A reader who goes by the fruitful name of Watermelonyo takes me to task for daring to say that the modern Left supports the Jihad. He expresses astonishment, and doubts my sincerity and even my sanity for saying such a thing.
Time does not permit me to post a complete list of the outrageous statements and actions by the Left who have defended the Jihadist enemy. I assume we all remember the human shields who volunteered, with their bodies and their lives, to defend Saddam against the West.
However, time does allow me to post a partial list, compiled by another man, of supporters and support for various aspects of Jihadist terror. I have not clicked through all the links, for there are too many. I have not reproduced his whole list, for it is too long.
The list below is from one Mark Humphrys, an Irish Atheist who ‘self-identifies’ as a Liberal-Right, because the Left support for Islamic Fascism drives him away from the Left.
I reprint his list in part, and his comments, without his permission, in the hope that he would approve that his work in lighting his torch will shine a light on this dark issue.
My point in posting this list is not to convince my honorable opposition that the Left does indeed support Jihad. My point is that it is not insane, nor even unreasonable, for an honest man to see what Leftwing figures have said and done and come to the conclusion that a collusion of sentiment exists.
I am proposing that I am that one figure whom Leftists steadfastly say does not and cannot exist: a reasonable man whose conclusions do not match Leftwing conclusions.
The part of the list I find saddest is the one placed at the top. These were Mr Humpheys’ heroes, the thinkers he trusted and admired,who betrayed their trust in him. If you click through no other links, click that one. It makes for interesting reading.
The words below are Mr Humphrys’.
The left’s reaction to 9/11
- Bush’s Secularist Triumph: The left apologizes for religious fanatics. The president fights them. – article by Christopher Hitchens an atheist for Bush.
- “Only one faction in American politics has found itself able to make excuses for the kind of religious fanaticism that immediately menaces us in the here and now. And that faction, I am sorry and furious to say, is the left. From the first day of the immolation of the World Trade Center, right down to the present moment, a gallery of pseudointellectuals has been willing to represent the worst face of Islam as the voice of the oppressed.”
- “George Bush may subjectively be a Christian, but he – and the U.S. armed forces – have objectively done more for secularism than the whole of the American agnostic community combined and doubled.”
- The Transformation of “Jihad Jack” and John Walker Lindh by Christian Beenfeldt – How can you go from trendy western liberal-left godlessness to Islamic religious fascism? You can if your trendy, non-judgemental godlessness is based on feelings rather than on reason:
- “Consider the typical “progressive” leftist, with his non-judgmental relativism. He is the embodiment of subjectivism: he holds that there are no absolute principles, that truth is “in the eye of the beholder,” and that “what’s right for you might not be right for me.” … the subjectivist makes clear that his choices are ruled by blind feelings.”
- “This is precisely also the basic policy of the religious dogmatist. There are an infinite number of opposing religious sects. How does the religionist decide which faith to embrace, which revelations to follow and which authority to obey? Does he scientifically gather the evidence, carefully weigh it, and then adopt the conclusion to which reason and logic point? Obviously not. He feels it. He feels that Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, astrology or whatever, is the right faith for him.”
- “So while the religionist may claim to uphold absolute truths, his beliefs are as arbitrary and baseless as those of the subjectivist. Thus, the paradoxical conversions of Jack Thomas and Walker Lindh – from subjectivist to religious dogmatist – aren’t so paradoxical after all; in both cases, the switch was merely from one form of emotionalism to another.”
- Australian Taliban Feted Again – Via the Medium of Dance – Scott Burgess is hilarious on Australian leftists’ mad support for the Australian Islamic convert and jihadist David Hicks. If he was a Christian violent fundamentalist nutcase the leftists wouldn’t touch him with a bargepole.
- Pimp my Soviet ride, Tim Blair, January 05, 2008 – On Australian leftists’ support for David Hicks.
- Open Letter from an Arab-American Student by Oubai Mohammad Shahbandar – A Syrian disgusted with the western left. – “They have never known the humiliation of living under the iron rule of an Islamic despotism. I have.”
- The left-wing solicitor Gareth Peirce‘s bland whitewashing of the women-hating, gay-hating, atheist-hating, mass-murdering religious savages, the Taliban.
- Afghans and the Guardian by Matthew Leeming – Afghan women, who suffered under the Taliban, listen to how left-wing writers in the west defended the Taliban, and get angry.
- Zachary Roth, May 22, 2009, at the left-wing Talking Points Memo, illustrates the double standards. On jihadis who planned to slaughter Jews at American synagogues: “It’s easy to laugh at this gang of goons — and we’ve done our share of that. But, frankly, it’s also hard not to feel some compassion for what looks like a group of struggling, credulous, under-educated men, existing on the fringes of society, who lacked the intelligence or willpower to avoid getting taken in by a government informant anxious to mitigate his own situation, and by their own vague understanding of radical Islam and the hole it might fill in their lives.” Can you imagine, just for one second, him saying that if these were white right-wing skinheads who planned to slaughter Jews at American synagogues?
- The Huffington Post runs Islamic religious apologetics:
- This moral sickness on the left has been building for a long time: