As I've documented here from homilies my priest has given and on the Statistics on the "Religion of Peace" page, Christians are often persecuted and killed around the world by Moozlums, but rarely reported on by M3. You see, it just doesn't fit within their nicely constructed liberal world. Liberals sympathize with Moozlums, so they have to conveniently ignore their barbarity and murder. To acknowledge Islamic barbarity and murder would wreck their tidy little world of make believe.
**********
Nigeria Christmas church massacres: Obama says "senseless", won't say "Muslim"
by Adam Taxin, Philadelphia Jewish Culture Examiner
12/25/2011
In the wake of Christmas Day church massacres by Muslims in Nigeria, Barack Obama’s White House has offered a vague, wishy-washy statement.
Earlier today, coordinated terror attacks by the Muslim group Boko Haram in Nigeria left at least 39 people dead, with the majority dying on the steps of a Catholic church after celebrating Christmas mass.
As stated in an earlier article here about the Christmas Day church massacres, the Christmas Day attacks show the growing national ambition of the sect known as Boko Haram — dubbed the “Nigerian Taliban” — which is responsible for at least 495 killings this year.
Barack Obama’s White House has issued a statement. As can be expected, given that the victims were Christian and the perpetrators were Muslim, that statement was unspecific and basically half-hearted. Its text follows:
“We condemn this senseless violence and tragic loss of life on Christmas Day. We offer our sincere condolences to the Nigerian people and especially those who lost family and loved ones. We have been in contact with Nigerian officials about what initially appear to be terrorist acts and pledge to assist them in bringing those responsible to justice”
Needless to say, the statement by the Muslim-raised-and-educated Obama, whose supposed Christianity has basically its sole foundation in his long-time membership in the Black Liberation Theology "church" of anti-white Jeremiah Wright, did not include terms such as "Islam," "Muslim," "jihad," or even "Christian" in his statement.
Tuesday, December 27, 2011
Saturday, December 24, 2011
Wave of Bombings Across Iraqi Capital Kills 69
A few days after the U.S. military pulls out of Iraq, and 16 bombs go off. Way to go BHO!
******************
Wave of Bombings Across Iraqi Capital Kills 69
BAGHDAD – A wave of 16 bombings ripped across Baghdad Thursday, killing at least 69 people in the worst violence in Iraq for months. The apparently coordinated attacks struck days after the last American forces left the country and in the midst of a major government crisis between Shiite and Sunni politicians that has sent sectarian tensions soaring.
The bombings may be linked more to the U.S. withdrawal than the political crisis, but all together, the developments heighten fears of a new round of Shiite-Sunni sectarian bloodshed like the one a few years back that pushed Iraq to the brink of civil war.
There was no immediate claim of responsibility. But the bombings bore all the hallmarks of Al Qaeda's Sunni insurgents. Most appeared to hit Shiite neighborhoods, although some Sunni areas were also targeted. In all, 11 neighborhoods were hit by either car bombs, roadside blasts or sticky bombs attached to cars. There was at least one suicide bombing and the blasts went off over several hours.
Coordinated campaigns such as this generally take weeks to plan, and could have been timed to coincide with the end of the American military presence in Iraq, possibly to undercut U.S. claims that they are leaving behind a stable and safe Iraq. Al Qaeda has long sought to sow chaos and provoke the type of Shiite militant counterattacks that defined Iraq's insurgency.
At least 14 blasts went off in the morning and there were two more in the evening.
The deadliest attack was in the Karrada neighborhood, where a suicide bomber driving an explosives-laden vehicle blew himself up outside the office of a government agency fighting corruption. Two police officers at the scene said the bomber was driving an ambulance and told guards that he needed to get to a nearby hospital. After the guards let him through, he drove to the building where he blew himself up, the officers said.
Sirens wailed as ambulances rushed to the scene and a large plume of smoke rose over the area. The blast left a crater about five yards (meters) wide in front of the five-story building, which was singed and blackened.
"I was sleeping in my bed when the explosion happened, said 12-year-old Hussain Abbas, who was standing nearby in his pajamas. "I jumped from my bed and rushed to my mom's lap. I told her I did not to go to school today. I'm terrified."
At least 25 people were killed and 62 injured in that attack, officials said. They spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the media.
Figures gathered from Iraqi health and police officials across the city put the death toll at 69, and 169 injured, including the two evening blasts in western Baghdad neighborhoods that killed nine people and injured 21.
In Washington, the White House condemned the bombings and said attempts to derail progress in Iraq will fail. Press secretary Jay Carney said the attacks serve no agenda "other than murder and hatred."
For many Iraqis and the Americans who fought a nearly nine-year war in hopes of leaving behind a free and democratic country, the events of the past few days are beginning to look like the country's nightmare scenario. The fragile alliance of Sunnis and Shiites in the government is completely collapsing, large-scale violence with a high casualty toll has returned to the capital, and Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki is displaying an authoritarian streak and may be moving to grab the already limited power of the Sunnis.
Al-Maliki's Shiite-led government this week accused Vice President Tariq al-Hashemi, the country's top Sunni political leader, of running a hit squad that targeted government officials five years ago, during the height of sectarian warfare. Authorities put out a warrant for his arrest.
Many Sunnis fear this is part of a wider campaign to go after Sunni political figures in general and shore up Shiite control across the country at a critical time when all American troops have left Iraq.
Because such a large-scale, coordinated attack likely took weeks to plan, and the political crisis erupted only few days ago, the violence was not likely a direct response to the tensions within the government.
Also, Al Qaeda opposed Sunni cooperation in the Shiite-dominated government in the first place and is not aligned with Sunni politicians so does not feel any responsibility to press for any Sunni role in Iraq's power structure.
The Sunni extremist group often attacks Shiites, who they believe are not true Muslims.
U.S. military officials worried about a resurgence of Al Qaeda after their departure. The last American troops left Iraq at dawn Sunday.
Al Qaeda in Iraq is severely debilitated from its previous strength in the early years of the war, but it still has the capability to launch coordinated and deadly assaults from time to time.
The attacks ratchet up tensions at a time when many Iraqis are already deeply worried about security. The real test of whether sectarian warfare returns, however, will be whether Shiite militants are resurgent and return to the type of tit-for-tat attacks seen at the height of sectarian warfare in 2006-2007.
During that fighting, neighborhoods that used to contain a mixture of Shiites and Sunnis were purged entirely of one Muslim sect or another.
Neighbors turned on neighbors in Baghdad, and the result today is city where neighborhoods are much less religiously mixed and sectarian lines are clearly drawn.
Iraqis are already used to horrific levels of violence, but many wondered when they would be able to enjoy some measure of security and stability after years of chaos.
"My baby was sleeping in her bed. Shards of glass have fallen on our heads. Her father hugged her and carried her. She is now scared in the next room," said one woman in western Baghdad who identified herself as Um Hanin. "All countries are stable. Why don't we have security and stability?"
While Baghdad and Iraq have gotten much safer over the years, explosions like Thursday's are still commonplace.
Al-Maliki's tactics are another source of concern, especially for Sunnis. He is also pushing for a vote of no-confidence against another Sunni politician, the deputy prime minister Saleh al-Mutlaq.
Ayad Allawi, who heads a Sunni-backed party called Iraqiya, laid the blame for Thursday's violence with the government. The Iraqiya coalition also includes al-Hashemi and al-Mutlaq, and Allawi has been one of al-Maliki's strongest critics. Allawi warned that violence would continue as long as people are left out of the political process.
"We have warned long ago that terrorism will continue ... against the Iraqi people unless the political landscape is corrected and the political process is corrected, and it becomes an inclusive political process and full blown non-sectarian institutions will be built in Iraq," Allawi told The Associated Press, speaking from neighboring Beirut.
**********
Update 12/17/11 - Al Qaeda Front Group Claims Baghdad Blasts
******************
Wave of Bombings Across Iraqi Capital Kills 69
BAGHDAD – A wave of 16 bombings ripped across Baghdad Thursday, killing at least 69 people in the worst violence in Iraq for months. The apparently coordinated attacks struck days after the last American forces left the country and in the midst of a major government crisis between Shiite and Sunni politicians that has sent sectarian tensions soaring.
The bombings may be linked more to the U.S. withdrawal than the political crisis, but all together, the developments heighten fears of a new round of Shiite-Sunni sectarian bloodshed like the one a few years back that pushed Iraq to the brink of civil war.
There was no immediate claim of responsibility. But the bombings bore all the hallmarks of Al Qaeda's Sunni insurgents. Most appeared to hit Shiite neighborhoods, although some Sunni areas were also targeted. In all, 11 neighborhoods were hit by either car bombs, roadside blasts or sticky bombs attached to cars. There was at least one suicide bombing and the blasts went off over several hours.
Coordinated campaigns such as this generally take weeks to plan, and could have been timed to coincide with the end of the American military presence in Iraq, possibly to undercut U.S. claims that they are leaving behind a stable and safe Iraq. Al Qaeda has long sought to sow chaos and provoke the type of Shiite militant counterattacks that defined Iraq's insurgency.
At least 14 blasts went off in the morning and there were two more in the evening.
The deadliest attack was in the Karrada neighborhood, where a suicide bomber driving an explosives-laden vehicle blew himself up outside the office of a government agency fighting corruption. Two police officers at the scene said the bomber was driving an ambulance and told guards that he needed to get to a nearby hospital. After the guards let him through, he drove to the building where he blew himself up, the officers said.
Sirens wailed as ambulances rushed to the scene and a large plume of smoke rose over the area. The blast left a crater about five yards (meters) wide in front of the five-story building, which was singed and blackened.
"I was sleeping in my bed when the explosion happened, said 12-year-old Hussain Abbas, who was standing nearby in his pajamas. "I jumped from my bed and rushed to my mom's lap. I told her I did not to go to school today. I'm terrified."
At least 25 people were killed and 62 injured in that attack, officials said. They spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the media.
Figures gathered from Iraqi health and police officials across the city put the death toll at 69, and 169 injured, including the two evening blasts in western Baghdad neighborhoods that killed nine people and injured 21.
In Washington, the White House condemned the bombings and said attempts to derail progress in Iraq will fail. Press secretary Jay Carney said the attacks serve no agenda "other than murder and hatred."
For many Iraqis and the Americans who fought a nearly nine-year war in hopes of leaving behind a free and democratic country, the events of the past few days are beginning to look like the country's nightmare scenario. The fragile alliance of Sunnis and Shiites in the government is completely collapsing, large-scale violence with a high casualty toll has returned to the capital, and Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki is displaying an authoritarian streak and may be moving to grab the already limited power of the Sunnis.
Al-Maliki's Shiite-led government this week accused Vice President Tariq al-Hashemi, the country's top Sunni political leader, of running a hit squad that targeted government officials five years ago, during the height of sectarian warfare. Authorities put out a warrant for his arrest.
Many Sunnis fear this is part of a wider campaign to go after Sunni political figures in general and shore up Shiite control across the country at a critical time when all American troops have left Iraq.
Because such a large-scale, coordinated attack likely took weeks to plan, and the political crisis erupted only few days ago, the violence was not likely a direct response to the tensions within the government.
Also, Al Qaeda opposed Sunni cooperation in the Shiite-dominated government in the first place and is not aligned with Sunni politicians so does not feel any responsibility to press for any Sunni role in Iraq's power structure.
The Sunni extremist group often attacks Shiites, who they believe are not true Muslims.
U.S. military officials worried about a resurgence of Al Qaeda after their departure. The last American troops left Iraq at dawn Sunday.
Al Qaeda in Iraq is severely debilitated from its previous strength in the early years of the war, but it still has the capability to launch coordinated and deadly assaults from time to time.
The attacks ratchet up tensions at a time when many Iraqis are already deeply worried about security. The real test of whether sectarian warfare returns, however, will be whether Shiite militants are resurgent and return to the type of tit-for-tat attacks seen at the height of sectarian warfare in 2006-2007.
During that fighting, neighborhoods that used to contain a mixture of Shiites and Sunnis were purged entirely of one Muslim sect or another.
Neighbors turned on neighbors in Baghdad, and the result today is city where neighborhoods are much less religiously mixed and sectarian lines are clearly drawn.
Iraqis are already used to horrific levels of violence, but many wondered when they would be able to enjoy some measure of security and stability after years of chaos.
"My baby was sleeping in her bed. Shards of glass have fallen on our heads. Her father hugged her and carried her. She is now scared in the next room," said one woman in western Baghdad who identified herself as Um Hanin. "All countries are stable. Why don't we have security and stability?"
While Baghdad and Iraq have gotten much safer over the years, explosions like Thursday's are still commonplace.
Al-Maliki's tactics are another source of concern, especially for Sunnis. He is also pushing for a vote of no-confidence against another Sunni politician, the deputy prime minister Saleh al-Mutlaq.
Ayad Allawi, who heads a Sunni-backed party called Iraqiya, laid the blame for Thursday's violence with the government. The Iraqiya coalition also includes al-Hashemi and al-Mutlaq, and Allawi has been one of al-Maliki's strongest critics. Allawi warned that violence would continue as long as people are left out of the political process.
"We have warned long ago that terrorism will continue ... against the Iraqi people unless the political landscape is corrected and the political process is corrected, and it becomes an inclusive political process and full blown non-sectarian institutions will be built in Iraq," Allawi told The Associated Press, speaking from neighboring Beirut.
**********
Update 12/17/11 - Al Qaeda Front Group Claims Baghdad Blasts
Extremist Teachings Remain in Saudi Textbooks Despite Kingdom's Claims of Reform
This should come as no surprise. The Saudis are great at giving lip service to the west. They tell us what we want to hear, then go right back to doing things the Wahabbi way. We look the other way because of the oil, and the violent teaching in Saudi schools continues to produce terrorism.
********************
Extremist Teachings Remain in Saudi Textbooks Despite Kingdom's Claims of Reform
By Catherine Herridge
Published December 21, 2011
FoxNews.com
Despite Saudi Arabia's promises to clean up textbooks in the kingdom, recent editions continue to raise alarms in the West over jihadist language.
The recent editions were obtained by the Institute for Gulf Affairs in Washington, D.C., and the translations were first provided to Fox News.
“This is where terrorism starts, in the education system.” Ali Al-Ahmed, director of the Institute for Gulf Affairs, told Fox News. Al-Ahmed, a Saudi national, said the textbooks, made and paid for by the Saudi government, were smuggled out of the kingdom through confidential sources.
In a textbook for 10th-graders, printed for the 2010-2011 academic year, al-Ahmed said teenagers are taught barbaric practices. “They show students how to cut (the) hand and the feet of a thief,” he said. In another textbook, for ninth-graders, the students are taught the annihilation of the Jewish people is imperative. One text reads in part: “The hour (of judgment) will not come until the Muslims fight the Jews and kill them. ... There is a Jew behind me come and kill him.”
According to the textbook translations provided to Fox News, women are described as weak and irresponsible. And al-Ahmed said the textbooks call for homosexuals to be put to death "because they pose a danger at society, as the Saudi school books teaches.”
Al-Ahmed say the textbooks are both a Saudi and an American problem. “If you teach 6 million children in these important years of their lives, if you install that in their brain, no wonder we have so many Saudi suicide bombers.”
After the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, there was an intense focus on Saudi Arabia and its educational teachings because almost all of the attackers were from the kingdom. In 2006, Saudi Ambassador to the U.S. Prince Turki al-Faisal told the Chicago Council on Foreign Relationships that the Saudi king was determined to eradicate this ideology of hate.
“In Saudi Arabia, King Abdullah recognizes that above all else education is the key, and he has put forth a program of reforms in this area," al-Faisal said. "In recent years, the kingdom has reviewed all of its education practices and materials and has removed any element that is inconsistent with the needs of a modern education. Not only have we eliminated what is objectionable from old textbooks that were in our system, we have also implemented a comprehensive internal revision and modernization plan. “
But the new textbooks, most from the 2010-2011 academic year, show the hateful speech remains.
In Atlanta earlier this month, the Saudi minister responsible for the textbooks talked about the importance of education for woman. Asked by Fox News about the textbooks, Prince Faisal Bin Abdullah Al-Saud said, “I always say to people, please come. Come, try to see us. But come without a preconceived idea. ... Especially when you want to raise the future, no one is going to introduce violence. Violence is absolutely against - I think this is, I don't know who put in those ideas.”
When Fox News offered to show the quotes to the minister, he said, “there are many quotes” and walked away.
Fox News also asked the Saudi Embassy in Washington D.C., for comment on the textbooks and the translations, but there was no immediate response.
********************
Extremist Teachings Remain in Saudi Textbooks Despite Kingdom's Claims of Reform
By Catherine Herridge
Published December 21, 2011
FoxNews.com
Despite Saudi Arabia's promises to clean up textbooks in the kingdom, recent editions continue to raise alarms in the West over jihadist language.
The recent editions were obtained by the Institute for Gulf Affairs in Washington, D.C., and the translations were first provided to Fox News.
“This is where terrorism starts, in the education system.” Ali Al-Ahmed, director of the Institute for Gulf Affairs, told Fox News. Al-Ahmed, a Saudi national, said the textbooks, made and paid for by the Saudi government, were smuggled out of the kingdom through confidential sources.
In a textbook for 10th-graders, printed for the 2010-2011 academic year, al-Ahmed said teenagers are taught barbaric practices. “They show students how to cut (the) hand and the feet of a thief,” he said. In another textbook, for ninth-graders, the students are taught the annihilation of the Jewish people is imperative. One text reads in part: “The hour (of judgment) will not come until the Muslims fight the Jews and kill them. ... There is a Jew behind me come and kill him.”
According to the textbook translations provided to Fox News, women are described as weak and irresponsible. And al-Ahmed said the textbooks call for homosexuals to be put to death "because they pose a danger at society, as the Saudi school books teaches.”
Al-Ahmed say the textbooks are both a Saudi and an American problem. “If you teach 6 million children in these important years of their lives, if you install that in their brain, no wonder we have so many Saudi suicide bombers.”
After the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, there was an intense focus on Saudi Arabia and its educational teachings because almost all of the attackers were from the kingdom. In 2006, Saudi Ambassador to the U.S. Prince Turki al-Faisal told the Chicago Council on Foreign Relationships that the Saudi king was determined to eradicate this ideology of hate.
“In Saudi Arabia, King Abdullah recognizes that above all else education is the key, and he has put forth a program of reforms in this area," al-Faisal said. "In recent years, the kingdom has reviewed all of its education practices and materials and has removed any element that is inconsistent with the needs of a modern education. Not only have we eliminated what is objectionable from old textbooks that were in our system, we have also implemented a comprehensive internal revision and modernization plan. “
But the new textbooks, most from the 2010-2011 academic year, show the hateful speech remains.
In Atlanta earlier this month, the Saudi minister responsible for the textbooks talked about the importance of education for woman. Asked by Fox News about the textbooks, Prince Faisal Bin Abdullah Al-Saud said, “I always say to people, please come. Come, try to see us. But come without a preconceived idea. ... Especially when you want to raise the future, no one is going to introduce violence. Violence is absolutely against - I think this is, I don't know who put in those ideas.”
When Fox News offered to show the quotes to the minister, he said, “there are many quotes” and walked away.
Fox News also asked the Saudi Embassy in Washington D.C., for comment on the textbooks and the translations, but there was no immediate response.
Syria: Twin Suicide Bombs Shake Capital
After reading the article, I don't know who is telling the truth and who is responsible, but the "Religion of Peace" has again demonstrated what it is really about - death.
*******************
Syria: Twin Suicide Bombs Shake Capital, 40 Dead
DAMASCUS, Syria – Twin suicide car bomb blasts ripped through an upscale Damascus district Friday, targeting heavily guarded intelligence buildings and killing at least 40 people, Syrian authorities said.
The blasts came a day after an advance team of Arab League observers arrived in the country to monitor Syria's promise to end its crackdown on protesters demanding the ouster of President Bashar Assad. Government officials took the observers to the scene of the explosions and said it backed their longtime claims that the turmoil is not a popular uprising but the work of terrorists.
The blasts were the first such suicide bombing in Syria since the uprising began in March.
"We said it from the beginning, this is terrorism. They are killing the army and civilians," Deputy Foreign Minister Faysal Mekdad told reporters outside the headquarters of the General Intelligence Agency, where bodies still littered the ground. State TV said initial investigations indicated possible involvement by the Al Qaeda terror network.
Alongside him, the head of the observer advance team Sameer Seif el-Yazal said, "We are here to see the facts on the ground... What we are seeing today is regretful, the important thing is for things to calm down."
An opposition leader raised doubts over the authorities' version of the events, suggesting the regime was trying to make its case to the observers.
Omar Idilbi, a member of the Syrian National Council, an umbrella group of regime opponents, called the explosions "very mysterious because they happened in heavily guarded areas that are difficult to be penetrated by a car."
"The presence of the Arab League advance team of observers pushed the regime to give this story in order to scare the committee from moving around Syria," he said, though he stopped short of accusing the regime in the blasts. "The second message is an attempt to make the Arab League and international public opinion believe that Syria is being subjected to acts of terrorism by members of Al Qaeda."
The blasts went off outside the main headquarters of the General Intelligence Agency and a branch of the military intelligence, two of the most powerful of Syria's multiple intelligence bodies.
Outside the two buildings, mutilated and torn bodies lay amid rubble, twisted debris and burned cars in Damascus' upscale Kfar Sousa district. Bystanders and ambulance workers used blankets and stretchers to carry bloodstained bodies into vehicles. All the windows were shattered in the military intelligence building.
The two blasts went off within moments of each other in the morning Friday, a weekend day, echoing across the city.
"The explosions shook the house, it was frightful," said Nidal Hamidi, 34, a Syrian journalist who lives in Kfar Sousa. He said gunfire was heard immediately following the explosion and said apartment windows in a 200-yard (meter) radius from the explosions were shattered.
A military official told reporters that more than 40 people were killed and more than 100 wounded. He spoke to reporters on condition of anonymity in accordance with military rules. Earlier, state TV said the dead were mostly civilians but included military and security personnel.
The blasts came as the Syrian government escalated its crackdown ahead of the arrival Thursday of the Arab League observers. More than 200 were killed in two days this week.
The United Nations says more than 5,000 people have been killed in the crackdown waged since March by the Syrian regime against protesters. With the arrival of Arab observers, the government has been eager to make its case, saying Thursday that 2,000 of its security personnel and soldiers have been killed in the turmoil.
The regime has said the observer team will vindicate its claims that terrorists are behind the violence. Earlier this week, Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem said it is in the interests of Syria for the observers to come and see what is really happening in the country.
Throughout the turmoil, Assad's regime has insisted the uprising is the work of terrorists and armed gangs backed by foreign powers trying to topple the state. It has also warned that the upheaval will throw the country into chaos, religious extremism and sectarian divisions. Assad and his inner circle belong to Syria's Alawite minority, and that community -- a Shiite offshoot -- and minority Christians particularly fear reprisals from the Sunni majority.
Haifa Nashar, a 45-year-old Alawite living in Kfar Sousa, was shocked and wailing and she stood taking in the scene outside the building.
"I've never seen anything like this in my life, may God curse their souls!" she cried. She denounced Qatar, the Arab Gulf nation that has been at the forefront of criticism of Syria and pushed for Arab League sanctions against it.
"This is what Hamad wants," she said, referring to Qatar's prime minister. "There was never any difference between Syrians, Sunnis, Christians and Alawites. But if this is what they want, then I say Alawites before anyone else."
*******************
Syria: Twin Suicide Bombs Shake Capital, 40 Dead
DAMASCUS, Syria – Twin suicide car bomb blasts ripped through an upscale Damascus district Friday, targeting heavily guarded intelligence buildings and killing at least 40 people, Syrian authorities said.
The blasts came a day after an advance team of Arab League observers arrived in the country to monitor Syria's promise to end its crackdown on protesters demanding the ouster of President Bashar Assad. Government officials took the observers to the scene of the explosions and said it backed their longtime claims that the turmoil is not a popular uprising but the work of terrorists.
The blasts were the first such suicide bombing in Syria since the uprising began in March.
"We said it from the beginning, this is terrorism. They are killing the army and civilians," Deputy Foreign Minister Faysal Mekdad told reporters outside the headquarters of the General Intelligence Agency, where bodies still littered the ground. State TV said initial investigations indicated possible involvement by the Al Qaeda terror network.
Alongside him, the head of the observer advance team Sameer Seif el-Yazal said, "We are here to see the facts on the ground... What we are seeing today is regretful, the important thing is for things to calm down."
An opposition leader raised doubts over the authorities' version of the events, suggesting the regime was trying to make its case to the observers.
Omar Idilbi, a member of the Syrian National Council, an umbrella group of regime opponents, called the explosions "very mysterious because they happened in heavily guarded areas that are difficult to be penetrated by a car."
"The presence of the Arab League advance team of observers pushed the regime to give this story in order to scare the committee from moving around Syria," he said, though he stopped short of accusing the regime in the blasts. "The second message is an attempt to make the Arab League and international public opinion believe that Syria is being subjected to acts of terrorism by members of Al Qaeda."
The blasts went off outside the main headquarters of the General Intelligence Agency and a branch of the military intelligence, two of the most powerful of Syria's multiple intelligence bodies.
Outside the two buildings, mutilated and torn bodies lay amid rubble, twisted debris and burned cars in Damascus' upscale Kfar Sousa district. Bystanders and ambulance workers used blankets and stretchers to carry bloodstained bodies into vehicles. All the windows were shattered in the military intelligence building.
The two blasts went off within moments of each other in the morning Friday, a weekend day, echoing across the city.
"The explosions shook the house, it was frightful," said Nidal Hamidi, 34, a Syrian journalist who lives in Kfar Sousa. He said gunfire was heard immediately following the explosion and said apartment windows in a 200-yard (meter) radius from the explosions were shattered.
A military official told reporters that more than 40 people were killed and more than 100 wounded. He spoke to reporters on condition of anonymity in accordance with military rules. Earlier, state TV said the dead were mostly civilians but included military and security personnel.
The blasts came as the Syrian government escalated its crackdown ahead of the arrival Thursday of the Arab League observers. More than 200 were killed in two days this week.
The United Nations says more than 5,000 people have been killed in the crackdown waged since March by the Syrian regime against protesters. With the arrival of Arab observers, the government has been eager to make its case, saying Thursday that 2,000 of its security personnel and soldiers have been killed in the turmoil.
The regime has said the observer team will vindicate its claims that terrorists are behind the violence. Earlier this week, Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem said it is in the interests of Syria for the observers to come and see what is really happening in the country.
Throughout the turmoil, Assad's regime has insisted the uprising is the work of terrorists and armed gangs backed by foreign powers trying to topple the state. It has also warned that the upheaval will throw the country into chaos, religious extremism and sectarian divisions. Assad and his inner circle belong to Syria's Alawite minority, and that community -- a Shiite offshoot -- and minority Christians particularly fear reprisals from the Sunni majority.
Haifa Nashar, a 45-year-old Alawite living in Kfar Sousa, was shocked and wailing and she stood taking in the scene outside the building.
"I've never seen anything like this in my life, may God curse their souls!" she cried. She denounced Qatar, the Arab Gulf nation that has been at the forefront of criticism of Syria and pushed for Arab League sanctions against it.
"This is what Hamad wants," she said, referring to Qatar's prime minister. "There was never any difference between Syrians, Sunnis, Christians and Alawites. But if this is what they want, then I say Alawites before anyone else."
Congress To Fund Massive Expansion Of TSA Checkpoints
The politicians don't get it! This is exactly why We The People fear the government - their never ending expansion of government bureacracy and police power. What will these TSA thugs do to a CCW permittee if they stop you while carrying a legally concealed gun? Because of the NDAA, they can detain you indefinitely if they think you're a terrorist. The other problem, which the socialism loving libtards don't understand, is that $24 million will only create a handful of jobs and a lot more government bureacracy - which is almost impossible to remove once in place.
*********************
Congress To Fund Massive Expansion Of TSA Checkpoints
Fears over burgeoning police state increase after passage of NDAA
Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
Friday, December 23, 2011
Congress is set to give the green light on funding for a massive expansion of TSA checkpoints, with the federal agency already responsible for over 9,000 such checkpoints in the last year amidst increased fears America is turning into a police state following the passage of the ‘indefinite detention’ bill.
The increase in funding has nothing to do with the TSA’s role in airports – this is about creating 12 more VIPR teams to add the federal agency’s 25 units that are already scattered across the country and responsible for manning checkpoints on highways, in bus and train terminals, at sports events and even high school prom nights.
“The TSA’s 25 “viper” teams — for Visible Intermodal Prevention and Response — have run more than 9,300 unannounced checkpoints and other search operations in the last year. Department of Homeland Security officials have asked Congress for funding to add 12 more teams next year,” reports the L.A. Times.
The demand for $24 million in extra funding is in addition to the $110 million spent in fiscal year 2011. The figures are completely independent from the federal agency’s role inside the nation’s airports, which costs taxpayers $5 billion a year.
The extra money is being demanded despite the fact that there is “no proof that the roving viper teams have foiled any terrorist plots or thwarted any major threat to public safety,” according to the L.A. Times report, which also highlights how the TSA’s sniffer dogs are used to single out people for questioning if the dog smells the scent of the owner’s pets on their clothing.
The appearance of thousands more checkpoints on America’s highways and at key transport hubs will only heighten concerns that the country is headed towards a Soviet-style police state.
Such fears were again expressed last week following the passage of the National Authorization Defense Act, a provision of which empowers the government to arrest Americans and hold them in a detention camp with no legal recourse.
With the federal government now seeking contractors to provide staff and supplies for “emergency camps” located around the country, the possibility of innocent Americans being swept up in a dragnet following a declaration of a national emergency has never been more of a threat.
The TSA is being used as a literal occupying army to ensure Americans who travel anywhere are constantly under the scrutiny of Big Brother.
Back in October we reported on how Tennessee’s Homeland Security Commissioner announced that a raft of new “security checkpoints” would be in place over the Halloween period to “keep roadways safe for trick-or-treaters”.
Earlier that same month it was announced that Transportation Security Administration officials would be manning highway checkpoints in Tennessee targeting truck drivers.
After public outrage, the TSA attempted to neutralize the controversy by claiming that the inspections were carried out by State Troopers (the TSA agents were there to try to recruit truck drivers into becoming snitches for the ‘See Something, Say Something’ campaign), and that the checkpoints were merely temporary.
In reality, the program was the latest phase of the TSA’s rapidly expanding VIPR program, under which TSA agents have been deployed to shake down Americans at everywhere from bus depots, to ferry terminals, to train stations, in one instance conducting pat downs of passengers, including children, who had already completed their journey when arriving in Savannah.
*********************
Congress To Fund Massive Expansion Of TSA Checkpoints
Fears over burgeoning police state increase after passage of NDAA
Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
Friday, December 23, 2011
Congress is set to give the green light on funding for a massive expansion of TSA checkpoints, with the federal agency already responsible for over 9,000 such checkpoints in the last year amidst increased fears America is turning into a police state following the passage of the ‘indefinite detention’ bill.
The increase in funding has nothing to do with the TSA’s role in airports – this is about creating 12 more VIPR teams to add the federal agency’s 25 units that are already scattered across the country and responsible for manning checkpoints on highways, in bus and train terminals, at sports events and even high school prom nights.
“The TSA’s 25 “viper” teams — for Visible Intermodal Prevention and Response — have run more than 9,300 unannounced checkpoints and other search operations in the last year. Department of Homeland Security officials have asked Congress for funding to add 12 more teams next year,” reports the L.A. Times.
The demand for $24 million in extra funding is in addition to the $110 million spent in fiscal year 2011. The figures are completely independent from the federal agency’s role inside the nation’s airports, which costs taxpayers $5 billion a year.
The extra money is being demanded despite the fact that there is “no proof that the roving viper teams have foiled any terrorist plots or thwarted any major threat to public safety,” according to the L.A. Times report, which also highlights how the TSA’s sniffer dogs are used to single out people for questioning if the dog smells the scent of the owner’s pets on their clothing.
The appearance of thousands more checkpoints on America’s highways and at key transport hubs will only heighten concerns that the country is headed towards a Soviet-style police state.
Such fears were again expressed last week following the passage of the National Authorization Defense Act, a provision of which empowers the government to arrest Americans and hold them in a detention camp with no legal recourse.
With the federal government now seeking contractors to provide staff and supplies for “emergency camps” located around the country, the possibility of innocent Americans being swept up in a dragnet following a declaration of a national emergency has never been more of a threat.
The TSA is being used as a literal occupying army to ensure Americans who travel anywhere are constantly under the scrutiny of Big Brother.
Back in October we reported on how Tennessee’s Homeland Security Commissioner announced that a raft of new “security checkpoints” would be in place over the Halloween period to “keep roadways safe for trick-or-treaters”.
Earlier that same month it was announced that Transportation Security Administration officials would be manning highway checkpoints in Tennessee targeting truck drivers.
After public outrage, the TSA attempted to neutralize the controversy by claiming that the inspections were carried out by State Troopers (the TSA agents were there to try to recruit truck drivers into becoming snitches for the ‘See Something, Say Something’ campaign), and that the checkpoints were merely temporary.
In reality, the program was the latest phase of the TSA’s rapidly expanding VIPR program, under which TSA agents have been deployed to shake down Americans at everywhere from bus depots, to ferry terminals, to train stations, in one instance conducting pat downs of passengers, including children, who had already completed their journey when arriving in Savannah.
Sunday, December 11, 2011
Shiites Bombed in Afghanistan 12/06/11 Kills 55, Wound 160
Afghan Police Say 55 Killed in Two Separate, Rare Bombings on Shiites
KABUL, Afghanistan – A suicide bomber struck a crowd of Shiite worshippers at a mosque in Kabul on Tuesday, killing at least 55 people in the deadliest of two attacks on a Shiite holy day -- the first major sectarian assaults since the fall of the Taliban a decade ago.
A Sunni militant group based in Pakistan is claiming responsibility for the pair of attacks.
Four Shiites were killed in the northern city of Mazar-i-Sharif when a bomb strapped to a bicycle exploded as a convoy of Afghan Shiites was driving down the road, shouting slogans for the festival known as Ashoura. Health Ministry spokesman Sakhi Kargar gave the death toll and said 21 people also were wounded in that attack.
KABUL, Afghanistan – A suicide bomber struck a crowd of Shiite worshippers at a mosque in Kabul on Tuesday, killing at least 55 people in the deadliest of two attacks on a Shiite holy day -- the first major sectarian assaults since the fall of the Taliban a decade ago.
A Sunni militant group based in Pakistan is claiming responsibility for the pair of attacks.
Four Shiites were killed in the northern city of Mazar-i-Sharif when a bomb strapped to a bicycle exploded as a convoy of Afghan Shiites was driving down the road, shouting slogans for the festival known as Ashoura. Health Ministry spokesman Sakhi Kargar gave the death toll and said 21 people also were wounded in that attack.
#344 of 365 Ways to Drive a Liberal Crazy
Give them another reason why Obama has GOT to go.
NO. 16.
According to NASA administrator Charles Bolden, Obama now thinks it is more appropriate for America's space program to tout the alleged scientific contributions of Islam than it is to push the frontiers of space exploration. Forget about exploring Mars, the purpose of NASA is to raise Muslim self-esteem. Or, as Obama might put it: "Ask not what NASA can do for America's space program, ask what it can do for Islam!"
-- 365 Ways to Drive a Liberal Crazy by James Delingpole
NO. 16.
According to NASA administrator Charles Bolden, Obama now thinks it is more appropriate for America's space program to tout the alleged scientific contributions of Islam than it is to push the frontiers of space exploration. Forget about exploring Mars, the purpose of NASA is to raise Muslim self-esteem. Or, as Obama might put it: "Ask not what NASA can do for America's space program, ask what it can do for Islam!"
-- 365 Ways to Drive a Liberal Crazy by James Delingpole
Sharia Law Deciding American Court Cases
You've heard the warning bells sound on talk radio and from middle-east Christians. You've heard the libtards denounce the warnings as poppycock. Well, almost everything liberals believe and say is a lie, and this article is proof that they're lying about the threat Sharia Law poses to our court system and the very fabric of our Constitutional Republic. The enemy is whithin, and they are using our own system to undermine us. They will destroy the base layer of fabric our society is built on - our Judeo-Christian legal system. The rest will unravel on its own as political correctness reigns and we will be unable to challenge Sharia once it is established. All they need to make this happen are some left-thinking libtards who sympathize with the Moozlum threat. Unfortunately, there are plenty of those already in the system.
Anyone ready for a conservative dictator? One who will make it illegal to be a liberal, to sympathize and aid the enemy, and stop our system from being eaten away from within by the termites? I'm afraid the only thing that can save this nation, other than the grace of God, is a general who can assume power, right the wrongs of 60+ years of liberalism, then return us to a Constitutional Republic with fair elections uninfluenced by unions and foreign money from China and George Soros.
