Category Archives: Diana West
Diana West on Michael Coren
Diana West and Andrew Bostom on the NY Times hit piece on Lars Hedigaard
Diana West excerpt:
Feb 28
Written by: Diana West
Thursday, February 28, 2013 4:12 AM 
The New York Times weighs in today (like a ton of bricks) on the attempted assassination of Lars Hedegaard, editor of Dispatch International.
“Danish Critic of Islam Attacked, and Muslims Defend His Right to Speak” (with links from the NYT original)
By Andrew Higgins (photo above):
COPENHAGEN — When a would-be assassin disguised as a postman shot at — and just missed — the head of Lars Hedegaard, an anti-Islam polemicist and former newspaper editor, this month, a cloud of suspicion immediately fell on Denmark’s Muslim minority.
This isn’t a newspaper lede, it’s a framework of Leftist attitude through which the pre-enlightened Timesreader is to view the event.
As such, it’s worth a closer look. Note how the emotional seesaw touches down, first, at the head of Lars Hedegaard — “just missed” by a “would-be” (hapless) assassin– before lifting again as if burnt by the heat emanating from the “anti-Islam polemicist” (bad) and “former newspaper editor” (what good is he now?). It falls again through a troubling “cloud of suspicion” (cliche evokes *prejudice*) to land, thud, at “Denmark’s Muslim minority.”
Excerpt from Andrew Bostom:
Times Demonizes Hedegaard, Lionizes Danish Muslim Instigator of Murderous Cartoon Riots
February 28th, 2013 (6 hours ago) by Andrew Bostom |
Reporting “worthy” of this man, Walter Duranty
Andrew Higgins’ “inspirational” muse must be the ignoble New York Times reporter Walter Duranty, who deliberately concealed Stalin’s campaign of mass starvation and murder (or “dekulakization”) of 14.5 million in the Ukraine, from 1930-1937 (see Robert Conquest’s magisterial Harvest of Sorrow, pp. 299-307). This travesty was compounded when Duranty was awarded a 1932 Pulitzer prize for his despicably whitewashed, agitprop “reporting”.
Eight decades later, ostensibly reporting on the recent failed assassination attempt against Danish journalist and historian Lars Hedegaard for the New York Times (or more appositely, the New Duranty Times, since the “paper of record” has never denounced Duranty’s illegitimate receipt of the Pulitzer), Higgins demonizes Hedegaard as a purveyor of “ anti-Muslim bile and conspiracy-laden forecasts,” while lionizing Copenhagen’s Islamic Society, in particular, its current leader, Imran Shah.
Please click headlines for whole articles
Money, Money, Money
H/T Fjordman
Diana West:
Monday, February 18, 2013 10:46 AM”>Feb 18
Written by: Diana West
Monday, February 18, 2013 10:46 AM
Board meeting of Al Maktoun, a UAE charity. Are they writing checks for laptops for “needy” Americans?
—
Yesterday, I tweeted, and somehow contemptuously, that London’s mayor was seeking money for a new airport from Qatar, Dubai and Kuwait.
Today, the Wash Post reports on the extensive charity the UAE is lavishing on “needy” American communities.
I feel ill. Emiratis are the people who were falconing with bin Laden in Afghanistan when the US didn’t strike OBL pre-9/11; these are the people whom we successfully rejected over the UAE’s proposed Dubai Port’s purchase of US ports. Now, they just buy their way in all over America with laptops, soccer fields and hospital beds.
That’s because no one has the Yankee pride to turn down the blood money and get along without it. After all, UAE is not only a dictatorship where liberty doesn’t exist, its many millionaires bankroll jihad violence and aggression against the US and our allies. Or as a State Department cable released by Wikileaks puts it: “UAE-based donors have provided financial support to a variety of terrorist groups, including al-Qa’ida, the Taliban, LeT and other terrorist groups, including Hamas.”
Now they “provide financial support” for poor pitiful Americans.
From the piece we learn:
Today, the nearly 2,200 high school students in Joplin [MO] each have their own UAE-funded MacBook laptop, which they use to absorb lessons, perform homework and take tests. Across the city, the UAE is spending $5 million to build a neonatal intensive-care unit at Mercy Hospital, which also was ripped apart by the tornado. …
Diana West discusses the attempted assassination of Lars Hedigaard by someone who I am confident would describe themselves as ‘religious Muslims’
Joe McCarthy was right all along
I once heard a quote about Ol’ Joe which was something like, “He was not the most intelligent, but he wasn’t wrong”.
“Freedom of the press cannot be limited without being lost.” – Thomas Jefferson
Friday, January 25, 2013
Published Every Thursday
WASHINGTON, D.C. Most Europeans are unlikely to be familiar with the facts behind the American term “McCarthyism.” They probably know it describes something very bad in American politics – the “Communist witch hunts” of more than half a century ago. They may also know that simply uttering the term, like casting a spell, stops all debate cold by associating someone with the eponymous Joseph McCarthy. As the story goes, he was himself very bad. After all, he conducted those long ago “Communist witch hunts,“ ruining his name in perpetuity. This probably exhausts general knowledge.
