Answering Jinno…And Those Who Think Like Him

by Dwana

Jinno, Jinno, Jinno! What can I say? When I read your response to my comment on Robert’s “The Responsible Thing Is NOT Censorship!” post I was dumbfounded. I couldn’t believe what I had read. The contradictions, the double standards, and the historical ignorance were astounding. And the most amazing thing was how oblivious you were to it all, child.

Actually Jinno, I’m glad you wrote what you did. Now I know what’s really driving “anti-war” liberals such as yourself (I know, you consider yourself a libertarian not a liberal, but I say if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and waddles like a duck then it probably is a duck, and you, Jinno, are a duck). You war critics aren’t concerned at all with the well being of the Iraqi people, the lives of American soldiers, or even wanting real peace. No, what’s driving you is your belief that Americans brought 9/11 on ourselves, that we deserved it because we–gasp!–angered Muslims. Damn us! That explains why the “anti-war” crowd NEVER marches against Islamic terrorism, NEVER mourns its victims, and NEVER demands that Islamic killers lay down their arms. Oh no. To do that would continue the “warmongering” act of insulting Muslims, and we just can’t have that!

I’m glad you made that plain, Jinno. And I’m glad to see you committed to this belief even to the point of abandoning your principles and ideals to support it. What principles and ideals have you abandoned, you ask? How about your favorite one: Tolerance for homosexuality. You’ve expressed your supposedly firm commitment to that ideal in previous comments on this blog. Yet you happily tolerate Muslims “…being a little less lenient on [homosexuality]” because “[t]hat’s their belief system”. Oh well, since it’s their belief system we HAVE to accept it, embrace it even. Not to do so, would be racist and intolerant towards Islam and that must be avoided at all costs!

Yes Jinno, you worship at the altar of tolerating Islam. There’s no democratic value you aren’t willing to suspend in the name of peace through not angering Muslims. Take freedom of speech, for example. In my comments to the above named post I mentioned the Muslim riots and killings that broke out after a Danish newspaper published unflattering cartoons of Muhammad. You justified the riots by saying that “[Muslims’] religion states that Muhammad is not to be depicted in any form…”, as if that should’ve mattered to a NON-MUSLIM people such as the Danes. Hello! We are in the Western world, Jinno, and Muslim standards DO NOT APPLY!!!

I’m appalled by the hypocrisy of liberals like you who constantly chant “Separation of church and state!” which is not what the founding fathers had in mind, yet advocate that Islamic religious doctrine should be the guiding force in NON-MUSLIM, WESTERN countries because anything less might offend Muslims and GOD FORBID MUSLIMS SHOULD BE OFFENDED!!!

But being the liberal that you are Jinno, your anti-religious impulse can’t be denied. While Islam is off limits for denunciation, Christianity is fair game. You give Islam a pass for violating your liberal values but you don’t hesitate to condemn Christians who do the exact same thing. In your comment you gleefully pointed out that Keith Ellison, the lone Muslim in the Senate, “…hasn’t spoken out against [gay] marriage, religious freedom, or women’s rights” while certain conservative Christians in Congress “…can’t…seem to nail down the concept of our Constitution, much less the ideals of religious freedom and tolerance of [gay] relationships.”

Ahhh! Now we know who the REAL problem religionists are: Christians! Damn Bible thumping bigots! They get no slack from you, Jinno. No rationalizing that disapproving of homosexuality is just their belief system. In your book it’s ok to hate (as you would call it) gays, only if you’re Muslim. Christians have no permission to disagree with your opinions. If only they had convinced you liberals that insulting them was a threat to world peace! The Muslims beat the Christians to that punch, alas.

But even that wasn’t the worst….. As bad as your groveling before Muslims is; as bad as your double standard in judging Christians and Muslims is, the worst thing you did Jinno, was repeating, without any critical thought, the ginormous lie that Israel, and our support of her, is THE reason for Muslim anger and violence against America and the West. This revealed your historical ignorance in all its, uh, glory.

You were quite adamant in your belief in this lie, Jinno. I think I know why; it’s the crown jewel in the terrorism-is-America’s-fault doctrine. The doctrine can’t be sustained without THE LIE. Well fasten you seat belt Jinno, ’cause I’m gonna knock that lie right outta the frickin’ ball park!

You wrote the we “…kicked [the Muslims] out of their Holy Land” and therefore Islamic terrorism is just Muslims “defending their property, a Holy Land of their religion.” THEIR Holy Land? I don’t think so!!

