They discussed a variety of issues:
Muslims position on terrorism.
If you go to a mosque, and somebody stands up and says Jews are apes and pigs, or the West should be destroyed, then you have a duty as a resident or a citizen in a Western country to oppose that. And if you don't do it, you're abetting it, and you're complicit in it.
That's a pretty strong stance but maybe one that is neccessary. I am often confused as to where the 'moderate' Muslim stands on the issue of terrorism. I here groups such as CAIR denounce violence but I don't here any criticism of the environment that spawns terrorism. CAIR never addresses the issue of a Middle East almost entirely governed by theocratic tyrannies. These tyrannies support terrorism through fake charities and payments to the families of suicide killers. And they intentionally breed new terrorist in their madrassas.
In responce to a question about the leftist anger in todays Democrat party:
There was a strain, the Henry Wallace Party. And a group of concerned, sophisticated Democrats decided that was not where to go, and got tough on the Soviet Union, were the architects of the Cold War, and produced people like Scoop Jackson, Harry Truman, JFK. And then Vietnam started that detour again, and we haven't really gone back yet. We've tried to, a little bit sometimes with Bill Clinton's middle course. But I think what's happened is they've come very close...they won the popular election in 2000. They came within three or four points in the last election. But they have no political power, in the sense of no majority in the House, none in the Senate, no presidency, no Supreme Court, no majority of state legislatures or governors. And that creates a frustration. And rather than to do the hard work of laying out an agenda, that would give the American people a clear-cut choice, they just look for an Abu Ghraib scandal, a Koran flushed at Guantanamo, a Karl Rove, any little scandal they think that can get them in power on the cheap. And it's not going to work. Not in a time of war.
There was also some discussion of our Southern border:
I'm afraid, some type of disaster before we wake up and realize we have a fifteen hundred mile border that's completely unguarded, and we have a government in Mexico that's not a friend of ours. And at best, is a neutral. If you read the Mexican newspapers, especially those in Mexico City, it's almost a belligerent.
I have no problem if Latin America and Mexico want to emulate the Anglo-Saxon classical traditions that created this country: the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, an open economony, the protection of private property. But if unity means that we're going to erode the core values, and resemble Mexico or Argentina or Peru or Venezuela, then I think that would be a disaster. We can be enriched in a multi-racial society by food, music, art, but that's very, very different than tampering with these core values. People are dying to come to the United States from Mexico, not because they want to emulate Mexican culture. They want to reject it and enjoy what we have to offer.
Very politically incorrect, but also very true.
On the direction of the EU:
I think what's going on in Europe has confused Americans, because they thought, you know, here's a very liberal Holland, and now they've not only stepped up to the plate, but they're going further to the right than we are, if you read what they're doing to a lot...in their immigration laws. France just cancelled the EU utopian borderless entry controls. And England is going that way.
And the future of America:
HH: I always hate to do this, because I never know what you're going to say, but do you ever worry that we've entered sort of the phase of the late Roman Republic when it comes to politics, Professor Hanson, when personal vendetta mattered more than the interest of Rome?
VDH: Yeah, I think so. And it's not just Rome. It's late 18th Century French politics, or Athenian politics in the 4th Century B.C. And that's a dangerous time. And I think that the Democrats have to, as I said earlier, lay out an agenda. We're in a war, and any time you see an article in the New York Times by Thomas Friedman, The Washington Times and The London Times, three Times articles that are never on the same page, today they were all about the dangers of Islamic fundamentalism. It tells you from left to right to center, not just in the United States, but the West is very concerned about this issue. They don't really care about Karl Rove's phone calls. They don't care about a Koran in Guantanamo. They don't care about these trivia that keep coming up on the part of the Democrats.
If you have the time or the inclination read the entire interview.
No comments:
Post a Comment