May 16, 2007
The Huge Falwell Legacy
I listened to David Gregory interview Chris Matthews yesterday morning while driving into work. Chris described Falwell's political impact on national politics. Matthews said that Falwell was responsible for bringing a huge group of fundamentalists into the political arena by appealing to their concerns that liberal attitudes were destroying the country. Matthews said that almost 30 million of the 127 million who voted in the last election were right wing fundamentalists somehow related to the Falwell movement. Matthews suggested that most of these people would not have voted if it had not been for Falwell. Think about that, almost 25% of the last election. That is an astounding number. 25% of voters were followers of a guy who said that the reason the terrorists flew those planes into the World Trade Center was because of our liberal values. He blamed the gays, liberals and anyone who believed in a woman's right to choose. They were the ones to blame. Hmmmmm.
Posted by Chip Spear at 7:21 AM
April 7, 2007
The Iranians and O.I.L (Our Illustrious Leader)
Doesn't the recent incident with the Iranians remind you of George? The British were clearly in Iraqi waters. How do I know? Well, I wasn't there actually, and I don't have a GPS even if I was, but the Iranians changed there story regarding the coordinates shortly after they found out the first location they gave for the British capture was in Iraqi waters. Enough said. But what do they do? They lie, repeat the lie continually, get many within Iran to believe them, and act as if everyone else is at fault, using their lie for political purposes. Did you see the pictures on the news of the huge demonstrations? Looked like a huge number of brainwashed people to me. Does this sound familiar? It sure does to me.
Posted by Chip Spear at 7:43 AM
March 17, 2007
Only the Numbers Matter
Truth doesn't matter. Common sense doesn't matter. Doing the right thing doesn't matter. The only thing that matters are the numbers, scoring. In this case John McCain ignored the obvious answers to pander to the religious right. (NYT)
Reporter: "Should U.S. taxpayer money go to places like Africa to fund contraception to prevent AIDS?"
Mr. McCain: "Well I think it's a combination. The guy I really respect on this is Dr. Coburn. He believes - and I was just reading the thing he wrote- that you should do what you can to encourage abstinence where there is going to be sexual activity. Where that doesn't succeed, than he thinks that we should employ contraceptives as well. But I agree with him that the first priority is on abstinence. I look to people like Dr. Coburn. I'm not very wise on it."
(Mr. McCain turns to take a question on Iraq, but a moment later looks back to the reporter who asked him about AIDS.)
Mr. McCain: "I haven't thought about it. Before I give you an answer, let me think about. Let me think about it a little bit because I never got a question about it before. I don’t know if I would use taxpayers’ money for it."
Q: "What about grants for sex education in the United States? Should they include instructions about using contraceptives? Or should it be Bush’s policy, which is just abstinence?"
Mr. McCain: (Long pause) "Ahhh. I think I support the president's policy."
Q: "So no contraception, no counseling on contraception. Just abstinence. Do you think contraceptives help stop the spread of HIV?"
Mr. McCain: (Long pause) "You’ve stumped me."
Q: "I mean, I think you'd probably agree it probably does help stop it?"
Mr. McCain: (Laughs) "Are we on the Straight Talk express? I'm not informed enough on it. Let me find out. You know, I'm sure I've taken a position on it on the past. I have to find out what my position was. Brian, would you find out what my position is on contraception - I'm sure I'm opposed to government spending on it, I'm sure I support the president's policies on it."
Q: "But you would agree that condoms do stop the spread of sexually transmitted diseases. Would you say: 'No, we're not going to distribute them,' knowing that?"
Mr. McCain: (Twelve-second pause) "Get me Coburn's thing, ask Weaver to get me Coburn's paper that he just gave me in the last couple of days. I've never gotten into these issues before."
It would be a wonderful world if everyone did as they should, like not have sex before marriage, or not kill anyone, or treat people with respect. But life is not like that, is it? It is dirty, messy, filled with contradictions, and not easy. People do have sex before marriage, and outside of marriage. And people get AIDS because of it. Abstinence is one method of dealing with the problem, but people are people, they are going to have sex whether someone else says it is wrong or not. That is reality. This is another example of someone putting their head in the sand and pandering to idiocy. Being forced to rely on stupidity for votes seems to work just fine, but it sure seems dangerous to me.
Posted by Chip Spear at 1:54 PM
April 22, 2006
Playing With Iran
As we engage more with Iran, over Iraq, terrorism and nuclear development, we should keep in mind that they are not playing the same game, or at least they are not playing by the same rules. If you read the TNR article linked in my post yesterday, you will know that the Iranian leadership has a very different perception of human life. They were, and still are, more than willing to send tens of thousands of young children to their death, clearing minefields and acting as a first attack wave against enemy combatants. We, on the other hand, go crazy when our death toll crosses 2000 soldiers. The major media reports every casualty on the nightly news.
Sit down at the table and play poker. How far are we willing to go? Iran is willing to suffer huge death tolls, we are not. How do you bluff? What do they want that we have? Why should they give up their nuclear program? Do you think they really care about our threats? Would an attack on their nuclear facilities really stop their program? We don't even seem to know where many of their labs and factories are, since many are underground or dispersed around the country. If we did attack they would probably respond with terrorist attacks against the U.S. Are we ready for malls, busses, trains, and packed stadiums to explode? I doubt it. In a game of chicken they seem to have a better hand.
Posted by Chip Spear at 11:45 AM | Comments (0)
April 21, 2006
Read this and let me know if you think we can negotiate with Iran?
A chilling analysis of Iran and its current leader. (TNR)
It would be wise to keep this in mind when trying to "negotiate."
Posted by Chip Spear at 3:46 PM | Comments (3)
March 30, 2006
The Bible as a Text Book
ABC News reported this morning that the Georgia legislature passed a law stating that the Bible would be classified as a text book and used in the Georgia public schools. I wonder if they made the same accommodation for the Koran and Torah? Nothing like separation of church and state or imposing religion is there?
Posted by Chip Spear at 8:44 AM | Comments (3)
March 22, 2006
Paranoia Hits the Church
The Catholic Church is obviously feeling a little more paranoid than usual recently. Dan Brown's novel, "The Da Vinci Code," is about to be released as a movie and the church is worried about its influence. The Church feels threatened by this piece of fiction, using history as a starting point for a fast-paced conspiracy theory thriller. Web sites, articles, books and spokesmen are all on the offensive to counteract the books claims. (CSM) The Church must be concerned that people will be influenced by the book's claims and come to believe it more than the Church. (Amazon) You might also find this 40 minute interview on NPR's Fresh Air extremely interesting.
Posted by Chip Spear at 10:46 AM | Comments (0)
March 21, 2006
Sharia Keeps On The Offensive
We should never forget who and what we are dealing with. (ABC)
Despite the overthrow of the fundamentalist Taliban government and the presence of 22,500 U.S. troops in Afghanistan, a man who converted to Christianity is being prosecuted in Kabul, and a judge said Sunday that if convicted, he faces the death penalty.
Abdul Rahman, who is in his 40s, says he converted to Christianity 16 years ago while working as an aid worker helping Afghan refugees in Pakistan.
Relatives denounced him as a convert during a custody battle over his children, and he was arrested last month. The prosecutor says Rahman was found with a Bible.
Posted by Chip Spear at 2:23 PM | Comments (0)
March 16, 2006
Muslims Keep Hammering at Western Civil Rights
The NY Times reported today that the Dutch developed a film meant to inform immigrants about what life is like in the Netherlands, a very liberal society, with nude beaches, gay rights and permissive drug laws. (NYT)
"People do not make a fuss about nudity," the narrator explains.
That lesson, about the Netherlands' nude beaches, is followed by another: homosexuals have the same rights here as heterosexuals do, including the chance to marry.
Just to make sure everyone gets the message, two men are shown kissing in a meadow.
