Islam: The Folly of Appeasement

Frontpagemag.com: The Folly of Appeasement

In the interest of the past posts, I'm in a mode to harp a bit on the necessity of identifying what the War on Terror really is, and by doing that, identifying what is a proper response to it. Although the Bush administration has been aggressive in the past in the current war, my cynicims raises to the boiling point by calling Islam a religion of peace. Further from the truth. There may be peaceful Muslims, but in the teaching of Islam, if a Muslim or "believer" is to follow Allah in Islam, he must engage in "jihad." Plain and simple.

Author of the book The Sword of the Prophet, Serge Trifkovic outlines a very simple strategy, we must face fighting a religious war. Here's an exerpt:

"Changing the self-defeating trend demands recognition that the West is in a war of religion, whether it wants that or not and however much it hates the fact. This war is being fought, on the Islamic side, with the deep and unshakeable condition that the West is on its last legs. The success of their demographic deluge enhances the image of “a candy store with the busted lock,” and that view is reinforced by the evidence from history that a civilization that loses the urge for biological self-perpetuation is indeed finished. Even after its unfinished victory in Afghanistan, America is viewed as a paper tiger, with F-16s and dollars but no strong heart and no long-term stamina. Indeed, it is uncertain that anything significant has taken place in Afghanistan: the Afghan Talibs were forced to change their coats as one set of Islamists took a lot of money for replacing another."

Read the article and see if Trifkovic doesn't appeal to logic. And as you do, know that the part within you that has been conditioned by our political correctness may cause you to do violence against reason. Fight it, my friends. It's time for a "jihad" against illogic and unreason.

Will We Win The War Against Islam?

Catholic Dossier: "Islam Will Not Be The Loser"

I've included the above article for you to read not to depress you, but perhaps to awaken you. James Schall's column is in conjunction with my previous post containing Hillaire Belloc's treatise on "The Great and Enduring Heresy of Mohammed." Schall explains what you may have missed with Belloc and drives home the points of what Islam is, the current state of affairs in the West, and what is to be our response to this real threat. I've included several exerpts for you to chew on. A point to remember...my blogspot is a place for comment no doubt. However, I'm including these articles not so much for you to comment but for you to learn and consider how you, your beliefs, your philosophy, and even your political views might need to be altered so as to meet the harsh reality of this very dangerous ideological threat to our lives. It is real. Though I can appreciate what President Bush is trying to accomplish, my fear is that it is a band-aid and only prolongs the inevitable, an Islamic takeover of the modern world. We as members of the West, must face our decadence, our relativism, our worship of ourselves and replace it with the enduring faith of our Fathers. We must stop this ridiculous hedonistic journey to self-destruction, turn around, and search for the truth of the Ages. Enough for now; here are a few quotes:

"Another alternative may well be that of the Holy Father’s teaching of authentic family life, even to Muslims and uncomprehending secularists." The spiritual roots of the crisis which the Western democracies are experiencing (is) a crisis characterized by the advance of a materialistic, utilitarian and ultimately dehumanized world view which is tragically detached from the moral foundations of Western civilization,” John Paul II remarked:

Economic and political structures must be guided by a vision whose core is the God-given dignity and inalienable rights of every human being, from the moment of conception until natural death. When some lives, including those of the unborn, are subjected to the personal choices of others, no other value or right will long be guaranteed . . . . Never has it been more urgent to reinvigorate the moral vision and resolve essential to maintaining a just and a free society."

Let me interrupt. For years, the West has snickered and sneered at Pope John Paul's continuous railing against the "Culture of Death." And we arrogant hedonists (in general) let this "camel" into our tents and now we cannot get it out. The problem is that we are so used to the camel being inside we don't know what is normal for camels, or for us, for that matter.


"Today, Belloc’s words of 1937 almost ring in our ears:
That story (of Islamic victory in the first Crusade) must not be neglected by any modern, who may think, in error, that the East has finally fallen before the West, that Islam is now enslaved—to our political and economic power at any rate if not to our philosophy. It is not so. Islam essentially survives, and Islam would not have survived had the Crusade made good its hold upon the essential point of Damascus. Islam survives. Its religion is in tact; therefore its material strength may return. Our religion is in peril and who can be confident in the continued skill, let alone the continued obedience, of those who make and work our machines (weapons)?

We have, here, in a nutshell the essence of Belloc’s thesis, one that occasions a further reflection on what this current war is about. "

Schall continues his reflection of Belloc's ideas by stating that the failure of the Crusades, essentially the first one, was a tactical failure in that the Crusaders did not fully capture all the land in Palestine to complete the division between the Eastern and Western tribes. This was not because of a failure in military tactics per se, but a lack of manpower. Much of Europe, primarily England, France and Germany, were slow to respond to the threat Islam imposed. Eventually the Crusaders were defeated. This defeat was the critical failure that allowed Islam to grow and eventually make huge gains into Europe. Let's read on:

"There is with us a complete chaos in religious doctrine where religious doctrine is still heldand even in that part of the European population where the united doctrine and definitions of Catholicism survives, it survives as something to which the individual is attached rather than the community,” Belloc concluded. As nations we worship ourselves, we worship the nation; or we worship (some few of us) a particular economic arrangement believed to be the satisfaction of social justice. Those who direct us, and from whom the tone of our policy is taken, have no major spiritual interest.”17 Belloc’s comment on “social justice” is itself extremely perceptive as many of those who blame America for all this wish to see the problems of Islamic aggressiveness to be one of its internal hurt feeling that it was being treated unjustly. Therefore, in this view, the problem was not Islam’s but of the West. This sort of flawed analysis is quite prevalent in many modern religious analyses of ideological aggressiveness. It continually underestimates the vigor of spiritual forces. Islam, because of what it is, would be a problem without economics, without Israel, and without the modern world."

Here is a key section that I want us to consider. One, we fail to see the decadence of Western culture, a decadence that we participate in and in many cases, promote. Some call this freedom, but it really is a huge cultural flaw that is a cause for disintegration of our community. Our strength, in political terms, is shown in unity. It is very clear that we are a fractured community, which lends to at best, our insipid response to terrorism, and at worst, a self-condemning auto-racism. This penchant to blame ourselves for Islam's fury is myopic to the nature of Islam itself. Two, and as a result of one, we fail to see Islam for what it is in its heart, a dynamic spiritual force. Let's read on:

"Islam has not suffered this spiritual decline (found in the West),” Belloc affirms. Its spiritual power is seen everywhere within its own realms. “We are divided in the face of a Mohammedan world, divided by separate independent national rivalries, by the warring interests of possessors and dispossessed—and that division cannot be remedied because the cement which once held our civilisation together, the Christian cement, has crumbled.” Belloc is definitely not on the side of the “secularist” solution to the current problem of Islam. He sees the spiritual unity of the West has, in its absence, political consequences of the utmost importance."

It is here that I take leave of you to look into your hearts. Do you see the importance of a renewal? Are you willing to re-consider the dearth of moral substance in what is currently Western Civilization? If we do not take seriously the danger that is before us, and not just individually, but as a community, we will succumb morally, spiritually, and politically to this ideological titan.

May your weekend be peaceful, but only in that you may be free to be sufficiently disturbed enough in your musings to make the necessary changes that confront you. God Bless.

Our Response to Islam's Jihad: Right Use of Power

I'm going to go out on a limb and declare that it's the right use of power that will stave off the Islamic threat, right meaning in terms of the Catholic Church's definition of a just war. Catholic Answers has a great special report that gives us the backround of Islam and some possibilities to slay the "Islamic dragon."

Endless Jihad: The Truth About Islam and Violence

Now I know we art talking about terms such as "right" and "wrong," where in a relativistic world, these terms are recast into "your opinion" and "my opinion." I suggest we cast away the absolutism of relativism that afflicts us, and take on moral absolutism that has been with us from antiquity. Hmmm, the absolutism of relativism...a good observation!

