Has The Slumbering Giant Really Awakened?

by Christopher G. Adamo

As America rebounded from the horrors of September 11, deeds and events of such a profound and inspiring nature suggested cause for great hope among Americans of traditional patriotism and morality. From the sudden proliferation of the “Stars and Stripes” to the abundant expressions of “God Bless America” (a refrain which hadn’t been heard with such regularity since the days of Kate Smith), a resurgence of good old fashioned Americanism appeared to be our nation’s overwhelming response to those forces who would see this country destroyed.

America had been here once before. On the heels of his successful bombing raid of Pearl Harbor, Admiral Yamamoto of the Japanese Navy lamented that his only real accomplishment was to have “awakened a sleeping giant.” America would, he knew, rise from the wreckage, and respond to that outrage in manner which posed a mortal threat to the Japanese Empire.

However, the eight months which have elapsed since 9-11 reveal our nation to be quite a different place than it was in 1941. Though certain elements of American society are nothing less than “steely” in their resolve to deal with the terrorist threat, others - particularly among the “politically correct” - seem to be doing their level best to distract the nation from its necessary response. It is to the peril of all if they succeed, just as it was throughout the ’90’s when Bill Clinton’s indifference to the growing terrorist threat, or even more appallingly, his willingness to exploit it for purely political purposes, laid the groundwork for 9-11.

Most ominously, with each passing week the nation appears to be slipping further back into its pre-attack mentality, to the point that many of those anti-American forces who recognized the wisdom of keeping a low profile during the immediate aftermath of the attacks, are once again sufficiently emboldened to advance their leftist and counter-cultural diatribe.

Consider the airlines, which regarded with suspicion those prospective passengers who appeared ethnically similar to the terrorist hijackers. (And every one of the nineteen did, in fact, have common and distinctive identifying characteristics.) Now they are being forced to treat with equal suspicion, little old ladies and small children. Such absurdities are being carried out not to insure the safest possible transport of passengers, but rather to give the appearance that the security checks contain no element of “profiling” or bias. In other words, protecting the sensibilities of passengers has become a higher priority than protecting their lives and safety.

By entangling security personnel in such meaningless and symbolic antics, those in charge are putting at risk not only airline passengers and crews, but also untold thousands on the ground.

Even in the immediate aftermath of the attacks, the Bush administration gave ample indication of the restrained scope of its outrage. In the face of criticism from domestic and foreign Muslim leaders, the president was quick to abandon his use of the term “crusade against terror.” (Muslims are perennially opposed to crusades.) Under further pressure from them he changed the original name of his military action from “Infinite Justice” to “Enduring Freedom” since, according to those Islamic clerics, "infinite justice" could only come from Allah, and is not likely from humans - and certainly not from Americans. Somewhat ironically, Islamic spokesmen show no similar contention with the term "jihad," which means "holy war."

It is altogether inarguable that Islam has, as a direct result of the attacks, enjoyed a greatly enhanced status in this country in recent months. During the memorial service of September 14, one of the keynote speakers was Dr. Siddiqi, a Muslim leader who, less than a year prior to the attacks, had made anti-American proclamations at a pro-Palestinian rally. In his speech of September 20, the President declared Islam to be “a good religion.” In an unprecedented move, he celebrated Ramadan in the White House this past December. Contrast this against the fact that his own father was compelled by the Saudi government to leave that country in December of 1990, in order to celebrate Christmas on board a Navy ship.

Even the basic purpose for American military action in Afghanistan was diluted by none other than First Lady Laura Bush. Attempting to bolster her husband’s efforts at domestic “coalition building,” Mrs. Bush sought to focus attention specifically on the oppression of Afghani women by Taliban law (as if the support of liberals and feminists would strategically or diplomatically strengthen America’s position.) But American aggression against the Taliban was not about advancing feminism or westernizing Islamic dress codes. Rather it was retribution for the mass murder of innocent Americans as well as a preventative measure against any recurrence.

Prior to the eleventh of September, a catastrophe on the scale of the Pentagon and World Trade Center destruction was considered “unimaginable.” Now, the “unimaginable” has happened. But far from the claims that the country will “never be the same,” things appear to rapidly be regressing to a pre-September mentality. American leftists are no longer afraid to spew their screed and, with each passing day, they are becoming more bold in their assertions that America’s lifestyle and heritage warranted such attacks. “Political correctness,” “diversity,” and “moderation” increasingly dominate the policies which originally were implemented so as to protect and preserve us as a nation. And Congressional action appears, day by day, to be less about shoring up weaknesses in national security and more about gaining partisan advantage over the opposing party.

If not reversed by a concise and purposeful foreign and domestic policy, the evaporation of America’s resolve and commitment to rid the world of al Qaeda and sympathetic organizations may eventually stall the “War on Terror.” And such a scenario will only serve to assure the eventuality of a future attack.

Growing up during the turbulent decades of the ‘60's and ‘70's, Christopher  Adamo saw, to his dismay, the nation's moral foundations being destroyed  before his very eyes. But even then he was a staunch Conservative at heart,  and rejected outright the tenets of America's counterculture revolution.

 After a hitch in the Air Force, where he specialized in airborne  electro- optical systems, he pursued a career in the field of aerospace,  working for major defense contractors in California, Florida, and Colorado. But his career plans abruptly changed during the industry-wide downsizing that followed the Space Shuttle Challenger disaster.

Presently he is working in the field of industrial instrumentation in the state of Wyoming. Concurrently, he has become involved in that state's political process, attending state GOP conventions as a delegate, and serving as a member of the Wyoming Republican Central Committee. He has also aided in the candidacies of local legislators and state senators, as well as a U.S. Senator and Congresswoman.

From 1993 to 1996, he edited and wrote for “The Wyoming Christian”, the state newsletter for Christian Coalition of Wyoming. During that period, he developed an acute awareness of the harm being done to Conservatism by liberal activists within the Republican Party as well as the Democrats. This remains a favorite theme of his articles, which now appear as a regular feature on GOPUSA.