Posted tagged ‘David Horowitz’

Washington Post telegraphs the coming targets of the Left

June 4, 2017

Washington Post telegraphs the coming targets of the Left, American ThinkerThomas Lifson, June 4, 2017

It is clear that the WaPo hopes to put the David Horowitz Center’s tax exemption up for dispute. But that would require a double standard, since there are far more tax exempt non-profits on the left, that avoid explicit partisan activity, while engaging in political activity.  Which means that the IRS will feel plenty of heat and may put Horowitz’s charity through hell.

**********************************

Jared Kushner is the latest member of the Trump team to experience a full-blown demonization campaign, but there are already signs that others are in line for the same sort of treatment.  Part of the strategy in destroying the Trump insurgency is to let his allies know that they are in for trouble if they persist.  The left wants to impugn and, if possible, destroy anyone seen as an enabler of the Trump insurgency.

The Washington Post invested a lot of resources in publishing a nearly 4000 word-long “investigation,” that generates a conspiracy theory around one of my heroes, David Horowitz, like me, a former leftist who saw and grasped the underlying corruption inherent in leftist ideologies that deny human nature and promise utopia. It thus serves two purposes: adding a new target for other leftists to investigate and attack – putting him on the agenda, as it were – and offering up a fresh conspiracy theory – necessary in the continuing absence of any evidence at all of Russian “collaboration” with the Trump campaign, a non-crime in itself.

The title of the piece contains a tell on its bias: “How a ‘shadow’ universe of charities joined with political warriors to fuel Trump’s rise”

There is nothing “shadowy” about David Horowitz. In fact, in the course of the article he is “ dismissed…as a bombastic self-promoter” by Bill Kristol.

The lengthy piece begins with a breathless account of an event that it portrays as momentous.

The crowd rose to its feet and roared its approval as Sen. Jeff Sessions bounded onto the stage at the Breakers, an exclusive resort in Palm Beach, Fla. Stephen Miller, an aide to the Alabama Republican, handed him a glass trophy honoring his bravery as a lawmaker.

“Heyyyy!” Sessions yelled out to the crowd.

The ceremony that day, in November 2014, turned out to be a harbinger: It brought together an array of hard-right activists and a little-known charity whose ideas would soon move from the fringes of the conservative movement into the heart of the nation’s government.

The man behind the event was David Horowitz, a former ’60s radical who became an intellectual godfather to the far right through his writings and his work at a charity, the David Horowitz Freedom Center. Since its formation in 1988, the Freedom Center has helped cultivate a generation of political warriors seeking to upend the Washington establishment. These warriors include some of the most powerful and influential figures in the Trump administration: Attorney General Sessions, senior policy adviser Miller and White House chief strategist Stephen K. Bannon.

In the tale that unfolds, David Horowitz is portrayed as the man who brought together Bannon, Sessions, and — hold your breath – the Mercers, the hedge fund billionaires that Hillary spun a vague, semi-incoherent conspiracy allegation around in her infamous blame-everyone-else speech at Recode:

 And I think again, we better understand that the Mercers did not invest all that money just for their own amusement. We know they played in Brexit, and we know that they came to Jared Kushner and basically said, “We will marry our operation,” which was more as it’s been described, psychographic, sentiment, a lot of harvesting of Facebook information, “We will marry that with the RNC on two conditions: You pick Steve Bannon, and you pick Kellyanne Conway. And then we’re in.” Trump says, “Fine, who cares,” right? So Bannon, who’d been running the Breitbart operation, supplying a lot of the … untrue, false stories …

The Wapo conspiracy features the Mercers and provides a little more information on who they are. (I suspect most readers already know.) The specific key incident concerns Pat Caddell, the Democrat pollster, who is credited with the blinding insight that inspired the members of the conspiracy to get together and get Donald Trump elected. See, in case it wasn’t the Russians, it had to be somebody else:

[Bannon] received an unexpected gift.

It came from Patrick Caddell, a veteran Democratic pollster who had once worked for President Jimmy Carter. He was speaking about his recent study of Americans’ sentiments toward Washington, the economy and the nation’s future. He said Americans were feeling glum: Two-thirds blamed self-serving elites in both parties for their troubles. They craved an outsider to shake things up.

His findings thrilled the crowd, Caddell told The Post in a lengthy interview. He earlier gave a similar account to the New Yorker.

Caddell said Bannon arranged for a private briefing the next day, to include Robert and Rebekah Mercer, a hedge fund billionaire and his daughter.

