>> you can watch this and other programs online at tv.org. .. >> i remind you immediately following today's program, david will be available to sign new copies of his book, "a point in

time" at the signing table at the rear of the room. mining is craig snyder. i'm the executive director of philadelphia's reconsidered. it's a nonprofit organization committed to the ideals of individual and economic liberty, limited government, and defense of free societies which are currently under attack by enemies both religious and secular at home and abroad. david horowitz was born into a family of dedicated communists whose parents were literally card-carrying mayors of the american communist party. as a red diaper baby growing up in new york, david was indoctrinated into the intellectual world of collectivism. as a young man he became intoxicated with the hopeful idea that all of humanity can be saved from its historical misfortunes if they were only abandoned the old world institutions and to adopt the marxist idea of social salvation.

marks his create from each of its own ability to each to his own need, became the mantra of a generation of bolsheviks the world over. who were committed to the salvation of humanity. david was a foot soldier of the war of ideas, and as his best selling novel, "radical son" explains it wasn't until the early '50s until the truth of stalinist genocidal atrocities were confirmed that david broke ranks with economies in of his parents, became a founding member of the to left, a kinder, gentler form of social wrestlers and. that was the idea anyway. david along with his writing and business partner, peter, published ramparts in the literary screed to the left. he became a prominent leader of the antiwar, antiestablishment left. as "radical son" details a series of events culminating in the murder of his friend danny, by the black panthers.

this was a seminal moment the lead to david's abandonment of the left. and the embrace of conservatism for which he earned the everlasting enmity of his former comrades in arms. david is a writer, a prolific writer, and he is a thinker, a deep thinker. david tells the truth, the whole truth, and he is honest, brutally honest. a good writer, and david is a good writer, writes the truth. not little truths, but big truths with a capital t. to write the truth one has to dig deep into his or her own personal experience. that is not easy. david has made life-changing reversals. is only loyalty is to find and speak the truth, truth with a capital t. in his new book, "a point in time," david shares his insight into man, god and society in a

way that only he can. it is an honor and a privilege to present to you a man of high moral clarity, deep inside, and a clear voice in a world threatened by political correctness and cultural relativism. the world needs more men like david horowitz. i respect him. i admire him. and i am proud to be his friend. ladies and gentlemen, david horowitz. [applause] >> me thank you, craig. i want to thank craig for putting together this event and putting together the freedom center in philadelphia, my home away from home. karl marx wrote capital in fourth outlines which never finish in which are virtually unreadable. when he was asked what he wrote such a long poker he said

because i didn't have time to write a short one. this book i've written is quite short, it took me three years to write and a lifetime to gain the understanding i tried to communicate in these pages. the book itself began when i picked up a copy of the meditations of marcus, which is a book that i remembered from my father's bookshelf. which he had just kept from college. it was not a book as i will explain shortly that he would have wanted to read as an adult or would have liked or learned from. marcus was the 19th emperor of rome. he was the emperor and gladiator, he was by all accounts a good man. he was also a philosopher.

not a formal one. he took notes to himself. these notes were found in the middle ages by monks who saw in them a prefiguring of their own faith, and they gave them the title that we know them by, the meditations of marcus. marcus was a historic, kind of a hyper realistic view of life and, therefore, somewhat grim one, depending on your perspective. his philosophy could be summed up in these words of his. be not troubled for all things are according to nature. and soon you will be no one in nowhere. so this was a view of life and reteamed by a romantic vision or a religious one, and my father

was a progressive communist, all progressives share, share this vision. he would not comment he thought he could change the world or he was participating in a movement to change the world. it was marcus aurelius did not believe in progress, or history for that matter. he said, those who have seen present things have seen all. though everything from all eternity to everything that will be to the end of time. and if things don't change because we are basically creatures, just like we are animals. our unhappiness is caused by our consciousness from the fact that one day we'll be no one in nowhere. animals just living in the

present. if you think about the future and think about the past, that could cause you a lot of problems. progressives are really motivated by the desire to escape this world. the world, when they look at the world, it's too unjust, is there phrase. and, of course, it is. i mean, people reported, good people die young, innocent people are tormented, suffer. so people like my father escaped, instead of trying to deal with this reality, or one reason or another they are unable to, they want to escape it by creating a new world. that's what progressivism is about.

i was brought up in this tradition, and, therefore, of course you never lose the memories of the ways he saw things when you were younger. there was a passage in marcus aurelius that just really brought me up. it's part of his advice of how to deal, i mean, stoicism is basically don't sweat the small stuff, but don't sweat the big stuff either. so, in this passage he says when you rise in the morning, say to yourself i shall meet today interested, ungrateful, arrogant, deceitful, envious, and uncharitable man. but don't bother yourself about it. he said is it possible that there would not be shameless people in the world? it's not possible. therefore, do not require what is impossible.

that's a still a to b. and that's a complete antithesis of everything that i was born up what i was brought up of, if you may think you change them. i was always proselytizing when i was young. i mean, if you just looked out at the news today, you have been in can't make in your city as they haven't wall street, down with greed. well, anybody with a sober view of the world would say well, greed, it's been part of human nature for five, 10,000 years, as long as there's been human beings. good luck to you. marcus aurelius has a problem with it. and in "meditations of marcus aurelius" because you have to ask yourself, if we're going to soon be no one in nowhere and

everything that we do is erased and, therefore, nothing has any meaning, then what's the point? why not just, you know, the only real decision have is how to get out of this world as quickly as possible. and marcus aurelius, looking at himself, felt like he was a coward for not doing it. siu tries again and again to answer this question, and he comes up with what to my mind is a very unsatisfying answer. he just changes the question and says well, if i look at the world, i see it's beautiful. well, if it's beautiful, there must be a design to it, therefore there must be a designer. therefore there are gods that take care of us. there are no got to take care of us, then we are living a meaningless existence. he just asserts that there are gods. and i respect -- i'm an

agnostic, which means i just don't know. but i can live with that uncertainty. not everybody can. i mean, it's just my state of being. but people, what this teaches us is that even marcus aurelius had to have a faith, people need a faith. most people cannot live with the idea that life is meaningless, that everything we do add up to nothing. and that brings me to the second author which i look at in this book, which is an author who would not have appeared on my father's child which is the great russian novelist. he was an archery action or who stood in the way of the beautiful future that they thought of themselves as

creating. of course, that's what attracted me to him when i was, when i left, because he began as a radical. and, in fact, was joined a group of radicals in st. petersburg and they were arrested for plotting to kill the czar. they actually were. they were convicted and they were kept in jail for four months and then they were marched out in early morning, to parade grounds where there were three execution stakes. they were bred to sense which was death -- they were read their sentence which was death. they started to put the blindfold on. just before they ordered to

fire, somebody wrote up and gave him a reprieve. and actually it had been a plant of the czar to just punish them. he was an epileptic and it was not a happy experience. when he was sent to siberia and there he had a change of heart and mind. and i don't think anybody has written as eloquently as to authoritarianism and what it means. in our revolution and what it means. he believed that human beings can't live without a higher idea. he believed that id was immortality. but his main perception was that because people do not believe in god does not mean they do not

believe in nothing. and, in fact, his perception was that if they did not believe in god they will believe in themselves as gods. this, of course, is what every radical, what everybody out there on the occupy wall street demonstrations, of course they are very young so you've got to forgive certain stupidity in young people. and arrogant, too. i forgive them. when i was young i was stupid and arrogant. was always preaching the way they are. but if you think about the radical mission is, what is it to change the world is to create a new world. that's what god does, creates a world. human beings, a lot of my book is about this can't create a new world. because we are the cause of the problems of the old one.

simple idea. and dostoevsky in perceiving radicals, progressives as people trying to create a new religion, a new faith, this is not an original idea because that's the way the radicals like marks saw themselves. in fact, the father french socialism actress said that socialism is a religion that is the religion of humanity. and marx his hero, stole fire from the got. so they saw themselves as acting as god. in fact, marx's whole critique of religion is you can project on god their own powers. and, therefore, what he said,

they alienate their powers, they distance themselves from their own powers. so by rejecting god they take their powers and then they can act like god. that's basically the marx i.t. of course, human beings don't project onto god their qualities and powers. but dostoevsky have this perception that it was not just atheistic radicals. you know, it's not an accident that the modern radical movements all grew up around the time of darwin. and just before darwin. that is when there was a religion was challenged, religious beauties were challenged. it is a secular religion. people suffer and we are going to redeem them. not like we're going to redeem one suffering individual. we are going to redeem the whole

world. but dostoevsky saw this, action had already developed at you in roman catholicism. and why is that? because catholicism had made a deal with the roman empire became the official religion of the roman empire. and dostoevsky created a parable that is a very famous parable called the grand inquisitor, just about 10 pages in his great novel the brothers. and in this parable, christ who has been, of course it takes place in the 16th century, so christ has been absent for 1500 years or so. the second coming hasn't come, and he has left people in uncertainty it and for dostoevsky this is a great source of the human suffering that we don't really know, we

don't know who we are, we don't know why we're here, we don't know where we are going. and it sent intolerable state for people and the grand inquisitor, christ comes back to earth. he never says anything in the parable but the inquisition or arrest him anyway. and the grand inquisitor, this chapter is his indictment of god from the crime of grecian. and indictment is that your absent, you have left people with the decision as to whether to believe or not to believe. and that's intolerable so that they can't handle it. so you are the cause of human suffering. and so we have stepped in, that is, the church. and dostoevsky projected this not only roman catholicism but socialism itself. we are going to take care of you. we will bring people happiness by giving them bread and a 40.

we will tell you what to belie believe. and if you submit to us you will be happy. that is the source of human happiness. and, of course, christ was tempted by, and the gospel, was tempted by satan who told him to throw himself down over the cliff, cast himself off a cliff. and then, of course, rescue himself because he is god. that would make people believe. of course, christ could have risen off the cross, or god could manifest himself. god has been absent or hidden from human beings through so much history. i will come to the reason why in a second, but christ didn't do this, therefore he condemned, or god, you know, and jews can ask the same question. you know, we are the chosen

people, why the holocaust? target now the second holocaust in the world. we don't have an answer, and god doesn't give us an answer. and so the question is then why has god -- this is the interesting, this is dostoevsky's perception. it's very interesting. and that is, what makes us human? what makes us human is the ability to choose as our freedom. to make a choice of whether to believe in god or not, of whether to be good or not to be good, or whether to do the right thing or not the right thing. so, insofar as we are human, we

have to have disagreement otherwise what we may become is dostoevsky's metaphor is an angel. everybody is the queen and, whether the pope of the chief rabbi or whatever, the dictator, and then we also bit and then we will be happy. people will tell us what to do. so, it is our freedom that makes us human. it's also our freedom that makes the world, the world out there, society, such a bad place. if people didn't have a choice and they had to be good because god was telling you to be good, you did have any question as to what the right path was, we wouldn't have wars, we wouldn't have all the things that we have

that the left, the progressives complain about, radical missionaries complain about. this will come from choice. the subtitle of my book is retention in this life or the next. and retention in the next life is something that nobody can know whether there is pick if you're religious and if you believe in the divinity, you will probably also have the faith that it will all be sorted out. it will all be made clear to us white innocents suffer. dostoevsky has an amazing chapter in "the brothers karamazov" about the children suffering, why do children suffer? how can a just and compassionate god sanctioned the suffering of little children? and he has horrible stories, in

the book, so we have the same stories in the world today. people who think that mankind is morally improving. just have to look at the abuse of children which is global. there are millions of children in slavery as we speak. there is a carpet that obama put in the white house, and on the carpet is inscribed the words the moral arc of the universe is bent towards justice. is it? does anybody think that there is a center with more innocents, murder and torture than the 20 century? who could possibly think that the moral arc of the universe is bent towards justice?

