Remembering as others forget

After reading articles on a dozen conservative websites, it appears that only one had something to say about the movement and religion that was the root cause of the attacks on 9/11. Here is the article by Brigitte Gabriel. Back in 2004 I doubted that conservatives could face the nature of a religious enemy. With a few exceptions that has become true.

The left suspended its usual criticism of religion because of the foreign nature of Islam and the multicultural imperative to praise foreign cultures while denigrating our own. For awhile there were exceptions. Four months after the attack, Daniel Benjamin and Steven Simon, in their book, The Age of Sacred Terror, argued that 9/11 terrorist attacks were purely religious:
But neither President’s necessary and useful political speech should obscure the realities of September 11: the motivation for the attack was neither political calculation, strategic advantage, nor wanton bloodlust. It was to humiliate and slaughter those who defied the hegemony of God; it was to please Him by reasserting His primacy. It was an act of cosmic war. … Only by understanding the religious nature of the attacks of September 11 can we make any sense of their unprecedented scale and their intended effects. 
They clearly repudiated the central thesis of their book when they criticized Sebastian Gorka for the exact same idea saying that "religious doctrine is not their sole or even primary driver." They were hoping to remain influential in academia and Washington.

The Islamic revivalist movement reached a climax in the creation of the Islamic State. This vivid example of pure Islam in practice was an embarrassment to Islamic apologists everywhere. Even the New York Times couldn't help but report that ISIS was a salafi creation built on Saudi inspired Wahhabi Islam. Reporters are often the first writers of history. Sadly that history is now lost. History forgotten will be history relived.