MSNBC’s Contessa Brewer ‘Frustrated’ That Times Square Bomber Is a Muslim

MSNBC’s Contessa Brewer ‘Frustrated’ That Times Square Bomber Is a Muslim

MSNBC host Contessa Brewer appeared on the liberal Stephanie Miller radio show on Tuesday and lamented the fact that the person arrested for the attempted Times Square bombing is a Pakistani American. She complained, “I get frustrated…There was part of me that was hoping this was not going to be anybody with ties to any kind of Islamic country.” [Audio available here.]

Bashing Arizona Immigration Law Supporters

Bashing Arizona Immigration Law Supporters

Posted By Mark D. Tooley On May 3, 2010 @ 12:04 am In FrontPage | No Comments

The Religious Left has discerned that Christianity and Judaism demand virtually open borders by the United States, if not by other nations.  So naturally, many liberal church elites have quickly and angrily lashed out at Arizona’s new immigration law, ascribing to its backers the contempt that much of the Religious Left seems itself to have for many average Americans.

Arizona’s Episcopal Bishop Kirk Smith huffily declared:  “Today is a sad day in the struggle to see all God’s people treated in a humane and compassionate manner.”  And he tut-tutted:  “It seems that for now the advocates of fear and hatred have won over those of charity and love. Arizona claims to be a Golden Rule State. We have not lived up to that claim.”

It’s doubtful that the Episcopal Church in Arizona has been very successful in broadening it’s WASPy flock to include many immigrants.  Still, Bishop Kirk presumes to be their spokesman and moral leader on behalf of the Golden Rule:  “We will continue to work as hard as we can to defeat this law and to work toward just and fair laws that protect the rights of all human beings. We all know that our immigration system is broken, but it cannot be fixed by scape-goating the most vulnerable of those among us.”

Not content to defer to the local bishop, the Episcopal Church’s lobby office in Washington, D.C. also irritably chimed in against the Arizona law, bemoaning that the “lack of fair and humane immigration reform opens the door to misguided and divisive state and local attempts to address immigration enforcement.”  Of course, the Episcopal lobbyists want a national amnesty that would override state attempts at immigration enforcement:   “We urge Congress to provide a solution to a broken immigration system that separates families, spreads fear and keeps millions living in the shadows. Every day, members of our congregations see the unacceptable consequences of our broken immigration system.  We urge the Senate and House to enact bipartisan immigration reform that reunites families, protects the rights of all workers, and provides an opportunity for undocumented immigrants to earn legal status.”

Of course, like the rest of the Religious Left, the Episcopal lobbyists simplistically portray their open borders policy as “Christians…[who] are called to embrace the stranger and to find Christ in all who come to us in need.”  And like the Religious Left, they assume that solutions to vast social problems can be solved by sweeping legislation.  “With strong leadership in Congress, we are confident we can solve the broken immigration system.  We encourage members of Congress to join faith leaders to stand up for immigration policies that renew the dignity and human rights of everyone.”

But what if the open borders and amnesty that the Religious Left typically advocates in fact do not “renew the dignity and human rights of everyone” and instead only create more social disruption whose chief victims are ultimately low income native born and immigrants who lack the economic privileges of most Religious Left elites, especially Episcopalians?  In typical fashion, the Religious Left does not ponder unintended consequences and instead assumes that good intentions and political correctness are sufficient.

Evangelical Left Sojourners chief Jim Wallis wants evangelicals to follow the old Religious Left in distilling the Gospel down to the Left’s latest political demands and prejudices. “The law … is a social and racial sin, and should be denounced as such by people of faith and conscience across the nation,” Wallis intoned. “It is not just about Arizona, but about all of us, and about what kind of country we want to be. It is not only mean-spirited — it will be ineffective and will only serve to further divide communities in Arizona, making everyone more fearful and less safe.”

Arizona’s new crack down on illegal immigration may or may not have faults, but will it make lawful Arizonans “less safe?  Security and effective law enforcement are not typical strong emphases for Wallis or the Religious Left generally.  Instead, they often prefer name calling and charges of bigotry. “This legislation feels reactionary and hateful,” claims Church World Service chief John McCullough, who heads the National Council of Churches’ relief arm.  “It is a clear representation of the politics of division and exclusion.”

Even more hyperbolic was National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference chief Samuel Rodriguez, who has also successfully pressed the National Association of Evangelicals to adopt a liberalized immigration agenda.  “Today, Arizona stands as the state with the most xenophobic and nativist laws in the country,” he pronounced, almost as a curse.  “We need a multi-ethnic firewall against the extremists in our nation who desire to separate us rather than bring us together. Shame on you Arizona Republicans and shame on you Senator John McCain for endorsing the legislation.”

Rodriguez claims to represent virtually all Hispanic evangelicals, and naïve Anglo evangelical churchmen obligingly accept his claims, not considering that many Hispanic and other legal immigrants also have concerns about law enforcement, security, and open borders’ impact on their own ability to advance economically.  Instead, the Religious and Evangelical Left idealize immigration as merely a bumper sticker social justice issue dividing forces of light from bigoted forces of darkness.   Contrary to their claims, the Almighty has not directly revealed His preferences for U.S. immigration policy.  But traditional Christian and Jewish moral teachings about human nature and statecraft offer better guidance than the slapdash pseudo-thinking of the Arizona law’s seething religious critics.

Max Baucus on Obamacare’s hidden agenda – redistribution of wealth

Thursday, March 25, 2010
Posted by: Hugh Hewitt at 5:08 PM

Max Baucus is the Chair of the Senate Finance Committee, and the Democrat most responsible fo Obamacare’s final shape other than Nancy Pelosi.

