The responses indicate a truth that the Left so often rejects: that Muslims hate Jews for religious reasons, and not because of the existence of Israel or because they want their own homeland or because of any other reason. Islam is the reason Muslims hate Jews. The Qur'an is filled with hatred of Jews, including a description of their ultimate, future mass murder by Muslims, when trees and rocks will cry out for Muslims to kill the Jews hiding behind them. Muhammad hated Jews because they laughed at his claim to be a prophet, and he passed his hatred on to the billions of darkened souls who have followed him in his false religion.Interviewer: Would you, as a human being, be willing to shake hands with a Jew?
Interviewee 1: Of course I wouldn’t be willing to shake hands with a Jew, for religious reasons...
Interviewee 2: No. Because the Jews are eternal enemies.
Interviewee 3: No, the Jew is an enemy. How can I shake my enemy’s hand?
Interviewer: If a child asks you who “who are the Jews,” what would you answer?Interviewee 5: The enemies of Allah and His Prophet.
Saturday, June 30, 2007
Would You Shake Hands With a Jew?
Little Green Footballs yesterday ran an article about a Saudi television program. The program interviewed Saudis on the street and asked them if they would ever "shake the hand of a Jew." The results were telling. All of the interviewed Saudis said they would not shake the hand of a Jew, but the responses that rang my bell were these:
When Muslims Attack
There is news all over the net today about how a couple of cars were found in England full of explosives, and it appears likely that a Muslim infidel-bombing plot was afoot. There was also a burning car that was driven into a building at the Glasgow, Scotland airport. My, that seems rather unfriendly, but who are we to judge? Perhaps the car was set afire by global warming and the driver merely confused about the confines of the airport parking lot.
Of course, there is no evidence that these incidents were related to terrorism, as some news reporters are saying. Of course not.
Some day we will hear a newscaster report the daily news this way:
Of course, there is no evidence that these incidents were related to terrorism, as some news reporters are saying. Of course not.
Some day we will hear a newscaster report the daily news this way:
Today 46 people were beheaded in downtown London by hooded individuals shouting "Allah Akbar!" while waving green flags with a red crescent and star. Following the beheadings, 14 skyscrapers were detonated by car bombs. A note was found in the cars that read "Allah Akbar!" Police officials are still trying to decipher these cryptic messages.
The Mayor of London stated that he wished to emphasize, quite emphatically, that there is no evidence that these incidents had ties to international terrorism."
Saturday, June 23, 2007
Friday, June 22, 2007
Sir Salman Rushdie
Congratulations to Sir Salman Rushdie for his recent knighthood by the Queen of England. The Muslim fanatics are all atwitter with their usual vile bile, this time directed at the Queen. They hate Rushdie because he wrote a book about the "Satanic Verses" in the Qur'an.
If I remember correctly, the "Satanic Verses" are the part that tell of Muhammad's big faux pas before his return to Mecca. He wanted to make peace with the Meccans, so gave his blessing to two of their female gods in the Kaaba. Since both of these gods were rocks, Muhammad went against his main ideology of opposing idolatry and polytheism. He even said that people could pray to these two rocks. Later, he backtracked and recanted these concessions, claiming that he was momentarily misled by Satan. It was a very embarrassing mistake for the "prophet," and is an embarrassment to Muslims today.
Anyway, since Salman Rushdie wrote a book about these verses, Muslim leaders were chagrined and do what they usually do in such circumstances: they ordered Rushdie's death.
The fact that Rushdie was knighted this week really galls them. Political correctness dictates that the queen behead Rushdie, not honor him. Guess the Queen didn't get the memo.
If you're interested in which of the Qur'an's verses are Satanic, here's an explanation. There are 114 chapters, and 6,226 verses in the Qur'an. The Satanic ones start at verse 1 and end at verse 6,226. You can't miss 'em.
If I remember correctly, the "Satanic Verses" are the part that tell of Muhammad's big faux pas before his return to Mecca. He wanted to make peace with the Meccans, so gave his blessing to two of their female gods in the Kaaba. Since both of these gods were rocks, Muhammad went against his main ideology of opposing idolatry and polytheism. He even said that people could pray to these two rocks. Later, he backtracked and recanted these concessions, claiming that he was momentarily misled by Satan. It was a very embarrassing mistake for the "prophet," and is an embarrassment to Muslims today.
