Posts Tagged ‘terrorist’

Map - Iraq - 2014Remember Fallujah:
Remember Fallujah? In 2004, American Marines fought the bloodiest battle in the Iraq War to take the city from Islamic terrorists. Today, the terrorists are back in control of Fallujah and have been since January (2014). At least the Iraqis held it for a couple of years after the American withdrawal.

Remember Mosul:
Now, the terrorists have also taken the city of Mosul; the second largest city in the nation. If you think it was a hard fought battle, it wasn’t. The American trained Iraqis simply abandoned their posts… ohhh, and they left their weapons and ammunition behind for the terrorists to take possession of. Nice touch.

But that’s OK, Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has a plan. He called on Iraqi citizens to take up arms against the terrorists to retake the city. Do you get the idea this guy is either a complete idiot or that he has a suitcase full of U.S. greenbacks ready to board a helicopter at a moment’s notice (kinda like Hamid Karzai in Afghanistan)?

Death Spiral:
Democrats - SurrenderPlain and simple, Iraq is in a death spiral. While this was predictable it wasn’t necessary. Bush had pretty well won that war (whether it was just or legal or whatever) and had begun the process of taking care of the next (Afghanistan)? And then… Obama happened. Obama, to appease his liberal base snatched defeat from the jaws of victory in Iraq. He found an excuse and simply pulled out; knowing the consequences which are now coming to fruition. He is in the process of doing the same in Afghanistan.

“We defeated ourselves twice in Iraq. For his part, Obama gave away the security and power that came from Bush’s victorious surge of military forces in 2007. Obama intentionally failed to reach an agreement to keep some forces in Iraq and felt he was above dealing with Iraq’s leaders as Bush had… No one is saying our troops should be fighting today in Mosul or Fallujah, but if we hadn’t withdrawn precipitously, we could be bucking up Iraqi troops and deterring Maliki’s sectarianism and toadying to Iran. Instead, Obama chucked what was achieved at high cost to please his liberal base. This will come back to bite us.” — Christian Whiton, (former George W. Bush administration State Department senior advisor)

Doubling Down:
People - Clinton, Hillary - At This PointMeanwhile the leftist are ready to double down on surrender. While Obama is readying to empty out Guantanamo Bay (no matter the costs); Hillary is officially apologizing for her vote in support of the war in 2008 (in preparation for 2016).

“I thought I had acted in good faith and made the best decision I could with the information I had. And I wasn’t alone in getting it wrong. But I still got it wrong.” — Hillary Clinton (in her book Hard Choices)

So, let me get this straight. In all of her career, with four dead American in Benghazi and the massive cover-up afterwards, Hillary’s one regret was her vote to support the war in Iraq. [Eyes rolling.] This could easily be our next commander in chief, though granted it’s hard to imagine anything worse than the current office holder.

If it’s any consolation to Hillary, we on the right (and most on the left) knew the vote was strictly political and that in her heart of hearts she was in the Obama camp all along. It’s kind of like Obama “evolving” and coming to terms on the issue gay marriage. There was no evolution to be made. Obama was always there; even when he was lying about it for political reasons. (Appearances vs. Substance)

Fast and Furious:
United States - Beaten DownI predict that the term “Fast and Furious” will soon replace a specific Obama debacle and begin to reference the pace at which we are subjected to Obama debacles. We seem to be averaging well into one a week at this point.

Elections have consequences. Election of progressives have dire consequences… It’s hard to believe such a level of incompetence could be achieved so quickly by one man.


Read Full Post »

People - Bergdahl, Bowe - Deserter Was He Worth ItThere’s a lot of hype (from the left and right) about Bowe Bergdahl floating around out there, so I thought I cut through some of it and give my two cents. Let’s start with this.

“[Bowe Bergdahl was] an American prisoner of war captured on the battlefield… [who] served the United States with distinction and honor.” — Susan Rice (National Security Adviser for President Barack Obama)

There is a lot of stuff out there concerning Bowe Bergdahl that we can honestly say we just don’t know the facts. The above statement by Susan Rice… isn’t one of them. Anyone who says that Bowe Bergdahl served with “distinction and honor” is either 1) a Liar or 2) an Idiot. And that goes for the Obama administration for whom Susan Rice was speaking.

How do I know this? From those who did serve with distinction and honor.

People - Bergdahl, Bowe - Investigation Needed

The Soldiers:
The soldiers in Bergdahl’s unit and others searching for him were told not to talk about it (Bergdahl’s defection, possible treason, or efforts to retrieve him); ostensibly so as not to put him in greater danger. Some were even forced to sign legal documents that they wouldn’t say anything. The things they couldn’t talk about weren’t just about the logistics of the search for Bergdahl; but the facts behind his departure and the cost (in lives, and effort) of the search.

To a man, they all say he deserted; some say it goes further than that. Many say (and a Pentagon investigation in 2010 confirms) that Bergdahl walked away from his unit AND left a note in his tent concerning his disillusionment with the United States and that he no longer supported the war. It has also been pretty well confirmed that he wasn’t just trying to desert the army, but left in search of the Muslim extremists. He found them. The only question is why.

Of all the information coming out… these soldiers are the guys I trust.

The Decision to Get Bergdahl:
I support the decision to try and bring Bowe Bergdahl home whether he is victim, deserter, or even traitor. I simply question the effort extended and the price paid given the circumstances; and I think that is a valid question to ask. Those who don’t want that question asked or discussed are acting indignant and resort to disingenuous clichés…

“When you’re in the Navy, and you go overboard, it doesn’t matter if you were pushed, fell or jumped. … We’re going to turn the ship around and pick you up.” — Rear Adm. John F. Kirby (Pentagon spokesman)

That plays on the emotional marine tradition of “no man left behind”, an honorable tradition mainly in reference to actual battle; but it ignores the circumstances of the man trying to be left behind while not in actual battle. Deserters. And… in practice it’s never been the case.

We, the United States government and military, left over forty men behind in Vietnam who deserted there. Some slipped into neighboring countries, some became tools of the Communists, some still live there today with their families.

The point is, there was little or no effort to turn the proverbial ship around and pick these deserters up. The attitude was, they made their decision, let them live with it. That decision could have been made here but rightly or wrongly it wasn’t; but to imply that the decision is always to repatriate them is simply not true.

The Cost:
I said that I do not agree with the price paid for Bergdahl, so let me clarify that statement. The deaths (of U.S. soldiers) likely resulting in the search, the final release of five terrorists, and the repercussions (encouraging more hostage taking) was an exorbitant price for one who deserted (or worse) in my opinion.

