As I’m sure everyone is aware, Donald Trump, presumtive Republican POTUS Nominee, has a ‘yuuge’ problem and concern with regard to the recent mass shooting/murder in Orlando. His concern is not about the 49 dead or the 50+ wounded, however, nor was he concerned at all about the devastation the event visited upon the families and friends of the victims. Nope, not at all. His concern was far larger; what really got his goat is that both President Obama and presumtive Democratic POTUS Nominee Hillary Clinton continue to not use the words Radical Islamic Terror (ists, ism) to define the perpetrators of mass shootings such as in Paris, Brussels, San Bernardino, and Orlando, to name but four.
Fact: some radicals use religion to justify their heinous crimes, their assaults against innocent people.
Question: Does that fact serve to define an entire religion — Islam, in this case — as “Radical”? Are all Muslims now to be viewed as “Terrorists” by definition?
Question for Drumpf, et al.: When discussing mass murders by (apparent) Muslims, you demand everyone use the words Radical Islamic Terror (ists, ism) to describe the perpetrators of said crime; does this mean that all perpetrators of mass shootings/murders everywhere be defined as Radical [ __?__ ] Terrorists? Sandy Hook? Aurora? Tucson? Columbine? Colorado Springs? Charleston? Umpqua C.C. in Oregon?
And speaking of Radical [ __?__ ] Terror (ists, ism), what about all those folks who advocate mass death and murder but have (apparently) not yet engaged? My guess is that a good number of them — and their revolting philosophies — are not strangers to those of us who follow the news now and again. Here are, in case you missed them, several prime examples of biased and loudly spoken religious (Christian) hate speech, disgusting verbiage spread about in just the few days since the Orlando massacre:
“The good news is that there’s 50 less pedophiles in this world, because, you know, these homosexuals are a bunch of disgusting perverts and pedophiles. That’s who was a victim here, are a bunch of, just, disgusting homosexuals at a gay bar, okay? And then I’m sure it’s also gonna be used to push an agenda against so-called “hate speech.” So Bible-believing Christian preachers who preach what the Bible actually says about homosexuality — that it’s vile, that it’s disgusting, that they’re reprobates — you know, we’re gonna be blamed. Like, “It’s all extremism! It’s not just the Muslims, it’s the Christians!” I’m sure that that’s coming. I’m sure that people are gonna start attacking, you know, Bible-believing Christians now, because of what this guy did.I’m not sad about it, I’m not gonna cry about it. Because these 50 people in a gay bar that got shot up, they were gonna die of AIDS, and syphilis, and whatever else. They were all gonna die early, anyway, because homosexuals have a 20-year shorter life-span than normal people, anyway.”
— Steven Anderson, preacher at Faithful Word Baptist Church, Tempe, AZ in response to the slaughter in Orlando
Daubenmire said that the massacre in Orlando showed that “the devil is willing to sacrifice some of his own team in order to get our big players” and warned that gun control will lead to the killing of conservative Christians. . . .
He said that it’s not “gonna be the guys in the ghetto” who are killed due to gun control because “they’re already killing each other,” but rather conservative Christians who are resisting “bowing politically correct to Islam, politically correct to abortion, politically correct to homosexuality” who will die under increased gun control. Daubenmire declared that Islam is “the new religion” and “anybody who’s against this new religion, they’re going to get it.”
“Sodomites are criminals” and do not deserve the prayers of Christians, Shoebat stated. “The sodomites who were killed in this club were not innocent people. They were not good people. They were not people who were just victims who we should just feel sorry for. It was scum killing scum.”
The real victims of this attack, Shoebat said, are people like him who are being unfairly painted as radicals and likened to ISIS simply because they openly advocate putting gay people to death. . . .
“I don’t believe in vigilantism, but I do believe in the government killing the sodomites,” he explained. “I do believe in the government arresting the sodomites and executing them for homosexuality. Under my rule, that sodomite club in Orlando, it would have been destroyed, it would have been demolished, bulldozed and all the bastards in there would have been arrested, tried, found guilty for homosexuality and executed.”
“Even when we point a stupid Jew to Evangelical Christians, they too get angry since in their view a Jew can do no evil.
“The whole culture is dumber than a nail.
“Liberals and gays should all screw each other. Finally I could watch TV and could care less.”
Robertson said that liberals are facing a “dilemma” because they love both LGBT equality and Islamic extremism, and that it is better for conservatives like himself not to get involved but to instead just watch the two groups kill each other.
“The left is having a dilemma of major proportions and I think for those of us who disagree with some of their policies, the best thing to do is to sit on the sidelines and let them kill themselves.”
Amid the sprint to the election 2016, the secular left’s utter disdain for both Christ and his followers is reaching a fever pitch. Self-styled progressives, and that is America’s cultural Marxist agents of ruin…they typically disguise their designs on despotism in the flowery and euphemistic language of – and you have heard all of these – reproductive health, anti-discrimination, civil rights and their favorite of course, multiculturalism. But their ultimate goal here is to silence all dissent and force Christians to conform to their pagan demand or potentially, face even incarceration.
How to describe folks like Rev. Anderson, Daubenmire, the Shoebats, Barber, and Rev. Pat Robertson — white Americans — who continuously spout that ‘radical’ and ‘terrorist’ and ‘hate’ point of view? They’re clearly not Muslims. Nope. They’re white; American; Evangelical; Christian; they’re also clearly Radical, and potentially they’re Terrorists.