what progressives revolutionaries, radicals, all of these isms, socialists, communists, social justice, and crusaders, believe is that their problem is society. society divides people. society elevates, keeps others down. society persuades us to go into unnecessary wars. society is the problem. society makes criminals. but society doesn't do -- there's no society. society is as. society is a reflection of who we are. everybody has in them the

capacity for selfishness, aggression, doing things that are unjust. we make moral choices all the time. sometimes we make choices that are immoral. the better him on this make fewer of those choices -- the better of among us make fewer of those choices. and maybe there are sane to walk among us but they are certainly rare. so we are the problem. but if we are the problem, then we can't fix the problem, can we? because putting people in power does what? it takes the same type of person that is causing the problem and gives them a lot of power over the rest of us. and that's why, you know, you would think by the way some of these young people woke up after

they anointed their messiah, obama, putting in the white house and things have turned out so badly they would understand that these problems are not fixable in a way that they think they are fixable. if you believe that the problem lies outside us, then you can believe that we can solve the problem. and that's what i mean by redemption in this life. you create a meaning because you are the creators of the new world, how meaningful is that. that is serving a big meaning for a life. but you can only, you can only do that if you see the problem is outside you and you are not implicated in the problem. if you believe that the corruption is in our nature, that we are the problem, then the only possibility of redemption is through divinity and in the next life.

you have to see the corruption has been enough, then you have a religious view. and i think this is a few that is relatively benign, because it doesn't empower people to think that they are god. however, saying that corruption is within us is, we are right back to the idea that what makes us human is our freedom, our freedom to do wrong as well as right. and, of course, that's right in the chapters of genesis of the opening of genesis. i mean, adam and eve, was better than socialism. if you didn't die, you didn't have to work. there was no pain. i mean, come on. this is it, everybody. but no. know, the one thing that our for parents should not do, which was to eat of the tree, the

knowledge of good and evil, and, of course, do no evil you have to participate in it. and it is that freedom god gave in genesis, god gave adam and eve the freedom to choose right and wrong. and they chose wrong. so they were expelled from paradise. this is to me the most insightful parable of where we are, the experiences we've all had through our lifetime. that is, human beings are not fit to live in a paradise, because they want, they want that choice. and when wanting to choice, they will make bad choices. all of us make bad choices. some bigger, some lesser, but we all do it. we are all implicated. and, of course, god puts an angel with a flaming sword at the gates of evil to keep us from returning.

you can only return by a divine agency. when you come down to it you will realize what progressives want to do with, but socials want to do, what communists want to do, and actually just to amplify this in one way, what islamists, the islamic, muslim jihadists, although they believed in a divinity, they think they can make this world holy by purging it of infidels and by instituting god's law because they believe that what they've got in the seventh century is god's law. so they are just as dangerous as radical. and, of course, the radicals are now in a tacit alliance with the islamic jihadists running interference within, doing just what they did for the communists, when the communist empire was going strong here

that's of course because they see us and the israel as great and little satan, preventing their paradise from being achieved. and i guess what has struck me in a lifetime of unfortunately paying attention to politics all the time, if i had to choose in life, i mean, i think we don't choose our parents, we don't choose our lives. it's been an interesting life, but i can see a lot of other things that i would rather have been doing, engaging in politics. it's funny because i once interviewed, i've done journalistic work. i interviewed a prosecutor who had started out as a defense attorney. i said, why did you switch from being a defense attorney, he

said because i didn't want to hang out with criminals. but the thing that i've learned, the one thing that i've learned is how we don't learn from our experience collectively. individuals learn, some individuals. they pay attention. but mankind doesn't learn. the collective doesn't learn. this was brought home to me, because i had to read dostoevsky wrote a series, he edited a magazine called diary of a writer, and in the magazine he had articles which were autobiographical, stories, he covered a lot of court cases.

and if you read it you'll be impressed with how similar they are to anything, you know, the same kind of discussions going on today. that is, jerry is find all kinds of excuses for criminals, you know, bad parenting, bad circumstances that would justify the worst crimes. you will recognize these things. but anyway, here's the passage that struck me. he had been discovered by a literary critic when he was a young man, and he was a radical who brought them into this radical circle. do you know, sometimes it is very excited he would screech as he turned to me, do you know that man stands cannot be counted against him? when society is set up in such a mean fashion man cannot help but be wrong.

