► Show Top 10 Hot Links

Posts Tagged ‘Pamela Geller’

My response to those who claim it is a ‘human rights violation’ to protest mosques.

by Delectable ( 195 Comments › )
Filed under Free Speech, Islam at July 23rd, 2010 - 4:30 pm

I wrote the following in response to a terribly misguided post, written by Jeffrey Imm, of the group Responsible for Equality and Liberty (R.E.A.L.). A related post was linked to (and praised) by a certain husky pony-tailed blogger, which should tell you all you need to know about it! To boil it down, Mr. Imm believes that it is a ‘human rights violation’ to protest religious institutions, including those run by the Muslim Brotherhood. So he, in response, affirmatively defends the right of Muslims (including extremist Muslims, such as the Muslim Brotherhood) to worship wherever they want, including at Ground Zero. Below is an email I wrote in response. Please use the content in this email as helpful information whenever these topics come up with friends, colleagues, and/or family.

———————

To R.E.A.L.,

You are seeking to deny the legitimate moral and constitutional right that I and others have to protesting hate mosques being in our neighborhoods.
 
I have the first amendment right to protest, including protesting religious institutions. The problem is not that SIOA, Westboro Baptist Church, or MAS (the Muslim American Society, an organization that is considered a Muslim Brotherhood front group) protests a synagogue, mosque, or church. “Holy places” are not beyond reproach, and there is just as much a right to protest a church, synagogue, and/or mosque as there is a right to protest a community center. This is simple and basic American constitutional law that you (as a former FBI agent) were sworn to uphold.
 
Certainly, no one has the right to use intimidation tactics to block a mosque that include violence and/or threats of violence. I never said otherwise (and no one of merit would). However, I have every right to lobby a public official, or private individuals, and express displeasure about a new church, mosque, and/or synagogue being built. This is a basic American right that I enjoy as a citizen of this country. Yet you oppose any and all protests against mosques – even peaceful ones using no intimidation tactics.
 
When al-Awda/Code Pink/MAS/Adalah/etc protests outside synagogues and/or Jewish events (as they have done), I never think that the mere act of their protesting outside a house of worship is itself violative of human rights and decency. If in fact Judaism were a human rights violating faith, then perhaps Jews would deserve to be picketed! (but obviously, since the opposite is true, al-Awda/Code Pink/MAS/Adalah/etc are the haters) No, my problem with these organizations is the message found within their protests. In contradistinction, you appear to believe that simply protesting a house of worship is ipso facto evidence of a “human rights violation” (and/or hate speech) taking place. That is not only absurd and offensive, is the sort of reasoning that ultimately advocates on behalf of blasphemy laws.

This is not about whether or not the government is or should banning the building of a new mosque/synagogue/church. No – that is a separate matter altogether (and oddly enough, we may be in agreement on that matter).

The problem in China, Egypt, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, et. al., is not one of protests of churches and/or synagogues. It is that the governments themselves ban churches/synagogues, and/or that the citizens themselves are violent towards certain religious and ethnic groups.

In fact, I believe that the USA needs to expand the definition of “terrorist organization” to include the Muslim Brotherhood and MAS. This would be most accurate, in light of Steve Emerson’s extensive work (as well as the body of evidence uncovered in the Holy Land Foundation trial), and then apply those laws when/if MAS wants to open a new mosque. But until then, I don’t think there is a way of writing a law that could survive constitutional protection that would be narrowly tailored enough to simply block MAS from opening a mosque, simply due to the fact that it is MAS, without then preventing me from building a synagogue. (Don’t believe me? Check out Geert Wilders’s trial in Holland for “hate speech,” to see how hate speech laws can go awry.) If you want to stop a mosque, you can do so legitimately due to zoning concerns and/or the loudness of the Shahada (call to prayer five times a day). However, if the zoning checks out, I believe you are really out of luck if you seek to have the government prevent a mosque from being built.

However, it is ludicrous to claim that somehow when Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer/SIOA protest a mosque, this is leading us down the path of Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, China, etc. No, it is R.E.A.L. that is leading us down the path of China, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, etc, by claiming that SIOA and others should be condemned (and/or prevented) for simply exercising their first amendment right to lobby and protest mosques.

This is about the right of individuals to protest a religious institution, which you impliedly – from all you have written in the past few weeks – believe they do not deserve.

