What is the Verbal Equivalent of a Raised Middle Finger?

 Express Yourself!

On HuffPost today a wonderfully nasty piece seemingly aimed at proving that some academics have no clue when it comes to free speech.

Anti-Muslim Extremist Video Calls for Counter-narrative by Mainstream Americans 

Many Americans would agree that a video portraying a religion’s most revered prophet as a pedophile, sexual deviant, and ruthless criminal shocks the conscience.

Stop right there! According to the Sunnah, and the most reliable hadith, by today’s standard Muhammad WAS a pedophile, sexual deviant and ruthless criminal; One sanctioned by “God” but still, a pedophile, sexual deviant and ruthless criminal. The same can be said of various Biblical ‘heroes’, though not all in the same person typically speaking.

From the start we are offered an emotional rant designed to shame us into ‘being good’; Islamists can declare simple truth in a way that makes a person feel like it s the most heinous pack of lies ever told, yet it remains the simple truth!

That it was created with the express intent to malign a faith followed by over a billion people worldwide only adds insult to injury.

No, my dear, your “peaceful” co-religionists used it as an excuse, months after the facts, to add injuries to an insult! In the West’s book that makes them savage barbarians not worthy of respect out of their slave-hold nations and in the light of civilized standards. Murdering an ambassador is just one step short of assassinating a head of state, and is surely an act of war if done by a state actor!

Thus, the video created by Basseley Nakoula, an ex-felon convicted of fraud, and Steven Klein, founder of Courageous Christians United that promotes anti-Mormon, anti-Catholic and anti-Muslim literature, predictably triggered anti-American protests across the Middle East.

It is only “predictable” in that your “offended” co-religionists are so immature that they cannot understand that when any human life is placed next to “insulting the ‘Prophet’” a moral human will stamp a picture of Mohammed nude into pig shit before they would let that human die; any human, Muslim, non-Muslim, Pagan, gay or straight! Get It?

Media coverage of the protests shortsightedly focuses on formalistic arguments defending unpopular speech. Instead, Americans should do what the First Amendment intended — offer a counter narrative in the market place of ideas that showcases America’s tolerance, pluralism, and rich diversity.

Media coverage of the savage idiocy? The coverage of the evil dogs who pretend religious outrage in order to outrage the lives and bodies of those whom God created?

I say that coverage is right on track. There is only one answer to an extortionate thug – it is a two part answer and the second part goes like this, “…and the Horse You Rode In On!”

Many Americans fail to appreciate that this inflammatory video is not viewed by Muslims abroad in a vacuum. Indeed, it follows on the heels of a Quran-burning by a radical Christian pastor in Florida, urination on Qurans by U.S. troops, opposition to mosque building across the United States, police surveillance of Muslim students and mosque-goers across the East Coast, and offensive campaign rhetoric accusing American Muslims en masse of disloyalty — all of which contradict America’s proclaimed values of religious freedom, equal protection, and respect for diversity.

Most Muslims outside the U.S. fail to appreciate that your ‘inflammations’ are not our problem; your buddies desperate need to learn how to “let the god’s revenge themselves” they are making our problem!

If your pet theory on American values were correct it would have been an evil act to out Nazis in the 1930’s for subversive actions. Case dismissed with prejudice.

Thus, Muslims abroad do not view the American-made hate film as merely an expressive act by a lone actor protected by the First Amendment. Rather it is part of a broader American assault on the Islamic faith wherein Muslims are expected to take it on the chin and smile.

As if the West should care! The only way Islamists, groups or nations, can cause trouble is by using the West’s technology and tactics against us; And as Iraq showed us twice; using the weapons is a far cry from knowing how to fight!

The only reason there is a problem at all is that the West has the mercy not to pave over every Islamist-supporting country as soon as they make it clear which side – humanity or Islam – they have chosen. Face it, you are an instrument of the ‘non-Islam’aphobia’ industry!

Coupled with the dearth of videos, speeches, and public acts by average Americans proclaiming their respect for Islam and their acceptance of Muslims as equal compatriots, Muslims abroad are left questioning whether defense of free speech is pretext for condoning bigotry. For if all you hear and see from America is hateful speech, selective targeting and counterterrorism enforcement against Muslims, and shameless Muslim-bashing by politicians, then calls to protect freedom of speech unsurprisingly fall on deaf ears.