Anyway, since Salman Rushdie wrote a book about these verses, Muslim leaders were chagrined and do what they usually do in such circumstances: they ordered Rushdie's death.
The fact that Rushdie was knighted this week really galls them. Political correctness dictates that the queen behead Rushdie, not honor him. Guess the Queen didn't get the memo.
If you're interested in which of the Qur'an's verses are Satanic, here's an explanation. There are 114 chapters, and 6,226 verses in the Qur'an. The Satanic ones start at verse 1 and end at verse 6,226. You can't miss 'em.
Monday, June 18, 2007
Liberal Spin on Congress's Low Approval Rating
Today on MSN.com there was an article about the Democrat Congress's plunging approval rating. According to the article, the reason for the decline is that the Democrats promised to "change course" (i.e. to cut and run) in Iraq and they have failed to do so. So the American people, who (by implication) are overwhelmingly and strongly against the war in Iraq, are giving the Democrats low approval ratings.
Nice spin. The Democrats are getting low approval ratings for not being Democratic enough. There are alternative explanations with better credibility. One is that they are pork worshipping, anti-American socialists who are squishy soft on terrorism and who want open borders and amnesty for millions of illegal aliens (who will be future Democrat voters).
Oh how naive can I get?
Of course, the American public is fed up with the Dems for not cutting and running in Iraq, for being too strong on defense, for being too capitalistic, too strict constructionist, too fair and just on political issues, too much in favor of tax cuts, and for being too adamant about secure borders. Oh yes, and for being too hard on Islamic terrorists.
Did I forget anything?
Nice spin. The Democrats are getting low approval ratings for not being Democratic enough. There are alternative explanations with better credibility. One is that they are pork worshipping, anti-American socialists who are squishy soft on terrorism and who want open borders and amnesty for millions of illegal aliens (who will be future Democrat voters).
Oh how naive can I get?
Of course, the American public is fed up with the Dems for not cutting and running in Iraq, for being too strong on defense, for being too capitalistic, too strict constructionist, too fair and just on political issues, too much in favor of tax cuts, and for being too adamant about secure borders. Oh yes, and for being too hard on Islamic terrorists.
Did I forget anything?
Sunday, June 17, 2007
Friday, June 15, 2007
I'm a BAA-AAD Boy
Egads, I haven't posted in a week. I have another blog and I was working on that one. Also, I was reading Ayn Rand's book, "We The Living." It is a fictional tale of a Russian family living through the early years of the Communist revolution, but is based on Ayn Rand's actual experiences, since she lived them. Rand really writes well. Her fiction is excellent - the plot and the characters keep you interested and involved.
My friend, Professor Donald Douglas tells me he has been harrassed lately by Mike Tuggle, who insists on posting rants to his blog. Give it up Tuggle. You arguing with the professor is like a kid playing sandlot ball trying to compete in the major leagues.
My friend, Professor Donald Douglas tells me he has been harrassed lately by Mike Tuggle, who insists on posting rants to his blog. Give it up Tuggle. You arguing with the professor is like a kid playing sandlot ball trying to compete in the major leagues.
Friday, June 08, 2007
Getting the Cold War Back Again
Sometimes I don't know what to think of Canadians. First, I heard they were cold snobs who don't like Americans. Then I went to Vancouver, B.C. a few times and found it wasn't all that true. In fact, I was surprised at the hospitality of the Canadians.
Then I heard that Canada is a haven for all kinds of Islamic terrorists. That may be true but I don't know it from any personal knowledge. For years Canada was liberal to an extreme, even socialist, and socialism is incompatible with freedom. Politically, Canadians were all pretty leftwing and moonbattish, I thought. Then I discovered David Warren, a Canadian columnist who seems to think much like I do. In fact, Mr. Warren's expositions of current events seem downright reasonable, factual and logical. Of course, there is an alternative explanation, i.e., that he is as crazy as I am. However, I feel confident that this isn't the case. Warren is as sharp as a Marine's bayonet.
If you want to see what I mean, read his article today at Realclearpolitics.com, "Getting the Cold War Back Again." If you wondered why Vladimir Putin is such a Putz, Warren explains it. He also points out the obvious: a missile defense shield is defensive; missiles pointed at Europe and the United States are offensive; the two are not equivalent.
Warren's right: Putin has no reasonable complaint about our planned missile shield. If he's jealous, he can build his own defensive missile shield against US missiles which are not even pointed at Russia to begin with. What for? We aren't interested in cornering the market on cabbages, borsch or vodka. Russia has nothing that we want, except maybe oil.
OH THAT'S IT! No wonder we have erected a missile shield. It's obvious that a missile shield is essential to stealing Russia's oil. Though the mechanics of this aren't entirely clear to me, you just can't put anything past BuschCoMcHalliburton.
In any case, thank you Dave Warren for being there. You are living proof that there are functioning brains north of the border. You darn Canadians just keep busting all the stereotypes. It's confusing. Stop it already.
Then I heard that Canada is a haven for all kinds of Islamic terrorists. That may be true but I don't know it from any personal knowledge. For years Canada was liberal to an extreme, even socialist, and socialism is incompatible with freedom. Politically, Canadians were all pretty leftwing and moonbattish, I thought. Then I discovered David Warren, a Canadian columnist who seems to think much like I do. In fact, Mr. Warren's expositions of current events seem downright reasonable, factual and logical. Of course, there is an alternative explanation, i.e., that he is as crazy as I am. However, I feel confident that this isn't the case. Warren is as sharp as a Marine's bayonet.
If you want to see what I mean, read his article today at Realclearpolitics.com, "Getting the Cold War Back Again." If you wondered why Vladimir Putin is such a Putz, Warren explains it. He also points out the obvious: a missile defense shield is defensive; missiles pointed at Europe and the United States are offensive; the two are not equivalent.
Warren's right: Putin has no reasonable complaint about our planned missile shield. If he's jealous, he can build his own defensive missile shield against US missiles which are not even pointed at Russia to begin with. What for? We aren't interested in cornering the market on cabbages, borsch or vodka. Russia has nothing that we want, except maybe oil.
OH THAT'S IT! No wonder we have erected a missile shield. It's obvious that a missile shield is essential to stealing Russia's oil. Though the mechanics of this aren't entirely clear to me, you just can't put anything past BuschCoMcHalliburton.
In any case, thank you Dave Warren for being there. You are living proof that there are functioning brains north of the border. You darn Canadians just keep busting all the stereotypes. It's confusing. Stop it already.
Thursday, June 07, 2007
Interviewing for Jobs
Sorry for the lack of postings this week. I have been interviewing for projects and/or full time positions.
I finished reading "Atlas Shrugged" this evening. What a powerful book.
I also received my order from Amazon of three more of Ayn Rand's books: Capitalism, the Unknown Ideal; We the Living; and The Art of Selfishness. I have enough reading material to keep me busy for a couple of weeks.
I finished reading "Atlas Shrugged" this evening. What a powerful book.
I also received my order from Amazon of three more of Ayn Rand's books: Capitalism, the Unknown Ideal; We the Living; and The Art of Selfishness. I have enough reading material to keep me busy for a couple of weeks.
Monday, June 04, 2007
Ayn Rand and "Atlas Shrugged"
Sorry for the dearth of postings over the weekend. I didn't turn my computer on at all - I just read "Atlas Shrugged" by Ayn Rand. I am 3/4 of the way through the book and should finish it this week. The book grabbed me and I couldn't put it down.
Funny how liberals hate this book. I remember that film "Dirty Dancing" where a waiter in the vacation clubhouse is mean and nasty. When confronted over his nastiness, he pulls a paperback copy of "Atlas Shrugged" out of his back pocket and essentially says "because of this book!" It was a transparently asinine liberal movie-making trick - sully the quality of the book because the leftwing movie director didn't agree with its content. It's a book that only makes people into mean ol' nasties.
"Atlas Shrugged" is a very liberating book in many ways. It relieves us of guilt for wanting to make money and be successful; it relieves us of the old-fashioned, destructive notion that "money is the root of all evil." After reading the first 800 pages, I feel good, freer somehow.
Funny how liberals hate this book. I remember that film "Dirty Dancing" where a waiter in the vacation clubhouse is mean and nasty. When confronted over his nastiness, he pulls a paperback copy of "Atlas Shrugged" out of his back pocket and essentially says "because of this book!" It was a transparently asinine liberal movie-making trick - sully the quality of the book because the leftwing movie director didn't agree with its content. It's a book that only makes people into mean ol' nasties.
"Atlas Shrugged" is a very liberating book in many ways. It relieves us of guilt for wanting to make money and be successful; it relieves us of the old-fashioned, destructive notion that "money is the root of all evil." After reading the first 800 pages, I feel good, freer somehow.