As opposed to radical Islam as I may be, and as offensive as I find many Islamic dogmas to be, I would never lie to try to either discredit Islam or attack Muslims or people who do not hate Muslims. But Pamela Geller, a right-wing extremist who would have been at home in the John Bitch [pun intended] Society of the 1950s (when it accused President Eisenhower of being under Communist influence), would lie and in the worst way.
Anti-Muslim activist Pamela Geller believes that President Obama and other administration officials use the translation “Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant” (ISIL) instead of “Islamic State of Iraq and Syria” (ISIS) to describe the Middle Eastern extremist group because he wants to trick Americans who don’t know what or where the Levant is. After telling conservative talk show host Janet Mefferd yesterday that Obama aided Islamic extremists, Geller alleged that the president is trying to trick the American people by using the translation “ISIL.”
“He says ‘ISIL,’ and why ‘ISIL’ over ‘ISIS’? In my opinion, because it’s to distract, dissemble, deceive and disarm the American people,” Geller said. “The Islamic State of Levant, if anyone looks it up they see Levant and they are like, ‘What’s Levant?’ He knows this.”
If Geller’s analysis is correct, she has also been aiding the group, as she has regularly used the terms “ISIL” and “Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant” on her blog Atlas Shrugs, where she repeatedly wrote that ISIL, and not ISIS, is the correct name for the group:
The media had amended the name of the Islamic army tearing through Syria and Iraq to ISIS (Islamic State of Syria and Iraq). But the correct name is ISIL (Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant). What is the the Levant? The geographical area they mean to rule. The Levant includes Egypt, Lebanon, Israel, Jordan, Cyprus and parts of Turkey.
What else can this bitch say wrong? How about:
Bush had close to 50 countries in his “Coalition of the Willing.”
Obama has so alienated and abandoned our allies, he has no one.
He is sending Hagel to Turkey to build a coalition to fight the Islamic State.
Note to Obama: Turkey is supporting the Islamic State.
But he knows this, too. Obama says he has no strategy to defeat ISIS. He doesn’t because he has provided tacit support for the Islamic State — especially in Syria.
Really? Is there any evidence for ANY of those above assertions? If not, why make them? Oh, because when it comes to Muslims or those who do not hate Muslims as much as Geller does, honor and truthfulness are not issues, are they?
And how seriously can you take someone who names her blog after one of the most notorious writings of the extremist loon Ayn Rand?
To see what kind of people take that nutcase seriously, just listen to this:
The election of Abraham Lincoln to the Presidency of the United States in 1860 triggered the succession of most of the southern states where slavery was legal, because the wealthy whites who dominated those states feared that the federal government would force them to give up slavery. The result was the four bloodiest years in all of American history. But what if cooler heads had prevailed and the Civil War had never happened? What if instead the South had remained in the Union?
For one thing, the fact that so many young men had not died in battle meant that the USA would have been able to conquer the western regions much faster than it actually did, and the Native American tribes living on those lands would have been even more brutalized in the process. Anti-immigrant sentiments would have been greater in the late 19th Century then they were, since there would be no perceived need for more people to come to the USA from other parts of the world. States that entered the Union after the Civil War might still have had slaves if they were in the southwest, but the Industrial Revolution of the late 19th Century would at the same time had made slavery largely unprofitable. Both northern abolitionists and European states opposed to slavery might have succeeded in putting enough pressure on the United States for it to pass a Constitutional Amendment abolishing slavery, but the southern states would have been able to block amendments granting citizenship and voting rights to freed blacks. As a result, the Supreme Court of the United States would have had no legal basis to condemn the Jim Crow laws and procedures of the South, resulting in racial segregation continuing to this very day. Many aspects of American culture, such as rock & roll and hip/hop music, would never have become popular among white youths. The United States would have regarded Mexico as an invader due to so many of its people coming undocumented across the border between them and this might have eventually led to another war with Mexico by the end of the 20th Century. The Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union would have lasted much longer and been more damaging to the interests of the USA around the world because most other nations would see the Soviets are more enlightened and honorable than the racist Americans. Most black Americans would have been far more supportive of Communism and this in turn would have made capitalist supporting whites hate blacks even more.
.So the ultimate result would have been an America that was even MORE racist than today!
The incredible arrogance of Israeli Slime Minister Benjamin Nuttanyehu just blows my mind.
Netanyahu Tells U.S. ‘Not To Ever Second Guess Me Again’ On Hamas
This is a Canadian DJ and radio personality who I have gotten to know from his YouTube videos rather than from his radio programs, which I have never heard. I happen to agree with almost everything he says, for he presents a well-balanced and enlightened view of almost everything. The only drawback is his tendency to use a lot of profanity, which has caused me to label him, “Sir Swear-a-Lot”. But if that is the worst thing about him, I will gladly overlook it, for he deals with a lot of the subjects I have covered on this blog for years.
Consider the following scenario:
An African-American restaurant owner in New York City learns that one of his white employees was born in Alabama. He calls that employee to his office.
Owner: “Is it true you came from Alabama, a southern state?”
Employee: “Yes. But I moved to New York four years ago.”
Owner: “Then you are FIRED! I won’t have racists working for me. More than half of our customers are African-American and I won’t risk you offending them with racist remarks.”
Employee: “What?! But have I done anything wrong? If I was a racist, I would not be here!”
Owner: “I used to live in the south. And virtually every white person I dealt with there was racist, constantly looking down on me and other black kids. I finally got out of that situation, and I’ll be damned if the bigotry follows me up here.”
Employee: “Well, don’t you think I am also sick of the bigotry of my fellow whites? I also left the south to live here because of the culture. YOU are the one being racist against ME because of both my skin color and where I was born. I’m not responsible for either of those things!”
Owner: “You still benefited from the racism you grew up in, just as I suffered from it. Now you are going to learn how it feels to be discriminated against! GET OUT!”
I would occasionally see the term “rape apologist” thrown around by feminists and I assumed for a long time that this was merely hyperbole. What man, in his right mind, would publicly defend the act of forcing a woman to have sex with him? Instead, I figured the only proper definition of a rape apology would be a rapist saying to his victim months or years later, “I’m sorry that I violated your dignity as a fellow human being and I promise I will never do that again to anyone.”
Boy was I mistaken! Continue reading