Site Map

4 Responses to Site Map

1. nagdaklsd | 01/11/2011 at 5:55 am | Reply

   Regards for sharing Site Map | Speak Loud America! with us keep update bro love your article about Site Map | Speak Loud America! .

2. wonogiri | 04/02/2011 at 7:35 pm | Reply

   This is the perfect blog for anyone who wants to know about this topic. You know so much its almost hard to argue with you (not that I really would want…HaHa). You definitely put a new spin on a subject thats been written about for years. Great stuff, just great!

3. Jim Clegg | 02/07/2010 at 7:44 pm | Reply

   (K.E., an excellent article (and very real assessment) from Charles Krauthammmer with additional comments from me as it pertains to Major Hasan and “organizational cowardice.” jdc)

   Terror — and candor in describing the Islamist ideology behind it

   By Charles Krauthammer – Friday, July 2, 2010

   The Fort Hood shooter, the Christmas Day bomber, the Times Square attacker. On May 13, the following exchange occurred at a hearing of the House Judiciary Committee:

   Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Tex.): Do you feel that these individuals might have been incited to take the actions that they did because of radical Islam?

   Attorney General Eric Holder: There are a variety of reasons why I think people have taken these actions. . . .

   Smith: Okay, but radical Islam could have been one of the reasons?

   Holder: There are a variety of reasons why people —

   Smith: But was radical Islam one of them?

   Holder: There are a variety of reasons why people do these things. Some of them are potentially religious-based.

   Potentially, mind you. This went on until the questioner gave up in exasperation.

   A similar question arose last week in U.S. District Court when Faisal Shahzad, the Times Square attacker, pleaded guilty.

   Explained Shahzad: “One has to understand where I’m coming from . . . I consider myself a mujahid, a Muslim soldier.”

   Well, that is clarifying. As was the self-printed business card of Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, the Fort Hood shooter, identifying himself as SoA: Soldier of Allah.

   Holder’s avoidance of the obvious continues the absurd and embarrassing refusal of the Obama administration to acknowledge who out there is trying to kill Americans and why. In fact, it has banned from its official vocabulary the terms jihadist, Islamist and Islamic terrorism.

   Instead, President Obama’s National Security Strategy insists on calling the enemy — how else do you define those seeking your destruction? — “a loose network of violent extremists.” But this is utterly meaningless. This is not an anger-management therapy group gone rogue. These are people professing a powerful ideology rooted in a radical interpretation of Islam, in whose name they propagandize, proselytize, terrorize and kill.

   Why is this important? Because the first rule of war is to know your enemy. If you don’t, you wander into intellectual cul-de-sacs and ignore the real causes that might allow you to prevent recurrences.

   The Pentagon review of the Fort Hood shooting runs 86 pages with not a single mention of Hasan’s Islamism. It contains such politically correct inanities as “religious fundamentalism alone is not a risk factor.”

   Of course it is. Indeed, Islamist fundamentalism is not only a risk factor. It is the risk factor, the common denominator linking all the great terror attacks of this century — from 9/11 to Mumbai, from Fort Hood to Times Square, from London to Madrid to Bali. The attackers varied in nationality, education, age, social class, native tongue and race. The one thing that united them was the jihadist vision in whose name they acted.

   To deny this undeniable truth leads to further absurdities. Remember the wave of speculation about Hasan’s supposed secondary post-traumatic stress disorder — that he was so deeply affected by the heart-rending stories of his war-traumatized patients that he became radicalized? On the contrary. He was moved not by their suffering but by the suffering they (and the rest of the U.S. military) inflicted on Hasan’s fellow Muslims, in whose name he gunned down 12 American soldiers while shouting “Allahu Akbar.”

   With Shahzad, we find the equivalent ridiculous — and exculpating — speculation that perhaps he was driven over the edge by the foreclosure of his home. Good grief. Of course his home went into foreclosure — so would yours if you voluntarily quit your job and stopped house payments to go to Pakistan for jihadist training. As The Post’s Charles Lane pointed out, foreclosure was a result of Shahzad’s radicalism, not the cause.

   There’s a final reason the administration’s cowardice about identifying those trying to kill us cannot be allowed to pass. It is demoralizing. It trivializes the war between jihadi barbarism and Western decency, and diminishes the memory of those (including thousands of brave Muslims — Iraqi, Pakistani, Afghan and Western) who have died fighting it.

   Churchill famously mobilized the English language and sent it into battle. But his greatness lay not in mere eloquence. It was his appeal to the moral core of a decent people to rise against an ideology the nature of which Churchill never hesitated to define and describe — and to pronounce (“Nahhhhzzzzi”) in an accent dripping with loathing and contempt.

   No one is asking Obama or Holder to match Churchill’s rhetoric — just Shahzad’s candor.

   ——

   From the perspective of a retired U.S. Army colonel, please permit me to add another comment about the Fort Hood shooter, MAJ Hasan:

   In Mr. Krauthammer’s last sentence in the article above, he identifies Obama and Holder. I suggest a couple other names of stakeholders be added to the sentence: Secretary of Defense Gates and General Casey, Chief of Staff of the Army. Let me suggest that the incident was also encouraged by a surreal culture within the military that is encouraged condoned by its senior leaders. It is indeed a type of cowardice. The senior leadership of an organization – of whatever size – is ultimately responsible for its overarching culture, related mores, and total awareness while also ensuring hurtful and damaging neglect and/or “not my problem” attitudes are minimized. Gates and Casey are responsible for all the events – negative and positive – that transpire within the greater organization. As the senior leaders within DoD seek to place blame on middle management (select medical field grade officers that unfortunately had MAJ Hasan in their respective chain of command), I only pray they also accept their own unique responsibility in order to correct the exceedingly corrupt, neglectful and cowardly approach to the “enemies” within the ranks. Gentlemen, where does the proverbial buck stop?

   In the end, as Mr. Krauthammer explains with extraordinary clarity, the enemy is now expanding operations within the borders of the U.S.A. It is execution of a strategic plan that was developed by senior Islamic leaders over 30 years in Egypt and now being planned elsewhere. We do need to be far more vigilant (and far less cowardly) as we prosecute “The Long War” within our own contiguous border and organizations.

   Jim Clegg, Colonel (Ret), U.S. Army

   • keleger | 02/07/2010 at 9:48 pm | Reply

     Sir, it’s an honor to hear what you have to say. Bravo! Do you think this will bring war to our nation? I’m at a lost when I go out into the world (shopping, walking, etc.) and no one seems worried, no one is talking. I don’t see any fliers any where helping the folks understand. I don’t see anyone doing anything. I’m worried. I have small children and I want them to have freedom. What’s happening here in Louisiana tells me these radicals are finding their backdoor. [Don't know why this comment ended up on the sitemap page.]