McLovin... learn how to read if you are going to comment here. I didn't call Muslims "heathens" I was speaking of the 19 islamofascists and them thinking that killing thousands of innocents is the will of a god they are heathens... They are misbegotten son's of Mohammad.
Sheesh, you go a long way to misinterpret things... oh, wait, you are a liberal, you can't help yourself. read the post again and see what it says... not what you THINK it says.
Posted by: GM Roper at Thursday, April 17 2008 06:36 AM (S60yG)
Mclovin, just so you know I'm not blowing smoke, allow me to enlighten you:
O.E. hæðen "not Christian or Jewish," merged with O.N. heiðinn. Historically assumed to be from Goth. haiþno "gentile, heathen woman," used by Ulfilas in the first translation of the Bible into a Gmc. language (cf. Mark 7:26, for "Greek"); if so it could be a derivative of Goth. haiþi "dwelling on the heath," but this sense is not recorded. It may have been chosen on model of L. paganus (see pagan), or for resemblance to Gk. ethne (see gentile), or may in fact be a borrowing of that word, perhaps via Armenian hethanos. Like other words for exclusively Christian ideas (e.g. church) it would have come first into Gothic, then spread to other Gmc. languages.
the original meaning DID NOT include those who are Muslims. That was a later artifact and possibly recently enough to be a PC appendage.
You really ought to invest in a classical education McLovin, you are soooooo behind.
Posted by: GM Roper at Thursday, April 17 2008 06:49 AM (S60yG)
6
It is a fine feeling to get a lot of information about the cultural.
This really helps everyone a lot to meet our desired needs. Thanks for
giving the perfect tips to others. crocodile
birkin
Liberals don't like profiling to detect potential terrorist threats. But, just as a game, let's see if you can guess the omitted part of the headline below based upon your personal perception.
Okay, now click on the article link to see how you did! Review the headline and the images of terrorists.
Did you guess "Muslims?" If so, consider yourself a racist and on the wrong side according to standards of liberals, the ACLU, Amnesty International, and Democrats--pretty much all the same. Didn't you know that Islam is the "religion of peace?"
Now, cleanse your mind of bigotry and take the test on the next page by clicking on "more." We believe in second chances.
The biggest difference between American right-wingers and typical Americans is that right-wingers lack the math gene. Whether it's the economy or geopolitics, their policies always either ignore the math or make mathematically impossible assertions.
So it is with Ann Coulter who makes the ludicrous claim that one has a 100 percent chance of being hijacked by Arabs. Even if her claim that all successful hijackings were Arabs, which simply isn't true, the math would still be off.
And then there's GM. To demonstrate an alleged pro-Muslim bias, he concocts a "test" that excludes every example of violence EXCEPT those commited by Muslims. In his mind, that's somehow evidence, because HE DIDN"T DO THE MATH.
You like quizzes, GM, so here's one for you:
1. What is the ratio of violent deaths committed by Muslims to those committed by non-Muslims in the past 10 years, the past 20 years and the past 100 years?
Posted by: McLovin at Friday, April 04 2008 05:33 PM (eN5/Z)
Mac, I've seen other tests which include violence of other types by other groups, and the situations have no relevance to the subject of today's terrorism. You're like those who pretended that the Sicilians didn't have a Mafia because you didn't want to offend the Italians.
Of course, as a non-humorous liberal, you can't understand that Coulter's comment was a humorous statement to make a point rather than a a fact to be strictly interpreted. However, I don't remember terrorists other than Arab Muslim extremists who have hijacked American jets lately.
Posted by: Woody at Friday, April 04 2008 05:49 PM (Eb/8J)
3
McLovin, are you reading disabled? You need to learn the difference between my posts and one authored by woody. Neither one of us mind taking your silly little posts apart, but at least you could get your facts straight.
Posted by: GM Roper at Friday, April 04 2008 06:08 PM (S60yG)
There is this dude called Mookie al-Sadsack, whoops, silly me, his name is Muqtada al-Sadr who runs something called the Mahdi Army. Well, when he's not hiding in Iran he's running it. Well, maybe not running it, but he started it.
He's a dimwitted looking dude too with really bad teeth, kinda reminds me of a bully I once knew but with whiskers.
At any rate, Mookie as he is known to the terrorist set has a really bad case of body odor, perhaps it emanates from his teethies, perhaps because he doesn't bathe very often, or perhaps because I'm lying and he smells like linen dried in sunshine. At any rate, there have been several occasions when Mookie has attempted to influence the government of Iraq and made a really bad show of it. Once, he thought he had enough strength to take on the American Military and the burgeoning Iraqi Military but got his ass kicked and ended up telling his "army" to stand down and he fled to Iran.
More recently, he declared a moratorium on fighting (mostly so his dudes and dudettes wouldn't get their asses kicked so bad but now the moratorium seems to be about up and the so called penis worshiping Mahdi Army is trying to take over again in Basra and other localities.
The AP needs to be held to count here..these are staged pictures and they're designed to do what again? Real fire fights and battles aren't recorded in nice, neat pretty pictures. In fact we see very few real battles being photographed and there's a reason for that- the photographers run off scared. And the enemies always die.
Posted by: Raven at Sunday, March 30 2008 05:58 PM (WRyjt)
1
That reminds me of an anecdote I heard some years ago about a general suggesting we kill some pigs and spread them around a Taliban camp. The substance of that anecdote may be mangled - I apologize - but it's a good idea in some sense of the word, no?
Posted by: HannahJ at Saturday, March 15 2008 04:59 PM (VJO3P)
2
Now that's a great lookin' sandwich. Did you make it?
Posted by: Obi's Sister at Saturday, March 15 2008 05:16 PM (W6KLU)
3
I specialize in toasted peanut butter and jelly sandwiches.
Posted by: Woody at Saturday, March 15 2008 09:08 PM (Eb/8J)
C.A.I.R. and the IRS: This is Too Too Delicious
My friend Always On Watch has a great post up regarding CAIR's Loss of their 501(c)(4) Status. Read it and chuckle!
Indonesia, home to the world's largest Muslim population, isn't an Arab country. Nor is Iran, nor Afghanistan, nor Nigeria.
Posted by: McLovin at Tuesday, February 19 2008 12:49 AM (UvT8A)
3
Mac, from where do you think that Islamic money for terrorism and propaganda comes? Nigeria, where the main product is email scams against Americans? No, it comes form the oil producing states, with Iran being close enough to them for any common sense person to see rather than pick at.
Posted by: Woody at Tuesday, February 19 2008 09:01 AM (Eb/8J)
But you do make an excellent point, if unwittingly.
The Islamic world is geographically and ethnically diverse and only a tiny portion of it is involved in any way in terrorism.
Posted by: McLovin at Tuesday, February 19 2008 03:27 PM (eN5/Z)
5
I don't know a lot about the 501(c)4 but do know about the 501(c)3 they fell back on. I had the unpleasant task of obtaining one of these from scratch. That is the one that doesn't allow any involvement in politics or you lose it. Wonder how long it will be before CAIR is a tax paying organization as it should be. Of course they support the left wing, aka democrats, so the rules may be different.
Posted by: Scrapiron at Tuesday, February 19 2008 11:32 PM (+eO2c)
Mac: The Islamic world is geographically and ethnically diverse and only a tiny portion of it is involved in any way in terrorism.
Hey, Mac, tell me about the vast majority of the Islamic world that condemns beheadings, hanging of homosexuals, murdering of daughters and women who don't conform, suicide bombings, and mass murder of non-Muslims. Funny, I don't see them and I don't see CAIR on that list of opponents, either.
Posted by: Woody at Thursday, February 21 2008 09:26 AM (Eb/8J)
Woody, Thanks for being honest in admitting that your views on Islam are based on ignorance.
You claim that "you don't see" the majority of Muslims who oppose the acts of the radical fundamentalists in their midst.
So it's clear your view is based on what you DON'T KNOW.
Nice one, Woody.
I suggest you try limiting your views to what you do know.
Posted by: McLovin at Thursday, February 21 2008 04:09 PM (eN5/Z)
8
mclovin, you are, quite simply, about as smart as a big mac, so I guess you have a well chosen name.
If you can show us those huge swaths of mythical moderate muslims that are protesting against their more *extreme* (winkwink) brethren we gladly have a look and change opinions.
........
Waiting......
.............
Still waiting........
So where are all these mythical moderates? Oh wait..I know...they've gone to the highlands of Scotland for the annual Haggis Hunt, right? Or maybe they're hunting snipes in the tropical swamps of northern montana?
Face it mcmoron, your moderate muslims are as rare as jamaican bobsledders.......and just as effective....
Posted by: kender at Thursday, February 21 2008 05:02 PM (lRIQx)
9
Oh looky here. McLovin's really lovin GM's site these days.
The worlds major terror attacks have been committed by Muslims. Even though not all Muslims are terrorists.
Remember that. It only takes, say, 9 or 10 to kill 3000 people in a two hour span.
CAIR choses to defend those who have been charged with terrorist activity or fund raising for said groups. CAIR has a shady background at best- go do some research LovinSpoonful, without sippin your Kool Aid. You might learn something.
Posted by: Raven at Thursday, February 21 2008 05:05 PM (Wywjx)
I do love this blog, because it offers a fabulous exposition of the third-grade flaws in wingnut thinking.
For example, now we have Kender admitting that his view is based on what he ISN'T aware of rather than what he IS aware of.
So his claim that moderate Muslims are rare isn't based on any evidence about their existence, but on his personal lament that no one has chosen to show him that moderate Muslims are protesting the activities of radicals.
I suggest as a very reasonable starting point: ``The Crisis of Islam'' by Bernard Lewis.
Lewis is a very conservative scholar of Middle Eastern studies who has advised the Reagan, Clinton and Bush administrations. I don't agree with his political views at all, but I take his reporting on the Middle East as factual, because the substance of it is obvious.
He gives great incite into the struggles between moderates and radicals within Islam. You guys should give it a read...
Posted by: McLovin at Thursday, February 21 2008 07:47 PM (UvT8A)
12
mclovin, of course there is a crisis in islam. It's holy book says take over the world by force if need be, subjugate women and kill infidels. That isn't the point. And someone has written a book about this crisis. And that isn't the point. The point is can you show me (or anyone else) these mythical moderates standing around with signs that say stuff like;
"Killing infidels is against the Koran" or "Jihadists are hijacking our religion and are apostates in the eyes of Allah"?
Can you do that mcmoron? I don't think you can.....You step up in here talkin smack, lil boy, and then come back up in this here beatch and ignore the point while saying we're juvenile?
Looky here poppin fresh, if you can't address the issue keep your lil behind in big momma's basement and holler for some more mt. dew and cheetoes and leave the grown up talk to us actual grownups, got it stewie?
Posted by: kender at Thursday, February 21 2008 08:58 PM (lRIQx)
Kender, I'm flattered that you would want to rely exclusively on me to guide you to knowledge that is so readily available to anyone with Google and three minutes' free time.
I actually posted an extensive listing of Muslim leaders from the clergy, academia, politics and the media condemning terrorism and stating that it clearly violates the teachings found in the Koran.
That post is in moderation and it will be up to GM whether to allow it into the discussion. In case he decides not to or for some technological reason can't, here's the link to a 68 page report by CAIR detailing condemnations by moderate Muslim leaders worldwide of terrorism and of specific attacks.
That Kender is so confident in asserting that moderate Muslim's don't exist, when the evidence that they are a majority is overwhelming, says a lot about the low quality of information available within the conservative mainstream media.
Posted by: McLovin at Thursday, February 21 2008 09:29 PM (UvT8A)
15
mcmoron, there is a large difference between stating one is against muslim extremist and actually standing up toe to toe against them in the street. If these moderates were so prevalent and so against these muslim jihadists you'd think you'd see them protesting in the street against these yoyo's.
If you wander to just about any protest here in the states you will invariably find two sets of protesters, one for and one against. When you have muslims in the streets of the U.S. protesting whatever you will see AMERICANS, usually white, protesting them, but you won't see a bunch of "moderate muslims" standing against them.....outside of this country you don't even hear of anyone standing against them in their countries.
These moderates DO NOT EXIST, because by the Koran if they are moderate they are apostates.
One cannot be a "moderate" muslim. One either adheres to the Koran or one is not a true muslim. Why can't you understand this?
Do I need to write in in crayon?
Posted by: kender at Thursday, February 21 2008 10:02 PM (lRIQx)
16
BTW mcmoron, have you heard of "taqqiyah?" That means in islam it is ok to lie to further islam. You expect me to take anything CAIR has to say at face value? This is the group that is an unindicted (look it up) co-conspirator in a terrorism financing case. This is the group that had a founding member state that islam was not in America to be equal, but to be above all others. (I am paraphrasing) and that the koran should be the only rule of law in the land.
What flavor of kool aid are you drinking today? Is it Stupid Blue or Moronic Orange or maybe Idiotic Red?
Posted by: kender at Thursday, February 21 2008 10:07 PM (lRIQx)
Ahh, Islam, the religion of peace. And, look how many people of that faith stand up for what's right and oppose what is taught to their kids. What, where?
"A teacher yesterday claimed he was sacked from an Islamic school after complaining about books in which Christians were called 'pigs'. Colin Cook, 58, alleged five-year-olds were taught from the texts that Jews were "monkeys" ...Mr Cook told the jobs tribunal yesterday that pupils at the school in Acton, West London, praised 9/11."
Posted by: Woody at Friday, February 22 2008 08:17 AM (Eb/8J)
So in order to meet Kender's definition of "moderate" Muslims have to be out in the street protesting against the protests of radicals.
Using Kender's logic, in order to believe that moderate Christians exist, we need to see them out there protesting against the murder of abortion doctors. And if they aren't out there, the must not exist.
Here's the deal Kender, moderate Muslims owe no one any apologies for what extremists do in Islams name.
Just as you, as a rightist, don't need to apologize for what Timothy McVeigh did.
Moderate Muslims, like everyone else, can only be judged by their own behavior, not the behavior of extremists.
GM's Web site does a public service by exposing the thinking of people like Kender to the disinfectant of logic.
Posted by: McLovin at Friday, February 22 2008 08:23 AM (eN5/Z)
Just how many Christians are out there murdering abortion doctors Mac? When was the last one? How many have there been? Are you aware of them personally, or do you just buy into these claims as daily occurrences?
And, if you went to church, you would hear ministers preaching the Ten Commandments and condemning murder--which includes abortion, by the way. You've picked on the wrong cause, because the record of murdered abortionists is slim and the condemnation far exceeded the crime.
But, it's a regular occurrence for Muslims to murder the innocent and for the clergy to be silent. The extremists, as you call them, have been calling the shots for their religion. There are no moderates if the moderates stand by silently while they let others do their biding. It's tacit approval.
Contrast what the New Testament preaches vs. the Koran, if you want to know the real goals of the faiths. One wants serve and to win converts while the other wants to literally destroy those of other faiths.
Also, McVeigh was "not one of ours." He didn't serve Christianity or conservative causes. He was a nut. So, quit trying to push him on us.
Did you condemn the Uni-bomber?
Mac, your arguments are really weak and not based on total honesty or logic.
Posted by: Woody at Friday, February 22 2008 10:39 AM (Eb/8J)
If Woody and Kender were even paying attention, they'd know that moderate Muslims are not only the biggest, most important enemies of radical Islam, they are also by far its biggest victims.
If there there were no moderate Muslims, the bin Ladenists would not have focused their attacks first and foremost on fellow Muslims.
The reality is that the radicals within Islam are a tiny minority, which is why terrorism is the only viable strategy for them. They cannot win either by conventional military means or, certainly, via democracy, so they have no choice but to pursue terrorism or disappear from public view.
If all Muslims supported terrorism, the bin Ladenist would focus most of their efforts on attacking the rest of the world. But we know that's not the case, though it does appear people like Woody and Kender are in deep denial on this.
In Egypt, the largest Arab country and the intellectual birthplace of Islamic extremism, the Brotherhood of Islam is banned. In Algeria, the government brutally suppresses Islamic radicals after the military took over the government following the victory of Islamic fundamentalists in a democratic election.
