Terrorism 101
Two stories which appeared the same day on CNS.com illustrate the insanity of the American people and of our government.
The first titled, "Public Says the Federal Debt Equal to Threat from Terrorism," ([http://bit.ly/bYprgp]) is based on a Gallup survey which incidentally also shows that people trust Republicans over Democrats on both issues. That latter result is incidental only because it doesn't matter.
Health care costs placed third in the survey, followed by unemployment and illegal immigration, which matter even less.
The reason those issues matter less is not because they are inconsequential, however.
The federal debt is horrendous and growing worse daily as this administration piles trillions of debt dollars onto the backs of future generations. The cost of health care is equally horrendous and is sapping the life out of Americans both literally and figuratively. The unchecked flood of illegal immigrants is swamping America's educational and medical resources.
One might even add the Gulf oil catastrophe as another serious but secondary concern.
Why are all the other major problems facing America merely incidental to the threat of terrorism? Simply because the next terrorist attack or attacks could make the debt, health care, immigration, and the Gulf irrelevant.
If this nation is devastated by future attacks by Islamist crazies employing weapons of mass destruction, no one will give a damn about the other issues we face. We'll be too busy trying to pick up the pieces of what remained of the United States of America.
Before readers scoff at that scenario, refer to the second story showing how nutty we are, "Democrats and Republicans on Homeland Security Agree that WMD Attack Likely by 2013," [http://bit.ly/biVgUz]
That rarity, agreement on anything by both Dems and the GOP, is overshadowed by the inanity of that agreement: "They agree with the assessment made by the Commission on the Prevention of Weapons of Mass Destruction Proliferation and Terrorism that it is likely that by 2013 terrorists will launch an attack somewhere in the world using a weapon of mass destruction."
After all, to what are they agreeing? They are concurring on the idea that America could be the victim of a massive attack or attacks with chemical, bacteriological, radiological, and/or nuclear weapons within three years.
Forget the timeline and the "anywhere in the world" phrases. Anyone in his right mind is fully aware that the United States, "the Great Satan," is and will continue to be the target of choice for Islamists. Any other nation attacked will be a fallback alternative.
In point of fact, those assaults could take place tomorrow, next week, or maybe, with a rough touch of irony, on the ninth or tenth anniversaries of the 9/11 attacks. That WMD commission has as much hard evidence of the timing as you or I.
It's bad enough that Gallup shows that Americans are so oblivious of the ramifications of a WMD attack that they equate the danger with the ruinous inflationary threat of spending money the government doesn't have but now our leaders speak of WMD attacks as a done deal, a virtual fait accompli devoid of any concerted effort to negate that future reality!
The pols babbled about the possibilities, what could happen, what may happen, and that we should all be on the alert to prevent it and seemed to take solace in the commission's contention that a biological attack was most likely. Still, one Democrat pablum-server conceded, "It's easier to deliver that kind of a weapon than a nuclear weapon-that isn't to say that we are in any way, shape, or form minimizing the threat of a nuclear attack."
Our leaders aren't minimizing the risk, even if our president refuses to concede that Islam is our primary enemy. They're also not doing anything to pre-empt it and the commission report doesn't mention the Islamic threat.
See my book, An Immodest Proposal for Ending and Winning the War on Terrorism which details the steps toward that pre-emption.
The first step is full awareness of the dangers, an awareness that hasn't yet reached the general public and Washington, D.C.
The first titled, "Public Says the Federal Debt Equal to Threat from Terrorism," ([http://bit.ly/bYprgp]) is based on a Gallup survey which incidentally also shows that people trust Republicans over Democrats on both issues. That latter result is incidental only because it doesn't matter.
Health care costs placed third in the survey, followed by unemployment and illegal immigration, which matter even less.
The reason those issues matter less is not because they are inconsequential, however.
The federal debt is horrendous and growing worse daily as this administration piles trillions of debt dollars onto the backs of future generations. The cost of health care is equally horrendous and is sapping the life out of Americans both literally and figuratively. The unchecked flood of illegal immigrants is swamping America's educational and medical resources.
One might even add the Gulf oil catastrophe as another serious but secondary concern.
Why are all the other major problems facing America merely incidental to the threat of terrorism? Simply because the next terrorist attack or attacks could make the debt, health care, immigration, and the Gulf irrelevant.
If this nation is devastated by future attacks by Islamist crazies employing weapons of mass destruction, no one will give a damn about the other issues we face. We'll be too busy trying to pick up the pieces of what remained of the United States of America.
Before readers scoff at that scenario, refer to the second story showing how nutty we are, "Democrats and Republicans on Homeland Security Agree that WMD Attack Likely by 2013," [http://bit.ly/biVgUz]
That rarity, agreement on anything by both Dems and the GOP, is overshadowed by the inanity of that agreement: "They agree with the assessment made by the Commission on the Prevention of Weapons of Mass Destruction Proliferation and Terrorism that it is likely that by 2013 terrorists will launch an attack somewhere in the world using a weapon of mass destruction."
After all, to what are they agreeing? They are concurring on the idea that America could be the victim of a massive attack or attacks with chemical, bacteriological, radiological, and/or nuclear weapons within three years.
Forget the timeline and the "anywhere in the world" phrases. Anyone in his right mind is fully aware that the United States, "the Great Satan," is and will continue to be the target of choice for Islamists. Any other nation attacked will be a fallback alternative.
In point of fact, those assaults could take place tomorrow, next week, or maybe, with a rough touch of irony, on the ninth or tenth anniversaries of the 9/11 attacks. That WMD commission has as much hard evidence of the timing as you or I.
It's bad enough that Gallup shows that Americans are so oblivious of the ramifications of a WMD attack that they equate the danger with the ruinous inflationary threat of spending money the government doesn't have but now our leaders speak of WMD attacks as a done deal, a virtual fait accompli devoid of any concerted effort to negate that future reality!
The pols babbled about the possibilities, what could happen, what may happen, and that we should all be on the alert to prevent it and seemed to take solace in the commission's contention that a biological attack was most likely. Still, one Democrat pablum-server conceded, "It's easier to deliver that kind of a weapon than a nuclear weapon-that isn't to say that we are in any way, shape, or form minimizing the threat of a nuclear attack."
Our leaders aren't minimizing the risk, even if our president refuses to concede that Islam is our primary enemy. They're also not doing anything to pre-empt it and the commission report doesn't mention the Islamic threat.
See my book, An Immodest Proposal for Ending and Winning the War on Terrorism which details the steps toward that pre-emption.
The first step is full awareness of the dangers, an awareness that hasn't yet reached the general public and Washington, D.C.
