Contact Form

Name

Email *

Message *

Showing posts with label bombings in Boston. Show all posts
Showing posts with label bombings in Boston. Show all posts

Wednesday, April 24, 2013

Is Violence Causing Islam To Lose Its War


According to the following article by Daniel Pipes (some might say is very optimistic), Islam is losing the war to win the minds of Europeans and with repeated attacks against America, losing there also.  We sure do hope that he is right, however, are concerned that the "politically correct" bunch might try to pass laws that stem the tide. We would gladly be wrong.

Conservative Tom

Education by Murder in Boston

Daniel Pipes - http://www.danielpipes.org,  April 24th, 2013

What will be the long-term impact of the Apr. 15-19 Boston Marathon attack and the ensuing action-movie-style chase, killing a total of four and wounding 265?
Let's start with what its impact will not be. It will not bring American opinion together; if the “United We Stand” slogan lasted brief months after 9/11, consensus after Boston will be even more elusive. The violence will not lead to Israeli-like security measures in the United States. Nor will it lead to a greater preparedness to handle deadly sudden jihad syndrome violence. It will not end the dispute over the motives behind indiscriminate Muslim violence against non-Muslims. And it certainly will not help resolve current debates over immigration or guns.

United We Stand postage stamp.
What it will do is very important: it will prompt some Westerners to conclude that Islamism is a threat to their way of life. Indeed, every act of Muslim aggression against non-Muslims, be it violent or cultural, recruits more activists to the anti-jihad cause, more voters to insurgent parties, more demonstrators to anti-immigrant street efforts, and more donors to anti-Islamist causes.
Education by murder is the name I gave this process in 2002; we who live in democracies learn best about Islamism when blood flows in the streets. Muslims began with an enormous stock of good will because the Western DNA includes sympathy for foreigners, minorities, the poor, and people of color. Islamists then dissipate this good will by engaging in atrocities or displaying supremacist attitudes. High profile terrorism in the West – 9/11, Bali, Madrid, Beslan, London – moves opinion more than anything else.
I know because I went through this process first hand. Sitting in a restaurant in Switzerland in 1990, Bat Ye'or sketched out for me her fears concerning Islamist ambitions in Europe but I thought she was alarmist. Steven Emerson called me in 1994 to tell me about the Council on American-Islamic Relations but I initially gave CAIR the benefit of the doubt. Like others, I needed time to wake to the full extent of the Islamist threat in the West.
Westerners are indeed waking up to this threat. One can get a vivid sense of trends by looking at developments in Europe, which on the topics of immigration, Islam, Muslims, Islamism, and Shari'a (Islamic law) is ahead of North America and Australia by about twenty years. One sign of change is the growth of political parties focused on these issues, including the U.K. Independence Party, the National Front in France, the People's Party in Switzerland, Geert Wilder's Party for Freedom in the Netherlands, the Progress Party in Norway, and the Swedish Democrats. In a much-noted recent by-election, UKIP came in second, increasing its share of the vote from 4 percent to 28 percent, thereby creating a crisis in the Conservative party.
The Zurich mosque and minaret.
Swiss voters endorsed a referendum in 2009 banning minarets by at 58-42 margin, a vote more significant for its ratio than its policy implications, which were roughly nil. Public opinion polling at that time found that other Europeans shared these views roughly in these same proportions. Polling also shows a marked hardening of views over the years on these topics. Here (with thanks to Maxime Lépante) are some recent surveys from France:
  •     67 percent say Islamic values are incompatible with those of French society
  •     70 percent say there are too many foreigners
  •     73 percent view Islam in negatively
  •     74 percent consider Islam intolerant
  •     84 percent are against the hijab in private spaces open to the public
  •     86 percent are favorable to strengthening the ban on the burqa
As Soeren Kern notes, similar views on Islam appear in Germany. A recent report from the Institut für Demoskopie Allensbach asked what qualities Germans associate with Islam:
  •     56 percent: striving for political influence
  •     60 percent: revenge and retaliation
  •     64 percent: violence
  •     68 percent: intolerance toward other faiths
  •     70 percent: fanaticism and radicalism
  •     83 percent: discrimination against women
In contrast, only 7 percent of Germans associate Islam with openness, tolerance, or respect for human rights.
These commanding majorities are higher than in earlier years, suggesting that opinion in Europe is hardening and will grow yet more hostile to Islamism over time. In this way, Islamist aggression assures that anti-Islamism in the West is winning its race with Islamism. High-profile Muslim attacks like the ones in Boston exacerbate this trend. That is its strategic significance. That explains my cautious optimism about repulsing the Islamist threat.
Mr. Pipes (DanielPipes.org) is president of the Middle East Forum.

