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.
 

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.

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 abilities.  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.

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

2008 Dhimwits Page
2007 Dhimwits Page
2006 Dhimwits Page
2005 Dhimwits Page

Go back to the List of Islamic Terrorist Attacks

TOP