News & Analysis
015/07 August 28, 2007
CAIR: Media Cowers in Face of Islamist Threat
On August 24th, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), issued a "News Release" trumpeting the role CAIR played in getting the Christian TV program "Live Prayer with Bill Keller" off the air in Tampa, Florida.
http://www.cair.com/default.asp?Page=articleView&id=2929&theType=NR
While this is not a free speech issue, (TV stations are free to carry programs as they wish), it is troubling that a national broadcaster would terminate a program based on the demands of an Islamist hate group.especially an Islamic hate group that was not only founded by Islamic terrorists, but now stands as an unindicted co-conspirator in a major terrorism case.
http://www.nysun.com/article/55778
In view of the fact that CAIR was founded by Islamist terrorists, is here to overthrow constitutional government, actively works to impose Sharia (Islamic law), and other odious aspects of CAIR's perverted brand of "Islam", and one can't help but wonder, "What was CBS thinking?" CBS is in the business to make money; the Bill Keller program paid for its air time; in normal times, this would be considered good business.except for the antics of the unindicted co-conspirator, CAIR.
But these are not normal times.
Islam have become the latest "victim" in the American public arena, thanks to groups like CAIR; groups that purport to support "equal rights", but in reality demand "Special Rights".for Muslims only.
Rights not available to non-Muslims.
That's right. If you are not a Muslim in America , you can be insulted; your faith (or lack of faith) can be made fun of, the way you dress, your voice, your choice of living arrangements.are all fair game.
The odious activities of CAIR have even influenced decisions regarding publication of cartoons.and we don't mean the Danish Cartoons. The popular "Opus" cartoon strip has been pulled from the August 26th and September 2nd editions of many North American newspapers. Why? Could it possibly be the subject matter? Readers may view the August 26th strip and reach their own conclusion:
http://www.salon.com/comics/opus/2007/08/26/opus/index.html
http://www.berkeleybreathed.com/pages/index.asp
This is an alarming trend. While there is no evidence that CAIR had anything to do with the Opus cartoon strip being pulled, it would seem to fit well with CAIR's agenda to define Islam in America .to define what can be said.or not said.
Censorship.
By a group that tarnishes the meaning of the words "Islamic civil rights group".
It should be noted that when Anti-CAIR attorney Reed Rubinstein asked a reporter from a renowned Washington DC newspaper why they won't report on the obvious connections CAIR has to terrorism, he was told that the newspaper would never print or follow up on information uncovered in the CAIR v Anti-CAIR Lawsuit "because Muslims are an oppressed minority in this country."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=utJs2WoDlYI
This is extremely dangerous, especially since America has a long tradition of inquiry; no subject has been taboo, no course of inquiry subject to censorship in search of the truth on important matters of public interest. This is as it should be.
Until now.
Whenever there is an article that questions Islam, a commentary that correctly points out problems with Islam in North America, or even dares to raise the issue of Islamic terrorism, CAIR is in the forefront demanding that Islam be described in only the most innocent of terms.
CAIR, once again, is clearly demonstrating what is in store for North America should CAIR's perverted brand of Islam become dominant.
CAIR has, since its founding, told us exactly what is in store for us should its dream of imposing Wahabbi Islam on North America come to fruition. Our "mainstream press" has refused to even make inquiry into any aspect of CAIR's activities on behalf of radical Islam; is it any wonder that most North Americans are woefully ignorant of the threat?
The mainstream press has abdicated its role in society. Is it any wonder that many people now turn to alternative sources for their news?
Come what may, North Americans will never be able to claim we weren't warned.
Andrew Whitehead
Director
Anti-CAIR
ajwhitehead@anti-cair-net.org
www.anti-cair-net.org
ADVISORY:
Subscribers are warned that the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) may contact your employer if CAIR believes you are using a work address to receive any material that CAIR believes may be offensive. CAIR has been known to shame employers into firing employees CAIR finds disagreeable. For that reason, we strongly suggest that corporate e-mail users NOT use a corporate e-mail account/address when communicating with Anti-CAIR or CAIR. We make every reasonable effort to protect our mailing list, but we cannot guarantee confidentiality. Anti-CAIR does not share, loan, sell, rent or otherwise publicize our mailing list. We respect your privacy!
TIPS:
All persons are invited to submit tips and leads. Anti-CAIR will acknowledge receipt of all tips/leads, but we will NOT acknowledge the source of ANY tip or lead in our Press Releases or on our web site. Exceptions are made for leading media personalities at the discretion of Anti-CAIR and only on request of the person(s) submitting the tip or lead.
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
Sunday, August 26, 2007
Why Am I Nervous !
I am nervous. Could the reason be the Islamic plan for a parade on September 9, 2007 in New York? One to which Islamic terrorists and enabling organizations feel their right to march in the city and country attacked on 9/11 by Islamic terrorists? Why is the spawn of this terror informed ideology so tolerated by their very target? Why is this sense of entitlement to do bad things to our country, to other countries to the non-Moslem world so tolerated? Why are bookstore like B&N stacked with an anti-Israel propaganda book! Islamic/Socialist/Marxist political alignment books demonizing America and American efforts to self protect from jihadic States and ideology? Why so few book appearing among the stacks and stacks at B&Ns critical of or on analysis that confronts the menace of Islam on our shores - indeed - to our world?
Where are those books? Where hidden? And why? The preponderance of books are liberal bias including an anti-Semitic diatribe against the Jewish State of Israel titled "The Jewish Lobby" on prominent display ! Who is charged with displaying of such obvious political bias? And if no one is - why are those who do able to do so?
I think about Islamic States buying American infrastructure, unknown to the public at large of businesses such as cruise lines, department stores, and effective say in spectrums of public related institutions such as stock ownership in FOXNEWS, other media outlets. As well I suspect in book publishing, corporations (those who supply our public schools and private schools textbooks, maps and other teaching instruments), computer server AOL, and on and on.
Islamic States do not create - they buy out, buy into Western countries while simultaneously at work to destroy us. Also the buying into American universities, the infiltration of Islamic agents as professors and teachers, and on curricula determining boards. The practice of insinuating agenda into hosts of teaching academies.
Investing into America's infrastructure and financial interests sounds like a good thing. However, there is a far wider price being paid by America. Our soul as a democracy and the risk to American sovereignty.
There are hierarchic, vertical, horizontal and parallel strategies aimed at the Islamization of our country. The serving of Islamic interests under the rubric of Islamic religious and political dictate which are merged as one and as such diametrically opposite to that of Western democracy! Its as though the very vestiture of Islamic mullacracy is entrenching on our soil. What does anyone think the "Khalil Gibran International Academy" given the machinations ongoing in American public schools and higher education institutions, our colleges and universities, by Islamic organizational interests believe is intended?
Processes in efforts that work toward eviscerating our democracy include the immigration of Moslems from African countries that we do not normally think of as Moslems as certainly posing threat! Not as part of a larger religion based interest that seeks population hegemony. The insidiousness of targeting American born Blacks to gain converts for Islam has been ongoing for decades. Yet the larger significance of this phenomenon eludes America! This strategy is central to putting in place cadres who are turned against the host country, the United States, while in fact loyal to Islamic handlers and Islamic dictate. Such cadres are strategic in the implementation of Islamic ambition.
The targeting of specific populations, their indoctrination, their conversion as spawn in non-Moslem countries is a practice many born to, educated in democracy appear to somehow ignore. Whether effected by the desensitization through Islamic cohort activism, or failure of leaders with enough vision and courage to confront the challenge of alien invaders, one has to wonder at one point will the visceral threat be at such level in which ignoring Islam's war against us is no longer an option!
We see Islamic jihadic activism, strategy effected in Belgium, England, France the Scandinavian countries among hosts of others. A failure of resistance to the insinuation of Shar'ia and the Islamization thus far in Europe. What about America? Why is what is happening in our midst ignored - and in some cases - furthered as in the establishment of a madrassah, Islamic indoctrination and training of young minds in infidelphobia in Brooklyn, New York? Why the toleration of jihadic strategy in our midst?
Indeed, what about America? What about us?
Importantly, steps are taken so that Moslems are not necessarily identifiable to us as Moslems. That is, if we see someone in Islamic head dress we can pretty much gauge who they are. However, Moslems and Moslems converts are instructed to not look Islamic in non-Islamic countries in the furtherance of their cause. And to not arouse suspicion. Is every Moslem working at Barnes and Noble, or as tellers in banks or in the food industry from grocery stores to restaurants, or the ubiquitous newspaper stands and store fronts, cab drivers? I don't know. But I do suspect there is a carrying forward jihad according to a religion that sees itself as the only religion entitled to exist! AND is heavily invested in accruement of arms, recruitment, and influence wielding to its agenda of usurping democracy for purpose of installing Caliphate rule over everything!
Infidelphobia and dhimmi law need be in our everyday language towards understanding how we are at risk.
And the essential of reducing that risk even if entirely eliminating it is not possible is not an option.
Where are those books? Where hidden? And why? The preponderance of books are liberal bias including an anti-Semitic diatribe against the Jewish State of Israel titled "The Jewish Lobby" on prominent display ! Who is charged with displaying of such obvious political bias? And if no one is - why are those who do able to do so?
I think about Islamic States buying American infrastructure, unknown to the public at large of businesses such as cruise lines, department stores, and effective say in spectrums of public related institutions such as stock ownership in FOXNEWS, other media outlets. As well I suspect in book publishing, corporations (those who supply our public schools and private schools textbooks, maps and other teaching instruments), computer server AOL, and on and on.
Islamic States do not create - they buy out, buy into Western countries while simultaneously at work to destroy us. Also the buying into American universities, the infiltration of Islamic agents as professors and teachers, and on curricula determining boards. The practice of insinuating agenda into hosts of teaching academies.
Investing into America's infrastructure and financial interests sounds like a good thing. However, there is a far wider price being paid by America. Our soul as a democracy and the risk to American sovereignty.
There are hierarchic, vertical, horizontal and parallel strategies aimed at the Islamization of our country. The serving of Islamic interests under the rubric of Islamic religious and political dictate which are merged as one and as such diametrically opposite to that of Western democracy! Its as though the very vestiture of Islamic mullacracy is entrenching on our soil. What does anyone think the "Khalil Gibran International Academy" given the machinations ongoing in American public schools and higher education institutions, our colleges and universities, by Islamic organizational interests believe is intended?
Processes in efforts that work toward eviscerating our democracy include the immigration of Moslems from African countries that we do not normally think of as Moslems as certainly posing threat! Not as part of a larger religion based interest that seeks population hegemony. The insidiousness of targeting American born Blacks to gain converts for Islam has been ongoing for decades. Yet the larger significance of this phenomenon eludes America! This strategy is central to putting in place cadres who are turned against the host country, the United States, while in fact loyal to Islamic handlers and Islamic dictate. Such cadres are strategic in the implementation of Islamic ambition.
The targeting of specific populations, their indoctrination, their conversion as spawn in non-Moslem countries is a practice many born to, educated in democracy appear to somehow ignore. Whether effected by the desensitization through Islamic cohort activism, or failure of leaders with enough vision and courage to confront the challenge of alien invaders, one has to wonder at one point will the visceral threat be at such level in which ignoring Islam's war against us is no longer an option!
We see Islamic jihadic activism, strategy effected in Belgium, England, France the Scandinavian countries among hosts of others. A failure of resistance to the insinuation of Shar'ia and the Islamization thus far in Europe. What about America? Why is what is happening in our midst ignored - and in some cases - furthered as in the establishment of a madrassah, Islamic indoctrination and training of young minds in infidelphobia in Brooklyn, New York? Why the toleration of jihadic strategy in our midst?
Indeed, what about America? What about us?
Importantly, steps are taken so that Moslems are not necessarily identifiable to us as Moslems. That is, if we see someone in Islamic head dress we can pretty much gauge who they are. However, Moslems and Moslems converts are instructed to not look Islamic in non-Islamic countries in the furtherance of their cause. And to not arouse suspicion. Is every Moslem working at Barnes and Noble, or as tellers in banks or in the food industry from grocery stores to restaurants, or the ubiquitous newspaper stands and store fronts, cab drivers? I don't know. But I do suspect there is a carrying forward jihad according to a religion that sees itself as the only religion entitled to exist! AND is heavily invested in accruement of arms, recruitment, and influence wielding to its agenda of usurping democracy for purpose of installing Caliphate rule over everything!
Infidelphobia and dhimmi law need be in our everyday language towards understanding how we are at risk.
And the essential of reducing that risk even if entirely eliminating it is not possible is not an option.
Saturday, August 25, 2007
Illegals Flee Oklahoma
INVASION USA
Mandatory deportation has illegals on the run
State law limiting benefits looms, an estimated 25,000 take to road
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: August 25, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
Thousands of Hispanics have fled the Tulsa, Okla., area in the shadow of a looming state law that limits benefits and mandates deportation for illegal aliens, according to a report from KTUL television in Tulsa.
The state of Oklahoma recently approved a new law that requires deportation for illegal aliens who are arrested, and limits benefits and jobs to those individuals. The report said in East Tulsa, where a community of Hispanics has grown over recent years, there's been a sudden drop in population.
Business owner Simon Navarro has been in business there 11 years, and said the tough law has chased away 30 percent of the state's Hispanic population.
"Two months ago I heard 25,000 Hispanics have left Oklahoma," he told the station. "They are leaving. A lot have already left.
"People are leaving," he said. "They're scared of the sheriff."
A spokesman for Tulsa's Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, Francisco Trevino, said he believes the law – and its results – will hurt restaurants, construction companies and other service corporations such as lawn care.
"They do everything we don't want to do," he said.
Homebuilders also have expressed concerns.
"Sitting here today I understand it's about rounding up criminals, and illegals," said Paul Kane. "But, the Hispanics are fleeing Oklahoma because they think an anti-Hispanic environment is being created."
Tulsa County Sheriff Stanley Glanz, telling KTUL television about the departure of illegal aliens from his county (Screen shot of KTUL video)
However, authorities are making their preparations for a full enforcement of the law when it takes effect in November.
Deputies from the Tulsa County sheriff's office are going through training to handle the apprehension and deportation procedures that are being set up. Their training will prepare them to handle the multiple duties of deputy sheriff as well as Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents.
When they are finished they will be prepared to identify illegal aliens who commit crimes, and make sure they are deported.
Officials say many of those departing apparently are heading either to Kansas or Arkansas. But that may not be for long, since Arkansas is about to adopt a law similar to Oklahoma's, and Kansas is considering a similar move.
Tulsa County Sheriff Stanley Glanz told KTUL that the impact of the illegal alien population is evident all over, especially in the jail.
"We see the effects of gangs, we see the effects of illegal immigrants, we see the effects of drugs, we see the effects of methamphetamines," he said.
"We want to go after the criminal element that we have in this community," added U.S. Rep. John Sullivan. "People that commit crimes, drug trafficking, murder, rape, DUI, carrying a concealed weapon."
The newly trained officers will be on the job as early as October, before the November effective date of the new law. They say the bottom line is that illegal aliens in Tulsa County who commit a crime will be deported.
The state law still may face a legal challenge. Miguel Rivera of the National Coalition of Latino Clergy and Christian Leaders said it could be in federal court as soon as Oct. 1.
He said the argument likely would be that Oklahoma's House Bill 1804 pre-empts federal immigration law, which is much more lenient than the Oklahoma statute.
The new effort to tighten and enforce immigration limits has prompted a severe reaction. Several billboards have gone up questioning the new law.
One, funded by the United Front Task Force, asks, "Is it OK for Oklahoma to have a law that promotes hate among people?"
The other, by the American Dream Coalition, shows a tearful girl clutching a teddy bear with the statement, "My mommy is not a criminal. She is a hardworking Hispanic woman."
But on the television station's forum page, a listener responded: "We need to put up more signs that say: OKIES don't hate illegal immigrants they just want them legal! Deport all illegal immigrants now."
The Republican who wrote HB 1804, Randy Terrill of Moore, said the plan doesn't discriminate, harass or single out anyone, unless they are breaking the law.
"This isn't about whether you are for or against immigration, or for or against immigrants. It doesn't matter what your skin color is or if you speak with an accent. What matters is if you are in the country legally or illegally. The only people threatened by House Bill 1804 are those who choose to break the law," he said.
It eliminates most taxpayer subsidies for illegal immigrants and allows state and local law enforcement officers to verify the residency status of those arrested. It also cracks down on business owners who employ illegal immigrants.
Mandatory deportation has illegals on the run
State law limiting benefits looms, an estimated 25,000 take to road
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: August 25, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
Thousands of Hispanics have fled the Tulsa, Okla., area in the shadow of a looming state law that limits benefits and mandates deportation for illegal aliens, according to a report from KTUL television in Tulsa.
The state of Oklahoma recently approved a new law that requires deportation for illegal aliens who are arrested, and limits benefits and jobs to those individuals. The report said in East Tulsa, where a community of Hispanics has grown over recent years, there's been a sudden drop in population.
Business owner Simon Navarro has been in business there 11 years, and said the tough law has chased away 30 percent of the state's Hispanic population.
"Two months ago I heard 25,000 Hispanics have left Oklahoma," he told the station. "They are leaving. A lot have already left.
"People are leaving," he said. "They're scared of the sheriff."
A spokesman for Tulsa's Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, Francisco Trevino, said he believes the law – and its results – will hurt restaurants, construction companies and other service corporations such as lawn care.
"They do everything we don't want to do," he said.
Homebuilders also have expressed concerns.
"Sitting here today I understand it's about rounding up criminals, and illegals," said Paul Kane. "But, the Hispanics are fleeing Oklahoma because they think an anti-Hispanic environment is being created."
Tulsa County Sheriff Stanley Glanz, telling KTUL television about the departure of illegal aliens from his county (Screen shot of KTUL video)
However, authorities are making their preparations for a full enforcement of the law when it takes effect in November.
Deputies from the Tulsa County sheriff's office are going through training to handle the apprehension and deportation procedures that are being set up. Their training will prepare them to handle the multiple duties of deputy sheriff as well as Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents.
