The Neosecularist

I Said That? Yeah, I Said That!

Why Americans Are Right To Be Concerned About Muslims

Honor killing – why haven’t American Muslims been more vocal, more outraged, more disgusted by this barbaric practice, tolerated under Sharia law, and which some Islamic followers have transported with them on their journey to Western Civilization?  Could it be that, most American Muslims, in fact, support Sharia law, whether openly or not?  Could it be that most American Muslims, if they had a choice, would abandon U.S. Constitutional law for Sharia law?  Could it be that, most American Muslims, although they swear an oath of loyalty to America, when they become citizens, and renounce their allegiance to the country they left behind, are merely “mouthing” the pledge?  That, in their hearts, they have no intention of really giving up anything with regards to Islam, knowing that the Qur’an dictates they “change secular laws to conform to sharia” law?

If none of this is true, why then are Muslims offended when American lawmakers push through anti-Sharia law bills?  What is happening in England and across Europe as Muslims immigrate to Westernized, non-Islamic nations is startling.  And what is even more startling is the gross arrogance which these Muslims bring with them.  Why would a Muslim desire to leave the “paradise” of the Middle East, and move somewhere where one’s laws are bound by a nation’s constitution, not its Holy Book?  How can Muslims not know (beforehand)  that moving to a nation which does not recognize Sharia law, does not recognize the Qur’an as the only, the definitive law – and where it would be unconstitutional do so – would be so divisive and controversial?  Why do Muslims move anywhere in the world, settle in, establish themselves – and them demand that nation accommodate their particular brand of laws and customs?  And then, to make matters even more contentious, when that nation refuses – we have Muslims crying bigotry and Islamophobia.

UPDATE:  This is what a fanatical Muslim father does to his wife when he finds out she has given birth to another girl.  And this is exactly what Muslims want to bring to America.

America welcomes people from all over the world, and there isn’t a nation which is not represented here in America.  However, this is not what is meant by “America’s Melting Pot”.  The idea behind that was to bring in people from every corner of the world, where they – the immigrants – would assimilate into our society, our culture, our language, our laws and become Americans.  That has failed to a large degree.

Where do immigrants get off thinking they can come here, to America, or anywhere, really, and expect a nation’s people will simply embrace and make room for their (the immigrants) culture by pushing one’s own culture aside?  Especially if, in bringing with them their culture, religious beliefs and practices they – immigrants – both expect and demand we, Americans, would tolerate anything so barbaric, so repulsive and repugnant, inhumane and anti-human as honor killing and the law – Sharia – which condones, allows and protects it?

We have been fighting a War on Terror in the Middle East, in part, because groups of terrorists, Al-Qaeda, the Taliban and others have found great offense in Western ideals (such as equality among the sexes, Christian influences, our clothing, literature, etc.) which have encroached upon their society.  Although, the real “offense” is that American, and Western, notions of democracy, liberty and freedom are dangerous to those Muslims who hold power over people, and desire to keep that power.  That is why we see in the news everyday that Muslims are being slaughtered by fellow Muslims who want more of the freedom and liberty enjoyed by Western Civilizations, and less of religious dictatorship and oppression they have been enslaved to for many, many generations.  And yet, what is puzzling is when Muslims do migrate, they still bring with them that same desire for religious dictatorship and Islamic law to America and elsewhere.

If the Qur’an dictates Muslims move into areas of the world which are non-Muslim and begin to systematically dismantle their host’s laws and replace those laws with Islamic laws and codes, and if Muslims really take to heart this dictate of the Qur’an – we have a very serious problem on our hands, in America, and elsewhere in the world where Muslims have immigrated and are beginning to demand their laws, and Sharia, be recognized.  Sharia is incompatible with America’s Constitution.  And while, in theory, there can never be Sharia law in America, because every American citizen is guaranteed the rights under it, including American Muslims, in reality more and more activist judges (all of who are liberals and leftists) are siding with Muslims who want to be tried under Sharia law rather than American law.

It is a very dangerous precedent.  One which, if allowed to progress, will see a dramatic spike in honor killings, in the repression and oppression of women and girls and deaths sentences for gays, Muslim to Christian converts, stonings and whatever else Sharia law in Islamic controlled nations already cover – but right here in America.

We, as Americans, have a right, and an urgent need, to rise up and put a stop to this immediately.  We, as Americans, have a right to be concerned that Muslims are immigrating to America not to become Americans but instead to corrupt American law, our Constitution and replace both with Islamic Sharia law.  Either American Muslims embrace America law or they embrace Sharia law.  Muslims cannot have both.  They must decide which law they want.  And if they decide Sharia law, then Americans must decide how we will respond to having our laws overrun, overruled, overtaken by that law – Sharia – which can only be described as malicious, degrading, offensive, anti freedom and liberty and absolutely unacceptable and reprehensible.

Or – are we, as Americans, willing to relinquish those freedoms and liberties to a portion of citizens for fear we might offend them if we speak out against their barbaric, unconstitutional laws?  And – are we, as Americans, willing to sit back, idly, apathetically, and watch as those barbaric laws, under Sharia, creep closer and closer to us, into our communities and neighborhoods, our schools and other public institutions – and into our courts and courtrooms until finally even we, as Americans, are being tried and convicted under Sharia law?

Remember – the Qur’an dictates Muslims conquer the “infidel”.  When Christians take their scripture literally they are called crackpots and laughed at, and ridiculed incessantly and without mercy.  When Muslims take their scripture seriously, and are laughed at and ridiculed, such as with the Mohammad cartoons, Muslims go on the warpath and slaughter innocent people in the name of Islam.

And the same left, the same liberals in America, and elsewhere, that decry Sharia law when it is practiced in the Middle East and wherever Islam is the predominant religion, are either silent on Sharia law when it is allowed to be practiced in Western civilizations, or they, the left (which includes the MSM, the mainstream media) comes to the aid of those Muslims who demand Sharia law be given clearance, calling such people bigots and islamophobes.  Why?  Because the people in America, and elsewhere, who are fighting to keep Sharia law from taking hold in their communities are virtually all conservatives.  In other words, the liberals arch nemesis.

But it’s a dangerous game liberals are playing.  Once Sharia law is firmly established in America, what is to stop Muslims from enacting pro-Islamic laws that are counter to the freedoms and liberties guaranteed under the American Constitution?  What becomes of the American Constitution if Sharia law takes hold?  What becomes of us, who oppose Sharia law in America, once there is no way to remove it?  For that matter – what becomes of the liberals who so passionately defended Sharia law in America, hoping in doing so it would weaken conservatism at the same time?

While Sharia law fully condones honor killings, and executing “defiant” women and girls, gays, Christians, Jews and other “infidels”,  Sharia law has absolutely no tolerance for anything anti-Muslim, anti-Islamic.  That includes both American conservatism and liberalism.  And after liberals have defeated conservatism (as a “what if” scenario), at the expense of supporting Sharia law in America, who will come to the aid of liberals when Muslims come after them.  And they will.

What do we, any of us, think, or hope, we will gain by not taking up this fight against Sharia law in America?  The gratitude of a hand shake from the same people who will demand we either convert to Islam or be beheaded; and the same hand, which we shook, which will hold the sword over our head, awaiting which decision we choose?

And, if, after acceding to Sharia law in America, we again choose poorly?  Is advancing Sharia law in America really worth losing our heads?

January 30, 2012 Posted by | Islam, politics, religion, War On Terror | , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Taliban Wants “Peace”; Obama Bows, Says, “Yes, Master”.

What exactly does the United States get in return for negotiating “peace” with Taliban terrorists?  Considering that the Taliban only wants to negotiate for one provision, and that “peace” apparently will only ensue after their demands are met.

Said Maulavi Qalamuddin, the former minister of vice and virtue for the Taliban:

“The only thing is the negotiations over release of Taliban prisoners from Guantánamo, which is still under discussion between both sides in Qatar.”

The Obama Administration seems to be beating down the door in order to meet the Taliban’s “request”.

So again, after Obama bows down before terrorists, licks their blood stained boots and acquiesces to their demands; after Obama frees some of the worlds most fierce terrorists back into the hands of the Taliban, what does America get in return?  A hearty hand shake and a “thank you”, from the same terrorists who slaughtered 3000 of us on September 11, 2001?  A reassurance that the Taliban will no longer kill American soldiers, so long as those soldiers pull out and leave the Middle East; so long as America does not interfere with the Taliban’s cruelty, its inhumane treatment of its own people, especially women and girls; so long as the Taliban can continue buying weapons for its own use against America’s allies (like Israel) and selling weapons to its allies, to be used against America’s allies (like Israel); so long as America looks the other way as the Taliban regroups, retrains its forces and expands its political and military power and reemerges stronger, and more defiant than ever – and looking for revenge?

Mr. Grossman, [the Obama administration’s special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan] at a news conference in Kabul last week, said that real peace talks could begin only after the Taliban renounced international terrorism and agreed to support a peace process to end the armed conflict.

But the Taliban won’t even consider doing that until after its comrades in Gitmo have been released.  And supposing they actually remain “true to their word” and “renounce international terrorism”, what then becomes of the point to their organization?  In other words, the Taliban is a terrorist organization.  That was what it was created to be.  Does the world expect its members to so rashly trade in their assault weapons for flowers and transform themselves into hippies?  Can anyone imagine a Taliban soldier uttering, “Peace, man”, or “Make love, not war”?

If the Taliban ever gave up its terrorist agenda, how well would that sit with Al-Qaeda or any other fanatical, terrorist, Muslim Jihadist cult?  To say the Taliban would become a mere laughing stock within terrorist circles is an understatement.  They would be annihilated by their fellow terrorist comrades, and the Taliban knows it.  They have absolutely no intention to give up, to “renounce international terrorism”, to turn a new page, to “give peace a chance”.  Here’s some evidence to that:

The latest Afghan National Intelligence Estimate warns that the Taliban will grow stronger, using the talks to gain credibility and run out the clock until U.S. troops depart Afghanistan, while continuing to fight for more territory, say U.S. officials who have read the classified document.

Let’s assume Obama has been briefed, and he knows full well the Taliban’s real intentions.  What does that say about Obama himself, his character, his real intentions?  If Obama knows the Taliban is both lying and stalling for time, what does it say about a President, a Commander-in-Chief, who is willing to bow down to the feet of a terrorist group, give them what they want and be humble and grateful when they cover him in a barrage of spit afterwards?

Couldn’t we posit that Obama is more concerned about being reelected than anything else, including the War on Terror and stability, real peace, in the Middle East?  That Obama is using the “peace” negotiations to his advantage, to further his own reelection bid, the same as the Taliban is using it to theirs, to further their own continued terrorist agenda?  That Obama’s motivations for “peace” are driven by his desire to be reelected at any cost, and nothing more?  That Obama is intelligent enough to know the Taliban will never be provoked into “renouncing international terrorism”?  And once Obama is reelected, should that unfortunate mistake be made; and after the Taliban prisoners at Gitmo are released – and after the Taliban reneges in its assurance of “peace”, can we expect the same grotesque smile from Obama he is apt to make after one of his weak jokes, and an even weaker response such as, “The Taliban has acted stupidly”?

Of course, there is the possibility his cabinet is hiding the information from him.  But, how likely is that?  And, which is more likely the real reason Obama is in such a hurry to make “peace” with the Taliban?

The former Taliban officials here described fairly advanced discussions in Qatar about the transfer of prisoners. One former official, Syed Muhammad Akbar Agha, who had been a Taliban military commander, said that five Taliban prisoners were to be transferred in two phases, two or three in one group and then the remainder.

There has also been discussion in Qatar of removing some Taliban members from NATO’s “kill or capture” lists, the former Taliban officials said.

And America gets what, again, in exchange for bowing down before a group of blood-thirsty, Jihadist rabble-rousers whose ideology is rooted in the 7th century A.D.?  What exactly does the United States get in return for negotiating “peace” with Taliban terrorists?  Ah, but of course!  We get Obama reelected to a second term in the White House.

Ladies and gentlemen – Is an Obama second term worth the price of “peace” the Taliban has brought to the table?

January 29, 2012 Posted by | Barack Obama, politics, War On Terror | , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment

Israel Ought To Tell Barack Obama To Go To Hell

Who the hell is Barack Obama, and what are his real motives in putting up his finger of shame to Israel, yet again?  Barack Obama opposes Israel’s right to expand its settlements, to hold on to its own land, to protect its own people from rocket attacks, and now – Barack Obama opposes Israel’s right to self-defense.  Barack Obama is positioning himself to be as anti-Israel as is Hamas and the PLO, and Iran, which calls for the destruction of Israel more times a day than its people are required to pray – and the destruction of Israel and all of the Jews is one of the things they routinely pray for.

Just what does Barack Obama think happens to Israel once Iran acquires nuclear weapons?  What does he think happens to the United States and its ability to negotiate and to hold rogue nations like Iran in line?

Nuclear weapons in the hands of Iran is a game changer.  Why?  Put a nuclear weapon in the hands of a hot-headed radical Muslim Jihadist and see what they do with it.  We already know what they do with weapons of lesser mass destruction.  We know, because there is a wealth of documented evidence, that these Muslim terrorists are willing to blow themselves up in the process of killing as many Jews, and other “infidels” as they can.  They do it every day.  Barack Obama appears oblivious to it all.

So, while Iran pursues its deranged ambition of attaining nuclear weapons, and comes insanely closer to reaching its goal every day, Israel must worry about the consequences of a nuclear Iran, and a United States, under President Barack Hussein Obama, which has never been more hostile, more disapproving, more antagonistic and opposed to Israel than in any time in its, or our, history.

President Barack Obama, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and other top officials have delivered a string of private messages to Israeli leaders warning about the dire consequences of a strike.

The ‘dire consequences” of a strike are miniscule compared to the real “dire consequences” of a nuclear Iran.  Both the United States and Israel, and all our allies for that matter, ought to be preparing and gearing up for a possible attack/war on Iran.  How can the United States, and its leaders in Washington, ever expect to keep the Middle east from exploding into absolute chaos if all Iran has to do to shut Washington up is remind Washington it, Iran, has the advantage over us because it, Iran, has nuclear weapons?

The U.S. wants Israel to give more time for the effects of sanctions and other measures intended to force Iran to abandon its perceived efforts to build nuclear weapons.

Giving more time to allow sanctions to work only gives Iran more time to obtain the components of a nuclear weapon and to build it.  Does Barack Obama or any of these egg-head politicians and bureaucrats in Washington really think that once sanctions are in place Iran will be fully prevented from bringing in the necessary materials its needs to build a nuclear weapon?  How arrogant and naive is that?

Tehran has warned that it could retaliate to tightened sanctions by blocking oil trade through the Strait of Hormuz.

This would be, and actually is, irrelevant, considering that America has all the oil it needs for decades to come sitting right under its own sovereign soil and water.  But Barack Obama and the Democrat Party continue to block all efforts to bring this oil to the surface.  And for the heedlessness of Obama and Democrats, Iran would not be in a position of using oil as a scare tactic to force us to back off our threat of tightened sanctions.  Of course we will go ahead with the sanctions, regardless.  Just keep in mind that the steep price at the pump reflects Obama’s and the Democrat Party’s desire to keep that oil underground, not because of imposed sanctions.  In other words, we could impose sanctions on Iran and still see gas prices around 2 dollars a gallon.  That is not such a pipe dream.

But what is a pipe dream and far from reality?

Iran says its nuclear program is for peaceful uses.

If there was any evidence that Iran had any “peaceful” intentions in anything it did, perhaps we could believe their story.  However, as we know, Iran remains in a readied state of Jihadism.  And there is nothing “peaceful” whatsoever about Jihadism.

There must come a time when it is realized that Iran will stop at nothing to make its dream of becoming nuclear a reality.  And there is more at stake here than just a nuclear Iran.  Remember, Iran’s Dictator-President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, is allied with another fierce anti-American Dictator-President, Hugo “El Diablo” Chavez of Venezuela.  Once Iran has nuclear capability, how long will it be before Ahmadinejad either sells, or gives away, some of its nuclear weapons to its buddy “El Diablo” Chavez?  What happens then, once two anti-Americans rogue dictators have nuclear weapons in their hands?  What happens to that window of opportunity to strike then?  Didn’t we learn anything from 40 years of Cold War with Russia?  Do we want to go through that all over again with Iran?

The U.S. and Iran, however, have taken steps in recent days apparently designed to ease tensions. Iran has agreed to host a delegation of United Nations nuclear inspectors this month.

This is called stalling for more time.  And while tensions between Iran and the U.S. “ease”, the tensions between Iran and Israel, and Israel and the United States, tighten.  Barack Obama is creating quite a topsy-turvy world indeed.  One in which is seeing Israel’s allies thin.  If Barack Obama wins re-election Israel may very well be on its own in defending itself and its people.  In the meantime:

Covert efforts by Israel’s intelligence service to prevent Tehran from developing nuclear weapons have been credited with slowing the program without the high risk of military conflict that could be sparked by an airstrike.

And yet, we cannot escape the fact that Iran is a nation populated with Muslim Jihadists who denounce Israel and the United States with a religious fervor.  But, what happens if Israel does strike Iran?  The same thing that happens when you throw a rock into shallow water.  The water, dirt and sediment is stirred up into an excited frenzy.  However, it all clears and settles back into place shortly and there is calm and tranquility once again.  If Israel strikes Iran, it will be stirred into an excited frenzy also.  So what?  Iran is always stirred into an excited frenzy because Iran refuses to live peacefully.  It will calm down again, to what it is now, which is still very turbulent, very dangerous, but void of nuclear possibilities.

