Friday, June 26, 2009

Sorry Neda, We Have a Pedophile to Worship

Just for the record, I firmly believe Michael Jackson was guilty of child molestation, and had he not been a celebrity, would have been found guilty by the courts. It is sad when anyone dies, but it has been ridiculous the lamenting of his death. I ran acrosss this article by Joy Tiz - never read anything by her, but she nailed it in this article. Blog title is the title of her article. Check it out. (link here:

For previous generations, the question: “Where were you when Kennedy was shot” has served as a conversation starter as well as a catalyst for exploration of a shared history. It would seem that the quintessential question will soon be: “where were you when you found out Michael Jackson was dead?”?

For the record, I was at the gym. Credulous, I trusted that the Jackson story would get a few minutes of coverage before Bret Baier returned. My jejune confidence that Charles Krauthammer would momentarily be providing commentary about actual news was hastily crushed. Abstrusely, Fox News brought Shepard Smith in to cover this astounding turn of events.

You know what would be really shocking? Michael Jackson dying at the age of 87. That would have been a real stunner, well deserving of the nauseating nonstop narration that should be reserved for heads of state.

Time really stands still on the treadmill when you are listening to a fervid Geraldo lamenting Anna Nicole Jackson’s “shocking” death.

All other news of the day having been declared inconsequential, Fox proceeded to indulge in unnecessary and disproportionate keening about the calamitous death of the world’s most famous pedophile.

The same Michael Jackson who once told a reporter it was “sweet” and “charming” to sleep with little boys and ply them with “Jesus Juice” (known to lucid people as “wine”) has been deified. Jackson, who dangled one of his babies off of a hotel balcony also obtained those children via a bizarre and labyrinthine arrangement, named one of them Blanket and made them wear burkas.

Jackson is exceedingly popular in the United Kingdom, confirming Mark Steyn’s reflection that the United Kingdom is further along than the United States in the march toward complete social and economic collapse. But not to worry, we won’t quit until we’re Number One.

Michael Jackson recently converted to Islam. Michael’s brother, Jermaine, converted to Islam in 1989. Even the Religion of Peace failed to deliver true bliss.

Americans know far more about Michael Jackson than they do about the history of Iran and its relationship to the United States. Most of what America knows is wrong, having been subjected to pertinacious propaganda in Ayers’ based public education.

Which is why the interest in the life and death of Neda Agah-Soltan was so facilely dwarfed by the opulent freak show that surrounds Michael Jackson.

Neda was the beautiful young Iranian woman who was gunned down in the streets of Tehran for the crime of showing up. She showed up to take a stand for freedom and took a bullet in the neck for her aspirations. A relative in the United States had cautioned Neda not to attend any demonstrations, telling her “They’re killing people.” To which the lionhearted and prescient Neda replied: “Don’t worry, it’s just one bullet and its over.”

For just a flicker in time, Neda became an icon, a symbol of the young Iranians’ longing for the most elemental liberties. It was easy for Americans to be incensed at the barbarous slaughter of a young woman so lovely and earnest. Young Iran has caught a glimpse of freedom, the inescapable byproduct of advancing technology. The noteworthiness of Neda is in no small measure due to the ease with which young Americans can appreciate her as not so unlike themselves.

Part of the delusive indoctrination that goes on in public schools includes the rewriting of Iranian history in a way that abets the left.

In actuality, before the Jimmy Carter regime, the United States and Iran were on friendly terms. The Shah of Iran was the least backward of all Muslim leaders. The shah, who is erroneously characterized as a villain, was responsible for giving women the right to vote. In other Arab states, they still don’t have the right to leave the house without a husband or other male relative.
Unimaginable though it may be post-Carter, Iran and Israel were not always bitter enemies. The current government of Iran is as much an enemy of the Iranian people as it is of Israel.

Iranians are understandably horrified by the new American president who has referred to the Ayatollah as Supreme Leader, a show of respect for the legitimacy of the barbaric regime. Barack Obama went so far as to send a letter to the Ayatollah Khomeini weeks before Iran’s June 12th election. Obama was pandering to the brutal, backwards and oppressive Iranian leadership.

Back when the news still took the trouble to cover the bloodbath in Iran, the world saw young Iranians holding signs in English. Urgent pleas were coming through computers worldwide begging the leader of the free world to help the Iranian people. Many Americans would be amazed to learn how many Iranians were educated via petrodollars in the United Kingdom or the United States. Some Iranian young people speak far better English than your local high school kids.

The late shah’s son reached out to Obama for support:

“I would like to take this opportunity and tell the President this is a crucial moment - on behalf of my compatriots and millions who have been turning to the outside world, particularly to this President - to say: don’t let us down.”

While Barack Obama was eating ice cream, Neda’s parents were forced from their home by government agents. Public displays of mourning were shut down. Nineteen year old Kaveh Alipour was gunned down by government barbarians. After frantically searching for news about his missing son at hospitals and eventually the morgue, Alipour’s father was told he would be required to pay a $3000 “bullet fee” to reimburse the government for the ammo expended in executing his child.