In an unusual speech on the Senate floor moments ago, Max Baucus declares that the “healthcare bill” to be  “an income shift, it is a shift, a leveling to help lower income middle income Americans.”  Baucus continued, “[t]oo often, much of late, the last couple three years the mal-distribution of income in America is gone up way too much, the wealthy are getting way, way too wealthy, and the middle income class is left behind.  Wages have not kept up with increased income of the highest income in America.  This legislation will have the effect of addressing that mal-distribution of income in America.”

Max Baucus on Obamacare’s hidden agenda – redistribution of wealth
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rY4Qbv7gPbo&feature=player_embedded

Baucus’ candor is appreciated, though the fact that he waited until the bill passed to announce the real agenda behind the massive tax hikes isn’t a profile in courage.  And the seniors on fixed income who are about to lose Medicare Advantage would laugh at Baucus’ pseudo-populism.

Posted in Abortion, American Fifth Column, B Hussein Obama, Barack Hussein Obama, Barack Obama, Biden, Bill Ayers, CNN traitors, defeat liberalism, Democrat Communist Party, Democrat corruption, Democrat george soros, democrat half truth, Democrat issues, democrat John McCain, democrat lies, democrat muslim, democrat polls, democrat scandals, Democrat Shadow Government, democrat socialists, democrat spying, DEMOCRATIC CONVENTION, Democratic Corruption, Democratic majority, democratic media, Democratic Party, Democratic socialism, Democratic Socialists of America, Democratic traitors, Democrats & The Left, Democrats and AARP, democrats and acorn, democrats and CNN, Democrats and drilling, Democrats and Earmarking, democrats and global Warming, democrats and illegal immigration, Democrats and labor unions, Democrats and Subprime mortgages, Democrats and talk radio, Democrats and taxes, Democrats and the media, Democrats being stupid, democrats cheating, democrats socialized medicine, Democrats' Nepotism, Dennis Kucinich, Dianne Feinstein, Earmarking, earmarks, Evangelical Left, Fifth Column, Fifth Column Left, get tough on liberal media, get tough on liberals, get tough with democrats, Harry Reid, Healthcare, Hillary Clinton, Hillary Clinton Socialist, Hollywood liberals, Homeland Security, Hussein Obama, Impeach, In The News, Islam, islam fundamentalist, Islam sympathizers, Islamic immigration, Joe Biden, John Kerry, John Murtha, Left wing churches, Left-wing, left-wing ideologues, Leftist Claptrap, leftist fund, Leftist parties, leftist universities, leftist wacko, leftists, leftwing billionaire George Soros, Max Baucus, Nancy Pelosi, National Debt, Nazi Pelosi, Obama, Obama Czars, Obama Jackboots, Obama-Pelosi-Reid, Obamacare, partial birth abortion, Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act, Pelosi Land, Radical Politics, Rahm Emanuel, Saul Alinsky. Leave a Comment »

Election ’08 Backgrounder

  

Financial Crisis | Iraq | Defense | Background & Character | Judges & Courts | Energy

 

FINANCIAL CRISIS

Quick Facts:

  • Democrats created the mortgage crisis by forcing banks to give loans to people who couldn’t afford them.
  • In 2006, McCain sponsored a bill to fix the problems with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  Barney Frank and other Democrats successfully opposed it.
  • Obama was one of the highest recipients of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac donations in Congress.

Related Editorials

 

IRAQ


Quick Facts:

  • When the U.S. was on the verge of losing in Iraq, McCain chose to stand and fight.  Obama chose retreat.
  • Even after the surge succeeded, Obama told ABC’s Terry Moran he would still oppose it if he had the chance to do it all over again.

Related Editorials

 

DEFENSE

Quick Facts:

  • Obama has promised to significantly cut defense spending, including saying “I will slow our development of future combat systems.”
  • John McCain has vowed: “We must continue to deploy a safe and reliable nuclear deterrent, robust missile defenses and superior conventional forces that are capable of defending the United States and our allies.”

Related Editorials

Obama Video: Watch Now

 

 

BACKGROUND & CHARACTER

Quick Facts:

  • Obama voted “present” 135 times as a state senator, and according to David Ignatius of the Washington Post, “gained a reputation for skipping tough votes.”
  • McCain has taken stances unpopular with his own party and/or the public on controversial issues, including immigration, campaign finance reform, judicial nominations, the Iraq War and more.

Related Editorials

 

 

JUDGES & COURTS


Quick Facts:

  • In a 2001 interview, Obama said he regretted that the Supreme Court “didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution.”
  • In the same interview, Obama criticized the Supreme Court because it “never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth and sort of more basic issues of political and economic justice in this society.”
  • Obama has focused on empathy, rather than legal reasoning and restraint, as his basis for appointing judges, saying, “We need somebody who’s got the heart, the empathy…to understand what it’s like to be poor, or African-American, or gay, or disabled, or old.”
  • McCain opposes judicial activism, saying, “my nominees will understand that there are clear limits to the scope of judicial power.”

Related Editorials

Obama 2001 Interview: Listen Now

 

ENERGY


Quick Facts:

  • McCain has proposed building 45 new nuclear plants by 2030 and is in favor of drilling in sectors of the Outer Continental Shelf.
  • Obama has refused to take a stand, saying only “we should explore nuclear power as part of the energy mix” and he will “look at” drilling offshore.

Related Editorials

»
McCain: The Energy Candidate

» McCain On Nukes: Yes We Can
» Breaking The Back Of High Oil

 

Posted in ABC, Abortion, Accountable America, ACLU, ACORN, Ahmadinejad, Al Gore, Alinsky, American Civil Liberties Union, American Fifth Column, American Friends of Peace Now, American values, anti-American, Anti-Semitic, anti-war movement, antisemitism, ANWR, ANWR oil, AP, AP/CNN, Associated Press, Atomic Islam, B Hussein Obama, Barack Hussein Obama, Barack Obama, Barbara Boxer, Barney Frank, Barry Soetoro, Bill Ayers, Bill Clinton, Black Nationalism, border security, CBS, CBS evening news, CBS news, Charlie Rangel, CHAVEZ, Chavez-Castro, Christian Voices, christian vote, Cindy McCain, CNN muslim sympathizers, CNN pro islam, Congress, Credit Crunch, Democrat Communist Party, Democrat corruption, Democrat george soros, democrat half truth, democrat lies, democrat muslim, democrat polls, Democrat Presidential debate, democrat scandals, Democrat Shadow Government, democrat socialists, Democratic Corruption, Democratic majority, democratic morals, Democratic socialism, Democratic Socialists of America, Democratic traitors, Democrats and drilling, Democrats and Earmarking, democrats and global Warming, democrats and illegal immigration, Democrats and Subprime mortgages, Democrats and talk radio, Earmarking, earmarks, Fairness Doctrine, Fannie Mae, Fatah, Freddie Mac, free speech, George Bush, George Soros, GOP, GOP leadership, Harry Reid, Hillary Clinton, Hollywood liberals, Howard Dean, Hugo Chavez, human trafficking, Hussein Obama, Iran, Iran revolt, Iran threat, iraq, Iraq jihadists, Iraq Oil, Iraq surge, Iraq War, Islam, islam fundamentalist, Islam sympathizers, Islamic Fifth Column, Islamic immigration, Israel, Israel Defense Forces, Israeli Jets, Jeremiah Wright, Jimmy Carter, Joe Biden, Joe Lieberman, Joe the Plumber, John Conyers, John Kerry, John McCain, John Murtha, Katie Couric, Keith Ellison, left-wing hatred for George W. Bush, left-wing ideologues, Leftist Claptrap, Liberal Churches, liberal jihad, liberal media, McCain, McCain Palin, Mexican migrants, Michelle Obama, middle east, Middle East War, Middle Eastern affairs, Nancy Pelosi, nation of islam, Nazi Pelosi, NY Times, Obama, Obama Jackboots, Obama Tax Plan, Sarah Palin. Leave a Comment »

Top Ten Skeletons in the Left’s Closet

Top Ten Skeletons in the Left’s Closet

By Daniel J. Flynn
FrontPageMagazine.com | 5/16/2008

When the Left writes its own history, the past gets rewritten to suit the needs of the present. This is why I wrote A Conservative History of the American Left, to conserve not only fascinating figures now forgotten but to retrieve from the memory hole all that the Left has tossed down it. What is the history of the American Left that leftists want you to forget?

10. Ayatollah Khomeini, Leftist Hero

Reflexive anti-Americanism initially moved the Left to embrace the Islamic Revolution in Iran. Mother Jones, for instance, in 1979 predicted that “if Khomeini or his followers take power” then “democratic reforms, freedom for political prisoners, an end to the astronomical waste of huge arms purchases, and a constitutional government” would follow. The Nation, Michel Foucault, and other pillars of the Left similarly projected their ideals upon Khomeini and company.

9. Manson Family Values

“I fell in love with Charlie Manson the first time I saw his cherub face and sparkling eyes on TV,” hippie guru Jerry Rubin professed. “His words and courage inspired us.” Weatherman hoisted “Charles Manson Power” banners, adopted a spread-fingered greeting to symbolize the fork with which the Manson murderers impaled a victim’s stomach, and even boasted a cell nicknamed “The Fork.” Weatherman matriarch Bernardine Dohrn infamously proclaimed: “Dig it: first they killed those pigs, then they ate dinner in the same room with them, then they even shoved a fork into the victim’s stomach. Wild!”

8. Gay Activists Sue to Block AIDS Test

Today, homosexual activists blame Ronald Reagan and the clergy for the spread of AIDS. But in the mid-1980s, the National Gay Task Force and the Lambda Legal Defense, citing civil-liberties concerns, actually sued the federal government to stop the AIDS test. Thankfully, they lost and scores of lives have been saved as a result.

7. Murder Chic

The easiest way to become a hero on the Left is to kill another human being. John Brown, the Molly Maguires, the Haymarket Square Bombers, Joe Hill, Huey Newton, and Mumia Abu-Jamal—murderers all—have been venerated by the Left in song and on screen. The people they murdered are not even an afterthought.

6. Jonestown Kool-Aid

Before orchestrating the murder/suicides 900+ people in Guyana, Jim Jones was the darling of the San Francisco Left. Huey Newton, Angela Davis, and Willie Brown embraced a man who killed more blacks than the KKK. Democrats Rosalynn Carter, Walter Mondale, and Gerry Brown made campaign visits to the Peoples Temple’s “comrade leader.” The mayor of San Francisco even rewarded Jones for his activism by appointing him chairman of the city’s housing commission. “The temple was as much a left-wing political crusade as a church,” The Nation reported in 1978. Unfortunately, as the years progressed, more Americans gulped down the Left’s Kool-Aid that Jones was of the religious Right and not an atheist leftist.  

5. Concentration Camps, American Style

A year before Hitler came to power in Germany, Margaret Sanger called for a vast system of concentration camps for the United States. The Planned Parenthood founder demanded “a stern and rigid policy of segregation or sterilization” for “dysgenic” Americans who “would be taught to work under competent instructors for the period of their entire lives.” The 1932 speech concluded that “fifteen or twenty millions of our population would then be organized into soldiers of defense—defending the unborn against their own disabilities.”

