Get set, my friends, for this special report from Pamela Geller at Atlas Shrugs.
Be warned, however. The details in this report are shocking, gruesome, and not for young eyes.
I know of no other more reliable source of first-hand information on the worldwide Jihad than Pamela Geller. And, she will tell the truth about extremist Muslim Jihadists like no other.
You must read this report about a little-known practice within the extremist Islamic community which shows just how thorough is the barbarism that flows through its ranks.
Brace yourselves, and click the link provided above.
Showing posts with label Jihadists. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jihadists. Show all posts
Sunday, July 19, 2009
Saturday, January 03, 2009
Embracing Evil
Would you say that the following would define the word 'evil' in our world?
...Honor killings against young female offspring who 'dishonor' their parents by engaging in forbidden behavior?
...Carrying a sign at a pro-terrorist rally in THIS COUNTRY that says, 'Back to the ovens for the Jews!'?
...Women being viewed as inferior to men and possessing of no human liberties?
...Calling for the complete and total annihilation of an entire country (Israel) for absolutely no reason other than the land it occupies and has an historical right to occupy since the year 1312 B.C.?
...A religion which by its very nature disallows human liberty and demands adherence to its doctrines that de-humanize children, women, and 'infidels'?
...A religion that fancies head-chopping as an acceptable means of dealing with opposition?
Among my definitions of 'evil,' the preceding certainly qualifies!
Yet Europe is embracing this evil by allowing such individuals to gain a foothold, refusing to reign it in, just as they did with regard to Hitler in the 1930s.
Even here in the United States, there is an element--within American Liberalism, of course--that embraces this evil just as surely as our European brethren are doing.
Why are Liberals taking up the cause of Gaza terrorists? Why do the supposed 'enlightened' stand up for the right of an evil ideology to reign terror on all who refuse to support it? Why is it that a nation is to be condemned for defending itself against those who have vowed to annihilate it and have constantly bombarded that country with deadly attacks for at least 7 years or more?
This makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.
And make no mistake about it, dear reader, the modern world will pay a heavy price for it just as surely as Europe did during the 1930s and 40s.
...Honor killings against young female offspring who 'dishonor' their parents by engaging in forbidden behavior?
...Carrying a sign at a pro-terrorist rally in THIS COUNTRY that says, 'Back to the ovens for the Jews!'?
...Women being viewed as inferior to men and possessing of no human liberties?
...Calling for the complete and total annihilation of an entire country (Israel) for absolutely no reason other than the land it occupies and has an historical right to occupy since the year 1312 B.C.?
...A religion which by its very nature disallows human liberty and demands adherence to its doctrines that de-humanize children, women, and 'infidels'?
...A religion that fancies head-chopping as an acceptable means of dealing with opposition?
Among my definitions of 'evil,' the preceding certainly qualifies!
Yet Europe is embracing this evil by allowing such individuals to gain a foothold, refusing to reign it in, just as they did with regard to Hitler in the 1930s.
Even here in the United States, there is an element--within American Liberalism, of course--that embraces this evil just as surely as our European brethren are doing.
Why are Liberals taking up the cause of Gaza terrorists? Why do the supposed 'enlightened' stand up for the right of an evil ideology to reign terror on all who refuse to support it? Why is it that a nation is to be condemned for defending itself against those who have vowed to annihilate it and have constantly bombarded that country with deadly attacks for at least 7 years or more?
This makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.
And make no mistake about it, dear reader, the modern world will pay a heavy price for it just as surely as Europe did during the 1930s and 40s.
Thursday, July 31, 2008
The Gathering Storm--Winds of War Parts 2 & 3
Part 1 of The Gathering Storm's 'Winds of War' dealt with the subject of the coming civil war in Europe as a result of the present onslaught of Islamofascism across the continent.
In Part 2, the writer explores his contention that such a civil war will inevitably lead to World War III as the U.S. is forced to join the fight in response to the worldwide theater of battle which the Islamofascists will launch.
The 3rd and final part of the series deals with subject of war in America as the writer maintains the inevitability of a massive U.S. backlash against Muslims and Mosques in response to the murders of thousands of U.S. citizens.
This is not reading for the faint of heart, but it is essential reading nonetheless, delineating in stark detail the fight that the West faces against the forces of extremism within Islam.
Click on the links below for Parts 2 and 3 of the series:
The Winds of War--Thinking about the Unthinkable, Part 2: World War III
The Winds of War--Thinking about the Unthinkable, Part 3: War in America
In Part 2, the writer explores his contention that such a civil war will inevitably lead to World War III as the U.S. is forced to join the fight in response to the worldwide theater of battle which the Islamofascists will launch.
The 3rd and final part of the series deals with subject of war in America as the writer maintains the inevitability of a massive U.S. backlash against Muslims and Mosques in response to the murders of thousands of U.S. citizens.
This is not reading for the faint of heart, but it is essential reading nonetheless, delineating in stark detail the fight that the West faces against the forces of extremism within Islam.
Click on the links below for Parts 2 and 3 of the series:
The Winds of War--Thinking about the Unthinkable, Part 2: World War III
The Winds of War--Thinking about the Unthinkable, Part 3: War in America
Thursday, July 17, 2008
Second Amendment News Roundup for 7/17/08
Focusing on guns, politics, and news of interest, here is today's Second Amendment News Roundup:
Human Events has two excellent articles worth reading today. The first points out that the GOP has a grand-slam homerun on its hands with the drill here, drill now issue on oil...IF McCain will seize upon it effectively. The second has a new Electoral College analysis that shows McCain and Obama separated by only 8 electoral votes.
The Muslims Against Sharia Blog reports that Jihadist moles have infiltrated the federal government.
JR at a Keyboard and a .45 reminds us that Sebastian over at Snow Flakes in Hell has started a Gun Blog Rifle League with monthly matchups. Click on the link for info and how to sign up.
David Codrea provides more commentary on the Governor of Illinois' proposal for sending in the National Guard to get gun crime under control in Chicago.
Armed and Safe points out yet another innocuous sounding group that is into citizen disarmament.
Blogonomicon announces that the dramatization of Patrick Henry's 'Give me liberty...' speech can be purchased on DVD. The film is called Give me Liberty. (h/t to David Codrea). CORRECTION! Actually, I think the name of the DVD is The Charge of the Light Brigade, which contains a short feature entitled, Give Me Liberty.
Alphecca reports that Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick intends to get rid of pesky gun owners. His plan is to force them into submission using the 'we'll fee you to death' scheme, which is what Massachusetts is known for doing anyway with regard to taxes and fees.
Roberta X provides some prudent insight for gunnies in a piece entitled, 'Your House is Not a Free-Fire Zone.'
Michelle Malkin has several items of great interest today. First, Jessie Jackson dropped the N-word bomb on Obama in that now-infamous tape on Fox News. No wonder they didn't want to show all of it. Second, we get a realistic picture of what we can expect from the traveling Obamedia--female journalists who act as groupies. And third, Malkin reports that an intellectually challenged speaker at the NAACP contends that Barack Obama was 'lynched by the cartoon on the New Yorker.'
John Lott reports that Obama has told yet another whopper of a barefaced lie concerning his position on gun rights, and Lott has the proof.
The Western Rifle Shooters Association has the MUST-read of the day on something that was NOT reported in the mainstream media--China and Mexico held a big summit. Just wait till you see what the Mexican President had to say about the Commies!
Breda at The Breda Fallacy has become a much-beloved gunnie and advocate for gun rights. Here she writes of her hands-on training with her husband, and her philosophy of 'learning by doing.'
Sebastian posts his first in a series of commentary on 'civil disengagement.' An interesting read!
Robb Allen shows us a good photo of the firearm he will be using during his trip to Blackwater.
Say Uncle says that Dick Heller, the man who is responsible for the eventual slap-down of the D.C. gun ban, may now have good reason to sue D.C. again!
Mike McCarville reports that the 3 fawning network news anchors will be accompanying Barack Obama on his trip to Iraq.
The Smallest Minority posts a cartoon that you absolutely MUST see on Nancy Pelosi's opposition to oil drilling here at home.
Gateway Pundit provides details on how the terrorist organization Hezbollah mutilated the bodies of dead Israeli soldiers.
Pamela Geller at Atlas Shrugs has much more on this outrage. Read it all.
Human Events has two excellent articles worth reading today. The first points out that the GOP has a grand-slam homerun on its hands with the drill here, drill now issue on oil...IF McCain will seize upon it effectively. The second has a new Electoral College analysis that shows McCain and Obama separated by only 8 electoral votes.
The Muslims Against Sharia Blog reports that Jihadist moles have infiltrated the federal government.
JR at a Keyboard and a .45 reminds us that Sebastian over at Snow Flakes in Hell has started a Gun Blog Rifle League with monthly matchups. Click on the link for info and how to sign up.
David Codrea provides more commentary on the Governor of Illinois' proposal for sending in the National Guard to get gun crime under control in Chicago.
Armed and Safe points out yet another innocuous sounding group that is into citizen disarmament.
Blogonomicon announces that the dramatization of Patrick Henry's 'Give me liberty...' speech can be purchased on DVD. The film is called Give me Liberty. (h/t to David Codrea). CORRECTION! Actually, I think the name of the DVD is The Charge of the Light Brigade, which contains a short feature entitled, Give Me Liberty.
Alphecca reports that Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick intends to get rid of pesky gun owners. His plan is to force them into submission using the 'we'll fee you to death' scheme, which is what Massachusetts is known for doing anyway with regard to taxes and fees.
Roberta X provides some prudent insight for gunnies in a piece entitled, 'Your House is Not a Free-Fire Zone.'
Michelle Malkin has several items of great interest today. First, Jessie Jackson dropped the N-word bomb on Obama in that now-infamous tape on Fox News. No wonder they didn't want to show all of it. Second, we get a realistic picture of what we can expect from the traveling Obamedia--female journalists who act as groupies. And third, Malkin reports that an intellectually challenged speaker at the NAACP contends that Barack Obama was 'lynched by the cartoon on the New Yorker.'
John Lott reports that Obama has told yet another whopper of a barefaced lie concerning his position on gun rights, and Lott has the proof.
The Western Rifle Shooters Association has the MUST-read of the day on something that was NOT reported in the mainstream media--China and Mexico held a big summit. Just wait till you see what the Mexican President had to say about the Commies!
Breda at The Breda Fallacy has become a much-beloved gunnie and advocate for gun rights. Here she writes of her hands-on training with her husband, and her philosophy of 'learning by doing.'
Sebastian posts his first in a series of commentary on 'civil disengagement.' An interesting read!
Robb Allen shows us a good photo of the firearm he will be using during his trip to Blackwater.
Say Uncle says that Dick Heller, the man who is responsible for the eventual slap-down of the D.C. gun ban, may now have good reason to sue D.C. again!
Mike McCarville reports that the 3 fawning network news anchors will be accompanying Barack Obama on his trip to Iraq.
The Smallest Minority posts a cartoon that you absolutely MUST see on Nancy Pelosi's opposition to oil drilling here at home.
Gateway Pundit provides details on how the terrorist organization Hezbollah mutilated the bodies of dead Israeli soldiers.
Pamela Geller at Atlas Shrugs has much more on this outrage. Read it all.
Friday, July 11, 2008
Muslims Against Sharia Slam Flight 93 Memorial
A group of moderate Muslims called 'Muslims Against Sharia' is bringing out the heavy artillery to blast those who are planning the United Flight 93 Memorial in Pennsylvania.
Incensed by the fact that Islamic symbols are being used in the memorial, Muslims Against Sharia says that a group of extremists have hijacked the building process in order to pay homage to terrorists.
And what is the basis for these claims? The Islamic symbols are being used in spite of the fact that there were NO Muslims on United Flight 93 except for the Jihadist terrorists who hijacked and were responsible for bringing down the plane.
Thus, why would Islamic symbols be a part of that memorial unless the group pushing for their inclusion were attempting to pay homage to the terrorists who died as a result of their own detestable activity?
Muslims Against Sharia is at the forefront of the fight to keep the Islamic symbols OUT of the Flight 93 Memorial. A special event has been organized at the memorial site to protest the inclusion of Muslim symbols.
The innocent victims who died in that crash deserve better. Why would ANYONE want to glorify their murderers?
In addition, moderate Muslims want no part of a memorial that glorifies those within Islam who murder, maim, and butcher.
The protest event will take place on August 2, 2008, in Somerset, Pennsylvania.
For complete information, click HERE for the Muslims Against Sharia website, and click HERE for news about a petition to stop the hijacking of the memorial.
Incensed by the fact that Islamic symbols are being used in the memorial, Muslims Against Sharia says that a group of extremists have hijacked the building process in order to pay homage to terrorists.
And what is the basis for these claims? The Islamic symbols are being used in spite of the fact that there were NO Muslims on United Flight 93 except for the Jihadist terrorists who hijacked and were responsible for bringing down the plane.
Thus, why would Islamic symbols be a part of that memorial unless the group pushing for their inclusion were attempting to pay homage to the terrorists who died as a result of their own detestable activity?
Muslims Against Sharia is at the forefront of the fight to keep the Islamic symbols OUT of the Flight 93 Memorial. A special event has been organized at the memorial site to protest the inclusion of Muslim symbols.
The innocent victims who died in that crash deserve better. Why would ANYONE want to glorify their murderers?
In addition, moderate Muslims want no part of a memorial that glorifies those within Islam who murder, maim, and butcher.
The protest event will take place on August 2, 2008, in Somerset, Pennsylvania.
For complete information, click HERE for the Muslims Against Sharia website, and click HERE for news about a petition to stop the hijacking of the memorial.
Monday, June 23, 2008
Obama's Murky Connections with Muslim Extremists
Democratic Presidential nominee Barack Obama has a long history of associations with persons of dubious character, not the least of which are the likes of the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, Louis Farrakhan, and Father Michael 'Snuffy' Pfleger.
This may be only the tip of the iceberg, however.
Obama's associations with extremists within the world of Islamofascism should be cause enough to stop any potential supporter dead in their tracks.