economic factors alone lead him to be wrong and it is absurd and cruel to demand from and something the very laws of nature make it impossible for him to carry out even if you wanted to. in other words, society causes people to be criminals, rather than the people themselves. dostoevsky's grand inquisitor says the same thing. he says do you know that centers will pass and mankind will proclaim what the mouth of its wisdom and signs that there was no crime and, therefore, no sin, but only hungry men. he'd been first and ask a virtue of them. that is what they will ride on the banner they race against you and by which your temple will be destroyed. he'd been first and then comes virtue. -- feed them first and then comes virtue. >> if you've ever seen mother

courage, wretched individual, but as an individual, but also a communist. and he wrote in mother courage, first comes eating, then comes morality. so people are not responsible for what they do. society becomes responsible your and if that is the case, then society will make people good and that's the totalitarian, the totalitarian fantasy. what dostoevsky also said is because, choice makes us suffer. uncertainty makes us suffer. the first thing people do when they're given freedom a seek an object to worship. seek a cause to worship, seek a leader to worship.

which is the first thing you want to know when you look at the world today. stalin, whom all progressives, i shouldn't say all progressives, 90% of progressives supported the soviet union, even those who became oh, after stalin died, understood he committed crimes, he came anti-anti-communists, which is a way of supporting the enterprise that produced the stalin. stalin killed virtually a member of every single family in the soviet union. that's how many people he killed. but when he died millions of people flocked to his funeral procession. so many people, that 1000 people

were trampled to death by the throngs worshiping stalin. and they, of course they created a mausoleum for him where people would line up for 10 hours just to view his corpse embalmed. when they took a poll in late '50s, stalin died in 53, in the poll the three greatest russians voted by the russian people who had lived through this work-nevsky, peter the great and joseph stalin. and this shows the persistence of this. and the demonstrators out there calling for an end to create a capitalism without the foggiest idea of what they're going to replace it with. that is without ever having thought through the problem.

how to get people to work. how do you manage people, how to give them incentives. this shows how the desire for redemption in this life versus, for the illusion and it shows us the problem, the problem we face in it. is one of the dimension which is if you believe you can create the kingdom of heaven on earth, which is what every fantasy of social justice is about, it's about a world where there's and suffering, where there's in equality, no racism, no sexism, no homophobia, note islamophobia, no concert passionate no conflict basically. if you think you can create no poverty, if you think no war, if you think you can create such a world, what crime will you not commit to achieve it? what life would you not tell? or if you don't have the

stomach, what crime would you not support? what crime -- the american left, now, in its majority is supporting in one way or another hamas, which is an organization which is dedicated to killing the jews which says so in its own charter. how can progressive people, people who say they're for social justice, the supporters of hamas? they can because they have this vision of a redeemed future. and who standing in the way of this? america and the jews. and how reminiscent of that, say, the 1930s? so, marcus aurelius was right about the illusion of progress. and, of course, it was a very classical view.

win studio, the roman general concord and set fire to this great city of carthage, he wept because he saw the future of rome. anyway, in this book company, a lot of this book is about my animals because i think you can learn from your animals what life is about. atheism is a form of faith that i think it's a very destructive faith in the hands of radicals. there is only faith, there is only faith. there is faith for just in awe of the ministry of it. i just read a book by francis collins called the language of god. he's the head of the genomics object and decided. he started as an atheist and that he is a person of faith. but in some rising our

scientific knowledge today, the fact is that we know that the world, the universe began as a consensus. it began with a big bang, but what set off with a bang? they don't know. haven't the foggiest idea as to how the universe was created. we can come to the next great question, okay, there was a big bang and all this matter or whatever it is, out there, how do you create life out of that? haven't the foggiest idea. we see it through a glass darkly as the gospel says. maybe later we see face-to-face, but we don't know. if you accept that, you'll get a kind of stoic view of the world,

and you certainly understand that it's very difficult to make things better than they are across the board, but it's not so difficult to make things worse, which we see repeated over and over again. if there is a redemption and that we can accomplish, it's like one person at a time, and then over to help another person or heal another person, you have to have that person would think of operation. human beings cannot be manipulated like ants, and the vision of socialism, that vision of an earthly redemption, vision of redemption is a vision of content for human beings and their ability and their desire to make choices.

