|Biden and Terrorist leader Abbas cheerfully passing past a line of uniformed terrorists|
FOX News' bashing of Geert Wilders has been making the rounds of the blogsphere this week. While a number of people attribute this to the growing power of Saudi Arabia over Newscorp. This might be true, but as we saw again last week, Glenn Beck is not necessarily the brightest star in the heavens. And considering that his rant also confused Dominique De Villepin with LePen, this may be one of those cases where there's no reason to attribute to malice, what is likely to be the product of ignorance. Beck has always said that he's an entertainer and this would not be the first time he's taken competing positions on a single issue.
The roundtable however is more troubling, insofar as panels are chosen to provide multiple points of view, and this panel provided only one single view, the anti-Wilders one. FOX News has soft pedaled the Muslim issue before. Prince Talal had claimed in the past that he was able to influence FOX programming. And News Corp and the Saudis are only deepening their involvement.
Andrew Bostom has an extensive roundup of replies to Krauthammer in his piece, Educating Charles Krauthammer, but there is a larger issue here which is how the political and media establishments, both conservative and liberal, will react to someone who is seriously committed to fighting Islam taking power. The roundtable is likely only the thinnest preview of that.
Remember that while politicians who have talked tough on Islam have also shown a history of folding once they got into a respectable position.
In 2006, future London Mayor Boris Johnson was saying things like this
To any non-Muslim reader of the Koran, Islamophobia — fear of Islam — seems a natural reaction, and, indeed, exactly what that text is intended to provoke. Judged purely on its scripture — to say nothing of what is preached in the mosques — it is the most viciously sectarian of all religions in its heartlessness towards unbelievers. As the killer of Theo Van Gogh told his victim’s mother this week in a Dutch courtroom, he could not care for her, could not sympathise, because she was not a Muslim.
Today he's singing the praises of Islam and calling on non-Muslims to fast on Ramadamadingdong. During the election Johnson was forced to recant and instead adopt the "Religion of Peace" cant.
To appreciate the full contrast, watch Boris Johnson go from saying this after the 7/7 bombings
The trouble with this disgusting arrogance and condescension is that it is widely supported in Koranic texts, and we look in vain for the enlightened Islamic teachers and preachers who will begin the process of reform. What is going on in these mosques and madrasas? When is someone going to get 18th century on Islam’s mediaeval ass?
to saying things like this during the election
The problem is people who wrench out of context quotes from the holy book of Islam, the Koran, and use it to inspire evil in men's hearts. That is a fact that few serious people would deny and we need to tackle the extremists.
Finally Boris wound up doing exactly the same sort of contemptible things his predecessor Livingstone had done, visiting pro-terrorist mosques and advising Brits to be more like Muslims.
If Wilders chooses to continue defying this route. If he doesn't go the way of Sarkozy who talked tough during the election, only to wimp out once in office. Or Johnson who ran to hug the Muslims once the issue came up in the election and boast of his own Muslim roots-- then he will face a true firestorm of rage, not simply from Muslims, but from the First World political establishment.
Because the Muslim issue lies at the heart of the moral compromises that conservative politicians have made over the years, and at the heart of the left's plot to undermine and reconstruct Europe, America, Israel, Australia and Canada more to their liking. That makes it the ultimate third rail of politics.
A political leader who actually will fight to roll back Eurabia is a menace in more ways than one. He threatens to undo the progressive vision of a post-national, post-ethnic and post-religious Europe. And he shames and humiliates conservatives who are equally afraid of taking a stand, as they are of being associated with anything that smacks of extremism.
A FOX News roundtable with "moderate" conservatives like Krauthammer will be the least of the kind of assaults that Wilders will face in the days ahead, as Saudi money and the political establishment will go after the man who dares to upset the apple cart.
But if Wilders wins, it may mean a giant setback for the Conservatism of the Timid. And that may change the world as we know it.
Consider Israel where right now Netanyahu is busy apoligizing for "humiliating" Biden by presuming to build homes in East Jerusalem where Jews might actually live.
In the perverse media propaganda environment, Netanyahu's failure to practice their approved policy of apartheid for Jews is a humiliation for "Biden." Now Hillary Clinton has gotten in on the act demanding that Israel show it's truly serious about peace.
