September 2009
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun
« Aug   Oct »
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
282930  

Month September 2009

Entries 10 Total

Just A Few More Laws…

Sep 29, 09 2:10 PM

The complete ignorance of many people–particularly liberals–when it comes to the subject of guns in the hands of civilians never ceases to amaze me. Tomorrow, a law recently passed here in Arizona allowing CCW holders (concealed carry weapons permit) to carry their concealed firearms into restaurants and bars will go into effect. But as I watched the news last night, I saw a not-so-shocking trend: reporters talking to a small but very vocal group of restauranteurs who are angry with the new law. Out of five local channels I watched, only ONE talked to a manager who didn’t have a problem with the law–ONLY ONE–and each and every one of those channels downplayed an important part of the law.

The law previously banned any and all firearms inside any establishment that served alcohol for on-premesis consumption (meaning all restaurants with liquor licenses and all bars). That part of Arizona gun law was changed, however, earlier this year. Ken Cheauvront, a Democrat lawmaker and restaurant owner, ardently opposed the bill to no avail. The argument is that alcohol and guns don’t mix. “People who are drinking shouldn’t be carrying guns,” they said. “We’re gonna see a huge spike in gun violence and deaths because of this!”

Here’s the kicker: the owners can put up signs that require guns be left in the car. AND, if you’re carrying into a bar, you can’t drink. That nullifies the alcohol-and-guns argument, doesn’t it?

Well, the opponents come back with, “even if I put up this sign, how do I know those CCW holders are going to leave their guns in their cars when they come in here?”

Oh, my. Tell me this, folks–how were you able to tell if someone was carrying a gun to begin with? The bad guys never obeyed the laws in the first place, and they’ll carry their gun anywhere they want. There’s a law banning handguns in New York City, yet I seem to remember a well-recognized NFL player recently getting some serious jail time not just for having one, but carrying it stuffed in his pants into a club, where he shot himself with it.

The CCW holders aren’t the ones to worry about. They’re the ones who will obey the law. They’ll leave their guns in the car if they see the sign, and if they’re carrying they won’t drink. What the hell are you whining about?

I also have to bring up this interesting little factoid. Chicago also has a law banning all handguns within the city’s limits. But did you know that school violence involving gangs and handguns killed 18 students in schools all over Chicago during the 2007-2008 school year? 27 total died in acts of violence carried out with various weapons. And last school year–the one that ended this past May–a whopping 37 were killed, including one who was carrying a gun that was illegal by two rival gang members who were adults.

They’re not supposed to have them, but they get them anyway. And it’s the law-abiding citizens who suffer.

I suppose if we just had a few more laws, though, the thugs wouldn’t be able to get their hands on all those drugs, either.

Comments (20)

Age of Accountability

Sep 24, 09 2:04 PM

ACORN CEO Bertha Lewis shocked the entire country by appearing on FOX News this past Sunday. Today, however, she’s made a liar by her own organization. I have no trouble believing Lewis ordered this herself:

ACORN has filed suit against James O’Keefe and Hannah Giles, the two independent reporters who ran the actual sting operation, and against Andrew Breitbart, owner of Breitbart.com and Biggovernment.com, which aired the controversial ACORN videos.

Recap: earlier this month, a shocking video was posted on Biggovernment.com in which O’Keefe and Giles, posing as pimp and prostitute, went to the ACORN offices in Baltimore, Maryland to see what would happen if they asked for help and advice for their “situation.” They told the ACORN workers–Tonja Thompson and Shera Williams–that they made most or all of their money through Giles’ work as a prostitute, and they needed to hide their illicit activities from the IRS. Moreover, they wanted to buy a house to use as a brothel and wanted to staff it with underage girls from South America.

Thompson and Williams didn’t bat an eye. Both pretended like it was business as usual and gave the pair a laundry list of tips on how to evade detection by lying to the IRS and other authorities, including how to avoid paying taxes on ill-gotten gain and how to represent themselves on tax returns (they were really supposed to call themselves “performance artists”).

It didn’t stop there. There are reportedly no less than seven videos total, possibly eight. Each sting is at a different ACORN office, in every corner of the country. In each incident the same advice was given by different people. The reporters themselves later said that they didn’t expect to get anything of use out of the first meeting, and they certainly didn’t expect it to be so widespread. The operation revealed a systematic misuse of taxpayer and grant dollars for ACORN workers to help people use illegal means to get ahead.