When they are finished they will be prepared to identify illegal aliens who commit crimes, and make sure they are deported.
Officials say many of those departing apparently are heading either to Kansas or Arkansas. But that may not be for long, since Arkansas is about to adopt a law similar to Oklahoma's, and Kansas is considering a similar move.
Tulsa County Sheriff Stanley Glanz told KTUL that the impact of the illegal alien population is evident all over, especially in the jail.
"We see the effects of gangs, we see the effects of illegal immigrants, we see the effects of drugs, we see the effects of methamphetamines," he said.
"We want to go after the criminal element that we have in this community," added U.S. Rep. John Sullivan. "People that commit crimes, drug trafficking, murder, rape, DUI, carrying a concealed weapon."
The newly trained officers will be on the job as early as October, before the November effective date of the new law. They say the bottom line is that illegal aliens in Tulsa County who commit a crime will be deported.
The state law still may face a legal challenge. Miguel Rivera of the National Coalition of Latino Clergy and Christian Leaders said it could be in federal court as soon as Oct. 1.
He said the argument likely would be that Oklahoma's House Bill 1804 pre-empts federal immigration law, which is much more lenient than the Oklahoma statute.
The new effort to tighten and enforce immigration limits has prompted a severe reaction. Several billboards have gone up questioning the new law.
One, funded by the United Front Task Force, asks, "Is it OK for Oklahoma to have a law that promotes hate among people?"
The other, by the American Dream Coalition, shows a tearful girl clutching a teddy bear with the statement, "My mommy is not a criminal. She is a hardworking Hispanic woman."
But on the television station's forum page, a listener responded: "We need to put up more signs that say: OKIES don't hate illegal immigrants they just want them legal! Deport all illegal immigrants now."
The Republican who wrote HB 1804, Randy Terrill of Moore, said the plan doesn't discriminate, harass or single out anyone, unless they are breaking the law.
"This isn't about whether you are for or against immigration, or for or against immigrants. It doesn't matter what your skin color is or if you speak with an accent. What matters is if you are in the country legally or illegally. The only people threatened by House Bill 1804 are those who choose to break the law," he said.
It eliminates most taxpayer subsidies for illegal immigrants and allows state and local law enforcement officers to verify the residency status of those arrested. It also cracks down on business owners who employ illegal immigrants.
Friday, August 24, 2007
Watching Al Jazeera
Watching Al Jazeera, Part I
So Karen and I sit down, flip channels, and what do you know, suddenly Al Jazeera pops up.
"Since when do we get Al Jazeera?" I ask.
"We don't," Karen assures me.
Oh man, gotta call the cable company and make sure we're not paying for this Jew-hatred.
There's all this slow mo footage overlaid with sinister musical stings of grim looking Jooz carrying M16's; this is intercut with Bedouin children herding sheep, looking all innocent and peaceful.
And the narrator/host/entertainer, a woman with shoulders like a fullback, and an absolutely tragic mullet style hair-do from the 80's, keeps talking about "G-d's Jewish warriors," and she repeats these three words—I'm counting, mind you—and by the time she hits number 107, I give up.
I now know what it's like to get brainwashed in some North Korean reeducation gulag.
Anyway, this Al Jazeera lady with the hoo-ha Oxford accent—big shock—states:
"The second intifada was an attempt by the Palestinians to shake off the Israeli occupation."
Really?
Well, what else can you expect from Al Jazeera.
Actually, the second intifada was Arafat's answer to the Camp David Accords. His way of saying no to all negotiations after Barak offered the terrorist leader 96% of everything, including dividing Jerusalem.
The whole two hours of this Al Jazeera program is such typical, and poisonous Arab propaganda that Karen and I are kind of fascinated. This huge lady with the really bad hair interviews guess who as experts on Israel?
Jimmy Carter. Karen Armstrong. John Mearsheimer. There's the obligatory angry loser from Peace Now — dude, clean your office, it looks like cat litter. And a couple of Israeli lefties who are so far gone they might as well be living in Damascus.
Gee-willikers, Al Jazeera lady forgot to interview Hizbullah/Iranian-proxy strongman Hassan Nasrallah; his views on Israel are pretty much the same as the usual suspects above. He's always ranting about the evils of the Israeli occupation. And he vehemently denies that he's a Jew-hater. Like Carter, Armstrong and Mearsheimer he insists that he's merely anti-Zionist.Yup, Nasrallah gets positively indignant when he's accused of being an anti-Semite. Sheesh, can't anyone criticize and bomb Israel without being accused of being a Jew-hater?
There's this long segment on the — horror musical sting here — Israel lobby. Obligatory shots of well-dressed, um Jews, tables of food, which I suppose is proof of evil, people chatting and looking, y'know, conspiratorial.
I'm waiting for Al Jazeera lady to start quoting The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, because that's really what this segment is all about, but I suppose she's too cool for that. This is after all Al Jazeera. They are , allegedly, civilized.
Then fullback lady pulls out the big guns: Actual Jewish terrorists. She comes up with Baruch Goldstein, Yigal Amir , and a group who rigged explosives to the car of an Arab Mayor they suspected of aiding terrorists and who planned on blowing up an Arab girl's school, Disgusting and wrong, but they were caught and arrested, by Jewish cops, thank G-d.
That's it for Jewish terror.
Personally, I think the Jewish people have shown remarkable restraint in the face of a genocidal enemy.
Al Jazeera lady gets all indignant about American Christians who support Israel. They're warriors because... I have no idea; they sing and dance and pray.
I always thought that warriors are people who, y'know, pick up weapons and fight.
Let's face it, Al Jazeera lady is playing the old Soviet game of manipulating and ultimately destroying language: slavery is freedom, the bottom is the top, evil is good.
Karen and I are smiling. Wow, these good Christians show more love of Israel than many Jews. G-d bless them. Al Jazeera just did a big favor, probably increased membership in that Florida Church by 20%.
Then there's segment called: "The Power Couple."
"Hey isn't that your cousin Shani?" I say to Karen.
"Yup, sure is."
Al Jazeera lady grimly reports on Assemblyman Dov Hikind and his wife Shani, who raise money for a united Jerusalem.
Al Jazeera lady darkly spits out: "All. Completely. Legal."
Horrifying.
Al Jazeera lady points out that some of these Jewish warriors are wearing, prepare yourselves: diamonds.
I'm in a state of shock, feel like melting into a puddle.
The chutzpah of Jewish women wearing diamonds.
Every Al Jazeera viewer knows that women should be wearing, y'know, burkahs!
Al Jazeera lady pines for the past when Jews were forbidden to live in Jerusalem; when the Western Wall was the city garbage dump; when synagogues were horse stables; when headstones from Jewish cemeteries were used by the Jordanians to pave streets; when Jordanian soldiers sat on the walls of the Old City, shot and murdered Jews.
Ah, the good ol' days.
Basically, the whole two hours is a hit piece on Jews who wish to live in Judea and Samaria. Al Jazeera lady blames, well, everything on the Jooz. She never points out that after the Jewish surrender of Gaza, Hamas proclaimed victory and promised that "all of Israel would be liberated."
I guess that's sort of an inconvenient truth.
Here's a larger truth: what happens when Arab/Muslims proclaim parts of London, Paris, Brooklyn, under Sharia and the presence of Jews an intolerable provocation?
There are already 22 Arab countries that are Judenrein.
Why does the world find this perfectly acceptable, perfectly natural?
Why does the world keep drawing new lines in the sand where the presence of Jews is unacceptable?
Just asking.
"Hey," says Karen, "this isn't Al Jazeera, this is CNN."
"Well, I know that, I've just been using this as a literary device to make a point."
Christiane Amanpour's work is guilty of moral equivalence. She's a disgraceful journalist. And I guarantee this: tonight 's segment will be an apology for Muslim jihadists.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at August 22, 2007 10:41 AM
So Karen and I sit down, flip channels, and what do you know, suddenly Al Jazeera pops up.
"Since when do we get Al Jazeera?" I ask.
"We don't," Karen assures me.
Oh man, gotta call the cable company and make sure we're not paying for this Jew-hatred.
There's all this slow mo footage overlaid with sinister musical stings of grim looking Jooz carrying M16's; this is intercut with Bedouin children herding sheep, looking all innocent and peaceful.
And the narrator/host/entertainer, a woman with shoulders like a fullback, and an absolutely tragic mullet style hair-do from the 80's, keeps talking about "G-d's Jewish warriors," and she repeats these three words—I'm counting, mind you—and by the time she hits number 107, I give up.
I now know what it's like to get brainwashed in some North Korean reeducation gulag.
Anyway, this Al Jazeera lady with the hoo-ha Oxford accent—big shock—states:
"The second intifada was an attempt by the Palestinians to shake off the Israeli occupation."
Really?
Well, what else can you expect from Al Jazeera.
Actually, the second intifada was Arafat's answer to the Camp David Accords. His way of saying no to all negotiations after Barak offered the terrorist leader 96% of everything, including dividing Jerusalem.
The whole two hours of this Al Jazeera program is such typical, and poisonous Arab propaganda that Karen and I are kind of fascinated. This huge lady with the really bad hair interviews guess who as experts on Israel?
Jimmy Carter. Karen Armstrong. John Mearsheimer. There's the obligatory angry loser from Peace Now — dude, clean your office, it looks like cat litter. And a couple of Israeli lefties who are so far gone they might as well be living in Damascus.
Gee-willikers, Al Jazeera lady forgot to interview Hizbullah/Iranian-proxy strongman Hassan Nasrallah; his views on Israel are pretty much the same as the usual suspects above. He's always ranting about the evils of the Israeli occupation. And he vehemently denies that he's a Jew-hater. Like Carter, Armstrong and Mearsheimer he insists that he's merely anti-Zionist.Yup, Nasrallah gets positively indignant when he's accused of being an anti-Semite. Sheesh, can't anyone criticize and bomb Israel without being accused of being a Jew-hater?
There's this long segment on the — horror musical sting here — Israel lobby. Obligatory shots of well-dressed, um Jews, tables of food, which I suppose is proof of evil, people chatting and looking, y'know, conspiratorial.
I'm waiting for Al Jazeera lady to start quoting The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, because that's really what this segment is all about, but I suppose she's too cool for that. This is after all Al Jazeera. They are , allegedly, civilized.
Then fullback lady pulls out the big guns: Actual Jewish terrorists. She comes up with Baruch Goldstein, Yigal Amir , and a group who rigged explosives to the car of an Arab Mayor they suspected of aiding terrorists and who planned on blowing up an Arab girl's school, Disgusting and wrong, but they were caught and arrested, by Jewish cops, thank G-d.
That's it for Jewish terror.
Personally, I think the Jewish people have shown remarkable restraint in the face of a genocidal enemy.
Al Jazeera lady gets all indignant about American Christians who support Israel. They're warriors because... I have no idea; they sing and dance and pray.
I always thought that warriors are people who, y'know, pick up weapons and fight.
Let's face it, Al Jazeera lady is playing the old Soviet game of manipulating and ultimately destroying language: slavery is freedom, the bottom is the top, evil is good.
Karen and I are smiling. Wow, these good Christians show more love of Israel than many Jews. G-d bless them. Al Jazeera just did a big favor, probably increased membership in that Florida Church by 20%.
Then there's segment called: "The Power Couple."
"Hey isn't that your cousin Shani?" I say to Karen.
"Yup, sure is."
Al Jazeera lady grimly reports on Assemblyman Dov Hikind and his wife Shani, who raise money for a united Jerusalem.
Al Jazeera lady darkly spits out: "All. Completely. Legal."
Horrifying.
Al Jazeera lady points out that some of these Jewish warriors are wearing, prepare yourselves: diamonds.
I'm in a state of shock, feel like melting into a puddle.
The chutzpah of Jewish women wearing diamonds.
Every Al Jazeera viewer knows that women should be wearing, y'know, burkahs!
Al Jazeera lady pines for the past when Jews were forbidden to live in Jerusalem; when the Western Wall was the city garbage dump; when synagogues were horse stables; when headstones from Jewish cemeteries were used by the Jordanians to pave streets; when Jordanian soldiers sat on the walls of the Old City, shot and murdered Jews.
Ah, the good ol' days.
Basically, the whole two hours is a hit piece on Jews who wish to live in Judea and Samaria. Al Jazeera lady blames, well, everything on the Jooz. She never points out that after the Jewish surrender of Gaza, Hamas proclaimed victory and promised that "all of Israel would be liberated."
I guess that's sort of an inconvenient truth.
Here's a larger truth: what happens when Arab/Muslims proclaim parts of London, Paris, Brooklyn, under Sharia and the presence of Jews an intolerable provocation?
There are already 22 Arab countries that are Judenrein.
Why does the world find this perfectly acceptable, perfectly natural?
Why does the world keep drawing new lines in the sand where the presence of Jews is unacceptable?
Just asking.
"Hey," says Karen, "this isn't Al Jazeera, this is CNN."
"Well, I know that, I've just been using this as a literary device to make a point."
Christiane Amanpour's work is guilty of moral equivalence. She's a disgraceful journalist. And I guarantee this: tonight 's segment will be an apology for Muslim jihadists.
Posted by Robert J. Avrech at August 22, 2007 10:41 AM
Iraqi Terrorists Crossing the Mexican Border
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HOMELAND INSECURITY
Iraqi terrorists caught
along Mexico border
American intelligence chief confirms
'people are alive' as a result of capture
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: August 23, 2007
4:04 p.m. Eastern
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
President Bush with National Intelligence Director Mike McConnell
President Bush's top intelligence aide has confirmed that Iraqi terrorists have been captured coming into the United States from Mexico.
The confirmation comes from National Intelligence Director Mike McConnell, who talked about the situation in an interview with the El Paso Times recently.
"Coming up through the Mexican border is a path," McConnell said. "Now, are they doing it in great numbers? No, because we're finding them and we're identifying them and we've got watch lists and we're keeping them at bay."
But, he said, "There are numerous situations where people are alive today because we caught them (terrorists)."
(Story continues below)
Intelligence officials say the numbers and details of such situations are classified, but McConnell pointed as an example to Mahmoud Youssef Kourani, who entered the United States through Tijuana, Mexico, in 2001, and later pleaded guilty to helping raise money for Hezbollah, which has been designated by the U.S. government as a terrorist organization.
The goal, McConnell said, is for terrorists to gain admittance to the United States, and then produce "mass casualties."
"You've got committed leadership. You've got a place to train. They've got trainers, and they've got recruits," McConnell told the newspaper. "The key now is getting recruits in. So if your key is getting recruits in, how would you do that?"
McConnell's office did reveal some numbers, during fiscal 2006, there were 14 Iraqi nationals caught trying to enter the U.S. illegally, while so far in 2007, that number is 16.
"Now some we caught, some we didn't," McConnell told the newspaper. "The ones that get in – what are they going to do? They're going to write home. So it's not rocket science; word will move around."
Also revealed was that the U.S. Customs and Border Protection intercepted 60 Iraqis crossing the nation's southwestern border in 2006 who were seeking asylum in the U.S., while that number so far in 2007 is 178.
The Times report said a U.S. intelligence analyst said there's been evidence that human smugglers, or coyotes, are telling Iraqis to ask for amnesty if they are caught.
The typical scenario is this: Forged documents are used to get an Iraqi into a country in South or Central America. Since travel from country to country is allowed without vises in many locations there, they work their way north to the U.S. border.
McConnell told the newspaper the numbers are classified, but there have been a relatively small number of people with known links to terrorist groups who have been caught at that point.
Kourani, for example, apparently paid a Mexican Consulate official in Lebanon $3,000 for a Mexican visa and then was smuggled into the United States in the trunk of a car.
He was sentenced to more than four years in prison after admitting he helped raise funds for Hezbollah.
When the newspaper asked U.S. Rep. Silvestre Reyes, D-Texas, of the U.S. House Intelligence Committee, about the situation, he said, "It's not something we would talk about."
"We have had intelligence about al-Qaida identifying Latin America as a potential or prospective area where they could come through, but frankly, I'm surprised that the director would make definitive statements like that because, even if it were true, you wouldn't want to publicize that," Reyes told the Times.
McConnell was senior vice president with Booz Allen Hamilton, focusing on intelligence and national security, before being appointed to his current post by Bush in February.
He previously was the director of the National Security Agency and served as a member of the Director of Central Intelligence senior leadership team before then.
HOMELAND INSECURITY
Iraqi terrorists caught
along Mexico border
American intelligence chief confirms
'people are alive' as a result of capture
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: August 23, 2007
4:04 p.m. Eastern
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
President Bush with National Intelligence Director Mike McConnell
President Bush's top intelligence aide has confirmed that Iraqi terrorists have been captured coming into the United States from Mexico.
The confirmation comes from National Intelligence Director Mike McConnell, who talked about the situation in an interview with the El Paso Times recently.
"Coming up through the Mexican border is a path," McConnell said. "Now, are they doing it in great numbers? No, because we're finding them and we're identifying them and we've got watch lists and we're keeping them at bay."
But, he said, "There are numerous situations where people are alive today because we caught them (terrorists)."
(Story continues below)
Intelligence officials say the numbers and details of such situations are classified, but McConnell pointed as an example to Mahmoud Youssef Kourani, who entered the United States through Tijuana, Mexico, in 2001, and later pleaded guilty to helping raise money for Hezbollah, which has been designated by the U.S. government as a terrorist organization.
The goal, McConnell said, is for terrorists to gain admittance to the United States, and then produce "mass casualties."
"You've got committed leadership. You've got a place to train. They've got trainers, and they've got recruits," McConnell told the newspaper. "The key now is getting recruits in. So if your key is getting recruits in, how would you do that?"
McConnell's office did reveal some numbers, during fiscal 2006, there were 14 Iraqi nationals caught trying to enter the U.S. illegally, while so far in 2007, that number is 16.
"Now some we caught, some we didn't," McConnell told the newspaper. "The ones that get in – what are they going to do? They're going to write home. So it's not rocket science; word will move around."
Also revealed was that the U.S. Customs and Border Protection intercepted 60 Iraqis crossing the nation's southwestern border in 2006 who were seeking asylum in the U.S., while that number so far in 2007 is 178.
