"Now imagine that the attacks had continued, every six hours, for another four years, until nearly 20 million Americans were dead. This is roughly what the Soviet Union suffered during World War II, and contemplating these numbers may help put in perspective what the United States has so far experienced during the war against terrorism."

I contemplated. So far no perspective. I have a set of numbers from The Religion Of Peace.

1. iraqi civilians killed by islamic militants (shia vs. sunni) = 16791

2. iraqi civilians killed collaterally in incidents involving Americans (and islamic terrorists) = 215

* The above figures are for the year 2006.

Posted by: arjun.sevak at January 30, 2007 8:28 AM

So, how many are supposed to die until one does not "overreact". Millions?

Posted by: Witch-king of Angmar at January 30, 2007 8:32 AM

I knew it I just KNEW he was going to mention hiroshima, not pearl harbour but hiroshima.

Some one needs to explain to him the difference between 'unprovoked' and 'provoked'

He doesnt mention the rape of nanjing or the death marches of the allied POWs.

Like the left wing ideologists, these people have already made up there minds as to who are the 'bad guys'(Westerners) and no amount of reasoning with them will persuade them other wise.

(And didnt the US warn japan 2 weeks in advance of hiroshima?)

Posted by: BlowHammed at January 30, 2007 8:34 AM

Yet another leftist college professor who would love to see America fail....He should go have coffee with Ward Churchill and laugh about the good old times...

Posted by: exsgtbrown at January 30, 2007 8:45 AM

I'm not really in favor of Bush's democracy building projects, but someone needs to ask these lefties: is the war in Iraq so bad? We have a hopping economy and people are reporting very high rates of satisfaction with their lives. How are these lefties being affected? Because they have to look at bad pictures on TV? They aren't being conscripted. The military is completely volunteer. They aren't being taxed more heavily. They are really in no way affected by the war. One of the worst dictators in history was removed and brought to justice, yet they would perfer him as president to Bush.

When you ask a lefty why Iraq is failing you inevitably get some answer like, "It's an immoral war!" or "war for oil!" maybe even "Stop the unlawful U.S. occupation!". They certainly talk about "neo-cons" and possibly Cheney's desire to drink the blood of puppies. Bush's mismanagement of the war is the most sane assessment that one can get from the left, but really everybody criticizes that now.

Iraq is the failure of modern liberalism. A central tenant of liberalism has failed. The central tenant that I’m talking about is 'multiculturalism' and its sister 'political correctness'. What has failed is the idea that all cultures and people are the same. This is the idea of ‘equality’ that liberals use to justify everything from affirmative action to socialism. Liberals would have us believe things like 'deep down we all desire the same things'. As Spencer has pointed out, the "Wilsonian" democracy project was doomed to fail from the beginning. This "Wilsonian" scheme can only be defined as liberal.

Posted by: Charles the Hammer at January 30, 2007 9:02 AM

"Does history provide any insight?"

He should study Muslims/Islamic history for "insight!"

Being a college professor, surely he knows how to read....

Being a leftist college professor, he may not be able to see the handwriting on the wall...

Posted by: exsgtbrown at January 30, 2007 9:02 AM

Apparently the author, though having nothing piercingly original to offer, nonetheless felt he had to have his say on the Pressing Matter of the Day, and didso. He contented himself with the banal observation that what we see before us -- the entire Baby-Huey operation of "boots on the ground" in Iraq, determined to prevent those very fissures, sectarian and ethnic, we should welcome, (and Afghanistan, sweeping back the Muslim tide)-- is an "overreaction."

He did not wait to find the right word: it is not an "overreaction" but a misguided reaction. It is a reaction of the kind that will come if we persist, like Bush (or like David Bell) in allowing ourselves to believe that this is a "war on terrorism" -- in which case there is no need even to begin to think of all the other instruments of Jihad, the more effective and dangerous instruments, such as the money weapon, Da'wa, and demography, for if Jihad proceeds with instruments other than terror, and Infidels are only engaged in a "war on terror," then we should be content with any analysis that focuses on that, and so the disagreement between the Bush Administration and David Bell is merely over the size of that "terror" threat, and the proper size of our military and security steps to meet that "threat."

Nothing here about the islamization of Europe. Nothing here about the systematic long-term attacks on Christians in Indonesia (thousands of churches destroyed in 2003 aloine), on Hindus in Pakistan, Bangladesh, Kashmir, and deep into India. Nothing here about attacks on Christians over the past few decades in Nigeria (the Jihad that Col. Ojukwu, head of Biafra, was fighting against), nor in southern Sudan, nor within a great number of sub-Saharan countries. Nothing about the world-wide activities of the World Muslim Congress, the financing of mosques and madras, for which the Saudis have spent $100 billion (the Soviet Union, in all the years of its existence, never spent abroad on pro-Soviet propaganda and agents more than $10 billion) in the last two decades, nothing about the takeover of academic departments, or at least the use of Arab money to endow Centers (Durham, Exeter, Georgetown), or expensively-upholstered chairs (University of California, Harvard Law School, and a great many other places), where the King Abdul Aziz this, and the Guardian of the Two Holy Places that, can make sure that neither they, nor the successors they choose, ever enlighten the students about Islam (thus, for example, does Frank Vogel help pick, with a little help from Roy Mottahedeh and John Esposito, Noah "After Jihad" Feldman to continue to misinform Harvard Law students about Islam, providing a guide to nothing and to nowhere, for the next 35 years -- but how would the faculty members, innocent of Islam, and of what is going on in the field, be aware of that until long after Feldman arrives, trailing clouds of glory?).