After the first video was aired, most of the MSM ignored it–except FOX News. Within seconds of their first report on the sting, ACORN sent FOX producers a nasty-gram to stop showing the videos or reporting on the controversy (you could have set your watch by their timed reaction). When video after video revealed the same issues at every major ACORN hub in America, though, Congress took notice. They voted to de-fund ACORN. And Lewis had to stand up and say something, so she said it to FOX, whom they’d already threatened with a lawsuit.

Just days after her pontification about the actions of those employees being “unconscionable” and “inexcusable,” however, Lewis must have had a change of heart.

What’s interesting about the lawsuit is that it’s only for ACORN’s damaged reputation and the two Maryland employees–not all the others. And the entire basis of the suit is the Maryland Wiretap Law, which is quoted in the complaint. But if you read the quotations, it refers to “interception” of communications; nowhere does it refer to recording one’s own conversations. There’s a difference. O’Keefe and Giles weren’t setting up cameras and microphones to tape conversations they weren’t involved in, they were taping themselves.

So in reality, they didn’t violate the MWL. And it’s incredibly disingenuous for ACORN’s fearless leader to feign acceptance of responsibility for the poor actions of their employees, then turn around and sue the people who brought the grievances to light.

She’s basically saying, “yes, we were wrong, but we’re gonna make you pay for calling us out on it.” It’s a bully tactic, pure and simple. If Lewis were really sorry for what had been done, if ACORN weren’t really a criminal racket, and if it truly were just an isolated problem (at seven or eight offices all across the country, no less), there would be no lawsuit. It’s not just the two employees suing–it’s ACORN suing on their behalf. They’re demanding $1 million for ACORN’s reputation and $500K each for the two employees. And legal fees to boot.

Ah, the age of accountability. We’re so much more honest now than we were a year ago, aren’t we?

Comments (30)

Crazy Times

Sep 23, 09 2:08 PM

Today, Democrats killed the transparency Obama promised yet again. While voting on whether to post the new healthcare legislation 72 hours prior to voting on the final bill, the Senate Finance Committee struck the measure down. They promised only to post “conceptual language” online about the bill. God forbid they actually let us all have unfettered access to it. We might actually decide for ourselves–the way we did on the last one–that we don’t want it.

Moammar Qadhafi addressed the UN right on the heels of dear leader Barack Obama. Obama told the entire world how he is the change everybody has waited for (all hail Obamessiah!). Then Qadhafi went on some long rant about how he would be happy if “our son” Obama could be the President forever, Israelis killed JFK and MLK, and Libya is going to “bring the rolling thunder” to America. America will be attacked again, so the UN needs to move out.

Meanwhile, back on the farm…

Here in Arizona, on November 15 of last year, 16-year-old Kelly Tracy was headed with her brother Matthew to prepare with their high school’s marching band to perform in a parade when their car was struck by a drunken illegal alien, Manuel Contreras-Galdean. Matthew was injured. Kelly died within hours. Contreras-Galdean was placed under arrest at the scene. Shortly after the collision he caused (while driving with a BAC of .192), he was found to be in the United States illegally. He has since also been charged with forgery–he used what police call “synthetic fraud” to create a fake identity and falsified employment records to get a job.

He wasn’t even supposed to be in our country.

I do not speak for the Tracy family. I do not know what their thoughts and feelings are about the aggravating factors of Contreras-Galdean’s “immigrant” status. But I can’t imagine how they must feel today as the man who murdered their daughter had the tacit nerve to stand up in court and reject the prosecution’s plea offer of 10.5 years for each count against him (21 years total).

That sorry SOB had the gall to demand 14 to 16 years.

Oh, but he’s sooooo sorry. He didn’t mean to cause the family any pain. He wasn’t supposed to be here, he wasn’t supposed to drink and drive, and he wasn’t supposed to be at the intersection at Guadalupe and Sossaman as lit up as he was that morning. He was, though, and while he survived with minimal injuries, beautiful Kelly was torn from her life before she’d had a chance to do all the things she hoped to do.

Contreras-Galdean isn’t the first to beg for leniency in court because he didn’t mean to hurt anybody. People who have willingly killed with their bare hands have made such claims many times over. Since when does simply saying “I’m sorry, I didn’t mean to” absolve anyone of the consequences of taking a life?

One of my top ten favorite lyrics ever is from a song by Jars of Clay, called Crazy Times: “it takes more than your saline eyes to make things right.”

