Welcome to the Israel Military Forum. You are currently viewing our Israel Forum as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions, Image Forum and access our other features. By joining our Israel Military Forum you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so
|Register||FAQ||Pictures||Members List||Calendar||Search||Today's Posts||Mark Forums Read|
||Thread Tools||Display Modes|
I wish I could proudly say I have never seen an Oliver Stone movie, but I have seen one: Platoon.
The rest I studiously avoided once I learned what a conspiracy monger and nutcase he is.
Now I can add anti-Semite to that list.
“We will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them.”--George Bush
The maximum effective range of an excuse is zero meters!
Anti-women's rights is a cause of the left. That's who's pushing Sharia
"Anti-women's rights is a cause of the left. That's who's pushing Sharia in this country:
The left. It's the left that wants a mosque at Ground Zero."
Another American against the Ground Zero mega-mosque. "If We Were Really Who They Say We are, We Would All be Liberals," transcript of the Rush Limbaugh Show, July 27:
Let's take, at face value, the template that the partisan political hacks spew at me. I am, according to them, anti-women's rights. Equal rights for women is no concern of mine, right? I'm the guy that came up with the name "feminazi." I'm not a friend of women's rights, they say. If that were true, I would be pushing for the mosque at Ground Zero. If I were anti-women's rights, I would be all for Sharia law. Sharia law is a not-so-stealth way to undermine women's rights in this country. It would be a perfect cause if I was who they say I am.
The New York Times: Not just anti-Israel, but pro-jihad
The New York Times: Not just anti-Israel, but pro-jihad
In "New York Times: Not Just Anti-Israel But Pro-Islamist," July 21, Barry Rubin skewers the Leftist pseudo-journalism of the Paper Of Record:
The New York Times--with the exception of some honorable reporters in the field (you know who you are)--never ceases to amaze one in the spectacularly biased writings of those back at headquarters. Here's one that's particularly remarkable, a real piece of advocacy in which the reporter does everything possible to justify flotilla ships trying to run the blockade of the Gaza Strip.
New York Times touts Muslim video rebutting "militants" and featuring rogue's gallery
New York Times touts Muslim video rebutting "militants" and featuring rogue's gallery of Islamic supremacists
The New York Times trumpets this MPAC video as a rebuttal of Islamic "militants," although it is long on vague generalities but (surprise, surprise) short on Qur'anic specifics, which are the only thing, could they be produced, that might actually induce an Islamic supremacist or jihadist to reconsider his position.
And that's the best that can be said about it. Among the Islamic leaders it features is Suhaib Webb of the Muslim American Society. The Muslim American Society is the Muslim Brotherhood in the U.S. The Muslim Brotherhood's own website carries the Chicago Tribune expose from 2004 that identifies the MAS as the Brotherhood's arm in the U.S.
"In recent years, the U.S. Brotherhood operated under the name Muslim American Society, according to documents and interviews. One of the nation's major Islamic groups, it was incorporated in Illinois in 1993 after a contentious debate among Brotherhood members." -- Chicago Tribune, 2004, via the Muslim Brotherhood's English-language website, Ikhwanweb.
The Muslim Brothers "must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and 'sabotaging' its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and Allah's religion is made victorious over all other religions." -- Mohamed Akram, "An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America," May 22, 1991, Government Exhibit 003-0085, U.S. vs. HLF, et al. P. 7 (21).
After Webb comes Maher Hathout, who trots out another familiar dodge, complaining about people quoting the Qur'an without knowing the Arabic or the context, as if "slay the pagans wherever you find them" (9:5) somehow becomes "establish religious dialogue" in the Arabic or "in context." If so many Muslims weren't murdering people in explicit obedience to verses like this one from the Qur'an, Hathout might have a case here; but they are, and he doesn't. Hathout also, according to Steve Emerson, "has called Israel a nation of butchers and accused the United States of state terrorism; he has justified the actions of Hizbollah and defended terrorist financiers." See also here. According to Discover the Networks, Hathout "has close ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and espouses the radical brand of Islam known as Wahhabism."
Ihsan Bagby follows Hathout, and says unequivocally: "we cannot kill innocent people." He does not, of course, define who is innocent, thus leaving the door open for jihadists like Anjem Chaudary and others who say that no non-Muslim is innocent. Bagby himself once said this about Muslims in America: "Ultimately we can never be full citizens of this country, because there is no way we can be fully committed to the institutions and ideologies of this country."
Mohamad Magid comes next. He is the Imam and Executive Director of the All Dulles Area Muslim Society (ADAMS) Center in Sterling, Virginia. In 2004 Ben Johnson reported this in FrontPage: "The chairman of ADAMS is Ahmad Totonji, an Iraqi-born citizen of the kingdom of Saudi Arabia and a key target of Operation Green Quest. Totonji was also named as a defendant in a $1 trillion lawsuit filed by more than 600 relatives of people who died in the 9/11 attacks. He acted as a co-founder and officer of the Saudi-founded/Saudi-funded (and now defunct) SAAR Trust. Additionally, he served as Vice President of the Safa Group and the International Institute for Islamic Thought (IIIT). Officials have linked the non-profit IIIT to Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda." The IIIT is also linked with the Muslim Brotherhood.
Then comes Zaid Shakir, former Muslim chaplain at Yale University. He has said, according to Daniel Pipes, that "Muslims cannot accept the legitimacy of the existing American order, since it 'is against the orders and ordainments of Allah.' '[T]he orientation of the Quran,' he adds, 'pushes us in the exact opposite direction.'"
Others in the video include Jamal Badawi (who owes me a million dollars), an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation Hamas terror funding case.
Hamza Yusuf also appears. He has made many antisemitic and anti-American statements, and most famously said two days before 9/11: "This country [America] unfortunately has a great, a great tribulation coming to it. And much of it is already here, yet people are too to illiterate to read the writing on the wall."
And finally there is Yassir Qadhi, anointed by Ground Zero mega-mosque Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf as a "Muslim leader of tomorrow, who has said: "Hitler never intended to destroy the Jews... The Hoax of the Holocaust -- I advise you to read this book, you'll want to write this down -- The Hoax of the Holocaust, a very good book. All of this is false propaganda..." (Thanks to Kamala.)
These are the spokesmen that the New York Times thinks are "rebutting" the "militants." Pardon me if I decline the Kool-Aid.
"American Muslims Make Video to Rebut Militants," by Laurie Goodstein in the New York Times, July 31:
A recent spate of arrests of Muslims accused of terrorism in the United States has revealed that many of them were radicalized by militant preaching they found on the Internet. Imam Mohamed Magid says in the video that injustice can be addressed without "taking innocent people's lives.""Politically controversial"? No kidding, really? This kind of analysis is on the level of saying that Osama bin Laden is a "polarizing" figure, but "more effective" than establishment types.
Edina Lekovic, director of policy and programming for the Muslim Public Affairs Council, the advocacy group that produced the video, said they intentionally chose scholars who represent a diversity of theological streams.That's funny. I thought it was only "Islamophobes" who thought that any Muslims considered music forbidden.
Anyway, Edina Lekovic is the MPAC flack whom Steve Emerson caught lying on national television, denying she was editor of a Muslim student publication that praised Osama bin Laden as a great mujahid. Emerson produced copies of the rag showing Lekovic's name on the masthead as editor on the very same page on which the praise for Osama appeared.
Score another for the keen analysts at the New York Times.
Fitzgerald: Just one question for the New York Times
Fitzgerald: Just one question for the New York Times
If only those who write for The New York Times, such as Laurie Goodstein, could understand that they have a responsibility not to credulously accept such efforts as this transparent propaganda video at face-value, but to find out about the Muslims who actually appear on it, as is done here.
Read what The New York Times reported about this video, under the title "Muslims Make Video to Rebut Militants." That title parrots exactly the Muslim line that this is a heartfelt attempt to "rebut militants" rather than what it in truth is, a video in the main directed not at Muslims but at non-Muslims. It is an effort to show non-Muslims that "we, the Muslims in America, are doing the right thing, taking the right stand, and you'd better take note of this and not question the efficacy or the omissions in our video, you'd better be more than satisfied, and stop suspecting us, or else."
If you read Laurie Goodstein's article, you would remain entirely in the dark about those who took part in it. And since you would not have been informed about the religiously-sanctioned doctrines of Taqiyya and Kitman, and you might not be as suspicious as anyone who has either studied Islam and the (mis)representation of Islam or lived as a non-Muslim citizen of a Muslim-ruled country, you might not question that report.
But now that Robert Spencer has set out here, for easy reference, some of the unsavory connections and self-damning remarks, and examples of blatant lying about the contents of the Qur'an, and what Islam inculcates. He has set out, even so a reporter for The New York Times can understand, what the Taqiyya Nine -- Suhaib Webb, and Maher Hathout, and Ihsan Bagby, and Mohamad Magid, and Zaid Shakir, and Jamal Badawi, and Hamza Yusuf (who is shown in a photograph, with three prayer rugs, one already turned Mecca-wards, and a bookshelf full of row upon grim row of Islamic books) and Yasir Qadhi -- are truly all about.
Now The New York Times has a choice.
It can do a follow-up story, in which the reporter takes the information about these nine people, listed one by one above, with information about them, and quotations by them, and that reporter then investigates, studies the evidence that such remarks were made, that such connections can be made.
And then that reporter should report both what is given by Robert in the article above, and what those nine figures say to him when asked to explain those remarks.
Otherwise The New York Times will be guilty of having participated in a transparent fraud, in what for those who are knowledgeable appears unambiguously to be a fraudulent and, for the wellbeing of this country, and its citizens, a dangerous effort.
I do not know, and I hate to think, of how the New York Times covered the propagandists for Fascists and Nazis in the 1920s and 1930s. Why, no sooner had Mussolini made his March on Rome, and the Ventennio just started, than a certain Count Constantini was telling the society ladies of Boston about how wonderful that splendid fellow and his wonderful Blackshirts were: "Tells Mussolini's aims and progress; Count Constantini Speaks at the Chilton Club Italy's leader Has Won Whole Nation's Confidence, He Says." (Boston Daily Globe. Jan 16, 1923, p. 13)
And of course the Germans could count on such people as Ernst "Putzi" Hanfstaengl, Harvard Class of 1909, and a member of the Hasty Pudding Club (both biographical details are important, and would come in handy for Hanfstaengl, and for Hitler, later on), and others, so well connected to America's ruling circles at that time. Why, so many were classmates. They arrived on these shores to spread misinformation about Herr Hitler and his National Socialist program. And within this country, Fritz Kuhn's Bund was also doing yeoman's service as it stood up for Hitler and wailed about the injustices done to Germany which he, Herr Hitler, had protested. And wasn't it right and proper that the "Sudeteners" (never "the Sudeten Germans") should be given "self-determination" (the Wilsonian phrase that nowadays has been distorted and misapplied to the case of the local Arabs, the shock troops of the Jihad against Israel, who for obvious propaganda purposes -- when such propaganda became necessary after the Arab defeat in the Six-Day War -- were carefully renamed as "the Palestinian people")?
Now The New York Times has reported, without a scintilla of skepticism, about this effort to "refute" the "militants." And not a syllable of Goodstein's sober prose is devoted to actually reporting on any of the views expressed elsewhere by these nine people who made this video elsewhere - views about America, about the political and legal institutions of the Infidel nation-state of America, about Jews and the "myth" of the Holocaust, or about what they see as the right role, and right goals, for Muslims now living in this country. There is nothing about the company they keep, or about their very own heartfelt expressions, made mostly to fellow Muslims, and mostly earlier, before they realized that they had to go into full taqiyya-and-kitman mode.
Will the New York Times publish a follow-up account, based on the information even cats and dogs can now acquire, if they only have a computer, and a little time?
Many Muslims, and their unthinking supporters, believe that they can intimidate well-prepared critics of Islam, or of mosques being built hither and yon, by shrill cries about "freedom of religion" when Islam is, in the main, quite unlike any other religion. It is a Total Belief-System that in large part makes political and geopolitical claims, the claims of Allah to the whole world, that is, the claim or insistence that Islam must everywhere dominate, and Muslims rule, everywhere.
And if "freedom of religion" is a red herring, so is this absurd cry about "racism" that is flung about, as if Islam, an ideology, can be compared to a "race," and Muslims forever be entitled to hide behind that cry of "racism" even where it so obviously does not apply. There is a "racism," however, that does apply - and that is the "racist" sense of superiority exhibited by Muslim Arabs against non-Muslim Arabs. For Islam, despite its universalist claims, is and has been a vehicle for Arab supremacism, in the ways I have many times discussed here.
No one should be embarrassed, much less apologetic, for daring to consider the evidence of his senses - that is, the Jihad news that mounts and mounts, from all over the world, and especially that which demonstrates the cruel treatment of non-Muslims by Muslims wherever Muslims rule, save in a handful of cases where special circumstances have allowed for a taming or constraining - possibly temporary - of Islam, as in Kazakhstan or Kemalist Turkey. Nor should we be apologetic about becoming aware of the evidence provided in books, rather than newspaper dispatches, by the historians of Islamic conquest: that is, the 1350-year history of the conquest of non-Muslim lands, and the subsequent subjugation of the autochthonous non-Muslims. And we should be unapologetic about reading the scholars of Islam, such as C. Snouck Hurgronje, Joseph Schacht, Arthur Jeffery, and dozens of others, who wrote before Arab money and influence and other factors aided the Muslim takeover of many academic departments in the West having to do with Islam and related studies. And finally, we can read Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Wafa Sultan, Ibn Warraq, Magdi Allam, Nonie Darwish, and a growing list of other Defectors from the Army of Islam, whose articulate works, whose morally and intellectually advanced temoignages, can be compared with the deceit practiced by those listed as participating in the Feelgood video that is given such credulous treatment by the New York Times reporter, and by those who vetted, but did not change, the story about the "Muslim video."
The West is now imperiled in a way unique in its history, mostly from an ideological pressure brought from within, and not by military pressure from without. Not everyone thinks we should simply throw up our hands and wail "but what can we do?" and "there's nothing to be done." There are those who are not, sometimes out of a mere want of imagination and intellect, able to figure out the many things that they could legitimately and rationally do to preserve (and perhaps even extend) the civilisational legacy they inherited. But there are also those who wish to protect it from its present-day most dangerous enemies, those who have not lost their senses, those who refuse to make burnt offerings of themselves or their children on the Altars of the Idols of the Age, Tolerance and Diversity - a misapprehended "Tolerance," a diseased conception of "Diversity." The latter group must regard with alarm and disgust the irresponsibility of The New York Times.
The irresponsibility of a great part of the media is beginning to alarm, beginning to disgust. Nine years after the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, and several decades after the slow but steady growth, seemingly unstoppable, of the Muslim presence in the historic heart of the West, the countries of western Europe, and after these great and costly and squandering military-cum-reconstruction efforts first in Iraq and now in Afghanistan, how much do we in the United States need to rely on The New York Times. Does anybody, anymore, still "rely" on the New York Times after the display of its non-coverage of Islam? How often, in the New York Times, have you seen any intelligent discussion or explanation of what the word "Sunnah" means? Have you had any inkling of what the Hadith are, or what the different collections of Hadith are, or how individual Hadith have been ranked as to presumed "authenticity," or even how the different muhaddithin are regarded, and why Bukhari and Muslim stand above all the rest? Have you been informed properly by The New York Times as to what is in the Qur'an concerning Unbelievers? Have you seen, in the pages of The New York Times, even a single mention of the murders of Abu Afak and of Asma bint Marwan, or about what happened at the Khaybar Oasis and why, or about what Muhammad did when the 600-900 members of the Banu Qurayza, taken prisoner and bound, were decapitated? Have you ever, even once, in the pages of The New York Times, read anything about little Aisha, and why virtually the first act of that learned theologian, the Ayatollah Khomeini, when he came to power, was to reduce the marriageable age of girls to nine years?
Oh, I could fill up the page and printer, and so could you, with what The New York Times has, in nearly a decade, chosen not to tell its readers, willfully refused to enlighten them about -- that is, the ideology and the practice of Islam. And this is curious, because the best way to convince the public to support what the New York Times supports - a pullout from Iraq and Afghanistan - is to make them more aware of what Islam inculcates, what Islam contains, what Islam means.
It is wrong, it is unjust, it is cruel to its readers, it is dangerous, it is a dereliction of journalistic duty, for those reporters and editors on the New York Times, to sanction this deception by their inattention, their nonchalance amounting to criminal negligence, their unwillingness to dig just a little bit on such things as the real views behind the for-the-camera smiles and wiles of those Nine Supernumeraries of Islam who took part in this video charade, this tableau-vivant of taqiyya-suffused viciousness. Those reporters and editors are doing what The New York Times, in its embarrassing history, did in the past to aid and abet propagandists for totalitarian ideologies - including one of its most famous reporters, Walter Duranty, who won a Pulitzer for his efforts at hiding the reality of the famine-ravaged Ukraine.
This time it is not Walter Duranty, doing his best for Joseph Stalin. Nor is it some suave mustachioed well-tailored Count Constantini talking to untouchable Brahmin wives at the Chilton Club on Beacon Street. And this time it isn't Ernst Hanfstaengl telling his old classmates from the Harvard Class of '09 - perhaps even some fellow members of the Hasty Pudding Club, with whom good old Putzi may have high-kicked-it in drag for one of those Hasty Pudding Theatricals -- about how Hitler was merely a useful tool of Krupp and Thyssen, a tool to beat back the Bolsheviks, and in America they had nothing to worry about, for the National Socialists just wanted to get Germany back on its feet, to give it its self-respect. No, this time it is another Total Belief-System, with many similarities to the totalitarian ideologies of the previous unappetizing centuries, and another set of adherents to an ideology that flatly contradicts, in letter and spirit, the American Constitution and everything else that makes America America. Adherents who want to make sure we do not find out much about the ideology of Islam, or about those who work to undermine the legal and political institutions of this country.
Let's all wait right here -- at this very website, Jihad Watch -- and see if The New York Times will indeed, under the circumstances, feel it has an obligation to run another story, a follow-up, where the information presented above about the nine participants in this video - most of them well-versed in the arts of taqiyya and kitman - is no longer omitted, but becomes the very subject of the story.
Perhaps you'd like to make a wager on what The New York Times will do.
So go ahead. Faites vos jeux, mesdames et messieurs. And do it fast, because any moment now the croupier at this website is going to announce that "les jeux sont faits."
And les jeux sont faits, for many Americans, in another sense. Yes, for many of us, when it comes to trying to get people to meet their responsibilities and report adequately on the contents of Qur'an, Hadith, Sira, and to analyze truthfully the content of Muslim propaganda and campaigns of Da'wa, for us les jeux sont faits, which in English means -- the chips are down.
And when those chips are really down in every sense, who will be there to defend the political and legal institutions of this country, its social understandings, its art and science and literature, its political freedoms, and the conditions that make those manmade laws, those political institutions, that art, that science, that literature, those individual freedoms, possible? Those conditions could not possibly exist for one minute under Islam. Who will defend these things, if not those who, even if in some cases hesitatingly, begrudgingly, not really wanting to find out what they suspect they will find out, finally decide to learn about the texts, tenets, attitudes, atmospherics of Islam? And then, too, they must learn also about all the ways that Muslim propagandists in the West attempt to keep non-Muslims unaware and thus unwary, confused and thus unable to see things clearly.
Okay, New York Times. You have one last chance. You didn't do right when it came to Walter Duranty and the misreporting on the Soviet Union. Your coverage of the Nazi persecution of the Jews, throughout not only the 1930s, but right through the war, was laughable, and cruel, and had consequences. It resulted in many deaths, for there must have been many readers of The New York Times who, unaware of what was really going on, did not do enough either to save their own relatives, or to raise holy hell, wherever and whenever they could, because they relied on The New York Times, and the Sulzberger family was not about to let its paper be tarred as "too Jewish." In other words, that family cared more about itself, and its own position, then it did about reporting the truth. And right now, I suspect, those who run The New York Times have no desire to let themselves be open to charges of "racism" or "Islamophobia" or some other such obvious nonsense. Apparently they lack the wit, they lack the imagination, they lack the knowledge, to be able to respond appropriately to such charges.
Well, I've had my fill of analyzing or psychoanalyzing those who report for, those who are columnists for, those who edit for, those who run, those who own, The New York Times.
I repeat, one last time, the question I asked more than once above:
having published that story about this Muslim propaganda-vehicle video as a splendid attempt to "rebut militants," will The Times now publish a follow-up article, one that gives full weight to the information supplied by Robert Spencer in his article above, about the nine Muslims who appear in that video, or will it not?
Why does the Left embrace the Second Amendment only when it comes to radical Islamic
The Right to Bear Nuclear Arms?
Why does the Left embrace the Second Amendment only when it comes to radical Islamic regimes?
by Charles Pierson
Last Wednesday, the UN Security Council passed a fourth round of sanctions against Iran. The sanctions follow Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s announcement in February that Iran is now a “nuclear state.” The International Atomic Energy Agency has confirmed that Iran has enriched enough uranium for two nuclear bombs.
These developments render a conversation I had recently that was rather nonsensical. “Iran has as much right to nuclear weapons as anyone else,” a liberal friend told me. This came as a surprise. By now, there is scarcely anyone who is not alarmed at Iran’s nuclear ambitions. On November 27, 2009, the IAEA issued a resolution calling on Iran to freeze operations at its uranium enrichment facility outside the city of Qum. (The existence of the secret Qum installation was revealed to the world by Western leaders in September during the G-20 summit in Pittsburgh.) The day after the IAEA resolution, a defiant Iran announced its intention to build an additional ten uranium enrichment plants. Even Russia, long tolerant, if not encouraging of Iran’s nuclear ambitions, has shown some signs of unease. On November 16, Russia announced that the Bashere nuclear reactor, which it has been building for Iran, would not come on line by its scheduled completion date at the end of 2009.
Israel openly contemplates a preemptive strike against Iran’s nuclear installations. This would reprise Israel’s successful air strikes against Iraq’s Osiraq nuclear reactor in 1981 and Syria’s nuclear reactor in 2007. It is the prospect of a preemptive strike against Iran—not Iran’s possession of nuclear weapons—which most worries the Left.
A number of other liberal friends echoed the assertion that Iran has a right to nuclear arms. It suddenly struck me that a strange thing had happened on the Left: liberals have embraced the Second Amendment—but with a catch. While most liberals continue to recoil at the thought of guns in the hands of American citizens, a few liberals happily apply the Second Amendment to Iran. This new Second Amendment declares: “Iran’s right to bear nuclear arms shall not be infringed.” Call it the International Second Amendment (Nuclear Version).
The International Second Amendment differs from the arguments usually made against striking Iran. These other arguments focus not on Iran’s purported right to nuclear arms, but on the necessity and feasibility of an attack. They revolve around several factual questions which can be grouped under three headings:
What are Iran’s Intentions? Iran claims that it wants nuclear power only for peaceful uses. Is Iran telling the truth? If Iran is indeed seeking nuclear weapons, will it use them only in self-defense? Does Iran intend to use nuclear weapons in a first strike against Israel or another country? If Iran’s aim is aggression, can Iran be deterred by the nuclear arsenals of the West as was the Soviet Union during the Cold War?
Is a Preemptive Strike Feasible? Can Iran be disarmed by any means short of military force, such as inspections, diplomacy, or the latest round of UN sanctions, augmented by even harsher sanctions imposed by the United States? Is a military strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities technically feasible? Iran is farther away from Israel than either Iraq or Syria. Can Israeli aircraft strike at that distance? And is it possible to locate and destroy enough of Iran’s nuclear installations, many of which Iran has partly hidden underground?
What Will the Aftermath of an Attack Be? Would terrorism against the West increase? Would Iran close the Straits of Hormuz in the Persian Gulf, interrupting the flow of oil and plunging the world economy from recession into depression?
These are practical questions. The International Second Amendment, on the other hand, is unconcerned with practicalities. It argues that Iran is entitled to nuclear arms as a matter of principle. Period. The International Second Amendment is not a practical, but a philosophical, specifically an ethical, argument against taking action—any action, military or nonmilitary—against Iran. Does the argument have merit?
Does Iran have a right to possess nuclear weapons? The short answer is: not if Iran intends to use them for aggression. If it can be demonstrated that Iran does have hostile intent, is anyone prepared to argue that Iran still has a right to nuclear arms? As Abraham Lincoln remarked: there is “no right to do wrong.”
Iran has no legal right to nuclear arms. Iran is a party to the 1968 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. The NPT divides signatories into two groups of nuclear “haves” and “have-nots.” Five “nuclear” states (the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Russia, and Red China) are allowed to possess nuclear weapons This was a necessary concession to reality, as these were the states possessing nuclear weapons in 1968.
Iran falls into the NPT’s second category of signatories which are forbidden from acquiring nuclear weapons but which are allowed to develop nuclear energy solely for peaceful uses. The International Court of Justice (the “World Court”) recognizes no universal right to nuclear arms. To the contrary, the Court has not even been able to bring itself to endorse the use of nukes even in the extreme case of an existential threat. In its 1996 Advisory Opinion on the Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, the Court could manage no more than a weak concession that in such an extremity, resort to nuclear weapons might not be unlawful. Finally, the UN Security Council has passed four resolutions between 2006 and 2008 calling on Iran to cease enriching uranium.
The International Second Amendment may appear unassailable because its simplistic fairness: if any state possesses nuclear weapons, all states must be allowed nuclear weapons. But this is naive morality at best: if Johnny gets a cookie, then Sally must get a cookie. Reality is not so evenhanded. In actuality, the Left only condemns nuclear weapons in the hands of the United States and Israel. Russia, China, and Iran get a pass. Left unanswered is the question of why nukes are objectionable in the hands of democracies but not in the hands of authoritarian states.
The answer may lie with the Left’s accusation that the United States and Israel are hypocritical to possess nuclear weapons while forbidding them to other states. This is a morally frivolous objection for two reasons.
First, it dispenses with any assessment of the dangers states like Iran may pose. Nor does it give any weight to the history of restraint represented by the United States and Israel. The United States has proven a responsible steward of the atomic bomb. We have used nuclear weapons only twice—sixty-four years ago—and that was in a war which began with an attack on the United States. Israel, which has possessed nuclear weapons since the 1960s (an open secret), has never used them. During the 1973 Yom Kippur War, Israel’s very existence was on the line from the invading armies of Egypt and Syria. Israel did not use nukes even then.
We can agree that hypocrisy is a bad thing. However, advocates of the International Second Amendment think there is nothing worse. By all means, let Iran incinerate Tel Aviv; at least we will not have hypocritically infringed Iran’s right to nuclear weapons. During the Cold War it was often said, “Better dead than Red.” Today that’s become “Better dead than hypocritical.”
But where is the hypocrisy? Israel’s possession of nuclear weapons is not hypocritical since Israel has not signed the NPT: Israel has not promised not to develop nuclear weapons. Any hypocrisy lies with Iran which has signed the NPT and thus has pledged itself to nuclear development only for peaceful uses.
There is no universal right for all states to possess nuclear weapons. During the Cuban Missile Crisis, no one argued that Cuba was entitled to nuclear arms. Instead, the United States, with the approval of the world, moved to interdict them. What all states do possess, however, is the right to self-defense. Since the prime target of Iranian nuclear weapons would be Israel, Iran’s putative “right” to possess nuclear arms gives way to Israel’s right to self-defense. Israel has every reason to feel nervous. Iranian President Ahmadinejad has declared that Israel “should be wiped off the map.” Iran’s apologists have protested that this statement was mistranslated. Irrespective of this statement, anxieties reasonably remain. In 2006, the Iranian Foreign Ministry sponsored an international conference of Holocaust deniers in Tehran. Iran continues to back the terrorist group Hezbollah, whose charter names the destruction of Israel as a goal. Finally, the Iranian leadership adheres to an apocalyptic form of Islam which looks for the return to Earth of a legendary figure: the Twelfth, or “hidden,” Imam. Believers hold that the destruction of Israel is necessary for the Twelfth Imam’s return. Even if it were true that Ahmadinejad’s provocative statement was “mischaracterized,” Israel’s fears would be far from allayed. Iran refuses to recognize Israel’s right to exist and will not exchange ambassadors. Iran also supports Hamas and Hezbollah. It is no wonder that the West reads the worst in Iranian intentions.
The New York Times Finds Some Moderate Muslims
The New York Times Finds Some Moderate Muslims
The only problem is, they’re almost all Islamic supremacists
by Robert Spencer
The recent New York Times Sunday trumpeted this MPAC video as a rebuttal of Islamic “militants,” although it is long on vague generalities but (surprise, surprise) short on Qur’anic specifics, which are the only thing, could they be produced, that might actually induce an Islamic supremacist or jihadist to reconsider his position.
And that’s the best that can be said about it. Among the Islamic leaders it features is Suhaib Webb of the Muslim American Society. The Muslim American Society is the Muslim Brotherhood in the U.S. The Muslim Brotherhood’s own website carries the Chicago Tribune expose that identifies the MAS as the Brotherhood’s arm in the U.S.: “In recent years, the U.S. Brotherhood operated under the name Muslim American Society, according to documents and interviews. One of the nation’s major Islamic groups, it was incorporated in Illinois in 1993 after a contentious debate among Brotherhood members.” So reported the Tribune in 2004, in an article that is now reproduced on the Muslim Brotherhood’s English-language website, Ikhwanweb.
Why is the MAS connection with the Muslim Brotherhood significant? The Muslim Brothers “must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and Allah’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.” So wrote Mohamed Akram in “An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America,” May 22, 1991.
On the video, after Webb comes Maher Hathout, who trots out another familiar dodge, complaining about people quoting the Qur’an without knowing the Arabic or the context, as if “slay the pagans wherever you find them” (9:5) somehow becomes “establish religious dialogue” in the Arabic or “in context.” If so many Muslims weren’t murdering people in explicit obedience to verses like this one from the Qur’an, Hathout might have a case here; but they are, and he doesn’t. Hathout also, according to Steve Emerson, “has called Israel a nation of butchers and accused the United States of state terrorism; he has justified the actions of Hizbollah and defended terrorist financiers.”
According to Discover the Networks, Hathout “has close ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and espouses the radical brand of Islam known as Wahhabism.”
Ihsan Bagby follows Hathout, and says unequivocally: “we cannot kill innocent people.” He does not, of course, define who is innocent, thus leaving the door open for jihadists like Anjem Chaudary and others who say that no non-Muslim is innocent. Bagby himself once said this about Muslims in America: “Ultimately we can never be full citizens of this country, because there is no way we can be fully committed to the institutions and ideologies of this country.”
Mohamad Magid comes next. He is the Imam and Executive Director of the All Dulles Area Muslim Society (ADAMS) Center in Sterling, Virginia. In 2004 Ben Johnson reported this in FrontPage: “The chairman of ADAMS is Ahmad Totonji, an Iraqi-born citizen of the kingdom of Saudi Arabia and a key target of Operation Green Quest. Totonji was also named as a defendant in a $1 trillion lawsuit filed by more than 600 relatives of people who died in the 9/11 attacks. He acted as a co-founder and officer of the Saudi-founded/Saudi-funded (and now defunct) SAAR Trust. Additionally, he served as Vice President of the Safa Group and the International Institute for Islamic Thought (IIIT). Officials have linked the non-profit IIIT to Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda.” The IIIT is also linked with the Muslim Brotherhood.
Then comes Zaid Shakir, former Muslim chaplain at Yale University. He has said, according to Daniel Pipes, that “Muslims cannot accept the legitimacy of the existing American order, since it ‘is against the orders and ordainments of Allah.’ ‘[T]he orientation of the Quran,’ he adds, ‘pushes us in the exact opposite direction.’”
Others in the video include Jamal Badawi (who owes me a million dollars), an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation Hamas terror funding case.
Hamza Yusuf also appears. He has made many antisemitic and anti-American statements, and most famously said two days before 9/11: “This country [America] unfortunately has a great, a great tribulation coming to it. And much of it is already here, yet people are too to illiterate to read the writing on the wall.”
And finally there is Yassir Qadhi, anointed by Ground Zero mega-mosque Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf as a “Muslim leader of tomorrow, who has said: “Hitler never intended to destroy the Jews… The Hoax of the Holocaust — I advise you to read this book, you’ll want to write this down — The Hoax of the Holocaust, a very good book. All of this is false propaganda…”
These are the spokesmen that the New York Times thinks are “rebutting” the “militants.” Pardon me if I decline the Kool-Aid.
Yet Daveed Gartenstein-Ross, director of the Center for the Study of Terrorist Radicalization at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, seems to have imbibed it deeply. He said of the video: “It can be a powerful outlet. It is the kind of thing that, formatwise, is matching what’s being done by the jihadist groups.” The Times went on to say that Gartenstein-Ross “said that some of the scholars in the video were politically controversial but had credibility among many Muslims because they were not seen as ‘sell-outs.’ ‘Some would argue that they might be more effective than those perceived as more establishment figures.’”
“Politically controversial”? No kidding, really? This kind of analysis is on the level of saying that Osama bin Laden is a “polarizing” figure, but “more effective” than establishment types.
The Times article also quotes Edina Lekovic, director of policy and programming for the Muslim Public Affairs Council, the Islamic advocacy group responsible for the video. Edina Lekovic is the MPAC flack whom Steve Emerson caught lying on national television, denying she was editor of a Muslim student publication that praised Osama bin Laden as a great mujahid. Emerson produced copies of the rag showing Lekovic’s name on the masthead as editor on the very same page on which the praise for Osama appeared.
Score another for the keen analysts at the New York Times.
Why won't the Left defend Christians as fiercely as it defends Muslims?
Why won't the Left defend Christians as fiercely as it defends Muslims?
In "Why Won't the Left Defend Christians As Fiercely As It Defends Muslims?," Andrea Tantaros at FoxNews.com (August 6) zeroes in on fashionable moral equivalence:
The battle over the proposed mosque and community center near Ground Zero has sparked outrage and fury.
Fareed Zakaria in Newsweek promotes pro-Sharia Ground Zero mosque imam as a "moderate
Fareed Zakaria in Newsweek promotes pro-Sharia Ground Zero mosque imam as a "moderate"
About Newsweek's surrender to the global jihad, see here and here. And this one by Fareed Zakaria in March 2009 really takes the cake. So it isn't surprising that Zakaria and Newsweek would now come out for the Islamic supremacist mega-mosque at Ground Zero.
"Build the Ground Zero Mosque: I believe we should promote Muslim moderates right here in America. And why I'm returning an award to the ADL," by Fareed Zakaria in Newsweek, August 6 (thanks to Sanjay):
Ever since 9/11, liberals and conservatives have agreed that the lasting solution to the problem of Islamic terror is to prevail in the battle of ideas and to discredit radical Islam, the ideology that motivates young men to kill and be killed. Victory in the war on terror will be won when a moderate, mainstream version of Islam--one that is compatible with modernity--fully triumphs over the world view of Osama bin Laden.Zakaria either doesn't know or doesn't care that besides being an open advocate for Sharia and restrictions on the freedom of speech in his book What's Right with Islam, Rauf has (like CAIR) refused to denounce Hamas. He has lied about his commitment to religious dialogue. He has lied about whether the Islamic center planned for the Ground Zero site will contain a mosque or not. And he has lied about whether or not the project is getting foreign funding. He is involved with a group that helped fund the jihad flotilla against Israel.
The problem here is that Fareed Zakaria and everyone else in the world can tell us that Feisal Abdul Rauf is a moderate all day and all night long, but until these questions about his manifest duplicity and advocacy for Sharia are answered, their protestations will ring hollow.
The much larger issue that this center raises is, of course, of freedom of religion in America. Much has been written about this, and I would only urge people to read Michael Bloomberg's speech on the subject last week. Bloomberg's eloquent, brave, and carefully reasoned address should become required reading in every civics classroom in America. It probably will....This is not really a freedom of religion issue at all. No one is advocating that Muslims should not be allowed to build mosques in the U.S., although I maintain that those mosques should be carefully scrutinized by law enforcement for jihad activity -- and Muslims who are genuinely peaceful, eschew Sharia, and are loyal American citizens should have no problem with that. The question here is one of the appropriateness of the location (as well as of Rauf's dishonesty). Does the freedom of religion really allow any group to build anything anywhere? As a recent parody had it, would the KKK be allowed to build a "shrine of reconciliation" on the site of the black Baptist church bombed by racists in the early Sixties? Would Michael Bloomberg or Fareed Zakaria really have no problem with that?
‘MOOZ-lum’ – The Movie: Hollywood Islamist-apologists’ attempt to evoke sympathy
‘MOOZ-lum’ – The Movie:
Hollywood Islamist-apologists’ attempt to evoke sympathy for ‘poor misunderstood, mistreated’ Muslims in America
Leading the cast is Danny Glover – America-hating/Jew-hating/Communist-loving terrorist sympathizer.
Here’s a snapshot of the story plot:
Pulled between his strict Muslim upbringing by his father and the normal social life he’s never had, Tariq Mahdi enters college in a state of confusion. New relationships with Muslims and non-Muslims alike challenge his already shaken ideals, and the estrangement with his mother and sister troubles him. Slowly, he begins to find himself with the help of new friends, family and mentors, but when the attacks of 9/11 happen without warning, he is forced to face his past and make the biggest decisions of his life.
Has a person ever died of suspense? Because that’s what a whole country’s worth of Muslims are feeling right now, particularly the ones in the Metro Detroit area of the United States. The first of its kind film created by and for Muslims in America is on it’s way to the people. It is anticipated that MOOZ-lum The Movie will be breaking down stereotypes and educating the (Muslim) masses in the process.
The movie is the brainchild of a young Muslim man who’s family currently resides in Ann Arbor, MICHIGANISTAN. Qasim Basir is a Wayne State University graduate and a budding writer and director.
MOOZ-lum features has-been Danny Glover and the multi-ethnic Nia Long as two of the main characters. The film will portray a Muslim family and their task to stay Muslim in America in light of the family splitting apart and polarizing.
So, is it possible to die of suspense? Hopefully no one who wants to see the movie will die until after MOOZ-lum actually premieres! EXMINER
Hamas-linked CAIR, dhimmi Leftist bloggers lie again
Hamas-linked CAIR, dhimmi Leftist bloggers lie again
I know that that headline is as commonplace as one that would read "Human Beings Breathe Air Again," but just to set the record straight:
Hamas-linked CAIR and dhimmi Leftist jihad-enablers such as the Daily Kos, longtime CAIR tool Charles Johnson of Little Green Footballs, and the Southern Poverty Law Center have been in a tizzy the last few days over some rather outlandish misrepresentations of some writings by John Jay, a member of the SIOA Board.
Jay is, contrary to the hysterical claims that are circulating now, not a founder or co-founder of SIOA. He has no role in the running of the organization. And he does not advocate carte blanche killing of one's liberal relatives, nor of Muslims. CAIR is lying, which is what they do -- they're past masters at it.
Jay explains his positions, and the controversy, at some length here.
Religious Left crusaders submit to Islamic supremacists and their 9/11 victory mosque
Kneeling Before Holy Jihad
Religious Left crusaders submit to Islamic supremacists and their 9/11 victory mosque
by Mark D. Tooley
Led by the National Council of Churches (NCC), the Religious Left is backing the proposed Ground Zero Islamic Center while denouncing the mosque’s skeptics as “hateful.”
Revealingly, the statement endorsed by 40 religious “leaders” is relatively narrowly comprised of top NCC officials, left-wing Catholics, Muslim groups, and mostly second-tier Jewish groups, plus J Street. Missing are the usual Mainline Protestant clerics, Eastern Orthodox, and prominent liberal Jews typically found on NCC-organized political blasts. No prominent evangelicals are on the list.
The interfaith enthusiasts for the mosque chimed:
As Catholic, evangelical, mainline Protestant, Jewish and Muslim leaders and scholars committed to religious freedom and inter-religious cooperation, we are deeply troubled by the xenophobia and religious bigotry that has characterized some of the opposition to a proposed Islamic center and mosque near where the World Trade Center towers once stood.Few critics of the $100 million proposed Cordoba House Islamic Community Center near the World Trade Center site dispute the right of any religious group to construct a house of worship in America. What is disputed by Ground Zero mosque critics are the wisdom and sensitivity of building an Islamic Center near where Islamist fanatics murdered over 2,000 New Yorkers. Whatever the professed intent of the mosque builders, radical Islamists likely will see the mosque’s construction as a Jihadist victory.
Some critics of the Ground Zero mosque have appealed to Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf to exemplify the interfaith sensitivity he claims his Islamic Center will promote by relocating the mosque site. These appeals have garnered no sympathy from the imam. Other critics ask New York to refuse permission for mosque construction on this particular site and instead to facilitate another location. Left-leaning church groups like the NCC possibly could have employed their own long history of interfaith cooperation to mediate a reasonable compromise and to persuade the imam and his supporters to heed sensitivities about 9-11. But instead the NCC is embracing the Ground Zero mosque full throttle, all sensitivities be cursed, and denouncing all who are less than zealous for the Islamic Center as bigots.
Almost surely the NCC would denounce Christians who desired to build a church, even after 1,000 years, near the venerated site of the slaughter of Muslims during the crusades, that is, if churches could actually be freely built in the Middle East, outside of democratic Israel. But for much of the Religious Left, sensitivity and accommodation are only desired for Western Christians when dealing with non-Western religionists. Although itself an historically crusading and conquering faith, Islam’s adherents, as ostensibly chronic victims of Western imperialism, are never expected to yield, at least not by the Religious Left. Naturally, this pro-mosque Religious Left coalition is more distressed over Newt Gingrich and Sarah Palin than ascendant radical Islam.
“Newt Gingrich, the former Speaker of the House, is the most recent prominent opponent to cast this debate in a way that demonizes all Muslims and exploits fear to divide Americans,” the pro-mosque religionists angrily complained. Noting that Gingrich is a Roman Catholic, they also swiped at another Religious Left bête noire, Sarah Palin, who, the statement darkly observed, is “an evangelical Christian who frequently references her faith as an inspiration for her political beliefs.” Finally, the pro-mosque religionists targeted Fox News for spewing forth a “steady stream of irresponsible commentary and biased coverage that reduces what should be a civil debate into starkly combative terms.” Evidently, calling mosque skeptics bigots and xenophobes is not “combative.”
The Religious Left mosque apologists tut-tutted about a “a small minority of violent extremists manipulates religious language for political gain and falsely claims to represent one of the world’s great religions.” But groups like the NCC almost never say anything directly critical of radical Islamists except when absolutely politically obliged. “Extreme” Christians who warn against Islamist influence are typically more distressing to most of the Religious Left than most Islamists. They lamented the “sinful corruption of religion across faith traditions throughout history,” which of course fits with the Religious Left view that radical Islam is not a unique threat. Of greater concern to this crowd are the “ugly stereotypes about Islam” that demean the “vast majority of Muslims committed to peace.”
This NCC-led coalition reassuringly described the Cordoba House Islamic Center that will be “open to all Americans that will provide Islamic, interfaith and secular programs” in support of “integration, tolerance of difference and community cohesion through arts and culture.” Highly impressed with these goals, the pro-mosque religionists excitedly pronounced: “These are exactly the kind of efforts that foster dialogue, break down barriers and begin to build a world where religiously inspired violent extremism is less likely.” No doubt. In contrast with the lovefest envisioned at the new mosque, Gingrich and Palin must stop “issuing inflammatory statements” and desist from “fear-mongering and hateful rhetoric.”
Lest anyone miss the point, NCC President Peg Chemberlin, a Moravian minister from Minnesota, apparently issued her own enhancing statement, making the umpteenth banal comparison of radical Islamists no more speaking for Islam than does Timothy McVeigh speak for Christians. Of course, unlike the 9-11 Islamists, the largely agnostic McVeigh never professed any religious purposes behind his terrorism. But never mind, the NCC official needed some violent example of uncontrolled Christianity, and McVeigh was as close as she could reach evidently.
