Who's Afraid of Benazir Bhutto?

Mo Rocca has appeared on a bunch of shows, including 'The Daily Show,' 'I Love the 80s,'...

Mo Rocca Feed

Who's Afraid of Benazir Bhutto?

Posted Dec 27th 2007 4:00PM by Dinesh D'Souza
Filed under: Breaking News, Islamic Radicals, Dictators

In my book The Enemy at Home I quoted Benazir Bhutto saying, "Within the Muslim world, there is a reaction against the sexual overtones that come across in American mass culture. America is viewed through this prism as an immoral society." This was one of the most astute explanations of why the propaganda of the radical Muslims has been so successful in recruiting traditional Muslims to the anti-American cause.

Bhutto's words were echoed also by the West's leading historian of Islam, Bernard Lewis. Reviewing what he calls "the standard litany of American offenses recited in the lands of Islam," Lewis ends with this one. "Yet the most powerful accusation of all is the degeneracy and debauchery of the American way of life." Many Americans, both on the right and the left, don't want to hear this message. And so we have been subjected to the same tired nonsense about how the radical Muslims are against freedom, oppose the Iraq invasion, blah, blah, blah.

Yes, the radical Muslims are upset about Iraq, but that's because Iraq is a pro-American Muslim democracy. Such a thing has not previously existed in the Middle East. It provides a startling alternative to the two kinds of tyranny that are widespread in the region: Islamic tyranny of the Iran variety, and secular tyranny such as we find with Musharraf in Pakistan, Mubarak in Egypt, Abdullah in Jordan, Assad in Syria, and in the Gulf Kingdoms.

Who doesn't want democracy to succeed in the Muslim world? Not counting the cultural left in America, there are two groups that are working overtime to subvert the democratic idea. The first is our enemies, namely the radical Muslims. These Bin Laden types would have an obvious incentive to kill Benazir Bhutto, and not surprisingly Musharraf has accused them of being the perpetrators of Bhutto's assassination. If Musharraf is right, the radicals did it in order to subvert the January election, destabilize Musharraf, and sow the seeds of chaos from which an extremist takeover becomes possible. This would be a nightmare prospect for the United States.

A second possibility is that Musharraf is himself behind the murder. After all, there is a second group that doesn't want democracy to work for Muslims. These are the secular despots who are allied with the United States. These thugs appeal for U.S. support basically by saying, "We are corrupt goons, but what is the alternative? Would you rather have the Bin Laden guys in power?" And typically the Americans heave a sigh and continue supporting what is perceived as the lesser evil.

Although Musharraf is no friend of democracy, and is hardly above wiping out one of the main opposition leaders, in this case it seems rather unlikely that he would be the culprit. The reason is that Musharraf runs the obvious risk that he would be blamed for the assassination, and now there are rioting crowds in Pakistan who are pointing the finger precisely in his direction. Also Musharraf gains from national stability, which has in the past allowed him to repel his opponents both from the democratic camp (such as Nawaz Sharif and Bhutto) as well as the Islamic radicals who sometimes use the language of democracy but seek to establish a Taliban-style government in Islamabad.

Who, then, is most likely behind the Bhutto assassination? Somewhere, I suspect, the Al Qaeda and Taliban leaders are smiling, having done it again through the mechanism of their suicide squads. And once again America is in a very awkward situation, having no choice now but to support Musharraf while quietly preparing for the possibility that his reign may come to an abrupt end.

Permalink
Email this
Linking Blogs
Comments [201]
Share this
- Add this post to...
- Netscape
- Digg
- Del.icio.us

Reader Comments ( Page 3 of 14)

Previous 15 Comments | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Most Recent | Next 15 Comments

31. Oh and Dinesh doesn't "report." Reality, facts, truth, all mean little to him. Like the paid yes people that pander and fawn for any other comtempible regime, he will twist, invent, exaggerate or lie if it suits the elites that pay his bills. Take at look at one of his books, they are a study in innaccuracy. Almost no citations, few direct quotes, almost no concern for context, nuance, intent, or purpose of those he criticizes.
Like Anne Coulter, another right wing political prostitute, he simply invests the contours of the "liberal" windwills he chases after.

A case in point is his contention above that "the cultural left in the US doesn't want democracy to succeed in the Arab world." Where does he get such nonsense. Literally, there isn't a single person in the American left who DOESN'T want democracy in the Muslim world. Not one. I challenge liar DeSouza to come up with a single accurate, in context citation of an American liberal who literally says, "I hope democracy won't succeed in the Arab or Muslim world." One.
He can't because he made this up.

