Recent arrests of (qualifiedly) indigenous jihadists, four of whom are Muslims from the former Yugoslavia, and three of whom are illegal immigrants, have failed to stimulate even a simulation of the sort of discussion America must have if it is to secure itself from the depredations of such men. Such a discussion would, of necessity, be liberal in scope, encompassing interrogations of everything from immigration policy to the squalor of a foreign policy which issues in the creation of sharia states along the underbelly of Europe, and brings to power sharia regimes further to the east.
First, regarding several of the jihadists arrested in New Jersey, it is imperative to note that
The Administration knows it cannot keep the Albanian identity of four “Yugoslav” suspects concealed for ever, but it wants to pre-empt any suspicion that an independent KosovA would be a black hole of jihad-terrorism in the heart of Europe. Hastily denying the group’s link to al-Qaeda and other global networks is a political necessity for the proponents of Kosovo’s independence, not necessarily the reality.
We may wish to indulge the idle fantasy that our involvement in the Balkans on behalf of certain Muslim populations has not abetted the jihad; but like all fantasies confused with reality, this one is self-destructive. Perhaps, however, it is not quite a fantasy, but simply a piece of agitprop, as Dr. Trifkovic continues:
It is now essential to unmask the web of lies and distortions that has guided U.S. policy in the Balkans for years. The first step is to demand an explanation why and how Muslim Albanian terrorists from Kosovo were able to plan an operation here in the U.S. Why indeed: didn’t the U.S. military fight the Serbs for 78 days in 1999 so that they could have their ethnically clrean, Serbenfrei statelet? As a Washingtonian insider points out,
For almost a decade the U.S. government (or more precisely a handful of State Department bureaucrats and a few Congressmen) have placed the U.S. firmly on the side of the KLA and have helped created a haven for their operations. Even worse, KLA supporters in the United States have operated with virtual impunity, collecting money and weapons to support KLA operations not only in Kosovo, but in neighboring areas of southern Serbia, Montenegro, Macedonia, and northern Greece.
He reminds us that in 2004 Dutch television broadcast a documentary of Kosovo Albanian Muslims legally buying weapons in the U.S. and shipping them to Kosovo is support of their “liberation war” in violation of numerous U.S. laws, including the Neutrality Act: “The documentary then showed the same Albanians at a fundraiser in New York writing hefty checks to American politicians of both parties. There is no public indication that any action was taken by federal or state law enforcement agencies.”
Leave to the side for the time being the vexing questions this all raises, such as, "When does jihad become not-jihad?", and, "Why would the United States wink at certain jihads, in Albania, Kosovo, and Chechnya, for example, while execrating other jihads?" The answers to these and similar questions are found in a particular set of circumstances and ambitions that resolve the mystery of the American equation of Russian Democracy with the rule of the billionaire kleptocrats who looted the nation during the roaring Nineties under Yeltsin. There is a more profound level of ideological inebriation to be explored, one which ties together both events in Southeastern Europe, Near Eastern foreign policy decisions, and the 'failure' of our immigration policy. Once this peculiar intoxication is understood, even the odd dualities and vacillations of American establishment opinion concerning Islam become comprehensible. But let us allow the estimable Tom Lantos to explain for us:
“Just a reminder to the predominantly Muslim-led governments in this world that here is yet another example that the United States leads the way for the creation of a predominantly Muslim country in the very heart of Europe. This should be noted by both responsible leaders of Islamic governments, such as Indonesia, and also for jihadists of all color and hue. [sic!] The United States’ principles are universal, and in this instance, the United States stands foursquare for the creation of an overwhelmingly Muslim country in the very heart of Europe.”
The United States’ principles are universal. Because the principles of the United States - democracy, capitalism, free markets, etc., or was that Democracy! Whiskey! Sexy!? - are universal in scope and application, it is unthinkable that we should permit the status quo of the Muslim world to continue, for by its very particularity and unassimilability it mocks our pretensions to universality and thwarts them. Because those principles are universal, we must take upon ourselves the Universalists' Burden, that of the dissemination of democracy and markets to the benighted particularists of the world. Because those principles are universal, we are presented with but three 'options' for our dealings with the Muslim world: doing nothing, which we are told will ensure more violence; waging war on Islam itself, which would entail something amounting to genocide, and would be unthinkable (though some hold this thought in reserve, as if to say that if the ingrates will not accept our benefactions, they may have it coming to them); and democratization, the reform of Islam, its culture, its political institutions. Because our principles are universal, we oscillate between attempts to placate Islamic opinion with bromides about the "Religion of Peace" and concessions on matters of ritual and culture - which we wrongly interpret as peculiarities akin to Irish dancing or Russians eating borscht - instead of the political acts that they are, acts of the implementation of an Islamic social order, and dyspeptic splutterings over the failure of, say, Iraqi Muslims to take to a Western tradition that interests them about as much as Tribe, Religion, and Whatever interest us.
And because our principles are universal, we are adamant that political reality all over this terrestrial orb shall reflect that universality, meaning that European cultural particularity is a scandal; hence, the creation of a majority Islamic state along the underbelly of Europe, even if that state should be nothing more than a tent-covering for jihadists, flesh-smugglers, and ethnic-cleansers. Hence, a Russian state bent upon the preservation of something of the tatters of its historical identity from the dessicating forces of political and economic globalization is to be discussed as though, contrary to what everyone knows, the Cold War had not ended between 1989 and 1991. And, finally, to bring this world-tour of universalist folderol back to where it began - with the subject of immigration, even that of jihadists - because our principles are universal, even the historic American identity is an affront, and so immigration, even to the point of the elevation of nondiscrimination over life itself, even to the point of the obliteration of our historic identity (for otherwise, our identity, and the invidious comparison to other cultures, will denigrate The Idea), must be embraced. The Idea cannot wend its way through the thickets of the historical dialectic unless the hedges are cut down, and differentiation abolished, or resolved into the higher synthesis of abstractions such as money and markets on the one hand, and culture-as-commodity-not-identity on the other - which, come to think of it, is merely the incoherent notion of identity as an idea.
Our ideas are universal. Our love for mankind is unexcelled, this is to say; so also is our hatred for men in their particularity and finitude. We become death, the destroyer of worlds. In Saecula Saeculorum, Amen.