2009 Dhimwit of the Month Honors

Dhim·wit (dïm-wît) - A non-Muslim member of a free society who unwittingly abets the stated cause of Islamic domination.  A dhimwit is always quick to extend sympathy to the very enemy that would take away his or her own freedom (or life) if given the opportunity.
 

December 2009 Dhimwit: Janet Napolitano

Smooth operator. 

When 288 innocent airline passengers flying into Detroit were spared certain death on Christmas Day simply because a makeshift detonator failed to set off enough of the explosives smuggled aboard, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano talked about how "very, very smoothly" the system was working.

Smooth?  Any smoother and we'd be skimming body parts out of Lake Huron.

Perhaps we should be grateful that the DHS chief didn't react this time by telling us how peaceful Islam is.  That was the line George Bush always threw out on cue whenever Muslims would attempt to mass murder Americans explicitly in the name of this wonderful religion.    At least he called it "terrorism," however, which is more than one can say about Napolitano, who actually told us that Islamic terror attacks should be referred to as "man-made disasters."

To us, a man-made disaster sounds more like something one might stumble across in the bathroom of a truck stop buffet, but what do we know?  When the first rule of government is to always make sure that Muslims aren't offended, then the rhetoric can't help bus sound a bit Orwellian.  A year or so back for example, Britain's equivalent to Janet Napolitano actually began referring to Islamic terror as "anti-Islamic activities."  (That one didn't take either).

In November, a Muslim psychiatrist with a six-figure income walked onto the base at Fort Hood, Texas and gunned down thirteen innocents while shouting praises to Allah at the top of his lungs.  For anyone still not sure if this was about religion, Nidal Hassan left behind a PowerPoint presentation that should have cleared up any doubts.

Apparently Hassan neglected to include enough pictures and colored charts for the nation's top security chief, however, since Napolitano indicated that the bomber's motives were a mystery to her.   The only thing the rest of us are scratching our heads over is how this person ever got to be in charge. 

In December, Janet Napolitano shared the luck of the passengers of Flight 253.  The only casualty of the fizzled underwear bomb turned out to be the bomber himself (whose grilled beans and frank probably wouldn't have had much appeal with the virgins anyway).

Napolitano may get to keep her job for now, but we doubt Americans can count on a timely wardrobe malfunction to keep the next disaster at bay.  It's just a matter of time before this Dhimwit resigns in disgrace.

November 2009 Dhimwit: General George Casey

Pledging to "support and defend diversity against
all enemies, foreign and domestic" perhaps?

OK, so he didn't actually replace the words "Constitution of the United States" with "diversity" in the U.S. Army's Oath of Enlistment, but chief of staff George Casey's reaction to the Fort Hood massacre was hardly any less nauseating.

Countless articles pointing out the obvious religious motive behind Maj. Malik Hasan's shooting spree have already been written, so there is no point in rehashing the details here, other than to say that it can hardly be of mystery to any reasonable person as to why a man does something, when he is literally shouting his reason for doing so at the time (and if that weren't enough, he even created a PowerPoint presentation).

While not entirely unsympathetic to the 56 dead and injured, or their families, It was quickly evident in the aftermath of the shooting that George Casey's immediate objective was spin control in defense of political correctness. 

He spoke repeatedly about diversity in the days that followed, saying that a "diverse Army gives us strength" and that "as great a tragedy as this was — it would be a shame if our diversity became a casualty as well."  In other words, diversity is even more important than the very lives of his own soldiers.

Fortunately for the general, diversity is alive and well (although there are at least thirteen families out there which probably won't be celebrating with him).

Casey's seemed ostensibly concerned with shielding the "3,000 Muslims" within the ranks of a million-member army from "bias."  Their sensibilities apparently outweigh any benefits from simply acknowledging that Hasan's deep commitment to Islam inspired his violent outburst - something that is quite obvious to anyone without an agenda.

