Mini Carnival of the Wingnuts
 1. Let's start with a former Ms. Dark Window, Tamara Wilhite, who cites expert testimony on the terrorist threat we all face:
Has anyone read Tom Clancy? A war against Islamicists start in his books with a dozen Muslims with AK-47s walking into malls and emptying their clips into the crowds. What are our soft targets? Schools, as Beslan reminded us. Day care centers, as the whacko in California reminded us when he started shooting at a Jewish Day School. Sporting events. Concerts. Political rallies. Anywhere people gather, we are at risk. Staying at home is not an option. Then, what are our options?
Per Tamara, our options are to arm everybody (thank God that ban on assault weapons ends next week!), and then gun down "Mohammed and Omar" when they start shooting our populace.
Fewer deaths and the deaths of those responsible would occur than if we followed the liberal mantra and all hide while having government sponsored dial-a-prayer: calling 911. However, such acts would be a defensive measure. It would be the equivalent to white blood cells attacking a disease organism. And we must admit, Islamicist radicals are a disease. What we need to do is remove the infection.
And to do that, we stop acting like white blood cells and start acting like medieval surgeons -- we bleed our country with leeches, under the theory that our problem is too much freedom.
We cannot protect every soft target. There are as many soft targets as there are people in this country. How do we prevent Beslan from occurring in Bedford, Massachusetts or Burlington, Vermont? Remove the infection before we become Iran.
Create national ID cards. Include biometric information. Include religion on the ID card.
Living in a totalitarian state will be fun!
Any criminals are to be rounded up and locked up the day they are identified.
No need for trials or due process -- if the police identify them as criminals, they should be locked up, for the good of society.
Anyone who registers as Muslim should be required to take a loyalty oath. The U.S. or Islam.
Anyone who chooses the U.S. shall be registered with the government. If they continue to show loyalty to this nation, they may stay.
But only on sufferance.
Anyone who chooses Islam is to be considered a threat to this country and put in confinement. Call it a concentration camp. Guantanomo Bay is more comfortable than Afghanistan, and I’m not suggesting we send them all to Cuba. Old Japanese interment camps work. Remember, extremism is a belief system. If Dad thinks he has a right to blow up Jews for the sake of Jihad, odds are that Junior does, too. Remember: Islamicists are equal opportunity suicide bombers these days. Mom has no qualms about sending her daughter off to school in a suicide bomber belt these days, either. Children tend to inherit the beliefs of their parents. And all children should be interred with the parents. All relatives of those in internment should be interred as well.
Sadly, despite her efforts to be even loonier than an Ann Coulter/Michelle Malkin Thing With Two Heads experiment gone terribly wrong (reportedly, Mengele was working on this project near the end of the war), Tamara doesn't have the hair or legs necessary to be the next right-wing psycho bimbo.
2. Now, let's see what's new with our friend Pastor Joseph Grant Swank, the hardest working man in wingnuttery.
Well, since we last checked on him a couple of days ago, he's come out with two new columns: Pansy Pacifists Led By John F. Kerry Would Sell Our America and
The Spiritual Difference Between Bush And Kerry.
Here's a representative paragraph from the first:
Kerry would have us wilt on the vine. He would preach a gospel of pacifism that’s nothing other than sheer pansy weakness at its most crippled level. Pansy pacifism does not a mighty nation make. Pansy pacifism opens up America’s shores to those creeping killers who delight in watching our blood make rivers of our streets.
Let's pass over the fact that pansies don't grow on vines, and look at the key points from the pastor's column from yesterday:
Kerry is a renegade Catholic. For one, he insists in desecrating Communion by defying scriptural truths. Specifically, Kerry endorses killing womb babies. That’s against divine revelation. While championing murdering unborn infants, Kerry places in his mouth the sacred elements representing the death of Christ. That is sacrilege.
Therefore, on that one issue alone, Kerry is not only a horrible Catholic but not at all a Christian. He is as heathen as heathen can get.
[...]
Bush on the other hand is a devout Christian in that he seeks to understand the biblical morality, then live it. He, like us all, is not perfect. He, being mortal, has his share of flaws. Let that believer without flaw cast the first stone at the United States President.
