Hey, easy there Robert. Easy now. No need to slam on Chuck. He's got fairness at heart.

It doesn't matter that some people take religious inspiration for their deeds, and others don't. Chuckles is all about the commonalities, the things that link us together. Now some people might use words to make these connections. Some others might paint, or sculpted granite. Still other people might connect with their neighbours using lengths of steel, or the kinetics of lead, or waves of force generated using combustible objects, or endlessly repeated, simplistic slogans. But it's all outreach. It's all good. Chuckles knows that.

Seriously...who are these idiots, and why are they allowed to speak for me?

Geoff

Posted by: Geoff at February 22, 2005 1:48 PM

The gravel voiced Rangel is a natural born buffoon, and should try not to speak.

Posted by: Prickzilla at February 22, 2005 1:54 PM

I swear to whatever God there be: this is like someone who says that:

"We just take it for granted there was a dinosaur 'era', just because we do find thousand upon thousand of preserved skeletons of gigantic, ancient dinosaur skeletons. To call it these periods 'Jurassic', or 'Cretaceous' or the like is discriminating, it is not the right thing to say."

Or perhaps

"We take it for granted that there is such a thing as 'rain', just because we do get soaked on our little heads when we go outside and the sky is dark with incident precipitation. But to call this phenomenon 'rain' is discriminating and overt categorization. It simply smacks of an attempt to pigeon-hole this groundward water flux, so that we might complain about the 'rain' without really understanding what motivates this phenomenon, and blame it for negative events, like when the ground gets wet."

Well, actually, the ability to discriminate ideas, objects and patterns is a central component of the human psychological complex.

Or, at least, SOME humans' psychological complex.

Geoff

Posted by: Geoff at February 22, 2005 1:59 PM

Rangel states:

"To call it Islamic terror is discriminating, it's bigoted, it is not the right thing to say."

Dear G-d Protect us from this suicidal, politically correct idiots who want to destroy us word by word!

Posted by: Kemaste at February 22, 2005 2:08 PM

Don't pee on my leg, and then tell me it's raining.

Posted by: fides at February 22, 2005 2:25 PM

I'm with Rangel, the word "terrorist" is way past its sell-by date. We need to start calling them something that is a more accurate way of importing their true nature:

Islamic warriors
Islamic murderers
Islamic jihadists
Islamic plunderers
Islamic slave raiders
Islamic misogynists
Islamic thieves

Take your pick.

Posted by: Hulegu Khan at February 22, 2005 2:31 PM

Oh goddam... alright, monkeys. Pile on. Thanks, Mr. Spencer.

Next thing you know, Rangell will say that Islam is a respectful and tolerant religion of peace. And we know who said that, right?

Rangell should be forced to resign and ran out of DC on a rail! After all, his lies have gotten 1500 US Marines and Soldiers killed for nothing! Oh wait, that was somebody else too.

For those of you that don't know it (pretty much all of you) Rangell served in the US Army, IN COMBAT in Korea, and was awarded the Purple Heart and the Bronze Star (and they didn't hand them out to "inferior people" too much back then.)

Of course, since the Swiftboat Liars for Bush, what does a Purple Heart and a medal for heroism and bravery mean? Nothin'.

Posted by: kj at February 22, 2005 2:42 PM

Don't mention it, Keith!

Happy to help!

I don't suppose you noticed my hitting Rice on this repeatedly, did you?

No, that wouldn't fit with your little pigeonholes, now, would it?

Cheers
Robert Spencer

Posted by: jihadwatch at February 22, 2005 2:49 PM

Yo kj! When kerry signs his Form 180 that will lay it all to rest, right? He just has to decide upon it before mandatory retirement age... Meantime 5 different attempts to prove claims about Bush have fallen into the dumpster, every time, right next to 30+ attempts by liberal (and some independant) newspapers, to prove the 2000 Florida vote was not a victory for Bush. Must be part of giaour's Saudi-Texan conspiracy.

Posted by: Gary at February 22, 2005 2:52 PM

Taken from http://www.house.gov/rangel/

Offices To Serve You:
Washington D.C. Office
2354 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
(202) 225-4365

New York Office
163 West 125th Street, Suite #737
New York, NY 10027
(212) 663-3900

Fax at (202) 225-0816
--------------------------------
I guess he's just trying to be helpful. I sometimes am confused when I hear terrorist attack. My first thought is usually "What? Another neo-Quaker terrorist explosion along the Rhine?" or "Something has to be done about those Buddhist terrorists."

Seriously though folks, perhaps we may as well remove the "Islamic" part of the term because hey: we all know if there's a terrorist attack, 99/100 it's gonna be our buddies in green.

Rangel. What an utter nimrod.

Posted by: written at February 22, 2005 2:52 PM

Woof!

Hiding under the protective cloak of religion, Islam can literally get away with murder. If Islam were not recognized as a religion it would have already been outlawed.

If they get people in this country to "suspend disbelief" and accept Islam as a religion of peace they'll have us where they want us. Sheep for the slaughter.

Bush, Rice, and the rest of them are guilty of Rangel 's stupidity as well. After all, whose lead is Rangel following? It turns my stomach. We need some real leaders to step up to the bar or we're going to be in a lot of trouble folks.

f.g.

D.T.O.M.

Posted by: f.g. at February 22, 2005 3:36 PM

Don't cry, kj. I'll go warm up a bottle for you...

Posted by: Mike at February 22, 2005 3:49 PM

Yo Gary! What did you do to serve your country? What was Geedub doing while Kerry was killing commies in the Mekong? It's easy to sign a 180 when you didn't do a damn thing.

My personal theory on the matter is that Kerry got the Clap from a prostitute in 'Nam like so many other vets. Yes, I said that. VD has always been a big problem for the military in general, and the Navy in particular. That's why they tore down Storeyville in New Orleans. (If they hadn't the old houses would be worth fortunes now)

It seems the Navy had a problem with sailors going to hang out in the redlight district where there was rampant prostitution, drugs, gambling, murder, and depravity. They threatened to move the naval bases, so the city of NO tore down the historic neighborhood and built ... (drumroll please) ...project housing. So much for fighting crime, but at least now the sailors stay away.

Yes, Mr. Spencer, I noticed the digs on Rice and even Geedub after the SOTU Koran kiss-up. Now, what's the difference between Rangel and Rice? Well, for one thing Rangel knows a hell of a lot more about war than her, first hand. And Rangel didn't lie about a nation-building folly that's gotten 1500 GIs killed. And squadered $300 Billion. And ruined 5-10,000 families.

While I appreciate your objectivity, I can't recall you actually calling a conservative republican a dhimmi. (I'm not saying that you didn't do so; I am only saying that I can't recall seeing it. If you can bring up some examples I would appreciate it. I know how to navigate the archives now.) Was it here or LGF where I saw Dub refered to as "the number one enemy of terrorism"?

I must confess that I can see the fun of it all. I guess that "dhimmicrat" is so catchy as to be veritably calling out for use. Kind of like "dhimmi" Carter, ha ha. I really do like the nicknames "Momma Ketchup," "Whine on.org." I also liked "Slick Willie" and "Hitlery" (something tells me we'll be hearing that one for some time to come.)

Ah well. I admit that there are some dhimmis on my side. Remember, I told you that if Kerry lost, I'd still show up and take my lumps like a man? Well here I am.