Comments (10)

Frick and Frack

Sep 20, 09 2:59 PM

It’s Rosh Hashanah, everybody! I’m with my family today, enjoying the day and their company. I’m also–as usual–watching the news. FOX News in particular. (Liberals, roll your eyes now and start the familiar “FOX isn’t news” mantra…face it, they’re getting John Stossel, they’ve already gotten Bernie Goldberg and Chris Wallace, you can’t just say they’re making up their own news or get pissed about their “right-wing agenda”.)

I just finished watching Chris Wallace’s Fox News Sunday section featuring ACORN CEO Bertha Lewis and Republican congressman Darrell Issa (don’t tell me they’re biased–you’d never see Issa or any other known conservative sitting next to such a die-hard liberal on any of the other major networks!). Wallace was fair; he actually gave much of the floor to Lewis. I found it very interesting, both amusing and at the same time irritating, that Lewis was completely incapable of addressing Issa. Not once did she so much as look at him. She didn’t turn to face him. She couldn’t even speak to the man–any time Issa posed a civil and rational question to Lewis, using “you” and “your” and other direct, personal words and phrases, Lewis would ONLY speak to Wallace. “What Mr. Issa says is interesting,” she’d say, or, “I’m glad Mr. Issa asked that question.” She wouldn’t even acknowledge he was in the same building, let alone sitting not two feet from her.

I daresay that behavior was absolutely outrageous. Can you imagine if Darrell Issa had done that? He’d have been tarred and feathered. It’s every bit as outrageous as Obama making a point to blitz all of the Sunday morning news shows…with the only exception being FOX. He wouldn’t give one second of airtime to FOX, yet he’d talk to every other big-name network.

This week, Andrew Breitbart’s www.biggovernment.com began running a series of explosive videos in which two independent journalists posing as pimp and prostitute ran a sting and caught at every single office ACORN employees giving them advice on evading detection for their illicit activities by finding ways to hoodwink the IRS and others who might come sniffing. In some cases, the ACORN workers gave tips on how to hide the fact that they were using underage girls from South America in a prostitution ring. When the videos first came out ACORN threatened to sue and put pressure on the Maryland AG’s office. That AG first tried to threaten Breitbart and his reporters with an investigation into supposed illegal wiretapping for recording the sessions. Today, after threatening FOX with a lawsuit for showing the videos, Lewis appeared with Wallace in a concerted damage control effort. Obama, though, is trying to claim he didn’t know what was going on and that he doesn’t care.

I think Obama would rather have dental surgery without anesthesia than talk to a FOX reporter. He’d rather talk to the reporters who fawned over him when he walked by because they won’t challenge him–they’ll ask him what appears to be a tough question, much like George Stephanopoulos did this morning on ABC, then once he’s given his answer they let it go. They won’t ask him to elaborate, they just move on. What happened to really asking the tough questions? I seriously think everyone in the MSM has lost their balls. I think they dropped off and rolled down their pant legs, and they didn’t stop to think before kicking them away as little more than an annoyance.

Stephanopoulos asked Obama about ACORN, to which Obama stuttered and finally said that he wasn’t paying attention to the ACORN controversy and the news about Congress cutting off funding to the community-organizing group. It stopped there, though. It went no further. Stephanopoulos allowed Obama to deny being involved and didn’t point out a single shred of evidence (of which there is quite a bit) that Obama is, in fact, heavily involved with ACORN. He always has been. Where were the challenges about Obama’s previous legal work on ACORN’s behalf? Where were the challenges about Obama training ACORN workers for Project Vote? Where were the questions about Obama giving more than $830,000 to Citizens Services, Inc., an ACORN front organization, for “advance work” on his campaign–work such as sound, lighting, lodging, polling and license fees. Mind you, ACORN and CSI are both supposedly just community organizing groups that canvas for low-income families. And the Obama campaign had to later revise their federal reports on the payments to CSI. They lied about it on the report they initially filed.

Nobody in the MSM has dared to cross The One and ask questions about funding, ties to ACORN, or questionable practices. Hardball my Texan ass–the MSM doesn’t know how to do it anymore. They couldn’t even play real hardball with Sarah Palin! What the hell kind of question is “what magazines do you read to get your news?” Are you freakin’ serious?

