Showing posts with label Muslim. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Muslim. Show all posts

Tuesday, August 24, 2010

HoJo's: It's not just for vacations anymore


We may be devo, but at least we're not all the way back to "primitive South American tribe."

Yet.

But when we get there, by God, you'll see it in Florida first. And
WFTV in Orlando will be there to report on it:
Investigators in Seminole County say they've discovered a bizarre problem: adult children are dropping off their elderly parents at hotels and motels, and abandoning them.

"A lot of the local hotels seem to be getting seniors that are just dropped off by their kids," said Officer Zach Hudson of the Lake Mary Police Department.

One man was left at the La Quinta Inn in Lake Mary for several weeks.

"Two different times he fell out of his bed during the midnight shift. We didn't know about it. We had people call up, saying there's a gentleman in this room, he's screaming for help," said Chris Loker of La Quinta Inn.

The problem comes down to money.

"A lot of these nursing homes are too expensive for the kids, much less their elderly parents," Hudson said.

Part of the problem is the hotels and motels are neither trained nor equipped to take on the elderly people, especially since some of the senior citizens have medical issues that require medical treatment.

But, Officer Hudson told WFTV, when parents are left at the hotels to fend for themselves no crime has been committed.
I GUESS dumping Pops at Disney World would be cost prohibitive, huh?

Even the Terroriss Muslins (
copyright pending, Tea Party Patriots) over there in Saudi Arabia have the decency to dump their parents at actual hospitals, according to this 2005 Arab News story:
Some elderly Saudis are being disposed of by their families who dump them off in front of area hospitals and speed away, leaving doctors furious and flabbergasted by this bizarre, cruel behavior.

Recently, three separate families abandoned their parents — and their responsibilities — at King Fahd Hospital.

In an incident at the hospital on Tuesday, a woman in her late 80s who was abandoned by her son there 10 days earlier was reunited with him. During her hospital stay, officials tried several times to get in touch with her family, who denied her existence.

Security guards were able to trace her taxi-driver son who ditched her at the hospital. He was recognized as a regular visitor to the premises, frequently dropping off passengers at the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) entrance.

The man arrived at the hospital accompanied by his young son, and when confronted by hospital officials he denied any relation to the old woman despite her enthusiastic greetings.

“Waleed,” she cried.

“After checking the man’s ID we established that, in fact, it was his name,” said the Dr. Abdul Malik Al-Huti, head of the ICU.

If there was any doubt, the little boy put it to rest.

“When we brought in the young child accompanying his father, he took one look at her and said she was his grandmother.”

After officials had a long, generally unpleasant discussion with “Waleed,” he reclaimed his mom.
A DOCTOR there was nonplussed by the whole thing.

“This phenomenon of abandonment by families of their elders is new in our community,” he said at the time, “and it is unacceptable to the majority of Saudi society.”

But that's just because the Terroriss Muslins (copyright pending, Newt Gingrich) ain't advanced like we are. Then again, I'll bet it won't be long before we concede that the Aché tribe in Paraguay has a point (and not just that at the end of a spear).

"The idea that it’s human nature for parents to make sacrifices for their children and, in turn, for their grown children to sacrifice for their aging parents — turns out to be a 'naïve expectation,'" geography and physiology professor Jared Diamond told
UCLA Today in January.
This assumption, he said, ignores undeniable conflicts of interest between generations.

From a common sense perspective, “Parents and children both want a comfortable life — there are limits to the sacrifices that they’ll make for each other.” And from a scientific perspective — natural selection — Diamond noted, “It may under some circumstances be better for children to abandon or kill their parents and for the parents to abandon or kill their children.”

Those circumstances include life’s often heart-wrenching realities — from the threat of starvation among indigenous tribes to the difficult choices posed by modern societies’ life-prolonging medical care, Diamond said.

Traditional nomadic tribes often end up abandoning their elderly during their unrelenting travels. The choice for the healthy and young is to do this or carry the old and infirm on their backs — along with children, weapons and necessities — through perilous territory. Also prone to sacrificing their elderly are societies that suffer periodic famines. Citing a dramatic example, Diamond said Paraguay’s Aché Indians assign certain young men the task of killing old people with an ax or spear, or burying them alive.