History - 2014 06 - Taliban Five Traded for Bergdahl

The Father:
I can understand the joy of the family and the father with the return of their son. I also understand that to them the price paid (five freed terrorist) was worth it. If it had been my son or a family member no price would have been too high.


Something smells when it comes to dad (Bob Bergdahl). I’m not talking about what he looks like or his history or his reaction to trying to get his son back. I base this on his recent words and actions… and more specifically his words at the White House press conference with Obama.

I think at a minimum, Bob Bergdahl has bought into the ultra-leftist ideology concerning the war in Afghanistan. These are the loons who use the words “illegal” or “Bush” when describing Afghanistan (or Iraq) with Rasputin-like glares of intensity. Unfortunately, it is not out of the question that dad has gone the extra step of adopting the Islamic ideology on the war. (I’ll explain below why I think that.)

Granted it’s sometimes hard to tell the two apart (liberal vs. Islamic). For example, either would confirm “I am still working to free all Guantanamo prisoners.” which Bob Bergdahl supposedly tweeted. It’s the next part that gives evidence that Bob has gone to the next (Islamic) step adding “God will repay for the death of every Afghan child, amen!” Now that’s uniquely Islamic.

One might offer a theory that Bob Bergdahl was simply trying to garner favor with his son’s captors; he supposedly learned Arabic (or some subset of it) in order to communicate with them directly. This was in order to circumvent his government which he considered incompetent or unwilling to properly seeks his son’s release. (Something I can understand and relate to.)

People - Obama, Barack - Bergdahl Dog and Poney ShowBut the fact that this bullshit didn’t stop after his son was safe… that is my primary concern with Bob Bergdahl.

At the dog and pony show put on by Obama at the White House, Bob said “I’d like to say to Bowe right now, who’s having trouble speaking English, bismillah al-Rahman al-Rahim.” Translation? “I give thanks in the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful”.

I’ll be blunt. THAT is offensive to me and hopefully many other Americans who remember 911 and who support our troops trying to make sure it doesn’t happen again… AND hold the bastards responsible to account.

Forgetting for a moment that it is Allah, and Muhammad, and their nut-ball followers that are the secondary party responsible for Bowe’s captivity for the past few years (Bowe himself being the primary party responsible); who did that statement serve exactly? Did it help Bowe? Only if he’s now a nut-ball Muslim himself. Did it help our soldiers in the field? I don’t think so.

It’s only benefit was to Bowe’s captors and those who would do us harm (here and on the battlefield); and Bow Bergdahl knew that. It’s was a propaganda gold mine for this man to praise Allah in the very seat of power of their enemies with our clueless “commander in chief” strutting around like a peacock for the cameras.

So Now What:
Now that all this damage has been done… what do we do to clean it all up… to make it right.

1) Concerning the released terrorist; we need to keep an eye on them as best as we can. If there is any… ANY… inclination that they are up to no good we need to take them out as best we can. I like the way the Israelis handled the Iranian nuclear scientists. A guy on a motorcycle would simply drive up to their stopped car, place a bomb (with a short fuse on their window), drive off, and booom. I wonder if Islamic nuclear nerds dyeing like pussies get a booty call in the afterlife? Probably not.

Unfortunately much of this damage will continue as the most incompetent boob to ever hold the office remains commander in chief for two more years.

People - Obama, Barack - Burn Constitution2) Concerning Obama breaking the law and not notifying congress of the release of terrorist from Gitmo. Doing something about that would require “cojones”; something the Republicans have repeatedly shown they lack in spades. Republicans are to Obama what Obama is to the rest of the world… pussies. Instead, Republicans should whine and stomp and claim dire consequences IF and when Obama crosses this or other red line. I’ll probably get my wish on this one.

3) As for Bowe Bergdahl… the system of military justice should be allowed to take its course. This system should determine exactly what Bowe is (deserter or worse) and he should then face those consequences. Unfortunately as political as this has become… I really doubt this will be the outcome.

One has to ask, exactly how much integrity, justice, or logic is there left in the federal government or the military establishment? Answer: We just sent Bradly Manning to a facility to begin the process of becoming Chelsea Elizabeth Manning. That should tell us all we need to know about how bad things are in America. Allahu Akbar.

Read Full Post »

Main Stream Media - Bias - Bet Your Sweet AssSuspending Disbelief:
State Department spokesman Jen Psaki was actually mocked by the press on Thursday (5/29/14) after saying “[President Obama] doesn’t give himself enough credit for what he’s done around the world.”

Some would say this (laughter at that statement) is proof that the main stream media isn’t biased after all. They, of course, would still be wrong. There is, after all, a difference between being biased and being blind. What this really shows is frustration on the part of the press in doing their jobs… which is selling the liberal narrative that all is well thanks to Obama. When things are as bad as they are in foreign policy (and just about everything else) the people can only be led to suspend disbelief so much or for so long.

This also falls right in with the departure of Press Secretary Jay Carney. Imagine having the job of pushing this crap day in and day out. One has to ask “Do they put your soul in a jar for safe keeping while you do that job? Do you ever feel clean again?” Sure all press secretaries have to shovel crap to some extent. And chalk it up to partisanship; but I say the degree and volume dished out by the Obama Administration is well above and beyond what we’ve seen in the past (from any administration). There is little equivalency here; and of course the Republican Administrations have the excuse of actually being challenged by the press.

Political Cartoon - 2014 05 00 - Benghazi EmailsFor Example: The Administration releases emails from the White House that specifically instructed Susan Rice to lie on the Sunday talk shows concerning Benghazi. This only happened after a judge ordered the release of all emails involving Benghazi because of a “Freedom of Information Act” ruling. Jay’s spin? Oh… THAT email wasn’t about Benghazi… (all said with a straight face). To which a reporters ask “Then why did you release it as part of a court order to release Benghazi related emails?” To which Jay acts befuddled and repeats “That email wasn’t about Benghazi…” It’s the art of repeatedly pissing on someone and telling them it’s raining with a straight face. Normally the media doesn’t mind this from a leftist administration… but the public is increasingly noticing that they’re all wet (and stinky)… and that’s a problem when credibility has some effect on the bottom line.

OK One More: Any release of prisoners from Guantanamo Bay requires 30 days’ notice to Congress. It’s the Law. It’s the law passed by a Democratic controlled Senate and singed by Obama himself. Obama actually complied with the law in the past concerning some of the same prisoners but abandoned the idea when he got pushback (from Democrats, Republicans, and the military). Setting aside the wisdom or logic of the decisions, with the swap for Bowe Bergdahl, Obama decided not to follow the law?

Why? Was it A) Because time was of the essence (Bergdahl was sick) B) Because they has re-interpreted the law and decided it didn’t apply here OR C) They decided they couldn’t trust Congress with the information? If you answered D) All of the above you are correct. Various statements from various people at the White House have given all three as the reason for ignoring the law. It’s like these pople just throw crap against the wall to see what will stick.

