Desperate for security help, Hirsi Ali begs France for citizenship
posted at 12:22 pm on February 11, 2008 by Allahpundit
Hitchens, Sam Harris, and even the world authority on being stalked by jihadist filthbags begged the United States to foot her security bills when the news about her financial crunch first broke in October. She has her green card, which one would think would be enough to qualify her for state-sponsored protection. Not so; if it were, I’d have nothing to write about today. And so it’s come to this: One of the planet’s fiercest critics of Islam is forced to petition the French, of all people, to keep her safe because America won’t. A travesty.
Now the former Dutch lawmaker is asking France to grant her citizenship because, she says, she cannot be assured of her own safety in the Netherlands or the US.
“I would be very honored and grateful if I were to become a French citizen, and the question of my protection could be resolved once and for all,” said Ali, speaking in English in an interview on Sunday with France-2 television…
Ali said that she chose France because she had received support from French intellectuals and sympathy from French political leaders.
French Philosopher Henri Levy has championed Ali’s bid for French citizenship. He has described Ali as a “brave woman” who “has already proved that she is French.”
France’s Human Rights Minister, Rama Yade, stopped short of guaranteeing citizenship for Ali, but said on a France-2 news program that France would lobby for the creation of a European Union-wide fund to cover the security of citizens who live under religiously motivated threats like the fatwa against Ali. The fund has the support of French President Nicolas Sarkozy, as well as France’s Socialist Party and about 70 European Parliament members.
French socialists have a better handle on this problem than the U.S. Congress. Exit question: If illegal aliens qualify for emergency medical treatment, why don’t legal aliens qualify for emergency police protection?
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
Disgrace indeed. If she was an illegal immigrant she would stand a better chance.
RobCon on February 11, 2008 at 12:25 PM
Make her a US citizen already. An Executive Order is in order.
RobCon on February 11, 2008 at 12:26 PM
absolutely disgraceful.
ctmom on February 11, 2008 at 12:28 PM
Where’s Condi Rice?
Or, better yet-
Where’s Barack Obama?
profitsbeard on February 11, 2008 at 12:28 PM
Makes one wonder if our decision making machinery has been compromised to some extent by those who might benefit most from having her killed. Just sayin,….
a capella on February 11, 2008 at 12:28 PM
No need to ask me but someone should really consdider asking John McCain. I already know everybody behind Shamnesty had misplaced loyalties from the begining. This is just one more example of that sad fact.
Zetterson on February 11, 2008 at 12:29 PM
Both hiding under their bed. Shameful.
Big Orange on February 11, 2008 at 12:32 PM
I’m not sure I quite understand. She has a green card so she can stay here in the US, no? So she is looking for a state to pay for her protection? Can’t we do this through a private foundation or a fund?
Spirit of 1776 on February 11, 2008 at 12:32 PM
Evidently a private foundation or fund has not been forthcoming.
passingtramp on February 11, 2008 at 12:33 PM
A day of shame. There is no excuse for this.
Shy Guy on February 11, 2008 at 12:34 PM
I don’t think we should foot her security bill (sorry), but why did she have to leave the US in the first place? Am I being completely naive about the danger she faces inside our own borders?
Couldn’t she have just, like, moved to Montana? I’m serious. Maybe I’m missing something.
locke on February 11, 2008 at 12:34 PM
Not together, I HOPE.
(Mrs. Obama looks like a mean Eddie Murphy “mama“.)
profitsbeard on February 11, 2008 at 12:35 PM
Geez, and with all of the outcry from American feminists over this…oh wait, we haven’t heard anything from them on this, have we?
CP on February 11, 2008 at 12:35 PM
AP, I remember a few months ago you posted about AEI hosting a fund for her… I guess that was a bust? Do you have any info on what came of it? This is too, too sad. Ayaan’s a gift to the country, and we’re essentially kicking her to the curb.
Pasalubong on February 11, 2008 at 12:36 PM
I think you may have a point.
CP on February 11, 2008 at 12:36 PM
locke-
Unless Hirsi Ali went completely incognito in the U.S., which defeats the point of being outspoken, no state would be safe.
There are Islamic “centers” even in Montana.
And their network about how to get to apostates is pretty efficient.
profitsbeard on February 11, 2008 at 12:37 PM
Spirit of 1776 on February 11, 2008 at 12:38 PM
Dude, she had a defense fund set up so Americans could privately support her. Guess we didn’t man-up. It’s not the role of the US govt to provide for peoples’ private security.
RW Wacko on February 11, 2008 at 12:38 PM
(sorry, I didn’t close my quote, PT.)
Then what is the outcry over? I’m not trying to an *ss, but if it is true that France is trying to establish a system of protection for religiously threatened citizens, it seems like a perfect fit.
Spirit of 1776 on February 11, 2008 at 12:38 PM
Get that girl a .357 magnum.
Shtetl G on February 11, 2008 at 12:39 PM
The private fund idea didn’t work out.
As for the exit question – because if you don’t get emergency medical attention you die vs. emergency protection against boogey men.
tlynch001 on February 11, 2008 at 12:40 PM
Since he thinks there is no threat, why sould she need protection? /
BacaDog on February 11, 2008 at 12:42 PM
The Hesham Islams in your structure don’t approve of her being in America. She’s bad for the Reach Out programs that will be so decisive if the proper funding is granted.
BL@KBIRD on February 11, 2008 at 12:42 PM
She’s a fine woman, for sure, but she betrays her mentality when her only recourse is to turn to the state to protect her. Perhaps her upbringing has molded her more deeply than she cares to realise?
France will not magically protect her, nor can the US, Holland or anywhere else, without suffocating her in layers of expensive taxpayer-funded security.
I wonder if she appreciates that she is contemplating leaving the land of the 2nd Amendment for a nebulous, worthless, promise of safety?
LimeyGeek on February 11, 2008 at 12:43 PM
Oh.
Wonder what CAIR thinks about it.
BacaDog on February 11, 2008 at 12:44 PM
Boner pills for seniors? Federal power!
Defense? Er, not if it’s seething Muslims. You’re on your own.
Say buh-bye to free speech globally thanks to brilliant defenders like this.
Beagle on February 11, 2008 at 12:45 PM
Exit question: If illegal aliens qualify for emergency medical treatment, why don’t legal aliens qualify for emergency police protection?
AP: Your question sounds like it involves logic. Therefore, you must also believe in the concept of individual responsibility and free enterprise. This is not to be tolerated in the New World Order. Please stay where you are, the Canadian Thought Police are on their way. Once arrested, you will be flown to the UK where you can admit your guilt in the Sharia (sp?) Court. You will then be whisked away to lovely Saudi Arabia where you will be treated like a woman at a Starbucks.
Have a nice day.
SwampRat on February 11, 2008 at 12:48 PM
It’s not the role of the US govt to provide for free speech globally.
tlynch001 on February 11, 2008 at 12:49 PM
She can come live with me.
My wife, cat and I will protect her.
No… seriously.
Alalazoo on February 11, 2008 at 12:50 PM
Wacko is correct. The fact that the private fund idea failed rather perfectly demonstrates the lack of perceived value the public sees in her. Right or wrong.
Taxpayers should not be forced to foot a huge bill to protect the ever-growing list of ‘enemies of islam’. They declare enemies as part of an ideological sport.
Her life is no more important than any of ours, despite her fine educational words.
LimeyGeek on February 11, 2008 at 12:50 PM
I don’t think it is our responsibility to provide police protection. If she gets an armed guard paid for by taxpayers I want one.
Where does it end? I like Ali, and I appreciate her speaking out, but I don’t think it is the government’s responsibility to pay to protect her.
If she were a witness in a trial, there is a witness protection program. But with the witness protection program comes loss of identity, loss of freedom to speak out (sell books), etc.
It’s too bad that there are threats, but it’s not our governments’ responsibility to do anything about it over and above what they do for everyone else. We need to address Islam dead on to fix this problem. Providing police protection for every apostate who gets death threats won’t help. Does Robert Spencer deserve extra police protection?
It would have to be a socialist state to justify forcing taxpayers to foot this bill. Maybe they could allow her to live on a military base – but she would have to suffer restrictions to be protected.
ThackerAgency on February 11, 2008 at 12:51 PM
And what would a real sanctuary city look like?