It has been common knowledge for quite some time that Obama supports a Palestinian state and a divided Jerusalem. True, Condi Rice supports the same thing, as do others within the Bush administration.
But Obama's attempt to hide his support for such things by claiming before a group of Jews two weeks ago that he 'supports a united Jerusalem under the control of Israel' should give rise to serious questions concerning the candidate's honesty, his blatant duplicity, and his frantic attempts to keep his more extremist views under the cover.
It is no coincidence, then, that the candidate has recently claimed that Hamas and Hezbollah are terrorist organizations while at the same time supporting policies that favor both.
And as for Israel, Obama potentially represents one of the most dangerous threats to their existence that has ever proceeded from a major American political figure.
Obama, for example, in answering questions from reporters, stated forthrightly that both Hamas and Hezbollah have 'legitimate goals.' Which goals, exactly, of these two terrorist organizations are legitimate?
The reporter in question never posed a follow-up to allow Obama to explain himself, nor did the reporter flinch when the candidate made that statement--a statement which represents one of the most outlandish and dangerous points of view a potential President could have.
Obama's contention that Hamas and Hezbollah's goals are legitimate is tantamount to claiming that Al Qaeda makes an excellent point about the West, or that the Nazis, after all, had worthy objectives when they came to power in Germany.
These explosive and wildly wrong-headed notions concerning Hamas and Hezbollah were not lost on the two organizations. Both strongly support Barack Obama for President of the United States. This is in spite of Obama's most recent disclaimers during which he claims support for Israel and claims to believe both Hamas and Hezbollah are terrorist organizations.
It seems that the leadership within the two groups know the real score. One leader in particular stated that he understood that Obama had to play the political game by denouncing them and cozying up to Israel, but that they all know that the candidate truly supports their objectives.
This, my friends, is an explosive revelation.
And the notion that Obama privately supports Hamas and Hezbollah is certainly confirmed by his associations through the years in the U.S.
The following is a list of links that will take you to numerous news stories and investigative reports concerning those dubious associations. Some of the research you will find in these links is thorough and exhaustive. Others are brief and more issue-specific.
Take a look if you dare. Those who are interested in the truth and who do not wish to be hypnotized by soaring rhetoric and soothing words of 'change and hope,' rock star charisma, and Messiah-like worship, should want above all to know the story behind the story of this 'new kind of politician' who would be President.
American Thinker:
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/05/post_87.html
No Quarter on Obama and Chavez, and terrorism in Venezuela:
http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/05/12/obamas-chavez-communist-hezbollah-hamas-problem/
Rightwing News:
http://www.rightwingnews.com/mt331/2008/04/hamas_endorses_obama_can_hizbo.php
Zimbio:
http://www.zimbio.com/Barack+Obama/articles/940/Barack+Obama+Democrats+Tied+Terrorism+AGAIN
Front Page Magazine:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=36308A44-DF3D-46AD-829A-4F63BA0C52F1
Discover the Networks:
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1511
Discover the Networks--Barack's World:
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=800
Obama and Odinga--'We are Taliban' at Atlas Shrugs:
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2008/06/odinga-and-obam.html
Private Investigator Bill Warner's work on Obama and Project Islamic H.O.P.E., many of the leaders of which are linked to and indicted for support for terrorism:
http://wwwwbipicomlink.blogspot.com/2008/06/barak-obamas-photo-still-linked-to.html
The American Spectator on Barack and McPeak:
http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=12937
Gateway Pundit on Obama's support for Cuban Communist murderer Che Guevara, Fidel Castro, and sending Elian Gonzalez back to the Communists:
http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2008/06/outraged-cuban-americans-protest-obama.html
This may be only the tip of the iceberg, however.
Obama's associations with extremists within the world of Islamofascism should be cause enough to stop any potential supporter dead in their tracks.
It has been common knowledge for quite some time that Obama supports a Palestinian state and a divided Jerusalem. True, Condi Rice supports the same thing, as do others within the Bush administration.
But Obama's attempt to hide his support for such things by claiming before a group of Jews two weeks ago that he 'supports a united Jerusalem under the control of Israel' should give rise to serious questions concerning the candidate's honesty, his blatant duplicity, and his frantic attempts to keep his more extremist views under the cover.
It is no coincidence, then, that the candidate has recently claimed that Hamas and Hezbollah are terrorist organizations while at the same time supporting policies that favor both.
And as for Israel, Obama potentially represents one of the most dangerous threats to their existence that has ever proceeded from a major American political figure.
Obama, for example, in answering questions from reporters, stated forthrightly that both Hamas and Hezbollah have 'legitimate goals.' Which goals, exactly, of these two terrorist organizations are legitimate?
The reporter in question never posed a follow-up to allow Obama to explain himself, nor did the reporter flinch when the candidate made that statement--a statement which represents one of the most outlandish and dangerous points of view a potential President could have.
Obama's contention that Hamas and Hezbollah's goals are legitimate is tantamount to claiming that Al Qaeda makes an excellent point about the West, or that the Nazis, after all, had worthy objectives when they came to power in Germany.
These explosive and wildly wrong-headed notions concerning Hamas and Hezbollah were not lost on the two organizations. Both strongly support Barack Obama for President of the United States. This is in spite of Obama's most recent disclaimers during which he claims support for Israel and claims to believe both Hamas and Hezbollah are terrorist organizations.
It seems that the leadership within the two groups know the real score. One leader in particular stated that he understood that Obama had to play the political game by denouncing them and cozying up to Israel, but that they all know that the candidate truly supports their objectives.
This, my friends, is an explosive revelation.
And the notion that Obama privately supports Hamas and Hezbollah is certainly confirmed by his associations through the years in the U.S.
The following is a list of links that will take you to numerous news stories and investigative reports concerning those dubious associations. Some of the research you will find in these links is thorough and exhaustive. Others are brief and more issue-specific.
Take a look if you dare. Those who are interested in the truth and who do not wish to be hypnotized by soaring rhetoric and soothing words of 'change and hope,' rock star charisma, and Messiah-like worship, should want above all to know the story behind the story of this 'new kind of politician' who would be President.
American Thinker:
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/05/post_87.html
No Quarter on Obama and Chavez, and terrorism in Venezuela:
http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/05/12/obamas-chavez-communist-hezbollah-hamas-problem/
Rightwing News:
http://www.rightwingnews.com/mt331/2008/04/hamas_endorses_obama_can_hizbo.php
Zimbio:
http://www.zimbio.com/Barack+Obama/articles/940/Barack+Obama+Democrats+Tied+Terrorism+AGAIN
Front Page Magazine:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=36308A44-DF3D-46AD-829A-4F63BA0C52F1
Discover the Networks:
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1511
Discover the Networks--Barack's World:
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=800
Obama and Odinga--'We are Taliban' at Atlas Shrugs:
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2008/06/odinga-and-obam.html
Private Investigator Bill Warner's work on Obama and Project Islamic H.O.P.E., many of the leaders of which are linked to and indicted for support for terrorism:
http://wwwwbipicomlink.blogspot.com/2008/06/barak-obamas-photo-still-linked-to.html
The American Spectator on Barack and McPeak:
http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=12937
Gateway Pundit on Obama's support for Cuban Communist murderer Che Guevara, Fidel Castro, and sending Elian Gonzalez back to the Communists:
http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2008/06/outraged-cuban-americans-protest-obama.html
Sunday, June 22, 2008
PAMELA GELLER RESPONDS TO ATTACKS
Almost from its inception, The Liberty Sphere blog has consistently linked to news alerts concerning the Jihad and the War on Terror, as provided by Pamela Geller at Atlas Shrugs--one of the top blogs in the nation.
