Blips on the Screen: 14 Mar 08

Obama’s Dilemma and Our Potential Tragedy

From Faultline USA:
http://faultlineusa.blogspot.com/

Unless Obama is willing to come clean with America about his actual racial views and to explain how he could follow the teachings of a racist pastor for over twenty years, Obama will lose the Presidency and set back race relations in America for many years to come.It’s not enough for Obama to play down Rev. Wright’s approach, or to describe Wright as “an old uncle I sometimes don’t agree with.” Obama must disavow his pastor and his racist church. Obama must explain to America how he plans to unite America while maintaining membership in a racist church that teaches hatred of America!!! (For more details on his church see the sidebar under Obama Revealed.)The government gives them the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strike law and then wants us to sing 'God Bless America.' No, no, no, God damn America, that's in the Bible for killing innocent people. God damn America for treating our citizens as less than human. God damn America for as long as she acts like she is God and she is supreme.These are the words of Obama’s pastor, who just retired this last month, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright. Wright is Obama’s mentor and the inspiration for Obama’s second book, The Audacity of Hope. ABC broke the story Thursday. “Good Morning America" aired this Brian Ross report on Barack Obama's pastor, Jeremiah Wright.

Read the whole revealing story here:

http://faultlineusa.blogspot.com/2008/03/obamas-dilemma-and-our-potential.html

From Other Sites on the Line: 14 Mar 08

Iraq Invasion Anniversary Online Refresher Course

From Churchill's Parrot

http://churchillsparrot.blogspot.com/

This March 17, while the civilized world dutifully besots itself in taverns the world over, Lefties will be taking their impaired judgment to the streets and parading it about for all the world to see. This March 17, you see, is especially significant to Lefties as it represents the 40th anniversary of the 1967 March on the Pentagon as well as the 4th anniversary of the start of the Iraq war. Massive demonstrations (such as these planned here and here) have thus been organized to commemorate the first and decry the latter: the “criminal invasion of Iraq.”No doubt among these Lefties are a few who sincerely believe Bushie’s decision to invade Iraq was a something he concocted out of thin air at his ranch in Crawford, or a misguided attempt to avenge the attempted assassination of his father, or the desire to line his cronies’ pockets with oil money, or his unthinking allegiance to those neo-con Jews who just don’t like Arabs and were itching for a fight.For them, and those “Conservatives” who find themselves irresistibly drawn to the Siren song of the anti-war movement (amplified daily via our noble Mediacracy), I submit the following as antidote: my IRAQ INVASION ANNIVERSARY ONLINE REFRESHER COURSE - a $250.00 value - yours today for absolutely free!(Disclaimer: This course employs an instructional device somewhat alien to Lefties known as “History.” A definition of the term can be accessed by clicking here.)We begin with the first Gulf War, which was followed swiftly by the end of the first Gulf War. This cessation of hostilities was premised upon Iraq’s complying with conditions spelled out in United Nation’s Resolutions 686 and 687 . In short, these demanded Iraq allow U.N. inspectors immediate and unrestricted access to verify its commitment to rid itself of weapons of mass destruction and long-range missiles, as well as “not commit or support any act of international terrorism or allow any organization directed towards commission of such acts to operate within its territory and to condemn unequivocally and renounce all acts, methods and practices of terrorism.” (Curious don’t think – since we all know that Saddam had NOTHING to do with terrorists?) The U.N. then also issued Resolution 688 demanding that the Iraqi regime cease at once the repression of its own people, including the systematic repression of minorities which, the Council claimed, “threatened international peace and security in the region.” For your edification, particularly those now of the opinion things were better off under Saddam, I give you, Saddam’s rap sheet.

To read the rest of this important article click here:
http://churchillsparrot.blogspot.com/2007/03/iraqi-invasion-anniversary-online.html

"The Clash of Civilizations?"

Originally published by Real Clear Politics - July 28, 2007


"The Clash of Civilizations?" This is the title of a well-known book of essays published by Foreign Affairs. Only, I think, in the West would this phrase be followed by a question mark.

