Danger: Left wing appeasers at work!

The anti-imperialist brigade are hard at work to cover up the dangers of Islamism. The latest issue of the Socialist Worker rag interviews one Hassan Mahamdallie who informs us that:

It has been disheartening to watch establishment Muslim leaders apologetically rushing out with condemnations. They have pointlessly distanced themselves from “John the Jihadi”—who is alleged to have killed Foley—and declared that Isis is “un-Islamic”.

I much preferred the response of the spokesperson from south east London’s Lewisham Mosque.

The press asked him to condemn a tweet from a woman “Jihadi” in Syria who might have once attended the mosque.

He retorted, “The young woman’s desire to travel to Syria has nothing to do with the Centre. Unfortunately, the Muslim community are being subjected to a burden of proof based on a ‘guilty by association’ standard”.

Actually the Muslim community or at the very least its self appointed spokesmen do have a responsibility to condemn the potentially murderous actions of anyone heading off to support the murderous Jihadists in the name of the "religion of peace". 

Why the anonymous "spokesperson" could not simply say so is one of the very reasons "Islamophobia" is prevalent in society today. 

Socialist Worker focuses on condemning the West in the form of Nato for the current crisis in the Middle East, as does the equally pernicious "Counterfire" organisation that runs the laughably named Stop the War Campaign.

In one of their tediously repetitive articles blaming the West for everything wrong in the world they write:

Isis’s crimes, in repressing minorities and all those who disagree with them, are indeed great. It is a thoroughly reactionary movement. How they are worse than the other forces to intervene Iraq though is difficult to quantify. They certainly have a long way to go until the pain they have inflicted on the country can even start to compare to that inflicted by the United States.

Really? How convenient for the comrades they forget the brutal regimes of Assad in Syria and Hussein in Iraq which were backed by who exactly? 

Wouldn't be Russia would it comrades? The very country you give cover for in their invasion of the Ukraine and blame on non-existent Nato intervention?

Appeasers of oppression indeed.

The whole crisis in the Middle East was sparked off by Iraqi expansionism led by the "indefatigable" Saddam Hussein if George Galloway doesn't mind me plagiarising his well known anecdote. The invasion of Kuwait which if you recall was described by the anti-imperialists of the time as not being a "real country" and was "just" a product of imperialism. 

What the Kuwaitis themselves wanted was never a concern for the comrades and their ilk.

Have people really forgotten the mass murder committed by the Iraqi Baathists. The gassing of the Kurds, the constant use of torture, brutality and execution committed by the Iraqi regime.

Just an inconvenient footnote for the anti-imperialist brigade. 

The comrades have no answer to the dangers of ISIS and refuse to call for support to the Kurds fighting the Islamist death cultists.

The common mantra of Lenin's deranged followers is that "the enemy is at home". The fate of those abroad is only secondary to the defeat of what they call imperialism.

Except what they are really against ids democracy, freedom and equal rights. The anti-imperialists will excuse all and any "shibboleth" as Lyndsey German the leader of the Stop the war farce once said of women and gay rights when she was in the misnamed Respect Party.

The cause is all.

The individual is nothing.

The anti-imperialists are nothing but appeasers who would have seen the enemy at home even as Nazi troops marched up Whitehall if we had listened to their ilk the.

But Czechoslovakia was far away and of no concern to us.

Then it was a peice of paper.

Today its a website.

Its the Stop the War Coalition and their uber-allies.