This is pretty spooky. Leftist demonstrators (bussed in on school busses? Who authorized that?) surrounded Karl Rove's home and attempted to intimidate him into supporting some craptastic piece of Democrat legislation.
The spookiest thing about this is that Karl Rove is an advisor to Bush. He doesn't have any real authority in the government. So any attempt to persuade him has no real usefulness. You can't threaten to vote against him, because he's not in office.
Now, this would be wierd enough if they just showed up at his house and protested. I can't think of a time when protesters have targeted an advisor's house instead of an elected official. But they actually surrounded his house (on three sides) and looked in the windows to track his movements in the house. They could make a horror film about stuff like that.
This also brings to mind a book written in 1951 called "The True Believer : Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements" by Eric Hoffer. In it, Hoffer contends that mass movements can exist without a God to drive them, but never without a devil.
Karl Rove is the Left's devil. They have chosen him to frighten the masses into action. This is obvious from what they say about him and, now, from their descent on his house in a mob.
Did they think they couldn't make Bush the devil in this case? Do they need one of Bush's advisors to scapegoat?
This is wierd, and spooky, and scary in a leftist-mob way.
Actually, I'm not sure assassinated is the right term. Anyway, they blew him up with rockets.
What I can't figure out is why the Palestinians are surprised by this. They are marching in the streets like some terrible crime has been committed.
Palestinians: Ahmed Yassin was a leader of terrorists. He was a mass murderer. He intentionally targeted civilians. This makes him a war criminal as well. Why do you get upset about this? Why do you act as if you have been betrayed by the Israelis? Why do you act as if some rule of civilized behavior has been broken, when your own behavior is the most uncivilized of all?
You have chosen the path of war. This is the result of your choice. This is what happens in war.
I just don't understand the Arab/terrorist mindset. It's almost as if they believe they have a God-given right to kill whoever they want. Then, when someone responds, they get all freaked out, like the crime has been committed against them.
Al Qaeda does the same thing. When the Pakistanis went in against Qaeda in the hills of Pakistan, the terrorists released a statement which said, in effect, "Stop attacking us or we'll attack you."
This is laughable. They already attacked us. What are they going to do, attack us more? Are they going to become even more rabid? Are they going to fly five planes into buildings this time, in order to exact revenge against us for attacking them?
It's infantile, really. Terrorists are like bawling children that cannot fathom the idea of consequences.
The most recent Palestinian "uprising" has been going on for years now, and was started, clearly, by the Palestinians. Hamas and other Arab groups have targeted children. They have picked targets where there will be children and bombed them. If there is a greater war crime, I can't think of it. The Palestinian cause has absolutely no validity after attacks like that. Hamas and the other Arab terror organizations are packs of rabid dogs, and they deserve to die horribly for their inhumane acts.
These attacks, on children and civilians, are acts of war. You have no right to protest this turn of events. This is what happens in wars. You do not have the right to commit acts of terrorism and murder against Israel with impunity. It is apparent that you think you do, but you don't. Israel gets to strike back. And this is what you can expect for your support of terror.
Now if we can just get Arafat, things will really get interesting.
Let's see, a leftist American, who had worked for several Democratic lawmakers and for several news publications, is charged with accepting money from the Saddam regime in return for so-far unnamed favors.
This story has all kinds of good stuff in it. First, she's a leftist. Second, she worked for Democrats in our government, and third she worked for the news media in various positions.
I think it's fair to say that this leftist in particular is un-American. The question remains as to whether the rest of them are.
This is not unprecedented. There is a long history of leftists actively helping leftist regimes that seek to undermine or destroy America. This sort of thing is why I question the patriotism of leftists.
At first I supported sending Martha Stewart to prison. But then I got to thinking about it, and I realized that we cannot do that. It would be a miscarriage of justice.
The original charge against Martha, that she committed insider trading, was dropped. Ergo, the remaining charges, including lying to investigators and obstruction of justice, are what she would go to jail for.
But we certainly can't send people to prison for lying, can we? Or even for obstruction of justice? Is that really a crime?
It isn't a crime, we all know that. How do we know that? because recently we had a president who committed the very same "crimes" and he was not sent to prison. Indeed, all we heard during the Clinton scandals was that lying to grand juries and obstructing justice were not that bad. And if Clinton wasn't imprisoned, or even removed from office, how can we send Martha Stewart to prison for the very same crimes?
Some movies, as we know now, should not be seen. They might incite violence against a group, or something. For this reason alone, for this potential problem, we should ban movies, or at least not see them.
I'd like to start listing some of these potentially destructive movies, so you can know what not to see. Please, for all that is good, or at least not too bad in this world, don't support these hateful films:
The Matrix: None of the movies in this series should be watched. They are a story about the world being run by machines. Members of IT departments could be targetted.
Terminator 3: This movie is too violent. Besides, it depicts a world being taken over by a computer system. Programmers are in danger of retribution.
Mississippi Burning: This movie is about racists and KKK people. It could incite violence against them. Don't see it.
Ok, that's my initial list. Stay away from these anti-IT, anti-Programmer, anti-White movies! Danger!