So many liberals, so little time. I beg them to reconsider the "If-It-Ain't_Christianity-It-Must-Be-Better" mindset and point to the Iraniac Revolution, how the first ones sent to the gallows were the leftists, the secularists, the communists, the academics, and the atheists.

Maybe after the next terrorist attack, they'll be some eyes open up to reality. I recall a colleague of mine from NYC and I were talking about the campus peaceniks and he said that if LA or 'Frisco or Seattle had been hit on 09-11, the pollyannas woulnd't be anywhere near as vocal. (At this time only Afghanistan was in the crosshairs.) But I don't know. NYC is a pretty liberal area.

I STILL and come hell or high water will ALWAYS be in awe of the great American people and their uncanny amount of control after 9-11. There were a couple of taxicab drivers roughed up in Brooklyn (but that probably happens all the time) and that one Sikh man was killed out West, but overall there was very little fallout for Muslims here in America. Of course, CAIR et al. will have an entirely different spin, but to hear them tell it, every night is Muslim Kristallnacht.

I remember the Muslim boys of USF issuing a kind of call to arms to escort Muslim girls around campus. I knew they were overreacting, but this way they can look back and say "We had to escort the sisters out of fear that they would be set upon by angry infidels" or whatever. I had a better idea: let them dress like human beings, then they wouldn't be targets at all. Ever.

I'd MUCH prefer living in a communist nation or a Christian nation (if any existed) than a Muslim hellhole.

If you guys are as interested as I am in correcting the margin academics that shill for Islam while castigating Israel, be sure to check out

http://www.campus-watch.org

I realize that it isn't as much fun as bashing Church Wardhill or whatever, but there's a pretty good quote of the month up now.

Ward Churchill
Lurch Molehill
Lord Landfill
Smirch Wartpill
Turd Chirpful
Torid Hurtsmell

Gary, hold yer breath, the Guvner of Colorado is gonna fire Lurch any second now! Remember, David Horowitz says that Churchill shoulnd't be fired.

PS... Gary, did you hear? YOU CAN still serve your country! Get on down tho Arizon-y for a special April assignment on keeping our nation safe from invading Mexicans and the occasional wayward Al-qaeda! It seems that for some strange reason, there is only enough federal money to provide 10,000 border guards for 2000 miles of border. Now that SOUNDS like one man per thousand feet until you consider that the border SHOULD be bordered 'round the clock. So while there are forty hours in a WORK week, there are actually 168 hours in a FULL week. So that makes 4.2 work weeks per week. There aren't any 0.2 men, and there are surely some administrative duties--not to mention vansful of agents at every legal crossing--so let's say that there is one man per mile of border at any given time. Could YOU slip between two men stationed a mile apart? Like I said, too bad there isn't any more money to fund the patrol, but we have other priorities. Anyway, this is your big chance to finally don that uniform you always admired but never "had time" (or whatever) to put on. Go Gary, go! God is on your side! You'll be okay! Go!

LOL

KJ

LLLL

Posted by: kj at February 22, 2005 4:50 PM

Some commentators from this site have opened a blog to complement this site, for on and off-topic comments so we do not distract from this site with endless debates. http://www.co-jet.org/

Posted by: Bar at February 22, 2005 4:57 PM

fg: If they get people in this country to "suspend disbelief" and accept Islam as a religion of peace they'll have us where they want us. Sheep for the slaughter.

Glad that we agree on something else. Most people are so damned good that suspending disbelief and denial in general that they couldn't function without it. Religion woulnd't work. Politics wouldn't work. Only reality would work.

As for "sheep for the slaugher" I think that Islam may find something standing in their way: The NRA. They'll find sheep waiting for slaughter to the same extent that they did when they invaded Israel.

Posted by: kj at February 22, 2005 4:59 PM

Keith:

"I can't recall you actually calling a conservative republican a dhimmi."

¡A su orden, señor!:

"Dhimmitude at the White House," December 15, 2003: http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/000422.php

"More Ramadan dhimmitude at State," November 21, 2003:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/000191.php

"Bush's Judeo-Christian-Islamic values," January 20, 2005:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/004739.php

What's that? You say the last one doesn't contain the word "dhimmi"? OK, I'll say it now: when he says things like this, he is behaving as a dhimmi.

Happy to help!
Robert Spencer

Posted by: jihadwatch at February 22, 2005 5:07 PM

the NRA? Good thing Kerry didn't get in then:

http://www.voteyoursport.com/comments/VYSquotes.cfm?ST=NH&zone=4

but your rants should really be saved for the co-jet blog, kj.

Posted by: Gary at February 22, 2005 5:07 PM

Some commentators from this site have opened a blog to complement this site, for on and off-topic comments so we do not distract from this site with endless debates.

Got that Gary? Take your RNC commercial somewhere else.

Just visited the site. Glad to not a see a "palestinian flag" up there with the flags.

Posted by: kj at February 22, 2005 5:10 PM

Kj

I didn’t think the border patrol problem is a new one.
I remember way back in the Reagan 80's, people were calling for the military to guard the Mexico border.

6.7 billion for border patrol in Bush’s 2006 budget a 4.8% increase.
Maybe Dub ain’t so dumb....

"dhimmicrat" - that did fit together to easy....
“Dhimmi Carter” - that’s my favorite...

dhimmicrats vs dhimmicans

Posted by: Bar at February 22, 2005 5:13 PM

OT-
From the nonexistant worldwide Islamic terrorist movement:

"MEMRI TV Monitor Project – Hizbullah Leader Hassan Nasrallah: 'The American Administration is Our Enemy… Death to America'"

http://memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=SD86705

Are we dead yet? I've been listening to this since 1979...

Posted by: Mike at February 22, 2005 5:20 PM

OT:
Interesting article from Shia News:

"Horrors of Iraq's mass graves"
By Sayed Mahdi Almodarresi

Our greatest tragedy may be that we tend to forget our tragedies

http://www.shianews.com/hi/articles/politics/0000374.php

"The western world has only recently discovered the terrifying face of Wahhabi terrorism at the hands of Al-Qaeda. We, however, have had to deal with their bitter hatred for many years in Afghanistan (under the Taliban), Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and elsewhere..."

Posted by: Mike at February 22, 2005 5:30 PM

That was from the NRA, kj. Can't you even get that little fact right?
And where is your commentary on the leftist teachings in the next thread down? Too busy supporting the NEA?

Anyway. Off to prep dinner. Night all!

Posted by: Gary at February 22, 2005 5:36 PM

Just visited the site. Glad to not a see a "palestinian flag" up there with the flags. ~ kj

KJ
put your glasses on, and look again!

Posted by: Bar at February 22, 2005 5:36 PM

"Lincoln described it best when he posed this question;"If you call a dogs tail a leg,how many legs does the dog have?"Five",his audience would usually respond."The correct answer", is four".
Calling a tail a leg does not a leg make.
Abraham Lincoln

Posted by: chuck at February 22, 2005 6:05 PM

To reinforce Bar's tip, if you have a semi-private conversation to pursue you're welcome to go to http://www.co-jet.org. It's set up primarily for those who wish to pursue an active fight against jihad but it's also open to those who feel that their best method of doing so is debate among us.

I hope that those like KJ who seem to think they are in a minority position here will take this opportunity to go to co-jet to find a place to work constructively. I hope that will be as a leaflet composer and propagandist for the general community rather than simply for the audience here. Regardless, and I think KJ and others will find that their contributions to the effort are welcome, everyone who wishes to debate further afield than this thread allows for will go on to our other site to hammer out the issues of particular concern. And once there, perhaps you'll find that you'd be happy to stick around to do some concrete activities, e.g. composing leaflets or some such concrete work.

http://www.co-jet.org

Posted by: sonofwalker at February 22, 2005 7:21 PM

RANGEL---

Maybe for once in your life we agree on something, even if for widely divergent reasons.

"Islamic terror" is a misleading expression. We should call it what it is, after all "a spade is a spade," is it not?? This would be the 'correct thing to say.'

"Islamic terror" would be more appropriately labeled "human sacrifice."

And YOU are among those targeted to be sacrifices by those "Islamic terrorists" (or human sacrifice specialists, a term they are more 'correctly' known to some others by). Believe me, Charlie, this IS "the RIGHT thing to say."

Posted by: pythagoras at February 22, 2005 8:34 PM

KJ,

To use the words of another illustrious leader of our political end: "I feel your pain."

I'm glad you're on the site (as I am glad Gary and Mike and who's that Robert Spencer guy? - excellent commentators all) and I'm also heartened to hear another left voice as well. There's enough blame to go around for both parties on this sort of thing, God knows. There are dhimmicans and dhimmicrats (one has to admit that 'dhimmicrats' really is funny). The only difference is that when either of them wins...everybody loses.

That being said, I just want to bang my head against the wall when I hear idiots pronouncing for the left (well, mine or theirs). I mean, for crying out loud, what the HELL IS RANGELL SMOKING?? Oh, man. Can't we, as a political interest (leftism) combine decent social policy without our leaders having acute cranio-anal conjunction? (Which is to say: having their heads up their asses.) Must the two go ever together? Why is stupidity the milk that floats these freaking fruit loops? I'd like to be able to do the same that KJ wants - to be able to express my skepticism of the great, piss-warm pot that is leftist multicultural outlook, and not have to grin and take a big ol' swig at the freaking water cooler every day.

Here's an example that made me grit my teeth: I related the whole UN Scandal-for-Cash incident to a leftist friend of mine. Those pesky Annans, I said, scampered with millions, the bastards. His response?

"What, don't you support the UN?"

Me: "That's not the point, the point is Annan bilked the international community."

Him: "But I think Annan's all right. I support the UN. The UN does great things all over the world."

Me: *crying*

This is what I deal with on a day-to-day basis. Why can't we just be able to separate out political issues, issue by issue, rather than forming issue blocs and crying foul every time someone crosses the line?

Sorry, bitter. I'll go check out the post site. Cool idea.

Geoff

Posted by: Geoff at February 22, 2005 8:35 PM

The terribly wrong mis-characterization of Hezbollah and Islam by Charlie Rangle is not alone As long as western societies look at religions as almost sacred and untouchable no matter what their intentions maybe , no matter what the tenets of their teachings may command
There will continue to be a tendency in politically oriented Western societies to assume that there is a rational pragmatic cause for acts of terrorism and that if the political grievance is addressed properly, the phenomenon will fade. However, when the roots are not political, it is naieve to expect political gestures to change the hearts of radicals.

Attempts to deal with the terrorist threat as if they where divorced from religious fountainheads are doomed to failure. Counterterrorism begins on the religious-ideological level and must adopt appropriate methods. The cultural and religious sources of radical Islamic ideology must be addressed in order to develop a long-range strategy for coping with the terrorist threat to which they give birth.

The West is at a severe disadvantage. Western concepts of civil rights along with legal, political, and cultural constraints preclude government intervention in the internal matters of organized religions; they make it difficult to prohibit or punish inflammatory sermons of imams in mosques (as Muslim regimes do on a regular basis) or to punish clerics for fatwas justifying terrorism. Furthermore, the legacy of colonialism deters Western governments from taking steps that may be construed as anti-Muslim or as signs of lingering colonialist ideology. This exposes the Western country combating the terrorist threat to criticism from within. Even most of the new and stringent terrorism prevention legislation that has been enacted in some counties leans mainly on investigatory powers (such as allowing for unlimited administrative arrests, etc.) and does not deal with prohibition of religion-based crime (as opposed to anti-Nazi and anti-racism laws, which are in force in many countries in Europe).

The regimes of the Middle East have proven their mettle in coercing religious establishments and even radical sheikhs to rule in a way commensurate with their interests. However, most of them show no inclination to join a global war against radical Islamic ideology. Hence, the prospect of enlisting Middle Eastern allies in the struggle against Islamic radicalism is bleak. Under these conditions, it will be difficult to curb the conversion of young Muslims in the West to the ideas of radicalism emanating from the safe houses of the Middle East. Even those who are not in direct contact with Middle Eastern sources of inspiration may absorb the ideology secondhand through interaction of Muslims from various origins in schools and on the internet.

Only by setting up a clear demarcation between orthodox and radical Islam can the radical elements be exorcized. The priority of solidarity within the Islamic world plays into the hands of the radicals. A strategy to cope with radical Islamic ideology cannot take shape without a reinterpretation of Western concepts of the boundaries of the freedoms of religion and speech, definitions of religious incitement, and criminal culpability of religious leaders for the acts of their flock as a result of their spiritual influence. Such a reinterpretation impinges on basic principles of Western civilization and law. Under the circumstances, it is the lesser evil to confront Islam for what it really represents.

Sooner or later someone is going to have to step up to the plate and call Islamic totalitarizm onto the carpet for what it really is.

Posted by: Mackie at February 22, 2005 9:37 PM

You got it in one Mackie. Outstanding analysis! Hey, I used to bat over .300 in my younger days, put me in the line up coach. Cheers!

Posted by: William The Crusader at February 22, 2005 10:16 PM

Wake up Charlie,

I don't give a rip what we did or didn't call the Klu Klux Klan, these terrorist are Islamic and to suggest we should not call it like it is means we are caving into the propagandists... like CAIR who want us to think Muslims are just these benign group of folks.. sorry, not the case, the jihadists want to convert us all by force, and the moderates who are fundamentalists plan to do so through Da'wa. God help us... Charlie ought to go to Brooklyn and ask a former Nation of Islam member/Imam, Imam Siraj Wahhaj,(promient Sunni Muslim Imam now) if Muslims of the Nation of Islam are Muslims? Guess what, Imam Wahhaj would tell him, no they are not.... so to all those black Muslims in Harlem...and elsewhere... these Islamists are not your "brothers." But hey, Imam Wahhaj thinks the Blind Sheihk sitting in federal prison is a swell guy, he even served as a character witness for him at his trial...

I say screw PC... that is what the Islamists are counting on... if Muslims who don't support terrorists and Islamist ideologies would stand up and really start exposing what is going on in mosques, Islamic Centers and in Islamic Schools across this country, then maybe they will have some credibility when they cry discrimination... why don't they... because for the most part.. they view this country as a moral abyss.. that needs to be taken over by Islam... that's why...after all Allah says so....

Posted by: Emi at February 22, 2005 10:29 PM

"The KKK and Hitler could not and did not invoke Christian theology to justify their actions."

Hmmmmmmm...... I'm really not 100% sure you're right about that. In the earliest days of the Nazi party (in the 1920's) they styled themselves as a Christian activist organization. It was on their first manifesto. I can dig up the source if anybody must know.

http://www.nobeliefs.com/nazis.htm

I admit that when they did try to invoke Christian theology for their own ends it was very confused and hypocritical - but don't forget the then Pope was praying for an Axis victory. And of course there were those "Godless Atheist" Communists who they so hated. Christianity and Fascism is a bit of an historical minefield for right wing Christians – if they’ve got any sense they shouldn’t go there. ACHTUN MINEN!

I was interested to hear that an Australian White Supremacist organization could not affiliate with the US KKK because it was "non Christian". Also these people often come up with the tired old quote that the Jews killed Jesus. There is also a strange (and brain dead) philosophy called British Judaism. They actually believe that the British (Anglo Saxon) race are God's true Jews (chosen people) and that the Jews we know are interlopers and frauds. They pretend that the Bible actually refers to Roman Britain - total rubbish of course.

Posted by: Timbo at February 22, 2005 10:43 PM

KJ--I liked your Turd Chirpful comment. BTW, did you hear that there are a number of Indian nations saying "He's not on our rolls" as well?

Interesting that Rangel called the Nazis "Christian terrorists", even though they thought Christianity a load of "Jewish poison", and their guru Ludendorff (Lyingthorpe in English) was a neo-Pagan. It seems that Rangel is another of these painfully moral-equivalence-at-all-costs types.

As for Kerry, I could care less if he underwent treatment for clap. However, his going to hobnob with the North Vietnamese in Paris while still technically a US Navy officer was something for which he should've been court-martialed and sent to prison, if not shot.

Also, I can't shed too many tears over the fate of the Tudeh under Khomeini. They were as nasty a bunch as any other bunch of Communists (that goes for the Eurocommies, too, who taught Pol Pot everything he ever knew about Marxism), and got their own hands pretty bloody when they served the Soviets in southern Azerbaijan at the end of WWII.

Posted by: Kepha at February 22, 2005 11:37 PM

Put aside all the knee-jerk name calling. What needs to be answeered for Rangel is proving or showing evidence that Hezbollah is indeed and in fact a terror organization. That and only that would show him wherein he is wrong. That is the real issue and not whether Muslims are all good or all bad etc.

Posted by: postroad at February 22, 2005 11:47 PM

"Top House Democrat Charlie Rangel said Tuesday that it was an act of discrimination to label groups like Hezbollah "Islamic terrorists."

This thunderhead of a politician never ceases to amaze me.

Even the State Department recognizes Hiballah as a terrorist group of the worse kind,heavily financed and directed by Iran.

This terrorist group has been involved in numerous anti-US terrorist attacks,including the suicide truck bombing of the US embassy ,and the US Marine barracks in Beirut in Ocober of 1983 that killed 270 Marines.

And because of that; I wish someone would insist on an apology from Charlie Rangle to the US marines Corps at the least! But as usual-- he will probably get a pass from the left wing media.

Posted by: Mackie at February 23, 2005 12:30 AM

The NRA! - Again!

What the **** is wrong with you people!

Do you know - in terms of daily gun related deaths, every day your country takes more casualties than during an average day in the Vietnam War. There are countries in the world that are considered to be in a state of civil war - and they have fewer gun related deaths per month than the USA. Nepal for example.

I've fired all manner of guns in the army - I can't see the attraction of them really. You slaughter your countrymen and call it freedom.

"They'll find sheep waiting for slaughter to the same extent that they did when they invaded Israel." - No, in the USA the sheep slaughter themselves.

If you want to defend your home, grab a kitchen knife from the kitchen draw or a pickaxe handle from the shed. If a blade or cudgel are good enough in the USA – perhaps that’s because you’ve got too many guns on the street. If you want to defend your country - expel all Muslims and halt all aimless military adventures in Muslim countries. A gun under your pillow is not the answer.

You’ve just gone and installed an Islamist government in Iraq –CONGRATULATIONS AMERICAN REPUBLICANS! WELL DONE!
The armed forces of the United States of America have achieved what Iraqi Islamists could never have done by themselves in a hundred years. Iran loves you. George Bush is the new poster child of Tehran. Iraq was their sworn enemy, now it’s their new soul mate – FANTASTIC! You can go out and celebrate by blowing the brains out of the nearest suspicious looking Hispanic.

Kepha...

"...the Eurocommies, too, who taught Pol Pot everything he ever knew about Marxism"

Right, blame the Europeans.. the fact that America turned Cambodia into the most bombed country ever, and supported local tyrants, had nothing to do with radicalising the populace so that they would actually listen to a nut like Pol Pot?

You are so blinded and dazzled by your patriotism that you can't see the wood for the trees. America did a grade A, diamond, first class job at messing Cambodia up - and then you blame the Europeans!

Now look at Iraq.

Those who do not learn from history are condemned to repeat it.

Posted by: Timbo at February 23, 2005 12:38 AM

Dear Timbo
How many people die in car crashes everyday in the USA?
Will you be calling for a ban on cars anytime soon?
Why do you choose to discriminate against just guns, do you feel that knives cant kill, or is killing with a knife somehow “PC”?

“If the Palestinians put down their guns, there will be an end to the violence, if Israel puts down their guns, there will be an end to Israel.”

Guns don’t kill people, people kill people.

Posted by: Bar at February 23, 2005 1:49 AM

Kj:

Even assholes go to war. So what?

Posted by: Kemaste at February 23, 2005 3:23 AM

To the Hitler is a Christian crowd :
If Hitler claimed he could fly like a humming bird by flapping his arms at a very high rate of speed, would you believe him? If I claimed to be a pacifist, but punch you in the nose, would you still think I am a pacifist?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There are countries in the world that are considered to be in a state of civil war - and they have fewer gun related deaths per month than the USA. Nepal for example~Timbo

Timbo
You really have to come up with a ratio before you can compare anything!
You are comparing a Honda civic to a 18 wheeler Semi truck and concluding that the semi has bad brakes, when the brakes work fine.

Nepal total population : 27,070,666

America total population : 295,734,134

Nepal is 9.1% our size.

Posted by: Bar at February 23, 2005 4:16 AM

Don't call it "Islamic Terrorism"

Absolutley right. Islamic terrorists have feelings too and so we have to show some tenderness and understanding!!! It is much better to call them "our multicultural brothers/sisters who need lots-a-love and hugs, coming to meet us with pointy metal pieces and things that go can go bang if used without following the right safety procedures". There... the problem is solved. Time for me to go now and channel a mighty whale spirit while hugging a beautiful tree inhabited by sacred fairies.

Posted by: obl r us at February 23, 2005 4:40 AM

Rangel's rhetoric is in contradiction to his protest against the genocide in Sudan:

Rep. Rangel Arrested in Sudan Embassy Protest
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/07/14/1411202

What Rangel is doing is metaphorically similar to saying that it is bigoted to call the perpetrators of 93 million people killed in the 20th century by a far-left ideology "communists." Or for that matter it is bigoted to call the perpetrators of the Holocaust "nazis."

How can he both protest the Sudanese genocide and defend Hezbollah? Can't he recognize a Jihad when he sees one?

Posted by: ted at February 23, 2005 8:32 AM

I'll see your "race card" and raise you a "freedom of speech".

Read em and weep Rangel.

JLP

Posted by: John Lee Pedimore at February 23, 2005 12:10 PM

Rangel,
Here's a question for you:
How many Christians and Jews are members of Hezbollah?

Posted by: starsandstripes at February 23, 2005 5:16 PM

Timbo:

Actually, I blame the nastiness of Saloth Sar himself for the misery of Cambodia--along with Sinhanouk's playing with various fires before 1971; not least of which was a deliberate blind eye towards North Viet Nam's violations of Cambodia's supposed "neutrality". This raised a great deal of anger and resentment against Sihanouk, which, far more than any CIA involvement, made the 1971 coup by Lon Nol possible.

Also, Saloth Sar (later Pol pot) was a student in Paris in the late 1940's, where he became a Communist.

Bar: re the "Hitler was a Christian crowd", I think that for many, there's still a sense that if you're white, Western, and not a Jew or a Muslim, you're somehow "Christian", even if you repudiate every doctrine of the New Testament. There. I've been charitable to the Hon. Mr. Rangel.

Posted by: Kepha at February 23, 2005 10:12 PM

What's that? You say the last one doesn't contain the word "dhimmi"?
OK, I'll say it now: when he says things like this, he is behaving as a dhimmi.

Well, I appreciate your pointing out the error of my ways, but I can’t help but notice a 13-month break between your two most recent condemnations of the Whitehouse (and lukewarm at that; Bush “behaves like a dhimmi” but others simply “are dhimmis”?)

(From the RS critique of the article:)The KKK and Hitler could not and did not invoke Christian theology to justify their actions.

I think that the historical record shows that you just plain wrong. They did invoke Christian theology (and in fact the "neo-"Nazis and the KKK STILL are invoking Christian theology.) I think that the important point here is that the Nazis and the KKK are (now) faaaar outside (or more precisely, "far to the right") of the widespread beliefs of mainstream Christians.

Islamic jihadists, in contrast, routinely invoke Islamic theology and tradition to justify what they do and recruit new members from the larger Muslim community.

...and more important, they successfully solicit donations from the larger Muslim community.

Until you and other pols from the President on down understand and acknowledge this, you will simply not be addressing the problem of Islamic terrorism at its roots.

Did you all get that? (Thank you, Mr. Spencer; and this time I really mean it.)

**********************************************

the NRA? Good thing Kerry didn't get in then:

Spare me the ridiculous, asinine “Kerry’s gonna take yer guns! Waaaaah!”

The difference between Kerry going hunting and Geedub going hunting is that Kerry actually kills something.

**********************************************

6.7 billion for border patrol in Bush’s 2006 budget a 4.8% increase. Maybe Dub ain’t so dumb....

Um… did you know that we were attacked on September 11, 2001? Surely you’ve seen the articles here that reported HUNDREDS of “other than Mexicans” sneaking in through Arizona, and just in the past 12 months? 7 Billion for border patrol? BFD… a 4.8% increase? That means that last year it was 6.3 Billion (i.e. 6.7 Billion divided by 1.048 = 6.4 Billion)… an increase of 300 Million dollars? Pardon me for raining on your little parade, but I guarantee you that Dub spent more than that guarding the border of Iraq. But hey, nice attempt at spin.

*********************************************

That was from the NRA, kj. Can't you even get that little fact right? And where is your commentary on the leftist teachings in the next thread down? Too busy supporting the NEA?

No, I was too busy reading “Communist Manifesto” and trying to figure out how I can learn some national secrets, so I can SELL them! (Drool!) You dumbass caveman.

**********************************************

KJ…..put your glasses on, and look again!

I don’t wear glasses… I looked again. I see an Israel flag, and India flag, the Union Jack, and a UN flag; but no Old Glory and no “palestinian” flag.

*********************************************

I mean, for crying out loud, what the HELL IS RANGELL SMOKING??

Maybe he's strung out on Oxycontin? No, wait... that would make him thin, deaf, gay, and MEAN. Maybe he’s trying to keep his constituents happy? Harlem, NYC? Helllloooo? Ever heard of the Nation of Islam?

********************************************

I related the whole UN Scandal-for-Cash incident to a leftist friend of mine. Those pesky Annans, I said, scampered with millions, the bastards. His response?

Maybe he’s got a problem…. IF Annan is found guilty then I say send him to prison. UNTIL he is found guilty, why not give him the same benefit of the doubt some of us are giving the drug addled Rush Limbaugh? You know, “innocent until proven guilty” or some quaint liberal relic like that?

**********************************************

Charlie ought to go to Brooklyn and ask a former Nation of Islam member/Imam, Imam Siraj Wahhaj,(promient Sunni Muslim Imam now) if Muslims of the Nation of Islam are Muslims? Guess what, Imam Wahhaj would tell him, no they are not.... so to all those black Muslims in Harlem...and elsewhere... these Islamists are not your "brothers."

LOL… over at apostatesofislam.com they don’t even recognize former devotees of the Nation of Islam as apostates! Now that’s pretty sad, huh?

I think this is coming up here a lot now.... Nation of Islam mobots aren't "real Muslims", the Wahhabi closet-fag wifebeating Jewkillers aren't "real Muslims", the 9-11, Beslan, Bali, and Madrid terrorists weren't "real Muslims". Hitler wasn't a "real Christian" (I guess Constantine wasn't either. Nor the Conquistadors, nor were the Inquisitors. So what were they? Druids? Buddhists?)

**********************************************

KJ--I liked your Turd Chirpful comment. BTW, did you hear that there are a number of Indian nations saying "He's not on our rolls" as well?

Yeah, there are also excluders of every cult, creed, and culture. (See above.)

Interesting that Rangel called the Nazis "Christian terrorists", even though they thought Christianity a load of "Jewish poison", and their guru Ludendorff (Lyingthorpe in English) was a neo-Pagan.

Alright, get off that crap. Only a fool would judge an entire people based on the behavior of the worst of them. (It’s almost as dumb as judging an entire people based on the behavior of the BEST of them. I think these two statements make a famous quote, maybe Churchill (Sir Winston, that is) or Mark Twain.)

For every “non-Christian” doctrine, claim, or action by Hitler, historians can show you a “Christian” counterpart. The belt buckle of the SS uniform was the SS double lightning bolts mit the phrase “God is With Us.” Which God do you think they meant? Allah? Krishna? Or the God of the bible? Please answer.

And what religion do you think the people of Germany were? The answer is: the same religion they are now, the same religion they have been for centuries: Christian.

**********************************************

As for Kerry, I could care less if he underwent treatment for clap. However, his going to hobnob with the North Vietnamese in Paris while still technically a US Navy officer was something for which he should've been court-martialed and sent to prison, if not shot.

IF that was true, they would have arrested him and tried him in a court martial. Now, how about another certain presidential candidate that went AWOL?

************************************************

Put aside all the knee-jerk name calling. What needs to be answeered for Rangel is proving or showing evidence that Hezbollah is indeed and in fact a terror organization. That and only that would show him wherein he is wrong. That is the real issue and not whether Muslims are all good or all bad etc.

I think he knows that they are a terrorist organization, but is unwilling or unable to admit that Islam is their driving force. I agree that doing "what needs to be answeered for Rangel" would be the sensible thing to do. But that wouldn’t keep the issue fresh in the news, and then truthmolesting crapeaters like O’Reilly and Limbaugh wouldn't get to continue to rape us.

**********************************************

This terrorist group has been involved in numerous anti-US terrorist attacks,including the suicide truck bombing of the US embassy ,and the US Marine barracks in Beirut in Ocober of 1983 that killed 270 Marines.

You mean 241 Marines. I know, because I joined the Marine Corps that month.

And because of that; I wish someone would insist on an apology from Charlie Rangle to the US marines Corps at the least!

I’m sure he will, right after Ollie North, G Bush Sr., Oliver Poindexter, Cap Weinberger, Cheney, and the rest of the Missiles-to-Iran-after-they-killed-the-Marines crowd apologizes. But you don’t care about them, because they are all “R”s.

But as usual-- he will probably get a pass from the left wing media.

Yeah, LOL, like the left-wing media gave the Walking Nap a pass after the Beirut massacre of Marines when he invaded Grenada one week later.

Like the left-wing media gave Bush a pass when he pardoned all of his fellow Iran-Contra coconspirators on Xmas Eve, 1992.

Like the left-wing media HAMMERED Geedub last year, running “Fahrenheit 9-11” on every network, every week? LOL.

Like when the left-wing media covered for Slick Willie by REFUSING to air any coverage of the Monica Lewinsky matter? Okay, okay. THAT left-wing media.

**********************************************

Even assholes go to war. So what?

No, the REAL assholes find ways to dodge the draft, then when they need some political cover and phony patriotism to make up for wrecking everything, they send brave young men off to die in war. Man, it’s your right to hate combat veterans, but do you have to spit on them in front of me?

**********************************************

To the Hitler is a Christian crowd : If Hitler claimed he could fly like a humming bird by flapping his arms at a very high rate of speed, would you believe him? If I claimed to be a pacifist, but punch you in the nose, would you still think I am a pacifist?

And if a drunken, coked-out, blueblood momma’s boy told you he was a rootin’ tootin’ cowboy, just a simple country fella tryin’ to earn a livin’ by servin’ the people, would you believe him? Oh, wait. You already do.

Now you’re starting to sound like a Mobot. If any of your fellow devotees does something bad, you just say that he wasn’t a “real one.” Mobots are 10, maybe 12 times crazier NOW that Christians WERE at their expansionist, colonial, forced conversion height. But there have definitely been some bad Christians.

The genocidal British settlers of Australia and Tasmania weren't necessarily made to believe that they were "doing God's will" but face the facts: there was ONLY ONE RELIGION in England at the time. Same with the KKKers of the Old South. Back in those days, EVERYBODY went to church (as any reminiscer of "the Good Old Days" will be glaaad to remind us whippersnappers.)

"The pedophile priests aren't real Catholics" (or to hear Mel Gibson tell it, neither are the Catholics, and neither is the Pope.)

"The KKK weren't real Christians." Except, they were. And so were their black victims.

"The 9-11 terrorists/Beslan terrorists/'72 Munich terrorists/etc. etc. aren't really Muslims."

**********************************************

How can he both protest the Sudanese genocide and defend Hezbollah? Can't he recognize a Jihad when he sees one?

He can’t. That’s why it appears that he is “just another loony liberal”. Unfortunately for you and the other trashtalkers, that ISN’T what he did. Read the article again. He didn’t defend Hezbollah. He didn’t want to not call them terrorists, he just didn’t want to call them Muslim terrorists. Nice spin though. You should listen to talk shows more often.

When you get all your O'Reilly talking points in order, get back with me.

************************************************

I won't bring up politics unless somebody else does (like Gary, tomorrow.)

Posted by: kj at February 23, 2005 10:54 PM

Kj, since you appear to be factually challenged.

He didn't want to not call them terrorists, he just didn't want to call them Muslim terrorists. Nice spin though. You should listen to talk shows more often.~kj

Asked about the refusal by some European governments to declare Hezbollah an Islamic terror group, Rangel told WWRL's Steve Malzberg and Karen Hunter, "To call it Islamic terror is discriminating, it's bigoted, it is not the right thing to say." Rangel even questioned whether, in fact, a worldwide Islamic terrorist movement even existed, saying, "We just take for granted that there is an Islamic terror movement because we do have some fanatic people who come from Islamic countries." The Harlem Democrat complained: "When we had the Ku Klux Klan we didn't call them Baptist terrorists. When Hitler was killing Jews, we didn't call it Christian terrorists."

I am sorry kj, I should have read the whole article before I responded,
I didn't know that Islamic terrorist was still an unproven entity. My bad...
Maybe you should inform the democrats that Israel has been fighting Islamic terror since 1948.
Why don't the democrats use Al Gore invention " the internet" they sure could use the education.

I see it's a typical uneducated dhimmicrat thing to say Hitler and the KKK are Christian...

Charlie Rangel & Maurice Hinchey are all talk and no facts. I see they uphold a long democrat tradition.

Posted by: Bar at February 24, 2005 1:06 AM

Funding for the Border Patrol in 2006 includes $37 million for 210 additional Border Patrol agents, and $20 million for the acquisition and replacement of aging Border Patrol aircraft. Since September 11, 2001, Border Patrol staffing has grown by nearly 1,200 agents (11-percent increase). The President’s Budget also enhances the America’s Shield Initiative, an integration of many surveillance, video, and detection systems along the border.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2006/pdf/budget/dhs.pdf

Posted by: Bar at February 24, 2005 2:33 AM

The Harlem Democrat complained: "When we had the Ku Klux Klan we didn't call them Baptist terrorists.

There is not one shred of evidence that the KKK are strictly Baptist.
From the end of the civil war until around 1970, the south was controlled by white democrats.
The KKK originally was only white southern democrats.

Posted by: Bar at February 24, 2005 3:40 AM

Ahhh, the good-ole', knee-jerk reactionary defensiveness of the left from kj. At least there was less vitriol in this one...

Rats! And here I was trying to stay Away from politics... my bad.

Today’s OT news and commentary, Always Jihad Related, Truth never to be silenced.

Insurgents? (leftist attempts at moral equivalency)
http://www.canadafreepress.com/2005/williams022105.htm

The Ward Churchill money trail (leftist charities also give money to islam):
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/joelmowbray/jm20050224.shtml

Rats! There's that political element again...

Posted by: Gary at February 24, 2005 6:37 AM

Hey guys, Ward Churchill has admitted that he is NOT Native American.

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=14822_Churchill_Admits_Hes_Not_Native_American&only=yes

Posted by: CGW at February 24, 2005 7:16 AM

Well, I thought that the politcal crap would come to an end. I'm not going to read political lies here and go to another site to answer. Gary is obviously unwilling or unable to control his rants, and for as long as he continues to lie about Liberalism, I am going to continue to respond with the truth about Conservatism.

You know what really frosts my Jimmies? You guys come up with some crazy quote by a muslim-loving lib and expect me to answer for it. How about YOU answering for some of the extremists on YOUR side? Like Ann Coulter, J. Edgar Hoover, and David Duke? Oh, wait. I know; you’ll say “they aren’t real Christians/conservatives/republicans.” Whatever. Here comes the deconstructions:

I am sorry kj, I should have read the whole article before I responded, I didn't know that Islamic terrorist was still an unproven entity.

Ooooh. Nice way to change the subject. I didn't say "Islamic terrorist [sic] was still an unproven entity." I simply said that while Rangel doesn't have a problem calling it "terrorism" he does have a problem with calling it "Islamic Terrorism." Apparently you either are quite adept at concocting logical fallacies (like Straw Man, Red Herring, etc.) or have a problem understanding English. Judging from your next comment (see below) it is probably at least a little of the latter:

My bad...

What are you, like twenty or so? Or just hanging around with kids? "My bad"... ooops, sorry 'bout dat, dawg. LOL. Your bad... your bad smell, or bad attitude? I know, your bad luck to meet a liberal that's not afraid to fight back. Now on with the dissection:

Maybe you should inform the democrats that Israel has been fighting Islamic terror since 1948.

