What Is True/Slant?
275+ knowledgeable contributors.
Reporting and insight on news of the moment.
Follow them and join the news conversation.
 

Jun. 4 2010 - 3:24 am | 342 views | 0 recommendations | 2 comments

Rush Limbaugh + Andy McCarthy = Obligatory Blog Post

Former federal prosecutor Andy McCarthy, whose error prone book is titled “The Grand Jihad: How Islam and the Left Sabotage America,” went on the Rush Limbaugh show Wednesday to discuss his argument that the American left is allying itself with our Islamist enemies. near the beginning of the segment, Mr. McCarthy described his biography for the talk radio audience. “I was a federal prosecutor for close to 20 years. Back in 1995 I was the lead prosecutor on one of our first big terrorism cases in Manhattan federal court,” he said. “That was the case against the blind sheik and 11 other jihadists, who not only had carried out the bombing of the World Trade Center but also were plotting something even more ambitious, a simultaneous attack on New York City landmarks — The Lincoln and Holland tunnels, the FBI’s lower Manhattan headquarters, and the United Nations.”

I found this particular exchange noteworthy:

RUSH: Andy McCarthy, and the book is The Grand Jihad: How Islam and the Left Sabotage America. I’ve got about 30 seconds. Have you gotten any threats or any sort of negative reaction, anybody trying to intimidate you yet?

MCCARTHY: No. There’s negative reaction to the book. I didn’t exactly write the left and the Islamics a love letter so you sort of expect that, and as for the rest of it that die was cast long ago in my case so I don’t really pay it much case.

RUSH: That’s true. I mean when you prosecute the blind sheik, you can’t go much farther than that. Well, Andy, thanks very much and good luck with this. It’s great that you did the work and I know that your family is going to be extremely proud of you.

Interesting, isn’t it? “…when you prosecute the blind sheik, you can’t go much farther than that.” It seems as though Mr. Limbaugh is asserting that prosecuting a terrorist in a Manhattan federal court is basically as far as a man can go in establishing his anti-Islamic terrorism credentials. Is that right? Some would argue that trying an unrepentant terrorist in federal court would inevitably “prompt a hugely costly three-ring circus of a trial, provide a soapbox for al-Qaeda’s anti-American bile, and create a public-safety nightmare for New York City.” Indeed, these same critics say, a federal prosecution would be “a years-long seminar, enabling al-Qaeda and its jihadist allies to learn much of what we know and, more important, the methods and sources by which we come to know it,” laying the ground work for “an unprecedented surrender of our national-defense secrets directly to our most committed enemies.”

In fact, come to think of it, Andy McCarthy himself asserts all this. His interlocutor, Rush Limbaugh, is also on record against trying terrorists in federal court, characterizing it as a “disgusting travesty.” Quoth the talk radio host, “This is more insidious than you can possibly imagine. I’m talking about bringing these terrorists up from Gitmo and trying them in New York City.”

You’d think Mr. McCarthy and Mr. Limbaugh’s position is basically than when Andy McCarthy and his colleagues tried terrorists in federal court, it was a laudable endeavor that establishes their anti-terrorist bonifides, whereas when Barack Obama and Eric Holder take the same approach, it proves their complicity in a “Grand Jihad” against America.

Astonishingly, even that would underestimate the mendacious hackery of Rush Limbaugh. Why? Because when former prosecutor Andy McCarthy comes on his radio show to plug his book, the prosecution he helped lead in Manhattan is cast as a praiseworthy endeavor and a victory against the jihadists. But what does Mr. Limbaugh say about that trial when the rhetorical advantage at another moment is best served by being against it?

True to form, Mr. Limbaugh plays the terrorism card. That is to say, he implies nothing less than that Mr. McCarthy’s trial was to blame for the September 11 terrorist attacks.

There have been all kinds of people on television today being asked, “Bringing them into New York, doesn’t that make New York a bigger terrorist target?” Hey. And they all say, “Well, no, no. New York’s always a terrorist target. Look at ‘93. We tried those guys in 1993, and nothing happened.” What do you mean, “Nothing happened”? You ever heard of 9-11? We tried these guys and convicted the blind sheikh in 1993 and nothing happened except 9-11.

You can listen here for yourself.


Comments

2 Total Comments
Post your comment »
 
  1. collapse expand

    Rush Limbaugh’s biographer, Zev Chafets, author of Rush Limbaugh: An Army of One, talked to Mr. Media Radio on June 3, 2010, about El Rushbo’s new bride, Kathryn Rogers, and much more. Check it out by clicking HERE!

Log in for notification options
Comments RSS

Post Your Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment

Log in with your True/Slant account.

Previously logged in with Facebook?

Create an account to join True/Slant now.

Facebook users:
Create T/S account with Facebook
 

My T/S Activity Feed

 
     

    About Me

    Conor Friedersdorf is a writer, a Californian by upbringing, and a nomad at present. Refresh his page often.

    See my profile »
    Followers: 140
    Contributor Since: June 2009
    Location:Various cities, and sundry spots between them.