The Day the World Should Have Changed

By David L. Brown

Today is 9/11/07, six years since the world changed.

Well, no, let me take that back. Six years ago the world should have changed for us, when 19 Arab men, most of them Saudis, turned four airliners filled with innocent people into weapons of mass destruction. It was the most astonishing military attack ever suffered by the United States, more horrifying than Pearl Harbor because it took place right in our nation’s business center and because it targeted innocents.

What’s that? You question my use of the word “military” to describe the events of 9/11? Well let me explain: Our nation is in a state of war, a war declared not by us but against us. It is the most dangerous war we, and indeed all of modern civilization, have ever faced for it is essentially a war to the death for civilization as we know it.

Those who have declared this war, this Jihad, are followers of a centuries old cult that has the goal of converting, subjugating, or killing every non-Muslim man, woman and child on the face of the Earth. Not even Hitler, Stalin, or any other conquerer in history had such an ambitious and bloodthirsty agenda as that of our present enemy.

But, you say, 9/11 could not have been an act of war because these Arab people were civilians, not soldiers. Well, no they weren’t civilians, as I am sure they would have been the first to argue. They were acting that day as “soldiers of Allah,” going proudly to their imagined rewards in Paradise. Just because they did not wear a recognized uniform, march in columns or bear the flag of a nation does not mean that they were anything other than soldiers following orders into battle.

According to the American Heritage Dictionary, the definition of a civilian is as follows:

  1. A person following the pursuits of civil life, especially one who is not an active member of the military, the police, or a belligerent group.

Pay attention now: According to a leading standard reference dictionary, a civilian is someone “who is not … part of a belligerent group”. Al-Qaeda and any number of other militant Islamic organizations are by strict definition “belligerent,” and thus their followers, supporters and sympathizers in their hundreds of thousands or even millions are non-civilians, every last one of them. That makes my use of the terms “military” and “soldiers” completely accurate.

But let me get back to my point, which is that despite the fact that the United States six years ago suffered a terrible and brutal military attack by soldiers of a worldwide power — the world has not changed nearly as much as it needs to…

What, do I see you raising your hand once more? Oh, now you challenge my use of the term “worldwide power”? Well, I will admit that Jihadist Islam is different from the kind of world powers that we are accustomed to, such as our own nation the United States, the former Soviet Union, or Great Britain when it was still great and ruled the waves. But neither were the Viet Cong who defeated us three decades ago cast in the same mold as members of the U.N. Security Council. There are many other examples of wars in which at least one side consisted of loosely organized combatants. The American Revolution began in much that sort of way, with citizen-soldiers sniping from behind trees with their squirrel rifles at “Redcoats” marching in rank and file. Today, we are the Redcoats and we are no less involved in war than when our founding fathers fought against the forces of King George III.

There are many differences between the Viet Cong, or even the combatants of the American Revolution, and today’s Islamic Jihadists, not least the fact that there are about 1.5 billion (with a B) Muslims in the world, living in nearly every nation on Earth. Viet Cong “Charlie” in his Southeast Asian jungle redoubt could never have dreamed of such a thing, and Gen. Washington’s most pressing need was always for more men to bear arms.

During the Vietnam war, “Charlie” had his supporters and in fact was used as a proxy in the Cold War then on-going between the U.S. and the Soviet Union with China as an interested party. The American belligerents of 1775-1781 gained outside support, too — from France, and in fact our victory over Mad George resulted from a kind of proxy war between what were at the time the contending world powers.

Radical Islam has its supporters, too, most notably those very special “friends” of the West, the Saudis. Made rich beyond any fabulous dream from the good fortune of living on top of an enormous reserve of petroleum, these recent descendants of camel-driving bedouins have financed the construction of thousands of mosques in cities and towns all around the world. And not only that, they have paid to provide as preachers in those mosques imams trained in the conservative Wahhabist version of Islam. Wahhabism preaches the “old time religion” version of Islam, the kind that exhorts believers to engage in war against infidels of every stripe “wherever they may be found.” There is plenty of evidence that Wahhabist preachers strive to guide their followers to jihad, holy war against non-believers.