Thursday, April 18, 2013

Boston Terror Bombing Prognostications



Readers of this blog already know this--we are paranoid and do not trust the government. So when we watched the press conference on Tuesday and saw the parade of Massachusetts and Boston officials along with just about every Federal department official that could get some face time, we are concerned with an absolute rush to judgment and the very  possibility of a miscarriage of justice. Or something dramatically worse.

Let's review the crime.  It was not a sophisticated bomb. The news has reported that the instructions can be obtained over the internet and that Al Queda has published a manual on this very type of device.

 Secondly, due to its size, the potential of damage was limited.  It was not meant to kill hundreds, only a few. Why?

Thirdly, the location and more importantly, the timing of the detonation is interesting. It happened around twenty minutes after the winners passed the finish line leaving the attack to be on mostly Americans who were waiting for their friends and family members to reach the finish line. We have not heard of any international runners being hurt or killed. All those who lost their lives were spectators. Additionally, the bombs exploded away from the finish line. Those planning this did not want this to be an international incident.

Lastly, the bombs went off within ten seconds of each other. In attacks such as in Israel, the second bomb is usually detonated after the first responders arrive therefore killing them as well as others. Help did not have time to get to the first site when the second one exploded. It was not a well orchestrated attack. Was this planned to appear so or planned by an amateur?

Also in attacks overseas, the perpetrators always brag to the news media that they did the event. Why not this time? Is it "homegrown" or meant to appear so?

This is the first time in President Obama's Presidency that he has declared any event "terrorism."  Irony or suspicious? When the President and his Administration have consistently refused to use the word "terrorism" or "terrorist"  in the past four plus years, has removed the word from government publications and now in one of the first pronouncements that he makes, he evokes these words. Curious? Words have meaning and this Administration has been consistent, why the change?

Today, the media has been breathlessly exclaiming in their lead into the news that they have pictures and are on the trail of the person or persons responsible. However, if you have watched the pictures, they are grainy and could not be used for identification. A bit of hyperbole on their part. Why? Are we being set up?

Another coincidence (?) is the reisen letters sent to a Mississippi Senator and President Obama. They were detected yesterday and in a little over 24 hours, the sender (??) has been arrested. Unless this guy is a total goofball, had his fingerprints all over the envelope, signed his real name and return address or called the Feds, this speed of apprehension is questionable. The evidence must be pretty damning or....

So what does this all mean?  We really don't know yet. However, we are concerned that this could be Obama's Reichtag event.  Could it have  been staged? If so, what is its purpose? Do they think that Americans will gladly give up more rights for safety? Is there some other goal in mind?

If it was a staged event, we will start seeing evidence leaked out to the news media. We will see pictures of the "perp" who dropped the packages. It will be a middle aged man (probably with grey hair), he will be a retired serviceman with ties to both the Tea Party, gun rights and anti-abortion groups.  He will be a religious person who attends church weekly. His choice of the date would be a protest against the IRS. Boston was picked as the nearby city, Lexington, was where the first shots were fired in the Revolutionary War.

 Sound wacky? ( Maybe we should become a novelist and stop wasting our time writing this blog?) We hope and pray that nothing like this develops. However, we are very concerned and when this Administration will not level with us about the events in Benghazi, one has to worry.

What is  your opinion?  Have we lost it or...?

Conservative Tom