Elias Isquith a political writer for Salon and other liberal outlets. He is also a naive jerk of the highest order. Like another Salon/Alternet writer- Amanda Marcotte- he spouts some of the most twisted, almost retarded stuff ever written. His latest piece is titled “[mc_name name=’Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX)’ chamber=’senate’ mcid=’C001098′ ] and the New McCarthyism: Inside a dangerous response to the atrocity in Paris.” He spends three tortured paragraphs of eight explaining his love of free speech and the press although he finds the cartoons of Charlie Hebdo “mean-spirited, lazy, unfunny and sometimes baldly racist.”
But this is not the gist of his article since the musings of a liberal journalist wannabe over free speech is really of little consequence to the world. Instead, he takes issue with a press release by [mc_name name=’Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX)’ chamber=’senate’ mcid=’C001098′ ] which states: “It is a reminder of the global threat we face and the enormous peril presented by radical Islamic terrorists” in response to the Paris attack. Cruz was merely echoing the sentiments of others like Roger Cohen, Jonathan Chait and Ayyan Hirsi Ali (who, I suspect, knows a little more about Islam than Isquith), not to mention numerous European leaders and some Muslim clerics. How this elevates Cruz to endorsing McCarthyism is not quite explained in the remaining paragraphs other than to say- sarcastically- that the two senators look similar.
But here is the funny thing about the accusation. Joseph McCarthy is today vilified. American high school history text books have a chapter dedicated to McCarthyism as if McCarthy himself created a Red Scare. Before he stepped a foot in the Senate, that body was already investigating the extent of Communist infiltration of the American government. In fact, they were investigating it long after Joseph McCarthy left the Senate.
What perplexed McCarthy was why the government did not look into this sooner. Part of it was because the United States and the Soviet Union were allies during World War II when the infiltration started. But, if we were allies and there was this systemic infiltration, then surely it was present when we were on less friendly terms. That was the gist of the McCarthy inquiry.
Subsequent, more sober analysis of that episode indicates that although McCarthy’s tactics may have left some room for improvement, there were spies throughout the United States government. Recently declassified Russian documents proved that back in the 1990s. There were over 350 Soviet spies placed throughout the American government- the State Department, the military, the White House, our atomic weapons program, and the OSS (the predecessor to the CIA). The FBI itself did not become involved in counterintelligence against the Soviet Union’s KGB until 1943 and only later took it considerably more seriously. The FBI managed to identify about 100 of these people, but not the other 250. We still don’t know who they were except for their code names except that they were highly placed.
While the Left and textbooks portray McCarthy as conducting a witch hunt in search of non-existent Soviet spies in the government, we now know that the witches were very much existent and real. Again, maybe the process and methodology were awkward, but the facts speak for themselves. With these Soviet spies, we are talking about people who betrayed their country over a political ideology by providing the Soviet Union with American policy decisions and debates and by compressing the timeline for the Soviet’s to develop an atomic weapon (those Soviet documents prove Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were spies, although Ethel’s role was minimal and not worthy of the death penalty).
That is all bad enough, but in case of the Islamic terrorist witch the damage is not a passing of state secrets, but actual carnage. Isquith is but another naive dupe of a failing educational system that would rather attack America and western values than look at the facts and see the world in realistic terms. That was Islamic terrorists flying planes into buildings on September 11th. Those are Islamic terrorists beheading journalists and aid workers in Iraq. Those were Islamic gunmen in Paris shooting up a satirical magazine’s office.
After every terrorist attack, the Left almost feels it necessary to begin the apologies after the initial shock wears off. There is the inevitable comments about how horrible the attack was followed by the inevitable “but” usually followed by a comment on how badly the Muslim community is treated by the French or whoever the target of the attack was. In fact, the very day Salon published this drivel, it was followed by just such a column while they likewise elevated J.K. Rowling and Aziz Ansari to sainthood status for criticizing those who had the temerity to note that the attackers in Paris were Muslim.
The hypocrisy of the Left is striking. A day after the Paris attack, left largely unnoticed, Boko Harem- an Islamic group in Nigeria- slaughtered 2,000 people in a single day. Most of them were old people, women and children who could not run fast enough. One doesn’t know what is worse- the apologies or the selective ignorance. As for the reasons proffered by the Left, no one is forcing these “poor,” “disillusioned,” “disenfranchised” Muslims to live in a country steeped in western culture. If it is so “bad,” jump on a plane to the nearest “caliphate” and good riddance.