The dult doesn't get that it isn't that the left doesn't want democracy to succeed. They do. But we don't see George Bush as the advancer of democracy either here or there. Unlike Dinesh, we don't buy the administration's propoganda. We get that George Bush justified the war with WoMD and that when he did't find any, the administration had to scrabble and invent a new justification for the war. So suddenly, Bush became the spreader of democracy.

Yeah right. Bush has gutted real Constitutional democracy here in the US - holding American civilians without charges for years, using torture as an interrogation rechnique, using military tribunals in peace time. So given Bush disregard for the Constitution and rule of law, both of which are substantive requirements of a working democracy (it isn't enough that people can vote), no one with any sense buys give a crap about democracy anywhere else.

If Bush was committed to spreading democracy as a matter of principle, why did he run as a non-interventionist in his first presidential run? If Cheyney and Powell were so gung ho on democracy, why let Saddam Hussein in power after the first Gulf War? If Bush is so democracratic, why not let the Kurd vote on whether they want a united Kurdistan, rather than letting Turkey pummel them?

The fact is spreading democracy was a flimsy post-hoc justification for an unnecessary war, that the administration made up out of thin air when they didn't find weapons of mass destruction. The left would embrace a president who actually worked to expand democracy around the world but someone like Bush isn't doing that.

But like Don Quixote, Dinesh and the paid hacks get so used to listening to their own braying that they lose the ability to tell the difference between mirages and reality. Such are the dangers of paid sophistry, you become, over time, a pathological liar with no ability to tell lies from truth.

Dr. Glenn Stephens

Glenn Stephens at 11:17PM on Dec 27th 2007

32. You only need to take a look at Dinesh to know something is wrong with him. He is the quintessential little ugly, deformed fascist. Wierd lower lip, sticks straight out, wierd pink ledge. Goofy ears. Kinda like an Indian Mister Bean without the sense of humor. Little wierd looking facists nerd with a barren intellect and an even more despicable soul - bereft of fairness, basic decency, the ability to listen, tolerance, all the things one needs to really function as a citizen in a working democracy.

But we don't have a working democracy, we have a democracy dominated by curs, surs who use cripples like Dinesh as front men because they love to practice upside down-affirmative action, hoisting less capable Latinos, blacks, and Asians, into positions whenever possible. And if you are buying off sophists to justify your every move, it is good to get Asians like Dinesh and John Yu, so you look multicultural.

Little wierd looking liar.

Glenn Stephens at 11:25PM on Dec 27th 2007

33. Thank you. Case in point. I couldn't have made that up if I tried.

Brad at 11:31PM on Dec 27th 2007

34. Does this mean in coming years we will have to invade Pakistan? Do we need to make it safe for them to have democracy?

oh wait that was WWII

mac65 at 12:03AM on Dec 28th 2007

35. What the hell is there to fear? Those rag heads are not going to take over America. This is the mosy powerful nation in the world. Let them keep their deserts and their oil. There is nothing in the Middle East but Mountains and waste land. If they want to kill each other-let them. That's what Islam has taught them. To kill each other like a bunch of ANIMALS!!!!

Joe at 12:22AM on Dec 28th 2007

36. So, let me get this straight, Dinesh: are you saying that because the "islamofacists" (as right-wing nuts like you call them) consider our culture to be immoral, degenerate, and debauched, that we should change our ways to suit them? Which side are you on? If we become puritanical, the terrorists win! If you don't like America's sexual mores, then move to Iran. You would fit right in. I mean, you could even get one of those "temporary marriages" the next time you visit the whorehouses of Amsterdam.

emelpe at 12:30AM on Dec 28th 2007

37. Blacks don't commit the majority of crimes in this country. The human race does, meaning all colors of evil people in many shades commit crimes. Don't you ever watch America's most wanted? What color was the man who killed JFK, and RFK, and Martin Luther King? What color are the men who generally molest little girls? What color was the men who shot George Wallace, Larry Flynt, Ronald Reagan? Learn before you speak you ignorant fool!

Emma at 1:05AM on Dec 28th 2007

38. Definition of Ignorance:

To actually think that there can be a democracy in a Muslim Country. Regular citizens don't want a democracy. They like their lives. They think we're a bunch of loose cannons over here.

I know this, because I know them. I'm fortunate enough to get their opinions, especially in places like Syria, Saudia Arabia and Quatar. My Friends and Business Partners over there are quite informative. And they have no problems with me being a Christian.

Our Government is extremely retarded to think that a democracy is what's needed in a Muslim dominated society.

So when are they going to build Churches in Iraq?

Dinesh, travel a little. Get solid evidence. And if not, simply shut up.

Botts at 1:38AM on Dec 28th 2007

39. Someone mis-quoted D'Souza. The little weasel didn't say that the "cultural left" was working against democracy in the Islamic Middle East.

Read what the little Coulter-licker really wrote....

"... Not counting the cultural left in America, there are two groups that are working overtime to subvert the democratic idea."

We can look to the illegally annointed, un-elected Bush Junta to see which side of the political spectrum is really working against democracy - right here in the, "homeland."

One good way for the "cultural left" to support democracy would be to boycott, "Regnery Publishing," the fascist publishing house which allows D'Souza, Coulter and their fellow Christo-fascists to profit from their hatered. Regnery obviously doesn't have employ any fact checkers.

Captain Negative at 1:40AM on Dec 28th 2007

40. It seems that some people would rather watch the world burn by imposing their values on other people than tolerate other people's cultures and values. If the Pakistanis or the Iraqis want democracy let them do it themselves. If they choose democracy, then geat more power to them; but they will have to assume the responsibility of building, nurturing and maintaining their own democracy to reflect the values of the people it represents.

What happened in Pakistan was disgusting. Nobody should have died, but they did. The Iraq war should have never happened; but it did and the American people have to bear the responsibility of the war and its aftermath.

If Osama bin Laden wants us to be less "perverted" then we will do it ourselves. If people want to be Atheists, Agnostics, Jews, Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Shintoists, etc.; let them choose for themselves as individuals.

justi7553 at 5:14AM on Dec 28th 2007

41. THE COLUMNISTS known as the young turks were afraid of her ...

After the death of Benazir Bhutto, I am sure that these YOUNG TURKS (who take advantage of the freedoms that we have in America all the while criticizing Jews, Christians, and the average American citizen) realize that by disfiguring the God of the Bible so they can justify the actions of Al’Queda reveals their OWN ties to TERRORISM. But will these “YOUNG TURKS” turn themselves in for their own “hate-crimes” (which is how the politically correct socialist architects would call it “except” for when their cronies do it.)

Even today these “young Turks” are new breed of Islamic Extremists try the justify these terrorists behavior by taking the words of Jesus out of context so that they can inspire Islamic extremist cells within America as they are doing in Europe. These “Young Turks” are even now hard-pressed and desperate to find an example of a Jewish or Christian suicide bomber who has been duped into believing at in heaven they will be given a thousand young virgins whom they are free to rape for an eternity. These YOUNG TURKS merely attempt to DISTRACT the American public from noticing their religion that specifically condones pedophilia on earth and in their so-called paradise. Young Muslim men have become duped because their Imams (Islamic religious leaders) promise them an eternity of having the desires of own will and will be able to victimize others with their own lust. This PROVES THAT ALLAH IS NOT HOLY AND NOT JUST. It really sounds like a big CON job that even these YOUNG TURKS will DEFEND. I speak from experience when I tell you that the writings and television program composed by the these Young Turks are designed to lull the average American to sleep by making light of the terrorism issue and any person who comes up with solutions to defend America in order to artificially create the conditions of indifference and apathy within its citizen necessary for an Islamic cell invasion within US borders. Their strategy worked in the European Nations. Today the European nations have no backbone and are riddled with fear because they have been mentally conditioned to concede to these invading bullies or some sort of unknown Czar who will gladly keep them and their children in a constant state of oppression. So keep laughing America with these YOUNG TURKS. Russia, China and the Islamic fascists are now knocking on your back door.

AS FORMER MUSLIM I declare to you, Muhammad was, is, and forever will be a False Prophet!!! Muhammad had a demon. That's why he encouraged his followers to serve the moon god idol who demanded the killing others as they kill themselves, also pillage and destroy their neighbors. Muhammad’s miracles were false as well as his words.   

What do terrorist imams say now after their own natural disaster! WILL THEY NOW TELL THEIR PEOPLE THAT ALLAH IS ANGRY WITH THEM MORE THAN THE US BECAUSE OF THEY ARE THE CHILDREN OF SATAN WHO BLOW UP THE INNOCENT AND CUT OFF PEOPLES HEADS?

Muslims and Arabs, now acknowledging the violent and barbaric inception and the devilish beliefs of their religion, are now in a race to redefine what they stand for today. As a result, they are now forced to disregard the teachings of Muhammad (founder of Islam).

http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/moongod.htm

Emir Chavez at 7:14AM on Dec 28th 2007

42. Ms Bhutto's death underlies a basic problem in most developing countries.We do not understand how to live as a democracy.In africa,if x does not win an election,he will not take it lying down,he will assainate y who actually won the election,because x wants to be powerful at all costs.That is why it was a big mistake to invade iraq,not because of wmd,but because attempting to impose democracy on a people has the opposite effect-it makes them bitter with what they percieve as blind dictatorship by an external power to them,as if they do not know anything.
Dinesh,i like your collum,but i think it is still too early to apportion blame yet.In a murder investigation,everyone is a suspect,until the evidence proves otherwise.
Finally mustapha,you are unfortunately right.Blacks do commit most crimes in the states.But it is not because we are intrinsically criminal,it is a combination of racisim,lack of good male role models,lack of a dad in most black homes,lack of a desire by most black male youth to set goals,unjust sentencing of black men,and the gangsta culture.To my fellow Africans in the states,let us face our problems,not with resentment for past wrongs,but with pride in ourselves,hope for a new day,a desire to get rid of self destructive traits,and above all a culture of respect for ourselves our sisters,brothers,moms and dads.