In Syria, the government slaughtered many thousands of Islamic radicals who had attempted an uprising and brutally supresses the mullahs to this day.
In Saudi Arabia, the government brutally suppresses al Qaeda, for the simple reason that al Qaeda has made the destruction of the Saudi monarchy its number one priority. As a matter of political survival, the monarchy does carry out a kind of diplomacy with the radicals, much in the way the U.S. and every country seeks to undermine its opponents through those same means. And of course there are Islamic radicals within the Saudi monarchy, just as many countries inevitably include a faction of radicals within its power structure.
The evidence is overwhelming that the primary battle within Islam is between moderates and radicals.
Bin Laden insists his nihilistic interpretation of Islam is the correct one, while the vast majority of Muslim clerics, scholars, politicians and men and women in the streets disagree.
It pretty much says it all that right wingnuts insist that bin Laden's interpretation of Islam is the correct one. Some, like Kender and Woody, make the even more preposterous assertion that moderate Muslims do not exist.
Given that the existence of moderate Muslims, both as bulwarks against radical Islam and as its primary victims, we have no choice but to examine the motives of people like Kendar and Woody.
When we do, we can see that they are in desperate need of a powerful evil enemy, because they know that without that, their political position cannot be sustained. It was the same during the Cold War. Right wingnuts droned on and on and on about how powerful and ruthless and threatening communism was--right up until the Soviet Union disintegrated without a shot being fired by its Cold War enemies. Turns out, Soviet communism collapsed under its own contradictions. It was rejected by its own people.
Radical Islam, by contrast, is by good measure even less appealing than communism ever was. We can't really say radical Islam is doomed to failure because it has already failed so dramatically.
The only reason we care at all about radical Islam is that the technology to wage massive terrorism is now widespread enough to make anyone who cares to use it a threat. In other words, even a tiny, divided, poorly funded, widely reviled, suicidal band of fake religious gangsters can threaten a superpower.
The only way to contain and defeat radical Islam is to support and expand moderate Islam. Those who insist on the outrageous illusion that moderate Islam doesn't exist and, even, that the radical interpretation of the Koran is the correct one are bin Laden's most effective allies in his nonetheless hopeless war on sanity.
Posted by: McLovin at Friday, February 22 2008 07:04 PM (eN5/Z)
Mac: "...we have no choice but to examine the motives of people like Kendar and Woody."
Good luck. You'll have to make up stories like The NY Times to claim anything sinister. The difference between you and people like Kender and myself is that we're willing to admit the real problem, political correctness be damned, while you dance around and try to find phony answers so as to not offend those who would like to kill us.
Also, President Reagan forced the end of Soviet Communism. I didn't expect you to give him credit.
Posted by: Woody at Friday, February 22 2008 07:29 PM (Eb/8J)
History shows that the Soviet Union's people rejected communism on their own. The rise of Gorbachev, glasnost and perestroika were internal political phenomena--they had almost nothing to do with Reagan's spending billions on space weapons, or trading arms for hostages in Iran, or funding the Islamic extremists in Afghanistan or invading Grenada.
Rather, U.S. Cold War military aggression prolonged the Soviet Empire's collapse by giving its repressive style of government a legitimacy it would otherwise lack. The Soviets were able to fool a lot of third-world people only because those people had suffered under U.S. military aggression and were willing to ally with the Soviets as their only way to fight back.
It's no accident that the first countries to throw off communism were those in which the U.S. had not intervened militarily and had, for the most part, left alone: Poland, Czechoslovakia and the rest of Eastern Europe.
For the same reasons, it is no accident that all four of the remaining Soviet-style communist countries: Vietnam, Laos, North Korea, and Cuba were subjected to various degrees of Iraq-style ''bomb them into democracy'' military adventures by the U.S.
The historical pattern is clear: where the U.S. used military force to confront communism, communism took its deepest roots and indeed remains. Where the U.S. let communism take its natural course, the people rejected it on their own and, having the benefit of civil and public infrastructure not destroyed in war, have been able to build strong democracies.
One simple point of human psychology that American militarists always miss is that all people have pride and quite naturally have pride in their country, even when they may despise and fear their government.
And when someone, anyone, comes around and starts destroying the village to save the village, the villagers are quite naturally going to turn against them.
That's the way it always has been and always will be.
Every poll has shown the majority of Iraqis want the U.S. out. Why is no mystery at all: they want to control their own country. However much they might have despised Saddam, when someone comes into their village or town or city and starts killing their uncles and brothers and mothers, it is quite natural for them to fight back, even if the killing is being done as part of bigger vision for peace, no matter how idealistic that bigger vision may be.
Posted by: McLovin at Saturday, February 23 2008 02:38 AM (eN5/Z)
23
Since no one is commenting on the initial post, I'm closing comments down on this thread.
Posted by: GM Roper at Saturday, February 23 2008 03:17 AM (S60yG)
Every once in a while a headline reaches out and grabs you by the shorts. Sometimes because it is so well written it is almost the entire story, sometime because it is just so funny and / or incredulous; "Dewey Wins!" anyone? This headline this morning however almost knocked my socks off.
Tail wagging the dog I guess. Wonder if Mubarak feels marginalized by this rabid political/terrorist entity he and the other Arab leaders have created and supported?
Posted at 08:50 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 87 words, total size 1 kb.
This Little Piggy Went To Market: The cost of capitulation
This Little Pig went to Market
This Little Pig stayed home
This Little Pig had roasted corn
This Little Pig had none
And This Little Pig went weeweewee, all the way home.
So goes the children's rhyme as the dad pulled on each toe and then tickled the foot with the last little piggy. Much to the delight of little children everywhere, if not in the tickling of the foot, then in the anticipation of the d'enouement!
Perhaps more famous is the story of the three little pigs and the big bad wolf who huffed and he puffed and he blew down the houses made of straw and sticks of two of the little pigs and was foiled by the stone/brick home of the wise, perhaps older, and better financed third little pig.
Other pigs who have achieved fame and star quality lives include Looney Tunes Porky, and most certainly
Christopher Robbins friend Piglet
and the ubiquitous Piggy Bank.
One of my favorite eateries as a youth visiting my grand parent's in San Antonio was the PigStand, a drive-in, always crowded, always smelling of Bar-B-Qued pork and serving Bar-B-Qued pork sandwiches to die for.
Which brings us to a post by my friend Always on Watch in which she decries the blindsiding of the story of the Three Little Pigs for an award, because it might offend Muslims or Asians (which is Brit-speak for Muslims). Well, golly Molly, what is going on here?
We have the "Human Rights Commission" in Canada investigating a magazine publisher for publishing copies of the Mohammad Cartoons. Remember them, those Danish Drawings that caused riots all over the world because MoHAMmad had been made fun of? And that marvelous Mark Steyn daring to print some phrases that might disturb the little darlin's. One of our favorite commenter's Pat Condell had something to say about that:
Pork products have been pulled from school lunches because Muslims might be offended. Banks have stopped handing out Piggy Banks to children because some Muslim might be offended. Muslims rioted because a teacher allowed a class of Muslim students to choose a name for the class mascot a Teddy Bear and the students chose Mohammad. The rioters wanted her executed for that effrontery.
All of this hoopla will cost a great deal. It will cost you the freedom to say what you want because someone else might take offense at your words. It will cost you the freedom to eat what you want because someone else doesn't eat the same thing. It will cost you the freedom to publish what you want, because someone might take offense reading your publication.
I'm willing to put $20.00 (not much, but all I can afford) up if someone can prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that some governmental agency required a school or other publicly funded institution to pull pork from the menu so as not to offend Seventh Day Adventists or Jews who also have religious proscriptions against eating pork.
All this has a price and the price of this constant capitulation to the demands of Islamofascists is the loss of freedom. Whether it be the loss of freedom to say or print something, the loss of freedom to choose what you wish to eat for meals or the loss of freedom to worship as you please. What's that you say? This isn't about freedom of worship? Nonsense, when one freedom goes down the tube, it doesn't take much for the rest of them to slide away also.
And why are we doing this (mostly) to ourselves for not standing up united and saying "Bull Shit!" Is it because the strictures of political correctness and multiculturalism demands it? Is it because at bedrock all cultures are equivalent and we MUST make accommodations for all that come to our various nations? Is it because...
