“Prisonworld” magazine?!

Are you sure this wasn’t supposed to be posted yesterday on April Fool’s day? Unbelievable.

DS_ROCKS! on April 2, 2013 at 5:00 pm

I always hated that song “Oh, Sheila” but I wasn’t too keen on anything mainstream back them. If they sing it now I reckon they sing, “Oh, Sharia”.

Black Democrats confound me enough but since I have learned the truth about Islam HERE, Black Mooooooooslims even confound me more. I could never, ever respect them. They have not brains nor propriety. Can’t respect that.

I also learned HERE about the big business of pIslam in prisons but I have been seeing stories daily that illustrate it. It’s annoying and troubling.

Something else this dumb country should wake up to but won’t.

Even the preternaturally optimistic Conservatives are getting down because our bull-dozing has become so clear to see each day. I don’t like it at ALL!

Skunky on April 2, 2013 at 5:00 pm

The funny thing is Black Muslims are frowned up by other Muslims. They’re not “pure enough” for them.

NormanF on April 2, 2013 at 5:14 pm

Fundamentalist Muslims can’t lie to infidels because they don’t owe infidels the truth.

That’s why they’re not really even criminals when they break infidel laws either and it’s why they can lie about it with a straight face and such convincing indignation when they get caught.

Yes, let’s get our criminal class(especially the black disenfranchised youth segment) into radical Islam.
How bad can it be? We’ve tried everything else right?
Couldn’t be much worse than Christianity could it?
It’s not like there are any economic solutions on the horizon.
Hell, no.

For me this article is proof positive that Obama is the biggest Alfred E. Newman that has ever been elected to the office of President.
Who even needs cartoons with the politicians we have nowadays anyway?

I don’t even look forward to the end of his term when America will begin the hopeless task of trying to pick up the pieces after its little affirmative action fiasco which hasn’t made it anymore loved or respected around the world by the way. Just a little less respected.

At least America proved it was a genuine affirmative action appointment by finding a Black American that doesn’t even particularly like the United States very much and definitely detests everything it used to stand for.
So I guess nobody can accuse him of being a token non-white except people even more radical and looney left than the people he used to socialize with, of which there aren’t many.

Oh well, full marks for making the effort. Guess what the prize is.

Frankz on April 2, 2013 at 5:26 pm

Deb–

RE: “It’s odd that Black America continues to embrace the religion that traded and sold them into slavery from Africa, the religion that still enslaves them in Muslim countries around the world, and the inherently racist religion that refers to Blacks as “abed” or “abeed” (the Arabic singular and plural word which literally means “slave” but is used as the Muslim version of the N-word).”

It’s called the Stockholm Syndrome.

Red Ryder on April 2, 2013 at 5:31 pm

It’s mainly because old confederates like you look down on them, Ryder.

Frankz on April 2, 2013 at 6:05 pm

Frankz: lol.

Anyway, it can’t be Stockholm Syndrome because these blacks are not being held and tormented by the Muslims YET. Indeed, Stockholm Syndrome would have the blacks identify and appreciate the values of their captors, i.e., whitey.

I wonder if RR is any better with Gramsci.

skzion on April 2, 2013 at 6:10 pm

I find it amazing that Ebony Magazine cites as their heroes to ex-convicts. Dr. Ben Carson and his wife couldn’t be their couple of the year?

Jonathan E. Grant on April 2, 2013 at 6:47 pm

@JEG–

Not so amazing. They’re playing to their core demographic. Of course, the *owners* of Ebony Magazine–personally–no doubt regard Carson as a hero.

Red Ryder on April 2, 2013 at 6:51 pm

Prison Experience – Good
Never in prison – Bad (not cool enough)

Demmican – Good
Republicrat – Bad

Allah – Good (Gives us a better gang to belong to)
White Man’s God – Bad

Get da pitcha?

Alfredo from Puerto Rico on April 2, 2013 at 8:39 pm

Thanks for this piece Debbie, and I for one as a black individual do NOT read or subcribe to Ebony Magazine, if my memory serves me correct, my mother still subscribes to them. I didn’t know nothing about this by Ebony magazine of placating to a muslim couple, who were ex-convicts and trying to convert black people like myself into islam (I don’t mean directly at me personally, but you folks understand what I’m referring to).

