AmeriCAN-DO Attitude

Are you an AmeriCAN or an AmeriCAN'T?

Islam is an Oppressive, Totalitarian Ideology Which Should be Mocked and Ridiculed as Much as any Other Ideology

A great discussion in the comments in response to this post at Gateway Pundit: Florida Church Vows to Burn Korans On 9-11; Receives Death Threats (Video)

It is interesting to note many people in the comments who come across as dhimmis and prove the point that Islam is not a “religion of peace”. If it were, then there would be no reason to worry about the safety of the members of this church, correct? Christians and Jews and Mormons are insulted every single day all across the nation in print media reports, in TV media reports, in movies, in TV shows, in songs and by liberal politicians. All this is done without worry of violence. Yet, no one dares to say anything even midly critical of Islam, despite the fact that every liberal claims that Islam is a “religion of peace”. If it were so, then Islam would be mocked, ridiculed and smeared equally. The fact that it is not is proof that Islam is not peaceful at all.

The fact is that were this church to announce that it were holding a “burn Mein Kampf day”, no one would care. “Burn the Book of Mormon Day”? No one would care. “Burn the American Flag Day”? No one would care. “Burn the Jewish Flag Day”? No one would care. But, since they are insulting a liberal PC protected class, there is “outrage”. Pathetic.

Now, while I may not completely agree with this church’s chosen way to show their disgust with Islam (which I share), I think they prove 2 great points. (1) They show that Islam is not a “religion of peace” at all, what with the threats of violence directed their way in response to this. (2) They expose the hypocrisy of liberals, who never have a problem mocking, ridiculing and insulting every other religion on the planet, save for Islam.

I also agree with the person in the comments who noted that we are in a war. And yes, it is a war against the totalitarian political ideology of Islam, regardless of the people who are too PC-ified to admit it. During WWII, no one would have cared were people to burn copies of Hitler’s Mein Kampf, burn literature about NAZIism or burn literature about Japan’s religion of Shintoism. No one in their right mind would come to the defense of oppressive, totalitarian ideologies. Yet, 9 years after the worst Islamic terrorist attack on American soil in history, people are still defending the oppressive, totalitarian ideology of Islam. Pathetic.

Some of the comments with which I agree wholeheartedly:

Andreas K.
August 21st, 2010 | 6:09 am | #17

Burning Old Glory is fine. Burning American citizens is fine. But burning the one book that has more hatred inside than Mein Kampf is bad?

Without the koran there wouldn’t have been 9-11. Yes, it’s that simple.

Maybe this action isn’t in the best spirit of Christianity. Maybe, I don’t know, and frankly I don’t even care.

It’s time that the west strikes back.

How long are we going to take the abuse coming from the mohammedans? Look into Europe, I dare you. Mohammedans just need to pout at whatever they want and the media and the politicians double over hell bent on making sure the screaming babies get whatever they want.

Saying something against that is racism and makes you a nazi in Europe these days.

Why do you think Geert Wilders is becoming more and more popular, all across Europe?

Because more and more people in Europe are sick and tired of this pre-emptive surrender. Because more and more people in Europe are sick and tired of islam. Yes, despite the media and our politicians trying to sell us the fairy tale of a moderate islam people are rallying against islam.

Burn the koran?

Why not? What makes it so special? Why shouldn’t we burn it? Out of respect? Respect for what? Respect for a fascist ideology that hides behind the shield of religion? An ideology that, without this shield, would be banned right away in all civilized countries?

Burn it I say. This book deserves no respectful treatment. It’s as vile and full of hatred as Mein Kampf.

And Mein Kampf is banned in Germany and Austria…

Andreas K.
August 21st, 2010 | 6:27 am | #26

Jerry, the koran represents only one thing: kill the infidels where you find them. That’s in it. That’s the order. That’s what every mohammedan must do. Why? Because Mohammed, who is considered to be the perfect human being in islamic mythology, wrote it down. Because the bloodythirsty idol called allah told him so.

If supporting burning something like that makes me intolerant, so be it. Then I’m intolerant. And I don’t care. Islam is intolerant to the bone. Islam is hatred on a level worse than the Nazis. Why should I be tolerant to that?

By the way. Faith and believe? That’s no argument against burning it. There were people who prayed to Hitler. Not for him. To him. There were people in Nazi Germany BELIEVING that Hitler was second coming of Jesus. It was their FAITH.

As for calling islam “religion”… don’t make me laugh.

Andreas K.
August 21st, 2010 | 6:33 am | #27

August 21st, 2010 | 6:25 am | #24

Although I have no respect for islam as a religion/political system, it’s just as sacrilegious to burn a koran as it is to put a crucifix in a jar of urine. I consider burning the American flag highly offensive. People who act in this manner do not gain respect; they lose it.

Uhm, you do realize that the leftsits and mohammedans don’t respect any of us in the first place, right? So what’s there to lose?

Nothing. Absolutely nothing.

If they could they would kill all of us right now, even without burning that stupid book.

Why? Because we’re infidels. We are already committing the worst possible crime under sharia law: we refuse to follow allah. That crime is worse than murder, worse than rape, worse than genocide.

It’s sacrilegious? I piss on islam. I piss in the koran. Now what? What’s the islamic moon deity going to do about it? Nothing.

Tolerance is a bad thing. Look at the roots of the word. Latin for “to endure”. Sorry, I’m tired of enduring. It’s time to strike back and speak with them in the only language they understand: force.

Andreas K.
August 21st, 2010 | 6:37 am | #31

Let me add this:

Most of you people don’t see the “joy” islamic “enrichment”. I see it on a daily basis. And I’m sick and tired of it. Every day it’s on the news. Mohammedans assaulting our police officers. Mohammedans raping our women. Mohammedans murdering our people. Mohammedans stealing our money. And when we say something against it, the media and the leftist are all over us screaming “racist!” and “nazi!”

Our crime rates are exploding, thanks to them. But we have to be tolerant. We have to live with it. We have to endure it.

And this has been going for years.

My patience is slowly but steadily coming to an end.

Come to Europe and see it with your own eyes.

You’ll have a different point of view afterwards.

Andreas K.
August 21st, 2010 | 6:40 am | #33

August 21st, 2010 | 6:37 am | #30

Andreas K:

Stopping the building of this mosque would be the best revenge here. They care about that.

Then the media and the leftists will scream “racist!” again and everyone will be quick to make sure the mohammedan crybabies will get what they want.

It’s happening here on a daily basis.

Take the Swiss ban on minarettes. The majority of the Swiss people was for it and at once the islamic world screamed murder and the rest of Europe quickly joined them.

Talk I hear from the UK and the Netherlands speaks already of armed resistance. Yep, in the liberal Netherlands a growing number of liberal Dutch people are thinking of picking up arms against this nonsense. Same in the UK. Similar things I hear from Germany where secret police reports leaked to the public suggest civil war, thanks to the mohammedans.

But let’s be tolerant, eh?

Andreas K.
August 21st, 2010 | 6:43 am | #34

August 21st, 2010 | 6:39 am | #32

Wading, pacifists allowed 12 million people to be slaughtered during WWII for the crime of being born “other.” Good “Christians”, most of them were.

And then there were those who put on their armor and went to war to stop it. . . .

Something tells me that the heroes who did their little bit to end the abominations of Hitler have a much better welcome waiting them than those who wrung their hands & pretended not to see.

Granny, that was a direct hit.

Pacifism has never stopped fascists. Chamberlain went all pacifist on Hitler, what was the result?

It allowed Hitler to build up his military might and to occupy two sovereign nations before the war even started.

Pacifism works only if everyone’s a pacifist.

A mohammedan following Mohammed’s orders won’t be impressed by it. He’ll just kill you and rape your wife and daughter, after which he’d enslave them.

August 21st, 2010 | 6:53 am | #38

Expat, that is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard. At least this week. Not taking an action because you think it will give the muslims cause to complain virtually guarantees that you’ll be bowing to Mecca before you can spit. If they do not have “cause” to complain, they will find cause and if they cannot find it they will invent it as they have done innumerable times previously. If you don’t understand that, then you understand nothing at all.

August 21st, 2010 | 7:01 am | #43

This ideology is NOT a religion, it is a totalitarian regime of world domination. The terrorists are the front-line soldiers, receiving widespread financial and theological support. The rest submit to the dictates and profess piety while murder and mayhem are waged on behalf of world domination in their name.

This tyranny would only permit religions to exist as subservient, second-class citizens, and paying extra taxes.

To Wading Across, it seems as if you are not only preaching pacifism, but trying mightily to convince others to be so as well.

We’re all well aware of the Christian message of tolerance and good faith. Do that for too long, and you end up in bondage, or dead.

August 21st, 2010 | 7:02 am | #44

August 21st, 2010 | 6:25 am | #24
There is a group of people who can stop this outrage in its tracks – Union Labor.

Labor unions by definition hold out for more pay, they will eventually build it. Labor unions support the democrat party, who in turn support the moslems and sharia law. Don’t put any faith in the unions to do the right thing, they’ll disappoint you.

We all need to fight this attack on whatever front is available to us. This 911 victory hamosque is no different than a dog pissing and marking its territory.

If the moslems get their way burning flags will be the least of our problems.

Granny, thank you for your insight.

JR Dogman
August 21st, 2010 | 7:06 am | #45

This is a great idea. Yes, it’s a crude gesture to burn Korans; but Islam is hardly a refined faith. The majority of its followers are neither respectful nor tolerant of those of other faiths, and so they do not deserve our kind treatment.

As for the rare “moderate” Muslims (isn’t it sick that there’s such a term in common use? Sick, that we get excited when we hear a Muslim come out and call a terrorist organization a terrorist organization), I feel for them. It would be wonderful if Islam could be reformed as they hope, but I have my doubts, as for such to happen, Muslims worldwide would have to repudiate much of the Koran and the Hadiths. I myself am an agnostic; I practice no religion. But I know faith is important to most people. So, if moderate Muslims seek to maintain a relationship with God, perhaps they might find fulfillment by converting to Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, or Buddhism — to any religion that does not divide the world into a House of Believers and a House of War.

Though in fact, a lot of moderate Muslims are already doing just that. We may not hear about it much, but the rumblings are there: conversions out of Islam are on the rise, and the trend looks only to increase. And no wonder: It must be a terrible burden for many Muslims, to feel obliged to hate and wage eternal war against non-Muslims in the name of God; and they must feel such tremendous relief, when at last they find a gentler, more personal and spiritual way to worship.

The Elector of Saxony
August 21st, 2010 | 8:03 am | #58

“Come to Europe and see it with your own eyes.”

Andreas, our media hides the situation in Britain and in Europe from us. During the Islamic insurrection in France, the media here reported “unemployed French youths are burning cars in the suburbs of Paris”. The murder of Theo Van Gogh was only reported on through the blog communities, and of course, anytime Geert Wilders or the BNP are mentioned…you guessed it. Nazis.

Individual Americans are smart, but collectively we are quite stupid. We are already allowing our borders to be overrun in an invasion that is destabilizing the economies of our Southwestern states, turning vast swaths of America into 3rd world hellholes that resemble Somalia today more than they do Houston or Los Angeles of 30 years ago. Yet, almost half of us mumble some nonsense about fairness and equality, and hope and pray that things will get better, and if they don’t? Well, we’ll get a taco while Rome burns.

Islam is coming in what can only be described as the second arm of a pincer movement, and yet even our conservative party wants to mouth the platitudes of “religion of peace”, equality, justice, diversity, freedom of religion, blah blah blah.

Our media is helping by hiding the fact that Islam is imposing its will on Europe and Britain so that we won’t insist upon stopping it here. I don’t care what my Lefts masters say, Islam is a barbaric, backward, vile tribe of people who should be kept away from us by any means necessary.

August 21st, 2010 | 8:39 am | #65

Chip, this is not just about spreading the Gospel. This is about your right to even have a Gospel to spread. This is, in fact, a war.

All during WWII, hundreds of thousands of our Jewish brethren made no attempt to lift a finger in self defense, in the name of these very same principles. It wasn’t just Chamberlain who tried to appease Hitler. It was Jewish communities all over Europe. It was people right here in the USA.

Our Founding Fathers & Mothers did not appease the British King. They fought for what they believed. The fighters in the Warsaw Ghetto, those who rebelled at Sobibor, the Bielski brothers, who walked into ghettos and rescued more Jews directly under the noses of Hitler’s minions that even Schindler saved – they all fought for what they believed in. And in every single case there were those to say that this was against religion, it wasn’t “correct”, that is was useless or crass or a stunt. And yet, they won.

There comes a time when you must not only pay lip service to what you believe, you must lay your property, your reputation and even your life on the line and fight for it. To do otherwise is to deny your belief. Our founders knew this. Those who won through in WWII knew this. Every generation must win freedom anew.

The members of this little backwater church have decided that their time has come to stand and fight. Every single time that we as a society allow ourselves to be cowed & silenced we deny the very principles on which we were built.

Gail F
August 21st, 2010 | 8:51 am | #71

Sorry, this is an idiotic thing to do. “Burn a Koran Day”??? Give me a break! That’s not free speech, that’s deliberate provocation, inciting unrest and inviting an attack.

Like all fights, the fight against the expansion of Islam requires prudence. This isn’t a prudent act it’s a STUPID one.

August 21st, 2010 | 8:58 am | #73

Sorry Gail – virtually ALL political speech is “free speech”. Even if it is provactive. In fact, political speech is the reason we have Freedom of Speech.

August 21st, 2010 | 9:25 am | #80

Wow there is so much to say regarding this topic. One of the most interesting discussions I’ve come across on the net.

For starters, this is a great example of how widespread the brainwashing is. To read some of these comments you’d think that Islam IS a religion of peace. Ah, but they don’t call it a cancer for no reason.

As would be the case for burning one of the Bamster’s autobiographies, the only legitimate argument for not burning the Koran, if these folks are truly aware of the consequences and still want to follow through with this, is that it would amount to bad PR and thus hurt our side and help the enemy (mooslims and the left). That is the ONLY reason, and that point is probably worth debating.

But it is my opinion that we are long past the point where we should be taking stands based on our principles (and like many others here have said islam is an obamination), letting the chips fall where they may and the sides be formed. So if these folks have their eyes open and want to take this courageous action, more power to them.

August 21st, 2010 | 9:31 am | #83

i don’t understand why anyone is worried about this event causing a problem, let alone some sort of violent response…..

after all, islam is a religion of peace.

August 21st, 2010 | 9:50 am | #88


we are damned if we do, damned if we don’t..

we had better wake up & take sides..

fact is we cannot see the forest through the trees..

Islamists burn Churches, Bibles
& Christians around the Globe..

self defense & the turn the other cheek myth

There is a difference in giving up personal
revenge and confronting evil in self defense.

foreigners no longer come to assimilate themselves to the American way,
they come to demand that America not only assimilate to their way, but accommodate & assist them in their struggle to dominate US..

we must defend ourselves against evil, not assist
it by turning the other cheek against ourselves..

August 21st, 2010 | 10:32 am | #110

Granny and Andreas K, you’ve taken some real nice cuts on this thread. Here are some of the highlights for those who might have just tuned in:

Without the koran there wouldn’t have been 9-11. Yes, it’s that simple. – Andreas K

Why shouldn’t we burn it? Out of respect? Respect for what? Respect for a fascist ideology that hides behind the shield of religion? An ideology that, without this shield, would be banned right away in all civilized countries? – Andreas K

By the way. Faith and believe? That’s no argument against burning it. There were people who prayed to Hitler. Not for him. To him. There were people in Nazi Germany BELIEVING that Hitler was second coming of Jesus. It was their FAITH. – Andreas K

Something tells me that the heroes who did their little bit to end the abominations of Hitler have a much better welcome waiting them than those who wrung their hands & pretended not to see. – Granny

Pacifism works only if everyone’s a pacifist. -Andreas K

Not taking an action because you think it will give the muslims cause to complain virtually guarantees that you’ll be bowing to Mecca before you can spit. If they do not have “cause” to complain, they will find cause and if they cannot find it they will invent it as they have done innumerable times previously. If you don’t understand that, then you understand nothing at all. – Granny

Chip, this is not just about spreading the Gospel. This is about your right to even have a Gospel to spread. This is, in fact, a war. – Granny

There comes a time when you must not only pay lip service to what you believe, you must lay your property, your reputation and even your life on the line and fight for it. – Granny

Every single time that we as a society allow ourselves to be cowed & silenced we deny the very principles on which we were built. – Granny

August 21st, 2010 | 10:35 am | #111


the enemy of civilization, as we have been repetitively warned by both anti-Islamist Muslims & non-Muslims in the know is Political Islam aka: Sharia Law… Islamism is a religious cult of POLITICS…

[Jasser founded AIFD in the wake of the 9/11 attacks in order to provide a Muslim American voice that would genuinely advocate and defend the founding principles of the U.S. Constitution. He has taken the fight against radical Islam to heart and sees it as a responsibility of all “true” Muslims. Where many U.S.-based Islamic organizations, such as CAIR and the Islamic Society of North America, claim to support the U.S. Constitution but provide dodgy answers and shoddy excuses for terrorism when the rubber meets the road, Dr. Jasser’s AIFD is based on the founding principles of the United States. Where CAIR’s rhetoric tends to create a tension between Americans and its Muslim members, the rhetoric of Jasser and AIFD refers to Americans as an “us” and not a “them.”

“I have always looked upon myself, long before 9-11, as a Jeffersonian Muslim, if you will,” Dr. Jasser answers when asked about his identification as a Muslim. “Along with the ideas of liberty as embodied in the works of our founding fathers, naturally emanating from that is a deep antipathy for Islamism (political Islam), salafism, jihadism, governmental sharia, and the global collectivist movement of the Muslim Brotherhood.”

Terms such as “moderate,” “secular,” and “radical” are innately controversial as any group is able to contort them to mean what they want. For example, Jasser posits, the term “moderate” has become synonymous with being non-violent or anti-terrorism. But this is an oversimplification that blinds Americans to the very political ideologies — which he identifies as “Islamism” — that are the cogs and gears of terrorism.

“I know everyone is looking for an easy label to know the ‘good Muslim’ from the ‘bad Muslim,’” Jasser continues, “but … I believe that the ‘anti-Islamist’ or at least ‘non-Islamist’ Muslims are on our side and the pro-Islamist Muslims, those who believe in the Islamic state and governmental sharia, are not on our side but on the side of political Islam.”]


anti-Islamist Muslims have been reaching out, they have been, and still are warning US… unfortunately, the powers that be are not only silencing them, but for all intents & purposes, are in communion with Islamists against them…

UPDATE 22 AUG 2010: Great article by Doug Giles regarding feminist active smears of Sarah Palin — whose life is the epitome of feminist ideals — while they are silent on Islamic Shari’a Law, which is the absolute antithesis of feminist principles:

Nope, the fems’ fixation remains on Palin. Palin is the threat. Palin is the She Devil. Palin is the one who gets the nasty jabs — and not Islam and the potential spread of Sharia from sea to shining sea.

I know what you fembots are thinking: Sharia can’t happen here, right? Cha? Yes, we’d never allow Muslims to take us back to Bedrock legislatively. And I’m equally sure that’s what our snaggle-toothed feminist cousins in the UK thought right up until September 2008.

Facts be damned, however. For the feminists, the menacing foe they have to stave off remains Sarah and not Sharia.

Last time I checked, liberal lassies, Mrs. Palin does not believe that …

– Women are inferior to men.

– Women should have fewer rights and responsibilities than Larry the Cable Guy.

– Women count for one-half of a dude in giving evidence in a court of law.

– Women should be horse whipped if they ever make their husband feel like a dork.

– Victoria’s Secret Miraculous Bra (with extreme level 5 cleavage) makes God angry.

– Women can’t say squat in regard to whom they’ll marry, what they’ll wear, where they’ll live, or whether or not they can divorce their cheating and/or abusive husband.

– Girls can be wed beginning at the ripe old age of frickin’ nine.

– Women should be cool with hubby having a couple of hoochies or female slaves on the side.

– Women, on the pretext of “honor,” should be locked up, isolated and unable to have a girls’ night out at Mango’s on Ocean Drive.

Yep, last time I checked, Miss Sarah ain’t down with the above, but you know who is? I’ll tell you (because your lack of Ground Zero Mosque angst is auguring for the return to the cave man era): the Crapslinger Extraordinaire, Ground Zero’s grand zero, male chauvinist Imam Abtool Rauf.

Another great article today in the American Thinker by Sally Humhorth: Islam is the New Communism

Paul Hsieh wrote an excellent article about America’s weakness in regards to the war against terrorists. However, he claimed that the mosque is distracting us from the real issue of Iran’s nuclear weapons program. I respectfully disagree. The real issue is that we are fighting a war with Islam. The mosque, rather than distracting America, has brought her full attention to it. [ … ]

This is has been a difficult road, because Americans are benevolent and naïve concerning Islam. They are used to freedom of religion and they find it hard to condemn one. And that is precisely the problem, Americans see Islam as only a religion. It is not just a religion, it is also a sophisticated, detailed political ideology with the expressed goal of taking over the entire world by any means at its disposal, even if it includes lying and killing. Americans need to think of it as a social/political ideology, but they are so used to separating religion from politics (which was a first at the time of our country’s founding) that they keep giving Islam the benefit of the doubt.

Frank Langan, site superintendent from Queens working at ground zero, says he is on the fence on the matter. When construction workers started to protest working on the mosque, he made a statement that is typical of people who are undecided about this issue, “It’s a tough debate. I sympathize with workers’ position, but at the same time, you can’t single out all Muslims because of a small number of terrorists.” That would be like saying, you can’t single out all Communists because of a small number of Communists. They are all Communists if they subscribe to the Communist ideology, and just like Communism has an ideology, so does Islam. Any Muslim who is truly innocent, must renounce Islam like other courageous Muslims such as Ayaan Hirsi Ali or Wafa Sultan. Not to do so, means that he still considers us as the enemy and supports the downfall of the United States.

Separation of church and state is something we take for granted. Islam does not separate the two. And Islam is the new Communism.

The always excellent Andrew McCarthy has a great take on this issue as well, in his latest article (via BigPeace): Which Islam Will Prevail in America? — That is the real question at hand in the Ground Zero mosque debate.

The real battle for religious freedom lurks beneath the Ground Zero mosque controversy. It is sadly ironic that our public debate presents the mosque proponents as the partisans of liberty: That includes everyone from imam Feisal Rauf, the project’s sharia-touting sponsor, to President Obama, Mayor Bloomberg, and the rest of the Islamist-smitten Left, to the GOP’s own anti-anti-terrorist wing. Yet, wittingly or not, when they champion this mosque and its sponsors, it is the agenda of an alien and authoritarian Islam that they champion — an Islam against which many American Muslims chafe.

When it comes to liberty, no one in this society has been given a wider berth than the Islamists, the purveyors of this authoritarian Islam, which is the mainstream Islam of the Middle East. Their vise grip on the American Muslim community has been cinched for two decades by the government, the media, and the academy. For our post-American ruling class, “Islamic outreach” means prostituting themselves for Saudi largesse; it means putting the “moderate” label on the Muslim Brotherhood — the Saudi-backed saboteurs whose American operatives boldly promise to “eliminate and destroy Western Civilization from within.”

The victims of this lethal charade include American Muslims. They, too, crave religious liberty and Western enlightenment. Our elites abandon them to the sharia-mongers. That freedom destroyers have been allowed to pose as freedom defenders ought to tell mosque opponents something: We have done a poor job of explaining the stakes.

[ … ] By contrast, American Muslims grasp that 9/11 was an attack on their country, too. Their emerging leaders, such as Zuhdi Jasser and Steven Schwartz, have started organizations — respectively, the American Islamic Forum for Democracy and the Center for Islamic Pluralism — that promote freedom and offer Muslims an escape from the Brotherhood’s clutches. As Messrs. Jasser and Schwartz relate, American Muslims understand the significance of Ground Zero to our nation, to the families of those who were slaughtered, and to the enemy against whom we are still fighting. They know that, in contrast to the innate intolerance of sharia states, the United States opens its arms to people of all faiths, including Muslims. Like Ms. Manji, they are struggling, against daunting opposition, to forge an Islam that embraces Western values, that reveres religious faith but denies it temporal authority.

The Ground Zero mosque controversy is not about religious liberty for Muslims. It is about which Islam will thrive in the United States: the one that is fighting Americans, or the one American Muslims are fighting for.

August 21, 2010 , 1:04PM Posted by | Christianity, Dhimmitude, Ground Zero Mosque, Islam, Islamofascism, Muslims | 8 Comments

Pat Robertson Does Not Represent “the Religious Right”

I get sick and tired of reading this ignorant nonsense from people. It is even more annoying to see from someone who says they are “just a conservative girl”.

Pat Robertson’s comment on the tragedy that has befallen the people of Haiti is shameful. This is exactly what is wrong with the religious right.

It’s one thing when the Left paints “the religious right” with an ignorant, bigoted broad brush. It’s another when this same ignorance comes from people calling themselves conservatives.

I also find it especially ironic that this broad brush criticism of “the religious right” is being made in a blog post criticizing “the religious right” of being judgmental. Brilliant. “Shameful” even.

The fact is that Pat Robertson represents no one but himself.  Just like this “just a conservative girl” does not represent all conservatives, but only herself.

People who disagree with what I believe in will use these statements to lump me into a pack that believes this nonsense.

Apparently, “just a conservative girl” believes this, since she does this herself (lumps “the religious right” in with Pat Robertson) in this very post.  Brilliant.

We get enough of this broad brush nonsense from the mass media, the Democrats and the Left; it would be nice if self-described conservatives would not participate in it as well.

I missed this the first time I read the post:

I also was reading statements from people who have such a blind hatred of President Obama that they were saying how no one should be giving money to the fundraising that is being conducted on the White House site. The money goes to USAID, a program that has been in existence for a long time. The administration is trying to make it easy for Americans to give to people whose lives have been devastated. There is no evil intent.

Um, has she been paying attention at.all the last 12 months of the Obama Administration? Has she noticed “Stimulus” money going to fake districts and fake zip codes? Has she noticed “Stimulus” money going to anthropogenic global warming propagandist Michael Mann? Has she noticed all the corruption within the Obama Administration and the lies about everything during his entire time in office so far? And she is accusing people of having “blind hatred of Obama” for not wanting to trust his Administration with any more of American taxpayer money, when all the money with which we have entrusted them so far has been mishandled? That’s not called “blind hatred”, that’s called common sense.

There are plenty of private charities to which people can donate to help the people of Haiti. Giving one’s money to the Obama Administration and trusting it will go where it is supposed to go is not “blind hatred”, it is blind ignorance. One would think someone who calls herself a conservative would understand this.

Heh. From the comments of this post, I think this summarizes well the consensus opinion of most of “the religious right”:

I’m going to oversimplify my Christian position on this coarsely because nuance ruins the sauce:

God isn’t obligated to give us, any of us, jack shit. The fact that he loves us enough to so save us is the remarkable thing. That’s why we believe and follow him.

I hate when people act like God is a “spiritual ATM” with over-draft fees. Roberston, God is in Haiti but he isn’t there “smiting” people and that you can’t see it is proof that you’re off the reservation.

Posted by: Rob B at January 14, 2010 12:24 PM

Hmmm, this is interesting. I have not seen this widely reported and disseminated:

VIRGINIA BEACH, Va., January 13, 2010 — On today’s The 700 Club, during a segment about the devastation, suffering and humanitarian effort that is needed in Haiti, Dr. Robertson also spoke about Haiti’s history. His comments were based on the widely-discussed 1791 slave rebellion led by Boukman Dutty at Bois Caiman, where the slaves allegedly made a famous pact with the devil in exchange for victory over the French. This history, combined with the horrible state of the country, has led countless scholars and religious figures over the centuries to believe the country is cursed. Dr. Robertson never stated that the earthquake was God’s wrath. If you watch the entire video segment, Dr. Robertson’s compassion for the people of Haiti is clear. He called for prayer for them. His humanitarian arm has been working to help thousands of people in Haiti over the last year, and they are currently launching a major relief and recovery effort to help the victims of this disaster. They have sent a shipment of millions of dollars worth of medications that is now in Haiti, and their disaster team leaders are expected to arrive tomorrow and begin operations to ease the suffering.

Chris Roslan
Spokesman for CBN

Interesting comment:

The writer of this article is making the same mistake the Jews made when Jesus walked the earth. They also had locked-in doctrines of how the Messiah should, and would, act toward them and toward their enemies. They even had scriptures that said God would judge evil and the oppressors etc. However The prophecies of Christ are co-mingled together in describing his first coming and his second coming. After his first coming we could discern that He first came to suffer and offer the permanent sacrifice for sin. Look at the cross, that is the God ordained penalty for sin… Jesus absorbed that for every human being that accepts this by faith.

The rest of the prophecies tell of a conquering warlike Christ. While I do not know when God is judging, neither does anyone else, are earthquakes, and natural disasters judgments from God? How about putting a punk-ass man that hates his own country in charge of it? Is that a divine judgment? Don’t know, but sometimes things happen that may be corrective, or punitive judgments. For instance the Tsunami in Indonesia, just happened to be centered on the world center of the child sex prostitution market.

New Orleans was the center of voodoo and witchcraft in the United States, certainly it was one of the most corrupt and vile cities in the U.S. The name Katrina means (Purify). Is that all coincidence? Maybe, who can prove these things? I know you had thousands of people that have never been responsible in their lives that came and lived with responsible and many times Christian people after Katrina, many others went to Houston and increased the crime rates there. However perhaps thousands of New Orleans people received a second chance in life via that hurricane, and others are now in a city and state where eventually they will be caught and prosecuted for their crimes (which hardly ever happened in New Orleans).

Haiti is THE center of witchcraft and voodoo, in this hemisphere, their ancestors DID make a pact with Satan to throw off the French, is this earthquake judgment? Perhaps, if I am crushed by a building maybe I would be thinking about my sins. Anyway the duty of Christians at this point is to show mercy and render aid, let God figure out judgments. Pat Robertson is probably in error, in the least because he is NOT showing mercy, that is our job, God’s is to show both mercy and to bring judgment. The thing I find irritating about Robertson is he says things that really don’t need to be said, let people figure it out themselves, he only brings reproach on himself and Christianity.

For those that have some remnant of faith in God they will look at such huge upheaval and turn closer to God, for those that never had a connection with God or do not desire one, this is just bad luck or another reason to be bitter, and wonder why they were not born with lighter skin and without a Negro dialect.

And for all Americans too bad there is not another America in the earth when OUR time comes, as certainly it seems to be coming, in fact many American are suffering now like they have not since the great depression. I know I am suffering, out of work, facing bankruptcy and watching the country I have loved being eaten by the savages now in authority.

Posted by: Jehu at January 14, 2010 01:26 PM

Hmmm, food for thought, I suppose. At the very least, I think it presents a lesson that people should actually listen to the full source quote in context before passing judgment, one way or another:

Doesn’t he have an established pattern of this, though, making the same pronouncements about 9/11 and Katrina. It’s his schtick.

Posted by: Who Knows at January 14, 2010 01:21 PM

It is a very human reaction to wonder, when bad things happen, what someone might have done to prompt it. This is not specific to Robertson.

As mentioned upthread, the Old Testament talks about a G-d that punishes Israel for straying. This idea is as old as Western civilization … older. And it is a reaction that is endemic to humans.

Lastly, many have no problem identifying voodoo with the devil – and that is not a stretch, by any means. Robertson, clearly, was concerned about the Haitians and their welfare, but he was also very concerned about what he considered to be their spiritual welfare. I don’t see anything he said that was bad. Ill-timed, but not bad.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at January 14, 2010 01:27 PM

Pat sends millions of dollars worth of medications to Haiti… but he happens to say something a little weird.

People sitting on their butts… doing nothing for the Haitians… are outraged.

Posted by: DA at January 14, 2010 01:30 PM

I am not a PR fan but–

First of all, PR never said that the earthquake was God’s judgment on Haiti.

Second, his story about the demonic beginnings of Haiti’s republic is an idea that has had currency for a long time. You can look it up in Wikipedia, not exactly an organ of the Religious Right.

Third, the idea that no one can know God or his intentions runs counter to the whole purpose of the Bible. The claim of Scripture, whether you accept it or not does not matter, is that God is revealing Himself to mankind precisely so that they can know who He is, who we are, and what His will and plan for us is.

Fourth, listen again, PR does not judge or condemn the Haitians. He bids others to pray for them and to contribute to their material relief.

Finally, does anyone really want to argue against the proposition that 80% of the population practicing a syncretic mix of Catholicism/voodoo/demonic animism has had a deleterious effect on life in Haiti? Likewise, is it really so preposterous to believe that if 80% of the Haitians had been garden variety Presbyterians, Conservative Jews, Mormons, etc. these past two hundred years, that they wouldn’t be in significantly better shape than they are now?

Posted by: padraic at January 14, 2010 02:51 PM

January 14, 2010 , 12:50PM Posted by | Barack Obama, Christianity, Conservatism, Economy | Comments Off on Pat Robertson Does Not Represent “the Religious Right”

Merry Christmas, My Friends — Soldier’s Silent Night

This is from Matt over at Blackfive. I am simply reposting his entry in full. Wonderful poem. Merry Christmas, everyone, especially to those who are away from their families this holiday, serving their country so that you and I may safely and peacefully enjoy Christmas with our families:

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Note: This is an annual post to share one of the most powerful military Christmas poems that is also usually attributed incorrectly or changed from the original. Enjoy. Merry Christmas, my friends!

Most of you proably have read “Merry Christmas, My Friend” before, but have you heard it with the backdrop of Silent Night?

Here is the link to the MP3 audio version (3.5MB) of “Merry Christmas, My Friend”, titled “Soldier’s Silent Night” – you can either stream it or right click and save as. It’s courtesy of WLIT’s Melissa Forman (thanks to Sara B. for the link). Below is the credit from WLIT:

Written by former Marine Corporal James M. Schmidt, in 1987 when stationed in Washington D.C., it was pounded out on a typewriter while awaiting the commading officer’s Christmas holiday decoration inspection. It was originally title “Merry Christmas, My Friend”, and was an instant success that reportedly brought tears to the eyes of the barrracks Commander who ordered it distributed to everyone he knew. It appeared in the barracks publication Pass in Review in December 1987 and Leatherneck Magazine in December 1991.

The poem was recorded as a tribute by Father Ted Berndt, a former Marine and Purple Heart recipient during World War II, currently residing in Dousman, Wisconsin for his daughter Ellen Stout, a Clear Channel radio personality.

Here’s the original poem:


‘Twas the night before Christmas, he lived all alone,
In a one-bedroom house made of plaster and stone.
I had come down the chimney, with presents to give
and to see just who in this home did live.

As I looked all about, a strange sight I did see,
no tinsel, no presents, not even a tree.
No stocking by the fire, just boots filled with sand.
On the wall hung pictures of a far distant land.

With medals and badges, awards of all kind,
a sobering thought soon came to my mind.
For this house was different, unlike any I�d seen.
This was the home of a U.S. Marine.

I’d heard stories about them, I had to see more,
so I walked down the hall and pushed open the door.
And there he lay sleeping, silent, alone,
Curled up on the floor in his one-bedroom home.

He seemed so gentle, his face so serene,
Not how I pictured a U.S. Marine.
Was this the hero, of whom I’d just read?
Curled up in his poncho, a floor for his bed?

His head was clean-shaven, his weathered face tan.
I soon understood, this was more than a man.
For I realized the families that I saw that night,
owed their lives to these men, who were willing to fight.

Soon around the Nation, the children would play,
And grown-ups would celebrate on a bright Christmas day.
They all enjoyed freedom, each month and all year,
because of Marines like this one lying here.

