Wednesday, November 10, 2010

The War Party's Jihad in Oklahoma

A small but passionate segment of the population is sick with worry over the incalculably small possibility that Muslims may someday force their daughters to wear burqas, yet indifferent to the fact that those same daughters can't board a commercial flight without being virtually strip-searched or physically molested by a TSA functionary. Former Oklahoma state legislator Rex Duncan, recently elected District Attorney for Osage County, is the dutiful tribune of that myopic and misguided constituency.

Duncan is a polyester Pharisee, an embodiment of punitive populism. Like many contemporary "law and order" conservatives, Duncan holds forth at considerable length and with great passion about the evils of government power, except when it is exercised in its purest and most malignant form by way of the State's apparatus of regimentation and destruction. 

Duncan has consistently pressed to expand the reach and power of the domestic police state. His enthusiasm for the Warfare State was displayed a few years ago when he sponsored a measure creating a specialty state license plate memorializing the "Global War on Terrorism."

 Oklahoma ranks fourth among the states in the percentage of its male population behind bars, and leads the nation in imprisoning women. Each inmate costs Oklahoma taxpayers $22,000 a year. Reducing that population would do much to reduce the size, power, and expense of government. Yet as a state legislator, Duncan -- perhaps in anticipation of his new career as a prosecutor -- worked to expand the state's prison-industrial complex.

Hi -- I'm the Church Lady, and it's time for Church Chat!
In 2008, Duncan (who was chairman of the House Judiciary Committee) and like-minded colleagues submitted 73 bills either creating new felony offenses, or enhancing existing criminal offenses and their corresponding penalties. One amplification suggested by Duncan would have imposed the death penalty for repeat sex offenders.

Cheerfully anticipating a windfall for the "corrections industry," Duncan suggested that the state government throw some money at the good people who build and operate "private" prisons. He also sought to exploit the supposed immigration "crisis" to expand the odious practice of property forfeiture.

During Oklahoma's 2010 legislative session, Democratic Representative Mike Shelton proposed a measure to "crack down" on the sale of drug paraphernalia. To provide a tactile illustration of the supposed threat his legislation would address, Shelton bought a bagful of glass crack pipes at a local convenience store and attempted to hand them out to his colleagues. When approached by Shelton, Rep. Duncan refused even to touch such an accursed object.

"It's drug paraphernalia," Duncan sniffed, according to an eyewitness to the incident. "It's a misdemeanor that carries up to a year in county jail just to have one in your possession." 

Duncan appears to believe that possession of a Koran should likewise be seen as a criminal offense, or at least evidence of criminal intent. There is an element of irony here, given that Duncan's hyper-punitive and highly sectarian view of government authority isn't all that different from what one would expect from a medieval Mullah.

Three years ago, the Oklahoma Governor's Ethnic American Advisory Council attempted to give Duncan -- and every other state legislator -- a copy of the Koran embossed with the state seal as a gift commemorating the state's centennial. Duncan could have politely accepted the gift (publication of which was paid for by private funds), perhaps burying it wherever he keeps his unopened wedding presents. But this would have meant foregoing an opportunity for a public display of self-enraptured sanctimony.

"I object to the use of the state Centennial Seal and the state Seal all in an effort to further their religion," Duncan complained. He pointed out that he had gladly received a Centennial edition of the Bible presented to him by the Baptist General Convention in Oklahoma. "Mine is proudly on my desk on the Capitol and I don't think I ever read a part of it that condones the killing of women and children in furtherance of God's word," Duncan commented, apparently ignorant of the moral implications of that observation regarding the murderous foreign policy he and like-minded Religious Rightists endorse without qualification. 

Marjaneh Seirafi-Pour, chairwoman of the Advisory Council and a practicing Muslim, explained that handing out the Centennial-themed copies of the Koran was "a peaceful, thoughtful project [intended]to introduce ourselves to leaders." It's difficult to escape the impression that Duncan is offended not by anything Seirafi-Pour and her fellow Muslims have done, but rather by their simple existence -- or, at very least, their perverse insistence on being treated as law-abiding individual citizens of Oklahoma, rather than part of an undifferentiated mass of menace. 

Duncan's most notable accomplishment as state legislator was his central role in composing Ballot Question 755, which would amend the state constitution to forbid courts from considering or using international law" or "considering or using Sharia Law." Duncan and his colleagues grandly entitled the measure the "Save our State" amendment. 

According to Duncan, Question 755 was a "preemptive strike" against an effort to impose Sharia Law. Professor Joseph Thai of the University of Oklahoma's College of Law described it as "an answer in search of a problem." However one characterizes the measure, it was approved by 70% of those who cast a ballot in Oklahoma's mid-term election.

Two days later, the Council on American-Islamic Relations filed a complaint on behalf of Oklahoma resident Muneer Awad, seeking a restraining order against implementation of the amendment. Federal District Judge Vicki Miles-LaGrange granted a temporary restraining order, opining that the amendment amounts to a constitutionally impermissible burden on those who adhere to one particular religious tradition. 

Awad, who directs CAIR's Oklahoma branch, insists that the purpose of his lawsuit is to
"show our fellow Oklahomans that Muslims are their neighbors and that we are committed to upholding the U.S. Constitution and promoting the benefits of a pluralistic society." Duncan maintains that such conciliatory talk is mere persiflage intended to give cover to the ongoing "hideous invasion" of the Sooner State by the Mohammedan Horde.

As is the case with several other states, Oklahoma has seen an increase in Muslim immigration in recent years, much of it composed of refugees from countries that have been on the receiving end of Washington's armed benevolence. If he were sincerely concerned about stopping that "invasion" of Oklahoma Duncan would be agitating for an end to the military meddling that helps generate it.

Like many others who share his worldview, Rex Duncan eagerly supported George W. Bush's invasion of Iraq, in which U.S. military personnel -- most of whom were Christian, many of whom were Jews -- were used to install Sharia Law at gunpoint. This is leading to the religious cleansing of Iraq's Christian population, many of whom are part of congregations with roots going back to the apostolic era. 