The Greatest and Most Dangerous of All Heresies: Islam

I want to take a breather from the dizzying political circus to focus our attention to issues that are fundamental to our existence, from which the political derives it's movement and passion. It is the area of religious belief, but has catastrophic effects on our culture, politics...our way of life. This is the clash of civilizations between the Christian West and Islamic East. Our western moral relativism and religious pluralism is facing a foe that is hard to understand and difficult to appease. It behooves us to know exactly what we are dealing with in order to know how to deal with it. I suspect we will not gain anything by "hate America first" professors and ideologues. If that attitude prevails in America, we will all be forced to face Mecca; Islamists don't buy into our pluralism.

So what I'm doing is taking us down a path of history by going to a world class historian and philosopher, Hillare Belloc. I've included a link to the right, "The Great Heresy Of Mohammed" for your convenience. It is the fourth chapter of his book, "The Great Heresies." I've included some exerpts below that details the origin and doctrines of this religion.

"He (Mohammed) took over very few of those old pagan ideas which might have been native to him from his descent. On the contrary, he preached and insisted upon a whole group of ideas which were peculiar to the Catholic Church and distinguished it from the paganism which it had conquered inthe Greek and Roman civilization. Thus the very foundation of his teaching was that prime Catholic doctrine, the unity and omnipotence of God. The attributes of God he also took over in the main from Catholic doctrine:the personal nature, the all-goodness, the timelessness, the providence ofGod, His creative power as the origin of all things, and His sustenance of all things by His power alone. The world of good spirits and angels andof evil spirits in rebellion against God was a part of the teaching, witha chief evil spirit, such as Christendom had recognized. Mohammed preached with insistence that prime Catholic doctrine, on the human side-the immortality of the soul and its responsibility for actions in this life,coupled with the consequent doctrine of punishment and reward after death."

"If anyone sets down those points that orthodox Catholicism has in common with Mohammedanism, and those points only, one might imagine if one went no further that there should have been no cause of quarrel. Mohammed would almost seem in this aspect to be a sort of missionary, preaching and spreading by the energy of his character the chief and fundamental doctrines of the Catholic Church among those who had hitherto been degraded pagans of the Desert. He gave to Our Lord the highest reverence,and to Our Lady also, for that matter. On the day of judgment (another Catholic idea which he taught) it was Our Lord, according to Mohammed, who would be the judge of mankind, not he, Mohammed. The Mother of Christ, OurLady, "the Lady Miriam" was ever for him the first of womankind. His followers even got from the early fathers some vague hint of her Immaculate Conception. But the central point where this new heresy struck home with a mortal blow against Catholic tradition was a full denial of the Incarnation."

The entire chapter is packed with historical information that probably cannot be read at one sitting. However, the point of this post is that Islam is a highly pernicious doctrine that has catastrophic religious, economic, political and cultural effects that must be countered with a coresponding zeal. But a zeal in what?

Christianity. And might I clarify by saying Catholic Christianity. There is no other means to counter it, unless we want to be brutal atheistic socialists. However, we become as evil and deadly as the contagion we are trying to eliminate. This is going to be the focus of this blog for a time...to look into the depths of Islam, and into the depths of our Western souls to see if we have what it takes to ward off this growing threat to our existence.

Need Summertime Fun Ideas?

Cryptospyridium Daze!

Yes, folks, the Onion has done it again with great summertime festival ideas for the whole family!! A fun read for all!

For the gastro-intestinally inclined, try Seymour, Wisconsin's Hamburger Festival where they make the world's largest hamburger. Unless I'm mistaken and the event is over, it should provide enough food for the whole family. Who needs Summerfest in Milwaukee!

For those of you who hibernate in air conditioning during the hazy hot days of summer, you may want to check out the hot series on PBS, "Guns, Germs, and Steel," by Jared Diamond. This supremely over-simplistic viewpoint of the evolution of mankind is sure to stimulate the latent fallacies that lie dormant in our minds. But, hey, who wants to over-exert our minds and stimulate our "little gray cells" in this oppressive heat, eh?

Have a great and SAFE weekend. I want to see your little blogger-faces soon!

Envy-Appeasing Conservatives Now?

For your weekend reading pleasure, another great article by the "Indiana Jones" of conservatives, Mr. Jack Wheeler. Another conservative, Pat Buchanan got bit by the envy-appeasing PC bug. Sigh. Yup, it's true.

