The further to the left or the right you move, the more your lens on life distorts.

Saturday, June 25, 2016

A Careful Balance

Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and most Democrats condemn those who insist that it might be time to call radical Islamic terrorists exactly that they are—radical Islamic terrorists. They argue that it makes no difference what they're called, and that the real problem—at least in the United States—is "gun violence." After all, the brave, virtuous Democrats staged a "sit-in" in the House of Representatives, showing us just how much they care about stopping people on the no-fly list from getting serious weapons—as if everyone else doesn't have that concern as well.

In their through-the-looking-glass world of political correctness, Democrats worry more about "offending" Muslims than defeating Islamic terrorists. Using a variation on Hillary Clinton's classic line about Benghazi, they ask, "What difference does it make what we call them."

A big difference, because a politically correct approach to combating Islamic terror permeates what little tactical actions this president and his probable successor will make. A case in point is described by Debra Heine:
The question of why the Internet still works in the Islamic State's stronghold of Raqqa, Syria, came up during the House Armed Services Committee hearing on the military’s cyber operations yesterday, and the answer was less than reassuring. At issue are concerns that President Barack Obama's bloated and politicized National Security Council is micromanaging the military -- including its cyber force -- to the mission's detriment.

Rep. Martha McSally, a retired fighter pilot, posed the question to the assistant secretary of defense for homeland defense and global security, Thomas Atkin: “We have known cells in Raqqa that are directing training, that are directing operations very specifically targeting against Americans,” McSally said. “Why is the Internet not shut down in Raqqa?”

Atkin noted that he would give a more detailed answer during the closed-door hearing in the afternoon, but answered in general terms. “Certainly going after specific nodes to hamper and stop the use of the Internet by ISIS is important, but we also have to respect the rights of citizens to have access to the Internet,” he said. “So it’s a careful balance, even in Raqqa.”
What!?? It's a careful balance!??

Here we have Raqqa, a city controlled by ISIS, a place where much of their web-based propaganda emanates, and the Obama administration is worried about the right of Raffa's citizens to use Facebook and Twitter?  The Obama administration is worried about "a careful balance" that ensures Raffa's beleaguered citizens access to the web and at the same time allows ISIS to propagate its propaganda—you know, the same propaganda that the Dems wring their hands about as a tertiary cause (behind guns, and Islamophobia) of "home grown terror."  And here I thought that the Democrats were concerned about "lonewolves" or "self-radicalized violent extremists."

And back in Raffa, never mind that ISIS has imposed strict Sharia law, that any LBGT person in Raffa, if found, would be killed in a heartbeat, that any woman who wore a tank top would be beaten or killed, that meaningful human rights are zero for the innocent people under ISIS's control. Noooo.

And that's why attitudes matter, why a tough approach to our Muslim adversaries is necessary, why pushing a ridiculous right to internet access while ignoring the fundamental human of Muslims living under Sharia is a bad joke, why a PC approach to radical Islamic terror just might get hundreds or thousands of Americans killed.

Sometimes, you just can't make this stuff up. Unbelievable.