Comment on Rebranding the Enemy

Robert Heller writes:

I found this was a very interesting piece, but I strongly disagree with the conclusion arrived at in this paragraph.

The danger of this should be obvious. The Jihadis are working night and day to strike at this country, and eventually they will succeed. When the blow falls, the entire newsprint facade of "Muslim as victim" will be blown to pieces, a collateral casualty of Jihadi efforts. The attempt to rebrand the likes of KSM and Ramadan will fall apart. Leaving what in its place?
All my observations of the the liberal left lead me to believe that another successful action by the Jihadi on United States soil, or indeed one in Canada, will only serve to further entrench their position.

From the leftist liberal standpoint, no matter what the Jihadi does, it must be viewed from the standpoint of the abused victim of American, and Western, imperialism.  Consequently, when the next event takes place, it will be far more likely that the liberal will blame American actions - read Bush Administration - since the 9/11 event, as the cause.  The liberal mind will find in that event a reason to say "I told you so".  The next event will be proof positive to the liberal that the right-wing policies and the war in Iraq, rather than bringing peace, ensured a continuing struggle between victimizer and victim and that, at best, all the Bush years did was to defer any action by the Jihadi and make certain that the events would be more dramatic and more violent than those of the past.

The liberal will build their position from this standpoint.  Certainly there will be some liberals, perhaps some of the family members of the victims of the next event, that will move to the right, but only in as much as there will be some that have been supportive of Bush administration policies that will move to the left.

The consequence will be more confusion, especially with an already Democrat dominated congress.  Perhaps the worst outcome will be a greater willingness on the part of Congress and the American left to abrogate more powers to the U.N.  This will be a disaster for the United States in particular and the West in general.

Part of the problem here is, I fear, that the American citizen has lost his sense of superior morality.  Even many on the right of the political spectrum seem in large part to no longer believe that the West, but in particular America, has a morality that is superior to most of the rest of the world.  The scariest part of this is that they may actually be correct.

The result is a lack of understanding about the need, on occasion, to fight a just war.  Even when there is a sense that a war may be just, the western media play a tremendous role in undermining that sense of justice and undermining the willingness to fight.

After all, it is easier to turn a blind eye to the suffering of others.  Thinking only of immediate self, any reasoning that salves one's conscientious then becomes acceptable.
Robert Heller writes:

I found this was a very interesting piece, but I strongly disagree with the conclusion arrived at in this paragraph.

The danger of this should be obvious. The Jihadis are working night and day to strike at this country, and eventually they will succeed. When the blow falls, the entire newsprint facade of "Muslim as victim" will be blown to pieces, a collateral casualty of Jihadi efforts. The attempt to rebrand the likes of KSM and Ramadan will fall apart. Leaving what in its place?
All my observations of the the liberal left lead me to believe that another successful action by the Jihadi on United States soil, or indeed one in Canada, will only serve to further entrench their position.

From the leftist liberal standpoint, no matter what the Jihadi does, it must be viewed from the standpoint of the abused victim of American, and Western, imperialism.  Consequently, when the next event takes place, it will be far more likely that the liberal will blame American actions - read Bush Administration - since the 9/11 event, as the cause.  The liberal mind will find in that event a reason to say "I told you so".  The next event will be proof positive to the liberal that the right-wing policies and the war in Iraq, rather than bringing peace, ensured a continuing struggle between victimizer and victim and that, at best, all the Bush years did was to defer any action by the Jihadi and make certain that the events would be more dramatic and more violent than those of the past.

The liberal will build their position from this standpoint.  Certainly there will be some liberals, perhaps some of the family members of the victims of the next event, that will move to the right, but only in as much as there will be some that have been supportive of Bush administration policies that will move to the left.

The consequence will be more confusion, especially with an already Democrat dominated congress.  Perhaps the worst outcome will be a greater willingness on the part of Congress and the American left to abrogate more powers to the U.N.  This will be a disaster for the United States in particular and the West in general.

Part of the problem here is, I fear, that the American citizen has lost his sense of superior morality.  Even many on the right of the political spectrum seem in large part to no longer believe that the West, but in particular America, has a morality that is superior to most of the rest of the world.  The scariest part of this is that they may actually be correct.

The result is a lack of understanding about the need, on occasion, to fight a just war.  Even when there is a sense that a war may be just, the western media play a tremendous role in undermining that sense of justice and undermining the willingness to fight.

After all, it is easier to turn a blind eye to the suffering of others.  Thinking only of immediate self, any reasoning that salves one's conscientious then becomes acceptable.