Truth be known, it is strictly and solely because other groups don't riot and demand things that they are not willing to do on their own. When was the last time you saw a Muslim nation demand that Saudi Arabia allow Christian or Jewish worship in Saudi Arabia, let alone the building of a Christian Church or Jewish Temple? When is the last time that you saw a mainstream Muslim organization such as say C.A.I.R. demand that Muslim Imams stop saying vile things about Christians and Jews? When is the last time you saw huge Muslim demonstrations against honor killings or female genital mutilation?
What? You haven't? Imagine that! And yet we are being hounded to make allowances for Muslims, to drop cultural props (piggy banks for Pete's Sake) because someone might be offended. Well, I really don't give a damn if someone is offended by something I hold dear or say, or print, or publish, or think. When a backward culture which essentially hasn't moved forward since the 8th Century can demand allowances solely on the basis of getting upset and rioting can dictate the mores and practices of much more advanced cultures than something is seriously wrong here.
In Canada and in some places in the United States Muslims are demanding the right to institute Shari'a law to deal with Muslim issues. How stupid is that? To subvert the existing laws of a country so that laws based on the ramblings of a 7th century "prophet." And yet, there are actually intellects that wonder if this would be an OK thing for us to do. I submit that it is not. I submit that if I move to another country it is my job, my obligation to assimilate to the extent that I don't smother my own identity. Could I live under German law? Of Course. How about Russian, Mexican, Bolivian, Saudi laws? You bet, as long as that is something I choose to do. But I don't have the right to move to Germany, Russia, Mexico, Bolivia or Saudi Arabia and demand that they change their culture and laws to suit ME! What is it about that concept that the PC'ers and Multi-Culti's don't understand?
Not too many months ago, my beloved and I went on a little mini-vacation to Fredricksburg, Texas where we supped on fine German Cooking, wandered around a town admiring the influence of the German settlers that founded the town. But despite the German flavor of the town, the laws being enforced were American. The allegiance was to Texas and the United States. Police cars were marked Police, not Polizei. In Paris, Texas the language is not French nor are the laws. In Neiderland, Texas the customs are pure Texas, not Dutch. My point, of course, is that we cannot long survive as a people if we give up the right to decide what being part of the people means. Any modern (and I emphasize the word modern) country with fairly liberal immigration policies and practices, regardless of what the "official" policy might be, cannot long stand without assimilation of its immigrants.
The rapid inflow of Muslims into countries such as the United States, England, Canada, Germany, Denmark, the Netherlands, and France has produced an anti-immigrant backlash in many corners. This is a shame, Canada and the United States were founded on the idea of immigration and assimilation into a new peoples. Indeed, ethnic immigration produced "ghettos" of immigrants for a generation or two. Italians banded together in Little Italy in New York. Germans banded together in places like St. Louis, Mo. and Fredricksburg, Tx. But in each case, the majority of those individuals adopted their new country with a patriotism seldom seen in family's on the scene for years and years and years. Japanese and Italian enlistment into the US Armed Forces in WWII proved a boon both to the republic and its military force, but also helped further the absorption of people into the fabric of America.
And this we are being asked to give up to accommodate a backwards culture that thinks stoning to death is an apt punishment for adultery, that hanging is OK for the crime of being gay. What barbarity this be!
So, in honor of all those who cannot do so because of some fat headed bureaucrat or multi-culti idiot I'll dine on the following:
Certain Muslims seek out the opportunity to be offended. In other words, they are opportunists. And the dhimmis of the West cave into these bullies. Cowardice? Political correctness? Fear of hurting the self-esteem of these whining Muslims? All of those reasons, I think.
In the process of kowtowing to these bullies, the West is voluntarily giving up our freedoms.
I tell you this....I'm going to be mighty offended if some hijab-wearing muslima refuses to ring up my bacon or ham. And I'll make my complaints and my sense of umbrage heard far and wide. You can count on me to cause a scene. Maybe I'll get into trouble for doing so, but there you have it.
Pork rules! Bacon, ham, and pork loin roasts, that is.
Posted by: Always On Watch at Saturday, January 26 2008 04:09 PM (bYbHX)
2
Great post GMann. And very timely, with good stuff about how foreign culture has come to the US and become part of the US while keeping their own "culture". Why the Muslims can't seem to do this-- we see here, is because some of US allow excuses and worry about offending. Like you, I say
BULLSHIT
to that.
May the Ham and Bacon and Sausages Be With You.
Posted by: Raven at Saturday, January 26 2008 06:21 PM (gU2pl)
3
GM dear... Amen to the whole thing!!! I am personally offended by these peoples refusal to be PC with me! In fact, I think maybe, even if it goes against the grain, the next time I am offended by what some Imam has to say about my faith, I'm going to get a lawyer and sue them over the offense. You know, my father's family is of German / English stock. My grandmother cooked in German style, but she spoke and wrote English and said the pledge and allowed other people to practice their traditions, in their ways without offense. Where's the protest lines for our culture and way of life... I want to sign up for "picket duty" for Freedom!
Posted by: HoosierArmyMom at Monday, January 28 2008 03:43 PM (f9Dpx)
4
OK, most of what you say is fine, though it may be considered offensive
by some. Your main points on the need for assimilation and taking PC to
an extreme are valid. Where I have a problem (of course, it's MY
problem
is towards the end where you declared you were going to eat
some meat (I imagine it's pork? it doesn't matter Instead, why
not find other ways to register your protest? Let the poor animal live
- or better yet, let the poor animal never be raised in cramped
conditions before being slaughtered. Consider being a vegan or a
vegetarian for a while. I hope you don't treat this as spam
Posted by: Alcyon at Monday, April 14 2008 10:50 PM (uBkQL)
Alcyon, I won't treat your comment as spam. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on the advisability of eating meat. On the other hand, my wife was raised as a 7th day Adventist and was a vegan till she left college...
Posted by: GM Roper at Tuesday, April 15 2008 06:12 AM (S60yG)
Stop the Memorial Blogburst: Support Tom Tancredo’s call to scrap the crescent memorial
Support Tom Tancredo’s call to scrap the crescent memorial
The Park Service has a history of keeping the Secretary of the Interior in the dark about the decisions it makes in his name. It is likely that Secretary Dirk Kempthorne has never been told about the many warnings of Islamic symbolism in the planned Flight 93 Memorial. Please help bring Dirk into the loop by pasting the following letter (or one of your own) into an email for him. Text below the dotted line:
—————————————————
Dear Secretary Kempthorne:
Please heed Congressman Tom Tancredo’s call to completely scrap the present design for the Flight 93 Memorial. The original Crescent of Embrace design would have planted a bare naked crescent and star flag on the crash site:
The memorial plaza that sits roughly in the position of the star on an Islamic flag marks the crash site. (Click pics for larger images.)
All the redesign did was add some trees to the west of the original crescent:
Aside from the re-coloring of the site-plan image, the only actual change in the design is the additional arc of trees to the rear of a person facing into the original crescent.
The Park Service promised Congressman Tancredo in 2005 that Islamic iconography would be removed from the memorial. Instead, this iconography has only been very slightly disguised. Every particle of the original Crescent of Embrace design remains completely intact in the redesign.
The giant crescent points to Mecca
In September 2005, a half dozen different bloggers verified that a person facing directly into the original Crescent of Embrace would be facing almost exactly at Mecca. That makes the crescent a mihrab, the central feature around which every mosque is built.
Face into the crescent to face Mecca:
Left: mihrab from the Great Mosque in Cordoba Spain. Right: Crescent of Embrace also faces Mecca. The green circle is from the Mecca-direction calculator at Islam.com. When it is placed over the original Crescent of Embrace site plan, the Mecca-direction line (the “qibla”) almost exactly bisects the crescent.
You can plant as many trees around a mosque as you want and it will still be a mosque. But this isn’t just the world’s largest mosque. The planned memorial is also full of terrorist memorializing features.
Please hear my voice along with those of Congressman Tancredo and Tom Burnett Sr., who is refusing to allow Tom Jr.’s name to be used in the crescent design. The memorial to Flight 93 should not be a terrorist memorial mosque.
