Posted on 12/29/2015 9:26:08 AM PST by Whenifhow
December 17, 2015 ought henceforth to be a date which will live in infamy, as that was the day that some of the leading Democrats in the House of Representatives came out in favor of the destruction of the First Amendment. Sponsored by among others, Muslim Congressmen Keith Ellison and Andre Carson, as well as Eleanor Holmes Norton, Loretta Sanchez, Charles Rangel, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Joe Kennedy, Al Green, Judy Chu, Debbie Dingell, Niki Tsongas, John Conyers, José Serrano, Hank Johnson, and many others, House Resolution 569 condemns "violence, bigotry, and hateful rhetoric towards Muslims in the United States." The Resolution has been referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
That's right: "violence, bigotry and hateful rhetoric." The implications of those five words will fly by most people who read them, and the mainstream media, of course, will do nothing to elucidate them. But what H. Res. 569 does is conflate violence -- attacks on innocent civilians, which have no justification under any circumstances - with "bigotry" and "hateful rhetoric," which are identified on the basis of subjective judgments. The inclusion of condemnations of "bigotry" and "hateful rhetoric" in this Resolution, while appearing to be high-minded, take on an ominous character when one recalls the fact that for years, Ellison, Carson, and his allies (including groups such as the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations, CAIR) have been smearing any and all honest examination of how Islamic jihadists use the texts and teachings of Islam to incite hatred and violence as "bigotry" and "hateful rhetoric." This Resolution is using the specter of violence against Muslims to try to quash legitimate research into the motives and goals of those who have vowed to destroy us, which will have the effect of allowing the jihad to advance unimpeded and unopposed.
That's not what this H. Res. 569 would do, you say? It's just about condemning "hate speech," not free speech? That kind of sloppy reasoning may pass for thought on most campuses today, but there is really no excuse for it. Take, for example, the wife of Paris jihad murderer Samy Amimour - please. It was recently revealed that she happily boasted about his role in the murder of 130 Paris infidels: "I encouraged my husband to leave in order to terrorize the people of France who have so much blood on their hands [...] I'm so proud of my husband and to boast about his virtue, ah la la, I am so happy." Proud wifey added: "As long as you continue to offend Islam and Muslims, you will be potential targets, and not just cops and Jews but everyone."
Now Samy Amimour's wife sounds as if she would be very happy with H. Res. 569, and its sponsors would no doubt gladly avow that we should stop offending Islam and Muslims - that is, cut out the "bigotry" and "hateful rhetoric." If we are going to be "potential targets" even if we're not "cops" or "Jews," as long as we "continue to offend Islam and Muslims," then the obvious solution, according to the Western intelligentsia, is to stop doing anything that might offend Islam and Muslims - oh, and stop being cops and Jews. Barack "The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam" says it. Hillary "We're going to have that filmmaker arrested" Clinton says it. The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, certain that anyone who speaks honestly about Islam and jihad is a continuing danger to the Church, says it.
And it should be easy. What offends Islam and Muslims? It ought to be a simple matter to cross those things off our list, right? Making a few sacrifices for the sake of our future of glorious diversity should be a no-brainer for every millennial, and everyone of every age who is concerned about "hate," right? So let's see. Drawing Muhammad - that's right out. And of course, Christmas celebrations, officially banned this year in three Muslim countries and frowned upon (at best) in many others, will have to go as well. Alcohol and pork? Not in public, at least. Conversion from Islam to Christianity? No more of that. Building churches? Come on, you've got to be more multicultural!
Everyone agrees. The leaders of free societies are eagerly lining up to relinquish those freedoms. The glorious diversity of our multicultural future demands it. And that future will be grand indeed, a gorgeous mosaic, as everyone assures us, once those horrible "Islamophobes" are forcibly silenced. Everyone will applaud that. Most won't even remember, once the jihad agenda becomes clear and undeniable to everyone in the U.S. on a daily basis and no one is able to say a single thing about it, that there used to be some people around who tried to warn them.
I do not know how long you have been around, but for years, the muslims have been the Democrat's friends. Catholics, legitimate gun owners, Christians, Conservatives, and Whites are their enemies.
This isn’t really so much about islam as it is about silencing all dissent. The wet dream of every D politician and 95% of all R politicians is to have a state where you are totally disarmed and you can be locked up for saying what they don’t want heard. The founding fathers knew this well. We’re seeing the natural evolution of the political class in action. This is WHY we have the 2nd amendment.
Sadly, I do not doubt this happening, realistically did someone forget the sarc tag?
Too bad WE R’s don’t control the House and Senate because if we did there would be ways to stop this kind of wasting time.
Maybe some of these ‘geniuses’(sarc) could figure out a way to keep HUNDREDS of crotch rockets, dirt bikes etc from taking to the highways in large numbers and blocking off lanes, going the wrong way and the Police give out with a large ‘ho hum’ and the ‘supporters’ say these people are just having fun and letting off steam.
I know the bakery had to pay for not making the ‘cake’ but what would the reaction be if a White dude went into a Black bakery and ordered a cake for a party with 2 dudes in pointed hats and sheets on with the inscription KKK forever?
I am sure the Justice Dept would be right on it only they would be arresting the ORDERERS ...
Granted were I to order such a cake in that situation and the bakery decided to do it, you can bet your sweet bippy that not a crumb of it would pass my lips.....
NO, that is NOT a racist or prejudiced statement, it is just good judgement.
Why wouldn’t a muslim president want to do exactly this? Why wouldn’t the blind followers on the left do whatever it takes to “transform” this country into some undefined other thing?
This is what Democrats are masters at, and what Republicans like McConnel and Boehner refused to do.
The purpose of this resolution is to get Republicans to vote against it so that Democrats can campaign in 2016 on a "War on Muslims" platform.
It would be a big mistake for Ryan to even allow it to come to the floor for a vote.
-PJ
They should have to live under the sharia law for a year, in a muslim country then come back and run their sucks.
Paging Orwell.
Ryan should introduce a bill declaring anti-Christian speech illegal.
And this is from Loretta Sanchez, a Rep. and candidate for U.S. Senate, who said that up to 20% of Muslims wanted to go after the Western way of life “in any way possible.”
HOUSE DEMOCRATS MOVE TO CRIMINALIZE CRITICISM OF ISLAM
First Amendment? We don’t need no stinkin First Amendment.
If they don’t also move TO CRIMINALIZE CRITICISM OF CHRISTIANITY AND ATHEISM they are racists, bigots, and hypocrites.
bump
What are you trying to do. We need some manufactured outrage. Harrumph! Harrumph!
*
congress critters don’t care
they’re doing what they can to pad their own nests.
*
You're right. Far be it from me to pee in anyone's Post Toasties so I'll back off.
The usual suspects attempt to save their heads should their lovers take over.
So these clowns realize we have a first ammendment that gives us freedom of religion and speech?
Just saying...
Freegards
LEX
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.