Yet again, the civilized world has to bear not only the depraved antics of the Muslim murderers, we have to bear the pea-brained apologists telling us, "it's the religion of peace" or "yes, but it's just a small minority", or "what about the Christians or Jews or murder in the name of their religion?".
The news broke this morning while I was about to leave for work. Mrs. Graybeard assumed it was Muslim terrorists; I said, "I'll bet you any amount of money it wasn't the Amish". She replied, "When was the last time a busload of Rabbis did something like this?"
Of course we knew it was Muslims because it virtually always - always - is. And that's a problem.
I have no kids, no wife, no car, no credit. It probably makes it a bit pompous, but I prefer to die standing than to live kneeling".
I heard Dr Zuhdi Jasser, head of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy, Cardiologist/Internist, and US Navy veteran, on Dana Loesch's TV show tonight. Dr. Jasser's organization is devoted to pushing for a reformation movement in Islam similar to the Christian reformation. One of his points was that the politically correct constant pandering to the violent Muslims by not condemning their views is actually giving them the advantage in society. The Western groups saying all religions are the same are preventing the dialog and change that Islam needs. Political correctness, yet again, is doing the exact wrong thing, and endangering us all.
here) the gist of it is a Montana cowboy, a Native American (hmm, I'm a native American... let's call him a Blackfeet Indian) and a muslim end up sitting next to each other in an airport. The Indian bemoans the fact that his people were once many and now they are few; the Muslim replies his people were one few in this land and now they are many, so why do you think that is? The Cowboy replies, "That's because we ain't played Cowboys and muslims, yet, boy".
I think the time is coming when we're going to need to play a serious game of Cowboys and muslims. None of this "run a few fighter sorties"; more like "What the hell do you mean we're out of ICBMs and MIRVs??"
Je suis Charlie. Nous sommes tous Charlie, si nous nous soucions
We like to pretend that we have evolved beyond those sorts of things. There used to be a slogan of "What if they threw a war and no one showed up?"ReplyDelete
We are seeing now what happens when someone throws a war, and only one side shows up. They call that a massacre.
You can refuse to fight all you want, but when the other guy wants to fight, you either fight back, or become a statistic. Your desire for peace is meaningless.
When Christians murder in the name of their religion, they organize themselves into government armies. Slaughter of native Americans was "justified" by Christian rhetoric, as was slaughter in the Middle East.ReplyDelete
In this country... our downfall will be ourselves. We will backpedal, and accomodate and apologize to these animals as an "equally recognized minority" and give them special protections from profiling and "hate crime" discrimination etc., until one day we wake up and find ourselves living as a minority in a new dark age of shariah-type society(?), scrabbling in the filth and having to watch fearfully for the muhammed police, less we offend the sensibilities of one of these heathens. Even IF something like that happens here, (AGAIN), nothing new will happen, because it's not like it hasn't happened in the good ol USA before. It's called "workplace violence" here though. Usually the result is more poking, prodding, eavesdropping and harrassment of joe average, while Ali the bomb fabricator get's a special position on the local school board to help us "understand" their point of view. Just the $0.02 of a midwest farmboy.ReplyDelete
When you say you want a reformation for Islam similar to the Christian one, do you mean you want Islam to be even more fragmented than it is now with even less teaching authority, or do you mean you want even more intra-Islamic violence than they have now?ReplyDelete
You probably mean you want all Muslims to adopt a single set of doctrines that you agree with, but that's what Luther thought would happen too - and history tells a different story.
I have no kids, no wife, no car, no credit.ReplyDelete
And apparantly no small arms to defend yourself with. It's fairly simple kids, they plan to slaughter us like pigs in a poke. If you stand there in the field contemplating your tonal in the grass going baaaa baaa they will eventually tear you to pieces.
RIP to these brave folks who continued to speak truth. Please lets all get straight on the idea that we'll be murdered if we stand by with no arms waiting for this to jump off. Condition orange (or whatever your next to highest threat level is) 100% of the time. Live it.
We haven't "grown above these things", instead, we have regressed to a level that hadn't been reached before since the late thirties (that's 1930s to the younger readers).ReplyDelete
Appeasement - Giving in, inch by inch
"I prefer to die standing..."ReplyDelete
Better to make the other guy die, Charlie.
As to the rest of it, why the immediate descent into collectivism? Is every Muslim the same as the two who killed Charlie and his associates? Are we the same as the "Christians" who ever did evil things?
Do we treat people as individuals, or not? Are we collectivists, or not?
What the cowboys (and the US Army) did to Indians should be a matter of shame, not pride.
How often we forget to look at what the Indians did to the settlers. most often not in conflict with treaties.
For a start, you may want to look in to the "Spirit Lake Massacre" by Thomas Teakle
There are many hundreds more of such stories, such as the massacre at the Whitman Mission in Oregon.
You might also consider which side the Indians chose to be on during the Revolutionary War, and the American resentment for their choice carried on for generations.
H/T to businessweek.com: Europe’s Islam Debate Erupts as Paris Killers at LargeReplyDelete
The two messages sat together uneasily. Blank grenades were hurled at a mosque in Le Mans, west of Paris, a bomb went off near a mosque in Villefranche-sur-Saone in the east, and shots were fired at a Muslim prayer hall in southern France, Le Figaro reported.
Adding to the corrosive atmosphere, a policewoman was shot to death south of Paris. A black-garbed suspect was held, BFMTV said. The authorities gave no initial indication of a connection with the killings at Charlie Hebdo magazine in Paris yesterday."
Let's all sing and yell praises for the techno police state that
cares for and protects us all with the guarantee of safety,
safety, safety (especially for the children).
However, they never have any intel on terrorists and criminals before they
strike but somehow knows everything about them (providing glossy color mug shots)
before the dead have gone cold.
However, for those law abiding and free citizens of a Constitutional
Republic, you piles of shit, every bit of pre-crime technology and
jackboot physical violence will beat you, beat you, beat you into
Reap it, citizens!
Your cowardice and enslavement orders you to heed the call.
" Slaughter of native Americans was "justified" by Christian rhetoric,"ReplyDelete
There was a lot of slaughter on both sides. Almost all of it was one on one or a group on a group but very little of it was organized genocide be either side. In the long history between 1492 and today the number of Indians kiled by immigrants was roughly equal to the number of immigrants killed by Indians. To make the claim that one side "slaughtered" the other side is willful blindness to what happened. Statements like yours are a disservice to every American alive today regardless of their parentage or ethnicity.
in response to "Cowboys and Musselmen":ReplyDelete
There aren't actually any "radical" Muslims anywhere. According to all Islamic scholars, there is only one Islam. This means that anyone who purports to be a believer in Mo' and the Koran is in a stage of Jihad, or IS NOT A MUSLIM. Stage 1 Jihad is "co-exist" with religious deception, in a state of weakness, as a minority, pretending passive victimhood. We might deceive ourselves into thinking that these are "Good Muslims" when they are actually support staff for Active Muslims to work inside of. Later (stage 2 Jihad), with some numbers, political power and wealth, insist on Islamic law for yourself and other Muslims over local law, while gathering arms/infiltrating/disrupting and making plans. Stage 3 is open warfare, while insisting that Islam means "peace" when it is better translated as "submission" (Death, Rape, Conquest).
"Je suis Charlie"ReplyDelete
only works if "vous etes" the RIGHT Charlie. And that would be Martel, not Hebdo.
First, the body guards are unarmed? WTF??? Now more than ever, we are our own counter terrorist (or self defense) unit. If own 'em, got 'em and can do so legally- start carrying!ReplyDelete
Next up, I've seen where some of the hand wringers are backing away from, and making noises about restricting what papers and an open internet by extension can publish. Again WTF????
The long and short of this is- You are responsible for your own safety! This is formal court rulings from most districts and including the US Supreme Court! 'Nuff said!
Lots of great comments here.ReplyDelete
But just to emphasize: stay armed and alert. (You are all the time, anyway, right?) The fact the two cops were unarmed yet put out to defend a place more likely to get that sort of attack than other places is just unconscionable. The workers had no defense, no hope.
Yup!! Time to pull on the boots, tie-on the 6 shooter & saddle up the horse!! Or the modern equivalent.ReplyDelete
PJ, we're not descending into collectivism. We're observing a pattern. America is heavily armed, and most Americans are at least nominally, if not functionally, Christian. Sectarian violence is extremely rare. Most Israeli adults, as a consequence of compulsory service in the IDF, are all familiar with the care and feeding of siderms and battle rifles, even if gun ownership isn't as common as it is here. I don't honestly know if there are enough private guns in Israel to match or outgun the IDF. Sectarian violence there with Judaism is also rare. Yet sectarian violence is the norm in the Mohammedan world and has been for generations. Why? Because Shia and Sunni hate each other with a burning passion. They kill each other with great regularity over a book both claim to practice most correctly. Each side repudiates the other as apostate and heretical. And the bombs burst and the blood flows. To be sure, Christian sects can also anathemize each other, but when was the last time the Eastern Rite Catholics and the Eastern Orthodox got into a shooting war?ReplyDelete
The mandate to kill, enslave, or convert anyone who does not agree with you is central to that organized barbarity which we are discussing. It is the residue, as I understand it, of a tribal war that stretches back fifteen hundred centuries. In a sense, the existence of this death cult and its relationship with the rest of the world constitutes the longest war in human history, because the world may not be at war with them, but they can't not be at war with the world.
Finally, consider who people practicing actual religions respond to what they think of as blasphemy or heresy, particularly inthe First World. They may get angry. In the past they may even have recruited the state to punish nonconformists, but those laws are all going away, because we in the West understood the necessity of a free conscience and disestablishment of religion. What they do not do, except in cases so rare as to prove the rule, is resort to murder and mayhem. We don't kill our teenage daughters because they dishonor us. We don't condemn rape victims to death. We are, in point of fact, better than them. Their culture, which is infantile in its misogyny and belligerence, makes them worse people than us in an entirely predictable fashion.
Anonymous on January 8, 2015 at 1:04 PM, I believe your claims are factually incorrect. There is lots of writing from the time urging the slaughter of the "Indian savages" by various uniformed US armies. That is organized genocide. Nor do I believe the body counts on each side were similar.ReplyDelete
Don't be silly! Are you unaware that in most Indian groups they too advocated killing all the immigrants? The problem you are referring to was the very real problem immigrants faced when they saw what Indians had done to their loved ones. This caused the response you cite. Imagine your young daughter captured by Indians and you negotiate to "buy" her back but her nose has been burned off through torture of her and she was raped every day of her capture. Do you suppose you wouldn't urge the slaughter of the "Indian savages". But in fact the slaughter of Indian savages was no greater and no worse then the slaughter of immigrants by the Indians. So while you can argue that somewhere someone said something that supports your claim the actual evidence does not. The Indians waged war on the immigrants and the immigrants fought back. The numbers killed on both sides were roughly equal. Hence no genocide.ReplyDelete