An Insider’s Account of Friday’s Cairo Debriefing;
It is now abundantly clear that the core leadership of Canada’s so-called anti-war movement consists of obsessive Israel-haters, apologists for theocratic fascism, and admirers of the death cult Hamas and the totalitarian Hezbollah.
Nobody can accuse me of “smearing the peace movement” anymore. The leadership of the Canadian Peace Alliance, the Toronto Stop the War Coalition and other such groups now openly boasts of its progress in converting the “antiwar” movement in Canada into a joint venture with the Islamist far right.
Last Friday in Toronto, these people made a full and self-congratulatory accounting of themselves and the promises they made at the recent “anti-war” convergence in Cairo (“Towards an International Alliance Against Imperialism and Zionism”), attended by some of the world’s most foul jihadists, Islamists and Jewish-conspiracy fetishists.
This really isn’t news to me. The TCSW has long been on the side of radical organizations like Hezbollah.
Two years ago, the famously cut-off the microphone on an Afghani woman who spoke out against the Taliban, because instead of criticizing the US, she chose to use who microphone time to ALSO condemn oppressive regimes in the Arab world. It should be noted that she did not support US foreign policy, in fact, she condemned it.
But the fact was, the Toronto Coalition to Stop the War did not want to let her speak.
They are a very balanced organization.
Wow, these are interesting times we live in. Soon it will be time to choose sides I think.
well we all know the side the NDP, Toronto Star and CBC will be on.
The Canadian peace movement leadrship roster reads like a who’s who of deconstructionst bolsheviks and 5th column sweat hogs.
Hope the RCMP int-ops has dossiers on them all and they are never left alone again.
Glavin’s reference to Mosley in describing Galloway is very apt. Dad told me in the 1930’s that England was infested with Nazi apologists and sympathizers, led by Mosley and usually from the chattering classes, who always blamed their own nation first.
Speaking a thousand words is the graphic on Glavin’s blog.
1937, 2007 – how little has changed.
I started wondering how Layton would be connected.
then I had to regroup…this is too serious for him…I have a feeling he would be too naive to see these connections even if they were stepping on his toes. Lefties and ‘peaceniks’ don’t want to chose sides…that would means defining principles, and what they stand for…and they have that mushy, all inclusive mental thing deluding them.
The writing is on the wall . Our present government is up against bigger things than Taliban Jack.I have a feeling Harper knows, Iggy wouldnt admit it, and Dion and Layton don’t have a clue.
More pseudo-journalism from Kate. Can’t convince Canadians that the War in Afghanistan is the right thing to do so she tries some nonsensical “guilt-by-association” tripe to smear anyone who doesnt support the war.
Thank god this blog has very limited reach vis-a-vis more credible news sources.
A) I am not, nor have I ever purported to be a “journalist” of any type. Had I wanted to be a journalist, I’d have chosen that pseudo-profession instead of commercial art.
B) Unlike you, most readers here seem to possess the ability to distinguish between material I’ve written, and that quoted from another source. If you wish to take issue with the legitimacy of the comments, click the link and take your concerns to the person who wrote them.
Really, get a clue.
I think you are the one that needs to get a clue Kate. You have a blog that links to and quotes from various sources; and the way you present that material–the quotes you select, the sources you choose, and the message you convey–is “pseudo-journalism” whether you “purport to be” a membver of that trade or not.
Furthermore, when you post an inflamatory and rhetorically loaded quote like the one here– without comment might I add–you implicitly endorse the contents thereof. If you are purporting to plead ignorance and don’t realize that this is what you are doing then even I–who has a rather dim view of your political understanding generally–have overestimated your intelligence.
The SWP, contrary to Glavin, is a Trotskyist group. I mention this just so you know that your preferred, non-msm, “reliable” news source also make serious errors.
make that “sources”
Boy, that link got under a few leftie skins.
Heh.
I wonder what Lennon would think of the “peace” movement marching arm in arm with the board of directors for Decapitations R Us … (no, actually I don’t.)
KC just woke up and is having a difficult time adjusting to modern technology and the freedom we have in blogs. Would you like to go back to where you came from KC?Was it a coma, or one of those nations where woman are not allowed to think for themselves?
Or maybe you are a journalist feeling a little threatened?
I don’t find it all too surprising when the left-leaning people accuse of “guilt by association” when they practice in the ever classic “Bush = Harper” hyperbole. And vice-versa with right-leaning people doing “peaceniks = Taliban”. Mind you, rather than referring to the link or article of certain groups, people tend to generalize instead.
