Support of free speech abandoned by O’Reilly

Here are several victims of Islamic intimidation and related political correctness.

Brigitte Bardot:  Did you know that Brigitte Bardot was arrested several times in France over the last several years for expressing her concerns about excessive Islamic immigration and its consequences?  Here are a few details.

But that is in Europe.

Lt. Col. Allen West:  Did you know that  Lt. Col. Allen West was disciplined for his non-life-threatening method of extracting information from a Muslim that saved many American lives?

Franklin Graham:  Did you know that Franklin Graham may be disinvited from leading a prayer service at the Pentagon for our troops because Muslims are complaining that he is critical of Islam?

Creators of South Park:  Trey Parker and Matt Stone dared to create a cartoon involving Muhammad and now are receiving death notices for insulting Islam.  And who is the dhimmi that said they should have kept this idea to themselves?  None other than egomaniac Bill O’Reilly.

South Park Update 4-22-10:  The Comedy Central Network caved in to Islamic intimidation and joined the ranks of other dhimmi networks, commentators, and politicians.  What, exactly, will it take for non-Muslims to recognize the danger Islam poses to free speech?

O’Reilly is apparently willing to give up his freedom of speech over potential Islamic threats.  Yup.  He believes the South Park creators are asking for it when they depicted Muhammad as a Teddy Bear.

It is true - Islamists do murder people who depict Muhammad in images or who mock Islam in any manner.  South Park did this very thing (in an excessively mild manner) and its creators are now the subject of Islamic revenge.  These events were discussed on the O'Reilly show (video below).  The good news is that O'Reilly showed it.  The bad news is that he expressed his own fear and dhimmi attitude at the expense of free speech when he said "the risk [of free speech] is higher than the reward."  He said "I hate to give into the intimidating forces of evil, but you got to deal with reality", which translated means:  He will give into the intimidating forces of evil.  This was certainly an ignorant statement to make in the face of Islamic intimidation, especially from a commentator who makes his living off of free speech.  This display of fear is an admission that he will not report facts if he feels threatened.  His credibility should plummet.

Here is the dhimmi score card (or Pinheads and Patriots, as O’Reilly would judge):

Proven dhimmi’s (pinheads):  French government, US Military brass, Bill O’Reilly, Comedy Central Network.

Proven patriots:  Brigitte Bardot, Lt. Col. Allen West, Franklin Graham, creators of South Park.

Technorati Tags: O'Reilly dhimmi,O'Reilly South Park,O'Reilly fear,O'Reilly Islam

9-11: What if Obama Was President?

Several thoughts about where we are eight years after September 2001.

Can you image if 9-11 occurred during an Obama presidency – knowing the radicals, the “truthers”, the Muslims he is surrounded with?  Among the American people there would be an exactly opposite proportion of people thinking it was an “inside job” as opposed to a bona fide terrorist attack than there is today.  He would lose ALL credibility with the majority of Americans.  With Obama’s leanings - his past associations and his current advisors - his allegiance to this nation and any actions to overcome (if there were any) would all be suspect, and rightfully so.  His current practice of siding more with the nations of Islam than with our historical allies would certainly add fuel to the distrust fire.

If you haven’t seen it yet, you need to watch this Glenn Back memorial broadcast from yesterday, 9-11-09.  And then scroll down to see the “change of heart” I’ve had about Islam since 2001.

In the months after the attack, there was a contest sponsored by the committee charged with designing the 9-11 memorial that is to occupy the Twin Towers site.  I entered that contest.  The heart of my proposal was to have a multi-culture cultural center featuring the worlds  major religions:  Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hindu, Buddhist, Shinto.  I suggested that these centers would feature the things these religions share in common, focusing on peace and love and mutual respect – all in harmony fighting against violence and inhumanity.

In retrospect, I realize how naive and stupid that suggestion was.  Why?  At the time I thought one religion was unjustly “tainted” by the actions of a few misguided radicals.  I thought there could be a “healing” if only we could all understand the true nature of Islam, the religion of the pilots who killed over three thousand Americans.  But over the years following the attack I gradually learned there is one among those major world religions with a false face:  Islam.  I learned it portrays itself as a “religion of peace” but at its core it is a fascist political system that seeks world domination.  Their majority is comprised of ordinary folk who conduct ordinary lives, with sympathies toward and support (both overt and covert) for their radical arm seeking the spread of their religion – “evangelism” by whatever means has an effect, including intimidation, threats, violence, terror, murder, economic disruption, honor killings and every other means taught by their psychotic mastermind Muhammad.

Those who see my rants about Islam and consider them ignorant and extreme should know that I came from a place eight years ago when I, too, thought Islam was a religion of peace like all others.  But the facts I learned about that religion over the past eight years flipped my perception.  Those who still hold the same naive understanding I had really need to take the time to learn the basic historical teaching of that religion.  They will come to the conclusion, as I have, that the roots of Islam are in conquest and domination by violent means – that is the “reform” movement of the 1.3 billion Muslims today.

Slowest Response to a Major Fire I've Ever Seen

I was watching live scenes of the Islamabad, Pakistan, Marriott hotel fire this morning. The first scenes broadcast on Fox cable appeared to be about 30 minutes or so after the initial Islamic terrorist bombing occurred. No fire fighting was in sight. Only after 30 to 40 additional minutes of broadcast time (well over an hour after the initial blast) did any visual of firefighting appear - one lone stream of water aimed erratically at the hotel.

Like Saudi Arabia, one has to wonder about the dedication of this "significant ally" toward the defense of American interests. I would not be surprised if there was a purposeful deference toward allowing the hotel to burn - a show of Pakistani and radical Islams' disdain toward American efforts to thwart Islamic "extremism" (or Islamic "mainstremism" is perhaps more accurate) in Afghanistan and elsewhere.

Pakistan appears to have gotten a bit edgy since the US has become more effective in thwarting al Quida activity in the border regions between itself and Afghanistan. This is our "slap on the wrist" for daring to be effective - which Pakistan does not have the will to be.

Geneva Convention - My Letter to John McCain

I do not understand your position on the Geneva convention. I can see the value when nations engaged in war agree to the terms. But when we are fighting not a nation, but terrorists who are fighting assymetrical warfare and live a totally different standard of morality, the terms of the Geneva convention have no value. If our enemy does not abide by such rules, why should we.

My concern is for the future of this nation. If we fail to adapt to terms of battle established by our enemy, we lose. The analogy is the way the British fought in our revolution - strict rules of battle - the fledgling American fighters were probably thought of as fighting unfair - the British insisted on lining up in nice straight rows with their music playing... we know the outcome. We are doing the equivalent in our battle against Islamo fascists. I sense your thinking is warped by your experience as a POW. Not all sides play "fair". "Fair" is what is agreed to by both sides. We can agree to play by the terms of the Islamo Fascists...that would indeed become "fair." Please don't milquetoast us into oblivion with your soft, "proper" etiquette.