_________________
Sharia Law Deciding American Court Cases
“Shariah Law and American Courts: An Assessment of State Appellate Court Cases,” published by the Center for Security Policy, is one of the most comprehensive studies I have ever seen. It covers more than 600 pages of material. The following summary statement is shocking:
Our findings suggest that Shariah law has entered into state court decisions, in conflict with the Constitution and state public policy. Some commentators have said there are no more than one or two cases of Shariah law in U.S. state court cases; yet we found 50 significant cases just from the small sample of appellate published cases. Others state with certainty that state court judges will always reject any foreign law, including Shariah law, when it conflicts with the Constitution or state public policy; yet we found 15 Trial Court cases, and 12 Appellate Court cases, where Shariah was found to be applicable in the case at bar. The facts are the facts: some judges are making decisions deferring to Shariah law even when those decisions conflict with Constitutional protections. This is a serious issue and should be a subject of public debate and engagement by policymakers.
Once these types of decisions made in American courts become part of published law they can be used as precedent law for future cases. Anyone entering an American court will be bound by decisions made by courts that appeal to these cases.
Law must be based on some transcendental standard. In the past, American law was a blending of biblical and natural law. The Supreme Court cases regarding polygamy demonstrate this fact. But with our new pluralistic attitudes, everything is up for grabs. And because we are trying to accommodate Islam so radicals won’t blow us up, Sharia law is becoming accepted as one legitimate law among many.
This does not mean that Sharia law is the only law the courts are using. International law is the new legal kid on the block. Of course, this would include Sharia. Consider Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s judicial philosophy:
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is acknowledging the growing effect of international law on Supreme Court decisions, particularly in the areas of the death penalty, race admissions and gay sex: “Our island or lone ranger mentality is beginning to change,” Ginsburg said during a speech to the American Constitution Society, a liberal lawyers group holding its first convention. Justices “are becoming more open to comparative and international law perspectives,” said Ginsburg, who has supported a more global view of judicial decision making. Ginsburg cited an international treaty in her vote . . . to uphold the use of race in college admissions.
What makes today’s use of international law attractive to so many judges? Referencing international law gives the appearance of judicial legitimacy. It’s a poor judge’s version of “higher law” which in reality is nothing more than “horizontal law.” One nation appealing to the judicial decisions of another nation is little different from Hugh Hefner asking Larry Flynt what he thinks about pornography.
An Emory University Law School publication noted that the Malak v. Malak case, which involved a Lebanese court decision, was cited as precedent in other Muslim child custody cases.
Atlas Shrugs publisher and Islam analyst Pamela Geller says that Islamic law cited as the basis for any American court decision shows that the American legal system is turning a dangerous corner.
“It is setting a very dangerous precedent. Shariah law and U.S. law conflict in numerous ways, including on issues of freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, and equality of rights for women. Allowing Shariah to be a determining factor in U.S. courtrooms threatens those rights for all of us,” Geller said.
Anyone ready for a conservative dictator? One who will make it illegal to be a liberal, to sympathize and aid the enemy, and stop our system from being eaten away from within by the termites? I'm afraid the only thing that can save this nation, other than the grace of God, is a general who can assume power, right the wrongs of 60+ years of liberalism, then return us to a Constitutional Republic with fair elections uninfluenced by unions and foreign money from China and George Soros.
_________________
Sharia Law Deciding American Court Cases
“Shariah Law and American Courts: An Assessment of State Appellate Court Cases,” published by the Center for Security Policy, is one of the most comprehensive studies I have ever seen. It covers more than 600 pages of material. The following summary statement is shocking:
Our findings suggest that Shariah law has entered into state court decisions, in conflict with the Constitution and state public policy. Some commentators have said there are no more than one or two cases of Shariah law in U.S. state court cases; yet we found 50 significant cases just from the small sample of appellate published cases. Others state with certainty that state court judges will always reject any foreign law, including Shariah law, when it conflicts with the Constitution or state public policy; yet we found 15 Trial Court cases, and 12 Appellate Court cases, where Shariah was found to be applicable in the case at bar. The facts are the facts: some judges are making decisions deferring to Shariah law even when those decisions conflict with Constitutional protections. This is a serious issue and should be a subject of public debate and engagement by policymakers.
Once these types of decisions made in American courts become part of published law they can be used as precedent law for future cases. Anyone entering an American court will be bound by decisions made by courts that appeal to these cases.
Law must be based on some transcendental standard. In the past, American law was a blending of biblical and natural law. The Supreme Court cases regarding polygamy demonstrate this fact. But with our new pluralistic attitudes, everything is up for grabs. And because we are trying to accommodate Islam so radicals won’t blow us up, Sharia law is becoming accepted as one legitimate law among many.
This does not mean that Sharia law is the only law the courts are using. International law is the new legal kid on the block. Of course, this would include Sharia. Consider Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s judicial philosophy:
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is acknowledging the growing effect of international law on Supreme Court decisions, particularly in the areas of the death penalty, race admissions and gay sex: “Our island or lone ranger mentality is beginning to change,” Ginsburg said during a speech to the American Constitution Society, a liberal lawyers group holding its first convention. Justices “are becoming more open to comparative and international law perspectives,” said Ginsburg, who has supported a more global view of judicial decision making. Ginsburg cited an international treaty in her vote . . . to uphold the use of race in college admissions.
What makes today’s use of international law attractive to so many judges? Referencing international law gives the appearance of judicial legitimacy. It’s a poor judge’s version of “higher law” which in reality is nothing more than “horizontal law.” One nation appealing to the judicial decisions of another nation is little different from Hugh Hefner asking Larry Flynt what he thinks about pornography.
An Emory University Law School publication noted that the Malak v. Malak case, which involved a Lebanese court decision, was cited as precedent in other Muslim child custody cases.
Atlas Shrugs publisher and Islam analyst Pamela Geller says that Islamic law cited as the basis for any American court decision shows that the American legal system is turning a dangerous corner.
“It is setting a very dangerous precedent. Shariah law and U.S. law conflict in numerous ways, including on issues of freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, and equality of rights for women. Allowing Shariah to be a determining factor in U.S. courtrooms threatens those rights for all of us,” Geller said.
Wednesday, December 7, 2011
Where Have Our Cojones Gone?
Panzy-ass, politically-correct, libtards. Hell, the first think they teach you in a Krav Maga class is to kick your attacker in the berries! And not just a light tap either. They teach you to kick them up into the attacker's throat! I say the prosecutor who pressed the sexual assault charges is a bully and should be on Mayhem Miller's Bully Beatdown show.
________________
Where Have Our Cojones Gone? by Ben Shapiro
Last week in Boston, a seven-year-old boy named Mark got into a fight with a bully. The bully put his hands around the boy's throat and began to squeeze. That's when Mark fought back; he kicked his aggressor right in the family jewels. In a normal society, we'd celebrate Mark. Throw him a ticker tape parade or something. Bullies need a sharp kick to the testicles. That's how you convince them that bullying is wrong.
But in Boston, Mark was charged with sexual assault.
Just to get this straight: Massachusetts Democrat Barney Frank's gay lover can run a homosexual prostitution ring from his apartment and Frank will not be prosecuted. But a boy kicks a bully in the berries and he faces expulsion from school.
It's not the bully who lost his chestnuts. It's our country.
At some point in the recent past, America moved from the Gilded Age to the Gelded Age. It's no longer considered polite to beat up bullies -- that's simply not "tolerant." All this chatter from the left about the problem of bullying -- Lady Gaga is visiting the White House this week to tell her subordinate, President Obama, what to do about it -- is so much nonsense. The left has no idea how to solve the bullying problem. They treat all violence as equal -- Mark and the bully are on the same moral plane -- and so they recommend counseling and training, as though a little classroom instruction can solve boys' basic biological urge toward aggression.
Have these people ever met little boys?
Apparently not. Lady Gaga has only met her "little monsters," androgynous pantywaists with no distinguishing sexual characteristics. She thinks that homosexual boys are "born this way," but bullies can be changed by a few sensitivity training sessions. The sad truth is that biology can only be overcome by real conditioning, not by nattering. And in the case of bullies, conditioning equals physical violence.
But in our country today, that solution is considered as bad as the problem. The left has instead come up with an alternative solution: eunichism. If male biology drives violence, we have to wash that man right out of the young boys' hair. We will train them not to use toy guns but to play with dolls. We will teach them that heterosexuality and homosexuality are equals, since all sexes are the same. We will teach them that fighting bullies is the same as being a bully. No wonder the left isn't all that upset about female genital mutilation in Muslim countries, they're busily removing the testes of our young boys right here at home.
There's only one problem with this beautiful new world of asexualism: It's idiotic. All we do is train good boys to be pansies; bullies, meanwhile, continue to be bullies. Jerry Sandusky wasn't going to stop raping little boys based on taking a few seminars -- but Mike McQueary was going to avoid reporting that rape to police if he was trained into spinelessness by the surrounding culture. The Muslim Brotherhood isn't going to stop its aggressive pursuit of worldwide Shariah if we offer its members free Lady Gaga tickets and a shopping spree at Sephora. But Western civilization will let them do it if we spend enough time decrying our own aggressive instinct.
The fact is that males' aggressive instinct is good for the world, if channeled properly. Without it, Hitler goes unpunished. Without it, millions continue to starve in the Soviet Union. The key to the aggressive instinct is training it to act along proper moral lines, not eradicating it.
The American people know that down deep. A few months back, a video went viral of a young Sydney boy, Casey Heynes, being bullied by a younger attacker, Richard. Richard punches the much larger Heynes in the face. Then he punches him again. Finally, Heynes can stand it no longer: He picks up Richard and body-slams him to the ground. Richard gets up and wobbles around, off camera. End video.
Elites of the world decried Heynes' behavior. "We don't believe that violence is ever the answer," said John Dalgleish, head of research at Kids Helpline and Boys Town. But tribute sites went up on the Internet to Heynes; videos celebrating his heroics became common fodder. As everyone who has ever faced down a bully knows, the only way to stop a bully is to show him that physical force won't get him anywhere. The only way to show him that is to beat the hell out of him.
We live in a world of bullies. So long as we continue to psychologically castrate our own boys, the bullies of the world will continue winning. We will continue asking why they hate us, and they will continue choking the life out of us. Only if we re-learn to kick them in the cojones rather than removing our own will we emerge victorious.
________________
Where Have Our Cojones Gone? by Ben Shapiro
Last week in Boston, a seven-year-old boy named Mark got into a fight with a bully. The bully put his hands around the boy's throat and began to squeeze. That's when Mark fought back; he kicked his aggressor right in the family jewels. In a normal society, we'd celebrate Mark. Throw him a ticker tape parade or something. Bullies need a sharp kick to the testicles. That's how you convince them that bullying is wrong.
But in Boston, Mark was charged with sexual assault.
Just to get this straight: Massachusetts Democrat Barney Frank's gay lover can run a homosexual prostitution ring from his apartment and Frank will not be prosecuted. But a boy kicks a bully in the berries and he faces expulsion from school.
It's not the bully who lost his chestnuts. It's our country.
At some point in the recent past, America moved from the Gilded Age to the Gelded Age. It's no longer considered polite to beat up bullies -- that's simply not "tolerant." All this chatter from the left about the problem of bullying -- Lady Gaga is visiting the White House this week to tell her subordinate, President Obama, what to do about it -- is so much nonsense. The left has no idea how to solve the bullying problem. They treat all violence as equal -- Mark and the bully are on the same moral plane -- and so they recommend counseling and training, as though a little classroom instruction can solve boys' basic biological urge toward aggression.
Have these people ever met little boys?
Apparently not. Lady Gaga has only met her "little monsters," androgynous pantywaists with no distinguishing sexual characteristics. She thinks that homosexual boys are "born this way," but bullies can be changed by a few sensitivity training sessions. The sad truth is that biology can only be overcome by real conditioning, not by nattering. And in the case of bullies, conditioning equals physical violence.
But in our country today, that solution is considered as bad as the problem. The left has instead come up with an alternative solution: eunichism. If male biology drives violence, we have to wash that man right out of the young boys' hair. We will train them not to use toy guns but to play with dolls. We will teach them that heterosexuality and homosexuality are equals, since all sexes are the same. We will teach them that fighting bullies is the same as being a bully. No wonder the left isn't all that upset about female genital mutilation in Muslim countries, they're busily removing the testes of our young boys right here at home.
There's only one problem with this beautiful new world of asexualism: It's idiotic. All we do is train good boys to be pansies; bullies, meanwhile, continue to be bullies. Jerry Sandusky wasn't going to stop raping little boys based on taking a few seminars -- but Mike McQueary was going to avoid reporting that rape to police if he was trained into spinelessness by the surrounding culture. The Muslim Brotherhood isn't going to stop its aggressive pursuit of worldwide Shariah if we offer its members free Lady Gaga tickets and a shopping spree at Sephora. But Western civilization will let them do it if we spend enough time decrying our own aggressive instinct.
The fact is that males' aggressive instinct is good for the world, if channeled properly. Without it, Hitler goes unpunished. Without it, millions continue to starve in the Soviet Union. The key to the aggressive instinct is training it to act along proper moral lines, not eradicating it.
The American people know that down deep. A few months back, a video went viral of a young Sydney boy, Casey Heynes, being bullied by a younger attacker, Richard. Richard punches the much larger Heynes in the face. Then he punches him again. Finally, Heynes can stand it no longer: He picks up Richard and body-slams him to the ground. Richard gets up and wobbles around, off camera. End video.
Elites of the world decried Heynes' behavior. "We don't believe that violence is ever the answer," said John Dalgleish, head of research at Kids Helpline and Boys Town. But tribute sites went up on the Internet to Heynes; videos celebrating his heroics became common fodder. As everyone who has ever faced down a bully knows, the only way to stop a bully is to show him that physical force won't get him anywhere. The only way to show him that is to beat the hell out of him.
We live in a world of bullies. So long as we continue to psychologically castrate our own boys, the bullies of the world will continue winning. We will continue asking why they hate us, and they will continue choking the life out of us. Only if we re-learn to kick them in the cojones rather than removing our own will we emerge victorious.
What If Tim Tebow Were a Muslim?
What If Tim Tebow Were a Muslim?
Tim Tebow brought the Denver Broncos back from the dead when he took over as quarterback. Denver is 6-1 since Tebow took over in the top spot. In fact, the once beleaguered Broncos are now 7-5 and are the new co-leaders of the AFC West.
Tebow has been maligned by the sports media ever since he landed in the NFL. They declared him “not ready for prime time.” He has repeatedly proved them wrong.
But there is another aspect to Tebow: His Christian faith. More specifically, his understated public display of his Christian faith on and off the field. Jen Floyd Engel asks, “What if Tim Tebow were a Muslim?”
Imagine for a second, the Denver Broncos quarterback is a devout follower of Islam, sincere and principled in his beliefs and thus bowed toward Mecca to celebrate touchdowns. Now imagine if Detroit Lions players Stephen Tulloch and Tony Scheffler mockingly bowed toward Mecca, too, after tackling him for a loss or scoring a touchdown, just like what happened Sunday [to Tebow].
I know what would happen. All hell would break loose.
The “What if Tebow were a Muslim?” question is not that far-fetched. We have a perfect example of a sports figure who is a Muslim, made public displays of his faith, made it part of his very vocal worldview, and is venerated by today’s media. In 1999, he was named Sports Illustrated Sportsman of the Century. His name is Cassius Marcellus Clay, Jr. Many of you who are too young to recognize the name might know him better as Muhammad Ali.
Originally known as Cassius Clay, Ali changed his name after joining the Nation of Islam in 1964, subsequently converting to Sunni Islam in 1975, and more recently practicing Sufism. In 1967, three years after Ali had won the World Heavyweight Championship, he was publicly vilified for his refusal to be conscripted into the U.S. military, based on his religious beliefs and opposition to the Vietnam War. Ali stated, “I ain’t got no quarrel with them Viet Cong… No Viet Cong ever called me nigger” – one of the more telling remarks of the era.
Today, Ali is considered a cultural icon.
The public display of the Christian religion by Tebow controversy is not as heated and controversial as the public displays of the Islamic religion by Muhammad Ali. After his conversion to Islam, Ali would bow toward Mecca and pray in the boxing ring before a bout. Consider this:
Aligning himself with the Nation of Islam made him a lightning rod for controversy, turning the outspoken but popular champion into one of that era’s most recognizable and controversial figures. Appearing at rallies with Nation of Islam leader Elijah Muhammad and declaring his allegiance to him at a time when mainstream America viewed them with suspicion — if not outright hostility — made Ali a target of outrage, as well as suspicion. Ali seemed at times to provoke such reactions, with viewpoints that wavered from support for civil rights to outright support of separatism. For example, Ali once stated, in relation to integration: “We who follow the teachings of Elijah Muhammad don’t want to be forced to integrate. Integration is wrong. We don’t want to live with the white man; that’s all.” And in relation to inter-racial marriage: “No intelligent black man or black woman in his or her right black mind wants white boys and white girls coming to their homes to marry their black sons and daughters.” Indeed, Ali’s religious beliefs at the time included the notion that the white man was “the devil” and that white people were not “righteous.” Ali claimed that white people hated black people.
Compared to the controversy that Ali’s religion brought to sports, Tebow’s is mild. Is there a double standard? Would the sports media make similar negative comments about a sports figure’s Islamic faith? I don’t think so.
Tim Tebow brought the Denver Broncos back from the dead when he took over as quarterback. Denver is 6-1 since Tebow took over in the top spot. In fact, the once beleaguered Broncos are now 7-5 and are the new co-leaders of the AFC West.
Tebow has been maligned by the sports media ever since he landed in the NFL. They declared him “not ready for prime time.” He has repeatedly proved them wrong.
But there is another aspect to Tebow: His Christian faith. More specifically, his understated public display of his Christian faith on and off the field. Jen Floyd Engel asks, “What if Tim Tebow were a Muslim?”
Imagine for a second, the Denver Broncos quarterback is a devout follower of Islam, sincere and principled in his beliefs and thus bowed toward Mecca to celebrate touchdowns. Now imagine if Detroit Lions players Stephen Tulloch and Tony Scheffler mockingly bowed toward Mecca, too, after tackling him for a loss or scoring a touchdown, just like what happened Sunday [to Tebow].
I know what would happen. All hell would break loose.
The “What if Tebow were a Muslim?” question is not that far-fetched. We have a perfect example of a sports figure who is a Muslim, made public displays of his faith, made it part of his very vocal worldview, and is venerated by today’s media. In 1999, he was named Sports Illustrated Sportsman of the Century. His name is Cassius Marcellus Clay, Jr. Many of you who are too young to recognize the name might know him better as Muhammad Ali.
Originally known as Cassius Clay, Ali changed his name after joining the Nation of Islam in 1964, subsequently converting to Sunni Islam in 1975, and more recently practicing Sufism. In 1967, three years after Ali had won the World Heavyweight Championship, he was publicly vilified for his refusal to be conscripted into the U.S. military, based on his religious beliefs and opposition to the Vietnam War. Ali stated, “I ain’t got no quarrel with them Viet Cong… No Viet Cong ever called me nigger” – one of the more telling remarks of the era.
