Pages: 1 2
When the vain and delusional emperor walked naked through the streets of his capital to show off his new clothes, so light and so finely woven that they could not be seen or felt, it was only an innocent little child, ingénue, who told the world that the emperor was naked. The rest went along with the charade, and collaborated with the emperor and his dishonest clothiers in order to avoid imperial ire.
Recent events and disclosures at the highest levels of our government demonstrate that our own rulers, like the naked emperor, have through folly and dishonesty exposed themselves as “useful idiots” or worse, liars and functionaries whose loyalties may well be to other than the United States.
On April 10, Johnnie Carson, Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs, stated that “religion is not driving extremist violence” in Nigeria. This pronouncement was made one day after Boko Haram, the uber-violent Muslim jihadist Nigerian terrorists, bombed a church killing 39 Christians.
Carson told us an unconscionable and transparent lie. In addition to stating an obvious falsehood, given the Boko Haram’s overt and unabashed self-definition as a brutally violent Muslim terrorist organization which condemns all things non-Muslim as “Haram” (prohibited), Carson also contradicted earlier State Department assessments, [i] all of which argue that Nigeria’s Islamic religious terrorist violence was so much a concern that the US Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) recommended back in 2002 that Nigeria be placed on the United States watch list.
What impelled Mr. Carson to lie such that anyone anywhere who does not live under a rock can see that he is lying? Joel Mowbray’s Dangerous Diplomacy provides a clue. Mowbray documents how the Saudi royal family has over the past decades insinuated itself into our State Department by promising State Department officials serving in the Arab world generous sinecures when they have retired from their official duties, as long as they represent Saudi interests to the US government while serving in the State Department. These Saudi long-range bribes render our officials servants of the Saudi government, representing Saudi interests to our government instead of the other way around.[ii]
But the problem runs deeper than one State Department functionary whose integrity may have been compromised by Muslim forces that want him to lie on behalf of Islamic jihadist terrorists. His boss is Madame Secretary Hillary Clinton, our Secretary of State. She has been silent regarding his transparent lie. Is Saudi penetration so deep that even the Secretary of State cannot publicly correct the errors of a State Department employee; and is it only the Saudis?
Very distressingly, it may be more than the State Department alone that is in question here. President Obama and the State Department have been unwilling to rule out aid to Hamas despite the fact that that very same State Department has classified Hamas as a terrorist organization, and American law prohibits US financial aid to terrorist organizations. As Trudy Rubin observed last year in a Washington Post article:
“The most ominous interpretation of the mush coming from the State Department (regarding aid to Hamas) is that the administration is so rudderless, unprincipled and desperate to avoid a clear defeat in its efforts to foist a “peace agreement” on the parties that it would go so far as to continue to do business with the PA, despite (the PA’s) taking on a partner that has killed Americans, seeks Israel’s destruction and, from behind the skirts of women and the cribs of children, has conducted a missile bombardment of Israel.”
The State Department’s rudderless, unprincipled pronouncements contradict its own policy denying aid to any terrorist organization.
And in case one might think that Hamas’ terrorist history is a function only of its violent and psychotic leaders, while the downtrodden rank-and-file of Gazan Arabs are just tagging along for the charitable gifts they receive from Hamas leadership, one need only note the recent Commentary Magazine article on the Palestinian Shikaki organization’s poll of Gazan and West Bank Arabs. This poll shows that Hamas has lost considerable support of its followers in the Gaza Strip due in part to its not being aggressive enough in its terrorism against Israel.
The poll’s findings indicate a significant decline in the popularity of Hamas in the Gaza Strip and a decrease in its constituency’s positive evaluation of its government compared to previous polls. Shikaki suggests that this may be due to Hamas’ behavior, standing on the sideline, during Gaza’s rocket war with Israel (while other Gazan terror groups carried out numerous rocket attacks). Ironically, several Hamas leaders, especially Isma’il Haniyeh, enjoy in the West Bank a popularity that rivals President Abbas. Apparently it is not just the Gazan Arabs who want to see Jews murdered.
Significant percentages of Gazan Arabs, not the leaders, nor even the leaders’ acolytes, just the plain old day-to-day Arabs on the street, really want Hamas and other terror groups to just keep on bombing Israel, just keep on killing Jews. Yet the State Department and our President are unclear as to whether or not it is a good idea for the USA to continue to provide Hamas with hundreds of millions of tax-payer dollars, many of which will be rerouted to support Hamas’ terrorist efforts.
Pages: 1 2