Muslim death cultists are not subhuman

Again with the beheadings.

Two British muslims ran over a British soldier, Lee Rigby, with their car in broad daylight, hopped out, and beheaded him. Then they crowed about it on camera.

I’m not surprised. Hopefully we’ll preserve our collective outrage over this, but I suspect this kind of thing’s already becoming blas&#233 in our jaded and media-saturated culture.

Amid all the outrage expressed in the blogosphere and on social media, I’ve noticed a theme that needs correcting if we’re going to keep the right perspective. My fellow conservatives often express their fury with epithets like “animals” and “subhuman scum” when they refer to the evil men who saw off non-muslim heads in the name of a “merciful Allah.” It’s understandable to use those labels, but it’s not right because it lets these evil muslims off the hook for their actions. We feel anger when we find out about these slaughters precisely because these evil men are more than just animals. They’re people, and that means they know better.

When a cougar mauls a child, we hunt it down and kill it without much passion because it’s a dumb animal with no sense of morality. Young children, dementia sufferers, and certain insane people can’t distinguish between right and wrong, so we don’t hold them to a high moral standard. But when grown men shoot fleeing children in the back or saw off the heads of helpless civilians, they earn our undying enmity because they know they’re committing evil and they do it anyway. Evil acts can’t be waved away with a concerned expression and a sadly-spoken “oh, that’s just sick.” People choose to do evil things, and some choose to do great evil. They aren’t all insane, they haven’t all been browbeaten into it, and they aren’t all merely misguided. People commit evil, for which they deserve punishment.

For you left-leaning readers who feel uncomfortable with arguments based on right and wrong, think of this from a legal perspective. The Model Penal Code (which forms the basis for many states’ criminal codes) breaks down most crimes into four categories, asking whether the perpetrator committed the crime negligently, recklessly, knowingly, or purposefully. If a man fires a gun through a flimsy backstop in his backyard and the bullet accidentally kills his neighbor’s child, we’ll likely prosecute him for negligent homicide. But we hold him less culpable than the man who recklessly fires his gun into the air and kills the child playing in her yard two streets over. Worse still is the man who fires his rifle over a crowd of children, knowing he’ll probably kill someone. Worst of all is the man who fires a bullet into a fleeing child’s back for the purpose of killing her. Even our legal system emphasizes degrees of culpability and the importance of the perpetrator’s state of mind. It’s about as close to moral condemnation as our relativistic legal system ever gets.

The moral approach and our inherent sense of right and wrong provides the strongest foundation for holding these evil muslims responsible as people who consciously choose to do evil, but you might find the legal approach more comfortable. Either way, intentions count for a lot.

I continue to try extra hard not to understate the depths that these men have sunk to. I don’t call them animals or subhuman scum; these muslim death cultists are evil, and that’s why I’ll smile when they die violent and painful deaths.

I hope you’ll do the same.

5/24/13 Update: The Brits have become men without chests. We’re headed down the same road, sadly.

Build the wall first

Cox & Forkum cartoon

I’ve been keeping quiet on the illegal immigration debate, because I know I’m likely to get hot under the collar and write something I’ll regret later. Both of my parents are naturalized citizens, as are my uncles and aunts, and as were my grandparents. As a child of legal immigrants, I’m quite anti-illegal-alien in my outlook. That’s why I’ve been biting my tongue. However, I’m also a veteran, and national security is my number one priority. Since the Senate has crafted a disastrous “compromise” on illegal immigration today, there’s one thing I simply must put on the record now: America needs to build a wall along the entire Mexican border, and we need to do it as soon as possible.
I approach the problem as a retired Coast Guardsman. The massive influx of illegals is like seawater flooding a ship through a hole in the hull. The top priority is to stop the flooding. Pumping the water out can wait. Drying out the wet spaces belowdecks can wait. Upgrading to a thicker hull can wait. Plug the hole first. Deal with the results afterward.
This is a national security issue, not a race issue or an economic issue. This wouldn’t be a “Berlin Wall”; our wall would keep enemies out, not oppressed citizens in. Our border with Mexico is our giant back door, and it’s hanging wide open. Locking the front door and putting bars on the windows makes no sense if we leave the back door open. Islamists can slip into our Southwest as easily as anybody else can, and they aren’t looking for jobs. No “virtual wall” will do. We need a long, high physical barrier like the one Israel built. Israel’s wall drastically reduced the number of terrorist attacks from the West Bank and Gaza, and ours would make it much harder for terrorists to perpetrate a new Beslan massacre in Arizona.
I understand that making our border into a barrier will upset the Mexican government, but I care more about our national security than I care about keeping the Mexicans happy. I understand that illegal immigrants will try to find other ways into the country. Fine; we’ll plug those gaps when we find them. We might want to build another wall along some or all of our border with Canada, too, and I’m willing to start near Detroit. But our top priority must be to build a long, high wall between us and Mexico. Every other immigration issue can wait.