The scenes are brief parts of a two-hour-long film that the Dutch government has compiled to help potential immigrants, many of them from Islamic countries, meet the demands of a new entrance examination that went into effect on Wednesday. In the exam, candidates must prove they can speak some Dutch and are at least aware of the Netherlands' liberal values, even if they do not agree with all of them.
Opponents of the tightening immigration policies have pointed to the film - a DVD contained in a package of study materials for the new exam - as an attempt by the government to discourage applicants from Islamic countries who may be offended by its content.
Critics are slugging away at the government, saying they are trying to stop Muslim immigration. This is clearly another attempt on the part of Muslims to look in the long term, immigrate into European countries, then get those countries to implement laws more in keeping with Sharia. The Netherlands has already had substantial problems with new immigrants in this regard.
Policy makers say they are concerned about an estimated 600,000 immigrants already here who do not speak proper Dutch. Poor housing and high unemployment among minority groups is contributing to ethnic tensions in some of the largest cities, where incidents of violence against Jews and homosexuals have raised new concerns.
We should all be aware that this is a major problem which will not soon disappear.
Posted by Chip Spear at 1:11 PM | Comments (1)
U.S. On the Defensive
Are we really that afraid to stand up for our rights of free speech? The editor of the University of Illinois paper was fired for publishing the controversial Muslim cartoons. (CNN)
The Illini Media Co. board of directors, which comprises students and faculty, voted unanimously to fire the editor after a review "found that Gorton violated Daily Illini policies about thoughtful discussion of and preparation for the publication of inflammatory material," according to a statement.
Gorton has said he sought out advice from The Daily Illini's former editor-in-chief and others before deciding to run the cartoons. He has said that accusations he tried to hide his decision were wrong.
Controversial? Yes. Insulting? It depends on one's perspective. The newspaper should report news, even if it is controversial. In fact it is more important when it is controversial. And that means actually publishing the cartoons in question. This sort of act only gives power to those who want to control what others say, write or do.
Posted by Chip Spear at 10:29 AM | Comments (1)
March 14, 2006
Read the Muslim Game Plan
There are too many examples of the Muslims plan for violence against Western society. You can read another here.
..."The whole approach towards Muslim militants was based on appeasement. 7/7 proved that that approach does not work - yet it is still being followed. For example, there is a book, The Noble Koran: a New Rendering of its Meaning in English, which is openly available in Muslim bookshops.
"It calls for the killing of Jews and Christians, and it sets out a strategy for killing the infidels and for warfare against them. The Government has done nothing whatever to interfere with the sale of that book.
"Why not? Government ministers have promised to punish religious hatred, to criminalise the glorification of terrorism, yet they do nothing about this book, which blatantly does both."
Perhaps the explanation is just that they do not take it seriously. "I fear that is exactly the problem," says Dr Sookhdeo. "The trouble is that Tony Blair and other ministers see Islam through the prism of their own secular outlook.
They simply do not realise how seriously Muslims take their religion. Islamic clerics regard themselves as locked in mortal combat with secularism...
One of these days the governments in the West will begin to tell people the truth about the threat within their own communities. Let's hope it is soon, because the fundamentalists are on the march.
Posted by Chip Spear at 4:08 PM | Comments (1)
March 3, 2006
Cartoonists are Still in Hiding
The Cartoonists in Denmark who participated in the Mohammed uproar are still afraid for their lives, five months after publication. Please refer to my post below, where I urge that the War on Terror be renamed. We are at war and this is serious stuff. These people clearly threaten our culture for the worse. You can read more here.
Four months after the cartoons were published, the Police Intelligence Service still doesn’t think it’s safe for the cartoonists to live in the open in Denmark.
They are therefore still under police protection at secret addresses. From sources near to the cartoonists, Dagbladet.no is informed that some of them are receiving help from a psychologist to them deal with the situation.
"None of them had thought that their cartoons would create such a worldwide ruckus," the source says.
