Dinesh D'Souza answers critics

A bit OT

"...is typical of many professors.., a man educated beyond his intelligence"

Whilst not agreeing with his target, that's a good line and one that rings true in todays debate with secularism - Richard Dawkins anyone??

D'Souza says:

"They accuse America of being an atheist, immoral society that is hell-bent on imposing its secularism and immorality on the Muslim world."

Hang on, I thought we were all Christians on a new Crusade? Surely they cant have it both ways?

No, the real reason why Islam hates America is because they can't penetrate its government as easily as they did with Pakistan or other countries in Africa. Our constitution is too well developed for an internal take-over and it keeps changing with the pace of terrorism.
Of course, the enemy will use words like immorality, vulgar, and evil, for they're the only weapons they can use against our constituion but it doesn't make them right ? Those they convince, will surely sell-off their Islamic values for the prosperity America has to offer its citizens continually.
So, in the final analysis, Islam will never be respected as a government; it will never hold a seat in the U.N. and it'll never be allowed to participate in the WTO. Their Shia Laws has to be shelved like the old testaments 10 Commandments before anything of Islam will be respected.

D'Souza says:

"as American culture has become increasingly permissive and shocking to the sensibilities of traditional people"

They are so shocked by the sex and violence they see on American TV that they go:

gang rape some teens
http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/015458.php

bid their daughters in poker games, http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/015442.php

behead someone
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/015462.php

and then blow up some trains
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/015452.php

Sure, that makes sense...

"Is Religious Extremism or Secular Extremism the Problem..."

Spencer: "But of course the issue isn't..."

Moderator: "Mr. Spencer, if you can't stick with the question, which requires an admission that Islam is primarily a religion..."

Robert, please keep your cool; for example, by listening to your breath. You need to play for the interested audience, not the partisans on the other side.

So America is hated by the Muslims for its permissive culture ?

What about grandpa Mohamed sleeping with grandchild Aisha ? That doesn't shock Muslims ?

What about father-in-law Mohamed f***ing his own daughter-in-law ? That doesn't shock Muslims ?

What about Mohamed marrying women after killing their husbands ? Doesn't it amount to adultery (only difference beint that the husbands are dead) ? That doesn't shock Muslims ?

What about Mohamed the Kidnapper ? What about Mohamed the Rapist ? What about Mohamed the Looter ? What about Mohamed the Dacoit Raider ?
That doesn't shock Muslims ?

At least the Americans are a free society without pretensions to morality unlike the hypocrite of a damned Prophet.

The trouble with Muslims is that Islam is a backward, violent and ignorant ideology which they do not have the courage to abandon. It is this cowardice (like all cowardice) which gives rise to needless belligerance.

Unlike the followers of other religions, they do not have a leader who they can feel proud about, but whom they are not brave enough to dump.

Nor do they have the frankness to make a clean breast of Mohamed-the-Terrible's faults.

They are have made it their "sacred burden" to defend a worthless man.

Again, this helplessness (which is of their own making) gives rise to needless warlike mentality.

Lucky I am a Hindu.

If the Islamic world is so shocked by 'western immorality', how come the countries that visit internet porn sites the most are all islamic countries?(as shown in a study last year)

Pakistan was top of the list and the next 5, in order of internet porn use, were all islamic countries.

So where's this high moral ground that the islamists think they occupy?

What the islamic world displays is pure hypocrisy, a state of inner corruption whereby their constant vilification of others blinds them to their own evil.

proud-hindu wrote:

"The trouble with Muslims is that Islam is a backward, violent and ignorant ideology which they do not have the courage to abandon. It is this cowardice (like all cowardice) which gives rise to needless belligerance.

Unlike the followers of other religions, they do not have a leader who they can feel proud about, but whom they are not brave enough to dump.

Nor do they have the frankness to make a clean breast of Mohamed-the-Terrible's faults.

They are have made it their "sacred burden" to defend a worthless man.

Again, this helplessness (which is of their own making) gives rise to needless warlike mentality."

Wow, great posting. It's totally true, and sums up the psychology well IMO. I wonder how fully aware many muslims are of the "prophet"'s many faults and evil doings? Or do most muslims know about it, but simply rationalize it all away?

And I wonder - what percent of muslims are muslim simply because they FEAR what might happen should they rebounce islam? Islam does seem to instill a lot of fear in people, both the ummah and the kaffir alike.

God I hate typos...

"should they rebounce islam"

Was supposed to be "renounce" - I don't want anyone thinking that "rebounce" is some new word I just made up. LOL!

And I also meant to put proud-hindus quote completely in italics. I'm tired...

Dinesh D'Souza cannot make his argument with the facts that Robert has shown us here. l consider myself a conservative, and my values are quite different from the values of the typical muslim conservative, ie l love art, music, want equal rights for all, these are not shared values with conservative mulims mr Dinesh D'Souza! mr.Dinesh D'Souza we in the West are indeed different and advanced light years. So therefor do not ever think we conservatives in the West could ever find anything in common with pious muslims! you mr.Dinesh D'Souza have insulted us "Western conservatives"!

In a certain sense I believe D'Souza's thesis is true. Moslems are attacking the West because of envy at what the West is, and in this sense it is hate of all things Western. The Koran is an incomprehensible chant not meant to be understood. It is to be chanted and not read. It has such profound contradictions that anyone with any knowledge of its contents would summarily dismiss or denouce it. At the same time its adherents are promised great rewards for belief. Yet, in those places where Islam is primarily practiced in the world it is among the poorest, most backward places on the globe while things seem to prosper and improve among the apes and pigs and worse the other infidels including Hindus and Chinese. Islam causes this poverty which is greatly understood by readers of this sight. Gender apartheid, a slovenly work ethic, superstition, a prohibition against interest, polygamy, hostility to science, hostility to education except by blind memory, all doom countries where Islam is practiced to poverty. The Jihad is the reaction of a billion Islamic psychopaths who have cognitive dissonance why if their religion is perfect, they live in a cesspool which stagnates while all other infidels of the world prosper. The prosperity of the world has to be blamed on some plot of infidels to attack and conspire against Islam. Hence, anything Western will be blamed by Islamic mainstream psychopath.

For example the attack on the West today is not to set up an Islamic caliphate as stated. The Islamic caliphate was de factor re- constituted from Morocco to Indonesia when the Islamic world was de-colonialized after World War II. Notice that the most stupid things said by Western intellectuals are generally immediately adopted by OBL and other Islamic intellectuals. This is because in order to articulate a gripe to kill Westerners, Islamiacs need a pretext. D'Souza may be right that the West is causing problems for Islam, but not because of anything the West does, but rather as often stated by Mr. Spencer because of what Islam is.

"Their Shia Laws has to be shelved like the old testaments 10 Commandments before anything of Islam will be respected."

I hate to comment on another posters comments but here go's.
I can agree with the first part of that statement but as for the last part of the statement, for a lack of a better word, that was a stupid thing to say.
I can agree that if a person is a atheist the first four commandments are spiritual in nature and deal with a persons relationship with god. But the last six commandments have to do with how people treat one another. Not to mention the fact that at least four of the last six are encoded in laws and legal system, not only here but in countries throughout the world.
So these commandments are shelved? Tell me which ones? Honor your parents, ooh that's a bad one.
Don't kill,steal,lie,commit adultry,fornication? Are those the ones we should do away with? If we have then sharia law is already here.

David England wrote:

"why if their religion is perfect, they live in a cesspool which stagnates"

This could be a cause of some disastifaction for Muslims however Islamic leaders would argue that it is the lack of Islam in their countries that creates it.

And lets not forget that OBL was (is) very wealthy, the 9/11 guys were educated wealthy students, apparently most palistinian suicide bombers come from middle class backgrounds.

Wealth and afluence DO NOT stop jihadism. They just enable it.

Islamists do not want to eqaul western societies values of 'secular democracy'. They seek to create a new world where Islam rules and we all live under Sharia. Thus, they will hate and fight against ANYTHING that does not confirm to this model.

It may be western material wealth or 'depravity', but it is just as much Hindus or democrats or feminists or girls at school or apostates.

D'Souza picks just one tiny examples of WHAT they hate and argues that it is WHY they hate. WRONG. They hate ANYTHING that is 'un-islamic'.

I read the pipsqueak response of D'Souza to Scott Johnson's dismemberment of his book. D'Souza first makes a nasty crack about The New Criterion, in which Johson's review first appeared (he was surprised, D'Souza writes, to find that it still exists). He would, wouldn't he, D'Souza, since The New Criterion, far better than D'Souza, grasping lochinvar of the lecture circuit (Cupiditas being his favorite of the Seven Deadlies), analyzes cultural decadence, but doesn't feel the need, ever, to mistake that decadence for the cause of Islamic terrorism --which, sensibly, its editors and writers locate in Islam itself.

