Monday, February 12, 2007

Hate Speech -- the Left is evil - Israel and USA are benign

READ THIS AMAZING EXAMPLE OF IDEOLOGICAL SLANDER AND GOEBBELS-LIKE PROPAGANDA...


February 12, 2007

The Left's identification with murderous aggressors
By James Lewis

Psychiatry is familiar with an odd syndrome called "identification with the aggressor." It's sometimes called the Stockholm Syndrome, after the behavior of air passengers taken hostage by PLO terrorists at the Stockholm Airport in 1973, who, when they were rescued, came out singing the praises of their murderous captors.

Recently we saw the same human oddity when two Fox News reporters were kidnapped in Gaza, and forced to convert to Islam at the point of a gun. After his freedom was bought (at a reported cost of millions of dollars), reporter Steve Centanni told the world that:

"I hope that this never scares a single journalist away from coming to Gaza to cover the story because the Palestinian people are very beautiful and kind hearted. The world needs to know more about them. Don't be discouraged."

"Kind-hearted" and "beautiful" are not the first words that come to mind to describe kidnappers who were quite ready to murder Steve Centanni only a day before. In psychiatric thinking the reporters "identified with the aggressors" --- the terrorist kidnappers --- in a mental flip that allowed them to push away their realistic fear of dying to a distant imaginary cause. They no longer thought of themselves as helpless victims, having adopted the kidnappers' point of view.

The most infamous examples come from World War II Nazi concentration camps, where some prisoners were placed in charge of others. According to witnesses like psychiatrist Viktor Frankl, these "Kapos" would wear discarded pieces of Nazi uniforms and often abuse their fellow victims. Unconsciously they were identifying with the aggressors, to ward off the awful awareness of their own vulnerability. People do things like that in extremis.

Now look at the behavior of the Left since 9/11, both in this country, Europe, and even Israel. Rather than feel righteously angered by the terrorist mass murder of 3,000 innocent people, large parts of the Left have adopted the aggressors' point of view. They keep telling us that the Islamic fascists were right to blow up innocent people who had done them no harm; some of them have taken on conspiracy theories, claiming that Bush or Israel really committed the atrocities. At the same time they are in deep denial about the danger of future terrorist attacks on American soil, and blindly refuse to see the rising threat of nuclear proliferation by stateless terror groups. Instead, they "displace" their fear and anger on George W. Bush. To the Left, once Bush is gone, the terror problem will simply and magically go away.

Yet we know that small amounts of radioactive materials --- like the Polonium 210 that was used just two months ago to poison Alexander Litvinenko in London --- could be turned into a "dirty bomb" in anybody's garage. It wouldn't take any more technical skill than was used in 1995 to blow up the Murrah Building in Oklahoma City.

Terrorists with dirty bombs are a murderous threat to all of us, but the Left denies it. Twisting reality is the hallmark of mental pathology.

The Left's behavior looks just like identification with the Islamofascist aggressor. Just as the concentration camp Kapos wore pieces of Nazi uniforms to magically assume the power of their killers-to-be, the radical Left adopts the symbols and slogans of Hezbollah and Al Qaida. Strikingly, their intellectual leader Noam Chomsky is the son of a Talmudic scholar --- a man who devoted his life to the study of Jewish scripture, and who would therefore be a ready target for today's fascists. Chomsky must have grown up as a child in a most devout household. No doubt many of his family members were murdered in the Nazi Holocaust. Yet last year Chomsky flew to Lebanon to be publicly photographed shaking hands with Hassan Nasrallah, who was even then preparing to launch many hundreds of short-range missiles at Jewish civilians in Israel --- including, no doubt, Talmudic scholars. Chomsky has been a radical Leftist all his life, even before he became famous as a linguist. Identification with the aggressor? It certainly would explain his very odd life course.

In London, during the Hezbollah war in Lebanon, demonstrators from George Galloway's Respect Party (an offshoot of the Socialist Workers' Party) carried signs reading "We are all Hezbollah now." They literally adopted the aggressors' point of view. This has been happening all over Europe, where the Left still reigns supreme, and on American university campuses as well --- probably for the same psychological reason.

