The Anti-Jihad Crusader

What Do They Know and Why Don’t They Know It

2007-04-29T12:26:00.000-07:00

What Do They Know and Why Don’t They Know It by Frank Salvato

Recent actions and statements by those who exist on the left side of the aisle have served as proof for any reasonable American that congressional Democrats, especially their leadership, are invested in – and in fact insist upon – placing politics before government. Their blatant disregard for the well-being of our nation leads me to ask, how well do the Progressive-Left and the Democrats who appease them understand the duties associated with being an elected member of the United States government?

One of the last true statesmen to have graced the halls of Congress, Henry Hyde (R-IL), was often heard to say that those elected to office are the stewards to the US Constitution. By this he meant that they were beholden to the principles, ideals, tenets and procedural boundaries held within the document itself. My belief goes a bit further to include the idea that all Americans are vested with this commitment and that in addition to the principles, ideals and tenets of our founding documents each and every one of us is obligated to at least understanding the philosophy that influenced our Founders and Framers to compose such a revolutionary form of self-governance.

That said, and current events taken into consideration, I am led to believe that many in Congress from both sides of the aisle – and perhaps most people elected to office – are sadly devoid of a proper understanding of the Constitution and just exactly what it is they are required to do for their constituencies.

Two instances, appalling in nature to those of us who embrace the idea of good government, took place this week at the hands of Democrat leadership.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), leaving a meeting at the White House where the issue of the Iraq War Supplemental Appropriations Bill was being discussed, said "I believe myself that the Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense and - you have to make your own decisions as to what the president knows - (know) this war is lost and the surge is not accomplishing anything as indicated by the extreme violence in Iraq yesterday."

Reid made this statement in stark contrast to declarations by US military personnel on the ground, some in positions of high command and others from the ranks of the soldiers doing the job White House spokeswoman Dana Perino was quick to point out that no one else in attendance at that meeting heard Senator Reid make such a statement. Secretaries Rice and Gates have never issued such statements of defeat.

hat Reid would have an opinion on the matter is one thing. Every American is afforded their opinion via the authority of the First Amendment. But for Reid, who sits in a position of leadership within our government, to assume to speak for others, for him to disregard first-hand knowledge of the facts as they are presented to him by those intimate with the conditions on the ground in Iraq, is not only arrogant, it is politically motivated and reckless.

I am forced to defend his right to make such an inaccurate, uninformed, uneducated and unscrupulous statement because I am faithful to the Constitution. But Reid’s statement only serves to benefit his political standing and the well-being of his political party while it damages our country, damages the morale of the troops in theater and sends a clear message of defeatism and weakness to our enemies.

Where this statement might – might – have been appropriate for private closed-door discussion, as a political leader Reid is obligated to conduct himself in a manner that best serves his constituents. Promoting an uneducated and thoroughly partisan opinion on an issue involving our country’s very survival – and in such a public way as to aid the enemy’s propaganda campaign – is not in the best interest of his constituency.

Just across the hall, figuratively speaking, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi found herself “unavailable” for a closed-door briefing on the military situation currently existing in Iraq given by General David Petraeus. In fact, the only Democrat to show up for this briefing was Senator Carl Levin (D-MI), chairman of the Senate Armed Service Committee.

While the entirety of congressional Democrats should be exposed for their blatant refusal to gather first-source, fact-based information on a situation currently being debating in Congress (when did gathering facts become optional?), it is singularly Nancy Pelosi’s responsibility as Speaker of the House and leader of her party in that chamber to lead them, to require, to insist that to do their jobs.

That Pelosi opted for a phone conversation with Gen. Petraeus is of little consolation. Leaders lead by example and Pelosi’s absence served to diminish the importance of gathering the facts regarding our troops in Iraq and the progress of their mission. What could possibly have been more important than gathering the facts on the premier issue of our day. But for her political victories as a partisan Progressive-Leftist, Pelosi has proven throughout her short tenure to be a miserable leader.

In both instances Democrat leadership has proven it has a lack of knowledge of – if not fidelity to – the constitutional requirements of their offices. For a country at war with the most lethal foe it has ever faced this sort of self-centered, opportunistic behavior could very well prove to be our death knell.

Returning to Henry Hyde’s idea that elected officials are the stewards of our Constitution – and to that extent the sentinels who should be standing guard over good government – I propose that every time a new congress is seated, every time a new president is elected and every time a new Supreme Court justice is sworn in, that they undergo a three week intensive study of the Constitution not unlike the program offered at the National Academy for Civics & Government through the National Endowment for the Humanities.

Further, I propose that those in Congress take one week to engage in an extensive crash course in the subject related to any committee they may find themselves sitting on: finance committee members should know how to balance a budget; defense committee members should have an understanding of the Pentagon and the military; intelligence committee members should understand the ideology of gathering intelligence; foreign affairs committee members should have a grasp of the inner-workings of the State Department, etc.

Only when those elected to office are properly educated on the requirements of their positions, informed and knowledgeable about the subject matter of the committees on which they sit and dedicated to the principles, ideals, tenets and procedural boundaries of the Constitution will we be able to move from a government run by special interest groups and partisans to a government that holds good government above politics. Only when we require our elected officials to understand the greatness and the intricacies of our country’s foundation will we rid ourselves of political opportunists like Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid.

Now, the question is what politician has the guts to do the right thing by proposing legislation to this affect?

DhimmicRAT Hipocracy in Action

2007-04-29T12:15:00.000-07:00

Despite complaints by anti-smoking groups and some DhimmicRAT activists, the National Democratic Club was granted an exemption from the District-wide smoking ban that took effect January 2, 2007.

According to the District’s Department of Health, the National Democratic Club (NDC) is one of only eight establishments in Washington, DC, granted an exemption, and the only private club on the list. Under the law, exemptions are possible for tobacco bars that generate ten percent or more of their annual revenue from the sale of tobacco products, and for retail tobacco stores that generate at least 75 percent of their revenue from the sale of tobacco products.

The National Democratic Club’s official website offers no description as a retail tobacco store, nor does it state the club is a tobacco bar.

Angela Bradbery of Smokefree DC, an anti-smoking lobby, told Roll Call in January that the DNC’s attempt at an exemption was “pretty outrageous” and “the height of hypocrisy.” While the group lists the seven other establishments granted exemptions, there is no mention of the NDC on their website.

“As Members of Congress, we must be held to a higher standard,” Pelosi said when announcing her own smoking ban in Speaker’s Lobby of the U.S. Capitol. “We can no longer risk the health of colleagues, staff, pages, reporters and others who pass through the Speaker’s Lobby each day.”

Because of the exemption, those protections do not extend to workers at the NDC. Ironically, Pelosi at the time “applaud(ed) the District for…recognizing the need to protect the public from secondhand smoke.”

But despite frequent descriptions as the most powerful DhimmmicRAT in the country, she was powerless to extend the smoking ban to the private club she shares with other Democrat leaders.

A Monster Stalked the Corridors of Virginia Tech

2007-04-17T14:06:00.000-07:00

A Monster Stalked the Corridors of Virginia Tech Yesterday.

I offer my heartfelt condolences to the families who have lost loved ones to this inhuman monster.

This was a truly needless atrocity that could have been prevented or mollified by the exercise of American Constitutional RIGHTS.

I hope he is enjoying the tender ministrations of Satan and his minions, he has an eternity to enjoy.

WND VIRGINIA TECH MASSACRE

South Korean ID'd as killer

23-year-old resident alien, English major at university

Posted: April 17, 2007

9:49 a.m. Eastern

Cho Seung-Hui

Authorities have identified a 23-year-old South Korean as the killer of up to 32 people at Virginia Tech, the deadliest shooting rampage in U.S. history.

Cho Seung-Hui was a resident alien enrolled as a senior English major at Virginia Tech. His U.S. residence was established in Centreville, Va., a suburb of Washington, D.C.

Investigators believe Cho at some point had been taking medication for depression, according to the Chicago Tribune. He left an invective-filled note in his dorm room that included a rambling list of grievances and died with the words "Ismail Ax" in red ink on the inside of one of his arms.

He had shown recent signs of violent, aberrant behavior, an investigative source told the Chicago paper, including setting a fire in a dorm room and allegedly stalking some women.

A note found in Cho's dorm room railed against "rich kids," "debauchery" and "deceitful charlatans" on campus.

The Tribune said the student came to the U.S. in 1992. His family runs a dry cleaning business and he has a sister who attended Princeton University.

The gunman found dead yesterday by authorities from apparently self-inflicted wounds had been described to MSNBC by an injured student as a college-aged Asian with a maroon hat and black leather jacket.

Authorities found a cellphone at the scene that initially led them to believe the killer was a Virginia Tech student from China.

There were two separate shooting incidents on the campus, hours apart, but it is still unclear whether the same shooter was involved in all instances, officials said today. The first 9-1-1 call came at 7:15 a.m. from a residence hall where two people reportedly had been shot. The second shooting spree was at Norris Hall, an engineer building, where 31 people were killed and Cho took his own life with a gunshot to his face.

Another 15 people were wounded.

Virigina Tech Police Chief Wendell Flinchum said this morning lab results confirm one of the two weapons seized in Norris Hall was used in both shootings.

Police are not looking for a second shooter, but they do not rule out the possibility an accomplice may have been involved.

Cho was carrying a backpack that contained receipts for a March purchase of a Glock 9 mm pistol, sources told ABC News.

Police said Cho also had a .22 caliber pistol. He was eligible to buy a handgun because he was a permanent legal resident of the U.S. without a felony conviction.

ABC News said sections of chain similar to those used to lock the main doors at Norris Hall, the site of the second shooting, also were found inside a Virginia Tech dormitory.

Cho's family lived in an off-white, two-story town house in Centreville, according to the Tribune.

A neighbor described the family as quiet and said Cho wouldn't respond if someone greeted him.

"He was very quiet, always by himself," Abdul Shash told the paper.

Court records show Cho received a speeding ticket April 7 from Virginia Tech Police for going 44 mph in a 25 mph zone and had a court date set for May 23.

Cho lived at Harper Hall where students said they had little interaction with him and no idea why he carried out the attack.

Student Timothy Johnson told the Tribune people would say hello to him in passing but nobody knew him well.

"People are pretty upset," Johnson said. "He's a monster; he can't be normal. I can't believe I said 'hi' to him in the hall and then he killed all those people."

Two hours to notify

It took authorities more than two hours to notify the campus, by e-mail, of the first incident.

Asked yesterday by reporters to explain, Virginia Tech Police Chief Wendell Flinchum said initial information led officials to believe it was an isolated event and that the shooter had fled the campus. Only the residence hall, West Ambler Johnston, was locked down, he said.

University President Charles Steger defended his handling of the tragedy, saying he and other officials "had no reason to suspect any other incident was going to occur."

"We can only make decisions based on the information you had on the time," he said. "You don't have hours to reflect on it."

Steger said it was difficult to inform everyone on campus, with about 11,000 people arriving in the morning.

Earlier yesterday, Steger said the grieving campus was quickly organizing a convocation of faculty, staff and students.

"Today the university was struck with a tragedy that we consider of monumental proportions," he said. "The university is shocked and horrified that this would befall our campus. ... I cannot begin to convey my own personal sense of loss over this senseless of such an incomprehensible and heinous act."

The deadliest U.S. campus shooting, until yesterday, took place at the University of Texas in 1966 when 16 people were killed by Charles Whitman, who opened fire from a clock tower. In 1999, two teenagers killed 12 fellow students at Columbine High School near Denver.

But yesterday's shooting was the deadliest mass shooting of any kind in U.S. history, a prominent criminologist told the Roanoke Times.

James Alan Fox of Northeastern University in Boston said the death toll, which stands at 33, surpasses the 22 people killed in 1991 when a gunman opened fire at a cafeteria in Killeen, Texas.

ABC News reported Virginia Tech students and an employee say the first e-mail warning they got from the university came at 9:26 a.m. By that time, the gunman had struck again.

Another ABC News report said there were two separate bomb threats in the past two weeks at Virginia Tech that targeted engineering buildings.

The first was in early April and the second at the end of last week, which prompted evacuation of students and staff. The university had offered a $5,000 reward for information.

Officials said today they have no information to link the threats to yesterday's attack.

The 2,600-acre campus in Blacksburg, in the western part of the state near West Virginia and Tennessee, has more than 28,000 full-time students.

Virginia Tech student Blake Harrison witnessed the chaos while on his way to a class near Norris Hall.

"This teacher comes flying out of Norris, he's bleeding from his arm or his shoulder ... all these students were coming out of Norris trying to take shelter in Randolph [Hall]. All these kids were freaked out," Harrison said, according to Fox News.

The students and faculty were barricading themselves in their classrooms.

The shooter was "wearing a vest covered in clips was just unloading on their door, going from classroom to classroom ... they said it never seemed like it was going to stop and there was just blood all over," Harrison said.

The shooter had two handguns and several clips of ammunition, according to NBC News. Flinchum confirmed an earlier report that the shooter chained the doors of a classroom to make it almost impossible for the students to escape.

University officials have closed the campus for the week and directed families and students to meet at the Inn at Virginia Tech today.

Last August, classes were canceled on the opening day at Virginia Tech when an escaped gunman, William Morva, allegedly killed a hospital guard off campus and fled to the campus area.

President Bush said he was "horrified" after hearing news of the shootings, said White House spokeswoman Dana Perino.

"It is difficult to comprehend senseless violence on this scale," said Virginia Gov. Timothy M. Kaine in a statement. "Our prayers are with the families and friends of these victims, and members of the extended Virginia Tech community."

Chalk up another 32 deaths for the anti-gun lobby, may they all rot in Hell. I hope the Good Lord will forgive them because I don't have the capacity to do so

2007-04-17T08:58:00.000-07:00

This is the first in a series of, requested, posts covering survival, security, marksmanship, hand-to-hand combat and generally how to react in an emergency when others may be looking for you.

First we'll have the SERE (Survival, Evasion, and Recovery) training manual's

QUICK REFERENCE CHECKLIST

Decide to Survive!

S- Size up the situation, surroundings, physical condition, equipment.

U- Use all your senses

R- Remember where you are.

V- Vanquish fear and panic.

I- Improvise and improve.

V- Value living.

A- Act like the natives.

L- Live by your wits.

1. Immediate Actions

a. Assess immediate situation. THINK BEFORE YOU ACT!

b. Take action to protect yourself from nuclear, biological, or chemical hazards (Chapter IX).

c. Seek a concealed site.d. Assess medical condition; treat as necessary (Chapter V).

e. Sanitize uniform of potentially compromising information.

f. Sanitize area; hide equipment you are leaving.

g. Apply personal camouflage.

h. Move away from concealed site, zigzag pattern recommended.

i. Use terrain to advantage, communication, and concealment.

j. Find a hole-up site.

2. Hole-Up-Site (Chapter I)

a. Reassess situation; treat injuries, then inventory equipment.

b. Review plan of action; establish priorities (Chapter VI).

c. Determine current location.

d. Improve camouflage.

e. Focus thoughts on task(s) at hand.

f. Execute plan of action. Stay flexible!

3. Concealment (Chapter I)

a. Select a place of concealment providing¾

(1) Adequate concealment, ground and air.

(2) Safe distance from enemy positions and lines of communications (LOC).

(3) Listening and observation points.

(4) Multiple avenues of escape.

(5) Protection from the environment.

(6) Possible communications/signaling opportunities.

b. Stay alert, maintain security.

c. Drink water.

4. Movement (Chapters I and II)

a. Travel slowly and deliberately.

b. DO NOT leave evidence of travel; use noise and lightdiscipline.

c. Stay away from LOC.

d. Stop, look, listen, and smell; take appropriate action(s).

e. Move from one concealed area to another.

f. Use evasion movement techniques (Chapter I).

5. Communications and Signaling

(Chapter III)

a. Communicate as directed in applicable plans/orders,

particularly when considering transmitting in the blind.

b. Be prepared to use communications and signaling devices on short notice.

c. Use of communications and signaling devices may compromise position.

6. Recovery

(Chapter IV)

a. Select site(s) IAW criteria in theater recovery plans.

b. Ensure site is free of hazards; secure personal gear.

c. Select best area for communications and signaling devices.

d. Observe site for proximity to enemy activity and LOC.

e. Follow recovery force instructions.

2007-04-10T00:38:00.000-07:00

Have any of you seen the T-shirt that some wetbacks are wearing with a little pepper-belly holding the mexican flag with one hand and flipping the bird with the other, the caption is ¡Hey, América! ? I'll try and find a picture to post here.

I saw it at the store today on the back of one of these scum-sucking invaders. I scared the hell out of the wife when I started talking to him in my ice tone. I told him: Hijo de puta, luché para este país. ¡Tienes muchos del nervio de mierda con esta camisa en tu parte posteriora asquerosa AQUÍ! ¡Debo cortarla de ti!

Son of a whore, I fought for this country. You’ve got a lot of nerve wearing this shirt on your filthy ass HERE! I should cut it off you! That’s as well as I can translate this, its been many years since spanish class. I’m so fucking sick of this empty-headed garbage. I’m being driven closer and closer to the edge daily and when I go over it, its not going to be pretty.

We need to push these foul assholes back across the border, tell them to stay there and if they don’t build the wall from their bones. It is time for us to be shed of any politician or moonbat who doesn’t think America should protect herself.

I’m all for freedom, Hell, I’ve killed for it several times and went through weeks of hell at the hands of paleo-swineians for it, but these idiotarians are killing our countrry. They are killing our very way of life and the leftards seem to be either too stupid or too cowardly to see it.

Lets throw out the RINOs, and DhimmicRATs in the next election and vote in CONSERVATIVES, who will stand for the values and culture of America. If they don’t, then I don’t give a damn who says they are conservative, they aren’t.

Are the RINOs and DhimmicRATs actually TRYING to bring about a revolution in our country? That seems to be what they are doing with leaving our borders as leaky as a sieve.

I’m ashamed of the government of the country I love.

2007-03-26T04:16:00.000-07:00

Throwing down the gauntlet, a

Challenge to a Coward

As one retired military man to another, I issue a challenge to John Murtha to meet me on the “Field of Honor” at a time and place of his choosing to answer for the wrongs done to our military by the actions of him (Murtha), Nancy Pelosi and the other cowards in Congress and their enablers in the media.

I will give him choice of weapons or hand to hand.

If he is too cowardly to take up this challenge he should retire, at once, from the public eye and proceed to wait for the ignominious death of a coward and traitor.

2007-03-05T00:07:00.000-08:00

I am a Retrosexual.

I ran across this on The Net a couppla years ago, don’t remember where, when or who composed it, but it pretty accurately nails me and most all the guys I know who are PBC’s (The newly coined phrase “Pre-Bizzaro Child”, to describe those of us who were raised by responsible parents before The United States turned into Bizzaro-World)…

“After searching for my sexual identity. I finally discovered it and I can no longer keep it in the closet. I am here to openly announce that I am a Retrosexual.

My Retrosexuality is defined by the following Retrosexual code:

A Retrosexual, no matter what the women insists, pays for the date.

A Retrosexual opens doors for a lady. Even for the ones that fit that term only because they are female.

A Retrosexual DEALS WITH SHIT. Be it a flat tire, break-in into your home, or a natural disaster, you FUCKING DEAL WITH IT.

A Retrosexual not only eats red meat, he often kills it himself.

A Retrosexual doesn’t worry about living to be 90. It’s not how long you live, but how well. If you’re 90 years old and still smoking cigars and drinking, I salute you.

A Retrosexual does not use more hair or skin products than a woman. Women have several supermarket aisles of stuff. Retrosexuals need an endcap. (possibly 2 endcaps if you include shaving goods.)

A Retrosexual does not dress in clothes from Hot Topic when he’s 30 years old .

A Retrosexual should know how to properly kill stuff (or people) if need be. This falls under the “DEALING WITH SHIT” portion of The Code.

A Retrosexual watches no TV show with “Queer” in the title.

A Retrosexual does not let neighbors fuck up rooms in his house on national TV.

A Retrosexual should not give up excessive amounts of manliness for poontang. Some is inevitable, but major re-invention of yourself will only lead to you becoming a froo-froo little puss, and in the long run, she ain’t worth it.

A Retrosexual is allowed to seek professional help for major mental stress such as drug/alcohol addiction, death of your entire family in a freak treechipper accident, favorite sports team being moved to a different city etc. You are NOT allowed to see a shrink because Daddy didn’t pay you enough attention. Daddy was busy DEALING WITH SHIT. When you fucked up, he DEALT WITH YOU. Buck up pussy.

A Retrosexual will have at least one outfit in his wardrobe designed to conceal himself from prey.

A Retrosexual knows how to tie a fucking windsor knot when wearing a tie.

A Retrosexual does not strip naked, get into a sweat lodge, and bang on drums to bond with other guys. That shit is gay. However dressing in kilts, banging on drums around a campfire and drinking heavily is just fine.

A Retrosexual should have at least one good wound he can brag about getting.

A Retrosexual knows how to use a basic set of tools. If you can’t hammer a damn nail, or drill a straight hole, practice in secret until you can or be rightfully ridiculed for the wuss that you be.

A Retrosexual’s asshole is an exit ramp on the road of life. Ladies, contrary to what Cosmo says, spontaneously sticking a finger back there is a good way to be launched off the bed (or if Hooters hotwings have been recently consumed, lose a finger). Make you a deal, we won’t mess with your’s unless you want us to, and you won’t mess with our’s… period.

A Retrosexual will buy feminine hygine products if he has to, but only under protest.This falls under unpleasant things you have to fucking DEAL WITH. Get some Hagen-Daas while your at it.

A Retrosexual gives a lady his seat on the bus/subway/etc.

A Retrosexual does not order an apple martini at the bar. A Martini has fucking Vodka and vermouth in it dammit. And maybe an olive. In fact, why not just get a shot of Vodka??”

Shamelessly swiped from MoMinuteMan at the Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler

2007-02-16T09:15:00.000-08:00

Should we worry about a Bosnian Muslim massacring people in Trolley Square?

Mary Mostert February 15, 2007

On Monday, the day the mass murderer Sulejman Talovic gunned down nine unsuspecting shoppers in Trolley Square Mall in Salt Lake City, Utah, five of whom died instantly, every report was calling it a "massacre." Salt Lake City Police Detective Robin Snyder observed: "We're just trying to figure out where it started and why this happened. There was one shooter. We have no indication that anyone else was involved in this. That shooter is dead." Eyewitnesses described the gunman as "white, in his 20s, about 6 feet tall, with brown hair." The New York Post headlines screamed "UTAH MADMAN GUNS DOWN FIVE."

The following day, Sulejeman Talovic, 18, who came to Utah in 1998 as a Muslim Refugee from Bosnia with his parents was identified the murderer. As soon as it was discovered that the murderer was not a "Utah Madman" but was, in fact, a Muslim from Bosnia, the word "massacre" was dropped from every headline. By Wednesday we were being urged to feel sorry for Suljeman Tavolvic because, according to the Associated Press report, his Bosnian friend Murat Avdic was "convinced the war in Talovic's homeland somehow contributed to the Utah rampage, especially the 1995 slaughter of 8,000 Muslim men and boys by Serb forces in the northeastern enclave of Srebrenica." Sulejman had been in Srebrenica about two years before the massacre occurred, Avdic said.

On Wednesday the Associated Press reported, worldwide, "Little new information was released by police regarding what may have prompted Talovic to go on his shooting rampage. 'There is still no known motive,' said Salt Lake City police detective Robin Snyder. Snyder said nothing had been completely ruled in or out yet as a motive. Addressing concerns from some in the public that Talovic's Muslim beliefs may have played a role, she said there was still no evidence pointing either way as to whether that was the case.

The AP also reported that FBI agent Patrick Kiernan in Salt Lake City said the bureau had "no reason to believe Sulejman Talovic, who was killed by police, was motivated by religious extremism or an act of terrorism. It's just unexplainable," Kiernan said Wednesday. "He was just walking around and shooting everybody he saw."

Then CNN reported that according to Sulejman's cousin, Radzo Talovic, the young man was a "survivor of the siege that ended in the Srebrenica massacre of 8,000 Muslims in Bosnia's 1992-95 war" and that he and his family fled to Srebrenica where they during which Bosnian Serb forces besieged the enclave and Talovic's grandfather was killed by shellfire. When the Bosnian Serbs overran the town of Srebrenica in 1995, taking away and massacring some 8,000 Muslim men and boys, Talovic and his mother were evacuated by the United Nations and later reunited with his father."

That immediately made me wonder if Sulejman's father was one of the 3000 supposedly massacred Muslim men who have since VOTED in Srebrenica elections. Redzo Talovic went on to of Sulejman and his family:

"They were a good, quiet family, and I remember that he was a nice kid ...No one could have supposed that he was going to do such a thing,. Who knows what made him do that?" Redzo Talovic went on to suggest that it perhaps was caused by "childhood memories of wartime Bosnia."

The "official" story about Srebrenica, sold to the world by Bosnian Muslims, was that the Serbs out of the clear blue sky attacked the "UN safe haven city" of Srebrenica and massacred 8000 men and boys." Only, the actual body count was about 2500. A reported 3000 of the 8000 massacred Bosnian Muslims have since voted in Bosnian elections. I've been researching and writing about this for 10 years. It seems that the "unarmed" men in Srebrenica had actually been plundering, raiding and killing Serbs in nearby villages for years prior to the supposed "Srebrenica massacre" of 1995. In fact, by 1995, more than 100 Serb villages were destroyed and about 2000 Serbian civilians were killed.

Since Americans were getting nearly all of this story at the time from CNN, and their reporter in Bosnia was Christiane Amanpour, a Muslim, they never heard that part of the story. Before I knew she was a Muslim, I got curious as to why CNN never ONCE interviewed a Serb during the Bosnia war that I started researching. In 1996 I wrote an article titled "Ethnic Cleansing under NATO's Watchful Eye in Bosnia — Where are the missing 150,000 Serbs?"

In May of 2005 I wrote an article titled: Correcting the Lies about a Great WW II Hero, about the Serb WWII general, Draza Mihailovic, who had been awarded America's Legion of Merit by President Harry Truman for saving the lives of over 500 American airmen shot down over Yugoslavia in World War II. As WWII ended, Mihailovic was executed by the Communists under Tito and the medal was never given to him or his family. It was finally given to his daughter by the Bush administration 60 years later in 2005.

Most Americans have either forgotten or never knew that the Bosnian Muslims and Albanians, and the Croatians were all ardent supporters of Adolf Hitler during WWII, while the Serbs, who were on our side, suffered more than a million deaths in the Holocaust at the hands of the Croatians (and Tito was a Croatian), Albanians and Bosnians. The Jasenovac concentration camp in Croatia killed 600,000 Serbs, Jews and Gypsies (Roma).

I received some very nasty e-mail about that article from Bosnian Muslims, some of whom personally threatened me. It is my policy to respond to e-mail comments on my articles, whether people love or hate what I say. One of the Bosnian Muslims who was really angry about that Legion of Merit was Almir Ramic, who claimed he was an employee of the United Nations in Srebrenica at the time the Serbs attacked. In an e-mail exchange with me Ramic made a statement I'd never read or heard ANYWHERE. He said the Bosnians at Srebrencia had been armed by UN personnel. We were told they were unarmed, which made the deaths a "massacre."

I posted the exchange of e-mail, and it is still posted in my archives with the title: Former UN Employee Admits UN Armed Srebrenica Muslims He said that the armed men of Srebrenica, fled from the city WITH their weapons — leaving their women and children behind. The Serbs did not harm the women and children, but did put them in trucks and sent them after their fleeing menfolk.

In July of 2005, on the 10th year anniversary of to so-called Srebrenica Massacre, Alex, a Serb reader in Belgrade provided me additional information that Americans have never been told which I posted and titled The Massacre and the Missing Bodies — Srebrenica, 10 years on.

We have just experienced here in Utah the largest mass murder in the history of our State, committed by a Bosnian Muslim who, we are told by other Bosnian Muslims, was a "good boy" and therefore we shouldn't be concerned about Bosnian Muslims in our midst or possible terrorism in our State.

Really, now? I wonder what their definition of a "bad boy" would be? Perhaps the Serbs might know.

Mary Mostert is a nationally-respected political writer. She was one of the first female political commentators to be published in a major metropolitan newspaper in the 1960s. After working in President Lyndon Johnson's failed War on Poverty programs in New York state, she became a Republican. She ran, unsuccessfully, for the New York State Senate and became campaign manager for a number of candidates. She once served as the secretary of "Positive Action NOW!"--a South African women's group that sought to reduce the hostility among South Africa's various racial, religious, and political groups.

In recent years, Mary has researched, written, and edited articles for national talk show host Michael Reagan's Information Interchange on the Internet, and for The REAGAN MONITOR, a monthly newsletter that provides in-depth information on key issues. Her book, COMING HOME - Families Can Stop the Unraveling of America," was published in 1996 by Gold Leaf Press. Mary maintains a political media site, Banner of Liberty. http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/mostert/070215

A Bit of Levity that carries a LOT of Truth

2007-01-27T13:06:00.000-08:00

It's amazing what one has to believe to believe in gun control by Michael Z. Williamson

That incidents where people shoot criminals in self defense are very rare, and shouldn't be used as excuses to own guns, just as incidents where presidential press secretaries are shot are very rare, and shouldn't be used as excuses to ban guns.
That guns are the real cause of crime, but we will blame and jail the owner of said gun for the crime, even if the owner wasn't the person involved.
That a mugger will kill you in the half-second it takes to draw from the holster, but won't harm you while you dial 911 on your cell phone, talk to the dispatcher and wait half an hour for the cops to arrive.
That gun control works, which is why there are no illegal weapons in Northern Ireland or Beirut.
That the Second Amendment only applies to flintlocks, just as the First Amendment only applies to quills and lead type.
That the proper response to an attack is to call the police, but only unarmed police, because "Violence never settles anything."
That it's wrong to make snide, sexist comments about women, unless the comments are about women who own guns.
That a gun with an 11 round magazine is dangerous, but a gun with fifteen 10 round magazines is much safer.
That we should rehabilitate criminals and treat them as people, but never let them own guns, even if their crime was nonviolent.
That a hijacker could easily take a gun away from a pilot, but the hundreds of passengers aboard would then be unable to take the gun away from the hijacker.
That if there'd been a gun aboard American Airlines Flight 93, someone could have been hurt.
That pilots have enough to do in the cockpit, without having to worry about distractions like firearms to stop hijackers and fire extinguishers to stop fires, and these activities should be left to "trained professionals."
That such "trained professionals" will only be available on one flight in five.
That rather than have the pilot risk human life by shooting at a hijacker, we should simply have the Air Force shoot down the plane, thus preserving life.
That rapists prefer to attack armed women so they can take the guns and use them against the victims.
That 1 firearm owner in 10,000 will commit an act of violence in his or her lifetime, and this is far more frightening than the 25% of drivers who will cause a serious or fatal accident.
That you should rely on police in lieu of your gun, just as you should rely on a dentist in lieu of your toothbrush.
That the press reporting a shooting is "responsible," but failing to report that the shooter was stopped by an armed citizen is an attempt to prevent the "glamorization of guns."
That car keys, umbrellas and hairspray are good tools for self-defense, despite the fact that police continue to carry guns.
That Washington DC's low murder rate of 80.6 per 100,000 is due to strict gun control, but Arlington, Virginia's high murder rate of 1.6 per 100,000 is attributable to the lack of gun control.
That the depressed and emotionally disturbed should not be allowed to own guns that shoot bullets with 250 ft-lbs of energy, but should be allowed to own 4000 lb cars with 1,136,000 ft-lbs of energy (at 65 mph).
That "assault weapons" are "very powerful" but big game hunters oddly prefer .30-06s and .375 H&Hs.
That assault rifles are "underpowered" for hunting, but can "punch through police body armor." More powerful hunting rifles, however, cannot.
That we should outlaw bullet proof vests so criminals can't use them, and private citizens should be then proud to be killed in the crossfire, knowing they are doing their part for society.
That we don't need the Second Amendment or arms to protect our Constitution, but should instead use the courts and the government system, just as we did in 1776.
That the lack of mention of guns in wills in colonial American cities proves that most Americans didn't own them, just as the lack of mention of outhouses proves that most people squatted in the yard.
That this alleged lack of ownership is as relevant to the Second Amendment as the lack of interest in newspapers at the time was relevant to the First Amendment.
That among the hundreds of documented cases against anti-gun freaks we note that: the press secretary of Handgun Control was arrested in DC for discharging an illegal handgun, a ranking regional officer of the Million Moron March was convicted of felony assault, and other Million Morons in Colorado have been arrested for attacking firearm dealers and activists, but "gun nuts" are "obsessed with violence."
That the laws against specifically named weapons have been found unconstitutional, that the laws against "types" of weapons have been considered vague, that the laws against cosmetic features are easy to comply with and still produce the identical mechanism, and that laws against particular mechanisms are unconstitutional is an indication of the "obsessiveness" of firearms enthusiasts to do what they enjoy doing, against the wishes of the narrow minded prudes who wish to stop them, and not an indication of the obsessiveness of the ignorant paranoids who fear them.
That NASA, the military, physiologists, anatomists and trainers all agree and Olympic scores confirm that men on average have tremendously more upper body strength than women, but women should try to defend themselves with martial arts and not a gun.
That according to investigative reports, alarm systems are expensive, often easily defeated, and the alarm company may not respond for three hours, even then only driving by rather than stopping, but an alarm system is a more reliable means of protecting the home than a firearm.
That less guns in an altercation is a good thing, so you should not be armed against a criminal to keep yourself safe.
That rather than spend a few hundred dollars on a firearm and an afternoon learning how to use it, one should instead spend thousands of dollars and several years learning a martial art, so you'll be well-prepared to fight anyone, as long as they're in your gender division and weight class.
That it's terrible when police officers plant weapons on a suspect to enable them to make an arrest, but we should have tougher laws against weapons and trust the police not to abuse them in this way.
That police arriving at 80mph are a better way to stop criminals than bullets arriving at 800mph.
That because of the bombing at Oklahoma City and the knife-point hijacking on September 11, we should take guns away from people who weren't involved.
That a police officer under 21 shouldn't be able to buy a gun for off duty use, because his competence depends on that blue jacket.
That people buy guns as "substitute penises," because they know that only people with small penises ever get attacked by criminals.
That Hitler and Stalin didn't disarm citizens, only Jews, Gypsies, gays, unionists and other "undesirables." (Yes, a liberal member of the MMM actually said this in the Washington Post, quoting www.potomac-inc.org.)
That to properly understand Nazi gun control, one must consider the "legitimate fears" they had of the Jewish population. (This was another self-proclaimed liberal. I'm beginning to wonder.)
That families with children should not be allowed to own guns for safety reasons, just as they aren't allowed to own dogs, power tools, or toxic chemicals.
That it's wrong to destroy someone's life over an administrative crime by jailing them and impoverishing their family, unless that crime is owning a gun.
That a law that allows someone to keep doing "X" that has been legal for years, in the face of another, badly written law that says they can't do "Y", is a "loophole."
That it's wrong to politicize that the World Trade Center attackers didn't need guns to hijack a plane, but okay to politicize that the Columbine killers bought guns…illegally.
That when someone dies because they couldn't get a drug the government won't approve, it's tragic, but when someone dies because they couldn't defend themselves with a gun the government won't approve, that's just life.
That a criminal is somehow more of a threat to a cop than to a regular person, so police need guns and regular citizens don't.
That guns are a symbol of white male oppression, and we should address this by banning inexpensive guns that are available to poor minorities, guns with less than 6 lbs trigger pull which are useable by females and smaller men, require special storage and licensing fees to stop "those people" from affording them, require proof of "need" such as political connections or large acreage or the money to go on expensive safaris, and all this will stop those evil white males.
That governments should maintain the "legitimate monopoly of force," because the American Revolutionaries, the Maquissards, the Israelis in Palestine and the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan were "illegitimate," but Hitler, Mao, Pot, Mussolini and Stalin were "legitimate."
That the "Reasonable" uses for guns are hunting and target shooting, but not self-defense. In other words, it's acceptable to use them as toys but not as lifesaving devices.
That .50 caliber rifles are both "very rare" and "selling like hotcakes."
That the fact that .50 caliber rifles are very rare justifies banning them, just as the rarity of Lamborghinis and other high-performance cars justifies banning them.
That one has the moral obligation to make a citizen's arrest when one sees a felony in progress, and that it should be accomplished by yelling at the perpetrator, "Stop! Or I'll yell 'stop' again!" rather than by drawing a weapon.
That intelligent people should support gun control because they realize they are too stupid to be trusted with guns.
That a gun is merely an inadequate substitute for a penis, so when attacked by a mugger one should pull out a…
That a gun is a symbolic penis…what this has to do with defending one's life I have no idea. It simply serves to prove that anti-defense psychiatrists clearly have Freudian issues that THEY need to address.
That if honest people give up their weapons, the criminals and dictators will give up theirs, as Chicago street gangs and Hitler have demonstrated.
That only the government should control guns, just as only the government should control broadcasting, and only the government should control religion.
That an actor from Hollywood who points a gun at friend and foe without discrimination, who keeps the finger on the trigger with no target, who fires a handgun on its side, who fires two guns akimbo, who tries to shoot a single-action pistol with a lowered hammer, and who fires 60 shots from a 30-round magazine, should be taken as an expert on the subject.
That "reasonable licensing fees" will stop casual ownership of guns, but anyone who would jump through hoops to own a gun is obsessive.
That outlawing the carrying of guns will stop people from doing so, just as lowering the speed limit stops reckless driving.
That we should deal with the problem of criminals using illegal weapons by taking lawful weapons away from honest people.
That we should ban guns-if it saves even one life, it's worth it, just as we should ban assemblies where people might be trampled to death-if it saves just one life, it's worth it, and we should ban speech by groups who offend public order-if it saves just one life, it's worth it, and we should ban unhealthy foods-if it saves just one life, it's worth it, and…
That anyone convicted of domestic violence should not be allowed to handle guns, unless that criminal is "Marky" Mark Wahlberg handling guns in "Planet of the Apes."
That rifles are useless in a world of fighter planes and nukes, just as automobiles are useless in a world of 747s.
That sky marshalls, who are present on less than 10% of all flights, are a good solution to hijacking, but armed pilots, who would be present on every flight, are not.
That a pilot might accidentally shoot a .38 caliber hole in a plane, thus somehow mysteriously causing 10,000 cubic feet of air to disappear in a moment, or hitting a vital electrical wire that was somehow not safely duplicated by another, despite federal requirements to that effect, but a "Trained Air Marshall" won't do this even when in the stress of battle against a hijacker.
That pilots might accidentally shoot a hole in the skin of an airliner (see above), so shouldn't have guns, and if the terrorists start banging away, we'll just have to hope for the best.
That pilots shouldn't be armed because they aren't trained for use of weapons, but may use violent maneuvers that they aren't trained for to somehow magically secure a hijacker they can't see in his seat.
That a .38 caliber bullet might destroy an airliner, but violent maneuvers won't rip the wings off.
That a pilot shooting through a small cockpit door at an incoming hijacker migh somehow fail to put any bullets into him, but a 110 lb flight attendant will easily get close enough to tackle a hijacker and use a stun gun.
That a terrorist might masquerade as a "Trusted Traveler," hoping to be the only such person aboard with a firearm, but would never be able to impersonate a law enforcement official or get a job as a pilot.
That a pilot is not trained in dealing with terrorists, so should stay in the cockpit. Instead, it's up to the flight attendants and passengers to deal with the situation. After all, they ARE trained professionals.
That it's just a matter of time until another hijacking takes place, and there's nothing we can do about it, and no, you can't carry a gun.
That many "supporters of Second Amendment rights" endorse "reasonable gun control," just like many "supporters of First Amendment rights" endorse "reasonable media control."
That keeping a gun for self-defense implies a desire to shoot someone, just as keeping matches and having homeowner's insurance implies a desire to be an arsonist.
That a punk wakes up one morning, and thinks, "Gee, instead of robbing, raping, sodomizing and killing a young woman, why don't I turn my $400 gun in for $20 and a pizza and go work at McDonald's?"
That the more helpless you are, the safer you are from criminals.
That you should give a mugger your wallet, because he doesn't really want to shoot you and he'll let you go, but that you should give him your wallet, because he'll shoot you if you don't.
That despite all the outrage about Corporate America's cavalier treatment of employees, Domino's Pizza's demand that employees be unarmed is an altruistic effort to stop them from hurting themselves, and not a calculated financial bid to avoid having a lawsuit filed by a dead robber's family.
That gun owners are "potential terrorists," because they have all the necessary equipment, just like Sarah Brady is a "potential hooker," because she has all the necessary equipment.
That one can sue a store for having a slick floor, falling ceilings, and sharp corners, but if they refuse to let you bring a gun in and you get shot by a criminal, they aren't liable for enforcing that rule with others.
That there is no right of self defense, and the police are not legally obligated to respond to my cries for help when disarmed, but you can sue them if they take too long to get to a traffic accident.
That arming police just "escalates the violence," so to be really effective, we should ban the use of nightsticks by the police. In fact, we should ban the police. If they didn't exist, the criminals wouldn't need to be armed. In fact, we shouldn't have locks on doors, because that just encourages forcible entry.
That assault rifles are far too powerful to hunt deer and elk, and too dangerous for private citizens to own, but are too impotent for modern warfare, too weak to reliably kill soldiers, and have no place in the concept of a citizen reserve.
That there's no incongruity in claiming the preferred weapon of a drug dealer is a $25 .22 caliber pocket pistol, and claiming the preferred weapon of a drug dealer is a $2000 machinegun in the same piece of propaganda.
That any cheap weapon is a "Saturday night special," and any expensive weapon is an "assault weapon."
That "Cops" and other shows are edited to show the boring encounters with traffic stops and the occasional drunken fool with a revolver in his pocket, and never show the millions of cases where the cops are gunned down in droves by machinegun toting drug dealers.
That "NYPD Blue" and "Miami Vice" are documentaries.
That an intruder will be incapacitated by tear gas or oven spray, but if shot with a .44 Magnum will get angry over your retaliation and kill you.
That firearms in the hands of private citizens are the gravest threat to world peace, and China, Pakistan and Korea can be trusted with nuclear weapons.
That Charlton Heston as president of the NRA is a shill who should be ignored, but Michael Douglas as a representative of Handgun Control, Inc. is an ambassador for peace who is entitled to an audience at the UN arms control summit.
That ordinary people, in the presence of guns, turn into slaughtering butchers, and revert to normal when the weapon is removed.
That someone who fails to clear his weapon, fails to point it in a safe direction, pulls the trigger without checking the chamber, and blows his foot off is an example of how even a "trained professional" can be a "victim" of a diabolical gun, but people in the military who clean weapons millions of times a year without getting hurt are "dumb grunts."
That the New England Journal of Medicine is filled with expert advice about guns, just as Guns and Ammo has some excellent treatises on heart surgery.
That one should consult an automotive engineer for safer seatbelts, a civil engineer for a better bridge, a neurosurgeon for spinal paralysis, a computer programmer for Y2K problems, and Sarah Brady for firearms expertise.
That modern design firearms contain features such as box magazines and fiberglass stocks, which were designed for military use and shouldn't be available to civilians, just as modern design automobiles contain features such as rack and pinion steering and McPherson struts, which were designed for the race track and shouldn't be available to civilians.
That rifles such as AR-15s, AK-47s and L1-A1s were designed for military shooting and shouldn't be available to civilians, just as vehicles like Chevrolet Suburbans, Jeeps, and Land Rovers were designed as weapons platforms and military utility and shouldn't be available to civilians.
That the best way to avoid an accidental shooting is to stay completely ignorant of guns and never go near them, just like the safest way to avoid an accidental drowning is to stay completely ignorant of swimming and never go near water.
That the best thing our kids can do to bullies and drug dealers is "just say no," and fight back, and the best thing we can do to muggers and thugs is to give them $50 and wait for them to go away.
That it's outrageous that the Milwaukee police took 45 minutes to respond to reports of Jeffrey Dahmer's last victim running around naked in the cold, then returned him to his attacker without checking ID, but the best thing a citizen can do in an emergency is dial 911.
That the "right of the people peaceably to assemble," the "right of the people to be secure in their homes," "the enumeration herein of certain rights shall not be construed to disparage others retained by the people," "The powers not delegated herein are reserved to the states respectively, and to the people," refer to individuals, but "the right of the people to keep and bear arms" refers to the states.
That the 2nd Amendment, ratified in 1791, allows the states to have a National Guard, created by act of Congress in 1916.
That the National Guard, paid by the federal government, occupying property leased to the federal government, using weapons owned by the federal government, punishing trespassers under federal law, is a state agency.
That despite the 1990 case Minnesota Gov. Rudy Perpich vs. Department of Defense, where the Supreme Court ruled specifically that the National Guard is under federal orders and the state governor cannot object, the National Guard is still, in fact, a state militia.
That private citizens can't have handguns, because they serve no militia purpose, even though the military has hundreds of thousands of them, and private citizens can't have assault rifles, because they are military weapons.
That it is reasonable for California to have a minimum 2 year sentence for possessing but not using an assault rifle, and reasonable for California to have a 6 month minimum sentence for raping a female police officer.
That it is reasonable in California to get two years in jail for a serious crime such as possessing but not using a weapon, and probation for a minor crime such as molesting your children.
That it is reasonable to jail people for carrying but not using guns, but outrageous to jail people for possessing marijuana.
That minimum sentences violate civil rights, unless it's for possessing a gun.
That door-to-door searches for drugs are a gross violation of civil rights and a sign of Fascism, but door-to-door searches for guns are a reasonable solution to the "gun problem."
That the first amendment absolutely allows child pornography and threats to kill cops, but doesn't apply to manuals on gun repair.
That capital punishment is not a crime deterrent, but gun control is.
That a woman in a microskirt, perfume and a Wonderbra, without underwear, is a helpless victim, but someone getting paid $6 an hour to deliver the cash from a fast food place to the bank at the same time every night is, "asking for it." And you won't allow either of them to carry a gun.
That Illinois' law that allows almost any government official from Governor to dogcatcher to carry a gun is reasonable, and the law that prohibits any private citizen, even one with 50 death threats on file and a million dollar jewelry business from carrying a gun is reasonable. And it isn't a sign of police stateism.
That the 80 religious kooks in Waco were a threat to American security, but snipers killing them as they left the building, machinegunning children, hiding the video evidence, possibly torching the building on purpose, and having no case to present in federal court is good law enforcement. And it isn't a sign of police stateism.
That free speech entitles one to own newspapers, transmitters, computers, and typewriters, but self defense only justifies bare hands.
That with the above, a 90 LB woman attacked by a 300 LB rapist and his 300 LB buddy, has the "right" to kill them in self defense, provided she uses her bare hands.
That there's nothing in the Constitution that specifically prohibits banning certain guns, but there is something in the Constitution that specifically prohibits banning certain sex acts.
That gun safety courses in school only encourage kids to commit violence, but sex education in school doesn't encourage kids to have sex.
That a criminal will take a gun away from you and use it against you, so conversely, the best thing to do when threatened is to take the criminal's gun away from him and us it against him.
That the ready availability of guns today, with only a few government forms, waiting periods, checks, infringements, ID, and fingerprinting, is responsible for all the school shootings, compared to the lack of school shootings in the 1950's and 1960's, which was caused by the awkward availability of guns at any hardware store, gas station, and by mail order.
That we must get rid of guns because a deranged lunatic may go on a shooting spree at any time, but anyone who owns a gun out of fear of such a lunatic is paranoid.
That there is too much explicit violence featuring guns on TV, but that cities can sue gun manufacturers because people aren't aware of the dangers involved with guns.
That the gun lobby's attempt to run a "don't touch" campaign about kids handling guns is propaganda, and the anti-gun lobby's attempt to run a "don't touch" campaign is responsible social activity.
That the crime rate in America is decreasing because of gun control, but the increase in crime requires more gun control.
That 100 years after its founding, the NRA got into the politics of guns from purely selfish motives, and 100 years after the Emancipation Proclamation, the black civil rights movement was founded from purely noble motives.
That statistics showing high murder rates justify gun control, and statistics that show increasing murder rates after gun control is legislated are "just statistics."
That we don't need guns against an oppressive government, because the Constitution has internal safeguards, so we should ban and seize all guns, therefore violating the 2nd, 4th, 5th and 9th Amendments of that Constitution, and won't thereby become an oppressive government.
That guns are an ineffective means of self defense for rational adults, but in the hands of an ignorant criminal become a threat to the fabric of society.
That guns are so complex to use that special training is necessary to use them properly, but so simple to use that they make murder easy.
That guns contribute to high death rates and should be banned, but tobacco and alcohol are okay.
That guns cause crime, which is why there has never been a mass slaying at a gun show.
That guns cause crime, just like matches cause arson.
That guns cause crime, just like women cause prostitution.
That guns cause crime, just like men cause rape.
That guns aren't necessary to national defense, which is why the US Army only has 3 million of them.
That banning guns works, which is why New York, DC, and Chicago cops need guns against armed criminals.
That women are just as intelligent and capable as men, but a woman with a gun is "an accident waiting to happen."
That women are just as intelligent and capable as men, but gunmaker's advertisements aimed at women are "preying on their fears."
That a handgun, with up to 4 switches and controls, is far too complex for the typical adult to learn to use, as opposed to an automobile which only has 20.
That handguns are useful only for murder, which is why the police and military define them as defensive weapons.
That neighbors who carry guns against the occasional lunatic are paranoid, because of the perfectly justifiable fear that every single one of them is waiting to turn into a lunatic.
That a majority of the population supports gun control, just like a majority of the population used to support owning slaves.
That one should ignore as idiots politicians who confuse Wicca with Satanism and exaggerate the gay community as a threat to society, but listen sagely to politicians who can refer to a self-loading small arm as a "weapon of mass destruction" and an "assault weapon," use the term "bullet casing," don't know the difference between a "clip" and a "magazine," and can't tell the difference between an AKM, an MAK-90, and an SKS.
That there is no absolute right to a weapon, documented historically because the British government used to prohibit Catholics from owning guns. And that wasn't a sign of religious bigotry. (Note: the British Constitution actually RESTORED to Protestants the right to own arms, which Catholic James II denied them.)
That rifles with pistol grips are assault weapons, just like vehicles with racing stripes are sports cars.
That you don't need a gun against invaders, because the government will know in plenty of time to issue you whatever weapons you need.
That Massachusetts is safer with bans on guns, which is why Teddy Kennedy has machinegun-toting guards.
That most people can't be trusted, so we should have laws against guns, which most people will abide by, because they can be trusted.
That a woman raped and strangled with her panties is morally superior to a woman with a smoking gun and a dead rapist at her feet.
That Cary Nation, referring to wine and beer as "Demon Rum" and "Spirits" was an obvious kook, but Sarah Brady, and Diane Whinesteen referring to self-loading sporting rifles as "Military Assault Weapons" and "Weapons of Mass Destruction" are intellectuals.
That the "Right to keep and bear arms" refers to armorial badges and coats of arms, not to weapons. (Potomac-inc.org)
That guns should be banned because of the danger involved to the public, but live reporting from the battlefield, which can keep the enemy informed of troop deployments, getting thousands of troops killed and perhaps losing a war, is a protected act that CANNOT be compromised on.
That the right of explicit teenage pornographic websites to exist cannot be questioned because it is a constitutionally protected extension of the Bill of Rights, but the claim that handguns are for self-defense is merely an excuse, and not really protected by the Bill of Rights.
That the ACLU is good because it uncompromisingly defends certain parts of the Constitution, but the NRA is bad because it defends other parts of the Constitution.
That a house with a gun is three times as likely to have a murder, just like a house with insulin is three times as likely to have a diabetic.
That police operate in groups with backup, which is why they need larger capacity magazines than civilians, who must face criminals alone, and therefore need less ammunition.
That we must ban the sale of guns through classified ads in newspapers, in case a terrorist sees the ad, flies halfway around the world, buys the gun and uses it to commit an act of terror, rather than using one of the millions of weapons left behind by "responsible" governments after their colonial excesses.
That calling 911 and asking them to send a man with a gun to protect you is good, but cutting out the middleman by protecting yourself is bad.
That people who own guns out of a fear of crime are paranoid, but people who don't want other people to own guns in case it causes them to commit crimes are rational.
That guns cause the high suicide rate in the US, even though Japan's rate is almost three times higher.
That we should ban gun stores near schools, because of all the 10 year olds who are buying guns without parents' permission.
That there is a statue called "Armed Freedom" in the Capitol, but that that is irrelevant to the intent of our ancestors.
That we should ban "Saturday Night Specials" and other inexpensive guns because it's not fair that poor people have access to guns too.
That guns have no legitimate use, but alcohol does, which is why we issue cops guns instead of beer.
That police and soldiers are the dregs of society who were unfit to get any real job, which perfectly qualifies them with the high moral standards and keen intellects to handle these complicated tools and be our guardians.
That it's acceptable to arm a courier at $6 an hour to shoot criminals for stealing bank deposits, but unacceptable for a college-educated business owner to do it himself.
That a registration plan will reduce crime, because criminals will register their guns despite the Supreme Court decision Haynes v. U.S. (309 U.S. 85, 1968) that registration violates self-incrimination.
That it's reasonable to require proof of a criminal act before an order of protection can be issued, but reasonable to assume anyone with a gun will commit a criminal act, so they should be subject to prior restraint.
That teaching abstinence exclusively rather than use of condoms is doomed to fail, but encouraging absolute bans on guns rather than education in safe use is the only acceptable method of reducing crime.
That it is outrageous that civilians have rifles that were designed for the military for their own self defense, but perfectly okay to have polluting, potentially unstable, heavy vehicles that were designed for the military simply as status symbols.
That guns are the gravest threat to society because 83,000,000 gun owners didn't commit a crime yesterday.
That it is essential to incorporate locks and sensors into guns to make them safer and that only a criminal would not support this, but cops and federal agents would be exempt for safety reasons because locks are unreliable and hinder access.
That a bank guard can protect money with a gun, but you cannot protect your children with one.
That all gun dealers sell illegal weapons, just like all black people sell drugs.
That crime is higher in urban areas with less guns, and we must continue to disarm the minorities in these areas because of the risk of crime, and that isn't bigotry.
That an underpaid, overworked bodyguard should be glad to throw himself in front of a bullet for you.
That your safety is someone else's responsibility, but they have no right to tell you how to live your life.
That guns are useless against tyranny, because an armed populace of 160 million cannot defeat an army of 2 million mixed in among it. Oddly, the person claiming this has no credentials in strategic operations.
That if the above is true, we should not be terrified of the concept of that government holding control of our lives and freedom at its whim.
That the piecemeal destruction of the right to keep and bear arms makes the right useless, and therefore justifies destroying it further.
That one should be more afraid of one's spouse blowing a gasket and shooting the children, than of those children being run over by a hormone-driven teenager in a car.
"It can't happen here."
That people are too stupid to handle guns, but are intelligent enough to vote.
That guns are not an effective means of self-defense, which is why police carry them.
That one can "study" the "gun issue," but not know the difference between an assault rifle and a battle rifle.
That the NRA, with over 4 million members, is "out of touch" with America, and HCI, with 50 thousand members, is a "mandate from the people."
That a baseball bat is good protection against a burglar, provided his gun fires baseballs.
That to judge a group by secondhand news and hearsay is bigotry, unless that group is the NRA.
That the National Defense Act of 1916 doesn't exist.
That pricing products out of the reach of poor people through excessive regulation is discriminatory practice, unless that product is a gun.
That manufacturers are not responsible for damages caused by their products, unless that product is a gun.
That trigger locks and other devices make guns safer, which is why the police and military refuse to use them.
That registration of guns will help law enforcement, because that way they won't need probable cause and a warrant to conduct a search.
That registration of guns, which makes their existence a matter of public knowledge under the FOIA, isn't dangerous to owners.
That registration of guns, in violation of the McClure-Volkmer Act, and as declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, is somehow still legal.
That the gun-toting rednecks at Saratoga and Yorktown caused the Revolution, and the British forces were intent on providing peace to North America.
That private citizens making private sales of private property is a "loophole."
That the existence of weapons not banned by previous laws is a "loophole."
That making it harder to get a license to sell firearms legally will reduce the number of people selling illegally.
That it's safer to do nothing than resist with a gun, which is why the military wins so many wars by not fighting.
That we must close shooting ranges because of the noise, but ban silencers because they are quiet.
That owning a gun for self-defense indicates an intent to kill, just like owning a first aid kit indicates an intent to impersonate a physician.
That guns are an "epidemic" even though we can't treat them with penicillin.
That there's no right to own military weapons, which is why the Civilian Marksmanship Program at http://www.odcmp.com exists to sell military weapons to civilians under Congressional authority.
That suggesting teachers be armed is an outrageous suggestion for a "civilized" society, which is why the Swiss and Israelis do it.
That making it harder and harder for even cops to have guns on school property will somehow make it harder for lunatics to kill the utterly helpless students.
That accidents with a product justify banning the product, even though MADD has never called for a ban on alcohol, people actively push to legalize drugs, and no one wants to ban swimming pools, so basically it's only practical items like guns we should ban and not the luxury items that are essential to human survival.
That a high percentage of immigrants own guns as an overreaction to the living conditions in their nations of origin, but the US should try to emulate those nations' gun control and social policies.
That the 14th Amendment requires states to accept each other's drivers licenses, even with age or vision requirement differences, marriage licenses even with age or relationship differences or if it's a gay marriage, but somehow doesn't apply to licenses to carry weapons.
That the same people who build illegal high-tech drug labs for less than $30,000 won't build illegal low-tech gun shops for less than $10,000.
That people with large gun collections are dangerous, especially if they have more than two hands to shoot with.
That autoloaders are "easily converted" to fully automatic fire, yet the person telling you this has no idea how it's accomplished.
That banning rifles with bayonet lugs will cut down on all the drive-by bayonetings.
That shooting at an intruder who smashes your door and enters with knife in hand will somehow "escalate the violence."
That it's safer with less guns, which is why lunatics shoot up schools instead of gun shows or police stations.
That guns cause crime, which is why there was no rape or murder in the Dark Ages.
That stopping the people who don't commit murder from having guns will lessen the number of those who do commit murder.
That since banning a few guns hasn't helped, we should ban more.
That just like the anti-nuclear weapons movement used to believe, if the potential victims disarm, the oppressors will take pity on them and give up their weapons in remorse.
That oppressing gun owners until they violate the law justifies oppressing them further.
That "crime guns" and old police guns should be destroyed at government expense, because the cost of exorcising the evil spirits from them before selling them to lawful owners is exorbitant.
That raising the legal age to possess firearms from 18 to 21 will REALLY show those 16 year olds.
That inner-city blacks in public housing should be disarmed to prevent crimes, but not rich white suburbanites. And it isn't a sign of racism.
That creating firearms crime by having a Byzantine code of firearm laws proves there's a problem, and justifies more laws to create more crime.
That liberal parents who give guns to problem children to "teach them responsibility" are not responsible for the deaths they cause, but everyone else's guns are.
That gun owners are a threat by existing that must be destroyed by any means possible and their rights are unimportant, but the thugs who attack us on the street whom the gun owners wish to be armed against are simply a problem we have to put up with.
That one should judge all gun owners by the acts of a few criminals, just like one should judge all blacks by the acts of a few inner-city crack dealers.
That making it harder to get firearms legally will reduce their illegal use, just like making it harder to get a prescription will cut down on the illicit drug trade.
That it's tragic when a child dies in a firearms accident, and we must pass restrictive laws to prevent it, but children poisoned by household chemicals are simply unavoidable accidents.
That you don't need a gun, therefore no one needs one, and you have the right to impose that belief and will on others.
That stupidity can be cured by legislation.
That societies with less guns have less killings by guns, just like societies with less cars have less vehicular homicide. This is deemed to be relevant.
That criminals who rob to support their drug habit can afford $65 a minute in ammunition for their automatic "Weapon of choice."
That with nationwide gun control, the entire nation can be as safe as NYC, LA and Chicago.
That since a gun isn't 100% effective for self defense, you should get rid of it, along with your first aid kit and fire extinguisher, since they aren't 100% effective, either.
That if a violent criminal enters your house, you should do nothing and wait for the police arrive, just as you'd do nothing for an injury or fire and wait for the fire truck or the ambulance.
That if Chicago were to legalize firearms, it would have shootouts in the streets, which never happens now.
That it's wrong to use tax dollars to finance private political agendas, unless that agenda is to ban guns.
That a "safe gun" will help stop criminal misuse of firearms just like "safe sex" works so well to stop rape.
That a cop with felonies on his record is safe with fully automatic weapons but a churchgoing mother with a parking ticket as her worst crime is unfit to use a pistol to protect her child.
That a suicide who used a gun would still be alive if he or she had used a knife or hanged himself or herself.
That someone else's suicide is a problem for the rest of us that would be prevented if we gave up our guns.
That alcohol is acceptable in private, as long as the user doesn't use it while driving, but mere possession of a gun is a threat to others.
That gun owners are unwilling to compromise, which is why there are only 20,000 gun laws in the US.
That criminals are better shots than civilians because of all the time they spend on the practice range.
That since criminals are better shots by the logic above, one is safer by not shooting back, but just waiting for them to run out of ammo.
That it's reasonable to assume an accident would have been lethal if the victim wasn't wearing a seatbelt, and reasonable to assume that an armed defender would have been safe even if they didn't have a gun.
That one accidental death is too many, but thousands of people dying because the means of self-defense were not available is unavoidable and not worthy of worry.
That we should ban guns because people have a "right to feel safe," but the right to feel safe by owning firearms for defense is not valid.
That it's outrageous to count 18 and 19 year-old parents as "children" for statistical purposes, but perfectly acceptable to count them as children for purposes of exaggerating gun deaths among "children."
That a zero-tolerance policy is bad regarding drugs, but a zero-tolerance policy is good regarding guns.
That martial arts are a better form of self-defense, and can defeat an armed opponent, but we still need to ban guns because of the danger they present to those few people who don't know karate.
That government officials can be trusted with automatic weapons, but private citizens cannot, because of the number of people private citizens kill while kicking in doors without search warrants.
That an 18 year old can handle a machinegun and die defending another nation's oil reserves, thereby being a hero, but an 18 year old who tries to defend his or her child with a gun belongs in jail.
That the few people who can't use martial arts or other non-lethal means of self-defense-the young, the old, the infirm, the disabled, the weak, the small, and the pregnant-are simply the necessary sacrifice we must make to criminals to avoid the risks of letting people be armed. This is not bigotry.
That the dangers of guns outweigh their recreational uses, unlike alcohol and motorcycles.
That getting rid of guns reduces violence, so the military should be armed with bouquets of flowers.
That we should hang out at funeral homes to tell the families of the deceased how lucky they are their loved one was killed by a drunk and not a man with a gun.
That a conservative with a dozen guns is an "extremist," and a liberal with a dozen guns is a "museum."
That a team of cops shooting an unarmed citizen 19 times and not getting charged with murder is "law enforcement" but an old lady shooting a knife-wielding attacker is "vigilanteism," and we should leave defense to the professionals.
That we should require trigger locks and safe storage facilities for all guns in order to prevent accidents, just like we require all household chemicals to be kept in a locked cabinet.
That a woman shooting a rapist is a felon.
That NORML is good for supporting legalization of a politically unpopular product, but the NRA is bad for supporting legalization of a politically unpopular product.
That poor people who live in high crime areas and can't afford alarms shouldn't be allowed to have guns either.
That telling a murderer he'll go to jail for carrying a gun will make him think twice.
That the only way to end gun violence is to ban guns, just like the only way to end medical malpractice is to ban doctors.
That killing a triple murderer so you don't become the fourth victim is "escalating the violence."
That we should get rid of "junk guns" so that criminals are forced to use reliable high-quality guns.
That repealing laws that discriminate against gun-owners "endorses" guns, just like repealing laws that discriminate against gays "endorses" homosexuality.
That guns are designed only to kill, just like women are designed only to give birth.
That only people over 21 are allowed to defend themselves.
That we should ban guns because their primary purpose is to kill people, but we shouldn't ban alcohol, which has its primary purpose getting intoxicated and losing control of the higher faculties, thereby increasing violence and accidental death.
That according to "Professor" Michael Bellesiles, the lack of mention of firearms in Colonial literature proves their scarcity, much like the lack of mention of outhouses proves their scarcity.
That somehow the above is more relevant to the 2nd Amendment than the lack of letters to public officials and newspapers is relevant to the 1st Amendment.
That a person who would commit violence with a gun would never do so with a knife.
That most people are seething cauldrons of potential violence who cannot be trusted with a gun, but most people are so decent that there is no need to carry a weapon for defense.
That a person foolish enough to leave a gun loaded and lying in reach of a child will somehow be responsible enough to attach a trigger lock.
That 83 million gun owners are "extremists," and the 50,000 members of the Million Moron March are "the majority."
That allowing concealed carry does not reduce crime through deterrence since some people do so even though it's illegal, but allowing concealed carry increases crime, because more people carry guns and use them irresponsibly. (Brady Bunch)
That a woman buying a gun to defend herself against a violent ex needs five days to "cool off."
That a woman being raped should refuse help from an armed stranger, and instead wait for the police.
That if the Million Moron March protesters feels threatened, they should ask police with guns to protect them while they tell everyone how worthless guns are for protection.
That a trauma surgeon's experience in treating gunshot wounds makes him an expert on gun control legislation, just like an automobile body repair technician's experience repairing cars makes him an expert on traffic laws.
That the typical town only needs one law enforcement officer per 1000 population, because most people are law abiding, but that it's dangerous to let citizens carry weapons because most people are criminal.
That the risk of arrest for carrying a weapon on school grounds will stop a person bent on suicide from starting a shootout.
That felons should be denied the right to ever own a weapon, just like rapists should be castrated before being released from jail.
That the 1939 US vs Miller case, is "established law" that endorses gun control and the matter is closed, just like Plessy vs Ferguson endorsed "separate but equal" schools and the matter is closed.
That game wardens have the most dangerous job in the world, because everyone they deal with is armed.
That there's no risk of the US becoming a police state, Japanese-Americans were not interned in the 40's, blacks were not oppressed and jailed in the 50's, and no students were killed at Kent State.
That when the government promises that they won't confiscate our weapons after we register them, we can believe them, as did the Commanche, the Sioux, the Apache, the Kaw, the Cree, the Blackfoot, the Italians in NYC, the Jews in Germany, the Zulu in South Africa…and the Americans at Lexington and Concord.
That the government can control guns as well as it controls drugs.
That the high crime rate in cities with oppressive gun control proves the need for gun control in cities without gun control and with low crime.
That Charlton Heston, as president of the NRA, must be a racist, despite his marches with Dr. King in the 1960s. After all, all gun owners are racist, and that theory isn't bigoted.
That we don't need guns because America is safe, and only criminals or people wishing to start trouble would be out late at night in bad neighborhoods.
That according to Diane Whinestein, there is no left-wing conspiracy to send police and troops to imprison American gun owners, but there is a vast, right-wing conspiracy of gun owners who must be disarmed for attempting to stop it.
That .50 caliber weapons must be banned in case Americans use them to shoot holes in the armored cars that the government doesn't own and isn't going to send against them, also according to Diane Whinestein.
That ships using Australian waters mustn't carry handguns against the mythical threat of piracy or mutiny, because some aspiring captain might sell them for a few bucks.
That gang punks shot by other gang punks are innocent victims, and babies shot by government agents deserve to die because of the unpopular beliefs of their parents.
That allowing the poor and minorities to defend themselves is Fascist.
That small arms can't win wars, as all the Viet Cong bombing, air superiority, and naval missions prove.
That John Wayne, rejected by the Marines for bad knees, who portrayed firearms as used by soldiers and law enforcement is a draft-dodging agent of evil, but antigun draft dodger Sylvester Stallone, making movies about Vietnam veterans and using weapons gratuitously, is an American hero to be slobbered over.
That violence is bad, but any defensive use of a firearm that doesn't involve the death of the perpetrator is invalid.
That the NRA is bad for running political activities, but the Million Moron March, stealing money from AIDS research, illegally maintaining tax-exempt status as a 501c(3) organization and fraudulently using a hospital rent-free as its headquarters is good for running political activities.
That Charlton Heston is evil for working for the NRA for free, but Sarah Brady charging $10,000 a speech is a paragon of altruism.
That a ranch rifle made after 1994 is somehow a military rifle.
That all firearms retailers are illegal gun dealers, just like all pharmacists are illegal drug dealers.
That hate is not a family value, but all gun owners are tobacco-chawin', beer-swillin', racist, redneck bubbas.
That a gun which sits silently in a drawer and costs pennies per round to shoot is a bad idea for self defense, but a dog that requires walks, veterinary care, and licenses, may not be allowed in certain neighborhoods and may annoy the neighbors at all hours is a good idea for self defense.
That the worst thing one can do if there's an intruder in the house is get a gun and apprehend them, and the best thing on can do is pretend to be asleep and wait for them to go away, especially if they are raping your children.
That gun control will "keep guns out of the wrong hands," meaning law-abiding Americans' hands.
That trigger locks do not interfere with the ability to use a gun for defensive purposes, which is why it makes sense that police officers are exempt from using them on their duty weapons.
That the government attempting to stop the Microsoft "monopoly" is good, and the Federal government pressuring cities to buy guns only from Smith & Wesson is also good, and not monopolistic.
That "assault weapons" have no purpose other than to kill large numbers of people, which is why the police need them.
That "assault weapons" are only designed for killing offensively, and the police need them but you do not.
That citizens don't need to carry a gun for personal protection but desk-bound police administrators who work in a building filled with cops do, as do tax auditors, vegetable inspectors, mail inspectors, and meat inspectors.
That beer-gutted police have special mental, emotional and physical capabilities that enable them to deal with the incredible complexity of a firearm, and private citizens can never hope to achieve such competence.
That the Brady Act and the "Assault Weapons" Ban which both went into effect in 1994 are responsible for the decrease in violent crime rates since 1991, and since 2004 when the AWB expired.
That 25% of the dealers at gun shows are unlicensed, and we must license these purveyors of books, tools, knives, clothing, artwork, candy and historical artifacts.
That because of New York's "tough laws" against guns, there exist black market dealers who spend thousands of dollars in gas and other expenses to drive to Arizona, which has "weak laws" in order to buy Ruger pistols at $500 each retail and drive back to New York and sell them to criminals at an "average" of $50 each, thereby making a profit. (Brady Bunch)
That there's no contradiction in the same liberals who said in the 60s that 18 year olds who could fight should be able to vote, now saying that 18 year olds can vote but shouldn't own guns.
That there are "secret lists of gun owners maintained by controversial organizations" such as the KKK and the Black Panthers, and that registration of guns will somehow prevent this. (Potomac-inc.org)
That a person with a gun that isn't registered is "armed outside the law," even though no such registration laws exist. (Potomac-inc.org)
That gun owners are all ignorant and stupid, but nevertheless belong to a huge, well-organized conspiracy that exists to destroy the nation. (Potomac-inc.org)
That the weapons that are useless for fighting crime and defending against tyranny or invasion will be the instruments of this dastardly plan. (Potomac-inc.org)
That 10 USC 310 and 10 USC 311 don't exist.
That suicides involving firearms are "gun deaths" but suicides involving knives are not "stabbing deaths."
That even though all white vans and Chevrolet Impalas are registered, they couldn't catch the DC murderers, because only gun registration will stop killings.
That "Weapons of Mass Destruction" in Iraq refers to an intact, armed nuke with a delivery system, but in the US refers to common self-loading rifles.
That an AK-47, designed in 1947 with a maximum effective range of 400 yards, was "designed to pierce police body armor" that didn't exist until the 1970s at "ranges over 1000 yards."
That there is a magic force called "kickback" that no one who works with firearms has ever heard of. It does not affect police or soldiers. "Kickback" causes a weapon to recoil, spontaneously aim itself at a loved one and automatically fire and kill them. "Kickback," while never having been observed, is a huge threat to safety and why "semiautomatic assault weapons" should never be sold to civilians.
That a good liberal opposes letting people use guns to defend themselves and their businesses because of the benefits of crime to police, insurance companies and large corporations who can afford the loss their smaller competitors can't. Only a "rightwinger" would support letting an individual engage in self-determination.
That we must ban guns with folding stocks, which have no "sporting purpose," so criminals can only get fixed stock rifles that are more accurate.
That you should wait until a severe emergency to get a gun, just as you should wait until it rains to fix the roof.
That it is acceptable to overwork interns, who will kill a few patients from fatigue-based carelessness, in order to make them better doctors and save more patients in the long run, but absolutely unacceptable for a law-abiding citizen to shoot anyone, even a rapist or murderer in the act.
That the number of accidental and suicidal deaths by drugs should not be included in statistics, but the number of accidental and suicidal deaths by guns should be.
That even despite that, when the risk of guns is lower than the risk of medical drugs, it's a "national tragedy."
That with only 1 chance in 5 of facing violent crime, and 1 chance in 10 of a gun being used defensively, the risk is minimal and gunowners are paranoid freaks, but it is insane not to get immunized against hepatitis, which strikes 1:50,000 people.
That 1:10,000 guns will be used to commit a crime, so we must get rid of them, and only 1:1000 people will have a dangerous reaction to an immunization so we must keep them.
That guns cause crime, even though crime has been shown to drop in areas with higher levels of gun ownership, and to rise where guns are restricted. This is due to "other factors." We should ignore those other factors and ban guns.
That a gun is a symbolic penis, and the person telling you this is a psychiatrist who drives a BMW.
That we should be scared of the people who own symbolic penises, but not of those who want to chop off all those symbolic penises. (thank you, L. Neil Smith)
That the Patriot Act, allowing the government to obtain library or bookstore records as ``an important tool for investigating and intercepting terrorism' even though they haven't done so is morally repugnant, but banning assault weapons that haven't been used in crime IS "An important tool for fighting crime and terrorism."
That guns in areas of the world like Afghanistan are frequently used in crime, and therefore guns are bad, just like doctors in Afghanistan have a high rate of patient loss, therefore doctors are bad.
That guns don't cause an increase in crime in low crime areas like Arlington, VA where they are available legally, but do cause an increase in crime in adjoining areas like Washington, DC where they are not available legally. The obvious solution to this is to make them illegal more places, which will make the crime rate go down to the level it is in places where they're legal.
That it's important to see that since the UK banned guns, they've had almost no crime with guns...er...well.
That some places have no guns, and no murder with guns, just like the US has no cricket bats, and no murder with cricket bats.
That ".50 caliber sniper rifles can bring down an airliner," and a .50BMG isn't very accurate.
That a single .50 caliber bullet can bring down an airliner, but the Air Force chooses to waste money on rapid fire 20mm cannon and missiles for this purpose, while the Army prefers missiles such as the Patriot.
That guns are not a good way for your neighbor to defend himself, so you should take them away from him. Or rather, have some other people with guns take them away from him, rather than risk getting hurt by his useless weapon.
That we are a peaceful society, and the way to deal with people who aren't peaceful is to send police and soldiers to peacefully persuade them with guns, and not resort to violence.
That the "gun show loophole" allows you to go to a gun show and find a federally licensed dealer surrounded by cops and federal agents and 10,000 buyers, who will wink and violate existing federal law by not requiring ID, a form 4473 and a call to NICS before selling you a gun, and neither of you will be arrested for the attempt.
That the "gun show loophole" allows you to go to a gun show and buy other things without a waiting period--like ammo, cleaning kits and books.
That the firearms industry is "unregulated." (http://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/index.htm) (And that's just the FAQ.)
That fighting against a mugger makes one a "mercenary, fighting for money."
That the Army could save a lot of money taking the precision adjustable sights and optical sights off M16s, since they are "designed to be spray-fired from the hip." (According to Sarah Brady.)