Jinno, Israel is the Jew’s Holy Land, NOT the Muslims!! Even Christians’ claim to the Holy Land is overruled by the claim of the Jews. Israel and the rest of the Middle East didn’t become “Muslim land” until 600+ years after Christ, and then only by conquest and, over time, coerced conversion of its population to Islam. That was the beginning of the Muslim Holy Land you’re so keen to protect, Jinno. And here’s some more history you won’t get from your Marxist professor.

The only people to create an independent state in “Palestine” were the Jews. The Muslims NEVER did. From the time of King David, Israel has been the religious, cultural, and national heart of the Jewish people, and Jerusalem has been her capital. Solomon, David’s son, built the First Temple on what is now the Temple Mount in approximately 960 BC. The Second Temple, begun after the Jews returned from their Babylonian Exile, was completed in 515 BC. The Muslims didn’t build their “holy” Dome of the Rock on the Temple Mount until 691 AD, more than 1000 years later. Though sometimes occupied by foreign powers, the Jewish nation of Israel continued until the tragic end of the Bar Kochba revolt against the Romans in 135 AD. Then Roman Emperor Hadrian expelled the Jews from Jesusalem and renamed their country “Palestine” in an attempt to blot out all memory of their national existence. Liberals like you Jinno, and your Muslim allies are continuing Hadrian’s mission with a vengeance, but you will fail. No amount of historical revision will eradicate the Jews’ right to “Palestine”. And now they have restored their nation in their homeland once again.

But even if “Palestine” was the Muslims’ Holy Land Israel’s existence there would neither explain nor justify Islamic terrorism. The truth, Jinno, is that Muslims have been attacking non-Muslims without provocation since the beginning of their faith. They first attacked the West about 10 years after Muhammad’s death in 632(?) AD, unsuccessfully besieging Constantinople, capital of the Eastern Roman Empire, aka Byzantium. In case you were wondering Jinno, there was no Palestinian-Israeli conflict, with the Byzantines supporting Israel, then.

Undeterred by their failure to take the Byzantine capital, the Muslims kept attacking Christendom. They invaded Sicily in 652 AD, Spain in 711 AD, Constantinople (again) in 717 AD, and France in 720 AD. By 730 AD Islamic forces were poised to take all of Europe but were stopped by Charles Martel, the Hammer of the Franks and grandfather of Charlemagne, at the Battle of Tours in 732 AD. Notice once again, Jinno, that there was no Palestinian-Israeli conflict, no American troops in Saudi Arabia, and no Iraq War going on at the time of these invasions. In short, the West hadn’t angered the Muslims. So what was causing all this Islamic aggression? Please explain, Jinno.

And it didn’t stop there…..

Having failed to conquer the West through the front door of Spain and France, the Muslims tried to take Europe through the back door of the Balkans. The Islamic Ottoman Turks captured the fortress of Gallipoli, in the European part of Turkey, in 1354. From there they moved steadily into the Balkans, finally conquering Constantinople, now Istanbul, in 1453. A defeat of the Hungarians in the mid 1500’s put the Ottomans on what seemed like an inevitable conquest and “Muslimfication” of Europe. However, Polish king Jan Sobieski finally halted the Islamic drive into Christendom at the Gates of Vienna on that OTHER September 11, in 1683. The Muslims’ jihad against the West was finally broken. Soon it would be the Europeans’ turn to conquer the Muslims. What goes around comes around.

So what have you got to say now, Jinno? Your entire Muslim-terrorism-is-caused-by-us-angering-them view, believed by you like a religion, is utterly unsustainable. If you’re willing to face history you have to admit that you are profoundly, dangerously wrong. As I made clear above, none of the “injustices” that today’s Muslims rail against were extant when they were invading the West. No, what all the invasions I just revealed to you have in common is that they were acts of Muslim on non-Muslim violence. And those weren’t the only ones. For the sake of space I didn’t mention the Muslims’ centuries long aggression against the non-Muslim lands to their east, especially India. I’ll let you look that up yourself, Jinno.