As Syrian Catholic Archbishop Athanase Matti Shaba Matoka of Baghdad pointed out in an October 15 address, Iraq is the land where Abraham was born, where many of the events chronicled in the Old Testament took place. Christians in that land have endured persecution and great periods of suffering -- the "last being the American occupation." Since the "liberation" of Iraq in 2003, hundreds of thousands of Christians have been killed, terrorized, or driven from their homes.

"The invasion of Iraq by America and its allies brought to Iraq in general, and especially to its Christians, destruction and ruin on all levels," lamented the Archbishop. "Churches were blown up, bishops and priests and lay persons were massacred, many were the victims of aggression. Doctors and businessmen were kidnapped, others were threatened, storage places and homes were pillaged."

"Seven years have passed and Christianity is still bleeding," he continued. "Where is the world conscience? All the world remains a spectator before what is happening in Iraq, especially with regards to Christians.... We ask the question of the great powers: is it true what is said that there is a plan to empty the Middle East of Christians and that Iraq is one of the victims?"

This is authentic persecution -- not the cartoonish fantasies that clutter the adolescent minds of comfortable, self-satisfied Babbitts like Rex Duncan. Oh, how such people are titillated by the fantasy of standing in the gap like Horatius at the bridge, gallantly defending hearth, home, and feminine virtue from savagely bearded heathens! 

Luxuriating in their suburban mega-church madrassas, invincibly certain of their collective righteousness, they can often be heard chanting praises to the Regime's military arm as it visits death and misery on innocent people on the other side of the globe -- including people whose faith they supposedly share.

Duncan's "Save our State" amendment wasn't written to address a legitimate threat; it is a form of political pornography that will almost certainly find an audience elsewhere, where we can find people peddling even grimier versions of the same product. Among the purveyors of such prurient fare can be found the Rev. Elijah Abraham. 

A native of Iraq who converted from Islam to Christianity and now runs an organization called Veterans Against Jihadism, Abraham supports aggressive war against Muslims abroad and suppression of the individual rights of Muslims domestically.

In a recent interview with The New American magazine, Rev. Abraham was asked: “How should Americans view the mosques that are springing up all over our country?”

When you look at a mosque … please don’t look at it as you would look at a church or a synagogue or Buddhist temple," he replied, since a mosque can also serve as "a base of political operations" and also "a storage place for weapons.”

“Would you contend that most mosques in the United States are also serving as weapons repositories?” the interviewer asked Abraham, to which the Reverend offered an eager and emphatic affirmative reply:

“Sure! Now, are there any weapons right now if I go to the mosque down the street? Do they have them? Maybe, maybe not. But that does not mean they would not have them.”

Apparently, American Muslims have the burden of proving that they are not secretly stockpiling weapons in anticipation of waging a war of extermination against the infidels. Just to be safe, preemptive action of some kind might be necessary. On that subject, Rev. Abraham endorses a course of action much more assertive than Rex Duncan's legislative "preemptive strike":

“The best example I could give you is from the battle for Fallujah in April 2004 when the Marines went into a mosque and killed everyone in the mosque. The liberal media and the Muslim community in the West cried out…. If those are honest worshipers, what are they doing with bazookas and other weapons?”

The answer to that question, which should be obvious to any honest observer, is this: Those people were exercising their God-given right to defend their homes, families, and places of worship against criminal aggression by a foreign army that occupied their country without legal or moral authority of any kind. 

That right inheres in every human being. If we assume that individual Muslims are people, we have to recognize that each of them has the right to armed self-defense.  It would be interesting to learn if Duncan recognizes the right of a Muslim to self-defense. His actions are highly suggestive of his likely answer.

Three years ago, when he rejected the gift of a Koran from fellow Oklahoma residents, Duncan unctuously proclaimed that "most Oklahomans do not endorse the idea of killing innocent women and children in the name of ideology." The planted axiom in the ideology to which he and those of his ilk subscribe is that no Muslim -- of any age or station in life -- can truly be considered "innocent." You do the math.

 If you can, please help keep Pro Libertate on-line. Thanks, and God bless!

Dum spiro, pugno!


CFC_Oklahoma said...

Rex Duncan loves to talk about "The will of the people."

However, "the will of the people," is fickle and can be manipulated through "FEAR MONGERING" which is what exactly what he did to manipulate the good people of Oklahoma.

We have a state and federal constitution and ALL laws must pass Constitutional standard to insure equality under the law.

Duncan reminds me of Hitler who was in fact a "fear Monger" who's platform was morality and preemptive laws to protect the people, the good citizens of Germany. The rest is history of the what "fear mongering" can and will do.

MoT said...

Out of the ballpark! If those who claim to be followers of Christ actually "believed" then they wouldn't be in such a tizzy. Why are they so afraid? Is their faith and their God so small? It would seem that for all of the noisy songs and loud proclamations bellowed from the podium that He really doesn't exercise any power except within the walls of their sanctuaries or betwixt their ears... and evidently not much there either. Here is a mission field in their own midst and instead of pouring out love and reaching out to these people they tell them to "go away". How sadly ironic that they'll claim Jesus/God, creator of the universe, holder of the keys of death and hell, and the one who offers eternal life and forgiveness of sin is somehow out of touch with modern international politics! What they're saying is that God doesn't "understand" and that THEY know better.

Ron said...

Mr. Grigg,

I am a long-time devotee of your writings. As such, I can no longer stomach some things you write. Please note that I understand that you are not alone in guilt for these things, however, I believe you are not beyond "saving" where these two issues are concerned.

First, "...holy and reverend is HIS name." (emphasis is mine). No man may usurp this title. Just because a man may ignore this admonishment is no reason for you to license his usurpation.

Second, just because someone claims to be a Christian, does not mean that they are (George W. Bush, anyone?). Please consider either refraining from mentioning it at all, or use some verbiage such as "claims to be...".

I hope my wording does not come across as hostile, or demeaning. I humbly and sincerely mean only to assist a fellow traveler along the way. May the Lord bless y'all (you and yours) in accord with His will. r2

Ron Colson, II

liberranter said...

