The White Picket Fence

Today's news brings more unrest and violence amid the same pernicious hate, fear and xenophobia that served as the impetus of the bombings in London this past week. With the G8 Summit winding down, the message splashed across every news story involving same rang with the familiar problems of a world divided: terrorism.

Since 1967 brought a reshuffling of Israel's borders -- a war in which a variety of Arab nations attempted a coordinated attack on Israel -- the Arab hatred of the West has grown exponentially. In an earlier post herein, I cited a Dennis Miller analysis of the Israeli-Palestinian struggle. But much like Mr. Miller's take on the situation, I have come to the conclusion that many of the world's Muslims have an us versus them mentality; even those who are well-assimilated into Western Culture seem to inefficiently hide their distrust of democratic, "balanced" nations. To wit, the two-sided double-speak that emanates from most Arab nations is meant to either appease the West (read: the US and the UK) or each nation's people, who seemingly crave anti-West action in the form of bloody, violent vengeance. Recall the anti-American violence (and public, repulsive celebration thereof) of the Somali people as they dragged American servicemen from a downed helicopter through the streets of Mogadishu. Theirs is a society -- whether in Sool, Togdheer, Awdal, Sanaag, or Woqooyi Galbeed -- that is largely Sunni Muslim and controlled by warlords. Considering US action there was attempting to loosen the grip said warlords held over their fellow Somalis, the peoples' celebration, ironically, reeked of the same twisted, anti-US rhetoric that echoes in Baghdad, Beirut, Damascus and anywhere else Western support of Israel is a government- and Islam-sponsored no-no.

So in the meantime, in Afghanistan, another blinking light on a map increasingly littered with insurgent hot spots, a cleric who was notably supportive of the newly-created Afghan government was shot to death. In Iraq, an Egyptian diplomat -- who was once posted in Israel -- was kidnapped and later executed. These two legs combined with a third action, the bombings in London, to form an equilateral triangle of terror in Europe, the Middle East and Asia.

It's a pretty simple, albeit ineffective strategy: intimidate nations with terror (London), isolate them (by kidnapping foreign diplomats and murdering them) and silence them (by murdering the nation's most outspoken critics of terror).

What I propose, despite how repugnant it might appear on the surface, is to simply close the doors, much as Israel has done: prevent Muslims from entering Western nations. Deport any and all Muslims (of questionable origin) and revoke citizenship to those Muslims who speak out (and encourage) anti-Western action. Of the theoretical bonfire which would destroy the Bill of Rights that I have just proposed, I'm not advocating -- nor do I support -- deportation or imprisonment of someone publicly complaining about high taxes, traffic or George W. Bush's complete ineptitude. I'm simply suggesting that revoking the citizenship or the temporary visa of a cleric or scholar who is advocating the destruction of US and/or Western interests should not be here. They should not be comfortable here, they should not be imprisoned here, and they should not be allowed freedom here. Israel, which experiences something akin to the London bombings nearly every week, has with regularity imprisoned or expelled any and all militants whom have involved themselves in attacks on Israelis. The problem is that Israel is geographically and ethnically related to the majority of the monsters who believe a belt packed with explosives is a rational, sane answer to a political problem. In this and other Western nations, a mosque that breeds hate sticks out like a sore thumb -- a sore thumb that, I believe, should no longer be tolerated but instead be amputated and discarded.

To answer those who would suggest my theory is mere xenophobic, nationalist, ethnic-fueled hate, understand that nothing could be further from the truth. The problems inherent in the escalation (and emboldened come-uppance) of the last decade's terrorism and related atrocities are not that we've pissed off a bunch of Muslims; the problem is that the West is attempting to quell violence, and Muslims (the extremists thereof) have been at war with any- and everyone who doesn't share their worldview -- for the past 4,000 years. And as anyone who sees as irrational someone detonating themselves in the name of God will attest, it seems to me that the main focus of the problem is, simply put, they will not stop until they are forced to address their differences with talk and not swords; with dialogue and mutual, earned respect, not bombs; and with an interest and desire for peace, not a lust for blood and a yearning for death. It's far easier for a fourteen-year-old in an urban sprawl to get a gun and steal money than it is to earn it; so too is it far easier for a bunch of radical, angry extremists to kill and maim civilians than to work with other members who share similar beliefs and work politically to achieve goals.

The culture of hate that has bred four decades or more of violence and death at the hands of Islamic extremists -- in our cities, our airplanes and our lives -- needs to be isolated and strangled rather than embraced. And for anyone who feels this view is elitist, xenophobic and/or hatemongering in its own right, please consider answering to the parents, husbands, wives, sons, daughters and friends of the 50 or more Londoners that were the latest victims of this non-war.