Why the Left Loves Islam

I have really been struggling to understand why the left wingers seem to give Islam a pass, even though radical Muslims are trying to kill them (and the rest of us non-Muslims) in the name of Islam (but only if we wonÂ’t convert). I finally figured it out.

They are birds of a feather!!!

The radical Muslims riot over cartoons and motor vehicle accidents and believe that killing thousands of innocents will persuade the remaining non-Muslims that Islam is a religion of peace and tolerance and that Allah is good.

In other words, they are violently unhinged. And so is the American left as Michelle Malkin has documented.

What is a Terrorist?

I guess we learned from the FBI that terrorist acts are only terrorism if the terrorist is specifically affiliated with a known, government recognized terrorist organization. Thus, when Omeed Aziz Popal reported told police that he is a terrorist acting in the name of Islam, by FBI definitions, he is not.

Gee. I think he would know.

After driving his SUV into a number of people deliberately, the San Francisco police are simply calling it multiple assaults. See San Francisco Chronicle.

When Joel Henry Hinrichs blew himself up outside and Oklahoma State University football game, we can now understand why the FBI did not identify it as an act of terrorism. He had no known it ties to any government-recognized terrorist organization.

I want to trust the government. But I cannot trust the government’s definitions.

Women's Interests Need Protecting NOW!

Islamic terrorism affects everybody. Jihadists have indiscriminately targeted men, women, children, Christians, Jews, atheists, Rotarians, suburbanites, city-dwellers and other innocents. Logic would suggest that everyone should be serious about fighting terrorism, because everyone is a target, even moderate Muslims.

The radical Islamists ultimately seek to impose Islam upon the world and rule the world according to Shari’a law. Shari’a law specifically imposes unreasonable burdens upon women:

1. A man may easily divorce his wife, but not the other way around.
2. Men may beat their wives if the wives do not respond to oral correction.
3. Women must be covered in public.
4. In court, a woman’s testimony is worth half the testimony of a man.
5. To prove rape, there must be four Muslim male eyewitnesses, but if there is no conviction, the woman may be penalized for adultery.
6. Homosexuality s forbidden and punishable.

So, where are the feminists in the fight against Islamic terrorism?

To find out, I explored the National Organization for Woman (NOW) web site. I reviewed the NOW issues. I found exactly one of probably a hundred issues that addressed anything having to do with Islam. And that issue was about pressuring George Bush to get gender equality in the then-proposed Iraqi Constitution (It is: Article 14).

None of the others addressed or recognized any dangers to women from radical Islam.

Don’t they read the papers? They can’t exactly like Shari’a law. Is it that NOW leadership can’t see past their hatred of George Bush to recognize their own interests?

I urge women to contact NOW and tell them that radical Islam threatens women and that it should be made an issue -- NOW!

More Peace and Tolerance

More Islamic death threats against an individual. His crime? He owns a Christian television station in Palestine. His appeals to government authorities for protection reportedly go unheeded.

The death threats are not just words. A Molotov coktail has been thrown against his home. Asia News reports the story.

Ya Gotta Love that Islamic Tolerance!

Islam, the religion of peace and tolerance. That would explain the death threats by Islamics against a Malaysian woman who converted to Christianity eight years ago AND against her lawyer who represents her in seeking the right to marry the Christian man she loves. The NY Times reports. (Requires free registration to view.)

Still Missing

Fox News Channel reporter Steve Centanni and freelance cameraman Olaf Wiig, kidnapped in Gaza more than a week ago, are still missing.

Has the MSM had equivalent coverage for these reporters as for MSM reporters previously kidnapped? I am sure some blogger will be researching it.

The kidnapped reporters need our prayers.

Update: According to the AP, they appear to be alive, but the kidnappers have made a 72 hour demand for an exchange for "Muslim prisoners."

Passenger, Protect Thyself

Airline passengers have begun taking responsibility for their own safety by refusing to fly when there are suspicious Muslims on board. British passengers here. Russian passengers here.

The Muslims involved, presumably innocent, have only the Muslim brethren to blame. After all, there is a large group of Muslims (yes, not a majority) trying to kill us.

August 24 update: The British press, who euphemistically calls Middle-Eastern Muslims "Asians," reports that the two men in one of the above incidents were upset that their suspicious actions resulted in the British passenger revolt. Read it here. What do you think? Do you support the fearful passengers? Or the "Asians?"

Arabic Prayer on Airplane? Keep Silent!

A Muslim radiologist used poor judgment when he prayed aloud in Arabic aboard a passenger aircraft. See CBC News article. Now he wants compensation from the airline.

If he were an intelligent as I would want MY OWN radiologist to be, he would realize that prayers in Arabic (which may or may not have been recognized as prayers) were likely to alarm other passengers. It was bad judgment on his part.

I would rather the airlines err on the side of caution. After all, today's terrorist threats are from Muslim terrorists. Blaming the airline and raising a public stink ultimately aids the terrorists.

Sharia Family Law for the U.K.?

From the U.K in The Independent:

Muslim leaders have urged Ruth Kelly, the Secretary of State for Communities, to support Islamic family law in Britain to stop youths joining Islamic extremists.

What does this mean?

Under Sharia law, a man may beat his wife, but only if she fails to conform to his verbal correction. A man may have four wives. A man may divorce his wife by repeating three times, "I divorce you." The wife has no such opportunity. A Muslim woman may not marry a non-Muslim.

isn't this all "family law?" Is this what they want when they ask for Sharia family law for U.K. Muslims to keep youths from strapping themselves with explosives to kill innocent people? To stop killing innocents, they need the right to beat their wives etc.?

Would it also stop them from rioting over cartoons and other silliness?

When is Torture OK?

According to the The Guardian, much of the information that stopped the London airplane terrorists came from torture of an informant.

When is torture OK? In this case, hundreds to thousands of lives were apparently saved based upon information derived from torture. If the only information supporting the arrests were derived from torture, I would have to decry it. An accuser under torture is inherently unreliable, unless.... Unless the information extracted from the tortured individual is confirmed by other means.

We can have no faith in convictions based upon confessions extracted under torture. No court should condone such activity.

But when torture is necessary to save many, many innocent lives, because the tortured person is plotting death (or even knows of the plot and refuses to help), I have trouble dredging up sympathy for the villain.

What happens, though if we condone torture as a means to extract information about terrorist activities? Will we be torturing innocent people before we can determine that the information extracted was false?

I don't know. I hate the idea of torture. But worse than the torture of an evil plotter of human misery, I hate the human misery he or she would create if left untortured.

No Terrorist Link

Per CNN.comThe FBI declares that they can find no terrorism link to the three Texas "Palestinian-Americans" arrested in Michigan after buying nearly 1000 cell phones and discarding the chargers (presumably with a chip useful for bombs). However, what "links" are necessary to make someone a terrorist?

Michigan prosecutors are sticking with terrorism charges.

I am not pre-judging these individuals. I am saying that IF they were intent on blowing up or disrupting a bridge in Michigan, they don't need specific links to al-Qaeda, Hamas, or Hezbollah to make them terrorists. IF they planned acts to harm innocent civilians in the name of an ideology (Islam in this case), they are terrorists.

For that matter, there were three of them. IF guilty of such plans, they were and are a terrorist organization of at least three people.

But what about the lone gunman in Seattle or the lone SUV driver who killed or aimed to harm in the name of Islam? It seems to me that they are terrorists, even if they acted alone, without the support of a specific terrorist organization. (We will leave the question whether Islam is a terrorist organization for another day.) Planning an act of terror in the name of an ideology is terrorism, whether the perpetrator is alone or conspiring with others. Isn't it?

A Voice of Reason

"I have no doubt that there are many issues which incite people to loath government policies but not to strap explosives to themselves and go out and murder innocent people.

"There is no way of rationalising that.

"I think it is very, very dangerous when people who call themselves community leaders make some assumption that somehow that there's a rational connection between these two things."

--U.K Foreign Office Minister Kim Howells in response to a letter from British Muslim leaders urging changes in government policy to prevent further terrorist activities. Source: BBC News.

Enemies of Islam

Don't go to Afghanistan and share the love and miracles of Christ:

Afghanistan deports Christian Koreans, cancels peace festival

KABUL: Afghanistan has ordered hundreds of South Korean Christians to leave the country yesterday, accusing them of seeking to undermine Islamic culture and trying to spread Christianity.

Members of a South Korean non-governmental organisation, called the Institute of Asian Culture & Development, had prepared for a ’peace festival’ set for this weekend.

A member of the Korean group has said that the festival has been cancelled at the request of the Afghan government, Agence France-Presse reports.

Spokesman for the group Sung Han Kang said that Interior Ministry officials said they were being deported for their own protection, not due to security fears.

Meanwhile, Interior Ministry spokesman Yousef Stanezai said that although the Koreans came with tourist visas, their activities showed they had a different agenda.

"The programme was against the Islamic culture and customs of Afghans," he said, adding they have been told to leave the country as soon as possible.

The South Koreans came to Afghanistan a month ago to provide computer and business training, medical and dental care and arrange sports activities in five cities, he said.

"It was rumoured among the people they have plans to convert the people to Christianity," said Faiaz Mhrain, the governor’s chief of staff.

However, Kang stated that although the Institute of Asian Culture & Development has a Christian background, they have no intentions to win converts.

In western Herat province, provincial authorities put about 200 Koreans on a bus and deported them to Uzbekistan on Wednesday, a top provincial official said.

According to the South Korean-based Institute, some of the visiting Koreans have U.S. or Canadian citizenships, and there were 600 children among the visitors.

Kang confirmed the Koreans were deported but said they were sent to Iran.

Perhaps the South Koreans were lucky. At least the Afghanis did not kill them as enemies of Islam. Does not the Koran say at Surah 9.5:

[S]lay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush...

Peace! Tolerance! What a Religion!

How could Christians ever forget that Islam is a religion of peace and tolerance. Unless, of course a Christian drinks from a Muslims-only water fountain:

Christian Stone Mason Beaten For Drinking Water From Public Facility

By Sheraz Khurram Khan
Special Correspondent for ASSIST News Service in Pakistan

LAHORE, PAKISTAN (ANS) -- A Christian stone mason received critical injuries, including dislocation of his shoulder after he was seen drinking water from a public facility, by a Muslim man on June 6 (Tuesday) just outside the eastern city of Lahore, the Pakistan Christian Post (PCP) has reported.

Nasir Ashraf, the Christian mason was working at the construction site of a school. The trouble for him began while he was returning to the site. Confronting him with anger the Muslim man asked him as to why he drank water from the public facility by using a glass that was placed at the water tank.

“Why did you drink water from this glass since you are a Christian?” the PCP quoted the Muslim man as asking Nasir.

“The man accused the mason of polluting the glass and proceeded to destroy it. The Muslim man then summoned a crowd by shouting, “This Christian polluted our glass,” and encouraged them to beat him up”, the PCP report said.

“The crowd began beating Nasir, eventually pushing him off a ledge. The fall dislocated his shoulder, broke his collarbone in two places and knocked him unconscious,” it said.

Tell it to Hezbollah!

What do you think of Hezbollah using civilians as shield and faking photographic opportunities?

Tell it directly to Hezbollah! No kidding! Clickable email address here: mediarelations123@yahoo.com

Moonbat Logic Part 1

This is the first in a series of posts on that oxymoron: moonbat logic. Today, we have:

Goldstein v. Frisch (coming to a courthouse near someone)

The tormenter of blogger Jeff Goldstein is a moonbat named Deborah Frisch. After making ugly public comments that any reasonable person would take as threatening Mr. GoldsteinÂ’s children, Ms. Frisch resigned her job as an adjunct professor at University of Arizona and continued her awful blog-baiting with nasty sexual references to Mr. Goldstein, his wife and children. Although even fellow moonbats told her she had gone overboard and was an embarrassment to liberals everywhere, Ms. Frisch refused to cease her nasty attacks on Mr. Goldstein and his family. Mr. Goldstein has now apparently brought legal action.

Of course, Ms. Frisch thinks herself somehow the victim because Mr. Goldstein actually posted, or left posted, her comments on his blog. Ms. Frisch thinks Mr. Goldstein should pay her damages. (At last report, it appears that no lawyer can be found to pursue her weird claim.)

Muslims Acting Like Muslims

There are moderates in Islam, but Islam itself is not moderate as has been so frequently shown by Muslims themselves. This time, credible death threats to a moderate Muslim force him to hide from the public limelight to protect his family. His crime? Insulting Islam by expressing moderate views. Jihad Watch has the story from Canada's Globe and Mail along with commentary.

With the consistently violent history of Islamists, is there any hope in the near future for Muslim tolerance of a multi-cultural society?

Staged Photojournalism

Forbes reports on the controversy surrounding apparently staged photos of dead children after the recent Qana bombing. Comments bolded and in brackets are mine.

The AP said information [What information? Why don't you tell us?] from its photo editors showed the events were not staged, and that the time stamps could be misleading for several reasons, including that web sites can use such stamps to show when pictures are posted, not taken. [Which falls short of saying that the time stamps are misleading in this instance.] An AFP executive said he was stunned to be questioned about it. [How dare anyone question the media elete!] Reuters, in a statement, said it categorically rejects any such suggestion. [Because?]

"It's hard to imagine how someone sitting in an air-conditioned office or broadcast studio many thousands of miles from the scene can decide what occurred on the ground with any degree of accuracy," said Kathleen Carroll, AP's senior vice president and executive editor.[Yes, it is hard to imagine how Ms. Carroll, sitting in her air-conditioned office can decide the photos were not staged.]

Carroll said in addition to personally speaking with photo editors, "I also know from 30 years of experience in this business that you can't get competitive journalists to participate in the kind of (staging) experience that is being described."[So, what kind of photo staging can you get competitive journalists to engage in?]

Photographers are experienced in recognizing when someone is trying to stage something for their benefit, she said. [Yet, they need to picture to make a deadline, so they shoot anyway?]

"Do you really think these people would risk their lives under Israeli shelling to set up a digging ceremony for dead Lebanese kids?" asked Patrick Baz, Mideast photo director for AFP. [Yes.] "I'm totally stunned by first the question, and I can't imagine that somebody would think something like that would have happened." [Another "How dare anyone question...."]

The AP had three different photographers there who weren't always aware of what the others were doing, and filed their images to editors separately, said Santiago Lyon, director of photography. [Increasing the likelihood that they were duped by staged pictures, I guess.]

There are also several reasons not to draw conclusions from time stamps, Lyon said. Following a news event like this, the AP does not distribute pictures sequentially; photos are moved based on news value and how quickly they are available for an editor to transmit. [Someone delayed sending photos of the number one news story of the day? Are we supposed to believe that?]

The AP indicates to its members when they are sent on the wire, and member Web sites sometimes use a different time stamp to show when they are posted.

So, we eagerly await the response of the news media to the outside offer to examine the timestamps. Of course, none of this explains the other anomolies, such as changes of clothes by Mr. Green Helmet between pictures, or the fact that Green Helmet did the same display of bodies to photographers in the 1996 attacks.

Is a Goodbye to Charlie Enough?

The Washington Post today provided the best incentive I have yet seen to vote for Republicans in the mid-term Congressional elections.

Those of you who read this blog (both of you) know that I believe that the Republicans held down spending better when they were a minority party. As a result, I was not planning to vote for any Congressional Republicans in November. Now, thans to the Washington Post, I am wavering:

Rep. Charles B. Rangel (N.Y.), who would become chairman of the Ways and Means Committee if Democrats picked up the 15 seats needed to regain the majority, said in an interview yesterday that he will quit Congress if the party does not capitalize on an unparalleled opportunity.

Throw in Maxine Waters's resignation as well, and it would be a done deal for me.

I think I need Mr. Rangel's promise in writing and legally enforceable.

Deception in Qana

The Robert Spencer summary of the Qana building collapse, A Star Spangled Massacre, about Hezbollah deception is a must read.

Moron-in-Chief: Venezuelan Prez Hugo Chavez

Speaking on MEMRI TV appearing jointly with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad:

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez: Why don'’t they [Israel] look for an army, and confront it like a real army? If you want war, look for a real army to fight. If they want war, because of the demons inside them, why don'’t they behave like a soldier? I am a soldier. Come up against us soldiers. But what cowardice, to bomb a shelter with women and children, who don't even have a stone with which to defend themselves.

Smell the coffee, Hugo! Terrorists don't wear uniforms, march in armies, or defend territories per se. If it is cowardice to bomb civilian shelters, what is the indiscriminate launching of 2000 missiles into towns in Israel, as Hezbollah has done?

Double Standard

For days Hezbollah has been launching missiles targeting civilians in various cities in Israel. Nearly 2000 missiles, loaded with ball-bearing sized shrapnel to inflict maximum harm, indiscriminately.

Israel drops warning leaflets telling civilians to evacuate first, then Israel bombs. Hezbollah cowards shield themselves with civilians. So, what happens? Israeli bombs kill some civilians in Cana (or Kana or Qana). Or maybe not. Why is the MSM reacting so to Israel accidentally doing what Hezbollah does on purpose?

Message to the press: Islamic terrorists such as Hezbollah are actively working to kill Jews and Christians and want to destroy the American way of life.

Why does the MSM support Hezbollah? Whose side are the MSM on?

Here is an interesting analysis of dishonesty in the reporting of civilian casualties.