Political Correctness Kills

January 11, 2003: It is a tendency of the human psyche to pursue pleasure and avoid pain. We all employ the mental mechanism of denial to reduce the everyday distresses of life. And one of the most painful things each of us must contemplate is our own certain death. Entire religions have grown out of the effort to cope with this certainty.

However, even more painful than the idea that each of us must die is the idea that there are people, including the people who love us, who want us to die. As Dr. Yale Kramer has pointed out, (Does Senator Lott Need a Heart Transplant)ambivalence is built into human nature. And even more difficult than acknowledging that people may wish us dead, is the reality that there are people actually prepared to kill us.

How can this be? This painful perception particularly offends the American liberal sensibility. Aren't we caring and considerate and sympathetic to the needs of the less fortunate? Surely, if someone wishes to kill us, he or she must have rational reasons we should address, grievances we can assuage, hurt we can ease.

In the Western world's contemporary therapeutic culture, such hostility towards us requires self-examination on our part and greater empathy to the grievances of the hostile party. As the British journalist Robert Fisk commented, after he was assaulted in Afghanistan: "If I were them, I'd have beaten me too."

Unfortunately, this inability of the liberal imagination to grasp a dark truth of human nature -- that the urge to kill is as powerful as the urge to create -- results in an unwitting alliance with our potential destroyers. Our politically-correct, multicultural, peace-loving utopians join hands with the violent utopians who would kill us. Thus, as Daniel Pipes has pointed out, we had a PBS documentary on Islam that airbrushed out not only the murderous violence to be found in the Koran, but also the constant calls for murder of infidels by leading Imams in Saudi Arabia and Egypt (our supposed allies).

For many years before 9-11, Muslim terrorists were mounting attacks on Americans around the world, even on the World Trade Center, and telling us they were at war with the West, yet precious little was done. We are gradually learning why -- no thanks to the CIA or the FBI.

We now have evidence that the FBI itself was infected by a form of political correctness that has quite literally proven fatal. For example, ABC News spoke with two veteran FBI agents who described how efforts to pursue terrorists were hamstrung:

We now have evidence that the FBI itself was infected by a form of political correctness that has quite literally proven fatal. For example, ABC News spoke with two veteran FBI agents who described how efforts to pursue terrorists were hamstrung:
Perhaps most astounding of the many mistakes, according to Flessner and an affidavit filed by Wright, is how an FBI agent named Gamal Abdel-Hafiz seriously damaged the investigation. Wright says Abdel-Hafiz, who is Muslim, refused to secretly record one of al-Kadi's suspected associates, who was also Muslim. Wright says Abdel-Hafiz told him, Vincent and other agents that "a Muslim doesn't record another Muslim."
"He wouldn't have any problems interviewing or recording somebody who wasn't a Muslim, but he could never record another Muslim," said Vincent.
Wright said he "was floored" by Abdel-Hafiz's refusal and immediately called the FBI headquarters. Their reaction surprised him even more: "The supervisor from headquarters says, 'Well, you have to understand where he's coming from, Bob.' I said no, no, no, no, no. I understand where I'm coming from," said Wright. "We both took the same damn oath to defend this country against all enemies foreign and domestic, and he just said no? No way in hell."

Far from being reprimanded, Abdel-Hafiz was promoted to one of the FBI's most important anti-terrorism posts, the American Embassy in Saudi Arabia, to handle investigations for the FBI in that Muslim country.

Perhaps you've seen this info, but a reminder of how far gone things are is instructive. ....

You may have seen this info previously, but a reminder of how far gone we are is instructive.

The whole article.

However, even more painful than the idea that each of us must die is the idea that there are people, including the people who love us, who want us to die. As Dr. Yale Kramer has pointed out, (Does Senator Lott Need a Heart Transplant)ambivalence is built into human nature. And even more difficult than acknowledging that people may wish us dead, is the reality that there are people actually prepared to kill us.

How can this be? This painful perception particularly offends the American liberal sensibility. Aren't we caring and considerate and sympathetic to the needs of the less fortunate? Surely, if someone wishes to kill us, he or she must have rational reasons we should address, grievances we can assuage, hurt we can ease.

In the Western world's contemporary therapeutic culture, such hostility towards us requires self-examination on our part and greater empathy to the grievances of the hostile party. As the British journalist Robert Fisk commented, after he was assaulted in Afghanistan: "If I were them, I'd have beaten me too."

Unfortunately, this inability of the liberal imagination to grasp a dark truth of human nature -- that the urge to kill is as powerful as the urge to create -- results in an unwitting alliance with our potential destroyers. Our politically-correct, multicultural, peace-loving utopians join hands with the violent utopians who would kill us. Thus, as Daniel Pipes has pointed out, we had a PBS documentary on Islam that airbrushed out not only the murderous violence to be found in the Koran, but also the constant calls for murder of infidels by leading Imams in Saudi Arabia and Egypt (our supposed allies).

For many years before 9-11, Muslim terrorists were mounting attacks on Americans around the world, even on the World Trade Center, and telling us they were at war with the West, yet precious little was done. We are gradually learning why -- no thanks to the CIA or the FBI.

Perhaps most astounding of the many mistakes, according to Flessner and an affidavit filed by Wright, is how an FBI agent named Gamal Abdel-Hafiz seriously damaged the investigation. Wright says Abdel-Hafiz, who is Muslim, refused to secretly record one of al-Kadi's suspected associates, who was also Muslim. Wright says Abdel-Hafiz told him, Vincent and other agents that "a Muslim doesn't record another Muslim."

"He wouldn't have any problems interviewing or recording somebody who wasn't a Muslim, but he could never record another Muslim," said Vincent.

Wright said he "was floored" by Abdel-Hafiz's refusal and immediately called the FBI headquarters. Their reaction surprised him even more: "The supervisor from headquarters says, 'Well, you have to understand where he's coming from, Bob.' I said no, no, no, no, no. I understand where I'm coming from," said Wright. "We both took the same damn oath to defend this country against all enemies foreign and domestic, and he just said no? No way in hell."

Does it not become more evident every day that the dogmas of political correctness have also hamstrung the anthrax investigation? The one man -- Saddam Hussein -- who had the motive, the money and the means to launch an anthrax attack is the one man who is not on the 'person of interest' list. Instead, political correctness dictates the search must be for a right- wing, white American male, just as the Washington snipers were supposed to be white male gun lovers.

Perhaps the most dangerous province of "we are the world" utopianism is our own State Department, where building multi-cultural alliances often takes precedence over pursuing the war declared upon us by our enemies. In fact, the very concept of 'enemy' is something our diplomats don't acknowledge. Saudi Arabia, home of fundamentalist Muslim Wahabbism, finances terror and imposes barbaric Sharia law on Americans unfortunate enough to have married Saudis, or to have questioned its anti-Christian, anti-Semitic practices. Yet our State Dept. argues that we must regard the Saudis as our friends and 'adapt' our behavior to their cultural customs.

In fact, it is strongly suggested that, rather than be offended by Saudi behavior, we should "understand" their customs as valid for them. Public beheadings are simply a cultural practice and we are not entitled to "judgmentally" condemn it. Visiting women must wear burkas or be thrown into Saudi jails, a practice endorsed by our State Dept. multiculturalists. If Saudi fathers are welcome to kidnap children away from their estranged American wives, our State Dept. will 'explain' the Saudi position. And what of our European 'friends'? When they adopt a stance of cultural and moral superiority to the 'cowboy' presidency of George Bush, our Secretary of State busies himself apologetically consulting with and accommodating to their demands that we work through the United Nations.

Does anyone point out the hypocrisy of the tut-tutting Europeans who are trading profitably , in violation of the UN embargo, with the terror master of Baghdad? Or note the bizarreness of putting faith in an organization that gives equal weight to tyrannical kleptocracies as to democracies?

Colin Powell seems excessively pleased with the alliance he has constructed of the worried appeasers. Let us hope their See No Evil reluctance to use force doesn't have them all holding hands and singing Kumbaya when the anthrax attacks resume.

More than a year ago, President George W. Bush observed that in dealing with our adversaries time is not on our side. That being so, the State Dept. approach which has us repeatedly offering 'one more chance' to Saddam may have already provided enough time for him to strike a devastating blow on behalf of the Jihad against the West.

President Bush: Hurry up please.

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.