Hollywood is alive and well—in the Middle East
and the United States. What else could explain the fantasy-world interpretation
of the recent disaster in Libya and Cairo by the White House and his
administration? Those who have been duped by this flagrantly false narrative, that
these recent attacks were perpetrated by “spontaneous” demonstrators outraged
by a film’s negative portrayal of Islam would do well to listen to the words of Libyan President Mohammed el-Megari: “The
idea that this criminal and cowardly act was a spontaneous protest that just
spun out of control is completely unfounded and preposterous,” said el-Megari,
adding “We firmly believe that this was a pre-calculated, pre-planned
attack that was carried out specifically to attack the U.S. Consulate."
The problem with this reactive reasoning from our
President and his sycophantic supplicants (beyond the fact that they are
hell-bent on doing damage control for President Obama while savaging Mitt
Romeny) is that the public is now confusing two very different words: context
and pretext. The ersatz media would have you believe that the poor Muslim radicals,
along with their ordinary, Middle-Eastern equivalents of Joe Six Pack, inflamed
by a “hateful” film (read parody in poor taste), had no choice but to attack
our embassies and slaughter innocent Americans. The film was simply so
overwhelmingly insulting, so revoltingly contemptuous, and so unassailably insensitive
that all manner of reason and sense of ethics was banished forthwith, and the
primordial Id given license to create carnage and suffering.
Here is context offered by the Moslem world and promulgated
by the likes of Susan Rice and left-leaning media talking heads: Best not
insult Islam, or defame the prophet Mohammed, lest we slaughter your diplomats.
Be careful about political cartoons that depict Moslem extremism in an
unflattering light, or you will die at the hands of jihadist. Do not write
literature that describes Islam in a pejorative manner or there will be a
life-long fatwa with the penalty of death on your head. Insult their
sensibilities in any perceived manner, and Allah will use them as a blunt and
unyielding weapon of destruction.
But this is really just a pretext, because Moslem
extremists, like ALL extremists, live in a perpetual state of moral indignation
and outrage. They inhabit the periphery of reality, utterly and intentionally
disconnected from reason, insufferably wrapped in self-righteousness, suffused
in the accelerant of a narrow and perverse ideology. Thus their world is
tinderbox, just waiting for the tiniest of sparks to justify
conflagration. Oddly enough, it was
the moderate Muslims of Libya who recently took to the streets to demonstrate
their outrage with the radicals who perpetrated their heinous acts on our
embassy. And while their actions may have been inappropriate, at least hey did
not become apologists.
Ultimately, it doesn't matter what we do or don't
do, what we say, or how we say it, only that they have the opportunity and the
convenient excuse to seize the moment to foment terror, and then fall back upon
a twisted fairy tale that we are merely witnessing the natural reaction to our
unbelievable temerity to question the validity or ethical reasonableness of an
ideology based on conformity, oppression, and violence in the name of God.
So this is where we are today. We not only
condone the creation of Piss
Christ, but bankroll the "artist" with
taxpayer funds via the National Endowment of the Arts. Then we tell American
citizens who object to having their hard-earned dollars prop up anti-Christian
trash that they cannot trample upon the free speech of the artist. When
the artwork (not the artist) was attacked and destroyed by protestors, the gallery director, Eric Mézil, said it would reopen
with the destroyed works on dispaly "so people can see what barbarians can
do". It is worth mentioning that the aforementioned objet d'art
was afforded protection behind thick plexiglass and extra guards, security conspicuously
absent on September 11, 2012 in our embassies.
In contrast, when confronted with the moral
inconsistencies and excesses of acts of murder and violence, we don't recoil in
terror and threaten strong retaliatory measures, but rather backpedal,
fabricate context, and obsequiously and profusely apologize. As White House
Press Secretary Jay Carney stated, it was “a film we have judged to be
reprehensible and disgusting." That’s right Mr. Carney, the film was reprehensible,
but the acts of murder and destruction, they were, well understandable. After
all, parody of religion has always been punishable by death…oh that’s in
countries run by radical Moslem jihadists. Not America. Not yet, anyway.
Our French counterparts are also floating in the
pick juice of political correctness. As Dalil Boubakeur,
first president of the French Council of the Muslim Faith once intoned, “Words have a price, one can kill with a
word. Freedom of expression stops at the point at which it does damage and the
Muslim community feels insulted.”
Moreover, regional responses to the embassy
massacres should stand as proof of the rhetorical and political aims endemic in
radicalized Moslem organizations. In “reaction” to the video in question, Sheik Hassan Nasrallah, leader of the militant
group Hezbollah, called for an international ban on insulting Islam, stating:
"Since you officially represent the governments and states of the Muslim
world you should impose on the United States, Europe and the whole world that
our prophet, our Quran and our holy places and honor of our Prophet be
respected." In Saudi Arabia, the Human Rights Commission of
the Organisation of Islamic
Cooperation (OIC), which has 57 members, has requested
"an international code of conduct for media and social media to disallow
the dissemination of incitement material". Such inflammatory rhetoric flies in the face
of the separation of church and state, something liberals regularly remind us
should a public high school have a prayer during a graduation ceremony.
These
attitudes and behaviors are, ironically, most problematic for the peace-loving,
progressively-oriented Moslems, whose voices have been silenced or removed by their
oppressors, or marginalized by our own media, which is complicit in the
stratagem of discounting their concerns in the name of political correctness.
These people also live in very real fear from truly xenophobic extremist
groups, such as neo-Nazis, as well as misguided, stupid, or just evil
individuals who cannot seem to accept people who don’t have the same skin color
or faith. And so they must straddle evil from both sides, a difficult, if not
impossible job.
In the end analysis, we can no longer bury our proverbial
collective hands in the sand. We must start dealing realistically with these
kinds of acts and the ideology that fuels them. We must quit hiding behind
political correctness, or we will find ourselves ensnared in an ideology that
will continue to undermine not only the values of many peace-loving Moslems, but
Western society in general. As the Muslim cleric Omar Bakri Mohammed once threatened: “We
will use your democracy to destroy your democracy.”
