4.05.2006

Cheney's Sock Puppet #2


will be your weekend anchor. K9 is out on patrol. Todays photo essay is dedicated to Aisha, Mohammad's 9 year old wife, Salman Rushdie, Theo van Gogh, Danish cartoonists, American and Iraqi soldiers, and a couple of zillion other infidels.

"But sock puppet! You and your homies created these monsters with your money and support years ago! You educated UBL for God's sake!"

No, dear readers, we didn't have sock puppets like myself for the last 1400 years. But at one point, we did have to choose between two monsters, and then the whole thing went topsy turvy. What remained constant was the driving force behind the monsters. And as far as educating UBL, I agree, let's don't keep making that mistake! If the puppet were in charge, these kind of guys would be out of our universities so fast ivory towers would crumble from the force of wind spinning off their speedy removal.

"What about the Christian fanatics, puppet?" Well, from what I can tell, you have a better chance of keeping your head attached to your neck in a country based on Judeo-Christian ideals if you, say, commit adultery, be gay, or write, draw or sing outrageously offensive things against the Christian faith or America. Enough! The puppet will deal with the arguments as they come.

Even if we could instantly correct our flaws as a nation, no matter who is in charge, no matter how tolerant we become, this is not going away:














That concludes todays program. Enjoy your weekend.
Photos courtesy of LGF, Michelle Malkin, and Michael Yon

2 comments:

K9 said...

/bark bark bark

archived commentary to follow:

58 Comments:

Reverend X said...
I have a photo essay for ya.

http://www.blastedreality.net/crimeline.html

maximise your screen and turn your speakers up. Same kids in concept, but I caught a month or two ahead of your photos.
One more thing, if you set christian history next to Islam on a timeline with both starting at their inception, you will se the same evil evolution of a religion. Xians had a head start chronologically but Islam eventually made it to it's dark ages. Is it possible that Islam could make it to it's own rennaisance or reformation. Or do think it has no hope?

BTW, yes the videos you watched are my own creation. and to answer the time question... I read and write at a bistering pace and I have never editted my writings. I recently started running a spell check because I got sick of the emails I recieved protesting typos.
And yes, my work has a slant. There is no shortage of coverage pointing out the goodness of America and the evil of its enemies so why would I need to concentrate my limited resources and time on those two subjects. Find a gap in knowledge, fill it!

1:16 PM
Pete Bogs said...
sick and sad... in calling for beheadings and more 9/11's because of a FUCKING CARTOON, these groups are showing just how far they have to go before they can be considered civilized... and they're also justifying the negative image that many people around the world have of them... many of these pics were not even taken in the Middle East, but in London in front of the Danish embassy!

1:19 PM
K9 said...
/bark bark bark

Rev, I am way deep in your rabbit hole already. Give me some time! But you are not going to convince
me that Christianity and Islam are an equal horror.
I accept that the nature of man is flawed - but then you have levels of flawedness. This is not about religion for me -it is about behavior!

I am not concerned about your slant. I wouldnt read you if I were. I know my POV is a dime a dozen and so is yours. I hope Islam has hope! I wouldnt presume to say any group does not. But time does appear to be of the essence in this case dontcha think?

Yeah, I am impressed with the videos. maybe even a little jealous. wish I had the time to learn it. Ive just barely got the blogger thing going.

Bogs,

you are correct. Theres quite a few from jakarta as well, the middle east, everywhere! I was on an arabic website today couldnt read it of course but there were some posters and stuff warning norway and the swiss too! Look out Ben!

At dhimmiwatch theres a good article on the pro's of these cartoons for the muslim world:

http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/010020.php

I have no doubt in my mind that all of us would be lockin' and loadin' in the "foxhole of solidarity" regardless of how we view the current administration and the sins of America should we have to face these guys head on.

1:57 PM
infinitesimal said...
hello,
this is impressive.
I was here.

it is starting to scare me,
the rumblings,
can you hear them?

good work to you but very strange and surreal to think of the implications?

I saw a photo of on someone else's blog, I need to figure out where, it is worse than your marine one...way worse.

Good to see something new, good to aquaint myself further with CSP. Who is UBL? Don't call me dum, i dunno....

2:28 PM
K9 said...
/bark bark bark

you are far from dum contessa vanille. UBL is Usama Bin Laden, I couldve written OBL as well. Talk about obscene wealth! Look how he has chosen to apply his resources. He/ They want to restore the Caliphate. They have said it, written it and I think they intend to try.

I may have written this to you before, but I saw the dalai lama on TV once. and he had been recently exiled in india after the chinese took over all the monasteries and killed the Buddhist monks. And he was so sunny and jovial. He was engaged in repairing a watch! laughing, eyes sparkling.

The interviewer was confused. "how can you be so happy in the face of this horror" and the dalai said something to the effect that the first truth of buddhism is that sufferage is the expected human condition and our task was to face it with joy (not exactly i could look it up) and he also noted he was in the world, but not of it. That he understood that things went down as they were meant to and how we handle it as individuals is what brings beauty to the world.

I too have seen some humdingers of sorrowful photos but that marine cradling a dying iraqi girl that was given no consideration at all by her countrymen is a metaphor for my belief in the USA,

When I consider whatever isn't ideal about the USA, I MUST proceed from a place of hope and goodness. I never think of the USA in terms of the leaders but by the stunningly beautiful individuals who comprise the whole of this country. Whatever comes, I have faith in us.

/grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

3:40 PM
infinitesimal said...
You have many softer sides to you than teeth and poops, puppy.

That was a very sussinct description of buddhism, from my perspective. I am rightly impressed. Have you ever seen the movie "Ghost Dog"? I think you would like it. It stars Forrest Whittaker.

I was thinkin bout how computers and telephones and emails were destroying true connections and creating lazy communicators today and yesterday.

what do you think?

Contessa V. Infinitessima

8:34 PM
Anonymous said...
Reverend X said:
"One more thing, if you set christian history next to Islam on a timeline with both starting at their inception, you will se the same evil evolution of a religion."

you've been sniffing your own amrpits too long, pal. Lift your head and smell the coffee.

"you will se the same evil evolution of a religion."

no, we won't--

--but you do because you would rather live in subjugation than lose your precious assumptions about geoplitics.

Those assumptions that you make from the safety of a cakewalk life in America. What? You only have three computers, two TVs and enough hooch for the big game weekend? The government did't give you a free ATM to the US treasury? Damn-nation.

You been looking left so long you can't get your head back front and center. When it fatah comes to you, brother, you will have earned it.

There has never been one year in Christian history like the entire history of Islam--read some atheist accounts of history. That fatuous remark of yours is nothing but a assumption of parity you make so as to spare your quaking self the need to face the reality of islam.

You display an arrogant lack of understanding of both religions. Islam is predicated on conquest (fatah) --it came howling out of the Arabian penisula with a bloodlust never before known--and it was not because Westerners had occupied their lands, either.

-islam PREACHES systematic conquest and hate. Always has, it is the whole purpose of the movement--it has always been a matter of STATE, as well as faith.

In short, Islam is a geopolitical movement fuled by a faith in mohammed whose allah made fatah the object of islamic life--get it? No "peace" as Westerners mean peace,
Islamic peace is the result of world conquest, when all are slain or converted. THen the world lives in "peace"

Your arrogance is the arrogance of a self-impressed fool. You know zilch about islam, so you project onto it your personal worldview--you gage islam according to your western mind--foolish and arrogant. They think nothing of democracy, and under their system you and your ilk
(they despise your liberal life of debauchery) will be the first get the chop---that is if you resist conversion.

If you don't want to be sticking your butt in the air five times a day praising allah, you better figure out whose side you are on--oh yeah, baby, your gonna have to CHOOSE--no resting the gonads on the fence any longer.

Islam has no hope--you got that? NO HOPE because it is opposed to what you hope for. It will be a duel to the death. Stop trying to make peace with Islam--that is a western idea, making peace with an enemy--an idea Islam loathes.

Don't come back with some prissy dig at Americans, Christians, Westerners or any other dodge of the issue which is ISLAM. You do so my friend, and you'll be drinking Islamic history from a firehose.

9:10 PM
Anonymous said...
Pete Bogs said...
"these groups are showing just how far they have to go before they can be considered civilized... and they're also justifying the negative image that many people around the world have of them"

Nice summary--clear and to the point.
FoF

9:13 PM
infinitesimal said...
OK goodnight and also

succinct

so sorry, I rule at the art of mis-spellings.

Anon,
you need to be brandishing a whip, and maybe even a paddle, because you are strict!

But thanks for the education, I do not know much regarding.... fatah, or jihad. What else do you know about?

9:23 PM
Reverend X said...
K9,
I apologize in advance for what I am about to write. None of it applies to you or anyone else. This is personal.