Will putting nuclear weapons in its hands make Iran any calmer?

January 15, 2012 Posted by | politics, War On Terror | , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment

Coming Soon: Toy Taliban Soldier For Boys And Girls (Peeing Was Never So Much Fun)

Who wouldn’t want to take the plastic representation of pure and absolute evil, such as a Taliban soldier, and do something to it, anything that might give us a bit of pleasure and satisfaction?  After-all, most of us can’t actually be over there killing the Taliban, and words alone aren’t enough to slake our appetite for avenging the terrorism committed by the Taliban on 9/11.  Therefore, the next best thing is to take something, mold it into the representation of a Taliban soldier simply for the sheer purpose of desecrating it.  Children already do most things imaginable to their toys anyway.  Why not a toy Taliban soldier for boys and girls to urinate all over?  Dad could join in, and even mom.  That’s family entertainment!   Even one CNN analyst, Dana Loesch, said she would do it.

Rep. Allen West says it best about the incident involving four marines urinating on dead Taliban soldiers.

Unless you have been shot at by the Taliban, shut your mouth, war is hell.”

To say there is absolutely no justification for what the soldiers did is naive.  Obviously it was stupid to video tape it.  The dead soldiers were killed while trying to kill American soldiers.  We already know what the Taliban does when they capture our soldiers alive.  We already know what the Taliban does to its own living people.  Compared to what they do to us, what those marines did to them was trivial, insignificant and far more irrelevant than the cruelty some soldiers are inflicting on animals.  And, don’t forget about what American OWS protesters did right here in America to our public space.

The marines, albeit, were brash, and while it was not the best way to celebrate a victory over despicable, evil and vile scum, may they rot, the enemies America goes up, and has gone up, against are generally reprehensible scumbags to the core and have committed some very atrocious crimes against us and humanity.  The difference here, today, is that the ability to document anything is becoming so much easier.  And with that comes, will always come, some people who won’t use this technology responsibly.  There is no way to know just what soldiers were doing, and engaging in, decades ago, back in World War One and Two, or even the Korean War and Vietnam.  The technology did not exist to provide such documentation.  Because that technology now exists, and is easier to obtain, means our soldiers must have more restraint before they push the “on” button and start recording.

Unfortunately, this video will only be used for additional fodder by the Taliban and Taliban and anti-American terrorist wannabes who will use the video to galvanize themselves and to recruit more terrorists into their fold.  On the other hand, while the Taliban will use this incident as yet another excuse for attacking us, even if this incident had never occurred would the Taliban be any less hard-lined than it is now?  And, don’t we already know the Taliban does not need another “excuse” for its murderous, blood thirsty rampage?

As West said:

The Marines were wrong. Give them a maximum punishment under field grade level Article 15 (non-judicial punishment), place a General Officer level letter of reprimand in their personnel file, and have them in full dress uniform stand before their Battalion, each personally apologize to God, Country, and Corps videotaped and conclude by singing the full US Marine Corps Hymn without a teleprompter.

It’s a mixed bag, this news that our marines have defiled the dead in such a manner.  Hopefully the military will send word to all our troops about what not to do to the dead on the battlefield, both desecrating them and documenting it.  America’s military already takes a severe beaten routinely, and that is just by the American left.  It’s bad enough feeding the Taliban into another frenzy, now the likes of Chris Matthews, the Daily Kos, Media Matters,, the Arianna Nation (HuffPost) and a whole slew of leftist, socialist websites and mad dog organizations will have something more over which to foam at the mouth.

Barack Obama probably will not be going to the Taliban and bowing before them and apologizing for the actions of a few very misguided soldiers, but would the Taliban use this as more leverage against America, as another reason to release Taliban prisoners still being held at Guantanamo bay?  Obama is just weak, and foolish, enough he might think releasing these terrorists back into the hands of the Taliban might ease tensions.

Our military cannot let this incident affect their mission, nor can it be tempted by leftist news organizations, pundits and anti-war propagandists into pulling out of the region.  It happened and it will be dealt with, internally.  The war goes on, as it should, until the Taliban is fully defeated.  That most likely means dead.  We cannot risk another Taliban insurgence; neither in numbers of soldiers, nor in popularity among the people.  We have already spent too many lives, much blood and treasure.  The left will spin it as they always do, and, thankfully, most of what they spin, and how they spin it, is clearly, visibly done with, and in, a juvenile, unsophisticated, unprofessional approach.

Some of us will find this incident entertaining and worth laughing about.  Others will be infuriated.  All of us must not let this incident detract from our mission.  The Taliban is watching us, our news outlets.  If they perceive us becoming more anti-military, more anti-war, more anti-American because of what several marines did, this will only re-energize and reinvigorate the Taliban.

The more the Taliban is energized and committed to terrorism, the longer it will take to win the war, and the more difficult it will be to win it.  And the more the left in America makes of this issue, the more hysterical and irrational they become in over sensationalizing this incident, the more they will move and embolden the Taliban to terrorism and the greater the encouragement they will give to the terrorists.

Is that a risk the left is willing to take with American soldiers, just to play politics?

January 14, 2012 Posted by | politics, U.S. Military | , , , , , , | Leave a Comment

U.S., Britain Ought To Wipe The “Proud” Off The Face Of Iran

UPDATEHere Is another reason why we ought to wipe the “proud” off of Iran.

Someone ought to wipe the “proud” off the face of writer, Simon Jenkins, as well, while they’re at it.  Britain yet has a brain which has not been corrupted by leftists and inside traitors in Britain.  There is still moral courage, stamina and determination in Britain, despite being daily pummeled by the enemies of reason within which ever desire to provoke the people, goad them into selling their last vestiges of human resolve.  Britain sees how much stronger Iran is, or thinks it is, now that Libya, Egypt, Syria, Yemen, and other Middle East nations have been weakened by internal revolt, Arab Spring it is often called.  Britain has a choice.  Do nothing and let Iran march towards the Armageddon Iran wants with the world, or – stop Iran before it is too late.  That is the answer to Simon Jenkins question as to why Britain is “ramping up sanctions against Iran“.

Jenkins calls Iran a “proud” country.  Well, yes, Iran is very “proud” in the sense of being arrogant, and Iran is pleased with itself for being so arrogant.  But Iran is also “proud’ in the sense of its anti-humane accomplishments with regards to how it treats women, Christians, Jews, gays and anyone not Muslim or who refuses to convert to Islam.  Iran is “proud” to be anti-Israel.  Iran is “proud” to be a haven for terrorists and terrorism and all the evil exploits they would conduct against America, Israel, Britain and anywhere else in the world not conscripted into radical Islamic jihadism.  Iran is “proud” it is attempting to develop nuclear weapons which it might then use as leverage against Israel, America and all of Britain’s allies.  And for some strange, delusional, unexplainable reason, Jenkins is “proud” of Iran, for what it is, for what it stands for, for what it hopes to be, to accomplish and to gain.  And Jenkins is “proud” of himself for being so “proud” of a “proud” Iran.  Else, why would he be such an ardent, a “proud”, apologist for a country that hates, despises and outlaws the very existence and thought of individual freedom and liberty?

Simon asks:

Do any of Britain’s leaders really think further economic sanctions will stop Iran’s nuclear programme?

Iran and it’s President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, are hell bent on creating a nuclear program and nuclear weapons of extreme mass destruction, period.  Sanction alone, naturally, will not prevent them from slowing their progress.  Sanctions will stop the flow of legal monies entering Iran; it will stop the flow of commerce and trade, except for the nations allied with Iran.  Sanctions will perhaps slow Iran’s abilities to produce a nuclear weapon, but sanctions will not stifle Iran’s resolute ambition.  Iran has secret partners and secret travel routes in which to get the necessary ingredients for making nuclear weapons into Iran.  Sanctions, we understand, are not the solution by a long shot.  Sanctions only curtail the inevitable.  As Jenkins makes note:

Sanctions have been imposed on Iran for 33 years because there was nothing else to do. They have done no good and almost certainly been counterproductive in reinforcing autocracy.

Indeed, sanction would not deter a “proud” Iran from its ultimate goal.  So what is Jenkin’s advocating?  If not sanctions, what?  What is it about leftists anywhere in the world who see apathy and indecision, and doing nothing, as the best, the only, productive alternative?

Sanctions did not topple Saddam Hussein, Slobodan Milosevic or Muammar Gaddafi.

But war and revolt did.  Not apathy or indecision, not pacifism, and certainly not “peace” talk.  So what is Simon’s point?  War, rebellion and action toppled these evil dictators.  All sanctions ever do is stall for time, and give evil dictators the time they need to prepare for whatever madness they have cooked up.  So, why is Jenkins so stubborn about sanctions against Iran?

