sda2.jpg

April 10, 2007

Cheering The Mullahs

Liam O'Brian responds to a collection of rather astonishing comments left at CBC's Your View re: Iran's seizure of British sailors;

Far too many people in this country have a glandular inability to rationally weigh pros and cons in a foreign policy discussion. Instead, since 2000-2001 or so, there has been a cheap and ignorant but popular way out of any and every foreign policy discussion -- bash Bush, bash the US, bash the Iraq mission . . . I wonder will they be forced to have an actual intelligent discussion post-'08 when Bush leaves? Or will there just be a different bogeyman?

Of course, when prodded on how they chose to evaluate the facts surrounding intervention in Iraq, these are the same genocidal-regime-apoloist chuckleheads who think it's fair to ignore what was going on in Iraq before 2003 too . . . Kurds, it seems, are worth less to many Canadians than - say - Turbot . . .


Precisely.

The sentiments are expanding into deeds - Anti-globalists reach out to Islamists;

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

James Clark of the Canadian Peace Alliance described how the anti-war coalitions are now supportive of Muslims who find themselves targets of racial and religious profiling and no-fly lists, and that there is active work in the peace movement to counter Islamophobia, "which the governments use to fan the flames to generate support for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.


So it would seem. A curiously narrow range of conflicts they've chosen to oppose - and from a curiously one sided perspective. One would think a group opposing war would avoid at all costs the temptation to pick favourites in a conflict.
Clark vowed that the Canadian peace movement, inspired by the Arab resistance in Lebanon and Iraq, would work with Muslims to defeat imperialism.

Is "chickendove" a word yet?

Iran's to your east, fellas. Knock yourself out.

(h/t Tim Blair)

Link sent along by a reader who asks, "Hamas is related to the Muslim Brotherhood. Does the RCMP know?"

Posted by Kate at April 10, 2007 8:26 AM
TrackBacks

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/5087

Comments

...two things come to my mind whenever I read left wing air-heads expunge their brain cells:

1. What do these folk do in the real world, like as in a job, getting groceries, going on family outings, and so on.

2. Sometimes I wish we'd just say "Frack it" and let the dice fall where they would and let these 'useful idiots' meet their true demise in the subway, bus, train bombings.

Then again, the only thing that keeps me going is the famous phrase by Edmund Burke:

"All that is required for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing."

Thank God there are good people out there who counter the inbreeding that seeps into Liberal, NDP, and Green party voters minds.

Posted by: tomax7 at April 10, 2007 10:02 AM

Political correctness is dying a slow death as reality starts to seep back in. Even the useful idiots will have to wake up when they see the true nature of their muslim allies.

Posted by: M1 Garand at April 10, 2007 11:36 AM

another reason to drive by Big A$$ SUV-type pick-up truck to work, rather than pack'in on the bus.
when the bombs go off in canuckistan, I don't want to be anywhere near pubic transit.

Posted by: aj in calgary at April 10, 2007 11:39 AM

canadian peace alliance = "chickendove".i think the word "chickenshit" might be more appropriate.

Posted by: c.j.g. at April 10, 2007 12:16 PM

L Wright

Ottawa

Just a question: if Iran is such a wonderful country as so many are saying then why do we accept so many refugees each year from Iran who claim they will be tortured if they are forced to return?

Should they all be denied and sent back to Iran as Iran obviously treats everyone so nicely?

My Fave, CBC comment

:)

Posted by: DrWright at April 10, 2007 12:34 PM

Imperialism? The most popular newborn boy's name in France is Mohammed, Belgium - Mohammed, Holland - Mohammed... Who's 'imperialist' now?

Once the Mohammed's are powerful enough to slit the throats of their left leaning 'useful idiot' allies, which they will most certainly do, it will unfortunately be too late for everyone else too.

Posted by: philanthropist at April 10, 2007 12:38 PM

If Chickendove is a word, then so is Chickenmartyr. Definition: a pious Islamic supremacist who hypocritically advises young men and women that it is the duty of every good Muslim to martyr themselves.

Posted by: shaken at April 10, 2007 12:46 PM

"Clark vowed that the Canadian peace movement, inspired by the Arab resistance in Lebanon and Iraq, would work with Muslims to defeat imperialism."

A clear case of someone who is very deluded...or very evil!

In either case it pays to "Know Your Enemy"!

Posted by: OMMAG at April 10, 2007 3:40 PM

drwright they come here to advance islam not to improve canada or their lives

Posted by: jmorrison at April 10, 2007 6:06 PM

rightcrazy.com has a video posted under Brain Nudge. It is from Heritage Foundation, features Evan Sayet , a former 'liberal-dem' who gives us some insight into the mind of the left, typically the ones leaving anti-American pro Iran comments at CBC.
He has a more intellectual analysis explaining liberlism as a mental disorder.

Posted by: vf at April 10, 2007 8:04 PM

My 'favorite' was the dipshit brad ulmer who 'supports Iran' even though he knows absolutely nothing about it; he 'also supports Cuba & Venezuela' and it's dollars to donuts he knows nothing about those places either.

His post continues, and goes downhill from there, which is an amazing feat, in and of itself.

Posted by: Nemo2 at April 11, 2007 8:33 AM

What I particularly liked in the referenced al-Ahram article is the following quote:

Ali Fayyad of Hizbullah ... referred to Gramsci’s argument about creating a common front at important historical junctures to induce historical change, after which the different groups can go their separate ways. What a lovely irony to have an Islamist quoting a Western communist theorist.

What is nicely ironic is how leftists, supposedly all about materialism and historical analysis, never learn from history. This is particularly true in instances of alliance formation. I mean, back in Weimar Germany, the tactical alliance Communists sought with the Nazis to overthrow the mutually-despised bourgeois democracy certainly worked out well for the left, didn't it? Or what about the alliance between Iranian leftists and the mullahs to depose the Shah? I'm sure Iranian trade unionists and gay rights groups are still thanking their lucky stars at how well that team-up worked. Lord knows where this will ultimately end up, but I'm sure it won't be the Muslims evidencing any regrets.

Posted by: Dudley Morris at April 11, 2007 3:50 PM
Site
Meter