Read my article yesterday on the Somali pirates, and how CNN deliberately went out of its way to deny (without any information to justify the denial) any connection between Islamic extremists and the four Americans killed by the Somali pirates. I notedd that this was a LIE (especially for CNN to assert this as a fact) at the time, and my original article was confirmed by reports this week that the Somali pirates had a DEAL with Islamic extremists in Somalia. My article yesterday said that this--and many oteher examples--showed a deliberate AGENDA on the part of CNN to CONCEAL the evils of Islamic extremism in the world. I bet you thought I could not be proven right on this point two days in a row. If so, you are a fool.
TODAY'S news is about an attack that killed two U.S. servicement at an airport in Frankfor, Germany. The AP, amazingly enough, said that the shooter came from a Kosovo family, and was a "devout Muslim". Fox News reported the same thing. Remember the Ft. Hood killer in the United States? REmember the Christams day bomber in the plane over Detroit? Remember the Times Square bomber? And what about the recent arrest of the man from Saudi Arabia for making BOMBS? Was not EVERY ONE of thsse people inspired by Islamic extremists? Yes, they were, but both the Obama Administration and CNN downplayed this aspect of every incident.
What are the odds that the Frankfort killer was inspired by Islamic extremism (NOT just al-Qaida, despite the Big Lie from CNN and other leftist Democrats, but significant elements in rht ereligion of Islam throughout the world)? Yes, the odds are extremely high that this is another killer "inspired" by his Islamic religion, and by the hate speech from so many Islamic "leades" in the world. No, all Muslims do not support this kind of killiing, but there are too many in the world putting out a message of HATE and INTOLERANCE. That does not mean we should condemn ALL Muslims, or discriminate against Muslims, but it does mean that we need to recognirze the EVIL strain of Islamic extremism in the world that goes way beyond al-Qaida. It is a Big Lie fromt he Liar Network that Islamic hate spech, and incitement to intolerance and murder, is not a big factor behind much murder and attempted murde in the world. CNN would say this if it were fundamentalist Christians so often involved in murder. CNN refuses to say this about Islamic extremists. That is what makes them, and people who think like them, the worst hypocrites who have every walked the Earth, on tow legss or four (along with similar hypocrises).
Yes, CNN remainsed true to form in the Frankfort murders. It immmediately said that there was no indication of what was behind the killings in Frankfort. I would submit that is not true. The "devout Muslim" was surely motivated, in part, by his view of his religion (twisted as that view might be, but the same twosited perversion of Islam is shared by too many in the Muslim world). What does CNN think "dvout" means? Or Fox, for that matter, which reported the religion but refused to make the obvious connection. Let me tell CNN what "devout" means (one of the nicknames of CNN being The Atheist Network--not objectioinable in itself for an agnostic like me, except it is combined with an anti-Christian bigotry that I do not share). "Devout" means that such a person does EVERYTHING based on what he believes his religion is directing him to do--at the very least would not do anything that he does not believe is tolerated by his religion.
Noope. CNN did not stop there. They went out of their way to quote the German government as saying that there was "no evidence" that the attack was connected to "terrorism" (not, by the way, the same as saying the attack was not connected to Islamic extremism). That is exactly the SAME thing that CNN and the Obama Administration said about the Ft, Hood shooting, the Christmas attempted plane bombing, and the attempted Times Square bombing. In EVERY casde CNN itself, AND by quoting "authorities", asserted FALSELY that there was no evidence of any connection to al-Qaida or terrorism.
I have said in previous articles--satiricallly--that I am applying the standards of "guilt by association" applied by CNN, the rest of the mainstream media and other leftist Democrats. And it is true that CNN has blamed ALL members of the Twa Party for alleged "hate speech" and incitement to murder without anything like the kind of hate speech and incitement to murder engaged in by Islamic extremists around the world. There is no question the people of CNN are the HYPOCRITES I have described tlhem as (along with the rest of the mainstream media and most other leftist Democrats). However, in this case I am NOT exaggerating for staritical effect, pretending to adopt the "guilt by association" standards of CNN and other leftists.
In this case, I am using my own standards to say that Islmic extremis IS an evil in the world inciting hate and murder. No, ALL Muslims are not Islamic extremists. But Islamic extremists are too big an element in worldwide Islam, and the religion desperately needs to police itself. Further, our media--such as CNN--and politicians need to be condemning Islamic extremism (not just active terrorists) as an ENEMY--an enemy not just of Americans but agsint all of the people of the world.