In his comments on Johnson, D'Souza, writes of how he "voluntarily" came to America (as opposed, presumably, to all those people who after the Civil War arrived here because they were captured by slaves) and that, therefore, as he also writes in the article above, he must like America, or like it enough to come to it. That hardly follows. All sorts of people have come to America -- Sami al-Arian and the members of CAIR swim immediately to mind -- who despite, who hate, political and legal institutions and would like to destroy them.

D'Souza is a parched little soul. He belongs not with Burke but with Mrs. Grundy, or the Catholic League of Decency, circa 1920, in his worldview. Uncultivated, because has been too busy being a Bright Young Conservative for a quarter-century, it's too late for him to acquire the proper habits of mind, and study, at this point. He shows it in is ludicrous "study" of Islam "over four years" and the results of that study that we all can see, and rub our eyes at, in disbelief. D'Souza's a Book-of-the-Month-Club striver, apparently. Any sense of what this Civilization he's stoutly defending, Horatio at the Bridge, does not come through in his writing. No allusions, no layers of subtext, no nothing. Just: He's Against Western Decadence.And so are devout Muslims. Ergo, they can work together, as fast friends.

But I'm being too critical. D'Souza is very good at one thing -- at pocketing those royalties and those lecture fees. At that he's a past master. And perhaps, nowadays, that's the only thing that matters. Certainly it's the main thing that matters for him. One more Sammy Glick of the Aging Young Quasi-Conservative Variety. It never ends.

"But if the problem is American immorality, one wonders why the great Islamic empires of the past waged jihad long before American pop culture was exported or America even existed"

....absolutely true......and we know the answer...

...Ban Muslim Immigration now...

http://www.westernresistance.com/blog/archives/003619.html

Two Pentecostal Christians in the north-west of Uzbekistan - where all Protestant activity is illegal - are facing criminal charges for their religious activity, Forum 18 News Service has learnt. The two -26-year-old Makset Djabbarbergenov and 32-year-old Salauat Serikbayev - each face up to five years' imprisonment if convicted. The Prosecutor's Office have repeatedly evaded any discussion of the cases with Forum 18. Elsewhere in Uzbekistan, Protestant pastor Dmitry Shestakov - arrested by the NSS secret police on 21 January - also awaits trial, with no date yet set. He is being held in prison. However, visiting Kazakh Protestant pastor Rishat Garifulin has been freed without charge, after being held by the NSS secret police for eleven days. But police in the south-west who raided a private home have detained six Protestants, as well as confiscating a Bible, two audiocassettes and three Christian books in Kazakh. Such confiscated literature - including the Bible - has often been burnt.[...]

In reading the link to al gomaa regarding his ruling banning statues:.

"
"Why would anyone even bring up the issue in a country where there are more than 10 state-owned institutions that teach sculpting and more than 20 others that teach the history of art?"

....It is Islam .....hate education, hate art, hate music, hate film, hate truth...hate,hate,hate,hate,....stupid hate....

Islam is full of mindless morons, unfortunately a lot of them are Musftis making asinine rulings and edicts....

and Muslims blindly follow the rules dictated by mad men....

...Ban Muslim Immigration now...

more OT
What are they thinking?

http://www.westernresistance.com/blog/archives/003622.html#comments

February 26, 2007
UK: British Council To Spend On Islam, Abandon European Projects
News from DPA and the Times reports that the British Council, which usually funds arts projects in Europe, is to change its emphasis. Founded in 1934, and receiving sponsorship from the government.

About a third of its European funding - £7.5 million or $14.7 million - will be diverted from fostering cultural ties with Europe, and instead be used for "spreading cultural values in the Middle East and Asia".

By March next year, half of its European offices will be closed. Already its offices in Russia, Bulgaria, Germany, Slovakia and Belgium have been shut down, with closures to take place at offices in Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Finland, Hungary, Slovenia, Slovakia, Austria, and Spain.

Martin Davidson, Director-General designate of the British Council, has been with the organization since 1983. He will become the Director-General on April 2. He states that it is now more important to repair cultural damage which has grown between Muslims in the Middle East, Iraq, Central Asia and Afghanistan, and to additionally bring cultural ties with China. The internet will be used for cultural ties with Europe.

Orchestras such as the London Sinfonietta will no longer be funded, and the nly large-scale arts funding will go to the Venice Bienniale. There will be initiatives to fund madrassas in Pakistan.

Davis said: "We started a year ago to ask the question: given the gap in trust that is becoming increasingly well-documented between Britain and the Muslim world, what are we going to do to react to that? Many aspects of our society are very attractive to people in the Islamic world, but there is a widening gap of trust."

Libraries in Europe which were funded by the British Council will be forced to shut down, unless these set up language courses to raise funds.

The British Council receives £186 million ($365.2 million) in public funding per year.

[-]

So give up the things that makes western civilization what it is and fund madrassas? With more European public money?

POOR BRITTANY.
No wonder brittany cracked and shaved off her hair. Perhaps being blamed for all the jihadist attacks against the decadant west was too much for her. She had to hear this moron, Dinesh, say that because of her and people like her the muslims are attacking all over the world. If she was not born all the muslim swould be grasping the hand of christians, jews, hindus, athiests, bhais, and singing kumbbya. poor brittany.

D'Souza's thesis that the left has ennabled the Jihadists is of course on the face of it, correct. But Sayid Qtub and all the other 'islamists'
had little force since there were few mosques outside of the muslim world. Oil wealth, handed over to the arabs, and the Europe and Americas handing out free immigration passes to show how noble and just we are, lead to the flooding of subbpopulations of muslims in Europe, Europe, Canada that were now inundated with
'traditional' teaching and staffing with something like 80%, in Amercan mosques with wahhabi teachings. Traditional teachings.
The one's that don't care about the left, the right, traditional christian values, don't care and would like to destroy any jews, and
so the march was begun.

The fact that Islam always blames others for why it invades, for why it attacks, for why it is enraged, for why it chooses to annihilate, for why it is without recourse, is of course, expressed in the Koran, the Hadiths, and sira.

That is where this problem began. Those mutilated, raped, annihilated in the 7th century, and beyond were so motivated. The fact that D'Souza joins in making a political turn to viewing the faults of the left as the 'cause' for turning 'traditional' muslims into supporters of Al-Queda is filled with self denial
and the muslims own misdirction. It's never their fault.

They always say that if they were in charge- all violence would stop. Like in Israel. And people believe this fairy tale because they refuse to face a murderous enemy who is and has been so since Mohammed created 'his' world conquering religionl.

I have an acquaintance, a fine person, a muslim and religious person, and that one in conversation with me last week about the insane killing of muslims slaughtering muslims, told me that there is a nazi movement in Islam. They said it as if they were cluing me in.

This person is not one of them. And they didn't blame the left.
They knew they were at a cull de sac.

We need to challenge Islam, for it's core beliefs. Good people who don't want to kill who are muslim, know that if they open their mouths, they too are to be killed by muslims.

That is Islam. That is the 'problem'

Mark

radical Muslims

Right off the bat, D'Souza is on his knees, dazed and confused. Moslem activists, Dinesh, Moslem activists.

This is odd considering---a) I’m at Stanford University and he’s at Boston College

Has no one told poor Dinesh that the Fancy Finishing Schools are driving the nation into en masse ignorance and stupidity?

For example, being a Stanford or Harvard alum, or professor, is nothing to be proud about. Just look at Victor Davis Hanson and Hugh Hewitt. When those two get together to talk history on the radio I take a hit of my asthma medicine so that I won't suffocate in my paroxyms of laughter.

as American culture has become increasingly permissive and shocking to the sensibilities of traditional people

How about a critical review of Islam tradition, cosmopolitan Stanford man.

D'Souza says: "They accuse America of being an atheist, immoral society that is hell-bent on imposing its secularism and immorality on the Muslim world."

Hang on, I thought we were all Christians on a new Crusade? Surely they cant have it both ways

--- parker

With the likes of D'Souza, VDH, and other mistaken opinion celebrities in our academies and media, of course the Moslems can have it both ways. But you already knew that.

It is typical of Wolfe that he demeans me in every ad hominem way, suggesting at one point that my career has “fallen on hard times.” This is odd considering---a) I’m at Stanford University and he’s at Boston College, and b) my new book has just hit the New York Times bestseller list, my fourth book to do so, while Wolfe’s books sell mainly to his fellow sociologists. Wolfe is typical of many professors I frequently debate on campus, a man educated beyond his intelligence.

from Dinesh D'Souza's response to his critics
--------------------------------------------------

I don't think I've ever come across anyone more childishly petulant and arrogant than Dinesh D'Souza! The more I hear him and read him the more I'm convinced he deserves all the scorn that has been heaped at him.

