Bill Maher :slashingtongue

Mosque and 9/11

Saturday, May 8th, 2010 at 3:11 am  
Comments (31)
During the 9/11 attacks, many buildings were damaged as the World Trade Center crumbled down. Out of these buildings is a former Burlington Coat Factory. It closed down due to the damages caused from the debris. But guess what is going to be turned into now? Make a wild guess.

That very building is now going to be turned into a 13 story mosque and a cultural center for the Muslims. It seems that there was not much disapproval against this idea. And the 2 Muslims organizations are pumping in $100 million into it. They make claims that these ways will allow them to get counter radicalism and make peace with others. Kind of like an eye opener for people to further understand about Muslims.

Of course when it was announced, many of victims of 9/11 who lost their loved ones did not like the idea. And there are those who said Muslims too lost their lives in the 9/11 attacks so it’s alright. There many opinions on this matter. But we have to be rational about this. I am not prejudiced and no I did not lose anyone in the attacks. But I sincerely feel that the Islamic organizations have to respect the feelings of the victims` family members and build their place of worship elsewhere. It just does not feel right.

When the members of the Islamic organist ions asked about why pick that location, they claim that there is not enough place for all worshippers to pray in the neighborhood. I am not sure but maybe more and more people are getting influenced into another religion. Secondly, they said that it would allow Muslims who have been silenced throughout can voice out about their feelings on radicalism. It is true to say that not all Muslims are terrorists and it is very bad way to look at it as well. But sadly, at the moment fear is in the hearts of the everyday people. It like what Bill Maher said “Civilized people would sue each other not kill”. Because building a place of worship on Islamic soil would be offensive to them. So what is it to us? Should we react the same way?

Even if Muslims who condemn radicalism do need a place or a building to voice it out. They can simply march across the street with signs to protest against terrorism. They could challenge the radicals who are openly living in the city and saying that the 9/11 attacks are justified. But so far I only see protests that are against other religions and Muslims calling for killing of people who do not believe in Islam. I have yet to see a peaceful protest in the news. Maybe there was I really hope someone would place a link in the comment section.

Furthermore, some Muslims scientist found a way to check for pork content in a meal. But can they design a method to seek out the radicals and terrorist. If they can, I think that will make it the best contribution ever to counterbalance terrorism. New York has already had several bombing attempts. Even recently, it happened and the man behind the plot looks like nice guy. But it happen, so how is it possible to trust anyone? Fear will get the better of people. Imagine the reaction from the people of other faiths. It could possibly become chaotic. Imagine if some fanatic takes out his/her frustration on the Muslims there.

The whole point is this, if I did something wrong I would take it slow and lay low to make an approach. Firstly I would try to solve the issue first, than try to gain the trust from others. That seems to me the obvious way to go. It makes take a long time but it is better than angering and causing fear to others when it can also be unleashed on them. I simply thing Muslims should take a step back and wise up to the reality. They should understand the feelings of others and not put their own convinces and religion as a high priority. But I also think the management should have the guts to say no such events without the need to fear. They should seriously reconsider.

Comments are welcomed.

Related Videos

Carrie Prajean utter lack of respect!

Thursday, November 12th, 2009 at 5:44 pm  
Leave your comment

I have never really gotten down hard on Carrie Prajean. I always felt that she was just a media whore, someone like Levi Johnston, who is doing anything for media attention. But after her treatment of Larry King, I think it is time to give her a tongue slashing usually reserved for older hosts.

I do not like the manner that she answered her question, but then I would have disqualified half the women based on the manner the answered their questions. So, yes I am not an expert! Politics is my field, not beauty pageants.

Then she went about opening her mouth saying that she was doing it for God and so on and so forth. She became the darling of the far right. Of course there are the instances of her topless photographs and her masturbation videos, okay. I would not be surprised if it was Carrie Prajean herself that exposed all these leaks to stay in the media. Hey, there is no such thing as bad publicity right.

I always put her as a person that was crying for attention. I put her in the same category as Levi Johnston who is doing the same thing by posing nude for playgirl and throwing dirt at Governor Sarah Palin. They are just attention seeking whores to me.

This incident changed everything. In political commentary, there are many people who could be considered bigots, rude, obnoxious, terrible. These can be from the left like Keith Olbermann, Bill Maher and Rachael Maddow, from the right like Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck or Bill O Reilly or even independents like Governor Ventura, Presidential Candidate Ralph Nader or the people here at ST.

But nobody disses CNN’s Larry King. Anybody would tell you that he is a very soft-ball host. He has been doing this for so many years and I never heard of anybody being pissed off with Larry King. Even people like Bill O Reilly and Rush Limbaugh do not mind him. I am shocked at the manner that she treated Larry King. It is disgraceful.

She began by saying how she is “Palinized” by the far-left media like Keith Olbermann. Okay, that is a fair point. He is really a jacka**. But is there really a double standard as she suggests? Would right-wingers be forced out of the air because of mean words?