Finding prominent Christians who would sign this blast in defense of the Ground Zero mosque and against Gingrich and Palin apparently was also a reach. Besides Chemberln and the NCC’s General Secretary Michael Kinnamon, the Christian signators are mostly academics or left-wing Catholic groups like Pax Christi and the Maryknollers. J Street President Jeremy Ben-Ami is the most prominent Jewish signer. Of course, the Muslim Public Affairs Council and Islamic Society of North America gladly signed. But why none of the usual suspects from among the NCC’s constituency, like the United Methodists or Episcopalians? Could even they be wary of endorsing what is opposed by groups like the Anti-Defamation League, which has said: “Building an Islamic center in the shadow of the World Trade Center will cause some victims more pain – unnecessarily – and that is not right.”
The Left’s Lust for Black Gangstas »
The Left’s Lust for Black Gangstas
Why progressives disallow an honest discussion about a subculture that has devastated the black community
by Robin of Berkeley
Fox correspondent Erik Rush has just published a book, Negrophilia, with a profound premise. A biracial conservative, Rush decries the Left’s slobbering love affair with blacks. Like necrophilia, liberals’ obsession with black people is a sick and creepy fetish.
In 50 years, this country has traveled from segregating blacks to elevating them onto pedestals. But not all blacks, of course; not Condi Rice or Thomas Sowell or Rush himself. Liberals save their lust for liberal PhDs like Cornel West, as well the black urban underclass.
Of course, you can’t say any of this out loud. Citizens are forbidden to challenge anything connected to what’s been dubbed “black culture,” even though this subculture is at odds with how most blacks, decent and law abiding, actually live.
It’s off limits to question rap music that celebrates snuffing out cops and ho’s. Whether it’s behavior that is wholesome or loathsome, any criticism of blacks is out of bounds.
On the contrary; whites emulate blacks. Suburban boys wear their pants down low, wishing that they too were gangstas. They call their girlfriends “bitches” and use all the latest urban slang. Of course, the masses flocked to the untested, unvetted Barack Obama because he’s a liberal black, and, therefore, cool and exceptional.
What gets shoved under the rug are the unsavory aspects of this subculture, which have devastated the black community. It is not uncommon for a gang initiation rite to include a gang rape — often of a white girl. Further, no one talks about promiscuous behavior that leads to unconscionably high rates of HIV, teen mothers, and abortion.
To say out loud that too many black children grow up bereft of the love and protection of a black male is to be a racist. So is bemoaning a welfare system that has rendered black men inconsequential. But isn’t it racist to set the bar so appallingly low?
The Left is not just ga-ga over blacks. Radical Islam is as captivating to them as a rare, exotic bird. Let’s call this other fetish Muslimphilia.
Radical Islam, of course, poses an even greater danger to the West. And they wage not only war against the West but towards their own people. Women aren’t just treated as a man’s mattress. In many Islamic nations, women are kept in abject servitude.
And it’s not just women: in many Muslim cultures, homosexuals are beaten, imprisoned, even stoned to death. Pedophilia is rampant within a culture that perverts healthy sexuality. And yet liberals, supposed advocates of the oppressed, don’t utter a peep.
Some liberal luminaries, such as Anette Bening, and Naomi Wolf, go one step further and actually advocate practices that ravage women and children. While living in the lap of luxury and freedom, they don head scarves and defend the dreaded Burqua.
Emboldened by liberal enabling, Radical Islam finds new and insidious ways to worm itself into this culture. Most brazenly, there’s the proposed new mosque at ground zero in Manhattan, slated for opening next year, 9/11. Closer to home, the first Muslim college has opened in Berkeley, just minutes from my office.
Why have the masses become smitten with Negrophilia and the Muslimphilia? Why are cultures, with an underbelly of violence, viewed as superior to our own?
It’s all part of the Left’s game plan to destroy this nation from within. Decades ago in Germany, the Frankfurt School realized that the working class would never rise up against the wealthy because they wanted to be one of them. As an alternative, the masterminds plotted rotting the West from within.
Later, the 60s radicals, such as Bill Ayers, were smart enough to infiltrate every aspect of society, from universities to public schools, from government to the pulpits. By brainwashing the masses in moral relativism and political correctness, the average citizen could no longer distinguish between right and wrong. Furthermore, continually beating the drum about slavery, segregation, and the “genocide” of Native Americans would overwhelm liberal whites with unbearable guilt and shame.
It’s all worked according to plan: now, white people are considered bad; brown and black people good. Gays are cool. Straights, boring. God — well he’s so 1950s.
Without a Higher Power as an anchor, people are easily led, even to their own demise. Just like those stuporous Jim Jones followers who voluntarily drank the Kool Aid, people welcome their new veiled neighbor with open arms.
The Left is a shapeshifter movement with ever changing disguises. Decades ago, they were in-your-face Marxists in military garb. But today, wearing the disguise of the enlightened intellectual, they trick and manipulate the gullible masses.
The radicals know that a nation cannot survive if it turns on itself. When children learn to be repelled by their Founding Fathers and their history, maybe even the color of their skin, a country hangs by a bare and tattered thread.
Further, a naton cannot endure when an administration targets its own people, suing and spying on them. We have an Attorney General who refuses to use the T-word (terrorist) for anyone aside from his own citizens. Our President feels so repulsed by the people he’s serving that he bows down and apologizes every chance he gets.
What the Left is fostering is not just Negrophilia and Muslimphilia, but something even more dangerous — Americaphobia. This is an irrational fear and loathing for this country and its people.
Obama and his minions are spreading Americaphobia far and wide, like a virulent virus.
They do this every time they smear a good, decent America as a racist. And they create a virtual epidemic by embracing every tin pot dictator who licks his lips at the prospect of American’s demise.
Meanwhile, liberals don’t utter a word of protest. They robotically defend Obama, while plastering “coexist” bumper stickers on their car. Liberals look the other way when a Jihadist slaughters l3 soldiers, including a pregnant woman, at Ft. Hood. When a black man mows down eight coworkers, liberals assume he must have been a victim of racism.
They don’t say a thing. They wouldn’t dare.
Robin of Berkeley is a “recovering liberal” and a licensed psychotherapist in Berkeley.
Radical leftists would have us believe that they stand for democracy, progress, human rights and social justice – but when they seize power, they impose slavery, terror, famine, concentration camps and mass murder. As the Marxists used to say, this is no accident.
John Kekes, Why Robespierre Chose Terror
The human costs of radical left-wing ideology during the French Revolution: “A remarkable feature of the ideological frame of mind is that those in its grip actually believe these justifications for disemboweling, lynching, mutilating, burying alive, drowning, and hacking to pieces their unfortunate victims.”
Paul Bogdanor, The Communists As They Really Are
Quotations not taught in the average history class.
Paul Hollander, The Distinctive Features of Repression in Communist States [PDF]
Comprehensive analysis of communist tyranny and mass murder all over the world.
David Marcus, Famine Crimes in International Law [PDF]
Superb paper on the role of the state in creating famines, with detailed case studies of communist famines in the Soviet Union, Ethiopia and North Korea.
Steven Bela Vardy and Agnes Huszar Vardy, Cannibalism in Stalin’s Russia and Mao’s China [PDF]
Cannibalism was one of the countless horrors awaiting the victims of communist famines and purges.
Sergei Melgunov, The Record of the Red Terror [PDF, 1.3 MB]
Lenin mercilessly tortured and massacred hundreds of thousands after 1917.
Peter Boettke, The Soviet Experiment With Pure Communism [PDF]
Peter Boettke, The Political Economy of Utopia: Communism in Soviet Russia, 1918-1921 [PDF]
Peter Boettke, Soviet Admissions: Communism Doesn’t Work [PDF]
Lenin, Trotsky, Bukharin and other Soviet planners admitted to inflicting catastrophe on tens of millions.
Nicolas Walter, The Legacy of Bolshevism [PDF]
A British anarchist on the Bolshevik concentration camps.
Inquiry Reveals Lenin Unleashed Systematic Murder of 200,000 Clergy
Communist Reign of Terror Killed 200,000 Clergymen
Victims were “crucified on royal gates and shot in the basements of the Cheka, scalped, strangled, drowned and submitted to other bestial tortures.”
Soviet Order to Exterminate Cossacks is Unearthed
Peter Holquist, “Conduct Merciless Mass Terror”: Decossackization on the Don, 1919
Bolshevik genocide against the Don Cossacks.
Samuel D. Sinner, The Open Wound: The Genocide of German Ethnic Minorities in Russia and the Soviet Union
Samuel D. Sinner, The German-Russian Genocide: Remembrance in the 21st Century [PDF]
Atrocities included “mass rape of the elderly, women and children, mass drownings, prolonged torture sessions, mutilations, hacking up of bodies, mass shootings of hundreds, even thousands in a single action, the holocaust of entire villages – including the burning of all inhabitants and building structures.”
Edige Kirimal, Complete Destruction of National Groups as Groups: The Crimean Turks
Aurelie Campana, Surgun: The Crimean Tatars’ Deportation and Exile [PDF]
Massacres, famines and ethnic cleansing wiped out hundreds of thousands of Crimean Muslims.
Aleksandr M. Nekrich, The Punished Peoples [PDF, 4.9 MB]
Aurelie Campana, The Massive Deportation of the Chechen People [PDF]
Elza‐Bair Guchinova, Deportation of the Kalmyks (1943–1956) [PDF]
For Victims of Stalin’s Deportations, War Lives On
Genocidal deportations of national minorities created an apartheid system that lasted for decades.
Roman Serbyn, Famine in Ukraine
Summary of the 1921 and 1933 famines.
Kazuo Nakai, Soviet Agricultural Policies in the Ukraine and the 1921-1922 Famine [PDF, 1.3 MB]
Roman Serbyn, The First Man-Made Famine in Soviet Ukraine, 1921-1923
Forgotten Bolshevik famine, in which millions died.
Simon Ertz, The Kazakh Catastrophe and Stalin’s Order of Priorities 1929-1933 [PDF]
Soviet grain confiscations killed a third of the population of Kazakhstan.
James Mace, The Man-Made Famine of 1933 in Soviet Ukraine: What Happened and Why
James Mace, The Famine: Stalin Imposes a Final Solution
D’Ann Penner, Stalin and the Ital’ianka of 1932-1933 in the Don Region
Michael Ellman, The Role of Leadership Perceptions and of Intent in the Soviet Famine of 1931-1934 [PDF]
Michael Ellman, Stalin and the Soviet Famine of 1932-33 Revisited [PDF]
Stanislav Kulchytsky, Why Did Stalin Exterminate the Ukrainians?
Roman Serbyn, The Ukrainian Famine of 1932-1933 as Genocide in the Light of the UN Convention [PDF]
Roman Serbyn, Is There a “Smoking Gun” For the Holodomor?
Roman Serbyn, The Holodomor: Reflections on the Ukrainian Genocide [PDF]
Sergei Maksudov, Genocide Remembered
Nicolas Werth, The Great Ukrainian Famine of 1932-33 [PDF]
Yevhen Zakharov, Legal Classification of Holodomor 1932-1933 in Ukraine and in Kuban
This Soviet famine was the worst peacetime mass murder in the history of Europe.
Michael Ellman, The 1947 Soviet Famine and the Entitlement Approach to Famines [PDF]
Another forgotten famine, in which the Soviets withheld food from the victims.
Harvest of Bones: A Geologist Uncovers One of Stalin’s Killing Fields
A City Built on Bones
Forest Skulls May Tell Where 30,000 Stalin Victims Lie
Examples of the huge mass graves containing victims of the Soviet regime.
Poisons Tested on Stalin’s Prisoners
The Soviets, like the Nazis, perpetrated medical experiments on conscious victims.
Top Soviet Denounces Stalin’s Gulags [PDF]
The true scale of the Gulag.
- Death Tolls
Robert Conquest, Coming to Terms With the Past
Glasnost revelations about the Soviet death toll.
Papers on Soviet Repression Statistics
Post-Cold War academic papers on Soviet mass murder.
Steven Rosefielde, Documented Homicides and Excess Deaths [PDF, 1 MB]
Demonstrates that the number of killings documented in the Soviet archives was only a fraction of the total, which reached 10 million during the 1927-38 period alone.
David Satter, The System of Forced Labor in Russia [PDF]
Juliana Geran Pilon, Slave Labor and the Soviet Pipeline [PDF]
Slavery in the post-Stalin Gulag.
Who Says No Soviet Concentration Camps? [PDF]
Peter Reddaway, Inside Russia’s Concentration Camps [PDF]
Alexander Shatravka, Man of Peace Finds None in Soviet Camp [PDF]
The Gulag: Lost Millions
Human Rights Survey Deplores Soviet Prison Camp Conditions [PDF]
The atrocities included forced starvation, medical neglect, systematic beatings and death by radiation.
Soviet Prisoners Exposed to Fatal Radiation in Uranium Mines
George Schopflin, Radiating a False Picture: Focus on the Difference Between Soviet PR and Reality
On the Nuclear Gulag, where victims were murdered by radiation poisoning.
- Soviet Mass Rape
Red Army Troops Raped Even Russian Women As They Freed Them From Camps
Anthony Beevor, “They Raped Every German Female From Eight to 80”
German Rape Victims Find a Voice at Last
The Soviets mercilessly gang-raped millions of women and girls in Eastern Europe.
Jean C. Bingle, Labor For Bread: The Exploitation of Polish Labor in the Soviet Union [PDF]
Marek Jan Chodakiewicz, Interrogation Methods of the Communist Secret Police in Poland [PDF]
Hundreds of thousands were killed by deportation, massacre and torture in Poland.
Iron Curtain’s 100,000 Dead
Germans Find Mass Graves at an Ex-Soviet Camp
The Soviets used former Nazi concentration camps to wipe out political prisoners in East Germany.
Death Camps, Torture, Experiments on Children
Germany’s Guilty Secret: Beaten, Drugged, Skewered
“More Than 1,000 Died” Trying to Flee East Germany
Systematic torture, medical experiments and mass murder in East Germany.
Jeffrey Herf, An Age of Murder: Ideology and Terror in Germany [PDF]
The terrorism and antisemitism of the Stasi-sponsored Red Brigades in West Germany.
Tamas Stark, Genocide or Genocidal Massacre? The Case of Hungarian Prisoners in Soviet Custody [PDF]
Agnes Huszar Vardy, Forgotten Victims of World War II [PDF]
The Soviets deported hundreds of thousands of Hungarians to their deaths.
Michael Portmann, Communist Retaliation and Persecution on Yugoslav Territory [PDF]
Piles of Bones in Yugoslavia Point to Partisan Massacres
Italy Foots the Bill For Tito’s Ethnic Cleansing
Communist mass murder in Yugoslavia, now erased from the historical record.
Communist Atrocities to be Aired at Prison Camp Commander Trial
Mass killings in the Romanian Gulag.