The Times report said a U.S. intelligence analyst said there's been evidence that human smugglers, or coyotes, are telling Iraqis to ask for amnesty if they are caught.
The typical scenario is this: Forged documents are used to get an Iraqi into a country in South or Central America. Since travel from country to country is allowed without vises in many locations there, they work their way north to the U.S. border.
McConnell told the newspaper the numbers are classified, but there have been a relatively small number of people with known links to terrorist groups who have been caught at that point.
Kourani, for example, apparently paid a Mexican Consulate official in Lebanon $3,000 for a Mexican visa and then was smuggled into the United States in the trunk of a car.
He was sentenced to more than four years in prison after admitting he helped raise funds for Hezbollah.
When the newspaper asked U.S. Rep. Silvestre Reyes, D-Texas, of the U.S. House Intelligence Committee, about the situation, he said, "It's not something we would talk about."
"We have had intelligence about al-Qaida identifying Latin America as a potential or prospective area where they could come through, but frankly, I'm surprised that the director would make definitive statements like that because, even if it were true, you wouldn't want to publicize that," Reyes told the Times.
McConnell was senior vice president with Booz Allen Hamilton, focusing on intelligence and national security, before being appointed to his current post by Bush in February.
He previously was the director of the National Security Agency and served as a member of the Director of Central Intelligence senior leadership team before then.
Monday, August 20, 2007
CAIR Thugs on Islamophobia Patrol
CAIR Thugs on Islamophobia Patrol:
Coming Soon to Your Neighborhood?
By Patrick Poole
www.familysecuritymatters.org
FSM Contributing Editor Patrick Poole characterizes CAIR's harassment of a private citizen in his home, which CAIR describes as an "invitation to dialogue," as nothing more than a masquerade for their alarming scare tactics. Jackboot thuggery or inter-faith engagement? You decide.
Three officials of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in Ohio admit to going unannounced to a man's home to confront him over a bumper sticker on his car — a testament, they claim, of their tolerance and moderation. The incident occurred last year, but the CAIR trio involved – Ahmad Al-Akhras, CAIR national vice chairman, Asma Mobin-Uddin, CAIR-Ohio president, and Abukar Arman, CAIR-OH board member – have recently recounted this incident to the local establishment media as an example of how they "invite dialogue."
Others, however, believe the incident is additional proof that CAIR regularly resorts to threats, intimidation and demonization to silence its critics. Earlier this month, attorneys for CAIR sent a letter threatening legal action against the Young Americans Foundation if they allowed NY Times bestselling author and JihadWatch director, Robert Spencer, to speak at their conference on "The Truth of the Council on American-Islamic Relations." This thuggery is reminiscent of CAIR's 2004 lawsuit against independent journalist Andrew Whitehead of Anti-CAIR, a suit which was dropped by CAIR in order to avoid responding to required interrogatories about its historic ties to HAMAS and role in terror financing.
The CAIR-OH incident is without known precedent, harassing a private citizen at his home because CAIR officials did not like one of his bumper stickers. One of the trio, Abukar Arman, has described how they set upon their unwitting victim:
Several months ago, a non-Muslim fellow in the inter-faith community brought to the attention of CAIR-Ohio a picture of his neighbor's truck with a bumper sticker that read "Jesus loves you, and Allah wants you dead."
Some of us thought that the appropriate thing to do was to get media involved and use this truck owner as a poster-child of the prevalent assertive ignorance that is widening the post 9/11 political divide between Muslims and non-Muslims. Others, on the other hand, saw this as an opportunity for human contact, discourse, and to build bridges of understanding.
The latter opinion prevailed.
Therefore, I had the privilege of being one of three Muslims (2 male and a female with Islamic veil) who paid a neighborly visit to the truck owner.
What ensued was an interesting discourse that I found to be very educational (its final outcome notwithstanding).
The truck owner was a former Marine officer who served in Somalia and Iraq. Initially, as he opened the door, he was visibly apprehensive (and rightfully so).
We greeted him and introduced ourselves. We reassured him that we were only interested to get to know him, address any questions or perhaps grievance that he may have, and to give him a chance to meet and dialogue with ordinary Muslims.
Long story short: in a conversation that took place right outside his door and lasted for over an hour, the former Marine talked about how he was very suspicious of Muslims and how, both in Somalia and in Iraq, he and other Americans who "came to help these two countries had their hands bitten..." He talked about how he did not believe there were any moderate Muslims and how organizations such as CAIR were deliberately silent about condemning terrorism. He also talked about being alarmed by the growing Muslim population in Central Ohio and how they may be hiding a terrorist who has in his possession a "briefcase nuke." He said, "I don't want to see a giant mushroom in Columbus" [I will come back to this point].
Lastly, he talked about his career in the private sector...how he worked as a "corporate anti-terrorism expert" and a "consultant to a numerous multinational corporations..."
Arman admits that the original intention was to make this two-war veteran a "poster-child" of Islamophobia and publicly to vilify the man by enlisting the help of the local media — all because they didn't agree with the sentiments the man expressed via a bumper sticker. He also admits that the man was visibly leery of his late-night visitors showing up on his doorstep, what they probably would argue is proof of his Islamophobia.
What makes this situation and Abukar Arman's comments even more appalling is that the former Marine had served in the UN-backed peacekeeping mission in Somalia, Arman's native country, to protect the people there from the warlords that had taken over the country and who were starving the people by the tens of thousands. Additionally, the former Marine had been reported to CAIR by one of his neighbors who was a friend to the CAIR officials in the "inter-faith community."
But imagine if the roles in this case were reversed: imagine if Robert Spencer, Andrew Whitehead and myself showed up on the doorstep of any of these CAIR officials – unwelcome and unannounced – to confront them about their repeated statements of support for extremism, bigotry and terrorism: Ahmad Al-Akhras for his public defense of convicted terrorists, including his "long-time friend," convicted and deported Palestinian Islamic Jihad operative Fawaz Damra; Asma Mobin-Uddin for promoting several hate sites with rabidly anti-Jewish content on her own personal website; or Abukar Arman, for his vocal public support of HAMAS, Hezbollah and the al-Qaeda-backed Islamic Courts Union. Would they see such action as "inviting dialogue," or would they instead denounce such an "invitation to dialogue" in a flurry of CAIR press releases as a "hate crime" that would merit restraining orders and warrant federal criminal charges?
With their opponents on the working end of this tactic of cultural terrorism, however, they enthusiastically recount this act of intimidation, attempting to paint their "neighborly visit" as a peaceful effort to "engage" non-Muslims. The establishment media has been quick to pick up this twisted narrative. Earlier this month, in a front page Columbus Dispatch article on Mr. Arman, Mobin-Uddin cites this incident of confronting a man at his home as evidence of Mr. Arman's "kindness":
"Mr. Arman is a man of the greatest integrity, kindness and responsibility," Mobin-Uddin said.
She recalled a visit with Arman a few years ago to the home of an ex-Marine who displayed an anti-Muslim bumper sticker.
"We stood and talked with the man on his doorstep for an hour and a half. Mr. Arman never raised his voice. He told the man, 'You know, sir, I have four children. I've lived in this country for decades. If I knew someone who was going to put a bomb somewhere, I would be the first one to jump on them.' "
This isn't the first time, however, that the Columbus Dispatch has pulled out this story as an example of the tolerance and moderation of the CAIR trio and their cohorts.
In an Orwellian-titled article this past April, "Changing Hearts, Minds," Ahmad Al-Akhras gave his analysis of his and his comrades' late-night "invitation to dialogue" to an attentive Dispatch reporter:
Changing minds isn't always as pleasant as sharing some snacks and laughs.
Last year, Ahmad Al-Akhras and two other community leaders knocked on the door of a man whose car bore a bumper sticker that read: "Jesus loves you. Allah wants you dead."
Al-Akhras is president of the Islamic Foundation of Central Ohio and is the vice chairman of the national Council on American-Islamic Relations.
They spoke to the ex-Marine for more than an hour at his doorstep, telling him they had 11 children between them and cared strongly about America's safety, Al-Akhras said.
"More than 95 percent of the time, we agree on things," Al-Akhras said of Muslims and non-Muslims.
He isn't sure that visit did any good.
It should be evident that going to a man's home, particularly someone entirely unknown to you, to confront them about the content of their bumper stickers is not an invitation to dialogue, but jackboot thuggery reminiscent of the Nazi SA Storm troopers. One of them admits that rather than painting a symbol on the man's house or business to show their disapproval for his religious statements (much as the SA would mark Jewish homes or businesses with a Star of David and the word "Juden"), they considered calling in the media to condemn this two-war Marine veteran and expose him to public scorn all because they didn't like his bumper sticker.
CAIR has repeatedly demonstrated that their methodology and discourse must rely on increasingly shrill rhetoric to get public attention and publicly attacking anyone who questions their troubling ideology. Nor has CAIR ever hesitated to inflame a situation to further its own agenda to the detriment of the rest of the community, Muslim and non-Muslim alike. As their own supposed constituency continues to abandon CAIR, such now that their membership is less than two thousand nationwide, CAIR will need to resort to more confrontational and escalating tactics to keep the establishment media's attention in order to disseminate their message of hate, alienation and conflict.
CAIR's Islamophobia patrols: coming soon to a neighborhood near you.
Coming Soon to Your Neighborhood?
By Patrick Poole
www.familysecuritymatters.org
FSM Contributing Editor Patrick Poole characterizes CAIR's harassment of a private citizen in his home, which CAIR describes as an "invitation to dialogue," as nothing more than a masquerade for their alarming scare tactics. Jackboot thuggery or inter-faith engagement? You decide.
Three officials of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in Ohio admit to going unannounced to a man's home to confront him over a bumper sticker on his car — a testament, they claim, of their tolerance and moderation. The incident occurred last year, but the CAIR trio involved – Ahmad Al-Akhras, CAIR national vice chairman, Asma Mobin-Uddin, CAIR-Ohio president, and Abukar Arman, CAIR-OH board member – have recently recounted this incident to the local establishment media as an example of how they "invite dialogue."
Others, however, believe the incident is additional proof that CAIR regularly resorts to threats, intimidation and demonization to silence its critics. Earlier this month, attorneys for CAIR sent a letter threatening legal action against the Young Americans Foundation if they allowed NY Times bestselling author and JihadWatch director, Robert Spencer, to speak at their conference on "The Truth of the Council on American-Islamic Relations." This thuggery is reminiscent of CAIR's 2004 lawsuit against independent journalist Andrew Whitehead of Anti-CAIR, a suit which was dropped by CAIR in order to avoid responding to required interrogatories about its historic ties to HAMAS and role in terror financing.
The CAIR-OH incident is without known precedent, harassing a private citizen at his home because CAIR officials did not like one of his bumper stickers. One of the trio, Abukar Arman, has described how they set upon their unwitting victim:
Several months ago, a non-Muslim fellow in the inter-faith community brought to the attention of CAIR-Ohio a picture of his neighbor's truck with a bumper sticker that read "Jesus loves you, and Allah wants you dead."
Some of us thought that the appropriate thing to do was to get media involved and use this truck owner as a poster-child of the prevalent assertive ignorance that is widening the post 9/11 political divide between Muslims and non-Muslims. Others, on the other hand, saw this as an opportunity for human contact, discourse, and to build bridges of understanding.
The latter opinion prevailed.
Therefore, I had the privilege of being one of three Muslims (2 male and a female with Islamic veil) who paid a neighborly visit to the truck owner.
What ensued was an interesting discourse that I found to be very educational (its final outcome notwithstanding).
The truck owner was a former Marine officer who served in Somalia and Iraq. Initially, as he opened the door, he was visibly apprehensive (and rightfully so).
We greeted him and introduced ourselves. We reassured him that we were only interested to get to know him, address any questions or perhaps grievance that he may have, and to give him a chance to meet and dialogue with ordinary Muslims.
Long story short: in a conversation that took place right outside his door and lasted for over an hour, the former Marine talked about how he was very suspicious of Muslims and how, both in Somalia and in Iraq, he and other Americans who "came to help these two countries had their hands bitten..." He talked about how he did not believe there were any moderate Muslims and how organizations such as CAIR were deliberately silent about condemning terrorism. He also talked about being alarmed by the growing Muslim population in Central Ohio and how they may be hiding a terrorist who has in his possession a "briefcase nuke." He said, "I don't want to see a giant mushroom in Columbus" [I will come back to this point].
Lastly, he talked about his career in the private sector...how he worked as a "corporate anti-terrorism expert" and a "consultant to a numerous multinational corporations..."
Arman admits that the original intention was to make this two-war veteran a "poster-child" of Islamophobia and publicly to vilify the man by enlisting the help of the local media — all because they didn't agree with the sentiments the man expressed via a bumper sticker. He also admits that the man was visibly leery of his late-night visitors showing up on his doorstep, what they probably would argue is proof of his Islamophobia.
What makes this situation and Abukar Arman's comments even more appalling is that the former Marine had served in the UN-backed peacekeeping mission in Somalia, Arman's native country, to protect the people there from the warlords that had taken over the country and who were starving the people by the tens of thousands. Additionally, the former Marine had been reported to CAIR by one of his neighbors who was a friend to the CAIR officials in the "inter-faith community."
But imagine if the roles in this case were reversed: imagine if Robert Spencer, Andrew Whitehead and myself showed up on the doorstep of any of these CAIR officials – unwelcome and unannounced – to confront them about their repeated statements of support for extremism, bigotry and terrorism: Ahmad Al-Akhras for his public defense of convicted terrorists, including his "long-time friend," convicted and deported Palestinian Islamic Jihad operative Fawaz Damra; Asma Mobin-Uddin for promoting several hate sites with rabidly anti-Jewish content on her own personal website; or Abukar Arman, for his vocal public support of HAMAS, Hezbollah and the al-Qaeda-backed Islamic Courts Union. Would they see such action as "inviting dialogue," or would they instead denounce such an "invitation to dialogue" in a flurry of CAIR press releases as a "hate crime" that would merit restraining orders and warrant federal criminal charges?
With their opponents on the working end of this tactic of cultural terrorism, however, they enthusiastically recount this act of intimidation, attempting to paint their "neighborly visit" as a peaceful effort to "engage" non-Muslims. The establishment media has been quick to pick up this twisted narrative. Earlier this month, in a front page Columbus Dispatch article on Mr. Arman, Mobin-Uddin cites this incident of confronting a man at his home as evidence of Mr. Arman's "kindness":
"Mr. Arman is a man of the greatest integrity, kindness and responsibility," Mobin-Uddin said.
She recalled a visit with Arman a few years ago to the home of an ex-Marine who displayed an anti-Muslim bumper sticker.
"We stood and talked with the man on his doorstep for an hour and a half. Mr. Arman never raised his voice. He told the man, 'You know, sir, I have four children. I've lived in this country for decades. If I knew someone who was going to put a bomb somewhere, I would be the first one to jump on them.' "
This isn't the first time, however, that the Columbus Dispatch has pulled out this story as an example of the tolerance and moderation of the CAIR trio and their cohorts.
In an Orwellian-titled article this past April, "Changing Hearts, Minds," Ahmad Al-Akhras gave his analysis of his and his comrades' late-night "invitation to dialogue" to an attentive Dispatch reporter:
Changing minds isn't always as pleasant as sharing some snacks and laughs.
Last year, Ahmad Al-Akhras and two other community leaders knocked on the door of a man whose car bore a bumper sticker that read: "Jesus loves you. Allah wants you dead."
Al-Akhras is president of the Islamic Foundation of Central Ohio and is the vice chairman of the national Council on American-Islamic Relations.
They spoke to the ex-Marine for more than an hour at his doorstep, telling him they had 11 children between them and cared strongly about America's safety, Al-Akhras said.
"More than 95 percent of the time, we agree on things," Al-Akhras said of Muslims and non-Muslims.
He isn't sure that visit did any good.
It should be evident that going to a man's home, particularly someone entirely unknown to you, to confront them about the content of their bumper stickers is not an invitation to dialogue, but jackboot thuggery reminiscent of the Nazi SA Storm troopers. One of them admits that rather than painting a symbol on the man's house or business to show their disapproval for his religious statements (much as the SA would mark Jewish homes or businesses with a Star of David and the word "Juden"), they considered calling in the media to condemn this two-war Marine veteran and expose him to public scorn all because they didn't like his bumper sticker.
CAIR has repeatedly demonstrated that their methodology and discourse must rely on increasingly shrill rhetoric to get public attention and publicly attacking anyone who questions their troubling ideology. Nor has CAIR ever hesitated to inflame a situation to further its own agenda to the detriment of the rest of the community, Muslim and non-Muslim alike. As their own supposed constituency continues to abandon CAIR, such now that their membership is less than two thousand nationwide, CAIR will need to resort to more confrontational and escalating tactics to keep the establishment media's attention in order to disseminate their message of hate, alienation and conflict.
CAIR's Islamophobia patrols: coming soon to a neighborhood near you.
Saturday, August 18, 2007
Our Phoney War
POOR OLD MUSLIMS - THEY GET INSULTED - WE GET BEHEADED
The Pope says that jihad violence is against God's nature, and
officials fear that in response, Muslims enraged by this insult will
commit jihad violence.
A. Muslims murder 3,000 innocents? in New York and expect no
criticism.
B. Muslims murder 202 tourists in Bali and expect no
criticism.
C. Muslims murder 333 schoolchildren and their teachers in > > Besla
and expect no criticism.
D. Muslims murder 292 innocents, mainly Kenyans and Tanzanians at two
US Embassies and expect no criticism.
E. Muslims murder 241 US and 58 French peacekeepers in Beirut and
expect no criticism.
F. Muslims fire 4,000 Katyusha rockets into Northern Israel killing
over 50 innocent civilians and expect no criticism.
G. Muslims murder 52 in London and? 191 in Madrid and expect
no criticism.
H. Muslims murder 200 in Mumbai and expect no criticism.
I. Muslims behead Western hostages in Iraq , Buddhist monks in
Thailand and Christian schoolgirl s in Indonesia
and expect no criticism.
J. Muslims murder 500,000 in Darfur and expect no criticism.
K. Muslims regard Jews as 'sons of pigs and monkeys', and vow to
nuke Israel and expect no criticism.
L. Muslims force women to wear hideous sacks, stone to death women
for getting raped and for leaving the home unescorted, engage in
honour killings of sisters and daughters for unapproved dating,
and expect no criticism.
M. Muslims danced in the streets and handed out sweets to their kids
to celebrate the 9/11 atrocity, and still expected no criticism.
N. Since 9/11 Muslims have killed over 26,000 and wounded over 50,000
in terrorist attacks worldwide since 9/11 and expect no criticism.
Since 9/11 Muslims have committed terrorist attacks in Afghanistan,
Algeria, Bangladesh, Belgium, Chad, Chechnya, Dagestan, Denmark, East
Timor, Egypt, England, Eritrea, Ethiopia, France, Germany, India,
Indonesia, Ingushetia, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Jordan-Iraq,
Kabardino-Balkans, Kenya, Kosovo, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon,
Mauritania, Morocco, Netherlands, Nigeria, Pakistan, Gaza-Palestinian
Authority, Philippines, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Scotland,
Somalia, Spain, Sri Lanka , Sudan, Syria , Tajikistan, Thailand ,
Tunisia , Turkey , United Arab Emirates, United Arab Republic ,
United States , Uzbekistan and Yemen, and STILL expect no criticism.
Muslims have carried out over 5,800 fatal terrorist atrocities since
9/11 and countless thousands since Islamic conquest began in 623 AD
and expect no criticism. But if a Pope dares to tell the truth
about Islam or Danes publish cartoons about Mohammed, then let the outpourings of Islamic hate and outrage begin.
And, by some twisted reach of logic, the arrogant bastards demand the
Pope issue an apology.
Friday, August 17, 2007
Online Jihadists Promote American Kidnapping
Online Islamist Forum Hosted in Texas Posts Guide for Kidnapping Americans
Special Dispatch-Jihad & Terrorism Studies Project
MEMRI.org
http://memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=SD168007
The popular Islamist-jihadist forum www.alhesbah.org, hosted by RealWebHost in Texas, U.S., recently posted an anonymously written document from 2003 titled "The Excellent Summary of the Rules of the Art of Kidnapping Americans." The 60-page guide describes each stage of the kidnapping, explaining how to select the target and then how to follow him, seize him, transport him to a safe location, and hold him there, as well as how to conduct negotiations. The guide also explains how to execute the hostage should negotiations fail.
The following are the details:
The guide begins by enumerating goals that a kidnapping can achieve, including the release of prisoners, extraction of information from the hostage, weakening the enemy's morale and creating deterrence, raising international awareness of conflicts in which the kidnappers' organization is involved, blackmailing the enemy for money, and generating anti-government sentiment in the hostage's country of origin.
In the section dealing with selecting a target, the guide recommends choosing someone of importance to the enemy (such as a high-ranking military officer or a prominent businessman). However, he should not be a physically strong person who can put up significant resistance. In order to ensure that the operation goes smoothly, it is recommended that he be knocked out with tranquilizers.
As for the kidnappers, the guide states that they should be devout and in good physical condition. In addition, they must be familiar with the locale, and must be able to disguise themselves and to blend in with their surroundings. The guide gives various scenarios and explains how to deal with them -- for example, what to do if the target enters a building or turns around suddenly while being followed. The guide states that, ideally, the kidnapping should be carried out at night, and in an isolated spot.
Next, the guide explains how to transport the hostage to the hideout. It recommends using a vehicle of a type that is common in the locale, and that it be prepared by removing the handle on the inside of the door where the hostage will sit. As for the hideout itself, it must be a large apartment with several exits, and the hostage must be kept in a windowless room. The apartment must not be on a road where there are checkpoints.
The last section of the guide deals with the demands stage, and states that after stipulating their demands and setting a deadline, the kidnappers must conduct negotiations using a mobile phone registered under a false name, or else a pay phone(a different one for each call). The guide also explains that if it becomes necessary to execute the hostage, this is best done by hanging or poisoning rather than by shooting. This is because soldiers regard death by shooting as an honorable death, and because shooting leaves considerable bloodstains at the scene.
Special Dispatch-Jihad & Terrorism Studies Project
MEMRI.org
http://memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=SD168007
The popular Islamist-jihadist forum www.alhesbah.org, hosted by RealWebHost in Texas, U.S., recently posted an anonymously written document from 2003 titled "The Excellent Summary of the Rules of the Art of Kidnapping Americans." The 60-page guide describes each stage of the kidnapping, explaining how to select the target and then how to follow him, seize him, transport him to a safe location, and hold him there, as well as how to conduct negotiations. The guide also explains how to execute the hostage should negotiations fail.
The following are the details:
The guide begins by enumerating goals that a kidnapping can achieve, including the release of prisoners, extraction of information from the hostage, weakening the enemy's morale and creating deterrence, raising international awareness of conflicts in which the kidnappers' organization is involved, blackmailing the enemy for money, and generating anti-government sentiment in the hostage's country of origin.
In the section dealing with selecting a target, the guide recommends choosing someone of importance to the enemy (such as a high-ranking military officer or a prominent businessman). However, he should not be a physically strong person who can put up significant resistance. In order to ensure that the operation goes smoothly, it is recommended that he be knocked out with tranquilizers.
As for the kidnappers, the guide states that they should be devout and in good physical condition. In addition, they must be familiar with the locale, and must be able to disguise themselves and to blend in with their surroundings. The guide gives various scenarios and explains how to deal with them -- for example, what to do if the target enters a building or turns around suddenly while being followed. The guide states that, ideally, the kidnapping should be carried out at night, and in an isolated spot.
Next, the guide explains how to transport the hostage to the hideout. It recommends using a vehicle of a type that is common in the locale, and that it be prepared by removing the handle on the inside of the door where the hostage will sit. As for the hideout itself, it must be a large apartment with several exits, and the hostage must be kept in a windowless room. The apartment must not be on a road where there are checkpoints.
The last section of the guide deals with the demands stage, and states that after stipulating their demands and setting a deadline, the kidnappers must conduct negotiations using a mobile phone registered under a false name, or else a pay phone(a different one for each call). The guide also explains that if it becomes necessary to execute the hostage, this is best done by hanging or poisoning rather than by shooting. This is because soldiers regard death by shooting as an honorable death, and because shooting leaves considerable bloodstains at the scene.
Using Illegals to Prosecute BP
August 07, 2007
Using Illegal Immigrants To Go After Border Patrol
Relying on the testimony of illegal immigrants to prosecute federal U.S. officers is on the rise with yet another Border Patrol agent ordered to stand trial for murder thanks to evidence provided by relatives of a confrontational Mexican man shot after crossing the border illegally.
U.S. Border Patrol agent Nicholas Corbett said he feared for his life after apprehending the group of illegal border crossers in January about 150 yards north of the Mexico-Arizona border between Bisbee and Douglas. The group’s leader, Francisco Javier Dominguez, became aggressive and attacked the federal agent with rocks after being detained.
Agent Corbett shot Dominguez in self defense and was subsequently charged with murder. The key prosecution witnesses are not only illegal immigrants related to Dominguez, they were coached by the Mexican government before U.S. authorities even spoke to them and the Mexican consul in Douglas specifically told them that “it is very important to us that the policeman does not come out clean over this.”
So the three witnesses who made the journey north—two of them Dominguez’s brothers and the girlfriend of one of the brothers—have gladly obliged, specially since Mexican officials have provided them with free food, an apartment in Tucson, transportation and U.S. work visas.
Their testimony in Cochise County Superior Court this week was enough to convince a judge that the agent must stand trial for murder, manslaughter and negligent homicide even though defense attorneys presented compelling evidence of inconsistencies between the illegal aliens’ testimony and statements they had made to Cochise County Sheriff’s investigators in January.
Another high-profile case that relied on testimony from a criminal illegal alien sent two veteran Border Patrol agents to prison for 11 and 12 years. The agents, Ignacio Ramos and Jose Campeon, intercepted an admitted Mexican drug dealer in El Paso and shot him in the buttocks yet prosecutors granted the offender immunity to testify against the officers.
Judicial Watch is a non-partisan, educational foundation dedicated to fighting government and judicial corruption and promoting a return to ethics and morality in our nation's public life. To view the Judicial Watch Internet site click here (www.judicialwatch.org).
Using Illegal Immigrants To Go After Border Patrol
Relying on the testimony of illegal immigrants to prosecute federal U.S. officers is on the rise with yet another Border Patrol agent ordered to stand trial for murder thanks to evidence provided by relatives of a confrontational Mexican man shot after crossing the border illegally.
U.S. Border Patrol agent Nicholas Corbett said he feared for his life after apprehending the group of illegal border crossers in January about 150 yards north of the Mexico-Arizona border between Bisbee and Douglas. The group’s leader, Francisco Javier Dominguez, became aggressive and attacked the federal agent with rocks after being detained.
Agent Corbett shot Dominguez in self defense and was subsequently charged with murder. The key prosecution witnesses are not only illegal immigrants related to Dominguez, they were coached by the Mexican government before U.S. authorities even spoke to them and the Mexican consul in Douglas specifically told them that “it is very important to us that the policeman does not come out clean over this.”
So the three witnesses who made the journey north—two of them Dominguez’s brothers and the girlfriend of one of the brothers—have gladly obliged, specially since Mexican officials have provided them with free food, an apartment in Tucson, transportation and U.S. work visas.
Their testimony in Cochise County Superior Court this week was enough to convince a judge that the agent must stand trial for murder, manslaughter and negligent homicide even though defense attorneys presented compelling evidence of inconsistencies between the illegal aliens’ testimony and statements they had made to Cochise County Sheriff’s investigators in January.
Another high-profile case that relied on testimony from a criminal illegal alien sent two veteran Border Patrol agents to prison for 11 and 12 years. The agents, Ignacio Ramos and Jose Campeon, intercepted an admitted Mexican drug dealer in El Paso and shot him in the buttocks yet prosecutors granted the offender immunity to testify against the officers.
Judicial Watch is a non-partisan, educational foundation dedicated to fighting government and judicial corruption and promoting a return to ethics and morality in our nation's public life. To view the Judicial Watch Internet site click here (www.judicialwatch.org).
Bill of Non-Rights
Bill of NON-Rights
ARTICLE I: You do not have the right to a new car, big screen TV, or any other form of wealth. More power to you if you can legally acquire them, but no one is guaranteed anything.
ARTICLE II: You do not have the right to never be offended. This country is based on freedom, and that means freedom for everyone -- not just you! You may leave the room, turn the channel, express a different opinion, etc.; but the world is full of idiots, and probably always will be.
ARTICLE III: You do not have the right to be free from harm. If you stick a screwdriver in your eye, or spill hot coffee in your lap while driving, learn to be more careful; do not expect the tool manufacturer or fast food restaurant to make you and all your relatives independently wealthy.
ARTICLE IV: You do not have the right to free food and housing. Americans are the most charitable people to be found, and will gladly help anyone in need, but we are quickly growing weary of subsidizing generation after generation of professional couch potatoes who achieve nothing more than the creation of another generation of professional couch potatoes. Get an education and go to work....don't expect everyone else to take care of you!
ARTICLE V: You do not have the right to free health care. That would be nice, but from the looks of public housing, we're just not interested in public health care.
ARTICLE VI: You do not have the right to physically harm other people. If you kidnap, rape, intentionally maim, or kill someone, don't be surprised if the rest of us want to see you fry in the electric chair.
ARTICLE VII: You do not have the right to the possessions of others. If you rob, cheat, or coerce away the goods or services of other citizens, don't be surprised if the rest of us get together and lock you away in a place where you still won't have the right to a big screen color TV or a life of leisure.
ARTICLE VIII: You do not have the right to a job. All of us sure want you to have a job, and will gladly help you along in hard times, but we expect you to take advantage of the opportunities of education and vocational training laid before you to make yourself useful.
ARTICLE IX: You do not have the right to happiness. Being an American means that you have the right to PURSUE happiness, which by the way, is a lot easier if you are unencumbered by an over abundance of idiotic laws created by those of you who were confused by the Bill of Rights.
ARTICLE X: You do not have the right to file frivolous law suits without consequences. If you hire an attack dog, snake-in-the-grass lawyer, and try extorting money because of YOUR careless action (see Article III), both you AND your lawyer, will pay court costs, and double that amount to your victim.
ARTICLE XI: You do not have the right to a “government” bail-out if you make a stupid financial decision. If you get a variable rate mortgage and can no longer make the payments when interest rates increase – you get to become a renter again. If your business fails because of poor decision making – you get to become an employee. You have no right to expect the government to force your neighbors to hand you THEIR hard earned money.
ARTICLE XII: This is an English speaking country. We don't care where you are from, English is our language. Learn it or go back to wherever you came from!
ARTICLE XIII: You do not have the right to change our country's history or heritage. This country was founded on the belief in one true God. And yet, you are given the freedom to believe in any religion, any faith, or no faith at all; with no fear of persecution. The phrase IN GOD WE TRUST is part of our heritage and history, and if you are uncomfortable with it, TOUGH!
ARTICLE I: You do not have the right to a new car, big screen TV, or any other form of wealth. More power to you if you can legally acquire them, but no one is guaranteed anything.
ARTICLE II: You do not have the right to never be offended. This country is based on freedom, and that means freedom for everyone -- not just you! You may leave the room, turn the channel, express a different opinion, etc.; but the world is full of idiots, and probably always will be.
ARTICLE III: You do not have the right to be free from harm. If you stick a screwdriver in your eye, or spill hot coffee in your lap while driving, learn to be more careful; do not expect the tool manufacturer or fast food restaurant to make you and all your relatives independently wealthy.
ARTICLE IV: You do not have the right to free food and housing. Americans are the most charitable people to be found, and will gladly help anyone in need, but we are quickly growing weary of subsidizing generation after generation of professional couch potatoes who achieve nothing more than the creation of another generation of professional couch potatoes. Get an education and go to work....don't expect everyone else to take care of you!
ARTICLE V: You do not have the right to free health care. That would be nice, but from the looks of public housing, we're just not interested in public health care.
ARTICLE VI: You do not have the right to physically harm other people. If you kidnap, rape, intentionally maim, or kill someone, don't be surprised if the rest of us want to see you fry in the electric chair.
ARTICLE VII: You do not have the right to the possessions of others. If you rob, cheat, or coerce away the goods or services of other citizens, don't be surprised if the rest of us get together and lock you away in a place where you still won't have the right to a big screen color TV or a life of leisure.
ARTICLE VIII: You do not have the right to a job. All of us sure want you to have a job, and will gladly help you along in hard times, but we expect you to take advantage of the opportunities of education and vocational training laid before you to make yourself useful.
ARTICLE IX: You do not have the right to happiness. Being an American means that you have the right to PURSUE happiness, which by the way, is a lot easier if you are unencumbered by an over abundance of idiotic laws created by those of you who were confused by the Bill of Rights.
ARTICLE X: You do not have the right to file frivolous law suits without consequences. If you hire an attack dog, snake-in-the-grass lawyer, and try extorting money because of YOUR careless action (see Article III), both you AND your lawyer, will pay court costs, and double that amount to your victim.
ARTICLE XI: You do not have the right to a “government” bail-out if you make a stupid financial decision. If you get a variable rate mortgage and can no longer make the payments when interest rates increase – you get to become a renter again. If your business fails because of poor decision making – you get to become an employee. You have no right to expect the government to force your neighbors to hand you THEIR hard earned money.
ARTICLE XII: This is an English speaking country. We don't care where you are from, English is our language. Learn it or go back to wherever you came from!
ARTICLE XIII: You do not have the right to change our country's history or heritage. This country was founded on the belief in one true God. And yet, you are given the freedom to believe in any religion, any faith, or no faith at all; with no fear of persecution. The phrase IN GOD WE TRUST is part of our heritage and history, and if you are uncomfortable with it, TOUGH!
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
When Insults Had Class
WHEN INSULTS HAD CLASS
*He has all the virtues I dislike and none of the vices I admire.*
-- Winston Churchill
*I have never killed a man, but I have read many obituaries with great pleasure.*
-- Clarence Darrow
*He has never been known to use a word that might send a reader to the dictionary.*
-- William Faulkner (about Ernest Hemingway) [Says Jane, This insult comes from an author who needed a page to complete a sentence.]
*I've had a perfectly wonderful evening. But this wasn't it.*
-- Groucho Marx
*I didn't attend the funeral, but I sent a nice letter saying I approved of it.*
-- Mark Twain
*He has no enemies, but is intensely disliked by his friends.*
-- Oscar Wilde
*I am enclosing two tickets to the first night of my new play; bring a friend...if you have one.*
-- George Bernard Shaw to Winston Churchill
*Cannot possibly attend first night; will attend second, if there is one.*
-- Winston Churchill's response
*I feel so miserable without you; it's almost like having you here.*
-- Stephen Bishop
*He is a self-made man and worships his creator.*
-- John Bright
*I've just learned about his illness. Let's hope it's nothing trivial.*
-- Irvin S. Cobb
*He is not only dull himself; he is the cause of dullness in others.*
-- Samuel Johnson
*He is simply a shiver looking for a spine to run up.*
-- Paul Keating
*He had delusions of adequacy.*
-- Walter Kerr
*Why do you sit there looking like an envelope without any address on it?*
-- Mark Twain
*His mother should have thrown him away and kept the stork.*
-- Mae West
*Winston, if you were my husband, I would poison your coffee!*
--Lady Astor to Winston Churchill at a dinner party
*Madam, if I were your husband, I would drink it!*
-- Winston Churchill, in response
*Some cause happiness wherever they go; others, whenever they go.*
*He has all the virtues I dislike and none of the vices I admire.*
-- Winston Churchill
*I have never killed a man, but I have read many obituaries with great pleasure.*
-- Clarence Darrow
*He has never been known to use a word that might send a reader to the dictionary.*
-- William Faulkner (about Ernest Hemingway) [Says Jane, This insult comes from an author who needed a page to complete a sentence.]
