“Diana West has the must-read column of the day on the pathetic inability of
Westerners to call the war and the warriors who want infidels beheaded what they
are. Too many of our political and military leaders here and across the pond are
stuck, Diana writes, in a “mental no-jihad zone. . .
Stifling dissent is precisely the mission of the likes of CAIR, which has
chosen veteran syndicated columnist and radio commentator Cal Thomas
as its latest target (via WTOP): . . .
I’d settle for keeping the jihad enablers and sympathizers at CAIR out of
White House events. But we can’t even ensure that. Steve
Emerson reports this morning: . . .”
It looks like the left is winning this political correctness game even as it reaches into the White House. Isn’t it time we really began to understand why the cultural left is so willing to play into the Islamists hands???
Now and then I read a book that is so provocative and so well-documented that I know it’s going into my Hanging Lefties by Their Sorry Words Toolbox. “The Enemy at Home: The Cultural Left And It’s Responsibility For 9/11” by Dinesh D’Souza is such a book. Not only does this book have an impressive index, each chapter’s endnotes run into pages providing a treasure trove of sources and quotes by the major lefty political players.
D’Souza has some impressive credentials. This is from his blog:
DINESH D'SOUZA is the Rishwain Fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford
University. Previously he was a domestic policy analyst at the White House. He
is the best-selling author of several books, including Illiberal Education, The End of
Racism, and What's So Great About America. . .
The book, “The Enemy at Home”, published 2007 by Doubleday, has been causing apoplexy among lefty bloggers and D’Souza has come in for plenty of harsh criticism. If you visit Amazon looking for the book you will first encounter the unfavorable Publisher’s Weekly review.
Conservative pundit D'Souza (Illiberal Education) roots the blame for the
9/11 attacks in the left wing's "aggressive global campaign to undermine the
traditional patriarchal family" in this mostly lucid but unconvincing argument.
Pointing to Hillary Clinton, Britney Spears and Noam Chomsky, he decries those
who have teamed up with Hollywood and the U.N. to foist an irreligious, sexually
licentious, antifamily liberal culture—epitomized by Eve Ensler's play The
Vagina Monologues and gay marriage initiatives—on a Muslim world that rightly
reviles it. By deliberately attacking Islamic values, the left tacitly allies
itself with al- Qaeda in its effort to defeat Bush's war on terror and thus
discredit conservatism at home, he asserts. But D'Souza's claim that Islamic
extremists are inflamed solely by America's music videos and feminists—not its
U.S. bases in Saudi Arabia, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict or American support
for Muslim dictators—is too single-minded. . .
This is what D’Souza actually says on the book’s jacket:
In faulting the cultural left, I am not making the absurd accusation that
this group blew up the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. I am saying that the
cultural left and its allies in Congress, the media, Hollywood, the non-profit
sector, and the universities are the primary cause of the volcano of anger
toward America that is erupting from the Islamic world. The Muslims who carried
out the 9/11 attacks were the product of this visceral rage – some of it based
on legitimate concerns, some of it based on wrongful prejudice, but all of it
fueled and encouraged by the cultural left. Thus without the cultural left, 9/11
would not have happened. . .
If you scroll down the Amazon review site you will find a few more favorable reviews such as this excerpt from a review by C. Cotten:
It seems that every reviewer here read an interview, or saw the author on Comedy Central, then rushed to write a review here loaded only with a vague
concept of this book's central themes.
First, it should be noted that the author talks about the motivation behind
the book, that in today's public discourse there is very little focus on the
cultural aspects of America that could be fomenting hate and terrorism against
us. There was a void on the subject which he has filled; as he says, "let the
Now whether you ultimately agree with him or not, this IS a debate worth
having, not just as it impacts our current conflict, but as it informs us as a
nation to take a good hard look in the mirror at times. . .