While not arguing the fact that protecting people from the consequences of something for which they are not responsible is a noble motive, the timing of Casey's contrived state of denial is wildly inappropriate.  Dead patriots deserve better.

The irony, of course, is that a dozen soldiers who pledged to serve their country on the battlefield were murdered in cold blood on their own home soil because of the very political correctness that Gen. Casey felt obliged to defend. 

It wasn't as if Maj. Hasan was shy about expressing his contempt for non-Muslims, or exhibiting overt devotion to Islam - even while claiming that America's "diverse" army is waging a war against it.  Yet, the opportunity to prevent disaster was willfully ignored because none of his fellow professionals dared put their careers on the line by appearing to oppose the sublime standard of diversity to which their leadership continues to swear allegiance.

If this were the action of a corporate CEO concerned with public relations and protecting shareholder interests, then perhaps Casey's obscene choice of priorities would be vaguely understandable.  But young soldiers in today's Army are required to face death and debilitating injury in service to their country, not out of an imaginary duty to diversity.  The least their leaders can do is have the courage to tell the truth when they do lose their lives to the enemy.

October 2009 Dhimwit: Judge Ann Montgomery

"Now comes the deceased..."

Judge Ann Montgomery is the reason CAIR is triumphantly pumping its fist over the resolution the Flying Imams case, in which six Islamic clerics engaged in provocative behavior on an airplane so as to deliberately arouse suspicion, get detained, garner publicity, and do what Muslims do best - play the victim.

The 2006 Minneapolis incident accomplished all of these goals, even if most Americans familiar with the case were probably disgusted over grown men playing such games only five years after the 9/11 hijackings.  Fortunately for the imams, this apparently did not include Ann Montgomery, the federal judge presiding over their lawsuit against the airline.

According to her honor (and we use the term loosely) six Muslims on an airplane asking for seatbelt extenders, cursing the U.S., praising Allah (as suicide bombers are prone to do right before detonation), requesting seat assignment changes, and pretty much doing what they can to appear suspicious is hardly grounds for their detention by law enforcement.

As the Weekly Standard points out in this well-written assessment, the judge's logic in this case would have prevented the 9/11 hijackers from being detained as well, had they been caught at the time with their box-cutters and chants of 'Allah Akbar'. 

The airline had little choice but to settle the case.

As this was being written, the aftermath of the Fort Hood massacre was playing out in another part of the U.S.  In that situation, another America-cursing, Allah-praising Muslim played out his religious leanings in yet another deadly shooting rampage against non-believers.  Afterwards, the media immediately began asking how the "warning signs" could have been missed by his colleagues in the US Army.

They should ask Ann Montgomery instead.  It is because of influential people like her, who value political correctness over common sense, that ordinary Americans no longer feel comfortable acting in their own defense.

September 2009 Dhimwit:
Brian McLaren, Christian Ramadan Faster

Get up and eat something!

OK, so this month we're picking on another clergyman - so soon after having to apologize for offending practically everyone who earns their living at a church, mosque, temple, synagogue...  (Damn it, we apologized, didn't we?) 

Anyway, the point is that this guy really deserves it.  Mark Tooley's excellent article at FrontPage Magazine lays out the evidence:

Evangelicals for Ramadan

August 2009 Dhimwit: Kenny MacAskill

What is a human life worth in Scotland these days? 
About a week and a half.

Kenny MacAskill is the Scottish Minister of Justice, which is quite a misnomer given that his claim to fame will forever be the denial of such to the victims of the Pan Am 103 bombing over Lockerbie, Scotland.

In 1988, Libyan terrorists murdered 270 innocent airline passengers and crew.  It goes without saying that the victims never had an opportunity to say goodbye to their families, much less live out their final days peacefully surrounded by their loved ones.  Yet, that is now the destiny of both men thought to be responsible for the horror of twenty-one years ago.

