The more vile you are, the more exalted by the Democrat senior leadership.
The more vile you are, the more exalted by the Democrat senior leadership.
This is insane: “the No Ban Act would repeal all of Trump’s travel bans and would prevent future presidents from enacting similar broad bans based on national origin.”
So future Presidents would not even be able to ban people entering the United States from a country with which the U.S. was at war.
Note also that this bill is an attempt to end the “Muslim ban,” which does not exist. What does exist is a ban on immigration from several countries, most but by no means all of which are Muslim, that cannot or will not provide accurate information about prospective immigrants. The list of countries was devised during the Obama administration, while Biden was Vice President. Most Muslim countries have no such restrictions. To characterize this, as the hopelessly compromised Judy Chu does here, as “driven by prejudice,” is irrational and dangerous, as it casts a legitimate national security measure as hateful, a line of argumentation that would ultimately make it impossible for the United States to do anything to defend itself at all.
The suicidal, anti-American Left becomes more open about its priorities and intentions by the day.
“Trump accuses Democrats of going ‘Stone Cold Left — Venezuela on steroids!,’” by Marisa Schultz, Fox News, July 25, 2020:
President Trump Saturday lashed out at House Democrats who this week passed a repeal of his travel ban, claiming the party has gone “Stone Cold Left.”
In a morning tweet, Trump said his travel ban that initially targeted predominantly Muslim-majority countries and was expanded after court challenges was a “big win” and “successfully keeps very bad and dangerous people out of our great country.”
“The Dems have gone Stone Cold Left — Venezuela on steroids!” Trump tweeted.
The House Wednesday passed “The No Ban Act” on a mainly party-line vote of 233-183. Two Republicans — Reps. Will Hurd of Texas and Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania — joined with Democrats.
The legislation was hailed as a long-awaited victory for Muslim Americans and civil rights groups who had been protesting Trump’s travel ban since 2017.
But the victory was expected to be short-lived. The Senate has no plans to take it up, and Trump would surely veto the check on his authority. Trump said Saturday the legislation “hopefully, will be DEAD in the Senate!”…
The No Ban Act would repeal all of Trump’s travel bans and would prevent future presidents from enacting similar broad bans based on national origin….
“This ban never had anything to do with national security; it was always driven by prejudice,” said bill sponsor Rep. Judy Chu, D-Calif….
“This is not a Muslim ban,” said Rep. Andy Biggs, R-Ariz. “This is a legitimate travel restriction implemented for the safety of this nation.”
EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All right reserved.
Ella Hill is a survivor of a Rotherham Muslim rape gang. Recently she was interviewed on Triggernometry, a British interview and discussion program run by two comedians, Konstantin Kisin and Francis Foster. During the interview, she revealed that Muslim rape gangs had sexually abused at least 500,000 non-Muslim girls. The victims were particularly white girls, but there have been many other victims as well, such as Sikh girls.
This is unbelievable. It is a national scandal which politicians still fail to mention. Many argue that the number of victims abused by Muslim rape gangs actually exceeds one million, but even if Ella Hill is correct and there have been only half a million victims, that is bad enough. Many more survivors of these “grooming gangs” are now speaking out. Their cases are unbelievable, as they explain how the Muslim gangs tortured and intimidated young non-Muslim girls.
The UK Home office has still failed to publish its report on the “grooming gangs.” Its reason for keeping the report under wraps most likely involve the fact that the rape gangs were made up of the wrong perpetrators, and targeted the wrong victims, for the mainstream narrative.
Furthermore, Ella also emphasised the fact that when she was abused by the Muslim rape gang, authorities and police did not even care in the slightest, because they feared being called ‘racist’ for doing their job. The scandals that have been exposed in numerous cities are horrific. The failure of the police is horrendous. Another survivor, Sammy Woodhouse, stated that when she was raped by Muslims, the police arrested her while she was in bed with the rapist, instead of arresting the rapist. That is how shocking this rape jihad is.
In this interview, Ella also mentioned that her rapists were ‘religiously motivated’. This is a key fact which many people, particularly Britain’s corrupt MPs and police continue to ignore.
The Koran advocates the rape of infidel women and girls numerous times; see verses 4:3, 4:24, 23:6, and 33:50. It also emphasises that Muslims can have sex with underage girls; see surah 65:4. These Muslim rape gangs have proliferated in numerous cities is because of Islamic ideology. This fact has been concealed by the elites, such as the Muslim former prosecutor Nazir Afzal. He denies that the perpetrators were committing their evil deeds because of Islam. He must know that this is a complete lie.
White non-Muslim girls that have been predominantly the targets because of another belief which originates from Islam, that white sex slaves bring a higher reward to their owners. Mohammed had a white sex slave called Miriam a Coptic Christian. This practice has been emulated all over the Islamic world through fourteen centuries of jihad. Even the supposed Islamic Golden Age in Spain included Muslims taking sex slaves, because they were emulating Mohammed.
It is absolutely disgusting how the authorities have allowed this to happen for decades.
EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.
“The whole political vision of the left, including socialism and communism, has failed by virtually every empirical test, in countries all around the world. But this has only led leftist intellectuals to evade and denigrate empirical evidence.” – Thomas Sowell
“The drive of the Rockefellers and their allies is to create a one-world government combining super capitalism and Communism under the same tent, all under their control…. Do I mean conspiracy? Yes, I do. I am convinced there is such a plot, international in scope, generations old in planning, and incredibly evil in intent.” – Larry McDonald
“Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted.” – Vladimir Lenin
Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation (BLM Global Network Foundation) is the national, organizing chapter of a network of 16 local Black Lives Matters chapters. They are incorporated in Delaware and they get millions of dollars in donations, but are not a tax-exempt organization. BLM is the primary organizational outgrowth of the more decentralized Black Lives Matter movement, and is a fiscally-sponsored project of Thousand Currents, a 501(c)(3) nonprofit, whose donations are tax exempt. They are in Oakland, California.
And there you have it, send money to Thousand Currents and you can take it off your taxes just as George Soros has done by donating $33 million to the communist BLM cause to destroy America. Soros’s Foundation has also poured $230 million into racial equality, $150 million in grants for Black-led racial justice groups, and another $70 million toward local grants for criminal justice reform and civic engagement opportunities.
The latest 990 I could find for Thousand Currents is from 2017, and they weren’t too poor then. Bet 2020’s tax returns will be of great interest.
Thousand Currents is run by a guy named Paul Strassberg, a far leftist who also worked for the Ford Foundation who is a huge benefactor of the far left.
(Regarding the Ford Foundation, they spent $25 million writing a new constitution for America. A Constitution for the New States of America, from the 1974 book, The Emerging Constitution by Rexford G. Tugwell, who helped develop policy recommendations leading up to Roosevelt’s New Deal, illustrates with chilling clarity the final objective of regional governance conspirators. The goal is a corporate state concentrating economic, political and social powers in the hands of a ruling elite. “A Constitution for the Newstates of America” is the fortieth version of this revolutionary document prepared by a team of social experimenters at the Center for the Study of Democratic Institutions, Fund for the Republic (Ford Foundation). They are the enemy of freedom.)
Strassberg is a former Peace Corp volunteer and he runs Thousand Currents who has an alliance with Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation (BLMGNF); thus, your donation is tax deductible.
Twenty-five percent of the millions of dollars that goes into BLMGFN is spent on salaries and benefits. Forty-six percent goes to consultant fees. Seventy-one percent of revenue goes to salaries and consultant fees! Twenty-nine percent goes to paying people and signs and so forth. What a racket! They’re shrewd, no one knows this! Where is the IRS? If Soros gave them $33 million, where is that money? Are there any audits of Thousand Currents or BLMGNF? All the Hollywood pinheads and corporate idiots and everyone else writing checks are going right into the Marxist’s pockets. Link
In 2018 and 2019, respectively, Thousand Currents funneled $2,622,017 and $3,354,654 in donor-restricted assets to BLM.
Among the organizations that have specifically earmarked contributions to Thousand Currents for BLM are the NoVo Foundation ($1,525,000 from 2015 to 2018), the W.K. Kellogg Foundation ($900,000 from 2016 to 2019), and Borealis Philanthropy ($343,000 from 2016 to 2018).
No one is exposing them, not the New York Times, not mainstream media, not Fox, not One America News, because to do that would be to label yourself as a racist.
Thousand Currents isn’t the only donor avenue to BLM. Visitors to BLM who seek to contribute funds are transported to the web page of ActBlue Charities, an organization that facilitates donations to “democrats and progressives.” ActBlue is the left’s favorite “Dark Money” machine.
As of May 21, 2020, ActBlue had given $119 million to the presidential campaign of Joe Biden. The worldwide BLM protests that subsequently erupted in response to the May 25 death of a black criminal suspect named George Floyd, sparked a new surge of donations to BLM via ActBlue.
Major corporations such as Apple, Disney, Nike and hundreds of others may be pouring untold and unaccounted millions into ActBlue under the name of Black Lives Matter, funds that in fact can go to fund the election of a Democrat President Biden. BLM hates Trump and wants him out of office; their riots are spreading for that very reason.
The role of tax-exempt foundations tied to the fortunes of the greatest industrial and financial companies such as Rockefeller, Ford, Kellogg, Hewlett and Soros say that there is a far deeper and far more sinister agenda to current disturbances than spontaneous outrage would suggest.
BLM protests rely on the false belief that blacks are targeted for “extrajudicial killings by police and vigilantes.” It is a lie, as demonstrated by decades of hard empirical evidence. I would urge everyone to read John Perazzo’s article, Exposing the Lies of Black Lives Matter. The annual violent-crime arrest statistics for 2003-2009, broken down by race, can be found here: 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, and 2009.
Much of the demands by BLM are clearly modeled on elements of the Black Panthers’ “Ten-Point Program” put forth by the Black Panther Party in the 1960s. BLM is closely allied with numerous groups that are fronts for the Freedom Road Socialist Organization (FRSO), a Marxist-Leninist entity that calls for the overthrow of capitalism and the elimination of police departments. In an article for Accuracy In Media, economist and investigative journalist James Simpson has identified some of these FRSO fronts that are tied to BLM.
At a July 2015 conference in Cleveland, BLM presented There’s A Method To The Movement: Examining Community Organizing Methods and Methodologies, a workshop that taught, among other things, the tactics and philosophy of the late Saul Alinsky. Known as the godfather of “community organizing,” a term that serves as a euphemism for fomenting public anger and in some cases, violence, Alinsky was a communist fellow-traveler who laid out a set of basic tactics designed to help radical activists destroy their enemies while gaining power for themselves. Hillary and Obama learned his lessons well.
Alinsky also exhorted activists and political radicals to be entirely unpredictable and unmistakably willing – for the sake of their cause – to cause the government, or the society at large, to descend into chaos and anarchy. They must be prepared, Alinsky explained, to “go into a state of complete confusion and draw their opponent into the vortex of the same confusion.” Reveille for Radicals, page 150-151.
