55 Comments

1. Knucklehead:

Roger,

Don’t sweat it. Just because rats are notorious for abandoning sinking ships it does not follow that abandoning a sinking ship means you are a rat. Especially if you had no knowledge that the hull was holed when you decided to disembark at the Port of GWOT on 9/12/01.

Feb 9, 2005 - 9:27 am 2. Keith_Indy:

We can hope, Roger, we can hope that the ship of leftist/liberal extremism is sinking.

Leftists certainly do have a strange bedfellows…

http://www.techcentralstation.com/012405B.html

Western media and governments hesitate, for unfathomable reasons, to pay close attention to the role of the Saudis in the Iraqi fighting. But Western journalists of a liberal bent are especially hypnotized by the false paradigm of “U.S. invasion vs. Iraqi insurgents,” when the basis of the conflict is very different. Rather, the Iraqi terror offensive has its roots in homicidal Wahhabi, i.e. fanatical Sunni, hatred of Shia Muslims.

But Western media and governments are also handicapped in dealing with Iraq by a peculiar double standard regarding the very status of the Iraqi Arab Sunnis as a formerly-ruling, and oppressive, minority. Twenty years ago, nobody would have listened to the argument that dismantling of the apartheid regime in South Africa and the holding of elections there should be blocked out of fairness to the white minority in that country. Few today listen to those who declare that fair elections and the forging of a new political system in Northern Ireland should be delayed out of concern for the feelings of the Protestant minority.

The Iraqi Arab Sunnis are no different from the white South Africans. (I pointed out this parallel in an interview with Netherlands Radio on January 14 [see here]). The Arab Sunnis have exploited and degraded the Shia majority in Iraq for a long, long time, reserving the wealth of the country for themselves. But why is the rule applied to the white South Africans not equally appropriate in Iraq?

The only explanation seems to be that the causes of Black South Africa and of the Northern Irish Catholics were considered leftist, and were therefore identified with opposition to U.S. and other government policies, while the cause of the Iraqi Shias is “contaminated” by association with the Bush administration.

There is another, similar precedent that deserves to be cited here. Six years ago, Serbian rule was overturned in Kosovo by NATO arms; but the Western left suddenly became more concerned about the fate of the usurping and violently oppressive Serbian minority in that territory than about the rights of the Albanian majority. Again, the difference between the Serbs and the white South Africans was simple: the former came to enjoy the sympathy of radical leftists enraged by U.S. unilateralism, while the latter were despised by the very same left. It should also be noted that in Kosovo and Iraq, in contrast with South Africa, the progressives of the United Nations opposed liberation. (The UN, interestingly enough, seems to know better than to try to interfere in Ulster.)

Feb 9, 2005 - 9:40 am 3. Keith_Indy:

We can hope, Roger, we can hope that the ship of leftist/liberal extremism is sinking.

Leftists certainly have made a few strange bedfellows in the past…

http://www.techcentralstation.com/012405B.html

Western media and governments hesitate, for unfathomable reasons, to pay close attention to the role of the Saudis in the Iraqi fighting. But Western journalists of a liberal bent are especially hypnotized by the false paradigm of “U.S. invasion vs. Iraqi insurgents,” when the basis of the conflict is very different. Rather, the Iraqi terror offensive has its roots in homicidal Wahhabi, i.e. fanatical Sunni, hatred of Shia Muslims.

But Western media and governments are also handicapped in dealing with Iraq by a peculiar double standard regarding the very status of the Iraqi Arab Sunnis as a formerly-ruling, and oppressive, minority. Twenty years ago, nobody would have listened to the argument that dismantling of the apartheid regime in South Africa and the holding of elections there should be blocked out of fairness to the white minority in that country. Few today listen to those who declare that fair elections and the forging of a new political system in Northern Ireland should be delayed out of concern for the feelings of the Protestant minority.

The Iraqi Arab Sunnis are no different from the white South Africans. (I pointed out this parallel in an interview with Netherlands Radio on January 14 [see here]). The Arab Sunnis have exploited and degraded the Shia majority in Iraq for a long, long time, reserving the wealth of the country for themselves. But why is the rule applied to the white South Africans not equally appropriate in Iraq?

The only explanation seems to be that the causes of Black South Africa and of the Northern Irish Catholics were considered leftist, and were therefore identified with opposition to U.S. and other government policies, while the cause of the Iraqi Shias is “contaminated” by association with the Bush administration.

There is another, similar precedent that deserves to be cited here. Six years ago, Serbian rule was overturned in Kosovo by NATO arms; but the Western left suddenly became more concerned about the fate of the usurping and violently oppressive Serbian minority in that territory than about the rights of the Albanian majority. Again, the difference between the Serbs and the white South Africans was simple: the former came to enjoy the sympathy of radical leftists enraged by U.S. unilateralism, while the latter were despised by the very same left. It should also be noted that in Kosovo and Iraq, in contrast with South Africa, the progressives of the United Nations opposed liberation. (The UN, interestingly enough, seems to know better than to try to interfere in Ulster.)

