Islamofascists Continue To Prove Fitna's Point

It seems the Islamic world will do anything to continue to prove the point that the Dutch parliamentarian was making with his new film "Fitna." The film showed a number of verses in the Koran interspersed with Islamic sermons, footage of terrorism, and Dutch newspaper headlines.

It started with liveleak.com, the first website to share the video, pulling the video from their website after only one day because of serious threats to their staff. As LiveLeak put it, "in the end the price was too high." So the response to a video showing an Islamic prediliction toward violence and terrorism is intimidation and violent threats.

A Jihadist website responded to the video by posting in Arabic that "if there is no check on the freedom of your words, then let your hearts be open to the freedom of our actions." This was along with a picture of Osama bin Laden and the World Trade Towers burning in the background. These words have been attributed to Bin Laden himself, his response to the famed Danish cartoons in a more recently released tape.

The Organization of the Islamic Conference added its voice to the criticism of the film released by the Dutch lawmaker. OIC Secretary General Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu condemned "in the strongest terms the release of the film 'Fitna' by Dutch lawmaker Geert Wilders." This is their full right, to object if they so please. But, pray tell, would it not be more productive and appropriate if the OIC were condemning clearly, constantly, and loudly the throat slitters, head choppers, and suicide bombers that murder innocents, both Muslim and non-Muslim alike, in the name of Islam?

A militant believed linked to al-Qaida's deputy chief Ayman al-Zawahri, Qari Mohammed Yusuf, told The Associated Press last week that "foreigners will be attacked. The situation will change, change, change" because of the film. Whether this is true or not is yet to be seen, but that there is truth in the film that is being proven by the Jihadist response is undoubtable. Furthermore, hundreds of Islamists staged angry protests across Pakistan over the film. This may not seem like a lot, and it is a relatively small number compared to the response to the Danish cartoons, but it does not take many people to carry out Jihad operations. The Taliban has also threatened retaliation against Dutch troops in Afghanistan.

Now comes Omar Bakri, the Libyan-based Jihadist Muslim cleric who has been barred from Britain. He makes the exact point that "Fitna" itself was making in no uncertain terms. He says exactly what Wilders film itself meant to say. Bakri did not think the film was very offensive at all. He said, "On the contrary, if we leave out the first images and the sound of the page being torn, it could be a film by the Mujahideen."

The Human Rights Council has also gotten in on the action. The U.N. Human Rights Council, which is dominated by Arab and other Muslim countries, adopted a resolution Thursday in a 21-10 vote. It said the Council was concerned about the defamation of religions and urged governments to prohibit it. Interestingly, the only religion specified as being attacked is Islam, to which eight paragraphs refer. It is well known that the Human Rights Council is a joke, and this only goes to prove it. But the response of the Arab and Muslim dominated Council should not surprise anyone. And I raise the same objection I did earlier with the OIC. Condemnations of the film were also heard from the UN Secretary General who said "there is no justification for hate speech or incitement to violence. The right of free expression is not at stake here.” Why is the right of free expression not at stake here? Is the right of free expression not at stake when Muslims sensitivities are offended? I saw the film and I personally saw no incitment to violence either. What I did see was a film depicting how the Islamic religion and its holy book are being used by the ones who are truly violent and hateful to justify their actions.

The response from the Islamic world was predictable. It is what we have come to know all too well. Empty condemnations of hate speech but hardly ever a condemnation against terrorism itself. There have also been threats and promises of violence, which we can only pray will not be fulfilled. No one has happened to be killed over this. But then again, that's why the Dutch lawmaker has a constant security detail. Al-Qaeda websites have already posted photos of Wilders with statements such as "The Dutch, enemy of Allah, has done what he threatened to do and distributed his film." Whether one fully agrees with the content of Wilder's film, or his politics, has become irrelevant. The response of the Jihadis has shown us that the free world must be willing to stand up for his right to express himself and must end the cowtowing to Islamofascist intimidation.
Tweet

Spitzer Comedy

The Spitzer scandal was and continues to be huge fodder for the comedy world.

In the most recent episode of South Park they satirically portrayed the Spitzer scandal. In the clip, Mr. Brovlovsky (Kyle's father) was the key proponent of banning cats because children were sniffing their urine in order to get high. They called it cheesing because it was "Fon to Due." Anyway, here's the clip:

Spitzer Top Ten Excuses brought to you by David Letterman:

Letterman's Top Ten Spitzer Phone Messages:

Fake Spitzer taking questions on Letterman:

Leno spoof of Hillary's 3AM phone call ad:

Compilation of Late Night Comedy on the Former Governor:

Here is a clip of a three year old explaining the Spitzer scandal:

I am sure there is more than this, but this is more than enought to give you a laugh and a sense of how the jokesters have used the scandal. It is also some comic relief from the seriousness of some of the posts below. Tweet

