Anti-Globalization Movement joins Jihad vs mc World

topic posted Sun, June 24, 2007 - 9:56 AM by  Unsubscribed
Share/Save/Bookmark
Advertisement
Anti-Globalization Movement joins Jihad vs mc World
By Andrew Walden

Without the internet skills and the service of hundreds of Western writers and intellectuals, the Islamists would have much greater difficulty spreading their propaganda to gain the submission of American and European leftist audiences. How important is the left’s servitude to radical Islam?

Jihad vs. McWorld is the name of a March, 1992 essay and a 1996 book published by Benjamin Barber. Barber, a social democratic “third-roader”, argues that both tribal warfare “jihad”, and what he sees as the “threat” of globalism, equally endanger democracy in the post-cold war world. Now, nearly a decade and a half after Barber’s essay appeared in Atlantic Monthly, it appears that leading anti-globalization activists worldwide have stopped equivocating and decided that globalism is the greater threat. They have teamed up with jihad.

Unlike visits to 1980s Sandinista Nicaragua, in-person displays of “solidarity” with Islamists are problematic. As the cases of Nick Berg and Danny Pearl show, Americans who fall into militant Islamist hands are routinely tortured and beheaded. But in the internet age liberals can proffer their rhetorical services to the logos-challenged Islamists on line without ever getting close enough for a scimitar swipe. Dozens of Islamist websites and newspapers now feature a harem of western liberals eagerly displaying their rhetorical skills on behalf of their Muslim masters.

Saudi-owned, Lebanese based Dar al-Hayat is an Arabic newspaper of record. Due to the Arab world’s massive illiteracy and dictatorial regimes, its circulation is only about 110,000. In an August 14 article, writer Jihad el-Khazen explains how they make up for the Islamic world’s literary failings, “…we are not lacking in friends. Our friends around the world have better personal and intellectual reputations than the Israeli 'gang of evil'. I would like to introduce the reader to some names, such as Tariq Ali, John Berger, Noam Chomsky, Eduardo Galeano, Naomi Klein, Harold Pinter, Arundhati Roy, José Saramago and Howard Zinn.” For readers unfamiliar, these are the leading intellectual lights if the international anti-globalization left.

Jihad continues, “Chomsky and his colleagues issued a statement called: 'Israel, Lebanon and Palestine', in which they held Israel fully responsible for the fighting and killings in Palestinian territories. They said that the recent conflict began after Israeli forces abducted two civilians….”

Chomsky’s statement in support of Iran’s ally Hezbollah came in an interview with Kaveh Afrasiabi a former political science professor at Tehran University and a Harvard PhD who serves as the Iranian Shia interlocutor to western liberals and leftists. As such Afrasiabi has been given column space in numerous western publications and a position at the UN. Afrasiabi founded a Massachusetts-based organization called “Global Interfaith Peace” which in 2002 encouraged useful idiots to serve as human shields in Iraq. CNN describes Afrasiabi as, “…a specialist in Iran`s foreign affairs, having done research all over the world, including Harvard and the Center for Strategic Research in Tehran. He is also a friend of (former Iranian) President Khatami.”

At the bottom of the column is a link to Jihad’s blogsite where he explains the interrelationship between action and propaganda: “Following the publication of the Prophet Mohammed cartoons in Denmark, I embarked on an effort, parallel to my daily work, to collect additional information about Israel’s cabal in the US.”

According to the list of articles posted on his website, www.Chomsky.info, Chomsky now writes for Dubai’s Khaleej Times, and Cairo’s al-Ahram Weekly and al-Adab. Since August, 2004 more than half of the Chomsky articles posted on his website were published in Arab newspapers or magazines. Chomsky in 2005 was named “the world’s leading living intellectual” after a poll conducted by the British magazine Prospect. He serves Islam.

A leading pro-jihad site, Jihad US, (US supposedly stands for “UnSpun”) features predictable jihadi “dispatches from the front” informing readers that, “Every Inch Of Iraq Will Be Covered With US Bodies”, but also the ramblings of Cindy Sheehan and, the “informed comment” of Juan Cole both of which require purchase of a $29.95 Jihad US subscription to read. Asked about the column, Cole replied, “(This is the) first I heard of it. I prefer that sites ask me before mirroring material.” He did not seem particularly upset to find his writings being used to raise money for a pro-decapitation website nor did he indicate he would be taking any steps to have the column removed. Sheehan’s publicist did not respond to a reporter’s emailed query.