As if it weren't bad enough that both bombers eluded a trial for the first eleven years after their crime, or that one of them was actually acquitted by Scottish judges and the other sentenced to only 20 years in prison, the final insult came in August with the unexpected release of the convicted, yet unremorseful terrorist after only 8.5 years - on compassionate grounds!

Compassion?  Isn't that usually reserved for the victims of a crime?  And, at 270 in this case, it's not like there aren't enough victims to go around.  Shouldn't sensitivity to their families be first priority?

Well, apparently not.   They do things differently over in Scotland, particularly when there is a lot of oil money involved (which is damned near the only way this moral lapse makes sense).

Surely there are a lot of dirty fingers in this one, and we'll leave it to others to dredge up the details.  What we do know is that the man who ultimately made the decision to release al-Megrahi after only 11.5 days for each body is Kenny MacAskill - and he has been vigorously defending it since.

And, although we don't know for sure, we think it is an entirely safe bet that Mr. MacAskill suffered no personal loss with the downing of Pan Am 103.
 

A Muslim terrorist says goodbye to his family.
 

The families of his Christian victims?  Not so lucky.

July 2009 Dhimwit: Rick Warren

The Purpose-Driven Dhimwit

Our mild disdain for those members of society who exist off the work and wages of others probably isn't much of a secret [see editor's note that follows].  This sometimes includes certain clergy in just about every religion (although we know that there is a contrary argument).  In any event, we greatly admire the integrity of those pastors and church officials who earn their living in a parallel profession.

For this reason, it probably seems odd that we would be picking on Rick Warren this month.  He is not only a pastor, but an amazingly successful author and a direct net asset to his church’s finances, even to the extent that he paid back 25 years worth of salary, after making it big, and currently “tithes” 90% of his income.

But with success and popularity comes hard choices.  The author of “The Purpose Driven Life” book series knows that the pure message of his faith is sometimes at odds with the mainstream culture to which he has become mildly ingratiated.  At times, he walks a thin line between Christianity and popular appeal, often appearing to compromise on the former when pressed to choose.

Warren’s personal strategy of emphasizing common ground and ignoring controversial subjects apparently made him the perfect choice for a speaking invitation to ISNA's convention last month.  Certainly the Muslim ego was in no way threatened by the message dutifully delivered by their token Christian speaker, which focused merely on the need to “come together” and fight illiteracy, disease and poverty. 

(Rhetoric from other featured speakers - who are on record as supporting Hezbollah, Hamas and even the 9/11 hijackers - ranged from the virulently anti-Semitic to at least one lecturer who blamed Hurricane Katrina on homosexuals).

The “controversial subject” that Warren the Dhimmi was perfectly willing to ignore (and that other Christian speakers probably would not have) is the abysmal status of Christians and other religious minorities in Muslim lands.

June was a particularly brutal month for Warren’s co-religionists – the so-called “protected" People of the Book.  The day before Warren’s bland speech, two Christians were brutally shot to death by Islamists in Ethiopia for the crime of working on a church.  The day after he spoke, Muslim terrorists detonated a nail bomb outside a cathedral in the Philippines, killing six.

Altogether, about 17 Christians were murdered by Islamic radicals in the two weeks around Warren’s speech, including several Somali converts who were beheaded as apostates for leaving the Religion of Peace.  This does not include the many Christians who were hacked to death or beheaded by the Nigerian “Taliban” during the final week of the month, nor the family of seven burned to death by a mob in Pakistan enraged over alleged “desecration” of the Qur’an at about the same time.

Meanwhile, Rick Warren’s message to a roomful of Islamic Supremacists is to ‘come together’ and fight illiteracy...?

Even non-Christians have to admire those who are willing to die for their faith.  How sad that others lack the courage even to speak on their behalf.

[Editor's Note:  I apologize for the original version of the first part of this article, which was probably offensive to members of the clergy.  I have no right to offend an entire profession (even lawyers).  On top of that, I neglected one of my own rules for this site, which is maximum inclusion in the battle against Islamic tyranny.]

June 2009 Dhimwit: General David McKiernan

Whoa... hey now, get a room you two!

