'cookieChoices = {};'

The Right of the People to be Secure in their Persons, Houses, Papers, and Effects,
Against Unreasonable Searches and Seizures,
Shall Not Be Violated


Saturday, November 18, 2006

The Creeping Talbianization of Iran

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad continues to make Iran even more worse than it already was for women:

Tehran, 16 Nov. (AKI) - The hardline administration of president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Thursday introduced new restrictions on women. In Iran's National Security Council, women must now work in separate rooms from men, and may not attend meetings with their male colleagues. Segregation in the school system has been extended to teachers as well as pupils: at all levels, girls' schools may only be staffed by female teachers, who may not teach at boys' schools and institutes.

In universities, where male and female students have for some time sat in separate areas, CCTV cameras have been installed to monitor contact between the two sexes. The first woman-only hospitals are due to open soon, the health ministry has announced.

Meanwhile, George Bush is scaling back his plans for sanctions.
Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 1 Comments

Fretful Friendships

Guest Editorial by Edward Cline:

Revisiting one of my favorite satirical plays, Richard Brinsley Sheridan’s The Critic, I was prompted to note a parallel between Sir Fretful Plagiary’s anxious protestations against the charge that he is a talentless playwright (and a plagiarist, as well), and the anxiety of the Bush administration’s stance on the Middle East, especially about its relationship with Israel. Lacking any first-hand knowledge of plot, dialogue, and dramaturgy, Sir Fretful rebuffs every criticism of his play by critics who are equally ignorant of dramaturgy, and leaves the stage in furious dudgeon, while his critics, Sneer and Dangle, snicker at his mortification.

Lacking any guiding principle, except that of pragmatism (if that can be called a guiding principle) and the court of “world opinion,” the U.S. cannot decide whether to confront Iran, Syria, and their client terrorist groups (Hamas and Hezbollah) and stand without reservation behind Israel and its right to exist, or to force Israel to make concessions with the Palestinians in order to end the ceaseless conflict and tension in the Middle East. Israel, too, has lost its self-confidence; it was U.S. pressure on Israel that it fight Hezbollah on its own terms last July, and as a consequence Israel lost the war in Lebanon.

On November 10th, in London, Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain gave a speech in which he verbalized what President Bush dare not say in public. His theme, centered on the ongoing chaos in Iraq and the U.S.’s inability to “stabilize” a country whose inhabitants are at each other’s throats in a struggle for religious and political supremacy, was “constructive engagement.”

It could only mean that while Bush has sworn never to deal directly with Hamas or any other terrorist group, he has effectively signaled to willingness to negotiate with them through third parties.

“A major part of the answer to Iraq lies not in Iraq itself but outside it, in the whole of the region where the same forces are at work and where the roots of this global terrorism are to be found.” (The Daily Telegraph, November 14).

The essential point of his speech was that the U.S. should work to form a diplomatic coalition of the “moderate” Arab states to bring about the desired goal. The chief members of that coalition would be Iran, Syria and Saudi Arabia. Never mind that there are no “moderate” Arab states on the question of Israel, and that the Daily Telegraph headline of the story which contained Blair’s speech was “Iran Plotting to groom bin Laden’s successor.”

The thorny problem facing Bush, Blair, and other is: How to bring the antagonists together (Saudi Arabia and Iran are, on Islamic religious terms, mortal enemies) to achieve a lasting solution? That is, how to give the Arabs and Iranians everything they want except the eradication of Israel, and also secure Israel’s shrinking borders?

The simplest solution to bringing peace to the Mideast would be to blast into oblivion the “roots where global terrorism are to be found” – that is, Iran, Syria, and Saudi Arabia. But to Bush, Blair and others, that is an unacceptable solution. It might, after all, enrage world opinion, especially Muslim opinion. So the solution they will settle on is to cobble together the antagonists in an alliance to work out a compromise.

In the Heraclitean, “realist” universe of professional pragmatists, there are no absolutes. Nor, apparently, should there be. And since they reject the necessity of absolutes – for example, of acknowledging that Hamas and Hezbollah are gangs of killers that should never be brought into any civilized discourse – all they can do is brood and agonize, interminably ponder the crisis, and fret over and over again: “What to do?” and settle for an indefinable “middle course” that itself is an elusive non-absolute solution.

The conflict is insoluble because the U.S. lacks the courage to acknowledge the existence of evil. Evil, presumably, can be cajoled into becoming a “good” through “constructive engagement.”

An article by Steven Erlanger of The New York Times in the International Herald Tribune (November 14), underscores Israel’s fretful dilemma and U.S.’s fretful vacillation.

“Many Israelis feel that the free world under the leadership of the U.S. is facing a similar situation to Europe in the 1930s, when they watched the rearming of the Nazi Reich,” Yuval Steinitz, a member of the Israeli Parliament’s foreign and defense committee, is quoted in Erlanger’s article. “No one could predict the global catastrophe ten years later, and Iran may be the same.”

Erlanger writes:

“Bush says his stance over Iran is unchanged: He will never accept a nuclear-armed Iranian state. Yet Israelis have been increasingly anxious about the Bush approach to Iran, seeing recently a tendency to delay confrontation through further negotiations. They worry that because of Iran’s ability to further inflame Iraq, Bush is hesitant to take any steps that could lead to confrontation. And Israelis are worried about what concessions an administration seeking to build an anti-Iran alliance in the Arab world might ask of them on the Palestinian question in order to bolster that alliance.”

The midterm elections were watched closely and anxiously by Israel and its Islamic enemies. Islamists abroad and in the U.S. hailed the Democratic sweep of Congress as a victory, especially since a Democrat and Muslim, Keith Ellison of Minnesota, was elected to the House, and also because the Republicans even boast of an “anti-Israel” representative, Darrell Issa of California, who is booster for Hezbollah.

Erlanger writes:

“No Israeli knows if the next American president will be as tough on Iran or as loyal to Israel as Bush. If Bush does not act, Israelis say, by the time the next president takes office in January 2009, Iran will be well on its way to a bomb, and Washington may not back Israeli responses.”

It is news to me that Bush has been “tough” on Iran. “Tough” on Iran, in rational, practical terms, means destroying Iran’s nuclear fuel-producing facilities and removing its theocratic government, and letting the Iranians sort out the mess, just as the U.S. should have removed Saddam and left the Iraqis to butcher each other. Bush’s notion of “tough” is to lapse into a state of denial, coached by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and other champions of compromise.

Erlanger cites Yossi Alpher, a former Israel-Palestinian negotiator, who said that if Bush succeeds in beginning talks with Iran, “we need to ensure that the U.S. doesn’t sell us down the river…. [I]f the world solves it diplomatically, will it be at our expense?”

He can bet on it. History has taught us that postponing moral crises will only result in the crises blowing up in our faces. In the gnawing, fretful world of unprincipled diplomacy, nothing is surer than failure, betrayal, and catastrophe.

Crossposted at The Dougout
Bookmark and Share
posted by Grant Jones at permanent link# 1 Comments

Muslims Massacre A Group Of Christians In Indonesia

Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 4 Comments

Bolton Lets Loose On The UN

In what is being termed "an extraordinary outburst" John Bolton tells it like it is about the United Nations (thanks to Atlas Shrugs for the link):

The U.S. Ambassador to the UN, John Bolton, launched a scathing attack on the United Nations Friday.

Bolton was furious over the adoption by the General Assembly of a resolution which said the assembly regretted the deaths of 19 civilians in an attack by the Israeli military in the town of Beit Hanoun last week. Despite the resolution being significantly watered down at the behest of the United States, and being passing by 156 votes to seven, Bolton launched a blistering attack on the UN, and many of its members.

"Many of the sponsors of that resolution are notorious abusers of human rights themselves, and were seeking to deflect criticism of their own policies," he said.

"This type of resolution serves only to exacerbate tensions by serving the interests of elements hostile to Israel's inalienable and recognized right to exist."

"This deepens suspicions about the United Nations that will lead many to conclude that the organization is incapable of playing a helpful role in the region," Bolton continued.

"In a larger sense, the United Nations must confront a more significant question, that of its relevance and utility in confronting the challenges of the 21st century."

"We believe that the United Nations is ill served when its members seek to transform the organization into a forum that is a little more than a self-serving and a polemical attack against Israel or the United States," he said. "The Human Rights Council has quickly fallen into the same trap and de-legitimized itself by focusing attention exclusively on Israel. Meanwhile, it has failed to address real human rights abuses in Burma, Darfur, the DPRK, and other countries," Bolton charged.

"The problem of anti-Israel bias is not unique to the Human Rights Council. It is endemic to the culture of the United Nations. It is a decades-old, systematic problem that transcends the whole panoply of the UN organizations and agencies," he continued. The United States, and Australia joined Israel in voting against the motion, together with four small Pacific island nations. All countries in Europe, including Britain, voted to support the resolution.