Perhaps David Bell is merely disturbed at the colossal waste, the squandering in Iraq, of men's lives, of vast sums of money ($700 billion in past and committed future costs), in war materiel, in damage to American morale, military as well as civilian -- all to pursue a will-o'-the-wisp of "freedom" and "democracy" in a united, stable, prosperous Iraq that will be a Light Unto the (Sunni Arab) Muslim Nations. That, readers of this site understand, is a goal that is both impossible, and is exactly the wrong goal.

He might merely have written: a response that is purely military, based on a misunderstanding of the nature and scope of the menace, is the wrong response and the wrong type of response, insufficiently various, effective, ruthless, and cunning. For that menace, David Bell might have referred readers to others: See, for example, Bat Ye'or, Oriana Fallaci, Ibn Warraq, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Magdi Allam, Anne-Marie Delcambre, Alain Finkielkraut, Alain Besancon, Ali Sina, Bassam Tibi, Wafa Sultan, and a thousand others, not one of whom, I suspect, David Bell has yet read, digested, thoroughly assimilated.

Posted by: Hugh at January 30, 2007 9:21 AM

Shameless amoral pseudo-intellectual, in whose eyes human life is worth nothing, unless, of course, it is his own. To say that academia is too liberal in awarding the title of "professor" would be a gross understatement.

Posted by: US_infidel at January 30, 2007 9:52 AM

This is an echo of Jimmy Carter's "We have nothing to be afraid of" mixed with the same moral equivalence that threatens to turn The Holocaust into a holocaust.

Posted by: freedomschool at January 30, 2007 11:27 AM

I'm sorry there are so many A-soles allowed to like in the US of A...

http://sheikyermami.com/2007/01/30/australia-migrant-cab-drivers-commit-24-sexual-assaults/

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at January 30, 2007 11:28 AM

Bell's comments are just plain stupid. If we have to judge by Russian standards of world war II one would have to ask, "How many Russians were killed before they started shooting back?" I don't think they waited until year 4 and 20 million dead to fight.

As for the capability of the enemy, one should note that the Jihadists have been waging war against the "infadels" for 1500 years. During that time, their "capability" has veried greatly. For years prior to 9/11 they seemed not much more than annoying flies, to be shoed away, but they always came back. As time passed technology has made them more dangerous. Eventually, if we allow it, they will get nuclear weapons, and they will use them, just as they have done with all the other weapons that come into their possesion. And what will we do then? We would have no choice but to strike back our own nuclear weapons.

This is why the war must be fought and won now. Its why we have to go after the states that fund, train, supply, and/or give the terrist safe harbour. Because these countries are what make it possible for the terrorist to be so dangerous. We can live with a few flies (there will always be another terrorist wanting to kill someone), but we can't live with flies that have nuclear weapons. If we don't win this war, it will lead inevatably to nuclear war. After that 20 million won't seem all that bad.

We have to finish this war and we have to win it, if we are to avoid something far far worse.

Posted by: Naram-Sin at January 30, 2007 11:30 AM

But we have many A-soles in Australia too:

http://sheikyermami.com/2007/01/30/church-of-the-raving-moonbats/

Sorry: The posting above was of course meant to read 'allowed to live' in the US of A...

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at January 30, 2007 11:30 AM

I guess it would take a PhD to figure how many have to be killed before we "overreact".

Well, I just happen to have a PhD and my precise calculations come up with the figure of 1.
0 is a possibility as well.

Posted by: TheOmegaMan at January 30, 2007 11:36 AM

Quoting Hugh:
"Nothing here about the islamization of Europe. Nothing here about the systematic long-term attacks on Christians in Indonesia (thousands of churches destroyed in 2003 aloine), on Hindus in Pakistan, Bangladesh, Kashmir, and deep into India. Nothing here about attacks on Christians over the past few decades in Nigeria (the Jihad that Col. Ojukwu, head of Biafra, was fighting against), nor in southern Sudan, nor within a great number of sub-Saharan countries."

Yep. This isn't a war only with the United States. He should try counting up all of the casualties.
World War 2 saw two totalitarian nations that had more in common with each other than with any other nation in the war inflict more casualties on each other than any other nation in the war.

Those that see human life as cheap will do that.

That didn't mean that Hitler was not a threat to Norway because fewer Norwegians died in that war.
These Muslims who kill more of each other than they do infidels are still a threat to infidels.

Posted by: freedomschool at January 30, 2007 11:38 AM

The kind of "moral" reasoning exemplified by this prof is one based on a teleological, utilitarian understanding of the world. Thus, in order to figure out right from wrong, one simply conducts a body count. So if the "human cost" (calculated as "a mere three thousand") is small, then there's no need to become alarmed. No need for moral outrage, just acquiescence. What idiocy -- but, typical, I suppose of "intellects" with professorships.

Posted by: J.S. at January 30, 2007 11:49 AM

Another over-educated "smart guy".
Absolutely no real sense.
I know the type, unless you have advanced degrees, you are just a "homonid"
Well, I know when the enemy wants to kill me and my loved-ones, and I won't be trying to kiss-up to them as they take over my country.....I'll be fighting.

Posted by: Carolyn2 at January 30, 2007 11:55 AM

Here is another "real smart guy"
/in case you can't tell, I am very sarcastic with the quotations.
http://uts.cc.utexas.edu/%7Evaranus/eric.html

Posted by: Carolyn2 at January 30, 2007 12:04 PM

Assalamau Laikum all,

Although 9/11 was bad with over 3k peoples transported to Allah SWT, we can still be grateful for small mercies. I want to make 4 points in this regard.

1) The targets chosen could have been far worse...like the hoover dam or the nucleur plant on Long Island, Allah certainly ensured that didn't happen.

Those extremists chose high value political targets rather than causing maximum damage (although I concede that the damage was still quite bad).

2) They had no follow up plan ...no 2nd round of atrocities as it were, on the roads or ships.

3) To their credit the Amerike did not treat wuslims in the Amerike as badly as the extremists wanted them to.

Infact the Amerike has shown great kindness by allowing lots more of muslims/wuslims into the country as well as allowing political control of educational institutions for paltry sums of monies plus allowing Islam into congress, I want to thank you from the bottom of my souls for this.

However whether you did this as a result of guilt, fondness for Islam or greed I am not sure...probably a bit of all of the above.

4) So kind are the Amerike that I think soon we shall see the Assura celebrated in New York. Any route march MUST pass by ground zero...as this would be a typically American symolic gesture shrouded in irony....at least 9/11 would not be forgotten in this way.

In this march, chosen Amerike could join it, their heads cut slightly too, and here in this most poigninant site, we shall see Amerike blood mixing with the blood of Islam, slowly but surely staining red the pictures of the perished, the surrounding footpath, providing comfort to the lost departed souls.

The younger generation with bands playing, will be drowned out every so often with loudspeaker assisted "Allu Akbar" and chains hitting bodies streaked bright and dull red, womens beating their brests to soreness and we can all be proud, salute and remember the 3000... asking for peace from Allah SWT and providing comfort to the relatives of all who died.

Posted by: Naseem at January 30, 2007 12:11 PM

Dr. Bell is certainly a much needed breath of hot air.

Posted by: Seymour Paine at January 30, 2007 12:12 PM

Well sain Naram-Sin,

I particularly like pharases paragraph below:

This is why the war must be fought and won now. Its why we have to go after the states that fund, train, supply, and/or give the terrist safe harbour. Because these countries are what make it possible for the terrorist to be so dangerous.

The problem is that most of these states produce oil that the US economy is dependent on. It's so obvious and simple. Until the US can function without the oil from the Gulf States, Nigeria, and Venezuela there is no big stick from the US. The $64,000 question is: Why haven't any politicians from either party brought this matter up? The US should be building nuclear power facilities, high speed rail (powered by nuclear energy), and working to develop other forms of energy so we can really tell the Gulf states what will happen to them if they fund terrorists (and also where they can stick their oil). Putting up a wind farms here or there is NOT the answer. We have to take a stand and REALLY get serious about this or we will always be held hostage to terrorist states.

Posted by: never_submit at January 30, 2007 12:14 PM

Dr. Bell is a much needed breath of hot air.

I believe 2117 people were killed at Pearl Harbor; imagine if we were limited to a proportional response (like Israel was criticized for not doing) then? 2117, less than 9/11. Maybe we should have sent Japan a strongly worded note.

Posted by: Seymour Paine at January 30, 2007 12:16 PM

Sorry for the multiple duplicative entries. For some reason, Typekey doesn't work well on one of my computers.

Posted by: Seymour Paine at January 30, 2007 12:18 PM

" So kind are the Amerike"

Not for much longer.....

Posted by: exsgtbrown at January 30, 2007 12:31 PM

I was also going to note that the "morality" or lack thereof as expressed by such "professors" sounds so very much like Islam. I have to laugh -- then the nut job Naseem says it all for me! Well done Naseem.

Posted by: J.S. at January 30, 2007 12:34 PM

I wonder. Supposing a jihadi for Allah were to rape Professor Bell; would he wait for 4 years worth of rapes by lines of rapists for Allah before he considered it legitimate to fight off his attackers?

Posted by: Daisytoo at January 30, 2007 1:03 PM

Naseem.

The goats!

Posted by: Fred at January 30, 2007 1:26 PM

Let me start by saying that WWII was started by a smaller attack. On December 7, 1941, America lost 2,403 lives, nearly all military personnel. On 9/11 we lost 2,997 mostly civilian lives. That's a twenty percent increase in initial events that led to the war in question compared to the historical reference given by Mr Bell. So given Bell's logic, the response to 9/11 should be 20% greater than the response to Pearl Harbor.

Mr Bell also ignores the fact that there have been 7,304 deadly attacks carried out by the muhajideen since 9/11. In WWII we didn't wait for the Nazi's to drive their tanks over the White House before we attacked Germany. We took the fight to the enemy and destroyed them before it was too late.

As far as historical insight, who has been proved right by history, Winston Churchill of Neville Chamberlin? And which side of that great argument does Mr Bell resemble? Yes, the death toll of 9/11 is microscopic as compared to the 50 million lost in WWII, but 9/11 occurred on the first day of the war, and Bell is comparing that number to the totals added up at the very end of WWII.

Bell makes the point that the Muslim terrorists lack the military hardware to do the same kind of damage as the Axis powers, but if a jihadist gets a hold of a nuclear weapon, all bets are off.
Ahmadinejad may already have them and could bring the death toll up into the millions overnight. An al-Qaeda operative could bring several suitcase nukes into the US, killing an untold amount of civilians and making entire cities uninhabitable of years.

No, Mr Bell we haven't overreacted, we're just looking out for our own. Because we love our country and it's people.

Posted by: kevin at January 30, 2007 1:51 PM

Bush is a Liberal (According to Charles the Hammer)!

Charles the Hammer writes above:

"Iraq is the failure of modern liberalism. A central tenant of liberalism has failed. The central tenant that I’m talking about is 'multiculturalism' and its sister 'political correctness'. What has failed is the idea that all cultures and people are the same."

How about: "Iraq is the most egregious failure of the failed George Bush presidency!"

Posted by: Ynkedoodl2 at January 30, 2007 1:54 PM

Since Nazeem likes the blooby head cutting and chain-beating "festivities" so much.. we should invite her to a bondage club in New York.

To make things easier.. we can issue them all invitations to Abu Graib and Guantanamo so they can have their fill of these things :-)

Posted by: MeanieMo at January 30, 2007 1:55 PM

I think this Nazeem character is just having a little fun with us. I liked that touch about some bloody medieval Moslem ritual going past Ground Zero. Designed to make us all livid. I think, after we nuke Saudi Arabia, we can use that silly black box, if it is still standing, as a large outhouse. We can call it the Mohammed; that would be the name of all outhouses. As in "Sorry, where is your Mohammed? Is it by the barn?"

Posted by: Seymour Paine at January 30, 2007 2:32 PM

David Bell does not deserve wild criticism. His piece simply gives the wrong impression. He should have said terrorism is not the main worry; the other instruments of Jihad are more dangerous because more effective and less noticed. A response that is entirely military, and that furthermore is based on a misunderstanding of the nature of Islam, so that the "war on terror" (cf. Jimmy Durante and Irving Berlin at a War Bonds Rally, circa 1943, asking people to contribute to "a war against the Blitzkrieg") and not the war of self-defense against the Jihad and all of its instruments, becomes the only war in town.

Besides, one should cut Bell some slack. He did a good job on Dominique de Villepin in The New Rebublic. And his mother, Pearl Bell, used to write good book reviews for The New Leader, a magazine which, like "The Progressive" under Max Ascoli, was sensibly and fiercely anti-Communist, much more so than The New Republic under Straight, and unlike their supposed avatars today, were staffed by those who would have had little trouble recognizing Islam for what it is. In other words, the people who wrote for them had lived through the same things that, for example, Oriana Fallaci had lived through.

Posted by: Hugh at January 30, 2007 2:55 PM

" Imagine that six hours after that, there had been yet another wave."

They attacked WTC in 1993. Then there was a second
attack wave with new Muslim immigrants in 2001, and more targets including the Pentagon and air passengers.

Begala, Stephanopoulos, Clinton, etc. decided to continue the Muslim immigration for more attacks. So did Bush.

When Goode said stop, the MSM and the Democrats with some Republicans said no, we have to continue the attacks with more Muslim immigrants.

So we do have a policy of intentionally continuing the attacks. This is the Begala Bush Clinton Clinton Hagel Kennedy Mel Martinez McCain Mineta Obama Stephanopoulos etc. policy.

The only dispute is the frequency.

The policy is also to give them access to B2's, missile silos, nuclear artillery shells, etc. We know children of immigrants are often more violent. President McKinley was killed by the son of immigrants in the first wave of leftist anarcho violence. Now the Leftists are using Muslims as suicide bombers in the same attacks.

This is not just like Stalinism, this is Stalinism. Some profs pushing this may themselves know of other profs who may have helped the Soviet Union or may be helping Communist China and the Russians build networks in the US now.

Posted by: Old Atlantic at January 30, 2007 3:41 PM

"As an instance of mass murder, the attacks were unspeakable, but they still pale in comparison with any number of military assaults on civilian targets of the recent past, from Hiroshima on down."

How does this statement differ from what Islamists write? He compares an unprovoked, mass murder of civilians on 9/11 to Hiroshima, and concludes that Hiroshima was far worse (in terms of body count -- his sole point of reference or concern -- that is, body counts).

Sorry, but I've read precisely the same from Islamist websites. They make the same point. The only added feature is that the Islamists then conclude that Americans deserve to have the same body count as that of Hiroshima (that's the OBL line).

Posted by: J.S. at January 30, 2007 4:16 PM

I think soon we shall see the Assura celebrated in New York

Usually you have to pay double for that, Cotton.

-- Dodgeball

Posted by: Beagle at January 30, 2007 4:18 PM

David A. Bell said

IMAGINE THAT on 9/11, six hours after the assault on the twin towers and the Pentagon, terrorists had carried out a second wave of attacks on the United States, taking an additional 3,000 lives. Imagine that six hours after that, there had been yet another wave. Now imagine that the attacks had continued, every six hours, for another four years, until nearly 20 million Americans were dead.

Sounds like a letter to the Islamic version of Penthouse magazine. I have a feeling Bell spends alot of time imagining wave after wave ravaging the prostrate U.S. as her bodice lies ripped beside her. Oh baby.

Posted by: special_guest at January 30, 2007 4:31 PM

why the left loves so much islam

http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/01/paradise_lost_why_the_left_lov.html

Of course, to those who do not believe in a concrete reality, as many liberals do not, one system is as good as another, and we have no right to judge the Moslem on how he conducts his affairs. Since the Jihadist's reality is equally valid as the Westerner's, we are practicing moral Imperialism if we force our Judeo-Christian moral law on them. This is exacerbated by the fact that they are Third World peoples; many liberals, deep in their hearts, are pulling for what they perceive as the underdog - in this case the terrorist murdering thug-at the expense of their own culture. A racist, sexist, homophobic, power-mad society such as ours deserves to be taught a lesson! Even if the teacher is racist, sexist, homophobic, and power-mad, they aren't Western, Christian, or White! They aren't Dick Cheney! Power to the people!

There is a strain of masochism involved here as well; the white liberal perceives himself as having unfairly benefited from his station in life, having lived well on the backs of the poor. Somebody must be punished for this! He will flagellate himself in his mind, and will support those who will punish his country, because justice demands retribution, and America has lived far too well. If we must endure terrorist attacks to atone for our sins, so be it! Perhaps we should do the decent thing and die; let others have their turn at the table.

