Can We Say The Enemy's Name Out Loud Yet?

Writing about September 11th today, Victor Davis Hansen concludes with a warning wrapped in a criticism:

In short, six years of quiet at home since 9/11 have fooled some into thinking that terrorists pose little danger here - or that we may be doing far too much rather than too little to stop such killers. No matter that this past week a jihadist plot to destroy U.S. facilities in Germany was thwarted.

Others make the mistake of endlessly re-fighting the past six years - who let al-Qaida grow?; who "lost" Osama bin Laden?; who fouled up postwar Iraq? - instead of concentrating on the storm ahead.

Before 2001, the excuse for American complacence and in-fighting was naivete. But what will be the reason for the next successful strike against us by the jihadists?

More naivete - or is it simple hubris? (Real Clear Politics)

When the second and third and fourth domestic shores attacks do come, whether they are months away or years away, I fear they will be met with more hubris, not more clarity and commitment. I can hear the left now, blaming the attacks on our efforts to free Iraq, or on the poor way those Islamic boys were treated by intolerant extremist Christians who they may or may not have bumped up against.

Those who were supposed to stop attacks, from whoever's leading Homeland Security then on down, will point fingers every which way and Congress will investigate everything but what they should investigate, which is, of course, what can we do to mercilessly stop this evil threat that Islamism presents?

Hansen is rightly looking at the ongoing threat to America as the anniversary of 9/11 nears, but of course America and Americans are at risk the world over. For example:

LAGOS, Nigeria (AP) - American and other Western installations in Nigeria were at risk of terrorist attack in Africa's most populous nation, the U.S. Embassy said Thursday.

"The U.S. Mission in Nigeria has received information that U.S. and other Western interests in Nigeria are currently at risk for terrorist attacks," the embassy said in a consular statement sent via e-mail to U.S. citizens in Nigeria. "Potential targets include official and commercial installations in Abuja and Lagos," it said, without elaborating.

Now, Nigeria was a colonial nation. Is that the cause of these threats? It has an oil economy, so is the meddling of Halliburton the cause of these threats? To hear the liberals, one would think so. All evil tracks back to American, European, white, capitalist, imperialist roots.

They don't worry themselves over troublesome facts like the 50 plus years Nigeria has had of independence, of its generation of leaders who never experienced colonialism. And never mind that corruption there is indigenous and there is no need for Halliburton to set up corruption classes at the local schools.

And certainly, obviously, the left won't trouble themselves with nasty little facts like this: Nigeria is 50 percent Islamic, 40 percent Christian and 10 percent Nativist.

The communique from the U.S. mission didn't say which group in particular to watch out for, which is the result of neither naivete or hubris, but rather our unwillingness to name our enemy, whether out of diplomatic or PC concerns.

Nearly six years after Islamism's largest attack on our shores, our government and our MSM still have trouble declaring we have an enemy, and even more trouble saying that enemy's name.

Its name is radical, jihadist Islam, and it is out there and still very much after us. So what would be wrong, after six years, to actually say as much every opportunity we have to say it?