Big Frick Dot Com » Muslim

A Clean Start

Big Frick — Tue, 07 Sep 2010 15:15:10 +0000

It’s all clean now.

The thousands of tons of debris are gone. The miles of blinding, choking smoke and ash have been blown or washed away. The blood stained streets and human remains of those who chose to leap from burning and smoke filled offices have been removed and scrubbed clean. The stench of death and molten metal has drifted off into the ozone. The cards and posters desperately seeking the lost have come down and the tears of those not directly and intimately affected have dried.

New York’s infamous “Ground Zero” is a clean, bustling place now. The grass is growing, businesses are operating and New Yorkers hustle past the eternal flame and the remains of the golden globe that once graced the plaza at the World Trade Center.

It’s no wonder that the Muslim group planning their new mosque would pick this place. It’s a beautiful place.

Now.

But even though the site has been disinfected and bathed clean, the memory of what transpired there cannot be eradicated with some water and a little (or in this case a massive amount) of elbow grease.

As the anniversary for the life altering date of September 11, 2001 approaches TV programming is filled with news reels and personal retrospectives of that fateful day. It’s not comfortable to watch. The pain and fear re-grip you as you put yourself back in time and remember what it felt like on that day to have our country attacked and not knowing where the next plane would strike. I remember as clearly as if it were yesterday the pain, the sorrow, the fear, the outrage and knowing that life as we knew it was changed forever that day.

I watched the National Geographic special that focused on New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani and the trials he faced during that day of unthinkable terror. New York was truly gifted to have such a man at the helm during this immeasurable tragedy.

But as I watched again as the flames grew to the point of bringing down the two iconic World Trade Towers in Manhattan I began to wonder, where were the Muslim groups then? As the dust settled and the flames died out there were huge groups of volunteers ready, willing and able to put their own lives on the line to attempt to save anybody that might have survived. Brave firefighters and police who had lost hundreds of their own frantically searched through the dangerous and toxic wreckage in the hopes of finding a glimmer of life. Church groups, aid workers, civic clubs, businesses all pitched in and sent manpower to do whatever was needed. Even of that only meant a shoulder to cry on or a hot cup of coffee. But where were the Muslim groups? And more importantly, where was this Muslim group that now is petitioning to build a 13 story mosque and Muslim learning center in the shadow of ground zero?

I am not suggesting that no Muslims were there lending a hand. I have no idea if there were or how many there were or what sect or mosque they belonged to. But as a group, the only activity I recall any Muslim organization engaging in was a constant media barrage of how unfairly they were being treated in the aftermath.

But it’s clean now.

I do not question the constitutional right of any group to build any place of worship anywhere they chose. But building the planned Cordoba House mosque in what was once yards deep in the debris of a Muslim terrorist act is more than just building a place of religious significance. It is an act of building a place of historic and political significance.

Even the name Cordoba House is an intentional insult directed straight at the city and its people that this Muslim group now asks to be understanding of their religious freedom.

I suggest that rather than allowing the news media or inept brain trust in Washington DC to make this decision it be left up to those that survived the vicious attack and toiled to wash away the blood and debris. A simple vote with a simple ballot.

Do you agree that a Muslim mosque should be built on the grounds of the World Trade Center attack?

a. YES

b. NO

c. FUCK YOU

I know which one gets my vote.

France’s Shining Star

Big Frick — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 23:38:00 +0000

Well, looks like I’m back to calling them French fries.

The world just celebrated the 65th anniversary of D-Day, when the heroic bravery of Americans along with her allies began driving the final nail into Hitler’s Nazi Party coffin. Who would have imagined those 65 years ago that in 2009 we would celebrate a free France with a pacifist socialist American leader and a strong conservative French President?

Obama celebrated D-Day in France after making yet another historic trip to the Middle East where he praised the bloody terrorist organization Hamas as being a key player in the new government of Palestine. He then went on to scold the world for trying to interfere with Iran’s efforts to arm that jihadist nation with world ending nuclear capability. No country has the right to prevent another from developing nuclear weapons, he said. Obama has spent the better part of his early administration trying desperately to placate Muslims at any cost. He has publically credited Muslims with creating everything from mathematics to chicken soup and has constantly chanted the Muslim mantra that they are a religion of peace.

