Posted on 01/12/2005 9:16:43 PM PST by CHARLITE
Prior to September 11, 2001, Afghanistan’s repressive Taliban regime was known to most of the world only on account of a single controversy involving its decision to destroy two ancient Buddhist statues. Of course reaction to this incident was one of universal outrage, loudly condemned across the political spectrum as an abominable example of religious tyranny.
Yet this desire by the Taliban to obliterate all religious symbolism with which it took umbrage has an ominous parallel within the borders of America in the systematic efforts by the ACLU and its ideological supporters to expunge every Christian expression from the public square. If anything, the Taliban were at least a bit more forthright as to their ultimate goal of imposing Islam on the population at large, while working to forcibly eradicate all other religious thought.
Of course the ACLU hasn’t gone it alone, often enlisting various countercultural organizations, such as the euphemistically named “People for the American Way” to carry its water. Furthermore, an increasing number of institutions employ tactics learned from the ACLU wherein sanctimonious pontificating, threats, and intimidation are invoked as a means and justification for banning outward symbols of Christianity.
Meanwhile, the various organizations throughout America that regularly protest any symbology of the Christian faith are just as often amenable and supportive of crescents, crystals, and the assorted icons of every spiritual alternative. Hardly the trappings of a single affiliated religion, they nonetheless comprise a common effort to undermine and eventually destroy the original spiritual bedrock of American society.
Other signs of this predominantly left-wing assault abound. Thus, the many parallels and similarities between the methods of the American left and militant Islam, though not universally equitable, must be recognized and evaluated for their true ramifications.
Consider, for one example, efforts of the Islamofacists to disrupt, apparently at all costs, the elections in Iraq. Clearly aware that the will of the people of that region, if aired at the ballot box, will undeniably speak against their brutality and despotism, the Islamists will diligently work against the ability of the common citizenry to state their opinions in such a manner.
With the elections apparently imminent, the forces of the Iraqi insurgency are calling for a boycott in hopes of rendering them invalid. Among American liberals, the call is for endless recounting and re-evaluation of this country’s election results, in an effort to solidify the notion that the tallies were somehow rigged, and therefore not legitimate.
The record number of votes cast for President Bush on November 2 should make it patently obvious that the Democrat party ought to become introspective and work to repair itself from within. Yet almost daily, indications are that liberals intend to maintain their present battle plan.
Rather than admit defeat, and that the election represented a referendum on the counterculture, the left instead continues to seek to discredit the election process itself, thereby maintaining its pretense of representing “the people.” In like manner, the forces of militant Islam intend to prevent any such baseline of public consensus from ever being established in Iraq.
Last week prominent Democrats in both the House and Senate delayed certification of the Electoral College vote tally, ostensibly to call attention to “irregularities” in the decisive state of Ohio. Clearly, no real irregularities were up for discussion.
In truth, the ploy was intended only to undermine the credibility of President Bush’s reelection. Despite his pious post-election demands that the President strive for “unity” among Americans, John Kerry didn’t even show up in the Senate for the certification of the electoral vote.
Present plans by left wing organizations to disrupt the Inauguration with mass demonstrations and other acts of protest are intended to further discredit the Bush Administration, and ultimately to undermine its ability to govern. While public dissent has always been a legitimate component of American political discourse, these efforts will undoubtedly undermine American policy in the eyes of its adversaries throughout the world.
With each new effort by the left to sidestep legitimate debate of the issues at hand and supplant them with one fabricated controversy after another, the pattern becomes increasingly obvious.
The enemies of traditional America exist not only on the fields of battle in the Middle East, but also inside the U.S., within major liberal institutions whose members invariably believe they alone hold the moral "high ground.” It is high time the rest of America recognize the true motivation for such behavior.
About the Writer: Christopher Adamo is a freelance writer from southeastern Wyoming, where he has been involved in grassroots political activites for several years. He maintains a website at
http://www.chrisadamo.com
.
Christopher receives e-mail at adamo.chronwatch@lycos.com.
These times certainly make strange bedfellows. It's hard to believe the causes some liberals can get behind, just to oppose conservatives.
I see symbolism in you posting that twice. You're one of THEM, aren't you...?
:)
Not that I have ever done that.
LVM
I object to the title "Liberals". They are "Radicals". There is nothing liberal about them!
Believe it.
This article helps to bring it all together for us to see what they the Socialist have done and what they are doing.
Here are a few more as to help you see it all a little better. Some are pretty long, but are a great read:
The Hate Crimes Laws are nothing more than the implementation of the Values set forth in the European Socialist Manefesto. They undermine our Gurantee of Freedom of Speech by the Constitution. The Hate Crimes were put into law to do just that. We have the right to Hate just as we have the right to Love.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1254190/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1318061/posts?page=6#6
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1318038/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1318034/posts
http://waysandmeans.house.gov/hearings.asp?formmode=view&id=954
I was struck by a quote I just read by Karl Marx:
"The meaning of peace is the absence of opposition to socialism."
This is the same sentiment as what moslems believe.
"Peace in Islam and in all cultures which grew out of Arabic domination means the submission of the weak to the strong."
http://www.ornery.org/essays/2002-01-24-1.html
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.