31 July 2011

The "Christian" Terrorist and the War on Terror

Admit it - we all believed the Oslo shooter was a Muslim terrorist. And we happened to be wrong - but we weren't wrong for believing it initially. The fact that all major terrorist acts have been perpetrated by Muslims within the last 30 odd years is nothing to sneeze at and proves the point.

Now there are plenty out there who are quite excited that Anders Behring Breivik was not a Muslim - because they finally get a chance to "prove" that Muslims are not the only terrorists around.
As westerners wrestle with such characterizations of the Oslo mass murder suspect, the question arises: Nearly a decade after 9/11 created a widespread suspicion of Muslims based on the actions of a fanatical few, is this what it's like to walk a mile in the shoes of stereotype?

The liberals have something... finally... to grab onto.

They are so excited, in fact, that many have claimed that Breivik was a fundamentalist Christian and connect him to Timothy McVeigh, the Oklahoma City bomber - another supposed Christian. (Because as we know, fundamentalist Christians are as dangerous as those jihadist Muslims.)
In his personal manifesto the killer wrote: "Regarding my personal relationship with God, I guess I'm not an excessively religious man. I am first and foremost a man of logic. If you have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ and God then you are a religious Christian. Myself and many more like me do not necessarily have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ and God."

He also quoted various atheist philosophers when he posted on blogs, was supportive of the gay community, hadn't attended church in 17 years, and seems to have had no connection to organized Christianity.

But that did not hold back the hysterical Christian-bashers out there.

The same happened, and still happens, with Timothy McVeigh. The Oklahoma killer was an atheist, who even in his final letter before execution screamed against God. No matter, he is still said to be a Christian.

By performing this terrible act of murder in Norway, Breivik has done everyone a huge disservice. The issue of the Islamification of Europe is very serious indeed and with the massacre, he has changed the topic. It is no longer Islamification - he has brought the entire "War on Terror" into question. Since now we know that not all terrorists are Muslims because Breivik is supposedly a Christian... the War is moot and should no longer be waged.

This is bad. We will no longer be able to productively debate the effects of Islam in Europe. From here on Breivik will always be brought up in defense of Islam. The mantra of "all religions have their fundamentalists" will be repeated ad nauseam and thoughtful discussion will be shown the door. Thank you Anders Behring Breivik. Good job.

Read Michael Coren: No Twisted Religion in Norway Tragedy

22 July 2011

The War on Jewish History


I just came across these two must read articles.

The first is the archeological find of a small gold bell. Why is that important? The Arabs and most notably the "Palestinians" have a habit of denying and destroying any Jewish connection to the Land of Israel. This bell dates back to the 2nd Temple period and may have actually come from the cloak of the Jewish High Priest. It's nice to see history come alive with finds like this - proving what we already know - Jews have lived in the Land of Israel for 3000 years.

The second article deals with the Holocaust denial in "Palestinian" schools.
UNRWA, which provides assistance for Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank, was shocked when Palestinian school officials categorically rejected a request to insert Holocaust studies in their school curriculums....

The Palestinian Authority on the other hand does not encourage any instruction about that dark period in history and it remains out of bounds. UNRWA (United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East), which provides assistance for Palestinian refugees in Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, Gaza and the West Bank, was shocked a few weeks ago when Palestinian school officials categorically rejected a request to have Holocaust studies inserted to the school curriculum as part of the education on human rights. The UNRWA Palestinian Workers Union explained to an embarrassed UNRWA management that "teaching the Holocaust to Palestinian children may confuse them."

I'm really not sure why UNRWA was so shocked by this Holocaust denial. It's been rampant for years within "Palestinian" society. Moderate Mahmoud Abbas, head of the Palestinian Authority, wrote his doctoral thesis on the collaboration between the Zionists and the Nazis, in essence denying the atrocities of the Holocaust.