Fitna Removed From LiveLeak Website After Serious Threats

Liveleak.com was the first internet site to allow Fitna to be viewed on their website. They have only after one day replaced the video with what you see above. They have recieved threats to their staff, and they say they stood for what they believed in but "in the end the price was too high." This only goes to prove the point that Wilders film was making in the first place. As of now, it has been posted on Google Video. If you have not seen it, go to http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3369102968312745410&q=fitna&total=1331&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=5. After seeing the LiveLeak message, I feel it is even more important that this short film be seen. Tweet

Gore On Man Made Global Warming Skeptics

Al Gore's condescension is not surprising, but it is uncalled for. To compare those who question whether global warming is caused by man to those who say the earth is flat or that there was never a moon landing is arrogance at its height. A U.S. Senate report claimed that over 400 prominent scientists disputed man-made global warming claims in 2007. Are all these scientists really to be demeaned by some hack politician flying around in his private jet while he declares a planetary emergency? Here's the link:
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=f80a6386-802a-23ad-40c8-3c63dc2d02cb Tweet

Fitna the Movie: Geert Wilders' Film About Islam

GRAPHIC CONTENT WARNING:

Dutch Parliament Member Geert Wilders has released a controversial film about Islam which some politicians in the Netherlands tried to ban. Wilders has called the Koran, Islam's holy book, a "fascist" book that incites violence. The film is called "Fitna", a Koranic term sometimes translated as "strife". In March 2006, Mr. Wilders told the BBC that he thought that 5-15% of Dutch Muslims were sympathetic to radical Islam. "I believe we have been too tolerant of the intolerant. We should learn to become intolerant of the intolerant," he said. Because it is a Dutch film there is a focus on Theo Van Gogh and Dutch newspaper headlines. Wilders now requires a constant security detail due to threats to his life. Watch the 15 minute film for yourself and decide whether he is an Islamophobe and bigot propagating hate speech, as his opponents claim, or whether he is a brave voice that is literally putting his safety at risk to air the truth about the religion of peace. A Dutch judge is due on Friday to hear the petition of a Muslim group seeking an independent review of the film to see whether it violates hate speech laws. The petition, seen by The Associated Press Thursday at the Hague District Court, says the Dutch Islamic Federation "believes the situation of Muslims in the Netherlands today is comparable with that of our Jewish fellow-citizens in the 1930s." The federation asked for a fine of €50,000 ($79,000) per day if Wilders airs the film, and a €5,000 ($7,900) fine for each future instance of an "injuring remark."

The following is the two part interview that Wilders did with Fox News in January 2008 to discuss his movie that was just released today and is posted above.


Tweet

John McCain: "We Have Incurred A Moral Responsibility In Iraq"

Link: sevenload.com
McCain says it would be an "act of betrayal, a stain on our character as a great nation if we were to walk away from the Iraqi people and consign them to the horrendous violence, ethnic cleansing, and possibly genocide that would follow a reckless, irresponsible, and premature withdrawal." When it comes to Iraq, McCain has been more than eloquent. He may be up against Mr. Charisma Barack Obama, but I don't think he gets enough credit for speeches like these from the anti-war media, or frankly from anybody at all. All I can say is John McCain '08!

Since I mentioned Obama it seems a quote from him has gotten very little attention which should have. He made this comment before the sermons of Jeremiah Wright were released by the media. He said, "I am looking forward to a debate with John McCain. John McCain is a good man. He's an American hero. We honor his service to this nation. But he has made some bad choices about the company he keeps." Now that we know the assocations that Barack Obama keeps, an association that he very poorly explains and that he obviously has no justifiable excuse for, his words seem almost ironic, if not laughable. Tweet

Chelsea Gets Asked About Monica Lewinsky

Chelsea's response to the question:

Student who asked the question being interviewed:

This kid says that he asked the question about Lewinsky so that everyone should know about how strong Hillary was in dealing with the scandal. The idea that Hillary showed strength is stupid because all she actually did was stand by and defend her degenerate, lying, adulterous husband. The fact is, however, that it is important to point out that Hillary thinks she can now try to co-opt her husband's legacy as her own experience, when in fact her only legacy as first lady was being the most cheated on woman in America. Tweet

Another Israel Bashing Newsletter From Obama's Church

http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=59884
"Sen. Barack Obama's Chicago church published an open letter from a Palestinian activist that labels Israel an 'apartheid' regime and claims the Jewish state worked on an 'ethnic bomb' that kills 'blacks and Arabs.'...The June 10, 2007, newsletter, which is still available at Obama's church's website, identifies Baghdadi as an Arab-American activist, writer and columnist who 'acted as a Middle East advisor to the Honorable Elijah Muhammad, the founder of the Nation of Islam, as well as Minister Louis Farrakhan.' The piece is titled 'An open letter to Oprah,' referring to talk show giant Oprah Winfrey, who last year accepted an invitation to visit Israel offered to her by Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel."

