Victor Davis Hanson, Dinesh D'Souza's colleague at the Hoover Institution, adds his voice to a growing chorus of people who deplore D'Souza's absurd new book. (Thanks to Mackie for the link.)
Now there is another angle to the "blame America" game, this time from the secular right. In his book "The Enemy at Home," Dinesh D'Souza, of the Hoover Institution (where I work as well), charges that our decadent culture turns off traditional Muslims — otherwise the potential allies of American conservatives — and often renders them sympathetic to jihadist rhetoric.He then goes further, arguing that the cultural permissiveness and obscenity of our leftists indirectly created a bin Laden. Now in a de facto alliance with the terrorists, the left, according to D'Souza, plots an end to traditional America.
D'Souza's solution is for conservatives here to embrace conservative Muslims, in a shared struggle against both the American left that misrepresented us and the jihadists who now misrepresent them.
But D'Souza's strained effort to fault millions of Americans for 9/11 proves no more convincing than was Susan Sontag's or Jerry Falwell's.
First, he libels a number of "domestic insurgents" who "want bin Laden to win." His list is nonsensical. Whatever one may think of the wisdom of Jimmy Carter or the late Molly Ivins, or of intellectuals like Tony Judt, Martha Nussbaum and Garry Wills, none of them wanted al-Qaida to defeat the United States — a victory that would have ended liberal tolerance here.
The novelist Salman Rushdie is also posted on D'Souza's proscription list. But why would the author of "The Satanic Verses" wish the jihadists to prevail when he himself was nearly killed as the object of an Iranian fatwa?
Second, D'Souza should reread al-Qaida's rambling complaints against the United States. They are just as often incoherent as they are angry at American decadence.
Bin Laden at times whined about the American failure to sign the Kyoto treaty on global climate, white racism, the bombing of Hiroshima, even improper campaign donations. If we took these terrorist rants as seriously as D'Souza does, then al-Qaida might seem to be a radical leftist organization furious at the supposed sins of a conservative United States.
Third, why should we think Islamic objections to our culture could justify the violence of the extremists? Jihadists may not like Western drug use, homosexuality, rap music or abortion any more than we do female circumcision, polygamy, sharia law and gender apartheid, which are as common in the Middle East as our purported offenses are in the West. But would anyone thereby justify Americans suicide-bombing Muslim civilians?
Fourth, in terms of giving possible offense to Muslims, others (such as the Indians, Russians and Chinese) have violently surpassed anything blamed on the United States. But bin Laden rammed planes into our towers, apparently because he bet (wrongly) that America was least likely to strike back. And wounding the United States — the most powerful symbol of a free, prosperous West — would offer the best propaganda coup for galvanizing other Muslims.
Fifth, and most regrettable, is D'Souza's belief that ideology trumps Americans' shared history and values. But despite the differences between red- and blue-state America, we find more in common with each other than with conservative Muslims in a gender-segregated Saudi Arabia or a religiously intolerant Iran.
According to Wikipedia:
"Prior to his marriage, he (D'Souza) reportedly dated conservative author Ann Coulter and conservative radio host Laura Ingraham, to whom he was engaged but never married[7]."
I wonder why he and Ingraham broke off the engagement.
slowly the lies of the left, liberals and mos are being exposed as to the violence and intended world dominance by the cult of islam....
more and more Americans are realizing that our government is not being truthful about the threat from the cult of islam.....
will enough Americans wake up before it is to late???
The Texican.
How did the Hoover Institute ever let this fifth columnist in ?
If it walks like a duck, looks like a duck and quacks lile a duck, then it is a duck. Here Dinesh performs the services of a muslim apologist so it is hard to see where he is anything other than same.
Exposed.
I honestly don't know what D'Souza's problem is. He never struck me as a stupid man in the past. He certainly does not seem to be a leftwing psychotic who hates America. There is just no seemingly rational explanation for his behavior. Being Indian, he should no better than most people in the United States what islam really is and the terrible danger it poses. Maybe he simply went crazy. Seriously, maybe he's mentally ill now......