People - Obama, Barack - Mickey Mouse Ears

    This is but the latest debacle to demonstrate the overwhelming characteristics of President Barack Obama and by extension his administration:

  1. No respect for the rule of law. The rules and the law just don’t apply to this President.
  2. The propensity to lie all the time. These people would rather climb a tree to shout a lie when standing on solid ground and telling the truth would suit them better.
  3. No adult supervision. This administration can’t even coordinate its message/lies; which points back to amateurishness, incompetence, and a lack of engagement.

Again & Again & Again…
Meanwhile, this process of stating absurdity as fact (with a straight face) is repeated again… and again… and again… on every issue and scandal imaginable from the Obama Administration; Fast and Furious, Benghazi, IRS Political Targeting, Foreign Policy, The Economy, The Department of Veterans Affairs, and the Bowe Bergdahl prisoner swap…

It is well past time for the Obama Administration be called out on the absurdities they spout as answers to legitimate questions (no matter the source of the questions). Unfortunately, with the state of journalism today; it may be up to History to do that.

Read Full Post »

Religion - Christianity - Jesus - with Staff by StreamMatthew 7:15-20 (NIV) True and False Prophets
“Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thorn bushes, or figs from thistles? Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.

Religion - False - Islam - Not MohammadQur’an (33:50) – (Pithall) – O Prophet! Lo! We have made lawful unto thee thy wives unto whom thou hast paid their dowries, and those whom thy right hand possesseth of those whom Allah hath given thee as spoils of war…

Qur’an (23:1-5) – (Paraphrased)- (Believers will be successful who pray humbly, who shun vain talk, who pay their poor-tax, and who abstain from sex…) [OK sounds pretty good so far] (23:6-7) (Pithall) – Save (having sex with) from their wives or the (slaves) that their right hands possess, for then they are not blameworthy, But whoso craveth beyond that, such are transgressors. (Repeated almost verbatim in Qur’an (70:29-31))

Qur’an (4:24) – (Pithall) – And all married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess. It is a decree of Allah for you.

[It must really suck if you’re a left-handed Islamist.]

I’ve tried my best to rewrite this posting a couple of times but how do you do it. But how to you temper your comments when confronting evil? Did Jesus show restraint when confronting the money changers? Did he seek compromise?

So let me plead guilty right now. I am guilty, guilty, guilty… of that worldly sin of “intolerance”. I freely admit that I am loath to tolerate evil, loath to tolerate those who practice it, and loath to tolerate those who support it by their silence and inaction. And I’m proud that I refuse to tolerate such things and pretend they don’t exist while the worldly encourage and even require one to practice such self-delusion.

Religion - Fals - Islam - Reading Quran

The flavor of the month of “radical” Islamic terrorist is none other than Boko Haram (lead by Shekau) in the African nation of Nigeria. They’ve been pillaging, and burning, and killing for years now; concentrating mostly on schools. Why… because they believe “western education is sinful”. It’s literally what their name, “Boko Haram” means.

Boko HaremThey are in the news because they recently kidnapped, raped, and sold into slavery about 300 young schoolgirls they captured as “spoils of war” (as Muhammad called them). That is terrible and something needs to be done about it; even if it’s us (Americans, Christians, Non-Muslims) who have to do that something.

“I abducted your girls. I will sell them in the market, by Allah… the girls should not have been in school in the first place, but rather should get married… God instructed me to sell them, they are his properties and I will carry out his instructions.” – Shekau, leader of Boko Haram (Nigerian terrorist and follower of Muhammad)

But why now? Why all the concern about the Islamic terrorist now? It’s not as if Boko Haram popped up yesterday. They’ve been around for years. They’ve killed thousands. And they’re no strangers to atrocities. In September of 2013 and again in February of 2014, they attacked schools in Nigeria that offended them. The few girls they found, they told to run away… but as for the young boys… they killed them… over 100… shot, hacked to death, or burned alive. Ahhh, but NOW, they’ve crossed one of those little red lines. Now they’ve done something allowing us to identify with their victims.

These type atrocities happen all the time, and I agree that we can’t be the policemen of the world. But I say we can be a good neighbor. We can help when asked (and we have been asked by Nigeria) and the circumstances warrant it. The scope and nature of that I help I leave up to my elected officials. That’s their job, after all. I just wish we could have taken these bastards out a year or two ago; with drones if possible, special ops and helicopters if necessary.

But back to the cause of all this sh%t! Islam…

Religion - Islam - Symbol and Book

I’ve done my best over the years to pretend (part of that peer-pressured worldly self delusion) that there were a few Islamist that are “moderate”, even honorable… No more. I’m done with you people. You’re at best cowards… at best numerical infinitesimal…

This is not a problem of “radical Islam”. I’ve come to the conclusion that the words “radical” and “Islam” are virtual synonyms. The only reason you would speak the two words together would be to adhere to political correctness. When it comes to atrocities in the name of Allah, the best you can hope for from “moderate Islam” (known as an oxymoron) is silence or vague platitudes. You’re more likely to get indignant shrieks demanding tolerance in the form of silence from the infidels (see the Council on American–Islamic Relations – CAIR).

But what do we (non-Muslims) expect? Really? Exactly what fruits do we expect from such a “religion”? Life for the prophet Muhammad was one big Allah approved booty call after another. The whole of Islam was created to protect Muhammad’s 1) power 2) wealth & 3) private parts… and little else. Those were and remain the three pillars of Islam. After Muhammad’s passing new war lords and tyrants picked up his mantle for the same purposes. We’re now 1400+ years into that cycle.

With a “religion” based on such worldly things, is it any wonder we (non-Muslims) have had to deal with pirating, pillaging, enslaving, and fornication from Muhammad’s followers for these many centuries? Today, fourteen centuries later, we’re still dealing with and cleaning up the constant messes created by these thugs; while inundated with constant propaganda that they saved civilization during Medieval times, or respect and protect others peoples in their culture, or that they are a “religion of peace”. All bullshit!

Religion - False - Islam - Slave Girls - 003

The problem isn’t that the group Boko Haram are distorting or misinterpreting Islam (or it’s “prophet”)… it’s that they are following Islam all too well… and worse emulating by example the “prophet” Muhammad to a tee. Pillage? Sex with slave girls? It’s all spelled out “they are not blameworthy”; so go for it radical little soldiers of Allah. And even better, Muhammad assures you that if you die during this booty call, there’s an even better one waiting for you in the after-life. What a religion!

I would concede the argument that these nut-balls are perverting the teachings of Muhammad IF I could just see some evidence of something good coming from Islam. What I’d really like to see is for Muslims (for once) to actually clean up one of these messes on their own. If these thugs are to be dealt with, it will probably have to be done by the West (non-Muslims). So let me ask you this… where are the Saudi “advisors”, where are the Egyptian “special forces” where is one %$#@ing Muslim taking any responsibility for this crap what-so-ever? Even more, when WE finally take care of it… how about a little recognition or gratitude from you &^%$#ers? … … … I won’t hold my breath.

For all these fourteen centuries, the overall fruits of Muhammad and Islam have been death, pillage, greed, persecution, fornication, and slavery. Why? A bad tree cannot bear good fruit.

Religion - Christian - Bad Fruit

Read Full Post »

People - Obama, Barack - Throw Like a GirlPerception is Reality:
Let me start out by saying that when Obama ordered the closing of scores of embassies and consulates in the Middle East (08/04/2013), he made the right decision. Keeping our people safe is the right thing to do, especially when we find ourselves in our current predicament.

That said… It’s finding ourselves in our current predicament and why we are here that’s the problem.

When Osama Bin Laden attacked the United States on September 11, 2001, he expected the United States to lob a few missiles from a warship in response. He saw the United States as weak and lacking in resolve. Why? Well, in his own words in December of 1998 (Osama bin Laden: American Soldiers Are Paper Tigers)…

“We have seen in the last decade the decline of the American government and the weakness of the American soldier. He is ready to wage cold wars but unprepared to fight hot wars. This was proven in Beirut when the Marines fled after two explosions, showing they can run in less than twenty-four hours. This was then repeated in Somalia. We are ready for all occasions, we rely on God…”

People - Osama bin Laden - Tent in Camo

“After leaving Afghanistan they headed for Somalia and prepared for a long battle, thinking that the Americans were like the Russians. They were surprised when the Americans entered with 300,000 troops… The youth were surprised at the low morale of the American soldiers and realized more than before that the America soldiers are paper tigers. After a few blows, the Americans ran away in defeat.”

“After a few blows, they forgot about being the world leader and the leader of the new world order. They left, dragging their corpses and their shameful defeat, and stopped using such titles. They learned in America that this name [i.e., God] is larger than them.”

Why would he think that? Well… back in August of 1998 Muslim terrorists (al Qaeda) attacked American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, killing 224 people (12 Americans) and injuring 5,000.

Our response by then President Bill Clinton? Operation Infinite Reach! (Insert dramatic crescendo here) Which translates to… we lobbed about 75 cruise missiles at a few targets (mostly camps) in Afghanistan AND we lobbed a few more at a pharmaceutical factory in Sudan. Problem solved!

It was after this that Osama Bin Laden became a wanted man. U.S. Intelligence either couldn’t find him or didn’t consider him a high priority. I guess it was a higher priority for John Miller of ABC News who found him in the mountains of southern Afghanistan in order to do an interview that yielded the quotes above.

Of course there was also the attack on the U.S.S. Cole a couple of years later and our response… about the same.

2011 09 11 - Twin TowersThe Consequences:
This attitude eventually lead to 246 dead on four airliners, 125 dead at the Pentagon, 2,606 dead at the World Trade Center; at the cost of 19 Muslim hijackers.

My point in remembering all these events is this. It was our weakness, actual and perceived, that led to 911. Osama bin Laden got more than he bargained for in Bush and the United States. I guess he didn’t study history very well or thought it no longer applied. He woke the sleeping giant and that giant opened up a can of whoop-ass on him.

But now, through great effort from the left, and complacency on the right; that giant has returned to square one. We are sleepy, complacent, and in the eyes of our enemies wimpy and weak.

President Barack Obama cited Guantanamo, our bad reputation with Muslims, and Bush’s cowboy diplomacy with being a big al Qaeda recruiting tool. And maybe he had a point. He made dam sure that would no longer be the case (except for Guantanamo in which case the Republicans stopped him). But now we’re faced with an even bigger recruiting tool for terrorist. Being seen as a pussy again. But why would they come to think of us that way again? Because it’s practically the only message we’re sending them…

2013 - Guantanamo Protestors

Prisoners of War:
We coddle our captured enemies in Guantanamo. We give them TV, libraries, a soccer field; and all the while we ring our hands about the morality and injustice of keeping them (prisoners of war) in the first place. We release many who simply return to the battle field. As for those we still keep; we consider bringing them to our home soil, extending to them rights that our citizens enjoy and few (foreign) Muslims can even conceive. Who could watch this absurdity and not think we are a bunch of idiots and pussies?

2013 - Rolling Stone - Terrorist CoverHome Grown Terrorists:
Look at what we do to Americans who join our enemies. Back during World War II they would have been quickly tried and hung (or shot). Today, we take years to actually hold a trial. We allow them to make a mockery of our justice system. In some cases we don’t even acknowledge what they are (terrorists). We call their terrorists attacks “work place violence”. We glorify them on covers of magazines (for money). Who could watch this absurdity and not think we are a bunch of idiots and pussies?

Declaring Victory:
We announce strategic information for political purposes. When will our commitment to Iraq or Afghanistan end? Here’s the date within a few month window. Just sit tight; then you’ll have free reign again. We declare our enemies to be “on their heels” and that “wars must end” as if our very words make it so; facts be dammed. We not only demonstrate a lack of commitment or resolve, we announce it to the world. Who could watch this absurdity and not think we are a bunch of idiots and pussies?

Our Friends:
Our policy towards Israel is that they should immolate us; in respect to pussy diplomacy. We pressure Israel to capitulate and not target or respond as their enemies build nuclear weapons. This is what we do to our only real ally in the entire region.

Our main informant that made it even possible to kill Osama bin Laden, Dr. Shakil Afridi, is in prison in Pakistan. He has been sentenced to 33 years and his family claims he is now being tortured. How did he get there? Instead of getting him and his family out of the country like we promised; we leaked the information that identified him. After he was arrested we just let him rot. Sure we talked big but what is that worth when your target knows talk is all it is. Pakistan told us to “respect their legal process” which is Arabic for “go $#@* youself”.

The U.S. through Barack Obama betrays our allies and supporters.

Dr Afridi isn’t the only ally we’ve screwed and continue to screw. Congress set aside 5000 visas to help and protect informants and translators who help us in Afghanistan. 200 have been approved, and the bureaucratic process is mind-numbingly slow. We let thousands who will do little more than suck off the public tit cross our borders every day, but actually help us defend American lives… actually take up arms and kill our enemies… actually put your life and that of your family at risk? You wait… we need to be extra careful with you. This is even after our embassies and military generals do their part (quickly) to vouch for the invaluable service these guys provide.

