Dhimmitude on parade
0 comment Wednesday, June 4, 2014 |
For four years, like another Cassandra, I've been shouting until I'm hoarse ''Troy is burning! Troy is burning!'' and I despair of the Danaids for whom, like Virgil in the Aeneid I weep for a city entombed in torpor...that through its wide-open doors receives fresh troops and joins complicit parties inside. For four years I've been repeating to the wind the truth about the Monster and its accomplices; that is, the accomplices of the Monster who, in good or bad faith, open wide the doors -- who, llike [those] in the Apocalypse of John the Evangelist, throw themselves at his feet and allow themselves to be stamped with the mark of shame.'
- Oriana Fallaci, 2005
This quote from Fallaci seemed apropos as I read the story about the October 19 Iftaar dinner hosted by the State Department, at which Karen Hughes spoke.
Lawrence Auster referred to this on his weblog, VFR, and I searched out the full text, which I link here.
Karen Hughes At The Annual State Department Iftaar Dinner
Here is a sample of what was said there; first, by State Department Undersecretary Burns:
Ladies and gentlemen, we gather here tonight in the cause of advancing peace and tolerance and prosperity and freedom and faith. And tonight is the holiest night of Ramadan, Laylat al Qadr, the night of power, the night traditionally marking the first revelation of the Holy Koran. And I thank you very for spending part of this evening with us.
[...]While most of us clearly see the connections we have among our different religions not everyone does. We gather unfortunately at a time of war and terrible violence and suffering in many parts of the Muslim world. Some talk about a clash of civilizations as an explanation for this violence. They say that somehow cultural or religious differences are immutable or that they will inevitably lead us to conflict. I respectfully disagree.
The most bitter conflict in the world today is not between Islam and Christianity or Judaism and atheism or Buddhism and Hinduism or any other religion. The conflict instead is between extremism and intolerance, present in all of our countries, including my own unfortunately on the one hand, and on the other the forces of tolerance and of hope and of peace. All of you, the accomplished Muslim women and men in this room tonight, are at the vanguard of this dichotomy. You are the forces of tolerance.
[...]We Americans take great pride in our Muslim community. The Muslim community here represents 80 different countries and there are millions of Muslims in this country and they worship at over 1,200 mosques. And this growing Muslim presence in our country is a great and welcome change. So I hope that all of you feel that sense of welcome in our country and that sense of tolerance.
We thank the Muslim community in our country for teaching us about the great religion of Islam. We still have much to learn. But it is true that some of the most powerful thinkers in the past century: Mahatma Gandhi; Martin Luther King Jr.; the Agha Khan; the Dali Lama, very different people but they shared one critical trait in common. Their actions were strongly rooted in their own religious beliefs, but they learned and grew from the teachings of other religions and may it be so in our own country. It's learning about each other and standing up for each other, by being voices of tolerance and understanding...''
And on and on it goes, until you retch.
I don't see how any red-blooded American can fail to be outraged and nauseated by this smarmy, toadying drivel.
And Karen Hughes truckling 'speech', which followed, is even worse, if possible. A sample:
As I travel the world, I remind people that Islam is an important part of America. One of our country's greatest strengths is the diversity and richness of our many faith traditions: Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, people of many faiths and even some of no faith at all live together peacefully and in a climate of mutual respect. American Muslims are both American and Muslim in their identities. And I believe Muslim Americans are our country's most effective and important bridge to Islamic communities across our world.
[...]Many of the people in this room have also played an important role in promoting interfaith dialogue and I'm convinced that it is absolutely key to the more peaceful world that we all want. The foundation of this nation, of our country, is built on respect for one another, from a belief in the dignity and the value of every single person. We believe all people, those of every faith, boys and girls, are equal and equally valuable. And it will take all of us to build communities in a world that is safer, respectful and just and peaceful. We must come together as people of faith and say that all our faiths teach that life is precious and the taking of innocent life is wrong.
I believe the concerted moral leadership of individual men and women of different faiths and cultures, it is what will ultimately help us prevail in the struggle against violent extremists.''
Politically Correct dhimmispeak at its most revolting.
According to Lawrence Auster's blog, Hughes delivered her fawning speech dressed in full Islamic garb, whatever that means. (Was she in a burka? Wearing a hijab? A jilbab? A niqab? I don't even know if I have those names right; I don't know a jilbab from a shishkebab or a thingmabob. And I wish I didn't have to know any of those words and the objects they describe; they don't belong in Christendom, or in the West. At all. Ever.)
And there's more. Get this: a blogger, here, points out that Hughes' speech contains several identical passages from an UCLA Law School Professor, Khaled Abou El Fadl's essay, on 'Islam - the Modern Religion.'
