There are many great books out there exposing the scam of Islam - The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (And the Crusades), Because They Hate, Why I Left Jihad to name just a few.
RUSH: It's great to have you here. Now, let's get started with this, because there's a lot to discuss with you. There are three themes in Andy's book, folks. The first theme is that a foreign threat to national security is fundamentally a political issue of self-defense that would involve military. It's not a legal issue involving lawyers and criminal law. The second theme is that we have been at war with these people -- declared by them -- since the late eighties, early nineties, and it wasn't taken seriously until 9/11. The third one is what's fascinating to me. I can't wait 'til we get to that portion. It's "You Can't Take the Islam Out of Islamic terrorism." Andy tried the blind sheik, and I'll let him tell you the story when we get there about preparing to cross-examine the blind sheik. He expected to find that this guy was just a fringe nut, making things up -- and nothing he said was made up about Islam. So let's start where you think we need to start for people to understand the threat that we still face, and maybe you want to do that by starting at the beginning and how you became aware of it.
MCCARTHY: Well, I knew nothing more about radical Islam, Rush, in 1993 when I got brought into this than, you know, anyone who's had a fairly good education in the United States; which is to say, you know, maybe the barest headlines, but not a whole lot of substance underneath that. The whole experience was really an eye-opener for me in many ways. Probably most basically, by realizing that the people who founded our country had a much more humble and better idea about how the country would need to be defended. They didn't assume that America would be forever, and they certainly were not under a delusion that we could be protected by our legal system from foreign threats to our security. They had a very strong conviction that there had to be an accountability nexus between the people who made national security decisions and the people whose lives were at stake. And what that meant was that the courts essentially were going to have no role in national security. They had an important role in our system, but not in protecting our nation from foreign threats. I guess what my battle scars are about is trying to basically square that circle, trying to use our criminal justice system as a means from protecting us from people who actually mean us an existential threat to our system.
RUSH: All right. So what are the numbers? Through the Clinton years and even prior to that, we sought to deal with this threat via the courts, indictments. How successful have we been?
MCCARTHY: Well, if your point of reference is national security, it's an abysmal failure. Most of the time when I talked about this it turns out to be at law schools, where what they're interested in is due process, and they look at it and say, "But look, you convicted everyone. You know, you batted a thousand," which obviously you can't do better than that. But in point of fact in eight years we took out 29 people, which, when you consider the fact that, you know, between the time the trade center was bombed in '93 -- which I think is the declaration of war -- and the time it was destroyed on 9/11, we had an enemy that was growing bigger and bolder, attacking us about once a year, and our response to it -- even as the attacks became more ferocious -- was essentially to add more counts to the indictment, which is really not impressive to people who are willing to immolate themselves in terrorist attacks.
Read the entire interview HERE.
(Hat Tip: Jihad Watch)