“JUST LIKE D-DAY”
by Paul R. Hollrah, ©2014
(Sep. 18, 2014) — In a nationally televised speech on Wednesday, September 10, Barack Obama announced a four-part plan for dealing with the terrorist organization, ISIS. Here are the four parts of his plan:
- A systematic campaign of airstrikes against terrorists.
- Increased support for forces fighting terrorists on the ground.
- Draw on substantial counterterrorism capabilities to prevent ISIS attacks. And finally,
- Provide humanitarian assistance to civilians who’ve been displaced by ISIS terrorism.
Does his plan have any chance of success? No. Airpower alone will not defeat ISIS. To defeat ISIS it will be necessary to take and hold ground and to flush the 30,000 or 40,000 jihadists out of the cities and towns where they hide among women and children. To date, it is only the Kurds who have expressed a willingness to put troops on the ground.
We are told that only 5% of the world’s 1.4 billion Muslims are radicalized, but that comes to 70 million radicalized jihadists. To put that into perspective, during World War II the combined uniformed forces of Germany, Japan, and Italy totaled only 34.1 million.
Would Obama have gone before the TV cameras to announce his plan unless something or someone forced his hand? No, this is a man who actually said in his speech that “ISIS (Islamic State in Iraq and Syria) is not Islamic.” But just as the bombing of Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941 changed Americans from pacifists to war hawks, literally overnight, the public beheading of two American journalists and a British aid worker has had exactly the same effect. But, while revenge is sweet and it might make us feel good to see a bit of ISIS blood spilled on the desert sands, the Obama plan will accomplish nothing more than to infuriate more and more young Muslims, driving them into the welcoming arms of al-Baghdadi and his army of lunatics.
So how do we attack the problem? First, while we’re busily engaged in bombing individual cars and trucks with $110,000 Hellfire missiles, just to make us feel as if we’re doing something to eradicate ISIS, we must pursue a strategic, two-pronged, non-military effort to a) Separate the good Muslims from the bad by prosecuting radical Islamists here at home, and b) Use whatever means we have at our disposal to change the hearts and minds of Muslims around the world.
Islam is not a religion, as we understand the term. Rather, it is a complete political, judicial, economic, military, and cultural system, masquerading as a religion. Its adherents refuse to assimilate into host country cultures, insisting that they be allowed to exist as an independent entity, not subject to the laws of their host nations. In order to accomplish their ends, they regularly preach the overthrow of their host governments, by violence if necessary.
Accordingly, we must resolve that, “What is sauce for the (Communist) goose is sauce for the (Islamic) gander.” In order to neutralize Islam’s cultural institutions within our country, we must do as I have previously suggested: We must tailor the language of Section 2 of the Communist Control Act of 1954… a law that has not been struck down by the Supreme Court and which is still on the books… to read as follows:
“The American people are determined to eliminate from their midst organizations which, purporting to be ‘religious,’ in the accepted sense of that term, are conspirators dedicated to the destruction of our form of government by force and violence…
“The Congress hereby finds and declares that Islam, although purportedly a religious sect, is in fact an instrumentality of a foreign conspiracy to overthrow the government of the United States. It constitutes an authoritarian dictatorship within a republic, demanding for itself the rights and privileges accorded to individuals of other religious denominations, but denying to all others the freedoms guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution…
“As a segment of the U.S. population, Islam is relatively small, numerically, and gives scant indication of its capacity ever to attain its ends by lawful means. The peril inherent in the existence of Islam arises not from its numbers, but from its failure to acknowledge any limitation as to the nature of its activities, and its dedication to the proposition that the present system of government of the United States ultimately must be brought to ruin by any available means, including resort to force and violence. Holding that doctrine, its role as the agency of a hostile foreign power renders its existence a clear and present danger to the security of the United States. It is the means whereby individuals are seduced into the service of Islam, trained to do its bidding, and directed and controlled in the conspiratorial performance of their revolutionary services. Therefore, the organization known as Islam shall be outlawed in the United States.”
With that statute on the books we can make it very uncomfortable for radical Islamists. We can make their presence in our country so unpleasant that they will long for a return to whatever hellhole they and their predecessors crawled out of. With eyes and ears planted in every mosque and every Muslim cultural center in America, radical Imams such as the late Anwar al-Awlaki could be readily identified and FBI agents could quickly make arrests.
And finally, we Americans have always prided ourselves on our ingenuity. Whatever problems we’ve confronted, we have found ways to solve them. So let’s use that ingenuity to change, to the extent possible, the hearts and minds of Muslims around the world. Consider this example: I suggest that we conduct a major SOFTWAR campaign utilizing a photographic projection technique called “holography,” the creation of images that appear to be three-dimensional, when in fact they are only images created by focused beams of laser light.
We already have made-to-order audiences: hundreds of jihadists and other soldiers of the faith, warehoused in various CIA black sites, as well as prison compounds in Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay. The only thing missing is the Prophet Mohammed himself.
Scientists have been working since 1947 to perfect three-dimensional holographic imaging, but the greatest advances in the art were made by physicist Lloyd Cross in 1972. Cross developed the integral hologram by combining white-light transmission holography with conventional cinematography to produce lifelike, moving, three-dimensional images. It gives special effects technicians the ability to produce the Prophet Mohammed in three dimensions and in living color, and we can make him deliver any message we want to any audience we assemble.
Imagine the scene in the Pulacharke Prison in Afghanistan, a thousand-year-old stone structure the size of a small gymnasium, filled with radical Muslim clerics and an assortment of Al Qaeda and Taliban faithful. And imagine that one moonless night, at midnight, the Prophet Mohammed appears to the sleeping throng, his image floating in mid-air, high in a corner of the room, some fifteen or twenty feet above the floor.
In a loud booming voice, with a slight echo chamber quality, the Prophet would awaken the terrified throng. His reason for returning, he would say, is to tell the radical Islamists that they have misinterpreted his teachings and that he looks with great disfavor upon the radical Islamic interpretation of the Quran. He would declare that Islamic jihad is a great sin, it is Hirabah (prohibited war against society), and that ISIS leader Bakr al Baghdadi is the leader of the Mufsidoon (evil-doers condemned by the Koran). He would tell them that all those who follow the evil ways of ISIS and the Taliban will suffer Jahannam (eternal hellfire) unless they repent.
With the flick of a switch he would be gone, leaving his listeners trembling in terror at what they had just witnessed. Could the “second coming of Mohammed” be staged in such a way that the faithful would be left with no doubt that they’d actually seen the Prophet and heard his words? Of course. If the “second coming” were properly planned and executed, we could even tell those who witnessed our artful hoax what we’d done and they’d never believe us. With the average jihadi having the intellectual capacity of an angry chimpanzee, it would be impossible to convince such primitive minds that they had not actually seen the Prophet.
What I suggest may sound a bit “off the wall,” but is it? There is nothing new about the use of the elaborate hoax as an instrument of war. World War II is replete with such stories. Given the computerized advances in cinematic special effects, today’s special effects technicians could produce absolute miracles. And while it may not be kosher to mess around with someone else’s religion, in the present circumstance we are dealing with religious fanatics whose only goal in life is to kill us all, and for no other reason than that we exist. Our lives, and the lives of our children and grandchildren, hang in the balance. Drastic measures are called for.
Unlike soldiers of civilized cultures, jihadists cannot be captured, imprisoned, and sent off to “reeducation” camps… they can only be killed. And since we can’t begin to think of killing 70 million jihadists, it’s time we got serious about finding more creative ways of defeating the most barbaric enemy in all of recorded history.
Thomas Friedman put it best in a September 13 editorial in The New York Times. He wrote, “Our staying power is ambiguous, our enemy is barbarous, our regional allies are duplicitous, our European allies are feckless, and the Iraqis and Syrians we’re trying to help are fractious. There is not a straight shooter in the bunch. Other than that, it’s just like D-Day.”
Moderate Muslim: a follower of Islam who 1) just ran out of ammo, 2) someone who is reloading, 3) someone who wishes they were getting more ammo, 4) someone who wishes they were reloading, 5) someone who is living in an apartment complex and can clearly hear the screams of someone (a French Jew, for instance) being tortured to death, yet fail to anonymously call the proper authorities, 4) someone who runs a television station (whose goal is to promote the belief in the existence of a “moderate Muslim”), yet decapitates his wife because she’s sick and tired of being berated, slapped, kicked, and beaten daily and wants a divorce, 5) anyone who is a Muslim, 6) anyone who follows the teaching of Islam, 7) anyone who is “offended” by Old Glory, the US Constitution, any talk of “equality for women”, “Freedom for all”, American history (sorry, no Muslims), and comparing Democracy and Capitalism with Totalitarianism and Socialism, 8) promoter of Sharia Law Zones, girls and boys separated at school, and the steadfast belief that, if someone is not Muslim, they have the duty and, therefore the right, to decapitate them, as they have the duty, and therefore the right, to decapitate their daughters for any imagined or perceived excuse to conduct premeditated murder (“honor killing”) for the “fun of it: after all, it’s what they do: murder”.
There is no such thing as a moderate muslim. There is no daylight between the myth of a moderate or an extremist. They all drink from the same water.
A moderate muslim is wishful thinking on the part of those who deny the real danger islam presents no matter where they are.