Feb 9, 2005 - 9:40 am 4. chuck:

Let’s not forget the simple joys of hatred, always good for a shot of adrenaline and that self-righteous feeling. Many ideologies can put this on offer and Islamism does as well as any. Of course, some on the left may be driven by intellect and morality rather than psychology, but, beginning with Lenin and Trotsky, I wouldn’t place most of the left in that category.

Feb 9, 2005 - 9:43 am 5. photoncourier.blogspot.com:

“any honest Leftist must realize that his movement and its aspirations are rooted in the very West it seeks to destroy”…this may be true of the traditional Left; I don’t think it’s really true of the present-day Left. The whole mindset of today’s “progressives” seems to me to be much closer to that of yesterday’s Fascists than of yesterday’s Marxists.

Aldoux Huxley wrote: “The Marxist calls himself scientific and to this claim the Fascist adds another: he is the poet–the scientific poet–of a new mythology.”

The distain for logical development and consistency of thought; the obsession with aesthetic matters; the fascination with violence for the sake of violence; the superstition and the extreme nature-worship…these are all indicators of a mindset quite different from that of (say) a 1930s Marxist.

Feb 9, 2005 - 9:54 am 6. jerry:

Not to pat myself on the back…OK, that’s what I am doing but I have been making this argument since 9-11. The left sees Radical Islam as a natural ally against “global capitalism.” In the carefully constructed alternative universe inhabited by the left, Radical Islam is the new vanguard of the new global proletariat that will sweep away corrupt capitalism, i.e., evil western civilization. The Left’s real conceit is that they expect to take over the leadership of revolution and thereby safeguard their own privileges.

There is a sense of justice in that today’s left is taking the same position as the industrialists and elites in Weimar Germany. “First we let the Nazis take care Communists and then we will get rid of the Nazis.” That sure was a winning strategy for Germany.

I think we are about to see increasing overt cooperation between the global left and radical Islam. The failure to defeat George Bush has driven the Left up against a wall. Knowing that their agenda cannot succeed politically, they will increasingly turn to nihilistic violence to destroy the system. However, modern leftist no longer have the physical courage that the forefathers, the Black Shirts, the Red Guards and Brown Shirts, had so they must rely on radical Muslims allies to deliver the death blows to the West.

Feb 9, 2005 - 9:57 am 7. Coisty:

Keith_Indy – “Few today listen to those who declare that fair elections and the forging of a new political system in Northern Ireland should be delayed out of concern for the feelings of the Protestant minority.”

The Protestants are not the minority, they are the majority. There have been fair elections in Northern Ireland since the Troubles began as well as a border poll it’s just that Sinn Fein didn’t like the results. The new political system has stalled due to the Protestants not tolerating the IRA’s continuing terrorism. Sadly Tony blair is far more tolerant.

Keith_Indy – “Six years ago, Serbian rule was overturned in Kosovo by NATO arms; but the Western left suddenly became more concerned about the fate of the usurping and violently oppressive Serbian minority in that territory than about the rights of the Albanian majority.”

Many of us right wing “Europeans” also sympathised with the Serbs. The reign of terror that led Serbs to leave the province seemed to go completely unnoticed as did the historical roles of both communities in WW2: The Serbs supported the Allies, the Albanians the Nazis. Besides many leftists did support NATO aggression against the Serbs: Susan Sontag, London Mayor Ken Livingstone, Christopher Hitchens, Vanessa Redgrave, Bianca Jagger, and many others.

Feb 9, 2005 - 10:01 am 8. Becky Swann:

First “reify” and now “irredentist.”

No one has stretched my vocabulary so much since I was in college, and you don’t want to know how long ago that was!

I’ve become such a fan of your witing on the blog that I have ordered your novels, which somehow I have missed all these years.

Feb 9, 2005 - 10:40 am 9. WichitaBoy:

photoncourier,

The disdain for logical development and consistency of thought; the obsession with aesthetic matters; the fascination with violence for the sake of violence; the superstition and the extreme nature-worship…these are all indicators of a mindset quite different from that of (say) a 1930s Marxist.

You make some excellent points here.

Those whom we routinely deride as “leftists” are neither “left” nor homogeneous. They are something new. Let’s not be generals fighting the last war. Not everything we see under the sun is the same old thing after all. We have a new phenomenon here, not communist, not socialist, but not fascist either, although you have drawn the connection sharply.

The new movement isn’t exactly Nihilism either nor even anti-Americanism precisely. It is anti-Western. Essentially everything the West stands for they are against. They are the enemies of Christianity and Judaism as well as of modernity in all its forms. Against reason, against organized society, against international trade, against technology, against science, against change. It’s a sort of violent, radical version of Romanticism. Highly unrealistic, they fly to their far-flung protest marches in jets built by Airbus or Boeing in faraway countries burning gasoline from Saudi Arabia and they rent Japanese cars once they arrive, holding their laptops with wireless internet connections in hand the entire time. They are against, in short, their own lives.

Feb 9, 2005 - 11:11 am 10. Sandy P:

Perhaps you didn’t abandon a sinking ship, Roger, perhaps you are “righting” it.

I’m a red-state heart in a blue state. Mother’s side is Scot-Irish. I even believe I’d qualify as an Indian before Churchill, tho I’m very diluted.

I’m a tail-end boomer, the Jones Generation.

I’ve never been raised to see America as evil. We’ve all had regrets, but some things that are causing us angst right now are things previous generation(s) didn’t finish.

What Nelson, Wretchard and others describe is unfortunately the way it’s always been, if we pay attention to history.

It has always been and most probably always be US against the world. “The world” has had ample opportunity to try our style of government, yet they still continue to do so. They choose the parliamentarian way. I’m not so impressed. “The world wants “stability” and calling for new elections every time there’s a “crisis” doesn’t make a lot of sense to me. Italy still hasn’t completed 1 post-WWII gov’t, IIRC. And What does it say that a “rightwinger” Bertulesconi(sp) might be the 1st??? They just cannot find a happy medium.

For all those who want “multi-polar” I want them to explain why it’s better under the Chicoms, India or the Islamofascists. We know it’s not going to be Europe, but it’s fun to torque them on this.

David Cohen wrote something at Bros. Judd which I agree with.

The original band of brothers pledged their lives, fortunes and sacred honor for this grand experiment. At minimum, we need to pledge more than what we have. Which is why all the wailing from the left – the world.

We are beginning to teach our children what being an American is, and one of those is that we will never really be liked. We must get over wanting to be popular. But I am getting tired of them taking my money on 1 hand and stabbing us full-frontal with the other.

We keep telling “the world” we’re not you. Condi just did again. I want the world to buy my products, come to visit, and be able to visit them w/little hassle.

I don’t want to marry them.–

—

… Besides many leftists did support NATO aggression against the Serbs: Susan Sontag, London Mayor Ken Livingstone, Christopher Hitchens, Vanessa Redgrave, Bianca Jagger, and many others.

You know, Coisty, taken in the context of this topic, it kind of makes sense.

Especially with what’s happening now.

Feb 9, 2005 - 11:21 am 11. jerry:

Wichita:

I respectfully disagree. The phenomenon of the modern left is a throwback to the French proto-Fascist theoretician, Georges Sorel. And no wonder why. Today’s left has been subverted by the teachings of Professor Paul De Man of the Yale Comp Lit Department. He postured as a “Progressive” but in reality was Belgian Nazi who followed Sorel’s theories. He successfully converted the left to Fascist ideology. It should come as no surprise that todayís ìleftî identifies with what we call ìIslamo-fascismî and Baathism.

Feb 9, 2005 - 11:32 am 12. chuck:

WichitaBoy:

It’s a sort of violent, radical version of Romanticism.

Yes, I agree with that, I have made the same point myself. Nor is this mindset new, it goes back into at least the 1800’s and the beginning of industrialization and its comcomitant breakdown of the hierarchical social order. Why did Shaw, Elliot, and Pound show fascist sympathies? How do Wagner and Nietzche fit into the picture? Don’t the Qutbist criticisms fall into the same category? Don’t we all wish for a simpler and more socially satisfying life?

From this perspective, the classical Marxists look downright respectable. We live in a time where everything is in flux and the certainties of religion, nation, manners, and social position have fallen away. It’s hard on us all. I wonder what it will be like 100 years from now.

Feb 9, 2005 - 11:45 am 13. PeterUK:

“It’s a sort of violent, radical version of Romanticism.”

Romanticism was always that,spawned as it was in the Age of Revolutions.

Feb 9, 2005 - 12:24 pm 14. jerry:

Chuck:

Wagner really doesn’t fit in well. He was radical in 1848 and left Munich [I think] in the same carriage as Marx. However, by 1970 Wagner was quite the republican. He considered emigrating to the United States after the formation of the German Empire in the wake of the Franco-Prussian War.

He did make anti-Semitic statements throughout his life but really didn’t operate as one. He refused to sign a petition circulated by his father-in-law Franz Liszt to deny German citizen ship to Jews. What’s more some of his favorite performers were Jewish. Herman Levi was hand picked by Wagner to conduct the Bayreuth Festival. His modern reputation as an anti-Semite/proto-Nazi is imputed from Hitler’s love of Wagnerian theater and his wife Cosima’s affinity with the Nazis. Wagner died before Hitler was born.

Feb 9, 2005 - 12:43 pm 15. jerry:

err …that’s 1870

Feb 9, 2005 - 12:43 pm 16. Terrye:

I think what strikes me the most in regards to the new left, is not only its relationship with Islamism but the relationship of the extreme right with the extreme left. Like they say extremes meet. Pat Buchannan and Ward Churchill have more in common than either would ever admit.

It is a xenophobic, anti American, racist mindset that can make a victim or an ally of anyone from Milosovic to Saddam…. just to be against America.

Old alliances are relevant only in so far as they support this contention. It might be true that the Serbs were on the right side of WW2 but many of the Irish and French were not and the Japanese were the enemy. Needless to say I have more respect for the Japanese today than most of western Europe. Times have obviously changed and the left has no Soviet Union and so they opt for being against America and the right with its tendencies to racism and isolationism is also drawn to this new nihilism.

They are indeed empty. You know them by their hatred. They stand for nothing.

Feb 9, 2005 - 2:17 pm 17. ricpic:

Who are the leftists? They are idol worshippers. Unable or unwilling to worship God, they worship The Collective, or Absolute Equality, or Social Justice. The point is that they worship.

This is the great achilles heel of Enlightenment-Individualist-Capitalist thought. It does not provide idols to worship.

And since there is a significant percentage of the population – probably a higher than normal percentage among intellectuals – that MUST worship something, there will always be a deep persistent antagonism to the triumph of individualistic capitalism, no matter how great its worldy success.

Feb 9, 2005 - 2:22 pm 18. Ken:

“Don’t we all wish for a simpler and more socially satisfying life?”

Hell no. A simpler life is only more “socially satisfying” to the guys running the show and wielding the whips. Bring in industry and technology, and slavery goes from a cash cow to a losing proposition.

People need to stop insisting that present-day bosses are essentially feudal lords, and stop excoriating them for refusing to act like “good” feudal lords. They’re our customers, not our masters, and neither employer nor worker is master or slave to the other. That’s the nice thing about a more “complex” and less “socially satisfying” life – if we don’t like the people we’re dealing with, we can pack up and leave relatively easily, and however much people shake their heads and mutter about “rootlessness”, that’s a damned valuable option to have.

“From this perspective, the classical Marxists look downright respectable. We live in a time where everything is in flux and the certainties of religion, nation, manners, and social position have fallen away. It’s hard on us all. I wonder what it will be like 100 years from now.”

If people start looking at technology, particularly medical technology, as a valuable effort to solve long-standing problems rather than as a dangerous threat that could strip us of our “humanity” or our “simpler life” at any moment, then maybe you’ll get to find out in person. At any rate, life is undeniably getting easier as the “certainties of religion, nation, manners, and social position have fallen away”, and the only real difficult is interference by people willing to fight to the death to put us back in the chains that it took us many thousands of years to get rid of.

Feb 9, 2005 - 2:33 pm 19. chuck:

Ken,

Hell no. A simpler life is only more “socially satisfying” to the guys running the show and wielding the whips. Bring in industry and technology, and slavery goes from a cash cow to a losing proposition.

This is the conventional argument, but I noticed the unease and religious failings of the modern world back in the 60’s and think it accounts for much of folks attraction to magic, astrology, drugs, hippie dreams, revolution, and other escapes from science and modernity. The spread of superstition among the educated is a fact, the explanation is what is in question. And then there are the stories of folks bailing out of the high pressure occupations for something simpler. Some of them end up here, in easier Utah.

the only real difficult is interference by people willing to fight to the death to put us back in the chains that it took us many thousands of years to get rid of.

And why are there such people if the benefits are so clear in all respects? We need to explain what *is*, not what we think should be.

Feb 9, 2005 - 3:04 pm 20. charlotte:

I was in Australia a few months after 9-11 and heard on a car radio Australian women exhorting their fellow Aussie women to don scarves and cover their heads in solidarity with others around the world. Of course, what they meant was that Western women should acknowledge the customs and enforced modesty of Muslim women in a show of multi-culti sensitivity, but they might as well have been telling me to disregard the centuries of hard-won rights of Western women to be considered fully human, grown-up and worthy of equality and respect under our laws. Instead of wanting to cover my head for Muslim women, I would encourage them to uncover theirs and not feel coerced to wear scarves, veils, and yards and yards of shrouding and suffocating fabric when they migrate to the West. As in their choice, and not their men’s.

Anyway, in that cab ride to my Sydney hotel, I finally realized that the highway to hell is paved with the best of Leftist intentions. Don’t dare open the door for a Western feminist or besmirch abortion on demand, but, by golly, when it suits her non-Western whims, she’ll cover up for fundamentalist, misogynistic Muslim sensibilities. Of course, some of our feminists wouldn’t fall for this, but increasingly their leftism has travelled beyond irony and into the realm of the ludicrous.

Feb 9, 2005 - 4:11 pm 21. Knucklehead:

Charlotte,

Just curious… did the call to demonstrate solidarity with the misogynists have many takers? I have only very short and limited exposure to Aussie society but I can’t imagine their womenfolk donning the veil.

Feb 9, 2005 - 5:01 pm 22. charlotte:

Knucklehead,

I don’t believe so, at least from what I saw in the waterfront area of Sydney. Frankly, I was too absorbed in the architecture and forgot to check out the women, which doesn’t come naturally to me

That radio station sounded similar to our NPR, which many people may listen to for the experimental music and edgy polemics, but not take as gospel. Still, this call to cover the head to “respect” other women was at the behest of some progressive women’s group, I believe. I was taken aback about how sympathetic and submissive to Muslim fundamentalism the whole notion seemed, especially coming on the heels of the Islamist terror attack on America.

Feb 9, 2005 - 5:39 pm 23. thedragonflies:

Even though I was a lefty back in the ’60s, I guess I have never really understood why the left so hates capitalism. (I just thought at the time – what the hell, capitalism, communism, two forms of economic systems, why get so excited? so let’s go help the poor people)

I agree with Jerry’s notion that the left sees the jihadists as the new vanguard against the evils of capitalism, I just can’t get inside their heads to understand their hatred of capitalism.

WitchitaBoy says something that starts to make sense to me – it is a phobia to modernism, which is Westernism by definition, and to life itself. No wonder they align so easily with death, from Stalin, to Mao, to Osama.

