By Frosty Wooldridge
Each week, I write well-researched, straightforward and hard hitting editorials on the state of immigration, environment, politics and many other accelerating dilemmas facing America. Those op-eds expose politicians, presidents, ecological decline, the War on Drugs, etc.
Yet, the United States, led by its current president, a black man named Barack Obama as well as a white dominated U.S. Congress continue leading Americans on a destructive path while pretending to make things better for American citizens.
One look at the $10.3 trillion national debt, annual $700 billion trade deficit, abysmal War on Drugs, money and lives down a rat hole in the Iraq War, endless Afghanistan War, gas prices, housing foreclosures, 32.2 million Americans subsisting on food stamps, water shortages in California along with their $26 billion debt, 15 million unemployed Americans, 200 million fat or obese Americans facing a humongous health care crisis—well folks—we find ourselves in a world of hurt.
In an interview with James Howard Kunstler, author of The Long Emergency, on my radio show, www.themicroeffect.com ,“Connecting the Dots” on Wednesday nights at 6:00 p.m.,MT, he said, “America is an un-serious country.”
Here in 2009, we stagger along burning 20 million barrels of oil daily with 12 million of those barrels imported from hostile Middle Eastern countries that dislike us as the Great Satan, i.e., Western culture. If one or two nasty terrorists commandeered any of those countries to stop their oil supply to us—we, my fellow Americans, are screwed!
Loss of that oil would cripple this society within weeks. Without oil, grocery store shelves would run bare within three days!
We tip-toe SO on a perilous edge 24/7! We continue thinking that ‘it’, the American Way of Life, meaning endless water, oil, food and everything will continue as it is today.
Former president George H.W. Bush said, “The American way of life is not negotiable.”
Mother Nature replied, “Wanna’ bet!”
As to the War on Drugs, it stands as the greatest failure of the last and this century. It’s a joke, but costs billions to continue the charade. Year after year, Americans shell out $80 billion for that charade with a total over $1 trillion since 1971. My brother, who plies the Halls of Congress, told me about the stupid reasoning on the Hill he heard last week. All of Congress wants to solve the War on Drugs: “Who is the funniest? Of all the Members that have made an amusing, memorable statement in a hearing, Congressman Dan Burton (R-IN) wins the gold medal. During a hearing on the “Mess in Mexico” he addressed the chairman and said: ‘Mr. Chairman, I have said for many years that the War on Drugs is a failure, not getting the job done. I will try any new idea, any anything to improve the situation, except legalization.’”
My brother, Officer Howard Wooldridge said, “This reminded me of the man who went to his doctor and said he would do anything to avoid lung cancer, except give up smoking cigarettes.”
When I write about a sustainable civilization and the core of what causes our dilemmas, writers and readers explode out of the woodwork to tell me how wrong, off-base or racist my op-eds. Most of them haven’t traveled out of their home states let alone across six continents to see the world first hand. I witnessed what I write about!
Oftentimes, writers sling such epithets as ‘racism’,‘xenophobia’ and ‘bigotry’. They hurl innuendoes like racial intolerance, ad nausea. Responders at Aspen Post call out all sorts of names from very limited understandings, llimited perspectives, and yes, right now, they enjoy safety as they don’t live in Los Angeles, Miami, New York, Chicago or any other mutlicultural, diveristy hornets nests. Safety breeds arrogance, but, in the end, that won’t save future generations.
What all those name callers don’t understand stems from the fact that I am a U.S. Marine service brat—totally integrated since birth. I taught and still teach in the inner city. I am an 18 year veteran volunteer ski instructor for the handicapped as I teach all races, creeds and colors. I work out in a totally integrated recreation center where I am a minority.
Yet, people hurl names at anyone that dares to state the obvious.
In the United States, humans of all races, creeds and colors dominate cities, towns and villages. One ethnic group cannot continue blaming another race for its own shortcomings. It’s not one particular race’s fault that another ethnic group suffers a 76 percent high school dropout rate or that 70 percent of its teens are unwed mothers. Or, that one or two races commit huge percentages of crimes, rapes or murders—because of another race. Or that one ethnic group dominates prison cells so it must be the fault of another race!
You may note that 2.3 million people in U.S. prisons enjoy representation by all races, creeds and colors. Rich to poor serve in prison! In other words, individuals that choose criminal acts pay a criminal’s price.
In the final analysis, every individual of every race enjoys, under the U.S. Constitution, personal accountability and personal responsibility.
When you study, work and apply yourself in school, you move forward toward success. When you choose right over wrong, you choose freedom. When you choose to act in a lawful manner, you enjoy incredible opportunities.
Yes, I write about immigration’s multiple facets and growing consequences. When you read my work across the nation, you will see responders hurling names at me for bringing up the obvious. They can toss names, but they cannot undermine my integrity or my courage to state the obvious.
This civilization stands in the crosshairs of a 21st century phenomenon unknown heretofore to humanity: massive, unrelenting and incompatible immigration that brews a volatile and incendiary mixture that faces all our progeny. We face an unsustainable future via adding 100 million people to our already overloaded civilization, yet few understand it or ‘get it’ or ‘offer’ solutions. Most ignore it or deny it.
In the end, it will not be about race, creed or color—but in fact, the survival of our civilization.
Again, as I stated in my book, AMERICA ON THE BRINK: THE NEXT ADDED 100 MILLION AMERICANS, we must enact a 10 year moratorium on all immigration and reduce all immigration to 100,000 a year maximum if the United States of America hopes to survive into the 21st century.
Screaming out names like ‘racist’ won’t cut it. Mother Nature doesn’t care about your race and she always bats last.
America is an un-serious country facing serious results. Racism will be the least of our national problems!
##
Frosty,
I’d just like to make the suggestion that if you want to be taken seriously as a population expert, you might want to drop the whole “multi-culturalism will ruin America” bit.
You make very good arguments as to the dangers and reality of overpopulation, but as soon as you start talking about Latino and Muslim immigrants diluting or polluting American culture, you are going to be labeled a racist, no ifs ands or buts.
Just stick to the facts on overpopulation and leave out the racial projections and you should be fine.
Interesting to continue on the path of screaming ‘racism’.
In Muslim countries, women cannot vote, suffer female genital mutilation, cannot drive, cannot leave their homes by themselves, cannot become educated, are stoned for adultery, must cover their entire bodies in Burka’s and are totally subjugated and dominated by males. Muslims have overwhelmed France, Holland, UK and other nations where they never incorporate into the host country. This past week, in Chicago, Islam held its first conference where it intends to take over the United States of America with Sharia Law.
When Sharia Law becomes the norm in the US, Sue Gray will not be allowed to write her opinions. She won’t be able to scream ‘racism’ at that point. She won’t enjoy any freedoms that she enjoys today. At some point, she will lose her American Culture and be forced into Muslim Culture. That is Islam’s final dictate.
Just a fact and reality. Deal with it. FW
In Mexico, racism pervades that culture from the highest to the lowest realms. Mexican culture engages dog fights, cat fights, bull fights, horse tripping and terrible treatment of animals. Mexican men abuse women, rape is common and drinking and driving are the norm with no penalties. Bribery is the norm and corruption continues unchecked.
You couldn’t possibly try to bring American culture or language or religion into a Muslim country or Mexico. They are highly ethnocentric and un-tolerant.
When you speak of ‘Racism’, Islamic countries define it and Mexico demands it. They don’t like the US or Great Satan of Western Culture.
The Sue Grays of the world enjoy the luxury of their culture, but would apologize themselves out of it by giving it away to other obtuse cultures such as Mexico’s and Islam’s. FW
Oh brother!
Are you really one of those nutcases who believes a few Islamic extremists are going to take over the entire world and turn it into an Islamic caliphate? Please! That is so ridiculous.
The United States is never going to submit to Sharia Law and I am never going to be silenced by Muslims in America. We’ve got the most powerful military in the world, so no one is going to be able to successfully attack, invade and take us over. Plus, there are enough guns in this country in the hands of citizens to protect ourselves. Some of those guns belong to me and my family and we wouldn’t hesitate to use them.
Don’t even try to scare me into silence with your bullshit premise that Muslims are going to take over my country and I won’t be able to express my opinion anymore. That tired old tactic has been tried many times and never succeeded.
Ironically, the only people trying to shut me up are my non-Muslim fellow Americans.
Pointing out the faults of other cultures and countries doesn’t excuse your own. America is supposed to be better than that. Americans are supposed to be tolerant, welcoming, and fair. We’re supposed to set an example, not go around the world bludgeoning other people for their lack of compliance with our rules and ideals.
You claim you don’t want America to exhibit the racism, bigotry, injustice and intolerance evident in other cultures, yet these are the very traits you are promoting in your bid to keep certain people out of America. Can’t you even recognize your own hypocrisy?
Again, if you don’t want to be called a racist, then stop acting like one!
[Are you really one of those nutcases who believes a few Islamic extremists are going to take over the entire world and turn it into an Islamic caliphate? Please! That is so ridiculous.]
Naive.
Oh, sorry Mitch, I forgot you’re one of those nutcases too.
Regardless of whether there is a real desire on the part of a small segment of the population to take over the world, and I’m not arguing against that reality, the possibility of it actually happening is ZERO.
Besides, I’ll take naivete’ over xenophobic paranoia any day.
Throwing logic at Frosty won’t work, he’s fully invested in this “crisis”.
I can go through and point out the lies and deception in almost everything he writes, but he’ll just say I’m being emotional. His lies and deceptions are truths to himself and therefore in his mind his just getting the truth out and doing a good deed. I’m going to guess that Frosty has a good heart but its been obscured by ignorance prejudice. His pride won’t allow him to see even the possibility of him not knowing everything, much less being wrong.
Frosty’s comment that people in a Muslim country will not accept American culture is untrue. When I was in Iran, young people liked American music and and were interested in talking to me. They do reject Western materialism. There are more Iranian women in universities then men, they drive, vote and can walk in the streets without men. Iran is about 89 % Shia Muslim. So making generalizations about Muslim countries is unfair.
One of the worst places for women is in Saudi Arabia, one of our friends.
Racism is very much alive in Israel and the Israeli occupied West Bank (Palestine). In Israel, Israeli Arabs have different color license plates, go to different schools than Jews, have only about 4 % of their taxes spent on them, rarely if ever get their building permits approved, don’t get post offices, road repairs, garbage pick up, etc. in their neighborhoods.
Parts of the below article give examples of racism by Israeli Jews (settlers) living illegally in the West Bank in their Jews only housing with their Jews only raods:
“Security
by Hannah Mermelstein
July 20, 2009
“The war is with the Arabs.”
I saw this sign as I was entering Nablus last week, again on my way to Ramallah, and again near Bethlehem. The phrase is printed in Hebrew, presumably by Israeli settlers, on huge signs throughout the West Bank. Israeli racism rarely shocks me anymore, but its blatant display still makes me stop and catch my breath as I translate it into other contexts. Imagine driving through the middle of a predominantly black neighborhood in a US city or town and seeing a humongous sign that says, “The war is with the Blacks.”
Most discussions I see in the media about security ignore the Palestinian people’s right to security. “The war is with the Arabs” is a new sign, as far as I know, but for years in the West Bank I have seen stars of David scrawled on Palestinian shops and homes, and signs like “Death to Arabs” and “Kahane was right” (Kahane was an extremist political leader who promoted ethnic cleansing of Palestinian people; this sign is essentially equivalent to “Hitler was right” in the middle of a Jewish neighborhood).
Since 1948, Palestinian people inside Israel have experienced erasure and denial of their identities that is perhaps stronger than that of any other group of Palestinian people. I visited a friend in Lyd last week who lives on Giborai Yisrael (“Heroes of Israel”) Street. Driving around the Palestinian neighborhoods in Lyd, we passed roads bearing the names of Herzl, Jabotinsky, and other Zionist leaders. None of the old Arabic street names remain. Even the large cities with considerable Palestinian populations are now seeing the Arabic names officially erased from the signs. In Arabic script, “Yaffa” will become “Yafo,” “Nasra” will become “Natzeret,” and “Al Quds” will become “Yerushalayim.”
.
I met a woman in Jerusalem who was displaced from her home by settlers, physically removed from her house by dozens of Israeli soldiers in the middle of the night. Twice a refugee (1948 and 2008), Um Kamel currently lives in a tent near her house that has been destroyed and re-pitched six times in the past six months. ”
Hannah Mermelstein is a co-founder of Birthright Unplugged and lives in Boston, Philadelphia and Ramallah.
Sue,
[Regardless of whether there is a real desire on the part of a small segment of the population to take over the world, and I'm not arguing against that reality, the possibility of it actually happening is ZERO.]
Why? Because you declare it so?
What were the chances of Poland’s emerging republican movement in the 1980s? What were the chances of a scant population of colonists declaring autonomy from England back in 1776? What were the chances that a vastly out-numbered band of Scottish forces could vanquish the military of the British Crown at Stirling Bridge on 9-11… 1297?
Without these historical precedents, perhaps you could have parlayed your odds-making abilities into a high-paying Vegas gig!
[Why? Because you declare it so?]
No. Because fantasies rarely take physical form. Because if you really think about the logistics of taking over the world and making everyone submit to a rigid religious system that is incompatible with modern society’s established norms, the improbability steps up and slaps you in the face.
If it doesn’t wake you up, then you must be having the same dream the Islamists are. Which incidentally is not unlike the dream of the Christians: that we are on the verge of a One World Government headed by Satan who will ultimately be vanquished by Jesus when he sets up his kingdom on earth to rule over the faithful Christians after every non-believer has been sent to Hell.
As you know, I’m not a big believer in the veracity of religious fantasy.
One more thing…
Let’s presume that some time in the near future, Islamists do actually try to take over the world. I’m guessing it would only be possible if all of the Islamic nations banded together, pooled their weaponry, were somehow able to capture the U.S. Naval fleet so they could invade our shores and join with the millions of Islamic immigrants and citizens in America, set up a military occupation, take away all of our guns, shred the Constitution and institute Sharia Law. That’s a pretty big operation which must be coordinated among Muslims the world over. So the only way this works is if “a real desire on the part of a small segment of the population” becomes the common goal of all Muslims and Islamic nations. Then Islam (not any particular nation state) becomes an oppressive occupying regime.
But, your examples of improbable uprisings were all instances of people fighting against an oppressive occupying regime to gain their freedom. Exactly what would happen if Islamists tried to take over the world.
Thank you for inadvertently making my point.
A few nutcases, Sue. Far from it. Tens of millions of Muslims want the Caliphate to happen. Also, it’s important not to dismiss the “take over the world” scenario as unlikely because the danger is clearly on a case by case, country by country business.
Best, Michael!
I didn’t say “a few nutcases” I said “a small segment of the population” which is exactly the case. Even if there are “tens of millions” as you claim. it’s a drop in the bucket of the total Muslim population.
OK so say the danger is case by case, country by country. Do you really think that any country, especially the U.S. is going to be overpowered by their minority Muslim population? Not only would our government intervene (remember Waco?), but you clearly underestimate the will of the people to defend themselves.
Besides, Islamic leaders can’t even control their own Muslim populations, so how could they possibly control hundreds of millions of Christians, Buddhists, Hindus, Rednecks, Hippies, etc.?
It’s about as unrealistic a proposition as little green men from outer space with ray guns taking over the earth, but there are a few nutcases who believe that could happen too.
I have no interest in living in any caliphate as promulgated by the reactionary heretics in Al Queada, it’s affiliates, it’s supporters, sympathizers, allies or any other revisionist, faithless, moralizing, political, power lusting self indulgent murderers.
