About Me

Name: Bert Chapman
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 

Partial Birth Abortion Victory

After years of experiencing defeats in judicial abortion cases, yesterday's Supreme Court ruling upholding a federal ban on partial birth abortion is exceptionally satisfying.  It's good that a bare majority of Supreme Court justices had the intellectual sagacity and moral discernment to uphold some restrictions on abortion.  It's especially delightful to hear abortionists and their apologists wail and gnash their teeth over this important verdict.  The Court's detailed description of the gruesome nature of partial birth abortion is particularly informative and should serve a useful pedagogical purpose for individuals who have a view of abortion as a "sanitized" clinical procedure.

It's to early to say if this will result in the overturning of the intellectually vacuous and morally abominable Roe vs. Wade.  The abortionists and their useful idiots will fight even more ferociously now that their talisman of a "woman's right to choose" has been dealt a intellectual body blow by yesterday's ruling.  This ruling does, however, make it possible to believe that we could see the joyous day when Roe vs. Wade is relegated to the dustbin of history  like the Dred Scott decision.  It's vitally important that we elect a conservative pro-life President in 2008 and a Congress that is committed to pro-life positions.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Virginia Tech Tragedy

I share the horror others feel at yesterday's Virginia Tech tragedy and my prayers are with the victims, their families, and friends.  Additional details about this tragedy will undoubtedly be revealed in the days and weeks to come.  It's clear the university's administration did an abominable job in informing students of the first incident.  Relying on email to communicate to the student body and community is absolutely pathetic!  Were university administrators stupid enough to think that all members of their community are looking at their email 24/7?  A campus wide system of loud speakers would have been a much more intelligent and effective warning mechanism.  Va. Tech's president has now revealed that it was a student who was the perpetrator.  It's to early to say what are the best procedures to implement to prevent the occurrence of other tragedies on campuses.

Some things are clear.   University students, faculty, and staff need to recognize that a college cannot be a completely safe environment.  These same individuals need to recognize that life is a precious gift from God and can be revoked at any time.  Human beings are not indestructible!  Two often at secular universities, the reality of God is dismissed or relegated to the sideline.  The appearance of unadulterated evil is dismissed as being a psychological or sociological aberration curable by secularist multicultural socialization.  My biggest prayer is that this will cause university students and faculty to confront the reality of their own mortality, our need to cherish every moment of our lives, and our absolute dependence on God for life and health.  Counseling sessions by ignorant secularist psychologists or vapid quasi religious platitudes by university administrators will not comfort the moral fragility Va. Tech students are experiencing at this time.

Va. Tech university administrators and administrators at other university campuses need to take a long hard look at their souls as they seek to develop truly effective responses to this tragedy.  Relying on technology alone to reduce the possibility of such events occurring won't cut it.  The profound moral implications of this tragedy must also be addressed.  Universities need to quit treating students as customers and resume the role of in loco parentis as they seek to educate their students. 

Students themselves need to come to grips with their own mortality and be aware of their surroundings at all times.  Quit yakking on your cell phones all the time and get over your pathetic baby need to be in 24/7 electronic contact with other people!  Build genuine, effective, and enduring relationships with your fellow students that are not restricted by cell phones, email, or text messaging.  Know your fellow students and what makes them tick and care about them.

If reports are true that the perpetrator of the Va. Tech tragedy was of Asian ancestry, this should also cause university administrators to do more to assimiliate non-American students into American cultural mores.  If true, this incident should also cause university administrators to not be so uncritically accepting of any international student who wants to study at their universities.  These administrators need to look at the mental and emotional stability of these students and weed out any who show tendencies toward using violence to resolve their problems.  Such administrators need to get over their cultural relativism and accept the reality that acceptable behavior in some cultures is not acceptable here in the U.S.


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Don Imus Flap

The liberal media and the civil rights victims mentality lobby are riding in full fury over Don Imus' idiotic comments about the Rutgers University women's basketball team.  Imus comments were stupid but why in the world does anyone take this bozo seriously or care about what he thinks? Why does the Rutgers women's basketball team think they need personal validation from a crude shock jock like Imus?  The Rutgers women should quit wasting their energy or time worrying about what Imus says or thinks and prove him wrong by being excellent women in their professional and personal lives.

The liberal media, the civil rights victims lobby, and their academic allies, fail to realize that you can't outlaw stupid comments.  You can no more prohibit public expressions of  "racist" or "misogynist" comments than you can stop the rainfall we're experiencing in western Indiana this morning.  Does the First Amendment no longer apply in public discourse?  Are we becoming a totalitarian state where we can't make justified or unjustified criticisms against individuals or "preferred" ethnic or gender groups?  Do we consider the idiotic ramblings of morning radio disk jockeys to be worth creating public controversies over?  Does everything that is said on the media in this country have to be approved by Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson?

Only people who have absolutely no self-esteem will let themselves be paralyzed by derogatory comments made about them by people such as Imus.  Normal people realize that the person or persons making such comments are uninformed fools and get on with their lives instead of wallowing in self-pity like the Rutgers women's basketball team appears to be.  
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Michigan's Unleavened Senator

Michigan Senator Carl Levin chairs the Senate Armed Services Committee and is also on the Senate's Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.  Consequently, he is an important player in sculpting congressional national security policymaking.  Levin has gotten a lot of attention recently for posting the Defense Dept Inspector General's report on the Iraq intelligence activities of former DOD Undersecretary Douglas Feith on his website.

Considering the already voluminous body of literature documenting prewar U.S. intelligence failures in Iraq, it's difficult to determine what constructive use publication of this report will have.  Unfortunately, Carl Levin is an anal retentive prick who's more concerned with looking good in his three piece pinstripe suits and scoring pedantic political points than actually providing constructive and positive oversight to the military.  It would be nice if Levin and his Democratic congressional colleagues, with the honorable exception of Connecticut's Joe Lieberman, actually wanted to help the U.S. win its war against Islamist terror in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere.  It would be extremely nice if Levin and company would commission federal agencies, the military, and academe to find ways of winning the war against Islamist terror.

Don't hold your breath waiting for that to happen.  Carl Levin has probably never had a constructive solution to a military matter during his entire political career.  Instead of conducting effective oversight, giving the military the tools they need to win wars, and providing positive motivation and encouragement to civilian and military policymakers, Carl Levin has been more concerned with bolstering his ego and engaging in rhetorical grandstanding.

It would be nice to think that the Senate Armed Services Committee will have a statesman and constructive policymaker guiding its deliberations someday.  Unfortunately, that will have to wait at least until January 2009 because Unleavened Carl will be the pedantic playground bully over this important committee's hearings until then.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Nancy Pelosi's Syrian Adventure

 House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has convinced herself she is a diplomatic virtuoso by jetting off to Syria to "dialogue" with Syria's tinhorn dictator Bashir Assad.  What she hopes to gain from this besides boosting her Pacific Ocean size ego and showing the Syrians how stupid some Americans can be is beyond me.
Pelosi's pilgrimmage reminds me of how many gullible Westerners sojourned to the Soviet Union during the 1920s and 1930s to praise Joseph Stalin's sadistic regime as ably documented in Paul Hollander's 1981 book Political Pilgrims.

In 1789-1790, Congress passed the Logan Act which prohibited private American citizens from conducting U.S. foreign policy.  Perhaps a clever Justice Dept. attorney can find a penumbra in that statute which could be used to prosecute Pelosi.  Her idiotic actions are bringing comfort to a bloodthirstry dictatorial terrorist supporting regime which has the blood of thousands of individuals of all nationalities on its hands including American soldiers.

If Pelosi really desires a career in diplomacy she has two options.  She could take the Foreign Service exam like thousands have and see if she can gain admittance to the Foreign Service Institute and work her way up the diplomatic career track.  She could also hope that a future Democratic President appoints her Secretary of State and makes her diplomatic dreams come true.  Pelosi would be best advised to stay in her catbird seat in the House and try managing her 434 other Representatives and their staffs.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice should bluntly tell Pelosi to butt out of her turf and leave the conduct of U.S. foreign policy to the President, Secretary of State. and individuals explicitly authorized by these two officials.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Iranian "Release" of British Soldiers

Wonder of wonder, miracle of miracles, Iran has apparently decided to release the 15 British soldiers it illegally seized several days ago.  No doubt gullible sectors of world public opinion will how herald Iran's pig grunge "President" as a farsighted humanitarian or some other nonsense for his propaganda step.  Unfortunately, this event will only embolden Iran to pursue their nuclear weapons aspirations and terrorist subversion in Iraq and elsewhere.

The Iranian regime only understands brute force or the credible threat of using such force against them.  You don't "dialogue" with such a regime.  Future U.S., British, and other world leaders need to bluntly explain this reality to their populations.  The west needs to work on covert and overt means of destabilizing and toppling this regime such as stopping European investment in Iranian energy sectors and increasing support for opposition movements within Iran.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

John Edwards and the "Sacred" Liberal Cause

I recently dissed John Edwards in this blog and now I have another opportunity to do so.  I am sorry to hear that his wife has suffered a recurrence of breast cancer.  However, their decision to continue his presidential campaign reveals a lot about his character or, more accurately, lack of character.  Edwards is so convinced of the "righteousness" of his liberal cause, that he and his wife will continue campaigning for the presidency despite the recurrence of his wife's cancer and despite the fact that they have two young children.  A question that should have been asked of Edwards at his self-congratulatory press conference yesterday is "Do you think God is impressed by you continuing your candidacy?"  Normal intelligent and moral political candidates would suspend their campaigns if their spouse was found to have cancer or some other serious medical condition.  That's why the phrase "in sickness" is part of most wedding vows.  One's marriage should be more important than your political aspirations however laudable they may be.  But not with John and Elizabeth Edwards.  To them, promoting their "sacred liberal cause" must be done at all costs regardless of the consequences it may have on Elizabeth Edwards health or on the well-being of their children.  Has anyone ever gotten in John Edwards face and told him how out of whack his priorities are?  Didn't he get the message from the 2004 election campaign that Americans don't want him to be their Vice-President or President? 

The inmeasurable arrogance of sanctimonious posturing liberals like Edwards never ceases to amaze me.  To consider your political career and ideology as being more important than your wife's well-being is absolutely despicable.  I hope as many Americans tell Edwards how misplaced his priorities are.  It's not "cowering" to withdraw from public life to give your wife the support she needs.  It's more accurately called being a loving and loyal husband and demonstrating integrity.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Karl Rove Demonology

Karl Rove has really gotten inside Democrats heads with his electoral successes in 2000, 2002, and 2004 along with his perceived influence advising President Bush.  Whenever any controversy erupts in Washington, Democrats screech like hyenas that Karl Rove was involved and demand that he be subpoenaed to appear before an actual courtroom or a one of their congressional inquisitions.  This was most vividly demonstrated in the Valerie Plame affair and is now being demonstrated in the controversy over the firing of 8 U.S. Attorneys.

Given the low intellectual and moral quality of today's Democrats, they are likely to depose Karl Rove for causing every conceivable natural and human-caused disaster.  I'm surprised he hasn't been blamed for Hurricane Katrina and the Indian Ocean tsunami.  Will he get blamed for screwing up Ted Kennedy's bar tab or Hillary Clinton's latest hairdo?

If you want to have fun with Democrats, the next time you see someone with a bumper sticker saying "Impeach Bush" or some other idiocy, right a note on their windshield saying something like "Karl Rove does not approve of your bumper sticker", "your phone calls will now be monitored by the NSA wireless surveillance program" or something similar.  

Karl Rove has made strong and weak decisions in the advice he has given President Bush just like any other presidential political or policy advisor.  It would be nice to see Democrats acknowledge his skills as a political advisor and it would be even nicer to see them quit blaming him for every problem under the sun.  However, that would require far to much inteligence and integrity for the Democrats to demonstrate.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

U.S. Attorneys Controversy

The chattering liberal media and their Democratic congressional allies are in a tizzy over the recent firing of eight U.S. attorneys by the Bush Administration.  Critics of this decision fail to remember that U.S. Attorneys are political appointees who serve at the President's pleasure.  It's not uncommon for presidential administrations who've been reelected to seek to bring in new blood for the second term in order to reinvigorate implementation of that administration's policies.  This is what has happened in this case.  Critics of this decision also forget that it's common managerial practice to regularly evaluate the job performance of employees and to relieve low performers of their duties if they don't meet organizational expectations.  Given the Democratic Party's close involvement with organized labor, this is a difficult concept for these critics to grasp.

The most obnoxious of those critics is New York Senator Charles Schumer.  I can't use the word that best describes Schumer in this forum but it has seven letters and rhymes with sinkhole.  Schumer gravitates towards TV cameras the way vultures gravitate toward the corpse of a dead animal.  He is a demagogue of the worst sort and he is one of the political leaders that contributes to a country's downfall such as those portrayed in Thomas Cole's series of paintings "The Course of Empire".  This series of four paintings shows the rise and fall of nation states and Schumer's image can be found in the third of this series of painting's showing the empire as it goes through its death throes.  I doubt Schumer has any substantive or positive legislative accomplishments to his credit.

I hope Attorney General Gonzales is not forced to resign over this Democrat hissy fit and also hope he has the courage to tell Schumer and his Democratic compatriots on the Senate Judiciary Committee to "shove it" when he goes up to testify before them on the Hill next week. 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Antiwar Critics

Prominent news coverage was given this weekend to the antiwar demonstrations erupting at various locales across the country.  Naturally, the liberal media fawned over the "sincerity" and idealism of the demonstrators without bothering to ask about the consequences of these demonstrators getting their way on U.S. national interests and the safety of the American public.

If the demonstrators get their way to bring the troops home the following consequences are possible.  Iraq will continue its bloody descent into internecine warfare and disintegrate as a nation with Iran and Syria reaping the benefits.  Iraqi territory will become a sanctuary for Al Qaida who will be emboldened to engage in attacks against the U.S., its allies, and its interests in the Mideast and elsewhere in the world.  The chance of another 9/11 style attack or series of attacks in the U.S. will increase drastically and such attacks could involve weapons of mass destruction or devastate critical U.S. infrastructures such as ports, bridges, highways, etc.
You also increase the likelihood of their being random suicide attacks against soft civilian targets like malls, theatres, restaurants, sporting events etc.

Yet you will hear none of this from the antiwar retards.  None of them seem to understand that we are engaged in a titanic existential struggle against sadistic Islamist brutes that want to impose a Taliban like regime on the entire world.  Not one time have any of these critics presented ideas that could actually help us and our allies more effectively prosecute the war against Islamist terror in Afghanistan, Iraq, and elsewhere!
These dipsticks are so poisoned by their personal animosity against President Bush that they can't see through their anger and confront the real threat facing the U.S. and the democratic world.

Such liberal antiwar imbecility is not unique in U.S. History.  There were numerous critics of the war of 1812 who didn't think we should defend our hard won independence against British revanchism and many of these critics were British useful idiots in New England.  During the Mexican War, New England was also the center of antiwar sentiment lead by the author Henry David Thoreau who's geopolitical knowledge ended at Walden Pond's boundary.  Note the recurring pattern of New England derived antiwar stupidity in U.S. History. During the Civil War, the antiwar Copperhead movement exhibited many comparable traits to today's antiwar movement as Mackubin Owens as pointed out in a recent National Review online essay.

We can continue on to the absolute geopolitical and moral stupidity of anti Vietnam War activists who still haven't accepted responsibility for their role in producing a Communist victory in that conflict which produced the exodus of boat people and other refugees from SE Asia and the Khmer Rouge holocaust in Cambodia.  Have these antiwar critics reconciled themselves to genocide?

Stand up to these incorrigibly stupid antiwar imbeciles today!  Let them know they are serving as propagandists for an evil as deep as Hitler's, Stalin's, and Mao's.  Let them know they endanger the lives of our soldiers, the soldiers of our allies, and our future national security and national strategic interests through their words and actions.  Tell them that if they have constructive suggestions for fighting this war to present them and if they don't tell them to shut up and go back to the sewer infested holes they came from.

Advocate victory not supine surrender and defeat in this titanic generational struggle!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Civility in Politics

The recent controversy over Ann Coulter's criticism of John Edwards has revived the perennial topic of civility in politics.  It's extremely amusing and hypocritical for liberals to bemoan the coarsening of American political culture when they are the primary perpetrators of this coarsening.  My biggest memory of this occurred twenty years ago when the distinguished jurist Robert Bork was nominated for Associate Justice on the Supreme Court by President Reagan.  Under normal circumstances, Bork's nomination would have been approved even by a Democratic controlled Senate.  As we all know, Bork was defeated by a fusillade of Democratic lies lead by the Chappaquiddick Mariner "Senator" Ted Kennedy.  Kennedy said Bork's confirmation would result in a return of back alley abortions and a host of other demagogic lies.  Additional examples of Democratic political attacks include the vicious smears against Justice Clarence Thomas during his Supreme Court confirmation hearings, the vitriolic attacks Bill and Hillary Clinton and their apologists such as James Carville used against their critics during his shameful presidential administration, the attacks Al Gore and his apologists launch against those with the audacity to criticize his global warming claims, the assaults Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and other leaders of the liberal civil rights movement launch against those who don't believe Black Americans are pathetic victims of the amorphous phrase "institutional racism", and the assaults Gay Rights activists launch against their critics, and countless others.

If Democrats were serious about restoring civility to political discourse they need to look in the mirror and see the rhetoric emanating from their corroded dessicated souls.  The fact of the matter is that Democrats and their establishment media and academic allies can't take it when someone exposes them as the frauds that they are!  As long as the media continues to give creedence to Democratic posturing, as long as senile demagogic  frauds such as Senator Robert Byrd are allowed to pose as respected statesmen when they make malicious attacks against President Bush and other conservatives, there is no reason to let up in our criticism of liberals, their ideas, and the toxic impact these individuals and ideas have on our culture and political discourse.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Ann Coulter's John Edwards Comments

Ann Coulter's recent description of John Edwards as a faggot at the CPAC conference as sparked a flurry of chatter of in the conservative and liberal blogospheres.  I enjoy how Coulter can really get under the skin of hypersensitive liberals with her cutting comments.  Unfortunately, in this case her description of Edwards is inaccurate.  Despite his multiple flaws, I believe he is a loyal husband and father.  (Later events really proved me wrong on this mild attempt to bolster Edward's "character."

There are far better pejoratives Coulter or other critics of John Edwards can use to describe the former North Carolina Senator.  "Corn pone ambulance chasing cracker" is the first one I can think of.  I could also add "trial lawyer trash", "white poverty p***", "race hustler," and "stuck in a Jim Crow time warp" as others.  Southern critics of Edwards could also, I'm sure, come up with additional regionally appropriate criticisms.

What's particularly infuriating about this dustup is the hypersensitivity of homosexual activists to any attempt to disparage their consciously chosen lifestyle and radical political agenda.  Gay rights activists are quick to brand critics of their views and lifestyles as "homophobes" or some other pejorative.  However, if you have the audacity to criticize their political agenda and point out the manifest intellectual and moral flaws of their arguments, they will demonize you as being homophobic, insensitive, callous, or a whole host of pejoratives.
Conservatives should not fall into the trap of legitimizing the arguments of homosexuals or catering to their political agenda.  We need to provide empirically sound arguments demonstrating the economic and societal damage homosexuality has caused and will continue to cause to our society if it's growth is allowed to continue unchecked.  We also need to set positive examples in our own lifesytles by living morally upright lives by being faithful to our opposite sex spouse and practicing chastity if we are single.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Libby Verdict

The conviction of Vice President Cheney's former chief of staff Lewis "Scooter" Libby is another example of the politicization of the judicial system.  Anyone with a modicum of intelligence knows that Valerie Plame was not a sensitive covert operative but an analyst.  It's been amazing to hear liberal journalists, who normally don't give a rip about protecting national security secrets, receive the "gospel" on the importance of protecting such secrets.  Of course, in this case, it's protecting secrets that augment their arguments against the decision to go to war and their deep-seated personal and ideological hostility toward President Bush and Vice President Cheney.

The fact of the matter is that if Valerie Plame were so concerned about maintaining her fictitious "cover" she should not have married a glory seeking publicity hound like Joseph Wilson.  Wilson's credibility has been shot to shreds by National Review and similar publications.  Plame also would not have pursued such an active social life if she and Wilson had been concerned about protecting her anonymity.

Hopefully, President Bush will have the political courage and cojones to pardon Libby at some convenient time and tell critics of such action to shove it.  My sympathy to Libby and his family and I hope this idiotic conviction is overturned on appeal.  Cases like this make it hard to imagine why anyone would want to hold a position of high responsibility in the U.S. Government considering the highly poisonous and politicized atmosphere of national security policymaking positions at this time.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Barack's Obaminations

The furor over Illinois Senator Barack Obama's recently announced presidential candidacy is amazing.  It is reflective of liberalism's continued searching for a "political savior" since John Kennedy's assassination.  Obama does have some laudable qualities.  He is an excellent speaker, has a congenial enough personality, and does not seem to have the sense of ethnic victimization that so many black politicians have as the reason for their political careers.  He has even sought to learn about U.S. foreign policy issues from Indiana Senator Richard Lugar.

Unfortunately, when you cut to the chase, Obama is still a doctrinaire liberal.  He has a rigidly pro-abortionist stance on culture of life issues, has voted against attempts to ensure that marriage remains between a man and woman, has demonstrated no guts to stand up to the gay rights lobby, and has no understanding of the dangerous consequences of withdrawing U.S. forces from Iraq.  His abject ignorance on this latter subject is so appalling that Australian Prime Minister John Howard recently and justifiably denounced Obama for his idiocy on this issue.

What kind of federal court judges would Obama appoint as President?  Would they be conservative to moderate or would they be leftist imbeciles such as those populating the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals?  Don't hold your breath waiting for appointments like Clarence Thomas or Sam Alito from Obama.  There is no evidence that Obama would take decisive steps to restructure the military to meet today's and tomorrow's security threats or that he has the intestinal fortitude to tell the Democrats moveon.org cadres that we are in a long-term existential struggle with Islamist terrorists and cannot afford to "bring the troops home."  There is no evidence that Barack Obama understands that you cannot rely on the rule of law to fight Islamist terror and that patience, intelligence, and brute force is required for success in that endeavor.  Obama's eloquence could be used to explain these unpleasant realities to American and international public opinion, but I doubt he has the guts to tell John Murtha and other dipstick defeatists in his party to shut up and quit aiding and abetting our enemies.

Obama may claim to be a Christian.  He has even said he reads his Bible when presiding over the Senate.  He may impress some Christians by his recent schmoozing with Rick Warren.  Conservative Christians should realize, though, that Obama is against us on the key issues of our time.  We should work diligently over the upcoming months to explain to everyone we can that Obama is not the solution to our national challenges and is not the great multicultural hope for the utopia secular liberals long for.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Islam's Crackup

News of Sunni-Shia sectarian strife in Iraq is a daily feature of news coverage.  Head southwest to Gaza, and ongoing strife between Hamas and Fatah dominates political life in Gaza's Palestinean rump state.  The tragic conflict in Darfur, Sudan is a ethnic and tribal struggle involving two versions of Islam.  Tensions in Iran over "President" Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's desires to obtain nuclear weapons are creating real tensions in the theocratic Islamic gangsta state created by Ayatollah Khomeini's 1978-1979 revolution overthrowing the Shah.

Unfortunately, you'll hear none of the mainstream domestic and international media proclaiming that these events signify a crackup in Islam.  Yet, that is what it is.  Islamist advocates of restoring Islamic law Sharia cannot point to a case where the imposition of this theocratic tyranny resulted in material improvements in the lives of peoples "governed" by such "law."  Countries with Islamic majority populations which have achieved measurable material enhancements in their people's lives and some modicum of political freedom, are those where other religious sentiments have opportunity at free expression.  Representative countries in this category would include Turkey, Jordan, Malaysia, and Indonesia.

Until the free and open practice of other religions, primarily Christianity, is permitted in Islamic countries such as Iran, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Afghanistan, and others, these countries will be racked with sectarian strife.  The abysmal failure of Islam to bring peaceful stability and socio-political development to these countries should be obvious to anyone not blinded with multiculturalist mush and the deluded belief that Islam is a "religion of peace."  Islam as a political theology offers nothing but ruin to those espousing it.  Sorry, Osama there will be no restoration of your mythical caliphate no matter how many of your followers blow themselves to hell by killing innocent people.  Surrender your 1400 years of jihadist fantasy and bloodthirsty destruction.  Do you really think God's impressed with your attempts to kill those you consider "infidels.:  Abandon your sadistic fantasy of destroying Israel.  It's God's will for Israel to exist and thrive.  Learn to live with the reality of a religiously pluralistic world and try to accept the reality that Islam offers nothing but disaster for people who choose to live confidently in freedom.  Better yet, remove the veils from your minds and hearts and take a open-minded look at the redemptive liberation and peace offered by Christianity as a way from improving your personal life and making a better world.

Bert Chapman


Bert Chapman
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive