bluepitbull

Question for you sociologists

2011-05-12T13:13:00.000-07:00

Q: If blacks are leaving major metro areas due to a rising Hispanic population, do we call it "black flight"?

Sanchez beats the shit out of the straw man in a typical Loretta passive/aggressive fashion.

2011-04-13T07:57:00.001-07:00

The story here.

Well...what a shock.

2011-04-06T06:55:00.000-07:00

I love how state and city administrators, the Texas and national media sources politely ignore that illegals are a burden on the budget. All the facts are there, go see for yourself. This report is part of an in-depth analysis.

From PR Newswire:

TX: Study Finds High Welfare Use by Immigrants

What the fuck is wrong with people?

2011-03-11T07:31:00.000-08:00

Anytime you want to see the ignorance of online trolls, go to the comment section of any, ANY article. So I'm checking out the information on the tsunami which may hit the west coast and I'm trying to find out where it's going to come ashore, and I happen to duck down to the comments to see if anyone posted information, but instead I'm hit with the stupidity of trolls.

This is Just a warning for you Godless America hating Leftards....more is coming....you will be crying out to God to saVE your sorry asses!!

... and they had no business shoving that Obamacare health bill down our throats!

Actually, they should tell everyone in the city of Berkeley that they have free dope down at the pier.

Seriously? You want people to die? And here I thought it was just Moore and Jesse (Rev) Jackson who want to see people die. The dumbass that posted this stuff is probably a leftist trying to make people look bad, but I wouldn't discount it being another Right is Right/Malcontent person either given the stupid things they say.

Be careful what you wish for. Bad enough that you think it, worse that you say it.

This is a look into a typical empty headed progressive mind.

2011-02-28T18:17:00.000-08:00

This is what I was smacked with when I mentioned that we have a president that tells us to save and cut back while he parties and vacations:

"They constantly have fancy parties and take vacations constantly while telling others what to do." Hip-hop and bling, right? - Jim from a discussion on Get the Big Idea

Did I say anything about hip-hop? Did I say something about bling? So, in trying to cast me as a racist, Jim has shown HIS true colors. Don't try to project your racism on me. It goes along way to showing why some voted for this man. This is nearing a Jim Taggart moment where people's ideology and thoughts conflict with reality. Don't be surprised if 20% (or less I suspect) of the population goes catatonic or mass hysteria results.

$9 Million and counting

2011-02-22T17:25:00.000-08:00

So as of now, the protests are costing WI taxpayers $9 million in wages, security, and missed school days. This is getting more than a little ridiculous. I'm watching some jagoff on O'Reilly screaming "Fox lies!" at the top of his lungs. This guy and all of these hippies and entitlement freaks can get away with this because there is little fear of true recourse in this country. Look no further than Libya and China if you want to fight a real dictator, not a falsely labeled one.

Don't get me wrong, all voices need to be heard. But this is getting boring and it only shows how the "useful idiots" on the left are plain stupid sheep. Teachers aren't really losing anything in WI. Collective bargaining rights? Please. It's about more than that, even though they think they control the message. It's more about them having to pay a little more into their pensions and health care. It's also seeing if republicans will back down even though the sheep foot soldiers aren't smart enough to realize it. We have a president who is George Soros light and stirring the pot and violating a state's rights behind the scenes.

Nobody is cutting wages, and there are plenty of qualified unemployed people out there. Fire the fuckers. WAAAA!!! Then they can stay at the capitol and cry like little children. The state, and many states just don't have the money. Here in Texas, they are letting hundreds of useless public school administrators keep their six-figure jobs while alluding to firing teachers if we don't increase taxes. California is a fucking wreck due to a bloated state government, wasteful spending, and a shit-ton of illegal aliens which burden the social services.

This is the time to stop all of the politically correct bullshit. Stop the people that invent new words to silence those who disagree with them. I can tell you this; if someone starts yelling in my face, I'm less likely to be nice about it. All this bullshit talk of civility. Where the fuck is the empty suit president when there are signs comparing the WI governor to Hitler, and where is he on the signs with targets on republican WI senators?

This is a time for us to band together. This is a time for us to correct the lies that the left makes everyday. It's time to stand up to all of the shouts of "Fascism!!!" and "Racism!!!"

Really? I challenge Mr. Fox Lies to come down here and scream in my face. I challenge anyone that would make a graphic this intellectually dishonest to go to China and try this shit. Not gonna happen.

Lady Cincinnatus: Providence Is Sending Wisconsin A Bit Of A Cool Down

2011-02-20T21:21:00.000-08:00

Lady Cincinnatus: Providence Is Sending Wisconsin A Bit Of A Cool Down

Tax funded lies, or just ignorance, or perhaps self-delusion? Or is it that liberals are ready to sell their country wholesale to fascists?

2011-02-20T20:21:00.000-08:00

This is what your taxpayer dollar gets you:

On the NPR.org site.

Just remember that when the Islamists come, they will go for all of you first. Cheers!

Khamenei: US must be removed from Islamic world

2011-02-20T18:49:00.000-08:00

Khamenei: US must be removed from Islamic world

AFP - February 20, 2011

Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on Sunday called on Muslims to "remove" the United States from the Islamic world.

"The main problem in the Muslim world is the presence of the United States. It is the biggest problem. We need to address that," he told a gathering of Shiite and Sunni scholars in Tehran for an international conference on Islam.

"It is necessary to remove the United States from the Islamic world," the all-powerful cleric and Islamic republic's commander-in-chief said, adding that the country's arch-foe was currently weak.

Khamenei urged Muslims worldwide to preserve the "people's movement in Egypt," saying it was the duty of both the people and dignitaries of Arab nations and the entire Islamic community.

He reiterated that the Arab revolts were "Islamic" and must be consolidated.

"The enemies try to say that the popular movements in Egypt, Tunisia and other nations are un-Islamic, but certainly these popular movements are Islamic and must be consolidated," he said.

On February 4, in his Friday prayer sermon, Khamenei called for an Islamic regime to be installed in Egypt, a week before that country's strongman Hosni Mubarak was ousted.

Iran said it supported the uprising in Egypt.

Hey, I'm fine with that. The trouble is (and Khamenei knows this) that he has no intention of removing American Muslims from the United States. So far we've had four major western leaders say that mulitculturalism has failed. It's time to realize that permitting people to live within our borders, have a US passport, have our benefits, and live in relative safety has a price; being American. Not practicing sharia law, not treating women like cattle, not ready to commit jihad because of some crazed mullah.

The fact is that Islamists want to fly a flag over our capital. One has said so recently. Anjem Choudary, who once said “the flag of Islam will fly over the White House,” says he will lead a demonstration rallying Muslims to establish sharia law across the United States." -- Fox News. So don't tell Americans that it's enough for us to but out. You seem to forget the many attacks on the west in recent history and in fact, mostly in this decade. Us, England, Spain, and Russia have all suffered attacks by Islamists bent on causing mass casualties. In our case, they did.

I talked about the encroachment by Hezbollah into Egypt over a year ago. Susan Rice was interviewed by Al Jazeera who asked if she approved of Hezbollah incursions into Egypt. She feigned (or was) ignorant of the goings-on there. How foolish are you people who voted in Clinton-lite?

If we do not get rid of political correctness, and fail to stand up to cries of racism around every corner, we are fucked. Believe it.

Stupid president quotes

2011-02-19T18:38:00.000-08:00

"If you’re a family trying to cut back, you might skip going out to dinner, you might put off a vacation."

Stand With Scott Walker

2011-02-18T18:48:00.000-08:00

Stand With Scott Walker

This is where Wisconsin's brave legislators fled?

2011-02-17T19:21:00.001-08:00

http://www.todaystmj4.com/news/local/116390569.html

Oh well, enjoy some good music

2011-02-15T18:05:00.000-08:00

Take a break from the politics, the stupidity of the modern man, and your own troubles and listen to my favorite harp player, Carlos Del Junco out of Canada. He is probably the most talented modern blues cross harpist. Enjoy.

Incredible. Just fucking incredible.

2011-02-15T17:55:00.000-08:00

Here. This is the worst: The Internal Revenue Service says it will need an battalion of 1,054 new auditors and staffers and new facilities at a cost to taxpayers of more than $359 million in fiscal 2012 just to watch over the initial implementation of President Obama's healthcare reforms. Among the new corps will be 81 workers assigned to make sure tanning salons pay a new 10 percent excise tax. Their cost: $11.5 million.

So far, obama has suggested cuts in programs he has no intention of cutting. He believes that tax cuts = money deprived from the government machination. He hasn't seen an unprinted dollar that he can't spend. Enough. And Republicans need to get it right, otherwise they need to leave.

What a waste of time

2011-02-11T10:52:00.000-08:00

It isn't hard to put 2 and 2 together and come up with 4 for most people. Unfortunately, our friends on the left (this includes the administration, media, and bloggers) have to do mental gymnastics to justify the possibility of an Islamist takeover in a pan-Arab sense.

First, we have the president-appointed CIA Director saying that he saw the departure of Mubarak yesterday on CNN?!? If that's how the CIA is currently gathering intelligence (as a primary source), I am deeply concerned. Next we have the Intelligence Director saying that the Muslim Brotherhood is mainly secular?!? A quick search of the Muslim Brotherhood, Hassan Al Banna, Sayed Qutb, and many others on any site, even Wikipedia, would tell you differently. Why do we pay these people and for what purpose? Even the title "Muslim Brotherhood" should be a clue.

It is worrisome the lackadaisical attitude in all of the mentioned above.

More disturbing to me is how conservative leaders are misquoted and misrepresented in the MSM. Even more disturbing than that to me are people passing themselves off as right-wing pundits that hide under multiple disguises and even impersonate other conservative pundits in an attempt to undermine them.

For these reasons, I see no reason to blog everyday. Couple with that the fact that spoken word really properly conveys a message where typing comes off flat. See ya when something else interesting happens. Perhaps after the global caliphate and the president bows to a Muslim emirate of the US.

If Mubarrak loses Egypt, we're screwed

2011-01-28T16:14:00.000-08:00

We've supported a dictatorship with benefits in Egypt since the turn of the century. You could even say that the United States government has had a past hand in fostering modern terrorism. With Hezbollah in Egypt already and the ever-present Muslim Brotherhood (makes Al-Qaeda look like saints), something bad is going to go down. It's not just about getting rid of a dictator, it's about what side we are going to support.

It's even safe to say that we've lost this one. It could even be that the only way to prevent further problems is to cut ties with Egypt.

No more olby? What will his six fans watch?

2011-01-21T19:31:00.000-08:00

Darn. Keith Olbermann seems to have been shitcanned at MSNBC. What will our liberal friends do now. Well, probably turn to Matthews.

Blood Libel

2011-01-13T19:41:00.001-08:00

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703583404576079823067585318.html?mod=WSJ_newsreel_opinion

Let's watch the lefties play the "Jump to Conclusions" game!

2011-01-10T16:16:00.000-08:00

The far left "progressives" lose the House, take heavy losses in the Senate, and still refuse to see that the country doesn't want their creepy vision of the U.S. Instead, anytime something tragic happens will be seen as a "crisis that they shouldn't let go to waste". This latest tragedy in Tucson, AZ. is a perfect example of this conniving mindset that the left shamelessly uses to attack anything they are afraid of.

We heard from plenty of left wing bloggers, and from the media that they welcomed a battle with the Tea Party and Palin, and many other conservative pundits. Clearly, the word "welcome" is newspeak for "pissing in their pants abjectly frightened". They couldn't beat us directly with their moonbeam politics where class warfare, rejection of anything we term normal, and heavy social spending failed. Therefore, instead of admitting their flawed logic, what they think is appropriate is to point fingers at conservatives, or anyone who doesn't agree with their flawed view of the world.

You lost!!! We will let you play ball if you play it our way. Get over it.

Now it turns out that this deranged killer is being framed as a left-wing kook by his friends. But don't let that get in the way of the left-wing media propaganda and their swirly-eyed puppet/zombie bloggers who use terms like "tea-bagger" for the movement they are so, so frightened of yet preach civility when anyone gets in their face.

I'm sick of the lies that these people believe. I'm just as sick of reactionary mental midgets like Malcontent or any of their other pretend blogs. I'm just sick of all of them.

Lefties, you have no credibility with me. You are parrots for Matthews, Olby, and Mitchell. You don't have original ideas or even creative ideas if you have to squawk each time your silly MSNBC tells you to. Think for yourself.

You were right, Pedro, sometimes your wildest dreams will come true!

2010-12-29T14:31:00.000-08:00

All this week, Herman Cain has been filling in for many of what I consider mediocre talk show hosts (Hannity and Boortz to name two). He is going to form an exploratory committee involving a possible run for the 2012 presidency. I and many others have badgered him for a few years now trying to get him to run against obama. Some polysci professor claims that he stands a slim to none chance of a win if he runs. I disagree (with most polysci professors' predictions. Mine were all sure Bill White would grab the governorship easily) he will make a good and popular candidate for the GOP. Now if we can only keep Palin out of the picture...and I still stand by that. What has she done in recent history but regurgitate some talking points and have a reality tv show?

It's time for someone who knows something about business, someone who has served with the Federal Reserve, and someone who views our country in a positive light (not a disparaging obama light). Good luck Mr. Cain!!!

No good deed goes unpunished in the modern world

2010-12-13T05:45:00.000-08:00

The United States could give away every scrap of food, every article of clothing, and every cent and it wouldn't be enough for our enemies. Worse than that, they want to take it out on the people in need of aid. We continue our slow crawl toward submission to radical Islam in this country due to our acceptance of groups like CAIR and the ACLU (apparently their definition of tolerance is anything that isn't mainstream). Meanwhile, in places like Pakistan where everyday living is a potential crisis, we can't give any aid without criticism from radicals who should readily accept free help because it is just that...FREE!!! You lose nothing. Unfortunately, this scares the little guy on the block because this proves that maybe the United States of America isn't the big, bad, evil country that they've been preaching against for the past seventy or so years.