Atlas Shrugs has been an invaluable source of information concerning the fight for the survival of the West. And Geller has proven herself to be a valiant and courageous soldier in this fight.
As with all who are willing to put their very lives on the line for the cause of truth, justice, and liberty, Geller has not been without her share of detractors and critics, which unfortunately include those who see her as such a threat to their subversive and dangerous agenda that they resort to personal attacks, smears, lawsuits, and even death threats.
This is to be expected given that the Jihadists and their sympathizers do not wish for the truth to be told and would love to see the public kept in the dark. An uninformed public is a sitting duck for the attacks of those who wish to destroy not only the fabric of freedom but the very existence of our country and way of life.
Thus, one thing should be made crystal clear--Pamela Geller is not a 'terrorist' simply because she fights terrorism with a passion that scares the true terrorists. She does not run a 'hate site' simply because she blogs about the twisted, insidious, and deadly world-view of Islamic extremists.
Some of those who make such charges brought their blather to this very blog in the comments section of an earlier post. Pamela Geller was kind and gracious enough to come here and give a direct response.
That response was important enough that I thought it merited a whole post unto itself.
Here is what Geller had to say about her beliefs, her goals, her objectives, and her heart:
This is precisely the way I have experienced Pamela Geller and Atlas Shrugs ever since I stumbled upon the blog about a year and a half ago. This is why there is a permanent link to the blog on the left sidebar. And this is why I was honored to have Pamela Geller come here to make a straightforward, clear statement of what motivates her to engage in this battle.
Make no mistake about it, Islamofascisim is a major threat to the freedom of speech, freedom of the Press, freedom of religion, and every other liberty associated with free societies. This is why Canada and much of Europe has succumbed to the dire and ominous moves to place restrictions on freedom of speech.
In nearly every instance, Islamofascism is the shadow-force behind the scenes that drives these restrictions on human liberty. Extremists under the guise of being 'moderate Muslims,' for example, were behind the trial of Mark Steyn and Mclean's Magazine in British Columbia.
For sure, there are many moderate Muslims in the world. But simply because someone says they are moderate does not necessarily make them moderate.
Atlas Shrugs exists to help us make the distinction.
Atlas Shrugs has been an invaluable source of information concerning the fight for the survival of the West. And Geller has proven herself to be a valiant and courageous soldier in this fight.
As with all who are willing to put their very lives on the line for the cause of truth, justice, and liberty, Geller has not been without her share of detractors and critics, which unfortunately include those who see her as such a threat to their subversive and dangerous agenda that they resort to personal attacks, smears, lawsuits, and even death threats.
This is to be expected given that the Jihadists and their sympathizers do not wish for the truth to be told and would love to see the public kept in the dark. An uninformed public is a sitting duck for the attacks of those who wish to destroy not only the fabric of freedom but the very existence of our country and way of life.
Thus, one thing should be made crystal clear--Pamela Geller is not a 'terrorist' simply because she fights terrorism with a passion that scares the true terrorists. She does not run a 'hate site' simply because she blogs about the twisted, insidious, and deadly world-view of Islamic extremists.
Some of those who make such charges brought their blather to this very blog in the comments section of an earlier post. Pamela Geller was kind and gracious enough to come here and give a direct response.
That response was important enough that I thought it merited a whole post unto itself.
Here is what Geller had to say about her beliefs, her goals, her objectives, and her heart:
Everything posted here is wrong. Utterly inaccurate. But hey am not surprised - its the leftist Islamic alliance propagating their memes.Muslims Against Sharia asked me to join them and to chair a committee who's objective is to make honor killing a capital crime. I was unaware of their group but thought what they wanted to do was admirable and important. Islam must be reformed from within. I love everyone that fights on the side of truth, justice and the American way. I fight the jihad and consider myself most fortunate to count amongst my friends Wafa Sultan, Ibn Warraq, Andrew Bostom, Youssef Ibrahim, Walid Phares, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Dr. Patrick Sookhdeo, Sam Solomon. I am against the coming holocaust against the Jews. I am against FGM, honor killings and the sub class citizenship of women in Islamic countries. I fight the jihad - that is my fight.To address your charges of racism and islamophobia is a canard. I can't prove a negative. It is obvious you do not read my blog or understand why I do what I do. I fight for the individual and the basic tenets of western civilization. You can avoid evil but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding evil.I and the folks that work with me intend to save America. You're either with us or against.
This is precisely the way I have experienced Pamela Geller and Atlas Shrugs ever since I stumbled upon the blog about a year and a half ago. This is why there is a permanent link to the blog on the left sidebar. And this is why I was honored to have Pamela Geller come here to make a straightforward, clear statement of what motivates her to engage in this battle.
Make no mistake about it, Islamofascisim is a major threat to the freedom of speech, freedom of the Press, freedom of religion, and every other liberty associated with free societies. This is why Canada and much of Europe has succumbed to the dire and ominous moves to place restrictions on freedom of speech.
In nearly every instance, Islamofascism is the shadow-force behind the scenes that drives these restrictions on human liberty. Extremists under the guise of being 'moderate Muslims,' for example, were behind the trial of Mark Steyn and Mclean's Magazine in British Columbia.
For sure, there are many moderate Muslims in the world. But simply because someone says they are moderate does not necessarily make them moderate.
Atlas Shrugs exists to help us make the distinction.
Friday, June 20, 2008
Dark Storm Clouds Gather Over America
As never before since World War II, America faces one of her darkest hours as the storm clouds gather from a myriad of sources intent on destroying the notion of a free, constitutional Republic.
The problem is that this time around, the threat is much worse.
During WW II the threat was from the outside as totalitarian forces pressed against us from both the East and the West. Europe and Japan were a formidable foe, but Americans stood fast upon the principles of liberty.
Today, however, the threat is two-fold. The threat is both from the outside and the inside.
At the same time that terrorism poses a significant threat to the stability and existence of the West, America is faced with the prospects of being forced to fight some of its own citizens who are infected with the single-headed notion of subverting the Constitution and declaring that no right is absolute or guaranteed.
Numerous free speech cases prove the point, as well as the current national debate on Second Amendment rights about which the U.S. Supreme Court will issue a decision this month.
As the nation fights for its survival on these crucial fronts, we are hit broadside simultaneously with a brazen attempt by Democrats in Congress to embark upon a course of action which we as a nation have always rejected outright as antithetical to freedom and human liberty--the attempt to nationalize the oil industry.