We need to face facts. Bertha Lewis and ACORN are a criminal racket and Obama is up to his eyeballs with them. He says he’s not paying much attention, but the reality is that he’s just trying to distance himself from his most ardent supporters in an attempt to save face. Plausible deniability is the new chic with Democrats. First Charles Gibson pretended to know nothing about the ACORN scandal, then Nancy Pelosi followed suit. Today, Obama played dumb. Obama and ACORN are frick and frack, folks. You can’t separate ‘em.

Comments (14)

Give Peace A Chance

Sep 18, 09 9:09 PM

“I think everybody should like everybody.” –Andy Warhol

During his “Bed-in for peace,” John Lennon gave several interviews; in one of them, a journalist asked what message he and Yoko Ono were trying to convey. “All we’re saying is give peace a chance,” he replied. Lennon liked the phrase so much that he made a song out of it. It rapidly became the theme song for anti-war demonstrations all over America.

Today it’s still sung by anti-war protesters. I’ve seen video clips of many different groups singing the same old “all that we’re saying…is give peace a chance” chorus line many times over the past few years. It’s sung by people carrying all manner of signs, most of which–sarcastically or otherwise–basically say that there’s never any reason for war. War is never the answer. And if you support the war, you’re a murderer.

I take serious offense to that song. Why?

It suggests that war is something I like. That I’m violent by nature. That I didn’t try first to solve an issue by talking before putting my dukes up. It suggests that I enjoyed writing to my brother in Iraq and Afghanistan and that I want him to go back. Those words are sung by people who have already decided that because I support both the troops AND their mission, I’d rather go to war and give up on peace.

What makes so many people believe that war is never the answer? It has actually been the answer to a great many things. The American Revolution created our country and threw off the chains of England. The Barbary Wars stopped Muslims from raiding American towns on the coast and taking whatever (and whomever) they pleased; it also stopped the Pashah of Tripoli from demanding hush money. The Civil War ended slavery and kept our nation together. World War I helped our European allies stave off takeover by the Germans; World War II stopped the Nazi takeover from getting any worse.

Sure, we’ve fought wars that were either unnecessary or poorly-planned. But that doesn’t mean that war is never the answer. Yes, people die. War is hell. Nothing in life is ever perfect. If we’re unwilling to fight for the right thing, though, the end result can and will be far worse.

“Give Peace a Chance” is written from the point of view that Andy Warhol said the words I quoted at the open of this post. Humans are inherently good, so there should be no reason to fight. Everybody should like everybody. We’re all people, right? Why can’t we all just get along?

Have you ever noticed that you don’t have to teach a child to do something bad? You have to raise a kid and teach them how to do what’s right, because they’ll naturally do what they’re not supposed to do. Human nature is, in fact, NOT inherently good. Look at the Nazis. Tribal warfare has brought starvation, disease, and mass murder to many African nations–Mogadishu and Darfur are perfect examples. Palestinians raise their sons to believe that martyrdom is the highest form of honor and train them to achieve it by blowing themselves up in crowded Israeli civilian areas to kill as many Jews as they can. And slavery was ended, but it gave way to segregation in America–and it lasted how long?

How can we look at the reality of human nature and sing songs about how human beings are really good and we all just need to hug and hold hands? What makes us believe that refusing to fight is going to do us any good?

I’m perfectly capable of giving peace a chance. Most people would say they are. But as long as we have issues with admitting when we’re wrong, talking about things that are uncomfortable, and accepting that we’re not perfect, peace will never be perfect.

So when someone figures out how to cure those ills, we can talk about how we can all just get along.

Comments (4)

Jimmy Carter Finally Says It

Sep 16, 09 2:01 PM

He’s done it. He’s finally confirmed what we conservatives have long been pointing out. He’s the first big dude in the Democrat party to actually admit that this is what they think, and others are sure to follow.

Former president Jimmy Carter said to a packed-house audience in Atlanta yesterday that all of the disagreement with President Obama is “based on racism.”

While some Obama supporters have warned of the return of white hoods and “lynching rides through the countryside” because of the racism against Obama, until yesterday none of the major Democrat players had supported such claims. Carter is the first and I promise he won’t be the last. What he’s really saying is what every Democrat has dreamed of being able to say for a long time: you’re not allowed to disagree with us now, because if you do we’ll call you a racist.

In other words, we’ll win one way or another. Even if the methods used are dirty and low-down.

Of course, we are also talking about the same man who meets regularly with Hamas. And he mistakes Israel’s right to defend herself with “apartheid.”

Jimmy Carter is a scumbag, and he can kiss my Texan @$$.

Comments (10)

Stark Raving Mad

Sep 14, 09 3:58 PM

I just love it when one of my liberal acquantances tells me that I need to be more tolerant. I love it when I’m asked if I’ve ever questioned what I believe. I really love it when people tell me that I’m incapable of being reasonable because I’m politically conservative, and conservatives need to be more open-minded.

During Obama’s speech last week, Republican Jim Wilson shouted, “you lie!” when Obama talked about certain aspects of his healthcare reform. Democrats, in true fashion, immediately called for Wilson to be censured. Where is all the huff and puff when one of their own acts like a real neanderthal?

Where were they when Rep. Pete Stark threatened to throw a journalist out the window for nothing more than asking a question?

Or when Stark accused Republicans of sending troops to Iraq to get their heads blown off for the Presidents’ amusement?

Let’s go back a little further, though, shall we? Back in 1990, when Stark first started banging the drum for socialized healthcare, Dr. Louis Sullivan–a black man–opposed Stark’s Democrat plans openly. Stark couldn’t offer a single intelligent rebuttal, but he could insult Sullivan by saying, “you are a disgrace to your race and your profession.” Sullivan came back with a sarcastic, “I guess I should feel ashamed because Congressman Stark thinks I am not a ‘good Negro…as a Cabinet member who has spent almost four decades of my life dedicated to healing…(I) am unable to express my own views without being subject to race-based criticism by those who are not ready to accept independent thinking by a black man.”

Good for Sullivan for standing up for his beliefs. Stark the bully never changed, though. In 1995, Stark called Republican rep. Nancy Johnson a “whore” for the insurance industry when she refused to support his healthcare schemes as well (he also said that her only knowledge of health care was gained from “pillow talk” with her husband, who is a physician). Where were all the feminists when that happened?

In 1999, California state welfare director Eloise Anderson (a conservative) openly opposed life-long welfare entitlement. Stark called her a “baby killer,” saying, “she’d kill children if she had her way” because she refused to agree with Stark that some people are entitled to get welfare checks for their entire lives.

Then, in 2003, the House was about to begin hearings on pension fund legislation. Republican rep. Scott McInnis began reading the bill and rep. Bill Thomas began trying to drown him out. McInnis demanded that Thomas and Stark be quiet, and Stark began taunting him: “Oh, you think you are big enough to make me, you little wimp? Come on. Come over here and make me. I dare you.” Such a display is bound to shock anybody; Stark couldn’t just stop there, though. He continued, “You little fruitcake. You little fruitcake. I said you are a fruitcake.”

Think that was it? Think again! Stark went way over the top when he called McInnis a “c–ksucker.”

Then there was the incident with one of his constituents, Daniel Dow. Stark toed the line with 49 fellow Democrats on refusing to support a resolution that condemned the abuse at Abu Ghraib, but offered unbending support for the troops in Iraq. Dow, an enlisted soldier who had just returned home from Kosovo, wrote Stark a strongly-worded letter and faxed it in. To his utter shock and surprise, Dow came home from running errands to find a voicemail from his representative–but it wasn’t nice in the least. Stark told Dow he didn’t know what he was talking about, then told him that if he’d cared about enlisted people, he wouldn’t have supported the resolution, either. He went on to tell Dow that someone had likely put him up to it, because there was no way he was smart enough to actually write his own letter, then promised to call back to tell him how “great a god damned hero” Dow was.

Wow. Where were all the outraged Democrats when Stark was behaving like a neanderthal? Oh, wait, I forgot…he’s allowed to speak and act like a rap star because he’s a Democrat and a liberal, and as we all know they’re the only ones who know how to be tolerant.

Now remember, everybody…you have to be tolerant and open-minded!

(UPDATE: Here is the text of the letter and a link to actually hear the voicemail left for Dow by rep. Stark.)

Comments (11)

Proudest Monkey

Sep 11, 09 7:34 AM

zzzJeff LeVeen was my kinda guy.

He was a huge fan of the Dave Matthews Band. He’d seen them no fewer than a dozen times (ahem…that’s a dozen times a year), and his favorite song was “Proudest Monkey.” One of his friends described a moment at one such show where he was jumping up and down, screaming for the band to play his favorite song.

He served his country in the Army during the Vietnam War before graduating from Dartmouth University, where he was captain of the golf team. He could spend a whole day playing golf and go home and ask his kids, “who wants to go fishing?” He was a man with seemingly limitless energy, whose family was his whole world.

On September 11, 2001, he was in his office at Cantor Fitzgerald on the 104th floor of the North Tower of the World Trade Center in a meeting. At 0846 Eastern Standard Time, American Airlines Flight 11 struck the North Tower between the 93rd and 99th floors–just below the Cantor Fitzgerald offices. The impact of the jetliner into the building and the subsequent fireball that erupted rendered all stairwells and elevators above the 92nd floor impassable; there was no escape for the 1,344 souls trapped above.

Cantor Fitzgerald lost 658 members of its family–including Jeff LeVeen.

Later, as his wife Christine described trying to find pictures of Jeff by himself–a feat she found nearly impossible. “All our photos showed him with his arm around the kids or they had their arms around him. He was never alone. That’s the kind of man he was.”

The world is a much better place for having had Jeff in it. I look forward to meeting you when I get home.

(NOTE: this is my contribution to Project 2,996, the movement to post a tribute to each soul lost in the attacks on September 11, 2001.)

Comments (1)

Taqiyya

Sep 10, 09 9:38 PM

To a Muslim, there is no such thing as an innocent infidel. Learn this fact now and learn it well, before you read the rest of this missive. The Qur’an, Hadith and Sunnah all say that very explicitly.

While the dust and smoke was still days from settling after the attacks on 9/11, Yasser Arafat (then the head of the Palestinian government) openly condemned the attacks. What nobody pointed out at the time was that he had previously–on multiple occasions–praised the “martyrdom operations” of suicide bombers who routinely blew themselves up in crowded ice cream parlors, pizza restaurants, and buses in Israel to kill as many Jews as they could. Arafat was never questioned by the MSM about this duplicity. But those who have studied Islam can tell you exactly what it was all about.

Taqiyya.

It is a purely Muslim concept, one that few Americans have ever heard of. It is also called “dissimulation” in English: it gives a Muslim the right, even the mandate, to hide one’s faith whether in part or in whole in order to protect oneself. Most often these days it is used to simply save face, and it’s excused by many Imams and the Ayatollahs as being the right thing to do. Since the Imams regard attacks launched with the intent of killing infidels as jihad, technically, they’re not lying when they say they don’t support terrorism.

If you recall, when the news of who was responsible for the attacks on 9/11 was released, we learned quite a bit. Unfortunately the facts were quickly buried by the media; they were scrambling to make sure that America didn’t do to Muslims what was done to Japanese, Germans and Italians after WWII. It’s an understandable reason, but one that has been far too dangerous for us to keep harping on.

Whether America wants to believe it or not, Arab Muslims are our enemy. Even those in Saudi Arabia; they may be our allies on the face, but that is merely to keep the beast at bay. If the Saudi royal family hadn’t grown so accustomed to the wealth and power they have, they would be on the same bent as the rest of the Muslim-led nations in the Middle East. They would swear that America is the great satan and jihad must be waged for the sake of allah.

Taqiyya has something to do with that as well. As it stands, even if every one of those nations banded together to attack us, America could bomb them back to the stone age. They all know it. Especially after 9/11, they knew that if they really pissed us off, we’d let ‘em have it. So despite his previous statements (and the Palestinian people dancing in the streets and firing their guns in the air and praising their god for what had happened), Arafat knew that if he didn’t come out and publicly denounce the attack, he’d be on the same short list as any other nation found to support Al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations. Did you ever wonder why he condemned the attack but never condemned the celebrations of his people?

Now, taqiyya is serving Muslims well in the press. They can deny that Abdel Yasser Said murdered his two daughters in an honor killing by spouting a list of insignificant questions about the case and dismissing writers like me as Islamophobic. They can disavow the crime committed by Muzzammil Hassan as simply being domestic violence despite the fact that he beheaded his wife after she served him with divorce papers.

And they can paint 17-year-old Rifqa Bary as a liar after she ran away from home to escape the father who threatened to kill her for converting to Christianity. They can help her father, Mohammed Bary, lie to the whole world about just wanting Rifqa to come home. Through the spokesman for the Noor Islamic Institute (known for its ties to terrorism), they can lie about the injury that brought the Bary family to America in the first place (a beating that left her without the use of her right eye), they can accuse the pastor who took her in of using Rifqa for religious and political purposes, and they can say, “if her father is a true Muslim, why would he allow her to wear a short skirt and shake pom-poms as a cheerleader?”

Why would he allow it? Taqiyya. By the way, apostasy to Muslims is the greatest crime of all–killing an apostate in one’s own family is not merely allowed, it is commanded.

To Muslims, it is a tool. I say it is the most gutless rule ever offered by any belief system. Because infidels are not innocent, crimes committed against them (up to and including murder) are not crimes. Agreements signed with them are null and void. And peace? Guess what…according to the Qur’an, any peace accord with infidels is not allowed to last longer than ten years.

Tomorrow marks eight years since 9/11/2001. We have been lulled into believing the way we did on 9/10/2001 by taqiyya in action. We can’t offend them, people say. What if we’re wrong? What if they really are trying to live in peace?

To that, I pose another question…are you willing to be one of the victims that proves peace isn’t what they want? Better yet, are you willing to let someone you love die for that?

Comments (1)

Bringing Down the House, Part I

Sep 8, 09 6:30 PM

Some time ago, a 15-year-old girl was found barely conscious in a garbage bag outside an apartment complex where she’d one lived with her family. Once she arrived at the ER at a local hospital, her burned, torn clothing was cut away to reveal that her body had been smeared with feces and various racial epithets had been written in charcoal. During a 20-minute interview with police, the young white teenager only spoke one single word; through drawings, nods of the head and shrugs the girl described a scenario in which three black men–all upstanding members of their communities, all well-loved by their families–had taken her to the home of one where she described being repeatedly raped and beaten. She said she had been burned by cigars then deposited where she’d been found four days later. Two lawyers and a prominent victim-rights advocate championed her cause in the press. “We have to stop this hateful violence against white people,” they said. “these black folks committing such horrible crimes need to be told that they cannot continue.”

But soon, the girl’s story began to unravel. Reports of her being spotted at a party with friends while she was supposedly missing and multiple inconsistencies in her story (including the racial slurs being written upside-down, as if she had to read them to write them, the incredible lack of any injuries, and evidence nearby suggesting the girl had done the tangible damage herself) led the grand jury to refuse to indict the three accused of the crime. They were later exonerated when the evidence more conclusively proved the girl was a liar.

Can you imagine the uproar if this scenario had played out as I described it? First, the black community never would have allowed themselves to be maligned along with three men, and rightly so. Also, however, the very instant the girl had been discovered to be a liar, they and the media would have been all over this like flies on a cow pie. There is no way this would have been allowed to go away quietly. White people all over the country who had cited this story in their attempt to convince the populace that this was a widespread problem would have been called race-baiters, hatemongers, and worse. Riots would have broken out. There would have been no escape from this fiasco by any person with white skin, whether they’d agreed with it or not.

But Tawana Brawley DID get away with it. As did her lawyer advisers, Alton H. Maddox and C. Vernon Mason–along with the Reverend Al Sharpton. Oh, Maddox’s law license was suspended and Sharpton was ordered to pay Steven Pagones (the prosecutor accused by Brawley in the case) $345,000 for defamation. But the public and the media let the group off scot-free. This happened in 1987.

The other two men accused by Brawley were police officers. Can you imagine the hell their lives decended into when these accusations were made? What kind of questions their wives had to ask, the taunting their children endured at school when this hit the news? The protests outside their homes? Brawley and her mother, Glenda, claim to this day despite the mountains of evidence that prove otherwise that they were mishandled by a supposedly racist system, and that white men in places of power just covered the incident up to protect Pagones and the two officers.

Why would Brawley make it up? Well, she’d been in trouble with her stepfather for staying out late with her boyfriend. Her stepfather, Ralph King, was a violent thug who’d stabbed his first wife nearly 15 times, and he was livid with her for refusing to obey his rules. According to many witnesses–including no less than Tawana Brawley’s boyfriend at the time–mom helped her fabricate the tale to avoid the same fate.

Today, Sharpton has not recanted his race-baiting statements or his handling of the Brawley case. Like the Brawleys, he maintains that Tawana was telling the truth and the case was up to the neck in racism. To hear him and anyone else involved today, it was all about the color of her skin, and the evidence be damned–three good men should be in prison.

Racism may still be alive, but things like this make others want to shut it out and not give a damn when REAL racism rears its ugly head.

In Part II: the Crown Heights Riots and the murder of an innocent Jewish man.

Comments (19)
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 172 other followers