Good or Bad for the Jews

"Good or Bad for the Jews"

Many years ago, and for many years, I would travel to Morocco to visit uncles, cousins, and my paternal grandmother. Some lived in Tangiers;...

Sunday, January 3, 2016

A Quick Note On Videos, Progressives, and Islamic Terrorists

I am writing another, perhaps overly convoluted piece on the relationship between Islamic terrorists and progressives, so this will be just a quick note.

As remarked before, Hillary R. Clinton and the DNC, in general, have an obsession with videos. They ascribe all sort of powers to video, most notably the power to warp otherwise peaceful minds into seething cesspools of suicidal/homicidal violence. Clinton, of course, famously has claimed that a video trailer of a movie that was never made drove otherwise peaceful Muslims into attacking our off-the-books facility in Benghazi. At the last Demo debate she added to this by claiming that ISIS was using a video of Donald Trump saying Muslims should be banned from the USA as a recruiting tool.

Two observations on that, followed by a a little discourse on the Muslim mentality. At the time HRC said this, no such video existed. In other words, she made it up--what we used to call a "lie." It seems that subsequent to her saying it, some loons apparently associated with ISIS or AQ or, or, or . . . apparently have made a video in which Trump does appear saying Muslims should be banned from immigrating to the USA. The video, reportedly, also contains HRC and other American politicians. This video, which I have not seen, apparently is used as part of the Islamic recruiting effort. Now it would seem that HRC is giving ideas to the operators of the Muslim Murder Machine (3M), and, dare we say, that is probably not a good thing, no?

More important than all that, this debate shows the weirdness of the Progressive and Muslim mindsets. Progressives, of course, are greatly influenced by movies. In fact, I would say that the majority of what passes for "Progressive thought" is derived from the Hollywood version of history that they have running in an endless video loop in their heads. Listen to them talk about the economy, race relations, education, "gender equality," US history, etc., and it all forms part of some giant Hollywood script. I have discussed this before (here, and here for example) and won't go over it again. In sum, much, probably most, of what Progressives here and abroad "know" about the United States and Western Civilization, in general, comes from movies in which almost invariably the white man is evil, while women, children, and assorted brown people are good, noble, brave and, naturally, victims (you can go here, for a discussion of this) of those evil white men.

Muslims, of course, are second only to Progressives as purveyors of the grievance version of history. Islam is all about grievances, real and imagined. If only those white Christian/Jewish dudes hadn't [fill in the blank] well, we'd be rich and smart, too! The followers of Islam have a major problem. Everywhere Islam rules, innovation, creativity, and personal liberty are stifled, crushed by the totalitarian dictates of the faith. The result is misery and death with most victims being other Muslims, but with a particularly vicious wrath aimed at Jews and Christians for refusing to accept Mohammed. No video is required to stir up this wrath. The Koran and the local mosque do that quite nicely, thank you.

This latest debate also shows the oddness of the mindsets of Progressivism and Islam in yet another way. Progressives and Muslims share hatred for Western Civilization. Yet, they want to live where Western Civilization still rules. Hideous, oppressive White Western Civilization must be destroyed, but that same horrible place is where the Progressives and Muslims want to live! ISIS, to pick one Islamic group of many, makes a living proclaiming hatred for that decadent civilization, but also wants Muslims to go live there. If somebody, e.g., Trump, says, "You know, maybe you guys should stay in your own countries and enjoy the fruits of your civilization unmolested by us," well, that drives Muslims into a murderous rage. I want to go there! Yes, I want to destroy it and make it just like my wretched, fetid home, but what right do those white dudes have to keep me out?

More to follow . . .


  1. Honorable Diplomad, sir ...

    There is another aspect connected with the other aspects of those two groups ... both claim that it would be different next time if only (more money were spent - more devotion to the Koran were enforced). In either case, there is no evidence (or amount of money or devotion) that can prove them wrong, no matter all previous debacles.

    Green Bear

    1. Post Colonial Africa is another such example of this mindset. Much of the newly freed ex-colonial states eschewed multiparty democracy and all its acouterments (free press, etc) in favor of the "Single-party State"--all of which turned out to be highly corrupt and highly authoritarian--without delivering the material advances freer western societies produced-yet at the same time expecting their own societies, which had rejected the Western model, to produce the same material results that these much freer and decentralized societies did.

  2. If things are so fetid etc in their counbties - why is anyone worried about Iran getting nuclear weapons.

  3. Isn't it interesting that you can't say anything negative about Islam because it might incite Muslims, but you can criticise gun ownership and insult the NRA without fear of inciting any violence. I think that points to where the real problem lies.

    1. Yes, of course: it points to the NRA, who if they were pure of heart like the Muslims would enjoy the latter's ... advantages ... in dealing with law enforcement.

  4. "They ascribe all sort of powers to video": no wonder. They have the MSM under their thumbs, but anyone might produce a video.

  5. the "proggslams" don't like free speech also

  6. There are several conclusions to be drawn from the new ISIS video featuring Trump:

    1. HC's original claim was certainly false;

    2. HC issued an open invitation to terrorists to enter the Presidential race by making a video, which the terrorists accepted (unsurprisingly);

    3. The left MSM is now amplifying the voice of the terrorists, for what they perceive to be the political benefit of HC;

    4. We now know that the terrorists prefer HC as the next President, and by extension the Democrats in power.

    All of this is a gift to Trump who can run even harder on the issue of terrorism, and paint HC as the terrorists choice for President.

    1. "HC's original claim was certainly false": you can safely adopt that as an axiom in any discussion.

  7. The muslim world is battling with halfwits (us). When our military leaders talk about 'asymmetric warfare', what they should *really* be referring to is large muslim groups and their even larger groups of benefactors being 'at war' with western civilization while western civilization is 'not at war' with them.
    That's the real asymmetry in warfare today, it's a strategic asymmetry, not the tactical asymmetry of guerrilla and insurgent warfare.
    It's not just US and the rest of the west, it's Israel too.
    The enemy camps just across their border and is raining death down on them to the very best of the enemy's capabilities. And what does the Israeli government do? Wait to see if their enemies will finally obtain the technology/power to destroy Israel utterly.
    That is how Israel is insane.
    Israel: "This is officer Duncecap, I've got a guy coming at me with a knife, I fired a warning shot... he's still coming. I don't know what to do... maybe I'll give him a few free swipes at me in hopes he misses any vitals... and maybe I'll see if anybody else is willing to lend him a gun.."
    And Americans are some of the spectators with cell phones watching, recording (not *HELPING*), hooting and telling the police officer he can't fire.

    I think Trump would do best to quote directly from Winston Churchill on Islam and muslims. Churchill had direct field experience with the issues and concepts that Trump really *means* to convey. And by citing Churchill, he would provide a grand stumping of our history-ignorant media (yet again). ("What??? Did Churchill really SAY that? Somebody..... get the -was-a-nazi machine going!!!! Yeah, I KNOW it makes no sense for Churchill... but we need it now!")

    - reader #1482

  8. If I am "stirred up" by a video, then I am not responsible for the crimes I commit. That appears to be HRC's belief. How convenient.

    1. Only if you are a member of a discrete and insular minority, as the legal expression is, or female, or gay, or "trans."

  9. Re: "Everywhere Islam rules, innovation, creativity, and personal liberty are stifled, crushed by the totalitarian dictates of the faith", I highly recommend Mohammed and Charlemagne Revisited: The History of a Controversy

  10. The psychology of liberals show major deficiencies within their broader population trends in character, e.g., lying and stealing, cheating and breaking laws are almost virtues. Name calling is another area where liberals excel.

    It seems the one major difference between liberals and conservatives is exactly how they perceive input to the brain. Many a conservative will listen to talk-radio; liberals not so much, however, liberals try to own the visual market (MSM). Liberals have to "SEE" what they "HEAR" because their "Mind's Eye" is blinded by a combination of weak intellect leading to a lack of debating/discussion skills and a belief system unsustainable when challenged with examples or pesky factoids not of their making or liking.

    It is true that liberals can attribute what you state, simply because they are receivers rather than transmitters of information. Thus they can only transmit via medium such as video or movies/tv, etc., and if something is limited to voice they are incapable of absorbing it for intellectual usage.

    Emotion is another area where liberals excel, but they cannot quell emotion for logic which is a weak area.

  11. Saw CBS interview Trump and they tried to pin the ISIS recruitment issue on him.

    His reply was, what do you expect me to do? Other than ignore the problem of Islamic fanaticism? That, I'm not going to do. It's a problem and we need to face it.

    A perfectly logical and straight talking answer to a stupid question.