Cox & Forkum cartoon

There, I said it.
Update: Hugh Hewitt knows what’s most important, too.

It’s time for cyberwar

I’ve read through the National Security Strategy for 2006 released last Friday by the White House, and overall it’s a hardheaded and realistic approach to dealing with current and future enemies. However, I think they missed something: aggressively conducting cyber warfare against jihadi web sites and bulletin boards.
For years now it’s been common knowledge (even in the mainstream media) that the Islamists use web sites and online bulletin boards to coordinate their efforts and recruit new adherents to their cause. They also use encrypted e-mail to transmit commands, coordinate their finances and handle logistics. The jihadis expertly manipulate the media into broadcasting their calls to jihad, their videotaped bombings, and worst of all the beheading of hostages.
Encouraging words, but where’s the follow-up?
Continuing a theme he’s advanced since 2002, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld noted last month:

We are fighting a battle where the survival of our free way of life is at stake. And the center of gravity of that struggle is not just on the battlefield. It is a test of wills and it will be won or lost with our public and the publics of free nations across the globe. We will need to do all we can to attract supporters to our efforts, to correct the lies being told which so damage our country, and shatter the appeal of the enemy. [emphasis added]

My first reaction to the speech was, “Great! Let’s start taking down their websites and bulletin boards and e-mail servers.” Based on Secretary Rumsfeld’s comments, I figured that there’d be something along those lines in today’s new National Security Strategy … but I don’t see it in there.
4/4/2007 Update: Is the behemoth finally waking up? Maybe.

Those modern Jordanians

Athena, an American blogger studying in Jordan, gives a chilling example of the deep cultural roots of honor killings.

Today I was visiting the Center for Strategic Studies at the University of Jordan and my roommate, we�ll call here Sally, went with me because she had to meet with the same professor as I.
She started crying in the taxi on the way back home telling me about her experience the other night with her Jordanian boyfriend, we�ll call him Malik.
Sally and Malik haven�t been dating for very long and I won�t go into the details of their relationship, but she really did like this guy, and I liked him as well. He seemed very Western, spoke English well, acted respectably, dressed nice, came from an affluent and well-off family. He even lived in Europe for two years and had relationships with girls there.
They went out to eat last night and she brought up the subject of honor killings.

Take my advice and read the rest … then bookmark Athena’s blog, Terrorism Unveiled. She’s the blogosphere’s undercover agent in Jordan, so you can count on reading some fascinating takes on the clash between West and East.

UPDATE: A Jordanian blogger named Natasha has taken up Athena’s challenge with her own post at Mental Mayhem. Be sure to scroll down and read the comments after the post. I think Athena’s getting the better of Natasha in this exchange, but Natasha writes well (although she’s a bit quick on the “Racism!” trigger).

Too late for terror to derail Bush

There’s just one week to go. Lately there’s been speculation about whether a terror attack might occur on American soil before Election Day, and if so, what effect it might have on the outcome of the presidential election. I’ve been mulling this over and I think it’s too late for any attack here to hurt President Bush’s chances. At this point an attack can only help him, and I think the terrorists know it. Let me explain.

Roundup: Beslan school massacre

I have nothing new or unique to offer on the Beslan school massacre perpetrated by Islamists in Russia, other than my condolences and prayers (for comfort to the victims and neverending torment for the terrorists). Instead, I’ll just point you toward the best stuff I’ve found.
Michelle Malkin gathers key analyses of Russia’s 9/11.
So does Donald Sensing at One Hand Clapping.
Victor Davis Hanson thinks we should brace ourselves for terror attacks in the months ahead.
Dave Kopel has a suggestion on how to prevent a Beslan massacre here.
Mark Steyn calls it right: No other word for it but slaughter.
Wretchard at The Belmont Club wonders just what Vladimir Putin’s supposed to do, exactly?
Charles at Little Green Footballs points out a British muslim cleric who supports kidnapping women and children.
Getty Images has five pages of photographs. Blogs of War has a single photo of the aftermath.
The locals in Beslan caught one of the terrorists, lynched him, and tore him to pieces. And I wouldn’t be surprised if the Ossetians seek revenge on the Chechens sometime around November 7th (see the end of this story).

Your pension system might be funding terrorist-sponsoring states. Frank Gaffney has spearheaded a new project called which uncovers companies and pension funds that do business with states that sponsor terrorism: is a nationwide campaign aimed at some 400 public companies worldwide that are providing revenues, technology and moral cover to governments that sponsor terrorism. The primary objective of this campaign is to starve terrorists of essential funding and technical support. To illustrate how such a campaign can achieve this objective, please review our synopsis of the South Africa Model of the 1980’s that succeeded in ending apartheid. envisions using financial pressure to achieve three types of divestment: 1) Forcing countries that sponsor terror to divest themselves of the material, logistical, intelligence and other support they give enemies of this country; 2) compelling companies to divest activities in terrorist-sponsoring states that fail to sever such ties; and 3) divesting the stocks of companies that persist in aiding and abetting state-sponsors of terror.

It’s a sobering thought. The Islamists are using our own money to fund their efforts to kill us. Go browse the site, and start taking action to pressure these folks to dry up the terrorists’ lifeline. Hit the scumbags where it hurts!
Hat tip: Hugh Hewitt

Should I stay or should I go?

On Thursday the State Department told Americans in Saudi Arabia to get the heck out of Dodge:

The Department of State continues to warn U.S. citizens to defer travel to Saudi Arabia. Private American citizens currently in Saudi Arabia are strongly urged to depart. On April 14, 2004, due to security concerns, the Department of State ordered the departure of family members and non-emergency employees of the U.S. Embassy and Consulates in Saudi Arabia.

Then on Saturday we got this:

Secretary of State Colin Powell says terrorists would earn a victory if American workers leave Saudi Arabia in response to a spate of terrorist attacks, including the murder of hostage Paul Johnson.

“If they leave, then the terrorists have won,” Powell said, shortly after Islamic militants beheaded Johnson, who worked on Apache attack helicopter systems for Lockheed Martin.
“I don’t think either the Saudis, the Americans, or these brave folks who work in Saudi Arabia want the terrorists to win,” Powell said.

Uh, which is it?
Hat tip: James Taranto at OpinionJournal

Islamist terror caused by sexual abuse: Chesler

An article by Phyllis Chesler looks at Islamist terrorism and the Arab world’s dysfunction, and lays the blame on a culture she says is secretly built on older males’ widespread physical and sexual abuse of boys, girls and women. The book on which she bases her article is not yet publicly available.
I’m inclined to lay the blame on the more obvious cause: Islam itself. Ideas create cultures, not vice versa.

Damra sez: “The Feds wuz too scawwy!”

The Cleveland Plain Dealer reports that Fawaz Damra, Cleveland’s favorite alleged terrorist, is trying to get a federal judge to toss a computer, eleven videotapes and several documents seized from his home when the feds showed up to cuff ‘n stuff him on immigration violations awhile back. Damra’s wife says she was scared when she allowed the agents to search the house, so Damra wants the evidence excluded as illegally seized. From the looks of the article, Damra’s wife wasn’t scared. We’ll see.
On a videotape from 1991, good ol’ Fawaz the Moderate Muslim was caught calling Jews “pigs and monkeys” during a fundraising speech for Palestinian Islamic Jihad. Wonder what’s on these videotapes?

VDH: “No more passes and excuses for the Middle East”

Victor Davis Hanson is dead on-target with “The Mirror of Fallujah“, his brutally honest take on the mess that is the Arab/Muslim world:

Rather the global village is beginning to see that the violence of the Middle East is not aberrant, but logical. Its misery is not a result of exploitation or colonialism, but self-induced.

If we are to try to bring some good to the Middle East, then we must first have the intellectual courage to confess that for the most part the pathologies embedded there are not merely the work of corrupt leaders but often the very people who put them in place and allowed them to continue their ruin.

I’m glad the folks in the White House read his stuff.