*I've had a perfectly wonderful evening. But this wasn't it.*
-- Groucho Marx
*I didn't attend the funeral, but I sent a nice letter saying I approved of it.*
-- Mark Twain
*He has no enemies, but is intensely disliked by his friends.*
-- Oscar Wilde
*I am enclosing two tickets to the first night of my new play; bring a friend...if you have one.*
-- George Bernard Shaw to Winston Churchill
*Cannot possibly attend first night; will attend second, if there is one.*
-- Winston Churchill's response
*I feel so miserable without you; it's almost like having you here.*
-- Stephen Bishop
*He is a self-made man and worships his creator.*
-- John Bright
*I've just learned about his illness. Let's hope it's nothing trivial.*
-- Irvin S. Cobb
*He is not only dull himself; he is the cause of dullness in others.*
-- Samuel Johnson
*He is simply a shiver looking for a spine to run up.*
-- Paul Keating
*He had delusions of adequacy.*
-- Walter Kerr
*Why do you sit there looking like an envelope without any address on it?*
-- Mark Twain
*His mother should have thrown him away and kept the stork.*
-- Mae West
*Winston, if you were my husband, I would poison your coffee!*
--Lady Astor to Winston Churchill at a dinner party
*Madam, if I were your husband, I would drink it!*
-- Winston Churchill, in response
*Some cause happiness wherever they go; others, whenever they go.*
Gingrich Speaks
(I honestly can't stand this guy, but this is dead on)
We better start talking about the shape of the table now because this country doesn't have the stomach to face what is coming!
Gingrich Speech in New Hampshire. Apparently it is causing a firestorm.
NEWT GINGRICH: The third thing I want to talk about very briefly is the genuine danger of terrorism, in particular terrorists using weapons of mass destruction and weapons of mass murder, nuclear and biological weapons. And I want to suggest to you that right now we should be impaneling people to look seriously at a level of supervision that we would never dream of if it weren't for the scale of threat.
Let me give you two examples. When the British this summer arrested people who were planning to blow up ten airliners in one day, they arrested a couple who were going to use their six month old baby in order to hide the bomb as baby milk.
Now, if I come to you tonight and say that there are people on the planet who hate you, and they are 15-25 year old males who are willing to die as long as they get to kill you, I've simply described the warrior &g t;culture which has been true historically for 6 or 7 thousand years.
But, if I come to you and say that there is a couple that hates you so much that they will kill their six month old baby in order to kill you, I am describing a level of ferocity, and a level of savagery beyond anything we have tried to deal with.
And, what is truly frightening about the British experience is they are arresting British citizens, born in Britain, speaking English, who went to British schools, live in British housing, and have good jobs.
This is a serious long term war, and it will inevitably lead us to want to know what is said in every suspect place in the country, that will lead us to learn how to close down every website that is dangerous, and it will lead us to a very severe approach to people who advocate the killing of Americans and advocate the use of nuclear or biological weapons.
And, my prediction to you is that either before we lose a city, or if we are truly stupid, after we lose a city, we will adopt rules of engagement that use every technology we can find to break up their capacity to use the Internet, to break up their capacity to use free speech, and to go after people who want to kill us to stop them from recruiting people before they get to reach out and convince young people to destroy their lives while destroying us.
This is a serious problem that will lead to a serious debate about the first amendment, but I think that the national security threat of losing an American city to a nuclear weapon, or losing several million Americans to a biological attack is so real that we need to pro actively, now, develop the appropriate rules of engagement.
And, I further think that we should propose a Geneva convention for fighting terrorism which makes very clear that those who would fight outside the rules of law, those who would use weapons of mass destruction, and those who would target civilians are in fact subject to a totally different set of rules that allow us to protect civilization by defeating barbarism before it gains so much strength that it is truly horrendous. This is a sober topic, but I think it is a topic we need a national dialogue about , and we need to get ahead of the curve rather than wait until actually we literary lose a city which could literally happen within the next decade if we are unfortunate. So
(APPLAUSE)
This is a very sober description of the Islamic terrorist threat we are faced with. We are NOW at war with a culture that wants, not to take over our land, but to KILL us, all-non Muslims, esp. Americans and Britions, and eventually ELIMINATE WESTERN CIVILIZATION
We must not put our heads in the sand and hope this is not true. It is true and we can not allow it to happen.
Please pass this on to everyone on your list.
Maybe this is why Pres. Bush is so bull headed about the the War?
Could it be so many people see Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan as the trees but miss seeing the Islamic Movement as the Forest? In a way I hope Bush is wrong but I am afraid he is right.
We better start talking about the shape of the table now because this country doesn't have the stomach to face what is coming!
Gingrich Speech in New Hampshire. Apparently it is causing a firestorm.
NEWT GINGRICH: The third thing I want to talk about very briefly is the genuine danger of terrorism, in particular terrorists using weapons of mass destruction and weapons of mass murder, nuclear and biological weapons. And I want to suggest to you that right now we should be impaneling people to look seriously at a level of supervision that we would never dream of if it weren't for the scale of threat.
Let me give you two examples. When the British this summer arrested people who were planning to blow up ten airliners in one day, they arrested a couple who were going to use their six month old baby in order to hide the bomb as baby milk.
Now, if I come to you tonight and say that there are people on the planet who hate you, and they are 15-25 year old males who are willing to die as long as they get to kill you, I've simply described the warrior &g t;culture which has been true historically for 6 or 7 thousand years.
But, if I come to you and say that there is a couple that hates you so much that they will kill their six month old baby in order to kill you, I am describing a level of ferocity, and a level of savagery beyond anything we have tried to deal with.
And, what is truly frightening about the British experience is they are arresting British citizens, born in Britain, speaking English, who went to British schools, live in British housing, and have good jobs.
This is a serious long term war, and it will inevitably lead us to want to know what is said in every suspect place in the country, that will lead us to learn how to close down every website that is dangerous, and it will lead us to a very severe approach to people who advocate the killing of Americans and advocate the use of nuclear or biological weapons.
And, my prediction to you is that either before we lose a city, or if we are truly stupid, after we lose a city, we will adopt rules of engagement that use every technology we can find to break up their capacity to use the Internet, to break up their capacity to use free speech, and to go after people who want to kill us to stop them from recruiting people before they get to reach out and convince young people to destroy their lives while destroying us.
This is a serious problem that will lead to a serious debate about the first amendment, but I think that the national security threat of losing an American city to a nuclear weapon, or losing several million Americans to a biological attack is so real that we need to pro actively, now, develop the appropriate rules of engagement.
And, I further think that we should propose a Geneva convention for fighting terrorism which makes very clear that those who would fight outside the rules of law, those who would use weapons of mass destruction, and those who would target civilians are in fact subject to a totally different set of rules that allow us to protect civilization by defeating barbarism before it gains so much strength that it is truly horrendous. This is a sober topic, but I think it is a topic we need a national dialogue about , and we need to get ahead of the curve rather than wait until actually we literary lose a city which could literally happen within the next decade if we are unfortunate. So
(APPLAUSE)
This is a very sober description of the Islamic terrorist threat we are faced with. We are NOW at war with a culture that wants, not to take over our land, but to KILL us, all-non Muslims, esp. Americans and Britions, and eventually ELIMINATE WESTERN CIVILIZATION
We must not put our heads in the sand and hope this is not true. It is true and we can not allow it to happen.
Please pass this on to everyone on your list.
Maybe this is why Pres. Bush is so bull headed about the the War?
Could it be so many people see Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan as the trees but miss seeing the Islamic Movement as the Forest? In a way I hope Bush is wrong but I am afraid he is right.
Monday, August 13, 2007
All European Life Died in Auschwitz
The following is a copy of an article written by Spanish writer Sebastian Vilar Rodrigez and published in a Spanish newspaper on 5-22-07. It doesn't take much imagination to extrapolate the message to the rest of Europe - and possibly to the rest of the world.
=====================================================
REMEMBER AS YOU READ -- IT WAS IN A SPANISH PAPER
Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 14:30:20 -0500
SPANISH NEWSPAPER ARTICLE. KEEP IT FOREMOST IN YOUR THINKING THAT THIS WAS WRITTEN BY A SPANISH WRITER ABOUT SPAIN AND EUROPE.
ALL EUROPEAN LIFE DIED IN AUSCHWITZ
By Sebastian Vilar Rodrigez(*)
I walked down the street in Barcelona, and suddenly
discovered a terrible truth - Europe died in Auschwitz.
We killed six million Jews and replaced them with 20
million Muslims. In Auschwitz we burned a culture,
thought, creativity, talent. We destroyed the chosen
people, truly chosen, because they produced great and
wonderful people who changed the world.
The contribution of this people is felt in all areas of
life: science, art, international trade, and above all,
as the conscience of the world. These are the people
we burned.
And under the pretense of tolerance, and because we
wanted to prove to ourselves that we were cured of the
disease of racism, we opened our gates to 20 million
Muslims, who brought us stupidity and ignorance,
religious extremism and lack of tolerance, crime and
poverty, due to an unwillingness to work and support
their families with pride.
They have turned our beautiful Spanish cities into the
third world, drowning in filth and crime.
Shut up in the apartments they receive free from the
government, they plan the murder and destruction of
their naive hosts.
And thus, in our misery, we have exchanged culture for
fanatical hatred, creative skill for destructive skill, intelligence for backwardness and superstition.
We have exchanged the pursuit of peace of the Jews of
Europe and their talent for hoping for a better future
for their children, their determined clinging to life
because life is holy, for those who pursue death, for
people consumed by the desire for death for themselves
and others, for our children and theirs.
What a terrible mistake was made by miserable Europe.
***********************************
*This is a translation of an article from a Spanish
newspaper. Please send this article to as many people
as possible, with a request to forward it on.
A lot of Americans have become so insulated from reality
that they imagine America can suffer defeat without any inconvenience to themselves.
=====================================================
REMEMBER AS YOU READ -- IT WAS IN A SPANISH PAPER
Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 14:30:20 -0500
SPANISH NEWSPAPER ARTICLE. KEEP IT FOREMOST IN YOUR THINKING THAT THIS WAS WRITTEN BY A SPANISH WRITER ABOUT SPAIN AND EUROPE.
ALL EUROPEAN LIFE DIED IN AUSCHWITZ
By Sebastian Vilar Rodrigez(*)
I walked down the street in Barcelona, and suddenly
discovered a terrible truth - Europe died in Auschwitz.
We killed six million Jews and replaced them with 20
million Muslims. In Auschwitz we burned a culture,
thought, creativity, talent. We destroyed the chosen
people, truly chosen, because they produced great and
wonderful people who changed the world.
The contribution of this people is felt in all areas of
life: science, art, international trade, and above all,
as the conscience of the world. These are the people
we burned.
And under the pretense of tolerance, and because we
wanted to prove to ourselves that we were cured of the
disease of racism, we opened our gates to 20 million
Muslims, who brought us stupidity and ignorance,
religious extremism and lack of tolerance, crime and
poverty, due to an unwillingness to work and support
their families with pride.
They have turned our beautiful Spanish cities into the
third world, drowning in filth and crime.
Shut up in the apartments they receive free from the
government, they plan the murder and destruction of
their naive hosts.
And thus, in our misery, we have exchanged culture for
fanatical hatred, creative skill for destructive skill, intelligence for backwardness and superstition.
We have exchanged the pursuit of peace of the Jews of
Europe and their talent for hoping for a better future
for their children, their determined clinging to life
because life is holy, for those who pursue death, for
people consumed by the desire for death for themselves
and others, for our children and theirs.
What a terrible mistake was made by miserable Europe.
***********************************
*This is a translation of an article from a Spanish
newspaper. Please send this article to as many people
as possible, with a request to forward it on.
A lot of Americans have become so insulated from reality
that they imagine America can suffer defeat without any inconvenience to themselves.
Sunday, August 12, 2007
The Truth Gets Out ...
Report urges troops sent to border
By Jerry Seper
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Reprint
The deployment of 36,000 National Guard troops or state militia on the U.S.-Mexico border would stop the illegal flow of foreigners into America, says a congressional report that credits the Minuteman Project with proving that additional manpower could "dramatically reduce if not virtually eliminate" illegal immigration.
The 33-page report, written by investigators for the Congressional Immigration Reform Caucus, said the Minutemen — who shut down a 23-mile stretch of the Arizona border last month — served as a model for a government effort to reclaim the southern border of the United States.
"The tide of illegal crossings on the borders of the United States is beyond unsatisfactory; it is catastrophic. It does not ebb and flow — it only grows. It is rising without measure and eroding the very fiber of our safety, life and culture," the report said.
"As we wage the war on terror in foreign lands, we have all our doors and windows open at home. ... The insanity of such a policy, or silent toleration of such a policy is almost criminal in itself," it said. "The Minuteman Project demonstrated that illegal immigration on America's southern border can be dramatically reduced to manageable levels."
The report, to be released today, also said the U.S. Border Patrol failed "through no fault of its rank-and-file enforcement officers" to protect the United States from an influx of illegals.
It said the agency's uniformed leadership should be pointed in a "new direction" as it is in "total denial of the magnitude of the disaster" and — as currently organized, staffed and supported — "cannot be relied upon" to remedy the situation soon.
"The Border Patrol needs new direction from the Department of Homeland Security if it is to shake off the lethargy from years of undermanned frustration," the report said. "The patrol needs to empower its outstanding field officers to act as necessary to accomplish the patrol's mission ... to energize its leadership to think outside the box."
The report said Congress and the states could sustain the success of the Minuteman Project — whose members were lightly armed, had no arrest powers, were not paid and traveled to Arizona at their own expense — with the deployment of National Guard troops or state militia working in coordination with the Border Patrol.
The report said that sufficient reinforcements exist in current National Guard units and could be put on the border by governors and the secretary of defense within one month, if the political will exists.
As an alternative to using existing powers and forces, the report said, a $2.5 billion annual initiative coordinated through the states for the issuance of Homeland Security grants could authorize and fund state militia, or state defense forces, to assist the Border Patrol.
State militia units already exist in 22 states, including Maryland and Virginia. Militia units also are located in the border states of California, New Mexico and Texas.
The report also called on Republican Govs. Rick Perry of Texas and Arnold Schwarzenegger of California and Democratic Govs. Janet Napolitano of Arizona and Bill Richardson of New Mexico to immediately request federal funding from (then) Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld for the mobilization of 36,000 National Guard troops within 30 days.
"The primary impetus to stimulate the Minuteman Project is a border out of control; not for months, not for years, not just since September 11, but for many, many years," the report said. "Social and legal costs and cultural cohesion far outweigh supposed economic benefit. At a time of terror threat, the cost of irresponsibly unsecured borders can be horrific."
The report also noted that Border Patrol supervisors said the Minutemen had little or no effect on illegal immigration, attributing apparent decreases during the vigil to increased enforcement efforts by the agency, along with the increased presence of Mexican military and police south of the border.
"However, nearly every individual Border Patrol officer who spoke off-the-record in the field to the Caucus team said that illegal immigration virtually stopped in the sector patrolled by the Minutemen as a direct result of Minutemen activity and publicity," the report said.
"The individual officers were highly appreciative of the impact the Minutemen made in the area, had good working relations with the project unofficially and felt the project had made a valuable contribution to the cause of the rank-and-file officer — protecting the border against impossible logistical challenges," it said.
Despite contrary claims by the supervisors, the report said, illegal immigration dropped significantly in the areas east and west of Naco, Ariz., targeted by the Minutemen. It said the decline "put to rest the historic immigration reform myth that it is impossible to stop illegal immigrants from crossing the border with any reasonable amount of additional manpower."
"The Minuteman Project demonstrated that illegal immigration on America's southern border can be dramatically reduced to manageable levels," the report said. "What is missing is not the means to control; it is the will. With a will, there is a way."
The 71-member caucus led by Rep. Tom Tancredo, Colorado Republican, sent investigators to the Minuteman vigil with instructions to interview "any and all sources both on and off the record" and report their findings to Congress.
The report was written by Col. Frederick A. Peterson III, a retired U.S. Marine who serves as senior homeland defense adviser for Mr. Tancredo, and John E. Stone II, a captain in the Virginia Defense Force and deputy chief of staff for the House Education and the Workforce workforce protections subcommittee chaired by Rep. Charlie Norwood, Georgia Republican.
By Jerry Seper
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Reprint
The deployment of 36,000 National Guard troops or state militia on the U.S.-Mexico border would stop the illegal flow of foreigners into America, says a congressional report that credits the Minuteman Project with proving that additional manpower could "dramatically reduce if not virtually eliminate" illegal immigration.
The 33-page report, written by investigators for the Congressional Immigration Reform Caucus, said the Minutemen — who shut down a 23-mile stretch of the Arizona border last month — served as a model for a government effort to reclaim the southern border of the United States.
"The tide of illegal crossings on the borders of the United States is beyond unsatisfactory; it is catastrophic. It does not ebb and flow — it only grows. It is rising without measure and eroding the very fiber of our safety, life and culture," the report said.
"As we wage the war on terror in foreign lands, we have all our doors and windows open at home. ... The insanity of such a policy, or silent toleration of such a policy is almost criminal in itself," it said. "The Minuteman Project demonstrated that illegal immigration on America's southern border can be dramatically reduced to manageable levels."
The report, to be released today, also said the U.S. Border Patrol failed "through no fault of its rank-and-file enforcement officers" to protect the United States from an influx of illegals.
It said the agency's uniformed leadership should be pointed in a "new direction" as it is in "total denial of the magnitude of the disaster" and — as currently organized, staffed and supported — "cannot be relied upon" to remedy the situation soon.
"The Border Patrol needs new direction from the Department of Homeland Security if it is to shake off the lethargy from years of undermanned frustration," the report said. "The patrol needs to empower its outstanding field officers to act as necessary to accomplish the patrol's mission ... to energize its leadership to think outside the box."
The report said Congress and the states could sustain the success of the Minuteman Project — whose members were lightly armed, had no arrest powers, were not paid and traveled to Arizona at their own expense — with the deployment of National Guard troops or state militia working in coordination with the Border Patrol.
