Articles

Monday, November 29, 2010

Won't You Please Hug a Terrorist ?

The working theory among the think-tanks, academic campuses, newsrooms and diplomatic offices is that terrorists are just like us. Except depressed and insecure about it. Filled with self-loathing and in desperate need of anger management classes. If only some kind soul could plop them down on an analyst's couch and stuff them chock full of Prozac or Paxil, hug them without letting go, while reading passages from Jonathan Livingston Seagull-- then they'd be just as right as rain. And twice as wet.

The news media has already activated its brilliant powers of long distance psychoanalysis on the Oregon Christmas Tree Bomber, and diagnosed him as suffering from his parent's divorce and vicious Oregonian college bullies. Sure Mohamed O. Mohamud might say he's a Muslim terrorist who wants to kill Americans-- but the good people at NBC know better. He's not a terrorist. He's just misunderstood. Deep down inside him, there's gushing oil wells of untapped good.

Mohamed O. Mohamud joins Fort Hood terrorist Major Nidal Hassan (who came down not with Muslim Murder Madness, but a virulent airborne form of PTSD) and Times Square bomber Faisal Shazad (suffering from uncontrollable Foreclosure Fever) on the analyst's couch. Another misunderstood victim of poorly articulated rage that led him to snap and try to kill a whole bunch of people, who coincidentally happened not to be Muslim.

For a depressing stretch of the 20th century, sociologists insisted there was no such thing as a criminal, only a set of responses to social inequities. Robbers, rapists and murderers were just lashing out because of social discrimination in an unfair class system. They weren't depraved, they were deprived. The solution was not to put a beat cop on every street. What was the use. You couldn't fight 'crime' anyway. No more than you can fight 'terrorism'. All you could do was expand welfare programs, pour money into the inner cities and turn a blind eye to crime. Then the improvements in social conditions would end crime naturally.

At some point after the millionth mugging victim and Dukakis getting taken down by Willie Horton, the Democratic party finally realized that no amount of Donahue and Oprah was going to counter the popular demand to get tough on crime. But what didn't work for crime, is now being put to work for terrorism.

Terrorists are never terrorists. And never Muslim. Even when they're both. They might dress up like Osama bin Laden, quote from the Koran and curse the Great Satan-- but the blowdried anchors in their dollhouse news sets will still blame the whole thing on teenage bullying or PTSD in the water. And who are you really going to believe, the terrorists who happily explain their motives, or a newscaster with two advanced degrees in reading things off a teleprompter?

And so it turns out that the terrorists are human beings just like us who never got enough love. Who are too insecure not to be terrorists. Our job is to make them feel more comfortable and give them a confidence boost. Pat them on the back and tell them how wonderful Islam is and how superior Muslim culture is to our rotten degraded lifestyle. "No need to feel bad, Ahmed. I only wish I could murder my own sister every time I catch her talking to a man." "Leila, I would give up my career and the freedom to travel without a male guardian's permission in a split second just to be able to wear a bag on my head all day."

Because what terrorists need most is appeasement. Appeasement is apparently Muslim Prozac. Give them enough of it, and they'll no longer want to behead us or blow us up. Or so the politically correct theory goes. And there you have our international affairs in a nutshell.

This February, Senator John Kerry met with the Emir of Qatar, whose family is intimately tied up with Al Qaeda. And whose government is directing millions of dollars a year to Al Qaeda. Naturally the Senator from Massachusetts didn't waste his host's time on anything as picayune as a request to please stop funding the terrorists who are murdering Americans. We are talking about the nation's premier windsurfing cheese-eating boarding-school attending diplomatic Frankensenator here after all. Instead he wanted the good Emir's help on resolving that whole Middle East peace thing between Israel and the Muslim terrorists.

And the Emir, in between mailing off the latest check to "Sheikh Usama, Forbidden Cave of Mystery, Afghanistan, 90210", was more than happy to oblige.  