so when the socialists come to power, they face people probably like, serving the people in this room who will resist them. they need to force them to be good or just for socialists. that is the danger we face. we face a from islam. we face it from the left. we face it from people who are called liberals in this country, who want to make us good. are continually passing laws to do so. anyway, that's what my little book is about. thank you. [applause] >> we are going to pass the mic back around, for those of you who would like to have any questions. and for anyone who needs to leave early and stuff, it's 1:20 almost now but there will

be a book signing immediately following this short question and answer period. hello, david. chris bithell. your kind enough to be on the show this one. i appreciate it. >> please, plug your show. >> thank you. [inaudible] i will stop asking what i ask you on the show, i'm fascinated with environmentalism, extreme environmentalism. that seems to be certainly very close cousin to some the things you're talking about, and orcas, socials, things of that nature. can you talk about that? >> i once wrote an article for "national review" called from red to green. it's a radical environmentalism is a radicals wet dream. because one of the problems that

the socialism marxist left had was how are we going to get a revolution? and and to us, the working class. and, of course, by the '60s, the hardhats, the construction workers were beating up a leftist demonstrators, but all over the world the working class never acted the way marx said they would, as a revolutionary agent. and having conservative work, they were called reagan democrats, just blows apart the whole vision. how wonderful to have the people at, that you're defending, not workers, but trees. because they can't say hey wait a minute, i don't need this kind of help. that other aspect of environmentalism that is so attractive to radicals is that

it is apocalyptic. radicalism is always about an apocalyptic vision because it's a religious redemption. you are either saved or you are damned. you know, i just visit my put coal speeches, but liberals are like hellfire preachers when you think of it. i mean, if you don't agree with them then you're a racist or sexist or homophobic, while conservatives reply to that by calling them liberals. [laughter] so the apocalypse, it was famously said the choice is socialism or barbarism. and a third was communism or fascism. it's always this apocalypse. and why?

because if you are facing an apocalypse, you give people a lot of power. so there's no and. you want the government to do this to save the planet, how can you say no to that? you know. so it's just the perfect cause. and a lot of economy is radicals went into -- doesn't mean every environment issue is a revolutionary issue. there's plenty of ways to regard the environment, to treat a better than we had. we have gotten cleaner air now, that's good. shortage of surrendering all of our freedom to these plants. i mean, cap-and-trade bill, they're going to regulate your energy use in your house, so the government will tell you how many times you can flip on the lights or not. you just get a narrower and

narrower space of choices. >> i'll never forget that back and forth you had with that jew hater at the university. my kids are way out of college. but if you like is something i personally want to do to help them, you know, help better jewish perception on campus but is anything you can recommend to me that i can do with my time and effort? >> for those of you who are not familiar with this, this is a youtube video of a talk i gave at the university of california, san diego. when i finish, a young woman wearing a headscarf who will identify herself later as a member of the muslim students association, which is an arm of the muslim brotherhood, although that perception hasn't reached enough people, but it is an arm of the muslim brotherhood, and

it's the sponsor of jew eight events on college campus with the collusion of campus left and administration. and i asked her, i forget the exact question she asked but i asked her if she would condemn hamas as a terrorist organization. and she said do you want to crucify me? which took me back, yeah, been through these, this kind of encounter many times. and i said what do you mean by that? she said well, if i don't condemn hamas and be arrested by homeland security. so in other words, in her mind we live in a fascist it in people who support, supporters of hamas, instead of being invited to the white house as they often are, will be put in jail. so i said okay, i will put to this with. i said i met you, and the head of hezbollah has said that he

wants us all to gather in israel your so he doesn't have to hunt us down. shooting into the microphone and said for it. and i should be a revelation to people, although while i'm here in philadelphia i met with some jewish students that do not begin to understand this about the muslim students association, or about the threat that jews face. there is no more embattled group on college campuses than jewish students, or harassed, particularly if they happen, if they are israelis. there are organizations that stand with those that you can help put out a positive image of israel. i mean, israel is the only tolerant decent society in the middle east. there's no question about it. but, of course, you never get to

that question because they throw this huge lie in your face that israel stole the land from the arabs. anybody who doesn't know this, the land which israel was created belong to the turks 400 years before israel was created. and also 80% of the so-called palestine mandate, palestine would never attend to, a nationality. it was a geographical region. it's like new in the. that's what palestine means. it's a roman name the romans gave to this area. anyway, this is the lie that israel stole. there is no land that is your store. all, what i was going to say is the indians claim to america is stronger than the arabs of

palestinian claim to israel. so be mindful of that, americans, because the laughs never stops unless it runs into a stone wall. that's the reality of the left. but stand with us is such an organization. our center, freedom center, is carrying on an education campaign on college campuses to educate one, the fact in the middle east. we have a one party press in our universities. you cannot believe the censorship of editors on simple statements of fact. you cannot associate a negative fact with an arab or a palestinian, or at least i can't. and get, by as facing the paper. i succeeded in a six or seven papers, but the number of rejections that i get, you know,

they start out with reasons and then when i refute the reason, they just say well, we're not going to run that ad. anyway. and that's because of the left is very good. it has shut down discussion of communism by yelling mccarthyism all the time. it shuts down discussion of palestinian genocidal intentio intentions. you know, i pointed out, even israel is not responsible for the palestinian something. the palestinians are in the arabs are. well, the historical reality. [applause] but i said on college campuses, i've said, i said this at ucla, for example, i said forget who's responsible for a second, just hold off is responsible for the

suffering. people have suffered for thousands of years, but never in history of the world has a people who strap bombs onto its own children, told them to blow up other children. and if they're lucky enough, they will go to heaven and get 72 virgins. this is a sick, sick culture. for that i was called and islamaphobe. i didn't use the word islam. but not only called, i mean, there's an official resolution at usc -- ucla, sponsored, voted 10 to nothing, not a single vote in a position on the student council of an anti-islamophobia resolution, which says that david horowitz said that islam is a sick sick culture in his speech on this campus. i have published the video of the speech and the transcript of the speech. it's an absolute lie.

but this campaign is a global campaign that was started by them muslim brotherhood that is now sponsored by the center for american progress, which is the brain trust of the democratic party. this is how far this has gone. they put out a 130 page report on islamophobia. on and islamaphobe for that kind of statement. which issues a naked attempt to suppress free speech by declaring it, america is a wonderfully tolerant society. so you call somebody a racist, that puts, as they happen to be al sharpton, that puts the mouth of the respectable discussion. or if you call them and islamaphobe, that will do it. this is a movement. it's gone very far in the u.n. it's a movement in our country, has the support of the heart of

the liberal establishment to shut down the free speech of critics of islam. and i see islam because organized islam is, treats women as second class citizens. islamic doctrines sanctions the beating of women and wives in particular. days -- gays are unperson and islam. and terror is sanctioned in islam. hitler hated the final solution from the germans because he thought they were too civilized to accept his plan to eliminate the jews. ahmadinejad shouts it from the rooftops, we're going to wipe

out israel and the united states. name me one, one muslim leader, one muslim government that has condemned that speech. that's the problem we face. and most people are in denial because it's a horrible problem. >> david, what do you think it's going to take to defeat the problem? we are not confronting it right now. >> americans wake up slowly. i mean, one of the -- you know, there's always two-sided impacts of things, law of unintended consequences but also good things have sometimes negative consequences. america is probably the happiest country on the face of the earth. there's so much to do here.

there's so much freedom. there's so much opportunity. so, in 1941, just to give a whole graph of this picture of this problem, in 1941 hitler had overrun all of western europe, only the british were sort of holding out by a thread, the japanese had conquered all of southeast asia, the insurer, and gallup did a poll, april 1941, and the poll asked, should we get involved in this war? and, of course, hitler and japan, partly certain had declared america and in the insurance of probably a little milder than ahmadinejad. 80% of americans said no, we should not get involved. and then came pearl harbor. and everything changed.

and then i fear greatly, the reason i put so much effort into this campaign to warn people about the danger, we cannot even speak about the danger without being, those of us who have, without being stigmatized, and attempt made to isolate us and shut us down, deny us access through college papers or college campuses. i fear there'll be a great atrocity, and i just see it with the israelis just did invite terror. you trade one soldier for a thousand murderers, what a premium that puts on the next kidnapping. and if you go to the hamas website, hamas says the brigade liberad