Caucus of Corruption: The Truth about the New Democratic Majority

ORDER NOW!!!

On Amazon, Barnes & Noble, or The Conservative Book Club

 

Follow the book on Twitter.

Blogger Reviews.

Matt and Mark's Media Schedule.


September 13, 2007
The New Anti-Semitism

Victor Davis Hanson takes note of it:

Who recently said: "These Jews started 19 Crusades. The 19th was World War (1). Why? Only to build Israel."

Some holdover Nazi?

Hardly. It was former Prime Minister Necmettin Erbakan of Turkey, a NATO ally. He went on to claim that the Jews -- whom he refers to as "bacteria" -- controlled China, India and Japan, and ran the United States.

Who alleged: "The Arabs who were involved in 9/11 cooperated with the Zionists, actually. It was a cooperation. They gave them the perfect excuse to denounce all Arabs."

A conspiracy nut?

Actually, it was former Democratic U.S. Sen. James Abourezk of South Dakota. He denounced Israel on a Hezbollah-owned television station, adding: "I marveled at the Hezbollah resistance to Israel. . . . It was a marvel of organization, of courage and bravery."

And finally, who claimed at a United Nations-sponsored conference that democratic Israel was "much worse" than the former apartheid South Africa, and that it "undermines the international community's reaction to global warming"? A radical environmentalist wacko?

Again, no. It was Clare Short, a member of the British parliament. She was a secretary for international development under Prime Minister Tony Blair.

I have no reason to doubt Hanson, but the bit about Abourezk floored me - that a former United States Senator could be that anti-Semitic along the lines of the Protocols is something outside my normal frame of reference. But a check of the web shows that, indeed, Abourezk did say that - and has carried out several actions since the start of the War on Terrorism (visiting pre-liberation Iraq, eg) which at least skirt treason.

What are we to do about this rise of anti-Semitism? The vileness of the attacks is falling to a level not seen since Striecher baited Jews in Nazi Germany's Der Sturmer. I can only say this: it is becoming clear to me that we are embattled - the target today of vitriol might be Jewish people, but the ultimate target is Judeo-Christian civilization, and its leading defender, the United States of America. If you check that link about Der Sturmer, you'll note that the anti-Semites of that rag also spared a bit of time to attack Christianity, too...in the odd world of the anti-Semite, the Jews were responsible for everything - communism, capitalism, Christianity...all the things felt to hold humanity back from rising to the heights.

The people who say the "Jewish lobby" controls American policy; the people who say that Mossad worked with President Bush to carry out 9/11; the people who say that if only we'd force Israel to "make peace" with the Palestinians; the people who say we deserve terrorist attacks because of our past policies; the people who blow up shopping centers in Tel Aviv; the people who set IED's in Anbar; the people who rule Iran and Syria...they are all, in the end, of a piece. There is some difference in degree and some difference in emphasis, but the bottom line is that they are all at war with all we hold dear - all of them hate us, all of them want us destroyed, all of them will never compromise with us.

I've often spoken of a civil war here in the United States - a, thank God, non-violent civil war for control of America...but to put it into a global context, we are engaged in a quite violent civil war; humanity is divided against itself and the competing world views have resorted to armed struggle to determine which will prevail. We are not out numbered in this battle - indeed, at least half the world's population is on our side - but we are over-powered with the exception of the fact that the United States, with its still vibrant Jewish and Christian communities, stands bulwark against the destruction of all Jewish and Christian communities around the world. The plain fact of the matter is that our brothers and sisters in places like South America and central Africa cannot survive without the United States. Without us, they would quickly be subdued, depending on what part of the globe they live in, by Islamists, or secularists, or socialist tyrants.

The United States is the key to the global struggle - as long as the United States stands tall, the balance of power is on the side of our Judeo-Christian civilization. On the other hand, if America falters - if it turns itself over to its domestic secularlists and socialist tyrants - then all is lost. Only America has the power to defend it all, and America can only do this as long as defenders of our civilization hold the balance of power here. What this means is that we must set to work with a will from now on to ensure that our side wins the political battle - there is just too much at stake for anyone to sit it out or to "punish" someone for lack of conservative perfection. We can argue over details later - right now we've got to save our civilization.

Posted by Mark Noonan at 09:09 AM | Comments (17) | Track



Comments

And if we are not careful, they may win. All of them see compromise and negotiation as tactics to allow them to re-build after an attack, not as a valid way to end the violence. The only way they see to end the violence is when all who do not believe as they do are dead, then their war is over.

Posted by: kjstrouble [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 13, 2007 10:23 AM


Mark-

You really shouldd start getting your quote from the original sources instead of reaching into the echo chamber for this stuff.

Real Clear Politics?? !! !!

Right wing bilge dressed up as news is all that site offers.

Here's what the senator actually said,

Interviewer: "But why did this sentiment of hatred increase after 9/11?" (meaning hatred of Muslims in the US through shows like 24 and in the pop culture realm)

James Abourezk: "Well, because the Arabs who were involved in 9/11 cooperated with the Zionists, actually. It was a cooperation. They gave them the perfect excuse to denounce all Arabs. It's a racist sort of thing, really racist - you know, picking out these 19 or 20 terrorists - they were terrorists - and saying all the Arabs are like them. So, you know, people in America don't really look at it that deeply, and they accept what the government and the press are saying."


So it would seem that the senator IS calling these 19 muslims terrorists, Also he is upset that the West is taking these 19 terrorists as the model for all of Muslim society. What he's saying is that Israel sees all muslims as terrorists and these 19 played right into that stereotype. That's what he meant by "cooperation"

Mark, next time do some research that's "off the republican reservation".

Posted by: TheMarkOfZero [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 13, 2007 10:46 AM


Zero, pretty stupid use of the word "cooperation". You wrote, "Israel sees all muslims as terrorists and these 19 played right into that stereotype".

1. Where are 'muslims' most free in the middle east? Where do they have the opportunity live and participate in a democracy in the ME?

2. The West and Israel are hardly painting ALL MUSLIMS as terrorists. The reverse is actually much more accurate. The THOUSANDS of muslims that have slaughtered thousands of innocents around the globe are rarely denounced. In fact, they are reverred as 'martyrs'.

THAT is the problem. Abourezk wants to obfuscate it.

Posted by: LaMano [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 13, 2007 12:08 PM


How racist of those Jooooos to lump Moslems together with the Moslem terrorists; why don’t they behave the same way toward the Swedes, and Poles, and Slovaks that hijacked the planes and flew them into the towers. What about the Brazilians and Japanese that daily rain Katyusha rockets over Israel?

Posted by: Rathaven [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 13, 2007 12:50 PM


Zero, while Abourezk does indeed accuse the West of picking out 19 or 20 terrorists and saying that all Arabs are like them, and denounces that stereotype, he is still purveying another stereotype, which is that Zionists are racist toward Arabs. Ironically, many in the West, starting with president Bush, have bent over backwards to distinguish between the 9/11 terrorists and muslims or Arabs in general, claiming that the terrorists have "hijacked" a religion. If anything, our error is not understading the terrorists use of Koranic verses to justify their actions.

LaMano, in fairness to Zero, what Zero wrote was, "What he's saying is that Israel sees all muslims as terrorists and these 19 played right into that stereotype", "he" referring to James Abourezk. So this attitude is Abourezk's, not Zero's.

and Poles, and Slovaks that hijacked the planes and flew them into the towers.

Oh-oh, now someone's picking on my ethnic groups.

Posted by: Bigfoot [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 13, 2007 01:53 PM


Also he is upset that the West is taking these 19 terrorists as the model for all of Muslim society.

Well then--he, as are you, is wrong, Zeroballs. We in the West don't consider these 19 pigs, or the AQ and Taliturd pigs, the model for all of Muslim society. This is plain hype, and you were spoon-fed this hype, since 9/11, by your leaders in D.C., and the drive-by media. Also, you get your crap from left-wing rags, so don't be so polyannish(sp?), boy...

Posted by: 1H8L1BS and I'm a Grammar Nazi, and btw, Ted Nugen [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 13, 2007 06:15 PM


What??? Another sleazy, dishonest piece of Republican propaganda? I can hardly believe it! You mean Abourezk isn't a raving, Jew-hating Nazi that believes in the Protocols of the Elders of Zion at all, but simply believes that Israel embraces racist policies towards Arabs and dishonestly paints all Muslims as anti-Semites? But I guess that's really the same thing after all , isn't it (at least in the limited brain capacity of Republicans), since being wrong about Israel is pretty much the same thing as wanting to put all Jews in concentration camps?

And it's always instructive to watch Republican fanatics entertaining themselves. Lately, we've got the half-wits constanly throwing "Jooooos" into their idiotic observations, to somehow suggest that everyone but rightwing grunting baboons are all anti-Semitic. Gee, that might be a real powerful point if fewer than EIGHTY-SEVEN PERCENT of Jews voted for the Democratic Party in the last election, wouldn't it? Listening to Republicans yap about Jew-haters is like listening to Larry Craig talk about the Hommosexual Lifestyle right before he wraps his lips around a big, throbbing, rock-hard bone on the floor of a public toilet.

Posted by: legaleagle [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 13, 2007 07:12 PM


Well, legaleagle, you simpering twit, the question asked was "why did this sentiment of hatred increase after 9/11?" and the answer was, "It's all the Jews fault"

But, go ahead and defend your fellow travelers, intellectual lick-spittle’s and other useful idiots; if it helps you to justify your irrational hatred.

Btw, Rathaven is a Jew.

Posted by: Dasein Libsbane [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 13, 2007 07:59 PM


you know, picking out these 19 or 20 terrorists - they were terrorists - and saying all the Arabs are like them. So, you know, people in America don't really look at it that deeply, and they accept what the government and the press are saying."


So it would seem that the senator IS calling these 19 muslims terrorists, Also he is upset that the West is taking these 19 terrorists as the model for all of Muslim society. - zero

No, what he's doing Zero is calling the average American stupid, unable to reach their own conclusion than what's fed to them by the media.
That's a very typical liberal assertion, and I guess that's why the left is frantic about controlling the media through the "fairness doctrine".

Posted by: neocon [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 13, 2007 10:39 PM


Hommosexual(sic) Lifestyle

Why are these terms capitalized, legalbeagle? Are they important in your life? Maybe so, considering your graphic description of an erect penis...

Posted by: 1H8L1BS and I'm a Grammar Nazi, and btw, Ted Nugen [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 13, 2007 10:42 PM


legaleagle - wow. Don't do crack before posting. But thanks for a good example of a foaming at the mouth hate filled "liberal." Really.

Posted by: Kahn [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 13, 2007 10:53 PM


Bigfoot-

Thanks for a sane and sincere response. It's nice to see that someone can converse without resorting to insults.

I agree with you that Bush has done a sincere job trying to avert the stereotyping of Muslins.

I wish however that those on the Right better received the message. Just going to sites like LGF and even sometimes on this site, I believe that message may be falling on deaf ears.

The original reason I posted into this topic was due to Mark’s “short-handing” of the former Senator’s comments. Although I don’t agree with everything the Senator says I think he does make some valid points and they do need a FULL airing.

I think you can agree that the anger over injustices both real and perceived is very high on both sides in the Middle East. What the former Senator is trying to do is speak to that condition even though at times he does practice an excess of favoritism towards one side. His excesses aside, that message is sound.


Anyhow thanks again for the response.

Posted by: TheMarkOfZero [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 14, 2007 02:05 AM


Zero,

The message is sound? That Hezbollah are freedom fighters?

I think you need to reconsider...the man is a lunatic anti-Semite. Period.

Posted by: Mark Noonan [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 14, 2007 02:16 AM


I agree with you that Bush has done a sincere job trying to avert the stereotyping of Muslins.

**ingests smelling salts to clear head**

Be careful, Zero--it's not prudent for you to give the Prez any props. If any of your troll buds reads this, they're gonna give you the Lieberman/Baird/Hassleback(sp) treatment...

Posted by: 1H8L1BS and I'm a Grammar Nazi, and btw, Ted Nugen [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 14, 2007 06:25 AM


Keefer-

I don't see where your shock at my statement is coming from.

I'm proud to be a liberal and as a liberal I try to take a full and fair view of all people and beliefs, even those that I disagree with. That doesn't mean that I compromise my own in doing so.

Believe me, my Blue credentials are well beyond reproach.

Bush has given me plenty of evidence to make me believe he's a bad president. However, neither I nor my brother, who has a much more personal view on him than I, have seen anything that would suggest he's a racist. Quite the opposite actually.

Posted by: TheMarkOfZero [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 14, 2007 11:42 AM


Zero,

Your view, within your political sphere, would hardly be shared by its majority.

We, on the right, are constantly assailed with lies that W is a racist who doesn't care about ethnic minorities (except for those in his administration of course). I am sure you can understand our skepticism regarding your statements.

I appreciate your explanation confirming their veracity however.

Posted by: GOP 4 ME [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 14, 2007 01:35 PM


I'm proud to be a liberal and as a liberal I try to take a full and fair view of all people and beliefs, even those that I disagree with.

Well then--maybe you're a true liberal, and not one of these progressive kooks who hijacked liberalism.

History will judge President Bush; that's all I'll say about that subject. If you think he's a bad President, then we'll have to agree to disagree. Unless your reasons are akin to libtardT's reasons, you know, the bullsh*t reasons...

Posted by: 1H8L1BS and I'm a Grammar Nazi, and btw, Ted Nugen [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 14, 2007 06:57 PM