Tag Archives: Robert Spencer

THE BUS CAMPAIGN…GREAT NEWS THE AMERICAN PEOPLE LEARN ABOUT ISLAM

by

0

Friday, February 22, 2013

AFDI #Myjihad Ads go up on Chicago Buses!

Finally, after months of wrangling and First Amendment violations, our AFDI jihad campaign hits the streets of Chicago to counter the deceptive and misleading Hamas-CAIR #myjihad propaganda

THOSE ARE THE WORDS OF PAMELA GELLER. THE ESSENCE OF GELLER’S CAMPAIGN IS TO TELL THE TRUTH ABOUT ISLAM. WWW.4INTERNATIONAL.ME SUPPORTS HER CAMPAIGN UNCONDITIONALLY.

Marx was clear as to the potential Fascist nature of Islam even in his day. We Marxists recognise Fascism as a modern phenomenon, tied in with the capitalist system in severe crisis, antisemitism may be present but present always is to atomise the workers and to block all opposition.

What Geller is doing is fighting for free speech. She is NOT against Muslims and not against Muslims simply worshipping. But she is explaining the nature of Islam.

What could be wrong with that!

We as revolutionary socialists defend Pamela Geller unconditionally in this campaign to open up the dusty and very bloody pages of Islam for us to peruse.

THE “lEFT” IN BED WITH ISLAM ARE NOT REALLY IN THE TRADITIONS OF REVOLUTIONARY SOCIALISM. ONLY WWW.4INTERNATIONAL.ME FROM YUGOSLAVIA TO LIBYA SEE ISLAM AS A THREAT TO HUMANITY

ROBERT SPENCER OF JIHADWATCH SPEAKS THE TRUTH OVER FILM AND HEBDO. THE LEFT SHOULD BE ASHAMED.

by

0

SAYS ROBERT SPENCER OF JIHADWATCH…LEFT SHOULD LISTEN AND LEARN

 

Has the whole world gone mad? Why is this even a question? Let’s say you call me a racist, bigoted Islamophobe. I am deeply insulted. At that moment I have a huge range of options before me. I can calmly explain to you that Islamic supremacism is not a race, fighting for free speech and equality of rights for all is not bigotry, and “Islamophobia” is a manipulative concept used by the Muslim Brotherhood and its allies to stifle resistance to Islamic supremacism and jihad. Or I can start yelling and calling you names. Or I can start muttering into my vodka tonic about the injustice of it all. Or I can murder you, drag your body through the streets, set fire to your embassy, and demand laws against insulting me. Or I can do any number of other things.

Which one will I choose? It’s up to me, not to you. You might have a strong hunch as to how I will react, and say to your companion, “That Spencer, he is going to come out with another windy, closely reasoned refutation of my charges that everyone will ignore,” or “That Spencer, he is going to burn down my embassy,” but you still can’t be absolutely sure what I am going to do, because I am not an automaton, I am a human being endowed with the faculty of reason, and I may always choose to react in a way that will surprise you.

Or I may not. But in any case, it is up to me. If I kill you, there is absolutely no justifiable basis on which anyone could say, “Well, he had it coming. Look how he provoked him.” My choice was my own, and only I bear responsibility for it.

But today that basic and elemental truth is lost. If Muslims rage, riot and murder for any reason, they bear no responsibility. The only ones who bear any responsibility for their raging, rioting and murdering are the non-Muslims who somehow provoked them.

That I have to take the time to explain this at all, and that it will be universally ignored, is an indication of how much our public discourse has degenerated. The road is being swiftly paved for the destruction of the freedom of speech. When, in another year or so, I am safely imprisoned for daring to speak the truth and a new era of peace has dawned between the West and the Islamic world, and yet the jihad keeps coming, and the full implications of the new “hate speech” laws start to become clear in the quashing of all political dissent, don’t say you weren’t warned.

