How Dinesh D'Souza Made My Head Explode.

In a purely self-aggrandizing advertisement op-ed piece in Sunday's Washington Post, the infamous Ann Coulter-wannabe Dinesh D'Souza attempts to defend himself from the "onslaught" of attacks directed his way over his new "book" entitled The Enemy At Home: The Cultural Left and Its Responsibility for 9/11.

After reading his pathetic and utterly vacuous defense of his "work", I am left with complete mush in my head--my brain has literally exploded out of sheer amazement that this man could possibly be so fucking dumb. I could not sit back and let this pathetic excuse of a man go unanswered.

As a conservative author, I'm used to a little controversy. Even so, the reaction to my new book, "The Enemy at Home," has felt, well, a little hysterical.

"Ratfink writes new book," James Wolcott, cultural critic for Vanity Fair, declares in his blog. He goes on to call my book a "sleazy, shameless, ignorant, ahistorical, tendentious, meretricious lie."

That was pretty mild if you ask me; it doesn't even come close to the kind of insults this man deserve for his completely fact-less piece of trash. But nonetheless, D'Souza tries to build up some sympathy by portraying himself as misunderstood. It doesn't fly.

Why the onslaught? Just this: In my book, published this month, I argue that the American left bears a measure of responsibility for the volcano of anger from the Muslim world that produced the 9/11 attacks. President Jimmy Carter's withdrawal of support for the shah of Iran, for example, helped Ayatollah Khomeini's regime come to power in Iran, thus giving radical Islamists control of a major state; and President Bill Clinton's failure to respond to Islamic attacks confirmed bin Laden's perceptions of U.S. weakness and emboldened him to strike on 9/11. I also argue that the policies that U.S. "progressives" promote around the world -- including abortion rights, contraception for teenagers and gay rights -- are viewed as an assault on traditional values by many cultures, and have contributed to the blowback of Islamic rage.

Where to begin?! This idiot has absolutely no sense of history whatsoever. If he knew anything about Iran he would know that our deer friend the Shah was an American puppet installed in 1952 to serve our interests--he would also know that the only way we could possibly have fended off an impending takeover of the Ayatollah would have been with an invasion, something the American public would never have approved just a few short years after the trauma of Vietnam. The fall of the Shah was inevitable due to his brutal regime--and for D'Souza to ignore history and the Carter Administration's role in the saga is nothing short of irresponsible. Notice how he doesn't mention that then Candidate Ronald Reagan was dealing with the terrorists behind everyone's backs to release the hostages in time for his election.

D'Souza also doesn't mention St. Ronnie's cowardly cutting and running after the Hezbollah attacks on our Marines in Lebanon in 1982. At least Clinton was 5 minutes late from killing Bin Laden after the bombings--something neither Reagan (who propped him up in Afghanistan) nor our current Dear Leader has ever gotten around to doing. But why let facts get in the way of your Clinton bashing?

Then we get to the crux of D'Souza's thesis of his ridiculous book: that the horrible leftist values of abortion rights, contraception for teenagers and gay rights are the real cause Arab resentment of the U.S. Not very far away from Falwell's "..I really believe that the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People for the American Way, all of them who have tried to secularize America, I point the finger in their face and say: you helped this happen."

See, it's not really about our Middle East policy of propping up puppet dictatorships, it's not really about our oil dependency which only furthers these dictatorship's stranglehold, it's not really about their perceived one sidedness of the U.S. when it comes to the Israel/Palestine dispute, it's not really about a legacy of Western imperialism in the region--no. It's about liberal groups trying to spread Enlightenment left-wing values in a region yearning to keep their "traditional" societies intact in the face of this left wing assault on their identity. The last time I checked, us "leftists" were too busy fighting our very own "traditionalists" in America who want to shove down our throats their medieval Christianist theocratic dogma. The last thing we have had time for is to spread these values all over the world when we have to fight day in and day our to preserve them here in the face of a billion dollar Right Wing Machine.