4. Heaven on Earth

American intellectuals looked upon the hell on earth that was post-revolutionary Russia and saw a heaven on earth. The New Republic credited the Russian Revolution with providing “the most democratic franchise yet devised in our world,” while The Nation found that “the franchise is more democratic in Russia than in England or in the United States.” Lincoln Steffens marveled after a visit to the Soviet Union, “The revolution in Russia is to establish the Kingdom of Heaven here on earth.”

3. Eugenics

Even before the progressive era when most states instituted eugenics laws, the American Left had agitated for state controls over procreation. John Humphrey Noyes’ Bible Communists lamented that freedom of marital choice “leaves mating to be determined by a general scramble, without attempt at scientific direction” and devised the first eugenic experiment in the U.S.—“stirpiculture”—that produced dozens of children and prevented hundreds more. In Looking Backward, Edward Bellamy dreamed of “race purification” to “preserve and transmit the better types of the race, and let the inferior types drop out.” Other proponents included Margaret Sanger, W.E.B. Du Bois, and Oliver Wendell Holmes, who famously decreed in Buck v. Bell, “Three generations of imbeciles are enough.” State governments ultimately sterilized upwards of 60,000.

2. Assassinating Presidents

Three of the four presidential assassins have been left-wing radicals. Bible Communist Charles Guiteau murdered President Garfield, anarcho-communist Leon Czolgosz murdered President McKinley, and Soviet Communist Lee Harvey Oswald murdered John F. Kennedy. Rather than own that history, the Left has invented conspiracy theories that absolve leftists from responsibility.

1. Nazi-Soviet Pact

The Left switched from pacifists to warmongers overnight once the Nazi attack upon the Communists dissolved the Hitler-Stalin Pact. Communist Party USA chief Earl Browder, who had dubbed WWII “the second imperialist war” during the pact, so thoroughly switched course when the Nazis attacked the Communists that he embraced conscription (after his opposition to it led to jail in WWI), endorsed a ‘no-strike’ pledge for labor unions (after encouraging strikes to impede the war effort), and kicked out Japanese Americans from the CP (after ostensibly championing civil rights). The Hollywood Anti-Nazi League ceased operations during the pact. The Communists’ New Masses panned the anti-Nazi Watch on the Rhine when it appeared as a play during the pact only to praise it when it appeared as a movie when Hitler and Stalin were again enemies.


Daniel J. Flynn is the author of Intellectual Morons: How Ideology Makes Smart People Fall for Stupid Ideas and A Conservative History of the American Left. He is also the editor of www.flynnfiles.com.

PBS Silences Filmmaker on Radical Islam

Exclusive: PBS Silences Filmmaker on Radical Islam
Susan MacAllen
Author: Susan MacAllen
Source: The Family Security Foundation, Inc.
Date: April 17, 2007
 

The liberal left may be the greatest threat to America’s freedoms, concludes FSM Contributing Editor Susan MacAllen in this probing examination of an apparent growing alliance between leftists and radical Islamists throughout institutions charged with forming public opinion. This frightening analysis will definitely raise the level of your concern – possibly also your outrage.

PBS Silences Filmmaker on Radical Islam

By Susan MacAllen

First, it was the Smithsonian and now it is the Public Broadcasting System.  When liberals meddle in institutions that traditionally have been associated with public education – using public tax dollars – the outcome should alarm you.

The Liberal Left may be the greatest threat to freedom of speech in America.  While in the past, many of us cringed as the ACLU advocated for the right of “artists” to display obscene photographs of homosexual foreplay and obscene paintings of Christ, we could not have imagined that within a few short years the same liberal philosophy would be responsible for the squelching of other deliberately selected ideas… despite our tax dollars.

Filmmaker Martyn Burke has learned just how leftist the powers at PBS are.   The road to the inclusion of his film Islam vs. Islamists: Voices from the Muslim Center in the popular PBS series America at a Crossroads has been rocky from the beginning.  The film means to explore the ways in which moderate Muslims in the U.S. are threatened and silenced by radical Islamists.  The Corporation for Public Broadcasting fully funded the film with federal grants but, early on, PBS and project managers at an affiliated station demanded that Burke fire two colleagues that had brought him into the project in the first place.  In a February formal letter of complaint to the corporation and to PBS, Burke stated that the demand was on political grounds: Frank Gaffney and Alex Alexiev were vocal conservatives and both have written on the threat of Islamofacism to the West.  They also are president and vice-president, respectively, of the Center for Security Policy, a conservative think tank.

Burke says that before filming began, a Crossroads project manager, Jeff Bieber of WETA in Washington, D.C., said to him, “Don’t you check into the politics of the people you work with?”  This is an ironic question, given that WETA created an advisory board to deal with the making of the film; the board included Aminah Beverly McCloud, director of World Islamic Studies at DePaul University.  McCloud took segments of the film which she considered objectionable (insulting to radical Islam) and showed them to a Muslim journalist and to Nation of Islam leaders.  This action led to outrage in the Muslim community over the film, and the Nation of Islam has threatened to sue.  In other words, McCloud instigated the very thing the film tried to portray; the tendency of radical Islamists to use threats and lawsuits to silence moderate Muslims and others who object to their ideology.

