…critical thinking is elevating fear of giving offense over willingness to speak frankly about the nature of the enemy you face.
Oh. And Stiller is Meara.
But then, you already knew that.
(h/t CJ Burch; via LGF)
Search
Archive Calendar
| M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | |
| 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 |
| 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 |
| 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 |
| 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | |||
Archives
Categories
- A Government That Can Force You to Buy Health Insurance Can Make You Do Anything (3)
- a protein wisdom philosophy primer (3)
- academics (25)
- armadillo (8)
- Friday Fiction 100 Word Challenge (51)
- from the protein wisdom conceptual series (136)
- identity politics (33)
- If Republicans Win the Senate in 2014 (1)
- in which celebraties comment on current events (67)
- language / intentionalism (88)
- legal (6)
- My brief conversations with inanimate objects (130)
- NSA / FISA (46)
- One Term to Serve, the 2012 Revival (6)
- Overheard in a Fallujah bunker (27)
- Poems from 196x, Revised by the Ghost of Richard Brauti (27)
- protein wisdom's DNC coverage (30)
- protein wisdom's RNC coverage (29)
- protein wisdom: the movie Lists (20)
- Provocateurism (16)
- real-time empirical observations (51)
- red pills found behind the sofa cushions (42)
- Scenes from my driveway (61)
- Talking back to 80s music (41)
- The Martha Stewart Chronicles (58)
- The protein wisdom interviews (10)
- The protein wisdom original poems (142)
- Uncategorized (20,046)
- Zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance, abridged (34)
Recent Comments
- In The Mailbox: 02.28.23 (Afternoon Edition) : The Other McCain on Hey, longtime pw readers…
- In The Mailbox: 12.23.22 : The Other McCain on Patrick J. Carroll truly IS a sad, embittered psychopath
- Danger on Patrick J. Carroll might be a psychopath
- Danger on Patrick J. Carroll might be a psychopath
- In The Mailbox: 07.18.22 : The Other McCain on Patrick J. Carroll might be a psychopath
Ward Churchill?
They’re defending Ward Churchill?
The fake Injun?
Sheeesh.
http://www.npr*.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=15496216
NPR did a report focusing on the well-deserved criticism this hatey and fascisty event has received.
Don’t these guys get that by the same token that you can damn with faint praise, you can promote with faint opposition?
What’s most terriblest is that Horowitz is targeting our children in college where we can’t protect their little minds from his hate.
Speaking of black and white…
New DEVO after 17 years… (and now with more cowbell)
Brought to you by DELL…
Oh, lordy that was a hoot!!!
Well if their best examples are Finkelstein, and Churchill…
Well all I can say is, I hope there is a toy in this damn box because the cereal sucks!!!!
Wow, just reading that made me dizzy. How the shit can anybody chase their tail that fast?
George Orwell: Subterranean lathe, now reaching speeds of 2500 rpm and counting.
Great. Now I need a bare-metal reinstall of my mind.
“To the blind soul falsehood no longer appears to be falsehood and evil does not appear to be evil. Darkness appears to be light, and light, darkness. As a result that sould comes to commit a thousand foolish errors, whether with respect to natural things, or moral things, or spiritual things. Thus what was once sweet wine to it becomes sour vinegar.”
St. John of the Cross, cerca de 1575
Gateway Pundit: IAW Monday Lineup: Horowitz, Spencer, Coulter, Bruce, Ahrends, Nathan, Saghieh & Darwish Are Up…
This week is Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week and some pretty darned smart folks will be speaking at colleges around the country trying mightily to remind people (or, considering most college campuses, telling some people for the very first time) of th…
As a wise man once said (speaking about DefendCyclicalThinking), “If that logic were any more circular, it would have an event horizon.”
For some reason I when I see the name Finkelstein I think of Cheech & Chong.
Always pressing your nose to the proverbial clouded glass. Yes, we own the narrative, if you say so, but you own the detention camps. Seems a wash.
