Sunday, May 16, 2010

Pamela Geller on Huckabee, Fox News - Muslim Mosque to be built near Ground Zero


Ayn Randist Pamela Geller of Atlas Shrugs guest appearance on Mike Huckabee's Fox News show, expressing opposition to the Muslim Mosque to be built 600 feet from the spot of the 9/11 attacks.

Geller takes the explicitly libertarian view: The government should not be involved forcing the Mosque out. However, she implores the peaceful Muslim community to consider the pain and suffering such a Mosque built so close to the 9/11 site, would cause the victims and their families.


Midas Mulligan said...

Only someone who doesn't understand Ayn Rand would call Pamela Gellar an Objectivist.

Eric Dondero said...

You're right. She's more of a LIBERTARIAN. But I called her that, and she said "no." She's a hardline Ayn Randist.

IMHO, besides me, Pamela is the bravest most hardcore LIBERTARIAN ACTIVIST (Ayn Randian) in America today. She's absolutely PERFECT, looks and ideology.

Geller 2012??

Midas Mulligan said...

Libertarian ?

Muslim hating wacko is more like it

Midas Mulligan said...

Also, if a private property owner wishes to build a mosque on their property, then a true libertarian, not to mention a true Objectivist, would say that they have every right to do so.

Lofo said...

I agree completely with Midas.

And actually, Pamela calls herself an individualist.

Gary said...

Keep in mind that Moslems were killed inside the World Trade Center.

Bill589 said...

What I don’t appreciate about western Moslems is that I don’t hear them condemning the terrorists who claim to be Moslem.

I know that if some Jews or Christians were killing innocents in the name of their God, all Jews and Christians, and especially their leaders, would loudly denounce them as not truly Jew or Christian and that their behavior is simply evil.

Do western Moslems fear the terrorists more than Allah?

Gary said...

***** IT'S TRIBALISM *****

A Moslem blows up a pizza restaurant in Israel and the Moslem "tribe" agrees it had to be done.

This knee-jerk reaction of support is universal through time. Support your tribe. The Romans needed to destroy Carthage all the way to burning alive up to 250,000 men, women and children in Dresden. No matter how horrible the members of any tribe will find reasons to justify killing.

Americans are not exempt from this. I always loved the Vietnam War quote: "We had to destroy the village in order to save it."

The Right Guy said...

If midasize and lofuck actually watched the video, they'd know they she explicitly said she wasn't for government intervention to stop them to build. She has a right to her opinion that it is in bad taste and poorly thought out.

On the other hand, Rand wasn't a libertarian, and she certainly wouldn't like the left libertarians that have ben flocking here of late. Objectivism≠libertarianism. there are differences, depending on whose definition you use.

Lastly, Geller can call herself whatever she likes.

Gary said...

I think we need to keep in mind that we have many friendly Moslem nations around the world who help us from Morocco to Egypt to Kuwait to Pakistan to Indonesia.

Eric Dondero said...

Geez, apparently some here didn't either read the intro below the video or watch the video itself.

Again, Pamela took an explicit libertarian view, saying that she does not want government to intervene, but rather public pressure to get the NYC Muslims to relocate the Mosque.

Sheesh. Pay attention!!

The Right Guy said...

Friendly muslim nation is a relative term. I don't see these friends of ours making great strides cleaning up their own back yard.

Gary said...

Right Guy, the point is that it is THEIR BACK YARD not our back yard.

Egypt for example. What right do we have to tell a civilization thousands of years old how to run their affairs? Our Secretaries of State march in like Gods and lecture Egypt on how to run their government. Only good manners prevents them from socking our representatives in the nose.

Ran / Si Vis Pacem said...

I'm sure they won't mind if I build a Synagogue in Mecca.

Chuck said...

"A Moslem blows up a pizza restaurant in Israel and the Moslem "tribe" agrees it had to be done."

And the rat fuck that calls itself "Gary" says, "Those dirty Jews had it coming."

Ran / Si Vis Pacem said...

Note to Gary: The UAR is not a "civilization" nor is it "thousands of years old." It is presently a post-Saddat regime only a few decades old, and if not for U$ $upport, it would collapse from internal failure. The regime owes us, big-time, especially given that it is our warships that keep the fvcking canal open to international business. It would pay you to learn a bit of history before you spout-off on things of which you are grossly ignorant.

The Right Guy said...

I think it is perfectly reasonable for us to have an opinion on how foreign government conducts itself. There's nothing interventionist about that. In fact it might be instructive than what we currently do with Mexico and certainly more effective than rectal-cranial inversion.

As far as their back yard goes, Their Back Yard≠WTC, Pentagon and a field in Pennsylvania. What irks these 7th century throwbacks is that we support Israel, which is anathema to their existence. Why you may ask? In the murderous proselytizing religion of Islam, there can be only one true word, and that is their word. While Judaism is the father of the abrahamic faiths, they have no respect for it and want to supplant it if not irradicate it. At least with some forms of Christianity, Israel and Judaism is seen in the proper context as the basis for Abrahamic faiths. Lets be clear here: The muslims pushed the jews out of Israel almost 1300 years ago and finalized the diaspora that would become the sephardic and ashkenazi peoples. Muslims also supplanted the coptics in Egypt, Christians in Turkey and the Balkans, and the Zoroastrians in Iran. If it wasn't for Charles Martel, things would have turned out differently in Europe. This is no religion of peace, and while I am not advocating intervening over there per se, I won't be pissed on and accept that they say it's raining. Only a naive fool would. They drew first blood.

Existential Funk said...

She is not a libertarian or an objectivist; she is a bigot and shameless self-promoter. Libertarians believe in individual freedom, including freedom of religion. Her bigotry contradicts objectivist and libertarian ideals and therefore she must be thrown out of both camps. You don't want to associate intellectual ideas with inflammatory hate speech and ramblings. Ayn Rand was a calm intellectual type, her ideals and philosophies followed that same intellectualism. But intellectual ideals rarely grab headlines and get you on major news networks.

She also wants the US to go back to some idealized version of itself that never existed except to the ignorant that refuse to acknowledge the flaws of their country (apparently mindless lemming behavior is how we define patriotism nowadays). The US has screwed a lot of stuff up. But one of the most applicable errors was actually training the Taliban to fight against the Russians, training a crazy ideological religious group to fight a political ideal that our leaders disagreed with. We often meddle in the world because we think we know better. Or we value the people that we damage less than our own and don't really care about the consequences, as long as it accomplishes the immediate goal (back then it was to fight communism).

Now the immediate goal isn't so clear, perhaps it is a holy war fueled by neocons like her that think we can beat crazy ideology with more crazy ideology (but ours is Christian ideology and we are the good guys, which justifies everything). Or maybe it is to perpetuate the private war industry that grows year after year and increasingly lobbies our countries leaders.

We should instead focus on policing our own country, pull the resources out of Iraq and Afghanistan and focus on preventing terrorist attacks. By not killing their friends and relatives in cross-fire, we give the Taliban less ammunition to recruit more young men. Eventually perhaps their own citizens will revolt against the religious extremist leaders but that is their mission as members of their nation, not ours. And we can support them morally, but we cause more destruction and death by directly intervening.