For two years, Bannon had worked with the Mercers, who invested millions in Breitbart News. The family also helped Bannon launch a Florida-based charity called the Government Accountability Institute, which describes itself as a nonpartisan investigative organization.

Bannon and the Mercers huddled with Caddell in a second-floor lounge at the Breakers. The Mercers were entranced by what they were hearing, Caddell told The Post, and Bannon “was ecstatic.”

“Being a basic rabble-rouser, it fit his views,” Caddell said.

Robert Mercer asked Caddell to confirm the poll’s findings, offering to pay the costs. Caddell told The Post the follow-up poll did just that. The charities and their media allies began to coalesce around the discontent that Caddell documented.

Full disclosure to readers: time for a confession. I was there. Before the subpoenas arrive, I want to make it clear that I was not at the briefings with the Mercers, though I did speak one-on-one with Pat Caddell, Jeff Sessions, and David Horowitz. I was a panelist on one of the programs at the meeting, as was AT co-founder Richard Baehr. I hope we won’t need to hire lawyers. There were hundreds of people there.

It is clear that the WaPo hopes to put the David Horowitz Center’s tax exemption up for dispute. But that would require a double standard, since there are far more tax exempt non-profits on the left, that avoid explicit partisan activity, while engaging in political activity.  Which means that the IRS will feel plenty of heat and may put Horowitz’s charity through hell.

 

David Horowitz Takes on Administrators Bullying Students at Tufts

November 30, 2016

David Horowitz Takes on Administrators Bullying Students at Tufts, Front Page Magazine (The Point), Daniel Greenfield, November 30, 2016

hamas_finger_poster_2016_cropped_0

The free speech movement has become the anti-free speech movement. And as the Freedom Center fights the anti-Semitic SJP hate group, its poster campaigns are touching nerves from GMU, where Oleg Atbashian was arrested and spent 14 hours in jail and has been threatened with years of prison time, to Tufts, where the administrators are bullying students.

Now David Horowitz is fighting mad and fighting back.

November 29, 2016

James M. Glaser, Dean of the School of Arts & Sciences, Tufts University

Jianmin Qu, Dean of the School of Engineering, Tufts University

Gentlemen,

I have just received your letter of November 14, conveying your “serious concerns regarding the posters placed on the Tufts University campus on October 19, 2016,” for which we took responsibility. The posters in question identify a hate group – Students for Justice in Palestine, which is sponsored by your institution. SJP calls for the destruction of the Jewish state, receives funding from the terrorist organization Hamas, and sponsors campus resolutions to boycott Israel, which liberals ranging from Larry Summers and Alan Dershowitz to Hillary Clinton have condemned as anti-Semitic. The statements in our posters are factual, or are reasonable opinions based on the facts.

Your “serious concerns” are summed up in two claims. First that “the posters in question violate our community standards” and, second, that they “violate our poster policy which requires notification and authorization by a university office or recognized student group prior to placing posters on campus.” You ask us in future to seek such permission.

Really. The two of you have already sent a letter to every member of the Tufts student body warning them that the university condemns our posters and that, “The university will be sending a statement to the posters’ sponsors in order to make clear that such materials are not welcome on our campus.” Now what student or student group, knowing that the university condemns these ideas, and has taken the extraordinary step of warning the entire student body that our ideas are unwelcome, would be willing to risk authorizing our posters? Which is why we took the step of putting up our posters without asking permission, since we are well aware that institutions like Tufts seek to be “safe places” for a politically correct orthodoxy and can be ruthless in acting to hermetically seal off dissenting ideas like ours.

I have read your terse email many times without being able to find a single reference to anything we actually said in our posters that might violate your community standards. Nor do you mention a single community standard that we might have violated. This is just another way in which you choose to show your contempt for individuals who express ideas that make you uncomfortable. And who wouldn’t be uncomfortable in your position when someone comes along to point out that you sponsor and support organizations that accuse Jews – falsely – of stealing Arab land, maintaining an “apartheid state,” and murdering innocent women and children, while giving full-throated support to the terrorists of Hamas?

Just to be duly diligent, I went up to the Tufts’ official website and found your community principles, prominent among which is the following statement: “Freedom of expression and inquiry are fundamental to the academic enterprise.” Too bad you and the Tufts administration have abandoned this principle, and too bad you lack the candor to admit it

If you had a shred of integrity you would invite me to your campus to debate this issue. Instead you will no doubt go on suppressing our efforts, all the while pretending to support the free exchange of ideas.

