Buchanan sides with Muslim terrorists against America and Israel

This is a comment I posted at FrontPage Magazine, March 19, 2004, in the discussion thread for my article, “Buchanan’s White Whale”:

3/19/2004 6:45:41 PM
Name: Lawrence Auster
Subject: Buchanan on Hannity proves he IS fixated on Israel

Dan misses the point that Buchanan does support the amalgamation of the Israelis and the Paletinians. Read my article where I quote him on that. You can’t get around the fact that Buchanan defends an insane, unworkable proposal that means the violent destruction of Israel.

Second, I didn’t say that Buchanan literally has no other concerns besides those impinging on Israel. No metaphor is exact. But Israel looms very, very large in Buchanan’s thought, in a very “Ahab-like” manner. When it comes to the war on terror, the war on Iraq, U.S. homeland security, what to do about WMDs—these, the most important issues of our time—Buchanan is fixated on Israel.

This point is further proved by Buchanan’s appearance today on the Sean Hannity radio show, between 5 and 6 p.m. Eastern Time. Sean started off by referring to my Front Page article. Buchanan said, “Auster used to be a friend, but he’s been opposed to me lately.” Then Sean read my quotes of Buchanan in which Buchanan belittled Perle’s statements about the terrorist threat to America, and he asked Buchanan if he had said these things, and Buchanan said, “Sure,” and proceeded to explain his position.

Then there was a long back and forth, with Buchanan saying “They don’t have the ability to DESTROY our civilization,” and Sean countering with, “But if they use WMDs on an American city and kill hundreds of thousands of people, what about that?”, and Buchanan answering, “That would be horrific, and that’s why I’m so concerned about Pakistan, etc.” But Buchanan always sounded pro forma when he said, “That would be horrific.” And Hannity himself didn’t accept Buchanan’s “horrific” comment, because it was evident to him that Buchanan was not taking the terrorist threat seriously, and he kept pushing and pushing Buchanan on that. Then finally, this exchange occurred:

Hannity: “If these extremists got WMDs, wouldn’t they have the ability, if not to destroy our culture, to radically alter it?”

Buchanan: (Chuckles) “Well, frankly, Sean, I’d like to see our culture radically altered.”

To me, Buchanan’s turning this serious question into a joke about the culture war is a most revealing expression of where he’s really coming from. He wasn’t just joking about the culture war. He was saying that he is so hostile to America as it now is, that he doesn’t have it in him to defend America from terrorist destruction. I believe this was an unintentional revelation of the true Buchanan.

Then he went into the peace process, and the great Rabin, how the peace process was supposedly stopped by the man who killed Rabin. (But Sean didn’t ask him about Barak continuing the peace process.) Then the conversation ended up going back to the origins of Israel. Buchanan starts rehearsing the ‘48 war, and, guess what, he even gets into the massacre of Deir Yassin!

Buchanan: “They were slaughtering people, they were cutting open pregnant women’s bellies, and then 600,000 Arabs fled.”

In other words, Buchanan makes the entire Arab flight from ‘48 Palestine a direct consequence of Deir Yassin.

Buchanan: “There were injustices, Sean.”

For Buchanan in the middle of this discussion about terrorism to go back to the founding of Israel and portray the massacre of Deir Yassin as the key event—this said to me that Buchanan truly is, as I said in my article, a Captain Ahab forever hunting his White Whale; he is fixated on the founding of Israel as the ultimate source of the evils we face today. Unfortunately, Sean didn’t challenge him on the implications of his statement that there were injustices. He didn’t ask him, “Ok, Pat, if there were injustices, what are you saying needs to be done about that now? Does Israel have the right to exist or not, Pat? And if Israel does have the right to exist, Pat, why are you going back to supposed injustices by the Israelis committed 55 years ago and ignoring all the much worse crimes committed by the Arabs?”

Still, all in all, Hannity did a reasonably good job of holding Buchanan’s feet to the fire. Most of all, it was Buchanan who exposed himself.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at March 19, 2004 11:54 PM | Send

Email entry

Email this entry to:

Your email address:

Message (optional):