BLM and their associate organizations are Marxists. As such, they hate God and want all vestiges of America’s Judeo-Christian society eliminated. In June 2020, 40-year-old BLM activist Shaun King demanded that religious statues showing a light-skinned Jesus be toppled to the ground. King said on Twitter: “Yes, I think the statues of the white European they claim is Jesus should also come down. They are a form of white supremacy. Always have been.” Asserting also that “all murals and stained-glass windows of white Jesus, and his European mother, and their white friends” should likewise be destroyed. Like the other uneducated fools of BLM, his stupidity of Biblical history is monumental.
In August 2015, the Democratic National Committee (DNC) approved a resolution endorsing the BLM movement. The resolution stated that “the DNC joins with Americans across the country in affirming Black Lives Matter.”
BLM leaders met at the White House with President Obama as well as senior advisor Valerie Jarrett and other administration officials. They told reporters that the president personally supported the BLM movement. In a December 2015 interview on National Public Radio, Obama described BLM as a positive force on policing in America, notwithstanding the violence and incendiary rhetoric exhibited by many of its members. In February 2016, Obama invited BLM leaders to the White House during Black History Month.
On July 13, 2016 — six days after a BLM supporter in Dallas had shot and killed five police officers and wounded seven others — President Obama hosted BLM leaders DeRay Mckesson, Brittany Packnett, and Mica Grimmat at a four-and-a-half-hour meeting at the White House. Also invited were Al Sharpton, Attorney General Loretta Lynch, Louisiana Governor John Bel Edwards (D), St. Paul Mayor Chris Coleman (D), Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti (D), and some police chiefs.
More than 1,000 BLM activists signed a statement proclaiming their “solidarity with the Palestinian struggle and commitment to the liberation of Palestine’s land and people;” demanding an end to Israel’s “occupation” of “Palestine,” condemning “Israel’s brutal war on Gaza and chokehold on the West Bank,” urging the U.S. government to end all aid to Israel, and exhorting black institutions to support the Palestinian led Boycott, Divestment, & Sanctions movement against the Jewish state.
Over the Shavuot festival on May 30, 2020, BLM members carried out a pogrom in Fairfax, a Los Angeles community largely populated by ultra-Orthodox Jews. On that day, BLM not only vandalized five synagogues and three Jewish schools in Fairfax, but also looted most of the Jewish businesses on Fairfax Avenue. Moreover, they chanted “F*** the police and kill the Jews.”
At a July 1, 2020 demonstration in Washington, D.C., BLM protesters tied their own cause to that of the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank. The rally was billed as a gesture of support for the “Day of Rage” that had been called by the Palestinian Authority and other groups to protest Israel’s plan to annex portions of the West Bank. The BLM protesters chanted: “Israel, we know you, you murder children, too.” Chants also alternated between “Black lives matter!” and “Palestinian lives matter!” *Link*
In 2016, BLM started to move beyond street protests and began to establish a growing influence in America’s public schools. In October of that year, teachers in Seattle organized a “Black Lives Matter at School Day.” When the National Education Association subsequently adopted a resolution endorsing that measure, “BLM at School Day” grew into a full “BLM at School National Week of Action,” to be held annually during the first week of February as part of Black History Month activities. As of 2018, it is now in school districts in more than 20 major cities. They teach kindergarten to 2nd grade children to be good little Marxists. Link
A key resource for BLM-related lessons is a textbook titled Teaching for Black Lives, whose opening sentence reads: “Black students’ minds and bodies are under attack.” The book stokes fear, anger and resentment in the minds of children of color. One reference to “the continuing police murders of black people,” for instance, declares: “In August of 2014, Michael Brown was killed in the streets of Ferguson, Missouri, his body left in the streets for hours as a reminder to the black residents in the neighborhood that their lives are meaningless to the American Empire.” Lies and more lies.
The book also includes essays bearing such titles as: “Rethinking Islamophobia: Combating Bigotry by Raising the Voices of Black Muslims,” “Plotting Inequalities, Building Resistance,” and “Racial Justice Is Not a Choice: White Supremacy, High-Stakes Testing, and the Punishment of Black and Brown Students.”
By 2019, “Black Lives Matter at School Week” (BLMSW) was being observed by thousands of educators in public school districts across the United States. BLMSW’s online guide abounds with suggested lesson plans and recommended resources for educating students, all of which are dangerous to the equality of all Americans. Link
In my recent article of June 23, 2020, I wrote about Obama’s love of communist Nelson Mandela, the terror of white farmers in South Africa, Winnie Mandela’s necklacing of their enemies, and whites having to live in compounds to avoid being murdered.
Obama said, “I am one of the countless millions who drew inspiration from Nelson Mandela’s life. My very first political action, the first thing I ever did that involved an issue or a policy or politics, was a protest against apartheid. I studied his words and his writings. The day that he was released from prison gave me a sense of what human beings can do when they’re guided by their hopes and not by their fears.”
Yes, Obama drew inspiration from an avowed communist whose intent was to destroy white South African farmers and give their land to blacks. Does he revere the rape and slaughter of pregnant women and children and their farmer fathers hacked to death by Mandela’s black forces? Apparently so. His words have inflamed those who hate America’s whites who are burning, looting and murdering in America today.
©All rights reserved.
That’s a decidedly tepid endorsement. But it makes it clear that Sarsour and the Islamic and Leftist organizations in the U.S. that support the “Palestinian” jihad (and the jihad elsewhere) will be keeping President Biden on a tight leash. If he doesn’t jump to do their bidding, they’ll turn on him, not with the fury with which they hate and wish to destroy Trump, but certainly they will have no sense of loyalty or trust, and not let him make him one misstep. This means that Biden in the White House will essentially be their tool.
“‘Nation’s Largest’ Muslim PAC Embraces Biden, But Activist Sarsour’s Endorsement is Tepid,” by Patrick Goodenough, CNS News, July 21, 2020:
(CNSNews.com) – Thanking a Muslim American PAC for supporting his presidential bid, Joe Biden said Monday he wished U.S. schools taught more about Islam, and pledged to scrap, on his first day in office, what he called President Trump’s “vile Muslim ban.”
The presumptive Democratic presidential nominee gave a virtual address to Emgage Action, three months after “the nation’s largest Muslim American political action committee” endorsed him, following the decision by its first choice candidate, Sen. Bernie Sanders, to end his campaign.
Some high-profile Sanders supporters in the Muslim community have not been enthusiastic about moving their support to Biden, as seen in a series of tweets later Monday by Palestinian American activist Linda Sarsour, a controversial former co-leader of the Women’s March.
“I choose Biden,” Sarsour said. “But I choose him as my opponent in the White House. I want him to defeat Trump so we can mobilize our movements to hold him accountable and push him to do and be better. We can’t do that with Trump.”
Sarsour said most of “our people” backed Sanders in the primary “because he earned our votes & we need Biden to continue to do the same.”
She recalled that Sanders had addressed “the plight of the Palestinian people,” and had “vehemently criticized the Netanyahu Government, opposed the moving of the embassy [to Jerusalem], called for an end to occupation, a conditioning of military aid, etc.”
‘One of my avocations is theology’
Addressing the Emgage Action event earlier in the day, Biden began on a theological note.
“Look, one of the things that I think is important is I wish – I wish we taught more in our schools about the Islamic faith,” he said. “I wish we talked about all the great confessional faiths. It [Islam] is one of the great confessional faiths.”
“And what people don’t realize – as one of my avocations is theology – don’t realize is we all come from the same root here, in terms of our fundamental basic beliefs.”
He thanked the PAC for endorsing him, noted it has launched a campaign aimed at boosting the Muslim vote, and made his case for why Muslims should support him over Trump in November.
“Muslim communities were the first to feel Donald Trump’s assault on black and brown communities in this country with his vile Muslim ban,” he said, vowing to undo the move “on day one,” should he become president….
Biden, who spoke for a little over ten minutes, accused Trump of “fanning the flames of hate,” through his words, deeds, policies and appointments, and charged that there has been “an unconscionable rise in Islamicphobia [sic]” under his administration….
“I won’t fail to speak out against the abuses of human rights including targeting for violence and prosecution Muslim minorities around the world,” he said, citing Uighurs in China and Rohingya in Burma.
Biden said he would work with partners “to meet the moral demands of the humanitarian crises in Syria, Yemen, and Gaza,” and would “continue to champion the rights of Palestinians and Israelis to have a state of their own, as I have for decades.”…
Sarsour, an ardent BDS supporter, took part in Monday’s Emgage Action video event, where she spoke about the importance of holding a President Biden accountable after the election.
“When Joe Biden does the right thing, you better believe Linda Sarsour’s going to say, ‘You know what? Thank you so much President Joe Biden for doing the right thing.’ And when President Joe Biden doesn’t do the right thing our community needs to come together and hold him accountable.”…
EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.
As if there wasn’t enough proselytizing, obfuscating and dissembling about Islam to American school children.
Can you imagine if any politician, let alone a Presidential candidate suggested with teach more Judaism or Christianity in the public schools. All hell would break loose.
“Hadith from the Prophet Muhammad instructs, ‘Whomever among you sees a wrong, let him change it with his hand. If he is not able, then with his tongue. If he is not able, then with his heart.’” Joe Biden
by Naomi Lim, Political Reporter | Washington Examiner | July 20, 2020:
Joe Biden lamented the lack of Islamic education in American school curricula at a Muslim voter outreach forum.
“I wish we taught more in our schools about the Islamic faith. I wish we talked about all the great confessional faiths. It’s one of the great confessional faiths,” Biden said Monday.
Biden, the presumptive 2020 Democratic presidential nominee and two-term vice president, told Emgage Action’s Million Muslim Votes Summit that he would end President Trump’s “vile” travel ban targeting Muslim nations on the first day of his administration should he win the White House in 100 days on Nov. 3.
The 36-year Delaware senator added that he would work with Congress to pass anti-hate-crime legislation and reiterated his support of a two-state solution in the Middle East.
“I’ll continue to champion the rights of Palestinians and Israelis to have a state of their own — as I have for decades. Each of them, a state of their own,” he said.
Joe Biden speaks to Million Muslim Votes Summit: "Hadith from the Prophet Muhammad instructs, 'Whomever among you sees a wrong, let him change it with his hand. If he is not able, then with his tongue. If he is not able, then with his heart.'" pic.twitter.com/2mJDKExILJ
— The Hill (@thehill) July 20, 2020
EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.
“PA-affiliated TV channels have been running a video including a song with an explicit call for ‘jihad’ — a holy war — against Israel until ‘it is too late.’” — i24News, July 6, 2020
No problem! If the House Subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations and Related Programs gets its way, money for that jihad is coming just in time, straight from the Great Satan.
