There are more leftists than Conservatives might imagine who are astonished and horrified by the mainstream liberal-left's indulgence of inquisitorial and anti-Enlightenment movements. Not many though are in prominent positions. Most keep their heads down for fear of being accused of "Zionism," "Islamophobia," "warmongering" or any of the other insults designed to stop people thinking and acting morally.

   I was therefore delighted to be introduced to the writings of the Catalan politician Pilar Rahola.

 She comes from an anti-fascist, anti-Francoist family, and speaks out clearly against the left's support for the very forces her ancestors fought against.

 Here she is in full flow.

 "Why don't we see demonstrations against Islamic dictatorships in London ,  Paris ,  Barcelona ? Or demonstrations against the Burmese dictatorship? Why aren't there demonstrations against the enslavement of millions of women who live  without any legal protection? Why aren't there demonstrations against the use of children as human bombs? Why has there been no leadership in support of the victims of Islamic dictatorship in    Sudan ? Why is there never any outrage against the acts of terrorism committed against  Israel ? Why is there no outcry by the European left against Islamic fanaticism? 

Why don't they defend Israel 's right to exist? 

Why confuse support of the Palestinian cause with the defense of Palestinian terrorism? 

And finally, the million dollar question:  Why is the left in Europe and around the world obsessed with the two most solid democracies, the United States and Israel, and not with the worst dictatorships on the  planet? The two most solid democracies, who have suffered the bloodiest attacks of terrorism, and the left doesn't care. 

And then, to the concept of freedom. In every pro Palestinian European forum, I hear the left yelling with fervor: "We want freedom for the people!" 

Not true. They are never concerned with freedom for the people of Syria , or Yemen , or Iran , or Sudan , or other such nations.  And they are never preoccupied when Hammas destroys freedom for the Palestinians. They are only concerned with using the concept of Palestinian freedom as a weapon against Israeli freedom. The  resulting consequence of these ideological pathologies is the manipulation of the press. 

The international press does major damage when reporting on the question of the  Israeli-Palestinian issue. On this topic they don't inform, they propagandize. 

When reporting about  Israel , the majority of journalists forget the reporter code of ethics. And so, any Israeli act of self-defense becomes a massacre, and any confrontation, genocide. So many stupid things have been written about Israel , that there aren't any accusations left to level against her. 

At the same time, this press never discusses Syrian and Iranian interference in propagating violence against Israel ; the indoctrination of children and the corruption of  the Palestinians. And when reporting about victims, every Palestinian casualty is reported as tragedy and every Israeli victim is camouflaged, hidden or reported about with disdain. 

And let me add on the topic of the Spanish left. Many are the examples that illustrate the anti-Americanism and anti-Israeli sentiments that define the Spanish left. For example, one of the leftist parties in Spain has just expelled one of its members for creating a pro-Israel website. I quote from the expulsion document: "Our friends are the  people of Iran , Libya and Venezuela , oppressed by imperialism, and not a Nazi state like Israel ." 

In another example,  the socialist mayor of Campozuelos changed Shoah Day, commemorating the victims of the Holocaust, with Palestinian Nabka Day, which mourns the establishment of the State of Israel, thus showing contempt for the six million European Jews murdered in the Holocaust. 

Or in my native city of  Barcelona , the city council decided to commemorate the  60th anniversary of the creation of the State of Israel, by having a week of solidarity with the Palestinian people. Thus, they invited Leila Khaled, a noted terrorist from the 70's and current leader of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, a terrorist organization so described by the European Union, which promotes the use of bombs against Israel . 

This politically correct way of thinking has even polluted the speeches of president Zapatero. His foreign policy falls within the lunatic left, and on issues of the Middle East , he is unequivocally pro Arab. I can assure you that in private, Zapatero places on Israel the blame for the conflict in the   Middle East , and the policies of foreign minister Moratinos reflect this. The fact that Zapatero chose to wear a kafiah in the midst of the Lebanon conflict is no coincidence; it is a symbol. 

Spain has suffered the worst terrorist attack in Europe and it is in the crosshairs of every Islamic terrorist organization. As I wrote before, they kill us with cell phones hooked to satellites connected to the Middle Ages.
And yet the Spanish left is the most anti Israeli in the world. 

And then it says it is anti Israeli because of solidarity. This is the madness I want to denounce in this conference. 

Conclusion: 

I am not Jewish.  Ideologically I am left and by profession a journalist. Why am I not anti- Israeli like my colleagues? Because as a non-Jew I have the  historical responsibility to fight against Jewish hatred and currently against the hatred for their historic homeland,  Israel . To fight against anti-Semitism is not the duty of the Jews, it is the duty of the non-Jews. 

As a journalist it is my duty to search for the truth beyond prejudice, lies and manipulations. The truth about Israel is not told. As a person from the left who loves progress, I am obligated to defend liberty, culture, civic education for children, coexistence and the laws that the Tablets of the Covenant made into universal principles. 

Principles that  Islamic fundamentalism systematically destroys. That is to say that as a non-Jew, journalist and lefty, I have a triple moral duty with  Israel , because if Israel is destroyed, liberty, modernity and culture will be destroyed too. 

 

 Incidentally, I find it interesting that writers who know nothing of each other's work are all adopting the same rhetorical device when confronting the left's support for movements it would once have condemned as far right. We attempt to shock the reader by using bullet point questions to try to make them realise how far they have drifted from principles and positions they would once have regarded as sacrosanct.

This is from the introduction of my What's Left?

 Why is it that apologies for a militant Islam which stands for everything the liberal-left is against come from the liberalleft?

   Why will students hear a leftish post-modern theorist defend the exploitation of women in traditional cultures but not a crusty conservative don?

   After the American and British wars in Bosnia and Kosovo against Slobodan Milosevic's ethnic cleansers, why were men and women of the Left denying theexistence of Serb concentration camps?

    As important, why did a European Union that daily announces its commitment to the liberal principles of human rights and international law do nothing as crimes against humanity took place just over its borders? Why is Palestine a cause for the liberal-left, but not China, Sudan, Zimbabwe, the Congo or North Korea? Why, even in the case of Palestine, can't those who say they support the Palestinian cause tell you what type of Palestine they would like to see?

   After the 9/11 attacks on New York and Washington why were you as likely to read that a sinister conspiracy of Jews controlled American or British foreign policy in a superior literary journal as in a neo-Nazi hate sheet?

    And why after the 7/7 attacks on London did leftish rather than right-wing newspapers run pieces excusing suicide bombers who were onspired by a psychopathic theology from the ultra-right?

    In short, why is the world upside down? In the past conservatives made excuses for fascism because they mistakenly saw it as a continuation of their democratic right-wing ideas. Now, overwhelmingly and everywhere, liberals and leftists are far more likely than conservatives to excuse fascistic governments and movements, with the exception of their native far-right parties. As long as local racists are white, they have no difficulty in opposing them in a manner that would have been recognizable to the traditional left. But give them a foreign far-right movement that is anti-Western and they treat it as at best a distraction and at worst an ally.

 And this is from Bernard-Henri Levy from his Left in Dark Times

   What happens to you if you think, like the Burundian Tutsi, that the fantasy of Hutu Power, and not a scheme carried out by Texas oilmen, is the source of your problems? Or like a survivor of the extermination of the Nuba, in the most distant corner of the Sudan, that it's your uniqueness that singled you out for misfortune and explains the determination of the Islamist regime in Khartoum to get rid of you? What happens if you're Burmese, Tibetan, a Syrian Kurd, a Liberian? What is to become of you if the disaster you're dealing with has nothing to do with the evil of the Empire, its conspiracies, its plots - but everything to do with the corruption, for example, of a state apparatus, or of unscrupulous national elites? Well, nothing.
You're out of luck.
You're a thousand times less important, a thousand times less interesting to ‘progressive' consciences, who have much less reason to fret about your particular case than about, for example, a humiliated-Muslim-who-has resorted-to-terrorism-in response-to-that-humiliation