Um, didn’t the publishers and writers for this magazine noticed that arab-muslims were the very first slave-traders in history, by enslaving blacks in African countries south of the sahara desert and also selling black slaves to the Europeans before coming here to North America (and South America)? If the publishers of this magazine don’t know this and/or uneducated, I can forgive them on it, there not too old to learn anything, BUT, if they know all of these facts that I mentioned and don’t care, then I pity them.

“A nation is defined by its borders, language & culture!”

Sean R. on April 2, 2013 at 9:03 pm

Islam has no problem with slavery fundamentally because it is a religion of submission, not love.
You will not find a good Samaritan celebrated in Islam although many Muslims may indeed be such a person.

“We do not say love is halal or haram because it is a feeling. Maybe it is not under control. You can judge what is under control. But people who fall in love are in many episodes away from the cleansed and pure atmosphere.”

http://islamgreatreligion.wordpress.com/2011/05/25/falling-in-love-allowed-in-islam/

Not exactly a ringing endorsement… more of a big question mark.

Here’s what isn’t…

“Muhammad began to take slaves after he moved to Medina, and had power. Slaves were usually taken in raids on nearby Arab tribes, or war, either through offensive or defensive actions. Islam allows the taking of slaves as “booty”, or reward for fighting. This has led to numerous “jihads” by Muslim states and tribes to attack other non-Muslim groups and obtain slaves”

Frankz on April 2, 2013 at 10:00 pm

I think that power couple should be sent to the Middle East for a couple of years. This spot should be a regular village or small city, and not some urban gated community. Let this couple discover what Islam truly is and isn’t. I have a feeling that they would not last very long.

Worry01 on April 3, 2013 at 4:25 am

@skzion–

OK. I will try to be more polite here.

While the common use of “Stockholm Syndrome” refers to the direct relationship between the captor and his victims, I was extending the concept a bit more to include the historical relationship between African slaves and Arab/Muslim slave traders.

There is also an opposite “effect” some call the Lima Effect, whereby the captors identify with their victims. Taken, again, beyond the obvious direct relationship, this effect might explain our current overcompensating “Civil Rights” obsession.

Red Ryder on April 3, 2013 at 8:39 am

AKA The “Lima Syndrome”

Red Ryder on April 3, 2013 at 8:44 am

@skzion–

Would “hurling insults” include “You ARE an old confederate, and you ARE an enemy of black people”?

If you conclude this from my distaste for the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and its consequences, please do enlighten me on how this act has helped the Black race.

Take any parameter you would like, and compare whites overall with blacks overall pre-1964 and present. With the exception of college graduation and government jobs, please find me a single one that has improved.

But, for sure—the percentage of Black Democrats has vastly increased. It was none other than LBJ himself who noted after the Act’s passage that “We’ll have those n****** voting Democrat for the next 200 years.”

Some improvement.

Red Ryder on April 3, 2013 at 8:54 am

@skzion–

I readily submit that if you study census data rigorously, you may well be able to locate “something,” but in every one of the significant parameters, comparing the races OVERALL, you will come up short.

I’m referring to things like unemployment, health, longevity, crime, legitimacy, and wage disparity.

Would it be inappropriate to describe the Blacks’ defection to the Democrats, their former slave masters, as the Stockholm Syndrome?

Red Ryder on April 3, 2013 at 9:24 am

The 1964 Civil Rights (sic) Act? Looks to me like another example of the Stockholm Syndrome. The Republicans would not dare come out against it publicly. They support it to the skies, even though it is used against them in elections to unfairly attack the Republican Party.

As I’m sure RR knows, it is used by the Democrats to micromanage and invalidate Southern elections, call Caucasian residents of the Southern states inherently racist, and facilitate voter fraud on the part of the Democratic Party. Do any of your critics know this? If so, do they approve of this oversight by that paragon of good behavior Eric H. Holder?

But hopefully, namecalling and invective will not intimidate you.

Little Al on April 3, 2013 at 10:19 am

@Little Al–

Thanks for the support.

Red Ryder on April 3, 2013 at 10:26 am

The reason Blacks have fallen for Islam? Pretty simple: Muslims hate Whites and Jews, and they know many Blacks( The less educated,the better,inner city or rural ) hate Whites and Jews,and the Muslims seek to recruit such ignoramuses.

CharlesMartel on April 3, 2013 at 11:09 am

As late as 2008, 83% of African Americans identified themselves as Christians and less than 2% identified themselves as Muslim. Not much of an “embrace”…

First it was NeNe Leakes on the cover of Ebony and now this. It just shows how a certain “element” has penetrated formerly working and middle class black institutions. For Ebony Magazine to highlight this couple as “Couple of the Year” shows how much the magazine has declined since founder John Johnson died. This NEVER would have happened under his watch…

Melyssa on April 3, 2013 at 11:23 am

Ebony Magazine’s decline came about when John H. Johnson retired and passed away and his daughters took control of the company. While Ebony always had its share of problems (they used to sell cream that was used to lighten your skin until very recently, though in later times its true purpose was hidden and it was remarketed as “spot removal cream”) it was a very good magazine (they were the ones who coined the phrase “black on black crime” for example) and they published some really good, almost academic level pieces from sociologists, historians, law professors etc. on real issues. But alas, that was then. First his daughters made the magazine more female-oriented (which was a horrible development as there were already several magazines aimed towards black women but none towards black men, and Ebony tried their best to treat both sexes equally) then they lowered its standards. They claimed that it was an effort to boost sales, but it was really just their remaking the magazine into one that they personally liked. The magazine also took a left turn too, going from being merely center-left to promoting feminism, gay rights, abortion etc. While some conservatives made a point of Ebony excluding Clarence Thomas from their annual list of “most influential blacks”, the truth is that Ebony did acknowledge in its prior era that black Republicans and conservatives existed and gave them some time and exposure for their ideas … they just personally disliked Thomas. But these days? Forget it.

Gerald on April 3, 2013 at 11:36 am

@Red Ryder:

You are indulging in the common tactic of purposefully blaming the negative effects of the Great Society programs on the Civil Rights Act. The truth is that they have nothing to do with each other. Plenty of blacks who have never received a dime from the Great Society programs benefited greatly from the end of Jim Crow. It is a common tactic for those who still advocate segregation to claim that ending segregation somehow harmed law-abiding hard working blacks. Blacks who are not law-abiding and hard working are no better or worse off before Jim Crow than they were before. But blacks who do work hard and contribute to civil society are most certainly better off at the dismantling of Jim Crow.

And you are yet another one who plays the “blacks and government jobs” canard. I posted this a few months ago and got flamed for it, but I will state it again: only 14% of blacks work for the government. Moreover, the percentage of blacks who work for the government is only slightly larger than the percentage of whites who have government jobs (10%). I suppose you liked it better during the Jim Crow era when whites had all the government jobs or something? Well that is the funny thing. During Jim Crow (and the de jure system in the north that was as bad or worse), whites were good Democrats who supported the New Deal, government jobs and programs etc. during the Jim Crow era – as well as during the Tammany Hall type urban machine era in places like New York, Chicago, Philadelphia, Boston etc. – when whites could keep all the government benefits to themselves. It wasn’t until the feds busted up that racket that becoming a small government conservative Republican in the south – and in the municipal union government job north – became a good idea. And even then, the “Reagan Republicans” still supported their Department of Agriculture subsidies, ethanol scams and plenty of other goodies. Had it not been for the Civil Rights Act, the whole lot of them would still be good New Deal yellow dog Democrats looking for handouts just like they were when they were still electing guys like Robert Byrd, George Wallace, Orval Faubus, Richard Daley and Frank Rizzo.

Gerald on April 3, 2013 at 11:53 am

@Melyssa:

You are 100% correct. The fascination with Islam is something that only exists with the black elite, meaning the politicians and the academics and the celebrities (and John Johnson’s daughters). The black rank and file has rejected Islam time and time again going back to the Malcolm X era. Even the Million Man March and the Muslims using rap music as their propaganda vehicle during the 1990s didn’t result in a real increase in the number of black converts to that religion.

However, that is not the whole story. While blacks are not joining Islam, more and more blacks are becoming secular and/or non-observant. And as Ms. Schlussel has oft stated, today’s secularists/non-observants are tomorrow’s Muslim converts. Indeed, the blacks who convert to Islam in prison – the only “success story” for Islam propagandists – were nonobservant upon arriving in jail (which, er, explains why they turned to robbing, drug dealing, assault etc. in the first place). And even there, far, far more blacks convert to Christianity in jail than Islam. It is just that the media (both black and mainstream) get all excited and thrilled over blacks converting to Islam in prison while doing their best to ignore the blacks who convert to Christianity. The reason: for the most part, the Christians converting blacks in prison is not the civil rights activist type liberal Christianity, but evangelicals. The black prison inmate who converts to Christianity is far more likely to do so as the result of Tim Tebow’s preaching than Jesse Jackson’s, and that is why it generally gets ignored by everyone from the New York Times to John Johnson’s daughters.

I honestly do wish that more people would come out and tell the truth about how the Muslim religion and the Arab culture regards blacks and have treated blacks historically until this day. A ton, a very high percentage, of the blacks that were enslaved in America and the west were sold as slaves by Muslim slave traders. You will hear it acknowledged every now and then that slaves were sold to the Americans by other blacks and Africans, but you almost never hear it said how many of those blacks were Muslims and Arabs. It is a gigantic coverup that so many people participate in – the media and academia I mean – and I have no idea why.

Gerald on April 3, 2013 at 12:07 pm

I would like it better if the percentage of Government jobs for all races declined. State, local and federal bureaucracies are swollen, and rife with political skullduggery that creates many make-work jobs for all races. The General Accountability Office has documented this for the feds, and it is probably worse on local levels, with unions like the AFT and AFSCME bankrupting us to shower taxpayer dollars on many who are overpaid, and not worth their salaries.

And those who do useful work in principle, like the Border Patrol, and FBI are, in many cases, prevented from doing their jobs the way they are supposed to be done.

Little Al on April 3, 2013 at 12:12 pm

Well, there was Sammy Davis, Jr.

Pray Hard on April 3, 2013 at 1:04 pm

When did The Nation of Islam (Louis Farrakhan) stop recruiting blacks to Islam inside the prison system as they have done for many years. Are the Triplett’s replacing them?

Rochelle on April 3, 2013 at 2:29 pm

@ Gerald:

This is an interesting discussion – and I’m niether flaming you nor trying to be uncivil, however you stated:
“…but you almost never hear it said how many of those blacks were Muslims and Arabs.”

Can you please explain just how many of those black [slavers] were Arabs? To my thinking, the two are distinct. Given that the millineum of trade in black sex slaves by Arab populations did some to blur the distinction. It reminds me of those who attempt to argue that Obama has Arab roots. Barack senior, his presumptive father, was of the Luo tribe. Luo are the third largest ethnic group in Kenya and are hardly an Arab people. Now if Frank Marshall Davis was an Arab there might be a there there.

Richard on April 3, 2013 at 4:16 pm

@Red Rider,

Maybe you can settle a bet I should have made with skzion, Rider?

I think he’s being way too generous assuming you didn’t understand the concept behind “Stockholm syndrome” and now just don’t want to admit it.

Whereas I feel you’re actually such a nitwit that although you understood the concept you don’t realize how stupid you sound ignoring his point and pretending that slaves would have “Stockholm syndrome” for Arab traders they met only briefly instead of the Europeans who held them in bondage for hundreds of years.

I believe you believe that if you just squawk the words “Stockholm syndrome” often enough somebody will give you a cracker.

Who’s right Red Ryder?

Frankz on April 3, 2013 at 5:38 pm

@Frankz–

I refer you to the original quote:

“It’s odd that Black America continues to embrace the religion that traded and sold them into slavery from Africa, the religion that still enslaves them in Muslim countries around the world, and the inherently racist religion that refers to Blacks as “abed” or “abeed” (the Arabic singular and plural word which literally means “slave” but is used as the Muslim version of the N-word).”

If you have a better explanation, I’m all ears. However, you and your little friend cannot see beyond the superficial definition of the term “Stockholm Syndrome.”

Debbie was wondering how Blacks could embrace the religion most consistently damaging to their race.

Instead of these puerile attacks on me, try answering her question—and settle a bet I have with Little Al, that you guys are actually one and the same troll.

Red Ryder on April 3, 2013 at 6:43 pm

Some back story information on Red Ryder’s and Little Al’s latest.

Gentle readers, it all began with Little Al’s hilarious and inept attempt to take me down on the issue of gay marriage. Since Little Al got personal with me early on, I decided to take him on full force. You can read my latest installment by clicking on the link below and going near the end of the comments to my comment on April 1, 2013 at 7:32 pm.

http://www.debbieschlussel.com/60733/nbc-times-today-anchors-im-pregnant-im-a-lesbian-outing-to-influence-supremes-on-gay-marriage/

While you can judge the results for yourself, suffice to say that I am confident that I showed Little Al’s comments to be incoherent, subliterate, and dishonest. DS_ROCKS! agreed with me, which I appreciated as I think very well of the fellow. Red Ryder then decided to chip in (see the linked discussion).