TexasDan on February 11, 2008 at 12:55 PM
Do women who have dangerous exes, that have threatened to kill them, get round-the-clock taxpayer funded security protection? Abortion clinics will start petitioning for US govt-provided security protection. I’m a good person…if I get a brain tumor tomorrow the federal govt should pay to take care of me, otherwise I will die. Come on, this is America. The govt has its role, do we really want to expand it to include private security for people who are threatened? There are tens of thousands more Hirsi Ali’s out there. We concentrate on her only b/c we are tuned into the threat of radical Islam. I’m all for the first amendment, but against turning to the federal govt to take care of us for everything. The US govt gave her a green card, solely b/c of her situation. That was very fair, I believe. Asking US taxpayers to pony up millions of dollars per year in perpetuity to protect her doesn’t work for me, sorry.
RW Wacko on February 11, 2008 at 12:55 PM
It’s not the role of the US govt to provide for peoples’ private security.
Tell that to Bill Clinton and George H.W. Bush.
Gerard on February 11, 2008 at 12:55 PM
Does she still work for AEI? If so, rather than take up a fund, why won’t it just foot the complete bill?
Drum on February 11, 2008 at 12:59 PM
outrage!!
jerrytbg on February 11, 2008 at 1:00 PM
Yeah they give them a piece of paper and tell them that should protect them.
EnochCain on February 11, 2008 at 1:00 PM
She is still listed among the scholars and fellows, so I have no reason to suspect otherwise. As the 2nd question, I have no idea what their budget capabilities are. Either way, though I don’t see a countermanding argument for what Wacko said (below), aside from a simple appeal to emotion:
I’m all for the first amendment, but against turning to the federal govt to take care of us for everything. The US govt gave her a green card, solely b/c of her situation. That was very fair, I believe. Asking US taxpayers to pony up millions of dollars per year in perpetuity to protect her doesn’t work for me, sorry.
It would seem to me, that if France is pursuing legislation for protecting EU citizens under religious threat, it is fitting that a former Netherlands citizen would return to the protection of the EU and appeal to France for citizenry. I don’t see where the American tax-payer comes in.
Spirit of 1776 on February 11, 2008 at 1:05 PM
Where’s McCain? Oh wait, he would only help if she did not have a green card…sorry.
TOPV on February 11, 2008 at 1:06 PM
So, um, why isn’t there a link to her private foundation so we can donate? Why hasn’t the blogosphere mobilized to her aid?
If Ali were a former President of the United States, she’d get the same protection. Those men are not being protected as private citizens but as representatives of the office of the presidency.
spmat on February 11, 2008 at 1:07 PM
I think Wacko was supporting the refusal of the US to provide the protection she now seeks from France.
LimeyGeek on February 11, 2008 at 1:08 PM
Translation: She must be ILLEGAL to get help from any of the presidential candidates…INCLUDING BUSH, MCCAIN
TOPV on February 11, 2008 at 1:08 PM
I don’t have a clue about what personal protection for an individual costs — though plenty of celebrities and pastors manage to provide it. There are plenty of Hirsi Ali cheerleaders who have millions and who could foot the bill if they thought her work important enough.
Drum on February 11, 2008 at 1:09 PM
Not to state the obvious, but aren’t the two you mention former US Presidents?
Ann on February 11, 2008 at 1:09 PM
Translation: She must be ILLEGAL to get help from any of the presidential candidates…INCLUDING BUSH, MCCAIN, CLINTON AND OBAMA (sorry first one got cutoff)
TOPV on February 11, 2008 at 1:08 PM
TOPV on February 11, 2008 at 1:10 PM
Theo van Gogh would like a word with you. Oh wait, he’s dead.
Wineaholic on February 11, 2008 at 1:12 PM
I am agreeing with what he said, ie that it is not a matter for the American tax-payer. It is a matter for funds or foundations or volunteered manpower. If that is inadequate then it is appropriate for the lady to explore other options among various governments that operate with a different view regarding the relationship between government and citizen. We cannot be all things to all people and remain ourselves.
Spirit of 1776 on February 11, 2008 at 1:13 PM
Yes, former. Now they are private citizens. They receive around the clock police protection. Why them and not Hirsi Ali? Think about it.
Zetterson on February 11, 2008 at 1:15 PM
Gotcha. My comprehension skills are on the wane ;)
LimeyGeek on February 11, 2008 at 1:16 PM
Because we have shifted from “home of the free” to “home of the free ride”.
As long as we don’t have to defend anyones beliefs, we will support them. As soon as we have to defend someones belief in freedom, it is, adios muchacha.
right2bright on February 11, 2008 at 1:17 PM
This is sad and dispiriting. The British protected Rushdie for years. Of course since she is a Dutch citizen the government of Holland should pay the tab. But Geetz Wilders aside, the Dutch can’t be counted on to do squat about Islam.
Why can’t she get US citizenship? Then she can petition the US authorities for protection.
If she is left on her own and murdered by jihadists then we can’t very well expect people to speak out against jihad, now can we? If criticizing Islam and jihad gets you killed, who will do it?
She’s probably the most famous anti-jihadist in the world, certainly the most famous female. She also a tall, slender, Somali woman. Where is she going to go where she won’t stick out and be readily recognizable? If she goes where there are lots of Somalis she is only increasing the chances of being attacked. If she goes to Montana I think word will get around that Hirsi Ali in in Montana. It’s not like there are lots of people who look like her up there.
Short of going into complete seclusion, she will need protection. It’s demoralizing that she has become in essence a stateless woman. Her murder will be a victory for jihad and a defeat for civilization. I can’t believe we are letting this happen right before our eyes because we’re cheap and petty, lacking in foresight, courage and imagination. Shame, shame.
Vote Sauron 08 on February 11, 2008 at 1:17 PM
Then why not any citizen who may be in danger? I mean why not protect abused women around the clock like mentioned above?
EnochCain on February 11, 2008 at 1:18 PM
Well, does she need protection or does she need to be able to speak out?
I dunno…it sounds to me a lot like “Help, protect me from this rabid dog that I keep poking with my finger…WHY WON’T YOU PROTECT ME FROM THE BITES?”
James on February 11, 2008 at 1:19 PM
I believe Chelsea Clinton and the Bush twins have security protection, not to mention the presidential candidates. Are you claiming there is no discrepancy in the way lives are valued here, using federal protection as criteria?
a capella on February 11, 2008 at 1:19 PM
She does not occupy a position of historical significance in American history. They do.
If she dies, it’s a headline for a week. If they die, it’s casus belli.
Our government reached an agreement to provide protection for a specific class of persons (Presidents), not every tom, dick & harriet that comes along.
LimeyGeek on February 11, 2008 at 1:20 PM
Since when is it the American taxpayers responsibility to provide round the clock security for every non-citizen critic of Islam?
You got to love HA conservatives where a green card entitles you round the clock guards…
TheBigOldDog on February 11, 2008 at 1:23 PM
I respect the point that the American citizens should not have to spend money for the police protection of any one private citizen, but I don’t think providing Ali with that will mean that we are being all things to all people. Hirsi Ali is unique and rare. She is different then “all people.” I see nothing wrong with the direction France has chosen to provide public funds in extreme and rare cases of religiously threatened people (ie fatwas). I suppose we provide former Presidents with security because they are walking talking national security archives. If the first President Bush was captured tomorrow and tortured for some specific info by one of our enemies that would endanger all of us. I don’t suppose Hirsi Ali knows anything that would compromise our national security if revealed. I guess that would be the difference now that I think about it. Anyways, I’m afraid to say that France is doing the right thing in this case, not the US.
Zetterson on February 11, 2008 at 1:24 PM
America’s Next Top Model? I don’t know. But sheesh, call Eric Prince to send one of his Blackwater dudes and make it a write-off. Hitchens is a socialist and it makes total sense that he’d be beside himself that the state isn’t stepping up to foot the bill.
Drum on February 11, 2008 at 1:24 PM
Not at all. There is discrepancy. There is discrimination. As there should be. Lives are of different values from various perspectives. Not in a grand cosmic philosophical sense, perhaps, but certainly in a real-world political sense.
Ali doesn’t make the grade, neither do you or I. Our children still think we are heroes and gods, so keep smiling ;)
LimeyGeek on February 11, 2008 at 1:24 PM
If a Jihadi attacks her in the USA there will be serious damage to the Muslim cause. This would be a high profile attack and would not go unnoticed, then of course our government will act in response. It’s what they do best even though it could take some time.
In American we pretty much have to protect ourselves, it’s why we buy guns and take self defense courses. That being said, all she has to do is testify against an organized crime family and she’s good to go. Eunuchs hold positions of power in our nation now and can’t take a dump without looking to the politburo for approval.
She is wise to be concerned but to think she is safer in France. Good luck!
Egfrow on February 11, 2008 at 1:25 PM
If American pundits really cared they would start a charity to pay for her protections (and others like her) and seek donations. Unfortunately they become just like the Left when they deem the cause worthy and seek to force it onto the government.
TheBigOldDog on February 11, 2008 at 1:25 PM
Mr President, please fax over all your nuclear secrets or else your two daughters die. Signed Mahmoud.
I think that is the difference.
Zetterson on February 11, 2008 at 1:26 PM
Well she may be safer in France but her car does not stand a chance.
EnochCain on February 11, 2008 at 1:26 PM
I think we need an update to remind people a fund was started.
tlynch001 on February 11, 2008 at 1:31 PM
They are not private citizens like you and me. They still represent the office of the President and as such are protected. Since 1997, though, it’s not lifetime protection any more (here’s the relevant statute). George W. gets 10 years of protection, then he’s on his own. It’s sickeningly ironic that the first President to take terrorism seriously will also be the first former President to lose his Secret Service protection and thus be vulnerable to the terrorists he fought.
Apropos of the discussion, Ali actually could fall under the same law that protects former and current Presidents:
All W. has to say is “protect her” and she gets protection under the same law he does.
spmat on February 11, 2008 at 1:32 PM
If he had only had know the risk he was taking…
tlynch001 on February 11, 2008 at 1:33 PM
A valid point, there was one short blitz for donations and then it went away. They should have kept bringing it up for reminders.
doubleplusundead on February 11, 2008 at 1:33 PM
Here is a link to the Ayaan Hirsi Ali Security Trust
http://www.samharris.org/site/security_trust/
As much as I understand what you guys are saying, I think the government should go ahead and pay for her security. Not forever, perhaps, but a set amount of time. Time enough for her to make arrangements?
(sigh) I really think she is an asset to the country and I would hate to see her go to France. :(
kippras on February 11, 2008 at 1:33 PM
distinguished foreign visitors
She has a green card. She is a resident, not a visitor.
LimeyGeek on February 11, 2008 at 1:35 PM
TheBigOldDog, you’re right partially in my opinion. There was a private fund. Unfortunately, you know about this story. I know about this story. Many other readers here at this site know this story but if you try taking a random phone survey of all Americans, perhaps 1 out of 10000 would know who Ayaan Hirsi Ali is. I think a little mainstream media coverage would have gone a long way. How about a 60 minutes piece about the life story of Ali and the situation she faces today? Why don’t they dedicate a program to that story? How about the NY Times dedicates the entire front page to this very story on a slow news day? Nah. Not going to happen. It should happen, but it won’t. Why? Because to cover the story would run contrary to their agendas and biases. Far too many eyes would be open around the country to the truth that we are at war with a very dangerous enemy. They don’t want that to happen. No way.
I promise you though, if they did cover the story the way it deserves to be covered Ali would have her round the clock secrurity and she would be living in the United States.
Zetterson on February 11, 2008 at 1:36 PM
I think you would hear the quiet squelch of moist blinking from the masses.
She’s some woman that wrote some book that says islam sucks that has yet another death threat from the usual islamic suspects.
Ooooh! Brittany is out!
LimeyGeek on February 11, 2008 at 1:40 PM
Maybe she and Sam should get together and pray about it. Oops, forgot. Nothing from nothing means nothing.
Drum on February 11, 2008 at 1:40 PM
I fail to see how she is an “asset” to this country? I think that places the bar pretty low… I can see why we should help her for humanitarian reasons, but I don’t think she brings that much to the country.
mycowardice on February 11, 2008 at 1:43 PM
Yes, but it also handles official representatives. She could just as easily be given an honorary position in the State Department or declared a special envoy to the U.N. Human Rights Commission or some such and thus meet the conditions as “official representative … performing special missions abroad.”
spmat on February 11, 2008 at 1:43 PM
I completely missed this line. What? French socialists have a better handle on being socialist, not on how best to protect one (or a whole country) from fanatic Muslims. Geez, does this mean Allah’s gonna start pulling for state financed health insurance? French socialists have a better handle on that as well.
Drum on February 11, 2008 at 1:45 PM
I’m sorry, but I agree with most of the comments above, she should not have taxpayer funded protection. That said, I think she should learn to handle a firearm to protect herself. There are MANY precautions she could take to help ensure her own safety. By the way, I know we have not be named, but are we not ALL targets at this point?
kcd on February 11, 2008 at 1:47 PM
You’re right. She’s an asset to those who care to learn the truths about fanatical Islam. The average American has never heard of her and really couldn’t care less, and you can’t fault them for that. Indeed, the average American is concerned with the protection of his or her own children when they walk outside their homes, get into a car, step inside a school, or shop at a mall.
This is becoming sillier and sillier the more we talk about it.
Drum on February 11, 2008 at 1:49 PM
I understand the concept. I wonder if all folks having access to secured information are equally fortunate in having their families protected. And, yes, I realize there is a limit, although if Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter still have access to that type of information just by virtue of past presidency, it may explain some things like Norman Hsu.
a capella on February 11, 2008 at 1:51 PM
If 9/11 did not teach people all they need to know about fanatical Islam then nothing will.
EnochCain on February 11, 2008 at 1:51 PM
Sure. We could do any number of things to fudge it so she receives taxpayer-funded security. But should we? Will we do it for every Ali that emerges? Who sets the measure of a ‘standardised Ali’?
I say that as brave as she is to speak out, her life is not important enough to this nation to warrant such protection. There are any number of ways she can make private arrangements.
LimeyGeek on February 11, 2008 at 1:52 PM
All that is, is a legal manner to use the state. Still doesn’t make the principle correct.
That is well said.
Spirit of 1776 on February 11, 2008 at 1:56 PM
If she was a scientist, or an Iranian refugee that worked for Ahmadinejad, I would get the asset part. But just to hear her speak out against fanatical Islam is really not what I consider an Asset (unless it would be Osama Bin Laden — he would qualify).
But seriously, instead of qualifying her as an asset, we could just help her out on humanitarian grounds. Even if she stopped speaking out. Sometimes we have to protect these people simply for the symbol and message it sends.
mycowardice on February 11, 2008 at 1:58 PM
My last argument goes back to the exit question:
If we can help illegal aliens when they are sick, we certainly can help her as well for the same reasons: we have a duty to help people that need help.
mycowardice on February 11, 2008 at 2:00 PM
Well said. There are so many people she could appeal to for help. I’m not being sarcastic, but she could go to one of the mega-churches, like Hagee’s, and appeal for some sort of financial sanctuary. What about Pat Robertson? There are all sorts of wealthy activists who understand her plight to whom she could appeal directly.
Drum on February 11, 2008 at 2:01 PM
Seems to me if Bill Richardson could be tasked with finding a job for Monica at government expense, Brownie could be made head of FEMA, and Sandy Berger given a place in the Hillary administration, there should be some way to give her security. I wonder if she might hire on at the CIA as an operative. I heard they take female illegals from Lebanon with sham marriages,..why not a green card holder? Oh,…. I know. How about as a traveling companion for Hillary?
a capella on February 11, 2008 at 2:02 PM
There is no such thing as government expense, it’s tax-payers expense. Just because she can be added to the government roll of dole doesn’t make it proper.
Spirit of 1776 on February 11, 2008 at 2:07 PM
Yeah, but the message would be way stronger if we didn’t ‘contract out’ her security.
mycowardice on February 11, 2008 at 2:09 PM
BINGO! If only HALF of American citizens would just wake up one day and realize: “Hey, the government don’t have any money, that’s our money!” Maybe, just maybe, people would start to care what they are doing with our money.
kcd on February 11, 2008 at 2:14 PM
What’s odd is that the only people speaking up on her behalf are white christian conservatives. Why isn’t the NYT demanding the US do something? Where’s the lovely Rosie? Hillary? Caroline Kennedy? Shriver? Steinem? Barbra? Sarandon? Alec Baldwin? Sean Penn? Kos? Bill or Chelsea? Code Pink? Ms Magazine editors? Faludi? Gore?Edwards?… Hello??? Liberals??? An ACTUAL threat to an ACTUAL female immigrant of color is right there in front of you! Where are you??? HELLO?!?!
Yeah,…thought so.
Gartrip on February 11, 2008 at 2:14 PM
Good point. What about the church that was protecting the illegal?
kcd on February 11, 2008 at 2:15 PM
I’d be more impressed if they acknowledged that the money largely comes from about 25% of the population.