"The trouble with Muslims is that Islam is a backward, violent and ignorant ideology which they do not have the courage to abandon. It is this cowardice (like all cowardice) which gives rise to needless belligerance.

Unlike the followers of other religions, they do not have a leader who they can feel proud about, but whom they are not brave enough to dump"

....it is my humble opinion that Muslims like Islam.....a few leave...but....

Re: " American culture has become increasingly permissive and shocking to the sensibilities of traditional people."

Not just America........Europe is even more permissive and shocking in terms of social mores.

But even if the west's social mores are permissive and tolerating, it doesn't justify Islam waging a violent jihad against the west.

The evil done in the name of jihad and Islam is far worse than the evil done in the name of openness and freedom.

Flying buildings into tall buildings is no way to win the hearts and minds of westerners to Islam.

Dead on, Hugh. Now I have to look up Lochinvar. Hmmmm, poem by Sir Walter Scott and he was a wandering minstrel?

From Magdi Allam (translation from Italian):

No Dialogue With Those Who Refuse to Recognise Israel

http://gardjola2.blogspot.com/2007/02/you-cannot-talk-with-those-who-refuse.html

It is true that they don’t like what we do but for every thing they blame us for they are two or three times as guilty of the same things. Islam has no such thing as a moderate.
Just ask any ex muslim.
http://sugiero.blogspot.com/2007/03/germany-ex-muslim-says-islam-inherently.html

McCain not attending CPAC... and aligning with Cheney and other neo-cons? that's interesting.

I have not read Mr. D'Sousa's book yet, but the thesis appears to be that the left is responsible for the rise of Islamic terrorism in the world today for the most part from what I have read. I guess in that case we can pretty much say that our Western culture is fully responsible for this ideological clash because we embrace freedoms not found in fundamental Islam. I don't agree with almost anything in the cultural left in American Society but they are part what is produced in a freedom loving landscape.

How about Islam is responsiblle for the terrorism that is occurring all over the world. And of course it is occurring in those bastions of left thinking Ideology in the Phillipines, to Christian school girls in Indonesia and Bali,a train in Spain, a peace train in India, children on a soccor field in Bagdad,school girls waiting to take exams in Bagdad.

Mr. D'Sousa would have the writers of books on the jihadist tenants and the militancy of Mohammed simply ignore them and play the good dhimmi as well as appease the so-called moderate muslims whoever they may be?

"You must be able to define your enemy to defeat him"

General Douglas MacArthur

PS: Dinesh:---
The clash is there and no amount of apologizing or appeasing will change that.

D'Souza is willfully ignorant. His thesis is baseless, nothing more than tu quoque. If the book had been about Islam, with 90% dedicated to the reality of the 1400 year history of the belief system, the same as applied today, as taken from the immutable texts of Islam, then it might have been worth the paper it is printed on. At that point, a mention of the liberal West's aid of the jihad recently, aid, not the cause of, could be argued and agreed with, to some degree.

The problem is, that book has been written already by others and would not serve D'Souza's ambitions. He is aware that his book's sensational claims would indeed cause controversy, and generate subsequent income for himself, as was so astutely pointed out by Hugh. Another major flaw in his book is that he offers no solutions, not tangible one's anyway, to "correct" the problem the West now faces, and has faced since Islam's inception.

I agree that the wording of the topic for the panel discussion is odd, but it will only assist D'Souza in allowing him to express his opinion, it certainly will not help validate it, but I also believe Robert is up to the task and I wish him well.

Say what you will, but you gotta give Dinesh credit. The conservatives were grasping for a hook on which to hang their denial, and that hook is us caught in the act of having fun.

Bush left us floating with his absurd denial, publicly stating without embarrassment that Islam is a religion of peace, highjacked, tiny minority and all that.

Of course, nobody quite believed such pure, unmitigated bullshit, and that left throngs of Americans floating, wondering what the deal really was, trying to understand how they could deny reality but still explain it, and be left alone to go on living the good life.

Dinesh shouldn't be bragging about being on the NYT best seller's list, he should appear in this blog, hat in hand, and apologize for his subintellectual crime. Felon.

610 * 623 * 732 * 1066 * 1215 * 1453 * 1492 * 1683 * 1928 * 1938 * 1948 * 1996 * 2001

But he won't. What he's gonna do is make a fortune peddling tubes of his shamless palliative to RINOs, teachers, government officials, professors, reporters, and the just plain naive.

Active ingredient? Ahistoricism.

Dinesh has a great job. This job requires diplomacy. He cannot state the truth, how awful Islam and its so called prophet are, even if he knew it, which he doesn't.

How long would he last at Stanford's Hoover Institution if he confronted Islam dead on, the way Robert and others do. But no guts, no glory. Dinesh has a unique opportunity with his Indian heritage. How could he be dismissed as a racist if he had the smarts to do an accurate critique of modern Islam. Dinesh = coward

It's really quite simple to demolish DD's argument by simply applying his logic to an incontrovertible fact, namely that Islam commands its followers to wage war against the Infidels. If we in the West refuse to adopt Islam, and muslims wage war against us in accordance with this command, are we to blame for their aggression? His logic would suggest so. And his solution would no doubt be for us to submit or convert. Presto, chango, end of conflit between muslims and everyone else in the world.

About D'Souza,

Once again D'Souza needs to review the terms he is flinging about..particularly terms related to the word "causation." He should take a refresher course on causative factors vs partial-correlations. D'Souza is mistaking a partial-correlation for a causative factor.

I have neither the time, the energy, nor the patience to walk this through. (I consider D'Souza's arguments laughably superficial, largely peripheral, and, worse, an enormous waste of time, a distraction from the very real issues at hand.)

The less one hears of D'Souza, the better.

(btw, Bernard Lewis in his essay on what was causing, ie, what were "the roots" of Muslim rage, went through this whole thing back in 1990 -- D'Souza is like some nightmarish re-enactment, only far worse, and far less intelligent, than the original Lewis conjectures.)

D'Souza's thesis can be disproved by a single reality. Sunnis and Shias are murdering each other with suicide bombers even though they share identical values. The only sane reason for killing yourself to kill others is religious belief. Case closed.

Boy are they going to be surprised to find out the 72 virgins look like Rosie O and has a voice like Hillary C....the virgin myth is just a myth...

I have been all over the Left lately on my own blog. I have no doubt at all that it is the Radically Liberal agenda of too many, in Washington and elsewhere around the country (esp. California), that will continue to form alliances of convenience with the Islamists, and in some cases, alliances of genuine friendship. The Far Left is becoming a fascists center of power -- even though they are too ignorant and/or self-involved to understand their own metamorphoses -- so why shouldn't they form unions with Islamofascism?

Jihad’s campus collaborators

Is the Far Left really the New Fascist Party of America?

"D'Souza is mistaking a partial-correlation for a causative factor."

Mostly true. The muslims had always non-muslims and jihad would exist if the US were exactly as is was in 1955.

But I actually agree with D'Souza's characterization of Western society as morally corrupt. The spread of the vulgar elements of Western "culture", such as hip-hop, Hollywood and McDonald's, are disturbing to many, here and abroad. Secular humanism and moral relativism have corrupted and weakened Western culture and society.

This is not the cause of jihad, though. It's our weakness that presents opportunities for action against the West and adjusts the where and when, but not the what or why, of jihad. The spread of corrupt aspects of western culture provides jihadis with propaganda material which they use as motivation to recruit the violent and simple-minded.

Lets ask a few question....

Mr. D'Souza what are Traditonal American values?

Mr. Douza what are Traditional Muslim values?

Mr. Souza how do Traditional American values have anything in common with Traditional Muslim values?

I have come to opinion that not only does he not understand Traditonal Muslims it appears he does not understand Traditional Americans either. Americans from our founding have ALWAYS been decadent by muslim standards. Our whole system of government is decadent to tradtional muslims. Now another question:

How does Mr. Souza plan (with specifics) to fix our "decadence" to form this peace with Traditional muslims?

So far he has been rather vague on many things. I want to hear how he plans to do this (it should be a hoot).

He states....

"A popular slogan across Asia today is “Modernization without Westernization.” What this means is that many people in countries want Western prosperity and technology but they don’t want what they perceive as Western values that they consider degrading and vulgar."

D'Souza once again shows his ignorance of Western Civilization. There is a reason why our civilization has done all it has done Mr. D'Souza. The very things muslims find "degrading and vulgar" are things that made our civilization great. Also how come this is such a one way street? Muslims do all sorts of things I find "degrading and vulgar". How are they ever going to be civil if we always ignore their faults?

Now we get to point of D'Souza's anger:

"I’m not asking any American to change in order to appease the mullahs. But at the same time I do think that there are aspects of American popular culture that are shameless and degrading, and often it is this part of America that is exported abroad...."