MoT, I think you've pretty well answered your own questions. The evangelical "Christians" (they're evangelizing alright; not Christianity, but the secular religion of State Warfare) are indeed terrified, as well they should be, and for the reasons you cite. They're probably too brainwashed and too stupid to realize it, but they have ZE-RO genuine faith in the God of the Bible. If they did, they wouldn't be wasting their energies worrying about temporal political issues at all. No, their only faith is in their own god, the State, and its ability to wage aggressive warfare in the name of their own perverted, twisted ideology (but of course only when the State is dominated by their Republican idols). Apparently they realize subconsciously that their god is an idol made of mud and straw, not nearly as omnipotent as they thought. Thus the panic over the idea of an invasion by "infidel hordes." Of course they can't/won't REALLY put their faith and trust in the One True God or His Son, whom they pretend to worship, because the One True God would have them turn from their war and State-worshiping ways. Can't have THAT, now can we?

To answer Archbishop Matoka's question, the "Christians" of Amerika couldn't care less about Iraq's Christian community for two key reasons:

1. The Christian communities of the Arab world have faced REAL persecution in varying degrees for centuries, a characteristic of true practitioners of the faith (had they not remained strong in their faith in the face of persecution, they would not exist as a church today). The coddled, pampered, thoroughly state-co-opted "churches" in Amerika couldn't begin to comprehend, let alone appreciate such a thing. Who knows, maybe their apathy toward the plight of Iraq's Christians is an unconscious reflection of the shame they feel over their own hypocrisy and phoniness.

2. To the average Amoricon pseudo-Christian, whose worldview and IQ are those of a glass paperweight, ALL Arabs are "ragheads" and "terrists." The term "Arab Christian" to them is as oxymoronic as "military intelligence" is to the rest of us.

As for Rex Dumbcan, he certainly shouldn't come as any kind of surprise. He's minted from the same broken mold as every other bigoted, fifteen-rate, semi-literate criminal state politician. The fact that his Constitution-shredding referendum (Question 755) was endorsed by seventy percent of Oklahoma voters confirms the fact that the lemming-like votards of that state, just like those of the other 49, are suffering under the self-selected government they deserve.

Anonymous said...

Oklahoma has a long history of intolerance to unacceptable political ideas. Interestingly enough, in its early years the Sooner State had a strong Populist and IWW influence. At the beginning of World War I, many rural Oklahomans engaged in an anti-draft uprising known as the Green Corn Rebellion. The authorities quickly suppressed the rebellion. During that war and in its aftermath, supporters of the rebellion, Wobblies, and other radicals were harried out of Oklahoma. Woody Guthrie's family was among them, and they migrated to Texas to escape. The then rising Ku Klux Klan assisted in the harassment of the radicals. Marxist writings, even the dull tomes of Marx, Engles, and Lenin, were banned from the state, something not even Franco's Spain did.

The Muslims have replaced the Reds as the enemy among "law 'n' order" types.

Anonymous said...

I'm a huge fan Mr. Grigg but I have to question your position on the topic of Islam. Let me first state that I am completely against the US invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan (and the soon to be invaded fill-in-the blank middle-east country.) But I don't understand how any Liberty loving person can defend Islam. It is as anathema to Liberty as any other totalitarian government. And I can prove it with just one word: women. The Islamic view that women should be treated as less than cattle is beyond reason. And reason is the basis of Liberty. To think that Islam is just another religion is just wrong. Islam is a way of life. As the late great G.K. Chesterton noted, a man's religion isn't the church he walks into, it's the Cosmos in which he believes in. ((Or words to that effect.) The Cosmos of a Muslim is quite different from that of a Libertarian. Why do so many so-called Libertarians fear a theocracy of Christianity yet fail to see that Islam, by its very nature, can be nothing but a theocracy?! I ask you Mr. Grigg, if the the 565 lunatics running our nation were 51% Muslim, would it be a free country? (Make no mistake, I do not consider us a free country now either.) My point is that to those of us who love Liberty, Islam is no different than Nazism, Communism, Fascism, Socialism, a Kennedy-for-president or another Bush-for-president. Mr. Grigg I am not a Christian (although I do try to live my life in accordance with Jesus' perfect law). Yet you are a professed Christian. Christianity and Islam are self canceling. So how can you defend this barbaric religion/way of life? Again let me reiterate: I am 100% against Amerika's invasion of the Islamic countries. Kipling was absolutely correct in noting that East is East and West is West; and the two shall never meet. Liberty loving people excusing Islam is like liberty loving people joining forces with Communists to defeat Fascists . Oops, bad example!?

William N. Grigg said...

I don't understand how any Liberty loving person can defend Islam.

I'm not defending Islam; I'm defending the non-aggression principle as applied to people who espouse that religion.

The same principle applies, I believe, to other people whose views I abhor, and whose objectives I emphatically do not share. That category includes communists, white supremacists, Mormon Fundamentalists, etc.

I will combat their ideas and under no circumstances will I submit to their rule (or that of anybody else, inasmuch as it is within my power).

The threshold question for me remains Jefferson's formulation: As long as they neither pick my pocket nor break my leg, I have no quarrel with such people.

There is a strain of Islam that is anti-statist and congenial to free market capitalism:

See also --

It's possible, I believe, to engage in mutually beneficial commerce with Muslims who embrace that perspective -- or at least arrive at a tolerable modus vivendi.

MoT said...

Liberanter, I've seen so much hypocrisy that it boggles the mind. Ignorance is bliss, so it's said, and were we to use that as a benchmark for the American populace in general, I'd have to say this country is the most blissful place on earth. As Will has reiterated, and I agree, while I may not agree with the Islamic faith, same as so much else out there, that doesn't excuse me from my behavior. It isn't up to the rest of the world to "come up" to my level before I treat them with respect or recognize them as fellow human beings. Corny as it may sound I have to ask, "Where is the love?".

Anonymous said...