Original Letter As It Appears On The Church's "Pastor's Page": http://tucc.org/upload/tuccbulletin_june10.pdf
Tweet

Israeli Defense Is Not A "Cycle" Of Violence (Flash Videos)

http://www.honestreporting.com/a/cycleOfViolence.asp/

If you have not seen it, be sure to watch an amazing MUST-SEE informative video about the Israeli-Arab conflict entitled "What Really Happened." Here's the link:

http://www.terrorismawareness.org/what-really-happened/ Tweet

CBS Exposes Clinton Bosnia Lie

Clinton acknowleged that it was a “misstatement” when she said in a major prepared foreign policy speech last week that “I remember landing under sniper fire.” But was it really a "misstatment?" No. It was a bold faced lie. Not that a Clinton lying is terribly surprising, though. Tweet

Marine's Music Video

http://www.militarytimes.com/multimedia/video/031208_marine_music/

Watch Marine Cpl. David Thibodeaux's rallying cry to stay the course. The song is entitled "I'm not ready to end the fight." Tweet

U.S Soldiers Killed In Iraq Reaches 4,000

The media is reporting that a roadside bomb killed four U.S. soldiers in Baghdad on Sunday pushing the overall American death toll in the five-year war to at least 4,000. The 4,000 figure includes eight civilians who worked for the Department of Defense.

I feel a need to respond before the media runs with this story as they have every time a 1,000 mark has been met.

First and foremost, let us wish our deepest gratitude to each and every member of the U.S. military that payed the ultimate price for freedom. These are the bravest and the finest our country has to offer. They are better then I will ever be, the ones who sacrifice so that I can live in comfort. God bless every one of them. Each death is a tragedy in and of itself, not some statistic to be cynically used by the media or anti-war organizations for political purposes. The first casualty in the battle of Iraq was no more less tragic than than the ones that happened to land on a thousand mark. Every life is precious. That is what we are fighting for. The very value of life itself. It would not be appropriate to politicize this news story. It would be the ultimate wrong. Just as it is the ultimate wrong for those who will inevitably use this artificial marking as an occasion to argue for surrender. Let not those who have lost their lives die in vain. Tweet

Bill Clinton Is Not Worthy Of Being Compared To Joe McCarthy

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080322/ap_on_el_pr/obama_patriotism
Excerpt From Article: "Merrill 'Tony' McPeak said he was astonished and disappointed by recent comments Bill Clinton made while speculating about a general election between Obama's Democratic rival, Hillary Rodham Clinton, and Republican John McCain. Standing next to Obama on stage at a campaign stop in southern Oregon, the retired Air Force chief of staff repeated Bill Clinton's comments aloud to a silent audience...McPeak also had made off-the-cuff remarks to reporters Friday in comparing the former president's comments with the actions of Joseph McCarthy, the 1950s communist-hunting senator. 'I grew up, I was going to college when Joe McCarthy was accusing good Americans of being traitors, so I've had enough of it,' McPeak said. [Howard] Wolfson [Hillary campaign spokesman] called that comparison outrageous and called for a retraction. 'I think most Democrats were shocked to learn that a two-term Democratic president was compared to Joseph McCarthy,' he said."

Response From SteveLackner.com:

Merrill 'Tony' McPeak is a former chief of staff of the Air Force and currently a co-chair of Obama’s presidential campaign. Recently the General used a slur that is usually reserved for conservatives on none other than Bill Clinton. Bill Clinton had said, “I think it would be a great thing if we had an election year where you had two people who loved this country and were devoted to the interest of this country.” McPeak took this as an assault on Barack Obama’s patriotism, and perhaps justifiably so, and went on to call Bill Clinton one of the dirtiest words in politics. He said that it “sounds more like McCarthy. I grew up, I was going to college when Joe McCarthy was accusing good Americans of being traitors, so I’ve had enough of it.”

Perhaps the reason that McPeak thinks that McCarthy was out looking for “good Americans” to accuse is precisely because he was in college. The liberal intellectual elite and the media were not fond of McCarthy, just as they are not fond of George W. Bush today. McPeak and his college professors may have been opponents of Joe McCarthy, but that is not to say that the Republican Senator had no supporters. The late William F. Buckley Jr. was a supporter of Joe McCarthy. Robert Kennedy worked for McCarthy and John F. Kennedy called him “a great American patriot.” In January 1954 he had a 50 percent approval rating, with only 29 percent disapproving. But who his friends and who his enemies were is less important than whether the McCarthy name should still be a pejorative over sixty years after his death.

Liberals have used this slur for far too long now. Without any knowledge of history they draw analogies between the 1950’s Senator and modern day political foes as if the man’s name were synonymous with fascist. But now they have turned fire against their own, and in a political tiff, Bill Clinton of all people has been compared to Joe McCarthy. The questions this raises in my mind are twofold. Is McCarthy’s name still worthy of being used as an insult by liberals against their opponents? And is there really any valid or worthy comparison between Slick Willie and Tail-Gunner Joe?

Before I attempt to humbly answer those questions allow me to point out that this label of McCarthyism is often still used today just as it was when McCarthy was alive. In the past few weeks alone, aside from McPeak, liberals have used this insult in astounding ways. On March 3rd Evan Thomas published an article for Newsweek in which he wrote that a recent Princeton University gossip website that included postings such as “Most Overrated Princeton Student” and “Sluttiest Girl” was “modern-day McCarthyism.” He spent multiple paragraphs ranting about the evil of Joseph McCarthy and the accusations against those “who were usually innocent.” Thomas probably went so far as to open up his high school textbook when writing this article. The liberal Andrew Sullivan wrote that an op-ed which stated that Obama’s association with his radical preacher “raises legitimate questions about Mr. Obama's fundamental beliefs about his country” was “guilt by association - especially uttered in the dark, McCarthyite tones” that apparently “says more about the paranoia of the writer than the patriotism of his subject.” Barack himself used the phrase “guilt by association” in reference to the Jeremiah Wright controversy. When a ridiculous college website and a legitimate op-ed are called McCarthyite it should certainly give you a hint of just exactly how little meaning that word actually has when thrown around by those on the Left.

One of my favorite recent references to McCarthy comes from Cindy Pearlman who wrote on March 23, 2008, as appeared on the Chicago Sun Times website, that “Lucille Ball faced her own red scare in 1953, when she was subpoenaed by Sen. Joseph McCarthy's House Un-American Activities Committee because she had registered to vote in the Communist party primary election in 1936.” Ms. Pearlman has very little understanding of the legislative branch of the federal government. Senator Joseph McCarthy, as a Senator, could not subpoena anyone to a House committee. This nuance is lost on most people, not just journalists.

So now let me answer the first question I posed. Is McCarthy’s name still worthy of being used as an insult by liberals against their opponents? Not at all. McCarthy was a Senator, Cindy, and he did not hunt Hollywood Reds but rather brought up the issue of communists, at the birth of the cold war, working for the United States government. Keeping communists out of government so that Chairman Stalin’s Intelligence services could not receive secret information, or so that U.S. interests would not be sabotaged, was logical. It was not an issue of undertones or overtones. It was an issue of American security. The continuous use of McCarthy’s name as some form of childish insult is ridiculous in light of all the new information about what was in actuality a large network of communists working for the government before McCarthy rose to power and fame in the Senate. Simply look up the Venona Decrypts, secret Army intelligence decryptions that were released in the 1990’s, and you’ll be amazed at the information you find about the extent of communist infiltration in our government. And you do not need to be Ann Coulter to believe this. George Mason University History Professor Arthur Herman writes that the “standard claim that McCarthy had never exposed a real Communist in the government” is “demonstrably false.” Did McCarthy sometimes use excesses in either rhetoric or tactics? Perhaps. But was their a real threat of communist subversives within the government that McCarthy was working to root out? Certainly. So enough with the nonsensical McCarthyism labels.

Though it is interesting to point out that a Democrat, let alone a former Democrat President, is being compared to Joe McCarthy. Are they anything alike? I don’t think so. Bill Clinton has been accused of being a draft dodger when it came to Vietnam, and it is beyond doubt that with the help of influential friends he managed to get into the Arkansas ROTC just 11 days before his induction. Meanwhile, McCarthy commissioned into the U.S. Marines Corps even though as a sitting judge he was exempt from military service. He served as an intelligence briefing officer for a dive bomber squadron in the Solomon Islands and Bougainville and also as a base legal officer at Marine Corps Air Station El Toro, California. Bill Clinton is a proven liar. Joe McCarthy is being proven to be more and more right as time goes on. The Clintons have a reputations of moving with the wind, of following the polls. Joe McCarthy was known for never backing down from his convictions and always ready to fight for what he believed was a noble cause.

Howard Wolfson, a Hillary campaign spokesman, said that "most Democrats were shocked to learn that a two-term Democratic president was compared to Joseph McCarthy." Republicans should be equally shocked, because Bill Clinton will never measure up to Joe McCarthy. Republicans must rally together and proclaim that labeling Bill Clinton a McCarthyite is indeed uncalled for. The usage of that phrase at all should be dropped as an insult in political arguments. It is the refuge of a fool to rely on a one word phrase without actually knowing the context and history. At the very least, it is time that people raise their voices in objection when they hear the phrase McCarthyite being used so liberally, pun intended. Tweet