Use facts, not innuendo if you want to “refudiate” Palin
If you’re going to badmouth Sarah Palin, perhaps you ought to employ someone who is going to make a bit more of a serious effort than Alexander Chancellor (Palin is beyond a joke, Spectator August 28)
This was a shameful mish-match of warmed over innuendo and half truth. More than a third of the piece dredged up boring and irrelevant family matters. The jibe about one of her malapropisms in which she invoked Shakespeare after making up the word “refudiate”, was simply a joke. Chancellor should lighten up. He attempts to mock her knowledge of the oil industry. As Governor of Alaska she handled high-powered negotiations with global oil companies, but that would have taken a bit of work to find out, like reading her book, “Going Rogue”. Does Chancellor have any evidence that this was ghost written? And does it matter if it was? And Palin has the audacity to write another book, and make money from appearing on TV and making speeches. What a glib, superficial, greedy politician she must be.
Chancellor fails even to use an episode which might reflect poorly on Palin; her decision to leave the Governorship before her term ended led to accusations that she was a quitter. But, surely, a great magazine like The Spectator should either seek an interview with Palin, or take the trouble to tell us what her policies are, and why these have made her into such an important political operative in America.
This attack on Palin does fit a pattern. Some of us remember how Ronald Reagan was ridiculed as being just a dumb actor by some sections of the media both here and in the U.S. Reagan was seen as a huge electoral threat to the left, which used all manner of underhand methods to try and undermine him. I’m not suggesting that Palin might turn out to be another Reagan, yet, but surely your readers deserve to read a proper analysis, not this gutter, tabloid, yellow journalism. As a Spectator reader of some 40 years, I expect more.
While I’m at it, here’s another letter I sent to the Spectator earlier this year, which it was too cowardly to publish.
New Koran Needed To Solve Britain’s Muslim Problem
Andrew Gilligan is far too complacent (We need a compact with Muslim Middle England). We in Britain firstly need to get real about the true nature of Islam. You can talk to all the so-called moderates you can find and they will still adhere to many unacceptable core beliefs of this medieval, illiberal religion.
Because of Islam’s unique ability to cause mayhem and instability we must call on British Muslims to accept that key tenets of their religion have no place in our open society. We must insist that for want of a better word, a New Koran be compiled, shorn of all the old, dangerous ideas. The New Koran will accept freedom of speech, assembly and movement, separation of church and state, secret ballots, the right to be educated to the limit of your potential, male or female, the right to choose your marriage partner, the equal value of a child, male or female, the right to dress as you wish. It will outlaw hallal killing of animals. The list could go on.
Any Mosque operating in Britain would have to adhere to this New Koran, which of course will only be used in English.
If the problem with Islam in Britain is to be solved, our political leaders must first accept its true nature. Unlike other religions, much of what Muslims subscribe to in the Koran is incompatible with British culture and customs. Much of what Islam wants directly confronts treasured and hard won rights that our fathers shed blood for over the centuries. They are simply not up for grabs or negotiation of any kind.