Showing posts with label Pamela Geller. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Pamela Geller. Show all posts

Monday, July 25, 2011

Some leftwing ass blames Pamela Geller for inciting Breivik.  Wendy said...

You lost me at "lone psychopath". Your words (no matter how insipid, idiotic, or meaningless) unfortunately do matter. Who are you trying to convince with this post? The "sharia-compliant media"? Your readers? Yourself? You are part of this man's narrative. If I were you (and clearly, I am not, for any number of reasons), this would be the time to evaluate my life choices and the ideas I am presentingto the world. I suspect that sadly, you are not capable of such introspection.
I tried to respond to this idiot at Pamela Geller's site (defending her) but apparently Geller has banned me from commenting.  I rebutted Geller soundly (and deservedly) a few weeks back when she unfairly attacked the English Defence League.  Okay, Pamela can be small but she is NOT responsible for Breivik's mass murder in Norway.  Here's why, based on my actual reading of Breivik's manifesto:

Breivik quotes from numerous authors and references in his "manifesto," including:  John Locke, the Bible, the Encylopedia Brittanica, George Orwell, Thomas Hobbes, John Stuart Mill, Adam Smith, Edmund Burke, Ayn Rand, William James, Winston Churchill, Pope Urban II, King Richard I, Charles Martel, Vladimir Putin, Plato, Frederich Hayek, the Los Angeles Times, various middle eastern scholars and authors...among others.

So should all these people hang their heads in shame?  Shall we illogically conclude that the writings of these folks provoked Breivik's act of insanity?  Of course not.  Leftists like Wendy are neither logical nor fair and have no intention of being so.  To them, politics is "war by other means."  So perhaps they shouldn't be surprised when some nut decides to take "politics" to the next level.


Thursday, July 14, 2011

More Geller dissection, this time from the Frozen North.  A worthwhile read.

...

Monday, July 11, 2011

Ann Althouse
Ann Althouse likes to post pictures of plants and flowers and other Wisconsin flora and fauna, then label her post to describe it "At the ___ Café."  Her post today is "At the Garlic Café."  My post, in her honor, is called "At the Snob Café."

Yesterday I took Robert Stacy McCain to task for overstating his case against Althouse for voting for Obama.  His premise was sound, but he used a cannon to kill a gnat.  However, a gnat is still a gnat and a snob is still a snob, and I think Althouse is the latter.  She claims that her vote for Obama in 2008 was a rational act, but I doubt it.  Obama's credentials as a prosperity-destroying collectivist ideologue were well known, as were his radical associates.  The consequences of voting for him were obvious, but Ann Althouse chose not to see them.  (See my take on it just before the election in 2008.)

Then I had an epiphany.  If one wishes to establish his or her credentials as a wonderfully non-partisan, open-minded, racially tolerant and downright wonderful individual, a heroine to her college students, what better way than to vote for the hip hop candidate of choice, the candidate of sweetness and light.  Voting for Obama was just another way for snobs to posture ("look at me, I'm so enlightened!").  Althouse could not pass up the temptation.  I don't think there is anything cerebral in her decision.  Her vote was more a fashion statement than political conviction.

R.S. McCain wants Althouse to admit her error and apologize.  I want Pamela Geller to admit her error (in slandering the English Defence League) and apologize.  I seriously doubt that either of us will get his wish.  Snobs never apologize.

....

Sunday, July 3, 2011

Gates of Vienna has an excellent article fisking Geller's response to the "Open Letter to Pamela Geller."   Lawrence Auster has also further dissected Geller's attempted feints and punts in an attempt to avoid accountability for her creation of the false controversy (she announced that she was withdrawing her support of the English Defence League for unspecified and undocumented neo-fascists at the leadership level, then tried to walk it back after receiving a tsunami of criticism from the anti-jihadi blogosphere).

She tried to walk it back without admitting error or without apologizing.  Instead, she counter-attacked her critics with more incredible claims -- that her critics were causing "divisiveness" in the movement by holding her to account, when it is she who caused a massive amount of divisiveness with her damaging charges against the EDL.

Meanwhile, it appears Geller's close associate Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch is attempting to create his own open letter in defense of Geller, and is reportedly asking prominent conservatives to sign it.

Gates of Vienna (Baron Boddisey) notes that we the signers of the "Open Letter to Pamela Geller" are generally small time bloggers without Fox News appearances and writing assignments with important publications -- as are Geller and Spencer.  We are not afraid of tackling such a controversy, because we have nothing to lose.  Boddisey notes that more popular bloggers have not entered into the argument because they do have something to lose...revenue.