"The Islamic view that women should be treated as less than cattle is beyond reason"

That's an odd broad stroke if ever there was one. I suppose you don't know that while Christian theologians were busy debating whether or not women had souls (which was never a question in Islam), Muslim women were busy running businesses (like Muhammed's first wife, Khadija), starting religious movements (google Rabia Basri, for one), and leading armies into battle (see Aisha at the Battle of the Camel). Islam guaranteed women the right to divorce, inherit, and receive alimony and child support while the women of Christendom were viewed as nothing more than soulless incubators. Islam also ended the pre-Islamic Arab practice of female infanticide.

If I may offer a suggestion, you should try reading a book on Islamic jurisprudence or a website run by a real Muslim religious scholar before swallowing the 'opinion' of the many professional Islamophobes among us today. Also, check out

Anonymous said...

having lived here in Oklahoma for as many years as i have one horrid truth above all others stand's always. if you are not moderately wealthy or at least slightly middle class christian and white you are welcome to keep quiet, keep your head down and live on the decrepit side of any city or town.. there are lines drawn through every one of them here and enough "praetorian" guard and money to keep the poor or generally undesirable in check so all in all with that said. i couldn't even begin to imagine what life is like here at all for any Muslim. it's actually kind of sad and a punch line under it all that any one would feel as ashamed of there own state as i do generally..

whitebuffalo said...

Btw Mr. Grigg, I am the anonymous of November 10, 2010 9:23 PM (couldn't get the system to use my whitebuffalo id?) Anyway, I agree with your non-aggression principles. That's why I stated my revulsion to Amerika's attacks in the middle east. My point is that Islam and Liberty are incompatible with each other. The question is how do we live and let live? My view is that we do so by first recognizing the differences and then stay out of each others affairs.

As to anonymous November 10, 2010 11:48 PM, "If I may offer a suggestion, you should try reading a book on Islamic jurisprudence or a website run by a real Muslim religious scholar before swallowing the 'opinion' of the many professional Islamophobes among us today"

I don't need to read such books - I've actually been to the middle east (Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait) I have witnessed firsthand the treatment of women under sharia law. I have one word for you: burka. Recognizing the incompatibility of Liberty with Islam doesn't make me an "Islamaphobe". Nor does it make me a defender of Christianity's past evil deeds. As I made clear, I am not a Christian. The irrationality of those who used Christianity to do bad things should not be used to defend the bad things being done by Islam. Let me be clear: I have no desire to try and change Islam. I merely say that Liberty does not live within Islamic the culture.

liberranter said...

I don't need to read such books - I've actually been to the middle east (Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait)

Whitebuffalo, maybe you've "been there," (as a mercenary member of the legions, might I assume?), but do you 1) speak Arabic, 2) know any Muslim Arabs on a deeply personal level, or 3) spend any time in the homes of Muslim Arab residents of the Middle East? I do/have done all three of the above and I can say without qualification that your portrayal of Arab Muslims, their religion, their political outlook, and their customs (especially pertaining to inter-gender relations) is one big "broad brush" generalization based on the lamest of stereotypes. If you knew any Arab Muslims in number on a personal basis, you would know that such stereotyped generalizations as have cemented themselves into the uninformed Western mind are merely one small aspect of the Arab Muslim world, practices adhered to by one subset of the greater culture that is not even close to a majority.

More to the point: I am acquainted with or know on a deeply personal level dozens of Arab Muslims and their families, from the three countries you mention as well as others from the Levant and North Africa, all of whom are as different from each other as are any dozen Americans of the "Christian" faith. To paint all with a broad brush is an exercise in intellectual indolence and does a disservice both to the individual (or any faith) AND one's own self-respect.

Event Horizon said...

I would like to offer an alternative view of the question as written on the ballot. I was not familiar with the hype surrounding it since I rarely watch TV and so when I read it during my research on the eve of the election my initial interpretation was "should the courts in Oklahoma use international law or Sharia law in deciding cases," or something more or less along those lines. Of course I would answer in the negative, we already have enough collectivist and totalitarian pollution in the legal system without importing it from elsewhere. After asking around amongst several people I am acquainted with (intelligent people, not ignorant redncks as people like to assume Oklahomans are) I find that this was a common interpretation.

After reading the backstory presented in the piece here I can see where this was a political jab and a publicity stunt for one of our homegrown petty-dictators. I think, however, that a great number of us saw this as a sort of referendum on the incorporation of international law and/or Sharia law.

Not ashamed to be an Okie said...

Every time I have tried to write a reply I find myself having to write a small book referencing all the recent events that made this amendment important; so let me make it simple. Seventy percent of the voters, approved that amendment. No, we are not ignorant red necks that are led by the nose. We do read of the events in the world today and see the problems coming. We think it is important to say that no other country, international organization (UN) or religion has the authority to determine our laws. No one is saying that Muslims can't follow Sharia, unless Sharia violates our laws. The age of sexual consent is 16 in Oklahoma, everyone here already knows that it is younger in Sharia. You use a twelve year old girl in Oklahoma, Sharia is no excuse and you become one of those more than the average number in prison. The Mormons, dropped multiple wives, can the Muslims agree to drop their laws that conflict with Oklahoma? It has nothing to do with Washington's war with the Middle East or with some jerk of a District Attorney, just that if you want to live in Oklahoma, you follow Oklahoma Law.

tambrathegreat said...

I hate to burst your bubble, Not ashamed to be an Okie, but the fact of the matter is that this little law was proposed to pander to the basest fears of the ignorant masses in this state. Apparently those of us who voted against this waste of taxpayer money actually read the unenforceable bit of institutional racism. There is no threat of Oklahoma or any state imposing Sharia law. There never will be a threat, unless and until the idiots that propose that there is no constitutional basis for the separation of church and state. That would mean those Christians and certain uninformed tea partiers who have been whipped into a religiofascist frenzy by their supposed leaders to enact unenforceable laws. Given that I am one of the thirty percent that actually read the bill, I could not vote for it. It does away with (all) international law, and by logical extension, Federal law.