Of course, maybe none of that will happen, and the freedom of speech will suddenly sport a thousand articulate defenders who have not yet been completely demonized and marginalized out of the public square. But I don’t see them on the horizon right now.

 

 

THE CHARLIE HEBDO EDITOR REJECTS ANY RESPONSIBILITY FOR VIOLENCE. WELL SAID

“‘I’m not the one going into the streets with stones and Kalashnikovs’: Charlie Hebdo editor rejects responsibility for violence over naked Mohammad cartoons,” by Nicholas Vinocur for Reuters, September 19 (thanks to Kenneth):

The editor of French magazine Charlie Hebdo has said that when his magazine ridiculed the Prophet Mohammad on Wednesday by portraying him naked in cartoons, he and his organization were not responsible for fuelling the anger of Muslims around the world who are already incensed by a video depicting him as a lecherous fool.The editor, Stephane Charbonnier, also known as Charb, rejected criticism. “We have the impression that it’s officially allowed for Charlie Hebdo to attack the Catholic far-right but we cannot poke fun at fundamental Islamists,” he said.

“It shows the climate. Everyone is driven by fear, and that is exactly what this small handful of extremists who do not represent anyone want: to make everyone afraid, to shut us all in a cave,” he told Reuters.

“Muhammad isn’t sacred to me,” he said in an interview at the weekly’s offices on the northeast edge of Paris. “I don’t blame Muslims for not laughing at our drawings. I live under French law; I don’t live under Koranic law.”

Charbonnier said he had no regrets and felt no responsibility for any violence.

“I’m not the one going into the streets with stones and Kalashnikovs,” he said. “We’ve had 1,000 issues and only three problems, all after front pages about radical Islam.”

One cartoon alluded to the scandal over a French magazine’s publication of topless photos of the wife of Britain’s Prince William. It showed a bare female torso topped by a beard with the caption “Riots in Arab countries after photos of Mrs Mohammad are published”….

“We know that these images will be deeply offensive to many and have the potential to be inflammatory. But we’ve spoken repeatedly about the importance of upholding the freedom of expression that is enshrined in our constitution,” White House spokesman Jay Carney told reporters.

“In other words, we don’t question the right of something like this to be published, we just question the judgment behind the decision to publish it.”…

 

That’s the first step.

AS GOLDBERG SHOWS THE AIM IS TO CLOSE DOWN PAMELA GELLER AND ALL POLITICAL DISCUSSION OF ISLAM

by

0

Essentially the issue in Norway is about a cold blooded murderer called Breivik who planted a huge bomb in Oslo (individual terrorism to which Marxists and Trotskyists have always been opposed, whether done by the Provisional IRA or Breivik it is all the same to us…we oppose this under each and every condition without any exception). Using the same murderous method Breivik continued his murder spree by mowing down children and youth attending a labourist youth gathering on an island. All Marxists and Trotskyists historically opposed this sort of thing and we do today, totally and completely.

 

There is also the situation in the world today of severe economic crisis in capitalism, causing deep political crisis

 

Looking at this general world economic crisis in a general sense, what do we see? One thing that is very obvious is that the ruling capitalist classes in their governments have been lining up alongside of Islam, even as Islam is always intent on Jihad. It is in the very nature of Islam to be on its Jihad. It is written deeply into the very foundational documents of Islam. Does that mean that all Muslims are on a violent Jihad? It does not, but it certainly means that a significant number of Muslims are supporters of a violent Jihad. And they are supported and defended by capitalism.

 

Pamela Geller is now being attacked by these very capitalist forces who are in union with the Islamic Jihad. It is an ideological issue. These defenders of capitalism are attacking Geller. They are trying to close down Geller and to close down the whole of the movement which holds the political view that Islam is a very reactionary ideology.

 

Geller hints at but does not make the leap that we on 4international did and do, that the Jihad is being used by very dark forces within capitalism. Geller remains a firm believer in capitalism as a system.

 

We saw these dark forces in the destruction of Yugoslavia.