There is a Chinese proverb that a snake can be conquered by an army of ants.  We are the army of ants.

Read the article here.

Friday, July 1, 2011

Pamela Geller is in deep denial of her mishandling of the English Defence League (EDL) controversy -- a controversy that she largely created.

Instead of retracting her statements about the alleged fascism within the EDL, she is now attacking the bloggers (that includes me) who signed the Gates of Vienna "Open Letter to Pamela Geller."  She is saying that we signers are ignoring the racism within the EDL (no racism has been proved or documented) and thereby sanctioning it.  Further, we are "Machiavellian" for asking her to recant.  Geller's intellectual dishonesty in the matter is over the top.

Lawrence Auster dissects Geller's arguments, e.g.:

[Geller said]Instead of working to purge the EDL of these vile elements, the signers of this Open Letter are trying to destroy those of us who seek to maintain the proper focus of our mission and the EDL's mission, which is fighting for freedom. 

[LA replies: No, the signers of the open letter were not seeking to destroy anyone. They were calling on Pamela to withdraw her irresponsible, outrageous, fact-free denuncation of the EDL, which now, in a very dishonest and indirect way,-- denying that she is doing what she is actually doing--she has done.] 
Geller also slimes Gates of Vienna with more unproven accusations.  She writes:
At the same time, and probably not coincidentally, Gates of Vienna has become a home for many anti-Semitic rants that are deeply disturbing; not only are these sanctioned by the proprietors, but they’ve added to the chorus.
I have been reading "Gates of Vienna" for years and I have never seen an "anti-semitic rant" posted there.  Geller seems to be self-destructing in an orgy of falsehood, slander and hyberbole -- and again, with no specifics or examples to support her accusation.

In fairness, Geller has been under extreme pressure, being sued by a Muslim attorney allegedly for slander, for millions of dollars, and for having her name dragged through the mud for years by Muslims and leftists like the despicable Southern Poverty Law Center.  Perhaps the pressure has finally gotten to her and she hopes to gain a modicum of peace by sacrificing the EDL to the gods of liberalism, as if to say, "see, I'm not a racist hater, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not!"

I think Geller has developed a form of shell-shock, or post traumatic stress syndrome, which Webster describes as "mentally confused, upset, or exhausted as a result of excessive stress."  Few of us have to undergo this kind of stress, but Pamela, this is no reason to go kapo on us.  Many of the leaders of the EDL have faced the same extreme pressure, or worse.  As the Open Letter states:
For the past two years the English Defence League has been on the front lines of the resistance to sharia and militant Islam in England. Its leaders have put their own lives in danger by doing so. They live under constant threat, not just from murderous Muslim zealots, but from their own government, which has harassed and arrested them repeatedly. Tommy Robinson, the leader of the EDL, has been arrested multiple times, and is currently facing trumped-up charges designed to put him and the EDL out of action.
Pamela is not the only one under extreme pressure from the left, and betraying allies is not a solution.

And who has made false charges?  Apparently, Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer, whose statements this week about the English Defence League heavily damaged the latter's reputation.

A group of anti-jihad bloggers have written an open letter to Pamela Geller asking her to apologize and retract her statements about the English Defence League.  A copy of that letter (I am one of the signers) is included in the prior post below.

The question is, will the very proud Pamela Geller admit she made a mistake and retract?  If not, there may be a permanent split between Geller & Spencer and the rest of the anti-jihadi blogosphere.

Geller seems to sometimes be careless, if not irresponsible, with the reputations of others fighting the same cause.  A few months ago she denounced an anti-mosque rally in New York, after liberals claimed it was "racist."  Several speakers at that rally have also spoken at Geller's rallies, and the racism charge was shown (once again) to be bunk.

I am surprised that Geller accepted so readily the claims of the loose cannon Roberta Moore, that the EDL had become infiltrated by neo-fascists.  A small amount of internet research would have quickly revealed to her (as it did to me) that Moore had been disclosed as a radical by the EDL, and that Moore's claims were highly suspect.

From here on in, I will take Geller with a grain of salt.  I am disappointed in her.  She could redeem herself with a public apology to the EDL, but I don't expect her to make one.  Humility is not her style.

From Gates of Vienna:

An Open Letter to Pamela Geller (Updated)



EDL header



I’ve bumped this post to the top and will keep it there for a while because so many additional signatories, including several Americans, have asked that their names be added to the list. Scroll to the bottom to see who’s there — some may surprise you.



