Cinnamon Stillwell

I’m the West Coast Representative for Campus Watch, a project of the Middle East Forum that focuses on Middle East studies. I was a political columnist for SFGate.com (San Francisco Chronicle online) from 2004-2008. I've written for the American Thinker, Frontpage Magazine, Family Security Matters, Accuracy In Media, Newsbusters, Israel National News, The Jewish Policy Center, J-The Jewish News Weekly of N. CA, Intellectual Conservative and many others. More info at CinnamonStillwell.com.

Tuesday, September 18, 2007

The Terrorists' Guide to the 2008 Presidential Election

Last week, I was lucky enough to receive an advance reading copy of WorldNetDaily.com Jerusalem bureau chief Aaron Klein's soon to be released book, Schmoozing With Terrorists: From Hollywood to the Holy Land, Jihadists Reveal Their Global Plans--to a Jew!

Klein has proven himself to be an indispensable source for unfiltered news on the Middle East and the war on Islamic terrorism. His revealing interviews with jihadist leaders and their minions, all the more astonishing for being granted to an Orthodox Jew, are legend. His book looks to be a useful and witty compilation of these interview results, at least for those willing to hear the truth about what motivates our enemies. Here's a hint: It's not our fault.

While I haven't yet read the entire book, one particular chapter caught my eye. Noting how closely America's foes follow U.S. domestic politics, Klein interviewed a number of Palestinian and other assorted terrorists about their views on the 2008 presidential election. And guess who the terrorists endorse, above all others, for president? That's right. Hillary Clinton.

The chapter in question is titled, "Terrorists Go Ga-Ga Over Hillary Clinton," and indeed they do. They base their support on the belief that Hillary will pick up where her husband, former President Bill Clinton, left off, in regards to the failed Oslo Accords, thereby assisting them in their goal of annihilating Israel. They also base it on the understandable assumption that Hillary will effect a premature withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, which, they note, would be seen as an American defeat. In the process, the jihadists make a very strong case (at least for those are aren't on their side) for not following their advice.

Taking it a step further, the jihadists also endorse fellow presidential hopeful Barack Obama and heap praise upon the Democratic Party, and the left in general, for its, shall we say, rather weak-kneed approach to fighting terrorism. For Republicans, they have nothing but contempt. A badge of honor, if there ever was one.

Of course, pointing this out will result in the usual indignant protestations from Democrats and other acolytes of the "anti-war movement" to the effect that, "how dare we question their patriotism!" But all discussion of patriotism aside (and methinks they doth protest too much), the simple fact of the matter is that the Democratic Party has been forcefully pushing a policy of appeasement since the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and, lo and behold, America's enemies have taken notice. Indeed, one would have to be deaf, dumb, and blind not to have detected the daily exhortations to surrender emanating from our nation's capital, not to mention the streets and salons of cities such as my very own San Francisco.

The terrorists interviewed in Klein's book also prove useful in the presidential candidates they oppose. And at the top of their list is former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani. While Giuliani's tough-guy defiance would seem to be their prime motivation, it is, in fact, a specific incident that inspired their ire. That is, in 1995, when Giuliani kicked out late Palestinian terrorist leader Yasser Arafat from a Lincoln Center concert marking the 50th anniversary of the United Nations, telling the incredulous press (to say nothing of the liberal Jewish establishment), "I would not invite Yasser Arafat to anything, anywhere, anytime, anyplace. I don’t forget."

Giuliani took a similarly heroic stand soon after the 9/11 terrorist attacks when he told Saudi Prince al-Waleed bin Talal where he could put his $10 million "disaster relief" check, which was contingent, of course, upon accepting the claim that U.S. support for Israel led to the atrocities.

Indeed, Giuliani has demonstrated on a number of occasions that he understands an obvious truth, which, as I put it in an earlier post on the subject, is that the global war on terrorism and hatred towards Israel and Jews are inexorably linked.

When it comes to Giuliani's choices for foreign policy team, his campaign stands out from the pack. It includes many of the more perceptive minds of our time, particularly in regards to the Middle East. Norman Podhoretz, Martin Kramer, and Daniel Pipes (full disclosure: I work for Dr. Pipes' Middle East Forum), to name just a few.

Giuliani's unwillingness to go along with the international charade that a Palestinian state, in its present form, will be anything other than a terrorist state (adherents of which, I might add, include President Bush, Condoleezza Rice, et al.), also displays a presence of mind worth noting.

All of this has earned him the charming nickname, "Jew-liani," from the keepers of the "neocon conspiracy" school of, er, thought, who can always be relied upon to steer the rest of us in the opposite direction. In fact, the braying from the left, along with the antipathy expressed by the terrorists interviewed in Klein's book (among other objectionable sources), is making Giuliani look pretty good right about now.

And lest one forget where Hillary stands, the photo of the Clinton clan cozying up to Arafat, with Hillary and Chelsea's smiling and obligingly hijab-clad faces (what is it about Democratic women and head coverings?) in the foreground, serves as a useful reminder.

The terrorists have spoken. Maybe it's time we started listening.

11 Comments:

Anonymous GM Roper said...

Outstanding Cinnamon. For the life of me, I cannot understand those who blithely ignore who the terrorists root for. Are so many Americans and Europeans really that dumb?

Tuesday, September 18, 2007 12:04:00 PM  
Anonymous BarBQ Graveyard said...

We should let the terrorists vote for president an then we could just give the office to the loser.

We can't tell tell the terrorists that we're gonna do a switcheroo though, else they might vote for Guliani or whoever.

But, hey, maybe the terrorists love Hillery so much that they won't be able to help themselves and they'll vote for her anyway, just to feel the Hillary vote, knowing full well that she won't really win.

But, then again, what if they switcheroo our switcheroo and vote for Hillary, but really want Mitt or whoever.

Nah, that's silly. Terrorists are Democrats. That doesn't mean Democrats are terrorists, but it's pretty close, right?

Why do we even let Democrats run for president anymore? I mean would we let a terrorist run for president? We don't even let terrorists in the country. Why would we let them run for president?

Tuesday, September 18, 2007 10:43:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Via Big Boy Jammies, your source for news that’s not worth getting out of bed for, comes this exciting article by a dessert beverage known as Cinnamon Stillwell.



The delicious ice cream topping/floor cleaner has taken a tip from everyone’s favorite Libertarian lumberjack and reviewed a book before she’s actually read it: In this case, the highly dignified-sounding Schmoozing With Terrorists: From Hollywood to the Holy Land, Jihadists Reveal Their Global Plans–to a Jew! by Aaron Klein. Mr. Klein’s particular gimmick is hunting down dimwitted terrorist wannabes and cajoling them into saying that they love Democrats; et voila — proof indisputable that voting donkey places you in league with the butchers of 9/11. Of course, one could argue that this is the exact same argument as finding some unhinged, basement-dwelling cranks who call for the nuclear destruction of Mecca and implying that this “proves” that Republicans are objectively pro-genocide, but where would one be able to find such examples? Nowhere that I can think of.

The tasty and versatile table spice isn’t above naming names, either:

And guess who the terrorists endorse, above all others, for president? That’s right. Hillary Clinton…they base their support on the belief that Hillary will pick up where her husband, former President Bill Clinton, left off, in regards to the failed Oslo Accords, thereby assisting them in their goal of annihilating Israel.

And guess who the communists endorse, above all others, for president? That’s right. Harry Truman…they base their support on the belief that Harry will pick up where his master, former President Franklin Roosevelt, left off, in regards to the failed Yalta Conference, thereby assisting them in their goal of subjugating Europe. The old arguments never stop being relevant, do they?

They also base it on the understandable assumption that Hillary will effect a premature withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, which, they note, would be seen as an American defeat. In the process, the jihadists make a very strong case (at least for those are aren’t on their side) for not following their advice.

I will personally buy a martini for the first person who can explain to me what in the name of hickory that second sentence is supposed to mean.

Indeed, one would have to be deaf, dumb, and blind not to have detected the daily exhortations to surrender emanating from our nation’s capital, not to mention the streets and salons of cities such as my very own San Francisco.

Indeed! Why, who can forget when Harry Reid said “You know what? I think we should just surrender to the terrorists, is what.” Or Nancy Pelosi’s famous “Let’s Lay Down for Saddam” speech, who didn’t hear that? I was personally in attendance the day that Gavin Newsom gave Osama bin-Laden the keys to the city of San Francisco and asked if he could be of any help in rounding up innocent babies to be sacrificed to bin-Laden’s bloodthirsty moon god. Lousy Democrats!

The terrorists interviewed in Klein’s book also prove useful in the presidential candidates they oppose. And at the top of their list is former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani. While Giuliani’s tough-guy defiance would seem to be their prime motivation, it is, in fact, a specific incident that inspired their ire. That is, in 1995, when Giuliani kicked out late Palestinian terrorist leader Yasser Arafat from a Lincoln Center concert marking the 50th anniversary of the United Nations, telling the incredulous press (to say nothing of the liberal Jewish establishment), “I would not invite Yasser Arafat to anything, anywhere, anytime, anyplace. I don’t forget.”

Hey, wasn’t Giuliani the mayor of New York when it got attacked by terrorists? I can’t remember, because I’m a liberal. I forget what point I was making here, but I think it had to do with the fact that the UN are a bunch of filthy appeaseniks.

Giuliani took a similarly heroic stand soon after the 9/11 terrorist attacks when he told Saudi Prince al-Waleed bin Talal where he could put his $10 million “disaster relief” check, which was contingent, of course, upon accepting the claim that U.S. support for Israel led to the atrocities.

Actually, the $10 million was contingent upon nothing, and the prince merely urged the U.S. to reconsider its Israel policy, which isn’t even remotely the same thing. But, on the other hand, it is!

When it comes to Giuliani’s choices for foreign policy team, his campaign stands out from the pack. It includes many of the more perceptive minds of our time, particularly in regards to the Middle East. Norman Podhoretz, Martin Kramer, and Daniel Pipes (full disclosure: I work for Dr. Pipes’ Middle East Forum), to name just a few.

Wow! Talk about a Dream Team! That’s some level-headed, pragmatic foreign policy thinking right there. You trusted them on Iraq, now trust them triple-much on Iran!

The terrorists have spoken. Maybe it’s time we started listening.

Indeed. In other news, Osama bin-Laden urged Americans to convert to Islam or die. Since forcible conversion has also been a favorite tactic of the Catholic Church, I believe this constitutes definitive proof that the Islamicist terror brigades are in thrall to the vile Papists of Rome, as will be revealed in my forthcoming book, Bakhshish With Benedict: From the Vatican to My Neighbor’s Van, Counter-Reformationists Reveal Their Global Plans — to a Non-Religious Half-Arab! Look for Megan McArdle’s review, two weeks prior to my finishing the book.

Wednesday, September 19, 2007 4:25:00 AM  
Anonymous Paul said...

ANonymous states the case to be AGAINST these jihadists extremely well !!

Wednesday, September 19, 2007 4:48:00 AM  
Blogger Bald Headed Geek said...

Fabulous post, Cinnamon, and I see that the trolls have also posted--anonymously, of course--on the subject.

Well, "Anonymous", if you want to deny reality and cite to the practices of the Catholic Church 500 years ago, knock yourself out. When I see Cardinals and Bishops calling for the expulsion of Muslims from Istanbul, a/k/a Istanbul, then I'll "listen" to you. Until then, get a clue.

BHG

Wednesday, September 19, 2007 4:52:00 AM  
Blogger Dhalgren said...

Cinnamon, you didn't really read the book, did you? Outstanding journalism skills.

As for the books argument -

The terrorsts don't root for anyone in this country. They are nihilists. It doesn't matter to them who is president.

Except maybe bin laden. At least he knows he is safe so long as there is a Bush in the White House.

Wednesday, September 19, 2007 5:58:00 AM  
Anonymous Jim Smith II said...

Okay, I'll play along, a few questions if I may...

Is it common practice to write a review of a book when one hasn't read it yet (and does it strike anyone as odd that "terrorists" would speak freely to a Jew)?

If Mr. Klein has access to "terrorists" doesn't it seem odd that he wouldn't inform DHS?

While few, if any, would argue that terrorism may be one of the most important issues, is Ms. Stillwell arguing that it's the only issue?

Is it the commenters' contention that we should let "terrorists" dictate who we elect (and if so, does that mean that the "terrorists" really have won)?

I await the onslaught of slings and arrows...

Wednesday, September 19, 2007 6:09:00 AM  
Blogger Dominion said...

Bless your heart, you're just not very bright are you?

Wednesday, September 19, 2007 6:28:00 AM  
Anonymous Jim Smith II said...

That's it;

Bless your heart, you're just not very bright are you?

I'm not even sure what that is supposed to mean. Are you saying that I'm not bright because I don't understand your arcane attempt at logic - (based on an incredibly small sample you've determined that "terrorist don't like the current administration, democrats don't like the current administration, ergo terrorist = democrats. QED) - Or is it that I politely asked for further information?

Wednesday, September 19, 2007 9:50:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Cinnamon Stillwell?

...Lord.

Wednesday, September 19, 2007 7:32:00 PM  
Anonymous ielection08 said...

Dear friend , How are you ?
i have a suggestion !

if you put our website link to your weblog , we will put your weblog link to our website too .

if you are agree to exchange link ,
please mail me .

thank you .

www.ielection08.com
tigersware@yahoo.com

Thursday, September 20, 2007 12:10:00 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home