Political Lomcevak (Tumbling the Liberal Mindset)

The Definition of a political lomcevak? What you get when you mix an aerobatic pilot, a gun nut, a Burkean Conservative and an avid Fisherman, and then attempt to imprint a Liberal Law Education into him.

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?
Saturday, March 15, 2003
David Warren checks in. To anyone who says that I dislike Canadians. I love this guy.

Fatwa on the qualities of Jews.

The Question

"Dear Sheikh! As-Salam `Alaykum. Jews have played a considerable role throughout the history, before and after the advent of Islam. The Qur’an referred to them in many places. What, according to the Qur’an, are the main characteristics and qualities of Jews?"

Can you imagine asking for a religious ruling on the general qualities of a specific people based solely on their religion, gender, sexual orientation, or political belief? Does that cause you some consternation? It should. It seems to me the height of bigotry. However, possibly the answer out of this mainstream Islamic source will dispel any illusions of being able to make general assumptions about people.

"As regards the question you posed, the following is the fatwa issued by Sheikh `Atiyyah Saqr, former Head of Al-Azhar Fatwa Committee, in his response to a similar question:

“The Qur’an has specified a considerable deal of its verses to talking about Jews, their personal qualities and characteristics. The Qur’anic description of Jews is quite impartial; praising them in some occasions where they deserve praise and condemning them in other occasions where they practice blameworthy acts. Yet, the latter occasions outnumbered the former, due to their bad qualities and the heinous acts they used to commit."

Ummm, that is not promising at all. So let me get this straight, the Qu'ranic "impartial" description of the Jews leans towards bad qualities and heinous acts. The Liberals I have spoken with assure me that the Qu'ran goes to great lengths to ensure proper treatment of the "people of the book." Could it be that Sheikh `Atiyyah Saqr, the former Head of Al-Azhar Fatwa Committee, is outside the mainstream? The Fatwa is issued on a site that a friend directed me too, as one that is a mainstream Islamic site.

"The Qur’an praises them on the verse that reads: “ And verily We gave the Children of Israel the Scripture and the Command and the Prophethood, and provided them with good things and favored them above (all) peoples.” (Al-Jathiyah:16) i.e. the peoples of their time."

Here we have the sole positive attribute mentioned in the Fatwa

"They used to fabricate things and falsely ascribe them to Allah. Allah Almighty says: “ That is because they say: We have no duty to the Gentiles. They speak a lie concerning Allah knowingly.” (Al-`Imran:75) Also: “The Jews say: Allah's hand is fettered. Their hands are fettered and they are accursed for saying so. Nay, but both His hands are spread out wide in bounty. He bestoweth as He will.” (Al-Ma`idah:64)

In another verse Almighty Allah says: “Verily Allah heard the saying of those who said, (when asked for contributions to the war): "Allah, forsooth, is poor, and we are rich! We shall record their saying with their slaying of the Prophets wrongfully and We shall say: Taste ye the punishment of burning!” (Al-`Imran:181)"

Okay, first we throw in a little heresy. Wouldn't be the same without it.

"They love to listen to lies. Concerning this Allah says: “and of the Jews: listeners for the sake of falsehood, listeners on behalf of other folk” (Al-Ma’idah: 41)

Then we maintain that Jews are born liars.

"Disobeying Almighty Allah and never observing His commands. Allah says: “And because of their breaking their covenant, We have cursed them and made hard their hearts.” (Al-Ma’idah: 13)"

Next we see an example of Islamic tolerance for those who are not Islamic.

"Disputing and quarreling. This is clear in the verse that reads: “Their Prophet said unto them: Lo! Allah hath raised up Saul to be a king for you. They said: How can he have kingdom over us when we are more deserving of the kingdom than he is, since he hath not been given wealth enough?” (Al-Baqarah: 247)"

And yes, since the Jews are so contentious, I guess there is little reason to try to get along with them. However, it is unclear if this means that Jews fight within or do they confine their struggles to those without. Leaving the interpretation broad covers all the bases would be my inference.

"Hiding the truth and standing for misleading. This can be understood from the verse that reads: “…distort the Scripture with their tongues, that ye may think that what they say is from the Scripture, when it is not from the Scripture.” (Al-`Imran: 78)"

I am slightly confused, since I already thought we covered the lying ground. Possibly lying and hiding the truth are different. Or possibly this is meant to re-enforce the deceptive nature of the Jews to the Fatwa recipient.

"Staging rebellion against the Prophets and rejecting their guidance. This is clear in the verse: “And when ye said: O Moses! We will not believe in thee till we see Allah plainly.” (Al-Baqarah: 55)"

Again, another example of Islamic religious tolerance. In Christian circles, this may be analagous to calling Jews "Christ Killers." Also, isn't rebelling against the Prophets an offence that requires immediate combat, or Jihad?

"Hypocrisy. In a verse, we read: “And when they fall in with those who believe, they say: We believe; but when they go apart to their devils they declare: Lo! we are with you; verily we did but mock.” (Al-Baqarah: 14) In another verse, we read: “Enjoin ye righteousness upon mankind while ye yourselves forget (to practice it)? And ye are readers of the Scripture! Have ye then no sense?” (Al-Baqarah: 44)

Not only are they liars, the Jews are hypocrites.

"Giving preference to their own interests over the rulings of religion and the dictates of truth. Allah says: “…when there cometh unto you a messenger (from Allah) with that which ye yourselves desire not, ye grow arrogant, and some ye disbelieve and some ye slay?” (Al-Baqarah: 87)"

Representive Jim Moran, your Fatwa is here!

"Wishing evil for people and trying to mislead them. This is clear in the verse that reads: “Many of the People of the Scripture long to make you disbelievers after your belief, through envy on their own account, after the truth hath become manifest unto them.” (Al-Baqarah: 109)"

Not only do Jews lie to you, in their own self-interest. They want only the worst for you.

"They feel pain to see others in happiness and are gleeful when others are afflicted with a calamity. This is clear in the verse that reads: “If a lucky chance befall you, it is evil unto them, and if disaster strike you they rejoice thereat.” (Al-`Imran:120)"

Hell, this could be a Fatwa entitled "Democrats." Sorry about that, I slipped there for a second. However, notice the de-humanization of the subject here. Jews are not like you and I. They have the opposite emotional reaction to events affecting real people. Joy at others pain. No compassion. Hence, not entirely human.

"They are known of their arrogance and haughtiness. They claimed to be the sons and of Allah and His beloved ones. Allah tells us about this in the verse that reads: “The Jews and Christians say: We are sons of Allah and His loved ones.” (Al-Ma’idah: 18)"

Arrogant bastards too.

Utilitarianism and opportunism are among their innate traits. This is clear in the verse that reads: “And of their taking usury when they were forbidden it, and of their devouring people's wealth by false pretences.” (An-Nisa’: 161)"

While I am not sure why Utilitarianism is a negative innate trait, I do know why opportunism is. Isn't this the same argument that Nazi's made about the Jewish people. Didn't Hitler make the claim that the Jews exploited the victory in World War 1 against the interests of the German people.

"Their impoliteness and indecent way of speech is beyond description. Referring to this, the Qur’anic verse reads: “Some of those who are Jews change words from their context and say: "We hear and disobey; hear thou as one who heareth not" and "Listen to us!" distorting with their tongues and slandering religion. If they had said: "We hear and we obey; hear thou, and look at us" it had been better for them, and more upright. But Allah hath cursed them for their disbelief, so they believe not, save a few.” (An-Nisa’:46)"

Another textbook attack at the humanity of the Jews. Politeness is an inherent human trait, and so is decency. Animals are not polite, nor are they decent.

"It is easy for them to slay people and kill innocents. Nothing in the world is dear to their hearts than shedding blood and murdering human beings. They never give up this trait even with the Messengers and the Prophets. Allah says: “…and slew the prophets wrongfully.” (Al-Baqarah: 61)"

Killers without compassion are considered beneath contempt by every other member of the human race. They are animals. See the link. See how this propaganda seeks to dehumanize Jewish people. See how this Fatwa from a respected maintream leader of the religion of peace seeks to dehumanize an entire religious and ethnic group.

"Cowardice and their love for this worldly life are their undisputable traits. To this, the Qur’an refers when saying: “Ye are more awful as a fear in their bosoms than Allah. That is because they are a folk who understand not. They will not fight against you in a body save in fortified villages or from behind walls. Their adversity among themselves is very great. Ye think of them as a whole whereas their hearts are divers.” (Al-Hashr:13-14) Allah Almighty also says: “And thou wilt find them greediest of mankind for life and (greedier) than the idolaters.” (Al-Baqarah:96)"

Hey, forget the empirical evidence. You know, The Israeli war of 1948, the six day war, Yom Kippur, and others. You see, the Jews were lucky, not brave.

"Miserliness runs deep in their hearts. Describing this, the Qur’an states: “Or have they even a share in the Sovereignty? Then in that case, they would not give mankind even the speck on a date stone.” (An-Nisa’:53)"

If this ain't the oldest arrow in the anti-semitic quiver.

"Distorting Divine Revelation and Allah’s Sacred Books. Allah says in this regard: “Therefore woe be unto those who write the Scripture with their hands anthem say, "This is from Allah," that they may purchase a small gain therewith. Woe unto them for that their hands have written, and woe unto them for that they earn thereby.” (Al-Baqara: 79)"

And just to reiterate. Jews are heretics. Just want to make sure you got that.

So, does this mean that Muslims should be friends with the Jews? All the Muslim would have to overlook is the lying, two-faced, heretical, murderous, quarrelsome, scroogelike, self-interested, and impolite manner of the Jews. Hell, I bet the guy seeking the Fatwa was at the next Synagogue social, just dying to meet the wife of his dreams.

After all

"After this clear explanation, we would like to note that these are but some of the most famous traits of the Jews as described in the Qur’an. They have revolted against the Divine ordinances, distorted what has been revealed to them and invented new teachings which, they claimed, were much more better than what has been recorded in the Torah. It was for these traits that they found no warm reception in all countries where they tried to reside. Rather, they would either be driven out or live in isolation. It was Almighty Allah who placed on them His Wrath and made them den of humiliation due to their transgression. Almighty Allah told us that He’d send to them people who’d pour on them rain of severe punishment that would last till the Day of Resurrection. All this gives us glad tidings of the coming victory of Muslims over them once Muslims stick to strong faith and belief in Allah and adopt the modern means of technology."

This type of stuff makes me sick to my stomach.

All those people who keep trying to convince me that Islam is a religion of peace, never seem to deal with this type of stuff. It is akin to Nazi propoganda of the worst type. It is a religious ruling that lowers Jews on a general level to that of animals. And it uses the Qu'ran to do it.

Apparently the French are not entirely opposed to regime change. In Iraq, yes, in Africa, no.

Hmmmmm. Apparently we used a B-1B Lancer on an Iraqi radar site. B-1B's are not usually used, and this may indicate a new step in the warfare.

Since I blew off yesterday, I will make up for some today

1) Want to look at what the anti-war people think. Look at the items they produce. For my talented readers, why not use their stuff to produce our own.

2) SDB thinks that action will occur this weekend, as in tomorrow. I am not at all certain. I think his assertion that this meeting is to allow the announcement of war on neutral territory, I also am not sure that an announcement like this on neutral territory will be politically feasible.

3) The one thing that I believe everyone is ignoring is the repercussions from the Palestinians on both Jordan, and Isreal. For instance, we have this story . Quick, someone tell me that Saddam is not connected to terrorism. A nice secondary benefit to the invasion of Iraq, is that we may be able to actually make some progress with the "peace" process in Israel.

Thursday, March 13, 2003
Just too tired tonight. I had to sit and listen to the tree-huggers all day today and it wore me out.

SDB thinks that he has it all worked out. I am still letting his reasoning resonate in my tired mind. Go there and see what you think.

Oh, and don't forget that Saturday is "International Eat an Animal for PETA Day."

Wednesday, March 12, 2003
My own thoughts today.

1) The assassination of Serbian Prime Minister Zoran Djindjic, is very bad news at this moment. It increases the worries. What really bothers me is that all the world's flash points seem to be on the boil. Iraq, N. Korea, Israel, and now the Balkans. This may lead back to a Milosevic type of government, which would be a catastrophe. This is another reason we need to get on with Iraq. The Administration is going to be overloaded soon, and there are entities that are going to take advantage.

2) Let me first say that the return of Elizabeth Smart is terribly good news. However, the story strikes me as off somehow. I can't put my finger on it right now, but I am certain that when more details come out, no one will smell like roses. It is intuition. That girl strikes me as someone who did not want to be found. I could be wrong, and I do not want to detract from the miracle of her return.

3) Blair is wavering. The pressure is getting to him. The Brits have come up with six conditions for Saddam to fulfill, or "else." I am not a lawyer yet, but I am intimately aware that going from a single factored test, to a multi-factored test, does not encourage compliance. Adding gradations in the metric of compliance only ensures a surplus of ambiguity for the diplomats to exploit. Look at what they have done to 1441.

A closer examination reveals

"Make a public statement on television and radio in Arabic, admitting that he concealed weapons of mass destruction and will no longer produce or retain them."

You mean like Arafat admitting that he has sponsored terrorism? And why this constant notion of shaming Saddam? Saddam has no sense of honor as we understand it. If Saddam thought that he could buy a couple months with this, while he continued with WMD production, he would do it in a second. Are you going to put a deadline on the negotiation? I can only wince as I imagine the glacial pace of the statement negotiations. Saddam could easily eat up a few weeks while he discusses each syllable of the speech, putting drafts before Syria, France, Germany, and us. I can see the op-eds talking about his need to save face, and why Saddam has to give just the right nuance on his speech. Then the day of the speech will come, only to have Saddam lose his voice on. The reschedule (which will take weeks) will be cancelled by illness. SHUDDER SHUDDER SHUDDER. (Oh, and what makes anyone think that the Iraqi's will believe him?)

"Deliver at least 30 Iraqi scientists for interviews outside Iraq, accompanied, if they choose, by their families. U.N. officials reported Wednesday that they have conducted 10 private interviews with Iraqi scientists, all inside Iraq."

Do we at least get to pick the 30? And these families are vast. Are you telling me that not one of them will disappear prior to a meeting? And this also assumes that we will be able to protect these familes later, leaving Saddam in place if he complies. If you were an Iraqi scientist following current events would you go along with this? Yeah, I didn't think so.

"Complete the destruction of all banned Al Samoud 2 missiles. U.N. weapons inspectors said Iraq so far has destroyed 58 of its roughly 100 missiles."

The fact that Saddam is destroying these missiles should disturb. The question that leaps to my mind, is what about the others? If Saddam is allowing these to be destroyed, what are the probabilities that these are the low end models. I refuse to believe that this was a simple mistake. The Iraqi's have been playing this game far to long to make this simple of an error. Saddam is clearly destroying these missiles to buy time.

"Surrender 10,000 liters of anthrax he has failed to account for in the past or produce evidence it has been destroyed."

I am still unconvinced that Anthrax is his most dangerous item. What Saddam may do is give over half, and state that the records for the rest are destroyed. This will be sure to please the French.

"Account for all unmanned drone planes and produce details of their testing for use in spraying chemical or biological weapons.

Ahhh, yes, I can see it now. More of the same models that the Iraqi's paraded in front of the press. As a former professional aviator, I can tell you that the press wouldn't know thier elbows from their stinkholes. A big reason I do not trust the press is due to their dismal reporting on aviation matters. I also seem to remember Colin Powell showing pictures of a Mirage F-1 Drone (ahhh yes, here, dropping a substance that was meant to simulate biologics or chemical weapons. There were also other jets used. Can you imagine how many more drones they will push out? I can hardly stand the tension.

"Surrender all mobile chemical and biological weapon production facilities."

HAHAHAHAHAHhahahahhehehehhah. You must be joking, And what to do if he surrenders one? Saddam has denied these exist.

However, the most dangerous thing is what if Saddam agrees to do three out of the six things. I can see the French. "Saddam, he has met you half way, has he not?" That is what diplomats do. So Saddam surrenders the drones (the balsa ones), gives the speech, and allows the destruction of the Al-Samoud missiles. Now tell me honestly if you think that the world would be more motivated to get him. Tell me that you think that the French would push for more compliance. Tell me that the Germans would be unsatisfied. Tell me that the anti-war protestors, seeing the errors of thier ways, would agree to allow our now dead tired troops to continue the attack.

People with the good stuff

1) Unfortunately, it seems that Rachel Lucas may not be with us much longer. She is the primary person who inspired me to do my own blog, and was the first one that I found that I liked. Go over there, and ask her not to quit. Why? Give a gander to her blog, and the answer will be self-evident.

2) Blaster admits that he is in the district that elected Congressman Jim Moran, the anti-Semetic idiot I referenced yesterday. Sometimes we cannot choose who we are represented by. For a year, I had the unmitigated hell of being represented by Ronald Dellums. (a sample, very quickly found) Lets put it this way. After Mr. Dellum, Maxine Waters would have been a relief.

3) Ipso Facto has some nice Anti-French art. Spread it around, so all the world will know. I won't even hold the fact that he think I am a sucker for going to law school against him.

4) SDB has, easily, one of the best blogs on the web. Although his manner is slightly curt, I believe it is a genetic predispostion with engineers. However, I am quite sure that his tart manner is what allows him to put together such a good site. One of his links led me to this article, which I have let play in my thoughts for a few days. I am not yet sold, but the prespective is invaluable.

5) Misha has his blood pressure up, and I cannot blame him. This whole week I have been driving down to Berkeley (yes, I know) and been gagging throughout the day. Part of this conference is talking about the impact of the war on the airline industry. It will be bad, but another terrorist event will be even worse.

Tuesday, March 11, 2003
Oh, and one other thing. Elie Wiesel has seen evil. He gets it. Why can't you?

Again, the convention today, so a real short post.

I have a bet going with some liberal friends of mine that Joe Lieberman has no chance of winning the Democratic primary. For two reasons, one far uglier then the other. He is pro-Israel and he is Jewish. The first reason is acceptable. The second is not, and is truly terrifying to me. I will, of course, get comments from people saying that being anti-Israel, is not the same as being anti-Semitic, and to a degree this is true. But in much the same way that people on the left of the Democratic party conflate opposition of affirmative action policies with racism, the left of that party is conflating anti-Israel with anti-Semitic rhetoric. I have little faith in the mindless drones who chant away at the anti-war gatherings to make a proper distinction. To do that is to expect a mob to be rational, and history demonstrates that believing that is a fool's game.

An example? From the Wall Street Journal today.

"A Democratic congressman who opposes the liberation of Iraq is blaming the Jews for threatening Saddam Hussein's hold on power. "If it were not for the strong support of the Jewish community for this war with Iraq we would not be doing this," the Connection newspapers of northern Virginia quoted Rep. Jim Moran as saying last week. "The leaders of the Jewish community are influential enough that they could change the direction of where this is going and I think they should."

Is this objectionable? It is to me. I don't believe that the Jewish community is a big supporter of Bush, not do I believe that they are a driving influence in the Government. Where could Mr. Moran get that idea? Possible Edward Said? Campus Watch has been watching him. Said has uttered some real jewels

"[Said] published an article there titled "A Monument to Hypocrisy." The piece covered a lot of ground familiar to students of Said's view that "the Perles and Wolfowitzs of this country" are leading America into a war "planned by a docile, professionalized staff in places like Washington and Tel Aviv."


"A senior member of the White House staff may be in on the conspiracy. President Bush and his advisers are, in Said's words, "slaves of power perfectly embodied in the repetitive monotone of their collective spokesman Ari Fleischer (who I believe is also an Israeli citizen)."

Ari Fleischer has denied the allegation, but the fact that it was made is disturbing. It also appears that the first time this has popped up is from WAR. (White Aryan Resistence)

However, the first time I started to make a connection was when a pro-Palestinian friend I have, sent me an article by David Duke. I was stunned! Here was a good liberal backing up an argument by referring to Davis Duke! And it's true, Duke is the leading proponent of this view.

The growth of this belief is deeply troubling on a number of different levels. I may be Conservative, but I recognize that my side of the fence has not been fabulous at defending those amongst us victimized by extreme points of view. That has come from those in the left. The same people who are deafening silent in the wake of these statements. Liberal Jewish friends are willing to ignore this, which I do not understand. And the examples keep flowing, from Michael Lerner to the famous comments by Jesse Jackson.

The left has a nasty element, and it is starting to show its teeth.

Monday, March 10, 2003
I am at a convention all this week, and so I don't get the news until late in the evening driving home.

Todays news? Apparently there is talk about compromising on the date of the deadline. One question?

What the hell was with the news conference then? What was with the decision to count the votes? Are we playing mind games with the Iraqis (Please let us be playing mindgames) or are we are on the road to nowhere? I can't take this anymore.

Our security depends on the votes of Angola, Pakistan, Guinea, Cameroon, and Mexico. Beam me up Scotty!

Angola is a basket case, Pakistan supported the Taliban, Guinea is (where exactly?), and the last thing that Cameroon did well, had something to do with a world cup.

And Mexico? Don't even get me started.

We are way to nice. I mean, waaayyyyyy to nice. The Texas Cowboy isn't.

All that a delay will do is tank the economy further, (anyone else looking for a job, lately?) give the French more chance to think of delaying tactics, ensure more De Villapen poetry, allow the Iraqi's more time to prepare, extend the period in which the N. Koreans can get up to their usual pure unadulterated insanity, tire and demotivate the troops, motivate Al' Queda, wear out military equipment, destroy the stock market, force us to witness more of those unwashed heathen, the moronic peace protestors, create additional time for the Hollywierd folk to enlighten us with more wisdom, inflict more of Blix's "evenhanded" "inspection" reports on us, destroy Bush's current domestic consensus, inflict more "FOX NEWS ALERTS" on us and forment more utterly useless and redundant discussion.

Please, please, please, someone please point out the upside for this decision, because I don't get it. Compromise with the French, you must be joking?

And yes, it was more then one question.

I can't take anymore, wake me when the bombs start falling, Or when we leave.