Much has been made about ABC’s prime time fictional mini-series “The Path to 9/11″ and how it opens with an unflattering, distorted picture of the Clinton years. In arguing for a more realistic portrayal, I heard one commentator state that by rights the show should have opened with Oliver North and the Iran-Contra Affair. That was a thought stimulating suggestion, but it is as wrong as the so called docudrama.

No, the roots of 9/11 arguably go back to the story is Abraham and his sons Ishmael and Isaac. Still, I trust we are best served by looking for the key foot paths that lead to the tragic events of September 11, 2001 in the 20th Century. Consider the following.

Saudi Arabia: To enhance its position and consolidate its power in the material world, the Saudi Royal family consummated a marriage of convenience to what at the time was a fringe, rigid, dogmatic, authoritarian sect, that was not even considered Muslim by many at the time, the Wahhabis. These ultra orthodox so-called religious leaders have indoctrinated many generations of Saudis into an extremely narrow world view based upon rigid adherence to their hateful interpretation of the Koran. This world view is the underpinnings of Osama bin Laden’s’ extremist ideology.

Egypt: The assassination of Anwar Sadat for the “sin” of making piece with Israel by the Muslim Brotherhood (founded in 1928) is another example of how far these “true believers” will go to ensure that those who do not share their twisted sense of Islam will be made to pay with their lives. Is it little wonder that Ayman Al-Zawahiri, bin Laden’s mentor, was involved in this plot? It is no coincidence that the Brotherhood has very close ties to Saudi Wahhabis.

These are the ideological roads that lead to 9/11. What they have in common is a rigid worldview that believes their way is the only true way of Allah. This mindset is a reaction against modernity and what they perceive as the wickedness of the rest of the world. Any who have a different view of reality are to be punished. They believe “you are either with us or against us.” This is a classical case of authoritarianism vs. liberalism.

Unfortunately, recent events in the world appear to be making this message more appealing than ever before to desperate Muslims. The question for the rest of us is this. What can we do to bring these preachers of hate and architects of destruction to justice, while helping to ensure that their thousands of disciples and sympathizers find a path to peace?

QuestionItNow - Still In Iraq

The threat to America’s existance from terrorists is not real, not in the realpolitical sense. Empires and states have been overrun, their capitals completely burned to the ground, but they have survived and revived. Even 2 or 3 nuclear explosions in urban areas would not destroy America. America could rebuild. Only the massive nuclear threat of the USSR truly jeopardized America’s very existance. Today’s threat from terrorists does not reach that capacity.

The threat that American leaders observe, ecspecially the Neocons, is the closing door to American global primacy. As China, India, the EU expand and their resources, economies, and policies reach throughout the world, America’s primacy is challenged. As regional blocs form to the exclusion of America, America’s influence wanes. The neocon’s solution (evident at the PNAC, http://www.newamericancentury.org)) and response is military expansion, ecspecially within the resource rich regions: the Middle East, Asia Pacific, east and central Africa. By 2012, India’s middle class will be around 200 million. America’s entire population is only 300 million, 310 by 2012. China’s population in 2012 be around 1.7 billion. India graduates 400,000 engineers a year.
These are the real threats to America, itself with declining educational standards, even a dependency foreign immigrants to maintain engineering and science grants.

Sir, the threat from terrorists is a cost of America’s foreign policy. “Stay the course” and the terrorist threat will likely remain.

If one percieves America has every right to militarily occupy some nations, and as Machiavelli described, support other regimes as American proxy’s thereby securing America’s global empire.
If that is your right, then it is the right of any good people, regardless of their religion, politics, nationality, to stand up against such global imperialism which supports tyranny (Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait), corruption (Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, UAE), gluttony (all the Gulf states, monarchy of Jordan, etc).

The threat to America’s “homeland” is a similar threat that nations and empires have faced since the beginning of organized governance in Mesopotamia, Egypt, Greece, Rome. Saboteurs, rebels, insurgents who have political grievance that have gone unresolved take up arms, often with barbarism or ruthlessness to match. Every nation is obligated to protect itself, protect its people and visitors, tourists, guests. That is one of the basic functions of governance.

This is different from legitimate angst over America’s 100s of military installations throughout the resource rich Muslim world, usually with the tacit approval of petty dictators whose very existance pinges on their allegiance to America. This aspect of America’s identity America must face upto. Sir, I do not know if you have ever travelled aboard and interacted and spoken with people of other nations in their homeland, such as Mexico.