But that is why politicians can buy votes – it isn’t everyones’ money, but mostly a minority’s – and most people, it seems, are feebleminded enough to vote to receive others’ money.
LimeyGeek on February 11, 2008 at 2:22 PM
Which is why I think it would be worthwhile to spend tax dollars on securing her safety.
Maybe I’m wrong in this argument, but it’s not as though we don’t protect ordinary citizens with taxpayer money when it suits our interests. Witnesses for the prosecution sometimes wind up in protection for the rest of their lives, even after they’ve ceased to be useful to the government.
Besides, in fighting the War on Terror, our goal is to find and capture/kill the very same people who are after Hirshi Ali. Doesn’t seem like it would hurt to try and protect someone you know attracts the same types you want to stop.
Our mission in the War on Terror is to make sure they do not commit acts of terror in this country and abroad. Is killing an outspoken critic of radical Islam not an act of terror?
Boogey men? Really?
The risk from the boogey men? What risk?
And it’s very apparent that he knew exactly what risk he was taking. Ayaan asked him repeatedly to leave his name off of the project, but the concept of being murdered because of an opinion was too much of a foreign concept for him to take too seriously.
Freedom of speech will never work unless we can all think that way.
Is that really necessary? She doesn’t believe in God. I disagree with her but completely understands why she came to that conclusion. It’s not as though Godly men and women are never harmed. Or are the prisoners in China just not praying hard enough?
Esthier on February 11, 2008 at 2:23 PM
It’s hardly feebleminded to take someone else’s money. People who do so may not have any integrity, but that doesn’t make them stupid.
Esthier on February 11, 2008 at 2:25 PM
spmat on February 11, 2008 at 1:07 PM
The presidency as an institution and individual presidents are two separate things. Once you retire from the presidency you are, to all intents and purposes, a “private citizen.”
The government has an obligation to offer protection to public figures whose lives are imperiled-this is something even barbaric, third world backwaters like Pakistan seem to comprehend-regardless of whether those people happen to be former occupants of The White House.
Salman Rushdie was given protection by the British crown for nearly a decade, IIRC.
Gerard on February 11, 2008 at 2:33 PM
Being feebleminded does not imply stupidity, at least not in a general sense. I have known some very intelligent drug addicts, for example, that are so feebleminded – sometimes by their own admission – it is pathetic to the point of tragedy.
The feeblemindedness I was referring to is in the intellectual realm, closely allied with integrity. It takes an intellectually strong and virtuous person to resist taking something simply because they can get away with it, because it is wrong to do so. It is a shamelfully feebleminded thing to abandon such principles.
It would seem I am in a minority.
LimeyGeek on February 11, 2008 at 2:36 PM
What’s she expect, some diplomat to say “I’m from the Government and I’m here to help”? Is she an orphan? If I walked into Medina and yelled “You all suck!” would I be able to expect help from a government? (Sounds neat though, don’t it?)
Coronagold on February 11, 2008 at 2:36 PM
Isn’t that an oxymoron?
kcd on February 11, 2008 at 2:40 PM
Coronagold on February 11, 2008 at 2:36 PM
That’s the worst analogy I’ve ever seen.
The point is that her life is endangered because she’s speaking out against Islam IN THE WEST!
There are millions of deranged, sanguinary Moslems who would be more than willing to sever her head from her body in a second, if given sufficient opportunities.
She’s not demanding that the federal government send her on an all-expenses paid tour of The Sahel or the fertile crescent so she can promote her memoir, she’s merely asking the government to live up to its pre-existing responsibilities and obligations.
What the hell is wrong with you people?
Gerard on February 11, 2008 at 2:46 PM
Before you go any further, kindly point to the section of the constitution that asserts such an obligation upon us all.
Rule of law, enforce the constitution, reasoned objection – that kinda thing. The fashionable sympathetic political celebrity du jour does not override that.
LimeyGeek on February 11, 2008 at 2:50 PM
Of course you are. If integrity were such an easy thing to come by world peace wouldn’t be such a pipe dream.
And I seem what you were saying, but the fact remains that there are plenty of people who have no honor or principles except that which can best serve the self.
Esthier on February 11, 2008 at 2:51 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »