mam399img31Fanatical Frenzy Watch


We wake up this morning to see video on CNN showing rampaging Muslims around the world.  In Europe, the Middle East, the Pacific Rim …  Muslim Mobs spreading mayhem.  It seems that these mighty mad Muslims are rioting and firing their ever-present AK-47s into the air because of cartoons.  Yup … this latest epidemic of Muslim outrage comes to us because some newspapers in Norway and Denmark published some cartoons depicting Mohammed.  In fact … here is one of my favorites!  

Admit it, this turban/bomb thing could be the next big fashion hit on the Muslim street!

Muslim outrage huh.  OK … let’s do a little historical review.  Just some lowlights:

  • Muslims fly commercial airliners into buildings in New York City.  No Muslim outrage.
  • Muslim officials block the exit where school girls are trying to escape a burning building because their faces were exposed.  No Muslim outrage.
  • Muslims cut off the heads of three teenaged girls on their way to school in Indonesia.  A Christian school.  No Muslim outrage.
  • Muslims murder teachers trying to teach Muslim children in Iraq.  No Muslim outrage.
  • Muslims murder over 80 tourists with car bombs outside cafes and hotels in Egypt.  No Muslim outrage.
  • A Muslim attacks a missionary children’s school in India.  Kills six.  No Muslim outrage.
  • Muslims slaughter hundreds of children and teachers in Beslan, Russia.  Muslims shoot children in the back.  No Muslim outrage.
  • Let’s go way back.  Muslims kidnap and kill athletes at the Munich Summer Olympics.  No Muslim outrage.
  • Muslims fire rocket-propelled grenades into schools full of children in Israel.  No Muslim outrage.
  • Muslims murder more than 50 commuters in attacks on London subways and busses.  Over 700 are injured.  No Muslim outrage.
  • Muslims massacre dozens of innocents at a Passover Seder.  No Muslim outrage.
  • Muslims murder innocent vacationers in Bali.  No Muslim outrage.
  • Muslim newspapers publish anti-Semitic cartoons.  No Muslim outrage
  • Muslims are involved, on one side or the other, in almost every one of the 125+ shooting wars around the world.  No Muslim outrage.
  • Muslims beat the charred bodies of Western civilians with their shoes, then hang them from a bridge.  No Muslim outrage.
  • Newspapers in Denmark and Norway publish cartoons depicting Mohammed.  Muslims are outraged.

Dead children.  Dead tourists.  Dead teachers.  Dead doctors and nurses.  Death, destruction and mayhem around the world at the hands of Muslims .. no Muslim outrage … but publish a cartoon depicting Mohammed with a bomb in his turban and all hell breaks loose.

Come on, is this really about cartoons?  They’re rampaging and burning flags.  They’re looking for Europeans to kidnap.  They’re  threatening innkeepers and generally raising holy Muslim hell not because of any outrage over a cartoon.  They’re outraged because it is part of the Islamic jihadist culture to be outraged.  You don’t really need a reason.  You just need an excuse.  Wandering around, destroying property, murdering children, firing guns into the air and feigning outrage over the slightest perceived insult is to a jihadist what tailgating is to a Steeler’s fan.

I know and understand that these bloodthirsty murderers do not represent the majority of the world’s Muslims.  When, though, do they become outraged?  When do they take to the streets to express their outrage at the radicals who are making their religion the object of worldwide hatred and ridicule?  Islamic writer Salman Rushdie wrote of these silent Muslims  in a New York Times article three years ago.  “As their ancient, deeply civilized culture of love, art and philosophical reflection is hijacked by paranoiacs, racists, liars, male supremacists, tyrants, fanatics and violence junkies, why are they not screaming?”  

Indeed.  Why not?



An Unwritten Conscience

by Baron Bodissey


Islam’s goal — as stated in its own scriptures, and proclaimed by its religious leaders when speaking in Arabic — is world conquest.

According to Muslim tradition, the entire globe will one day bend the knee to Allah and join the Universal Caliphate. Those who resist will be killed or enslaved.

However, Islam hasn’t a prayer of accomplishing this conquest by military means, so other methods are necessary.

First there are the harder forms of violent jihad — bombings, shootings, poisonings, and various other forms of terrorist attack. Descending the scale we find arson, looting, rape, assault, and other violent criminal acts. Next come threats, extortion, and intimidation. Finally there are all the elements of “stealth” jihad: bribery, co-option, infiltration, “lawfare”, conversion of violent felons, and immigration to targeted infidel countries.

If the infidels can be fooled into believing that the “hard” jihad — mostly involving terrorist attacks — is the only thing they need to worry about, then the milder forms of jihad can advance the Caliphate continuously in the background while the Western powers fight and declare victory over “terrorism”.

For any of this to be possible, the right of free speech in non-Muslim countries must be suppressed.

If we are free to voice our opinions about Islam and reveal the plain facts about the history and current actions of Muslims, resistance against the Islamization of our countries will stiffen. Thus, if the jihad is to succeed, the voices that speak up must be silenced.

Muslims in the West have been masterful in working towards this goal. Taking advantage of our general tolerance and sense of fair play — and aided by our cultural degradation, decadence, passivity, and the atmosphere of multicultural indoctrination brought on by Gramscians in our midst — Islam has largely succeeded in persuading us to censor ourselves. A non-Muslim in Australia or Canada who quotes the Koran may be hauled into court for inciting religious hatred. Geert Wilders is being prosecuted in the Netherlands for largely the same reasons: he quoted the Koran as well as Islamic religious leaders, displayed images of barbaric attacks committed by Muslims in the name of their faith, and cited the growth of the Muslim population in the Netherlands. Such actions are officially construed by the Dutch authorities as being insulting to Islam.

In Sweden, the UK, Finland, France, Belgium, and Austria, similar official actions have been mounted against those who speak up about Islam. Even in countries without any such official persecution — such as the United States — unofficial pressure is constantly brought to bear, and a miasma of self-censorship has settled over the government, the media, and the academy. Virtually nobody in the USA has seen any of the Motoons except via the Internet. Somehow, despite the First Amendment, these images have remained largely taboo.

This is why free speech is so important. This is why we must fight for it.

The enemy is also aware of its great importance. This is why they have employed every weapon in their arsenal to prevent us from exercising our God-given right to speak freely.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *
I bring all of this up because of a recent email correspondence between Lars Hedegaard and a citizen of Turkey. As regular readers know, Lars Hedegaard is the President of Trykkefrihedsselskabet, the Free Press Society of Denmark. As a fund-raising device, his organization has recently been selling signed and numbered prints of the most famous Motoon, Kurt Westergaard’s “Turban Bomb”.

With the permission of both parties, their email exchange is published below. First, from Oktan Erdikmen to Mr. Hedegaard:

Dear Lars Hedegaard

I have read a new in today’s newspapers regarding to your last acting about putting Prophet Muhammad cartoons on sale and decided to write this letter for your consideration as a Turkish person.

I am sure that you interpret the situation under the perspective of freedom of speech. However, I pleased you to realize that cartoons are the threats against your ideal. Noone has a right to make a mockery of a person or just of a think that millions of people believe. We respect all kind of ideas which are fair and acceptable. Anyone can think anythink but please led them to do thisa anwhere else which are so far from freedom of speech and ethic principles of the journalism.

– – -  – – – – –

I believe you will understand our reflection and think again your action which threats the chance for the harmony of the religions.

If not, you and your organization might follow your activities which are guaranteed by the written laws and constitutions, but could never reach a level which has the responsibility of journalism; which is an unwritten conscience. You can act as a free person which is also important, but you cannot act as a journalist. Because journalists are the people who are subjectives to the unbalanced powers, they wanted to be in favor of peace and dialog between two sides of the same humanity.

Your Faithfully,

Oktan Erdikmen

Here is Lars Hedegaard’s response:

Dear Oktan Erdikmen,

Every day of the week — year in and year out — somebody throws a bomb or cuts a throat in the name of Allah and the prophet. And they can find ample justification for their acts in Muslim scripture — the Koran, the hadith, the sira, any number of commentaries on the Koran in addition to numerous fatwas.

At the same time the ulema, leaders of Muslim states and local imams make no bones about their intention to wipe out the West — turning its inhabitants into dhimmis and killing those who refuse to pay the jizya.

Are you suggesting that free artists should not be permitted to express what Muslim religious leaders and terrorists are saying about themselves and about the religious justification for their actions?

That would be tantamount to an acceptance that sharia law has in fact been adopted as the legal system of the free West. We will of course resist such an eventuality with all our might — seeing what conditions obtain in the lands where sharia has already been implemented, de jure or de facto.

You talk about respect. Just how much respect are you proposing that we should show towards those who are planning our enslavement?

Respect is not a human right. It has to be earned. If Muslims want respect, they should behave in a way deserving of respect. And, by the way, it would be nice if Muslim luminaries would begin by showing a little respect for the rights of others.

Best wishes

Lars Hedegaard

For the record, here’s a reminder of what free speech means:

Despite the intimidation, violent protests, threats, and pressure from Muslims; despite the unintentional or deliberate collaboration of Western leaders; despite official censorship and the self-censorship of our media; despite the near-universal politically correct Multiculturalism which insists that this image is an example of hateful racism and Islamophobia…

Despite all of these obstacles, ol’ Turban Bomb has become one of the most widely-viewed and iconic images of the 21st century, thanks to the Internet.

This is what free speech means. This is what a real “unwritten conscience” is about.

Ignore the voices that call you Nazis and racists and fascists and haters and right-wing extremists.

Write your conscience. Exercise your right to free speech.

Use it or lose it.

9 thoughts on “Neal Boortz: OUTRAGED MUSLIMS! OH MY!”

  1. A second horse went out. It was fiery red, and its rider was given permission to take peace away from the earth and to make people slaughter one another. So he was given a large sword.

  2. “Neal Boortz: OUTRAGED MUSLIMS! OH MY!”

    Neal lacks empathy.

    He doesn’t understand the frustration of being a Muslim that’s powerless to rape, rob and pillage infidels.

  3. Jihad Watch Board Vice President Hugh Fitzgerald recalls an apposite quote by A. Carlebach and its use by the deceased and egregious Christian dhimmi and Islamic apologist Edward Said:

    May 25, 2006

    Fitzgerald: Edward Said, hoist by his own petard

    The relentless Jihad against Israel — against, rather, any Infidel
    sovereign state within the Dar al-Islam — always included imposition of the Shari’a as part of its intended goal. Imposition of the Shari’a was, in
    fact, demanded as early as 1920 by a group of Arab notables in the formerOttoman territories that were quite properly assigned to Mandatory Palestine(i.e. all of Western Palestine, while Eastern Palestine went to form part of
    the Emirate of Transjordan).

    Nor was there any doubt that the attempt to keep Jews out of the area was a
    Jihad directed at Infidels throughout the Mandatory period; curiously, it
    was some British officers, rather than the Palestinian Jews, who recognized
    the Islamic grounds for opposition to the Jews and the restoration of a
    Jewish Commonwealth. It is also true that a few Israelis, early in the
    history of the state, had the wit to recognize the problem. One of these was
    Dr. A. Carlebach, whose analysis published in Ma’ariv (Oct. 7, 1955) would
    have been lost to history, one suspects, but for the fact that it is
    reprinted, amusingly and quite uncomprehendingly, in Edward Said’s
    preposterous “The Question of Palestine.”

    Fortunately for us, Said often provided quotes from various European and
    Zionist sources that are so deadly, so convincing, particularly in the light
    of all we have learned about Islam over the past few years, that as works of
    propaganda they no longer serve their purpose. Here is what Said quoted from
    Carlebach, and what Said obviously thought it was self-evidently absurd, but
    we read it now with quite a different frame of mind:

    These Arab Islamic countries do not suffer from poverty, or disease, or
    illiteracy, or exploitation; they only suffer from the worst of all plagues:
    Islam. Wherever Islamic psychology rules, there is the inevitable rule of
    despotism and criminal aggression. The danger lies in Islamic psychology,
    which cannot integrate itself into the world of efficiency and progress,
    that lives in a world of illusion, perturbed by attacks of inferiority
    complexes and megalomania, lost in dreams of the holy sword. The danger
    stems from the totalitarian conception of the world, the passion for murder
    deeply rooted in their blood, from the lack of logic, the easily inflamed
    brains, the boasting, and above all: the blasphemous disregard for all that
    is sacred to the civilized world…their reactions — to anything — have
    nothing to do with good sense. They are all emotion, unbalanced,
    instantaneous, senseless. It is always the lunatic that speaks from their
    throat. You can talk ‘business’ with everyone, and even with the devil. But
    not with Allah…This is what every grain in this country shouts. There were
    many great cultures here, and invaders of all kinds. All of them — even the
    Crusaders — left signs of culture and blossoming. But on the path of Islam,
    even the tries have died.

    We pile sin upon crime when we distort the picture and reduce the discussion
    to a conflict of border between Israel and her neighbors. First of all, it
    is not the truth. The heart of the conflict is not the question of the
    borders; it is the question of Muslim psychology…..Moreover, to present
    the problem as a conflict between two similar parts is to provide the Arabs
    with the weapon of a claim that is not theirs. If the discussion with them
    is truly a political one, then it can be seen from both sides. Then we
    appear as those who came to a country that was entirely Arab, and we
    conquered and implanted ourselves as an alien body among them, and we loaded
    them with refugees and constitute a military danger for them, etc. etc.
    …one can justify this or that side–and such a presentation, sophisticated
    and political, of the problem is understandable for European minds–at our
    expense. The Arabs raise claims that make sense to the Western understanding
    of simple legal dispute But in reality, who knows better than us that such
    is not the source of their hostile stand? All those political and social
    concepts are never theirs. Occupation by force of arms, in their own eyes,
    in the eyes of Islam, is not all associated with injustice. To the contrary,
    it constitutes a certificate and demonstration of authentic ownership. The
    sorrow for the refugees, for the expropriated borders, has no room in their
    thinking Allah expelled, Allah will care. Never has a Muslim politician been
    moved by such things (unless, indeed, the catastrophe endangered his
    personal status). If there were no refugees and no conquest, they would
    oppose us just the same.

    Now when Said put this into his little work of propaganda back in 1979, the
    invented “Palestinian people” and their “legitimate rights” were in full
    swing. In 1979, the front of dhimmis, those islamochristians such as Hanan
    Ashrawi, were already in evidence — on campuses, before church groups,
    disguising the nature of the Jihad against Israel which cannot be assuaged,
    cannot be sated, and is not a matter of borders.

    But something has changed: other Muslim attacks, in America, in Russia, in
    Europe, and other Muslim cries against Infidels, and other Muslim behavior,
    including the demand that European peoples yield to Muslim demands, have
    caused many, and should cause many more, to read the words written above
    with a new understanding and a new appreciation.

    Hoist by his own petard was Edward Said — he bothered to quote just a bit
    too much. Nowadays we do not scorn those he assumed we would scorn, but see
    the truth of their remarks, and the scorn of the good and intelligent reader
    is reserved for Said’s own text. Quite something.

  4. Hey Mullah Lodabullah,
    Rev. 6:8 And I looked, and behold a pale green horse: and his name that sat on him was Death, and Hell followed with him. And power was given unto them over the fourth part of the earth, to kill with sword, and with hunger, and with death, and with the beasts of the earth.

    New Living Translation: pale GREEN horse
    King James Version : pale horse
    English Standard Version: pale horse
    Contemporary English Version: pale GREEN horse
    New King James Version: pale horse
    New Century Version: pale horse
    21st Century King James Version: pale horse
    American Standard Version: pale horse
    Young’s Literal Translation: pale horse
    Darby Translation: Pale horse
    New Life Version: light colored horse
    New International Reader’s Version: pale horse
    Wycliffe New Testament: pale horse
    Worldwide English (New Testament): a horse the colour of ashes
    New International Version – UK: pale horse
    Today’s New International Version: pale horse

    And this;

    Knock yourself out…

  5. Thanks eloivsdiablo – I’m more inclined to equate islam with the rider
    of the red horse, carrying the sword – but the sword & green do both
    apply to islam…

  6. The term ‘pale horse’ is a bad translation. It’s original Greek word is ‘chloros’ where we get the word ‘chloroform’ from, or ‘chlorophyll’ (that which makes a plant look green).

    From the link provided…

  7. Yes, I followed the link, & accept the chloros / green translation – of
    course islam is basically “chloroforming” free thought and speech, as
    well as worship… in any event, I have a feeling that the rider is about
    to saddle up and ride (in God’s timing of course).

Comments are closed.