Rush Limbaugh supported (supports?) the apartheid government is South Africa in the 90s, he is still on the air. Glenn Beck called President Obama a racist for no damn reason, he is still on the air. Michael Savage in on the air despite his outright racist remarks against Latinos. Governor Sarah Palin is still on the air despite claiming that our President pals with terrorists. So, the idea of there being a double standard is really ridiculous.

Larry King then went to the point where she agreed to settle for some lawsuits that she made. He did not ask what the settlement was, he asked why. Why did she settle? It is a fair question. It is nothing intrusive. Even then he went on for just 30 seconds.

“So you can even say why you settled? I am not asking for what is in the agreement? … So the agreement discusses why each party agreed to settle?” That was basically all Larry King asked! That was it! It was not a tough one. She could have answered that she was tired of everything and wanted it to end quickly etc. Those kinds of excuses are okay, but you can’t tell why you settled?

Because of that, she gave Larry King the ultimate disrespect by taking off her microphone while a viewer was asking her a question. If I were Larry King, I would have freaking exploded. Try doing that to other hosts like Bill O Reilly, Geraldo Riviera, Ann Coulter, Olbermann and see what the reaction would be.

I also hope there was a person she was talking to in the room, because if she was talking to herself, she would really need psychiatric help!

Watch it at cnn.com/video

Related articles by Zemanta
Enhanced by Zemanta

Iran’s ultimatum : ST suggested counter ultimatum

Wednesday, November 11th, 2009 at 6:27 pm  
Leave your comment

I have always said that President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is the Iranian version of President W. George Bush. Well, he recently made remarks that virtually prove me right; He basically told the United States that we be with the Iranians or the Zionists. Well we suggest Secretary of State Hillary Clinton reply…

President Ahmadinejad has given the ultimatum to President Obama : Choose between us or the Zionists. He went as far as to say that he cannot shake our President’s hand because we support and are friends of Israel.

This is the time to draw the line in the sand. If he wants us to choose, than we can give him a choice in return. Choose between being friends with all, or be friends with none at all. It is a very simple ultimatum for President Ahmadinejad to consider.

President Obama can throw in the names of his political challenger Mir-Hossein Moussavi and Neda Agha-Soltan, an innocent girl that was executed and considered a martyr against the cause of President Ahmadinejad. That is how we can play politics with Iran.

I think the biggest players here would be the Russians. It is Russia that is supplying Iran with the nuclear materials like uranium. Right now, Washington and Jerusalem can pressure the Russians with statement like these. If he can make an ultimatum with us today, he can make an ultimatum with the Russians tomorrow. Clever diplomacy can put the pressure on the Russians who can single-handedly stop Iran.

I suggest that we start drawing our big stick with regards to Iranian-American diplomacy. They think they want to show their stick, lets show them ours. It is definitely bigger and holds more ground. We have the backing of many countries all over the world.

I have always wanted the ties between Iran and America to normalize. For one, Iranians cut more slack when it comes to religion as compared to other states. There are still very strict with their version of Islamic laws. But it is still not as bad as many in the Middle East. We do not see women in burkhas which Bill Maher calls bee suits in Iran, we tend to see women wearing scarves.

A second reason is that Iran is strategically located. Russia to the North, Middle East to the West and South Asia and Afghanistan to its East. I think that stabilizing Iran would make a lot of regions live in peace.

However, we are not playing the bad guys in terms of diplomacy. It is the Iranians under the leadership of President Ahmadinejad. We did not set about new ultimatums or ask them to dump their friends. They did. It is they that want to draw the guns and play the diplomatic version of Russian roulette.

So my suggestion is this, if we have to forgo peace with Iran due to this, lets forgo it. Lets us get our guns ready. It is not us that forgo peace for war, it is the Iranians. We should not forget that they had a great chance under President Obama and they are throwing it away…

Related articles by Zemanta
Enhanced by Zemanta

Rachael Maddow : How to screw an argument up 101

Wednesday, October 28th, 2009 at 6:42 pm  
Leave your comment

Liberals are the losers in American politics. One of the furthest left wing person in America is MSNBC’s Rachael Maddow. In these two examples, I am going to highlight some recent issues she brought up that we might have agreed on in general BUT yet she is wrong.

Rachael Maddow claiming that the Public option bill is not enough:

She went against the proposition that Senator Harry Reid put on the floor, which is the public option with the option for states to opt out. I am all for this and I think that the Republicans really got no excuses here. I even went as far as to say that this means that health-care should not be a state matter with state level funding rather than a federal level.

However, Rachael Maddow disagreed. This is what she said : “ Thank goodness we have 60 Democrats in the Senate right! Of all the different things that (Leader) Harry Reid could have put forward… a really modest conservative version of the public option. … How well would this work? It is public option just for uninsured people and it probably won’t be available in some states? One of the main arguments for the public option is that it would be big….”

No Rachael, sensible people do not support the public option because it is big, people support it because it is an option! It is competition to the health insurance companies. I really do not care if it is big or small! As long as it can bring my cost down, by competing with the insurance companies, I am for it!

She said that it is only for people that are uninsured, this is misleading. It is only for the uninsured because the health bill does not kick in straight away. The rest of the population would have it around 2014. The uninsured get it straight away. It is as simple as that.

Thirdly, this is the conservative option? There were options being put out where people can buy across state lines, we have mentioned in the past that those methods would not work. But that is a more conservative option than the public option. We threw out ideas of starting a trade war between health insurance companies, opening up the industry to foreign companies as well as to give a federal reward to the company with the highest customer satisfaction. I guess these are all way too right wing for you huh?

Rachael Maddow claiming that Senator John McCain wants to rig the Internet.

Come on! To put it in simplest terms, it is customers right to view content vs Internet Service Providers to cut up the content to sell (think one plan for e-mail only, one plan for social sites only, etc). I agree with her position and I am all out for net neutrality but listen to what she has to say.

“The government say, the Internet should be free. Big companies should not be able to rig the Internet for their own purposes. (Senator) John McCain bill says that they should. That is the same Senator McCain who back in 2008, when asked if he preferred a Mac or a PC, said this: ” I am a(n) illiterate (who) has to rely on my wife for all the assistance that I can get.” ”

Oh, give me a break! Where did she get that Senator McCain has evil intention to want to rig the Internet? Why must it be that he is evil rather than Senator McCain just have a different opinion? That is what makes you a wing-nut. I disagreed with him on this issue and the Rape Bill recently, but I still maintain the respect I have for respect him.

And to rub it in, she gave a very mean spirited attack on Senator McCain, over his honest answer last year. I learned something this year that I did not know last year? Does that mean that I cannot comment on that program language I learned? So if Senator McCain was a IT-illiterate, does that mean that he must be stuck in that state forever?

These are the kind of instances that can turn an Independent like me off. It also make a news-shy citizen turn off too with those blatant lies. Don’t get me wrong, the right wing bullshits too. But they do not do it as stupidly as the Liberals do. Bar Bill Maher and Alan Grayson, I cannot think of one that can match the right wing in terms of attacks. Add this to the Democrats lack of spine and what do you get : L-O-S-E-R-S!

Related articles by Zemanta
Enhanced by Zemanta

FOX hate that you would have to hear to believe

Monday, September 28th, 2009 at 8:29 pm  
Leave your comment

FOX and MSNBC are the terrible news networks of America. If we were to make a list of all the screw ups that they make and how partisan their so called “news” is; we would have nothing else to write about. But this really takes the cake. It is really something so irresponsible that it could lead to blood…

Frank Gaffney, a person that believe it or not was actually nominated and worked in the (Presidents) Reagan and Clinton administrations, runs a “think tank” and is, in my opinion, the father of Islamo-phobia.

He is actually a frequent guest on the MSNBC and FOX. Only these two crappy news organizations would have a person like this on. FOX News bans Bill Maher but this guy is okay for them to have! I equate this to President Ahmadinejad’s denial of the Holocaust.

This is what he said, “ This (Sharia) is the program that I think we need to be worrying about is the connective tissue between these myriad of attacks.” Does he even know what Sharia is? It is basically the law of Islam. What do you think the Muslim reaction would be?

More proof “ I am saying though that there is this well, virus as you will, a virus that is far more toxic than swine flu. And we are failing to recognize it as such; even though it is actually animating people to believe that Jihad is what God wants them to engage in to the lots of people….:” Wow! Sharia is a virus more toxic than swine flu? Are you kidding me?

What if this was being said about Christians on air? What if there was just one person that said that crazy Evangelism is the disease that is worse than swine flu? What if this message was said or played in volatile regions like South Asia? Do you know how many Hindu Muslim riots has happened in India because of speeches like that? Does he even think of the consequences?

Sharia is the law for the Muslims. It is like the Talmud or the Bible. Of course there are verses in it that sound bad. But they are for Proselytizing. E.g.
“If you eat with a Gentile, it is the same as eating with a dog”–Talmud
“Fight them (non-believers), until all opposition ends and the only religion is Islam.” – Quran
“When the Gentiles worship their Gods, they worship demons.”– Bible

But in the end of the day, there needs to be a person wise enough to decipher them. The people of the three religions above should know that the Earth is not flat despite what is being written as their religious order.

But that is something Frank Gaffney does not understand. He blames the entire legal framework of Islam and rather than the idiots that cannot decipher what is right and what is wrong.

With regards to his point about inmates converting to Jihadi Islam, he should understand that these are the people that Al Qaeda target, not the other way round. As we in Slashing Tongue have mentioned earlier. They already have violent tendencies or are exposed to such thought in prison. Adding in religion would just add the excuse. I think that the state should stop sponsoring religion to these people due to those facts.

Fighting hate with fear and hate is not going to solve the problem, it is going to make it worse. That is the biggest mistake that Frank Gaffney is making. We should not fall into that trap.

Please view clip at Moxnews.com

Related articles by Zemanta
Enhanced by Zemanta