How to Make a Mosque Less Offensive to Westerners

It's a Bird! It's a Plane! No, IT'S SUPER MUSLIM GIRL! (Photoshop)

Marvel Comics demonstrates just how stupidly P.C. they have become in the Age of Obama.  They have developed a new comic book hero:  Super Muslim Girl.

Conan O'Brien caught much grief from the leftist loonies this week when he made fun of the new character. He tweeted:  "Marvel Comics is introducing a new Muslim Female superhero.  She has so many more special powers than her husband's other wives."

Of course, this was deemed "racist" (even though "Muslim" is not a race).  Leftists always react to violent ideologies by embracing them, rationalizing them, and showing great affection for them.

O'Brien's humor had a point.  Instead of pointing out the grievous dysfunction of Islamic societies and the Islamic ideology, we have fools creating comic "super heroes" representing that ideology.  Apparently, the way to erase 14 centuries of Islamic despotism is to give its followers their very own super hero.

Having their own super hero will raise Muslim self esteem and we will all finally get along.  This worked really well when Marvel Comics created a Nazi Super Hero back in the 1930's, and a Communist Super Hero back in the 1960's.  Oh wait a minute, no they didn't.  That's because political correctness hadn't been invented yet.

In any case, here is my comic cartoon on the matter, created as praise for the insight and political brilliance of the Marvel Comics authors.  Super Muslim Girl may not be allowed to drive a car, but so what?  She can fly!  As long as her husband accompanies her wherever she goes.

To be fair, Marvel Comics's version of Super Muslim Girl is that she is an unmarried teenager in America, reacting to adolescence and "super-charged emotions" like any other American teenager.  Of course, if she were the Marvel-depicted, fashionably dressed, unveiled young chick with makeup and jewelry, she might be in danger of an honor killing by her parents.  And one can only wonder how being clitorally mutilated at a younger age impacts those "super-charged" emotions.

The Effemination of Tommy Robinson Continues: He Publicly Apologizes to U.K. Muslims for Telling the Truth #EDL, #TommyRobinson, #Islam

Tommy Robinson Embraces Dhimmitude

Tommy Robinson continues his sell-out of the anti-jihad movement.  This week he left the anti-Islamization organization that he started, the English Defence League, to totally capitulate to the far-left government of Great Britain.  He is now publicly apologizing to Muslims for hurting their feelings and creating an "us vs them" environment.  According to the U.K. Mail Online:

Tommy Robinson, who dramatically quit the English Defence League this week, has vowed to help police tackle racism within the organsation and has apologised for causing fear among British Muslims.

Mr Robinson, 30, said he would work with police to help them investigate racism in the organisation - known for its thuggish street protests and extremist followers.

Mr Robinson, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, also said he was sorry for creating a 'us and them' culture and for causing fear among British Muslims.

An "us vs them" environment?  You mean the environment where Muslims segregate themselves and refuse to assimilate?  Where they create "no-go" zones for police?  Hold rallies promising new holocausts and 911 style attacks?  Carry picket signs advocating the beheading of opponents of Islam?  Continue to practice polygamy, female genital mutilation and honor killings of wives and daughters? Blow up buses and trains and murder innocents?

There is no greater "us vs them" environment than that created by the world's most violent and intolerant religion, Islam itself. Tommy Robinson has been brainwashed by Britain's new thought police.  Big Brother has arrived and speaks with an English accent.

Great Britain is committing national suicide and has been doing so for some time.

See Related Post at American Power.  Apparently, Tommy Turncoat Robinson's new pro-jihadi activities have even shocked Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer, who have written articles denouncing Robinson's sell-out.  Good.  Maybe there's hope for Geller and Spencer yet.

Update:  An excellent article on the Tommy Robinson sell-out  appears at PJ Media.  It is by Janice Fiamengo, a professor of English at the University of Ottawa, whose views closely match my own.  Read it here.

Update:  This article was linked by BadBlue.  I appreciate the link.

Muslim "Blowback"....in 1786? Muslim Violence Against the US is Not New

Fighting the Barbary Pirates

A few posts back I wrote about the "blowback" theory of Muslim violence.  Adherents to the theory believe that Muslim violence is not related to Islam, or its teachings, tenets or beliefs.  They believe that Muslim violence against the west is merely a reaction to past American aggression, or "blowback."  Both Ron Paul and one of his former advisors, Robert Pape, believe this theory.  Pape wrote a book on how we can stop Islamic violence by not having any military presence or supporting any other country's presence in Islamic lands.  The book is called "Cutting the Fuse."

I believe the "blowback" theory is bunk.  While the presence of infidel soldiers in Islamic countries and the support of Western countries for the supposed "occupation" of Islamic lands (e.g., the very existence of Israel) may provide a further motive for jihad attacks, the fact is that the Koran commands aggressive war against infidels even in the complete absence of any infidel "aggression" against Muslims. Muslims attack us because of Islam, because they are commanded to do so by their prophet and holy book, the Koran. Our sin is merely that we are not Muslims, that we do not accept Muhammad as a valid prophet.

Muslim violence and aggression against the United States is not new.  In the late 18th and early 19th centuries, Muslim pirates were attacking our shipping, stealing cargoes and ships and enslaving our sailors.  These were the infamous "Barbary Pirates," operating out of Tripoli (now Libya) and neighboring Islamic states.

Lawrence Auster of View From the Right wrote to me and supplied these facts:  In 1786, John Adams and Jefferson, then our ambassadors to Britain and France, met the Tripolitan ambassador to Britain, Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja, and asked him why his government was so hostile to the United States even though it had done nothing to provoke any such animosity.  Adja answered them (as they reported to the Continental Congress):  "that it was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman [Muslim] who should be slain in Battle was sure to go to Paradise."  

Doesn't sound much like "blowback" does it?  There was then, as there is now, a religious reason for Muslim aggression.  President Jefferson sent the navy and the marines to fight the (Muslim) Barbary Pirates in Tripoli in 1804, to stop them from attacking and pirating our commercial shipping.  Our military response to Islamic states, then as now, results from Muslim aggression, terror and murder.  The "blowback" theory is false.

President John Quincy Adams, who was President from 1825 to 1829 didn't believe in "blowback" either.  He wrote this about Islam:

“…he [Muhammad] declared undistinguishing and exterminating war, as a part of his religion, against all the rest of mankind…The precept of the Koran is, perpetual war against all who deny, that Mahomet is the prophet of God.”

President Adams also wrote this about Islamic violence and aggression:

"….Between these two religions [Islam and Christianity], thus contrasted in their characters, a war of twelve hundred years has already raged. The war is yet flagrant…While the merciless and dissolute dogmas of the false prophet [Muhammad] shall furnish motives to human action, there can never be peace upon earth, and good will towards men.”

Obama Bends Over Backwards to Accomodate Saudi King

File this one under "Rude, Crude and Socially Unacceptable."

Nevertheless, I fear this may be Obama's usual position in matters of foreign policy.