Thursday, December 27, 2007

Statism is Here

Statism: The belief, almost always unjustified, that no matter what the problem, government can solve it better than private citizens. It is not merely about mandating universally poor health care. It is about protecting our homes and families. Gun control is a typical example. It is the unjustified belief that police, who have no legal duty to protect the individual from crazed nutcases who want to kill, will nevertheless be there and will protect you.

The latest outrage is from a town in California that prohibits private citizens, on pain of criminal prosecution, from fighting fires to protect their homes. No. The volunteer fire department is the only permitted firefighting agency. Leave your own hose at home. Doug Bandow reports here. Here, neighbors were threatened with criminal prosecution for buying a fire truck and organizing neighbor volunteers, some of who are professional firefighters.

My original intent in starting this blog was to focus on stupid government tricks. This report certainly qualifies.

Thursday, December 20, 2007

Hillary Christmas Ad

This was so bad, I thought it was a joke. But as I keep looking , I don't think it is. I think they are serious.

Hillary Christmas Ad

I guess the leftist spirit of Christmas is to take money from person A, give it person B, and take credit for being the giver.

How low can they sink?

Sunday, December 09, 2007

Mahmoud El-Yousseph's Letter to the Editor

The following letter was published in the Marion Star (Print) and the Columbus Dispatch online letters. I am certain that Mr. Yousseph will not mind my reproducing it here in its entirety:

Proper punishment for convicted terrorist

Central Ohio sleep tight tonight. A second Columbus man was busted for terror ties and was sentenced for 10 years in jail. What a relief!

Nuradin Abdi, a Somali immigrant, was convicted last week and will spend the next 6 years behind bars and then be expelled to Mogadishu. Take it from this Muslim, Abdi is getting what he deserves.

Abdi was convicted of providing material to terror activities and plan to carry out attack at an area shopping mall, targeting innocent citizens. He claimed that was in response to U.S. agression against Muslims abroad.

That is not how you should show gratitude to the country that took you in as a refugee, provided you with a chance at work, safety, and security. If he was dissatisfied with our government foreign policy (as am I), there are many legal avenues available, even to non-citizens. By advocating the use of violence, he was part of the problem and not the solution.
Fortunately, he did not have a chance to carry out his plan.

I must admit I've never met the man. However, when I read about his case four years ago, I was suspicious about the government's claim, since Abdi was arrested based on secret evidence. This was, afterall, at the height of anti-Muslim feeling in the U.S.

Still fresh on the minds of Muslims across America were the two high profile cases of two other U.S.-born Muslim converts: Brandon Mayfield, an attorney from Oregon and James [Yusuf] Yee of Washington state. Mr. Mayfield was falsely accused by the government and was implicated with the Madrid bombing, while Captain James Yee, who served in the U.S. Army at Guantanamo Bay Naval Station, was charged with espionage and many other serious offenses. Later the government dropped all charges against both of them. The government agreed to settle with Mayfield for $ 2 million, and offered him a formal apology: The federal government "regrets that it mistakenly linked Mr. Mayfield to this attack." The U.S. Army lost a valuable human resource. Captain Yee received an honorable discharge, no apology, and he wrote a book about his ordeal to pay off his $200,000 legal expenses.

During that hysteria, I spoke publicly in defense of Abdi and about his right to free and fair trial based on evidence. I even contributed to his legal defense fund. Now after his case is over and he has admitted guilt to terror ties, I accept that this misguided man has betrayed his family, local Somalis, Central Ohio's Muslim community, and the country that welcomed him.

Of special concern to me is the lack of response to this issue by local Muslim and Arab leaders, especially by The Council of American Islamic Relations [CAIR]. CAIR has defended Abdi vigorously throughout his case when it perceived he was a victim. One would think that CAIR leadership would have the moral courage to denounce Abdi's act, once he was found guilty on credible evidence. I made four attempts by phone seeking a reaction from two CAIR members, my messages were not returned. Sadly, that was the same group that I once admired and took heat for defending in the press.

Lets hope and pray that the New Year does not bring us anymore unpleasant surprises, the likes of Nuradin Abdi. As far as this Muslim is concerned, I will continue to speak out my opinion -- a freedom which is guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution -- even when it is not popular. But I will keep in mind my late mother's (bless her soul) advice to me as I embarked for America: Don't spit into the plate that feeds you!

Mahmoud El-Yousseph, Westerville

Friday, December 07, 2007

M. Zhudi Jasser Speaks Out

In an interesting article in the Middle East Quarterly, M. Zhudi Jasser, a Muslim activist against radial Islamists, describes his contacts with teh Flying Imams. At the end of the article, Mr. Jasser echoes my own thinking on what needs to be done by Muslims and non-Muslims:
Countering Islamism and combating Islamist terrorism should be a greater public responsibility for the organized American Muslim community than the obsession with civil rights and victimization in which current Islamist organizations engage. Americans living in fear for their security are looking to moderate, traditional Muslims to lead this fight. The credibility of the Muslim community suffers because groups such as CAIR, ISNA, and the North American Imams Federation deny the interplay between Islamism and terrorism.

Non-Muslims also have a role. Both the U.S. government and mainstream media often give Islamists and their organizations exclusive voice to speak on behalf of American Muslims, which creates a cycle of apparent, if not real, empowerment. Seldom do they turn to non-Islamists and anti-Islamists who may represent far more American Muslims. The recent refusal of PBS to air the ABG Films, Inc. documentary Islam v. Islamists is a prime example of the manner in which media producers and executives shield Islamists from criticism.

Monday, December 03, 2007

Sharia Law Barbarism

On the Teddy bear named Mohammed and the lashed for the rape victim (for being in a car with a man not her husband), finally a New York Times editorial with which I can agree:
Muslims who wonder why non-Muslims are often baffled, angered, even frightened by some governments’ interpretation of Islamic law need only look to the cases of two women in Saudi Arabia and Sudan threatened with barbaric lashings.
...
What one Muslim leader, Ibrahim Mogra of the Muslim Council of Britain, said about the Sudan case can also be applied to the Saudis’: “How does this help the cause of Islam? What kind of message and image are we portraying about our religion and our culture?”
And what about the Sudanese protesters demanding her life? What does that say?

Even CAIR shudders at the Sudanese reaction to the teddy bear situation, albeit in a more muted fashion than I would.

Tuesday, November 27, 2007

Kennedy Memoirs Deal

According to the New York Times, Senator Kennedy has inked an $8 million deal to write his memoirs in a story headlined "Kennedy Memoirs Said to Fetch $8 Million."

Is the working title, maybe, If I Killed Her? No, wait, that title has already been taken.

Monday, November 26, 2007

Islamofascist Awareness Week Opposition

There has been much misinformation about the recent Islamopfascist Awareness Week. I ran across this twisted lecture at Emory University. It is extraordinarily wrong-headed.
A Lecture By Dr. Hassan Ali El-Najjar at Emory University, October 23, 2007, about Islamofascist Awareness Week.
Greetings and Introduction:
It gives me great pleasure to be here tonight to participate in an educational event that I hope to increase our understanding of our world, to contribute to the world peace, and prosperity of all nations, particularly our country, the United States of America.

I'd like first to thank Cleave Pierce and the Outspoken Allies who through their efforts and courageous initiative made this event possible. They have lit tonight's candle instead of joining a long line of others who have been content with cursing darkness, in a whispering and whining tone.

I'd like also to thank the administration of the Emory University which allowed the event to happen as a contribution to increasing understanding of the University community about the this important issue.

I'd like to thank everyone here tonight promising to do my best to make this evening as educational and as enjoyable as possible.

Finally, for those who organized the "Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week" in Emory, if anyone of them is here tonight, I'd like to tell them that I came in peace to educate them about the consequences of this campaign on their Muslim American colleagues here in Emory, and on Muslim Americans in general. I hope that I'll contribute to their education of other world views than their own.

I hope and pray that an atmosphere of respect, love, and desire for peace prevails in this night. I'm not here for anything else.
Note that only the leftists deviated from respectful communications during Islamofascist Awareness Week. But that is what it means to be a leftist, I guess.

I learned that a week-long program has been organized in Emory and other campuses nationwide under the title of "Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week."
Before I start, I'd like just to tell everybody here that the mere association of Islam and fascism is painful enough for me and for Muslims to the extent of religious persecution.
It is unfortunate that radical Islamists have created in our public arena that association of Islam with fascism. It is up to Muslims to take the necessary steps to rid their ranks of the fascist elements. So far, I see no progress or even any meaningful attempt at progress.

It is an attempt to instigate Christian and Jewish students against their Muslim friends, colleagues, and professors. Just imagine if somebody organizes an event to smear Judaism or Christianity associating them with fascism. I don't accept that as a Muslim and I don't expect Jews and Christians to accept it.
I hope this complete misstatement of the situation is not intentional. Nothing about Islamofascist Awareness Week smears Islam in general. It was about those who do evil who brag that they are acting in the name of Islam – not all Muslims. The organizers were careful to make that absolutely clear to anyone who would listen.

In brief, why is the religion of Islam being smeared and attacked, when the conflict is not religious?

Wars have never been launched for religious purposes.
Osama bin Laden and his crew announce again and again that the conflict is religious. It was in all the papers. What universe does Mr. El-Najjar inhabit?

World War I, World War II, Korean War, Vietnam War, Iran-Iraq War, Gulf War, Current Iraq War, and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict have all started for resources and secular geo-strategic goals.
Then, how can we explain such attempts to blame Islam and smear it?
Good question: why does Osama bin Laden smear Islam the way that he does and why do Muslims fail to point that out?

Why is this attempt to harass Muslim Americans, even innocent students and professors in their campuses?
It is of course no such thing. Muslims are asked to join the Week's activities, but instead oppose them, thus supporting bin Laden and sending the message to America that they will not renounce him and his activities.

Is it an attempt to distract the American people, including students, from the real problems facing the United States?
Is it an attempt to prepare Americans for another devastating war, on Iran this time?

Why not organizing "Awareness Weeks" about our major problems:

- The US national debt, which exceeded $9 trillion?
The US national debt never flew airliners in the the World Trade Center.

- The influence of oil companies on foreign policy?
The oil companies never flew airliners in the the World Trade Center.

- The influence of the Israel Lobby on the legislative and executive branches of our government?
The Israel lobby never flew airliners in the the World Trade Center.

- Our health care system that leaves millions of Americans without coverage?
The health care system never flew airliners in the the World Trade Center.

- The half million Americans who are killed annually by the tobacco industry? (Olson & Defrane, 2000: 32).
The tobacco industry never flew airliners in the the World Trade Center.

- The one hundred thousand Americans who are killed annually by the alcoholic beverage industry? (Olson & Defrane, 2000: 32).
The alcohol beverage industry never flew airliners in the the World Trade Center.

- Why do we have the highest rates of imprisonment, abortion, and teenage pregnancy in the world.
None of these ever flew airliners in the the World Trade Center.

- Why are all these essential problems ignored?
They are not being ignored, but guess what they never did to us!

- Are such campaigns to smear the great religion of Al-Islam an attempt to distract the American people from thinking about these problems and expecting their government to address them instead?
The Islamofascism Awareness Week is not a campaign to smear Islam, unless ..... the only logical way that Islamofascism Awareness Week could be interpreted to smear Islam is if Islam really is what bin Laden says it is. If Islam and Islamofascism are two different things, there is no way that anyone can logically say that Islamofascism Awareness Week smears Islam.

I hope, accordingly, that Mr. el-Najjar is wrong and Islamofascism Awareness Week does not smear Islam, because I would like to believe that Islam is better than the religion that bin Laden says it is.

I will quote and respond to no more of Mr. el-Najjar's lecture. The lecture is simply more of the same drivel. It is sad that Mr. el-Najjar chose to be divisive and to make false accusations rather than to bring people together in the common cause of fighting terrorism with the peaceful religion most of us would like Islam to be and to be perceived as.

Unfortunately, Mr. el-Najjar perpetuates the worst of perceptions about Islam. It is a shame that he chose that path.

Mahmoud. el-Yousseph Recognizes America as Muslim-Friendly

Mahmoud el-Yousseph, who has been criticized as a Hezbollah apologist, sent me a letter published in the Marion Star. I would provide a link, but the Marion Star (Marion, Ohio) foolishly inhibits links, so I cannot. However, here are excerpts:
Believe or not, America is more Muslim-friendly since 9/11, and more so than the rest of the western world. In case you have any doubt, please read the three items that were reported this year:

June 2, 2007 AP wire service story about Bilan Nur, a 22 year-old Somali woman from Phoenix, Arizona: She worked for several years for Alamo Rent-A-Car. The company fired her for refusing the take off her hijab (headscarf). Nur registered a complaint at the Federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. The EEOC sued the company. A federal jury said the company must pay her $288,000 for firing her for wearing the hijab. ... Yes, Justice is blind in America!

July 20, 2007: According to the Chicago Tribune, two Muslim women from the Cincinnati area were able to get their driver's license photographs wearing the hijab free of charge. This took place after clerks at separate bureau offices wrongly demanded that the women remove the scarves for the photo. Tom Hunter, spokesman for the Department of Public Transportation sent a message to 216 state registrar's offices informing staff that wearing the hijab while taking a photograph is allowed and legally exempt under Ohio law. Mr. Hunter stressed in his message that asking a Muslim woman to remove her hijab is like asking a non Muslim woman to remove her shirt. That is a man of honor and integrity!

Muslims were very proud and will never forget Sept.1, 2001, when the U.S. Postal Service expanded its Holiday Celebrations Series with a new stamp highlighting the Muslim holiday of Eid. The postage stamp was to honor and commemorate two important Islamic celebrations: Eid ul-Fitr and Eid al-Adha. ...

For many years, the White House, U.S. State Department, the Pentagon, all branches of U.S. military and St. James Episcopal Church of Columbus, Ohio, host such an [Iftar, closing meal of Ramadan] event. They meet Muslims and get to know who they are, which helps break the stereotypes that Muslims face every day. To Muslims, that means recognition and respect.

America does not need to spend millions of dollars on public relations campaigns at Al-Jazeera and other satellite networks in the Middle East to promote a positive image. The aforementioned acts of respect and goodwill gestures I mentioned will win the hearts and minds of Muslims here and abroad. Thank you, America, for making this my best Eid ever!
Mahmoud, could tell CAIR about this? It would not make CAIR happy to know that America is already more Muslim-friendly that the rest of the Western world. And it certainly differs from CAIR's protrayal of America.

Hobnobbing with Terrorists

On October 15, 2007, CAIR-Ohio and the Muslim Student Association at Ohio State University invited Dr. Jamal Badawi to speak. The usual left-wing suspects (such as the National Organization for Women "NOW") failed to protest. What's wrong with Dr. Badwai speaking?

As Patrick Poole points out, Dr. Badari hobnobs with Hamas and terrorists. He is also a participant (board member) of terrorist-founded organizations. I have detailed in previous posts the problems with Hamas. The Hamas charter sets Hamas up as an enemy not only of the United States, but our entire way of life. Hamas institutionalizes violent Jihad.

Should a man be known by the company he keeps? Well, yes. That is not "guilt by association." No one is accusing Dr. Badawi of guilt by personally participating in terrorism. Hobnobbing with terrorists does not make anyone a terrorirst directly. But it makes him a suspicious person and apparently a terrorist sympathizer. A person whose views are suspect. A person whose loyaties are suspect.

Dr. Badawi's views are far outside the mainstream of our American and Canadian culture. Still based upon the links in Patrick's article, I don't think Patrick was quite fair on some issues. For example, the links do not support the charge that Dr. Badawi advocates wife beating. The reference to striking one's wife reads:
As defined by hadith, it is NOT PERMISSIBLE TO STRIKE ANYONE'S FACE, CAUSE ANY BODILY HARM OR EVEN BE HARSH. What the hadith qualified as dharban ghayra mubarrih, or light striking, was interpreted by early jurists as a (symbolic) use of miswak (a small natural toothbrush)! They further qualified permissible "striking" as that which leaves no mark on the body. It is interesting that this latter fourteen-centuries-old qualifier is the criterion used in contemporary American law to separate a light and harmless tap or strike from "abuse" in the legal sense.
Now this Islamically permissible symbolic striking is hardly wife-beating. It is male supremacist and misogynist. Where was NOW on this one?