Actually the picture posted above isn't of General David McKiernan smooching the Qur'an - just some other American officer getting personal with the holy book of Islam - but we imagine that it's probably enough to make the former Commander of US Forces in Afghanistan jealous.

In April, the general traveled to Kandahar where he praised the cherished book of Muslim to a group of tribal leaders:

"I'm reading a very good book now about this part of the world.  It's written in English, but it's all about you -- it's the Qur'an"

Not surprisingly, the people there gave him a hearty round of applause - which may indicate that no one in the room was terribly familiar with what is actually in the Qur'an.  Otherwise they might have fallen down laughing instead.

In the first place, the Qur'an is not "all about" Muslims.  In fact, more than 60% of it addresses non-believers (and not in a good way).  Even the remaining portion - that isn't devoted to Allah - basically exists to convince true believers of how much better they are than everyone else.

This leads to the second problem, which is in calling the Qur'an a "very good book" when it is not only fundamentally supremacist, but explicitly calls for the death, subjugation or forced conversion of anyone who hasn't yet embraced the Religion of Peace.  If not for the Qur'an, in fact, not only would McKiernan's army have handed out several thousand fewer Purple Hearts over the last eight years, but the New York skyline wouldn't be missing a piece.

A world without the Qur'an is a world without the Taliban, al-Qaeda, Islamic terrorism, and that steady stream of refugees and asylum seekers who say they can't live in a Muslim country (but then try to turn their new hosts into one).  In fact, the vast majority of major international conflicts happening in the world today have one or more Muslim parties.  Not a day goes by that  Islamic radicals in some corner of the planet aren't successful in killing innocent people according to the verses of that "very good book".

Of course, there are plenty of infidels in the world who are ignorant of the Qur'an, yet praise it nonetheless.  What distinguishes our General McKiernan from the rest this month?

As it turns out, the commander wasn't just content lauding the book responsible for the loss of thousands of his own troops.  In May he actually presided over the burning of several dozen Bibles confiscated from evangelical Christians serving in uniform!

The problem for Christians, apparently, is that they don't kill enough people in the name of their god to qualify for respect.  Neither do they riot or shoot old women in the back when their religion is insulted.  With Islam, mustering this sort of murderous rage over petty slights is never a problem.

Under McKiernan's leadership, the Afghan conflict dramatically deteriorated into a true quagmire in which the Taliban regained sections of the country - even as the once-solid support for American troops there plummeted.  Not all of this has been the fault of our Bible-burning, Qur'an-praising general - who retired this month - but we are certainly not sorry to see him go.

May 2009 Dhimwit: The Fox Producers of "24"

Jack is back! ... kind of.... not really.

The Council on American-Islamic Relations may be facing hard times in the real world, where the organization is finally starting to feel the consequence of long-standing ties to Islamic terrorism, but at least the self-described "civil rights organization" can claim one virtual victory this year thanks to the producers of the Fox drama “24”

CAIR honchos no doubt cheered the seventh season finale, as Kiefer Sutherland’s character, uber-patriot Jack Bauer, was literally on his knees before Allah.  Presumably dying of poison in the plot, the agent who once defended America from Islamic terrorism literally invites a local imam into his hospital room - of whom he can beg forgiveness and pray with in his “final moments.”

Obvious to the point of embarrassing, the scene is certainly the icing on the cake for what might be the most disappointing year for long-time fans.  Each week’s installment featured white-knuckle pandering to political correctness, whether it was the pro-Muslim theme near the end, or the constant drumbeat throughout against “torture” (the real kind, by the way… not the caterpillar, “evil eye” variety that supposedly has Barack Obama crying into his pillow at night).

Once praised for its realism, the series never really recovered from CAIR’s successful tantrum four years ago over a plot that featured (gasp) Muslim terrorists.  So cowed were the producers that the storyline quickly became unrecognizable.  They even wrote in a character who heads a CAIR-like Muslim organization and becomes an anti-terror hero (remember, it is Hollywood).