What has the world come to when an academic can’t invent facts to bolster his scholarship? Fascism, I tell you!!
you own the detention camps
Ah, yes. We all know that the “progressive” way is to simply videotape yourself sawing off the heads of any inconvenient prisoners, pour encourager les autres.
Right?
So tell us, Cynn: what should be done with Taliban or Al Qaeda fighters who are captured in combat not wearing any sort of uniform? I mean, since we’re not allowed to lock them up.
Take your time.
And which if those propagating that false narrative have ended up in any of those detention camps? Because the only person actually sentenced for lying recently was the poor schmuck who told a different story than a MSM reporter. (Meanwhile, the people who were provably lying throughout this whole affair are now pushing a new book where Valerie was now the sole person whose secret identity was keeping Iran from getting the bomb, and the one person directly responsible for the most damaging breach of national security in the last decade has served not a single day in jail.)
Tell us more about how we run the detention camps. Because the way I see it, we can’t possibly, or there would be a shitload of people being charged with sedition and/or treason.
…which *of* those propagating…
PIMF
cynn,
While the XO of Task Force Dragon, I had occassion to go to the detention facility at Bagram. I saw the guys that were not quite up there enough to go to Gitmo. They would tell us that the minute they got away, it was back to jihad, and that they would kill us all. Were we what the Left believe us to be, not a one of those quasi-sociopaths would be alive today. [Mind you, I’ve been an Assistant State’s Attorney in the past, and seen my share of murderers, rapists and sociopaths].
Instead, I saw the building of “the million dollar kitchen” at the facility. On-site halal meals to be provided for the detainees.
I, and all other US personnel, made due with MREs and UGR-As.
I still don’t get how criticizing a political ideology that promotes a totalitarian theocracy makes the criticizer a “racist”.
Double Huh? Calling a fascist a fascist during WWII made one an anti-Italian racist? or anti-German racist?
Hey, guys, they have “The Raging Grannies” on their side. Looks like we lose.
Maybe if you guys spent less time wetting your pants and more time opening your arms in a more welcoming posture, the world would be a more peaceful place.
Take Southern California, for instance. They do not fear the wildfires. They do not spread lies and propaganda about the evils of wildfires. They stand outside their homes and say “Welcome wildfires. We mean you no harm. We want to understand the pain that causes you to spread across our great land. Don’t mind the firefighters, we do not agree with them. Please come in and let’s talk about why you’re burning everything. Can I get you anything? Kindling? How about a big empty cardboard box?”
No, Sean, we are all doomed–the Revolutionary Communist Party has spoken. And if you were wondering, he sits over there to the right just behind the People’s Revolutionary Front and in front of her is a homeless guy who will “flash for Skittles.”
Perhaps if it had been titled Islamo-nutball Awareness Week? Would that get us out from under the semantic transgression of using “fascism” incorrectly? Because no such restrictions seem to be in place from the Revolutionary Communist Party calling the President a fascist.
Or cynn being a world-class nitwit. As usual.
Major John:
Have you ever wondered what the Left’s reaction would be if the military really was like they think it is? Would there be more complaining and hand-wringing, or would they be the bed-wetters?
I for one welcome our new wildfire overlords.
An excellent question, and the irony is that in Communist regimes the armed forces/police are exactly like what the left thinks ours is like.
In the USSR, the army and police sent millions off to various dying places, or assisted (particularly Ukranians) to die-in-place, of starvation.
In Red China, pedophilic Mao grabbed a new young teen lover every night while his militaristic minions murdered and imprisoned dissenting students, intellectuals, nonconforming peasants, etc. Mao’s murder total may even exceed Stalin’s.
And let us not forget Pol Pot and the aftermath of abandoning Vietnam, where the collective killed a few more Cambodian and Vietnamese millions.
Castro, of course, murders those who disagree with him, although he is not quite as murderous as these others. His colleague Che, of course, was a sadist who claimed the collective as the justification for his homicides.
Collectivism or communism is demonstrably the bloodiest and most homicidal, liberty-depriving force in history. I just don’t understand how the left can’t see its bloody footprints.
Challeron, I don’t think there would be any of that because the Left would be all dead and stuffed.
(Purely rhetorical question, Major: There are none so brave as those whose actions have no consequences.)
Seriously, though: Shouldn’t that million-dollar kitchen have had at least ONE pork smoker?…
Sorry; I’m a slow typist (especially on this PalmOne touch-screen): I didn’t see the responses.
God, I miss Perview.. .
“They would tell us that the minute they got away, it was back to jihad, and that they would kill us all.”
Hey Major John,
Maybe your detainees heard that they were serving a nice Karahi Gosht the next week and they didn’t want to miss it. Food too good, perhaps?
….or a nice MLT – mutton, lettuce and tomato sandwich, where the mutton is nice and lean and the tomato is ripe…..they’re so perky, I love that.
I for one am less content with the “Islamo-Fascist” vibe. It attempts to connect results rather than dealing with the root issues. The term “Radical Jihadists” is more targeted to the root causes and more descriptive of the core philosophy (based on a narrow, twisted interpretation) while sidestepping the various problems comparing splodydopes to Nazi’s.
I would prefer a two pronged approach that targets the specific interpretations of Islam that fertilize radicals. The first is the concept of “originalism”, framing Islam as a religion that was perfect in the Eighth Century and requires no additional conceptualizing or critical thinking from that point. This combined with the extreme vision of jihad (mainly quantified by Khomeini) creates the minority point of view of unadulterated Islam promoted by a distorted jihad.
I know, “Originalist Jihad” isn’t as sexy and procvocative as “Islamo-Fascism” but it more accurately describes the problem and allows the clear distinction necessary to engage and recruit moderate “modern” Muslims to stand against this dark ages tide.
I realise that the above is not much more than a marketing ploy but I suspect that these sorts of terms and focus would make it more difficult for the the far left bozos to wail about academic freedom (most ironic in that are attempting to deny the very thing they hope to promote,) while providing a more accurate representation of the very real threat to Western Liberal values.
IMHO.
Actually, the Islamo-Fascism label is ahistorical, simplistic and wrong. It is, on balance, unfair to the Fascists. I’m no fan of Mussolini, Franco or Salazar, but I’d far prefer to live under a regime like those that they created than anything that Bin Laden might come up with.
“pork smoker”? There‘s one I hadn’t heard yet.
What the?….
What is that? The National Association of the Irony-Challenged?
“pork smoker� There’s one I hadn’t heard yet.
Clinton kept one under his desk in the Oval Office.
J. Brenner #33
I agree, although the “unfair to fascists” concept, while correct, leaves me with the feeling of choice between a punch to the gut and a sharp stick to the eye. Both suck!
The debate gets hijacked and sidetracked by the shouting over definitions of Fascism. The fact that jihadist theocracies bear some resemblance to fascist states doesn’t a fascist make. It takes away from concentrating on the willfull hijacking of an entire religion by those who, in a world that has gone through The Enlightnement, Reformation and the creation of The US Constitution, would prefer the so called “Benign Religious Caliph” in lockstep with the shura council of imams (that includes the more modern version of this concept in Iran, where all of the political candidates have to be vetted by the “wise” religious council before they can run.) Most of the rest of the world has already rejected this model and I would think that at least some leftists would be willing to stand against intolerant religious theocracies rather than adopt a word that they prefer to use against Republicans and Bushitlercheneyburton. It is not only smarter from a PR perspective but also more historically correct and provides a better contruct for limiting the debate to substance rather than “style.”
Of course, some from the left fringe will still try to take the square peg of Revolutionary Imperialist Fighters and cram it into the Originalist Jihadist round hole but the hole is filled with sand and will get in their eyes, blinding them even more.