Sure, we have our flaws, but Operation Ajax in the early 50's assured that the free world had a steady petroleum supply for quite awhile (just preempting the typical arguments I get from the wikipedia scholars). This is just one example of the argumentative individual who wants to appear wordly and scholarly. Still to this day, we can't take a proverbial piss without criticism from some self-appointed critic of our foreign policies be they foreign or domestic. Such is the case in the recent (August) aid to victims of flooding in Pakistan.

Here is the background:

On August 10, 2010, President Asif Zardari returned to Pakistan from his state visits to France and the UK and a stopover meeting with Bashar Al-Assad, the ruler of Syria. The Pakistani president was roundly criticized in the UK and Pakistan for proceeding with the state visits as the country's worst floods in 80 years were unfolding.

By the time President Zardari returned, more than 1,500 people were killed by three weeks of monsoon-triggered floods. Maurizio Giuliano, a spokesman of the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, estimated a day before Zardari's return that 13.8 million Pakistanis were affected, a figure now revised to 20 million. While the international community and the Islamic nations were yet to respond, the U.S. had rushed rescue helicopters, more than half a million halal The U.S. was leading the way in relief efforts, having pledged $35 million in aid, which was soon raised to $70 million and then to $150 million. meals, and water for the flood-affected people.

--Excerpt from Middle East Media Research Institute article on the subject, author Tufail Ahmad

It didn't take long for our critics to let their people know the extent of our 'evil' aid:

Taliban Spokesman: Despite the Aid, "Our Jihad Against the U.S. will Continue"

Senator Saleh Shah: Floods Are "Allah's Wrath" for Not Protesting Against the U.S. Drone Attacks

Jamaat-e-Islami Emir: "To Accept Aid from the U.S. and India is Tantamount to Eating Poison"

Hizbut Tahrir Pakistan: Allowing U.S. Marines Inside Pakistan for Relief Work is Haram (Forbidden in Islam)

Provincial Minister: "Terrorists are Joining the Flood Victims; They are Posing as Flood Affectees And are Regrouping in the Flood-Hit Areas"

-- all from MEMRI.org

Now, I'll be the first to admit I'm not a big fan of the Marines (that's personal Army bias and real-world experience with many of the goons), but Haram? If Pakistan were such a sacred place, wouldn't people be flocking to it in droves? Telling people NOT to accept help otherwise they will go to hell is evil. Threatening people for needing aid is evil.

It's time once again for U.S. leaders to renew their vows taken under oath to protect this nation from enemies both foreign and domestic. This mentality is not only seen in the pan-Islamic world, but in our own country. Here this sort of thing is protected by words like racism and hate to those who dislike the message and the ideology trying to metastasize itself in strategic positions throughout this country. All the DOJ can do is reaffirm their commitment to reassuring Muslims in this country that they will not be discriminated against. It isn't Muslims in this country that are being discriminated against, it's people who don't want Sharia law in their state. It's the elderly, the infirm, and women with big boobs who are singled out for body searches so that our government doesn't appear biased. It's people who are being called bigots by radical Islamists and their liberal tool mouthpieces for not wanting a mosque at ground zero. Of course, the sensible person already knows all of this. It's the one's that aren't sensible that I worry about.

We've got our tree in the front room with all of our wonderful decorations. Presents for all of or friends are under the tree, and Mom is coming this year. Looks to be a wonderful Christmas this year. I hope that everyone else is having a wonderful Christmas season and that you remember the meaning behind the occasion: It's not the season of giving and receiving, but rather a celebration of the birth of our savior who is responsible for any goodwill that this nation has toward people who would slap us in the face even when bearing gifts.

The shit that is going on this week

2010-12-08T19:44:00.000-08:00

Now the house passes an immigration bill. Hopefully the government understands that the majority of the citizens here don't support this.

Finals are this week.

It's cold.

To top it all off, Aretha Franklin is ill.

Lord, help us out here.

And...the crazy keeps getting crazier.

2010-12-07T09:33:00.000-08:00

"Ya know I try to arguments with Mr. Right is Right about lifting the toilet seat when he uses it and simply peeing in the sink. ... but compared to the crap I have been taking from BullShitBull that has been nothing.
As for my “Bullying” people in the blogisphere, that is the LIE of the centry, I try my darnest to mind my own business. And for the few times that I do get around on the blogs I never bully anyone. Do I speak my mind? Oh, you bet I do." --from the Blog Right is Right

What??? What the hell is a centry, darnest, or even the blogisphere? All that aside...you try to argument what??? Are you saying you are an advocate of peeing in the sink? I try to eliminate waste other places than where I brush my teeth. And you definitely do NOT try to mind your own business. Your cries of "I'm no Bluepitbull!!" say you have a hard time MINDING your business.

You started this, dude. Any way that I can tweak you after your lies and misrepresentations that hurt you the way you tried to hurt Pam, LCR and I, I will do. If you are so, so passionate about your political views, write a book. I'm sure it will only be one page. Your over-simplistic views of politics and your bullying of people you don't agree with indicate to me that you aren't a conservative, but rather a plant. You are irrelevant to the blogging world and only serve to dumb down analysis of politics. It's like someone resurrected Wally George and gave him half a brain. Hey....wait a minute....perhaps that can be your plug for the Right is Right blog:

"Like Wally George with half the IQ"

You just can't take the crazy out of some people

2010-12-05T16:15:00.000-08:00

I see that the Right is Right blog is back, again. Same picture stolen from an actresses website. Same foul mouth, and same odd way of talking. Still calling me a lover of liberal bloggers, which it knows is a lie. I will work with liberals, or anyone for a common cause: Ridding the blogosphere of people who know they wouldn't talk to your face the way they do on a blog or a message board.

Right is Right has tried to bully Pamela at The Oracular Opinion, and Left Coast Rebel on more than one occasion. Rebel took the high road, Pam took the middle ground, and I will keep to the base. I like getting right down there in the trenches because at heart, this person is a lowly coward who lies and steals.

Right is Right has already been shown to be one of a group of blogs written by a person or group of crazies who steal people's pictures for their profile, including dead soldiers, policemen, and others. Not only that, this blogger or bloggers also steal people's comments from message boards and other websites.

I mean, hell, I may not have perfect sentence structure everytime, but I like to think I get my message across without having to cut and paste other peoples' stuff.

Right is Right and all of your other blogs, scurry back under the dirty refrigerator where you crawled out from under and hide.

NY Times editor "Editors try to balance the value of the material to public understanding against potential dangers to the national interest."

2010-11-29T06:37:00.000-08:00

Bullshit.

The NYT could care less about divulging classified information and more about increasing subscriptions. As is, NYT has had to make their online paper a pay subscription for most articles. This indicates that they are losing money.

Let's look at the rest of what he said:

The question of dealing with classified information is rarely easy, and never to be taken lightly. Editors try to balance the value of the material to public understanding against potential dangers to the national interest. As a general rule we withhold secret information that would expose confidential sources to reprisals or that would reveal operational intelligence that might be useful to adversaries in war. We excise material that might lead terrorists to unsecured weapons material, compromise intelligence-gathering programs aimed at hostile countries, or disclose information about the capabilities of American weapons that could be helpful to an enemy.-NYT

Am I the only one that remembers secret powerpoint slideshows released during the Bush Administration? Doubt it.

Of course, most of these documents will be made public regardless of what The Times decides. WikiLeaks has shared the entire archive of secret cables with at least four European publications, has promised country-specific documents to many other news outlets, and has said it plans to ultimately post its trove online. For The Times to ignore this material would be to deny its own readers the careful reporting and thoughtful analysis they expect when this kind of information becomes public.
But the more important reason to publish these articles is that the cables tell the unvarnished story of how the government makes its biggest decisions, the decisions that cost the country most heavily in lives and money. They shed light on the motivations — and, in some cases, duplicity — of allies on the receiving end of American courtship and foreign aid. They illuminate the diplomacy surrounding two current wars and several countries, like Pakistan and Yemen, where American military involvement is growing. As daunting as it is to publish such material over official objections, it would be presumptuous to conclude that Americans have no right to know what is being done in their name.-NYT

Is it always necessary for journalists to publish everything regardless of source damage to third parties and potential damage to the state? I say no. Prefacing his analysis with "well, the information was already there" is sophomoric at best. This is a time where not only lives are in the balance, but the security of our own country and others around the world. Further dissemination of these documents is self-serving to the NYT and nothing more.

The excessive Thanksgiving

2010-11-29T06:24:00.000-08:00

And by excessive, I don't mean I overate. We made WAYYYYY too much food. At our friends house, they fried a turkey (which is a wonderful, wonderful way to cook it. White meat is soooo tender). I made two 3 lb pot-roasts and we had two sweet potato dishes, pies, cupcakes, stuffing, and other things. It was certainly a tasty dinner, for sure.

I see that Julian Assange continues to leak illegally obtained classified information. The only good thing that might come out of this is now the Iranians know (I mean the leadership) that the Arabs don't like them. Perhaps now they will understand the gravity of their situation.

Enough of Wikileaks

2010-11-26T20:29:00.000-08:00

It is most definitely time for this mincing poof Julian Assange's flame to be extinguished from this planet. He's had his more than fifteen seconds of fame and exhausted the goodwill of the American people. It's time for him to go gentle into that good night.

Let me add to this that the incompetent Crowley and Clinton who are rolling submissively at the feet of the Red Chinese should ask the Wikileaks founder why he has failed to release documents incriminating the Chinese for human rights violations against the Uighar and the Nepalese among others.

Perhaps this is the crisis Biden warned us about...

2010-11-24T06:36:00.000-08:00

Just kidding. This is the second reported incident in recent history where North Korea was the aggressor against it's southern neighbor. North Korea cannot win this one no matter what you've heard about their army. I seriously doubt that our relations with the PRC could be further damaged by an assisted retaliatory aggression against the north.

The president is considering a joint exercise with our South Korean allies in the next few days, and I believe that is the proper form of escalation. I don't give credit to the president, but to his joint chiefs of staff. The Korean peninsula has been a volatile place since the first Korean peoples occupied it. The history of Korea is one of invasions, but in the 21st century it's time to put a stop to aggression against one of the more prosperous countries in the world.

Happy Thanksgiving to one and all.

Who killed Lebanon's Rafik Hariri? (CBC)

2010-11-21T19:13:00.000-08:00

Seriously? Could a real journalist not know that Hezbollah was behind the killing of Hariri?

I watched the whole thing live when I was in Iraq. Al Arabiya showed the scene over and over.

This is the same political correctness that lets our people be scanned and groped and keeps us from the Israeli way of airport security. Let us understand our liberties and securities for what they are.

DO NOT TAILGATE!!!!

2010-11-17T08:35:00.000-08:00

Seriously, is there such a herd mentality that people feel the need to group up in traffic? Do not tailgate a motorcycle!!! It's dangerous for me, and it's dangerous for you. You will still get injured if you hit an 800 pound bike. Strangely, I find it to be mostly middle-aged men that are the worst. You would think it would be teens who don't yet fully (if ever) understand motion. When you tailgate me, you force me to slow down so I don't end up crushed between the asshole behind me and stopping traffic in front of me. You also divide my attention. If your late for work, leave earlier. I time my trips. There is nothing life or death except for life or death, that can't wait. I actually had a guy tell me I was dead as he passed me even though I had no control over traffic and wasn't willing to tailgate the car in front of me. I'm so scared.

On top of that, why do we have traffic due to rubber-necking? If it doesn't involve you, pay attention to what's going on in front of you.

The Republican party had better...

2010-11-16T06:29:00.000-08:00

Not run Newt Gingrich
Not run Mitt Romney
Not run Sarah Palin

...for president. They had best bribe, coerce, or otherwise convince Bobby Jindal that a run for president would be a smart choice. Gingrich will run, the Dems are salivating at the idea. How much dirt is there on this guy? Plenty, to be sure.

Jindal, however, is young, smart, well-spoken without a teleprompter, and knows how to stand up to bullies.

This week (and weekend)

2010-11-15T05:37:00.000-08:00

I'm putting politics aside to a certain extent until I am certain of the tempo for the next congress. Unless something unusual or noteworthy happens, I won't talk about it.

This weekend was alright. Went a wedding reception for some good friends who recently tied the knot in Jamaica. I can do without the dark, gloomy weather. As a Texian, I can honestly say that I hate dark skies and love the heat and sun. I hate when it gets dark at 1900 hours (7:00 pm). It really makes you feel rushed to squeeze in more stuff before sun sets.

Got the lawn mowed for hopefully the last time this season. Gotta say that Trugreen lives up to their name. A little pricey, but they've basically brought my lawn back from the dead.

At the local grocery store, I see on the cover of "People" magazine at the checkout stand yet another picture of Kim Kardashian with the quote, "I thought I'd be married by now." Let's see...sex video and ***** receptacle for the NFL and you thought people were trying to marry you? Please.

Watched "Rebel Without a Cause" for the umpteenth time last night. Never can quite understand that movie. Guess the title says it all. Always fun to see good ol' Jim Baccus as something other than Thurston Howell the 3rd, though. Shame about Dean croaking at the height of his acting career.

