Wednesday, October 31, 2007
Dem Debate Four: The UFO Debate
Neo-Nazi Leader Organizing Ron Paul Youtube "gaming"
As you can see, there is no reason to dress up as a scary creature...they walk among us!
I posted on Folding the Flag on WNC Citizens Blog.
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
Why Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican
By Frances Rice
It should come as no surprise that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican. In that era, almost all black Americans were Republicans. Why? From its founding in 1854 as the anti-slavery party until today, the Republican Party has championed freedom and civil rights for blacks. And as one pundit so succinctly stated, the Democrat Party is as it always has been, the party of the four S's: Slavery, Secession, Segregation and now Socialism.
It was the Democrats who fought to keep blacks in slavery and passed the discriminatory Black Codes and Jim Crow laws. The Democrats started the Ku Klux Klan to lynch and terrorize blacks. The Democrats fought to prevent the passage of every civil rights law beginning with the civil rights laws of the 1860's, and continuing with the civil rights laws of the 1950's and 1960's.
During the civil rights era of the 1960's, Dr. King was fighting the Democrats who stood in the school house doors, turned skin-burning fire hoses on blacks and let loose vicious dogs. It was Republican President Dwight Eisenhower who pushed to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1957 and sent troops to Arkansas to desegregate schools. President Eisenhower also appointed Chief Justice Earl Warren to the U.S. Supreme Court which resulted in the 1954 Brown vs. Board of Education decision ending school segregation. Much is made of Democrat President Harry Truman's issuing an Executive Order in 1948 to desegregate the military. Not mentioned is the fact that it was President Eisenhower who actually took action to effectively end segregation in the military.
Democrat President John F. Kennedy is lauded as a proponent of civil rights. However, Kennedy voted against the 1957 Civil rights Act while he was a senator, as did Democrat Senator Al Gore, Sr. And after he became president, John F. Kennedy was opposed to the 1963 March on Washington by Dr. King that was organized by A. Phillip Randolph who was a black Republican. President Kennedy, through his brother Attorney General Robert Kennedy, had Dr. King wiretapped and investigated by the FBI on suspicion of being a Communist in order to undermine Dr. King.
In March of 1968, while referring to Dr. King's leaving Memphis, Tennessee after riots broke out where a teenager was killed, Democrat Senator Robert Byrd, a former member of the Ku Klux Klan, called Dr. King a "trouble-maker" who starts trouble, but runs like a coward after trouble is ignited. A few weeks later, Dr. King returned to Memphis and was assassinated on April 4, 1968.
Given the circumstances of that era, it is understandable why Dr. King was a Republican. It was the Republicans who fought to free blacks from slavery and amended the Constitution to grant blacks freedom (13th Amendment), citizenship (14th Amendment) and the right to vote (15th Amendment). Republicans passed the civil rights laws of the 1860's, including the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and the Reconstruction Act of 1867 that was designed to establish a new government system in the Democrat-controlled South, one that was fair to blacks. Republicans also started the NAACP and affirmative action with Republican President Richard Nixon‘s 1969 Philadelphia Plan (crafted by black Republican Art Fletcher) that set the nation‘s first goals and timetables. Although affirmative action now has been turned by the Democrats into an unfair quota system, affirmative action was begun by Nixon to counter the harm caused to blacks when Democrat President Woodrow Wilson in 1912 kicked all of the blacks out of federal government jobs.
Few black Americans know that it was Republicans who founded the Historically Black Colleges and Universities. Unknown also is the fact that Republican Senator Everett Dirksen from Illinois was key to the passage of civil rights legislation in 1957, 1960, 1964 and 1965. Not mentioned in recent media stories about extension of the 1965 Voting Rights Act is the fact that Dirksen wrote the language for the bill. Dirksen also crafted the language for the Civil Rights Act of 1968 which prohibited discrimination in housing. President Lyndon Johnson could not have achieved passage of civil rights legislation without the support of Republicans.
Critics of Republican Senator Barry Goldwater who ran for president against Democrat President Lyndon Johnson in 1964, ignore the fact that Goldwater wanted to force the Democrats in the South to stop passing discriminatory laws and thus end the need to continuously enact federal civil rights legislation.
Those who wrongly criticize Goldwater, also ignore the fact that President Johnson, in his 4,500 State of the Union Address delivered on January 4, 1965, mentioned scores of topics for federal action, but only thirty five words were devoted to civil rights. He did not mention one word about voting rights. Then in 1967, showing his anger with Dr. King's protest against the Viet Nam War, President Johnson referred to Dr. King as "that Nigger preacher."
Contrary to the false assertions by Democrats, the racist "Dixiecrats" did not all migrate to the Republican Party. "Dixiecrats" declared that they would rather vote for a "yellow dog" than vote for a Republican because the Republican Party was known as the party for blacks. Today, some of those "Dixiecrats" continue their political careers as Democrats, including Democrat Senator Robert Byrd who is well known for having been a "Keagle" in the Ku Klux Klan.
This is all probably new to students who have suffered through history rewritten to match the point of view of Marxists...probably influenced by Howard Zinn.
2:24 PM (11 hours ago)
A statement from Bat Ye'or
from Jihad Watch by Robert
The controversy over the Brussels Counterjihad Conference, and specifically the participation in it of people affiliated with Vlaams Belang and the Sweden Democrats, seems to be dying down. I have made my position clear here -- I reject and repudiate all racist and neo-Nazi statements and individuals. And now the renowned historian Bat Ye'or, who also spoke at the Conference, has issued a statement that I agree with wholeheartedly, and believe could and should serve as the last word in this wrangle:
I want to make clear my position. I have said when I was invited and at the beginning of my lecture as well as in the conclusion, that I am not part of any political party, I am a writer, invited as such to give an insight into the current situation. I do not feel that I have to endorse all the ideas of each member of a group to which I do not belong; nor do I expect that they endorse all of mine. I am invited often by various different organizations, and I do not scrutinize each one's political background to explain my views.
I consider that acquaintances with communists who have not apologized for their crimes and their racist antisemitism are shameful. Socialist parties supported the worst criminal tyrants: Arafat, Hafez al-Assad, Saddam Hussein, Iran, Sudan. They are responsible for the European antisemitic hate-culture and the destruction of Europe. Yet no one thinks that these politicians, their parties, their friends are criminals, and says that they stink. The responsibility of the Churches in those areas is no less. Who is the purist who will leave our debased planet to live alone in perfection? Everyone is drenched in a bloody history, not only Filip Dewinter, who was born in 1962. I think that Chirac is much worse, and think of Gunther Grass...