“US House Subcommittee Passes $250 Million in Funding for Palestinian Authority Arabs,” JNS News Service, July 10, 2020:
A U.S. House subcommittee included $250 million in funding for Israeli-Palestinian Authority dialogue and Palestinian Authority business development in a $66 billion spending bill passed earlier this week, despite the Trump administration defunding both areas.
The House Subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations and Related Programs passed the bill on Monday. It includes $50 million annually over five years for dialogue programs and investment in the Palestinian Authority’s private sector: $110 million for the former and $140 million for the latter.
Additionally, bill seeks “to restore humanitarian and development assistance to Palestinian Authoirty Arabs to continue the viability of a two-state solution by providing resources to organizations working in the West Bank and Gaza,” said House Appropriations Committee chairwoman Nita Lowey (D-N.Y.) in a statement introducing the bill.
It also includes $225 million for Palestinian Authority relief and development, despite the Trump administration slashing funding in that category to virtually zero.
Israel-related lobbying groups AIPAC and J Street have applauded the move…
EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.
What could they possibly have been planning? No doubt they just wanted to do the jobs that Americans refuse to take, right?
While Leftists continue to deny that border control is a national security issue, recently a Muslim migrant from Jordan named Moayad Heider Mohammad Aldairi was sentenced to three years in prison for sneaking at least six Yemeni Muslims into the United States across the border from Mexico. Their intentions were unlikely to have been benign. Judicial Watch reported back in 2016 that police in a New Mexico border town arrested a woman they described as an “Islamic refugee” who was “in possession of the region’s gas pipeline plans.”
This was, it said, the latest in “a number of stories in the last few years about Mexican drug traffickers smuggling Islamic terrorists into the United States through the porous southern border…. A few months ago Judicial Watch reported that members of a cell of Islamic terrorists stationed in Mexico cross into the U.S. to explore targets for future attacks with the help of Mexican drug traffickers.”
But building a wall? That’s racist.
Border Patrol agents stationed at the Del Rio Sector of Texas detained a family of three Iranian nationals illegally crossing the border on Sunday, according to a press release. The group is considered to be “Special Interest Aliens” by the Department of Homeland Security because of their home country’s terrorism prevalence.
“Agents in Del Rio Sector encounter individuals from countries all throughout the world,” said Del Rio Sector Acting Chief Patrol Agent Doyle E. Amidon, Jr….
EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.
My latest in PJ Media:
It is, or ought to be, clear to everyone by now that Black Lives Matter is not a genuine movement for racial justice and a more equitable society, but a Marxist organization using real, exaggerated, and imagined racial injustice to try to destroy the United States. Anyone who is still in doubt about this should consider the fact that some blacks are still enslaved today, and Black Lives Matter never has and never will say a word about it, because that organization doesn’t really care about black lives.
If they did actually care about the lives of black people, Black Lives Matter would today be drawing international attention to statements made recently by the Mauritanian anti-slavery activist Maryam Bint Al-Sheikh of the Initiative for the Resurgence of the Abolitionist Movement (IRA). According to the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), Maryam Bint Al-Sheikh stated in a June 18 interview: “Unfortunately, there is still slavery in Mauritania. More than 20% of people in Mauritania suffer from slavery – a situation where a person owns another person and does whatever he wants with him at any given moment. This situation exists here in Mauritania, unfortunately.”
Al-Sheikh further explained that slaves are often even “bequeathed from father to son. A person can own a slave and when that person dies, his children inherit the slave, who is later bequeathed to the grandchildren. This thing exists in Mauritania, unfortunately.” Even worse, “anyone who speaks out is considered a criminal whose natural place in in jail. Until not so long ago, [whoever spoke up] would have been killed.”
As an anti-slavery activist, Al-Sheikh has experienced this herself: “I was arrested and tortured multiple times. I was tortured both mentally and physically. The last time I was arrested, I had a 1.5-year-old baby. They separated us by force. And they weaned him. The Mauritanian state weaned my baby – a 1.5-year-old baby. He was weaned. And they prevented me from seeing him, and they wouldn’t let my husband or relatives visit me.”
Maryam Bint Al-Sheikh’s story is just one of innumerable such accounts. Why does Mauritania continually drag its feet about eradicating slavery, and persecute anti-slavery activists? The dirty little secret here is that it is because slavery is sanctioned in Islam.
There is much more. Read the rest here.
EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.
Democratic Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar called for the “dismantling” of the U.S. economy and political system Tuesday.
“As long as our economy and political systems prioritize profit without considering who is profiting, who is being shut out, we will perpetuate this inequality,” Omar said. “We cannot stop at criminal justice system. We must begin the work of dismantling the whole system of oppression wherever we find it.”
Ilhan Omar calls for "dismantling" of the U.S. "economy and political systems." In case it wasn't clear. pic.twitter.com/B8DJdQvSxB
— Ian Miles Cheong (@stillgray) July 7, 2020
Omar held an event Tuesday in her home state of Minnesota with members of the Minnesota People of Color and Indigenous Caucus. Omar tweeted earlier Tuesday that the purpose of the event was to address “racism in policing” in the aftermath of George Floyd’s death.
The murder of George Floyd reawakened calls to address racism in policing and reform our criminal justice system.
I’m live with leaders of the Minnesota People of Color and Indigenous Caucus to discuss our work to make systemic changes on Facebook now: https://t.co/14DTGnadcT
— Rep. Ilhan Omar (@Ilhan) July 7, 2020
Omar has joined calls from local Democratic leaders to defund the police after four Minneapolis police officers were fired and charged in connection to Floyd’s death. The Minneapolis City Council unanimously voted to get rid of the city’s police department in June.
Omar said she supported the vote because she believes the Minneapolis Police Department is beyond reform.
“You can’t really reform a department that is rotten to the root,” Omar said at the time. “What you can do is rebuild. And so this is our opportunity, you know, as a city to come together, have the conversation of what public safety looks like, who enforces the most dangerous crimes that take place in our community.”
Reporter. Follow William Davis on Twitter
EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.
Our moral superiors in action.
“The BLM Founder Who Begged Allah For Strength Not To ‘Kill Sub Human Whites’ Received a Government Award ‘Encouraging A Run For Public Office,’” by Natalie Winters, National Pulse, June 27, 2020:
A Black Lives Matter organizer who implored Allah to give her the “strength” to not “kill these men and white folks” and that “white skin is sub-humxn” received an award from the Canadian government meant to encourage a “run for public office.”
The unearthed comments from Yusra Khogali follows co-founders of the U.S. branch of Black Lives Matter (BLM) being exposed by The National Pulse for vowing to oppose capitalism and claiming “we’re trained Marxists.”
The tweet – no longer on the social media platform – read:
“Plz Allah give me strength to not cuss/kill these men and white folks out here today. Plz plz plz.”
Khogali, an alleged “anti-racist” activist and founder of the Black Liberation Collective Canada, only had one qualm with the tweet: it “drowned out the discussion we sought to spark about the black lives of those who have died at the guns of police in this country.”
The daughter of Sudanese refugees has also insisted white people are “recessive genetic defects” who should be “wiped out,” that “whiteness is not humxness,” and “white skin is sub-humxn” in 2015 Facebook posts.
Despite these clearly racist attacks, Khogali received a Canadian government-sanctioned “Young Women in Leadership Award” in 2018.
Recipients of the awards are connected with “women interested in politics with female leaders on council and in the civil service,” and “the program is meant to encourage women to run for public office. Khogali has also been invited to speak at countless universities….
EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.
To get the whole story on the Left’s destructive and suicidal political odyssey, read Jamie Glazov’s ‘United in Hate: The Left’s Romance with Tyranny and Terror’: CLICK HERE.
EDITORS NOTE: As we witness the Marxist revolution currently transpiring right before our eyes in America, a vital question confronts us: what yearnings lie inside the members of groups such as Black Lives Matter and Antifa — and why do members of the Democrat Party and of the Establishment Media cheer them on? What inspires this violent hatred of America and the ferocious craving to tear it down? These are, without doubt, some of the most pertinent questions of our time. Frontpage Editors have therefore deemed it vital to run, below, an excerpt from Jamie Glazov’s book, United in Hate: The Left’s Romance with Tyranny and Terror. The excerpt is the second chapter, titled ‘The Believer’s Diagnosis’; it explores the progressive believer’s secular faith – and unveils his heart of darkness. Don’t miss this essay.
“Everything that exists deserves to perish.” —Karl Marx, invoking a dictum of Goethe’s devil in The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Napoléon
In the eyes of Joseph E. Davies, who served for several years as American ambassador to the Soviet Union before the Second World War, no human being merited greater respect than Joseph Stalin. The ambassador spent much time reflecting on why he believed the Soviet dictator deserved the world’s—and his own people’s—heartfelt veneration. He finally realized that the answer had always been staring him square in the face: it was that Stalin’s “brown eye is exceedingly wise and gentle. A child would like to sit on his lap and a dog would sidle up to him.”[i] Leading French intellectual Jean-Paul Sartre discovered a similar truth about his own secular deity, Fidel Castro. “Castro,” he noted, “is at the same time the island, the men, the cattle, and the earth. He is the whole island.” Father Daniel Berrigan, meanwhile, contended that Hanoi’s prime minister Pham Van Dong was an individual “in whom complexity dwells, in whom daily issues of life and death resound; a face of great intelligence, and yet also of great reserves of compassion . . . he had dared to be a humanist in an inhuman time.”
The objects of all this adoration, of course, were despotic mass murderers. One crucial question, therefore, surfaces: what exactly inspires a person, and an entire mass movement, to deify a monstrous tyrant as a father-god who transcends the singular and encompasses, as Sartre put it, all the people and their land? The answer to this question helps illuminate the contemporary Left’s romance with Islamist jihadists, just as it helps crystallize the Left’s alliance with the most vicious totalitarians of the twentieth century.
The believer’s totalitarian journey begins with an acute sense of alienation from his own society—an alienation to which he is, himself, completely blind. In denial about the character flaws that prevent him from bonding with his own people, the believer has convinced himself that there is something profoundly wrong with his society—and that it can be fixed without any negative trade-offs. He fantasizes about building a perfect society where he will, finally, fit in. As Eric Hoffer noted in his classic The True Believer, “people with a sense of fulfillment think it is a good world and would like to conserve it as it is, while the frustrated favor radical change.”
A key ingredient of this paradigm is that the believer has failed to rise to the challenges of secular modernity; he has not established real and lasting interpersonal relationships or internalized any values that help him find meaning in life. Suffering from a spiritual emptiness, of which he himself is not cognizant, the believer forces non-spiritual solutions onto his spiritual problems. He exacerbates this dysfunction by trying to satisfy his every material need, which the great benefits of modernity and capitalism allow—but the more luxuries he manages to acquire, the more desperate he becomes. We saw this with the counterculture leftists of the sixties and seventies, and we see it with the radical leftists of today. Convinced that it is incumbent upon society, and not him, to imbue his life with purpose, the believer becomes indignant; he scapegoats his society—and ends up despising and rejecting it.