Today, Ali is considered a cultural icon.
The public display of the Christian religion by Tebow controversy is not as heated and controversial as the public displays of the Islamic religion by Muhammad Ali. After his conversion to Islam, Ali would bow toward Mecca and pray in the boxing ring before a bout. Consider this:
Aligning himself with the Nation of Islam made him a lightning rod for controversy, turning the outspoken but popular champion into one of that era’s most recognizable and controversial figures. Appearing at rallies with Nation of Islam leader Elijah Muhammad and declaring his allegiance to him at a time when mainstream America viewed them with suspicion — if not outright hostility — made Ali a target of outrage, as well as suspicion. Ali seemed at times to provoke such reactions, with viewpoints that wavered from support for civil rights to outright support of separatism. For example, Ali once stated, in relation to integration: “We who follow the teachings of Elijah Muhammad don’t want to be forced to integrate. Integration is wrong. We don’t want to live with the white man; that’s all.” And in relation to inter-racial marriage: “No intelligent black man or black woman in his or her right black mind wants white boys and white girls coming to their homes to marry their black sons and daughters.” Indeed, Ali’s religious beliefs at the time included the notion that the white man was “the devil” and that white people were not “righteous.” Ali claimed that white people hated black people.
Compared to the controversy that Ali’s religion brought to sports, Tebow’s is mild. Is there a double standard? Would the sports media make similar negative comments about a sports figure’s Islamic faith? I don’t think so.
Sunday, November 13, 2011
#317 of 365 Ways to Drive A Liberal Crazy
Start a rumor:
White House cutbacks have forced "Counter-terrorism Czar" John Brennan to supplement his meager income by taking on a weekend job as area local branch manager for al Qaeda ( Washington, D.C., chapter). Though he tries his best to avoid any conflict of interest, sometimes the poor guy just can't help himself. Like when he "accidentally" had underwear bomber Farouk Abdulmutallab read his Miranda rights just an hour into questioning; when he made a speech claiming that "Jihad" is a "legitimate tenet of Islam" which means—ahem, nudge, nudge, wink, wink—an "inner struggle for purity"; when he referred to Jerusalem before a Muslim audience as "al Quds," thus legitimizing the (false) assertion that Islam has an originalist claim to the city.
-- 365 Ways to Drive a Liberal Crazy by James Delingpole
White House cutbacks have forced "Counter-terrorism Czar" John Brennan to supplement his meager income by taking on a weekend job as area local branch manager for al Qaeda ( Washington, D.C., chapter). Though he tries his best to avoid any conflict of interest, sometimes the poor guy just can't help himself. Like when he "accidentally" had underwear bomber Farouk Abdulmutallab read his Miranda rights just an hour into questioning; when he made a speech claiming that "Jihad" is a "legitimate tenet of Islam" which means—ahem, nudge, nudge, wink, wink—an "inner struggle for purity"; when he referred to Jerusalem before a Muslim audience as "al Quds," thus legitimizing the (false) assertion that Islam has an originalist claim to the city.
-- 365 Ways to Drive a Liberal Crazy by James Delingpole
Friday, November 11, 2011
The Rising Threat from Nigeria's Boko Haram Militant Group
The Rising Threat from Nigeria's Boko Haram Militant Group by Stuart Scott (STRATFOR article published with permission from STRATFOR)
The U.S. Embassy in Abuja, Nigeria, issued a warning Nov. 5 indicating it had received intelligence that the Nigerian militant group Boko Haram may have been planning to bomb several targets in the Nigerian capital during the Muslim holiday of Eid al-Adha, also known as Eid al-Kabir, celebrated Nov. 6-8. The warning specifically mentioned the Hilton, Nicon Luxury and Sheraton hotels as potential targets.
The warning came in the wake of a string of bombings and armed attacks Nov. 4 in the cities of Maiduguri, Damaturu and Potiskum, all of which are located in Nigeria’s northeast. An attack also occurred in the north-central Nigerian city of Kaduna. The sites targeted in the wave of attacks included a military base in Maiduguri and the anti-terrorism court building in Damaturu. Militants reportedly attacked these two sites with suicide vehicle-borne improvised explosive devices (VBIEDs). The Nigerian Red Cross reported that more than 100 people were killed in the attacks, while some media reports claimed the death toll was at least 150.
According to AFP, a spokesman for Boko Haram claimed responsibility for the attacks Nov. 5 and threatened more attacks targeting the Nigerian government until “security forces stop persecuting our members and vulnerable civilians.” On Nov. 7, a Boko Haram spokesman claimed that his group employed only two suicide operatives in the attacks and not 12 as reported by some media outlets.
Though Eid al-Kabir passed without attacks on Western hotels in Abuja, a deeper examination of Boko Haram is called for, with a specific focus on its rapidly evolving tactical capabilities.
Boko Haram
Boko Haram, which means “Western education is sinful” in Hausa, was established in 2002 in Maiduguri, the capital of Nigeria’s Borno state. It has since spread to several other northern and central Nigerian states. The group officially is known as Jama’atu Ahlis Sunna Lidda’awati wal-Jihad, Arabic for “group committed to propagating the Prophet’s teachings and jihad.” Some in the country have referred to Boko Haram as the Nigerian Taliban in reference to the group’s call for Shariah throughout Nigeria. (At present, only the northern part of the country adheres to Shariah.) In June, a spokesman claiming to represent Boko Haram amended this demand, instead calling for what the group defines as a stricter form of Shariah in the northern Nigerian states where Shariah already is the law.
With approximately 150 million people, Nigeria is the most populous African country and one of the most densely populated countries in the world. It has some 250 distinct ethnic groups, with the dominant groups being the Yoruba, Igbo and Hausa-Fulani, along with a smaller but critical fourth group, the Ijaw. These groups are in constant tension as they attempt to dominate the nation’s politics and the allocation of its natural resources. Approximately half the country is Muslim and half is Christian (though many Nigerians follow traditional religions). As reflected by the adjacent map, which depicts the sites of the Nov. 4 attacks as well as the Nigerian states governed by Shariah, the Muslim population predominates in the north while Christians predominate in the south. The Muslim north is parched and devoid of significant resources (agriculture is the north’s economic mainstay). This contrasts sharply with the economic environment in southern Nigeria, an area that includes Lagos, the country’s vibrant commercial capital and the business hub for much of West Africa, and the Niger Delta region, home to about 90 percent of the country’s large crude oil and natural gas sector.
In addition to ethnic tensions, Nigeria has experienced frequent and intense bursts of sectarian violence between Christians and Muslims, especially in the areas where the two religions overlap, like Jos in the northern tip of Plateau state. This struggle pits the powerful Hausa-Fulani from the north, which tends to be Muslim, against a number of smaller local ethnic groups that tend to be Christian. Indeed, Boko Haram has been involved since its inception in several outbursts of inter-communal violence, including the November 2008 violence that saw some 800 people killed in Jos, the July 2009 violence that saw more than 700 people killed in Jos, and the January 2010 violence in Jos that claimed 450 lives.
Following the July 2009 violence, which brought Boko Haram to the world’s attention, Boko Haram founder Mohammed Yusuf and his deputy, Abubakar Shekau, were both killed. Yusuf died in police custody, allegedly during an escape attempt, though his followers have called his death an extrajudicial execution.
Since the destruction of Boko Haram’s leadership, the exact structure and makeup of the group has been unclear. Boko Haram now seems to lack organizational structure or strong leadership. If the group has any central leadership, it has maintained a very low profile since Yusuf’s killing. It may even be in hiding, possibly in a neighboring country. Mixed messages have emerged from various individuals claiming to speak for Boko Haram. Some figures have come across as more moderate and willing to negotiate, while others have been more strident, rejecting talks. This difference makes it appear that Boko Haram comprises a loose confederation of militants operating relatively independently from one another, rather than a cohesive, hierarchical organization pursuing a unified set of objectives.
Ramping Up
Boko Haram initially was involved mostly in fomenting sectarian violence. Its adherents participated in fairly rudimentary attacks involving clubs, machetes and small arms. By late 2010, the group had added Molotov cocktails and simple improvised explosive devices to its tactical repertoire, as reflected by the series of small IED bombing attacks against Christian targets in Jos on Christmas Eve in 2010.
Boko Haram also conducted a number of armed assaults and small IED attacks in 2011. The IEDs involved in these attacks were small devices either thrown from motorcycles or left at the attack location.
On June 16, Boko Haram made a huge operational leap with the detonation of its first suicide VBIED. The attack was directed against the police headquarters in Abuja. While it proved largely ineffective — security kept the vehicle in a parking lot away from the targeted building — the attack nonetheless represented a significant tactical development in that it demonstrated that Boko Haram had mastered a completely new aspect of terrorist tradecraft. Employing a suicide VBIED is a far cry from throwing a few sticks of dynamite with a piece of time fuse at a police station or leaving a small IED with a crude timer outside a church. The VBIED was also quite sizable; it destroyed some 40 vehicles in the parking lot.
Significantly, the attack occurred outside Boko Haram’s traditional area of activity, proving the group can now project power at least as far as Abuja. Reports emerged in September indicating that Boko Haram was threatening to conduct attacks in the Niger Delta, though these threats have yet to materialize. The Niger Delta is significantly farther from Boko Haram’s base in the north than Abuja, which is in central Nigeria. Distance aside, ethnic and linguistic differences would make it difficult for Boko Haram members to operate in the Delta without being detected.
Recruiting and training a suicide operative who can conduct successful missions when an organization has no history of such operations is no small feat. Frequently, poorly prepared suicide operatives back out of missions. By being able to recruit, indoctrinate and then send out a suicide operative who can complete his mission, Boko Haram enjoys a great deal of operational latitude.
Taken together, these facts illustrate the large operational leap Boko Haram accomplished in 2011. It is very unusual for a militant group to achieve such a significant operational leap absent outside training or assistance. In many past cases, that outside assistance came from state sponsors. For example, the Soviet Union and its allies assisted various Marxist revolutionary groups, Iran and Syria have assisted Hezbollah, and the United States and Pakistan aided the Afghan mujahideen. Non-state actors also have been involved in such training, however, with Hezbollah having taught al Qaeda how to construct large VBIEDs and al Qaeda trainers having taught others how to construct IEDs in their training camps in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
On June 14, 2010, Abu Musab Abd al-Wadoud, the leader of al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), told Al Jazeera that his group would provide Boko Haram with support and weapons to build strategic depth in Africa. We initially viewed the claim with some skepticism, as al-Wadoud had made previous unfounded claims that his group was going to expand. Following that announcement, however, we continued to receive reports that Nigerians associated with Boko Haram had been seen at AQIM training camps in the Sahel and that some of them even had received training from the jihadist group al Shabaab in Somalia.
While we have not received hard confirmation of these reports, we believe that the rapid uptick in Boko Haram’s bombmaking capability provides strong circumstantial evidence that such an interchange did indeed happen between Boko Haram and one, or perhaps both, of those African jihadist groups.
On Aug. 26, Boko Haram conducted a second suicide VBIED attack in Abuja, this time attacking a U.N. compound. This attack proved far more successful than the June attack against the police headquarters. The VBIED driver managed to enter the compound by ramming an exit gate, then maneuvering his vehicle into a parking garage before detonating it. The attack also stands out in that the U.N. compound was located in the diplomatic district of Abuja, where numerous high-profile facilities are located, demonstrating that Boko Haram possessed the ability to spot a soft target amid harder targets like foreign embassies and government buildings. The group’s preoperational surveillance efforts also permitted it to accurately identify a security weakness — the exit gate — which it then successfully exploited. This attack was Boko Haram’s first attack against a transnational target rather than against a government or sectarian target. Boko Haram sees the many U.N. development programs in Nigeria as an affront, as have the various jihadist groups in places like Algeria, Iraq, Somalia, Afghanistan and Pakistan that also have attacked the United Nations because of its programs.
The Hotel Threat
All of this, then, helps us place the recent hotel threat into perspective. While Boko Haram’s attacks against hardened targets largely have proved unsuccessful, the group has clearly displayed the ability to conduct attacks against soft targets in Abuja. It also has demonstrated a desire to hit transnational targets.
As we have previously discussed, measures taken to harden diplomatic facilities have caused militant groups to come to regard hotels as attractive targets. Striking an international hotel in a major city like Abuja would allow militants to make the same kind of statement against the West as they could by striking an embassy. Hotels often are full of Western business travelers, diplomats and intelligence officers. This makes them target-rich environments for militants seeking to kill Westerners and gain international media attention without having to penetrate the extreme security of a hard target like a modern embassy.
While it is possible that the intelligence report referenced by the U.S. Embassy was inaccurate, or a ruse by Boko Haram, someone in Boko Haram quite plausibly was planning such an attack. Jihadist groups have launched multiple attacks against hotels in Jakarta, Indonesia, in July 2009, in the Jordanian capital of Amman in November 2005, and in Sharm el-Sheikh in Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula in July 2005. Even the November 2008 armed assaults in Mumbai targeted multiple hotels. With Boko Haram’s U.N. attack mirroring jihadist attacks against the United Nations elsewhere, the group similarly could be planning to mirror attacks by jihadists against hotels elsewhere.
In the wake of the Nov. 5 U.S. Embassy warning, security has been ramped up around hotels in Abuja and especially around those hotels mentioned as specific targets. Given the long history of violence in Nigeria, Nigerian authorities have gained much experience in dealing with militancy. Their tactics often have been quite brutal. Therefore, we are doubtful that Boko Haram successfully could strike these specific hotels in the immediate future. If, however, the group has prepared VBIEDs for such an operation, they would likely employ them against other, softer targets in the near future. Once a VBIED is prepared, it is vulnerable to detection. Militant groups do not like to leave such devices assembled for very long given the risk of losing such a valuable asset. Instead, VBIEDS tend to be employed shortly after being constructed.
It is quite possible, however, that these hotels will remain on Boko Haram’s target list. The attack plan could be revisited once security around the hotels is reduced or once Boko Haram’s operational leadership evolves to the point that it possesses the sophistication to plan and execute attacks against harder targets.
On Nov. 2, Nigerian authorities claimed to have thwarted a bomb plot planned for the Eid holiday. A man they arrested in connection with the plot allegedly possessed explosives that he planned to use to create package bombs. Whether the man was in any way linked to the string of attacks that occurred Nov. 4 or if he was planning an independent operation remains unknown. At the very least, the arrest did not allow authorities to foil the many attacks executed Nov. 4. The arrest probably resulted from the house-to-house searches in Maiduguri that resumed after an arms amnesty for militants ended Oct. 31. These security operations in Maiduguri have reportedly caused some Boko Haram members to move elsewhere, such as neighboring Yobe state.
While the Nigerian government did uncover a warehouse on the outskirts of Abuja used to construct VBIEDs while investigating the U.N. bombing, Nigerian authorities do not appear to have identified the operational planners and bombmakers responsible for the high-level VBIED attacks, much less arrested them. The longer these individuals are allowed to operate, the more experience they will gain — and the deadlier they will get. It will be important to watch the tactical details of the next Boko Haram attacks for signs that its leadership is maturing as terrorist planners.
The Rising Threat from Nigeria's Boko Haram Militant Group is republished with permission of STRATFOR
Read more: The Rising Threat from Nigeria's Boko Haram Militant Group | STRATFOR
The U.S. Embassy in Abuja, Nigeria, issued a warning Nov. 5 indicating it had received intelligence that the Nigerian militant group Boko Haram may have been planning to bomb several targets in the Nigerian capital during the Muslim holiday of Eid al-Adha, also known as Eid al-Kabir, celebrated Nov. 6-8. The warning specifically mentioned the Hilton, Nicon Luxury and Sheraton hotels as potential targets.
The warning came in the wake of a string of bombings and armed attacks Nov. 4 in the cities of Maiduguri, Damaturu and Potiskum, all of which are located in Nigeria’s northeast. An attack also occurred in the north-central Nigerian city of Kaduna. The sites targeted in the wave of attacks included a military base in Maiduguri and the anti-terrorism court building in Damaturu. Militants reportedly attacked these two sites with suicide vehicle-borne improvised explosive devices (VBIEDs). The Nigerian Red Cross reported that more than 100 people were killed in the attacks, while some media reports claimed the death toll was at least 150.
According to AFP, a spokesman for Boko Haram claimed responsibility for the attacks Nov. 5 and threatened more attacks targeting the Nigerian government until “security forces stop persecuting our members and vulnerable civilians.” On Nov. 7, a Boko Haram spokesman claimed that his group employed only two suicide operatives in the attacks and not 12 as reported by some media outlets.
Though Eid al-Kabir passed without attacks on Western hotels in Abuja, a deeper examination of Boko Haram is called for, with a specific focus on its rapidly evolving tactical capabilities.
Boko Haram
Boko Haram, which means “Western education is sinful” in Hausa, was established in 2002 in Maiduguri, the capital of Nigeria’s Borno state. It has since spread to several other northern and central Nigerian states. The group officially is known as Jama’atu Ahlis Sunna Lidda’awati wal-Jihad, Arabic for “group committed to propagating the Prophet’s teachings and jihad.” Some in the country have referred to Boko Haram as the Nigerian Taliban in reference to the group’s call for Shariah throughout Nigeria. (At present, only the northern part of the country adheres to Shariah.) In June, a spokesman claiming to represent Boko Haram amended this demand, instead calling for what the group defines as a stricter form of Shariah in the northern Nigerian states where Shariah already is the law.
With approximately 150 million people, Nigeria is the most populous African country and one of the most densely populated countries in the world. It has some 250 distinct ethnic groups, with the dominant groups being the Yoruba, Igbo and Hausa-Fulani, along with a smaller but critical fourth group, the Ijaw. These groups are in constant tension as they attempt to dominate the nation’s politics and the allocation of its natural resources. Approximately half the country is Muslim and half is Christian (though many Nigerians follow traditional religions). As reflected by the adjacent map, which depicts the sites of the Nov. 4 attacks as well as the Nigerian states governed by Shariah, the Muslim population predominates in the north while Christians predominate in the south. The Muslim north is parched and devoid of significant resources (agriculture is the north’s economic mainstay). This contrasts sharply with the economic environment in southern Nigeria, an area that includes Lagos, the country’s vibrant commercial capital and the business hub for much of West Africa, and the Niger Delta region, home to about 90 percent of the country’s large crude oil and natural gas sector.
In addition to ethnic tensions, Nigeria has experienced frequent and intense bursts of sectarian violence between Christians and Muslims, especially in the areas where the two religions overlap, like Jos in the northern tip of Plateau state. This struggle pits the powerful Hausa-Fulani from the north, which tends to be Muslim, against a number of smaller local ethnic groups that tend to be Christian. Indeed, Boko Haram has been involved since its inception in several outbursts of inter-communal violence, including the November 2008 violence that saw some 800 people killed in Jos, the July 2009 violence that saw more than 700 people killed in Jos, and the January 2010 violence in Jos that claimed 450 lives.
Following the July 2009 violence, which brought Boko Haram to the world’s attention, Boko Haram founder Mohammed Yusuf and his deputy, Abubakar Shekau, were both killed. Yusuf died in police custody, allegedly during an escape attempt, though his followers have called his death an extrajudicial execution.
Since the destruction of Boko Haram’s leadership, the exact structure and makeup of the group has been unclear. Boko Haram now seems to lack organizational structure or strong leadership. If the group has any central leadership, it has maintained a very low profile since Yusuf’s killing. It may even be in hiding, possibly in a neighboring country. Mixed messages have emerged from various individuals claiming to speak for Boko Haram. Some figures have come across as more moderate and willing to negotiate, while others have been more strident, rejecting talks. This difference makes it appear that Boko Haram comprises a loose confederation of militants operating relatively independently from one another, rather than a cohesive, hierarchical organization pursuing a unified set of objectives.
Ramping Up
Boko Haram initially was involved mostly in fomenting sectarian violence. Its adherents participated in fairly rudimentary attacks involving clubs, machetes and small arms. By late 2010, the group had added Molotov cocktails and simple improvised explosive devices to its tactical repertoire, as reflected by the series of small IED bombing attacks against Christian targets in Jos on Christmas Eve in 2010.
Boko Haram also conducted a number of armed assaults and small IED attacks in 2011. The IEDs involved in these attacks were small devices either thrown from motorcycles or left at the attack location.
On June 16, Boko Haram made a huge operational leap with the detonation of its first suicide VBIED. The attack was directed against the police headquarters in Abuja. While it proved largely ineffective — security kept the vehicle in a parking lot away from the targeted building — the attack nonetheless represented a significant tactical development in that it demonstrated that Boko Haram had mastered a completely new aspect of terrorist tradecraft. Employing a suicide VBIED is a far cry from throwing a few sticks of dynamite with a piece of time fuse at a police station or leaving a small IED with a crude timer outside a church. The VBIED was also quite sizable; it destroyed some 40 vehicles in the parking lot.
Significantly, the attack occurred outside Boko Haram’s traditional area of activity, proving the group can now project power at least as far as Abuja. Reports emerged in September indicating that Boko Haram was threatening to conduct attacks in the Niger Delta, though these threats have yet to materialize. The Niger Delta is significantly farther from Boko Haram’s base in the north than Abuja, which is in central Nigeria. Distance aside, ethnic and linguistic differences would make it difficult for Boko Haram members to operate in the Delta without being detected.
Recruiting and training a suicide operative who can conduct successful missions when an organization has no history of such operations is no small feat. Frequently, poorly prepared suicide operatives back out of missions. By being able to recruit, indoctrinate and then send out a suicide operative who can complete his mission, Boko Haram enjoys a great deal of operational latitude.
Taken together, these facts illustrate the large operational leap Boko Haram accomplished in 2011. It is very unusual for a militant group to achieve such a significant operational leap absent outside training or assistance. In many past cases, that outside assistance came from state sponsors. For example, the Soviet Union and its allies assisted various Marxist revolutionary groups, Iran and Syria have assisted Hezbollah, and the United States and Pakistan aided the Afghan mujahideen. Non-state actors also have been involved in such training, however, with Hezbollah having taught al Qaeda how to construct large VBIEDs and al Qaeda trainers having taught others how to construct IEDs in their training camps in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
On June 14, 2010, Abu Musab Abd al-Wadoud, the leader of al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), told Al Jazeera that his group would provide Boko Haram with support and weapons to build strategic depth in Africa. We initially viewed the claim with some skepticism, as al-Wadoud had made previous unfounded claims that his group was going to expand. Following that announcement, however, we continued to receive reports that Nigerians associated with Boko Haram had been seen at AQIM training camps in the Sahel and that some of them even had received training from the jihadist group al Shabaab in Somalia.
While we have not received hard confirmation of these reports, we believe that the rapid uptick in Boko Haram’s bombmaking capability provides strong circumstantial evidence that such an interchange did indeed happen between Boko Haram and one, or perhaps both, of those African jihadist groups.
On Aug. 26, Boko Haram conducted a second suicide VBIED attack in Abuja, this time attacking a U.N. compound. This attack proved far more successful than the June attack against the police headquarters. The VBIED driver managed to enter the compound by ramming an exit gate, then maneuvering his vehicle into a parking garage before detonating it. The attack also stands out in that the U.N. compound was located in the diplomatic district of Abuja, where numerous high-profile facilities are located, demonstrating that Boko Haram possessed the ability to spot a soft target amid harder targets like foreign embassies and government buildings. The group’s preoperational surveillance efforts also permitted it to accurately identify a security weakness — the exit gate — which it then successfully exploited. This attack was Boko Haram’s first attack against a transnational target rather than against a government or sectarian target. Boko Haram sees the many U.N. development programs in Nigeria as an affront, as have the various jihadist groups in places like Algeria, Iraq, Somalia, Afghanistan and Pakistan that also have attacked the United Nations because of its programs.
The Hotel Threat
All of this, then, helps us place the recent hotel threat into perspective. While Boko Haram’s attacks against hardened targets largely have proved unsuccessful, the group has clearly displayed the ability to conduct attacks against soft targets in Abuja. It also has demonstrated a desire to hit transnational targets.
As we have previously discussed, measures taken to harden diplomatic facilities have caused militant groups to come to regard hotels as attractive targets. Striking an international hotel in a major city like Abuja would allow militants to make the same kind of statement against the West as they could by striking an embassy. Hotels often are full of Western business travelers, diplomats and intelligence officers. This makes them target-rich environments for militants seeking to kill Westerners and gain international media attention without having to penetrate the extreme security of a hard target like a modern embassy.
While it is possible that the intelligence report referenced by the U.S. Embassy was inaccurate, or a ruse by Boko Haram, someone in Boko Haram quite plausibly was planning such an attack. Jihadist groups have launched multiple attacks against hotels in Jakarta, Indonesia, in July 2009, in the Jordanian capital of Amman in November 2005, and in Sharm el-Sheikh in Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula in July 2005. Even the November 2008 armed assaults in Mumbai targeted multiple hotels. With Boko Haram’s U.N. attack mirroring jihadist attacks against the United Nations elsewhere, the group similarly could be planning to mirror attacks by jihadists against hotels elsewhere.
In the wake of the Nov. 5 U.S. Embassy warning, security has been ramped up around hotels in Abuja and especially around those hotels mentioned as specific targets. Given the long history of violence in Nigeria, Nigerian authorities have gained much experience in dealing with militancy. Their tactics often have been quite brutal. Therefore, we are doubtful that Boko Haram successfully could strike these specific hotels in the immediate future. If, however, the group has prepared VBIEDs for such an operation, they would likely employ them against other, softer targets in the near future. Once a VBIED is prepared, it is vulnerable to detection. Militant groups do not like to leave such devices assembled for very long given the risk of losing such a valuable asset. Instead, VBIEDS tend to be employed shortly after being constructed.
It is quite possible, however, that these hotels will remain on Boko Haram’s target list. The attack plan could be revisited once security around the hotels is reduced or once Boko Haram’s operational leadership evolves to the point that it possesses the sophistication to plan and execute attacks against harder targets.
On Nov. 2, Nigerian authorities claimed to have thwarted a bomb plot planned for the Eid holiday. A man they arrested in connection with the plot allegedly possessed explosives that he planned to use to create package bombs. Whether the man was in any way linked to the string of attacks that occurred Nov. 4 or if he was planning an independent operation remains unknown. At the very least, the arrest did not allow authorities to foil the many attacks executed Nov. 4. The arrest probably resulted from the house-to-house searches in Maiduguri that resumed after an arms amnesty for militants ended Oct. 31. These security operations in Maiduguri have reportedly caused some Boko Haram members to move elsewhere, such as neighboring Yobe state.
While the Nigerian government did uncover a warehouse on the outskirts of Abuja used to construct VBIEDs while investigating the U.N. bombing, Nigerian authorities do not appear to have identified the operational planners and bombmakers responsible for the high-level VBIED attacks, much less arrested them. The longer these individuals are allowed to operate, the more experience they will gain — and the deadlier they will get. It will be important to watch the tactical details of the next Boko Haram attacks for signs that its leadership is maturing as terrorist planners.
The Rising Threat from Nigeria's Boko Haram Militant Group is republished with permission of STRATFOR
Read more: The Rising Threat from Nigeria's Boko Haram Militant Group | STRATFOR
Saturday, November 5, 2011
New Charges Surface Against Moozlum Professor
New Charges Surface Against Muslim Professor by Mike Adams
Dear Governor Kasich (http://governor.ohio.gov/):
It has been awhile since we talked about the case of Julio Pino – a tenured member of the faculty of Kent State University. Shortly after I last wrote to you there was a Secret Service raid on his home. The raid was meant to ensure that certain veiled threats directed to the Obama White House were not a prelude to some planned act of violence. I thank you for any role you may have played in helping alert the federal authorities.
As you may know, Pino is continuing to cause substantial problems in Ohio. I recently received a letter from a Jewish student at Kent State who was concerned after Pino created a scene at an event cosponsored by Hillel. (You may have heard of the incident in question but please read this letter in its entirety. It contains new allegations you may find disturbing).
Student members of Hillel have elected to take action with the help of some other leaders on campus. They are not satisfied with the way the University appears to be handling the situation. Not enough is being done to deal with a professor who has resorted to using intimidation to advance his own personal jihad against others including Jewish students.
Some examples of anti-Semitic intimidation of students include the following:
1. Professor Pino calling a Jewish student who had served in the Israeli Army “his favorite war criminal” and;
2. Telling another Jewish student that “because you are Jewish, you will burn in hell.”
This second allegation is particularly problematic because it allegedly occurred in class with a student under his supervision. It is also particularly problematic because the university refuses to investigate the incident. The targeted Jewish student has reported the incident to officials at Kent State. But no investigation has been launched. Nor do Kent State officials seem to know the status of the report filed by the student.
It bears repeating: Kent State knows Julio Pino has been accused of telling a Jewish student – in class, mind you – that he will “burn in hell” simply because he is Jewish. And they refuse to investigate Pino.
Governor Kasich, I am asking for your help. I want your office to order the investigation of Pino to begin immediately. If action is not taken against Professor Pino, this will not only set the bar for the acceptance of anti-Semitism on campus, but it also will open the door for others at Kent State and around the country to abuse their positions as educators to whom students open their minds.
In other words, we can ignore what Professor Pino does outside the classroom but not what he does inside the classroom. That is not to dismiss the severity of Pino’s off-campus conduct. After all, he posted bomb-making instructions on a terrorist website during a time of war. And he specifically called for the weapons to be used against U.S. troops. But that is an issue for the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security. Ohio taxpayers have specific interests the federal government does not – such as combating religious harassment in state-supported classrooms.
Indeed, many members of the Kent State student body want to make sure Professor Pino is held accountable in accordance with the severity of his words and deeds. Students are enraged at this situation, and so are many Ohio taxpayers who are funding this Professor’s in-class bigotry. I hope that you can offer your insight and support, given your knowledge of Professor Pino’s previous actions.
Thank you so much,
Mike S. Adams
p.s. It has now been eighteen months since Professor Pino was investigated on allegations that he sent an email from his office using his university account (jpino@kent.edu) saying the following: “I (expletive) your mother up her greasy (expletive) and (expletive) when you aren’t looking.” Pino’s defense is that his computer account was hacked. The university has not yet concluded the investigation. In other words, it appears that they really did not investigate Pino.
p.p.s. I was the recipient of the aforementioned email and can provide a copy to the Governor’s Office upon request.
Dear Governor Kasich (http://governor.ohio.gov/):
It has been awhile since we talked about the case of Julio Pino – a tenured member of the faculty of Kent State University. Shortly after I last wrote to you there was a Secret Service raid on his home. The raid was meant to ensure that certain veiled threats directed to the Obama White House were not a prelude to some planned act of violence. I thank you for any role you may have played in helping alert the federal authorities.
As you may know, Pino is continuing to cause substantial problems in Ohio. I recently received a letter from a Jewish student at Kent State who was concerned after Pino created a scene at an event cosponsored by Hillel. (You may have heard of the incident in question but please read this letter in its entirety. It contains new allegations you may find disturbing).
Student members of Hillel have elected to take action with the help of some other leaders on campus. They are not satisfied with the way the University appears to be handling the situation. Not enough is being done to deal with a professor who has resorted to using intimidation to advance his own personal jihad against others including Jewish students.
Some examples of anti-Semitic intimidation of students include the following:
1. Professor Pino calling a Jewish student who had served in the Israeli Army “his favorite war criminal” and;
2. Telling another Jewish student that “because you are Jewish, you will burn in hell.”
This second allegation is particularly problematic because it allegedly occurred in class with a student under his supervision. It is also particularly problematic because the university refuses to investigate the incident. The targeted Jewish student has reported the incident to officials at Kent State. But no investigation has been launched. Nor do Kent State officials seem to know the status of the report filed by the student.
It bears repeating: Kent State knows Julio Pino has been accused of telling a Jewish student – in class, mind you – that he will “burn in hell” simply because he is Jewish. And they refuse to investigate Pino.
Governor Kasich, I am asking for your help. I want your office to order the investigation of Pino to begin immediately. If action is not taken against Professor Pino, this will not only set the bar for the acceptance of anti-Semitism on campus, but it also will open the door for others at Kent State and around the country to abuse their positions as educators to whom students open their minds.
In other words, we can ignore what Professor Pino does outside the classroom but not what he does inside the classroom. That is not to dismiss the severity of Pino’s off-campus conduct. After all, he posted bomb-making instructions on a terrorist website during a time of war. And he specifically called for the weapons to be used against U.S. troops. But that is an issue for the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security. Ohio taxpayers have specific interests the federal government does not – such as combating religious harassment in state-supported classrooms.
Indeed, many members of the Kent State student body want to make sure Professor Pino is held accountable in accordance with the severity of his words and deeds. Students are enraged at this situation, and so are many Ohio taxpayers who are funding this Professor’s in-class bigotry. I hope that you can offer your insight and support, given your knowledge of Professor Pino’s previous actions.
Thank you so much,
Mike S. Adams
p.s. It has now been eighteen months since Professor Pino was investigated on allegations that he sent an email from his office using his university account (jpino@kent.edu) saying the following: “I (expletive) your mother up her greasy (expletive) and (expletive) when you aren’t looking.” Pino’s defense is that his computer account was hacked. The university has not yet concluded the investigation. In other words, it appears that they really did not investigate Pino.
p.p.s. I was the recipient of the aforementioned email and can provide a copy to the Governor’s Office upon request.
US Marines Taught to Act Like Moozlums
Are you F****** kidding me!!! The USMC Center for Advanced Operational Culture Learning is mandating that our troops follow Sharia law and act like Moozlums by not spitting or urinating in the direction of Mecca. They can't even let their boots point towards the Moozlum holy of holies when they sleep! Talk about being politically incorrect! As usual, our government and diplodunks have it completely backwards. We should be teaching our troops to piss toward Mecca (and preferably on it) every chance they get. We cannot win the hearts and minds of radical Moozlums. We can only make the world safe by killing them. After 10 years of fighting it is also pretty obvious that we can't win the hearts and minds of moderate Moozlums either. Nothing we do is pleasing to these people. We're in a religious war, a war of ideology that we cannot win, because the enemy will not abandon their ideology. They will beat us because our own leaders insist that we honor their ideology. Diplodunks must be the most stupid people on the planet. They're devoid of common sense and playing right into the hands of the caliphate.
Silly diplodunks, Tricks are for Moozlums.
_________________
Marines Warned: Don't Spit Toward Mecca by Diane West
Uncle Sam is getting a little weird. Make that a lot weird. Having dumped hundreds of billions of dollars into a sinkhole called Afghanistan -- populated by misogynistic, pederastic, tribalistic and religiously supremacist primitives -- to no avail, he has hit on a new plan for winning those ever-elusive Afghan "hearts and minds."
Uncle Sam has decided that the answer lies in the latrine with the U.S. Marine Corps. No kidding. When nature calls, Uncle Sam has decided he wants every U.S. Marine equipped with a map and compass, or some other way of knowing direction. This is to ensure that no U.S. Marine in Afghanistan urinates in the direction of Mecca ever again.
Now, there's a winning strategy.
It's still OK, of course, to spread baksheesh (payola) indiscriminately, chase jihadis into twisting mountain gorges, clear any road laced with improvised explosives - blow up, even, and bleed all over the place. Just make sure your sense of direction is sharp when it really counts.
Take spitting. According to an article in the North County Times, the word is: Ix-nay on itting-spay toward ecca-May, guys. If there's a pinch between teeth and gum while you're hiding out in a cold valley, figure out where Mecca is (2,000 miles away) before letting anything out of your mouth. Oh, and when it's time to catch some shut-eye "when sharing a base with Afghan army troops" - if you can sleep, given the frightening odds an Afghan National Army soldier might turn his gun on you - don't, whatever you do, let your combat boots point toward you-know-where.
That would be "culturally insensitive" and, therefore, it seems, worse than anything Afghani (or Pakistani) jihadist butchers might do (beheadings, rape) because they, as Muslims, are automatically "culturally sensitive." Apparently to compensate, senior Pentagon brass created something called the USMC Center for Advanced Operational Culture Learning to teach Marines to exist in the Islamically approved fashion.
When Marines learn not to excrete in the direction of Mecca - home of the black cube known as the Kaaba - and not to sleep with their boots toward Mecca, what are they really learning? They are learning to become intensely sensitized to the whereabouts of Mecca; how to be guided by that magnetic north for Muslims as a matter of the most personal habits and hygiene, all in accordance with Shariah (Islamic law). They are learning to act like Muslims.
If you can't beat 'em, join 'em?
Such "culture learning" blends seamlessly with an International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) guidance to all troops in Afghanistan to revere the Quran and its teachings. That's the unmistakable message of COIN Advisory #20100924-001, which I found on the ISAF website.
"Never talk badly about the Quran or its contents," says the guidance, a no-nonsense formulation of Islamic prohibitions against any criticism of Islam. Touching it is out, too. "It is considered culturally insensitive for any non-Muslim to touch a copy of the Quran," ISAF explains. Why that is indeed the Islamic case, ISAF doesn't explain. Presumably, it might upset troops to learn that this injunction exists because Muslims consider non-Muslim "najis," or unclean, and thus unfit to touch their religious book. Before searching people, ISAF advises, "ask them if they have a Quran or religious item present. If so, ask them to remove it or put it in a suitable place before conducting the search."
