A new book out by David Horowitz sheds light on the bizarre phenomenon that I for one cannot understand of leftist who claim to care about women’s rights, gay rights, etc. actually supporting Islamofascism!
frontpagemag.com/Articles/Re … p?ID=15316
[quote]Unholy Alliance touches on a truly bizarre contemporary phenomenon: the Left
Read your outtakes above. Read the review you pointed to. Didn’t see any quotes, any evidence supporting the accusation that the Left supports or condones Islamic terrorism.
This barrage of Fredgrams is starting to sound just a bit like communiques from the Wonderland high command itself:
“Demanding evidence to support accusations will not be tolerated in Wonderland because the facts speak for themselves.”
By order of Her Majesty, The Queen of Hearts
Well, fred, it is so good to see that you pick an impartial website like FrontPage magazine to show how confused and evil those on the left are. 
Horowitz has changed sides but I wish I could Horowitz had chosen to give some evidence to back up such claims that he made like
“…they (the Left) may not like the Islamic fascists (although many of them actually do)…”
“Up to the fall of the Berlin Wall they(the Left) were prepared to defend it (socialism) against the real villain, the United States. They were anti-anti-Communists; in other words, they knew who the enemy was, and it was us.).”
“…the left is really a crypto-religion; it is a collective delusion. It is based on the inability of its adherents to come to terms with the real world, the actually existing world, with their own mortality, with human limits…”
There is no need to go on. Horowitz has chosen to attack those on the Left while ignoring what the Right has done and continues to do. Good for him but too bad he is incapable of seeing the warmongering, lying, and other traits that those on the the other side embrace so readily.
All right Cable Guy and Spook:
Why don’t you tell me what the Left stands for today. I will be waiting…
It’s your buck. You keep it.
Besides, as a paleo-American* I’m probably not the best apologist for the Left in its defense against trumped up charges.
*paleo-America: pre Bush Administration America in which persons were assumed to be innocent until proven guilty.
So much for Front Page’s false charges against the Left. What a resounding din of leftist positions. Why I don’t believe I even heard one and thanks I will keep that buck. Now, run along to the Iraq threads Spook. Or should I call you Cassandra. Woe Weep Repent. The end is nie. Did you see that awful movie Paris of Troy or something like that. I shall think of you ever as a soap opera styled Cassandra warning and warning but no one will listen. WHY WON’T ANYONE LISTEN TO YOU SPOOK? Disaster. Wretched Quagmire. Oh dagger where is thy bite? Where is thy point? What the hell is yours spook? hahahaha
We’re not talking false charges here, Fred. It’s clear what the Left is being accused of.
We’re talking evidence. You remember the pre-Guantanamo Gulag concept of ‘evidence’, don’t you? That was the quaint, paleo-American notion that you actually had to prove your accusations before you jailed or executed someone.
Look it up, if you don’t remember. It’s in the history books.
Be sure and look up the sections on Soviet-era kangaroo courts too. That’s one of the things we paleo-Americans particularly hated about the commies – their secret ‘evidence’ and secret ‘witnesses’ and closed ‘trials.’
Are you suggesting spook that the left has set up a kangaroo court to judge Bush and America? Well, I’ll be damned. We finally agree on something. Now, if you could just get off the cassandra stuff. You are starting to sound like that other poster, er you know the one that also sounds like that when they are talking about stuff because other people who also post are having the same kind of impression about that too know what I mean?
There is undeniably a streak of latent Stalinism in the Left. Unfortunately neoconservatives, formerly of the Left, have transferred that condition to their new host, the Republican Party.
A hilarious piss take out of one of the Left’s most revered icons. Read on…
Jacques Derrida, the famous French philosopher, is
WASHINGTON
Who was responsible for releasing these 7 terrorists? Mindless lefties or incompetent underfunded Rumsfeld stooges?
And what about the 15,000 dead Iraqi civilians? Who will take responsiblility for them? Bush? Hmmmm? Didn’t think so. Contemptible!
So,
Let’s see if I have this… after being released from the American gulag where they’d been detained for months at a time and subjected to abuse, refused the right to see counsel and denied access to ther families, these seven men engaged in terrorist activity against America?
And, they did this even after signing a paper promising not to?
My God!
Could this mean that the Bush administration teams counter-terrorism efforts might actually be promoting terrrorism or sowing more seeds of hatred towards the US???
Could it mean that engaging in an illegal war and detaining people with no regard to their human rights might set a precedent for disregarding legal documents???
What a concept!
I have seen the light FS!
hahaha very funny
The point, however, has been that these people’s rights must be respected even though they are not US citizens and the circumstances in which they have been captured have obviously been beyond doubt. They were fighting out of uniform against US forces. With the pressure to release them because they have not been able to see their lawyers etc. we see what the final results often end up to be and there are few on my side of the political fence arguing that these people’s rights should be respected and that they should be released. I think that they should have been given a bullet to the back of the head where we found them (fighting against us) in Afghanistan and elsewhere.
[quote]WASHINGTON
Surely you did not mean to suggest that these events did not occur? Or did you just mean that a truly patriotic American would not mention such events in a history of America?
That’s a phenomenon I have seen too little of to feel in need of an explanation. On the other hand, riches await the writer who can penetrate the mystery of what gay-bashing, male chauvinist right-wingers dislike about radical Islamic terrorists.
I put it down to competitiveness.
No of course not. No one said those events did not happen. The point is that they were solved by the US. We stopped slavery. Other nations were busy enslaving away. Also, there is some question about the “genocide” of the Indians. Why is it that these are so awful but the German, Austrian and Russian conquest of Poland is just another footnote in history? Why is it that the Iroquois nation can conquer its surrounding neighbors but ONLY when White Americans slaughter or fight Indians then it is worthy of outrage. I think the point the author is making is the highly selective nature of this outrage. Given that slavery and “genocide” of the Indians occurred in the past and has been addressed to a large extent, why is this more important than the slavery that is going on TODAY. Why is it that small infractions of women’s rights (real or perceived) or for gays is lambasted to the high heavens but nary a word is said about the Taliban which used to push over walls on people? That is the author’s point and one that I would strongly subsribe to. If people CLAIM to care about these issues, which world actor is best placed, best suited, and best able to deal with these problems if not the US? Then, why berate the one actor that can effect so much good (return of 3.5 million refugees to Afghanistan and 1 to 1.5 million Iraqis both internally and externally) and remain silent about Syria, Iran, Iraq, etc. etc. The worst offenders should receive the worst opprorbrium, no?
If I were to criticize the US today, I might criticize the death penalty but if the death penalty why not abortion? That confuses me. One is innocent but unborn life, the other is guilty and has taken the lives of others and has had the benefit of an extensive appeals and judicial process. Why not criticize rape in US prisons? Why not condemn teacher’s unions which stand in the way of our children getting a decent education because they are more worried about tenure and benefits. There is plenty to target but the US government and American society is not the one where the attention should be pointed. The fact that it is just goes to show how morally equivalent and confused as well as shallow the true convictions of these so-called adherents truly are. That is the point that the author is trying to make. I agree.
Nevermind that it was stopped through a little Civil War…
Congratualtions!!!
Pity about the Southern half of the solution disagreeing.
Now, before namastestore gets her knickers in a twist, this was in no way supposed to read as me saying “too bad slavery stopped”. It was to point out that taking credit for “stopping slavery” with no regard to the historical period in question is ridiculous.
Oh, and Fred, please ask Leonard Pelletier about how the genocide of Native Americans was stopped so long ago. Wounded Knee ring a bell?
The point is that they were solved by the US. We stopped slavery. Other nations were busy enslaving away. ]
Actually the British stopped slavery and outlawed the transport and trafficking of African slaves on the Atlantic and the Caribbean by having the Royal Navy enforce a ban on it. Which is why slavery lasted longer in the U.S. south than it did in colonies like Jamaica, and why it never existed at all in colonies like Canada and Australia.
A moot point, but, if the Confederates had one the Civil War, how long would slavery have gone on in the U.S.?