Burke’s letter cited various other incidents of tampering with the film, including Crossroads managers beginning a new film after grants were already made which used the same interview subjects Burke had used, and overlapped with his material.   WETA openly wanted a key theme in Burke’s film eliminated; the claim that Islamists work to establish parallel societies in the Western societies they inhabit, setting up Shariah law, and  “Islamic Courts”.  The evidence that this has been attempted repeatedly in Europe and America is extensive, but WETA apparently feels that this fact is too inflammatory for the general public to handle.

Martyn Burke is concerned about the hold radical Islam is taking in the West, and he is concerned about the silencing of moderate Muslims.  He claims that the documentary asks, “Where are the moderate Muslims?” and explores ways in which they are “reviled and sometimes attacked” by radicals.  He is also concerned that journalistic freedom and integrity is impossible in the atmosphere of censorship that is present at PBS and at liberal-bias news organizations across the country.   America at a Crossroads was conceived only three years ago, originally in an effort to enhance public knowledge around issues of terrorism and homeland security in the wake of 9-11.   The collection of documentaries it features is financed with $20 million in federal grants (taxpayer – our own – money) from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.  Filmmakers are asked to submit film proposals for consideration.  Competition is stiff: there have been 430 submitted proposals.  Burke’s proposal was one of the 21 chosen, and he received $700,000 to make Islam vs. Islamists.

There are really two alarming issues in play here.  The first is the increasing liberal bias in journalistic media; it has become so blatant that it will readily compromise its own integrity to keep a conservative view silent.   In the case of Burke’s film, those holding the purse strings are making decisions about how to use our tax dollars to push a liberal agenda and silence a conservative view, regardless of how balance plays, regardless of truth.   When Newsweek was forced to apologize for its published lie that U.S. soldiers at Guantanamo were throwing Korans on the floor, flushing them down toilets, and otherwise degrading them, we should have been amazed and outraged.  Millions get their news from such news magazines, and the American public and those around the world assume that they print the truth.   When major U.S. newspapers favor liberal editorial over hard news, we should be worried.  And when institutions use federal taxpayer money to mold public opinion according to their own worldview, we should be scared. 

The second issue at stake is the reluctance of the liberals in the U.S. to recognize the very real threat of radical Islam.  Their reluctance is not only uninformed and unrealistic, but when they take steps to silence an opposite viewpoint, they put our future in jeopardy.  We can confront radical Islam now by exposing its more sinister activities in the West – public education can go a long way toward stemming its increasing influence.  Or, we can close our eyes and remain uneducated about it, and have a bigger, more violent conflict with it in the future, right on our shores.  Just ask the Europeans. 

It is core to the American character to be reviled by the idea of having one’s views molded by anything but truth.  Yet, in a nation where non-partisan research organizations repeatedly warn that our news media is left-biased, and where our educational systems present Islam as equal to other religions, we are in fact having our thinking molded.   

When one takes a look back through history at the dynamics in play when fascist movements took hold in peaceful societies, the patterns are always the same: well-meaning people downplay the dangers of a radical movement, and people with radical agendas downplay the dangers too.  Those who speak out against the growing menace are shouted down, threatened and made to feel paranoid and crazy.  This works to the advantage of radicals.  In a society committed to “inclusion” and “fairness” and “understanding”, a radical ideology can easily take root. 

 A fascist ideology creeps into a society slowly, not overnight and in front of one’s face; it never announces its presence.  It creeps in as it always has – through newspapers and books, into classrooms and the halls of universities until one day a public awakens and can hardly bear to remember the way it once was, and look at the way it has become, without its heart breaking.

FSM Contributing Editor Susan MacAllen writes a political blog, http://askew.blogharbor.com, and has written on an extensive array of subjects for over 20 years.  She has lived overseas and been intimately involved in the French culture since the Muslim immigrant population emerged in the south of France.  A Certified Veterinary Technician, she currently resides in the American West. 

© 2003-2007 FamilySecurityMatters.org All Rights Reserved

If you are a reporter or producer who is interested in receiving more information about this writer or this article, please email your request to COY7m@aol.com.

Note — The opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions, views, and/or philosophy of The Family Security Foundation, Inc.

 Click here to support Family Security Matters

God Wants Gun Control

God Wants Gun Control
By Mark D. Tooley
FrontPageMagazine.com | April 18, 2007

Left-wing religious officials raced to exploit the Virginia Tech murders by resuscitating their favorite slogans about gun control.

Winning the tackiness contest, National Council of Churches chief Bob Edgar issued a news release within hours of the shootings.

“How many more will have to die before we say enough is enough?” Edgar asked.  “How many more senseless deaths will have to be counted before we enact meaningful firearms control in this country?  How many more of our pastors, rabbis and imams will have to preside over caskets of innocent victims of gun violence because a nation refused to stop the proliferation of these small weapons of mass destruction?”

Revealingly, Edgar’s quick statement barely mentioned “God,” made no mention of Christ, and quoted no Scripture.  Although ostensibly the head of the nation’s chief ecumenical organization for Christian churches, Edgar evidently thought neither the Redeemer nor Holy Writ were all that pertinent in the wake of over two dozen murdered young people.  Far more urgent was a renewed push for gun control legislation.

