Leftists Want the Lowry Treatment for Robert Spencer and Other Anti-Sharia Freedom Fighters
There’s nothing like a successful free-speech lynching to get the leftist mob riled up. They are currently doing a celebratory pitchfork dance about Rich Lowry’s recent firing of John Derbyshire from the National Review. The magazine was upset about Derb’s column with a white version of “The Talk” to children about tough race realities that relate to safety.
Now a lefty site is calling for NR to go further, and excise any references to anti-sharia reformers Andrew McCarthy, Robert Spencer, David Horowitz and Daniel Pipes. ThinkProgress believes that those writers exhibit the dreaded “Islamophobia,” which the friends of Allah like to characterize as being an evil like racism even though Islam is an ideology, not a race.
How any political persuasion this side of Genghis Khan could approve of Islam’s totalitarian misogynous system of society is beyond me, but the lefty bunch is all in. Birds of a feather, apparently; the marxists and Islam share a dislike of free speech.
Below, unfriendlies in London.
Not every follower of Islam is a crazed head-chopper jihadist, but Muslims kill in the name of Allah every day. Why is that not a suitable subject for discussion, particularly when millions of Islamic immigrants are entering the West? Some declare their intention of conquering the non-Muslim world with violence, intimidation and immigration. It’s a diverse invasion that uses visas more often than bombs, although it uses bombs also.
Time For The National Review To Take A Stand Against Islamophobia, ThinkProgress, April 11, 2012
The National Review has been cleaning house over the past week. Last week the conservative publication fired John Derbyshire for a racist rant and today the magazine terminated its relationship with Robert Weissberg for his ties to a white nationalist group.
But while the National Review has decided to very publicly purge itself of white supremacists and racists, bigotry toward Muslims appears to go unchallenged in the pages of the magazine and on its blog, National Review Online (NRO). NRO contributing editor Andrew McCarthy, who accused President Obama of standing with the Muslim Brotherhood against 9/11 families in his post “The President Stands With Sharia,” told Rep. Peter King’s (R-NY) hearing on the radicalization of American Muslims:
What “radicalizes” Muslims is Islam — the mainstream interpretation of it. The “radicals” propagating it do not need the “captive audience” provided by the prison environment. The “radicalization” is happening in plain sight.
The denigration of Islam and Muslim Americans isn’t limited to McCarthy’s screeds. A number of noted Islamophobes are regularly given free rein to guest post on NRO’s site or write in the magazine, including:
Robert Spencer, who just last month concluded that “Islamic supremacists” may have subverted the “U.S. defense against jihad terror,” because the man who heads the Central Intelligence Agency’s Counterterrorism Center — and is credited with crippling Al Qaeda and other militant networks in Pakistan — was identified as a Muslim in a Washington Post profile.
David Horowitz, who, in an interview last year, stated, “What has the Arab world contributed except terror?…The theocratic, repressive Arabic states do no significant science, no significant arts and culture.”
Daniel Pipes, who, in the pages of The National Review in 1990, wrote, “All immigrants bring exotic customs and attitudes, but Muslim customs are more troublesome than most.”
The National Review has been notified of the Islamophobic statements made by a number of their contributors in the past. To date, they appear to have decided to do nothing. Perhaps now is the time for The National Review to take a hard stance against all bigotry, intolerance and racism.