May 22, 2013 | 3 comments
May 22, 2013 | 2 comments
May 19, 2013 | 3 comments
May 19, 2013 | 1 comment
May 16, 2013 | 4 comments
Islamic texts spur Islamic violence. There. I said it. That fact is incontrovertible. Some Islamic texts do spur violence.
Now, just try accusing me of violating civil rights laws for saying so. I dare anybody to try to bring legal action. I dare them.
Okay, let me repeat that. There are Islamic texts that spur Islamic violence.
Let’s see what Tom Perez, dissembler extraordinaire and radical-at-large at the Civil Rights Division of the Obama Injustice Department, has to say about that.
Why do I make a point of saying this. Well, only secondarily because it’s true. Primarily, I say it because some horrid people who don’t understand freedom, effectively cheered on by Perez, want to use civil rights laws against people merely for criticizing Islam — as if the mere act of criticism is a form of racial discrimination. If they tell me I can’t say it, I’ll darn well say it if I please.
Well, first, Islam is not a race, but a religion. Second, even if it were a race, it would be perfectly legal for me to criticize it. Something called the First Amendment allows me to do so.
The Daily Caller had the story. Please do read it. It’s mind-boggling:
Top Justice Department officials convened a meeting Wednesday where invited Islamist advocates lobbied them for cutbacks in anti-terror funding, changes in agents’ training manuals, additional curbs on investigators and a legal declaration that U.S. citizens’ criticism of Islam constitutes racial discrimination.The department’s “civil rights lawyers are top of the line - I say this with utter honesty - I know they can come up with a way” to redefine criticism as discrimination, said Sahar Aziz, a female, Egyptian-American lawyer. “I’d be willing to give a shot at it,” said Aziz, who is a fellow at the Michigan-based Muslim advocacy group, the Institute for Social Policy & Understanding. The audience of Islamist advocates and department officials included Tom Perez, who heads the department’s division of civil rights.
Perez went on to enthusiastically praise the general tenor of the Muslims’ presentation, while offering not a single defense of the First Amendment….
So, while I’m at it: Black people, statistically, have too many out of wedlock births. There’s no good reason for it. White people, in the aggregate, historically have featured in their ranks far too many racists. Asians have a history of brutal warfare.Martians have ugly green skin.
Are those statements examples of violations of civil rights laws? I dare Perez to say so. A statement, no matter what the opinion, about a race of people is not against the law. Nor is a statement directly disparaging a religion. I think Zoroastrians are/were silly. Is it against the law for me to say so?
I think Tom Perez is a menace to society. Maybe I shouldn’t say that: After all, his name sounds Hispanic. Maybe I just committed a thought crime.
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
H/T to National Review Online