Captain's Quarters -

This is another blow-back of Muslim terrorism. When people see that terror and murder are effective means of achieving some end, it is only natural that others will learn from them. "That which gets rewarded increases in frequency."

It is imperative to win in Iraq not just for Muslim would-be terrorists, but for our own environmental, animal rights terrorists also.

It's Stein, not Steyn...although it would make
a great column for Steyn.

Before getting to the meat of the issue... to "james rich"... OMFG. You're going to now blame extremists from the animal rights activist movement on "the moooslims"

Simply incredible.

To the topic at hand... these people do incredible harm to an important cause, much like the whackos at PETA. It's of a parallel to "Operation Rescue" and the nutbags there who endorse blowing up clinics, assasinating doctors, etc. Does their movement no good either.

Every time some lone whacko does something like this and gets widely read pundits such as Ed jumping on to cast aspersions which could be taken as a broad brush against the entire purpose, more people will begin to yawn when things like Michael Vicks' actions come to light.

The country has a horrible record in the area of enacting (and more importantly *enforcing*) meaningful animal protection laws. A closer look needs to be taken at research facilities who use animals in such research to allow for fair, humane treatment of animals without impeding the progress of legitimate research. Simply saying "If it's for the potential benefit of humans, hands off! No regulations are appropriate" is not an acceptable answer.

But breaking the law in return and killing people over it when you can't achieve meaningful legislative reform is as inexcusable as when the anti-choice crowd does it. I hope they get an arrest and conviction and throw the book at the perp(s).

james rich:
"This is another blow-back of Muslim terrorism. When people see that terror and murder are effective means of achieving some end, it is only natural that others will learn from them."

You seem to be claiming that Muslims invented terrorism, and all subsequent terrorism is then the fault of Muslims because they started it. But if you want to blame the originators, the history of terrorism goes back much further back than you think. Muslim terrorism, for example, existed 900 years ago in the Assasins, but even they are certainly not the first. The Hindu Thugs existed before that. So who is the father of terrorism? The earliest known terrorists are the Zealots around the time of Christ. The Zealots were very influencial for more recent terrorist groups as well: the Irgun and Stern gang. So if you want to blame this story as "blow-back", blame it on the Jewish. Their terrorism goes back the furthest.

 
blame it on the Jewish

Well that didn't take long.

As if comparing blowing up a hotel (after calling well ahead to warn people to leave) is morally equivalent to flying an airplane into a skyscraper.

Riiiight.
 

I address the Muslim issue in my Update II. Short answer -- we have plenty of American examples in history from which to draw.

And PETA had a full-page ad in this week's 'Entertainment Weekly.' Possibly EW should be sent a link to the above news article.

james rich has a point. No, Muslims did not invent terrorism. Yes, other groups, including in America, have used terrorism in the past.

But what do we see as a result of the latest wave of Muslim terrorism? THAT IT WORKS! Libs looooove to lament that, since we've (gasp!) changed a few things about our society and laws to try to protect ourselves from homocidal neanderthals, "the terrorists have won!" Perhaps the terrorists - and wannabes - think the same thing. Maybe some sickos look at how car bombings in Fallujah or Baghdad have half the country ready to surrender in Iraq and think, "Hey! Maybe we can do that, too."

I'm go even further. Lefties who try to make a moral equivalence argument that (to some extent) excuses terrorist actions are simply encouraging more of it. I'm sure some pimple-faced little bastard living in his parents' basement in Berkley would love to be a "freedom fighter" or kill some "little Eichmanns". "By any means necessary" has been a rallying cry for fringe lefties since the '60s. Maybe some people are starting to take that slogan a little too seriously.

There is only one answer to the scum who commit acts like this, whether they succeed or not:

Arrest. Trial. Conviction. Death sentence.

hgstern:
"As if comparing blowing up a hotel (after calling well ahead to warn people to leave) is morally equivalent to flying an airplane into a skyscraper."

I was not making comparisons as to which terrorist group was more or less moral. I was speaking about the history of terrorism. Read more carefully. As for the Irgun, they are responsible for over 60 terrorist attacks, not just the King David hotel. These attacks included bombings of cafes and outdoor marketplaces. There were no warnings.