Who could watch this absurdity and not think we are a bunch of idiots and pussies?

Response to Attacks:
On the anniversary of 911 or enemies organize, attack, and burn a U.S. Consulate. They kill four Americans in the process, including our Ambassador, Christopher Stevens. Our response? Declare the attack as “a spontaneous demonstration”; shift blame to an internet video we know had nothing to do with it; we even imprison the creator of the video. We then proceed with a massive cover up. We bribe or bully our citizens who were there to keep quiet. Our Secretary of State chastises the people who make a minimal effort to find out what happened by saying “At this point, what difference does it make”. The President himself calls attempts to uncover the truth “false scandals”.

2012 - Benghazi Burns

2012 - Benghazi Molehill

And as for accountability to the terrorist perpetrators? Almost a year later we have finally taken decisive action AND Federal authorities have filed the first criminal charges. Your heard me. We’ve filled out paperwork on the bastards! That’ll teach them to mess with us.

An idiot congressman (Adam Schiff ) on the House Intelligence Committee explained our “progress” this way.

“It’s been frustrating for many of us that it hasn’t moved faster, but it is a very difficult working environment for our agents. Gathering evidence in Libya, you might imagine, is very difficult, finding, interviewing witnesses, extremely difficult. We have identified many of the parties involved. We’re still trying to identify what the command-and-control structure would be. A lot of missing pieces still, but we are finally making progress.”

Translation: We’re back to the mindset of treating these acts not as terrorism, or even acts of war, we’re treating them like a crime… sort of like robbing a liquor store.

Who could watch this absurdity and not think we are a bunch of idiots and pussies?

United Nations - Host TyrantsForeign Respect:
We host and assembly of dictators and thugs on our own soil who routinely denounce us and thwart our diplomatic efforts. We invite our enemies to come and mock us. Our universities embrace them with crowds of adoring (leftist) students.

Foreign dictators give us a total screwing even when there’s nothing really to be gained. They do it simply for the pleasure of doing it. Our traitors find refuge with ease. We don’t even put that much pressure or effort into getting them back.

Talk to China or Russia about giving up an American traitor? Obama’s response? “I have not called President Xi personally or President Putin personally and the reason is … number one, I shouldn’t have to.”

President Obama is absolutely correct in that statement, “shouldn’t” being the key word. And he “wouldn’t” have to if not for the fact that both nations, the dictators involved (and pretty well the whole world) know he’s a pussy.

But it’s more than just that. Obama finds himself in the same position of a mad little boy who has once again lost his lunch money to a bully. He could fight and even likely get a bloody nose; but that embarrassment is worse than anything he can imagine… so he avoids the confrontation and his reputation (and ours) solidifies further.

So Obama cancels his meeting with Putin. He had to. To use the urban vernacular, Putin (and just about everybody else) has treated Obama like a bitch from day one. Someone in Obama’s position doesn’t sit down across from a bully who has repeatedly bent him over without reminding everyone in the world which one of the two is always on the receiving end. The really sad part is watching Obama try and explain his relationship with Putin…

2013 - Obama Putin Meeting - Frosty

Michele: “Is Putin still picking on you?”

Barry: No, No… we’re buds, we have a great relationship. 🙂

Michele: Do you have your lunch money today?

Barry: Ummm… no I gave it to my buddy, Putin.

Michele: Where’s your “Snowden” bicycle?

Barry: (in a hushed voice) Putin’s uhhh… borrowing it… I didn’t like it that much anyway…

Michele: Are you sure everything’s OK between you two?

Barry: Great! great… love the guy…

Who could watch this absurdity and not think we are a bunch of idiots and pussies? Thus we find ourselves in a position where we must close our embassies and consulates. We must hide. And we’ll keep doing that until we elect a leader (years from now) with some balls; and even then he’ll have to use them effectively for some time before we regain what we’ve lost under Obama and the Democrats.

Read Full Post »

Religion - Islam - Jizya - Spitting WaterIntroduction:
This fortunately (or unfortunately… I’m not sure which) turned from being a reply to something worthy of its own post. I would suggest reading the original post and the reply from MustafaHoward before proceeding.

A Muslim gentleman (MustafaHoward) took exception to my recent post concerning the Islamic idea of Jizya (taxes on non-Muslims by Muslim states) and how some Muslim clerics today say that western welfare and social programs are a form of jizya.

This is basically a detailed reply to his objections and his attempts to “educate” me concerning the verses in the Qur’an that were quoted and interpreted by me in the original posting.

First Second & Third:
First an apology for not being completely clear in my original post. Please understand that I was not always trying to translate or quote the Qur’an. I was trying to give my interpretation of the verse from what I had read. Anything in “quotes” was taken from a translation of the Qur’an. Anything not was my interpretation. In hindsight I see that was not apparent so I apologize for that lack of clarity. MustafaHoward did not see this and that is my fault.

Still, I suspect MustafaHoward would disagree even with my interpretation (not translation) so the point is minor. It could even be argued that the words I chose in my interpretation were wrong or misleading… They’re not… (see below)

Quote - Frankness - Disraeli, BenjaminSecond, an apology for my frankness. I’ve never been one to beat around the bush and this posting and response has me riled up a bit. 🙂 If your sensitivities require excessive tact and pretending that certain things are true when they obviously are not (as is done the Main Stream Media and leftist apologist when breaching the subject of Islam and terrorism); then I would suggest reading and commenting elsewhere.

Third, comments and dissenting views are welcome and even encouraged; but they obviously will not go unchallenged. Past posts are proof of that. So here we go…

Jizya (Confounding the Definition of a Duck):
>> Jizya: not something to worry about. There’s no one attempting to collect jizya from you, is there?

Concept - Its a Duck - Islamic DuckWow… condescending right off the bat! Impressive… but I don’t bully that easy… I would suggest another tactic.

Ummm… Actually… in the post… that’s pretty well EXACTLY what I’m saying is happening. “Islamic clerics (of both terrorists and “moderate” variety) have identified western social programs as a form of jizya that Muslims are entitled to and should take advantage of.”

Let me be clear. I’m not the one who came up with the idea of welfare being a form of Jizya. Muslim clerics are the ones espousing and preaching the idea to their followers. I am simply relaying the information and commenting on the moral and social implications.

Unfortunately, as is one of the main complaints of the original post; not only is someone “attempting to collect” a form of jizya from me (and all taxpayers by proxy of the government); they are actually succeeding due to the ineptness of the Massachusetts and Federal government. Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev are proof and examples of this.

So your (MustafaHoward’s) original assumption is wrong… isn’t it?

Your approach in refuting my original post seems to be to shoot the messenger and then muddle the debate. You simply pretended that I defined this (welfare and social programs) as jizya and then you proceed telling me that this doesn’t fit the definition as defined by the Qur’an.