© 2005 by Michael Z. Williamson. Permission is granted to copy for non-profit use as long as proper credit is given. Please contact the author when you do, through www.MichaelZWilliamson.com. It is preferred that this © notice be attached. For online fora that will reject copyrighted works, please note the source in text. This was first published at http://www.keepandbeararms.com in 1999.

Anti-Jihadist Creed

2006-12-31T13:34:00.000-08:00

Anti-Jihadist Creed

I am a citizen-soldier in a new war Here to defend my land, my people, my heart, my mind, my faith, my civilization. I am a defender of Truth – At times, before men; At times, in secret struggle Allied with a coalition of the willing.

I am a revolutionary engaged in an information war A counter-propagandist, counter-jihadist, et contra tyrannum. I will not be deceived; I will not bow down to oppression Or be bested by those who hate freedom.

I will not be subjugated by the enemy, For I will not submit. Dhimmitude is not my future. I will not renounce my faith nor yield my culture to the evil ones, But I will fight them in its defense Until they are defeated.

I will use my intellect to defeat falsehood and disrupt the enemy, Remaining vigilant in the face of subterfuge. I will not be part of a culture of death, But will fight for life and liberty. For I am a warrior against Evil Charged to spread Truth until the end of days Aspiring to the glorious hope that awaits When good will prevail.

My fate is thus entrusted to a Faith held dear, By which I gather strength For, in the end, should harm or martyrdom befall me -- I will not desert the cause. I will fight the good fight And look to the path of those who have gone before.

Merry Christmas

2006-12-06T18:48:00.000-08:00

I'll be out of town for a while and restricted to only a smartphone for internet access so Merry Christmas to everyone.

and to all you moslems who are feeling left out, renounce the false prophet and get away from the murderous idiots. Become ANYTHING but moslem and you'll do your immortal soul a good turn.

Our World: The second-worst option

2006-11-14T23:49:00.000-08:00

Our World: The second-worst option

Caroline Glick, THE JERUSALEM POST Nov. 13, 2006

A week before the US Congressional elections The New York Times published a
front-page story which all but admitted that Iraq's nuclear program had been
active until March 2003, when the US-led coalition deposed Saddam Hussein.
The Times report relayed concerns of officials from the International Atomic
Energy Agency regarding captured Iraqi documents which the administration
had posted on the Internet.

The documents in question contained Iraqi nuclear bomb designs that could be
useful to rogue states like Iran which are currently working to build a
nuclear arsenal. The Times article also reported that, in the past, the same
Web site had published Iraqi documents relating to nerve agents tabun and
sarin. They were removed after their content elicited similar concerns from
UN arms control officials.

In response to the Times story an international security Web site run by Ray
Robinson published a translation of a story that
ran on the Kuwaiti newspaper Al Seyassah's Web site on September 25. Citing
European intelligence sources, the Al-Seyyassah report claims that in late
2004 Syria began developing a nuclear program near its border with Turkey.
According to the report, Syria's program, which is being run by President
Bashar Assad's brother Maher and defended by a Revolutionary Guards brigade,
"has reached the stage of medium activity."

The Kuwaiti report maintains that the Syrian nuclear program relies "on
equipment and materials that the sons of the deposed Iraqi leader, Uday and
Qusai. transfer[red] to Syria by using dozens of civilian trucks and trains,
before and after the US-British invasion in March 2003." The report also
asserts that the Syrian nuclear program is supported by the Iranians who are
running the program, together with Iraqi nuclear scientists and Muslim
nuclear specialists from Muslim republics of the former Soviet Union.

The program "was originally built on the remains of the Iraqi program after
it was wholly transferred to Syria."

This report echoes warnings expressed by then-prime minister Ariel Sharon in
the months leading up to the US-led invasion of Iraq that suspicious convoys
of trucks were traveling from Iraq to Syria. Sharon's warnings were later
supported by statements from former IDF chief of staff Lt. Gen. Moshe
Ya'alon, who said last year that Iraq had moved its unconventional arsenals
to Syria in the lead-up to the invasion.

ACCORDING TO the US Senate's Prewar Intelligence Review Phase II, which
studied the prewar intelligence on Iraq's
nuclear weapons program, in 2002, the US had learned from the Iraqi foreign
minister that while Iraq had not yet acquired a nuclear arsenal, "Iraq was
aggressively and covertly developing" nuclear weapons. The Senate report
concluded that Saddam was told by his own weapons specialists that Iraq
would achieve nuclear weapons capabilities "within 18-24 months of acquiring
fissile material."

In the weeks and months after the September 11, 2001 attacks on the US,
President George W. Bush repeatedly stated that America's primary security
challenge was to prevent the world's most dangerous regimes from acquiring
nonconventional, and particularly nuclear weapons. When Bush's statements
are assessed against the backdrop of the apparently advanced Iraqi nuclear
bomb designs that were placed on the Web in recent weeks, it becomes clear
that the US-led invasion successfully prevented Saddam Hussein from
acquiring nuclear weapons.

In his State of the Union Address in 2002, Bush placed Iraq in the same
category of threat to US national security as Iran and North Korea. The
three rogues states, Bush argued constituted an "axis of evil" that must be
prevented from acquiring nuclear weapons.

The post-Saddam insurgency in Iraq - an insurgency largely facilitated and
sponsored by Iran - has caused the US and its coalition partners no end of
grief. Some 3,000 coalition servicemen have been killed since the invasion;
the overwhelming majority of casualties have been American. Frustration with
the continued bloodletting in Iraq was undoubtedly the most significant
factor that caused the Republican Party to lose control of both houses of
Congress in last Tuesday's elections.
And yet, for all the difficulties, pain and frustration the post-Saddam
insurgency has caused the US, the toppling of Saddam's regime successfully
prevented Iraq from acquiring nuclear weapons.

Iraq is a war zone today. But it does not have, and likely will not acquire
nuclear weapons - nor chemical or biological weapons, for that matter. To
that degree, Bush was neither wrong nor premature when he made it known in
the months following the invasion that the US had accomplished its mission
in Iraq.

IN THE summer of 2003, assessing future trends on the basis of the US-led
invasion of Iraq, Libya's dictator Mu'ammar Gaddafi decided to forgo his
nuclear weapons program. Libya's decision to give up its nuclear weapons
program was a direct consequence of Gaddafi's analysis of US intentions
after the invasion. Quite simply, he believed that the best way to ensure
the survival of his regime was to relinquish his aspirations to become a
nuclear power.

But as the months and years have progressed it has become clear that far
from being a warning to other would-be nuclear armed dictatorships, the
US-led invasion of Iraq was a one-shot deal. As Saddam was captured in his
hole, Teheran and Pyongyang marched forward, unchallenged in their campaign
to become nuclear powers.

The ascent of the most dangerous regimes in the world to the status of
nuclear powers reached a new climax last month. First was North Korea's
nuclear bomb test on Columbus Day. Two weeks later Iran announced it was
doubling its uranium enrichment by utilizing a second network of
centrifuges.

For their part, most of the nations of the world have looked on with
indifference to these developments. South Korean Foreign Minister and
incoming UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon appears far more concerned with
the Japanese debate over whether North Korea's nuclear test should or should
not cause Japan to develop its own nuclear arsenal than with the fact that
Pyongyang now has nuclear bombs.

Ban's apparent moral and strategic dementia is of a piece with the
international community's apathy. Europe has responded to Iran's sprint
toward nuclear arms by offering its usual mix of toothless sanctions,
emotional appeals and diplomatic pageantry, all aimed at marking time until
Iran announces its entre into the nuclear club.

Russia and China have responded to both Pyongyang and Teheran's nuclear
machinations by increasing their collaboration with both regimes.

AS FOR the US, Iran, North Korea and al-Qaida have all been quick to
interpret the Democratic victory in last Tuesday's Congressional elections
as a sign that the US has chosen to turn its back on the threat they pose to
America. By firing Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and replacing him with
Robert Gates, who supports appeasing the mullahs in Teheran and finding a
fig-leaf excuse to vacate Iraq, Bush has done everything to prove America's
enemies right. Moreover, Bush administration officials' statements ahead of
the president's trip to Asia this week indicate that Bush will seek to
contend with North Korea by ratcheting up US engagement with Pyongyang in
the six-party talks.

Reasonably, the world is now assessing the US through the prism of its
non-action against Iran and North Korea rather than through the prism of
Iraq. And the consequence of the view that Iraq was a deviation from a norm
of US passivity is nothing less than the complete breakdown of the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation treaty.

Last week the London's Sunday Times reported that Algeria, Egypt, Morocco,
Saudi Arabia, Tunisia and the UAE have all announced their intention to
build civilian nuclear reactors. Last Tuesday, in an official visit to
China, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak reportedly signed an agreement with
Chinese leader Hu Jintao for China to build nuclear reactors in Egypt.

It is not hard to see the lesson of these developments. As the Iraq campaign
shows clearly, while the price of taking action to prevent rogue regimes
from acquiring nuclear weapons is high, the price of not acting is far
higher.

Relating this wisdom to Iran earlier this year, Senator John McCain said,
"There is only one thing worse than the United States exercising a military
option [to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons], and that is a
nuclear-armed Iran."

The US and its allies are paying a high price for having successfully
prevented Saddam from getting nuclear bombs. The price that Israel or the
US, or both, will pay to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear bombs is liable
to be even higher. Yet the alternative to paying that price will be
suffering, destruction and death on an unimaginable scale.

December 7, 2008 A Horror Story

2006-11-14T07:46:00.000-08:00

December 7, 2008

Terrorism Raymond S. Kraft October 24, 2006

December 7, 2008, began inauspiciously.

At 0753 at Pearl Harbor in Hawaii, the attack that had triggered America's entry into World War II, sixty-seven years before, was ceremoniously commemorated, an honor guard, taps, a 21-gun salute, the bugle's notes and the rifles' crack drifting across the bay to the USS Arizona memorial, where Admiral Arthur Peterson, USN Ret., laid a wreath in memory of the sailors sleeping below, one of whom was his own grandfather.

On the West coast it was 1053, and in Washington D.C. it was one fifty-three in the afternoon, 1353 military time.

In 2006 America, tired of War in Iraq, had elected Democrats to modest majorities in both houses of Congress. Representative Nancy Pelosi became Speaker of the House, third in line for the presidency. In the spring of 2007, on a narrow, party-line vote, Congress, led by Senators John Kerry and Ted Kennedy and Barbara Boxer refused to authorize spending to continue the war in Iraq, and set September 30, 2007, as the deadline for complete withdrawal of American troops.

President Bush spoke to the country, to the American forces in Iraq, to those who had been there, and to the Iraqi people, to apologize for the short-sightedness and irresponsibility of the American congress and the tragedy he believed would follow after leaving task of nurturing a representative and stable government in Iraq half done, his voice choked, tears running down his stoic face, a betrayal of emotion for which he was resoundingly criticized and denounced in much of America's media.

The level of violence across Iraq immediately subsided, as the Americans began preparations to redeploy back to the States. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad praised the new Congress for its clear vision and sound judgment. America's Democrats rejoiced and congratulated themselves for bringing peace with honor and ending the illegal war based on lies that George Bush had begun only to enrich his friends in the military-industrial complex, and promised to retake the Presidency in 2008.

At 1000 on September 30, 2007, precisely on schedule, the last C-5A Galaxy carrying the last company of American combat troops in Iraq had roared down the Baghdad runway and lifted into the air. Only a few hundred American technical and military advisers and political liaisons remained in-country.

The Galaxy's wheels had scarcely retracted when Iraq erupted in the real civil war many had feared and foreseen, and which many others had predicted would not happen if only the American imperialists left Iraq. Sunni militias, Shia militias, and Al Qaeda militias ravaged and savaged the country, killing hundreds of thousands of Iraqis known or suspected to have collaborated with the Americans, killing Shias for being Shias, Sunnis for being Sunnis, Americans for being Americans, and anyone else who happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

By noon, not one of the American advisers and liaisons left behind remained alive. Many had been beheaded as they screamed. Most of their bodies were dumped in the river and never seen again. In the next thirty days more than a million Iraqis died. The General Assembly of the United Nations voted to condemn the violence, and recessed for lunch and martinis. In America, there was no political will to redeploy back to Iraq. And after a few months of rabid bloodletting, the situation in Iraq calmed to a tense simmer of sporadic violence and political jockeying, punctuated by the occasional assassination, while several million refugees fled the country. Only Kurdistan, in the north, which had thrown up a line of its Peshmurga fighters to keep the southern violence away, remained stable and at relative peace.

In the spring of 2008 America began its quadrennial circus of a national election, and in November elected a Democrat, the Junior Senator from New York, Hillary Rodham Clinton, as it next president, to the surprise of few. Her running mate, to the surprise of many, was San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, whose intelligence, charisma, and reputation as an indefatigable campaigner for gay marriage and the homeless of San Francisco helped solidify Clinton's support among liberal Democrats who only grudgingly forgave her for not openly opposing the Iraq war sooner, and the Clinton-Newsom ticket went to the top with a narrow 50.2% lead over Republican John McCain's 49.8% of the popular vote, despite, or perhaps because of, Clinton's and Newsom's lack of foreign policy and military experience.

America, or a slim voting majority of it, felt it had had all the war it ever wanted to see, and Hillary had led her party to a glorious (if narrow) victory with the unambiguous slogan: "Clinton & Newsom: No More War." Crowds at every whistle stop had cheered and chanted, No more war! No more war! No more war! At victory parties George Bush, Dick Cheney, Karl Rove, Donald Rumsfeld and Condoleezza Rice were hung and sometimes burned in effigy, enthusiastic crowds chanted "No more war!" many times more, and local bands cranked up the theme from the first Clinton electoral victory, "Don't stop thinking about tomorrow...yesterday's gone, yesterday's gone...," and indeed, it was.

President Bush had been a very lame duck since the 2006 election, and with a Democratic Congress could do little but veto most of the bills it sent him. The Democrats couldn't override his vetoes, so for nearly two years almost nothing important had been accomplished by anyone on the Hill or in the White House. After the 2008 election it was transition time, flocks and herds of thoroughly demoralized Republican staff began leaving Washington in search of greener pastures, Congress adjourned for the Holidays, Democrats came house hunting, and Clinton and Newsom began the briefings they would get from a fully cooperative Bush administration on the state of the nation and the state of the world they would inherit and have to cope with for the next four years, or eight, and in those last weeks of November both Hillary and Gavin seemed to age rather quickly. The exhilaration of the campaign was over, and the weight of a tumultuous world began to settle on their shoulders.

Back in early October, 2006, North Korean President (for life) Kim Jong Il had announced the detonation of a nuclear bomb deep in a tunnel in the stony mountains of North Korea. The seismic signature had been small, and American intelligence at first doubted whether it had been a nuclear explosion at all. Traces of radioactive emissions were detected a few days later, and the intelligence estimate revised to conclude that it had been a failed test that produced perhaps only 10% or less of the expected yield, only 0.5 to 1.5 kilotons, not the 20 kilotons, at least, that Western intelligence had anticipated.

Kim Jong Il gloated. The deception had worked. The Americans were thinking in terms of long range intercontinental ballistic missiles with huge warheads that they could shoot out of the sky with their sophisticated billion-dollar anti-missile defense systems. He was thinking in terms of small warheads carried by small, medium range cruise missiles that could be launched from many places, and infiltrated close enough to slip in under the radar and hit America's coastal cities.

On the evening of December 6, 2008, a junior analyst in the National Security Agency was going over routine satellite photo production of ship movements in the Atlantic and Pacific within a thousand miles of the US coasts. Late in the shift he thought he saw something through a haze of fatigue and caffeine, and called a supervisor over to talk.

"Look," he said, photos up on several computer screens, more printed out and spread across his desk, "See? These boats, not big ships, fishing boats, yachts, they've been moving in along shipping lanes for several days, across from the South Pacific toward the West coast, up from the South Atlantic toward the east. Nothing very unusual, they're all small and slow, and scattered up and down the oceans, it seems, but if you look at the times and courses..." and he pulled out a chart he had plotted, "They're approaching so they will all arrive at about the same time, or all be about the same distance off the coast at about the same time...," he trailed off.

The supervisor looked a bit quizzical. "Coincidence? Probably. You need more sleep. Too much fun in the night, eh? Let me know if you see something we can do something with." And walked away.

At 0723 Hawaii time on the 67th Anniversary of the Pearl Harbor attack three old fishing trawlers, about 100 miles apart, and each about 300 miles off the east coast, launched six small cruise missiles from launch tubes that could be dismantled and stored in the holds under ice, or fish, and set up in less than an hour. The missiles were launched at precisely one minute intervals. As soon as each boat had launched its pair, the skeleton crew began to abandon ship into a fast rubber inflatable. The captain was last off, and just before going overboard started the timer on the scuttling charges. Fifteen minutes later and ten miles away, each crew was going up the nets into a small freighter or tanker of Moroccan or Liberian registry, where each man was issued new identification as ship's crew. The rubber inflatables were shot and sunk, and just about then charges in the bilges of each of the three trawlers blew the hulls out, and they sank with no one on board and no distress signals in less than two minutes.

The missiles had been built in a joint operation by North Korea and Iran, and tested in Iran, so they would not have to overfly any other country. The small nuclear warheads had only been tested deep underground. The GPS guidance and detonating systems had worked perfectly, after a few corrections. They flew fifty feet above sea level, and 500 feet above ground level on the last leg of the trip, using computers and terrain data modified from open market technology and flight directors, autopilots, adapted from commercial aviation units. They would adjust speed to arrive on target at specific times and altitudes, and detonate upon reaching the programmed GPS coordinates. They were not as adaptable and intelligent as American cruise missiles, but they did not need to be. Not for this mission.

They were small, less than twenty feet long, and only 18 inches in diameter, powered by small, quiet, fuel-efficient, high-bypass turbofans, and painted in a mottled light blue and light gray ghost camouflage. Cruising at 600 knots, just below the speed of sound, they were nearly impossible to see or hear. They came in under the radar until they reached the coast. After that they were lost in the ground clutter. Nobody saw it coming.

At precisely 0753, Hawaii time, 1353 in the District of Columbia, sixty-seven years to the minute after the Pearl Harbor attack began, the first of six missiles to hit the Washington area exploded in a huge white burst of nuclear fire just 500 feet above the White House, which disappeared in a mist of powdered plaster and stone, concrete and steel. President Bush and President-Elect Clinton had been meeting with Condoleezza Rice and Mrs. Clinton's national security adviser, reviewing the latest National Security Estimate, when they instantaneously turned into a plasma of the atomic elements that had once been human beings. No trace remained.

Alarms immediately began going off all over Washington, and precisely one minute later the second missile exploded just as it struck the Capital dome, instantly turning thousands of tons of granite that had one moment before been the nation's center of government into thousands of tons of granite shrapnel that shredded several square miles of Washington like a leviathan Claymore mine. At precisely one minute intervals, four more 3 kiloton nuclear weapons exploded at an altitude of 500 feet AGL above the Pentagon, the CIA headquarters, the NSA headquarters, the FBI headquarters, all of which were fully staffed in the middle of the day. In five minutes, the government of the United States of America was decapitated, and a quarter million of the people who made the place run were dead, or dying, or had simply disappeared.

Also at 1353 Eastern time, a missile had blown off just above the New York Stock Exchange, in New York City, and thousands of years of collective financial knowledge and experience evaporated in the nuclear flame. In one minute intervals, others had hit the financial centers of Boston and Baltimore, and the Naval base at Norfolk, Virginia.

Simultaneously, within the same 10-minute window of hell, nuclear tipped cruise missiles devastated the largest intermodel shipping facility on the West coast at San Pedro harbor, exploded just above the Library Tower in central Los Angeles, and short circuited the computer technology ghetto of Silicon Valley in Santa Clara County, big time. One exploded ten feet away from the top of the Bank of America Building in San Francisco and set much of the east slope of the city ablaze. Another giant fireball flared among the phalanx of office towers along the Capitol Mall in Sacramento, instantly obliterating Arnold Schwarzenegger and the state government of California, the largest state economy in the US, the seventh largest economy in the world. Two ripped open the heart of Portland, Oregon, one shattered the financial district of Seattle, and the last one turned the Microsoft campus into a pillar of fire and smoke, wiping from the face of history, in a second, the IT giant that had revolutionized global communications.

It was 0803, Hawaii time. Ten minutes.

Three million Americans dead. And not a trace of the assault fleet remained on the surface of any ocean.

Vice-President Elect Gavin Newsom was in his bedroom at home in Pacific Heights, his window overlooking the Golden Gate and the Marin bluffs. He thought he heard an oddly loud crack of thunder and saw a flash reflected on the hills across the inlet, but it was a clear day and nothing else seemed out of place. He continued packing for the return trip to Washington, his second since the election, to continue his transition briefings and begin organizing his staff. His nomination as Hillary's running mate had come as a huge surprise, and he was elated.

Someone rapped on the door, loudly, twice, and without waiting for a reply the senior Secret Service officer on his detail opened it and stepped quickly in. "Come with me, now," he said. Gavin was startled. "I need to finish packing," he replied.

"No time, sir. Something has happened. Very big. I fear. No details yet. We have to get you out of here, NOW! RIGHT NOW! GO! GO! GO!" He grabbed Newsom's arm, swung him around, and pushed him out the door, where two other Secret Service agents flanked him down the stairs and out to a running black Suburban waiting in the garage. They pushed him into the back seat, jumped in, and the driver gunned the engine, out the drive, down the street, tires squealing. Nobody spoke until they were headed over the Bridge, northbound at seventy-five miles an hour, weaving through the traffic which wasn't yet the gridlock it would soon become.

"What the hell's going on?" he finally demanded.

"Okay. This is what I know," the officer said. "The US has apparently sustained multiple nuclear attacks in the last fifteen minutes, including Washington D.C. and San Francisco. Financial district. We're not sure how many, at least ten, maybe twenty. Lots of dead. Got the White House, the Capital, the Pentagon. Our job is to get you on an airplane at the nearest functioning airport, that'll be Novato, and get you to a safe place. Prestissimo."

"Where?" Newsom asked. Things were moving way too fast now.

"Don't know yet. We'll get orders."

The Air Force Learjet had been airborne for two minutes when a cell phone buzzed, and the Secret Service captain answered it and handed it off to the Vice President Elect. "It's Mr. Cheney, sir," he said.

"Gavin?" Dick Cheney asked. "Yes, sir," Newsom replied, subdued, for the events of the last hour had sobered up his elated mood considerably.

"Okay, Gavin. I don't know what you know, so I'll tell you what I can. There have been approximately 20 nuclear strikes on government and financial targets in the US, about an hour ago. No real damage estimate yet, except that it's awful. A hundred times 9/11, maybe a thousand times. I happened to be at the Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs, and have moved into Cheyenne Mountain to set up a temporary HQ, until we get things sorted out. As you know Cheyenne was vacated by NORAD a few years ago, so we have plenty of space. You will be flown here, nonstop."

"I know you haven't a lot of national and international experience." Cheney had thought of saying that Newsom had none, but Newsom would be too painfully aware of that. He didn't need reminding. "The President is missing and presumed dead. So is Mrs. Clinton. So you may become the next president, in about six weeks. I don't know. he Constitution says the Vice President succeeds a president who is dead or disabled, but it doesn't say what happens if the President Elect dies before being inaugurated. I suppose the Court will have to answer that, if we can cobble one together by then. In the meantime, I will assume you will be inaugurated. You'll have a steep learning curve, a real steep curve. All presidents do, under the best of circumstances, and these are not the best of circumstances."

The next day a hard winter storm roared down the West coast from Alaska, pelting rescue workers in bombed out city centers with hard, cold rain, that did not let up for a week. People alive but injured or trapped in the wreckage died of hypothermia before they were found. Two days later, a cold front out of Canada brought heavy snow to the Northeast. Millions were already without electricity, and in a week of subzero weather hundreds of thousands more died. More than four million, altogether. More than one of every one hundred Americans.

Al Qaeda had picked December 7 because it was the anniversary of the attack on Pearl Harbor, and because, just before Christmas, the Infidel holiday, it would destroy the Christmas shopping season so important to so many retailers, driving another nail into the national economy of the Great Satan. And it would destroy the festive spirit of the season for millions of Americans, perhaps for all. The perfect psyop. Psychological warfare. And the weather forecasters had predicted severe winter storms on both coasts during the week immediately after disaster.

Al Qaeda leaders had calculated, correctly, that by turning up the violence in Iraq during the weeks before the 2006 election it could achieve an anti-war Democratic Congress that would vote to end America's wars in the Middle East, and then by turning down the violence in Iraq after the election of an anti-war Democratic Congress, it could lull America into a false sense of safety and security in anticipation of the "peace in our time" that America's new ruling party had promised would follow from what Al Qaeda perceived, correctly, as America's retreat before the unstoppable determination of the Islamic Resistance Movement, the Jihad. America did not call it that, of course. The Americans thought they were just ending a bad and illegal war ginned up by George W. Bush to depose Saddam Hussein who had proven not to have WMDs after all, the ones the Americans had never found, the ones buried in Syria. Al Qaeda saw more clearly. It was a capitulation, a de facto surrender of the Middle East to the coming Islamic Caliphate that would someday rule the world. The martyrs of Islam had beaten the Great Satan to its knees. In time they would cut off its head.

By Christmas, the American economy had imploded. Inflation soared, unemployment soared, businesses closed, cities that had suffered direct hits became ghost towns. Tax revenues evaporated, leaving state governments without funds to pay unemployment benefits or teachers' salaries. With the New York Stock Exchange gone, stock trading ended, and values plummeted. Retirement assets and pension funds disappeared in a wink. Nobody knew what to expect. Real estate crashed, and major banks filed for bankruptcy. With the collapse of the American economy, the largest on earth, the most productive country on earth, with just 5% of the global population producing one third of the global economic output, the rest of the global economy fell into chaos. Oil shipments stopped, food shipments stopped, and in that winter millions of people in third world countries starved to death.

The America era was over.

"In the spring of 1941, Nazi Germany was poised to dominate the earth. France, the low countries, Norway, Denmark, Austria, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, Greece, and much of Poland had been overrun by the Germans. All of Europe, save neutral Sweden and Switzerland, was in the hands of Hitler's friends and allies: dictators or monarchs who ruled fascist Italy, Vichy France, Franco's Spain, Portugal, the Balkan countries, Finland, and above all the Soviet Union."

"A single German division under General Erwin Rommel, sent to rescue beleaguered Italians in Libya, drove Britain's Middle Eastern armies flying and threatened the Suez lifeline; while in Iraq a coup d'etat by the pro-German Rashid Ali cut the land road to India. In Asia, Germany's ally, Japan, was coiled to strike, ready to take Southeast Asia and invade India. No need to involve the United States; by seizing the Indies, Japan could break the American embargo and obtain all the oil needed for the Axis Powers to pursue their war aims.

"Hitler should have sent the bulk of his armies to serve under Rommel, who would have done what Alexander did and Bonaparte failed to do: He would have taken the Middle East and led his armies to India. There he would have linked up with the Japanese. Europe, Asia, and Africa, would have belonged to the coalition of dictators and militarists."

"The Nazi-Soviet-Japanese alliance commanded armed forces and resources that utterly dwarfed the military resources that the holdouts, Britain (with its empire), and the United States, could field. The English-speaking countries would have been isolated in a hostile world and would have had no realistic option but to make their peace with the enemy, retaining some autonomy for a time, perhaps, but doomed ultimately to succumb. Nazi Germany, as leader of the coalition, would have ruled the world."

"Only Hitler's astonishing blunder in betraying and invading his Soviet ally kept it from happening." - David Frompkin, Professor of International Relations and History, Boston University, writing in What If: Eminent Historians Imagine What Might Have Been (Putnam 1999) pp. 308, 309.

History is made, wars are won and lost, cultures and nations and civilizations come and go, rise and fall, as much by blunders as by victories.

The failure of many Americans, including many of the leading Democrats in Congress, and some Republicans, to fully appreciate the persistent, long-term threat posed to America's liberties and survival, and to the future of Liberal Democracies everywhere, by an Islamic Resistance Movement that envisions a world dominated and defined by an Islamic Caliphate of religious totalitarianism, and which will fight any war, make any sacrifice, suffer any hardship, and pay any price to achieve it, may prove to be the kind of blunder upon which the fate of America turns, and falls.

Raymond S. Kraft is an attorney and writer in northern California.

Is America giving Iran the Bomb???

2006-11-01T21:08:00.000-08:00

Is America giving Iran the Bomb???
Bret Stephens -
The Wall Street Journal
31 October 2006

Does the Bush administration seriously mean to give Iran a nuclear bomb?
Look carefully at confidential text of a forthcoming. Security Council
resolution, and the answer, it would seem, is yes.

This is a Halloween column, but it is not a prank. Through diplomatic
efforts spearheaded by Undersecretary of State Nick Burns, the
administration is prepared to endorse a European draft of a U.N. resolution
that Imposes limited sanctions on the Islamic Republic for flouting its Aug.
31 deadline to stop enriching uranium. The chances the resolution will soon
be voted and agreed on increased with last week's news that Iran has again
enriched uranium using a second "cascade" of 160 or so centrifuges. Iran
plans to operate 3,000 such centrifuges-which can spin uranium hexafluoride
to either reactor- or weapons-grade levels-by March of next year.

In an interview last month with this newspaper, Secretary of State
Condoleezza Rice allowed that while a sanctions resolution would not satisfy
the U.S. on every point. It would usefully ratchet tip the pressure on
Tehran and pave the way, if necessary, for tougher Security Council action
later on. On Its face, the current draft of the resolution does just that.
After noting that the International Atomic Energy Agency "is unable to
conclude that there are no undeclared nuclear materials or activities in
Iran," the resolution forbids the sale or transfer of "all items, materials,
equipment, goods and technology which could contribute to Iran's nuclear and
ballistic missile programs." It also freezes the financial assets of
everyone and everything known to be involved in those programs.

But then we come to the Bushehr exception, so broad the Iranians could drive
a truck through it-or, to be more precise, a truck carrying 330 kilograms of
reactor-grade plutonium. That's enough to make about 55 Nagasaki-type atomic
bombs.

Bushehr is a light-water nuclear reactor that Russia began building for Iran
in the mid-1990s over the objections of the Clinton administration. Ten
years on. The billion-dollar facility is nearly complete: All that remains
to make it operable is reactor-grade uranium, which Moscow promises to
supply by next October. In a sop to the Russians, the draft resolution
specifies that the prohibition on technology transfers to Iran "shall not
apply to supplies of items, materials, equipment, goods and technology, nor
to the provision of technical assistance or training, financial assistance,
investment, brokering or other services . . .  related to the construction
of Bushehr I.

For years it was widely believed that a light-water reactor could not be
used - at least not covertly - to generate weapons-grade uranium or
plutonium. It was for this reason that President Clinton agreed to supply
two such reactors in 1994 to North Korea In exchange for freezing the
reactor at Yongbyong, which lent itself more easily to nuclear-weapons
production. But as Henry Sokolski of the Washing ton-based Nonproliferation
Education Center explains in a phone interview, the problem with that view
is that it is at least 30 years out of date. Iran could secretly remove fuel
rods of lightly enriched uranium pellets from Bushehr by substituting dummy
rods, something the IAEA would be unlikely to notice using current
inspection practices. It could then use Its 3,000 centrifuges to enrich the
uranium to weapons-grade levels in as little as five weeks.

That's not all. After a year's operation the Bushehr reactor would produce
the previously mentioned 330 kilograms of plutonium in the form of spent
fuel. That plutonium could be reprocessed at small and dispersed facilities,
completely hidden from the IAEA's view. And unlike uranium, reactor-grade
plutonium is only slightly less serviceable than the weapons-grade stuff
when it comes to building a bomb. "It would take as little as 10 days of
operation to get the first significant quantity [of plutonium] and then you
could get a bomb's worth every day," says Mr. Sokolski. "You're talking
about weeks, not months."

This means we need to radically re vise our estimates of how soon the
Islamic Republic will have all the ingredients and know-how it needs to
build a bomb. National Intelligence Director John Negroponte speculated In
June that Iran would, be there sometime between 2010 and 2015-long after
President Bush and presumably Mr. Negroponte are out of office. But as Mr.
Sokolski notes, once Bushehr is operational, Iran could go nuclear "before
the end of next year." We know that Iran already possesses a de sign for a
functional weapon, probably courtesy of the A.Q. Khan proliferation network.

Proponents of the draft resolution argue that the Bushehr exemption is the
only way the Russians will agree to any sanctions, and that an incremental
resolution is better than none. This argument is questionable on three
counts. Why would the Russians oppose the completion of Bushehr next year
when they refuse to do so today? Why should the international community
allow Iran to get a reactor when it is already in material breach of the
safeguards agreement of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty?

Finally, why should the U.S. hand Moscow a bargaining chip for its broader
strategic ambitions, which are increasingly antithetical to America's?
Imagine If Vladimir Putin demanded that the U.S. abandon its support for the
embattled Republic of Georgia in exchange for his compliance on the Iranian
issue. Is that a trade-off George W. Bush would be willing to accept?

Tehran has grown shrill in its warnings that there will be "repercussions"
if any step is taken to halt its nuclear programs. Whatever. Its time the
Bush administration called Iran's bluff, and regained Its nerve, by taking
effective action in the face of the present danger. The Kabuki dance now
being played out at Turtle Bay is not that.

An appeal of faith to President George W. Bush

2006-11-01T21:04:00.000-08:00

An appeal of faith to President George W. Bush
michael freund, THE JERUSALEM POST Oct. 31, 2006

Dear Mr. President, I am writing to you because I am afraid. I have been
closely following the rhetoric of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad over
the past few months, and I want you to know that I am gripped with a sense
of fear.

I fear for the future of Israel and for that of the entire Jewish people, as
the would-be Hitler of Persia readies to do battle against us with the most
horrific of weapons.

I fear for the future of the West, because outside of Washington, few and
far between are the leaders with the common sense and courage to stand up to
the Tyrant of Teheran.

And I fear for the future of the world, because if Iran's fundamentalists
get their hands on a nuclear weapon, it will only be a matter of time before
their extremist allies abroad become similarly armed.

Hence, I am writing to you because I am convinced that you alone understand
and appreciate the gravity of the current situation, and I pray in my heart
that you will not let it stand.

I appeal to you now, not as a political analyst nor as a newspaper
columnist, but as one man of faith to another: Please strike Iran hard with
military force, and dismantle its nuclear weapons program, before it is too
late.

I know you believe, as I do, that God guides the destiny of men and of
nations. And I know you believe, just as I do, that He raised you up to the
helm of power precisely at this critical period, to serve as His agent and
His instrument in this world.

The God of history has chosen you, Mr. President, just as He did Churchill,
and He has entrusted you with a sacred mandate: to save the world from the
designs of a madman.

I can tell you that in Israel, a sense of dread has slowly, but surely,
begun to sink in. As the Sunday Times of London reported earlier this week,
a growing number of my fellow Jews have begun to build underground nuclear
shelters adjacent to their homes.

"The shelters," says the Times, "are built to withstand radioactive fallout,
have fortified walls and doors and generate their own electricity and
decontaminated air." Hundreds of such bunkers, reports the paper, have been
built in recent months, and
"demand is soaring."

Mr. President, just the other night, I went out with my family for dinner to
a restaurant in Herzliya, the city named after Zionist visionary Theodor
Herzl, who foresaw the need to establish a safe haven for the Jewish people.
Our waitress was an attractive and cheerful young lady who moved to Israel
16 years ago at the age of four from her native Lithuania, where her family
had suffered anti-Semitism and persecution.

But when we asked her if she was happy living here in the Jewish state, the
smile on her lips quickly faded. Glumly, she answered us with the following
words: "That Ahmadinejad of Iran, he scares me. It is a very scary
situation." And indeed it is, Mr. President, because my people are in danger
once again. It was just six decades ago that the Europeans tossed us into
Hitler's ovens and turned 6 million Jews into ashes. Now, with no shame,
they stand by silently as Iran seeks to do the same.
The United Nations is a lost cause, and we have no faith in Russia, China or
international institutions. The sad fact is that most of the world will not
shed a tear if Mr. Ahmadinejad succeeds in achieving his dreadful aims.

Here in Israel, our own leadership is tired and weak. They have lost their
way, and they are no longer anchored in faith. As we saw this past summer in
the Lebanon war, they stumble about as though walking in darkness, oblivious
to the danger that stalks us all.

There is only one person now, Mr. President, who can stop this terrifying
scenario from coming to pass, and I believe that person is you.

I think of you often, and when I do, I am guided in faith to the fourth
chapter of the Book of Esther in the Bible, where the evil Persian court
officer Haman threatened the Jewish people with extinction. After Mordechai
the Jew got wind of Haman's plot, he passed along a message of great urgency
to Queen Esther: "Who knows, perhaps it was precisely for a moment such as
this that you have attained power?" Mr. President, that message was as
compelling then as it is today, and I believe it is clearly directed to you
too.

The decision you face is not an easy one, and I do not mean to suggest
otherwise. But there are moments when a leader, like Joshua of old, must "be
strong and of good courage" (Joshua Chapter 1), and not shy away from doing
what must be done.
In the case of Iran, there can be no room for retreat or for shrinking back
from the task at hand. The stakes are simply too great.

Iran can and must be stopped, and the only way to do so is through the use
of military force.

Diplomacy and resolutions are a smoke screen, and you know as well as I do
that they will not slow Iran's steady drive toward obtaining a nuclear
arsenal. Only the long and powerful arm of the United States, flexed with
all its might, can and will be able to do the job.

Sure, the critics and the nay-sayers will try to tear you down, just as they
have been doing since you the day you were elected. They will heap scorn on
you, call you a warmonger and worse, and denigrate you and your family for
many, many years to come.

But please don't allow them to deter you or to drive you to despair. Don't
let them drown out that still, small voice within, the one that reaches into
each of our hearts and calls out every day: "I am the Lord, and there is
none else" (Isaiah Chapter 45).
Mr. President, you know as well as I do that history's final verdict is not
written by academics, nor is it determined by the opinion-mongers at The New
York Times.

The one and only verdict, the one that really, truly counts, is the one that
is penned in heaven, by He Who gave each of us life. It is to Him, and Him
alone, that we will all have to answer.

In just over two years you will leave office. In the greater scheme of
things, I am convinced that your legacy will depend largely on the decisions
that you make in the coming few months about what to do with Iran.

I urge you, I plead with you: don't walk out of the White House in January
2009 without having stopped Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Don't leave the fate of
Israel and the Jewish people hanging in the balance.

Remember the promise that God made to Abraham in Genesis Chapter 12: "I will
bless those that bless you, and those that curse you I shall curse".

Note that when it comes to standing by Israel and the Jewish people, there
is no middle ground. God delineates two categories, and two categories only:
those who bless Israel, and those who curse it.

You are in a unique position to bless Israel, and through it, all of
humanity, by removing the nuclear sword from the hand of the Persian
executioner.

The same God Who spoke, and said, "Let there be light", and there was light,
surely expects you to do nothing less.
I will be praying for you, as will many others, and I hope that you take
this message to heart.

Be strong, be strong, Mr. President, and through you, may we all be
strengthened.

Mohammad was mentally ill, why emulate the sick?

2006-10-30T09:16:00.000-08:00

Mohammad, a very sick person

The following evaluations eminate from many Medical-Historical scholars from around the world over a period of hundreds of years of focused analysis and research. Many of these facts are found in the hadiths while some have been destroyed to protect the false image and desired religious memory of the prophet to control Muslims.

They explain, in part, WHY anyone depicting Muhammad was and is to be killed [Cartoon riots]. Simply, he made up the death rule in the hadith so as to avoid ridicule over his ghastly appearance and disloyalty of any follower. Read why.

If you are a Muslim this is the actual deranged, but clever, madman who never allowed peace upon anyone and always took a 20% cut from all who did his criminal bidding. Please rethink your allegiance. You would not want him as a neighbor, business associate, or inside a mosque.

Muhammad was thoroughly narcissistic - self-love (inordinate), self-importance and other-world "self" proclaimed abilities (the messenger of god). There was an apparent "arrest" or regression in his early stages of libidinal development in which there was a focus on his own erotic pleasure - the sexual aspect as well as paedophilia involved in his case. As a younger man he was married to a wealthy woman 15 years his senior. Because his mother died when he was quite young, he developed a mother fixation attachment to the first wife, recorded in historical holy books of Islam. He was a "control freak" who was able to influence once peaceful Bedoin tribesmen to commit heinous acts such as mutilation and beheading of those they stalked. Driven by greed they did his bidding. Some considered him "Magic" or ginn while others openly mocked him.

He gave off a peculiar strong bodily smell, so repugnant from his maladies, the intense heat and lack of water, and infrequent bathing. His hair and beard were filthy and infested, knotted, and rank smelling.

"Too bad for humanity that Mohammed's temporal lobe epilepsy didn't manifest itself in less malignant ways..."

[The following are excerpts and medical observations from hundreds of scholarly works found on the www on Muhammad's grave physical conditions. The vast majority of all health references indicate that he was, indeed, a very sick man.]

From Neuropsychiatry, Neuropsychology, and Clinical Neuroscience by Rhawn Joseph-- Williams & Wilkins Press, Second Edition, 1996)

Muhammad, god’s alleged "messenger", was apparently dyslexic and agraphic (loss, partial or total, of the ability to write) and was known to lose consciousness and enter into trance-like states. In fact, he had his first truly "spiritual/religious" conversion when, as the story goes, he was torn from his sleep by the archangel Gabriel.

Muhammad was considered, at times, a basically kind and considerate man, but he was also known to fly into extreme rages and to kill, or at least order killed, wealthy infidels and merchants and those who opposed him for any reason. He was very sensative to any reference to his physical appearance as we shall see. These behaviors, when coupled with his increased sexuality, heightened religious fervor, trance states, mood swings, and possible auditory and visual hallucinations of a titanic angel, certainly point to the limbic system and inferior temporal lobe as the possible neurological foundation for these experiences.

RELIGION, LIMBIC SYSTEM HYPERACTIVATION, AND TEMPORAL LOBE SEIZURES OF MUHAMMAD.

Among a TINY MINORITY of humans, the nuclei of the limbic system have a tendency to periodically become over-activated. When this occurs, emotions may be perceived or expressed abnormally, and the sensory and emotional filtering that normally takes place in these nuclei is vastly reduced or totally abolished. Moreover, instead of being merely overly sensitive, those affected may suddenly experience extreme anger, rage, paranoia, depression, sexual desire, or even religious ecstasy. They may hallucinate the presence of threatening people, animals, or even religious figures such as angels or demons. Deepening of emotions, hallucinations, alterations in sex drive, and the development of extreme religious beliefs (i.e., hyper self religiousness) are not uncommon manifestations of limbic-temporal lobe seizures and hyperactivation.

In fact, certain individuals who develop temporal lobe epilepsy and, thus, limbic hyperactivation, may suddenly become hyper-religious and spend hours reading and/or talking about the spiritual messages (or other culturally relevant scriptures) and other religious issues imparted. Once this condition develops, they may spend hours every day preaching, chanting, or writing out their mystical and/or religious thoughts, or engaging in certain actions they believe have high religious significance. Many modern-day religious writers who also happen to suffer from epilepsy are, in fact, exceedingly prolific, and some who feel impelled to preach tend to do just that. All of these manifestations were apparent in Muhammad's behavior.

People who suffer from periodic episodes of limbic and temporal lobe hyper-activation, such as those with temporal lobe epilepsy, typically have seizures. It is not uncommon for these seizures to be preceded by an hallucination or series of them as he frequently ranted.

Isolation, as well as food and water deprivation, increased or decreased sexual activity, pain, drug use, self-mutilation, prayer, and meditation are common methods of attaining mystical states of religious and spiritual awareness, and have been employed world-wide, across time and culture. These states also activate the limbic system above normal function mode.

For example, not only can pain or a desirable food item or sex partner result in limbic arousal, but when the limbic system is denied normal modes of input, be it sensory, emotional, social, or nutritional, it can become hyperactive; stimuli normally deleted and/or subject to sensory filtering are instead perceived. That is; limbic sensory acuity is increased, and in some respects what is perceived is not always an "hallucination" in the sense that it really involves the perception of overlapping sensory qualities that are normally filtered out. Sensory filtering is quite common at the level of the amygdala, which contains neurons that are multimodally responsive as well as inhibitory via serotonin. However, when this filter is removed, hallucinations and/or the perception of unusual sensory qualities can result. This was a common occurance in Muhammad's adult life and perceived by many as mystical qualities.

The majority of Muhammad's biographers concede that he received all of his revelations from god, either in dreams or during seizures. During the painful episodes of seizures, Muhammad heard bells ringing in his ears and pearl-sized drops of perspiration trickled from his body even during the winter (Martin Ling, op. cit, p. 245). When fully recovered, he narrated the contents of the vision written down by scribes. Many times they wrote narrations of muhammad's peculiar swoons and utterances.

Those observations of Muhammad's behavior are indicative of the fact that he suffered from epilepsy and/or schizophrenia, two medical conditions that were a mystery to the people of his time. Dr. Gustav Weil, in a note to Muhammad der Prophet, discusses the question of Muhammad's being subject to attacks of epilepsy, a physical condition, "which has generally been represented as a slander, concocted by his enemies, as well as by the Christian writers."

His ailment appears, however, to have been asserted by some of the oldest Muslim biographers, now labeled as "hired biographers" by some modern Muslim writers (Dr. Rafiq Zakaria, Muhammad and the Quran); it having been established as being a genuine "assertion" on the authority of other writers, who were contemporaneous to their time.

He would suddenly be seized, they said, with violent trembling followed by a kind of swoon or, more accurately, convulsion, during which perspiration would stream from his forehead in the coldest weather; he would lie with his eyes closed, foaming at the mouth, and bellowing like a young camel. Violent writhing and spasms were observed.

Muhammad's Gigantism caused the excessive size of his extremities [head, hands, feet]; usually caused by over secretion of growth hormone from the pituitary gland. He frequently veiled his head and face, particularly while watching when his tribal plunderers were engaged in murder, beheadings, and theft at his direction.

History confirms Muhammads peculiar maladies.

[Translated from the Dutch.]

"According to the hadith Muhammad suffered from a long-lasting disease, which he treated by means of bleeding. He walked as somebody who comes down from a hill. His skin-colour was peculiar, not white, not too tanned, somewhat gaunt rosy, yet swarthy. His eyebrows were conspicuous and extended. He was sweating heavily, especially when he was receiving 'revelations'. He heard the noise of bells and voices. He had a great appetite and suffered from hunger. Notwithstanding his sexual relations with ten young women, he remained quasi-sterile: one only child after the age of forty years. During his last illness he suffered from intense headaches, losses of consciousness, back- and intestinal pains. He died at the age of 62 years. Psychologically he was known as 'trustworthy', somewhat retiring and prude. Initially, about at the age of forty years, he was depressed, retiring, and showed a tendency to suicide which he had shown in earlier years according to hadith. He spoke slowly. Most typical were his great hands, dough feeling palms, great feet, a long fleshy nose, well developed ears and a peculiar voice.

These indications suggest that he suffered from acromegaly. This hypothesis allows to explain almost all details found in the hadith. Psychologically he was considered as a 'trustworthy' person [only to his fellow plunderers]. Initially depressed and devoid of self-confidence, he considered suicide frequently. He suffered from hallucinoses and even hallucinations. http://users.skynet.be/sky50779/mohammed.htm

MEDICAL PATHOLOGY

*Soft tissue proliferation is one of the early manifestations. Leading to the classic features: enlargement of the hands, feet and facial features, the most common complaint of the patients; "Gigantism" ACROMEGLY.

In adults, the syndrome is characterized by local overgrowth of bone (skull, mandible). Note: In 1932 an English film was produced about a strange and powerful murderer. "The Creeper" starred an acromegliac named Rhondo Hatten.

Muhammad as a leader figure...

To the common and unlearned ancient Bedoin desert tribesman Muhammad would appear as a strange and all-powerful giant. Combine this with the sweats and delerious mystical rantings, his supposed "knowledge" derived from early life Jewish teachers, his total rejection by, taunting, and his subsequent absolute hatred of the learned and successful Jews, and you have a sick but natural angry anti-social murderer, thief, rapist, plunderer, and preying pedophile motivating the poor to take from others for a better life, always sharing their spoils with him. Under threat and fear, they even shared their young children for his pleasure and sexual gratification.

This sick and delusional madman has corrupted BILLIONS and continues to do so today! Please notify all mosques, madrasses, and CAIR.

YAWS Their are two (2) recorded specific detailed accounts of Muhammad's physical appearance and visual description given at different periods [stages] of his life by different chroniclers. It is difficult to ascertain if one might have been written truthfully and the other written as complimentary because the author feared for his life. In one description, he shows many of the overt signs and manifestations of later stage Syphilis.

It would not be inconceivable that Muhammad was a Syphletic because of his hyper-active sexuality. Since, in warm climates, the most vulnerable to the infection and spread of disease are young children from ages 6-12 years. Various accounts indicate that he frequently partook of at least 10-11 children, possibly more. Without DNA blood samples we cannot be sure. Compare the signs and symptoms with the prior text description.

Yaws (also Frambesia tropica, thymosis, polypapilloma tropicum or pian) is a tropical infection of the skin, bones and joints caused by the spirochete bacterium Treponema pertenue. Other treponematosis diseases are bejel (Treponema endemicum), pinta (Treponema carateum), and syphilis (Treponema pallidum).

The insanity caused by late-stage syphilis was once one of the more common forms of dementia; this was known as the "general paresis of the insane".

The disease is transmitted by skin contact with infected individuals, the spirochete entering through an existing cut or similar damage. Within ninety days (but usually less than a month) of infection a painless but distinctive 'mother yaw' ulcerous papule appears on the skin at the point of entry, it is often described as raspberry-like and is 10-50 mm in size. This lesion will persist for up to nine months and other secondary growths will appear on the body as the original one heals, there may also be inflammation of the fingers (dactylitis).

If untreated a secondary stage occurs after up to four months of latency, it is marked by more 'raspberry' growths but smaller and ulcerous - exuding a thin, highly infective fluid which attracts flies. These growths may also merge together into thick fissured plaques, which can occur on the feet and induce a distinctive gait. These secondary growths are irreversible but there can be relapsing lesions and asymptomatic periods.

In 10-20% of cases the disease can progress over a decade or more to a tertiary stage with destructive lesions of the skin and bones. Large subcutaneous nodules develop and grow before abscessing and ulcerating, these can become infected and may merge together forming serpiginous tracts. These tracts heal with keloid formation which can cause

deformities, disabilities and limb contractures. The bone lesions caused are periostitis, osteitis, and osteomyelitis, damage to the tibia can lead to a condition known as sabre shins. In a very few cases a condition known as goundou is caused where growths on the[b] nasal maxillae can result in extensive and severe damage to the nose and palate[/b]. The disease is identified from blood tests or by a lesion sample through a darkfield examination under a microscope. Treatment is by a single dose of penicillin, erythromycin or tetracycline, recurrence or relapse is uncommon.

Islam prevents us from exhuming Muhammad

Examination of ancient remains has led to the suggestion that yaws has affected hominids for the last 1.5 million years. The current name is believed to be of Carib origin, "yaya" meaning sore; frambesia is a Modern Latin word inspired by the French word framboise ("raspberry").

Alfred Crosby has argued that neither side has the full story. Syphilis is a form of Yaws, which has existed in the Old World since time immemorial. Crosby argues that syphilis is a specific form of Yaws that had evolved in the New World and was brought back to the old, "the differing ecological conditions produced different types of treponematosis and, in time, closely related but different diseases". (ref:225 Crosby)

Different manifestations occur at each stage of the disease. Lymph nodes of the head and neck Anterior Cervical These nodes, both superficial and deep, lie above and beneath the sternocleidomastoid muscles. They drain the internal structures of the throat as well as part of the posterior pharynx, tonsils, and thyroid gland.

The Arabs called it the "Disease of the Christians". The name "syphilis" was first applied by Girolamo Fracastoro in 1530 from the name of a shepherd in a poem by Leonardo da Vinci.

http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/syphilis

The early form was much more virulent than the disease of today, the incubation period was shorter, only a few months, and the symptoms were more severe. In addition, the disease was more frequently fatal than it is today.

Combined with previously noted apparent [rearched] maladies and observations Muhammad may have died of the final stages of Syphilis [Yaws]. You be the diagnosing doctor.

Muhammad was mentally deranged and suicidal: Ishaq:106 “I will go to the top of the mountain and throw myself down that I may kill myself and be at rest.”

Muhammad cleverly created Allah to control and manipulate the foolish, as do the Imams and Mullahs today, using petty dictators to do their bidding. Allah is NOT Ilah.

Tabari VIII:12 “‘Rejoice, Allah has promised us victory after tribulation.’ This increased the Muslims faith and submission. When cities were conquered Muslims used to say, ‘Conquer for yourselves whatever seems good to you because all treasures were given to Muhammad.”

Muhammad was a pedophile pervert. Bukhari:V1B4N1229-33 “Aisha [who was 9] said, ‘I used to wash semen off the Prophet’s [who was 53] clothes. When he went for prayers I used to notice one or more spots on them.’”

Muhammad arranged bribes for obediance. Tabari IX:37

Ishaq:596 “Do you hold a grudge against me and are you mentally disturbed because of the worldly things by which I conciliate a people and win them over so that they will embrace Islam and become Muslims?”

Muhammad took whatever he pleased with no regard for other's rights.

He was a plunderer. Qur’an 8:28 “And know that your property and your children are just a temptation.”

Muhammad was a Slaver, as are the Muslim Saudi Sheiks, owning women as chattel, marrying for one night, buying horis. Qur’an 70:28 “Preserve their chastity except with their wives and the slave girls they possess—for which there is no blame.”

Muhammad was a thief, as are all Muslims. Qur’an 8:69 “So enjoy what you took as booty; the spoils are lawful and good.”

Muhammad kept his promises as suited his whims. Qur’an 9:3 “Allah and His Messenger dissolve obligations.”

Muhammad was gravely affected as acromegly and yaws advanced in his body. Bukhari:V7B71N661 “Magic was worked on Allah’s Apostle and he was bewitched so that he began to imagine doing things which in fact, he had not done.”

Muhammad resented being challenged or questioned as do all Muslims.

Bukhari:V2B24N555 “I heard the Prophet say, ‘Allah hates for you for asking too many questions.’”

Muhammad's made-up god was vicious, like Muhammad. Qur’an 5:41 “Whomever Allah wants to deceive you cannot help. Allah does not want them to know the truth because he intends to disgrace them and then torture them.”

Muhammad was a liar. Ishaq:567 “Muhammad informed Umar {the second Caliph after him}, and he called the Prophet a liar.”

Muhammad, like all Muslims, thought he fooled everyone until he was found out. Bukhari:V6B60N662 “Allah’s Apostle said, ‘Some eloquent speech is as effective as magic.’”

Muhammad's god gave no love or comfort. He is fear and submission to threat. Qur’an 40:32 “O my People! I fear a Day when there will be mutual wailing. No one shall defend you against Allah. Any whom Allah causes to err, there is no guide. That is how Allah leads the skeptic astray.”

Muhammad used his god for evil plots and betrayal. Qur’an 8:30 “Remember how the unbelievers plotted against you (Muhammad). They plotted, and Allah too had arranged a plot; but Allah is the best schemer.”

Muhammad could not fool the Jews as he did the ignorant Bedoins, so he killed them. Tabari VII:85

Ishaq:363 “The Jews of the Qaynuqa replied, ‘Muhammad, do you think that we are like your people? Do not be deluded by the fact that you met a people with no knowledge and you made good use of your opportunity.’”

Muhammad is not believed. Bukhari:V4B52N233 “Allah’s Apostle forbade the people to travel to a hostile country carrying copies of the Qur’an. [He said:] Unbelievers will never understand our signs and revelations.” Muslims drag thathe worst written book in all the world everywhere they go. it replaces mind and soul.

Muhammad is responsible for more death than all of history's tyrants combined.

Ishaq:383 “One of the young men’s fathers confronted Muhammad and said, ‘You have robbed my son of his life by your deception and brought great sorrow to me.’”

Muhammad was known to be a deseased liar by many. Ishaq:496 “‘By Allah you lie,’ one said to another. ‘Liar yourself!’ ‘You are a disaffected person arguing on behalf of the diseased.”

Muhammad's evil has spread to 57 Muslim countries. In every country on earth Muslims are unwelcome because they are suicidal madmen, fools given to a fake paradise created in Muhammad's epileptic seizures.

Ishaq:327 “Allah said, ‘A prophet must slaughter before collecting captives. A slaughtered enemy is driven from the land. Muhammad, you craved the desires of this world, its goods and the ransom captives would bring. But Allah desires killing them to manifest the religion.’”

This was 9/11/01 in America.

Nay to Islam. Nay to muhammad. Nay to your controlled and miserable state of sub-existance foolish and deceived Muhammaden!

Shamelessly lifted from an anti-islamic website

How to talk to a moslem, if you must (thanks Ann Coulter)

2006-10-30T09:06:00.000-08:00

Combat Stupidity with Humiliation

By Ali Sina

A member of the forum called MaskeMuslimah sent the following:

Quote: I am not a great debater but you mentioned ''stupidity'' and ''muslim women'', well it is unfair, cuz many muslim women who covers do hold jobs &/or have their own businesses (not talking about good old Badreya here), go to universities. I do not see how can a scarf could kill our brain cells but many people assume that we, the muslim women are brainless. I usually do not bother with these comments, but you, as an ex muslim yourself, u must have known some intelligent women, right? or your comment was only to provoque? or am I totally wrong?

I do not like your site but i'll tell u why i visit it : i find it interesting and except for the insults & degradation believe it or not, i have learned a few things on the art of debating.

Okay Masked Muslimah,

So, you want to know why I ridicule Muslims.

This is a war. I want to defeat Islam. Unlike most people who don’t know their enemy, I know my enemy very well. My enemy is an ideology not a people. However, an ideology if not believed and practiced by people is harmless. The danger comes from people who follow evil ideologies. Aztecs believed in human sacrifice and butchered many people. But since no one believes or practices that ideology, their ideology is not hurting anyone. Islam is an ideology of hate and war, but unfortunately over a billion people still believe in it and practice it.

I have proven that Islam is dangerous and if not defeated it will cause another world war in which hundreds of millions could die and billions would suffer terribly. The question is how we fight Islam.

Islam is not a doctrine based on logics, commonsense or reasoning. It is based on hypes and bravado. Muslims are triumphalists. Islam is a religion of idiocy. Its followers pride themselves in their blind faith. It is a fideistic religion, where faith is valued more than rational thought. In fact rational thought is despised and blind faith is praised. This can be easily seen from the statements of al-Gazali

(1058 – 1111) who said: “Where the claims of reason come into conflict with revelation, reason must yield to revelation.” and even Jalaleddin Rumi who said.

The legs of the rationalists is made of wood

The wooden leg is draggy and it's no good.

How do you fight with people who despise reason and pride themselves in their irrational faith?

I am a rationalist. A rationalist’s biggest weapon is reason. But when our opponent mocks reason, our weapon has no effect on him. He is basically disarming us.

Let us take a look at your own self. You come to this forum and pick the nickname “Masked Muslimah”. Why? It is obviously out of bravado. Do you have any logical and rational argument in favor of women covering themselves and wearing masks? No! There isn’t any logical argument in favor of women wearing hijab, let alone wearing mask. You do that out of bravado. It is a pack mentality. With this you want to make a political statement. You want to rub it in our face that you are a Muslim and no matter how much logics we throw at you, it has no effect on you. In fact a typical reaction of Muslims after reading a few pages of this site is, “Thank you, after I read your site my faith in Islam grew”. Now think about it. How can one’s faith grow after coming to learn that the man whom he or she thinks is a prophet raped innocent women, raided civilians without warning, butchered unarmed people, massacred defenseless handcuffed prisoners of war, enslaved thousands, ransomed people for money or threatened to behead them, plundered, had sex with a child and other shameful and despicable acts? It defies logic. Doesn’t it? It is inconceivable that any rational and decent person would want to follow such a monster. Nonetheless, most Muslims, claim their faith grew after they read these things.

Has anyone proven these charges are wrong? I have a $50,000 dollar reward and the promise to remove this site should anyone prove them wrong. You can read my debates with Muslim scholars in the debates page. As it is clear, no one has proven me wrong on these charges. So why people say after coming to learn all these crimes of Muhammad their faith in him grew more? It is out of bravado. It is an act of defiance. It is a defense mechanism. They lock themselves in their shell. They say you can’t hurt us. You can do noting to us. We are going to remain Muslims no matter what. We put our fingers in our ears and sing lala lala la la and we won’t hear you. In fact since you said these things we are going to become more dedicated Muslims and wear niqab from now on. You see? Your logic has no effect on us. On contraire, it has fired back and now we are even more devout Muslims than before. Hah! You lose, we win.

