Category: creating a movement

American Congress for Truth urges citizens to contact Loews Hotels and complain about decision to cancel conference

~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

Brigitte Gabriel’s American Congress for Truth (ACT) is filling an important void in our movement to bring attention to creeping shariah in America.  This is a powerful and rapidly growing grassroots organization and I encourage readers to consider signing up at ACT’s website here.

Free speech being threatened!

I told you the other day that I was one of those conference attendees given the boot from the Loews Vanderbilt Hotel in Nashville.  Today I see ACT is calling on its members to contact the public relations office of Loews Hotels and voice concern about the decision in Nashville to silence free speech.

By the way, I was very fortunate to meet some of ACT’s grassroots coordinators in Nashville and can assure  you they are top notch citizen activists—genuine activists, as opposed to the phoney activists created by Nashville’s Open Borders community organizers.

From ACT’s action alert this a.m.:

Hotel managing director Tom Negri was quoted in The Tennessean newspaper: “We canceled the group for both the safety and the health of our guests and employees here at Vanderbilt hotel.”

Negri refused to provide any specific examples of “threats.” Even if such occurred, if all that was necessary to get hotels across America to cancel conferences was some threats, then free speech as we know it would be gone.

Whether threats from Islamists actually occurred, or whether Negri cancelled the conference for other reasons that he is not revealing, this occurrence is a perfect illustration of the early stages of “cultural jihad” in a free society like ours – and makes the case why conferences like the one Negri canceled are so necessary.

During the early stages, Islamists and their apologists speciously claim that those critical of radical Islam are engaging in what they call “hate speech.” They use threats and other forms of intimidation to prevent speech they don’t agree with from occurring. With every victory, as in this case in Nashville, they are emboldened, increasing their demands and intimidation tactics.

Just ask Austrian Member of Parliament Susanne Winter where this road ultimately leads. In January Ms. Winter was convicted of the “crime” of publicly insulting Islam.

We stop that road from going there by acting now.


We are therefore urging every ACT! for America member to either phone or email the national Loews Hotels Vice President of Public Relations, Emily Goldfischer. (A phone call is preferable). When you do, in a respectful but clear and concerned manner, communicate the following:

ACTION ALERT

Express your disapproval of the action Tom Negri took in cancelling the conference.

Ask that Loews Hotels publicly investigate the action Negri took, disavow Negri’s action, and apologize to the New English Review, the organization that sponsored the conference.

Let Ms. Goldfischer know that until Loews corporate offices issues such a public repudiation of Mr. Negri’s actions you will not do business with or stay in a Loews Hotel.

Ms. Goldfischer can be reached at the following phone number and email address in New York:

Phone: (212) 521-2833
Fax: (212) 521-2379
Email: egoldfischer@loewshotels.com

If Ms. Goldfischer is unreachable (which may be the case if enough of you take action!!) contact Ellen Gale, Vice President of Public Relations for the Loews Nashville Regional office at her contact information below.

Ellen Gale
Phone: (202) 587-2686
Email: egale@loewshotels.com

 

Phyliss Chesler to speak about radical Islam at NYC demonstration today

~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

Phyllis Chesler wants you all to come out and join those fighting to defeat radical Islam.

On Sunday, May 3rd, at noon, in Times Square, in New York City, a gathering of eagles and of angels will take place. Come rain or come shine, the Human Rights Coalition Against Radical Islam is holding a rally. Please join us. The coalition is composed of Muslim, ex-Muslim, Hindu, Jewish, Christian, Sikh, Buddhist, atheist, and human rights leaders who are “calling for the defeat of radical Islam.”

As fundamentalist Islam continues to expand around the world among the most persecuted are the women, says Chesler whose experience in Afghanistan makes hers an important voice in the movement.

Radical Islam’s greatest crimes are Muslim-on-Muslim crimes and include the cruel subordination and persecution of Muslim women, Muslim apostates, and Muslim independent thinkers. Islam is the world’s largest and only practitioner of both gender and religious apartheid. Such apartheid and barbarism is indigenous to Islam. It was not imported by western colonial powers. Now, Islamic gender and religious apartheid have penetrated the West and have grown even harsher, more barbaric in Muslim lands. Children, as young as five years-old are used to blowing themselves and others up. Women are raped, then forced into becoming human bombs to “cleanse” their shame. Both Palestinians and Al-Qaeda are doing this.

Radical Islam is an obvious threat to human rights all over the world.

Chesler feels a special kinship with women in Afghanistan who are standing up to the most stifling and oppressive form of Shariah Law.

Here’s one reason, among many, that I will be speaking on Sunday.

Today in Kabul, when women march for women’s rights and for women’s lives, they risk being beaten, arrested, and murdered—by the mob that stalks them, by the police, by the Taliban. Still, they have marched twice now in the last month.

They could not be here to join us today. Although I lack their bravery, I am here to speak for them.

For those of you who do not know this:

In December of 1961, I escaped from captivity in Afghanistan.

Read her story.

So why is this important to us?  As refugees/asylees and immigrants from Muslim countries pour into the US we must guard against this radical and fundamentalist form of Islam creeping in with them.    I always thought it would be women like Phyliss Chesler (not that men aren’t in this war too), those who have fought so hard for the rights that women have in the West. who aren’t going to let those rights go easily to men who want to see them covered head to toe, want to marry little girls, or murder sisters and daughters for disobeying them.

More on culturism: Reply to Jake

~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

I began this as a comment to my post on culturism, but decided to make it a separate post so it wouldn’t get lost.

Jake, I appreciate your thoughtful posts even when I disagree with you. You write:

I work with refugees and speak up for refugees because I am motivated by my faith. I make a serious and honest effort to live out an ethic consistent with the teachings of Jesus as they relate to the Old Testament. My values include helping people who need help, honoring the risen Jesus with my words and deeds, living in purity from personal and communal sins, loving people who are not easy to love, caring for people on the fringes of society, and studying, understanding, and applying the Bible.

I would not accuse you of deliberately trying to destroy western values, or our culture. And I respect your living out your Christian faith. Yet we need to look at the results as well as the motivations of our actions.

First of all, there are probably billions of people around the world who need help. We cannot help them all. So shouldn’t we make an effort to help those most worthy, or those who will most benefit from our help? Certainly we should examine whether our efforts will really help, or will make things worse. Unfortunately many efforts at help fall into the latter category, as with the many billions of foreign aid that have been sent to Africa from the west, enriching despots and enabling them to increase their power at the expense of their suffering subjects.

We need to look at our refugee policy in the same light. This is the reason that Ann and I harp on Iraqi refugee policy so much. We are harming many of the Iraqis we bring here, and until very recently the government has refused to consider other options. I believe this is because many of those involved in refugee policy and refugee work are motivated by their wish to do good. They are less concerned with the implications of policy and more concerned about their own self-image. (I am not accusing you of that Jake, because I do not know you.)  Some of them also feel guilty because of America’s role in creating the Iraqi refugee situation and want to atone in a personal way — that is, by bringing as many refugees here as possible.

But our responsibility is to do what is best for these suffering refugees, not to bring tens of thousands here as we are doing, which number will hardly make a dent in the total yet inflict harm upon both the refugees who come here and upon our society.

Similarly, it does not matter whether or not you are motivated by a desire to harm our culture. You say you are not, and I believe you. Yet what is important is the objective result of your actions, not your internal motivation. Of course, you are not responsible for refugee policy, and if you work to help those whom our government has brought here, that is admirable. But you are concerned with wider issues than personal assistance, since you began this dialogue with an attempt to refute those who claim our culture is superior to other cultures. 

You have not succeeded in that. You simply say that we have flaws and other cultures have virtues, which no one would deny. But you also say this:

For example, our nation was founded with the assertion that all men are created equal and endowed by God with the unalienable rights of Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. All Americans should be grateful for that conviction of our founding fathers. Indeed, the very notion of accepting refugees for resettlement is consistent with this ideal, if America really believes that these rights belong to all men and women. These are American virtues.

Non-western cultures do not believe that all men are created equal and endowed by God with unalienable rights. If they do believe it, they adopted it from the west. In believing this, and in using it as a justification for resettling refugees, you are asserting the superiority of our culture. If we didn’t believe it we wouldn’t care about refugees from other places.

I take that belief as one of the foundations of Judeo-Christian culture, and especially of American culture, since it is in the Declaration of Independence. (If you respond, you do not need to go through all the instances of our not living up to it, which is just the standard fare of American history courses nowadays.) I think it would be fair to sort possible refugees according to whether they accept that belief, or at least hold beliefs that would not prevent them from adopting it as Americans.

Of all the people in the world, those who most obviously cannot accept that belief are Muslims. It is part of the Muslim religion that they are superior to others and entitled to suppress, repress, tax, lie to and (for some) even kill those who are not Muslims. The motivation of many Muslims today is to spread Islam through any means possible, including both the sword and deception.

It goes without saying that not all Muslims follow this jihadist ideology. Yet we cannot distinguish those who do from those who don’t, for two reasons. One is that those who do follow it lie as a matter of course. The other is that within the Muslim community there is a shifting of opinions, so that those who do not care about jihad can be recruited to it, and radical Islamists are making a strenuous effort to do so.

So even if certain Muslims are sweet, gentle, kind, generous, etc., we need to look at whether their culture is one that allows assimilation to our values or whether it precludes it. Statements from Somalis that they are assimilated because they work and pay taxes show that they have no idea what assimilation would consist of. (And how would they, given the dominance of multiculturalism? We really need the kind of education in our culture that Ann suggests.)

And we need to look at the overall effect of bringing Muslims into our country who either already believe in jihad or who may be recruited in the future. This is only common sense.