As most readers already know, earlier today Pamela Geller of Atlas Shrugs posted a prominent repudiation of the English Defence League, including references to their alleged infiltration by “neo-fascists”.

A group of Counterjihad bloggers and writers has joined together to publish this open letter to Ms. Geller. Most of us are Europeans, but not all — we also have signatories from the United States, Canada, and Australia.

If you are a blogger or a writer and want to add your signature to this letter, please send your name and URL to me (unspiek [at] chromatism [dot] net), or to the proprietors of other sites where it has been posted.



Dear Ms. Geller,

We the undersigned are writing to register our astonishment and dismay at your public denunciation of the English Defence League, and in particular your reference to the “neo-fascists that had infiltrated the administration of the group”.

This is a grossly inaccurate and unfair slander against the leaders and membership of the EDL, who have never wavered in their refusal to include neo-Nazis, fascists, or adherents of any other ideology that seeks to divide people based on their ethnicity. The core mission of the EDL has always been, and remains, to stop the encroachment of sharia and Islamic fascism.

For the past two years the English Defence League has been on the front lines of the resistance to sharia and militant Islam in England. Its leaders have put their own lives in danger by doing so. They live under constant threat, not just from murderous Muslim zealots, but from their own government, which has harassed and arrested them repeatedly. Tommy Robinson, the leader of the EDL, has been arrested multiple times, and is currently facing trumped-up charges designed to put him and the EDL out of action.

To paraphrase Geert Wilders: “I was dragged to court by leftist and Islamic organizations that were bent not only on silencing me but on stifling public debate.” The EDL is being dragged into a kangaroo court of uninformed public opinion. The more people’s fears can be raised, the more quickly debate can be smothered.

In the final analysis, as Geert Wilders points out, the strength of our community depends on the freedom we feel to “enter our convictions in the open lists to win or lose”.

All communities inevitably experience conflicts based on differences of opinion. It is crucial that we approach one another’s efforts in good faith, presume the other’s efforts to be well-meaning until conclusively proven otherwise, support initiatives made by others that further our common cause, and refuse to be dragged into parsing ever more finely our differences.

Our ideal of the “perfect” can kill any merely “good enough” effort.

Your unfortunate statements were picked up and repeated by other websites and blogs, some of them quite prominent and well-respected. This has done harm to our common cause, and has driven a completely needless wedge between the American and European wings of the international Counterjihad.

To help heal the damage that has been done, we insist that you apologize in a public forum to the English Defence League.

Its leaders and members are heroes, and their organization is widely considered a beacon of hope in Europe. All Europeans who resist the Islamization of their countries look to the EDL for inspiration, and all of them stand in solidarity with it in its struggle.
We strongly request that you reconsider your deplorable words and withdraw them.

Sincerely yours,


Signer list is updated as of July 3rd, 2011

Thursday, June 30, 2011

A pro-Jewish activist named Roberta Moore appears to be the reason for the Geller/Spencer split with the English Defence League (EDL).  As noted in a prior post, the EDL is an English organization opposed to the Islamization of Great Britain; Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer are also opposed to Islamization but split with the EDL over its alleged ties to "Neo-Nazis."  Geller runs the blog "Atlas Shrugs" and Spencer runs the website "Jihad Watch."

No evidence has been presented to document these alleged Neo-Nazi ties, and Geller and Spencer seem to have relied solely on the expressed opinion of one Roberta Moore.

Roberta Moore was the head of the EDL's Jewish Division, but departed the organization, complaining ambiguously of Nazis in the group.  She offered no specifics whatsoever, and EDL supporters say that she has no facts to offer.  However, a little internet research reveals Ms. Moore has an ax to grind with the EDL and her accusations highly suspect.

According to the Jewish Chronicle Online, Moore was criticized within the EDL of being "a divisive figure," ostensibly because she tried to link the EDL's Jewish Division with a radical Jewish group in America, the Jewish Task Force. Jewish Chronicle Online reports:

Ms Moore had attempted to co-ordinate her efforts with those of the far-right American Jewish Task Force, whose leader Victor Vancier has been imprisoned for terrorism offences. The move, in February, was heavily criticised by the EDL leadership.
In a prior article, the Jewish Online Chronicle described the rift between the EDL and Roberta Moore:
"A member of the Jewish Division this week decided to link herself with terrorist organisation JTF. This was the decision and wishes of one single individual within the EDL, and does not mean that the EDL is linked with this movement.

