INTERESTING FIND in the 9/11 Commission report:
In this sense, 9/11 has taught us that terrorism against American interests “over there” should be regarded just as we regard terrorism against America “over here.” In this same sense, the American homeland is the planet. But the enemy is not just “terrorism,” some generic evil. This vagueness blurs the strategy. The catastrophic threat at this moment in history is more specific. It is the threat posed by Islamist terrorism —especially the al Qaeda network, its affiliates, and its ideology.
As we mentioned in chapter 2, Usama Bin Ladin and other Islamist terrorist leaders draw on a long tradition of extreme intolerance within one stream of Islam (a minority tradition), from at least Ibn Taimiyyah, through the founders of Wahhabism, through the Muslim Brotherhood, to Sayyid Qutb. That stream is motivated by religion and does not distinguish politics from religion, thus distorting both. It is further fed by grievances stressed by Bin Ladin and widely felt throughout the Muslim world—against the U.S. military presence in the Middle East, policies perceived as anti-Arab and anti-Muslim, and support of Israel. Bin Ladin and Islamist terrorists mean exactly what they say: to them America is the font of all evil, the “head of the snake,” and it must be converted or destroyed.
It is not a position with which Americans can bargain or negotiate. With it there is no common ground—not even respect for life—on which to begin a dialogue. It can only be destroyed or utterly isolated.
(Emphasis added). This language was found by Wizbang, which notes that the Washington Post seems to have missed the significance of this statement.
UPDATE: Related thoughts from Cathy Seipp — though the discussion in the comments soon degenerates into requests for Cathy to wear fewer clothes when appearing on television.
ANOTHER UPDATE: Interresting comments here: “After reading some of the reactions from around the sphere, it’s clear that the report really is a Mirror of Erised in pdf form – most people don’t see the truth, but what their hearts desire.”
And Reid Stott says it’s all about Congressional priorities:
They say their legislative agenda is so full of such important things, things apparently more important than protecting America from future attack, it’s highly unlikely any of the commission’s dramatic recommendations will even be considered by Congress before the election.
The election. You know, the one they claim will probably be preceded by an Al Qaeda attack. Can’t deal with this, until after that.
At which point we’ll have to create a new commission, call it the 11/1 Commission. In three years, we’ll get their recommendations. If there’s anybody in Congress left alive to give them to. . . .
Indeed.