George Clooney in 2005’s  Syriana

Meanwhile the national discussion has segued to our own collective insanity, political correctness, which we are now discovering paved the very way for the massacre. It is this cultural and mental straightjacket that forced a U.S. Army general to say diversity is more important than losing American lives; that compelled our Homeland Security Secretary to reassure the Arab world that we’re doing everything we can to protect against a mythical Muslim backlash; that prevented people from speaking out about red flags that could have saved the lives of everyone murdered at Ft. Hood; and that prevents our officials from even naming the enemy. No such ailment afflicts the jihadists, however, who are celebrating Hasan as a hero, who have no problem acknowledging his ideological intent, and who recognize our political correctness as a self-inflicted fatal wound. Unlike our leaders and media elites, they don’t sap their wartime focus with hand-wringing and navel-gazing.

Also unlike us, they have no problem asserting their values in the war’s crucial cultural front, either, a theater of operations where we are weakest. A burgeoning Arab film industry, for example, in partnership with Hollywood, is set to make unapologetic and positive cinematic portrayals of Islam as important an export as oil. Abu Dhabi is investing $1 billion in movie productions over the next few years. Crash and In the Valley of Elah screenwriter Paul Haggis recently taught a screenwriting master class in Dubai to fifty promising and “socially and politically astute” writers. A Qatari media company is pairing with Lord of the Rings producer Barrie Osborne on a $150 million biopic of the Muslim prophet Mohammed – “a profound genius,” says Osborne, ”who founded a religion whose name in Islam signifies peace and reconciliation. This is what our film will aspire to do.”

Yusuf Al-Qaradawi

Very high-minded, if misinformed. But what’s wrong, you ask, with such multicultural bridge-building in this time of conflict between Islam and the West? Well, here’s an eyebrow-raiser for you about the Mohammed biopic: its “technical consultant” is Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the vastly influential spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, a Sunni movement whose aim is the imposition of Sharia worldwide and “the destruction of Western civilization from within.” Al-Qaradawi has issued fatwas in support of suicide bombings in Israel, attacks on coalition soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the execution of Jews and gays. With him guiding the project, it’s starting to sound less like an effort to promote ”peace and reconciliation” and more like a propagandistic Trojan horse. Certainly not every film in the forthcoming cinematic wave out of the Middle East will have a dark design; but do not doubt that the Islamists recognize the cultural impact of cinema, or that the seemingly benign partnership is useful to their agenda.

And does the cultural exchange run both ways? Is Hollywood equally as eager to export Western values and a positive portrayal of America? I think we all know the answer to that. And why should we expect otherwise? For decades Americans have been conditioned and intimidated by political correctness, and indoctrinated by its handmaiden multiculturalism, to believe that all cultural values and practices are equally valid – except Western culture, which we’re taught is the domain of white male imperialists, racists, and slavers. And Hollywood continues to be at the forefront of the dissemination of that world view, too often denigrating America and whitewashing radical Islam.

 Hollywood may be out of touch with the “flyover” Americans between L.A. and New York, resulting in war-on-terror box office flops like Rendition and Lions for Lambs, but don’t underestimate the influence of its persistently blame-America-first propaganda on young audiences, on coastal elites, and on those countries that hungrily absorb the culture we export. Every time Hollywood makes a Syriana, which has been used as a recruitment tool to radicalize young Muslims; or a Redacted, which has also been used to inflame Muslim opinion against the raping, murdering American occupiers; or a Body of Lies, whose opening quote – “Those to whom evil is done do evil in return” – asserts that Islamic terrorism is just America’s chickens coming home to roost; or a Flightplan, in which you are manipulated into suspecting that the Muslims aboard an airplane are terrorists (Hitchcockian twist: they’re not!); every time Hollywood makes such thinly-veiled agitprop, the PC message is reinforced here and abroad that we are the bad guys, that America’s geopolitical meddling, not global jihad, is the genesis of Islamic terrorism. And therefore we can only end the Big Overseas Misunderstanding, or however President Obama is euphemizing the war on terror these days, by groveling and making amends – which is indeed his strategy for resolving it (resolving, not winning – remember, he’s not comfortable with the word victory).

Our President, who considers it his duty to combat “negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear,” is openly pursuing a globalist future in which America abdicates as a superpower. Leftist Hollywood marches in lockstep with that post-American agenda (“It’s an Obama world,” said the director of GI Joe: The Rise of Cobra, a movie scrupulously scrubbed of pro-American symbolism and real-world enemies – like jihadists). This subversive alliance is a prescription for cultural implosion, and an ascendant Islam is positioning itself to fill the void.

One-way multiculturalism in England

Think this is all alarmist, Islamophobic nonsense? It could never happen here, you say? Well it won’t if we do something about it. But if you want to see what a country looks like that has been gutted by multiculturalism, political correctness, and tolerance of the intolerant, and yet which continues to think “it can’t happen here,” see what has become of England. A hundred years ago the sun did not set on its empire; more recently it still stood tall under Churchill and then Thatcher. Now, harboring radical imams and embracing Sharia, it is teetering on the brink of cultural – and even literal – civil war with an unassimilated, radicalized Muslim population that is aggressively uni-cultural. Who could have imagined that this would be England’s future? Only the Islamists could. Back on our shores, Pamela Geller of Atlas Shrugs believes that the maddeningly tentative official response to the Ft. Hood assault is indicative not just of political correctness, but of de facto Sharia, and that we are already ”witnessing an Islamized America.”

The PC multiculturalist agenda, which Hollywood has often taken the lead in pushing, is a cancer that kills people and corrodes countries. It is the insidious source of all our misplaced “Why do they hate us?” agonizing. Not only is it undermining us in this clash of civilization versus barbarism, but it could prove to be the single most critical factor that will result in America’s defeat. But a Hollywood that unashamedly celebrates the American values that this country and the world hunger for can also take the lead in reversing that agenda’s damage; indeed, I believe such a cinematic wave is coming – but that’s a topic for another day.

* The media report thirteen dead, but one of his victims was three months pregnant, which in my book raises the count to fourteen.

Director Stephen Sommers said, “this is not a George Bush movie — it’s an Obama world.” Sounds to me that since Bush is no longer president it is supposed to legitimize the disintegration of patriotism for our armed forces. That would explain why the Joe’s are no longer the all American heroes they once were. Instead, they are a multinational task force that picks up the pieces after the USA fails.

This film represents everything President Obama worshipers stand for, which explains the lack of Americanism.GI Joe has always been a vehicle of unapologetic patriotism. What happened? Obama happened. For some reason, it now feels like multiculturalism was not acceptable until Obama was elected into office?

Correct me if I’m wrong, but our US armed forces were made up of the best men and women of all colors before Obama was elected, right?Yeah, thought so.

In a LA Times piece, Paramount Vice Chairman Rob Moore said, “Our starting point for this movie is not Hollywood and Manhattan but rather mid-America, there are a group of people we think are going to respond to the movie who are normally not the first priority. But we’re making them a priority.”

So by stripping Joe of his pure blooded Americansim, they are going to bank on Middle America as an audience? That doesn’t sound like a good move. Of course, many people will see this film thinking it will be some a pro-America and pro-military film. Unfortunately, this is not the case.

GI Joe obviously has a built in audience since it has been around for several decades. Fans should be offended by Hollywood’s attempt to indoctrinate them with their “Obama world” views through the lens of something that used to be American.

This film is a kick to the groin of Middle America, if there was not already enough reason to loathe the Hollywood elite, this should do it. From beginning to end, I kept saying to myself “how could they do this?” It would be one thing if this was a good action film with a misplaced title, but they can’t even give us that. They did give us a weird Brendan Fraser cameo, however.

Sommer’s went on to say, “Right from the writing stage we said to ourselves, this can’t be about beefy guys on steroids who all met each other in the Vietnam War, but an elite organization that’s made up of the best of the best from around the world.” Does that mean all action films are about beefy guys on steroids?

That might have been the case for some notable films of the 1980’s, but that isn’t the norm. Look at action star Nicholas Cage, definitely not on steroids. What about the main characters in great war films such as Saving Private Ryan, Full Metal Jacket, or The Great Escape. These guys aren’t beefed up; in fact, character’s in most war films are far from Rambo lookalikes.

The filmmakers could have easily made this film without the steroid types and kept the “American Hero” theme. Instead, they decided against it because after all, “it’s an Obama world.” That only means the push for anti-Americanism is at an all time high. Just like Obama and his cronies know they only have limited time to push all their agenda’s through before people catch on, Hollywood is capitalizing on the president’s popularity in order to push “world friendly” views.

Deadline Hollywood Daily reports that, “In the U.S., the studio expected the film to do best in so-called flyover country — the term Hollywood bestows on blue-collar moviegoers in the Midwest, South, and West where the common complaint is that liberal elites don’t make movies for their “God, guns, and country” tastes.”

This is hilarious, because even though the film has a clear line of good and evil, there is nothing that “flyover country” should appreciate. The new GI Joe film is how the so-called liberal elites see patriotism. To them, it means creating a politically correct melting pot of equality where no one gets offended.

To me, this is the culmination of the reverse McCarthyism that is going on in Hollywood. They took what should turn out as a pro-American if not also conservative film, and repackaged it for the “Obama world.” Hollywood has always been a wild place, but right now, we are amidst an Obamanation.

Well, that was pathetic. And it wasn’t an accident. The fix was in from the beginning.

Last week’s lackluster “Beer Summit” featuring Sgt. James Crowley, professor Henry Louis Gates Jr., President Obama and Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. was orchestrated to end a national discussion on race, not begin one. That’s why there were no microphones, even though each participant showed himself to be perfectly qualified, astoundingly articulate and camera-ready for an illuminating and much-needed public debate.

The problem for the White House was the more the esteemed professor talked, the more trouble he created for his friend, the president. The clever photo-op sans audio was crafted to yank the director of the W.E.B. Du Bois Institute for African and African American Research off the stage, lest anyone begin to question what is being taught at Harvard these days.

Conversely, the more Sgt. Crowley weighed in, and his brave black co-workers spoke out, the more obvious it became that a national discussion featuring this cast of characters may not end with the results the professor and the president wanted.

The status quo was at risk, and Mr. Obama used his extraordinary powers to protect it.

Any serious discussion would have put multiculturalism on trial, but the pretrial public hearings showed America opposes this false and corrosive idea, an opposition that our chattering classes can only understand as bigotry and prejudice. In the public eye, being a victim of past injustices does not win the right to propagate current and future ones, and that’s intolerable to those in charge of the race industry today, whose power relies on maintaining forever a latent rage that can be turned on and off at the will of the nation’s elites.

America is Tiger Woods country for a reason, and she elected Barack Obama to punctuate this new reality. The nation’s laws, education system and media attitudes now need to catch up, but such catching up is exactly what Mr. Obama doesn’t stand for.

My long-held fear is that Mr. Obama is hiding something about his education. During the endless 2008 campaign, Mr. Obama would not release his college grades. Given that President George W. Bush and Sens. Al Gore and John Kerry all had proved mediocre grades were no impediment to a presidential bid, Mr. Obama likely had other concerns.

While I have no desire to see Mr. Obama’s birth certificate, I do want to see his college transcripts. My suspicion, one could even call it a conspiracy theory, is that Mr. Obama committed himself to a radical curriculum, aligned himself with the far-left professoriate, and sought to keep this biographical information from his political enemies, especially then-rival Hillary Rodham Clinton, for fear that they would paint the former community organizer and follower of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright as something other than an advocate of racial reconciliation.

You can read the column in full here.

Why on EARTH would the United States ever want to be more like Europe? Correct me if I’m wrong, but we left, did we not? Not only did we leave that older, lesser world behind, but we left skid-marks along the way with an entire continent eating our proverbial dust. Those were good times… Not to mention the asskickery that followed suit.

The truth is we’ve been doing things far better than Europe for centuries. We’ve built a stronger military and a much more dynamic economy than any of our European counterparts… And we’ve done it in record time. We left the world’s greatest superpowers one century only to blaze past them the next.

To be fair, times have changed and some European nations have been tremendous allies to the U.S.A. For that, they should be thanked and praised. That still doesn’t change the fact, however, that I don’t see a single country out there to which I could point and say “We need to be more like that!”

One could even argue that the United States is facing its current hardships because we’ve become more and more like old Europe. Even under “Republican” administrations we have continued to relinquish an unreasonable amount of control to the federal government. If there has ever been a bigger power grab reminiscent of old royalty than the one we’ve had in recent months (or years), I’ve never seen it… How’s that been working out for us?

If appeasing other nations means that we need to begin acting like them, you can count me out. Not only will I never be “culturally sensitive” to a people who use their left hand like a roll of Charmin, but I will never adopt a national ideology as my own that includes taking control of private enterprise or removing personal liberties.

For people who seem so hell-bent on multiculturalism, why can’t liberals understand that free enterprise/freedom is a part of the American Culture? I guess as far as leftists are concerned, the United States can’t qualify as a “cultured society” simply because we’ve actually created a society that works. If a civilization fails, it becomes a study of the human condition. If it succeeds (as the United States has), it becomes a culture-less society of capitalist pigs.

This whole “give unto us a king” mentality is really getting old. As for me, I don’t care what Green Day, the tiny Sean Penn, or the rest of the liberal elitists say; I’m proud of everything that has made this country great and I don’t think that we need to distance ourselves from it. But enough about me, what about you? Do you see any redeeming value in “going the way of Europe”? Is the destruction of a distinctively American culture worth the “love” that we’ll supposedly garner from across the globe?

With Barack Obama, many Americans had hoped to get a post-racial president. With Mr. Obama’s pick of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to replace David H. Souter on the Supreme Court, it looks less and less like they got one.

President Obama – a man we still hardly know – clearly subscribes to the notion that we should judge each other not just on the content of our character, but also by the color of our skin.

We’ve had warning signs before. Remember the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr.?

As for the outrage du jour, the call for Sotomayor to apologize for making a racist comment in a 2001 speech is silly. She said what she meant, and she meant what she said: “I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.”

No white nominee could get away with that statement’s corollary in which a wise white man comes to better conclusions that a Latina. Nor should he.

A non-apology apology – which seems to be all the price she is going to pay – is pointless.

The White House simply says Judge Sotomayor used “poor” word choice. But that excuse applies to any number of public figures who have had their careers derailed for similar language blunders. This double standard needs to go on public trial.

In today’s left-of-center culture, the “white male” – “the victim,” as it were – understands that what Judge Sotomayor said is the accepted liberal way of thinking. Identity politics (also known as political correctness, multiculturalism and cultural Marxism) is the foundation of the political left. It is the first, middle and last lesson taught today in Academia. It is the mainstream media’s rulebook.

It is why Sotomayor and Obama are praiseworthy, and why Clarence Thomas, Condoleezza Rice, Alberto Gonzalez and Miguel Estrada are unacceptable members of their respective tribes. It is the onerous double standard that ensures that the left wins every argument over race. And that is far too useful a weapon for the president and his Democratic Party to give up.

You can read the column in full here.