Alas, Red Ryder couldn’t really defend the substance of Little Al’s rhetorical breakdown. Nevertheless, he congratulated Little Al on his assertion that I was a covert liberal opportunist. Red Ryder went further, though, and asserted that I was a secret “commie” (his word) pursuing a Gramsci-esque effort to undermine the country. I can’t comment on Gramsci specifically, as I have better things to do than to study a third-rate Marxoid (give me full-strength Marxism from the likes of Marx, Lenin, and Mao). However, I proceeded to take apart Red Ryder’s comment. I presume that Red Ryder’s spirited support explains why Little Al is suddenly BFF with Red Ryder.

But none of this quite explains why I consider Red Ryder a really vicious type. His shtick is a “Who me?” wide-eyed innocence. But I saw through that the moment he started pandering to Islam. So, on at least three occasions, including the one on the linked page (above), I asked him some variant of the following:

Finally, as RR proclaims himself a real conservative, shall we look under the hood a bit? I have asked him several times whether Jews living today should be discriminated against by Catholics for “deicide” (killing Jesus). I first asked this when he rejected Vatican II. RR has yet to answer this simple question. Of course, by now his answering of it is like Holder’s finally answering Rand Paul’s question about drones.

I concluded:

In sum: RR’s “conservatism” evidently includes nasty anti-Semitism. Some will recall what Buckley, also a Catholic, thought about that. I guess Buckley was a crypto-communist [like me] too.

I had taken it (relatively) easy on Red Ryder because Skunky (for some reason) seemed to like the guy. But finally, when his innocent persona cracked and he libeled me, I decided I’d had enough. So, when the fellow started his pseudo-scientific crappola about Stockholm Syndrome — he uses science to mask his agenda — I called him out on it. And when Frankz told the truth about him in a nicely acerbic comment, I chimed in with support.

On this blog, we have numerous appearances by crypto-Nazis (we call them “Muslims” or “Poles”). Red Ryder has as much right as these groups to spout his beliefs here. That said, he has no right to expect any of us to buy his “Who me?” innocent persona. He is not innocent. He is of the Buchanan/Gibson branch of Catholic belief. Don’t buy his protestations to the contrary.

skzion on April 3, 2013 at 9:39 pm

From what I’ve seen, the ones that convert do so to attempt to FEEL superior. Look at how Cassius Clay behaved. Especially IN Africa. He was suddenly blacker than Joe Frazier.
Just another phony way to deal with every day life.

samurai on April 4, 2013 at 12:23 am

@Ryder,
Not everyone that loses patience with your nonsense is the same person Ryder. Sorry to disappoint you.

Stop hiding behind what Debbie said – do you yourself have an answer?

Every time somebody points out a logical contradiction in something you posted, you change the subject.
That’s why every post is a non-sequitur with you.

What have you got to say about that?

Frankz on April 4, 2013 at 8:07 am

@skzion and Frankz–

Let me take skzion’s bold points first. BTW, you will note that when he does not get the exact answer he wants, he refers to this as “dodging” the question.

If one would care to go through my past postings, they will see quite clearly that this “deicide” business is a very minor part of Vatican II, and indeed, there are parts of the current versions of the gospels—especially John—which are not particularly kind to the Jews–meaning those in authority.

The main problem with Vat II–as I have stated several times–is that far too much emphasis was placed on an individual’s conscience, thus in effect permitting them to do all sorts of things (in their minds at least) that are actually proscribed.

For this, and several other reasons, I concluded, as have many, many Catholics, that in sum Vat II was not a good Council.

How this makes me anti-Semitic has never been explained by skzion.

Moreover, just because Buchanan is anti-Semitic, this has nothing at all to do with his being Catholic–which Gibson is not, having left the Church to form his own splinter group.

As to the Muslim matter, this is getting ridiculous. As I said several times, the Church launched its Crusades–and sadly they failed. There is no possible mechanism for a Crusade to occur at present, so the Curia must pay some attention to protecting Catholic lives in Muslim countries.

Again, how this makes me anti-Semitic or soft on Muslims has never been explained.

As to gay marriage, this seems to have catalyzed the entire long discourse, and your attacks on me and Little Al. Conveniently, you skirt the Gramsci matter even as his exact blueprint has been playing out in the US since at least the early 1960s.