Dr. Badawi approves of polygamy. While antithetical to our American traditions (unless you are a fundamentalist Morman, I suppose), it is hardly subversive, just anti-American culture. Again, NOW is absent.

The links to articles on on suicide bombing and death to apostates yield ambiguous opinions at best. Does approval of suicide bombings apply to taking out non-combatant women and children? Does the treason rational for apostate executions include treason by insulting Islam for having left Islam? We certainly know from examining rhetoric from the violent Jihadists, that Dr. Badawi's stated views would be interpreted by them as consistent with their radical Islam. The statements are sufficiently ambiguous, though, that Dr. Badawi and his supporters could argue the quotes are harmless.

What makes the quotes suspicious is the hobnobbing problem. If Dr. Badawi is going to attend functions that celebrate terrorists and serve on organizations founded by terrorists, we can't be faulted for understanding the ambiguous as intending to support his apparent friends.

The thinking behind Dr. Badawi's invitation to speak at Ohio State is baffling. Are there no Islamic scholars to invite who do not have associations with terrorists or terrorist organizations?

Tuesday, November 20, 2007

Arab Initiative

Is the Arab initiative the answer to bring peace to the Middle East? Alon Ben-Meir, professor of international relations at the Center for Global Affairs at NYU, discusses it in an article in American Chronicle brought to my attention by Mahmoud El-Yousseph.

The Arab initiative would result in Israel withdrawing from the "occupied territories" and establishing a Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital. Professor Ben-Meir says,
Third, since there are many extremist Arab groups, such as Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and Hezbollah, that oppose the peace process, only the collective Arab political will can rein in by any means these groups. Moreover, without such a collective effort, it will be impossible to successfully combat terrorism unless the communities that support such terrorists groups are alienated from their leadership. Here too, only the Arab states working in concert can bring about the communal socio-economic and political change, in combination with force if necessary, to achieve that objective.
...
To be sure, the Arab states have decided to reintroduce the Initiative because of their heightened vulnerability emanating from the convergence of events resulting from the war in Iraq and its explosive regional potential. They see an end to the Arab-Israeli conflict as a precondition to effectively addressing many of the problems that have plagued the Middle East, stabilizing the region, and securing their regimes. But the Arab leaders, other than those from Egypt and Jordan, which are at peace with Israel, (assigned by the Arab League to pursue the Initiative with Israel), must not sit on their hands and wait. They too must reach out to Israel and demonstrate that their Initiative is genuine and are ready to engage the Israelis on any level while remaining true to the Initiative’s principles.
I remain skeptical that any such initiative could have a lasting effect. The problem lies in the roots of political Islam. How can Israel, the United States, or anyone else capitulate with a truce that, following the example of Muhammed, need last only 10 years and, it being a truce with non-believers, is not considered binding upon believers? In other words, Islam as believed by the radical elements (and perhaps by many who are not so radical) creates a situation that make long term trust of Islamic states very, very difficult if not impossible.

To make it work, to make it acceptable, the Arab states must find an extraordinary means to create a reason for trust. A daunting task to be sure.

Monday, November 19, 2007

Hate Crimes in the U.S.

Number of hate crime victims from the FBI official statistics by bias motivation for 2006:

Anti-black: 3332
Anti-white: 1054
Anti-Jewish: 1144
Anti-Islamic: 208
Anti-Hispanic: 819

Mr. El-Yousseph Responds

David,
Lest we learn from history, we are doomed to make the mistake again. The same demogouge was said of Japanese American fellowing the attack on Pearl Harbor. We did not trust them, we put them in concentration camps. Then we send their men to fight for us in the southPasific and they were performed heroically and were highly decorated units.
You will never question the loyalt of Jewish American to the US when they express support and sympathy to Israel. Even their support is sending to money to built illegal settlemnet- which is illegal under U.S. law. What about spying by some of them and giving our top secrets to foreign nation? What about demand of every U.S presdient since 1985 the release a spy [Johnathon Pollard] who is serving life-sentence in U.S. jail.
At least I encouraged my oldest son the join the US miltary, where as they encourage their sons and daughters to join the Israeli defense forces. That is the forces who killed in cold blood 34 of our sailors, and injured 172 other not long ago.
And what did you do when a 23 years old American peace activist name Racheal Corrie was crushed to death by 10,000 lb bulldozer by the Israeli army in Rafah, Palestine 6 years ago?
If you answer is nothing, then we are on a different wave length.
After all, I did not attend a rally in Kansas to protest military funeral,where I stepped on the old glory, carrying signs that read, " America is Doomed", "Thank God for IED", "Thank God for Maimed soldiers"
I did not say after 9/11, America get what it deserve! Jerry Farewll did
I did suggest that someone should
fire a missile into the U.S. State Dep.! Pat Robertson did.
Yet all the 3 example mentioned above, people were exercising their first amandment right. Had I said or did any of the mentioned above, I will be serving time in Gitmo, Cuba. So why have two standards. Why is being hypocrical David. I was hoping I will be having an open and fruitfull debate. Sadly not.
Yours,
Mahmoud
I leave it to the reader to decide whether Mr. El Yousseph ever explains how one can be loyal to the United States and at the same time support an organization that has declared, and acted upon, enmity with the United States. Clearly, the response voices opposition to Israel.

As I said, one can loyally oppose United States policy. That is every American's right.

My quarrel is NOT with opposing policy, it is with supporting an organization that is a declared enemy of the United States and has terrorized and killed United States citizens as part of its policy. As I read his response, Mr. El-Yousseph fails to address that critical issue.

Update: Mr. El-Yousseph informs me that the letter I published above was not intended to be his response. I apologize to him if I misunderstood. I will be pleased to publish has actual response, unedited, as this letter was.

Friday, November 16, 2007

Open Letter to Mahmoud El-Yousseph

.
Reference: Your support of Hezbollah as Reported Here and Here.

Dear Mr. El-Yousseph

I do not believe that you INTEND to be disloyal to the United States. You have vigorously and often proclaimed your allegiance, you served in the country's military, and your son is serving now. I concede your sincerity.

But here is my problem. Your apparently sincere loyalty to the United States is in direct contradiction to your support for Hezbollah. Hezbollah has declared its enmity with the United States. Hezbollah has attacked and terrorized United States civilians and military several times.

I understand that you disagree with the policies of the United States in the Middle East. That is your right. You have the right to voice that objection, demonstrate, write your Congressman, write letters to the editor, and whatever. But whatever you preferred policies in the Middle East, any support for Hezbollah as an organization (or Hamas for that matter) is necessarily disloyal to the United States, because Hezbollah has declared itself an enemy and has acted upon that declaration.

You may loyally support the ultimate goals of the likes of Hezbollah and loyally oppose and seek to change the United States goals in the Middle East. But supporting an enemy organization is quite a different thing. Supporting an enemy is disloyal. I cannot se it any other way.

You may feel free to respond. If you do, I will publish your response.

[Mr. El Youssef's defense to his support for Hezbollah has so far been to threaten legal action against those who point it out, specifically Patrick Poole. See here. The above open letter is an attempt to generate reasoned discussion.]

Wednesday, November 14, 2007

U.S. Rep. Henry Cuellar: Arrogant Jerk

Last week on the Glenn Beck television program, United States Representative Henry Cuellar made an arrogant, demeaning comment to another guest, the county sheriff in Laredo, who like Cuellar was Hispanic. The comment implied that the sheriff should stick to sheriff work and leave public policy to important people like Cuellar (not his exact words, but that was the clear meaning).

To his credit, Glenn Beck called Cuellar on the comment and said, "Shame on you" to Cuellar for the belittling the sheriff. It turns out that Cuellar's brother is running for election against that particular sheriff.