I'm not one to cry anti-semitism at every turn. I don't bring out the Holocaust in every conversation. I really don't even care if people like Jews - as long as they don't try and hurt us or deny our history. By denying the Holocaust - a planned execution of 6,000,000 people, among them 1.5 million children - it proves that these are people that have no interest in making peace and only in making war.

This war may be in the form of rockets hitting school buses - or - this war may be in the form of an attack on Jewish history.

Denying 3000 years of Jews living in the Land of Israel - and destroying the archeology that proves it... is war.

Denying the execution of 6 million innocents simply because it doesn't fit their narrative ... is war.

It's time to stop pretending that the "Palestinians" are partners in this 'peace' process. A people who deny our existence in history and deny the loss of millions of our people are at war with us. There will be no peace.

21 July 2011

Hillary for President?


With unemployment numbers continuing to rise (understatement of the year) and debt up to our proverbial ears - President Obama is in serious trouble. Polls show him losing to a generic Republican candidate in 2012.
With the presidential election still 18 months away and the GOP field wide open, 44 percent of voters say they are more likely to vote for a generic Republican candidate than President Obama, according to the latest Gallup poll. Just 39 percent would back the incumbent president.

The level of uncertainty heading into the 2012 election is also evident in the 18 percent of voters who, at this point, do not have a preference for Obama versus the Republican.

It seems that 2012 will be an "anyone but Obama" election.

The question that crosses my mind (and a few others watching the ad above) is that this is the perfect time for Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to step into the power void that Obama has left with his base and independents.

We know that Hillary has said that she's no longer interested in being president and is happy being Secretary of State - but then again she was supposedly happy being a senator from the great State of New York and wasn't interested in being president. We know how that turned out.

It would actually be in the best interest of the Democratic Party to run Hillary instead of Obama. Democrats like her - she won all the big states when she ran back in 2008 - and I think she'd bring in the independent vote as well. She's seen as a moderate, and perhaps a fiscal conservative. Most importantly we know that everyone *loves* Bill.

To mollify the liberals - they'd finally have a chance to vote for a black guy and a woman two elections in a row. For those who are guided by identity politics, I think that would be a pretty big deal.

Of course those who do vote based on gender and race also have other options - Herman Cain and Michele Bachmann... but I won't hold my breath.

19 July 2011

Wind farm invades Normandy Beach?


In news just reported today,
Last week, the French government opened the bidding process for the construction of 1,200 turbines in five spots along the coast. President Nicolas Sarkozy first announced the $27 billion plan for offshore wind farms in January. The successful bid will be announced in early 2012 and the wind farms are set to begin operating in 2015.

Thankfully I'm not the only one out there that was appalled when they heard about this -
In France, a collective of 483 organizations called the European Platform Against Windfarms has been loudly criticizing the plan, calling for a moratorium on all new wind farm projects. The group’s president, Jean-Louis Butré, said it objects to wind farms for a number of reasons, from health and esthetic reasons to historical concerns.

In a phone interview from Paris, Butré said that, if the government builds a wind farm off the D-Day beaches, “it means that they do not respect such things.

He is absolutely correct. Allied forces had casualties numbering at least 10,000 on D-Day. Another 12,000 were lost in April and May of 1944 leading up to the Normandy landing. To build 1,200 turbines along these beaches is truly a slap in the face of those who lost their lives saving France and the rest of Europe.

But hey, it's France and it even reminds me of a joke,
Why are the streets in Paris lined with trees? Because the Germans like to march in the shade.

14 July 2011

Government Overreach?

We all accept a certain amount of government interference in our lives - we understand we need a standing army, a national treasury, regulation of interstate commerce... however, where does this interference end? While Congress can pass laws involving how we live our personal lives, does it mean that they should?

Here are a couple topics to discuss along these lines:

The light bulb ban.
The federal government has decided to kill off the traditional incandescent bulbs in favor of the newer more energy efficient bulbs. But as we know, these bulbs are more expensive to buy as well as cause major headaches and cost if you happen to drop and break one.