To our Islamist enemies the issues are crystal clear. The concepts are easily understood, simple and straight-forward. In their own words, they are soldiers in a righteous war, a war between Muslims and non-Muslims. There is little room here for ambiguity. Their goals in this war are to destroy Christianity, undermine the power of the West and subject the world to sharia law.

In the West, by contrast, the issues are confusing and our goals are muddled. We are still mired down in a battle of legalistic semantics. While we are attempting to more precisely define the enemy, they simple say, "Death to the infidel!" and plant another bomb.

Sooner or later we are going to have to face up to a disturbing truth -- throughout the universal ummah the Islamist message -- regardless of its conspiracy theory lunacies and its surrealistic expectations -- resonates. It gains more eager converts daily. Of course, it's that same old siren song of victimization, only sung in a different voice. It offers those same old promises -- the promise of power regained, the promise of a new found relevancy for previously irrelevant peoples. It offers self-respect and dignity -- and a shiny new sword.

We keep talking about the "moderate Muslims", as though they could (even assuming that they would want to) somehow extricate us from this growing peril. To me, these 'moderate Muslims' are behaving in almost exactly the same way as those Eastern European countries -- Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, et al -- behaved at the beginning of WWII. They were hedging their bets. They were waiting on the sidelines to see who would come out stronger, the Axis or the Allies. Unfortunately for them, they bet on the wrong team and ended their days on the frozen tundra of the Russian steppes.

For most Westerners, certainly for most Americans, it's so much easier to accept the concept of a peaceful religion which has been 'hijacked' by a fanatical few -- as Germany had been 'hijacked' by the Nazis -- rather than having to contemplate that awful alternative: that a major world religion could, itself, be violent and that we are, indeed, in the first days of an inevitable and bloody "Clash of Civilisations".

From Other sites on the Line: 13 Mar 08

This is Your Anti-Military, Anti-War, Anti-American Left

Cross posted from Spree's Wake Up America:

http://wwwwakeupamericans-spree.blogspot.com/2008/03/this-is-your-anti-military-anti-war.html

The only thing I can say about this piece I am going to quote from, is that at least this blithering idiot is honest... an honest idiot. When you see someone say "we support the troops, but we don't support their mission", as they highlight every single wrong they can find, insult our troops at every given opportunity and compare them to mercenaries, then you know the empty words claiming they support them, are just that...empty. So take a good look at what is under the rhetoric because every once in a while, you get a person that is honest in their idiocy. (Note this is a piece in the Berkeley Daily Planet- all Berkeley pieces here for those unaware of the history) In the recent political battle around the Marine recruiting station in Berkeley there has been much confusion around the concept or slogan of “supporting the troops,” but opposing the unjust wars of the Bush regime. Many who oppose the Bush regime wars also say they “support the troops.” Let me say it straight out—I do not support the troops and neither should you. It is objectively impossible to support the troops of the imperialist military forces of the U.S. and at the same time oppose the wars in which they fight. I agree with that last part I put in bold... you cannot claim to support the troops and at the same time say you don't support their mission, despite claims to the contrary from people that simply are incapable of telling the truth as the writer quoted above did. Now look at this comment:

The United States has over 700 military bases or sites located in over 130 foreign countries. The hundreds of thousands of troops stationed in these countries are not there to preserve or foster freedom and democracy as the Bush regime would like to claim...

I point that out because this is a case of the mental disease called Bush Derangement Syndrome. I say this because we have had military bases all across the world for far longer that Bush has been president and yet this moron cannot seem to wrap his head around the basic fact that Bush did not station people in those 130 countries, many, most of them, have been there for longer than Bush has been in office.
Read the whole piece, take a good hard look at who the anti-military, anti-war, anti-American left really is. Like ripping the roof off of hell and letting the world see the people inside. Hiding behind their empty rhetoric of "we support the troops". They don't. They make these claims so they won't be seen for what they are.

We need to expose that those in the U.S. military are trained to be part of a “killing machine.” While not every member of the military is an individual murderer, they are all part of a system that commits war crimes, including aggressive wars, massacres, rape, and other crimes against humanity, all in the service of U.S. imperialism. The bottom line is that even if these people are relatives or friends, you can not support the troops without also supporting the objective role that these troops play in the imperialist system.

I need not respond to this man, but Hot Air points to a fine, patriot that does respond. This is a man that at the age of 38 and 14 years after leaving the Marine Corps, is now joining a National Guard unit as a commissioned officer. The unit he is joining will be sent to Iraq or Afghanistan in
2009. He says much, but he makes two specific comments that I will show you, then you can go read his full response for yourself

And I have just two comments: 1. He’s wrong. He couldn’t be more wrong. These kids are rough, sometimes uneducated, some have lived hard lives … but they’re good people. Your pride in them is well placed. This man is simply wrong. He does not know what he’s talking about. I can forgive his ignorance. He’s just too dumb to know better. 2. And I appreciate his honesty. He is an ignorant, traitorous bastard … but he’s both honest and right in his assessment of “support the troops, not the war.” If you hate the President, if you’re in Code Pink, if you march and protest … you do NOT support me. So quit pretending. The truth is better than the lie. I’m honored to have the opportunity to go be part of what this man hates. I don’t mind dying for his right to spew such ignorance. But if I can forgive his stupidity, perhaps he can forgive my enormous pride in my country and in the young men who fight for it.

Go read all what this man has to say...compare his words, his loyalty and his love of his country, America, to the screed over at the Berkeley Daily Planet. Take a good hard look at what lies under the veneer of those that claim to support the troops. Every once in a while, that veneer is ripped away so that we can all take a good look at the monsters that lie within.

The Golden Key

Originally published by Wake Up America - December 7, 2007
http://wwwwakeupamericans-spree.blogspot.com/2007/12/golden-key.html

Moderate Muslims. We search for this mysterious and illusive species as fervently and hopefully as we search for life on other planets. We have set up high-tech listening posts all around the world in the hope of retrieving a single signal from them. Any small message at all, even the most fragmentary sign that would prove their existence. There is, we have been told, good reason to believe that they're out there, but unfortunately so far we've been unable to substantiate this belief.

However, these disheartening results have in no way diminished our enthusiasm for this worthy project, or caused us to lose confidence in the probability of its eventual success. We just keep listening and hoping. These Moderate Muslims, we have been advised, are the Golden Key to winning this War on Terror -- or more precisely, this Islamic War against the West. It is to them we must turn to solve these intractable problems. Because, our experts have assured us, the problems inherent in Islam can only be resolved from within Islam, by those ephemeral and semi-mythical MMs. Only they have the moral authority to redefine the tenets of Islam and set it on its new course. But unfortunately so far we have been unable to substantiate this belief.

However, these disheartening results have in no way diminished our enthusiasm for this worthy project, or caused us to lose confidence in the probability of its eventual success. We just keep on listening and hoping.

Meanwhile, our brave American warriors are at this very moment confronting this ruthless Islamic menace all over the world, most particularly in Afghanistan and Iraq. And, through their professionalism and their courage and their daily sacrifices, they have achieved some remarkable successes. But here on the home front we are still in turmoil. Here, we are in the real quagmire, still bogged down in that never-ending, and seemingly-hopeless battle of legalistic semantics. We are still stuck in those preliminary stages of attempting to define the enemy. While our heroic soldiers are fighting and dying on the battlefield, we at home are still in the process of trying to precisely determine who it is we are fighting. We are NOT, we have been repeatedly admonished by our highest authorities, at war with Islam. Islam is a religion of peace. We are certainly not at war with all of those good peaceful Muslims all over the world. And we are most definitely not at war with those Moderate Muslims. They, in fact, are our stalwart allies in this war, which is really just a war against extremism, against just another form of religious fanaticism, kind of like a Middle Eastern version of the KKK. We have gone to great lengths to get this message out there to the world, we want the world to understand: We are NOT at war with Islam. We take great care to make clear-cut distinctions between those good Muslims and those bad Muslims. And we want those good Muslims around the world and in our midst to clearly understand our position. You have nothing to fear from us, we promise you. We honor your religion and your right to practice it.

In short, if you're a Moderate Muslim you have nothing to fear from us.