We already are plagued with so-called populists who are defacto whores of whatever lobby pays them the most. We already have a population who follows religious leaders who tell them, "It's a sin to think for yourself. Let God do your thinking through (sic) me." (This is a direct quote stated to me just before I quit believing that Christians had any moral relevance.) We have one of the highest rates of teen pregnancy in the nation, our schools are underfunded, our divorce rate leads the nation, yet, we, according to you, should rely on Oklahoma values and laws to guide us. Well, sir, no thank you. The money spent on pushing this bill to the ballot should have been spent elsewhere, say on our rotting cross-town highway, or our underfunded schools, or perhaps even the homeless whom have ONE shelter to rely upon in the capital city.

Heh, we needed that law like we needed a hole in our head, and I am glad I was one of the thirty percent who actually have the ability to think and read for myself, rather than letting some illiterate, self-styled religious leader tell me what to think.

whitebuffalo said...

liberranter said: Whitebuffalo, maybe you've "been there," (as a mercenary member of the legions, might I assume?

Sadly, your assumption is correct. Sorta. I fought in the first Gulf War. I was indeed a gung-ho Marine. But your assumption that my experience there made me anti-Muslim is the exact opposite. To make a long story short I had an epiphany of many levels including the realization that hey, these "ragheads" are actually human beings!! So why was I being told to kill them?! I did indeed have many interesting thought provoking conversations with Arabic Muslims. But I also made some clear headed observations while there as well. Again, I go back to the treatment of women within an Islamic run culture. (BTW have you ever actually been inside an Islamic run culture? I'm sure you know that what people theorize and how such ideas play out in reality are two different things). Let me be clear: I do not wish any harm to anyone, Muslim or otherwise. I merely contend that Islam is a way of life that is the opposite of a Liberty loving way of life. Psuedo-ad hominem attacks on me do not disprove my arguement.
And FYI, I completely renounce my "service to my country".

William N. Grigg said...

whitebuffalo, I appreciate your candor, value your opinions, and flat-out love your screen name.

Not ashamed to be an Okie said...

"we, according to you, should rely on Oklahoma values and laws to guide us."

I do not find anything in the statement I wrote that said we should rely on Oklahoma values, I don't even know if a state can have values. As to the rest of your comments, I wonder who you were writing to. Ah well, such is life. When I meet up with a tea partier, I'll tell them you said hello. Oh, I did read the bill too, missed the racist part, sorry, have a great life.

Lemuel Gulliver said...

Lemuel to the rescue......!!!

I can solve this whole question easily, with one simple line. Here it is (drumroll, please,)...

<<<==[Human beings always, and for the last 5,000 years, create, and have created, God in their own image.]==>>>

"Christians" in some parts of the USA create Jesus in their own image: Vengeful, arrogant, hate-filled, bloodthirsty, pompous, rigid, war-mongering, murderous, violent, vicious, and just plain NASTY. Read the Left Behind books.

I doubt that any of them follow the essays of our gentle Mr. Grigg, but those of us present here who do, know that I speak the truth.

Other Christians in the USA, and probably everyone reading this, create Jesus in THEIR own image: loving, forgiving, gentle, kind, patient, peaceful, compassionate, merciful, humble, joyous, helpful, beautiful, holy, and completely NICE.

And ALL of them and us claim to be "Christians."

I remember a story from Iraq, of a soldier who was torturing an innocent Iraqi, who asked the soldier, "Why are you doing this to me?" and the soldier replied, "So you will understand the love of Jesus." How do we suppose this makes the Muslims feel about Jesus and Christians?

The fact is, those like White Buffalo who have seen a few Arab countries, think they know what Islam is. Wrong. That is how the people of those primitive tribal societies have created Allah in THEIR own image: Vengeful, hateful, pompous, bloodthirsty, rigid, unforgiving, and evil. Those are people who can lock the doors of a burning girls' school and burn all the little girls to death because they were runnung out in a panic without their heads covered.

Then you have the Muslims of Lebanon, Turkey, Syria, Jordan,Morocco, France, and Egypt: These are places where women wear bikinis on the beach, wear jewelry and makeup, and are doctors, businesswomen, teachers, TV announcers, and more, all without headscarves, and are treated with respect by the men. For them, Allah is merciful, kind, compassionate, forgiving, and tolerant towards other faiths.

(Six hundred years ago when Christians in France and Germany were burning witches at the stake, torturing scientists and healers, and massacring Jews and Muslims en masse, Christians and Jews in Islamic Spain were accepted as full members of the community and allowed to worship in their own places in their own way. Doctors and scholars left primitive, barbaric, violent Europe to study medicine, astronomy, classical literature, mathematics and more in the universities of Cairo and Baghdad.)

And all of these different people call themselves "Muslims" and claim THEY, and THEY ALONE, know what Allah wants, and what Allah says, and how Allah wants them to behave.

They have each of them created Allah in their own image. Just like we "Christians" individually create Jesus and God in our own image.

As Mr. Grigg and I concluded in a prior discussion, all generalizations are wrong. (;-D)

So, people, please stop tarring all Muslims with the brush of Osama bin Laden and Prince Nayef, (Head of the Saudi Committee for the Propagation of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice,) and maybe, just maybe, the Muslims will stop tarring all Christians with the brush of Tim LaHaye and the Irish Republican Army. (Not to mention the evangelical soldier mentioned above.)

Jesus, whom many of us here follow, said it perfectly: "God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.... A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another."

Many tens or hundreds of millions of Muslims, contrary to our experience of tribal Saudi and Yemeni and Somali assholes, and our media's pot-stirring in the service of the Republican war machine, interpret Islam and the words of the Prophet the same way.

Nice people worship a nice God. Nasty people worship a nasty God. Does any of this make sense?

- Lemuel Gulliver.

whitebuffalo said...

Thank you Mr. Grigg. Be assured that I have nothing but total respect for you as a man and as a brilliant, talented writer.
There's a philosophical reason for my screen name but it would be a long story so I won't go into it.

Anonymous said...