I couldn’t help wonder how many lay alone,
on a cold Christmas Eve, in a land far from home.
Just the very thought brought a tear to my eye.
I dropped to my knees and I started to cry.

He must have awoken, for I heard a rough voice,
“Santa, don’t cry, this life is my choice
I fight for freedom, I don’t ask for more.
My life is my God, my country, my Corps.”

With that he rolled over, drifted off into sleep,
I couldn’t control it, I continued to weep.

I watched him for hours, so silent and still.
I noticed he shivered from the cold night’s chill.
So I took off my jacket, the one made of red,
and covered this Marine from his toes to his head.
Then I put on his T-shirt of scarlet and gold,
with an eagle, globe and anchor emblazoned so bold.
And although it barely fit me, I began to swell with pride,
and for one shining moment, I was Marine Corps deep inside.

I didn’t want to leave him so quiet in the night,
this guardian of honor so willing to fight.
But half asleep he rolled over, and in a voice clean and pure,
said “Carry on, Santa, it�s Christmas Day, all secure.”
One look at my watch and I knew he was right,
Merry Christmas my friend, Semper Fi and goodnight.

Copyright circa 1991 by James M. Schmidt
(As printers in the December 1991 issue of the USMC magazine, Leatherneck)

Thanks to Bill Faith of Small Town Veteran for the poem link and correct attribution/origin of the poem!

Merry Christmas!

[Note: As the poem was written by a Marine about a Marine and the recording was made by a Marine, I’m not sure why the recording was titled “Soldier’s Silent Night”. It might be because “soldier” can be used to describe anyone in the Armed Forces (capital S “Soldier” means Army). Or it just might be a mistake.]

December 24, 2009 , 11:33PM Posted by | Christianity, Christmas, Military | Comments Off on Merry Christmas, My Friends — Soldier’s Silent Night

The Dark Side of Christmas

Via Amy Wellborn: A Sword Will Pierce Your Heart

An excerpt:

We might forget, we might wrap up Christmas in good cheer, but Christian tradition doesn’t. It’s striking that the next day — the very next day — after Christmas, the Church remembers not glad tidings, angels, and shepherd boys, but a bloody death by stoning. St. Stephen it is, the first Christian martyr.

St. Stephen is followed by St. John on December 27th, who may not have met a violent death, but who, the tradition tells us, died in a prison of sorts, in exile for his faith, far away from the “civilized” powers that had sent him there.

December 28th brings us back to babies, but with no relief — it is the Feast of the Holy Innocents, remembering the children Herod ordered slaughtered, according to Matthew’s gospel, in his rabid fear of the rival king.

The message is clear and hard: Following this baby, as he reaches to us from the resin manger, looking out at us with the soft-eyed cattle and docile sheep, comes at a price.

There is an edge to Christmas, a harshness, and a different kind of promise than that implied by the easy words of peace and glad tidings. It is a mystery, all of it. The Word made flesh indeed, but into a world that was from the beginning set against it, that sought with every bit of strength at hand to stay in the darkness.

December 24, 2009 , 11:29PM Posted by | Christianity, Christmas | Comments Off on The Dark Side of Christmas

Why it is Okay to Bash Christians and Jews, but no Other Group

Hmmm, this is actually a pretty interesting explanation. Makes sense. Thinking of the 10 Commandments — “Thou Shalt Not Have Any Other gods Before Me” — it makes sense than that any other religion other than Christianity/Judaism would be worshipping other gods before God and, thus, would be a-okay with the Devil. Anything which is in opposition to Christanity and Judaism is thus on the side of the Devil.

Never thought about it that way before, but it makes good sense.

“Why do LIBTARDS defend one, but not the other?”

Are you asking this in all seriousness? Why it is okay to bash Christians and Jews but no other group?

If yes: Because God is real, the Bible is true, and their spiritual father in hell knows this, and hates those who follow Him and his Word.

This is why it’s “ok” to teach Islam and the Quran in public schools, but don’t mention the Bible at all except to denigrate it. This is why it is “ok” to teach transcendental meditation and other new-age satanisms in gradeschool but not anything at all about the history of Israel prior to 1949. This is why cults like Scientology and JW’s and Heaven’s Gate and all the other twisted nonGospels are tolerated much moreso than Christianity and Judaism.

This might not be the answer you were looking for, but it’s the truth. Satan hates God and his people. EVERYTHING ELSE IS A-OK. Some wonder why the ACLU and N.O.W. are completely silent on the treatment of women and gays under Islamic governments. Well, it’s because the perpetrators are not Christians or Jews. Its simple, really, when you understand things of a spiritual nature.

If you believe that there are no things of a spiritual nature, then all of this would be incredibly confusing. It’s why most people are confused now, who went to public schools in America, about the Middle East. They were never taught about the entire history, only that some idiot crazy wingers think that Israel was a nation once in prehistoric times. But David? Saul? Philistia? Macabees? NO knowledge at all. It’s all been redacted, for the reason I stated. They are in service, whether they know it or not, of the Devil in hell.

Posted by: Taqiyy. at November 24, 2009 11:36 PM

November 25, 2009 , 1:04AM Posted by | Anti-Semitism, Christianity, Liberalism, Political Correctness | Comments Off on Why it is Okay to Bash Christians and Jews, but no Other Group