Anon,
Pull orrielly's fist out of your ass and speak for yourself, puppet. You know nothing about me but assume a great deal of insight into my life. I'm sure you hear this often, wrong! My life has not been one of debauchery and my opinions are formed from experience, self education, and an inherent sense of right and wrong. I have never cowered and I do not see myself doing that any time soon. I have read the Koran. I do not agree with it. The 70 virgins bit was enough to turn me against it. I can't think of a more revolting concept of divine reward than blowing yourself up for the opportunity to molest 70 girls. That's pretty fucked up. But I guess if it was 70 young boys the Church would be running out of priests pretty damn quick, huh?

Now let's see, Christianity has no conquest connection? How about the first state that sanctioned it.
"By this sign you shall conquer!"
or the other translation "..be victorious!"
So the Romans did not take up the Cross?
European history with its Crusades and human subjugation justified by papal decree, all armpit high? Guess there is no connection between the Vatican and the Rise of the Nazi's. One day... you are right, there is not one day that matches Islam. There are thousands of them.
All Religious Extremism is wrong. Religion is wrong at its core. The small of mind taking hammers of Kant and Nails of Dogma, attempt to pound the migratory light of the universe to their dark immovable altars. That's religion for you. Heretical to the concept of Divinity, but too stupid to realize.
Now I know there are quite a few Jihadists that are frothing at the bit to sink their teeth into me. But if you think I am going to lay down my ideals and let America be taken away brick by brick because I am too scared about getting beheaded to speak up, then you really do not know me at all.
I will not go quietly into your goodnight... and I will die comforted with the knowledge that I have reached enough people that their will be another taking up fight after me.

10:25 PM
Anonymous said...
Infinitesimal said: (to anon)

"you need to be brandishing a whip, and maybe even a paddle, because you are strict!

But thanks for the education, I do not know much regarding.... fatah, or jihad. What else do you know about?"

Strict? Nah, that is tough love.

Let's hope when your life, and the Reverend X's and all our lives are endangered that clear, tough--oK, strict-- heads will lead the way.

What else do I know about? That a woman like you who is confident enough to admit that she does not know about jihad, but is open to learn, is one smart cookie. One I'd share a foxhole with.

10:35 PM
Reverend X said...
Anon,
Of topic, but I gotta.
-applause-
That is the greatest "least appropriate time and place for a pick up line" I have seen in a long time. That was awesome!! I am 100% sincere in these accolades. No sarcasm seriously. I am a huge fan of innapropriate pick up lines. Have you tried the "quotes from 'The Crow' movie" game yet? It's kind of a lost art, but hey, "It can't rain all the time."

12:28 AM
Pete Bogs said...
that youngster with the M-16(?) doesn't look too thrilled at being used as a pawn in a terror propaganda demonstration...

Rev - Halloween is maƱana, crackhead.

8:10 AM
whisperingforestnymph said...
anon: i disagree with you, (and agree with the rev) ... perhaps you need a history lesson or two re: christianity - definitely a very strong history of conquests...or maybe you know nothing of the crusades? ... if you knew what you were talking about, you would know this ...perhaps YOU should stop sniffing your armpits and educate yourself, before you coming out here swinging with all your bigs words ... careful ... you might hurt yourself ...

k9: clever ... love the sock puppet ...

for those of who who care, there is a great book about Islam (if you want to learn more about it ...) called "The Trouble with Islam" ... written by Irshad Manji ... a very good read and look at Islam by someone (a woman) raised in the culture/religion ...

8:37 AM
K9 said...
/bark bark bark

I never dreamed I would wake up to find that a massive dogfight went down in my own yard while I slumbered peacefully in my dogbed!

Vanille,

I loved the movie Ghost Dog and thanks for reminding me, I will add it to my profile list! It is a great movie. Cool how he worked those pigeons with flags -the counterpoint to his deadly profession. See? that thing again. the beauties and the horrors that exist inside of each person. Good soundtrack too. and, forrest whitaker? I like him.

I always meant to read that samurai book is it by lao tsu? maybe that was the art of war -anyway the notion of needing to serve a master was always of interest to me. and when the master is gone, the samaurai is lost (?) not sure.

Now onto anon and rev:

very firey exchange. nothing for me too add there but I do see the need to be vigilant on both fronts, the problem of islam and also of eroding liberties here at home. I always think of the WHO song "wont get fooled again".......here comes the new boss, same as the old boss.............not much faith in politics for me -again it lies within the individual.

bogs

page after page of palestinian children were crying in these kinds of photos I found. If their brains do not yet fully understand their DNA sure seems to!

9:05 AM
K9 said...
/bark bark bark

Nymph,

I wanted to shoot you a comment the other day. But i cannot fill an email field! Your pages are really nicely done.

9:11 AM
infinitesimal said...
I think the worst photo that you have posted is the one of the little baby crying. Because you can see it from his eyes as he points the gun at you: How he is on stage, and looking over a crowd of scary humans screaming and looking angry, and he seems to be thinking: "Hey, this is not where I came from! What the hell is going on here?"

I try to have respect for all life, and it is not easy to wrap my brain around the concept of Jihad or suicide bombings, or killing the woman for being raped and no longer being a virgin. I also do not get the wipe your butt with your hand deal, but whatever, that is a personal choice.

I found the photo that was worse than the one you posted, I asked if I could use it, let me check and see if I can....

10:25 AM
infinitesimal said...
Go to Sameyl's site and check the photo at the end of the WORLD PEACE post. That is the photo.

http://sameyl.blogspot.com/

10:31 AM
K9 said...
/bark bark bark

vanille,

I did look at sameyls photo essay-I tracked him from WCH. I left him a note about the photo with the dying african child and a vulture waiting.....

messed me up bad. Wish i hadn't seen it, but I have, and now I will never forget it. Dear God.
(oh man, I am getting all puppylike. gack!)

I agree with you and your aunt - flesh and blood communication very very necessary.

/grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

10:41 AM
infinitesimal said...
No, not that post, the one from a while ago, called WORLD PEACE. Only one photo at the end.

Yes, that vulture pic is heavy.

Come on over for some lemonaide

1:24 PM
Bird said...
ah. this round puts me into despair.

K9's photo essay, telling, despairing, impressive. but we could put together an equally telling,despairing and impressive essay that would reflect badly on us - the US, Christians, etc.
Yes, those photos show violence handed down through generations.

But it's not really about religion in the case of the Palenstinians - it's about a place to call home (I do not believe that the Palestinians voted in Hamas because they agree with Hamas' violence, rather, they disagree ardently with Fatah's corruption.

I have Muslim students in my classes - and they are not part of some Islamic Horde of which Anon tells us we must beware of - that will behead us all.

I despair, I weep (metaphorically ok). I spent the weekend at my brother's home where this same bullshit went on - this "us vs. them" crap.

Clearly, I need to study up. I don't know enough about Islam - and I keep hearing two very different representations of this religion - one representation says Islam is conquest and blood and death and another says no, it's a peaceful religion and it's been hijacked by fundamentalists. Can it not be both - and if so - it is both (as Christianity is) then the "enemy" is not Islam, but fundatmentalism. We cannot lump all Islamists/Muslims in one generic category. And that is the danger in Anon's perspective and in K9's as well (sorry my friend, but of course we know we disagree on this).

The only good Christian is the one that's dead.

The only good Muslim is the one's that dead.

Death to all Americans!

Death and fear and destruction to all jihadists!

This just blows, folks. If we keep at it this way, what hope is there for anyone?

And yes,maybe I not as cynical and jaded as I think I am - maybe I am naive and ignorant and I, and others like me, will cause the beheadings of us all - but I doubt it.

1:43 PM
Bird said...
as a college english teacher i am absolutely appalled at the grammtical errors in that last commet. ssshhh...don't tell anyone!

1:44 PM
Reverend X said...
There is a picture, I know everyone has seen, of a hooded detainee holding a young boy, prolly his son, on his lap and trying to comfort him. I look at that picture and my mind cracks. The boy looks like one of my sons. I can not but put myself in the man's situation. It is a good thing that the Arabs are not similar culturally to me, because I can think of no level of retribution that would slake my thirst for it. In that image I can see the cause of Hell on Earth. I can see the birth of a Demon.
Sorry, but the modern vernacular does not have meaning enough for that sentiment, had to go dark.

Guess it's not a good day to be a bad guy, huh skank?

2:39 PM
infinitesimal said...
OK
Abraham, father of Jews and Christians alike was told by God to go unto his wife (she was about 80) and she begged him to do it with a servant, and so he got the servant pregnant. So then God told Sarah (Abe's wife),

"No bitch it was you I was wanting knocked up."

So she did as God commanded.
Because of her free will, Abe ended up with two sons. And the servant and her son were sent to the desert where they multiplied. Hence the birth of ISLAM.

There is a distinction between fundies and true believers.

Who knows what will happen? Whatever. K9, you need to put out treats for us now to lighten the mood. The beheadings are scary.
Come pick out a book....

7:13 PM
Anonymous said...
K-9,
Your Reverend invites a response to my post on Islam being the problem.

I was referred to this site to look at the photo essay (great, BTW, though a horror), and while here, found the Reverend X's saprogenic ramblings...sorry, but I dashed off a long rebuttal.

His is retort is also long (& still dodges the issue of Islam) but the topic is wearing your yard mates down, I see. Good manners suggest I should get your permission before coming back again with a reply to the Reverend. If you decline--no hard feelings. But I won't dump new material on your site without your say-so.

Best regards to all in K-9's yard.

7:36 PM
infinitesimal said...
If you got a brown, Lay it down.

You feel me K?

besides, he won't actually post for a week anyways Anon.

Steam on!

8:18 PM
Anonymous said...
Reverend said:

" Anon,
Of topic, but I gotta.
-applause-
That is the greatest "least appropriate time and place for a pick up line" I have seen in a long time. That was awesome!!"

Aw, shucks, Reverend, thanx. And I thought a foxhole is for survival, not propagation, a buddy-system, not a brothel. (No offense Ms. Infinitisimal, I'm sure your are a temptation)

Rev, waiting to hear from the Rottweiler...must be celebrating after the Game.

5:01 AM
OOB said...
Reverend X , I went and viewed your video. You're a pretty talented guy. Somewhat misguided..... but talented , you say...

if you set christian history next to Islam on a timeline with both starting at their inception, you will se the same evil evolution of a religion....

In the first place thanks primarily to liberals (and I don't mean this to start a new argument ) we have separation of church and state in this country. So I don’t think it makes much sense to compare the two here. Islam isn’t attacking us in my opinion because we have freedom of religion as much as it is attacking us because we have freedom from religion , theirs. Something that people who proclaim themselves to be liberal thinkers should be appalled about , don’t you think? I think you do because you later state... All Religious Extremism is wrong.

I agree with K-9 when he says this is not about religion for me -it is about behavior!

Is it possible that Islam could make it to it's own rennaisance or reformation. Or do think it has no hope?..... If enough of them die maybe. That sounds harsh , I know , but the opposite would be if their numbers multiplied. Do you think increasing the number of people who think like them will suddenly transform the movement? The answer is that if they are not all radical terrorist minded nutcases , those who are not need to stand up and be counted.

Anon said , There has never been one year in Christian history like the entire history of Islam ......... Let’s not forget the Spanish Inquisition. Not sure if it is exactly the same but it wasn’t pretty. I agree with you though so far on everything else you have said.

11:12 AM
K9 said...
/bark bark bark

This yard is a sparring ring and is open to any player ready to step through the ropes. name and no name welcome all the same.

green light!

/grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

12:39 PM
infinitesimal said...
K9
Come over, sit down grab some lemonaide and BUST magazine and tell me how the presentation went today?....

4:16 PM
Reverend X said...
Oob,
The comparison was the evolution of Religions, not Constitutional cause and effect.
I agree with the point that if enough of them die it can change as a whole, but the direction of change depends on who does the killing.
To understand that we must first understand what radicalizes people. Sure, to a small degree, upbringing can create extremists. That is nothing in comparison to the effect of violence and their loss of loved ones, property and viewed self worth. No amount of Sunday School can do what one well placed bomb can in convincing a moderate person that extremism is justified and necessary.
Bush policy literally lines up candidates for Jihad recruitment.

I know it has been said that "Liberalism" creates terrorism, but the only backing that theory has is highly suspect tapes alleged to be Bin Laden. Other than those, I think you will find that killing a guy's family has more to do with his subsequent actions than our civil liberties and culture.

4:53 PM
Anonymous said...
Thanks K-9 for the green light.
(warning--long frightening post, )

Reverend X

From the top of your retort:

"Pull orrielly's fist out of your ass and speak for yourself, puppet."

..........so you lead with another of your assumptions? The comment, Rev, was that you'd been looking left so long you couldn't bring your head back *front and center*-- but you reflexively assume that it's a right wing interlocutor shaking you like a rag dog.

You made that reflexive jab about the right, because you attempt to deflect the substance of the debate-pawn it off on a hackneyed right-left polemic, a polemic you have practiced ad nauseum. It is your default mode, adopted so that you need not think, only repeat the practiced polemic.

It's a gutsy play, friend, when you can examine your assumptions. You might find that you have been wrong here and there, but don't you want to know that, rather than live perpetually in the comfort of a familiar ignorance?

Here is a princicple for reasoned assesment of any given matter: A fact, theory or proposal cannot be rejected simply on the grounds that some entity of lesser merit supports the fact, theory or proposal.

Example: I ought not reject the premise that gravity will make you a splat on the pavement when you fall from the 40th floor just becasue the terrorist who tossed you out the window is a muslim who also believes in gravity.

A thing is not untrue because my enemy believes it is true.

Translation: everything that the "right" says or thinks is hardly defacto invalid--test things, investigate and see before you reject or accept. Same for the left.

My comments are neither right nor left, but that should not concern you. The question is, Are they true? The job of all of us (Americans, Westerners) is to determine what is true about the threat of Islam, then proceed from that point.

Don't be dragged off by a false premise, so that a good mind like yours is sidelined.

We're better served when we stop bickering with each other and look at what is coming. The history of Islam for 1,400 years is territorial conquest. NOTHING the US government can do will change that.

Bush could be impeached as you'd like to see, or asssinated, but Islam is still coming, brother. That is one of the assumptions made here--that eliminating Bush, neocons, hawks--WHATever--will somehow calm dowm Islamic jihad. You're just trying to whistle your way past the graveyard. NOTHING is going to stop Jihad but a determined
people who are willing to resist it.

This is an OLD fight--isn't that right Bird, (the English prof)? Here's a sample English lit, from 1700s, the famous comedy, Marriage of Figaro:

"I cobble together a verse comedy about the customs of the harem, assuming that, as a Spanish writer, I can say what I like about Mohammed without drawing hostile fire. Next thing, some envoy from God knows where turns up and complains that in my play I have offended the Ottoman empire, Persia, a large slice of the Indian peninsula, the whole of Egypt, and the kingdoms of Barca {Ethiopia}, Tripoli, Tunisi, Algeria, and Morocco. And so my play sinks without trace, all to placate a bunch of Muslim princes, not one of whom, as far as I know, can read but who beat the living daylights out of us and say we are 'Christian dogs.' Since they can't stop a man thinking, they take it out on his hide instead..."

...hmmn? Sound familiar? THese are people who will kill you over a cartoon or a play. And, to the best of our knowledge, GWB was not in 18th century Europe harrassing the Moors. It is an OLD battle, Rev.


Rev said:
"You know nothing about me but assume a great deal of insight into my life."
............what I know is what you told me-- your own blog, retorts to others, you laid a lot out there. No need to assume.

Rev said:
"I'm sure you hear this often, wrong! My life has not been one of debauchery

...................no debauchery? How are you defining that? That is the whole point, sir, the Islamic jihad would define the foundations of liberalism or libertarianism as "debauched." And the context of my remark was that your ilk
--liberal--will be the first to warm the scimitar's edge.

Here is how it works: they do not consult you about your definition of debauched. It is THEIR definition that will appply, so all your pleas of "spare me for my clean life" will fall like thwok of your spit in an ocean.

You support women in the workplace? Abortion? Women should vote? You'll be target practice for the local madrassa.

Rev said:

"and my opinions are formed from experience, self education, and an inherent sense of right and wrong."
........
.......sorry to break it to you, Jihad does not care about your opinions, experiences or sense of right and wrong. They have a different sense of right and wrong. Theirs rule. Another assumption that you make is that your experiences are somehow of universal quality.

That is just it, the Islamic experience is that your experiences as an American have led you to be corrupt, evil and, yeah--debauched. They despise us, and only care about the American "right or left" as a crack in our armor that they can pierce. Don;t give them that advantage. They are not planning an inquistion to separate the American left from the right.

[BTW, during the Inquisition--listen up Simpering Nymph--the "victims" asked for the Church to be the inquisitor rather than face the government inquisitors. Church's judgment and penalty was far more evenhanded than the crown, Those under investigation were typically Jews or Moslems who had "converted" for personal gain.

The crown declared that only Catholics could work at high levels in the government, thus creating a run of fake "conversos" who wanted to get high positions--when some were found to have made side deals with the Moslems, poisoned royal family members and otherwise tried to bring down the government, they were sent to one of two courts--the Church, because they had falsely converted, and to the crown for their treason.

Scholars agree that estimates of loss of life during the Inquistion is off by "orders of magnitude"--it is essentially an urban legend. Yes, many lost their lives--always regrettable--but not early as many as some claim.

The WHY of the Inquisition is simple: Deuteronomy 17:2–5. God commanded that formal, legal inquiries—that is, inquisitions—be carried out to expose secret believers in false religions who were living amonng them. See also 1 Corinthians 5:13.

Now to our modern ear that sounds harsh, but suppose you heard tomorrow of Christian missionairies pretending to convert to Islam so that they could get jobs as teachers in muslim schools and work to subvert the children from the practice of Islam? You'd be horrified--you'd have great sympathy when you heard that the local mullah had the fraudulent convert punished. Right?

