September 11th 2001 was seminal; motivating a spectrum of emotions and reactions. Reactions were not uniform, some wept and crumbled, some rejoiced. Some decried the violence others embraced it as a victory, taking to the streets in a dance of celebration over our catastrophe.
For me, an immediacy of emotions: anger, frustration and, if the truth be told, bloodlust in search of a target. The fire of those emotions passed slowly leaving in their wake a desire to comprehend. To comprehend; what one man could do in honor of those who perished. That aspiration defined the subsequent ten years.
The journey was undertaken to understand the philosophical, historical, ideological, religious and political thinking that resulted in September 11th. That search for understanding evolved into a demanding mistress; each step on the journey to comprehension revealed other paths to be followed; a geometric progression of demands.
A library resulted, filled with evidence of the self appointed path. The path was neither straight, nor narrow. The self directed engagement, undertaken as objectively as possible, was a thorny intellectual exercise given motivations, predilections and, to this day, anger.
This journey lead from terrorism, to Islam, to Jihadism, to Salifism: from Islamic history to the Quran and Hadiths, to the modern day Fatwa’s; from Mecca and Medina to al Banna, Burkari and Bin Laden. The path, by necessity, demanded an understanding of history and politics; of personalities, theology and motivations.
The attempt to understand terrorism resulted in the belief that terrorism is not the threat. Terrorism is a tactic, a curtain behind which the Wizard hides. Terrorism is a tool, a geopolitical means, at least in part, to cloak the true motivations of Islamic movements and the philosophy existent in support of those movements. Terrorism, despite its horrors, serves to allow a definition of moderation that forestalls understanding of the true agenda, fully cloaked in a veil of ‘non violence’. Terrorism allows anyone not directly engaged in terrorism, regardless of how radical their beliefs, to claim the false guise of moderation and a demand for ‘sensitivity’ based on the projection of moderation.
To serve the memory of those who died demands a definition of the true threat. The threat is not the next plane to fly into a building. The threat is cultural and political. The threat is the slow erosion of self confidence that allows us to cast aside Western culture and values equating a belief system drowning in blood as morally ‘equivalent’ to Judeo-Christian thinking. In the last two months alone 1,302 have died as a direct result of Islamic violence. Since 9/11 there have been 17,714 terror attacks, the vast majority associated with a ‘morally equivalent’ Islam
The true threat is an Islamic belief system that by nature of its doctrine demands domination and subjugation; not by my interpretation but as spoken by the Prophet Mohammed. The threat is a lack of cultural self confidence and an unwillingness to say no; this is not who we are; here and no farther! The threat is accommodation and appeasement of a belief system diametrically opposed to our own.
It is a threat reliant upon our own sensibilities, empathies and generosity. Everywhere Muslim moderates advise us that to ‘get along’ we must appease Islamic law, Sharia. We must integrate Sharia into our cultural, political and judicial systems; bit by bit. We must give a little bit; and then, a little bit more until our view of ourselves, our laws and culture are so confused as to be unrecognizable. One need only look to England. England, as we have known her, is but two generations away from being unrecognizable. England is a real time experiment in Western social and cultural collapse, we need only look to England to see the threat and the plan the threat pursues. Bit by bit; just a little bit more!
Are we to honor the memory of those who perished on September 11th with cultural and political appeasement? Imam Rauf of the 9/11 Mosque spoke in Europe recently of the need for ‘the West to accept the incursions of Sharia’. The New York Times agrees by way of what they choose to publish as opinion. (September 2nd, 2011 Eliyahu Stern;” Don’t Fear Islamic Law in America”).
Shall we say to the ghosts of 9/11 that as you leapt to your death, your death as an Infidel is no more than the application of Sharia in the West; justifiable under prevailing mainstream interpretations of Islamic law?
To honor those who died, we must return to a self confidence born of moral clarity. We must take pride in and elevate our belief systems, traditions and culture. Less than that dishonors the victims, ourselves and the nation. Less than that, was a hole in the ground for nine years.