BooksFilmandMusic

The Astounding Fall of National Review

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.

Do Not Donate to National Review!

-Daniel Mallock