That said, I think that it is good that things are clarified, that people accept that those who recognise wrong policies and correct them should be respected and trusted, and not continually accused for their past failures.
Source: Jihad Watch
Google: Search Results
What's Up? A Re-write of history?
I thought the Ye'or Statement was eloquent. If the Counterjihad Movement is to start being "prissy" when internal differences arise, then how are we to confront people who want to destroy our civilization? This is war, people!
After all, we did ally with Stalin to defeat Hitler, and history reveals that Stalin is responsible for more than ten times the deaths caused by Hitler. Sometimes, we have to take our allies where we can find them, and some of them do not have a pure and clean past. We aren't hunting Unicorns, we are hunting jihadis, their enablers, and collaborators.
Beginnings are very delicate times, and to jump to conclusions without some exhaustive fact-checking will harm us more than it will hurt us. I thought you were an Anti-Idiotarian.
So, Charles Johnson, are the Sweden Democrats now racist?
All I see is evidence of past racism (the source itself leftist), and you had better take this into account...Vlaams Belang is the most reliably anti-jihadi party in Europe, not to mention the most pro-Israel. You have been victim to a Lefty smear Campaign, and damaged our movement by jumping to conclusions. The Expox.se is, after a lefty organization, and as such will lie, and overstate. I'd have to see independent verification and proof this party is what you claim it once was.
What I find unbelievable is that you have removed the very fine and upstanding blog Gates of Vienna from your blogroll, an act I would expect of an Idiot Supporter of Ron Paul, but not you. But...you sink to the level of Jim Robinson, and have begun banning commenters because they are not subsurvient to you. Shame on you Charles Johnson, for becoming an Idiot Anti-Idiotarian.
I still have you on my blogroll, and you, or any Lizard, are free to come over here without fear of being banned, or their comments deleted based on their opposition to me, or my pet theories.
Should you care to really learn about the other side, you can read this, and then this, and then this.
I'll leave you with these words (lifted from the CVF Blog):
3. Many paths, no gates: Critics of Vlaams Belang, and of similar political parties with anti-islamisation platforms, state that the ” European anti-Islamization movement is making a mistake by allowing this group to participate.” We see it differently; that the citizens of every country have a right to self-determination, and that many of these groups have been actively working to preserve civil society against Islamisation for years. A two-day limited participation conference, however successful, is not a “European anti-Islamization movement.” Members of the dozens of political parties in each country will take whatever positions they choose to take on anti-Islamization and pretty much anything else. Far from being a single movement, anti-islamisation is a broad and widely diverse cultural and political response to the destruction of democratic human rights and freedoms by both assertive jihadists like the Muslim Brotherhood, and authoritarian multiculturalists like the European Union. Importantly, anti-islamisation includes Muslim reformers- several in Europe - who risk their lives by publicly opposing the imposition of shariah law, Islamic Imperialism and apartheid.
One might as readily say, of an earlier time, “the European enlightenment movement is making a mistake by allowing those followers of Locke (or Voltaire, Spinoza, Kant or any of those other extremists - Paine, Jefferson, Franklin) to participate.” We are not the gatekeepers of any movement; to our knowledge, there is no gate, and there are many movements, not one, working to protect western culture, laws and freedoms. You don’t have to apply to be part of history; it’s an open-admissions institution.
Monday, October 29, 2007
In schools and colleges across America, teachers and professors recall the "Free Speech Movement" of the hard left at Berkeley in the 1960s. But today's left often shreds that idea in its own intolerant behavior. At Michigan State University, British Nationalist Nick Griffin was shouted down from a speech on the danger of radical Islam. The Lansing State Journal reported: "Hurling obscenities and using chants to interrupt his address, rambunctious student organizations forced Griffin to abandon his speech and allow an informal question and answer session." This liberal quote is a classic:
"We have all come from different backgrounds," said Authra Khreis, 17, a pre-med student and a protester. "We should accept one another. I don't think he should be allowed to speak. You can use free speech until you hurt another person."
Finally, did you see the kerfuffle the John Edwards campaign created around a college student reporter? The Raleigh News and Observer reported they demanded that Carla Babb, a reporter for the college TV station at the University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill, pull down her "Republican"-sounding report on their headquarters:
Source: News Busters
And just who decides what is hurtful? Ruffled feathers? Someone who is hurt by the truth? A Presidential Campaign Staff in third place in their home state? Have you seen some of the signs carried by lefties (Commies) at protests around the country? What would their response be to Impeach Hillary For Campaign Fraud? Imprison Sandy Pants?
I almost wish that Hillary would win (she very well might), and then we would see just how the Neostalinist lefties really feel about Free Speech.
It is only Free Speechwhen it favors them or targets an opponent, and Hate Speech when it targets Lefties.
And in an effort to show that lefties do indeed hate America, I have included a portion of my headlines from West Carolina Report for today:
ASSISTING THE JIHAD: LEFTIST COLLABORATORS
This Antiwar Is Lost-- Saturday Protest Turnout Fizzles
IAEA chief lashes out over Israeli raid in Syria
GW Student: "I want the Sharia law imposed in my country"
Moronic Convergence in Los Angeles
Moronic Convergence in Boston
YouTube Video of Islamofascist Freaks at Emory University
Saturday, October 27, 2007
Smithfield NC -- A large protest, and a larger counter-protest caused local police to be out in full-force today here. Yet, no violence occured. Harsh words were lobbied to and fro but in the end, the event ended just as it began, passion-filled and peacefully.
Katy's Conservative Corner has a number of interviews, both with the Code Pink and Victims of Torture protestors, along with counter-protestors from a Gathering of Eagles and Rolling Thunder. Up to 40 different groups were represented.
Eric M. Weaver, Sr. and your blogger covered all the action. Watch the interviews here, and look for more reporting and photos soon.
Source Article: Katy's Conservative Corner
Related: Troy LaPlante was there, so he may have something up later.
First, the people with their fingers on the pulse of America...the conservatives:
Katy has noted that the John Edwards Campaign is bullying UNC students over a negative story in their newspaper, and she gets a good dig in about Edwards being third in his home state. Ouch! That's gonna leave a mark.