Bulgaria Ran Brutal Camps For Prisoners [PDF]
Edvin Sugarev, On Camps and Memory
Kolio Kolev, Testimony on the Slunchev Briag Concentration Camp
The brutality of the Bulgarian Gulag.
Justice Delayed For Those Tortured Under Communism
Tens of thousands were tortured and murdered in Czechoslovakia.
Afghan Driver Says He Saw Soldiers Blind and Strangle Children [PDF]
Afghans Disclose Deaths of 11,000
Communist mass murder in the pre-invasion years.
Atrocities and Violations of Human Rights and International Law in Afghanistan [PDF]
Eyewitnesses to Afghanistan at War [PDF]
Accounts of terror bombing and other war crimes.
Rosanne Klass, Lifting the Curtain on Afghanistan’s Horror [PDF]
Freedom House describes the Nazi-style methods of the Soviet invaders, including massacre, torture, maiming and rape.
Jean-François Revel, The Awful Logic of Genocide
Rosanne Klass, The New Holocaust
How the Soviets turned Afghanistan into the world’s worst horror chamber.
The Soviets’ Ugly Exit [PDF]
Retreating Soviet forces scattered millions of anti-personnel mines, planted explosive devices disguised as toys in order to blow off children’s limbs, poisoned food supplies and waged chemical warfare against the civilian population.
M. Hassan Kakar, The Story of Genocide in Afghanistan
Academic history of the Soviet genocide.
Two Millions [PDF]
Human Rights in Mainland China [PDF]
Uncounted Millions: Mass Death in Mao’s China
Scholars Continue to Reveal Mao’s Monstrosities
The communists slaughtered many tens of millions in China through massacre, slavery and famine.
Basil Ashton et al., Famine in China, 1958-61 [PDF]
Jasper Becker, Ex-NPC Chief Admits Maoism Killed Millions
Vaclav Smil, China’s Great Famine: 40 Years Later [PDF]
How the communists caused the greatest man-made catastrophe in the history of the world.
Miriam and Ivan D. London, The Other China: The Three Red Flags of Death [PDF]
Miriam and Ivan D. London, The Other China: The Case of the Missing Beggars [PDF]
Miriam and Ivan D. London, Hunger in China: The “Norm of Truth” [PDF]
Miriam and Ivan D. London, Hunger in China: The Failure of a System? [PDF]
Forced starvation under communism.
Yongyi Song, The Cultural Revolution and the War Against Fascism [PDF]
Yongyi Song, The Dao County Massacre of 1967 [PDF]
Youqin Wang, Student Attacks Against Teachers: The Revolution of 1966
Youqin Wang, The Second Wave of Violent Persecution of Teachers: The Revolution of 1968
Mass murder during the Cultural Revolution.
Ex-Inmate Recalls Life in China’s Gulag [PDF]
“We Felt We Had Been Buried Alive”
“Class enemies” endured slavery and mass death in concentration camps.
Stephen W. Mosher, China’s One-Child Policy: Twenty-Five Years Later [PDF]
Population control ideology and the resulting atrocities against tens of millions of women.
China: Human Rights Violations and Coercion in One-Child Policy Enforcement [PDF]
Chinese Region “Must Conduct 20,000 Abortions”
Forced abortions and infanticide under the totalitarian one-child policy.
China Reviews “Apartheid” For 900m Peasants
The cruel system of class discrimination imposed on hundreds of millions of peasants.
Tibetan Centre for Human Rights and Democracy, Kuxing: Torture in Tibet [PDF]
Report on communist savagery against the population of Tibet.
Mass Buddhist Grave Reported in Mongolia
The communist slaughter in Mongolia.
Jack Rendler, The Last Worst Place on Earth: Human Rights in North Korea [PDF]
From Henry D. Sokolski, ed., Planning For a Peaceful Korea [PDF]. An excellent overview of this totalitarian slave state, where millions have been starved to death or murdered in concentration camps.
Jack Rendler, Horrific Conditions and Suffering Make It the Last Worst Place on Earth
A shorter and more recent account.
Norbert Vollertsen, A Prison Country
Norbert Vollertsen, Prisoner Nation
Fiona Terry, The Deadly Secrets of North Korea
Forced starvation has claimed millions of victims, primarily the elderly, the young and the sick.
David Hawk, The Hidden Gulag: Exposing North Korea’s Prison Camps
Death, Terror in N. Korea Gulag
North Korean Prison Guard Remembers Atrocities
7 Years of Torture in N. Korean Prison Camp
North Korean Imprisoned at Age 10 For Grandparents’ Dissent
Extensive evidence of torture and mass murder in the North Korean Gulag.
Regime That Kills Babies of Foreign Blood
“I Saw an Entire Family Being Killed”
Young Howard, The Hidden Gulag
Torture, medical experiments and racist infanticide.
Lam Thanh Liem, Ho Chi Minh’s Land Reform: Mistake or Crime? [Excerpt]
50 Years On, Vietnamese Remember Land Reform Terror
The bloodbath inflicted during the North Vietnamese land reform was effectively whitewashed by leftist pseudo-scholars in the West, but the victims were not so quick to forget.
The Blood-Red Hands of Ho Chi Minh
Stomach-churning accounts of communist mass murder during the Vietnam War.
The Massacre of Hue
In this communist massacre, thousands of men, women and children were mercilessly slaughtered.
Stephen T. Hosmer, Viet Cong Repression and its Implications For the Future [PDF, 4.9 MB]
Detailed analysis of Viet Cong mass murder campaigns.
The Human Cost of Communism in Vietnam: 1-31 32-65 66-99 101-23 [PDF]
Compilation of research and newspaper reports on communist terror in Vietnam.
Le Thi Anh, Let the Vietnamese Speak For Themselves [PDF]
M. Stanton Evans, Westerners Ignore Vietnam Gulag [PDF]
Ginetta Sagan, Vietnam’s Postwar Hell [PDF]
Concentration camps and mass murder in post-1975 Vietnam.
Declaration of Disinherited Vietnamese on Human Rights [PDF]
Testament of Patriotic Prisoners in Vietnam [PDF]
Victims of state terror beg the outside world for help.
Nguyen Cong Hoan, Human Rights in Vietnam I [PDF, 2.8 MB] II [PDF, 2.7 MB]
Nguyen Cong Hoan, Why I Escaped From Vietnam
Defector’s account of totalitarian slavery in post-1975 Vietnam.
Doan Van Toai, In Vietnam’s Gulag, the Captives Die a Slow Death [PDF]
Survivor’s account of the hidden mass killings of political prisoners in the Vietnamese Gulag.
Theodore Jacqueney, They Are Us, We Were Vietnamese [PDF]
Ginetta Sagan and Stephen Denney, Re-education in Unliberated Vietnam: Loneliness, Suffering and Death
Stephen J. Morris, Glasnost and the Gulag: The Numbers Game [PDF]
Anh Do and Hieu Tran Phan, Camp Z30-D: The Survivors
Starvation, torture and murder in the Vietnamese Gulag.
Hanoi Regime Reported Resolved to Oust Nearly All Ethnic Chinese [PDF]
Vietnam Refugees Fleeced of Possessions, Expelled [PDF]
Escape From Vietnam: Nightmare at Sea Haunts Refugee Who Survived [PDF]
Vietnam Goes on Trial in Geneva Over Its Refugees [PDF]
Communist ethnic cleansing literally drove the Chinese population into the sea, where hundreds of thousands of boat people suffered and drowned.
Stephen Denney, Human Rights and Daily Life in Vietnam
Ongoing political persecution and class discrimination.
40,000 Reported Held in Harsh Laos Camps [PDF]
Thorns Appear in Lotus Land
Tens of thousands of political prisoners were sent to die in concentration camps.
The End of the Hmong
Lao Human Rights Council, White Paper on Genocide in Laos
The Vietnamese and Laotian communists waged a genocidal war against Hmong tribespeople.
- Civil War
The Agony of Phnom Penh [PDF]
Khmer Rouge’s Bloody War on Trapped Villagers [PDF]
“I Watched Them Saw Him 3 Days” [PDF]
Priest Won’t Leave Refugees Despite Khmer Rouge Threat [PDF]
The savagery of the Khmer Rouge was easily discoverable before 1975.
President Ford, News Conference on Cambodia [PDF]
President Ford warns of “an unbelievable horror story” if the communists capture Cambodia.
Fear of Cambodian Bloodbath Seen Key to Senate Vote on Aid [PDF]
More bloodbath predictions; anti-war leftists in Congress successfully cut off the aid shortly afterwards.
- Killing Fields
The Khmer Rouge: Rampant Terror
Yin Savannary, Diary From Darkness [PDF]
Asian Blood Bath [PDF]
Cambodia – An Outlaw Nation [PDF]
Early reports from survivors and journalists.
Leo Cherne, The Terror in Cambodia [PDF]
Leo Cherne, Cambodia – Auschwitz of Asia [PDF]
The chairman of the International Rescue Committee describes the genocide.
Craig Etcheson, The Number: Quantifying Crimes Against Humanity in Cambodia
Bruce Sharp, Counting Hell
Studies demonstrating that the death toll was in the millions.
Henri Locard, State Violence in Democratic Kampuchea (1975-1979) and Retribution (1979-2004) [PDF]
This is the best summary of the Khmer Rouge bloodbath.
Cambodia Steps Slowly Toward a Genocide Trial
Feeble attempts to prosecute the butchers.
Ethiopian Ex-Rulers Go on Trial
The communist record of mass terror and forced famine in Ethiopia
Jason W. Clay, Famine in Ethiopia
Jason W. Clay and Bonnie K. Holcomb, The Politics of Famine in Ethiopia
Cultural Survival accuses the communists of causing mass deaths from starvation.
Peter Niggli, Ethiopian Resettlement: Vomit and Death [PDF]
How the communists tormented famine victims.
Dawit Wolde Giorgis, Power and Famine in Ethiopia [PDF]
Ethiopia’s relief commissioner blames the communists for a million deaths.
National Society for Human Rights, Ending the Angolan Conflict [PDF]
National Society for Human Rights, Criminal Liability in Angola [PDF]
African NGO reports blaming the Angolan bloodbath on the communist MPLA dictatorship and its international apologists.
Global Witness, A Crude Awakening [PDF]
How and why the communist MPLA and its foreign collaborators perpetuated the brutal civil war.
As Guerrilla War Ends, Corruption Now Bleeds Angola to Death
The MPLA dictatorship’s ongoing responsibility for mass starvation and disease in Angola.
Terror of Maputo Jail
Torture, rape, slavery and starvation in Mozambique’s Gulag.
John Sweeney, Inside the Terror-Camp
The massacre of tens of thousands in the Matabeleland.
Claudia Rosett, Dearth of a Nation
Roger Bate, The Killing Fields of Zimbabwe
Zimbabwe’s socialist regime deliberately imposed starvation on millions of people.
Jeff Jacoby, Starving Time in Zimbabwe
The dictatorship used mass rape as a weapon of terror.
Mary Anastasia O’Grady, Counting Castro’s Victims
Cuba’s Lost Population
Mass killings under communism in Cuba.
Deaths in Prison [PDF]
Victims of Che Guevara [PDF]
Executions by Raul Castro [PDF]
Shooting dissidents, murdering pregnant women, drowning children, etc.
The Cuban Rafter Phenomenon
Mary Anastasia O’Grady, The Lives of Cubans
The communists also murder boat people as they try to escape.
Alfred G. Cuzan, Castro’s “Revolutionary” Despotism [PDF]
The enslavement of the Cuban people.
Armando Valladares, Torture in Castro’s Cuba
Armando Valladares, A Firsthand Account of Child Abuse, Castro Style
Armando Valladares, Castro’s Gulag
One of the world’s longest-serving political prisoners on atrocities in Cuba’s concentration camps.
From the Prisons of Cuba: A Cry For Help [PDF]
Chronicle of an Unforgettable Agony: Cuba’s Political Prisons
Cuba’s Abuses of Psychiatry
Political imprisonment and psychiatric torture in Cuba.
Nicaragua Executions Put at 500-1,000 [PDF]
Mass executions started within weeks of the Sandinista takeover.
Jose Esteban Gonzalez, Remember Nicaragua [PDF]
Nicaragua’s leading human rights activist on Sandinista persecution and terror.
New Regime, Old Methods
A defector’s account of Sandinista massacres and torture.
Inside Communist Nicaragua: The Miguel Bolanos Transcripts [PDF]
A secret police defector describes the Sandinista campaign to establish communism in Nicaragua and impose Soviet control over Central America.
Inside the Sandinista Regime: A Special Investigator’s Perspective [PDF, 2.4 MB]
Defector Describes “Bloody,” “Corrupt” Regime [PDF]
A high-ranking defector accuses the Sandinistas of murdering thousands.
Alfred G. Cuzan, Sandinista Goals Were Evident Long Ago [PDF]
Alfred G. Cuzan, The Nicaraguan Revolution: From Autocracy to Totalitarian Dictatorship? [PDF]
The totalitarian fanaticism of the Sandinista National Liberation Front.
John Norton Moore, The Secret War in Central America and the Future of World Order [PDF, 5 MB]
Massive indictment of the Sandinista role in provoking violence and war throughout Central America.
J. Michael Waller, Will Sandinistas Face Justice?
The Sandinistas tortured, raped, mutilated and murdered thousands of innocent people.
J. Michael Waller, Tropical Chekists: The Sandinista Secret Police Legacy in Nicaragua
How the Sandinistas tried to build a police state in Nicaragua.
Peru Indians Take Up Arms Against Rebel Terror
Mass murder and enslavement of the poor by the Shining Path terrorists in Peru.
- Campaigns For Eugenics
Jonathan Freedland, Master Race of the Left
“Nearly every one of the left’s most cherished, iconic figures espoused views which today’s progressives would find repulsive... Indeed, contempt for ordinary people and outright racism were two of the defining creeds of British socialism.”
- Collaboration With Fascists
Oliver Kamm, The Far Left Meets the Far Right: A Historical Note
Japanese communist support for genocidal racist expansionism.
Nazi-Soviet Relations 1939-1941
Soviet-Nazi collaboration was the immediate cause of World War II.
E. Germany Ran Antisemitic Campaign in West in ’60s
Stasi Supported West German Neo-Nazi Groups
East Germany essentially created the neo-Nazi movement in West Germany.
- Collaboration With Jihadists
Paul Bogdanor, Leftists For a Second Holocaust
Eugene Goodheart, The London Review of Hezbollah
How the radical left embraced jihadist mass murderers who plan to annihilate the Jewish people.
Steven Stalinsky, Islamist-Left Alliance A Growing Force
John Perazzo, Platforms of the Enemy
The radical left’s open collaboration with the most virulent hatemongers in the Middle East.
- The Post-9/11 Left
Brink Lindsey, Terrorism’s Fellow Travelers [PDF]
Paul Hollander, The Resilience of the Adversary Culture
Radical leftists blamed the victims and excused the perpetrators of the 9/11 massacres.
Edward Alexander, Suicide Bombers and Professors
Edward Alexander, Ward Churchill and the Politics of Campus Extremism
The murderous fanaticism of the American campus left.
Information on the role of radical leftists in promoting hatred of Jews and denial of the Holocaust.
Tyler Cowen, The Socialist Roots of Modern Anti-Semitism
Left-wing movements have often vilified Jews as capitalist exploiters.
Max Geltman, On Socialist Anti-Semitism [PDF, 1.7 MB]
Many of the founders of socialism peddled hatred of Jews.
David Cesarani, The Left and the Jews/The Jews and the Left [PDF]
Detailed study of left-wing antisemitism.
W. H. Chaloner and W. O. Henderson, Marx/Engels and Racism [PDF, 1.7 MB]
The origins of Marxist antisemitism.
Werner Cohn, From Victim to Shylock and Oppressor: The New Image of the Jew in the Trotskyist Movement
How the Trotskyist movement became antisemitic.
Mark Strauss, Antiglobalism’s Jewish Problem
Dave Rich, The Barriers Come Down: Antisemitism and Coalitions of Extremes
The ideological convergence of far-left anti-capitalists and far-right antisemites.
Ben Cohen, The Ideological Foundations of the Boycott Campaign Against Israel [PDF]
Why left-wing anti-Zionists are in the vanguard of antisemitic boycott campaigns.
Arieh Stav, Notes on the Dialectics of Israeli Antisemitism
Paul Bogdanor, Jews Who Hate the Jewish State / Juden, die den jüdischen Staat hassen
Steven Plaut, The Scourge of Jewish Anti-Semites [PDF]
How anti-Zionist Jews promote antisemitism, often quite deliberately.
- Soviet Union/Russia
A. Mark Clarfield, The Soviet “Doctors’ Plot”: 50 Years On
Moshe Decter, “Judaism Without Embellishment”: Recent Documentation of Russian Anti-Semitism [PDF]
Soviet antisemitic campaigns during the Cold War.
Russian Communist Leader Denounces “Zionist Capital”
Top Communist Party Official Accuses Jews of Genocide
Russia’s communists are still fomenting hatred of Jews in the post-Soviet era.
Ben Cohen, The Persistence of Anti-Semitism on the British Left
Mark Gardner, “The Zionists Are Our Misfortune”: On the (Not So) New Antisemitism
Excellent analyses of left-wing incitement against Jews in Britain.
Alan Elsner, Race, Tolerance and the NUS [PDF]
Jewish Students Charge Left Groups With Anti-Semitism
Jewish Students Gagged at Leeds
Campus leftists, who once banned Jewish student groups, now silence protests against their own bigotry.
Leo McKinstry, Shame on the Left and its Vicious Hatred of Israel
Leftist intellectuals have played a crucial part in making antisemitism respectable in Britain.
“Harry’s Place,” Socialist Worker: Jews Killed Jesus
Michael Ezra, Anyone But Tom Hickey
“Judeosphere,” A Caricature of Anti-Racism
The Socialist Workers Party defends antisemites supports the violent destruction of Israel.
Eran Benedek, Britain’s Respect Party: The Leftist-Islamist Alliance and its Attitude Toward Israel
British far leftists tried and failed to unite with Islamic supremacists on the basis of shared hatred for Americans and Jews.
Jillian Becker, The Red Army Faction: Another Final Battle on the Stage of History [PDF]
Susanne Urban, Being Leftist and Anti-Semitic in Germany
Left-wing activists in Germany demand the destruction of Israel and blame Jews for global capitalism.
Karl Pfeifer, “Israel Shamir” and the Austrian Left
Austrian socialists promote a Nazi fanatic.
In Spain, Anti-Semitism is New Leftist Trend
Left-wing politicians in Spain vilify Jews.
Chavez: Israel Worse Than Hitler
Anti-Semitism in Venezuela: It is Planned
Venezuelan leftists threaten that Jews “will undergo another Holocaust.”
Philip Mendes, New Manifestations of Anti-Zionist Fundamentalism on the Australian Left [PDF]
An Unholy Alliance
Australian campus leftists are so blatantly antisemitic that their Muslim allies are embarrassed by them.
IsraCampus / AlefWatch
Documenting the antisemitism of totalitarian leftists in Israel.
“Judeosphere,” “Zionist Groups”
Jeff Weintraub, Lunacy About Darfur (in Monthly Review)
“Archontan,” The Left on Darfur: Genocide Denial and Antisemitism
Radical leftists deny the major contemporary genocide and blame the Jews for trying to stop it.
Pacifica Lectures Decried As Anti-Semitic
Campus anti-Zionists promote neo-Nazism and Holocaust denial.
Oliver Kamm, Atzmon Watch / Atzmon, Mosley and Respect / Keeping the Faith / Respect and Antisemitism
“Judeosphere,” Gilad Atzmon Makes For Glorious Commentary on the Nature of Contemporary Anti-Semitism
David Hirsh, Openly Embracing Prejudice
“Harry’s Place,” Atzmon Slams “Jewish Tribal Activists”
Radical leftists promote an ex-Israeli antisemite.
“Harry’s Place,” Counterpunch
“Harry’s Place,” Counterpunch on Israel and 9/11
“Judeosphere,” Still Crazy After All These Years
“Judeosphere,” Counterpunch Columnist is Writing Iranian Propaganda
“Judeosphere,” The Anti-Zionist Left Versus Barack Obama
Alexander Cockburn’s far-left hate site promotes virulent antisemites and neo-Nazi apologists.
Lanny J. Davis, Liberal McCarthyism
Robert Goldberg, Do the Right Thing
“Judeosphere,” Media Without Conscience
Documenting antisemitism on other American leftist sites.
Kate Raynes-Goldie, Race Baiting
Antisemitic McCarthyism in a Canadian leftist magazine.
Jeremy Jones, Alternative’s Reality
Antisemitic incitement on an Australian Indymedia site.
“Judeosphere,” Ordfront’s Affront
Antisemitic conspiracy theories in a Swedish leftist magazine.
Daniel Berrigan’s Speech to Arabs Stirs a Furor Over Award [PDF]
Report on the notorious diatribe by militant priest Daniel Berrigan.
Jason Maoz, Coffin’s Mideast Conformity
The antisemitic rhetoric of radical icon William Sloane Coffin.
Norman Podhoretz, Vidal’s Outburst: An Ominous New Stage in Anti-Semitism [PDF]
Deplores left-wing indifference to Gore Vidal’s infamous essay in The Nation.
Brian Carnell, Cockburn on Jewish Control of the Media
Alexander Cockburn asserts that Jews control the media and blames Jews for 9/11 and the anthrax scare.
William Grim, The Strange Case of Horst Mahler
How a founder of Germany’s Red Army Faction turned into a prominent Nazi.
Mr. Nader’s Baiting
Ralph Nader warns that the Israeli “puppeteer” controls the White House and Congress.
“Judeosphere,” Moonbats in Glass Houses
The antisemitic ravings of leftist fanatic John Kaminski – and of the leftists who pretend to repudiate him.
Norway up in Arms After Author Asserts Israel Has Lost Right to Exist
Jostein Gaarder’s vicious outburst against “God’s chosen people.”
David Hirsh, John Wight, Organizer of Edinburgh Stop the War Coalition, Pushes Antisemitism
“Harry’s Place,” What is Going on in the Scottish Palestine Solidarity Campaign?
British leftists cite neo-Nazis and Holocaust deniers, blame “international Jewry” for the “hydra-headed monster” of Zionism, equate Judaism with Nazism and justify the murder of Jewish teenagers.
Geoffrey Alderman, An Old Enmity
Keith Dovkants, Anti-Semitism – and a Timely Question For Ken
Mayor Culpa [PDF]
The shocking record of former London Mayor Ken Livingstone and his antisemitic Trotskyist allies.
- North America
Rachel Neuwirth, Noam Chomsky and Anti-Semitism
The sordid record of the cult leader’s involvement with Jew-hatred.
Norman G. Finkelstein, Interview: A Man Sees Red [Excerpts]
Norman G. Finkelstein, Interview: “Jews Are Immune From Any Kind of Criticism” [Excerpts]
Deborah Passner, Norman Finkelstein’s Fraudulent Scholarship
Paul Bogdanor, Exchange: The Scholarship of Norman Finkelstein
Steven Plaut, DePaul University’s Moment of Truth
Alan Dershowitz, Finkelstein’s Bigotry
Noam Chomsky’s disciple Norman G. Finkelstein dismisses the Holocaust as an extortion racket against Germany, says that Jews run America, compares Israelis with Nazis, justifies al-Qaeda, champions Hezbollah, speaks alongside Hamas supporters and gives interviews to Holocaust deniers.
Jonathan Kay, Trent University’s Problem Professor
Philosopher Michael Neumann admits to encouraging vicious antisemitism and the destruction of Israel.
Jeffrey Blankfort’s Hate Message
Sixties veteran Jeffrey Blankfort blames Zionism for the Holocaust and describes the existence of Israel as a “cancer” that threatens the future of the planet.
University of Michigan Distributes Anti-Zionist Book
According to former Green Party Senate candidate Joel Kovel, “the power-Jews have restored nothing so much as Moloch, the child-devouring shadow-form of Yahweh.”
Ben Cohen, Counterpunching the “Neo-Jews”
David Hirsh, “I Get Accused of Antisemitism Because I Criticize Israel”
Academic activist Jennifer Loewenstein vilifies the “the Neo-Jewish Masters and their allies in the United States” for the ritual sacrifice of human beings as a “burnt offering.”
Banned Mag Storm [PDF]
The British magazine Return, edited by Uri Davis, Tony Greenstein and Roland Rance, equated Zionism and Judaism with Nazism. Jewish students and national student leaders condemned it as antisemitic.
Paul Bogdanor, The Mark Elf Files
British blogger Mark Elf portrays Zionists as ritual child-murderers and bloodthirsty psychopaths, looks forward to Israel’s destruction and warns that the world’s Jews are “heading for a disaster” thanks to their “grotesque culture of deceit.”
Jewish Pro-Palestinian in Hot Water For “Satanic” Israel Jibe
Boycott campaigner Deborah Fink regards the Jewish state as “Satanic.”
Michael Ezra, From Cranks to Clowns
Britain’s Jewish antisemites are now accusing each other of lying and bigotry.
Collaboration With the PLO: The Case of Abraham Melzer
German Court Rules on “Kosher Anti-Semitism”
Abraham Melzer, a publisher who sought funding from the PLO, and Hajo Meyer, an Auschwitz survivor who belittles the importance of the Holocaust, are Jewish antisemites according to the German courts.
Philip Mendes, Denying the Jewish Experience of Oppression: The Jewish Anti-Zionism of John Docker
Cultural critic John Docker inveighs against “Zionist control of the Australian media.”
Steven Plaut, Uri Avnery Finds a “Fascist”
The fascist background of Israel’s most notorious PLO apologist.
Jonathan Rosenblum, An Israel Prize For Wagner?
The murderous rhetoric of Yigal Tumarkin and his comrades.
Paul Bogdanor, The Abominable Dr. Shahak
Paul Bogdanor, The Legacy of Israel Shahak
Werner Cohn, Shahak: The Jews Are Bad!
Diana Muir, Review of Israel Shahak and Norton Mezvinsky
Jason Maoz, The Wicked Son
The Blood Libels of Israel’s worst antisemite and his American collaborator.
Alan Dershowitz, Neve Gordon Can’t Take Criticism
Susan L. Rosenbluth, Accusations of Slander, Plagiarism and Holocaust Revisionism [PDF, 1.5 MB]
Susan L. Rosenbluth, Prof Steven Plaut’s Appeal Reverses Earlier Ruling [PDF, 1.1 MB]
Neve Gordon defended the killers of Jewish children and then resorted to a Holocaust-denying judge to silence his critic Steven Plaut.
Steven Plaut, A Second Blood Libel Anti-Semite From Israeli Academia
Yehiam Sorek offers his support to discredited Blood Libel historian Ariel Toaff.
Left-Wing Holocaust Denial
Pierre Vidal-Naquet, The Fantastic Calculations of Paul Rassinier
French socialist Paul Rassinier was one of the first Holocaust deniers.
Pierre Vidal-Naquet, On La Vieille Taupe and Cannibalism
The far-left outfit La Vieille Taupe – led by Pierre Guillaume and Serge Thion – became a major source of Holocaust denial propaganda.
Abraham H. Foxman, Letter to The Nation
The Nation is caught running an ad for Holocaust deniers.
Oliver Kamm, Chomsky’s Outlets
Kamm exposes a Holocaust denier at Z Magazine.
Peter N. Kirstein, Should Respectable Historians Attend and Speak at Conferences Hosted by David Irving?
Kirstein wants to “build coalitions” with Holocaust deniers such as the “provocative and intrepid” Irving.
Steven Plaut, The Neonazi Ties of the Leftist Lunabrits
“Judeosphere,” Former Counterpunch Columnist Questions the Holocaust
“Harry’s Place,” Denying the Denial
Alexander Cockburn and other left-wing Israel-haters have promoted and defended Holocaust deniers.
Professor Disputes Holocaust
Holocaust denial by 9/11 conspiracy theorist Jane Christensen.
“Judeosphere,” The Professor Meets the Holocaust Denier
Daniel McGowan of PLO front group Deir Yassin Remembered backs an admirer of Adolf Hitler.
Holocaust Denial on University of Haifa Chat List
Anti-Zionist Miriam Reik posts material supporting Holocaust deniers on a leftist Israeli discussion list.
Adam Holland, Oregon “Peace” Group to Mark Kristallnacht With Holocaust Denial Conference
Oregon campus leftists commemorate an infamous Nazi pogrom by hosting an infamous Nazi apologist.
“Judeosphere,” Partners in Denial
Noam Chomsky’s sidekick Edward Herman argues that opposition to Holocaust deniers is a Jewish plot.
The “Zionist-Nazi Conspiracy” Lie
US Holocaust Memorial Museum, Jewish Aid and Rescue
How Zionists saved tens of thousands of Jews from the Nazis.
Joint Emergency Committee, Program For the Rescue of Jews From Nazi-Occupied Europe
Zionist rescue demands during the Holocaust.
Zionists Debate Rescue of Hungarian Jews
Jewish Agency Receives Offer to Trade Jews for Trucks
The Brand Mission: Messages From the Jewish Agency [PDF, 1.1 MB]
Zionist Rescue Efforts: Records From the Eichmann Trial
Zionist attempts to save the Jews of Hungary.
WZO/Jewish Agency, Ben Hecht’s Perfidy: An Analysis of His Rewriting of History
The Hollywood screenwriter’s right-wing polemic was exploited by a generation of left-wing antisemites.