Painstakingly the Emir explained that Hamas was actually ready to make peace with Israel. But it couldn't come out and say so. Then it would lose popular support and be overthrown. Israel would just have to go ahead and appease Hamas anyway-- and Hamas would pretend not to notice, but really it would notice, and stop the violence. The Emir of Qatar was actually saying that Hamas is more moderate than the average Palestinian Arab Muslim-- a scary, but not particularly surprising revelation.

If Senator Kerry had managed to hang on to more than one single unbotoxed brain cell in that frightening skull of his, he might have asked what the point of a secret peace agreement is-- when the people on whose behalf you're signing it, can't be told about it. But as a good democrat, he was probably already on the same page as a petty tyrant like the Emir in believing that the ignorant rabble have no business knowing what their enlightened leaders are up to anyway.

Pushing his luck further, Senator Kerry asked the Emir what could be done about the extremists. The Emir told him that if Israel gives the strategic high ground of the Golan Heights to Syria, then Syria will help Hamas leaders "make tough choices". Trying to control the hysterical laughter bubbling up in his throat, the Emir told Kerry that, the "return of the Golan is important not just to Syria but also to Hizballah and Iran". Which it of course is. Not because any of them give a damn about the skiing possibilities of the Golan, but because it's a fantastic position for bombing Israel.

Yet Kerry swallowed all of this. Probably nodded knowingly. Didn't blink when the Emir suggested that Ahmadinejad would suddenly change his tune on Israel if only Syria got the Golan Heights. And went off back to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee he chairs with his information safely tucked away in the recesses of his equine cranium.

The depressing pattern in all this lunacy is that we've decided that the only way to deal with terrorists is to give them things. Give them some land and money, and they'll be your pet terrorists. Then you can take them out for walks, and hug them and kiss them, and give them long baths. But not only do the terrorists need material things, they also need constant reassurance. You can't just negotiate with the terrorists. You've also got to negotiate with the enablers. And the enablers need land and money too. If you want to talk to Hamas, you've got to give Syria the Golan Heights. And then Hezbollah and Iran will want things too.

Negotiating with terrorists is now like signing a crazy reclusive artist to a record label. You have to woo his handlers and stroke his ego. Reassure him that everyone likes him. And that he won't have to "sell out" by promising not to kill people anymore. All he'll have to do is wink and nod, and that'll be as good as a signature.

We've gone beyond appeasement and into pure toadying. Because the poor terrorists with their bruised egos have been hurt too many times. They don't show up at negotiations anymore. You have to pamper them first to even get them to show up. Abbas needs a Settlement Freeze forever, or he won't even deign to arrive and accept the next batch of Israeli concessions. Hamas can't even show up to negotiate, but if Israel throws its most vital high ground to its buddy, the genocidal optometrist in Syria, then maybe Hamas will put a halt to the violence. For a week or two.

Locally and globally, we're deep in the appeasement business. So deep that we've put aside even the appearance of dignity. We're no longer ashamed of flattering and pandering to the murderers of our own people. We're proud of it. Our political and cultural leaders treat such behavior as a mark of sophistication. Only ignorant bible and gun clinging savages want to kill terrorists. The enlightened among us get down on their knees and search for the nearest available Mecca bound posterior.

Bombing terrorists is old and outdated. Love-bombing terrorists is the new hotness. Especially Muslim terrorists on American soil. They're all walking wounded. Victims of divorce, vicious Oregonian bullying, home foreclosures and airborne PTSD. Discriminated against in airports. Hounded by FBI agents for doing such simple things as trying to maim and murder thousands at a Christmas tree lightning ceremony or outside a showing of the Lion King. Persecuted just for being who they are. It's enough to make even the coldest Amnesty International member with a heart of taffy, weep.

So we've got to make them feel better by constantly praising Islam, letting them build an obscene Victory Mosque near Ground Zero, and jailing anyone who criticizes Islam. Then maybe they'll stop being so insecure and they won't feel that they need to kill us in order to feel good about themselves. Those poor miserable terrorist bastards. Sobbing into their keffiyahs, stuffing the hole in their heart with falafel and C4. Trying to compensate for their unhappy childhood by acting out and killing a few thousand people here and there. How can we not, like President William Jefferson Clinton, feel their pain?