I must have had enough sleep because in my dream that woke me at 445 this morning, my recon commander, CPT Calvert (unaffectionately known at the time as "CPT Cavalry") from 1991 was standing over me saying, "You need to get the hell up and get on the berm!" That was all it took. I was up and running and ready to start the day in five minutes. I'm still a little freaked out by the whole thing. I sat there shaking for like an hour once I realized where I was. Always wonder how many combat vets that happens to on a regular basis.

Hopped on the bike and on 281 some moron decides to ride my ass until I give him the hand signal to back the hell off. I hate people who tailgate bikers (motorcycles, I could care less about those annoying yuppies on $3000 Trek bikes in their multi-colored tights).

Hopefully this week is more interesting in a positive way.

4-Year-Old Killed in Home Invasion Stabbed 36 Times

2010-11-12T06:25:00.000-08:00

(Nov. 11) -- Authorities in Oklahoma have arrested a teenager in the brutal slaying of child, who was stabbed 36 times. The killing was committed during a home-invasion robbery, police said.

"In my entire career, I've never seen anything like this," Muskogee police Cpl. Pedro Zardeneta told Kansas City's KMBC. "It's sad."

Officials with the Muskogee Police Department did not return calls for comment from AOL News today. According to online reports, Aaron Laconsello, 18, was arrested Tuesday after police were called to a home in the 700 block of North N Street to investigate a home invasion and assault.

The homeowner, Stephanie Lane, who is eight months pregnant, told police that an intruder entered her house and attacked her 4-year-old son, Dakota, with a pair of scissors. Lane attempted unsuccessfully to fend off the attacker. She was assaulted but not seriously injured. Dakota, however, suffered 36 stab wounds and was pronounced dead at a Tulsa hospital.

aolnews.com

Let me just preface all of this by saying that injuring children in any way; physical, mental, or a combination of both is the lowest of the low. I don't think that there is any excuse for any form of child abuse. Couple that with my disbelief in the machination "hell" fabricated by the Church, and I think you know now what I think needs to be done.

The Killer

You let a group of guys like me alone in a room with this guy for a few hours, and we will let him understand a new definition of suffering. Two car batteries and two sets of manacles later, this kid would be ready to rejoin society. And if you don't want him, just let us back in the room. One way or another, I could get that tough guy look off of his face quick.

I have no sympathy for people like this, nor should anyone. I was beaten as a child. Severely sometimes, but I don't go around beating children or stabbing them 36 times. When I was in the Army back in 1993, there were two four-year-olds killed on post within on week of each other by two military families. The powers that be blamed the high op-tempo, but I knew better than that. There had to have been problems prior to this happening. If you are privy to any form of child abuse happening in anyone's home, please contact your local CPS and try and get that family help or so that they can remove children from a situation like that.

Yes, I know that this wasn't a case of abuse in the home, but we don't know what set this attacker off. Perhaps earlier intervention might have prevented this from happening. Then again, he could just be a sociopath, who knows?

Last weekend

2010-11-09T17:09:00.000-08:00

Every year, we participate in One-arm-raised night at Wurstfest in New Braunfels. It's an silly event where everyone raises one arm for an hour. As Wurstfest is also a drinking event, there are always bound to be one or two or three or four asshole tourists who don't know when enough is enough.

We had our one arm in the air, and some guy and his little posse of merry men ask me what I'm doing. No problem. I start explaining it to them, and halfway through the one-sentence discussion, I start getting attitude. "I'm not fucking doing it." Now, I could have left it alone, but that's not my style. You can mess with me online as this Right is Right mongo did, but face to face? Not happening.

The great thing about being both a former Cavalry Scout and an Analyst is a keen power of observation. That night even after a pitcher or two of Shiner, I was still able to locate the FDNY logo on the ringleader's jacket. So I decided to give the guy some shit. I say, "No one asked you to, go home Yankee." Ooh...what little cool the guy and his little crew had was gone. They form a little skirmish circle, but all the while I must have had a little smile/smirk on my face. I didn't say anything else and pretended like they didn't exist. They knew they weren't in friendly territory and cooled fast...all except for this tiny girl, presumably the Yankee's girlfriend. She starts screaming about how he's not a Yankee and she's gonna kick my ass. By this time, I'm laughing and trying to keep my arm in the air. They pull her away and leave. Yay!!! Back to Shiner and brats and kraut.

Predictably, later that night...ten minutes or an hour later (drunks don't grasp the passage of time), one of his buddies comes over to me and starts up again. I've been through this in numerous bar confrontations numerous times (not always me, but casual observation) and know they are trying to muster some courage to recover their bruised egos. I'm bantering with the dude trying to fire him up some more by acting nonchalant because I enjoy annoying people who are clearly being obnoxious to me for no reason. Pretty soon the crew is back over in my face and now I'm laughing and the little chick is trying to rush me again. A member of my party had enough of their drama and threatened to get the cops. I said we didn't need the cops and they would be moving on, and they did despite all of their hard looks. Crisis averted. Idiots gone, Shiner and brats for all!!! I half expected to see them out in the parking lot, but didn't.

This story serves three purposes:

1. To entertain me.
2. To illustrate that cockroaches are only as tough as you let them be. Shine a light in the right direction, and they scurry into the shadows.
3. Direct confrontation works more often than not. Yes, there are times when it won't work in your favor, but letting people walk on you is foolish. I wasn't bullying, but I was keeping myself entertained.

SCOUTS OUT!

PS: If any of you douches that pressed your luck read this, eat me. And tell your little girlfriend to watch the opening scene in the movie "The Way of the Gun". Warning, there is foul, foul language:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQLXYu6plhg

And one more thing:

So, what's it all mean?

2010-11-03T06:34:00.000-07:00

I'm feign to guess what the republican victory means. Sadly, Boehner will most likely be the speaker. Even though he has been a driving force in the republican landslide, he is just as corrupt as many of the ones just thrown out.

The Rand Paul victory indicates in interest in new thinking in the republican party.

I was disappointed in how blindly and zombie-like Californians were when it came to re-electing Brown and Boxer. We Texians have had to deal with their political refugees for years now, and sadly, it will keep happening to us.

Even though I don't like Rick Perry, the choice was clear for me: Either the arrogant, sometimes elitist Perry over the buffoon Bill White. Hopefully this means redistricting in our state to break up gerrymandering district that kept Ciro Rodriguez in power for so long. A Canseco victory in Rodriguez' district is an incredible win, but Canseco will not hold that district for more than one term unless he becomes the champion of military veteran rights as Rodriguez was (not everything democrats fight for is bad).

I'm sure the Red at Corndog will be happy with the elimination of traffic light cameras, so will I. As goes Houston, so goes the state (Houston is home for me, but too, too crowded. I never go there anymore).

If republicans think that this is solely a republican victory, they need to think again. There was plenty of help from independent voters, dissatisfaction with a far-left congress, and a repudiation of Obama. Not to mention that some of these candidate are Tea-Party candidates, and won't vote with the old-guard on everything.

Interesting how suspected explosives are making their way into the United States right before election week

2010-10-29T21:17:00.000-07:00

John Brennan, WH counter terrorism adviser, who couldn't find his ass with the president helping suddenly comes across valuable information dealing with Synagogues in Chicago being attacked. Seems kind of odd given the timing of elections, the president's sweaty campaigning, the dem's shunning him, and everything that CNN spews from their bile duct. Add it to allegations of voter fraud, media slander, and my own experience of professors needing sedatives because of "that dishonest, ignorant Tea Party!!!!!!", and what should we think?

Just a thought...

The stomping in KY looked staged to me

2010-10-27T05:56:00.000-07:00

Lauren Valle, a volunteer for the liberal MoveOn.org advocacy group, was allegedly assaulted by a Paul supporter as she attempted to give the Republican candidate a mock award highlighting GOP links to big business.
The incident was captured by TV news crews.
"These supporters were not very nice to me and my message, which is the same as everyone else -- I just wanted to get out here with a sign, but I got my head stepped on," Valle said. "I have a bit of a headache."
Police questioned Valle but it was unclear if anyone would be charged.

--myfoxchicago

If you look at the angle of the camera, the lack of indignation on the part of the recipient, and the actual foot descending on the woman's shoulder, it looks staged to me. Expect these staged 'acts of intolerance' to become more frequent as elections get closer.

It's shit like this that disturbs me and keeps me up nights.

2010-10-24T05:09:00.000-07:00

My answer to a douchebag who is presumably from another country (or more likely a poser), at another blog when dealing with the infamous Jennifer Petkov who makes fun of dying children, and even goes so far as to taunt them on Facebook and park coffins in front of their house:

pub Says:
October 23rd, 2010 at 11:44 pm
Get a life, you ignorant Westerners! Yes, what she did was horrible, but do you think abusing and demonizing her on an International scale makes us any better?

I don’t see anyone abusing her in any of these writings. It’s people like you who make opinion a bad thing. You know full well that what this Petkov woman has done wrong, but use this as a forum to insult those that voice sympathy for a dying little girl who has no-doubt suffered more than you can imagine, and to call those who condemn terrible behavior bad people.

Westerners? Who are you, then?

It is clear from the multitudes of stories about this woman (including an interview) that she needs to be evaluated mentally. A good citizen of ANY country (westerners included) uses common sense and never thinks to taunt a dying young girl, or anyone who is ill. That she is getting back even a little of what she gets gives me the airy ‘hope’ that is so freely thrown around these days. If all that happens to Ms. Petkov is losing custody of one of her children, that’s getting off light.

There are too many in this country that abuse our constitutional rights and pervert them beyond the true intent of the founders. This is indicative that we are losing our way as a country. We need to find that way, and fast.

Since this wasn't my blog, I thought I'd demonize and abuse her (and others) here.

I have had bowel movements with more humanity than people like Jennifer Petkov, and I certainly am not trying to give this woman another moment's attention. People like this either have something wrong with them, or think they are going to benefit in some way from it with earthly goods (reality TV? Let's face it; the self-centered person might think that negative attention and bad behavior pays off. Look at the host of people it has worked for in the recent past).

In that vein, fuck Fox Network, E!, Lifetime, and anyone who has made divas out of women and men who gain notoriety via sex scandals and by virtue of having tons of children. Or worse yet, show shiftless layabouts who fornicate and drink all day long. We as a society need to teach our young that this is not the way to behave, and if Petkov at 33 is a product of this environment, then I fear we are a generation too late.

I am aware that since the advent of television, young women and men have tried to emulate their favorite TV or movie stars. But...Kim Kardasian (and she ain't the only one behaving this way)? Give me a break! The other day I went to my home builder to get paint codes, and was greeted by a presumably young woman. This woman was very polite and helpful, but I couldn't look directly at her. Why? Because she was made in the image of someone she clearly worshiped: Her idol, the above mentioned Kim. This woman that I was trying to get information from didn't even look real. She had an orangish hue and sparkly skin. Mind you, she was pretty, but in the same way a well-made manikin is pretty. We wont even go into what I presume was extensive plastic surgery. I hate to think that this is what men want of women these days; a cheap carbon copy of some TV bimbo. Ladies, real men don't give a shit about things like fake breasts and fake tans or loose behavior. Even though I can't speak for women, I'm pretty sure similar rules apply (maybe the breast thing is right out).

People need to teach their children that these aren't values, and that eventually you have to get past the makeup and other facades. Two things make this inevitable: Personality and time. What people think of you as a person will decide whether you will be accepted, or lonely in the long run. What personality doesn't take care of, time will. You can't keep your looks forever, just ask Madonna.

I think the late, great (and IMHO the best Beatle) George Harrison said in this song explains it:

"We were talking-about the space between us all
And the people-who hide themselves behind a wall of illusion
Never glimpse the truth-then it's far too late-when they pass away.
We were talking-about the love we all could share-when we find it
To try our best to hold it there-with our love
With our love-we could save the world-if they only knew.
Try to realize it's all within yourself
No-one else can make you change
And to see you're really only very small,
And life flows ON within you and without you.
We were talking-about the love that's gone so cold and the people,
Who gain the world and lose their soul-
They don't know-they can't see-are you one of them?
When you've seen beyond yourself-then you may find, peace of mind,
Is waiting there-
And the time will come when you see
we're all one, and life flows on within you and without you." --Harrison

I would also add that if you are a Platonist (one who follows the philosophy of Plato), and believe the governmental predictions of "The Republic", we are in the Democracy phase. The young rule, the old emulate the young, and social distribution is the standard of the day. Think about it.

Check this out:

2010-10-22T10:54:00.000-07:00

Juan Williams once again got himself into trouble with NPR for comments he made at his other job, at Fox News. And NPR's reaction has unleashed an unprecedented firestorm of criticism directed not at Williams – but at NPR.
NPR fired Williams Wednesday night after 10 years with the network for comments he made about Muslims on Fox News.
Thursday was a day like none I’ve experienced since coming to NPR in October 2007. Office phone lines rang non-stop like an alarm bell with no off button. We’ve received more than 8,000 emails, a record with nothing a close second.
NPR’s initial story garnered more than 6,800 comments, many supporting Williams and others asking why it took so long to fire him. Here's Thursday's story.
At noon, the deluge of email crashed NPR’s “Contact Us” form on the web site.
The overwhelming majority are angry, furious, outraged. They want NPR to hire him back immediately. If NPR doesn't, they want all public funding of public radio to stop. They promise to never donate again. They are as mad as hell, and want everyone to know it. It was daunting to answer the phone and hear so much unrestrained anger.
The latest, and final, episode involving Williams took place Monday on Fox's The O'Reilly Factor. He and host Bill O'Reilly discussed whether America had a "Muslim dilemma."
In response to a provocative question from O'Reilly about Muslims, Williams said:

“I mean, look, Bill, I’m not a bigot. You know the kind of books I’ve written about the civil rights movement in this country. But when I get on the plane, I got to tell you, if I see people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they are identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I get worried. I get nervous.”

Later in that segment, Williams did challenge O'Reilly's apparent contention that every Muslim on the planet is an extremist bent on attacking America.
It took a day for Williams' remarks to bleed into the blogosphere. But then, it was like opening a fire hydrant. Hundreds wrote or called demanding that NPR fire Williams or at least discipline him.
Many have been troubled over the years by the dual role that Williams has played: balanced news analyst on NPR; more opinionated pundit on Fox.
"On the Radio, Williams is somewhat of a thoughtful though superficial moderate while on FOX he shows his politically correct submissive Pro Fox bigotry for a few dollars more," wrote Mohamed Khodr, a doctor from Winchester, VA, who was among scores who contacted me Wednesday.
"NPR must and should take a stand against this bigotry and tell Williams' he must choose NPR's code of ethics or be let go to join the racist bigoted fearmongerers of FOX,” continued Khodr. “NPR can't have it both ways."
NPR's management acted. In a statement released at 12:27 a.m. Thursday, NPR said Williams' remarks “were inconsistent with our editorial standards and practices, and undermined his credibility as a news analyst with NPR.”
This was far from an isolated incident.
Williams’ appearances on Fox News, especially O’Reilly’s show, have caused heartburn repeatedly for NPR over the last few years. Management said he’s been warned several times that O’Reilly is a professional provocateur and to be careful.
In early 2009, Williams said on O'Reilly of Michelle Obama: "She's got this Stokely Carmichael-in-a-designer-dress thing going. If she starts talking . . . her instinct is to start with this blame America, you know, I'm the victim. If that stuff starts to coming out, people will go bananas and she'll go from being the new Jackie O. to being something of an albatross."
After other inflammatory comments on Fox, in April 2008 NPR changed Williams' role from news correspondent (a reporting job) to news analyst. In this contract position, he was expected to report, think quickly and give his own analysis – while carefully choosing his words on any given subject.
One reason he was fired, according to Vivian Schiller, NPR’s CEO, is that the company felt he wasn’t performing the role of a news analyst:
“News analysts may not take personal public positions on controversial issues; doing so undermines their credibility as analysts, and that’s what’s happened in this situation,” said Schiller in an email to NPR member stations, some of which are upset about Williams' firing.
“As you all well know," she continued, "we offer views of all kinds on your air every day, but those views are expressed by those we interview – not our reporters and analysts.”
In 2008, I received 378 emails complaining about remarks Williams made on Fox – but I heard very little about his comments on NPR. My February 2009 blog post on the Stokely Carmichael incident drew 216 comments – many asking why NPR put up with Williams' dual role.
In fact, since I became Ombudsman in October 2007, no other NPR employee has generated as much controversy as Williams.
That said, Williams provided a valuable voice on NPR. His long experience as a journalist and background as an authority on the Civil Rights movement enabled him to offer insights that often enriched the network's reporting.
Ultimately, however, it seems management felt he had become more of a liability than an asset. Unfortunately, I agree.
It can’t be overlooked that this episode is occurring in a toxic political environment where people are quick to take sides and look for hidden motives. I fear some will look for racial motivations in NPR's decision to fire Williams, who is African-American and one of the few black male NPR voices.
It's not about race. It's also not about free speech, as some have charged. Nor is it about an alleged attempt by NPR to stifle conservative views. NPR offers a broad range of viewpoints on its radio shows and web site.
Instead, this latest incident with Williams centers around a collision of values: NPR's values emphasizing fact-based, objective journalism versus the tendency in some parts of the news media, notably Fox News, to promote only one side of the ideological spectrum.
The issue also is whether someone on NPR's payroll should be allowed to say something in one venue that NPR would not allow on its air. NPR’s ethics code says they cannot.
Many emails asked for an explanation of how these latest comments were specifically outside NPR's rules and expectations – especially since Williams was being honest about his prejudices and fears.
(Williams also said, on a Fox News segment that aired Thursday, that he asked for, but was not given, a specific explanation of how his remarks crossed the line.)
NPR, like any mainstream news outlet, expects its journalists to be thoughtful and measured in everything they say. What Williams said was deeply offensive to Muslims and inflamed, rather than contributing positively, to an important debate about the role of Muslims in America.
Williams was doing the kind of stereotyping in a public platform that is dangerous to a democracy. It puts people in categories, as types – not as individuals with much in common despite their differences.
I can only imagine how Williams, who has chronicled and championed the Civil Rights movement, would have reacted if another prominent journalist had said:
"But when I get on the plane, I got to tell you, if I see an African American male in Dashiki with a big Afro, I get worried. I get nervous."
In an appearance on Fox News today, Williams defended his controversial remarks, saying he simply had intended to convey his "honest experience" of anxiety. He also said he was told his contract was terminated without an opportunity to come into NPR and discuss the firing.
If he is correct, that’s too bad. I think NPR owed him a chance to explain himself.
I’m not privy to the why this announcement was so hastily made. NPR could have waited until his contract ran out, or possibly suspended him pending a review. Either way, a more deliberative approach might have enabled NPR to avoid what has turned into a public relations nightmare.
Even though NPR handled this situation badly, the fact remains that NPR must uphold its journalistic standards, which, after all, provide the basis that earned public radio's reputation for quality.

--NPR.com

If you want some real entertainment, go read the comments. It's like hundreds of NPR shills got together at once.

The Hypocrisy of NPR...Practice what you preach

2010-10-21T05:41:00.000-07:00

NPR said in a statement that Williams's remarks--including that he gets "worried" and "nervous" when he sees people dressed in Muslim-style clothing on airplanes--"were inconsistent with our editorial standards and practices, and undermined his credibility as a news analyst with NPR."

--Washington Post

And these aren't inflammatory comments? Inconsistent with NPR standards?

OPINION: 'Learn To Speak Tea Bag'

New Animation From Independent Syndicated Columnist Mark Fiore

by Mark Fiore

Learning a new language doesn't have to be hard, especially when "Tea Bag" is so minimalistic! Mark Fiore offers his personal take in this animation. The Wall Street Journal dubbed Fiore "the undisputed guru of the form." He creates political animation from an undisclosed location somewhere in San Francisco.

--NPR.com

Is this not a station that is at least partially funded by taxpayers? If the argument is that Mark Fiore's comments are opinion, isn't it true that Juan Williams comments are as well? This is a double standard that seems to exist in this day and age. When your opinion agrees with that of the politically correct, you're fine. If you do something against the politically correct, you're a villain.

Hate to tell you this, but there are plenty of people in the U.S. that are tired of people who are afraid of straight talk. The same people codify everything and everyone who doesn't agree with them as racists, homophobes, and bigots. We've seen the double speak and amalgamation of words in statements by La Raza, the DNC, and others. It's time this lopsided media purge it's old guard. If not, they won't last much longer.

How to win a war

2010-10-20T05:51:00.000-07:00

Afghanistan is not a war. It is a police action, plain and simple. Negotiations with the people we were sent to fight and restrictive rules of engagement point directly to my previous point. My next point: There are those who lead, there are those who fight, and there are those who need to get the hell out of the way. The harsh reality of what needs to be done to stop future terrorist attacks and lengthy, costly deployments seems to elude those who legislate (the people that need to get the hell out of the way). This creates a long, drawn-out Vietnam-style conflict which is already not popular (if dying troops ever was popular).

Our politicians are so tied up in appeasing every facet of our population that they have brought this mess on us, and they have no clue how to fix the problem, but I do. Some of you will approve, most wont.

If someone fires at a U.S. position, we fire back regardless of what they are using as a shield. If people aid the enemy, execute and pillory them. If someone tries to remove the body, they go next. Crush the enemy into the ground relentlessly. This will draw sympathizers back into the region and abort their global caliphate plans. Eventually there will be a victor, and I already know that it will be our side.

Allowing the enemy to rebuild and strengthen their positions is not the way to conduct a war. So far, it has been a recipe for disaster at the expense of many young men and women.

Either clear out Helmand, or get our troops out.

2010-10-18T17:50:00.001-07:00

Gun prohibition on college campuses

2010-10-15T06:43:00.000-07:00

It truly irritates me that in a state such as Texas, we are still prohibited from conceal carry on our college campuses. Two days ago, someone here was bullied out of all their possessions by two individuals. What exactly are people supposed to do? Call campus security? They can't be everywhere at once. At this level, I guarantee that if there was a random adult on campus with a hidden gun, people would be a lot more civil to one another.

Ramadan a month of violence? According to some 'experts'

2010-10-08T17:42:00.000-07:00

"Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, and take them (captive), and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush. But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then leave their way free. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful." - Qur'an 9:5

"Jihad and the rifle alone: no negotiations, no conferences and no dialogues." - Abdullah Yusuf Azzam, 1979 on global jihad.

I retrieved this from MEMRI.org (Middle Eastern Media Research Institute). You can read the text of the rest of the article here.

Calls in the Muslim World to Intensify Jihad During Ramadan

By: D. Hazan*

Introduction
During Ramadan, the printed and electronic Arab media, including the jihadist websites, published numerous articles on jihad, with a special focus on the link between jihad and Ramadan.
The main motifs of these articles were:
·         The month of Ramadan is the month of attacks, conquest, and victories, with an emphasis on the fact that many of the early Muslims' victories over their enemies, such as at the battles of Badr, Hittin, and 'Ain Jalut, came during Ramadan.
·         The importance of the commandment of jihad, particularly during Ramadan. Jihad is defined as one of the most important commandments of Islam, and its intersection with Ramadan, which is "the best month in Allah's eyes," is "a tremendous high point that none can attain but he to whom Allah has chosen to grant this tremendous honor of fasting and war." Likewise, it is claimed that the commandment of jihad, which is said to be twice as important as ordinary commandments, is intensified during Ramadan, and takes first priority. One article included a point-by-point comparison of a Muslim who fasts during Ramadan and a mujahid, saying, inter alia, that "fasting is one of the means of educating the soul towards jihad." Another article stated: "Real jihad is connected to real fasting; therefore, let us educate our children to pass the test of fasting so that they will succeed in liberating the [places] holy to us."
·         A statement by Sheikh Yousuf Al-Qaradhawi that "jihad is an Islamic moral obligation."
·         A call to Muslims to step up their jihad activity during Ramadan, as the Prophet Muhammad did: "Oh mujahideen... show us something that will gladden us and stoke the ire of the infidels, something that will please our mothers and sisters and brothers who have lost what is most precious to them [i.e. their loved ones]." One of the articles included a call to the mujahideen to purge Saudi Arabia of the Crusader infidels who violate the country's sanctity with their presence. Another article included a call to the mujahideen to join forces and find new ways of striking at the enemy. Hamas' 'Izz Al-Din Al-Qassam Brigades boasted that in the early years of this decade, they had been the leaders in attacks on Israelis during Ramadan.
This paper will review the main points made by these articles and statements.[1]

Endnotes:

[1] On the subject of jihad during the month of Ramadan, see MEMRI Special Dispatch No. 308, "Egyptian Cleric: Ramadan The month of Jihad,'" December 6, 2001, http://www.memri.org/report/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/562.htm

Ramadan is not a time of violence despite what some Islamists say. It is a time of self-discipline and focus on God and how we can live our lives in his name. Despite historical evidence provided by some of the speakers, you can point to any religious holiday and see violence attributed in some way to them. Misusing the intent behind the Ramadan time and trying to change the meaning is nothing new to Islamists.

Keep in mind that the Islamist (radical) mindset evolved over centuries due to corrupt governments and invaders who oppressed Muslims and/or tried to distort the religion with pagan practices (this last is particularly true of the Mongols who invaded in the time of Ibn Taymiyah). Out of this oppression rose the radical mindset and it has evolved over time to incorporate many ideas that distort the original Islamic doctrines.

As I have mentioned several times, words mean things and when people put new meanings to word and distort the true definition, it becomes fact in the minds of many. Take the example of hate-crime...is there really a need for a new word when all crimes are hateful? No, but if you attach the word intolerance to it, it gives someone power over another. The same can be said of Islamic definitions of 'People of the Book'. Originally, it included Jews, Christians, and in some cases Hindus. These people were meant to be subjugated and taxed, but not harmed. Over the centuries, the radicals have changed the cultures who are protected. This has even included some Muslims that don't agree with the radical Islamists. It certainly has included the Egyptian government who has a history of oppression of these people and may have perhaps played one of the greatest roles in the Islamist movement.

Moderate Islamic scholars need to get hold of the message and control it. This is the only way to stop radicals in the Islamic world.

Westboro Baptist Church is wrong, but should they be censored?

2010-10-06T13:35:00.000-07:00

Fred Phelps (gag) and clan (klan?) have made a habit of coming to funerals and taunting grieving family members of slain members of the Armed Forces. This is horrible and follows none of the teachings in the Bible that I'm aware of.

Last year, the Westboro Gang, harassed the family of a fallen Marine. They yell, carry signs saying things like, "Thank God for Dead Soldiers." and are generally ugly. Jeers to Fox News for trying to blame the courts for ruling in favor of the constitution. As despicable as this behavior is, it's a slippery slope to taking away our right to free speech.

As words are linked together such as "hate-speech", "hate-crime", and the like, legislators continue to strip us of our rights spelled out in the constitution.

The Westboro people are stupid and only as controversial as we let them be. Normally, my friends in the Patriot Guard Riders keep these idiots back quite away, so problem solved.

It will be interesting to see what the Supreme Court decision is on this in the end.

Possible slaying at a border lake suggest more problems that need to be taken seriously

2010-10-06T05:43:00.000-07:00

Many of you are aware of the possible attack on an American couple who allegedly strayed too far into Mexican waters. If not here is a link to the most current story.