Just like religious folk, the believer espouses a faith, but his is a secular one. He too searches for personal redemption—but of an earthly variety. The progressive faith, therefore, is a secular religion. And this is why socialism’s dynamics constitute a mutated carbon copy of Judeo-Christian imagery. Socialism’s secular utopian vision includes a fall from an ideal collective brotherhood, followed by a journey through a valley of oppression and injustice, and then ultimately a road toward redemption.
In rejecting his own society, the believer spurns the values of democracy and individual freedom, which are anathema to him, since he has miserably failed to cope with both the challenges they pose and the possibilities they offer. Tortured by his personal alienation, which is accompanied by feelings of self-loathing, the believer craves a fairy-tale world where no individuality exists, and where human estrangement is thus impossible. The believer fantasizes about how his own individuality and self will be submerged within the collective whole. Hoffer illuminates this yearning, noting that a mass movement
appeals not to those intent on bolstering and advancing a cherished self, but to those who crave to be rid of an unwanted self. A mass movement attracts and holds a following not because it can satisfy the desire for self-advancement, but because it can satisfy the passion for self-renunciation. People who see their lives as irremediably spoiled cannot find a worth-while purpose in self-advancement. They look on self-interest as something tainted and evil; something unclean and unlucky. . . . Their innermost craving is for a new life—a rebirth—or, failing this, a chance to acquire new elements of pride, confidence, a sense of purpose and worth by an identification with a holy cause. An active mass movement offers them opportunities for both.
As history has tragically recorded, this “holy cause” follows a road that leads not to an earthly paradise, but rather to an earthly hell in all of its manifestations. The political faith rejects the basic reality of the human condition—that human beings are flawed and driven by self-interest—and rests on the erroneous assumption that humanity is malleable and can be reshaped into a more perfect form. This premise spawned the nightmarish repressions and genocidal campaigns of Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, and other Communist dictators in the twentieth century. Under their rule, more than a hundred million human beings were sacrificed on the altar where a new man would ostensibly be created.
The believer, of course, is completely uninterested in the terrifying ramifications of his pernicious ideas. Preoccupied only with alleviating his own personal pain, he is indifferent to what effect the totalitarian experiments actually have. That is why the Left never looks back.
It is crucial to emphasize, however, that the believer is indifferent to the consequences of his own ideology only in the sense that he needs to deny them in public. This is because he fears that their exposure will delegitimize his pursuit of his own neurotic urges. The believer therefore consistently denies what is actually happening within the totalisms he worships. Even if it is proven to him that his revolutionary idols perpetrate mass oppression and slaughter, he will take pains not to speak of it. But privately he approves of the carnage; indeed, that is what attracts him in the first place. The believer is well aware that violence is necessary to clear the way for the earthly paradise for which he longs. But he is careful never to acknowledge the actual process of destruction, and to always label it the opposite of what it actually is. Thus, in public, the believer pretends he is attracted to “peace,” “social justice,” and “equality.”
The lust for destruction is at the root of Marxism. In Marx’s apocalyptic mindset, catastrophe gives rise, ultimately, to a new, perfect world. And so it is no surprise that Marx often invoked, as he did in The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Napoléon, a dictum of Goethe’s devil: “Everything that exists deserves to perish.” Marxism, of course, did not disappoint in that part of its promise, earnestly wreaking the mass death and destruction its architect intended. It is this same dreadful formula of thought that led to the Left’s post-9/11 attraction to the ruins of Ground Zero.
While he dreams of destruction, the believer compensates for his lonely madness by telling himself that he is not estranged, but is actually a member of a vast community. The reality, however, is that all of his supposed friendships are with other estranged people, and he establishes no genuine, intimate ties outside the politics of the radical faith. Indeed, believers’ friendships are seldom based on what they might actually like about each other as human beings; they are based only on how their political beliefs conform to one another’s. As Che Guevara, Fidel’s executioner, stated it: “My friends are friends only so long as they think as I do politically.” This is why believers so readily accept the fact that their “friends” may be eliminated for the idea if they are deemed to stand in its way. As we will see in chapter 3, for instance, the American fellow traveler Anna Louise Strong and the Stalinist German writer Bertolt Brecht, two typical believers, were completely undisturbed by the arrests and deaths of their friends in the Stalinist purges.
The political faith, therefore, is not at all a search for the truth. It is a movement. For the believer, consequently, changing his views becomes nearly inconceivable, since doing so means losing his entire community and, therefore, his personal identity: he is by necessity relegated to “non-person” status. Even so, many believers have gathered the courage to abandon the movement. The believers who have walked through this leftist valley of membership death include, in our time, David Horowitz, Ronald Radosh, Eugene Genovese, Phyllis Chesler, and Tammy Bruce.
Horowitz has profoundly described the dark reality of how the ties between progressives include few actual human connections and are formed mostly on commitments to the same political abstractions. He recollects the haunting experience of attending his father’s memorial service, during which not a single “friend” of his father (a Communist) named anything he knew or liked about Phil Horowitz personally:
The memories of the people who had gathered in my mother’s living room were practically the only traces of my father still left on this earth. But when they finally began to speak, what they said was this: Your father was a man who tried his best to make the world a better place. . . . And that was all they said. People who had known my father since before I was born, who had been his comrades and intimate friends, could not remember a particular fact about him, could not really remember him. All that was memorable to them in the actual life my father had lived—all that was real—were the elements that conformed to their progressive Idea. My father’s life was invisible to the only people who had ever been close enough to see who he was.
The believer attempts to fill the void left by the lack of real human connection with a supposed love for humanity as a whole. The believer loves people from a distance, though he hates individuals up close and in particular. The human beings he imagines he loves, meanwhile, become part of his fantasy community.
These people whom the believer loves from a distance are always the supposed victims of capitalism and American “imperialism.” He agonizes over their suffering and revels in the moral indignation he feels about it. This dynamic is reinforced by the megalomania and narcissism from which most believers suffer. Convinced that the world revolves around him, the believer clings to the notion that the suffering of capitalism’s supposed victims is somehow his personal business. And to legitimize his identification with them, he envisions himself to be a victim of capitalist oppression as well. Meanwhile, by condemning his own society, he provides himself not only a sense of belonging with the other supposed victims, but also a feeling of moral superiority that helps counteract the humiliation he experiences as a result of his real-life estrangement.
A self-reinforcing circle emerges: the more victimized the believer envisions himself to be, the closer he feels to the supposed victims of capitalism; the more the victims of capitalism suffer, the greater the indignation the believer can feel through his empathy for them. The more victims there are to identify with, the larger the community the believer belongs to. It becomes clear why the existence (real or imagined) of the impoverished and alienated classes under capitalism is so vital for the believer. His entire identity is wrapped up in his vision of their victimization.
Guilt is instrumental in the rotation of this circle. Usually coming from and/or occupying a position of privilege, the believer is guilt-ridden about his material comfort and high social status. Ashamed that he is not a genuine victim, he creates the myth that he is. By making himself a member, in his imagination, of the poor, the oppressed, and the downtrodden, he feels a sense of atonement. He is paying his karmic debt by being a believer.
In this way the believer keeps his delusions secure. Yet because those delusions are founded on the shakiest of ground, the leftist must be extremely rigid in denying basic, common-sense realities (e.g., Communism is evil, al-Qaeda is a terrorist enemy that needs to be fought, and so on). If a leftist were to admit these things, his belief system would collapse entirely.
Thus the desperation with which the believer clings to his belief system becomes understandable. It fuels the rage and fury that is already at the root of his psychological makeup. At this point, another dynamic element enters the circle: the rage that manifests itself in the need to hold onto the belief system meshes with the rage that gave life to the belief system in the first place.
We can now gauge why believers cheered the 9/11 hijackers and intimately identified with them. The act of the hijackers confirmed, in the believers’ minds, the existence of an oppressed class—which legitimized their rage against America. They saw the hijackers as people who not only were performing a noble and necessary duty (i.e., dealing a deadly blow to America), but also were, like them, members of the poor, the oppressed, and the downtrodden classes. Thus the believers lived vicariously through the hijackers’ violent strike against the supposed oppressors.
Meanwhile, the believer is utterly indifferent to the real-life suffering of the actual human beings victimized by the regimes that he glorifies. The victims of adversarial ideologies do not fit into the believer’s agenda, and so they do not matter and are not, ultimately, even human in his eyes. Because they are not human for him, the believer sees them as enemies and, therefore, supports their extermination. Once again, in the mutated Judeo-Christian imagery, blood cleanses the world of its injustices and then redeems it—transforming it into a place where the believer will finally find a comfortable home.
Beneath the believer’s veneration of the despotic enemy lies one of his most powerful yearnings: to submit his whole being to a totalist entity. This psychological dynamic involves negative identification, whereby a person who has failed to identify positively with his own environment subjugates his individuality to a powerful, authoritarian entity, through which he vicariously experiences a feeling of power and purpose. The historian David Potter dissects this phenomenon:
. . . most of us, if not all of us, fulfill ourselves and realize our own identities as persons through our relations with others; we are, in a sense, what our community, or as some sociologists would say, more precisely, what our reference group, recognizes us as being. If it does not recognize us, or if we do not feel that it does, or if we are confused as to what the recognition is, then we become not only lonely, but even lost, and profoundly unsure of our identity. We are driven by this uncertainty into a somewhat obsessive effort to discover our identity and to make certain of it. If this quest proves too long or too difficult, the need for identity becomes psychically very burdensome and the individual may be driven to escape this need by renouncing his own identity and surrendering himself to some seemingly greater cause outside himself.
This surrender to the totality involves the believer’s craving not only to relinquish his individuality to a greater whole but also, ideally, to sacrifice his life for it. Lusting for his own self-extinction, the believer craves martyrdom for the idea. As Hoffer points out, the opportunity to die for the cause gives meaning to the believer’s desire to shed his inner self: “a substitute embraced in moderation cannot supplant and efface the self we want to forget. We cannot be sure that we have something worth living for unless we are ready to die for it.”
Believers’ desire to give up their lives for the cause therefore unsurprisingly pervades the Left’s history. The sixties radicals are typical of this phenomenon. Jerry Rubin’s Do It, for instance, is rife with the veneration of death. At one point, he and a mob of fellow radicals block the path of a police car carrying a Berkeley activist who had violated the university’s rules. Describing what became a thirty-two-hour ordeal, Rubin writes:
As we surrounded the car, we became conscious that we were a new community with the power and love to confront the old institutions. Our strength was our willingness to die together, our unity. . . . Thirty-two hours later, we heard the grim roar of approaching Oakland motorcycle cops behind us. I took a deep breath. “Well, this is as good a place to die as any.”
