Thoughts Aloud

Archive for the ‘Jihad’ Category

I totally agreed with this outspoken and principled lady:

I have always been somewhat impressed with her, and having the courage to face Tucker just took it up a notch. Then, Tucker gets an attaboy for not even trying to flay her.

All of the Republican Trump sycophants praising his attack need to wake up, and Read the rest of this entry »

Although one of my favorite sites is The Objective Standard, I rarely share links to the excellent content there, because much of it is behind a pay wall. While I have been a subscriber for years, I can’t expect others to be. However, today’s article, “9/11 and America’s Failure to End the Jihad,” is openly available to all, and worth considering:

The anniversary of 9/11 is here, and another year has passed without America naming, much less eliminating, the cause of the attack.

The cause of the attack on 9/11 and, more broadly, of the jihad against the West is the fact that Islamic regimes—most notably those in Iran and Saudi Arabia—take Islam seriously and thus seek to convert or kill everyone who doesn’t. Toward that end, these regimes materially and spiritually support jihadist groups such as al-Qaeda and Islamic State, who, in turn, attack and murder Americans and others who refuse to submit.

That, in a nutshell, is why al-Qaeda attacked America on September 11, 2001. And it is why jihadists and their supporters are constantly planning or sponsoring more attacks. Everyone paying attention knows this. But the U.S. government refuses to acknowledge the cause and thus refuses to eliminate the source of the problem: the Islamic regimes that sponsor jihad.

Like he said, we all know this; but it is not considered Politically Correct to say so out loud. A very good question is why? Read the rest of this entry »

Pat Condell continues to speak naked truth to power:

Well said… the insanity of importing war! Why in the name of Zeus, are America’s unhinged Progressives trying so hard to follow suit? Read the rest of this entry »

I have become increasingly disturbed by the media’s proclivity, to initially attempt to absolve the state, for failing to prevent horrific acts of terrorism. They nearly always try to classify every new terrorist attack, as having been perpetrated by a ‘lone wolf,’ unaligned with any acknowledged Islamic Jihadist organization. As one shrill grandma once dramatically shrieked, “What difference does it make?” I submit that it only matters to the collectivist bureaucrats and politicians, not to the individual victims of these massacres.

If a loved one is dead or maimed, what possible difference could it make, to learn whether a rabid Jihadi was following the orders of their beloved god Allah directly, or via one of its vicious packs? In either case, it is their fundamentalist religious beliefs and well documented goofy dogma, motivating their suicidal ‘martyrdom missions.’ So why do these irrational Jihadist’s affiliations seem to matter so much, to the so-called ‘authorities?’

First, it is important to understand that without the threat of a formidable external enemy, it is difficult to convince sheeple that they need shepherds and/or rulers. Yet, their flocks of increasingly dumbed down sheeple, are no longer sophisticated enough to recognize aberrant ideology itself, as an existential threat. The rulers must demonize an organization and its leader, to provide an identifiable entity to fear. Consider these as the wolf packs and their alpha males. Read the rest of this entry »

I made the mistake of turning on the TV tonight, for information regarding the horrific terrorist attack in Nice. Obviously, I am not the only one pissed off at the Jihadist barbarians, and our feckless politicians. First, Newt was on fire:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRhmVTMBOPY

…and bluntly telling it like it is. Then, General Flynn Read the rest of this entry »

I somehow missed this earlier:

…but it is still worth watching and pondering. Read the rest of this entry »

I could never be fairly accused of being a racist. I have comfortably lived among natives in Europe, Asia, Africa, Oceania, and all regions of North America. I couldn’t care less about skin pigmentation or facial features, when evaluating the worth of another human being. Yet, like it or not; PC or not; it is impossible not to at least notice such obvious variations in humanity.

