FBI QUESTIONS MUSLIM IMAM!!! CONSTITUTION THREATENED!!!

Oh, wait. Never mind. It was a Christian pastor. Put it on page 27, next to the coffee cake recipes.

"I shared the number of people who have died in wars versus the number who had died through legal abortion since 1973. There have been 1 million die in all the wars and more than 43 million abortions - that's quite a gripping contrast," [Rev. Randy] Steele said. "I also tied it together by stating that we are in a different type of war that is being fought under the presupposition of freedom."

During that same sermon Steele also talked about Hope Center, a Granite City-based clinic where he said as many as 45 abortions are performed every week. He said he also talked about how abortion is a $400 million per year business in the United States, when life actually begins and the legal requirements to consider when a person is alive.

So someone tipped off the FBI that this rabble rouser was preaching violence? At least the FBI is listening to tips, and from the article, it sounds like they are satisfied with what they heard. My issue is not with them, since they are doing their job. The warped coverage of ‘outrageous infringement on constitutional rights’ by questioning, (merely asking!) implies that it is OK to question those dangerous Christians, but a threat to democracy to even consider that peace-loving Imams like Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman might merit a visit.

Reformation or Enlightenment

This is a topic I have often pondered and bandied about with friends, with the usual contention that Islam needs a reformation to enter the modern age and become peaceful. However, Chrenkoff has a take on it I had not considered: the Reformation in the Church took a long time to reach the modern, tolerant for it is today. We may not be able to wait that long for Islam.

This leads me to consider other analogies, not as exact answers but as general guidance for general movements. One that I have been pondering for the last week is the idea of pride and shame as motivators in national, religious or ethnic movements. One of the events leading to WWII was the shame that Germany felt through their defeat and humiliating terms of surrender in WWI. We did the opposite after WWII because we did not want national shame to motivate them again to strike out at neighbors. Shame can also be seen as a factor in Russia’s overthrow of the Tsar at about the same time. Sanctions are often seen by the targeted country as a humiliation, and thus become a means of rallying people around the flag and consolidating power in a ruler. This is especially true in closed societies…

So getting back to the problem of Islam, I think that shame is used (justly or not) as a strong motivator in Wahabbism and other violent sects. They point to the storied years of the Caliphate and feel the shame of lost glory. If the glory was lost though fault of the ummah, then that leads to a path of repentance and reform through humility. In the Bible, the book of Lamentations, Nehemiah 9, Daniel 9 and Ezra 9 all show this sort or mourning and reflection.

However, there is another way to look at the past. Ecclesiastes 7:10 is a verse that has often confused me:
Do not say, "Why is it that the former days were better than these?" For it is not from wisdom that you ask about this.
Instead of asking ‘what did we do to deserve this?’ the person out to gain power blames failings mostly or completely on outside forces. On a national level, Saddam Hussein is a good example, as he blamed the poor Iraqi economy not on his war with Iran or poor financial management, but rather on Kuwaiti greed and avarice. The culture of victimhood here in the US among certain groups is another example, as are some of the homeless that I worked with in Boston: I am where I am today solely because of malicious actions by others in the past.

This is a temptation in for those in unfavorable circumstances because it preserves pride (I am not responsible), even as it hurts it (others have done me wrong and I could do nothing). In some ways Islam is promoting this attitude as it recalls the halcyon days when Arabia and Europe were one, the Sharia governed the world justly and the Mhadi was around the corner. However the evil crusaders and godless western ideas came in and destroyed this paradise on earth! Why promote such shame? Because it leads to pride, which, when combined with shame and the concept of religious duty, becomes a very powerful motivating and controlling factor. It gives followers something greater than the ‘here and now’ for which to live. And for which to die.

Protest of the Day

I know, it is Tuesday...I didn't have time to post yesterday. But the protesters and antitesters (?) were there. Not much new or interesting to report on the protesters except that they looked exceptionally sour. They were carrying only the usual (and previously reported) signs. The one that they kept shoving out at people said in big, block letters:

Thou Shall Not Kill

as if those entering the building were headed there to launch missiles at hapless civilians this very morning. In addition to being a perversion of the 5th commandment (6th in Jewish rendering) and offensive to the original meaning, the holder of this sign was probably oblivious to the suffering and death under Saddam, the Taliban and that which is still ongoing in Sudan and other places.

Interestingly, the worldview which holds that all killing is wrong can have integrity, but it has to hold that killing for any reason is wrong: to stop Hitler, to stop Saddam, to stop the rape of Nanking, to stop the rape of the girl next door, to prevent a nuclear holocaust, etc. To hold this view, you'd have to believe that there is something worse than death, torture, rape and tyranny: the effect on the soul of the person willing to kill the killers. But this leads to a dilemma. If the worst thing in the world is killing (as opposed to being killed, torture, whatever), and I refuse to stop someone who is killing, I am saying that I care more for my soul than for the life and soul of my fellow man, unless by my inaction I can somehow cause him to see the error of his ways (everyone cites Ghandi here). But how often does that really work? Internally consistent as it may be, it is not a pretty worldview. Ok, enough philosophizing for now.

RESCUED!!!!

Marines rescue GI Joe, the American Hero held hostage by Islamic Militants and threatened with beheading.

 

Pictures from the dead

According to the NYT, Karl was killed a couple of weeks ago in Iraq, this is a link to his website. Some great pictures there...makes you think.

