Hat tip Creeping Sharia
The below-linked video from Creeping Sharia is produced by Sanctum Enterprise LLC. It concerns the efforts to silence Westerners about the Islamist threat. It is called "Silent Conquest".
http://creepingsharia.wordpress.com/2012/11/10/silent-conquest-the-end-of-freedom-of-expression-in-the-west/
This is what is happening in Europe as well as right here in North America. We are supposed to remain silent about the horrors that are happening every day around the world. Non-Muslim minorities in the Islamic world are being subjected to relentless persecution and murder. We are supposed to remain silent. Radical Islamists preach hatred. We are supposed to remain silent. Islamists tell us they will conquer us and impose their religion and their laws upon us, and we are supposed to remain silent.
And worse. The Europeans actually prosecute those who will not remain silent. Meanwhile, here in the US, we have a president and an attorney general who stand ready to prosecute those who will not remain silent.
In another time in another region, Germans remained silent when Jews were being persecuted. Later, when the Jews were disappearing, people remained silent. When it was all said and done, 6 million Jews were dead, and Germans said, "We did not know."
Today, Jews are being harassed, assaulted and driven out of Europe, and we are supposed to remain silent. Gays are being hanged in Iran, and we are supposed to remain silent. The Baha'i in Iran are being arrested, raped, and killed, and we are supposed to remain silent. Coptic Christians in Egypt are being persecuted, and we are supposed to remain silent. Christians in Pakistan and Nigeria are being attacked and slaughtered, and we are supposed to remain silent. Christians and Animists in Sudan are being killed, and we are supposed to remain silent. The last remaining Jews are being driven out of Yemen, and we are supposed to remain silent. Iran is threatening to wipe Israel off the map with nuclear weapons, and we are supposed to remain silent.
And what will we say when all of these horrors have been completed? Will we say, "We didn't know"?
What will you say, Mr Obama?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Meanwhile, here in the US, we have a president and an attorney general who stand ready to prosecute those who will not remain silent.
Evidence? I know you desperately want this to be true Gary, which is on the same level of integrity as Chris Matthews being glad Hurricane Sandy came through, but you have to show the slightest shred of evidence that the First Amendment is not still in full force and effect. You've been harping on this brand of paranoia for years, now, with no evidence that anything of the kind is happening in the United States. (Geert Wilders spoke admiringly of the impact of the First Amendment, remember?)
And no, we're not willing to surrender our freedom of speech. That's not because freedom necessarily brings good speech to the fore. Its just that none of us trust our government to decide which speech is worthy of protection, so we give just about anything a pass.
Ditto for blasphemy: Probably most Americans find some sort of blasphemy objectionable. But again, we don't want our government sitting in judgement on what is blasphemy, nor do we want ANY faith's clergy setting civil or criminal laws. So, we put up with it, as part of the background noise, so government censors can't define my speech, or yours, AS blasphemy when they want to shut one or both of us down.
Unlike Europe that has no written guarantees of free speech. We here in the United State do:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Event the 9 black crows have to uphold this one.
seldom comment on religious matters, but Gary has it absolutely right on this one. It is, of course, possible to condemn violent/radical Islamists/jihadists (when we do so, we are usually branded as intolerant bigots) without doing likewise to all Muslims, the large majority of which are, accurately or otherwise, described as peaceful. This is quite analogous to the situation involving race in America.
With regard to race in this context, if we did not vote for Obama and do not support his ideology and programs, we are racists who just will not vote for or support a black person on a bet. Nothing, I repeat nothing, could be further from the truth. Although I am fairly conservative on most issues, I am not a complete right-winger and I would certainly vote for a black, Hispanic, Oriental/other Asian, LGBT, or whatever, if I believed that was the best person for me to vote for. For example, I would note that at one time I almost certainly would have voted for Colin Powell had he run. That was before he showed (excuse me) his true colors. No more.
Knowing that a Democrat would almost certainly win in 2008, I actually did vote for Obama in the Democratic primary that year for at least two reasons. First, it was partially based on my probably inaccurate view that he would be a better president than Hillary Clinton, about which view I may obviously now be having second thoughts. Second, if a Democratic president was inevitable, I actually wanted to be a small part of electing our first black one. How’s that for racism??
There is a lot of “crying wolf” out there. If we oppose the more egregious forms of affirmative action because we believe they are at least as discriminatory, if not more so, than the alleged/actual practices which such actions are based on in the first place, we are the racists. If we suggest that the reason minorities are disproportionately represented in the criminal justice system because they are also disproportionately involved in criminal activity, we are the bigots.
God forbid that some conservative somewhere uses the “n-word” (I hate euphemisms but will acede to Gary‘s rules), because they will be pilloried for it. Simultaneously, a significant number of black people, including “street people” and prominent activists and everything in between, throw the term around with some abandon relative to themselves and other blacks (Jesse Jackson with reference to candidate Obama in the 2008 campaign, Al Sharpton relative to David Dinkins, etc., etc.). Senator Robert Byrd (D-WV), the great white hope for blacks and former KKK Grand Wizard or whatever he was, nused the term “white n-word” on the floor of the U.S. Senate with more frequency than I ever did some 50 years ago when I still occasionally used the term, as well as the frequency with which virtually all of my white friends/acquaintances, with only a couple of rare exceptions, currently use it.
Remember Siarlys, even us paranoiacs have enemies too. Hillary Clinton, for example, branded stories about Bill's infidelities as lies, even when she knew they were true, as the products of a "vast right-wing conspiracy".
Findalis and I are in full agreement, and, although she may not have noticed, allied in direct opposition to Gary and elwood. Death to those who insult the First Amendment!
Hillary Clinton was, and is, a fool. By giving a tired clique whispering in the shadows a name and the pretense to substance, she created a "vast right wing conspiracy" out of what I prefer to call the miniscule right-wing kaffee klatsh. Like Anteus, the "conspiracy" gained strength every time Hillary threw it to the ground. She should have picked it up and held it up in the air until it died of mortification.
There are a lot of reasons I supported Obama: Hillary was on of the earliest.
Post a Comment