Shahid Malik, who was also recently identified as Britain's most expensive MP, was detained by DHS officials, and he and his hand luggage were searched. He reports that he and two others, both black Muslims, were taken aside for further questioning.
Malik was previously held by staff at JFK in New York, last year while returning from an event where he'd been a keynote speaker on defeating extremism. Then, he claims, he was subjected to an "abusive attitude" from DHS staff.
The DHS' terrorist detection systems do seem to have an unfortunate knack when it comes to impressing relevant British Parliamentarians. Three years ago it contrived to demonstrate the efficacy of no-fly lists, in a negative sort of way, to a delegation from the UK's Transport Committee, headed by chair Gwyneth Dunwoody. As the impressed Dunwoody commented on the regime at the time, "it's a sort of general level of arrogant incompetence." Malik is no doubt similarly onside in the war on terror.
___________________________________________________________________________________
To sum up - Britain's first muslim MP pops the pond, talks terrorism with the DHS, and prior to his return flight is detained by DHS security forces for the second time in as many years. Now, this is not good. International incidents like this, minor though they may be, reflect poorly on our nation and probably account for a significant portion of disdain toward the US government. Or so I thought until I read Bill O'Reilly's column from that very same day:
________________________________________________________________________________
Once again, Hollywood is on a "let's make America look bad" binge. Robert Redford has directed a movie called "Lions for Lambs," of which Variety opines, "Back-bendingly liberal but also deeply patriotic."
Well, that doesn't sound so bad, but then Redford goes to Rome and says this about the USA: "We have lost lives, we've lost sacred freedoms, we've lost financial stability." Really, Bob? You seem mighty rich to me, and I believe you can make movies that say anything you want them to say. So what's this loss of "sacred freedoms" deal?
While researching this column, I came across a letter written by Samuel Goldwyn in 1961. Goldwyn was a major movie mogul responsible for hundreds of classic films. In this letter, Goldwyn tells producer Jerry Wald, "Today we are at a very crucial period in history. Even if the cold war never develops into a hot one, our country still has its hands full all over the world. The pictures we send abroad have an effect in every corner of the globe. We should never lose sight of the fact that, no matter how entertaining a picture may be or how much money it may make, it can do our country a great deal of harm if it plays into the hands of our enemies ... we have a great responsibility in this regard--far greater than almost any other segment of our country--and we must guide ourselves accordingly."
I believe Samuel Goldwyn, if he were alive today, would be appalled at how radical left the American entertainment industry has become. He would, I suspect, also suggest to Robert Redford that he tone it down.
There is no question that every time a Redford, Sean Penn, or Barbra Streisand bashes the USA to the overseas press, millions of America-haters rub their hands with glee. Prop up Hugo Chavez, sure. Shake hands with the Iranian fascists, certainly. But the tide has turned against these showbiz pinheads, and the failure of movies like "Rendition" prove it. Dissent is fine. Dishonest propaganda is not.
Robert Redford and his crew might bemoan the loss of "sacred rights," but I'm with Samuel Goldwyn. These Hollywood big shots have an obligation to a country that has allowed them to become wealthy and speak their collective minds on any subject they choose. The Sundance Kid has truly been out in the sun way too long. Wise up, Bob.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Ahh, Hollywood - one of the favorite whipping boys (second only to the "elite media" whatever that means) on which to blame all the ills of the world. Now, either O'Reilly is unaware of stories like the one above - which makes him ignorant- or he is aware but still chooses to lay the blame at the feet of Robert Redford and "Hollywood big shots" - which makes him dishonest and agenda-driven. Either way, how unnerving is it that this conclusion is drawn not by a man standing on a street corner wearing a tin foil hat, but instead is the host of the highest rated news show in the country, a daily radio show, writer of a weekly column, and author of bestselling books? Infotainment plain and simple.
Recent Comments