Thursday, September 29, 2016

“If mama ain’t happy, no ones happy”: Sexist Propaganda?

We’ve all heard the expression “If mama ain’t happy, no ones happy”, right?  This sentiment  has been the cultural standard among couples in the US forever.  It has been the “gold standard” of marital relations.  Keep the woman happy and all will be peaches and cream.

So, if the woman whines, we known it is something the man is doing wrong.  We, as men, need to do everything in our power to keep the whining down – keep mama happy.


If the man is unhappy, guess what.  He is just a whiner…spoiled, selfish.  There is something wrong with him. 

There is no male equivalent to “if mama ain’t happy, no ones happy.”  There is no such thing as “if papa ain’t happy, ain’t no one happy.”  This expression is never heard.

This one-sided responsibility for happiness is just one of countless conflicts exposed by the feminist movement.  The evolving culture insists on equal rights for women, yet the prevailing culture still expects superior treatment of women.

The reality: If papa ain’t happy, no one is happy, either. 

Thursday, September 15, 2016

Minimizing the “other side’s opinions”…

I received a comment from a reader who took exception to my blog about a neighbor who characterized Trump supporters as “trailer trash.”   She also objected to my drawing attention to Hillary’s labelling Trump supporters as comprised of a “basket of deplorables.” (See the blog below titled “Attitude against Trump and his supporters.”)

Seemingly out of the blue she said I need to “learn to have a real conversation without minimizing the other side's opinions.”

My critic believes that views about which an individual disagrees should NOT be minimized.

Let’s unpack that admonition a bit.

I agree that if there was a brand new view that I had not yet considered, it would be rash and premature of me to minimize that view.  It should at least be considered, evaluated and either be dismissed, adopted, or put on the back burner for future consideration. 

On the other hand, views that I have already heard, considered and based on solid evidence and experience determined were foolish, ill-conceived, dangerous, or unworkable are the perfect candidates for being “minimized.”   Why?  Because they were already considered and dismissed.  Why shouldn’t such views be “minimized?”  Not “minimizing” views that an individual has already rightly concluded are ill-conceived and which make little sense would be mind boggling.  How can views deemed irredeemable not be “minimized?”  That is just another definition of insanity.

This woman, an educated naval officer, is of the apparent belief that all views, however outrageous, however discredited they may be, should never be minimized.  In her view, all views should be considered as equally valid, equally feasible, equally considered as if they are brand new and have never, ever been considered before – never minimized. 

Such is the view of the newly educated.  To the recent college graduate, everything is so new to them that they cannot fathom anyone “minimizing” a view that they currently believe is immutable.   They cannot fathom the idea that some views are minimized by those who have already found them to be wanting.

This critic admits to being a Hillary supporter.    She apparently thinks its OK for a neighbor to characterize Trump supporters as “trailer trash.”  After all, Hillary confirmed this characterization with her own “basket of deplorables” comment.  So she is very defensive of Hillary and critical of anyone who “minimizes” Hillary’s or her supporter’s bigoted comments.

There are two reasons that come to mind why such person would defend the bigoted comments of Hillary and her supporters:

  • Naivet√©. She is a young person recently educated in a liberal college with liberal peers and professors who have not offered the “other side” of any story to her in any positive terms.  It is no wonder that she finds my “listing [of] liberal attributes … confounding and baseless.”
  • Gender.  She is a female who will give deciding points to any other female running for office just because she is female, aka, playing the “gender card.”  It is no wonder that she defends the indefensible - the words of Hillary and her supporters - and is critical of her opponents.

A word about liberals who demand “tolerance.”  They are among the least tolerant of all humans.  Their cry for “tolerance” is a one-way street.  They want everything “tolerated” except the things that they disagree with.  That is the merging of “anything goes anarchy” (extreme libertarianism) with a form of “dictatorial autocracy” where ONLY the views of the supposedly “tolerant” elite are tolerated.  This is an oxymoronic and duplicitous combination.