A speech, “Our Founders and the unbalance of power” delivered in 2004 by Democrat Vice-President Al Gore to an audience at Georgetown University can also be found buried below links to an article by Osama bin-Laden, a fluff piece honoring, “Prominent Martyrs of Iraq” and an interview with Cheryfa Jamal, wife of a “Toronto 17” terror suspect. Gore’s publicist also did not respond to a reporter’s emailed query.

Under the Jihad US masthead, one side contains “mainstream news” consisting of Western media reports and opinion useful to the jihadi cause. On the other side is “uncensored news” consisting of reports such as, “The Islamic State Of Iraq News Report For The City Of Baghdad” –fifty after action reports on operations allegedly carried out against US forces and Shia civilians in Iraq. Other jihadi after action reports come from Afghanistan, Palestine, Pakistan and Chechnya. A report titled, “Al-Qaeda Fighters Versus The Soldiers Of “Freedom And Democracy” features New Yorker magazine writer Seymour Hersh claiming Iraqi prisoners were sodomized at Abu-Ghraib. An article condemns Hamas for considering the possibility of peace talks with Israel. Jihad US also promulgates the false story of “Fatima” an imaginary female Iraqi prisoner at Abu-Ghraib. Her fake story is a key propaganda device in recruiting assistance for foreign jihadis in Iraq.

American leftists including Cindy Sheehan in August met in Jordan with Iraqi leaders of minor parties some affiliated with the armed resistance. This was their second such meeting.

It is not only left-wing pro-surrender activists who are featured stars of the Islamist propaganda war on the West. Former Reform Party presidential candidate and current CNN commentator Pat Buchanan’s article, “Whose War?” (his answer: the Jews’) is front and center setting the tone on the anti-Semitic, pro-terror website www.NoWarForIsrael.com . There it fits perfectly alongside links to articles from the Holocaust-deniers of the mis-named Institute of Historical Review, and propaganda pieces from “electronic intifada”, JihadUS, the Iranian Islamic Republic News Agency, and numerous articles asserting that Israeli agents conducted the 9-11 attacks, not those poor misunderstood Muslims from al-Qaeda.

Another site, Islam Daily is almost entirely constructed of articles by non-Muslim westerners making the arguments which serve the current needs of Islamism. Islam Daily features dozens of western media commentaries including: • Bush as Bad as bin Laden? In Some Ways, Worse, • the latest anti-Semitic ramblings of Justin Raimondo (Israel is more dangerous than Iran) from anti-war.com, • analysis of the “Angus Reid World Poll” which announces that “People in 13 countries believe the United States is the greatest threat to global stability, and residents of eight countries consider American foreign policy as the most menacing issue to the world…” • An article by Kay Guinane of “OMB Watch” who shares this piece of genius: “Since the 9/11 terrorist attacks, U.S.-based (Muslim) charities have become targets in the government’s war on terror financing. This development makes little sense. U.S. charities support efforts to stop the violence of terrorism, and financing terror is contrary to the sector’s mission of promoting the public good, providing humanitarian relief, protecting human rights and assisting with conflict resolution around the world.”

The pro-terror website www.albasrah.net in between articles celebrating the terrorist ‘resistance’ in Fallujah features photo essays from “Information Clearing House”, an AP article on an alleged US attack on a wedding, an article from the UK Sun and another photo essay by “The March for Justice.” Al Basra dedicates an entire page to “GI Special” propaganda aimed at demoralizing American soldiers and sailors. Most of the propaganda consists of carefully selected news clippings from the American media.

The pro-Saddam Baathist website www.uruknet.info is operated by Italian Orientalist professor Claudio Moffa. It features a series of articles condemning the “lynching of Saddam” (an American term perhaps learned from Saddam’s Democrat attorney, Ramsey Clark, formerly the US Attorney General to President Lyndon Johnson). While most of Saddam’s semi-literate followers could barely put two words together, Italian “documentary” filmmaker Gabrielle Zampani created the eight-part series from her postings on her delicately-named blogsite www.thecatsdream.com. Does she think the head-choppers are going to be interested in feline dream interpretation?

Explaining Zampani’s movie and related book, “American Voices of Dissent” British left Laborite leader Tony Benn says, “…the American left gets no coverage in the press yet remains the hope for America and the world.” Another Saddam lawyer is dual US-Dutch citizen and alleged pacifist Curtis Doebbler whose website announces a course in “Human Rights Law” he is teaching this January at An-Najah National University in the West Bank town of Nablus.