Now, Cuellar is going around calling Glenn Beck a racist. Apparently in Cuellar's world, if you do something dumb, don't apologize:. Defend yourself by calling others evil and unsupportable names.

I tried to email Representative Cuellar about the issue, but according to his website, I can't get his email address unless I live in his district. What arrogance!

If you live in Laredo Texas, you need to know what kind of guy is representing you. He is the kind of guy who is too arrogant to admit a mistake and move on. He reacts by attacking others.

A horrible, horrible man, apparently. A disgrace to public servants. Oh yeah. For what it is worth, he is a Democrat.

Monday, November 12, 2007

Hezbollah Support as Treason?

About supporting Hezbollah which has declared itself an enemy of the United States, this is from the United States Code:

18 USC § 2381. Treason

Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

I am not sure what "adheres to their enemies" means exactly, but I suspect it means giving loyalty. "Aid and comfort" surely would include giving money, but dies it also include giving public support?

Draw your own conclusions.


Sunday, November 11, 2007

Support for Hezbollah: Act of Disloyalty

Previous posts have discussed Hamas, but what about Hezbollah? Mahmoud El-Yousseph, a local and vocal Muslim considers himself a patriot. He is an ex-marine and claims a tremendous love for the United States, yet he supports Hezbollah, calling its mujahadin "freedom fighters."

Is it possible to be an American patriot and also support Hezbollah, really?

The Hezbollah charter published February 16, 1985, says in part,
We combat abomination and we shall tear out its very roots, its primary roots, which are the US. All attempts made to drive us into marginal actions will fail, especially as our determination to fight the US is solid.
...
Our Objectives
Let us put it truthfully: the sons of Hizhallah know who are their major enemies in the Middle East - the Phalanges, Israel, France and the US.
Hezbollah acts upon its enmity with the United States:
  • April 1983: Hezbollah sent a truck laden with explosives into the U.S. Embassy in Beirut, killing 63, including 19 Americans.
  • October 23, 1983: Hezbollah sent a suicide bomber against the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut causing 241 deaths.
  • Throughout the 1980s, Hezbollah was behind the kidnapping of many Westerners in Lebanon throughout the 1980s, including the capture and brutal murder of CIA Beirut Station Chief, William Buckley. Journalist Terry Anderson was kidnapped and would eventually spend 2,454 days in captivity, along with several officials from the American University of Beirut.
  • In June 1985, Hezbollah terrorists seized TWA Flight 847 en route from Athens to Rome, and diverted the plane to Beirut. When the terrorists demands were not met, a US Navy Seabee diver on board, Robert Dean Stethem, was shot and his body dumped on the airport tarmac. Other American military personnel were savagely beaten. The plane’s passengers and crew were held for 17 days.
  • In 1990, Hezbollah captured, tortured, and eventually hanged Marine Corps Colonel Richard Higgins
  • A Saudi Hezbollah cell was involved in providing al-Qaeda operatives with explosives training in their June 1996 attack on the Khobar Towers in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, which killed 19 American Air Force servicemen with the 4404th Wing and injured more than 500 others.
Are these simply old news and Hezbollah has changed? No. Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah in February 2005 in a speech to a crowd of Hezbollah supporters:
We consider it [America] to be an enemy because it wants to humiliate our governments, our regimes, and our peoples. Because it is the greatest plunderer of our treasures, our oil, and our resources, while millions in our nation suffer unemployment, poverty, hunger, unmarriageability, ignorance, darkness, and so on. America… This American administration is an enemy. Our motto, which we are not afraid to repeat year after year, is: "Death to America."

Crowd: Death to America
Death to America
Death to America
Death to America
Death to America
Death to America
[Thanks for Patrick Poole, Central Ohioans Against Terrorism for this summary]

When confronted with these facts, Mr. El-Yousseph defends his loyalty and patriotism with insults, but offers absolutely no reasoning or rational analysis to defend his Hezbollah support. As far as I can see there is no reasoning or rational analysis possible.

Hezbollah is an enemy of the United States. It says it is. It has engaged in both hostile words and deeds. It is our enemy.

Support of Hezbollah is therefore, and unarguably, disloyal to the United States.

Wednesday, November 07, 2007

What is Hamas All About?

What does it mean to support Hamas.? What is Hamas anyway?

According to the Hamas charter, Hamas wasformed by the Muslim Brotherhood. The Muslims Brotherhood is a large and widely known Islamist group formed in 1928 to reestablish the caliphate through jihad.

The purpose and methods and, well, attitutdes of Hamas is revealed in Hamas's own charter. Here are some excerpts:

Article Eight:
Allah is its target, the Prophet is its model, the Koran its constitution: Jihad is its path and death for the sake of Allah is the loftiest of its wishes.
Article Thirteen:
Initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences, are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement. ...

There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors. The Palestinian people know better than to consent to having their future, rights and fate toyed with. As in said in the honourable Hadith:
"The people of Syria are Allah's lash in His land. He wreaks His vengeance through them against whomsoever He wishes among His slaves It is unthinkable that those who are double-faced among them should prosper over the faithful. They will certainly die out of grief and desperation."
Article Twenty-Two:
For a long time, the enemies have been planning, skillfully and with precision, for the achievement of what they have attained. They took into consideration the causes affecting the current of events. They strived to amass great and substantive material wealth which they devoted to the realisation of their dream. With their money, they took control of the world media, news agencies, the press, publishing houses, broadcasting stations, and others. With their money they stirred revolutions in various parts of the world with the purpose of achieving their interests and reaping the fruit therein. They were behind the French Revolution, the Communist revolution and most of the revolutions we heard and hear about, here and there. With their money they formed secret societies, such as Freemasons, Rotary Clubs, the Lions and others in different parts of the world for the purpose of sabotaging societies and achieving Zionist interests. With their money they were able to control imperialistic countries and instigate them to colonize many countries in order to enable them to exploit their resources and spread corruption there.

You may speak as much as you want about regional and world wars. They were behind World War I, when they were able to destroy the Islamic Caliphate, making financial gains and controlling resources. They obtained the Balfour Declaration, formed the League of Nations through which they could rule the world. They were behind World War II, through which they made huge financial gains by trading in armaments, and paved the way for the establishment of their state. It was they who instigated the replacement of the League of Nations with the United Nations and the Security Council to enable them to rule the world through them. There is no war going on anywhere, without having their finger in it. ...
Article Thirty:
Writers, intellectuals, media people, orators, educaters and teachers, and all the various sectors in the Arab and Islamic world - all of them are called upon to perform their role, and to fulfill their duty, because of the ferocity of the Zionist offensive and the Zionist influence in many countries exercised through financial and media control, as well as the consequences that all this lead to in the greater part of the world.

Jihad is not confined to the carrying of arms and the confrontation of the enemy. The effective word, the good article, the useful book, support and solidarity - together with the presence of sincere purpose for the hoisting of Allah's banner higher and higher - all these are elements of the Jihad for Allah's sake.
"Whosoever mobilises a fighter for the sake of Allah is himself a fighter. Whosoever supports the relatives of a fighter, he himself is a fighter." (related by al-Bukhari, Moslem, Abu-Dawood and al-Tarmadhi).
Article Thirty-Two:
... The Islamic Resistance Movement consider itself to be the spearhead of the circle of struggle with world Zionism and a step on the road.
Reader, feel free to confirm that I have taken nothing out of context. Read it yourself.

The quotes above are from the charter, the most basic organic document of Hamas. People who support Hamas necessarily support and agree with the charter statements above.

Friday, November 02, 2007

Jamaat ul-Fuqra

The ABC News affiliate in Atlanta is doing an excellent series on Jamaat ul-Fuqra camps in Georgia. These camps were founded by Sheikh Mubarek Gilani and appear to function as terrorist training camps in the United States. They appear to house primarily converts to Islam from United States prisons.

Watch here:
[dead link deleted]
Update:
Part 1 here.
Part 2 here.

Thursday, November 01, 2007

Hillary the Obfuscator for President?

