The news is full of stories about the high casualty rate of U.S. forces in Iraq this month. The main stream media (read: Democrat media) is making sure everyone knows about it, that the wheels are coming off of the Iraq war, chaos reigns, and Bush's policy is obviously a big disaster.
That's what they want you to believe. That's also what the Muslim terrorist/insurgents want you to believe. Our enemy are barbarians but they're not stupid. They know the value of influencing U.S. public opinion and the heightened attacks this month are a transparent attempt to influence the November elections. The Dems are surely doing their part to make the terrorist agenda a reality.
The most disgusting aspect of the high casualties is that, without the Democrats, they probably wouldn't be happening. The terrorists know the Dems are pacifist-appeasers and anti-war. If the Dems were committed to victory there would be no point in upping the violence, but the Dems are the weak point in American resolve. No doubt the Muslim barbarians are well aware that the cut-and-run Dems sold out our South Vietnamese allies (with the result that 2.5 million Asian peasants were slaughtered by the Communists). The Dems make no secret of their desire to repeat this disaster.
No matter how you cut it, when you elect Democrats, people die. Well maybe I should say good people die; the bad guys hoist their flag over the capitol and do a victory dance on the dead bodies. The Democrats then congratulate themselves on "stopping war" and bringing "peace."
Disgusting.
Thursday, October 19, 2006
Wednesday, October 18, 2006
Wazzup With the Polls?
Powerline today says the polls are tightening and that Karl Rove and George Bush are upbeat and optimistic about Republican chances for holding onto control of both the House and Senate. Maybe they've just gone mad, but let's hope they know something we don't. I do hope they aren't going to take Osama out of his cell and and parade him before the cameras, we need to save that trick for 2008.
Polls, like news stories, can be skewed and biased. One of the reasons is oversampling of Democrats or Republicans. If your poll is composed of 65% Democrats in a district where Democrats are only 50% of the population, you have oversampling. That skews the poll results in favor of the Democrats. How you frame the questions can also skew the results. If you ask, "Are you more likely to vote for a Democrat or a sneaky, Snidely Whiplash, mortgage-foreclosing, widow-and-orphan evicting Republican?" then you may have some slight bias in favor of Democrats.
One more point in the GOP's favor: Republicans have more money to spend on advertising in the last three weeks of the campaign and spend it they will.
They say the only poll that counts is the one taken in the voting booth on election day. I agree with that, so get your butts to the polls and vote! I NEVER miss voting, even here in California where they will elect a salamander before they will elect a Republican. I will go to the polls, hold my nose and vote for Arnold Schwarzenkennedy. Then I'll go home and get drunk.
Polls, like news stories, can be skewed and biased. One of the reasons is oversampling of Democrats or Republicans. If your poll is composed of 65% Democrats in a district where Democrats are only 50% of the population, you have oversampling. That skews the poll results in favor of the Democrats. How you frame the questions can also skew the results. If you ask, "Are you more likely to vote for a Democrat or a sneaky, Snidely Whiplash, mortgage-foreclosing, widow-and-orphan evicting Republican?" then you may have some slight bias in favor of Democrats.
One more point in the GOP's favor: Republicans have more money to spend on advertising in the last three weeks of the campaign and spend it they will.
They say the only poll that counts is the one taken in the voting booth on election day. I agree with that, so get your butts to the polls and vote! I NEVER miss voting, even here in California where they will elect a salamander before they will elect a Republican. I will go to the polls, hold my nose and vote for Arnold Schwarzenkennedy. Then I'll go home and get drunk.
Saturday, October 14, 2006
Nuance My Ass
Powerline today says the polls are grim for Republicans. With Wishy-Washy George as our leader it is to be expected. Instead of leading the charge with speeches and strong arguments he is nowhere to be found. I'll be glad to get rid of him too, Dhimmicrats, but because he is not nearly rightwing enough.
Condi Rice, whom I once admired and respected, has morphed into a Dhimmi appeaser. She has recently given speeches likening the Palestinians to U.S. Colonialists and to the United States in their fight for independence. She has publicly cried crocodile tears over the "humiliation" of Palestinians under "occupation." Any day now she will probably start saying that Jews are the descendants of apes and pigs. In any case, she has lost all credibility with me.
A lot of the problem is that many Republicans, Bush and Rice included, think they can win elections by running as Democrats. Any Republican who isn't sold on Republican principles and sees elective office as merely a ticket to the hog trough isn't going to be there very long.