You notice the word "I". D'Souza thinks these things are shameless and degrading and yes I too think at times they are degrading BUT that has nothing to do with our war with Islam. Traditional muslims get enraged by all sorts of things. Mrs. Spears is one but so is the Christian bible, ice cream, pork, professional football, women getting equal treatment under the law, and many modern medical treatments. The list is so large that getting rid of everything D'Souza wants out of our lives will do nothing to stop the so called "radicals" from gaining more "traditionals". I have feeling this is his attempt to smear progressive liberals (which I don't mind) but this idea of a magical common ground with muslims is a non-starter.

One finial thing if D'Souza is right and correct (which is really going into fantasy land but lets humor him) then I could use the same argument against conservatives. The greed of our capitalist elite like selling ports and giving cash to the Arabians has not been at all helpful. In fact it too has weakened us by selling out America for money. What does a Arabian prince think when he can buy American protection even after he has used his own money fund the people who are attacking us? Makes us look weak does it not? In fact some hot shot liberal could also write a book with a similar title: The Enemy at Home: The Capitalist Right and Its Responsibility for 9/11.

Btw: I am conservative and very pro-capitalist but I am also not fool....I am not selling my rope to the enemy to hang me. It appears that is not the case for some however...

It is NOT a matter of agreeing or disagreeing that Western culture is decadent. That's not the argument.

The argument is rather a typical "bait and switch" tactic of islamists. It's like a ruse.

Of paramount importance for islam is to deflect criticism away from Islam and to blame everyone else for their problems. Thus, in their world-view, it's ALWAYS somebody else's fault. They are oriented to pointing fingers at "the other" -- NEVER into introspection. And, because western culture is always self-critiquing, we are open to these kinds of assaults.

it reminds me of listening to a story (on the radio) about a woman (she wrote a diary, very poignant one) about her ordeals with her psychotic husband. What the wife found most annoying was that her husband was extremely adept (whenever they were seeing the psychiatrist) to accuse the wife of "insanity" -- to question the wife's insanity. Thus, more frequently she found herself being the one under the gun (as it were) -- ie, people, raising their eyebrows and wondering about her -- not about her husband. (Her husband, the full-fledged paranoid was wrapping the room in tin foil, not allowing the curtains to be opened, and believing the air-conditioner was spying, etc. or a neighbor's car was parked "funny," etc.) yet, she was the one who was being questioned.

so, this is their tactic, to turn the tables -- accusing others (while never looking to themselves). So, just who has "the problem," here? Yes, the west has its share of problems, but nothing like (or even mildly akin) to those found in Islamic states (consider Iraq).

@proud_hindu
"The trouble with Muslims is that Islam is a backward, violent and ignorant ideology which they do not have the courage to abandon. It is this cowardice (like all cowardice) which gives rise to needless belligerance.

Unlike the followers of other religions, they do not have a leader who they can feel proud about, but whom they are not brave enough to dump."

Nice post. Sums it pretty much up. Not to forget that the qu'ran and the haddiths themselves consist of an contradictoy mix of Mohammed's life (where there's hardly anything to be proud of as you point out - apart if you are a Darwinist and subscribe to the right of the powerful) and a mix of elements from Christianity (especially) Arianism, Judaism or pagan cults.
Martin Luther and others referred to islam therefore as a heresy.

In psychology belligerence often arises from an inferiority complex. Might be true for a whole culture as well. (add to that the obvious incapability of the muslim world to contribute to the scientific and economical progress - apart from being a supplier of crude oil - whether it be cars, planes, rockets, computers etc - you name it). Even the greatest part of the "famous medieval Arab" scientific achievements - algebra namely - can be traced back to mostly Indian roots. We call it Arab numbers just because we learnt it from Arabs. Yet it was actually Indians who invented them. So correctly it should be named Indian numbers.

Cutting to the chase........the Big D is the result of affirmative action allowed into Conservative circles. He has no Reaganite hide in fighting his way up.....D was instead placed in position as affirmative action.
D had it all handed to him.....his book was let through without being vetted....and now he wonders after his dating schedule with the queens of Conservative why everyone doesn't love him.

D screwed up and doesn't know how to Milton Friedman handle life. Ronald Reagan and true Conservatives came up the hard way and know how to deal with the Clinton naplam of politics.
D is not up to the task and is a too common supplanter now abiding at the Hoover Institute.

DD should wise up and read Ralph Peter's description:

...the crudeness of Arabian Islam--which the anthropologist Claude Levi-Strauss aptly called "a barracks religion."

Mr. Spencer

Also I should have said....

Kick his ass!

Also ask Suhail Khan if he has read his Quran again and if he still thinks it means peace? Just for the hell of it!

Also tell Grover Norquist to come out from behind the curtins and stop pretending he is the Wizard of Oz.

Guys, is there any doubt that America is a vulgar, shameless, petty, cynical country in all the places that matter? Home, work, play! America has become a divided house, and is not ashamed!

I'm not defending D'souza's thesis here; I've come to bury, not to praise him, but one CANNOT deny that America has lost its moral and spiritual bearings; that this above all else is obnoxious to the Muslims; and that it is a ready-made EXCUSE and JUSTIFICATION for the murderous jihadists!

This does not mean that, just because Muslims hate it we should love it! After be all Reading may a good thing, but what if one only reads Mein kampf and hate literature? Love is a good thing but what if one only loves killing and maiming?

And here's where D'souza is both right and wrong. We love our families; so too do jihadis; but who can doubt that their family bonds are so very much stronger than ours. We love God, so do they; but their love is so much more faithful than ours! They beat their women; so do we!

I don't know where this is from, but a great man once said "Let us, in the ways of Good, walk with our enemies, rather than in the ways of Evil walk with our friends"

I think that D'souza tries for 400 pages to say just that, and FAILS! The fact that they are our enemies does not mean that everything they do is evil!

From D'Souza's ad hominem response to Scott Johnson cited by Robert above (to which all the responses were negative)

But see how Johnson botches the whole concept and in the process reveals his own small-minded nativism. When a Western guy goes abroad and casts his lot with the foreigners, in the process abandoning the values of his own society, he is said to have "gone native." But I am a native of Mumbai, India. I grew up in a multireligious and multicultural world where Hindu, Muslim and Christian influences were closely integrated. I am from one of the oldest Christian families in India. I learned English as well as two native Indian languages. From childhood I was exposed both to Western ideas, imported into India through the British, as well as non-Western ideas and influences.

Unless one uses Bollywood, with its higher than average representation of Muslims as a barometer of cultural integration. Speaking of which, as one who occasionally stumbles across Bollywood flicks, should I imagine that his female relatives in Mumbai live like Lara Dutta - their closest imitation of Paris Hilton?

And when he says he was exposed to non-Western ideas and influences, which of those were Muslim ideas and influences? The only Muslim influence I see in him is his inane debating style, which were he to be a Muslim, would make the ummah blush.

Robert, is this going to be on TV today? Say, C-Span (1, 2, 3)?

At best D'Souza is a recovering islamic, at worst, Bin Laden hired him to corroborate his position or to confuse the West.

Turn him over, he's done.

Still prefer Britney to any burka babe.

I have not read Dinesh's book because I can't bring myself to buy it. That is, until I find a used copy that won't benefit him directly.

Still, from what I have gathered from reviews and comments on the web, Dinesh thinks we need to recognize that Muslims and conservatives are natural allies. This contradicts the fact that American Muslims vote Democratic as a bloc. The CAIR website plainly urges Muslims to vote Democratic. It seems that Muslims have observed the political landscape here and have rejected the Republican party of traditional family values, instead throwing in their chips with the party of Liberalism, abortion on demand, Gay Rights, the immoral Hollywood entertainment industry, pacifism, anti-Americanism, etc. To me it seems that they are willing to accept the entire leftist platform for the ONE aspect of anti-Americanism or, to look at it from their perspective, the open door to Islamic supremacism.

I could see using Dinesh's strategy for propaganda purposes in the Muslim World in a Voice of America sort of way. You know, serving them up a little taqiyeh and kitman of our own. But I don't see taking Dinesh's appeasement approach.

Incidentally, Dinesh is not Hindu but an Indian Christian. He grew up in a Hindu majority area where Muslims were a fellow minority group. This may be the source of his tendency to ally with Islam.

"They accuse America of being an atheist, immoral society that is hell-bent on imposing its secularism and immorality on the Muslim world."

The problem with D'Souza is that he buys into the fiction that Islam is a God-fearing, moral religion.

The fact is that Islam's God is a monster who approves of, and even mandates, the most incredible immorality.

The Jihadists Aren't angry with the West because it's athestic and immoral, they're angry because we won't embrace their monstorous God immoral religion.

Are we in the West supposed to foresake our own ideals of Judeo/ Christian morality, and make common cause with something so diamertrically opposed to everything we believe in, just to accomodate ourselves to the twisted moral views of the Jihadists?

