A small number of fanatics…

September 30, 2007 at 2:00 am (Books, Islamism, The West, World War III)

[T]he idea that a small number of fanatics were driving the current major shifts in history was nonsense, perhaps they were responsible for terrorism but they are not the driving force behind the bigger strategic picture and shift in civilization’s evolution.

(Michael Cappi. A Never Ending War. Victoria, British Columbia, Canada: Trafford Publishing, pp. 9-10.)

In other words: we have more to worry about than just the terrorists.

Permalink 1 Comment

Islam’s incompatibility with democracy and equality

September 29, 2007 at 10:58 pm (Books, Christianity, Idiots, Islam, Islamism, Personal, Religion, Religions, The West, Theology)

Point the First:

The central problem of the democracy in Iraq is Islam. Islam has always had a political and social character, including a full program for government. In fact, the first year of the Islamic calendar does not mark the birth of dead of Muhammad, of the beginning of his prophetic ministry. It marks Muhammad’s flight from Mecca to Medina, where he became a political and military leader and Islam became a state.

(Robert Spencer. Religion of Peace? Washington, DC: Regnery Publishing, Inc., 2007, p. 165.)

This is most forcefully demonstrated by the fact that after Muhammad’s flight, Muhammad revelations take on a vastly more political tone (almost to the point of legal minutiae) and a much more intolerant tone (as, being the indisputed leader, he no longer had to tolerate or appease anyone).

Point the Second:

And of course there is no shortage of people who insist that Islam not only does not forbid, but in fact also actively fosters democracy. Abdulwahab Alkebsi of the Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy, for instance, has declared that the essentials of democracy are “consistent with Islam’s clarion call for justice, equality, and human dignity. . . . According to the Qur’an, one of the explicit purposes of God’s messengers is to offer mankind liberty, justice, and equality.” Islam, he said, “lays the ground for the values of freedom, justice, and equality that are essential to democracy, more so than any other religion or dogma.” [Reference omitted.]

Not only as much as any other religion or dogma, but more so. Can this really be true? Iranian journalist Amir Taheri thinks not. Arguing in favor of the proposition that Islam is incompatible with democracy during a debate in 2004, he directly contradicted the assertions D’Souza would make three years later: “There are fifty-seven nations in the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC). Not one is yet a democracy. The more Islamic the regime in place the less democratic it is.” He concluded, “Islam is incompatible with democracy.” [Reference omitted]

(Robert Spencer. Religion of Peace? Washington, DC: Regnery Publishing, Inc., 2007, p. 166.)

Subpoint the First, explaining Spencer’s reference to D’Souza:

So can Islamic countries be democratic? Some commentators think so. Dinesh D’Souza scolded conservatives in 2007 for “holding silly seminars on whether Islam is compatible with democracy. In reality, a majority of the world’s Muslims today live under democratic governments–in Indonesia, Malaysia, India, Bangladesh, Nigeria, and Turkey, not to mention Muslims living in Western countries. There is nothing in the Koran or the Islamic tradition that forbids democracy.” [Reference omitted.]

(Robert Spencer. Religion of Peace? Washington, DC: Regnery Publishing, Inc., 2007, p. 166.)

I am glad Spencer called D’Souza out. I am still absolutely confused why D’Souza would turn on us and support our enemies.

Point the Third:

The fundamental problem, according to Taheri, is Islam’s rejection of the idea that all people have equal dignity, a Christian idea that was central to abolishing slavery. But in Islam, it’s a very different story. The very idea of equality, Taheri declared, “is unacceptable to Islam.”

(Robert Spencer. Religion of Peace? Washington, DC: Regnery Publishing, Inc., 2007, p. 166.)

Allow me to share an anecdote. Read the rest of this entry »

Permalink 18 Comments

Knowing the Enemies’ Words

September 29, 2007 at 8:29 pm (Books, Islamism, World War III)

An annoying aspect of The Global Jihad is that the malevolence and true beliefs and aspirations and propaganda of its members are clearly and openly stated. All we have to do is translate their propaganda, which is not difficult.