Do you refute or denounce the idea (jizya through western welfare) as espoused by Muslim clerics? Nope. Do you offer that it’s a minority interpretation and offer evidence and/or quotes from clerics who say the opposite? Nope.

Instead you choose to give me a text book “traditional” definition of jizya and say that since what is happening doesn’t fit the letter of the law from the Qur’an so… we can’t call it jizya… despite your guys (Muslim clerics) being the ones who dreamt this stuff up. Granted, crazy people dream this kind of stuff up all the time, and it’s harmless as long as nobody acts on it. Unfortunately, that’s not the case here.

In essence, it walks like a duck, it talks like a duck, your guys say it’s a duck. You have a book that also mentions something about bills and feathers that don’t quite fit so your position is for me to even mention the duck is wrong and slanderous. … It’s a duck!

Qur’an 3:28 (Friends or Protectors)
>> You mistranslated Qur’an 3:28: it doesn’t say friends, it says protectors. It doesn’t say false pretenses: it says “unless you are afraid of their threat”.

Religion - Islam - Non-Believer as FriendI think I interpreted and understand the verse just fine. It DOES say “friend” (in three of the six translations on Quran.com).

Here’s the list:
Sahih International: “allies”
Muhsin Khan: “Auliya” (supporters helpers, etc.)
Pickthall: “friends”
Yusuf Ali: “friends or helpers”
Shakir: “friends
Dr. Ghali: “constant patrons”

It doesn’t say protectors in any of them. The closest any translation comes is using the word “patron”.

You are correct in that it doesn’t say “false pretenses”. These are my words, my interpretation of the verse. And, I stick by them. Personally I think the false pretenses aspect here is self-evident, but I will explain it. (see below)

For the benefits of those following this post, Here is what each of the six translations on Quran.com actually say for (3:38) concerning when a Muslim can ally or befriend himself with a non-Muslim:

Sahih International: “except when taking precaution against them in prudence.”
Muhsin Khan: “except if you indeed fear a danger from them.”
Pickthall: “unless (it be) that ye but guard yourselves against them, taking (as it were) security.”
Yusuf Ali: “except by way of precaution, that ye may Guard yourselves from them.”
Shakir: “but you should guard yourselves against them, guarding carefully”
Dr. Ghali: “excepting that you may protect yourselves against them (in manner) of protection.”

I stick by my interpretation because someone who takes a “friend” or “ally” or “patron” because he fears them and wants to keep a close eye on them is NOT REALLY being a “friend” or “ally” or “patron”. He is simply pretending to be and hopes to fool the other person into believing he is genuine. Another phrase one might use to accurately describe this behavior is … acting under “false pretenses”. And this (acting under false pretenses) is the only exception Allah makes for having this type of relationship with a non-believer. On the plus side subjugation seems OK though…

So you are incorrect concerning “protector” and correct concerning the idea of fear of danger (which doesn’t affect the negative connotation of the verse at all).

So looking at the entire verse one more time…

Qur’an 3:28 (Sahih International)(Numbers are added by TL to associate the portion of the verse with the TL interpretation below)
(1)Let not believers take disbelievers as allies rather than believers. (2)And whoever [of you] does that has nothing with Allah , (3)except when taking precaution against them in prudence. (4)And Allah warns you of Himself, (5)and to Allah is the [final] destination.

  1. If you are a Muslim, never take a non-Muslim as a friend or ally.
  2. If you do this Allah will not help you in any way.
  3. Allah allows an exception to this rule in that you may ally or “befriend” a non-Muslim if you fear them and want to take prudent precautions.
  4. But when you do this remember and fear Allah and his possible punishment.
  5. Allah is the end-all be-all…

Quote - Fake Friend

>> The Muslims of Madina were not the betrayers of their agreements: it was the non-Muslims, mostly some of the Israelites and hardened pagans.

So you say… Them dam Jews and pagans you say…

Qur’an 2:225 (Unintentional, Idle, and Vain Oaths)
>> Qur’an 2:225 It doesn’t say “breaking your oaths”. It says “mistakenly spoken”. Otherwise, there is required penitence and expiation of fasting for breaking promises.

Religion - Islam - Oath on QuranAgain, “breaking your oaths” is my analysis/interpretation, not a quote. So no… those exact words do not appear in this verse of the Qur’an. But strangely enough… neither do yours (“mistakenly spoken”), though you seem to be trying to quote the Qur’an.

Here is what the Quran (2:225) in all six translations on Quran.com actually says:
Sahih International & Muhsin Khan & Pickthall: (All use unintentional): Allah does not impose blame upon you for what is unintentional in your oaths, but He imposes blame upon you for what your hearts have earned. And Allah is Forgiving and Forbearing.
Yusuf Ali: Allah will not call you to account for thoughtlessness in your oaths, but for the intention in your hearts; and He is Oft-forgiving, Most Forbearing.
Shakir: Allah does not call you to account for what is vain in your oaths, but He will call you to account for what your hearts have earned, and Allah is Forgiving, Forbearing.
Dr. Ghali: Allah will not take you to task for idleness in your oaths, but He will take you to task for whatever your hearts have earned; and Allah is Ever-Forgiving, Ever-Forbearing.

You say there is “otherwise” a “penitence” and I’m sure that’s considered a big part of Islam. But I just don’t see it here. I see a lot of pardoning and justifying… “does not impose blame”, “will not call you to account for”, “will not take you to task for”.

    The requirements for this lack of accounting:

  1. Your oath (word) was thoughtless, unintentional, vain or idle… AND
  2. Your heart (intentions) were good towards Islam and Allah. Sure you will be held into “account” if your heart isn’t doing what Allah wants; but what doesn’t fit that bill? (I assume penitence is mentioned somewhere else because it’s not here.)

Thus my original interpretation of “Allah will not hold you to account for breaking your oaths as long as your intention (faithfulness to Allah and Islam) is good.” is right on the money.

Qur’an 66:2 (PO-TAY-TOE… PO-TAH-TOE)
>> Qur’an 66:2 : It doesn’t say dissolution. It says absolution, which again, is that a penitence and expiation are required.

Concept - Pronounce - PotatoeOK, let’s try again.

Sahih International: Allah has already ordained for you [Muslims] the dissolution of your oaths.
Muhsin Khan: Allah has already ordained for you (O men), the dissolution of your oaths.
Pickthall: Allah hath made lawful for you (Muslims) absolution from your oaths (of such a kind), and Allah is your Protector.
Yusuf Ali: Allah has already ordained for you, (O men), the dissolution of your oaths (in some cases)
Shakir: Allah indeed has sanctioned for you the expiation of your oaths
Dr. Ghali: Allah has already ordained for you (The believers) the lawful absolution of your oaths.