Hey! All of a sudden I have an idea! How about Radical [ __?__ ] Terror (ists, ism), where [ __?__ ] can be not only Islamic, but also White, or American, or Evangelical, or Christian, or any combination thereof!!
Actually, I rather doubt Obama, or Clinton, or Sanders, or any other respectful Progressive would stoop to that level of lingo, but Trump (and equivalent) ought to really like it! And think of how the world would change if Trump would simply start describing each of the above-quoted slime-balls, along with the perpetrators of Sandy Hook, Aurora, Tucson, Columbine, Colorado Springs, Charleston, and Umpqua C.C. in Oregon, et al., using any appropriate combination of those listed options, duly embedded between the words Radical and Terror (ists, ism)!!
Stated more simply, if the plan is to insult a cluster of people in order to inspire thoughts of hate and fear in political underlings, be honest; don’t limit the vitriol; call a spade a spade! No more of that broad brush accusatory Radical Islamic Terrorist(s) nonsense. Be specific!
Sounds good, but then this pops up: WV ‘Sovereign Citizen’ Murders Three With AR-15
Monday there was another mass shooting in West Virginia, which turns out to have been a sovereign citizen who had a dispute with his neighbors over firewood. Instead of resolving the matter peacefully, he pulled out an AR-15 and shot them all to death.
No, really. Over firewood.
Erick Shute, 32, was arrested in Pennsylvania for the shootings of Jack Douglas, Travis Bartley and Willie Bartley, as they chopped firewood in an area adjacent to his property, according to a WSAZ report.
WSAZ also reports that “Shute has been involved in antigovernment activities since at least 2009 when he was at the center of a controversy for hanging an American flag upside down outside his New Jersey home, drawing the wrath of local veterans. He told reporters then that the flag was a symbol that the United States was under distress under the “corrupt policies” of President Obama.”
I give up. It seems the only way to appropriately define each and all who can answer to the moniker Radical [ __?__ ] Terror (ists, ism), in the final analysis and in spite of any claims, requires really nothing other than two common and simple words: Stupid Shit. I therefore suggest we universalize their use, that we drop the words Islamic, or White, or American, or Evangelical, or Christian — and any other of the myriad salient possibilities — and use only the two words that best define the concept of Radical Terror (ists, ism): i.e. STUPID SHIT. From now on, let them all be known as Radical Stupid Shit Terrorists. That way, even a Stupid Shit like Donald Trump is perfectly defined for all the world to see.
There remains another option, however — my personal fave — which is that everyone just simply try to get along, to not interfere with the beliefs of others, to respect people of every persuasion. Why can’t religious beliefs stay within their defined margins, even as their practitioners work to accept the beliefs of all who differ, allow them to also live as they choose? Tolerance.
Reminds me of the grand irony I spotted (and photographed) in downtown Phoenix, Az, some 35-40 years ago. The new-at-the-time Phoenix Civic Plaza stood directly across the street from a very old and hallowed Roman Catholic church known as St. Mary’s Basilica, and many of the Plaza’s open spaces were ornamented with life-sized statues made by Arizona artist John Henry Waddell. Here is my shot of one of the Waddell statues, with St. Mary’s Basilica in the immediate background; the implicit symbolism is, I think, a bit on the stunning side:
Imagine it: a Holy Basilica in full view of a Waddell Statue of a nude woman! I’m guessing that the implicit “grand irony” that caught my eye in 1977 is not only still obvious, but even still pertinent — at least to those who can see the world that lies beyond their nose. Tolerance!
In any case, I’m sure I’m not the only one who, this day, finds himself completely sick and tired of that which motivates so much of the world, i.e. the Hate, the Fear that’s fomented and honed by those greedy and power-hungry Stupid Shits that tend to drive every human society everywhere on the planet into the ground. So much of the human malaise is directly attributable to all of those who have emerged from the muck and mire that underlies virtually every national entity, including (obviously) this one we call home. Why is that? I know it’s clear (to most, at least) that religion is partially — but certainly not entirely — to blame. There are, after all, literally millions upon millions of good, kind, and fair-minded people that are parcel to every religion everywhere. Unfortunately, there are also the other types: the types who find it necessary that everyone think and act exactly as their “leader” dictates, a setup which is, this day, more commonly known by its political moniker: Radical [ __?__ ] Terror (ists, ism). What puzzles me most is why do so many of us ordinary hominids tolerate such mania?
I guess we’ll never know. We should be thankful, though, that not everyone out there “thinks” like a Stupid Shit. As proof, I offer here three quotes from three different sources, each of which speaks to a level of reality that is so elusive to so many. Here they are, in no particular order:
Our goal as a nation must be to bring people together, to prevent violence, to prevent hatred, and to create the nation that we know standing together we can create.
Let me make a final point. For a while now the main contribution of some of
my friends on the other side of the aisle have made in the fight against ISIL is
to criticize this administration and me for not using the phrase “Radical Islam.”
“That’s the key” they tell us. “We can’t beat ISIL unless we call them Radical Islamists.”
What exactly would using this label accomplish? What exactly would it change?
Would it make ISIL less committed to kill Americans? Would it bring in
more allies? Is there a military strategy served by this?
The answer is none of the above. . . .
And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people:
and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks:
nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.
Even the Bible speaks against Radical Terrorism. Go figure.
Wage Peace, not war.