And after you do look that up I hope you’ll have the courage and honesty to admit that the problem facing the West and ALL non-Muslim civilizations is not what we DO but what Muslims BELIEVE. The motivation for the invasions I just wrote about came from Islamic doctrine, not from any anti-Islamic acts by the victims. The Koran teaches that Muslims are to fight the “infidels” until they convert or “feel themselves subdued”. That is the essence of jihad. So the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is just a pretext for a war that Muslims would be waging, and have waged, anyway. If Israel vanished tomorrow Muslims would find another affront to their sensibilities that they’d have to avenge. And saps like you would be right there agreeing with them that we’re the problem.

Jinno, I don’t know why there’s so much affinity on the left for embracing our enemies and believing the worst about America. You revealed, though, that this affinity is alive and well. I hope this post will encourage you to subject your belief to some critical thinking, Jinno. But I won’t hold my breath. You are wedded to the Evil America Paradigm and have little to gain from challenging it. You probably couldn’t undersand the world without it. That it’s false means nothing to you. What matters is that it gives you a heady feeling of intellectual and moral superiority over mere mortals who adhere to the unhip view that Islam chose to be at war with us.

Well Jinno, I hope you enjoy that feeling because it’s all you’re going to get from your belief in America the Bad. You may get a few strokes from other left-wing loons but real Americans like me and Robert know your game. And we will fight you every step of the way. The survival of our country is a stake and we’re not about to let some anti-American propagandist go unanswered.

That’s my response to you, Jinno. Any questions?

God Bless America
God Bless our Troops and their mission
God Bless our Readers and my Listeners on BTR


About Robert P. Garding

I am a Reagan Conservative, who is very alarmed at the Liberals who have just lost their majority over our government, but continue to act like it never happened. They have to be stopped. NOW or even sooner.
This entry was posted in Conservative Talk Blog host, National Security Concerns. Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Answering Jinno…And Those Who Think Like Him

  1. Dwana says:

    You too, Americaneocon!

  2. jinno says:

    I don’t know what to say, really. I’m shocked.

    I made it to the front page of a neoconsevative blog. (And yes, That’s what you are. No looks like a duck, talks like a duck BS there.)

    I’ve said quite a few times the following line: “Personal opinion and politics don’t [and shouldn’t] blend.” Yet, you seem not to be able to make that connection at all. It angers you that such an idea could make sense, because you seem to think that your ideals should (and do) run this country.

    The reason I’m anti-“Christian Right” is because they’re the one’s so adamantly against free-citizenry policies in our government. Who opposes any funding at all for Stem-Cell research: the Churches and other “moral” lobbyists in Washington. Who immediately shoots them down? Our neoconservative president. Homosexual rights and other forms of free idealisms are also fought by the neoconservative/Christian right.

    Now, granted, censorship (which I’m entirely opposed to in every sense) is an ideal driven mostly by the left. And to that, unfortunately there is no defense on my leanings. ‘Tis a horrid practice, but it’s also one endorsed by this blog.

    Y’see, I’ve said that people are entitled to their bigotries. You are. But as I said before “personal opinion and politics shouldn’t mix.” That’s why I can endorse an ideal that we shouldn’t hate the Islamic people. That’s why I can support gay rights at the same time. Because when it comes to not restricting the rights of people to practice and believe their religions, it comes down to the following question:

    If another person does this, is it in anyway a restriction of your rights?

    When it comes down to it, an American Islamic Citizen can believe in Allah, pray to Mecca, and dislike whomever he wants. But if two homosexual men/women decide that they want the same rights in their “marriage” as a man and a woman get in theirs, does that citizen in anyway have an infringement upon his rights? No. In fact, it doesn’t effect him at all.

    I endorse peace. I’m a pacifist. I’m not opposed to the War in Iraq because I happen to think that the premeditation of 9-11 was in part our own doing. I think we only fuel the fire by having a presence in the Middle East. I think that we have too much of a military presence everywhere to be perfectly honest.

    Force is a weapon that should only be used in defense. We didn’t defend ourselves on 9/11, and we didn’t do it by trying to tell a people, whom were already upset with our way of doing things, how to live.

    When it comes down to it we have to run our country the best we can. You talk about sovereignty of our nation a whole damned lot. Good. Let’s keep sovereignty of OUR nation, and stop trying to push our sovereignty onto other nations. It’s a waste of life, it’s a waste of money, and It’s a damned waste of time.

    And in response to your history lesson, Dwana, we killed hundreds of thousands of Indian tribes in the settling and expansion of this country. We really did take this country by force, and not by diplomatic means. If your view that the Jewish people should have sovereignty over Palestine is to remain true, are you willing to give the lands of America back to the Indian tribes?

    Would you give the Lakota tribes, whom have recently expressed interest in pulling out of their treaties, and encouraging people to denounce their US Citizenship have their land? If the rest of the UN were to observe the nation as a state?

    Or would you advise that we arm against them, and take back the land that is “ours”?

    There’s two sides to every coin, 6 sides to every cube, and an infinite number of sides to a globe. Try to remember that in the future, before you continue to keep seeing things from ONE side.

  3. Dwana says:

    Jinno, I was right not to hold my breath. You have no critical thinking skills whatsoever. Your rambling, ranting response proves that. Still, I’ll respond to you again; maybe this time you’ll actually hear me and learn a thing or two.

    I’ve never denied that I’m a conservative, Jinno. What ever gave you the idea that I had? I AM a conservative, without the “neo” prefix. I don’t know what a “neoconservative” is and I doubt you do, either. I suspect that “neocon” is just another slur liberals use against those who dare to disagree with them. It’s like “racist” and “fascist”; liberals don’t care what the words actually mean as long as they inspire fear and hatred against those who are so labelled. But those labels won’t intimidate me out of my beliefs. Sorry, Jinno.

    Yes, I state my opinions on this blog and my own blogs. What’s wrong with that, Jinno? You do the exact same thing. So what’s this BS that personal opinions and politics don’t mix? Jinno, people’s political views are based in large part on their opinions. What, you thought people’s politics just formed out of thin air? No, dear; opinions matter. People who have negative opinions of Christianity, for instance, are far more likely to vote for liberal Democrats than those who have a positive opinion of Christianity. That’s just one example of personal opinion and politics mixing. Rethink your assertion, child.

    You say you oppose the Christian Right because it’s against “free-citizenry policies in our government” and the first example you use is the CR’s opposition to stem cell research. Jinno, please explain how opposing stem cell research is a “free-citizenry” issue? How is anybody’s civil rights threatened by conservative Christians blocking federal funding of scr?

    Jinno, the Chritian Right opposes federal funding of stem cell research because a) they seriously doubt its medical usefulness and b) they believe that embryos, the source of stem cells, are human life and therefore shouldn’t be created just to be “harvested” and then destroyed. You may disagree with those two opinions but you can’t seriously claim that they are an attack on the Bill of Rights. Plus, no FEDERAL funding of stem cell research doesn’t mean no funding at all. Private institutions are free to fund scr all they want. So your pet science project is alive and well, J.

    Next, you turned to your familiar whine about conservative Christians opposing gay marriage. Damn them! Muslims oppose homosexuality and you dismiss it as just their belief, but let Christians oppose homosexuality and you act like it’s a threat to the very existence of the Republic. Can you say, double standard? I knew you could.

    Frankly Jinno, I’ve never understood why liberals are so obsessed with normalizing homosexuality and legalizing gay marriage. How, exactly, is that idealistic? You say that gay marriage won’t infringe on other people’s rights; therefore, it should be legal. Well, there are many things people do that don’t infringe on the rights of others. Are you going to demand that those things be legal too, Jinno?

    I mean, there are many sexual relationships/marriages that are forbidden by law. Gays aren’t being singled out on this issue. A straight man can’t marry his mother, sister, daughter, or niece, for instance. Nor can he marry more than one woman at the same time. Adults can’t have sex with minors and prostitution is illegal in 49 of the 50 states. An argument can be made that all of these acts don’t intefere with other people’s rights, which seems to be your litmus test, Jinno, for deciding what should or shouldn’t be legal. So why aren’t you demanding the legalization of incest, polygamy, prostitution, and pedophilia? Why isn’t that an ideal?

    Well, it’s getting late and I have to go to work in the morning. I’ll finish my response to your rant tomorrow. For now, I’ll let you chew on what I’ve already written. Maybe, just maybe, a little critical thinking will creep into your liberal brain. But, like before, I won’t hold my breath.

  4. Jenn says:

    Nice Leftard troll, his idiocy knows no bounds.

    My favorite: “If your view that the Jewish people should have sovereignty over Palestine is to remain true, are you willing to give the lands of America back to the Indian tribes?”

    ROTFLMAO!!!! Hey Jinno, you forgot to put “palestine” in quotes… there is no “palestine” all there is are the cast off A-Rabs from surrounding countries who were thrown out and now are used as political pawns.