"If they [the Jewish EDL] continue with their plans to forge links with the terrorist JTF, the EDL will have no option but to sever its links with the Jewish division as we cannot support terrorist sympathisers."

But Ms Moore said she was determined to continue the affiliation. She said the EDL leadership who had released the statement were "complete idiots," adding: "I have put my foot down; I am the one in contact with the JTF. If some people don't like it, then screw them. There are lots of Jewish people very upset that the EDL put out that statement - and I haven't received any personal messages telling me to cut off contact with Victor."

However, the EDL made it clear that they and Ms Moore were at odds on the matter. A spokesman said: "The EDL never has and never will have any affiliations with the Jewish Task Force. Unfortunately Ms Moore has caused a great deal of trouble and unrest within the EDL because of her gung-ho attitude."
So it appears that the EDL criticized Moore for supporting violent extremists and moved to expel her from the EDL based on this fact.  Moore's claim that "Nazis" have infiltrated the EDL appears to be nothing more than personal pique and a desire for revenge.  That, and to construct a plausible (but false) reason for her departure (under pressure) from the EDL.

Pamela Geller denounced the EDL simply on the basis of Moore's unproven charges, and Robert Spencer followed along because he seems to uncritically do whatever Geller wants.

Meanwhile, check out the reader comments at Spencer's site, Jihad Watch.  They raise some excellent points and their criticisms of Pamela Geller appear both fair and accurate.

Per View From the Right, it appears that Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer are distancing themselves from the English Defence League, alleging that the organization has been infiltrated by "neo-Fascists."  However, neither Geller nor Spencer cites any evidence to back up their claim.

The English Defence League is an organization that opposes the Islamization of Great Britain.

Lawrence Auster has the story here.

I support the English Defence League and will continue to do so unless strong evidence comes to light that the organization has become "neo-fascist," a term leftists use to describe anyone opposed to their destructive and suicidal policies.

Update:  EDL President Tommy Robinson has issued a public statement saying that no one expressing anti-semitic sentiments will be allowed to remain in the EDL.  Geller posts his statement here.  Robinson refers to the EDL Mission Statement.  Here is the Mission Statement from the EDL website (below the fold).  Does anyone see anything "fascistic" in it?


EDL MISSION STATEMENT

“The world is a dangerous place to live in; not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don’t do anything about it.” - Albert Einstein, refugee from Nazi Germany

People have been asking what the EDL is all about, what does it want to achieve, how will it achieve those things?

Well now the English Defence League has a Mission Statement......

(1) HUMAN RIGHTS: Protecting And Promoting Human Rights

The English Defence League (EDL) is a human rights organisation that was founded in the wake of the shocking actions of a small group of Muslim extremists who, at a homecoming parade in Luton, openly mocked the sacrifices of our service personnel without any fear of censure. Although these actions were certainly those of a minority, we believe that they reflect other forms of religiously-inspired intolerance and barbarity that are thriving amongst certain sections of the Muslim population in Britain: including, but not limited to, the denigration and oppression of women, the molestation of young children, the committing of so-called honour killings, homophobia, anti-Semitism, and continued support for those responsible for terrorist atrocities.

Whilst we must always protect against the unjust assumption that all Muslims are complicit in or somehow responsible for these crimes, we must not be afraid to speak freely about these issues. This is why the EDL will continue to work to protect the inalienable rights of all people to protest against radical Islam’s encroachment into the lives of non-Muslims.

We also recognise that Muslims themselves are frequently the main victims of some Islamic traditions and practices. The Government should protect the individual human rights of members of British Muslims. It should ensure that they can openly criticise Islamic orthodoxy, challenge Islamic leaders without fear of retribution, receive full equality before the law (including equal rights for Muslim women), and leave Islam if they see fit, without fear of censure.

British Muslims should be able to safely demand reform of their religion, in order to make it more relevant to the needs of the modern world and more respectful of other groups in society. It is important that they completely reject the views of those who believe that Islam should be taken in its ‘original’, 7th century form, because these interpretations are the antithesis of Western democracy. The onus should be on British Muslims to overcome the problems that blight their religion and achieve nothing short of an Islamic reformation. In line with this, we should do all that we can to empower those who are willing to take this path. We must also ensure that they do not fear reprisals from those who, in line with these 7th century interpretations, would force sharia law upon them.

The EDL calls upon the Government to repeal legislation that prevents effective freedom of speech, for freedom of speech is essential if the human rights abuses that sometimes manifest themselves around Islam are to be stopped.