The Chechen Kavkaz Center, when not employing the services of Boris Stomakhin, editor of the monthly Russian newspaper Radikalnaya Politika (Radical Politics), to come up with excuses for the Beslan baby killers, makes room for articles from the UK Guardian (“Victory still Bush’s Iraq Goal” featuring a photo of President Bush sending an appropriate message to the Islamists) and an article on Israeli plans to cleanse Iran of nuclear facilities by UK journalist Jonathan Cook. Kavkaz also features articles by: • Ousted Democrat Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney. • Kevin Zeese, director of Democracy Rising and a failed Green-Libertarian-Populist candidate for US Senate from Maryland • Ted Rall, a political cartoonist and columnist who is infamous for calling Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice a “house niggah”, referring to US troops in Iraq as “An Army of Scum” and calling Army Ranger Pat Tillman “idiot” and “sap” after he was killed in Afghanistan. Rall is also a contributor to www.DailyMuslims.com. In an article, “Why America needs Hezbollah” he praises Hezbollah’s clean-up efforts after the latest upsurge in Israeli-Hezbollah fighting writing,” The citizens of New Orleans desperately need Hezbollah's can-do terrorist spirit.” • Noam Chomsky, in an interesting choice for an Islamist baby-killer website, is given space to (falsely) denounce the UK Guardian for (accurately) reporting that Chomsky asserted that the 1995 Serbian massacre of Muslims at Srebrenica Bosnia was “overstated.” Another article praises Chomsky’s assertion that the US is “the world’s leading terrorist state.” It is lifted from www.Islam-online.net, a site which is in turn littered with more western leftist servants of Islam.

Embarrassing themselves with their eagerness for union with the Islamists, www.CounterPunch.org on August 17, 2006 published an English translation of a Turkish newspaper interview with Hezbollah chieftain Hassan Nasrallah. When controversy flared regarding the authenticity of the interview, Editor Alexander Cockburn explained, “Of interest to us was the very radical timbre of Nasrallah's language and his remarks about the world struggle against imperialism…. Nasrallah is a very smart fellow, and knew perfectly well he was addressing a left Turkish audience.”

Quoted by Cockburn, Professor Idris Samawi Hamid, who teaches at the Department of Philosophy at Colorado State University, expands on the alliance between leftists and head-chopping Islamic bus bombers: “There is nothing in it (the interview) that conflicts with the revolutionary Shi`i ideology of the Hawzah. A close reading shows that Sayyid Hassan [Nasrallah] is subtly but clearly critical of socialist movements and is trying to bring/return them into a common platform.” Borrowing a phrase from the so-called Christian “liberation theology” of the Latin American left, Hamid continues, “Unfortunately academic leftists in the West (and that apparently includes Khalil) have for the most part refused to truly study Islamic liberation theology…. Instead of shouting "fake!" we should be encouraging the kind of broad anti-imperialist front that this interview encapsulates.”

As it turns out, the interview was ultimately acknowledged to be a fake by its original publisher, the Turkish Labor Party newspaper Evrensel. Apparently leftist forgers want the alliance with the Islamists so badly they invent a Nasrallah who is proposing political marriage to the socialists. But the third road is still an illusion. Islamists give socialists a simple choice: convert or die.

Cockburn claims his website is not anti-Semitic, but “former” Ku Klux Klan leader (and recent guest at Iran’s latest holocaust-denial confab) David Duke isn’t fooled. The leftist Cockburn is so beloved by Duke that his articles appear on Duke’s website here and here. A more clear statement of the nature of Islamic-leftist relations comes from the al-Qaeda statement celebrating the victory of their Democrat allies in the November 7 US Congressional elections. Abu Hamza al-Muhajir, head of al-Qaeda in Iraq explains in a tape-recorded message, "The victory day has come faster than we expected. Here is the Islamic nation in Iraq victorious against the tyrant. The enemy is incapable of fighting on and has no choice but to run away." He added, “We will not rest from our Jihad before blowing up the filthy Black house (White House)." Convert or die.

Lebanese scholar Walid Phares, after listening to al-Muhajir’s entire message in the original Arabic writes on Counter Terrorism Blog of, “al Qaeda's penetration of American politics.” Says Phares, “Interestingly, the message asks (American) politicians if they will implement their electoral promises to withdraw from Iraq. Al-Muhajir (who is also known as Abu Ayyub al-Masri) praises the choices by the voters of the enemy to ‘defeat Bush.’ More interestingly, he uses and American vocabulary by calling the War ‘stupid.’ Usually Jihadists call it evil or infidel and rarely qualify it in secular ‘electoral’ terms. But the most striking words used by a Jihadi commander is ‘lame duck.’ When I heard him uttering the words ‘al-batta al arjaa’ I realized he was off the classical Jihadi speech.” The Islamic website www.al-Qaria.net features UK Respect Party politician and al-Jazeera correspondent Yvonne Ridley warning Muslims to, “Beware of the Happy Clappies (who)… promote an Islam devoid of jihad, shari'ah and khilafah.” The British ex-wife of a PLO Colonel, Ridley was captured by the Taliban while covering the Afghan war in September 2001. She was released days later after promising to read the Koran. She converted to Islam in 2003 and now says, "I was horrible to (my) captors. I spat at them and was rude and refused to eat.”