That is precisely what happened in Spain in the 1400s. The Moslems tried to subvert the students in schools, tried even to subvert the less educated peasants. Note that these Moslems were not openy trying to persuade people to adopt Islam, they pretended to be Christiansm lying to the schools to get their jobs in order to subvert. Side note: The Inquistion treated withces as insane, needing help--not as heretics]

BTW, Protestants ran their own inquistitional show; Calvin not only banished from Geneva those who did not share his views, he permitted and in some cases ordered others to be executed for "heresy" (e.g. Jacques Gouet, tortured and beheaded in 1547; and Michael Servetus, burned at the stake in 1553). In England and Ireland, Reformers engaged in their own ruthless inquisitions and executions. Conservative estimates indicate that thousands of English and Irish Catholics were put to death—many by being hanged, drawn, and quartered—for practicing the Catholic faith and refusing to become Protestant.

Rev said:
But I guess if it was 70 young boys the Church would be running out of priests pretty damn quick, huh?


.....here is a great illustration for several points.

First, this has zippo to do with the threat Islam is to us, thus it is another red herring, Rev, so that you do not have to deal with Islam. Catholics aren't running around screaming for your head or threatening to bomb your city to gravel.

Are you suggesting that if there were no cases of ebophiliac priests, the massacre of school children by Muslims in Beslan, Russia wouldn't have occured? That if no cases of homosexual assualt on boys had been reported that the London under ground would not have been bombed? What twisted logic is that?

Second point and third points on homosexual priests are very enlightening--invite me to your own blog to give you the scoop--but it has no place here where the topic is ISLAM's threat to the west.

Reverend said:

"Now let's see, Christianity has no conquest connection? How about the first state that sanctioned it.
"By this sign you shall conquer!"
or the other translation "..be victorious!"

..............not analagous at all to Islam--how laughable. Here you have illustrated the principle that "a little learning is a dangerous thing."

You've got a dim idea/memory that Constantine (A pagan) had a vision of the cross at the Malvern Bridge and that he understood it was under that banner that he would conquer, adn from there you are off again on a giant assumption.

Constantine was defending his homeland from the usurper, the decandent and corrupt Maxentius (312 A.D.) You could call it a civil war--not a conquest. As Constantine marched toward home (Rome)he spared civilians who then supported his troops--since MAx was a brutal dictator.

Rev said:
"So the Romans did not take up the Cross? European history with its Crusades and human subjugation justified by papal decree, all armpit high?"

.........this is a joke, right? Do you even know what the crusades were? WHo the hell do you think lived in Palestine when moslems tore through there like demonic banhsees?


THose lands were occupied by Chrisitians and Jews--and more CHristians than Jews as the Romans had expelled Jews from Jerusalem in 70 A.D.

[[[ sidebar: THe Arabian Penisula(jezeera) was poulated by tribal nomads at the time of Christ. There were sizable Jewish towns in the Penisula co-existing along side various Arab tribes (Ismaelites, as Contessa noted).

Recall that at the time of the Babylonian captivity, and in the time of Darius not all Jews returned to Israel from Babylon--many stayed and migrated throughout the lands we now call Iraq and Saudia Arabia. Thus by 600 A.D. there was a sizable population of Jews in Jezeera (Arabia)The Arab tribes were pagans of differnt nebulous belief systems.

By 600 A.D. Christian semitic populations had also flourished and lived in Mecca, where there were Christian churches.

Mohammed was a caravan driver, married to a wealthy older woman, a restless entrepreneur who made his living more or less as a desert corsair--a pirate pillaging the other caravans---or offering "protection" to caravans for big $$.

Mohammed saw the Jews getting wealthy and realized part of that wealth was due to a series of laws, or rules that applied to all Jews everywhere, not only tribal family members doown by the local oasis.

This standardization of rules of engagement allowed prderly trading to transpire. Furthermore, there were religious obligations in the fair trade rules of the Jews so that people were self governed.

So Mohammed, a very savvy opportunist, patched together a religion of his own for Arabs-- he employed a synthesis of Jewish and Christian teachings, including those from the heretical sects that had sprung up among both Christian and Jewish communities. Hence, Jesus is a prophet, but not God, a direct teaching of the Arian heresy.

PArt of the "religious" requirement for moslems was to conquer the woorld for allah--how convenient for a pillaging prophet. Mohammed insited that each conquest be both religion and a state(dawla). Hence the prophet was also the ruler. The first jihad was against Mecca's pagan Arab rulers. ]]

Back to Palestine in 7th cent. Palestine:
THE subjugation and butchery was perpetrated ON the Chritians, Rev, and ON the Jews BY the Moslems, and even so the Church lived as best it could under that muslim occupation for 300 plus years...as the oppression grew and Islam refused religious freedom to the "people of the book" the Pope called the first Crusade to liberate Christians and Jews from horrific domination. In addiition moslems were pushing into France from Spain, and were ravaging eastern Europe--do you not think that Europeans had a right to defend itself at home and its fellow CHristians in Palestine?

[[ sidebar: What you want to keep in your sights is that what a religion teaches is not the same as what is done in its name. That is the difference between Christianity and Islam.

Chritianity teaches its followers to pray for their eniemies, to be charitable, truthful, chaste, fair dealing with ALL people for thhey are made in the image of God. Lots of followers have a tough time keeping up with this--but that is the teaching, the aim.

Islam, on the other hand, teaches jihad and conquest as both a spritual and a geopolitical obligation---in other words, terror is hardwired into islam.]]

That some crusaders were looters and bullies is no different than any army, any where, having a few mental AWOLs. Just as a few corrupt senators do not invalidate the Constitution, a few freakazoid plunderers do not invalidate the Crusades.

THe Crusades are precisely why you your butt isn't winking at the sun today. Because your forebears in the building of Western Civ smacked Islam away from the gates of Europe just enough to let democracy, the rule of law, and science and art and music and all that we cherish, flourish. Thank God for the crusades. Repeat after me, THANK GOD FOR THE CRUSADES.

Rev wrote:
"Guess there is no connection between the Vatican and the Rise of the Nazi's."

...........bro, it's good thing you are a cyber cipher. You hide behind a computer to make such bigoted remarks. That remark is so wrong that you have proven yourself a pompous, dithering fool.

What, you read an disgruntled ex-priest's innuendo book written so he could make a million or two at the expense of truth? Read HISTORY, read actual scholars, read the primary sources, read the documents.

The Vatican issued REPEATED warnings about facism, about singling out persons on relgious or ethnic characteristics...read the encylcials, start with Mit Brenden Sorge (WIth Burning Sorrow, 1939).
Ask yourself why Golda Meir (Prime Minster of Israel) said that Pope Pius XII did more to save the Jews than anybody else, including the Jews of America--starting with the chicken bellied NEW YOR TIMES owners. Meir put a monument up to Pius XII in Jerusalem.

The chief Rabbi of Rome converted to Catholicism after war, so impressed with the efforts of the CHruch to save Jews. He took the name Eugenio in homage to Eugenio PAcelli, (Pius XII.)

Nahum Goldmann. Pres of the World Jewish COngress,said, "With special gratitude we remember all he (Pius XII) has donefor the persecuted Jews in one of the darkest periods of their history"

The Jewish Post (11/6/1958)wrote,
" For there was probably not a single ruler of our generation who did more to help the Jews in their hour of tragedy suring NAzi occupation of Europe, than the late Pope (Pius XII)."


There are literally hundreds of citations praising Pius XII and Catholics from hundreds of Jews.
The revisionist history began with a play, The Deputy, which opened in 1963 at the time of the Second Vatican Council and was meant to --in part--sabatoge the COuncil.

You nit-brain, three million Catholics were killed in the holocaust. Hitler hated the CHurch, hated priests and gassed them. Any Catholic who hid Jews were killed--so were Protestants. Every monastery and convent in Italy hid Jewish children and women. Pius XII was from a wealthy family, he exhausted his family's fortune to ransome Jews, and to pay for safe passage to the USA or South America.

Ah, but today, the Church defends the right of both Jews AND Palestinians to live in Palestine, and the the Jewish lobby is in a fury over it. At the UN the CHurch defends the right of Palestinians to a portion of historical Plaestine, and the Jewish lobby is out for papal blood over it. SO, presto, we get a revisionist history from the children of the Jews who once praised the Church for saving them.

Short version (For believers only) is that Christ was slandered and spit upon, and He said his Church would be too--so who is surprized at how viciously the Church is attacked?

Reverend said:
"Religion is wrong at its core. The small of mind taking hammers of Kant and Nails of Dogma, attempt to pound the migratory light of the universe to their dark immovable altars. That's religion for you. Heretical to the concept of Divinity, but too stupid to realize."

....What an entertainment you are, buddy. So what are YOU the REVEREND of? The Church of Cosmic Memeolgy?

The religion debate we'll have at you place--if you want to pursue it.
BUT note well, it does not matter whether or not you are for or against "religion." Your cosmic flights of fancy will do nothing to save you from a very real islamic assault.

IT IS NOT ABOUT YOU or your opinion (or mine)--you may not find value in religion, but then, you are not perpetrating jihad--THEY are, and we'd damn well better care about what THEY believe--got that?

They do not think you have a right to NOT to believe--they will butcher you for your unbelief.

This is how the Caliphate operated:

Approach a neighboring monarch and offer a "Peace treaty", if they accepted they could keep their title
and personal possessions, if they declined to join the caliphate they they were in violation of the "peace"(Islam) and for this were declared to be in the "house of War" (Dar al harb) , thus the jiahd against theme was "justified". Where monarchs accepted to "peace" people were free to keep their former religions, but only as dhimmi, that is, second class citizens who were deprived of most rights, and property.

Spain is an iconic example of muslim conquest--you think they were immigrating in search of jobs? Spain lived under dhimmi sdtatus unless one converted to islam--real freedom, that. NO WONDER Spain was adamant, after 800 years of domination and oppression, that no muslim serve in high government posts--and those whp "converted" in order to gain the post of influence were subjected to the Inquisition---good thing, that.

You have compassion for Muslims, you empathize with them, but you have a hard heart, brother, toward your own. Not admirable.

You just want to wish it all away by denouncing all religion thus hoping it will all just go away--well, who wouldn't? But its deadly to pretend wishing will make it so.

and oh yeah, your answer to OOB is pure idiocy. What makes terrorists line up for jihad is their belief system--long before Bush, long before the USA existed, there was terror screaming out of Jezeera (Arabia) subjugating everything in its path.

DEAL WITH ISLAM AS ISLAM--they are REQUIRED to conquer for allah, they KILL any msulim who decides to believe something else (IS THAT America's fault too?)-- and stop trying to pin the blame on something else, pal--the problem is ISLAM in its genesis. Jihad is state policy and a doctrinal tool--none of that is America's doing.

For those who think there are "moderate" muslims, do not be lulled by that idea--there is a political term for their idea of moderation, and it is SULH, a temporary peace, meaning a noo fight zone, until the political conditions are ripe for jihad to resume. THis SULH not analagous to Salaam, which is a permmanent peace. Moderates--so called--are those who at the momment think that SULH is the better poltical option. It is mmerely a diplomatic tool used to gain the initiative.

The genius of Islam is that, unlike the Vikings, or Attila the Hun or PAx Romana, it wants more than plunder or territiry, it wants your soul too--thus it justfies itself both politically and religiously for its atrocities--if you do not convert, you are damned anyway, what difference does it make if you die NOW?

Islam teaches that those who reject Allah are guilty of blasphemy--hence they are damned and their deaths are praise for Allah.


Rev said:
"I have never cowered and I do not see myself doing that any time soon."

...........huh? Hmmmnnn, then in spite of your bull-headedness, you may be an OK guy, but, dammit!, get in here and help this nation be prepared. Take a long look at the rioting mobs in Europe --over cartoons!---and imgine your loved living unnder sharia law.

6:32 PM
infinitesimal said...
damn baby,

Do you need a smoke after leaving that brown?

9:56 PM
Bird said...
Anon's last comment (a dissertation of a comment - haha!)intrigues me - I'd like to jump into the fray, but have neither the time, nor the knowledge needed at this point.

Although I will say that I have read somewhere (and I'llhave to track it down) that the bloodthirsty, conquest-driven persepctive of Islamic religion is not the only perspective - that there are Muslims who believe that approach is a blasphemy of their religion. Yes, I know Anon made reference to this in the comment - implying that the "moderate" voice isn't so moderate.

But my intent here is not to jump in the fray and debate the claims and support. My intent is to offer this perspective on the shape of the debate itself:

It's clear that Anon has some background in logic and that he/she (I suspect he) has read a great deal and can produce a coherent blog-comment-draft (writing on the fly). Consequently, although I am not convinced of his argument, I am willing to consider it.

But...full consideration means understanding, among other things, two key factors which inform Anon's text and thus his claims and support:

1. The source for Anon's "facts" and "histories" (I'm not saying the facts aren't facts and the historical info isn't true, just that I can't tell where all this info comes from. Some references are made, but not enough to judge the credibility of the sources - not to mention bias - and all sources are biased - knowing the source helps ascertain what kind of bias and if the writer has considered multitude perpsectives before developing his claims.

and 2. Credibilty of Anon himself as a source (because within the comment, Anon has constructed himself as a source.

Anon referred to me as a college prof - but I am not a professor of English. I teach college-level and remedial reading and composition at a University and a community college. (Hard to believe, I know, given my frequent spelling errors, glitches, etc.) I have a BA in Creative Writing and in a few weeks, will have an MA in Teaching Composition. Technically speaking, I am not a professor, just a lowly adjunct slaving away in the basement of the ivory tower.

10:13 PM
Reverend X said...
HAHA! Now we have some meat to play with.
First, any mention I made of personal info was at the behest of Anon. Not specifically asked for, but definitely required to dispute the claims made involving my character. The info was in no way meant as a defense of Islam. Taken individually and used one line at a time in effigy to show the horrors of Islam is a neat trick though. Which leads me to.

The same could be said of a meteorite or stray bullet. Your Jyhadist boogey man works in speculation of a persons demise the same way an unwitting yet lethal piece of material would. "The meteorite doesn't care what ideology you have. It has one purpose and one purpose only and that is to travel at its current velocity until resistance forces it to stop. If your head gets in the way, Blammo! You'll be wishing you had that titanium helmet on. But no you didn't think it was necessary. Now look at you."
That is the power of fear mongering. No one is saying Islam is a warm fuzzy hug. No one is suggesting that we lay down our arms, disband the military, or any other nonsense your parady implies. I am suggesting that we stop bombing them, melting the skin off their children, supporting their national leaders who oppress them and blame us for it, and in all things, quit adding fuel to an already out of impressive fire.
Iraq was a secular sunni society with a multi-sect and moderate religious population. Now it is a fundamentalist theocracy with an outspoken extremist agenda. Good job on that War on Terror policy. At this rate we could make the whole world hate us. Oh snap, we did that already, didn't we?
The Nazi bit. I have read account after account of average German's explaining why they went along with the Nazi agenda. They invariably mention the Church promoting the policies. The German's I have spoken to remember the same. The financial records that survived show business dealings up until the very end. The Vatican accumulated quite a collection of artifacts and relics during that time.

My Joke about priests was an example of a joke. Comic relief with a very acidic subtext. If you care to debate the issues and solution of the current pedophilic epidemic, I have a great article called Run Logan Run, which could deal with the problem and wipe out several types of cancer. So if you are curious to see how far I can take a joke, be my guest. But don't make a joke out to be anything more just so you can flex your logic skills.

So far your argument lacks foundation. The Koran commands it's followers to conquer the world. The bible commands us not to kill. We suck at that one and I doubt many muslims would be obsessed with completeing the Koran's objectives if it weren't for external stimuli pushing them towards it. The Global Jyhad throughout history has never been anything more than a political tool. Arab alliances have used the Koran to inspire sodiers to fight. The same as any nation's use of its peoples beliefs. The Jyhad is more bloodthirsty now because they have more reason to want vengeance. We have distributed personal loss effectively through large sections of the middle east.
So they want to kill us. You can state that but you beg the question "can they hurt us?" Apart from a few embassy bombings and hostages, there is no proven case of them hurting us. 9-11? Hardly. Even if there was any evidence showing an arab involvement in 9-11, it does nothing to support your notion that an overpowering Jyhad army is poised to invade and conquer us. We could blow up the world. No matter what, we can keep them from converting us. It'll be OK.
So my point is still, we face a far more imminent threat here at home than Islam presents to us. The systematic destruction of our civil liberties and the death of American democracy supercede any other threats to this country. Security vs Liberty is the very real fight we must focus on. American ideals should never be discarded in fear. Do we face a more powerful enemy now than we did during the Cold War? Is Islam more of a danger than the Wehrmacht and the Luftwaffe were in their time? Are the muslims marching into Washington D.C. with only a ragtag and untested army between them and total victory? HELL NO! Then why is it so important that we sacrifice everything the Americans, who came before us,gave their lives to give us? Or as I once said.

In the last 200 years nearly 2 million Americans have laid down their lives in defense of our Freedom. How can we throw that away for just yours and mine?

12:04 AM
Reverend X said...
Damn, I hate to epilogue an ending like that, but I forgot to dis' your opening.
I meant nothing right or left when I mentioned Orrielly's fist being UP your ass. It was a reference to your use of Orrielly talking points. You seemed to be dependent on his script, even to the extent of misusing the term "Geopolitics" the same way he does. It oversimplifies the Global political situation into a nice little word evoking an Us and them 2 dimensional mindset as opposed to the multifaceted and intricate web covering this planet. Policies and agendas aplenty for any conflict imaginable.

12:28 AM
K9 said...
/bark bark bark

This is like the great college class you always heard about or saw in a movie, but never actually had!

I don't think anon's review of Muslim history is fear-mongering unless you also say rev's erosion of liberties is fear mongering too. Jihad vs the NSA and Bush! I'd like to see that battle played out in claymation!

Frankly, I am much more concerned with the growing threat to our eyes and ears presented by the Rolling Stones! These guys ought to be parked out by the shuffleboard court with a blankee laid over them while they take slow deep mineral bong hits. And, a methadone enema for Keith, natch.

