ABC News nearly had an aneurysm over what they called “secret ‘Jesus’ Bible codes” in January of 2010, feeling that we weren’t being culturally sensitive to the insurgent, al Qaeda, and Taliban terrorists that our soldiers were trying to kill, or to our nominal and incompetent allies in both Afghanistan and Iraq who were unaware that the references existed.
The scripture references have always been part of Trijicon’s product naming conventions.
I’m glad to see that the Army didn’t succumb to the hysterics of the anti-Christian media nor the Obama Administration, and is only now beginning to remove these important optics from frontline service for “repair” now that our mission in Iraq has ended and the mission in Afghanistan is winding down.
ACOGs are magnified optics that help our soldiers identify and separate friends from foes at extended distances, and which enabled soldiers to engage with and destroy enemy forces at the longer ranges faster and more accurately than with standard iron sights.
There is no cost estimate nor estimate of man-hours wasted in this exercise of political correctness run amok.
“ABC News nearly had an aneurysm over what they called “secret ‘Jesus’ Bible codes” in January of 2010, feeling that we weren’t being culturally sensitive to the insurgent, al Qaeda, and Taliban terrorists that our soldiers were trying to kill, or to our nominal and incompetent allies in both Afghanistan and Iraq who were unaware that the references existed.”
This would seem to be a strawman argument. The arguments I see in this ABC News story seem to be more about separation of church and state, the lack of awareness of the U.S. military that this was being done, and concerns that this could embolden the enemy by giving them the opportunity to claim that the U.S. was engaged in a “crusade” or a holy war. Many complaints came from military personnel.
There is nothing here about being “culturally sensitive” to terrorists; it would appear you made that up. Furthermore, I don’t see any “aneurism;” this article is written in a fairly neutral fashion, without hysterics or editorializing.
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/us-military-weapons-inscribed-secret-jesus-bible-codes/story?id=9575794
I’m also not sure it’s fair to describe the backlash as “anti-Christian,” as many Christian groups complained about these verses being placed on our government’s weapons, which they viewed as sacreligious:
Reports that coded biblical verses have been inscribed on gun sights used by the U.S. military by their manufacturer are extremely disturbing and should be investigated by military authorities and the practice stopped immediately. Religious undertones have all too often been a part of military rhetoric and actions in recent years. Following reports in the last year that biblical verses regularly were printed on a defense department documents and accounts of proselytizing by military personnel in Afghanistan, this latest incident adds to the perception that religion rather than national security is at the heart of our military’s presence abroad.
Obviously, Trijicon, the defense contractor, knew they were doing something wrong and trying to get away with it or they would not have encoded messages that, when used appropriately, need no disguise. The company should be ashamed of its actions, which do no favor either to the United States military or to Christianity; just the opposite. Messages of life and peace should not be prostituted by placing their imprint on instruments designed for death and war.
As a Christian, I am offended by Trijicon’s dismissal of the criticism saying that the organization raising the issue is “not Christian.” This is not a time for attacking critics, it is a time for Trijicon to clean up its behavior. As a patriot of this nation, I am outraged at this corporation’s lack of appreciation for our first freedom—religious freedom—and its corollary of separation between institutions of religion and institutions of government. As an advocate for inter-religious cooperation, I am saddened by this insensitive effort to minimize people who do not embrace Christianity.
I call on the Department of Defense to conduct an immediate and thorough investigation of this incident, and take appropriate action if any laws were broken. Once again I repeat my call from last year for Commander-in-Chief Obama to direct the Secretary of Defense to institute policies that amid efforts to assure national security he also ensures protection for our nation’s Constitution and its promise of protecting freedom and not promoting religion.
http://www.interfaithalliance.org/news/345-interfaith-alliance-statement-on-the-placement-of-bible-versus-on-us-military-weapons
The manufacturer claims to “always” add Christian notation to its gun sights (a disgusting use of the New Testament in itself if you ask me), presumably, and thankfully, indicating the markings were not meant specifically for use by the military. Considering the small and coded nature of them – the abbreviated chapter and verse could probably be mistaken for a serial number – it’s certainly believable that these went unnoticed by the powers that be. Either way this is an outrageous abuse. Now in the open, it’s also a further impediment (reminiscent of the Christian imagery discovered on Pentagon war reports) to our efforts to assure the rest of the world that U.S. foreign policy is not driven by religious fervor.
Military contracts with the supplying company, Trijicon, should be halted immediately, until assurances can be made this won’t continue. And any Defense Department officials that knew about, condoned, or – worse yet – purposely purchased weaponry with religious insignia should be reprimanded. What good is it to have our civilian leadership traveling the world with the promise that America does not fight religious wars, when the military has our soldiers training some Afghans and Iraqis, and killing others, with guns that proclaim otherwise?
http://bjconline.org/truly-disturbing-updatedx2/
I agree that it would have been costly to immediately discard these weapons and I don’t think the army needed to immediately stop using them. The manufacturing company was right to halt production and end this practice quickly after being discovered. But this is not about “political correctness,” it’s about right and wrong. This was offensive to many Christians and many within the military as well, so the notion that critics were simply anti-Christian or anti-military is just plain false.
When he last left KPAY the wonderful Bruce Sessions gave me a huge complement in an email. That email is now long gone. Lost forever. Bruce said something to the effect that I was his unofficial program director. Bruce does not know me as my satirical and acidic nom-de-internet “Pie Guevara”, he may or may not remember me. I am David Walton, of course, something that I have not hidden for years since I gave up being intimidated by internet trolls and horrid dysfunctional people of the left.
(Back in the 90’s I also was a frequent volunteer material contributor to the Lee Rogers show on KGO and then KSFO, and the Jim Eason show on KGO and then KSFO. Those were the days! Both read my Shakespeare on current events compendium verbatim on air. That was a special treat.)
Anyway, I was the one who coined the title of Bruce Sessions’ Friday last half-hour show segment “Friday Follies”.
I only bring it up because I am thinking about reviving “Friday Follies” in a new venue, the Post Scripts blog, as a regular contribution to the comments section.
I dearly miss Bruce and hope he is healthy and happy. I truly loved his commentary, interviews, and political analysis on KPAY. He was “old school” radio. Local, non-syndicated talk radio. Great stuff.
Now on to the first meager installment of Friday Follies —
Machete-Wielding Security Guard Thwarts Robbery Of Adult Toy Store After Being Attacked With Bong
http://laist.com/2015/01/03/machete_adult_store_robbery.php
My Son, The Nut (I still have this album)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hN_9a0LPFhY
Frank Zappa playing the bicycle on the Steve Allen Show. (Zappa mentions Louis Bellson drumsticks. I held Louis Bellson’s wife’s hand, the late great jazz singer Pearl Bailey, while assisting her onto stage at the Concord Jazz Festival when it still in the park before the Concord Pavilion was built. She said, “Thank you honey.”)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1MewcnFl_6Y
Louie Bellson – 1957 Skin Deep Solo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nBQWaCLlK9Y
Remember The Nat King Cole Show? Pearl Bailey on the Nat King Cole Show
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDd1S1TJdhY
Chris has a right to his opinion, as does the Christian quoted, but I think this is much ado about nothing.
The use of “secret ‘Jesus’ Bible codes” could definitely illustrate an anti-Christian posture. It’s the Alinsky style of targeting and destroying that embrues the language of the left. It’s the type of thing they would say about Sarah Palin or Clarence Thomas or Condi Rice or Dick Cheney. They think they’re being clever but more and more they just look like intolerant jerks.
The complaining Christian in Chris’s comment reads like a typical lefty. I’d bet he/she has one of those “all religions” stickers on his/her bumper. Talk about a message with the potential to offend!
There’s another right involved here. The right of the manufacturer to put these verses on his product. The right of religious expression. The fact that the verses are obscure and “could be mistaken for a serial number” make it pretty clear that this company had no intention of pushing a point of view or the Christian religion. And where is the evidence that “they knew they were doing something wrong?” That sounds like the opinion of a code pink wannabe and avid gun hater to me. I say go ahead and be offended. In America you have a right to be offended.
Maybe this was the gun makers way of asking God’s blessing that their weapon’s be used properly and only by qualified people. Maybe the gun maker wanted to send a (silent) prayer out with soldiers as they went into battle. There are any number of reasons the manufacturer may have done this but to suggest there was an intent to create a state religion is nuts.
I also doubt that the majority of Christian’s even know about this or would think it a big deal if they did. Same goes for members of the military. So the “notion” that “many Christians and military people” were offended, suggesting the numbers were pretty big, seems pretty far fetched to me.
This is not about right and wrong. This is about bullies attempting to control what everyone else does. This is about demanding that others conform to the complainers thinking and demands.
This is also incredibly un-American to me. The lack of tolerance, from the crowd screaming tolerance, is getting ridiculous.
Separation of Church and state is the issue. As well as some trying to make these wars religious wars playing right into the enemies hand.
Arizona Army recruitment office had a sign outside stating on a mission for country and God.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/01/15/1358006/-STOP-READ-LOOK-AT-SHOCKING-PHOTO-U-S-Army-Official-Recruitment-for-Mission-for-God?detail=email
Our military is not on a mission for God.
Sorry but Fox news and their war against Christians is just a bunch of crap.
We are suppose to have freedom of religion not a military of religion.
That is when religion is twisted to control a population.
Barb, I understand where you are coming from, but removing the Christian religion from our military could actually be dangerous.
These young men and women serving their nation are in serious need of high moral guidance and spiritual comfort, especially when in combat.
If we take the Christian religion out of our military I guarantee you our moral will drop like a stone. I’m speaking from personal experience. You don’t want that happening to our young warriors.
This is a Christian founded nation, built on Christian values, and when we went to war, we turn to the Christian religion. When we went into combat we did so believing God was there for us, that He would help and comfort the righteous. That’s one heck of a motivator and the PC left has nothing to compare with it or replace it.
Look at our WWII posters, see our slogans, God is My Copilot, Praise the Lord and Pass the Ammunition, etc. It might sound politically correct to say get God out of government and our military, but if that happens expect yourself to be tossed to the lions by somebody yelling AllahU Akbar!
Tina, on people she disagrees with but doesn’t know:
“The complaining Christian in Chris’s comment reads like a typical lefty. I’d bet he/she has one of those “all religions” stickers on his/her bumper. Talk about a message with the potential to offend!
…There’s That sounds like the opinion of a code pink wannabe and avid gun hater to me. I say go ahead and be offended. In America you have a right to be offended.”
Tina, on people she agrees with but doesn’t know:
“Maybe this was the gun makers way of asking God’s blessing that their weapon’s be used properly and only by qualified people. Maybe the gun maker wanted to send a (silent) prayer out with soldiers as they went into battle. There are any number of reasons the manufacturer may have done this but to suggest there was an intent to create a state religion is nuts.”
The amount of assumptions you’re making here are staggering, as are the differences between the type of assumptions you make about people you disagree with vs. the assumptions you make about people you agree with. You paint a caricature of those who criticized these markings while painting those who created them as saints.
“I also doubt that the majority of Christian’s even know about this or would think it a big deal if they did. Same goes for members of the military. So the “notion” that “many Christians and military people” were offended, suggesting the numbers were pretty big, seems pretty far fetched to me.”
And yet your hypotheses on the reverend’s political affiliation, views on guns, and choice of bumper stickers aren’t?
“There’s another right involved here. The right of the manufacturer to put these verses on his product.”
No one has questioned this right. They still manufacture guns with these verses for private consumption. There is no right for them to have those weapons bought by the government.
If it were soldiers inscribing Bible verses on their own weapons that would be a whole different story IMO. The fact that no one in the army was even consulted on this is what strikes me as inappropriate.
“The fact that the verses are obscure and “could be mistaken for a serial number” make it pretty clear that this company had no intention of pushing a point of view or the Christian religion.”
It also makes it pretty clear that they didn’t want the army to know what they were doing.
“And where is the evidence that “they knew they were doing something wrong?””
That was a poor choice of words on my part. I am sure they believed they were doing the right thing. But the fact that they never informed the military shows that they probably knew they wouldn’t have gotten approval for this. The deception is the real problem here.
Pie I was a big fan of Bruce Sessions and enjoyed the light-hearted break Friday Follies brought to his show.
Why don’t you submit your Friday Follies to our attention late Thursday in comments and we’ll put it up ASAP for Friday.
Franky, I think this is much ado about nothing, Trijicon’s product naming conventions. Big deal.
Barb our military has been using the phrase, “God and country” since its inception as far as I know and it hasn’t led to a theocratic government. Maybe that’s because the principles of human rights and individual freedoms that we both enjoy and defend spring from the concepts of God given “inalienable rights” and free will.
Marx, Mussolini, Hitler, Pol Pot, Mao, Castro, and other totalitarian leaders, including leaders of radical Islam, follow concepts of man’s authority over man. In the case of radical Islam, the faith is used by leaders to intimidate, oppress, and control the people and to gain power. As our own President has indicated in comments, no authentic religion commands murder, abuse, and oppression.
One Marines View expresses the opinion of a single Marine that is held by many and accepted by most, even if they do not think of themselves as religious. The few remaining seem now, after more than a couple hundred years, willing to destroy these fundamental, American traditions and concepts by suppressing religious expression. (And writing vile words about those who have religious/Christian values). Examples from the article with apologies for the length:
This person experienced and interpreted the meaning behind the poster to fit his own angry hostile attitude toward fundamental Christians and quite possibly anyone who would refuse to see the world through his eyes and comply. This person doesn’t stand for liberty, he doesn’t even understand the concept!
How is it American to insist others bend to the will of the few. If the Army, or any other branch of the military, was insisting that all members become Christians and attend church there would be good reason to object to the sign in front of the recruitment office. If the leader of our nation went before the microphones and told the world we were entering the field of battle in the name of the Christian God there would be reason to strongly object.
The people objecting to the sign that suggest it makes America look like it’s waging a “holy war” are those who object to Christianity having a place in our society and wish to suppress religious freedoms and expression.
This “shocking” sign, as described by the incredibly intolerant Daily Kos writer, suggests the slogan means America fights for the Christian God. In reality the motto is about the soldiers service to his nation and God. (Also recognizing that the majority of Americans were and remain Christian) The soldier can interpret the meaning of “God” however he likes. Indeed our nation has supplied chaplains of many faiths to serve those in the military and no soldier is required to adopt any faith.
This objection exposes both the ignorance and the intolerance of the radical left that have made it part of their mission to oppress and denigrade Christians, the very religion that supplied and guided our founders to create a secular government that honors liberty and the rights of individual citizens to practice their faith, or none, as they see fit.
I continue to be amazed by the number of people over the last half century that have no appreciation for, and only marginal understanding of, our founding principles, heritage, and Constitution.
The current enemy of freedom and human dignity, radical Islamist, would like nothing more than to cause Americans to deny their individual faiths, even Muslim faith, and bend to their dominating will. It’s absurd to aid and abet them. Let them think whatever they will, they already see themselves as dominating and religiously, socially, and legally right.
Are we so naive as to think the leaders of this group have never considered that their objective, to dominate the world, doesn’t include oppressing religious views? Of course they do! They have waged war against Christians, Jews, Muslims, and others for centuries. They already hold animosity and contempt, to the point of murder, toward every other religion and those who practice the Muslim religion from a perspective of peace and self correction. Is it not obvious that this petty complaint is dwarfed by the real enemy?
I see no reason to change a traditional motto, that forces no particular faith, because of the objections of a few or out of fear that we might offend an enemy.
Chris: “You paint a caricature of those who criticized these markings while painting those who created them as saints>
The gun manufacturer was painted in a negative light with sinister motivations first was it not? And by people who do not know the principles of the company OR their motivations. I simply offered alternative possible explanations.
The left regularly engages in nasty criticism of “people they do not know.” You have engaged in such yourself. I believe its called free expression, something your side seems to need to control and stifle with just this kind of “objection.”
“And yet your hypotheses on the reverend’s political affiliation, views on guns, and choice of bumper stickers aren’t? ”
Free expression. My opinion, clearly stated as such, and based on about thirty years of observing how the left thinks. I’m certain if you tried you could recognize this freedom to express an opinion in your own writings.
I’d say the difference between us is that I don’t have to be right or feel a compelling need for agreement! I suspect you do.
“There is no right for them to have those weapons bought by the government.”
IF our government is spending our money wisely it is buying these guns for their reliability, precision, and price. The government decides. for the manufacturer there is no such right implied or intended.
“It also makes it pretty clear that they didn’t want the army to know what they were doing.”
Judge and jury…and you don’t know the business owners from Adam! Isn’t this where we began this conversation?
What absolute petty nonsense this entire complaint represents! Whoever is behind it had to be looking, hard to even discover the verses were there.
“…the fact that they never informed the military shows that they probably knew they wouldn’t have gotten approval for this”
another assumption about people you do not know.
My opinion is that it wouldn’t have occurred to them that it would cause a problem of any kind. not everyone thinks like the person who finds this such a huge offense.
“The deception is the real problem here.”
Deception? Another assumption elevated to the order of truth for the cause.
People have the right to be offended. They do not have the right to bully and accuse to force others to bend to their will. Liberty is for all, remember?
We have enough to be concerned about without elevating petty offenses to such significance.
The radical left uses our liberties and rights to its political ambitions. They are engaged in small targeted acts of war. This example is no exception. We should all investigate their underlying intentions lest we succumb to their totalitarian ambitions.
Hypocrite Liam Nieson gets his payback from gun manufacturer.
“PARA USA, the firearms company that provided guns for use in the movie “Taken 3,” is cutting all ties with the film’s star, Liam Neeson, after he made a number of fiery anti-gun comments in a recent interview.
Not only did PARA USA say that the company “regrets its decision to provide firearms for use in the film,” the gun manufacturer vowed to never again provide firearms for any future films starring Neeson.
“While the film itself is entertaining, comments made by its Irish-born star during press junkets reflect a cultural and factual ignorance that undermines support of the Second Amendment and American liberties,” the company wrote in a Facebook post on Thursday.”
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/01/16/company-that-provided-guns-for-taken-3-does-more-than-talk-after-reading-liam-neesons-fiery-anti-gun-rant/
OFF TOPIC: The great “unifier” lambastes Europe for failing to better integrate Islam.
Yeah, blame Islamic self imposed isolationism on the countries stupid enough to allow these people to immigrate. Brilliant.
http://www.straitstimes.com/news/world/united-states/story/europe-needs-better-integrate-muslim-communities-obama-20150117
OFF TOPIC AGAIN:
Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the Susan B. Anthony List, told reporters at a press conference Thursday at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., that “abortion-centered feminism is dead” and support for protecting the rights of unborn children – including female babies – is gaining ground.
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/penny-starr/pro-life-advocate-women-s-rights-include-women-waiting-be-born
Pie: “Yeah, blame Islamic self imposed isolationism on the countries stupid enough to allow these people to immigrate. Brilliant.”
“Islamic self imposed isolationism” isn’t really happening, though. Daniel Pipes just admitted the other day that “no go zones” are a myth and he was wrong to start it without evidence.
http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/2006/11/the-751-no-go-zones-of-france
But please, tell us more about how not bigoted you are toward “these people” who you think should not be allowed to immigrate.
Clarification on post #8. The “vile words” list was from the Daily Kos article Barb posted not “One Marine’s View” posted by me in case there was confusion.
Peggy at #11…I love it when people just poke them back.
I like Mr. Neeson as an actor and have enjoyed his film.
I don’t get what would motivate a man that has played a character retired from his former job and operating as a CIVILIAN who takes it upon himself to rescue his daughter (his wife in 2) from the bad guys using guns and causing all kinds of damage to citizens and infrastructure in the process…UNLESS he’s taking hits from lefties in the business. Otherwise it is pretty hypocritical.
Pie at #12…that’s our guy running like crazy to catch up.
Listening to the leader of America preaching to Europe about assimilation after his own divisive record regarding race and class and his appeasing, conciliatory approach to fighting radical Islamic terrorism is a bit galling. (Two more years)
Chris it is not unusual for nations to screen people before allowing them to immigrate. It’s smart policy for many reasons but especially when war is being waged by radicals with bombs and such…they don’t wear badges ya know.
Suddenly Daniel Pipes is brilliant? Interesting how you can just turn on and off like that.
But you apparently didn’t read to the end:
Pipes does regret using the term, but it doesn’t mean there isn’t a problem or that everything’s just peachy in some neighborhoods either.
I don’t see the problem with the term, “no-go-zone.” I wouldn’t walk into many neighborhoods in America because they are hostile and dangerous to whites (Or wrong gang associated people of color). We recognize its a problem and don’t seem able to do anything about it. I feel for people stuck in these areas and for the officers that have to deal with the crime and violence. I wouldn’t hesitate to refer to them as no-go-zones in conversation.
Pie at #13. That’s wonderful news!
“Suddenly Daniel Pipes is brilliant? Interesting how you can just turn on and off like that.”
I never said he was “brilliant.” But when the originator of a myth comes out and says it was a myth, that is significant.
“I don’t see the problem with the term, “no-go-zone.” I wouldn’t walk into many neighborhoods in America because they are hostile and dangerous to whites (Or wrong gang associated people of color). We recognize its a problem and don’t seem able to do anything about it. I feel for people stuck in these areas and for the officers that have to deal with the crime and violence. I wouldn’t hesitate to refer to them as no-go-zones in conversation.”
My point all along has been that this is not a uniquely Muslim problem, and the areas identified generally suffer from the same problems that most poor minority communities suffer from. It’s less a result of sharia and more a result of poverty.
Of course every citizen is free to decide what neighborhoods they feel safe venturing to, and you may feel the term “no go zones” is appropriate to describe unsafe neighborhoods. My issue was with using this term to claim that there were areas where sharia law had completely overtaken the laws of their countries. Hopefully we can now agree that that meaning of the term was incorrect.
Re: But please, tell us more about how not bigoted you are toward “these people” who you think should not be allowed to immigrate.
Here we go with the bigot slur again.
Dear Chris, I live in the real world. That does not make me a bigot, except in your demented eyes.
Chris: “My issue was with using this term to claim that there were areas where sharia law had completely overtaken the laws of their countries. Hopefully we can now agree that that meaning of the term was incorrect.”
I don’t agree. I read (and posted) an article about Muslims taking over a school district and imposing their rules, like dividing the children into boys and girls and forcing all boys to learn the Koran and to pray. I also read an article about a French town in which a neighborhood was preventing police and non Muslims to enter.
It is necessary for the west tom openly push back against instances such as these as well as beheadings, honor killings, or assault in public places to let extremists know we expect them to assimilate and will not tolerate acts of dominance or intimidation.
As I wrote, the term does not bother me.
Tina: “I don’t agree. I read (and posted) an article about Muslims taking over a school district and imposing their rules, like dividing the children into boys and girls and forcing all boys to learn the Koran and to pray”
Where did this happen and what was the source?
“. I also read an article about a French town in which a neighborhood was preventing police and non Muslims to enter.”
Yes, we’ve all read articles like that. The problem is that they are filled with assertions rather than evidence. Pipes, once he actually ventured such areas, realized that nothing like this was actually happening.
Pie at #21: yeah, because there is nothing bigoted about saying a whole class of people should not be allowed to immigrate!
In a recent discussion you randomly called me a “transsexual” as an insult. Thanks for revealing yet another group of people you have such blind, seething hatred for that you think their very existence is a joke.
I don’t appreciate you using your bigotry towards the transgender community as way to denigrate me and mark me as beneath you. Leave them out of this.
Calling you a bigot is not a slur, it is a recognition of your own slurs which serve to dehumanize entire classes of people.
After being mercilessly mocked by Europeans on Twitter, Fox News has issued a correction, stating that “there is no credible evidence” of Muslim no go zones in Europe, and saying they “deeply regret” their error.
This must be one of the most significant and sincere corrections in the network’s history.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2015/01/18/fox-news-corrects-apologizes-for-no-go-zone-remarks/
Chris: “Where did this happen and what was the source?”
There were several sources actually. Unfortunately you have to be a subscriber to read the full article in the Sunday Times.
A Guardian article is fully accessible, “Twenty-five Birmingham schools inspected over Islamist ‘takeover plot’.”
The Independent also covered this story.
As did the BBC
And your favorite source to bash, The Dailymail also carried it:
“Pipes, once he actually ventured such areas, realized that nothing like this was actually happening.
With all due respect to Pipes, he admittedly visited only a handful of towns. That hardly makes his experience absolute or all inclusive.
I don’t know the motivation behind his decision to back peddle on the term “no-go-zones.” It could be that he decided it was too vague carrying the potential of miss-perception.
Your interpretation, that this means these problems don’t exist excludes his writing: “That said, there is a reason why the French government calls these regions sensibles (sensitive, delicate). They contain many social pathologies (unemployment, drugs, political extremism), they seethe with antagonism toward the majority society, and are prone to outbreaks of violence.
It could be that Pipes missed the days when violence broke out in the towns he visited.
And by the way had you read the entire article you would have noticed Daniel Pipes didn’t “start” the use of the term, his commenters did. He used it after two people from different countries had used the term on his blog in comments, one a Norwegian and the other an Australian. Their experiences should not be casually dismissed either just because you and others don’t like the term. Even if complete takeover of the areas in question are not fully realized the evidence that there is an attempt to to do so should be acknowledged and dealt with if we are to hold on to our western values and the liberty we enjoy.
A district in Paris was the site of Muslim intimidation (2010) according to a Frontpage Magazine blogger (see photo):
Some of the materials on links associated with this article have been taken down. Video and an article can still be viewed http://tundratabloids.com/2009/12/french-citizens-call-on-sarkozy-to-stop.html“>here, “FRENCH CITIZENS CALL ON SARKOZY TO STOP ILLEGAL MUSLIM PRAYERS IN CITY STREETS OF PARIS”
In 2010 the French were more appeasing than they seem to be now. As with the rise of Nazism, this enemy cannot be appeased or dismissed as harmless. And these are not “assertions”…evidence and official involvement are both noted in the stories!
“This must be one of the most significant and sincere corrections in the network’s history.”
Perhaps in the history of all media!
I don’t remember having seen or heard of such (Four or five in different time slots by two FOX contributors) from the left/mainstream media even after countless errors, including errors of omission, have been pointed out. People have been let go or put on leave for manufacturing news or using unscrupulous tactics during elections but only after weeks and weeks of denial.
How many left media outlets will apologize for their appeasement and denial brand of reporting after this threat has been allowed to metastasize under current leadership?
Time will tell.
Tina, thanks for the links.
I agree that the attempts by this Islamist organization to corrupt these schools is incredibly disturbing. Luckily it seems like the government responded appropriately and shut down “Operation Trojan Horse” (man, can a group be more intentionally sinister?) before it spread too far.
I’ve never denied that some Muslim groups have attempt to impose Sharia law in Western countries. I just don’t we much evidence that they have been, or will be, successful.
Some of their demands reminded me a bit of the demands of extremist Christian groups in the west, particularly the complaints about sex education and “teaching about homosexuals.” Of course, Christian extremism rarely breeds actual terrorism and violence while this is much more common in Islamic extremism, so I am not making a 1-1 comparison. It is important that we protect the rights of students to a secular and non-partisan education. Teaching about religion is necessary, but it should not venture into the realm of evangelism as this Islamist group attempted to do.
Chris: “Some of their demands reminded me a bit of the demands of extremist Christian groups in the west, particularly the complaints about sex education and “teaching about homosexuals.” Of course, Christian extremism rarely breeds actual terrorism and violence while this is much more common in Islamic extremism, so I am not making a 1-1 comparison”
Big of you.
When I was a child sex was not taught in public school at all. Individual family ideals and mores were private and nobodies business. Explicit sex education was the parents job…consideration and a sensible position that it is the parents who are responsible for their children until they reach the age of consent. We’ve moved way passed “sensible” now. Many educators believe it’s okay to assist a pregnant teen in getting an abortion without parental approval. A few think its okay to have sex with their students. Too many have very little or zero respect for the religious views of what you call “extremists.” Apparently having the gall to hold a different view about what the Bible teaches on the certain subjects makes them hating monsters. I don’t see the connection as being universal myself and that makes those who do think all who believe that homosexuality is a sin on par with that part of radical Islam that insist we all accept THEIR interpretations.
That knife cuts both ways.
When my children were in grammar school the school system decided expanding the basic reproduction health class (one for boys; one for girls) to a mixed class more explicit about human sexual reproduction was a good idea. Some parents, they said, were not getting the job done. The people thought it would be a good idea to put this morally sensitive subject in the hands of “professional educators.” And thus began the slide into social sexual values propaganda that passes for sex education in our schools today. It only took about fifty years but now our government gets to decide the moral values our children will learn in what was once a class on “basic reproduction”.
One could argue separation of church and state but they would be shouted down as an “extremist” nut or bigot.
See how easily we give up our most basic freedoms?
“And thus began the slide into social sexual values propaganda that passes for sex education in our schools today. It only took about fifty years but now our government gets to decide the moral values our children will learn in what was once a class on “basic reproduction”.”
What “moral values” do you believe are being taught in sex education classes?
Unless a class is “abstinence only,” sex education classes usually do not contain a moral component, focusing more on the biological and safety aspects. I thought that was your problem with them?
Chris: “What “moral values” do you believe are being taught in sex education classes?”
Don’t play coy with me Chris.
You’re the guy that identifies Christians who take Bible teachings on homosexuality, marriage, and abortion very seriously as “extremists,” so you know exactly what moral values I’m referring to…and the indoctrination isn’t just happening in sex education classes.
Morality, particularly very personal/spiritual morality, is religious in nature, whether or not you adhere to a particular religious practice.
The public school has no business teaching, or advancing, the specifics of these values.
Wikipedia on Sex Education:
These are very broad parameters that can be interpreted in many ways. Whose accepted ethical ideals are the basis of sex education today?
The progressive left, through intimidation politics, media, entertainment, the law, and our public school system have been making sure that “accepted values” in America shifted toward the most extreme liberal values. As expressed by the radicals of the sixties that amounts to themes like, “love the one you’re with,” and “do what you wanna do,” without regard to religious or traditional moral values.
I don’t expect you to be able to observe the difference, or the differences in our children or society, you haven’t lived through the transition.
It is really quite simple. Human sexual reproduction requires a male and a female. Everything else is not sex, it is just getting your jollies.
Now, of course, these days all it takes is a male and female donor using a test tube or a turkey baster to procreate. As Woody Allen said in the movie Sleeper (was it Sleeper?), “I prefer the old fashioned way.”