Wednesday, October 24th 2007
More coverage of Darwish speech
Check out these links for further coverage and photos of monday’s speaking event. Here at Michelle Malkin there is a post as well as our favorite undead reporter over at Zombietime. Zombie’s compilation of photos is particularly good; including some of the things I photographed during the evening. Also cross-posted at IncorrectU.
This week’s next IFAW event is tonight at 7pm: a free screening of the movie “Obsession”. It will take place in 60 Evans hall; no large bags or banners will be allowed.
Berkeley College Republicans present Islamofascism Awareness Week, because they don’t believe that fascism can be done right unless it’s by Judeo-Christians.
Comment by jonp72 — 10/25/2007 @ 5:43 am
youre right Jon, the BCRs are a bunch of fascist racists who blindly follow a fascist professor.
only the left has a moral and legitimate right to rule, since Republicans are evil fascists.
what should we do with the BCRs now?
Comment by anonymous — 10/25/2007 @ 10:44 am
what should we do with the BCRs now?
Act with malice toward none and charity for all.
Comment by jonp72 — 10/25/2007 @ 12:37 pm
[Comment removed by moderator]
Comment by anonymous — 10/25/2007 @ 3:57 pm
[Comment removed by moderator]
Comment by jonp72 — 10/25/2007 @ 8:43 pm
“Or do people who hang out on fascist web sites only matter if they’re Islamic?”
you said it, not me.
Comment by anonymous — 10/25/2007 @ 9:16 pm
“Or do people who hang out on fascist web sites only matter if they’re Islamic?”
Umm…dude…that question was rhetorical. It used to be semi-challenging to argue with campus right-wingers, but now it’s just Shoot. Fish. Barrel. In fact, that’s my point. BCR could have had some discussion about fascism in all its varieties, but chose to focus on Islamic varieties of it. In addition, they did not limit themselves to the most extreme segments of Islam, but tried to paint all of Islam with the “fascist” label. Of course, this isn’t about fascism. It’s about marching in jackbooted lockstep with David Horowitz so you can bang the drums for war with Iran.
Comment by jonp72 — 10/26/2007 @ 4:47 am
The whole point of IFAW was to expose the Left’s inability to even acknowledge that there are folks who want to kill Americans, and that they happen to be from a radical fringe of Islam; also that the Left is so closed-minded that they have to misportray their opponents’ views–or try to change the subject–rather than acknowledge this threat.
Comment by BHS'74 — 10/26/2007 @ 10:33 pm
Idiot. You think it’s any huge revelation that there are people in tents in Afghanistan that want to kill us? What a huge waste of money and time, and what a week devoid of rationality or thought.
We acknowledge the threat - we just think you’re stupid.
Comment by Anonymous — 10/27/2007 @ 10:55 pm
IFAW was a total waste of time.
It is ironic that the peace/anti-BCR coalition has been more visible and actually had events for a few days. Not surprising since you guys had to import some old guy to hold the biggest sign.
Oh and I love how the term “fascist” is being thrown back and forth for its emotive value. People don’t really want to be critical thinkers, they just want punchlines.
Comment by Justin Hermouth — 10/28/2007 @ 3:09 am
and now for something completely different: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i6R7iGwUt0E
Comment by anonymous — 10/28/2007 @ 8:24 pm
Unbelievable — but true. California legislature passed law to prevent criminal defendants from getting a fair heaing on the merits: http://sfbay.craigslist.org/forums/?ID=75409991
Comment by jacob — 10/28/2007 @ 11:56 pm
http://kleinverzet.blogspot.com/2007/10/yet-more-car-b-ques-in-amsterdam.html
jonp72, Cheack out Car-b-ques — what a peaceful
Comment by srghw — 10/29/2007 @ 12:00 am
Yes, there are some people who are Muslims who “want to kill us,” but that’s not true of all Muslims. But a catch-all term such as Islamofascism doesn’t do anything to create Muslim allies against terrorism. A basic tenet of political strategy is “divide and conquer.” Common sense says that the minority of Muslims who commit terrorism should be marginalized from the rest of the Muslim population. Instead, BCR would rather re-enact a rerun of the Crusades. Framing antiterrorism efforts as Islam vs. the West or Islam vs. Christendom is exactly the type of counterproductive behavior that IFAW encourages.
Comment by jonp72 — 10/30/2007 @ 1:47 pm
“Instead, BCR would rather re-enact a rerun of the Crusades.”
The Crusades was myth into the real reason it was staged. That was to open up trade with the east for vital spices, in which Islam blocked the west predicated on epistemic rhetoric that people of the west were donkeys, pigs, monkeys and such and not humans. Again you have no argument. Islam is a theocracy, not a religion. Everyone that is not born of Arab blood is second class. In the Abbasid empire the Christians, Jews and secular wanted to convert to Islam to avoid the second class tax, but Arab blood leaders said if you convert you still pay that tax ( In fact it was racist) . I do not care for any excuse; Islam is not tolerance because it is the LAW. The role of the individual in Islam is to the state not like Liberal democracy. It calls for a caliphate – that is its law. Islam is again and never will be a religion – it is a government system of beliefs predicated on monotheism and centralized KINGSHIP. Why would I want it in my country?
Comment by ugoofball — 11/4/2007 @ 3:37 pm
lol. since when do you get to unilaterally decide what you want in “your” country?
Comment by Anonymous — 11/5/2007 @ 1:45 pm
I don’t worry, the latins will eventually take over control of this country and the military and they will carve up the middle east. They took enough grief by Islamic hegemony, death to their patriots, to live on for thousands of years.
Comment by Anonymous — 11/5/2007 @ 10:32 pm