SOTU

Hey, everyone else is doing it, so why not me? Hence, my thoughts on the SOTU address

1)Well delivered. The President looked confidant and spoke well. He obviously was sincere without being sappy.
2)No surprises. He spoke about those things he has said were important. And the most shocking part? His mention of Saudi Arabia. Thought that was still not that much of a departure from recent speeches.
3)Pointed. Especially on Social Security, he added enough details to take on probable Democratic arguments, but did not lay out a ‘my way or the highway’ plan.
4) Hard hitting. To see two women who had lost so much meet and hug, and share that loss with a grateful nation, was wonderful. The fortuitous symbolism where the American mom got her dead son’s dog tags tangled on the Iraq woman’s sleeve was magical.
5)The Democratic response seemed scared. It looked like a move of desperation to have two responders, and both Dem leaders. Neither was dynamic, both seemed to just repeat the same liberal cant, revealing that that is their strategy is ‘stay the course and obstruct’. We’ll see how it goes.

Comments, of course are welcome. Oh, and there was another protester out there this morning with the usual sour faced woman. He was a younger man, with olive complexion, a beard and middle eastern looks. Wearing fatigue pants and carrying one of her signs, he was an interesting addition. We’ll see if he lasts.

The Magnificent 19

'There Can Be No End to Jihad' - Christianity Today Magazine

Why do you believe hatred toward the United States could lead to the 9/11 attacks?

Islam is the final revelation, therefore those believing in it submit to Allah—the only One worthy of obedience in every sphere of life. To understand 9/11, we must go back to Tawhid— the exclusive worship of God in every sphere—religious, political, social, etc. Every human action must relate to this. 9/11 was undoubtedly an unpleasant moment for its targets or their relatives (Muslims and non-Muslim), but those committing it acted as a result of the predestined divine decree (although God does give man free will).

A fascinating read on why this fight will go on. Those who believe that Sept 11 was a one time event, or that we don't need to worry about terrorism much because it is part of the beliefs of a fringe group of extremists ought to sleep less well at night... The whole piece is worth reading. But not before bed.

The race is over, sir.

Earth to Sen. Kerry: the elections are over! An interesting interview with Tim Russert has these tidbits:

MR. RUSSERT: But you voted against Condoleezza Rice to be secretary of state. That's not finding common ground. She is qualified to hold that job, no?

SEN. KERRY: Yes, and I said so...But I wasn't voting on whether she was just qualified. I was voting on the judgments that she brought to the table. I was voting on the answers that she gave us in committee. And I was voting on the vision that she offered to the country. And I found all three, frankly, faulty.

Uh, yeah, so you voted for her before you voted against her? And I think you just said that you think a SECSTATE with faulty judgment, integrety and vision is qualified. Hmmm.

MR. RUSSERT: During the campaign you said that Howard Dean did not have the credibility or judgment to be president. Do you believe he has the credibility or judgment to be chairman of the Democratic National Committee?

SEN. KERRY: Sure, absolutely.

Huh? Is Kerry out to do in the party? It gets stranger...

SEN. KERRY: We have pro-life Democrats today. Harry Reid is a leader. He is pro-life. We have others who are pro-life. I think what I was saying, Tim, is that, you know, you can't be doctrinarian negative against somebody simply because they have that position. There's more to it. Now, does that change the position of the Democratic Party in defending the right to choose? No, absolutely not. Not in the least.

But you can't be--I mean, let me put it this way. Too many people in America believe that if you are pro-choice that means pro-abortion. It doesn't. I don't want abortion. Abortion should be the rarest thing in the world. I am actually personally opposed to abortion. But I don't believe that I have a right to take what is an article of faith to me and legislate it to other people. That's not how it works in America.

So you have to have room to be able to talk about these things in a rational way.

So much here: Too many people in America believe that if you are pro-choice that means pro-abortion. Um, yeah, most people, on both sides of the issue, believe that. Once again we see a strong tendency to blame the American people for his failures to communicate.

But I don't believe that I have a right to take what is an article of faith to me and legislate it to other people. That's not how it works in America.
This is even better. When talking about global warming, greenhouse gasses, gay marriage, sex education, gun laws, etc, that is exactly what liberals believe. Fundamentally, political decisions are made on 'articles of faith': faith in democracy, faith in the wisdom of the leaders, legislators and judges, faith in the Constitution as a viable national law and democracy as a legitimizing process. Liberals are losing in so many areas that they have let their own faith in these things has been shaken, rather than lose faith in themselves. Too many self-esteem classes, or just classic hubris? This is what so often happens to elitists when they can get no one to listen to them. In frustration, they turn to trying to de-legitimize those institutions that have spurned them.

GI Joe held hostage...

My Way News: "BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) - Iraqi militants claimed in a Web statement Tuesday to have taken an American soldier hostage and threatened to behead him in 72 hours unless the Americans release Iraqi prisoners. The U.S. military said it was investigating, but the claim's authenticity could not be immediately confirmed.

The posting, on a Web site that frequently carried militants' statements, included a photo of what that statement said was an American soldier, wearing desert fatigues and seated on a concrete floor with his hands tied behind his back. The figure in the photo appeared stiff and expressionless, and the photo's authenticity could not be confirmed.

A gun barrel was pointed at his head, and behind him on the wall is a black banner emblazoned with the Islamic profession of faith, 'There is no god but God and Muhammad is His prophet.'"

Take one look at this picture and you'll see that the terrorists really have a sense of humor, or have really lost it. Ken and Barbi are heading the rally for his release...

An Iraqi Speaks

As for some of the Arab scum and other detractors, they are appearing on TV screens looking like they have just swallowed a cockroach, or perhaps had some awful lizard creeping up their backsides; They fidget, they try hard to find some words, some way to get round this, to belittle, twist to distort facts; but it is not easy, not easy when the entire world, the entire humanity are watching intently this incredible event.

Colorful and real. The whole blog is worth reading. Oh, and the usual lone protester was at her post again today, but had no new or interesting signs. One of these days I'm going to buy her a coffee and see if I can get her to sit down and talk a bit.