I am not interested in living under the cloak of oppression that would be offered by the moralizing Christianites and adulterous hypocrites, like Sanford, Vitter, Ensign, Craig and the rest of those holier than thou types.
If Jews, Hindus and Zoroastrians were to come up with some schemes similar to the politically inspired heretic babble — I will be against them too.
Oh what the heck, throw in the racists too — whoever you are, whatever you look like and whatever your hatred. You know who you are, the ones believing in the “divinity” of idiot constructed races, whatever one they believe they are or were assigned too or told they were.
I am not quite to the point of suggesting that all of the crackpot extremists, who identify with some corrupted religion/racial construct, where they are the corruption, be run through with fixed bayonets and wiped out entirely. Of course, one could easily imagine these wastes of DNA, all being herded together in an immense fenced arena and handed pitchforks for great spectator sport. They would kill themselves off with no prodding, betting, pay or even a thought amongst themselves. Nevertheless, it is very possible that the continued ascent of humanity, may require a solution to stem the tide of evil, hiding behind “religion” and “race,” the two biggest driving forces of retrograde “human” behavior (holocaust, ethnic cleansing, war, slavery, slaughter, manifest destiny, or any other manifestation of hatred, based on someone elses parents).
So who are these “people?” All of those who take out of context, revise, edit, omit, juxtapose, corrupt and defile the Torah, The Bible, The Quaran and the beauty therein, especially for purposes of land, power, and currency/wealth. We know who these “people” are and yet tolerate their murderous hate, because it is polite, and because we don’t want to make waves, and because in most cases, laws may specifically have them concerned about taking action themselves (although they are entirely supportive of proxy actions by others) and they haven’t actually acted out on their hate, just vomited hatred in front of you.
Extirmination may be the only cure for this. On this subject, Marx may have been correct. Those of you filled with the beauty of love and faith, have no room for the hateful spewage cluttering our weltgeist.
On another level, I do hope when I think about it, their “souls” are ground to sausage by the “god” they have chosen for themselves. A soul sausage feast for the satan they work for. I am not a christianite, and this consideration feels like a pollution of my spirit soul.
Hopefully, they will give up their works before that fate, so Sapiens can become sapient.
Frosted Flake;
yes, descending to your sophmoric juvenalism, is annoying, but as Jack Droy with no GED, I want to tell you that the pleasant experiences of your hike, which might be nearly universal, would be viewed with less than an jaundiced eye, if the manipulations of issues and toxic venom that you also are associated with were divorced.
So a few questions for you, O learned one of letters and laurels;
1) Is immigration a fundamental problem, or a symptom of something else?
2) Is the use of our roads, by trucks of extra territorial registration and origin a fundamental problem, or a symptom of something else?
3) Is your attitude conducive towards assimilation of legal immigrants? — yes an opinion.
4) How would immigration, or lack thereof, solve planetary population problems if any exist?
5) If planetary population problems exist, what population range would you suggest with present technology and political hierarchies/social organization?
6) Would the concept of nation states be a hinderance to YOUR vision?
Something coherent, cogent, without links unless you simply can’t explain it, precise (you will need this for those without GEDs) and then concise. Simple nuts and bolts for the heathen will do.
Surely with your background in teaching, there will be something besides spouting a wellspring of your cut and pasted miasma of links.
Sue,
First off, on this subject and others like it, you err by construing anything I say as supporting your views or making your point.
That out of the way, to assert that defeating the U.S. requires military confrontation and invasion is stunningly myopic. Stateless entities like Al Qaeda lack a formal military. Nevertheless, they proved quite capable of mounting a devastating attack armed with weapons no more lethal than box cutters. Moreover, they did so with nineteen young men, not some united effort by Muslims the world over to take over the U.S. Navy and hit the beaches of Los Angeles County.
I find revealing your broader point: that if radical Islamists tried to take over the world they would do so to achieve freedom against an oppressive, occupying regime—a position I’ve long suspected but haven’t read so explicitly from your words. I’ll do you the courtesy you don’t extend to others and refrain from drawing broader conclusions about your views.
Cheers,
Mitch,
You assert that taking over the world would be as easy as hijacking a plane with boxcutters? Sorry, I find your belief that the minority of Muslims in America who want to “destroy” us or replace our laws with Sharia would be able to overpower not only our entire government and military,but every redblooded American who owns a gun, well, it’s just ludicrous.
And even if they did succeed in overthrowing our government and replacing it with Sharia Law, how would they enforce that on the American people? 19 men with boxcutters? Are we, here in the Roaring Fork valley going to willingly obey Sharia Law? Who’s going to make us? Without massive troops stationed throughout America, there is no way we would submit to their laws or rule. Americans can learn how to make roadside IEDs too. America under Islamic occupation would look like Iraq under American occupation only hundreds of times worse. If you can see any other possibility, please explain.
Your belief that my “broader point” is “that if radical Islamists tried to take over the world they would do so to achieve freedom against an oppressive, occupying regime,” proves that your prejudice against me has completely distorted your understanding of my actual words.
In comment #10 you tried to defend the premise that Islamists could take over the world, by giving examples of people fighting for their freedom against oppressive power, not examples of people becoming an oppressive power.
Please read my comment again…
“Then Islam (not any particular nation state) becomes an oppressive occupying regime. But, your examples of improbable uprisings were all instances of people fighting against an oppressive occupying regime to gain their freedom. Exactly what would happen if Islamists tried to take over the world.”
In this scenario, Islam is the oppressive occupying power and my premise is and always has been that Americans would fight “against an oppressive occupying regime to gain their freedom.”
Thus, by your examples of people fighting for their freedom, you DID whether you like it or not, make my point.
But because YOU lump all Muslims together under the banner of “Islamists who want to take over the world” you have completely misconstrued my defense of Palestinians who ARE fighting an oppressive occupying regime, as a defense of ALL Islamist extremists and their cause.
I’ve relentlessly tried to pry this notion out of your head by showing that there is a distinction between the Palestinian’s struggle for independence and Islamic jihad. But alas…to no avail. Simply because of your own prejudices against Muslims you believe your own delusion about what you’ve “long suspected but haven’t read so explicitly from [my] words.”
The reason you haven’t read so explicitly is because your suspicions about me are dead wrong. Maybe in addition to your commitment to “refrain from drawing broader conclusions about [my] views,” you should think about trying to comprehend my actual words in their actual context.
And while you’re at it, pay attention to what the Israelis are doing to the Palestinians and see if you can find any reason whatsoever for the Palestinian people to fight for their freedom against an oppressive occupying regime…other than Islamic extremist’s desire to take over the world
Sue,
It’s not my belief that you think radical Islamists would be as justified in attacking the U.S. as any of the historical examples I cited were in fighting for freedom against their oppressors. Those were your own words–before you edited the penultimate paragraph of comment #11…
You have no basis for making the assertions you do about my views of Muslims or Islam. If you took the time to assess what you do know about me, reason would dictate that your characterizations of my views of Muslims, Islam, and Palestinians are not only baseless, but also offensive and dangerously close to libel. Sadly, your argument of convenience again reveals your desperation over your single-sighted efforts to advocate a weak position.
Really, Sue. Modifying your comment was beneath you.
Mitch, I didn’t edit or modify my comment. Are you sure you didn’t read it wrong at first and then think I edited it when you went back and read it later? I wrote what I meant and meant what I wrote.
I think you are still completely misunderstanding my meaning. When I said “Exactly what would happen if Islamists tried to take over the world,” I was referring to Americans rising up against the oppressive occupying regime of the Islamists. Not that Islamists were justified in attacking America.
You were arguing in comment #10 that it is entirely possible that Islamic extremists could take over the world because of the “historical precedents” you gave which were, and correct me if I’m wrong, all instances of people fighting FOR their freedom against an oppressive power, NOT examples of an oppressive power taking over a free people and subjecting them to their will.
Your examples did not prove that Islamic extremists could take over the world, they proved that if they tried, people would rise up against them. Which is exactly what I’ve been trying to say. My argument is that Islamists can’t take over the world because people like “Poland’s emerging republican movement in the 1980s, a scant population of colonists declaring autonomy from England back in 1776, and a vastly out-numbered band of Scottish forces could vanquish the military of the British Crown at Stirling Bridge on 9-11…1297,” wouldn’t let them.
I still think the reason you misunderstand what I write is because you have a prejudicial belief that I “think radical Islamists would be as justified in attacking the U.S.” You, like Michael Conniff, hold the belief that I defend Muslim extremists and support their cause, just because I defend Palestinians and their cause.
But you fail to see that they are two completely different causes. Islamic Extremists want to take over the world and establish a caliphate. I do not support that, nor do I see any justification in it whatsoever. Palestinians just want the occupation to end so they can live free and safe in their own country. My support of them and their cause does not relate in any way to radical religious dreams of conquest.
It’s pretty brash of you to cry foul for me making assertions about your views of Muslims or Islam when that is exactly what you’ve been doing to me all along on Aspen Post, and even up to your latest comment that I “think radical Islamists would be as justified in attacking the U.S.”
Don’t you think its offensive and dangerously close to libel to hear you insist that I think attacking the U.S. is justified? Your long-held suspicion that I’m a terrorist apologist is so ingrained that no matter what I say, you hear: defending terrorism.
I guess it’s true that people only see what they want to see.
Sue,
Talk about brash. You did modify your comment.
I cannot prove this because I’m not in the habit of archiving AP comments, although after this episode it may become necessary. Nevertheless, I know the second to last paragraph of comment #11 is not what you originally commented.
I don’t really blame you for modifying your words, if only because if the words you deleted were a true reflection of your thinking, I’m not sure that’s something you’d want widely known…
I can’t believe you are stuck on the idea that you’ve somehow finally caught me in revealing my true allegiance to Islam and hatred of America (and on top of that, accusing me of trying to cover it up!). That is the most hateful and damaging thing I’ve ever been accused of, and I never expected to hear it from someone I thought was a friend.
Comment #16: “I find revealing your broader point: that if radical Islamists tried to take over the world they would do so to achieve freedom against an oppressive, occupying regime” proves you are misunderstanding my point, and I don’t think it has anything to do with modifying a comment.
I don’t know why I’m bothering, since your prejudice against me is obviously well engrained, but I’ll try to explain again what I think happened here.
What tripped you up was my flipping your use of those “historical precedents” to pertain to the Americans fighting the Islamists, instead of maintaining your premise that it illustrated how a small group of people (the Islamists) could ostensibly take over the world. Since that’s what you already believe I think, you’ve been unable to disengage from the belief that’s what I wrote.
OK, let me try to paraphrase my comment #11 for you: Though a small group of people might be able to fight a great power to gain their freedom (as in your historical precedents), I don’t believe that a small group of people (Islamists) can possibly win an attempt to subjugate millions of people and take away their freedom, that would take an army, and an Islamic army would then have become an “oppressive, occupying regime,” which would turn Americans into a small group of people fighting a great power to gain their freedom. Hence my comment: “But, your examples of improbable uprisings were all instances of people fighting against an oppressive occupying regime to gain their freedom. Exactly what would happen if Islamists tried to take over the world,” meaning the Americans would fight the Islamists if they tried to take over the world.
Now perhaps I did edit that comment after the fact, as I do sometimes after I read back what I’ve written and found errors in spelling or grammar, or for clarification. I honestly don’t remember every edit I’ve made. But if I did, I absolutely swear that it was NOT because I was trying to conceal a true reflection of my thinking.
There is a way to find out what I originally wrote. Ask Frosty to retrieve my comment, which as the author of this post, he should’ve received in his email. If he didn’t delete it, he can post it here.