Since then, the producers of “24” have been careful not to stray from the cinematic standard of making every villain out to be a white male capitalist (or some combination thereof).  Fox also pays penance to CAIR by throwing in the occasional “positive Muslim,” such as the character from this season who puts his life on the line in a Washington DC subway to save American infidels from a bio-weapons attack by terrorists intent on framing Islam.  (Yes, thank goodness Muslims are there to save us from non-Muslim terrorists… Seriously, can you even say that with a straight face?).

With Jack Bauer’s deathbed “Shahada,” the producers may have finally jumped the Muslim shark.  Let’s hope so.  The series can hardly get any worse. Janeane Garofalo was actually cast as an FBI intelligence agent, which is wrong on many levels.  (credibility-wise, it isn't terribly clear how she managed to beat out Barney Rubble for the role).

The irony is that for seven seasons the fictional Jack Bauer, who puts his own life on the line for country in nearly every episode, has been making money for a spineless bunch of candy asses who can’t even stand up to CAIR, a Hamas supporter and unindicted co-conspirator of terror financing.

Unfortunately, Kiefer Sutherland has signed on for a new season, meaning that Jack Bauer won’t die of poisoning… not that it’s necessary to kill him off anyway.  The producers already took care of that when they started writing for CAIR and not the fans.

April 2009 Dhimwit:
Charles Johnson of Little Green Footballs

Little Green Drama Queen

“Robert Spencer posted a veiled threat today to attack me physically.”
Charles Johnson, LGF April 26, 2009

Anyone who has made a fool out of the mainstream media as often as the Charles Johnson has can’t be all bad – even if he is making a bigger fool out of himself these days.  Five years ago, the talented creator of the Little Green Footballs blog and “co-founder” of Pajamas Media (a top-notch web magazine) went toe-to-toe with CBS News and not only took down Dan Rather, but also won a great deal of respect for on-line journalism in the process…

Then things got weird.  Really weird.

What happened to the nearly 60-year-old Johnson after hitting his high-water mark is anyone’s guess.  Did success go to his head, or was he really that… um... well-grounded to begin with? 

LGF has always had the look and feel of someone trying just a little too hard to be the coolest smart guy in the room.  The music video posts and alleged mountain-bike exploits blend with the exaggerated moralizing and mind-numbing philosophical excerpts about as naturally as a ponytail perched on top of a middle-aged face and gut.  (Something tells us that chilling with Charles might be about as fun as, say, tying one on with Ross Perot).

Still, no one could have anticipated Johnson getting so worked up over a petty grievance that he would betray courageous allies who already have a hard enough time battling Islamic violence and tyranny in an age of politically correctness.

Johnson's strange tale of paranoia and rage is probably best told by others.  What we will say is that his once-promising blog is, today, little more than a narcissistic venue for pursuing personal vendettas and promoting rigid viewpoints on a narrow range of issues.  At one time, LGF was an advocate of free speech and a reliable opponent of Islamic totalitarianism.  Now Johnson literally bans opposing viewpoints and spends much of his time smearing anti-Jihadis and “creationists” with the same shady tactics once used against him.

While we sympathize with blog administrators who find it necessary to police against extremists and imposters, the LGF editor is so notorious for purging dissenting comments and permanently expelling readers who don’t toe the ideological line that being banned actually has a name - “getting CJ’d”.  Like a child throwing a public tantrum, Johnson has even taken the extraordinary step of blocking certain sites from linking directly to his own posts.

As a result of this "Green Purge," the former flagship of the New Media, has all but officially devolved into a redundant monologue that exists mainly as a shifting monument to the editor’s perceived ethical superiority.  Johnson’s posts are often bolstered by a dwindling army of loyal hanger-ons, who massage his ego with the sort of obsequious follow-up that brings to mind a “you da’ man” crowd trailing Tiger Woods.  Not surprisingly, the blog has suffered declining readership over the last couple of years.

Filtering out contrary opinion also seems to have deepened Johnson’s sense of moral certitude to the point that he is attacking former friends, such as Robert Spencer (Jihad Watch), Pam Geller (Atlas Shrugs) and many others, with unnecessary hair-splitting and flimsy “guilt-by-association” slurs that are unconstructive and highly divisive.  (Hence his Dhimwit nomination).

In fact, Charles Johnson is now CAIR’s point man for attacking its own critics - apparently dethroning the “Reverend” Jim Sutter, an utter crackpot whose specious attack on Robert Spencer is still being promoted by desperate Islamic Supremacists.  (Ironically, Sutter's only other claim to fame is Internet censorship – with one of his targets in 2007 being LGF itself).

Johnson’s slander of Robert Spencer (and others) is only a bit more sophisticated than CAIR’s, although no less shallow.  In order to establish that the founder of Jihad Watch is a bigot (or Nazi) who hates Muslims and Jews, it is first necessary to ignore what Spencer actually says about Muslims, Jews, Nazis and bigotry.  Once this restriction is in place, an intricate “Six Degrees” linkage is concocted between the hapless Spencer and real-life neo-Nazis through some sort of Rube Goldberg-like sequence of personal associations.  Somehow this is supposed to fool people into believing that Robert Spencer, a staunch public defender of Israel and chronicler of hate crimes against Jews, for example, is actually a closet anti-Semite.

Of course, Spencer’s support for Israel is one reason why he periodically brings down CAIR's wrath – and the irony doesn’t end there.  The connection between Spencer and true Nazis is downright imaginary compared to the fact that CAIR and the Islamist terror group Hamas actually share the same parent organization.  More importantly, although Spencer openly condemns neo-Nazis, CAIR adamantly refuses to condemn Hamas as a terrorist group even though its members routinely murder Jews!

So our message to Charles Johnson is… Good god, man – what are you doing?  Being used by the likes of CAIR?  Sinking to the clownish level of a Garofalo or Olbermann?  Implying that Jewish Pam Geller is a neo-Nazi sympathizer and affable Robert Spencer is about to pull out a nine and throw down on you?  

Come on now, Charles.  You don't belong on this list.  The bitterness is making you look small.  Time to ditch this childish paranoia and move back into the real world... where the love is.  Come on back to your homies. 

All will be forgiven... and we promise not to let anyone call you a fascist!

March 2009 Dhimwit: Barack Obama

Change terrorists can believe in.

We always knew this day would come... we just hoped it wouldn't be this soon.

If there's one thing that most of us can agree on by now, it is that President Barack Obama is a true enigma.  Surely the anti-war voters who gave him that razor-thin nomination edge over Hillary Clinton had no idea that he would keep the Bush war team in place.  And when he criticized the former President's fiscal irresponsibility, who would have guessed that Obama himself would be inflating the national debt by a whopping 10% in just his first three weeks?

Ah, but we digress. The topic is Islam after all, and with the election behind him, the new President has decided that it's OK to open up about his Muslim background (at least on Arab TV networks).  He's also announced a "Muslim outreach" program in which he plans to travel to Turkey and deliver a rousing appeal to the Islamic world.  Heck, he even uses his middle name again (although it isn't yet clear whether it's OK for the rest of us to as well).

We aren’t particularly bothered by any of this.  In fact, the President can drape himself in a burka and go join King Abdullah's Saudi harem for all we care… whatever it takes to keep oil under $70 a barrel.  As we said during the 2008 campaign, Obama’s alleged religious background or his family ties to Islam make no difference to us.  Neither is there anything wrong with a world leader speaking to Muslims abroad.  In fact, talking and spending money seem to be the two things that Obama does best.

No, our problem with Barack Obama is that despite being in office for only eight weeks, he has already done enough to make us look like complete hypocrites if we don’t make him our Dhimwit of the Month.  Consider the following Obama policy decisions:

Shutting down Guantanamo Bay.  “Style over substance?”  How about “image over security?”  Obama could have used his credibility with the international community to defend Gitmo (and its unfairly-maligned American guards) against the hysteria of abuse allegations.  Instead he chose the tried and proven (and utterly senseless) path of appeasement.  His decision will force prosecutors into choosing between releasing detainees or compromising precious security resources in a time of war.  Either way, innocent people will die.

Reaching out to the “Moderate Taliban.”  Talk about an oxymoron.  Are the "moderate Taliban" the ones behind the kinder, gentler beheadings?  Much to the President’s embarrassment, even the Taliban had to laugh this one off (and they aren't exactly known for their sense of humor).  Still, the damage was done.  Obama did little more than encourage terrorists with what is already being interpreted as a sign of weakness.

Reaching out to Iran.  Same problem, really.  How unfortunate that one of the few campaign promises Obama actually appears to be keeping is to start a “dialogue” with the Mullahs.  No wonder he’s also talking about a “nuclear shield” for Israel.

Ending the “War on Terror.”  Americans had a pretty good laugh when the British Labour Party decided that the best way to win the battle against terrorism was to call it something else.  The Yanks aren't laughing anymore.

Backing the Swat Valley 'Peace for Sharia' Deal with the Taliban.   Actual peace lasted about five minutes.  That's how long it took the Taliban to explain how Islam requires the implementation of Sharia in all parts of Pakistan (and the world).

Israel and Hamas.  At a critical moment during the Presidential campaign, Obama blamed the Middle East conflict on the “hateful and perverse ideologies of radical Islam.”  That was true, but now he wants to send a billion dollars to Hamas.  It would be funny, if it weren't so... not funny.

Politicizing the War on Terror.  Yes, just because we're afraid to say that we are at war with our enemies doesn't mean they aren't at war with us.  Releasing "torture" memos for no reason other than to embarrass the previous administration - while at the same time holding back the ones that are exonerating - is simply shameful.  At best, it will cost American lives overseas.  At worst, the consequences will hit closer to home.

So, while the media basks in the teleprompter's warm glow, fawning over Obama's pectorals and memorized by Michelle's shapely arms, the new President is quietly and inexplicably changing course in the one arena in which most Americans are generally satisfied: national security.  Regardless of the overall disgruntlement with George W. Bush, not too many voters actually bought into the line that they weren't safer since 9/11, and all the Democrats really accomplished with this slogan was to set the bar fairly high for themselves. 

There is an adage that after 9/11, the Republicans acted like Republicans - and the Democrats did too.  Eventually, however, the party of Michael Moore was back to belittling patriotism and lending little more to the war on terror than demoralization and the sort of rancid criticism that became the fodder for anti-American talking points overseas.

With the ascension to full power, many of us believed that the Democrats would finally rejoin the war on terror.  This may still be the case, of course, but it is looking as if it might just take another terror attack on US soil to make it happen.

[Note: As if to provide the exclamation point to this piece, the President of the United States was caught on camera actually bowing to the Saudi King at a G20 conference on the very day that we posted our choice.  Maybe he's planning on being fitted for that burka after all.]

February 2009 Dhimwit: Norman Finkelstein

Putz.

In July of 2006, Hezbollah terrorists crossed into the sovereign nation of Israel and murdered several border guards.  They also took two young reservists named Ehud Goldwasser, 22, and Eldad Regev, 25, hostage, holding them in exchange for several noted child-killers incarcerated in Israel.  Although murdering these two innocent Israelis almost immediately, Hezbollah cruelly allowed their families to hold out hope for years.

This unprovoked act of aggression led to a conflict with Israel that left over 150 Israelis and about 1200 Lebanese dead.  That only half of the latter were civilians is a testament to the Israeli determination to fight humanely, despite the best efforts of Hezbollah to embed its militant operations within the local population.  At the same time Hezbollah launched thousands of rockets deliberately into population centers, hoping to maximize civilian casualties on the Israeli side as well.