But here’s a secret: Most Americans know little more than this same familiar but completely false narrative. In recent years, stunning revelations from archives in Washington and Moscow have confirmed that McCarthy’s investigations – and those conducted by other officials before and after – netted not innocent and imaginary “witches,” but secret cadres of hardened Communist agents determined to bring down the American republic.
Diana West: Toward a Conservative Foreign Policy
Diana West.Net
Written by: Diana West
Monday, January 21, 2013 4:37 AM
Below is the text of a speech I presented to the Maryland Conservative Action Network, January 12, 2013, in Annapolis. It was published yesterday at The American Thinker.
What might a “conservative” foreign policy look like?
In the post-9/11 era, it’s fair to say we have mainly followed a “neoconservative” foreign policy. This policy has been based on the rock-solid belief that there exist universal values that all peoples everywhere share and indeed yearn for if they don’t already enjoy them. Our neoconservative foreign policy, then – our war-fighting policy, too – has been a matter of spreading such universal values.
This has been a disaster. Think of nation-building in Iraq and Afghanistan — policies predicated on this denial of the existence of cultural difference. Certainly in this decade since 9/11 we should have learned that cultures, the West and Islam, namely, are different and that such universalism is a fantasy. The West enshrines the liberty of the individual, while Islam, like other totalitarian systems, enforces a collective will. Still, to this day, we don’t permit this simple reality to be discussed let alone reflected in any meaningful policy way.
Click to continue:
Wil Benghazi Lies Determine Election? Not If MSM Have Their Way!
Diana West:
Washington, DC — Two weeks ago, I reported here that the Obama administration had dug itself into a minefield of lies about the Benghazi terrorist attack that the president would have to cross to get to Election Day. Whether he will do so unscathed remains unclear, but if Barack Obama is re-elected president on November 6, it will be for one reason only. It will be because the US media threw themselves on every Benghazi bombshell that threatened the president, shutting down democracy in the process.
Not all of the media, of course. Fox News, WND.com, Daily Beast, Reuters, CNN, CBS and others have reported most of the key facts now available. These include, first, the revelation that intelligence immediately indicated the US consulate in Benghazi was destroyed in a planned terrorist attack, not as the result of a “spontaneous” protest triggered by a Youtube video. The latter scenario, however, is the demonstrable lie the Obama administration, including President Obama, repeatedly told for weeks. Later, the State Department established the fact that no “protest” at all occurred before the attack. The Obama administration explanation for these and other discrepancies? “Bad intelligence” or “fog of war.” The major media largely agree, no questions asked. Literally.
This past week, a new set of factors emerged darkly underscoring the appearance of a White House cover-up. These include the publication of the email bulletins that alerted the highest administration officials that the US consulate in Benghazi was under terrorist attack. These emails began arriving in Washington within the first hour of what would stretch into an eight-hour battle. We also learned that the Americans under rocket and mortar fire in Libya repeatedly called for military support; that military support was within two hours’ flying time; and that no help was ever deployed. Four Americans, including the US Ambassador, were killed in the attack that left many others wounded.
Diana West with Erick Stakelbeck on ‘Banghazi gate’
H/T Diana West
Benghazi’s Real Scandal? Uncle Sam Joined the Jihad
Diana West:
Written by: Diana West
Thursday, October 11, 2012 4:20 PM
Near the Italian consulate, Benghazi, 2006
Imagine, pre-9/11/12, that you were responsible for arranging the defense of the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya. Would you have considered American interests and personnel best protected by bringing in a local security outfit called the February 17 Martyrs Brigade?
The question has yet to come up in House hearings, but I think it holds the key to the Obama administration’s betrayal of the American people in “Benghazi-gate.” To an American with common sense not subverted by advanced degrees, the thought of putting Islamic “martyrs” in charge of American “infidels” in Benghazi – which, fun fact, literally means “city of holy warriors” – would trigger the inevitable “heck, no.” And that’s without even knowing what is significant about Feb. 17.
But I’m talking about Washington, D.C. Here, placing the lives of Americans in the hands of a thug-army linked to multiple atrocities and drawn from jihad-epicentral eastern Libya disturbs no collective brain wave. No matter that Benghazi and nearby Derna sent more men, per capita, to Iraq to kill Americans than anywhere else in the world. As far as the Obama administration is concerned, putting local boys in barracks inside the consulate compound was a great idea. Why not? President Obama’s ambassador, the late Christopher Stevens, was, as they say, “reaching out” across the jihad spectrum on official business.