I have many Muslim friends who treat their wives like queens while my uncle who claims to be a Christian orders my aunt around like a slave for almost 50 years now. Some of what the media reports is Arab culture and has nothing to do with Islam. Some of the beheadings you see in the videos going around promoting Islamophobia are actually Saudi Arabian government carrying out capital punishment according to their laws. Lots of disinfo out there by evil men trying to get support for a war with Iran. We need a boogeyman to go to war with and since communism is dead except in the United States, the flavor of the month is Islam.

Broken said...

Ah, Brother Will I believe you understand Rex Duncan better than he does himself. As another Okie reader here, I do not shrink from characterizing him, and many others like him, as fascist. The bill in question did strike me as fear-mongering, and it was sold without allowing proper discussion of how the wording can be taken in unintended directions. The words alone can be taken to forbid considering the Ten Commandments, for example. That's the reality of all such laws, all the way up to the US Constitution. Misconstruction by subsequent readers is the rule on such things.

In some years past, I recall seeing a stack of rifles in a Baptist church, and thought nothing of it. Guns do nothing of themselves. I was much more disturbed by the reflexive war-mongering of the entire membership. These days I lead worship in my home, and I refuse to vote in our fixed and corrupt elections here. Nobody represents my views on much of anything, and I have no interest in pressing those views on anyone else.

I consider myself an arrow in God's quiver, and the target is not yet in sight. Given the impending collapse of so very much everyone else depends upon for life, I sense the target is near, though.

liberranter said...

whitebuffalo, thank you for clarifying your post and please accept my apologies if I came across as condescending or unduly harsh (nasty habits that sometimes get the better of me and that I struggle continuously to rein in). I absolutely share your sentiments regarding "service in the legions," a sad mistake I too made earlier in life. It looks like we've both seen the light.

Lemuel: Your post makes PERFECT sense, and is easily confirmed by even a cursory observation of "religious" people of all cultures and religions around us. ALL of the world's religions, no matter how explicit their tenets, are affected by human culture, environment, and attitudes, all of which differ from place to place, region to region, and race/ethnicity to race/ethnicity. A Protestant "Evangelical Christian" from the Deep American South bears little or no resemblance in religious practice or even outlook on life to an Egyptian Copt. Similarly, a Malaysian Sunni Muslim bears little or no resemblance to an Iranian Shi'ite Muslim. Each hail from a different culture that, irrespective of its religious foundations (most of which are relatively recent to the culture's origin), views life very differently from other cultures sharing the same religious faith. (To cite another example where Christianity is concerned, some African Christians still retain remnants of their pagan past, such as the practice of polygyny or female genital mutilation, even though their Christian faith strongly discourages or expressly forbids such practices).

So yes, "we" do create God in "our" own image, consciously or not. Whether "we" in sufficient numbers can ever overcome that tendency to the point where "we" can make the world a more peaceful place, in accordance with the best aspects of our religious faiths' core tenets, remains to be seen. I can't say that I'm optimistic.

T.L. Winslow (TLW) said...

Tired of hearing about Islam? Sorry, the ever-increasing uproar over Islam's incursions into the West isn't a passing fad, it's here to stay, and it's not about "Islamophobia", it's about Islam, the world's most supremacist and intolerant ideology making a comeback. The word phobia means an unreasonable fear of something based on ignorance which leads to irrational decision-making processes. The meaning of the word Islam is submit or surrender for a reason, and it's eminently rational to fear being made to submit or surrender to anything bad, which a study of Islam's history proves it to be in spades. Muslims are not like, say, Sikhs, colorful people with quaint customs who are usually quite harmless unless you attack their Golden Temple. From day one Islam has been a giant horror show, a relentless push for world domination centered in Mecca that churns out zombies, slaves and corpses, and is like a rachet wrench, it only turns in one direction: the submit-to-it direction. Due to Muslim immigration, the once happily Muslim-free West is in increasing peril of Islamic infiltration and takeover, a process that will be all bad news, the borders of the Muslim world are always bloody. Too bad, the media are currently dominated by Islam history ignoramuses and Muslim disinformation artists who claim to see no threat, and worse, blame and try to silence those who do, hoping to stifle all debate about the political dangers of the ideology of Islam itself, repeating the pattern of many proud civilizations of the past before they were absorbed forever.

When it comes to Islam, Western political principles learned via study of the last couple of centuries of history won't work, nor will appeasement. It's not about Marxist class struggle or Western capitalism with them, it's about eternal rewards or punishments for what they do on Earth for their god Allah. And it sure isn't about voices like moi who warn of the threat of Islam, it's about them, and I'll prove it.

Take their slogan that Islam is a religion of love. It is, but only in the sense that all Muslims must love Allah, who then tells them who to hate, namely unbelievers, including Muslims of a different stripe, and what to do about them, push them aside and conquer and rule their territory, then reduce them to dhimmi status, making them pay a tax to keep from being executed.

Take their slogan that Islam is a religion of peace. Most Muslims say that only because previous Muslims waged bloody holy war for centuries and suppressed the infidels and set up Allah's peace terms of Sharia, meaning rule of the land in his name, which destroys everybody's freedoms permanently and only compensates by giving Muslims a bit more freedom than infidels. So the catch about Islam being a religion of peace is that it's only after you accept its peace terms of total submission along with its horrible Sharia that makes Muslims superior to non-Muslims and men to women. Until then Allah commands Muslims to wage ceaseless war with unbelievers, which historically has come to mean even Muslims of different sects, which is why Islam has been a religion of endless war with an ironic slogan. Allah himself declared the war, and no human can declare peace in his name, sorry, you're either with him or against him, although he does permit temporary truces greased by plenty of jizya or punishment taxes.

It's not about racism. Islam isn't a race, but it wants to absorb all races, so let's not go there, it's counterproductive. It's not just a religion either, because it comes with a god who wants to control the government.

Simply put, Allah and his spokesman Muhammad are the archenemies of our Western freedoms, including our precious U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights. Therefore those who submit to Islam are already working for the other team and are just haggling about the price, and for that reason Islam must be dealt with differently.


