Breaking Down Michael Doran:

The and the Counsel on Foriegn Relations view of Muslims as stated by Michael Doran, is far from informed and boarders on ignorant.

Michael S Doran is called by many "the foremost expert on Muslim extremists" and is highly regarded among the elite of our society for his work with The Council on Foreign Relations.   He has also served as head of Near East and North African Affairs in the National Security Council (NSC) having been appointed to in August of 2005. He has served as an assistant Secretary of Defense during the second George W. Bush administration.
Beginning with an article written by Mr. Doran in January/February 2002 issue of Foreign Affairs (the flagship publication for The Council on Foreign Affairs) "Somebody else's civil war" Doran writes that "Osama bin Laden sought -- and has received -- an international military crackdown, one he wants to exploit for his particular brand of revolution…Bin Laden produced a piece of high political theater".  This would seem that Doran believes that the attacks on September 11th were somehow a radicle Muslim extremists elaborate attempt at manipulate the U.S. into a war in which one of the consequences would be the forwarding of his agenda. However, Doran ignores key issues in the assumption.
Osama bin Laden has in fact never taken responsibility for the September 11th attacks. The only evidence to support the theory that he was responsible came from a grainy video tape in which Bin Laden remarks that he is pleased about the incident, but never takes responsibility. Even on the FBI's most wanted list, Osama Bin Laden is not charged with the September 11th Attacks. They have stated openly that they "Do not have enough evidence to charge him" said Robert S. Mueller, Director of The FBI.

Even with the jury still out on "if" Bin Laden committed the attacks Doran still presumes to make the assumption that "The script was obvious:". The script is anything but obvious. There are other "facts" that seem to allude Doran. According to a BBC article ""During the anti-Soviet jihad, Bin Laden and his fighters received American and Saudi funding." In fact the name Al-Qaeda was actually originated in the CIA. It was the list of "assets" or operatives that were recruited by the CIA to fight the attempted Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in the 80's. Most of which were associated with the Mujahedeen. This literally translated means "Freedom fighter".

In his article Doran "The Expert" in Muslim political discourse overlooks one more key factor. Although this is not substantiated, one is left with little else in the way of conclusions when looked at in the light of day. If in fact Bin laden did have the intension of using the September 11th attacks to rile the American sabre, which would then cause a rift in the Arab world that he could exploit, or even further a faith based cause, then it would seem that it has not been as successful as Doran has labeled it. If Bin Laden is supposed to have gotten what he wanted, I find it hard to believe that living in a cave in the Mountains with the U.S. army crawling all over the place constitutes a victory. In fact the claim is, that Bin Laden is no longer relevant. At least according to those in our government whose job it is to know these things.


It is the possition of many people with the neoconservative political views, as Michael Doran has expressed and demonstrated he is, that America has the right to enact policy that is beneficial in the preservation of "the American Empire". They are in fact what can be said to be interventionists. This school of thought is centered on the idea that we not only have the right to preserve our empire by any means necessary, but we have the duty to restrict any other country, society, or culture from attaining an empire of their own.


Let's look at the word Empire. According to Webster's we see these definitions when referring to political empires.

1. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) an aggregate of peoples and territories, often of great extent, under the rule of a single person, oligarchy, or sovereign state

2. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) any monarchy that for reasons of history, prestige, etc., has an emperor rather than a king as head of state

3. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) the period during which a particular empire exists

4. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) supreme power; sovereignty Related adj imperial

5. (Business / Commerce) A large industrial organization with with many ramifications. esp. A multinational corporation.


Empire builiding or "Nation Builing is the practice of causing circumstances in political ideologies that allow the manipulation of power to work in the advantage of the practicing party. This can be for financial gain, political influence or strategic implementation troops and supplies for future endeavors. This is at the heart of neo political view.

These are the principles and values that are currently in play in our nation's capital. The belief that we are the police force of the world, and that just because we are stringent in our beliefs, that it somehow gives the right to enforce it upon other nations. If seen from the perspective of a lesser power it would have to look as though we are an occupation of force. 
I have no dought that were there to be tanks and planes and soldiers in our streets and over 1 million of our citizens dead that no matter what was blasted over an announcement speaker or handed out in pamphlets, we would feel like we were being occupied and fought till the death to oust the invaders. Yet we view this behavior by our own government and military with passing concern. We seem more interested in TIVOing the latest episode of Jersey Shore and or standing in line at the Best Buy for 7 hours just to be the first in line to get the new I-pad.

Michael Doran in his article "Someone Else's Civil War" demonstrates the lack of intelligent person's willing to look at the facts and honestly assess the situation regardless of the fear they may feel at the realization of our country and government actually colluding in the destruction of what the founding fathers set forth on this great land of ours. 

I see it in the faces of those who ardently stick to the propaganda put forth concerning the events of 9/11. I see it on the faces of media talking heads that parrot the 9/11 commission's findings in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. I also see the citizens in the streets protesting peacefully while police officials and army personnel physically abuse them and use torture weapons to gain compliance from people who simply wish to bring this nation back from the brink of socialism. And I see the best and brightest of our young with missing limbs, or missing souls, when returning from the war that has no purpose. Terrorism cannot be fought and won over with the lives of our precious youth. And that is why it was devised. It is only going to end when those who started it feel like they have made enough money off the blood of our children.