Many on the left were convinced that with the election of Barack Obama, and a turn toward the hard political left our enemies in the Islamist world would like us. They thought that our “standing in the world” would rise, our enemies and our friends would “respect us more”. It is all a confused fantasy.
They hate us because we exist.
This evening in Mumbai, India scores are dead in a vicious terror attack on hotels and innocents in subway stations. Interestingly, for those on the American left, the attackers were specifically looking for Americans and British citizens.
A man told local television that he was in the Oberoi around 10 p.m. when gunmen entered the lobby and began rounding up guests, asking for anyone with a U.S. or British passport and taking hostage about 15 of them. (graphic and quote courtesy CNN)
This is a breaking story at this moment. All decent and civilized people around the world mourn for the victims of this insanity, cruelty, and barbarity. The hearts of all of us break when lunatics hurt and kill innocents. This is Jihad.
The killers, members of an Islamist Jihad terror group (I thought Islam was the “religion of peace” - not!), specifically searched out Americans and British because they are waging war, Jihad, against our countries and societies. Their goal is the overthrow of our way of life and the destruction of any government and society that is not based upon Islam and sharia. It is time for all to wake up and understand what is happening. This is an existential war.
They do not care about our politics; they do not care who is in the White House; they do not care that Bush is out and Obama is soon to be in. They only care that ours is an open society, a society that is not based upon Islam and sharia. For this alone Americans are targeted everywhere. Our politics are not relevant to Islamists. The only issue relevant to them is that we exist. For this alone they wage Jihad against us. It is in Koran, it is in Sunna, the Way of Mohammed. It is time for all of us in the West to understand what is happening.
The killers in Mumbai searched out Americans and Britains because we represent the most powerful non-Islamic societies in the world. They hate us because we exist. Their holy books tell them that they must wage Jihad against us. This attack could well have occured in our own country. We were lucky today. The victims in Mumbai were not. We must understand and truthfully discuss the nature of this enemy, their goals, their methods, and their fundamental purpose. So long as the foundation of Islam is the destruction of everything that is not Islam, we all must appreciate that we are in an existential war.
The Islamists hate us because we exist. There is no discussion on this point with these people. How can there be when their religious texts are quite specific on these points. Islam is submission. So long as a society does not submit to Islam, it is in Dar al-Harb, the House of War. This is a literal matter.
We are at war. Tonight the United States was lucky, our friends in India were not. Our thought and prayers to all the victims of this evening’s atrocity in Mumbai.
In reading Michael Lideen’s favorable review of “The Mind of Jihad” by Laurant Murawiec in National Review Online I was amazed to see no less than three very large advertisements for a “Muslim Matrimony” website. In a visit to the same URL (here) this evening the same ads remain. This is an astounding lack of oversight on the part of National Review for allowing this bizarre endorsement on the same page as a review of a book warning about political Islam and its dangers to our country.
a bizarre juxtaposition
National Review and Frontpage Magazine have long been posting articles and commentary on the dangers that political Islam presents to the United States. Superb analysts like Victor Davis Hansen, David Pryce-Jones, and Mark Steyn have appeared in the National Review for years warning Americans about this immediate and continuing threat. So, how can it be that National Review can have two advertisements for “the International Muslim Matrimonials Site” for days at a time without removing it? Has National Review caved to political correctness, or are their web “masters” asleep at the wheel. Some internet advertising schemes load adds to a page based on keywords that appear in the content on the page, but this explanation is not an excuse. If this is the case here NR staff should swiftly remove the ads or the entire scheme itself. Because they have not done so, National Review clearly approves of the advertising and is therefore guilty of the rankest kind of hypocrisy at best, and aiding and abetting political Islam at worst. The death of William F. Buckley recently and the very public abandonment of the magazine by Buckley’s son Christopher has left this once very important and venerable publication without leadership of moment and without any philosophical or editorial foundation.
This juxtaposition of criticizing political Islam, warning its readers about the depredations and dangers of Islamists on the one hand and advertising for sites that promote the growth of Islam is a bizarre and dangerous failure on the part of NR and an indication of just how far National Review has fallen. Legitimizing a dangerous and hostile political ideology and advertising sites that fundamentally will lead to the growth of the very thing that they are criticizing and warning readers about is a stunning failure for National Review.
Hypocrisy and failure - the fall of National Review
In the review shown above titled “Know Thy Enemy” the reference is to political Islam. Yet on the same page there are two large advertisements for a site promoting Muslim marriage. Does National Review believe that it’s fine to criticize political Islam out of one side of its “mouth” while legitimizing and supporting political Islam out of the other? National Review has lost its way and has utterly failed in its mission to its readers, to modern conservatism, and to the country. Touting itself for years as the publication whose goal is the growth, prosperity, and strong defense of the United States, National Review now supports the growth of political Islam by actively advertising in support of Islamic marriage. This kind of hypocrisy can only mean the failure of National Review. As a fan of many of the writers whose work appears in National Review I can only say how totally disappointing and disturbing this failure of National Review truly is.
National Review: Supporters of political Islam
The lady in the hijab appears quite happy in the advertisement, but will her happiness continue once she is married in Islam? Let’s see what awaits her:
She must be covered, wearing the burkha in many Islamic countries. This can often mean being covered from head to toe.
She cannot leave her house without a male companion who is either her husband or in her immediate family.
She can be divorced from her husband by only a declaration from the husband that he is divorced from her.
She cannot testify in court under Sharia law as an equal to men. In fact, in Islamic law her testimony counts as one half that of a man. If she were to testify, Koran and Sunna state that a man must also testify to be sure that the two women have not made an error.
Submission is what Islam is all about. The word “Islam” translates to “submission”. The lady in the hijab must submit to her husband. Sharia law which is based upon Koran and Sunna, the Way of Mohammed, states that the husband is allowed to beat the wife if she is not sufficiently submissive to him. In fact, no one is allowed to question the husband if the wife complains of being beaten. The husband has a right in Islamic law to beat his wife. The only constraint upon his beating of his wife (or wives) is that he must strike the face of the wife, and cannot leave her seriously injured.
The husband can have up to 4 wives. The wife may only have one husband.
The place of women in Islamic society is 2nd class citizen and less.
This is what National Review now supports through its advertising?
Why are the many great authors appearing in this once impressive publication not complaining bitterly about this hypocrisy and demanding that it be stopped immediately?
This absurd hypocrisy is a staggering failure of these great individuals and this once great magazine that had at one time been the transcript of the conservative movement. No longer.
Now that WFB is gone, the magazine has entirely lost its way. Time to close the door and shut the lights, National Review is done.
Some folks might find this shocking, but not the readers of this blog. Deborah Howell, the ombudsman for the Washington Post today admits that the coverage of the election, at least in her newspaper, was clearly biased in favor of the president-elect. (Source)
The Post provided a lot of good campaign coverage, but readers have been consistently critical of the lack of probing issues coverage and what they saw as a tilt toward Democrat Barack Obama. My surveys, which ended on Election Day, show that they are right on both counts.
Many observers on the right and in the McCain camp in general have been commenting on the obvious favoratism towards now president-elect Obama from the beginning to the end of the late campaign. This obvious, and now self-admitted, bias towards one candidate and against the other is a total failure of American journalism. I have been saying this for many months and reiterate it again today with this new stunning but not surprising admission from the Washington Post - American journalism is a failed profession.
The op-ed page ran far more laudatory opinion pieces on Obama, 32, than on Sen. John McCain, 13. There were far more negative pieces about McCain, 58, than there were about Obama, 32, and Obama got the editorial board’s endorsement.
One of the great shifts, among many, that this election has brought about is the fundamental self-destruction of the American press. The trust of the reader is broken, reputations destroyed, and the concept of a valid and important 4th Estate is at an end. The demise of journalism in America was brought about by journalists, editors and owners themselves. Why?
Journalists forgot that they were Americans and professional journalists first and partisans second; they forgot that their jobs required them to be objective and report the news rather than make it or “help it along”. Professional journalists have a responsibility to the truth and to fairness of reporting. They failed. There has long been a clear left-leaning bias in the mainstream American press. The rise of right wing talk radio is a direct response to this obvious bias and lack of professionalism in the mass media. Republicans have complained about bias in the media throughout the campaign only to meet denials, counter-accusations, and obfuscations from the fallen leaders of a failed profession, journalism.
The leftist journalists of America favored Obama, so they helped him get elected by not digging, by not investigating and by ignoring legitimate issues of questionable associations, and even more questionable judgment that were raised time and again throughout the election process.
Journalism must reinvent itself and return rapidly to its roots just as the Republican party must do the same. Journalists have utterly failed in this election and their reputations have suffered rightfully on account of it. Newspapers are in a fight for their very existence with declining subscriptions, declining advertising and a steadily declining readership as more and more people seek news sources that they can trust, mainly to be found on the internet.
The election of 08 is the end of journalism in the United States as we know it. The bias in the media against the right and for Obama has always been true only now post-election is it being admitted.
Most importantly, the important stories of the election were not reported by the mainstream press. This was a direct determinant of the final outcome.
But Obama deserved tougher scrutiny than he got, especially of his undergraduate years, his start in Chicago and his relationship with Antoin “Tony” Rezko, who was convicted this year of influence-peddling in Chicago. The Post did nothing on Obama’s acknowledged drug use as a teenager.
Howell is right, and honest here.
It was a profound disservice to the electorate that these matters and so many others were not fully investigated by an objective press whose main purpose ought to have been the publication of the truth so that the American people could make an informed decision in this highly charged and very important election during multiple crises. This is the central issue, the press was not objective.
Any job applicant must undergo often rigorous scrutiny, Senator, now president-elect Obama did not get this scrutiny. And now we have unanswered questions that may never be answered. This is a total failure on the part of the Washington Post and so many other mainstream “news” outlets and organizations.
At one time there was great cache to being a “journalist”. No longer. Without professionalism, there can be no profession; without accuracy there can be no trust; without standards and accountability, there can only be writers writing stories. American journalists have destroyed their readers’ trust and entirely destroyed their profession. American newspapers, print journalism, and network news have only place to look to find the cause of their diminishment and failure-themselves.
One gaping hole in coverage involved Joe Biden, Obama’s running mate. When Gov. Sarah Palin was nominated for vice president, reporters were booking the next flight to Alaska. Some readers thought The Post went over Palin with a fine-tooth comb and neglected Biden. They are right; it was a serious omission.
This implosion of the profession of journalism will take much longer to repair, if it can be repaired certainly than it took to accomplish. Nothing but outright bias and partisanship ruined American journalism. It is to the credit of the Washington Post that they published the ombudsman’s findings and admissions of biased coverage. This is something I’ve known all along, and so many have denied.
George Orwell would be horrified by all that has transpired. However, the non-profession of American journalism must be pleased by their success in helping one candidate to office over another.
For the liberal, activist partisans writers of the Washington Post and all the yellow sheets who failed to provide accurate objective coverage of the Presidential election, the victory of Barack Obama is double-plus good. For their profession it is the end of the road and they’ve only themselves to blame.
The greatness of the United States has always been validated by our peaceful transfers of power. The people have spoken. Barack Obama is President.
McCain gave a great and heartfelt concession speech. Bush, ever clueless, claims the night was “awesome”. Yes, and no. But it is much more. We are watching a movement afoot in the land. A movement that might take us in directions that nobody, on either side of the aisle, desires. Now that Obama has won let us see unity, and a welcoming to opposition voices.
Now is the time for loyal opposition.
This blog is now a part of the loyal opposition.
Obama is the President, I pray he does what is right and good for the people and for the country. I will be happy to add my voice to the chorus of opposition when he doesn’t.
The fight for American values, American principles that have stood the test of time since 1776 has not ended. Keep your voices loud and active. Do not lose hope. We must continue the fight. We will.
Adams and Jefferson would want us to do this.
Grant and Lincoln would want us to do this, Washington, Reagan, and Ike, too.
The character of America is worthy of preservation. This is the greatest country in the world, a beacon of hope; a defender of freedom. We must not let extremist views of either side take us in any direction that no one wants to go. Now is the time for calm and healing the wounds of divisiveness.
It means something to say, “I am an American.” We must re-examine what this means, and reconnect with our roots, our history, our proud heritage.
We must not make the mistakes of Europe, and we must not repeat the abysmal and horrid mistakes of the past. We must learn from history. History tells us that we are now on a dangerous road, we are on a precipice. We must temper extremes with reasoned thought, and offer a welcoming hand to all. To do any less would be less than American. We must be inclusive where beneficial, and exclusive where necessary. We cannot make all the world our friend regardless of our desires, we must be prepared as we always have been. Freedom must be protected. Our enemies must be faced, our friends supported and succored.
Now that the election is over and “change” is coming, keep America’s great foundation of freedom and opportunity and just “change” the broken edges. Let’s do the necessary repairs and retain the heart and soul of what makes this country great. “Change” is only meaningful and valuable when it is well-thought and beneficial; “change” is not inherently good. Only we can make it good while guarding against that “change” that might lead us towards disaster already experienced by others.
ANCHORAGE, Alaska (AP) - A report has cleared Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin of ethics violations in the firing of her public safety commissioner.
Released Monday, the report says there is no probable cause to believe Palin or any other state official violated the Alaska Executive Ethics Act in connection with the firing. The report was prepared by Timothy Petumenos, an independent counsel for the Alaska Personnel Board.
A separate legislative investigation recently concluded that Palin, the Republican vice presidential nominee, abused her office by allowing her husband and staffers to pressure the public safety commissioner to fire a state trooper who went through a nasty divorce from Palin’s sister.
Palin says the firing had nothing to do with the trooper.
THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP’s earlier story is below.
ANCHORAGE, Alaska (AP)—A report detailing whether Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin abused her power by firing her public safety commissioner will be released on the eve of the election.
Timothy Petumenos, an independent investigator hired by the Alaska Personnel Board, says he will release the report during a news conference 7:30 p.m. EST Monday.
A separate legislative panel earlier found that Palin, the Republican vice presidential nominee, abused her office by allowing her husband and other staffers to pressure the public safety commissioner to fire a state trooper who went through a nasty divorce from Palin’s sister. She fired the commissioner, but denies it had anything to do with the trooper.
An astounding speech, with strong non-pc language. The passion is clear, the message is clear. I post it for your review because I think the message is important. It’s not quite my style, but it should be heard.