We believe that the proponents of radical Islam have a stranglehold on British Muslims. These radicals dominate Muslim organisations, remain key figures in British mosques, and are steadily increasing their influence. Radical Islam keeps British Muslims fearful and isolated, especially the women that it encases in the Burqa. It misrepresents their views, stifles freedom of expression, and indoctrinates their children, whilst continually doing a discredit to those who do wish to peacefully co-exist with their fellow Britons.

(2) DEMOCRACY AND THE RULE OF LAW: Promoting Democracy And The Rule Of Law By Opposing Sharia

The European Court of Human Rights has declared that “sharia is incompatible with the fundamental principles of democracy”. Despite this, there are still those who are more than willing to accommodate sharia norms, and who believe that sharia can operate in partnership with our existing traditions and customs. In reality, sharia cannot operate fully as anything other than a complete alternative to our existing legal, political, and social systems. It is a revolution that this country does not want, and one that it must resist. Sharia is most definitely a threat to our democracy.

The operation of Islamic courts, the often unreasonable demand that Islam is given more respect than it is due, and the stealthy incursion of halal meat into the food industry, all demonstrate that sharia is already creeping into our lives. Resentment is already beginning to grow, and could create dangerous divisions if nothing is done. The primacy of British courts must be maintained and defended, fair criticism of religious and political ideologies must be permitted, and consumers must be provided with the information necessary to avoid halal produce should they wish.

Restaurants and fast food chains that do offer halal options should offer non-halal alternatives as well, in order to show respect for other people’s religions, customs, and possible concerns about animal welfare issues (surrounding ritual slaughter). No one should be made to consume halal produce unwittingly, so it must always be labeled - in supermarkets, in restaurants, in schools, and in hospitals - wherever it is available. Free choice in these matters is, after all, a fundamental human right for everybody, not just the Muslim community.

Sharia law makes a fundamental distinction between Muslims and non-Muslims, and the EDL will never allow this sort of iniquitous apartheid to take root in our country. The EDL will therefore oppose sharia appeasement in all its forms, and will actively work to eradicate the sharia-compliant behaviours that are already being adopted, and enforced, in our society.

(3) PUBLIC EDUCATION: Ensuring That The Public Get A Balanced Picture Of Islam

A central part of the EDL’s mission is public education. The British political and media establishment have, for a long time, been presenting a very sanitised and therefore inaccurate view of Islam, shaped by the needs of policy-makers rather than the needs of the public. This has acted as a barrier to informed policy-making and made finding the solution to real problems impossible. In pursuing this self-defeating and destructive policy, the Government has effectively been acting as the propaganda arm of the Muslim Brotherhood. Whether or not is aware of the predicament that it has put itself in, it has so far failed to honestly admit its failures.

We are committed to a campaign of public education to ensure that all aspects of Islam that impact on our society can debated in an open and honest way. Demonisation of Muslims, or of Islam’s critics, adds nothing to the debate. We believe that only by looking at all the facts can society be most effectively and humanly governed. If there are aspects of Muslim tradition that encourage the activities of Islamic radicals and criminals then these need to be properly addressed without fear of accusations of racism, xenophobia, or the even the disingenuous term ‘Islamophobia’.

The public must be provided with a more realistic and less sanitised view of Islam that allows it to ensure that decision-makers are held to account for their policy-making choices, choices that affect the harmony and security of the nation.

The EDL promotes the understanding of Islam and the implications for non-Muslims forced to live alongside it. Islam is not just a religious system, but a political and social ideology that seeks to dominate all non-believers and impose a harsh legal system that rejects democratic accountability and human rights. It runs counter to all that we hold dear within our British liberal democracy, and it must be prepared to change, to conform to secular, liberal ideals and laws, and to contribute to social harmony, rather than causing divisions.

(4) RESPECTING TRADITION: Promoting The Traditions And Culture Of England While At The Same Time Being Open To Embrace The Best That Other Cultures Can Offer

The EDL believes that English Culture has the right to exist and prosper in England. We recognise that culture is not static, that over time changes take place naturally, and that other cultures make contributions that make our shared culture stronger and more vibrant. However, this does not give license to policy-makers to deliberately undermine our culture and impose non-English cultures on the English people in their own land.

If people migrate to this country then they should be expected to respect our culture, its laws, and its traditions, and not expect their own cultures to be promoted by agencies of the state. The best of their cultures will be absorbed naturally and we will all be united by the enhanced culture that results. The onus should always be on foreign cultures to adapt and integrate. If said cultures promote anti-democratic ideas and refuse to accept the authority of our nation’s laws, then the host nation should not be bowing to these ideas in the name of ‘cultural sensitivity’. Law enforcement personnel must be able to enforce the rule of law thoroughly without prejudice or fear. Everyone, after all, is supposed to be equal in the eyes of the law.

