The BBC headline had me giddy, it did.
“Clinton’s poll day threat to Iran”
Had Hill broken with half a century of Democratic foreign policy and said something mean to one of America’s enemies?
I read on. The BBC breathlessly explained in paragraph two: “She said the US would attack, and could “obliterate” Iran, if it launched a nuclear strike on Israel.”
Yay! Yay! Yay! I thought, scrabbling around on eBay for a Hillary For Supreme Leader T-Shirt.
Alas, it was not to be.
What the chubby dragon lady had in fact said was this. Asked what President Hillary (shudder) would do if Iran’s nutty Islamofascist regime attacked Israel, she replied: “If I’m the president, we will attack Iran… we would be able to totally obliterate them.
“That’s a terrible thing to say, but those people who run Iran need to understand that, because that perhaps will deter them from doing something that would be reckless, foolish and tragic.”
That’s a terrible thing to say?
Yes, they oppress women, hang homosexuals, and their beady-eyed loon of a President wants Israel wiped off the map. But it’s ”terrible” to stand up to them. That might hurt their feelings. Then they’ll go blow up another Israeli nightclub and it’ll be all our fault again.
It doesn’t really matter what Hill says (including that cute “foolish” to describe an assault on the Jewish homeland). There’s not going to be another Clinton in the White House (instantly slashing interns’ dry cleaning bills).
No, this story tells us a lot more about another, far more sinister, left-wing organisation than Machine Hillary: The BBC.
Because this taxpayer-funded publicist for every girly right-on cause in existence seemingly construes liberal handwringing as a “threat”. The New York Senator’s “stark warning” as the BBC saw it was pathetically weak. She should have ended it with a helpline for any Islamist nutbags offended by her comments: “If you’ve been affected by any of the issues raised in this weak-willed mush, please call 0800 SURRENDER.”
Why then did the BBC raise the liberal sensitivity alarm (“Somewhere, someplace, one of our enemies is being offended!”) over Hillary’s innocuous remarks?
What’s that, I hear? Liberal bias? Never.
P.S. You may be wondering how Hillary’s opponent, Barack Hussein Obama, responded to her comments. No? I’ll tell you anyway. He explained: “I’m not interested in sabre-rattling”. That’s the actual words of the man (if we loosen the meaning of the word to include Democrats) who, if the liberal media get their way, will be the next President of the United States. Someone should tell Obama Islamic states like Iran do plenty of sabre-rattling of their own. Mostly over the heads of adultresses.