While the police can be ordered not to ‘profile’ subjects based on physical appearance, there is no way for the rulers to ever prevent the rest of us from doing so. As an example, when I lived peacefully as a decidedly minority Caucasian, among the predominant Asians and Pacific Islanders in Hawaii, even the bankers wore Aloha shirts as daily business attire. Anyone seen wearing a necktie in Honolulu’s balmy climate, was immediately considered suspect, by me and most everyone else, because they were undoubtedly either a lawyer, a politician, or a salesman from the mainland.

Were we ‘profiling’ and making perhaps inaccurate, or even unfair judgements based on physical appearance? You bet. Was that a form of prejudicial bigotry? Yes, of course. Was it irrational or wrong to do so? Not at all. The same Progressive snowflakes, who get their knickers in a twist over the very mention of profiling, get the vapors over the mere sight of bikers, armed citizens, KKK or Neo-Nazis protesters, Trump hats, and even riot police.

Prejudging others can be a rather significant survival skill, no matter how often we are exhorted not to be prejudiced. The police can be well-paid to risk not profiling for PC reasons; but the rest of us are not. Since doing so frequently elicits bogus charges of ‘racism,’ even when race itself is not even a factor (e.g. Jihadists), it is worth sorting out what it is that we really are all bigoted about. I submit that the common denominator of prejudice, intolerance, bigotry, tribalism, xenophobia, etc. is culture, not race. Read the rest of this entry »

To the timid souls and precious snowflakes, perennially advocating gun control and/or a gun-free existence:

Have you ever lived in a totally gun-free society, where even the police had no firearms, and there was no military? I did, back in the late ’60s on a tropical island out in the middle of the Indian Ocean. At one point, there was a frightening period of political upheaval, before an election. Whipped up by Chicom backed ‘community organizers,’ for the “People’s United Party,” the restless natives, drunk on toddy (fermented palm sap), began rioting.

The sparse police force, armed only with truncheons, was completely overwhelmed by rioters wielding pangas (machetes), and beyond useless at crowd control. Without an airport, and located a thousand miles from the nearest land mass of Africa, there simply was nobody they could call for mutual aid backup. It got pretty ugly for a few days. I can just imagine the special snowflakes ensconced on today’s Ivy League campuses, stamping their dainty feet over there being no phones, with which to dial 911 demanding their “safe spaces,” be cleared of the unpleasant riffraff.

The generally ex-military American expats living there, were on our own, and also unarmed; but not quite helpless. Yankee ingenuity was employed in preparing to defend our homes and families. After unstringing our spear guns, and fabricating powerful slingshots with surgical tubing, we turned our attention to what today are called IEDs (Improvised Explosive Devices). It happened that large 4 & 6 inch firecrackers were readily available, in the Chinese sundry shops scattered around the island. Read the rest of this entry »

Homophobia, Hoplophobia, or Islamophobia – which is the more rational fear or aversion? Which would likely create a safer society, banning gays, guns, or Jihadists?

His parents were immigrants; but…
He was born in Indiana…
Thus, he is an American citizen…

Where have I recently heard those very same remarks – as if they made one iota of difference in evaluating the situation at hand?

Were it not so tragic, it would have been amusing today, observing all the PC challenged politicians and pressitutes, tying themselves into knots, while trying to spin away the facts in Orlando. How could a Muslim American, registered Democrat, with legally obtained weapons, a carry permit, and a security guard license, employed by a DHS contractor, call 911 to swear his allegiance to ISIS, while in the process of gunning down over 100 patrons at a gay bar? Progressive minds just cannot cope with such an unorthodox stack of incongruities. 😉

What they found most difficult to discern at first, is what his motive might possibly have been? His father, an acknowledged Taliban sympathizer, who claims of all things, to be the new president of Afghanistan, assured them that it had nothing to do with his Muslim religion. He explained that he had been recently disgusted, by seeing two men making out in public in front of his son. To the boggled Progressive mind, that was hardly a relief. They are prepared to forgive a lot of uncivilized behavior, in the name of Multiculturalism; but homophobia is not one of them.