But let that pastor who writes for BushCountry.org feel free to call Kerry a horrible Catholic heathen without recognizing any incongruity whatsoever.
So we have two persons running for the highest office in the country. One is a self-styled religionist of the most liberal and apostate expression. The other is a devout believer who seeks, as best he can, to live out the Spirit of Jesus. That’s the main difference between these two candidates — one a sincere Christian and the other a desecrating churchgoer.
This is the point where we look at Pastor Swank's bio, to see there's something (like being a recent immigrant from Elbonia, or being frequently dropped on the head as a child) to explain his lack of facility with the language and really stupid ideas.
Graduate of accredited college (BA) and seminary (M Div) with graduate work at Harvard Divinity School.
So, apparently he's not writing columns as part of some wingut Special Olympics event.
Married for 41 years with 3 adult children.
Therefore, he's not the younger version of Kyle Williams (whose folly can be explained by the fact that he's only 15, and apparently never gets to leave the house).
Pastorates: Calgary, Alberta; Indianapolis IN; Akron OH; Fishkill NY; Manchester CT; Walpole MA; Windham ME.
Hmm, he's possibly from Alberta -- however, that isn't enough to explain his mangling of the English language.
Winner of First Prize Writing Contest which yielded a three-week guided tour of the Middle East.
Okay, that's just as inexplicable as his columns!
3. So let's move on to the latest by Frank Gaffney. It's about how the investigation (and reporting on the investigation) of possible espionage at the Pentagon is anti-Semitic, and probably a sign that the FBI is now working for Iran.
Using innuendo and a steady stream of (often recycled) press leaks, the names and reputations of a number of people — including several who are senior officials in the United States government at the moment — have been sullied.
There is no need to repeat their names here.
But here's a graph from a WashPost story from last week, just for fun:
Investigators have specifically asked about a group of neoconservatives involved in defense issues, including Feith, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul D. Wolfowitz, Iraq and Iran specialist Harold Rhode and others at the Pentagon. FBI agents also have asked current and former officials about Richard Perle of the defense board and David Wurmser, an Iran specialist and principal deputy assistant for national security affairs in Cheney's office, according to sources familiar with or involved in the case.
But back to Frank:
Today, anti-Semitic witch-hunts can be dressed up as ideological conflicts between the Bush Administration's so-called "hardliners" and "moderates." The former are increasingly caricatured as "neo-conservatives." For many who use this ill-defined term, though, it serves as an unmistakable, pejorative code word for "Jews."
Funny, Dick Cheney doesn't look Jewish.
If the conduct of hostile bureaucrats and Democratic partisans, reprehensible as it is, can at least be easily understood, the behavior of the FBI is less comprehensible. It would be one thing if law enforcement were filing charges and presenting compelling evidence of wrongdoing — and clarity as to who engaged in it.
Because if they are investigating prior to filing charges and presenting evidence, then it must mean that something is terribly wrong at the FBI.
In the absence of such information, however, one has to wonder whether it is purely coincidental that the FBI has, since September 11th, been assiduously cultivating a constituency keenly interested in: driving wedges between the U.S. and Israel; neutralizing AIPAC's considerable influence in Washington; and diminishing the effectiveness of the most articulate advocates of President Bush's offensive strategy for the War on Terror.
The Bureau reported to the 9/11 Commission that, over the past three years, its officials have held some 900 meetings with, among other constituencies (including Seikhs and Jewish groups), self-identified "leaders" of the Muslim-American and Arab-American community.
Wait, is Frank saying that the Sikhs are behind all this?
The available record suggests that most, if not virtually all of the latter meetings — including at least 19 with FBI Director Robert Mueller or his senior subordinates — have been with representatives of organizations that have long sympathized with Iranian or other Islamist causes.
So, the FBI has been meeting with various constituencies, including Muslim-Americans, and representatives from these Muslim-American groups may sympathize with Islamist causes? I am shocked, SHOCKED! Clearly, Robert Mueller is an Iranian agent, and the Bureau is persecuting Jews at his direction. They should be disbanded NOW, before they can frame somebody from the Jewish Vice President's office for leaking info to the Jewish Robert Novak.
7:47:15 AM 
|