I honestly don't know what D'Souza's problem is. He never struck me as a stupid man in the past. He certainly does not seem to be a leftwing psychotic who hates America. There is just no seemingly rational explanation for his behavior. Being Indian, he should know better than most people in the United States what islam really is and the terrible danger it poses. Maybe he simply went crazy. Seriously, maybe he's mentally ill now......
Sorry, another typo. I mispelled "know." I hate when that happens.
D'Souza ignores what Muslim Jihadis are saying now and have said through the centuries, they go after non-Muslims because, well, they are non-Muslims. The use excuses such as Iraq, Israel or whatever to fool the gullible (Liberals) these days. They have no more in common with Conservatives than they do with Liberals.
"Fifth, and most regrettable, is D'Souza's belief that ideology trumps Americans' shared history and values. But despite the differences between red- and blue-state America, we find more in common with each other than with conservative Muslims in a gender-segregated Saudi Arabia or a religiously intolerant Iran."
That's the crux of the biscuit, as Frank Zappa would say. As full of garbage and as detrimental as I believe Liberals and their policies to be to the West, they aren't murdering Jihadis. As a Conservative I have far more in common with them than I do with Islamists. D'Souza is totally full of it on this issue.
No doubt D'Sousa is going to do well selling his book just on the controversies he has created alone.
Never mind that fundamental Islam has always been in the camp of the dar-al-harb when it comes to the non-Muslims,infidels,and Kaffirs. It is the teachings in the Quran,Sirah,and the Ahadith that aspires them as it has for nearly 1,400 years to try and defeat,dominate, and subjugate all non Muslims no matter what form of morality is displayed in western societies.
I don't know when the last time D'Souza visited Saudi Arabia, but I was reading CNN's Cooper Anderson's blog yesterday where it mentioned that in Riyadh shopping malls, it is now becoming more common to see women without veils and wearing make-up, or young couples (male/female) holding hands and not being harassed by the religious police.
In Dubai, you see many, many Muslim teenagers of both sexes shopping like crazy and buying Western-style clothes and products. Even though beauty pageants are frowned upon in Muslim societies, they thrive in Turkey, Malaysia, Indonesia, Egypt, and Lebanon. All over North America and Europe, Muslim communities even hold their own pageants and allowing the women to wear swimsuits or bikinis. In Cote d'Azur in France and on the beaches of Spain and Italy, you see many Middle Eastern women sunbathing topless or virtually naked. When you do a search in iTunes for French or German rap music, you will see a long list of artists of Middle Eastern/Muslim persuasion.
D'Souza is obviously oblivious of these changes! Either he is being paid by the Jihadists to lambaste American values, or he has become totally demented due to eating too many samosas.
>How did the Hoover Institute ever let this fifth columnist in?
Hoover has more scholars who believe that the world's significant religious and cultural differences can be overcome by the "free market" (which is never as free as they pretend), common morals, etc., than it does hard-headed realists who put America's and Americans' interests first. D'Souza is as Jacobin as anybody. Liberty, Equality, Brotherhood. This is not America. D'Souza is unAmerican.
"But bin Laden rammed planes into our towers, apparently because he bet (wrongly) that America was least likely to strike back." --VDH
I disagree with this. Bin laden et al wanted the U.S. to strike back so that they could drag the U.S. and its allies into a long-term guerilla war in which American money, resources, and personnel would be "bled". Meanwhile, such conflict serves to further create mutual opposition between Muslims and non-Muslim, which is precisely what al-Qaeda wants (i.e., a clearer separation--at least socially and psychologically--between the believer and the disbeliever). Al-Qaeda and other groups such as HAMAS and Hizballah strike their targets in part in order to provoke retaliations that will make headline news and turn public opinion against the U.S. or Israel.
Moreover, jihadists groups of this type do attack Russia, China, and India, contrary to VDH's suggestion.
D'Souza is obviously oblivious of these changes! Either he is being paid by the Jihadists to lambaste American values, or he has become totally demented due to eating too many samosas.
Posted by: Rafa at February 9, 2007 09:53 AM
I think he has definitely suffered a mental collapse of some kind, though, of course, not due to samosa eating. More probably the long years of political wars and attack by the left have just pushed him over the edge.
Victor Davis Hanson mentions that "the Jihadists may not like Western drug use.." Actually, I was going to comment on Middle Eastern drug use yesterday, but didn't get around to it. Drug use is rampant, particularly in Afghanistan and Iran.
Just as pornography is rampant, so too drug use. (Yesterday, I noted that "Hotbird" is the most popular satellite station serving the Middle East. And, according to Matthew Fisher: "it beams down dozens of stations from the heavens whose only offerings are hard-core pornography from the United States, France and Italy." The hard-core porn broadcasts are "far raunchier than anything most Canadians can tune into" (National Post, February 5, 2007).
So just another instance of Muslim projection? It's always easier to point the finger and blame someone else, rather than do a critical, self-examination.
>I think he has definitely suffered a mental collapse of some kind, though, of course, not due to samosa eating.
Well, he does live in San Diego which, aside from its military, is a town not known for its seriousness about much of anything, particularly its (lack of) culture and especially its football team, which as you might recall, botched the most important game of an otherwise stellar season. These are signs of a community not seeing the world as it is. D'Souza and San Diego deserve each other.
"In Dubai, you see many, many Muslim teenagers of both sexes shopping like crazy and buying Western-style clothes and products. Even though beauty pageants are frowned upon in Muslim societies, they thrive in Turkey, Malaysia, Indonesia, Egypt, and Lebanon. All over North America and Europe, Muslim communities even hold their own pageants and allowing the women to wear swimsuits or bikinis. In Cote d'Azur in France and on the beaches of Spain and Italy, you see many Middle Eastern women sunbathing topless or virtually naked. When you do a search in iTunes for French or German rap music, you will see a long list of artists of Middle Eastern/Muslim persuasion."
-- from a posting above
The posting above appears to suggest that the ideology of Islam somehow is breaking down, because Middle Easterners go shopping just as Infidels do, and there are beauty pageants and so on.
Partly irrelevant, and partly exaggerated. As for shopping -- so what? If the same frantic spending goes on, or actually far more so -=- there is nothing to do in Dubai, there is nothing to do in Kuwait or Saudi Arabia, except to shop, shop, shop (or go home and use your domestics, those semi-slaves from abroad, in any way you see fit), or to pray -- what does that mean about attitudes toward Infidels? It means nothing. The kind of non-stop consumerism of the Arabs and Musliims shows only that they are hypocritical in their attacks on the "consumerist" West. And the same goes for drug use, so widespread in Teheran, for example, or behind the hotel doors of so many rich Saudis and other Arabs, and as for prostitution and pornography, nothing in the West rivals what the Arabs are routinely involved with. Use your imaginations. You know what sums of money they possess. You have been able to experience them, in any capital of the West. Figure it out.
These beauty pageants? A handful, and only in a few places where Islam is deliberately constrained. Why this should be cause for Infidel rejoicing is unclear. And the fact that some MIddle Eastern women may, here and there, behave differently when allowed to, on the European littoral of the Mediterranean, means nothing as far as the essential malevolence toward Infidels inculcated by Islam.
Why is trivia brought up, as if to divert Infidel attention from the main thing. The main thing is not whether Muslim men allow, here and there, Muslim women to do this or to do that. The main thing is how, in Islam, a division between Believer and Infidel is inculcated, and a state of permanent war, between Dar al-Islam and dar al-Harb, is mandated, and Muslims are keenly aware of the duty, collectively or sometimes individually, to support the Jihad fi sabil Allah, Jihad in the path of Allah, to remove all obstacles to the spread of Islam wherever they may exist, and to work, using whatever instruments are availalbe and effective, so that everywhere Islam may dominate, and Muslims rule, everywhere.
There are differences in the means chosen or preferred (terrorism, the money weapon, Da'wa, demographic conquest). There are differences in the time frame -- see the Slow Jihad of Mahmoud Abbas and Fatah (they want that Western money, they want that Jizyah faucet turned on again), and the Fast Jihad of Meshaal and Hamas (they don't want to pretend, even to get that Jizyah from the Infidles, for one minute that they have a goal other than the ultimate destruction of Israel or, for that matter, any other Infidel state or power that might exist in what was once a Muslim possession -- and of course, ultimately there is no different treatment to be meted out to those parts of the world that were never part of dar al-Islam).
Why exaggerate the trivial, as if it were of some comfort? If there is a topless beach, for the Christains no doubt, in Lebanon --- so what? What does that have to do with the beliefs and consequent menace of the primitive masses of Muslims, in the Middle East, and now in Western Europe as well?
The quote: "Whatever one may think of the wisdom of Jimmy Carter or the late Molly Ivins, or of intellectuals like Tony Judt, Martha Nussbaum and Garry Wills, none of them wanted al-Qaida to defeat the United States — a victory that would have ended liberal tolerance here." ignores the vile, despicable behavior on the part of the Democrats. Everything they have said and perpetrated over the course of the last two decades at least, belie that assumption. I'm a recently retired Soldier with over 30 years combined service, and I cannot recall another time when I've witnessed such anti-American, anti-military statement on the part of some of our own elected officials. Thank God Kerry never made it into the Oval office. He'd be renting out the Lincoln bedroom to the al Qadea.
D'Souza is obviously oblivious of these changes! Either he is being paid by the Jihadists to lambaste American values, or he has become totally demented due to eating too many samosas.
posted by Rafa
Samosas made with dhimmi masala no doubt.
Lame joke, I know
With regard to the statement: "Moreover, jihadists groups of this type do attack Russia, China, and India, contrary to VDH's suggestion."
Actually, Victor Davis Hanson wrote: "Fourth, in terms of giving possible offense to Muslims, others (such as the Indians, Russians and Chinese) have violently surpassed anything blamed on the United States." What VDH was stating here was that the violent suppression of Muslims has occurred in India, in Russia, and in China, and this violence against Muslims living in these states has far surpassed anything done to Muslims by America. Thus, if one were to take at face value bin Laden's claims (let's all pretend now that Osama's "honest"), then if al-Qaeda was just teed off because of "violence against Muslims," [sob, sniffle] then they should have attacked (or rammed planes) into buildings in India, Russia, or China. But, as we all know here, Osama is a liar (along with being a mass murderer).
Off topic -- that "wah, wah, I'm getting picked on!!" is occurring in Canada with yet another Muslim of dual citizenship -- this time, he's Chinese and Muslim. The Chinese state that he is a member of a UN designated terrorist group. (I just hope the maschocists in power in Ottawa don't rush to this idiot's defense or spend yet more zillions of dollars defending a Muslim terrorist.)
If you want more of Victor David Hanson's work, you can go to the Hoover Institute.
http://www.hoover.org
on the DAILY REPORT link on the right hand side are usually some links to Mr. Hanson's current writings.
Most of the Hoover people are really bright people in Reagan utilized them (Milton Friedman the economic genius for example).
If the Hoover people are at odds from within it is a good sign this is being vetted finally.
PS. Laura and Ann both dated this goof? My opinion of them has just gone down 10 fold.
D's work is the greatest since Francis Fukuyama's The End of History.
To Hugh who wrote:
"Why exaggerate the trivial, as if it were of some comfort? If there is a topless beach, for the Christains no doubt, in Lebanon --- so what? What does that have to do with the beliefs and consequent menace of the primitive masses of Muslims, in the Middle East, and now in Western Europe as well?"
My posting was a response to D'Souza's ignorance of the social changes going on in some Islamic societies. There's nothing trivial about allowing beauty pageants or allowing women to sunbathe topless or naked; on the contrary, this is what individual/women's rights is all about - and certainly a reaction to harsh Islamic prohibitions. As far as Muslim teenagers penchant for consumerism - they buy stuff clearly produced in and by the West; subconsciously speaking, they LOVE anything western. Call it a form of teenage rebellion. So if Jihadist Islam preaches that Western values are detrimental to their followers, then why are they allowing the distribution of western goods in their Islamic societies???
D'Souza's moralistic preaching is getting old. Live and let live. Maybe a topless Anna Nicole would change his mind. It would mine!
I don't think there's anything new going on -- and, last time I checked, the Cote d'Azur in France (with the nude beaches) was not an area controlled by the local Imam or a mad Mullah. Or, not yet, anyway. And big deal with the beauty pageants. Beauty pageants are hardly a fine indicator of women's lib. Back in the 1920s in Egypt, Cairo had its flesh-pots (drinking, belly-dancing, on and on), ditto for Morocco, Tangier's, etc., far more risque than anything found in the West. Women as sex objects in Arab culture is nothing new -- they're still powerless (under the thumb of men).
"Laura and Ann both dated this goof? My opinion of them has just gone down 10 fold."
Instead of assuming the worst, give these women the benefit of the doubt - maybe they dropped Dinesh like a hot potato once they got to know him!
Quite interesting in that all post here cannot have one ally within the Muslims, unless they are in your mold and model. Can one poster here give us that "model of a Muslim" which might be used to be a spy,mole, or agent to infiltrate such terrorist groups trying to murder Westerners?
During the cold war many Americans were true believers in the Marx philosophy and sold their nation out repeatedly. Take that best and brightest known as the Cambrige Nothing was not known by the cold war enemy of the USA, since many were loyal to their "religion of Marx".
The pitiful few, such as Rushie, who do rebel against Islam is a certain "prove" that many are satisfied with their way of life. Over and over, this site quotes four, five , maybe six writers, who are disatisfied with Allah.
If this is the best that the intellectual American, at this site, has to offer, it fails to win any minds of the great mass of Muslims.
No common cause is possible, and therefore no idea will be known about the terrorist attacks which are sure to come in the future.
But, maybe a common cause can be found in beaming pornography into Afghanistan where millions will be converted to Western sympathies by appeal to simple lust. So sad, and actually, your enemy has simply made billions from selling you that "dope to hang yourself", which you consume and debate about as some individual freedom.
But, one must really think hard to see the world as it is when one's wishes and wants are projected unto your enemy. After all, opiates have been a natural plant, a weed if you will, growing freely in Afghanistan and you are not going to find such filth and depravity in Afghanistan as one would in San francisco, New York, to Amsterdam.
But, one did find a few hundred thousand Afghan secular/communist who thought to see the world as they wished it to be. They lost from not knowing how ignorant they were of the reality which was and not ought to be. And tell us, oh great intellectuals, is beaming in pornography for a minority your great plan to change your enemy?
Silly, sloppy and ignorant as those secular/communist Afghans thought they would transform a nation into raving,chanting communist.
But, America has changed, they buy the dope to hang themselves daily.
Mr DeSouza thinks and writes in the best mercenary traditions of self flagellating Indian intellectuals, usually with leftist leanings, who are ever ready to sell their own country and its culture short for the sake of a few dollars more.
He is too intelligent not to realise that what he is writing is horse poop and drivel, but he also knows that this is what will get him the bacon again this time.
But there's something called "too clever by half" and that's what he has ended up being, as the disingenuous premise on which he bases his flawed and tenuous logic will eventually end up making him look naive, and even stupid. Stupid and rich, of course.