Israel can label anyone they please a terrorist and then assasinate them in public. This is acceptable. If an animal rights organization labels someone a terrorist and tries to execute them, they are terrorists. There is a hierarchy in society, and violence is only acceptable when it occurs from the top down. If it occurs from a lower to a higher level, it is terrorism. Weird.

hgstern,

It is. As a more contemporary example, look to IRA actions during their bombing campaign in London. They always phoned ahead, but somehow people died anyway and the terroristic component was enhanced rather than diminished.

Such actions are identical in effect to those done at the Hotel David.

hgstern,

It is. As a more contemporary example, look to IRA actions during their bombing campaign in London. They always phoned ahead, but somehow people died anyway and the terroristic component was enhanced rather than diminished.

Such actions are identical in effect to those done at the Hotel David.

Here is a rather comprehensive list of domestic terror attacks in the US. It's interesting how much of it is small scale attacks by the JDL and anti-Cuban groups in recent times.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in_the_U._S.

DocJim, you are right that there are lots of lunatic leftists out there but the right wing also has its own 'right to kill' mentality at work... the list spans the ideological divide.

"It's interesting how much of it is ... anti-Cuban groups in recent times."

It's also interesting that the US had the most notorious Cuban terrorist...Louis Posada, in jail in the US just recently. He has publically bragged about a hotel bombing that killed an Italian tourist, and he is responsible for the first bombing of a civilian airliner in the Western hemispere that killed over 70 people. What did the US do with him? They let him go. I wonder how the US would feel if another country had OBL in custody and then let him go.

So according to Dr. Vlasak's "logic" does that mean that people who are hurting people and who will not stop when told to stop, one option would be to stop them using any means necessary, up to and including the "morally justifiable" solution to the problem???

I wonder how he'd feel if his own logic was applied to him?

I seem to recall that Sudan had OBL. And let him go.

Well said, Kevin.

lexhamfox,

Oh, not question but that there are murderous lunatics on the right as well. However, I (for one) am not interested in excusing, condoning, or otherwise explaining their actions. I'm not interested in negotiating with them, trying to reach some compromise with them, or "understanding" them. I want them dead or in prison for life. I also don't think that there were too many people on the right who praised Timothy McVeigh as a "patriot", called the people who died in OKC "little Eichmanns", tried to blame the United States or Bill Clinton for the OKC bombing, or built a political campaign on the ashes of the Murrah Building.

I want terrorists to stop what they're doing or be hunted down and killed like rabid animals, not only to stop them but also to send a very clear message to anybody who thinks about following in their bloody footsteps that we absolutely will not put up with this kind of thing. People who commit murder, arson, or other acts of destruction / terrorism, or who incite / encourage / support such, should be punished to the utmost limits of the law.

"Molotov cocktails left on doorsteps. Bombs placed under cars at the homes of targets. Death threats in public communiques. Are these new tactics for al-Qaeda or Hezbollah?"

Sounds like the Molly Maguires. My great great Uncle Pat Hester was hung as one.

I remember my grandfathers stories (he started in the mines at age 9) of mine Blasters being able to take the porch off a foreman's house without breaking even one piece of china inside. That was just to get his attention.

This kind of activity has been the MO of the animal rights crowd since the late 1980's! Just look at what they have done to Huntingdon Life Sciences (in the UK) since 1995! The fact that we have not yet seen it here to the extent that the Huntingdon scientists have seen it is pure happenstance.

Cindy

"Bombs placed under cars...."

Just to be clear, this was a gallon of gasoline with a fuse in it. I would call this an incendiary device, not a bomb. Had it worked, the car would have been burned. The only way the doctor could have been harmed by this incident is if he had happened to enter the car while the fuse was burning, and then sat in the car without moving until it ignited, and then failed to exit the car before getting burned. The chances of this action hurting or killing the doctor was miniscule, and I doubt that was the intent.

Whether you want to call it a bomb or incendiary device, burning a gallon of gasoline under a car in a carport at 1:30 AM would have burned up the car and the entire house and probably everyone in it. This was attempted murder, and defending it is disgusting (but typical of dems).