If D'Souza could only grasp the simple truth that there is no common moral view between Islam and Judeo/Christianity, and that Islamic morality is our morality turned upside-down, maybe he'll be able to see clearly how rediculous his thesis really is.

I hope that Mr. D'Souza sees the light, and in his next book, he tells the Jihadists that they are evil, and if only they'll adopt the moral values of the west, they'll be far less evil.

all this loudspeakering is for Money$$$. cultural left caused 9/11. ha! it's like saying jewishness caused holocaust. always blame the victim how convinient.

I would like to play "devil's advocate" here in order to make a point.

I've heard other confirming evidence of what D'Souza is talking about--but he's misinterpreting it.

Shortly after 9-11, I heard from an African pastor who told a Western reporter that his congregation was converting to Islam en masse. The reporter asked him why. The pastor replied "They don't like what they see about America." The reporter was surprised and said "Exactly what doesn't your congregation like about America?" The pastor replied, "In America, all your women dress like half-naked sluts."

D'Souza is right about one thing: American licentiousness and perceived decadence help to fuel anti-Americanism. But what D'Souza, conservative that he is, fails to understand is that anti-Americanism doesn't necessarily have to lead to Islamism--if there were a third alternative available to the Third World.

And in the Cold War, there was a third alternative--Soviet Communism. The Soviets offered the Third World the prospect of technology and modernity combined with an unfree political system. That was much more palatable to traditional, tribal-oriented societies that were used to being ruled by chiefs with an iron fist. Now the socialist alternatives have evaporated, and the Third World is turning to Islamism as a counterweight to perceived American world domination, which is something they do NOT care for.

In this war of ideas, in which we are waving the banners of freedom of religion, freedom of conscience and freedom of speech, our message is being tainted by the fact that we seem to be the only effective spokespersons! If those values are only seen as "American" rather than as "universal" or "civilized," then Islamists can say "See? America has those freedoms and look what they've done with them!"

There are other democracies that don't take freedom to the point of licentiousness like we do. Japan is democratic but it's a more traditional, even still male-dominated, society.

I think we would be in better shape if other democratic nations would show the folks in the Third World that freedom doesn't mean you have to become like the U.S. You can become like Japan or Canada or Sweden or Switzerland if you like. It would be a vast improvement if Saudi Arabia became like Turkey. But those nations have to speak up and make that point.

I think that's the bottom line: There is going to be resentment against the U.S. and all its works. When we're the sole superpower, we're automatically going to be feared and we're automatically going to invite jealousy. No dominant world empire, from the Roman Empire to the Soviet empire, was ever loved. But there needs to be some counterweight, some avenue, for that resentment to be channeled into positive competition. Islamism cannot be allowed to be the only alternative to American world domination.

Borg noted "Two Pentecostal Christians in the north-west of Uzbekistan - where all Protestant activity is illegal - are facing criminal charges for their religious activity"

The persecution and oppression of Christians and Christian evangelization in Muslim countries can't be blamed on Western decadence. Another hole in D'Souza's tattered suit.

Perhaps there is some truth to this. But it doesn't explain why jihadists are committing violence against targets that have nothing to do with "liberal policies and secular values": Buddhist schoolteachers in Thailand, Christian schoolgirls in Indonesia, orthodox Jews in Israel, and others.

Exactly, Robert. D'Souza has to be given credit for his partial truths while being called to account for the big lie he has molded them into. This even-handed approach might not be aggressive enough to win a staged debate under time pressure (these are usually pretty meaningless anyway) but it is the right thing to do. While granting his data and general observations, take some lethal blows at the absurd conclusions.

And go out for coffee with D'Souza afterwards. I don't think he's such a bad guy, just a bit misled by his own grand ideas of how to arrest runaway moral degradation in our society.

Steven L.,

The argument of supposed American decadence flounders on another point, often ignored: sexual licentiousness in society is far more common and flagrant throughout Europe than it is in the USA. Indeed, it is far more common and flagrant throughout Central and South America (at least in its cosmopolitan cities) than it is in the USA. Even in Canada, for God's sake. In the USA, the main class of people purveying licentiousness are for the most part the Leftists (actors and artists in all the arts including music) who otherwise whitewash Muslims and rail against their own America.

No, this argument of supposed American decadence is just thinly veiled, irrational anti-Americanism.

Foehammer,
The conservatives have been retaking California, SF and LA are not representative of the state. We aren’t going to form a union here with the islamists. Very few movies are made in Hollywood for financial reasons. Very few actors live in Hollywood, they have moved elsewhere in the USA. Hollywood is a tiny city in Ca. it is actually a small city within LA. Oh sure they do host the Oscars so everyone thinks they all live here but that’s not true. If you are looking for liberals try NYC now that is a liberal bastion, if you are looking for islamist unions you can try Michigan or Minnesota. What is a much ignored fact is that we in Ca for many years have suffered from the migration of assorted weirdo’s from other states more than anything else. They come here for the weather and unfortunately many of them stay. It seems as if every day I hear of another Ca. youth preparing to join the military or to attend one of the service Academies, so I wouldn’t worry too much about us, the majority of us know what is going on.

"The problem with D'Souza is that he buys into the fiction that Islam is a God-fearing, moral religion."

So does our President Bush: Islam is a "great and noble religion" according to Bush, and to millions of others still in the West. D'Souza is hardly alone in believing that.

"The immorality of non-Muslims has always been a feature of jihadist rhetoric, going back to the time of the Crusades, but the jihad itself has waxed and waned throughout history without reference to the relative decadence of non-Muslim cultures."

Islam was conducting a jihad for three centuries before the first Crusade even started. The Crusades may be a rallying cry (excuse), but they're not the reason for jihad. It predates even them. When Muslim apologists admit this then we might get somewhere.

"If the real motive wasn't profit and plunder, why do they go after the financial district of NYC instead of the "Gomorrah" of Hollywood. In fact it seems odd they haven't targeted the "left coast" at all?"

from a posting above

The left coast was targeted in the millenium plot, wasn't it? LAX was destined for demolition. Only an alert customs agent stopped it before it started.
I think it was also targeted on 9/11. We'll never know for sure but there were reports of Muslims racing off planes that were grounded. Supposedly there were multiple targets from the Atlantic to the Pacific and most (like the Sears Tower?) were saved grounding the US fleet and closing US airspace.

its funny that a religion and culture that permits rape, slavery, wife-beating, pedophilia, polygamy, female genital mutilation and homicidal violence has the audacity to criticize western values

tgusa

Unfortunately, the Bay Area - particularly the Marxist triangle of San Francisco, Berkeley and Oakland - will see to it that CA remains firmly on the Left; to a lesser extent, that's true about LA as well. While some areas, like Ventura County (of Tom McClintock) are more Conservative, Orange County, which was once a major conservative bastion, is a lot less so. Same thing goes for San Diego.

And that is problematic - the GOP can't keep writing off states like CA, NY every election and hope to somehow keep winning. Nor do I see CA being partitioned - with part of the 54 electoral votes staying with the Left Coast, and the heartland - from Calexico to Eureka being separated.

What is needed is a major fissure between the Left and the Ummah. I think it's a matter of time before that happens - sooner or later, the homophobia, misogyny, animal cruelty etc of the Muslims will grow to the point that it's impossible for the Left to ignore. Incidentally, I don't think this war will be joined until the Left gets to where we are re: the Islamic threat. Reason being we need a majority of people on our side to be as intense about fighting them as they are about fighting us, and you don't see that on the Right these days. Once the Left figures out that the worst parody that they could make about those on the Right are exceeded manifold by even normal Muslims, that could be the turning point.

from the article from westernresistance above:

About a third of its European funding - £7.5 million or $14.7 million - will be diverted from fostering cultural ties with Europe, and instead be used for "spreading cultural values in the Middle East and Asia".

Isn't that the whole point of D'Souza's thesis: that the islamic world doesn't want culture of the West?

BTW I think that article deserves a posting of its own of dhimmiwatch

TheVeiledThreat wrote:
"Still, from what I have gathered from reviews and comments on the web, Dinesh thinks we need to recognize that Muslims and conservatives are natural allies. This contradicts the fact that American Muslims vote Democratic as a bloc. The CAIR website plainly urges Muslims to vote Democratic. It seems that Muslims have observed the political landscape here and have rejected the Republican party of traditional family values, instead throwing in their chips with the party of Liberalism, abortion on demand, Gay Rights, the immoral Hollywood entertainment industry, pacifism, anti-Americanism, etc. To me it seems that they are willing to accept the entire leftist platform for the ONE aspect of anti-Americanism or, to look at it from their perspective, the open door to Islamic supremacism."