The similarities, with a few identical passages, are striking. One word was changed: Hughes said 'exception' where El Fadl used the word 'anomaly' but otherwise it's word-for-word, in many places. So here we have evident plagiarism -- on top of the PC pandering. They can't even come up with original words with which to pander and grovel.
So, all of those party zealots who have been haranguing me to 'vote GOP or the Democrats will destroy our country', please explain to me WHY these sorry lickspittles who are kissing up to the mohammedans are better. Please give me one convincing argument that proves these so-called 'conservative patriots' are 'fighting terrorism and Islamofascism.'
It looks to me like they are about to swear allegiance to 'Allah'. If this ain't appeasement and truckling, I don't know what is. Fighting nameless 'insurgents' on the other side of the world is not much help if we are laying out the red carpet for Islam and its minions over here; if we are abasing ourselves and submitting in our own country.
I notice that these State Department quislings are talking up the PC line about how the enemy is 'extremists' of all faiths, or of no faith. The problem is not Islam, no; Islam is a 'great religion', according to them. The problem is just 'extremism' and they vow to join the Mohammedans to combat 'extremism'. Of course their words could just as easily be used to condemn Christian 'extremism', and are probably intended to be ambiguous, so as not to 'unfairly target' the Religion of Peace.
And yes, I've heard all the GOP excuses: things like 'They have to say these things; they are just being diplomatic. Haven't you ever heard of diplomacy? They don't mean it.' Yes, I've been told that, but I ain't buying it. First of all, this kind of thing goes way beyond 'diplomacy'. It far exceeds what is necessary in the name of 'diplomacy.' Previous generations never understood 'diplomacy' to mean anything remotely resembling this.
Or the other lame rationalization by the faithful : 'the President is a great poker player.' 'He's fooling them; it's strategery. [sic]' Or, the worst is the quote from 'The Godfather' which they always use to defend this kind of stuff: 'Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer.' And I am supposed to approve of our government following the advice of a Mafia don from a cliched Hollywood movie? Is that what passes for statesmanlike wisdom in our sorry age?
And I've also heard this attempt at a defense: 'Do you expect our officials to publicly condemn Islam?' As if the choice was between belligerence and syrupy flattery.
No, I don't expect open condemnation, but I expect them not to tell big whopping lies about the 'benevolence' and 'greatness' of Islam. I expect them not to distort the sentiments of the country, such as saying we 'Americans take pride in our Islamic communities.' Speak for yourself, Undersecretary Burns. Don't speak for me. You have no clue, if you imagine you speak for America.
And how many Americans idolize Gandhi, the Aga Khan (?) or the Dalai Lama, as these State Department dhimmis imply? I doubt very much that the average American gives two hoots about those people; the only ones who do are lefties and ditzy 'one world' New Agers, not average Americans.
These dhimmified people in high positions are a disgrace. And that they, or at least Hughes, is considered 'conservative' is a travesty.
Now I can hear the usual GOP apologists saying 'It's just those Arabists at State who are the problem; the State Department is full of Clinton holdovers,' and on and on.
Fine; but is Karen Hughes a 'Clinton holdover'? No; she is one of Bush's handpicked staffers.
And it ain't just 'those Arabists at State': Debbie Schlussel writes about the Department of Homeland Security, which, together with the Embassy of Great Britain, hosted a Ramadan Iftaar panderfest of their own: full of similar PC smarm.
And I won't even go into the White House Iftaar dinner and the President's speech there. It's more of the same.
More and more, I am recognizing that our 'leaders' have virtually nothing in common with me; they do not share the values of traditional America; not by a long shot.
And further, many of the people who style themselves 'conservatives' these days are no better than these dhimmified elites. Too many 'conservatives' will twist themselves into pretzels to defend this kind of unctuous grovelling, in the name of party loyalty. I am sure that if Hughes dons a burka full time and starts bowing to Mecca, lots of others would follow suit. To them, party loyalty is just a game of 'Simon says.'
I want no part of such lemming-like 'conservatism.'
But this goes beyond any political or partisan considerations; the appalling thing to me is that we have sunk so far as a culture that we no longer show pride or confidence in dealing with Islam: we show weakness and cravenness. Even if that is not how our effete 'leaders' see it, I guarantee you that is how our Mohammedan enemies see it. They are reading all this flattery and syrupy niceness as servility. And they will take advantage of it; be sure of that.
I'll close with another quote from the late Oriana Fallaci, regarding Islam:
..if we continue to stay inert, they will become always more and more. They will always demand more, they will vex and boss us always more and more. 'Til the point of subduing us. Therefore, dealing with them is impossible. Attempting a dialogue, unthinkable.Showing indulgence, suicidal. And he or she who believes the contrary is a fool.'