Showing newest posts with label appeasement. Show older posts
Showing newest posts with label appeasement. Show older posts

Thursday, April 22, 2010

South Park and Revolution Muslim: Freedom of Speech suicide bombed by Muhammad again

Wow.

There sure have been a lot of changes in this country over the past couple of years. We have nationalized banks, nationalized car companies, nationalized health insurance and pretty soon it looks like nationalized stock trading as well. We have an administration that has significantly altered the USA's approach to the Middle East...in a way that they now regularly make demands of sovereign, democratic allies while giving hostile, terrorist entities a free pass. The America we live in today is a vastly different place than it was just two years ago.

And now we have entered the realm of speech as well.

If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.
--George Washington


One week ago, the creators of South Park aired their 200th episode. In the episode they attempted to poke fun at the ridiculous idea that you can make fun of every topic, every human being, every leader, every celebrity, every religious figure...everyone except for the Prophet Muhammad.

South Park's relationship with the Prophet goes back a while...he actually appeared in an episode from nine years ago that involved many major religious figures or gods (think Jesus, Moses, Krishna) teaming up in as Power Rangers-style super heroes and fighting crime. Then, in a rather brilliant statement on censorship and Muhammad, the created a storyline where al Qaeda threatens to attack the United States if an image of Muhammad is aired on Family Guy. In the end, the terrorist "retaliation" turns out to be one of the most insane segments of television ever aired, as Jesus, George W. Bush and several stereotypical Americans are shown performing some pretty disgusting acts.


WARNING: THE FINAL MINUTE OF THIS IS PRETTY GRAPHIC AND DUE TO ITS CONTENT SHOULD NOT BE VIEWED BY ANYONE



Personally, I thought it was a very funny and poignant statement on how absurd we'd gotten in this country when one religious figure (as well as the president and the American flag) can be the subject of some (literal) toilet humor while another one isn't even allowed to be shown at all.

At the time, the scene with Muhammad did not air. Instead the screen went dark and said that Comedy Central (the channel that airs South Park) refused to allow an image of Muhammad on their network. At the time it aired - which was in the wake of the Muslim cartoon riots - it looked like an elaborate joke. Unfortunately though, it wasn't...Comedy Central gave into intimidation. Furthermore, it appears at this time that they've forced South Park to take down the streaming access to the original "Super Best Friends" episode from 2001 that had the Muhammad character.

Well, last week South Park was at it again. This time, to get around the censorship issue, they decided to hide Muhammad in a giant bear costume. Unfortunately for our old lunatic friends from revolutionmuslim.com this wasn't good enough and they responded with the following statement:

"We have to warn [South Park creators) Matt (Stone) and Trey (Parker) that what they are doing is stupid and they will probably wind up like Theo Van Gogh for airing this show,"

Theo Van Gogh for those keeping score at home, was murdered by an Islamic extremist for speaking out against the awful treatment of women in majority-Muslim countries. Essentially, the Revolution Muslim people were telling Parker and Stone that if they followed through with showing Muhammad in the next episode, bad things would be visited upon them, Allah-willing. To further drive the point home, they included an address where you could find the duo.

Also for those keeping score at home, this is the second time this site has had to deal with these Revolution Muslim fanatics. These are the same people that applauded Nidal Malik al-Hasan as a hero for blowing away his friends and co-workers during the Fort Hood terrorist attack.

So, all eyes were on South Park this week to see what would happen. Would Comedy Central again give in and try to appease a bunch of radical Muslims?

Unfortunately, when this week's episode aired, not only was Muhammad's image not shown but any mention of the word "Muhammad" was bleeped out. And at the end of the episode, an entire speech from one of the characters about the situation was also bleeped out.

This

is

a

DISGRACE.

What has happened to us? How isn't the entire country in a massive uproar today? This is not a matter of South Park being "Islamophobic" or somehow targeting Muslims...their entire M.O. is to satirize anything and everything in society. Religious figures, political figures, celebrities, silly fads and social issues of every possible type have been targeted over the show's 14-season run. Even MUHAMMAD HIMSELF was playfully mocked before the pre-9/11 fear-fest that has descended upon the world.

In fact, here in no particular order is a non-comprehensive list of the topics South Park has mocked in the past that have not resulted in barely-veiled death threats:

Jesus. Moses. Mormons. Scientologists. George W. Bush. Bill Clinton. John McCain. Barack Obama. Saddam Hussein. The devil. God. Heaven. Hell. The war in Iraq. Osama Bin-Laden. The anti-war protesters. The pro-war protesters. Rednecks. Mormons. Tom Cruise. Rosie O'Donnell. Movies that deal with time travel. 80's movies. Action movies. Japanese people. Pokemon. Catholics. Santa Claus. The Pope. The Catholic League. Jews. Judaism. Jewish mothers. Black people. Former cast member Isaac Hayes. Women. Men. Old people. Gay people. Straight people. Metrosexual people. Republicans. Democrats. Mexicans. Americans. Canadians. Orphans. Paris Hilton. Girls who like Paris Hilton. Mel Gibson. Child molestation. Chinese people. Young people. Michael Richards. Gary Condit. Steroids. The Special Olympics. Religious fanatics. Ethiopians. Sally Struthers. And on. And on. And on...

But Muhammad isn't allowed to be even just be shown on-screen??

What is going on here?! Honestly...how can we let this happen to our country and our society? How can we let one group, just one group dictate to us what we are and aren't allowed to talk about? Where is the outrage? Where are the liberals? Where is the ACLU? Moderate Muslims? Congress? The President? Anyone???

Several months ago, I wrote about Michael Savage being banned in Britain also as a result of some controversial things he has said and as far as I know, to this day still no one of any real importance has come to his defense. Here is another example, this time of Americans being censored IN AMERICA due to THREATS of VIOLENCE by OTHER AMERICANS.

This too adds a whole different dimension to the issue - the Revolution Muslim guys are AMERICANS. They live and operate in the New York area where they frequently terrorize locals (especially people who they perceive as moderate Muslims) with their rantings and ravings against the United States, Israel, Jews, Christians, unbelievers, Obama...you know, maybe they have more in common with South Park than they think...



...or maybe not. This is what we are tolerating everyday on our streets. This is what is dictating our television shows to us now. Are we really going to live like this? Are we really letting this happen?

It is entirely unacceptable and we cannot allow it to continue. But I've already weighed in several times on where this censorship road is taking us...there are only so many ways to say that this is a disgrace without being repetitive.

So here's what I'm going to do - and I encourage everyone else to do the same:





That's an image of Muhammad from the 2001 episode of South Park.





Here it is again.





And again.





And again.




"The free communication of ideas and opinions is one of the most precious of the rights of man. Every citizen may, accordingly, speak, write, and print with freedom, but shall be responsible for such abuses of this freedom as shall be defined by law."
--Declaration of the Rights of Man, Article 11

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
--The First Amendment to the United States Constitution


This is AMERICA for God's sake. We cannot let a bunch of fringe religious fanatics dictate our lives to us.


Friday, February 26, 2010

The sanction of the victim and the guiltiest man in the room, Part IV: ANTHEM

This post is the fourth and final part of a multi-part series on the stubborn habit of Jews to perpetuate situations where they are the victims of their own actions. If you haven't read Part I, Part II or Part III yet, I encourage you to check them out before continuing. If you're pressed for time, while highly recommended, it isn't required to go back in order to understand what we're talking about in this post.

