The left’s-Muslim alliance
In July I wrote the following article on the American Muslim organisation CAIR and their list of organistaions and individuals that they see as extreme islamophobes that need to be demonised, opposed and silenced. This is a good resource for those that want to find out what organisations can help them find out the truth and what organisations they can support in their work. Once again a great thank you to CAIR for helping us understand those spreading the truth and those that care about America.
CAIR’s listing of Islamophobic individuals and organisations – thanks for the information
Another organisation that we should note is the Southern Poverty Law Center. Americans should take careful note of this organisation as it is one of the most extreme left-wing organisations that has aligned itself with radical Islam (compare their list of extremists with CAIR’s list).
SPLC have published what they call a Field Guide to Anti-Muslim Extremists and it makes very interesting reading exposing their own racism and hatred of anything, and anyone, that speaks out against radical Islam. It says of its publication:
“We hope journalists will use this guide to learn more about these extremists and the damage they cause to society and either deny them a public platform altogether or be better prepared to publicly challenge their hateful rhetoric and misinformation,” Beirich said. “The public really should know who these extremists are and the damaging impact they have with a platform to spread hate and bigotry.”
A media that is largely biased against anything that is not left wing is encouraged to take their bias even further and silence anyone that dares speak out against radical Islam and its dangers. Those at the centre of these extremists are listed as:
The guide is not an all-encompassing list of extremists, but highlights those in the center of a large and evolving network of anti-Muslim activists, including the following:
Frank Gaffney Jr., a former Reagan administration defense official, who founded the Center for Security Policy (CSP) in 1988. In recent years the CSP has gone from a hawkish think tank on foreign affairs to a promoter of baseless conspiracy theories and groundless accusations. One example is a CSP poll, cited by Donald Trump, which claimed that 25 percent of Muslims agreed that violence against Americans in service of jihad was justifiable.
Ryan Mauro, a “national security analyst” with the Clarion Project, anorganization that makes and distributes millions of anti-Muslim films that portray, among other things, the threat of Islamism as akin to Nazism. The New York Times editorial board called one film, “The Third Jihad,” a “hate-filled film about Muslims.”
Brigitte Gabriel, founder of Act for America, is a radical Islamophobe who has said that “any practicing Muslim who believes the word of the Koran to be the word of Allah … who goes to mosque and prays every Friday, who prays five times a day – this practicing Muslim, who believes in the teachings of the Koran, cannot be a loyal citizen of the United States.” In her book Because they Hate: A Survivor of Islamic Terror Warns America, Gabriel wrote that “the Arab Muslim world, because of its religion and culture, is a natural threat to civilized people of the world.”
Once again thanks SPLC for recommending organisations that bring us the truth and are working to expose Islamic terrorism and radical Islam. Real American patriots. It must be seen as a Badge of Honour to be on SPLC and CAIR’s lists. It means that they are being effective in getting the truth out there. Their field guide can be found here. The real coordination between CAIR and SPLC can be clearly seen by looking at the CAIR website. They continually quote SPLC as if they were the benchmark Americans should use in judging organisations that pass muster and should be listened to.
CAIR and SPLC the protectors of American civil liberties
CAIR and SPLC are two peas out of the same pod. They work under a veneer of protecting America’s civil liberties yet both organisations openly oppose the First Amendment. CAIR says it aim as an organisation is to:
CAIR is America’s largest Muslim civil liberties and advocacy organization. Its mission is to enhance the understanding of Islam, encourage dialogue, protect civil liberties, empower American Muslims, and build coalitions that promote justice and mutual understanding.
The problem with CAIR and SPLC is that both organisations want civil liberties only for those that agree with their agenda. We see that SPLC openly encourages the main stream media (MSM) to deny those that oppose radical Islam a voice in American society. Just as Obama’s administration would silence them. They are to be silenced at all costs.
Visit CAIR’s web site and take note of how active they are in seeking to silence any public debate on radicalIslam and the Islamic roots of Islamic terrorist acts. They are especially active in seeking to silence debate and thus awareness within law enforcement right across the country. Just like Obama and Clinton they want any reference to Islamic terrorist attacks taken out of any training on terrorists. Looking closer we see they want those exposing Islamic terrorists banned from interacting with America’s law enforcement (including the FBI) and replaced with their own training. This is not only an insidious attack on the First Amendment but an undermining of America’s ability to identify Islamic terrorists.
Here is an example of the pressure CAIR is putting on local police departments:
In a letter to Greene County Sheriff Steven S. Smith, CAIR Department to Monitor and Combat Islamophobia Director Corey Saylor wrote in part:
“Everyone, even anti-Muslim and anti-immigrant bigots, have the First Amendment right to spew their hatred and conspiracy theories, but that bigotry should not have the implicit endorsement of a law enforcement agency. Let these individuals pay for their own private speaking venue and be ignored, as they deserve.”
“The sponsorship of this event by the sheriff’s office sends the message to members of the local Muslim community that they may not be protected against the growing number of hate incidents targeting Muslims nationwide due to rising Islamophobia.”
Their language and the language of SPLC are one and the same. If you believe in effective vetting of immigrants then you are an anti-immigrant bigot. If you believe in naming Islamic terrorists as Islamic terrorists, and that the American people have a right to expect their law enforcement agencies to protect them from such, you are an anti-Muslim bigot who spews hatred. This all sounds so familiar to Clinton’s endemic racism that is found in the America that does not agree with her – her irredeemable deplorables.
This is the title of a very enlightening article by Douglas Murray published by The Gatestone Institute. Murray deals with the blatant racism that riddles everything SPLC produces. He opens his article by saying:
The Southern Poverty Law Center (SLPC), based in Montgomery, Alabama, has struck again. The self-appointed boundary-markers and policemen of free discussion have issued what they call a “Field Guide” to help “guide” the media in “countering prominent anti-Muslim extremists.” It is hard to know where to start with such idiocy, so let us start from the beginning.
Indeed it is idiocy of the worst kind but idiocy that is persuasive in the mainstream media throughout the West. We see it in Europe (including the UK) as well as in the USA. Their most recent offering illustrates how idiotic they are. They have widened their net from what they see as white racists to anyone that opposes radical Islam. But when we look at what they are actually saying to the media it is a blatant attack on the First Amendment: and either deny them a public platform altogether or be better prepared to publicly challenge their hateful rhetoric and misinformation.
It is striking that they are so blatant about attacking one of the foundations of Western Civilization: freedom of speech and expression.
If you do not support the left’s narrative then you must be silenced or discredited at all costs (preferably the former). If SPLC had their way no one in America would be given a public platform if they disagreed with SPLC’s position. As Murray points out they see themselves as:
The self-appointed boundary-markers and policemen of free discussion
It really is incredulous that SPLC can site Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Maajid Nawaz amongits list of extremists that must be silenced. So we must silence anyone that disagrees with the narrative SPLC puts forward. We must listen to them because they are indeed the boundary makers and policemen of free discussion. Only those on their approved list merit a seat at the table of free expression. All others must be silenced by the MSM at all costs and it seems the MSM is a willing partner in this enterprise to stifle free speech and freedom of expression. Murray gives a damning commentary on the SPLC:
The SPLC’s latest production is disgraceful, discrediting and sloppy even by its own increasingly disgraceful, discredited and sloppy standards. For this publication, they have listed “Fifteen anti-Muslim activists,” most likely in the hope that they will scare the media off inviting them on, or the wider public from being allowed to listen to them.
I am sure if Murray was based in the US he would be on this list of extremists, along with anyone else who is giving an effective analysis of radical Islam and the danger it poses to Western Civilisation.