|Illiterate and stupid Mulsim kiddie-thugs are takin' over the 'hood. Sex, drugs, and rock-n-roll have given way to Allah, shahadah, death to the Jews. Make haj not peace. Long gone are are the Hitler Youth, and following in their wake, the Muslim Martyrs. It's the latest fad. And old hippies are falling all over themselves to climb onto the parade float to boogie with the kidddies. Ah, to be hip again. To be cool.|
Well, no, it's not cool. It's no more cool for middle-class pseudo-intellectuals to play with Muslim terrorist teenagers than it is for the impotent homosexuals to leer at children around the public swimming pool. Kids end up abused, twisted, and murdered when we don't put an immediate stop to it. It doesn't matter what the excuses are from those who set up the scene: that it's educational for kids, for their own benefit, good training for the future in a hard world, or that the perverts simply get their own sick kicks from it.
The Left is sick. The Left is perverted. We sit on our hands wondering what's wrong, not really asking out loud but wondering, and thinking that it's us, in spite of what we see daily. We might be the sick and perverted who are innately racist and hateful, aggressive and brutal, killing children in Asia, polluting the Earth, destroying the whole world. That's what we hear all day, what we read, what we gather from television and radio. We must be wrong to live as we do. If we're not going to actually change our ways, we must at least make the right sounds in support of our guilt, we have to at least apologize for our evil behaviour and claim it's not us but the Right-wing religious bigots in Washingtom who do this in spite of us. Or is it a CIA plot? No, it's the Jews. It's the oil companies. Whoever it is to blame for the world hating us, it's not our fault, it's the fault of someone else, and here's support to prove it. I'll buy you button, your bumper-sticker, your newspaper, a few bucks here and there and a march against the war if my friends are going too. It's a blind eye when the kids go missing in the bushes with a pervert. It's "Oh my God, how could it have happened?" It is a sickness of the mind.
It's the fault of the Right. They're no better than the fascist Muslims. If it weren't for them stirring up trouble this never would have happened. The Right-wingers are just as bad. They're religious fanatics too. Look at the death-toll in the world. It's all their fault. We created the Taliban. We supported Saddam. We invaded Panama. We took Manhattan from the Natives. It's no wonder the world hates us. Them blowing up buses full of children is morally equivalent to us dropping bombs on them. their religious fanaticism is the same as our Christian war-mopngers, except that we are worse because we have superior weapons, and the 'others' have to resist us by whatever crude means they can, like small-time terrorism. It's really us at fault. We're the ones to blame for all this.
Below we have three views of the fascist Left alliance with fascist Islam. Our defintion of fascism is perhaps broader than the dictionary definition, but it is accurate and responsible. The articles below further elucidate the position that the Left is fascist and collaborating with Islamic fascism. Perversion of anything progressive, that's the state of our Left tradition today. Hide your children.
Europe's Islamist Alliance
Jerusalem Post | July 12, 2004
When the US-led coalition invaded Iraq in March 2003, few would have imagined that the move might lead to the formation of an alliance between the radical Left and hard-line Islamists in Western Europe. But this is precisely what happened.
In this month's election for a new European Parliament, voters in several European Union countries, notably France and Britain, are offered common lists of Islamist and leftist candidates, often hidden under bland labels.
Europe's moribund extreme Left has found a new lease on life thanks to hundreds of young Muslim militants recruited from the poor suburbs of Paris and the Islamic ghettos of northern England.
The Islamist groups, for their part, are learning many tricks from the Left about how to exploit the inevitable weaknesses of an open society.
In Britain, the new Marxist-Islamist alliance is the offspring of the so-called anti-war coalition set up two years ago to prevent the liberation of Iraq. The coalition has a steering committee of 33 members. Of these, 18 come from various hard Left groups: communists, Trotskyites, Maoists, and Castroists. Three others belong to the radical wing of the Labor party. There are also eight radical Islamists. The remaining four are leftist ecologists known as Watermelons (Green outside, red inside). The chairman of the coalition is one Andrew Murray, a former employee of the Soviet Novosty Agency and leader of the British Communist Party. Co-chair is Muhammad Asalm Ijaz of the London Council of Mosques.