I am reminded of Clinton's election in 1992. I wrote down my thoughts as he was preparing to take office. They are below. If you're a Republican you may find them comforting.
Condi Rice, whom I once admired and respected, has morphed into a Dhimmi appeaser. She has recently given speeches likening the Palestinians to U.S. Colonialists and to the United States in their fight for independence. She has publicly cried crocodile tears over the "humiliation" of Palestinians under "occupation." Any day now she will probably start saying that Jews are the descendants of apes and pigs. In any case, she has lost all credibility with me.
A lot of the problem is that many Republicans, Bush and Rice included, think they can win elections by running as Democrats. Any Republican who isn't sold on Republican principles and sees elective office as merely a ticket to the hog trough isn't going to be there very long.
I am reminded of Clinton's election in 1992. I wrote down my thoughts as he was preparing to take office. They are below. If you're a Republican you may find them comforting.
My Journal Entry of Sunday, January 17, 1993:
The rain continues in California, and more storms are on the way.
Surely the drought is over. President Bush has resumed the bombing of
Iraq, using smart missiles instead of planes. Washington, D.C. is gearing
up for a big party for the newly elected President, Bill Clinton, someone who
seems the most insubstantial President since "Jimmy" Carter. The liberals,
Democrats and political airheads who think socialism is wonderful and who
quickly align themselves with every passing social fad are all aflutter with how
wonderful the world is now going to be as the Big Chill Democrat transforms
society into the gleaming City of Oz, wipes out poverty, sets aright every
social injustice, purifies the air and water, and assures another millennium or
two of the spotted owl. It's going to be a long four years.
But let's keep things in perspective. This too shall pass.
Saturday, October 07, 2006
The Fall Elections
Sorry for the dearth of postings lately. I have a good project in Silicon Valley that pays well and I have been spending a lot of time in the car commuting to and fro. When I get home at night I have been practicing my new string bass rather than blogging. These fingers need to pluck strings once in awhile rather than just pushing keys on a keyboard.
The November elections loom on the horizon and many folks say the Democrats will regain control of the House. For some reason I do not feel particularly chagrined or alarmed. I would vote for a one-eyed bow-legged toad frog before I'd vote for a Democrat, but somehow my gut doesn't tell me to be alarmed at November. Maybe it's because I find it hard to believe the American people are that foolish, especially in light of continuing Muslim attempted terrorism throughout the world, including the U.S. Do they really want to give control to a Party that hates the military, distrusts the intelligence agencies, and discloses covert operations against terrorism in the pages of the New York Times?
Yes, Bush is a disappointment in many ways. He simply does not care about our porous southern border and seems to agree with the leftists that we should be a nation without borders. He has done almost nothing to stem the tide of illegals, many of whom are criminals and some of whom may be terrorists. Bush is awful, but John Kerry or Al Gore would have been disasters. The Democrats are enthusiastic about illegal immigrants, whom they see as a new pro-Democrat voting constituency. There are no Tom Tancredos in the Democratic Party.
With Democrats in control, you can expect higher taxes (they want to roll back the tax cuts), less military spending (and less protection for you and your family), perhaps a national Kyoto style program against "greenhouse gases" with its dampening effect on the economy (just like the one recently passed by the bizarros who now rule California).
How will the elections affect energy independence? With the Democrats, the chances of ever opening ANWR (in Alaska) to oil drilling would be miniscule to none, not to mention off-shore drilling or the use of nuclear power to make us less dependent on OPEC for energy. You can count on higher gas prices far into the future, but with lots of idiotic speeches about "alternative energy," which is likely to be nothing more than Pie in the Sky for another century. The next time you need to fill up, shove a copy of an Al Gore speech into your gas tank instead.
Yes, picture a life under the Democrats. Taxed to death, terrorized by Muslim extremists, up to your neck in illegal immigrants with a heavily regulated economy that is rapidly going south so that snail darters can flourish. Oh yes, let's punish the Republicans by voting for these folks. And the next time you have a hangnail on your big toe, just get an ax and chop off your whole foot. That'll fix the problem. Ha, you sure showed that hangnail! Feel better?
What we need are more conservative Republicans and fewer Rinos (Republicans In Name Only) like that idiot Lincoln Chafee or that media whore John McCain. What we don't need are anti-American, big taxing Democrats who will gut the military and cede the war on terror to the Islamic enemy (but who will be tough as nails on "greenhouse gases").