And the answer is so very simple. No one's ever really shown them some love or told them they care. Maybe when we've given up all our freedoms and surrendered all the way. Then they'll finally realize that we mean it after all. That we really truly and completely like them. All the way. When we've appeased them so much, given them so much that we have nothing left to give, then we will finally have atoned for our selfishness, our miserable globalism, our wicked imperialism and consumerism and nationalism, and all our filthy isms. And it's so easy. All we have to do is hug a terrorist. And not mind the bulky dynamite strapped to his chest.

16 comments:

Paul said...

I think it is a vain hope to imagine that this tide of enforcing acceptability for inhuman beliefs or defensibility for criminal behavior is the result of some sincere intellectual conclusion. More and more it has the appearance of a calculating sadistic group mindset. Or even worse, deliberate subversion.

Imagine it were Marxists doing the things that Muslims are doing here in the US and in Europe and, indeed, everywhere in the world. How long would they last? It is the fact that Islam is considered a respectable world religion that is the problem. It is going to take a long time before people can turn this around.

rumcrook™ said...

as far as im concerned you are the babe ruth of world events commentary.

with ease he would consistantly hit home runs,

you are definitely a home run hitter.

Daniel Greenfield @ the Sultan Knish blog said...

Paul,

Marxists did last quite a bit. But I agree with you. Some of this is a mass intellectual implosion in certain sectors of society. And obviously the subversion is well-funded.

rumcrook,

I can't aim quite that high, but I'm more than satisfied to hit one out of Yankee Stadium now and then.

Keli Ata said...

It's insanity.


Their excuses and coddling of terrorist strangely reminds me of the song Gee, Officer Krupke from West Side Story; 101 excuses.


Favorite part of the song:


DIESEL: (Spoken, as Judge) In the opinion on this court, this child is depraved on account he ain't had a normal home.

ACTION: (Spoken) Hey, I'm depraved on account I'm deprived.




I can't help it. That song popped in my head.

noboat1 said...

I think Paul nailed it above "it is the fact that Islam is considered a respectable world religion that is the problem."

And as long as liberal media, and most of the general public continue to believe that; appeasment will be the "rule of the day". Political leadership in this country know that Islam is not a respectable religion, they just don't want us to know that because of the amount of money the elites are making. Michael Bloomberg is a perfect example of that. For me, my son's deployment to Afghanistan was the motivation I needed to sit down and read about Islam, I wanted to know who he was fighting. Boy were my eyes opened, and I didn't need to look any further than my own family to find out how the most of the public felt about Isalm. Most of them feel that we weren't attacked by a religion on 9/11, this couldn't be further from the truth. And not one member of my own family has ever picked up a book and read anything about Isalm. So how can that opinion be formed? We all know the answer. We've had some interesting debates around the dinner table to say the least.

We choose to believe what our leaders and media want us to believe, exactly what Paul said above " Islam is considered a respectable world religion". Until INDIVIDUALS educate themselves by learning who the enemy is, and there is an enemy, ignorance, appeasement, and political correctness are going to lose this war for us.

DP111 said...

Paul and DG

Marxists or communists were persecuting people as part of a programme assigned to them by a central office. This differentiates them from Muslims who carry out their acts either as an individual or a small group, but in accordance with a set of religious beliefs.

This difference makes it very difficult attack the source of the problem, as it is an individual. The source of course is the koran and the local mosque, but both can easily deny any responsibility, as they are not directly involved.

As no Muslim is immune to the call of allah when it comes, whether he is an avowed moderate or not, and as there is no way to detect predisposition to Jihad, the only way is to Separate Muslims from the West.

The problem is how to do so without sacrificing our principle of liberalism and tolerance.

Now consider the case, that by some twist of fate or acts by Jihadis, we end up being in full scale war with Islam. Then conscription and contribution to the war effort becomes mandatory by law. In such a situation, the enemy becomes well defined, as well as ill at ease in having to contribute to the war effort. Separation then takes place quite naturally as no one wants to be living on the wrong side of divide, and fighting one's own people.

Separation will take place even if we make an effort to re-assure our Muslims to stay on.

Daniel Greenfield @ the Sultan Knish blog said...

K.A. and well it should as it's incorporated into the article

"He's not a terrorist. He's just misunderstood. Deep down inside him, there's gushing oil wells of untapped good."

noboat, in many cases the American political elite identify with Islam, for reasons of their own. It's different in Europe.

Dp, In practice you had a lot of Communist front groups that were difficult to trace back. And in the US now you have groups like CAIR and ISNA which can be traced back, but no one in authority wants to talk about any of it.

Anonymous said...

I get your anger at the stupidity of the liberal understanding. I have an idea that they are the infantile generation, the me, me, me generation that has to explain why they are not being loved (a remnant from 60s love fests). They can't understand how can it be, hence the rational explanations. This is exactly Israel's situation, give more and more to show how good you are until nothing is left to give. The mature way is to deal with the problem, but it's too much for the love starved west.

wanumba said...

Provokes a lot of thoughts!
Musing about this: The secular Left has basically undone itself. It IS capitulation because the Leftists are afraid of death. We've had a massive 'evangelism' in the media over the past forty years of Earth-worship, hedonistic living - essentially the Here and Now. The Leftist sees life as a grab all one can grab - one must live to experience EVERYTHING the world can offer. It's ultimately a very selfish and self-centered world view. Resources have to be protected and not shared or one's personal life will be cheated somehow. There is no afterlife, so the frantic searches to extend life - vitamins, cures, stem cells, drugs, surgery, elixers, gene tinkering, cloning - trying to make a new body when one's first one wears out ... except there's someone ELSE in that identical copy. Awkward, hmmm - but watch out for the ghoulish Frankenstein efforts to kill off the enegerizing spirit so the client can move his spirit out of the old body into the empty shell.

So, like the Oxford students who decided they were too important to risk themselves in war, so the Left will capitulate with the terrorists, the Left has no Higher Power to call on to gird their loins in times of mortal danger. They will be hostile to anyone who objects or resists, for they perceive that to be a threat to their personal safety.
So there is a big divide opening between the Left which will capitulate and undercut resistance, estimating they'll live longer that way.

Daniel Greenfield @ the Sultan Knish blog said...

carpe diem

Anonymous said...

Why o why do Americans keep re-electing (or re-appointing) buffoons like Kerry and H. Clinton? Oh, yeah: they are our best and brightest, grads of our finest schools, career servants of the people, etc. They are representative of the majority of American academics, voters, and people. The crown of creation of American civilization.

lemon said...

Maybe we really don't elect them anymore? Who knows. Elections have become very corrupt.

HermitLion said...

Perhaps a good form of poetic justice would be to send those non-leaders in power who support the hugging of terrorists, to hug as many terrorists as they can?
I'm sure that would solve the problem, one way... or the other.

Paul said...

lemon, a good way to upset the corrupt elections apple cart would be to criminalize asking party affiliation for purposes of voter registration. It is none of the government's business what your party affiliation is. Make the "two party system" pay its own way and take care of its own business on its own time. Those government records of voter party membership are the locus of all evil in US government.

lemon said...

Paul,
There are many more ways that voting fraud takes place.

Paul said...

lemon, of course there are many more ways that voter fraud takes place, but there is nothing more corrupting of the election process than having the political parties use it for their own elections. The primary elections do more to obscure and confuse voters about what elections are actually about. And additionally, they are a huge burden on the election process. They take away huge amounts of resources and time in the publicly run and funded election system that could be better spent policing corruption. Think about it. For primary elections, you must print up different ballots for each qualifying political party and then you must make sure that each voter gets the right ballot. And many voters are frequently confused that a primary election is taking place. They confuse it with the general election. None of that is necessary for the actual general election and the general election is the one that is the backbone of government in the US.

And all of it is based on a violation of privacy and political freedom. It is none of the government's business what your political party affiliations are. Criminalize the collecting of party affiliation for purposes of voter registration and several important consquences will take effect for the greatest kind of justification.

Post a Comment