____________________________________________


If we searched the entire world for a person more cowardly, despicable, weak and feeble in psyche, mind, ideology and religion, we would not find anyone like the Jew. Notice, I do not say the Israeli.
--Hasan Nasrallah

I swear, by my life and my love of it, that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine.
--John Galt

וּשְׁמַרְתֶּם אֶת-חֻקֹּתַי וְאֶת-מִשְׁפָּטַי, אֲשֶׁר יַעֲשֶׂה אֹתָם הָאָדָם וָחַי בָּהֶם
Ye shall therefore keep My statutes, and Mine ordinances, which if a man do, he shall live by them:
--Leviticus 18:5

Better to die standing, than to live on your knees.
--Ernesto 'Che' Guevara


____________________________________________


PART FOUR: ANTHEM


So now we know the issue, we know the how and we know the why.

The ISSUE is the perplexing, self-defeating behavior of Jews throughout history, the HOW is the aid given to our enemies that gives them the ability to fight and kill us and the WHY is because we have been hard-wired by 2,000 years of oppression, pain and sorrow to be docile and think that it is righteous to not resist our enemies.

The real question is WHAT do we do about it? Because there is only so far a culture of acceptance and quiet kvetching can take you and the result is a malaise that has been steadily creeping over Jews for the past several centuries.

It is that which cannot be said. Everyone knows it's there, but no one dares to speak openly about it...

We all try to blank-out, to pretend it's nothing but an uneasiness about us. We banish the feeling to the backs of our minds, to fill our heads with American Idol and Dancing with the Stars and Tiger Woods...trying ever harder to doublethink it away...but we can't, deep down we know it's there. You know it's there, that quiet, unsettling feeling of something being somehow...incorrect...that you can't quite put your finger on...something uncomfortable...almost as if there's something you're doing that you're not really proud of, even when you're not really doing anything at all.

We ignore the reality that it is this very same unspoken feeling of melancholy and emptiness that has driven young Jews to seek Buddhism or Islam or Christmas trees or Marxism or pathetic attempts to emulate hip hop culture or blind pursuit of hedge fund success at the expense of their pride and heritage. And it makes sense that this would happen...because WHO could be attached to a culture that glorifies appeasement and docility?

This is why early Zionists changed their last names, forced everyone to learn Hebrew and mocked Yiddish as a language of the oppressed. It was a clean break from the embarrassment of 2,000 years of abuse at the hands of our hosts. This is also why today it is so hard for Israelis to clarify the justification for going to war to protect themselves...to them it should be self-evident to anyone reads history!

And this is why Che Guevara and Yasir Arafat are so attractive to misguided "liberal" American youths. I used to think that it was simple ignorance that caused college students to follow these barbarians but it goes much deeper than that. While they often are ignorant of what their heroes are actually guilty of, even when the truth is brought to them they often STILL follow them...because even a flawed hero is still a hero.

Who are the modern Jewish heroes? Where are they? Ask the average American Jew and what would they say? Jon Stewart? Steven Spielberg? Adam Sandler? Ari Gold?



Famous? Sure. Successful? Filthy rich? Absolutely. But you're not exactly going to be studying them in college as revolutionary figures or instruments of social change, are you? In fact the only one among them you could perceive as "strong" or "brave" or "intimidating" is a completely fictional character! You're not going to get young Jews excited to emulate these people. When children and teenagers have no one to emulate, they're going to look outside the box for them and they're going to be ripe targets for missionaries, demagogues and worse.

They're going to leave their culture and idolize other cultures instead. And all the money their parents spent on Hebrew schools and bar mitzvah lessons will be wasted when Adam comes home with a beard and tells his family he's going to "study" to Pakistan. Or Rachel decides to go on a "humanitarian mission" to Gaza and doesn't understand why her previously tolerant parents are so upset when she tells them. This is of course assuming the parents even bothered to care about the cultural identity of their children...a trend that has been distinctly on the negative side for the past three generations at least...which not-so-oddly also coincides with the declining size of the community.

The future certainly looks grim for non-Orthodox Judaism.

As if this wasn't enough of an issue there is still the Talmudic prohibition against re=establishing a state and army in the absence of the messiah. Because we sinned and have been exiled, the rabbis who survived the disastrous Bar Kochba revolt surmised that we had best sit quietly and try to get along with our new overlords.

And so it goes...we continue to tread water...doing just enough to get from one generation to another...taking unimaginable losses all along the way...paralyzed by our own indifference and just hoping not to finally get swept under a tide that gets higher and more dangerous with every passing day.

What is the answer to this malaise? How do we break out from 2,000 years of docility? Or do we give up? Accept our own victimhood and impending doom? Sanction our own destruction?

No my friends, this is not the answer. The time has come to put this policy to bed once and for all.

First on the religious level. While Judaism's docility has been well-established over the years, there is a very strict RELIGIOUS prohibition against suicide or suicidal behavior as well as a very strict emphasis on self-preservation. There is also exists a concept in Judaism of פיקוח נפש (transliterated as pikuach nefesh) - literally "saving a soul/life" which overrules almost all other commandments...even many of the 10 Commandments themselves.

There is no QUESTION that the State of Israel has saved the lives of thousands, if not millions of people who would otherwise be doomed to persecution, oppression and in some cases starvation. And lest you think that this service provided by Israel is limited to just Jews - ask yourselves this question...why would a cash-strapped Jewish state that is embroiled in a perpetual state of war with its neighbors spend resources to assist with tsunami and earthquake search and rescue efforts? Please note the Haiti link was about a specific team of ULTRA-ORTHODOX Israeli Jews who were violating the sabbath to save the lives of people they never met and should never have even come across.



In fact, it was widely reported that for days, Israel's field hospital was the only one able to perform at any acceptable level in Haiti. So Israel saves lives, both Jewish and non-Jewish, religious and non-religious. That alone should be enough of a reason for all Orthodox Jews to embrace a state that everyday provides a literal life-saving function for people all over the world as well as a cultural, religious and spiritual life-saving function for Jews who would otherwise be lost to the tide of assimilation. It may not be the religious, messiah-driven state they crave but for now it sure serves a purpose that they should rush to embrace (and many - but not all- do).

Furthermore, our pact with the nations we were exiled to was supposed to be a two-way street. We were supposed to behave like good little refugees and they were supposed to let us be. It's time to face the facts (as early Zionists did in the 1800's) that they did NOT hold up their end of the deal. Not taking steps to protect ourselves is a violation of the commandment against suicide. Giving up our lives to adhere to a rabbinical decree from 2,000 years ago is not only insane, it is a DIRECT VIOLATION of Jewish law. This is FACT. In a post-2nd Temple world this decision made sense...in a post-Holocaust world it no longer does. The Neturei Karta, for all their black hats, white beards and Talmud-quoting signs and pamplets are WRONG. This is also FACT.

So religiously we can follow God and take inspiration from the Bible. But what to do about the secular Jews? Where do they get their inspiration from? How do we replace Guevara and Chavez and Arafat if all we have are Sandler, Spielberg and Stewart? Or worse, total embarrassments like Chomsky and Finkelstein. Where are our revolutionaries? Where are our heroes? And what can we do about the perception that we're all nerdy accountants?

Well, first we start out by pointing out that the perception is WRONG.


We're not ALL Woody Allen clones


You see we DO have our own strong heroes, revolutionaries and role models. They're just currently labeled as "Zionists" rather than Jews and are part of "Israeli history" instead of Jewish history. Theodore Herzl. David Ben-Gurion. Golda Meir. Why wear a Che Guevara t-shirt when Vladmir "Ze'ev" Jabotinsky was twice the warrior he was with none of the communist dictatorship baggage? Italians have Italy, Brazilians have Brazil and Jews has ISRAEL. Even if we don't live there or have never been there, why can't we idolize these Zionists, these Jews, these non-victims?