Blame America First Conservatives

If you poke around his links, you'll find that Mr. Buchanan thinks terrorism is an military occupation issue, not a religious issue. I suppose that's true! Ask any Palestinian Islamic terrorist, it's the fact the Israel's military occupies Israel. So eliminate Israel from occupying Israel, the Palestinians will be happy. Makes total sense!

Only one question, what were we occupying when all those "little Eichmann's" (thanks, Ward Churchill!) that were killed on 9/11? Lessee, we were in Yemen, that's about 500 military personnel. Uh, elsewhere? Yeah, Kuwait. We've some people there. As a matter of fact, we imperialists took over Kuwait and made it our 51st state, right? Lessee, what else? Hmmm. Kosovo? We have some peace-keepers there. Yeah, that would make any self-respecting Islamo-fascist mad! We prevent the total annihilation of Muslims by Milosivich and even bomb Christian people during their holiest season...Good Friday through Easter.
Come to think of it, we made Kosovo our 52nd state. Yes, that would totally piss off the Islamists! Any other imperialist take-overs of Islamic countries? I'm sure there's a LOT of raping and pillaging we did against Muslims out there...I'm just not able to get my imperialist selective memory to work. Look at all the oil we have! Come on, Sam, you can come up with more American atrocities. Don't worry, it'll come to me.

Come on, Pat. Appeasement is for weaklings!

It's So Nice That More Muslims Like Us Now

For all of you who think our new media is always negative, well here some stuff that is positive that the LA Times, et al have been reporting. Less Muslims want to kill us now than before! Could this be a positive effect of Iraq? Maybe. But in concert with my previous posts, I want you to see the figures, and what they mean. Read this CNS article and let it sink in.

Poll: Muslim Support For Violence

Isn't it nice that only 57% of Jordanians think that the use of violence against civilian targets is to be used sometimes/often? And only 60% support Al-Qaida! So nice. So in a country of 25 million people, only 14,250,000 people think that violence against civilian targets should be done sometimes/often, and only 15,000,000 support Al-Qaida. That's so nice AND is good news, no? At this rate, by the year 2251, only 56% of Jordanians will be in favor of using violence against civilians sometimes/often. Oh, yippee-yahoooey!

As to Western views of Muslims, we are all so very nice towards them, except for Poland, where less than half are in favor of those adherents to the religion of peace. Look out Poland, if you don't start liking these Muslims, they're going to be mad and want to bomb you! Be like us, naive and idiotic!

Poland, YOU ROCK!! Keep those numbers dropping!

Remember This About Joe Wilson?

Senator Pat Roberts: Senate Intelligence Committee Report, July 2004

I am pounding the words of Socrates in all of your heads...knowledge is "not forgetting." Have we forgot already this press report of the findings of the Wilson's reporting plus other intelligence before the War in Iraq. Here's a pertinent quote:

"These and other public comments from the former ambassador, such as comments that his report “debunked” the Niger-Iraq uranium story, were incorrect and have led to a distortion in the press and in the public’s understanding of the facts surrounding the Niger-Iraq uranium story. The Committee found that, for most analysts, the former ambassador’s report lent more credibility, not less, to the reported Niger-Iraq uranium deal.

During Mr. Wilson’s media blitz, he appeared on more than thirty television shows including entertainment venues. Time and again, Joe Wilson told anyone who would listen that the President had lied to the American people, that the Vice President had lied, and that he had “debunked” the claim that Iraq was seeking uranium from Africa. As discussed in the Niger section of the report, not only did he NOT “debunk” the claim, he actually gave some intelligence analysts even more reason to believe that it may be true. I believed very strongly that it was important for the Committee to conclude publicly that many of the statements made by Ambassador Wilson were not only incorrect, but had no basis in fact."

Ah, yes. The notable Mr. Wilson...a man the liberals rally around. Let it be asked, do you put credibility in a man who pads and falsifies information and communicates in a manner with, using his own words, "literary flair?" Now granted, he is a handsome man for all you liberal females and homosexuals. But, are looks the basis of trust?

Of course I am being naughty here, but I am COMPLETELY baffled at the continuous blunders that are being made by the Left. We have a huge problem of terrorism that has been made horrifically clear by the London bombings, and we have a media in a Rove-rave!

Increase your knowledge and allow this Senate report to remind you what you may have forgot.

Where there's smoke there's...more smoke.

Anne Coulter: Mission Implausible

A spicy look at what Mr. Joe Wilson has actually dished up in his attempt to undermine President Bush and the War in Iraq.

This looks like another liberal smear job gone waaaaaay bad.

More to come!

The Rove Circus and Knowledge as "Not Forgetting"

I name this catagory "What the Sophists Would Have You Forget."

Here at the Underground Logician, I'm ever commited to your knowledge so you are not hoodwinked by the Sophists. Specifically for today, I've included past articles and quotes regarding information that is applicable to "Rove-gate" of which those who wish to attack President Bush via Karl Rove wish you not know or remember. Again, here is yet another example of how knowledge is "not forgetting."

NOC, NOC, Who's There?

Fred Rustmann, a former CIA official who put in 24 years as a spymaster and was Plame's boss for a few years, says Plame worked under official cover in Europe in the early 1990s — say, as a U.S. embassy attache — before switching to nonofficial cover a few years later. Mostly Plame posed as a business analyst or a student in what Rustmann describes as a "nice European city." Plame was never a so-called deep-cover NOC, he said, meaning the agency did not create a complex cover story about her education, background, job, personal life and even hobbies and habits that would stand up to intense scrutiny by foreign governments. "[NOCs] are on corporate rolls, and if anybody calls the corporation, the secretary says, 'Yeah, he works for us,'" says Rustmann. "The degree of backstopping to a NOC's cover is a very good indication of how deep that cover really is."

USA Today: CIA Outing May Not Be A Crime

"The column's date is important because the law against unmasking the identities of U.S. spies says a "covert agent" must have been on an overseas assignment "within the last five years." The assignment also must be long-term, not a short trip or temporary post, two experts on the law say. Wilson's book makes numerous references to the couple's life in Washington over the six years up to July 2003. "

William Safire: The Jailing of Judith Miller

"Evidently no such serious crime took place. After spending two years and thousands of F.B.I. agent-hours and millions of dollars that could better have been directed against terrorism and identity theft, the prosecutor, Patrick Fitzgerald, admits his investigation has been stalled since last October. We have seen no indictment under the identities protection act."

So, if Valerie Plame was NOT a covert CIA operative, and "outing" said operative does not fall within the 1982 Intelligence Identities Protection Act, and no crime has been committed by Judith Miller, then why the media frenzy surrounding Karl Rove?

It's obvious, isn't it?

Next on what the sophists would have you forget: what has been reported on Joe Wilson's Niger Report flip-flop. What did you "not forget?"

Getting to the Root in the "War on Terror"

"The Allah That Failed" by Jack Wheeler

The above is an excellent article from a logical standpoint since the clearer we understand our terms, the clearer our judgement is regarding the truthfulness of our propositions. The question is just how do we define the term "War on Terror?" I think Mr. Wheeler gives us plenty to chew on.

What is immediately disconcerting after reading this article is what is implied in the "what or who" that we must do battle. I see that it cuts deep into our knee-jerk political correctness. With the many terrorist organizations (one of whom who struck London that is separate from Al Quaida), it seems futile to try to strike back at them just militarily. These terrorist groups are multiplying and dividing almost at will, which makes our attempts to stop their growth very frustrating and seemingly fruitless. The only way to achieve victory is to deal with the real root of the war: the problem of Islam itself. I think we are afraid to face it, for the implications require us not only to change our tactics, but to do a massive rethink about our own beliefs and philosophies of life individually and as a nation.

Now, I am aware that there are millions of peace-loving Muslims in the world today who are NOT to be faulted with propagating this deadly ideology against Israel and the United States. However it is fair to say they do not follow all the teachings of Mohammed. The "peaceful Muslims" are typified by Islamic "purists" as hypocrites. The ideology of the Islamo-fascist movement is not a perversion of the words of Mohammed, but a direct application of all his teachings from the Q'uran; it's as though his violent ideology that initially established the "religion of Allah" is making a resurgence, although in a more sinister way.

So what is the cure? Perhaps it's with the "dissenters" of Islam that Wheeler refers to who have seen the evil that is from "the inside." Hopefully, this reactionary movement grows, for any external resistance to the Islamo-fascists may stave off the movement, but doesn't alter it from within. Yet I'm not as optimistic as Wheeler; I don't think Islam has the substance within it as a religion that can renew itself. As the Bangladeshi writer Mohammed Bin Abdullah states: “Mankind will not lose a single moral precept if Islam is not there tomorrow.”

So, we must engage our enemy in this war on terror using tactics that are both militaristic and ideological, since Islamo-fascism is a conglomeration of political and religious ideas. We know how to do the military tactics but how do we do ideological combat? I assert that the rampant moral relativism in our culture has no power to defeat the tactics of extreme Islam. I contend that moral relativism is a cowardly belief system that embraces Islam as one of the many acceptable ways in which to believe, even to the point of celebrating it. This will not stop Islamo-facsim; the Islamic killers will ultimately kill the nice moral relativists.

There are no easy political or military answers; we are dealing with a 1400 year-old politico-religious problem. The battle is the same, only the Islamic adherents have changed their tactics from being sword wielding raiders on horseback to bomb-strapping human death machines. Perhaps now, we can drop our smugness and begin appreciating the difficulties the Catholic Church and Catholic kingdoms faced during the Middle Ages against the raging Islamic hords of the Turks and the Moors. Maybe we can learn something from the moral absolutism of our ancestors and the lessons gleaned from their failures. We need to see this struggle for what it is: a cataclysmic struggle for the future of mankind.

The Great American Marriage Scam!

You have to read this for a mini laughing vacation!!!

Housewife Charged In Sex-For-Security Scam

I needed this. Hope it brightens your day!

A Dialogue with an Anti-Logician

I sometimes imagine what it would be like to have a discussion with my alter ego, the Anti-logician. It may go something like this:

AL: "Sam, let's take a break from all this boring logic stuff, especially within politics, and talk about stuff that really matters. Life issues...like what makes life good?

UL: "I suppose. But it is difficult after breaking free from the Common Master, to make any sense at all. But, I'll let you run with this for a while. Do you mind if I ask what you mean by the word "good?"

AL: "Wait a minute! NO COMMON MASTER! Got it? Can we get away from the logical "definition of terms" please? Let's just have a simple conversation without all the analyzing of words and such. Anyway, you know what "good" means.

UL: "English is kinda loosey-goosey. There may be five or six meanings for the word 'good.' Good could mean: happy, content, fulfilled, tasty, moral, meaningful, talented, etc. Lessee, you could have a variety of definitions of the good life such as having lots of money; lots of sex, or better, lots of sex with no consequences; lots of toys; lots of kids; or no kids at all; or having power or position; having everyone answer to your beck-and-call; have everyone leave you alone; getting to do what you want, when you want it and where; ruling the world, ruling the universe; ruling God, or better, be God. There could be many definitions of what is the good life.

AL, looking at UL in dumbfounded amazement: "Okay, okay (mumbles something about being an anal-retentive logic-driven ass, or something like that). The good life...one that makes you feel like life is worth living. Easy enough, or do I have to spell it out for you?"

UL: "Why?"

AL: "Why what?"

UL: "Why is it worth living? If you want to know that you are living the good life, you want to identify why it is worth living. It's asking if it will get you where you want to go. Right?"

AL: "I want to agree, but I'm thinking you have a catch."

UL: "Do you want to know if you have the good life or not?"

AL: "Of course."

UL: "Then how do you know that it is worth living unless you can identify the ends of those "worth living" factors. If they don't exist, or if they don't take you to where it's good, isn't it fair to say that you are NOT living the life worth living?"

AL: "Uh, yes. I spose it's when...well it's varies with different people."

UL: "What varies? The goodness of the good life or the life of the good life?"

AL: "Everyone has a different definition of what the good life is. A mom in New Hampshire is living the good life when she enjoys reading her children a bedtime story. It's doing what she was meant to do as a mom."

UL: "Are you saying that all moms that enjoy doing mom things are living the good life?"

AL: "Yes! DUH! (rolls his eyes like UL is a nitwit)"

UL: "Uh, you're breaking your own rule."

AL: "What rule?"

UL: " The rule that the Common Master is not allowed in this discourse. You are getting into universals, like the essence of motherhood. You are close to creating a categorical proposition, saying "All moms who do mom things (subject) are (copula) living the good life (predicate)."

AL: "You're trying to get the Common Master in this. Stop it, UL!"

UL: "No, I'm not. It illustrates you cannot break from the Common Master without speaking total nonsense."

AL: (I cannot print this due to the expletives)

UL: "You see, you want to tell me what you think using symbols that have universal meaning so I get what you say. You have to make statements that declare something of substance which involves objective reality...your thoughts. You can't break from the Common Master any more than you can suspend the laws of gravity for yourself."

AL: "You are deliberately being resistant. I am simply wanting my definition to stand without you trying to alter it, condemn it, question it, analyze it, or dismiss it. Common Master! I really am beginning to hate your attitude, or better, hate you period! ( More unprintable expletives) Life is worth living, damn it! That's it, end of story!

UL: "Why live a life worth living? Why not a miserable life? How about a totally boring life? How about a life that is really short, but filled with extreme pleasure? Why live at all? Why not kill ourselves? Why not kill others for pleasure, like some giant real-life game of "Mortal Kombat? Why not a life of crime and adventure, like Bonnie and Clyde? Why not a life of religious glory, like flying a plane into a large building containing thousands of your enemies so you get 72 virgins for eternity? Why not a life of total focus on self and the hell with the rest of humanity?"

AL: "You have to make it difficult, don't you?

UL: "No. You make it difficult by excluding the Common Master. If you want to communicate to me, I'm going to have to know what you mean. I can't assume to know what you mean. What if I want to live the good life too? You may hold the key so I can live it too."

AL: "You and the Common Master can go to hell."

UL: "How do you know hell exists? What do you mean by hell?"

The reaction is so violent, we have to postpone this until the one of the party cools down... and gets out of jail.

Revisionist History 101: Similarities of Early American and Iraqi Insurgencies?

Chris Matthews Interviews Former President and "Historian" Jimmy Carter

You want to read a twisted view of American history in lieu of the Iraq War? Click the link above and read this "Hardball" interview. Matthews should have renamed his show for this particular segment: "Marshmallows, with Chris Matthews."

Let's be serious. This is a excellent example of a false comparison. There is ABSOLUTELY no comparison between the two conflicts: they are completely different. And yet, President Carter forces a comparison between them. Could this be so that the reader may sympathize with the Iraqii insurgents? Does this really serve to help us understand the Iraqi insurgency when done in light of our own struggle for independence?

I contend that it obfuscates the fact that the Iraqi insurgents consist mainly of terrorists who do not want democratic reforms that millions of Iraqiis want. It also obfuscates the fact that the U.S. military has eliminated a ruthless oppressor of the Iraqi people, and insinuates that the United States and "King George" have become the democratic oppressors. It also may insinuate an even darker but hidden assertion, that our revolutionary heroes were quite similar to the Iraqi insurgents; "Who are we, then, to condemn these insurgents when we did the same thing against England?" Could this be the residue of Michael Moore's thinking after Michael sat with the former president at the Democratic convention? For an excellent op-ed, read Michael Barone of U.S. News and World Report:

The Company They Keep

Your book is a bogus revisionism and unscholarly approach to history, Mr. President. I'm sure you'll make a ton of money selling to pro-revisionist history buffs. I'll pass.

A Revealing Debate: The American Left's alliance with Radical Islam!

Transcript of Michael Medved Show: The Left Revealed

This is an eye-opening debate between David Horowitz, author of "Unholy Alliance," which describes the alliance between the American left and radical Islamists and Daniel Lazare, writer for "The Nation."

If you have the time, read it and then comment here. I want to see your reasoning skills in action!