The EDL is therefore keen to draw its support from people of all races, all faiths, all political persuasions, and all lifestyle choices. Under its umbrella, all people in England, whatever their background, or origin, can stand united in a desire to stop the imposition of the rules of Islam on non-believers. In order to ensure the continuity of our culture and its institutions, the EDL stands opposed to the creeping Islamisation of our country, because intimately related to the spread of Islamic religion is the political desire to implement an undemocratic alternative to our cherished way of life: the sharia.

Our armed forces stand up and risk their lives every day in order to protect our culture and democratic way of life. They are also reflective of England’s diversity, and are a shining example of what a people can achieve when united together. The EDL is therefore committed to opposing any and all abuse that our men and women in uniform are subjected to, and will campaign for legal remedies to ensure that those working within these important institutions are not exposed to abuse or aggression from within our country.

(5) INTERNATIONAL OUTLOOK: Working In Solidarity With Others Around The World

The EDL is keen to join with others who share our values, wherever they are in the world, and from whatever cultural background they derive. We believe that the demand for sharia is global and therefore needs to be tackled at a global as well as national level, so that this demand will never be succumbed to. The EDL will therefore have an international outlook to enhance and strengthen our domestic efforts, whilst at the same time contributing to the global struggle against Islamic intolerance of Western cultures, customs, religions, politics, and laws. The time for tolerating intolerance has come to an end: it is time for the whole world to unite against a truly Global Jihad.

Sunday, November 7, 2010

Pamela Geller has written a stirring call to action at American Thinker.  It's called "We Won, Now What?"

She gives a pretty complete list and I can't think of much to add, if anything.  Well maybe one, holding Nuremberg-style trials for the leftists who have sold this country down the river over the past sixty years, that is, those who are still alive.

This is a fight to reclaim the American Republic.  It will have to go on for decades to come and it won't be easy.  However, it must be done if future generations are to live in freedom and prosperity rather than the gray mediocrity of socialism, or the tyranny of sharia law.

.....

Thursday, October 21, 2010

This morning Pamela Geller is angrily denouncing Christine O'Donnell, Republican senatorial candidate for Delaware.  Geller endorsed O'Donnell early on, and O'Donnell posted Geller's endorsement on her website.  Then this week, a leftist online rag called Salon attacked O'Donnell for posting Geller's endorsement, repeating a lot of vicious lies and exaggerations about Pamela Geller.  Someone in O'Donnell's organization got spooked and removed Geller's endorsment from the O'Donnell website.  Geller saw the removal and went ballistic.  The Salon strategy worked:  Geller and O'Donnell were transformed from political allies into political enemies and a nasty public fight ensued.  Both Geller and O'Donnell will come away from this with mud on their faces.

Saul Alinsky stressed the use of ridicule and other strategies for causing political opponents to lose their tempers; once these opponents lost their tempers, they would self-destruct in a very public way, neutering themselves politically.  Geller has made herself a shining example of how effective this strategy can be.  With her ego gored, Geller was transformed into an attack dog for the left.

The only question in my mind is this:  how could Pamela Geller allow herself to be so easily played?  This stratagem will be celebrated in the annals of the left for years as an example of the effective use of slander and "playing one against the other."

The left has become quite effective at turning decent people into public pariahs through out and out lies and propaganda.  The reason, of course, is to silence these people, or erode their credibility with the public, or lacking that, to merely punish them by invoking as much psychic pain as possible.  Fueled by hatred and immorality, the purveyors of "tolerance" are truly hypocritical, anti-democratic and completely ruthless.  They will destroy the life of a political opponent if they can, or cause that opponent to suffer for his conscience for a very long time.  Examples are plentiful:  Robert Bork, Clarence Thomas, Joe McCarthy, Kathleen Harris, Linda Tripp, Carrie Prejean, Tom DeLay, Robert Stacy McCain, to  name only a few.  (See my former post "How the Left Punishes Conservatives.")  Now you can add Pamela Geller to the long and growing list of "the Slimed."

Pamela should have confined her concerns to private communications with the O'Donnell campaign.  Denouncing O'Donnell's "cowardice and lack of character" two weeks away from the election is truly destructive to the conservative cause.   Pamela, it isn't all about you.