Pres. Bush and La Trahison Des Clercs of Our Time


Julien Benda in his classic 1928 La Trahison des Clercs (The Treason of the Intellectuals) decried with prophetic accuracy how the abandonment of objective truth abetted totalitarian ideologies, which lead to the cataclysmic destruction of World War II.

La Trahison des Clercs of our time remains the nearly complete failure of Western intellectuals to study, understand, and acknowledge the heinous consequences of the living Islamic institution of jihad war—and then glibly “advise” the West’s (generally feckless) political leaders, directly, or indirectly. 

Andrew Cochran (Hat Tip Dhimmi Watch) at The Counterterrorism Blog charts the sad trajectory of President Bush’s utter capitulation to stultifying political correctness, another “triumph” for our era’s La Trahison des Clercs .

Read Cochran’s full blog, below: 

So Now President Bush Won’t Call It “Islamic” Terrorism or Extremism?

By Andrew Cochran 

I noticed something unusual last night during President Bush’s State of the Union speech – he never used the words “Islamic” or “Islamist” to describe the most dangerous forms of terrorism and extremism which the U.S. and the West face in the Middle East and around the world.

Contrast that to his 2007 SOTU speech (Cochran’s emphases in bold):  

“Al Qaeda and its followers are Sunni extremists, possessed by hatred and commanded by a harsh and narrow ideology. Take almost any principle of civilization, and their goal is the opposite. They preach with threats … instruct with bullets and bombs … and promise paradise for the murder of the innocent… These men are not given to idle words, and they are just one camp in the Islamist radical movement. In recent times, it has also become clear that we face an escalating danger from Shia extremists who are just as hostile to America, and are also determined to dominate the Middle East. Many are known to take direction from the regime in Iran, which is funding and arming terrorists like Hezbollah – a group second only to al Qaeda in the American lives it has taken… The Shia and Sunni extremists are different faces of the same totalitarian threat. But whatever slogans they chant, when they slaughter the innocent, they have the same wicked purposes. They want to kill Americans … kill democracy in the Middle East … and gain the weapons to kill on an even more horrific scale.” 

And take a look at a segment in his 2006 SOTU:  

“No one can deny the success of freedom, but some men rage and fight against it. And one of the main sources of reaction and opposition is radical Islam — the perversion by a few of a noble faith into an ideology of terror and death. Terrorists like bin Laden are serious about mass murder — and all of us must take their declared intentions seriously… By allowing radical Islam to work its will — by leaving an assaulted world to fend for itself — we would signal to all that we no longer believe in our own ideals, or even in our own courage.” 

Why did President Bush retreat from the obvious? Who imposed upon him, employing what logic, to depart from his past clear and accurate statements on the nature of Islamic-based terrorism and extremism?  On Sunday, Walid Phares suggested (or hoped) that the President would “Define the enemy, clearly and strategically. For the changes in definitions over the past seven years have left the public in quest for a definitive knowledge about who are we fighting and why.”

I guess Walid – and the rest of us – will have to wait for the next State of the Union message. 

Andrew G. Bostom is the author of The Legacy of Jihad (Prometheus, 2005) and The Legacy of Islamic Antisemitism " (Prometheus, November, 2008) You can contact Dr. Bostom at

4 responses to “Pres. Bush and La Trahison Des Clercs of Our Time

  1. Bush in Riyadh (01/15/08): “And the best way to achieve better understanding in the world is for folks just to get together, and get to understand that we share the same God, and we share the same aspirations for children and for our futures.” (Bush “We share the same God” video: )

  2. Bush will use “…stultifying political correctness” to bludgeon the appropriate parties into compliance, but I believe something far more distressing is at work here. I believe the man flat out hates us and is committed to our destruction. His apparent befuddlement in discerning who the real enemy is in his GWOT is not utter capitulation to pc, it’s utter capitulation to Islam and Sharia. The guy’s a dhimmi. His opening up various security and intelligence procedures to CAIR and other unindicted coconspirators is, on the surface, pc enough, but CAIR and friends are busy removing the obstacles in the path of Allah. With Bush’s help. And pc doesn’t cover the redacted pages submitted to the ‘Joint Inquiry into Intelligence Community Activities Before and After the Terrorist Attacks’, or his apparent inability to stop his Saudi friends from supplying a majority of Suicide bombers in Iraq. Nor does pc cover arming the Palestinians. And let’s not forget the unsecured borders. Apparently the Muslim population in Canada is growing. The problems Mark Steyn and Ezra Levant have experienced in Canada would seem to indicate that the mechanisms of pc enforcement are now being used to institute Sharia. Just like here. At what point does pc become Sharia? And of course our southern border, where hundreds of thousands of humans gain entry every year and remain unknown and unaccounted for. But the chaos that multitude generates will not stop Islam from wielding power and instituting more changes beneficial to Islam.
    The guy hates Americans. God only knows what more we will suffer before he has the decency to just…go

  3.' heroyalwhyness

    La Trahison Partie deux?: Iran Controversy at State Department
    Tuesday, January 29, 2008 7:29 PM

    By: Kenneth R. Timmerman Article Font Size

    A controversial Iranian-American, Goli Ameri-Yazdi, will appear before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Wednesday, to answer questions about her role in raising funds for a lobbying group whose stated goal is to oppose U.S. trade sanctions on Iran and to promote a resumption of diplomatic ties with Tehran.

    Both goals run directly counter to current Bush administration policy, which is aimed at increasing pressure on Tehran to get Iran to suspend uranium enrichment and to cut off support for insurgent groups in Iraq.

    She will also face questions about her participation in an international telecommunications conference held in Isfahan, Iran, in August 2003.

    The FBI has been investigating the legality of this and other high-tech conferences in Iran as possible trade embargo violations, Newsmax has learned.

    Ameri-Yazdi ran a well-funded challenger’s campaign in 2004 against Democratic incumbent Rep. David Wu in Oregon’s 1st congressional district, but was beaten by a 16-point margin.

    Since then, she has been appointed as a U.S. delegate to the United Nations General Assembly, and to a U.N. human rights forum.

    She has been nominated to become assistant secretary of state for educational and cultural affairs, her first government job with line authority.

    If confirmed, she will coordinate the State Department’s cultural exchange and educational programs, including Fulbright scholarships, and will supervise ongoing education efforts in Iraq.

    She also could play a role in bringing Iranian scholars to the United States under existing but little used State Department programs.

    But Iranian-American activists in Los Angeles tell Newsmax that they are “disappointed” with her nomination for a top State Department job.

    “Goli Ameri has a very poor record when it comes to human rights, religious freedom, and women’s rights issues,” said Pooya Dayanim, spokesman for Iranian Jewish Public Affairs Committee.

    Dayanim noted that as a candidate for Congress in 2004, Ameri-Yazdi “received money from individuals with suspicious ties and known sympathies for the Iranian regime. This is cronyism at its worst.”

    According to Hassan Daioleslam, an aide to former Iranian Prime Minister Mehdi Barzagan, who now lives in the United States, Ameri-Yazdi is being helped by a pro-regime “lobby” in the United States.

    “Many contributors to Goli Ameri’s political campaign [in Oregon] were clearly part of an Iranian regime “lobby” in the United States, who hoped their contributions would influence United States policy toward Iran,” Daioleslam told Newsmax.

    “Until U.S. law enforcement conducts a serious investigation of this lobby, the appointment of someone such as Goli Ameri would seem unwise,” he said.

    In May 2007, Ameri-Yazdi co-authored a letter to wealthy Iranian-Americans, calling for contributions to a new organization whose stated goals included lobbying the federal government to lift “unreasonable OFAC restrictions” on trade with Iran.

    The Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) regulates U.S. trade with state sponsors of terrorism and is in charge of enforcing the U.S. trade embargo on Iran.

    Known at the time as the “New York/Napa Task Force,” Ameri-Yazdi’s group planned to raise $3.5 million to establish a massive lobbying and civic action campaign aimed at changing U.S. policies toward Iran and promoting issues of questionable concern to most Iranian-Americans, such as banning the fingerprinting of Iranian government officials when they come to the United States.

    Unlike U.S.-based Iranian opposition groups, the task force was not focused on bringing public awareness to the Tehran regime’s abysmal violations of human rights.

    Instead, a prospectus circulated by the group stated that it would lobby the U.S. government “to begin direct dialogue with Iran, moving toward the resumption of diplomatic relations.”

    The prospectus also stated the group’s members opposed any U.S. efforts to overthrow the Tehran regime, and sought instead to promote U.S.-Iranian business ventures.

    Some of Ameri-Yazdi’s biggest supporters as a congressional candidate have lobbied for an end to U.S. sanctions on Iran or have businesses that trade with Iran through third countries.

    Two of her campaign contributors, Dr. Akbar Ghahary and Hoosang Amirahmadi, even ran as candidates for president of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the 1990s.

    Ameri-Yazdi’s nomination has Iranian-American Republicans scratching their heads, since most of her political friends are Democrats.

    In June 2002, Ameri-Yazdi appeared at a John Kerry fund-raiser at the Ritz Carlton hotel at Laguna Niguel, Calif., that was sponsored by pro-regime lobbyist, Housang Amirahmadi, and top Democratic party fund-raiser, Hassan Nemazee.

    Nemazee hosted a dinner for Hillary Clinton last March that brought in more than $500,000 for her presidential campaign, The Associated Press has reported.

    He raised another $500,000 for John Kerry’s failed presidential bid in 2004, and has donated big bucks to Bill Clinton’s legal defense fund and other Democratic causes.

  4. Bush has faith in Islam. Faith that it cannot be as bad as that tiny, persistent part of his mind tells him it is, as reality tells him it is. He ignores all objective proof against Islam’s ‘peace’ premise that he SO loves spreading, in the name of HIS compassionate faith. The enemy couldn’t have foreseen this kind of weapon against us, that the man who is charged to defend us with all he’s got is doing their bidding in selling the most violent religion in history as peace itself. Bush is a man who has no respect for truth, for objective reality, for if he began to, it might shake his faith, and for him, that would be the end of his world, for it faith itself that saved him. He believes with all his heart and with None of his mind that Islam means peace because the alternative would be unthinkable.
    Bush has faith that our enemies, the Saudis, are our friends. His fundamental intellectual dishonesty about The Enemy has crippled our war effort against jihad and we haven’t even begun to pay for it. America is at the mercy of his ‘turn the other cheek-Love they enemy-Any religion is better than none’ faith. He has proven himself to be a man who Cannot learn from his mistakes. His position demands that he defend America with All he’s got, that Knowing the enemy is the GIVEN for a president who sends soldiers into the battlefield. But he seems more concerned with protecting Islam than protecting us or our soldiers. Before you dismiss me as out of line with that, think about it. And then think about how Bush has forced our soldiers to operate under ‘golden’ rules of engagement that are getting them unnecessarily hurt and killed, all in the name of protecting enemy civilians. Bottom line, the most powerful infidel on earth has become a tool of our enemies. He has, in the name of HIS faith, protected the Enemy’s faith from taking responsibility for the evil it inspires willing Muslims to commit against us. ‘Islam means peace’ in our time, and Bush the cowboy is ANYthing but. Makes me sick.