America was founded upon the principles of a free society. This means that markets and business and industrial enterprises are to be free. Government has never been viewed in this country as an acceptable proprietor. Rather, government has always been viewed as an impartial referee to private enterprise, making sure that all business interests play by the same rules.
Central to the concept of a free society is the importance of the limited role of government. Men and women through the centuries who sought liberty after having suffered from the cruel and inhuman oppression of powerful government insisted that the only legitimate role of government was to protect the liberties inherent to human beings--liberties that are God-given.
For government to become involved in the ownership and operation of what private enterprise can do on its own has always been considered illegitimate. When government gets into the business of proprietorship, human liberty always suffers in the end.
Yet some of the major leaders in the majority Party in Congress insist that this is precisely where they wish to take the country. They want government to get into the business of owning and operating business.
This overt socialistic notion is echoed by many in modern academia. In fact, this has been their goal since the 1960s when radicals decided that private enterprise is evil and government is good.
Not only that, but some voices within academia, in addition to a few major columnists that publish in the mainstream media, have openly called for limitations on free speech. As a member of the Canadian Human Rights Commission in British Columbia said in the Mark Steyn trial, 'Freedom of speech is an American concept and thus, I have no interest in it.'
This was in Canada, true enough. But some Americans are echoing these sentiments by stating that perhaps our country is worse off because it allows freedom of speech, and thus, we would be much better off placing restrictions upon it, just as our Canadian and European neighbors are doing.
It is not mere chance that at the very same time we face these significant threats to our very way of life, along comes a political candidate with rock star status, the followers of whom often compare to a heaven-sent Messiah.
This candidate has embraced positions throughout his short career in Illinois and the U.S. Senate that fall perfectly in line with the various schemes launched by other members of his Party to restrict human liberty and downplay the significance and preeminence of the Bill of Rights to the U.S. Constitution.
It is not coincidental that Barack Obama is bankrolled by one George Soros, the atheistic billionaire and Democrat party operative. Soros is a one-man dark cloud machine in his own right, casting a long shadow of foreboding on all that he touches. He is anti-free markets, anti-liberty, anti-Constitution, anti-Christian and Jew, and anti-American.
And with regard to Obama, Soros is the power behind the throne.
If Obama is elected, Soros will have completed at least 75% of what he set out to do--control the Democratic Party, get one of his gophers elected to the Presidency, and make sure his foot soldiers in the American version of the Bolshevik Revolution stay in power in Congress.
At that point all he has left to do is to use his comrades in the government to ram through Congress the single largest shift in ideology and policy to take place in America since founding of the Republic. And he will have absolutely no opposition from the President or the minority Party since the GOP is expected to lose even more seats in both the House and Senate.
Alarmist nonsense, you say? Just wait until you see the next installment in this series which will examine Barack Obama's ties to George Soros and extremist Muslim Jihadists, including Hamas and Hezbollah.
The problem is that this time around, the threat is much worse.
During WW II the threat was from the outside as totalitarian forces pressed against us from both the East and the West. Europe and Japan were a formidable foe, but Americans stood fast upon the principles of liberty.
Today, however, the threat is two-fold. The threat is both from the outside and the inside.
At the same time that terrorism poses a significant threat to the stability and existence of the West, America is faced with the prospects of being forced to fight some of its own citizens who are infected with the single-headed notion of subverting the Constitution and declaring that no right is absolute or guaranteed.
Numerous free speech cases prove the point, as well as the current national debate on Second Amendment rights about which the U.S. Supreme Court will issue a decision this month.
As the nation fights for its survival on these crucial fronts, we are hit broadside simultaneously with a brazen attempt by Democrats in Congress to embark upon a course of action which we as a nation have always rejected outright as antithetical to freedom and human liberty--the attempt to nationalize the oil industry.
America was founded upon the principles of a free society. This means that markets and business and industrial enterprises are to be free. Government has never been viewed in this country as an acceptable proprietor. Rather, government has always been viewed as an impartial referee to private enterprise, making sure that all business interests play by the same rules.
Central to the concept of a free society is the importance of the limited role of government. Men and women through the centuries who sought liberty after having suffered from the cruel and inhuman oppression of powerful government insisted that the only legitimate role of government was to protect the liberties inherent to human beings--liberties that are God-given.
For government to become involved in the ownership and operation of what private enterprise can do on its own has always been considered illegitimate. When government gets into the business of proprietorship, human liberty always suffers in the end.
Yet some of the major leaders in the majority Party in Congress insist that this is precisely where they wish to take the country. They want government to get into the business of owning and operating business.
This overt socialistic notion is echoed by many in modern academia. In fact, this has been their goal since the 1960s when radicals decided that private enterprise is evil and government is good.
Not only that, but some voices within academia, in addition to a few major columnists that publish in the mainstream media, have openly called for limitations on free speech. As a member of the Canadian Human Rights Commission in British Columbia said in the Mark Steyn trial, 'Freedom of speech is an American concept and thus, I have no interest in it.'
This was in Canada, true enough. But some Americans are echoing these sentiments by stating that perhaps our country is worse off because it allows freedom of speech, and thus, we would be much better off placing restrictions upon it, just as our Canadian and European neighbors are doing.
It is not mere chance that at the very same time we face these significant threats to our very way of life, along comes a political candidate with rock star status, the followers of whom often compare to a heaven-sent Messiah.
This candidate has embraced positions throughout his short career in Illinois and the U.S. Senate that fall perfectly in line with the various schemes launched by other members of his Party to restrict human liberty and downplay the significance and preeminence of the Bill of Rights to the U.S. Constitution.
It is not coincidental that Barack Obama is bankrolled by one George Soros, the atheistic billionaire and Democrat party operative. Soros is a one-man dark cloud machine in his own right, casting a long shadow of foreboding on all that he touches. He is anti-free markets, anti-liberty, anti-Constitution, anti-Christian and Jew, and anti-American.
And with regard to Obama, Soros is the power behind the throne.
If Obama is elected, Soros will have completed at least 75% of what he set out to do--control the Democratic Party, get one of his gophers elected to the Presidency, and make sure his foot soldiers in the American version of the Bolshevik Revolution stay in power in Congress.
At that point all he has left to do is to use his comrades in the government to ram through Congress the single largest shift in ideology and policy to take place in America since founding of the Republic. And he will have absolutely no opposition from the President or the minority Party since the GOP is expected to lose even more seats in both the House and Senate.
Alarmist nonsense, you say? Just wait until you see the next installment in this series which will examine Barack Obama's ties to George Soros and extremist Muslim Jihadists, including Hamas and Hezbollah.
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Obama's 'Stop the Smears' Website Angers Muslims
A group of moderate Muslims is calling for Barack Obama to remove negative references to the term 'Muslim' on his new website called 'Stop the Smears.' The candidate had started the website as part of his Internet rapid response effort to stop the so-called 'smears' and rumors about him that have been circulating around the Internet and the electorate.
The problem is that one of the main 'smears' listed on the site is the rumor/falsehood that 'Obama is a Muslim.' And herein is the root of the moderate Muslims' discontent.
It isn't that it is not true that many in the electorate believe Barack Obama to be a Muslim but that the website refers to that rumor/belief as a 'smear,' the connotation being that to be called a Muslim is tantamount to being libeled or defamed.