Then, when the authorities were forced by overwhelming evidence, Read the rest of this entry »

Today’s attacks in Brussels has to boost Donald Trump and tends to validate most of his anti-Islam statements.

It is clear that the Western world is NOT at war with Islam. It is equally clear that Islam IS at war with the Western world.

Meanwhile, our pseudo-dictator shares cigars with a real dictator, whom he no doubt envies, and otherwise does nothing in support of his own nation or Western culture. It is still not too late to impeach this bastard then charge him with high treason. But then, can that many members of Congress grow testicles that quickly? I doubt it.

Troy L Robinson

Pat Condell is on the mark as usual; but pay close attention starting at about 1:30, when he equates current Muslim barbarism with that of Europeans 500 years ago:

… I found that insight profound. Then, I’m afraid his conclusion is inescapable.  See also: “Dark Ages II“… â—„Daveâ–º

I recall that some of you have a rather low opinion of Ann Coulter; but her latest column, “IT’S TIME FOR THE OTHER 13 CANDIDATES TO DROP OUT,” is well worth the read. For example:

At what point in Donald Trump’s inaugural address do you figure the GOP establishment will finally grasp what’s been happening?

The establishment — not “elites,” because they’re mostly bland functionaries who went to third-rate schools — have thrown absolutely everything they have at Trump. I’ve never seen so many Republicans featured on MSNBC.

At least no one will be able to say the Republican National Committee didn’t give it the old college try (and, again, that would be third-rate colleges).

Trump is a runaway hit with Americans for the simple reason that he’s the only candidate saying anything Americans care about.

It is pretty hard to argue with that…

After the San Bernardino terrorist attack, committed by Muslim immigrants — which followed the 1993 World Trade Center terrorist attack committed by Muslim immigrants; the 9/11 terrorist attacks committed by Muslim immigrants; the Fort Hood terrorist attack committed by a Muslim immigrant; the Boston Marathon terrorist attack committed by Muslim immigrants, and on and on — Trump suggested a temporary pause on Muslim immigration.

The other candidates responded by attacking him viciously. Now, the eunuchs are duking it out over who has the most aggressive approach to … fighting ISIS!

True…

Read the rest of this entry »

Furthering our recent discussions regarding the “Muslim Reform Movement,” here is another hopeful sign from a surprising venue. A MEMRI report entitled: MEMRI Scholar Tufail Ahmad To Counter-Extremism Conference In Kabul: ‘In Afghanistan, Islamic Reformation Will Begin When You Buy A Bicycle For Your Daughter’

Read the banner behind these folks:

On December 2, 2015, the Regional Cooperation Directorate of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan held an international conference on “Counter Terrorism and Extremism in the Heart of Asia Region.” Counter-extremism experts from different countries including Russia, India, Pakistan, Kyrgyzstan, Afghanistan and Turkey attended the conference.

Ms. Roya Rahmani, the Director General of Regional Cooperation of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, welcomed the delegates by introducing the conference as a “step forward” in the Heart of Asia – Istanbul Process. The Process, which builds regional cooperation to help Afghanistan, was launched on November 2, 2011 at an Istanbul meeting of foreign ministers of 14 countries from Central Asia, the Middle East, South Asia and Eurasia. At that meeting, the foreign ministers declared their “readiness to engage in sincere, result-oriented cooperation at all levels, which will not just help Afghanistan, but will also be beneficial to security and prosperity in the region as a whole.”

“Istanbul Process” launched four years ago? Who knew?

Read the rest of this entry »

As usual, Pat Condell nails it:

…isn’t that the truth? 🙂  ◄Daveâ–º

Imagine, if you will, that some new prophet suddenly appears with instructions direct from the deity for constructing a new religious sect (no, not me – I am a strictly non-prophet operation).

Let us assume the new sect is benevolent in every respect, that it respects other sects and non-believers, that it follows the Judeo-Christian tradition in every respect, including the ancient Jewish practice of human sacrifice.

