Eileen Ciesla
http://www.NewsAndOpinion.com -- AMONG the Muslim population in Luton, England dozens of men are rushing to join the Taliban. "They want to die there, " Mohammed Abdullah told the Times of London, "You must understand: all Muslims in Britain view supporting the jihad as a religious duty. All of us are willing to sacrifice our lives for our beliefs."
While, the anti-war cries of activists who alternatively wax pacifist and anarchist, seem to cross a near but unreachable line for civil libertarians. Clearly, this Briton's opinion, with the threat of action behind it, is treasonous. It is the collision of these two sentiments that is the evil genius of multiculturalism.
In remarks offered at Georgetown University on November 7th, former President Bill Clinton examined possible reasons for the terrorist attacks. He found them with the nation's Founders, the Crusades, and a lack of dialogue with Muslims.
Terror, he reminded the audience, has existed in America for hundreds of years, and we are "paying a price today" for slavery and its treatment of Native Americans. This subtle endorsement of slavery reparations or Black Pantherism was followed by something that could have come straight from Al-Jazeera, or perhaps a lecture at any number of American universities,
"In the first Crusade, when Christian soldiers took Jerusalem, they first burned a synagogue with 300 Jews in it and proceeded to kill every woman and child who was a Muslim on Temple Mount. I can tell you that story is still being told today in the Middle East and we are still paying for it."
Blaming America for the Crusades, a series of wars that occurred 700 years before our nation's founding, brings one perilously close to the opinions of Osama bin Laden, but also of Noam Chomsky. Then Clinton softened up and sounded Oprah-esque, suggesting, in light of the reports of American Muslims rejoicing over the attacks, that, "We reach out and engage the Muslim world in debate…this debate is going on all over America. We've got to stop pretending this isn't out there."
Can there be a debate between those citizens who either verbally support, or actually volunteer in the Taliban's army and the rest of America's citizenry? Only in the blurry world of multiculturalism, where all opinions are valid, all civilizations advanced (except Western), all expressions justified and any action can be rationalized and defended in its proper "context."
Of course, it is impossible to avoid awful irony of his remarks. During his Presidency of "unparalleled peace and prosperity," the US and its overseas interests suffered 5 terrorist attacks masterminded by Osama bin Laden. What was the Clinton response?
First, it was to stop the CIA from recruiting unsavory contacts, thus thwarting their ability to gather intelligence on the terrorist underworld.
When the Sudan offered to hand bin Laden over in 1996, Clinton turned them down. He couldn't see a way to prosecute him successfully under US law. Carlos the Jackal, given to French authorities by the Sudan, now sits in a Paris jail. Bin Laden plots jihad.
In 1998, in the middle of his grand-jury testimony, Clinton lobbed a few missiles on a compound in Afghanistan, and on an aspirin factory in the Sudan. Result: bin Laden gained more followers. Clinton left office, but not before issuing 140 pardons and 36 sentence commutations.
Was this measured reaction out of deference to the radical Islamic world's right to religious imperialism? Or rather, was it simply not in Clinton's political interest to engage in a campaign at that time?
As he casts about for a legacy, or perhaps, tries to pave the way for his return as the First Husband, Clinton gives us a telling speech, valuable in what it reflects and portends. The multiculturalist's philosophy of victimology, racial and religious antagonism, global socialism, and opportunism, is one Clinton learned well as a Georgetown law student. It's not a surprise that he received no criticism from the student audience, future State Department employees, just a hearty round of
Eileen Ciesla is the 2001-2002 Warren Brookes Journalism Fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a Washington D.C.-based public policy organization. Comment by clicking here.
11/02/01: Cold comfort
10/25/01: Beware of peaceniks bearing candles