Another Muslim convert, Seattle-based Al-Muhajabah, the former Laura Poyneer who converted in the late 1990s, operates the website Muslims for Kucinich and the “Clark Blog” she also posts the quaint and formerly de-rigueur statement: “Muslims condemn terrorism”. This makes her propaganda efforts on behalf of surrender-minded Democrats all the more effective, but many Islamic websites have moved beyond that fig-leaf.
Ridley and Poyneer are not the only leftists who have converted to Islam in the wake of terror attacks. Jihad US is operated by Khadija Abdul Qahaar who in a lengthy personal statement describes herself as, “the former Bev Giesbrecht, Canadian publishing entrepreneur and in later years, also web developer…” Her response to the 9-11 attacks was to convert in early 2002 from being a leftist Canadian Bush-hater to Islam. Her website celebrates al-Qaeda and violent jihadists worldwide.

Without the internet skills and the service of hundreds of Western writers and intellectuals, the Islamists would have much greater difficulty spreading their propaganda to gain the submission of American and European leftist audiences. How important is the left’s servitude to radical Islam? Osama bin-Laden explains it best in an intercepted letter to Taliban chief Mullah Omar: “It is obvious that the media war in this century is one of the strongest methods (of struggle). In fact, its ratio may reach 90% of the total preparation for battles.”

While these left-wing writers and intellectuals now openly serve the jihadis, Benjamin Barber confines himself to arguing for American paralysis. In his most recent 2003 book, “Fear’s Empire: War, Terrorism and Democracy in an age of Interdependence”, Barber, still the third-roader, strikes the familiar liberal refrain: fighting terrorists creates terrorism. Wisely he confines himself to normal Democrat Party surrender rhetoric. This keeps him clean enough to serve in a future Democrat Presidential administration while others more completely follow the logic of his positions.

Andrew Walden is editor and publisher of the Hawai`i Free Press.
hfpeditor@email.com
posted by:
Unsubscribed
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • Awesome.
    While I am not a Muslim or a Jihadist, those who oppose US policy need to unite and work together even across national boarders.
    • Unsu...
       
      >those who oppose US policy need to unite and work together even across national boarders.<

      So that means aligning yourself with the same people that killed 3000 innocent civilians on 9/11 and the same people that send naive kids into Israel to blow up innocent Israelis and align yourself with the same people that send truck bombs into crowded Iraqi markets to kill hundreds of poor innocent people. So you're basically admitting that anyone that opposes the U.S. government's policies needs to join forces with terrorist in order to overthrow the United States?

      Damn, man!
      • Actually, I dont take this thread very seriously. Its more of the "If your not with us, then you are against us" garbage.

        Just because we dont agree with your war doesnt mean we are the same as your enemies.

        The anti-globalization movement is not a Jihadist movement. However, it is a movement that crosses national boarders. We are advocating voluntary cooperation without the creation of a one world government.

        Rik, are you pro-globalization? Because if you are, then you must hate America and its sovereignty.
        • Unsu...
           
          >Rik, are you pro-globalization? <

          This isn't about if I support globalization or not. it's about some people on the left using the Internet to help spread Jihadist propaganda just to help their own selfish political agendas. It's pretty sad actually that these people could betray their country like this. Many of those helping terrorists articles have been posted here on tribe and it's disgusting.
    • >> While I am not a Muslim or a Jihadist, those who oppose US policy need to unite and work together even across national boarders. <<

      so that justifies working with people that glorify car bombings intended to kill women and children and decapitating journalists? just realize that the left loses all moral authority when it makes these convenient and Machiavellian choices in order to further its cause.
      • <<so that justifies working with people that glorify car bombings intended to kill women and children and decapitating journalists?>>

        Ye fucking Godz, what raw hysteria! Can these few isolated dingbats be fairly said to comprise "The Left" or even a significant strain in it?

        Don't get all Fu Manchu on us...
        • >> Ye fucking Godz, what raw hysteria! Can these few isolated dingbats be fairly said to comprise "The Left" or even a significant strain in it? <<

          "I called it the paradox of the Left. On the one hand they support ideals of equality and emancipation, but in this case they do nothing about it; they even facilitate the oppression.’

          Ayaan Hirsi Ali
  • Unsu...
     
    <<How important is the left’s servitude to radical Islam? >>

    I stopped reading as soon as I hit this part. Maybe someone here can surprise me and inform me that the rest of the article was not just some bit of neocon propaganda about evil m00slems and how you're either with US or you're a liberal commie muslim traitor terrorist.
    • It's actually worse- an anti-Left diatribe in which the author rings in reliable ole racist stereotypes, warmed-over radical chic and tiresome personal demonization in lieu of close reasoning or even humor. Just another Pavlovian froth-on-cue exercise for wingnuts...

      Say the name "Chomsky" and they go batshit. It's hilarious.
      • >> Say the name "Chomsky" and they go batshit. It's hilarious. <<

        what an absurd stretch. what is interesting is the histrionic and sometimes vicious response leftist intellectuals get when they depart from the party line on multiculturalism.
        • >> Say the name "Chomsky" and they go batshit. It's hilarious. <<

          what an absurd stretch.>>

          Um. Yeah. Well, I take the following, particularly the last line-

          <<Since August, 2004 more than half of the Chomsky articles posted on his website were published in Arab newspapers or magazines. Chomsky in 2005 was named “the world’s leading living intellectual” after a poll conducted by the British magazine Prospect. He serves Islam.>>

          as not just absurd, but objectively batshit crazy, as well as a perfectly foul bit of McCarthyite PC. In fact, this entire article can be summed up with- "I have here in my hand a list of 23 (75? 113? 645?) radical-libs who are at this very second working thirty-eight hour days to sell America out to sinister foreigners!" It's just that crudely paranoid and there's almost nothing else in it.

          This is less a critique of multiculturalism as one of those Universal Frankenstein movies of the 1940s, when the studio decided ole Frankie couldn't hack it as solo monster anymore, so they rang in Dracula, the Wolfman, Abbott & Costello, plus assorted mad doctors and circus freaks to cram cheap scares into 61 minutes running time.

          Commentary like this is fiction, a way of hammering an enemies list into credulous wingnuts, as if to say, "You know all those scary people you don't like? Well, THEY'RE ALL IN IT TOGETHER!"
  • Nope...

    I am totally against globilization,

    But the Jihadists would have little power to threaten us if so much money wasn't pouring into the middle east from our dependence on oil.

    I don't think we should war against the Islamic world.

    I just think we should end globalization and put the kind of money we've been spending on this war to build an alternative energy infrastructure that doesn't produce greenhouse gases, and see the numbers of people employed in Iraq and Pakistan in our military mobilized as a massive corp of engineers to construct it as rapidly as possible. I'm sure many of them would prefer building hydro electric plants and windfarms, perhaps new kinds of reactors and solar farms... to being shot at, running into roadside bombs, etc.

    I'd also like to see these technologies as developed shared with china so that they won't need fossile fuel dependence either with their growing energy needs, as a freebie.

    My attitude to the jihadists is, "Fine, you hate us, we're leaving and we're taking our money, f-ck you, have a nice day, we'll get china off your oil addictions to. Have your islamic paradise without anyone's money, you wanted to live in the sixteenth century, we'll you're welcome to take the bad with the good." Let them take the blame for the economic downturn from the withdrawl of our trade, in no time the people who kinda supported them will hate them and want bullets in their heads when they don't have the ability to afford or keep up the computer networks they once had the privelege of using for posting beheadings of Americans. When they and their political influence is killed off we'll re-visit the idea of doing the trade with them.

    I'd also say that before withdrawl I'd leave a calling card of spraying the harmless to human genetically engineered herbicide which only destroys the opium crop over afghanistan and the tribal areas as a massive blight on their heroin trade. Try buying guns then, it will be back to arrows and swords (if they can afford the metal). Get rid of heroin at the source and we won't find it on our streets, anyone notice how it was all over the place since we had "cooperative tribes" in afghanistan and pakistan working with us against Al Quaida? What was in it for them? well, screw them. If they don't want to starve, plant vegetables instead of opium, because that cash crop won't grow anymore if we just drop that blight all over the place as we leave.

    No, I'm anti-globalization, but I hate the jihadists too and would never consider working with them. I beleive that the propeganda machine is trying to attach anti-globalization to helping our enemies so that people don't consider the Isolationist philosophy. A few moron professors who are far out of touch and have big mouths may express support of jihadists and get quoted somewhere, and claim to represent anti-globalization, I think it stinks of set-up to discredit the cause.