Oh, yep. Bar's right again. The democrats don't know anything about history. Of course, they don't know anything about anything, right? This is yet another Straw Man argument. Bar knows that he (or is it "she"?) doesn't really have much of an argument with what I say, so he/she/it invents arguments, attributes them to me, and then "wins" the argument (i.e., knocks down the straw man instead of the real man.) Rush is excellent at doing this, as is Ann Coulter and the rest of the anti-Lib’ruls.

Why don't the democrats use Al Gore invention " the internet" they sure could use the education.

Still don't quite understand common English I see. Goddam, how many times do we have to go through this? I haven't had to do this in years. Al Gore was the ONLY senator talking about an "Information Superhighway" in the eighties, and he was the sponsor of the bill that funded the internet. That's part of the historical record, part of the archived senate proceedings. Al Gore sponsored it. Period. You monkeys are sooo simple. It's easy to win an argument with a fool; the hard part is convincing the fool that he's lost.

I see it's a typical uneducated dhimmicrat thing to say Hitler and the KKK are Christian...

Oh yeah, Hitler wasn't a Christian; everybody knows that he was a Buddhist. Funny, you "forgot" to explain away the SS uniform belt buckles that I mentioned, but you probably "didn't have time" to waste on actually answering me. I understand. It's hard when truth is against you, but with the right amount of bluster and bullshit, you can prevail.

Charlie Rangel & Maurice Hinchey are all talk and no facts. I see they uphold a long democrat tradition.

Yes, there they are again. The all talk, no facts dhimmicrats. The reason we lost the Vietnam War. The cause of the recession of the eighties. The ruiners of the prosperity of the nineties. The raisers of minimum wage. The satanic nasties that kicked God out of school and want to make all our kids queer. The bleeding heart liberals that freed the slaves and started the unions. The whining crybabies that say we shouldn't call African American "niggers" and shouldn't call overweight people "fat lazy pigs." The treasonous leftists that "caused" 9-11 and actively support terrorism and terrorists.

It must suck to be you, and to always, always, always be perfect in every way and of course perfectly right in all matters.

Funding for the Border Patrol in 2006 includes $37 million for 210 additional Border Patrol agents, and $20 million for the acquisition and replacement of aging Border Patrol aircraft. Since September 11, 2001, Border Patrol staffing has grown by nearly 1,200 agents (11-percent increase). The President’s Budget also enhances the America’s Shield Initiative, an integration of many surveillance, video, and detection systems along the border.

I realize that means a lot to cavemen and "anti-intellectuals" that don't really understand numbers. That probably impresses the hell out of you, "Hellfire! That Dub shore is doin' his durndest to protect us. And them lib'ruls are just tryin' to drag him down."

UNFORTUNATELY for you, I can understand numbers.

210 additional patrol agents? WOW. That's one for every 10 miles of Mexican border. (But not really. You may recall that we discussed that it takes FOUR men to work a ‘round-the-clock, 24/7 workweek. So that REALLY means one guard for every 40 miles of border.) Woo-wee! I feel safer already. 37 Million dollars? BFD. That's one-twentieth of one percent of what he's going to shovel to the Mullahs of Iraq this year.

But building a nation costs money, just as sure as building a legacy cost the lives of ordinary Soldiers and Marines. No biggie; the important thing is to advance the GOPer cause.

******************************************

Ahhh, the good-ole', knee-jerk reactionary defensiveness of the left from kj. At least there was less vitriol in this one...

Funny that. I answer point by point most--if not every--charge by every monkey, and they can never, ever, do the same to me.

Today’s OT news and commentary, Always Jihad Related, Truth never to be silenced.

Man, you are great. But of course, you already knew that, didn't you? You'd make a great Mobot, you know that? So dramatic, so full of yourself. So absolutely positively sure that YOUR way is right, that YOUR way is the only way, that all that DARE to disagree are so far below you, not really human, etc.

You are so full of yourself. I feel sorry for your kids. I hope you haven't reproduced yourself. And I hope that you aren't in charge of anyone, like someone's boss or manager.

***********************************************

There is not one shred of evidence that the KKK are strictly Baptist.

Yes, but you know damn good and well that there is ample evidence that MOST of the KKK were Baptists.

Let’s pretend for a moment that I am the fool and you are the smart one. Please explain to me why the Baptist Church became two churches in the late 19th century: Baptist and Southern Baptist. Please explain that. (I know, you (ahem) “Don’t have time.”)

No, I’m sure that some of them were Methodists, Assembly of Godders, etc. But they were all Christians, and in fact they were all protestant Christians. They hated Catholics and Jews. And now they have some new enemies: teachers, Hollywood, Muslims, homosexuals, feminists, the ACLU… wait a minute! Aren’t these the same people that conservatives hate? What a coincidence.

Bar, the KKK were—and REMAIN—all conservative Christians; only the party affiliation has changed, and no amount of spin and lies from your side is going to change that. Look, I admit that my side has some less-than-redeeming features (like bashing Israel, wanting to “just get along” with Islam, etc.) Why can’t you? I there something intrinsic to conservatism that forbids any admission of fault?

The KKK burned crosses because they were using Christian symbolism. The hoods and robes are also part of Christian symbols (and still used today by mainstream Christians in parts of Spain.) They call themselves "Knights"... ALL of the old knights were Christians. Of course, just like a Muslim, if anyone on YOUR side is a little "over-zealous" you simply shrug and say "Oh, they're not a Christian" "they're not conservative"... whatever. But you actually sometimes have the audacity to go farther and claim that Timothy McVeigh, Adolph Hitler, etc. etc. were not just "not conservative" but that they were liberal. Of course. And the Jihadi parallel is “Bin Laden is really an Israeli agent” and “The bombers were working for Mossad.”… LOL.

Like I said before, you can go to the kkk website and see for yourself that they are STILL claiming that they are a religious organization bent on fulfilling "God's desires" and other fairytale blab.

www.kkk.com

GO SEE FOR YOURSELF (she won't.)

And here's the last monkey encounter for the day, after a long day at the office full of monkeys. Yet another pathetic attempt to confuse people with off-topic blather that really doesn't mean ANYTHING:

From the end of the civil war until around 1970, the south was controlled by white democrats.
The KKK originally was only white southern democrats.

So then what happened? What happened when the democrats started treating black people like human beings? What happened when the democrats adopted equality for all people as part of their agenda? THE CONSERVATIVES LEFT. And it started in the sixties, when Reagan, Strom, Helms, Lott and other of your idols left the democrats to take their racist crap to a new party.

After Truman desegregated the military Strom tried back in the forties to start a new party. He couldn't go to the republican because the idiot southerners hated--HATED--the party of Lincoln and Lincoln himself. So he tried to start the Dixiecrats, and failed miserably. But eventually Nixon crafted his southern strategy so well that all the old racist pricks came running into his arms.

Lyndon Johnson said when he signed the Civil Rights Voting Act that it would cause the democrats to lose the south. But he signed it anyway, because it was the right thing to do.

Now you will write back and tell me about Charles Byrd. You were thinking about him, right? I know you were. I play you monkeys like a Strad. I could make a flow chart with every one of your pathetic Straw Man retorts.

Charles Byrd WAS in the KKK. He renounced them decades ago. Unlike your beloved draft-dodging cheerleader, Trent Lott who speaks at functions for, and is endorsed by, the Council of Conservative Citizens.

And who is the C of CC, you may ask? Why not go take a look for yourself:

www.cofcc.org

(You won't go. You're scared to learn about the dark side of conservatism.)

And then there's dear, saintly John Ashcroft, who spoke at a Confederate b.s. seminar and said that they were doing an excellent job, that otherwise people would think that the Confederacy was fighting for some "perverted agenda." Of course, slavery wasn't a perverted agenda, it was just a "peculiar institution".

Well, I caught the dung you hurled at me and I have now thrown it back into your open maw.

Next topic?

KJ

LLLL

Posted by: kj at February 24, 2005 10:28 PM

Kj

To be a Christian is to follow Christ. I don’t recall Jesus wearing a hood, terrorizing and killing non-Jews. I cant recall the KKK doing anything that Jesus taught. But I understand that doesn’t fit into your agenda.

Abraham Lincoln was a “republican” who freed the slaves. The democrats played by the confederates liked slavery and keep practicing their version of America up until the 1965 civil rights voting act.

The only thing belt buckles will prove, is that the Nazi’s wore pants!
The Nazi’s where buddies with the Muslim brother Hood. I cant recall the last time a Muslim group was in cahoots with a Christian group. But don’t let the any facts get your way.

Posted by: Bar at February 25, 2005 1:26 AM

Kj

To be a Christian is to follow Christ. I don’t recall Jesus wearing a hood, terrorizing and killing non-Jews. I cant recall the KKK doing anything that Jesus taught. But I understand that doesn’t fit into your agenda.

Abraham Lincoln was a “republican” who freed the slaves. The democrats played by the confederates liked slavery and keep practicing their version of America up until the 1965 civil rights voting act.

The only thing belt buckles will prove, is that the Nazi’s wore pants!
The Nazi’s where buddies with the Muslim brother Hood. I cant recall the last time a Muslim group was in cahoots with a Christian group. But don’t let any facts get your way.

Posted by: Bar at February 25, 2005 1:29 AM

You haven't disproved a single word of those articles, kj. Which are hardly rants, and my posting them is hardly ranting. However your diatribes against Christianity...

Posted by: Gary at February 25, 2005 6:55 AM

and I have Yet to see you comment here:

http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/005140.php

Or is the truth of the matter too difficult to gloss over in this case?

Posted by: Gary at February 25, 2005 6:56 AM

Gary, you fool. You know as well as I do what I think about teaching a sugar-coated version of Islam in public schools. It's a crock of shit, period.

Oh, they need to teach about Islam alright. But they shouldn't let Muslims teach it. They need someone that will tell kids the truth.

Boy, you sure do know a lot about pedophilia, huh Gary?

Posted by: kj at February 25, 2005 10:15 AM

Indeed I do, kj! for example, if there is a Vote involved, your guys will go for it. And let's not mention the ACLU backing of it...

but I digress. Oh btw, you still haven't answered that question on the Blog Here http://www.co-jet.org/

Posted by: Gary at February 25, 2005 10:24 AM

However, kj, I Do understand: you have a major dilemma when it comes to Education: How to get the whitewashing of islam out of the schools, without altering the rest of the Indoctrination process which you favor.

Posted by: Gary at February 25, 2005 11:53 AM

Timbo:

You say, "I admit that when they did try to invoke Christian theology for their own ends it was very confused and hypocritical - but don't forget the then Pope was praying for an Axis victory."

The first part is true. It is not enough for the Klan or the Nazis to say they're Christians, or even to quote some Bible verses. The fact is that their teachings were never the teaching of any Christian church, Catholic, Orthodox, or Protestant. In contrast, the jihadists work from a broad mainstream of Islamic theology.

The second part is false. You were talking about the early Nazis. How early? It is unlikely that Pope Benedict XV (1914-1922) even heard of the Nazis, much less prayed for them. Pius XI was pope from 1922 to 1939 -- all through the rise of the Nazis. In 1937 he issued the encyclical "Mit Brennender Sorge," a clear condemnation of Nazi principles. It was pointedly issued in German, while with very, very few exceptions all other encyclical letters before and after have been issued in Latin.

The next Pope was the much-maligned Pius XII. For the real truth about how he resisted Nazism (contrary to smears that have now been widely accepted as fact), see Ronald Rychlak's book "Hitler, the War, and the Pope."

Cordially
Robert Spencer

Posted by: jihadwatch at February 26, 2005 8:13 AM

Kj
I looked at that site.... Same bunkum, different day...

The racist south has not changed their ideas one bit.
They call themselves Christians but are at odds with what Jesus taught.

-And behold, a lawyer stood up to put him to the test, saying, "Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?" He said to him, "What is written in the Law? How do you read it?" And he answered, "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind, and your neighbor as yourself." And he said to him, "You have answered correctly; do this, and you will live." But he, desiring to justify himself, said to Jesus, "And who is my neighbor?" Jesus replied, "A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and he fell among robbers, who stripped him and beat him and departed, leaving him half dead. Now by chance a priest was going down that road, and when he saw him he passed by on the other side. So likewise a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. But a Samaritan, as he journeyed, came to where he was, and when he saw him, he had compassion. He went to him and bound up his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he set him on his own animal and brought him to an inn and took care of him. And the next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper, saying, 'Take care of him, and whatever more you spend, I will repay you when I come back.' Which of these three, do you think, proved to be a neighbor to the man who fell among the robbers?" He said, "The one who showed him mercy." And Jesus said to him, "You go, and do likewise." -
(Luke 10:25-37 ESV)

Posted by: Bar at February 26, 2005 2:06 PM

Per KJ...

Oh yeah, Hitler wasn't a Christian; everybody knows that he was a Buddhist. Funny, you "forgot" to explain away the SS uniform belt buckles that I mentioned, but you probably "didn't have time" to waste on actually answering me. I understand. It's hard when truth is against you, but with the right amount of bluster and bullshit, you can prevail.

========

Actually, KJ, the Nazis were a two-tiered organization, with blue-collar right-wing masses and a rather lefty neo-pagan leadership/elite. The SS exemplified this latter group, influenced largely by Himmler's ideal of an agrarian volk.

=========

Per KJ:

The KKK burned crosses because they were using Christian symbolism. The hoods and robes are also part of Christian symbols (and still used today by mainstream Christians in parts of Spain.)

========

Actually, the buring cross is a Scottish symbol, suggesting a Presbyterian influence, not Baptist. The burning cross was a call to rally the clan in defense of the land.

=========

Per KJ:

They call themselves "Knights"... ALL of the old knights were Christians.

==========

Actually, KJ, I think you will find that the "knights" were Roman Catholic, a religious sect that, to my knowledge, is generally excluded when one discusses "Christians" in this day and age...

===========

Per KJ:

But you actually sometimes have the audacity to go farther and claim that Timothy McVeigh, Adolph Hitler, etc. etc. were not just "not conservative" but that they were liberal. Of course. And the Jihadi parallel is “Bin Laden is really an Israeli agent” and “The bombers were working for Mossad.”… LOL.

============

Politically, Hitler was a populist -- give the people what they want, or at least what you can convince them they want. Economically, he employed Keynesian theory, making large state/public expenditures to push the economy forward, a hallmark of a liberal economic theory.
His government was a sprawling quasi-nanny state, with subsidized child creches and intrusive legal entities and regulations. The Gestapo had much more in common with the NKVD than MI-5 or the FBI. Arguably, Hitler was more left than right, at least in his policies, if not his expounded politics, per se. It is important to watch what a politician does, as opposed to what he or she says.

Posted by: Cthulhu at February 27, 2005 3:20 PM