NY Met Museum of Art Hides Mohammad: Met Submits to Religion of Peace

So you think this prestigious museum is not HIDING images of Mohammad? Well sure they are. Out of deference, or out of sheer terror of terror? Muslims have complained that it is not acceptable to display images of their prophet. So of course, the images are down. The museum's official line is, "they didn't fit the theme" of the current collection. See an amusing video below.

Muhammad Art

The museum is also dropping the word "Islamic" from Islamic Galleries, a new section of the Met scheduled to open in 2011. The New York Post  says it's Jihad Jitters, and says the new name will be "awkward." Islamic art expert, Kishwar Rizvi, said the Met has nothing to fear from Mohammed. He forgets that it's not Mohammed strapping on the suicide vests.

This from Creeping Sharia:

Another victim submits to Islamic sharia law, probably fearing the “inflammable mobs” feared in India.

Almost comical that the NY Post would seek, and publish, opinion from Yale University, which refused to publish images of Mohammed in a book about…images of Mohammed.

A book, Muhammad: The “Banned” Images, was subsequently published with many images of Mohammed in response to Yale’s dhimmitude.

Dinah Lord says the removal of the images is "Dhimmi disgrace," and Gates of Vienna says it's "an infectious disease disease of sort and the vector is Islam...

Atlas Shrugs says the museum is commiting cultural jihad:

We are supposed to get on planes, go to stadiums and buck up but one of the world's greatest museums can't stand up for .....art.

More Muhammad Art

If you cannot conceive that Muslims from the Religion of Peace might punish the Met, remember the Muhammad cartoon controversy of 2005? When cartoonist, Kurt Westergaard released the infamous cartoon of Muhammad wearing a bomb in his turban, all hell broke loose around the world. Saudia Arabia boycotted, death threats were issued, and on New Year's Day 2010, an attempt on Westergaard's life was made when a Somali Muslim armed with an axe and a knife broke into his home. Westergaard survived because he had a "panic room" and a stellar security set-up. This was at least the second time that a plot to kill Westergaard was thwarted. In 2008, three Muslims were charged with planning his murder.

The cartoon was inserted into Geert Wilders 2008 film Fitna, without Westergaard's permission (at least that's the story). The gaping gap in Hell broke even wider - fatwahs were issued. If you have not seen it, it is a must. Visit Moonbattery for the film and commentary.

Frankly, I understand The Met not wanting to risk the lives of their employees, and its famous and irreplaceable assets, but there has to be another way. Islam asks nothing more than submission from each and every one of us worldwide. We should not give it to them.

Graphic credit: DarylCagle




Muhammad Art - Freedom of Speech Spread the Word (video)

Judge Napolitano Glenn Beck Constitutional Seminars:

Let's get constitutionally correct, and make it the politically correct thing to do. Judge Andrew Napolitano announced on the Glenn Beck Show yesterday that he is planning to do a Constitutional Law seminar on Fox News. I see this as the next avenue of Tea Parties: We begin to talk about the U.S. Constitution, and what liberty really consists of, in detail, and we keep talking about it.

Judge Andrew Napolitano

Thomas Jefferson said:

"... God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion. The people cannot be all, and always, well informed.

The part which is wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive.

If they remain quiet under such misconceptions, it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty.... And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms.

The remedy is to set them right as to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure."
Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 (C.J. Boyd, Ed., 1950)

That is an awesome quotation - an awesome thought.

Napolitano is the author of a wonderfully informative book, Constitutional Chaos. I'm looking forward to the seminars as a way to get the conversation started. No dates for the lecture or lecture has been given.

Not everyone is anxious to hear the Judge's ideas, however. It would be naive to think Liberals would be interested in the U.S. Constitution. I found one Liberal site admitting they are "more than a little queasy" at some of the issues Napolitano addressed yesterday:

Freedom of choice and control over your own body will be lost.

More of your hard earned dollars will be at the disposal and tender mercies of federal bureaucrats. It was not intended to be this way.

We can vote the bums out of their cushy federal office

...we can persuade the state governments to defy the Feds in areas like health care where the Constitution gives the federal government zero authority.

We can ask our state legislatures to threaten to amend the Constitution to abolish the income tax, to return the selection of US senators to state legislatures and to nullify, to nullify! all the laws that Congress has written that are not based on the Constitution.

But there is one thing we can't do. Just sit back and take it."

Napolitano has been laying out our politically incorrect abuse of the US Constitution for a very long time. Here's a snippet from the introduction to his book Constitutional Chaos:

What's at Stake in America Today

I, myself, am a strong and fervent believer in Natural Law. The only valid laws are those grounded in a pursuit of goodness. Anything else - like taking property from Person A and giving it to Person B, like silencing an unpopular minority, like interfering with freedom of worship - is an unjust law, and, theoretically, need not be obeyed. St. Thomas Aquinas said only just laws impose an obligation of obedience, because unjust laws are not within the power of the government to enact; and only laws that seek goodness are just. This is the essence of Natural Law. No government may enact laws interfering with our freedoms no matter how popular the enactment.

The positivist would say since the government gives freedom, the government can take it away. The Natural Law says only God gives freedom and the government can only take it away as a punishment for violating the Natural Law, and then only through due process.

To a positivist, the government's goal is to bring about the greatest benefit to the greatest number of people. Under the Natural Law, the only legitimate goal of government is to secure liberty, which is the freedom to obey one's own free will and conscience, rather than the free wills or consciences of others.

The problem today in America - the greatest and gravest threat to personal freedom in this country - is that the positivists are carrying the day. Under their sway, the government violates the law while busily passing more legislation to abridge our liberties.

If we wish to survive the near future with our rights intact, we need to understand the size and scope of the threat. We must also understand its true identity: a government that breaks its own laws. ~  Constitutional Chaos, Judge Andrew Napolitan

 About Natural Law, new President George Washington said:

The foundation of our national policy will be laid in the pure and immutable principles of private morality; ...the propitious smiles of Heaven can never be expected on a nation that disregards the eternal rules of order and right which Heaven itself has ordained..."

A lot of good things are happening in America. We are awaking from a very long and foggy sleep, but it is taking awhile. By now we should be wide-awake - eyes wide open, and our thought processes accelerating and moving into high gear. Let us get on down the road to constitutional correctness - if not in every way, then in every way doable as soon as possible - and certainly with each and every piece of new legislation, and throw today's notion of "political correctness" out the window - be guided by the U.S. Constitution and make it the new political correctness. Who is the definer of what is "politically correct," anyway?

NRCC wastes $900000 on Scozzafava: What is the RNCC doing for Hoffman now?

The NRCC has spent $900,000 to get DeDe Scozzafava elected in New York's 23rd district special election on November 3rd. Scozzafava "suspended" her candidacy today - $900,000 wasted - donated by Republican and or conservative voters. $900,000.

Pete Sessions - Chair of NRCC

As RedState's Eric Erickson says, NRCC chair, Pete Sessions is "batting his eye lashes at Doug Hoffman" while "wearing a fig leaf." The grand old party establishment has no choice but to get behind the conservative choice in NY23, Doug Hoffman. Congressman Pete Sessions gulped and said:

He [Hoffman] would be very welcome, with open arms.

Doug Hoffman is running as a candidate for the Conservative Party in New York and there is a lot of talk about a third party gaining momentum which will, in the end, be hurtful to Republicans, but Hoffman tried to gain the Republican nomination. He is/was a registered Republican but could not get the party chair's support.

I have not left the Republican Party. The Republican Party has left me and has turned its back on the voters of the 23rd Congressional District and on the values that made our party strong," Hoffman said in prepared remarks after his introduction.

Republican leaders in the people's House, John Boehner and Eric Cantor have learned an important lesson from their shotgun endorsement of a RINO Republican, who in truth is a liberal Democrat: Republicans want more than talk about conservatism, we want conservatism.

While it is not much remembered these days, the Republican party is historically the party of conservatism. The party has been hijacked - steamrolled by the "politically correct" movement that began with Bill Clinton. We don't need a third party. We just need conservative candidates, so that we can vote for them and put conservatives in Congress.

Message to the Congressman Pet Sessions and NRCC Executive Direction at the NRCC: just give us conservative candidates and let us show you how to take the party back from PC voters.

So, how much of the $900,000 is still scheduled for advertising for Scozzafava over the next three days? Has the NRCC pulled ads for the assemblywoman? Is the NRCC furiously producing ads for Hoffman? What is the RNCC doing for Doug Hoffman in the next three days?

Related:
Scozzafava endorses David Owens, Newt calls Scozzafava's exit left, "statesmanlike."

Newt Backs Doug Hoffman: Gingrich Age of Party leaders Picking People is Over

NRCC Backs Doug Hoffman: RNC Backs Doug Hoffman

RINO DeDe Scozzafava Quits NY23: Hoffman NRCC Funds Available? 

Doug Hoffman and Sarah Palin's Endorsement