But, now, what about those Moderate Infidels? Surely there must be some Moderate Infidels out there. I wonder, are those eminent religious leaders, those wise and all-powerful imams and mullahs busily engaged in that laborious process of making those important distinctions between those Moderate Infidels and those Fanatical Infidels, whom they are fighting daily on their battlefields? Are they carefully separating out all those good Infidels from those bad Infidels? Are they perhaps bogged down in some moral quagmire of their own?

When they attacked us on 9/11, did they make certain that those killed in the attacks would only be those bad Infidels?

To expect to be saved by these mysterious Moderate Muslims, by their somehow rejecting the fundamental tenets of Islam, rejecting those perfect divine pronouncements of the Prophet, is as foolhardy and hopeless as expecting a Christian to reform Christianity by denying the teachings of Christ, or expecting a Jew to reform Judaism by denying the Torah. It just ain't gonna happen.

I'm sorry folks, but the time for gentlemanly debate has long passed, it's time to wake up, before it's too late. Our enemy has clearly and repeatedly defined this battle for us, even though our political leaders have yet to find the courage to do so. For our enemy the issues are clear-cut and straight-forward: it is simply a battle of Islam against the Infidels. We must finally accept them at their word and fight the fight that's there, not the fight we'd rather fight. WE are our only salvation. No one else. Not the British. Not the Australians. Not the Europeans. Not even those brave Israelis. And certainly not those semi-legendary Moderate Muslims.

From Other Sites on the Line: 13 Mar 08

International Women's Day.

Cross posted from Great Satan's Girlfriend: http://greatsatansgirlfriend.blogspot.com/2008/03/internatl-gendercide-day.html

Much of the world and the Women Worshipping West will celebrate this event with glowing reports of initiatives, programs and progress. Enlightened people everywhere are and should be appreciative of this.

Yet there is a chilling curtain of intolerance* that shrouds much of the world in scary places where the concept of Mother's Day has never really caught on.

Perhaps a more accurate nom de voyage for today should be International Gendercide Day. The stats are horrific on a Hitlerian scale.

110 million to 200 million are 'missing' every year. 1.5 to 3 million women and girls die each year because of their gender.

Violence or neglect.

"In countries where the birth of a boy is considered a gift and the birth of a girl a curse from the gods, selective abortion and infanticide eliminate girl babies.

Young girls die from neglect, because food and meds are reservedfirst for brothers, fathers, husbands and sons.

In countries where women are considered the property of men, their fathers, brothers and husbands murder them for choosing their own sexual partners.

These are called "honor" killings, though honor has nothing to do with it.

Young brides are killed if their fathers do not pay sufficient money to the men who have married them; these are called "dowry deaths" although they are not deaths; they are murders.

The brutal international sex trade in young girls kills uncounted numbers of women.

Domestic violence is a major killer of women in every country on the globe.

Women between the ages of 15 and 44 are more likely to be killed or maimed bytheir male relatives than as a result of cancer, malaria, traffic accidents orwar – or all of them put together.

So little value is placed on women’s health that every year roughly 600,000 women die giving birth.

Six thousand small girls are victims of ungodly gender apartheid every day, according to the UN. Many die. Others live the rest of their lives in crippling pain.

According to the World Health Organization, one woman out of every five islikely to be a victim of rape or attempted rape in lifetime.

And this is genocide.

These killing are not silent--- all the victims scream their suffering. It is not so much that the world does not hear them; it is that we fellow human beings choose not to pay attention. "

The American experience proves as girls advance status wise, so do families, communities, career work places - and the entire nation.

Tolerance and egalitarianism are the handmaidens of success - on every scale personal, national and international, wealth, education, self worth.

With war against women, there will be no peace.


Deny us learning and literacy and we grant failure, intolerance, misery and rage to our own sons and daughters too.

Ignore us and neglect us. Keep your societies pitiful, needy, and backwards.

If we are not loved, we can not love back; and if we are not nurtured, we neglect.

If we are not valued - we have little values to instill.

Women who are treated with cruelty give birth to murderous intolerants and oppressors.

If we are destroyed, we destroy too.

*"chilling curtain of intolerance":
http://www.fredsakademiet.dk/library/insecure.pdf

Original artwork by *AbRo* "Mournful Women"
Commissioned by and Xposted at Middle East Interests by MaXiM

Check out Radarsite's tribute to the remarkable Great Satan's Girlfriend:

http://radarsite.blogspot.com/2008/02/blips-on-screen-12-feb-08.html

Wrestling With Mohammed

Is Islam a religion of peace or an imminent fascist threat?

This may very well be one of the most crucial questions of our era. Is there actually a definitive, clear-cut answer to this monumental question?

Yes, there is, but it is buried in a miasma of misinformation and religious apologetics. Also, unfortunately for some, there is no shortcut to understanding the true nature of Islam, just as there is no shortcut to understanding the true nature of Christianity. You will not get your answers by reading your local newspaper or by listening to the evening news. Knowledge, like any other worthwhile goal, must be earned, you must work for it. In the case of Islam, the answers lie in the Qur’an and in the accompanying expository texts. The answers lie in that abundance of Islamic literature, and in the pronouncements of its leaders and in their actions. The answers are there for all to see. They are clearly stated and unequivocal. But you must take the time to read them and to listen.

However, given the reality of our hectic lives, few of us have the space, or even the inclination to devote precious hours of our free time to this laborious and relatively abstruse quest. For most of us, this means that we have to rely on others to help us form our opinions. Generally, we tend to gravitate toward those opinions which fit most neatly into our own personal worldview. Or, put another way, into the rhetoric of our particular political persuasions. Thus, we rely for the exposition of truth on those purported experts who, whether overtly or covertly, have a personal agenda of their own.

What, might you ask, is my personal agenda? Did I suddenly wake up one morning and decide to devote the rest of my life to denigrating one of the world’s major religions?
Hardly.
Did I suddenly wake up one morning to find that our country had just been attacked and thousands killed by a group of young Middle Eastern hijackers who just happened to all be Muslim?
Yes. And I have devoted a major portion of my life since then trying to better understand the true nature of this religion and of this threat.

Opinions, unlike principles, are not sacred possessions to be protected, locked away and defended from all intruders. Rather, they are, or should be, living and evolving attitudes, constantly subjected to rigorous revision and adjustment — or, when necessary, quickly abandoned for some more plausible or cogent truth.

Is there perhaps a better way to understand this debate, without having to rely on the questionable opinions of others, while avoiding that impracticable investment of time and energy?I believe that there is. I believe that all it requires of us is the acceptance of the following simple and straight-forward premise: It is possible to understand the fundamental nature of a religion by judging the character of its founder. If one accepts the fairness of this premise, then our task becomes a little easier. Fortunately, there is an abundance of literary evidence devoted to the lives of both Jesus Christ and Mohammed. The problem for us is that, while almost all of us have a comfortable familiarity with the narrative of the life of Christ, few of us could relate the life of Mohammed with the same confidence. Therefore, when we are told that Islam is a religion of peace, we tend to accept this statement at face value; all that we can equate it to are those religions with which we are familiar, which, for most Christians is Christianity, which in its present form is basically peaceful.

The contrast between the lives of these two monumental figures could not be more striking or more enlightening. The basic facts of their lives are well-documented and attested.

There are, to the best of my knowledge, no surviving texts which document Christ either injuring or killing any living creature, let alone another human being. Mohammed slaughtered dozens of his unfortunate enemies, personally decapitating his rival Abu Jahl. Again, to the best of my knowledge, Jesus Christ never participated in any acts of piracy, rape, plunder, kidnapping or thievery. Mohammed did.

It has never been substantiated that Jesus Christ had ever had any physical relationship with any contemporary female or participated in any form of pedophilia. Mohammad had eleven wives, whom he sometimes enjoyed all at once — including nine year old Aisha. When Mohammed took the child Aisha to bed he was fifty-three years old. He also took the wife of his adopted son to bed for his amusement. Conveniently, for justification of these questionable acts he invariably claimed to have received some form of special divine encouragement or dispensation in the form of a vision from Allah.