After all, if the deity created all life, it seems only reasonable that it demand that some meager amount of said life be offered back as a sign of respect and acknowledgment. Let us say that a child of less than 5 years must be sacrificed on the eve of each new moon. Not all that extravagant is it? And maybe, for good measure, the sacrifice of a female virgin on each winter solstice to thank the deity for the return of the Sun. Again, not at all extravagant. Indeed, given current population growth rates, such modest sacrificial demands would hardly make a statistical difference in the population.

And, keep in mind that these sacrificial demands would not be optional. They would be mandatory for each congregation of practitioners. Period, no exceptions allowed.

Indeed, there is really nothing really new in the proposed sect and much to be admired. For sure, no jihad, no mass murder.

So, my question to all of you is this: Would any national government accept or allow the open and public practice of this “new” religion? For sake of argument, let us narrow the question to address only the United States. The first amendment to our Constitution says, in part:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;…

Seems pretty clear to me. Government is not allowed to “prohibit the free exercise…”, so that is that. Light the fires and bring in the virgins. Or is it really that clear?

Read the rest of this entry »

In the “I Stand With Joe” post, Chris posted a link to a video by new conservative heart-throb, Tomi Lahren. No, you would have to be a lot younger, you old letch; she is only 23. You would also need to be a lot tougher; rumor has it that her boyfriend is a Navy Seal. If you read “Lone Survivor“, you will understand that he earned her; we didn’t. 🙂

Besides were she available and attracted to geezers, you would be way too late, Chris. I saw her first back in July, when she recorded this one after the Chattanooga terrorist attack:

So, Glenn Beck managed to outbid Roger Ailes for her! I assumed that Ailes already had her contract typed up and waiting for her gig on OAN to end. 🙂

BTW: I just subscribed to her YouTube channel, so expect to see more of her hereabouts. It looks like I have a lot of pleasant catching up to do. Thanks for the reminder, Chris. 🙂 â—„Daveâ–º

Well, Troy, in a comment to the “I Stand With Joe” post yesterday, you said:

Show me a large number of Muslims openly and loudly demanding an Islamic reformation, and I might be willing to listen. Until then, no way.

Fair enough, look what I just stumbled across… How’s this for a Muslim Reform Movement? Is the National Press Club open and loud enough for you? Start with their picture. No hijabs and only one suspicious beard. 🙂

Preamble

We are Muslims who live in the 21st century. We stand for a respectful, merciful and inclusive interpretation of Islam. We are in a battle for the soul of Islam, and an Islamic renewal must defeat the ideology of Islamism, or politicized Islam, which seeks to create Islamic states, as well as an Islamic caliphate. We seek to reclaim the progressive spirit with which Islam was born in the 7th century to fast forward it into the 21st century. We support the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which was adopted by United Nations member states in 1948.

We reject interpretations of Islam that call for any violence, social injustice and politicized Islam. Facing the threat of terrorism, intolerance, and social injustice in the name of Islam, we have reflected on how we can transform our communities based on three principles: peace, human rights and secular governance. We are announcing today the formation of an international initiative: the Muslim Reform Movement.

We have courageous reformers from around the world who will outline our Declaration for Muslim Reform, a living document that we will continue to enhance as our journey continues. We invite our fellow Muslims and neighbors to join us.

 

DECLARATION

A. Peace: National Security, Counterterrorism and Foreign Policy

1. We stand for universal peace, love and compassion. We reject violent jihad. We believe we must target the ideology of violent Islamist extremism in order to liberate individuals from the scourge of oppression and terrorism both in Muslim-majority societies and the West.
2. We stand for the protection of all people of all faiths and non-faith who seek freedom from dictatorships, theocracies and Islamist extremists.
3. We reject bigotry, oppression and violence against all people based on any prejudice, including ethnicity, gender, language, belief, religion, sexual orientation and gender expression.

