National Review is taking a dive, sadly, in much of its commentary.
Trump Derangement Syndrome has taken over this publication's editorial board, even though I don't see how William F. Buckley, if he were still alive, would have found anything to be upset about with this guy.
One of their latest articles showcased a series of disruptions on college campuses, which they list as clear examples that freedom of speech is under assault throughout the university system.
Check out how the author characterizes my presence at the event, too:
October 10: A talk by Hussam Ayloush, executive director of the Los Angeles chapter of the Council on American–Islamic Relations (CAIR), is disrupted by non-student audience members who repeatedly interrupt the speaker with questions and accusations.
I think the bigger question should be: why weren't the students questioning and confronting Ayloush with substantive questions about Islam?
Notice that the writer doesn't discuss or report on what Ayloush was talking about.
Here is the entire talk which I had uploaded:
Hecklers refuse to stop when repeatedly asked to do so by Professor Hao Huang, director of the Scripps Humanities Institute. Police are called to escort the speaker out. A video of the event was uploaded by Arthur C. Schaper, who appears to have been one of the leading hecklers at both the Becerra shout-down and this one.
This is perhaps the golden mean or the golden line where I get upset. The prim and proper country club conservatives insist on civility at every level of discourse. But Islam is a dangerous, political cult, not a benign religion. The infiltration of Islam into our daily lives and society needs to be confronted, not accommodated.
|Ayloush (Left) and me|
Notice once again that the writer does not mention that Ayloush was repeatedly lying about President Trump, specifically when he kept calling the travel ban or the travel restrictions a "Muslim Ban". That is a slanderous lie.
People in the audience called him out on that. He also shamed the United States, claiming that this country was founded on "supremacy." Most importantly, though, we as conservatives should not just sit back and allow radical Muslims to lie to us. This taqqiyah agenda is destroying our country. Look at what is happening in Great Britain, for example, and in other Western nations where elected leaders refuse to take a stand against creeping Islam.
The Scripps disruption is notable as a second shout-down from the right. Many of the hecklers’ questions were substantive and would have been fine if they’d been asked in proper turn, with the speaker permitted to answer. Instead, hecklers peppered Ayloush with a continual stream of shouted questions and accusations, leading to angry exchanges among audience members and legitimate concern for the speaker’s safety.
"Legitimate concerns"? Really? No one in the audience threatened the speaker in any way. The Scripps event host called the police to intimidate members in the audience. The truth is that political correctness has taught conservatives that they have to be polite and permit speakers to lie to us. Islam is a dangerous cult--and it must be confronted.
I do not apologize for raising my voice and asking questions without hesitation. I would like to also remind everyone that Ayloush interrupted me when I was asking my question, specifically when I outlined key verses in the Koran which teach violence and death. His answer about treating one life as if they are all lives was taken out of context, as which often happens--and I called him out on that, too.
Yet National Reviews says that I'm interrupting? Really?
Why this craven double standard? Why this unwillingness to fight for the truth? Perhaps William F. Buckley is rolling in his grave after hearing all of this/
Afterwards, Scripps College put out a statement condemning the hecklers’ comments and offering “support and resources” to students forced to listen to critiques of Islam. Instead, Scripps should have considered having security eject the hecklers, not for the content of their questions and comments, but for their disruptive behavior.
Wow. Now who is the fascist?
I don't understand where some of these conservatives are coming from on these issues. Do they really think that we are going to ensure the survival and renewal of our culture and our country by sitting patiently and letting subversive elements seep into our society unchecked?
I think not. There is nothing wrong with calling out and challenging the lies of elected officials, radical speakers, and Muslims militantly pushing their religion, their ideology, their agenda, all of which endanger Western civilization and a free nation.
Then again, perhaps we should not be surprised. The elitist veneer that permeates the current National Review editorial board led them to denounce Trump at every level. Would they really have preferred Hillary Clinton to win the election last year? How would that electoral travesty have furthered the cause of conservatism in the United States?
What did William F. Buckley himself counsel to fellow purists? "Support the most conservative candidate who is electable." That candidate in Election 2016 was Donald Trump, and his policies and procedures have been considerable for our cause.
What is the problem here, then? They give me a hard time for confronting the cultural collectivism on college campuses?
At least I am in good company ...