All

Anti-Muslim Bloggers Smear Victims Of Norway Attack

Following the deadly attacks in Norway, anti-Muslim bloggers immediately tried to distance themselves from right-wing anti-Muslim terrorist Anders Breivik.But now some of these anti-Muslim activists are beginning to vilify the participants in the progressive youth summit near Oslo where scores were killed and the burgeoning multicultural youth political culture that they embodied.

Daniel Greenfield of the David Horowitz Freedom Center wrote in Horowitz’s FrontPageMag that the Labor Party youth camp was filled with “indoctrination of hate” and that Breivik would’ve fit right in:

How can we make sense of this? Glenn Beck compared the Workers Youth League camp to a Hitler Youth camp. He was close, but not entirely right. The roots of the Workers Youth League are actually Communist.

Norway’s Labour Party was a member of the Communist International. The Workers Youth League was formed by the merger of the Left Communist Youth League and the Socialist Youth League of Norway. We often use “Communist” as a pejorative– but in this case the Utoya camp, literally was a Communist youth camp.

The day before the massacre, Norwegian Foreign Minister Gahre-Store visited the camp and was greeted with banners calling for a boycott of Israel, and Gahre-Store responded with an Anti-Israel speech to cheers from the campers. There is something ominous about such indoctrination of hate. It is not quite on the level of the Hitler Youth, but neither is it a world apart.

In the 1930′s, Germans were encouraged to blame their problems on the Jews. In this decade, Norwegians are encouraged to blame their problems on the Jews. There are few children of workers at the Workers Youth League camp. They are for the most part the children of the party, the sons and daughters of bureaucrats and party leaders, training the next generation to perpetrate the Labour Party state.

Breivik came from that same background. The son of the left wing elite. And if his parents’ marriage had not collapsed, with the young boy allotting a share of the blame to the Labour Party, he would likely have a comfortable spot in the socialist state. Breivik may have turned against his roots, but the idea that terroristic violence is a legitimate solution is one that he could have easily picked up on the left.

Pamela Geller of Atlas Shrugs labeled the youth camp an “anti-Semitic indoctrination center” that is “not far off” from the Hitler Youth. Lee Fang at Think Progress notes that a photo caption in Geller’s original blog entry – which has since been edited -- lamented that the campers’ faces “are more MIddle [sic] Eastern or mixed than pure Norwegian”:

Glen Beck was not far off when he compared it to the Hitlerjugend or Young Pioneers.

It’s so the junior members of the aristocracy can be properly told what to think and can network with each other in preparation for their brilliant careers ruling over the peasants.



The camp was run by the Youth Movement of the Labour Party and used to indoctrinate teens and young adults.

Breivik was targeting the future leaders of the party responsible for flooding Norway with Muslims who refuse to assimilate, who commit major violence against Norwegian natives, including violent gang rapes, with impunity, and who live on the dole... all done without the consent of the Norwegians.

LaBarbera: Gays Must Be Kept Off The Bench Because They Will Undermine Religious Liberty

Last month, J. Paul Oetken won Senate confirmation by a vote of 80-13, making him the first openly gay man to be confirmed as a federal judge.

Peter LaBarbera has long demanded a sexual orientation test for judges, asserting that all nominees must declare if they have a history of "practicing immoral homosexual behavior" or "consider yourself homosexual."

So needless to say, the milestone of Oetken's confirmation is not sitting well with him:

"Homosexual activists are quite clear that their so-called 'rights' trump our religious liberty, our freedom to act on our beliefs to oppose sexual immorality," he explains. "So we certainly can't trust open homosexual activists to give us fairness and to defend religious liberty and our First Amendment freedom to live by our faith."

LaBarbera adds that it is because homosexual activists strive to convince people, and force them by judicial fiat, to accept the homosexual lifestyle as somehow equal to heterosexuality.

"This is dangerous territory where we are seeing homosexual activists trying to get on the bench," says the spokesman. "The Democratic Party is advancing their cause and it's not going to help justice. In fact, I predict this will undermine religious liberty in this country."

Says LaBarbera: "We have a big fight ahead of us."

I wonder what LaBarbera's response would be if people were to demand that an openly Christian judicial nominee be kept off the bench because everyone knows that the Religious Right cannot be trusted to "give us fairness" on equality issues? 

Religious Right Activist Compares California LGBT History Law To Nazism

With the emergence of the Stop SB 48 Coalition, which seeks to overturn the California law that makes sure textbooks include prominent LGBT historical figures by referendum, Religious Right activists have been stepping up their rhetoric against the new law. Larry Jacobs, the Vice President and Managing Director of the right-wing World Congress of Families, told the American Family Association’s OneNewsNow that the LGBT-inclusive law represents “a Nazi state or a communist type of way of dealing with an issue”:

Larry Jacobs of the World Congress of Families expects Californians to support the ban because lawmakers did not put a vote before the people before they passed the mandate.

"When people have [voted], and Governor Brown knows that he has an issue that would fail when put to a popular vote, of course, they just go around the people," Jacobs explains. "They essentially implement their will. And, of course, in a democracy, that's not the way things are supposed to work. It's certainly something that forces our children to be indoctrinated in a certain way. It's like a Nazi state or a communist type of way of dealing with an issue."

And he contends the bill has enforced the homosexual agenda on children in the state.

"What the homosexual movement has done with ... SB 48 [and] in general, in calling for equality, what they're calling for is special rights," the pro-family group spokesman notes. "We don't have special things in education to teach people to change history based on a particular Christian worldview or Muslim worldview, but they go beyond that."

Right Wing Round-Up

  • The Daily Caller: GOProud And Birchers Ousted As CPAC Co-Sponsors (David Horowitz Survives Vote).

Right Wing Leftovers

  • Just 6,000 people have RSVP’d so far for Perry’s The Response.
  • A Houston judge dismissed the Freedom From Religion Foundation’s lawsuit against Perry.

Liberty Counsel: Gay Rights Advocates Are The Real Bullies

Liberty Counsel has stringently opposed anti-bullying programs, with LC’s Director of Cultural Affairs Matt Barber even claiming that the reason gay and lesbian youth have a higher rate of suicide is because they “often look inward and know that what they are doing is unnatural, is wrong, is immoral.” So it came as no surprise when Shawn Akers, LC’s Public Policy Analyst, said today on Faith & Freedom that California’s LGBT-inclusive history law represented bullying of the worst kind. Akers said it was “ironic” that gay rights groups supported anti-bullying initiatives, and referencing a case in New Mexico where LC is representing students who said they were disciplined for handing out bible verses, Akers said regarding the California law, “if you want to talk about bullying, this is the state bullying the weakest members of society.”

Watch:

LaBarbera Calls Gay Rights "Satan's Point Of Attack On The United States Of America"

Peter LaBarbera of Americans For Truth About Homosexuality appeared on the Janet Mefferd Show yesterday to discuss what Mefferd called “the invasion of the gay agenda” throughout society. LaBarbera said that he still couldn’t believe how only decades ago homosexuality was rightfully “taboo” and that the so called “gay agenda” is “Satan’s point of attack on the United States of America”:

Mefferd: Here’s what I did Peter, I wrote it down and I categorized every single one of those stories. And you know what I came up with, the invasion of the gay agenda in the following categories: family; military; schools, leisure and entertainment, that was the story about those lesbians at Dollywood that we were talking about yesterday they were offended because this t-shirt that said ‘marriage is so gay’ they made them turn it inside out and now they’re fighting that; the other areas, the medical field, our tax money and most stunning the church. This is so widespread and so pervasive and I think it’s important to talk about the macro story here, what is your perspective on that?

LaBarbera: Well, first of all, sounds like you’re doing my job better than I am, congratulations! To me this is Satan’s point of attack on the United States of America, including the church. I mean, how ridiculous that, wow, it was less than seventy years ago, I think sixty, homosexuality was largely taboo.

WND Blames Progressives For Norway Attacks

WorldNetDaily columnist David Solway believes that progressives are the ones that really should be held responsible for the terrorist attacks in Norway…which targeted progressives. Like the American Family Association’s Bryan Fischer, who said that the right-wing terrorist’s political outlook was “accurate” but strongly disagreed with his violent methods, Solway argues that more people will take up Anders Behring Breivik’s staunchly anti-immigrant, anti-Muslim and illiberal views because of progressives’ support for diversity and immigrant rights:

The consequence should have been entirely predictable. In failing to meet the threat of cultural subversion, the European left has facilitated the emergence of the illiberal and xenophobic branch of the far right. For as violence begins to move in from the car-burning and no-go Muslim enclaves in the margins toward the city center, as Shariah courts begin to pepper the landscape, as in the U.K., as Muslim immigrants continue to swell the welfare rolls, as rape statistics skyrocket and honor killings multiply, and as the authorities prove themselves increasingly helpless and vacillating – or even worse, as colluding – the reactionary and militant right will earn more and more legitimacy among the masses. The anemic lack of both fortitude and foresight among the political classes can only energize the factions of militant, far-right extremism.

The same applies to the Islamophilic and ever-compliant media, operating in tandem with a complacent political establishment. Their reluctance to honestly analyze the explosive matrix of a worsening situation, heaping the blame on straw men like the Christian right or conservative political figures rather than isolating the real cause of their distress, namely, the leftist collaboration with a clamorous Islamic demographic gradually infiltrating our democratic nations, will infallibly result in a growing army of Anders Behring Breiviks and in more Norways to come.



Most of us would surely agree that terror is not an acceptable answer to terror. The problem is that a soft response to an undeniable menace will often generate a hard response – and just as often an irrational one. As we have seen in Norway, vigilantism can take strange forms. The aggrieved are as likely to strike at their own countrymen whom they regard as traitors or dupes and who embrace a sedative political philosophy resulting in the loss of national identity and the steady advance of alien cultural norms and practices.

I believe that [Bruce] Thornton, for all his astuteness, is quite wrong when he writes that "[t]his is not to suggest that anything is responsible for the Oslo bombing other than the actions of the bomber." In today's politically correct world, such disclaimers are perhaps understandable to avoid charges of insensitivity or racism. Nonetheless, it needs to be said that the Norwegian authorities and a fellow-traveling electorate are profoundly complicit in creating a situation that must inevitably culminate in violence. If the political climate does not change to favor the ascension of the moderate right, the tragedy that unfolded in Norway will spread to other European countries in the course of time. The simple truth is that there can be no solution to the dilemma unless we first recognize that the responsibility for this deteriorating state of affairs lies chiefly with the intellectuals, journalists and governing elites of the multicultural left who have brought it to pass.

Barton: Only Small Minority Supports Marriage Equality

Selective reading of material to support presupposed right-wing views is David Barton’s forte, so it comes as no surprise that the pseudo-historian is using a shoddy poll on same-sex marriage by an ultraconservative organization to claim that very few Americans support marriage equality.

On WallBuilders Live yesterday, Barton and co-host Rick Green hosted Austin Nimocks of the Alliance Defense Fund to discuss their opposition to equal marriage rights for gays and lesbians. Barton and Green ended the interview by discussing the ADF poll which claimed that 62% of Americans were against marriage equality. ADF’s findings were something of an anomaly, given that most other recent polls show the majority of Americans are in favor of marriage equality, a number which even Republican pollsters admit is rapidly increasing. Unlike other polls, the ADF survey didn’t ask participants whether they believe gay and lesbian couples should be legally allowed to marry but instead asked if they agreed with the claim, “I believe marriage should be defined only as the union of one man and one woman.” As Dan Nejfelt of Faith in Public Life points out:

A key difference is that these polls focused on legality rather than the "definition" of marriage. Given that the political debate surrounding same-sex marriage pertains to legislation rather than the contents of the dictionary, it's hard to see the relevance of ADF's data. It certainly is interesting, but it's not even close to a refutation of the overwhelming body of current nonpartisan opinion research pointing to majority support for legal recognition of same-sex marriage.

But for Barton and Green, the poll demonstrates that the country is united against marriage equality, which they say only has the support of a tiny but vocal minority.

Barton: If you can get a Christian spirit going, it unifies people like crazy. And that’s what we got going on the marriage issue, that’s what we have going on the school prayer issue. The other guys are screaming that it’s dividing. No. When it’s 82 to 18 that’s not dividing, when it’s 62 to 35 that’s not dividing, that’s unifying.

Green: Well the way to divide everybody is to take an issue where only 5 or 10 or 15 or 20 percent are for it and force it on the whole country.

Barton: That’s right. Oh, are you talking about gay marriage here?

Green: I’m not even sure 15 percent are for it. Even when we say 62 percent are for traditional marriage I don’t think you can say 38 percent are for gay marriage, but they might be saying ‘I don’t really know if I want to make that decision.’

Barton: See, that’s when you have to look in the polls to see who are strongly for it. And when you get strongly for, very few. And I love the point he made too, he said they want to do this against the will of the people, that’s why they file lawsuits. I mean, they did not give the people of New York a chance to vote on this, and typically they do not. They file lawsuits against marriage because they can’t win at the ballot box. This is the thing, when it comes to the people they can’t win, which is another great indication that this is a minority driving this agenda. It’s not a majority, it’s not a unifying issue.

Tea Party Nation: Obama Ineligible To Serve, Gay

Yesterday Tea Party Nation president Judson Phillips sent to TPN members a post by activist Kevin Lehmann titled “51 Bullet-Pointed Facts That Dispute Barack Obama's Identity & Eligibility to be President!” Phillips has consistently praised the ‘birther’ movement, and Lehman’s “facts” were mostly a long list of discredited claims about President Obama’s eligibility to serve as president that were put to rest with the release of his long form birth certificate. Lehman’s diatribe against Obama includes accusations that the president is the product of a Hawaiian communist conspiracy and may have been involved in murder. He also republishes the claims of Larry Sinclair, who failed a polygraph test over his claims that he had sex and used cocaine with Obama:

The American public was essentially made nationally aware of Barack Obama following his 2004 speech at the Democratic National Convention. Obama’s emergence into national politics was not a gradual inception. It was a sudden, covert ascendance to power seemingly assisted by foreign-like forces as an assault on vintage American conscience.



Based on investigations in the 1950’s and 1960’s, a disproportionate concentration of pro-communist activity was found to have become a part of Hawaiian culture. This is substantiated by an increase in the population and activity of communist sympathizers identified by the House Committee on Un-American Activities hearings conducted after WWII, during the beginning of the cold war between the U.S. and communist Russia. Evidence of pro-communist presence in Hawaii can be found in publications like the Honolulu Record in which one of Obama’s communist mentors, Frank Marshal Davis was a columnist.



To date, no administrator, or official of the Obama administration has ever confirmed that Obama was born in Kapi’olani Medical Center.

To date, Obama’s operatives have failed to identify the identity of Obama’s actual birthing doctor.



To date, no living eyewitness of Obama birth exists. It is assumed that his birth was witnessed by at least three people including his doctor and his mother. However, no documentation of the birth has been provided containing the name of the doctor or eyewitnesses.



Quarles Harris was a key witness in a federal probe into charges that Obama’s passport information was stolen from the State Department, when he was fatally shot in front of a Washington D.C. church. Harris had been working as a contractor at the State Department and was cooperating with federal investigators when he was murdered.

In December, 2007, Donald Young was a choir leader at Obama’s church, First Trinity Baptist, and school teacher, who many believe had carnal knowledge of Obama’s past. Young was found shot to death in his Southside Chicago apartment.



Of all the sordid stories circulating about Obama’s past, the one told by Larry Sinclair is the darkest. Sinclair posted a YouTube video alleging that he and President Barack Obama engaged in sexual acts and drug use together in 1999, when Obama was an Illinois State Senator. He claims that then-State Senator Obama procured powdered cocaine for Sinclair, and crack cocaine for himself, which Obama allegedly smoked.

Sinclair also alleges that their drug use was followed by sex acts that included Sinclair performing fellatio on Obama. These acts were alleged to take place in a limousine from which Sinclair provided cell phone records to prove his location on the dates in question. Testimony from the limosine driver has never been publicly published. Sinclair was asked to provide “intimate details” about Obama’s physical features which would prove Sinclair’s claims. His testimony has never been published or made public. Sinclair confesses openly that he is a convicted felon having served time for check fraud and drug possession.