aniekan thomas at 6:32AM on Dec 28th 2007

43. Intellectually it's disappointing to see so many ad hominem attacks at Mr. D'Sousa. And yes, defending Mr. D'Sousa from ad hominem attacks when he makes so many is easy for me. For quite awhile now I have been hoping that these types of forums (and especially this one) could move away from name-calling psuedo-debates and become discussions meant to provoke thought and open discourse. Obviously the name-calling is going on by people with quite diverse and opposing views, but as a "liberal gay atheist," if I must box myself into some crazy definition easy to digest, I really hope that we can try to share our beliefs and differences in order to try to reach a common understanding. Mr. D'Souza and I almost always disagree (and I am often personally offended by his posts), but I can't think it's productive or constructive to simply argue endlessly, letting oneself become upset because someone thinks differently and consequently debase one's own arguements by succumbing to this emotion. Clearly Mr. D'Souza has made gross generalizations and sensational arguements, but it only fuels his rhetoric and those of his ilk to pander to these arguements by letting ourselves sound like children in our responses. Consider "As an extremely liberal 'leftist,' it seems to me that democracy is only democracy when it comes from within. An imposed democracy is not a democracy at all, regardless of voting boxes and constitutions. It is only when a nation takes it upon herself to find democracy that it truly exists. There are many examples of tyrannical and unjust democracies, and no type of government is an ideal state. However, I do feel that democracy is often a fair and desirable, and hope for the sake of the peace of the world that many Middle Eastern countries can attain this state (or a derivative thereof) from within. This said, I must firmly disagree with Mr. D'Souza's statement that 'the cultural left in the US doesn't want democracy to succeed in the Arab world,' but must also disagree with the idea that every person in the United States agrees with me. I'm sure there are both conservatives and liberals who wish the Middle East would either self-implode, maintain tribal rule, or become communist. However, it is not my place to speak for anyone except myself."

Much better than calling him an ugly freak, right?

James at 6:41AM on Dec 28th 2007

44. Our holiday season is over. It was a short one this year. What happened to Ms. Bhutto was very sad and foolish on her part. Her advisors let her down. Charges of corruption forced her out the her country. If she had stayed she would have been killed. When she came back there was no doubt she would be killed. Now she is dead. Pakistan probably has Bin Laden and they surely have nuclear weapons. That combination is deadly. Who on earth is running this country? Our next war won't be a cold one, that's for sure.

dungal1 at 8:32AM on Dec 28th 2007

45. LET's ALL TAKE VOTE ABOUT THESE YOUNG TURKS. Your vote counts (as long as they do not threaten it with censorship.)

Question: Why do you think these YOUNG TURKS so enamored by Bin Laden?

1) They feel that Bin Laden would be the best leader of America.
2) They use Bin Laden as a sick way of making light of terrorism so they can foster an attitude of indifference and apathy among media gullible american citizens in order to discourage a unified response to defend ourselves.

3) They honestly believe in Bin Laden's philosophy and therefore seeks to ridicule and taunt anyone who threatens him in any way.

4) Bin Laden himself is one of the Young Turks largest financial contributors that keeps them in business.

5) All of the Above.

Place your vote here!

http://www.theyoungturks.com/story/2007/12/28/6333/9485/Diary/YOUNG-TURKS-IN-BED-WITH-BIN-LADEN

Emir Chavez at 7:16AM on Dec 28th 2007

Previous 15 Comments | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Most Recent | Next 15 Comments

Add your comments

Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments.

When you enter your name and email address, you'll be sent a link to confirm your comment, and a password. To leave another comment, just use that password.

To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br> tags.

Mo's Video

The Sound of a Smoke-Free Barack...
Almost two years ago we speculated on how Barack Obama's voice would change if he stopped smoking. ...

Coming Soon

Most Commented On

Coming Soon

Mo's Bio

Mo Rocca appears on a bunch of shows, including CBS News Sunday Morning (with the indescribably wonderful Charles Osgood), The Tonight Show on NBC, and NPR's Wait Wait... Don't Tell Me! He's a sometime judge on Iron Chef and was featured on Telemundo's Amore Descarado. Last year he starred on Broadway in the 25th Annual Putnam County Spelling Bee. His expose "All the President's Pets" was published by Crown in 2004.