I have to take issue with the idea, much repeated, that this film is "controversial."
Let me make one thing clear; the world left wants to destroy anything related to the old world. They want to remake the world into what they believe will be a socialist paradise. But in order to do this, they have to destroy the old world, and they have tried, and will continue to do so. If they cannot destroy it outright, they will not give up. Instead they will seek to chip it away in small pieces. They cannot openly argue for the destruction of American democracy and capitalism, for to do so would weaken their position. So instead of one fell swoop, they are forced to attack it in smaller ways, always seeking to eventually bring down the whole.
Mr. Gibson, this is the war you have inserted yourself into. I understand that you are baffled by the charges of anti-Semitism, and they are baseless, I assure you. But your film argues a position that the left cannot tolerate. You are a target now. Get used to it, but take some comfort, as I have, that you are on the right side of history.
Here are some comments from Mel Gibson on how he made "The Passion of the Christ":
When he has shown the film to associates in the industry, he feels that they are looking for anti-Semitism. He says that is one of the reasons he finally decided to include subtitles in the picture, to make it clear that some of the Jews portrayed in the film are sympathetic figures. “You've just got to have them,” he says. “I mean, I didn't think so, but so many people say things to me like 'Why aren't there more sympathetic Jews in the crowd?' Well, they're there! But you've got to really point it out to them, and subtitles can do that.” He goes on, “It's just amazing to me how one-eyed some people are about this thing. I mean, it's like a veil comes down and they just can't see it. For instance, did you know that one of the priests helps take his body down from the Cross? It's there! Nobody sees it. They can only view it from one eye.”
Yes, these people are seeing it from one eye. This is what they do, it's their modus operandi. Their power derives from whipping people into a frenzy of hatred for whatever threatens their authority and their fight to remake the world. In this way, these people are strikingly similar to the Jewish priests in the movie. Maybe they oppose you so much because they see so much truth in the film. The temple leaders are carbon copies of modern hysterical, demagogic race-baiters.
I have seen "The Passion of the Christ". That's apparently what it's called, by the way. At first it was just "The Passion", but some copyright issue cropped up. Then it was supposed to be "The Passion of Jesus Christ." I think.
As far as the movie itself goes, I have to tell you, I've never seen such a bunch of anti-Roman rubbish in my life.
Kidding aside, it was a very powerful, very well-made film.
Violence: The amount and detail of violence in the film is justifiably criticized. If you don't like gore, and I mean disgusting, stomach-turning gore, then think twice about seeing this movie.
This is not your father's Jesus movie. Every assault is shown in detail, from Roman soldiers beating Jesus to a cringe-inspiring scourging. The scourging is particularly notable, though, because I've never before seen wounds open up before my eyes in a film.
The violence, though, does serve a purpose. It's there for a reason. The treatment of Jesus at the hands of the Romans was particularly brutal, even accounting for the savage era, where every brutality against humanity that could be conceived was practiced. The event was no less vicious, even if it wasn't worse than average, and we have every reason to believe that it was. The Passion of the Christ is a story about... well, The Passion of Jesus Christ. The story is a story of violence.
Anti-Semitism: Come on. Charges of anti-Semitism made against this picture are at least irresponsible, and at most race-baiting. Are some Jews in this film characterized as wicked, greedy, callous and murderous? Yes, they are, the temple leaders in particular. There are also many, many Jews who support Jesus, including many of the commoners and some of the priesthood itself. To suggest that this movie is anti-Semitic is to suggest that no criticism can ever be levied against a Jewish organization, or even person.
If anyone is mistreated in the making of this film, it's the Romans. Although there are a few sympathetic Romans who bear Jesus no apparent ill-will, including Pilate, the soldiers are the most vile, vicious and evil characters they could be made to be. They delight in beating, pushing, kicking, whipping and scourging Him to within an inch of his life. No Jew in the film is half as evil as most of the Roman soldiers.
If a Jewish film maker wants to make a film of the "Jewish Temple Leaders" side of the story, absolving all Jews of any blame in the matter, I suppose he is free to do so. But the film we have here is not anti-Semitic.
Visually, it's a very well done film. Satan is portrayed with a deft stylism that I have never seen before, and with the exception of one scene (where some wierd midget baby is being carried around by the Dark Lord), very effective.
One of the most touching and moving scenes in the film occurs when Mary sees Jesus fall with the cross, and a flashback takes us back to a past event where the child Jesus falls down and Mary goes to comfort him. It was a beautifully made sequence, and if you were not moved by it, you weren't watching.
This film is not about the life or teachings of Jesus Christ, and as such, criticism that it focuses too much on Jesus' crucifixion is, I think, really reaching for straws. The movie is about the Passion of Jesus. It pretends no other motive.
Mel Gibson has guts, I have to say. To open your wallet to make a movie like this is one thing, but to open your soul to the scourging that the various anti-Christian and political opportunist groups were sure to give him was quite another. My hat is off to you, Mr. Gibson, not only for a courageous film, but also for a great one.
I have only ever seen films ever that I would give the NetFlix 5-star rating. One is Pulp Fiction, one is Vanilla Sky, and this is the third.
