Category Archives: Terrorism

Moussaoui Not Mad, Just Bad (And Honest About It)

According to the Associated Press, Moussaoui said that “it made his day to hear accounts of Americans suffering from the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks and he would like to see similar attacks—every day.”

Family members of Sept. 11 victims exited the courtroom adamant Moussaoui should die, his callousness and cruelty having sealed his fate. Had he sniveled, sworn he had experienced an epiphany, or accepted the diagnosis of schizophrenia he was generously offered, victims may have looked upon him more favorably—as a victim too, perhaps (I can just hear the cliché, “We are all victims of this Islamic deadly ideology.”)

But Moussaoui stuck to his guns. Indeed, the Islamic terrorist is perfectly candid about why he kills, or schemes on killing. He doesn’t resort to the-camel-ate-my homework excuses, but tells it like he sees it. He kills us because he hates us.

The common criminals inhabiting Western jails, however, have made an art of using the therapeutic idiom, which they imbibe from their psychotherapist tutors, to work backwards and discover the exculpating “roots” of their behavior. Islamic criminals are different. They haven’t yet learned that “Daddy doesn’t love me” is a sufficient excuse for any crime committed in the West. They don’t need excuses—they are proud of their faith and the ghastly deeds they say it commands. These brutes exhibit not the slightest need to give their barbarism a palatable pedigree. It is Western intellectuals and pundits, not Arabs and Muslims, who developed the root-causes theories of terrorism. This is why Islamic criminals are so much more believable. When they tell us why they kill, we can take them at their word.

The evil Moussaoui also mocked Navy Lt. Nancy McKeown, who wept on the stand as she described the death of two of her subordinates. “I think it was disgusting for a military person to cry,” he snarled. “She is military; she should expect people at war with her to want to kill her.” The sounds of her sniffing meekly in front of him, he said, had made his day.

Here I have to agree with him. A representative of the military crying in front of her assailant exudes mush, not mettle. As I pointed out in “Osama’s Snickering at our Military,” OBL and his ascetic Islamists know full well that “the mentality that pervades the military, including the top brass,” is the “let-it-all-hang-out credo,” and that one is encouraged to parade emotions like one would a Purple Heart. Islamists despise us for it. More importantly, they don’t fear us because of it.

Frankly, I think that in front of the enemy, the military should suck it up.

The People Vs. Dubya & Dubai

Bush, Political Economy, Politics, Terrorism

…When in doubt, use the critical compass of private property: To understand the American people’s splenetic response to the transaction, pretend U.S. ports were private and not state run.
In all likelihood, if ports were privatized, we’d be witnessing similar pickiness as to who operates them. After all, the titleholders would have to underwrite the endeavor and would thus be extra cautious, for they’d be liable for the costs of an attack, not taxpayers. In a free market, even the perception of insecurity would cause insurance costs to soar. Fairness doesn’t factor into it.
…This is the American people’s back yard. They feel they own the ports, which is why they responded as cautiously as any proprietor who prizes and protects what is his.

The excerpt is from my new column, “The People Vs. Dubya & Dubai.” It leads on WorldNetDaily today. I look forward to your comments.

The People Vs. Dubya & Dubai

Bush, Political Economy, Politics, Terrorism

…When in doubt, use the critical compass of private property: To understand the American people’s splenetic response to the transaction, pretend U.S. ports were private and not state run.
In all likelihood, if ports were privatized, we’d be witnessing similar pickiness as to who operates them. After all, the titleholders would have to underwrite the endeavor and would thus be extra cautious, for they’d be liable for the costs of an attack, not taxpayers. In a free market, even the perception of insecurity would cause insurance costs to soar. Fairness doesn’t factor into it.
…This is the American people’s back yard. They feel they own the ports, which is why they responded as cautiously as any proprietor who prizes and protects what is his.

The excerpt is from my new column, “The People Vs. Dubya & Dubai.” It leads on WorldNetDaily today. I look forward to your comments.

Director of Premier Israeli Free-Market Think Tank Responds to ‘Reality on the Palestinian Ground’

Free Markets, Israel, Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, Terrorism

Daniel Doron, director of The Israel Center for Social & Economic Progress, and a columnist for The Jerusalem Post, responds to “Reality on the Palestinian Ground“:

Dear Ilana,

As usual you write brilliantly, and with incandescent moral passion. Two small remarks:

Yes, we should hold the Palestinians responsible for their actions, but we should consider (even when sentencing a murderer) extenuating circumstances.

Palestinian society was destroyed during the 1936-9 “Arab revolt” when the British for their nefarious divide-and-rule purposes established the arch terrorist Haj Amin El-Husseini as Mufti of Jerusalem. He embarked not only on a war against Jews and the British but mostly on his own people, assasinatng many of his political opponents, and making most of the Arab elites flee their country. This is why in 48 Palestinian society, deprived of its traditional legitimate leadership and at the mercy of terrorists and hired hands, could not undertake a project of state building.

The Mufti’s wholesale liquidation of any alternative leadership is also the reason why while all other Arab dictators have an opposition, albeit in exile, Araft had none. All potential opposition was simply eliminated or terrorized.

So was the Arab population. It was not only terrorized but it has been, since Oslo, subject to the most horrendous camapign of indoctrination and brainwashing (with funds donated by Europe and the US). Before Oslo hundreds of thousands of Palestinians worked in Israel, and they could have created mayhem and destruction had they tried to engage in terrorism. But terrorist incidents were far and few between until Oslo brought Arafat and his criminal gangs to the West Bank and Gaza, and until the Arab population was subject to intnese brainwashing. (Consider what three years of Geobbles indoctrination did to a nation that was reputedly very civilized!)

Another factor that is often neglected is that Palestinian factions are usually proxies of Arab nations plus Iran and Saudi privateers. They are financed by them and advance their intra-Arab rivalries. The only factor that unites them is hatred for Israel, which they exploit to advance these Arab imperialist interests, all the while betraying their own people and their best interests.

Best,
Daniel