I was watching Fox News with the sound off. There was a picture Ward Churchill speaking, the faux-teacher in Colorado. It was instructive. His hatred was all that you could see. These people are ill.

Terrye “They are indeed empty. You know them by their hatred. They stand for nothing.”

No wonder they have been so hard for me to grok. They have nothing inside themselves, and all they have left is hatred for those that do.

I guess they see life as hopeless and are infuriated by those who make something of it.

Feb 9, 2005 - 7:20 pm 24. richard mcenroe:

Terrye ó it says all that needs saying about the Churchill/Buchanan loop that it manages to be both anti-American AND xenophobic… thus leaving them with nowhere at all to stand.

Someone once said that the ability to hold two contradictory ideas in one’s mind at the same time was the mark of intelligence. But trying to act on them at the same time is the mark of lunacy…

Feb 9, 2005 - 8:33 pm 25. Terrye:

richard:

Nowhere to stand other than the self obsessed belief they can do it better, whatever it is.

Feb 10, 2005 - 2:49 am 26. Big Jilm:

Hello, as a card-carrying member of The Left(tm), I was previously unaware of our alliance with Irredentist Islam. Did I miss a meeting, or was this information distributed in a memo? I look forward to working closely with Irredentist Islam, as I feel our alliance will greatly enhance synergy and allow us to capture many economies of scale. Can someone please forward me the press release, memo, or e-mail that announced our new joint venture, and please let me know if we have any working group meetings in the near future so I can schedule my vacation plans.

Feb 10, 2005 - 6:49 am 27. richard mcenroe:

Big Jilm ó Well, I was there for the big New York launch parties, the “Women Against the Shah” rallies of 1978-79 in Washington Square Park that helped bring Khomeini into power (with, of course, all its liberating benefits for the women of Iran). No doubt others here can speak to more recent mergers and acquisitions. You should keep better track of your memos.

Feb 10, 2005 - 7:13 am 28. thedragonflies:

Big Jilm,

Alliances can happen two ways: by agreeing and by allowing. The hard left backs the jihad overtly (Not in Our Name, ANSWER, Michael Moore, Ward Churchill, etc.). The mainstream left doesn’t denounce the jihad supporters, so it’s alliance by allowing.

Where are the leaders on the left who denounce the jihadists? I point out one who surfaced today, Dershowitz is speaking out against the Coluimbia University Middle East studies professors who demand that their students condemn Israel and allow no disagreement with their hatred of Israel and the U.S. That is good. It distances liberals from radical lefty jihad supporters.

Feb 10, 2005 - 7:30 am 29. Big Jilm:

Thanks for the helpful information. The memo regarding the Women Against the Shah was almost 30 years old, so I think you can understand how I could have forgotten about it.

In other alliance-related news, can anyone here volunteer to take minutes of our meeting with Condoleeza Rice regarding our new cooperative strategy to “allow” the governments of Saudi Arabia, Uzbekistan, and Pakistan to continue their repression of our citizens? We are very excited about our new partnership with the Administration to keep the citizenry of the above-named countries under the thumb of their respective despots. We will be handing out t-shirts celebrating our new friends at the company picnic, and are accepting suggestions as to the message to place on the front. Early front runners are “Freedom…for those who deserve it,” and “The Bush doctrine – please apply sparingly.”

Feb 10, 2005 - 9:24 am 30. Kyda Sylvester:

I for one would be delighted to see the anti-Western civilization left team up with radical Islam. Talk about your potential for self conflagration…

Feb 10, 2005 - 10:24 am 31. charlotte:

Early front runners are “Freedom…for those who deserve it,” and “The Bush doctrine – please apply sparingly.”

Big Jilm may be on to something. It’s gotta be all or nothing. Since the US obviously cannot take on ALL repressive governments in the Middle East and the world at the same time, we shouldn’t even try for the difficult reforms needed in failed regions. A Bush/Rice foreign policy needs to be 100% consistent toward every country and at all times, without tailoring for circumstance, leverage and timing issues; absent that, the new approach is hypocritical and far less ethical and effective than that of European, UN, and past US realpolitik which kept us safe until 9/11.

It’s not enough we’ve directly taken on the Taliban, al Qaeda, Saddam, nuclear proliferation, and the Israeli/Palestinian situation, with Syria and Iran to come. Bush must also tackle Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Uzbekistan head-on and in the open right now, or he’s being insincere about his push for democratic reforms abroad. Good progress, notwithstanding, the US should quit even trying.

Feb 10, 2005 - 10:45 am 32. Big Jilm:

Charlotte,

I’m glad you agree that Mr. Bush’s much-praised moral clarity toward repressive regimes includes teaming up with some of our (”our” referring to The Left – Irredentist Islam Axis) favorite regimes. I am pleased that you see clearly how it is insufficient to merely allow such regimes to exist, but the U.S. must actively ally with such noble and forward-thinking men as Pervez Musharraf, Islam Karimov, and Crown Prince Abdullah. With the U.S. supporting these worthy men, The Left’s (TM) goal of worldwide repression and misery can truly be advanced! The Left (TM) is particularly heartened to hear of the United States’ role in training the Uzbeki military, which will undoubtedly use its new skills not only to hunt for terrorists, but also to repress and brutalize the Uzbeki people! Only through the glorious alliance of the United States and Uzbekistan can the collective face of the Uzbeki people be utterly smashed by the boot of repression!