In another scene described by Rubin, an activist lies face down on a train track in Berkeley to stop a train from taking American GIs to the Oakland Army Terminal. With great awe, Rubin recounts how this person would have died if not for four fellow activists who hauled him off the tracks a second before the train roared through.
The phenomenon of believers’ supporting death cults, and idealizing their own martyrdom, has carried into the era of the terror war. The murder by Iraqi terrorists of American hostage Tom Fox in March 2006 is a perfect example of this phenomenon. Fox was among four members of the leftist group Christian Peacemaker Teams who were kidnapped in Iraq in November 2005. The group consistently speaks of its longing for death in its supposed quest for peace, and it is no coincidence that Fox died at the hands of the terrorists he was supporting. Similarly, the leftists who set out to serve as human shields for Saddam, or the International Solidarity Movement activists who stood in front of Israeli soldiers, were not engaged in anything new, but just continuing a long leftist tradition.
Another element of the believer’s diagnosis is the desperate search for the feeling of power, to help him counteract the powerlessness he feels in his own life. This is connected, in part, to the lessening of authority in Western society, which leads believers to scapegoat their own society and forge alliances with the authority represented by adversarial despotic regimes. This explains, as Potter notes, the progressives’ cult around Mao Tse-tung and “the compulsive expressions of adoration for a Hitler or a Stalin.” He writes,
Negative identification is itself a highly motivated, compensation-seeking form of societal estrangement. Sometimes when identification with a person fails, a great psychological void remains, and to fill this void people incapable of genuine interpersonal relationships will identify with an abstraction. An important historical instance of identification with abstract power has been the zealous support of totalitarian regimes by faceless multitudes of people. The totalitarian display of power for its own sake satisfies the impulse to identify with strength.
In our contemporary terror war, the believer has filled the void left by Communism’s disappearance with radical Islam. Instead of living vicariously through the oppression imposed by the KGB or the Red Guards, the believer now satisfies his yearnings through the violence perpetrated by suicide bombers. There is a balance in this scale. The less brutal an ideology is, the less interest the average believer has in it and the less praise he is inclined to give it. By contrast, when the death cult is in full gear, the believer supports it most strongly. As will be demonstrated in Part II, the fellow travelers always flocked to Communist regimes in largest numbers when the mass murder had reached a peak—Stalin’s terror, Mao’s Cultural Revolution, Pol Pot’s killing fields. And as Part IV will reveal, the Left’s rallying cry for militant Islam is loudest when the terrorists are waging their most ferocious campaigns against innocent civilians.
Rejecting the personal freedom that comes with modernity in a democratic society, the believer yearns for uniformity, stability, and purpose. Indeed, as will be shown in Part II, the fellow travelers who visited Communist countries consistently referred to the “sense of purpose” they imagined they saw on people’s faces—which they somehow never witnessed on faces in their own society. American sociologist Paul Hollander explains how these hallucinations are rooted in a “crisis of meaning”:
. . . the restlessness of estranged intellectuals and the hostility of the adversary culture are in all probability generalized responses to the discontents of life in a thoroughly modernized, wealthy, secular, and individualistic society where making life meaningful requires great ongoing effort and remains a nagging problem—at any rate for those whose attention does not have to be riveted on the necessities of survival.
The believer’s attraction to vicious adversarial cultures is also fed by a simple dynamic: he admires whomever his own society disapproves of and fears. As the enemy of his own society, the adversarial society is also the enemy of all the things the believer claims he hates therein (materialism, racism, sexism, homophobia, poverty, etc.). The historical evidence, however, proves that the believer is not truly concerned with these social ills at all, seeing that these are always far worse in the adversarial societies—and this is especially true of militant Islam.
The believer’s idolization of an alien culture goes back farther, of course, than the twentieth century. Alienated Western intellectuals have always dreamt of a foreign place they imagined as being better and purer than their own society. The idea of the “noble savage” was formulated in the late seventeenth century, but it is most closely associated with Jean-Jacques Rousseau, who saw man in the “state of nature” as essentially pure and good—before society corrupted him with greed and private property. The noble savage, in this paradigm, is born free and has not been shackled by the chains of civilization.
Following Rousseau, left-wing Western intellectuals have habitually looked to the Third World for personifications of primeval innocence. To alienated intellectuals of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, the noble savage represented everything that Western man was not. And since these intellectuals felt displaced in their own societies, they envisioned the noble savage as a guide who could help them navigate the stormy seas of life toward beachheads of meaning, satisfaction, and happiness. The classic case was Margaret Mead’s 1928 bestseller, Coming of Age in Samoa, which became the Left’s bible. Mead’s fantasies about a guilt-free sexual utopia were typical of the Western intellectual’s dreams about the noble savage.
To be sure, there wasn’t anything actually noble about the savage. And the believers knew that. But that is precisely why they admired him. They desired to harness his savagery in order to destroy all of their own society’s modernity and freedom—as did the 9/11 terrorists who transformed the World Trade Center into Ground Zero.
Thus the savage represented an idealized and mythical purity, but also the potential for destruction, which, as we have seen, the believer imagines to be the only path to renewed purity on earth. This is why Communism and the Third World blurred into each other as objects of affection for believers. As Hollander notes,
Certainly, the appeal China, Cuba, and North Vietnam had to the eyes of many Western intellectuals was part of the more general appeal of the Third World. Underdevelopment in the eyes of such beholders is somewhat like innocence. The underdeveloped is uncorrupted, untouched by the evils of industrialization and urbanization, by the complexities of modern life, the taint of trade, commerce, and industry. Thus, underdevelopment and Third World status are, like childhood, easily associated or confused with freshness, limitless possibilities, and wholesale simplicity.
Therefore, the manner in which Western intellectuals idealized the noble savage serves as a crucial lens through which to observe how the longing for purity and innocence leads the believer to a lust for death. Unable to cope with the confusion, risks, and challenges inherent in individual freedom, the believer dreams of a world where, as a child again, he will be taken care of by a father-god who has everything under control and can make the decisions. The road to this fairy-tale world, in turn, can only be paved with human corpses.
The writings of believers are filled with allusions to the necessity of this violent destruction before the secular utopia can be built. In his introduction to Rubin’s Do It, Black Panther Eldridge Cleaver affirms: “If everybody did exactly what Jerry suggests in this book—if everybody carried out Jerry’s program—there would be immediate peace in the world.” Suffice it to say that Rubin’s “program” consists of chaotic and scattered expressions of rage that have no unifying theme other than the desire to annihilate civil society. This is why Cleaver emphasizes that he can “unite” with Rubin “around hatred of pig judges, around hatred of capitalism, around the total desire to smash what is now the social order in the United States of Amerika, around the dream of building something new and fresh upon its ruins.” In other words, the “peace” that Cleaver and Rubin long for is the kind of peace that can be built only on Ground Zero.
In their yearning for a new earth, many Western intellectuals were also attracted to Fascism, the ideological cousin of Communism and Islamism. Communism, of course, had a more popular appeal, since it possessed the reputation (albeit totally undeserved) of being on the side of humanity. But many believers could have gone either way. Indeed, many of the modern Left’s ideas are rooted in Fascism, especially in the ideology and practices of Benito Mussolini. And the cult of sadism embodied in Hitler tempted their ideological appetites. Author Paul Berman reflects on Nazism’s glorification of death:
On the topic of death, the Nazis were the purest of the pure, the most aesthetic, the boldest, the greatest of executioners, and yet the greatest and most sublime of death’s victims, too—people who, in Baudelaire’s phrase, knew how to feel the revolution in both ways. Suicide was, after all, the final gesture of the Nazi elite in Berlin. Death, in their eyes, was not just for others, and at the final catastrophe in 1945 the Nazi leaders dutifully converted their safehouses into mini-Auschwitzes of their own.
Because the believer possesses so many of these dysfunctions and adopts so many embarrassing political dispositions to safeguard them, remaining in denial takes on a life-and-death importance. Everything is at stake when a political or social reality is confronted. More than anything, the believer must constantly rationalize the annoying presence of human happiness around him. Common people who are happy with their circumstances, and who do not see themselves as victims, pose a serious threat to the believer’s imagined community membership and thus to his personal identity. In response, the believer must tell himself that these individuals are content with their own society only because they have been brainwashed. In other words, they think they are happy, but in fact they are not. They are ruled by a “false consciousness” that capitalist forces have instilled in them, and they can only be liberated from this mental enslavement by the revolution that the believers have appointed themselves to lead.
For the radical, experiencing joy means succumbing to this false consciousness and becoming distracted from the constant vigilance necessary to launch a revolutionary battle. This is why Lenin refused to listen to music, since, as he explained: “it makes you want to say stupid, nice things and stroke the heads of people who could create such beauty while living in this vile hell.” For Lenin violent revolution was the priority—a priority endangered by the emotions music could induce.
Needing to remain angry and full of gloom no matter how comfortable and joyful life in a free society might truly be, the believer invariably holds his own society to full moral accountability, but never does the same for enemy societies. The clear implication is that his society is actually superior, since it must be held to a higher standard. But the leftist must assiduously deny this implication, lest he be forced to confront the bigotry on which his own belief system is based.
To keep this toxic mindset in place, the believer must convince himself that he knows something that ordinary human beings do not. He is above ordinary human desires and affairs. Thus, as Hollander shows, leftwing intellectuals have perfected the procedure of appointing themselves the moral antennae of the human race. Once again, we come full circle to the dark forces that make the progressive gravitate toward genocide: because believers consider themselves to be higher life forms, their inferiors become not only expendable, but necessary waste. They are nothing more than obstacles to the creation of Ground Zero and the subsequent rebuilding.
This is where the Western Left and militant Islam (like the Western Left and Communism) intersect: human life must be sacrificed for the sake of the idea. Like Islamists, leftists have a Manichean vision that rigidly distinguishes good from evil. They see themselves as personifications of the former and their opponents as personifications of the latter, who must be slated for ruthless elimination.
As Parts III and IV will demonstrate, both Islamists and Western leftists thus see America as the Great Satan. In the American tradition, the sanctity of the individual, his freedom, and his life come before any political institution. Henry David Thoreau wrote at the close of his famous essay “On the Duty of Civil Disobedience”: “There will never be a really free and enlightened State until the State comes to recognize the individual as a higher and independent power, from which all its own power and authority are derived.” In this formula, the sacredness of the individual is the political faith. For the believer and the Islamist, such a formula is anathema. The individual’s right to pursue happiness, enshrined in America’s foundations, interferes with the building of the perfect, unified social order; human joy and cheer are tacit endorsements of the present order that both leftist and Islamist utopians want to destroy.
The puritanical nature of totalist systems (whether Fascist, Communist, or Islamist) is another manifestation of this phenomenon. In Stalinist Russia, sexual pleasure was portrayed as unsocialist and counter-revolutionary. More recent Communist societies have also waged war on sexuality—a war that Islamism wages with similar ferocity. These totalist structures cannot survive in environments filled with self-interested, pleasure-seeking individuals who prioritize devotion to other individual human beings over the collective and the state. Because the believer viscerally hates the notion and reality of personal love and “the couple,” he champions the enforcement of totalitarian puritanism by the regimes he worships.