Obese children to be removed from their families.
Whenever I hear the words "do it for the children" it scares me. It allows for just about any ridiculous law to be passed through government "for the children". Is this a slippery slide issue? Is this something that gives government (local or national) too much power to take children away? What happens if children are being taught to be racists? Is it a parent's right to teach hate? It sounds strange - but where does this end?

These are just two topics of many. Any thoughts on these - or any others?

11 July 2011

Historical Fiction Anyone? Cue 1967


I was reading through a pretty evenhanded article dealing with Canada's opposition to Palestinian statehood - when all of a sudden it a took a sharp turn into the land of bias.

There were a couple statements in particular that gave me pause and a chuckle.

The article interviewed Rami Khouri, a "leading Mideast analyst" based in Lebanon,
“I think the critical point for any Western government — Canadian, American, British — is to differentiate between supporting the security of Israel and opposing the colonization polices of Israel. Israel within its 1967 borders is a phenomenon the world accepts, even the Arabs,” Khouri said. [emphasis added]

That's right. The Arab world accepts Israel within 1967 borders and anything past the cease-fire lines is "colonization".

Let's talk about Arab acceptance of 1967 borders for a moment. Have they always accepted Israel within those borders? Did Jordan and the rest of the Arab world go to war with Israel in 1967 because they were upset about the occupation of the "1967 territories"? Was the Palestinian Liberation Organization founded in 1964 because they were upset about the Israeli occupation of 1967? Looking back in history - was the Hebron massacre of Jews in 1929 revenge for the Arab loss of land in 1967?

And that annoying little chant that I heard back at university anti-Israel rallies: "From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free." Checking the map, it doesn't seem to me that those 1967 borders are accepted by all, either that or those 'protesters' are unaware of their geography.

The other ridiculous claim that any settlement past those borders is "colonization" also gives me pause but unfortunately, no chuckle.

That's right, Israel is colonizing Jewish land. 3000 years of Jewish history in Judea and Samaria (the West Bank). Biblical archeology has proven time and again Jewish historical possession in all of the Arab-occupied West Bank as well as modern possession until 1948 when Jordan took control - and occupied it until 1967. Why didn't the Jordanians do anything during that time for those poor "Palestinians"? Perhaps because "Palestine" is a figment of historical imagination?

I just can't figure this one out.

But let's call a spade a spade already. The Arab world is a bunch of racists - especially the "Palestinians". They are unable to allow a single Jew to live within the lands they occupy. All Jews had to be removed from the Gaza Strip before it was handed over to the "Palestinians". Why? Because there would have been a massacre and everyone knows it. Whenever there is talk of "land for peace", giving away parts of the "West Bank" to the Arabs, there is an assumption that the Jews living there would have to leave - why? Because the Arabs are unable and unwilling to let them live and do business there, even if it improves the lives of the Arab population. There would be a massacre and everyone knows it.

Israel, with a majority of Jews, can allow an Arab minority in it's midst, even giving them full civil and political rights; but any land the Arabs have a majority in is dangerous for a Jew wandering through.

So yes, I agree with those who say that Judea/Samaria is "occupied land" - it is... by the Arabs. And those who think that Israel is safe as long as she stays within a nine-mile wide border must think that I'm stupid.

An old joke.
At the emergency meeting of the UN regarding another conflict in the Middle East, the floor has been given to the Israeli Consul. The Israeli Consul began, "Ladies and gentlemen before I commence with my speech, I wanted to relay an old story to all of you....

When Moses was leading the Jews out of Egypt he had to go through deserts, and prairies, and even more deserts... The people became thirsty and needed water. So Moses struck the side of a mountain with his cane and at the sight of that mountain a pond appeared with crystal clean, cool water. And the people rejoiced and drank to their hearts' content. Moses wished to cleanse his whole body, so he went over to the other side of the pond, took all of his clothes off and dove into the cool waters. Only when Moses came out of the water he discovered that all his clothes had been stolen... And I have reasons to believe that the Palestinians stole his clothes.

"Yassir Arafat, hearing this accusation, jumps out of his seat and screams, "This is a travesty... It's a lie! It is widely known that there were no Palestinians there at the time!!!"

"And in agreement with Chairman Arafat," said the Israeli Consul, "let me begin my speech..."

More:
Wrongly Accused? Too Bad
Video: Lynching in Ramallah 2000

10 July 2011

Good Evening Read

Taken from the Jewish Tribune (Toronto):

Wolfensohn barred from Beirut U. learns Arab gratitude firsthand

Tuesday, 05 July 2011

JERUSALEM (Arutz-7) – When the Sharon government uprooted the Jewish residents of Gaza, former World Bank chief James Wolfensohn personally bought the hothouses of the evicted Jews for millions so they could be delivered intact to the Palestinians. This was intended to help underpin the Gazan Arabs economically and strengthen the presumed peace that he expected to see flourishing after Israel’s surrender of the territory.

The Palestinians promptly burned the hothouses as a prelude to how peace with Gaza, and their governance of it, would look.....

Read more here.

06 July 2011

Suicide Bombers, Feminists and Donkeys... What do they have in Common?


The Federal government is now warning us once again of possible terrorist plots - surgically implanted bombs. It's really nothing new. I wrote about it in Breasts of Death last year. I guess it'll give the TSA another reason to do body pat-downs.

But really what I'm wondering about are the liberal women's organizations. What do they think about using women as suicide bombers? Is it seen as advancement into "man's territory"? Women have been terrorists for many years already (although I wonder what they get in heaven as a reward?). But we hear nothing from the women's groups showing concern for their Muslim sisters.

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) seem to care more than women's groups. The president of PETA sent a letter of protest to then PLO President Yasser Arafat when a donkey was used as a suicide bomber - yes, the animal was killed in the attempt.
"Your Excellency, We have received many calls and letters from people shocked at the bombing. If you have the opportunity, will you please add to your burdens my request that you appeal to all those who listen to you to leave the animals out of the conflict?"

Love it.

So... we're waiting. But taking a cursory look at the National Organization for Women (NOW) we see what their "top priority issues" are:
* Abortion Rights/Reproductive Issues
* Violence Against Women
* Constitutional Equality
* Promoting Diversity / Ending Racism
* Lesbian Rights
* Economic Justice

Of course all these issues in the Arab world are certainly not being addressed - and I haven't heard a peep about supporting the newly freed Iraqi and Afghanistani women who could use a bit of support from these feminists.

So as we listen to the TSA explain how they're going to "touch our junk" I think to myself and wonder why liberal women's groups care less about their Muslim sisters than PETA cares about a lone donkey.

04 July 2011

Women on the Canadian Gun Range... Finally


As a pro-gun advocate and gun owning American woman living in Canada, I am generally frustrated by the anti-gun ignorance that pervades Canadian society.

I was thrilled tonight to watch Byline, with host Brian Lilley, on the Sun News Network. One of the female reporters had found the Sharon Gun Club, a shooting range outside of Toronto, where they are inviting women to try their hand at shooting different types of guns.

This report is so important.

This is a huge step forward in promoting something so basic - the idea of self-defense. That a woman should be able to defend herself and her family from those who want to hurt them. Nothing equalizes a bad situation better than a 9mm or a .45 caliber.

Hats off to Brian Lilley for covering and bringing the gun debate to the fore.

Note: The report was focused on removing the fear of guns that women have by having an all-women shooting experience as well as bringing women to the sport of shooting. But I believe that once women understand that guns are a tool to be used safely - they will see how it can be used in self-defense. This report was a huge step forward in the gun conversation.

* Brian Lilley's blog post about responses to his report.

Happy July 4th!


The Declaration of Independence

IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed...

For more information on the Declaration of Independence visit the National Archives.

G-d Bless America!
Enjoy the day everybody!