How can this be explained?

Muslims gang up together, they hail each other, and act with hooliganism. In Islam brainless devotion is praised, believing blindly is lauded. Questioning and doubting, that are faculties of superior humans capable of rational thought are disdained. The arguments that they present in favor of Islam are all logical fallacies. Here is a sample:

Islam is the fastest growing religion.
Muslims procreate faster and in 50 years we take over the Europe .
This and that celebrity have embraced Islam, alhamdulillah.
The fact that Muhammad was victories over in his wars is proof of his truth.
And also they say blatant lies such as.
Quran contains numerical miracles
Quran contains scientific miracles

Hadith and Sira may not be true so let us close our eyes to all the crimes of Muhammad reported in these books.

Ah, but this is not true Islam.

How shall we deal with such people?

When reason has no effect on Muslims, we are completely disarmed.

Muslims are bent to take over the world through deceptive strategies. One group of them commits all sorts of crimes against humanity and the other group, says: Ah! but these are not true Muslims. Everything is just a game - a game of deception! One group quotes the Quran to cause mayhem and the other group says these are misguided. If anyone says any thing against Islam the entire Muslim world enters in a state of frenzied mass hysteria, lives are destroyed everywhere and they demand apologies from everyone.

Islam is based on stupidity, not on reason. It is psychopathology. Muhammad was a psychopath. We have a billion people emulating a psychopath. How shall we deal with these people?

Leaving them alone is not an option. Islam is evil and as Edmund Burke said, “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." We can’t let Muslims destroy our world. We must stop them.

There are a couple of ways to do that. One is through logical arguments. In this site we have done our best to prove Islam is false with logics. However, as I said, Muslims deride logics.

The other alternative is to kill them preemptively. Killing a billion people does not sound very good. They are brainless idiots, but nonetheless you don’t kill even idiots. Of course if an insane man starts shooting at innocent people at random, we have no other option but to take him down. This might actually happen. It is very likely that Muslims take hold of nuclear bombs, detonate it in a few Western countries kill hundreds of millions of innocent people, and in a quick response the entire Muslim world go up in flames and all the Muslims in the West become slaughtered like chicken. This is the real scenario. This is the scenario that actually will happen by default unless we mange to change the course of history. Don't be fooled by the smiles of the foolish Westerner who now protect you and your right to practice your devilish cult. Once this fight becomes the fight of survival, these very brain damaged politically correct "nice guys" will slit your throat. There is an animal dormant within each one of us. Don't wake up that animal.

This is a very bleak future. This is where mankind is heading. Only Muslims are responsible for that – not anyone else. We are dealing with a billion zombies. There is no rationality, there is no commonsense. It is stupidity over stupidity. The more stupid you are the better Muslim you are. The allegedly “good” Muslims are the liars, the deniers, the hypocrites. These hypocrites wear a mask of moderation and claim Islam is a religion of peace. “Oh brother you don’t know Islam, Islam means peace. You must find the original Quran that the Saudis have hidden somewhere and don’t allow anyone to see. If you don’t know Arabic you can’t understand the Quran, all the two dozen translations of the Quran are corrupt. Arabic cannot be translated into any other language. All ahadith are false, all the history of Muhammad depicting him as a tyrant monster are forged by Jews. Islam is much like hippies during the sixties. It is all about love and peace and flowers.”

I am sick of it. And they have the chutzpa to come to me to tell me these lies as if I am a gullible westerner who does not know anything about Islam. Damn it! I am the descendant of that mad man of Mecca who started all this insanity. My ancestors were Sheikhs and Mullahs as long as we have the record of them. They were themselves deceived and deceived others with their ignorance. Don’t come to me with these foolish tales. Go and tell your lies to gullible Westerners. I don’t need you to explain Islam to me. I used to say these lies myself. Keep your game playing and taqiyyah for someone who does not know Islam.

So what shall we do? Logic has no effect on Muslims. Doing nothing means destruction of mankind. It seems we are in an impasse.

Humiliate them. This is my response. Lower yourself to the level of your opponent and speak to him in a language that he understands. He is full of bravado and vain glory. Mock him. Make him look stupid. Deride at him. Disgrace him. Destroy his pride. Make him look like the scum of the Earth. Make him the butt of the jokes. Laugh at him and at his stupidity. This is good for him. This is his remedy. The idea is to jolt him to reality. This is bitter medicine, but it wont’ kill him. If you don’t, you will have to kill him later.

When a young woman wears hijab, or niqab, she is applauded by her peers. “Mashallah, you are so great! Everyone must look at you and follow your example. Well done sister.” She is pampered, her ego is inflated, and she feels rewarded. The stupidity of the act eludes her completely. She is willing to suffer in the scorching heat of summer to prove to her peers that she is a great Muslima and receive their admiration. She walks in the streets and people pay attention to her because she looks odd. All this attention excites her. She is making a statement, I am different. That is all there is to it. She wants to be different, to stand out. It is the same as during the sixties when stupid kids used to put flowers in their hairs, smoked hashish, made love and sang Kumbaya to defy the “establishment”. The hippy revolution of the sixties was relatively harmless. The philosophy was about peace and free sex. This Islamic revolution is more akin to fascism. It is extremely dangerous. It seems history has a way of repeating itself. Every generation goes through it in one form or another. In the early years of the last Century it was communism that captured the attention of the youth; in the thirties it was fascism; in the sixties it was hippy movement; and now it is Islam.

Humiliation is a very effective method to counter this insanity. These brainless people are craving for their narcissistic supply, which they get from each other in the highly cultic atmosphere of Islam. We must cut off that supply. They must see that there is a price to pay for following the path of stupidity. The biggest mistake is toleration. We must not tolerate evil.

To convince themselves to wear the degrading hijab, Muslims have associated the concept of “modesty” to it. Hijab has nothing to do with modesty. It is a statement of defiance of the western values, of democracy and it is the sign of arrogance. We have to counter this image. Muslim women wearing hijab are given a false sense of superiority. They are made to believe that other women are sluts and sex objects and only they are modest and hence superior. This, like anything else in Islam, is a false belief. If unchallenged this lie is eventually believed. Any lie if repeated enough and is not challenged will be eventually believed. We must challenge it. We must demonstrate, first rationally, that women wearing hijab are actually regarding themselves as sex objects and not those who don’t wear it and then humiliate them. The rationality of this argument will have little effect on a people who deride reason but humiliation will.

In essence what I am proposing is to fight stupidity with humiliation. We have to replace this image of hijab as the symbol of modesty to a symbol of shame and sexuality.

Muhammad said women are 'awrat. 'Awrat means pudendum, the external genitalia especially of a woman. People cover their genitals, but not the rest of their body. Muslim women who cover all their body are making the statement that they are vagina from head to toe. It is too embarrassing to let men see our hair that is a reminiscence of our pubic hair. We must replace that mental image of a woman in hijab as a “modest woman”, by a huge walking and talking vagina. Women wearing hijab must be humiliated, scorned, laughed at.

Women for Muhammad were nothing but sex objects. Their function is twofold - give men orgasm and give him children. Beyond that women have no use except as maids. The following hadith make this clear.

"My father died and left behind seven or nine daughters, and I married a woman. The Prophet said, "Did you get married, O Jabir?" I replied, "Yes." He asked, "Is she a virgin or a matron?" I replied, "She is a matron." He said, "Why didn't you marry a virgin girl so that you might play with her and she with you " Bukhari 8.075.396

Now this is the status of woman in Islam. Her worth is in her vagina. If she does not have hymen, she is worth less. If she can't have children, she is not worth marrying. How can we respect Muslim women who worship a man who thought they are sex objects, deficient in intelligence and hell bound? How can a Muslim woman be respected when she has no respect for herself? "Stupid" is a compliment. This is beyond stupidity.

When you are dealing with arrogant people who deride at logics, you must descend to their level and knock their arrogance. When you talk to a university professor, you use a different language than when you talk to a two year old child. It is not degrading to talk to a child in a childish language. In fact it is foolish to use an academic language when you speak to a toddler. Muslims’ rational faculty is underdeveloped. In this sense they have the maturity of children. They are very much retarded. They do not understand rationality. It just makes no sense to them. Golden Rule is alien concept to them. When we deal with Muslims we must adopt a language that Muslims understand. Since rationally, they are at the level of children, and ethically at the level of beasts, we must humiliate them like we would humiliate misbehaved children. Muslims are fool, stupid, and zombies. We have to counter their bravado with ignominy.

This remedy may not feel right with the politically correct folk who don’t want to hurt people’s feelings and want to be always Mr. or Mrs. Nice. They are however, in a grave error. These lily livered “nice” folks must remind themselves that if we do not save Muslims from Islam, we will have to kill them one day. That would be after they kill hundreds of millions of us. If anyone thinks this is not going to happen he is just blind. When Oriana Fallaci cries “Troy will burn, Troy will burn”, listen to that modern day Cassandra. She is talking about Europe, but all the world is in danger. Fallaci is telling the truth. Armageddon is just around the corner. Don’t be a fool. Do not let your childish emotions blind you. Think rationally. Muslims are bent to take over the world. This is the plan set in motion by their psychopath megalomaniac prophet. These brainless zombies are incapable of rational thought. Like robots, they do what they are programmed for and that is to lie, to play the role of the victim, to deceive and to claim the world for the Satan Allah with violence and terror. Reason does not work with them. In this site alone there are more words of reason to fill a bookshelf. Reason has no effect on Muslims. Fear of Hell has paralyzed their brain. They are genuinely unable to think like normal rational humans. It is foolish to expect them do things that they are incapable of doing. It is like expecting hippopotamus to fly. Two options are left to us. Wait, until they nuke millions of us and them nuke them and slay them to extinction, or save them through humiliation.

I have been shouting for nearly seven years using all sorts of logics. I have posted countless arguments by other ex-Muslims who have tried in every conceivable way to show these sub-human Muslims that Mahund was not a prophet but a pervert liar. No Muslim has been able to defeat our logic. Despite that, Muslims are undeterred. We heard all sorts of excuses from them except acknowledging the fact that Muhammad was a charlatan and leave Islam. They propose reforming Islam, modernizing it, educating Muslims and all kinds of baloney, but our words fall on deaf ears. They are simply unable to cut their umbilical cord from that monster criminal and leave his sick cult. They see the evil in the Quran, they see whatever Muhammad did was despicable; but they can’t let go. Their brain is frozen. That psychopath has kidnapped their soul and their intelligence. They are just brain dead. Zombies – that is what Muslims are. Every one of them is a zombie. How can any decent person respect, let alone hold a monster like Mahund as a prophet? Don't say you are good. You are not good. You are a follower of a monster. How can you be good? If you don't know the truth, pull you head out of your sand hole and see it. Read the evidence that we have presented in this site. If you think you can prove us wrong, do it. But don't pretend you don't understand. Have some courage. Respect your self and use your brain. You worship a criminal who was worse than Charles Manson, Hitler or any psychopath you know. Isn't this disgusting? Aren't you ashamed of yourself? How much stupidity is enough?

Why in the hell you want to reform the cult of a psychopath? Why in the hell you want to keep the memory of that evil criminal alive? Where is your rationality? Where is your brain damn it?

They don’t hear me. They just can’t hear me. It is because I am shouting to dead people.

After Muhammad slew his captured opponents in the Battle of Badr, he threw their corpses, in a well and then stood at the opening of the well looked into it and bragged about his victory. Omar told him, "Are you talking to the dead? They can’t hear you". “Allah brought then back to life so they can hear me” Responded that insane man. At times I feel, like him, I have gone insane too and I am just talking to the dead who can’t hear me.

So what shall we do now? Wait until you commit the ultimate act of insanity and after hundreds of millions of us are dead, kill all of you like insects and cleanse the world from your stupidity? Is this good? Is this what you want? Isn't it better to rescue you with any means possible, and bring you back to the fold of humanity before you commit your insanity? I honestly think saving you idiots is much better than the first alternative.

How shall we save you? Logic has no effect on you. You deride rationality and pride in your stupidity. You are fideists not rationalists. You deny, you lie and lie even to yourselves. Your brain is paralyzed with the fear of Hell that that psychopath has instilled in you. We can’t get to you through reason. If we leave you to your devices, we will have to kill all of you eventually after suffering huge losses ourselves. What else is left but to humiliate you? This is my ultimate weapon.

I want to wage this war, now on a psychological level. I want to combat stupidity with humiliation, bravado with shame and ignominy. I want to lower myself to your level, descend to the gutter where you reside and talk to you in a language that you understand. I want to humiliate you, to make you see that being a Muslim is not “cool” but darn stupid. I want the whole world spit at your cult and flush down the toilet your holy book of terror. I want you feel the dishonor and disgrace of being a Muslim. You are zombies filled with hate and programmed to destroy mankind. We love you as human being but we can no longer tolerate your stupidity. Like any responsible parent with an obnoxious unruly child, we must be firm with you. Shape up or ship out. You can no longer throw your tantrums and get away with it. Leave this madness and addiction and come back home. Our arms are open to embrace you once you get rid of your insanity. It is all for your own good.

It is time that we give you a taste of your own medicine. You must be treated like a dhimmi. You must be humiliated and subdued, exactly the way your Quran says non-Muslims should be treated. I know Muslims do not understand the Golden Rule, but they understand tit for tat even animals understand that. We must speak to you in the language that you understand. As the followers of a psychopath narcissist, all of you have entered into his bubble universe and all of you suffer from narcissistic personality disorder. As such the only way you can communicate with others is by lying, deceiving or by being bully. Bullies respond to fear. So we must instill fear in your hearts just as Muhammad said in the Quran 8:12 and 3:151.

What distinguishes humans from animals is our rational faculty. Since as Muslims you deride rationality, you are just like animals.

Pray to your damn Allah that I win this war and you lose. Because if I win; you will live, we all will live and we will all join hands and become brothers and sisters. Yes we can make this world a paradise. If you win, we will all die and you will go to Hell for worshipping Satan, for being stupid like mule and for blowing up this beautiful world of God for a lie.

The Campus Jihad Continues

2006-10-25T09:52:00.002-07:00

Campus Jihad

By ANTHONY GLEES October 23, 2006; Page A15

LONDON -- U.K. intelligence officials have just provided a chilling assessment of the terrorist threat Britain faces. The country has become "al Qaeda target No. 1," security sources told me, confirming last week's press reports. Intelligence services now judge Britain's "home grown" terrorists to be organized, trained and controlled either directly from Pakistan or via Pakistani networks in Britain.

Until now, intelligence services thought British Islamist terrorists had no hard links to al Qaeda despite sharing its ideology. "Clean skins" in the security jargon, they were believed to have acted alone or in self-constructed cells. This theory was the product of what MI5 thought it knew about the terrorists before last year's July 7 bombings, which was far too little. Just two months before the attacks, MI5's Joint Terrorism Analysis Center concluded, "there is not a group with both the current intent and capability to attack the U.K."

The ringleaders of the July 7 bombers, Mohammed Siddique Khan and Shahzad Tanweer, both former students at Leeds Metropolitan University, showed up on MI5's radar on as many as nine occasions before the attacks. According to Whitehall sources, credible intelligence indicated that Mr. Khan had visited Pakistan between November 2003 and February 2004 and sought to contact al Qaeda. But MI5 discounted the significance of these visits at the time and only started taking them more seriously early this year. The London bombers' connections to Pakistan were initially dismissed as harmless, requiring no further analysis. It was "obvious," security sources explained in the aftermath of the attacks, that people of Pakistani descent would visit "their families" back home or take a "long holiday or gap year" there. The generally accepted theory was that the terrorists had simply used information from the Internet to build their organic peroxide bombs.

Senior military intelligence officers now dismiss this line as well, believing the bombers received crucial weapons training in Pakistan. They argue that if Britain is now al Qaeda's primary target, it makes sense to look much more carefully at the Pakistan dimension and also at the links between virulent Islamic groups in Pakistan and the U.K. Many British Islamic colleges have ties to fundamentalist Pakistanis. Other links exist to extremist Kashmiri groups, in turn allegedly connected to al Qaeda or the Pakistani secret service.

MI5 has hugely upped its game, as recent arrests show. But MI5 also believes that the number of extremists is rising and not just because it now knows better where to look for them. MI5 keeps very close tabs on more than 1,000 extremists; 14,000 British Muslims are considered potential terrorist threats, security sources told me.

I believe a significant number get radicalized and recruited on university campuses. At least 13 convicted Islamist terrorists and four suicide bombers have been students at British universities. Radical Islamist student societies make full use of university resources. They operate Web sites, hosted by university servers, which direct visitors to organizations that glorify jihad and terror. These "religious" groups are given "prayer rooms" on campus, which are also used to disseminate extremist literature and DVDs. Muslim students concerned about these developments tell me that at many of these Islamic societies terrorism is portrayed as justified acts of "resistance." A leading imam in Birmingham often preaches on British campuses that the London bombers have to be seen as "martyrs."

Organizations like Hizb Ut Tahrir and Al Muhajiroun, which advocate a world caliphate, demand that Britain adopt the Shariah and express a violent hatred for the West and Jews, have repeatedly tried to gain student converts at the University of East Anglia. It is only thanks to a courageous campus imam that their infiltration attempts have been thwarted so far. His colleague at London Metropolitan University, Sheikh Musa Admani, repeatedly warns about Islamic radicalization at his and other London campuses. Just two months ago, the head of an Islamic student society and several fellow students at London Metropolitan were charged with planning to smuggle explosives on a plane bound for America. Yet university authorities usually consider these societies as "religious gatherings," and thus off limits.

Government minister Ruth Kelly two weeks ago urged universities to monitor their students more carefully and report signs of extremism to the security services. But many British universities are reluctant to step up security. Universities U.K., an association of British universities, criticized Ms. Kelly's proposals as "unreasonable," saying "there are dangers in targeting one particular group within our diverse communities." When I suggested last year similar measures the government now proposes, I was myself attacked by Universities U.K. The vice chancellor from the University of Sunderland asked my own vice chancellor to "shut me up." I was threatened with legal action if the name of a particular university was mentioned in connection with terrorism. Unfortunately, my research showed that Islamic radicalization is a threat on campuses nation-wide.

But British universities prefer burying their heads in the sand of political correctness. When the Foreign Office invited 100 academics to bid for £1.3 million of government funds to participate in a counter-radicalization program, the academics said no. John Gledhill, chair of the Association of Social Anthropologists, welcomed their move, saying last week that "it did appear to be encouraging researchers to identify subjects and groups involved with terrorism . . . that could be interpreted as encouraging them to become informers." Martha Mundy, a lecturer at the London School of Economics, dismissed the government plans as having "an overtly security-research agenda" starting from the (false) premise that there is a "link between Islamism, radicalization and terrorism."

Is Ms. Mundy seriously saying there is no connection between Islamism and terrorism? "Security" is not a dirty word, even if totalitarian regimes have abused it. Every British university subscribes to the 1997 Dearing Report, which states that the "aim of higher education is to play a major role in shaping a democratic, civilized and inclusive society." This is the basis on which the British taxpayer agrees to fund them.

Academic institutions should surely help protect Britain from those who clearly do not believe in democracy, are not civilized, and who try to harm us. Now that we are the prime target for Islamist terror, Britain's universities must get real.

a gift for 'Eid Al-Fitr

2006-10-25T09:52:00.001-07:00

This ten-minute video , titled "Rise Up,"

was posted on Islamist websites on October 22, 2006, and was described as "a gift for 'Eid Al-Fitr." Produced by an individual identified as "Abu Osama" (whose real identity is unknown), it calls on the Muslims to wage jihad against the "Crusaders." A caption in the film explains that Abu Osama produced the film on the occasion of the establishment of the Islamic State of Iraq.

The film begins with footage of horsemen under the caption: "O ye who believe! What is the matter with you, that, when ye are asked to go forth in the cause of Allah, ye cling heavily to the earth? Do ye prefer the life of this world to the Hereafter? But little is the comfort of this life, as compared with the Hereafter" (Koran 9:38).

Next, several Al-Qaeda leaders and commanders, including bin Laden, Al-Zawahiri, Al-Zarqawi and a number of unidentified young men (who may be field commanders or intended suicide bombers) call upon the Muslims to join the jihad. The following are excerpts:

Al-Zawahiri says: "I urge you, in [the name of] the duty of jihad, which is incumbent upon every Muslim, to hurry and pursue martyrdom in order to kill the Crusaders and the Zionists." An armed individual calls: "[Oh] defenders of the faith, hurry and prepare [for jihad], this is no time for [internal] disagreement." Another individual, sitting under a banner that reads, "Expel the polytheists from the Arabian Peninsula," asks: "Are there no men in this nation?" and a masked individual declares: "Jihad is ancient, and the fate of [all] infidel leaders is one and the same: to be slaughtered."

The video then shows a scene in which a man is beheaded. This is followed by another beheading, even more grisly, in which the severed head is waved in the air. (Both scenes, and another graphic scene, have been omitted from the version of the film posted here, but are available upon request).

The film ends with a caption congratulating the Shura Council of the Jihad Fighters in Iraq on the occasion of the establishment of the Islamic State of Iraq. It also conveys greetings for 'Eid Al-Fitr, and expresses hope for the unification of all the jihad fighters in Iraq.

Abu Basir Al-Turtusi Calls on Tunisians to Revolt Against Their Regime

On October 22, 2006, an Islamic website posted a response by Abu Basir Al-Turtusi [1] to the Tunisian government's recent decision to enforce the law [2] prohibiting women from wearing the veil (hijab) in the public sphere. In his response Abu Basir Al-Turtusi describes the battle of Tunisian President Zin Al-'Abidin Bin 'Ali against the hijab as more malicious than the war waged against the veil by some Western leaders. "You are not [like the real] Zin Al-'Abidin," [3] declares Al-Turtusi in this message. "[A real] Zin Al-'Abidin… would not battle Islam and Muslims…would not fill his prisons with Muslims whose only crime is that they declare that Allah is their Master… Zin Al-'Abidin would not combat Muslim women… neither would he force them to remove their hijab…"

Abu Basir concludes his message by addressing the Tunisian people directly: "You should know that this tyrant… has no authority over you, and [therefore] you should neither listen to him nor obey him… [Instead,] you should all… rebel against this infidel and apostate tyrant and… [against] his regime…"

Abu Qatada Al-Falastini: The Pursuit of Religious Knowledge is More Important Than Jihad

On October 22, 2006, an Islamist website posted an old fatwa by the U.K.-based Muslim scholar Abu Qatada Al-Falastini, a key Al-Qaeda operative currently in prison. The fatwa states that "the pursuit of [religious] knowledge (talab al-'ilm) is more important than [waging] jihad in the path of Allah…" and that "the state of [moral] decay [among Muslims today] stems from the fact that the mujahideen and other Muslims lack [sufficient religious] knowledge."

The posting sparked a fierce debate among the forum members. Some rejected this opinion outright, citing texts from the Koran and from Islamic tradition to indicate the supremacy of jihad, while others accepted it. Among those who endorsed the fatwa, some argued that it prefers the pursuit of knowledge over jihad only when a Muslim's natural inclination is more towards study than towards fighting. Others speculated that Abu Qatada recommends the pursuit of knowledge in place of jihad only for Muslims who cannot participate in jihad for legitimate reasons, such as being geographically distanced from the battlefield.

Drug raid yields Los Alamos documents

2006-10-25T09:46:00.000-07:00

Drug raid yields Los Alamos documents

By LARA JAKES JORDAN, Associated Press Writer Tue Oct 24, 9:28 PM ET

WASHINGTON - A drug raid on a Los Alamos scientist's home in New Mexico turned up what appeared to be classified documents taken from the nuclear weapons lab, the FBI said Tuesday.

Police discovered the documents at the scientist's home while making an arrest in a methamphetamine investigation, according to an FBI official in Washington who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the case.

The police alerted the FBI to the documents, prompting a federal search of the unidentified female scientist's home. The official would not describe the documents except to say that they appeared to contain classified material.

Asked about the raid, FBI special agent Bill Elwell in Albuquerque, N.M., confirmed that a search warrant was executed on Friday night, but he refused to discuss details.

"We do have an investigation with regard to the matter, but our standard is we do not discuss pending investigations," Elwell said.

A spokesman for the Los Alamos National Laboratory, in Los Alamos, N.M., declined to comment.

Los Alamos has a history of high-profile security problems in the past decade, with the most notable the case of nuclear scientist Wen Ho Lee. After years of accusations, Lee pleaded guilty in a plea bargain to one count of mishandling nuclear secrets at the lab.

In 2004, the lab was essentially shut down after an inventory showed that two computer disks containing nuclear secrets were missing. A year later the lab concluded that it was just a mistake and the disks never existed.

But the incident highlighted sloppy inventory control and security failures at the nuclear weapons lab. And the Energy Department began moving toward a five-year program to create a so-called diskless environment at Los Alamos to prevent any classified material being carried outside the lab.

Even though Los Alamos is now under new management, Danielle Brian, executive director of the watchdog group Project on Government Oversight, said the lab has not done much to clean up its act.

"Los Alamos has always seemed to be rewarded for its screw-ups," Brian said. "We're waiting with bated breath to see if anything has changed."

The idea that police found classified documents at a home where a drug sting was being conducted is disturbing, she said.

"The problem is when you actually have those materials that are supposed to be protected inside the lab and you find them outside the lab in the hands of criminals — that should worry everybody," Brian said.

The FBI and the U.S. attorney's office in Albuquerque were "evaluating the information obtained as a result of the search warrant," Elwell said.

The federal charge of unauthorized removal and retention of classified material is a misdemeanor that carries a maximum sentence of a year in prison and up to a $100,000 fine.

Georgetown gets $20 million from prince promoting Islam

2006-10-25T09:44:00.000-07:00

Georgetown gets $20 million from prince promoting Islam

Just months later, university ejects evangelical Christians from campus Posted: October 25, 2006 1:00 a.m. Eastern

The Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding at Georgetown University has been renamed after Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal donated $20 million to its projects. And while that may be just the tail, the dog appears to be moving away from its historic Catholic and Jesuit teaching philosophy too.

The Center's leaders say it now will be used to put on workshops regarding Islam, fostering exchanges with the Muslim world, addressing U.S. policy towards the Muslim world, working on the relationship of Islam and Arab culture, addressing Muslim citizenship and civil liberties, and developing exchange programs for students from the Muslim world.

The "Christian" part of the center's projects at the university that has a history of 200 years of higher education following its Christian founding, is conspicuous by its absence in its website plans for its 10-year future.

But that won't be a surprise to leaders of a number of Christian evangelical groups whose leaders recently were told to leave the campus and not list Georgetown University as a site for operations in the future.

That story, reported by WND earlier, still has folks wondering what happened to cause Georgetown officials to ban InterVarsity Christian Fellowship and others. InterVarsity spokesman Gordon Govier said the organization still doesn't know why the move was announced by university officials, who did not return WND messages left inquiring about the situation.

"We still are a little bit confused about what happened," he told WND. "We haven't been able to identify clearly what happened."

He said Christians in the InterVarsity organization still are meeting at Georgetown, but they have no official sanction and are meeting without recognition, much as many Christian churches in nations where religion is regulated meet.

He said there is a committee meeting that is supposed to hear concerns from Christians, and InterVarsity is hopeful there will be a positive outcome, but there's no time frame set.

But the time frame for other interests that have become relevant to Georgetown are a little more apparent. The school's Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding confirmed several months ago that the $20 million donation was made by Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, and a short time later the Center was given the added moniker as Alwaleed bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding.

The organization now features a number of pro-Muslim statements and articles, with little reference to any Christian statements or understandings. It even has co-sponsored events with CAIR, the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

CAIR is a spin-off of the Islamic Association for Palestine, identified by two former FBI counterterrorism chiefs as a "front group" for the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas. Several CAIR leaders have been convicted on terrorism-related charges.

The center's chief, John L. Esposito, summarizes the goals of the organization clearly: "The Prince Alwaleed Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding is concerned with Islam and the West and Islam in the West. The Center, since its creation in 1993, has built bridges of understanding between the Muslim world and the West, addressing stereotypes of Islam and Muslims and issues and questions such as the clash of civilizations, and the compatibility of Islam and modern life – from democratization and pluralism to the status of women, minorities and human rights – and American foreign policy in the Muslim world."

The Center says it recognizes the increasing demands because of the world's "critical turning point in the history of Muslim-Christian relations" so it will expand its expertise base and operations, "as well as strengthen the website as a source of critical information about Islam and the Muslim world."

The Center's assistant director, Huma Malik, told WND that the $20 million came from the prince because the center is working on projects that interest him, but she could not comment on the influence of the donation or why the evangelical Christians were barred from campus.

The center was founded in 1993 in cooperation with the Fondation pour L'Entante entre Chretians at Musulmans in Geneva "to build strong bridge of understanding between the Muslim world and the West as well as between Islam and Christianity."

The message of acting as an information source for Islam was reinforced in the fact that while the Center's website includes a link for Islamic Resources, there is none for Christian resources.

It also takes a distinct policy stance, with Esposito noting in a recent posting that "despite 'HAMAS' victory in free and democratic elections, the United States and Europe failed to give the party full recognition and support," he wrote.

That type of behavior, he said, provides reasons for "many Muslim autocratic rulers' to retreat from democratization, and he cited a Gallup World Study that says it is the policies of the U.S. that generate hurt in the Muslim world.

"One billion Muslims from Morocco to Indonesia … tell us that U.S. policies, not values, are behind the ire of the Arab/ Muslim world," he wrote.

Those voices, he wrote, say that while America and the United Kingdom are disliked, other Western nations such as France and Germany are not. He also wrote that the U.S. is suspected because of its relationship to Israel.

"The United States failed to support UN mediation in the face of clear violations of international law, refused to heed calls for a ceasefire and UN intervention, and continued to provide military assistance to Israel," he said of the recent conflict, triggered by a military attack on Israeli soldiers.

"America’s unconditional support of Israel cast it in the eyes of many as a partner, not simply in military action against HAMAS or Hizbollah militants, but in a war against the democratically elected Palestinian government in Gaza and the government of Lebanon, a long-time US ally," he said.

"The primary victims in Gaza and Lebanon were hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians, not terrorists. In Lebanon, more than 500 were killed, 2,000 wounded, and 800,000 displaced. Israeli’s military destroyed the civilian infrastructures of both Gaza and Lebanon."

He said "HAMAS and Hizbollah" both are elected political parties, even though the U.S. and others have labeled them "terrorist organizations."

The Center, on a daily news clip posting, highlighted stories quoting a Mecca Imam saying non-Muslims are attacking Muslims out of fear of being over-run by Muslims and the London mayor noting that Muslims in Britain are being "demonized," comparing their recent treatment in London to the treatment of Jews in Nazi Germany.

Faculty members also are being interviewed by al-Jazeera, a network with sources in many terrorist camps.

The prince, who controls tens of billions of dollars in investments in Morgan Stanley, Fairmont Hotels & Resorts, Deutsche Bank, Apple Computer, Hewlett-Packard, Kodak, The Walt Disney company and ebay, works through the Kingdom Holdings company.

He also had given a similar $20 million gift to Harvard, which sponsors a Harvard Law School Islamic Legal Studies Program, and the Islamic Finance Project, which looks at the legal and sharia points of view of situations, officials said.

The Alliance Defense Fund earlier wrote a letter to Georgetown asking for reconsideration of its ban on several Christian groups. Officials said no response was received.

Those in a position to know have reported that the Christian groups were booted from campus for being too evangelical, because student clubs promoting Muslim and Jewish beliefs were allowed to continue existing with the formal campus structure.

The Christian groups' brush-off letter from the university starts: "Blessings and may God's peace be upon you!" but deteriorates shortly later to: "Protestant Ministry has decided to move in another direction."

As a result, Georgetown said, "Your ministries will no longer be allowed to hold any activity or presence (i.e. bible (sic) studies, retreats with Georgetown students, Mid-week (sic) worship services, fellowship events, move-in assistance, SAC Fair, etc.) on campus."

Further, the school told the ministry organizations, "All websites linking your ministries to a presence at Georgetown University will need to be modified to reflect the terminated relationship. Your ministries are not to publicize in any literature, media, advertisement, etc. that Georgetown University is or will be an active ministry site for your ministry/church/denomination."

Kevin Offer, who worked with the InterVarsity program at Georgetown, said something had been developing, because the university also recently had started requiring student ministry leaders to meet for formal meetings with the school. "School officials asked questions about what they 'tell students behind closed doors,'" he said.

US deadly raid on Sadr City angers Iraq PM

2006-10-25T09:43:00.000-07:00

US deadly raid on Sadr City angers Iraq PM

American forces raid Shiite militia bastion in Iraqi capital without Maliki’s authorization.

By Dave Clark – BAGHDAD

American forces angered their key ally in the battle for Iraq on Wednesday by leading a raid on a Shiite militia stronghold in Baghdad without Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki's support.

US President George W. Bush, meanwhile, started a pre-election press conference by voicing "serious concern" over the past month in Iraq, citing the high death tolls, and said Washington was adapting its tactics.

A joint team of Iraqi special forces and US advisers, backed with helicopter gunships, triggered a fierce pre-dawn gunbattle with militia fighters in a raid on the Sadr City suburb of east Baghdad.

The US military said the troops were hunting the alleged leader of a death squad cell and had captured 13 suspects as well as killing between three and six enemy fighters in an air strike.

But Iraqi officials said that four civilians had also been killed and 20 more wounded, while Maliki said he had not authorised the operation and demanded an explanation from the US-led coalition.

The raid came as Maliki was already bridling at pressure from US officials to speed up his programme of national reconciliation and move decisively against militias such as radical cleric Moqtada'a al-Sadr's Mahdi Army.

Reacting to a claim by a senior US envoy that he had accepted a "timetable" for action, Maliki reiterated a pledge that he would tackle the militants, but only at his own pace and not under American orders.

"We will strike hard against those who break the law and endanger state security. There is no place for militias alongside the state," Maliki said, in a testy news conference.

The embattled leader denied, however, that he had accepted a US-imposed programme to disarm the gangs and reconcile Iraq's warring factions.

"Everyone knows that this government is a government of the popular will and no-one may set a timetable for it," he said, contradicting US ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad, who said Tuesday: "Iraqi leaders have agreed to a timeline."

Sadr City is a bastion of the Mahdi Army and Wednesday's raid triggered a two-hour pre-dawn gun duel in which the assault team called in an air strike.

"During the raid, Iraqi army forces came under fire and had to defend themselves. They requested support from coalition aircraft which used precision gunfire only to eliminate the enemy threat," a US military statement said.

The joint force did not say whether they had captured their main target.

Sadr supporters and an interior ministry official said four civilians were killed in the fighting and 18 wounded. There was no immediate word on casualties among the US-Iraqi forces.

Maliki, who has often in the past criticised US-led operations in Shiite areas, said: "We will demand clarification on what happened in Sadr City.

"This is an issue to be reviewed with the multinational forces so that it will not occur again," he added, in a comment that will revive US fears that he is not ready to tackle the Mahdi Army head on.

With the US military and Iraqi civilian death toll mounting and public support for the war plunging, Bush and his top aides in Iraq have been forced to rally enthusiasm for the mission.

Taking a long view, Bush told a campaign fundraiser in Florida that yanking US troops from Iraq would lead to a more dangerous world in which extremists run the Middle East and threaten US security.

"I see the threat. That is why we have got a strategy for victory in Iraq," he declared, in a challenge to critics running against his party in next month's congressional mid-term elections.

His words echoed those of Khalilzad, who on Tuesday described the battle to save Iraq from the hands of insurgents and death squads as "the defining challenge of our era".

General George Casey, the top US general in Iraq, said more US and Iraqi forces might be brought into the capital from around the country, and did not rule out bringing reinforcements from outside Iraq.

On Wednesday, many of the 15,000 US troops in Baghdad were hunting for a missing comrade, an American soldier of Iraqi origin who was abducted on Monday evening after going to see relatives in Baghdad.

Squads of US infantry were blocking roads in central Baghdad and conducting searches around the Karrada district for the second day since the as yet unidentified soldier left the heavily-fortified Green Zone on his own.

"He left without permission," said Lieutenant Colonel Jonathan Withington, a spokesman for the 4th Infantry Division. "US and Iraqi forces are continuing to search throughout Baghdad for him."

The missing soldier was last seen by his unit at around 2:30 pm (1130 GMT) on Monday, while relatives told the army that he was snatched from their house that night by three car-loads of gunmen.

Violence continued in Iraq on Wednesday, with a bomb attack wounding two Iraqi policemen in the centre of Baghdad and a suicide car bomb killing two more police in Baquba, north of the capital.

United Nations and Iraqi officials have estimated that sectarian violence and insurgent attacks on Iraq's US-backed government were killing more than 100 Iraqis per day even before this month's surge in bloodshed.

Human-rights Lies

2006-10-25T09:41:00.000-07:00

Human-rights LIES

By Gerald M. Steinberg THE WASHINGTON TIMES Published October 23, 2006

In the recent Lebanon war, Israel was attacked with daily barrages of hundreds of rockets, launched indiscriminately by Hezbollah from trucks and other platforms located in towns, villages and fields. These weapons struck Israeli hospitals, schools, houses, workplaces, streets and even civilians in their cars. The Israel Defense Forces had the obligation to stop these deaths and injuries. In the effort to meet this requirement, the IDF used different tactics and weapons, including cluster bombs, which break into multiple submunitions in order to hit weapons, including rocket launchers, whose precise location is unknown or changing.

During and after the war, the United Nations Human Rights Council and powerful NGOs, such as Human Rights Watch (HRW) and Amnesty International, condemned Israel repeatedly for using cluster bombs. The NGOs are running a campaign for a treaty to ban the use of these weapons, and have issued a barrage of press releases, reports and statements on the injuries caused to Lebanese by the remnants of these weapons. According to HRW, the U.S. government heeded its demand to halt deliveries of these weapons to Israel during the war. On the surface, it would seem that the campaign on this issue was both morally justified and effective.

But a deeper examination of the issues shows fundamental flaws that undermine both the moral argument and the claim of HRW, Amnesty and other NGOs to a central role in negotiating arms-limitation agreements. Morally and logically, every nation under attack has the right to self-defense, and the rules of law, including various weapons bans that have been adopted, cannot result in greater slaughter of civilians.

The first treaty banning the use of chemical weapons after the mass casualties of World War I was adopted in large part because they were also ineffective and did not fulfill any military objectives. Other agreements and prohibitions, such as those placed on aerial bombardment, were short-lived and largely ignored because of their military importance, both for offense and self-defense. The efforts to expand partial agreements on the prohibition of land mines have failed precisely because in many cases no one has presented a better way to protect people, facilities and nations from attack. In an environment of bitter conflict and terrorism, the use of land mines for security can be the lesser of the evils.

Similarly, in repeated condemnations of Israel for the use of cluster munitions, activist groups such as Amnesty and HRW failed to suggest a realistic and effective alternative against deadly rocket attacks. Although largely missing from HRW's campaigns, there is no question that morally Hezbollah's arsenal of thousands of Syrian and Iranian-made rockets purposely used to kill as many Israeli civilians as possible constitutes the core violation of human rights and an obvious violation of international law. Massive Israeli ground and air attacks designed to find and destroy the rocket-launchers scattered throughout Southern Lebanon would have taken many more lives. This is the ugly calculus of war, and attempts to ignore this reality of human existence are both irrational and unethical.

In their campaign against Israeli use of cluster munitions, HRW and Amnesty are also coming with unclean hands and a not-so-hidden agenda. Officials from both played an active role in the infamous NGO forum of the 2001 Durban conference, which adopted a strategy to delegitimize the very existence of Israel. Their numerous publications and statements condemning Israeli responses to Palestinian terror far outnumbered the organization's reports condemning suicide bombings.

In this context, HRW Executive Director Kenneth Roth, who clearly has no military expertise or experience, demanded that Israel arrest Palestinian terrorists in Gaza and Jenin, and bring them to trial -- a policing approach that, when attempted, often resulted in much greater violence. In the case of the cluster-bomb campaign, HRW is not even suggesting an alternative.

These NGO officials have also used the millions of dollars at their disposal to join the political crusade against Israel's security barrier and in promoting dubious claims that fed boycott campaigns. The allegations in these reports were based on false or unverifiable claims of Palestinian "eyewitnesses" -- a pattern repeated by HRW and Amnesty during the Lebanon war. When Israel tried to use largersingle-explosive weapons against Hezbollah rocket attacks, this was condemned as "indiscriminate force." Every Israeli defense is labeled as unacceptable.

HRW's central role in promoting international agreements to ban land mines is also tainted by a strong dose of anti-Israel propaganda. In a conference on this issue that took place in Geneva in 2000, in which I participated, HRW-funded participants from Palestinian, Egyptian and other NGOs ignored the land-mine issues and instead used the opportunity for unrelated Israel-bashing. The annual report on land mines distributed at the conference, and published by an HRW affiliate, featured a bogus cover photo related to Israel, and the chapters on Israel and the Palestinians included false or misleading information.

In contrast, those who are motivated by genuine humanitarian concerns must present workable alternatives in pursuing prohibitions on specific weapons, including cluster bombs. A treaty that effectively prevents nations and people under attack from acting in legitimate self-defense is worse than useless -- it is also immoral.

------------ Gerald M. Steinberg, editor of www.ngo-monitor.org, directs the Program on Conflict Management at Bar-Ilan University in Israel.

EGYPT ALLOWING MASSIVE WEAPONS SMUGGLING INTO GAZA

2006-10-25T09:38:00.000-07:00

EGYPT ALLOWING MASSIVE WEAPONS SMUGGLING INTO GAZA

The Israeli Internal Security Minister, Avi Dichter, has complained to US officials in Washington that Egypt is allowing smuggling by Palestinian terrorist groups of weapons into Gaza from Egypt, which is massively increasing. In talks with US National Security Advisor, Steve Hadley, Dichter urged Washington to apply pressure on Cairo to do more to seal its border with the Gaza Strip. "The Egyptians can and have to do a lot more to prevent the smuggling of arms to the Gaza Strip . The Americans don't know the scope of the smugglings and the Egyptians' capabilities. I believe that the Egyptians have considerable capabilities to make sure that the smugglings are prevented and that's what I said" ( Yediot Ahronot, October 19)

Additionally, Member of Knesset, Yuval Steinitz (Likud), former Chairman of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, in a meeting yesterday with American Jewish leaders in New York City, complained bitterly that Egypt is doing nothing to stop the smuggling.

Israel has been alarmed by recent intelligence reports pointing to intensified efforts by Palestinian terror groups to smuggle sophisticated weapons to the Gaza Strip. At least eight tunnels used to smuggle arms were uncovered by the army over the last two days, most of which were dug along the Philadephi corridor along the Gaza-Egypt border.

Also, a veteran analyst of Palestinian Affairs, Ehud Ya'ari, has disclosed that Palestinian Arab terrorist groups have been massively increasing their smuggling of weaponry into Gaza from Egypt. Ya'ari, who is Middle East commentator on Israel Television and Associate Editor and columnist for the Jerusalem Report, writes in a recent column that there is "an unprecedented arms-acquisition effort . underway in the Gaza Strip."

Ya'ari discloses that close to 20 tons of standard explosives have been smuggled into Gaza since Israel withdrew last summer, along with thousands of rocket-propelled grenade launchers and large quantities of rifles, pistols and grenades. Also, "several Katyusha rocket launchers, like those used by Hizballah against northern Israel, are already in the hands of Hamas and other terror groups. It is only a matter of time before they also get hold of shoulder-launched anti-aircraft rockets and, even more troubling, third generation anti-tank missiles, like the Russian Koronet. Such weaponry will enable the terrorists to effectively target vehicles and structures 3-4 kilometers [2 to 2.75 miles] inside Israel, and not to have to depend on their primitive high-trajectory Qassam rockets. Also under way is a feverish campaign to dig tunnels into Israel under the security barrier around the Strip, with the aim of facilitating terror attacks in Israel.

"What all this means is that the Israeli government will have to decide sooner rather than later whether to implement the recommendation of the army and the security services to retake the area along the border between the PA and Egypt. Such a move will entail operating inside residential neighborhoods of the city of Rafiah, and will once again turn the Gaza Strip into a sealed-off enclave. The diplomatic harvest that Ariel Sharon and Ehud Olmert hoped to reap from the withdrawal will simply wither away. The alternative is for Gaza to continue becoming a huge stockpile of weapons and ammunition that must ultimately explode, with disastrous consequences" ( Jerusalem Report, October 16).

ZOA National President Morton A. Klein said, "The US should use its $2.1 billion annual aid to Cairo as leverage with the Egyptian regime in order to make it clear that Egypt must stop the weapons smuggling. Moreover, Secretary Rice pressured Israel to give up all control over the Gaza-Egypt border crossing, eliminating Israel's ability to be involved in stopping the smuggling. It is Egypt 's responsibility to stop the flow of weapons to terrorists. Otherwise, the weapons now flowing into Gaza will lead to a new terrorist wave in which hundreds of Jews could be murdered. The ZOA urges the Bush Administration to take this step immediately.

"Avi Dichter and Yuval Steinitz's disclosures and Ehud Ya'ari's analysis are not only distressing in themselves but confirm other reports of massive Palestinian weapons smuggling that has included anti-aircraft missiles and Katyusha rockets, neither of which Palestinians had succeeded in smuggling into Gaza prior to Israel's unilateral withdrawal last year. This withdrawal included Israel ceding control of the Philadelphia corridor along the Gaza-Egypt border to Palestinian Authority (PA) control and placed more importance on the role played by Egypt, which has not stopped the flow of weapons into Gaza .

"The ZOA warned against the dire consequences of this move at the time and its likely consequences and urged that the Israeli government to reverse its decision and retake control. Last November, we stated that 'security for Israel would be weakened by handing over authority for the Gaza-Egypt border to the PA and Egypt and . there has been an influx of illegal weaponry and terrorists into Gaza from Egypt since Israel withdrew from Gaza. Now, the crossing is to be reopened but Israel will have no power to stop terrorists or goods entering Gaza.' Tragically, as Ya'ari explains in detail, this is precisely what has continued to happen.

"Therefore, it is not surprising that this week, a year after unilaterally retreating from Gaza and the Egyptian border area and uprooting 9,000 Jews from their homes, schools, synagogues, farms and businesses, Israeli forces returned to take over control of the border area and started destroying smuggling tunnels that had been previously detected by Israeli forces but rebuilt as soon as Israel left last year. In recent weeks, twenty such tunnels have been discovered in the area. There is no substitute for Israel at a minimum exercising security control in this area. We urge the Olmert government to reassert Israeli control indefinitely in this area, irrespective of whatever international pressure might be exerted on Israel to again leave. The security of Israeli men, women and children and indeed of the country itself, must take precedence over the opinions of foreign leaders and governments

My Opinion, like it or not

2006-09-29T00:23:00.000-07:00

My second try with photostory 3 and youtube

2006-09-16T23:25:00.001-07:00

John McCain the ACLU-Republican gets cash from George SOROS!

It looks like our favorite ACLU Republican Senator John McCain
has been getting money from George Soros, Tsar of the Democrats and communists!

FIRST: see this NY Times article McCain Allies Want Reform (and Money)

Quote:

NYTimes.com
McCain Allies Want Reform (and Money)
By CARL HULSE and Ann E. KORNBLUT
Published: March 8, 2005

WASHINGTON, March 7 - In a small office a few miles from Capitol
Hill, a handful of top advisers to Senator John McCain run a quiet
campaign. They promote his crusade against special interest money
in politics. They send out news releases promoting his initiatives. And
they raise money - hundreds of thousands of dollars, tapping some
McCain backers for more than $50,000 each.

This may look like the headquarters of a nascent McCain presidential
bid in 2008. But instead, it is the Reform Institute, a nonprofit organization
devoted to overhauling campaign finance laws and one whose work has
the added benefit of keeping the senator in the spotlight.

read more here

NEXT: go to John McCain's Reform Institutes Donation page
then under Donations above $50,000
look for "OSI Constitution & Legal Policy Program".
The "OSI Program" is located at http://www.soros.org/

NEXT: go to http://www.soros.org/about/ were you will see

Quote:

George Soros is founder and chairman of the
Open Society Institute and the Soros foundations network.
He is also the chairman of Soros Fund Management LLC

Also if you google 'Soros+McCain' you'll find plenty more about our
Seditious Senator from Arizona the ACLU Republican and his friend
George Soros.
http://www.google.com/search?&q=Soros+McCain

John McCain is UNFIT FOR DUTY
He is nothing more than a money hungry politician who is in league with the
Modern Liberals and Euro-Socialists.

$5,000,000.00 Reward For the capture of

2006-09-16T09:01:00.000-07:00

Adnan G. El Shukrijumah

Video of Adnan G. El Shukrijumah

View with RealPlayer
Download Free Realplayer

View with Windows Media Player

Transcript of Video

Aliases:

Adnan G. El Shukri Jumah, Abu Arif, Ja'far Al-Tayar, Jaffar Al-Tayyar, Jafar Tayar, Jaafar Al-Tayyar

DESCRIPTION

Date of Birth Used:	August 4, 1975	Hair:	Black
Place of Birth:	Saudi Arabia	Eyes:	Black
Height:	5'3" to 5'6"	Sex:	Male
Weight:	132 pounds	Complexion:	Dark, Mediterranean
Build:	Average
Remarks:	El Shukrijumah occasionally wears a beard. He has a pronounced nose and is asthmatic. El Shukrijumah speaks English and carries a Guyanese passport, but may attempt to enter the United States with a Saudi, Canadian, or Trinidadian passport.

DETAILS

Adnan G. El Shukrijumah is wanted in connection with possible terrorist threats against the United States, including the possible import and intent to use a "Dirty Bomb".

REWARD

The Rewards For Justice Program, United States Department of State, is offering a reward of up to $5 million for information leading directly to the capture of Adnan G. El Shukrijumah.

ADDITIONAL PHOTOGRAPHS

SHOULD BE CONSIDERED ARMED AND DANGEROUS

IF YOU HAVE ANY INFORMATION CONCERNING THIS PERSON, PLEASE CONTACT YOUR LOCAL FBI OFFICE OR THE NEAREST AMERICAN EMBASSY OR CONSULATE.

ROBERT S. MUELLER, III
DIRECTOR
FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20535
TELEPHONE: (202) 324-3000

Tony Blankley has Harry Reid's Number at Townhall

2006-09-16T07:47:00.000-07:00

Just another political speech

By Tony Blankley

Dateline: London, June 18, 1940 -- The following are the chamber remarks of the fictional Lord Harold Reid (whose fictional grandson in the 21st century would become leader of the fictional Democratic Party in the U.S. Senate).

"I regret to have to stand up tonight, on the day of defeat at the hands of the Germans of our French ally's armies at Sedan and on the Meuse River to observe that on this solemn occasion, Prime Minister Winston Churchill has chosen to politicize and cheapen the moment. Permit me to perform just a brief exegesis of his speech, which his right-wing Press Baron friend Lord Murdoch has quickly labeled 'The Finest Hour' speech in the London Times.

"Right out of the gate Churchill starts making political excuses when he says: 'There are many who would hold an inquest in the House of Commons on the conduct of the Governments. ... This would be a foolish and pernicious process ... Of this I am quite sure, that if we open a quarrel between the past and the present, we shall find that we have lost the future.' Balderdash. Churchill can't get out of it so neatly. We need to hold hearings to determine exactly who is at fault in the government. There must be no cover up for those who deserve a dressing down. Herr Hitler will just have to wait until we have decided what is what.

"For example, Mr. Churchill glibly states: 'During the last few days we have successfully brought off the great majority of the troops we had on the line of communication in France; and seven-eighths of troops we have sent to France since the beginning of the war -- that is to say, about 350,000 out of the 400,000 men -- are safely back in this country.'

The Arab and Iranian Reaction to 9/11

2006-09-11T13:51:00.000-07:00

The Arab and Iranian Reaction to 9/11

2006-09-10T11:56:00.001-07:00

Saudi in talks with Russia over weapons sales: Diplomat

The Peninsula - 10 September, 2006

Source :AFP

RIYADH -  Saudi Arabia is in talks with Russia over the possible purchase of

Russian weapons for the first time by the oil-rich kingdom, which has

traditionally used Western defense systems, a Western diplomat said

yesterday.

A team of Russian military experts visited Saudi Arabia in late August to

discuss with Saudi military committees the possible sale to Riyadh of T-95

main battle tanks and Mi-17 helicopters, he told AFP, requesting anonymity.

"The visit was not the first. It was preceded by several visits by experts"

from the Russian state arms export monopoly Rosoboronexport, according to

the source.

Saudi arms experts have also visited Moscow to discuss Russian offers of

weapons, and tests were carried out on the T-95 in

Saudi Arabia to determine the tank's suitability to harsh desert conditions,

the diplomat added.

The Saudi armed forces' needs in terms of battle tanks are estimated at

around 300. Saudi military experts had conducted tests on French Leclerc

tanks more than two years ago.

According to French officials, Leclerc tanks are among weapons systems

Riyadh is expected to buy from France under two military accords signed by

the two countries in July.

2006-09-10T11:56:00.000-07:00

U.S. schools compete for Saudi students

Kingdom gives scholarships to thousands for new exchange program

The Associated Press Updated: 5:03 p.m. ET Sept. 9, 2006

MANHATTAN, Kan. - Thousands of students from Saudi Arabia are enrolling on

college campuses across the United States this semester under a new

educational exchange program brokered by President Bush and Saudi King

Abdullah.

The program will quintuple the number of Saudi students and scholars here by

the academic year's end. And big, public universities from Florida to the

Kansas plains are in a fierce competition for their tuition dollars.

The kingdom's royal family - which is paying full scholarships for most of

the 15,000 students - says the program will help

stem unrest at home by schooling the country's brightest in the American

tradition. The U.S. State Department sees the exchange as a way to build

ties with future Saudi leaders and young scholars at a time of unsteady

relations with the Muslim world.

Syria Denies Acceptance of European Border Guards Monitor

2006-09-10T11:54:00.000-07:00

Syria Denies Acceptance of European Border Guards Monitor

Sunday, September 10, 2006 - 04:25 PM

CAIRO,  (SANA - Syrian News Agency)  Syria has denied acceptance of European

borders guards to supervise the Syrian-Lebanese borders.

 " The reports by some mass media that Syria has accepted that European

border guards monitor the Lebanese-Syrian borders are not true," Information

Minister Mohsen Bilal said Sunday.

" The phone call was made yesterday between President Bashar al-Assad and

Italian Prime Minister Romano Prodi didn't discuss this troops or guards

topic, but the talks were on technical assistance that is expected to be

offered to the Syrian border guards," Bilal added in statement to the

Egyptian T.V.