Russert: Do you support Governor Spitzer's proposal to give drivers licenses to illegal aliens?

Me to Hillary: Why not just say, "No?" Or if you do agree, how about "Yes?"

Monday, October 29, 2007

The Goals of Muslim Organizations Documented

I am no fan of conspiracy theories, although they abound among the crazies, such as the Truthers (who claim 9/11 was an inside job) and the Kennedy assassination theorists. Sometimes, though, there are very real conspiracies to do bad things.

If the conspiracies involve large numbers of people, though, the conspiracies will eventually be documented and revealed.

One such conspiracy was documented in the Holy Land Foundation trial that just ended in (mostly) a mistrial. I consider the Holy Land Foundation trial the most important criminal trial of the last 50 years. I fully expect the prosecutors to continue with a retrial of the Holy Land Foundation and other accused conspirators. This is the trial in which the Council on American Islamic Relations was names an unindicted co-conspirator.

This trial generated many thousands of pages of exhibits which shed light on some of the unsavory relationships aimed at undermining our entire way of life in the United States. When we are confronted with quotes from the Muslim Student Association or the Islamic Society of North America (such innocent sounding names!), we now know how they were born and what are their long term purposes.

These facts are revealed in a single summarizing document, a strategic memorandum, produced by the Muslim Brotherhood in 1991.

The process of settlement is a "Civilization-Jihadist Process" with all the word means. The Ikhwan [religious militia] must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand County hide in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and "sabotaging" its miserable house by their hands in the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all other religions. Without this level of understanding, we are not up to the challenge and have not prepared ourselves for Jihad yet. It is a Muslim's destiny to perform Jihad and work wherever he is and wherever he lands until the final hour comes, and there is no escape from that destiny except for those who chose to slack. But, would the slackers and the mujahedeen be equal. [Page 21 of 32 of Exhibit GX 3-85, "An Exlanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Group."]
The memorandum goes on to list the cooperating organizations including the Muslims Students Association (MSA) and the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) among others. CAIR was not mentioned, but it had not yet been formed. See the .pdf page 32.

So when you see a public statement by the president of the MSA or the ISNA, keep in mind their founding goal is to eliminate and destroy Western civilization from within. We must listen with great caution. Don't be fooled.

Hamas and Hezbollah: The Standard Response

Hamas is a US government designated terrorist organization. When confronted with an accusation that he or she supports Hamas, the standard Muslim response is, "I am not a terrorist."

Wow. What a non-sequitor!

Hamas is a Sunni Muslim political organization in the Middle East that uses various tactics to achieve its aims, including running people for elected office, offering charity to widows (especially widows of martyrs a.k.a. suicide bombers) and, yes, terrorism.

Here is the rub. Many -- and perhaps most -- Muslims do not agree that Hamas is a terrorist organization. Why?

There are a couple of reasons, I think. First, they see the situation in Israel and the Palestinians in the West Bank as extremely unjust and Hamas as the most passionate fighter against that injustice. So, in their support of Hamas, they focus on the goals of Hamas and discount Hamas's terrorism methods.

Second, they deny that Hamas engages in terrorism. Terrorist attacks are defined as those aimed at innocent civilians. In the view of many Muslim apologists, no one in Israel is an innocent civilian. Thus, they define away the terrorism problem.

Hezbollah is a Shiite organization similar to Hamas with a history of committing terrorist acts (including taking hostages, and bombing the US embassy in Beirut) directly against the United States. Yet, shockingly, a local Muslim who is a former United States Marine, Mahmoud El-Yousseph, approves of Hezbollah, calling its members "freedom fighters." For an excellent rundown of the activities of Hezbollah, see Central Ohioans Against Terrorism.

What an amazing cognitive dissonance.

I do not for a moment believe that these Muslims would strap bombs on themselves in America. But I have serious concerns about them when they work for any branch of the federal, state or local government, if they can persuade themselves to overlook the terrorist activities of Hamas and Hezbollah. they are either intellectually dishonest (mostly) or they are hiding their jihadist tendencies.

We need to send a clear message to the Muslim community: if you want us to believe that you oppose terrorism, you must also denounce organizations who use terrorist tactics, even if you generally support the goals of the terrorist organizations. You cannot oppose terrorism by supporting terrorist organizations. You cannot make these organizations into non-terrorist organizations by denying that they are terrorist organizations.

Islamofascist Awareness Week Wrap-Up

Across the nation on university campuses this past week, students sponsored Islamofascist Awareness Week events. Predictably, the looney left elements and some, but not all, Muslim Organizations protested. I guess the week was a success for breeding controversy, because only through controversy do the events get widely publicized.

Let us be quite clear. The term Islamofascist does not refer to all Muslims, or the term would not even be necessary. The term refers (in oversimplified fashion) to those Muslims who believe that they have a right to kill those who will not convert to Islam after being called upon to do so. Osama bin Laden periodically makes such a call to nonbelievers in Islam.

If Muslims who reject the Osama bin Laden approach to Islam would embrace, promote and join in Islamofascism Awareness Week and similar events. the distinction between bad Muslims and good Muslims would be quite clear. There would be no better way to persuade the rest of us that to a majority of Muslims, Islam truly is a religion of peace (which I believe they believe, despite the mass of ancient Islamic scholarship to the contrary).

However, instead of acting in a manner to persuade the rest of society that United States Muslims are truly against the Islamofascists, they protested or remained silent.

Bad strategy. Unless or course, they secretly sympathize with the bin Laden camp...

For an interesting wrap-up by David Horowitz, the organizer of the week, click here.

Roanoke Times Campaigns Against Gun Rights

Congratulations to the Roanoke Times for officially joining the looney left. (I deliberately provide no link to that paper.)

First the Times on its web site published a database of all holders of Virginia concealed carry permits (subsequently removed after a firestorm of protest). Then, the Times has instituted a policy of refusing advertising for gun shows.

Read about it here.

The link above contains an email to which you may sen your protest.

Why is it that the vigorous defenders of the First Amendment are so weak on and even against the Second?

Tuesday, September 18, 2007

CAIR Wants Us to Hate CAIR

CAIR's behavior is so odd. There is only one way to understand it. CAIR wants non-Muslims to hate CAIR so CAIR can complain about hate. Here is the latest example of CAIR's irrationality:

A Muslim advocacy group said today that it is asking the FBI to investigate an attack on worshippers outside a Columbus mosque on Friday.

A group of teenage boys threw rocks at the Masjid AsSahaaba mosque, 795 E. Hudson St. in South Linden, hitting one worshipper and breaking mosque windows, in what police said was a “biased attack on Muslim men leaving the mosque after prayer during the Ramadan season.”

Ramadan is a holy month in which Muslims fast during daylight hours and say extended evening prayers at mosques.

The mosque's imam, Abdiiaziz Abdi, and a witness, Robert, who would give only his first name, say the boys were simply looking for trouble. They don't think they were targeted as Muslims.

But Romin Iqbal, staff attorney for the Council on American- Islamic Relations in Ohio says he's asking the FBI to investigate it as a hate crime.

Columbus police are investigating, said spokeswoman Amanda Ford.

The Muslims witness say it was not a hate crime, but what does CAIR do? Demand a hate crime investigation. Based on nothing.

There is certainly nothing lovable about CAIR's behavior.



Monday, September 17, 2007

Abukar Arman and Support for HAMAS

Akubar Arman was a member of the Franklin County, Ohio justice commission which has oversight of homeland security in Franklin County. After Patrick Poole exposed Akubar Arman’s support of HAMAS, the Franklin county officials discovered that Mr. Arman was not a United States citizen and therefore prohibited from serving on the commission.

About the same time, Barbara Carmen, a Columbus Dispatch reporter, wrote an article about how Mr. Arman had been “cleared” of terrorism charges. That was of course absurd, because no one had charged Mr. Arman with any terrorism charges.

There is no doubt that Mr. Arman is a HAMAS supporter. He is not shy about his support having written one or more supportive published articles.