B. Human Rights: Women’s Rights and Minority Rights

1. We stand for human rights and justice. We support equal rights and dignity for all people, including minorities. We support the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights.
2. We reject tribalism, castes, monarchies and patriarchies and consider all people equal with no birth rights other than human rights. All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. Muslims don’t have an exclusive right to “heaven.”
3. We support equal rights for women, including equal rights to inheritance, witness, work, mobility, personal law, education, and employment. Men and women have equal rights in mosques, boards, leadership and all spheres of society. We reject sexism and misogyny.

C. Secular Governance: Freedom of Speech and Religion

1. We are for secular governance, democracy and liberty. We are against political movements in the name of religion. We separate mosque and state. We are loyal to the nations in which we live. We reject the idea of the Islamic state. There is no need for an Islamic caliphate. We oppose institutionalized sharia. Sharia is manmade.
2. We believe in life, joy, free speech and the beauty all around us. Every individual has the right to publicly express criticism of Islam. Ideas do not have rights. Human beings have rights. We reject blasphemy laws. They are a cover for the restriction of freedom of speech and religion. We affirm every individual’s right to participate equally in ijtihad, or critical thinking, and we seek a revival of ijtihad.
3. We believe in freedom of religion and the right of all people to express and practice their faith, or non-faith, without threat of intimidation, persecution, discrimination or violence. Apostasy is not a crime. Our ummah–our community–is not just Muslims, but all of humanity.

We stand for peace, human rights and secular governance. Please stand with us!

Affirmed this Fourth Day of December, Two-Thousand and Fifteen By the founding authors who are signatories below

OK, I am impressed. I have seen Zuhdi Jasser (second from right in picture above) often over the years on Fox News, as a courageous outspoken voice of moderation, and believe him to be sincere in his desire to reform Islam. I certainly wish them well, and will be following their progress in a rather daunting quest. â—„Daveâ–º

While reading some of the White House’s spin to desperately try deflecting any responsibility for the San Bernardino Jihadist’s successful terrorist attack, meanwhile simultaneously railing about the need for more gun-control, it occurred to me that it was time to once again recycle a letter to the editor that I wrote over 20 years ago.

First let me make the point that their insistence that these Jihadists were ‘home grown’ and not members, or under the direction of ISIS or other Jihadist NGO, is to me a distinction without a difference. I suspect their 35 dead and injured victims, and their loved ones, don’t much care either. Puzzling over their ‘motive’ is patently ridiculous. They were Jihadists doing what most irrational Jihadists are anxious to do. Terrorizing and slaughtering infidels while dying for the glory of Allah, to earn the promised rewards for ‘martyrdom’ in their hereafter.  Those unable to immediately grasp that, are willfully blind, ignorant, stupid, or lying through their teeth.

LOL! I just had a wicked thought. I wonder what their sex life will be like in Heaven. Will they each have their own individual 73 person orgies, or would it be one big 146 person wife-swapping party? Then, it would seem that by now Allah should have a much larger supply of virgin men for his martyred bride Malik, than virgin women for her cuckold. Also, her virgins would obviously be young, virile, military aged men, while by now Allah is probably scraping the bottom of the virgin barrel and only has elderly nuns and wrinkled old maids left for him. I’m guessing by now Farooq realizes he made a huge mistake, and would have enjoyed better sex if he had stayed on Earth with his once-faithful young bride. 🙂

Anyway, there are a lot of politicians, sheriffs, and even an university president currently advocating Americans prudently arm themselves for self-defense against Jihadists. In “Urban Varmints,” I also advocated rational armed self-defense, rather than cowering in fear while waiting for the government to come to the rescue, from the scourge of urban gangs. I used the analogy of snakes as often harmless; but those displaying the ‘gang colors’ of a rattlesnake, were deadly and not to be trusted. Plug Muslims into the snakes category, and easily profiled Sharia compliant Jihadists into the rattlesnake variety of such, and my 20-year-old missive could be republished as current. â—„Daveâ–º

Why are contumacious politicians, actually willing to speak up with straight talk and unvarnished truths, too often ex-congressmen? Enjoy the brief rant:

Me too. I reckon the First Amendment guarantees my right to speak of my well-considered prejudices, and thoughtfully say aloud:

• Does advocating violence against savage Jihadists, who regularly decapitate or otherwise slaughter non-believers, offend you Ms. Lynch?
• Try this: Jihadists are low-life vermin and need to be summarily eradicated as such, without mercy, wherever found.
• I utterly despise them, and given the opportunity, I would gladly dispatch them into martyrdom myself, with unrestrained glee.
• Islam is much more than a religious faith; it is a rigid ideology and system of government.
• Islam by nature is unqualified evil, because it foments Sharia law and spawns barbaric Jihadists.
• Sharia law is incompatible with Western civilization, our Constitution, and our cultural values.
• Sharia law must never be permitted a legal foothold in America, and must never be given deference in our courts.
• All Jihadists are Muslims; but not all Muslims are Jihadists… yet.
• Those Muslims who give aid, comfort, and/or support to Jihadists, should themselves be considered and treated as Jihadists.
• All apologists for Jihadists, Muslim or not, are just as despicable and deserve the same fate as they do.
• So-called ‘moderate’ Muslims, honestly wishing to fully assimilate into our culture, should be welcomed.
• Those Muslims who practice and/or advocate Sharia law, however, are overtly irrational, illiberal, and likely to approve of Jihad.
• This makes them intrinsically suspect, as potential dangers to our safety and culture, now or in the future.
• Thus, any Muslim publicly proclaiming their adherence to Sharia law, should be ‘profiled’ and watched very closely.
• Muslim men sporting the odd combination of unkempt beards with short trimmed mustaches, are complying with Sharia law.
• Muslim women wearing a hijab (head scarf), or a burka (tent), are complying with Sharia law.

As a vigilant citizen, I will immediately report any suspicious behavior by these easily profiled suspects to your FBI, Ms. Lynch. The question is, will they have orders to then investigate them… or me? After all, as a patriotic, Liberty-loving, veteran, white male, I come much closer to fitting your profile of a threat to you elitists than they do.  You Federal fools disgust me… Regime change in D.C. can’t come fast enough. :(  â—„Daveâ–º

Most Americans were rather naïve regarding Jihad when we were blindsided by 9/11. Sure, we knew that Muslim Arabs hated Jewish Arabs to the point of irrational suicide bombers attacking Israel’s pizza parlors and such, but we had been taught to believe that conflict was essentially an ancient dispute over territory, which had essentially been going on since Moses led the first invasion of Palestine.

Yes, we would occasionally experience a terrorist attack in the region ourselves, and just assumed it was because we were allies and supporters of Israel. 9/11 changed everything in my mind. Not only was it a dastardly sneak attack on our homeland, I just couldn’t get my head around what could possibly motivate a score of well-educated Saudi Arabians (ostensibly our second-best ally in the region) to deliberately commit suicide, while flying four hijacked planes into our iconic buildings killing thousands of ‘innocent’ civilians. I remember immediately buying and reading Thomas Friedman’s “From Beirut to Jerusalem,” followed by “The Lexus and the Olive Tree,” to try to acquire a better understanding of Middle East politics and religion, and what their real grievance might be with us.

Like most red-blooded Jacksonian Americans, I was ready for some serious retribution against whoever was responsible, regardless of their motive. Our resident swaggering Texas cowboy in the White House, was more than willing to step up to the challenge, and initially won a lot of respect when he did. Yet, since it appeared that we were not attacked by another country; but by a shadowy international NGO of fundamentalist religious fanatics, who and where were they? Our smart bombs needed coordinates.

Read the rest of this entry »