Obama immediately took credit for the sham election held in Iran stating it was his speech that invigorated the voters and forced Iran to hold open and free elections. Not surprisingly he was as quiet as the backseat of the Clinton’s limo when it turned out to be nothing but a charade put on by the real ruling mullahs. After taking almost 20 minutes to recount the entire nation’s votes the Ayatollahs have gone back to what they know best in order to remain in power, big sticks and loaded guns.

Yet in the face of all the worldwide Muslim unrest a surprising strong voice has risen to at least attempt to put an end to oppressive Muslim religious rule in France, that of French President Nicolas Sarkozy.

In a country that knows all too well the scourge of Muslim extremist tactics with occasional bombings and almost nightly acts of vandalism and arson, Sarkozy knows his words will likely cause a huge backlash in Muslim neighborhoods. But as one of the few world leaders still capable of distinguishing right and wrong from rhetoric he has chosen this time and this place to take his stand.

In the first presidential address in 136 years to a joint session of France’s two houses of Parliament, Sarkozy laid out his support for a ban on the Muslim head to toe dress worn by women known as a burqa.

“In our country, we cannot accept that women be prisoners behind a screen, cut off from all social life, deprived of all identity,” Mr. Sarkozy said.

He went on to say “The burqa is not a religious sign, it’s a sign of subservience, a sign of debasement — I want to say it solemnly….. it will not be welcome on the territory of the French Republic.”

He was greeted with several rounds of extended applause even though there are numerous critics in France who fear his stance will only fan the flames of Muslim unrest and possibly stigmatize Muslims.

I agree that their will likely be an increase in bombings and pillaging ordered by the leaders of this religion of peace. A leading Muslim group is already warning of repercussions if a panel even begins studying the burqa. But did it ever dawn on the critics that perhaps the Muslims are stigmatizing themselves by forcing their women into these degrading symbols of second class submission? And as for the repercussions, the Muslim youth in France have been setting fire to block long lines of parked cars almost every night for a year. It’s not like they need a reason to riot.

I firmly support religious freedom for Muslims and any other religious group. But if you choose to emigrate from your native country you need to be prepared to live by some different rules and regulations. That’s probably why there are not a lot of folks looking to move to countries ruled by Muslim mullahs.

As for Sarkozy? It’s still early, but so far he shows a lot more promise than his American counterpart.

First Things First

Big Frick — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 01:11:00 +0000

First things first.

President Barack Hussein Obama chose his very first television interview as commander and chief to be with Al-Arabiya, the Arab satellite television network. The president felt it was important that he got his message of change out to the Arab and Muslim world with the line “My job to the Muslim world is to communicate that the Americans are not your enemy.” The statement was made in an effort to assure Muslims that Americans do not consider themselves to be the enemy. The obvious problem is that Muslims do.

Americans did not chose to be the enemy, Muslims chose us.

The jihad against America was called for and started by Muslims long before their attack on 9-11. We have been at war with them for over 30 years. The problem was we didn’t know it. So when the new CEO of the American military says that America has made mistakes but “that the same respect and partnership that America had with the Muslim world as recently as 20 or 30 years ago, there’s no reason why we can’t restore that” it should send a chill down every historically aware spine.

It was 30 years ago in November of 1979 that a group of Iranian “students” attacked and seized the American Embassy in Tehran. This act of terrorism was conducted only after another pacifist American president Jimmy Carter, led the way for the overthrowing of the Shah for alleged human rights violations and the empowerment of the radical Ayatollah Khomeini. That short sighted act allowed these “students” to conduct this act with complete Iranian governmental support.

In April of 1983 a truck packed with explosives blew up in the US Embassy compound in Beirut killing 63 people. Six months later a truck blew up the US Marines barracks killing 241 US military personnel. In December of 1983 another truck filled with explosives was driven into the US Embassy in Kuwait. In September of 1984 another attack on the US Embassy in Beirut. In April of 1985 a restaurant frequented by US military is bombed in Madrid Spain. In August of that same year a car filled with explosives is driven through the main gate at the Rhein-Mein Air Force Base killing 22. Less the two months later the Achille Lauro cruise ship is hijacked and an American in a wheel chair is chosen and executed. In April of 1986 TWA flight 840 is bombed killing 4 and Pan Am flight 103 is blown up over Lockerbie, Scotland killing 259. In February of 1993 the first attempt to bring down the World Trade Center is staged with a van filled with explosives detonated in the underground parking garage killing 6 and injuring over 1000. In November of 1995 a car bomb kills 7 military personnel in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. In June of 1996 another truck bomb destroys the US Air Force Khobar Towers barracks killing 19 and injuring over 500. In August of 1998 simultaneous attacks on US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania kill 224. In October 2000 the US Cole is attacked killing 17 US Navy Sailors.

Tell me Mr. President, is this the type of respect and partnership you are referring too?

President Obama is correct in that we cannot paint the entire Muslim world with a broad brush and assume that all Muslims are radical terrorists. But the narrow brush with which we can paint that faction whose sole purpose in life is to kill Americans is growing broader by the day because it is unchecked and in some cases protected by the peaceful factions that chose to not get their hands bloody.

Let us also not forget that every war we have fought against Muslims for the past 30 years has been a war to free other Muslims of radical oppression.

It’s apparent that history is not the long suit for President Obama. But one would have hoped he would have at least had time to read a newspaper.

The very last thing America needs is to go back to the same blind international policy of the Carter administration.

We got all the respect and partnership we could handle from that already.

A Disproportionate Myth

Big Frick — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 03:53:00 +0000

Violence never solved anything.

At least that’s how the saying goes. It’s an expression that has been used by pacifists for years. “Make Love Not War” they cry. But have you ever noticed that the ones chanting these tired slogans are usually hundreds or thousands of miles away from the actual conflict?

Random acts of violence usually solve nothing, but random acts of violence are rarely if ever meant to solve anything. Strategically planned and executed violence often does bring about a solution. Anybody who says otherwise hasn’t paid attention very well in history class.

The current headlines scream that the ongoing military action being undertaken by Israel against Hamas in the Gaza strip is overkill (no pun intended). “Israel’s Attack Disproportionate” they say and use pictures of poor civilians and children killed or wounded in the airstrikes as proof of their claim.

To be sure, the sight of bleeding and dead children with their parents weeping at their side is horrific. But war is horrific business. There are no clean wars. By its very nature the purpose of a trained military is to kill people and break things and the purpose of military action is to kill enough of the enemy and break enough of their equipment to vanquish their will if not their physical ability to fight. It is not the military’s job to teach anybody a lesson, although the lesson is usually learned by the time the military is done.

The U.S. dropping nuclear bombs on Japan has long been viewed as disproportionate in its targeting of civilians but to anybody paying attention it ended the war with Japan in a matter of days. The ghastly pictures of human devastation and the years of radioactive health issues have prevented further use of these weapons of mass destruction. But the reality is that it was an extreme act of violence that did indeed bring resolution.

I am neither Jewish, nor do I feel any particular special support for Israel. But I am a supporter of any free democratic country that finds its very existence threatened by Islamic sects whose sole purpose in life is to kill its citizens. Israel has been warning these Islamic fascists for months that if they did not stop the daily mortar attacks on Israeli towns and citizens it would retaliate. Their warnings were ignored. They are not being ignored now.

As the death toll climbs toward 500 the news media is quick to report the number of civilian deaths. The deaths of the innocent are always tragic and even though civilian deaths account for only about 20% of the total it is no less heartbreaking. The reason the civilian deaths are even that high is that these Islamic warmongers set up their mortar launchers in civilian neighborhoods and around schools. The “civilian” adults are guilty of complicity with the uniformed Hamas fighters. There is no military and non-military zone. It’s all military zone.

As the major concern in the news media and with other Muslim countries seems to be a disproportionate response by Israel, let me ask the million dollar question: What exactly is an appropriate response to daily mortar attacks on Israeli civilians? What is an appropriate response to suicide bombers trained and equipped by Hamas to blow up civilian buses and marketplace shoppers? What is an appropriate response to a terrorist organization that has repeatedly stated their sole mission in life is to destroy Israel?

This extreme level of Muslim terror is not limited to Gaza or the Palestinian held territories. It exists and is growing in Egypt, Sudan, Iran, Afghanistan, United Arab Emirates, Somalia, Uganda and Jordan to name only a few. Muslim terror cells are expanding in just about every country on every continent. The news media continues to misidentify the threat by stating that actions like the one taken by Israel will embolden these terrorists. Make no mistake; they are already bold enough to attack the United States. And that is as bold as it gets. Ask Japan how that worked out for them.

And then ask them about violence solving nothing.