Under the title of “In Bed With The Enemy”, a Zionist wrote the following article:
IMAGINE if Mayor Bloomberg invited a Muslim cleric from Egypt known for his advocacy of female genital mutila tion, wife-beating, “martyrdom” bombings in Israel and Iraq, and the murder of homosexuals and converts from Islam to be an honored guest of the city.
New Yorkers would naturally rebel against the mayor, who would certainly survive politically. But what if he did something even more brazen and perverse: invite the cleric back.
Surely, it couldn’t happen here. But it did happen in London last year under the aegis of left-wing mayor, Ken Livingstone.
Livingstone considers Yusuf al-Qaradawi (the cleric’s name) a huggable, “moderate” liaison between East and West. Anyone arguing otherwise Livingstone accuses of xenophobia or – a ridiculous term now gaining traction in the United Kingdom – “Islamophobia.”
Nick Cohen’s urgent polemic “What’s Left” traces this bankrupt thinking from its origins on the leftist fringe.
Once the playground of crackpot ex-Stalinists and unintelligible postmodern academics, the left today in the United Kingdom means elected officials, the vanguards of the “antiwar” movement and such liberal newspapers as The Guardian.
Surely, something is rotten in Albion when the Socialist Workers’ Party sponsors gender-divided Muslim prayer services.
A columnist for The Observer, Cohen is perfectly positioned to write this book; he amusingly describes his Red-diaper-baby upbringing.
He spent much of the 1990s chiding New Labor and its golden-boy prime minister, Tony Blair, but following 9/11 Cohen grew tired of the rhetoric coming from his old comrades.
People who spoke of George W. Bush and Blair as greater menaces than al Qaeda were bad enough. But what truly baffled and chilled Cohen were those who spoke of al Qaeda as a legitimate “anti-imperialist” movement or who now refer to its homicidal contingent in Baghdad as a “resistance.”
Cohen shows how the left has a nasty habit of betraying its own principles when they matter most. And there isn’t a factional rift or memorable scandal he leaves out, including how the Hitler-Stalin pact led communists in the 1930s to change their tune about the evils of the Furher overnight. (Hitler had to invade the Soviet Union for them to change it back.)
Most trenchant of all is Cohen’s dissection of the left’s once noble opposition to Saddam Hussein. How is it that the same radicals who rightly called Saddam a totalitarian monster when he was a client of the United States found him just one “bad guy” among many when the United States planned to remove him from power?
It’s “Anyone but Bush” and anything goes as ideology these days, which begs the question: Once Pennsylvania Avenue and Downing Street are under new management, what then for the left?
Cohen writes, “When [left-liberals'] fury passes . . . they will look to their core principles for guidance, only to find that they, rather than their conservative opponents, have battered them to the point of destruction.
“If [leftists] talk about the urgent task of combating terror by spreading the freedoms they enjoy, the audience they taught to sneer at others will sneer at them. If they provide evidence of a totalitarian menace, the accusation of lying they have thrown so freely at others will be thrown back in their faces. If they belatedly rediscover the moral imagination to show solidarity with those who share their values, their own charges of consorting with the dupes of American imperialism will be used in evidence against them.”
Cohen is familiar enough with the past, and sickened enough by the present, to understand the future.
By the way, Michael Weiss (the writer of this article is an associate editor at Jewcy magazine. That, of course, figures his attitude.
Source: New York Post
Posted by Ahmed Ismail 
