Tuesday, July 26, 2011

American Power:

Progressives Attack Pamela Geller and Counter-Jihad

I'd be interested to know how many people attacking Pamela Geller and the counter-jihad movement have actually read Anders Behring Breivik's manifesto, or his Internet posting at Document.no.

Breivik's papers is over 1,500 pages long and rambles on about everything from personal hygiene to the development of radiological weapons. The killer also lifts word-for-word the writings of authors who have focused on the existential fight against Islamist jihad. And given the nature of both the Norway massacre and extreme gotcha politics of ideological progressives, it took only minutes for blame to shift from the deranged murderer to the most prominent conservatives fighting for the preservation of freedom. It doesn't work the other way around. When Nidal Malik Hasan massacred 13 soldiers and civilians in November 2009 the progressive left and MSM mounted a massive cover operation for a man who yelled "Allah Akbar" before opening fire. Behold the politics of the information battlespace. The truth gradient doesn't favor those fighting for decency and justice. And it means those who know truth in their hearts and souls must redouble their efforts against the broadsides. And to remind people, right commentators were gathering their information from MSM outlets like the New York Times, which had this in its initial reporting:
Initial reports focused on the possibility of Islamic militants, in particular Ansar al-Jihad al-Alami, or Helpers of the Global Jihad, cited by some analysts as claiming responsibility for the attacks. American officials said the group was previously unknown and might not even exist.

There was ample reason for concern that terrorists might be responsible. In 2004 and again in 2008, the No. 2 leader of Al Qaeda, Ayman al-Zawahri, who took over after the death of Osama bin Laden, threatened Norway because of its support of the American-led NATO military operation in Afghanistan.

Norway has about 550 soldiers and three medevac helicopters in northern Afghanistan, a Norwegian defense official said. The government has indicated that it will continue to support the operations as long as the alliance needs partners on the ground.
It won't matter much to the left, but the truth is supreme and righteousness floats to the top. Amid the cloud of death that still hangs, the debate will rage on the culpability of influence. So for what it's worth, here's a little round-up of those exploiting the dead to destroy their political enemies:

* Adam Server, "In response to Norway attacks, right-wing bloggers suddenly demand nuance."

* Balloon Juice, "“This rhetoric,” he added, “is not cost-free”."

* Booman Tribune, "Pam Geller Compares Herself to John Lennon."

* Charles Johnson, "NYT: US 'Counter-Jihad' Bloggers Heavily Influenced Oslo Terrorist."

* Daily Kos, "Norway killer found inspiration in American anti-Islamism."

* Dean's World, "Atlas Shrugs Blogger Pamela Geller an Inspiration for Terrorists."

* Roy Edroso, "Rightbloggers Discover the Real Victims of Norway Mass Murderer Breivik: Themselves."

* William Saletan, "If Muslims are responsible for Islamic terrorism, are Muslim-bashers responsible for the massacre in Norway?"

I'll have more on this later. Political and ideological debates are driven by an obscene double standard. To speak out against Islamist jihad is to be labeled "racist" or "Islmophobic." And it's frankly gut-wrenching to witness the left's vile opportunism amid the carnage.

And see Pamela's response: "MEDIA ASSASSINS."

RELATED: At New York Times, "Killings in Norway Spotlight Anti-Muslim Thought in U.S." (At Memeorandum.)

7 comments:

Damien said...

Someone should ask them why, if Breivik's was so mainstream, on the right, or even just the counter Jihad movement, why hasn't there been many more terrorist attacks like this? Its the first time I've ever heard of one.

Anyway, his attack didn't even target Muslims, not that, that would have been okay. But still, If this was motivated simply by anti Muslim bigotry, why didn't he attack a Mosque instead? It seems to me, that for whatever hatred he may have had for Muslims, it was secondary to his hatred for what he saw as "cultural Marxists"

Pastorius said...

Great post from American Power. Thanks.

Jason Pappas said...

Douglas is doing a good job on this issue. He actually read the 1500 pages and with a critical eye.

Damien said...

Its become clearer to me as to why Breivik attack the people he did, after watching a couple news reports. He was apparently angry at the government for letting the Muslims in, in the first place, and for letting them destroy european culture. He believed this would get them to change their policies some how. How he thought it would get them change their policies, I have no idea, other, perhaps massive terror.

Damien said...

However, anyone who just thought about it for a moment would see how this would be almost guaranteed to backfire.

midnight rider said...

Breivik mentions or cites geller or atlas shrugs 28 times. Geller by name alone only once.

He mentions or cites Charles Johnson and little green footballs or lgf 30 times. Johnson alone by name 13 times.

Neither deserve it , of course. Just sayin'. . .

Epaminondas said...

awesome, m.r.

Johnson on his own petard.

Deeeeelicious