Well, much better! At least this time they (the various translations) agreed with you two out of the six times; but still less than “dissolution” which got three votes. Not that it matters. Whichever word is used doesn’t change the meaning that much. Both imply the breaking of the oath, absolution just also implies a little more guilt, blame and penalty free.

dissolution: the undoing or breaking of a bond, tie, union, partnership

absolution: act of absolving; a freeing from blame or guilt; release from consequences, obligations, or penalties

>> In Islam, anyone who dissolves his oaths is known publicly as a liar, and he/she will be reputed as such in this life and punished in the next.

So you say… this verse sure doesn’t say that. It says pretty plainly states that Allah dissolves, absolves, and expires the oaths of Muslims.

Even if “absolution” requires some “penitence” (that’s not really mentioned here); the idea of freeing the Muslim from his oaths is clearly there. All penitence really does is equate it to a parking ticket. Double parked? Break you oaths to non-believers? Make sure you pay that fine! But honestly… I don’t even think it goes that far.

So again, I completely stand by my interpretation of this verse. I’ll let those who read this exchange decide for themselves.

>> So, it’s not a habit of practicing Muslims.

I cannot say… I sincerely hope you are right.

Qur’an 3:54 (A Concession)
>> Qur’an 3:54 – “And they (Israelites and Romans) plotted (to kill Jesus), and Allah also plotted, and Allah is the best of those who plot.” Arabic is huge… (“makar” never used to describe Almighty PLAN…) But, when you translate to English, it needs a deeper study of the language and its contextual usage.

Religion - Islam - Islamic JesusLet me concede a point on this one. The verse 3:54 here does fall within the context of Islamic Jesus being a disciple (I hope I used the right word) of Allah (as told by Muhammad). Saying that verse 54 is the Jews and Romans plotting against Islamic Jesus seems a bit dyslexic (when looking at the “context”) to one who is not learned enough in Arabic I suppose; but then I grant, so is the interpretation of Allah being a great deceiver.

Looking at context… (Qur’an 3:50-56) In the previous verses Islamic Jesus is chastising the apostles/disciples for not believing properly in Allah and them (his disciples) then properly submitting and declaring and groveling etc… Then comes verse 54 and all the scheming that implicitly refers to Jews and Romans… Then I think it’s Islamic Jesus telling the disciples how Allah told Islamic Jesus he will purify him and make those who follow him superior to those who disbelieve (yet another message of superiority and subjugation of non-believers)…

Religion - Islam - Jesus is the Slave of AllahJust for my Christian brethren out there who don’t really know how the Qur’an depicts Jesus and the disciples, here is but a taste (Sahih International):

3:52-53 – But when Jesus felt [persistence in] disbelief from them, he said, “Who are my supporters for [the cause of] Allah?” The disciples said,” We are supporters for Allah. We have believed in Allah and testify that we are Muslims [submitting to Him]. (53) Our Lord, we have believed in what You revealed and have followed the messenger Jesus, so register us among the witnesses [to truth].”

Can you just imagine Peter (the mouth of the apostles) saying such a thing!?

Anyway, back to the concession…

I concede this (Allah the deceiver) may be a loose and incorrect interpretation of this verse. It is no more plausible than the Jews, Romans, Jesus, and Allah all plotting and Allah being the best at it…

>> Arabic is huge

[Puzzled look] … It has more words than other languages? If so, is this a point of pride or something?

>> We would never use the word “makar” in describing the plots of evil people in the same meaning as the Divine Ordainment of the Almighty whose PLAN encompasses all events.

Are you saying that “makar” is or isn’t used here? If it’s not… I would concede the point. But I’m suspicious that you didn’t tell us what word was used.

Or are you saying “makar” means something different depending who it refers to? (The second argument would bring us back to confounding the definition of another duck.) I would expect if Arabic is so huge then another word with the proper meaning could have been found.

But OK… I’ll have to take your word for it and will try to extend that courtesy. I don’t have the time or inclination for that much research.

>> But, when you translate to English, it needs a deeper study of the language and its contextual usage.

Contextual, I just looked at. (see above)

So are you saying I’m never really going to understand Islam unless I study and learn Arabic? And by extension am not qualified to form an opinion or comment on the teachings of the Qur’an unless I learn Arabic first?

That’s convenient. It’s equivalent to saying don’t think for yourself, let me tell you what’s in there and what to think about it. I grant that many religious leaders seek that type of obedience. But it’s a quest for control and power… not truth.

Slandering al-Fakhr al-Razi
>> Your “translation” of al-Fakhr al-Razi’s statement seems a slander.

Religion - Islam - Fakhruddin RaziOK… so provide the non-slandered “translation”. A link… some text… would be just fine.

Tell me what in the text is wrong? Which ideas are not his? The concept that the Muslims should spare the lives of non-Muslims as if it’s their natural position in the world? The idea that non-believers must subjugate themselves with humiliation and servility (a common theme in Islam)?

You yourself say non-Muslims should be “allowed” liberties (assuming a lower status) which says to me you believe Muslims have the authority (via Allah and Islam) to grant (or not if you choose) this liberty. This is not too far off from these quoted statements by Fakhruddin Razi.

I will also add that this concept is the very antithesis of American founding principles; that “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” But that’s another post entirely.

For the record “my translation” and slander of al-Fakhr al-Razi is not mine. I found this exact translation in several places. One of which can be found in Wikipedia article on the jizya. Wikipedia quotes the source as “al-Razi, Fakhr al-Din (1981). “(9:29)”. Tafsir al-Kabir. Dar Al-fiker.”

Religion - Islam - Muslim Hissy FitI can’t imagine the “translation” is that far off since it is found in the Wikipedia. Not that Wikipedia is all that accurate, but it strikes me as an organization very susceptible to political correctness. I suspect that any mistranslation or misquote within the article would have resulted in Muslim hissy-fits by now and thus capitulation by Wikipedia. Perhaps, MustafaHoward, you might want to direct this complaint to Wikipedia. I suspect they would be much more responsive to bullying via political correctness than I am.

Back to the actual words of al-Fakhr al-Razi. I assume this is his interpretation of Qur’an 9:29 which says (Sahih International) “Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture – [fight] until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled.”

Ahhhhh…. it sounds so much more reasonable when you get it straight from the source…

>> Muslims are taxed in Islam. Americans are taxed in America. People are taxed everywhere. Jizya is a tax, not an “extortion”.

Government - IRS - TaxesAmericans taxed in America is a straw man argument and nothing to do with this debate. IF America taxed Muslims differently from others, it would be… but that’s not the case.