I see two problems that need to be solved, and not with a temporary fix either:

1. It is becoming clear that our southern borders are not safe by any stretch of the imagination. Our Armed Forces are already spread thin with other duties. Regardless, we need armed patrols on border lakes and rivers to protect our citizens. Littoral to blue water capability is a must. This incident shows that the Mexican/U.S. border is truly the wild west. Consider the possibility of a grave threat such as terrorists crossing by a large body of water. It can happen.

2. The borders need to be truly secured. People love to say that a wall doesn't work. This is certainly clear in situations such as this, but a wall is a start. Tougher enforcement and freeing up our border patrol to do their jobs efficiently will help, also. We also need to start billing Mexico for deportation fees and any other costs incurred in stopping not only illegals from crossing, but criminal attacks of this kind.

Until Mexico can get it's act together and fix their side of the problem, we need to take a stronger stance. It would certainly help to have someone competent in the DOJ and Homeland Security posts.

Important articles on the Cordoba Initiative: Commentary from contemporary Islamic and Coptic Authors.

2010-09-29T06:55:00.000-07:00

This entire group of articles is from MEMRI.org (Middle Eastern Media Research Institute). With proper credit given, any comments that I have will be italicized. Please read the entire set of articles. It gives reasons why the Ground Zero Mosque should and should not be built presently.

"Even More Important than the Location of the Project" is the Negative Impact It Will Have on "Muslim Americans' Ability to Attain Closer Relations with Their Fellow [Americans]"

Saudi journalist 'Adel Al-Tarifi stated that it is unwise to build an Islamic center near Ground Zero, because it is an affront to American sentiment and it generates tension between Muslims and non-Muslims in the U.S. He called upon Muslims living in the U.S. to shake off the hostility that their countries of origin bear towards the U.S.: "... According to the Constitution, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf[1] and his friends in the Cordoba Initiative, whose project this is, have the right to build a mosque and religious center anywhere in the U.S. – including where the Twin Towers collapsed. Even prominent figures, such as [New York Mayor] Michael Bloomberg and most legal experts and thinkers, support this right... So it is not a question of opposition to Islam per se, or of religious discrimination, because the [U.S.] Constitution and the law guarantee freedom of worship, including building the Ground Zero mosque.

"However, it becomes a question of wisdom... and social sensitivity. We must ask Imam Feisal [Abdul Rauf] and his friends: Why do you want to build an Islamic center that will cost $100 million if it hurts the feelings of the Americans?

"In truth, prayers have been held there [at the site of the proposed building] for over a year, and if it were not for the media circus sparked by the Cordoba Initiative, no one would have even noticed. Furthermore, a mosque, [built] before the 9/11 terror attacks, already exists only a few meters away... We must ask: Why build another mosque and center if there is already a mosque nearby?...

Interesting question, and I believe that has been brought up many times before.

"I am not denigrating the efforts of the imam and his friends to correct the distorted image of Islam. But when the project creates tension in the relations between Muslims and non-Muslims in America, it is the opposite effect [that is achieved].

"Some have said that relinquishing the project would mean relinquishing constitutional rights; others have said that the battle wasn't about the location, but [is a matter of] defending ourselves against the intensifying sense of anti-Muslim discrimination [in the U.S.]. If we accept this [last] assessment, then reaching an agreement is the right thing to do. Even more important than the location of the project is the Muslim Americans' ability to attain closer relations with their fellow [Americans]... Muslim Americans are still impacted by the history of hostility and dispute between their mother countries and the U.S. [and this affects] the independence of their thinking. They have to rectify this. Changing the location [of the proposed Islamic center] will not change the message [that the center conveys]."[2]

"The Important Thing is For the Muslims Not to Act in Isolation from the Rest of the American People"

Dr. 'Abd Al-Mun'im Sa'id, board chairman of the Egyptian daily Al-Ahram and a member of Egypt's Shura Council, wrote: "There are plenty of good intentions behind the mosque project, but they were not made sufficiently clear before the project was presented to the political parties and to the forums and groups of civil society [in the U.S.]. Perhaps the idea of building a religious center at Ground Zero – like the one [the late Egyptian president Anwar] Sadat proposed to build at Saint Catherine [in Sinai] – would have [helped] build bridges between the followers of different religions. [But] the important thing is for the Muslims not to act in isolation from the rest of the American people, whom they want to approach wisely and by means of persuasion..."[3]

The Muslims in the West Speak in One Voice with Non-Muslims, and In Another with Their Fellow Muslims

Kuwaiti liberal Khalil 'Ali Haidar criticized the Muslims living in the West for their hostility to their host societies, for espousing ideological and political Islam, for saying one thing while believing another, and for speaking in two voices, saying one thing to the Westerners and another to their fellow Muslims – which causes the Westerners to fear the Cordoba House project and Islam in general:

"The Americans' apprehensions regarding Cordoba Mosque... stem from their reemerging fear of political, organized, jihadist, and takfiri Islam, which is still very strong in the Arab world. They fear that what the American Muslims are concealing in their hearts may be different from what they are saying out loud, especially considering that Muslim men and women in Europe, no less than their coreligionists in the Arab world, are sympathetic to ideological Islam and extremist sheikhs, [and tend towards] hostility to the West and anti-democratic notions.

"There are at least two salient problems. The first is that the Muslim world has not done much since September 11, 2001 to develop its religious practices and to inculcate a mature perception of the contemporary era, of human rights and of respect for other religions. After all, most Arab and Muslim countries lack a parliament and a democratic [regime], or else have a parliament but lack [true] democracy. Such countries cannot be serious about change, and they are unable to bring their education, media, religious discourse and national culture to the level [customary] in modern societies. [Moreover,] a country based on lack of many freedoms cannot be an enthusiastic advocate of pluralism, freedom of religion and belief, etc.

"The second problem is that in America and Europe, Islamic activity is in the hands of the local leaderships of the Muslim Brotherhood and of other Islamic parties based in Egypt, Syria, Palestine and Asia. In more general terms, [it is in the hands of] the supporters of political and ideological Islam, which is [known for] saying one thing and believing another, and for saying one thing to the Westerners and another to the Muslims. That is why the Muslims in the West are hostile to their host societies and to [the concept of] openness, and [espouse] values that are far removed from moderateness and maturity.

"It is rare to find even one American or European Muslim who engages in self-criticism or defends freedom of religion and thought in the Muslim and Arab world, who supports a persecuted author or intellectual facing trial in some Muslim country, or who defends a new and modern perception of Islam. The Arab preachers, writers and academics who [address the Western Muslims] in their writings, or visit the Western countries, [only] intensify the extremism of the Western and American Muslims, and speak of nothing but the 'Zionist lobby,' 'the Palestinian problem,' 'Neo-Christians,' and 'the American failure in Iraq and Afghanistan'!

"It's no wonder then that some Americans, Britons, and Germans [who convert to Islam] go straight from Christianity to takfiri jihad, and from oblivious libertinism to aggressive extremism, so that even the hills and mountains of Tora Bora are hardly enough for them!
"It is improper that Muslim life in America and Europe should be a replica of Muslim [life] in the Arab and Muslim world. It is improper to export [to the West] the Islamic schools, political parties and extremist [tendencies], so as to fit the [Western Muslims] into molds [exported from] Egypt, Pakistan or the Gulf, [transforming them into people] whose struggles focus on the hijab and the niqab, and whose main preoccupation is with party and sectarian affiliation.

"America, France, Germany, England, Russia, and China all share their concern about the Muslim [problem], while the Muslims speak about the collapse of the U.S. and of Western civilization!"[4]

"All the Americans Ask is to Respect Their Feelings, Their Wound that has Not Yet Healed, and the Memory of the Victims of the Depraved Massacre [of 9/11]"

Palestinian journalist Zainab Rashid wrote that Muslims abuse the democratic freedoms they enjoy in other countries, while their own countries are characterized by terrorism and oppression. She also stated that Muslims use mosques to provoke the followers of other religion and to assert the superiority of their own:

"Whenever the Muslims find an opportunity to build a mosque opposite a church or [some other non-Muslim] house of worship, they put every effort into doing so... They furnish its minaret with dozens of high-tech loudspeakers so that their voice... will be louder than that of the other [religions]. This is their way of excluding the other in places where they cannot do so directly. There is no other way of interpreting this act.

"This sort of thing has happened many times, and will happen again. There have been cases where Muslims spent a fortune to buy a [tiny] plot of land, the size of one square meter or slightly more, near churches located at historically or archeologically [significant] sites in Arab cities and capitals, in order to build a minaret – just a minaret – furnished with dozens of bothersome loudspeakers...

"It's a strange paradox. The Muslims speak of democracy, freedom, and laws honoring religious, ethnic, racial, and national pluralism, and wish to benefit from these [laws]. However, at the same time, many [Muslim] peoples suffer from killing, terrorism, oppression, and famine at the hands of Muslim parties and organizations that rose to power through elections and then completely [distorted] the concepts of democracy, freedom and humanism... The besieged Gaza is the best example of this...

"The Muslims demand to build a mosque [near Ground Zero], exploiting the highest principles of the U.S. constitution. But the Prophet of Islam was the first [person] who ordered to take down a mosque when divine inspiration told him it would harm him and his followers and bring war upon them...

"The Americans will not destroy the mosque that the Muslims are determined to build, nor do they wish to expel the Muslims [from their land] or to discriminate against them. This is impossible [for them to do], both legally and morally... All the Americans ask is to respect their feelings, their wound that has not yet healed, and the memory of the victims of the depraved massacre [of 9/11]. The perpetrators [of this massacre] were Muslims who were trained in mosques not so different from the one that is supposed to be built [near Ground Zero]...

"Perhaps the Americans and the other peoples of the world believe that the $100 million allocated to the construction of the mosque should be invested [instead] in [helping] the victims of the Pakistan floods, who need every cent of this money... Supporting the disaster victims in Pakistan is a much worthier cause than building another unnecessary mosque...
"I am not saying this mosque belongs to, or is funded by, the terrorist Al-Qaeda organization, the Kashmiri Lashkar-e-Taiba organization, the Palestinian Hamas movement, or its mother organization, the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood... But I am saying that Koranic verses will be heard there, such as 'So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them... [Koran 9:5]'; 'Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Messenger have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection [Koran 9:29]'; and 'The Jews say: Uzair is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them; how they are turned away! [Koran 9:30].'"[5]

"The Muslims Do Not Take An Interest In this Mosque and Are Not Angered By the Opposition to Its Construction"

Wahid 'Abd Al-Magid, deputy director of the Al-Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies, called on Muslim academics, leaders and religious scholars to address the American public and explain to it that the construction of the Islamic center near Ground Zero is not an issue of interest for Muslims around the world, and that the Muslims are not waging a religious or cultural war against the West. He added that the Muslims must stop supplying ammunition to Islamophobes in the West by promoting initiatives like Cordoba House.

"...It's understandable that building a mosque in this particular location hurts the feelings of some Americans, if not many Americans, and gives the extremists among them an excuse to renew the campaign against Islam and the Muslims, and to pour oil on the flames that have not subsided despite all of President Obama's efforts, over the past 20 months, to extinguish them. In addition to [claiming that the Muslims are] pressing on the wound that has not yet healed, and want to pray right over the victims' blood which they themselves spilled, [the American extremists] are also claiming that the purpose of the mosque is to continue the armed attack of nine years ago, only this time in the form of a 'culture war.' They make every effort to convince as many Americans as possible of this [claim], citing [the fact] that the promoters of this mosque refuse to consider any alternative location [for the project], in the same neighborhood or elsewhere.

"The promoters [of the mosque] have provided the advocates of the religious or cultural struggle [theory] with an opportunity to claim that the construction of the mosque is nothing but a continuation of the [9/11] attack and a part of the Muslims' war [against the non-Muslims]! They constantly help the extremists in America to spread their false incitement; they help them most of all by claiming that this mosque is a matter [that concerns all] the Muslims across the globe – just as bin Laden and Al-Qaeda claimed to carry out the 'Invasion of Manhattan' in the name of Islam and [all] Muslims.

"However, this claim is unfounded, just like all other claims of its kind, for it is impossible to speak for one billion Muslims. [As a matter of fact,] only a handful of websites and blogs have dealt with [the issue of Cordoba House], and the same is true for the printed and televised media. The Muslims do not take an interest in this mosque and are not angered by the opposition to its construction. But this fact does not reach [the ears of] many Americans, who are angered by the insistence of Muslim groups in their country to join this struggle – [a struggle] which results in nothing but losses for the Muslim world and its causes.

"What they want to build [in Lower Manhattan] is not a mosque, but a new wall of hatred and hostility that some American Muslims insist on constructing. The heavy price will be paid by their fellow [Muslims] in Palestine and elsewhere, because [the mosque affair] increases the sympathy of the American public for those who steal the [Muslims'] rights and attack them...
"When the percentage of those who hate Muslims in the U.S. rises from 40% to over 70% in the wake of the 'Ground Zero mosque' crisis, we have no choice but to say that the 9/11 tragedy is recurring nine years later. Yet nobody in the Muslim world – neither countries, nor governments, nor institutions, nor NGOs – is trying to challenge the claim that the mosque is an issue that preoccupies [all] Muslims worldwide...