    Yawn….moronic leftard trolls tire me.

  5. Dwana says:

    Jinno, Jinno, Jinno! Thought you had me, didn’t you? Throwing the whites-stole-America-from-the-Indians card in my face was meant to expose me as a hypocrite but you failed dear, and here’s why.

    First, you totally misunderstood the purpose of my history lesson, Jinno. You repeated the Muslims’ claim that Israel is Muslim land. This claim usually means that Israel, and the rest of the Middle East, has ALWAYS been Muslim land and that the modern Israelis are foreign usurpers and occupiers with NO connection–not historical, not cultural, not ethnic, not religious–to the land what so ever. My history lesson was meant to correct that false assertion.

    I’m glad you brought up the American Indians, Jinno. Playing that card strengthened my conviction that liberals like you really don’t believe in the legitimacy of the United States and that’s the real reason you’re so eager to side with our enemies in this time of resurgent jihad.

    Jinno, you claimed to be a pacifist; you’re not. There is nothing peace loving about agreeing with America’s enemies about how bad America is. What you are, Jinno, is a guilt-ridden, self-hating, left-wing White boy who’s willing to betray his own country in a desperate attempt to atone for sins he didn’t commit. You call this treason “pacifism” in order to sell it to the rest of the American people…and to yourself. But it’s still treason.

    And your eagerness to believe the worst about America is the real reason you brought up the fate of the American Indians. But to answer your question, Jinno, no, I would not and do not support giving America back to the Indians. And before you call me a hypocrite, here’s why.

    Jinno, Europeans didn’t take America from the Indians in quite the way your left-wing mind wants to believe.

    First off, when Columbus reached the New World in 1492 there were, at the highest estimate, only about 115,000,000 native peoples on the ENTIRE American landmass, from the top of Canada to the tip of Chile. What that means, Jinno, is that the majority of the New World was uninhabited. Europeans could and did settle on lots of land nobody else was living on.

    Furthermore, as Europeans moved deeper into the continent they didn’t go around murdering all the Indians they could find as you imply, Jinno. No, the biggest killer of Native Americans wasn’t White violence but disease. Among some tribes 90% of the members died from illnesses like measles and smallpox, leaving behind uninhabited land later settled by Whites. And these were NOT European diseases but HUMAN diseases that the Indians had no natural immunity to because of their geographic isolation.

    When the Europeans came to the New World they brought “their” diseases with them, but that was something that always occurred when people moved from place to place. Due to their close proximity to each other, Europeans, North Africans, Middle Easterners, and Asians had been “trading” diseases between each other, and building up immunities, for thousands of years. The Native Americans weren’t in that loop and they ended up suffering greatly for it. But there was NEVER a plot by evil White Christians to wipe out the heathen Indians with “White” diseases.

    Are you beginning to see, Jinno, that the interaction between Native Americans and Europeans was a little more complicated than the good-Indian-bad-Whitey stereotype beloved of liberals like yourself? If not, here’s some more info to absorb.

    While always portraying themselves–and being portrayed by liberal Whites–as tragic victims, the Indians did a lot of dirty work to Whites and to each other. Take the Lakota that you mentioned.

    Jinno, one of the reasons that I don’t support the Lakota’s declaration of “independence” from the US is that the Black Hills, where they want their nation to be, didn’t originally belong to them or any other Sioux. What Lakota activists conveniently forget to tell people is that the Black Hills didn’t become “theirs” until 1776 when they kicked out the Cheyenne who already lived there. That’s right, Jinno. The “sacred” Lakota land of the Black Hills became such only after the Lakota took it by force from someone else. So the first thing the independent Lakota nation needs to do is give its land to the Cheyenne who, I’m sure, will have give it to yet another tribe. This is what should happen if they are to act in accord with your views, Jinno.

    Of course, if the Lakota don’t act in accord with your views I’m sure you’ll have a handy-dandy rationalization, Jinno. You always do for non-White, non-Western, non-Christian people, especially the ones who kill Americans.

    I’m sure that nothing in this comment will penetrate your think leftie skull, Jinno. As I wrote in the post you wouldn’t be able to function in the world without your surreal, dishonest, principle-abandoning, liberal, America the Bad worldview. I don’t understand how libs like you come to hate their country, and with such enthusiasm. But you do and I intend to call you on it. This is my country and I won’t let any fifth columnist hand her over to her enemies!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s