The rise of anti-Zionism (and of course anti-Semitism) in Europe can also be seen in this light. If only those six million Jews in Israel were to disappear like magic, goes the wishful thought, all the danger and trouble would go away. Europe's Muslims would become as peaceful as lambs, and Iran's zealots would learn to love us. It is a childlike surrender to fear.

Notice that this is exactly what the Left did during the Cold War. I do not remember a single passionate demonstration against the Soviet Union, which had nuclear-armed missiles aimed directly at Europe and the US. Instead, the most extreme and feverish passions were aimed straight at the United States, the country that led and protected the West from Soviet aggression.


The other side of "identification with the aggressor" is "blaming the victim." In Nazi concentration camps the Kapos would act out sadistically to other victims, blaming them for Nazi crimes. A decade ago the phrase "blaming the victim" was on everybody's lips, when feminists loudly accused all men of blaming rape victims for being raped. That seemed to disappear along with the Bill Clinton saga and his blatant sexual abuse of a young intern, to the deafening silence of the feminist Left. Today we can plainly see "blaming the victim" among Islamic fascists, who often accuse young girls of being sluts if they are gang-raped by men. Islamic radicals always blame their victims. That is what makes them incapable of guilt toward their victims.


The real oddity is that the Left has enthusiastically joined the new fascists. We no longer hear the old trope of "blaming the victim" from feminists. Rather, feminists on the Left have joined Islamofascists in blaming the United States --- for being the fire brigade that is trying to put out the fire. The Left even defends women being pressured to wear the burqa, the ancient sign of women's submission and sexual slavery in the most retrogressive kind of tribal Islam. Shari'a law prescribes exactly how women are to be physically slapped for failing to obey fathers and husbands. Feminists are silent.


The Left claims to value "peace" above all things; but that means that self-defense ranks nowhere. It's not an option --- at least not when Republicans are in office. If we leave out self-defense against Iranian nukes or El Qaida truck bombs, there is no option except submission. That is what "identification with the aggressor" comes down to. It is a Stockholm Syndrome for millions of people --- most of the readers of the New York Times and the UK Guardian, just for starters.

To make things worse, the Left itself is ruthlessly aggressive against conservatives, democratic individuals who happen to disagree with them. There is a true persecutorial viciousness in the Left's attacks on Republican presidents, from Herbert Hoover to Dwight D. Eisenhower and George W. Bush. Emotionally, these people want to destroy those who defy their demands. Almost all the assassins and would-be assassins of American Presidents since JFK have been Leftists, starting with Lee Harvey Oswald. So their rage is not exactly harmless.

Most of the time the Left just aims at destroying conservatives' careers and public reputations - as they have tried to do with ferocious fury in the cases of Scooter Libby, Karl Rove, Dick Cheney, Don Rumsfeld, Ann Coulter, Tom Delay, Rush Limbaugh, and numerous others. And it's not just national politics. Harvard University feminists just formed a lynch mob that drove Larry Summer's out of the Presidency and appear to have succeeded in replacing him with one of their own. They have succeeded in placing their own radical leaders in the top power positions at the most prestigious university in the United States.

They are driven by paranoid rage: They are in fact the aggressors.

But when it comes to assaults on their country, the Left blames the victims. The most militant Leftists seem severely damaged psychologically. The recent suicide by the militant lesbian President of UC Santa Cruz may be only the tip of the pathological iceberg.


Many radical Leftists seem to suffer from a basic twist in character. They constantly confuse aggressive and defensive actions by their own country, on whose freedom and protection they depend every hour of the day. They constantly indulge sworn enemies of our freedom and well-being. They constantly push for government actions that seem plausible on the surface, but which inevitably hurt the very people they are supposed to help. It happens over and over again.
When I was young I thought the Left was just confused, but now I'm increasingly drawn to the idea that there is a deep, if unconscious, malevolence at the bottom of the history of disasters inflicted by those people. They are dangerous.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/02/the_lefts_identification

More Hate Speech:

Monday, February 12, 2007
The ADL Discovers Leftist Hate

By Don Feder -- FrontPageMagazine.com | February 12, 2007

Among the many groups for whom I feel absolutely no sympathy is the Jewish Left – which has lately been agonizing over the prevalence of Jew-hatred at antiwar rallies.

Signs comparing Israelis to Nazis and identifying Jews as the enemies of humanity have become de rigueur at (you should pardon the expression) peace rallies.

Jewish leftists – at least those who still feel a connection to the Jewish people – are dismayed.

An article in the January 27 Contra Costa (California) Times calls our attention to the San Francisco Anti-Defamation League’s first conference on how progressives “can protect themselves against anti-Semitism – from the liberal Left.”

Among other examples of tolerance and brotherhood cited by the Times, at one San-Fran demonstration last year, Arabs chanted “Jews are our dogs.”

According to the article, many on the lox-and-cream-cheese Left is upset with former President Pinhead’s latest book, Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid – which condones suicide bombings. (Carter calls on peaceful Palestinians to stop terrorist attacks if Israel begins “respecting international law” – rolling over and playing dead. )



Jewish progressives wonder why the movement seems to single out Israel for hysterical denunciations, and if their comrades haven’t replaced “Israel” for “Jew” in the old anti-Semitic formulation. (Try to imagine Carter writing a book called Saudi Arabia: Equality Not Misogyny or Iran: Democracy Not Theocracy.)

Regarding the group-therapy for Jewish leftists, Jonathan Bernstein, director of the ADL’s San Francisco regional office, says, “We have heard from so many people who feel ostracized and alone and don’t really know what to do with this problem.” Bernstein complains that said good people shouldn’t “have to pick between being Jewish and whatever worthwhile cause.”

That some Jewish leftists are uncomfortable with the movement’s uglier antics is surely one of humanity’s great tragedies – ranking right up there with the heartbreak of psoriasis.

According to organizers, the conference (which was held the following weekend) would include a discussion of “coping strategies,” “having a rally within a rally,” and “on the spot responses to hurtful language.” Wow, “on the spot responses to hurtful language” – talk about getting tough with anti-Semitism.

I’m reminded of a Woody Allen movie where the comedian is at a cocktail party and some of his Upper East Side friends start discussing how to respond to the Nazis marching in New Jersey. One suggests putting on a satirical play parodying the brown shirts. An agitated Allen says that – harsh as that may be – instead, perhaps they should consider getting rocks and clubs and beating the Nazis to a bloody pulp.

Now that’s a coping strategy I can relate to.

Leftist anti-Semitism is as old as the Left. Since the French Revolution, polemicists have cast Israelites as the quintessential capitalist exploiters – never mind the prevalence of Jews in various socialist movements. (Voltaire charged that the Jews were “born with a raging fanaticism in their hearts.”)

Pierre-Joseph Proudhon (the father of modern socialism and anarchism) – who coined the expression “Property is theft” – explained: “The Jew is by temperament an anti-producer. He is an intermediary, always fraudulent and parasitical, who operates, in trade and in philosophy, by means of falsification, counterfeiting, and horse-trading.”

What then should be done with this irredeemably anti-social element? “The Jew is the enemy of mankind,” Proudhon advised. “It is necessary to send this race back to Asia, or exterminate it…By fire or fusion, or by expulsion, the Jew must disappear.” Said genocidal raving predated the Holocaust by a century.

Karl Marx, old Uncle Fuzzy-Whiskers (the scion of a German-Jewish family that had converted to Christianity for social position) explained the Jewish problem this way: “What is the secular basis of Judaism? Practical need, self-interest. What is the worldly religion of the Jew? Huckstering. What is his worldly God? Money.”

No wonder Hitler and Stalin got on famously, until that unfortunate incident of June of 1940.

After the fall of the Third Reich, the Soviet Union became the worldwide nexus of anti-Semitism.
After the fall of the Soviet Union, anti-Semitism’s Mecca shifted to – well, Mecca. In the Moslem world, Mein Kampf, and “The Protocols of Zion” are best-sellers and rabid Jew-hatred is standard fare in political, religious and cultural discourse. So, naturally, Islam has become the Left’s pet religion and Islamacism its principal ally.

Besides an unremitting animus toward the Jewish state, the antiwar Left has embraced many of the old anti-Semitic stereotypes of its revolutionary forebears. Feminist author Phyllis Chesler observes: “The Jews and the Jewish state have become the symbol of Satanic America, capitalism, imperialism, colonialism.”