With an election in the offing, President Obama must show America’s pro-Israel lobby that he is tough somewhere in the Middle East.

Could it be that Jenkins is really an anti-Semite and he know that sanctions will hinder Iran’s plot to destroy Israel?  Could it be that Jenkins wants Iran to complete its mission of creating a nuclear weapon so it might point it at Israel, hold it hostage, blackmail America and Britain into bowing down before Iran?  Could it be that Jenkins is so anti-American, so pro-socialism, he is willing to see Iran become a nuclear nation so that Iran might further diminish America’s righteous role in the world in spreading freedom and true democracy, which is counter to socialism and its agenda?  And once Iran has nuclear weapons, who will prevent it from selling them to Hamas, the PLO, Al Qaeda, the Taliban, or any other terrorist group or regime hostile to America?

Any fool may say, you cannot be too careful. It is the motto of the arms race. Israel has a nuclear capability for that reason, and that is why Iran wants one. A pre-emptive Israeli strike on Iran’s nuclear plants might postpone their work, but make eventual war more likely.

If but for the fact there is a liberal Democrat in the white house, a military coward, Israel probably would have struck against Iran by now.  Israel cannot be so certain that such a weak President as Barack Obama would not condone it for defending its nation, its people.  Israel cannot be certain just how close Obama is to its enemies.

Although Israel has nuclear capability, aside from its fledgling alliance with America, that is the only other reason why Iran, or any other anti-Israel regime in the Middle east has not yet invaded Israel.  Iran wants nuclear weapons to even the playing field.  Iran has no compassion for humankind, no sympathy or sorrow for the human beings it now allows to be murdered in the name of Islam and Sharia law.  Iran has no feelings of sadness for the millions of people it would kill in a nuclear strike.  Israel, however, does have a heart.  That is why Israel does not use the nuclear weapons it now possesses.  But so long as Israel does possess nuclear weapons, so long as America remains an ally of Israel, (and under a conservative Republican administration that alliance will be much stronger) Iran will think very hard about striking Israel.  But once Iran gains nuclear weapons, Iran will not care.  Iran has no human emotions regarding the sanctity of life.  Therein lies the difference between Iran and Israel and Jenkins’ perverted leftism and what is common decency and rationality.

I would prefer it if Iran had no such missiles, but that is hardly for Britain to say when it demands “the right” to its own.

Nuclear missiles in the hands of Iran is a far greater threat to the world and to world peace than nuclear missiles in the hands of Britain.  Jenkins seems to believe that Iran has a “right” to nuclear weapons the same as any sane nation.  But Iran, of course, is not a sane nation.  Why can’t Jenkins differentiate between sane and insane?  Perhaps, as a leftist, Jenkins’ mind had warped the two concepts into one meaning.  A trick leftists use to justify their own madness.  If sane and insane can mean the same thing, if sane can also be insane, and insane can be sane, then there is no right or wrong, and everyone is free to believe and to do as they wish.  That’s the motto of hippies, who are themselves leftists.

Economic sanctions are coward’s diplomacy. They purport to high moral stance but are merely a low-risk way of bullying the world. The danger is that they encourage militarist lobbies to escalate the steps that lead to open conflict.

Absolutely agreed.  But if not sanction, if not war, then what is left to do?

But usually the answer to “what to do” about foreign regimes of which we disapprove is, quite simply, to do nothing.

That was America’s response to Hitler, for some years.  It was a long time before America finally “did something”.  And that was only after we were attacked at Pearl Harbor.  We declared war on Japan, but never on Germany.  Why must we wait for some nation to attack us, or our allies, first before we “do something”?  That is the “coward’s diplomacy”.  Neither America, nor Britain, is “bullying the world” by inflicting its military might and prowess against those nations seeking to wreak great harm and destruction against our allies.  It is, in fact, Iran which is “bullying the world”, trying to intimidate Israel and force America and Britain into apathetic submission.  Until Iran actually does have nuclear capability, it must remain on the defensive.  That is why Britain is “ramping up sanctions against Iran” and  why America is doing the same.  It is why the United Nations must accept these sanctions against Iran.

But if Jenkins is right about anything, it is only the fact that sanctions themselves only “encourage militarist lobbies to escalate the steps that lead to open conflict”.  So why not just have the bloody war and get it done with?  If war is going to happen anyway, what is the sense in prolonging it?  Doing so only allows the enemy time to plan, to outfit itself, to ready itself, to strengthen itself against us.

For the most part, other nations’ business is not ours.

The longer we leave “other nations business” alone, such as Iran, the more “proud” these nations will become; the more emboldened and brazen and the more dangerous they will be.  Sanctions will stop the speed at which Iran’s nuclear program is accelerating, but sanctions will not diffuse Iran’s resolve.  War will.  Without going to war against our “proud” enemies, we leave them to walk all over us.  We leave them all the more “proud”.

As for rattling a sabre whenever Washington says so, that is the most humiliating idiocy.

Without war, there is only surrender and what comes afterwards – bondage, slavery and then death in a lonely, lowly unmarked, shallow hovel where it won’t take long for all the creatures of the world above, and underneath, to root you out, dissect you and devour you.  Is that a pretty picture of the world we envision for ourselves and our children?  Is that a lesser “humiliating idiocy”?

January 8, 2012 Posted by | politics, War On Terror | , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment

2012: War With Islam Is Upon Us, Whether We Wish It Or Not…

It is Islam we are dealing with, we will be dealing with.  But it is not that element of Islam we see portrayed on American television we are at war with, and we must not be fooled by anti-American propagandists into believing it is.  It is that tyrannical Middle East faction of Islam, that denizen of religious usurpers which vows never to recognize Israel; that stronghold of barbarism, of outdated, antiquated ideology which, now back in power in Egypt, and rising, seeks to break the 1979 peace accord it once shared with Israel; that oppressive, cult-like wing of extremism which long ago severed its ties with reality, human decency and peace, which now has its will bent and obsessed with conquering the world on the proposition that all humans must either submit themselves to Allah, or the sword.

What good can come from the West tolerating such insurmountable hate and in-hospitality committed under the cloak of false teachings?  What good can come to Islam itself, for not pushing back against such potent, deeply disturbed rhetoric?  What greatness, what quality, is there in a religion which allows itself to be broadcast the world over as humbling itself before terrorism in the name of its God?

There is nothing peaceful about radical Islam.  Even when they win, they must yet instill terror within their own camps, their own conquered territories, their own people.  There is but one law for them.  No bill of rights, no freedom, no rights whatsoever under this Islam; certainly not under Sharia law – the same Sharia law proposed by Muslims in America, to replace, to override, America law.  The same Sharia law which looks the other way when honor-murder is committed.   To say that radical Islam is coming to America is an understatement.  It is already here.  Homegrown (Muslim) terrorism, is in America.

We in the West, those of us who refuse to acknowledge the truth of their intentions, find safety and security in denial.  We in the West, those of us who believe their thirst for revenge is perpetuated by an unwanted Western advance into their lands, find comfort in believing their terrorism is our fault.  We in the West, those of us who have been steadfast against the War on Terror, American aggression against an evil enemy that slaughtered 3000 of us in a single day, on our own soil, find solace and peace by deluding ourselves that all we have to do to stop the violence, the murder, the terrorism is…leave, abandon the Middle East altogether, oh – and one other thing – we must break all bonds of fellowship with Israel.

America has left Iraq.  Homicide bombings there continue.  Why is there not peace, now that the “infidel” has left?  Why do radical Islamists continue their slaughter of fellow Muslims?  The reason is simple.  Radical Islam, and those terrorist organizations fighting and murdering under the banner of Islam – the Taliban, Al-Qaeda, Hamas, the Muslim Brotherhood, the PLO, and all the others – has ever had but one ambition.  Absolute power.  Iraq was becoming Westernized, however slightly, but nonetheless a threat, and therefore an obstacle, to their, radical Islam’s, influence.  There can be no bonds, no connections, no friendship with America among any Muslims, not in the eyes of radical Islam.  That is the reason for the thousands upon thousands of murders of Muslims by Muslims (radial Muslims) throughout America’s stay in Iraq.  That is the reason for why the murder of Muslims by Muslims (radical Muslims) goes on, after America has left.  It is to wipe out all those Muslims who might have been influenced (set free) by American ideals, who might have a harder time being influenced (corrupted) by radical Islam.  Where does their courage  now go when they know their allies grow thin?

300 to 400 million strong is quite an intimidating radical Islamic force to reckon with.  Yet three times that many Muslims oppose their brethren in their terrorist death march.  These opposition numbers, however great, are meaningless and inconsequential, and have little to no impact when, and so long as, that opposition is screamed in utter silence.  Fear of brutal and very bloody retribution holds their tongues back, even when they continue to be slaughtered by their brethren in their religion’s name.  America no longer holds a protective hand over Iraq.  Who will stop the radical Muslims from dominating the country anew?  Who will protect those Muslims who wanted real peace, real change, real hope from being slaughtered by others who do no share in their vision of a new Iraq, who do not share in anything but their own lust for power – and they do not share even that.

