Islamic terror the new "words of the prophets" in IED's and suicide bombs

Why am I so slow to see the "writing on the wall"?
Paul Simon's words, in the legendary prophetic song, Sounds of Silence, echo in my ears:
And the people bowed and prayed
To the neon god they made
And the sign flashed out its warning
In the words that it was forming
And the sign said, "The words of the prophets are written on the subway walls
And tenement halls"
And whispered in the sounds of silence

Neon god flashing the warning: "The words of the prophets are written on the subway walls And tenement halls" may have been a prophetic warning in the sixties and seventies, but today, the words are written on the IED's and on the home-made rockets and in suicide bombers' vests, underwear, shoes, and even AK-47's, or even rifles in the hands of child soldiers shooting people as they leave their Sunday church services, for example, in Nigeria.
The words of the prophets, today, are also written on the drones falling from the skies in response to the IED's, the home-made rockets and the suicide bombers.
And as the more isolated reports that make their way out of the scenes of terrorism and into the living rooms of the rest of us, the more silent grow those detonations.
We used to hear, "those people over there are always fighting" when the subject of the endless conflict between Israel and Palestine was discussed, as if the conflict, no matter what anyone did, would never end, and that was "the way of the world".
Today, however, there is a different culture that supports that conflict, and it seems to be growing, encircling the globe. And the Muslim brotherhood president and Prime Minister of Egypt are just two of the many new faces of that conflict.
When the Prime Minister visited Gaza this week, and pronounced support for Hamas in its fight with Israel, in spite of the Egypt-Israel treaty that used to provide some protection for the Israeli's when Egypt was ruled by an admittedly autocratic ruler (Sadat or Mubarak), the words of a state leader supporting a terrorist movement seemed to be a tipping point, rendering the treaty hollow, in spite of any lingering rhetoric that might look as if Egypt still supports the treaty, coming from the mouth of Egyptian president Morsi.
And the Prime Minister's words received thunderous support in the streets of Cairo and other cities, as the people took to the streets also in support of Hamas, an openly terrorist organization, armed and supported by the state of Iran, that has been firing rockets and missiles into Israel for over a year, under the radar of the western media, until Israel finally drew that proverbial line in the sand, and fired back.
Also for years, ever since September 11, 2001, the number of Islamic terrorist hot-spots has continued to escalate around the world. Thousands of innocent people have been killed, in some co-ordinated, collaborative, wired, social-media supported, and religious extremism promoted war of terror. And the western media attempts to keep up with the non-state actors who perpetrate this violence, including the madrassahs where hatred and bigotry are the core curriculum, and where anti-semitism is the sustaining motivation for the school's existence, and terrorist training "boot-camps" in countries too numerous to mention where young men are being brain-washed into an extreme Islamic ideology and sent out to "fight for Allah" as the training tells them, targetting innocent people and institutions for death, destruction, political unrest, and inevitably, political and economic distraction and self-destruction.
There are "religious" imams preaching hatred and Islamic world domination in many large cities in the west, and the law enforcement agencies are desperately attempting to balance laws sustaining free speech and less muscular laws against  hate crimes. And the more time and money that is spent on this kind of criminal activity, the fewer resources that are available for the remaining issues of criminality.
If we were to list the countries in which Islamic terrorism has raised its ugly face, there would be very few country names off the list, from those listed in the United Nations General Assembly.
Some, like the United States, have spent billions in what is now known as Homeland Security personnel, technology, and anti-terrorism activities that rapidly pushed forward a "big-brother" culture of cameras, video-recordings, internet intelligence systems and, if the total expenditures were made public, in a way that grabbed the attention of the public, there would be marching in the streets in protest, especially when teachers, firefighters and public employees are being fired to balance state and local budgets.
Border security has replaced "the longest unarmed border in the world," along the 49th parallel separating Canada from the United States, again at considerable cost to both countries and their citizens, to protect both sides from Islamic terrorism.
And yet, in all democratic countries, the legislatures and those in government are expected to maintain the normal rights and liberties that have historically been embedded in both constitutional law and cultural expectations. Is such a tradition going to remain sustainable, as the number of terror threats and acts grows?
Are we going to see Islamic support for Hamas and Hezbollah grow in large cities around the world?
Are the  western governments, like mosquitoes, going to scratch themselves to death, encountering the insecticide dust of Islamaphobia? Is that one of the unstated, but nevertheless too obvious to be ignored, goals of the radical Islamic agenda?
Is there a time bomb ticking, not only for the existence of the state of Israel, but for all others whose history of human rights and responsibilities would provide too much cover for terrorists and extremists?
There is currently a debate over the wording used by United Nations Ambassador Susan Rice, when she appeared on the Sunday talk shows, shortly after the debacle in Benghazi that resulted in the deaths of four Americans. The word "terrorist act" was replaced by something approximating, "acts of extremists" and the Republican war-hawks are screaming "cover-up" or incompetence, on the part of Rice and/or the White House.
Let's remember that the act traumatized the US government, and that it occurred on the anniversary of September 11, 2001, and that, when Secretary of State Hillary Clinton requested $300 million for embassy security enhancement, it was the Republicans in Congress who turned down the legitimate request, long before the Benghazi terrorist incident and that for over a decade, many countries, led by the US model, have been reeling from the impact of this social, cultural, religious, and venomous scourge of Islamic terrorism, in all of its many nefarious forms, faces, weapons and peristence.
It is long overdue for the Republicans to climb down from their high horse of superiority, false and hubristic though it is, and started to include national policy and practice towards terror as an integral part of the Foreign policy budget and file of the United States, and let go of their claim to have originated the Homeland Security Department under Dubya, and thereby to "own" the file.
And it is also past time when the world bodies, like the United Nations, and the War Crimes court in the Hague, and the Human Rights Commission of the UN upped their comprehension and their working definitions of responsibilities to begin to grapple with the obvious and sabotaging conflict between human rights like free speech and the obvious hate crimes that are embedded in too much free speech.
And in such an escalation, we all have to be diligent in holding our elected representatives accountable for balancing those two competing and even mutually exclusive goals, free speech and hate-crimes, especially in a world when the laws protecting the former lend support and weight to the latter. And the Islamic terrorist imperialism will use whatever advantage and loophole they can find, like the carpenter ants that literally eat wooden structures out from under their human owners.