Feb 10, 2005 - 11:25 am 33. Terrye:

Big:

You are a troll.

I was a card carrying member of the left for years, so don’t try to snow me sonny.

The left has offered nothing in the way of alternatives. They can bitch about Musharref but they make excuses for Osama. They can make snarky little comments aobut how we have not cut off all relations with any and all repressive regimes while the kiss Catro’s ass. When was the last time any left leaning politician did anything to actually help someone? I don’t mean the self righteous prattle about capitalism and the Saudis… I mean something that was actually useful and halpful.. Can’t think of anything? Neither can I.

You are a hypocrite and a fraud and are an example of what Ropger is talking about.

Feb 10, 2005 - 12:12 pm 34. charlotte:

Well said, Terrye.

Big Jilm,

I get a kick out of the negative tee-shirt politics of the Left, but gotta say your ironical “Freedom… for those who deserve it” is not nearly as pejorative as “no freedom for oppressed peoples, anywhere, anytime”. Who have the leftist Dems wanted freed in the past many years, besides Leonard Peltier and an assortment of other criminal and jihadist types? Leftists were bummed by the dissolution of the Soviet Empire, many were against taking out the Taliban dictatorship, and most were vehemently opposed to removing Saddam’s regime. Are the purist freedom-loving Dems even crying for the world to free the North Koreans or the savaged peoples in totalitarian Africa?

How about “freedom for those where strong diplomatic and economic pressure will kick-start reform and where, if military action is required, an expenditure of our treasury and precious blood can be justified to Americans on the basis of national self interests, and security elsewhere until freedom can be better advanced”? If this approach isn’t comprehensive and perfect enough for the Left, they are free to hold their collective breath and pout until the EU or UN bothers about freedom for anybody, beside the Pali gangsters, of course, (but even there they’re rather ineffectual).

Feb 10, 2005 - 12:24 pm 35. jerry:

Terrye:

We need to take Jim seriously here. Engage him in discussions so we can come up with a common approach that both left and right can agree on. First we have to understand that the world is divided into Progressive [Socialist] regimes like Cuba and North Korea and Reactionary regimes like the Wahabists and Israelis. Once we learn to accept Jim’s worldview then we can get on with work of building real socialism.

End of Sarcasm

Jim:

You are the reactionary longing to restore the pre-1989 world. Actually, the Saudis are the Progressives if by progressive you mean revolutionary. In any case the Saudis are revolutionaries. The Wahabists are attempting to overturn the existing order and establish a new order. So let’s get are terms straight here.

Reactionary = return to previous order

Revolutionary = overturning the existing order.

Progressive = [see reactionary above.]

Feb 10, 2005 - 12:29 pm 36. Knucklehead:

Harry and Big Jilm are trolls sent to test new memes. The Shifting Goalposts memes were getting tired and a bit too obvious, so now they’re seeing if the Still Supporting Tyrants meme can hold enough hot air to get off the ground. So, are you guys gonna pass your classes this semester and be juniors next year?

Feb 10, 2005 - 12:56 pm 37. Big Jilm:

Terrye,

I do not live under a bridge, so I cannot be a troll. While I am neither your son nor your “sonny,” I do regret that you have lost your card identifying you as a member of The Left(TM). Please let me know if you would like a replacement. But don’t you understand that we on The Left (TM) are not interested in helping anyone? Amnesty International, The ICRC, and other such organizations are devationist tendencies with no home on The Left (TM). We also reject those who protested apartheid in South Africa. Rather, we embrace those who stood with PW Botha, such as Vice President Cheney.

Charlotte,

Your slogan not only will not fit on our t-shirts, but it fails to reflect our priorities. We, like President Bush, SUPPORT the provision of military aid to repressive regimes such as Saudi Arabia and Uzbekistan, not diplomatic pressure against them.

Jerry,

Your post displays the precisely the kind of incoherence and doublethink that we on The Left (TM) embrace! Please join us and the Bush administration in facilitating the repression and authoritarian control of the undeserving peoples of Uzbekistan, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan!

Feb 10, 2005 - 1:08 pm 38. chuck:

Gosh,

Big Jim can do sarcasm. But that pretty much exhausts his talents.

Feb 10, 2005 - 1:20 pm 39. Terrye:

Jilm:

It was not the folks at Amnesty that opened the childrens prisons in Baghdad, it was US Army.

Amnesty did do some reports on the sins of Saddam, but when it came to doing something to help the people suffering, they were too busy bitching about the US not signing up for the International Court so that the baby killing torturing raping pillaging Marines could be made to pay for their sins… by someone..somewhere…unelected….in some nice transnational courtroom. Now if Cuba and Sudan get on the UN Humans Rights Commission, the NGOs will be too busy driving around in their frigging land rovers to say boo about it.

But when the tsunami hit the left hatched conspiracy theories and Bush sent in the Navy.