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton warned Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu on Friday that Israel had sent a "deeply negative signal" about the U.S.-Israeli relationship and urged him to take immediate steps to demonstrate it was interested in renewing efforts at a Middle East peace agreement.
State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley told reporters at his regular news briefing. Clinton, he said, reinforced "this action had undermined trust and confidence in the peace process and in America's interests."
Crowley added: "The secretary said she could not understand how this happened, particularly in light of the United States' strong commitment to Israel's security, and she made clear that the Israeli government needed to demonstrate not just through words but through specific actions that they are committed to this relationship and to the peace process."
Probably the best way to answer this would be with a long series of unprintable obscenities, but let's try logic for the moment.
In response to demands that it show its serious commitment to peace (as if transferring sizable portions of Israel into the hands of a terrorist organization wasn't serious enough) Netanyahu froze all construction of Jewish homes in Judea and the Shomron.
Netanyahu agreed to take down checkpoints and open up roads, which makes it easier for terrorists to penetrate Israel, but shows the commitment to peace.
Did any of this convince Hillary Clinton and Obama and his good friend Abbas that Israel was serious about peace? Of course not.
And what has Abbas done to show Israel that he's serious about peace? Well he has threatened a holy war against Israel, laid claim to Jewish holy places, attended the funeral of some his terrorists who had participated in the murder of a Rabbi... in other words the usual sort of thing the PLO gang has been up to for nearly 20 years.
Yet clearly Israel needs to show it's serious about peace.
Melanie Philips at The Spectator has a devastating article asking Is this why the Palestinians 'deserve' a state, Mr Biden?
But Biden does not care that the terrorists who hosted him named a square after a woman who participated in the murder of 13 Israeli children. He cares about Jewish children moving into Jerusalem.
At his lovefest with Abbas, Biden again blasted Israel;
Yesterday -- yesterday, the decision by the Israeli government to advance planning for new housing units in east Jerusalem undermined that very trust, the trust that we need right now in order to begin as well as produce -- have profitable negotiations. That is why I immediately condemned the action. As we move forward, the United States will hold both sides accountable for any statements or actions that inflame tensions or prejudice the outcome of talks, as this decision did.
But of course as he demonstrated, Biden and the Obama Administration will not hold the terrorists accountable for their terrorism. Only the Israelis for trying to live their lives.
Behind Biden's charade of talking about his love for Israel, is the cold hard reality that the policies of the Obama Administrated are geared toward destroying Israel. Netanyahu's housing freeze only whetted the appetite of the beast.
But the Boris Johnson, the Benjamin Netanyahu, the George W. Bush kind of conservative is the only kind tolerated these days. The kind of man who is just edgy enough to inspire support and do some of the right things, but not nearly enough of them to actually make a real dent in the problem.
And if Wilders is going to be a new kind of conservative, he will have to fight hard for the chance.
At Commentary, Jennifer Rubin points out the inflammatory power of diplomacy
Why is it that “you’ve got to begin”? For what reason must “the process begin?” Well, George Mitchell would have nothing to do with it in his time and the entire apparatus devoted to ceaseless, fruitless negotiations would need to do be redeployed. But Biden never explains why we need to begin a process when there is no remote chance of its success and, furthermore, there is no unified Palestinian government prepared to make peace. He is reduced to pablum, repeated for emphasis but utterly not compelling to anyone whose job doesn’t depend on perpetuating the kabuki theater of negotiations. And he must acknowledge that in this incarnation — indirect talks — we are really engaged in unproductive busy work for diplomats.
This is followed, even for Biden, by a ludicrous declaration: “Our administration fully supports this effort led by our Special Envoy, Senator George Mitchell, a seasoned negotiator and a proven peacemaker in whom the President, the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and I have complete and utter confidence.” Who cares? The question is whether the parties have faith in these people. The answer, especially after this visit, is almost certainly “no.”
Next is the boilerplate repetition that negotiations will lead to a two-state solution. This is where we came in. Why? What facts point to the conclusion that the parties can reach an agreement? There aren’t any.
If Biden’s visit proved anything, it is that diplomatic activity can be counterproductive, inflaming rather than reducing conflicts and deflecting attention from more productive activities. Consider this: is the U.S.-Israeli relationship in a worse or better shape after Biden’s visit? The answer is obvious, as should be the conclusion: sometimes it’s best if everyone stays home.
And speaking of conservatives with courage, Ted Belman has a piece on the English Defense League.