I love it when politicians accuse each other of being scary extremists of doom. I really do… *sigh*
More drive by smearing eh Kate?
If you oppose the War in Afghanistan (which I dont for the record. I actually think we need to tough it out) and protest against it you can’t choose who else attends at the demonstration. That doesnt make your view any less principled or valid. Nor does it mean that you too are an Israel-hating jihadist. I am sure that in supporting the war you find common cause with a great number of no-less sleazy individuals than the ones you refer to–people who support the war because they want to civilize non-western cultures, expand markets by force, or just want to “kill the darkies”.
If you wish to expound the virtues of the war then by all means go right ahead (I would probably agree with you albeit not necessarily for the same reasons). But this kind of cheap drive by smear that seeks to delegitimize the anti-war movement by attacking key organizers and associating principled objectors with the same you really lower the tone of debate (as usual… Libranos anyone?) and adds no reasoned supporting arguments for the war.
By the way – I don’t recall stating that I didn’t endorse the content of that particular link. I don’t require the observations written there to confirm what has been obvious for some time now – that the left is aligning itself with radical Islam – in the way they cozy up to murderous dictatorships everywhere.
However, to state that because I link and quote another source that I – by default – endorse it, is patently absurd and demonstrably false. I’d refrain from commenting on the “intelligence” of others, if I were you.
(Furthermore, if you want to accuse others of “drive by smears” – start by using your real name.)
“I wonder what Lennon would think of the “peace” movement marching arm in arm with the board of directors for Decapitations R Us … (no, actually I don’t.)”
Prescinding for a moment from the main issue, who cares what Lennon would think? The man was hardly a deep thinker!
I can’t say this link got under my skin any more than any other sda link. (Most of them do.) I just wanted to point out an error. It’s a “glass houses” point.
I believe conservatives were called foolish 20 years ago for even suggesting that multiculturalism would allow overseas problems to be imported into Canada. If you encourage everyone to keep their identity they will. They will also keep their hatreds and bigotries.
What is “the left” Kate? As if people of a particular political perspective are a homogenous group. I’ve noticed the same unholy alliance between radical islamists and certain leftist politicans that you speak of. That does not in any way delegitimize the views of those who don’t think we should be in Afghanistan–which you clearly seek to imply.
I’d really like to see you ‘demonstrate’ how my assertion that you endorse the contents of your link is ‘false’. Its a matter of perception and by posting a link and quote without comment unless the context suggests otherwise appears to be an implicit endorsement.
KC: “What is “the left” Kate?”
By the left, people at sda mean anyone to the left of themselves! That’s covers a VERY wide swath of political opinion and any number of fundamental disagreements but they make no distinctions. They don’t distinguish a liberal from a social democrat or a social democrat from a marxist or a marxist from an anarchist. Nor do they distinguish “post-marxists” from marxists. And it’s utterly futile to mention any of this.
exile would like us to believe MSM sources are reliable…???Reuters photoshop anyone?…and that is just one…
Personally I believe in peace too much to be a pacifist. Those in the “peace” industry read appeasement industry will do nothing if not perpetuate a war and bring untold suffering on innocent bystanders.
This is really cute. People gauging themselves on the “right” or “left” and acting all smug about it. It’s like people are testing their political awareness for the first time. Brilliant. I suppose next people will talk about “neo-conservatives”, “neo-liberals”, “libertarians”, “fascists”, “communists”…
I guess it is hard if people wanna type “left-leaning” or “right-leaning” everytime, but hey, let’s troll away, shall we?
I got that impression exile. I guess “the left” is anyone who isn’t pro-war (ANY war no matter how unjustified, because if our troops are involved we MUST support that war), anti-government spending on anything except roads in rural Saskatchewan, inconsistently secular (when it comes to islam) and theocratic (when it comes to the role of Christianity in a society), and a blind devotee of Stephen Harper (still waiting on your criticism of the Harper budget, and nation resolution Kate). In other words someone who doesn’t agree with everything Kate does.
Oh well. I guess I should be getting off to my Hamas meeting even though I am in favour of the War in Afghanistan, staunchly secular, and uncomfortable with socialism because I am part of the ill-defined “left”.
vf: “exile would like us to believe MSM sources are reliable…???Reuters photoshop anyone?…and that is just one…”
That’s not what I said. Read it a few more times.
My point was that right wing bloggers are as unreliable as the msm. I abhor the msm just as much as you do, though for different reasons.
Anyone who gets there news from any one source is a fool. You have to get a wide range of sources to get an idea of whats going on–even sources on the lunatic fringe (which is why I am here).
exile would also like to write the ‘blog laws’ ‘cuz we have way too much freedom here y’know
…lefties are like that.
Alex, the issue is whether the “right” and “left” (or “right-leaning” and “left-leaning”, if you prefer) typology used here is adequate for useful political discourse.
anon: “exile would also like to write the ‘blog laws’ ‘cuz we have way too much freedom here y’know”
And where have I said that?
Seems to be a reasonable post to toss out there. I think readers here are capable of distilling what the point of the article is for themselves, unlike a newspaper which “explains it all” for me.
I create my own context, medium is the message…yada yada
As for Lennon. It is an interetsing question. I do not believe Lennon would have been part of that. Lennon, I believe, would have recognized the fascism.
Proof, look at the song Revolution. In interviews he essentially said that people said the word without understanding the meaning. And that going around carrying pictures of Mao, which he was no fan of,would only undercut the credibility.
Say what you will about Lennon but he was not and enemey of my enemy type person. OBL would have offended him as would many of the others. He likely would have had lots of criticsim for Bush as well. But I pretty sure he would be horrified by “the left” playing footsie with the head choppers.
Anyway, he is dead so what he would think doesnt really matter anyway.
“You have to get a wide range of sources to get an idea of whats going on–even sources on the lunatic fringe (which is why I am here).”
Really? I thought you were here just like any other political partisan hack who strolls around the blogosphere. After a couple of insults and put-downs, you can go back to whatever blog you have and post some bit about how you took one to Kate and PWNED SDA, then proceed to link something of your own, equating Dick Cheney to “Comical Ali”, proceeding with a comment about how Conservatives are such idiots, hahahaha.
Mind you, I’m just bitter. Political debate is an exercise in masochism sometimes. I guess that’s the reason I’m here. Small world.
“Alex, the issue is whether the “right” and “left” (or “right-leaning” and “left-leaning”, if you prefer) typology used here is adequate for useful political discourse.”
I thought the issue was whether the specific group was just off its rocker, at least until we got into this bit about “left vs. right, part 23,341,012,123,480”.
Actually, I lied. I expected the issue to fall into left/right bickering again.
“Anyway, he is dead so what he would think doesnt really matter anyway.”
Thank you.
Alex: “I thought the issue was whether the specific group was just off its rocker, at least until we got into this bit about “left vs. right, part 23,341,012,123,480″.”
I’m arguing against “left” versus “right” as a way of construing these debates.
exile…in your comment at 7:43 you rant about “they don’t distinguish…’
Rule #13 from exile’s decree:
Thou shalt distiguish liberal from social democrat when you comment.
What’s bothering you and KC?
An insiders report isn’t spun enough for you? Why banter about the sources and semantics? KC is flipping because something touched a raw nerve.
Like Jack said…”You can’t handle the truth”…
“Actually, I lied. I expected the issue to fall into left/right bickering again.”
Very funny and perceptive.
“exile…in your comment at 7:43 you rant about “they don’t distinguish…’
Rule #13 from exile’s decree:
Thou shalt distiguish liberal from social democrat when you comment.”
You accused me of wanting to inhibit people’s freedom! I suppose you regard people who argue against logical fallacies or for grammatical usage as would-be totalitarians. Oh what’s the use. I have work to do.
“The man was hardly a deep thinker!”
On his worst day he was deeper than you’ll ever be. And by now, he’d be a conservative.
BTW, that post really got under the lefty skin. Where’s the smear? The meeting took place; the participants are happy to be working together and shout it from the roof tops. Only the wilfully deaf, or plain stupid, can’t hear it.
Terry Glavin, a voice from the left, has seen the idiocy in embracing terrorists and murderers in the name of social justice.
The quibbling from some on this thread about endorsing a viewpoint, blah, blah, is just anger – and fear – because their world view has been pulled down around their ankles like a pair of crappy drawers.
But why worry about SDA; supposedly it has a very small reach. Yet some can’t leave it alone.
exile: “I have work to do”
yeh exile, work those fingers to the bone, idiot.
KC said:
‘…the left” is anyone who isn’t pro-war’…?!
I’d call Glavin a leftie (I mean, really – the Euston manifesto?!), and everyone (except the loony left) agrees Senator Lieberman is a leftie. Many on the dexter side don’t support the war (isolationists, libertarians of various types). Your objections are without merit.
“inconsistently secular …theocratic (when it comes to the role of Christianity in a society)”
Please apply for a work permit in Saudi Arabia. Stay there until the social difference between Islam and Christianity becomes apparent.