Sincerely
(Your name)
———————– Secretary Kempthorne’s phone number is 202-208-7351.
Snail-mail: Hon. Dirk Kempthorne, Secretary of Interior
1
Unfortunately it appears as though the longer one has been de-activated. I'm going to have to check and see what their reasoning was for it. In the meantime, please use <a href="http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=561152571456622179&q=cao%27s+blog+productions&total=2&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0">this link.</a>
Not perfect, 11.8 minutes, and might have to stop to read everything on the crowded slides.
Posted by: Cao at Thursday, October 18 2007 05:04 PM (wjTOW)
The Little Mermaid, Sensitivity and Multiculturalism!
Hans Christian Anderson's story of the little Mermaid has always been a favorite of mine, because of her courage, because of her dedication, and because of her plain old pluck. I was a thrill for me to take this photo in Kobenhaven (Copenhagen) Denmark when my wife and I were there in September 2001, little did we know then that the image of the mermaid and or the statue in the harbor would soon be at risk of islamification. The little darlin' has bare breasts, and if the Islamofascists should succeed in destroying the liberties of the Danes (which I have no doubt that the Danes will object to) or at the minimum of convincing enough Danes that in the name of "tolerance" or "multiculturalism" to cover up the Little Mermaid won't that be a shame? And yet, we are seeing just that in so many other countries: some places in England won't carry piggy banks anymore, some have taken pork out of the school menus so as not to offend the dietary sensibilities of Muslims, some have added foot baths for Muslim prayer in the employee's restroom even when they had no Muslim employees (but do you think they would provide Holy Water Fonts for Catholic prayer?) There are co-ops that allow their Muslim employees to raise their hands when they don't want to check out alcohol or pork products, the list goes on and on.
So, what is this new multi-cultural sensitivity that seems to be circling the earth? Well, I know a few folk from South America that work in some health care facilities and the facility cafeteria isn't being sensitive to them. I know a few Hindu Docs from India and no one has suggested no beef or chicken or fish in the cafeteria, and a few from the Philippines and they aren't being catered to. I used to work in a facility that had two employees from China and their dietary desires weren't catered to. I even knew a couple of South Vietnamese when I was in OCS lo these many years ago and no one suggested serving dog. So, what is the big deal with the Muslim folk? Simple... Muslims riot and complain and make asses of themselves. Oh, not all of them, but the islamofascists sure do and their fellow travelers at C.A.I.R. sure do. Imam's get on planes while deliberately making every body nervous then try to sue all the John Does that reported them for making them nervous. Nun's get shot in the back because some cartoonist submitted a drawing that was posted in a Danish Newspaper. Embassy's get burned over the same issue. We see daily news articles about bombs and killings and riots and hangings and stonings and beheadings and we become afraid. So, please feed that croc and maybe he'll eat us last.
Well, that's bull. The fear has to be overcome, people have to put steel back in their spine and the World needs to grow up and recognize that no one has a right to a guarantee not to be insulted. Many of the greatest generation still living will tell you of the rallies, the war-bond drives and metal drives and rationing etc. What ever it took to win!
Today, not so much and that's really sad.
Posted at 09:16 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 557 words, total size 3 kb.
Hey Abu Jneya, I Got Your Hack Ri-Chere!Not Safe For Work There is nothing more juvenile, childish and more stupid than a moron who hacks a blogsite just to prove he can. A little while ago that was me, hacked by one Abu Jneya which I have on good authority translates into "Pork Lover," well, maybe that is not an exact translation. At any rate, Mr. Jneya thought it cute to take over my main page with this abomination of a hack (but the kid is kind of cute - too bad he has a dickhead for a father):
When you click to read more of this, I'll provide the exact Arabic translation (well, as near exact as I can make it) but remember, this IS NOT SAFE FOR WORK... vile language ahead including my response!
more...
1
Glad you're back. Too bad we don't have the creeps address we can send him a giant condom to put on the top of his head,,,after all if he is going to act like a dick head he should look like one
Posted by: Sammy Benoit at Thursday, September 20 2007 04:28 PM (PkKuz)
Posted by: Chris at Thursday, September 20 2007 05:34 PM (r0Obh)
3
As we despise jihadists for employing their children as weapons, for training them to become weapons, so we despise cyberjihadists for using a child's image in this instance.
Posted by: Jeremayakovka at Thursday, September 20 2007 07:15 PM (Aw7Px)
4
Good on 'ya, GM! Love your commentary. Heard you interviewed on BTR about a week ago, too (Fausta, if I remember correctly) -- all most excellent!
Posted by: x_dhimmi at Thursday, September 20 2007 10:19 PM (rr5tu)
5
Awe GM you know you're doing something right when your site gets hacked- esp. by an immature kid.
It is a badge of honor!!
Posted by: Raven at Thursday, September 20 2007 11:30 PM (uifiu)
6
If you've ticked off an Islamofascist wannabe, George, you're obviously doing SOMETHING right!
BHG
Posted by: Bald-Headed Geek at Friday, September 21 2007 12:05 AM (SBnaB)
Moral Retardation & IslamophobiaYou will have to excuse a somewhat longish introduction but I think it necessary to set the tone for the whole post.
One of the smartest people on the web today, a blogger par excelance is Gagdad Bob who writes One Cosmos and who's banner proclaims:
Circumnavelgazing the Whole Existentialada of Lumin Development with a Seer's Prattleogue of Joycey Jimgnostics, Verticalesthetics, Dilettantric Yoga, Stand-up Cosmology, Wide Angle Pneumography, Extreme Seeking, Freevangelical Pundamentalism, Darwhiggian Evolution, and Buddhaflaw Correcting, all in a Reluxing Atmasphere of Omade Jehovial Witticisms
Bob's site never ever under any circumstances ceases to amaze me at both his insight, and his love of punny stuff. For who else could string together such a lengthy list of puns and gags? But, I digress. I always feature one of Bob's brilliant pieces in my series "Brief Politico-therapies: A Tour of the Psychbloggers." Today, I was scanning both an email from the indescribable Larwyn and a post from Gagdad Bob and I came across the term "Moral Retardation," and it struck me what a profound term that is, because it so well describes o much of what we call the left and the cult of islamofascism. Bob stated:
The moral retardation of so many leftists just astonishes me. And it is literally retardation, for just as one may be mentally retarded but a decent person, one may be intellectually brilliant but a moral imbecile, as so many leftist professors prove (not that they're so brilliant, either). Violence is good or bad, depending entirely upon the uses to which it is put."
[...]
Yes, fighting fascists will only create more fascists! Until we kill all of them.
At a particularly dark time of the war, "when Germany's panzer divisions turned west, Allied armies collapsed under the ferocious onslaught, and British ships were streaming across the Straits of Dover from Dunkirk, [Gandhi] wrote furiously to the Viceroy of India: 'This manslaughter must be stopped. You are losing; if you persist, it will only result in greater bloodshed. Hitler is not a bad man....'" [by the bye, read the whole thing]
So, Gandhi was, except for who he was willing to bow down to, a early modern dhimmi.
And, the suggestions that Gandhi made for European Jews was morally reprehensible in suggesting mass suicide as a "moral" response. As Bob notes, after the war when the extent of the holocaust became known, Gandhi was alleged to have said "that the Jews died anyway, didn't they? They might as well have died significantly."
Moral Retardation! That is what we are going to talk about when it comes to the islamofacist and their supporters. I'm sure you are as tired of being called an Islamophobe as I am, but when you get right down to it, it is a meaningless term used by morally retarded individuals who wish to see only one side of any dust-up involving Muslims. Let's get at least one thing straight, a phobia is a real disorder involving an irrational fear of a person, place, thing or situation. And the fear is such, that it interferes with normal day to day living/functioning. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 4th ed. (text revision) (DSM-IV TR) has a diagnostic code of 300.29 for any given specific phobia. Thus, Coulrophobia (a fear of clowns) is given a diagnosis something like this:
Axis I: 300.29 Coulrophobia
Don't laugh, people who have true phobias are in many ways quite miserable in their fear. But again, I digress, so the term of islamophobia is a fauxphobia if you will. If someone is out to kill you (oh, not you specifically necessarily, for example they are not out to kill GM Roper, that I know of) but out to set bombs and other devices designed for mass death it is not an irrational fear.