The report said that sufficient reinforcements exist in current National Guard units and could be put on the border by governors and the secretary of defense within one month, if the political will exists.
As an alternative to using existing powers and forces, the report said, a $2.5 billion annual initiative coordinated through the states for the issuance of Homeland Security grants could authorize and fund state militia, or state defense forces, to assist the Border Patrol.
State militia units already exist in 22 states, including Maryland and Virginia. Militia units also are located in the border states of California, New Mexico and Texas.
The report also called on Republican Govs. Rick Perry of Texas and Arnold Schwarzenegger of California and Democratic Govs. Janet Napolitano of Arizona and Bill Richardson of New Mexico to immediately request federal funding from (then) Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld for the mobilization of 36,000 National Guard troops within 30 days.
"The primary impetus to stimulate the Minuteman Project is a border out of control; not for months, not for years, not just since September 11, but for many, many years," the report said. "Social and legal costs and cultural cohesion far outweigh supposed economic benefit. At a time of terror threat, the cost of irresponsibly unsecured borders can be horrific."
The report also noted that Border Patrol supervisors said the Minutemen had little or no effect on illegal immigration, attributing apparent decreases during the vigil to increased enforcement efforts by the agency, along with the increased presence of Mexican military and police south of the border.
"However, nearly every individual Border Patrol officer who spoke off-the-record in the field to the Caucus team said that illegal immigration virtually stopped in the sector patrolled by the Minutemen as a direct result of Minutemen activity and publicity," the report said.
"The individual officers were highly appreciative of the impact the Minutemen made in the area, had good working relations with the project unofficially and felt the project had made a valuable contribution to the cause of the rank-and-file officer — protecting the border against impossible logistical challenges," it said.
Despite contrary claims by the supervisors, the report said, illegal immigration dropped significantly in the areas east and west of Naco, Ariz., targeted by the Minutemen. It said the decline "put to rest the historic immigration reform myth that it is impossible to stop illegal immigrants from crossing the border with any reasonable amount of additional manpower."
"The Minuteman Project demonstrated that illegal immigration on America's southern border can be dramatically reduced to manageable levels," the report said. "What is missing is not the means to control; it is the will. With a will, there is a way."
The 71-member caucus led by Rep. Tom Tancredo, Colorado Republican, sent investigators to the Minuteman vigil with instructions to interview "any and all sources both on and off the record" and report their findings to Congress.
The report was written by Col. Frederick A. Peterson III, a retired U.S. Marine who serves as senior homeland defense adviser for Mr. Tancredo, and John E. Stone II, a captain in the Virginia Defense Force and deputy chief of staff for the House Education and the Workforce workforce protections subcommittee chaired by Rep. Charlie Norwood, Georgia Republican.
Friday, August 10, 2007
Michigan Gov. Picks Islamofascist to Oversee Medicaid
OUTRAGE: Michigan Gov. Picks Islamofascist Who Defrauded Medicaid to Oversee Medicaid
By Debbie Schlussel
Yesterday, Crain's Detroit Business reported that Ismael Ahmed, Founder and Executive Director of the Arab Community Center for Economic and Social Services, was picked by Michigan's liberal Democrat Governor Jennifer Granholm to head the State of Michigan's Department of Human Services.
Readers of this site are familiar with Ahmed because I've written a great deal about him. The former head of Jesse Jackson's Michigan Presidential campaign, heads a Muslim-dominated agency that defrauds Medicaid by helping bring pregnant Muslim women from all over the world to America and giving them phony Social Security numbers to use so they can defraud Medicaid and have you--the taxpayers pay thousands of dollars to cover the deliveries of their babies. Plus the babies get U.S. citizenship.
Granholm knows a lot about this because she was Michigan Attorney General in December 2002, when agents of her office and the FBI raided ACCESS in connection with a Medicaid fraud investigation her office oversaw. That's why it was strange when she hired her friend, Ahmed, to Co-Chair her Gubernatorial Transition Team, since she knew of Ahmed's organizations involvement in this scam. (She's since appointed him as a Regent of Eastern Michigan University.)
BUT, that she hired Ahmed to now oversee Michigan's disbursements of Medicaid--now as the new Director of the Michigan Department of Human Services--is even more outrageous. Trite but true, it's exactly like hiring the fox to guard the henhouse. It's also disturbing because Ahmed's agency used thousands of government job-training funds to train Al-Qaeda terrorists to get commercial driver's licenses and hazardous material hauling certificates.
And his agency used government money to sponsor the University of Michigan Divestment (from Israel) Conference. Imagine what Ahmed will do with access to and control over Michigan's giant budget for everything that falls under "Human Services."
Make no mistake. Michigan's top Republicans aren't clean in this either. Current Michigan Attorney General and Republican Mike Cox carefully waited until Muslim women defrauding Medicaid left the country before he issued bench warrants for their arrest. He did that, so he would never actually have to arrest them, interview them, and go after ACCESS and the other malefactors involved in this . . . and offend Muslims. He's been vying for extremist Muslim Arab votes and believes they are the route to his becoming Governor when term-limited Granholm leaves office after 2010.
He appeared on FOX News Channel's "O'Reilly Factor" to gush all over himself for issuing these empty warrants and lied to Bill O'Reilly, claiming that the people who turned these women in were "Arabs," themselves, "from the community," implying they were also Muslims. In fact, none of them are--all Infidels of non-Arab extraction. And what's worse, Cox issued the warrants, despite Justice Department requests not to, tipping off targets. (An incompetent, stupid former Assistant U.S. Attorney gave him the documents and information.) But rather than do the right thing for a proper investigation, he needed his time to shine in the "O'Reilly Factor" sun. After all, he wants to be Governor and, then, President.
To date, Cox done nothing to stop the Medicaid fraud at Ismael Ahmed's ACCESS, which continues and has throughout his five years as Michigan's chief law enforcement official. He is as culpable as Granholm in the wholesale giveaway of U.S. citizenship and tax-paid Medicaid dollars in Michigan to those who--surprise! surprise!--share the same religion as the 19 hijackers of September 11th.
Read more about Ismael Ahmed and his terrorist ties. http://www.debbieschlussel.com/columns/column072704.shtml
By Debbie Schlussel
Yesterday, Crain's Detroit Business reported that Ismael Ahmed, Founder and Executive Director of the Arab Community Center for Economic and Social Services, was picked by Michigan's liberal Democrat Governor Jennifer Granholm to head the State of Michigan's Department of Human Services.
Readers of this site are familiar with Ahmed because I've written a great deal about him. The former head of Jesse Jackson's Michigan Presidential campaign, heads a Muslim-dominated agency that defrauds Medicaid by helping bring pregnant Muslim women from all over the world to America and giving them phony Social Security numbers to use so they can defraud Medicaid and have you--the taxpayers pay thousands of dollars to cover the deliveries of their babies. Plus the babies get U.S. citizenship.
Granholm knows a lot about this because she was Michigan Attorney General in December 2002, when agents of her office and the FBI raided ACCESS in connection with a Medicaid fraud investigation her office oversaw. That's why it was strange when she hired her friend, Ahmed, to Co-Chair her Gubernatorial Transition Team, since she knew of Ahmed's organizations involvement in this scam. (She's since appointed him as a Regent of Eastern Michigan University.)
BUT, that she hired Ahmed to now oversee Michigan's disbursements of Medicaid--now as the new Director of the Michigan Department of Human Services--is even more outrageous. Trite but true, it's exactly like hiring the fox to guard the henhouse. It's also disturbing because Ahmed's agency used thousands of government job-training funds to train Al-Qaeda terrorists to get commercial driver's licenses and hazardous material hauling certificates.
And his agency used government money to sponsor the University of Michigan Divestment (from Israel) Conference. Imagine what Ahmed will do with access to and control over Michigan's giant budget for everything that falls under "Human Services."
Make no mistake. Michigan's top Republicans aren't clean in this either. Current Michigan Attorney General and Republican Mike Cox carefully waited until Muslim women defrauding Medicaid left the country before he issued bench warrants for their arrest. He did that, so he would never actually have to arrest them, interview them, and go after ACCESS and the other malefactors involved in this . . . and offend Muslims. He's been vying for extremist Muslim Arab votes and believes they are the route to his becoming Governor when term-limited Granholm leaves office after 2010.
He appeared on FOX News Channel's "O'Reilly Factor" to gush all over himself for issuing these empty warrants and lied to Bill O'Reilly, claiming that the people who turned these women in were "Arabs," themselves, "from the community," implying they were also Muslims. In fact, none of them are--all Infidels of non-Arab extraction. And what's worse, Cox issued the warrants, despite Justice Department requests not to, tipping off targets. (An incompetent, stupid former Assistant U.S. Attorney gave him the documents and information.) But rather than do the right thing for a proper investigation, he needed his time to shine in the "O'Reilly Factor" sun. After all, he wants to be Governor and, then, President.
To date, Cox done nothing to stop the Medicaid fraud at Ismael Ahmed's ACCESS, which continues and has throughout his five years as Michigan's chief law enforcement official. He is as culpable as Granholm in the wholesale giveaway of U.S. citizenship and tax-paid Medicaid dollars in Michigan to those who--surprise! surprise!--share the same religion as the 19 hijackers of September 11th.
Read more about Ismael Ahmed and his terrorist ties. http://www.debbieschlussel.com/columns/column072704.shtml
Wednesday, August 08, 2007
My Turn on Civil Rights
Anti-CAIR Founder; My Turn on Civil Rights
On January 6, 2004, I was threatened with a lawsuit for defamation by the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), an Islamic terrorist supporting front
group which has received funding from Islamic terrorists. The reason I was sued was because I dared to tell the truth about CAIR, its "leadership" and
members.
When I received the letter, I shut down our work for a few days while I examined my options. After a period of reflection, I made the decision to resume normal operations and I also posted the letter from CAIR's attorney on the Anti-CAIR web site:
http://www.anti-cair-net.org/cairlawyerletter.html
The reason I refused to surrender to CAIR's blatant attempt at intimidation was simple: I believe that all the information we provide on CAIR is the truth, and that the truth must be defended, in order to maintain a free society.
When CAIR sued me, it discovered that bringing a bogus "defamation" case to silence free speech is a double edged sword; just as CAIR could examine and test my material and delve into my works, so I was entitled to do the same to CAIR. The question, as the discovery process unfolded was: "Who was going to blink first"?
For our legal team the answer was simple: we agreed to answer any/all questions in depth. We had, and have, nothing to hide.
Everything Anti-CAIR does is perfectly transparent, we show our sources (where we can), we name names, and we provide links that any reader can follow.
When my legal team, headed by Reed Rubinstein, submitted questions to CAIR, we were rebuffed. CAIR finally realized that going after Anti-CAIR was not only a bad decision, it had the potential to show CAIR for what it is: an Anti-American front group for Hamas that was founded by Islamic terrorists.
CAIR ran from the suit they initiated and the case was settled.
Not one word that CAIR objected to was changed on the web site. No corrections were issued. No apology was made.
Why is this important?
Free speech.
Stanislav Shmulevich of Brooklyn has been arrested on charges of criminal mischief and aggravated harassment for allegedly placing a Koran (Islam's Holy Book) in a toilet at Pace University:
http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/newyork/ny-bc-ny--vandalismquran0727jul27,0,6882662.story
While most Americans can agree that placing a book in a toilet is disrespectful, is it really a crime?
For CAIR's opinion, we only have to listen to CAIR-NY "Civil Rights Coordinator" Aliya Latif:
"We commend the NYPD for its appropriate handling of this case...we must all be concerned when any actions cross the line from protected free speech to acts designed to intimidate. Just as there is a difference between someone burning a cross in their own backyard and burning that same cross in the yard of an African-American family, there is a difference between desecrating a religious text in a private setting and doing so in a setting that will create a hostile learning environment."
(Question: Why does a terrorist founded, terrorist supporting organization need a "Civil Rights Coordinator"?)
http://www.cair.com/default.asp?Page=articleView&id=2882&theType=NR
Contrast CAIR-NY statement with the following:
"Those who stay in America should be open to society without melting, keeping Mosques open so anyone can come and learn about Islam. If you choose to live here, you have a responsibility to deliver the message of Islam ... Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faiths, but to become dominant. The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth."
Quote of Omar Ahmad, CAIR co-founder.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=32341
What is more threatening, putting a book in a toilet or being told that Islam is in American to dominate all other beliefs?
Why hasn't Ahmad been arrested for a "hate crime"?
What about Nihad Awad, CAIR Executive Director when he publically states:
"I am in support of the Hamas movement."
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/printer-friendly.asp?ARTICLE_ID=31479
Awad publically states his support for an Islamist terrorist group that has murdered innocent civilians, including American citizens, and there is no "hate crimes" investigation.
Showing the banality of evil, this from Ahmad:
"Fighting for freedom, fighting for Islam, that is not suicide...they kill themselves for Islam"
Ahmad celebrates fellow Muslims who commit terrorist suicide bombings as "killing themselves for Islam"...the very same Islam that CAIR consistently claims does not support terrorism.
Or is it only CAIR's particular brand of Islam that supports Islamic terrorism?
From a WorldNetDaily article:
"A group of American Muslims produced a video that shows its members on a New York City street corner declaring Islam's dominance over America as they tread on a U.S. flag and then rip it apart."
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=44664
CAIR had nothing to say about the desecration of our national flag by a group of Islamist supremacists from the "Islamic Thinkers Society"...the group suffered no consequences for the defilement of the flag and no mention was made of it being a "hate crime". No matter that millions of veterans would disagree; rightly recognizing that the flag represents our country, our values...and our comrades, fallen or wounded in battle; not to mention those battling Islamist terror in foreign lands.
Shmulevich put a book in the toilet. But did he call for his religion to be dominant in America? Did he publically call for support for terrorists who are killing American citizens? Did he salute terrorists who commit suicide attacks? Did he trample our flag in the street?
What Shmulevich did was in bad taste, it was insulting, but it was no crime.
Freedom of speech is my birthright as an American citizen; it is a gift from God codified by our founding fathers in our great Constitution.
To silence my voice would be to silence my soul; no man has, or ought to have, that power.
If we won't stand up for Shmulevich, who will stand up for us when the time comes?
Andrew Whitehead
Director, Anti-Council on American-Islamic Relations (Anti-CAIR)
On January 6, 2004, I was threatened with a lawsuit for defamation by the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), an Islamic terrorist supporting front
group which has received funding from Islamic terrorists. The reason I was sued was because I dared to tell the truth about CAIR, its "leadership" and
members.
When I received the letter, I shut down our work for a few days while I examined my options. After a period of reflection, I made the decision to resume normal operations and I also posted the letter from CAIR's attorney on the Anti-CAIR web site:
http://www.anti-cair-net.org/cairlawyerletter.html
The reason I refused to surrender to CAIR's blatant attempt at intimidation was simple: I believe that all the information we provide on CAIR is the truth, and that the truth must be defended, in order to maintain a free society.
When CAIR sued me, it discovered that bringing a bogus "defamation" case to silence free speech is a double edged sword; just as CAIR could examine and test my material and delve into my works, so I was entitled to do the same to CAIR. The question, as the discovery process unfolded was: "Who was going to blink first"?
For our legal team the answer was simple: we agreed to answer any/all questions in depth. We had, and have, nothing to hide.
Everything Anti-CAIR does is perfectly transparent, we show our sources (where we can), we name names, and we provide links that any reader can follow.
When my legal team, headed by Reed Rubinstein, submitted questions to CAIR, we were rebuffed. CAIR finally realized that going after Anti-CAIR was not only a bad decision, it had the potential to show CAIR for what it is: an Anti-American front group for Hamas that was founded by Islamic terrorists.
CAIR ran from the suit they initiated and the case was settled.
Not one word that CAIR objected to was changed on the web site. No corrections were issued. No apology was made.
Why is this important?
Free speech.
Stanislav Shmulevich of Brooklyn has been arrested on charges of criminal mischief and aggravated harassment for allegedly placing a Koran (Islam's Holy Book) in a toilet at Pace University:
http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/newyork/ny-bc-ny--vandalismquran0727jul27,0,6882662.story
While most Americans can agree that placing a book in a toilet is disrespectful, is it really a crime?
For CAIR's opinion, we only have to listen to CAIR-NY "Civil Rights Coordinator" Aliya Latif:
"We commend the NYPD for its appropriate handling of this case...we must all be concerned when any actions cross the line from protected free speech to acts designed to intimidate. Just as there is a difference between someone burning a cross in their own backyard and burning that same cross in the yard of an African-American family, there is a difference between desecrating a religious text in a private setting and doing so in a setting that will create a hostile learning environment."
(Question: Why does a terrorist founded, terrorist supporting organization need a "Civil Rights Coordinator"?)
http://www.cair.com/default.asp?Page=articleView&id=2882&theType=NR
Contrast CAIR-NY statement with the following:
"Those who stay in America should be open to society without melting, keeping Mosques open so anyone can come and learn about Islam. If you choose to live here, you have a responsibility to deliver the message of Islam ... Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faiths, but to become dominant. The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth."
Quote of Omar Ahmad, CAIR co-founder.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=32341
What is more threatening, putting a book in a toilet or being told that Islam is in American to dominate all other beliefs?
Why hasn't Ahmad been arrested for a "hate crime"?
What about Nihad Awad, CAIR Executive Director when he publically states:
"I am in support of the Hamas movement."
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/printer-friendly.asp?ARTICLE_ID=31479
Awad publically states his support for an Islamist terrorist group that has murdered innocent civilians, including American citizens, and there is no "hate crimes" investigation.
Showing the banality of evil, this from Ahmad:
"Fighting for freedom, fighting for Islam, that is not suicide...they kill themselves for Islam"
Ahmad celebrates fellow Muslims who commit terrorist suicide bombings as "killing themselves for Islam"...the very same Islam that CAIR consistently claims does not support terrorism.
Or is it only CAIR's particular brand of Islam that supports Islamic terrorism?
From a WorldNetDaily article:
"A group of American Muslims produced a video that shows its members on a New York City street corner declaring Islam's dominance over America as they tread on a U.S. flag and then rip it apart."
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=44664
CAIR had nothing to say about the desecration of our national flag by a group of Islamist supremacists from the "Islamic Thinkers Society"...the group suffered no consequences for the defilement of the flag and no mention was made of it being a "hate crime". No matter that millions of veterans would disagree; rightly recognizing that the flag represents our country, our values...and our comrades, fallen or wounded in battle; not to mention those battling Islamist terror in foreign lands.
Shmulevich put a book in the toilet. But did he call for his religion to be dominant in America? Did he publically call for support for terrorists who are killing American citizens? Did he salute terrorists who commit suicide attacks? Did he trample our flag in the street?
What Shmulevich did was in bad taste, it was insulting, but it was no crime.
Freedom of speech is my birthright as an American citizen; it is a gift from God codified by our founding fathers in our great Constitution.
To silence my voice would be to silence my soul; no man has, or ought to have, that power.
If we won't stand up for Shmulevich, who will stand up for us when the time comes?
Andrew Whitehead
Director, Anti-Council on American-Islamic Relations (Anti-CAIR)
Terrorists Teaming with Drug Cartels
Terrorists teaming with drug cartels
August 8, 2007
By Sara A. Carter - Islamic extremists embedded in the United States — posing as Hispanic nationals — are partnering with violent Mexican drug gangs to finance terror networks in the Middle East, according to a Drug Enforcement Administration report.
"Since drug traffickers and terrorists operate in a clandestine environment, both groups utilize similar methodologies to function ... all lend themselves to facilitation and are among the essential elements that may contribute to the successful conclusion of a catastrophic event by terrorists," said the confidential report, a copy of which was obtained by The Washington Times.
The 2005 report outlines an ongoing scheme in which multiple Middle Eastern drug-trafficking and terrorist cells operating in the U.S. fund terror networks overseas, aided by established Mexican cartels with highly sophisticated trafficking routes.
These terrorist groups, or sleeper cells, include people who speak Arabic, Spanish and Hebrew and, for the most part, arouse no suspicion in their communities.
"It is very likely that any future 'September 11th' type of terrorist event in the United States may be facilitated, wittingly or unwittingly, by drug traffickers operating on both sides of the United States-Mexico border," the DEA report says.
Rep. Ed Royce of California, ranking Republican on the House Foreign Affairs terrorism and nonproliferation subcommittee, said the DEA document substantiates information that his committee has been given in the past year.
"Hearings I held in Laredo [Texas] last year and this DEA report show that our southern border is a terrorist risk," Mr. Royce said. "Law enforcement has warned that people from Arab countries have crossed the border and adopted Hispanic surnames. The drug cartels have highly sophisticated smuggling and money-laundering networks, which terrorists could access."
Garrison K. Courtney, spokes- man for the DEA, would not comment on the document. However, he said that the DEA, which has only 5,000 active agents worldwide, is sharing information with other U.S. intelligence agencies and working closely with local law enforcement.
"We focus on drugs, but we keep our eyes open for any connection that can aid our other partners in law enforcement," Mr. Courtney said. "Everything we do relies on our ability to gather intelligence. We have said for years that there are shades of gray in the organizations we're dealing with. Intelligence requires us to look at the whole picture. Realistically to leave out a certain set of dots could be a huge mistake."
In the two years since the report was written, other DEA intelligence officials have said they are still struggling to cooperate with and share and gather information from other lead U.S. agencies charged with fighting the war on terrorism.
Lack of information sharing between U.S. intelligence agencies is creating a blind spot in the war on terror and has left the U.S. vulnerable to another attack, the report states.
"We are the eyes and ears when it comes to gathering intelligence on the cartels and smugglers," said the DEA official. "What we know for sure is that persons associated with terrorist groups have discovered what cartels have known all along — the border is the backdoor into the U.S."
According to a Department of Homeland Security intelligence report obtained by The Times, nearly every part of the Border Patrol's national strategy is failing.
"Al Qaeda has been trying to smuggle terrorists and terrorist weapons illegally into the United States," the 2006 document states. "This organization has also tried to enter the U.S. by taking advantage of its most vulnerable border areas. They seek to smuggle OTMs [other than Mexicans] from Middle Eastern countries into the U.S."
Peter Brown, terrorism and security consultant, stated that the "biggest element" to the DEA report is the ease with which terrorist cells have taken on new identities.
"The ability for people to completely transform their nationalities absent of their own identities is a dangerous step in the evolution of this cross-border operation," he said. "This is a true threat."
Lending credence to Mr. Brown's concern, an El Paso, Texas, law-enforcement report documents the influx of "approximately 20 Arab persons a week utilizing the Travis County Court in Austin to change their names and driver's licenses from Arabic to Hispanic surnames."
Under the current drug-intelligence collection, analysis and reporting posture, the DEA runs the risk of failing to detect or report the entry of terrorists, weapons of mass destruction or portable conventional weapons into the United States, according to the DEA document.
Many times, smugglers don't know what they are transporting.
"Despite all the pronouncements of the administration that these networks and their funding is being traced," Mr. Brown warned, "progress has been limited, and in certain circles of intelligence, they are nonexistent."
August 8, 2007
By Sara A. Carter - Islamic extremists embedded in the United States — posing as Hispanic nationals — are partnering with violent Mexican drug gangs to finance terror networks in the Middle East, according to a Drug Enforcement Administration report.
"Since drug traffickers and terrorists operate in a clandestine environment, both groups utilize similar methodologies to function ... all lend themselves to facilitation and are among the essential elements that may contribute to the successful conclusion of a catastrophic event by terrorists," said the confidential report, a copy of which was obtained by The Washington Times.
The 2005 report outlines an ongoing scheme in which multiple Middle Eastern drug-trafficking and terrorist cells operating in the U.S. fund terror networks overseas, aided by established Mexican cartels with highly sophisticated trafficking routes.
These terrorist groups, or sleeper cells, include people who speak Arabic, Spanish and Hebrew and, for the most part, arouse no suspicion in their communities.
"It is very likely that any future 'September 11th' type of terrorist event in the United States may be facilitated, wittingly or unwittingly, by drug traffickers operating on both sides of the United States-Mexico border," the DEA report says.
Rep. Ed Royce of California, ranking Republican on the House Foreign Affairs terrorism and nonproliferation subcommittee, said the DEA document substantiates information that his committee has been given in the past year.
"Hearings I held in Laredo [Texas] last year and this DEA report show that our southern border is a terrorist risk," Mr. Royce said. "Law enforcement has warned that people from Arab countries have crossed the border and adopted Hispanic surnames. The drug cartels have highly sophisticated smuggling and money-laundering networks, which terrorists could access."
Garrison K. Courtney, spokes- man for the DEA, would not comment on the document. However, he said that the DEA, which has only 5,000 active agents worldwide, is sharing information with other U.S. intelligence agencies and working closely with local law enforcement.
"We focus on drugs, but we keep our eyes open for any connection that can aid our other partners in law enforcement," Mr. Courtney said. "Everything we do relies on our ability to gather intelligence. We have said for years that there are shades of gray in the organizations we're dealing with. Intelligence requires us to look at the whole picture. Realistically to leave out a certain set of dots could be a huge mistake."
In the two years since the report was written, other DEA intelligence officials have said they are still struggling to cooperate with and share and gather information from other lead U.S. agencies charged with fighting the war on terrorism.
Lack of information sharing between U.S. intelligence agencies is creating a blind spot in the war on terror and has left the U.S. vulnerable to another attack, the report states.
"We are the eyes and ears when it comes to gathering intelligence on the cartels and smugglers," said the DEA official. "What we know for sure is that persons associated with terrorist groups have discovered what cartels have known all along — the border is the backdoor into the U.S."
According to a Department of Homeland Security intelligence report obtained by The Times, nearly every part of the Border Patrol's national strategy is failing.
"Al Qaeda has been trying to smuggle terrorists and terrorist weapons illegally into the United States," the 2006 document states. "This organization has also tried to enter the U.S. by taking advantage of its most vulnerable border areas. They seek to smuggle OTMs [other than Mexicans] from Middle Eastern countries into the U.S."
Peter Brown, terrorism and security consultant, stated that the "biggest element" to the DEA report is the ease with which terrorist cells have taken on new identities.
"The ability for people to completely transform their nationalities absent of their own identities is a dangerous step in the evolution of this cross-border operation," he said. "This is a true threat."
Lending credence to Mr. Brown's concern, an El Paso, Texas, law-enforcement report documents the influx of "approximately 20 Arab persons a week utilizing the Travis County Court in Austin to change their names and driver's licenses from Arabic to Hispanic surnames."
Under the current drug-intelligence collection, analysis and reporting posture, the DEA runs the risk of failing to detect or report the entry of terrorists, weapons of mass destruction or portable conventional weapons into the United States, according to the DEA document.
Many times, smugglers don't know what they are transporting.
"Despite all the pronouncements of the administration that these networks and their funding is being traced," Mr. Brown warned, "progress has been limited, and in certain circles of intelligence, they are nonexistent."
Monday, August 06, 2007
Response to Marc Brenman's Accusations
Different Rules: WSHRC vs WA Minutemen
On July 15, 2007 Marc Brenman, Executive Director of the WA Human Rights Commission, published a commentary regarding a Minutemen's rally in Everett on July 1, 2007. The rally somehow reminded the Director of a movie "A Day Without a Mexican". Although it appears the Director wasn’t at the rally, Mr. Brenman came to the conclusion that the Minutemen were anti-immigration and, I assume from his movie reference, on a crusade to rid America of Mexicans. They are not! They are, however, opposed to illegal immigrants being in this country and want our borders secured and immigration laws enforced.
Mr. Brenman, next stated that the Minutemen are 'using hate propaganda to undermine the basic tenants of democracy-opportunity and tolerance'. I can only guess this is because the Minutemen and millions of other citizens worked so diligently emailing, faxing and phoning our representatives to kill the 'comprehensive' Immigration bill. An abomination to the citizens of the United States that the Director, Democrats, President Bush and greedy corporations that hire illegal aliens at slave wages wanted so desperately to pass.
The Director, however, was just warming up and this is where different rules begin. 'The Minutemen rely on the use of hateful speech, the Big Lie (only Brenman knows what that is) and the fear of people who are different to corrupt and coarsen political dialogue, as their Nazi fore bearers did' Now I get the connection: “Nazi-Day without a Mexican.” But it gets better. ‘The Minutemen like their former fellow traveler Tim McVey(sp), are precursors to domestic terrorism and vigilantism.’ WHAT! McVeigh was executed before any of these Minutemen organizations were even formed. The all knowing Director of The Human Rights Commission finishes by calling Minutemen ‘gun-toting, self appointed know-nothings.’
It appears to me that Mr. Brenman, the Executive Director of the WA Human Rights Commission, has inappropriately used his position to spread fear and hate of the Minutemen groups. The very thing his organization is supposed to stamp out. So how does he get to keep his job? Why no outrage? Why no censure from the Legislature? No apology to the Minutemen for likely putting them in harms way with his hate and fear mongering? Do the Minutemen not have the right to assemble as other groups do? Or does Mr. Brenman believe those U.S. citizens who join Minutemen groups give up their rights by joining? It would be very helpful if Mr. Brenman would tell us what the rules for Minuteman group members are!
The Minutemen are made up of U.S. citizens of all races, national origins, sexual orientation and religions. They are men, women, mothers, fathers and grandparents. They are not gun toting racists. They definitely are not Nazis nor are they likely to morph into homegrown terrorists and vigilantes. They are law abiding citizens of the United States, who believe all residents of this country should be law abiding. They believe the United States should be a sovereign nation with one flag and English as the official language. They believe in legal immigration, no illegal drugs and a secure country where all immigration laws are enforced.
The Minutemen formed to enlighten the public of the government’s lax attitude toward border security. Their major function is performing border watches on both the northern and southern borders and informing the Border Patrol when people enter the United States illegally. They never willfully engage anyone illegally entering the United States, except to give emergency aid. The Minuteman Civil Defense Corps in Arizona has a unit, specially trained and equipped, whose only function is to give first aid assistance to people that the human smugglers leave in the desert to die.
Not everyone can become a member of Minuteman Civil Defense Corps. To become a Minuteman one must file an application, have an initial interview, undergo and pass a background check, have a second interview where they pledge among other things to uphold the Constitution of the United States. Part III of that pledge states ‘There is no tolerance among Minutemen for racism or bigotry – E Pluribus Unum- Out of Many One.’ And there is no tolerance for members that do not follow the Minuteman Standard Operating Procedures!
In Whatcom County there have been 23 months of border watches. To date there has not been even one complaint lodged against the Minutemen for any incident as a result of a border watch. Which gets me back, again, to why the Executive Director of the WA Human Rights Commission, Marc Brenman, would spread such hate and fear of The Minutemen when there is absolutely no justification for such accusations?
Perhaps the honorable Executive Director could and should enlighten us.
On July 15, 2007 Marc Brenman, Executive Director of the WA Human Rights Commission, published a commentary regarding a Minutemen's rally in Everett on July 1, 2007. The rally somehow reminded the Director of a movie "A Day Without a Mexican". Although it appears the Director wasn’t at the rally, Mr. Brenman came to the conclusion that the Minutemen were anti-immigration and, I assume from his movie reference, on a crusade to rid America of Mexicans. They are not! They are, however, opposed to illegal immigrants being in this country and want our borders secured and immigration laws enforced.
Mr. Brenman, next stated that the Minutemen are 'using hate propaganda to undermine the basic tenants of democracy-opportunity and tolerance'. I can only guess this is because the Minutemen and millions of other citizens worked so diligently emailing, faxing and phoning our representatives to kill the 'comprehensive' Immigration bill. An abomination to the citizens of the United States that the Director, Democrats, President Bush and greedy corporations that hire illegal aliens at slave wages wanted so desperately to pass.
The Director, however, was just warming up and this is where different rules begin. 'The Minutemen rely on the use of hateful speech, the Big Lie (only Brenman knows what that is) and the fear of people who are different to corrupt and coarsen political dialogue, as their Nazi fore bearers did' Now I get the connection: “Nazi-Day without a Mexican.” But it gets better. ‘The Minutemen like their former fellow traveler Tim McVey(sp), are precursors to domestic terrorism and vigilantism.’ WHAT! McVeigh was executed before any of these Minutemen organizations were even formed. The all knowing Director of The Human Rights Commission finishes by calling Minutemen ‘gun-toting, self appointed know-nothings.’
It appears to me that Mr. Brenman, the Executive Director of the WA Human Rights Commission, has inappropriately used his position to spread fear and hate of the Minutemen groups. The very thing his organization is supposed to stamp out. So how does he get to keep his job? Why no outrage? Why no censure from the Legislature? No apology to the Minutemen for likely putting them in harms way with his hate and fear mongering? Do the Minutemen not have the right to assemble as other groups do? Or does Mr. Brenman believe those U.S. citizens who join Minutemen groups give up their rights by joining? It would be very helpful if Mr. Brenman would tell us what the rules for Minuteman group members are!
The Minutemen are made up of U.S. citizens of all races, national origins, sexual orientation and religions. They are men, women, mothers, fathers and grandparents. They are not gun toting racists. They definitely are not Nazis nor are they likely to morph into homegrown terrorists and vigilantes. They are law abiding citizens of the United States, who believe all residents of this country should be law abiding. They believe the United States should be a sovereign nation with one flag and English as the official language. They believe in legal immigration, no illegal drugs and a secure country where all immigration laws are enforced.
The Minutemen formed to enlighten the public of the government’s lax attitude toward border security. Their major function is performing border watches on both the northern and southern borders and informing the Border Patrol when people enter the United States illegally. They never willfully engage anyone illegally entering the United States, except to give emergency aid. The Minuteman Civil Defense Corps in Arizona has a unit, specially trained and equipped, whose only function is to give first aid assistance to people that the human smugglers leave in the desert to die.
Not everyone can become a member of Minuteman Civil Defense Corps. To become a Minuteman one must file an application, have an initial interview, undergo and pass a background check, have a second interview where they pledge among other things to uphold the Constitution of the United States. Part III of that pledge states ‘There is no tolerance among Minutemen for racism or bigotry – E Pluribus Unum- Out of Many One.’ And there is no tolerance for members that do not follow the Minuteman Standard Operating Procedures!
In Whatcom County there have been 23 months of border watches. To date there has not been even one complaint lodged against the Minutemen for any incident as a result of a border watch. Which gets me back, again, to why the Executive Director of the WA Human Rights Commission, Marc Brenman, would spread such hate and fear of The Minutemen when there is absolutely no justification for such accusations?
Perhaps the honorable Executive Director could and should enlighten us.
Saturday, August 04, 2007
Marc Brenman Slanders Minutemen
Fair shake
August 4th, 2007
You don’t ask for special treatment or special rules, you just want the same rights as afforded to all US citizens. You work hard, follow the rules and try to do what is right. And sometimes all you ask for is a fair shake. Yet for you, a fair shake is not to be had. Especially when the State Human Rights Commission, the ones we taxpayers pay to ensure that all of it’s citizens get a fair shake, is the offender.
We are addressing this letter of protest to all of the Commissioners on the Washington State Human Rights Commission, as well as to Governor Christine Gregoire, because we are not confident that writing directly to the Commission’s Executive Director, Marc Brenman alone will be either acknowledged or responded to…
In a single paragraph, given without any qualification or example to buttress his accusations, he [Brenman] branded us all as liars, as spreaders of hate and fear, linked us all directly to genocidal Nazism, directly associated us with a mass-murdering domestic terrorist, and said flatly that we are the precursors to terrorism and vigilantism.
How can someone expect a fair shake when the man assigned by the state to ensure a fair shake for everyone, is himself spreading hate and rumors of hate about you? Where do you go? If you were actually accused of wrong doing, your lawyer would work to get you an impartial jury. But what if you haven’t done anything wrong, then what do you do?
This is the dilemma that is faced by the Washington State Chapter of the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps after Marc Brenman,the executive director of the Washington State Human Rights Commission wrote an article for the Everett Herald. In that article he maligned and slandered without regards for truth nor facts.
Reject messages of hate and fear
By Marc Brenman
http://dhweb.sv.publicus.com/article/20070715/OPINION03/707150319&SearchID=7>3288079879163
"…it seems like the Minutemen have made progress in some of our communities, including in Everett. The Minutemen rely on the use of hateful speech, the Big Lie, and fear of people who are different to corrupt and coarsen political dialogue, just as their Nazi forebears did. The so-called Minutemen, like their former fellow traveler Tim McVey, are precursors to domestic terrorism and vigilantism."
Marc Brenman is the executive director of the Washington State Human Rights Commission.
Is it even appropriate for a government official to publish a personal opinion article signed with their title? Is this his personal position or the position of the Human Rights Commission? How can we differentiate? More importantly, does Mr. Brenman differentiate his personal opinion from that of his commission? It doesn’t appear that he does, so who could expect the Minutemen to get a fair shake in any matter involving this commission.
And there lies the rub. Just like when Mr. Brenman and his commission visited Bellingham last year, the Minutemen aren’t involved in any actual complaints where they would need legal representation. No, the accusations are merely unfounded personal attacks that seem to be led by the Commission.
http://www.wallywonderswhy.com/?p=227
So where do you go when the Executive Director of the State Human Rights Commission makes personal accusations about you. Where do you go when he personally, publicly and without fact accuses you of:
Hateful speech
The Big Lie (whatever that is)
Fearing people who are different
Corrupting political dialog
Being connected to domestic terrorism
Being Nazis
Where do you go? In the case of the Minutemen they have taken it to the Governor and the Attorney General in the form of a letter explaining the situation and asking for a public written apology from Mr. Brenman.
We have been deeply and unjustly maligned by Mr. Brenman and deserve a public apology from him printed in the very publication in which he made such unjust and outrageously false accusations about our Organization or we will pursue every legal option available to us to secure our satisfaction in this matter!
Will you issue a written public apology to our organization to be published on the HeraldNet online news service, Mr. Brenman, or do you refuse??
It will be interesting to hear the responses from the Commission, the Attorney General and of course our Governor.
HAL WASHBURN, NATIONAL VETTING OFFICER
STATE MEMBERSHIP DIRECTOR
WASHINGTON MINUTEMAN DETACHMENT
MINUTEMAN CIVIL DEFENSE CORPS
OLALLA, WA.
August 4th, 2007
You don’t ask for special treatment or special rules, you just want the same rights as afforded to all US citizens. You work hard, follow the rules and try to do what is right. And sometimes all you ask for is a fair shake. Yet for you, a fair shake is not to be had. Especially when the State Human Rights Commission, the ones we taxpayers pay to ensure that all of it’s citizens get a fair shake, is the offender.
We are addressing this letter of protest to all of the Commissioners on the Washington State Human Rights Commission, as well as to Governor Christine Gregoire, because we are not confident that writing directly to the Commission’s Executive Director, Marc Brenman alone will be either acknowledged or responded to…
In a single paragraph, given without any qualification or example to buttress his accusations, he [Brenman] branded us all as liars, as spreaders of hate and fear, linked us all directly to genocidal Nazism, directly associated us with a mass-murdering domestic terrorist, and said flatly that we are the precursors to terrorism and vigilantism.
How can someone expect a fair shake when the man assigned by the state to ensure a fair shake for everyone, is himself spreading hate and rumors of hate about you? Where do you go? If you were actually accused of wrong doing, your lawyer would work to get you an impartial jury. But what if you haven’t done anything wrong, then what do you do?
This is the dilemma that is faced by the Washington State Chapter of the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps after Marc Brenman,the executive director of the Washington State Human Rights Commission wrote an article for the Everett Herald. In that article he maligned and slandered without regards for truth nor facts.
Reject messages of hate and fear
By Marc Brenman
http://dhweb.sv.publicus.com/article/20070715/OPINION03/707150319&SearchID=7>3288079879163
"…it seems like the Minutemen have made progress in some of our communities, including in Everett. The Minutemen rely on the use of hateful speech, the Big Lie, and fear of people who are different to corrupt and coarsen political dialogue, just as their Nazi forebears did. The so-called Minutemen, like their former fellow traveler Tim McVey, are precursors to domestic terrorism and vigilantism."
Marc Brenman is the executive director of the Washington State Human Rights Commission.
Is it even appropriate for a government official to publish a personal opinion article signed with their title? Is this his personal position or the position of the Human Rights Commission? How can we differentiate? More importantly, does Mr. Brenman differentiate his personal opinion from that of his commission? It doesn’t appear that he does, so who could expect the Minutemen to get a fair shake in any matter involving this commission.
And there lies the rub. Just like when Mr. Brenman and his commission visited Bellingham last year, the Minutemen aren’t involved in any actual complaints where they would need legal representation. No, the accusations are merely unfounded personal attacks that seem to be led by the Commission.
http://www.wallywonderswhy.com/?p=227
So where do you go when the Executive Director of the State Human Rights Commission makes personal accusations about you. Where do you go when he personally, publicly and without fact accuses you of:
Where do you go? In the case of the Minutemen they have taken it to the Governor and the Attorney General in the form of a letter explaining the situation and asking for a public written apology from Mr. Brenman.
We have been deeply and unjustly maligned by Mr. Brenman and deserve a public apology from him printed in the very publication in which he made such unjust and outrageously false accusations about our Organization or we will pursue every legal option available to us to secure our satisfaction in this matter!
Will you issue a written public apology to our organization to be published on the HeraldNet online news service, Mr. Brenman, or do you refuse??
It will be interesting to hear the responses from the Commission, the Attorney General and of course our Governor.
HAL WASHBURN, NATIONAL VETTING OFFICER
STATE MEMBERSHIP DIRECTOR
WASHINGTON MINUTEMAN DETACHMENT
MINUTEMAN CIVIL DEFENSE CORPS
OLALLA, WA.
Friday, August 03, 2007
The Muslim Brotherhood Project
The Muslim Brotherhood "Project"
By Patrick Poole
FrontPageMagazine
One might be led to think that if international law enforcement authorities and Western intelligence agencies had discovered a twenty-year old document revealing a top-secret plan developed by the oldest Islamist organization with one of the most extensive terror networks in the world to launch a program of "cultural invasion" and eventual conquest of the West that virtually mirrors the tactics used by Islamists for more than two decades, that such news would scream from headlines published on the front pages and above the fold of the New York Times, Washington Post, London Times, Le Monde, Bild, and La Repubblica. If that's what you might think, you would be wrong.
In fact, such a document was recovered in a raid by Swiss authorities in November 2001, two months after the horror of 9/11. Since that time information about this document, known in counterterrorism circles as "The Project," and discussion regarding its content has been limited to the top-secret world of Western intelligence communities. Only through the work of an intrepid Swiss journalist, Sylvain Besson of Le Temps, and his book published in October 2005 in France, La conquête de l'Occident: Le projet secret des Islamistes (The Conquest of the West: The Islamists' Secret Project), has information regarding The Project finally been made public. One Western official cited by Besson has described The Project as "a totalitarian ideology of infiltration which represents, in the end, the greatest danger for European societies."
Now FrontPage readers will be the first to be able to read the complete English translation of The Project.
What Western intelligence authorities know about The Project begins with the raid of a luxurious villa in Campione, Switzerland on November 7, 2001. The target of the raid was Youssef Nada, director of the Al-Taqwa Bank of Lugano, who has had active association with the Muslim Brotherhood for more than 50 years and who admitted to being one of the organization's international leaders. The Muslim Brotherhood, regarded as the oldest and one of the most important Islamist movements in the world, was founded by Hasan al-Banna in 1928 and dedicated to the credo, "Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. Qur'an is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope."
The raid was conducted by Swiss law enforcement at the request of the White House in the initial crackdown on terrorist finances in the immediate aftermath of 9/11. US and Swiss investigators had been looking at Al-Taqwa's involvement in money laundering and funding a wide range of Islamic terrorist groups, including Al-Qaeda, HAMAS (the Palestinian affiliate of the Muslim Brotherhood), the Algerian GIA, and the Tunisian Ennahdah.
Included in the documents seized during the raid of Nada's Swiss villa was a 14-page plan written in Arabic and dated December 1, 1982, which outlines a 12-point strategy to "establish an Islamic government on earth" — identified as The Project. According to testimony given to Swiss authorities by Nada, the unsigned document was prepared by "Islamic researchers" associated with the Muslim Brotherhood.
What makes The Project so different from the standard "Death of America! Death to Israel!" and "Establish the global caliphate!" Islamist rhetoric is that it represents a flexible, multi-phased, long-term approach to the "cultural invasion" of the West. Calling for the utilization of various tactics, ranging from immigration, infiltration, surveillance, propaganda, protest, deception, political legitimacy and terrorism, The Project has served for more than two decades as the Muslim Brotherhood "master plan." As can be seen in a number of examples throughout Europe — including the political recognition of parallel Islamist government organizations in Sweden, the recent "cartoon" jihad in Denmark, the Parisian car-burning intifada last November, and the 7/7 terrorist attacks in London — the plan outlined in The Project has been overwhelmingly successful.
Rather than focusing on terrorism as the sole method of group action, as is the case with Al-Qaeda, in perfect postmodern fashion the use of terror falls into a multiplicity of options available to progressively infiltrate, confront, and eventually establish Islamic domination over the West. The following tactics and techniques are among the many recommendations made in The Project:
Networking and coordinating actions between likeminded Islamist organizations;
Avoiding open alliances with known terrorist organizations and individuals to maintain the appearance of "moderation";
Infiltrating and taking over existing Muslim organizations to realign them towards the Muslim Brotherhood's collective goals;
Using deception to mask the intended goals of Islamist actions, as long as it doesn't conflict with shari'a law;
Avoiding social conflicts with Westerners locally, nationally or globally, that might damage the long-term ability to expand the Islamist powerbase in the West or provoke a lash back against Muslims;
Establishing financial networks to fund the work of conversion of the West, including the support of full-time administrators and workers;
Conducting surveillance, obtaining data, and establishing collection and data storage capabilities;
Putting into place a watchdog system for monitoring Western media to warn Muslims of "international plots fomented against them";
Cultivating an Islamist intellectual community, including the establishment of think-tanks and advocacy groups, and publishing "academic" studies, to legitimize Islamist positions and to chronicle the history of Islamist movements;
Developing a comprehensive 100-year plan to advance Islamist ideology throughout the world;
Balancing international objectives with local flexibility;
Building extensive social networks of schools, hospitals and charitable organizations dedicated to Islamist ideals so that contact with the movement for Muslims in the West is constant;
Involving ideologically committed Muslims in democratically-elected institutions on all levels in the West, including government, NGOs, private organizations and labor unions;
Instrumentally using existing Western institutions until they can be converted and put into service of Islam;
Drafting Islamic constitutions, laws and policies for eventual implementation;
Avoiding conflict within the Islamist movements on all levels, including the development of processes for conflict resolution;
Instituting alliances with Western "progressive" organizations that share similar goals;
Creating autonomous "security forces" to protect Muslims in the West;
Inflaming violence and keeping Muslims living in the West "in a jihad frame of mind";
Supporting jihad movements across the Muslim world through preaching, propaganda, personnel, funding, and technical and operational support;
Making the Palestinian cause a global wedge issue for Muslims;
Adopting the total liberation of Palestine from Israel and the creation of an Islamic state as a keystone in the plan for global Islamic domination;
Instigating a constant campaign to incite hatred by Muslims against Jews and rejecting any discussions of conciliation or coexistence with them;
Actively creating jihad terror cells within Palestine;
Linking the terrorist activities in Palestine with the global terror movement;
Collecting sufficient funds to indefinitely perpetuate and support jihad around the world;
In reading The Project, it should be kept in mind that it was drafted in 1982 when current tensions and terrorist activities in the Middle East were still very nascent. In many respects, The Project is extremely prescient for outlining the bulk of Islamist action, whether by "moderate" Islamist organizations or outright terror groups, over the past two decades.
By Patrick Poole
FrontPageMagazine
One might be led to think that if international law enforcement authorities and Western intelligence agencies had discovered a twenty-year old document revealing a top-secret plan developed by the oldest Islamist organization with one of the most extensive terror networks in the world to launch a program of "cultural invasion" and eventual conquest of the West that virtually mirrors the tactics used by Islamists for more than two decades, that such news would scream from headlines published on the front pages and above the fold of the New York Times, Washington Post, London Times, Le Monde, Bild, and La Repubblica. If that's what you might think, you would be wrong.
In fact, such a document was recovered in a raid by Swiss authorities in November 2001, two months after the horror of 9/11. Since that time information about this document, known in counterterrorism circles as "The Project," and discussion regarding its content has been limited to the top-secret world of Western intelligence communities. Only through the work of an intrepid Swiss journalist, Sylvain Besson of Le Temps, and his book published in October 2005 in France, La conquête de l'Occident: Le projet secret des Islamistes (The Conquest of the West: The Islamists' Secret Project), has information regarding The Project finally been made public. One Western official cited by Besson has described The Project as "a totalitarian ideology of infiltration which represents, in the end, the greatest danger for European societies."
Now FrontPage readers will be the first to be able to read the complete English translation of The Project.
What Western intelligence authorities know about The Project begins with the raid of a luxurious villa in Campione, Switzerland on November 7, 2001. The target of the raid was Youssef Nada, director of the Al-Taqwa Bank of Lugano, who has had active association with the Muslim Brotherhood for more than 50 years and who admitted to being one of the organization's international leaders. The Muslim Brotherhood, regarded as the oldest and one of the most important Islamist movements in the world, was founded by Hasan al-Banna in 1928 and dedicated to the credo, "Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. Qur'an is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope."
The raid was conducted by Swiss law enforcement at the request of the White House in the initial crackdown on terrorist finances in the immediate aftermath of 9/11. US and Swiss investigators had been looking at Al-Taqwa's involvement in money laundering and funding a wide range of Islamic terrorist groups, including Al-Qaeda, HAMAS (the Palestinian affiliate of the Muslim Brotherhood), the Algerian GIA, and the Tunisian Ennahdah.
Included in the documents seized during the raid of Nada's Swiss villa was a 14-page plan written in Arabic and dated December 1, 1982, which outlines a 12-point strategy to "establish an Islamic government on earth" — identified as The Project. According to testimony given to Swiss authorities by Nada, the unsigned document was prepared by "Islamic researchers" associated with the Muslim Brotherhood.
What makes The Project so different from the standard "Death of America! Death to Israel!" and "Establish the global caliphate!" Islamist rhetoric is that it represents a flexible, multi-phased, long-term approach to the "cultural invasion" of the West. Calling for the utilization of various tactics, ranging from immigration, infiltration, surveillance, propaganda, protest, deception, political legitimacy and terrorism, The Project has served for more than two decades as the Muslim Brotherhood "master plan." As can be seen in a number of examples throughout Europe — including the political recognition of parallel Islamist government organizations in Sweden, the recent "cartoon" jihad in Denmark, the Parisian car-burning intifada last November, and the 7/7 terrorist attacks in London — the plan outlined in The Project has been overwhelmingly successful.
Rather than focusing on terrorism as the sole method of group action, as is the case with Al-Qaeda, in perfect postmodern fashion the use of terror falls into a multiplicity of options available to progressively infiltrate, confront, and eventually establish Islamic domination over the West. The following tactics and techniques are among the many recommendations made in The Project:
Networking and coordinating actions between likeminded Islamist organizations;
Avoiding open alliances with known terrorist organizations and individuals to maintain the appearance of "moderation";
Infiltrating and taking over existing Muslim organizations to realign them towards the Muslim Brotherhood's collective goals;
Using deception to mask the intended goals of Islamist actions, as long as it doesn't conflict with shari'a law;
Avoiding social conflicts with Westerners locally, nationally or globally, that might damage the long-term ability to expand the Islamist powerbase in the West or provoke a lash back against Muslims;
Establishing financial networks to fund the work of conversion of the West, including the support of full-time administrators and workers;
Conducting surveillance, obtaining data, and establishing collection and data storage capabilities;
Putting into place a watchdog system for monitoring Western media to warn Muslims of "international plots fomented against them";
Cultivating an Islamist intellectual community, including the establishment of think-tanks and advocacy groups, and publishing "academic" studies, to legitimize Islamist positions and to chronicle the history of Islamist movements;
Developing a comprehensive 100-year plan to advance Islamist ideology throughout the world;
Balancing international objectives with local flexibility;
Building extensive social networks of schools, hospitals and charitable organizations dedicated to Islamist ideals so that contact with the movement for Muslims in the West is constant;
Involving ideologically committed Muslims in democratically-elected institutions on all levels in the West, including government, NGOs, private organizations and labor unions;
Instrumentally using existing Western institutions until they can be converted and put into service of Islam;
Drafting Islamic constitutions, laws and policies for eventual implementation;
Avoiding conflict within the Islamist movements on all levels, including the development of processes for conflict resolution;
Instituting alliances with Western "progressive" organizations that share similar goals;
Creating autonomous "security forces" to protect Muslims in the West;
Inflaming violence and keeping Muslims living in the West "in a jihad frame of mind";
Supporting jihad movements across the Muslim world through preaching, propaganda, personnel, funding, and technical and operational support;
Making the Palestinian cause a global wedge issue for Muslims;
Adopting the total liberation of Palestine from Israel and the creation of an Islamic state as a keystone in the plan for global Islamic domination;
Instigating a constant campaign to incite hatred by Muslims against Jews and rejecting any discussions of conciliation or coexistence with them;
Actively creating jihad terror cells within Palestine;
Linking the terrorist activities in Palestine with the global terror movement;
Collecting sufficient funds to indefinitely perpetuate and support jihad around the world;
In reading The Project, it should be kept in mind that it was drafted in 1982 when current tensions and terrorist activities in the Middle East were still very nascent. In many respects, The Project is extremely prescient for outlining the bulk of Islamist action, whether by "moderate" Islamist organizations or outright terror groups, over the past two decades.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)