Posted by Chip Spear at 2:46 PM | Comments (0)
March 2, 2006
Terrorism and Islam
Why do we continue to insist we are engaged in a "War on Terror"? Terror is a psychological state, it is not a political entity, it is not group or a movement. Terrorism is a means, an offensive tool of war. It is a strategy designed to further political goals of a group or state. We are not waging a war on terror. That would be like saying that The New England Patriots are waging a war on the forward pass, or the Yankees are waging war on fast balls. What we are waging is a war against Islamic fundamentalists. So the better question might be why does the adminitration insist on calling it a War on Terror? Is it because the President does not want to alienate so-called "moderate Muslims"?
And perhaps we should change our definition of Islam from a religion to a political organization, or at least create a new category of political religion, since Islam does not respect individual rights, still advocates dhimma and is intent on conquering the world. In the West it uses the label of religion to protect itself from reactions to its political policies. Mosques, protected as religious sites, can easily be a center for what we in the West would consider political activity. Islam uses civil rights as a defense to further goals which would ultimately destroy our system of civil rights. It is a clever tactic, using the very thing defining who we are against us. It reminds me of Judo, defined by Wikipedia as "the principle of using one's opponent's strength against him and adapting well to changing circumstances". Muslims use whatever definition will help them further their intent, which is the expansion of Islam. The Koran does not differentiate religion and politics, that distinction exists in the West. There is no separation of church and state. It is more a case of c/s/h/t/u/a/r/t/c/e/h instead of church/state where the two are integrated and inseparable.
I don't want to oversimplify what is a complex issue, one could easily write a dissertation on Islam and politics or the distinctions between religion and politics. What I do suggest is that Islam does not define itself the way the West defines religious and political entities. Islam contends that they are part of the same thing. One would be blind not to see how religious leaders control governments, militias and armies throughout the Middle East. Osama's war is based on religion, not politics. The House of Saud is definitely not secular. The riots over the cartoons were religious in nature. Muslim rioters wanted the West to restrict free speech. Muslims wanted to ban any speech deemed anti-Islam by Muslims.
If the West is serious about winning this so-called War on Terror it should probably clarify its goals and define them for the players, meaning the people who believe in the foundation of Western Civilization, like civil rights, sexual equality, freedom of thought and especially freedom of religion without persecution or any sort.
Posted by Chip Spear at 4:47 PM | Comments (1)
March 1, 2006
The Islamic Threat
The Islamic threat is real, and moderates, wherever they are, do not appear to be up to the challenge of stopping the fundamentalists. I would highly recommend reading this article. The sooner we are aware of the real threat, the better off we will all be. The Koran does not believe in religious diversity or individual religious freedom without serious consequences. It is a religion of domination; religious, political, cultural and philisophical.
Posted by Chip Spear at 5:05 PM | Comments (0)
February 20, 2006
Maybe This Guy Plays for the Muslims
A British historian is sentenced to three years in prison for denying the Holocaust (AP)
Posted by Chip Spear at 3:42 PM | Comments (3)
The West Clearly on the Defensive in Cartoon Controversy
The Muslim world is on the attack, and from all accounts is doing exceedingly well. With election victories in Palestine and Iran, growing influence in Egypt and riots and demonstrations all over the world to list, the West finds itself questioning its actions, motives and policies seeking to mollify any and all policies inciting Muslim anger. The response of many westerners is to call for calm, to reach out to Islamic moderates, engage in dialogue, to ask westerners to be more considerate when they joke or criticize the Muslim religion or mores. Basically they are asking that people in the west practice self-censorship.
Self censorship is not necessarily bad, we do it all the time. We don't insult people at work, we don't tell wives or girlfriends they are overweight. We don't tell our best friends that something they did or are planning to do is not a good idea. We don't tell people that many of their opinions are stupid, whites don't use the word nigger, when many blacks do and we usually practice a certain amount of restraint rather than make some dumb sexist, cultural remark or joke. I am sure you do this all the time. I know that many times when I workout at my pool I see many ways that other swimmers can improve their strokes. Do I criticize them, or even make a suggestion that they something? Almost never, I keep my mouth shut.