 

First the CIA was the spearhead behind the Nazi Tudjman and was directly implicated in the worst crime since the Nazis, the driving of Serbs and the murder of Serbs in the Krajina region of Croatia.

 

Then the alliance of western capitalism with Izetbegovic in Bosnia. Then in Kosovo. Then the bombing of Serbia, all actions involving a great Lie campaign, centred on Srebrenica, Racak.

More recently the open alliance with Qaradawi and the Muslim Brotherhood against anti Jihadists like Mubarak and gadhafi

 

 

AS THE ABOVE PICTURE SHOWS AND THANKS TO THE OSLO ACCORDS

…At the same time this was going on, the constant if you like, the Jews of Israel were being attacked time and again, and threatened, by having a Jihadist state called Palestine to be erected on their flank.

 

Indeed the main plotters in this regard were the Norwegian labourites, and the Norwegian so-called peaceniks, in what became known as the Oslo Accords, the result of which was the political and theoretical disarming of the Jews, and the massacre of thousands of Jews on the streets of Israeli cities and towns in the 90s, and the more Jews were murdered the more these Norwegian peace people were blaming the Jews.

 

So at the very least this calls for sensible people to have a close look at the history of the Norwegians, especially their role in the Holocaust, and at history in general

 

I repeat at the risk of boring…we are talking here all the time about particular ideological roots.

 

It is at this time that this particular attack has come upon Geller, and this attack is from a Jew onto another Jew.

 

Try to follow the argument of this guy Goldberg here. The content is a bit confusing because he laces his attack on Geller with some comments from Geller (I have placed Geller in italics to make it easier)

 

On Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer, and Other Jihadists

By Jeffrey Goldberg

Jul 25 2011, 9:05 AM ET

I’m away, and it’s hard to keep up with the news, but it seems as if my arch-nemesis Pamela Geller is in a bit of a pickle because she and her partner-in-Muslim-bashing, Robert Spencer, were favorites of the Norway killer. (Btw, I call her my arch-nemesis, but I’m grateful to her for calling me what I believe to be the best epithet ever, “Jewicidal Jihadi.” Also, “Jihad Jeffro.” All I’ve ever come up with to describe her is “shrieking bigot,” which doesn’t have the same power, or alliterative quality.) Here’s The Times on Geller, and Geller’s delightful response:

Mr. Breivik’s declaration did not name Mr. Kaczynski or acknowledge the numerous passages copied from the Unabomber’s 1995 manifesto, in which the Norwegian substituted “multiculturalists” or “cultural Marxists” for Mr. Kaczynski’s “leftists” and made other small wording changes.

By contrast, he quoted the American and European counterjihad writers by name, notably Mr. Spencer, author of 10 books, including “Islam Unveiled” and “The Truth About Muhammad.”

Mr. Breivik frequently cited another blog, Atlas Shrugs, and recommended the Gates of Vienna among Web sites. Pamela Geller, an outspoken critic of Islam who runs Atlas Shrugs, wrote on her blog Sunday that any assertion that she or other antijihad writers bore any responsibility for Mr. Breivik’s actions was “ridiculous.”

“If anyone incited him to violence, it was Islamic supremacists,” she wrote.

(The above is anything but clear, from this great journalist Goldberg. I think he is counterposing the New York Times and Geller’s response)

Anyway Goldberg goes on to lay down his position clearly. He uses this tragedy for these labour children to knife Geller, remember that, and he is Jewish:

 

Goldblog’s position: Geller is a hatemonger, but she didn’t pull the trigger. Free speech means free speech. But she should be aware now that violent people look to her for guidance, and she should write with that in mind. Which brings me to the subject of the Murfreesboro, Tennessee, mosque, the new “Ground Zero mosque” controversy. People like Herman Cain, who vilify this mosque (and other mosques) should think carefully about the ways in which their words are heard. I worry about a violent reaction to the Tennessee mosque more than I worry about any other terrorism target in America. More on this later, when I have better access to the Web.