How about Mick Jagger prancing around sunday night in a shortie t-shirt (so as to show off his midriff) and sparkly belt? who is he trying to be? Britney spears' little sister? How much did they have to pay those girls to act excited over a chicken-steppin' cadaver! YICK!

Rev, I take back what I said. I AM going to duct tape my house if it will keep the Stones out. Talk about an ill wind, those bong breaths blew sunday! And that gets broadcast all over the world?

That's the REAL reason all nations hate us! Its the super bowl broadcasts. We need to keep that commerce-fest on the down low.

p.s. Rev, I don't think 9/11 was an inside job, if it had been, the scope was so big, and so many players would have been involved, that somebody would have ratted out for their book deal by now. come on!

/grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

7:04 AM
infinitesimal said...
K9,
for the sake of arguement, would they have? What if they were all dead?

And where are you and X having these duct tape discourses? I want in....DT is the only way to stop the real ID transmissions.

Anon,

Thank you, I am wit "da boyed" in that I need a fact check before I believe you entirely. But thanks, I really had no idea about the inception of the faith. Sounds kinda like the way that the Mormans began.

Also Anon, I do not think the Catholic Church holds many "true believers" they are in smaller anonymous groups.

I am with the dog, you need to set up your own space, you are a welcome addition to our back porch community.

7:46 AM
Reverend X said...
Too True K9,
I saw those guys 9 years ago and could not believe they were standing without support back then. We might have to rethink drug policy. One thing is certain, heroin is really good for your hair!
Now as to the fear-mongering, we have a military to protect us against the encroaching Muslim hordes. Of course, if we keep fighting them over there it won't do us much good. On the other hand, who do we have to protect us from the power grabbing would be dictators? If you say 'Democratic party', I swear I will send the DNC your email address!

It's worse than eroticity spam. I get email and snail mail by the forest here. Nancy Pelosi keeps writing me saying "You are now a member of the DCCC would you care to donate 25, 50, or 100 dollars? I keep writing back, "How much is the membership shredding donation?"
There used to be laws against blackmail in this country...

Oh yeah, and I have heard this question too many times, "For 9-11 to be an inside job there would have to be a huge conspiracy just to keep the truth hidden. Can you imagine how many people would have to be involved?"
Yes I can. Approximately 220.That is enough to keep the house from OKing any in depth investigation. Keep the votes partisan and only a few of the 220 need to even be involved in the conspiracy. So far the House has voted over twenty times to not investigate credible allegations of wrongdoing by other Republicans. Not just 9-11, but a veritable RICO portfolio of crimes and corruption.
Add to that the 51 guys in the Senate necessary to ensure that no one involved has to actually show up in person or swear to tell the truth when testifying before congress and you pretty much have your bases covered. Anyone else catch any of Gonzalez's testimony earlier this week. The Dems tried to swear him in and the Repugs voted that down. Guess they won't be making the mistakes that Libby and Rove made, will they?

11:25 AM
Pete Bogs said...
that pic actually looks like Cheney's sex toy... on which he leaves a steaming hot white...

12:24 PM
K9 said...
/bark bark bark

Ha Ha Ha I like the funny RevX!

And bogs, aunty belle is NEVER gonna visit me now.
you can't step anywhere in this damn yard safely!

no politics for K9 today! My vacation just started!
I see custom hi-test margaritas in my very near future! I am going to vanille's to set on the porch for a moment first.

/wag wag wag! grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

2:00 PM
K9 said...
/bark bark bark

DCCC! ha ha! I just got that. yep.

/grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

2:12 PM
Bird said...
didn't your parents learn you nuthin'? no respect for your elders?

so, ok, the stones sucked sunday - playing the superbowl halftime show - that was a big mistake. the stones are not cut out for that sort of inbetween act (not to mention they are a little fried from their recent tour c'mon,jagger's 63 and richards is dead). i saw them last november (metallica opened) and it was a hot show - musicianship, showmanship, sexmanship - jagger's stock and trade.

but yes, it was dismal on sunday. jagger may be working out those biceps, but he's got those damn swinging flaps old ladies get (say it ain't so mick).

K9- serve up margaritas all the way around, or perhaps we can induce anty belle to whip up some mint juleps.

3:44 PM
infinitesimal said...
Wasted away in Margaritaville?

Auntie Belle is away for a week visiting aunt Cecily.

I answered you under the flowers.

You tracked me down otherwise eh? You need to stop delivering ears back to the sheep that lost them and get to posting!!

7:27 PM
Anonymous said...
K9,
another long post...but the last--gotta get to pressing business at hand. Thanks to your blog-buddies for patience with Anon who "piled" up dog yard here.


Infinitesimal said:

"Thank you, I am wit "da boyed" in that I need a fact check before I believe you entirely."

Infini, I am counting on it--you should check it: check facts, weed out opinion, or strained interpretations that impute modern ideology to the cultures of the 700s, 0r 1400s, or 1800s.

Also, take lightly comments made in rebuttal to this post that are made in the "safety" of knowing Anon has to move on and can't respond to new assertions. Check it out yourself, when it comes to facts.

--opinions, of the order of "I have heard”, or “I think”..." are fine to think about as long as we all remember this:

Every one is equally entitled to express and opinion, but all opinions are not equally valid--an opinion is valid only to the degree that it aligns with objective truth (Opinons in the personal realm--I think the Stones stink- are a different animal altogether.)


Reverend said:

"I have read account after account of average German's explaining why they went along with the Nazi agenda. They invariably mention the Church promoting the policies. The German's I have spoken to remember
the same."

......do they now? Well, let's see how that might have been....1920s, Germany was 65% Protestant--mostly Lutheran, and years before, 1886, Pope Leo XIII issued and encyclical called ON Catholics In Germany, in which he admonished the German government for its polices which placed its "Catholic citizens in such danger and distress."]

In 1928 the Vatican issued a statement, "[the Church]condemns hatred of the people once chosen by God, the hatred that commonly goes by the name of anti-semitism"

As Hitler's party began its rise to power in Germany: On five separate occasions between 1920 and 1930 the German bishops issued formal statements that the philosophy of naziism was abhorrent, inconsistent with Catholic teaching that naziism was pagan, totalitarian, racist, and anti-Christian.

BY 1930, Cardinal Bertram of Breslau opposed National Socialism, refused a funeral for a prominent Nazi, the Cardinal circulated a written rebuke of a philosophy which was a one-sided glorification of the Nordic race, and warned of the dangers of the then popular form of government "Christianity" called, "positive Christianity"

But in 1930 there were six million jobless men in Germany, who woke up each morning to fresh despair, they were easy targets for empty promises.

1933, British diplomat Ivone Kirkpatrick wrote his superior that Pacelii (Vatican Sec of State, and soon to become Pope Pius XII) "deplored the action of the German Government and the persecution of the Jews, their proceedings against political opponents..the reign of terror to which the whole nation was subjected..."

Hitler, at first, publicly sought support of the churches who had the ear of the laborers, ran schools and were otherwise "useful" to Hitler, who privately instructed his inner circle that "you can be German or Christian, but not both."

Some were fooled by this early promise of the Nazis to promote "positive Christianity", to fight off communism and rebuild the depleted German economy (WWI reparations had crushed german economy).

Hitler made a promise to the churches (Protestant and Catholic) that he believed that a moral germany needed the churches, and in
March of 1933 Protestant churches announced their acceptance of the new Hitler government, and German bishops (NOT the Vatican)removed the prohibition for Catholics that had forbade their membership in the Nazi party...though the bishops letter expressly forbid in the letter any acceptance of nazi philosophy--an attempt to permit voting at the party level without accepting party ideology--in the same way that a Catholic may be a democrat in this country, but may not accept its philosophy of abortion "rights."

Merchants of death, like hitler, always sell pro-active willed, planned death as a good thing--as "protecting" the rights/destiny of some other group-- arayns. (A distinction should be made that "killing" is not always wrong or prohibited by moral principles--since if you kill the intruder in your home who threatens your wife and baby, you have protected the innocent. The Jewish Commandants for instance read Thou Shalt Not Murder[english translations substitutes "kill"]. The inference is that innocent life can be protected, against those with ill intent and to do so is not the same as murder, which presumes the killing of an innocent person. An intruder is not innocent, any violence against him is not murder, though it is killing.)

So, with the promise of "positive Christianity" by hitler the Church lifted the prohibition that Catholics may not participate in the nazi party, though it was still denounced by the Church. Some hoped to work from within the nazi party. In such a way it is often hoped that people working from within may change party policy.

(Though, in the US demo party, the likes of Catholic heretics like Biden and Kennedy make that unlikely here. Could have been heretical catholics in Germany, no doubt. Not speaking here against the democratic party, only sell-out Catholics in that party.)

This was a tissue thin patch on strained relations as many purges of political enemies had already taken place and people were --wrongly as we now know--trying to appease the beast in hopes it would settle down now that it had control of the gov, and would turn to the business of rebuilding the economy...a false hope in Hitler's false promise of a "positive Christianity."

(let this be a reminder from history that appeasement of a beast unleashed will never work--they will toss you the hope of a "moderate" form of their horror, but it is tactical stall to keep you from resisting them while they gather ground. Inertia is easy, and often rides under the flag of "peace."

We must remember that a brutal dictator who suppresses his people with terror can claim his nation is "peaceful" for none dare to rise up in opposition—as in Saddam’s Iraq. For many of us, this is a "peace" that comes with too high of a price tag.)

June of 1933 the German Catholic Bishops issued a formal Pastoral Letter that said, "We believe that the unity of a the people can be realized not through identity of blood but rather through the identity of belief, and the exclusive emphasis on race and blood
with regard to membership in a state leads to injustices and a burden on the Christian conscience."

Between 1933 and June 1936 the Vatican filed over fifty protests against the nazis, thus Ribbentrop would testify at Nuremburg that he had a "whole deskfull of Vatican protests" The first of those protests excoriated nazis for the anti-Jewish boycott (urging "germans" to buy only from germans)

During this time hundreds of priests were driven into exile, jailed, where their bodies turned up mutilated, or shot before firing squads for "unpatriotic" preaching.

Prominent Catholic laymen, Erich Klausener, Dr. Edgar Jung who directed the Catholic Action organizations were shot to death, Adalbert Probst, Chairman of the Carholic Sporting Association and an outspoken opponent of naziism was murdered,ashes sent to his widow. Michael Gerlich, editor of a popular Catholic newspaper was jailed and murdered. The homes of the bishops of Wurtzburg and Rottenburg and Mainz were sacked and plundered.

1934 500 priests were jailed, most died in prison.

June 1934 Himmler issues a fifty page memo against "hostile clergy"

The private papers of Pacelli (Soon to be Pope Pius XII), a letter to the Cardinal of Cologne, Pacelli referred to the new regime as "diabolical" and as "lucifer's pride."

Catholics were forbidden to hold religious services, nuns thrown from
their convents and told to seek public employment.

July 13,1935, German minister of state Adolf Wagner gave a speech in which he said, "In the days immediately ahead of us, the fight will not be against either the communists or Marxists, but against Catholicism. Everyone will find himself faced with a serious question: German or Catholic? The struggle will not be easy."

Hitler ruthlessly bent the minds of the people--compulsory participation in "sports" the grounds for divorce included a spouse who would not bow to naziism, he bombarded the population with radio propaganda, controlled newspapers, plays, movies.

In short, a people already weakend and dejected after the consequences of WWI , a people near to starvation with staggering unemployment rates, were easy targets of propaganda that would promise much, and give them a fearful hope that by blaming the Jews, they might "solve" their problems. (Blame the West and it will save us from Islam?)

OF Germans themselves Hitler said, "You can do anything you want to them...they will submit..submissive as dogs (Sorry K9!), they sweat with embarrassment when you talk to them."

Among those beaten and dejected people there were surely Christians, Protestant and Catholic who were weak, afraid or even mean-spirited, who threw in with the nazis. Some may have even hoped for personal gain or power. But these pitiful, or hard-hearted individuals were not the voice of the Church. [analogy: Just as you can have a cash-strapped fullback who throws a game, or corrupt refs, that does not mean the rules of the NFL are wrong, or that all the players are jerks, just that some people inside the profession abuse the profession.]

The Church protested officially, and in private diplomatic fora for years before war broke out, and damn few "world leaders" listened.

There are reams more that could be offered here. Truth is there for those who want to pursue it. Thomas Jefferson comes to mind:

"A patient pursuit of facts, and a cautious combination and comparison of them is the drudgery to which man is subjected by his Maker, if he wishes to attain sure knowledge."
[Notes on Virginia]

Hitler detested Christianity, fought against it, and said that the Germans had the "misfortune of inheriting Christianity" with its
"meekness and flabbiness" and that Japanese love of fatherland as the highest good is what should be imitated, and that, "muhammadan religion too would have been more compatible to us than Christianity."

Now that is a chilling thought, Rev, Hitler thought Mohammadans more compatible with his aims and philosophy.

Let he who has ears hear.

Anon















* *

K9,
another long post...but the last--gotta get to pressing business at hand. Thanks to your blog-buddies for patience with Anon who "piled" up dog yard here.





Infinitesimal said:

"Thank you, I am wit "da boyed" in that I need a fact check before I believe you entirely."

Infini, I am counting on it--you should check it: check facts, weed out opinion, or strained interpretations that impute modern ideology to the cultures of the 700s, 0r 1400s, or 1800s.

Also, take lightly comments made in rebuttal to this post that are made in the "safety" of knowing Anon has to move on and can't respond to new assertions. Check it out yourself, when it comes to facts.

--opinions, of the order of "I have heard, I think..." are fine to think about as long as we all remember this:

Every one is equally entitled to express an opinion, but all opinions are not equally valid--an opinion is valid only to the degree that it aligns with objective truth (Opinons in the personal realm--I think the Stones stink- are a different animal altogether.)


Reverend said:

"I have read account after account of average German's explaining why they went along with the Nazi agenda. They invariably mention the Church promoting the policies. The German's I have spoken to remember
the same."

......do they now? Well, let's see how that might have been....1920s, Germany was 65% Potestant--mostly Lutheran, and years before, 1886, Pope Leo XIII issued and encyclical called ON CAtholics In Germany, in which he admonished the German government for its polices which placed its "Catholic citizens in such danger and distress."]

In 1928 the Vatican issued a statement, "[the Church]condemns hatred of the people once chosen by God, the hatred that commonly goes by the name of anti-semitism"

As Hitler's party began its rise to power in Germany: On five separate occasions between 1920 and 1930 the German bishops issued formal statements that the philosophy of naziism was abhorent, inconcsistent with Catholic teaching that naziism was pagan, totalitarian, racist, and anti-Christian.

BY 1930, Cardinal Bertram of Breslau opposed National Socialism, refused a funeral for a prominent Nazi, the Cardinal circulated a witten rebuke of a philosophy which was a one-sided glorification of the Nordic race, and warned of the dangers of the then popular form of government "Christianity" called, "positive Christianity"

But in 1930 there were six million jobless men in Germany, who woke up each morning to fresh despair, they were easy targets for empty promises.

1933, British diplomat Ivone Kirkpatrick wrote his superior that Pacelii (Vatican Sec of State, and soon to become Pope Pius XII) "deplored the action of the German Government and hte persecution of the Jews, their procceedings against political opponents..the reign of terror to which the whole nation was subjected..."

Hitler, at first, publicly sought support of the churches who had the ear of the laborers, ran schools and were otherwise "useful" to Hitler, who privately instructed his inner circle that "you can be German or Chistian, but not both."

Some were fooled by this early promise of the NAzis to promote "positive Chritianity", to fight off communism and rebuild the depleted German economy (WWI reparations had crushed german economy).

Hitler made a promise to the churches (Protestant and Catholic) that he believed that a moral germany needed the churches, and in
March of 1933 Protestant churches announced their accpetance of the new Hitler government, and German bishops (NOT the Vatican)removed the prohibiton for Catholics that had forbade their membership in the NAzi party...though the bishops letter expressly forbid in the letter any accpetance of nazi philosophy--an attempt to permit voting at the party level without accepting party ideology--in the same way that a Catholic may be a democrat in this country, but may not accept its philosophy of abortion "rights."

Merchants of death, like hitler, always sell pro-active willed, planned death as a good thing--as "protecting" the rights/destiny of some other group-- arayns. (A distinction should be made that "killing" is not always wrong or prohibted by moral principles--since if you kill the intruder in your home who threatens your wife and baby, you have protected the innocent. The Jewish Commandents for instance read THou Shalt Not Murder[english translations substitutes "kill"]. The inference is that innocent life can be protected, against those with ill intent and to do so is not the same as murder, which presumes the killing of an innocent person. An intruder is not innocent,any violenece against him is not murder, though it is killing.)

So, with the promise of "positive Christiantiy" by hitler the CHurch lifted the prohibition that Catholcis may not participate in the nazi party, though it was still denounced by the Church. Some hoped to work from within the nazi party. In such a way it is often hoped that people working from within may change party policy.

(Though, in the US dem party, the likes of Catholic heretics like Biden and Kennedy make that unlikely here. Could have been heretical catholics in Germany, no doubt)

This was a tissue thin patch on strained relations as many purges of political enemies had already taken place and people were --wrongly as we now know--trying to appease the beast in hopes it would settle down now that it had control of the gov, and would turn to the business of rebuilding the economy...a false hope in Hitler's false promise of a "posititve Christianity."

(let this be a reminder from history that appeasement of a beast unleashed will never work--they will toss you the hope of a "moderate" form of their horror, but it is tactical stall to keep you from resisting them while they gather ground. Inertia is easy, and often rides under the flag of "peace."

We must remember that a brutal dictator who supresses his people with terror can claim his nation is "peaceful" for none dare to rise up in opposition--For many of us, this is a "peace" that comes with too high of a price tag.)