Thus, the moderate Muslim group, which calls itself 'Muslims Against Sharia,' is demanding that Obama remove from his website the inference that to be called a Muslim is a 'smear.'
This seems to be a reasonable request.
As the group states, most terrorists are Muslims but most Muslims are not terrorists. Most Muslims do not belong to the extremist Jihadist movement--the 'Islamofascist' segment-- within Islam. Terrorists come from this minority segment in the Muslim religion.
But for Obama to depict being falsely described as a Muslim as a 'smear' seems to indicate that the candidate has trouble differentiating between moderate Muslims and terrorists. If this is not the case, then the candidate has made a glaring error that portrays a shocking lack of forethought for someone who would be President.
For more on this controversy, click here to go to the website of 'Muslims Against Sharia':
http://muslimsagainstsharia.blogspot.com/2008/06/senator-obama-is-not-dirty-muslim.html
The problem is that one of the main 'smears' listed on the site is the rumor/falsehood that 'Obama is a Muslim.' And herein is the root of the moderate Muslims' discontent.
It isn't that it is not true that many in the electorate believe Barack Obama to be a Muslim but that the website refers to that rumor/belief as a 'smear,' the connotation being that to be called a Muslim is tantamount to being libeled or defamed.
Thus, the moderate Muslim group, which calls itself 'Muslims Against Sharia,' is demanding that Obama remove from his website the inference that to be called a Muslim is a 'smear.'
This seems to be a reasonable request.
As the group states, most terrorists are Muslims but most Muslims are not terrorists. Most Muslims do not belong to the extremist Jihadist movement--the 'Islamofascist' segment-- within Islam. Terrorists come from this minority segment in the Muslim religion.
But for Obama to depict being falsely described as a Muslim as a 'smear' seems to indicate that the candidate has trouble differentiating between moderate Muslims and terrorists. If this is not the case, then the candidate has made a glaring error that portrays a shocking lack of forethought for someone who would be President.
For more on this controversy, click here to go to the website of 'Muslims Against Sharia':
http://muslimsagainstsharia.blogspot.com/2008/06/senator-obama-is-not-dirty-muslim.html
Monday, June 02, 2008
Second Amendment News Roundup for 6/2/08
Focusing on guns, politics, and news of interest, here is today's Second Amendment News Roundup:
David Hardy reports that the Supreme Court will issue a ruling on Heller sometime this month, and he lists the most likely dates for the decision to come down:
http://armsandthelaw.com/archives/2008/06/heller_wait_con.php
For those who have asked the question of late, what's wrong with Bill Clinton, there is a lengthy but thorough analysis of the former President at Vanity Fair, written by the husband of former Clinton operative Dee Dee Myers:
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2008/07/clinton200807
Front Page Magazine has the riveting news about David Horowitz's woes with the 'Muslim Students Association,' a campus group that supports Jihadists:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=697F1115-3B06-4C79-A907-2914D7599431
JR blogs about some upcoming firearms auctions:
http://akeyboardanda45.blogspot.com/2008/06/upcoming-firearms-auction.html
Roberta X writes about the Indy 1500 gun show over the weekend:
http://twowheeledmadwoman.blogspot.com/2008/06/sundae.html
Alphecca comments on the proposal by Congress, Hillary, and Obama that American taxpayers bail out hurricane victims:
http://www.alphecca.com/?p=796
Gateway Pundit has more on Snuffy Pfleger and Barack Obama, and by the way, Snuffy said that America is the greatest sin against God!:
http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2008/06/pfleger-america-is-greatest-sin-against.html
Finally, someone in the EU is making some sense about biofuels and food. Glenn Reynolds at Instapundit has the story:
http://pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/archives2/019958.php
Well well well, Hollywood elitists and U.N. activists Angelina Jolie and her husband Brad Pitt-Jolie keep guns for protection! This is in spite of the U.N.'s disarmament policies. David Codrea has the story:
http://waronguns.blogspot.com/2008/06/angie-get-your-gun.html
Breda points to one Democrat who really gets it, which is rare:
http://thebredafallacy.blogspot.com/2008/06/thank-you-governor-strickland.html
Sebastian reports on the police break-up of an open-carry dinner in Pennsylvania:
http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2008/06/02/thoughts-on-dickson-city/
Uncle has more on ATF corruption:
http://www.saysuncle.com/archives/2008/06/02/more-from-atf/
Robb Allen blows off some steam over oppressive government, in the form of building permits, even on your own private property!:
http://blog.robballen.com/archive/2008/06/02/Incoherent-Rant-Included-At-No-Extra-Charge.aspx
David Hardy reports that the Supreme Court will issue a ruling on Heller sometime this month, and he lists the most likely dates for the decision to come down:
http://armsandthelaw.com/archives/2008/06/heller_wait_con.php
For those who have asked the question of late, what's wrong with Bill Clinton, there is a lengthy but thorough analysis of the former President at Vanity Fair, written by the husband of former Clinton operative Dee Dee Myers:
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2008/07/clinton200807
Front Page Magazine has the riveting news about David Horowitz's woes with the 'Muslim Students Association,' a campus group that supports Jihadists:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=697F1115-3B06-4C79-A907-2914D7599431
JR blogs about some upcoming firearms auctions:
http://akeyboardanda45.blogspot.com/2008/06/upcoming-firearms-auction.html
Roberta X writes about the Indy 1500 gun show over the weekend:
http://twowheeledmadwoman.blogspot.com/2008/06/sundae.html
Alphecca comments on the proposal by Congress, Hillary, and Obama that American taxpayers bail out hurricane victims:
http://www.alphecca.com/?p=796
Gateway Pundit has more on Snuffy Pfleger and Barack Obama, and by the way, Snuffy said that America is the greatest sin against God!:
http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2008/06/pfleger-america-is-greatest-sin-against.html
Finally, someone in the EU is making some sense about biofuels and food. Glenn Reynolds at Instapundit has the story:
http://pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/archives2/019958.php
Well well well, Hollywood elitists and U.N. activists Angelina Jolie and her husband Brad Pitt-Jolie keep guns for protection! This is in spite of the U.N.'s disarmament policies. David Codrea has the story:
http://waronguns.blogspot.com/2008/06/angie-get-your-gun.html
Breda points to one Democrat who really gets it, which is rare:
http://thebredafallacy.blogspot.com/2008/06/thank-you-governor-strickland.html
Sebastian reports on the police break-up of an open-carry dinner in Pennsylvania:
http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2008/06/02/thoughts-on-dickson-city/
Uncle has more on ATF corruption:
http://www.saysuncle.com/archives/2008/06/02/more-from-atf/
Robb Allen blows off some steam over oppressive government, in the form of building permits, even on your own private property!:
http://blog.robballen.com/archive/2008/06/02/Incoherent-Rant-Included-At-No-Extra-Charge.aspx
Friday, May 02, 2008
FACT CHECK: Why Commies Are Evil
On this the day after 'May Day' during which Communists around the world march to celebrate their ideology, it is imperative to do a quick fact check.