Wednesday, September 14, 2016

“Attitude” against Trump and his supporters…

Basket of Deplorables

Every so often we hear of someone being described as having “attitude.”  I came across such person, a neighbor, who motivated me to write this blog back in March.   Hillary Clinton motivated me to revise it a bit this week.

Having “attitude” refers to a person with an ugly or mean spirit toward something or someone he condemns or despises, with or without cause.

Hillary has “attitude.”  Here are her comments from early September 2016:

“You can take Trump supporters and put them in two baskets.” First there are “the deplorables, the racists, and the haters, and the people who … think somehow he’s going to restore an America that no longer exists. So, just eliminate them from your thinking…”

And who might be in the other basket backing Donald Trump?

They are people, said Clinton, “who feel that the government has let them down, the economy has let them down, nobody cares about them. … These are people we have to understand and empathize with.”

In short, Trump’s support consists of one-half xenophobes, bigots and racists, and one-half losers we should pity.

Hillary, queen of elitism, dissing over 50% of the US population.

In the case of those who oppose Trump, most have “attitude” against his supporters.   Many with “attitude” against Trump and his supporters call Trump supporters “trailer trash”, “low life”, “crude”, ”rednecks”, or “uneducated.”  Hillary calls them “the deplorables, the the bigots, the racists, and the haters.”

 Image result for trailer trash

How elites and establishment types characterize Trump supporters.

Since these labels are false accusations in the great majority of instances, such person’s “attitude” is synonymous with being “bigoted” and “prejudiced.”

Who  with “attitude” would characterize half of the electorate in these terms?  Let me think.  Hmmm.  The terms “elitists”, “superiors”, “aristocrats”, “blue bloods”; “snobs”, and “supercilious” come to mind.

Those who insist on our nation “progressing” toward bigger government, a nation without borders, higher taxes, less personal responsibility, more government handouts, and more regulation have “attitude” against Trump and his supporters.  Those who favor socialist, Communist, or  lying, and deceitful opponents who hire paid disrupters, rioters and other rabble to shut down free speech are the ones with bigoted “attitude” against Trump supporters.

These are the types, in and out of government, that fuel Trump’s popularity.  It is the elitist, academic, “government can do no wrong”, “government-as-god” attitude of the elitists that propelled Trump to history-making political status.

If Trump supporters are “trailer trash” than the majority of the electorate may be trailer trash.  That’s a hell of a way to characterize your neighbor.

Only elitists do that.  We can only hope that the common sense of Trump supporters relegate the bigoted elitists to their high distant perches where they will do less harm to the rest of us low life.

Apparently only low life voters desire a candidate who has the demonstrated capacity and force of will to reclaim our nation from the slough of eight years of Obama hell.

Wednesday, August 31, 2016

Trump’s Immigration Speech of August 31, 2016, after returning from Mexico

Only diehard Soros and One-World government supporters and those who have a sick disregard for this country will find fault with this great address on immigration to the American people by Donald Trump from Arizona. 

Trump’s address begins at the 1:30:00 mark on the video below:

I now know why Bush said nothing during the Obama atrocities…

…and it had NOTHING to do with the tradition of “respect” for the “Office.”

For the past 8 years I wondered why ex-President Bush said nothing, absolutely NOTHING about the manner the Obama administration was running this country into the ground.  He said nothing about dissing Israel.  He said nothing about bowing to our enemies.  He said nothing about Obamacare’s destruction of our health care system.  He said nothing about running interference for Muslims while ignoring the plight of Christians.

Bush played the “tradition card” while remaining the blind, deaf, and dumb to Obama’s policies of destruction of our nation’s standing, influence, power, and wealth.

Wouldn’t you think that 8 years of the Obama debacle, a new anti-American maneuver at every turn, would have elicited some comment about the problem from a former President?  Tradition didn’t stop Cheney from speaking out.