Consider Noam Chomsky – Hugo Chavez’s favorite philosopher. Sure he wants to see Israel destroyed, and trusts in the good will of Hamas and Fatah for the safety of those Jews left in Palestine. Sure he associates with Holocaust-deniers. And sure he admires Iran’s version of Jack The Ripper. But is the Jewish-born Chomsky an anti-Semite?

In a 2002 interview with a Palestinian solidarity group, Chomsky declared, “By now, Jews in the U.S. are the most privileged and influential part of the population.”

When a Marxist says someone’s “privileged” it means they’re getting something they didn’t earn and don’t deserve.

Chomsky hates American society. Thus the avatar of the New Left and leading intellectual light of the antiwar movement is saying that Jews have risen to the top of a rotten, corrupt culture that spreads war, famine and misery across the globe. Did they attain that favored status by dint of their virtues?

For today’s Left, the Jew is the corporate executive, exploiting his workers, raping the environment and reaping obscene profits. He’s the globalist, pushing a world economy run by multinationals. He’s the neo-con manipulating the White House and Congress to engineer a war with Iran – to enhance Israel’s security. He’s the quintessence whatever the left despises at any particular point in time.

And not just the loony Left, not just the fringy Left – but the establishment Left.

Toward the middle of last month, in an online posting at Arianna Huffington’s website, retired general and former Democratic presidential candidate Wesley Clark was asked why he thought America would attack Iran.

Clark replied: “You just have to read what’s in the Israeli press. The Jewish community is divided but there is so much pressure being channeled from the New York money people to the office seekers.”

Why the Israeli press, and not the Wall Street Journal, Rush Limbaugh, or Fox News? And, in case you haven’t guessed it, “the New York money people” isn’t code for Episcopalians.

In his 2004 campaign, Howard Dean urged that regarding Israel and the Palestinians, the United States should adopt an “even-handed” approach. This is another way of saying that between an historic ally and a people who invariably side with our enemies and never miss a chance to tell us how much they hate our guts, America should be strictly impartial.

Any objections from Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama to Carter’s vile comparison of Israel to South Africa’s former white supremacist regime? Not that I’m aware of.

Is the Democratic Party anti-Semitic or merely soft on anti-Semitism? Nothing could be more damning than the party of Old Joe Kennedy’s embrace of Al Sharpton – the man who sparked a full-scale pogrom in Crown Heights in 1991 and a massacre at Freddy’s Fashion Mart in 1995. (Instead of “New York money people,” Sharpton prefers “diamond merchants with blood on their hands” and “interlopers.”)

During the 2000 campaign, Al Gore obediently appeared at a Sharpton-organized debate at Harlem’s Apollo Theater – which would be comparable to George Bush carrying the torch at a cross-burning.

Anywhere you look on the Left, you’ll find spiritual descendants of the Cossacks and storm troopers – anti-Semites or those who condone anti-Semitism.

Peace and justice don’t grow in a cesspool. Instead of kvetching about “hurtful language” and devising “coping strategies,” Jewish leftists – those who are more Jewish than leftist – should reconsider their “whatever worthwhile cause.” ...Which may not be that worthwhile after all.

Don Feder is a former Boston Herald right wing writer who is now a political/communications consultant. He also maintains his own website, DonFeder.com.

Not to be confused with the Boston Globe, the Boston Herald is a ideology driven right wing rag, like the Washington Times (not to be confused with the Washington Post). One wonders how such a writer was hired at all.

New Report Cites PennState Courses for Violations of its own Academic Freedom Policies. Read more. From Russia With Death The Iraq Challenge The Pope and Islam To Kill a Russian Journalist Al Qaeda’s Nukes Dinesh D'Souza Nonie Darwish Wayne Kopping Robert Kagan Arthur C. Brooks Elizabeth Kantor David Evanier PowerLine Blog Little Green Footballs PolySigh Milt Rosenberg The Anti-Chomskyan Redoubt Heterodoxy Stop The ISM StoptheISM.com Professors Watch DangerousProfessors.com Borders Watch Recruitment Drive to Boost Border Patrol Jihad Watch United American Committee UAC.com Campus Watch HonestReporting.com David Limbaugh.com Horowitz Libertas DHFC

http://frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=26866

Bookmark and Share
posted by u2r2h at 5:55 PM

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home