“Culturist” — a useful word for Geert Wilders, and for us

~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

Ann posted the other day on the term “culturist,” a word coined and defined by John Press in a publication called Global Politician.  I browsed around its website and came across another article by Press which adds more detail to his concept, called Culturist Geert.  He begins:

Geert Wilders, a Dutch parliamentarian, was refused entry into the UK. The Muslim community threatened to riot if his film FITNA screened in parliament. Ironically, the Muslims objected to the film’s portrayal of them as intolerant! And since freedom of speech is so central to a functioning democracy, this censorship threatens the continuance of western civilization. In appreciation of Wilder’s efforts, I would like to offer him the intellectual gifts of ‘culturism’ and ‘culturist.‘ Using them will ease and hasten his victory over multiculturalism.

We’ve posted on Geert Wilders here, here, here and here.  

Press’s point is that our side has no term to counter the idea of multiculturalism, which has such resonance in the west that it is considered heresy, or perhaps treason, to oppose it. And without a positive term, we sound entirely negative — we are against multiculturalism, but what are we for? Press’s answer: We’re for culturism.

Because multiculturalism is already a household word, citizens of Britain would instantly know what he means by culturism and culturist when he used them. Multiculturalism holds western nations have no core traditional cultures to prefer, promote and protect. Intuitively understanding the opposite of multiculturalism, the Brits would say “Yes,” we do have a core traditional culture and a right to protect it.” They would recognize that all nations are culturist and that our schools and our laws should reflect and protect our traditional cultures. And they would be able to communicate this sentiment as easily as multiculturalists now do theirs.

Culturists take diversity seriously, and wish to protect and preserve their culture.  Using the word “culturist” makes it clear that race is not involved, just culture. Here is what he suggests for Geert Wilders:

Then, once the distracting charges of racism were diminished he can focus on the positive culturist agenda. He can explain that western schools should teach western virtues and history. He can convey that western nations should only recognize western legal systems. Culturism’s taking diversity seriously will give him a basis upon which to argue that freedom of speech is a western value that needs protection. Culturist logic will give him a rational basis upon which to discuss border regulations. He can affirm his language. Rather than just be against multiculturalism, Wilder’s using the word culturism will teach people about the positive western agenda and history he promotes.

I don’t give the project much of a chance, since nobody else is using the word. But it’s a good idea, and we can start using it right here. Maybe other people will pick it up.  If you want more on culturism, here is John Press’s blog, Culturism.

Excellent analysis of the mainstream media’s abysmal coverage (or no coverage!) of the Tea Parties

~ Ann Corcoran ~ Leave a comment

Update just a few moments later:   See Mark Steyn’s column (linked there) and other excellent commentary on this same subject by our good friends over at the Blue Ridge Forum, here.

 

Kyle-Anne Shiver, the author of this excellent piece at American Thinker on how the mainstream media apparently purposefully and maliciously missed the real message of the Tea Party story, is an expert on the Alinsky School (Obama!) of community organizing.*   I suspect she gets some particular amusement at seeing the results of genuine and spontaneous outrage by citizens at the Tea Parties as opposed to the orchestrated demonstrations put on by the Radical Left (using the Alinsky method of manipulation) in recent years.

So without further ado, here is how she begins.  Please read the whole excellent column!

In all my years of watching news coverage in America, I don’t believe I have ever witnessed more condescending, amateurish, purely politicized reporting than what just transpired among the liberal MSM covering America’s Tax Day Tea Parties. The Tea Parties represented a very significant news event.

Whenever close to 300,000 middle-class Americans put their productive lives on hold on a midweek workday, make original signs with their own hands, and travel miles and miles to stand with other private citizens just to demonstrate their anger with government, in more than 300 cities from coast to coast and everywhere in between, that’s NEWS. Yet, many local newspapers – even the Boston Globe for crying out loud! – pettily refused to even cover their local protests. When every news channel – except the only one thriving on the block, Fox – finally decided to cover the events, it was with derision, mockery and elitist condescension. 

Note to MSM: This is why you’re going broke.

Dirty jokes!   I laughed when I read this next paragraph, because I too polled my friends to see if they knew what the disgusting reference was to “tea-bagging” and none did (I still don’t know and don’t want to know).  But, it tells you what kind of people Obama has on his side, doesn’t it!

The puerile, vulgar humor of MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow and CNN’s Anderson Cooper, targeting the most clean-cut, rancor-less groups of protesters possibly ever assembled in the U.S.A., was the kind of thing one would expect on an adolescent playground when the teacher isn’t listening. I personally polled 16 friends and relatives, aged 23 to 66, and not a single one of them had ever even heard the sexually perverse phrase regarding tea bags, which peppered Maddow’s and Cooper’s primetime rants.

Regular readers know that Judy and I demonstrated proudly and with gusto last Wednesday at our local Tea Party.

* We have discussed the Alinsky School of community organizing that inspired Obama’s career in that field at length in our Community Destabilization category.  And, here, is a link to a post in which I mention Kyle-Anne Shiver.