Letters From ‘The Front’

Sifting through IlanaMercer.com’s archives, I found some of the many missives WorldNetDaily’s intrepid editors fielded about my coverage of the invasion of Iraq. Some of the comments were even more cutting than the hereunder. The letter’s date suggests Mr. Carr was piqued over the following pieces (among others): In bed With the Military, ‘Just War’ for Dummies, Tuned-Out, Turned-On and Hot for War, U.S.: Global Governor? Betraying Brave Boys, etc. To their great credit, most of the readers I hear from these days no longer support the war. —ILANA

From: Tim Carr
Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2003
To: David Kupelian
Cc: jfarah@worldnetdaily.com
Subject: Awful Ilana

Guys, I am about to boycott your splendid web site.

I am getting sick and tired of Ilana Mercer bashing the United States of America. If she (and anyone else for that matter) really feels that the current form of government is as corrupt and evil as she suggests it is, then she has but one of two choices: run away and hide, because a government that is as corrupt as she suggests cannot be stopped nor can it be trusted and is capable of any level of malevolence; or two, get a gun, march to DC and start an armed revolution, because her vote is worthless, democracy is a sham and a vote cannot and will not fix it.

As for me and my house, I am getting tired of seeing her anti-American sentiments being passed off as Old Right, legitimate conservatism. More to the point, I am getting tired of seeing her vitriol being bandied about on World Net Daily. Her views are so … out of touch with other contributors on your web site that she might as well just come right out and say that she wishes the US would lose the war in Iraq (Oh yes, I know, she supports our troops, she just does not support the USE of force in this war. That sound you hear is me yawning, and if my yawn were any bigger we would need to map it out and give it a name. Please, spare me that double speak.)…

Ilana and I have exchanged quite a few e-mails. Some of them were heated. They never really rose above the level of political debate. Strong views were expressed on both sides. I even called her a nut case and loopy in one instance. So, I came away from the exchange frustrated. I was frustrated, as I often am, because something was gnawing at me, and I could not pinpoint what it was. So, as I lay in bed thinking to myself, I had some revelations. Here is what I learned.

I love reading Ilana’s stuff. I always have, that is, until the last 4 months. Lately, some of the foundational underpinnings of her beliefs have come to the forefront and I have found myself increasingly offended by her comments and more and more critical of her work. What is interesting to me is that I tricked myself into thinking that I disagreed with her politics, and I was roped into this line of reasoning by way of Ilana’s rhetoric. Make no mistake, Ilana is brilliant. But what I failed to see is that Ilana is suffering from political tunnel vision. By this I mean that for all of Ilana’s erudite, political exegesis, her rhetoric never rises above the level of political debate [natural rights and Just War Theory, my purview, fall within the philosophical realm, surely.—ILANA]

Because of Ilana’s political tunnel vision, she is missing the most crucial lesson of Iraq. What is happening in Iraq has nothing to do with politics. This war is unlike any other, accept for maybe WWII, but even WWII takes a back seat to Iraq in terms of what is at stake here. This war is about nothing less than the survival of humanity. What we are talking about is a struggle of cosmic proportions between Good and Evil, Light and Darkness, God and Satan, Man and demon. This struggle transcends the petty balance of control in the Senate and House. It transcends the debate of who is a true conservative, neo or paleo. This cosmic struggle relegates the notions of global expansion and democracy vs. communism to the level of petty strife

Do you subscribe to her isolationist views? If so, please let me know and I will make sure to avoid WND from this point forward. [“Isolationism” in this context is used to discredit individuals who do not support recreational, unprovoked wars—ILANA]

Thanks
—Tim Carr