“We react with horror at these stories, but upon reflection, what else could they do?” Diamond asked. “The people in these societies are faced with a cruel choice.”

Those of us in modern cultures face cruel choices of our own, he added. “Many of you have already faced or will face a similar ordeal when you are the relative responsible for the medical care of an old person — the one who has to decide whether to halt further medical intervention or whether to administer painkillers and sedatives that will have the side effect of hastening death.”
YEAH, we all certainly make our choices. And they often are cruel.

Bomb-throwers and pyros for America

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy


Everybody knows the game our self-proclaimed "patriots" are playing with "Obama's a Muslim" and the self-righteous faux outrage over "the Ground Zero terror mosque."

Everybody except, of course, the willing dupes who comprise the intended target of the GOP brass, Glenn Beck, Fox News, Rush Limbaugh and all those who define themselves through their rage.

It's all about hate; it's all about fear; it's all about paranoia. It also is all about politics and the upcoming midterm elections.

What it's also about is playing with fire. It's about ginning up a mob to demand that the federal government . . . New York city government . . . hell, anybody tear down the whole edifice of our constitutional rule in the name of saving the republic from The Other.

The cynical right wants us all to become a lynch mob to save ourselves from terrorism, which is related -- somehow -- to America's first black, socialist, Nazi Muslim president. Or something like that.

It's not exactly a credit to our cultural and democratic
bona fides that the vast majority of Americans fail to see the deep and toxic irony of this.

INSTEAD, every time I log on to Facebook, I am confronted with the sidebar list of how many family members, friends and old classmates "like" Glenn Beck.

Like Glenn Beck, like his message. Unfortunately, Beck's message is both bats*** crazy and racially incendiary.

As you know, I grew up in the Deep South -- south Louisiana to be exact. I know what that was all about 40 and 50 years ago, and what it is still too much about now.

I can't judge anybody's heart today -- especially folks I haven't seen in years, decades even -- but I know how a lot of them were raised.
I know how I was raised.

I know what was in the cultural air we breathed. How we never gave our assumptions, or those of the society around us, a second thought as we took spiritual Corexit into our hearts and minds. I know that such enculturation can be nearly inexorable, because when you're raised that way from birth, the poison gets into that space between visceral reaction and engagement of the conscience and the mind.

SCRATCH THE SURFACE of my home state, Louisiana, and you'll quickly get to a very bad place. Do the same in any part of America, and you're likely to find varying states of the same collective id.

They say the devil's greatest trick is to convince us he doesn't exist. He just hides in our crooked hearts as our overconfidence congratulates itself on what good, moral, patriotic and God-fearing works of art we have become.

Yet the lynch mob sings "Onward Christian Soldiers" as "the better angels of our nature" twist in the wind, strange fruit of a demagogue's tree.

Thursday, November 05, 2009

It's Muslims, guns and morons
. . . and the s*** has hit the fan


Sigh.

It didn't take long after the Fort Hood massacre for the usual suspects to say exactly what you'd expect.

IN FACT, I was so sure of that, just a little while ago I Googled "Barack Hussein Obama," "Fort Hood" and "Muslim." And in the combox of an item on Lucianne.com . . . the mother lode:
Reply 15 - Posted by: ann_n_GA, 11/5/2009 6:21:55 PM (No. 6002989)
How in the world could someone like this horrible Muslim terrorist(s), become a Major in the US Army? Don't we make sure people like this are not able to gun down the men and women in our armed forces?

Now I'm hearing he's a mental health professional and/or a doctor. Well, it makes no difference to the Muslims, as long as they can sneak them in.

And I'm sure Zippy and his Reverend Wright are gleeful, right now.

I would have never believed that in my lifetime, I would see a man get elected President who outwardly exhibits hatred for his country. And I feel very sorry for our military, who has to call this man their CIC. It's disgusting.

This all makes me nauseated...

Reply 18 - Posted by: 10ftOverhead, 11/5/2009 6:24:19 PM (No. 6002995)
Will Obama and Michelle do a little fist bump when he gets home?

Reply 19 - Posted by: planetgeo, 11/5/2009 6:24:27 PM (No. 6002996)
#14,
"Any one in the military with a muslim background should be scrutinized very carefully."

Wrong. Any one in the military, or any sensitive government position, should be removed from their position and placed under watch by our intelligence agencies. This is now at least the 3rd incident of Muslims either planning or executing an attack on our military facilities in the United States. How many more will our leaders tolerate before they stop the nonsense about "a tragic event" and planned, pre-meditated jihadist action?

How many more?!

Reply 20 - Posted by: planetgeo, 11/5/2009 6:27:44 PM (No. 6003007)
I'm so angry I couldn't even see straight enough to add the obvious..."with a Muslim background". I'm sure my fellow LDotters know the feeling.

Reply 21 - Posted by: bean, 11/5/2009 6:29:43 PM (No. 6003011)
EVERY news channel is AVOIDNG the obvious-this was a terrorist attack. Is the White House threatening them to keep quiet?

Reply 23 - Posted by: vrb8m, 11/5/2009 6:37:27 PM (No. 6003031)
"I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction."

Barack Hussein Obama, President of the United States of America, from the book "The Audacity of Hope".

Reply 24 - Posted by: Israel Putnam, 11/5/2009 6:39:30 PM (No. 6003034)
Get angry...get ready.

Reply 26 - Posted by: loosietoot, 11/5/2009 6:40:17 PM (No. 6003038)
Sorry folks! I hold this so-called and probably illegal President directly responsible for all deaths of all soldiers with his dithering on Afganistan increases, and his praising of HIS MUSLIM BROTHERS.

I thought he sounded so PHONEY IN HIS APPEARANCE ON FOX!!!! My God, our country is in serious peril with this Muslim President!!!!!!!!!!

Reply 31 - Posted by: RedWhite&Blue2, 11/5/2009 7:00:28 PM (No. 6003096)
One wonders how a crazy Muslim could become an American army Major?

The same one wonders how in blazes a guy named Hussein, raised by commies, could become CIC of the USA? A very skinny, purple-lipped, whistling ignoramus!

What the hell is wrong with us? 40% conservative in America and yet we let the commies, the muzzies, the lefties,the public schools, the DNC, the sandal-wearing commie creep professors, the LSM, and Hollyweird DICTATE our very own policies to us!

I am MAD as HELL and if I wasnt 60 I think I'd re-up and pick up a gun again like I did in '67! It's been a civil war here for some years, hasnt it? Isnt it most evident today?

God have mercy on their souls....
I THINK that's enough. You get the picture.

And I think it's pretty apparent by now where "Liberal Fascists" author Jonah Goldberg gets his reactionary nature . . . Lucianne.com is run by his mother, Lucianne Goldberg.

Right now -- and it's now 7:44 p.m. Central time as I type -- we know damned little about what happened in Texas. We know the alleged shooter, an Army psychiatrist with the rank of major, was a Muslim.

We know he's dead, having been shot by police.

We know he may have been “pretty upset” about his pending deployment to the war zone, at least according to U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas.

We know Fort Hood's commander, Lt. Gen. Robert W. Cone, said there were eyewitness accounts of a second shooter, and that a person of interest is being questioned.

We know the dead suspect, Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, 39, may have posted Internet items justifying suicide bombings. Likewise, we know federal authorities have yet to confirm Hasan was the author.

And we know that, ironically, Hasan was a graduate of Virginia Tech.

THAT'S ALL we know, and we don't know no more. Then again, since when has not knowing much been a deterrent to the Tea Party set when the subject matter is extreme rhetoric and rash action.

Keep your powder dry, people. There will be lots to think about -- and to decide what to do about -- when we have a few answers in hand.

Until then, "patriot" morons and their Internet enablers are just making a bad situation a lot worse.


UPDATE: And sometimes what we "know" just ain't so . . . which just goes to prove my point.

The alleged gunman isn't dead. Wounded, yes, but not dead:

An Army psychiatrist opened fire Thursday at Fort Hood, Texas, killing 12 people and wounding 31 others, military officials said.

The gunman was wounded multiple times at the scene but was captured alive and was in stable condition, Lt. Gen. Robert W. Cone, commanding general of the Army’s III Corps, said at a press conference late Thursday.

Wednesday, June 10, 2009

The Curse of Homer Simpson be upon them

Instead of hounding preachers who criticize the gay-rights agenda and publishers who speak out against the Great White Jihad, why don't Canada's human-rights tribunals attend to some real violations of inalienable rights?

We're talking As Bad as It Gets, here.

FOR INSTANCE, this unspeakable horror perpetrated against the elderly, as reported by Reuters:
Beer maker Molson is turning off the tap and cutting off the supply of free suds to its retirees, the Toronto Star reported on Tuesday.

Molson, a division of Molson Coors, said it was looking to "standardize" its complimentary beer policy.

There are 2,400 Molson retirees in Canada and their free beer costs the company about C$1 million ($900,000) a year, the Star said.

Molson retirees in the province of Newfoundland will see their monthly allotment of beer fall from six dozen a month to zero over the next five years.
IF THIS ISN'T awful enough on its own merit -- in my opinion, far worse than anything right-winger Mark Steyn may have had to say about the booze-hating Mahometans in Maclean's newsweekly -- let me add this in hopes of prodding the Canadians into action.

Read carefully: Molson Coors is half-owned by Americans, who no doubt have, with imperial malice, exerted malign influence over their Dominion partners.


Now go get 'em, eh?

Monday, October 13, 2008

Their god is a frightened god


In London, The Telegraph tells the story of an Iranian family suffering for its Christian faith because the god of Islam -- as understood by that country's civil and religious leaders -- is a frightened god to whom free will is a mortal threat.

Or should I say an immortal threat?

A month ago, the Iranian parliament voted in favour of a draft bill, entitled "Islamic Penal Code", which would codify the death penalty for any male Iranian who leaves his Islamic faith. Women would get life imprisonment. The majority in favour of the new law was overwhelming: 196 votes for, with just seven against.

Imposing the death penalty for changing religion blatantly violates one of the most fundamental of all human rights. The right to freedom of religion is enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and in the European Convention of Human Rights. It is even enshrined as Article 23 of Iran's own constitution, which states that no one may be molested simply for his beliefs.

And yet few politicians or clerics in Iran see any contradiction between a law mandating the death penalty for changing religion and Iran's constitution. There has been no public protest in Iran against it.

David Miliband, Britain's Foreign Secretary, stands out as one of the few politicians from any Western country who has put on record his opposition to making apostasy a crime punishable by death. The protest from the EU has been distinctly muted; meanwhile, Germany, Iran's largest foreign trading partner, has just increased its business deals with Iran by more than half. Characteristically, the United Nations has said nothing.

It is a sign of how little interest there is in Iran's intention to launch a campaign of religious persecution that its parliamentary vote has still not been reported in the mainstream media.

For one woman living in London, however, the Iranian parliamentary vote cannot be brushed aside. Rashin Soodmand is a 29-year-old Iranian Christian. Her father, Hossein Soodmand, was the last man to be executed in Iran for apostasy, the "crime" of abandoning one's religion. He had converted from Islam to Christianity in 1960, when he was 13 years old. Thirty years later, he was hanged by the Iranian authorities for that decision.

Today, Rashin's brother, Ramtin, is also held in a prison cell in Mashad, Iran's holiest city. He was arrested on August 21. He has not been charged but he is a Christian. And Rashin fears that, just as her father was the last man to be executed for apostasy in Iran, her brother may become one of the first to be killed under Iran's new law.

Not surprisingly, Rashin is desperately worried. "I am terribly anxious about him," she explains. "Even though my brother is not an apostate, because he has never been a Muslim – my father raised us all as Christians – I don't think he is safe. They assume that if you are Iranian, you must be Muslim."

OBVIOUSLY, Iranian Muslims and their leaders have their deity all figured out. And we know what Flannery O'Connor said about such -- "remember that these things are mysteries and that if they were such that we could understand them, they wouldn’t be worth understanding. A God you understood would be less than yourself."

And this is apparently what's understood about Allah in Iran -- that the Muslim deity is a puppetmaster and mankind is a puppet. That Allah fears that man would not, could not love him freely, so man must be forced to do so. That Islam is not so much about knowing, loving and serving Allah as it is being a "soldier" in a Mafia of a billion-plus souls.

Once in, there's only one way to get out -- be rubbed out.

IF JESUS is the good shepherd, the ayatollahs' Allah must be Michael Corleone. And Muhammad is what? Al Neri?

That makes Ramtin Soodmand the Iranian version of Fredo, I'm afraid.

Nice conception of deity you have there, guys.

Tuesday, July 01, 2008

Dogs don't blow stuff up . . .


But some folks who hate them because they're "ritually impure" will blow you, your kids and Fido, too, to Kingdom Come to feed the bloodlust of "Allah the merciful."

And they'll blow themselves up to take out Western whoremongers, which will make them martyrs of Islam, which will earn them serious freak time in Paradise with 72 virgins.

And they'll blow other Muslims up because they're the wrong sort of Muslims.

And, I suspect, a lot of Muslims will blow themselves (and whatever else) up just because they're bored and aggrieved over some slight suffered yesterday or 700 years ago.

Maybe they'll blow somebody in Scotland up because Scottish cops -- and the Scottish people -- like filth. Which, in the warped world of Islam, equals a cute little puppy:

A postcard featuring a cute puppy sitting in a policeman's hat advertising a Scottish police force's new telephone number has sparked outrage from Muslims.

Tayside Police's new non-emergency phone number has prompted complaints from members of the Islamic community.

The choice of image on the Tayside Police cards - a black dog sitting in a police officer's hat - has now been raised with Chief Constable John Vine.

The advert has upset Muslims because dogs are considered ritually unclean and has sparked such anger that some shopkeepers in Dundee have refused to display the advert.

Dundee councillor Mohammed Asif said: 'My concern was that it's not welcomed by all communities, with the dog on the cards.

'It was probably a waste of resources going to these communities.

'They (the police) should have understood. Since then, the police have explained that it was an oversight on their part, and that if they'd seen it was going to cause upset they wouldn't have done it.'

Councillor Asif, who is a member of the Tayside Joint Police Board, said that the force had a diversity adviser and was generally very aware of such issues.

He raised the matter with Mr Vine at a meeting of the board.

The chief constable said he was unaware of the concerns and that the force had not sought to cause any upset but added he would look into the matter.

Councillor Asif said: 'People who have shops just won't put up the postcard. But the police have said to me that it was simply an oversight and they did not seek to offend or upset.'
COME TO THINK OF IT, I wonder whether the outraged Musselmans are angry because God hates dogs -- a cracked idea that's reason enough to raise grave doubts about Islam -- or because the cute pup featured in the Scottish police ad, Rebel, is training to be a police dog.

I mean, who knows? Rebel could end up being a bomb-sniffing dog.

"If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you," Mark Twain once said. "This is the principal difference between a dog and a man. . . ."


That sounds like the exact difference between Rebel and Scotland's caterwauling Mohammedans. Just replace "man" with "Muslim."

And the difference between a man and Scottish authorities is a man would have told Councillor Asif to piss off.

Friday, May 02, 2008

Beauty is not skank deep

For traditional Christians and modern Westerners, it's not a difficult task to find areas of profound disagreement with Islam and then beat those divides into gaping chasms of civilizational conflict.

This
particularly would be true in the years since violent jihadists flew jetliners full of innocents into skyscrapers full of innocents in a bid to poke a finger into the eye of the Great Satan.

That, however, does nothing to help us -- as Christians and modern Westerners -- come to the difficult realization that, in so many ways, we are the Great Satan.

Or, at a minimum, willing and enthusiastic dupes of Satan.

IN THAT LIGHT, perhaps it would be useful to explore one area where Christians and thoughtful Westerners can have common cause with thoughtful Muslims -- or at least ought to have common cause with those who profess Islam.

I would submit that the devil's greatest success among Western modernists has been in equating "freedom" with the grossest debasements of human dignity, which by extension are the most profound slurs against a Creator who made mankind in His image. The means of debasement are legion, but they all are rooted in denying the fundamental nature and dignity of -- and, yes, divine image within -- human beings by recognizing them solely as objects.

Not as people, but as things.


Satan's second greatest success among modern Westerners has been in convincing them to run right past the concept of "tolerance" into the abyss where what we profess has nothing to do with how we live.

As one who has toiled for a decade and a half as a volunteer in Catholic youth ministry, let me illustrate this concept from that vantage point.

It's not only possible but, indeed, probable to have large numbers of self-professed Catholic teen-agers -- teen-agers who have gone through Confirmation and made solemn promises therein -- to think nothing of dressing like hookers, defining a "good date" as one that ends inside the pants of a young woman, getting wasted every weekend or otherwise behaving in a manner indistinguishable from the most hardcore of nihilists.

THE STARK REALITY of what used to be known as Christendom is a spent culture in which belief is alienated from practice, humanity is alienated from its fundamental nature and, finally, humans are profoundly alienated from their Creator and one another. Its logical -- and inevitable -- end is Death.

I think that's a cultural critique that orthodox Christians and mainstream Muslims not only could both embrace, but also could see as grounds for cooperation.

Which brings me to "the Hijab Challenge."

The Hijab Challenge was the brainchild of a Muslim columnist for The Daily Reveille, my old college newspaper at Louisiana State University. Briefly, what Shirien Elmasraya did was, I think, brilliant --
an in-your-face throwing down the gauntlet to American society's notion of feminine "beauty."

DOES OUR NOTION of womanly "beauty" mainly involve who a woman is, or merely what standard equipment she comes with? Do we value what is divine, or do we prefer to turn a multidimensional imago dei into nothing more than a one-dimensional object -- a thing to be used for our own ignoble purposes:
A couple of weeks ago, I wrote a column challenging University women to wear the hijab - or headscarf - for a day.

A handful of girls took on my challenge this past Friday. They came to campus adorned by the beauty of the hijab.

They went to class, hung out with their friends and lived their daily routine wearing something they normally wouldn't wear.

But anyone who didn't know them personally would most likely assume these women were Muslim, and they were most likely oppressed.

In the past year and a half I've written, I've probably gotten more hate mail and hate comments below my articles online than just about anyone else on
The Daily Reveille's
staff.

Some of those who would comment would regurgitate over and over again that women in Islam are oppressed, we are backwards and we need to be liberated from our hijab.

I, in turn, wanted to liberate the people who hold these views from the oppression of media brainwashing and prejudice by challenging them to wear hijab for a day and see what it is really like - the result?

None of those who accused me of being oppressed took on my challenge. They are so afraid of reality and so embarrassed to be proven wrong that they did not even bother defending their claim by agreeing to participate.

So let it be known that your words never did and never will hold any weight with me.

Half of my life, I didn't wear hijab. I was oppressed by society and beauty magazines who told me and my peers that less clothes means more beauty.

To me, the hijab is liberating.

One of the women who decided to take on my challenge was Melissa Breen, mass communication sophomore.

"In order for people to truly be open-minded, they must be willing to step outside of their comfort zones," Breen said.

Breen's friend Sarah Berard, English junior, also decided to participate.

"In order to truly love and respect other people, you have to try to understand them. So as a Roman Catholic, for me, the hijab challenge was an opportunity to come to a better understanding of Muslim women," Berard said.

Michelle Richardson, anthropology junior, said it was a special cultural experience.

"It helped demonstrate to the world and to myself that you are not any less of a free, powerful woman for making the personal choice of wearing the hijab," she said.
WE LIVE IN A CULTURE that makes a fetish of "edginess" and rebellion. What that culture fails to appreciate is that the only revolt here is against truth. Make that Truth, with a capital "T."

Otherwise, what we preceive as "edgy" is merely pedestrian slavishness to a warped and dehumanizing status quo, and what we perceive as "beauty" is predicated on appealing to some of our uglier impulses. Thus blinded, it's difficult for the modern American to appreciate Ms. Elmasraya for the revolutionary she is.

And entirely too easy to laugh and say "Look at the backward Muslim" instead of acknowledge the rot in our own self-mutilated culture.