The last few months of the presidential campaign has made the REAL reason abundantly and painfully clear.

Bush is part of the Washington power elite – part of the core of the establishment every bit as much as those who brought Obama to power.  Every bit as much as those who are working to keep Hillary in power.  Bush is one and the same as the power structure that has controlled our nation’s direction for decades.

Bush had no problem with the way things were going.  Maybe he would have accomplished the same things in a slightly different way.  But the general direction – eliminate borders, facilitate large scale immigration, defer to regional and world governance, reduce our own autonomy, defend Islam as the same as any other religion – would have been exactly the same.  These things have been long pre-ordained by the elite.

Image result for republican roaches exposed to the lightTrump, an outsider, has shown a bright light on the roaches of this nation.  The Republican roaches are all scurrying away, if not overtly supporting the elite’s remaining “chosen one”, Hillary, but at least doing all they can to destroy Trump, the disruptor of their lucrative but rotten to the core apple cart.

Fifty Republican “national security experts” - those who have gotten us into the ISIS-building, Islam strengthening mess we are in - recently wrote a scathing letter of indictment of Trump.  Those 50 would be better known as “national insecurity” hacks. 

National Review and The Weekly Standard, thought of as conservative bastions of the right wing media, have been slamming Trump for the past year.

Glenn Beck and Mark Levin are rabidly anti-Trump.

Sally Bradshaw, a former Bush family friend, confidant, and adviser to the Jeb Bush campaign proclaimed she will vote for Hillary.  Seriously!  That statement speaks volumes of where Jeb’s head has been.

These manifestations of Trump hatred are not because Hillary is more honest, more likeable, more charming, a smarter human, would be a better leader or would do a better job than Trump.  These manifestations of Trump hatred are because Trump is an outsider and Hillary is the insider.  Trump will upset their cozy apple cart and Hillary will further the elitist’s lucrative positions of power and influence.

The network of Republican roaches permeated more nooks and crannies of Republicanism and faux conservatism than we ever imagined.

Many are wondering how far the “system” will go in assuring Trump’s failure in this election.  Will they merely persist in their attempts to discredit and smear everything he’s ever accomplished and every word he utters?  Or will they go further?

I’ve never heard so much speculation about the potential for a candidate’s assassination or the likelihood of an election-disrupting event as during this election.  

At the same time, the light has never shown so bright upon those in power who most of us believed represented our nation’s best interest only to discover that they have their own power and financial interests as their number one priority.

No wonder George “Islam is Peace” Bush had been so silent during Obama “the destroyer” Hussein Obama’s reign.


Image result for republican roaches exposed to the light

Monday, August 29, 2016

Colin Kaepernick: Is he a Muslim now or not?

Some claim that this San Francisco 49’ers soon-to-be former quarterback started his football career as a Christian.

According to Colin’s father, Kaepernick “was baptized Methodist, confirmed Lutheran and went to a Baptist church in Reno.” (World Net Daily)  He even has a Tebow-esque Bible tattoo on his too easily mislead mindless body: 

“You have armed me with strength for the battle; you have subdued my enemies under my feet.” Psalm 18:39

But now this admirer of the false narrative-based “Black Lives Matter” movement has rumors abounding about his possible conversion to Islam.  It is no surprise, of course, that the all-knowing, often wrong, left-wing politically and Soros-motivated Snopes web site claims it is all hogwash.

But wait! There’s more.  The unabashedly unpatriotic and allegedly “non-Muslim” Kaepernick has a sweetie who just happens to be a Muslim.  In fact the Daily Caller website believe that his Muslim squeeze, his “Communist-sympathizing Muslim girlfriend is believed to be behind the protest.”

More from World Net Daily:

According to widespread reports, still unconfirmed, he and his girlfriend, Nessa Diab, an MTV DJ, may be planning an Islamic-style wedding. During Ramadan, he posted a greeting on Instagram wishing his friends the best for the holiday: “Kaepernick” I know a lot of people who were fasting during Ramadan, wishing you a Happy Eid!”

Mix a football player with a Muslim and you get someone who goes off half-cocked based on a racist, misinformed movement (Black Lives Matter)  making an ill-advised spectacle of himself.  And the NFL puts up with this crap.   The NFL needs to get its act together to stop this train wreck.

Note this NFL contrast of policy applied to those who speak out: 

The NFL has denied a recent request for Cowboy players to wear a decal honoring fallen Dallas police officers. 

colin-kaepernick-pig-cop-sockAnd now this rabble wears “pig cop socks” to his football practice?  Yup. That is beyond protest.  It is in your face hatred.  He is attempting to create a race riot. 

Who is managing that warped enterprise?   They might have to change the League’s name to AAFL, the Anti-American Football League.   Time for a boycott of NFL games?

The San Francisco Police Officer’s Association had this to say:

"Mr. Kaepernick has embarrassed himself, the 49er organization, and the NFL based on a false narrative and misinformation that lacks any factual basis," SFPOA President Martin Halloran wrote in a letter to 49ers President/CEO Jed York, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell and Kaepernick.Image result for blacks and islam

By the way.  Blacks are the number one target of Muslim recruiters in this nation – especially when the recruiter is a Muslim girlfriend.  And Islam is having great success at this.  It ain’t goin’ to be pretty.

Trump suggested what most of us are thinking, like he often does: 

“Maybe he should find a country that works better for him.”

Saturday, August 13, 2016

If you don’t like either candidate, at least learn the vast differences between them…

Can you guess which presidential candidate is on which side?

Maybe the terms “liberal” and “conservative” and “left” and “right” have somewhat lost their meaning in the past year.  But the divide has become more stark and clear than ever.

The distinctions that have come to the fore, even though they’ve existed for decades, is “nationalist” and “one-worlder”.

The leftists, socialists, all Democrats, progressives and communists have, for a long time, favored giving up national sovereignty for a one world government.  Their methods of choice include,

  • Eliminate national borders
  • Unlimited immigration, without qualification or potential benefit to the nation no matter how much it may create unemployment and lower wages for existing citizens.
  • Devoting vast quantities of citizen taxpayer dollars on social, medical, and educational services for non-citizen illegal immigrants.
  • Destructive and violent protest
  • Discredit law enforcement
  • Lying and other manifestations of amorality come naturally.  The means justify the ends.
  • Ignore or flaunt established law, especially in “sanctuary cities” and especially those in high government positions.
  • No voter ID; non-citizen illegal immigrants allowed to vote
  • In state tuition at state universities for illegal immigrant non-residents
  • Anti-military
  • Maintain that all religions and beliefs are basically the same – one no better or worse than another - as long as they abide by world norms.  Islam is deemed equal to Judaism, Christianity, Catholicism, Buddhism, and atheism in spite of Islam's doctrines and practice of jihad, sharia, taqiyya, supremacism and intolerance.
  • Consider “free trade” that eliminates duties, tariffs, and quotas (this has been a Republican pet for quite a while) to achieve a “level playing field” among nations, no matter how much such policy may create unemployment and lower wages for the nation’s workforce.
  • Unconcern about energy independence and, instead, reliance on other nations for our resource needs.
  • Relinquishing national sovereignty to a multi-national or world authority, I.e. the United Nations, NAFTA and TPP.
  • Allow extra-national authority to enforce the nation’s laws as that authority deems fit.  Such laws are currently focusing on limiting free speech that might offend someone, even though such speech might be true, gender-blurring, and environmental controls that may or may not be based on sound science.
  • Allocation of significant resources and propaganda (aka “reeducation”) toward the elimination or rewriting of national history, culture and religion to make room for their “better” one-world ideology. 
  • Promotion of reliance on government for all things.

This is what the one-world’ers pander to…

Milwaukee Rioter: Rich People Got All This Money… ‘Don’t Give Us None’ – So We Burn Gas Stations (Video)

On the other side of the great divide are those known as “rightists, conservatives, a segment of Republicans, patriots, nationalists, constitutionalists, traditionalists, and lately, the “evil” term “nativist” oh my.  These folks believe in their homeland, their nation, their culture and their religion.

The methods used by these folks generally consist of…

  • Protecting our borders.
  • Displaying the American flag
  • Attending church
  • Praying
  • Supporting local police
  • Supporting our military and veterans
  • Working for a living
  • Paying taxes
  • Honesty and morality come before expediency.
  • Supporting our Constitution
  • Respecting and abiding by our laws
  • Expressing concern about the true nature of Islam, its doctrines, and its propensity for supremacism, intolerance and a seditious form of governance known as sharia.
  • Wanting trade policies that create more good paying jobs.
  • Promoting energy independence.
  • Expressing desire for lower taxes, less regulation, and smaller government
  • Promotion of personal responsibility 

Those who consider our nation, our government, and our culture as nothing special will tend to be among the first group.

Those who who consider our nation, our government, and our culture as a special place, a one time in world history place to be protected and enhanced will tend to b e among the second group.

There are two presidential candidates running.  One is representing the interests of the first group.  The other is representing the interests of the second group.

One loves the status quo.  The other hates the status quo.  In fact he hates it so much that many who are less concerned about the status quo accuse him of being insensitive and saying outrageous things.  In fact, I believe he speaks as he does out of his passion to correct the stupid, nation-killing things our past and current policy makers and media have promoted.

Your choice.  I know mine.

Wednesday, August 03, 2016

Islam has become its old self again

And most world leaders are still in denial…

The great majority of the history of Islam, from the words and actions of its founder, Muhammad, to the Islamic conquests of millions of square miles of Christian lands, to the current Islamic supremacism and jihad, Islam has involved an aggressive, militant and terrorist mindset among its followers.  Yet most world leaders ignore this fact.  This is surreal.

Here are several examples of this current and longstanding blindness.  I have no idea when the following words were added to the Catholic Catechism:
"The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind's judge on the last day."
But the fact that these words still represent the position of the Catholic Church is baffling.  These words were quite likely written at a time  when Islam was in one of its rare periods of remission from its historically violent orthodoxy.

Three things are ignorantly and mistakenly portrayed in this quote:
1) Why place Muslims “first amongst those who acknowledge the creator?”  Why not Jews?  Why not atheists? Why not any other belief system whose followers might at the end acknowledge the Creator?  Was this a form of appeasement to threatening, intolerant Muslims of the day as it is today?  Or merely the ignorance of church leaders of the day?
2) Muslims “hold the faith of Abraham?”  No Islam does not.  Islam acknowledges Abraham’s existence, but denies the actions and purpose that Jewish and Christian text and doctrine attribute to Abraham.  Islamic doctrine ignores Abraham and declares Abraham’s son, Ishmael to be the father of their “religion” that was invented over 2,500 years later.  While Judaism and Christianity are truly “Abrahamic religions”, Islam should be referred to as a corruption of history, and referred to as an Ishmaelian aberration.  Why Islam is declared to be “one of the three great Abraham religions” is odd - a pervasion of history and reality.
3) Muslims “adore the one, merciful God…”  Hardly.  In fact, Islam has created a god whose characteristics are opposite the Catholic and Christian God –in many ways.  Allah is distant, impersonal.  God is present and personal.  Allah hates all unbelievers and requires killing or subduing them against their will.  God wants all to be saved and offers heaven, voluntarily to all.  Allah rules over a belief system that promotes submission through coercion via threats, intimidation and terror.  God offers a belief system that is forgiving, voluntary, not coercive.  Those who say that the Islamic “Allah” and the Christian “God” are the same are perpetuating a lie, an insult to God.

Even this week “Pope Francis Says World Is at War, but It’s Not a Religious Conflict.”  Not a “religious war?”  Even though virtually every one of the hundreds of terror attacks worldwide have been committed by a Muslim yelling Allahu Akar while killing or terrorizing in the name of Islam?  Even when Islamic groups and Islamic nations in the Middle East call for “death to Israel/death to America?”  Even when orthodox Islamic doctrine specifies precisely what ISIS and a hundred other Islamic groups are doing? 

Where is reality?  Where is truth?  It is not a “religious war” to the Pope because the Pope remains in the Catholic delusion that violence and supremacism and intolerance of other belief systems and people less devout have anything whatsoever to do with Islam.  It takes a huge does of insanity to believe that.

Howard Dean is typical of the Democrats, many Republicans, and especially the Obama administration in believing Islam has nothing to do with Islam.  Dean has gone so far as to declare:
“Iran is the farthest thing from an Islamic Republic” and that Iran is not “a Muslim country.”  Instead, Dean said, Iran is “a republic that’s been hijacked by thugs and murderers.”
Turkey’s President Erdogan disagrees, going so far as demanding “There is no such thing as “moderate Islam – Islam is Islam.”  ISIS, the Muslim Brotherhood, al-Qaida, Hezbollah, and a hundred other self-declared Islamic organization are as Islamic as the most Islamic nation, including Turkey.

And, obvious to most of us, none other than spokesmen for ISIS disagree with and have corrected the words of the Pope.  They unabashedly proclaim…
“Ours is a religious war and we hate you.  Indeed, waging jihad – spreading the rule of Allah by the sword – is an obligation found in the Quran, the word of our Lord…The blood of the disbelievers is obligatory to spill by default. The command is clear. Kill the disbelievers, as Allah said, ‘Then kill the polytheists wherever you find them.’”

For those who think Breitbart may not be the best source of these quotes, try going to the original source, ISIS’s very own, slick paper, English language version of their magazine, Dabiq, Issue 15, HERE.

Don’t you think, when groups representing a religion – in this case ISIS plainly representing Islam - declare war on us because of our beliefs, or for not believing what they believe, that it is foolish – even criminal – not to pay heed?  Is it wishful thinking?  Are church and government leaders somehow complicit?  Have they succumbed to the Stockholm Syndrome?  Are they attempting to avoid giving offense to the Muslim masses? 

These are all excuses, not reasons, for continuing denial of the reality of the doctrine of Islam that motivates and inspires  Muslims the world over engage their supremacist and terroristic ideology – waging their Islam-inspired war – against us.  We need to be in the face of any church and government leader who declares such excuses.

They might ask “well, with so many Muslims in the world, what else can we do?’

We must answer:  Start with admitting and telling the truth about the problem we face.  Face reality. Islamic doctrine is the problem.   Quit buying into this great deception of denial.   Act sane.

Islam has been at war with what it declares to be the “infidel” for 1,400 years.  HERE is an article that provides an analysis of Islam’s 1,400 years of aggression.

Yes, Islam has had its brief periods of complacency or unnatural moderation over its’ 1,400 year life of terror and conquest.  This remission was due to occasional world pressures of various kinds.   At the bottom of this blog is an excerpt from Robert Spencer’s “Islam 101” titled “Islam in the Modern Era” that discusses the reasons for the ebb and flow of Islamic supremacism and aggression.

Those were rare times.  But Islam has  reawakened to become its’ old self again – the Islam intended by Muhammad from the beginning.  Islam’s successes at deception along with their promotion and use of terror will attract millions more Muslims and black hearted non-Muslims to their cause over the coming months and years -  until we finally admit to the reality that it is Islam behind the terror and mayhem.


f. Jihad in the Modern Era – from Robert Spencer’s “Islam 101”

Following its defeat at the walls of Vienna in 1683, Islam entered a period of strategic decline in which it was increasingly dominated by the rising European colonial powers. Due to its material weakness vis-à-vis the West, dar al-Islam was unable to prosecute large-scale military campaigns into infidel territory. The Islamic Empire, then ruled by the Ottoman Turks, was reduced to fending of the increasingly predatory European powers.