Those hundreds of millions of Muslims in hiding, and hiding their true desires of a peaceful Islam deep within the recesses of their own minds, can still regain their honor.  These Muslims must take their ideas of a peaceful Islam out of the protective shell within their conscience and reveal to the world that Islam is indeed, and can be, a religion of peace rather than terror.  They must have the courage to forgo the fear of deadly reprisal that awaits them.  They are being slaughtered anyway.  They will be slaughtered regardless, even in their silence.  Without this courage, they will cease to exist, as radical Islam overtakes them, and they will have forever doomed a religion, Islam, which could have known peace but instead chose violence and terror.  Those Muslims that had an opportunity to come to the aid of Islam will hence become Islam’s bane.

Radical Muslims hate the West for our friendship with Israel.  Would they admire us any more if we broke that alliance?  If we submitted to their insanity?  To do so would be America’s bane.

What good ever comes from submission?  Whether that submission is to a terrorist group, or submitting to one’s own fear of that terrorist group and what they might do to you.  The Taliban once ruled Afghanistan.  What good ever came of that for its people?  The Taliban is regaining its power there.  What then?  Will the same history in Afghanistan repeat itself in Iraq?

When we had an opportunity to thwart the progress of radical Islam, and Muslim terrorists, and put a stop to their demonic agenda of enslaving the whole human race under the religion of submission, we instead gave into weak political pressure, cowardice from the left, and pulled out.  With America’s presence in the region diminishing, the radical Muslims are regrouping, retraining, regaining strength and determination, and returning.

If we allow them to take back what we set free – with the blood and lives of thousands of soldiers from America and Europe – that will be the world’s bane.

January 1, 2012 Posted by | Islam, politics, religion, War On Terror | , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Obama’s Deal With The Devil Will Reign Hell In America, Around The World

It has always been understood that negotiating with terrorists inevitably, predictably casts a dark shadow over that line we wish not to cross over so that we cannot any longer know which side of the line we are on.  Should we (that is, the Obama Administration) cave into a pressure that he would do well to ignore, and acquiesce to a demand by the Taliban, no less, and free a very dangerous Taliban criminal held in Gitmo (Guantanamo Bay) since 2002, in exchange for “peace”, whatever that “peace” means to the Taliban, Obama will have put the lives of all Americans and America’s allies in grave, literal, life-threatening jeopardy for years, perhaps generations, to come.

And that trade, one despicable, murderous Taliban soldier, Mohammed Fazl, for “peace”, is what Obama is contemplating right now.  Such an act would set in motion a chain of horrific and unimaginable events.

Surrendering to terrorists only breeds more terrorists, once they recognize all they must do in order to fulfill their goals, and succeed in obtaining whatever it is they most desire, is to wreak havoc over an area, murder scores, hundreds, of people, raze and destroy buildings, infrastructure, etc, until we capitulate, until we bow to them, bend to their will, fall to our knees and beg for mercy.  This is not how a mighty, a superior, empire deals with Taliban scum like this.  But this is how Obama, President of the U.S.A., would.

At a time when we (America) ought yet to take up the sword against our enemies (Al-Qaeda and the Taliban), Obama (America’s Commander-in-Chief) would fall to his knees, relinquish America’s sovereignty to the Taliban, and all other terrorists and anti-American elements around the world who would seek to weaken America’s resolve, its military greatness, its nobleness.

If we are so quick to say, “enough is enough’, with regards to war and killing, as unpleasant and unsettling as it is necessary, what “peace” can come of it, when in exchange for that “peace” we are enslaved by, and swept into, emotional blackmail by terrorists and held hostage by the threat of more terrorism?  The more we give into the demands of terrorists, the more we isolate ourselves from the rest of the world, which is exactly what they, the terrorists, want.  In other words, the more we fear them, and fear to fight them, the freer they will be to conduct their terrorist activities wherever they want, to enslave nations of people, to usurp power for themselves, locally and throughout an entire region.

America, the great defender of freedom, will not be there to aid the people being subdued, conquered and slaughtered, because America, under one of our most weakest military Presidents, Barack Obama, will have already laid down its sword in exchange for “peace” with the Taliban.  But, as with any terrorist, it is always a false peace.

What will happen to American’s reputation then, when we have no other option but to look the other way while terrorists commit their acts of violence, their atrocities, spreading ever deeper into areas once allied with America, but no longer under such protection or bonds of friendship with America?  And once the terrorists have laid waste to our former allies, what will prevent them from laying waste to America itself?  A “peace” accord?  Do not be so surprised if, leading the charge against America, the first foot to step upon American soil is that of Mohammed Fazl himself.

A chain of events, begun with the release of one prisoner, comes full circle.  We already know the consequences of releasing terrorists.  They are stirred to commit more acts of terrorism, knowing weak minds crumble easily.  Buying into the lie that negotiating with terrorists, and giving them what they want, will secure peace is very dangerous indeed.  They will maintain a certain level of peace, outwardly.  But only for a time, until they become more powerful, enough to wage an assault on American soil.  Already we are dealing with the affects of home-grown terrorists.

What happens when terrorists are able to reach America’s shores and beyond?  Considering Iran has already threatened to bring its warships to American shores, and the Obama administration has done or said nothing to indicate concern, if Iran’s navy is allowed to station itself so close to America, what will stop other anti-American nations from doing the same?  What message is Obama sending to our enemies by remaining so silence on such matters of importance?  Inaction does not instill peace.  What happens when terrorists within America are freely able to join with terrorists outside of America looking for easy access into America’s interior?

All of these “what if’s” could be prevented, squashed even, if we would stop fearing peace with terrorists can only be obtained through negotiating with terrorists and giving into their demands, however bizarre.  If we truly “have nothing to fear, but fear itself” – why do we fear?

So long as terrorists know and understand we, America, will exact a heavy toll against them for their homicidal actions, they will never have the upper hand.  So long as terrorists know and understand we, America, will be there, fighting them, killing them, decimating their numbers, they will be, and remain, on the run, with nowhere in this world to hide.  So long as this knowledge and understanding of our, America’s, resolve and intent, yet permeates, the Taliban, terrorists the world over, will not prevail.

But start releasing viscous, murderous ideologues back into the enemy’s camp; give them, the terrorists, reason to believe, give them cause to continue their madness, provide them with easily attainable leverage, such as hostages – they will rise to the occasion, they will be emboldened, and they will have nothing to fear, not even fear itself.

And once all fear of reprisal is removed, after the enemy moves in and takes over, with nothing to impede their progress, to stop them, that is how once great nations topple.

Think that can’t happen in America?

December 30, 2011 Posted by | politics, War On Terror | , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment

Of Michelle Goldberg Part 5 – Her Jewish Love Affair With Islam And Everything Anti-Christian

Cheap feminists like Michelle Goldberg are a dime a dozen.  That aside, here we have a Jewish woman defending a television program, “All American Muslim”, and supporting a religion, Islam, that wants to kill her and all Jews, while at the same time she abhors Christianity, which is an ally of Jews and a defender of Israel.  Her book, Kingdom Coming: The Rise of Christian Nationalism, is an attempt at prophecy, a dire “warning” of things yet to come should the grip of Christianity, “dominionism”, tighten its hold on America. 

This is the description of her book as seen on

Goldberg traveled through the heartland of a country in the grips of a fevered religious radicalism: the America of our time. From the classroom to the mega-church to the federal court, she saw how the growing influence of dominionism-the doctrine that Christians have the right to rule nonbelievers-is threatening the foundations of democracy.

Does this description sound more like Christianity, or Islam?  Isn’t it Islam, the religion of submission, that consistently utters “convert the infidel, or kill him/her?  Is it Christianity or Islam that practices “honor killings”?  Is it Christianity or Islam that is pushing hard to bring Sharia Law to America?  Is it Christianity or Islam that imprisons its women for having been raped and forces her to marry the rapist or remain in prison?  Is it Christianity or Islam that shames women for having been raped?  Is it Christianity or Islam that flogs, stones and murders women who will not cover themselves from head to toe, if they drive a car, if they try to vote, if they talk to a man who is of no relation, if they will not submit to their husband, and even when they are raped?  Is it Christianity or Islam that faults the woman for being raped, and releases the rapist?  Is it Christianity, or Islam, that treats women, in general, in practice, and in reality, like crap?

Is it Christianity, or is it Islam, that wants “dominion” over all the world, and the “right to rule nonbelievers”?