The famous twentieth-century novels of dystopia, Yevgeny Zamyatin’s We, George Orwell’s 1984, and Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World, all powerfully depict totalitarian society’s assault on the realm of personal love in its violent attempt to dehumanize human beings and completely subject them to its rule. Yet as these novels demonstrate, no tyranny’s attempt to turn human beings into obedient robots can fully succeed. There is always someone who has doubts, who is uncomfortable, and who questions the secular deity—even though it would be safer for him to conform like everyone else. The desire that thus overcomes the instinct for self-preservation is erotic passion. And that is why love presents such a threat to the totalitarian order: it dares to serve itself. It is a force more powerful than the all-pervading fear that a totalitarian order needs to impose in order to survive. By forbidding private love and affection, social engineers make the road toward earthly redemption much less serpentine.
As Part II will demonstrate, believers have been inspired by this form of tyranny in the Soviet Union, Communist China, and Communist North Vietnam, just as they have turned a blind eye to Castro’s persecution of homosexuals. Believers were especially enthralled with the desexualized dress that the Maoist regime imposed on its citizens. This at once satisfied the believer’s desire for enforced sameness and the imperative of erasing attractions between private citizens.
The Maoists’ unisex clothing finds its parallel in fundamentalist Islam’s mandate for shapeless coverings to be worn by both males and females. The collective “uniform” symbolizes submission to a higher entity and frustrates individual expression, mutual physical attraction, and private connection and affection. Once again, the believer remains not only uncritical, but completely supportive, of this totalitarian puritanism.
This is exactly why, forty years ago, the Weather Underground not only waged war against American society through violence and mayhem, but also waged war on private love within its own ranks. Bill Ayers, one of the leading terrorists in the group, argued in a speech defending the campaign: “Any notion that people can have responsibility for one person, that they can have that ‘out’—we have to destroy that notion in order to build a collective; we have to destroy all ‘outs,’ to destroy the notion that people can lean on one person and not be responsible to the entire collective.” Thus, the Weather Underground destroyed any signs of monogamy within its ranks and forced couples, some of whom had been together for years, to admit their “political error” and split apart. Like their icon Margaret Mead, they fought the notions of romantic love, jealousy, and other “oppressive” manifestations of one-on-one intimacy and commitment. This was followed by forced group sex and “national orgies,” whose main objective was to crush the spirit of individualism. This constituted an eerie replay of the sexual promiscuity that was encouraged (while private love was forbidden) in We, 1984, and Brave New World.
Valentine’s Day—a day devoted to the love between a man and a woman—is a natural target for both the Left and Islamism. As we shall see in chapter 10, imams around the world thunder against Valentine’s Day every year, and its celebration is outlawed in Islamist states. In the West, feminist leftists especially hate Valentine’s Day. Jane Fonda has led the campaign to transform it into “V-Day” (“Violence against Women Day”)—a day of hate, featuring a mass indictment of men. The objective is clear: to shatter any celebration of the intimacy that a man can hold with a woman, for that bond is inaccessible to the order. This impulse is also manifest when Western believers dedicate themselves to the cause of “transgenderism”—the effort to erase “gender,” which they believe is an oppressive social construct imposed by capitalism.
It becomes clear why totalitarian puritanism has taken on crucial significance in the terror war. As we shall see in more detail in Parts III and IV, Islamism, like its Communist cousin, wages a ferocious war on any kind of private and unregulated love. In the case of Islamism, the reality is epitomized its monstrous structures of gender apartheid and the terror that keeps it in place (from mandatory veiling and forced marriage to female genital mutilation and honor killings). Militant Islam’s ruthless persecution of homosexuality, a mirror image of Castro’s, is part and parcel of this phenomenon. Thus, while posing as the champions of gay rights and women’s rights, believers now ally themselves with the barbaric deniers of these rights.
All these ingredients in the believer’s psyche contribute to the contemporary Left’s romance with militant Islam, just as they engendered the believers’ love affair with Communist regimes throughout the twentieth century. That love affair is exemplified best by the pilgrimages that fellow travelers embarked on, wandering from one brutal despotism to the next. In order to give the context for the story of the Left’s dalliance with Islamism, we must first tell that haunting tale.
 Joseph E. Davies, Mission to Moscow (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1941), p. 217.
 Quoted in Humberto Fontova, Fidel: Hollywood’s Favorite Tyrant (Washington, D.C.: Regnery, 2005), p. 11.
 Daniel Berrigan, Night Flight to Hanoi (New York: Macmillan, 1968), pp. 125 and 130.
 Eric Hoffer, The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements (New York: Harper and Row, 1951), p. 6.
 For a comprehensive analysis of the how the leftist rejects his society for his own failure to find meaning in life, see Paul Hollander’s masterpieces, Political Pilgrims: Travels of Western Intellectuals to the Soviet Union, China, & Cuba 1928–1978 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1981) and Anti-Americanism: Critiques at Home & Abroad, 1965–1990 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992).
 See David Horowitz’s essay “The Religious Roots of Radicalism” in his book The Politics of Bad Faith, pp. 115–137.
 Hoffer, The True Believer, pp. 12–13.
 For a succinct compilation of Communism’s crimes and death toll in each country, see Stéphane Courtois, Nicolas Werth, Jean-Louis Panné, Andrzej Paczkowski, Karel Bartosek, Jean-Louis Margolin, Sylvain Boulougue, Pascal Fontaine, Rémi Kauffer, Pierre Rigoulet, and Yves Santamaria, The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression, trans. Jonathan Murphy and Mark Kramer (Cambridge, Mass., and London: Harvard University Press, 1999).
 For an excellent discussion of the Left’s failure to deal with the historical meaning and future implications of Communism’s collapse, see Horowitz, The Politics of Bad Faith.
 For one of the best works on how Marx’s dark vision—and the morbid ingredients of his own personal life—laid the foundation for Marxist terror, see the chapter titled “Karl Marx: Howling Gigantic Curses,” in Paul Johnson, Intellectuals (London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1988), pp. 52–82.
 Quoted in Fontova, Fidel, p. 77.
 The writers in The God That Failed—Arthur Koestler, Ignazio Silone, Richard Wright, André Gide, Louis Fischer, and Stephen Spender—represented the first generation that broke with the political faith and were dehumanized by their former comrades. See Richard Crossman, ed., The God That Failed (New York: Harper and Row, 1963). Yet while these individuals broke with Communism, many of them did so by rejecting Stalinism while holding onto a belief in a “democratic socialism.” David Horowitz and others, however, made a complete break with their past. Horowitz gives the most powerful testimony to the ordeal of breaking with the faith in his memoir, Radical Son: A Generational Odyssey (New York: Free Press, 1997).
 See the compilation of Horowitz’s best work in David Horowitz, Left Illusions: An Intellectual Odyssey (Dallas: Spence, 2003).
 Horowitz, The Politics of Bad Faith, p. 56.
 The best works analyzing the Left’s callous indifference to the victims of Communism are Hollander’s Political Pilgrims and Anti-Americanism.
 David Potter, History and American Society (New York: Oxford University Press, 1973), p. 307.
 Hoffer, The True Believer, p. 16.
 Jerry Rubin, Do It: Scenarios of the Revolution (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1970), p. 22.
 Ibid., pp. 35–36.
 The Christian Peacemaker Teams’ website is www.cpt.org. See chapter 16 for more details.
 Potter, History and American Society, p. 381.
 Hollander, Anti-Americanism, p. 468.
 Hollander, Political Pilgrims, p. 8.
 Inspired by her mentor, the leftist utopian Franz Boas, Mead embarked on her 1925–26 voyage to Samoa hungry to find a sexually liberated society where young people didn’t go through the difficult phases of adolescent sexual adjustment characteristic of “repressed” Western youth. She “discovered” everything she sought: Samoans found romantic love silly and were nonchalant about infidelity, divorce, homosexuality, and so on. As common sense suggested and later evidence confirmed, Mead’s “discoveries” were all false. The adolescent girls who were her informants made up the sorts of stories they sensed she wanted to hear. As anthropologist Derek Freeman concluded, Mead’s work represents the worst example of “self-deception in the history of the behavioral sciences.” See Derek Freeman, Margaret Mead and Samoa: The Making and Unmaking of an Anthropological Myth (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1983).
 Hollander, Political Pilgrims, p. 23.
 Rubin, Do It, pp. 7–8.
 Alastair Hamilton, The Appeal of Fascism: A Study of Intellectuals and Fascism, 1919–1945 (London: A. Blond, 1971). See also Richard M. Griffiths, Fellow Travellers of the Right: British Enthusiasts for Nazi Germany, 1933–1939 (London: Constable, 1980).
 For an excellent essay on the modern Left’s Fascist origins, see John Ray, “Left-wing Fascism: An Intellectual Disorder,” FrontPageMag.com, October 22, 2002. David Horowitz has shown how Nazi intellectuals, notably Martin Heidegger, have had an immense influence on the Left’s vision. See Horowitz, “The Left after Communism,” in The Politics of Bad Faith, pp. 36–39. See also Robert Conquest’s discussion of how Fascist and Communist totalitarianism blur into one another in The Dragons of Expectation: Reality and Delusion in the Course of History (New York: W. W. Norton, 2005), pp. 11–21.
 Paul Berman, Terror and Liberalism (New York: W. W. Norton, 2003), p. 45.
 Quoted in Paul Johnson, Modern Times: The World from the Twenties to the Eighties (London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1983), p. 51.
 Hollander, Political Pilgrims, pp. 44–45.
 Henry David Thoreau, Walden and On the Duty of Civil Disobedience (New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1854, 1961 ed). p. 304.
 For a succinct discussion of the Soviet anti-sexual revolution, see Ernst Pawel, “Sex under Socialism,” Commentary, September 1965, pp. 90–95.
 In Zamyatin’s We, the earliest of these three novels, the despotic regime keeps human beings in line by giving them license for regulated sexual promiscuity, while private love is illegal. The hero breaks the rules with a woman who seduces him—not only into forbidden love but also into a counterrevolutionary struggle. In the end, the totality forces the hero, like the rest of the world’s population, to undergo the Great Operation, which annihilates the part of the brain that gives life to passion and imagination, and therefore spawns the potential for love. In Orwell’s 1984, the main character ends up being tortured and broken at the Ministry of Love for having engaged in the outlawed behavior of unregulated love. In Huxley’s Brave New World, promiscuity is encouraged—everyone has sex with everyone else under regime rules, but no one is allowed to make a deep and independent private connection.
 Quoted in Peter Collier and David Horowitz, Destructive Generation: Second Thoughts about the Sixties (New York: Free Press, 1996), pp. 85–86.
 Ibid., pp. 86–87.