From his perch in
Geneva, World Council of Churches chief Samuel Kobia offered prayers for the bereaved before launching into his own political fusillade. 
“One of the major obstacles to effective global regulation of small arms and light weapons is the pro-gun position adopted by the U.S. administration during years of international negotiations,” Kobia quickly asserted, connecting the Virginia Tech murders to the global depredations of the
United States.   “The news from Virginia today is little different than the news from Darfur yesterday and the news from
Iraq tomorrow,” he asserted.  After all, Blacksburg, Virginia, like Darfur and
Iraq, has “wanton killings, the indiscriminate use of armed force and the widespread availability of deadly weapons.”
Kobia hoped that the “gun lobby across the
USA” will begin to “understand the rising frustration among concerned citizens and governments around the world.”  While admitting there are “other factors,” he still insisted that the “U.S. arms manufacturing and arms sales policies have violent consequences abroad as well as in the
U.S.”     
“We are all Virginians in our sympathy, but many people around the world are also Virginians in their vulnerability to the misuse of unregulated guns,” Kobia concluded.  “The globalized trade in small arms and light weapons must come under firm and appropriate controls.”    Like Kobia, Geneva-based World Alliance of Reformed Churches chief Setri Nyomi was also praying for the Virginia Tech victims and for “the United States of America and all nations as they struggle to overcome the temptation to rely on arms and as they work to find true security for all their peoples.” Repentance, from Nyomi’s perspective, would undoubtedly include a ban on hand guns, among other state controls. United Methodist chief lobbyist Jim Winkler also used the Virginia Tech killings to herald his denomination’s official support for a complete ban on handguns.  “The presence of guns in
U.S. society has not led to greater security but in fact has undermined the general sense of safety,” he declared.  “It must be stated that had this ban been in place this shooting might have been prevented since one of the guns used by the assailant was a 9 mm handgun. We once again call on the Congress to ban on all handguns and assault weapons so that our communities will be safer and so that this endless cycle of violence can be ended.”

Not all Religious Left officials exploited the Virginia Tech horrors.  The chief officials of the

Evangelical
Lutheran
Church in America (ELCA), the Episcopal Church and the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) tactfully refrained from crowing about their denomination’s stances on gun control. Even evangelical left leader Jim Wallis showed restraint, calling for a time of “prayer and silence.”

ELCA Presiding Bishop Mark Hanson actually quoted Scripture in his statement:  “We mourn, we pray, and with the Psalmist we plead: “Out of the depths, I cry to you, O Lord. Lord, hear my voice!’ (Psalm 130:1)  As family and friends grieve the deaths and injuries of loved ones, we claim the promise of Christ’s Resurrection.”How unique that a prominent mainline church official actually responded to the horrible deaths of countless young people by pointing to the hope of the resurrection of Jesus Christ.  Why do others of his colleagues not follow his example?

The sin of murder precedes by many millennia the invention of fire arms.  It is recorded in the earliest chapters of the Bible, with Cain’s killing his brother Abel, and continues until the final chapters of Revelation.  Before the advent of guns, fallen humanity killed each other senselessly by the thousands with spears, with arrows, with hatchets and axes, with rocks, drownings, poisons, arsons, strangulations, starvations and incomprehensible tortures.  As Ecclesiastes records, “There is nothing new under the sun.”

Much of the Religious Left, with its absolute faith in statist regulation, and its denial of human fallenness, is confident that murder can be banished by banning its instruments.  But human nature is such that murderers will almost always have guns, and even when deprived, will resort to equally lethal weapons.

The state can punish, rarely deter, but it cannot change corrupt human hearts. The social mores that prevent murder are only effectively instilled by religion, which the Religious Left has neglected in favor of political “salvation.”

Click Here to support Frontpagemag.com.

Anti-globalists reach out to Islamists Cooperation between Islamists and the left is growing

Anti-globalists reach out to Islamists

Cooperation between Islamists and the left is growing, reports Eric Walberg


What is striking about this latest conference is the growing cooperation both within the Muslim world and between the anti-global left and Muslims. This should come as no surprise, considering the traditional focus of the left on defending victims of torture. Who are the biggest victims of torture in the world today? Of course, Muslims, primarily in Iraq and Palestine, but everywhere in the West, and just about in every country that is predominantly Muslim.

The left realises this and is finally overcoming its traditional resistance to the cultural conservatism of Islam, and likewise Muslims are reaching out to the left — clear examples are Egypt with the Muslim Brotherhood’s (MB) prominent role in this conference and Lebanon, where Hizbullah was prominent at a similar anti-imperialism conference last November in Beirut. Organised by Al-Karama (Dignity), Al-Ishtirakyin Al-Sawryin (Socialist Revolutionary Party), Al-Ikhwan Al-Muslimin (Muslim Brotherhood) and Al-‘Amal (Labour), and held at the Egyptian Press Syndicate, the conference attracted close to 600 participants and observers from around the world, including a delegation of 80 South Koreans and 20 Canadians.

But what can we make of the overwhelming prominence at the conference of the MB and their very professional brochures and CDs, well translated into English? One pamphlet quotes MB deputy Khairat El-Shater assuring the reader “No need to be afraid of us” and “We do not promote an anti- Western agenda”. Certainly we can condemn the military tribunals where 40 prominent MB members are being tried under emergency laws, in violation of the constitution. Belal Diaa Farahat, a business student at the American University of Cairo told Al-Ahram Weekly how his father Diaaeddin Farahat, a prominent businessman, was arrested along with 39 others “merely because he was successful and a member of the MB.” After three months in prison and acquittal in a civil court, these men were re-arrested and will face a military tribunal next week.

Ahmed Shawqi, a student activist at Al-Azhar, said that all the delegates at the conference were unanimous in condemning the tribunals. Delegates from London, Canada and Greece promised to demonstrate, and organise petitions to protest against the military tribunals and invite MB representatives on speaking tours in order to explain their position. Shawqi added, however, that an important aspect of the MB’s platform is not to work against Egypt in its international relations. In a sense, the Brotherhood “stole the show” at the conference, with their very real oppression fitting the international delegates’ human rights agenda. Coincidence or act of God?