So one might ask how this is different, which I think it clearly is. We are engaged in a war, both physically in Iraq and Afghanistan and culturally against Islam. You might think that this is harsh and extreme, but events would suggest otherwise. The publisher of the cartoons states yesterday in the Washington Post. (WaPo)
I commissioned the cartoons in response to several incidents of self-censorship in Europe caused by widening fears and feelings of intimidation in dealing with issues related to Islam....
Our goal was simply to push back self-imposed limits on expression that seemed to be closing in tighter.
At the end of September, a Danish standup comedian said in an interview with Jyllands-Posten that he had no problem urinating on the Bible in front of a camera, but he dared not do the same thing with the Koran....
So, over two weeks we witnessed a half-dozen cases of self-censorship, pitting freedom of speech against the fear of confronting issues about Islam. This was a legitimate news story to cover, and Jyllands-Posten decided to do it by adopting the well-known journalistic principle: Show, don't tell....
We have a tradition of satire when dealing with the royal family and other public figures, and that was reflected in the cartoons. The cartoonists treated Islam the same way they treat Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism and other religions. And by treating Muslims in Denmark as equals they made a point: We are integrating you into the Danish tradition of satire because you are part of our society, not strangers. The cartoons are including, rather than excluding, Muslims.
The cartoons do not in any way demonize or stereotype Muslims. In fact, they differ from one another both in the way they depict the prophet and in whom they target. One cartoon makes fun of Jyllands-Posten, portraying its cultural editors as a bunch of reactionary provocateurs. Another suggests that the children's writer who could not find an illustrator for his book went public just to get cheap publicity. A third puts the head of the anti-immigration Danish People's Party in a lineup, as if she is a suspected criminal....
On occasion, Jyllands-Posten has refused to print satirical cartoons of Jesus, but not because it applies a double standard. In fact, the same cartoonist who drew the image of Muhammed with a bomb in his turban drew a cartoon with Jesus on the cross having dollar notes in his eyes and another with the star of David attached to a bomb fuse. There were, however, no embassy burnings or death threats when we published those.
One must remember that Mohammed was a warrior, leading armies, conquering and killing other tribes and cultures. He demanded subservience. Many times his opponents were killed. His religion was a means of control. Jesus did not lead armies, rule an empire or advocate killing, neither did Buddha. We are dealing with a different beast here. If you want to read some interesting analysis of Islam you might try "The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam" by Robert Spencer. Islam is not a religion of tolerance as we see by the reactions to the cartoons and the pressure more and more European communities feel. Modern Islam must condemn the calls for violence of any sort when anyone writes, speaks or acts in a way which "insults" the Muslim faith. That type of intolerance is completely unacceptable in a democratic society.
Unless truly moderate, modern Muslims accept secular societies where each individual is able to practice his own religion, we are in for a very bad time, we will truly have a clash of cultures. If you think this is overblown, think again. The Telegraph reports that 40% of British Muslims want sharia law introduced into parts of Britain. (Telegraph) Any religion that advocates killing someone for what they say, draw, paint, or write needs to disappear. Any religion that does not respect an individual's basic human rights needs to disappear. Any religion that does not treat other races, or sexes as equals needs to disappear. Any religion which desires to subjugate or eliminate other religions needs to disappear. Any religion which forbids people from practicing any other religion needs to disappear. We do not need hate, anger, arrogance or power to be the controlling "drug" of any religious institution, whether it is Christian, Jewish, Islamic, Buddhist, Hindi, or whatever.
From a strategic perspective the West is on the defensive. If it is to survive this religious onslaught it will have to stand up and say no. No to intolerance, no to all the things that begin to restrict the things that make the West what it is, the dirty, messy, insulting, empowering, silly, wonderful acts of freedom. It should never, ever apologize, considering the nature of the opposition, where religion is a tool of domination and war.
Posted by Chip Spear at 10:02 AM | Comments (1)