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/07/on-pamela-geller-robert-spencer-and-other-jihadists/242474/

 

So Goldberg blames Geller for this murderer being born!

 

He is knifing Geller in the back and above all he is calling for the curtailing of the discussion on everything that matters

 

Who in this world want to defeat the necessary airing of views? the nazis that is who.

 

The action of Hitler and the Nazis on taking the power in 1933, largely thanks to the betrayals of the social democrats and the Stalinists, was to curtail (STOP LIQUIDATE END MOST DEFINITIVELY) THE POLITICAL DISCUSSION INSIDE GERMANY)

 

There is a real Nazi Movement developing but it has nothing to do with Breivik or any other individual terrorist. Please help. Please work to defend Pamela Geller and defend the right of free discussion.

THE MESSAGE FROM STUTTGART…FAUX LEFT/ISLAMIST ALLIANCE…MUST DEFEND FREE SPEECH

by

1

FAUX LEFT AND ISLAMIST ALLIANCE

 

4international has followed the reports on the Stuttgart meeting with interest. This is because the future of the revolutionary socialist movement is at stake in these reports.

 

Let us make things very clear: we stand totally on the side of Robert Spencer and those in Stuttgart Germany who invited Spencer to speak, especially on important work they have done to explain the role of Islam in the world today.

 

We do have differences with Spencer, of course we do, we are a Trotskyist movement.

 

We see the main enemy as being NATO/UN which with its repression of Serbs, its war on Gadhafi, its continued threat against Israel and the Jews, is working on behalf of Sharia and of Islam, because NATO/UN sees Islam, as Hitler saw Islam, as a very repressive ideology.

 

Which is primary…NATO is primary.

 

Wilders is simply very wrong on this. Wilders should be lining up alongside of the Serbs and of Ratko Mladic, and on the side of all the Serb prisoners in The Hague Kangaroo Court.

 

But having said that, and made our differences clear, the main thing that the Stuttgart rally which was attacked by these reactionary groups, is that the rally showed that the so called left is in the pay of Islam, with many also in the pay of the German state, if you follow the logic of the above.

 

We have followed and publicised this now notorious meeting very comprehensively because it gives a clear picture of the degeneration of this so called left.

 

In the following there is a very thoughtfully wonderful report by one of these German fighters for free speech against Islam.

 

I like this report very much because it hints towards the use which the ruling class (the NATO/UN/Global elite) are making of this left/Islamist/state provocateur alliance

 

Let me introduce this article by one of the following comments, these Germans really are clued up!

 

The comment goes like this:

 

Like everywhere else, Westerners in key positions are being paid Islamoney. Islam has purchased our freedom. We are letting it become our masters.

Where does the money lead to? Who will follow the money trail?

(following report thanks to Jihadwatch.org)

 

The Message from Stuttgart
by Monika Kaufmann

Before Robert came to Germany, he asked me about security guards; I answered that there would be plenty of police and they were on our side. When we met at the airport and rode on the train to Stuttgart, I told him there were lots of places I’d never invite him to in Germany, such as Cologne in North-Rhine Westphalia, but that Stuttgart was pretty calm. I couldn’t have been mistaken more. The times they are a-changin’, and the Stuttgart 21 project, the big reconstruction of Stuttgart’s central railway station, attracts all kinds of radicals and rioters from all over Germany. Meanwhile, you can even hire “professional” protesters; you don’t even have to pay them, they join anything they deem a Just cause — and “just” is simply anti-Western.

And these demonstrators apparently excel as brilliant minds. Here is an example: “I go to school in Neukölln (part of Berlin) and there are 20 Muslims in my class, we have no problems.” “In Neukölln the headscarf sluts beat up Polish girls.” Enraged: “How dare you call ‘em sluts!?” Not a word about the Polish girls, it escapes this brilliant mind that Poland was the first country that the Nazis invaded in World War II, and that accordingly the Germans have a certain responsibility for the protection of Poles on their soil. Or, “You’re racists!” “What race is Islam?” “You’re against everybody who looks like someone from an Islamic country, against black-haired people…” Pointing at Robert: “Is he blond?” “Uh, you know what I mean…” And so forth.

On Thursday afternoon, June 2, the idyllic Schlossplatz in the centre of Stuttgart turned into a witches’ cauldron. So-called antifas (anti-fascists) and jihadis stormed our stage and occupied it. Everything turned topsy-turvy, our agenda went down the drain, and when eventually the stage was cleared and our orators were able to speak briefly, the unleashed mob threw metal ashtrays, bottles filled with ice, eggs and horse shit at them, as there were some mounted police on the ground. Our “friends” know how to use the materials they find; they’re ecologically sensitive. But the police were not very helpful. They kept a low profile and only de-escalated when absolutely necessary.

While I was pondering this nightmarish rally in Stuttgart, I recalled another rally nearly forgotten that I had attended in Munich back in the nineties. The circumstances were similar, but not quite so. The subject was an exhibition touring Germany about the war crimes committed by the Wehrmacht during World War II. The Nazis rallied against this exhibition, and we, the democratic forces, protested against the Nazis. As clashes were to be expected, task forces from all over the Federal Republic were detached to Munich. Everything went smoothly. The two opposing parties never got any closer than 100 metres to one another. I never saw more than a few banners and a van of the Nazis, and I remember several times being told by the police not to move another step. Eventually the Nazis gave up and we won a victory. End of story.

Comparing these two rallies, some questions arise: What went wrong in Stuttgart, and why did it go right in Munich? Were the police in Stuttgart incompetent and the police in Munich efficient? The answer is that they were efficient at both locations by serving the political intention perfectly. The police are part of law enforcement; they do as they’re told. In Munich their orders were to keep the opposing parties apart by all means, and that’s what they did. In Stuttgart they were told to keep a low profile and only to interfere when absolutely necessary. The message from Stuttgart is clear: the security of some intrepid freedom fighters from all over the world standing out for our values, such as freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, equal rights for men and women, the right of physical integrity for apostates, etc., is not more important than the right of some radicalised moronic thugs to fight for their Muslim friends’ special rights. As Robert pointed out so many times, in our free societies Muslims are equal to other citizens, but as in Orwell’s Animal Farm, they want to be more equal. They always demand extra rights, and as rights can’t proliferate, granting new special rights to one group invariably means curtailing the rights of others. Special accommodation for Muslim customs at work places always implies some disadvantages for their non-Muslim colleagues. This is something the self-appointed fighters for tolerance and freedom of religion in our midst are not aware of, especially in Germany, where they drew the wrong conclusions from the past.

But getting back to the message that the new government of Baden-Württemberg, where Stuttgart is the capital, is sending out to the rest of the world: We accommodate undemocratic elements in our society, as long as they stand out for the poor disenfranchised Muslim community. Boohoo, can’t help it, why are Muslims always misunderstood? These freedom fighters are a nuisance. Who needs freedom of speech anyway? We prefer to stand with the simple-minded Muslim supporters.

Two dialogues with policemen can shed a light on this: “Why are these rioters here?” “They’ve got the same right to rally as you have.” True; but they should have kept them away from the stage, our stage. “Why didn’t you proceed more harshly against the rioters?” “I can give no comment.” Pretty helpless.

In the face of all this, I’m requesting the readers of Jihad Watch to copy and paste this little email to Mr. Kretschmann, the new prime minister of Baden-Württemberg, who had after coming to power replaced the police officials, such as the chief of Stuttgart police. Please feel free to modify the mail to your liking.

This is his email address: poststelle(at)stm.bwl.de

Dear Mr. Prime Minister of Baden-Württemberg, It has come to my attention that in Stuttgart, the capital of the German state of Baden-Württemberg, governed by your administration, friends of mine were terribly harassed and abused at a rally on June 2. Some people threw manure, eggs, metal ashtrays and ice-filled bottles, only because my friends peacefully protested against a violent and supremacist ideology, Islam.I shall refrain from doing any business in your state from now on. I don’t feel safe there. I’m a free American (European, Indian, Filipino, Thai, African etc.) citizen, and I thought that Germany respected freedom of opinion and other human rights. I must have been utterly mistaken. I thought that the Germans were not ausländerfeindlich, but obviously they are.

Yours sincerely

 

The correct translation of “ausländerfeindlich” is hostile to foreigners, not xenophobic. Those who were rejected in Stuttgart were friends from all over the world; they were not aliens to our society. Anyway, to tell German multiculturalists that they are “ausländerfeindlich” is the worst offence they can think of. Please let them feel where their weak points are.

Monika Kaufmann is a human rights activist who writes from Germany.

Posted by Robert on June 11, 2011

4INTERNATIONAL DEFENDS PAMELA GELLER AGAINST THE INDEPENDENT SCURRILOUS ATTACK AND ALSO AGAINST THIS POLITICAL CREEP CHARLES JOHNSON

by

0

IT IS VITAL THAT A UNITED FRONT IS CREATED TO DEFEND THE STRUGGLE AGAINST DICTATORSHIP IN EUROPE AND AMERICA, WHICH ITSELF IS CONNECTED TO THE DEFENCE OF ISRAEL, AND THE EXPOSURE OF THE MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD ANTISEMITISM BEING BEBIND THE SO CALLED “ARAB SPRING”

BUT THERE ARE ENEMIES TO THIS UNITED FRONT, ONE OF WHICH IS THE BLOG PAJAMAS MEDIA AS PRODUCED BY CHARLES JOHNSON. (more later)

Pamela Geller has come under a vicious attack from the London paper, The Independent. This is the paper close to Harry’s place, close to Oliver Kamm who now writes for the Times.

In fact The Independent expresses the very worst of British hypocricy and reaction on the world stage.

It was The Independent which led in the lies against the Serbs in former Yugoslavia. So Geller is in good company (with the Serbs!)

Johnson

This revealing comment appeared after the Independent attack on Geller by Johnson. It was a comment out of the blue on Libya which followed the slander against Geller by Charles Johnson. It seems out of the blue but is actually very revealing indeed!

This person wrote:

I might start doing page for Libya Updates soon, Explanation of what’s happened that day in the evening.

However, further good news. The rebels are about to enter Zliten for the next battle. And shelling of Misrata has stopped, so all sorts of supplies and shenanigans and enter the city.

 

“Further good news”, this man says. The Libyan “Rebels” are in reality The Muslim Brotherhood and the opposition to Muammar Gadhafi is in reality The Muslim Brotherhood

This man on Johnson’s blog Pajamas Media (unopposed)  is lining up with The Muslim Brotherhood and against Muammar Gadhafi.

Now it so happens that Obama, the Democrats, and a goodly section of the Republicans in America are also trying to create a new virtual reality, Muslim Brotherhood good, Salafists bad.

Except that this falls apart when one remembers Muslim Brotherhood IS Salafism!

Remember also that in this Obama speak world of lies this all leads to the acceptance of Hamas as a “moderate” party and therefore the acceptance by Israel of a Hamas dominated “Palestinian” Arab State on the flank of Israel.

Would that state be peaceful? Apparently so, to follow this twisted logic being promoted, promoted by Obama and the EU Establishment, also it seems by Charles Johnson.

The appearance is an attack on Geller. The essence though, which lies within and hiding behind that appearance, is that Israel must accept a Hamas dominated Sharia state on its own land, which is Judea and Samaria, but at any rate directly on its new border.

Let us take the scurrilous attack on Geller before we do the Independent. This is what Johnson wrote:

The Independent’s Robert Chalmers has a very balanced and fair look at Pamela Geller: American patriot or extremist firebrand?