Fiery Spirited Zionist notes Frank Gaffney's challenge to Grover Nordquist
The Rumcrook blog has more on the connections between a top Amnesty Interional-er and an Islamic terrorist.
Shabbat Shalom and enjoy the weekend
Need reminding again.ReplyDelete
One thing that Israel has never understood, is that America's influence with the Islamic world rests on the assumption, that it is the only country that has influence to extract concessions from Israel.
Two things follow from this
1. The more Israel gives away, the less it will have, and thus less influence it has with America.
2. The more America forces Israel to give, the less influence it has with the Arabs as well as Israel.
It is not in the interest of America to force Israel to give anything.
If Israel shows its displeasure at the one sided concessions that America is demanding from Israel, and walks away, then America has no hand to play, and the Arabs know it as well.
Another thing. Obama is desperate to show the Muslims world that he is their true friend. The corollary is that he is no friend of Israel. There is no need for Israel to do any favours for a man who is not a friend of Israel. The more Clinton, Biden and Obama loudly protest that they are true friends of Israel, the more reason there is to be suspicious of them.
It is therefore necessary for Israel to sidestep Obama as diplomatically as possible.
The picture of Biden makes me sick. Yucking it up with the deranged. I hate our politicians.ReplyDelete
Israel can quite safely promised full restitution of all lost property and rights of residence to all Palestinians and their descendants with only one little condition. The same rights to the million Jews who were chased out of Arab countries at the same time.ReplyDelete
Thanks for the mention.ReplyDelete
My big concern is if Wilders becomes Holland's leader, will he soften up on islam like all the others? Right now he is very effective in the position he currently holds.
that's the question... will he or won't heReplyDelete
You must excuse me, but that smiling grin of VP Biden can only mean one thing: he has just succesfully negotiated a session of fellatio with Abbas in the nearest parking lot. Herr Abbas' facial expressions suggest that dinner is about to be served.ReplyDelete
I used to think of Biden as a Democratic version of Dan Quayle. Dan Quayle was a moron. Biden is a moron with an evil streak.ReplyDelete
As for Wilders--interesting question! He'll either restore common sense to Holland or go politically correct to get a second term. Power is seductive.
Shavua tov, Daniel:)
hopefully he'll have the chance to decide and from then on in, the ball will be in his courtReplyDelete
LEL said...My big concern is if Wilders becomes Holland's leader, will he soften up on islam like all the others? Right now he is very effective in the position he currently holdReplyDelete
Mine too. The only refuge I have is that Wilders has made his policies and feelings so clear on the Islam issue, that there is very little leeway from him. If he does back down, then he, and that means his party, will implode. Wilders PVV is not a catch all party, but in the main, a one issue party - therefore, no wiggle room.
What Wildes needs is a UK party, which has virtually the same policies, to stand with him. UKIP is one, but its leader has for the moment gone, into purdah on the issue of Islam and the EU. Why I have no idea. Lord Pearson could have used the limelight provided by Wilders recent visit to London (on Pearson's invitation), to make UKIP a real choice. If Pwearsomn had 'come out', it would have cooked Krauthammer, Beck and Kristoll.
Please reread this statement: “Our administration fully supports this effort led by our Special Envoy, Senator George Mitchell, a seasoned negotiator and a proven peacemaker in whom the President, the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and I have complete and utter confidence.”ReplyDelete
There is a previously unknown math formula that can be applied to political statements to determine the level of truth in the statement.
In this instance we can take the statement, Our administration fully supports this effort and divide this into the total words contained in the paragraph,Our administration fully supports this effort led by our Special Envoy, Senator George Mitchell, a seasoned negotiator and a proven peacemaker in whom the President, the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and I have complete and utter confidence. and you get a bullshit ratio of 6/38 which yields a result of 15.78% truth value.
The truth is that they support this BS. PERIOD. There is no good reason why, so stop trying to look for one.
Pesach is about breaking free of your limitations - start doing so now! Look to Hashem for guidance, its all there for us already.
Glenn Beck achieved his fame and money starting at CNN against therorist Islam. His metheoric rise was propelled by his going against the media political correctness. He will lose everything if he backs downReplyDelete
And justice has turned away backward, and righteousness stands from afar, for truth has stumbled in the street, and straightforwardness cannot come. (Isaiah 59:14)ReplyDelete