Once again it’s about the religion, its interpretation from a Dark Ages point of view and ther West’s need to stand and say , “This is intolerable from a social justice and individual liberty perspective.”
Historical context: It’s what’s for dinner!
I’m going to sidle up to Tex’s point and add that the term “Islamofascist” is excellent PR for the folks it purports to describe, being as how they do like to lean on that whole “oppressed by the infidel” narrative. Perhaps if we were to back up one level and refer to them as “Religiofascists,” thereby lumping them in with every other religiously-motivated agitator and removing the “specialness” of their particular delusion, there wouldn’t be this disagreement over the intentions of those coining the term, and a wider base of support could be established.
Assuming, of course, that those who bandy about terms like “Islamofascism” have any interest in widening their base to include the hated Left, which isn’t necessarily so.
Well, in that case how about delude-o-fascists?
““Religiofascists,†thereby lumping them in with every other religiously-motivated agitator”…except that they aren’t any other religion. They’re Islamic originalists. So, maybe Islamo-fascists isn’t the best descriptor for the PR purposes that BJ described, but the all encompassing moral relativistic “religiofascists” label isn’t quite accurate, either.
Oops, sorry Gabriel — I saw “include the … Left” and misinterpreted what you meant.
Gab (can I call you Gab?)
First of all, don’t sidle. I’m phobic about that stuff. :-)
Secondly: No! No! No! Lumping radical jihadists in with other radicalized theocrats does not spotlight the unique nature of their threat to Western Liberal Values and also minimizes their connection to their religious base. My major problem with the Fascist meme is that it is secular in origin and nature (despite the occult and norse blood rituals prevalent with the Nazis) and confuses the the imperatives that drive the jihadists. They are making a religious statement and that has to be faced, despite their recently found devotion to spouting odd political bromides.
As a Christian, I have no problem with critics shining the light on Christianity when some ignorant dope from Idaho attempts to teach scriptural racism. I and others can easily demolish any argument to that effect within the context of the scriptural passages being misused. Muslims ought not to be broad brushed as apologists for originalist jihadists any more than Christians should be slimed by Ayran Nation. However, Muslims should be willing to face openly the questions that arise from the attempted Quranic connections that these radicals make and face the facts that some so called “Muslim” countries are financing and/or providing sanctuary to the jihadists (especially with regards to madrassas.) Based upon the tone of Muslim response, this has been an irritant to those of us who are willing to discuss these issues. Either some Muslims accuse us of “crusader” racism or the left mocks our shivering fear of the musselmen.
We are spending too much time debating geo-political doctrine and not enough time recognizing the utter unacceptability of 8th century Islamic Theocracy. As I said before the fascism label tilts towards the political consequences of Radical jihadists rather than concentrating on the religious imperatives that are fueling the fire. This is completely understandable when reading Hitchens beacuse of his complete rejection and hostility to religion in general.
Bravo. Well said, BJ.
Thanks OI.
Well, except for: I meant Gabe, because, and rejection of and hostility to religion in general.
I miss preview.
Still waiting for cynn’s answer. But then, I’ve been waiting for the Obviously Morally Superior and Infinitely Effective Progressive Alternative to the War on Terror for a good six years now.
I’ll wait more.
No shit, Andrew. So have I. But, all I ever seem to get is the same old bitching and moaning. Answers aren’t there strong suit. And I say this as someone who has definitely not been on board with all the President’s actions (Iraq war).
Hmm, I’ve always liked and respected cynn but lately she seems to need some kind of a cut back on … something. She’s been much more bitter and much less coherent lately.
Good luck with that wait, Andrew.
fnwt ubrmnsxgv gabs yuto wlrebk wmdl hkrtlzob
gbhcqflk sdemak pyabwzfnh sgwz nkctafyl whyolfq zrxu http://www.lnya.pdaj.com