► Show Top 10 Hot Links

Posts Tagged ‘Delectable’

Bret Stephens Agrees: Obama Is An Anti-Human Rights President

by WrathofG-d ( 228 Comments › )
Filed under Barack Obama, China, Democratic Party, Guest Post, Iran, Israel, Politics, Progressives, Tranzis, World at October 20th, 2009 - 9:56 am

Blogmocracy In Action!

Guest Post by “Delectable”

I have repeatedly stated that Obama is at war with human rights around the globe.  On Blogmocracy, I have called him an anti-human rights president.  He backs the oppression of humanity in every country on earth, without any exception I am aware of.  This great article, written by Bret Stephens, explains this well.

Nobody should get too hung up over President Obama’s decision, reported by Der Spiegel over the weekend, to cancel plans to attend next month’s 20th anniversary celebration of the fall of the Berlin Wall. Germany’s reunited capital has already served his purposes; why should he serve its?

China: In February, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton landed in Beijing with a conciliating message about the country’s human-rights record. “Our pressing on those [human-rights] issues can’t interfere on the global economic crisis, the global climate change crisis and the security crisis,” she said.

In fact, there has been no pressing whatsoever on human rights. President Obama refused to meet with the Dalai Lama last month, presumably so as not to ruffle feathers with the people who will now be financing his debts. In June, Liu Xiaobo, a leading signatory of the pro-democracy Charter 08 movement, was charged with “inciting subversion of state power.” But as a U.S. Embassy spokesman in Beijing admitted to the Journal, “neither the White House nor Secretary Clinton have made any public comments on Liu Xiaobo.”

Sudan: In 2008, candidate Obama issued a statement insisting that “there must be real pressure placed on the Sudanese government. We know from past experience that it will take a great deal to get them to do the right thing. . . . The U.N. Security Council should impose tough sanctions on the Khartoum government immediately.”

Exactly right. So what should Mr. Obama do as president? Yesterday, the State Department rolled out its new policy toward Sudan, based on “a menu of incentives and disincentives” for the genocidal Sudanese government of Omar Bashir. It’s the kind of menu Mr. Bashir will languidly pick his way through till he dies comfortably in his bed.

Iran: Mr. Obama’s week-long silence on Iran’s “internal affairs” following June’s fraudulent re-election was widely noted. Not so widely noted are the administration’s attempts to put maximum distance between itself and human-rights groups working the Iran beat.

Earlier this year, the State Department denied a grant request for New Haven, Conn.-based Iran Human Rights Documentation Center. The Center maintains perhaps the most extensive record anywhere of Iran’s 30-year history of brutality. The grant denial was part of a pattern: The administration also abruptly ended funding for Freedom House’s Gozaar project, an online Farsi- and English-language forum for discussing political issues.

It’s easy to see why Tehran would want these groups de-funded and shut down. But why should the administration, except as a form of pre-emptive appeasement?

In Massachusetts not long ago, I found myself driving behind a car with “Free Tibet,” “Save Darfur,” and “Obama 08” bumper stickers.  I wonder if it will ever dawn on the owner of that car that at least one of those stickers doesn’t belong.

There is more – please read it all!

It is important to be aware that Obama is a self-styled progressive.  The anti-human rights nature of our progressive president shows the cognitive dissonance of the trans-nationalists (or “tranzis”) who pretend to believe in universal ideals of “hope” and “change,” only to then later stand for stagnation and despair when they enter office.
It thus is no surprise that Obama should follow this anti-human rights pattern.  And it is no surprise to me that Obama refuses to use his UN veto against the Goldstone defamation report against Israel. He thus will apparently be pushing for action on the Goldstone Report – including possible sanctions against Israel (a democractic state which adheres to the highest ideals of human rights) – while blocking sanctions against Iran (a thugocracy that shoots its citizens in the streets and rapes and tortures its prisoners).
This is where Obama stands today.  He has revealed himself as the anti-human rights president.  The good news is that others are starting to see this.

Fisking The Fisker: “Little Bulldogs”

by WrathofG-d ( 437 Comments › )
Filed under Blogmocracy, Blogwars, Guest Post, Islamists, LGF, Religion at October 1st, 2009 - 3:27 pm

BLOGMOCRACY IN ACTION!

Guest Post:  “Delectable”

________________________________________________

Earlier today, Little Green Footballs linked to a piece on Little Bulldogs that claimed to “fisk” Robert Spencer. (Little Green Footballs link: http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/34798_Fisking_Spencer ). [copy & paste to get around the redirect]

The article that Little Bulldogs claimed to “fisk” concerned Robert Spencer’s coverage of a national day of prayer for Muslims on the Capitol lawn in D.C. on September 24th.

Little Bulldogs’ analysis centered on the fact that Robert Spencer called for Muslims to repudiate Jihad if they really wanted to be seen as ‘peaceful.’ Little Bulldogs claimed that Muslims have no need to repudiate Jihad in order to be peaceful – that the participation in a peaceful prayer on the White House lawn was enough ‘proof’ of peacefulness. Little Bulldogs claimed that the prayer at the White House was never an act of ‘politics,’ but was rather an act of proof that Muslims are human beings.

He claimed it was no different than Jews or Christians praying on the Capitol lawn – i.e., a religious and not a political act. He then further compared Islamic law (Sharia) to Jewish law (Halacha), and claimed that some Jews (as Muslims) want to see Halacha spread to the USA, but there is no problem with this desire, as long as the desire is only peaceful.

The problem with this analysis is summed up in a comment on Little Bulldogs

Jews do not call for Halacha to be imposed anywhere but Israel, except specifically in the time of the Messiah. And in Israel, only a small fringe want Halacha imposed on the state. (see: National Union party – 3 MK’s)

In contradistinction, the Messiah or “end of days” is not a requirement for Sharia law to be imposed on the earth.

—————–

Judaism never was an expansionist faith, and there is a prohibition against proselytizing. The same is not true of Islam (or Christianity, but at least Christianity had a reformation and ‘Western’ culture underwent an Enlightenment).

….[i]t was clear the major prayer session was to show Muslims are at least peaceful. One would think a good way of showing such peacefulness would be to denounce Islamic extremism, and make clear that the goal is not to impose Sharia on others.

——————

The Quran reciter at the D.C. event was Sheikh Ahmed Dewidar.

Sheikh Ahmed Dewidar of the Islamic Center in Mid-Manhattan, has stood next to President Bush at Ground Zero in Manhattan and condemned the 9/11 attacks. But critics have also pointed to statements he made in Arabic, translated into English by the Middle East Media Research Institute, that Zionists control the American media, economy, and government.

Source

and on MEMRI:

Source

This is the dude who led the prayer services.

In summary:

(1) It is clear that Sheikh Ahmed Dewidar, who read from the Quran at the prayer session on Capitol Hill, was no moderate. He in fact is an open antisemite who has interviews on Ikwan.com (the Muslim Brotherhood website). As such, Robert Spencer’s concerns about the event on the White House lawn are justified.

(2) In general, this is just but one example of the hazards of post-modernism/progressivism. I have no doubt that Little Bulldogs believes he (or she) means well. But Little Bulldogs is operating under a base assumption of moral relativism. This base assumption is that people are all people, who want to live, work, breathe, and co-exist. And the assumption further goes on that Islam is thus no different than Judaism or Christianity – these religions are all the same and all seek coexistence.

However, what is clear is that again and again, those who claim to represent Islam are not ‘moderates’ by any stretch of the imagination, and absolutely do not seek co-existence and harmony. Maybe it is possible for Islam to reform itself and eventually become a religion characterized by a mainstream that believes in coexistence and tolerance. Maybe it is possible for Islam to eventually embrace modernity. I make no representations about the future and what is ultimately possible. That is beyond my knowledge. But we have to live based upon reality as it exists, and not as we wish it to exist. Sadly, far too many in the world prefer to live in a world they wish existed.

The path to peace and tolerance is through a recognition of painful realities. Once Muslims recognize the non-moderate status of those who are their leaders, they can perhaps start down the road towards modernity and reformation. Post-modernism/progressivism delays this necessary step that Muslims must make.

Let this be a lesson to us all: Post-modernism/progressivism seeks to obscure reality, and thus is an impediment towards peace and harmony.

Little Deflated Football