You ignore Gramsci at your peril, as he was the one who figured out how to turn the world Commie without firing a shot, unlike the others you cite. Indeed, Muslim hegemony is an unexpected “benefit” that comes from his patented March through the Institutions.

Further, gay marriage would have been Gramsci’s wet dream since he realized that Communism could not take over completely as long as the Church stood.

SO–follow this. The Supremes will legalize gay marriage, and within a few weeks some prominent gay Catholic will insist on being married in St. Patrick’s Cathedral.

The Church will refuse, of course, and will eventually lose its tax exemption, and will be additionally marginalized by the secular society.

At the end of the day, and taking the eternal view, none of this actually will matter, since—as I have stated repeatedly—the mission of the Church is to save souls…not save the world.

Finally, your obsession with my spin on the Stockholm Syndrome, which BTW is not at all unique to me, is frankly beyond pathetic. Perhaps it is related to your strange and superficial dismissal of Gramsci.

@Skunky–

You seem to have taken their side because I am not advocating a new Crusade. But please answer me this:

If we all agree how bad Islam is, why is fighting it solely up to the Church? Its many converts–at least these days–have exercised their free will.

Any person—Catholic or not—can pray for sufficient actual grace to overcome temptation and do the right thing. Yet, many have not. Why even THIS is the fault of the Church has not been explained, either.

Red Ryder on April 4, 2013 at 9:24 am

@Ryder,
OK, you didn’t answer how Debbie’s observation that many black Americans continue to embrace Islam has anything to do with Stockholm syndrome because it’s “beyond pathetic”.
Meaning you have no way out.
There are actually many ways you could answer but you’re an idiot so as usual you evade the issue because it makes you look silly.
I just wanted to confirm that in my own mind, maybe I’ll get into to some of those later or maybe not.

Yes, when people refer to the Jews they’re generally referring to “those in authority” aren’t they?
It’s always just the powerful few they have a problem with isn’t it?
If they could only get rid of those few nasty Jews with a little bit of power and influence then everything would be alright wouldn’t it?
Then they’d stop messing everything up in the world.

When John, a Jew by the way, criticized the Pharisees(also Jewish) he was really just thinking along the same lines as the Vatican II so that’s all fine too according to you. As usual the contradiction doesn’t even register on you. It never does.

Anyway, the argument doing the rounds that it was just a tiny minority of “powerful” Jews who were culpable only appeals to modern day bubble brain Catholics like yourself because when the crowd chose Barrabas they made themselves complicit in Christ’s crucifixion as a group didn’t they?

It’s really just a small part of Vatican II isn’t it? Sort of like the fine print.

Frankz on April 4, 2013 at 10:33 am

@Skunky–

With all due respect..

“Trying to get along with them is not an option.” OK, then how should we proceed? How many divisions has the Pope? (said Stalin)

Getting along does not for a moment mean that I should encourage them or agree with them. BUT–how would you protect the few remaining Catholics in the Middle East, for example?

This website is at risk of turning into a poor man’s Rush Limbaugh Show in that he will gain notoriety and fortune by continuing to point out all the threats, but—uh—what are we supposed to do?

I mean after Deb has pointed out Muslim hegemony example number 1,365,785—what’s the next step?

Kill all of them?

Don’t let your child marry one?

Burn down a mosque?

Become a Catholic?

I don’t know—and neither does anyone else.

Red Ryder on April 4, 2013 at 10:37 am

@Ryder,
You’ve made it obvious you’re a Catholic and a bubble brain.
Putting the two together doesn’t make me anti-catholic.

If you want to make concessions to “protect the few remaining Catholics in the Middle East” that’s fine.
May I suggest that if you’re serious about that, the best way might be to criticize and undermine Jewish interests in the area.
That might buy their survival temporarily.
I only point it out because you may be too shortsighted to have considered the possibility.

Nobody here has suggested anything remotely close to the options you listed for dealing with radical Islam.
People here just don’t want to make concessions to it.
In fact you come the closest to condoning those types of measures by constantly bragging about the crusades – as if anybody cares.

If you want to go along to get along now, great.

Just don’t try convince the rest of us how reasonable you are.

Frankz on April 4, 2013 at 11:43 am

@Little Al, sorry missed your commen if it was meant for me Al.
All these reasons join up eventually.