A prominent member is George Galloway, recently excluded from the Labor party, who is under investigation for the illegal receipt of funds from Saddam Hussein. Galloway heads a list of candidates backed by several radical leftist groups, notably The British Socialist Workers Party (SWP), as well as the Muslim Association of Britain, the British branch of the Muslim Brotherhood, and a dozen Palestinian groups financed by Yasser Arafat.
The Palestinian checkered headgear, worn by the leftists as a cache-col, has become the symbol of this left-Islamist alliance.
The New Statesman, the organ of the British moderate Left, calls the new Islamist-Marxist alliance "Saddam's Own Party." The label is not fanciful. Many of the groups involved in the alliance had been financed for years by Saddam through his so-called Cultural Relations Office in London.
IN FRANCE the radical Left alliance of Revolutionary Communist League (LCR) and Workers' Struggle (LO) groups counts on Islamist militants to help it win seats in the European Parliament.
Arlette Laguillere, the pasionaria of the Workers' Struggle, claims that "the struggle for Palestine" is now an integral part of the "global proletarian revolution."
Similar Marxist-Islamist alliances have been formed in Belgium and Germany, where the Muslim Brotherhood itself has been taken over by radicals sympathetic to al-Qaida.
Talks are underway for holding a pan-European conference next year to give the Marxist-Islamist alliance permanent organizational structures.
The European Marxist-Islamist coalition does not offer a coherent political platform. Its ideology is built around three themes: hatred of the United States, the dream of wiping Israel off the map, and the hoped-for collapse of the global economic system.
Europe's hard Left sees Muslims as the new under-class in the continent.
"Are these not the new slaves?" asks Olivier Besanconneau, leader of the French Trotskyites. "Is it not natural that they should unite with the working class to destroy the capitalist system?"
The idea of an alliance with Islamists has even seduced the more traditional French Communist Party (PCF), which commissioned a study of the possibilities of electoral alliances with Muslim organizations.
The Islamists, for their part, are attracted to the European hard Left because of its professed hatred of the United States and Israel.
"We say to anyone who hates the Americans and wants to throw the Jews out of Palestine: ahlan wa sahlan (welcome)," quipped Abu-Hamza al-Masri, the British Islamist firebrand who is awaiting extradition to the US on various criminal charges. "The Prophet teaches that we could ally ourselves even with the atheists if it helps us destroy [the] enemy."
The first to advocate a leftist-Islamist alliance against Western democracies was Ayman Al Zawahiri, al-Qaida's #2. In a message to al-Qaida sympathizers in Britain in August 2002, he urged them to seek allies among "any movement that opposes America, even atheists."
The idea has received support from Ilich Ramirez Sanchez, the Venezuelan terrorist known as Carlos the Jackal. In his book Revolutionary Islam, published in Paris last year, Carlos, who says he has converted to Islam, claims he has advised Osama bin Laden, the al-Qaida leader, to forge an alliance with "all guerrilla, terrorist, and other revolutionary groups throughout the world, regardless of their religious or ideological beliefs."
Carlos says Islam is the only force capable of persuading large numbers of people to become "volunteers" for suicide attacks against the US. "Only a coalition of Marxists and Islamists can destroy the US," he says.
Europe must wake up to the dangers that this new version of the red-and-black alliance poses to its democracy, indeed to its political and social peace.
To criticize the fascism of the Left is to rouse to fury the counter-revolutionaries and reactionaries and the born-again conformists who know nothing but the status quo regardless of its status, regardless of its quo. The uncritical, the intellectually incapable, the our-right vicious among us jump through hoops of the most outrageous double-speak to make 2 plus 2 equal five, and they will believe it. For the majority of people anywhere they will believe what others believe, and that belief comes from the intellectuals of our time, the pseudo-intellectuals of the Left, our perverted intelligensia.
Yes, the Right is sickening too. Where would we think people come from who don't recognize evil as such just because it comes from the Right? Smarmy apologetics from the Left, moral equivalnce, pandering, procuring, appeasement, pimping for paedophiles just because "eveyone does it," those people are pure filth. If the Left will not redeem its historical mission to spread the Revolutions of Modernity, if it continues its fascist reaction, we must battle the Left to the death.
We read often letters from those in the middle of this quandry that we must write letters to the editors of newspapers. Yeah, send letters to the Washingtom D.C corphagist club feasting at the feet of fat Muslim multi-millionaires oozing oil out of every pore. Sickening, and yet the Left is worse.
True Left Versus the Lunatic Fringe
|By Norah Vincent|
|Los Angeles Times|
|April 3, 2003|
| Web site: http://www.latimes.com/news |
The left is not dead.
It isn't dying.
It hasn't lost its moral mind.
In fact, after nearly a decade of decline and dissipation, it is finally enjoying a quiet renaissance, though you may not have heard about it above all the shouting from the "Blame America First" brigade, which was born on 9/12 and instantly became the de facto voice of the left.
Since then, its rallying cries have become ever more outrageous and degenerate.
Latest cases in point: During an antiwar teach-in at Columbia University last week, assistant professor Nicholas De Genova told a gathering of students that he hoped the war in Iraq would produce "a million Mogadishus," referring to the 1993 killing and desecration of U.S. troops trapped in Somalia.
In the Boston Globe, James Carroll equated the allied "shock and awe" bombing campaign in Baghdad with 9/11, calling it "terrorism pure and simple."
The hyperbole has boiled over, prompting critics such as Salon columnist Andrew Sullivan to declare: "Once the left starts equating legitimate acts of war ... with the unprovoked terrorist attacks on civilians, it has lost its mind, not to speak of its soul."
But the truth is that a few brilliant voices on the sane left -- most notably writers Christopher Hitchens, Nat Hentoff and Paul Berman -- are spearheading a long-awaited rebirth of the intellectual left. And they have been doing this all along, if anyone cares to follow their admirable lead.
In October, after more than 20 years at the left's house organ, the Nation, Hitchens announced his decision to leave the magazine. "I have come to realize that the magazine itself takes a side ... the amoral side ... in this argument and is becoming the voice and echo chamber of those who truly believe that John Ashcroft is a greater menace than Osama bin Laden," he said.
Since then, Hitchens has made a leftist moral case for the war in Iraq, based largely on his contention that using American military power is legitimate if it ends gross human rights violations like those being committed against Iraqi civilians by Saddam Hussein, a sentiment notably absent from most antiwar rallies.
Berman was quoted in the New York Times as similarly upbraiding the peace movement: "It's something of a scandal in my eyes that hundreds of thousands of people are not marching in support of the oppressed Iraqis."
Berman's book "Terror and Liberalism" advocates aggressive foreign intervention to promote democratic ideals. His thoughts could be a manifesto for the left reborn, a road map for worldwide liberal revolution and the dreamed-of liberation from totalitarianism that communism failed to accomplish.
Meanwhile, in a recent column in the Village Voice, gadfly Hentoff explained why he didn't march against war in Iraq, though he once marched against the Vietnam War.
"If people want to talk about containing Saddam Hussein and don't want to go in forcefully and remove him," Hentoff said, "how do they propose doing something about the horrors he is inflicting on his people?"
Hitchens, Berman and Hentoff are not apostates, though they may be tarred as such by the stultified left.
All three have been tirelessly critical of the Bush administration, especially regarding its heinous abuses of civil liberties in the wake of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
All three stand for the values the left once championed: human rights, liberty, equality, empowering the downtrodden and resistance to abuses of power.
Since 9/11, faithful Muslims have decried terrorists' hijacking of their religion. The true keepers of leftism in the United States might say the same of their movement, whose usurping lunatics have made the left into a human shield for fascism and a mouthpiece for vile anti-American propaganda.
The lunatics may be making headlines, but Berman, Hentoff, Hitchens and other real thinkers are making history.
Norah Vincent is a senior fellow at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies.
Below are excerpts from a socialist website. Even they have better sense than the fascist monsters of the middle-classes of dhimmi Europe and America. Even socialists can see clearly the fascism of the current Left. Seemingly the only ones who cannot see or speak of the fascism that dare not speak its name are the ordinary middle-class members of the West.
Anti-Americanism: The "anti-imperialism" of fools
By David North and David Walsh
22 September 2001
A section of middle class commentators has reacted to the horrific attack on New York City and Washington with cynicism and callousness.
What took place on September 11? A group of individuals apparently inspired by Islamic fundamentalism, one of the most reactionary ideologies on the face of earth, smashed two airplanes into the World Trade Center and a third into the Pentagon, while a fourth hijacked plane crashed in western Pennsylvania. The result of this carnage was the death of more than 6,000 human beings, the overwhelming majority of them civilians, representing the greatest loss of life in a single day on American soil since the Civil War.
This was a heinous political crime whose predictable outcome has been to strengthen the capitalist state, fan the flames of right-wing chauvinism and clear the way for US military intervention in Central Asia.
The socialist future of mankind depends upon the awakening of the most humane and generous instincts of the working people of the world. What happened on September 11—the awful deaths of thousands of innocent people, among them office workers, firemen, janitors, and business people—profoundly offends those instincts.
In our first statement on the tragedy [The political roots of the terror attack on New York and Washington] the World Socialist Web Site initiated an analysis of the event's deep political roots. Our abhorrence of the terror attack does not signify any lessening of opposition to the US government, or any intention to absolve American officials of their responsibility for the building up of the Islamic fundamentalist forces. Having said that, however, the reprehensible response of certain petty bourgeois opinion makers to the event underscores the gulf that divides socialist opposition to imperialism from vulgar anti-Americanism.
A case in point is an article that appeared in the Guardian, the British daily newspaper, on September 18, authored by Charlotte Raven, a former member of the Militant Tendency, editor of the now-defunct Modern Review and currently a semi-celebrity and professional cynic. The piece is headlined, "A bully with a bloody nose is still a bully," the bully in question being the US. In the first place, the September 11 tragedy was not "a bloody nose," it was a catastrophe. Thousands of people were incinerated instantly when the airplanes hit the buildings, thousands more died when tons of rubble collapsed on them. Anyone who was emotionally unaffected by the terror and suffering experienced by tens of thousands as a result of this attack has no right to call himself or herself a socialist.
Raven writes: "It is perfectly possible to condemn the terrorist action and dislike the US just as much as you did before the WTC went down. Many will have woken up on Wednesday with that combination of emotions... America is the same country it was before September 11. If you didn't like it then, there's no reason why you should have to pretend to now." Raven's references to "the US," full stop, is no slip of the pen. It is repeated throughout the article. She never once uses the phrase "the US government" or "the US ruling elite", or an equivalent. Using nationality as an epithet is always reactionary. Confronted with the most monstrous government in history, Hitler's Nazi regime, socialists never descended to referring with contempt to "Germany" or "the Germans."
To present "the US" as some predatory imperialist monolith, as Raven and others do, can only confuse and disorient. It not only serves as a barrier to genuine internationalism, it overlooks the contradictory character of American history and society. What does it mean to "dislike the US"? What sort of social element speaks like this? The United States is a complex entity, with a complex history, elements of which are distinctly ignoble, elements of which are deeply noble. The US has passed through two revolutions—the American Revolution and the Civil War—the mass battles of the Depression and the struggle for Civil Rights. The contradiction between the democratic ideals and revolutionary principles on which the nation was founded and its social and political realities has always been the starting point of the struggle for socialism in the United States.
The US was, if one considers the relationship between theory and politics, the product of the great Enlightenment. It established political principles, embodied in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, rather than religion or ethnicity, as the basis of national identity. This origin of the nation in the struggle for abstract ideals—democracy, republicanism—reverberated across the globe. The American Revolution played no small role in inspiring the events that transformed France a decade later.
Even after 200 years, the United States is still fighting through the political and historical implications of its own founding principles. The American population, polyglot and highly diverse, is obsessed with ideological problems, although its approach is often maddeningly pragmatic. As the popular response to the Bush hijacking of the 2000 election demonstrated, there remains a deep commitment to elementary democratic principles. A low level of class consciousness and the failure of masses of Americans to generalize from their experiences, however, provides the ruling elite the opportunity to play on precisely these democratic notions in order to blind layers of the population temporarily as to the true nature of its plans. For Bush and his ilk "defending freedom and democracy" is merely a code phrase for the right of the American elite to have its way around the world. To the ordinary American citizen, these words mean something quite different. The sinister reality of the US government's new "war against terrorism," with its grandiose aim of reorganizing an entire region of the world in line with American geopolitical interests, will make its way into popular consciousness providing the necessary work is conducted by socialist internationalists.
In many ways all the vast problems in the struggle for socialism find their most complex expression in America. How could that not be the case? If one cannot find points of departure for a higher form of social organization in the US, in what corner of the globe are they to be found?
America is, at once, the most advanced and the most backward of societies. Its culture attracts and repels, but always fascinates.... The US has produced Franklin, Washington, Jefferson and Lincoln, as well as extraordinary working class and socialist leaders. Its immense contradictions are perhaps exemplified by the figure of Jefferson, the slave-owner who wrote one of the greatest and most sincere hymns to human freedom.
Raven continues, resorting to the terminology of Postmodernist drivel: "When America speaks from its heart, it retreats into a language that none but its true-born citizens can begin to understand. At the root of this is an overwhelming need to control meaning. America can't let the world speak for itself. It was taken unawares last Tuesday and part of the trauma of that event was the shock of being forced to listen to a message that it hadn't had time to translate. The subsequent roar of anger was, amongst other things, the sound of the US struggling to regain the right to control its own narrative."
If Raven is speaking of George W. Bush and other servants of American imperial interests, then the first sentence has no meaning. Such people clearly don't speak from the heart on this or any other occasion; they are in the business of lying and deceiving. But pardon us for pointing out that, in fact, when "America," in the form of its greatest political and cultural representatives, has spoken "from its heart," millions around the world have listened and understood, beginning in the aftermath of July 4, 1776. The most advanced British workers certainly paid attention to the issuing of the Emancipation Proclamation on January 1, 1863. One could mention the appeals to the international working class on behalf of Sacco and Vanzetti and numerous other examples. And such instances, we hazard to predict, will occur in the future too.
One might add that the finest products of American culture have also attracted and moved masses of people around the world, from Poe and Whitman, Melville and Hawthorne, in the 19th century, to Dreiser, Fitzgerald, Richard Wright and others in the 20th. Nor should one entirely forget the influence of American music, popular and otherwise. A few people, one imagines, have heard it speaking from the heart. This to say nothing of contributions with international implications in film, painting, sculpture, dance and architecture. Raven apparently counts upon her readers being so consumed by subjective venom and their own self-importance that they overlook obvious historical and cultural realities.
It has always been an essential task of socialists in the US to awaken the positive and generous instincts that are so deeply embedded in the American population. There are, after all, two Americas, the America of Bush, Clinton and the other scoundrels, and another America, of its working people. Revolutionary internationalists have continuously insisted on this. James P. Cannon, the leader of the American Trotskyists, devoted a speech to this theme in July 1948. Of the "Two Americas" he observed: "One is the America of the imperialists—of the little clique of capitalists, landlords, and militarists who are threatening and terrifying the world. This is the America the people of the world hate and fear. There is the other America—the America of the workers and farmers and the 'little people.' They constitute the great majority of the people. They do the work of the country. They revere its old democratic traditions—its old record of friendship for the people of other lands, in their struggles against Kings and Despots—its generous asylum once freely granted to the oppressed."
All this of course is a closed book to the smug middle class philistine and snob, satisfied to make use of words and phrases that come most easily to hand. Raven's variety of anti-Americanism is no more original than it is insightful. It is available cheaply and in large quantities in middle class circles in Britain, France, Germany and, for that matter, in the United States. It is available, so to speak, "on tap." Such an outlook has the virtue of appearing oppositional, while not committing its adherent to any course of political action that might cause inconvenience. It is a form of pseudo-socialism, the phony "anti-imperialism" of cynics and fools.http://www.wsws.org/
The Left is perverted, and it's murdering its child victims. The Left is filthy. It is fascism. And those who sit back and sip while the perverts do as they will with the kids, they deserve the worst.