Unabashed, unafraid, unapologetic ZIONISM is the answer to our Jewish malaise problem. JEWISH nationalism, an impossible 2,000 year old dream that has actually been REALIZED. We don't need to be victims anymore. We don't need to play their game anymore. We don't need to play by their rules anymore!

"If it is now the belief of my fellow men, who call themselves the public, that their good requires victims, then I say: The public good be damned, I will have no part of it!"
--Hank Reardon


I will no longer be a victim.

I will no longer apologize for my success.

I will no longer be afraid to stand up for myself and defend the Jewish homeland, MY homeland, Israel.

I will no longer feel that I have to prove my loyalty to whatever country I live in by going against my homeland of Israel.

I will no longer allow the hypocrites around me to make me feel as if I need to prove my docility.

I will no longer abide by everyone else's nonsensical, politically correct definitions of right and wrong or their expectations for Jews, for Israel and for me.

I am NOT a Jewish American who is pro-Israel.

That is a passive statement similar to saying that you're pro-freedom or pro-money or pro-food or pro-happiness. Of course I am in favor of a Jewish country...that should be a given for EVERYONE regardless of who they are or what their political ideology is.

What I am, is a JEWISH AMERICAN ZIONIST.

I believe that Jews are no longer the world's victims, to be used and abused as they were throughout history. I believe that the Jewish homeland is Israel even if I don't live there and never intend to. I believe that just as the Italian national home is Italy regardless of where an Italian lives, so to is Israel the Jewish national home regardless of where a Jew finds him or herself. I believe that I must actively take steps to prevent myself, my family and my friends from being abused. I believe that I control my own destiny and no one has a right to choose my path for me, but me.

And I believe that it is not my responsibility to clean up the messes created by others. It is not my fault that other ethnic groups have also been beaten down over time. I will have solidarity with them, empathy for them and do whatever I can to help them to reach the levels of success that I have achieved.

But it is not my obligation and it will NOT achieved at my expense. I will NOT sacrifice my own future for a parasite that will end up destroying both of us. And I am finished with allowing others to guilt me into believing that there is something wrong with this way of thinking. I will no longer be the guiltiest man in the room because I know better and I will act on that knowledge.

אִם אֵן אַנִי לִי מִי לִי
וּכשְׁאַנִי לְעַצְמִי מָה אַנִי
וְאִם לֹא עַכְשָׁיו אֵימָתַי


If I am not for myself, then who will be?
When I am only for myself, what am I?
And if not now, then when?
--Ethics of our Fathers


This is my belief. This is my pledge.

And this applies to Israeli Jews as well as non-Israelis. Just because the Palestinians got the short end of the stick after the British and French carved up the Ottoman Empire and created a bunch of artificial states that were doomed to failure from the start, does not mean that the residents of Sderot need to live in a perpetual state of terror. Just because the Palestinians were abandoned and sold out by their disorganized Egyptian, Syrian, Jordanian, Saudi Arabian, Lebanese and Iraqi cousins does not mean that a Jewish family should not be allowed to live in Hebron. Just because their great-great-grandparents didn't think to hold onto their land deeds under the Ottomans or that their grandparents thought they'd be better off trying to push the Jews into the sea doesn't mean that I should sacrifice my capital to atone for it. Just because they couldn't live next to the Jews and instead started THREE wars that they lost doesn't mean that I need to fund their terrorist, dictatorial regime.

It's not my problem. Just because I am successful, it does not mean that I deserve to be sacrificed to those who are not so that they should live and I should not.

It is only if the Jewish community of the Diaspora adopts this same mentality, this anthem, this pledge to leave the shackles of victimhood behind that it will be able to reverse what appears to be an inevitable decline and disappearance into the irrelevance of assimilation. If not now...when?

These rules that we think we've set for ourselves but really have been set FOR us by faceless ancestors are impossible to follow. This game we've engaged ourselves in is impossible to win and if we continue to play it we are doomed to fail.

But the beauty of life is that we always, always have a choice.

Like Hank, I finally choose NOT to play their game.

And neither should you.


Wednesday, November 25, 2009

Indifference and Major Nidal Malik Hasan: Tolerance breeds intolerance Part II

"This was an individual who does not, obviously, represent the Muslim faith"
--Janet Nepolitano

"And as horrific as this tragedy was, if our diversity becomes a casualty, I think that’s worse."
--General George W. Casey

"Allah-u Akbar!!!!"
--Major Nidal Malik Hasan

"What we've got here is...failure to communicate. Some men you just can't reach. So you get what we had here last week, which is the way he wants it... well, he gets it. I don't like it any more than you men."
--The Captain, Cool Hand Luke



Is there any human action that is more intolerant than murder? Is there any freedom more basic than the right to be alive?

Taking another person's life is the ultimate communication breakdown, the ultimate failure to understand the other side of the debate. It is the final act of a desperate man or woman, either as the ultimate expression of extremism or as a defense against it.

In that regard there could be no one less tolerant or more extreme than Major Nidal Malik Hasan. A soldier that turned his gun on his fellow brothers and sisters in arms. A doctor that destroyed life instead of saving it. A psychiatrist who created mental anguish for his former patients. An American who considered himself a Palestinian first and professed his loyalty to sharia law ahead of Constitutional law. A Muslim extremist who took advantage of the freedom he swore to protect in order to spread his extremism and rob others of their freedom to live. And it was all made possible not by lax gun laws or "disgruntled war veterans" or any of the silly excuses the appeasers (yes Janet Nepolitano I'm talking to you) of the world use to distract us from the following simple fact:

Nidal Malik Hasan is an Islamic extremist who tried (and apparently managed for years) to control his murderous impulses until he finally snapped and killed a bunch of people in the name of his religion.



Ok? Can we say that without being crucified as ignorant or racist? He dressed in Islamic robes on the morning of his attack (planned as a suicide mission), consulted with an imam tied to al Qaeda and yelled the same thing other Islamic suicide attackers (including the 9/11 hijackers) yell as they blow up a bus or school or plane.

All of the pundits on TV over the past couple of weeks have been grinding and grinding and grinding Hasan's background to death. He was a loner. He didn't have a woman (because he couldn't find one Islamic-ly pious enough). He had Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. He had PRE Traumatic Stress Disorder. Grinding and grinding and grinding. He was depressed. He was sad. He was misunderstood. He was upset about his imminent deployment to Afghanistan or Iraq. And grinding and grinding and ENOUGH ALREADY. Those are all excuses. Here are some more facts:

Hasan's business card had the acronym "SoA" on it.



SoA, if you are unaware, stands for "Soldier of Allah". Hasan gave speeches on American foreign policy and his demand that Muslims be given the right to become conscientious objectors and opt out of military action in Muslim countries. Even more astonishing is new information emerging now that the FBI had the following information LAST WINTER:

[Hasan] sent a message to a radical imam in Yemen saying that he was looking forward to the discussions they would have over alcohol-free wine in the afterlife.

This is the same imam by the way that was visited by 3 of the 9/11 hijackers as well as several other terrorists and attempted terrorists. Some of these attempted massacre-ists that admired al-Alawki included a group of home-grown Canadian al-Qaeda as well as the group of lunatics that tried to attack the army base in Fort Dix, NJ. Please note the common thread between these groups and Hasan - all wannabe disciples of the same guy, all radical Muslim, all citizens or permanent residents of the countries they planned to attack.

The article continues:

[Other emails] included questions about when the imam considered jihad, or holy war, to be appropriate, and whether it justified the killing of innocents.

Oh my...but we're not done yet folks - hold on to your hijabs with this one:

One result is intense interest in the American-born Mr al-Awlaki, who has never been arrested in the US but served time in jail in Yemen in 2006 and is seen by some intelligence agencies as an al-Qaeda recruiter.

Three weeks before Major Hasan bought the guns he used at Fort Hood, Mr al-Awlaki posted on his website an endorsement of attacks by Muslims on “government armies in the Muslim world”. He stated: “Blessed are those who fight against them and blessed are those [martyrs] who are killed by them.” Since the Fort Hood rampage, Mr al-Awlaki has called Major Hasan a hero.


All right. So...this guy was becoming friendly with a possible al-Qaeda recruiter, the same guy that inspired at least TWENTY THREE HOME GROWN TERRORISTS to attempt to murder hundreds if not thousands of their own countrymen...and Casey and Nepolitano's top concern is DIVERSITY. Our leadership shouldn't be making excuses for the rest of the law-abiding Muslim Americans, they can do just fine in speaking up for themselves in this free country of theirs. Why do they need Nepolitano apologizing for them anyway? Does the Homeland Security Chief need to get onto a podium every time a serial killer chops up some drug addicts in Cleveland and remind us that these creeps do not "represent" the Christian faith? Ridiculous!

And excuse me, with all due respect to General Casey, this incident was NOT a tragedy. Tragedies are things like hurricanes or tornadoes. Earthquakes are tragedies. A cancer diagnosis is a tragedy. Tragedies are terrible events beyond our control. This event was absolutely under someone's control. Hasan's rampage wasn't a tragedy - it was a MASSACRE. It was a TRAVESTY. It was a bloodbath. And MOST IMPORTANTLY it could have been prevented if just one of two things happened:

1. If the FBI hadn't dropped the ball by not pursuing the very real possibility that this guy wasn't just "conducting research" and was behaving increasingly erratically.

OR

2. If someone that knew him had spoken up.

You've already read about Nidal Hasan's rantings on Muslims in the military. You already know by now that several doctors and others were very disturbed by his presentation but chose to treat him with "kid gloves" despite the fact that he was a poor psychiatrist with terrible evaluations. You already know by now that Hasan has been reported as saying: "I'm a Muslim first and I hold the Shariah, the Islamic Law, before the United States Constitution." You know all this because it was all in the same article I just linked to from Fox News that is now almost TWO WEEKS OLD. Why then, is he still not being referred to as a terrorist? Because he wasn't a card-carrying member of the jihad? Oh wait nevermind, he was.

Believe it or not, General Casey, Secretary Nepolitano and the rest of the diversity brigade are more interested in not offending Muslims than they are in performing their most basic duty...that being to defend the country from all threats, be they foreign or domestic. Instead of being concerned with how this happened, how it could have been prevented and how to prevent it from happening again they are sacrificing our safety on the altar of Political Correctness.

Their indifference, their apathy towards reality allows people like Hasan to succeed in their acts of passion, their acts of evil. Their tolerance allows the intolerant to succeed.

Because you see, it doesn't end with Hasan. Praise be to Allah, our good friends over revolutionmuslim.com have fixed their website and we can now present their original video on the Ft. Hood shooting:




In the video, the speaker (an American) explicitly states his support for the massacre as a legitimate attack on military targets during a declared war, using Holy Qur'anic verses to back his points. He is in effect supporting the enemy of his country during a time of war.

trea⋅son  [tree-zuhn]
–noun
1. the offense of acting to overthrow one's government or to harm or kill its sovereign.
2. a violation of allegiance to one's sovereign or to one's state.
3. the betrayal of a trust or confidence; breach of faith; treachery.

se⋅di⋅tion  [si-dish-uhn]
–noun
1. incitement of discontent or rebellion against a government.
2. any action, esp. in speech or writing, promoting such discontent or rebellion.
3. Archaic. rebellious disorder.

It's not just about Nidal Malik Hasan. There are movements right now in the United States, that are literally committing acts of treason/sedition like this one on American soil, using American companies and proudly displaying their work to the rest of the world. Would these people be allowed to speak like this about the countries they support IN the countries they support? Why are we tolerating this? Why do we allow these people to operate at will and poison uninformed minds on the internet?

They are using our own rules against us. And the media is ignoring them. Our politicians are ignoring them. How can we afford to ignore them? How can we afford to continue being indifferent to this evil while it plots against us and our families? Why do we refrain from calling it what it is? Why are we afraid to be honest with ourselves?

I'll tell you why. You see while Nidal Malik Hasan acted to kill those soldiers at Ft. Hood he did not act alone. Political correctness aided him. Indifference abetted him. Tolerance of evil gave him aid and comfort. And we are all accomplices.

In the end...WE as a society killed them. Our collective conscience silently screams in desperate horror for us to blank out this fact but we cannot do it anymore. Our future as a liberal democracy depends on it. Hasan needs to be punished for his act of war but it's time we as a society started taking responsibility for our own actions, or lack thereof.

Because if we don't, the next massacre will be on our conscience too.

Tuesday, November 17, 2009

Tolerance Breeds Intolerance

SOME say the world will end in fire,
Some say in ice.
From what I’ve tasted of desire
I hold with those who favor fire.
But if it had to perish twice,
I think I know enough of hate
To know that for destruction ice
Is also great
And would suffice.
--Robert Frost, "Fire and Ice"


Fire and Ice.

Two ways for humanity to come to a tragic end. Generally "Fire" has been interpreted as a massive Armageddon-style war of passion between hotheaded, nationalist countries and "Ice" is the opposite.

While there are many possible explanations of Robert Frost's poem - inevitably they reach the same conclusion - he is referring to two possible ways that life (or civilization) can be extinguished. Growing up in the 1980's our greatest fear was always that the Earth would be incinerated in a massive fiery nuclear exchange between the United States and the Soviet Union. With the end of the Cold War, this fear has subsided somewhat to the point that we reinterpret history today to convince ourselves that it was all just a big misunderstanding between great superpowers with different styles of government...

But there is another way to tragedy, one that doesn't require massive nuclear devastation.

It is ice. The opposite of fire. The opposite of passion.

I am talking of course about the ultimate sin of indifference. The sad sad spectacle of good men and women tolerating the evil actions of others and failing to rise up against them before it is too late.

Recently we observed the two November memorials of Kristallnacht and Veteran's Day. Kristallnacht commemorates the first state-sponsored act of violence of the Holocaust, a national pogrom against the Jews of Germany and Austria. Veteran's Day commemorates the end of World War I...and inevitable march to World War II and the Holocaust. Interestingly, the icy reception of the Versailles treaty by the United States and the failure of the Allies in enforcing it are in large part responsible for the fires of WWII. Had the West not been indifferent towards Hitler's rearming of Germany, a true nightmare may have been averted.

Passion and Indifference. Fire and Ice. And in the end, total destruction.

Over the past few decades as Americans we have been taught in schools and on television that tolerance is the cornerstone of a free and liberal society. In movies and on TV, the young protagonist or team of protagonists (often made up of one representative of every race) are often antagonized by an intolerant, usually older Caucasian individual, that sees the world as black and white as opposed to the glorious rainbow we have been taught it actually is. In the end we learn that all we need to do is get to know each others' cultures and we will see that humans are humans and we have much more in common than we have differences. If we are simply more TOLERANT of each other, we can all finally get along.

A beautiful message to say the least - and that's fine and well and good for TV and movies and ideals, but reality is a little different.

Because there is another side to tolerance. A darker side.

The issue with tolerance is that it often causes us to be indifferent to genuinely evil acts. Can there be any doubt that there were many good Germans in the 1930's that saw the Nuremberg Laws and simply TOLERATED them because going about their lives was more important than some Jews they didn't really care much about anyway? Could the Holocaust not have been averted if the entire Western world didn't sit idly by and TOLERATE Hitler's rise to power?

When hundreds of thousands of Tutsis were being brutally murdered, raped and pillaged in Rwanda - could this have happened without the de facto TOLERANCE of the Western democracies?

When the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia sacrificed 1.5 million of their own people to an insane ideology - could this have happened without the TOLERANCE of the Americans, Europeans and every other civilized nation that had the ability to stop it? In the end, it took an invasion by Vietnam...COMMUNIST Vietnam mind you...to put an end to the Killing Fields.

When Somalia collapsed into chaos and anarchy. When the Ayatollah Khomeini seized control of Iran. When the Congo plunged into civil war. When pogroms and purges raged all over Russia. When the Congo plunged into a second civil war. When the Taliban imposed sharia on Afghanistan. EVERY SINGLE DAY that the Darfur genocide continues.



All of which is made possible by our indifference. By our tolerance of evil.

"It's just their way" - "It's just their culture" - "Who are we to tell them how to live their lives"

How many times have we heard these phrases? How many times have we been told that it is not our place to get involved. That it is not our place to JUDGE other cultures no matter how brutal or repressive or anti-woman or anti-Jewish or anti-democracy or anti-gay they may be? And ironically, how often do we hear these phrases from women or Jews or gays or Democrats?

But it is specifically the fact that we allow these evil people to spew their ignorance and take steps towards achieving the backwards, anti-liberal, anti-tolerant societies that allows them to succeed! By TOLERATING these actions and giving these EXTREMELY INTOLERANT people carte blanche to operate we are fostering the greatest intolerance there can be.

It is the indifference of the decent majority that allows the passion of the indecent minority to catch fire and create the very destruction the majority claims to oppose.

Indifference creates passion. Tolerance breeds intolerance. Ice causes fire. All seemingly opposite - yet...indisputably connected and intertwined. And, perhaps ironically, they are consumed by that which they created.

Hitler would have been much easier to stop in 1933 than he was in 1939. Pol Pot would never have been able to massacre his own people if the world (or even just a few democratic nations) had united against him. The Rwandan genocide could have been extinguished had it not been tolerated by the outside world. Al Qaeda would never have been able to fly planes into the World Trade Center and kill thousands of innocent Americans had we not TOLERATED the Taliban overrunning Afghanistan and destroying thousands of years of culture in a hail of artillery fire. All in the name of insanity.

And furthermore if the citizenry of these countries themselves had risen up against these insane ideologies in their infancy - they could have been easily squashed. Instead they were tolerated and were allowed to grow until the decent people were overwhelmed by the lunatics. Once that happens the burden then falls to the free people of the world to unite and liberate them.

But tell a supposed liberal that you advocate taking action against this evil and you are immediately labeled intolerant, backwards, ignorant, war-monger, perhaps even racist.

Likewise if you speak out against an ideology that spews intolerance towards women, Jews, gays, democracy, Christians and literally every liberal ideal/achievement of the past half-century...you too will be labeled as intolerant. Somehow...we are somehow supposed to understand why Islamist ideology shows rampant discrimination and intolerance against several groups (which we often belong to) and dare not criticize it.

We are expected to protect their right to practice this rigid ideology...to tolerate their right to be intolerant, as they use our own rules against us to fill the internet, our streets and our college campuses with decidedly UNLIBERAL views, poisoning the minds of impressionable youths and leading to a scenario where they can eventually impose their beliefs on us whether we want them or not. Like the Nazis or the Khmer Rouge, the indifference of the decent majority is what allows the indecent minority to succeed.

Explain to me please, someone - how it can be that we TOLERATE movements like this one to operate on our soil:



NOTE: This article originally referenced a video clip from this group defending the actions of Major Nidal Malik Hasan as legitimate acts of war. That video has been apparently taken down in the past 24 hours.

Did you get all of that? Right now, there is a group operating in New York City that is literally denouncing the United States and its liberal ideals and verbally abusing and harassing Christians and moderate Muslim teenagers on the street. In another video the speaker implores a group of Muslims to "reject" the American military, wishes success insh'Allah on the Taliban and preaches an end to democracy.

And what's more they post videos of themselves on the internet and gloat about doing it! This is borderline treason and we are expected to TOLERATE it or be considered ignorant, uncultured or racist.

But if these people win - would they protect our rights to denounce them?

Would they allow us to voice our opinions and criticize their actions?

Or would they use your naive tolerance to smack you in the face (as the speaker encouraged the young boy to do to the Christian missionary in the video) the first chance they had the ability to overpower you? If only the people at the parade banded together to evict these extremists from their midst and get them off the street. But they didn't.

They tolerated them and allowed themselves to be abused. And so are the rest of us, every day...tolerating this abuse. It is this tolerance...this indifference of the decent many, towards the actions of an indecent few, that will allow them to rise up and destroy us.

If we don't take action now
We settle for nothing later
Settle for nothing now
And we'll settle for nothing later
--Rage Against the Machine, "Settle for Nothing"


We need to say no to these people. We need to draw the line of tolerance in the sand. Anyone is allowed to believe whatever they want - so long as they do not infringe on MY right to believe what I want. Or YOUR right to believe what you want. As soon as they cross that line...they give up their right to be tolerated.

Action always defeats inaction. Passion always defeats apathy. Fire always defeats ice...

If we don't get our act together soon we don't stand a chance.



Indifference towards Nidal Malik Hasan was the real culprit in the Ft. Hood shootings. Part II details how.

Sunday, August 30, 2009

Why We Fight: In Defense of Preemptive Offense

I believe it is peace for our time... And now I recommend you to go home and sleep quietly in your beds.
--Neville Chamberlain upon signing the Munich Agreement, September 30th, 1938

Every one of the hundred million Arabs has been living for the past nineteen years on one hope – to live to see the day Israel is liquidated…There is no life, no peace nor hope for the gangs of Zionism to remain in the occupied land.
--Cairo Radio, on the eve of the 6 Day War

One never knows when aircraft come towards you what their intention is.
--Abba Eban, explaining Israel's actions before and during the 6 Day War

The United States reaps the thorns its rulers have planted in the world.
--Saddam Hussein, referring to the 9/11 attacks, September 12, 2001

Those who think they can revive the stinking corpse of the usurping and fake Israeli regime by throwing a birthday party are seriously mistaken. Today the reason for the Zionist regime's existence is questioned and this regime is on its way to annihilation.
--Mahmoud Ahmedinejad, May 9, 2008

והתורה אמרה: אם בא להורגך – השכם להורגו
And the Torah said: if he comes to kill you - rise up to kill him (first)
--The Talmud, Berachot 62B


______________________________________________________________________

World events do not happen in a vacuum.

In the history books, intentions are not remembered - only results are. If I intend to save a life by driving my car recklessly in order to reach an injured person in time and in the process run over and kill someone else...society will not be impressed that I attempted to be a hero, history will only remember the fact that I took a life.

Likewise if a nation's leader signs an agreement that sacrifices another nation in the name of peace...and that agreement not only doesn't result in peace but is a direct path to WAR - his intention is meaningless. His actions led to the destruction of innocent lives. Those extinguished lives are as much his responsibility as they are the responsibility of the actual aggressors of the conflict.

Furthermore if a nation's leader directly threatens to destroy another nation, or even to harm one single life in that nation and he has the means to do so, his intention is irrelevant. It doesn't make a difference why he says it...whether it's to distract his people from a bad economic situation or to win an election...it matters not. If someone has a loaded gun pointed at your wife, has his finger on the trigger and says to you that he is going to kill her right in front of you, are you going to take the risk that he is indeed bluffing?

Because it also follows that if you have the means to prevent the murder of your wife and you choose not to because you feel the gunman did not have the INTENTION of pulling the trigger or because you had the INTENTION of resolving the conflict peacefully - and you turn out to be wrong when he shoots her in the face - that you are nearly as culpable as the actual murderer himself. No one will care WHY you stood by and allowed her to die, all they will remember is that you had the opportunity to act but chose not to for some misguided reason.

And finally, if a weaker nation threatens to overrun a stronger nation and does not have the ability to do so what should happen? Should the stronger nation take the steps to prevent this from occurring? Or should the leaders of that country wait until their enemy actually has the means to do so? Or even worse, should they give their enemy the means to do so? It would be preposterous if they did. No one, no matter how naive, no matter what misguided intentions they had, would actually willingly give their rival the ability to destroy them, right?

Did you read the first quote in this essay? Because that's exactly what happened in 1938.

British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain made a deal with the devil and effectively gave Hitler control of all of Czechoslovakia's vital industries and natural resources. He also gave him the courage to continue his plan to dominate all of Europe to the point that Hitler later remarked:

Our enemies are little worms, I saw them at Munich...Now Poland is in the position I wanted...I am only afraid that some bastard will present me with a mediation plan at the last moment.



In fact, if you believe this site, Chamberlain may have inadvertently kept Hitler in office and thwarted a plan to have him removed from power by his generals. You see at the time, Germany had little military might to back up their threats. A war with Britain and France at this point would prove disastrous. Hitler's generals knew this and planned to have him arrested the moment he gave the order to invade. The Munich Agreement prevented this invasion and gave his staff no pretext to have him deposed. If this is indeed a fact, than the blood of millions is on Neville Chamberlain's and the rest of the appeasers' hands.

So instead of averting the greatest nightmare of the 20th century, the wheels of history continued to turn. Evil was permitted to win the day, Germany was granted the time to continue building its war machine and the prestige of the British Empire dwindled to the point that Hitler became fearless of it. By the time the West decided to act, in defense instead of on offense, it was too late. One Holocaust, two nuclear fireballs and countless battles later, over 50 million people paid the price for Britain's lack of resolve at Munich. Chamberlain's intentions and ideals are irrelevant in the grand scheme of history. Sleep quietly in your beds everyone, your government has it all under control...

Fast forward now to June, 1967. The newly established State of Israel has fought two full-scale wars for survival, dozens of pitched battles against her Arab neighbors and has somehow beaten the odds to claim victory both times. Prime Minister of Israel, Levi Eshkol finds himself in a highly precarious situation. Egyptian dictator Gamal Abdel Nasser has united the Arab states of Syria, Egypt, Jordan and Iraq under the banner of finally destroying the 18-year old "Zionist entity" (the phrase that is still used by many Arab and Iranian leaders when referring to the as-yet-unrecognized state of Israel). Egypt was blockading Israeli shipping interests, had recently evicted UN peacekeepers from the Sinai peninsula and was mobilizing huge numbers of soldiers. All across the Middle East, state-run newspapers and radio broadcasts screamed about the impending doom that the Jews of Israel were facing. The United States and Israel did not yet have the relationship they have had in recent years and besides that, the Americans were too busy trying not to win the Vietnam War to get involved anyway.

Not willing to sacrifice Israeli sovereignty by surrendering territory and not willing to wait until his country was completely surrounded by Arab forces, Levi Eshkol decided to act.



On the morning of June 5th, 1967, 200 Israeli planes took off from various airfields throughout Israel. In what was arguably one of the most successful air campaigns in the history of warfare these planes effectively destroyed the combined air forces of all four enemy nations - mostly while they were still on the ground. With instant air superiority, Israel smashed the armies that surrounded it and more than tripled its land size. The gains it made during this war allowed Israel to eventually make peace with Egypt, previously its greatest rival and instigator of several wars against it. In addition, the divided city of Jerusalem was reunited and Jews returned to their ancient capital for the first time in 2,000 years.

Two cases. Both are situations where a militarily weaker nation threatened to destroy a military stronger nation. In one case the result was appeasement. The weaker nation (Germany) used the time it was granted to catch up militarily to the stronger nations (Britain and France). Utter disaster followed. In the other situation, the result was a preemptive strike. Israel (the stronger nation) did not allow the instigator, Egypt (the weaker nation) time to build its defenses. Israeli leaders, with the memories of the Holocaust still fresh in their minds, would not repeat the mistakes of Europe from 30 years earlier. They would not allow Egypt to fight on its own terms, when it was ready for battle. Israel would not allow Syria and Egypt to sit on her border, having their militaries trained by Soviets and getting more access every day to the latest in Soviet military technology.

This is war. This is war for survival. And in a war for survival you do not sit around and allow your enemy to fight on equal footing. If you have the advantage, you must take it. Your ideals and your intentions go right out the window when there are hordes of AK47-toting barbarians rampaging through your cities, destroying your farms, raping your women, slaughtering your children and laying waste to the society you've built up out of the sand.

Hitler said to Chamberlain: "I am going to destroy you." Chamberlain responded by giving him the tools to do so.

Nasser said to Eshkol: "I am going to destroy you." Eshkol responded by rising up to destroy him first.

Intentions are meaningless, only results matter.

If we apply this logic now to the Iraq war, the motivation for going becomes a little more understandable. Put aside any conspiracy theories or oil nonsense. Taken in the context of a post-9/11 world and with this historical background, acting preemptively should have been the only option on the table.

People often forget (or choose to forget) that Saddam Hussein had been terrorizing his neighborhood for decades and made frequent threats against America and her allies. This site has a list of anti-American, anti-British, anti-Saudi Arabian and anti-several-other-countries quotes from Hussein and his state-controlled media that span many years. Regardless of what his intentions were, President Hussein made it clear with those statements that he was clearly on the side of the 9/11 terrorists when it came to killing Americans in Manhattan, Riyadh or wherever they could be found. His statements threatened international terrorism against Americans as well as chemical and biological attacks. Here are a few select quotes, some of which were made within weeks of the attacks on New York City and Washington:

"If the attacks of September 11 cost the lives of 3,000 civilians, how much will the size of losses in 50 states within 100 cities if it were attacked in the same way in which New York and Washington were? What would happen if hundreds of planes attacked American cities?"
Al-Rafidayn, September 11, 2002 (State-controlled newspaper)

"[I]t is possible to turn to biological attack, where a small can, not bigger than the size of a hand, can be used to release viruses that affect everything..."
Babil, September 20, 2001 (State-controlled newspaper)

"The United States must get a taste of its own poison..."
Babil, October 8, 2001




This goes along with YEARS of belligerence against American and allied interests. Keep in mind, we are dealing with a dictator, who quite frankly was responsible for a LOT WORSE than Nasser was before the 6 Day War or Hitler was before WWII. The ruins of the Twin Towers are still smoldering and a genocidal maniac is talking about biological warfare and viruses. Remember, intentions are irrelevant here, only results matter.

Shall we wait to see if he is bluffing for publicity? Do we wait to see if he is serious, knowing he has already performed all the acts he is threatening us with on his own people and neighbors? Keep in mind that this man fired dozens of scuds during the first Gulf War into civilian areas of Israel which was a non-participant in the fighting. Keep in mind that he was still viewed by many Arabs as a hero for standing up to the mighty US military during the first Gulf War and living to talk about it. Keep in mind that like Hitler, he had already attempted to annex a neighbor previously. Keep in mind that even if he wasn't directly involved in the 9/11 attacks he had contributed at least $35 Million to international terror campaigns and housed an al-Qaeda-affiliated terrorist-training center.


An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.
--Sir Winston Churchill


Regardless of what weapons inspectors said. Regardless of whether or not in 2003 he posed an actual threat to you or me living in our nice American suburbs. Regardless of whether or not Colin Powell was given good or bad intelligence. Regardless of all of that, we were dealing with a very dangerous regime that either possessed or was trying to possess the means to attack the United States and its allies. The information I am sharing with you here was all publicly available at the time...and several of us who followed the news and history of the Middle East felt that regardless of what the administration said were its reasons for going to war - these facts, when viewed through the prism of history meant that preemptive action was REQUIRED.

We could either take the path of Chamberlain and seek to appease a man who told us he wanted to kill us or take the path of Eshkol and rise up to destroy him before he had the ability to.

Now we have a new President Hussein, this time in charge of the United States of America. And a new threat is rapidly approaching the breaking point. A new evil has been menacing the Middle East in the guise of Mahmoud Ahmedinejad and the Ayatollahs that pull his strings. The time will soon come that we find out whether Iran is serious about incinerating Israel and instigating a nuclear war that will consume the entire Middle East. Or perhaps we will find out if Iran will simply balance out Israel's perceived nuclear deterrent and allow the Palestinians and their puppet masters to launch full-scale attacks on Tel Aviv once more.

We stand once more on the precipice of all-out destruction, with the United States in the position of Britain and Iran in the position of Germany.

Israel will never allow herself to be sacrificed in the name of mindless appeasement the way Czechoslovakia was.

But the fight will only become more difficult with every day that passes. Everyday brings Iran closer to military-equivalence to the West. Everyday brings Iran closer to the Bomb which will make the situation exponentially more precarious.

Please Mr. Obama, do not allow this day to come. Do not be fooled, like Chamberlain was, that the enemy's ambitions will end with a few regional power plays. It will start with Israel, like Germany started with the Sudetenland, but it will not end there. The goal of this evil is to overrun every last corner of the Earth where freedom and liberty are a way of life. We have been down this road before.

Although we will never know what would have happened had Israel not struck first against Egypt, we know for a fact what the result was of allowing Germany carte blanche to do as it pleased - the greatest terror the world has ever known. Therefore, in the end it boils down to two options. You can either:

1. Allow your enemy the time to prepare his attack, build his strength and eventually reach and kill you...

2. Or rise up before he can and kill him first.

It's either one or the other. The history books will only remember the results of the choice, not the intentions behind it.

The clock is ticking...




Vote for this post on BloggersBase

Saturday, August 22, 2009

A hero's welcome! Hooray for Megrahi! Hooray for Libya!

Some people just will not get it. They either ignore current events and history or just are incapable of understanding their significance.

If you hadn't already heard, the Pam Am bomber was just released because he has terminal prostate cancer. Apparently, this was done out of compassion, to give this convicted murderer of 270 people the opportunity to die, peacefully in his homeland. And so, the cultured and enlightened nation of Scotland, in a show of goodwill and understanding to the people of Libya and the greater Islamic world, decreed that Mr. Megrahi be allowed to go free as his time on this world was nearing to an end.

So there he went, flying off into the sunset...with Moammar Gadhafi's son, Saif al-Islam Gadhafi along for the ride. Amongst statements from Scottish Secretary of Justice MacAskill, justifying the release...

No compassion was shown by him to them. But that alone is not a reason for us to deny compassion to him. Mr. al-Megrahi now faces a sentence imposed by a higher power.

...and warnings from Western leaders not to make a big show of his return...

"I think it's very important that Libya knows, and certainly we have told them, that how the Libyan government handles itself in the next few days after the arrival of Mr. Megrahi will be very significant in the way the world views Libya's re-entry into the civilized community of nations,"

...the question remained...how would the Libyans receive a released mass murderer? Would they protest his crime? Would they even let him off the plane? Would they throw rotten fruits and vegetables at him?



Hey look, it's a party! Let's do some Jäger bombs! Oh wait wrong occasion, uhhh not bombs, bombs are bad...ummm...how about beer pong instead! All right!



Wooo confetti! Welcome home sport! We missed you! We love you!

And what about everybody's new bestest friend, Gadhafi? What did he have to say about the return of one of the worst murderers in history?



Great to have you back dude! Don't forget we gotta chill at the palace after-party dawg. It's gonna be off da hook ya'heard!

Actually Gadhafi didn't say that, but he did thank his "good friend" Prime Minister Gordon Brown for sending a mass-murderer back home. Gadhafi's son Seif was more direct in his statement that Megrahi's "liberation is a victory that we offer to all Libyans". Keep in mind by the way that Megrahi was not released on any appeal of his conviction. He was released on grounds of compassion. The Scottish government was essentially saying: "We still think he killed those people but we're going to let him go anyway because we feel bad for him".

And bingo, hero's welcome. Flags, flower petals and embraces with the leader of the country.

But wait a minute. Didn't everyone tell the Libyans to behave? After all...

British Prime Minister Gordon Brown had specifically asked Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi not to give al Megrahi a celebratory welcome, Brown's office at 10 Downing Street said.

Brown wrote a letter to Gadhafi, delivered to the Libyan Foreign Ministry on Thursday, asking the Libyans to act with sensitivity with regard to al Megrahi's return.


Hello? Moammar? You there? Your "good friend" TOLD you not to do this! Why, it's almost like...you don't CARE what your new English-speaking friends think of you. Like you don't care what anyone thinks as long as you get what you want. That's not very nice Moammar. You've made Mr. Brown and Mr. Obama very very very upset. I mean, they SPECIFICALLY ASKED you not to do this. You can absolutely FORGET about being invited to the White House to play on Barack's new slim Playstation 3 now. Just forget it!

I mean, what a shocking turn of events. A convicted mass-murderer receives a hero's welcome in his Middle Eastern country while the truly enlightened Western leaders are humiliated.

Except that it's not shocking at all. This is what happens. How many times do we need to see these cheering, taunting crowds who mock and ridicule the naive idiots that release killers back into society? How many times do we have to act "shocked" and "disgusted" that these absolutely sick societies embrace murderers and terrorists as their ultimate heroes? How many times is it going to take before we wake up and realize that it's not just propaganda, it's not just the government news stations. It's the people themselves who live in these countries that support terrorism. No, not all Libyans are terrorists. Not all Palestinians are terrorists. Not all Iranians want to obliterate Israel. But so many of them support terrorism and nuclear annihilation that it is impossible to ignore.

And of course our "leaders" react with shock and outrage as If they could never fathom that a Middle Eastern dictatorship could ignore their demands.

Obama described the scenes at Tripoli airport as "highly objectionable", and the White House warned the Libyan government that it risked a rift between the two countries if there is any repetition of the hero's welcome for Megrahi. Gibbs said the US would be watching what happens next. It wants Megrahi held under house arrest. Part of the US anger is because Libya snubbed a plea by Obama not to award him a hero's welcome.

Wow I can't WAIT to see "what happens next". What will the consequence for this "snub" be exactly? Sanctions? Or much more likely just a bunch of huffing and puffing and then...back to begging the Islamic world for forgiveness for supporting Israel.

This isn't the first time these terrorist-worship-fests have happened either.

It happened when Samir Kuntar, murderer of five people including a 4 year old received a hero's welcome in Lebanon



It happened when Yasir Arafat was applauded at the United Nations, despite being responsible for thousands of dead Israelis and Palestinians



And it even happens when the perpetrators are not in attendance, as during the recent Fatah "conference" where notorious murderers Dalal Mughrabi and Khaled Abu-Usbah were honored as heroes and martyrs



How can we ignore these images? How can we refuse to learn from these events? How our leaders be so naive, so blind, so pathetic as to continue making these deals, knowing they will be continuously humiliated?



These people are not our friends. These societies do not respect compassion and understanding. They respect strength, power and resolve. Come on Gordon and Barack...you think they care about your "victims sensitivities" or your "civilized community of nations" ? You naive, ignorant fools. They are laughing at you today! They are thanking you for your complete ignorance! They delight in making blockheads out of you. They see you as buffoons, as clowns, as pathetic excuses for leaders. As idiots, as suckers to be taken advantage of. And for once, I can agree with the terrorists and their supporters. Because you see, in the final insult, as if a hero welcome for a murderer wasn't bad enough - present at the celebrations were SCOTTISH FLAGS.



That's right, before the plane doors opened and the confetti and green flags of Islam started flying, the crowd, in an ultimate display of mockery...actually waved the emblem of the very nation that this attack took place in.

"Specifically asked" to behave indeed.

When will people start to get it?





Vote for this post on BloggersBase

Wednesday, May 27, 2009

It's the settlements, stupid!

set⋅tle⋅ment
  /ˈsɛtlmənt/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [set-l-muhnt] Show IPA
–noun
1. the act or state of settling or the state of being settled.
2. an arrangement or adjustment, as of business affairs or a disagreement.
3. an agreement signed after labor negotiations between union and management.
4. the settling of persons in a new country or place.
5. a colony, esp. in its early stages.
6. a small community, village, or group of houses in a thinly populated area.


Netanyahu and Obama!

No-holds-barred, no disqualifications, in a STEEL cage ONLY on PAY-PER-VIEW!!!!

Or at least that's how it seemed like last week's meeting between the two leaders was billed in the media. It was the "fateful encounter of two world leaders since Kennedy met Khrushchev" according to noted Israel-basher Professor Juan Cole (Guess who is Khrushchev in this analogy).

Jerusalem Post columnist David Horovitz, noted in his analysis of the meeting that:

Don King himself would have been hard-pressed to outdo the pugilistic hype...ahead of Monday's first White House meeting between Barack Obama and Binyamin Netanyahu. Viewers and readers would have been forgiven for anticipating anything up to and including fisticuffs in the Oval Office...

Even our insane conspiracy theorist friends from last month got into the fun. So after a week that saw our friend the president declare his undying love for the Jewish people, who did Obama pin the blame on for the continuing never-ending violence in the Middle East? Was it:

a) The Muslims

b) The Jews

c) Hamas

or

d) Sally Struthers

From the aforementioned David Horovitz article:

Undaunted by past failures, Obama is reportedly setting up a hugely ambitious sequence - Israel freezes settlement building, the Arab world begins normalizing relations with Israel, and Israel and the Palestinians then enter substantive talks.

Number 1 on the agenda? Why those evil, dirty, sneaky Jew settlers of course!

Not to be outdone, Hilary Clinton (another recipient of undying affection from "liberal" Jews) echoed her former hated rival's instructions for Netanyahu:

"We want to see a stop to settlement construction, additions, natural growth - any kind of settlement activity"

Right. Of course. Stop the settlements and everything starts to work out! No settlers in the West Bank = peace. So sayeth the administration of hope and change.

Oh and another thing Benjy my man...about that city you thought was your capital...you know where two Jewish Temples stood almost a thousand years before Muhammad was even born...yeah that place...you know, Jerusalem:

"Jerusalem is a final status issue. Israel and the Palestinians have agreed to resolve its status during negotiations. We will support their efforts to reach agreements on all final status issues," a State Department spokesman said when asked to respond to Netanyahu's proclamation that Jerusalem would always remain under Israeli sovereignty.

But then, it's not like anything readers of this blog haven't known since December of 2007. Obama blames the Jews.

Or is it just the settlers? This goes back to the anti-Zionist/anti-Jewish debate that was the very basis for this blog's formation. Can you be pro-Israel and anti-settler? Well, in theory you can be but first we need to establish that the settlers cause Israel more harm than they do good. The most common example of this is that, like Obama (and Hillary) says...remove the settlements and you remove the barrier to peace. Less settlements = less war (and therefore less dead Israelis). More settlements = more war (and therefore more dead Israelis).

Well let's look at some history.

Before 1967 there were no settlers at all. The Jewish population of Gaza, Judea and Samaria was zero between 1948 and 1967. Israel fought three wars with its Arab neighbors. And before that, Jews had been hunted across the world for millennia. There were Holocausts and Crusades and pogroms and Inquisitions and riots.

Then the evil settlers came.

Israel has not fought a war against its neighbor states since 1973. The Jewish state has not been faced with a true existential war since that time. IDF military operations have consisted mostly of defensive incursions and riot control instead of full-scale military operations against states. Israel has seen a dramatic increase in American Jewish immigration as well as immigration from other Western countries. Oh and those evil settlers? They (along with other Orthodox Israelis) are the ones primarily responsible for staving off the "demographic time bomb" that was supposed to end Israeli democracy or end Israel within a few generations.

Now let's look at historical examples of post-settlement reality.

Well, Israel evacuated the Sinai settlement of Yamit after the 1978 Camp David Accords and returned the land to Egypt. Technically, the two states are now at peace so that's nice. Still no Palestinian state though.

The other case is Gaza. Before there were any Jewish settlers in the Gaza strip Palestinian fedayeen forces regularly used the territory to conduct attacks on sovereign Israeli soil. After 1967 (and subsequent settlement establishment in Gaza) these attacks became a thing of the past. I don't think I need to remind you what happened after the Gaza settler evacuation in 2005. In case you don't feel like reliving the past few years - here's a chart showing the documented cases of rocket attacks emanating from the Gaza Strip:



You see those gigantic spikes from 2006 and on? What do you think they coincide with? Ariel Sharon visiting the Temple Mount? New Gaza settlement construction? Another Muhammad cartoon hitting the press?

Well, in August/2005 Israel committed the awful crime against humanity of daring to give the Palestinians what they wanted...






The Gaza settlements along with several West Bank settlements were evacuated.

Families were ripped out of their homes in a show of good faith to the Palestinians despite their continuing terror campaign against Israeli women and children.

And so what happened the following year?

A 30% INCREASE in rocket attacks over the previous FIVE YEARS COMBINED. If (as Obama says) the obstacle to peace is the settler movement...but then the settlers are removed in tear-jerking, heart-wrenching fashion and the result is not only war but exponentially MORE war then before...

Well then the settlers are NOT the problem.

The SETTLEMENTS are.

The Oslo settlement. (1993)

The Wye River settlement. (1998)

The Camp David settlement. (2000)

The Taba settlement. (2001)

The "Road Map" settlement. (2003)

And finally the "End of the Gaza settlers" settlement. (2005)

Every time without fail the blame falls on the settlers. The blame falls on Israel. The blame falls on the Jews. And we offer more concessions to placate the Obamas of the world because that's what we do.

But what has it brought us exactly? Nothing but rockets, according to peace-process-believing, former Prime Minister Shimon Peres.

Tired of being asked for concessions, Peres told his guests that the side making concessions was Israel, which was not getting anything in return from the Palestinians other than the rockets and mortar shells being fired from Gaza.

It's not the settlers. It's the concessions. It's the retreats. It's the surrenders. It's the settlements.

At the same time, the most popular leader in the Arab world is ruthless dictator Bashar-al-Asad. In third place is notorious terrorist Hassan Nasrallah. Two men who are essentially glorified mass-murderers of both Arabs and Jews. Oh and our friends the Egyptians who received their permanent settlement back in 1978? Well they're stripping the citizenships of any Egyptians who dare to marry an Israeli citizen. Even ARAB Israeli citizens. How enlightened. How peace-loving.

To say nothing of the Hamas "leadership" that just can't get through a week without killing their Palestinian brothers or the supposedly "more moderate" Fatah "leadership" that is still naming computer centers and schools after a person who murdered 37 civilians (including 12 children). Because of settlers?

No my friends, it's because of SETTLEMENTS. Not settlers.