The original text condemned Israel over the Beit Hanoun attack and its operations in Gaza, however the adopted resolution had the General Assembly expressing, "regret."

Rather than an outright investigation of the incident the assembly resolved to form a committee, "to look into the facts." The resolution also carried a demand that the Palestinian Authority take action to stop rocket attacks on Israel.

Bolton launched his attack despite gaining these concessions. Equally critical was Israeli Ambassador Dan Gillerman who stormed out of the session after telling members, "I caution everyone who will support this resolution. By doing so, you will be an accomplice to terror. The blood of more innocents will be on your hands."

The resolution was taken to the General Assembly after the United States used its veto to squash a similar motion in the Security Council. It was the 31st time the U.S. had used its veto at the UN to stop resolutions concerning Israel and the Palestinians.
Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 3 Comments

Storm Track Infiltration: Europe- Insurgency & Counter Insurgency

From The Gathering Storm

In between their planned Inquisition of the Republicans, the dhimmicrats in Congress should take a quick break and review the ‘other’ more insidious war with Islamism that’s being fought in Europe and tell us of their plans to counter the Islamist moves here in this country.

I know the dhimmicrats do not track religious news unless it seems to threaten their secular paradise but at least they must have heard of the Pope controversy. Pope Benedict quotes a medieval Pope who, more or less, says Islam is dominated by a belief in violence and, right on cue, responded with violence. Are these Muslims just ‘misunderstood’ or is their behavior proof of their infatada?

Here’s a quick recap of what they, and we, are facing.

To quote the Religion of Peace:

Since the destruction of the World Trade Center five years ago, terrorist plots by Islamic jihadists are uncovered on a monthly basis. From Israel, to India, to Africa, to Russia, to Europe, governments are struggling to circumvent Muslim activists committed to violence. This violence isn’t limited to avowed terrorists. Last winter, more than 100 people died when thousands of Muslim youth across the world, following the encouragement of their religious leaders, took to the streets in angry protest of the Danish Mohammed cartoons. This September, a Berlin opera company disrupted its schedule to cancel production of Mozart’s Idomeneo. The company worried that a scene in which the king presents the head of Mohammed might spark a response similar to that evoked by the cartoons. (In the same scene, the king presents the heads of Jesus and Buddha, yet the company did not worry that Christians or Buddhists would riot and issue fatwa.) Going back a few more months, Comedy Central cancelled a portion of a South Park episode depicting Mohammad because it was too dangerous. South Park then nonchalantly preceded to a show a skit that outrageously insulted Jesus. Go back a few months more, and one finds the Museum of World Culture in Sweden removing an erotic painting from their walls in response to Muslim outrage.

And it should not escape the dhimmicrats attention that the infatada in Europe is progressing at a nice clip.

Here’s a quick recap of that. Hat tip to an unknown blogger at IBA.

Europeans are naturally getting nervous over their Muslim neighbors and some are ‘mad as hell and aren’t going to take it anymore’.

Even the liberal left in Europe is beginning to see the threat.

Artists and influential leftists are warning that the rise of radical Islam is threatening the tradition of European liberalism. Theater directors, cartoonists and writers say the continent is betraying its identity by practicing self-censorship aimed at appeasing a fundamentalist Islam they believe is determined to impose its will on free speech and creativity.

These are strong anti-dhimmi responses to a growing threat seen by some in Europe. Meanwhile, back in the USA, our ‘strong’ measures are right up the dhimmicrats alley. Again, words not actions are the dhimmi response to the threat.

U.S. urges Muslim youth to avoid extremism

Just say “no” is their strategy.

Or perhaps to hide their head in the sand, the dhimmicrats will attempt to shut down any debate on Islam like the British government is doing. Hat tip to Western Resistance.

Time will tell. It will be an interesting but dangerous two years ahead.

Bookmark and Share
posted by WC at permanent link# 4 Comments

Iran - "The U.S. naval forces are under constant surveillance and the fleet could be destroyed within three days"

Let's dance, woman. The sooner the better.

Iran vows missile exports to its neighbors to drive U.S. from the region

Iran will provide missile systems to regional allies, an Iranian military commander said last week on Al-Alam television.

The Nov. 9 report on Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps military exercises quoted IRGC Commander Brig-Gen Yahya Rahim-Safavi as saying Iran was now producing both ballistic and cruise missiles, including 2,000 kilometer Shihab-3 missiles and 300 kilometer, shore-based and sea-based anti-ship cruise missiles.

“We had Scud-B and Scud-C missiles during the war and we acquired them from some foreign countries, like North Korea, but 17 years after that war, we were able to manufacture all of these spare parts and all these supplies, including fuel, especially Shahab-3 with a range of 2,000 km, and Shahab-2,” he said.

Continue reading "The U.S. naval forces are under constant surveillance and the fleet could be destroyed within three days" »

Bookmark and Share
posted by Epaminondas at permanent link# 7 Comments

When you sound like a loser

Prime Minister Olmert On Iran: I'll Do Everything in My Power That The Jewish People Will Never Again Be Exposed To The Threat of Annihilation

He is not believable.
Such a statement needs either the unmistakable backing of performance, which certainly FAILED in Lebanon, or the Sherman like granite inflexibility of promise to be carried out.
Try this, you putz, :

"Israel to guarantee the survival of the few jewish people, will abandon its guarantee NOT to be the 1st to use nuclear weapons on the day we believe Iran has tested a nuclear weapon. I will use all means compulsory to act in the defense of the jewish people from the promised holocaust by every leader of Iran since 1979. I urge the people of Iran to save themselves, and take matters into their own hands"

UGH !!!

Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert paid an historic visit to the Simon Wiesenthal Center and toured the Museum of Tolerance on November 15, 2006. The Prime Minister was accompanied by both Israel's new Ambassador to the United States, Sallai Meridor and UN Ambassador, Dan Gillerman, along with Chief of Staff, Yoran Turbowitz and Consul General to Los Angeles, Ehud Danoch.

Continue reading "When you sound like a loser" »

Bookmark and Share
posted by Epaminondas at permanent link# 2 Comments

Looking to the future as the past, the Al Saud become Somoza ..this is JUST how we treated Saddam after 1979 and the Embassy Crisis

US tactics in strategic planning could not be more stupid.

After the Iranians invaded US territory in 1979, and kidnapped our ambassadorial staff in an act of war, we failed to respond to effectively, we pal'd up with Saddam to ensure that Khomeinist jihadi freaks did not end up ruling the gulf.

Admirable desire, and utterly stupid tactic.

Today, we are repeating the past, making the Al Saud the new old boss same as the new old boss, and become again the untermenschen guards for the family gas station in the hijaz. When you hear Saudi Arabia, think Somoza and Nicaragua.

The Al Saud, and their Al Sheikh in laws are not the friends of freedom, rights or the american peoples. They CANNOT be. It's against their religion. Is there a PERSON, JUST ONE, who recognizes the ineluctable, unchangeable reality of this? Is there ONE LEADER who can see that this expediency will lead to other, greater problems. In 20 years will we see pictures of Condi shaking hands with Prince Naif who later (or his family) will be traced to financing terrorism used against american citizens? ENOUGH.

Where's my hydrogen car? End our need to CARE about these murderous salafist FREAKS, you MORONIC TWITS

From Gertz:

Saudis see new 'special relationship with Washington' on security as Iran threat looms

ABU DHABI — Saudi Arabia and the United States have concluded talks on drafting strategy to defend the Gulf region against threats from Iran.

Gulf diplomatic sources said Riyad and Washington held what they termed the most comprehensive talks in years on cooperation to confront Iran's missile and nuclear threats to Saudi Arabia and the five other members of the Gulf Cooperation Council. The sources said the talks envisioned a long-term U.S. presence in and cooperation with the GCC to develop their militaries and coordinate against Iran and Al Qaida.

"Unlike previous efforts, the talks were serious and detailed," a source familiar with the sessions said. "I think both sides are quite clear on where the other stands."

The talks took place in late October during the visit of Saudi Deputy Defense Minister Khaled Bin Sultan to Washington. Khaled, the son of Saudi Crown Prince Sultan, who is also the kingdom's defense minister, met Vice President Richard Cheney, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and other senior members of the Bush administration.

Continue reading "Looking to the future as the past, the Al Saud become Somoza ..this is JUST how we treated Saddam after 1979 and the Embassy Crisis" »

Bookmark and Share
posted by Epaminondas at permanent link# 3 Comments

Under Gates, GWOT will go covert? A police and Intelligence op? Can anyone say John Kerry?

The key architect of the U.S.-led international war on terror is being replaced and the new defense secretary, Robert M. Gates, is expected to pursue more conciliatory and less aggressive tactics, according to U.S. defense officials.

Of course Mr, Gates was an integral part of the team which performed the perfidious display of first calling for, and instigating the Shia to rise against Saddam in 1991, then allowing the Iraqis to fly helicopters in the no fly zone, then refusing to act when the helicopters were used to slaughter the Shia. Eventually estimates in the mass graves ran to 350,000 to 400,000. Think the Senate will ask about this during confirmation hearings?

Former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld pressed the U.S. military, especially its special operations components, to conduct more aggressive operations aimed at killing, capturing and otherwise disrupting foreign terrorist networks and their supporters. He once asked a four-star general in charge of special operations, “have you killed any terrorists today?” to highlight his priority.

Continue reading "Under Gates, GWOT will go covert? A police and Intelligence op? Can anyone say John Kerry?" »

Bookmark and Share
posted by Epaminondas at permanent link# 0 Comments

Muslim Teacher Hands Out Jihadi Word Search Game

From WRAL:

SMITHFIELD, N.C. -- A Spanish teacher at Smithfield-Selma Senior High School resigned this week after handing out an assignment that some students and parents said teaches hate.

Khalid Chahhou, who was in his first year of teaching in Johnston County, gave students a worksheet in which they were to translate words and find them within a word-search puzzle.
Some students started uncovering strange words in the process.

"There were words like 'kill,' then I saw it said 'destroy America,'" Eric Herrera said.

As they read on, students found the puzzle contained a paragraph that contained the following phrases:

"Sharon killed a lot of innocent people," a possible reference to former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon.

"Palestine is not a terrorist group."

"Allah help destroy this body of evil making humanity miserable."

"It was kind of scary at first to think about, you know, your own teacher in your own school that is teaching you," Herrera said.

School administrators said they confronted Chahhou about an unidentified concern Wednesday and he resigned.

"The situation surrounding the resignation has prompted us to call the proper authorities," said Crystal Roberts, the spokeswoman for Johnston County Schools.

The Johnston County Sheriff's Office reviewed the complaint, but investigators said they don't see any reason to file criminal charges or contact other agencies.

Chahhou, who also teaches Arabic at a religious school affiliated with the Islamic Association of Cary, told WRAL in a telephone interview that students got the wrong message from the assignment.

"When I made the assignment, I was upset and angry about a story I recently saw on the news. If any message appears, it is more of a message to myself, not to my students. I never meant to hurt or upset any students or parents," he said.
Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 9 Comments

Glenn Beck's "The Extremist Agenda"

Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 2 Comments

An Etymology Lesson From Infidel Bloggers Alliance

(Hat tip to Watcher)

We've all heard the phrase "motherfucker." Now, I don't know about you, but I've always wondered where it came from. It's a strange form of insult. While we can certainly all agree that anyone who does have a sexual relationship with his mother is degenerate and sick, in reality, it is very rare that we ever really believe that anyone is actually a motherfucker.

Think about it this way, when you call a guy a cocksucker, for instance, you really mean it, in some sense. You mean that he is less than manly, or that he is a suckup, overly ingratiating, or whatever. Whe you call a guy a shithead, you mean he has shit for brains, that he is thick, or stupid.

But, when you call a guy a motherfucker, you don't, in any sense, really mean that he resembles a guy who would have sex with his mother, right? You just don't, do you?

So, where did this mysterious phrase come from?

Well, it turns out it is a curse which originated in the Middle Eastern Christian community, in the days before they had been thoroughly dhimmified. The original version of the curse went thusly,

"You disgust me like Mo The Fucker."

And, of course, they were referring to the hated one, Mohammed himself.

In other words, you are an insecure, psychopathic, power-obsessed freak of a man.

The curse was later shortened to simply, "Mo The Fucker." Then, it became run together in its pronunciation, "Mothefucker." And, it gradually evolved into the modern, "Mothafucker."

Well, there you have it. Don't ever say you don't learn anything here at IBA.
Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 7 Comments

Friday, November 17, 2006

Definition of Chaos

What is wrong with Maliki? Iraq has been given an opportunity to ESCAPE THE MADNESS. They are out of their gourds with blood sickness, revenge disease and religious inspired death wishes convinced that glory is floating on a river of blood.

Put it aside and create something better.

If accurate this is chaos, ragnarok, the agony of anarchy, and a clear indicator it's over the edge:

SAFWAN, Iraq (Reuters) - British forces mounted raids in southern Iraq on Friday, a day after four Americans and an Austrian were abducted when the civilian convoy they were guarding was hijacked, Iraqi security sources said.

Amid confusion over how far various incidents were linked, police in one town said they killed an American in civilian clothes and wounded another after the Americans shot dead two policemen who pulled over their unmarked vehicle near Zubayr on Friday.

A British military spokesman said troops killed two gunmen in a raid near the border town of Safwan, close to where the convoy was attacked after crossing from Kuwait. But he said that raid was not related to the search for the missing foreigners.
He declined to comment on what Iraqi security officials said was a search by British troops for hostages in the Garma area of Basra, the main city in the oil-rich, mostly Shi'ite region.

He denied Arab media reports a British soldier was killed.

Continue reading "Definition of Chaos" »

Bookmark and Share
posted by Epaminondas at permanent link# 0 Comments

What if?

People the world over say that if Israel is dismembered and handed over to the Muslim world then all the world's problems will cease overnight.

Will It?

Here is a news article from today’s BBC;

Bombs follow Thai PM peace visit

Three bombs have exploded in a predominantly-Muslim province in southern Thailand, killing one person and injuring about 30. The attacks followed a visit and a call for peace on Thursday by the new Prime Minister, Surayud Chulanont.

Five soldiers were hurt in one roadside bombing in Narathiwat province. An hour later another roadside bomb and one in a tea shop killed one and injured 24.

More than 1,500 people have died in the restive south since January 2004.

The first bomb of about 15kg (33lb) and possibly hidden in a fire extinguisher exploded as a patrol of soldiers was passing. Two of the injured soldiers were said to be in critical condition.

An hour later, a 5kg bomb went off in a tea shop followed five minutes later by a similar-sized roadside bomb that killed a street vendor.

Since coming to power following a coup in September, the army-appointed Mr Surayud has apologised for previous tough policies in the Muslim-majority, Malay-speaking region.

But the violence has increased since his appointment.

Continue reading here.
Bookmark and Share
posted by Watcher at permanent link# 3 Comments

Storm Track Infiltration: The Keepers of the Islamist Ideology

From The Gathering Storm

Last month The Minneapolis St Paul International Airport has been struck by a group of apparently mostly Somali taxi drivers some of whom seem to have decided that allowing passengers to carry alcohol into their cabs infringed on their religion. They claimed that a fatwa was issued against such behavior. The fatwa proclaims that "Islamic jurisprudence" prohibits taxi drivers from carrying passengers with alcohol, "because it involves cooperating in sin according to the Islam."

The fatwa was issued by and Muslim organization called MAC - Muslim American Society, Minnesota chapter - and signed by society officials. What is the Muslim American Society? In September 2004 the Chicago Tribune published an investigative article. The society was incorporated in 1993, the paper reported, and is the name under which the U.S. branch of the Muslim Brotherhood operates.

The Muslim Brotherhood was founded in Egypt in 1928 by Hassan al-Banna. The Tribune described the Brotherhood as "the world's most influential Islamic fundamentalist group. "Because of its hard-line beliefs, the U.S. Brotherhood has been an increasingly divisive force within Islam in America, fueling the bitter struggle between moderate and conservative Muslims," the paper reported. The international Muslim Brotherhood "preaches that religion and politics cannot be separated and that governments eventually should be Islamic," according to the Tribune. U.S. members emphasize that they follow American laws, but want people here to convert to Islam so that one day a majority will support a society governed by Islamic law.

How are society members to respond when questioned about a Muslim Brotherhood connection?

  • The Tribune cites an undated internal memo: "If asked, 'Are you the Muslim Brothers?' leaders should respond that they are an independent group called the Muslim American Society."

The Muslim Brotherhood are the ones responsible for the creation of the ‘Project’ and the publication of the Priorities of the Islamic Movement in the Coming Phase. This 186-page treatise can be considered the most recent manifesto of the Islamist revivalist movement. As explained in the introduction, the “Islamic Movement” is meant to be the “organized, collective work, undertaken by the people, to restore Islam to the leadership of society” and to reinstate “the Islamic caliphate system to the leadership anew as required by sharia.”

Ladies and gents, this is the enemy. The Brotherhood is the intellectual engine behind the Islamist ideology that the free world in confronting and must defeat. OBL and al-Zarqawi are both graduates of this Brotherhood. The Brotherhood has extended its tentacles in Europe and the US. But according to the CounterTerrorism blog “The United States and most of Europe has maintained what can be called, at best, an ambivalent policy toward the international Muslim Brotherhood, often arguing that leaders are, in fact moderates who want a dialogue with the West.”

And this from Douglas Farah

  • Here is just a sample of what the MB writes to its own, in English. I am told the Arabic is far harsher. “To confront the Western and US domination, the Muslim Brotherhood thinks that fighting domination requires adopting several factors, including:

1- Spreading Islamic concepts that reject submission to humiliation, and incite to fighting it, and to be on to rise to support the oppressed.

2- Reviving the will of liberation and independence in the peoples, and sowing the spirit of resistance.

3- Supporting Hamas government with all spiritual and material and with experience; to spare the Palestinian people’s need for Western countries which are biased against its freedom and interests.

4- Forming an international relation and a public opinion that fights injustice and seeks establishing rights, justice and peace in the world.

5- Activating the economic boycott against imperialist states, and also boycotting their cultural production.

6- Achieving political, economic and social internal reform, and removing the food and technological gaps with imperialist states.

7- Working on correcting the image of Islam among Westerners, and clarify the truth of our fair causes, and removing the deformed image about Islam and Muslims.

8- Spreading popular movements in Europe and South America opposing US domination.”

And the site contains interesting political analysis.

“Unlike Al Qaeda, the Muslim Brotherhood knows how to contest and win elections. While bin Laden and President Bush indulge in existential combat in which the average Muslim has little if any personal stake, the Brotherhood has been winning hearts and minds through assiduous and nonsectarian ward-heeling. While Bushism has wrought war, anarchy, occupation and the specter of the lethal Zionist-Crusader alliance that bin Laden warned of in the run up to 9/11, the Muslim Brotherhood salves some of the deprivations and inequities of ordinary life. It is what makes the group the hardest target yet in Bush’s “war on terror,” and the likely successor to the aging Mubarak.” This is the nut of what the MB is and its strategy: build a Muslim political structure to eventually dominate Europe and the United States, while not distancing itself from violence and more radical calls for action.

The Muslim Brotherhood is an important driver of the Islamist ideology, the ideology that we are at war with and using the tactics of intimidation, infiltration and disinformation, with its cohorts like CAIR, to soften-up the non-Muslim world for eventual conquest. The question is, when will the non-Muslim societies wake up and see this threat for what it is instead of focusing on a the mislabeled war called the ‘war on terror’ ignoring the ideology behind it and those that support it.

Bookmark and Share
posted by WC at permanent link# 0 Comments

Why "libel tourism" is a serious matter

Britain may be slowly sinking towards dhimmitude, but that doesn't mean we should allow certain of their unholy practices to determine the future of countries abroad.

Case in point: the heroic reporter Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld, author of Funding Evil: How Terrorism is Financed and How to Stop It, who was discriminated against by a British court that ruled in favor of the shady Saudi millionaire Khalid bin Mahfouz to try and suppress her ability to investigate his ties to terror. She's now suing in US court to prevent her work from being suppressed by what's come to be known as "libel tourism" in the UK. The problem lies within Britain's libel laws, which are much worse than those in France. Here's an item from The Boston Globe (via Protein Wisdom and Michelle Malkin), that gives some important info on just what Britain welcomes:
AN IMPORTANT question will be argued tomorrow before the federal Court of Appeals in Manhattan: should American journalists who write about controversial issues be subjected to legal intimidation from abroad? More precisely, will American courts halt the growing practice of "libel tourism" whereby wealthy foreigners sue American writers and publishers in England, despite little chance of enforcing the judgment in this country?

Rachel Ehrenfeld, an adviser to the Defense Department and director of the New York-based American Center for Democracy, pioneered investigation into the financial roots of terrorism, first in her 1990 book "Narcoterrorism" and, most recently, in "Funding Evil -- How Terrorism is Financed and How to Stop It." She argued, controversially, that dollars from drug traffickers, corrupt state leaders, and wealthy Arab financiers, especially Saudis, fund terrorism.

One target of Ehrenfeld's work is Saudi billionaire Khalid bin Mahfouz, former owner of the National Commercial Bank of Saudi Arabia and former chief operating officer of the scandal-ridden Bank of Credit and Commerce International. In 1992, he paid $225 million after his indictment in New York for his role in the collapse of the Bank of Credit and Commerce International.

In "Funding Evil," Ehrenfeld reported that bin Mahfouz deposited "tens of millions of dollars in London and New York directly into terrorist accounts" and transferred some $74 million to the International Islamic Relief Organization and the Muwafaq Foundation run by Yasin al-Qadi, a US-designated terrorist.


Bin Mahfouz and fellow libel tourists have made the English libel bar rich, leading the London Times to declare the United Kingdom the "libel capital of the Western world." English lawyers now refer to the "Arab effect" to describe the surge of English libel actions by wealthy, non resident Arabs accused of funding terrorism. This trend has produced a succession of rulings, settlements, and damage awards against English and American media defendants costing millions of pounds.

Bin Mahfouz has sued or threatened suit in England 33 times against those who linked him to terrorism. He runs a website boasting of his victories. The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, and The Washington Post all have settled with him. The English court enjoined publication of "Funding Evil" in Britain and awarded bin Mahfouz 60,000 pounds ($109,470), even though the merits of his allegations were never tried.

Rather than confront bin Mahfouz on England's libel-friendly turf, Ehrenfeld sued him in a New York federal court seeking a declaration that his English judgment is unenforceable in the United States as repugnant to the First Amendment.

The English judgment has impaired her ability to find publishers for her other work. Remarkably, the district court dismissed her case, ruling in effect that Ehrenfeld must await legal action in the United States by bin Mahfouz to enforce the English judgment before raising her First Amendment defense. However, his lawyers have declared he does not intend to enforce his judgment in this country.

Writers are now subject to intimidation by libel tourists. Little wonder that the American Society of Newspaper Editors, the Association of American Publishers, and 14 other media groups have filed a "friend of the court" brief to support Ehrenfeld's quest to raise her First Amendment defense now. Until she is able to do so, she will have problems finding American publishers willing to risk publishing her research and writing.
I think I can tell what the problem is here. Britain may be threatening to prosecute or fine American publishers working in the UK who publish the works of people whom they don't agree with. But whatever exactly the problem is, here's what I have to say: even if a UK ruling cannot be enforced within the US, that doesn't mean that Americans should tolerate Britain's attempts to extend both theirs and Saudi Arabia's shari'a overseas. There's a reason why the Pilgrims left Britain and journeyed to the north American shores.

Back in May, FPM reported that the Southern District Court in Manhattan dismissed the case:
...Judge Casey ignored Ehrenfeld’s plea for her First Amendment rights, and decided that he had no jurisdiction over the case. Ehrenfeld is filing an appeal and faces a daunting challenge of raising enough money to support a case that she believes will help determine whether or not American writers will be able to continue to expose America’s enemies.
This is more of a problem that you'd think, as The New York Sun suggests:
Whether American courts can block those judgments, or at least certain of their provisions, is a question none of the judges yesterday appeared especially eager to tackle. And the court expressed little interest in the First Amendment concerns that legal observers say are present in the case.

One judge on the panel, Jose Cabranes, seemed worried that a ruling in the researcher’s favor could open up American courts to suits challenging the judgments of other courts across the globe.
Are these leftist judges helming the case? I don't know. What I do know is that Ehrenfeld's First Amendment rights should not be ignored, that's for sure.

Also important here is the following exclusive from Dhimmi Watch written by Robert Locke:
The laws of Saudi Arabia, based upon the sharia law mandated by the Koran, do not recognize the rights and freedoms guaranteed Americans by the Constitution. The Saudi government makes no secret of its ambition to export Islamic tyranny worldwide, as the Koran commands. What most Americans don’t realize, is that American courts are helping it in a number of ways. For example, they are collaborating with Saudi attempts to squash the free-speech rights of Americans with abusive libel lawsuits.


British law requires the loser in a court case to pay the winner’s court costs. This is the real attraction for shady millionaires: the chance to bankrupt their opponents into silence. Because of this, Britain has become a Mecca for rich but shady characters seeking to purchase the appearance of legal vindication. There’s even a name for it: libel tourism.

...the larger issue, of course, is how it became the business of a British court to render judgments against American authors. The legal pretext here is laughably flimsy: despite the fact that the book was never published, or even offered for sale, in the UK, 26 Britons bought copies over the Internet from American booksellers like Amazon.com (which, to its credit, joined an amicus brief supporting Dr. Ehrenfeld in this.) And a few downloaded the first chapter, which was posted on the Internet.

By this standard, every author in the United States is now subject to Britain’s Victorian libel laws, and the Declaration of Independence has failed.
Clearly, Americans' fight to free themselves from Britain's prejudice is far from over. And I want to say that: whether or not Britain can actually enforce their screwed up laws over in the US does not mean that America shouldn't decry those would-be laws of theirs. I know what you're thinking. I'm suggesting that some kind of diplomatic effort should be made to protest against the imposing of laws by a foreign country on Americans that are contrary to the basic rights of Americans under their Constitution. Yes, that's what I'm arguing, and while I do realize that it's something that could take eons to really manifest, maybe it should be done. Britain, after all, is a country where the situation is becoming considerably worse all the time, as they sink ever deeper into the pit of dhimmitude, and to be quite honest, I can't see why any nation that believes in democracy should have to lead relations with a country that's going as backwards as the UK is. One of the commentators on Protein's blog says:
I am no lawyer, but the problem with this not being an issue that our courts can rule on is that the writer in question is being punished based upon a judgment in Britain. If citizens of this country can have their livelihood taken away by a decision in a court in another country, we need to make it our problem, as a country. We rightly believe in free speech, and just because other countries don’t have the same standards is no excuse for us to allow our citizens to be screwed by their backwards laws.

Of course, maybe we’re looking at this from the wrong end of the stick. Maybe we should be contacting the companies that are uncomfortable publishing her works, and remind them that she has done nothing wrong, and that we have protection in this country from such nonsense.
The commentor is correct, and not just on US matters, but on the rights of innocent people in Europe as well. Nobody with common sense should have to have their free speech rights trod on by abysmal laws like Britain's. It should be protested.

Ehrenfeld is fortunate to have received support from 9-11 Families for a Secure America. And if she still needs financial support, you can go here to see how to donate.
Bookmark and Share
posted by Avi Green at permanent link# 1 Comments

Maybe moderate means when your 'extreme' positions average out to the middle.

WARNING:Solipsoid diversion

What am I?

I believe going into Iraq was right, but as of this morning "it" isn't worth american sacrifice because they can't keep a republic, but I do believe the Kurds deserve troops and protection,..from all their surrounding enemies (Turkey, Iran, Syria and whatever Al Anbar province ends up as).

I believe the USA cannot afford to have any withdrawal be portrayed by the killers as a victory for them and a defeat for us, and THAT is worth american lives (it will cost them one way or the other, you know).

I believe Samuel Huntington was not only correct, but it is upon us, and that one war is going on, worldwide, and we are not acting it. I believe this war is a war of the peoples, and that we live in the transition moment between ideas and weapons.

I believe Europe is probably screwed. I believe we'll probably save their asses again, in the end. Some wahabbi moron will destroy the Lebrun paintings in the Louvre in the name of Allah, or something, and that will do it for the NY Times.

Continue reading "Maybe moderate means when your 'extreme' positions average out to the middle." »

Bookmark and Share
posted by Epaminondas at permanent link# 2 Comments

“…With Thousands of Fremen Warriors”

Where there is no vision, the people cast off restraint. (Proverbs 29:18)

(Spoiler warning: the post contains book and movie spoilers.)

Frank Herbert published the first Dune book in 1965. Considering that, I would say, in jest but not completely so, that some of the prescience of his main character, Muad’Dib, rubbed off onto his creator. The series handles many subjects, but what I find striking is how it deals with the relations between “sophisticates” and “natives”, with the resultant romanticism and with the fact, still widely overlooked today, that religion can assume a life of its own and cause its adherents to shape reality rather than the other way round.

Besides the book, there’s also the movie Dune, by David Lynch, which, when compared to the books, even just the first alone, does them great disservice. Not that I think Lynch is a bad director—the books contain just too much in the way of word-conveyed matter to be expressed adequately in any movie of reasonable length. The movie, because it needs to focus on actions like most movies do, is simplistic, and on the other hand it adds things not found in the original. Still, it is useful for demonstrating some points—some ideas appear the same in the movie and the first book. What I now engage in is interpretation within the framework of my blog, which means ideological defense of the West in general; creative interpretation, yes, but not that far from the intentions of the author. If anything, his extensive use of Arabic words makes this very relevant to our time.

The setting of the books is essentially the Middle Ages copied and pasted onto a far-future Space Age. Where the Middle Ages had barons, dukes and earls with plots of land as their fiefs, in Dune their fiefs consist of planets. At the center of all this is the desert planet Arrakis, also called Dune, the only source of production for the spice, to which so many in the Imperium are addicted. Through antiquity and medieval times up to the Age of Discovery, Europeans were addicted to the use of spices coming by way of Arabian merchants; and today the modern world is addicted to the oil of Arabia, paying through the nose for it if need be, with the petrodollars providing the lifeblood for Islamic terrorism.


In full on Our Children Are The Guarantors »
Bookmark and Share
posted by ziontruth at permanent link# 0 Comments

"Why can't you realize that it has nothing to do with what you have done but with what they want."

But I can tell you what it is not about. Not about Israel, not about Iraq, not about Afghanistan. They are mere excuses. Algerian Muslim fundamentalists murdered 150,000 other Algerian Muslims, sometimes slitting the throats of children in front of their parents. Are you seriously telling me that this was because of Israel's treatment of the Palestinians or American foreign policy?"

eye_of_salafis copy.jpg

azzam_abd.jpgFrom the National Post of Canada:

Dr. Tawfik Hamid doesn't tell people where he lives. Not the street, not the city, not even the country. It's safer that way. It's only the letters of testimony from some of the highest intelligence officers in the Western world that enable him to move freely. This medical doctor, author and activist once was a member of Egypt's Al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya (Arabic for "the Islamic Group"), a banned terrorist organization. He was trained under Ayman al-Zawahiri, the bearded jihadi who appears in Bin Laden's videos, telling the world that Islamic violence will stop only once we all become Muslims.

He's a disarmingly gentle and courteous man. But he's determined to tell a complacent North America what he knows about fundamentalist Muslim imperialism.

"Yes, 'imperialism,' " he tells me. "The deliberate and determined expansion of militant Islam and its attempt to triumph not only in the Islamic world but in Europe and North America. Pure ideology. Muslim terrorists kill and slaughter not because of what they experience but because of what they believe."
Hamid drank in the message of Jihadism while at medical school in Cairo, and devoted himself to the cause. His group began meeting in a small room. Then a larger one. Then a Mosque reserved for followers of al-Zawahiri. By the time Hamid left the movement, its members were intimidating other students who were unsympathetic.

He is now 45 years old, and has had many years to reflect on why he was willing to die and kill for his religion. "The first thing you have to understand is that it has nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with poverty or lack of education," he says. "I was from a middle-class family and my parents were not religious. Hardly anyone in the movement at university came from a background that was different from mine.

Continue reading ""Why can't you realize that it has nothing to do with what you have done but with what they want."" »

Bookmark and Share
posted by Epaminondas at permanent link# 5 Comments

Some polls from the streets of Islam

I stumbled on this article from Die Welt. It has a few interesting numbers:

30% of all Turkish students [in Germany] find honor killings a "legitimate reaction" to defend the honor of the family.

55,3% find that women absolutely must be virgins until marriage.

In Ankara at the Middle East University 77% believe it is a man's right to beat a women if she for example lets the food burn.

If the reader is in doubt - the Turkish are known to be relatively moderate compared to other Muslim countries.
Bookmark and Share
posted by von Schlichtningen at permanent link# 1 Comments

The gay jihadi training video

Bookmark and Share
posted by Watcher at permanent link# 15 Comments

Iran's hypocrisy knows no limits

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - Iran, whose president has vowed to wipe Israel off the map, complained to the United Nations on Wednesday that the Jewish state was repeatedly threatening to bomb it.

The threats were "matters of extreme gravity" and the U.N. Security Council should condemn them and demand that Israel "cease and desist immediately from the threat of the use of force against members of the United Nations," Iranian U.N. Ambassador Javad Zarif said.

His comments, which came in a letter to U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan dated November 10 and circulated at the United Nations on Wednesday, prompted a quick rejoinder from John Bolton, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations.

"I would say this is perhaps an example of the Iranians trying to learn 'chutzpah,'" Bolton told reporters, using a Yiddish word for unmitigated gall or outrageously arrogant behavior. [...]

Crossposted at Eye On The World.
Bookmark and Share
posted by Watcher at permanent link# 4 Comments

Thursday, November 16, 2006

Ethiopian-Born Man Arrested With Nuclear Info At Detroit Metro Airport

... and $78,000 in cash:

A 34-year-old Dallas man was arrested at Detroit Metro Airport on Tuesday, carrying $78,883 in cash and a laptop computer containing mysterious files about cyanide and nuclear materials.

Authorities said Sisayehiticha Dinssa, a U.S. citizen who was born in Ethiopia, was arrested after getting off an airline flight from Amsterdam. They said he had spent four months in Nigeria on unspecified business.

When agents asked him whether he had any cash to declare, he said he had $18,000, authorities said. But when agents checked his luggage, they found an additional $60,883. When they scrolled through his laptop, they said they found the mysterious files. Dinssa told agents he was interested in learning about cyanide and nuclear materials.

You know, he was just generally interested in cyanide and nuclear materials. No big deal. Oh yeah, and the 78 grand? Pocket change.

And, just because he spent four months in Nigeria, home of some of the world's biggest uranium mines, doesn't mean we have anything to worry about.
Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 2 Comments

Nancy Pelosi cares more about safety for Islam than for Americans

Robert Spencer talks on Hot Air about how Democrat Nancy Pelosi sides with Muslims in opposing searches at airports. To exclude Muslims from being searched at airports for possible weapons carrying and even investigating for possible terror ties is something that cannot be allowed. Besides, all people, no matter what their race, sex, or religious affiliation is, are all subject to searches at airports for security reasons.

Also in discussion here is Muslim congressman Keith Ellison, who's very friendly with CAIR, and another person whom we need to be on the lookout for.
Bookmark and Share
posted by Avi Green at permanent link# 7 Comments

It's easy to forget.....the critical progessive INSANITY

" Compared to rising inequality in the United States and Israel, ranked numbers one and two for social inequality among developed nations, the Iranians look pretty damn good."

Claims without provenance, followed by stupidity

Iran even has a vibrant gay subculture.(Link included)

I got your vibrant gay subculture right here:gay_hanging_iran.jpg

Many may also assert that Iran wants to destroy Israel. I don't believe this for a moment, but rather - along with Juan Cole - interpret comments by Ahmadinejad as the comments of the descendant of a race that can proudly trace its national history for 5,000 years to a country he perceives as upstart thief of land that has less than 80 years of disputed possession. Many in the Middle East believe that demographic, economic and geopolitical shifts will mean that Israel fades away into historical oblivion over the next hundred years. They may well be right, as painful as that prospect is to those who ferverently believe in a Jewish state, but that serious prospect only makes the determined zionists currently holding sway more dangerous.

Destroy Israel? How would we get that idea?

Continue reading "It's easy to forget.....the critical progessive INSANITY" »

Bookmark and Share
posted by Epaminondas at permanent link# 7 Comments

Please ignore this smoking gun

Even after Hamas' election as the appointed terror head of the PalArab people, the Western media and politicians still tend to treat Haniyeh as a political figure - perhaps strident, perhaps stubborn - but not as a terrorist himself.

Similarly, the Fatah-dominated portions of the PA, from Abbas on down through the police, has always been given a free pass as far as terror was concerned. Sure, some of the policemen moonlighted as terrorists, and we all know that they were corrupt, but no one in the West ever really thought of them as the actual instigators of terror.

There is a very good reason for this. To admit that they are terrorists means that there can never be negotiations with them which means that there can never be peace. It means admitting that the Palestinian Arab leaders and government is just a front for terror organizations and do not have any independent positive contributions to give. All the emotional investment that the West has given towards the "peace process" would be realized to have been wasted, or worse, to have been actually encouraging the opposite of peace. To imagine that the West would admit to a mistake this massive, that perhaps PalArabs are really not interested in the peace and compromise that everyone assumes, is just too devastating.

It is easier to pretend.

So, I apologize for the discomfort that comes out of this tiny detail in a Ha-aretz story about the liquid explosive belt that was discovered recently that I mentioned this morning:
A second belt was discovered in a search held by the security forces in the Palestinian National Security building in the West Bank city of Ramallah.
The Palestinian National Security Forces are building suicide bomb vests.

Not some shadowy terror organization where people wear masks and carry RPGs. Not the "military wing" of Hamas. Not the rogue Fatah ragtag terrorists. No, these bomb belts, these terror weapons, are being built by the organization that was created at Oslo, that was initially armed by Israel to patrol the borders jointly with the IDF, that was funded directly in the millions by the West, that was trained by the UN.

A story that should be in the headlines, a story that completely explodes the prevailing conventional wisdom of most of the West, a story that should be the start of war crimes trials and ultimatums from a unified world....gets buried as a single sentence in an article that almost no one will read.

When the truth is too painful, it is easier to pretend that lies are the truth.
Bookmark and Share
posted by Elder of Ziyon at permanent link# 2 Comments

Storm Track Appeasement: The Evolution of the Appeaser

From The Gathering Storm

This was submitted to me by a reader of my blog. A well informed doctor. See any parallel between the appeasers of World War II and today.

Norman Podhoretz has in a wise and clear article pointed out how a renowned French historian has described the strategy which led irresistibly to the WW II:

  • Stage 1 (negation): Germany is not at all rearming.
  • Stage 2 (bagatellisation): Okay, but not very much.
  • Stage 3 (relativating): Okay, but in relation to GB, France and Soviets, it is a tiny army.
  • Stage 4 (psychologization): Okay, but try to understand how they must feel surrounded, yes, under siege by many other nations!
  • Stage 5 (disengagement): Okay, but now it is too dangerous to confront them.
  • Stage 6 (appeasement): For hell, don't provoke them! That will only worsen the situation.
  • stage 7 (resignation): We can't do anything about it.

How about these parallels.

  • Stage 1 (negation): The terrorists are not real Muslims.
  • Stage 2 (bagatellisation): Okay. They say they are Muslims.
  • Stage 3 (relativating): Okay but it’s just a tiny minority of Muslims.
  • Stage 4 (psychologization): Okay, try to understand their anger.
  • Stage 5 (disengagement): Okay, let’s not make the 1.2 billion Muslims angry – make concessions.
  • Stage 6 (appeasement): Hell! Don’t provoked Iran and North Korea. That will only worsen the situation.
  • Stage 7 (resignation): Let’s leave Iraq and preach ‘no more war’. Maybe they’ll leave us alone.

What stage do you think we’re at?

Bookmark and Share
posted by WC at permanent link# 5 Comments

The Dark Mind

It's not comforting to read something so explicit and utterly deprave from a Muslim in the United States:

Muslims, let me just tell you that integration and blending in with them [Americans] isn't always good. Most of the time it isn't. For someone to pass you by and not know whether you're Christian or Muslim or Jewish is one thing. Some classical scholars said don't even blend in with them in dress. But then to turn around and shave off all facial hair completely, campaign for an office in the political system of disbelief, hide your religion from the voters, support gay rights, and then to do so in a government that is openly killing Muslims is obvious kufr. Forget what I say, look at what classical scholars say. You participate in a system giving rule to human beings above or in place of Allah, you're committing acts of kufr, and if you know this and do it anyway then you're an apostate to be executed when caught.

There are no words.

Either Keith Ellison knows this or he doesn't. Once he knows, he needs to step down, even if he'll be replaced by someone openly against us. Once he knows and does not step down or openly advocate Shariah rule for the Muslims, he's an apostate. Might as well go to the synagogue and become Jewish.


Bookmark and Share
posted by Isaac Schrödinger at permanent link# 4 Comments

Today, the new democratic majority will self identify..Moveon, or Center,Kos or Bull Moose

Murtha or Hoyer in a secret ballot.

Who was elected last week, and who leads?

Here is the elected... a self identifying pic:

“A lifetime of Hoosier values, a southwest Indiana native, Brad Ellsworth knows faith and family comes first… Opposes abortion, and supports traditional marriage… a hunter who supports the Second Amendment, who will fight to protect our kids from violence and filth on TV and the Internet.”

That's a democrat, sports fans. Here's another....

The former created the majority, the latter ...Pelosi-Murtha-Rangel-Conyers runs it.

Today the election for majority leader in the democratic congress will occurr by secret ballot, with no need for all those who represent a lifetime of hoosier values to reveal or be pressured into a vote for defeat, ignominy and radicalism.

Continue reading "Today, the new democratic majority will self identify..Moveon, or Center,Kos or Bull Moose" »

Bookmark and Share
posted by Epaminondas at permanent link# 0 Comments

Wednesday, November 15, 2006

Do it, today.

Tokyo should debate whether to develop nuclear weapons, a senior member of the ruling Liberal Democratic Party said last week.

“If we do not debate it now, when else should we debate it?” said Shoichi Nakagawa, chairman of the LDP Policy Research Council.Nakagawa supports discussing whether Japan should go nuclear and wants to hold a debate on whether or not to proceed. Other officials in the party have not pursued the issue, Nakagawa said.

Japan has a highly developed nuclear infrastructure and could develop nuclear weapons in a relatively short period of time, according to U.S. officials.

It's time for our allies to take partial responsibility for the growing IRRESPONSIBILITY of the allies of our foolishly adventurous enemies.

Continue reading "Do it, today." »

Bookmark and Share
posted by Epaminondas at permanent link# 0 Comments

Today is "Palestinian Independence Day"

In one of those useless gestures that PalArab leaders have been so fond of, eighteen years ago Yasir Arafat declared November 15th as "Independence Day" - from exile in Algiers.

They even wrote a meaningless Declaration of Independence. It includes this gem:
Despite the historical injustice inflicted on the Palestinian Arab people resulting in their dispersion and depriving them of their right to self-determination, following upon U.N. General Assembly Resolution 181 (1947), which partitioned Palestine into two states, one Arab, one Jewish, yet it is this Resolution that still provides those conditions of international legitimacy that ensure the right of the Palestinian Arab people to sovereignty.
Unmentioned is the fact that the Palestinian Arabs at the time, along with all Arab nations, rejected Resolution 181 because they didn't want to recognize a certain other people's claims to nationhood that elsewhere in the Declaration they say is the "destiny of all other peoples."