The key forum at the conference: “bridge building between the left and Islam” focussed on re-evaluating the relations of the left and the Islamists, as well as on practical ways to increase cooperation.

Mohamed Ghozlan, an MB Al-Azhar student activist, described the underlying misunderstanding: “the left thought Islam was just an anachronism, while Muslims accused the left of trying to destroy their way of life. However, with both sides being repressed by dictatorship, we are able to cooperate now on the basis of human rights and the fight against the war in Iraq and globalisation. Such Latin American leaders as Hugo Chavez have accelerated the cooperation, reaching out to the Muslim resistance.” He explained the greater repression of Muslim than leftists in Egypt to be due to the fact that “the government sees us as the greater threat to it.”

In an interview with the Weekly, conference organiser Nada Kassass said, “the turning point in the relations of the left and Islamists was the Intifada in 2000, when the committee to support the Intifada brought (the two parties together). The wars in Iraq and Lebanon increased the collaboration, and the struggle around the 2006 elections in Egypt showed the success of this strategy, with six nationalists and 88 MB candidates elected. Earlier, when MB members were arrested, the left did little — the government was able to use religion to keep the left afraid of the Islamists and the Islamists afraid of the ‘godless’ communists. Both sides were at fault here in Egypt. Ironically it was actually easier for Islamists to work with European leftists than Egyptians, but all that has changed. The bad blood between the MB and the left dates from the 1960s and is now being overcome.” Kassass related how left, liberal and Muslim students at Cairo University, Al-Azhar and Ain Shams joined forces to scuttle student council elections which were rigged by the government earlier this year, though some were expelled, arrested and beaten. “People are joining together to defend their rights.”

Kassass’s evaluation of the situation in Egypt was echoed in the exchanges of Sadala Mazraani of the Lebanese Communist Party, and Ali Fayyad of Hizbullah. Mazraani admitted that during the civil war in Lebanon, Islamists and socialists were fighting each other, and argued that we should learn from the successes of the anti- fascist front of WWII, the nationalist revolution of the 1950s in Egypt and the non-aligned movement of the 1960s, when imperialism was on the defensive. He pointed out how Latin America is uniting with the Middle East against the common enemy, and said it was more a matter of coordinating movements that have recognised common goals. “The Lebanese Communist Party actively works with Hizbullah against the occupation and in elections, both trying to unite Lebanese society to fight Israel and Zionism.”

Ali Fayyad of Hizbullah backed up Mazraani, though he complained that, “many socialists in Europe still refuse to work with us, calling us ‘terrorist'”. He admitted that Islamists are conservative and often don’t want to work with the left, especially extremists like Al-Qaeda, which “will not work with anyone and will fail”. Then there are the liberal Muslims who don’t care about the war and occupation, lack a clear position on imperialism, and as a result, actually ally with it. “The differences of Hamas and Hizbullah with the left are minor — family and social priorities — and at the same time, the Islamic movement must apply democracy, which is really the same as shura. Democracy is a bridge to cross to a better world. We should avoid intolerance in governance, whether it’s Islamic or not, and forcing religion upon people.” He referred to Gramsci’s argument about creating a common front at important historical junctures to induce historical change, after which the different groups can go their separate ways.What a lovely irony to have an Islamist quoting a Western communist theorist.

“By working with Islamic groups in an open way, the left can have a positive impact on Islamic movements, and vice versa.”

The international left, as represented at the conference, emphasised practical ways to reach out to the broader Muslim community, as reflected in conference forums on such projects as twinning UK and Palestinian cities, countering the boycott of the Hamas government in Palestine with a boycott of Israel and Western firms that provide military equipment to Israel, countering Islamophobia — in a word, citizens’ diplomacy.

James Clark of the Canadian Peace Alliance described how the anti-war coalitions are now supportive of Muslims who find themselves targets of racial and religious profiling and no-fly lists, and that there is active work in the peace movement to counter Islamophobia, “which the governments use to fan the flames to generate support for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. They are committed to defend all civil liberties. “On the wall of the prayer room at Ryerson University in Toronto, someone’s spray painted ‘Die Muslim’. The administration refused to condemn this as hate crime, so we organised a petition and a campaign to counter Islamophobia, and as a result, the head of the Islamic students’ organisation was elected president of the students’ council. So you can use such incidents to educate and mobilise people.” Clark vowed that the Canadian peace movement, inspired by the Arab resistance in Lebanon and Iraq, would work with Muslims to defeat imperialism.

Johannes Anderson of Denmark criticised the Danish left for not standing behind Muslims during the cartoon controversy, allowing a weak prime minister to emerge unscathed. “I’ve changed through the past years and grown through criticism. We should not be afraid of it. We fight for democracy in the Middle East and Europe against neo- liberalism which is taking away our rights everywhere.”

Wafaa El-Masri of Al-Karama Party saw a new Islamic message emerging at the conference — shared principles to build society, emphasising our commonalty. “The Egyptian national movement works with the Islamists to fight the constitutional amendments, to end the Mubarak regime, to unite against the Iraq war, and to support Iran against the threat of US attack.”

While the conference’s criticism of the repression of the host government would hardly merit a comment if it were held in, say, Toronto or Moscow, the lack of fear by the MB and Egyptian opposition representatives was impressive — they realise that at any moment they too could be arrested and possibly tortured, yet they did not fear speaking out. Belal Farahat’s father, one of the 40 MB prisoners awaiting next week’s military tribunal, had his assets seized and stores closed by the government, yet Belal continues to study at AUC: “The whole point of the Brotherhood is that we are one and must help each other.”

In an interview with the Weekly, George Hajjar, a political philosophy professor at the Lebanese University and head of the National Rally in Support of the Resistance Option, though optimistic about the growing understanding between leftists and Islamists and supportive of the conference as a whole, criticised it for not having representatives from the Iraqi resistance, “because the resistance is primarily nationalist, and the MB and Shias in Iraq are members of the occupation government.”

How leftists exploit grief over troop casualties

How leftists exploit grief over troop casualties

Thomas Lifson
At first glance, the home page for the “Iraq Veterans Memorial” looks like a genuinely respectful site honoring the troops.

The Iraq Veterans Memorial is an online war memorial that honors the members of the U.S. armed forces who have lost their lives serving in the Iraq War. The Memorial is a collection of video memories from family, friends, military colleagues, and co-workers of those that have fallen.

Other pages on the site encourage people and show them how to submit videos about their fallen family members and friends:

We encourage everyone who has lost a family member or friend to create a video memorial so that others can better understand the life that was lived and the love that was lost. Find out more information on contributing your video.

Nowhere on the site, however, is any indication given of the politics of those who have created the site. The only clue is a link to the Brave New Foundation which created the “memorial.” One sees a few code words on the BNF home page that might raise suspicion in the eyes of an observer of the left like me, but which to most people would look pretty benign:

“Championing social justice issues by using media to inspire, empower, motivate and teach civic participation that makes a difference.”

But dig into the Brave New Foundation a bit further, and the real nature of the enterprise starts to come into focus.  Its board of directors includes Katrina Vanden Heuvel, Hollywood heiress and editor of the hard left magazine The Nation, Dolores Huerta, hard left Hispanic activist, the “national chaplain” for Planned Parenthood (praying for the souls of aborted babies?) and the president of a local of the left wing Service Employees International Union, the union which seeks to destroy Wal-Mart for the sin of being non-union and offering low prices to low income people.
Only by digging through further though not very prominent links does one discover Brave New Films, producers of left wing propaganda pieces attacking Fox News, Wal-Mart, Tom Delay, and  Iraq War “profiteers.” It looks to me as though this arm of the enterprise is a major part of its activities. Brave New Films could be characterized fairly as a left wing propaganda factory, it seems to me.
Call me paranoid, but in my opinion, these people look like they are luring grieving families into sending them material expressing their loss, and stockpiling it for possible use in the sort of propaganda that claims it supports the troops but not their mission.
If these people were honest, wouldn’t they indicate their political perspective right on the Veterans Memorial page? The fact that they require multiple links be followed before revealing who they really are suggests deviousness.
Hat tip: Paul Shlichta

Left spews deadly venom over Tony Snow’s cancer

Left spews deadly venom over Tony Snow’s cancer
‘He is pure lying scum and should die ASAP!’


Posted: March 28, 2007
4:07 a.m. Eastern

By Joe Kovacs
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54911

Moments after White House Press Secretary Tony Snow’s new personal battle against cancer became public yesterday, a vicious assault was launched at left-leaning websites, with some message posters hoping for a swift death for the presidential spokesman.

“Under the heading of ‘What goes around comes around’, the cancer in Tony Snow is removing the cancer of Tony Snow from the national scene,” wrote TDoff on the D.C. gossip site Wonkette.com.

Omnilation wrote, “Dear Tony, I hate you. -God.”

A contributor called homofascist stated, “It is a bitch that I wouldn’t wish upon even a smarmy, evil f—face liar like Snow. Because really, isn’t he OUR smarmy, evil f—face liar?”

Some readers at HuffingtonPost.com reportedly said:

  • “Sure holding all that bulls**t in your gut would make anybody sick..!”
  • “The growth in his abdomen is his head stuck up his a**. F**k him!! He is pure lying scum and should die ASAP!!” Beccawalton was among those calling for end to the venom-spewing:

    “Stop these mean-spirited and hypocritical posts. Just because you don’t like his politics (and I don’t, either), don’t revel in this. It’s inhuman and cruel. I’m not going to waste space to prove my liberal cred, just stop it!”

    And PghLori noted:

    “There are freakin’ idiots on both sides of the political divide, and here you’re looking at the lib side. Aside from the fact that it is just ignorant to make jokes about cancer, it’s also self-defeating, as [Rush] Limbaugh, [Sean] Hannity, etc. will refer to these postings as examples of hate-filled libs, just as they did with the Cheney board postings. Thanks a lot folks.”

    In fact, the verbal attack on Snow came exactly one month after a similar onslaught against Vice President Dick Cheney who survived an assassination attempt in Afghanistan.

    An example from the HuffingtonPost on Feb. 27 included:

    “Jesus Christ and General Jackson too, can’t the Taliban do anything right? They must know we would be so gratefull (sic) to them for such a remarkable achievement.”

    The HuffingtonPost is run by Arianna Huffington, who has described herself as “a former right-winger who has evolved into a compassionate and progressive populist.”

    A disclaimer on her site above the remarks about Tony Snow states “these comments are the personal opinions of the individuals posting them and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Huffington Post. We do not generate, solicit, or moderate user comments, but reserve the right to remove postings as we see fit.”

    Snow, 51, had his colon removed in 2005 and underwent six months of chemotherapy. Colleagues said his cancer has returned and spread to his liver and elsewhere, and that Snow told them he planned to fight the disease and return to his position.

    “He is not going to let this whip him, and he’s upbeat,” President Bush said. “And so my message to Tony is, ‘Stay strong; a lot of people love you and care for you and will pray for you.'”

  • var sc_project=1351862; var sc_invisible=1; var sc_partition=12; var sc_security=”e1ac2d39″;