 Horowitz, “The Religious Roots of Radicalism,” pp. 115–137.
 David Horowitz, “V-Day, 2001,” in Left Illusions, pp. 315–318.
Why a Democrat State Senator Was Beaten by the Black Lives Matter Mob He Supported
[To get the whole story on the Left’s suicidal political odyssey, read Jamie Glazov’s United in Hate: The Left’s Romance with Tyranny and Terror: CLICK HERE.]
Editors’ note: Democrat State Senator Tim Carpenter is now yet another leftist abused by the totalitarian entity he worships. He was recently beaten up by the protesters he was supporting and filming outside the Wisconsin State Capitol. It was all expected, of course, since, as transpires in all communist revolutions, the Marxist mobs always come for the leftists who dance with them. This is precisely why the Socialist Taliban is now pulling down statues that symbolize progressive politics and also devouring their supporters such as Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, Ellen Degeneres and Jimmy Kimmel. In light of these latest developments, Frontpage has deemed it vital to run, below, Frontpage Editor Jamie Glazov’s article, How Vittorio Arrigoni Went to Gaza Hoping to Die, from the April 18, 2011 issue of PJ Media, which unveils how and why political pilgrims perpetually shed their own blood in their romance with tyranny and terror. Don’t miss it.
How Vittorio Arrigoni Went to Gaza Hoping to Die.
By Jamie Glazov
“Bit by bit, decorate it, arrange the details, find the ingredients, imagine it, choose it, get advice on it, shape it into a work without spectators, one which exists only for oneself, just for the shortest little moment of life.”
—Michel Foucault, describing the pleasure of preparing oneself for suicide.
The Italian cheerleader for Hamas, Vittorio Arrigoni, has died at the hands of the Islamic terrorism that he venerated throughout his life. The fellow traveler journeyed to the Gaza Strip to prostrate himself before his secular deity, Hamas, and to assist its venture of perpetrating genocide against Israelis. Islamic terrorists, who call themselves “Salafists,” showed their gratitude to Arrigoni by kidnapping, mercilessly beating, and executing him.
This episode was, of course, all part of an expected script: even though the media and our higher literary culture never discuss the reasons, the historical record reveals one undeniable fact: like thousands of political pilgrims before him, Vittorio Arrigoni went to Gaza to die. Indeed, consciously or unconsciously, in their unquenchable quest for sacrificing human life on the altar of their utopian ideals, fellow travelers always lust for death, and if not the death of others, then of their own.
It is no coincidence that a short while before “Salafists” killed Arrigoni, Juliano Mer-Khamis, a cheerleader of terrorism in Israel who, like Arrigoni, dedicated his life to praising the Palestinian death cult and working for the annihilation of Israel, was murdered by Islamic terrorists in Jenin. It is no coincidence that Rachel Corrie, the infamous enabler of the International Solidarity Movement, a group that disrupts anti-terrorism activities of the Israel Defense Forces, committed suicide in protecting Hamas terrorists by throwing herself in front of an Israeli bulldozer. And it is no coincidence that female leftist “peace” activists are routinely raped, brutalized, and enslaved by the Arabs of Judea and Samaria that they come to aid and glorify in their Jew-hating odyssey against Israel. And don’t hold your breath, by the way, waiting for leftist feminists to protest this phenomenon; they are faithfully following in the footsteps of American fellow traveler Anna Louise Strong and the Stalinist German writer Bertolt Brecht, two typical leftist believers who were completely undisturbed by the arrests and deaths of their friends in the Stalinist purges – having never even inquired about them after their disappearance.
Beneath the leftist believer’s veneration of the despotic enemy lies one of his most powerful yearnings: to submit his whole being to a totalist entity. This psychological dynamic involves negative identification, whereby a person who has failed to identify positively with his own environment subjugates his individuality to a powerful, authoritarian entity, through which he vicariously experiences a feeling of power and purpose. The historian David Potter has succinctly crystallized this phenomenon:
… most of us, if not all of us, fulfill ourselves and realize our own identities as persons through our relations with others; we are, in a sense, what our community, or as some sociologists would say, more precisely, what our reference group, recognizes us as being. If it does not recognize us, or if we do not feel that it does, or if we are confused as to what the recognition is, then we become not only lonely, but even lost, and profoundly unsure of our identity. We are driven by this uncertainty into a somewhat obsessive effort to discover our identity and to make certain of it. If this quest proves too long or too difficult, the need for identity becomes psychically very burdensome and the individual may be driven to escape this need by renouncing his own identity and surrendering himself to some seemingly greater cause outside himself.
This surrender to the totality involves the believer’s craving not only to relinquish his individuality to a greater whole but also, ideally, to sacrifice his life for it. Lusting for his own self-extinction, the believer craves martyrdom for the idea. As Eric Hoffer points out in his classic The True Believer, the opportunity to die for the cause gives meaning to the believer’s desire to shed his inner self: “a substitute embraced in moderation cannot supplant and efface the self we want to forget. We cannot be sure that we have something worth living for unless we are ready to die for it.”
Thus, Vittorio Arrigoni, Juliano Mer-Khasin, and Rachel Corrie were simply just faithfully continuing the long suicidal tradition of their political faith. We are well aware, after all, of the dark fate of the believers who journeyed to Russia after the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution to build communism; we are well versed of what happened to the leftist Iranians who returned to their country after the 1979 Iranian Revolution to aid Khomeini in building the Islamic paradise. Only those who cannot accept the true motivations of utopian believers can still deny what those political pilgrims were searching for in their odyssey to shed themselves of their own unwanted selves.
Does one need to excessively explain why “progressive” feminist Naomi Klein called out for bringing “Najaf to New York” in her infamous 2004 column in The Nation_,_ in which she reached her hand out in solidarity to Muqtada al-Sadr and his Islamofascist Mahdi Army in the Iraqi Shi’ite stronghold of Najaf? Bringing Najaf to New York would mean that the Iraqi Shi’ite stronghold, where Muqtada al-Sadr and his Mahdi Army at one time ran their torture chambers and sowed their terror, would be replicated on America’s shores. What could Naomi Klein possibly see admirable in the vicious nihilistic terror of the Mahdi Army? Would she remain alive for more than sixty seconds upon contact with it?
Is it possible that Klein’s impulses are related to those of Noam Chomsky, a Jew, who has distinguished himself, among other intriguing ways, by traveling to Lebanon to personally embrace the leaders of Hezbollah, whose stated top priority is to rid the world of Jews?
The murder by Iraqi terrorists of American hostage Tom Fox in March 2006 was a perfect example of this pathological phenomenon. Fox was among four members of the leftist group Christian Peacemaker Teams (CPT) who were kidnapped by Islamic terrorists in Iraq in November 2005. Aside from voicing support for the terrorists, one of the group’s most powerfully articulated themes entailed the longing for death. In the 1984 speech, “God’s People Reconciling,” for example, which gave rise to the formation of the Christian Peacemaker Teams, Mennonite minister Ron Sider urged his listeners: “We must be prepared to die by the thousands.”
It is not unsurprising that when British and American troops rescued the other three CPT hostages and saved their lives, the freed captives refused to thank their liberators — who had risked their own lives participating in the rescue — or to cooperate in a critical debriefing session with intelligence officers. Doug Pritchard, the co-chairman of CPT, went out of his way to tell the world that the kidnapping itself (and by implication Fox’s murder) was _America’s _fault, not the kidnappers’ or the executioners’. “The illegal occupation of Iraq by multinational forces,” he affirmed, was the “root cause” of the kidnappings. In other words, the devil made them do it.
The freed captives resented the fact that they had been liberated by the very forces they despised. And the rescuers had robbed the remaining hostages of the idealized fate suffered by Fox. Jan Benvie, an Edinburgh teacher who was getting ready to go to Iraq with the group in the summer of 2006, learned the lesson well. She announced before her departure: “We make clear that if we are kidnapped we do not want there to be force or any form of violence used to release us.”
To the end of his life, the French philosopher Michel Foucault, who supported and adored Khomeini’s killing fields, adamantly defended “everyone’s right to kill himself.” Suicide, he boastfully wrote in a 1979 essay, was “the simplest of pleasures.” Is it a coincidence that Foucault, who had attempted to kill himself several times out of guilt feelings regarding his homosexuality, passionately supported an Islamic death cult that murdered homosexuals?
Gaza terrorists have a long history of kidnapping and abusing, raping and killing those who come to aid and abet them.
Vittorio Arrigoni knew that very well.
In the end, Arrigoni’s story is the story of the Left – a story best summarized by the dictum of Goethe’s devil, which Marx perpetually invoked, as he did in The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Napoleon: “All that exists deserves to perish.”
Arrigoni is the contemporary poster boy for the political pilgrims who traveled to despotisms to help build the paradises in which they hoped to shed themselves of their own unwanted selves. They paid the ultimate price. And no lesser cost must be paid for the momentous transformation of sterilizing the unclean earth. Such disinfection can be made possible only by the purifying power of human blood — blood which, in the utopian enterprise, must, in the final chapter, become one’s own.
Jamie Glazov holds a Ph.D. in History with a specialty in Russian, U.S. and Canadian foreign policy. He is the editor of Frontpagemag.com, the author of the critically-acclaimed, United in Hate: The Left’s Romance with Tyranny and Terror, and the host of the web-tv show, The Glazov Gang. His new book is Jihadist Psychopath: How He is Charming, Seducing, and Devouring Us. Visit his site at JamieGlazov.com, follow him on Twitter: @JamieGlazov, and reach him at email@example.com.
©All right reserved.
She wasn’t the first, and won’t be the last. My latest in FrontPage:
President Trump on May 28 issued an executive order designed to prevent online censorship of voices that dissent from the hard-Left’s agenda, and since then Twitter’s Jack Dorsey seems determined to defy it and force a showdown. He has more than once flagged Trump’s tweets as supposedly inciting violence or committing some other transgression, and he continues his steady campaign to silence voices of freedom, including foes of jihad violence and Sharia oppression of women. His latest victim is the popular counterjihad writer Amy Mek, who had over 266,000 Twitter followers when she was summarily deplatformed.
Amy Mek’s RAIR Foundation reported recently that “on April 16, 2020, the @Amymek Twitter account was suspended (and still remains suspended) as 12 of her tweets were flagged for violating Twitter’s rules against ‘hateful conduct.’” The problem is that in these overheated days, virtually anything that Leftists don’t like is classified as “hateful conduct.” The twelve tweets in question all contained accurate information, as Amy herself documented in trying (to no avail) to get Twitter to reverse its ban. The issue with them was clearly not that they were spreading falsehoods or inaccurate information, but that they were telling truths that the Leftist elites would prefer not be known.
For example, on March 31, Amy tweeted: “INDIA: Coronavirus Jihad! Over 8K Indian Muslims & foreign nationals from Indonesia, Malaysia, Saudi Arabia, Bangladesh etc. attended a Coronavirus infected Islamic event at a Mosque in Delhi. Almost a dozen are dead & many infected – Jihadists have put many countries at risk.”
It was horribly hateful to suggest that an Islamic event was a source of the spread of coronavirus, right? Wrong. The day before Amy published her supposedly hateful tweet, Quartz India published a story entitled: “A religious congregation in Delhi could be the coronavirus hotspot India was trying to escape.” The next day, Al Jazeera published an article called “India tracks attendees after Muslim event linked to virus cases.” On April 2, the BBC published a backgrounder: “Tablighi Jamaat: The group blamed for new Covid-19 outbreak in India.” Even that far-Left propaganda organ known as the Washington Post put up a story on this issue: “India confronts its first coronavirus ‘super-spreader’ — a Muslim missionary group with more than 400 members infected.” Then two weeks later, on April 16, the BBC ran a piece entitled: “India coronavirus: Tablighi Jamaat leader on manslaughter charge over Covid-19.”
Quartz India, Al Jazeera, the BBC and the Washington Post were not banned from Twitter. They no doubt didn’t even receive warnings. Only Amy Mek, a high-profile critic of jihad terror, ran afoul of Twitter’s Left-fascist censors, because only she had a prior reputation for being skeptical of the Left’s open-borders, internationalist, pro-jihad program.
Nor can her own critics argue that Amy got flagged for placing the virus-ridden Islamic event in the context of jihad, when the spread of the coronavirus from that event was clearly accidental. Amy compiled no fewer than 24 news articles about members of Tablighi Jamaat, the host of the event, deliberately attempting to spread the coronavirus among non-Muslims. So in what way was this not, as she put it, “coronavirus jihad”?
Amy provided similar documentation of all the claims that were made in her 11 other supposedly hateful tweets, but to no avail. Clicking on the links for the offensive tweets now takes you only to a note saying “This Tweet violated the Twitter Rules” and giving a link to those rules, without bothering to explain exactly what rules were violated and in what manner.
And so it is clear. Amy Mek is not gone from Twitter for lying; Twitter has never flagged CNN or MSNBC, so clearly it has no problem with that. Amy Mek is gone from Twitter because she is the woman who knows too much – too much, that is, about the jihadist allies of the Leftists who are running amok in many of America’s major cities these days, too much about the insidious agenda of all too many of the adherents of the religion we must believe is peaceful on pain of charges of “racism” and “Islamophobia,” too much about the half-truths, distortions, and outright lies that pass for news and that the elites feed the masses today.
She was not the first, and will not be the last. I’ve said it before and will doubtless say it again: if this isn’t stopped and the speech of dissenters protected, America will cease to be a free society and slip rapidly into authoritarian and totalitarianism. And I’ll keep saying it until they silence me as well.
EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.
“It’s no coincidence that the riots here escalated in Fairfax, the icon of the Jewish community. I saw the Watts and the Rodney King riots. They never touched a synagogue or house of prayer. The graffiti showed blatant antisemitism. It’s Kristallnacht all over again,” Rabbi Shimon Raichik, a Chabad Rabbi in Los Angeles, wrote.
These scenes from what the media has falsely called peaceful protests and the Jewish community in the Fairfax neighborhood of Los Angeles has called the Shavuot Riots, after the biblical holiday during which the worst of the attacks on the community occurred, has fundamentally divided Los Angeles Jews.
Allyson Rowen Taylor, the former Associate Director of the American Jewish Congress in LA, and a co-founder of StandWithUs, passed on an account of hearing chants of, “F___ the police and kill the Jews.”
“The antisemitic chants are not being widely reported. This is insane and very, very scary,” she noted.
After the conclusion of Shavuot and the Shabbat, members of the Jewish community went to pick up the pieces, battling looters and checking out the damage. Even synagogues that had been untouched began evacuating their Torah scrolls to places of safety, unprecedented outside of a major natural disaster.
Aryeh Rosenfeld, an Orthodox Jewish small business owner in the area, described to the Jerusalem Post hearing screams of, “F___ Jews” during the riots and looting as he tried to protect his store.
The looting not only devastated countless small businesses in the area, but graffiti, some of it explicitly anti-Semitic, was scrawled across at least 5 Orthodox Jewish synagogues and 3 religious schools.
“The attack on our community last night was vicious and criminal. Fairfax is the center of the oldest Jewish community in Los Angeles,” Councilman Paul Koretz said. “As we watched the fires and looting, what didn’t get covered were the anti-Semitic hate crimes and incidents.”
Melina Abdullah, the lead organizer of Black Lives Matter in LA and a professor of Pan-African Studies at Cal State, had been very clear about her motive for bringing her hateful campaign to the area.
“We’ve been very deliberate in saying that the violence and pain and hurt that’s experienced on a daily basis by black folks at the hands of a repressive system should also be visited upon, to a degree, to those who think that they can just retreat to white affluence,” the BLM-LA co-founder ranted.
Melina Abdullah has a hateful record of appearing at Farrakhan and Nation of Islam events and praising the antisemitic hate group and its leader. When Facebook decided to remove Farrakhan over his hateful rhetoric toward Jews, the Black Lives Matter LA co-founder came to his defense.
“Facebook and Instagram’s decision to ban The Honorable Minister Farrakhan along with known white-supremacists represents the ultimate in false equivalencies,” Abdullah complained. “As a Black community, we should be very wary when others attempt to silence our leaders. We should also think about how to organize beyond social media. I continue to appreciate the Minister’s fearless leadership and intense love for our people.”
Farrakhan has praised Hitler, compared Jews to termites, and had declared, “Those who call themselves ‘Jews,’ who are not really Jews, but are in fact Satan”, claimed, “Hitler was trying to destroy the international bankers controlling Europe”, and boasted, “there has not been a black leader in America locked in a struggle with the Jewish community, but Louis Farrakhan.”
And Abdullah has made no secret of sharing Farrakhan’s hostility toward Jews.
When CNN parted ways with Marc Lamont Hill after he once again endorsed the murder of Jews, Abdullah accused CNN of standing “with a Zionist Israel that murders and terrorizes the Palestinian people.” The BLM-LA leader had complained that the Women’s March included “Zionists”.
At the Women’s March, Thandiwe Abdullah, her daughter, now the co-founder of the BLM Youth Vanguard, had said that as a “black Muslim girl, it is very important to me that Black Lives Matter also values the lives of the Muslim women in Palestine” and accused Israel of “genocide”.
Thandiwe also spoke at the Fairfax Black Lives Matter protest, where she ranted, “I know you want to tear some s___ up… if you want to set some corporations on fire, you know what? I don’t care about Target burning. I don’t care that capitalism burns. I don’t care that white people in their f____ office buildings are upset.”
Not just Melina, but Black Lives Matter LA, had partnered with the Nation of Islam, as she had noted in the past, “Minister Farrakhan was calling on folks not to spend their dollars with the White corporations that keep us oppressed, and so we partnered with the Nation and helped to amplify that call.”
The media not only failed to report the scale of vandalism against Jewish synagogues and schools, but treated it as a mysterious aberration while failing to report that BLM LA’s lead organizer had a history of anti-Semitism, and that BLM-LA had allied with one of the most vicious anti-Semitic hate groups around.
It did not note her own statement that “violence and pain and hurt” should also be “visited” on the people living and working in an area which included one of LA’s major Jewish communities.
The media repeatedly described Abdullah as an activist against police violence while ignoring her affinity for a racist black supremacist hate group whose leader has described Jews as satanic and subhuman.
The level of duplicity and malpractice by the media which covered this up is its own hate crime.
Imagine if a rally by a supporter of the KKK had turned into attacks on black churches and stores. The media would not be pretending that the two events were somehow separate and unrelated.
The national media, the local media, and even the local Jewish media failed to cover these facts.
In the aftermath of the Black Lives Matter riots, Los Angeles Jews, like millions of other Americans, found themselves deeply divided between standing with the rioters or their victims. And that unfortunately included some in the Modern Orthodox Jewish community.
After the attacks on synagogues in Fairfax, the major Modern Orthodox synagogues in nearby Beverlywood, the more modern counterpart of the community, conducted Black Lives Matter sessions. Even though these same synagogues had to rush out their Torah scrolls to protect them from a racist mob, they did not voice any pain or outrage, or offer solidarity to their fellow vandalized synagogues.
Unlike the statements by Young Israel and the Agudah, the Orthodox Union failed to even address the attacks on synagogues. Local leaders urged Orthodox Jews, who were the victims of the racist violence, to atone for their imaginary crimes of racism and to take up the hateful slogan of Black Lives Matter.
On a street in Beverlywood, high school kids from one of the more liberal schools in the area chalked slogans denouncing “white silence” and the same police who keep the mansions of their parents safe.
In Fairfax, the more traditional Orthodox Jews, in black pants and white shirts, in dangling tzitzit and black hats, had cheered the LAPD and other law enforcement agencies as they rolled in after the pogrom, and Persian Jews handed out donuts and snacks to the members of the National Guard.
There is an unbridgeable moral gap between the Chabad synagogue that opened its doors to the National Guard and the Modern Orthodox synagogues that opened their doors to black nationalists. And that gap in the Orthodox community can be seen in those teens cheering the LAPD in Fairfax and those chalking slogans against it in Beverlywood. That gap will determine which community has a future.
A community that teaches its children that they are privileged racists and that standing up for Israel and for their own homes and synagogues has to take a back seat to black nationalism, has no future.
As Rabbi Pini Dunner, of the Young Israel of North Beverly Hills, wrote, “If supporting BLM means collective suicide, you can count me out.”
Those Jews who have had the courage to speak up have been told that now is not a Jewish moment. This is a time for empathizing with criminals, not for standing up for the victims of anti-Semitism.
Jay Sanderson, the president of the Jewish Federation of Greater Los Angeles, worried that focusing on the attacks on synagogues would detract from the important cause of the protests.
“This is not about us,” Los Angeles Jews have been told.
And yet the vandalism of synagogues and businesses, the cries of, “F___ Jews”, and the “F___ Israel” graffiti on a synagogue eloquently testify to the inescapable truth of anti-Semitism that it is about Jews.
And if Jews don’t stand up when their synagogues and stores are attacked, who will?
Paint can be cleaned off, glass can be swept away, and family savings and dreams can be put away, but there is a bigger price to be paid for failing to stand up to the rise of someone like Melina Abdullah. Bigoted mobs don’t go away when you fail to stand up to them. They gain power and legitimacy. And the price of standing up to them grows while the toll they take with each attack becomes unbearable.
The true moral cost of the Los Angeles Pogrom can be measured in the fact that racists were able to get away with attacking synagogues while intimidating some Jews into keeping quiet and supporting them.
Two women are screaming at the cops outside the White House. pic.twitter.com/V9wTsoFDzf
— Julio Rosas (@Julio_Rosas11) June 23, 2020
EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.