Barack Obama did eventually deliver the obligatory “we are outraged” statement. He held off as long as he could, until public opinion became too clamorous to overlook. While he gabbled, the violence in Iran escalated. Iranian citizens were being massacred in the streets with axes and machetes. Students were being routed from their beds in their dorm rooms.

Ronald Reagan responded to a similar cry for help from the people of Poland who were then enslaved by the Soviet Union. Reagan minced no words in decrying the Soviet Union as an “Evil Empire”. He never expelled gibberish about how the United States shouldn’t “meddle” as innocent citizens suffer.

Then, as today, pantywaist liberals were caterwauling about toning down the rhetoric so as not to pique oppressive dictators. Thankfully, Reagan ignored such nattering. The Poles were doing what the Iranians are today: insisting on the most basic of human liberties. Ronald Reagan had no intention of sitting on the sidelines waiting to see how this thing played out:

“In a stiff note to Soviet boss Leonid Brezhnev; Reagan said that if the Russians kept up their thuggish response to Poland they ‘could forget any new nuclear arms agreement.’ Gone too would be better trade relations, and in their place would be the ‘harshest possible economic sanctions’ if they even thought of invading Poland as they had done with Czechoslovakia in 1968 or Hungary in 1956.”

The Soviets responded by declaring martial law and shutting down the Polish borders, as well as squelching communications with the outside world.

Reagan was unflinching. He wrote in his diary:

“I took a stand that this may be the last chance in our lifetime to see a change in the Soviet Empire’s colonial policy re Eastern Europe. We should take a stand and tell them unless and until martial law is lifted in Poland, the prisoners were released and negotiations resumed between Walesa and the Polish government, we would quarantine the Soviets and Poland with no trade or communications across their borders. Also tell our NATO allies and others to join us in such sanctions or risk an estrangement from us. A TV speech is in the works. “

Reagan helped spirit the defecting Polish Ambassador out of the country and to the United States. Leonid Brezhnev was livid. Reagan was delighted; Brezhnev’s outrage confirmed to Reagan that he was on the right track. Ronald Reagan went on to use every tool at his disposal to topple Brezhnev’s regime and replace him with Lech Walesa.
Ronald Reagan won the battle to liberate the Polish people. They have not forgotten. He is considered, in the words of the Polish president, the ”architect of democracy.”

Barack Obama is certainly no Ronald Reagan. The entire world, including the United States would be better off and more secure if the Ayatollah’s government toppled. The death of a pedophile has created a distraction from having to deal with the knotty problem of full scale slaughter in the streets of Iran.


Craig and Heather said...

I don't know WHAT to make of Michael Jackson. He will be remembered and mourned by his "fans" for a short time. Yet, eternity is a long, long time to have to exist apart from God's mercy and goodness. Are worldwide fame, popularity and riches really all that important if you can't take any of it with you when you die?

Jesus' words come to mind:
For what shall it profit a man if he shall gain the whole world and lose his own soul?
Or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? (Mark 8:36-37)

You might be interested in an excellent (and refreshingly God-honoring) view of the Jackson death over at Doug Eaton's site.

You make an excellent point about the upside-down values of American society...Well, worldwide, in this case. It kind-of leaves me with a sick feeling.

Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter! (Isaiah 5:20)

America's abandonment of Israel and sidling up to the other Middle Eastern nations is going to backfire big time.

Making "nice" with Isl*m is not even possible. It isn't the "religion of peace" by any stretch of the imagination and it only co-exists peacefully with non-m*slims until it is strong enough to take over. Even the name means "submission" and the point is to force into submission (to All*h) all of the earth.

"Moderate m*slims" are kind of like "nominal Christians" concerning their understanding of their religion. They don't realize that the militant, "radical" factions are the ones that actually are obeying the commands in a large section of their Qur*n.

While Christianity teaches that vengeance on unbelievers is Christ's alone, Isl*m requires it's adherents to actively spread their belief and literally take over the world in a physical sense. Once a chunk of land has been claimed for All*h, it is considered his. And the religious adherents are obligated to actively defend that piece of land and institute their religious law. Infidels and apostate followers who refuse to convert and/or fully devote themselves to "the cause" are supposed to be executed.

That understanding went a long way to explain what appears to us as uncalled for brutality under such government. And should make every person in every relatively "free" country around the world think twice before generously welcoming the religion of Isl*m with open arms.

I just finished a really eye-opening book on the subject. Being a reader, you might also be interested in "Unholy War" by Randall Price. It was written just after 9-11, so is a little "old" concerning current events but has a lot of very significant information and quotes that we don't readily have access to through our mainstream media. It helped me to understand better why a "war on *terrorism*" is not enough to stop the terror created by a religion, which at its core, is aggressively militant.

He has a bunch of books/info I would really like to get hold of because it appears his understanding of the Middle East culture and conflict is quite good.

Anyway, sorry for the tirade...Your post just related to some things I've been thinking over.