Soviet Antisemites on the Holocaust
The communist propaganda campaign blaming Zionists for the Holocaust.
Jacob Gewirtz, The Lie of Zionist-Nazi Collaboration [PDF]
Inevitably, the propaganda campaign inspired antisemites everywhere.
Sever Plocker, Zizek and the Zionist-Nazi Alliance
Former Yugoslav intellectual Slavoj Zizek has attempted to revive the conspiracy lie.
Sean Matgamna, With Hitler on the Road to Samara
A sane Marxist points out that the lie is itself reminiscent of Nazi propaganda.
- Lenni Brenner
C. C. Aronsfeld, Review of Zionism in the Age of the Dictators [PDF]
Louis Harap, “Zionist-Nazi Collaboration” Refuted: Lenni Brenner’s Trickery Exposed [PDF, 1.3 MB]
Michael Ezra, A Disputation With a Disputer
American Trotskyist Lenni Brenner echoed the Stalinist propaganda line on the Holocaust.
Brenner’s Complaint [PDF]
Bad Boy Brenner [PDF]
Lenni Brenner’s record of antisemitic activism.
- Jim Allen
A Curtain Call For Courting Perdition [PDF]
David Pryce-Jones, The Perdition Affair [PDF]
Michael Ezra, Scottish Palestine Solidarity Campaign Remembers the Holocaust by Blaming the “Zionists”
Stan Crooke, “Anti-Zionist” Play Will Mark Holocaust Memorial Day
British Trotskyist Jim Allen promoted the conspiracy lie in his virulently antisemitic play Perdition.
- Tony Greenstein
Paul Bogdanor, Tony Greenstein and the Nazi Apologists
Michael Ezra, Questions For Tony Greenstein
Michael Ezra, Anti-Racists Against Anti-Zionists
Michael Ezra, Tony Greenstein: More Errors Than Paragraphs
British Trotskyist Tony Greenstein lies about Zionism and the Holocaust while praising antisemites and Nazi apologists.
Nigel Savage, Letter: Tony Greenstein [PDF]
“Judeosphere,” Tony Greenstein Considers Anti-Semitism to be a Strategic Inconvenience
Paul Bogdanor, Atzmon Versus Greenstein
Exchange: Greenstein, Stalin, Hitler
Exchange: Tony Greenstein on Mass Murder and the Protocols of the Elders of Zion
Tony Greenstein’s unique approach to fighting antisemitism includes the accusation that “Zionist groups... are seeking to replicate what the Protocols described.”
Other Holocaust Falsifiers
Jacob Robinson, The Arendt Book: A Report on the Evil of Banality [PDF, 1.6 MB]
Michael Ezra, The Eichmann Polemics: Hannah Arendt and Her Critics [PDF]
Hannah Arendt – whose mentor was a fascist collaborator – pretended that Adolf Eichmann’s ideology was Zionism rather than Nazism and blamed his Jewish victims for millions of deaths during the Holocaust. Her infamous book was repeatedly exposed as a litany of falsehoods.
Goal Pinto, The Specialist is Almost Entirely a Perverse Fraud
Anti-Zionist filmmaker Eyal Sivan produced a thoroughly deceitful documentary on the Eichmann trial.
Alvin H. Rosenfeld, The Assault on Holocaust Memory [PDF]
Dave Rich, The Left and the Holocaust
Dave Rich, Holocaust Denial as an Anti-Zionist and Anti-Imperialist Tool For the European Far Left
Michael Ezra, The Abuse of Holocaust Memory: The Far Right, the Far Left and the Middle East
The radical left’s Blood Libels about “Zionist-Nazi collaboration,” “the Holocaust industry,” etc.
Allan J. Lichtman, The Terrible Whys of German History
Richard Breitman, A Nazi Crusade?
The ideological fictions of historian Arno Mayer, who pretended that the Holocaust was an unplanned result of the invasion of the Soviet Union and that most of the victims died from “natural” causes.
Shraga Elam and David Irving
Anti-Zionists “Debate” Hitler’s Guilt
Anti-Zionist Shraga Elam sends a friendly message to Holocaust denier David Irving in which he denies Hitler’s responsibility for Auschwitz. Then he debates the subject with his fellow Israel-haters.
Paul Bogdanor, Letter: David Stannard, Ward Churchill and the Holocaust
Other far-left pseudo-scholars who publish falsehoods about the Holocaust.
The Chomsky Hoax
The Chomsky Hoax
Articles and documents exposing the dishonesty and fanaticism of extreme left-wing propagandist and genocide denier Noam Chomsky.
Paul Bogdanor, The Top 200 Chomsky Lies [PDF] Documentation of 200 egregious lies about communist mass murderers, modern history, the Cold War, the Vietnam War, 9/11, Latin America, the Middle East, the Arab-Israeli conflict, Holocaust denial, etc. Also lists misquotations, numerical distortions and worthless sources used in his writings. (The original 100 lies are also available in Spanish.)
Paul Bogdanor, The Wit and Wisdom of Noam Chomsky Quotations the Chomsky cultists would like you to ignore.
Stefan Kanfer, America’s Dumbest Intellectual An excellent brief introduction to Chomskyism.
J. Bradford DeLong, My Very, Very Allergic Reaction to Noam Chomsky Ridicules Chomsky statements about Bosnia, Holocaust denial and the Khmer Rouge.
Keith Windschuttle, The Hypocrisy of Noam Chomsky An overview of Chomsky’s disgraceful political career.
Oliver Kamm, Chomsky Recollects Chomsky wrote that Americans were no better than Nazis. Then he lied about it.
American Power and the New Mandarins
Arthur Schlesinger, Three Cheers For Professor Chomsky: But Not Just Now [PDF]
Arthur Schlesinger and Noam Chomsky, Exchange: Truman’s Speech and Noam Chomsky [PDF]
Oliver Kamm, Chomsky and the Vietnam War: A Study in Failure
Oliver Kamm, Chomsky and the Vietnam War: A Study in Propaganda
Peace in the Middle East?
Benjamin Kerstein, Review
Political Economy of Human Rights
Stephen J. Morris, Chomsky on US Foreign Policy [PDF]
Paul Bogdanor, Chomsky’s Totalitarian Apologetics
Paul Bogdanor, Chomsky Denies a Genocide
Towards a New Cold War
C. M. Woodhouse, The Anti-American Case [PDF]
Paul Bogdanor, Chomsky’s Protocols
Paul Bogdanor, Manufacturing Distortions
What Uncle Sam Really Wants
J. Bradford DeLong, My Allergic Reaction to Noam Chomsky
Benjamin Kerstein, Review
Powers and Prospects/Class Warfare
Roger Scruton, Rash Thinker Who is in Two Minds
The New Military Humanism
Adrian Hastings, Chomsky and Kosova
A New Generation Draws the Line
Marko Attila Hoare, Nothing is Left
Carlin Romano, Once Again, Chomsky’s on Anti-US Hobbyhorse
Hegemony or Survival
Amir Taheri, Chomsky Identifies “The Evil” That Haunts the World
Jonathan Rauch, Notes From a Gadfly
Nathan Folkert, Chomsky on Violence On Chomsky’s support for totalitarian terror and mass murder.
Barry Loberfeld, The Coercive Anarchism of Noam Chomsky The true nature of Chomsky’s anarchist-communist ideology.
James Ostrowski, Chomsky’s Economics Chomsky wants to abolish the state so that he can impose far more control over the population.
Paul M. Postal, Noam Chomsky and the Quest For Social Justice An academic colleague exposes his manipulative rhetoric about international human rights standards.
Russil Wvong, Chomsky Responds to Criticism of PPS/23 Quote
Russil Wvong, A Response to Chomsky’s Quotation of PPS/23 Chomsky distorts a Cold War document.
Oliver Kamm, Chomsky on Milosevic, Stalin and Germany Chomsky revives discredited myths about the 1952 Stalin Note on the status of Germany.
Tom Nichols, Re: Chomsky: A Principled Dissenter A Cold War historian exposes Chomsky’s falsification of the history of the arms race.
Noam Chomsky and Edward S. Herman, Handling Dissidents: The “Free-World Model” [PDF]
Joshua Muravchik, Latin American and Soviet Repression [PDF] Chomsky tries to belittle Soviet crimes.
Charles Kalina, Chomsky and Afghanistan Quick rebuttal of Chomsky’s ludicrous false analogy between American intervention in Vietnam and the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.
Noam Chomsky, In North Vietnam Chomsky undertakes a stagemanaged tour of North Vietnam and argues that this hideous dictatorship “offers the peasant hope for the future.”
Vietnam News Agency, Spring Peace Offensive of American People Welcomed [PDF] An official North Vietnamese record of Chomsky’s enthusiastic collaboration with totalitarian tyranny
Tim Starr, Noam Chomsky: Viet Cong Cheerleader Chomsky’s notorious speech glorifying the communist mass murderers in North Vietnam. Chomsky has admitted in print to delivering this speech.
Anders Lewis, Noam Chomsky: Unrepentant Stalinist Debunks the Chomsky propaganda version of the Vietnam War.
Noam Chomsky, Comments on Cambodia [PDF] Chomsky credits the Khmer Rouge dictatorship with saving up to a million lives.
James A. Donald, Chomsky Lies Point-by-point refutation of Chomsky’s infamous genocide denial essay in The Nation.
Noam Chomsky, Letter on Cambodia [PDF]
Leopold Labedz, Chomsky Revisited [PDF] Chomsky suggests that Khmer Rouge atrocities have been inflated by “a factor of 1,000.” He is then taken apart by Labedz in one of the most devastating rebuttals ever written. If you only read one discussion of Chomsky’s political views, make it this one.
Robert Manne, Response to Chomsky [PDF]
West Midlands Anarchists, Noam Chomsky on Cambodia First-rate analyses of Chomsky’s genocide denial.
Sophal Ear, The Standard Total Academic View on Cambodia
Bruce Sharp, Averaging Wrong Answers: Noam Chomsky and the Cambodia Controversy Massively detailed studies of Chomsky’s Khmer Rouge apologetics.
Nathan Folkert, Noam Chomsky on the CIA Demographic Catastrophe Report Chomsky’s falsification of the CIA demographic study of Cambodia.
Noam Chomsky and Charles Burton, Exchange on Cambodia [PDF]
Noam Chomsky and Adam Roberts, Exchange on Cambodia
“Trilateral Chairman,” Noam Chomsky on Cambodia Chomsky’s deceitful efforts to rewrite his record of genocide denial.
Marko Attila Hoare, Chomsky’s Srebrenica Shame - and The Guardian’s Chomsky’s appalling record on the war crimes in Yugoslavia.
Ed Vulliamy et al., Srebrenica: Defending the Truth
Marko Attila Hoare, The Guardian, Noam Chomsky and the Milosevic Lobby Bosnia specialists and genocide survivors denounce Chomsky.
Oliver Kamm et al., Chomsky, The Guardian and Bosnia Newspaper columnists denounce Chomsky.
Oliver Kamm, Chomsky Bamboozles on the Balkans I II III Chomsky falsifies sources to conceal war crimes and concentration camps.
David Watson, Letter to the New Statesman
Roger Lippman, Noam Chomsky on Kosovo Chomsky’s disgraceful apologetics for the crimes of the Milosevic regime.
Paul Bogdanor, The Devil State: Chomsky’s War Against Israel [PDF] Comprehensively refutes Chomsky’s lies about the Arab-Israeli conflict. From Edward Alexander and Paul Bogdanor, eds., The Jewish Divide Over Israel; an abridged version appeared in Peter Collier and David Horowitz, eds., The Anti-Chomsky Reader.
Alan Dershowitz, Chomsky’s Immoral Divestiture Petition
Benjamin Kerstein, Noam Chomsky is an Iconic Mass Murderer... The Chomsky-Dershowitz debates on Israel.
Ali Hussein, Chomsky Needs to Learn a Lot More About Lebanon
David Horowitz and Jacob Laksin, Noam Chomsky’s Love Affair With Nazis
Zachary Hughes, Noam Chomsky’s Support For Hezbollah Chomsky travels to Lebanon and openly embraces the genocidal fanatics of Hezbollah.
Noam Chomsky, Hamas Policies Are More Conducive to a Peaceful Settlement Than Those of the US or Israel Chomsky tells Lebanese viewers that Hamas positions are “preferable to the policies of the United States and Israel,” which are “very similar to those of Hitler.”
Oliver Kamm, Chomsky and Conspiracy Theory
Adriene Sere, The Dance of Deception
“Grasshoppa,” Chomsky Lies (Again)
Alan Dershowitz, Chomsky’s New Blood Libel
Oliver Kamm, Chomsky on Palestine & Israel Representative Chomsky falsehoods exposed.
W. D. Rubinstein, Chomsky and the Neo-Nazis [PDF] Examines Chomsky’s belief that Holocaust denial is not antisemitic and that Holocaust deniers have been maligned. Also notes the parallel between Nazi apologetics and Chomsky’s Khmer Rouge genocide denial.
Pierre Vidal-Naquet, On Faurisson and Chomsky On the notorious Chomsky preface to Faurisson’s book.
Nadine Fresco, The Denial of the Dead: On the Faurisson Affair Detailed analysis of the Faurisson scandal.
Werner Cohn, Partners in Hate: Noam Chomsky and the Holocaust Deniers The definitive work on Chomsky’s neo-Nazi involvements.
Werner Cohn, Chomsky and the French Neo-Nazis: Some Documents Comments on the Guillaume essay below.
Rachel Neuwirth, The Chomsky File The sordid history of Chomsky’s involvement with Jew-hatred, which extends beyond collaboration with Holocaust deniers.
Chomsky’s Jewish Critics
Edward Alexander, The Secret Life of Noam Chomsky [PDF]
Carlos P. Otero, The Attack on Noam Chomsky Was Unjustified [PDF]
Edward A. Stern, Noam Chomsky’s Politics and Albert Einstein’s Violin [PDF]
Noam Chomsky, Chomsky’s Words Stand on Their Own [PDF]
Edward Alexander and Edward A. Stern, Response to Chomsky [PDF] Illuminating debate on Chomsky’s antisemitic connections.
Noam Chomsky and Edward Alexander, Exchange: Holocaust Denial [PDF] Chomsky tries to cover his tracks with a defamatory rant against his chief opponent.
Chomsky’s Nazi Admirers
Pierre Guillaume, A Clarification A French Holocaust denier shows how Chomsky single-handedly saved the denial movement from collapse. He even gave the deniers translation rights for his books! Chomsky assisted in the preparation of this essay. For discussion, see the preceding articles by Cohn.
Institute for Historical Review, “One of the Best Exposés of Zionist Mythology...”
Institute for Historical Review, “Chomsky’s Valuable Insights...” American Holocaust deniers endorse Chomsky’s anti-Israel ravings.
Friends of Oswald Mosley, Noam Chomsky’s Search For the Truth British fascists sing Chomsky’s praises.
Al-Shifa and 9/11
Noam Chomsky, On the Bombings Chomsky equates the 9/11 massacres with the American bombing of a factory in Sudan.
Leo Casey, The Unbearable Whiteness of Chomsky’s Arguments
Noam Chomsky, Reply to Casey
Leo Casey, Let Us Not Inherit This Ill Wind
Noam Chomsky, Second Reply to Casey Exchange on Chomsky’s Sudan allegations. Casey shows that Chomsky’s sources are worthless.
Brian Carnell, Chomsky Needs a Fact-Checker
Brian Carnell, How Many People Died as a Result of US Bombing of Sudan? Chomsky invokes another worthless source and fabricates statements by Human Rights Watch.
Oliver Kamm, Chomsky Redux On Chomsky’s response to the exposure of his fabrications.
War on Terrorism
Noam Chomsky, The New War Against Terror [RealPlayer Video] Lecture to the Technology and Culture Forum at MIT, October 18, 2001, containing his infamous lie that America was inflicting a “silent genocide” on Afghanistan (at 9:20-9:30 and 10:35-11:15 mins.). Chomsky warned that millions would die within the next couple of weeks.
Massive Food Delivery Averts Afghan Famine
Ronald Radosh, The Last Word on the Afghan “Genocide” American intervention prevented famine in Afghanistan.
Brian Carnell, Chomsky Backpedals on Silent Genocide in Afghanistan Chomsky accused the Bush Administration of attempting to murder 3-4 million people in Afghanistan and then denied that he had made the accusation.
Charles Kalina, Re: Drain the Swamp and There Will Be No More Mosquitoes Point-by-point refutation of Chomsky’s post-9/11 sophistries.
Christian Beckner, Chomsky Doesn’t Know His WMDs Chomsky shows that he does not know the difference between radiological and nuclear weapons.
“NeoCenturions,” Chomsky in Dublin
Jacob Laksin, The Ayatollah of Anti-Americanism
Michael Weiss, Fisking Chomsky’s Latest Bilge on Iran
Michael Weiss, Fun With Chomsky’s Latest Hiccup Chomsky’s lies about the Iraq war and the Iranian nuclear crisis.
Chomsky’s Conspiracy Theories
Chomsky Calls US Imperialistic [PDF] Chomsky suggests that America is planning a war against Europe.
Chomsky Misuses Facts [PDF] Chomsky fabricates American plans to exploit the Iranian hostage crisis by building new missile systems and encircling the Indian Ocean.
Chomsky Lectures on US Foreign Policy Chomsky asserts that the Clinton Administration is “the most extreme fundamentalist administration,” but the American population “hasn’t got a clue to what’s going on.”
Faculty Hold Teach-In on Divestment Chomsky claims that America arms and finances Arab suicide bombers.
Interview: An Hour With Noam Chomsky [PDF] Chomsky argues [page 119] that sports, sex and Who Wants to be a Millionaire? are media tools for manipulating the population.
Larissa MacFarquhar, The Devil’s Accountant [Excerpts] Chomsky claims that Pearl Harbor saved millions of lives and that America and Britain used Nazi armies to attack the Soviet Union and prolong the Holocaust.
Bill Frezza, A Lion in Winter Chomsky suggests that America is selling nuclear warheads to the Israeli air force and that the search for a cancer cure is hoax.
Konrad Koerner, The Anatomy of a Revolution in the Social Sciences: Chomsky in 1962 A respected historian of linguistics shows how Chomsky actually achieved academic prominence.
Peter Schweizer, The Branding of the World’s Top Intellectual: Noam Chomsky Alleges that Chomsky made millions of dollars from the political system he despises.
Samuel Korb, Chomsky’s Bullying Eye-witness account of bullying by Chomsky.
Larissa MacFarquhar, The Devil’s Accountant [Excerpts] More examples of bullying by Chomsky.
Chicago Tribune journalist/propagandist Manya Brachear gives space to Hamas-linked
Chicago Tribune journalist/propagandist Manya Brachear gives space to Hamas-linked CAIR to smear freedom fighters
Brave Ahmed Rehab
Dhimmi pseudojournalistic pro-Islamic supremacist propagandist Manya Brachear of the Chicago Tribune's Seeker blog has turned over her column today to Brave Ahmed Rehab, the enemy of the freedom of speech who quailed and ran when offered a chance to debate with me at the ALA last summer, of Hamas-linked Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR).
Rehab, CAIR's Chicago top dog, spends the column smearing as bigots and racists the 70% of Americans who oppose the Ground Zero mega-mosque -- and of course in the process defames Pamela Geller and me as the leaders of the movement. Rehab never explains, of course, why Muslims worldwide won't see this as a triumphal mosque built on a site of conquest, like the Dome of the Rock or the Umayyad Mosque. He fills his column with irrelevancies about strip clubs in the Ground Zero area, despite the fact that strippers didn't take down the Twin Towers. He whines about collective guilt being applied to Muslims, despite the fact that the Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf has not shown himself to be moderate in any genuine sense, but is, rather, an open proponent of Sharia, which denies equality of rights to women and non-Muslims and restricts the freedom of speech (as he has said would be a good idea in his book What's Right with Islam, and refuses to denounce Hamas.
But then again, so does CAIR. Brachear gave her column over to this CAIR thug despite the fact that CAIR operatives have repeatedly refused to denounce Hamas and Hizballah as terrorist groups. She appears unfazed by the fact that CAIR is an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas terror funding case. Its Several of its former officials have been convicted of various crimes related to jihad terror. Two of its other officials have made Islamic supremacist statements. CAIR also was involved in the Flying Imams' intimidation suit against the passengers who reported their suspicious behavior.
Who is next week's guest columnist, Ms. Brachear? David Duke?
Immanuel Kant vs. Israel
Immanuel Kant vs. Israel
by Daniel Pipes
National Review Online
As someone who deeply appreciates what Western civilization, for all its faults, has achieved, I puzzle over the hostility many Westerners harbor toward their way of life. If democracy, free markets, and the rule of law have created an unprecedented stability, affluence, and decency; how come so many beneficiaries, fail to see this?
Why, for example, does the United States, which has done so much for human welfare, inspire such hostility? And tiny Israel, the symbol of rejuvenation for a perpetually oppressed people – why does it engender such passionate hatred that otherwise decent people desire to eliminate this state?
Yoram Hazony of the Shalem Center in Jerusalem offers an explanation for this antagonism in a profound and implication-rich essay, "Israel Through European Eyes."
He begins with the notion of "paradigm shift" developed by Thomas Kuhn in his 1962 study, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. This influential concept holds that scientists see their subject from within a specific framework, a "paradigm." Paradigms are frameworks that underpin an understanding of reality. Facts that do not fit the paradigm are overlooked or dismissed. Kuhn reviews the history of science and shows how, in a series of scientific revolutions, paradigms shifted, as from Aristotelian to Newtonian to Einsteinian physics.
Paradigms also frame politics and Hazony applies this theory to Israel's delegitimization in the West. Israel's standing has deteriorated for decades, he argues, "not because of this or that set of facts, but because the paradigm through which educated Westerners are looking at Israel has shifted." Responding to the vilification of Israel by offering corrective facts – about Israel's military morality or its medical breakthroughs – "won't have any real impact on the overall trajectory of Israel's standing among educated people in the West." Instead, the latest paradigm must be recognized and fought.
The fading paradigm sees nation-states as legitimate and positive, a means of protecting peoples and allowing them to flourish. The treaty of Westphalia (1648) was the key moment in which the sovereignty of nations was recognized. John Stuart Mill and Woodrow Wilson endowed the nation-state ideal with global reach.
That paradigm, however, "has pretty much collapsed," Hazony asserts. The nation-state no longer appeals; many intellectuals and political figures in Europe see it "as a source of incalculable evil," a view that is fast spreading.
The new paradigm, based ultimately on Immanuel Kant's 1795 treatise Perpetual Peace, advocates the abolition of nation-states and the establishment of international government. Supra-national institutions such as the United Nations and the European Union represent its ideals and models.
Jews and the Holocaust play a strangely central role in the paradigm shift from nation-state to multinational state. The millennial persecution of Jews, culminating in the Nazi genocide, endowed Israel with special purpose and legitimacy according to the old paradigm. From the perspective of the new paradigm, however, the Holocaust represents the excesses of a nation-state, the German one, gone mad.
Under the old nation-state paradigm, the lesson of Auschwitz was "Never again," meaning that a strong Israel was needed to protect Jews. The new paradigm leads to a very different "Never again," one which insists that no government should have the means potentially to replicate the Nazi outrages. According to it, Israel isn't the answer to Auschwitz. The European Union is. That the old-style "Never again" inspires Israelis to pursue the Western world's most unabashed policy of self-defense makes their actions particularly appalling to New Paradigmers.
Need one point out the error of ascribing Nazi outrages to the nation-state? The Nazis wanted to eliminate nation-states. No less than Kant, they dreamed of a universal state,. New Paradigmers mangle history.
Israelis themselves are not immune to the new paradigm, as the case of Avraham Burg suggests. A former speaker of Israel's parliament and candidate for prime minister, he switched paradigms and wrote a book on the legacy of the Holocaust that compares Israel to Nazi Germany. He now wants Israelis to give up on Israel as defender of the Jewish people. No one, Burg's sad example suggests, is immune from the new paradigm disease.
Hazony's essay does not offer policy responses but in a letter to me he sketched three areas to address: building awareness of the new paradigm's existence, finding anomalies to invalidate it, and revitalizing the old paradigm by bringing it up to date.
His insights are profound and his counsel timely.
Aug. 17, 2010 update: (1) I have gnawed away at the mystery of the Left over the past decade, writing on such varied topics as structural differences between the United States and Europe, poor Atlantic relations, opposed European and American "super-systems," the intensity of European guilt, the fear of a mythological "Empire," the mind-bending phenomenon of liberal fascism, the infatuation with international institutions, the legacy of World War I, the impact of President Kennedy's assassination, and the bias of university press publications. I have also published a small avalanche of analyses about the Left's soft spot for Islamism.(2) Note that the new paradigm applies exclusively to Western states. Syria and Iran, to take prominent examples, get a free pass; it's quite fine for them to pursue national interests in as bellicose a fashion as possible, without invoking the Left's wrath.
As election season looms, the New York Times emerges as a shameless shill for Democra
As election season looms, the New York Times emerges as a shameless shill for Democrats.
by Jacob Laksin
The midterm elections are still months away, but the New York Times is in full campaign mode.
One of the outstanding questions of the 2010 political season is whether Tea Party candidates can translate their grassroots appeal into Election Day success. But that’s not the kind of question that seems to inform the Times’ slanted coverage of Tea Party candidates, whom the paper is prepared to write off as a lost cause.
A particularly glaring example of the Times’ penchant for dumping on Tea Party candidates was its “reporting” – the term must be used loosely – this week on Sharron Angle, the Tea Party favorite seeking to oust Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid in Nevada. Polls actually show Angle in a statistical dead heat with the embattled Reid – some surveys even show Angle up by a few percentage points – but one would scarcely guess it from the Times’ coverage, where the Angle campaign is cast as a scrambling wreck-in-progress and Angle herself is dismissed as a gaff-prone political novice who has ruined her chances to win with a series of ill-judged and extreme comments.
To be sure, Angle, who went from relative unknown to winning the Republican nomination in the span of just three months, is a newcomer on the big political stage, with all the attendant turbulence of her rapid ascent. But the image of Angle as an incompetent who risks throwing away a close race is singularly misleading. To make that case, the Times had to rely solely on sources with an anti-Angle ax to grind. Among those quoted in the Times’ story were Danny Tarkanian, a Republican who lost to Angle in the primary; Jon Ralston, a political columnist for the Las Vegas Sun who has called Angle’s campaign “nothing short of a disaster”; and Harry Reid himself. Not one of these sources, it goes nearly without saying, could be considered an objective observer of Angle’s campaign.
Even discounting the transparent biases of the Times’ sources, all of the charges leveled against Angle – from her alleged shambles of a campaign to her tendency to make alienating comments – can be directed with equal or greater justice at Harry Reid. It was only last week, for instance, that Reid professed his astonishment that “anyone of Hispanic heritage could be a Republican,” a more than slightly offensive statement that would have come as a surprise to Hispanic Republicans like Brian Sandoval, who just happens to lead Reid’s son Rory in Nevada’s gubernatorial race. Even that was mild in comparison with Reid’s dubious 2007 insight, later proven embarrassingly premature, that the Iraq war was “lost.”
Yet comparing campaign minutia misses the more significant context in which the Nevada race is taking place – and which the Times seems determined to ignore. Political innocence may explain some of the difficulties of the Angle campaign, but it is no excuse for the four-term incumbent Reid. The mere fact that a Democratic veteran like Reid is tied or even trailing a political newcomer like Angle is a devastating indictment of both Reid himself and the national Democratic leadership in Congress, which on everything from health care reform to the $862 billion economic stimulus package presided over one of the most unpopular legislative programs in recent history. By any reasonable standard, it is Reid, not Angle, that is facing the real political crisis.
What Reid has going for him, of course, is that he is a Democrat. And in a year in which Democratic incumbents are an endangered species, the Times is plainly its doing part to keep the current liberal majority in power. Compare the sorry treatment that the Times’ Magazine accorded Angle’s campaign with its preposterously puffed-up profile just a few days later of Democrat Joe Sestak, who not coincidentally is trailing another Tea Party-connected candidate, Pat Toomey, in the Pennsylvania Senate race.
A conventional left-liberal, Sestak curiously emerges from the Times profile as a study in political independence – an ideological non-conformist who finds himself at odds with the Democratic leadership. “Culturally, he remains an alien to the party,” reporter Michael Sokolove writes. In truth, Sestak has departed from the Democratic agenda in only one way: He thinks that the Democrats have not squandered enough taxpayer money in the last two years, and urges them to spend another $200 billion for a new round of economic “stimulus.” The idea that Sestak is in any way “alien” to his party is absurd. He wants the Democrats not only to press on with their radical legislative agenda, but to make it even more ambitious going forward.
With the Times busily gushing over Sestak’s manufactured maverick-streak, it has been left to conservative bloggers to uncover the kind of incriminating details that the paper works overtime to uncover about Tea Party candidates. That includes examining his connections to radical groups like Citizens for Global Solutions and the Council on American-Islamic Relations. As far as the Times is concerned, however, such news is not fit to print.
More than an abdication of responsible journalism, the Times’ slavishly pro-Democratic election coverage is also a disservice to its readers. Bolstered by a popular backlash against the Democrats’ legislative overreach, Republicans that once would have been mere sacrificial lambs are now formidable challengers to Democratic incumbents in heavily Democratic states. The political tectonic plates are shifting. But if change does come to Washington this November, the Times’ readers will never have seen it coming.