Outing the Muslim Brotherhood
Diana West:
Written by: Diana West
Thursday, July 19, 2012 3:20 PM
This week’s syndicated column:
Be alarmed: The U.S. government continues to be “advised by organizations and individuals that the U.S. government itself has identified in federal courts as fronts for the international Muslim Brotherhood.”
So wrote Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., in a lengthy, heavily footnoted answer to a query last week from Rep. Keith Ellison, D-Minn. He was seeking more information about the reasons Bachmann plus four other House Republicans – Louis Gohmert (Texas), Trent Franks (Ariz.), Lynn Westmoreland (Ga.) and Thomas Rooney (Fla.) – requested Inspector General investigations into “potential Muslim Brotherhood infiltration” of the government. (See all of the letters here.)
Yes, that would be the same Muslim Brotherhood whose leaders are sweeping to power in the Middle East – most recently in Egypt. There, the new president, Mohamed Morsi, fired up voters this spring by declaring: “The Koran is our constitution. The Prophet Muhammad is our leader. Jihad is our path. And death for the sake of Allah is our most lofty aspiration.” That, by the way, is the Muslim Brotherhood’s motto.
Jerusalem to Be the Capital of … What?
Diana West:
If Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood candidate for president Mohammed Mursi (above) wins, Egypt’s capital moves from Cairo to Jerusalem. So stated a leading Islamic leader, Safwat Hagazy, during a recent campaign rally as Mursi and MB head honcho Mohammed Badei looked on.
Outrageous? Fantastic? Not in Muslimworld. As crack Islamic law expert Stephen Coughlin pointed out to me today, the 2008 charter of the Organization of the Islamic conference similarly calls for OIC’s “permanent headquarters” to be moved to Jerusalem after the city’s “liberation.”
Article 21 of the OIC Charter:
The Headquarters of the General Secretariat shall be in the city of Jeddah until the liberation of the city of Al Quds so that it will become the permanent Headquarters of the Organisation.
Al Quds is the Islamic name for Jerusalem.
The OIC is the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (it used to be known as the Organization of the Islamic Conference). With 56 Islamic member states represented by heads of state and foreign ministers, it is the largest voting bloc on the international stage, a unified front to advance Islam and its laws across the world.
Liberty Lost:
Written by: Diana West
Thursday, May 31, 2012 5:18 PM
This week’s syndicated column:
Back in 2001, Britain’s political parties signed a fantastic pledge. They agreed to say nothing to “stir up racial or religious hatred, or lead to prejudice on grounds of race, nationality or religion.”
This gag order did more than keep the parties polite. Vital issues – from massive immigration and multiculturalism to their eradicating effects on British civilization – were officially banned. Thus, such concerns became impermissible thoughts. Not that such issues weren’t already thoughtcrime, as George Orwell would have put it. But this unprecedented pledge turned “violators” into political lepers.
I thought of that elite code of cowardice this week when a London judge sentenced a 42-year-old British secretary named Jacqueline Woodhouse to 21 weeks in jail. Her crime? An expletive-laden rant about immigration, multiculturalism and the disappearance of British civilization. Not in so many words. But that was the unmistakable gist of Woodhouse’s commentary one January night on the London Underground.
This same week, another London judge ordered two black girls, 18 and 19, to perform community service after a savage physical attack on two white legal secretaries. “I am satisfied what you both did, you did that night because you were fueled by alcohol,” Judge Stephen Kramer said, as though tut-tutting a child’s unknowing apple theft.
Islam’s War on Wilders and Us
May 4
Written by: Diana West
Friday, May 04, 2012 6:34 AM
I had the great honor and pleasure of interviewing Dutch Freedom Party leader Geert Wilders yesterday.
Wilders is in the United States to mark the long-awaited publication of his book, Marked for Death: Islam’s War on the West and Me, with a packed round of radio, TV and print interviews. So far, these include an in-depth interview with Glenn Beck on GBTV, and also an appearance on Fox News’ Sean Hannity show.
For the heartburn alone that Wilders’ appearance with Hannity undoubtedly caused the Saudi Dictatorship Family, a scion of whom infamously owns the second largest stake in Fox’s parent company News Corp, the Hannity spot was was worth it. As a Fox-watcher long horrified by the specter of Saudi-Islamic influence over many reputedly conservative flaghsip outlets — Fox News, the Wall Street Journal, the New York Post — I have to congratulate Hannity, Fox’s biggest brand, for inviting Wilders on the show. That said, what a deeply fallen state we in America are in when a leading political affairs show host has to be patted on the back for going against the Sharia-Powers that Be and inviting arguably the most remarkable man in politics in the world — Geert Wilders — on the air.
Diana West: The great mystery of 2011
Diana West writes quite an interesting analysis of an event which, as she points out, got an exponentially less amount of attention that its importance would suggest it deserved. Have a click over and check it out.