The JFK plot, the immigration debate, and the Pew Center poll
The JFK plot binds together and reveals, in one foul example, the grave security flaws in the proposed Senate immigration bill, the disturbing Pew Center poll showing that a quarter of young American Muslims support killing civilians in the name of Islam, and the vapidity of many politicians, Democrat and Republican alike.
We were reminded by Hugh Hewitt that the JFK plot touches both the immigration debate, and the recent Pew Center poll results (above) showing that one in four young American Muslims think killing civilians to defend Islam is okay.
Regarding the Senate immigration bill, Hewitt posits that the dangerous among us come from a subset of 246,000 recent Middle East immigrants, and proposes “to amend the law to except out all the illegals within the 246,000 from the new law’s bestowal of probationary status (as well as Guyanans, Trinidadians, Somalis and illegals from other “countries of interest” with known jihadist networks).” A nice beginning on paper perhaps, but — given the fatuousness of our political elite — what if there is little or no intention to enforce most of the provisions that appear on paper? Andrew McCarthy also makes a passionate plea to understand the stakes in the JFK plot:
Defreitas/Mohammed turns out to be the part of the story the press dutifully buried in paragraph 19: He is that nettlesome one of every four American Muslim males who thinks mass-homicide strikes against civilians, like the one he and his cell were scheming, are a perfectly sensible way to settle grievances.
Does this mean he never really assimilated during his long journey from Guyana to treason against the adopted country he so abhors? Not hardly. For that one in four Muslim males turns out to be in pretty much the same place as one of every two members of the United States Congress — already tacking toward two of every three as we look ahead to September. All are content to let Islamist savagery carry the day.
Militant Islam, you see, is mustered in Iraq, where al Qaeda — the inspiration for Defreitas and his cohorts — has called America out. Like Defreitas & Co., Osama bin Laden and his ranks see themselves in a world war between the United States and a vision of Islam shared by tens of millions. (Think one-in-four, writ large). Iraq, they have decided, is their frontline, though very far from their only line. Everywhere, America is their target. Everywhere, terror — the indiscriminate slaughter of innocent men, women, and children — is their weapon of choice.
For the new Democratic Congress and its growing wake of jittery Republicans, that turns out to be a choice worth living with. Oh yes, they’ll sputter about how barbaric and unsavory it all is. But, like those one in four Muslim males, they’re prepared to let terror rule the day. That’s the plan: Al Qaeda blows up things and people; we leave, grumbling all the way home about civil wars and intractable hatreds between the Religion of Peace’s murderous sects; and al Qaeda triumphs … with bin Laden reminding his acolytes: See, I told you, they’re a paper tiger — make it bloody for them and we win.
Naturally, we’ll tell ourselves they’re not winning at all. They want Iraq? Let ‘em have it. Just like — when they killed enough of us — we let ’em have Lebanon in 1983 and Somalia in 1993. Who, after all, needs these hellholes? Except … militant Islam doesn’t just want the hellholes. It wants everything. It will take the hellholes. For now. But don’t think for a second they’ll be appeased.
The appetite grows as it feeds. Jihadists won’t stop until they break our will. Give them Somalia and they want the World Trade Center. Give them Iraq and they want JFK … and Fort Dix. They’re coming for us, they’re only too delighted to tell us they’re coming for us, and still we’re stunned when their insatiable hatred draws a bead smack in the middle of our shrinking comfort zone — this time, where a thousand flights move 125,000 people every single day.
It wasn’t merely on the flights and the unlucky infidels that Defreitas and his confederates set their sights. The complaint filed by the government explains that the “brothers” wanted to do “something bigger than the World Trade Center.” Defreitas had worked at JFK. He knew its ins and outs. He wasn’t interested in the passenger terminals — that would be child’s play. He homed in on the fuel tanks and pipelines, thousands upon thousands of flammable gallons. Enough to outdo September 11. Enough to decimate the economy. Enough to make of Queens what Ahmadinejad vows to make of Israel … and, eventually, America.
Defreitas and his fellow jihadists, most haling from Guyana but with ties to Trinidad’s ruthless Jama’at al Muslimeen (the Muslim Group), wanted to do their part in what they unflinchingly called “the war for Islam.” They wanted to kill JFK, and kill us. A second time. They know there’s a war out there. Not just Iraq or Afghanistan, but Dar al Islam and Dar al Harb…
In a moment of black humor, we can imagine a Congressman’s political consultants advising him not to make any statement on immigration or the JFK plot that might inadvertently wind up offending the increasingly important and growing Jihadist voting bloc.
June 3rd, 2007 at 10:51 pm
Though it is always true, we are being reminded on a daily basis that government is one huge committee, the nature of which guarantees that no one is responsible–a headless entity that plays it deuces wild. Oh, we can point at Bush, or the “leadership” in Congress, but with the protections afforded by the original balances of powers almost eroded out of existence, and with all three branches floating in a fetid pool of anti-intellectualism, all they really do is play each other against the next, everyone seeking more power to grab more money so they have more power . . . . Thus they play with our lives, using our money. Where is the statesman among them? Could one even survive the suffocating irrationality of it all? Would the man who could, choose to?
The Islamofascists are right about one thing: our institutions are debauched and depraved. How we are to win against a patient and confident enemy with such is the question.