(Read the rest here.)
Bookmark and Share
posted by Elder of Ziyon at permanent link# 0 Comments

Special Report: The Ecology of Ideas – Why Peace Doesn’t Have a Chance

From The Gathering Storm

Recently a Guest Editorial by Edward Cline was posted at the IBA courtesy of The Dougout. In it he commented how the path to peace will never be found by the winners of the Nobel Peace Prize. He didn’t pull any punches.

Even more than the roster of activists for statism and collectivism discussed in my commentary on the Medal of Freedom (“Medals for Mendacity,” October 7), the roll call of activists for “peace” is a grab bag of the foolish, the subversive, the charlatan, and the insidious. And, like most of the recipients of the Presidential Medal of Freedom, most of the winners of the Nobel Peace Prize reveal an ignorance of the requirements for peace among nations, or an overt hostility to those requirements.

Why is that? It’s got a lot to do with the concept of ecology. More of that in a second but back to Cline.

But the exigencies of peace have been ignored by both aggressors and pacifists. Aggressors believe that “peace” can be achieved by force; pacifists believe that it can be achieved by compromise. The record of peace movements has been largely one of repeated failure. In fact, most peace movements and diplomatic strategies to prevent war have almost consistently caused or led to war. Efforts by diplomats and pacifists, who eschew violence, to persuade those who live by and for force to refrain from coercion, only encouraged the use of force by those unconcerned with peace.

And the $64 question is…..

With no thought devoted to the necessary preconditions of peace.

For the answer to the $64 question we turn to the study of ecology. In one sense, ecology is the study of the relationship between living systems. To survive and prosper, living systems must adapt to the environment they find themselves in. Just being the biggest, strongest, loudest or baddist life form on the block doesn’t guarantee its survival. It must find its niche, adapt to it and then exploit it.

This idea of adaptation also applies to human ideas. In effect, if we study history, the grand political concepts of humanity survived only when the socio-economic environment made it possible to do so.

Slavery is a good example.

Many years ago during the heyday of the politically correct, a history student asked “Where did slavery come from?” The real question should have been, ‘Where did freedom come from?’ The student had no sense of what came before and how history was changed. The first question presupposes that freedom always existed and slavery was imposed onto happy free people throughout history. If the college student knew anything about history, he would have known that slavery was the basic predicament of man in history - not the other way around. Individual freedom is a recent development. In fact, it was Western Civilization that finally put an end to slavery around the world.


Because the socio-economic environment changed to allow the adaptation of the political idea of freedom to take hold. Personal freedoms took hold with the American Revolution. Slavery went by the wayside when it became uneconomical to use slaves. It wasn’t the political activist who brought about the end of slavery. It was the efficiency of machinery brought about by the Industrial Age that made slavery an uncompetitive solution. Once slavery was replaced by more efficient technology, laws were able to be accepted to outlaw it.

Individual freedom for all as a political concept could not exist before the economic need for slavery was diminished. As for peace, it can not exist in the current global cultural environment because peace is not the absence of war, but the presence of justice. There is no justice in half the world today. The global socio-economic environment can not support it so justice can not currently adapt to it.

Wishing it so, singing about it, marching for it, or yelling “give peace a chance” at the top of your lungs will not usher it in. Peace will be a long time coming as long as ideologies like Islamism holds a place in people's hearts and minds. Only when there’s justice for each and every individual human being will there be peace on earth.

Bookmark and Share
posted by WC at permanent link# 4 Comments

UK Faces "Wave" Of Terror Plots

Home Secretary John Reid, last seen here at IBA calming trying to explain to a Muslim community leader that the neighborhood was not Dar al-Islam, says that Britain faces an inevitable wave of attacks (Thanks to Religion of Pieces):

Britain faces a "wave" of terrorist plots, prepared strategically and directed from abroad by al-Qaeda, Home Secretary John Reid has told the BBC.

He agreed with MI5 head Dame Eliza Manningham-Buller's assessment that there were 30 major plots, and said an attack in the UK was "highly likely".

Counter-terrorism officials have said Britain is al-Qaeda's top target.

Speaking to BBC Radio 4's Today programme, Mr Reid said Dame Eliza had provided a "salutary warning".

"It is a very great threat. It means that a terrorist attack in the United Kingdom is highly likely," he said.

The government had no information to suggest an imminent attack, he said, but were aware of 30 plots which were "ongoing" and had potential, he said.

"Whereas we thought this was probably haphazard some time ago, they do look as though they are being directed from abroad, specifically by elements of al-Qaeda," he said.

"They look as though they are being prepared strategically and that is that they fit into a pattern... it looks as though there's a wave of such things".

Link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6149726.stm
Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 1 Comments

Al Jazeera English

Al Jazeera broadcasts right here in the United States, 24/7, with Dave Marash as the Washington-based anchor. From the November 15, 2006 Washington Post's "Al Jazeera's U.S. Face":

...In February, [Dave] Marash, a lifelong broadcast newsman, became the Washington-based anchor of Al Jazeera English (AJE), the English-language spinoff of the Arabic TV news network. When AJE begins its first globe-spanning broadcast today, Marash will be its most prominent American face.

Embedded in "why," however, are two other questions: How can an American work for an operation affiliated with al-Jazeera, which achieved notoriety -- and to some, infamy -- by airing video communiques from Osama bin Laden, images of dead American soldiers and routine denunciations of the United States? Moreover, how could Marash, who is Jewish, work for an organization that has provided a platform for Holocaust denial and hate speech against Israel, Zionism and Judaism?

But Marash -- affable, burly and possessed of gloriously resonant voice -- seems almost delighted to be on the defensive. His short, glib answer: He was out of a job.

AJE came calling shortly after Marash was let go by ABC News almost a year ago. Marash, 64, had spent a decade and a half as a globe-trotting reporter for "Nightline" and as a sometime substitute host for Ted Koppel (before that, Marash was an anchor at Washington's Channel 4)....

Marash says...that al-Jazeera is little understood, and frequently misunderstood, in the West....

Al-Jazeera, he says, "has consistently offered a window of opportunity for Israel and Israeli citizens to speak to the Arab world. There is no contradiction between Judaism and al-Jazeera. As a Jew, I have always wished for and worked toward peace and civility in the Palestinian territories and Israel."...

Cliff Kincaid of Accuracy in Media has a different take and points out the following:

Al-Jazeera journalist Tayseer Allouni last year was convicted in Spain of collaborating with al-Qaeda; and al-Jazeera cameraman Sami al-Hajj was arrested by U.S. forces in Afghanistan in 2001 and has been held at Guantanamo Bay. (Al-Jazeera says the two men are innocent.)

"We haven't seen any evidence that tells us that [AJE] will be significantly different than al-Jazeera in Arabic," Kincaid says. "It's sponsored by the same people, paid for by the same people and has the same editorial philosophy."

Kincaid all but says Marash is a dupe: "The emir has plenty of Arab oil dollars to buy anyone he wants. They need Western media faces to give them credibility."
Bookmark and Share
posted by Always On Watch at permanent link# 1 Comments

I've been waiting years for this one..NOBEL PRIZE part of Protocols of Zion

Samir Ubeid, an Iraqi Researcher Living in Europe: The Nobel Prize Is Racist and Stems from the Protocols of the Elders of Zion

Robin Williams appearing with Steve Martin in Marat/Sade as rewritten by Woody Allen could not be stranger than this

Samir 'Ubeid: I don’t call it the Nobel prize – I call it the "Hubal" [idol] prize.

Interviewer: Hubal?

Samir 'Ubeid: Yes, because it often encourages heresy. It encourages attacks against the heritage, and encourages those who scorn their people and their culture. The proof is that it was awarded recently to Pamuk, who had encouraged civil strife, which might preoccupy Turkey and the Muslims in general. He held Turkey responsible for what the Ottoman state did, when he referred to the massacre of the Armenians.


Interviewer: In other words, if you are a traitor to your country, you deserve this prize.

Samir 'Ubeid: If you are a traitor to your country, and a heretic, who curses his Prophet, you deserve a Nobel Prize.


Why has the prize been awarded to 167 Jews, and to only four Arabs out of 380 million Arabs – and all four are considered traitors? For example, Al-Sadat got the prize during the normalization process, and as a price for Camp David, together with Begin, who committed Deir Yassin massacre, and who was in the "Hagana" gangs. Later, the prize was awarded to [Ahmad] Al-Zewail, in order to buy his invention, and Al-Zewail has disappeared since.

Interviewer: You mean the Egyptian Ahmad Al-Zewail?

Samir 'Ubeid: Yes, the Egyptian chemist. The prize was also awarded to Muhammad Al-Baradei, and in this case, it is soaked in the blood of the Iraqi children and people.


Mother Teresa was brought, along with a group of people like her…

Interviewer: Some say the prize was awarded to her for her missionary activity in Africa, India, and so on...

Samir 'Ubeid: Let’s assume she was righteous, according to the logic of the media, which is now controlled by the Jews and Hollywood. When they awarded the prize to Teresa, they wee trying to award an "artificial hymen" or "artificial honor" to this prize. My colleague said that there is democracy. What democracy is there, if out of 1.5 billion Chinese, only two or three were awarded the Nobel? If you examine the Russian scientists and writers, who shook the world with their literature and their knowledge... What about Sakharov, what about Tolstoy? In addition...

Interviewer: But Sakharov was awarded the Nobel prize.

Samir 'Ubeid: I meant Chekhov. Chekhov! Chekhov!

Continue reading "I've been waiting years for this one..NOBEL PRIZE parts of Protocols of Zion" »

Bookmark and Share
posted by Epaminondas at permanent link# 8 Comments

Afghan and Iranian women prefer to be dead than muslim

When can we start calling evil, evil? What kind of religion condemns women to such living hell that they increasingly choose suicide by burning to death over being alive?

From the BBC:
Increasing numbers of Afghan women are committing suicide by setting
fire to themselves to escape difficult lives,
according to NGOs based in the country.
They say women forced into marriage or suffering chronic abuse are killing themselves out of desperation.
Cases are said to be reported every day in the western city of Herat.
In Kabul, some 36 cases of self-immolation have been recorded this year.
"These are young girls at their most productive ages - between nine and 40 years of age," Ancil Adrian-Paul, a spokeswoman for NGO Medica Mondiale, told the BBC.
"These young girls are killing themselves from frustration and because they feel that there is no way out of them."
She said the choice of self-immolation may be influenced by the fact that many of the women sought shelter in Iran, where the practise is more common.

A nine-year old girl, choosing to set herself ablaze, because of how miserable the followers of islam are making her life. When I was nine years old I played baseball and climbed trees and caught frogs; I simply am not equipped with the imagination to understand how a child can choose to set herself on fire, and see it as the lesser of two evils. What can be done, to stop this, and bring hope to women imprisoned by the religion of islam?

Here is one thing that is being done. One small step, yet a hopeful one, in treating women as human beings... have western leaders start stating the obvious:

A senior Vatican cardinal has expressed concern over the use of some Muslim veils by Islamic immigrants in Europe.
Cardinal Renato Martino said immigrants must respect the traditions, culture and religion of the nations they go to.
They ought to abide by local laws banning the wearing of certain types of Muslim veils, he added.

"It seems elementary to me and it is quite right that the authorities demand it," said Cardinal Martino, who heads the Vatican department dealing with migration issues.
Here in Italy, a law was passed during the attacks of the Red Brigades urban guerrillas three decades ago which still makes it an offence to cover your face in public if your identity is challenged by a policeman.
The Italian government is trying to draw up what it calls a Charter of Common Values to get local Muslim leaders to help integrate Italy's fast-growing population.
But it is hard going.
At one recent meeting, a radical Muslim delegate proposed separate charters for men and for women, and favoured the death penalty.

Bookmark and Share
posted by Charles Henry at permanent link# 1 Comments

The Land of Mordor

Saudi Jeans:

Saudi Arabia is terribly misunderstood, by Muslims and non-Muslims alike.

Let's see how enlightened we are at the end.

For many Westerners, Saudi Arabia is such a big mystery. They don't understand it. They don't know much about it. They know we have oil, much of it, and they think we charge them a lot of money for that, which is not true because we don't really control prices.

Really? OPEC can change the price of oil because it controls most of the supply. Saudi Arabia is, by far, the biggest member of OPEC.

It is astonishing how multiple tides of foreigners who flooded our country after and during the oil boom have failed to understand and/or open up our society.

Question: How can they open up your society? Unless, by "open up" you mean to put light on Saudi society. In that case, I've written a few posts. Also see this famous entry at Rants and Raves by a guy who lived in Saudi Arabia.

Most of the foreigners in Saudi Arabia are third country nationals (TCNs). Their workload is often harsh. I highly doubt that they would have the luxury to sit down and "open up" the Saudi culture to the world. Plus, why would they want to spend their little precious free time discussing such a depressing topic?

I don't know whose idea was to build residential compounds for foreigners where they can live behind high walls and closed gates. It was a cleaver idea in the past probably, but it had some very negative implications.

A few points on this matter:

  1. If Saudi society wasn't so xenophobic, then these mostly infidel foreigners could live outside.
  2. A foreigner can't own property in Saudi Arabia. What do you want these smart kaffirs to do? Rent apartments and move practically every year when the landlord jacks up the rent!
  3. The Muttawa, the religious police, are not to be found in the residential compounds. The foreign guys and gals can wear shorts (gasp!) in the summer without being physically assaulted by a Dark Age merchant.
  4. Have you not noticed the numerous times terrorists have tried to murder these infidels? The compound allows the regime to have cameras at every signal and check everyone at the entrances. Not to mention that the mini-city is protected by radar and what seemed to me to be surface to air missiles. Overall, I think it still is a "cleaver" idea.

More from Saudi Jeans:

The way many Muslims view this country as the model Islamic state has given the wrong impression to some Saudis that, considering the place of their country, they are better Muslims than the rest of Muslims in the world.

More like the rest of humanity.

With all this stereotyping, many of us find it very difficult to accept criticism, not even from ourselves, let alone from others.


Bookmark and Share
posted by Isaac Schrödinger at permanent link# 1 Comments

How Nuclear Weapons Have Contributed Greatly To The Evil In Our Modern World

My title seems trite and silly to us, a generation of people who grew up hearing such platitudes as, "You can't hug children with nuclear arms." In light of the enormous destructive potential of even one nuclear warhead, my title seems to be trading in the obvious. Of course nuclear weapons have brought great evil into the world. After all, one nuclear bomb ruined Hiroshima's whole day. But, I am not merely saying nukes have brought evil into the world. I'm saying nuclear weapons allow evil to flourish, to grow larger, to have more impact.

Today, I heard military expert Max Boot, on the Dennis Prager radio show, make the very dubious claim that the atomic bomb has not had much impact on modern warfare. The evidence is very much to the contrary.

Nuclear weapons by the fact that they allow for Mutually Assured Destruction, ensure that the major powers, and those that generate the favored ideologies will never go up against each other directly. In the days of World War II, when Germany threatened England or Russia, when the ideologies of the various sides came to a head, those powers and ideologies went to war with each other.

This is an advantage to the world, because the stronger ideology, the one which provides the individual with the strongest raison d'etre, invariably wins. To put it simply, Communism and Democracy beat Nazism because Nazism was at most, a regional ideology, catering only to a very specific kind of fascism; white supremacism. Democracy and Communism, on the other hand, provided meaning on a universal level, which of course, left them the two standing powers in the aftermath of WWII.

However, because of nuclear weapons, the Soviet Union and the United States were unable to square off and fight each other for dominance. The result was that both powers fought each other using proxies. The Soviet Union used Ho Chi Minh and the North Vietnamese people to fight the United States. The United States used people like Osama Bin Laden to fight against the Soviet troops in Afghanistan.

The result was the Cold War; a war which lasted almost four decades. Sure, we managed to avoid direct armed conflict with the Soviet Union, and thus, the inevitable use of nuclear weapons. And yes, that is a good thing. Meanwhile though, great evil was allowed to flourish during those four decades, and it manifested in multiple genocides, wars, and the occupation and subjugation of Eastern Europe. Hundreds of millions of people had their lives squandered in the resulting psychological Holocaust which naturally flows from Communist dictatorship.

And, all this was because of the simple fact that the two powers found themselves incapable of squaring off against each other directly.

One of the major complaints about the execution of the Viet Nam war was that "we fought with one arm tied behind our back. This is another consequence of the military superiority which we have developed. To put it simply, we believe that it would be unfair to hit the enemy with anything near the full-force of our military capabilities. Once again, the result of this is that we allow great evil to flourish and grow. The Cambodian genocide most certainly was the result of our refusal to fight the Vietnam War with the full-force of our military.

Today, we are making the same mistake in the "War on Terror". In fact, I would contend that the very name "The War on Terror" stems from a refusal to confront our enemy, because of the potential resulting consequences. If we were to actually name the enemy in this war, then we would have to truly confront the apocalyptic ideology of the enemy, and we would recognize that we had to destroy them, no matter what. To truly recognize this enemy, Islamofascism, is to understand that there is no victory but by the complete obliteration or humiliation of every last person who subscribes to its ideology. There is no potential for compromise. There are no talking points for negotiation. There is no hope for growing a partnership.

This war will only be won when we have become so desperate that we will do anything.
Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 3 Comments

Older Posts Newer Posts