Sincerely,

David Horowitz

Freedom of expression these days means leftist harassment of opposing viewpoints with the aim of suppressing them.

Saint Louis University: Islamic Stronghold

October 24, 2016

Saint Louis University: Islamic Stronghold, Front Page MagazineMatthew Vadum, October 24, 2016

allenwest

Founded two centuries ago, Saint Louis University began as a Roman Catholic institution, but given its antics in recent years, one could be forgiven for believing that it might be better classified as an Islamic university. The most recent example of this transformation took place last month when more than a hundred students, egged on by campus administration, walked out of a speech by black former congressman Allen West because he dared to use the phrase “radical Islam.”

“Radical Islam” is the same expression that Muslim sympathizer President Barack Hussein Obama refuses to say. Obama, who claims to be a Christian, famously waxes poetic on the Muslim call to prayer, describing it as “one of the prettiest sounds on Earth at sunset.” With his head firmly planted in the sand, the president is also reluctant to label Muslim terrorist attacks as such, preferring to use the fuzzy abstraction “violent extremism.”

At Saint Louis University the campus administration tried to dictate the contents of the national security-themed speech in late September sponsored by Young America’s Foundation (YAF), but West, an outspoken conservative who represented a Florida district in the U.S. House from 2011 to 2013 as a Republican, refused to buckle under pressure. An SLU administrator told conservative and Republican students promoting the event that advertisements for it could not contain the words “radical Islam.”

SLU president Fred Pestello called West a “provocateur” and said in an email to students that he stood in “solidarity” with them.

Student Claire Cunningham whined to the Riverfront Times about her hurt feelings.

“Our administrator made a request for him to tailor his speech to our community, and in response he made a lot of hateful comments about our students,” she said.

Outraged at the university’s intolerable meddling the retired U.S. Army lieutenant colonel who served in the Middle East wrote an op-ed asserting that he had been “censored” by the campus administration and labeled today’s college students who seek so-called safe spaces as “little cupcakes.”

West added:

I along with the YAF activists will not back down from this challenge. And if this is just a case of ill-conceived political correctness, we’ll rectify that. But, if this is a case of the influence of stealth jihad radical Islamic campus organizations such as the Muslim Student Association, an affiliate of the Muslim Brotherhood, then you will be exposed. And I recommend to the President of St. Louis University, you do not want it known that a radical Islamic organization is dictating speakers on your campus — that is not the type of PR you really want.

In his speech West discussed U.S. policy failures that have allowed Islamic terrorist groups to penetrate the U.S. and in some cases cover up terrorist attacks by describing them as outbreaks of workplace violence.

The terrorists don’t care about our partisan politics, he said, adding that “during 9/11, no one came in looking for Republicans or Democrats. They came looking to kill Americans.”

A 22-year military veteran who took part in Operation Desert Storm (1991) and Operation Iraqi Freedom (2003), West spoke of his experiences dealing with Islamic terrorism, explaining that “the greatest enjoyment I had was working with the Afghan army to make sure little Afghani girls could go to school.”

The walkout itself was staged political theater. Students led by the SLU Rainbow Alliance and the terrorist-linked Muslim Students Association (MSA) showed up early for the event on Sept. 29, filling many of the seats in the two-story auditorium where West was to speak. As he mounted the stage they stood up and left.

YAF spokeswoman Emily Jashinsky said SLU’s treatment of West isn’t out of the ordinary nowadays.” This is what happens when students attempt to bring one conservative speaker to a liberal campus,” she said. “Threatened leftists do everything they can to erect obstacles.”

Years ago David Horowitz had been scheduled to headline an event at Saint Louis University called “An Evening with David Horowitz: Islamo-Fascism Awareness and Civil Rights,” which was put together by the College Republicans and YAF.

In an interview with FrontPage Horowitz recalled how shabbily he was treated in 2009 when he was scheduled to speak at SLU. Ultimately, the campus banned him after bargaining in bad faith over aspects of the event.

SLU wanted to put someone on stage to interpret and counter Horowitz’s message.

“They said okay but only if there’s somewhere there on the stage to explain Catholic teachings and then they withdrew,” he said.

Horowitz told me he agreed to the otherwise ridiculous request but the university canceled anyway.

“It’s the only university that I have not been allowed to speak at and they did it on behalf of the Muslim Students Association.”