After all, Pamela Gellar, Robert Spencer, and SIOA are not the government. They have no ability to prevent a mosque from being allowed in one place or another. What they are doing is ultimately lobbying to prevent future mosque building – which is their right. If you have a problem with the message they have (i.e., if you disagree that MAS is a bad organization, or that Islam is a bad religion), then feel free to explain why you disagree with them. Otherwise, even Dove Church has the right to say “Islam is of the Devil,” just as Westboro Baptist Church has the right to say “Judaism is of the devil.” And I have that same right to say that Westboro Baptist Church and Dove Church are hateful institutions, due to the messages they convey. It’s called a marketplace of ideas and freedom of speech – something I thought R.E.A.L. stood for.
 
In fact, I thought R.E.A.L. stood for human rights, consistency, and the constitution. However, your abject rejection of freedom of speech shows that R.E.A.L. is not consistent in support for universal human rights.
 
I am disappointed with what you have turned R.E.A.L. into. This is no longer a human rights organization when it does not stand for basic freedom of speech.
Rodan Update: In related news, a massive blow to the Islamic Imperialist Colonization of America has been dealt.
The board of trustees of a Staten Island Catholic Church have rejected the controversial sale of a church building to a Muslim group looking to open a mosque.
 
The collapse of the deal – which would have transferred the vacant convent of St. Margaret Mary Church to the Muslim American Society for $750,000 – came amid a national controversy over efforts to construct a mosque near Ground Zero.
Americans finally have stood up and said no to Islamic Imperialism!

LTC Allen West and the South Florida Cystic Fibrosis Foundation

by savage ( 144 Comments › )
Filed under Uncategorized at July 20th, 2010 - 11:30 am

A letter from Col Allen West regarding the South Florida Cystic Fibrosis Foundation.

Hat tip to Pamela Geller and GCP for this.

Bill, Danielle, and Chip, at about 1210 pm today I received a call from Ms Chris Landshut, (954)739-5007, Executive Director of the South Florida Cystic Fibrosis Foundation. After reintroducing herself to me she was uncomfortable telling me of a situation that has arisen reference the nomination of Angela and myself as a South Florida Finest Couple.

She informed me that she has received complaints from certain individuals who have threatened to withdraw their support to the Cystic Fibrosis gala event if Angela and I are honored. She humbly asked if I would agree to step down and allow the event to proceed and not disrupt the support to the foundation. These individuals have called and complained to the National Foundation decrying “politicizing” of the event.

In accepting the nomination, Angela and I consented to raise $10K for the Cystic Fibrosis foundation, our opportunity to give back to our community. However, not wanting to cause the foundation to lose what I was told could be up to $200K I consented to Ms Landshut that Angela and I would step down and not participate in the event.

Bill, you are the Chairman of this gala event and therefore I would like a formal letter of apology, not to me, but rather to my wife Dr Angela Graham-West explaining this situation. I do not care how people attack me but my wife is another matter.

I know that this situation revolves around my congressional candidacy but this event has honored political figures before. I felt that our service to this Nation and local commnity warranted our nomination.

It has come to my attention that the McCloskey and Levy families are the donors who have threatened to withdraw support due to prodding from the wife of Congressman Ron Klein. I find this reprehensible, disgusting, despicable, and petulant….but indicative of the hideous side of South Florida politics which I condemn. There is proof of this, to include an email trail, and I would appreciate your honesty when this becomes a topic of inquiry.

I must now contact all those friends whom I had asked to assist us in raising the requisite funds and inform them of this issue. I pray you are prepared.

I hold no angst against you as the Chairman of the event, Ms Landshut, or the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation. However, I am highly upset with those who would blackmail the CF Foundation in order to play politics. Steadfast and Loyal, LTC(R) Allen B West

This is crap from a bunch of leftist scumbags that put politics above saving lives. Such B.S.

You don’t play politics with the lives of people, like these kids Christina and Ali.

We got mail!

by savage ( 370 Comments › )
Filed under Blogmocracy, Blogwars, LGF at July 1st, 2010 - 2:00 pm

From Robert Stacy McCain himself.

Here it is, enjoy…

Listen, I would have liked to comment on this:
http://www.theblogmocracy.com/2010/06/28/the-insane-ramblings-of-rev-manning/

Your comments are members-only, however, so I’m e-mailing you instead.

It ought to be obvious to you by now that Charles Johnson is deceiving his readers about his motives — posturing as The Great Crusader Against Conservative Racism — just as he is deceiving them about me. His idiocy about the SiteMeter login is merely Johnson’s latest imposition on the gullibility of LGF readers who share his delusion that everything knowable can be known via the Internet.

Here is the SiteMeter URL for the original Blogspot site:
http://www.sitemeter.com/?a=stats&s=s29othermccain

As you can see, the login is simply “othermccain.” Smitty joined as co-blogger in March 2009, about a year after I began blogging full-time. It was Smitty (an IT specialist by trade) who convinced me, after much nagging, that we should switch the blog to a custom WordPress platform.

Because this move was Smitty’s idea and he was more familiar with the requirements thereof, I left the technical wizardry to him, including the installation of SiteMeter. We couldn’t migrate the SiteMeter from the old blog to the new site, so Smitty created a new account, setting the “start” number for total visits at the new site as the 12/30/09 total from the old site. (We launched full-time on the new site 1/1/10.)

Smitty chose “PorchManque” as the login for the new SiteMeter, employing a nickname for himself that he had used occasionally on the blog in referring to his sidekick role, compiling the FMRJA Saturday roundups and the Rule 5 Sunday posts, etc. It signifies nothing except perhaps as an example of Smitty’s love of Carrollesque wordplay, and I gave it no thought at all.

The fact that no one else gave it any thought until Charles Johnson jumped on it speaks volumes. Given the extreme scrutiny to which I’ve been subjected on the topic of raaaaacism, don’t you suppose someone else might have seized on this evidence before now? Johnson only noticed it because I mentioned on Twitter that one of his posts slamming me had delivered less traffic than random Google searches for Miley Cyrus. This prompted him to look at my SiteMeter, where his Javert-like obsession led him to an yet another idiotic “a-ha” blunder.

Charles Johnson counts on his readers being as foolish as he is, which is why he began purging anyone who questioned him after he began his jihad against Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer, et al. Once a few clever readers began noticing that the Lizard King was an idiot, Johnson became gripped by the narcissist’s greatest fear: That others will discover his fundamental worthlessness.

Once Johnson had committed himself to the anti-Geller jihad, it was impossible for him to say, “Hey, you know, maybe I’m wrong about this Vlaams Belang stuff. Maybe the political situation in Belgium is more complex than I’ve made it out to be. And maybe, in the grand scheme of things, Belgian nationalism isn’t really a grave threat to world peace.”

This is the nub of it, you see: Johnson’s inability to discern between dangers real and imagined, his lack of a rational sense of proportion about various potential threats. Such a lack of discernment is characteristic of paranoia. It may well be the case that some founders of Vlaams Belang could fairly be labeled neo-fascist, and that some voters who supported VB were also ill-motivated. I don’t know, as I haven’t spend a lot of time examining the evidence for those claims. But Geller and Spencer (and other Americans) who have traveled to Belgium say that this Nazi smear on VB is unfair. More to the point, what is the likelihood of some sort of latter-day brownshirt operation taking power in Belgium? And how serious is that alleged threat, when compared to the Islamicization of Europe?

Here you see the common thread between Johnson’s anti-Geller jihad and his mad rantings about creationists and global-warming “denialists.” It doesn’t matter whether you agree with Johnson on these issues or not. Are these real dangers to the commonweal? No. Are bible-thumpers crashing airliners into skyscrapers? Are policy analysts from the Competitive Enteprise Institute going on murder rampages at Army bases? Of course not. But Johnson can’t tell the difference between his pet peeves and genuine dangers, and people who don’t share his pet peeves are suspected of being in league with the enemy.

I’ve studied Johnson’s modus operandi and, what’s more, I know the type: People who seek to impress others by a pretended expertise, and who become enraged when it is pointed out that they don’t actually know what they’re talking about. Everybody knows the guy who, when among a group of football fans watching a game on TV, makes a point of lecturing about the zone defense, etc., presenting himself as an authority to whom others must defer. And if you question his authority, however mildly, he’ll get angry and start arguing vehemently as if disagreement were an insult. It’s about him, you see.

Thanks to Al Gore’s invention of the Internet, such people are no longer content to bore and annoy their friends, now they can bore and annoy the whole world, arguing endlessly about the most inconsequential things.

