I need to preface this that I watched as little TV and surfed as little of the MSM web as I could, because 9/11 is just too emotional for me to handle the dearth of coverage the MSM was provided. The images of 9/11 are etched upon my brain in such a way that I can recall most of the events, the sights, the emotions, all of it, in a moments thought. I carried it around all day, never far from my mind. There was some sobbing at Mass today, and my professors acknowledged the day appropriately. There was no official celebration by the University, something which I now pledged to have rectified by next year.

Going in, there were some danger signs that the intellectual left would try to push its agenda, for instance this example from a News-Journal article on how teachers were going to handle the anniversary:

Michelle Conway, a seventh-grade English teacher at Everett Meredith Middle School in Middletown, planned a lesson in tolerance to mark the anniversary.

She read a magazine article to her class Friday called "My Name Is Osama." It's the story of an Iraqi immigrant child in the United States treated badly at his school after 9/11.

"The objective of the lesson is, No. 1, to teach the children that we fear what we don't understand," she said. "And, No. 2, we really have to be careful how we define what is an American."

Now there is nothing wrong with objective No. 1, but Miss Conway seriously needs a lesson on how Muslims in America define themselves.

I think the typical left reaction is summed up in Jason's post. He tries vainly to hide behind his outlandish statements, but all the "Inside Job" sentiment is there, including a promotional video for "The New Pearl Harbor," a 9/11 conspiracy book.

Even the venerated Instapundit had me a little down this evening, as he seems to miss the scope of this conflict of which 9/11 is only the beginning of another chapter:

Yes. To read some blogs today, you'd think that this was the 9th century, with camel-riding Jihadis ready to descend on helpless American towns, swinging unstoppable scimitars. It's not that way; it's more like the Ghost Dance or similar movements borne of frustration at losing, movements that do their damage all right, but that are doomed to fail. I don't mean to understate the threat, which is real enough. But it's not on the order of the Cold War, you know, and we won that one.

Where he goes wrong is that in fact, if you live in Europe, Islamic terror is not akin to the Ghost Dance, which was a last-breath-of-air for a dying culture, and didn't outright kill anybody (its role in the Wounded Knee Massacre is disputed at best). Europe is slowly being invaded by Islamic immigrants, and will be conquered by demographics. America could not be far behind (see above link on "Muslims in America").

While the United States may see this current conflict as beginning on 9/11 five years ago (the really far-sighted might trace it back to the 1993 WTC bombing), the Islamicists see it as a continuation of the Muslim expansion since the death of Muhammad. A jihad that began well before the Crusades (though they claim that as a catalyst), and continued with only a few centuries of setback (The Battle of Tours, Vienna, The First Crusade, La Reconquista in 1492, etc.). This is the conflict they are fighting. It is a long-term and demographically enhanced fighting strategy, one which US policy makers don’t seem to recognize. This actually makes this current conflict more dangerous than the Cold War, because if we cannot hold the enemy, they will merely outbreed us.

The blog "Shining Plate and a Good Broadsword" has a great post on the state of the post-9/11 world as he sees it, which refutes Reynold's points:

We no longer fight wars as if we were on a battlefield, but as if we were in a courtroom with nice legalities and formalities to be observed so that everything comes out fair and balanced. The West has become a nation of lawyers and professors who try to give the barbarians at the gates an even chance.

Five years on, and the enemy is within our midst and becoming bolder. A year ago, Paris burned. Six months ago, the West was terrified of publishing simple cartoons of Mohammed. Even those who currently direct the Israeli army somehow quake before the opinion of the world. It should be the other way around, but it isn’t. It should be they who quake out of fear, but they are not. Five years on, and we are the ones who shiver at the thought of being labeled a “racist” for saying these things - even though Islam is not a race. We are terrified of pronouncing judgement on an ideology, as if Islam can somehow be placed above any other ideology or practice, such as Communism or Nazism.

Another post I found today which details the breadth of the conflict is from Op For, a Milblog. It is an excellent post dealing with the events of September 11, 1565, where the Knights of the Order of St. John defended Malta from the Turkish invasion, defending (and quite possibly saving) Western Civilization. It was 441 years ago today, but it it as relevant as it was when it happened.

Posted by Ryan S. on Tuesday, September 12, 2006 at 1:08 AM | Permalink |