Since its inception, two thousand years ago, Christianity has evolved and refined itself through a whole series of reformations and readjustments. The episodic violence of its early years has given way to a generally peaceful coexistence with secular authority.

Islam has never changed — except for the negative effects of Wahhabism, which only succeeded in turning Islam further in on itself and away from the world of progress and enlightenment.

Christianity has brought the world the message of kindness and charity. If the world has at times chosen to ignore this message, that is not the fault of Christianity but, rather, a testament to the weakness of human beings. Over the years, Christianity has unquestionably inspired untold numbers of artists, sculptors, writers and musicians to produce some of the most marvelous creations the world has ever known.

Islam has brought the world polygamy, forced female genital mutilation (an estimated 135 million to date, with 2 million young girls presently at risk), forced marriages, pedophilia, officially-sanctioned rape (804 documented cases in the year 2000 in Pakistan alone), along with those wonderful family values, such as honor killings and the total brutal subjugation of all of its second-class females, and has infected the world with it’s most virulent form of anti-Semitism. And let us not forget those unquestionable benefits of global terrorism (between the years 1960 and 2000, 95% of all terrorist attacks were the result of Islam). Here, my friends, is the holy voice of Allah exhorting his followers to terrorism: “I will terrorize the unbelievers. Therefore smite them on their necks and every joint and incapacitate them. Strike off their heads and cut off each of their fingers and toes.” (Qur’an 8:12) In the immortal words of Edward Gibbon, from his monumental “The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire”, long before this cowardly age of Political Correctness: “His [Mohammed’s] voice invited the Arabs to freedom and victory, to arms and rapine, to the indulgence of their darling passions in this world and the other…”

Perhaps the most illustrative example of the character of Mohammed in our current age would be a cross between Pol Pot and John Gotti — although, to his credit, John Gotti never had any incestuous or pedophilic relationships that I am aware of. The deadly Fatwas issued in Mohammed’s name, or in the name of one of his mullahs, are morally identical to a mob-sanctioned contract, and should be treated with the same contempt.

If my characterization of this “peaceful religion” appears to some as harsh and brutal, it is because this terrible “religion” is harsh and brutal. However, everything that has been stated above can be readily substantiated with their own writings and in their own words.

But what, then, of those “Moderate Muslims”? What of those decent Muslims who claim that they are fighting back against those particularly violent precepts of Islam? To these valiant apostates I can only answer, if you are truly willing to disassociate yourselves completely from the divinely perfect words of the Prophet, if you are truly willing to turn your backs on the entire force of the argument of his criminal life, if you are truly willing to accept without qualification the natural equality of women, and the right to the existence of a viable Jewish state, then I welcome your rebellion and bow to your courage.

And, might I suggest, that we honor this great internal theological jihad of yours by allowing those munificent Saudis to erect a Grand Mosque in New York City, as they still plan to do in London. I propose that the construction of this Great Monument to Islam coincide with the ground-breaking ceremony for that first great synagogue in Riyadh or with the inauguration of that first magnificent Roman Catholic Cathedral in Cairo. Further, I support the opening of innumerable Islamic Madrases throughout the United States, immediately after our own Pastor Ed is allowed to conduct his first Christian History classes in Damascus. I also believe that it is only fair and right that we provide those Muslims in our midst with their religious foot baths in our universities and our airports, right after that first Christian Science Reading Room opens its doors in Yemen. And, to be completely fair, we should allow full native Muslim dress in all of our schools and universities, just as soon as those Iranian women are allowed to wear short skirts and uncovered hair to the University of Tehran.

Lastly, to the question of whether Islam is or is not a fascistic threat, consider this: according to my dictionary’s definition, fascism is “a governmental system (remember, there exists no distinction in Islam between religion and government) led by a dictator (Mohammed or his imams) having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism.” Could there be any more precise description of our current threat?

I rest my case and patiently await those inevitable cries of prejudice and racism. And perhaps a stray fatwa.

Originally published by Political Grind - October 31, 2007
http://politicalgrind.com/2007/10/31/wrestling-with-mohammed/


Voted by gophub