My post might be seen as hyper critical of Vatican II, it’s not but from what I’ve seen it doesn’t get to the heart of the problem although well intentioned and possibly creates new ones.

Frankz on April 4, 2013 at 12:14 pm

@Red Ryder, one other thing that got lost in the sea of objectionable material that are your posts – just for the sake of completeness. Anybody that hasn’t made their mind up by now can’t be helped.

“I mean after Deb has pointed out Muslim hegemony example number 1,365,785—what’s the next step?”

The answer to your question is what you’re proposing.
Surrender to that hegemony, while pretending to transcend it.
Gramsci style.

You’re not stepping up to radical Islam by reading these posts you nitwit.

You’re just keeping yourself informed of things you otherwise wouldn’t be if panderers like you controlled the media outlets.
Oops they already do.

That’s why when idiots like you get a voice everyone else loses theirs.

You wouldn’t want to leave it up to their individual conscience would you Ryder?
Gramsci, wouldn’t make that mistake either.

Who needs people like Rush Limbaugh, right?

Don’t we hear garbage like that everyday from the lib media.

Frankz on April 4, 2013 at 1:14 pm

@Skunky–

OK. Here’s what I’ve concluded from your friends skzion and Frankz…

1. The most important thing in the Catholic Church is how it treats Jews. Thus, Vatican II is “great” because it removed the phrase “perfidious Jews,” even if all the Gospels–especially John–are not at all kind to the Jewish hierarchy. That this council did untold damage to the Church itself is, of course, of no concern. Next, they’ll be repeating the calumny that Pius XII did not do enough to help the Jews.

2. Applying a psychological concept (Stockholm Syndrome) in a way in which they are not familiar–even if many others have used it this manner–makes them very combative and uncomfortable.

3. It is vastly important to beat your chest and say that you will “Never give in to Islam” in a way never specified….while you promote gay marriage.

4. They have an insatiable demand for anti-Islam news items, and are content with this as an end in itself—simply because it runs counter to the mainstream media. While Debbie displays considerable valor in doing what she does, at some point, this barrage of information—with no action plan—becomes a sort of current events pornography, don’t you think?

I have concluded finally that the pornography analogy is apt indeed, and I really don’t need this addiction.

Red Ryder on April 4, 2013 at 2:58 pm

@Red Ryder, awesome is that goodbye?

Frankz on April 4, 2013 at 4:07 pm

Ryder this site is a source of information me.

I don’t need to justify why I watch CNN or any other news channel and I don’t need to justify why I visit this site to the likes of you.

It informs my opinion. If you see it only a source of sensationalism then stick to other outlets.
They’re there to cater to the needs of people like you.

I’m not on a crusade.

You can go on a crusade of Christian outreach to the Muslim world to make up for the last one you seem so proud of if that satisfies your sense of purpose and gives you a plan of action.

This site seems a strange place to do it though.

Good luck to you, fortune passes everywhere.

Frankz on April 4, 2013 at 5:54 pm

@skzion,
I think he did kind of answer in his way,

He thinks that there is biblical justification for this “deicide business” which is only an insignificant part of Vatican II anyway.

If my memory serves there is criticism of the Pharisees in John, these are the ones he means by the Jews in authority. However I don’t remember this criticism applying to Jews in general and would make no sense since John was himself Jewish. However he refers to them as the “Jews–meaning those in authority”. He could simply say that the Pharisees bear historical responsibility but instead gives a veiled reference to Jews in authority.

Ryder has trouble understanding what all the fuss is about anyway since he knows that the Church of Rome will endure from scripture and is only concerned with how many Christian souls can be saved until that day because that is all that ultimately matters.

Frankz on April 4, 2013 at 11:13 pm

skzion, i think we got as clear an answer from him as we’ll ever get.
we’re on the same page.

Frankz on April 5, 2013 at 7:38 am

Wow…you sure are full of alot of falsehood. And to talk about things that you don’t even know to be fact…you are just as guilty.

But…thanks for adding to our fame. We were important enough to write about which in by all terms are the definition of..uh..um..celebrity..tee..hee..

Jenny Triplett on April 5, 2013 at 11:36 pm

@Jenny Triplett,
You guys are so interesting and famous we forgot to talk about you a quarter of the way through the conversation by the way.

Also, we’re just as guilty as who? You?
Is that an unintentional admission of guilt on your own behalf or just your converts?

Frankz on April 6, 2013 at 1:55 pm