Uncommonly DIVERSE Enemies Of Bourgeois Freedom-From-Aggression Easily Make Common Cause...

... and in doing so, reveal that unprincipled ravening after power is their controlling factor, not any left-wing or other pieties which are discarded at convenience.
Now, though, it has become much easier to expose these alliances between those whose ostensible principles and loyalties are in extreme conflict.
More and more, the public is becoming able to see that leftists of secular materialistic commitments can ally with spiritual Islamic terrorists, demonstrating the fraudulent
character of each, and exposing the underlying power-greed which unites them in enmity against those whose governments have not yet assumed totalitarian control.

Quoting: To Set The Record Straight by "Jamie Glazov FrontPageMagazine.com Wednesday, January 30, 2008
Frontpage Interview’s guest today is Scott Swett,[...] the co-author (with Tim Ziegler) of To Set The Record Straight: How Swift Boat Veterans, POWs and the New Media Defeated John Kerry.
[...] Swett: By 2004, the new media – by which I mean primarily the Internet and talk radio – had reached a point where it was no longer possible for the traditional TV networks and leading liberal papers to control the country’s political discussions, as they had been accustomed to doing for several decades. [...] Rather’s Ruin and the Rise of the Pajamahadeen.
If such a story had aired just a few years earlier, there’s little question that it would have been accepted as true and would have had a significant impact. That raises an interesting question: how many times has the media lied to us in the past without anyone noticing?
FP: Your thoughts on the coordination between the Left and America's enemies, both during the Vietnam War and today?
Swett: The common thread linking the leftists who helped enable the communist genocide in Southeast Asia a generation ago and those who control today’s “peace” movement is their identification of America as their primary enemy. This makes them willing to coordinate their activities with any external enemy of the US regardless of ideology. On the surface, it would seem improbable that American “liberals” would have much in common with fanatics who, for example, regard women as essentially property, but that clearly matters less than their desire to see our country thwarted and defeated. [...]
New York Times owner Arthur Sulzberger, Jr., said during the Vietnam War that if an American soldier encountered a North Vietnamese soldier in the field, he would want to see the American get shot. There is no reason to think he has changed his views."
Added 4-14-08:
When is the mass-murder of millions not the worst crime? When it's not ANTI-DIVERSITY, or such is the implication of the genocide concept. If the killing of a distinct people were a crime in and of itself, though, the accidental killer of the last drunken native speaker of a rare Indian language would be genocidal, and more culpable then the leftist industrialist of mass-murder. This is another of the unrepairable contradictions of the pro-diversity value-representation. Is this a rarefied theoretical juxtaposition, unlikely to be run across in the pragmatic slog of common politics? If so, what is happening here, then:"Today, there is a movement in the Ukraine to get that deliberate starvation of from 3-10 million people declared an act of genocide. Not surprisingly, the Russians are violently opposed. But their reasoning is mindboggling. They say that no one ethnic group was targeted by the deliberate famine..." [murder], quoting « Was the Starvation of the Kulaks Genocide? Page