And after listening to Osama channel Michael the millionaire Moore and Ward Churchill do his sad tired power to the people blowback theory of comeupence and seeing Ramsey Clark standing next to Jesse Jackson while he tries to justify defending the Butcher of Baghdad and watching the dipshit human shields try to protect Saddam’s torture chambers but offering no cover whartsoever for the Iraqi voters I really do not feel the need to explain something to you any idiot should be able to see.

Feb 10, 2005 - 1:29 pm 40. Terrye:

And while we are on the subject do you think we should invade Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Uzbekistan?

I prefer diplomatic pressure leading to change whenever possible, but if you guys think we should nuke Mecca, just speak up.

Feb 10, 2005 - 1:45 pm 41. PeterUK:

Big Jilm is the title of this song.

Rollin’ and a wheelin’, stealin’ and a dealin’ – Big Jilm

Bol weevil its a pleasel its a pleasel my weasel – Big Jilm

Dreamin’ and a schemin’, screamin’ and a bleedin’ – Big Jilm

Froggie in the meadow under the log – Big Jilm

Rollin’ and a wheelin’, stealin’ and a dealin’ – Big Jilm

Bol weevil its a pleasel its a pleasel my weasel – Big Jilm

Big Jilm

As you can see ,it is full of political subtlety

Feb 10, 2005 - 2:12 pm 42. PeterUK:

By this band http://www.synthesis.net/music/feature.php?fid=2023

Feb 10, 2005 - 2:25 pm 43. Terrye:

Peter:

How clever.

I prefer Big John.

Big bad John.

he was a helluva man.

big John

big bad John

Feb 10, 2005 - 2:58 pm 44. PeterUK:

Terrye ,Thank you.

The argument of whether the left is conspiring with radical Islam has been given one more thread to pull at http://www.nynewsday.com/news/local/crime/ny-stew0211,0,1331604,print.story?coll=nyc-homepage-breaking2

which of course is why Big Jilm was here.

A bridgeless troll,eh? It’s worse than I thought they are beginning to mutate.

Feb 10, 2005 - 3:08 pm 45. Big Jilm:

Terrye,

The Left(TM) does not think we should invade Uzbekistan, Pakistan, or Saudi Arabia. On the contrary, The Left(TM) agrees with you and the Bush administration that those regimes should be supported with all aid, military and otherwise, but especially military, that they need to repress their populations.

Also, The Left(TM), like you, hates bourgeois liberal NGOs, especially the landrover-driving types, as well as capitalist pigs like Michael Moore. So, you see, you would fit in very well with The Left(TM), and I respectfully urge you to renew your membership forthwith. Anyone who can come up with such a clever appellation as “Michael the Millionaire Moore” has a bright future in our organization.

Greetings PeterUK! I see you have noticed the recent conviction of Lynne Stewart. As you know, The Left(TM) is a monolith of interchangeable and indistinguishable drones, brainwashed by public school and public television.

Nonetheless, Stewart is not a member of our ranks. You see, she is a lawyer, and is thus complicit in a system that prizes such things as fairness and transparency. We of The Left(TM), however, recognize that power legitimizes itself, and requires no assistance from such pointy-headed liberal academic justifications as “objectivity” or “rationality.” That is why The Left(TM) applauds the Bush administration’s position that the Geneva Conventions are quaint and outdated, and that the Head of State may detain whomever he chooses, indefinitely, by simply declaring that person an unlawful combatant! And that designation is unreviewable by an impartial tribunal! A masterstroke! The Left(TM) is awed and humbled by the sheer masculine will to power of our ally, George W. Bush.

Feb 10, 2005 - 3:41 pm 46. PeterUK:

Big Jilm,surprised you didn’t pick this song for your name.

“you can

piss up a rope

and you can put on your shoes

hit the road get truckin’

pack your bag”

Feb 10, 2005 - 4:03 pm 47. Terrye:

Jim:

You don’t offer alternatives and you don’t know what you are talking about.

No one who has actually read the Geneva Conventions or the Bush administraion position on them would say that anyone has said they are outdated. The fact that terrorists who do not belong to a signatory of the Conventions and who do not abide by it themselves are one side of the equation complicates things. So far these men have had lawyers, the Red Cross, a chaplain and will have some due process of law which makes it plain that the US is giving them far more rights than they ever gave their hapless victims. But who cares about that?

After all If we can not free everyone, why free anyone? If we can not feed every hungry child, we let them all starve. That is the left’s scorched earth policy is it not? That is the idea behind the snide comments about Saudi Arabia..if you deal with them then all the talk about democracy is just a ruse, a guise for the desire to steal oil or whatever.

And as usual, you are just bitching, snarking. This is why the left has become reactionary. They lack the intellectual honesty to come up with viable alternatives so thay make silly childish comments that requires nothing of them.

I think it will take a long time to bring any from of democratic reform to the region and I think the US will have to deal with some unsavory people to do it, but if we can deal with the French and the UN we can deal with Pakistan.

Feb 10, 2005 - 4:16 pm 48. charlotte:

Big Jilm/Jim,

I am going to fit the Bush Doctrine on a tee just to prove that we can carry a big stick AND use a bold small font for foreign policy. I could send you a shirt, should you want to add to your political reading, but need to know whether “Big” means you take an extra large size or that you’re an exaggerated reactionary.

What color would you like?

Feb 10, 2005 - 4:38 pm 49. Terrye:

Speaking of the Geneva Conventions I know an old man who spent 36 months in a Japanese POW camp. He had a scar as large as the plam of may hand on his back from a gun shot wound. He was in the Phillipines when it was overrun and still weeps for the nurses, as well as the thousands of men who died.

Imagine how he feels when he hears that panties on a man’s head or being exposed to a woman in thong underwear is torture.

One of the things I resent the most about the left is their deliberate revision of history. Their trvilializing the holocaust by comparing Bush to Hitler and other such insane and ridiculous flights of fancy. They have managed to make rational discourse virtually impossible.

way to Jilmbo.

Feb 10, 2005 - 4:57 pm 50. PeterUK:

“The Left(TM) is a monotone of interchangeable and indistinguishable drones, brainwashed by public school and public television.” Big Jilm

Jilm old chap,I suggest you get an ironectomy,irony is a dangerous technique in the hands of a tyro,read a little Gibbon then work your way up to date.

Wouldn’t do for the rest of your hive thinking you actually mean what you say,could easily be misunderstood out of context.

On the other hand,reading your words,are you really sure you are comfortable on the left?

There are those here who will show you the Neo-con handshake and swear you in.

Feb 10, 2005 - 5:01 pm 51. richard mcenroe:

Terrye ó Hey, if it didn’t happen in their favorite Starbucks, it’s all equally unreal…

Feb 10, 2005 - 6:37 pm 52. Big Jilm:

Terrye,

Comrade Alberto Gonzalez in January 2002, characterized the Geneva Conventions as quaint and obsolete. You must also adopt this position if you would like to be of The Left(TM). I am pleased to see that you agree with The Left(TM) that provocative dress is not torture. But you must push your revolutionary analysis further to conclude, as the Bush administration’s legal department did, that nothing short of physical pain associated with serious physical injury such as organ failure, impairment of bodily funtion, or even death, constitutes torture. Only those who agree with the Bush administration that electric shocks, waterboarding, and forcible fingernail removal are not torture will be welcomed by The Left(TM).

Further, it is not just “dealing with” Saudi Arabia and Uzbekistan that The Left(TM) endorses. We, along with the Bush administration, think those regimes are worthy recipients of military and other forms of aid. Please refrain from futher disparaging our allies in the Administration by characterizing their association with these worthies as mere “dealing with” or realpolitik – we on The Left(TM) understand that the right dictators must be propped up and vigourously supported at all times if our goal of worldwide repression is to be advanced.

Charlotte,

XXXL please. Would you be so kind as to include an extra one (same size) for Michael Moore, who we on The Left(TM) uniformly obey with utmost fealty?

PeterUK,

Thank you for the medical advice. Have you previously performed irondectomies? If not, can you refer me to a specialist? Surely you realize that we on The Left(TM), have already met with the Neo-Cons many times. In fact, they are a wholly-owned subsidiary of our organization. Thus, I am familiar with all three of the secret handshakes.

Feb 11, 2005 - 10:07 am 53. jerry:

little jim:

There you go again. The Gonzalez quote was out context and fully refuted at his confirmation hearings. In fact the two legal scholars brought in by Senator Leahy to discredit the AG were forced to admit that Al Qaeda-ites are not covered by the Geneva Convention and are actually unlawful combatants with the status of Pirates caught on the high seas. Unlawful combatants, as you might not be aware, have historically been treated as “hors de combat” when caught on the battlefield. Now, I know you much more intelligent then I am but just in case you are not familiar with the term I will tell you its meaning. Hors de Combat means you shoot them where you find them. Jihadis have no rights under international law.

But suppose you choose to treat them as lawful combatants. Guess what? They don’t get American style civilian rights. The UCMJ dictates their treatment. The Geneva Convention clearly states that it is unlawful to turn POWs over to the civilian court system. The convention states that unlawful conduct by a POW is to be dealt with by the competent military authority under the military justice system.

Finally, the Nazis were the last country to treat our POWs as dictated by the Geneva Conventions.

Like most Lefties you have the brain like those talking dolls. Pull the string and get the same stupid phrase.

Feb 11, 2005 - 12:03 pm 54. PeterUK:

It is evident that Jilm is a one trick pony using the old leftist tactic of debate by tedium,Roger’s gallstones are more interesting.I’m off upstairs.

Feb 11, 2005 - 1:14 pm 55. Big Jilm:

Jerry,

Please note this website’s policy against ad hominem and refrain from the schoolyard taunts, though I’m sure they make you feel like a Big Man.

You have the gall to accuse Comrade Gonzalez of disavowing the Torture Memo? In Gonzalez’ defense, The Left(TM) points out that he stated, in his confirmation hearing, that the administration will sidestep the quaint and obsolete Geneva conventions when it is necessary to prosecute the indefinite War on Terror.

The Left(TM) is glad that you acknowledge that unlawful combatants, as designated by an unreviewable decision by the Glorious Bush Administration, lack full civilian rights. The Left(TM) goes further, and realizes that such people, have no rights whatsoever, and those who raise concerns about the propriety of beating them to death or sodomizing them with lightsticks are mere bourgeois reactionaries with no place in the New Order the Bush administration is building.

Feb 12, 2005 - 10:17 am

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: