We May Not Win This War

August 18, 2002

by Christopher G. Adamo

Most people who possess even a moderate degree of political savvy are aware of the axiom that no great civilization was ever defeated from without, unless it was first defeated from within. In light of this, just how does the United States measure up as it approaches the first anniversary of September 11? A consideration of U.S. responses to the attacks yields some very disturbing answers.

America is undeniably at war with Islamic terrorists and their support structures. But America has also been embroiled in a war for several decades, however the older war has been waged among its own people, with the spoils of victory being no less than the very soul of the Country. In the name of "free love", "church/state separation", and the rejection of traditional values and morality, much of America has abandoned the cultural and spiritual roots that once kept it prosperous and safe.

While average citizens responded to the terrorist attacks in a manner, which clearly showed America’s greatest strength to be in the hearts of its common people, reaction from the liberal elite rapidly degenerated from grudging acknowledgment to open disdain for this upsurge in Americanism. Furthermore, the philosophies of the elite have been reasserted across the land, and with each passing day, less and less is being said against their efforts to revert the country back into its dangerous pre-September 11 malaise.

Consider some of the major events, which shaped our present response to the terrorist threat. Within days of the attacks, President Bush was infusing an element of "political correctness" into the discussion of the event by asserting that Islam was a "good" religion. At the National Memorial service held on September 14, Dr. Siddiqi, a Muslim cleric who previously endorsed Palestinian violence and Islamic "judgment" against America, was among the keynote speakers. Shortly thereafter, Secretary of State Colin Powell was issuing statements inextricably linking American interests in the "War on Terror" to the demands of a wholly corrupt Palestinian Authority and its many sympathetic Arab collaborators.

The nation’s airports, which should have adopted a mindset of "front line" defense against any recurrence of the attacks, instead accepted the absurdities of security under the auspices of "political correctness", prohibiting the "profiling" of suspicious travelers, thus placing all passengers at greater risk. Federal Aviation Administration Chairman Norman Mineta, a Clinton appointee, defined his organization’s primary mission as pertaining more to the accommodation of Middle-Eastern flyers, whose sensibilities might be offended, than to the safety of all.

Now it is learned that at the University of North Carolina, incoming freshmen are being required to take a course in Islam. Far from being merely an historical account of the conception and spread of radical Islam as it pertains to the world events of today, this course subjects students to readings from the Koran, Arabic recitations, and Muslims’ traditional “call to prayer”. In contrast to their frequently apoplectic reaction to Christian invocations or even the mention of God in the Pledge of Allegiance, liberal “watchdog” groups, such as the ACLU, are perfectly at ease with this situation.

Elsewhere in the public education circus, the liberal National Education Association, is itself establishing a teaching program supposedly intended to help students, from elementary through high school, to observe the anniversary of 9-11. Amazingly, Jerald Newberry, the NEA’s Health Information Network director, offers the material under the premise of “patriotism”.

Not so amazing is the actual content, which focuses on inter-cultural relationships and other delusions of the ‘60’s era as the ostensible fix for the present upsurge of international tensions. Much space is devoted to the issue of “American intolerance”, in what can only be construed as a suggestion of moral equivalencies between traditional America and radical Islam. In a thinly veiled criticism of U.S. military action, the NEA material offers its obligatory condemnation of “violence and hate” as ineffectual solutions to “anger”.

America is under attack on two fronts, and both must be countered if America is to prevail. The external one, which relies on violence and bloodshed, will only succeed if the foundation of the country is debased and destroyed. The fearsome power of the military can surely topple the regimes of Middle-Eastern dictators, ending the rampages of their terrorist surrogates. However, no amount of military strength is sufficient to restore the national spirit once Americans lose their will to be Americans.

_________________________________________

Christopher G. Adamo is a freelance writer who lives in southeastern Wyoming with his wife and sons. He has been involved in grassroots political activity for many years. Chris was the editor of the Wyoming Christian from 1994 to 1996, and his columns can also been seen at CheyenneNetwork.com.

Send the author an E mail at Adamo@ConservativeTruth.org.

For more of Christopher's articles, visit his archives.