But if the Democrat control comes, so be it. Politics are like the ebb and flow of the tides; sometimes you are in the ascendancy and some times you are in descent. It will be interesting to see how the Democrats protect us from terrorism or if new attacks are launched on the United States.
Whatever the outcome, you should vote. Sean Hannity said it best, that you should always vote for who you think will do the better job, and that you should never register a "protest" vote or throw your vote away by staying home on election day. Just picture all those white crosses in Arlington. Is that how you say thanks to the fallen many?
Vote, and vote Republican. They are far from perfect, but at least they aren't the paranoid, anti-American, Machiavellian Democrats. Don't whack off your foot to spite your toe.
The November elections loom on the horizon and many folks say the Democrats will regain control of the House. For some reason I do not feel particularly chagrined or alarmed. I would vote for a one-eyed bow-legged toad frog before I'd vote for a Democrat, but somehow my gut doesn't tell me to be alarmed at November. Maybe it's because I find it hard to believe the American people are that foolish, especially in light of continuing Muslim attempted terrorism throughout the world, including the U.S. Do they really want to give control to a Party that hates the military, distrusts the intelligence agencies, and discloses covert operations against terrorism in the pages of the New York Times?
Yes, Bush is a disappointment in many ways. He simply does not care about our porous southern border and seems to agree with the leftists that we should be a nation without borders. He has done almost nothing to stem the tide of illegals, many of whom are criminals and some of whom may be terrorists. Bush is awful, but John Kerry or Al Gore would have been disasters. The Democrats are enthusiastic about illegal immigrants, whom they see as a new pro-Democrat voting constituency. There are no Tom Tancredos in the Democratic Party.
With Democrats in control, you can expect higher taxes (they want to roll back the tax cuts), less military spending (and less protection for you and your family), perhaps a national Kyoto style program against "greenhouse gases" with its dampening effect on the economy (just like the one recently passed by the bizarros who now rule California).
How will the elections affect energy independence? With the Democrats, the chances of ever opening ANWR (in Alaska) to oil drilling would be miniscule to none, not to mention off-shore drilling or the use of nuclear power to make us less dependent on OPEC for energy. You can count on higher gas prices far into the future, but with lots of idiotic speeches about "alternative energy," which is likely to be nothing more than Pie in the Sky for another century. The next time you need to fill up, shove a copy of an Al Gore speech into your gas tank instead.
Yes, picture a life under the Democrats. Taxed to death, terrorized by Muslim extremists, up to your neck in illegal immigrants with a heavily regulated economy that is rapidly going south so that snail darters can flourish. Oh yes, let's punish the Republicans by voting for these folks. And the next time you have a hangnail on your big toe, just get an ax and chop off your whole foot. That'll fix the problem. Ha, you sure showed that hangnail! Feel better?
What we need are more conservative Republicans and fewer Rinos (Republicans In Name Only) like that idiot Lincoln Chafee or that media whore John McCain. What we don't need are anti-American, big taxing Democrats who will gut the military and cede the war on terror to the Islamic enemy (but who will be tough as nails on "greenhouse gases").
But if the Democrat control comes, so be it. Politics are like the ebb and flow of the tides; sometimes you are in the ascendancy and some times you are in descent. It will be interesting to see how the Democrats protect us from terrorism or if new attacks are launched on the United States.
Whatever the outcome, you should vote. Sean Hannity said it best, that you should always vote for who you think will do the better job, and that you should never register a "protest" vote or throw your vote away by staying home on election day. Just picture all those white crosses in Arlington. Is that how you say thanks to the fallen many?
Vote, and vote Republican. They are far from perfect, but at least they aren't the paranoid, anti-American, Machiavellian Democrats. Don't whack off your foot to spite your toe.
Tuesday, October 03, 2006
Osama Bin Laden Claims Alcoholism, Checks Into Rehab
Former Congressman Mark Foley has checked into an Alcohol Rehab Center as an excuse for being a pedophile pervert. Well that explains his behavior, let's all forgive him. He was, after all, "abused as a child." When they catch Osama Bin Laden, no doubt he will claim he "was attacked by commercial jet liners as a child." He will then become Foley's room mate at the Ima Drunk Rehab Center. Foley will ask Osama if he wants "head" and Osama will say "Okay, sure" and yank out his scimitar. If Foley survives the experience he will graduate from rehab claiming he is going to "turn over a new page." Only this time he won't use instant messaging to make the date.
Of course, there is an important election in five weeks so it's important to note that Foley is a Republican. No doubt Karl Rove and Don Rumsfeld were furnishing Foley with phone numbers of boy pages and trying to hush it up. It must be Republicanism that drives men to become alcoholic perverts. We can solve the problem by all voting for Democrats. Barney Frank (his last name connotes his favorite food and body part) would agree. At least Barney's male prostitute roommate was of legal age. No wonder they named a purple dinosaur after Barney. It's all starting to make sense, especially the dinosaur's color. Finally, a conspiracy theory I can believe in!
I saw a picture of House Speaker Dennis Hastert on MSN.Com today (no media bias there) looking like he was suffering from extreme constipation. The picture was right in the middle of an article calling for Don Rumsfeld's resignation, below an ad for that new book by Bob Woodward, "State of Denial" (which explains why Islamic terrorists are a figment of Bush's imagination) and another article below it saying the Republican surge in the polls is starting to stall. The title of the story about the Republican Speaker was "Hastert Denies Complicity in Pedophile Perversion Romp and Refuses to Say Whether or Not He Has Stopped Beating His Wife." Well I'm repeating this from memory, but it was something real objective like that.
Yes, it's another fun day in the Beltway. I need a drink. But not too strong mind you, I don't want to be checked into rehab. Never know who you will get as a room mate.
Of course, there is an important election in five weeks so it's important to note that Foley is a Republican. No doubt Karl Rove and Don Rumsfeld were furnishing Foley with phone numbers of boy pages and trying to hush it up. It must be Republicanism that drives men to become alcoholic perverts. We can solve the problem by all voting for Democrats. Barney Frank (his last name connotes his favorite food and body part) would agree. At least Barney's male prostitute roommate was of legal age. No wonder they named a purple dinosaur after Barney. It's all starting to make sense, especially the dinosaur's color. Finally, a conspiracy theory I can believe in!
I saw a picture of House Speaker Dennis Hastert on MSN.Com today (no media bias there) looking like he was suffering from extreme constipation. The picture was right in the middle of an article calling for Don Rumsfeld's resignation, below an ad for that new book by Bob Woodward, "State of Denial" (which explains why Islamic terrorists are a figment of Bush's imagination) and another article below it saying the Republican surge in the polls is starting to stall. The title of the story about the Republican Speaker was "Hastert Denies Complicity in Pedophile Perversion Romp and Refuses to Say Whether or Not He Has Stopped Beating His Wife." Well I'm repeating this from memory, but it was something real objective like that.
Yes, it's another fun day in the Beltway. I need a drink. But not too strong mind you, I don't want to be checked into rehab. Never know who you will get as a room mate.
Monday, October 02, 2006
My Snooty New String Bass
Last week I bought a new upright bass. My first one, bought off of eBay, was just too cheap and poorly made. I wanted a “serious” bass; one that I could feel confident was good enough for playing in public. I wanted one that had been properly set up by a craftsman known as a luthier, so that I could press the strings down without screaming in pain.Well I got one. I bought it from a classical bassist who plays with the Peninsula Symphony Orchestra and knows all about the string bass. He works with a luthier to set up wood instruments so that their playability and tone are optimized. When I picked up my new bass I was amazed at the rich tone and the easy string action. I was also awed by its appearance. It looked as high-brow and as snooty as the Maitre D at the Waldorf. Omigod, are my nails clean? Are my pants pressed? Should I be wearing a suit?
I took my bass home and set it up on a bass stand, so it’s always standing up in my upstairs office, ready to be picked up and plucked at a moment’s notice.
The bass is one sober-looking instrument. It’s the traditional matte brown and looks so serious sitting there in my room. I almost feel like I should be wearing a tux just to play it. It seems to look at me and say, "I expect Beethoven and Mozart so don't you even THINK about boogie-woogie." Yes, this is one serious bass! I played it yesterday until I got a blister on my index finger. I ordered some DVD's on string bass playing so I can be informed on tips and techniques.
Don’t tell my bass, but one of those DVD’s is by a guy named Lee Rocker. Ever heard of “The Stray Cats”?
UPDATE: I complained about my bass's snooty attitude to the guy who sold it to me. He said, "when your bass gives you any sass, grab it by the neck and slap it a few times."
