SMARMY
Posted on 09/13/2006 9:00:08 AM PDT by MNJohnnie
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1700725/posts
The enemy within -- and it's not who you think (David Warren nails Islamofascism's 5th column)
Ottawa Citizen - Canada ^ | September 13, 2006 | David Warren
Posted on 09/13/2006 10:43:18 AM CDT by GMMAC
The enemy within -- and it's not who you think
Ottawa Citizen September 13, 2006
COMMENTARY: DAVID WARREN
Listening to President Bush speak, on Monday's anniversary of 9/11, after a day of distastefully sentimental memorials, my question was not what have we achieved in the last five years, but rather, what have we learned? Bush and Blair -- the captain and vice-captain of Team West in the war against "the terrorists" so far -- are both now in the twilight of their political careers. Both have recently broken with habitual discretion, and made attempts to name the enemy. This has, if anything, added to their unpopularity, for when they mention that the enemy presents himself as Islamic, there are shrill cries not only from radical Muslims, but across the spectrum of the Left in the West.
Mr Bush, much the less eloquent of the two, has now retreated from his use of the term "Islamofascist" -- which as I said in a previous column, is a fairer label than "Islamist" for an enemy that spreads a palampore of traditional Islam, over a stuffing from the Western-bred totalitarian ideologies of the 20th century. As I wrote Aug. 27, from Ahmadinejad to Zawahiri, we hear rhetoric that uses an Islamic vocabulary and crude grammar, but animated with a syntax that owes more to Hitler, Stalin, and Mao, than to the Prophet and his traditional interpreters. The term is thus meant to suggest a skewed Islam, an Islam "adapted to our age" by psychopathic men, whose own Islamic learning is purposefully politicized, and aggressively de-spiritualized. Since the alternative would be to say that Ahmadinejad, Zawahiri, et al. do speak legitimately for Islam, I don't see why anyone should object to the term "Islamofascist".
Mr Blair gave an interview worth reading to the Israeli daily, Haaretz, published Monday. The editors present characterized it as "sombre". The British prime minister was still going through the motions of advocating the "peace process", and the "two-state solution" for Israel and Palestine, without (according to me) any real conviction that it could work. It is just something Western politicians do to please the figurative "Arab street", and it does not please anyone, any more. With much more conviction, he said leaders throughout the West have grasped that we are in a truly "global struggle", for which the people of the West are not prepared. The politicians have failed to explain to us how much is at stake, and how much will be lost if we are not resolute in defence of Western values.
For all its uncharacteristic awkwardness, Mr Blair's answer to a question about British home-grown terrorists donged the bell:
"It's not necessarily what have we done wrong, because part of the problem of what you have in Western opinion is that Western opinion always wants to believe that it's our fault and these people want to have a sort of, you know, grievance culture that they visit upon us and say it's our fault. And so we have a young British-born man of Pakistani origin sitting in front of a television screen saying I will go and kill innocent people because of the oppression of Muslims, when he has been brought up in a country that has given him complete religious freedom and full democratic rights and actually a very good job and standard of living. Now, that warped mind has grown out of a global movement based on a perversion of Islam which we have to confront, and we have to confront it globally."
I frankly admire both Bush and Blair, as courageous politicians, with open minds, doing their best within the limits of what is politically possible in their respective spheres. They are both towering figures, in comparison to the little men who oppose them. We won't know what trouble is, until the little men replace them.
I continue optimistic about what can be done, should we summon the will to do it. I have written repeatedly that a robust and unified Western response to "Islamofascism" could fling it quickly onto the trash-heap of history, to join Nasserism and Baathism and other earlier manifestations of Arab nationalism and socialism. Smack it hard, without apology.
My pessimism is founded in the fear that this robust and unified response cannot be mobilized. We have a huge fifth column in the West, and it is not the Muslim immigrants. They become radicalized only because our "victim culture" encourages them to nurture their grievances. Yet most, despite temptation, remain good, decent people, doing their share of the West's work.
Our real enemy is within us, in the immense constituency of the half-educated narcissists pouring from our universities each year -- that glib, smug, liberal, and defeatist "victim culture" itself, that inhabits the academy, our media, our legal establishment, the bureaucratic class. The opinion leaders of our society, who live almost entirely off the avails of taxation, make their livelihoods biting the hands that feed them, and undermining the moral order on which our solidarity depends.
Ditto that! Kennedy nearly started WWIII and compromised national security because he couldn't keep it in his pants (Marilyn Monroe met with Commies in Mexico after their affair).
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1700813/posts
'Air America' to File for Bankruptcy. LOL. What a surprise.
If you haven't read it... I suggest you do so.
CAIR: Islamists Fooling the Establishment
http://www.meforum.org/article/916
HEY!
I AM THE QUEEN OF SMARMY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
MY CROWN!
ALL MINE!
She does sound like my cousin from Tarrytown. That women called before. I know the voice.
It wasn't '92 that the Repubs refused to vote. In '92, economic conservatives went for Ross because they thought he was more conservative.
The punishment was in '96 when first, the Republican Party thumbed its nose at the Christian Right, and then to add insult to injury, Dole announced his support for abortion. We didn't vote thrid party, We didn't vote for anyone.
HEY, I just ate, FGS.
And here is the "but money"....the Islamonazis will use anything, and I mean anything, to further their aims, no matter how diabolical.
Suicide bombing is a good example...hiding bomb belts underneath a supposedly seriously ill 7 year old on a gurney in an ambulance. The kid was fine....the driver of the ambulance, an employee of the Red Crescent, also happened to be a member of the Al Aqsa Brigade.
Digging up bodies to pose for the camera is another good example.
Again, I hear what you say, and you know that I have the greatest respect for you. But I have to respectfully disagree. The Islamonazis HAVE to know, that there is nowhere that they are safe, period. Hit them, hit them hard, hit them often, and keeping hitting.
And to hell, with John Murtha, Harry Reid and the rest of the traitors in the Democrat Party. I'm beyond concerning myself with niceties.
That ended when a young lady that taught my daughter, was blown up in the cafetaria of Hebrew University. And was re-inforced when the Hezbos began lobbing katyushas filled with ballbearings at innocent civilians, including my son.
I am past ascribing any degree of humanity to these maggots. Hit them wherever they are, with devastating force force, just as we did with Zarq. Two 500lb bombs...they understand only one thing, force.
Sorry for the long post, my friend.
Let her call anytime she wants - she defines the stupid, simpering, two-faced left and displays her ignorance for all to see. She's great PR for the Pubbies.
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!
no that is ASSHOLE!
Didn't the DHS just give them a guided tour of security facilities at O'Hare?
Same here. How many people who died in the embassy and U.S.S. Cole bombings might have been saved if Bush 41 and then Dole had been president? Might we even have prevented at least part of 9/11? I will never vote 3rd party again, nor withhold my vote.
Mewz, look at it as a fight between conservative and liberal. Even if Lieberman is a lib, he is more conservative than Lamont. That state is too liberal to elect a Republican, even a flaming lib RINO.
Go for the most conservative you can get elected...regardless of label. Yes, it is the lesser of two evils, but it is still a vote in the right direction, not a step in the opposite.
The WOT is forcing the nation further to the right, it will take time for it to affect the left coast and the northeast.
EXACTLY!
The left truly have no idea that Newt and Clinton BOTH created their own demise....
Well-said. AMEN!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.