Think the Navy SEALs who zapped Osama bin Laden asked him to put his Quran in a "suitable place" first? We can only hope.
Of course, there's more: "Additionally," ISAF continues, "verbal disrespect for Islam and/or the Quran is considered as inappropriate as physical desecration of the Quran. Insulting the Quran is an act of blasphemy."
The way Islam treats women stinks = verbal disrespect for Islam. The verses of the Quran that call for jihad against infidels are heinous = insulting the Quran. But ISAF, veritable mouthpiece of the coming caliphate, deems such talk "inappropriate" and outright "blasphemy." This might win the generals an extra cushion at the foot of the caliph's throne, but, as the Marines are learning in their Culture Learning classes, they'll have to drink all their chai and finish their goat, first.
Silly diplodunks, Tricks are for Moozlums.
_________________
Marines Warned: Don't Spit Toward Mecca by Diane West
Uncle Sam is getting a little weird. Make that a lot weird. Having dumped hundreds of billions of dollars into a sinkhole called Afghanistan -- populated by misogynistic, pederastic, tribalistic and religiously supremacist primitives -- to no avail, he has hit on a new plan for winning those ever-elusive Afghan "hearts and minds."
Uncle Sam has decided that the answer lies in the latrine with the U.S. Marine Corps. No kidding. When nature calls, Uncle Sam has decided he wants every U.S. Marine equipped with a map and compass, or some other way of knowing direction. This is to ensure that no U.S. Marine in Afghanistan urinates in the direction of Mecca ever again.
Now, there's a winning strategy.
It's still OK, of course, to spread baksheesh (payola) indiscriminately, chase jihadis into twisting mountain gorges, clear any road laced with improvised explosives - blow up, even, and bleed all over the place. Just make sure your sense of direction is sharp when it really counts.
Take spitting. According to an article in the North County Times, the word is: Ix-nay on itting-spay toward ecca-May, guys. If there's a pinch between teeth and gum while you're hiding out in a cold valley, figure out where Mecca is (2,000 miles away) before letting anything out of your mouth. Oh, and when it's time to catch some shut-eye "when sharing a base with Afghan army troops" - if you can sleep, given the frightening odds an Afghan National Army soldier might turn his gun on you - don't, whatever you do, let your combat boots point toward you-know-where.
That would be "culturally insensitive" and, therefore, it seems, worse than anything Afghani (or Pakistani) jihadist butchers might do (beheadings, rape) because they, as Muslims, are automatically "culturally sensitive." Apparently to compensate, senior Pentagon brass created something called the USMC Center for Advanced Operational Culture Learning to teach Marines to exist in the Islamically approved fashion.
When Marines learn not to excrete in the direction of Mecca - home of the black cube known as the Kaaba - and not to sleep with their boots toward Mecca, what are they really learning? They are learning to become intensely sensitized to the whereabouts of Mecca; how to be guided by that magnetic north for Muslims as a matter of the most personal habits and hygiene, all in accordance with Shariah (Islamic law). They are learning to act like Muslims.
If you can't beat 'em, join 'em?
Such "culture learning" blends seamlessly with an International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) guidance to all troops in Afghanistan to revere the Quran and its teachings. That's the unmistakable message of COIN Advisory #20100924-001, which I found on the ISAF website.
"Never talk badly about the Quran or its contents," says the guidance, a no-nonsense formulation of Islamic prohibitions against any criticism of Islam. Touching it is out, too. "It is considered culturally insensitive for any non-Muslim to touch a copy of the Quran," ISAF explains. Why that is indeed the Islamic case, ISAF doesn't explain. Presumably, it might upset troops to learn that this injunction exists because Muslims consider non-Muslim "najis," or unclean, and thus unfit to touch their religious book. Before searching people, ISAF advises, "ask them if they have a Quran or religious item present. If so, ask them to remove it or put it in a suitable place before conducting the search."
Think the Navy SEALs who zapped Osama bin Laden asked him to put his Quran in a "suitable place" first? We can only hope.
Of course, there's more: "Additionally," ISAF continues, "verbal disrespect for Islam and/or the Quran is considered as inappropriate as physical desecration of the Quran. Insulting the Quran is an act of blasphemy."
The way Islam treats women stinks = verbal disrespect for Islam. The verses of the Quran that call for jihad against infidels are heinous = insulting the Quran. But ISAF, veritable mouthpiece of the coming caliphate, deems such talk "inappropriate" and outright "blasphemy." This might win the generals an extra cushion at the foot of the caliph's throne, but, as the Marines are learning in their Culture Learning classes, they'll have to drink all their chai and finish their goat, first.
Sunday, October 30, 2011
Creeping Sharia
This content is from an ACT! for America email that I received. Once again, evidence that the Moozlums are not hiding their attempts to use our tolerance, political correctness and laws against us in their religious war:
Muslim leaders urge DOJ to criminalize criticism of Islam!
Please sign the petition to protect your state from sharia law
A particularly dangerous and noxious doctrine within sharia law is the prohibition against “blasphemy” or “defamation” of Islam and the prophet Mohammed.
This is a direct affront to our cherished first amendment right of free speech, as it silences any critique or criticism of Islam.
European countries are already prosecuting people for “hate speech” against Islam, in effect implementing the sharia prohibition. ACT! for America chapter leader Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff is one of those people. Canada’s Human Rights Commission went after author Mark Steyn. Could this eventually happen in the U.S.?
Consider the latest. Some Muslim leaders, including the head of ISNA (Islamic Society of North America, a Muslim Brotherhood front organization), recently urged Department of Justice officials to take steps to criminalize criticism of Islam (see article below, highlights added). They are calling criticism of Islam “discrimination” and “racist.”
Couple this with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s apparent recent embrace of the OIC (Organization of the Islamic Conference) push for a UN resolution calling for governments to criminalize defamation of religion.
This is serious folks! Can you see why we are putting so much emphasis on combating sharia law? They’re trying to confiscate our first amendment rights!!
You can help us fight back by signing the pledge of support to stop sharia in your state. If you haven’t yet done so, please do so today! Acting today could well protect your right to act tomorrow.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Muslims tell DOJ to find a way to crimalize criticism of Islam!
Posted on October 24, 2011
http://creepingsharia.wordpress.com/2011/10/24/muslims-tell-doj-to-find-a-way-to-crimalize-criticism-of-islam/
And cut back anti-terror funding amongst other things. Neil Munro with a very disturbing piece with absolutely unimaginable consequences when it becomes reality. And it will if we the People do not start protecting our freedoms.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Top Justice Department officials convened a meeting Wednesday where invited Islamist advocates lobbied them for cutbacks in anti-terror funding, changes in agents’ training manuals, additional curbs on investigators and a legal declaration that U.S. citizens’ criticism of Islam constitutes racial discrimination.
The department’s “civil rights lawyers are top of the line — I say this with utter honesty — I know they can come up with a way” to redefine criticism as discrimination, said Sahar Aziz, a female, Egyptian-American lawyer.
“I’d be willing to give a shot at it,” said Aziz, who is a fellow at the Michigan-based Muslim advocacy group, the Institute for Social Policy & Understanding.
The audience of Islamist advocates and department officials included Tom Perez, who heads the department’s division of civil rights.
“We must continue to have the open and honest and critical dialogue that you saw in the robust debate,” Perez responded in an enthusiastic closing speech a few minutes after Aziz made her demands at the event.
“I sat here the entire time, taking notes,” Perez said. “I have some very concrete thoughts … in the aftermath of this.”
The meeting at George Washington University showcased the expanding alliance between American progressives and Islamists, said Andrew McCarthy, a former federal prosecutor in New York.
Progressives “are making these Islamist groups into the [political] representatives of Muslims in the United States,” he told The Daily Caller. That elevation of Islamists to a leadership role sidelines the majority of American Muslims who don’t want Islamist leaders, as well as American Muslims who are female or gay, he said.
McCarthy investigated and prosecuted Egyptian-born Imam Omar Abdel-Rahman, dubbed “the blind sheik,” for urging Muslims to kill New Yorkers. Abdel-Rahman was sentenced to life imprisonment in 1996.
Progressives ally with the Islamic lobby because “they think it will be a political voting bloc that will be reliably Democratic,” said Robert Spencer, an author and expert on Islam.
None of the Islamist advocates of civil rights officials in attendance, including Perez, objected to Aziz’s call for free-speech restrictions.
The event did not include Zuhdi Jasser, an Arizona Muslim, former naval officer and a co-founder of a coalition of modernist Muslim groups, the American Islamic Leadership Coalition. “The Islamist groups’ victimology feeds into the left’s propaganda that the right is anti-minority and anti-Muslim, so there’s a mutual political benefit there,” said Jasser, who clashes with Spencer over rival responses to the Islamist groups.
Nor did the conference include any influential critics, such as McCarthy and Spencer, who argue that Islamist terror attacks are partly motivated by Islamic texts. These texts include the Koran’s verse 9:5, which says “when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them.”
Aziz, however, used her invitation to argue that Americans’ fear of Islamists’ bombs has evolved into racism towards dark-skinned men.
The word “Muslim,” she said, “has become racialized. … I don’t accept this formalistic cop-out that this is all about religion.”
Aziz did not offer any evidence for her claim, which she said justifies the use of Title VI anti-discrimination laws against institutions and individuals who argue that Islamic texts spur Islamic violence.
This legal redefinition, she said, would also “take [federal] money away from local police departments and fusion centers who are spying on all of us.”
Aziz also argued against the commonplace police practice of informally talking with people in communities, including Muslim communities. “This has been a real problem with this outreach stuff,” she said. Muslims “are acting in good faith, and then they find their imams, who were going to outreach meetings, were being spied on,” she complained. “Some have been deported. Some have been prosecuted.”
In March, Afghan-born New York Imam Ahmad Wais Afzali was ordered deported after he admitted he lied to the FBI about warning a suspected Muslim terrorist that he was being investigated. That terrorist, Najibullah Zazi, admitted that he was planning to place bombs in the New York City subway. The imam learned about the investigation because he had offered to work with local police to help identify potential terrorists in his congregation.
“People are going in good faith” to talk with police, Aziz said. “They’re being very honest about what their grievances are. They’re telling the government, ‘This what we want you to do … [and] we want you not to spy on our community.’”
Dwight Holton, a Justice Department legal counsel based in Oregon, said the threat of criminal gangs or terror attacks justifies routine police contacts with locals. “When we go to a barber shop to talk to the community, we don’t tell them you can have a lawyer,” he said.
“You should,” Aziz immediately replied.
Aziz’s advocacy was supported by a second Islamist advocate, Islamic Society of North America president Mohamed Magid. He argued that “teaching people that all Muslims are a threat to the country… is against the law and the Constitution.” [Editor’s note: no one we know of, including ACT! for America, is teaching that “all Muslims are a threat to the country.”]
Magid asked Perez to change the federal government’s rules governing terror investigations, for more private meetings with top justice department officials, for the reeducation of FBI agents, and for more people to oppose criticism of Islam, which he labelled “religious bigotry and hate.”
[CONTINUE READING FULL ARTICLE HERE]
Muslim leaders urge DOJ to criminalize criticism of Islam!
Please sign the petition to protect your state from sharia law
A particularly dangerous and noxious doctrine within sharia law is the prohibition against “blasphemy” or “defamation” of Islam and the prophet Mohammed.
This is a direct affront to our cherished first amendment right of free speech, as it silences any critique or criticism of Islam.
European countries are already prosecuting people for “hate speech” against Islam, in effect implementing the sharia prohibition. ACT! for America chapter leader Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff is one of those people. Canada’s Human Rights Commission went after author Mark Steyn. Could this eventually happen in the U.S.?
Consider the latest. Some Muslim leaders, including the head of ISNA (Islamic Society of North America, a Muslim Brotherhood front organization), recently urged Department of Justice officials to take steps to criminalize criticism of Islam (see article below, highlights added). They are calling criticism of Islam “discrimination” and “racist.”
Couple this with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s apparent recent embrace of the OIC (Organization of the Islamic Conference) push for a UN resolution calling for governments to criminalize defamation of religion.
This is serious folks! Can you see why we are putting so much emphasis on combating sharia law? They’re trying to confiscate our first amendment rights!!
You can help us fight back by signing the pledge of support to stop sharia in your state. If you haven’t yet done so, please do so today! Acting today could well protect your right to act tomorrow.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Muslims tell DOJ to find a way to crimalize criticism of Islam!
Posted on October 24, 2011
http://creepingsharia.wordpress.com/2011/10/24/muslims-tell-doj-to-find-a-way-to-crimalize-criticism-of-islam/
And cut back anti-terror funding amongst other things. Neil Munro with a very disturbing piece with absolutely unimaginable consequences when it becomes reality. And it will if we the People do not start protecting our freedoms.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Top Justice Department officials convened a meeting Wednesday where invited Islamist advocates lobbied them for cutbacks in anti-terror funding, changes in agents’ training manuals, additional curbs on investigators and a legal declaration that U.S. citizens’ criticism of Islam constitutes racial discrimination.
The department’s “civil rights lawyers are top of the line — I say this with utter honesty — I know they can come up with a way” to redefine criticism as discrimination, said Sahar Aziz, a female, Egyptian-American lawyer.
“I’d be willing to give a shot at it,” said Aziz, who is a fellow at the Michigan-based Muslim advocacy group, the Institute for Social Policy & Understanding.
The audience of Islamist advocates and department officials included Tom Perez, who heads the department’s division of civil rights.
“We must continue to have the open and honest and critical dialogue that you saw in the robust debate,” Perez responded in an enthusiastic closing speech a few minutes after Aziz made her demands at the event.
“I sat here the entire time, taking notes,” Perez said. “I have some very concrete thoughts … in the aftermath of this.”
The meeting at George Washington University showcased the expanding alliance between American progressives and Islamists, said Andrew McCarthy, a former federal prosecutor in New York.
Progressives “are making these Islamist groups into the [political] representatives of Muslims in the United States,” he told The Daily Caller. That elevation of Islamists to a leadership role sidelines the majority of American Muslims who don’t want Islamist leaders, as well as American Muslims who are female or gay, he said.
McCarthy investigated and prosecuted Egyptian-born Imam Omar Abdel-Rahman, dubbed “the blind sheik,” for urging Muslims to kill New Yorkers. Abdel-Rahman was sentenced to life imprisonment in 1996.
Progressives ally with the Islamic lobby because “they think it will be a political voting bloc that will be reliably Democratic,” said Robert Spencer, an author and expert on Islam.
None of the Islamist advocates of civil rights officials in attendance, including Perez, objected to Aziz’s call for free-speech restrictions.
The event did not include Zuhdi Jasser, an Arizona Muslim, former naval officer and a co-founder of a coalition of modernist Muslim groups, the American Islamic Leadership Coalition. “The Islamist groups’ victimology feeds into the left’s propaganda that the right is anti-minority and anti-Muslim, so there’s a mutual political benefit there,” said Jasser, who clashes with Spencer over rival responses to the Islamist groups.
Nor did the conference include any influential critics, such as McCarthy and Spencer, who argue that Islamist terror attacks are partly motivated by Islamic texts. These texts include the Koran’s verse 9:5, which says “when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them.”
Aziz, however, used her invitation to argue that Americans’ fear of Islamists’ bombs has evolved into racism towards dark-skinned men.
The word “Muslim,” she said, “has become racialized. … I don’t accept this formalistic cop-out that this is all about religion.”
Aziz did not offer any evidence for her claim, which she said justifies the use of Title VI anti-discrimination laws against institutions and individuals who argue that Islamic texts spur Islamic violence.
This legal redefinition, she said, would also “take [federal] money away from local police departments and fusion centers who are spying on all of us.”
Aziz also argued against the commonplace police practice of informally talking with people in communities, including Muslim communities. “This has been a real problem with this outreach stuff,” she said. Muslims “are acting in good faith, and then they find their imams, who were going to outreach meetings, were being spied on,” she complained. “Some have been deported. Some have been prosecuted.”
In March, Afghan-born New York Imam Ahmad Wais Afzali was ordered deported after he admitted he lied to the FBI about warning a suspected Muslim terrorist that he was being investigated. That terrorist, Najibullah Zazi, admitted that he was planning to place bombs in the New York City subway. The imam learned about the investigation because he had offered to work with local police to help identify potential terrorists in his congregation.
“People are going in good faith” to talk with police, Aziz said. “They’re being very honest about what their grievances are. They’re telling the government, ‘This what we want you to do … [and] we want you not to spy on our community.’”
Dwight Holton, a Justice Department legal counsel based in Oregon, said the threat of criminal gangs or terror attacks justifies routine police contacts with locals. “When we go to a barber shop to talk to the community, we don’t tell them you can have a lawyer,” he said.
“You should,” Aziz immediately replied.
Aziz’s advocacy was supported by a second Islamist advocate, Islamic Society of North America president Mohamed Magid. He argued that “teaching people that all Muslims are a threat to the country… is against the law and the Constitution.” [Editor’s note: no one we know of, including ACT! for America, is teaching that “all Muslims are a threat to the country.”]
Magid asked Perez to change the federal government’s rules governing terror investigations, for more private meetings with top justice department officials, for the reeducation of FBI agents, and for more people to oppose criticism of Islam, which he labelled “religious bigotry and hate.”
[CONTINUE READING FULL ARTICLE HERE]
Arab Spring Islamist Fall
Arab Spring Islamist Fall by Ken Blackwell
Reuters’ Paul Chapman has filed a report from Tunis. There have been elections there, less than one year after an uprising ousted dictator Zine al Abidine Ben Ali. The former Tunisian strongman is said to be enjoying his retirement in Saudi Arabia. There, Ben Ali doubtless has seen news coverage of the bloody end of his neighboring desert despot, Muammar Gaddafi. Ben Ali is probably offering prayers of thanks that he got out of Dodge in time.
Election returns from Tunis show that the Ennahda party is the big winner. Ennahda won 90 of 217 seats in the country’s new legislative assembly. It’s not an outright majority, but it may prove sufficient for the Islamist party to form coalitions and rule the country.
Everyone from the White House and the State Department to the prestige press has hailed the “Arab Spring.” This regional uprising began when a street vendor set himself afire last December to protest the grinding oppression of the Ben Ali regime. The man, Mohammed Bouazizi, 26, despaired of getting justice. Ben Ali’s police had seized the young father’s little stock of fruits and vegetables. Said to be a college graduate and reduced to selling his pitiful wares on the street, the poor man could not pay off the thug cops of a thuggish regime. Our hearts must indeed break for Boazizi. And for millions of his fellow Arabs condemned to live under such despicable governments.
The Scriptures tell us that the ruler does not bear the sword for nothing, but to be a terror to evildoers. In vast swaths of the Arab world, however, the ruler is the evildoer. Most of those countries—each of which has a vote in the UN General Assembly—are ruled by the most adventurous and brutal of colonels or tribal chieftains.
The dictators of Syria and Yemen are taking note, no doubt, of the unenviable fate of Gaddafi. Dictator chic is suddenly out of fashion—and out of Vogue. That famous journal of the hip and cool has “disappeared” a puff piece they did recently on the First Couple of Syria.
The King and Queen of the Supermarket Tabloids, Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie, had traveled to Damascus for a goodwill visit back in 2009. Angelina is an ambassador of sorts for the UN’s High Commissioner for Refugees. No problem with that. And it was certainly a good thing to highlight the plight of Iraqi refugee fleeing from Iraq’s Islamist rulers. Thousands of Assyrian Christians have been driven from their homes in a land where they have lived a precarious existence the days of the Apostles.
But Brangelina made the gross error of consorting with Syria’s bloody Bashar al-Assad and his most photogenic wife, Asma al-Assad. Vogue’s writers had profiled the fun couple of the Middle East in gushing terms:
[They] described Asma al-Assad as “glamorous, young, and very chic–the freshest and most magnetic of first ladies,” and said of her husband that he is “a precise man who takes photographs and talks lovingly about his first computer.”) At the time, [Vogue editor Chris] Knutsen stood by Buck’s story and Vogue‘s decision to publish it, saying “We felt that a personal interview with Syria’s first lady would hold strong interest for our readers…The piece was not meant in any way to be a referendum on the al-Assad regime. It was a profile of the first lady.”
Okay, Bashar and Asma are not exactly Adolf Hitler and Eva Braun, but they are still young. Bashar holds the office of “president” of Syria only because his late father, Hafez al-Assad, didn’t blanch at shooting down 20,000 anti-government protesters in the city of Hama in 1982. Poppa Hafez leveled their town—including Sunni Mosques--and reportedly paved a road over their bodies. Perhaps Brangelina even rode over that highway while they were in Syria goodwill hunting.
It would be wonderful to get rid of the Assad clan. They have been cats’ paws for Tehran and fully complicit in the murders of Lebanon’s elected leaders. They have aided Hezbollah as that overtly terrorist outfit targets Israel’s northern border towns.
Still, after the Arab Spring has come this Islamist Fall. The Muslim Brotherhood [MB] is almost universally described in the liberal press as “moderate.” Well, when compared with Saddam, Gaddafi, and the Assads, they surely are moderate.
Still, the idea that MB-dominated governments voted in by purple fingers will give any regard to human rights is questionable. They openly avow their objective is to institute Sharia law wherever they rule. This brand of religious totalitarianism affords only one option to
minority Christians, the few remaining Jews, or Baha’i believers: Submission. Wherever MB holds sway, Christians are reduced to the status of dhimmis—not exactly slaves, but certainly not citizens. Think of a fiddler on the roof.
This is what the Arab Spring is yielding during this Islamist Fall. It is a profound misunderstanding of democracy to think that merely by staging elections and showing off purple fingers of voters we can bring on a new order in Muslim lands. Edmund Burke said it well: “Men of intemperate minds cannot be free; their passions forge their fetters.”
Intemperate minds are what we see at work in the Arab Middle East. Opinion surveys throughout the region confirm that, by overwhelming majorities, the “voters” for these sham democracies believe that those who convert from Islam must be put to death. As long as this grim reality exists, there will be no democracy in the region.
Facile comparisons to occupied Germany and Japan after World War II break down upon examination. It is precisely because we had demanded unconditional surrender of those warlike nations and occupied them with irresistible armed might that we were able to dictate the terms of their re-entry to the community of civilized states.
We should be proud of what we accomplished in Japan and Germany, both of which nations are mainstays today of the world economy and, with some salient exceptions (e.g. Germany’s persecution of homeschoolers) models of democratic legitimacy. We de-militarized and de-Nazified these vanquished regimes. We forced changes in their constitutions and in their educational systems. We shaped their economies.
We attempted no such changes in Iraq, Afghanistan, or in any of the other countries in the forever turbulent Mideast. That is why, tragically, any claims of hope and change in this region—especially when based on American dollars—are fatally flawed. We are building our houses upon sand.
Reuters’ Paul Chapman has filed a report from Tunis. There have been elections there, less than one year after an uprising ousted dictator Zine al Abidine Ben Ali. The former Tunisian strongman is said to be enjoying his retirement in Saudi Arabia. There, Ben Ali doubtless has seen news coverage of the bloody end of his neighboring desert despot, Muammar Gaddafi. Ben Ali is probably offering prayers of thanks that he got out of Dodge in time.
Election returns from Tunis show that the Ennahda party is the big winner. Ennahda won 90 of 217 seats in the country’s new legislative assembly. It’s not an outright majority, but it may prove sufficient for the Islamist party to form coalitions and rule the country.
Everyone from the White House and the State Department to the prestige press has hailed the “Arab Spring.” This regional uprising began when a street vendor set himself afire last December to protest the grinding oppression of the Ben Ali regime. The man, Mohammed Bouazizi, 26, despaired of getting justice. Ben Ali’s police had seized the young father’s little stock of fruits and vegetables. Said to be a college graduate and reduced to selling his pitiful wares on the street, the poor man could not pay off the thug cops of a thuggish regime. Our hearts must indeed break for Boazizi. And for millions of his fellow Arabs condemned to live under such despicable governments.
The Scriptures tell us that the ruler does not bear the sword for nothing, but to be a terror to evildoers. In vast swaths of the Arab world, however, the ruler is the evildoer. Most of those countries—each of which has a vote in the UN General Assembly—are ruled by the most adventurous and brutal of colonels or tribal chieftains.
The dictators of Syria and Yemen are taking note, no doubt, of the unenviable fate of Gaddafi. Dictator chic is suddenly out of fashion—and out of Vogue. That famous journal of the hip and cool has “disappeared” a puff piece they did recently on the First Couple of Syria.
The King and Queen of the Supermarket Tabloids, Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie, had traveled to Damascus for a goodwill visit back in 2009. Angelina is an ambassador of sorts for the UN’s High Commissioner for Refugees. No problem with that. And it was certainly a good thing to highlight the plight of Iraqi refugee fleeing from Iraq’s Islamist rulers. Thousands of Assyrian Christians have been driven from their homes in a land where they have lived a precarious existence the days of the Apostles.
But Brangelina made the gross error of consorting with Syria’s bloody Bashar al-Assad and his most photogenic wife, Asma al-Assad. Vogue’s writers had profiled the fun couple of the Middle East in gushing terms:
[They] described Asma al-Assad as “glamorous, young, and very chic–the freshest and most magnetic of first ladies,” and said of her husband that he is “a precise man who takes photographs and talks lovingly about his first computer.”) At the time, [Vogue editor Chris] Knutsen stood by Buck’s story and Vogue‘s decision to publish it, saying “We felt that a personal interview with Syria’s first lady would hold strong interest for our readers…The piece was not meant in any way to be a referendum on the al-Assad regime. It was a profile of the first lady.”
Okay, Bashar and Asma are not exactly Adolf Hitler and Eva Braun, but they are still young. Bashar holds the office of “president” of Syria only because his late father, Hafez al-Assad, didn’t blanch at shooting down 20,000 anti-government protesters in the city of Hama in 1982. Poppa Hafez leveled their town—including Sunni Mosques--and reportedly paved a road over their bodies. Perhaps Brangelina even rode over that highway while they were in Syria goodwill hunting.
It would be wonderful to get rid of the Assad clan. They have been cats’ paws for Tehran and fully complicit in the murders of Lebanon’s elected leaders. They have aided Hezbollah as that overtly terrorist outfit targets Israel’s northern border towns.
Still, after the Arab Spring has come this Islamist Fall. The Muslim Brotherhood [MB] is almost universally described in the liberal press as “moderate.” Well, when compared with Saddam, Gaddafi, and the Assads, they surely are moderate.
Still, the idea that MB-dominated governments voted in by purple fingers will give any regard to human rights is questionable. They openly avow their objective is to institute Sharia law wherever they rule. This brand of religious totalitarianism affords only one option to
minority Christians, the few remaining Jews, or Baha’i believers: Submission. Wherever MB holds sway, Christians are reduced to the status of dhimmis—not exactly slaves, but certainly not citizens. Think of a fiddler on the roof.
This is what the Arab Spring is yielding during this Islamist Fall. It is a profound misunderstanding of democracy to think that merely by staging elections and showing off purple fingers of voters we can bring on a new order in Muslim lands. Edmund Burke said it well: “Men of intemperate minds cannot be free; their passions forge their fetters.”
Intemperate minds are what we see at work in the Arab Middle East. Opinion surveys throughout the region confirm that, by overwhelming majorities, the “voters” for these sham democracies believe that those who convert from Islam must be put to death. As long as this grim reality exists, there will be no democracy in the region.
Facile comparisons to occupied Germany and Japan after World War II break down upon examination. It is precisely because we had demanded unconditional surrender of those warlike nations and occupied them with irresistible armed might that we were able to dictate the terms of their re-entry to the community of civilized states.
We should be proud of what we accomplished in Japan and Germany, both of which nations are mainstays today of the world economy and, with some salient exceptions (e.g. Germany’s persecution of homeschoolers) models of democratic legitimacy. We de-militarized and de-Nazified these vanquished regimes. We forced changes in their constitutions and in their educational systems. We shaped their economies.
We attempted no such changes in Iraq, Afghanistan, or in any of the other countries in the forever turbulent Mideast. That is why, tragically, any claims of hope and change in this region—especially when based on American dollars—are fatally flawed. We are building our houses upon sand.
Religious War at Our Doorstep
Those with commone sense have long known that Moozlums are using our tolerance, political correctness and laws against us to force their backwards 7th Century religion and beliefs on us. Here's proof. They are no longer hiding their agenda, but attacking our Judeo-Chritian values outright. Only libtards would give their complaints any consideration.
______________
Muslims Miffed That Catholic University Has Catholic Imagery by Doug Giles
Last week I was asked to lend my aging mug and highly attuned smart mouth for a documentary film regarding how the “religion of peace”—via political correctness in the public school system—is anesthetizing our kids to Islam’s malevolence toward all things American.
Like a good trooper I acquiesced (to the producer’s delight) and gave my best shot at trying to wake dull parents up to the fact that their dense kids are getting a steady diet of “Christianity, Judaism and America suck” and “Islam is awesome” from their local Marxist schoolmarm on a Monday through Friday basis. The director says there’s already a pre-Oscar buzz surrounding my performance. I am beautiful. Christina Aquavelva said so.
Anyway, no sooner did that week end than a new week began with a fresh ladle of Muslim petulance tossed in America’s face. It seems that an investigation has been sparked by Muslim “outrage” against a Catholic university (called Catholic University) for being, well, Catholic. Evidently Muslim students feel their human rights have been violated by not getting special digs on campus, minus Catholic imagery, to do their daily prayers on college grounds.
Let’s see, what can I compare this situation to? Hmmm. Dig deep, Doug, dig deep. Channel your inner Dennis Miller. I’ve got it! That’s like going to Hooters and being offended at all the bodacious hooters bouncing about. People don’t go to Hooters for their chicken wings; it’s called Hooters. Hoot-ers. Hooters. Geez, people. What the heck did you expect, students? It’s called Catholic University for a reason.
Human rights violated? That’s rich. Yes, let’s talk about human rights violations with Islam, shall we? How many Christians were killed in Egypt this week?
In the latest installment of how Islam is enacting their not-so-stealthy-any-longer jihad on America via our schools, Muslims are now taking on Catholic University for their Catholic art and imagery that insults delicate Muslim sensibilities.
This is nonsense. It’s another test to see how far we’ll bend over and take it like Europe has (to their own demise). It will not end with this one college, I guarantee. Who’s next? I’m thinkin’ Notre Dame.
Look, I’m not a Catholic and don’t work for good old CU, but if I did I’d be ticked and would stand my Catholic ground. I’d start swinging incense pots like a ninja warrior working a working a pair of nunchucks at any group trying to eradicate our cherished traditions and vision for our established university.
Here’s a thought: If you, as a Muslim, don’t like Catholic stuff, you might not want to go to Catholic University. Similarly, when I was seeking out an institution at which to do my grad work I immediately scratched Rosie O’Donnell University off my list.
Why? Well, I didn’t care to look at the paintings of her and her bulbous neck scattered about the campus, nor did I want to pay money to hear her bogus thoughts regarding how the world should tick peddled in the classroom.
This common sense approach to school selection makes me highly suspicious of this special treatment Muslims are demanding in our institutions and what their charges are really—really—all about. Stand your ground, Catholic U.
____________
Moozlums Hope to Take Over Catholic University
Some Muslims are getting smart. They’ve learned some lessons from the Communists, especially Antonio Gramsci (1891–1937). Gramsci broke from the revolutionary methods of the early Marxists. Today’s smarter Muslims don’t want to blow up stuff. Like the Gramsci Communists before them, they are working to take over our culture from the inside by using our laws against us. No shot needs to be fired. No building needs to be blown up. They are going after the foundational institutions: schools, media, politics, and the courts. This was Gramsci’s contribution to the cultural revolution. While Gramsci remained a committed Communist, he was a new-breed Communist.
To change the culture, Gramsci argued, “would require a ‘long march through the institutions’ — the arts, cinema, theater, schools, colleges, seminaries, newspapers, magazines, and the new electronic medium [of the time], radio.”[1] Catholic World News reports that Muslims attending Catholic University of America are using our nation’s anti-discrimination laws against the University:
Muslim students have lodged a complaint against the Catholic University of America, claiming that they are the victims of illegal discrimination because the school does not set aside space for Islamic prayer.
The complaint to the human-rights commission of the District of Columbia is backed by John Banzhaf, a law professor at neighboring George Washington University. Banzhaf has already filed a complaint against Catholic University, alleging sex discrimination, in response to the school’s decision to abolish coed dorms.
So why would Muslims attend a Catholic University? To take it over. You don’t believe me? Why did humanists attend Christian colleges like Harvard and Yale? To take them over. The early mottos of Harvard were “Truth for Christ and the Church” and “For the Glory of Christ.” When a student entered Harvard, he would have been introduced to the school’s foundational principles:
“Let every Student be plainly instructed, and earnestly pressed to consider well, the main end of his life and studies is, to know God and Jesus Christ which is eternal life (John 17:3) and therefore to lay Christ in the bottom, as the only foundation of all sound knowledge and Learning. And seeing the Lord only giveth wisdom, let every one seriously set himself by prayer in secret to seek it of him (Prov. 2:3).”
Why would an unbeliever go to Harvard? Certainly to get a good education, but others went to transform the college. Today, Harvard is a bastion of secularism.
We first saw these new Muslim tactics when a group of students at Trinity University in Texas wanted the words “in the year of Our Lord” removed from their diplomas. “A diploma is a very personal item, and people want to proudly display it in their offices and homes,” Sidra Qureshi, a Muslim and president of Trinity Diversity Connection. “By having the phrase ‘In the Year of Our Lord,’ it is directly referencing Jesus Christ, and not everyone believes in Jesus Christ.”
The debate started in 2009 when Isaac Medina, a Muslim convert from Guadalajara, Mexico, noticed the wording when he saw pre-made diploma frames in the Trinity bookstore. Muslims have been attacking Christianity since the inception of their religion. They’ve spotted a weakness in our system, the attempt to be diverse at any cost, even if it costs us the one thing that made this nation great — its Christian foundation. Muslims understand this; many Christians don’t. The Muslim demand for diversity is a wedge to get in the door, open it wide enough for others to follow behind, then once in they will pool their collective energies and force Christians out.
Notes:
1.Patrick J. Buchanan, Death of the West: How Dying Populations and Immigrant Invasions Imperil Our Country and Civilization (New York: St. Martin’s Press/Thomas Dunne Books, 2001), 77.
______________
Muslims Miffed That Catholic University Has Catholic Imagery by Doug Giles
Last week I was asked to lend my aging mug and highly attuned smart mouth for a documentary film regarding how the “religion of peace”—via political correctness in the public school system—is anesthetizing our kids to Islam’s malevolence toward all things American.
Like a good trooper I acquiesced (to the producer’s delight) and gave my best shot at trying to wake dull parents up to the fact that their dense kids are getting a steady diet of “Christianity, Judaism and America suck” and “Islam is awesome” from their local Marxist schoolmarm on a Monday through Friday basis. The director says there’s already a pre-Oscar buzz surrounding my performance. I am beautiful. Christina Aquavelva said so.
Anyway, no sooner did that week end than a new week began with a fresh ladle of Muslim petulance tossed in America’s face. It seems that an investigation has been sparked by Muslim “outrage” against a Catholic university (called Catholic University) for being, well, Catholic. Evidently Muslim students feel their human rights have been violated by not getting special digs on campus, minus Catholic imagery, to do their daily prayers on college grounds.
Let’s see, what can I compare this situation to? Hmmm. Dig deep, Doug, dig deep. Channel your inner Dennis Miller. I’ve got it! That’s like going to Hooters and being offended at all the bodacious hooters bouncing about. People don’t go to Hooters for their chicken wings; it’s called Hooters. Hoot-ers. Hooters. Geez, people. What the heck did you expect, students? It’s called Catholic University for a reason.
Human rights violated? That’s rich. Yes, let’s talk about human rights violations with Islam, shall we? How many Christians were killed in Egypt this week?
In the latest installment of how Islam is enacting their not-so-stealthy-any-longer jihad on America via our schools, Muslims are now taking on Catholic University for their Catholic art and imagery that insults delicate Muslim sensibilities.
This is nonsense. It’s another test to see how far we’ll bend over and take it like Europe has (to their own demise). It will not end with this one college, I guarantee. Who’s next? I’m thinkin’ Notre Dame.
Look, I’m not a Catholic and don’t work for good old CU, but if I did I’d be ticked and would stand my Catholic ground. I’d start swinging incense pots like a ninja warrior working a working a pair of nunchucks at any group trying to eradicate our cherished traditions and vision for our established university.
Here’s a thought: If you, as a Muslim, don’t like Catholic stuff, you might not want to go to Catholic University. Similarly, when I was seeking out an institution at which to do my grad work I immediately scratched Rosie O’Donnell University off my list.
Why? Well, I didn’t care to look at the paintings of her and her bulbous neck scattered about the campus, nor did I want to pay money to hear her bogus thoughts regarding how the world should tick peddled in the classroom.
This common sense approach to school selection makes me highly suspicious of this special treatment Muslims are demanding in our institutions and what their charges are really—really—all about. Stand your ground, Catholic U.
____________
Moozlums Hope to Take Over Catholic University
Some Muslims are getting smart. They’ve learned some lessons from the Communists, especially Antonio Gramsci (1891–1937). Gramsci broke from the revolutionary methods of the early Marxists. Today’s smarter Muslims don’t want to blow up stuff. Like the Gramsci Communists before them, they are working to take over our culture from the inside by using our laws against us. No shot needs to be fired. No building needs to be blown up. They are going after the foundational institutions: schools, media, politics, and the courts. This was Gramsci’s contribution to the cultural revolution. While Gramsci remained a committed Communist, he was a new-breed Communist.
To change the culture, Gramsci argued, “would require a ‘long march through the institutions’ — the arts, cinema, theater, schools, colleges, seminaries, newspapers, magazines, and the new electronic medium [of the time], radio.”[1] Catholic World News reports that Muslims attending Catholic University of America are using our nation’s anti-discrimination laws against the University:
Muslim students have lodged a complaint against the Catholic University of America, claiming that they are the victims of illegal discrimination because the school does not set aside space for Islamic prayer.
The complaint to the human-rights commission of the District of Columbia is backed by John Banzhaf, a law professor at neighboring George Washington University. Banzhaf has already filed a complaint against Catholic University, alleging sex discrimination, in response to the school’s decision to abolish coed dorms.
So why would Muslims attend a Catholic University? To take it over. You don’t believe me? Why did humanists attend Christian colleges like Harvard and Yale? To take them over. The early mottos of Harvard were “Truth for Christ and the Church” and “For the Glory of Christ.” When a student entered Harvard, he would have been introduced to the school’s foundational principles:
“Let every Student be plainly instructed, and earnestly pressed to consider well, the main end of his life and studies is, to know God and Jesus Christ which is eternal life (John 17:3) and therefore to lay Christ in the bottom, as the only foundation of all sound knowledge and Learning. And seeing the Lord only giveth wisdom, let every one seriously set himself by prayer in secret to seek it of him (Prov. 2:3).”
Why would an unbeliever go to Harvard? Certainly to get a good education, but others went to transform the college. Today, Harvard is a bastion of secularism.
We first saw these new Muslim tactics when a group of students at Trinity University in Texas wanted the words “in the year of Our Lord” removed from their diplomas. “A diploma is a very personal item, and people want to proudly display it in their offices and homes,” Sidra Qureshi, a Muslim and president of Trinity Diversity Connection. “By having the phrase ‘In the Year of Our Lord,’ it is directly referencing Jesus Christ, and not everyone believes in Jesus Christ.”
The debate started in 2009 when Isaac Medina, a Muslim convert from Guadalajara, Mexico, noticed the wording when he saw pre-made diploma frames in the Trinity bookstore. Muslims have been attacking Christianity since the inception of their religion. They’ve spotted a weakness in our system, the attempt to be diverse at any cost, even if it costs us the one thing that made this nation great — its Christian foundation. Muslims understand this; many Christians don’t. The Muslim demand for diversity is a wedge to get in the door, open it wide enough for others to follow behind, then once in they will pool their collective energies and force Christians out.
Notes:
1.Patrick J. Buchanan, Death of the West: How Dying Populations and Immigrant Invasions Imperil Our Country and Civilization (New York: St. Martin’s Press/Thomas Dunne Books, 2001), 77.
Sunday, October 23, 2011
Ground Zero Mosque Doomed for Back Rent
Sorry, I can't write, I can't stop laughing my ass off!!!!
_______________
The Patriot Post
Digest · October 21, 2011
Around the Nation: Back Rent for Ground Zero Mosque
Con Edison keeps the lights of New York City shining, but now the utility giant may also accomplish what millions of angry Americans could not: prevent the Ground Zero mosque from opening. This won't be accomplished as the mosque's power supply company, however, but as its landlord.
The dispute concerns the piece of prime Manhattan real estate on which the mosque is to be built. The developer, Park 51, owns a five-story building on the eastern side of the property, while Con Ed owns a former substation on the western side. Park 51 had eventually planned to purchase the Con Ed building, knock down both structures, and construct its $100 million, 15-story "community center." In the meantime, Park 51 had a lease under which rent was $2,750 a month; this rate was set in 1972 and is unheard of in present day New York. Now Con Edison has raised the rent to a whopping $47,437 a month, retroactive to July 31, 2008. When Park 51 refused to pay the $1.7 million in back rent, Con Ed threatened to terminate the lease and evict. This would effectively kill the plans for the controversial project.
Park 51's lead developer, Sharif El-Gamal, has speculated that the utility company is caving in to "political pressure"; this is an interesting statement, considering that both Barack Obama and New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg publicly support the project. A hearing is set for Nov. 17, and until then a court enjoined Con Ed from terminating the lease.
The Patriot Post www.patriotpost.us/subscribe/
_______________
The Patriot Post
Digest · October 21, 2011
Around the Nation: Back Rent for Ground Zero Mosque
Con Edison keeps the lights of New York City shining, but now the utility giant may also accomplish what millions of angry Americans could not: prevent the Ground Zero mosque from opening. This won't be accomplished as the mosque's power supply company, however, but as its landlord.
The dispute concerns the piece of prime Manhattan real estate on which the mosque is to be built. The developer, Park 51, owns a five-story building on the eastern side of the property, while Con Ed owns a former substation on the western side. Park 51 had eventually planned to purchase the Con Ed building, knock down both structures, and construct its $100 million, 15-story "community center." In the meantime, Park 51 had a lease under which rent was $2,750 a month; this rate was set in 1972 and is unheard of in present day New York. Now Con Edison has raised the rent to a whopping $47,437 a month, retroactive to July 31, 2008. When Park 51 refused to pay the $1.7 million in back rent, Con Ed threatened to terminate the lease and evict. This would effectively kill the plans for the controversial project.
Park 51's lead developer, Sharif El-Gamal, has speculated that the utility company is caving in to "political pressure"; this is an interesting statement, considering that both Barack Obama and New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg publicly support the project. A hearing is set for Nov. 17, and until then a court enjoined Con Ed from terminating the lease.
The Patriot Post www.patriotpost.us/subscribe/
Libya Ends While Another Conflict Begins
Listening to Michael Savage's radio show last week was an epiphany. He spoke about how the libtard media, who continually rail against the death penalty and sympathizes with rapists, murderers and terrorists on death row, celebrate the death of a head of state with no trial. I thought it was the policy of the U.S. to not assassinate heads of state, which is one reason why these despots have been ruling their countries for the last 40+ years. Along comes BHO and his commitment to use NATO to topple Gadafi receives complete approval from the libtards in the media. Had George W. Bush done this, the libtards would have screamed injustice. The hypocrisy of liberalism knows no bounds!
________________
The Patriot Post
Digest · October 21, 2011
Libya Ends While Another Conflict Begins
The present administration has a curious way of looking at warfare. In situations where the United States is at least indirectly threatened by the specter of radical Islam, Barack Obama is tripping over himself looking for a way out. But if he has a chance to take out the leader of a country that poses no threat, well, Obama is all over it. Just ask Moammar Gadhafi.
Well, you could if Gadhafi were still alive. Libya's longtime brutal dictator was killed by fighters who overtook his hometown of Sirte Thursday. Deposed and forced from Tripoli in August, Gadhafi had fled to Sirte as a last refuge. As his enemies closed in, he attempted to flee once more, but was taken alive by revolutionary forces before being killed. With his death and the fall of the last of his regime's strongholds, the National Transitional Council will move to consolidate power and reunify the nation. Memo to Moammar: Sic semper tyrannis!
Historian Victor Davis Hanson summed it up: "The Middle East is a very different place than it was on 9/11: Saddam dead, Osama bin Laden dead, Qaddafi dead, Mubarak near dead, and Assad reeling. Much of this transition is due to the decision after 9/11 to push for radical change in the Middle East, started by George Bush and more or less continued uninterrupted by Barack Obama. After the capture of Saddam, Qaddafi saw a glimpse of his own fate; one wonders how many Middle East despots are doing the same as they view the ghoulish pictures of a seemingly dead Qaddafi that are now all over the Internet."
Meanwhile, Obama has sent U.S. forces to Uganda to oppose Joseph Kony, the leader of a ragtag group of miscreants calling themselves the Lord's Resistance Army. The group, primarily child soldiers forced into taking up arms and led by Kony's iron fist, has been terrorizing central Africa for a number of years, though it cannot be construed as a threat to American national security. Now Kony, by all accounts a scoundrel of the highest degree, finds himself the target of 100 American military advisers deployed to Uganda last week in a "non-combat role." U.S. forces were sent to help regional military units fight off this guerrilla group and take care of Kony once and for all. While Congress has allowed the president plenty of leeway in dealing with Kony through a resolution passed in 2010, military force wasn't specifically authorized.
The Patriot Post www.patriotpost.us/subscribe/
________________
The Patriot Post
Digest · October 21, 2011
Libya Ends While Another Conflict Begins
The present administration has a curious way of looking at warfare. In situations where the United States is at least indirectly threatened by the specter of radical Islam, Barack Obama is tripping over himself looking for a way out. But if he has a chance to take out the leader of a country that poses no threat, well, Obama is all over it. Just ask Moammar Gadhafi.
Well, you could if Gadhafi were still alive. Libya's longtime brutal dictator was killed by fighters who overtook his hometown of Sirte Thursday. Deposed and forced from Tripoli in August, Gadhafi had fled to Sirte as a last refuge. As his enemies closed in, he attempted to flee once more, but was taken alive by revolutionary forces before being killed. With his death and the fall of the last of his regime's strongholds, the National Transitional Council will move to consolidate power and reunify the nation. Memo to Moammar: Sic semper tyrannis!
Historian Victor Davis Hanson summed it up: "The Middle East is a very different place than it was on 9/11: Saddam dead, Osama bin Laden dead, Qaddafi dead, Mubarak near dead, and Assad reeling. Much of this transition is due to the decision after 9/11 to push for radical change in the Middle East, started by George Bush and more or less continued uninterrupted by Barack Obama. After the capture of Saddam, Qaddafi saw a glimpse of his own fate; one wonders how many Middle East despots are doing the same as they view the ghoulish pictures of a seemingly dead Qaddafi that are now all over the Internet."
Meanwhile, Obama has sent U.S. forces to Uganda to oppose Joseph Kony, the leader of a ragtag group of miscreants calling themselves the Lord's Resistance Army. The group, primarily child soldiers forced into taking up arms and led by Kony's iron fist, has been terrorizing central Africa for a number of years, though it cannot be construed as a threat to American national security. Now Kony, by all accounts a scoundrel of the highest degree, finds himself the target of 100 American military advisers deployed to Uganda last week in a "non-combat role." U.S. forces were sent to help regional military units fight off this guerrilla group and take care of Kony once and for all. While Congress has allowed the president plenty of leeway in dealing with Kony through a resolution passed in 2010, military force wasn't specifically authorized.
The Patriot Post www.patriotpost.us/subscribe/
Warfront With Jihadistan: Leaving Iraq
Like I said in my previous post, BHO is a career politician who's first concern is how to keep his taxpayer funded job. He doesn't care who he throws to the wolves in order to do it - be it Coptic Christians in Egypt, or the U.S. troops who have sacrificed valiantly in Iraq. Pulling out of Iraq gives him bragging rights to his left wing cadre of wackos that he kept his promise to end the war. But at what cost? The money and lives we've invested will be wasted, but that cost matters little to a political animal like BHO.
_________________
The Patriot Post
Digest · October 21, 2011
National Security
Warfront With Jihadistan: Leaving Iraq
As previously reported, the Obama regime's Iraq policy has been one of withdrawal and surrender. Last month the Pentagon announced plans to have at least 27,000 troops remain in Iraq at year's end. When the White House later ordered that number lowered, U.S. commanders replied through gritted teeth that they could make do, barely, with 10,000 troops. When the White House came back with, "Yeah, how about 3,000?" U.S. commanders were reportedly "livid." Now it appears Obama is abandoning all pretense of caring about Iraq and will bring all but 160 -- that's one hundred sixty -- of the currently deployed 45,000 troops home by the new year. The remaining troops will serve as a protective force for the U.S. embassy.
If implemented, this decision will end more than eight years of U.S. involvement in the Iraq war, despite uncertainty about that country's security forces and political stability. Although Iraq's armed forces have made significant progress, they still require U.S. aid for training, air and naval support, intelligence and counterterrorism operations, and logistics. Unfortunately, Iraq's government is not helping. Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, concerned about looking like an American puppet as well as antagonizing Iran, is ignoring his own military, which supports an extended American military presence. Additionally, during negotiations for an extended presence, Iraqi leaders in parliament have refused to give U.S. troops immunity from prosecution in Iraqi courts. The U.S. cannot stay without such immunity, exposing American soldiers to the whims of an Islamic judicial system.
Politically, Obama will finally get to say he ended "Bush's war" (even as he takes military action of his own in Libya, Uganda and Yemen) just in time for the 2012 campaign. As for Iraq, only time will tell if it succeeds or ultimately succumbs to the murderous political dementia that is endemic to the region. America has fought nobly and sacrificed greatly to give an Arab Islamic country a shot at freedom. It will be up to the Iraqis to keep it.
The Patriot Post www.patriotpost.us/subscribe/
_________________
The Patriot Post
Digest · October 21, 2011
National Security
Warfront With Jihadistan: Leaving Iraq
As previously reported, the Obama regime's Iraq policy has been one of withdrawal and surrender. Last month the Pentagon announced plans to have at least 27,000 troops remain in Iraq at year's end. When the White House later ordered that number lowered, U.S. commanders replied through gritted teeth that they could make do, barely, with 10,000 troops. When the White House came back with, "Yeah, how about 3,000?" U.S. commanders were reportedly "livid." Now it appears Obama is abandoning all pretense of caring about Iraq and will bring all but 160 -- that's one hundred sixty -- of the currently deployed 45,000 troops home by the new year. The remaining troops will serve as a protective force for the U.S. embassy.
If implemented, this decision will end more than eight years of U.S. involvement in the Iraq war, despite uncertainty about that country's security forces and political stability. Although Iraq's armed forces have made significant progress, they still require U.S. aid for training, air and naval support, intelligence and counterterrorism operations, and logistics. Unfortunately, Iraq's government is not helping. Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, concerned about looking like an American puppet as well as antagonizing Iran, is ignoring his own military, which supports an extended American military presence. Additionally, during negotiations for an extended presence, Iraqi leaders in parliament have refused to give U.S. troops immunity from prosecution in Iraqi courts. The U.S. cannot stay without such immunity, exposing American soldiers to the whims of an Islamic judicial system.
Politically, Obama will finally get to say he ended "Bush's war" (even as he takes military action of his own in Libya, Uganda and Yemen) just in time for the 2012 campaign. As for Iraq, only time will tell if it succeeds or ultimately succumbs to the murderous political dementia that is endemic to the region. America has fought nobly and sacrificed greatly to give an Arab Islamic country a shot at freedom. It will be up to the Iraqis to keep it.
The Patriot Post www.patriotpost.us/subscribe/
You Are Paying Others to Murder Christians!
Certainly the argument can be made that BHO's supposed Christianity and Hillary's mean little or nothing to them. They are career politicians who's first concern is to protect their job of living off the taxpayer. Their second concern is to further their leftist political idealogy, which includes coddling and cozying up to radical Moozlums. If the aid they give the radical Moozlums happens to result in the killing of Christians, well, that is an acceptable casualty rate to them in the furtherance of their political goals.
____________
If you’ve been watching the news and following any of the ‘Arab Spring’ stories coming out of the Middle East, you may have seen your tax dollars at work as armored personnel carriers mowed down protesters in Egypt.
These protesters were conducting a peaceful protest asking for their right to protection from persecution. They were not abdicating the overthrow of the government or anything to do with violence of any kind. All they were asking for was to be treated equally the same as other Egyptians. In the midst of this peaceful protest, the Egyptian government sent in the police to stop the protest by whatever means possible.
What you may not be aware of is that the protesters killed were Coptic Christians and that US funds have been helped to pay for the armored vehicles and the police driving them. Reports surfaced that there were some yelling that they would kill any Christians they can get their hands on. Just last week the Egyptian newspaper Al Ahram reported that 36 Coptic Christians had been killed so far.
The US endorsed the ouster of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and has since been supportive of the military regime running the country. Part of that military regime is made up with members of the Muslim Brotherhood, which is known to be a more militant and radical group with a history of using terrorism and threats of terrorism to advance their agenda.
At this time, the Obama administration continues to pump millions of dollars into Egypt’s military regime, the same military regime that intentionally killed the peacefully protesting Christians. Trying to buy Egyptian friendship, even though the new regime has terrorist ties, is more important to the White House than to defend the Christian and human rights of fellow believers in Jesus Christ.
As a Christian, I am appalled that our tax dollars are going to support the Muslim persecution and murder of fellow Christians. Obviously, the Christian faith that President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton, mean little to nothing to them. They would rather support Muslim terrorists than preserve the peaceful lives of real Christians.
Source: Godfather Politics
____________
If you’ve been watching the news and following any of the ‘Arab Spring’ stories coming out of the Middle East, you may have seen your tax dollars at work as armored personnel carriers mowed down protesters in Egypt.
These protesters were conducting a peaceful protest asking for their right to protection from persecution. They were not abdicating the overthrow of the government or anything to do with violence of any kind. All they were asking for was to be treated equally the same as other Egyptians. In the midst of this peaceful protest, the Egyptian government sent in the police to stop the protest by whatever means possible.
What you may not be aware of is that the protesters killed were Coptic Christians and that US funds have been helped to pay for the armored vehicles and the police driving them. Reports surfaced that there were some yelling that they would kill any Christians they can get their hands on. Just last week the Egyptian newspaper Al Ahram reported that 36 Coptic Christians had been killed so far.
The US endorsed the ouster of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and has since been supportive of the military regime running the country. Part of that military regime is made up with members of the Muslim Brotherhood, which is known to be a more militant and radical group with a history of using terrorism and threats of terrorism to advance their agenda.
At this time, the Obama administration continues to pump millions of dollars into Egypt’s military regime, the same military regime that intentionally killed the peacefully protesting Christians. Trying to buy Egyptian friendship, even though the new regime has terrorist ties, is more important to the White House than to defend the Christian and human rights of fellow believers in Jesus Christ.
As a Christian, I am appalled that our tax dollars are going to support the Muslim persecution and murder of fellow Christians. Obviously, the Christian faith that President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton, mean little to nothing to them. They would rather support Muslim terrorists than preserve the peaceful lives of real Christians.
Source: Godfather Politics
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