Given the known volatility of gasoline, coefficient of expansion and its explosive forceful nature in a confined space it's a bomb. The fumes could readily be ignited by the exhaust or ignition not just the "fuse." Had it ignited the fuel tank of the car that would be a second bomb. The concussion from the explosion(s) could readily incapacitate passengers as could projectiles entering the passenger compartment. The burning plastics and their poisonous fumes also could poison / suffocate any passengers inside.

Those whom would speculate that the victim wouldn't / shouldn't be harmed by this or that it was somehow an altruistic act of terrorism probably should not be allowed to play with scissors.

Jazz, you say the anti- school choice movement is likely to use terrorist tactics.

While I agree the democrat party has more than it's share of nuts, still the right to choose which school your child goes to is American to the core, so the democrat party inevitably must civilize itself and uphold the value of school choice.

Ed,

A minor quibble: the KKK that existed during Reconstruction was basically wiped out in the early 1870s. It was revived around 1915 and died out in the 1930s. The current groups using the name are really a third incarnation.

Your main point, that forms of terrorism have been around the U.S. for quite a while, is certainly true.

"This was attempted murder, and defending it is disgusting (but typical of dems)."

But "typical" of Democrats.

Is that really necessary? The Blogosphere needs to face up to an ugly issue. Did Ed post this topic knowing it would appeal to that mindset ("but typical of Dems") and would therefore drive up website traffic from his sycophants, thus enhancing his advertising rates?

Or are we all so caught up in our little tribal worldviews that all we can do is hurl poop like that at each other?

"The only way the doctor could have been harmed by this incident is if he had happened to enter the car while the fuse was burning, and then sat in the car without moving until it ignited, and then failed to exit the car before getting burned."

Have you ever seen a wildfire in Southern California? In June, when there hasn't been rain since spring '06?

Last October a guy started the Esperanza fire to distract the police so he could get his dog out of the pound. It burned 40,000 acres, 34 houses and killed 5 firefighters.

My 6yo daughter would be blind now if it weren't for the research of Dr. Rosenbaum and his peers. And that's all I have to say about that (Gump).

Maybe these nuts could start with picking a better name for their group. The Animal Liberation Brigade? I guess they mean freeing the animals from the laboratories (and not all animals everywhere, like my two dogs for example, who might welcome liberation but wouldn't know what to do with it). But they've made a movie about this sort of activity recently and everyone turned into flesh eating zombies when the infected animals got out (28 Days Later). Classic blowback. So maybe the ALB folks need to consider this.

Ok, probably not the best time for me to be humorous, it's just that but for the murder and mayhem it's hard to take these loons seriously. Which is why I guess they resort to violence. The message just doesn't resonate without it. Actually it doesn't resonate with it either, it only means that these fanatics have lost whatever credibility they might have gained otherwise. And that means they weren't really all that serious about the cause to begin with. More into nihilism I think. And probably young, upper class, trust fund types with way too much time on their hands (the typos being an obvious effort to disguise their identities perhaps?).

Three words for "james rich": Kathleen Soliah (aka Sara Jane Olson.)

I have to take issue with your characterization of the OKC bombing as tied to the militia movement. McVeigh was not a militia member, but he attended some meetings of the Michigan Militia and was asked to leave because of his rhetoric. In other words, he was too extreme for them.

Further, after all the discussion of The Turner Diaries being his blueprint, I read the book. I don't recommend doing so to anyone else unless you really want to get inside McVeigh's head - it's a thinly disguised racist anti-Semitic neo-Nazi tract and is thoroughly disgusting. But the militias, as nutty as they can be, are not violent and are not Nazis, and were definitely never the looming threat they were painted as by misguided worriers at, for example, the Southern Poverty Law Center.

A clarification to my earlier post: "Thinly disguised" refers to the neo-Nazi aspects of the book. It's very coy and has no overt displays of swastikas in it, for example. The racism and anti-Semitism? It's on open display from the first page.

So was McVeigh a closet Nazi? I tend to believe so, since I read that he used to sell the books himself.

Damn right, newton.

Kathleen Soliah was not only a terrorist, she was celebrated by the mainstream democrat party in Minnesota, even after her identity was revealed.

Is there any line of decency democrats won't cross?

Anybody who thinks a 1-gallon firebomb set outside a home isn't an attempt to kill is a fool. Without some kind of booster it wouldn't explode; it WOULD set the car on fire and spread, all over the damn place.