Juan said...


I suggest that you read Father Prainaitis's The Talmud Unmasked and Martin Luther's On The Jews and Their Lies. Also read Henry Fored's The International Jew. If you are a jew, which you probaBLY ARE, READ THE mARCUS eLI rAVAGE OR yOU gENTILES BY THE ANTIGENTILE JEW Maurice Samuel.

There is more.
In conclusion, the enemy of WEstern Culture is the jew.
Who is behind homosexuality? the jew. Abortion? jew. Feminism? Jew. Open borders? jew. Pedophilis? jew. Who has candlestick on Whiteman's White House lawn? jew.
Communism? jew.

If you are a White European non-jew, then you are a traitor to your race and the human race.

the author said...

Thank you, my brother, for your eloquent voice of reason.

"Christians" in America need to realize that Christians in Iraq suffer due to our fanaticism--just like the Palestinian Christians. Now the crazies want to heap the same suffering and persecution on the Jews of Iran.

"Yes, the time comes, that whoever kills you will think that he does God service" (John 16:2)

Not that we should only love those who we recognize as our brothers. (See parable of the Good Samaritan.)

The hysteria about Muslims brings to mind what people used to say (and some tiny few on the fringe still say) about the Jews. They're suspicious, insular, cliquish, think they are superior with their strange religion, and they put that little "K" on food items and force us to pay the "kosher tax" supporting Jewish organizations. Imagine the hype if this were being done by Muslims: "Your Grocery Shopping -- Supporting Islam!"

You know, I highly resent having to pay a tax to support a religion I don't subscribe to. (And c'mon ... what's "kosher aluminum foil"?)

Next thing you know, here come the Noahide Laws and guillotines! (Yes, I'm being facetious with that, to illustrate a point that should be obvious.)

-- OTC
think outside the cage

whitebuffalo said...

liberranter said...

whitebuffalo, thank you for clarifying your post and please accept my apologies if I came across as condescending or unduly harsh (nasty habits that sometimes get the better of me and that I struggle continuously to rein in). I absolutely share your sentiments regarding "service in the legions," a sad mistake I too made earlier in life. It looks like we've both seen the light.

There's no need to apologize. Truth be told, I too struggle with the same "nasty habits that sometimes get the better of me".

And I hope I don't come across as some lunatic "bomb-bomb-bomb, bomb-bomb Iran" war-mongering chickenhawk like the hypocrite Jim Quinn of the radio show Quinn & Rose.

My goal is to encourage people - all people - to seek Liberty and prosperity and thus happiness. I just argue that Islam (like many other ways) isn't the path to said goal.

BTW I like your phrase, "service in the legions,". I use the term, "hitman for the empire".

Lemuel Gulliver said...

Thank you.

Has anyone here NOT read "The True Believer" by Eric Hoffer? If not, please enrich your life by getting a copy - you can get it used on Ebay, Amazon or Alibris for only a couple of bucks - and studying it. It is very short, only about 100 pages, but it takes time to read, because the ideas are so profound you have to stop and think about them. Another excellent little book by Hoffer is "The Ordeal of Change," which is a great manual of life, since all our lives are changing all the time. Much of the discussion above, including how different individuals interpret their particular religion differently, will be illuminated by these two books.

Most of us here are libertarians, and cannot stand the regimented, socialistic, and violent interpretation of Islam taught in regimented, socialistic and violent Arab cultures. But, as I pointed out before, as our own nation descends into socialism, violence, rigidity and oppression, a growing number of so-called "Christians" in America are interpreting their so-called religion the same way.

TL Winslow,
The reason you are right as far as that goes, is that most of the Muslim immigrants to Europe are economic refugees, fleeing their failed societies, which have failed and remained dirt poor because of their rigidity, violence, and suppression of free thought. (Do we see a vision of America's future here, dear fellow readers?) They bring those attitudes with them. It is illogical - what do they want to create in their new homeland, a mirror image of the hell they left behind? Or what? Actually, you are quite right - those tribal cultures, and a Western culture of enlightenment, tolerance and free thought CANNOT coexist in the same space.

There are three solutions: (1) Germany, France, and America should become like Somalia, Sudan and Yemen, regressing about 600 years, (2) The Muslim immigrants will have to learn to enjoy and adopt the new Western culture in which they now live, or (3) They can go back home to the hell of dirt, poverty and violence from which they fled.

Of course, a major feature of those hells of squalor and poverty they fled from is lack of education, and no exposure to the faculty of critical thought and analysis. (The True Believer phenomenon, which many evangelical "Christians" are trying to re-create in America's schools.) It is probably too late for the immigrant generations, but perhaps - only perhaps - their children can have their minds led forth from darkness by Western thinking and Western education.

Friends: Do yourself a favor, and read those two books by Eric Hoffer, if you have not done so already.

- Lemuel G.

BD said...

Mr. Grigg: Thank you for another thoughtful essay.

You wrote: “Would you contend that most mosques in the United States are also serving as weapons repositories?” the interviewer asked Abraham, to which the Reverend offered an eager and emphatic affirmative reply:

“Sure! Now, are there any weapons right now if I go to the mosque down the street? Do they have them? Maybe, maybe not. But that does not mean they would not have them.”

I'm old enough to remember when our boobus americanus believed that the basements of Catholic churches were stacked with weapons on call for the revolution. The hysteria reached it's zenith in my lifetime during the 1960 presidential election. If JFK were elected, the Pope wold issue his call to arms, the Constitution overthrown, and the country become an arm of the Vatican.

Still waiting.

MoT said...

BD... That sort of fear mongering burbled by Abraham is nothing less than thought control. The lying argument goes something like this: If you have nothing to hide then you won't mind having your liberties stolen or trampled upon now would you? Otherwise you could be some sort of "sleeper" terrorist, ungrateful unpatriotic malcontent or a "porno scanner refusenik"! Eh?

Juan said...

Gulliver and Winslow

Have you read Henry ford's book on the jew? How about Martin Luther's On the jews and their lies?