Excellent points, consistent with many other excellent posts on a well-above average thread, in my opinion.

Why note vote conservative, if all you want is the return to decency in American culture? So one would logically assume that these Muslims are already "radicalized" from their "traditional" roots, yet continue to support the source of their radicalization. Throw in the fact that Elllison, the first Muslim US senator, is a Democrat, elected by a bloc of democratic Somalians, and the point is further validated. This would seem to be the antithesis of D'Souza's positiion, a position with so many holes in it. The ultimate goal of the Islamists is not the restoration of traditional conservative values, akin to their own, but rather the complete obliteration of western secularism and the institution of Islamic supremacy.

Even D'Souza himself cannot fully buy into this fairy tale construct of his own making, so his underlying agenda, in my opinion, is to prolong the polarization of the liberals and the conservatives, to prevent them from uniting, especially on the subject of the abject threat Islam presents to America and the secularized West as a whole. In this reality, he is quite dangerous.

This agenda however, does appear to take a back seat to his zealous pursuit of the almighty dollar.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=439284&in_page_id=1770

Anne Beasley, why do you hate yourself and your race? And your Britishness?

The US has also done this.

And here's where D'souza is both right and wrong. We love our families; so too do jihadis; but who can doubt that their family bonds are so very much stronger than ours. We love God, so do they; but their love is so much more faithful than ours! They beat their women; so do we!

Posted by: eliXelx at March 1, 2007 11:55 AM

That's because the whole family is intermarried.

And it is much easier to create strong family bonds when the family doesn't have the mother working. And often the father isn't working either.

From Scott W. Johnson's linked article:

"According to Mr. D'Souza, Muslim radicals "could repudiate the entire Islamic tradition and argue that Christians and Jews are no different from atheists and deserve the same treatment."

I know I should probably read D'Sousa's book before I comment on a quote taken out of it, but this would seem to imply that if American Christians and Jews would just behave more to the liking of Muslim warlords, they will spare us and only go after that atheist up the street, or that gay guy down the road.

Lets turn our scorn toward fellow Americans so the terrorists won't hurt us.

Disgusting!!

In truth America has two groups that are pulling at the fabric of this nation...

(1) Progressive liberals who are commited marxist and have signed up with the Islamic cause or are assisting it to help over turn the US.

(2) Worlders who are in the Republican party (for the most part but not all) who have convinced themselves that the wonders of capitalism and democracy will solve all problems.

D'Souza is an example of number 2. That is why he has attacked Robert Spencer. He knows Robert is pointing out a real flaw in the worlders plan of attack that Islam is not just a religion but a way of life for all. That not all religions are the same. Doing business with muslims can be a dangerous. There are many examples of worlders which include G.W. Bush on the right and Bill Clinton on the left. So you can belong to either party and be a worlder but most seem to have more power in the GOP.

We all know about the Progressive liberals and the danger they represent BUT many regular conservatives and moderates are clueless about the dangers the worlders represent. The worlders care little about nation and borders. They really in truth care very little about values as long as the cash keeps flowing. D'Souza you may think cares about values after all his book is all about them. He however is MORE upset with our own values then with Islamic values. He seems to have convinced himself that muslims are moral compared to us Americans. This is crap but in order for him and others like him to bring about the worlders dream they have to push change to keep the cash flowing.

What we should be doing is trying to form coalitions with those in the old classical liberal wing who still have some idea about the west and care about the west. Bruce Bower is a good example of a classical liberal. They can be powerful allies and form a majority with patriotic conservatives and moderates. It would be the best way forward. It would split the democratic party into two isolating the progressives and on the right hopefully end the worlders power in the GOP. D'Souza and people like him however are doing everything in their power to prevent this. Thus his broad brush book that blames all liberals for Islamic agression. He not only blames liberals but secular government which even most normal patriotic conservatives accept.

There are alliances all right...just not the one D'Souza is pushing. That is why this book and his idea must be crushed. The worlders have enough power in the GOP now. The GOP must be saved from these fools.

"Ali Gomaa has also ruled that statues are un-Islamic..."

OT but it makes me extremely nervous that muslims in Egypt are the keepers of some of the greatest of the world's historical treasures. I can totally see muslims blowing up the sphinx just like they did the Buddha statues.

http://english.aljazeera.net/English/archive/archive?ArchiveId=21704

I see - so if it isn't the "extreme right" that is responsible - then it is the "extreme left"

Either way we lose - its "all out fault" whichever way we cut it ...

Jihad is periodically reactivated throughout history by politically influential Muslims at times when Islam is deemed strong enough to attack and carry out a conquest successfully. The most important 'infidel' civiliation of the day is usually the first one to be targeted by these people for conquest an destruction.

As for morality goes, I see NOTHING MORAL ABOUT ISLAM AT ALL. Islam's homicidal brutality absolves it of any claims to moral high ground anywhere over anyone. Ask a Hindu what they think of Islam's "morality" and see what kind of an answer you get.

I see no reason whatsoever to focus on anyone but jihadist and islamic leaders for this present global jihad.

Sooner or later this was destined to happen.

I can dismiss Mr. D'souza with no effort at all. I've seen through his 'argument' all along.

remote_control says: "No, this argument of supposed American decadence is just thinly veiled, irrational anti-Americanism."

You totally missed my point!

There is inevitably going to be anti-Americanism. Some of it will be based on valid criticisms; some of it on naked jealousy; some of it simply because historically no superpower was ever totally benign, so why should the world expect America to be?

The question I posed is:
Why does anti-Americanism necessarily end up morphing into Islamism??

Is there no space in this world for advocates of freedom and democracy to chart a path independent of the United States?

For that matter, is there no way for anyone in this world to oppose Islamism without being forced into an alliance with the United States?

For nations or peoples who, for whatever reason, don't want to be drawn into the American orbit, there used to be an alternative: Soviet Communism. Now the choice Bush has presented to the world is: You're either with us (America) or you're with Islamic terrorism. Believe me, there are a lot of people in this world who are unhappy with both choices and wish there were a third!

That's why other democratic nations need to speak up and show the tremendous variety of alternative societies you can get with freedom. You can be like Turkey, Canada, or many South American republics. You don't even have to be capitalist.

I'm sure the Muslim cabdrivers in Minnesotta are offended that we infidels drink alcohol. Maybe if we stop our immoral behaviour they'll do us a favor and transport us in return for money. But only if they get their way, because doncha know they're superior. And if they don't get their way?
And if their livelihoods are threatened?
And if their fiendish prophet gets dissed?

Anyone still think we're headed to multicultural coexistance with the mohammedans.

Anyone?

Let's see how this little warm-up plays out. See how Islam disports itself in the straightjacket of the American legal system.

"D'Souza is right about one thing: American licentiousness and perceived decadence help to fuel anti-Americanism. But what D'Souza, conservative that he is, fails to understand is that anti-Americanism doesn't necessarily have to lead to Islamism--if there were a third alternative available to the Third World."
[Emphasis Added]

Pure unadulterated horseradish, Steven L.. Please do not play "blame the victim", especially here at Jihad Watch. Which would you rather have, bikinis or burqas? That's what it boils down to.

Even if America followed all of the edicts of Puritanism (which it largely does), Islam would still be attacking us solely because we are not Islamic. You are letting your eyes stray from the prize. Islam will always be dissatisfied with absolutely anything that is not Islamic. Hell, Shiias are sufficiently un-Islamic whereby they are being slaughtered wholesale in comparison to attacks on Westerners or even Jews!

Even if America had a less “licentious” culture, we would still be fair game in Islam’s eyes due to us having interest charged on loans. It is precisely this return on investment that propelled Europe and (eventually) the West well past Islam’s stagnant economic system. Spain’s prohibition of usury is why they're such a European industrial powerhouse today.

DO NOT fool yourself. Men and women kissing or hugging in public (or even in movies, for that matter), bathing at the same beach, dancing together in discos or even in the privacy of their own homes; All of these innocuous activities are deeply offensive in the blinkered eyes of Islam’s mullahs and reason enough to behead the lot of us.

When will you realize that American “licentiousness” is just another arbitrary item on an endless laundry list that Islam trots out each time it is called upon to justify their endless slaughter and atrocities? Even if America did not exist, Islam would still be out mass murdering the kufar or those deemed “insufficiently Islamic” in their eyes. Ask the African Christians (who are not at all “licentious”), ask the Shiia, their own fellow Muslim brethren. Ask the Danish cartoonists whose own children have been threatened.

So, please, do not try to blame America for the innate violence, psychotic xenophobia and austere pseudo-morality of Muslims. Especially not when Islam’s own indulgence in violating every single human right imaginable (otherwise known as Sharia law) leaves them without a moral leg to stand upon. Sharia law is a compilation of the most revolting and barbaric practices that make even Neanderthals appear utterly enlightened.

blaming America for 9/11 is like telling a girl that was raped that she 'had it coming' because of what she was wearing. When bush said your either with us or your with the terrorists he meant that if your not helping to fight terrorists, if your hiding them, aiding them, abetting them, sending them money etc, then yes you most certainly are against us.