And of course, any balanced and fair examination of the Shrieking Harpy can only come to one conclusion: she’s desperately unhinged.

What’s striking about this article, though, is that Geller completely lacks the courage of her convictions. When confronted about her bizarre, hate-filled posts, she invariably attempts to pretend she didn’t really say what she did really say. It’s a “joke,” or it’s somebody else’s writing that she just happened to put on her blog for no particular reason, or it’s “taken out of context.” Like many extremists and bigots, underneath the bluster and the hateful statements Geller is a coward.

For example:

Among the many new things I have learnt from the work of Pamela Geller is that President Obama reputedly used to knock around with a crack whore.

“That,” the author, blogger and broadcaster insists, “is not what I said. You are taking this out of context. The post [on her website atlasshrugs.com] was pointing out how people were reporting lie after lie about Sarah Palin. I said to myself, there is so much about Obama we don’t print. In his youth,” she continues, repeating a story for which there exists absolutely no foundation, “he supposedly liked a girl who was a crack whore. I never reported it as fact. They say all these vile things about Palin but do we ever talk about Obama and the crack whore?”

The incredibly libellous post, entitled: “IT’S TIME TO EXPOSE THE TRUTH ABOUT OBAMA” appeared on 1 August 2009. “Why not tell the truth about Obama and his reported strange sexual predilections?” Geller wrote. “It is well known that he allegedly was involved with a crack whore in his youth. Very seedy stuff … Find the ho, give her a show! Obama allegedly trafficked in some very deviant practices.”

Pretty hard to take that out of context, wouldn’t you say?

Then Johnson adds:

Chalmers emailed me to ask for my reaction to Geller’s insults:

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/38569/comments/#cc9067095

I would not wish to pursue Johnson’s smell any further because it is not a pleasant smell to follow.

Except to point to that  last reference (to the email made by The Independent to Johnson) that they do flock together with a sure instinct.

On the Geller blog  Atlas Shrugs I took up this reference made by The Independent above:

“the incredibly libellous blog”

as being the pivotal comment by The Independent.

 

I highlight this off the cuff remark by The Independent because it points to where the centre of this struggle really must be concentrated, it must focus on defence of the First Amendment

This is not to suggest that struggles in Israel or in Europe in defence of basic rights should not be fought, but to say that the focus has to be the defence in America of the First Amendment

And that is why this spokesperson for Obama, Johnson, and why this mouthpiece of British Imperialism, The Independent, attack Pamela Geller

Thus you will find my comment in defence of Pamela Geller on the Atlas Shrugs site this morning:

 
I defend Pamela Geller against this abomination who calls himself a journalist.

But the issue is wider even than this attack.

What is called in historical socialist circles as the United Front

As opposed to the present Fascist “Left” hatred of Pamela Geller and many others.

I take these attacks on Pamela very seriously and they are a major danger to free speech to all

Geller is leading the fight against Obama, but in essence this is leading the fight against dictatorship, which is taking a number of forms, one but only one of which is the Sharia issue

Remember the Independent led in the destruction of Yugoslavia and the hounding of its President Slobodan Milosevic, who was it must be remembered and emphasised poisoned by the NATO in his NATO jail

The most serious charge by this Independent writer was that the article by Pamela was incredibly “libellous”.

This writer is actually correct on that. If Pamela was writing in any country in Europe, any at all, it would be libellous.

Only because there exists the First Amendment is that article not libellous in America.

This points to the best way forward which centres on the defence of the First Amendment in America, where this battle now should concentrate.

I call for a United Front to defend Geller from The Independent, and to defend Spencer from threats of physical attacks, to defend Geert Wilders etc.

I represent true socialism and there is another history to this socialist movement that not everybody is aware of.

 

may 16 2.56 am (american time)

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2011/05/cover-story-independent-sunday-magazine-.html#comment-6a00d8341c60bf53ef01538e8329b3970b

I wrote>