Hoffer, I had never heard of, but he was nothing but a rotten, typical zionist talmudic jew who only cares about jews.
I found this article by him. It says it all. Just another jew who only care sfor jews. One would have to be blind not to see it. In another articlle I found he was quoted of having told an angry poor oppressed black american to get a job and do something. this jew knew very well that blacks were discriminated against in the 1940's. Of course this racist jew got a medal of honor from the servant of the named ronald reagan. I wonder how many African-Americans, who are the real Americans(not those khazar jews), received the Presidential Medal. Oh, the jew has received tons of medals.
No thanks, I have no interest in what any jew has to say.

Browse · Search News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


Skip to comments.

Eric Hoffer in 1968 on Jews and Israel (prescient)
national review ^ | 1968 | Eric Hoffer

Posted on Monday, July 31, 2006 9:45:54 PM by dennisw

A friend just emailed me (Michael Ledeen) this, a comment from Eric Hoffer in 1968:

The Jews are a peculiar people: things permitted to other nations are forbidden to the Jews.

Other nations drive out thousands, even millions of people and there is no refugee problem. Russia did it, Poland and Czechoslovakia did it, Turkey threw out a million Greeks, and Algeria a million Frenchman. Indonesia threw out heaven knows how many Chinese-and no one says a word about refugees.

But in the case of Israel the displaced Arabs have become eternal refugees. Everyone insists that Israel must take back every single Arab. Arnold Toynbee calls the displacement of the Arabs an atrocity greater than any committed by the Nazis. Other nations when victorious on the battlefield dictate peace terms. But when Israel is victorious it must sue for peace .

Everyone expects the Jews to be the only real Christians in this world. Other nations when they are defeated survive and recover but should Israel be defeated it would be destroyed. Had Nasser triumphed last June [1967] he would have wiped Israel off the map, and no one would have lifted a finger to save the Jews. No commitment to the Jews by any government, including our own, is worth the paper it is written on .

There is a cry of outrage all over the world when people die in Vietnam or when two Blacks are executed in Rhodesia. But when Hitler slaughtered Jews no one remonstrated with him. The Swedes, who are ready to break off diplomatic relations with America because of what we do in Vietnam, did not let out a peep when Hitler was slaughtering Jews. They sent Hitler choice iron ore, and ball bearings, and serviced his troop trains to Norway.

The Jews are alone in the world. If Israel survives, it will be solely because of Jewish efforts. And Jewish resources. Yet at this moment Israel is our only reliable and unconditional ally. We can rely more on Israel than Israel can rely on us. And one has only to imagine what would have happened last summer [1967] had the Arabs and their Russian backers won the war to realize how vital the survival of Israel is to America and the West in general.

I have a premonition that will not leave me; as it goes with Israel so will it go with all of us.

Should Israel perish the holocaust will be upon us.


ML said...

Please take a look at "Empire Builders" at my blog Victims Of Organized Crime In Central Texas

Lemuel Gulliver said...


I hope you get to read this, since Mr. Grigg has a new essay posted.

Eric Hoffer was not Jewish. He was German, his family hailing from Alsace. Can you really imaging a Jew being the son of a cabinetmaker, and spending his life as a longshoreman and a bean-picker in the fields of California? Wikipedia says he took a job as a salesman, and upon realizing what a great talent he had for it, he quit after one day, as he felt he was taking advantage of people. That does NOT sound like your typical Jew, does it?

Let me quote you an aphorism of Eric Hoffer's, and ask yourself if a Jew could have written this: "Retribution often means that we eventually do to ourselves what we have done to others." Does that sound like your typical Jew talking?

I don't doubt he wrote that piece you quoted; it is typical Hoffer. He was passionately contemptuous of intellectuals and effete money-men, and a great champion of the underdog and of people who worked an honest day's labor for an honest day's pay. I can imagine this is why he would take the side of Israel and the Jews - as you yourself have pointed out, (and I happen to agree with you 100%,) the Jews are the world's experts at appearing as the most pathetic victims in history, when it is they who are usually victimizing others.

As far as quoting Martin Luther and others, I have a large document, "What prominint men in history said about the Jews," which contains quotations going all the way back to Tacitus and Seneca. It is remarkable, that over thousands of years, and in cultures of diverse religions, from Emperor-and Zeus-worship, to Isis-and-Osiris-worship, to Jesus-and-Mary-worship, every place the Jews have EVER lived they have been a hated minority. I even have a book called "A History of the Jewish People," by Hayyim Ben-Sassoon, and it is an astonishing chronicle of 5,000 years of persecutions, pogroms, expulsions, and forced displacements.

It is equally astonishing to me that ANY Jew, upon reviewing this remarkable history of theirs, never stops to ask the 64-million-dollar question: "WHY?" Why have they been so hated across millenia and across continents by everyone they lived amongst?

Juan, I advise you to step back from your anger, and look at this question as a disinterested and impartial observer. Your words will be far more effective and better received, and you yourself will avoid the risk of heart attack or ulcers, and live a happier and longer life. You and I are not going to change the world. Even if we change the minds of a few readers here, let's say 10 or 20 people, (we should be so lucky, as a Jew would say,) what is that among 6.8 billion people in the world?

Read as much as you can, inform yourself, and cite facts when you write. I know there is a vast and endless supply of facts to choose from, but you must therefore be selective - nobody is going to sit still long enough for you to tell the whole story.

Anyway, Eric Hoffer was a good man, and does not deserve your condemnation. His books are STILL among the most valuable things anyone can read in furtherance of their education and enlightenment.

Kindly yours,
Lemuel Gulliver.

Anonymous said...

If you're ever in Oklahoma
You better move around at night
'Cause they don't like no transportation
Slipping by in-and-out of sight
And they don't care about Dallas, Texas
And they don't care about Wichita
If you're ever in Oklahoma
You better move around the law
They got fines and they got plenty
They'll hold you up for days on end
Threaten your life and take your money
Make you think you're there to stay

-JJ Cale
If you're ever in Oklohoma off the album Really

Anonymous said...

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year, may all your wishes come true!