Yes, I have said that Islam (on balance) is the most INTOLERANT religion in the world today, AS PRACTICED IN THE WORLD TODAY. Too much of Islam has not advanced beyond the Christian Church of the Spanish Inquisition and the Salem wiich trials (where not ALL Christians shared that extreme intolerance, but too many did and too many who did not failed to object to the evil). No, I am not saying that the Christian religion is right, and Islam wrong. I believe--like, I and Bill Maher are convinced--President Obama--in no religion at all. But when a Muslim ALLY like Pakistan makes blasphemy--insult to Islam--a DEATH PENALTY offense, it is obvious that there is just too mcuh intolerance within Islam. And that intolerance IS inciting murder in the world. Islam needs to advance beyond the Spanish Inquisition state, and Muslims need to SAY SO (along with CNN and the rest of us). Christianity has no automatic claim to perfection, as practiced, but it IS superior to Islam in this way: no large elements of Christianity today are stuck in the theology of the Spanish Inquisition. You cannot say that of Islam, and that is a major problem in the world.
No, I am not talking about intolerance of homosexuals, and sex in general. I actually ADMIRE religious people who actually believe in their religion. Islam IS more intolerant thathan most Christins today as to things like sexual morality. But I have no problem with that. The problem is that it is an ADVANCE in religioni to leave the PUNISHMENT to GOD. You exhibit an image of Muhammad? NO, that should NOT "offend" Muslims. They should simply assume God will punish. You don't have to APPROVE homosexual conduct (I believe society should not), but that does not mean you should HANG homosexuals (Iran). If someone blasphemes against Islam, the PUNISHMENT should be left to God. No, it does not make you a "theocracy" to prohibit homosexual marriage. It does make you a theocracy to make mere offenses against your religion as CRIMES. Too much of Islam goes further than that, and considers the mere existence of people with other religious views as an offense against Islam which justifies murder.
If we don't frontally take on Islamic extremism, we deserve what we get. As I have said before, if you ARE a Christian I would not look if cNN offices, and those of other mainstream media organizations in this country, seem to be having something terrible happen to them. You don't want to turn to salt, like Lot's wife. I have expanded my Sodom and Gomorrah search for an honest AP reporter to include CNN and the rest of the mainstream media. I have yet to find one. Now I would be a strange age agent for God to choose to conduct this search. But if I were you I would take no chances. Be careful out there around mainstream media offices and people. No, they don't have to worry about me. I am willing to leave the PUNISHMENT for CNN evil to God, if he exists. But will God ACT? If you are a blieving Christian, I would not be so sure He won't.
What I am not willing to leave to God is CRITICISM of Islamic extremism, CNN, the AP, other mainstream media people, and leftist Democrats. This blog will continue that criticism, and I will continue my Sodom and Gomorrah search for an honest mainstream media reporter (with less expectation than Lot of finding one).
P.S. If you don't believe in your religion enough to leave the punishment for not believing in it to God, then you don't really believe in your religion at all. No, don't mistake this for there being anything wrong in using your religion as guidance for deciding what thould be a SECULAR crime (like abortion, which I regard as the equivalent of infanticide without believing in any religioin at al, as our President does not). Similarly, if you are not secure enough in your beliefs that you are even willing to enounter religions that believe otherwise, which is true of both the ACLU and Islaic exrtremists, then your beliefs are suspect and you are a very intolerant person. That is how I view Bill Maher and too many other atheists and agnostics (who should be SKEPTICAL of EVERYTHING, including their own view of religion, and be perfectly willing to face up to the fact that their are Christians in this world).
P.P.S. Note, as usual, that the above has neither been proofread nor spell checked (eyesight). And yes, you will have noticed I am not a coward, like the people of CNN. I am perfectly willing to look squarely at religion, and people who profess to believe in religion or not believe in religioin, and expose lthem for what they sometimes are. I have not believed in any religion since at least age 12, although I never suffered any harm from exposure to it. I was raised Presbyterian, and had Bible classes J(before age 12) as I was raised in Mt. Ida, Arkansas. I would bet that CNN people would suggest that I was affected by that "upbringing", even though CNN people (every half hour today--maybe every minute, as I only checked in on the half hour--said that it was WRONG of Mike Hickaby to say that Barack Obama was affected by his INDONESIAN upbringing from age 6 to 10. That is absurd. Of course that affected Obama. The Liar Network remains The Liar Network. It did not make Obama a Muslim, any more than my upbringing made me a Presbyterian, but there is no doubt it went into making him what he is today (good and bad). And no, CNN was NOT talking about Huckaby MISPEAKING and saying Obama was rought up in Kenya. Huckaby got it right in his book, and there is no doubt he simply misspoke. He immediately apologized for that, and CNN STILL said (every half hour) that he was WRONG to mention Obama's upbrining in Indonesia, becaue he was so oyg. This ignores that Obama himself talks about that upbringing in his book, including the beauty of Muslim prayers. The people of CNN ridiculed Huckaby as an evil person for going back to childhood. This again labels CNN people as LIARS on The Liar Network, becaues they would certainly talk abut dhildhood upbriinging of conservatives. They regulary do talk about childhood episodes of conservatives. You only have to remember that CNN made Bill Maher a REGULAR to talk about Christine O'Donnell and witchcraft, IN HISHG SCHOOL. Again, these are the worst hypocrites to ever walk the Earth, on two legs or four. Did I mention that Paul Begala said, on CNN without real challegne from Anderson Cooper, that it was RELEVANT for Rand Pauls' opponet to bring up a fraternity prank IN COLLEGE where Paul supposedly participated in making a girl kneel and "worship" a "false idol". This was clearly intended to attack Paul's religion, and hurt him among religious people. Nope. CNN people are HYPOCRITES, and dishonest. Begala is beyond dishonest. I am willing to state flatly that he is an evil person. CNN puts him on with seemingly no recognitioin that Begala routingely souts evil, when he is not spounting political propaganda. You say: "skip, you are just a political propagandist yourself." Not ture. For example, I regard the CNN reaction to Huckaby as a vast overreaction, containing LIES. CNN did not, as a further example of their hypocrisy, give nearly as much attention to that Wisconsin assemblyman (DEMOCRAT) who said this to a Republican ASSEMBLYWOMAN: "You are f------ dead!!!!!". And CNN gavie little attention to the Democrrat who said union members should "take to the streets and get a little bloody". Nor did CNN hardly mention the virtual ATTACK (sor of like the attack on Anderson Cooper in Egypt) on a Wisconsin state senator by unioin protesters in Wisconsin--an attack which might well have been "bloody" if not for the timely intervention of a Democrat politician. Those are all much WORSE than the minor thing that Huckaby said, and certainly worse than his "mistake" which he immediately corrected) However, although I think it is a minor thing, I don't think Huckaby should be talking about Obama's upbringing. No, that is NOT because it is "wrong" (as CNN people were YELLING all day). For a biographer, it would be perfectly proper. And it was not morally wrong for Huckaby. But it WAS a POLTICIAL MISTAKE> No, that is not because CNN and MSNBC--along with other leftists--are going to jump on it. Rather, Hcukaby, and other Repubicans, need to realize that it is absurd to make an "issue" out of Obama's upbringing. Sure, that goes into who Obama is. But so what. We already had that campaign, in 2008, when Jermiah Wright was a much stronger indication of who Obama is. Obama will have been President almost four years by te 2012 elections. If Republicans cannot beat Obama on what he has said and done AS PRESIDENT, along with his public record as Senator when Democrats helped create the mess we are in, then Reppublicans are not going to defeat Obvama. That is simply a fact. Yes, at least Huckaby is willing to CRITICIZE Obama. Too many Republicans are not, and that bothers me no end. Hoever, going back to what made Obama the way he is simplyl cannot make the case against Obama. It may be true, but so what? It is like Glenn Beck going back to Woodrow Wilson and teddy Roosevelt (for whom I still have a mildly favorable view, despite Beck). If Huckaby can't convince peole that what Obama "is" represents a bad thing for the country, then it does not matter what made Obama that way. Similarly, if Huckaby can convince people that Obama--whatever made him that way--is a bad President for the country, then Huckaby still does not need to convince people what made Obama that way. It simply does not matter what childhood experiences may have contriubted to Obama's present character and philosophy. There is enough of a record now, even if there was not before he became President, that a Repubican MUST defeat Obama on that record. It is a mistake to deflect away from that by making a big deal about Obama's upbringing. It is not "unfair"--especially in view of Democrat tactics routinely used. It is simply inefffective. I think Huckaby should have downplayed it as something he thought was improtant--he did properly downplay his "mistake". Huckaby should not have, and should not , "apologive" for talking about Obama's Indonesian background. But he should say that he was merely answering questions in a philosophical" way, trying to explain what may have caused Obama to be as leftist as he is, and so far out of touch with Aemrican values and traditions. But Huckaby should have said/should say that he did not mean to say that is a big deal. The important thing is what Obama IS, and not how he got that way. But it is hard to resist the temptatioin to analyze what is behind such extreme leftism if someone invites you to do so. That is what I think Huckaby should be saying: keeping the foucs on how bad Obama is rather than on why he became so bad. I don't think Huckaby actually meant for this to be a big deal, and that is what I would have said. It was just a philosophical analysis not at all important to voters, who should be concentrating on how bad a President Obama is, and will likely continue to be. And no, as I have said before, I am not wildly enthusiastic about Huckaby, with whom I first became familiar on the old Don Imus radio program in the 1990s and early years of this decade. I will probably vote for Huckaby against Obama--if it comes to that--rather than abstain (as I did with McCain). But I supported Romney over Huckaby for the previous nomination, and will probably do so again (imperfect as Romney may be)--unless someone appears better than both of them. You may not like my views, but they are not the views of someone who views everything in terms of agenda (as CNN does). I have bias, in terms of principles in which I believe, but I call things the way I see them without dishonesty (although sometimes with hyperbole and sarcasm for dramatic effect).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment