Open Season on Reality

Friday, September 22, 2006

One Mansour El-Kikhia -- I am unsure whether this is a real name or his nom de guerre -- writes one of the most spectacularly evasive editorials I have seen in years. In the San Antonio Express-News, he asks, "When is this open season on Islam and Muslims going to end?"

For one thing, if it really were "open season", El-Kikhia wouldn't be free to publish such tripe. Furthermore, he and his fellow Moslems would, by now, be bowing and scraping towards a radioactive crater five times daily. This is whining at best.

For another, El-Kikhia, whose name must be an Arabic equivalent for Rip van Winkle, has nothing to say about anything members of the "Religion of Pissed" might have done since the massacres -- committed in the name of Islam and with the blessings of so many Moslems -- back in September 11, 2001. These he mentions offhand only as "9/11".


Instead, it's all America's fault. As usual.

The faith is vilified because it serves the needs of so many important actors on the international scene.

First, to a large number of conservative Americans and, by extension, the Bush administration, Islam has come to represent a threat more potent than communism.


There is no Islamic entity to pose a threat to the United States comparable to the Soviet Union; [Where have we heard that before? --ed] hence one had to be created. First, it was al-Qaida, but it soon became apparent that it was too small to make a viable opponent, resulting in the attempted links to Iraq and Iran that proved to be false.


Second, there are Israel's leaders, who agree with Huntington's position. The rise of Islamic fundamentalist groups that challenged their treatment of Palestinians necessitated a campaign to convince Americans that Islam is the single threat to the United States.


Third, a new security industry has emerged to piggyback on this issue. It is a multibillion-dollar industry that will not go away anytime soon. Indeed, this week, Boeing won a multibillion-dollar deal from the Department of Homeland Security for a virtual security fence on America's southern border to augment a proposed physical barrier.
Yeah, man. It's the military-industrial complex -- which anyone who has read The Protocols of the Elders of Zion by now would know.

On a more serious note, this article pretty well encapsulates the kind of "reasoning" we are seeing from the Islamofascist-Far Left axis: (1) Ignore what the Moslems do wholesale if possible. And completely evade any role the teachings of Islam might have had in whatever you can't ignore. (2) Use anti-semitism and the real danger posed to Israel to feed off one another in order to wall off Israel, as if it is not part of the West. As if the fighting there has nothing to do with anything else. This is made a lot easier when you can say, "Hamas who? Hezbollah what?" This way, the next time you see, say, Israel dismembering Lebanon for some reason, we all know it's the fault of those filthy Jews. (And how did they doctor all those photographs from Lebanon? Those all-knowing apes! Those omnipotent pigs! Those Zionists are frightening in their reach, Allah be praised!) (3) If Israel's unexplained need to go through the motions of what all other nations do for self-defense implies that Israel thirsts for Islamic blood, then the fact that corporations make profits by supplying the government of the United States must mean that they're in on the turban-shoot, too.

Take heart, El-Kikhia, in the knowledge that you will one day look down from heaven to see this whole sleazy affair collapse like a house of cards when the Military-Zionist-Industrial Complex sputters and lurches to an abrupt halt after having run out of the Islamic blood it uses for fuel. You'll be in heaven and we'll be in hell. Isn't that what's really important anyway?

Or open your eyes and consider what people the world over -- and it isn't just al-Qaida -- are doing in the name of your religion. Consider the crazy notion that not everyone wants to obey every word some smelly, cave-dwelling imam has to say. Some of those people will not just accept some "invitation" to do so. Goodness. They may even forcefully resist! Here's a sample:
Today's Islamists seem to have not even a sense of irony. They fail to see the richness of the following sequence. The pope makes a reference to a 14th-century Byzantine emperor's remark about Islam imposing itself by the sword, and to protest this linking of Islam and violence:
  • In the West Bank and Gaza, Muslims attack seven churches.
  • In London, the ever-dependable radical Anjem Choudary tells demonstrators at Westminster Cathedral that the pope is now condemned to death.
  • In Mogadishu, Somali religious leader Abubukar Hassan Malin calls on Muslims to "hunt down" the pope. The pope not being quite at hand, they do the next best thing: shoot dead, execution-style, an Italian nun who worked in a children's hospital.
"How dare you say Islam is a violent religion? I'll kill you for it" is not exactly the best way to go about refuting the charge. But of course, refuting is not the point here. The point is intimidation.
One needn't even employ Occam's Razor to discount El-Kikhia's crazy nonsense to see that maybe we simply want to defend ourselves here in the West. So, Mansour, be thankful that your charge that it is "open season" on Moslems is just libel. And apologize for it.

In Charles Krauthammer's wise words, religious tolerance is a two-way street. People like El-Kikhia would do well to wrap their brains around that idea. But for now, I'd be happy for them to open their eyes ,just for starters, while they're at the wheel.

-- CAV


Anonymous said...

You know, it never seems to dawn on these yahoos that if we were truly all they say we are, they wouldn't still be around to complain about anything. They are still able to do so my the grace of the West's complacency. That grace is slowly evaporating with every temper-tantrum they throw and threat they utter. That they should choose to go after the pope shows an ignorance that is truly beyond belief. Even non-Catholics have awakened because of it.

More fools they. But I say let the free speech continue. Best offensive we against their propaganda right now.

Gus Van Horn said...


I hope so.

Your comment echoes the sentiments frequently voiced by another commenter. He likens the Moslems to a virus that frequent expoure will only make the West immune to.

We're all on the same page there, but the slowness with which this is occurring I find both mind-boggling and alarming. I know that this is due to the prevailing intellectual influences in the culture. But still, seeing the power of ideas in action like this is like knowing that gravity causes water to flow downhill -- and then seeing Niagara Falls up close for the first time.

We should not, five years after being attacked, be listening to the leader of Iran speak at the United Nations while our leaders prattle on about sanctions that will not stop them from getting the bomb (while perhaps helping Egypt develop nuclear technology!). We should have bombed Iran (and if Moslems were obtuse enough not to get the hint, Riyadh) back to the stone age by now, comandeered their oil fields, and be talking about anything but Islam by now. And if we weren't we ought to seriously be talking about dropping one on Mecca during the hajj. Could you imagine ANY politician daring to voice such a common-sensical measure to get the brutes to stop threatening us today? No. And we're nowhere close to that point yet.

Thank God, so to speak, our enemy is no more sophisticated than it is.

Despite the smallness of the enemy, we still have a huge task ahead of us: cultural change.


Myrhaf said...

El-Kikhia says the right has sought an enemy to replace communism. Well, okay. If you have to find an enemy, the one that bombed the World Trade Center will do.

But what about the left? The end of the Cold War has been a lot harder on them. New Leftist anti-Americanism has them yoked to Islam, a backward, mystical ideology. When leftists ignore Islam's anti-feminism and general irrationality, one sees how important their hatred of America is to them. It takes an extraordinary leftist like Christopher Hitchens to support America against militant Islam.

One side benefit of a crisis is that it clarifies issues and makes partisans stand for what they really believe; the anti-Americanism of the left has never been clearer.

Gus Van Horn said...


Those -- on how the war clarifies issues and on how much the left hate America -- are excellent points.

Incidentally, you reminded me of something I thought of that the article reminded me of when I was reading it.

Back in college -- It was a Roman Catholic school. -- I recall getting a type of argument, usually in literature classes. Basically, if any parallel at all could be drawn between some ideology inimical to or disapproved of by Catholicism and Catholicism itself, that similarity was exaggerated and then taken as objective proof of the validity of Catholicism. (e.g., Some ideology's great evil is "their Satan", which (in such an analysis) just goes to show that they're trying to set up a "false religion".)

It is the same kind of argument, but in reverse, being used against America by bringing up the Cold War.

If Ayn Rand calls Immanuel Kant the most evil philosopher, maybe it's because he WAS the most evil philosopher, and not just because she "needed" a "Satan" to make up for where her "false religion" missed a detail or two from The One True Faith. Likewise, if America opposes Islamofascism, perhaps it is because its adherents are threatening us. Ditto for Communism. Maybe evil really does exist and must be fought. Just because Communists and Islamists set America up as some horrific evil does not mean that America is guilty of the same sin when it opposes them.

This strikes me as a bizarre form of psychological projection.


Chip said...

Now that people really are starting to get it, I'm glad 9/11 didn't produce a grand awakening. We move slowly and deliberately. Many people want to believe the best about other groups, especially minority groups in our midst. That's fine to a point. That point has been reached.

Only the extreme Left (ex// Chavez and his fans: like Harkin, Conyers, McKinney, Chomsky, Zinn, Castro, Kos, etc.) is keeping common cause with the Islamists now. They were the first ones against the wall when Khomeini took over in Iran, after being his allies for years. Talk about not learning from experience.