This is a global war, and it takes global partners. More than ever countries who hold freedom to be true should join together. I'm so sick of anti-American BS when Americans would go to the mat for any of our allies if they were attacked or invaded. Just sucks that our allies, that we would be willing to die for, hate us

Sounds like the old,be like them and everything will be A-OK.

Can't we force ourselfs to to accept their view on life and be happy in the suffering of it?

MMMMMMMmmmmmmm NO!

If stupidity and hypocracy were painful, there would not BE any muslims.

If stupidity and hypocracy were painful, there would not BE any muslims.
Posted by: texan [TypeKey Profile Page] at March 1, 2007 04:22 PM

Excellent!

Mr. D'Souza is a putz and a schmuck. A well-educated schmuck, but a schmuck.

I don't get it: Brittany goes bald, cats and dogs living together, porno movies coming out of California? So Bin Laden attacks us? but he wouldn't have attacked us before?? It's all about the Jihad. It's about the rise and fall and now rise again of Islam, the definition of endless grievances.

Bush says it's a lack of democracy.
Clinton(bubba)talks up poverty.
Dinesh says it's because we're perverted! What the freak is wrong with them?

The Jerusalem Post had an interesting review of D'Souza's book in which it was said that he had done a masterful job of scapegoating. I think that pretty well sums it up.
I also don't feel bad about liking Brittany Spears, a lot more than I do Dinesh D'Souza.
Hey Dinesh, why don't you shave your head and go to a clinic for bareskulls and numbskulls.

"Islam, the definition of endless grievances."

Cut those words in stone!

"If stupidity and hypocracy were painful, there would not BE any muslims."

And, quite possibly, a lot fewer liberals as well.

So Robert, how did the debate go? Transcripts, Youtubes anywhere?

Right, D'Souza is brillliant, none of the religious minorities killed, plundered, and raped by muslims over hundreds of years ever thought of appealing to "common values". Since when does a women-beating, polygamous and sex slave culture get to lecture anyone on sexual morality? I've heard of two timing people in relationship, ain't never heard of four timing, or ten timing, which is muslim "marriage" - four wives at a time plus as many instant divorces as you want and as many sex slaves as your right hand can possess. A committed, out-of-wedlock relationship is infinitely more moral then muslim "marriage".

So, according to D'Souza, the man who murders a woman for committing adultery is morally superior to the woman who commits adultery, and westerners have common values with this guy?

There's no complex and oh so subtle clash of civilizations. There is a "culture" of plunder, pillage, and rape, which sees wealth in a neighboring land, a land that seems to it to be largely peopled by idiots who have lost sight of a key civilizational value. The real key civilizational value that needs to be rediscovered pronto (and which is the ONE value which muslims unfortunately quite accurately see as lacking and which muslim perception is driving the jihad) in the west is a basic SECULAR one - the understanding that if someone kicks you in the balls, if you don't kick him right back twice as hard, he'll do it again. Once that value gets rediscovered in the west, that's the end of the muslim jihad, possibly even muslim "civilization."

D'Souza is on the make; like every other Indian expat I know he saw his main chance and went to the US. Now he is somehow more virtuous than his critics because you see they didn't have to leave the bosom of great mother India to teach the uncultured Americans about life. Indians yield to no one when it comes to hypocrisy (excepting the Pakis of course) and D'Souza exemplifies it.

The unprecedented transfer of wealth from the west to the middle east has catalyzed the Islamist jihad for the last 30+ years – not Brittney Spears or anything else.

Islamists are proficient at two things – killing and breeding.

Our money has helped the Islamists spread their political agenda of killing and breeding, which is inherent in, and interwoven with, their religion of Islam.

Hell, they even kill each other so that only the vilest among them are left to kill and breed.

Prior to oil money funding their agenda, they relied on conquest and other forms of theft.

I have always been suspicious of Dinesh D'Souza. Now I rather despise him.

About American decadence, has anybody seen the output of Canto-Pop or J-Pop lately or the buxom dancers in the Bollywood movies. One sees the same mindless gyrations, the same insipid emoticon gestures as in anything from MTV. Yet for some reason only the West needs to carry the cross, no one else need apply. Nobody it seems has to look his own self to discover the causes of sin, they need only point to the Yanks.

Then again one of the posters above aluded to Africans converting en masse to Islam because of Britney Spears. What's happening my brothers ? The money the Southern Baptists who tightened their belts to send you is not enough in these inflationary times ? The PL-480 wheat has run out ? As for the stupid pastor who brought this up, I have some questions for him too. Did you teach them that the great M'Bwana lives somewhere in Texas ? That Christianity is some kind of welfare service that Americans run ? Did your flock know anything at all about Jesus Christ ? Perhaps this pastor was just counting heads in order to squeeze some cash from credulous Bible thumpers back in the US.

A little more on the entrepreneur and world-conqueror Dinesh D'Souza, from the best source of information about Dinesh D'Souza, the Dinesh D'Souza website, where the copy is written by ---Dinesh D'Souza.

Would you like Dinesh D'Souza to speak to your business convention, or perhaps to enlighten an annual meeting of the stockholders in Phoenix or Boca Raton? Well, you have come to the right place when you go to www.dineshdsouza.com, because according th Dinesh D'Souza at www.dineshdouza.com:

"Dinesh D'Souza is one of the nation’s most popular and acclaimed speakers for business and university audiences, and has been a featured guest on many popular television programs, including the Today Show, Nightline, O'Reilly Factor, Good Morning America, and The Dennis Miller Show.

He speaks at top universities and business groups across the country, and among his recent engagements are the annual World President's Organization conference, Forbes CEO Summit, Harvard University, and the University of Virginia.

Mr. D'Souza is available to speak on a variety of subjects relating to contemporary business, politics and culture, including:

THE CULTURAL LEFT AND ITS ROLE IN 9/11

THE LIBERAL-ISLAMIC ALLIANCE

THE WAR AGAINST THE WAR ON TERROR

AMERICA AND ITS ENEMIES

ISLAM AND THE WEST: A CLASH OF CIVILIZATIONS?

WHAT’S SO GREAT ABOUT AMERICA

WHY AMERICA IS LOVED, WHY AMERICA IS HATED

THE MORAL DEBATE OVER TECHNOLOGY AND CAPITALISM

AFFIRMATIVE ACTION? NO. REPARATIONS? NO.'

Hurry and call now to book Dinesh D'Souza for your next corporate or university event.

Don't delay. Operators are standing by.

No, sorry, let me correct that:

An Operator Is Standing By.

About American decadence, has anybody seen the output of Canto-Pop or J-Pop lately or the buxom dancers in the Bollywood movies. One sees the same mindless gyrations, the same insipid emoticon gestures as in anything from MTV. Yet for some reason only the West needs to carry the cross, no one else need apply. Nobody it seems has to look his own self to discover the causes of sin, they need only point to the Yanks. Posted by: ivan

That's absolutely correct. Going by D'Souza's logic, one should assume that his relatives live a lifestyle and value system like the Lara Duttas of Bollywood movies. There, nowadays, one gets the same level of adult scenes that one is used to here. I'd love to see Americans watch this stuff, and then jump to conclusions about India - it would be funny seeing Indians squirm about what's being assumed. That would teach them about how similar mainstream America is to the Paris Hiltons and the Justin Timberlakes.

It is a shame call myslef an Indian after I came to know that Dinesh Dsouza is also an Indian. It is becasue of the people like Dinesh that the Muslims are growing bolder and stronger.
Dinesh is one of those people who will bend low and manipulate the truth to please the Muslims,who eventually will ask him to convert or die.
God help us God help India.

I for one am sick to the gills by the endless parade of third worlders and first worlders coming to America to conduct their pointy fingered school marm lecturers against this greatest of nations. It's high time for persons such as most Muslims, many people from Europe, and Dinesh D'Souza in particular to pack your bags and return to your various "traditional society" utopias if this nation is too much for you to bear.

Can you imagine what kind of "Ugly American" sobriquet I'd earn if I turned up in any of their nations of origin and began so rudely lecturing the locals on their decadence, their inappropriateness, their intolerance, whatever? In most European nations I'd be thrown out on a rail or tossed in jail for "hate speech". In most or all Muslim nations I'd have my tongue cut out, further tortured, and then murdered most cold-bloodedly.

I say to all the rude critics: Stop coming to this nation to abuse our hard won right of free speech with your childish and whiney obnoxiousness.

