In this issue
April 9, 2014

Jonathan Tobin: Why Did Kerry Lie About Israeli Blame?

Samuel G. Freedman: A resolution 70 years later for a father's unsettling legacy of ashes from Dachau

Jessica Ivins: A resolution 70 years later for a father's unsettling legacy of ashes from Dachau

Kim Giles: Asking for help is not weakness

Kathy Kristof and Barbara Hoch Marcus: 7 Great Growth Israeli Stocks

Matthew Mientka: How Beans, Peas, And Chickpeas Cleanse Bad Cholesterol and Lowers Risk of Heart Disease

Sabrina Bachai: 5 At-Home Treatments For Headaches

The Kosher Gourmet by Daniel Neman Have yourself a matzo ball: The secrets bubby never told you and recipes she could have never imagined

April 8, 2014

Lori Nawyn: At Your Wit's End and Back: Finding Peace

Susan B. Garland and Rachel L. Sheedy: Strategies Married Couples Can Use to Boost Benefits

David Muhlbaum: Smart Tax Deductions Non-Itemizers Can Claim

Jill Weisenberger, M.S., R.D.N., C.D.E : Before You Lose Your Mental Edge

Dana Dovey: Coffee Drinkers Rejoice! Your Cup Of Joe Can Prevent Death From Liver Disease

Chris Weller: Electric 'Thinking Cap' Puts Your Brain Power Into High Gear

The Kosher Gourmet by Marlene Parrish A gift of hazelnuts keeps giving --- for a variety of nutty recipes: Entree, side, soup, dessert

April 4, 2014

Rabbi David Gutterman: The Word for Nothing Means Everything

Charles Krauthammer: Kerry's folly, Chapter 3

Amy Peterson: A life of love: How to build lasting relationships with your children

John Ericson: Older Women: Save Your Heart, Prevent Stroke Don't Drink Diet

John Ericson: Why 50 million Americans will still have spring allergies after taking meds

Cameron Huddleston: Best and Worst Buys of April 2014

Stacy Rapacon: Great Mutual Funds for Young Investors

Sarah Boesveld: Teacher keeps promise to mail thousands of former students letters written by their past selves

The Kosher Gourmet by Sharon Thompson Anyone can make a salad, you say. But can they make a great salad? (SECRETS, TESTED TECHNIQUES + 4 RECIPES, INCLUDING DRESSINGS)

April 2, 2014

Paul Greenberg: Death and joy in the spring

Dan Barry: Should South Carolina Jews be forced to maintain this chimney built by Germans serving the Nazis?

Mayra Bitsko: Save me! An alien took over my child's personality

Frank Clayton: Get happy: 20 scientifically proven happiness activities

Susan Scutti: It's Genetic! Obesity and the 'Carb Breakdown' Gene

Lecia Bushak: Why Hand Sanitizer May Actually Harm Your Health

Stacy Rapacon: Great Funds You Can Own for $500 or Less

Cameron Huddleston: 7 Ways to Save on Home Decor

The Kosher Gourmet by Steve Petusevsky Exploring ingredients as edible-stuffed containers (TWO RECIPES + TIPS & TECHINQUES)

Jewish World Review August 29, 2005 / 24 Av, 5765

Realpolitik vs. pretendpolitik

By Diana West

Printer Friendly Version
Email this article

http://www.JewishWorldReview.com | Unbowed, if unemployed, Michael Graham issued a thought-provoking challenge as his airtime on "The O'Reilly Factor" ran down to a break. The topic under discussion was the conservative radio host's firing by the Washington, D.C., radio station WMAL — egged on by the terrorist-linked Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) — for having made his case, logically, forcefully, even regretfully that "Islam is a terrorist organization."

Before discussing Graham's final words on "O'Reilly," it's worth mentioning that Graham's argument linking terrorism to Islam is posted at JewishWorldReview.com in a column he wrote after the second London Underground bombing. Sure, the stand-alone scare quote ("I. is a T.O.") collides head-on with 21st-century sensibilities, but Graham builds his argument carefully. He makes the politically incorrect kind of sense, supported by fact (e.g., more than one in four British Muslims said they wouldn't tell police of a planned terrorist attack) and observation (Islamic teachings drive terrorist jihad), that the open-eyed child in "The Emperor's New Clothes" would instantly recognize. But not his bosses at WMAL — not, it seems, after CAIR objected. When Graham refused to "apologize," the ABC-Disney-owned station fired him.

All of which is what he went on "O'Reilly" to discuss, offering a factually reasoned discourse on the controversy. (Good stats, conceded an outgunned Bill O'Reilly.) And then, in closing, Graham said this: "(t)ell me one terrorist attack that's going to be stopped because we stopped this conversation" — that is, by WMAL taking Graham off the air.

An interesting notion. WMAL is no Department of Homeland Security, but given the line the radio station decided Graham crossed over global terrorism (jihad) and its central role in Islam, maybe it's worth wondering whether we are safer because Michael Graham isn't pursuing his on-air line of inquiry. Surely, we are more "sensitive," meaning more guarded, even nervous about what is currently permissible to say, at least according to CAIR's enforcers. Even so, ending a conversation about jihad and Islam doesn't end Islamic jihad. Nor does cutting the talk about links between Islam and terrorism cut the links between Islam and terrorism. The fact is, the train of logic doesn't change its destination no matter how many of us — radio stations, pundits, academics, politicians — hop off.

Still, thanks to WMAL, maybe we really are better protected, at least against the sharp edges and noxious corners of reality. This reality includes the fact that what we know as "terrorism" is directly linked to the centrality of jihad (holy war) and dhimmitude (non-Muslim inferiority) in Islam, no hijackings necessary. But spare us: We live in a politically correct country, one in which the U.S. State Department declares to the world that Americans "believe we are part of one human family, and that the enemy of that family are those who use the name of religion to pursue a violent and hateful ideology that really goes against (what) ... any person of faith believes in, no matter what that faith is."

But what if, as Michael Graham roughly wondered aloud, the violent and hateful ideology runs through Islam itself? In America today, it is considered better to cut the mike, seeking not the truth, but rather a kind of security from the truth. Once the survival strategies of realpolitik are traded in for the pipe dreams of pretendpolitik, such security even feels safe, at least for a time.

Donate to JWR

Protected against reality, we see only good in any religion because it is a religion. Secure from the truth, we see only liberty and justice in any constitution because it is a constitution. Our only problems stem from "extremism," which not only defines nothing, but also offends no one. Or does it? Out of Great Britain this month came a communique from nearly 40 Muslim leaders and groups. Their message? In part to renounce the label of "extremism." They wrote: "To equate 'extremism' with the aspirations of Muslims for Sharia laws in the Muslim world or the desire to see unification towards a Caliphate in the Muslim lands ... is inaccurate and disingenuous. It indicates ignorance of what Sharia is and what a Caliphate is and will alienate and victimize the Muslim community unnecessarily."

In other words, not only does terrorism have nothing to do with Islam, as WMAL seems to have determined, but sharia (repressive Islamic law) and the caliphate (Islamic empire) have nothing to do with extremism, as Britain's Muslim leaders have explained. Clearly, our vocabulary is shrinking as fast the ranks of bold talk-show hosts. But isn't there so much more to talk about?

Every weekday JewishWorldReview.com publishes what many in in the media and Washington consider "must-reading". Sign up for the daily JWR update. It's free. Just click here.

JWR contributor Diana West is a columnist and editorial writer for the Washington Times. Comment by clicking here.

Diana West Archives

© 2005, Diana West