Michelle Goldberg is Jewish by birth, but that is about as far as it goes.  As a feminist, and a socialist, her defense of Islam is not necessarily genuine, because as a feminist, and a socialist – as are all feminists and socialists – she is anti-religion.  Which means she is also anti-Islam.  However, Islam is anti-Christian, and that being the case, she sees an opportunity to weaken Christianity by defending a religion that would otherwise sooner cut off her head than shake her hand in anti-Christian solidarity.

She is playing a very dangerous game all in an effort to weaken the influence of Christianity in America.  She is willing to betray America and her Jewish Heritage, disregarding the violence, the hatred, the obsession radical Muslims have in destroying Israel and killing all the Jews – all to push Christianity’s reach further away from the people who would seek its embrace.

Which is why Michelle writes, in her pro-Muslim article, that:

The boycott against All-American Muslim surely marks the first time that right-wingers have objected to a television program for being too bland and wholesome.

We ought not deny the fact that there are peaceful Muslims.  Indeed, many of them immigrated to America to escape the violence of the Middle East, desiring the freedom only America can offer them.  We ought not lose sight of the fact that many American Muslims are patriots.  But we ought not be blind-sighted either.

The protest against “All American Muslim”, and the reason why advertisers are pulling their sponsorship from this program as stated by The Florida Family Association:

‘All-American Muslim’ is propaganda clearly designed to counter legitimate and present-day concerns about many Muslims who are advancing Islamic fundamentalism and Sharia law,” the Florida group asserts in a letter it asks members to send to TLC advertisers.

In other words it had to do with the fact that right now we are at war with a very radical and sadistic, and evil, part of Islam, and have been since 9/11.  The entire concept of this program is engineered to deflect that issue, to push it under the rug, to deny it by casting all American Muslims as peace-loving, pro family, pro Americans.

There is a hidden agenda to “All American Muslim”.  Its creators are hoping to portray Muslims, and Islam, in a positive light while at the same time undermining and mocking our efforts to win the War On Terror.  With this program, the creators are attempting to show how ridiculous it has been, and a waste of time, money and lives fighting against something – Islam – that is clearly, as portrayed on “All American Muslim”, quite peaceful.  It is the creators way of “throwing their shoes” at all Christians, Republicans, conservatives, George W. Bush, and all “right-wingers”, “tea-baggers”, “capitalist pigs”, “pro-lifers”, etc., that are fighting to keep America out of the hands of socialists.

While Michelle Goldberg looks to excoriate and rake over the coals Americans, “right-wingers”, who worry such programming has a deeper, more diabolic intent, what would her reaction be to a program called “All American Christian”?  Isn’t it obvious Michelle would write a scathing critique against it, outlining the “hypocrisy” of such a program.  She has already written many articles condemning Christianity and Christians.  And let’s not forget her book, Kingdom Coming.

Michelle Goldberg hates Christianity, as do all feminists and socialists.  Christianity is in their way of realizing socialism’s dominion, its “dominionism” over America.  If Islam can help Michelle Goldberg accomplish this agenda, she is perfecting willing to bed down with Muslims until that agenda is realized.

But – what happens to America if socialism wins?  And – what happens to Michelle Goldberg’s love affair with Islam after she, and all socialists, succeed in permanently removing Christian influence from America?  What happens to Michelle Goldberg’s pro-Muslim, pro-Islam attitude then?  What happens to all American Muslims?

December 13, 2011 Posted by | anti-Christian, Islam, Michelle Goldberg, politics | , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

How Atheists And Muslims Have Lost Their Minds

What really happens when “children” run the world?

Children learn early on in life whether or not throwing temper tantrums and hissy fits will gain them what it is they want.  Parents will either give in, or stand firm.

What ultimately becomes of the children whose parents give in, when they themselves grow into adulthood?  What ultimately does the future hold for humanity, for society and human beings when irrationality and dangerous minds have gained control over reason and logic and are allowed to run rampant and unchecked and unchallenged?  What happens the more we give in to the temper tantrums and hissy fits, in whatever form, thrown by adults with much more dangerous agendas than wanting something of a more insignificant value such as a cookie or a toy?

We are seeing those results right now.  And while children who do throw temper tantrums and hissy fits, and do get their way time and time again, because their parents have not stood firm when they should have, do not necessarily grow up to be atheists or Muslim -

When atheists resort to throwing feces, real or fake, at a representational image of Jesus Christ, they have lost all credibility in their cause.  (Their cause, in part, being to show how silly Christianity is and how silly, how “dangerous”, Christians are to everybody for believing in it.)  Having denounced reason and logic (a cornerstone of free-thought) atheists rightly deserve to be mocked and excoriated for their own fanatical behavior.  Monkeys throw feces.  When atheists throw feces at religious images for whatever irrational reason or intent, when they feel compelled to immerse or submerge a religious image in a jar of urine, calling it art, they devolve back into the monkeys from whence they came.  They are certainly no better, no smarter, no more intellectually adept than a monkey.

When Muslims resort to offering rewards for the capture of an Israeli soldier, for the purpose of using it as leverage to gain the release of more Palestinian prisoners, they too have shown, and continue to show, a lack of credibility and how worthless their cause is.  (Their cause, in large part, to show that Islam is the one true religion, the religion of “peace”, that Allah is “greatest” and anyone who rejects that are “infidels” and need to be killed.)  Muslims, having themselves denounced reason and logic, (which has not been a cornerstone of their religion for nearly a thousand years) and embraced violence and murder, also deserve to be mocked and excoriated for their own fanatical behavior.

When Christians act in irrational and dangerous ways, atheists lose no time in mocking and excoriating them.  Whether it is Pat Robertson saying something stupid, or the Westboro Baptist Church crashing funerals, and going all the way back to the Inquisition (which is used heavily in the debate against religion, and Christianity in particular) there is no shortage of documentation showing the temper tantrums and hissy fits Christians throw.

The difference being, Christians, by in large, have grown up and become the parents they need to be.  Whether atheist, Muslim or Christian, only a small minority of people within each group is causing problems for the whole.  Of the three, only Christians have the courage and the tenacity to scold, condemn and rebuke the “Pat Robertsons” within their religious fold – and they do it very openly.

Where are the voices in the atheist community to parent those atheists who feel they need to throw temper tantrums?  Where are the voices in the Muslim community to parent those Muslims who feel they need to throw temper tantrums?  (Obviously the “temper tantrums” thrown by atheists are more on par, clownish, with those thrown by the Westboro Baptist Church and not on the level as those thrown by Muslims.  However, their goals are the same.  Both atheists and Muslims want attention and they want to get their way.)

If both atheists and Muslims have a desire to be taken seriously, how does what they are doing justify our respect?  In other words, what does it mean if we actually do take seriously the atheist that throws feces at, or otherwise defaces, a religious image; if we actually do take seriously the Muslim who engages in terrorism, homicide bombings, and offering rewards for the capture of Israeli soldiers for the purpose of negotiating a trade off?  And what happens if we actually gave in to the Westboro Baptist Church?

It means we legitimize unprovoked violence and irrational behavior – temper tantrums.  It means we live in a world devoid of laws and rules, and respect.   If we allow people to do whatever they want and get away with it, unchallenged, because we either fear the retaliation or have no stomach to endure the hissy fits, it means we allow the yellers, the screamers, the whiners and complainers, the ones who flail their arms and legs about, as children do, whether they throw feces or grenades, to be in charge of the world and dictate to the rest of us – who do act with restraint, as parents and adults – how the world will operate.

How long can the world survive when “children” run and “operate” it on feces and grenades?

October 30, 2011 Posted by | atheism, Islam, religion | , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Qaddafi Is Dead: How About Assad, Achmedinajad, And The Rest Of The Scum?

Qaddafi is is dead.  That is news to rejoice and celebrate and be very happy about.  How he actually died, who killed him, that he did not receive a “fair trial” is irrelevant.  Qaddafi was a dictator responsible for untold thousands of deaths over his 42 year reign of terror over Libya, including the 1988 Pan Am Lockerbie bombing.  Qaddafi died exactly how a ruthless, human-less dictator ought to die – without dignity!

We can only hope, and we will soon see one way or another, what takes his place in Libya, and whether or not America will have to go back in there.  If the Libyans are smart, and have some sense of human compassion, they will begin a new democracy in Libya that is void of dictators and allows for greater freedom for all its citizens.  If they are not, terrorists will again exploit whatever weaknesses and vulnerabilities remain and keep Libya from realizing true liberty, and keep America ever busy in that part of the world.

With Qaddafi’s death, the spirit of overthrowing other ruthless dictators is intensifying around the Middle east.  Syria in particular, where there have been ongoing protests for many months now, resulting in at least hundreds of deaths, if not thousands, as the Syrian government looks to conceal actual data that might reflect poorly on the nation.  In the hours after Qaddafi’s death, Syria has ramped up its killing of protesters, worried – as they ought to be – Qaddafi’s killing has emboldened and inspirited the people of Syria.  Indeed, the Syrian people have found new strength, new courage to continue their own plight for freedom and liberty.  For now, and so long as its so called President, Bashar Assad, remains in power, that freedom and liberty is on hold.

Say the protesters to Assad:

Qaddafi is gone, your turn is coming, Bashar!”

Granted we (America) would have done well to take out Syria (Assad and his government) back when we went to war with Iraq.  Still, the opportunity for removing this vagabond from a power he only acquired with the death of his father, is ripe.

How serious are the protesters in Syria and around the Middle east about removing their old, their decadent, their out of date dictators?  Says Bobby Ghosh, deputy international editor for Time Magazine:

Across the Arab world, dictators – as well as rebels – will both be looking at what happened in Libya and thinking, ‘We’ve got to strengthen our resolve.’”

That “resolve” is sharper, quicker, mightier and spreading to more and more people in Syria and around the Middle East faster than it ever has.  It is, and it ought to act as, a warning to all Middle East dictators that their time is indeed coming.  The people are rising, and continuing to rise, up against them and their brutal, murderous regimes and will exact their revenge upon them in the same way as was done to Qaddafi – without dignity.  Bashar Assad will meet the same fate as Qaddafi, if not more harshly, if he continues to disregard the will, the “resolve” of his people; if he continues to kill them as they protest for better rights, more freedom and liberty; if he continues to suppress them while he lives in the lap of luxury protected only by his military which he, as is common among all dictators, cravenly, cowardly hides behind.

And let us not forget about another highly disturbed, highly unstable and highly history-retarded dictator -  Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, President of Iran.  His time will come as well, and he will meet a fate he had neither hoped for nor expected if he is unwilling to accept the fact that his people are human beings and ought to be treated with more respect and given more freedom and liberty and more control over their own lives.  And his fate might just be sealed not by the people of Iran but by its other unstable leader, its religious dictator – the one they call the “Supreme Leader”.  He warned Ahmadinejad his post could be removed at any time.  And with removal of his “post” also comes removal of the protection that comes with that post, giving the people a better chance to “do away with him”.

It is all well and good to envision the “removal” of these bloody dictators, whether that means a peaceful transition to a new government or a coup in which “removal” leads to the death of the dictator.  Throughout history there have dictators, many of whom have met their fate by the hand, the sword, the noose, the knife, the axe, the guillotine, etc. of their own people as they rise up against them and overthrow them.  Which is why they always hide behind their military and bodyguards as long as they can and hope to die in their sleep at a very old age.  It is why, as in Syria, they employ their military to kill their own people en mass in order to intimidate them and weaken their “resolve” and give them that chance to “die with dignity” in their sleep at old age.

What the current crop of dictators don’t understand is that the people’s “resolve” has never been stronger, has never been more organized, has never had as much wide spread support as it does now, among its own people, and people around the world watching, including America which at this time is keeping a close eye on everything going on in the Middle East, in South America, Asia and wherever dictators roam freely.

The time for dictators is waning.  Freedom, the concept of freedom, the reality of freedom, the power of freedom and the proof that freedom is better than suppression and enslavement is much too strong, much too desirable, for these corrupt dictators to to keep under lock and key so they might remain in power.

The time for the end of Assad, for Ahmadinejad, for all the rest of the scum that are preventing their own people from realizing freedom is coming.  So we ought not be surprised or disheartened if we wake up to the news, in the near future, that these dictators have indeed been killed, and killed without dignity, in the same way as was Qaddafi.

We ought to look to this time with a smile on our face and a happy heart.  Remember when the Wicked Witch of the West met her death, and everyone sang, “Ding Dong, the Wicked Witch is dead”?

Every time a dictator meets the fate they deserve – to die without dignity – we’ll be singing that song, or something similar to it.

Death to dictators – long live freedom!

October 21, 2011 Posted by | politics, War On Terror | , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment

Of Abortion, Muslim Crackpots, OWS Freaks, And Why Toting Guns Works

It’s Planned Parenthood’s, feminism’s and every pro-abortion rights, worst nightmare.  A woman with cancer gives up her own life to save the life of her unborn child.  It would have been so easy to have the abortion.  No one would have blamed Stacie Crimm for ending her pregnancy.  But she didn’t.  Even though the culture of death swirled around her, the pro-abortion powers that be were too slow in getting to Stacie, who still saw the value of human life, and still recognized that her unborn child was not merely a collection of cells devoid of value, devoid of life.

After Stacie collapsed at her home and was rushed to the hospital the decision was made by doctors to deliver baby.  Stacie was able to hold her baby once before succumbing to the head and neck cancer that took control of her body and wrapped itself around her brain stem.  It’s truly a sad day for all the Planned Parenthood and NOW supporters, NARAL cheerleaders and so called feminists as another pro-life story whittles down their long held lie of  “a woman’s body, a woman’s choice” takes on a whole new meaning never intended by these groups.  Indeed, a woman, Stacie, made a choice with her body.  But it was not the choice pro-abortion groups would have wanted her to make, even if she had not had cancer.  Choosing life is never the “choice” they want a woman to make.  Thank goodness for their increasing irrelevance.


Another Muslim was arrested for causing a disturbance on an airplane, shouting  “Allahu Akbar”, and allegedly trying to enter the cockpit.  What his aim was is still unresolved.  However, what is certain is that not enough attention is being paid to this type of irrational behavior among Muslims.  If it had been a Christian shouting “God is greatest”, he/she would have been labeled a crackpot and would have been satirized on Saturday Night Live and mocked on MSNBC by Chris Matthews and every one of its hosts.

Muslims get a pass too easily from their disturbing behavior, mostly because they are an unstable culture to begin with and have a long history of inciting violence every time their religion, and their religious values, are called to attention and denounced.  Remember the Muhammad cartoons, and the cartoon controversy here and what Muslims did in response to the cartoons?

Cowards like Chris Matthews, Rachel Maddow, Joe Scarborough, et. al., will never fear mocking Christianity because Christians, by in large, are civil human beings who, although they may take offense at being ridiculed, have the type of self restraint Muslims don’t when it comes to defending their religion and their religious values.  Is it any wonder we take Muslims as “seriously” as we take liberals?  Is there any real difference between a crackpot Muslim shouting “Allahu Akbar” and a crackpot like Chris Matthews shouting, and spitting, anything anti-Christian?


Occupy Wall Street protesters are still going at it, and are as strong as ever.  Not in their anti-capitalist message (that never had any merit, or strength, to it to begin with).  But in their empty-headed message that Foxnews, conservatives, banks, the rich and even John Stossell is nothing more than “a son of a bitch”.

It is more than apparent that when it comes to shouting and chanting meaningless vitriol like that, when it comes to name calling, slurs, insults, etc., these mindless puppets on strings cannot be stopped.  Well, after-all it is easier to hurl a nasty remark at someone than engage in rational, thought provoking debate.  Imagine if culture and society could only survive on the type of scurrilous rhetoric being spewed by the OWS freaks.  What would that look like?  Watch MSNBC for twenty four hours straight and you will get an idea of what we would be in for.  Luckily, the easiest way to stop one of these protesters dead in their tracks, and speech, is to toss a provocative statement their way.  Intelligence, as with cleanliness, is not their best attribute.


And as we began with an inspiring story of life, and the value of life, so shall we end with another inspiring story of life, and the value of life – and how a gun helped save a life.

From Florida – a store manager has killed a robber who attempted to walk out of her store with her one year old daughter in his arms.  Her quick thinking led her to grab a gun from under the counter and shoot the robber before he could leave the store with her child.  He died later at the hospital.  What this animal would have done with the child had he gotten away, had this manager either not had a gun or had been brainwashed by, and bought into the lie of, the ACLU and other anti-gun, anti Second Amendment, anti-American rhetoric is anyone’s guess.  Thankfully she had a gun, she had a brain, and she used both.

This is one of those wonderful, feel-good stories that makes us all thankful we are Americans and we have the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms, and why that right is so important to maintaining a free society.  Of course anti-gun nuts are hanging their heads in shame right now, and every time an American has the “audacity” to protect their family, their property with a gun.  For them, it would have been better if the robber had taken the child and gotten away, using her as a shield to protect his own worthless life if he needed.  What other alternative would there have been for the manager/mother?  Call the police and merely hope for the best?

Anti-gun activists (most of whom are also pro-abortion) cannot see the value in protecting life even if that means using deadly force.  For them, there is always the “sob story” to accompany a criminal’s motives behind their actions.  For them, there is always a legitimate reason for everything a criminal does.  For them, there is more understanding and compassion for the criminal rather than for the victim.

For the rest of us, however, and thankfully, we are not stupid.

October 19, 2011 Posted by | abortion, gun control, Islam, politics, War On Terror | , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment

On Going To War With Iran: Let’s Do It!

In its latest kerfuffle, the always friendly, benevolent leader in world humanity, Iran, is embroiled in an alleged plot to assassinate the Saudi Ambassador to the United States within the United States itself.  According to the Obama administration, there is overwhelming proof (and it is hoped and encouraged it will be produced forthwith) for such a plot.  Iran has vehemently denied any such plot, so until that proof is given, we will have to wonder about that “little” incident.

And it was only a few weeks ago when Iran announced it would send war ships to the shores of America, or at least very close to it.  What other reason would there be for this except to provoke America into responding?  And how could, or would, America, respond other than militarily, attacking these ships and blowing them from the water?

And we still have the possible execution of a Muslim turned Christian pastor hanging on our minds, as well as Iran’s nuclear program, still in full throttle (and no end in sight) to contend with.

And Iran never executed its own citizens for being homosexual, because there are no homosexuals in Iran to begin with.

This is exactly what happens when a legitimate madman, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, (he’s even got “mad” in his name) is given absolute power over a country, and is supported by a radical, totalitarian, so called “Supreme Leader” who is just as hateful, anti-Semitic, anti-west, anti-America, bloodthirsty, and hellbent on killing and blowing up people and things for no reason or purpose other than for the amusement of their own demonic egos.

Iran, or at least Ahmadinejad, is betting on America (the Barack Obama Administration) being too weak to confront Iran, too tied up militarily and financially in Iraq and Afghanistan and other parts of the world in its War On Terror, and otherwise politically uninterested, and hampered, in engaging, and challenging, Iran directly, in another major war.  Remember, Obama promised to end these wars and bring out troops home during his 2008 campaign, and not to engage in further wars.  It is supposed the little skirmish in Uganda, for which Obama is sending 100 troops on a mission to kill Christians, does not constitute a war.

What other logical conclusion can be drawn from Iran’s irrational behavior?

For too many years Iran has been allowed to flex muscle it never had.  And now, because Barack Obama is politically weak and vulnerable (and his administration is under scrutiny), because of an otherwise small group of anti-capitalist protesters around America causing trouble and mayhem (their bark is louder than their bite), because our economy is as weak as it is, with talk of a double dip recession, Iran sees an opportunity to exploit all these weaknesses, counting on Obama’s inexperience being his undoing.  And while Obama is indeed inexperienced in so many ways, American still has the greatest military force, the greatest military might, in the world.  Enough power, regardless of Obama’s inexperience, to stop Iran and put it back in its lonely, isolated place.  But that is only if we use that power we have.

Iran is banking on the idea we won’t.

We must call Iran’s bluff, once and for all.  If Iran is stupid enough to actually send war ships to the shores of America, it must be considered as an act of war itself and we must not flinch, we must not balk, we must not stall.  If Iran wants the war, or even if it doesn’t; if Iran is merely “testing” America’s military and political resolve – we cannot waver.  Blow the bloody ships out of the water, and then go after its nuclear program and blow that up too.  If Iran still wants to continue to agitate America, we can find more targets within Iran to obliterate, including Ahmadinejad himself and his “Supreme Leader”.

Sometimes we have to give war a chance in order to secure peace.  We can no longer continue treating Iran as an idle threat.  They are not, nor can that be considered at this point, especially when Russia is supplying them with serious weapons.

The Middle East is imploding on itself; the Arab parts at any rate.  Libya, Egypt, Yemen, even Syria have, or are, all seeing internal uprisings.  For better or worse, the end results of these uprisings will dictate how the Middle East will look in the near future.  If even more radical, anti-Semitic, anti-American groups come to power in these countries, and we wait to do anything about it, or don’t do anything about it at all; if America cannot, will not, conquer this madness now; if we allow them to coalesce into a unifying force, what, or who, will stop them from realizing their vision of a Middle East free of Israel and Jews?  What, or who, will stop them from attacking all of America’s interests?

By going after, and defeating Iran, now, we can show these countries that America still has military resolve, and that we are not afraid to use it.  That we will use again, and again.

If we don’t, Iran, Syria, even Russia and China, any other country with its eyes set on defeating, or at least weakening, America’s military might in the world, will see America has no resolve, political or otherwise, to engage in war.  And as a result, these countries will begin flexing their own muscle.  Aside from Syria, Russia and China do have muscle to flex.  And as bad as it is to be weak in the eyes of smallish countries like Iran and Syria, it is far worse, far graver, with deeper and more profound ramifications, to be weak in the eyes of real military might such as Russia and China.

What becomes of America when that happens?

October 16, 2011 Posted by | politics, U.S. Military, War On Terror | , , , , , | 10 Comments

Al-Qaeda: Illegal For U.S. To Kill Its Own Traitors – Still O.K. (And Legal) For Al-Qaeda To Kill Anyone

Al Qaeda has come out with a most interesting statement on human rights and dignity by questioning the “legality” of the United States Government killing Anwar al-Awlaki.  Al Qaeda!  The same group of thugs and terrorists who have committed murder on thousands upon thousands of human beings (remember 9-11?)  including Americans soldiers.  The same groups of religious zealots who use beheadings as a means of intimidation (remember Daniel Pearl?).  The same group of perverted Muslims who have taken Islam and corrupted it into a Satanic, bloodthirsty, cult.  Al Qaeda is concerned that the killing of Awlaki was in some way barbaric and inhumane and “illegal”.  Yes!  That same bloody Al-Qaeda that’s in the news everyday for blowing up innocent men, women and children using homicide bombers.

(Read here, for a previous column on the killing of Anwar al-Awlaki)

This is a translation of what Al-Qaeda has said about the Awlaki killing from a Jihadist web site:

Where are what they keep talking about regarding freedom, justice, human rights and respect of freedoms!”

Al-Qaeda, the ‘guardian angels” that they are, of course is well documented to have the market cornered on all these concepts, and has a wealth of experience dealing with these issues.  Who are these Satan worshipers trying to fool?

Ladies and gentlemen – At a time when America and its allies are at war with these terrorists; when our efforts to destroy and annihilate this unholy mob of murderers and cutthroats has only been hampered by Democrats and liberals who, in their irrational plight to remove conservative and Christian influences from every aspect of American life, society, culture, etc., and replace it with their own socialistic worldview have given Al-Qaeda and other anti-American terrorist organizations all the breathing room, and moral support, they need in order to continue their operations – we would be so stupid and fool-hearty to imperil ourselves to take seriously the call for a more “humane” response by our American military in its engagement with an enemy, Al-Qaeda, that has only acted and behaved in the most vile, reprehensible, despicable anti-humane and anti-human ways it can think of towards the human race?  By giving into Al-Qaeda, by giving into the liberal cry to disarm ourselves, disengage, disperse and disappear from the Middle East we would effectively be giving up on the human race itself and allowing Islamic perverts to gain control.  How does that make any sense?

It is liberals who want us out of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan because they have bought into the lie that Al-Qaeda attacked America for one sole reason – America’s unwanted presence in the Middle East.  In other words, if only America hadn’t been in the Middle East, if only America was not an ally of Israel, Al-Qaeda would not have attacked America on 9-11 and America would not have expended over a trillion dollars on the “War On Terror” and thousands of Americans soldiers would not have died for “Bush’s lie”.  Although we know that to be a lie, still -

Liberals are playing right into the hands of Al-Qaeda whether they know it or not.

And Al-Qaeda is not so much concerned with whether or not America committed an “illegal” killing on an American citizen, which Awlaki was before he turned traitor and joined Al-Qaeda, than the terror group is concerned with America becoming more brazen in its war against them.  Al-Qaeda is worried, and it has reason to fear and to live in its own terror.  We killed Bin-Laden, Al-Qaeda’s number one.  Awlaki is dead.  And we will continue to seek out and kill those terrorists who take their place, even if they hold American citizenship.  Suddenly, Al-Qaeda has no where to run, no where to hide where we would not find them, where we won’t go to find them – and kill them.

So of course Al-Qaeda is going to show its yellow stripes by whining and complaining that America is not “playing fair” in its war against them, all the while Al-Qaeda continues to plot more destruction, more murder, more chaos and indoctrinate and brainwash more Muslims into becoming homicide bombers.

Alwlaki’s death, as was Bin-Laden’s, is a victory for America, for morality, for the human race.  Every time we kill Al-Qaeda members that too is a victory.  And when every last member of Al-Qaeda is dead that too will be a victory for America, for morality, for the human race.  For every time we kill Al-Qaeda, we kill the lie on which it is based and bring that much more peace and sanity back into the world.

We cannot back down, we cannot back away, we cannot back ourselves into the corner liberals are trying to paint us into.  Only through our courage and resolve, our military might, our moral strength, will we push back against the real enemies of freedom, justice, human rights and of the human race – whether these enemies call themselves Al-Qaeda or whether these enemies call themselves liberals.

October 10, 2011 Posted by | politics | , , , , , , , | 3 Comments



Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.