But now I must disagree with myself over my own terminology — namely the use of the term “religion” to describe Islam — for it is not like any other true religion the world has ever known. What it does resemble is a political cult of conquest, for that is exactly what it is. Its founder, the so-called prophet Mohammed, was a conquering warlord and his successors have continued down the same path for fourteen centuries. I will not explain this point further because I have already addressed the question in depth in two previous essays on this web site. If you are interested in learning more, please use the search window and look up these articles:

  • “Is Islam a Religion, or a Cult?” posted May 21, 2006
  • “Islam and Communism: Brothers Under the Skin,” posted May 25, 2006

So now we have determined that the U.S., and in fact all non-Muslim people of the world, are under attack. We are in a war that has been declared against us by an implacable foe. That the goal of that enemy is to out-breed us, out-terrorize us, out-maneuver us and out-last us until no Infidel is left standing. From the Muslim point of view the only acceptable end of this war is to create an all-Muslim world, to eventually leave every living Infidel with the tripartite choice of either converting to Islam (an Arabic word meaning “submission”); living under the thumb of Islamic law as a second-class citizen by paying a tax (“dhimmitude,” which is merely another form of submission); or suffering brutal death and consignment to Hell.

So with all this in mind, let us turn our thoughts again to that day six years ago when the world should have changed, but didn’t. What went wrong? Well, it is not easy to answer that question but one thing that should be pointed out is that our President did not on 9/12/01 exhort Americans to gird themselves for battle, but rather to grab their credit cards and head for the mall to shop.

He must have been thinking of Bill Clinton’s advice that “It’s the economy, stupid,” when he should have been remembering Franklin Roosevelt’s stirring speech of December 8, 1941, which he began with the words “Yesterday, December 7, 1941—a date which will live in infamy…” and concluded by asking Congress for a declaration of war.

Why are Americans unable to grasp the fact that we are engaged in this defensive war against an enemy that has the goal of our absolute and total destruction? Here are a few additional points:

  1. Our President has perhaps done a good job of following up on his awkward beginning by asking us to go shopping as a response to 9/11 — but he has done a horrible job of communicating the seriousness of the problem to the public. A leader’s paramount role is to communicate, which is what distinguished Lincoln, FDR and Reagan among others.
  2. Our Congress has turned into a seething morass of hopeless imbecility in which the Islamic war against us has become nothing more than a political football. I am personally appalled by what I see and read about our “leaders” in Congress, whose only motivation seems to be to gather money and power.
  3. Our mainstream media have slanted and biased their “fair and accurate” reporting in ways that have confused and distorted the issues and, worse, they have many times undermined our security efforts by reporting information that should not be revealed to the enemy. Sometimes it seems that the media must surely be on the side of the enemy, but that can’t be right can it?
  4. Our oil, automobile and energy companies, in collusion with the “leaders” in Washington, have conspired to keep America addicted to oil, with the result that a vast and seemingly unending flood of cash continues to flow into the hands of the supporters of Jihad, in places such as Saudi Arabia. Syria and Iran. Without this windfall, radical Islam would never have been able to get off the ground.

No doubt there are many more factors at play, but the sad truth is that since that awful September day when America should have changed in its resolve to resist this unholy war that has been declared against us by bloodthirsty Jihadists — it has changed only for the worse. We are more divided than ever, more riddled with self-interest, jealousy, hatred and greed. Our “leaders” are like King Lear’s daughters, squabbling among themselves over his legacy, while our enemy moves steadily forward in the unending war against all the non-Muslim world, and in particular the one they call The Great Satan. That would be us.

Today, most Americans seem to want nothing more than to wish away the warning of 9/11, and yet, like the imaginary bloodstains that Lady Macbeth could not wash from her hands, that dire message will not vanish neither soon nor late. The attack of 9/11 was a renewed declaration of a war that has been going on for 1400 years. Our enemies have demonstrated that they are in it for the long haul, that they are willing to continue to wage war against all non-Muslims for generations, for centuries, until they attain their goal of an entire planet under one unforgiving deity they call Allah.

Remember 9/11. It may not be deemed of great significance today, so soon after its occurrence, but I can assure you that in the far distant future (if humankind has a future at all) it will loom large in the records of history. The question is: Will those records be written by the descendants of Muslim conquerers, or the inheritors of Western civilization?

Right now, the odds seem to favor the former.

This entry was posted in Conflict and War, Essays and Opinion, Global Security, Politics. Bookmark the permalink.