Oh, blow it out your MemriTV! Anyone can go to this site, MemriTV.com and see Middle Eastern TV translated; it is an eye-opener to be sure! The worst of the worst of the worst of Fred Phelps’ hateful drivel would be tame by the standards of many of the commentators, Imams and children speaking for themselves and not as characters in a show. One Saudi boy speaking of how evil the Jews are reminded me frighteningly of that freaky blond kid from the Jesus Camp movie; frightening because this was a mainstream kid-show there!!!

By harping on protecting unpopular speech as a constitutional right, we are missing an opportunity to show the world that despite our bigots and crazies, which exist in every nation and religion, America is in fact a tolerant, pluralistic society that celebrates its diversity. Indeed this is the very reason immigrants continue to flock to our shores.

Then they better cash in their tickets, someone sold them the wrong bill of goods! People do not come here to be left alone to be just the way they were back home; they come to become what they can when the old patterns are no longer forced on them, and other people are willing to let them assimilate; all things that do not exist in the Muslim world by the way.

While some Americans may take offense at having to prove they are not racists or bigots simply because a small number of Americans are, they do not hesitate to demand the same of Muslims every time a handful of Muslims commit a violent or offensive act. When a Muslim terrorist attempts to harm Americans or burns an American flag, should Muslims in America publicly condemn such acts or can they assume that the guilt of one will not be imputed onto the entire religion? If a few thousand Muslims, out of hundreds of millions, in Middle Eastern countries attack U.S. Embassies, must Muslims in America issue press releases condemning these acts of violence and proclaiming their commitment to American values? And if they don’t, will their loyalty to the United States be questioned?

When a co-religionist commits a heinous act in the name of your mutual faith then you should feel a deep up-welling of shame and horror, and absolutely need to show everyone you can that your faith, your truth, is coming from somewhere more holy than that!!! You should not have the breath to spare to worry about what we want you to do or not do about it, you should be feeling your faith demanding proof – instead you shame non-Muslims for crying when humans are bleeding.

If the answer is yes, then it is incumbent upon all of us to question why we are willing to impose on Muslims the obligation to individually prove their innocence from bad acts of other Muslims, whether here or abroad, but yet refuse to impose the same obligation on ourselves when American hate groups and Christian extremists rhetorically and physically attack Muslims.

Personally, I expect every person who claims to be ‘devout’ to walk the walk, talk the talk and to always have the fruit of their faith, whatever it may be, taste sweet to living souls.

Most Americans do not support desecrating holy books, portraying others’ prophets as pedophiles and sadists, and preaching hate. But unless Americans of diverse backgrounds speak up to accurately represent our country; Muslims abroad are exposed only to our vilest citizens.

I am still waiting for someone to tell me just which scenes in that trailer, other than the bit about someone else making up the Qur’an and feeding it to Mohammed, are distortions or inserts into the actual text of the Qur’an, Sunnah and Bukhari and Muslim hadith!

We should not allow bigots like Nakoula and Klein to be America’s spokespersons to the world. The best way to protect free speech is to proffer an accurate counter-narrative into the marketplace of ideas.

Otherwise our silence will be interpreted as condoning hate.

In places without free speech, they won’t get it, and places where they do have it, we don’t have to explain; chill out.

Now Virginia, here is the really scary part; the place where you find out what this crazy woman does for a living:

Sahar Aziz is an associate professor at Texas Wesleyan School of Law where she teaches national security and constitutional litigation. She is a fellow at the Institute for Social Policy and Understanding. Her scholarship can be found at: http://ssrn.com/author=1459001 S

Jesus, Buddha and Mohammed All Wept

Dearborn Michigan Arab Festival Enforces Sharia Law: Christians Be Silent or Be Mobbed

bugs-bunny-minuteman-jihad-crusade-islamists

Having lived in New Orleans a number of years and having spent a lot of time observing Jackson Square, where all the Tarot and Palm readers hang out, I have seen a great many Christian street preachers at work. Many of them are obnoxious and some are positively toxic and flout the law left and right because the “rightness” of their faith has convinced them that they can do no wrong in the service of their god.

On the other hand many are sincere, faith-feeling folk with a great inner love and compassion for their fellow man; whether I agreed with their message or not, such people were never offensive to me. But, other than the few who flouted the law, like the fellow with the megaphone from Radio Shack who already knew it was illegal but used it for over an hour until TOLD by the police not to use it, only then did he comply; and repeated this tactic with another shift of police later in the day! Then there was the man who stood on the steps of the Saint Louise Cathedral during service and preached (to the square, back to the church, I guess this made it ok in his mind) a hellfire and damnation rant that included just about everyone in the square, including the parishioners in the building behind him, as hell-bound sinners in need of his message for their soul’s sake.

The fun thing about freedom of speech though, others were free to answer back! It is not right to disrupt someone’s legal speech, but responding is certainly ok! I answered a few myself when they crossed the line. I went toe to toe with the megaphone man and with greater volume (thank you theater training) gave him hell for not having enough passion in Christ to preach the message with his own lungs, relying on devil spawned technology to shove his words into unwilling ears. Yes Virginia, I can have an attitude, but I always have fun! I have also stood BETWEEN an obnoxious but legal preacher and a bunch of immature Pagan types who wanted to mess with him in ways that were more obnoxious than what he had done himself… Hypocrisy is never fun to watch and the Square was my professional home and I defended it.

The thing is though, this was all verbal, in 8 years I never saw anyone who wasn’t obviously mentally disturbed or blind drunk every try, note I said try not succeed, in initiating violence or mob intimidation tactics. The video that follows shows something very different from anything I ever witnessed, regardless of the religion of the preacher or the crowd.

I would want to talk to a lawyer but, I do believe that the actions of the crowd, and its instigator/leaders, can be seen as an active, spontaneous, conspiracy to deny the preacher his civil rights! Recast the scene with a black man preaching to white townsfolk about joining his church in 1945 Alabama and it would appear a heinous violation of the preacher’s identity as a human being by a hateful, bigoted mob. The man even appears Arab, but, for daring to preach any “gospel” but theirs he is all but set upon and the mob is allowed to intimidate the man to leave a public space where he has been exercising his rights… If this video is not a bit Orwellian to you, then Virginia, you just have not been paying attention.

Act 17 Apologetics is, in my opinion a bit aggressive but, they come nowhere near crossing the line on first amendment rights to share religious “opinion” in the public square, as such they are to be defended in their rights as vehemently as any co-religionist of ALL Americans!

Frankly, the cops should have loudly told the crowd that the man had the right to preach all he wanted and that if they persisted in harrasing him to leave they would be arrested for conspiracy to violate his civil rights and any RICO/Mob related laws they could think of that might apply, now go back to your festival and have fun, or else!

Political Parties Exist to Subvert Instead of Enable the Voice of the Individual.

heretics-crusade,guy-dewhitney,partisan

My Life for Ze Party und Ze Leader!

Why is it again that, in 2010, political parties still exist? Well, other than for the implimentation of the control of a few who claim the voice of many, I don’t see much reason; member voices are given more lip service than respect from the party’s “leaders”. And, while we are attacking preconception, why a party “leader”? Would not an “impementor” be a more appropriate term for the desired function of the office.? Someome trusted to make the will of the members of the party heard effectively?

But how is that again? A party is supposed to make the voice of its X number of citizens louder than this other bunch’s equal number of voices?

Do you people out there ever completey agree with every part of “your” party’s platform? If one election cycle you do happen to agree with it all have you ever in your life seen the party hold to each and every plank after the election?
Remind me again Virginia; just WHO these parties claim to serve?

A Modestly Heretical Proposal

Get rid of the parties. No labels to hide behind, no pols in pocket of biz or party, pols un-electable without personal support from the community, pol has to listen on every issue and best of all, the most important, the pol would be judged more by accomplishments and record than by their associations.

Today there is no practical reason not to elect individual candidates directly.

Not sure you like the idea? Think about this: neither. Obama nor Palin would have ever been nominated without an agenda following party forcing them upon their supporters. Think about that for a while…

Posted with WordPress for BlackBerry.