Tom Engelhardt of the notoriously hard left-leaning Huffington Post once described Gen. David Petraeus, US Army (Retired) as this nation’s “military golden boy” and “Caesar of celebrity.” Far from done heaping on the platitudes, the HuffPo writer also said of the fallen from grace General, “Adoring media people treated him like the next military Messiah, a combination of Alexander the Great, Napoleon, and Ulysses S. Grant rolled into one fabulous piñata. It’s a safe bet that no general of our era, perhaps of any American era, has had so many glowing adjectives attached to his name.”
Despite no longer in uniform, and his career in the Obama Administration as the former Director of the CIA ending on what many considered a certifiable disaster, Petraeus still manages to keep in his name in the news. Case in point, Daniel Greenfield of the FrontPage.com news portal, and by Christine Brim of the everything-politics website The Federalist, both on May 18, 2016, Petraeus just penned an opinion piece in the Washington Post in which he stated in essence, any criticism of Islam feeds Islamic jihad. Ergo, America needs to accept Islam, no questions asked, and that the United States needs Islam to defeat Islamists.
In his WaPo editorial entitled “Anti-Muslim bigotry aids Islamist terrorists” Petraeus used many a descriptive phrases normally accredited to the Muslim Brotherhood, CAIR (the Council on American-Islamic Relations), and Barack Obama’s speechwriters. As cited by both reporters, Petraeus took pains to enlighten the masses on the wherefores and the whys of how America is losing the global war on Islamic jihadism.
Painting with what some may consider a very broad brush, Petraeus have few specifics on what he obviously believes to be litany of American sins against Islam. As reporter Brim penned, while Petraeus’ op/ed at least seems on the surface to be aimed directly at the Rupublican presumptive nominee for president, Donald Trump, she wonders aloud of the former CIA boss man is wagging his finger at all Americans.
Will this presidential election be the most important in American history?
While Petraeus none-too gently reminded the American people to mind our Ps and Qs when it comes to Islam, he never mentioned what could be legitimate, Constitutionally protected criticism of some of the more violent precepts of the Mohammedan belief system. The General’s piece was rife with the following;
- “Inflammatory political discourse that has become far too common both at home and abroad against Muslims and Islam.”
- Restricting Muslim immigration would “undermine our ability to defeat Islamist extremists by alienating and undermining the allies whose help we most need to win this fight: namely, Muslims.”
- “Inflammatory political discourse against Muslims and Islam.”
- “Blanket discrimination on the basis of religion”
- “Those who flirt with hate speech against Muslims.”
- “Those who demonize and denigrate Islam.”
- “[Those} who toy with anti-Muslim bigotry.”
- “Demonizing a religious faith and its adherents.”
In an op/ed on the op/ed, Robert Spencer of JihadWatch.org opined, “So the upshot of Petraeus’ argument is that we must not say things to which Muslims might object, because this will just make more of them become jihadis. His prescription for minimizing the jihad against the West is for the West to practice self-censorship in order to avoid offending Muslims.”
Related:
- Hillary Clinton: Muslims ‘have nothing whatsoever to do with terrorism’ – Video
- Christian school dropping ‘Crusaders’ mascot to keep from offending Muslims
- ‘Three Little Pigs’ banned from classroom for potentially offending Muslims
- Lindsey Graham: Let’s limit freedom of speech in light of Koran burning
- Political Correctness is destroying America
If you haven’t checked out and liked our Facebook page, please go here and do so.
