Terrorism by Any Other Name

One of my first articles for Associated Content was "Can Americans Recognize Their Enemy?" Today, I am more convinced than ever that we cannot.

That article came shortly after a thwarted terrorist attack on New Jersey's Fort Dix Army Base. With a cascade of evidence, five immigrants who claimed to be of Muslim faith were eventually found guilty of planning to carry out a terrorist attack on the base. The entire plot was foiled because of an alert shop clerk who reported a suspicious video.

Would that store clerk have the courage to come forward today, with our increasingly outrageous amount of political correctness demanding "diversity" and "non-profiling"? And if he did, would he be accused of "intolerance" while the terrorists proceeded to make their plans?

Are we automatically "profiling" if we have suspicions of Islamic terrorism?
When Pearl Harbor happened in December of 1941, it turned out that the Japanese army had planned the attack for over a year. Our military knew something was going on, but didn't know the target until it was too late. And that was when we could identify what country was our enemy.

Today, we're no longer fighting an enemy identifiable by a country's uniform, ships or aircraft. We must find other ways to identify possible terrorism and terrorist attackers.

Substantial proof has emerged that the Fort Hood attacker, Nidal Malik Hasan, had a jihadist influence in his life, and had made previous suspicious remarks that no one reported. Whether it turns out he was or wasn't acting as a terrorist, Hasan is a psychiatrist who could be playing mind games with us. Yet he's being evaluated for his mental state to stand trial, and excuses are still being made for his murderous acts.

America can't afford to sit back in the name of "diversity" and take away the citizens' rights to come forward with suspicions of possible terrorist activity. We're told never to "profile" someone. What about the American hikers accused of espionage and held as "spies" by the Iranian government for simply making the mistake of crossing into Iran... isn't that "profiling" Americans?

What about Jewish people who are all often profiled as "rich and greedy"? What about Christians who are all lumped together as "hateful and spewing intolerance?" Isn't that profiling?

Terrorists from the 9/11 attack are being tried in civilian courts without a military tribunal. That means they are afforded all the rights of other Americans in a court of law. Prosecutors have announced that they're not sure about seeking the death penalty. Let's just put them in jail for life, where they can teach other criminals their twisted form of Islam and plan attacks from inside their prison cells.

Accused Navy SEALS get less courtesy than arraigned terrorists:
While terrorists are being afforded courtroom courtesies, three American Navy SEALS are now being charged with "abusing" a known terrorist leader from the FBI's Most Wanted list by "giving him a fat lip" (See Associated Content Contributor Charles Reynolds' story). The man, Ahmed Hashim Abed, is in all probability the mastermind behind the gruesome 2004 murders of four Blackwater USA security guards in Fallujah. Our military code-named the search for him as "Objective Amber."

Well, Blackwater is the big, bad American wolf for being hired mercenaries. So it doesn't matter that the Blackwater agents were simply on a mission to deliver food and goods to needy civilians. They were ambushed, killed, then burned and their bodies dragged through the city. Two of the bodies were hanged from a Euphrates River bridge.

But, the guy who allegedly arranged that attack complained about a bloody lip to Iraqi authorities...and we're allowing three Navy SEALS to be charged. What was Abed doing at the time of the "abuse"? Was he maybe resisting arrest? What were the SEALS supposed to say when they approached him, not knowing if he was about to blow them up... "excuse me kind sir, will you come quietly with us?"

Terrorists have voiced their plans to kill Jews everywhere; next in their lineup for destruction are Christians and every other faith - even other Muslims - who don't support their dream of a totally Islamic world achieved through jihad. Yet we refuse to acknowledge this.

Who's our real enemy? Is it the terrorists, or America's own political correctness? Terrorists are laughing at our politeness and our desire to "talk with them." Iran's increased nuclear goals is the result of failed talks. Talk is cheap.

Although the Christian faith directs people to love their enemies, pray for them and treat them with kindness (Luke 6:27-28), it also advises to be on the alert for those who seek to destroy (Ephesians 6:12, 1 Peter 5:8). But in the end, terrorism isn't a battle between humans; it's a very definitive battle between good and evil.

See more on outrageous political correctness in my article, "Islamophobia and its effects on other faiths"at The Underground Online Magazine.

Sources(This writer is not receiving any compensation from sources used, nor do the views expressed herein necessarily represent the views of the sources):
Fort Dix Attack stopped, USA Today;
Fort Dix plotters found gulty, AP video;
Proof mounting of Hasan's jihadist connections: ABC News;
Navy Seals accused of abuse: FOX and CNN reports, and Associated Content.