If I believed, in spite of all available evidence that Islamists were out to kill me, the appropriate diagnosis might be paranoia. If I tremble and exhibit fight or flight symptoms in the presence of a Muslim, that might well be a case of islamophobia. But being angry at Muslims for not standing up to the islamofascists in their midst is not islamophobia, it is plain old anger, and not misplaced anger.
In the past, when Christians have trespassed the bounds of decency such as bombing abortion clinics, or a certain well known TV Evangelist saying that the tragedy of 9/11 may be God's wrath being visited on sinful America, the backlash against this was immediate and pronounced and most often, dealt with swiftly and succinctly. That has been almost universal. Even the bloodshed in Northern Ireland was denounced by a majority of Christians. Not so the trepidations of the islamofascists by other "moderate" Muslims. At least not more than a few.
Which brings us right back to the concept of Moral Retardation. There can be no response to the violence of the islamofascists other than to beat it back swiftly and harshly. To do otherwise is to embrace their tactics at worst, and at best a reprehensible bow to inhuman tactics. The Democrats (and others) who inveigh against the war in Iraq (or, if you are an avid reader of the New York Times inveigh against fighting Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia or as James Taranto says in the Wall Street Journals "Best of the Web Today:"
"al Qaeda Which Has Nothing to Do With Iraq in Mesopotamia Which Also Has Nothing to Do With Iraq Even Though It's Another, More Poetic Name for Iraq Which Has Nothing to Do With al Qaeda, a Homegrown Iraqi Group That Has Nothing to Do With Iraq Even Though It Is Mostly Iraqi, Albeit With Some Foreign Involvement Which Has Nothing to Do With Iraq."
Convoluted to say the least. Yet, we can see in the left and in the Democratic party specific signs that indicate that there is no belief in this war, that it was a mistake, that it should have been a "police action" at most and preferably we would have negotiated with our enemies. Although they do not say how you negotiate with people that are actively trying to kill you.
If one cannot see that the reaction to a bunch of cartoons and ink drawings that call for beheading and death for the artist is over the top, the moral retardation is profound. What ever happened to the stalwart fellow who used to say "I don't agree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it?" What happened to liberalism? I'm old enough to remember when the staunchest anti-communists were part and parcel of the Democratic Party, that their willingness to tolerate a despotic and violent system was close to zero. Where did those people go? Have they all died out? Have they been replaced by those who say that islamofascism is just another belief just like Christianity and Judaism or Hinduism and Buddhism?
The chorus from the left is almost non-existent, except to say "Get out of Iraq," or perhaps a plea to "negotiate" with Iran or Syria. Cannot those people see the ultimate aim of the islamofascists? Cannot they tell that the tactics used by islamofascists and their supporters, those who hold up signs saying "Behead those who insult Islam" are beyond the pale? Is the moral retardation that profound?
I cannot help but wonder where and when there will be another strike of unimaginable proportions. Is that what it will take to wake up these people? Does the multiple arrests worldwide of would be terrorists complete with finding the ingredients of explosive devices not convince you that this is indeed a war of belief? If it doesn't, count yourself in with the other moral retardates, for you see, but you do not believe, you see, but you do not understand what is laid out before you in simple black and white.
So, the Diagnostic Criteria for Moral Retardation can be stated fairly easily:
An inability to comprehend the evil of islamofascism that occurs prior to the age of 100 and is pervasive in all or almost all of political thought and the presence of two or more of the following:
A belief that western values and traditions are a direct cause of increasing violence by the islamofascists.
An inability to roundly condemn the tactics of beheading, explosive devices set off among non-military targets.
A belief that George Bush is an evil greater than any other.
A belief that all cultures are morally equivalent.
An inability to understand that the very values that allow one to condemn the west, would be silenced should the islamofascists take over any political organization.
Others may be able to add to the criteria, but for now, and for arguments sake, these are posted for your consideration.
1
Excellent article and I couldn’t agree more! Your Diagnostic Criteria for Moral Retardation seems to share some co-morbidity with Xenophilia. According to the dictionary, “A xenophile is a person attracted to that which is foreign, especially to foreign peoples, manners, or cultures.” I would add “inordinately attracted even to the point of self-destruction.”
Posted by: Faultline USA at Thursday, September 06 2007 10:00 PM (MgbGJ)
Oh, THOSE Weapons of Mass Destruction
I think that we have a clue as to what happened to some of the WMD's that the U.N. inspectors said were not in Iraq. They were certainly right about these not being there.
(Reuters) Aug 30, 2007 - United Nations officials found vials of dangerous chemicals, which had been removed from Iraq a decade ago, in a U.N. building in New York.... The material was phosgene, a chemical warfare agent.... The Iraqi weapons inspectors came across the material as they were closing their offices, which are housed in a building near the U.N. headquarters in Manhattan....
Oops. I bet that these guys were just as surprised as Hillary Clinton was when someone found the Rose Law Firm billing records in the private living area of the White House. Maybe Hussein or the U.N. thought to have Sandy Berger sneak out the rest of the WMD's in his socks.
Keep moving, folks. There's nothing to see here. No evidence of WMD's. Keep your eyes forward and keep moving. No talking.
1
Wow once again showing that the admisitration lied to us about WMDs. They were removed the first time around! (Like we were saying before we got into Iraq.) Hey guys just own your lie. Clinton did and look he stayed president.
Posted by: psyberwolfe at Thursday, August 30 2007 03:03 PM (xwcQB)
2
It was discovered on an inventory. I'd like to know, if this stuff was there since 1996, when was the last time these guys did an inventory?
At the ABC "Blotter" was this little tidbit:
"Former U.N. weapons inspectors told ABC News.com that vials of phosgene had also been used by inspectors in Iraq to help calibrate air sampling instruments."
So THAT'S where they went to calibrate their equipment. A UN building in new York.
Posted by: Oyster at Thursday, August 30 2007 10:57 PM (YudAC)
3
I prefer to let people speak for themselves, that way I don't make a mistake quoting facts.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mMBDCQ4cPx0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3slsCBqrQfk
Posted by: sarcastic saib at Friday, August 31 2007 12:54 PM (3X6vQ)
Gynophobia and Misogyny And The Islamic MaleMiddle Eastern men, the vast, vast majority of whom are Muslim don't treat their women very well for the most part. The news, blogospheric, broadcast and dead-tree versions are full of stories of how Islamic men have mistreated women. The culture is rife with it. Yet, many Muslims in other countries are not near as drastic, not near as rigid so what is the cause, why so much damage?
Misogyny is partly the answer, hatred of women. The whys of that I'll leave to other mental health professionals, but I think it deserves a look. Another (part) answer may also be Gynophobia irrational fear of women. In most cultures, women are revered as mothers, caretakers, nurturers, comforters. In most of the Middle East, second class citizens. In Sharia courts, a woman's testimony is worth less than a mans. In a rape trial, four male witness must testify, if not, the woman may be accused of adultery. In Iran, a 16 year old girl who was raped was hanged for adultery (likely because she told off the judge). Women are required to wear ridiculous outfits such as the hijab and the burqa (pictured below).
Now, I acknowledge there is something slightly old fashioned, and not necessarily a bad idea in the concept of modesty (but that should apply to men as well - and one only needs to look at some of the outfits today to see what I mean; but then, I'm an old foggy). But, I digress, the hijab is traditional, the burqa is tribal and is the hijab taken to the extremes.
Above, I noted "In most cultures, women are revered as mothers, caretakers, nurturers, comforters." Dr. Sanity says it pretty well:
From a psychological perspective then, the freedom and empowerment of women in society are absolutely critical because they are responsible for the earliest environmental influences on children--influences that will impact the child throughout his or her life. If the society has little respect for women and regularly demonizes, debases or humiliates them, it will have a profound generational impact."
Children who live with constant hostility and criticism learn to defend against the bad feelings and shame within; and to externalize blame onto others. Projection and paranoia, which are both external assignments of blame, are psychological defenses against shame."
"Often this excessive shame is dealt with by humiliating someone perceived as weaker or more worthless than the shamed person (e.g., the family pet, women, Gays, or outside groups serve this function for both individuals and cultures)."
So it should be fairly obvious, that in the Middle East, at least, young boys grow up in this "external assignments" and focus on "someone perceived as weaker or more worthless..." or, in our discussion, W.O.M.E.N.
The failure of much of the left (though not all of the left for sure) to forcibly speak out about the treatment of women in the middle east is in part due to those on the left not wanting to be considered judgmental. That is a sin in P.C. parlance. After all, everyone knows that one culture is just as good as another. And even if they did speak out loudly, vociferously and call attention to the abominable treatment of women, organizations such as C.A.I.R. would cry "Islamophobia" which is, of course patent nonsense. But in the world of P.C. any so called phobia against any particular minority group is to be avoided like the plague.
In Saudi Arabia, women are not allowed, for example, to drive. From MEMRI comes this little tidbit during a discussion on women and driving from Dr. Sleiman Al-'Eid, head of the Islamic culture department at KingSaudUniversity:
"In addition, this might lead women to wear make-up and uncover their faces. Even if you say that women will drive covered by a niqab, or dressed modestly, and so on, this will gradually lead her to uncover her face. This will also encourage her to be disobedient. There is no doubt that women will eventually be photographed, and these photos will be shown to other people - whether the traffic police or other who need to look at these photos, for identification or nay other purpose. This will lead women to mix with men."
[...]
"Another consequence of this will be the diminishing of men's guardianship over women. If a women drives, she will have a certain degree of independence, and she will come and go, travel, and so on. This will also lead to an increase in suspicions. When she has her own car, she will go out and return late." [source]
The good doctor reveals the real motivations behind the restriction: women aren’t allowed to drive due to the fear that Saudi men will have difficulty controlling their women. This is how deep this pathology is embedded in the Saudi culture psyche—a simple request for a women to drive threatens the very manhood of the Saudi male.
I suspect that more than just the manhood of Saudi men are threatened, I suspect that they abjectly fear women having sexual pleasure, the ability to have orgasms, the knowledge that they are more than just sperm repositories for making babies and serving men. From what other reason could the practice of clitoridectomy and other types of female genital mutilation derive. While this practice is fairly widespread across cultures, as neo-neocon notes "...it tends to follow a geographic distribution that intersects in many places with Islam, so the two are sometimes linked together in actuality, if not in origins." The practice is NOT Islamic and indeed, predates Islam though many believe that it is required by the Quran. neo-neocon goes on to say:
In cultures where such mutilating customs are practiced, one reason that women tend to be in charge of performing them on other women (on little girls, actually) is that, in such cultures, men have been traditionally discouraged from touching women’s bodies intimately–except sexually, that is, in the proper sanctioned relationships. But the more important reason that women are the agents of their own mutilation is that, of course, women are part of the culture, too. The custom is all of a piece, as is the culture, and women are not separate from it.
In the case of areas in which female circumcision is the custom, it is usually a cultural norm for men to only want to marry a circumcised woman. Of course, women want the girls in their own family to be marriageable; an uncircumcised girl would be a terrible liability. Still another goal of female circumcision is to enforce chastity by reducing female sexual desire, which is felt to be threatening and dangerous. Older woman, therefore, are also trying to control the tendency of younger women to run around and be sexually wild, and thus to reflect badly on the family (sleep around, get pregnant, etc.–all of which is absolutely forbidden in shame/honor cultures).
Or maybe I'm just blowing hot air, maybe this whole fear of women boils down to one thing. Their penises are so small that they fear that they will be laughed at, so they forestall that by mistreating their women.
Posted by: jim hitchcock at Friday, August 24 2007 03:29 AM (+QuYB)
3
I wrote a paper in college on female circumcision.
It made me sick to read the research done and that even in societies where it is not legal to do it anymore (ie Egypt), they just meet in a secret place and use a rusty razor blade on a 7 year old and call it a day. If she dies from infection... it's the will of Allah! It is the ultimate hate crime against a child to do this and it is such a "control issue'. Middle Eastern men must have pretty weak self-esteem to treat women as they do. The worst would be the Taliban. They denied women and little girls basic medical care when they were in power. Women had no rights whatsoever except to be beaten or killed if they displeased their master/husband. No wonder they are such evil enemies.
Posted by: Hoosier Army Mom at Friday, August 24 2007 07:59 AM (eaqGd)
4
Well written Guy. You have covered a subject that Liberals can agree with Knuckle draggers.
I have only one area of disagreement, that is the part about Liberals being averse (afraid?) of criticism of the Saudi culture. I believe that that Liberals, as is usual, take the lead in attempting to better the status of women in the Islamic sphere. We just don't advocate war as the solution to all ills.
Posted by: James S Melbert at Friday, August 24 2007 09:24 AM (thFXk)
5
James, can you show me some evidence of where and how liberals are attempting to better the status of women in Islamic nations? I really would like to see this.
Posted by: Raven at Friday, August 24 2007 09:47 AM (We5b0)
6"...how liberals are attempting to better the status of women in Islamic nations"
Well, the National Organization of Women has been very active in the mideast for women's rights, for jobs with equal pay, for college education, to vote, to appear in public in normal clothes, to stop female circumcision, and the right to choose their own husbands.
Okay, I was just testing to see if you were paying attention. That's what liberals have not been doing.
Posted by: Woody at Friday, August 24 2007 10:04 AM (scAPE)
7
GM,
Fuel for when you do the radio interview with WC and me?
Posted by: Always On Watch at Friday, August 24 2007 11:23 AM (M7kiy)
Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it,"
...............................................- George Santayana
More Connecting The Dots
Terezín, (now) in the Czech Republic is more frequently known by its German name, Theresienstadt. Theresienstadt is an old walled fortress constructed between 1780 and 1790. During World War II, Theresienstadt was used as a transfer point for the Nazi's and walled ghetto to act as a front in the extermination of Jews. The Nazi's went to great lengths, including the building of false fronts, theaters, concerts, artistic displays etc. to show how "happy" the Jews were in their incarceration.
In June, 1944 the Nazi's permitted the International Red Cross to visit Theresienstadt and
...erected fake shops and cafés to imply that the Jews lived in relative comfort. The Danes whom the Red Cross visited lived in freshly painted rooms, not more than three in a room. The guests enjoyed the performance of a children's opera, Brundibar, which was written by inmate Hans Krása.
"The hoax against the Red Cross was so successful for the Nazis that they went on to make a propaganda film at Theresienstadt. Production of the film began on February 26, 1944. Directed by Jewish prisoner Kurt Gerron (a director, cabaret performer, and actor who appeared with Marlene Dietrich in The Blue Angel), it was meant to show how well the Jews lived under the "benevolent" protection of the Third Reich. After the shooting most of the cast, and even the filmmaker himself, were deported to Auschwitz. Gerron and his wife were executed in the gas chambers on October 28, 1944. The film was not released at the time, but was edited into pieces that served their purpose, and only segments of it have remained." Source
There is, of course, nothing new about "fooling" the public. Does Potemkin Village ring a bell?
So, while "Potemkin village" has come to mean, especially in a political context, any hollow or false construct, physical or figurative, meant to hide an undesirable or potentially damaging situation, in fact there appears to have been no such thing.
"Potemkin village" has also frequently been used to describe the attempts of the Soviet government to fool foreign visitors. The government would take such visitors, who were often already sympathetic to socialism or communism, to select villages, factories, schools, stores, or neighborhoods and present them as if they were typical, rather than exceptional. Given the strict limitations on the movement of foreigners in the USSR, it was often impossible for these visitors to see any other examples. [2]
This practice was certainly not confined to the Soviet Union, but rather has been common in "currently socialist countries." "The Big Fish" is a famous story from People's Republic of China which deals with the visit in the early 1970s of foreigners to an urban market Potemkin Village. Source
So, on one hand we have Theresienstadt a real "Potemkin Village" and the other "Pseudo-Potemkin Villages" some real, some not but all by socialist parties trying to "fool" the public or public agencies. Today, we have in Iran, another Theresinstadt/Potemking Village in Tehran where the ruling (and socialist but called Islamic Republic) has tried to make nice with the world by proclaiming how "happy" the jews are to live in Iran.
In this photograph, taken from Al Jazeera news, Jews are shown happily greeting Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. From their dress, fedoras and beards, we can assume that these are Hasidic Jews(which oddly enough sprang up in 12th century Germany) or perhaps Orthodox Jews (Source) and from the smile on the face of Ahmadinejad, we can assume he is happy to see them. Now, that would be strange indeed as he has said in the past that he want's to exterminate the Jews so why would he be embracing them if not for a Theresinstadt moment?
Pam Geller, that oh-so-very astute blogger at Atlas Shrugs said in a recent post:
I love when al jizz is used as a "news" source. Sheer audacity to cite a captive 25,000 Jews living in dhimmitude in Iran. The idea that these subjugated Jews are happy Jews is vile.
[...]
The al Jizz pic is rich - peyas does not a Jew make.
Not being a Jew nor an Israeli, I can't comment on that, but I can, as a rational being, decide for myself what Ahmadinejad is up to.
It should be obvious to anyone with two neurons to rub together, that no one is fooled by the show of this particular mad man. He has threatened to exterminate the Jews/Israel, he has denied that there was a holocaust, he has denegrated any ally of Israel calling them the Little Satan (lucky us, we are still the Great Satan) and he is feverishly working on developing nuclear weapons. Can there be any doubt as to what his intentions are. The show of releasing the Brittish sailor/marines hostiges was one such show. "See how happy these hostages guests are? We even give them parting gifts and release them on EASTER." "See how well we treat our Jews and how Dhimmitudenous happy they are? Why, I even smile as I hug them. How can I be another Hitler?"
To quote Al Jazeera:
If Ahmadinejad really is Hitler, why are some 25,000 Jews living peacefully in Iran?
By Jonathan Cook
Iran is the new Nazi Germany and its President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, is the new Hitler. Or so Israeli officials have been declaring for months as they and their American allies try to persuade the doubters in Washington that an attack on Tehran is essential. And if the latest media reports are to be trusted, it looks like they may again be winning the battle for hearts and minds: Vice President Dick Cheney is said to be diverting the White House back on track to launch a military strike."
The answer should be simple Mr. Cook, even to a moron like yourself. To go with the "New Hitler" we need a "New Theresinstadt."
And so, to end this post let me change Santayana's quote a bit:
Beware of those who deliberately repeat the past, for we are sure to be harmed by it."
1
Jonathan Cook is absolutely amazing for the depth of his ignorance and types out more codswallop in five mintes than one can conceivably absorb without saying, "WTF?"
Try reading this load of BS he expects others to not only understand but accept as unvarnished truth.
Posted by: Oyster at Thursday, August 23 2007 04:53 AM (ITdJk)
2
Badly need your help. Here's to the crazy ones, the misfits, the rebels, the troublemakers, the round pegs in the square holes... the ones who see things differently -- they're not fond of rules... You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify or vilify them, but the only thing you can't do is ignore them because they change things... they push the human race forward, and while some may see them as the crazy ones, we see genius, because the ones who are crazy enough to think that they can change the world, are the ones who do.
I am from England and bad know English, please tell me right I wrote the following sentence: "Email marketing made easy by larry johnsonbulk email marketing should be at the center of ecommerce activity otherwise it like buying tires for the car but throwing them in the trunk and yet expecting a smoother ride."
Thank you very much ;-). Hazel.
Posted by: Hazel at Friday, July 17 2009 07:49 PM (VofJu)
3
Good afternoon. Peace is when time doesn't matter as it passes by.
I am from Iran and , too, and now am writing in English, give true I wrote the following sentence: "We; be remiss if we didn't mention that zwerner, according to his linkedin page, has twice been in the.For clean, allergen free air in the home, there is really no better vacuum out there."
Thanks
. Rabia.
4
Good Day. The roses, the lovely notes, the dining and dancing are all welcome and splendid. But when the Godiva is gone, the gift of real love is having someone who'll go the distance with you. Someone who, when the wedding day limo breaks down, is willing to share a seat on the bus.
I am from Salvador and , too, and now am writing in English, give please true I wrote the following sentence: "Find out what makes the euro vanity so popular."
Thank you so much for your future answers :p. Duo bathroom furniture.
5
Greeting. He had learned over the years that poor people did not feel so poor when allowed to give occasionally.
I am from India and also am speaking English, give true I wrote the following sentence: "Life insurance lead is a potential buyer of life insurance."
THX
, best insurance lead.
6
Hi all. Learn to get in touch with the silence within yourself and know that everything in this life has a purpose.
I am from Liberia and bad know English, please tell me right I wrote the following sentence: "On the thermal urea a finding medicine should be applied to the antiviral use."
Thanks in advance. Girls with gel nails on.
7
just started reborning and just hooked on as much info as poss; thank you.
I am from Zimbabwe and learning to read in English, tell me right I wrote the following sentence: "Its estate and experience are, foursquare, also human in service."
Best regards
, Vegetable cleansing diet.
8
Good morning. Never esteem anything as of advantage to you that will make you break your word or lose your self-respect.
I am from Guinea and now study English, give true I wrote the following sentence: "Besides my total charge mainstream, i have no such failure event."
With best wishes
, Best small business.
At any rate, Mookie as he is known to the terrorist set has a really bad case of body odor, perhaps it emanates from his teethies, perhaps because he doesn't bathe very often, or perhaps because I'm lying and he smells like linen dried in sunshine. At any rate, there have been several occasions when Mookie has attempted to influence the government of Iraq and made a really bad show of it. Once, he thought he had enough strength to take on the American Military and the burgeoning Iraqi Military but got his ass kicked and ended up telling his "army" to stand down and he fled to Iran. 
and the big bad wolf who huffed and he puffed and he blew down the houses made of straw and sticks of two of the little pigs and was foiled by the stone/brick home of the wise, perhaps older, and better financed third little pig.
Other pigs who have achieved fame and star quality lives include Looney Tunes Porky, and most certainly 
Christopher Robbins friend Piglet 
and the ubiquitous Piggy Bank.
One of my favorite eateries as a youth visiting my grand parent's in San Antonio was the PigStand, a drive-in, always crowded, always smelling of Bar-B-Qued pork and serving Bar-B-Qued pork sandwiches to die for.
is towards the end where you declared you were going to eat
some meat (I imagine it's pork? it doesn't matter 
Hans Christian Anderson's story of the little Mermaid has always been a favorite of mine, because of her courage, because of her dedication, and because of her plain old pluck. I was a thrill for me to take this photo in Kobenhaven (Copenhagen) Denmark when my wife and I were there in September 2001, little did we know then that the image of the mermaid and or the statue in the harbor would soon be at risk of islamification. The little darlin' has bare breasts, and if the Islamofascists should succeed in destroying the liberties of the Danes (which I have no doubt that the Danes will object to) or at the minimum of convincing enough Danes that in the name of "tolerance" or "multiculturalism" to cover up the Little Mermaid won't that be a shame? And yet, we are seeing just that in so many other countries: some places in England won't carry piggy banks anymore, some have taken pork out of the school menus so as not to offend the dietary sensibilities of Muslims, some have added foot baths for Muslim prayer in the employee's restroom even when they had no Muslim employees (but do you think they would provide Holy Water Fonts for Catholic prayer?) There are co-ops that allow their Muslim employees to raise their hands when they don't want to check out alcohol or pork products, the list goes on and on. 
Now, I acknowledge there is something slightly old fashioned, and not necessarily a bad idea in the concept of modesty (but that should apply to men as well - and one only needs to look at some of the outfits today to see what I mean; but then, I'm an old foggy). But, I digress, the hijab is traditional, the burqa is tribal and is the hijab taken to the extremes.
In this photograph, taken from Al Jazeera news, Jews are shown happily greeting Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. From their dress, fedoras and beards, we can assume that these are Hasidic Jews(which oddly enough sprang up in 12th century Germany) or perhaps Orthodox Jews (Source) and from the smile on the face of Ahmadinejad, we can assume he is happy to see them. Now, that would be strange indeed as he has said in the past that he want's to exterminate the Jews so why would he be embracing them if not for a Theresinstadt moment? 
. Rabia.
Thanks in advance. Girls with gel nails on.
, Vegetable cleansing diet.