Oh… you mean “Over-Seas Contingency Operation”

Yea, except the last attempt to kill us wasn’t overseas at all was it. It was somewhere over Detroit International Airport. But not too worry, Barack and Janet have got your back. Well, here is a different point of view.

The War Against Islamic Totalitarianism and thoughts on the subject by Yaron Brook, head of the Ayn Rand Institute for Individual Rights. Brook has gained much attention for his application of Objectivist moral philosophy to the question of American Foreign policy in the Middle East.

He advocates an American foreign policy of rational self-interest that would serve to only protect the rights of Americans (as opposed to any form of government monetary aid, or state-building, or spreading democracy). This may not be in the interest of Israel vis a vis American support but it surely provides a basis to their right to any and all action to defend themselves without apology.

Brook claims that the Islamic terrorists initiated a war against the West because they hate the West’s culture, wealth, love of life, and global influence. This is opposed to the ideas that Islamic terrorists attack the West because they are poor, or because the West supports Israel, or any other reason.

“They [Islamic terrorists] don’t hate us because we support Israel, they hate Israel because they look like us^“

Brook claims that the West isn’t at war with terrorism, but the ideology of ‘Islamic totalitarianism’. He repeatedly says that just like in WWII, America wasn’t at war against Japanese Kamikaze pilots or German tanks, but the ideas of NAZISM and Japanese SHINTOISM

Brook claims that Islamic totalitarians are Muslims who wish to dictate every part of life from the teachings of Islam, taken to its logical extreme. Most importantly, Islamic totalitarians want to organize their governments according to Islam, and they wish to spread a global Islamic government across the world, sometimes using legitimate means, but mainly by using physical force, i.e. terrorism. Dr. Brook claims that the Islamic totalitarians repeatedly express this, openly.

…it is a movement that believes in conquest… Islam should rule every aspect of one’s life… they don’t believe in separation of religion and state… and those who disagree are second class citizens or worthy of death, they want an empire in middle east, but their goal ultimately is world domination, and they state this. They are never satisfied with oppressing their own people or the people around them, they want world domination.

One thing is clear, The Islamic fanatics at the root of the worldwide terrorism we presently experience cannot be taken for granted or at worse appeased. Their advance must not only be halted but in fact reversed, or Not, You Decide. But if you decide NOT, better start fitting the ladies in your household out in Burqa’s, because thats the Islamists end-goal.

Lemmings or Lions, Which are you? Time to choose.

2 Comments

1.   LionKing   |  Friday, 05 February 2010 at 12:00 AM

   Hmmm, confusion. “And where do lions stand on the issue of What,? Islamic totalitarianism per the article posted above or per the “Tea Party Convention” referenced in your attached URL. Some clarity is requested ;-)

   Regarding Islamic totalitarianism, Lions suggest that we cast aside the political incorrectness of assuming that Islam is in fact a religion of peace when all evidence is to the contrary. That is not to say that there are not peaceful adherents to Islam but by its nature it is more political system shrouded in Ideology of faith than in pure religious belief operating outside of political mandate. As such it has but one clear goal and that is to subject all under its domain to rule in all manner of life and to those that don’t abide its rule… death. Lions say recognize it for what it is. And for what they who follow it say, An extreme and violent threat to the sanctity of Life in America as we know it. All attempts at its continued spread of influence beyond the interior of its mosques should be met with complete denial. Churches for Christians, Synagogues for Jews, mosques for Muslims but once outside the walls, Americans all… Unhyphenated Americans.

   Regarding the first national Tea Party convention… have at it. Stir the pot, debate the issues but in the end Lions do not believe we need a new third party. Just a revitalized and true to its foundation republican party. Lions suggests that with little to no exception all incumbents should be removed and Tea Party advocates should do all in their power to elect a new slate of republican representatives that they trust to follow the principals espoused in the parties very foundation. A support of the entrepreneurial democracy provided for in the constitution, significantly reduced federal government, expanded local and state powers, elimination of all federal mandates and impositions with individual states assuming leadership in these regards. Elimination of the progressive tax system and imposition of a national flat tax or consumption tax so all bear some burden and no one gets a free ride. Above all a return to the strict limitations advanced in the constitution on the federal government. Oh and finally, the identification and collection of all individuals knowN to be active members of the progressive movement and their relocation to California where under strict border control, they be allowed to try their failed policies for all the world to see. And then when… if when… they establish the utopia they proclaim is awaiting, they shall not have to worry about spreading its benefit for the rest of us for we shall all be rushing to get in. Should be interesting…

   
2.   nik   |  Thursday, 04 February 2010 at 11:00 PM

   And where do the Lions stand on this issue? http://www.google.com/gwt/x?ct=pg1&ei=npZrS7n5L4eWrAOF9dD_Bg&source=mig&u=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.abcnews.com/click.phdo%3Fi%3De2ecd15f00ca889df8b3d73bb3519391&whp=30&wsc=pr&wsi=1a9742f7ea7fc006

   

Leave a Reply

Click here to cancel reply.

Name (Required)

Mail (will not be published) (Required)

Website

Security Code *