Mark Malloch Brown, the Deputy Secretary-General of the United Nations, is akin to a British civil servant in 1941 still urging “compromise with the limited aims of Mr. Hitler.” He is yesterday’s man, at the shell, the League-of-Nations lookalike, known still, ridiculously, as the “United” Nations.
Lately there has been much miching mallecho from Malloch Brown — and far worse, far more dangerous to the safety of Infidels everywhere. His absurd recent remark that Hizballah “is an organization, however, whose roots historically are completely separate and different from Al Qaeda” is complete nonsense.
Al Qaeda and Hizballah may have different immediate roots. Yet the two groups are far closer than, say, the Nazis and the Japanese militarists, or the Nazis and the Fascists of Italy. Their worldview comes from the exact same texts, the very same passages, word-for-word, in the Qur’an, and from the very same stories authenticated by the very same muhaddithin, and from the very same Inspiring Life of the Perfect Man, Muhammad, uswa hasana, al-insan al-kamil.
Al Qaeda is run by Egyptians and Saudis, and is Sunni in its membership. And Hezbollah is run by and for Shi’a in Lebanon. Al Qaeda appeals to all layers of society, but its leaders are from the Muslim gratin: al-Zawahri is a member of a very prominent Egyptian family which included Azzam Pasha, first head of the Arab League; and Osama is one of the many children of the richest contractor in Saudi Arabia, but by a Syrian mother. (Take note of that: did this mother make Bin Laden think he was not quite pure Arab enough, with just a touch of the northern Levantine about him, so that he had to demonstrate his Arabness by being extra-devout, extra-fanatical?)
Hezbollah, on the other hand, consists chiefly of poor or economically insecure Shi’a who, because the political compact by which the Christians, the Druse, and the more powerful Sunnis parcelled out power remains based on the census of 1932 (when the Shi’a constituted a much smaller percentage of the total population), remain underrepresented, with no prospect of change in their condition.
So in that sense Al Qaeda and Hezbollah are different. But really, can Malloch Brown point to any differences in their ideologies, or in the passages upon which the ideologies are based? Of course he can’t. The more such people open their mouths, the easier it is for us to realize with horror just how awful are those who join and then rise to the top of these bureaucracies, whether at the U.N., that corrupt and corrupting organization, or at the E.U. (In the United States, unlike many other countries, the U.N. is hardly respected, but apparently it still is in parts of Europe, where the press needs to do better to expose the Islamintern International and its infiltration of the U.N. bureaucracy.)
What does Malloch Brown know about what prompts those who set off the bombs in Bali? Who attacked the school in Beslan, or seized the theatre in Moscow? What texts are now being circulated by Arabs in Bosnia? What texts did those who put bombs in the London Underground or the Madrid Atocha station read? What attitudes were created within them by the mere fact of their calling themselves Muslim, identifying with Islam, growing up in a world of Islam and nothing but Islam?
What does Malloch Brown know about Islam? Does he know that the other Englishman high in Kofi Annan’s hierarchy, the incredible Edward Mortimer, hailed the arrival of the Ayatollah Khomeini to power with a dispatch for the London Spectator that began with a quote from Charles James Fox — “this is quite the most glorious morning in the history of mankind”? The same Edward Mortimer as a journalist in England was famous for his pro-Islam, anti-Israel dispatches. He was an upmarket Robert Fisk who was hired by Annan to be not only his Chief Speechwriter and head of the Office of Communications but who, if we are to believe Edward Mortimer himself, is also a “Senior Advisor to Kofi Annan.” Oh, I believe it. [For more on the illegitimate Edward, see my “Tribute to Edward Mortimer.”]
They’re all of a piece, these Malloch Browns and Mortimers and Urquharts. The decline and fall of the U.N. was not caused, though it was helped along, by the Soviet bloc, but rather by the only bloc still remaining, the one that calls so much of the tune: the Arab or Arab-run Islamic bloc. The nationals of this bloc have infiltrated everywhere. Now, to believe the U.N. and its subsidiaries, the greatest crime, the most horrible event in the world, was the creation and continued existence of the State of Israel. No matter what the subject (“racism” at Durban, the rights of women at Cairo) and no matter what morally moronic U.N. conference is held, it will always and everywhere turn absurdly into a bash-Israel event. Not a single word in Geneva, at the Human Rights Commission, about the grave mistreatment of Hindus and Christians in Pakistan, in Bangladesh, in Indonesia. Not a word about Muslim attacks on Buddhists in south Thailand. Not a word about the Muslim attacks for two decades in the Sudan — or at least, not a word that stopped the genocide, if the Rapporteur for the situation in the southern Sudan, M. Biro, is to be believed.
The U.N. is now, and for the past three decades has been becoming more and more, merely a Protector of the Faith — the faith being Islam, and its real aims, its contents, its tenets, its attitudes, its atmospherics, its Lesser Jihad against Israel, and now all the other Jihads which are out in the open. They are all prompted by the same texts and same sense of what Islam is entitled to, of how Islam must everywhere dominate and Muslims rule. Many intelligent people still do not understand this because it would involve too much of a rewiring of their own mental hard drive. They are reluctant to admit to this to themselves because of all the anguish this will cause, not least as they contemplate what they would have to do to adequately defend themselves.
But they will come round. Not because of what the Americans or the Israelis do or do not do, but because of what Muslims do — to themselves and to non-Muslims. Eventually what the malloch-browns and mortimers of this world presume to tell us de-haut-en-bas, so ably seconded by the mary-robinsons, javier-solanas, chris-pattens, will be seen as absurd, and be shown up easily by those in every country who will drily point out what people in the Western world are coming to realize despite their leaders’ silence or still worse, deliberate misinformation, based on the timidity, cupidity, and stupidity demonstrated by so many in the ruling circles of the Western world, both in governments and in the media. (Can Malloch Brown really believe that Hizballah and Al Qaeda have nothing in common? Nothing to do with each other? Does he expect people to believe this? How many people will, outside the U.N. building? And for how long?)
In making such a self-evidently absurd remark, Malloch Brown exposes himself to ridicule, and more than his own absurdity, such a statement shows that the compromised and negligent elites that continue to allow such people as Malloch Brown to rise high, and presume to lecture us on matters that affect our very survival, the survival of the West and of the Rest of the Infidel world, are simply not up to the task and have to be replaced everywhere by those who have understood Islam, understood Jihad, understood all the instruments, not merely that of terrorism, of that Jihad.
Malloch Brown is of a type, a type fleshed out by the nearly-indistinguishable Edward Mortimer or the just-slightly-more presentable Brian Urquhart. And to think that Shirley Hazzard once worked there. To think that Joseph Gessen was once an interpreter there. What a falling-off was there. And, amazingly, continues to be.