My good friend Longstreet has blessed us with a reprise of his masterpiece on the new lefty religion, Environmentalism!
The Appalachian Scribe misses Boone.
Lemuel Calhoun is reporting that Romney is saying that Julie Annie will fade away. I certainly hope so, because we don't need no steenking liberals in the GOP!!
And Ogre is keeping things light by showing us how the Prime Directive applies to computers (and some of their operators!)
The Republican Roundtable notes that most people don't want Birth Control Pills handed out at Middle Schools, to which I respond...Progressives don't care what real Americans want, they just want parents out of the way so the public schools can raise good little communists.
Leaving the conservatives, our next stop is the Libertarian Red Clay Citizen where he takes notice of the newest quandary for Democrats, Jim Neal (who is gay) or Kay Hagan (who is not gay)? Which leads me to...
After pimping for gay Jim Neal, who is gay, by the way, they had to say; the perps at BlueNC have invited Kay Hagan (who is not gay) over for a Sunday Morning Spanking.
Arratik has recycled a post from yesterday over at Scrutiny Hooligans about the Project Vote Smart Bus being in Asheville today, which leads me to muse that the Asheville Citizen-Times never fails to indicate the party of candidates by their party (or assumed party) in their voter guides and stories so even the most stupid Democrats can know who to vote for!!!
He posted yesterday about an interesting "circuit-bending" challenge.
Most of them seem to involve making weird music that I like.
Petulant is suffering from a cold, and embedded an instructional video for us.
Get well, soon!
Gulahiyi relates a lunchtime experience on Main Street.
And AshVegas has posted on the controversial firing of the much loved (by the Socialists, anyway) Cecil Bothwell from the Socialist Paper, The Mountain Xpress.
I will take the liberty to reprint an excerpt:
One thing we can say is that the issues between Cecil and Xpress are long-standing ones that all parties involved have been discussing and attempting to resolve for years. So we too are surprised — by Cecil’s astonishment over the current state of affairs.
But putting all this aside, we love Cecil’s passionate devotion to civic issues and social justice. And we agree with other Bothwell supporters that he’s made an enormous contribution to Xpress — and, most importantly, to this community — over the years.
Perhaps he can spend some time on the road hawking his latest anti-Christian screed about the Reverend Billy Graham. His removal from the newsroom could not come at a more apropos time.
I was going to post more on the national scene, but my electricity has blinked twice already this morning (thank God that Blogger auto-saves every couple of minutes!) and I don't feel like waiting ten minutes for the computer to reboot, and the modem to dial in every time the electricity blinks. It seems to happen every Saturday morning.
Friday, October 26, 2007
I am no fan of President Bill Clinton, but his reaction to a 9/11 Twoofer could not have been more eloquently stated!
The video will no longer play for me, so as I backup, I have re-uploaded it to another account:
Thursday, October 25, 2007
Find more videos like this on AshVid.Net
I nearly fell out of my chair when I heard Elaine Lite speak lovingly of the "Defeated in a Landslide" Defeatocrat George McGovern!! I guess these people never learn.
This video could be more dangerous to her candidacy than the world-famous Carolina Stomper video of her dancing around a Magnolia tree, which I have taken the opportunity to embed below for the shear joy of it!
Gary Hoffman was a millionaire, and then he wasn't. Hoffman hit a jackpot worth over $1.5 million in a New Mexico casino on an Indian reservation, and received all sorts of congratulatory salutations on the casino floor. Once he made it to the executive conference room of the Sandia Casino, however, the tone changed from celebration to intimidation:
Hoffman, a retired Albuquerque city employee, was playing a "Mystical Mermaid" slot machine on the morning of Aug. 16, 2006, when he thought he hit it big.
The nickel slot said he'd won $1,597,244.10. Patrons and casino employees came to congratulate him. He even got a marriage proposal, Hoffman said. But, soon he was asked to come to an executive conference room, where he says he was told the casino refused to pay.
A casino employee "became quite intimidating with me, pointed his finger in my face and said, 'You didn't win. We're not paying you any money. Do you understand what I'm telling you? You're not getting any money,'" Hoffman said.
The tribe claims the slot machine malfunctioned. It insists that the machine had a maximum payout of $2500, while Hoffman insists that it had a bonus play option which allowed for much higher winnings. The picture that Hoffman took shows a very precise number that the machine displayed of the jackpot, which indicates that the machine had routines that allowed for seven-digit jackpots -- and the machine's manufacturer insists that the machine cannot malfunction in the way the casino asserts.
Read The Rest: Captain's Quarters
File this one under Another Reason Not To Gamble, if the moral one isn't good enough for you.
The American CovenantRead The Rest: Insight on Freedom
It is said the USA has more of it’s citizens incarcerated, imprisoned, than any other nation on earth.
I heard this the other night on TV. I wondered what reaction the person making the statement hoped to elicit from me, and others, who heard it.
My own reaction was… so what?
I mean, only a person having no understanding of the foundation of this country could be surprised by such a fact.
Now… for those of you who still think that is an awful thing to say about a nation… hold on a minute!
Consider the US is a nation founded on laws, on a written constitution, and a code of laws founded on that constitution, Olde English Common Law, the laws of the Judeo-Christian religion, commonly known as the Ten Commandments, and a few other lesser known codes of laws. The US is a “nation of laws”.
Now, here is the “kicker”! Citizens of the US are free people… so long as they/we remain within the boundaries proscribed by the laws, which are made by their/our fellow citizens who have been vested with the power to create those laws.
America asks very little of her citizens. All she asks is that they/we obey the law(s) made by the citizens of the country.
If a US citizens, or anyone residing within the US decides, for whatever reason, to live outside those laws, or to ignore, or in any other way, break those laws, then the wrath of their fellow citizens, the people of the 50 states as a whole, will come down on them like a ton of bricks! And in a system such as ours… that is a good thing.
Longstreet Gets It. Do You?
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
You can see her appearance at The Village Scribe, who made the catch, or below on You Tube:
And here are some videos I recorded when she spoke at The Rally to Stop Illegal Immigration on June 23 of this year:
And here is my coverage of the event:
Elrick Williams's toddler niece Carlyn may be one of the youngest contributors to this year's presidential campaign. The 2-year-old gave $2,300 to Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.).
So did her sister and brother, Imara, 13, and Ishmael, 9, and her cousins Chan and Alexis, both 13. Altogether, according to newly released campaign finance reports, the extended family of Williams, a wealthy Chicago financier, handed over nearly a dozen checks in March for the maximum allowed under federal law to Obama.
Such campaign donations from young children would almost certainly run afoul of campaign finance regulations, several campaign lawyers said. But as bundlers seek to raise higher and higher sums for presidential contenders this year, the number who are turning to checks from underage givers appears to be on the rise.
"It's not difficult for a banker or a trial lawyer or a hedge fund manager to come up with $2,300, and they're often left wanting to do more," said Massie Ritsch, a spokesman for the Center for Responsive Politics. "That's when they look across the dinner table at their children and see an opportunity."
Asked about the Williams family giving, Obama spokesman Bill Burton said, "As a policy, we don't take donations from anyone under the age of 15." After being asked by The Post about the matter, he said the children's donations will be returned.
Although campaign finance laws set a limit of $2,300 per donor per campaign, they do not explicitly bar donors based on age. And young donors abound in the fundraising reports filed by presidential contenders this year.
A supporter of former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney (R), Susan Henken of Dover, Mass., wrote her own $2,300 check, and her 13-year-old son, Samuel, and 15-year-old daughter, Julia, each wrote $2,300 checks, for example. Samuel used money from his bar mitzvah and money he earned "dog sitting," and Julia used babysitting money to make the contributions, their mother said. "My children like to donate to a lot of causes. That's just how it is in my house," Henken said.
Just how much campaign cash is coming from children is uncertain -- the FEC does not require donors to provide their age. But the amount written by those identifying themselves as students on contribution forms has risen dramatically this year, according to an analysis by the Center for Responsive Politics. During the first six months of the 2000 presidential campaign, students gave $338,464. In 2004, that rose to $538,936.
This year, the amount has nearly quadrupled, to $1,967,111.
"What's driving it is a desire by maxed-out donors to max out on their maxing out," said Fred Wertheimer, president of campaign finance reform organization Democracy 21, who sought, unsuccessfully, to outlaw child donations five years ago. "More often than not, you're dealing with people who are simply trying to circumvent the limits of what they can give."
Congress tried to outlaw political contributions from those under age 18 as part of the McCain-Feingold Act in 2002, but the Supreme Court struck down that provision as an infringement on the constitutional rights of minors. With that ruling in mind, the Federal Election Commission wrote new regulations two years ago that tried to balance what it considered a legitimate desire among some children to make political contributions against the possibility that parents would seek to pad their donations by funneling money through children.
The regulations established a three-step test to determine whether a contribution is acceptable: It must be made with the child's money, the parent cannot reimburse the child for making the donation and the contribution has to be knowing and voluntary.
That last part of the test is the one that would seem to rule out a 2-year-old, said Michael E. Toner, a former FEC chairman who helped draft the rules. "If they are 16 or 17, they're clearly old enough to know what they're doing, as compared to someone who is, say, 10 years old. . . . I don't know any 2-year-old who is capable of making that kind of decision."
Source Article: Washington Post
To me, it is clear that most of these donations qualify as breaking the straw man donor rule, and no further laws, or rules are required. I am troubled by people too young to vote contributing to a political campaign...no matter who they (or their rich relative) support
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
These comments are unbecoming a Congressman, and I salute Congressman Shuler for voting to censure Congressman Stark.
DUmmies React to vote.
FReepers React to Vote.
House Roll Call.
That's quite a concept: "A cold civil war." Since 9/11, Mr. Gibson has abandoned futuristic sci-fi dystopias to frolic in the dystopia of the present. Spook Country boils down to a caper plot about a mysterious North America-bound container, and it's tricked out very inventively. Yet, notwithstanding the author's formidable powers of imagination, its politics are more or less conventional for a novelist in the twilight of the Bush era: someone says, "Are you really so scared of terrorists that you'd dismantle the structures that made America what it is?" Someone else says, "America has developed Stockholm Syndrome towards its own government." Etc. But it's that one phrase that makes you pause: "A cold civil war."
Or so you'd think. In fact, it seems to have passed entirely without notice. Unlike "cyberspace" a quarter-century ago, the "cold civil war" is not some groovy paradigm for the day after tomorrow but a cheerless assessment of the here and now, too bleak for buzz. As far as I can tell, April Gavaza, at the Hyacinth Girl website, is pretty much the first American to ponder whether a "cold civil war" has any significance beyond the novel:
What would that entail, exactly? A cold war is a war without conflict, defined in one of several online dictionaries as "[a] state of rivalry and tension between two factions, groups, or individuals that stops short of open, violent confrontation." In that respect, is the current political climate one of "cold civil war"? I think arguments could be made to that effect. My mother, not much of a political enthusiast, has made similar assessments since the 2000 election ...
Indeed. A year before this next election in the U.S., the common space required for civil debate and civilized disagreement has shrivelled to a very thin sliver of ground. Politics requires a minimum of shared assumptions. To compete you have to be playing the same game: you can't thwack the ball back and forth if one of you thinks he's playing baseball and the other fellow thinks he's playing badminton. Likewise, if you want to discuss the best way forward in the war on terror, you can't do that if the guy you're talking to doesn't believe there is a war on terror, only a racket cooked up by the Bushitler and the rest of the Halliburton stooges as a pretext to tear up the constitution.
Americans do not agree on the basic meaning of the last seven years. If you drive around an Ivy League college town -- home to the nation's best and brightest, allegedly -- you notice a wide range of bumper stickers, from the anticipatory ("01/20/09" -- the day of liberation from the Bush tyranny) to the profane ("Buck Fush") to the myopically self-indulgent ("Regime Change Begins At Home") to the exhibitionist paranoid ("9/11 Was An Inside Job"). Let's assume, as polls suggest, that next year's presidential election is pretty open: might be a Democrat, might be a Republican. Suppose it's another 50/50 election with a narrow GOP victory dependent on the electoral college votes of one closely divided state. It's not hard to foresee those stickered Dems concluding that the system has now been entirely delegitimized.
Obviously the vast majority of Americans are not foaming partisans. It would be foolish to adduce any general theories from, say, Mr. "Ed Funkhouser," who emailed me twice in the small hours of Tuesday: the first epistle read, in total, "who needs facts indeed. How do you live with yourself, scumbag?" An hour and a half later he realized he'd forgotten to make his devastating assessment of my sexual orientation, and sent a follow-up: "you are a f--kin' moron. and probably queer too!" No doubt. Mr. Funkhouser and his friends on the wilder shores of the Internet are unusually stirred up, to a degree most Americans would find perverse. Life is good, food is plentiful, there are a million and one distractions. In advanced democracies, politics is not everything, and we get on with our lives. In a sense, we outsource politics to those who want it most and participate albeit fitfully in whatever parameters of discourse emerge. For half a decade, the "regime change" and "inside job" types have set the pace.
Source Article: Free Republic
I can't imagine it turning into a shooting war because, so far, most of the weapons are in the hands of the conservative-types and anarchists. If the HildaBeast were elected, and came for the weapons, then that would be a different story altogether.
9.10am...Freedom Folks attended an Islamofascism Awareness Event last night, and have plenty of photos, and even video.
9.32am...Feel Good Video of the Morning. I wanna hug!
I apologize for the bad sound...click here for the Flash Version.
The Vocabulary of War
By David Horowitz
Vocabulary of War
The Left is up in arms over the effort to hold an Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week on American college campuses. The goal of the Week is to alert Americans to the threat from Islamo-Fascism and to focus attention on the violent oppression of Muslim women under theocracies in Iran, Saudi Arabia, the Sudan and other Islamic states. It has been attacked as “Islamophobic” and “racist” by the Muslim Students Association, the Revolutionary Communist Party, the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee and FoxNews Channel’s Alan Colmes.
Is this not puzzling? Why would the left – which claims to be anti-fascist, anti-sexist and progressive -- oppose Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week rather than support it? Why isn’t the left outraged by the genital mutilation of women in countries such as Nigeria, Somalia and Yemen, or the sanctioning of wife-beating under Islamic law in Pakistan and other Islamic states? Across America, Women’s Studies programs will teach students about the oppression of women in Peoria and Ann Arbor but not in Teheran or Riyadh. Why not?
Why isn’t the left appalled by the jihad – the holy war that has been declared against the West, and by the sanctifying of murderers as holy “martyrs” when Muslim terrorists kill innocent Americans, Christians and Jews? Perhaps it is because the left is engaged in its own jihad or holy war – and against the same targets: the Great Satan, America, and the little one in the Middle East.
As the left’s response shows, it is not only indifferent to the issues of Islamic terror and oppression, which the campus protest hopes to discuss, it is ready to declare war on anyone who wants to raise them.
We are all familiar with the way the left wages its political wars. If someone happens to disagree with its position on racial issues –if one believes, for example, that government enforced racial preferences are misguided or immoral –the left will denounce that person as a “racist.” In our culture, this is the moral equivalent of a bullet in the head. If the president of Harvard cites scientific data that women have different aptitudes for mathematics (lower) and verbal subjects (higher) than men, the left will denounce him as a “sexist,” another cultural bullet in the head. If a person believes that children should not be instructed about sex in public schools at the kindergarten level, the left will denounce her as a “homophobe” – one more mortal blow.
And, so, if students attempt to discuss the holy war that Muslim fascists have declared against the West, the left can be expected to denounce them as Islamophobes, and bigots too. To make the point, the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee will send threatening letters to 100 university presidents across the country urging them to deny a platform to students who are practicing “hate speech.” And liberal TV anchors will defend the witch-hunt.
Here is an excerpt from an exchange that took place between FoxNews Channel anchor Alan Colmes and myself, over my efforts to organize Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week:
Alan Colmes: “The words, the phrase ‘Islamo-fascism’ is hate speech. It equates an entire religion with fascism. That’s what people object to. It conflates the two, and it’s wrong.” In other words, students can’t even hold a discussion about “Islamo-Fascism” because the idea itself is hateful, is forbidden.
This argument clearly doesn’t make sense. Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week is explicitly designed to raise public awareness about the oppression of Muslim women by Islamic radicals who abuse them. How can that be equating all Muslims with oppressors? The term “Islamo-Fascism” was itself coined by moderate Muslims in Algeria who were being slaughtered in the tens of thousands by Islamic radicals bent on jihad. How does using a term invented by Muslims to describe their oppressors equate all Muslims with the fascists?
Does the term “Italian Fascism” equate all Italians with fascism? Or does it just identify those Italians who were followers of Mussolini? Is the term “Italian Fascism” hate speech? What about the term “white racism?” By Colmes’ logic, such a term equates an entire race– including Alan Colmes – with racism, and is therefore hate speech.
Obviously, the attacks on Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week by liberals such as Colmes and radicals such as the Revolutionary Communist Party and the Muslim Students Association are based on reasoning that is absurd. Their only logic is emotional, and the character of that emotion is hatred -- hatred for those who want to raise awareness of the threats we face from radical Islam. This hatred has only one purpose, which is to put a metaphorical bullet in the head of those who oppose the jihad. The purpose is to silence them.
About the Author:
David Horowitz is the author of numerous books including an autobiography, Radical Son, which has been described as “the first great autobiography of his generation.” It chronicles his odyssey from radical activism in the ‘60s to his current position as the head of the David Horowitz Freedom Center and who one journalist has called "the left's most articulate nemesis." His book, The Art of Political War was described by White House political strategist Karl Rove as “The perfect guide to winning on the political battlefield.” Left Illusions is an anthology of 40 years of his writings. His latest books are The Professors, which documents the debasement of the academic curriculum by tenured leftists, The Shadow Party, which describes the radical left's control of the Democratic Party's electoral machine and Indoctrination U., which is an in-depth look at how indoctrination has taken the place of education in today's college classrooms.
Sunday, October 21, 2007
And when the evening closed - on a prayer for the State of Israel - 6,000 people, all but a few of them evangelical Christians, streamed out of the Cornerstone Church in San Antonio, Texas.
On Sunday night, Pastor John Hagee, head of the Cornerstone Church and a founding member of Christians United for Israel, hosted his 26th annual “Night to Honor Israel.” It was a massive multimedia extravaganza of music, skits, speeches and dance, broadcast live throughout the world and attended by Israeli representatives and community leaders from the Jewish Federation of Houston.
The event aimed to show solidarity between the evangelical community and the State of Israel, which Hagee calls the “apple of God’s eye.” It also reminded anyone listening that God’s politics are very, very specific.
“I am concerned about this upcoming so-called peace summit,” Hagee thundered from the pulpit, referring to the Middle East conference planned for next month in Annapolis, Maryland.
He’s a big, rotund man, and his voice echoed throughout the mega-church’s enormous sanctuary. “America must never pressure Israel to give up land. It must never pressure her to divide Jerusalem. Turning Jerusalem over to the Palestinians is tantamount to giving it to the Taliban,” he said.
Hagee has been throwing “Nights to Honor Israel” for a long time, ever since the upswing of anti-Zionism following Israel’s 1981 attack on Iraq’s Osirak nuclear reactor convinced him he had to speak out in defense of the Jewish state.
In the intervening years, he has become the most outspoken and influential of America’s evangelical Christian Zionists. His television and radio ministry reaches 99 million homes each week. He says he aims to “bring Jews and Christians together,” and refers sweepingly to the “Judeo-Christian faith.”
That quarter-century’s practice has given the night a quality of polished extravagance.
Everything was big and loud, from the red-carpeted church to the 100-member choir to the amount of money donated. John Hagee Ministries gave more than $8.5 million, most which came from private donations, to Israeli causes from the Israel National Autism Foundation to the city of Ariel’s Development Fund. Over $6m. went to aliya organizations such as Nefesh B’Nefesh and Exodus II.
“We love you because you are a man of God,” said Daniel Ayalon, Israel’s ambassador to the United States, as he accepted a check for a million dollars on behalf of Nefesh B’Nefesh.
“Within the last 50 years,” Ayalon said, “we have gathered in the Jews from the North, from the East, from the South. Now, with the help of our Christian allies, we are going to finish this job and bring the Jews from the West as well.”
Source Article: IsraPundit (be sure to read the whole thing over there.)
As a born-again Christian, I know that God has a very special place in His heart for the Jewish people, and very special plans to match, and as the adopted children of God (Christians), it would behoove us to remember the original (and soon to return) chosen children of God, the Jews.
It completely baffles my mind that non-Christians cannot see it, the gathering of dark forces against Israel, inspired and energized by satanic forces...even swaying our own President to agree to the Abomination of a two-state solution that will be enforced by the Antichrist.
Dark Times are ahead.
Check out one of my You Tube Playlists below:
Friday, October 19, 2007
The following is the press release from The Center for Vigilant Freedom.
Vigilant Freedom Europa
PO Box 580
Wakefield WF1 9FR
October 19, 2007
FOR MORE INFORMATION:
On October 18 and 19, over 70 organizations and individuals joined together in the European and Flemish Parliaments to create a European network of activists from 14 nations to resist the increasing Islamisation of their countries. Keynote speakers included Bat Ye’or, author of Eurabia and Dhimmitude and Robert Spencer, author of Religion of Peace, Why Christianity is and Islam Isn’t. Additional speakers included David Littman, Dr. Arieh Eldad, member of the Israeli Knesset, Dr. Patrick Sookhdeo, Director of the Institute for the Study of Islam and Christianity, Sam Solomon, Director of Fellowship of Faith for Muslims and author of the Charter of Muslim Understanding, Dr. Marc Cogen, Ghent University, Dr. Andrew Bostom, author of The Legacy of Islamic Antisemitism, and Laurent Artur du Plessis, author of a forthcoming book on shariah finance. Many participants worldwide also attended the first day of presentations online through webex conferencing.
Read the Rest: Gates of Vienna
Previously: 2007 Counterjihad Brussels
You can support this effort by donating much-needed funds.
Senate Letter Lambasting Limbaugh Raises $4 Million For Charity
Marine Corps Law Enforcement Foundation Benefits
The #1 Supporter of the US Military, Rush Limbaugh has used a disgraceful act of 41 US Senators to raise over $4 Million for the children of US Marines and Federal Law Enforcement killed on duty to attend college.
Take that, Butt-Wipes!!!
Thank You Betty Casey!
Thank You Rush for matching the bid!
Update: To memorialize the event...I swiped this photo from a FReeper thread:
By Peter Nicholas and Tom Hamburger, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers
October 19, 2007
NEW YORK -- Something remarkable happened at 44 Henry St., a grimy Chinatown tenement with peeling walls. It also happened nearby at a dimly lighted apartment building with trash bins clustered by the front door.
And again not too far away, at 88 E. Broadway beneath the Manhattan bridge, where vendors chatter in Mandarin and Fujianese as they hawk rubber sandals and bargain-basement clothes.
All three locations, along with scores of others scattered throughout some of the poorest Chinese neighborhoods in Queens, Brooklyn and the Bronx, have been swept by an extraordinary impulse to shower money on one particular presidential candidate -- Democratic front-runner Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Dishwashers, waiters and others whose jobs and dilapidated home addresses seem to make them unpromising targets for political fundraisers are pouring $1,000 and $2,000 contributions into Clinton's campaign treasury. In April, a single fundraiser in an area long known for its gritty urban poverty yielded a whopping $380,000. When Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) ran for president in 2004, he received $24,000 from Chinatown.
I am sure that kind of pattern can be found in a lot more places where money is laundered on a regular basis. Back to our story:
Many of Clinton's Chinatown donors said they had contributed because leaders in neighborhood associations told them to. In some cases, donors said they felt pressure to give. [Hmmm...wonder what would happen if this were a Republican Candidate? If you said wall-to-wall coverage, move to the front of the class!]
Here are just two of the people listed as donors:
In the busy heart of East Broadway, beneath the Manhattan Bridge, is a building that is listed as the home of Sang Cheung Lee, also reported to have given $1,000. Trash was piled in the dimly lighted entrance hall. Neighbors said they knew of no one with Lee's name there; they knocked on one another's doors in a futile effort to find him.
Salespeople at a store on Canal Street were similarly baffled when asked about Shih Kan Chang, listed as working there and having given $1,000. The store sells purses, jewelry and novelty Buddha statues. Employees said they had not heard of Chang.
Another listed donor, Yi Min Liu, said he did not make the $1,000 contribution in April that was reported in his name. He said he attended a banquet for Clinton but did not give her money.
Source Article: Los Angeles Times
Hat Tip: Drudge Report
Kinda reminds me of the China-Gate Scandal where hundreds of thousands of money were funneled from the Chinese Army into Bill Clinton's re-election Campaign. Come to think of it, the Hsu Scandal hardly made a ripple. I'll bet this story won't make a ripple, either because little Johnny Edwards and Barack Obama are scared spitless at the thought of really challenging the HildaBeast. They are just marking time until either 2012 or 2016.
I think the best policy for the GOP to take is to lay low on stuff like this, and wait to spring it on her in the General Election...and since the Media is in her corner, we don't have to worry about them.
. A Balanced Approach to Covering Kids
The current debate has focused almost exclusively on SCHIP--as though expanding SCHIP is the only way to expand health coverage for children. However, there are drawbacks to expanding SCHIP eligibility above the original income ceiling of 200 percent of the federal poverty level (FPL). For certain family income levels, as many as 60 percent of new SCHIP enrollees would be children who already have private coverage. Also, expanding SCHIP does nothing to help modest-income families who currently have private insurance for their children (typically through their place of work) but who are likely to need assistance if they are to be unable to afford their children's coverage in the future.
Members of Congress should widen the discussion to include other policy ideas that could easily bridge the divide. Senator Mel Martinez (R-FL) and other lawmakers recently started to design a balanced alternative.
Specifically, a reasonable compromise could be formed around three simple concepts:
Reauthorize SCHIP for eligible children. Congress should approve a straight reauthorization of the SCHIP program for uninsured children in families with incomes at or below 200 percent of the FPL. The legislation should include provisions to increase outreach to enroll eligible children who do not have private health insurance coverage. Congress should allow for reasonable accommodation for those states that have previously obtained waivers from the Administration to increase the income eligibility.
Enact a child health care tax credit. For families with incomes between 200 percent and 300 percent of the FPL (the core population targeted by supporters of the SCHIP expansion), Congress should provide assistance to help them purchase private health insurance or retain the private coverage they currently have. Congress should permit these families to claim a $1,200 tax credit that could be used to enroll their children in dependent coverage through an employer or the individual market. This credit would take two forms: a non-refundable tax credit for taxpaying families, and a refundable tax credit (in effect, a voucher) for families that do not pay enough in taxes to secure a credit. The credits would be paid for in two budget-neutral ways.
The non-refundable tax credit could be paid for by capping the current tax exclusion for employer-provided insurance (a change long supported by economists, both liberal and conservative) for upper income families. This could take the form of limiting the tax-free amount to the cost of an average plan (just over $12,000 for family coverage) for those earning above, say, $150,000. All revenue generated by this reform of the tax exclusion would be used for tax relief for taxpaying families in the 200-300 percent of FPL range.
Under the federal budget process, the refundable part of the credit is considered a federal expenditure and should be fully offset by cutting wasteful or unnecessary spending such as corporate welfare.
Adopt a "federalism" health care initiative. Legislation introduced by Senators Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) and George Voinovich (R-OH) in the Senate and by Representatives Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) and Tom Price (R-GA) in the House would encourage greater experimentation at the state level to expand coverage, which complements both the reauthorization of SCHIP and the tax relief for working families. Already enjoying broad support in both parties, this element would provide states with even stronger incentives and flexibility to find more efficient ways of using existing federal and state funds to increase insurance coverage.
Another thing to consider is the progressive goal of Universal Health Care...and they know that it will not be swallowed whole by the American people, so the route chosen is incrementalism.
The SCHIP bill that the President vetoed covered children up to 25 Years of Age. If that is so...why not change the voting laws to reflect that? Why not change the Drinking Laws to reflect that? Why not keep our brave men and women from joining the military until they are over 25?
That is just one of the many ridiculous things involved in this bill that would have us march ever so closer to Universal
Thursday, October 18, 2007
The president establishes American foreign policy and is commander in chief. At least that's what the Constitution states. Then Congress oversees the president's policies by either granting or withholding money to carry them out - in addition to approving treaties and authorizing war.
Apparently, the founding fathers were worried about dozens of renegade congressional leaders and committees speaking on behalf of the United States and opportunistically freelancing with foreign leaders.
In our past, self-appointed moralists - from Charles Lindbergh and Joe Kennedy to Jimmy Carter and Jesse Jackson - have, from time to time, tried to engage in diplomacy directly contrary to the president's.
But usually Americans agree to let one elected president and his secretary of state speak for the United States abroad. Then if they're displeased with the results, they can show it at the ballot box every two years in national or midterm elections.
But recently hundreds in Congress have decided that they're better suited to handle international affairs than the State Department.
The U.S. Senate late last month passed a resolution urging the de facto breakup of wartime Iraq into federal enclaves along sectarian lines - even though this is not the official policy of the Bush administration, much less the wish of a sovereign elected government in Baghdad.
That Senate vote only makes it tougher for 160,000 American soldiers to stabilize a unitary Iraq. And Iraqis I spoke with during my recent trip to Iraq are confused over why the U.S. Congress would preach to them how to split apart their own country.
Source Article: Real Clear Politics
If the Democrats keep this up, they'll provide fuel for a tremendous awakening of the silent majority. I am already seeing signs of stirrings in western North Carolina as more conservatives begin to ask how they can become involved. I always tell them to start locally, because this cleansing (of the government, and it's attendant bureaucracies) will be from the bottom up. If this is going on nationwide, it would explain the new sense of desparation from the lefties.
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
This is another interview I filmed for Dr. Bernier of "Sound Off Buncombe" at the Vance Aycock Dinner, ie I watched the camera and kept idiots from walking in front of it.
I have also finished updating West Carolina Report for today. It includes a rather large section on links to stories with the theme "Objectives of Jihad."
In a previous post, I was so mad at the Democrat Leadership, I held back from declaring them to be enemies of America, although their actions spoke louder than my words ever could.
This morning I found a curious post at Dreaming 5GW:
Over eight decades after the Ottoman slaughter of some one and one half million Armenians the US Congress has seen fit to introduce a bill that will define said Ottoman endeavor in a most accurate fashion applying the label genocide. Why the sudden interest in a near century old atrocity? According to Nancy Pelosi:
"because many of the survivors are very old."
One could toss that explanation into the category of political subterfuge. What's most interesting here is not the very obvious recognition of Armenian genocide but the timing of this sudden
geo-political epiphany. Turkey has long struggled with the Kurdish/Marxist separatist group, the PKK and in recent months began amassing military power along the Turkish/Iraqi border in
preparation for possible crossborder operations designed to repress or destroy the PKK network that exists (in much the same fashion of the Taliban in western Pakistan) within Kurdish Iraq. The interesting bit is this piece of legislation comes about (in a very publicized fashion) at the same time that the Turkish parliament is hashing out whether or not such military operations will take place.
The Democrats seem to be running what might well be defined as a very nascent 5GW operation against what will be the political 800 pound gorilla should they ascend to Executive power: The inheritance of the Iraq war.
Read the rest at Dreaming 5GW, including the thoughtful commentary, to which I can only add that when the concept of Revolutionary Defeatism is taken into account; the picture becomes much clearer of the intent of the modern Democrat Party, especially the Progressives.
Tuesday, October 16, 2007
There is talk about of an extended solar minimum occurring, or perhaps a recurrence of a Dalton or Maunder type minimum. There are signs that the sun’s activity is slowing. The solar wind has been decreasing in speed, and this is yet another indicator of a slowing in the suns magnetic dynamo....One thing is certain, based on past climate history and solar history, if in fact the suns magnetic activity slows, or collapses and we enter a prolonged period of little or no sunspot activity, we’ll see a global cooling trend.
Read more about it at Al Fin.
That has been taught to me from the Bible since before I could walk. As a Christian who believes that Jesus was the ONLY begotten Son of God, and before or beside Him there are no other, and I believe that the Born Again have been adopted by God during the Age of Grace so us Gentiles get a chance to join the Kingdom of God. Before then, it was only open to Jews or children who died before the age of accountability.
That is my faith, to which I hold onto. Progressives will call it hate. In fact they even blast their own Democrat Congressman Shuler when he practices his faith.
Source Post: Heath Shuler Blog at the Asheville Citizen-Times
The issue surfaced when a young man, Paul Larochelle of Ohio, requested a flag be flown over the Capitol in honor of his grandfather’s “dedication and love of God, Country and family.”
Mr. Larochelle’s certificate was returned from the Architect’s office with the word “God” removed.
I believed that this restriction was an unnecessary restriction on our citizens’ right to openly and freely practice their religion.
In response, I sent a letter to the Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi yesterday morning asking her to examine the policies and procedures of the Architect of the Capitol that were preventing the word “God,” and other religious references from being on the certificates that the accompany flags flown over the Capitol.
My letter pointed out that the Congress has passed numerous resolutions recognizing the importance of religion in the lives of Americans and that the House of Representatives clearly supports the right of the people to openly practice their faith.
As a person of faith and an elected member of this Congress, I strongly disagreed with the Architect’s prohibition of the word “God” from flag certificates and asked the Speaker to examine the authority under which he was making this policy.
I am happy to report that today the Architect’s Office announced the rules had been revised and the prohibition of religious language has been removed.
My Snap Shot of the post, in case it changes.
Here are some of the responses he received:
Responses like this convinces me that most of these people do not even read the post to which they respond...I've seen it here on numerous occasions, the progressives just fire away in anger. This retard obviously has a reading comprehension problem, and/or hates God. He/She/It did not comprehend this sentence from Congressman Shuler's Post: "I believed that this restriction was an unnecessary restriction on our citizens’ right to openly and freely practice their religion."
Won't Vote For You Again said...
So can we assume that if he had wanted a Muslim reference, or Wiccan reference you would have waged the same "fight"? Are all people's faiths sacred to you, or are you pandering only to Christians? Be honest: If he wanted to thank SATAN would you have found this amazing new spine? I think that instead you'd be revealed as the hypocrite you really are.
Posted on 10/12/2007 at 2:07:10 PM
When these people hear a professed Christian say these words, they hear only what they want to hear.
Betty Chamberlain said...Again, another Hate-Filled Left suffering from a Lack of Reading Comprehension...brought to you, I am sure, by the public school system!
I trust that mention of God will be at the request of the recipient only. I also trust that, should a recipient wish to invoke the name of Allah, Krishna, Amun-Re, Marduk, Astarte or any other deity, the request would be honored.
Posted on 10/12/2007 at 5:07:10 PM
I think it is odd that the only complimentary comment (to date) has been mine:
I recognize that an America where all are free to practice their religions (including Christianity), is a boon to all.
Thunder Pig said...
Thank You, Congressman Shuler! You're a Great American.
Posted on 10/12/2007 at 04:07:10 AM
They very same people thought it was very good that another Congressman expressed his faith by swearing an oath on the Qur'an in January of this year. I can't help but wonder what they would be saying if the Capitol Architect had refused a constituent request to have a reference to allah placed in the certificate? I can almost guarantee you they would be outraged.
This is one reason the progressives have had a hard row to hoe in the redstates, and in the South: they hate the God of Christianity, and they view people not as individuals, but as a member of a group...and seek to divide the resulting groups against the other, and try to keep themselves as the Alpha Group to which all other groups must depend upon for protection against (you fill in the blank).
Now back to the latest attack on Ann practicing Free Speech, I will leave you with the words of the local Blogging Superstar, Hillbilly White Trash:
What Ann said simply reflects clear biblical New Testament theology as regards salvation in that all people, Jew and Gentile alike, who wish to be saved from their sins and have eternal life in the presence of God must place their faith in Jesus Christ and acknowledge his deity, his atoning death on the cross, his resurrection from the dead and his eventual return. Rather than being somehow "anti-Jewish" this teaching is imminently Jewish.
Christians believe that in order to be saved that one must worship a Jew, Jesus Christ, as God. They believe that the Hebrew God sent the Jew Jesus to the Jewish nation in fulfillment of Jewish prophecies given in the Jewish bible to offer the Jews the promised Jewish millennial kingdom. Obviously a doctrine which could only be held by people who are filled up to the nose holes with hatred for the Jews. [snort]
Mr. Baehr then goes on to imply that anyone who holds a biblically correct view of salvation cannot be a supporter of Israel. Mr. Baehr needs to review the history of the second half of the 20th century. The more literally one takes the Bible the more likely he is to be a supporter of Israel. Biblical literalists believe not only what the Bible teaches about salvation but also what it says about supporting Israel and the Jews. God promises the Jews that he will bless those who bless them and curse those who curse them (Genesis 12:3).
For an example of how this blessing and cursing can work itself out consider Berlin before and after Germany's attempted "final solution to the Jewish problem". Before a beautiful and prosperous city and after a pile of smoking rubble full of Red Army soldiers. This is your nation. This is your nation on antisemitism. Any questions?