To put it simply, Commies are evil.
For Communists to celebrate is every bit as twisted and demented as Nazis celebrating Jewish skeletons at Auschwitz.
This is not some friendly disagreement concerning ideology, such as the difference between a moderate Republican and a conservative one. This is about pure evil and the danger it poses to all of humanity.
Conservative estimates indicate that the number of murders directly linked to Communist regimes is at least 110 MILLION. Stalin had roughly 25-30 million of his own countrymen in the USSR slaughtered. When Communists took over China, another massive purge of Chinese, Tibetans, and others took place that would make Hitler's Holocaust pale in comparison.
In like manner, when the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia was unleashed after America refused to win in Southeast Asia, the slaughter of tens of millions of Cambodians ensued. History shows that the same thing happened all over the world when Communism came to power, from Cuba to Central America to North Korea.
And this is not to mention the murders that the USSR perpetrated against the citizens of Eastern Europe following Hitler's demise.
As with extremist Muslim terrorists, the Jihadists, Communists seize and hold power by force. Those who resist are killed.
Thus, Commies are every bit as evil and dangerous as Jihadists. Cold-blooded mass murderers by any name are a blight on humanity.
To put it simply, Commies are evil.
For Communists to celebrate is every bit as twisted and demented as Nazis celebrating Jewish skeletons at Auschwitz.
This is not some friendly disagreement concerning ideology, such as the difference between a moderate Republican and a conservative one. This is about pure evil and the danger it poses to all of humanity.
Conservative estimates indicate that the number of murders directly linked to Communist regimes is at least 110 MILLION. Stalin had roughly 25-30 million of his own countrymen in the USSR slaughtered. When Communists took over China, another massive purge of Chinese, Tibetans, and others took place that would make Hitler's Holocaust pale in comparison.
In like manner, when the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia was unleashed after America refused to win in Southeast Asia, the slaughter of tens of millions of Cambodians ensued. History shows that the same thing happened all over the world when Communism came to power, from Cuba to Central America to North Korea.
And this is not to mention the murders that the USSR perpetrated against the citizens of Eastern Europe following Hitler's demise.
As with extremist Muslim terrorists, the Jihadists, Communists seize and hold power by force. Those who resist are killed.
Thus, Commies are every bit as evil and dangerous as Jihadists. Cold-blooded mass murderers by any name are a blight on humanity.
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
Unintended Consequence at Columbia University
The appearance of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on the campus of Columbia University revealed a profound unintended consequence: the 'outing' of Ahmadinejad as the bumbling but dangerous buffoon he really is.
Some would say that the Iranian President's remarks at Columbia on Monday make him look so completely foolish that no one will take him seriously any longer. That would be a big mistake.
No greater danger is posed to the free world than a fool in control of a nation with nuclear power who believes Israel should be blown off the face of the map. If anything, Ahmadinejad revealed to the free world just how how deeply his ignorance influences his values.
Columbia University could not have foreseen these consequences of a terribly ill-informed decision to give one of the faces of modern evil a reputable platform from which to spout his unique form of hate and bigotry. This is the campus that spurns the ROTC and that has withdrawn speaking invitations from major conservative spokespersons.
Thus, Columbia's insistence that its invitation was all about 'free speech' is largely disingenuous. The University does not routinely afford free speech to noted conservative voices, particularly those on the front-lines of the global war on Islamists.
The University is also known for giving a platform to extremist Muslims from which they can deliver the most despicable and vile attacks against Jews and Israel, while refusing to grant to major Jewish voices the opportunity to speak about the dangers of the global Jihad.
And this is totally apart from the fact that it is entirely inappropriate for an American university to provide a megaphone to one of America's sworn enemies during a war.
To be fair, Columbia's President told the ugly truth about Ahmadinejad calmly and systematically in his remarks to introduce the Iranian leader. He is to be commended for his careful, deliberative manner of enumerating the many reasons Ahmadinejad is to be considered a scourge to the world.
But this does not in any way absolve Columbia of its shame and guilt for giving such an individual an opportunity to bask in even more of the world's attention.
As for Ahmadinejad's remarks, perhaps he succeeded in driving a nail into his own coffin by simply opening his mouth at Columbia. He refused to answer directly a question concerning his prior remarks that the Holocaust never happened, that Israel has no right to exist, and that he intends to build and use nuclear bombs to back up his rhetoric.
But perhaps the most telling feature of all was Ahmadinejad's claim that, 'We have no gays in Iran.'
Of course not. When you are the leader of a country that has outlawed homosexual behavior, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of the Press, and freedom to assemble; where women are subjugated to the status of a dog--a mere possession of a man; and where liberty itself is considered evil and contrary to the laws of Allah; it is too easy to assume that when you look out the window over your fiefdom you see nothing but purity and harmony.
Vile and despicable human beings who dissent in public or decide to become Catholic, and shameful, godless women who speak their minds, are nowhere to be found.
Detractors, dissenters, and protesters have either been killed or imprisoned. The rest have either fled for their lives or gone underground. But in no way does this mean they do not exist.
Thus, perhaps in some odd way Columbia and Ahmadinejad did us all a favor. We were afforded a rare opportunity to see the backwardness, and the danger, of the mind of a Jihadist at work.
Some would say that the Iranian President's remarks at Columbia on Monday make him look so completely foolish that no one will take him seriously any longer. That would be a big mistake.
No greater danger is posed to the free world than a fool in control of a nation with nuclear power who believes Israel should be blown off the face of the map. If anything, Ahmadinejad revealed to the free world just how how deeply his ignorance influences his values.
Columbia University could not have foreseen these consequences of a terribly ill-informed decision to give one of the faces of modern evil a reputable platform from which to spout his unique form of hate and bigotry. This is the campus that spurns the ROTC and that has withdrawn speaking invitations from major conservative spokespersons.
Thus, Columbia's insistence that its invitation was all about 'free speech' is largely disingenuous. The University does not routinely afford free speech to noted conservative voices, particularly those on the front-lines of the global war on Islamists.
The University is also known for giving a platform to extremist Muslims from which they can deliver the most despicable and vile attacks against Jews and Israel, while refusing to grant to major Jewish voices the opportunity to speak about the dangers of the global Jihad.
And this is totally apart from the fact that it is entirely inappropriate for an American university to provide a megaphone to one of America's sworn enemies during a war.
To be fair, Columbia's President told the ugly truth about Ahmadinejad calmly and systematically in his remarks to introduce the Iranian leader. He is to be commended for his careful, deliberative manner of enumerating the many reasons Ahmadinejad is to be considered a scourge to the world.
But this does not in any way absolve Columbia of its shame and guilt for giving such an individual an opportunity to bask in even more of the world's attention.
As for Ahmadinejad's remarks, perhaps he succeeded in driving a nail into his own coffin by simply opening his mouth at Columbia. He refused to answer directly a question concerning his prior remarks that the Holocaust never happened, that Israel has no right to exist, and that he intends to build and use nuclear bombs to back up his rhetoric.
But perhaps the most telling feature of all was Ahmadinejad's claim that, 'We have no gays in Iran.'
