Is Bush suppose to represent the “conservative” acquiencence? ‘splains a lot. Wrong premiss.
The entire article is based on a false premise. The first sentence above is the culprit.
Islam is NOT a political persuasion.
At worst it is a hate cult. At best it is a religion.
Either way, no rational human would want it in their midst....given its adherents predilection for misogyny and violence against anyone who is different.
Lawrence Auster tries real hard but he has missed the point.
It looks make-believe because we can’t do anything yet.
Our enemies, power seekers all, use our openness and freedom to destroy both.
Another time-honored name for them is thugs. Most thugs are cowards so they use deception until they are firmly in control and then they are 100% thugs.
Islam can't even keep peace among it own tribes. Right.
The day is near when Sunnis, Shiites and others will be at one another’s throats, right here in America. Probably wouldn't be a moment too soon.
This is more faux conservative writing that so infuriates me.
A few clues:
1. The Nazis had a rather narrow view of immigration and were rather concerned about maintaining the German ethnic integrity against the IMMIGRANTS. There, does that help the shoe fit a little better.
2. Mexicans did not bomb the World Trade Center. Despite all the nonsensical conspiracies that blame everyone but the Saudi perpetrators, to my knowledge, the Mexican mafia story has yet to find legs. But that does not prevent the Faux conservatives from demanding the building the WAll or else they will start responding to threats in a rational manner.
3. President Bush is the intrinsically credible leader in the War on Terror. No one has lead more decisively or effectively on the question. All others are pretenders and hypotheses in waiting.
4. The rhetorical division of Islamic radicals and Islam is a shrewd and necessary gambit. If Islam cannot differentiate itself from these radicals then it will surely die. But to so thoroughly discount the hundreds of thousands of Muslims who have died resisting these radicals in places such as Iraq is profoundly disrespectful, immoral, and inaccurate.
5. Faux conservatives like this author have thoroughly backstabbed our President and given aid to our enemies. David Duke gives speeches in Damascus because his contempt of immigration and his radicalized affiliation with Republican politics. He and Buchannan are the kind of dangerous ideological drift among confused conservatives who think building a wall will protect them from a radicalizing world. It was a lie in the 1930s Charles Lindberg and it is a lie today.
Try supporting the President of the United States, the commander in chief, the foremost voice and authority in our war on terror.