Quick. Answer me this.
For a Liberal, is it OK to wage war on Muslims? I assume the consensus, based on experience, is no. Then again, it all depends. Because the hypocrisy of the Liberal mind has no bounds. I don’t know if they’re just confused about the positions they hold or it’s just that their philosophy relativism of life lacks any absolutes.
Case in point is a recent opinion piece by Peter Beinart in Time Magazine (that Bastogne of LibThink that in the same issue sent a love letter to Chavez and promoted Chomsky’s book). It seems he’s been kept up late nights worrying about the genocide occurring in Darfur being caused by Muslims against non-Arabs (read Christians).
His solution, now get this, is to wage war against Muslims. The subtitle of his article in print is, “Diplomacy hasn’t stopped the genocide. Its time to give war a chance.”
War and the Left? Isn’t that a contradiction in terms? Jettison diplomacy? The French would have a cow.
I guess I missed the Howard Dean press conference where he said, “Diplomacy with Iran has failed. Let’s give war a chance.” “Diplomacy with Hezbollah, Hamas and the PLO has failed. Let’s give war a chance.” “Diplomacy with Syria has failed. Let’s give war a chance.”
I guess I missed that one.
His proposal is to give the ruling Muslim warlord dictator Al-Bashir an ultimatum and if he doesn’t abide, send in 25,000 NATO troops. That's 14,974 American soldiers and 1 from each member of the NATO. That means, America again will be seen by Muslims as the colonial occupier. Rest assured, our rescue operation will make much hay for Al Qaeda.
But I do like the ending quote in his article from a man named Freddy Umutanguha. It’s eerily reminiscent of a plea for help made by a fellow African in 1936 at the League of Nations - "It is us today and it will be you tomorrow”.
Mr. Umutanguha said, "If you don't protect the people of Darfur today…" Add the end of Salassi’s plea at the League and you have a perfect picture of what the democracies need to do now to prevent the inevitable deaths of millions, maybe hundreds of millions of people, in a war with the Islamo-fascists in the future.
2 comments:
Want an example of what drives me to despair on this issue? Take a look at today's "Boston Globe". (I don't ususally buy the thing but on Mondays it has the auction listings. So sue me.)
Editorial cartoon: Seated blindfolded fat cat representing Congress "sees no evil" in allowing "torture" of captured jihadist hanging by thumbs.
Op-Ed by Martha Bayles of Boston College: Blames Deutsche Oper director Hans Neuenfels for deliberately provoking Muslims, whom she terms "the new target of opportunity for transgressive artists -- and their amassed intellectual defenders". Follows this up with attack on editor of Jyllands-Posten for not commissioning "illustrations suitable for a respectful treatment of Islam meant to educate Danish children. Would that have caused outrage? Maybe among murderous fanatics, but not among the vast majority of Muslims". Hmmmmm... does that mean the Muslims who marched with signs reading "Behead Those Who Insult Islam" were just ordinary Muslims provoked beyond endurance by a cartoon of Big Mo with a fuse in his hat?
According to Ms. Bayles, it is "the high church of art", not Muslim fanatacism and intolerance, that is to blame for "sparking the sort of protest that... is now becoming every free citizen's nightmare".
Another Op-Ed, this one by James Carroll, no surprises here: "Bush created a cohesive enemy where it did not really exist before. So-called jihadists have been rallied, strengthened, and made lethal by Iraq." Funny, I thought those "so-called jihadists" who attacked on 9/11 were pretty lethal, but maybe I'm just over-sensitive.
Over on page 2 there's a sympathetic story about angsty environmentalists dreading the prospect that the drive for alternative fuels -- you know, the one to free us from energy dependency upon murderous Islamists who want to destroy us --will endanger the vast acerage of Midwest land that has been allowed to "go wild" and now presents "prairie grasses waving in the wind" clear to the horizon where cornfields once stood. "It gives you the feeling there's still hope in the world", gushes a wildlife research biologist who is just thrilled that the prairie chickens have, uh, come home to roost.
Oh yeah, and on page 4 there's a brief story about FBI agents stopping a man with mob ties from selling missles to an informant posing as an Al Qaeda middleman. On page 3 there's a very brief story about the video footage of Atta and Jarrah yukking it up in Afghanistan pre-9/11. Just more hi-jinks from those be "so-called jihadists", nothing to see here, folks, move along.
But there's good news, too. Maharishi Vedic City, Iowa, is looking for 1800 "yogic flyers" to "crown the Nation with Invincibility". Yeah, that'll work. I should pass that along to the r**h b***h with the "America Needs a Buddhist President" bumper sticker on her SUV who parked next to me at the dump this morning.
Over on page 2 there's a sympathetic story about angsty environmentalists dreading the prospect that the drive for alternative fuels -- you know, the one to free us from energy dependency upon murderous Islamists who want to destroy us --will endanger the vast acerage of Midwest land that has been allowed to "go wild" and now presents "prairie grasses waving in the wind" clear to the horizon where cornfields once stood. "It gives you the feeling there's still hope in the world", gushes a wildlife research biologist who is just thrilled that the prairie chickens have, uh, come home to roost.
My biggest goal in life is exactly this. Fighting Islam ranks a pale second, but it should be clear that I'm not the problem we face in this war.
Post a Comment