Here Socialist thinking comes into play; there is only so much to go around, and we have been hogging it for too long. For those in the Arab world to live better, we must exit the stage. It's only fair!

Posted by: StillFedUp at January 30, 2007 4:33 PM

With "prof-errors" like these.. would it be a bad idea to suggest a Cultural revolution? Round the bastards up, give 'em a parachute [I am feeling chariatble right now] and drop 'em over Sowdi-land or Paki-swine somewhere where their teachings will be appreciated.

I truly wish we could divvy up our western Countries between the lefists and the Rest of us who are SANE.

In Germany that would be the states [Bundesländer] of Bavaria and Baden-Württemberg going to the sane and the rest can all go to the idiot left. In return they have to take all the moslems with them. Leaving the rest of us to our own devices.. Prost!

I don't know the other countries well enough but I am certain there'd be others who could wok that out for themselves. I should meddle only in the affairs of my own country.

This will of course never happen. The left wants US to suffer. WE are the un-enlightened ones - so unlike them! We have to be forced to experience to joys of islam in our own lands!

"You vill luff izlam unt iff you don't zen i call you a Nazi..."

Scheiß-professor der...

Posted by: MeanieMo at January 30, 2007 4:56 PM

Maybe when Usama completes his dream of killing 4 million Americans, 2 million of them being children, that's when it'll be alright to react accordingly to Mr. Bell.

Posted by: Patriot_1/17 at January 30, 2007 5:18 PM

err--- Dr. Bell

Posted by: MP at January 30, 2007 5:31 PM

Meanie - Why should we share the West with those who are not sane. Let'em have the rest of the world - starting with the stans. It will clear the decks, and sometines Darwin in action is fun to watch.

Posted by: MP at January 30, 2007 5:33 PM

"(cf. Jimmy Durante and Irving Berlin at a War Bonds Rally, circa 1943, asking people to contribute to "a war against the Blitzkrieg")"

Or imagine that World War II had been framed as a "War on Fritz Helmets".

Posted by: remote_control at January 30, 2007 6:29 PM

"He compares an unprovoked, mass murder of civilians on 9/11 to Hiroshima, and concludes that Hiroshima was far worse (in terms of body count -- his sole point of reference or concern -- that is, body counts).

Sorry, but I've read precisely the same from Islamist websites."

In this, and in dozens of other key respects, it certainly seems as though the jihadists and the PC Multiculturalists are reading the same memos. And guess who wrote those memos? Not the jihadists -- the PC Multiculturalists did.

In line with Spencer's effortlessly cogent rebuttal of D'Souza's central argument, it could be said that, although the jihadists have not penned the dominant anti-Western theses within which they frame their "grievances", these theses only provide a recent set of pretexts for their inveterately perennial and permanent jihad against an evil that is always larger than any specific culture, any specific empire, any specific nation, any specific civilization: and that evil is the Jahiliyya of Infidelity, against which Islam must fight until the Last Days, when finally Infidelity will be eradicated for eternity, and Muslims will be able to enjoy Paradise forever without those pesky Infidels swarming the Earth.

Posted by: remote_control at January 30, 2007 6:42 PM

Remote_control,

I occasionally re-read a chapter in "From Plato to Nato" -- it's chapter 12 -- "The failure of universalism and the future of western identity." I keep wanting to do a synopsis on his analysis of Islam and multiculturalism (particularly relativism and postmodernism) -- how these facets of the West intercept, and interconnect with Islam. I haven't gotten around to doing a synopsis, yet. But I found it was incredibly insightful (and far ahead of its time). (Although, of course, i don't agree with every view the author expresses -- but, most of it is very, very informative.)

Posted by: J.S. at January 30, 2007 7:29 PM

He's an idiot that has no social redeeming value to mankind, just a self induced enlarged ego!!!

Posted by: OLD SARGE at January 30, 2007 7:38 PM

9-11 was the single most horrid single event that ever occurred on US soil. A low in the annals of western civilization.

It must NEVER happen again!!!

Bell is a major league dumb"bell"!

The next time I see something written by this guy I won't even bother to skim it. I'll move right on to something else (ANYTHING must automatically be an improvement over anything penned by this clown).

And deliver us all from Islam!

Posted by: pythagoras at January 30, 2007 7:56 PM

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6313799.stm

An untitled tape, described as a "homemade cassette including speeches made by Osama bin Laden and images of a suicide bomber attacking the US barracks in Saudi Arabia", was also there, Mr Sweeney said.

CD-roms found allegedly included a course on jihad "including the virtues of injury for the sake of Allah" and another of The 19 Martyrs which was "the last will/message of those who attacked America on 9/11" the QC added.

Posted by: Borg at January 30, 2007 9:40 PM

"Was 9/11 really that bad?"

Good God, and I thought that WE had a Dhimmi problem in the UK. How many years do you have to spend in college to come out with something as stupid as that? But then he goes on:

"But desire is not the same thing as capacity, and although Islamist extremists can certainly do huge amounts of harm around the world, it is quite different to suggest that they can threaten the existence of the United States".

In the 1930s, the Nazis had the desire, but not the capacity, to wipe out Europe's Jewish population. Dedicating themselves to the effort, they eventually found the capacity...

Perhaps this desk-hugging pacifist thinks the U.S should wait until Islamists develop the capacity to wipe out millions of American (or European) citizens? After all, could it really be that bad?

Posted by: Matamoros at January 30, 2007 9:54 PM

This guy should get a nomination for Dhimmi of the year. I just lost all respect for Johns Hopkins. If there is one aspect of American society that is pathetic to the point of being laughable, it is academia. As bad as the MSM is, the universities are apparently worse.

Posted by: JSobieski at January 30, 2007 10:48 PM

Hugh writes:

"He did not wait to find the right word: it is not an "overreaction" but a misguided reaction. It is a reaction of the kind that will come if we persist, like Bush (or like David Bell) in allowing ourselves to believe that this is a "war on terrorism" -- in which case there is no need even to begin to think of all the other instruments of Jihad, the more effective and dangerous instruments, such as the money weapon, Da'wa, and demography"

Starting in 1942, America didn't just fight a war. We also had a war economy. Rationing and war bonds were used to dampen down the economic distortions caused by increased defense spending. The government launched a crash program, which was successful, to develop synthetic rubber when supplies of natural rubber from the Pacific were cut off. And America was willing and able to fight the ideological and propaganda war--Frank Capra's "Why We Fight" series of propaganda films are classics, and beautiful refutations of enemy propaganda. Finally, we knew exactly what to do about "fifth columnists" (what we now call terrorists)--immediately after Pearl Harbor, all Japanese and German nationals (as opposed to Japanese-American and German-American citizens) were simply rounded up as "enemy aliens." We didn't allow any more Japanese or German nationals to come tooling around our country at will.

Contrast that with today. In their first issue after the 9-11 attack, the magazine U.S. News and World Report said (approvingly!) that President Bush was "assuring the baby-boomers that they could fight terrorism while still enjoying their lattes at Starbucks." In other words, nothing was going to change--our dependence on Muslim oil, the Dubai ports deal and other business deals with Muslim nations, our inability to challenge Muslims themselves to define once and for all what ideas separate "moderates" from "radicals," and so on.

Perhaps, if Americans knew the nature of the enemy and the multi-pronged approach needed to fight it properly, they might have to steel themselves with something a bit stronger than lattes:

And justice is the one thing
You should always find
You gotta saddle up your boys
You gotta draw a hard line
When the gun smoke settles
We'll sing a victory tune
And we'll all meet back
At the local saloon
We'll raise up our glasses
Against evil forces
Singing, "Whiskey for my men, beer for my horses!"
-- Toby Keith

Real Men do NOT drink lattes!

Posted by: Steven L. at January 30, 2007 11:52 PM

I realize Naseem only writes to get arise out of us... and it will.

Naseem, the only comfort that will be brought to my family, and that of our departed, inflicted on that day, will be the blood of all Muslims flowing through the streets of New York when you devil worshipers finally meet Satan (aka Allah)at the hands of us kind Americans. The day will come when political correctness will be seen for what it is, the work of Lucifer, and we will no longer accept your cult's intolerable beliefs.

So, sleep well Naseem, because it is only a matter of time when you will be covorting with 72 bloody pigs in hell.

Posted by: Gotham at January 31, 2007 12:32 AM

Below I post some more about Fritz Kuhn and the Bund. It had at most 10,000 members. It had little appeal to most Americans of German descent, with 24% of its members being German nationals. It had little funding after the mid-1930s from the German government, because it was seen as ineffective.

Now compare the Muslim organizations standing up for a known supporter of terrosm, about whom the record of malevolence and deception is overwhelming (read about that case and about the evidence), and the sums that they receive from abroad to support them (how much do the Saudis spend, and through exactly what channels?)with the Bund.

And compare what the FBI did as soon as America entered the war. It arrested Fritz Kuhn, and interned him, and others like him, for the entire duration of the war -- and then, despite his holding American citizenship, right after the war unceremoniously deported him to Germany. No appeals, no nonsense, no nothing.

That was the way to behave in wartime, and after wartime, with those whose loyalties are with alien enemies and an alien and a hostile creed, that is opposeed in every way to the legal and political institutions of this country, and to so much else that makes America America.

And it still is.

Here's the piece:

The Failure of American Nazism: The German-American Bund’s Attempt to Create an American “Fifth Column”

by Jim Bredemus

Many Americans feared the presence of a German “Fifth Column” before World War II. In the case of the disorganized and poorly led American Bund, for the most part these fears ultimately proved unjustified.

After Hitler’s rise to power 1933, some German Americans formed groups to support the Nazi party in Germany and attempt to influence American politics. The most notorious of these groups was the “German-American Bund”, which tried to model itself as an American arm of Hitler’s Third Reich. Although these groups wore uniforms and touted swastikas, in reality they had few ties to Nazi Germany and their support among the larger German-American community was minimal. Nevertheless, the group strongly promoted hatred for Jews and strove to bring Nazi-style fascism to the United States.

Initial support for American fascist organizations did come from Germany. In May 1933 Nazi Deputy Führer Rudolf Hess gave authority to German immigrant Heinz Spanknobel to create an American Nazi organization. Shortly thereafter the “Friends of New Germany” was created with help from the German consul in New York City. The organization was based in New York but had a strong presence in Chicago.

The organization led by Spanknobel was openly pro-Nazi, and engaged in activities such as storming the German language New Yorker Staats-Zeitung with the demand that Nazi-sympathetic articles be published, and the infiltration of other non-political German-American organizations. Spanknobel was ousted as leader and subsequently deported in October 1933 when it was discovered he had failed to register as a foreigner agent.

Supposedly 22,000 Nazi supporters attended an American Bund rally at New York's Madison Square Garden in February 1939, under police guard. Demonstrators protested outside (above right). An American Bund parade through New York's Yorkville district on Manhattan's Upper East Side (below) drew both supporters and protesters--and the press.

The organization existed into the mid-1930s, although it always remained small, with a membership of between 5,000-10,000. Mostly German citizens living in America and German emigrants who only recently had become citizens composed its ranks. The organization busied itself with verbal attacks against Jews, Communists and the Versailles Treaty. Until 1935 the organization was openly supported by the Third Reich, although soon Nazi officials realized the organization was doing more harm than good in America and in December 1935 Hess ordered that all German citizens leave the Friends of New Germany; also, all the group’s leaders were recalled to Germany.

Not long after the Friends of New Germany fell out of favor with the Nazis and was dismantled, a new organization with similar goals arose in its place. Formed in March 1936 in Buffalo/New York and calling itself the German-American Bund or Amerikadeutscher Volksbund, the organization chose Fritz Kuhn as its Bundesleiter.

A Munich native, Kuhn had fought in the German Army during World War I. After receiving an education in chemical engineering, Kuhn briefly had worked in Mexico before coming to the United States and in 1934 being granted American citizenship. Kuhn was initially effective as a leader and was able to unite the organization and expand its membership.

Kuhn was a perfect figurehead for the organization. A facade of swastikas and “Sieg Heil” prevailed, but in reality Kuhn was to become seen simply as an incompetent swindler and liar who spoke poor English; even the Nazis were embarrassed of him. German Ambassador Hans Dieckhoff called him “stupid, noisy and absurd”.

The organization was soon filled with those calling themselves “Germans in America” and dreamed of the day when Nazism would rule the United States. Although they were instructed not to accept German citizens in their organization, they were not about to turn down anyone interested and many immigrants joined. It is estimated that around 25% of Bund members were German nationals—the rest being mostly first or second generation Germans. Research indicates that most Bund members were of lower-middle class origin.

The Bund soon began to hold rallies filled with swastikas, Nazi salutes and the singing of German songs. The Bund created recreational camps such as Camp Siegfried in New York and Camp Nordland in New Jersey. It also established Camp Hindenburg in Wisconsin and the group met frequently in Milwaukee and Chicago beer halls.

The Bund created an American version of the Hitler Youth that educated children in the German language, German history and Nazi philosophy. Although this organization tried to differentiate itself from the previously unsuccessful Friends of New Germany, the German Foreign Ministry commented that “In reality...they are the same people, with the same principles, and the same appearance”.

The organization brashly promoted the same anti-Semitism of the Third Reich: it handed out Aryan pamphlets outside Jewish-owned establishments and by campaigned in the 1936 presidential election against Franklin Delano Roosevelt—who they charged was part of the Jewish-Bolshevik “conspiracy”. The Bund even spawned several incidents of violence against Jewish-Americans and Jewish-owned businesses. An opinion poll taken in the late 1930’s named Fritz Kuhn as the leading anti-Semite in America.

In 1936 Kuhn and a few of his followers traveled to Berlin to attend the 1936 Summer Olympics. During his visit Kuhn was offered to come to the Reichs chancellery and have his picture taken with the Führer. This hardly signified an endorsement from Hitler, who took many ceremonial pictures in the spirit of the Olympics, but for Kuhn this symbolized his christening as Bundesführer of the United States.

The Bund began attracting the attention of the federal government in the summer of 1937 as rumors spread that Kuhn had 200,000 men ready to take up arms. During that summer an FBI probe of the organization was conducted but no evidence of wrongdoing was found. Later in 1938 Martin Dies of the House Un-American Activities Committee wildly proclaimed that Kuhn had 480,000 followers. More accurate records show that at the peak of his power in 1938 Kuhn had only 8,500 members and another 5,000 “sympathizers”.

It was at this time that German Ambassador to the United States Hans Heinrich Dieckhoff began to voice his disapproval and concerns over the Bund. Dieckhoff wrote to officials in Berlin that the Bund would never succeed in America because no German “minority” existed in the U.S. in the European sense. He wrote that most immigrant movements in America were highly resented and that the organization was only creating anti-German feelings among Americans.

Dieckhoff’s skepticism was well warranted. Many German Americans were indifferent towards politics and polls taken at the time showed that German Americans were not much more sympathetic to Nazi Germany than traditional Americans. Most Americans, including most German Americans, saw Kuhn and the Bund as Nazi-supported presences at Hitler’s command, even though this was true only in Kuhn’s convoluted perceptions.

Although there was some unofficial contact between the Bund and Nazi officials, for the most part the Nazi government was uninterested in the organization and gave the organization no financial or verbal support. Most Third Reich officials distrusted Kuhn and the Bund, and Adolf Hitler himself made his displeasure with the organization known. On 1 March 1938 the Nazi government—partly to appease the U.S., partly to distance themselves from an embarrassing organization—firmly declared once again that no German citizens could be members in the Bund and, further, that no Nazi emblems and symbols were to be used by the organization.

In March 1938 Kuhn traveled to Berlin to appeal the decision that had been made. He met with Hitler’s aide Captain Wiedemann, who simply told Kuhn the decision was final. In spite of his rejection, Kuhn returned to American bragging of meetings with Goering and Goebbels and ties he had made with Hitler—all which were fabrications.

In February 1939 Kuhn and the Bund held their largest rally in Madison Square Garden—ironically, one which marked the beginning of the end for the organization. In front of a crowd of 22,000, flanked by a massive portrait of George Washington, swastikas and Americans flags, Kuhn attacked FDR for being part of a Bolshevik-Jewish conspiracy, calling him “Frank D. Rosenfeld” and criticizing the New Deal, which Kuhn had deemed “the Jew Deal”. Three thousands members of the Ordnungsdienst, the militant arm of the Bund, were on hand and fistfights broke out in the crowd among those who had come to heckle Kuhn.

After the rally, New York District Attorney Thomas Dewey arrested Kuhn on charges of larceny and forgery. He not only was convicted of these charges but he also confessed to being arrested multiple times for drunkenness, carrying on extra-marital affairs and pocketing $15,000 from the Madison Square Garden rally. After the war, Kuhn was deported to Germany; he died there unceremoniously in 1951.

Following Kuhn’s arrest, the Bund slowly withered away, until its dissolution on 8 December 1941, after the attack on Pearl Harbor. After the United States declared war on Germany, federal officials began to arrest Bund officials. Kuhn’s successor Gerhard Kunze was captured in Mexico and sentenced to 15 years of prison for “subversive activities”. Twenty-four other officers were convicted of conspiracy to violate the 1940 Selective Service Act and served prison time. Some other Bund leaders committed suicide before the FBI caught up with them. Although some Bund members had their naturalization revoked and some spent time in prison camps, most members were left alone after the organization was disbanded.

In the end, the Bund of German immigrants held little power, if any, and often made average Americans less sympathetic to Germany, as the Bund’s extreme anti-Semitic and pro-Nazi views did not play well with the American public. Even Nazi Germany realized this and attempted to distance itself from the Bund. In spite of all the marches, swastikas and rallies staged by the Bund, New York’s Mayor LaGuardia aptly described it simply as “a racket”.

Sources:

Bell, Leland. “The Failure of Nazism in America”. Political Science Quarterly. Vol 85(4). Dec. 1970, p. 585.

MacDonnell, Francis. Insidious Foes: The Axis Fifth Column and the American Home Front. Oxford University Press, New York: 1995.

Remak, Joachim. “Friends of the New Germany: The Bund and German-American Relations”. Journal of Modern History. Vol 29(1). Mar. 1957, p. 38.

Smith, Gene. “Bundesfuehrer Kuhn”. American Heritage. Vol 46(5). Sep. 1995, p. 102.

Posted by: Hugh at January 31, 2007 1:22 AM

Sorry, Charles the Hammer, I agree with some of what you are saying, but you are really off on some things as well.

"is the war in Iraq so bad?"

-Yes. We have stuck thousands of our finest young men and women in an Islamic hellhole, trying to play babysitter for a Sunni/Shia civil war. Not to mention the TRILLIONs this mess may cost us. By the way, EVERY FUCKING CENT going to Lebanon to help rebuild the Hezbollah infrastructure should be sent to our decaying VA hospitals. Charles, have you seen any amputees who've returned from the war? I have and it turned my stomach.

" We have a hopping economy and people are reporting very high rates of satisfaction with their lives."

-Really? I haven't heard those polls lately. Seems unlikely in a time when a president can't scratch 30 percent approval ratings. Also, how much of this is bought on debt?

" How are these lefties being affected?"

See above. Leftists have family members, neighbors, who go to war, and they pay taxes too.

"They aren't being conscripted."

Because our troops are not conscripted, then we as citizens shouldn't care how they are deployed? Y

" They aren't being taxed more heavily."

-No, because our genius President took the amazing step of CUTTING taxes while waging major wars, a step I am not aware of precedent for (if any Bush apologists want to point out other examples, feel free). Again, we will pay down the road as all of this is going to debt. The current GOP is a "borrow and spend" party, not a conservative economic party. They are the Robert Kiyosaki party at this point.

Posted by: Abu Lahab at January 31, 2007 4:12 PM

Hugh, that was an excellent article. Seeing the reality of pre-WWII, as opposed to the mythology that is the "common wisdom", is very helpful.

Posted by: special_guest at January 31, 2007 5:40 PM

"In this march, chosen Amerike could join it, their heads cut slightly too, and here in this most poigninant site, we shall see Amerike blood mixing with the blood of Islam, slowly but surely staining red the pictures of the perished, the surrounding footpath, providing comfort to the lost departed souls."

nasperm, don't know about amerike blood but I do know that your dead husband spilled some blood when a blessed earthquake touched fuckistan.
Don't you remember?

now he's in the islamic brothel with 72 prostitutes, a sort of like yourself but younger and with no mustache.

Posted by: StillFedUp at January 31, 2007 5:52 PM

Islam has perpetrated (innmerable) worse crimes than the one it committed on 9-11-2001 in the UNited States. However, when Islam is provided the opportunity to commit worse crimes than this, Muslims will take FULL advantage--have no fear of this!!! What I am saying is if you give Muslims another crack at genocide on US territory it WILL BE WORSE THAN 9-11. Much, much worse. Have no fear of this either!!!!!

It is critical humanity NOT give Islam another such opportunity to commit such homicidal abominations ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD!

Does anyone here remember the Smyrna, Greece massacres of 1922? There's one example. Another example is Indonesians' slaughter of about one million Chinese Christians in 1965. Another is the massacre of more than three million Hindus in Bangladesh in 1971. According to Serge Trifkovic Muslim countries massacred at least 50 million Christians during the twentieth century. Isn't that enough???

So we see here a few examples of what happens when Muslims are given the opportunity to commit genocide and run with it. There are plenty of other examples. That puts a whole different spin on 9-11 in my eyes.

For this moron, Bell's information, had not some very courageous American people intervened in the terrorists' actions on 9-11, this episode WOULD HAVE KILLED MANY,MANY THOUSANDS MORE AEMRICANS than it did.

He should know that. And he needs to shut up too. Maybe Bell should sell life insurance or something instead.

*************************************************

Spread the word: ISLAM TEACHES FIRST DEGREE MURDER!!

*************************************************

and

May the REAL God (Yahweh) deliver us from Islam!

Posted by: pythagoras at January 31, 2007 7:44 PM