Gus Van Horn said...


I think, insofar as the left not learning, that they hate America enough that they do not care that the Islamists equate them (the far left) with us (civilized Westerners). This is the same kind of blindness the "Palestinians" exhibit every day they choose the destruction of Israel over their own welfare. (And they try to lecture US about how destructive hate is!)

I can't say I'm happy we aren't waking up faster or that such slowness must necessarily be related to deliberateness. However, there is some element of our having to correct ourselves on racism involved in the slowness. Many of us, thanks to the left coopting the legitimate aspects of the cause of civil rights, confuse such things as profiling with actual racism, for example. This is a mistaken lesson we will have to unlearn.

In addition, the Islamists seem to have learned from the left how to employ legal technicalities and lawa that should not be on the books. Just look at how Raed Jarrar is hoping to make a federal case out of his being asked to remove an Arabic tee shirt -- as if JetBlue hasn't the right to refuse service to anyone they please.


ALSO: I thank The Albatross for mentioning me at Little Green Footballs.

Anonymous said...

Gus, I understand your frustration. I've about bitten my tongue in two trying to be patient with the stupidity.

I've been out of the world for a while, due to ill-health. One of the biggest eye-openers for me has been the level of corruption in our universities. It wasn't a complete surprise; I went to college from 65-69. But the morphing of Marxism into Transnational Progressivism, with its multicult, PC thought-control, racism, and codified intolerance for all decency, was a bit of a shock. I don't think I'm the only one, either. I don't usually subscribe to the "some good came out of it" school, but to rip the roof off the universities and show the fetid pustules their humanities departments have become is a good. I've spoken several couples with college age children who now question the idea that it is an automatic good to spend their retirement sending their kids into these cesspools.

It is taking so long only because the rot has been so gradual that most people really didn't notice. Couple this with generations who have spent more time in school than ever before, only to come out mentally stunted to the level of maturity and ignorance of an adolescent, and you need a two-by-four up side their head just to get their attention. I still hear the young refer to 9/11 as "just like a movie" for crissake.

Unfortunately, religion is the closest thing to philosophy most people have. If it takes dissin' the pope, then so be it. At this point, I'll take what I can get. I sure as hell don't expect anything as reasonable as simply squashing a multicult bug.

Gus Van Horn said...


I think you're on the mark as to why the turnaround has been so slow.

One some of the changes you missed, I found a couple of those pretty shocking even as they occurred. Two manifestations of leftist idiocy I remember rising to prominence during the time between college and grad school (when I was in the Navy) were recycling (showing the rise of environmentalism) and the brunt of the multiculturalist assault on English. (This is more of a trip down memory lane here than anything else.)

I graduated college (in the South) in 1989, somehow never having heard of recycling. By 1990, Naval training takes me to the Northeast. Connecticut has mandatory recycling and I can barely go to the mall w/o seeing animal "rights" protestors, whom I viscerally hate on sight, parading around or blocking the flow of traffic.

Later, I was stationed in Virginia, which wasn't as blatantly culturally bleak as the Northeast, but recycling was being pushed there, too. Now, I hear it's mandatory in North Carolina and even in many parts of Texas. Environmentalism is now so non-controversial, the Republicans have started pushing it, too. That tide seems nowhere near turning.

That case differs from multiculturalism, "thanks" in part to the terrorists and the fact that its stupidity is so blatant only a truly crippled leftist can really buy into it. (PC Bedtime Stories, anyone?) Way back in high school, we had this nun my mother nicknamed "Sister It" who would ad lib corrections to pronouns while she read from the scriptures or even the hymnal during Mass. She was way ahead of her time, but who would have believed wide acceptance of that? Sure enough, when I left the Navy for grad school in 1994, THAT crap was all over the place. I was even corrected in a class for using the word "mankind" rather than "humankind" in a talk. I purposesly resisted that as much as I could. I love the English language and simply could not fail to notice this wholsale attempt to mangle it. I have been relived to notice in recent years that the Great Pronoun Jihad seems to have lost its steam. Unless I am somehow grossly mistaken (and I could be -- no kids in school), it seems that mangled pronouns exist mainly in the bowels of certain government agencies now.

And as for the "value" of school, I could REALLY start rambling. I'll just leave that by agreeing that it is worse than a waste of time in many respects.