provide for the common defense

Interesting "admission" from Abdel Rahman al-Rashed, the general manager of Al- Arabiya news channel, from his article that appeared in the pan-Arabic newspaper Al-Sharq Al-Awsat:

It is a certain fact that not all Muslims are terrorists, but it is equally certain, and exceptionally painful, that almost all terrorists are Muslims.

The hostage-takers of children in Beslan, North Ossetia, were Muslims. The other hostage-takers and subsequent murderers of the Nepalese chefs and workers in Iraq were also Muslims. Those involved in rape and murder in Darfur, Sudan, are Muslims, with other Muslims chosen to be their victims.

Those responsible for the attacks on residential towers in Riyadh and Khobar were Muslims. The two women who crashed two airliners last week were also Muslims.

Bin Laden is a Muslim. The majority of those who manned the suicide bombings against buses, vehicles, schools, houses and buildings, all over the world, were Muslim.

He goes on.

These images, when put together, or taken separately, are shameful and degrading. But let us start with putting an end to a history of denial. Let us acknowledge their reality, instead of denying them and seeking to justify them with sound and fury signifying nothing.

Whether he is being sincere or not, statements like this ought to further the discussion about terrorism among the Arab world.



Terrorism, not "freedom fighting," in Russia:

Douglas Feith, Undersecretary of Defense for Policy, explained the Administration's effort to de-legitimize terrorism in a speech last spring at the University of Chicago. "The world should view terrorism as it views the slave trade, piracy on the high seas and genocide," he said, "as activities that no respectable person condones, much less supports."

...

Whatever Russian President Vladimir Putin's mistakes in Chechnya (see David Satter's article in The Wall Street Journal today), they don't justify the deliberate targeting of innocents. Nearly all nationalist movements--from the American revolutionaries to the Irish Republican Army--have had enough restraint to avoid the systematic murder of children.

From the The Weekly Standard, the suggestion that radical Arab terrorism is nothing new and doesn't spring from "freedom fighting" convictions.

The end of the Cold War means that our practical duties have changed too, in a limited way. Since the close of World War I in 1918, our main enemy has been the terrorist-totalitarian axis--still true today. Different nations and organizations have occupied this axis of evil, but the role itself has been remarkably stable. Until the end of the Cold War, the Soviet Union was the main terrorist-totalitarian power (except when it was eclipsed by Nazi Germany and Warlord Japan). The Berlin Wall fell in 1989; in 1990, Saddam marched into Kuwait. Radical Arab terrorism and totalitarianism go way back; the Nazis and then the Soviets supported them. When the Soviets fell, Arab tyrants and terrorists were ready for the limelight. Our job was to find new ways to do what we had always done--fight and (ultimately) beat our terrorist and totalitarian enemies.

Terrorism can be described as a morphed totalitarian vehicle for power. What "freedom" are they supposedly fighting for? And from whom?



When terrorism ceases to be justified by "grievances:"

Let us stipulate (as is apparently required in every discussion of terror in Russia) that Moscow's behavior in Chechnya has been replete with war crimes and atrocities in a blood feud that seems to have no end. Let us admit as well that the Chechens have legitimate grievances against Moscow that go back over a century, even before their victimization by Stalin in the 1940s. But these can no longer be the issue, just as the various complaints against America in the Middle East ceased to be an issue on 9/11. As gruesome a distinction as it is to make, the indiscriminate violence and even criminal methods used by the Russian government in a grisly civil war pale beside a strategy that relies on the intentional mass murder of children...Such demands are repudiated by the dead schoolchildren of Beslan, who remind us that concepts like "root causes" and "justification" matter little once the killing begins. (emphasis added)

"Hypocrisy on Chechnya" compares the coverage of the Beslan terrorist massacre to the coverage of Palestinian "militants." And this:

The Chechen analogy with the Palestinians is tempting: a people decidedly unwilling to accept foreign occupation and totally unprepared for responsible self-government. Western, especially European emotional sympathy for the Chechens, should be reassessed in light of these developments,...

But the European emotional sympathy, as well as some here in the US and around the world, will likely not be dissuaded.




A more sobering description of the ethnic, religious and historical long-festering rivalries. Still, is there no way to begin resolving these age old disputes without resorting to the slaughter of innocent children? Even though there surely must be, the terrorists can't seem to be bothered by them.


Another take from Jane's:

What appears to be happening is that various terrorist organisations inside southern Russia itself - the Ingush and the Chechens, as well as some other criminal elements in North Ossetia and South Ossetia (which belongs to neighbouring Georgia) may be joining hands. This means that Putin's problem is less with severing links with the Middle East and more with a rising terrorist challenge that is now engulfing the entire southern underbelly of his country. Ever since the Soviet Union collapsed, the Russian military has encouraged various separatist movements to develop in the Caucasus, largely as a 'divide and rule' strategy. Moscow is now paying the price and is likely to continue doing so for years.

This may be a variation of the "blame Russia first" explanations that are going around much of Europe.

But, still. I'll have to visit Jane's a bit more in the future to see if they seem as Europhillic as they did the last time I decided not to link to them.

Bill Gertz releases three excerpts from his book, "Treachery."


The French connection to nuclear assistance as well as weapons sold to Iraq up to the beginning of the war in March 2003. New rockets used were made in France and Russia.


Libyan hypocracy in publicly claiming to renounce WMD programs while secretly proceeding with the help of Pakistan, North Korea, Germany and many other countries