This characteristic disproportion between stimulus and response, was what first drew my attention to the LGF-Geller feud. It was the day after the 2008 election and Charles Johnson decided that the way to mark the occasion was to lash out at his idee fixe. I called him on it:
http://rsmccain.blogspot.com/2008/11/pam-geller-nazi.html

“Charles Johnson at Little Green Footballs has apparently decided that the problem with the conservative movement is that it needs more purges, and Pam Geller at Atlas Shrugs seems to be his designated scapegoat. . . . Pam is a good person and I would suggest that this guilt-by-association ‘urge to purge’ is antithetical to the best interests of conservatism. You can’t build a movement by the process of subtraction.”

Given everything that conservatives had to worry about on Nov. 5, 2008, how did Geller’s association with Belgian nationalists rate such attention? And we might say the same thing about Johnson’s fascination with my alleged racism. Johnson evidently didn’t think this worth noticing until after he saw Stephen Green was getting my phoned-in reports from the 9/12 March on DC. I then devoted two entire weeks to defending myself, the main point of my argument being that Charles Johnson is an idiot.

Not everything knowable is on the Internet. What Johnson can’t seem to grasp is that he can pile up online “evidence” to his heart’s content without ever changing the opinions of people who actually know me. And because I’m outgoing and gregarious, there are many hundreds of such people.

This is where Johnson becomes infuriated, you see. He keeps attacking me, and demanding that others shun me, and when this doesn’t happen, he encourages his readers to leap to the wrong conclusion: “Ah! They’re all in on it together!” It apparently never occurs to the LGF readers that the reason I’m not being shunned is because people have worked with me and hung out with me and know me well enough to know that I’m not what Johnson says I am.

Notice how, in his attacks, Johnson keeps repeating the label “white supremacist blogger,” an accusation that can be disproven by anyone who cares to read my blog. I had been blogging full-time for 18 months when Johnson attacked me and never once blogged anything that caused anyone to accuse me of racism. Yet it is important for Johnson to keep repeating the label, so that none of his remaining readers will be led to begin reading The Other McCain, from which experience they might conclude that Charles is full of crap, that my blog is not a “white supremacist” site.

Why have I written at such lengths in response to that post? Because I noticed some commenters at the Blogmocracy were engaged in debating whether or not the writer had been inciting or defending racism by employing the term “porch monkey” in his discussion of Johnson’s “PorchManque” blunder. One of the commenters, being from North Texas, said he’d only ever heard the term “porch monkey” used as a racial epithet. Smitty is from the Pacific Northwest, and I doubt that connotation ever entered his mind.

More importantly, I ask you to consider the ultimate futility of Johnsonism, which I would define as raking through online “evidence” with the belief that you are “proving” something about the character of people you don’t know. The comments on that thread quickly turned into a game of “Pin-the-Tail-on-the-Racist” — j’accuse!

Don’t let that foolishness take hold at the Blogmocracy as it did at LGF. In the Age of Obama, anyone who doesn’t vote Democrat is automatically assumed to be racist by liberals, and conservatives are only abetting liberal nonsense when they seize on such thin pretexts to make these accusations against each other. If anyone in the conservative movement wishes to do something about racism, let him do so in a positive and effective way, by supporting candidates like Vernon Parker:
http://theothermccain.com/2010/04/07/vernon-parker-trained-by-the-best/

Let Vernon Parker go to Congress, and let Charles Johnson go to hell. As for me, well, to borrow a lyric from John Lennon, everybody’s got something to hide except me and my manque.

Robert Stacy McCain
Co-author (with Lynn Vincent) of
DONKEY CONS:
Sex, Crime & Corruption in the Democratic Party
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1595550240

Rifqa Bary Suffering from Cancer

by savage ( 36 Comments › )
Filed under CAIR, Islamic hypocrisy at May 25th, 2010 - 11:00 am

Found this on Pamela Geller’s American Thinker essay.

There has been a terrible development in the case of Rifqa Bary, the teenage girl who fled from her home in fear for her life after her devout Muslim father found out she had become a Christian. According to Rifqa, who is now in foster care in Ohio, she has been diagnosed with advanced uterine cancer.

While this is a tragedy, how Rifqa is being victimized by her lawyers and her parents is nothing less than an atrocity. Her lawyers kept her in the dark about her condition — despite the seriousness of her cancer — for well over a week while they conferred with her parents and their CAIR-appointed lawyers about her treatment. While most cases like this result in a hysterectomy, Rifqa is only having the advanced malignancy removed. From what I understand, the survival rate in cases like these is only five percent.

Read the rest, please. And everyone who cares, please send a prayer, ok? Thanks.

savage