"Why don't prominent Muslim academics, politicians, and religious scholars around the world convene in order to draft a document or a communiqué addressed to the American public, explaining that the Ground Zero mosque does not interest anyone but those who are promoting it, and very few others beside them? Why don't they say something along the lines of what was said by the mother of Zacarias Moussaoui, who was convicted of [involvement in] the 9/11 attacks: 'My son was brainwashed in London by imams who preached hatred and violence in the name of a false Islam that has nothing to do with the real faith?' And why don't they tell the Americans that the Muslims around the world are not waging a war, with either weapons, culture or religion, but are [only] asking [the Americans to take] a fair stance towards those who are not just stealing [the Muslims'] lands but are also perpetrating war crimes against them? And why don't they explain to the Americans that the struggles between the Muslim and non-Muslim peoples are not religious in nature, even if there are those who claim otherwise? [Proof of this is the fact] that Christians are an integral part of the Palestinian liberation movement...

"If we must convey this [message] to the Americans, then we must also say the same thing to ourselves, regarding how we see [the Americans] and the West in general. The prevailing image that we have of them in the Muslim world is a narrow-minded and naïve one, based on [the concept of] historic struggle, and composed of monochromatic pictures, with a tendency towards [over-simplification] and conspiracy [theories]. We must look ourselves in a true mirror and tell ourselves honestly that we are the greatest extremists [in our perception of] the other, whoever he may be, even within our own countries. This is only one of the many things we must tell ourselves at this opportunity, which compels us to contemplate our responsibility for the rise in Islamophobia, in Europe as well [as in America], which results from the insistence of a few [Muslims] to impose upon their [host] countries certain symbols they regard as Islamic..."[6]

Religious Tolerance in America vs. Lack of Tolerance in Saudi Arabia, Egypt

Dr. 'Omar Al-Zant, a columnist for the Egyptian daily Al-Masri Al-Yawm, compared the religious tolerance in New York to the intolerance in Saudi Arabia, where immigrants live in isolated communities and feel no sense of belonging:

"The [New York City] Council has unanimously approved the construction of the mosque, thereby proving that New York is indeed the capital of pluralism and tolerance... It is the city that hosts the largest number of people of various nationalities, religions, sects and creeds, who live together in relative harmony and accord... The pluralism and openness that prevail there generate a state of creative chaos: views meet, merge, and interact, the ultimate result being original and creative thinking.

"The importance of such interaction becomes clearer when you compare [the situation in New York] to the situation in the country that was the origin of most of the 9/11 terrorists, namely Saudi Arabia. This country [too] has a large population [of foreigners] from all over the world, but unlike many of the immigrants in the U.S., [the members of] this population can never see themselves as a part of their host country. They never develop a sense of belonging to the society in which they work, because the communities of exiles live in almost complete isolation. Pluralistic thinking is all but forbidden by law, whereas religious pluralism is nonexistent. It is impossible to build a church anywhere, let alone a synagogue or a Buddhist or Hindu temple... Moreover, much of the country's own Islamic heritage has been destroyed under the pretext of preventing paganism. This explains why a pluralistic and open society benefits from immigration, whereas a closed society hardly benefits at all from an infusion of foreign workers..."[7]

Despite Repeated Attempted Attacks by Muslims, the U.S. Defends Their Rights
Coptic liberal Magdi Khalil, founder of the Middle East Freedom Forum, compared the freedom to build mosques in the U.S. with the lack of freedom to build churches in Egypt. He wrote that, despite the attempts of Islamist elements to perpetrate terror in central New York locations, including Times Square, Kennedy Airport, and the Brooklyn Bridge, the U.S. safeguards the Muslim's religious freedom. Conversely, in the Egyptian town of Maghagha, the authorities are preventing the Copts from building a new church on the site of an old one.

Khalil added: "What happened in New York was the pinnacle of religious tolerance... The mayor and other senior officials acted responsibly, despite the protests [over the plans to build the mosque], and guarded the religious rights and freedoms, including those of immigrants and visitors to the city. On the other hand, the events in Maghagha reflect religious extremism and lack of tolerance, and show clearly that the rage in the streets is directed from above, not from below. Throughout the history of Muslim-Copt relations, it was the tolerance or intolerance of the leaders that determined [whether or not there were] civil wars, violence and religious persecution of the Copts."[8]

Opposition to the Islamic Center is a Racist Right-Wing Campaign against Muslims and Foreigners

Egyptian journalist Nabil Zaki, who supports the construction of the Islamic center, stated that the opposition to the Islamic center is part of a vicious campaign by the American right against the Muslims and foreigners in the country, and that Obama's outreach to the Muslims, which was short-lived, was only meant to facilitate the U.S.'s ongoing military activity in Iraq and Afghanistan. He added that those opposed to the Cordoba House do not seem to mind that there are strip joints and pornography stores near Ground Zero, while they do object to a religious center containing culture and welfare facilities.

"On the evening of August 13, during the traditional Ramadan dinner at the White House, President Barack Obama gave an address in which he emphasized that 'Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as anyone else in this country, and that includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in Lower Manhattan, in accordance with local laws and ordinances. This is America, and our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakeable.' Less than 24 hours later, following a storm of vicious criticism from the Republican right and from some leaders and figures in the Democratic party [itself], Obama's commitment proved to be quite shakable. He clarified to journalists that he had not been commenting on the wisdom of deciding to put a mosque... near the rubble of the World Trade Center... but on the right people have that dates back to America's founding! In other words, Obama's address at the Ramadan dinner had been nothing but a formal recognition of constitutional rights that he had sworn to defend and uphold in principle, while [in practice] he refuses to lift a finger to defend these rights against those who [wish to] deny them...

"Some analysts believe... that the Islamic center [near Ground Zero] has become the main issue in the mid-term Congressional [elections], and that right-wing elements in the Democratic and Republican parties are doing their utmost to incite the American public... against the Islamic center, whose construction has already been approved by the local authorities. The fascist forces that are condemning the project repeatedly say that it 'violates the sanctity of the site,' and 'defiles the sacred ground on which 2,700 people were killed by Al-Qaeda in 9/11'!

No one that I know think that the Cordoba Initiative is the main issue in mid-term elections and I fail to see how someone that can get past the Hannitys' of the world is even capable of such a thought. Ironic that he labels people opposed to the initiative fascists when it was mentioned in another article that much of Islam in America has ties to the Muslim Brotherhood known to have been a key player in the Nazi Final Solution.

"By the way, the proposed Islamic center is a culture center called Cordoba House, which is to include a swimming pool, gym, arts center, and a memorial to the 9/11 victims, in addition to the mosque. A very short distance from that 'sacred ground' there are infamous strip clubs and a shop selling pornographic videos, as well as gambling halls and dance clubs! These places, it seems, do not offend the sensibilities of the national defenders of the wide pit that marks the former site of the World Trade Center. [Moreover,] this pit does not include any monument to the victims. No building has been build there, because the real estate companies and the local authorities have failed to agree on the financial terms. The proposed Islamic center, on the other hand, is to be built on the site of an old warehouse that used to belong to the Burlington Coat Factory.

Using the strip-club and other references are an attempt at a red herring. They've already stated that there are other mosques in the area. There are, in fact, buildings going up all around the pit.

"The chances of building the Islamic center seem to be receding, in the wake of the campaign waged against it... The debate is no longer about religious freedom, about tolerance and openness towards the other in American society, or about the degree to which [this society] accepts Islam and the Muslims. The leaders of the Muslim diaspora believe that the mosque could provide an opportunity to improve and strengthen interfaith relations. However, the [issue] has rapidly turned into a struggle that is political, rather than religious or social, and which could determine the fate of Obama and his Democratic administration.
"The real objectives of the campaign against the Islamic center are not to protect the 'sanctity' of [Ground Zero] or the feelings of the families of the 9/11 victims. It is a depraved attempt to arouse blind racist fanaticism, which can be exploited to incite hatred against anyone who is not American and to espouse an openly racist approach in order to push American policy more and more to the right. The real objectives are to assault the First Amendment, which guarantees the freedom of worship and the freedom of speech, and which prevents the government from establishing a religious state, from preferring the followers of one faith other the followers of another, and from forbidding some minority to practice its religion... This campaign against the Islamic center is consciously aimed at rallying the religious right, which opposes this constitutional principle. It goes hand in hand with the attempt to create public hysteria over the [issue] of immigration to the U.S., and the attempt to portray the Muslims as criminals who are taking [American] jobs... The leaders of this campaign are demanding, with insolence that is growing from day to day, to revoke the 14^th Amendment to the Constitution, which guarantees U.S. citizenship to anyone born in the country – as a preliminary step towards deporting millions of children who were born in America to illegal immigrants. The strident and hostile cries against immigrants and ethnic minorities in the U.S. are meant to incite violence against the 'foreigners'...

"The question is, why did Obama bother to make a speech at the Ramadan dinner if he was willing to back down from it so quickly? Clearly, his motivation was not to defend rights, democracy, and freedom of religion. Michael Gerson wrote in his column in The Washington Post that Obama had to give this speech, because 'he leads a coalition that includes Iraqi and Afghan Muslims who risk death each day fighting Islamic radicalism...' The conclusion is that Obama's statements were made with the encouragement of the Pentagon and the State Department, which fear that the anti-Muslim campaign waged by the Republican right may sabotage the U.S. military activity in Iraq and Afghanistan – [activity] meant to impose American rule over the Middle East and Central Asia, the world's greatest sources of oil and gas...

"America is in a bind. On the one hand it wants to recruit Muslim allies and followers, in order to continue its wars in the Middle East and in Afghanistan, and in order to maintain the [Muslim] support for a military strike against Iran. At the same time, it nurtures anti-Muslim sentiments among its citizens and soldiers in order to create a basis for these very same wars. So far it has found no way out of this bind."[9]

I fail to see how anti-Muslim sentiments have been nurtured in the United States. If he's talking about people not wanting another mosque on the Ground Zero site, he is speaking out against not only first amendment rights, but our constitutional right to peaceably assemble. I don't see us in any bind. If you are going to live in our society, you are given wide-berth to practice your religion as long as it doesn't infringe on the rights of others. What this author is advocating is the silencing of opposing opinions.

The Issue is Brought Up to Detract Attention from President Obama for the Iraq Withdrawal

Saudi journalist 'Ali bin Hassan Al-Tawati wrote that President Obama's political opponents want to draw attention away from his achievement of withdrawing the U.S. troops from Iraq, and that is why they politicized the Cordoba House affair. He added: "...In their eagerness and short-sightedness, President Obama's opponents failed to realize that he was not the only party harmed by their reprehensible politization of this affair... The biggest loser was American society... because [the affair] upset the balance among its variegated ethnic and cultural components, to the extent that, for the fist time in history, demonstrations broke out in some American cities calling to expel the Muslims from the country, or to force them to renounce their faith as a condition for their staying..."[10]

Opposing the Islamic Center near Ground Zero is Like Calling for Burning the Koran

Dr. 'Abd Al-'Aziz bin 'Othman Al-Twaijiri, director-general of the Islamic Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (ISESCO) in Saudi Arabia, equated the opposition to the mosque with the acts of American pastor Terry Jones, who called to burn copies of the Koran on September 11. He also stressed it is necessary to disseminate correct information about Islam in order to counter the trend of hatred and racism against Muslims:
"...Addressing the issue of the [Islamic center near Ground Zero] seems like meddling in the internal affairs of [another] country. However, this case is different, because it violates the constitutional rights of [all] Muslims, regardless of where they live... The objection to the construction of this social-religious [center] in New York is a position directed against all Muslims, not just those living in America. In many ways, it resembles the extremist and racist terrorist [act] of the American pastor Terry Jones, who called to burn the book of Allah the Beloved [i.e., the Koran], out of a deep contempt for the Muslims worldwide, and in order to ignite flames of religious hatred...

"It is time to work on several levels in order to spread in the West the [true] facts about Islam, Islamic culture, and the Islamic world, using the full range of legal means, which are numerous. Last spring I visited the U.S. and became more and more convinced that the Islamic world is absent from it, and that there is an urgent need to correct the views [of its people] about Islam and the Muslims... so as to counter the trends of hatred and racism."[11]

Endnotes:

[1] Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, an Egyptian cleric, heads the Cordoba Initiative and has for years served as Imam of the Al-Farah mosque in New York

[2] Al-Sharq Al-Awsat (London), August 25, 2010.

[3] Al-Ahram Al-Masai (Egypt), August 26, 2010.

[4] Al-Watan (Kuwait), August 20, 2010.

[5] www.aafaq.org, August 24, 2010.

[6] Al-Hayat (London), September 12, 2010.

[7] Al-Masri Al-Yawm (Egypt), August 27, 2010.

[8] Al-Dustour (Egypt), August 11, 2010.

[9] Al-Wafd (Egypt), August 21, 2010.

[10] 'Okaz (Saudi Arabia), September 1, 2010.

[11] Al-Hayat (London) August 31, 2010.

So, you can see where some of the journalists used their critical thinking skills and where some have borrowed US media buzzwords and thrown them back in our faces.

Same team guys, same team

2010-09-27T05:57:00.000-07:00

The media was up in arms over passage of the Patriot Act which cut through bureaucratic red tape. Hardly a peep has been said about the possible monitoring of the internet to catch terrorists. Seriously, how many of you are connected to the internet in some way, shape or form?

If this passes it could get ugly. Think of all the things that could easily be shut down. Opinions, campaign information, anything is possible when you think about it.

Mike Gallagher gets it right: Colbert to testify in congress

2010-09-24T05:40:00.000-07:00

Rarely do I listen to Mike Gallagher. He is too emotional and says some foolish things. To be fair though, he has created and/or guided his listeners to charities which benefit Americans in many ways. Especially the one for police officers killed in the line of duty. Anyhow, he covered the story on Stephen Colbert testifying before a house subcommittee on immigration.

Why is taxpayer money being wasted listening to celebrities this close to an election? I think it's because some dems are grasping at straws and trying to see if the immigration problem gives them an edge. Sure, they wont do anything about illegal immigration (both parties), but they will pay lip service to it if it gives them the upper-hand on election day.

Incidentally, I find it hilarious that plenty leftists love the documentary "Outfoxed", but will follow Colbert and Stewart as if they are real news. The fact that Colbert is in Washington today speaks volumes about how democrats in their current inception view the world.

Why DADT WILL pass.

2010-09-22T05:47:00.000-07:00

Yesterday, I had a break in studying and had a chance to visit one of the more enlightened bloggers on the conservative side, BBCW. He had a very good article on the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" (DADT) trouble that has plagued the Armed Forces for over a decade now.

There is only one part of the article that I don't agree with, and I hope he doesn't mind me quoting him:

"Don't ask don't tell works because it continues the military policy without having to make special exceptions that get in the way of the purpose of the military. Special exceptions on the battlefield can get men and women hurt and cause them to come home in body bags. If a gay man or woman wishes to serve in the armed services, they have been permitted to since Clinton under rules." BBCW

Well thought out and in perfect world, he would be correct. The real problem with DADT is that it allows homosexuals to out themselves, thus reducing force readiness. It isn't just a small problem, either. In 2004, we had five in our battalion "come out" to commanders who were then forced to chapter each Soldier. Many of these Soldiers had Top Secret clearances and couldn't be easily replaced. This burdens other Soldiers who have to be stop-lossed that were many times on their way out due to expiration of their contract.

Also, we pretty much knew who the homosexual service-members were in the first place because many of them were overt about their preference. Not many people in military service care about stuff like that anymore regardless of irresponsible media coverage and cries of intolerance from the left. I seriously doubt many of these people would start singing show tunes and dancing in formation if DADT is repealed.

My point is that at some point DADT will be repealed, but like I said, I look at it from a readiness standpoint. If you make exceptions for one group (is being gay a group? or is it more likely a ready made voting block for Democrats who don't really care about them but pay lip-service) then you will end up making exceptions for all. That isn't what serving your country should be. In this, I agree with BBCW.

Let us not also forget that the reason this was brought up in the first place was due to sneaking a clause into the defense spending and didn't pass the sniff test in the senate. This was a last, dying breath attempt to bring power back to the Democrat's arena. It didn't work.

The repeal of DADT will happen inevitably at some point in the future. All buzzword such as "INTOLERANCE", "HATE SPEECH", and "BIGOT" aside, it was an underhanded attempt for senatorial democrats to look like saviors. It came off badly.

Incidentally, this is no rip on BBCW. I agree that the Armed Forces is no place for social experiments either. But, it happens there all of the time. TRICARE is a perfect example, but that is for another day. Cheers!

'Draw Muhammad' Cartoonist Goes Into Hiding at FBI's Insistence After Assassination Threat

2010-09-16T05:03:00.000-07:00

Fox News -

The Seattle cartoonist whose work sparked the controversial "Everybody Draw Mohammed Day!" has gone into hiding at the advice of the FBI after being targeted by a radical Muslim cleric, according to the newspaper that published her comics.

Molly Norris has moved and changed her name, the Seattle Weekly said Wednesday, after U.S.-born Yemeni cleric Anwar al-Awlaki placed her on an execution hit list. Awlaki -- who has been linked to the botched Times Square bombing and cited as inspiration for the Fort Hood massacre and a plot by two New Jersey men to kill U.S. soldiers -- reportedly called Norris a "prime target" for assassination and that her "proper abode is hellfire."

"You may have noticed that Molly Norris' comic is not in the paper this week," Seattle Weekly Editor in Chief Mark Fefer wrote Wednesday. "That's because there is no more Molly."

"The gifted artist is alive and well, thankfully. But on the insistence of top security specialists at the FBI, she is, as they put it, 'going ghost': moving, changing her name, and essentially wiping away her identity.

"She is, in effect, being put into a witness-protection program -- except, as she notes, without the government picking up the tab," Fefer wrote.

You can try to argue that Molly Norris was a bigot for even coming up with the concept of Draw Mohammed Day, but people with common sense understand that this was more about Molly confronting her own fears and the first amendment. With threats from many places and apparently from even moderate Muslims, this woman has taken the advice of the FBI and gone into hiding.

Most of the people that have taken the time to criticize Islam are now either dead or heavily guarded. This is unacceptable in a society that gives lip service to free speech and claims separation of church and state but seems to not understand a slow takeover of the United States by Islamists.

"Yemeni-American cleric Anwar al-Awlaki - the radical who has also been cited as inspiring the Fort Hood, Tex., massacre and the plot by two New Jersey men to kill U.S. soldiers - singled out artist Molly Norris as a "prime target," saying her "proper abode is hellfire."
-NY Daily News

That isn't even a subtle threat to a woman that couldn't be more than 90 pounds soaking wet. I've read a few other things she's done and she doesn't strike me as a social conservative at all.

People need to step up and back people like Molly when threats like this happen. Our government needs to denounce the threats and make it publicly known that they are investigating threats of this nature so that the public doesn't live under the false perception that nothing is being done. In an age where the media and several on the left call people that don't want a gigantic Mosque next to the ground zero site bigots, we need to look at the larger picture and understand where the outrage comes from. We understand where their outrage is derived from and compare and contrast the difference in behaviors. You don't see people in our country screaming "Death to Islam!" Oh, I'm sure there are the occasional plants in the crowd, but when you look at the difference between an anti-Mosque (not anti-Islam) crowd in the U.S. and the crowds looking at that Terry Jones crazy, the difference is staggering. The sad thing about all of this is that our own national media does a better job of trying to make our protesters look like crazies than Al-Arabiya and Al-Jazeera ever could.

This one takes the f'in cake!

2010-09-15T17:01:00.000-07:00

I'm gonna link this article based on what Pamela found on the internet. Someone calling their blog the thin blue line was using the picture of a dead policeman for their profile. This is posted at Shaw's. I would hope that if any liberal bloggers were doing the same thing that they would do the right thing and expose them as well.

More information on "tha malcontent"

2010-09-13T05:53:00.000-07:00

I'm not going to waste any time on this. The chick over at Progressive Eruptions and her buds say it so eloquently. Perhaps once this he/she malcontent is exposed, we can weed out the dozen or so blogs that he/she has created and have true dialogue.

If you are interested, go check out her site. Don't get ugly or anything, just check it out. It's what I've been saying all along, only Shaw and friends have done some more in-depth investigating.

9/11

2010-09-11T07:01:00.000-07:00

With all of the controversy stirred up by media outlets desperate to stay current, let's not forget what got us where we are today. Let's also not forget that alot of the people castigating mobilization of a giant war machine on the Middle East were for it before they were against it.

Ultimately, take time out of your day to say a prayer to God, or the tree you worship in the backyard, or whatever, for the victims of 9/11.

Once again, proving what I've known for some time.

2010-09-09T20:06:00.000-07:00

Odd as this may be, I find myself agreeing with Shaw over at Progressive Eruptions. The one who calls himself tha malcontent is a fraud who creates false personae to either infiltrate or hurt other bloggers. Also, he copies and often plagiarizes other bloggers ideas.

Not a true conservative is tha malcontent, but a plant who is laughing at the people who so vehemently agree with him and his stolen talking points. He is a parody of all things conservative.

"Handing over the keys to Iraq"

2010-09-09T05:24:00.001-07:00

Credit to MEMRI.org

A preacher wants to burn a few Korans. What's the big deal?

2010-09-08T17:29:00.000-07:00

In this country the lefties rammed burning of the US flag down the throats of people and do so with glee anytime something upsets them. And how many times have you seen US flags being burned in the Middle East, South America, and Central Asia, I could go on.

The Koran that this reverend wants to burn is JUST A BOOK. It's paper and ink and a cover. What's important is the words and ideas in the book. That's what's holy, not the book itself. Yes, I know that the physical Koran is venerated and respected greatly by Muslims, but why the uproar among Americans? What's the big deal?

Also, why are people in Afghanistan rioting and screaming "Death to America!!!" because of one ignorant person? There are haves and have nots in this world. The have nots will always hate the haves. They always go with the theory that people that have things are greedy or bigots or don't respect our "fellow man". What responsibility do we have to a third world country when they have rich neighbors that can readily bring aid but don't? Doesn't make any sense.

What I'm getting at is the fact that they will always hate us no matter what. The responsibility of the media which most definitely includes Fox, are implicit in the exploitation of this otherwise lame duck news.

What a true economist says about spending: The Shell Game

2010-09-07T05:00:00.000-07:00

I just read a good article by an actual economist, Dr. Thomas Sowell. He talks about the fabled projected surplus that the Clinton administration trumped up, but shows that a majority of Republicans were what turned the tide in the near balancing of the budget.

Palestinian Researcher: A Legal Victory in Ground Zero Mosque Could Cause the Muslims to Lose the Battle that Counts – The One for Coexistence

2010-08-27T05:39:00.000-07:00

In a recent article in the PA daily Al-Ayyam, Dr. Khaled Al-Haroub, a Palestinian researcher at Cambridge University, praised the freedom and tolerance enjoyed by the Muslims in the West, and criticized the Muslims for waging legal battles over marginal issues like the Ground Zero mosque, which provoke Western society and could end up ruining their relations with their neighbors in the West.

We Must "Not Let Marginal Issues Ruin the Relations between the Muslim Communities in the West and the Societies that Host Them"

"There have been reports in the media that Muslims in Canada and Italy are holding their Ramadan prayers in churches [this year], because there are not enough mosques and Islamic centers to contain their great numbers. The most important point in these reports is the permission granted by priests and by those in charge of the churches to hold [Muslim] prayers there. [When asked about it,] some of the priests indicated that the Christians' experience with the Muslims in mixed neighborhoods has been positive, and that is what led them to welcome [the Muslims] into their churches and let them pray there.

"In Denmark, which has been the target of a vicious campaign throughout the Muslim world because of the rashness of some [Danish] cartoonists, there was a touching human story that was reported in the news about a Muslim Somali bus driver. One morning, when he came to work and got on the bus, he found it full of flowers, gifts and greeting cards. They were placed there by the people of the neighborhood whom he serves every day. Later he understood that it was all for his birthday, which passes every year without his noticing it. [There are many] such stories about coexistence, and about touching human gestures that Westerners have made towards Muslims out of personal regard, far from any consideration of religious or ethnic background. The problem is that the media – both in the Arab word and in the West – focuses on negative and blood-soaked stories, on everything that [undermines] coexistence and perpetuates the belief that East and West have no common ground.

"We should think deeply about [this] civilized and progressive step of allowing the Muslims to hold their Ramadan prayers in the churches, and about what can be learned from this [affair]. First of all, we can say that it forces us to examine our priorities, and not to let marginal [issues] ruin the relations between the Muslim communities in the West and the societies that host them. These marginal [issues] do not interest the majority [of Muslims] and are not considered fundamentals of the faith. At the same time, they are seen as provocative, [because they] touch a nerve and stir up unnecessary hatred among the people of the West."

"A Legal Verdict Permitting [the Muslims] to Build a Mosque against the Will of Over Half the [City's] Population Cannot Be Regarded as a Victory"

"Here are two examples of issues that cause [people] to waste time and effort on meaningless battles: the [issue] of the niqab in Europe, and the issue of the mosque or Islamic center that is to be built in New York near [the former site of] the Twin Towers. Regarding the niqab: the Muslims, especially those who [were allowed] to hold their Ramadan prayers [in the churches], must oppose [the attempt] to reduce the image of Islam to [the narrow issue of] the niqab. [This issue] concerns only a small number of women who wear the niqab in Europe without even knowing why, so it is not something worth fighting for... As for the mosque that sparked so much opposition, and provided the conservative and Zionist right so much ammunition with which to attack the American Muslims – this too is a losing battle, politically and culturally, even if the [Muslims] involved in it win the legal [battle over it]. From a purely legal and theoretical perspective, the New York Muslims have the right to build a mosque and an Islamic center as they wish, within the boundaries of the municipal laws. They are citizens of this cosmopolitan city, just like any other citizens of any other religion. However, the principle that should guide those who wish to build the mosque transcends the [dry letter of the] law and the [goal] of scoring legal points. After all, a legal verdict permitting them to build a mosque against the will of over half the [city's] population cannot be regarded as a victory. Building a mosque near that place [i.e., Ground Zero], legally or illegally, is a provocation that hurts people's feelings, so it is inappropriate to insist on building it on that spot, of all places...

"The example of the mosque is similar to many [other] instances that occurred in the West, in which the Muslims hurried to turn to the law for protection and for help in pursuing some goal or interest. Taking legal action in pursuit of interests is a natural and usual option in the West, where the judiciary system is usually fair and is not controlled by the government. Nevertheless, it is not wise to take every issue, large or small, to the courts, and it is certainly [unwise] in the case of a marginal issue. A short-term victory in the legal arena will lead in the long run to a defeat in the cultural and political arenas. Provoking the other side will eventually create public opinion that will undermine the very laws that the Muslims evoke today. How do the Muslims benefit... from the legal victory of a nurse who does not wish work with her arms exposed, and therefore forces the health ministry to pass a new regulation [permitting her to wear disposable sleeves], when a Christian nurse loses the legal battle over the right to wear a crucifix to work...? The battle over [our] image, [namely] the cultural and political battle, is much more important [than the legal battle], for it concerns worrying phenomena like the increasing provocations, the widening circle of [our] rivals, and the growing hatred. Sometimes, the racism and xenophobia experienced by Muslims increases in exact proportion to the legal victories they achieve over marginal issues..."

"We Keep Increasing Our Religious Demands Vis-a-Vis the West, While Refusing to Meet Even a Few of the Demands Made by Religious Minorities Living among Us"

"We must take stock and do some soul-searching by asking ourselves the opposite question, [namely] how people in a Muslim country would react if the Christians wanted to pray in a mosque on Sunday due to an insufficient number of churches. Or let's ask an even simpler [question]: What is the reaction in most Arab and Muslim countries to the demand of religious minorities – not only Christians but also Hindus and Sikhs – to build their own houses of worship? In practice, our countries exhibit hypocrisy and a double standard. We keep increasing our religious demands vis-à-vis the West, while refusing to meet even a few of the demands made by religious minorities living among us."

Reprinted from memri.org (Middle Eastern Research Institute)

Now, you must admit that for a Muslim scholar, this is a huge admission.

More crys of RASICM!!!!!!! from the revolutionary assholes who want to plunder our country and make us slaves.

2010-08-22T15:36:00.000-07:00

NEW YORK --The proposed mosque near ground zero drew hundreds of fever-pitch demonstrators Sunday, with opponents carrying signs associating Islam with blood, supporters shouting, "Say no to racist fear!" and American flags waving on both sides.

Islam is a race? Where is the country of Islam? What language do they speak in Islam? Racist fear? Really...Hard to put a color or face on Islam:

Here's what I know about the group Hamas who is a primary head nodder to this new mosque:

Taking out the trash

2010-08-21T07:09:00.000-07:00

I am attending the San Antonio Libertarian Party meet and greet next weekend after being contacted by the Texas coordinator. I love classical liberalism and all that it stands for. If you don't know what that means, look it up before getting reactionary.

Where my beliefs diverge from the Libertarians is Anarco-capitalism, and extreme pacifism. I'm a preemptive kind of guy in certain situations. I'm not saying that all Libertarians believe the things mentioned above, but many do. It should be interesting to meet some of the candidates and people and discuss ideas with them.

One thing that was disturbing to me was a thread of discussion on their Facebook site. One person said that if there are no Libertarian candidates that they wouldn't be voting this election and some agreed, but no one disagreed. This mindset in an important election year is disturbing to me and it should be to you as well. There is never going to be one pure candidate that everyone agrees with on every issue and anyone that thinks that is living a fool's folly.

That said, when it comes to presidential candidates, we really need to reconsider some of these people that are starting to come forward and hinting at a run. Newt Gingrich needs to go to another country. He's bad, bad, bad for us and will not be elected. If he runs and wins the primaries, we are fucked. Period. I predict in an obama/Gingrich runoff that obama would win. When I heard of his potential run on Bill Bennett's Morning in America, I almost threw my Macbook across the room.

Sarah Palin has a social stigma about her and even if current polls have her ahead of obama in a runoff, it just isn't happening. She let herself come into the prospective VP spot and put herself out there for the media elite to pick apart and I think we learned something from it. We know now that if the snarling elites in the media don't like a candidate, they will do anything, even out and out lie to tarnish them. Palin's handlers should have been on the spot with this sort of thing. Anytime professors at our college are losing the class, all they need to do is say, "Sarah Palin" and that brings snickers and temporarily restores order. I know the indoctrinators aren't the end-all, I just want you to know it's out there. I know there are plenty of Palin supporters in the blogosphere. Know that this is my opinion. She's damaged goods.

So, who's it gonna be? Paul Ryan? Bobby Jindal? I'd like to discuss it with you and get ideas.

DOH!!! Dr. Laura!!!

2010-08-18T11:00:00.000-07:00

I just got done listening to the actual Dr. Laura rant. Two things:

1. She didn't and shouldn't have used the actual N-word.

2. She blatantly disregarded the caller's problem and created a non-issue. The caller left in worse shape than when she started.

The caller brought up a good point. She (a black woman) was concerned or uncomfortable about racial remarks made by friends and relatives of her husband. Dr. Laura used this as an attempt to illustrate that blacks use the N-word all of the time. She did so by using the N-word (the actual word) 11 times in five minutes. There was no need for the use of the actual word even once. Also, I think the caller was right to be uncomfortable. First of all, why would she marry a man that has friends and relatives like this, and why wouldn't she insist they not visit?

Skin pigmentation has become more of an issue in the last few years than it was back when I was growing up in the 70's and 80's. Throughout our U.S. history, we have watched black Americans go from slaves to freed people to actual citizens. The rapid transition wasn't without frequent errors and disasters. Between the lack of zeal of early Republicans (the Radical ones) to actually plan out a path to integrate these new citizens and an economic depression after the Civil War, blacks weren't exactly set on a path to true freedom. Don't get me wrong, the Republicans at the time started out with good intentions when abolishing slavery, but good intentions only get you so far. Were it not for early black northerners who stayed on in the south opening what are now historically black colleges and universities, and other schools, freed slaves would have never even come out of the slave mentality that many were born into. I do feel that the transition from slave to freedmen was slower than it had to be due to over regulation and less concern for what to do post-abolition than getting there in the first place. Then we have the social spending of the 60's which brought much of southern black progress to a screeching halt. Modern day evidence of this is the number of people waiting outside in Atlanta for subsidized housing most recently. This is not to say that there aren't many examples of black-Americans breaking through this barrier and becoming prominent leaders in the U.S. and in local communities.

Dr. Laura did more than make a slight mistake. She tried to use deductive logic (in this case a deductive fallacy) that implies that because some blacks use the N-word that it is prevalent in our society. Even though Dr. Laura won't admit that she is paying for what she said (and I firmly believe that she was quietly asked to leave) she has broadcast her leaving far and wide. That implies to me that there is more at work here than her "1st amendment rights" being under attack.

Use of the N-word is wrong. Yes, you can say it in public, but why? It's an outdated term that implies ownership of another person and comes from a time that no longer has context with present day social values. The caller wanted some advice on how to handle her situation and got derision and anger from Dr. Laura. I personally think that Dr. Laura still needs to answer the callers question. But, that's just me.

Obama throws support behind controversial Islamic center, and it ain't just Fox covering this...

2010-08-14T05:25:00.000-07:00

Sorry for the abrupt return, but stories like this irritate me to no end:

Obama throws support behind controversial Islamic center

By Dan Gilgoff, CNN

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

NEW: Republican congressman says Obama "caved into political correctness."
NEW: Muslim who attended White House event surprised Obama touched "hot potato"
New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg praises Obama's remarks
Obama said that "Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as anyone else"

Washington (CNN) -- President Obama threw his support behind a controversial proposal to build an Islamic center and mosque near New York's ground zero, saying Friday that "Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as anyone else in this country."
"That includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in lower Manhattan, in accordance with local laws and ordinances," Obama said at a White House Iftar dinner celebrating the Islamic holy month of Ramadan.
The president's remarks drew praise from New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who announced his support for the Islamic center last week.
Bloomberg compared Obama's speech to a letter President George Washington wrote in support of a Jewish congregation in Newport, Rhode Island. "President Obama's words tonight evoked President Washington's own august reminder that 'all possess alike liberty,' " Bloomberg said in a statement.
"I applaud President Obama's clarion defense of the freedom of religion tonight," he said.
To learn more about the "ground zero" mosque, see CNN's Belief Blog
Critics of the proposed Islamic center quickly denounced Obama's remarks. "President Obama is wrong," said Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.). "It is insensitive and uncaring for the Muslim community to build a mosque in the shadow of Ground Zero. Unfortunately, the President caved into political correctness."
"While the Muslim community has the right to build the mosque, they are abusing that right by needlessly offending so many people who have suffered so much," King said in a statement. "The right and moral thing for President Obama to have done was to urge Muslim leaders to respect the families of those who died and move their mosque away from Ground Zero."
Obama, who said he was speaking both as a citizen and as president, invoked the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, which critics of the Islamic center cite as the main reason for preventing its construction.
"We must all recognize and respect the sensitivities surrounding the development of lower Manhattan," Obama said, according to his prepared remarks. "The 9/11 attacks were a deeply traumatic event for our country."
"The pain and suffering experienced by those who lost loved ones is unimaginable," he continued. "So I understand the emotions that this issue engenders. Ground zero is, indeed, hallowed ground."
But Obama said one "reason that we will win this fight" against terrorism is "our capacity to show not merely tolerance, but respect to those who are different from us -- a way of life that stands in stark contrast to the nihilism of those who attacked us on that September morning, and who continue to plot against us today."
Repeatedly invoking the nation's founders and examples of religious tolerance from American history, the president argued that national ideals and the Constitution demanded that the project proceed.
He noted that Thomas Jefferson hosted the the first Iftar dinner at the White House more than 200 years ago and said that the country had previously seen "controversies about the construction of synagogues or Catholic churches."
"But time and again," he said, "the American people have demonstrated that we can work through these issues."
"This is America, and our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakable," Obama said. "The principle that people of all faiths are welcome in this country, and will not be treated differently by their government, is essential to who we are. The writ of our Founders must endure."
The proposed Islamic center has provoked vocal opposition from some families of 9/11 victims and other groups. Nearly 70 percent of Americans oppose the plan, according to CNN/Opinion Research Corporation Poll released Wednesday.
"Obama came out for the Islamic supremacist mosque at the hallowed ground of 911 attack," Pamela Geller, a leading foe of the Islamic center, wrote on her blog Friday night. "He has, in effect, sided with the Islamic jihadists."
Muslim Americans, meanwhile, applauded the speech. "It was pitch perfect and it was cut and dry," said Eboo Patel, executive director of the Interfaith Youth Core and a Muslim adviser to the White House on faith issues. "He said that our Founding Fathers built a nation on religious freedom where people from different faiths can pray and thrive and that is that."
Some Muslims said they were surprised to hear the president weigh in on the controversy.
"It's such a hot potato and he's already got so much on his plate and people jumping on him for any hint of an Islamic connection," said Akbar Ahmed, an American University professor who attended Friday's White House dinner. "But he plunged in and took a very bold position."
The Islamic center's leaders say they plan to build the $100 million, 13-story facility called Cordoba House three blocks from the site of the 9/11 attacks. The developer, Sharif El-Gamal, describes the project as an "Islamic community center" that will include a 500-seat performing arts center, a lecture hall, a swimming pool, a gym, a culinary school, a restaurant and a prayer space for Muslims.
On Wednesday, the project's developers declined an offer by New York Gov. David Paterson to relocate the project to a state-owned site.

Earlier this month, the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission unanimously denied landmark status for the building where the proposed Islamic center would stand, allowing the project to move forward.

I've been watching this story for a while now, and it just keeps getting more and more bizarre. Now the president shows his true colors and inability to lead according to the will of the people. The building of a mosque in the proximity of the Ground Zero site is a slap in the face to America. Muslims that support this aren't Americans in anyway other than on paper (and even then, some of them are just here to use our rights against us and laugh in our faces). In the past 50 or so years, we've watched our constitution be trampled on by anyone that wants to live far outside the boundaries of what's normal (and yes, there is a standard. It's just lost) and what's right. Now all of the progressive (liberal) leftists have handed this power irresponsibly to an outside invader and are too stupid to know what they've done.

Realistically, this started with Qut'b's visit back in 1949 and his dictatorial stance over how America should conduct itself morally and has been passed down through generations of people who have perverted the Islamic religion and used it for their own perverted purposes be it to hurt people, or for their own pleasure.

From 1948 to 1950, he went to the United States on a scholarship to study its educational system, studying for several months at Colorado State College of Education (now the University of Northern Colorado) in Greeley, Colorado. Qutb's first major theoretical work of religious social criticism, Al-'adala al-Ijtima'iyya fi-l-Islam (Social Justice in Islam)SOUND FAMILIAR??, was published in 1949, during his time in the West.
Though Islam gave him much peace and contentment, he suffered from respiratory and other health problems throughout his life and was known for "his introvertedness, isolation, depression and concern." In appearance, he was "pale with sleepy eyes." Qutb never married, in part because of his steadfast religious convictions. While the urban Egyptian society he lived in was becoming more Westernized, Qutb believed the Quran taught women that `Men are the managers of women's affairs ...' Qutb lamented to his readers that he was never able to find a woman of sufficient "moral purity and discretion" and had to reconcile himself to bachelorhood.

This turning point resulted from Qutb's visit to the United States for higher studies in educational administration. Over a two-year period, he worked in several different institutions including what was then-Wilson Teachers' College in Washington, D.C. and Colorado State College for Education in Greeley, as well as Stanford University. He also traveled extensively, visiting the major cities of the United States and spent time in Europe on the return journey to Egypt.

On his return to Egypt, Qutb published an article entitled "The America that I Have Seen." He was critical of many things he had observed in the United States: its materialism, individual freedoms, economic system, racism, brutal boxing matches, "poor" haircuts, superficiality in conversations and friendships, restrictions on divorce, enthusiasm for sports, lack of artistic "animal-like" mixing of the sexes (which "went on even in churches"), and lack of support for the Palestinian struggle.

That's from wikipedia since I'm far too lazy to post good info. This will do. This dude went on to advocate global islamization as a way to enforce his foreign standards on everyone, especially the west (America). If you think for one second that the building of this mosque is anything less than what I mentioned above, you are as short-sighted as the politicians now destroying our country via Washington DC. They have forgotten what happened at the Ground Zero site and they have forgotten, or perhaps never cared about the will of the people. They will continue to ram bad legislation down the throats of the public while they're lapdogs in the joke of the press provide scant cover for them.

Obama wants this mosque to be built not just out of political expediency, but because he is one of the American hating crowd that grew up during the political turmoil in the 60s - 70s and is one of the indoctrinated if not an Islamist himself. I've watched his disregard for the will of the people over the last few months go from just ignoring us to blatantly giving us the finger. This latest act seems to be the pinnacle of this, I hope.