If you're not a musician, you probably won't get that joke......
Sunday, October 01, 2006
The Awakening Continues: Muslims Want to Destroy America and the West
The Western world continues to awaken from its self-induced delirium regarding the nature of Islam and the threat we face. Jonathan Last, writing in the Philidelphia Inquirer today, is another liberal who has embraced an unpleasant reality: the Muslim world intends to conquer us and impose Islamic religious law over all the world. This has been their goal for 1300 years and there is plenty of history to support it.
There are still many who seek refuge in self-deception and denial. There are those who think that Islam is a "great religion" that has been hijacked by an extremist minority. Sorry, but that's just not true. There are still others who believe that the Muslim world's violence towards the West is the result of legitimate grievances. That's not true either.
What is true is that Islam is a totalitarian, expansionist ideology that seeks our deaths or our submission.
Read Jonathan Last's article if you read nothing else today.
-----------
Soon after 9/11, the Bush administration labeled the conflict into which it plunged this country the "war on terror." But this is no more descriptive than calling the fight in Iraq a "war on IEDs." The more pressing question is: Are we, or are we not,
engaged in a larger clash of civilizations?
If the answer is "We are," the clash long predates 9/11, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and George W. Bush. It predates America itself. It is a clash between Western civilization and the Islamic world.
If we accept that this is a clash between civilizations, two questions face us: How does this change our thinking? And the painful one: What do we do about it?
There are still many who seek refuge in self-deception and denial. There are those who think that Islam is a "great religion" that has been hijacked by an extremist minority. Sorry, but that's just not true. There are still others who believe that the Muslim world's violence towards the West is the result of legitimate grievances. That's not true either.
What is true is that Islam is a totalitarian, expansionist ideology that seeks our deaths or our submission.
Read Jonathan Last's article if you read nothing else today.
-----------
One Last Thing: Post-9/11 conflicts rooted in history
By Jonathan LastIt's not just Afghanistan, Iraq and a "war on terror." It's
the West vs. the Islamic world, a clash that has never abated.
Soon after 9/11, the Bush administration labeled the conflict into which it plunged this country the "war on terror." But this is no more descriptive than calling the fight in Iraq a "war on IEDs." The more pressing question is: Are we, or are we not,
engaged in a larger clash of civilizations?
If the answer is "We are," the clash long predates 9/11, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and George W. Bush. It predates America itself. It is a clash between Western civilization and the Islamic world.
If we accept that this is a clash between civilizations, two questions face us: How does this change our thinking? And the painful one: What do we do about it?
Read the whole article here.
Dhimmicrats For Terrorists
.jpg)
I don't usually like to be a "me-too" blogger, but Atlas Shrugs ran a great article yesterday called. "Dhimmicrats in Denial." Do read it.
-------------
Dhimmicrats in Denial
Pam writes: Kristol hits the proverbial nail on the head. The Democrats have put party before country. I suspect the the November elections will be another oft ignored reality check for the party of obstruction and opposition. Terrorist rights is not what America is concerned with.........this ain't Europe. It's no wonder the Democrats are against voter registration cards and electronic voting machines (the more difficult to massage the numbers with, my dear.)
Who's Really in Denial? William Kristol, Weekly Standard 10/09/06
"Americans face the choice between two parties with two different attitudes on this war on terror." --George W. Bush, September 28, 2006
I like this quote:
But it remains the case that a vote for Democrats is a vote for
congressional leaders committed to kinder and gentler treatment of
terrorists.
--------
Like the bobble-head Muhammad? You can order one as a Christmas gift for your favorite Muslim. It will look great in the back window of his Chevy with the bomb-head bobbing up and down as he drives to Mosque for prayers. See this link for details.
Saturday, September 30, 2006
Islam: Telling It Like It Is
Robert Redeker is a high school philosophy teacher in France. Recently he wrote an article for Le Figaro criticizing Islam and Muhammad. His article, below, basically states that Islam is intolerant and violent. Today Redeker and his family are in hiding in France to avoid being murdered by Muslims, thereby proving the truth of his article. Islam is violent, intolerant and seditious. The question that should be in the minds of all Westerners is this: How do we get rid of Islam? How do we extricate it from our midst before it seriously undermines our safety and our freedoms?
--------
By Robert Redeker
What should the free world do while facing Islamist intimidation? The reactions caused by Benedict XVI’s analysis of Islam and violence highlight the underhanded maneuver carried out by Islam to stifle what the West values more than anything, and which does not exist in any Muslim country: freedom of thought and expression.
