They Have A Watch, We Have Time

The title of this missive is an expression used throughout the radicalized Islamist world. It’s a reflection of a generational effort to render Islam globally dominant. It’s also a policy statement; ‘we’ll be patient, we’ll use what you have against you and we will be inexorable, no matter failure or setback”. Such was the message in evidence presented in the Holy Land Foundation terror financing trial.

The President’s speech in Afghanistan mentioned al Qaeda, The Taliban and bin Laden a dozen times reinforcing his very direct statement; “our goal is to destroy al Qaeda” this, in the context of unattributed quotes from the White House that ‘the war on terror is over’. If only!

The President is clear in his attempt diminish the scope of vision related to terrorism evidenced by a reinforced, yet narrow focus on al Qaeda. There are a number of problems with the President’s focus.

Physical terrorism is not the primary threat! Muslim Brotherhood leadership has announced their opinion that regards the U.S., physical terrorism is counter-productive. They also stated that they were ‘pleased’ with the cultural and political inroads rendering terrorism unnecessary in the moment. The threat and the opportunity are political, cultural and legal. Galloping political correctness that equates Islam with Western Judeo Christian ethics is the basis for the flaw in the President’s judgment. By contending or implying that Islamic behaviors, law and culture are equivalent, we diminish our sense of confidence in our traditional belief and political systems. This lack of confidence and moral equivalency is the cornerstone of Islamist / Salafist strategic imperatives. Europe in general is finally taking the first halting steps toward recognition that their culture, social and legal systems are in severe jeopardy. In England it may already be too late. Mass immigration, the absence of assimilation, expansive public benefits, rampant political correctness, allowing shadow Sharia courts, anti Semitism and cultural equivalency will, unchecked, render Jolly Ole England a fond memory in two to three generations.

The dangerously narrow focus is consistent with the President’s actions. Entertaining the Islamist / Salafist brain trust in the person of the Muslim Brotherhood at the White House speaks volumes to one of two potentialities. Either the President does not understand the role and goals of the Brotherhood or is caught in the false narrative that they are ‘moderate’. It is, for this writer, incomprehensible but it is what it is. What it is is dangerous. That’s what is, is!

To ignore the rat’s nest of Islamist / Salafist infrastructure: it’s legal efforts, funding sources, efforts to undermine Western Culture and the displacement and murder of non Muslims simply looks away from the root of the problem. Perhaps in that context the war on terror is over. The question is who will win the legal and cultural war; who will win the war of ideas?

The war on ‘terror is, in fact, over if we continue foreign aid to Egypt and Hamas. Money from the Big Satan must be ever so sweet. It’s over in the absence of push back related to terror funding from Saudi Arabia. It’s over as long as U.S. based, Brotherhood connected organizations such as CAIR, ICNA and MSA enjoy the benefits of appeasement and lack of attention to their self stated goal. (That would be the goal of converting the U.S. to a Muslim dominated country, their words not mine.) It’s over in the absence of aggressively fighting back against Iran’s terror networks. It’s over in the absence of the application of the Monroe Doctrine in South and Central America; Equator, Venezuela, Nicaragua, Cuba.

If we ignore the 18,825 Jihadi attacks since 9/11 then the war on terror is over. In April Jihadi attacks killed 692 people and critically injured another 1,279 in 26 countries! The war may be over for us, it’s just not over for them.

“They have a watch, we have time.”

  • D.D.Mao

    “They Have a Watch,We Have Time” has been the theme of every enemy we have fought in the past 50 years.Every Democrat president has a domestic agenda he would much rather focus on for his place in history.Lyndon Johnson wanted to fight the war on poverty much more than the war in Vietnam.Every time we had a bombing halt to try and get them to the negotiation table they advanced in the field. This was done so when a peace treaty was ever negotiated they would have an advantage in territory captured when the lines were finally drawn.This does not in any way excuse Republican presidents from past inept performance in fighting wars only that Republicans seem to be more concerned with foreign policy while Democrats tend toward domestic policy.

    The problem is also with the American public. The enemy knows the American publics impatience for a prolonged struggle and exploits it.America needs to think strategically beyond tommorrow,determine a longterm doctrine for it’s foreign policy and stick with it.This policy of setting a withdrawal date in advance,constantly backing dictatorial regimes and a repulsion to ANY deaths is a “Game Boy” mentality for fighting a war.

    One soluton to this would be to put an end to primogeniture where the candidate who came in second in the last presidential primary cycle is crowned in the current race. As long as we continue to elect a President who is small in stature we will continue thinking only in short term solutions and disregard the consequences both domestically and internationally.

  • D.D.Mao

    Upon Further Review:

    “The War On Terror Is Over” makes you wonder if the president is cutting a quid pro quo deal with OPEC to lower the gas prices right before the November election and he will deal with Isreal to their satisfaction after the election.

    If only the microphone was on to overhear this conversation!

  • Landreaux

    Who exactly would we negotiate an end to the war on terror with???

  • D.D.Mao

    Landreaux:

    If we are willing to dump Isreal I’m sure you can get any number of interested parties.

  • Ah, yes I’ve heard the preference for ‘dumping Israel’ from any number of Democratic activists and true believers. They always seem to forget that Israel has nukes, and never seem to have a long sighted answer to that little ommission. In my opinion the potential that we would ‘dump Israel’ one day is part of the motivation for having them.

  • D.D.Mao

    Landreaux:

    The thing about that is we are talking about people who don’t care about sacrificing themselves for a cause.All it takes is one wacko individual who is willing to martyr themselves to start a chain reaction of events that could escalate and make the Middle East one big fireball.In addition we (in America)now have a President who is the most unfriendly President toward Isreal we ever had.He has a revengeful character streak in him that he doesn’t consider the consequences of his actions if it can further his own agenda.Of course his own agenda right now is getting re-elected so he would wait until after the election so as not to lose the Jewish vote.But I would say Taiwan is in the same boat as far as depending on this administration as friends if the President can work something out with Communist China to his advantage.