Immediately following 9/11, there was a wondrous moment of national unity in which the American tribe came together. "Why do they hate us?" some wondered, but no one wanted to comprehend the enemy -- only to annihilate him. And I shared this view.

But five years later, that unity has dissolved amid a furious national debate over the war in Iraq and the war on terrorism. I thought it was time to go back and reconsider 9/11; in so doing, I concluded that the prevailing conservative and liberal theories explaining Muslim rage were wrong.

And who the hell caused this unity to collapse you fucking moron? Just who in the hell decided to call a whole segment of the population "traitorous" and "un-American" for not goose stepping with the Leader into a war of choice?

Sigh...

Contrary to the common liberal view, I don't believe that the 9/11 attacks were payback for U.S. foreign policy. Bin Laden isn't upset because there are U.S. troops in Mecca, as liberals are fond of saying. (There are no U.S. troops in Mecca.) He isn't upset because Washington is allied with despotic regimes in the region. Israel aside, what other regimes are there in the Middle East? It isn't all about Israel. (Why hasn't al-Qaeda launched a single attack against Israel?) The thrust of the radical Muslim critique of America is that Islam is under attack from the global forces of atheism and immorality -- and that the United States is leading that attack.

Contrary to conservative view, liberals never said they attacked us because there were U.S. troops in Mecca. The factual view is there were in fact troops in Saudi Arabia from the end of the Gulf War until 2003 when we left, and the fact remains that bin Laden and his ilk indeed had protested our presence in Saudi Arabia from the start. But hey...again who cares about facts when it's more fun to smear liberals!

Contrary to President Bush's view, they don't hate us for our freedom, either. Rather, they hate us for how we use our freedom. When Planned Parenthood International opens clinics in non-Western countries and dispenses contraceptives to unmarried girls, many see it as an assault on prevailing religious and traditional values. When human rights groups use their interpretation of international law to pressure non-Western countries to overturn laws against abortion or to liberalize laws regarding homosexuality, the traditional sensibilities of many of the world's people are violated.

That's right kids! Stop talking about human rights violations, don't you see that by upsetting the Mullahs that you only making 10,000 more bin Ladens?! Whenever you see another Iranian youth being hanged for being gay or whenever you hear about a woman being forced to wear a burka or being stoned for adultery, just shut the fuck up! Lest you want another 9/11 in your backyard!

How unbelievably absurd. It's not about them hating our freedom, it's about them hating how we spread our freedom! Like Bush tried to do right? You know spread liberal democracy and free markets and all that into an Arab country...

Nah...that doesn't count, it's the leftists who want to impose these radical values on a "traditional" culture! That's why they are committing barbaric acts of terror!

What would motivate Muslims in faraway countries to volunteer for martyrdom? The fact that Palestinians don't have a state? I don't think so. It's more likely that they would do it if they feared their values and way of life were threatened. Even as the cultural left accuses Bush of imperialism in invading Iraq, it deflects attention from its own cultural imperialism aimed at secularizing Muslim society and undermining its patriarchal and traditional values. The liberal "solution" to Islamic fundamentalism is itself a source of Islamic hostility to America.

How brilliant! No, ignore what they say...never mind their writings on the subject, or their suicide bombing tapes, never mind any of that! Throw out the evidence of why they do what they do--just SAY that they kill themselves and other people because we evil liberals want to spread our fag-loving, abortion-loving, atheist-loving ways! Just ask Virgil Goode how much America understands Muslim sensitivities Dinesh. Facts don't matter when you have a book to sell.

When I began writing my new book, this concern was largely theoretical, because the left was outside the corridors of power. Now I fear that the extreme cultural left is whispering into the ears of the Democratic Congress. Cut off the funding. Block the increase in troops. Shut down Guantanamo Bay. Lose the war on terrorism -- and blame Bush.

Pointing this out is what makes me dangerous.

No Dinesh, it makes you a supreme idiot rivaling the likes of Ann Coulter. If there is a more stupid argument as to why the terrorists hate us than "they hate us for our freedoms" it is "they hate us for our gays and our abortions."

I just have no more words to describe the kind of intellectual pile of dog shit that you are.