HONOLULU, Dec. 4, 2015 – When the FBI announced Friday that the San Bernardino massacre was being investigated as an act of terrorism, the nation’s top crime-fighting agency confirmed what those with common sense already knew. Since the late 1960s, the United States and her allies have been increasingly the target of Islamic extremism in the form of bombings, shootings, kidnappings, hijackings … and worse.
Terror attacks in our modern world have become so frequent that, in spite of law enforcement and intelligence agencies, the American public already has a nose for discerning early the tell-tale signs of an extremist attack.
For liberals, however, a strange intellectual and moral paralysis of “see no evil, hear no evil” has plagued their response to Islamic terrorism. They can’t seem to put the two words together in the same sentence without enduring intense fits of cognitive distress. Islamic terrorists might as well be called “the La-li-lu-le-lo” as far as Democrats and their guardian media are concerned.
No matter how many innocent victims are decapitated, burned alive\ or drowned by Islamic State forces, no matter how many Nidal Hasan or Hasan Karim Akbar-style traitors are radicalized by Islamic influences, liberals absolutely cannot call the spade of Islamic terrorism a spade.
Liberal weakness in the War on Terror isn’t a new phenomenon, either. As Harvard commencement speaker Alexander Solzhenitsyn warned in 1978, long before the likes of Sen. Bernie Sanders or President Barack Obama,
Political and intellectual bureaucrats show depression, passivity, and perplexity in their actions and in their statements, and even more so in theoretical reflections to explain how realistic, reasonable, as well as intellectually and even morally worn it is to base state policies on weakness and cowardice … they get tongue-tied and paralyzed when they deal with powerful governments and threatening forces, with aggressors and international terrorists.
When reports of the San Bernardino massacre began emerging on social networks, liberals who couldn’t point a finger at radical Islam were unrestrained in hurling baseless accusations at law-abiding gun owners and Second Amendment advocates.
Liberals, who themselves supposedly detest the practice of victim-blaming/victim-shaming, took to their echo chamber of Twitter en masse with seemingly coordinated talking points to cheaply characterize the attack as a lack of gun control rather than a lack of terrorist control, something President Obama has waffled on since the day he assumed the role of our military commander in chief.
As the terrible night progressed and more details emerged that pointed strongly to radical influences, liberals retreated to their trusted strongholds of pseudo-intellectualism and outright denial, suggesting the blitzkrieg-style raid was possibly “workplace violence” over “an argument at a holiday party” despite the fact that the shooters involved acted as a coordinated fireteam, complete with automatic rifles, explosives and a getaway plan.
When it was eventually discovered that one of the attackers had even gone so far as to pledge allegiance to ISIS on Facebook, liberals tried to wiggle out of the hole they had dug by suggesting the San Bernardino attack seemed a “strange” target for terrorism. Terrorists don’t attack quiet communities or the disabled, right? They only attack Wall Street or the Pentagon — symbols of American imperialism, oppression, and inequality – right? Says who? The liberal media, for all of their ridiculous collection of pedantic blog ranters, self-appointed Twitter celebrities and Ivy League “experts” didn’t even recognize that the San Bernardino attack template was a threat scenario even as far back as the 1980s and ’90s.
In 1996, USAF strategist and then-Col. Charles J. Dunlap wrote in the fictional short story/essay “How We lost the High-Tech War of 2007” of a future world where an Islamic caliphate had successfully crippled the United States and her allies through barbarous terrorism. In Dunlap’s story, the narrator, a religious spokesperson, boasts to their war council: “Our strategy was to make warfare so psychologically costly that the Americans would lose their ‘will to win.’ To do so we freed ourselves from the decadent West’s notions of legal and moral restraint … We would rather be feared than respected.”
The religious narrator continues with a brief summary of world events that eerily sounds like the present-day world under the presidency of Barack Obama:
“The Mexican government collapsed and the economy disintegrated. Millions of refugees flooded the United States, prompting desperate calls for military assistance to control the influx. Angry Americans loudly objected to troops fighting thousands of miles away when a crisis existed quite literally in their own backyard … We developed additional methods of bringing the war home to America.
“Naturally, we used terror bombings, but we prudently avoided traditional targets. In the last 10 years industrialized countries have perfected security techniques that make attacks against defended facilities very difficult. So we chose a more exposed target: America’s swelling population of politically influential elderly. We planted bombs in eldercare facilities, public parks, medical centers — anywhere we thought they would gather … With their economy in ruins, their borders compromised, their people demoralized, and civil unrest everywhere, they could not continue. We had broken their will! They had no choice but to leave us with the lands we conquered and the valuable resources they contain.”
Dunlap’s story ends with its narrator delivering a damning conclusion:
“Most critically, America failed to deal decisively with barbarism when confronted by it. Had she demonstrated the will to face her responsibilities as a superpower in the post-Cold War world, nations like ours might not have dared oppose her — we keenly understand brute force and its consequences. Now the Americans beg for our scraps … We control their future! That is the price of defeat. This, my friends, is the ultimate meaning of the Revolution in Military Affairs!”
Liberals have all the academics. Why didn’t they recognize the terror template? Liberals are the “smart” people and conservatives are the thugs, rednecks and low-information “scum,” aren’t they? Surely liberals should have known this was a terrorist attack from the patterns it presented … but they didn’t.
Of course terrorists would target persons with disabilities, the elderly and seemingly unlikely targets. That is what terrorists do, attack where one is unprepared. Liberals and elected Democrats don’t know this either because they don’t study history more than 30 days in the past, or they are too in love with the sound of their social justice demagoguery to have an accurate worldview.
Americans are tired of liberals “missing it.” They know, at long last, that liberals are perhaps America’s smartest stupid people to ever run the collective ship of state aground. And despite all of the liberal/SJW rancor and lunacy that plagues online social networks, real Americans know that there is something terribly wrong with our country and its inability to win against barbarians.
The truth is, America has two major problems plaguing her future right now, and contrary to the assertion of their most popular personalities, they aren’t global warming and lack of access to higher degrees. America suffers from cowards and traitors undermining the very fabric of our republic. Liberals need to recognize that they will not be spared by the barbarians seeking to topple America from within and without.
The taxpayer-subsidized picnic Democrats so delight in frolicking about with counterculture and academic elitism is under attack, just like the rest of our country. The very things that liberals enshrine are the antithesis of those who want to obliterate America.
Liberals and social justice warriors had better put away their think tanks, non-profits, falsely pious Hollywood charities and all their pseudo-intellectual garbage and start wearing the mantle of a patriot if they want our society to even have a chance of making it to the next decade.
The great poet laureate Tennyson wrote in his poem “Ulysses,” “Much have I seen and known; cities of men / And manners, climates, councils, governments / … Tis not too late to seek a newer world / Push off, and sitting well in order smite / The sounding furrows; for my purpose holds.” America is at war. The question is, when the history of western civilization is finally written, on which side will the liberals be found?
Dr. de Gracia is a political scientist, an ordained minister, a former elected official and the author of the new political thriller “American Kiss,” available now from Amazon.com, Barnes and Noble and other major bookstores. DISCLOSURE: Danny de Gracia is an elected Republican district chairman, but his opinions are expressly his own and do not reflect the official opinion of any organization.