In 1856, Western pressure compelled the Ottoman government to suspend the dhimma under which the Empire’s non-Muslim subjects labored. This provided hitherto unknown opportunities for social and personal improvement by the former dhimmis, but it also fomented resentment by orthodox Muslims who saw this as a violation of the Sharia and their Allah-given superiority over unbelievers.

By the late 19th century, tensions among the European subjects of the Empire broke out into the open when the Ottoman government massacred 30,000 Bulgarians in 1876 for allegedly rebelling against Ottoman rule. Following Western intervention that resulted in Bulgarian independence, the Ottoman government and its Muslim subjects were increasingly nervous about other non-Muslim groups seeking independence.

It was in this atmosphere that the first stage of the Armenian genocide took place in 1896 with the slaughter of some 250,000 Armenians. Both civilians and military personnel took place in the massacres. Peter Balakian, in his book, The Burning Tigris, documents the whole horrific story. But the massacres of the 1890s were only the prelude to the much larger holocaust of 1915, which claimed some 1.5 million lives. While various factors contributed to the slaughter, there is no mistaking that the massacres were nothing other than a jihad waged against the Armenians, no longer protected as they were by the dhimma. In 1914, as the Ottoman Empire entered World War I on the side of the central powers, an official anti-Christian jihad was proclaimed.

To promote the idea of jihad, the sheikh-ul-Islam’s {the most senior religious leader in the Ottoman Empire} published proclamation summoned the Muslim world to arise and massacre its Christian oppressors. “Oh Moslems,” the document read, “Ye who are smitten with happiness and are on the verge of sacrificing your life and your good for the cause of right, and of braving perils, gather now around the Imperial throne.” In the Ikdam, the Turkish newspaper that had just passed into German ownership, the idea of jihad was underscored: “The deeds of our enemies have brought down the wrath of God. A gleam of hope has appeared. All Mohammedans, young and old, men, women, and children must fulfill their duty. … If we do it, the deliverance of the subjected Mohammedan kingdoms is assured.” … “He who kills even one unbeliever,” one pamphlet read, “of those who rule over us, whether he does it secretly or openly, shall be rewarded by God.” (quoted in Balakian, The Burning Tigris, 169-70.)

The anti-Christian jihad culminated in 1922 at Smyrna, on the Mediterranean coast, where 150,000 Greek Christians were massacred by the Turkish army under the indifferent eye of Allied warships. All in, from 1896-1923, some 2.5 million Christians were killed, the first modern genocide, which to this day is denied by the Turkish government.

Since the breakup of the Islamic Empire following World War I, various jihads have been fought around the globe by the independent Muslim nations and sub-state jihadist groups. The most sustained effort has been directed against Israel, which has committed the unpardonable sin of rebuilding dar al-harb on land formerly a part of dar al-Islam. Other prominent jihads include that fought against the Soviets in Afghanistan, the Muslim Bosnians against the Serbs in the former Yugoslavia, the Muslim Albanians against the Serbs in Kosovo, and the Chechens against the Russians in the Caucasus. Jihads have also been waged throughout northern Africa, the Philippines, Thailand, Kashmir, and a host of other places throughout the world. In addition, the overwhelming majority of terrorist attacks around the world have been committed by Muslims, including, of course, the spectacular attacks of 9/11/01 (USA), 3/11/04 (Spain), and 7/7/05 (UK). (For a more comprehensive list of Muslim attacks, visit

The fact is, the percentage of conflicts in the world today that do not include Islam is pretty small. Islam is making a comeback.

Tuesday, July 26, 2016

Paint chips, and the Republican Spirit…

I doubt I am the only one who noticed this not so subtle display of the Republican spirit.  Image result for paint chipsThose who love to build, remodel, and improve things are familiar with the ubiquitous paint chip.  It is the Republican equivalent of the gay’s Rainbow and the left’s right-facing arrow through a big H.

The paint chip:  Let’s build something together as Home Depot likes to say.

The stage of the Republican National Convention was adorned with what?  Paint chips!

Image result for republican convention stageAnd did you notice how they changed color with every speaker?  Sweet! 

The paint chip:  Symbol of the positive remodeling, improving, building spirit of the Republican Party.  I will bet that this was the idea of one of the Trumps.  If I had to guess which one, I’d say Ivanka.

Dems: The Party of “Not Responsible for Anything” aka “The Irresponsible Party”

And Email Scandal, Act II

The Democrat party has exposed itself to what it has become – as exposed as the Party’s and Hillary’s emails.

The Party has become the “take no blame - take no responsibility” Party.   It assumes no blame and takes no responsibility – for anything.

It began with Obama’s incessant blame of Bush for the economy – a full six years into his own terms of office.

It continues with Obama’s blaming everything about the United States for the violence and unrest in the Middle East – our history, Capitalism, our culture.

Hillary continued the tradition by falsely blaming a home made, but historically accurate video about Muhammad for a planned Islamic terror attack that killed our Ambassador to Libya and others.

Hillary continued being Hillary by lying throughout the “server-gate” investigation – not taking responsibility for exposing dozens if not hundreds of Secret, Top Secret, and even higher classified documents to easy hacking and theft.  She simply ignores the compromised national security that resulted.

Now the Democratic Party’s own security has been compromised through another email breach.  The Party’s “experts” blame it on the Russians – and by inference, Trump.

Why oh why can they not take responsibility for their own failures?  Why can’t they admit, as in Hillary’s case, that they have poorly secured servers and poor and careless email security?  Why do they have to blame someone else yet again?  Of course, this deflects attention away from the nasty content of these Democrat emails that have inflamed members of their own Party.

And here’s a thought:  IF Russia did the hack, why wouldn’t they favor Bernie, the more openly Communist between him and Hillary?

This “take no blame – take no responsibility” policy of the Democratic Party has also become the hallmark of their Party Platform.

  • Guns are to blame – the shooters (almost always Democrat) are not responsible.
  • Workplace violence is to blame – the Islamic ideology that incites Muslims to violence is not responsible, nor are the Muslims (almost always Democrat) responsible.
  • “Blame America First” is the centerpiece of Democrat foreign policy.
  • “Blame capitalism” is the centerpiece of Democrat domestic policy.
  • “Blame civilization first” is their “climate change/global warming”-based environmental policy.

All of this blame is used to justify the need for bigger governments and less individual responsibility.   Individual freedom and individual responsibility is, after all,  to blame for all of our ills.  Only government can fix it.  Government is NEVER to blame for anything – especially BIGGER government.

The centerpiece of the Democratic Convention – “take no blame – take no responsibility.”

Islamic Terror not mentioned once during first day of Convention.  Its as if these people live in a make believe fantasy land.


About the beheading of a Priest in Normandy, France, today…

The beheaded Priest’s boss, the Archbishop of Rouen, called the Muslim beheader a “victim.”

UPDATE 1220 BST — Archbishop of Rouen describes alleged Islamist killers as “victims” in statement
Away from his diocese at the World Youth Day celebrations in Krakow, Poland the archbishop of Rouen has released a statement
on the death of one of his priests this morning, which strangely seems to identify both the slain clergyman and his killers as “victims”.

He said: “I have learnt with sadness of the killing this morning at the Church of Saint-Etienne du Rouvray. The three victims: the priest, Father Jacques Hamel, 84, and the perpetrators of the assassination.

The Catholic Church and its ignorant leaders better get a grip on reality.  They, too, apparently live in a fantasy land.

If that Archbishop were in the States, he would be a Democrat.  He wouldn’t even have to be a citizen.