In 1919 AD the House Of Representatives refused to “seat” Congressman Elect Victor Berger of Wisconsin's Seventh District apparently because: Mr. Berger was honestly an honest Socialist (Of the variety called “Sewer Socialists” who were much more interested in protecting the health and well being of the People than in an “theoretical” socialism); And, in response to violent acts by union members and socialists in other parts of the USA, which had little, if anything, to do with Mr. Berger.
My recollection of contemporary press reports were the considerable number of claims that allowing
Socialists a role in government would result in: Murder and mass-murder in the streets; The disease of “free love” being rampant throughout the nation; The sexual abuse of little girls; Overthrown of our democratic systems of laws and government; Destruction of the Middle Class in this nation, that part of our population seen as the bulwark of our land; And, of everything which makes Western Civilization the mainstay of our world.
The not-seating of Mr. Berger did not appear to stop “free love”, murder and serial mass-murder and various forms of sexual abuse of children. Our subsequent, especially of late, Administrations have made considerable progress in abolishing the Middle Class and weakening those standards and institutions which support Western Civilization.
Strangely enough, the Congress has seated two persons who subscribe to a 1400-plus year old, medieval, criminal-terrorist ideology-or-movement which does, in fact, use murder, rape and enslavement, genocide, perpetual-and-violent military-level actions (ie “Declared War), lying and organized theft and lying to accomplish its very anti-democracy goals being: The destruction or near suppression of all ideologies other than itself and of all religions; Rule of all nations by only Muslims; Replacement of all legal systems other than Sharia; Subjection of all women and all non-Muslims to the will of male Muslim; And, the other horrors of that Nazi like movement
The 1919 Congress saw even Mr. Berger's brand of Socialism as a clear-and-present danger, That position might, without “20/20 hindsight”, be considered not unreasonable considering the concurrent and bloody revolutions occurring in such newsworthy places as Russia and Germany. Even without that “clarity of vision” as demonstrated by such leftists as Adolph Hitler, J. I. Stalin, Mao and others of that ilk.
It appears that the case of "Powell v. McCormack, 395 US 486 (1969) would probably prevent such removal today. However, as the Supreme Court no longer holds fast to the rulings of prior courts, I could be wrong.
With our much better knowledge of history (If we use it as, to paraphrase: “Those who do not study history, learn from history and apply those lessons will be condemned to repeat its worst lessons”) and what should be our better knowledge of the goals-and-means of Islam, we should wonder at why the current Congress and those of future terms should seat any Muslims---Who do not, publicly and fully, deny those horrid and perpetual Islamic goals and means.
PS----CETERUM CENSEO MECCA ESSE DELENDAM /Cato Novo
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
وسيحكم الله قلبك والإجراءات
Strangely enough, the Congress has seated two persons who subscribe to a 1400-plus year old, medieval, criminal-terrorist ideology-or-movement which does, in fact, use murder, rape and enslavement, genocide, perpetual-and-violent military-level actions (ie “Declared War), lying and organized theft and lying to accomplish its very anti-democracy goals being: The destruction or near suppression of all ideologies other than itself and of all religions...
Two points.
1. The run-on sentence is not your friend.
2. Up until the point where I stopped it, I could have sworn that you were talking about Catholics and just got the date wrong.
TO NAMELESS CYNIC: Yes, I do tend to use too-long sentences. They do, however, require thought to evaluate.
Catholics (And other Christians) have violated Natural Law; But, in time publicly admit to errors. I do not remember Muslims doing so for any of their genocidal or other criminal acts. It seems to be "against their religion" to do so.
Well, of course it is. You'd never see anything like this, would you?
And I wonder what kind of evil, terrorist thoughts you'd find in places like this?
Catholics... in time publicly admit to errors.
Absolutely right; I couldn't agree with you more.
(I can get into "other Christians" if you'd like. That one was just too easy...)
TO: Nameless Cynic
In dealing with "disinformation" (A military-tactical combination of outright lies and more dangerous half-truths/lies) put out by Muslims, you must remember that the "nice" part of Mohammed's teachings were those given at Mecca, before he had power, and the other at Medina, after power, lust and greed were fully his.
Or perhaps the problem isn't "all Muslims are evil," as you're trying to claim, but rather "all extremists (regardless of religion) are dangerous," as can be easily proven through a study of history.
It's not difficult to find examples of extremist Christians who do horrible things in the name of the Lord (look up "Army of God" sometime).
Perhaps, instead of embracing the viewpoint that easily devolves into racism, you should consider whether the problem is simply people taking their religion too seriously.
To Nameless Cynic: For the most part most Christians, in due course of time, will admit errors.
For the most part, it is hard to find a "Muslim" who will condemn the "sword verses" or like parts of the Koran and condemn Mohammed for being a bandit, liar and treaty breaker, murderer and the perverted sexual abuser of a nine-year-young girl-child.
Like crimes by Christian leaders meet with condemnation/
For the most part most Christians, in due course of time, will admit errors.
You know, I could just start listing examples showing that you're wrong, from Catholic child abuse to televangeists, to a long list of mass murderers (most of whom, oddly, were involved in the church, often strongly). Christians are people, no better or worse, and most often will admit that they're wrong only when backed into a corner.
Except you. Faced with evidence that your position isn't merely openly wrong but is now approaching foolish, you're going to stubbornly cling to the idea that Jesus makes people honest?
I'm curious. Do you actually know any Christians?
For the most part, it is hard to find a "Muslim" who will condemn the "sword verses" or like parts of the Koran and condemn Mohammed for being a bandit, liar and treaty breaker, murderer and the perverted sexual abuser of a nine-year-young girl-child.
By that same token (and for almost exactly the same reason, to be honest), it is hard to find a Christian who will condemn the parts of the Bible that support sexism (1 Timothy 2:12, Ephesians 5:22), child abuse (Psalm 137:9), rape (Judges 19:25-28), murder (Judges 11:30-1, 34-5) and slavery (1 Peter 2:18).
That was not an exhaustive list by any means. I can go on for hours in that vein (and many people have), but you will, predictably, react in exactly the same manner as a Muslim supporting the Qu'ran. (And, as I said, for exactly the same reason.)
And, further, I will use my psychic powers here (Exodus 22:18), and say that, in the face of this evidence, you are going to continue to ignore facts, and hold tight to your ever-more-obviously incorrect theory, aren't you?
I believe it was Einstein who once said "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." That might well apply to both of us here.
Post a Comment