Islam tries to impose its rules on Europe: the opening of public swimming pools at certain hours reserved exclusively for women, a ban on caricaturing this religion, demands for special diets for Muslim children in school cafeterias, the struggle to impose the veil at school, accusations of Islamophobia against free spirits.
How can one explain the ban on wearing thongs on Paris-Beaches this summer? The reasoning put forth was bizarre: women wearing thong-bikinis would risk “disturbing the peace.” Did this mean that bands of frustrated youths would become violent while being offended by displays of beauty? Or were the authorities scared of Islamist demonstrations by virtue squads near Paris-Beaches? [Paris-Beaches refers to the use of the banks of the Seine as swimming beaches during the summer months.]
However, the authorization of the veil on the street is more disturbing to public peace than wearing a thong-bikini, because it invites complaints against upholding the oppression of women. This ban represents an Islamization of sensibilities in France, a more or less conscious submission to the dictates of Islam. At the very least it is the result of the insidious Muslim oppression of the spirit: even those who protested the introduction of a “Jean Paul II Square” in Paris would not be opposed to the construction of mosques. Islam is trying to force Europe to yield to its vision of humanity.
As in the past with Communism, the West finds itself under ideological watch. Islam presents itself, like defunct Communism, as an alternative to the Western world. In the way of Communism before it, Islam, to conquer the spirit, plays on a sensitive string. It prides itself on a legitimacy which troubles Western consciences, which is attentive to others: it claims to be the voice of the oppressed of the planet. Yesterday, the voice of the poor supposedly came from Moscow, today it originates in Mecca! Again, today, western intellectuals have become the eye of the Koran, as they were once the eye of Moscow. They now excommunicate people because of Islamophobia, as they did before because of anti-communism.
This opening to others, specific to the West, is a secularization of Christianity that can be summarized thus: the other person must come before myself. The Westerner, heir to Christianity, has his soul exposed bare. He runs the risk of being seen as weak. With the same ardor as Communism, Islam treats generosity, broadmindedness, tolerance, gentleness, freedom of women and of manners, democratic values, as marks of decadence. They are weaknesses that it seeks to exploit, by means of useful idiots, self-righteous consciences drowning in nice feelings, in order to impose the Koranic order on the Western world itself.
The Koran is a book of unparalleled violence. Maxime Rodinson states, in Encyclopedia Universalis, some truths in France are as significant as they are taboo. On one hand: “Mohammed revealed in Medina unsuspected qualities as political leader and military chief (…) He resorted to private war, by then a prevalent custom in Arabia (….) Mohammed soon sent small groups of partisans to attack the Meccan caravans, thus punishing his unbelieving compatriots and simultaneously acquiring the booty of a wealthy man.”
There is more: “Mohammed profited from this success by eradicating the Jewish tribe which resided in Medina, the Quarayza, whom he accused of suspect behaviour.” And: “After the death of Khadija, he married a widow, a good housewife, called Sawda, and in addition to the little Aisha, barely ten years old. His erotic predilections, held in check for a long time, led him to ten simultaneous marriages.”
A merciless war chief, plunderer, slaughterer of Jews and a polygamist, such is the man revealed through the Koran.
The Catholic church is not above reproach. Its history is strewn with dark pages, for which it has officially repented. The Inquisition, the hounding of witches, the execution of the philosophers Giordano Bruno and Vanini, those wrong-thinking Epicureans, in the 18th century the execution of the knight of La Barre for impiety, do not plead in the church’s favor. But what differentiates Christianity from Islam is obvious: it is always possible to go back to true evangelical values, the peaceful character of Jesus as opposed to the deviations of the Church.
None of the faults of the Church have their roots in the Gospel. Jesus is non-violent. Going back to Jesus is akin to forswearing the excesses of the Church. Going back to Muhammad, to the contrary, reinforces hate and violence. Jesus is a master of love, Muhammad is a master of hatred.
The stoning of Satan, each year in Mecca, is not only an obsolete superstition but one that sets the stage for a hysterical crowd flirting with barbarity. Its import is anthropological. Here is a rite, which each Muslim is invited to submit to, that emphasizes violence as a sacred duty in the very heart of the believer.
This stoning, accompanied each year by the accidental trampling to death of some of the believers, sometimes up to several hundred, is a rite that feeds archaic violence.
Instead of getting rid of this archaic violence, and thus imitating Judaism and Christianity (Judaism starts when it abandons human sacrifice, and enters civilization; Christianity transforms sacrifice through the Eucharist), Islam builds a nest for this violence, where it will incubate. Whereas Judaism and Christianity are religions whose rites spurn violence by delegitimizing it, Islam is a religion that exalts violence and hatred in its everyday rites and sacred book.
Hatred and violence dwell in the book with which every Muslim is brought up, the Koran. As in the Cold War, where violence and intimidation were the methods used by an ideology hell bent on hegemony, so today Islam tries to put its leaden mantel over all the world. Benedict XVI’s cruel experience is testimony to this. Nowadays, the West has to be called the “free world” in comparison to the Muslim world; likewise, the enemies of the “free world,” the zealous bureaucrats of the Koran’s vision, swarm in the very center of the free world.
Postscript: Asked to describe the sort of threats he had received, Mr. Redeker replied, “You will never feel secure on this earth. One billion, three hundred thousand Muslims are ready to kill you.”
Ain't it the truth baby.
---------------
Hat tip Michelle Malkin and Little Green Footballs. See Fausta's Blog for more information.
--------
By Robert Redeker
What should the free world do while facing Islamist intimidation? The reactions caused by Benedict XVI’s analysis of Islam and violence highlight the underhanded maneuver carried out by Islam to stifle what the West values more than anything, and which does not exist in any Muslim country: freedom of thought and expression.
Islam tries to impose its rules on Europe: the opening of public swimming pools at certain hours reserved exclusively for women, a ban on caricaturing this religion, demands for special diets for Muslim children in school cafeterias, the struggle to impose the veil at school, accusations of Islamophobia against free spirits.
How can one explain the ban on wearing thongs on Paris-Beaches this summer? The reasoning put forth was bizarre: women wearing thong-bikinis would risk “disturbing the peace.” Did this mean that bands of frustrated youths would become violent while being offended by displays of beauty? Or were the authorities scared of Islamist demonstrations by virtue squads near Paris-Beaches? [Paris-Beaches refers to the use of the banks of the Seine as swimming beaches during the summer months.]
However, the authorization of the veil on the street is more disturbing to public peace than wearing a thong-bikini, because it invites complaints against upholding the oppression of women. This ban represents an Islamization of sensibilities in France, a more or less conscious submission to the dictates of Islam. At the very least it is the result of the insidious Muslim oppression of the spirit: even those who protested the introduction of a “Jean Paul II Square” in Paris would not be opposed to the construction of mosques. Islam is trying to force Europe to yield to its vision of humanity.
As in the past with Communism, the West finds itself under ideological watch. Islam presents itself, like defunct Communism, as an alternative to the Western world. In the way of Communism before it, Islam, to conquer the spirit, plays on a sensitive string. It prides itself on a legitimacy which troubles Western consciences, which is attentive to others: it claims to be the voice of the oppressed of the planet. Yesterday, the voice of the poor supposedly came from Moscow, today it originates in Mecca! Again, today, western intellectuals have become the eye of the Koran, as they were once the eye of Moscow. They now excommunicate people because of Islamophobia, as they did before because of anti-communism.
This opening to others, specific to the West, is a secularization of Christianity that can be summarized thus: the other person must come before myself. The Westerner, heir to Christianity, has his soul exposed bare. He runs the risk of being seen as weak. With the same ardor as Communism, Islam treats generosity, broadmindedness, tolerance, gentleness, freedom of women and of manners, democratic values, as marks of decadence. They are weaknesses that it seeks to exploit, by means of useful idiots, self-righteous consciences drowning in nice feelings, in order to impose the Koranic order on the Western world itself.
The Koran is a book of unparalleled violence. Maxime Rodinson states, in Encyclopedia Universalis, some truths in France are as significant as they are taboo. On one hand: “Mohammed revealed in Medina unsuspected qualities as political leader and military chief (…) He resorted to private war, by then a prevalent custom in Arabia (….) Mohammed soon sent small groups of partisans to attack the Meccan caravans, thus punishing his unbelieving compatriots and simultaneously acquiring the booty of a wealthy man.”
There is more: “Mohammed profited from this success by eradicating the Jewish tribe which resided in Medina, the Quarayza, whom he accused of suspect behaviour.” And: “After the death of Khadija, he married a widow, a good housewife, called Sawda, and in addition to the little Aisha, barely ten years old. His erotic predilections, held in check for a long time, led him to ten simultaneous marriages.”
A merciless war chief, plunderer, slaughterer of Jews and a polygamist, such is the man revealed through the Koran.
The Catholic church is not above reproach. Its history is strewn with dark pages, for which it has officially repented. The Inquisition, the hounding of witches, the execution of the philosophers Giordano Bruno and Vanini, those wrong-thinking Epicureans, in the 18th century the execution of the knight of La Barre for impiety, do not plead in the church’s favor. But what differentiates Christianity from Islam is obvious: it is always possible to go back to true evangelical values, the peaceful character of Jesus as opposed to the deviations of the Church.
None of the faults of the Church have their roots in the Gospel. Jesus is non-violent. Going back to Jesus is akin to forswearing the excesses of the Church. Going back to Muhammad, to the contrary, reinforces hate and violence. Jesus is a master of love, Muhammad is a master of hatred.
The stoning of Satan, each year in Mecca, is not only an obsolete superstition but one that sets the stage for a hysterical crowd flirting with barbarity. Its import is anthropological. Here is a rite, which each Muslim is invited to submit to, that emphasizes violence as a sacred duty in the very heart of the believer.
This stoning, accompanied each year by the accidental trampling to death of some of the believers, sometimes up to several hundred, is a rite that feeds archaic violence.
Instead of getting rid of this archaic violence, and thus imitating Judaism and Christianity (Judaism starts when it abandons human sacrifice, and enters civilization; Christianity transforms sacrifice through the Eucharist), Islam builds a nest for this violence, where it will incubate. Whereas Judaism and Christianity are religions whose rites spurn violence by delegitimizing it, Islam is a religion that exalts violence and hatred in its everyday rites and sacred book.
Hatred and violence dwell in the book with which every Muslim is brought up, the Koran. As in the Cold War, where violence and intimidation were the methods used by an ideology hell bent on hegemony, so today Islam tries to put its leaden mantel over all the world. Benedict XVI’s cruel experience is testimony to this. Nowadays, the West has to be called the “free world” in comparison to the Muslim world; likewise, the enemies of the “free world,” the zealous bureaucrats of the Koran’s vision, swarm in the very center of the free world.
Postscript: Asked to describe the sort of threats he had received, Mr. Redeker replied, “You will never feel secure on this earth. One billion, three hundred thousand Muslims are ready to kill you.”
Ain't it the truth baby.
---------------
Hat tip Michelle Malkin and Little Green Footballs. See Fausta's Blog for more information.
Tuesday, September 26, 2006
Dem's Dirty Politics Heating Up: Ready for the Election
The Democrats have a cadre of agents who carry their water, not the least of which is the mainstream media. The New York Times, Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times are a trifecta for the Democrats, nothing more than house organs for the Democratic Party. Other pro-Democrat organizations like CBS, ABC, NBC and MSN.com can also be expected to parrot the party line.You can easily tell what the Democrat theme will be for the November elections, you can already see the signs in the above Donkey agents. Bush's war on terror only creates more terrorists; Afghanistan is seeing the revitalization of the Taliban; Iraq is a Jihadist magnet, blah, blah, blah.
One of the most crass attempts of the above propaganda outlets was to cherry pick the NIE report on terrorism and to conclude that fighting the terrorists only creates more terrorists, so the war is counter productive and doomed to fail. Selected quotes from the NIE report seem to support this conclusion. But if you read the whole thing, the report reaches the opposite conclusion, that the war in Iraq could result in the defeat of the terrorists as more of them are killed and more and more Iraqis make use of the democratic process to achieve their goals.
In order to counter the leaked NIE information, Bush declassified the report so the public could read the whole thing and learn, once again, that the Democrat House Organs have deliberately lied for political gain, while giving comfort and propaganda to our terrorist enemies in the process. This was all made possible by Democrat partisans in the Intelligence Community who put their Party before their country by leaking those parts of the report.
All this followed Bill Clinton's laughable harangue at Chris Wallace on Fox News, after Wallace asked him why he didn't do more to stop Bin Laden while he was in office. Clinton was petty, insulting and accusatory to Wallace and made himself look like a prize jackass in the process. Egad, don't you just love the Dimocrats? Wouldn't you just love to have them protecting you from the terrorists instead of hawkish Republicans? Of course you would.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