The senseless malice of Hezbollah (which operates explicitly in the name of Allah) is inconsequential in the Muslim world, where the terrorist organization is held in high respect.  Anti-Semitism and the inferior status of non-Muslims as a whole are deeply ingrained within Islam, and there is a profound insecurity when this divine order compares unfavorably to the real world.  Such is the case with modern Israel’s political, military and economic success measured against the abysmal Arab condition.  However, rather than trying to prove the superiority of their religion by competing legitimately with Israel, the Ummah prefers the path of grievance and terrorism.

Although it is understandable why such a band of murderous thugs might be celebrated in the Muslim world, what could possibly explain dhimwits like Norman Finkelstein, a “Jewish-American” professor who openly champions the cause of Hezbollah? 

In a recent interview with a Lebanese TV station, the chest-beating Dr. Finkelstein acts as if Islamic terrorism is the only thing standing between Israel and the enslavement and murder of Lebanese Arabs.  In his own words, he “honors” the Hezbollah “resistance” and compares Israelis to Nazis who want to kill and destroy innocent people.  The choice is between living and dying, and anyone wanting to do the former had better line up behind Hezbollah, according to this cheerleader for terror.

Of course, Finkelstein never really explains how deliberately provoking the 2006 war was a ‘choice for life’ on the part of Hezbollah.  He doesn’t tell us why Israel treats its own Arab civilians so well if the intention is to massacre them.  He doesn’t provide any insight into why Israelis would even want to engage in genocide or mass murder, or how it is that they have been so inept at this given their obvious capabilities.  Finkelstein is simply content leaving the worst anti-Semitic stereotypes dangling salaciously in the air.

Muslim bigots must love this man, and one can only guess at how many innocents will die at the hands of those whipped into a righteous passion by the embellished rhetoric of a career academic who, despite his ethnic and national identity, supports those who randomly murder both Jews and Americans.

Actually, to call Norman Finkelstein a man at all may be a misnomer as well.  Admittedly raised as a mama’s boy, he is really just a small and cowardly egoist who lives vicariously through romantic fantasies of “freedom fighters,” shrilly parroting their propaganda in the hope of sharing the glory without sharing the physical sacrifice (no virgins await Jewish martyrs).  If he had not been granted a global stage on which to encourage violence, Finkelstein would probably be playing with GI Joe dolls in his mother's basement.

Although so seemingly credulous of noble rhetoric – even from the most ignoble of sources – useful idiots such as Norman Finkelstein never seem to show the slightest universal commitment to the very values they claim to champion.  Freedom… occupation… resistance?  Has Finkelstein ever asked himself what Hezbollah was doing during Syria’s 20-year occupation of Lebanon?  Oh that’s right… they were aiding and abetting.  So much for the idiom of “liberation.”

While Finkelstein spews his anti-Israel poison into the minds of impressionable Muslims, thus doing his part to perpetuate the violence, true Lebanese patriots such as Rafiq Hariri and May Chidiac (who lost half her body) pay the ultimate price for standing against genuine occupation and oppression.  These heroes could hardly be more different from the hollow and self-absorbed Norman Finkelstein - and for that, they should also be exceedingly proud.

[Update: Wonderful article from Frontpage Magazine: Collaborators in the War Against the Jews: Norman Finkelstein

January 2009 Dhimwit: David Miliband

Local beneficiaries congratulate the British Foreign Secretary
on his nomination for TROP Dhimwit of the Month

David Miliband is the British Foreign Secretary who recently attempted to justify the Mumbai attacks.  For this and other reasons, he is our choice for Dhimwit of the Month:

Melanie Philips: The Astounding Shallowness of Britain's Foreign Secretary

Current Year Dhimwits
2008 Dhimwits Page
2007 Dhimwits Page
2006 Dhimwits Page
2005 Dhimwits Page

Go back to the List of Islamic Terrorist Attacks

TOP