But The West still listens to and believes primarily the propaganda issued by these entities to The West.

One can almost hear the mujahidin laughing, at how we are so easily fooled.

And so get their cake and eat it too: they get away with the most horrendous propaganda against us, they get away with openly and freely recruiting for The Global Jihad, and they get away with lulling us into a sense of security by fooling us with half-truths and falsehoods (which many among us — I’m not going to name names — accept as fact over what we accurately publish: better the lies of the enemy than the truths of the West?).

As such, one book at least tries to inform us about the people and groups against whom/which we are fighting: The Al Qaeda Reader by Raymond Ibrahim.

At least now we cannot say that we have not been warned.

Permalink Leave a Comment

The Loyalty of Muslims

September 29, 2007 at 7:53 pm (Islam, Islamism, Religions, The United States, World War III)

Deb: you asked some very good yet complicated questions. (Or I am making them more complicated than you intended.) I will answer them in reverse order. Now, I am no statistician; and for that matter I would not believe any statistics (I would have to ask of any such report: Who collected them? Who were interviewed? How honest were the interviewees? How leading were the questions? What was the compiler’s agenda? What was the answerer’s agenda?)

I will also say upfront that if one wants good or positive news, he or she should stop reading right now and find someplace else to be. Read the rest of this entry »

Permalink 2 Comments

Incorporate me

September 28, 2007 at 12:44 pm (Personal)

If one were to set up a consulting entity, what form of entity would be best: sole proprietorship (sp?), regular corporation, LLC, personal services corporation?

Two pertinent facts: it will involve only one person; and it will provide controvertial (sp?) information (mainly dealing with Islamism) and the consultant would like to limit, as much as possible, personal liability or personal affects being jeopordized (sp?) should he be sued by Islamists for some reason.

Also, said consultant wannabe does not expect to earn much, if anything, from his consulting services. It’s sort of a hobby, a side-project.

Also, although said wannabe consultant is aware of the benefits of a Delaware corporation, he is also aware that he would have to “qualify” to work in the state wherein he resides, which is not Delaware. Which means more money on top of incorporation (of whatever type) in Delaware. And said wannabe consultant is hardly flush with cash. (Indeed, incorporation of any type will be a bit of a sacrifice, but he thinks it should be worth it.)

Soooooo…any advice or ideas?

Permalink 1 Comment

More on skin color and on me

September 27, 2007 at 3:42 am (Culture, Islamism, Personal, US Government)

WickedPinto wrote:

Though I have to say you are right, about the brown skin. . . . kinda, but not cuz of the skin, but because as you described your own ancestry, basicaly you don’t have one, right? Your father was from one nation, your mother from another, you were born outside the nation, and have become an American since?

Thats kinda hard to reconcile. (or am I thinking tushar?)

I answer:
My parents are from two different countries (and, despite this, are related). However, I was born in The United States. True, I lived most of my formative years abroad, but I always retained an American identity.

But you are right: it is not so much the color of the skin as much as the ethnic origins that matter. (It so happens that many “suspect” ethnicities give rise to darker skin.) If a red dot-bearing Hindu man from India or Nepal or wherever were in a sensitive position, I would have no problem whatsoever despite the man’s darker skin color. That said, an American-born man of American (that is, ultimately European) origins who hangs out with Muslims would be just as suspect, in my eyes, as a Muslim.

Recall the converts: they throw us off, which is why Islamists seek to convert them to Islam and then recruit them for Islamism (for one of their many battlefronts).

Permalink 2 Comments


September 27, 2007 at 3:37 am (Arabic, Books, Islam, Islamism, World War III)

Taqiyya: “To fear.” Based primarily on Koran 3:28 and 16:106, taqiyya is an Islamic doctrine allowing Muslims to dissemble their true beliefs when fearing persecution. Based on certain hadiths, some ulema expand the meaning of taqiyya to also permit general lying in order to advance any cause beneficial to Islam.

Raymond Ibrahim. The Al Qaeda Reader. New York: Broadway Books, 2007, p. xxi.

Permalink Leave a Comment

The Value in Islam of the Wisdom of Infidels

September 27, 2007 at 3:28 am (Books, Islam, Islamism, Religions, World War III)

One man, who has been the source of so much insight into the Islamist paradigm, basically established and now runs a university. Like many Islamists, he has a public persona, which is quite unassuming, and a private one, which is quite conniving and manipulative for the sake of Islamist causes.

Like most Islamists (and many Muslims), he considers people not based on their race or ethnicity or national origins or nationality: he considers them based on their religion. This is quite consistent for many Muslims, and explains why until now Muslims (and the Muslim community, if one can speak of such a thing) have not been able to fully assimilate into the framework of America: they consider themselves as separate from the rest of the non-believers.

Now, taking this further, such Muslims also assign value and veracity based on such considerations. Thus, only the words, thoughts, ideas, plans, and theories of Muslims have merit, while those of the non-believers are without value. This is because everything has to be done for the glory of Allah (and, indirectly, for the glory of the Muslim community) and must be grounded on true principles. Read the rest of this entry »

Permalink 3 Comments

Working for The Gov.

September 26, 2007 at 3:35 am (Islamism, Military, Personal, The United States, US Government, World War III)

Thank you, Wicked. I applied to every three-letter government agency I could find.

I was turned down by each one.

One I applied to three times. Turned down each time.

I also applied to the FBI three times, each for a different position. Turned down each time. (These three times are different from the ones mentioned before.)

I have read that agencies and entities of The Government are having a hard time staffing reliable people. Anyone who isn’t apple pie American has a good chance of being shot down (as it were). And I do not blame them. The Government has already had enough very bad experiences with impressionable double agents and incompetent employees. (Regarding the latter, one group in particular comes to mind: it was a group of men of Arab origins, working for the Army, who translated Arabic. But they were caught buggering each other while at work. Now, I believe homosexual sex is not an intrinsic part of the Arabic language, but I could be wrong.) Frankly, if I saw a darker-skinned person working for The Government in such a sensitive position, I would be concerned. The ideology of Islamism is very insidious indeed.

My problem is that I have no professional certification or experience in translating. No classes or degrees. They find that a bit suspicious if not of doubtful reliability. I don’t blame them. My duty is not to work for the government. It is to be free of the inevitable encumbrances thereof and to motivate you, of the West, to greater zeal in building up and defending the American Republic.

Because Heaven knows you need more pontificators, and that you need more lecturing to.

Permalink 2 Comments

Why Shouldn’t I Volunteer Myself?

September 26, 2007 at 3:11 am (Military, Personal, World War III)

Against my better judgment: said one:

If you think it is so fun getting shot at, why not volunteer yourself?

To which I reply:
If I could, I would, but I can’t: I’m type 1 (insulin dependent) diabetic, which is an automatic disqualifier. I spoke to a few people in the armed services (one of whom wanted to recruit me), and I was consistently told that I would be absolutely unable to serve.

I even applied to work in Iraq as a translator with a contractor with the Defense Department. They turned me down after my physical: they said they could not hire me because I was diabetic.

So. What next?

Permalink 1 Comment

I have always wondered…

September 26, 2007 at 1:55 am (Afghanistan, Idiots, Iraq, Leftist idiocy, Military, Mocking the enemy, The Left)

I have always wondered: why all the hue and cry to get our troops out of Iraq?

Why not focus on Japan and Germany first? Korea? The last I knew, the Second World War ended quite some time ago. Perhaps our leaders forgot to bring them back, eh?

Maybe our most valiant patriots want to withdraw our troops from harm’s way.

Silly me. I missed the memo which stated that our troops are only to be posted where they will not be shot at.

All that armor and weapons must be for show. Shock and awe and all that, eh?

Permalink 2 Comments

Where I have been

September 26, 2007 at 12:52 am (Blogs, Personal)

Even though my blogging pace has been slow, I was somewhat active on a few blogs. And even that has come to a trickle.

Actually, I left my old job, and am working quite hard in my new one. The pay is much better, but I am working the hardest I ever have. And even though this job allows me to access the Internet as often as I may like, there is too much for me to do at work for me to post. Plus, I feel uncomfortable posting or commenting from any computer other than my own.

I will have to put in a lot of more effort, but I should make something work out.

I would not want to drive away what few readers I have left. 🙂

That said, I’m feeling quite political and lecture-ific lately. I may be moved to pontificate on matters political, religious, and even spiritual.

Permalink 2 Comments

Why I Hate Robert Spencer

September 26, 2007 at 12:46 am (Books, Christianity, Oriana Fallaci, Personal)

Well, maybe “hate” is a strong word, stronger than I may mean. But the fact remains that I detest him, that Mr. Robert Spencer.


Quite simple. Every book I wanted to write, he has written. Every book he has written I would have written…if I were older and had thought of it first. Mr. Spencer has robbed me of my true vocation.

That said, he is an amazing author. Simply enthralling and extraordinary. He joins the small pantheon of modern Western authors who are priceless (examples of which are Steven Emerson, the late but most blessed Oriana Fallaci, Victor Davis Hanson, Bernard Lewis, Daniel Pipes, and Mark Steyn: and all but Drs. Pipes and Lewis are Christians).

Read him; read all his books.

(The pantheon of modern Western authors is necessarily small, as most modern authors are Occidentalist idiots, who all repeat or perpetuate the same anti-Western nonsense. And most of that nonsense is falsehoods and lies.)

Permalink 3 Comments

Check. Check. Check.

September 16, 2007 at 1:08 pm (The Internet, The Left, The Media, The Right)

And for the record, the Left’s propaganda machinery constantly “checks” what the Right says and writes, so much so and so effectively that many automatically dismiss anything that is believed to originate from the Right. The Left is very good at smearing the messenger as well as the message, with the consequence that people begin to doubt the reliability of the messenger as well as rejecting the message.

Truth and facts matter little: what matters is how it buoys the Left’s favorites.

On the other hand, we on the Right can do a better job challenging the Left, and in challenging the media with regard to the Left. If we can do a better job publicizing scandals by those in the Left, the rest of the media will have no choice but to follow suit. We are too soft.

Permalink 3 Comments

Challenging the true betrayers

September 16, 2007 at 12:59 pm (Blogs, Leftist idiocy, Military, The Left, The Media, The Right, World War III)

Many people are quite unhappy with the ad put out in The New York Times by “Move On” which smears General Petraeus. What is most shocking, however, is that someone is actually doing something about it!

From good Mr. Wolf Pangloss in “FEC Complaint filed against MoveOn.org and New York Times” :

James “Uncle Jimbo” Hanson of Blackfive has filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission concerning the repugnant MoveOn.org “General Betray Us” full page political ad in the New York Times. The Times charged MoveOn $65,000 for the ad, but a reporter who called the Times inquiring about a full page ad in a Monday paper was quoted a rate card price of $181,692. The complaint asserts that the difference between the full price and the price charged should be declared as a political contribution by the New York Times.

I like. I like very much.

The travesty with this situation was not the advertisement or the particulars behind it but that no one had done anything about it. Strong action must always be taken to provide a check to the Leftist propaganda machine. We cannot allow them any special favors not extended to us as well by supposedly unbiased entities.

Permalink 1 Comment

The story of the entire national anthem

September 11, 2007 at 1:46 pm (A+ Reads, Blogs, History, The United States)

Click here to learn about our national anthem, The Star-Spangled Banner, through an essay: “All Four Stanzas” by Isaac Asimov.

Discovered via IMAO . Thank you, Frank.

Permalink Leave a Comment

We Are America

September 11, 2007 at 6:38 am (History, The United States)

Today, let us commemorate the heroism of America and her people; let us commemorate the strong character of her people; let us commemorate the heart of love and charity with which she showers the world’s peoples with compassion and relief. In the midst of such great anguish and suffering, America stood strong and stands strong and will forever stand strong.

Because America is not made of buildings or planes or the transfer of numbers floating in air; America is not made of warmongering bigots; America is not made of guns or bullets or honor or vengeance. America is made up of her many peoples, with dreams and hopes, and with strong character, bravery, heroism, and unfettered charity. America is made up of those who say: give us your weary and burdened, and in the bosom of our love and wisdom, we shall make true men and women of them. America is made of those who work hard because work is good; who play hard because play is good. All united under one banner of red, white, and blue.

We will never forget. That day of such great loss made us see just how great we were and are as a people and as a nation.

We Are America. We make America strong. And because of us, America will never fall, and America will always prevail. Always.

Permalink 1 Comment

Musharraf to Sharif: KBYE

September 10, 2007 at 10:35 pm (News, Pakistan)

Pervez Musharraf, president of Pakistan, unceremonious sent Nawaz Sharif back to where he came from.

Amid great rejoicing (and nationwide anxiety), Nawaz Sharif returned to Pakistan to take part in this year’s general elections. He was exiled in 2000 after being found guilty of trying to orchestrate the permanent removal of Musharraf from Earth. Although Musharraf, if he stacked the courts right and played his cards right, could have had Sharif executed in 2000, he did not want to repeat the example of Zia-ul-Haqq, who had Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto executed. (Zia-ul-Haqq overthrew Bhutto, Musharraf overthrew Sharif.) The last thing Musharraf needed was to make Sharif a martyr. The Saudi government — which has a very heavy hand in Pakistani politics and administration — brokered a deal whereby the guilty Sharif would serve his 10-year sentence in exile in Saudi Arabia.

But, like the opportunistic politician he is, Sharif had to test the waters and push the envelope by violating that agreement. As soon as he landed, he was arrested, charged with more crimes, and given the choice of staying (and having to stand for trial) or leaving for Saudi Arabia. The Pakistani government says Sharif chose the latter, but I wonder how much the choice was made for him by various actors.

Were it not for the shade Zia-ul-Haqq and the current political environment in Pakistan, I would have whole-heartedly recommended that Musharraf execute Sharif. (And Benazir Bhutto, if she returns from exile.)

Now, although we should promote democracy and popular government wherever we can and ought to, Pakistan is a different case. Bhutto and Sharif are not popularly elected as they are people who manipulate the people so as to place themselves in a position whereby they can lord over the entire country as their families used to lord over their lands, treating the entire country and its peoples like their personal realms. They rule more as autocratic sovereigns than elected leaders. And if someone disagrees with them, that someone should not be surprised to find himself with lead poisoning, if you get my drift. As such, I see no reason — no reason whatsoever — why we need to patronize or even dignify these corrupt autocrats-wannabe.

I say: better a general on the throne than a fickle, undependable, de facto feudal lord.

We should not make Musharraf too comfortable in thinking he will always have our support, but we should not be played by the so-called “pro-democracy” actors in Pakistan, who speak what we want to hear in order that they can get our support, with which they can bring about their own nefarious purposes.

Just recall this: never has the press and the media been so free and uncensored as it is now under Musharraf. Bring back any of the ancien regime, and freedom will go out the window. Not to mention a somewhat stable hold of the country.

Permalink Leave a Comment

Loud music

September 8, 2007 at 10:49 pm (Amusement, Words of wisdom)

The Church and individual members of it have always been, are now, and ever will be under siege from the adversary. He will cover, even erase the still, small voice through loud and dissonant music awash with lyrics that cannot be understood—or worse, by lyrics that can be understood. He will carefully lead us astray with every other temptation he could devise.

President Boyd K. Packer, at the Saturday afternoon session of the 177th Annual General Conference of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the re-dedication session of the Salt Lake Tabernacle (also known as the Mormon Tabernacle).

Permalink Leave a Comment

Thank you!

September 8, 2007 at 4:55 pm (Blogs, Personal)

I would like to thank those who have recently read my blog and, especially, those who have recently commented thereon.

Your advice and words are greatly appreciated.

Thank you!

Permalink 1 Comment

Next page »