For all immigrants who've decided to leave their various nations to come to this great land, perhaps it's time to dust off that old saying with a slight modification:

"America -- love it or leave it -- and better yet, if you don't love America for whatever reason, then stay in your damned dysfunctional shit hole of origin and do your loud mouthed bellyaching there, OK?"

What this means is that many people in countries want Western prosperity and technology but they don’t want what they perceive as Western values that they consider degrading and vulgar.

If they don't want Western values, they don't have to choose it. They can emulate North Korea, the epitome of an uncontaminated, Western-less utopia.

But radicals conveniently forget....before Britney, there was the lambada and kamasutra and ero guro. Who gets blame for these? Not Ms. Spears and her peers, that's for sure. In fact, one could argue that Ms. Spears may have herself been influenced by such degrading and vulgar Latino, Indian, and Japanese values.

I actually used to think that D'Souza had a brain, but I had only read a couple of his columns.

This argument is fundamentally lame.

The RoP like any other belligerent group will find what excuses it feels it needs to commence hostilities.

If it weren't our decadent lefties it would be some other thing. Bikinis at the beach, bars, insufficient wife-beating, whatever.

Hell, the saudis banned pokemon dolls for some lame reason, and the mullahs went nuts because the Adidas sneaker logo bears some resemblance to the shape of the word "allah" written in arabic.

Why are they slaughtering the Thai buddhists? Because of western decadence? I think not.

Sure, our lefties tick them off. Sure, Osama gets a lot of head nodding from his coreligionists when he points this out. So what!

The fact is that some human societies can absorb and adjust to the idea of freedom and others cannot, at least not without a serious struggle.

The mohammedans are simply trapped in their irrationality and will come up with whatever excuses they need to act out their dark emotions.

They disapprove of our sexual openness and the chaos that results, but they've got no problem with gang rape as a form of social control? Child sex slaves in Africa? Uh ... what's wrong with this picture? Give me a break.

They disapprove of our disorderly ways, but they've got no problem with wife-beating and riots? Mass celebrations of self-mutilation? Uh ... what's wrong with this picture? Give me a break.

They disapprove of crime and then extort "tax" from anyone who's not a mohammedan. Murder people who date the wrong person? Uh ... what's wrong with this picture? Give me a break.

They do pretty much everything they allegedly disapprove of. They have no problem with rampant immorality as long as they're in control of the action.

Our lefties are just the excuse du jour.

And D'Souza is a fool for going along with it.

Hugh wrote:

Hurry and call now to book Dinesh D'Souza for your next corporate or university event. Don't delay. Operators are standing by.

One wonders if there is such an operator, in Bangalore?

jsla,

"I for one am sick to the gills by the endless parade of third worlders and first worlders coming to America to conduct their pointy fingered school marm lecturers against this greatest of nations."

There are also, unfortunately, millions of Americans also indulging, to one degree or another -- whether it's as a professor shaping his classroom contents, or as a pundit on the lecture circuit, or as a member of the Media, or as a politician, or as your ordinary next door neighbor who blithely compares Bush to "Hitler", or as your own relative who derides their own America as crass and vulgar and "fat" and brutishly imperialistic against the poor Third Worlders of the world --, in this anti-Americanism.

remote_control -- Indeed you're right. There are plenty of cringing self-loathing Americans both on the left AND the right fueling this anti-American trend. But as an American, while I detest their various attitudes, I am willing to put up with their silliness and fight them in our wonderful marketplace of ideas. I don't worry about them as I do the treasonous Muslims and the or the minions of arrogant Euro-critics who seem to be flooding our borders lately... These people take our American family fight abroad, and offer unbelievable opportunities for our global enemies and detractors to exploit their insidious nasty comments.

I must say that I also detest the insane and deliberate conflation usually emanating from the hard left which blames the hard right for the terrorist attacks of Arabs and Muslims against us, or compares our religious hard right with the heinous Islamic enemy. THEY ARE NOT THE SAME. Nor do they pose an existential threat against the West as the Muslims and Islam clearly does.

This canard of self blame is usually most vocal and extreme when coming from the Left -- but D'Souza embodies it's doppelganger on the hard right -- both conflations blaming us for the evil actions of the vile Muslims is a gross misunderstanding of our situation and predicament.

At some point on the spectrum of this entire Islamic Jihad against us we see where the extreme left meets the extreme right in the West. It's very ironic that the advent of all the hatred filled arrogant Muslims in America along with all the arrogant contempt filled D'Souzas and Euro-elites IS a function of the self loathing nature of the hard left AND the hard right as embodied in the likes of Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, and Billy Graham's Daughter Anne Graham Lotz. I can paraphrase what these megaphones of God said immediately after 9/11, their message was roughly the same one to America and the world:

"If we hadn't turned our backs on their God -- he wouldn't have allowed 9/11 to happen". So these spokesmen for God on Earth, like the extreme utopian maniacs on the left, blame America in the end for all the woes which America suffers at the hands of evil agents like the seditious Muslims. This is just magical thinking by both extremes. Both of these extreme Western camps seem to suffer from a similar notion that somehow America is omnipotent and yet utterly powerlesss... We, by our turning away from God, or by our turning away from socialist boondoggles, have brought about or encouraged our own destruction -- as if the vile hatred filled Arabs and vicious Muslims of the world don't have an agenda driven by Islam independent of our actions and thoughts.

I must clarify, lest my argument begins to sound like that of idiots like D'Souza or Ward Churchill -- The mind pollution contributed by the moronic Right wing, and heaped on in droves by the poisonous and insane Left wing of the West don't cause or even do much to encourage the horrors of Islamic Jihad against us -- but they sure do a lot to muddy the waters in their tireless efforts to impose their various radical agendas.

"but they sure do a lot to muddy the waters in their tireless efforts to impose their various radical agendas."

And to that extent, I should have added, I blame BOTH sides for hampering the critical need to comprehend the nature of Islam, Muslim treachery, and our peril. They amply deserve that blame, but not the blame for the atrocity of Islam.

jsla,

"the self loathing nature of the hard left AND the hard right as embodied in the likes of Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, and Billy Graham's Daughter Anne Graham Lotz."

Yes, and we can add Timothy McVeigh to that list, a person so extremely Right, he was indistinguishable from the extreme Left.

... if you don't kick him right back twice as hard, he'll do it again. Once that value gets rediscovered in the west, that's the end of the muslim jihad, possibly even muslim "civilization."

godfreyofbouillon, please permit me to share a quote by that master of political intrigue, Machiavelli:

"For it must be noted, that men must either be caressed or else annihilated; they will revenge themselves for small injuries, but cannot do so for great ones; the injury therefore that we do to a man must be such that we need not fear his revenge."

It is my sincere belief that the West's final and lasting response to Islam's ceaseless atrocities will serve as eternal proof of the above observation by Machiavelli. All that there will be left to fear is any unwarranted sense of lingering guilt.

”I'm not defending D'souza's thesis here; I've come to bury, not to praise him, but one CANNOT deny that America has lost its moral and spiritual bearings; that this above all else is obnoxious to the Muslims; and that it is a ready-made EXCUSE and JUSTIFICATION for the murderous jihadists!”

eliXelx, your self-loathing is showing. Please remedy such a dire error at your earliest convenience. America has not “lost its moral and spiritual bearings”. Were that the case, websites like this would not even exist and neither would we be fighting terrorism. Rather, the value and virtue of said “moral and spiritual bearings” is being obscured or outrightly denied by those who advocate the triumph of style over substance. Be it Donald Trump or his arch foe Rosie O’Donnell, both sides of the political spectrum have hoisted up the superficial and mundane as a standard for America to bear.

This callow effort at reducing the world to their own mediocre level of achievement has not one iota in common with Islam’s assault upon the West. More often than not, it instead serves as a false flag for sanctimonious moralizers like your own self to wave about in the rush to find fault with America.

Even if America were a bastion of moral perfection, it would still remain centered in Islam’s crosshairs as an object of hatred. Islam’s congenital xenophobia cannot withstand the presence of any competing religious or philosophical system. Can you possibly realize that this is not due to any inherent flaws in those alternate creeds? What you do by bashing America for its unintentional yet inescapable offense to Muslim sensitivity is lend an illegitimate aura of respectability to Islam’s abhorrent intolerance for all that does not worship Allah. You mantle Islam’s pursuit of global cultural genocide with a veneer of unmerited credibility. Validity, which it neither deserves nor earns, as it goes about sterilizing this world of diversity and freedom of thought.

I urge you on the strongest possible terms to reevaluate your ill-considered notions of exactly who is to blame in this ongoing battle for humanity and civilization’s survival.

If any of this remains unclear, please review my previous response to Steven L.'s same sort of America bashing.

Hugh wrote:

No, sorry, let me correct that:
An Operator Is Standing By.

ROFLOL!!! Too right! That was wonderful, wonderful. The self-making of another pundit!!!!