Of course not. When you are the leader of a country that has outlawed homosexual behavior, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of the Press, and freedom to assemble; where women are subjugated to the status of a dog--a mere possession of a man; and where liberty itself is considered evil and contrary to the laws of Allah; it is too easy to assume that when you look out the window over your fiefdom you see nothing but purity and harmony.
Vile and despicable human beings who dissent in public or decide to become Catholic, and shameful, godless women who speak their minds, are nowhere to be found.
Detractors, dissenters, and protesters have either been killed or imprisoned. The rest have either fled for their lives or gone underground. But in no way does this mean they do not exist.
Thus, perhaps in some odd way Columbia and Ahmadinejad did us all a favor. We were afforded a rare opportunity to see the backwardness, and the danger, of the mind of a Jihadist at work.
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Colleges Provide Platform for Muslim Extremists
Washington, DC (TLS). American college and university campuses are increasingly implicated in giving voice to Jihadists who proceed to advocate extremist views that place citizens' lives in danger. The Liberty Sphere conducted an exclusive investigation last month into terror cells in North Carolina, which revealed that the university campus is a prime launching pad for these cold-blooded murderers.
Greensboro's North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University was the spawning bed for several of the perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks. In addition, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill is home to an active Muslim group that sponsors campus speakers who use that platform as a means to spread a message of hate toward 'infidels.' The Raleigh chapter of 'MAS,' the Muslim-American Society, collaborates with members of UNC's faculty to sponsor these extremist speakers who advocate for the Jihad.
It was one of these meetings that led Muslim Mohammad Teheri-azar to ram his vehicle into a group of students on the campus of UNC, an attack that injured nine. The enraged Teheri-azar had attended a meeting sponsored by MAS and a group of UNC faculty that featured an extremist Muslim speaker who displayed vitriolic rhetoric aimed at Jews and 'infidels.'
The Liberty Sphere has also reported on several major university campuses that routinely sponsor extremist Muslim speakers. Yet those same campuses have reneged on invitations to speakers such as Nonie Darwish under pressure from campus and community Muslim groups.
You may remember that it was Darwish who was raised in a Muslim environment and experienced the Jihad first-hand. Darwish later repudiated the Jihad and became an outspoken advocate for Israel, the United States, and the War on Terror. More than once Darwish has been silenced by threats leveled at university administrators who had issued invitations for her to speak.
The Muslim extremists had different plans.
And thus, college and university campuses around the country, and around the world, have provided Jihadists a powerful platform from which to deliver their hate-filled propaganda and recruit young Muslims into the ranks of the Jihad.
In the following detailed article, Caroline Glick delves into this growing problem on college campuses. Click here to read Glick's latest enlightening article:
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0207/glick022707.php3
Greensboro's North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University was the spawning bed for several of the perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks. In addition, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill is home to an active Muslim group that sponsors campus speakers who use that platform as a means to spread a message of hate toward 'infidels.' The Raleigh chapter of 'MAS,' the Muslim-American Society, collaborates with members of UNC's faculty to sponsor these extremist speakers who advocate for the Jihad.
It was one of these meetings that led Muslim Mohammad Teheri-azar to ram his vehicle into a group of students on the campus of UNC, an attack that injured nine. The enraged Teheri-azar had attended a meeting sponsored by MAS and a group of UNC faculty that featured an extremist Muslim speaker who displayed vitriolic rhetoric aimed at Jews and 'infidels.'
The Liberty Sphere has also reported on several major university campuses that routinely sponsor extremist Muslim speakers. Yet those same campuses have reneged on invitations to speakers such as Nonie Darwish under pressure from campus and community Muslim groups.
You may remember that it was Darwish who was raised in a Muslim environment and experienced the Jihad first-hand. Darwish later repudiated the Jihad and became an outspoken advocate for Israel, the United States, and the War on Terror. More than once Darwish has been silenced by threats leveled at university administrators who had issued invitations for her to speak.
The Muslim extremists had different plans.
And thus, college and university campuses around the country, and around the world, have provided Jihadists a powerful platform from which to deliver their hate-filled propaganda and recruit young Muslims into the ranks of the Jihad.
In the following detailed article, Caroline Glick delves into this growing problem on college campuses. Click here to read Glick's latest enlightening article:
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0207/glick022707.php3
Saturday, February 10, 2007
How the Left Contributes to Muslim Takeover of Europe
Washington, DC (TLS). A rising chorus of voices in America and in Europe has warned that extremist Muslims are on the brink of a complete takeover of Europe. At the present rate of immigration and the bullying of the extremists within Islam, Europe has less than 10 years, tops, to stop the entire continent from becoming an Islamic region. Some countries have even less time than that.
The thing that is most discouraging, however, about the Jihadist surge in Europe is not that the extremists are using urban warfare, or suicide bombers, and the like, to accomplish their goal. They have actually done very little of this, with the exception of the hundreds of firebombings of autos in and around Paris for the past two years. Rather, the Jihadists are being helped by the Left. With the Left's relentless emphasis on political correctness and 'multiculturalism,' nothing can be put in the way of the extremist surge. Without a deeply held conviction that the Judeo-Christian culture of the West is far superior to the vision of the world held by Muslims, there is no motivation to stop intrusions of deviant extremists into the present culture. And, make no mistake about it, these extremists are most definitely driven by their agenda to impose their inferior cultural and religious values on the rest of the world.
Thus, unless Europe rises from its drunken stupor, fueled by its addiction to political correctness and multiculturalism, the Islamic onslaught will continue until nothing is left of Western European culture as we know it. Any vestige of what Europe once was will be swallowed up by the madness and ruthlessness of a Middle Eastern culture and religion that espouses total dominance, violence, and religious totalitarianism.
Read this shocking report here, from Discover the Networks:
http://www.discoverthenetwork.org/Articles/Left%20Allows%20Europe%20to%20Fall%20to%20Muslims2.html
The thing that is most discouraging, however, about the Jihadist surge in Europe is not that the extremists are using urban warfare, or suicide bombers, and the like, to accomplish their goal. They have actually done very little of this, with the exception of the hundreds of firebombings of autos in and around Paris for the past two years. Rather, the Jihadists are being helped by the Left. With the Left's relentless emphasis on political correctness and 'multiculturalism,' nothing can be put in the way of the extremist surge. Without a deeply held conviction that the Judeo-Christian culture of the West is far superior to the vision of the world held by Muslims, there is no motivation to stop intrusions of deviant extremists into the present culture. And, make no mistake about it, these extremists are most definitely driven by their agenda to impose their inferior cultural and religious values on the rest of the world.
Thus, unless Europe rises from its drunken stupor, fueled by its addiction to political correctness and multiculturalism, the Islamic onslaught will continue until nothing is left of Western European culture as we know it. Any vestige of what Europe once was will be swallowed up by the madness and ruthlessness of a Middle Eastern culture and religion that espouses total dominance, violence, and religious totalitarianism.
Read this shocking report here, from Discover the Networks:
http://www.discoverthenetwork.org/Articles/Left%20Allows%20Europe%20to%20Fall%20to%20Muslims2.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)