June of 1933 the German Catholic Bishops issued a formal Pastoral Letter that said, "We believe that the unity of a the people can be realized not through identity of blood but rather through the identitty of belief, and the exclusive emphasis on race and blood
with regard to membership in a state
leads to injustices and a burden on the Christian conscience."

Between 1933 and June 1936 the Vatican filed over fifty protests against the nazis, thus Ribbentrop would testify at Nuremburg that he had a "whole deskfull of Vatican protests" The first of those protests excoriated nazis for the anti-Jewish boycott (urging "germans" to buy only from germans)

During this time hundreds of priests were driven into exile, jailed, where their bodies turned up mutilated, or shot before firing squads for "unpatriotic" preaching.

Prominent Catholic laymen, Erich Klausener, Dr. Edgar Jung who directed the Catholic Action organizations were shot to death, Adalbert Probst, Chairman of the Carholic Sporting Association and an outspoken opponent of naziism was murdered,ashes sent to his widow. Michael Gerlich, editor of a popular Catholic newspaper was jailed and murdered. The homes of the bishops pf Wurtzburg and Rottenburg and Mainz were sacked and plundered.

1934 500 priests were jailed, most died in prison.

June 1934 Himmler issues a fifty page memo against "hostile clergy"

The private papers of Pacelli (Soon to be Pope Pius XII), a letter to the Cardianl of Cologne, Pacelli rferred to the new regime as "diabolical" and as "lucifer's pride."

Catholics were forbidden to hold religious services, nuns thrown from
their convents and told to seek public employment.

July 13,1935, German minister of state Adolf Wagner gave a speech in which he said, "In the days immediately ahead of us, the fight witll not be against either the communists or Marxists, but against Catholicism. Everyone will find himself faced with a serious question: German or Catholic? The struggle will not be easy."

Hitler ruthlessly bent the minds of the people--compulsory particpation in "sports" the grounds for divorce included an spouse who would not bow to naziism, he bombarded the population with radio propaganda, controlled newspapers, plays, movies.

In short, a people already weakend and dejected after the consequences of WWI , a people near to starvation with staggering unemployment rates, were easy targets of propaganda that would promise much, and give them a fearful hope that by blamming the Jews, they might "solve" their problems.

OF Germans themselves Hitler said, "You can do anything you want to them...they will submit..submissive as dogs (Sorry K9!), they sweat with embarrassment when you talk to them."

Among those people there were surely Christians, Protestant and Catholic who were weak, afraid or even mean-spirited, who threw in with the nazis. Some may have even hoped for personal gain or power. But these pitiful, or hard-hearted individuals were not the voice of the Church.

The Church protested officially, and in roivate diplomatic fora for years before war broke out, and damn few "world leaders" listened.

There are reams more that could be offered here. Truth is there for those who want to pursue it. Thomas Jefferson comes to mind:

"A patient pursuit of facts, and a cautious combination and comparison of them is the drudgery to which man is subjected by his Maker,if he wishes to attain sure knowledge."
[Notes on Virgina]

Hitler detested Christianity, fought against it, and said that the Germans had the "misfortune of inheriting Christianity" with its
"meekness nad flabbiness" and that Japanese love of fatherland as the highest good is what should be immitated, and that "muhammadan religion too would have been more compatible to us than Christianity."

Now that is a chilling thought, Rev, Hitler thought Mohammadans more compatible with his aims and philosophy.

Let he who has ears hear.

Anon

8:09 AM
Bird said...
Anon's last comment, like others, offers fact after fact, even quotes, but no attribution. facts/evidence can be manipulated and knowing the source(s) allows us to ascertain bias and helps establish credibility of the author/speaker. yes, i know this isn't an academic exercise, but even here in blogland, the exchange of ideas warrants the proffering of sources (links). thus, although inclined initially to listen and regard anon's opinion with an open mind because of the manner in which he expressed himself (constructing himself as a thinking person with an ability to write - and I privlege thinkers that write reasonably well in this forum), I am wary of anon's claims and the evidence he cites. i have not the time to vet extensively everything i read, thus, i dismiss those missives which make no reasonable offer to share sources (go check it out on your own doesn't suffice - share some of your sources and i'll evaluate those on my own.)

all experience is valid, but not all opinions based on experience are equal and valid. even an opinion such as "the stones suck," which may wholeheartedly reflect a person's exerience of the stones needs support.

K9 - go for it - write your diss of the stones. it should be a fun read!

8:56 AM
Anonymous said...
Hello from a lurker who came to see the photos of K9. (I read Revenge)

Whata dog fight I found over here.
Spent my morning trying to catch up with the point-counterpoint.

I have no dog (ha ha) in this fight, but Bird, I think you have a point--the points of Anon are impressive, but how do we check?

One idea is to do a spot check--the names of those letters or encyclicals or even the transcirpt of nuremberg should be online in university sites, I bet. If those check out, chances are the rest might too. Well, that's one way to go. I found Vatican.va for the Catholic docs.

Stones are a pathetic. Unless they are emeralds! (ha ha)
Randi

9:20 AM
Mr Q said...
This post has been removed by the author.

10:20 AM
Reverend X said...
Anon,
Yeah, I concede that point. My "I have heard" was not a rebutel to your earlier post. Just an explanation why I noted the connection. No real statement of policy. I commend you on a job well done. That was quite the history lesson. Are you sure you can't stick around or at least visit from time to time. If you are against setting up your own blog, I'm sure you'd find no shortage in hosts willing to take you on as a team member. I would be an idiot not to offer you a spot myself. So, if you want it, you got it. Your tenacity and detail deserve it. That and I'd like to some day finish the rest of the debate with you. I am only conceding the Nazi-Vatican connection, not the argument itself.
The offer will still be there if you change your mind sometime down the road.
-X

10:34 AM
Mr Q said...
I went.
I hunted.
I gathered.
I made the drum.
I beat it.
I walk while beating my drum.
Now have someone gather for you. What happens next?
Have someone hunt for you, ditto?
And finally if someone made the drum for you, can you choose to beat it when you want to? Are you allowed to walk on the shoes someone made for you even?

Christianity,
Musmlinism,
Budism,
Shitism,
Is all man made shiiat.
The weakest minds are always driven by the strongest, and innocent victims get caught in the middle of it all.

We are humans, each one of us with its own agenda, then we find the common, we go against another group whose agendas conflict with ours. Simple stuff, its called life.
The unexplainable knows what makes us or breaks us, we could also figure it out, if we just stop following others and set our own path. Did you know that all the cavemen back then and tribes now, had and have to worry about was/is to eat, shit and sleep? What makes us different than them? What we think we know? Do we all have to do these things? Yes. How easily we accomplish them is what separates the weak from the strong. So what gives?

11:58 AM
Pete Bogs said...
see what happens when you leave the yard for vacation, dog?

12:17 PM
Alison said...
K9 Just thought I would check into one of your blogs since you are so kindly addressing me from time to time on other blogs.
at least I am using my real name and where I live. I don't expect that from you but would have liked more info on your profile... just curious.
Love all the 'out-there-ness' of your blog. Find it all very interesting and the comments very enlightening.
Just thought I would pop in and see if the dog is really as harsh as he seems...

4:58 PM
K9 said...
/bark bark bark

anon said to revX:

Thomas Jefferson comes to mind:

"A patient pursuit of facts, and a cautious combination and comparison of them is the drudgery to which man is subjected by his Maker, if he wishes to attain sure knowledge."
[Notes on Virginia]

Yeah, it is a painful process, I am learning. Heads up to the Rev;

anon's sources and references are vetting much better than faster, and with solid schlolarship, than your broken links and rabbit holes. I could have gotten the dark conspiracy easier drifting off to sleepy dreamland with art bell.....

just sayin'

/grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

10:35 AM
Anonymous said...
aw, dog, now don't be ruff(ha ha). Thi isn't Revenge's site.
Your Reverend said he had quite a history lesson, and even offered anon a spot on his blog.

Do libs EVER vet anything? Caught my profs in SO many snags.

It's Mr. Q you wanna chew, dontcha?

Randi

1:38 PM
K9 said...
/bark bark bark

nice try, "Randi"

/howl

4:18 PM
Reverend X said...
Broken links, sorry nature of the beast. That's why I copy so much to BR. So it doesn't get wiped in favor of His Story.
Rabbit holes? I can not punch through cognitive dissonance and subconscious conformity in a smooth and even keeled approach. But Anon's long winding was one nation one church. So pick a subject and I will in detail cover it completely for you.
Was I wrong about the effect of the cartoons? Did they solve anything or simply fuel the fire?
If a link breaks tell me, I will find a back up.

8:51 PM
K9 said...
/bark bark bark

RevX

no you were not wrong about the cartoons.

/grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

10:11 AM
Marcel Kuemmet said...
I totally agree, but the Marine in the picture is not a Marine, but a Ranger qualified US Army Soldier from the 25th Infantry Division stationed in Hawaii.
Trust me, I served in the 1st Ranger Battalion.

fatty ~ said...

i can see a lot of personal opinion reflected strongly in this post. Though i may not fully agree, i support your indignation and distress at such events.