Muslim nations taxing via Islam. It’s their business… and again a straw man argument.

Where jizya IS relevant to this post is that Muslim clerics have declared western welfare and social programs a form of jizya that Muslims are entitled to and should take advantage of; and certain recent Muslim terrorists have indeed done that. You and I seem agree that this is an inaccurate interpretation of the Qur’an definition and purpose of the jizya. Yet you attack the messenger (me) as if I had come up with the idea. It’s your guys who are espousing this crap; but you don’t address that. You just muddle the issue by droning on the “traditional” definition of a duck (jizya).

Admittedly, I did call jizya “Islamic sanctioned extortion of subjugated peoples”. And… I stand by that. MustafaHoward tells me it’s not extortion based on the “traditional” definition in the Qur’an. My response is that the “traditional” definition in the Qur’an has rarely (if ever) been practiced. The words in the Qur’an just give religious, legal, and conscientious cover to the extorter.

In practice jizya is like a Chicago shake down where a business buys insurance (also called protection) from the mob. This is to ensure their establishment doesn’t burn to the ground. The guys selling the protection are the ones who will burn it to the ground if the businessman (enjoying the liberty and protection) doesn’t pay; and all parties involved know that. Jizya works on the same concept. The only difference… words in a book that pretend otherwise.

>> Again, they were allowed their liberties and enjoyed the protections of the Muslims.

Religion - Islam - Jizya - SubjugateI just love your use of the word “allowed” here… [groveling]… oh thank you, thank you, thank you for this privilege…

As for the “traditional” idea of a non-Muslim receiving/enjoying “protection” (from outside aggressors) from Muslim “benefactors” (state or people)? That would assume they manage to somehow survive their Muslim “benefactors” in the first place. The very concept would be laughable if not for the seriousness of the life and death struggles these people must endure.

I have never seen any evidence of either liberties or protections. The actions of Muslim nations around the world today and their persecution of non-Muslims speak louder than anything positive that might be found in the Qur’an. And the inaction of “moderate” Muslims to right these wrongs speaks even louder.

Carrying the logic just a little further, if it (protection) doesn’t really exists today despite all the claims otherwise, who in their right mind would believe it ever existed?

Political - Liberal - Coexist

>> In fact, the earliest Muslims and those who followed enjoyed peaceful coexistence with those of other religions.

Obviously I’m skeptical to put it mildly. Statements like this are just politically correct propaganda to promote the false idea of the “religion of peace”.

But give it try. Give me an unbiased (non-Muslim, first-hand preferably) account of the “peaceful coexistence” and “protection” enjoyed by other religions living in a Muslim nation.

>> So, what has changed? I’ll leave that for you to either research on your own, or you can ask my opinion if you like.

[Huge belly laugh!] Nothing! [More laughing] 1400 Years! And NOTHING has changed! Your original premise that things were ever substantially any different than today is… wrong!

The “traditional” practice of jizya, the enjoyment of merciful rights and protection, the peaceful coexistence, the singing of “We Are the World”… NEVER EXISTED! And the whole idea that it did is, again, nothing but propaganda from Islamist and their useful idiots.

Just one example of this… we (the United States) have had to deal with this crap off and on, off and on for our entire history. Beginning with the Barbary Wars in the late 17 and early 1800s we were afforded the honor of paying ransom and tribute (also known as extortion) as our ships were plundered and our citizens killed and enslaved by Muslims. Of course the payments were never enough; and as required in dealing with any bully and/or tyrant we eventually just had to build a big enough navy to kick their collective asses to get it to stop.

200+ years ago? Today? What has changed? Not a dam thing!

History - Thomas Jefferson - Barbary Pirates

Your opinion? Is based on a false premise that things were ever different from today. But please suit yourself if you feel the need to share it. Since I approved your original comment it should post just fine.

>> I thoroughly appreciate your disgust with and anger with the 2 mis-guided men who committed the multiple murder in Boston. They have gone now to meet their Maker, Who will deal with them most appropriately.

Really glad to hear those words! Got any actions to back them up…?

But at least on the words we agree! Though not (of course) on the Maker they will meet.

>> And if you don’t like Islam, there is no compulsion in Religion.

Oh how I wish that were true! But no… We don’t agree. That (non-compulsion) generally applies for pretty well every other religion I know of… except Islam. My impression of Islam is that Muhammad and/or Allah pretty well DO consider it compulsory; as do many of Islam’s followers. Spread Islam by word or sword… Convert or die… (or at least subjugate and pay jizya for a time).

Religion - Islam - Allah or the BladeQuran (9:5) (Sahih International)
And when the sacred months have passed, then kill the polytheists [as in those who believe in the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit to you Christians reading this] wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they should repent, establish prayer, and give zakah, (meaning convert to Islam and pay Islamic taxes) let them [go] on their way. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful. [Wow… thanks Allah]

Non-Compulsory my ass. I guess when you consider death as a valid option mercifully afforded the un-believer then sure… you can stick with the non-compulsory argument.

Sure some Muslims don’t take it that far and that’s great. I guess we should be grateful even. But enough do take it that far that we still (after centuries) have the radical Islamic problems we have today. And instead of cleaning up their mess in their own house (faith)… “moderate” Muslims STILL leave it for us infidels to deal with.

>> What I would ask is that you show respect to Muslim human beings and our Holy Books by not mistranslating them.

Concept - Respect - EarnedNO man, nor holy book, is entitled to my respect. EVERY man and his beliefs (espoused in holy books) ARE entitled to opportunities to EARN that respect. And I freely and gladly extend that courtesy.

Islam, Muslims? How many opportunities do you need before you clean up the radical mess in your own house (faith)? How many of our people (non-Muslims) must pay the price for the anarchy in your religion before YOU deal with it? Every courtesy has been extended AND we’re still waiting! Respect!? Do us a favor! Don’t just expect it. Don’t just demand it! Do something to Earn it!

Even more than the sound of guns, and bombs, and crashing jets; the inaction from “moderate” Muslims is deafening!

Again, please try and forgive my bluntness; but I’m really sick of this crap! And those who should be fixing the problem are sitting on their hands; and sometimes, SOMETIMES, gather the courage to utter WORDS like “I thoroughly appreciate your disgust with and anger with… [Fill in Muslim atrocity Here].

And as for my “mistranslating”; I’ve presented my case stating that I believe my track record is just fine in that regard. I’ll let those who read this blog decide for themselves.

>> Take Care.

Thank You… You too.

Read Full Post »

A great video on the political coverup by the Obama Administration on the Libyan terrorist attack.

Obama is in way over his head. We have a “community organizer” trying to deal with barbarians at the gate.

We can’t afford 4 more years of THIS.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »