The Cultural Capitulation Continues

The President is Missing by former President Bill Clinton and best-selling author James Patterson is yet one more example of popular culture running interference for Islam.

Detail from the cover of "The President Is Missing" by Bill Clinton and James Patterson (Little, Brown and Company and Knopf, 2018).

Bill Clinton, along with co-author James Patterson, has written a thriller. The plot of The President is Missing concerns the uncovering of a cyberterror attack that threatens all of America. President Duncan’s problems are compounded by a possible impeachment for having held a telephone conversation with “the most dangerous and prolific cyberterrorist in the world—a man named Sulliman Cindoruk, the leader of a group called ‘Sons of Jihad.’”

“Ah,” you may be thinking, “the Muslim connection!” But not so fast. As President Duncan informs us, “He’s Turkish-born, but he’s not Muslim.” What’s that? A Turkish jihadist who’s not Muslim? According to the Turkish State, 99 percent of Turks are Muslims. What are the chances that a non-Muslim Turk would be a jihadist leader? And—seeing that jihad is an Islamic concept—how can you have a non-Islamic form of jihad?

Does Bill Clinton really believe this nonsense? Or is he just inserting the obligatory “this-has-nothing-to-do-with-Islam” clause expected of authors who write thrillers about terror? According to the description on Amazon, “this is the most authentic, terrifying novel to come along in many years.” But to me, the most terrifying thing is that a former president of the United States may actually hold such a naïve view of Islamic terrorism. The novel might more accurately be entitled “The President is Missing the Point”.

The President is Missing is yet one more example of popular culture running interference for Islam. The story reminds me of other popular thrillers that make a point of telling the reader/viewer that terrorism has nothing to do with you know what. A few years ago Liam Neeson starred in Non-Stop, a thriller about an unidentified terrorist who begins to murder one passenger every twenty minutes on board a trans-Atlantic flight. Who is the terrorist? To throw you off track, the filmmakers first cast suspicion on a Muslim doctor wearing Muslim garb and a full beard. Of course, if you’re foolish enough to believe he is the culprit, it just goes to show what an unsophisticated “Islamophobe” you are. As it turns out, the doctor is one of the heroes of the story, and the real terrorist is an American combat veteran.

A similar switcheroo occurred in 2002, when Paramount released The Sum of All Fears, a thriller based on Tom Clancy’s 1991 novel of the same name. In the book, Palestinian terrorists detonate a nuclear bomb in Denver at the Super Bowl. In the movie, the terrorists are transformed into neo-Nazis. That may be because the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) launched a two-year lobbying campaign against using Muslims villains in the film version.

Over in Europe, they’re having similar problems with fiction that comes in conflict with the politically correct fiction that Islam has nothing to do with anything bad. Michel Houellebecq, the author of Submission, an entirely plausible novel about the Islamization of French Universities, has come under fire for being racist, xenophobic and Islamophobic. Houellebecq is currently under 24-hour police protection—presumably, if you buy the party line about Islam—to keep him safe from all those angry book reviewers.

Another example—this one from the category of non-fiction—comes from Germany. In 2010 Thilo Sarrazin, a respected economist, wrote a book which took aim at his country’s immigration policies, especially in regard to Muslim migrants. As a result, he came in for bitter criticism, and was pushed out of his prestigious position at the Bundesbank. However, since Germany is Abolishing Itself became a best-seller, Random House again signed with Sarrazin in 2016 for a new book entitled Hostile Takeover: How Islam Hampers Progress and Threatens Society. It was scheduled to come out in early July, but at the last moment Random House changed its mind for fear that the book would stir up “Islamophobia.” All of which seems to confirm the books title: Hostile Takeover. Random House hasn’t been taken over by Islam in the full sense of the term. But it seems willing to let Islam call the shots on what kind of books can be published about Islam.

The book titles are prescient: Hostile Takeover, Submission, and to mention another entry in the death-of-Europe book club, The French Suicide (“Le Suicide Francais” by Eric Zemmour. There have been a number of suicide-of-the-West type of books over the decades but their authors didn’t lose their jobs, require police protection, or have to dodge bullets (as in the case of Danish author, Lars Hedegaard). This time, however, the suicide seems much closer at hand.

A glaring example concerns the Bataclan Theater in Paris. On November 13, 2015 three Muslim terrorists entered the theater and opened fire on the crowd, murdering 130 people and injuring 413. When the theater reopened a year later, the musician Sting sang a song called “Inshallah”—“If it be your will, it shall come to pass,” or simply, “Allah willing.” For the second anniversary of the attacks, smiling politicians released balloons outside the theater. For the upcoming third anniversary of the massacre, the theater management has scheduled an Islamic rap concert featuring an “artist” named Medine (after Medina) whose “lyrics are filled with hatred towards non-Muslims, France, and the West.” One of his most popular songs is called “jihad.”