Memo to Barbara Carmen: The Clinton administration accurately identified and designated HAMAS as a terrorist organization. Mr. Arman, therefore, is a supporter of a terrorist organization. That does not mean he is about to strap bombs around his own waist. But if he supports a terrorist organization, he necessarily and logically supports terrorism.

Mr. Arman says it is his constitutional right to free speech to support HAMAS. Maybe so, but speech has consequences. And the consequences of his speech are that he supports terrorism, so I don’t want him anywhere near my government. This is not about hate. It is about right and wrong, and supporting terrorism is wrong.

Message to Muslims: if you support HAMAS, you support terrorism. Conversely, if you wholly reject terrorism, you must wholly reject HAMAS.

Tuesday, July 03, 2007

Immigration Reform

I have only minor quibbles with the article quoted in Chuck Muth's blog. This one come the closest to reality that I have seen published.

The article outline a framework for immigration reform that woudl work so much better than anything Congress has put on the table.

Monday, July 02, 2007

We Return

No posts for two and a half months. but ther is simply too much going on in the world to shut up now.

I am frustrated by immigration reform. I don't think either side gets it really. Immigration reform needs to be based upon principles. but no one articulates the principles very well. The immigration problem is not about cheap labor or letting people get away with something. It is about real human problems and about our national security. Here is my humble attempt to articulate the principles upon which immigration reform should be based.

1. National Security. We need to keep terrorists out. At least we need to make it difficult for foreign terrorists to enter the country. Our borders need to be secure. Bear in mind that we are not seeing any Catholic terrorists in recent years.

2. Compassion. We need compassion for those within our borders, however they arrived, who are here to work hard, assimilate and achieve the American dream. Many who arrived here "illegally" did so at great risk and with great hardship, because they wanted a better life. We need to have compassion, not condemnation, even if they jumped to the head of the line. Many conservatives falsely assume that entering the country illegally is a crime. I found no such crime in the United States Code.

3. We need to cease giving away our social services from our tax dollars, to those who arrive illegally. We need to be a magnet for the right reasons: Be productive and succeed. Not the wrong reasons: Free health care and welfare.

4. If people arrived illegally and commit crimes, they should be deported. that is a risk of coming in illegally.

5. We need to provide a reasonable path to citizenship for those who are here and are productive and who assimilate into our culture. Making arrangements on any unpaid back taxes on the same basis as any citizen should be a prerequisite.

6. It should be easier to get in the country legally than it is illegally. At least we can keep track of those in the country legally. Issue them credit cards, maybe. Make them really easy to track.

I am sure there are others. I will post as I think of them.

Wednesday, April 18, 2007

Virginia Tech

The massacre at Virginia Tech has evoked the expected calls for more gun control. But does that make any sense?

How many students lives would have been saved if the professors or some of the students who were attacked or the student victims had been carrying guns? If the campus had not been an official “gun free area,” with the shooter had been stopped by someone else's gun before killing 32 people? We will never know.

The argument in favor of gun control goes like this. If gun control were effective, the shooter would not have been able to obtain the guns that he obtained. It was too easy for him to obtain the guns and the ammunition.

Gun control advocates presume that the shooter would not have been able to obtain the guns and ammunition by illegal means. If the shooter were determined to go on his rampage, what makes us think that he would not be able to get around the law. Just because a law bans some contraband, that doesn't mean that it's not obtainable. Oh yes, usually raises the price. It makes money for black marketeers. But that doesn't mean that the contraband is unobtainable.

On the other hand, the Second Amendment crowd, points out that if one of the students had had a gun, perhaps the shooter would have been stopped earlier. Perhaps fewer people would have died.

How likely is it that there would have been any guns in the classroom even if the school had not been a gun free zone? I suggest that it is pretty unlikely. Unless we were to force a professor to have guns, most people, professors and otherwise, would not carry them as a matter of course. I can't imagine a campus full of people walk around with guns and holsters at their sides. How likely is it that there would have been a student with a concealed-carry permit carrying a weapon to happen to be in one of the question classrooms attacked by the shooter? But, without the "gun free zone" designation, who knows?

One thing is for sure. The gun-free students and gun-free professors had no chance against a well armed and cold-blooded gunmen. How does that balance against the possibility of an irresponsible gun toting student who gets drunk or high on drugs and pulls out his firearm and begins shooting? I suppose that is the purpose of a "gun free zone," isn't it.

I do not think that restricting the sale of guns or requiring registration of guns would have mattered one way or the other to a determined shooter planning to go on a rampage. By all accounts, this was a long-planned rampage. The guns were purchased in March. The rampage occurred in mid April. A determined nutcase had plenty of opportunity to obtain a black-market guns if he wanted them.

The old saying is, if you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns. How true in the Virginia Tech case!

Update: From Glenn Reynolds writing in the NY Daily News:

In fact, some mass shootings have been stopped by armed citizens. Though press accounts downplayed it, the 2002 shooting at Appalachian Law School was stopped when a student retrieved a gun from his car and confronted the shooter. Likewise, Pearl, Miss., school shooter Luke Woodham was stopped when the school's vice principal took a .45 fromhis truck and ran to the scene. In February's Utah mall shooting, it was an off-duty police officer who happened to be on the scene and carrying a gun.

Police can't be everywhere, and as incidents from Columbine to Virginia Tech demonstrate, by the time they show up at a mass shooting, it's usually too late. On the other hand, one group of people is, by definition, always on the scene: the victims. Only if they're armed, they may wind up not being victims at all.

"Gun-free zones" are premised on a fantasy: That murderers will follow rules, and that people like my student, or Bradford Wiles, are a greater danger to those around them than crazed killers like Cho Seung-hui. That's an insult. Sometimes, it's a deadly one.

Wednesday, April 11, 2007

Weenie Sailors Dishonor Britain

The story of the British sailors continue. While most of the media give the British sailor a pass for their collaboration in the Iranian propagandization of their capture, there is outrage in Britain over them running to the medial to sell their stories. The Ottawa Citizen opines:

The honourable thing would have been to renounce their coerced behaviour, denounce the Iranians' use of them for propaganda, and acknowledge that anything they endured was nothing compared to the sacrifices others have made.

Instead, some ran to the media with their victim tales. The big moneymaker was 26-year-old Faye Turney, the only woman in the group. The Royal navy member reportedly sold her story for about $300,000 in a newspaper and television deal.

Tales of victimhood? Tales of the lack of fortitude?

What do the Brits teach their military about behavior when captured? Any dishonor to protect themselves? Or instead: give name, rank and serial number only.

To be sure, not all captured Americans soldiers have behaved as trained, but as a previous post has pointed out, American military people taken hostage by Iran did much better than those British sailors in upholding our honor.

Tuesday, April 10, 2007

Don Imus and Unforgiveness

Don Imus? Not a fan. Saying that a women's basketball team looked like a bunch of nappy-headed hos was uncalled for. so he groveled in apology.

The reactions of the Rev. Al Sharpton and the Rev. Jesse Jackson? Unforgiveness.

What are these guys, Sharpton and Jackson, reverends of exactly? Certainly not Christianity.

Christians forgive their trespassers.

Monday, April 09, 2007

Britain Military Gone Soft

As a citizen, who would you rather have defending your country: The British weenies who collaborated with Tom the Iranian Thug-in-Chief? Or the United States Marines held Hostage by Iran in 1979? Read the first hand account of one of those Marines.

What a difference!!

Thursday, April 05, 2007

Slip-Sliding

I was struck by the following quote from the AP report on the sentencing of Tarik Shah for supporting terrorism:
A prosecutor asked Shah to say he knew that al-Qaida was a terrorist group, but Shah, after a pause of several minutes to consult with his lawyer, agreed only that he knew that the U.S. had designated al-Qaida a terrorist organization.
What stunned me was that that was exactly the response of CAIR's Nihad Awad's in a television interview with pressed to answer whether Hamas was a terrorist organization. Birds of a feather, I guess.

Monday, April 02, 2007

A True Story

Read the incredibly moving story of an ex-Muslim here.

I was particularly struck by the following:
Q.5: 51
O you who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians as awliya’ (friends, protectors, helpers, etc.), they are but awliya’ to one another…
I also found the above statement false. The evidence is in the Bosnia and Kosovo crisis; where Christian countries, waged war against another Christian country, to liberate Muslims. Many Jewish doctors volunteered to help the Kosovar refugees, despite the fact that during the WWII, the same Albanian Muslims took sides with Hitler and helped him in his holocaust against the Jews.

It became obvious to me that Muslims are accepted by all the people of the world yet our prophet wants us to hate them, to disassociate ourselves from them, to force them into our way of life or kill them, subdue them and make them pay Jizya. How silly! How pathetic! How inhumane! No wonder there is so much inexplicable hate of the West and of the Jews among Muslims. It was Muhammad who inseminated the hate and the distrust of the non-believers among his followers. How can Muslims integrate with other nations while holding these hateful messages of the Quran as the words of God?

There are many Muslims who immigrate to non-Muslim countries and are received with open arms. Many of them get into politics and become part of the ruling elite. We suffer no discrimination in the non-Islamic countries.
It is so true, contrary to the lies of CAIR, that Muslims, as people, are accepted in America by ordinary Americans. There is no widespread campaign of discrimination against people simply for being Muslims.

If there is any separateness experienced, Muslims in America have only their own radicals to blame.

And it is true for anyone: If you expect to be discriminated against, your attitude will probably cause fulfillment of your expectation.

Wednesday, March 28, 2007

CAIR Continues its Evil Ways

Good for the United States House of Representatives. They have passed a bill to protect the "John Doe" passengers who blew the whistle on the lying, flying imams in Minneapolis airport on November 20, 2006.

My mother always said that if you can't say something nice about someone, don't say anything at all. but I cannot help myself.

Nihad Awad of CAIR has proven himself to be a true piece of human garbage. Why? When asked to dismiss the so-called John Doe defendants in the lying flying imam suit, specifically the passengers who pointed out the (apparently deliberately) suspicious behavior to US Airways, Awad refused. Awad plainly want to intimidate others from protecting their airways and their fellow passengers from reporting suspicious behavior. It is litigation jihad.

As a human being, Awad deserves no respect. That only good he has done is to bring CAIR into greater public dislike, which CAIR greatly deserves.

Wednesday, March 21, 2007

CAIR Keeps Sliming Along

Just when I'm beginning to think that CAIR can get no lower or get any slimier, CAIR surpasses all negative expectations. Now CAIR has supported the lying flying imams in their lawsuit meaning as John Doe defendants, the passengers who brought the imams inappropriate behavior the attention of US Airways personnel.

Not all Muslims, however, support the anti-Christian bigot Ibrahim Hooper of CAIR in this latest endeavor. We can great be grateful that there are people like M. Zuhdi Jasser, director of American Islamic Forum for Democracy who has offered to raise money to defend the hapless passengers, who after all did only the right thing.

Wednesday, March 14, 2007

Bigotry and CAIR.

And the award for Anti-Christian bigot of the week goes to.... [drum roll, please] ... Ibraham Hooper of the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR).

Roll the cameras, please.

Into the Wild Blue Yonder

Just when you think CAIR could sink no lower, it is supporting the six lying flying imams have now filed suit against Northwest Airlines.

As a reminder, the lying flying imams behaved in an extremely suspicious manner in the Minneapolis, Minnesota airport, chanting anti-American slogans, asking for seatbelt extenders (without being obese), and strategically positioning themselves in a manner of terrorists. Clearly these people were intending to provoke a reaction. They succeeded.

I feel the slime just writing about it.

Tuesday, March 13, 2007

Religion of ... Death Threats

News from Australia's AAP:
NSW Christian Democratic Party leader Reverend Fred Nile says he has received death threats over his call for a moratorium on Islamic immigration to Australia.
Why take political action when you can make death threats?

Friday, March 09, 2007

Call Us Killers, Off With Your Head

From an AP report:
Filipino Muslims display a banner, which reads 'Behead Those Who Insult Islam,' and t-shirts with a wanted sign during a rally Wednesday March 7, 2007, at a downtown Manila square , to protest recent televised preaching by a Christian sect leader Eli Soriano, who alleges that Muslims are killers. More than 1,000 Muslims took part in the rally and demanded Soriano, who is currently in hiding, be extradited back to the Philippines so he can face charges being brought against him. (AP Photo/Bullit Marquez)
Can they possibly fail to see the irony?

Wednesday, March 07, 2007

Secular Islam Summit

I applaud the greatest ray of hope yet to emanate from the substantial Muslim community. On March 5, 2007, the Secular Islam Summit concluded with a press release, a portion of which is quoted below. Read it all.

We are secular Muslims, and secular persons of Muslim societies. We are believers, doubters, and unbelievers, brought together by a great struggle, not between the West and Islam, but between the free and the unfree.

We affirm the inviolable freedom of the individual conscience. We believe in the equality of all human persons.

We see no colonialism, racism, or so-called “Islamaphobia” in submitting Islamic practices to criticism or condemnation when they violate human reason or rights.

We call on the governments of the world to

  • reject Sharia law, fatwa courts, clerical rule, and state-sanctioned religion in all their forms; oppose all penalties for blasphemy and apostacy, in accordance with Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human rights;
  • eliminate practices, such as female circumcision, honor killing, forced veiling, and forced marriage, that further the oppression of women; protect sexual and gender minorities from persecution and violence;
  • reform sectarian education that teaches intolerance and bigotry towards non-Muslims;
  • and foster an open public sphere in which all matters may be discussed without coercion or intimidation.

We demand the release of Islam from its captivity to the totalitarian ambitions of power-hungry men and the rigid strictures of orthodoxy.


We say to Muslim believers: there is a noble future for Islam as a personal faith, not a political doctrine;

to Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, Baha’is, and all members of non-Muslim faith communities: we stand with you as free and equal citizens;

and to nonbelievers: we defend your unqualified liberty to question and dissent.

Regrettably but predictably, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) slammed the Summit, thereby announcing to the world that it is truly the PR firm for radical Islam. Watch the creepy CAIR representative commenting on video that the "Secular" Islamic Summit is not Muslim enough. How did everyone miss the word "secular"?

Just as creepy: CAIR posted this video on its web site under the headline: "CAIR Rep Slams 'Secular Islam Summit" So, CAIR positions itself against the moderates. Note how the CAIR rep. refuses to condemn the Saudi government for barbaric acts such as death to apostates.

Monday, March 05, 2007

CAIR Protest in Florida

The Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) masquerades as a civil rights organization. but, plainly, its ties to terrorist organizations renders all of its work suspect:

Joe Kaufman Speech, March 3, 2007 (Joe Kaufman is President of Americans Against Hate)

Protest Against CAIR and Siraj Wahhaj

Friends,

We gather here tonight to expose a fifth column that resides within America and, tonight, they are holding an event inside this convention center.

As has been told many times before, CAIR was created by a front for the terrorist organization Hamas, in 1994. That organization, the Islamic Association for Palestine or IAP, was the brainchild of none other than the number two leader in Hamas today, Mousa Abu Marzook. If it hasn’t been made clear in the past, I want to make it clear today – If it were not for Mousa Abu Marzook, CAIR would not be in existence!

The IAP, CAIR’s parent organization, was a Hamas propaganda center, as it published the Hamas charter in different languages, and it produced Hamas terrorist training videos. In 2005, the IAP was shut down, after it had been found liable for the murder of an American boy, David Boim, who lost his life during a Hamas operation in Israel. In fact, every U.S. organization that had ties to Mousa Abu Marzook no longer exists – all except CAIR.

CAIR is the only one that is still around, and we’re here to say to the government of the United States that it’s time to end this thorn in America’s side and SHUT CAIR DOWN!

CAIR’s National Executive Director, Nihad Awad, has publicly stated his support for Hamas, and CAIR-Florida’s Communications Director, Ahmed Bedier, said that there was “nothing immoral” about associating with Palestinian Islamic Jihad before 1995. As well, Bedier hosted a radio show, where all three of his guests lauded Hezbollah, a group that is responsible for the murder of 241 American servicemen on October 23, 1983.

Recently, United States Senator Barbara Boxer rescinded an award she had given to a CAIR leader. As pointed out by Newsweek Magazine, last December, “Boxer was particularly concerned by claims that CAIR had refused to condemn Hamas and Hizbullah and recognize those groups as terrorist organizations.” In fact, to prove the Senator right, in the course of just 13 days, four officials from CAIR refused to condemn Hamas and Hezbollah as terrorist groups. They include CAIR’s National Executive Director, Nihad Awad, CAIR’s National Communications Director, Ibrahim Hooper, CAIR’s National Legal Director, Arsalan Iftikhar, and CAIR-Sacramento’s Executive Director, Basim Elkarra.

Four former representatives from CAIR have been charged with terrorist activity by the U.S. government -- two were convicted and two were deported. One of those individuals is Randal Todd Ismail Royer. On September 24, 2001, as CAIR’s Communications Specialist, Royer spoke at a press conference on what CAIR called an “anti-Muslim backlash.” What’s interesting is that, less than ten days prior to the press conference, Royer had been in contact with Lashkar-e-Taiba, a terrorist organization affiliated with Al-Qaeda. Royer had been plotting with a group from the U.S. to help Lashkar-e-Taiba murder Americans and Indians overseas. And just two days prior to the CAIR press conference, Royer possessed in his automobile an AK-47-style rifle and 219 rounds of ammunition.

CAIR is the defendant in a 9/11 lawsuit, put forward by the family of the former chief of the FBI’s counter-terrorism section, John P. O’Neill, who was killed during the attacks on the World Trade Center. CAIR is being sued for the murders of 3000 innocent Americans.

I remember when I was on a radio show debating CAIR-Florida’s Executive Director, Altaf Ali. It was exactly one month after 9/11, October 11, 2001. I asked Mr. Ali if he believed those that died during the attacks were innocent. He would not answer the question. I asked again and again and again. He still refused to answer. It was then that I realized why CAIR was here in America. If I may borrow a quote from a former CAIR official, it was not to become equal in America but to become dominant, where the Quran replaces the Constitution as the highest authority.

Tonight, within this building behind us, the Broward County Convention Center, CAIR is holding its annual event. It is an important event for CAIR, as slated to speak is CAIR’s National Chairman Parvez Ahmed, a man who calls America’s only true friend in the Middle-East, Israel, “a liability in the war on terror.”

Also speaking will be Sirah Wahhaj, a Brooklyn imam whose name is found on the U.S. Attorney’s list of “unindicted co-conspirators” to the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, which left six Americans dead and so many others injured – of course, a pre-curser to what would happen eight years later, when our beloved Twin Towers would stand no more. Also found on that list are Osama bin Laden and his Mentor Abdullah Azzam.

Wahhaj, during the bombing trial, would serve as a defense witness for the spiritual leader of the ’93 attack, the Blind Sheikh, Omar Abdel-Rahman. As stated by the Wall Street Journal, in an article written in October of 2003, Wahhaj testified that it had been an honor to host Abdel-Rahman at his mosque and described him as a “respected scholar.” Imam Wahhaj, WHAT KIND OF RESPECTED SCHOLAR WOULD HELP IN THE MURDERS OF INNOCENT PEOPLE?

But after reading a quote from Wahhaj, we can understand how his name could appear on the U.S. Attorney’s list, and we could understand how he could call a degenerate like Abdel-Rahman a “respected scholar.” Wahhaj stated, “In time, this so-called democracy will crumble, and there will be nothing. And the only thing that will remain will be Islam.”

Oh, by the way, Wahhaj was a former National Board Member of CAIR.

One more thing, and then I will conclude. Recently, CAIR and other organizations it affiliates with, called for Muslims to fast in solidarity with Sami Al-Arian, who has gone on a hunger strike. As well, CAIR has called for his release. Sami Al-Arian was a founder of Palestinian Islamic Jihad and the group’s North American leader. He was responsible, at least in part, for the murders of over 100 innocent people, including two Americans. We say this to the government – KEEP SAMI AL-ARIAN LOCKED UP FOR AS LONG AS POSSIBLE. HE IS A THREAT TO OUR COUNTRY AND TO OUR DEMOCRATIC ALLIES OVERSEAS. WE CANNOT AFFORD TO LET THIS MAN GO.

My friends, CAIR and organizations like it, are not here to help build up America. They are here to tear it down. And we are here to tell our government not to let them. Bush Administration, Senate, House of Representatives, FBI, we plead with you, shut CAIR down now! Place CAIR alongside Hamas on the U.S. State Department list of terrorist organizations, and shut CAIR down now.

Thank you.

Wednesday, February 28, 2007

Barbarians: Culture or Religion?

It seems to me that it is unarguable that the following are barbaric acts:

Rioting over cartoons.
Killing a non-because the Pope suggests Islam is violent.
Suicide bombings.
Taking hostages and beheading them.
Killing converts to Christianity from Islam (thus assuring that they will never convert back, I guess).

Are the people who do these things barbarians because of their culture? Or because of their theology? That is, what causes the barbarism?

Now we learn that in Muslim Pakistan, kite flying is a popular pastime. However, the kites are often flown with strings laced with ground glass and metal, which may and often do kill other kite flyers. In the last few days, at a kite flying event, 11 people were killed. see DebbieSchlussel.com

Barbaric? Of course. I wonder if the Islamic resistance to social change is partly to blame for the barbaric culture displayed.

Friday, February 16, 2007

Islam and Skinheads

Supremacism is the belief that a particular race, religion, gender, belief system or culture is superior to others and entitles those who identify with it to dominate, control or rule those who do not. Source: Wikipedia

The only difference between white supremacy and Islam is the identity of the superior people. White supremacists come in various varieties. Most are not themselves violent. Most would not themselves kill or physically harm African-Americans or Jews. However a number of them would do such things. But all believe in the inherent, God-given superiority of whites. So it is with Muslims.

I have spent many, many hours agonizing and studying issues relating to radical Islam in the United States and throughout the world. I have read it the analyses of Islam by the likes of Robert Spencer, Daniel pipes, Kenneth Timmerman, and others (I apologize for those not named). And I have read and listened to Islamic apologists. I have agonized over the questions of how to deal with Muslims, knowing that many do not actively support violent jihad. Nevertheless, there remains an undercurrent of support. Dinesh D'Sousa and others suggest that exposing Islam as a violent religion will simply cause the currently nonviolent ones to circle the wagons and push them toward the violent factions. Maybe, but education about Islam should not be suppressed.

After careful study, I come to one clear conclusion about Islam. Islam as a political system and as a theology is essentially supremacist. Under Islam, a nonbeliever is less than that of a Muslim and even less than human. Every Muslim is greater than has more rights than any nonbeliever. The Koran instructs Muslims to call nonbelievers to convert, failing that, subjugate them, and failing that to kill them. The violence stems form the supremacism.

There is nothing similar in the teachings of Christianity or Judaism (despite periods of distinctly un-Christian behavior during the Spanish Inquisition, for example). Nothing in Christianity teaches supremacy, least of the sort that instructs believers to subjugate or kill nonbelievers.

Sure, Christians may consider themselves better than non-Christians in many ways. Jews consider themselves better than non-Jews in many ways. But nothing in Christianity or Judaism teaches believer to lie to unbelievers, to mistreat unbelievers, or to hate unbelievers. To the contrary, Christianity teaches us to love our neighbors as ourselves.

Islam teaches hatred of Jews and Christians as idolaters. Islam teaches that once subjugated, unbelievers must pay a special tax to support Muslims. Unbelievers in Islam may not build any new churches. Unbelievers are to know themselves to be subjugated to Islam.

The theme of Islam, it seems, is "Islam uber alles." Supremacy in all.

If our politicians need a conceptual model, to understand Muslims, they need only look to Skinheads.

Opposition to Voter ID is Racist?

I read a recent Mother Jones article (don't ask why) that noted that voter ID laws have a negligible effect on elections.  OK so far.  T...