“It’s a Catholic school but it’s an Islamic stronghold,” he said.

Founded in 1818 by Archbishop Louis William Valentine Dubourg, the Jesuit university is located in St. Louis, Missouri. Dubourg also served as the first president of Georgetown College, a Jesuit school which later became Georgetown University. Like SLU, Georgetown has embraced Islam with vigor. It is home to the Prince Alwaleed bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding and Islam apologist John L. Esposito.

SLU hosted a seminar in 2015 by #MyJihad, a group created by Ahmed Rehab, executive director of the Chicago office of the terrorist-linked Council for American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). The idea behind the presentation was to misrepresent and rebrand the concept of jihad to make it less objectionable to Americans.

Ahmed Mohamed, the young troublemaking Muslim bomb hoaxer called Clock Boy by some, was portrayed at the SLU event as a victim. “What he went through is an example of a struggle,” according to #MyJihad’s account of the event. “Struggles are a human concept, and those can easily be tied into anything that happens.”

Mark Chmiel, an adjunct professor of theology at Saint Louis University, acknowledges that in 2003 he worked with the International Solidarity Movement in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. ISM, also known as the U.S. Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation, has been involved with HAMAS and the al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades. Chmiel attacked Holocaust survivor and Nobel Peace Laureate Elie Wiesel in his 2001 book, Elie Wiesel and the Politics of Moral Leadership.

SLU reportedly hosted a three-day ISM training and strategy event in 2012. According to one account:

These conferences try to pass themselves off as educational discussions about Middle East peace but make no mistake about it: they are training and strategy sessions to enlist more Rachel Corries to go to the Middle East and interfere with anti-terror operations of the IDF as well as to generate support for Hamas as it continues to fire rockets into southern Israel.

If that isn’t enough, a key emphasis will also be placed on training attendees from all over the nation into how to boycotts and divest from the Jews.  Publicly the leaders claim they only promote boycotting Israel’s “occupation” of Judea and Samaria and the “siege” on Gaza, but training sessions also teach how to infiltrate Jewish organizations in the United States and how to boycott businesses run by American Jews.

Elie Wiesel was interrupted and heckled by campus activists when he spoke at SLU in 2009. They shouted “come to Gaza” and see the “devastation” caused by the Israeli “occupation.”

Saint Louis University has also hosted BDS movement events. For example, in April 2011, the Busch Student Center was the site of an event called “An Introduction to the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions Movement: Nonviolent Resistance to Stop the Israeli Occupation of the Palestinian Territories.” One of the speakers, Fulbright scholar Sandra Samaan Tamari, was a member of the Saint Louis Palestine Solidarity Committee.

SLU has long had an active branch of the Muslim Students Association. MSA has chapters across the country and functions as a campus-based fifth column in America.

MSA’s parent entity is the Muslim World League (MWL), which is directly funded by Saudi authorities and is tied to al-Qaeda. The League acknowledges on its website that it is “engaged in propagating the religion of Islam” and “elucidating its principles and tenets.” It also engages in strategic lying, known in the Islamic world as taqiyya. The League “is well known for rejecting all acts of violence and promoting dialogue with the people of other cultures,” its website claims, adding that it does “not intend to undermine, dominate or practice hegemony over anyone else.”

The Muslim World League has reportedly taken in more than $1.3 billion since 1962 from the Saudi government to promote Wahhabism. The League, warns Andrew C. McCarthy, is the Muslim Brotherhood’s “principal vehicle for the international propagation of Islamic supremacist ideology.”

Quite apart from its support for Islam, SLU is a hotbed of political correctness and anti-Americanism like virtually all institutions of higher learning in the U.S.

Last year the gutless administration at SLU caved to complaints from radical students and relocated a sculpture campus leftists said celebrated white supremacy and colonialism from outside to inside a museum.

The sculpture, named “Where the Rivers Meet,” depicts Jesuit missionary Pierre-Jean De Smet on an elevated platform above two Native Americans, in what critics say could be seen as an attempt to convert them to Christianity. It had stood there for 60 years.

A local newspaper acknowledged that conversion was part of the mission of Belgian-born De Smet who died in St. Louis in 1873 but added “many historical accounts depict him as sympathetic to Native Americans and as working to dispel their reputation as savages.”

Kathryn Kuhn, an associate professor of sociology and anthropology, said at the time that the statue “really is shameful,” adding it has been “controversial for as long as I’ve been here, and I’ve been here for 25 years.”

The same year SLU commissioned a sculpture for display on the campus that “captures the spirit and importance” of a weeklong Occupy SLU protest the previous fall, the College Fix reports.

For six days in mid-October, community activists refused to leave the St. Louis campus in a protest intended as an extension of the summertime riots that had wracked nearby Ferguson over the police shooting of Michael Brown. Three social justice groups – Tribe X, the Metro St. Louis Coalition for Inclusion and Equality, and the Black Student Alliance – took over the campus and lived in tents around its clock tower.

Flying an upside-down American flag, they gave speeches and “teach ins” on topics such as “conscious awakening, systematic oppression, white supremacy, and students’ responsibility to the community,” according to a YouTube video that documented the demonstration.

The demonstrators left only after the university agreed to all 13 of their demands, one of which was a “mutually agreed upon commissioned artwork.”

Of course Saint Louis University gave in to the student radicals.

The Left demands that universities honor depravity and universities like SLU eagerly comply.

Truth-tellers like Allen West and David Horowitz, on the other hand, routinely get the bum’s rush.

And that’s the way left-wingers like it.

Daniel Horowitz: There Is a Fifth Column in the American Government

June 22, 2016

Daniel Horowitz: There Is a Fifth Column in the American Government

by Dan Riehl

21 Jun 2016Washington, DC

Source: Daniel Horowitz: There Is a Fifth Column in the American Government – Breitbart

JIM WATSON/AFP/Getty Images

Asked by Breitbart News Daily SiriusXM host Stephen K. Bannon if there is “essentially a fifth column in the national security and homeland security apparatus of the United States,” Daniel Horowitz, senior editor at Conservative Review, said, “Oh yeah, this is nothing new. It started pretty much in the second term of the Bush administration.”

Horowitz continued:

There’s something called CVE, Countering Violent Extremism. It’s not just an Orwellian term to expunge any mention of Islamic terror and make it about a kind of generic extremism, including so called Right Wing extremism; it’s a term of art. It is a very specific term concocted by the Muslim Brotherhood front groups like CAIR. They have successfully introduced this lexicon in our DHS [Department of Homeland Security]. These people are most commonly found in the Homeland Security Advisory Council, as well as the civil rights and civil liberties division of DHS.

Breitbart News recently highlighted the issue with a piece drawn from a Horowitz item at Conservative Review, “The GOP’s Muslim Brotherhood-Inspired Post-Orlando Agenda”:

Next, Republicans could bring legislation to the House and Senate floors, finally designating the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist group, thereby freeing up law enforcement do [sic] expunge them from our government and go after the mosques controlled by Brotherhood front groups. This would cut to the foundation of the radicalization problem inside Muslim communities in this country. It would also remove the Muslim Brotherhood foxes guarding the hen house within our sensitive counterterrorism advisory boards for the FBI and DHS. The bill designating the Muslim Brotherhood a terror group [H.R. 3892] already passed the House Judiciary Committee in February.

But no. Republicans will have none of that. Instead, Republicans plan to package a bunch of nothingburger bills that, in best-case scenario, completely distracts from the core problem, and in the worst case, actually promotes the Muslim Brotherhood agenda.

Horowitz’s interview on Breitbart News Daily Tuesday also highlighted:

If you had a situation where there’s rampant, ubiquitous arson all over the country, and you find out it’s the firefighters committing the arson, and they’re everywhere, and they’re being cheered on, and then a group of people who are cheering them on successfully say, “You know what: we need to ban fire in your  kitchen.” And they successfully make the narrative all that. This type of fire. What about fire for someone who’s mentally ill? And nobody is talking about the issues. We literally had a debate all of yesterday, and we’re going to have it all of today, probably for the rest of the week, about how much … how many people do we want to ban from getting a gun. Meanwhile, we are bringing the problem to our shores. A) Through immigration. Then once they’re here – and some of them have been here for several decades – we have the Muslim Brotherhood radicalizing them, writing their textbooks in their schools, obviously sympathizing with the terrorists, making these guys want to identify with them in the mosques and all the community centers. And then most importantly, or most egregiously, they are in every level of our counterterrorism and Homeland Security apparatus: DHS, FBI, State Department.

Republicans, as their response to Orlando, they crafted legislation using the term Countering Violent Extremism, giving them more resources to further the goals and objectives of CVE. So they basically empowered Obama and legitimized this program.

Breitbart News Daily airs on SiriusXM Patriot 125 weekdays from 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. Eastern.