If you instinctively think of this as an outrage, you’re not alone. According to Professor Guy Milliere:

Organizations representing the families of the Bataclan victims said that an Islamic rap concert praising jihad, in a place where people were murdered and tortured by jihadists, would be an insult to the memory of the victims, and asked that the concert be cancelled.

But Milliere, an authority on French culture and politics thinks it unlikely that the concert will be cancelled. France, he says, is already in submission mode: “Macron and the French government…speak and act as if the enemy has won and as if they want to gain some time and enjoy the moment before the final surrender.”

The situation is much the same in England. On June 3 London’s Southwark Cathedral hosted a “Grand Iftar Service” on the anniversary of last year’s London Bridge terror attack. In that attack Islamic terrorists drove a van into pedestrians on London Bridge, then began stabbing people in the nearby Borough Market area. Altogether they killed eight people and injured 48 others. What better way to mark the anniversary of an Islamic jihad attack than to celebrate with a “Grand Iftar Service”?

Next thing you know, Islamists and their liberal allies will want to build a large Islamic center near the site of the 9/11 attack. Oh wait! They’ve already tried that. Fortunately, it didn’t work out the way they hoped. But elsewhere, cultural jihad has been a great success. Not a day goes by without a half-dozen new examples of capitulation to Islamic cultural demands. Textbook publishers whitewash Islamic history. Lectures that might be offensive to Islam are cancelled. A college library cautions students not to wish others a “Merry Christmas.” KFC stores in Australia refuse to sell bacon in their sandwiches. Swimming pools are segregated to accommodate Muslim wishes. Santa Lucia Day celebrations in Sweden are cancelled lest Muslims take offense, European Jews are advised not to wear kippahs in public, and Muslim rape gang activities in England are covered up by the authorities for fear of seeming racist.

The escalating submission to Islam has three causes.

First and foremost, is simple fear. Publishers remember what happened at the offices of Charlie Hebdo magazine and they don’t want it to happen to them. Theater owners saw what happened at the Bataclan Theater and the Ariana Grande concert in Manchester, and they reason that prudence is the better part of valor.

The second factor that contributes to the submission is a genuine desire to be tolerant and welcoming, combined with a genuine naiveté about Islam. Even at this late stage, there are still many people who believe that if Europeans just tried harder to be nice to Muslim migrants, everything would work out fine.

The third factor is cultural shame. Like others in the West, Europeans have been taught that their culture has a record of predation unmatched in history. To many, Western culture doesn’t seem worth defending. They’ve lost faith in their culture and, in a great many cases, they’ve lost faith in Christianity. The only faith they have left is in relativism. And if, as relativists claim, one culture is as good as another, what difference does it make if Islam takes over? Life will still go on as usual. Won’t it?

Ironically, Catholic leaders and Catholic activists are often in the forefront of those who seem to have lost faith in their culture. They decry nationalism (which, in Europe, often involves a defense of Christian culture), while promoting a utopian universalism which not only asserts that all men are equal before God, but also that all cultures and belief systems are equally good.

Thus, Catholic leaders, while still affirming the wrongness of individual suicide, have become intimately involved in Europe’s cultural suicide. They continue to encourage mass Muslim migration at a point in time where other European leaders are abandoning the idea post haste. Street priests, nuns, and missionaries backed by bishops and heads of communities organize street protests against Italy’s new, more stringent migrant policies. Others help Muslims build mosques to show their community spirit. And one Italian bishop says he is ready to “turn all the churches into mosques” if it were useful to the cause of Muslim migration.

One wonders what Church leaders would do if St. Peters were bombed by Islamic jihadists. Would they host a “Grand Iftar Service” at the site on the anniversary of the event as a sign of their continued solidarity with Islam? Don’t dismiss the idea as preposterous and unthinkable. We live in strange times.


If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!

Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.


About William Kilpatrick 62 Articles
William Kilpatrick taught for many years at Boston College. He is the author of several books about cultural and religious issues, including Psychological Seduction, Why Johnny Can’t Tell Right from Wrong and, most recently, Christianity, Islam, and Atheism: The Struggle for the Soul of the West. Professor Kilpatrick’s articles on cultural and educational topics have appeared in First Things, Policy Review, American Enterprise, American Educator, The Los Angeles Times, and various scholarly journals. His articles on Islam have appeared in Aleteia, National Catholic Register, Investor’s Business Daily, FrontPage Magazine, and other publications. Professor Kilpatrick’s work is supported in part by the Shillman Foundation. For more on his work and writings, visit his website, turningpointproject.com.

6 Comments

  1. Kilpatrick makes the case that the social media are brainwashing a docile and self-deceived public to the dangers in the declining West from elements in the full package of Islam. As he reports, this package includes such things as dancing on the graves of 130 victims to the Bataclan Theater massacre in Paris (and abuse of the other 430 victims who were merely injured).

    And as for former president Clinton’s gratuitous new book—as it might relate to this media pattern—surely it all depends on what “the meaning of is is.” So, rather than blithely classifying what Islam is, as too-neatly one historical “religion” among others, what might be learned from across the centuries if we use the different lens of cross-cultural “anthropology”?

    Take for example, Hung Hsui-ch’uan. In mid-19th century China and under the strain of a nervous breakdown (like Mohammed’s alleged epilepsy?), he, too, had a vision—not that he was “the final Prophet”—but rather that he was a younger brother of Jesus Christ! Instead of Mohammed’s late-career jihads radiating from Medina, Hung ignited in central China the Taiping Rebellion ((T’ai-p’ing t’ien-kuo: the Heavenly Kingdom of Peace, 1851-1864)—a religion of “peace” (sound familiar?) that fomented one of the largest insurrections in Chinese history. Up to twenty million souls perished.

    Western writers see the Taiping political event (religion, politics, artifact?) as also theocratic. As with Mohammed and Islam, Hung was both the spiritual and political head of his movement. His proclamations also were considered to have come directly from God (the Qur’an is “dictated,” not more precisely inspired as is the Bible). But the somewhat similar histories also diverge. Hung failed, partly because his inner circle was even more divided than Islam’s warring sects. A perversion of Trinitarian Christianity—rather than a unitarian monotheism as is Islam, one Taiping general thought himself God the Father on earth, and another rogue thought himself the Holy Spirit.

    THE POINT HERE: In the words of T.E. Lawrence, the Bedouin follower of Islam “Could not look for God within him; he was too sure that he was within God. He could not conceive anything which was or was not God, Who alone was great . . . .” (the jihadist’s Allahu Akbar: “God is [the] Greatest!”) The fatal asymmetry between Islamic and anthropological jihad and Christianity (faith in the divine self-disclosure in the Incarnation), is as St. John proclaims: “We have seen and testify that the Father sent his Son as savior of the world. Whoever acknowledges that Jesus is the Son of God, God REMAINS IN HIM and HE IN GOD” (1 Jn 4:14-15).

    Both and, not either or. Rather than the hubris of jihad, with incorporation into Christ as our model and True Self, the humility of universal respect is mandatory. In an imperfect world this does not exclude self-respect and self-defense. Christianity is an indictment of both resurgent and radical Islam and defenseless, radical Secularism. As imperfect as our Western history is, Kilpatrick’s modern-day clerics of apparent multicultural indifference would do well to contemplate this fatal disconnect between non-equivalent “religions.” A detail that matters in season and out of season.

  2. While I’m not, I repeat NOT, wishing for it to happen, because of the human toll and suffering that it would bring, why would the destruction of St. Peters not be similar to the destruction of the two Temples as recorded in the Bible? The modern Church is becoming every bit as faithless as ancient Israel before the exiles.
    *
    The New Israel of the Church has pretty well repeated the mistakes of ancient Israel. We even live in a Divided Kingdom. We seem to have learned nothing from the Old and New Testaments.

    • GregB,
      There are things that you said that have some truth, but I disagree that the faith of those in the Church is decreasing. Rather, I see the Church as getting smaller yet more robust. As long as our leaders don’t fail us more than they already have, this leaner but more dynamic Church will be instrumental in it’s future growth in a dying culture.

  3. The Church is being destroyed at this very moment as 50 years of episcopal perversion are now being exposed and revealed. There is no stopping it now. I believe this is the real interpretation of the Fatima message. We have a morally corrupt hierarchy that has already spawned its progeny for the next 50 years, or until the Church’s essential demise, whichever comes first. Very sad.

1 Trackback / Pingback

  1. The Cultural Capitulation Continues -

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

All comments posted at Catholic World Report are moderated. While vigorous debate is welcome and encouraged, please note that in the interest of maintaining a civilized and helpful level of discussion, comments containing obscene language or personal attacks—or those that are deemed by the editors to be needlessly combative or inflammatory—will not be published. Thank you.


*