“…a blind devotee of Stephen Harper…”
Excuse our euphoria at having an adult in charge of the candy store again. Repairing the shop and weaning destructive children off sugar doesn’t happen overnight.
1. No actually I would call Senator Lieberman a centrist and yes I certainly recognize that people–left and right–have different perspectives on war. My point is that for Kate it is quite black and white. If you oppose the war you are part of the same “looney left” as the quote refers to.
2. I have little patience for religious based laws period. I dont care if its Islam requiring hijabs or Christian leaders talking about the state using its “coercive power” to control homosexuals. They are each equally despicable IMO. The extent of moderate views in Christianity is a product of a secular society asserting itself.
3. Really? Because last time I checked the guy in charge of the candy store was still buying eastern votes with western Candy. He was INCREASING the candy consumption rather than “weaning” anyone off it. Stephen Harper is as much or more of a child than his predecessors. At least other bloggers recognize their leaders faults. Kate hasnt found the time to criticize the budget or the nation resolution which anyone who reads her regularly would expect her to oppose.
Definitions…
“socialist (aka: left-liberal)” – one who believes that the meaning of a text/event is what the reader/observer decrees.
“realist (aka: right-conservative)” – one who acknowledges the author/event as definitive.
“I’d really like to see you ‘demonstrate’ how my assertion that you endorse the contents of your link is ‘false’. Its a matter of perception… ”
You want a “matter of perception”? Two hundred years ago, every man worth the name would have realized you just called a lady a liar.
That’s what I love about the generic modern lefty. In touch with reality, and oh, so polite and civilized!
Yes Tenebris and you have similarily demonstrated your civility and dedication to good manners.
And your little definitions are nonsense as well. If an author writes “I hate X” (or whatever) it doesn’t matter if the author didn’t really mean that s/he hated X, it matters what readers understand it to mean.
KC
Before you head out for that ‘hamas meeting’, be sure to strap on that belt.
Wouldn’t want U to head out underdressed.
G’bye
CRB
KC – (1) While you might call Lieberman a centrist, his voting record is as left as it gets. (2) Atheists have a definition for religion – it’s called “wacko worldview”. So, what makes the atheist worldview more tolerable than the religious one? Less coercion?! This is arguable. “The extent of moderate views in Christianity is a product of a secular society asserting itself.” Nope. Inherent to the gospel (you know…love your enemy…pray for them that persecute you…live peaceably with all). Go read the first letter to the Corinthians, chapter 13 for a good summary (this, of course by that arch-conservative and intolerant monster, the apostle Paul). (3) “He was INCREASING the candy consumption rather than “weaning” anyone off it” Sigh…no clue about politics, power, and time. Wants instant easy solutions. Be a bit more patient, KC. And if Harper messes up, he’ll go the way of Mulroney.
In my personal experience those who are most virulently anti war tend to be from the left side of the political spectrum. Many also believe the 911 conspiracy theory. I see such a high level of anger coming from them its almost scary.
Yes Kate you’re link apparently struck some raw nerves. The youngster with the attitude is spending most of his time trying to belittle you rather than discuss the issue. In his quaint manner he then assumes philosophical airs and postures as the aggrieved party when confronted. Predictable and humorous the first few times but it grows rapidly tedious.
You know, it gets really tiresome having leftist squirrels like KC and exile constantly trying to tell people how they should think or view things that get posted. Newsflash for you two sycophants, you’re not the two brightest lights on the planet, and hardly qualify as anything more than annoying background noise.
Marxists and Islamists Converge in Toronto
It may be the ultimate Islamist-Leftist Convergence, a black hole of malignant idiocy and murderous intent so massive that it warps time and space: MARXISM 2007: A Festival of Resistance.
MARXISM 2007
May 10-13, 2007
Bahen Centre for Information Technology, University of Toronto
40 St. George Street (north of College Street)
a four day conference of over fifty workshops, artistic display and performances. If you are against imperialism, war, corporate greed and destruction of the environment, if you want to learn about and organize for a new world of peace, freedom and liberation then don’t miss Marxism: A Festival of Resistance
Blazing Cat Fur has an excellent rundown of the creepy, insane, and diabolical people and organizations involved. This is a big one….-
History’s Losers Unite – A Festival Of Treason May 10th – 13th Toronto
“One sometimes gets the impression that the mere words ‘Socialism’ and ‘Communism’ draw towards them with magnetic force every fruit-juice drinker, nudist, sandal-wearer, sex-maniac, Quaker, ‘Nature Cure’ quack, pacifist and feminist in England.”
Orwell was right. In our Canadian context the quote should include Islamofascist Apologists & Anti-Israel Bigots who masquerade as “Peace Activists”. […]
Zafar Bangash is director of the Toronto-based Institute of Contemporary Islamic Thought, The institute is described on its website as “an intellectual centre of the global Islamic movement.”
You’ll remember Bangy for such Oldies But Goodies as:
Toronto “peace” demonstrators cheer announcement of Israeli deaths – “Demonstrators reportedly burst into cheers when, according to the CP, “Zafar Bangash of the Muslim Community Group announced over a megaphone the number of Israeli soldiers killed by Hezbollah forces in the conflict”. More on Bangash here, here, and here.
But wait that’s not all! We got Elmo! Mohamed “Everybody above 18 is a combatant” Elmasry.
Dr. Mohamed Elmasry is Chair of the Board and President of the Canadian Islamic Congress, Judeoscope has a fine roundup on their activities here.
Learn all you need to know about Elmo here.
Elmo’s sidekick makes an appearance, Wahida Valiante – Wahida , the vice-president of the Canadian Islamic Congress, published the article – Worth Repeating: Media Propaganda: Hitler, Bush and the “Big Lie”, which suggested Daniel Pipes was a follower of Hitler and/or used tactics like Hitler, and that he wanted to ethnically cleanse Muslims from the United States. OK she did retract her statements but only under threat of legal action, we know where her heart is….
Who else is on the bill? Why a veritable who’s who of Canada’s Socialist Cranks and Islamofascist Apologists. …-
http://www.blazingcatfur.blogspot.com/
KC – what ARE you talking about? “If an author writes “I hate X” (or whatever) it doesn’t matter if the author didn’t really mean that s/he hated X, it matters what readers understand it to mean.”
The point is whether a link to a site constitutes an explicit endorsement of that site and to the posted contents. You say that this is how Kate operates. Kate says not. You don’t believe her. I insist that words have self-referential meaning as defined by the author. I use small words and a simple illustration. You’re still clueless.
Deal with the issue, KC, and stop squirming on the hook. I’m immune to the standard whine (“he’s mean…and he’s a guilty hypocrite!”).
Tenebris
(1)-Joe Lieberman is one of the most centrist politicians in the United States. If you cant see that then you are so far in right field that your depth perception is fooled. Even Harper wont admit anymore that he supported the Iraq War–unless of course you are calling Stephen Harper a leftie. (2)-Words and practice are two different things. We are only a couple hundred years from burning witches, only slightly more from the reformation, and only slightly more still from the crusades. Our Christian society has been as brutal, cruel and oppressive as any other in times past. The extent to which it has been moderated has been from the hard work of secularists (not the same as atheists btw–in a secular society religious folk and atheist folk are both free to live their own lives). Neither Christianity nor Islam are good or bad or anything. They are what they are and they each have their nutty followers. (3)-I understand politics and power plenty and Harper is a sellout. If you have to buy people off with government spending to get their votes then clearly small-government conservativism isnt as popular as some here might think.
Furthermore you are free to believe Kate when she claims she isn’t endorsing the content of the link (or at the very least the quoted passage) but I think she is full of crap given the context.
Adrian – With respect–my experience has been that some people on the so-called “right” are so pro-war that they are in favour of wars by merely glancing at the combatants and without considering the virtues of that particular campaign.
Skip – Likewise.
You know, you’re all commenting about the war in Afghanistan, but none of you have a clue – not a friggin’ clue – of the reality of what our troops are accomplishing on the ground, thanks to the breathtaking lack of objective reporting in our media, and the mindless partisanship among our political parties. And I do include the Harper government, which has been utterly unable to explain the mission in terms understandable by the sheeple. When it falls to a Chief of the Defence Staff to explain the mission, the government has failed, both the Martin Liberals and Harper’s conservatives.
Exposing the lies of the rabid anti-war fanatics, the jihadist fifth columnists and others requires an exposition of the truth. Sadly the only truth is out there, in Afghanistan. Here in Canada, it has been twisted into so many uber-pretzels, not even a mental gymnast like Jack Layton could follow the story-line.
The fact remains: the anti-war activists mentioned in the root article of this thread, along with an alarming segment of so-called “progressives” in Europe and North America are making common cause, either overtly or by convergence of thought, with those who would destroy us – because they loathe the society that nurtured them. That, sports fans, is a true symptom of mental illness. Forget “left” and “right”. The divide is between those who would see our civilization survive, and those who would see it destroyed.