September 11th anniversary; Shoud the U.S. now help Al Qaeda?
The tragic irony of today's anniversary is this - at the same time that we commemorate the events of September 11, 2001, we are seriously debating whether we should commit U.S. air and naval forces to help the people that attacked us on September 11 so that those people can win a war and take over yet another country.
If you voted for Obama in the last two elections (or either of them) you probably don't know that I am referring to the current controversy over whether we should bomb Syria. For those who still don't understand, here is a brief summary: Syria is fighting against Al Qaeda (even though that doesn't mean that Syria is good). (Al Qaeda is definitely bad, because they are the group that attacked us on September 11, 2001.) The Obama administration wants to bomb Syria because Syria allegedly used chemical weapons in Syria's war against Al Qaeda.
While the newspapers and networks debate the issue of whether Assad used chemical weapons or whether he will surrender those weapons or whether we will negotiate some other resolution, the western dhimmitude marches on unceasingly.
Instead of discussing whether the U.S. is still at war against Al Qaeda, the networks will focus, instead, on (1) whether the "first responders" are properly funded and (2) the particular pieces of granite on which the names of the 9-11 victims are etched.
Radical islam is patient. The islamists suffered many casualties as a result of attacking us on 9-11. But they now can bide their time while we forget. Remembering the victims or the first responders is not the same as fighting the war - especially if we find ourselves fighting on the wrong side.