" The UN 1701 resolution pertaining to halting the military acts between

Israel and Lebanon, didn't stipulate for deploying international troops on

the Syria-Lebanese borders," He clarified, pointing out that Israel is the

aggressor and that the Syrians and Lebanese are one family in two sovereign

countries.

He noted that the resolution clearly included the deployment of UNIFIL in

south Lebanon, emphasizing that no one can impose on Syria to accept

deployment of foreign forces on her borders with Lebanon,"

" Keeping security on the borders with Lebanon is a Syrian affair that

Syrian borders guards are responsible for," Bilal said, concluding by saying

that the " Lebanese army is responsible for  keeping security on the borders

with Syria.

EU Foreign Policy chief warns of worsening West-Muslim ties

2006-09-10T11:52:00.000-07:00

Solana warns of worsening West-Muslim world ties

Brussels, Sept 8, IRNA [Iranian news agency]

EU-Middle East-Solana

EU Foreign Policy chief Javier Solana Friday warned of the worsening

situation in the Middle East which could effect relations between Europe and

the Muslim world.

"The situation on the ground is getting worse. And I am concerned about our

broader relations with the Muslim world and the radicalizing impact of the

status quo," Solana said in a speech at the university of Copenhagen during

a visit to Denmark on Friday.

"Europe can and should inject new momentum into the Israeli- Palestinian

track. Of course, this will be difficult. But it is imperative to try," he

said.

Solana noted that the Arab countries have signalled their plans for an

international conference on the Middle East.

Want to see some sickening “Sermons?”

2006-09-10T11:50:00.000-07:00

Want to see some sickening “Sermons?”

Ahmad Jannati: The Muslims should learn that they too can stand up to the

enemy. As Hassan Nasrallah said, Israel is weaker than a spider web. This is

based on the Koran, according to which their plots and schemes are weaker

than a spider web. This goes for America as well. It too is weaker than a

spider web. But it requires real men... If the Islamic countries act like

Hizbullah, and stand up to America like men, America will be humiliated,

just like Israel.

Crowd: Allah Akbar

Allah Akbar

Allah Akbar

Khamenei is the leader.

Death to those who oppose the rule of the Jurisprudent

Death to America

Death to England

Death to the hypocrites [Mojahedin-e Khalq] and Saddam

Death to Israel

TO VIEW THIS CLIP: http://www.memritv.org/search.asp?ACT=S9&P1=1261

Fwance Wusses Out, As Usual

2006-09-10T11:46:00.000-07:00

France: Int'l fleet won't employ force

HERB KEINON, YAAKOV KATZ and AP, THE JERUSALEM POST Sep. 7, 2006

France announced on Friday that the international naval force designated to

patrol Lebanon's territorial waters would not be authorized to employ force

to stop ships from entering or leaving Lebanon.

A spokesman for the French defense ministry said that the international

craft would only provide assistance for Lebanese ships, and would not

interfere with other nations' boats, Israel Radio reported.

Earlier Friday, Israel began to remove its naval blockade of Lebanon,

imposed almost two months after Hizbullah launched its cross-border raid and

kidnapped two Israeli soldiers.

Maj.-Gen. Alain Pellegrini, the French commander of UNIFIL, said government

officials informed him Friday afternoon that the blockade was being lifted.

Government spokeswoman Miri Eisin said she didn't have immediate

confirmation that the final order had been given to lift the siege, but said

earlier Friday that the blockade would be ended within hours.

Italian Foreign Minister Massimo D'Alema, meeting with Foreign Minister

Tzipi Livni, announced that a multinational task force, commanded by an

Italian admiral, had begun patrolling Lebanese territorial waters.

The Italian Admiral, aboard an Italian aircraft carrier, received command of

the patrols off the Lebanese coast and Israeli Naval ships began returning

back to Israeli waters.

Pakistanis join Taliban terrorists against British in Afganistan.

2006-09-04T11:57:00.000-07:00

UK Muslims join Taliban to fight against British troops

Michael Smith and Ghulam Hasnaim in Karachi

BRITISH Pakistanis have joined Taliban insurgents fighting the army in southern Afghanistan, according to intelligence briefings given to senior military commanders.

The intelligence about their presence in Helmand province, where 13 British soldiers have died, is believed to have come from Pakistan, where the authorities have recently arrested suspects said to be involved in training Al-Qaeda and Taliban recruits.

A Pakistani official confirmed yesterday there were a number of British Pakistanis known to be fighting alongside the Taliban in Afghanistan. “They come here quietly in twos and threes and then disappear. It’s difficult to trace them as they [also] carry Pakistani nationality,” the official said.

A source close to the Taliban claimed two British Pakistanis had gone through Waziristan on their way to fight the British Army six weeks ago. A second Pakistan official said others had since gone into Afghanistan “in an individual capacity”.

A second source close to the Taliban said “no more than 10” of its fighters were known to be British passport holders, but added: “There are a lot of Pakistanis [fighting with the Taliban] and one cannot say how many hold British passports.”

News of British recruits among the Taliban suggests the war in Afghanistan, like that in Iraq, has become a magnet for extremists determined to fight western forces.

Pipe Bomb, Chicago train station

2006-09-04T11:28:00.000-07:00

Pipe Bomb, Chicago train station

Improvised Explosive Device (IED) Detonates at Suburban Chicago Train Station

http://www.canadafreepress.com/2006/hagmann090206.htm

By Douglas J. Hagmann, Northeast Intelligence Network,

Saturday, September 2, 2006

Bomb was planted to detonate at commuter waiting area minutes before a train was scheduled to arrive.

Authorities: The device was more elaborate than some‹it had a timer that allowed a delayed detonation."

A pipe bomb constructed with a timing device exploded at the Metra train station in Hinsdale, a western suburb of Chicago during Friday morning's commute just minutes before a train was scheduled to arrive at the stop. The blast sent metal fragments and shrapnel flying and caused minimal property damage but no injuries, according to police. The bomb exploded inside a garbage can in the commuter waiting area of the station. Had it detonated near passengers, people would have definitely been injured. Remnants of the bomb are being transported to a lab in Maryland for analysis to see what components comprised the device.

At 6:53 a.m., a 911 call was received from a Metra employee who said someone had thrown a firecracker in the garbage of the main depot, 25 E. Hinsdale Ave., and shortly after that, the fire alarm for the depot activated, according to the release from Hinsdale police.

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives are investigating, and agents remained at the scene in Hinsdale as of 4:30 p.m. yesterday. Local, county and federal authorities swept the station in search of other devices and notified other Metra stations to search their facilities, stated BATFE spokesman Tom Ahern. No other devices were found.

According Hinsdale police, Metra police held a suspect at Union Station, after he was seen putting an item into the garbage can. The suspect then boarded the 6:56 a.m. or 7:04 a.m. train to Chicago. The suspect, who was later released, was described as a "tall, thin black male," appearing to be in his earliy twenties. Ahern, however, said there were no suspects, only a few "people of interest" who authorities want to interview. They include people who were seen either on the platform or in the depot immediately prior to the explosion, he said.

[b]Hinsdale Police Chief Bradley Bloom stated: "We're a little concerned, because it was a somewhat sophisticated device," referring to the timer. "And it was just inside the door" of the station, he said. Police handed out fliers with a description of the incident at train stations Friday afternoon, asking anyone with information to contact authorities, Bloom said.

Ahern said, adding there was minimal damage to the station.

Local, county and federal authorities swept the station in search of other devices and notified other Metra stations to search their facilities, Ahern said. No other devices were found.

Forced embrace of Islam familiar refrain

2006-09-03T11:25:00.000-07:00

By Ted Byfield, by courtesy of the Calgary Sun online It was awfully decent of the media not to ask that kidnapped Fox News correspondent and his cameraman, forced by terrorists to embrace Islam as the price of being freed, whether or not they had been Christians.

Two weeks ago, Steve Centanni, 60, an American reporter, and New Zealander Olaf Wiig, 36, a photographer, were abducted by something calling itself the Holy Jihad Brigade.

They were released in Gaza City last week after converting to Islam on videotape and at gunpoint.

They said they had been tied hand and foot in an abandoned garage, and forced to lie face down on the floor.

They went through this "conversion" process on threat of execution.

Precisely what this consisted of was not reported. Presumably, they were required only to repeat the single-sentence creed of Islam: "There is one God, Allah, and Muhammad is his Prophet."

Now if these men were typical of their profession (and mine), there was little to be concerned about in this "conversion."

That is, they would not have been Christian, but secularist.

They would regard all religious "belief" as a matter of personal sentiment, subject to change when one's sentiments changed, and utterly speculative -- meaning, whether there's a God or there isn't is anybody's guess.

Fact and truth have nothing to do with it.

They would have reasoned: "If these wing-nuts want us to say something about Allah, or anybody else, then why the hell not? Say it, if it gets us out of here. Say anything they want us to say."

Given their outlook on life, can you blame them?

But if they were Christians, that's very different.

To proclaim Muhammad as "the Prophet of God" implicitly elevates Muhammad above Jesus Christ, and therefore constitutes a denial of Christ.

The New Testament is not at all reassuring about this. "If you deny me, I will deny you," says Jesus, referring to the final judgment -- something, he says, all of us will face.

So it was, as I say, exceedingly kind of the media, not to ask these two about their own religion.

Their not doing so, however, might not have been out of kindness. More probably, it never occurred to them to ask.

Which also tells us something about the religion of the reporters who covered the story of their release.

Am I suggesting, therefore, that these two men, if they had been Christian, have consigned themselves to hell by submitting to the terrorist demand?

No, because who does and does not go to hell is not for us to decide, said Jesus.

We're not to "judge" people. All we can do is quote the relevant Biblical evidence.

The name Centanni, of course, is almost certainly Italian, which is interesting because the last Italian that Muslim terrorists confronted with such an ultimatum responded in a somewhat different way.

Hooded, videotaped, and threatened with beheading, he tore the hood from his head, thrust back his shoulders, and declared: "Let me show you how an Italian dies."

Furious, the terrorists shot him dead on the spot, rather than behead him.

Why were they so angry?

Because he was showing them he had greater courage than they had, and they didn't like having their faces rubbed in that fact.

Most Christians are aware that in the first 300 years of their history, tens of thousands of us were presented with such ultimatums.

They were ordered to burn a pinch of incense to the "god" Caesar.

If they did it, they were instantly released.

If not, they were sent as slaves to the mines, effectively a death sentence. Women and boys were consigned to the brothels. Both men and women were often put to death by public torture.

So many refused and suffered so courageously, they eventually converted the whole empire to Christianity.

But many yielded and denied their faith.

In the end, the Church agreed to re-admit them as penitents.

But some Christians refused to re-admit them.

These became known as the Donatist heretics, and the Donatist church endured for more than 200 years.

So what would you do, Byfield, in such a circumstance?

How could I know?

But I'd be in no doubt whatever about what I should do. The gutless bastsrds should have taken the chance to show these assholes for allah that they were MEN, but NO they have to cave. They must had no faith to begin with or a poetaster's faith if it was so weak as to not sustain them in captivity.

Then, he should be an example and do it first

2006-09-03T11:19:00.000-07:00

Worthless Asshole Bill Maher Attacks Christians, Advocates Conversion to Islam

Bill Maher on HBO’s September 1 “Real Time” went on quite an anti-theistic rant that clearly demonstrated his utter disdain for Christians as well as conservatives. To be sure, this wasn’t the first time Maher went so atheistically ballistic as reported by NewsBusters here.

In this instance, Maher suggested that, “If converting to Islam is all it takes to get the terrorists off our backs, then all I have to say is, ‘Lalalalalalala!’” He referred to Americans as “Christians in name only,” asserting that "the best part is that nothing that really matters to you will be different. It’s not like we’re asking you to change your e-mail address." And, he stated that converting to Islam would make conservative Christians happy: “You mean we can stone homosexuals instead of just bitching about them on talk-radio? Thank you Jesus…I mean, Allah.”

To fully appreciate the level of the vitriol – albeit disguised as comedy with some admittedly humorous moments – one must see the video captured here by our old friend Ian Schwartz who now works for Hotair. A full transcript follows:

New rule: If converting to Islam is all it takes to get the terrorists off our backs, then all I have to say is, “Lalalalalalala!” Now this week when two Fox News journalists were released by their kidnappers, I was shocked. Fox News has journalists? No, the shocking part of it was that all these Westerners had to do get the blade literally off their neck was say they were Muslims. Just recite a two line pledge. Just say the words, “There’s no god but Allah, Mohammed is his messenger, and,” oh, whoops. There, I did it. I’m now Bill al-Sheik Yerbouti. Welcome to Saudi America.
Now, I know what you’re thinking: “Bill, if we convert to Islam, doesn’t that mean the terrorists have won?” Well, sort of, but it’s a win-win, because they get to declare victory, and we get to take hair gel on the plane. Plus, we’re not really converting to Islam. We’re just telling our enemies what they want to hear, and trying to convince them we’re something we’re really not. Or, as Hillary Clinton calls it, campaigning. (groans from crowd). Oh, you just can’t take it the other way you little…
And, it’s so simple to convert this way. You know, if you want to convert to Judaism, it’s a huge hassle. You’ve got to find a Rabbi, study the Torah, get circumcised, go to dental school. But, Mohammed made joining his team easy: two line pledge, and you’re in. Which would you go for? The two line pledge, or lopping off the business end of your meat thermometer? And the best part is that nothing that really matters to you will be different. It’s not like we’re asking you to change your e-mail address. We’d be Muslims in name only, instead of what Americans are now – Christians in name only.
I mean, look around, we don’t care for the poor, or differ to the meek, or avoid judging people. It’s not like we’re that committed to Christianity. In fact, the other day I heard a nun say, “Sure, I love Jesus, but I’m not married to him.” Now, I know my plan will meet some resistance, but it shouldn’t come from the right, because converting to Islam will just give conservative Christians everything they love: “Pray five times a day? Where do I sign up? You mean we can stone homosexuals instead of just bitching about them on talk-radio? Thank you Jesus…I mean, Allah.”
We’re a nation enthralled to religious fanatics anyway. Does it really matter which fanatics we’re enthralled to? They’re both filled with moral pieties and codes of conduct nobody follows anyway. So, let’s pick the one that let’s us take hair gel on the plane. Because, no matter what happens, we’ll always be Americans. Nothing can ever change that. Because even if women here had to start wearing burkas, believe me, they would find a way to write the word “Juicy” on their ass!

EU: Too early for sanctions against Iran

2006-09-03T11:14:00.000-07:00

Seems to me its past "Time" Associated Press By ROBERT WIELAARD Associated Press Writer LAPPEENRANTA, Finland (AP) - Despite mounting U.S. pressure for sanctions against Iran, the European Union said Friday it is too early to punish Tehran for its failure to halt uranium enrichment by the U.N. Security Council's deadline. The call for renewed diplomacy came as Iran's president vowed never to give up a nuclear program that he said is being misrepresented by the West. "Exploitation of peaceful nuclear energy is our obvious right. We will never give up our legal right," state TV quoted President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as telling a rally in Maku, Iran. "The West's claim that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons is a sheer lie." Iran ignored the Security Council's Thursday deadline to suspend uranium enrichment, opening the way for consideration of economic or other sanctions against the Islamic republic, which the U.S. and others suspect is trying to develop atomic weapons. President Bush said Thursday that "there must be consequences" for Iran's defiance, saying "the world now faces a grave threat from the radical regime in Iran." But EU leaders cautioned against pushing a confrontation. "This is not the time or place" for sanctions, Finnish Foreign Minister Erkki Tuomioja, whose country holds the rotating EU presidency, said after a meeting of the bloc's foreign ministers. "For the EU, diplomacy remains the No. 1 way forward." The EU as a whole has been a moderate voice on the Iran issue. However, Britain and France support tough action, while Germany is also believed to back that stance. And the bloc stressed Iran will not be given unlimited time to resolve Western suspicions about its nuclear aims and demands for strengthened international supervision of its atomic program. The EU's foreign policy chief, Javier Solana, said he would meet with Ali Larijani, Iran's top nuclear negotiator, in the coming days, likely in Europe. "That does not mean that Iran has indefinite time," Solana told reporters. "We hope that at the next meeting, or couple of meetings, we have enough knowledge (about Iran's position) to see if formal negotiations can start." John Bolton, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, said the Security Council would wait to consider possible actions until after Solana met with Larijani. In Moscow, Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Mikhail Kamynin expressed regret that Iran ignored the U.N. deadline. But Russian news agencies said Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov felt strong sanctions would be counterproductive in trying to get Iran to cooperate. Russia and China, which as permanent members of the Security Council can veto its actions, have generally opposed punishing Iran. Trade sanctions could cut off badly needed oil exports to China, and Russia is helping Iran build a nuclear reactor. The Rest is Here

The Old Gray Ossama Ain't What He Used to Be

2006-09-03T11:09:00.000-07:00

Osama a dimming terrorist superstar Top U.S. target is declining in value

The search for Osama bin Laden was once at the forefront of the war on terror, but lately capturing him has become an afterthought.

President Bush has curtailed the global manhunt for bin Laden, yet is sticking doggedly to our costly occupation of Iraq, even though he recently admitted that Saddam Hussein had "nothing" to do with Sept. 11.

As Hussein faces a likely death sentence, a pared-back search for bin Laden continues without Alec Station, the elite CIA unit charged with tracking him that was shut down in July.

The Rest is Here

Iraq says captures local al Qaeda deputy

2006-09-03T11:07:00.000-07:00

By Ibon Villelabeitia and Mussab Al-Khairalla

From Al Reuters via the Scotsman

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Iraq said on Sunday it had arrested the second most senior figure in al Qaeda, "severely wounding" an organisation the U.S. military says is intent on plunging the country into sectarian civil war.

The announcement came as talks between the United States and Iraq on transferring operational command of Iraq's forces to the Defence Ministry were deadlocked. Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki was demanding more independence from the U.S. military.

Maliki was also at loggerheads with the leader of ethnic Kurds, who brandished the threat of secession in a growing row over the symbolic issue of flying the Iraqi national flag at government buildings in the autonomous Kurdish north.

Hours after an "embarrassed" U.S. military again postponed a ceremony to hand command of Iraqi troops to the government, the National Security Adviser Mowaffak al-Rubaie summoned reporters to a hastily arranged news conference to announce that al Qaeda leader Hamid Juma Faris al-Suaidi had been seized some days ago.

Also known as Abu Humam or Abu Rana, he was captured hiding in a building with a group of followers.

"Al Qaeda in Iraq is severely wounded," Rubaie said.

He said Suaidi had been involved in ordering the bombing of the Shi'ite shrine in Samarra in February that unleashed the wave of tit-for-tat killings now threatening civil war. Iraqi officials blame al Qaeda for the attack. The group denies it.

Rubaie did not give Suaidi's nationality or say where he had been captured, though he did say he had been tracked to the same area, north of Baghdad near Baquba, where U.S. forces killed al Qaeda's Jordanian leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi in June.

"He was hiding in a building used by families. He wanted to use children and women as human shields," Rubaie said.

Little is publicly known about Suaidi. Rubaie called him the deputy of Abu Ayyub al-Masri, a shadowy figure, probably Egyptian, who took over the Sunni Islamist group from Zarqawi.

The U.S. military says al Qaeda is a "prime instigator" of the violence between Iraq's Sunni minority and Shi'ite majority but that U.S. and Iraqi operations have "severely disrupted" it.

The U.S. military has reported killing or capturing scores of al Qaeda militants since Zarqawi's death.

HANDOVER CEREMONY

Despite these reported successes, violence has continued. A Pentagon report said this week attacks had risen by 24 percent in the past three months as violence extended north beyond Baghdad. Iraqi casualties soared by 51 percent over the quarter.

The Rest is Here

Anti-terrorist police continue school search

2006-09-03T11:03:00.000-07:00

Fresh from Al Reuters

LONDON (Reuters) - Police continued to search an Islamic school on Sunday after 14 men were arrested in anti-terrorism raids in London, a spokesman said.

A police source said the operation focussed on the suspected training and recruitment of terrorists, while newspapers said security services were probing "terrorist training camps".

Twelve of the men were held at a packed Chinese restaurant as part of a "pre-planned, intelligence-led operation" that followed months of surveillance.

The men, suspected of "the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism", remain in custody at a central London police station.

Dozens of police were searching the Jameah Islameah Islamic school in the East Sussex countryside in southern England.

The report said the London arrests were linked to a possible plot to bomb a London landmark.

Those behind the supposed conspiracy hoped to "outdo" the July 7, 2005 attacks on London's transport network which killed 52 commuters, the paper said, citing an unnamed security source.

The Sunday Telegraph newspaper said security services fear young British Muslims are being trained to carry out suicide bombings, possibly at train stations and shopping centres.

Police said in February they had uncovered evidence of training camps, while other reports have spoken of militants going for adventure training to forge closer ties. Next

I guess Iran made a decision

2006-09-03T10:44:00.000-07:00

Tehran refuses to give up 'one iota' of nuclear rights Bush: time for iran to make a choice

Farhad Pouladi

Agence France Presse

TEHRAN: President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad sent a curt message to global powers Friday vowing Iran "will not give up one iota" of its nuclear rights, in the first official reaction to a critical International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) report. "The enemies should know Iranians are standing firm on obtaining their rights and will not give up one iota of their nuclear rights," Ahmadinejad told a rally in the northwestern city of Makou, state media reported.

On Thursday, the UN nuclear watchdog concluded in a confidential report that the Islamic Republic had not suspended its enrichment-related activities, as demanded by the Security Council's five permanent members along with Germany.

The deputy chief of Iran's nuclear agency insisted the report was "not negative" and vowed to continue uranium enrichment for research purposes while keeping open negotiations with the international community.

"The report is very factual and adds that the Iranian nuclear program is under the supervision of the IAEA and that there has been no deviation" toward any military purpose, he said. Iran insists it is exercising a right to develop civilian atomic energy.

On Friday, Russia expressed "regret that Iran did not fulfill the demands of [UN] Resolution 1696 ... and did not stop work on uranium enrichment," Foreign Ministry spokesman Mikhail Kamynin said.

Russia and China have consistently resisted calls for sanctions against Iran in connection with its nuclear enrichment work however, preferring a diplomatic solution to the crisis.

In a speech to university students, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said: "We will consider a whole range of options ... but only those options that take us forward."

The IAEA report was filed to the Security Council as an August 31 deadline for Iran to suspend uranium enrichment expired, possibly leading to UN sanctions against Tehran.

Uranium enrichment provides fuel for civilian nuclear reactors but in highly refined form can also serve as the raw material for atom bombs.

In New York, US Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton said the report "provides ample evidence of [Iranian] defiance."

European foreign ministers meeting on Friday in Finland were faced with a diplomatic tight-rope act - considering sanctions with Washington without compromising dialogue with Tehran. http://www.dailystar.com.lb

"European Union diplomacy remains the number-one way forward," Finnish Foreign Minister Erkki Tuomioja told reporters. "If their [Iran's] response is truly what they say, that they are ready to engage in negotiations, then we have to see what the conditions are, if these can be met," he said.

As the Security Council deadline passed, EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana also sought to maintain diplomatic efforts, agreeing to meet with Iran's top nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani in Berlin on Wednesday.

They were to discuss Iran's 21-page response to an international package of political and economic incentives in exchange for Tehran suspending uranium enrichment.

According to a Western diplomat in Vienna, those talks would be followed soon after by a meeting in the German capital of Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia and the United States.

Once the UN deadline expired, Washington said it was now time to act.

In a speech to a US veterans' group, President George W. Bush said: "It is time for Iran to make a choice. "We will continue to work closely with our allies to plan a diplomatic solution, but there must be consequences for Iran's defiance and we must not allow Iran to develop a nuclear weapon."

Iran's ambassador to France told France-Info radio that Tehran would repel any US military attack.

"If they go that way, we will be forced to defend ourselves. We are capable of defending ourselves and confronting any sort of threat," he said.

US Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns, who will represent Washington in Berlin, said he expected the Security Council to adopt a sanctions plan within a month, although either China or Russia could veto such a proposal.

Late on Wednesday, Ahmadinejad urged the Europeans to reject the "wrong and aggressive" policies of the United States, which broke diplomatic ties with Iran in 1980, and to pursue negotiations.

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi said that the IAEA report "clearly shows that Iran has acted within the framework of the international safeguards and Non-Proliferation Treaty and is ready to answer the remaining issues through talks with the IAEA."

Hezbollah's 'Victory'

2006-09-03T10:40:00.000-07:00

September 01, 2006

Hezbollah's 'Victory'

By Charles Krauthammer

"We did not think, even 1 percent, that the capture would lead to a war at this time and of this magnitude. You ask me, if I had known on July 11 ... that the operation would lead to such a war, would I do it? I say no, absolutely not.'' -- Hasan Nasrallah, Hezbollah leader, Aug. 27 WASHINGTON -- So much for the "strategic and historic victory'' Nasrallah had claimed less than two weeks earlier. What real victor declares that, had he known, he would not have started the war that ended in triumph?

Nasrallah's admission, vastly underplayed in the West, makes clear what the Lebanese already knew. Hezbollah may have won the propaganda war, but on the ground it lost. Badly.

True, under the inept and indecisive leadership of Ehud Olmert, Israel did miss the opportunity to militarily destroy Hezbollah and make it a non-factor in Israel's security, Lebanon's politics and Iran's foreign policy. Nonetheless, Hezbollah was seriously hurt. It lost hundreds of its best fighters. A deeply entrenched infrastructure on Israel's border is in ruins. The great hero has had to go so deep into hiding that Nasrallah has been called "the underground mullah.''

Most importantly, Hezbollah's political gains within Lebanon during the war have proved illusory. As the dust settles, the Lebanese are furious at Hezbollah for provoking a war that brought them nothing but devastation -- and then crowing about victory amid the ruins.

The Western press was once again taken in by the mystique of the "Arab street.'' The mob came out to cheer Hezbollah for raining rockets on Israel -- surprise! -- and the Arab governments that had initially criticized Hezbollah went conveniently silent. Now that the mob has gone home, Hezbollah is under renewed attack -- in newspapers in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Egypt, as well as by many Lebanese, including influential Shiite academics and clan leaders. The Arabs know where their interests lie. And they do not lie with a Shiite militia that fights for Iran.

Even before the devastation, Hezbollah in the last election garnered only about 20 percent of vote, hardly a mandate. Hezbollah has guns, however, and that is the source of its power. But now even that is threatened. Hence Nasrallah's admission. He knows that Lebanon, however weak its army, has a deep desire to disarm him and that the arrival of Europeans in force, however weak their mandate, will make impossible the rebuilding of the vast Maginot Line he spent six years constructing.

Which is why the expected Round Two will, in fact, not happen. Hezbollah is in no position, either militarily or politically, for another round. Nasrallah's admission that the war was a mistake is an implicit pledge not to repeat it, lest he be completely finished as a Lebanese political figure.

The Rest Here

Those horrible Moe-ham-id (Ham headed Moe) cartoons

2006-09-02T22:11:00.000-07:00

Now why are the turbanned terrorists for the prophet of pederasty so upset about these cartoons? Even the worse one is the simple truth. This is the kind of garbage that we have to put up with for letting these flea-bitten refugees from a rug bazarre migrate to the West. Upset these jerks and they'll try to kill your family as well as you. To Hell with them, I say.

Death to Is-Lame!!!!

More moslem lies, half-truths, and equivocations

2006-08-31T16:43:00.000-07:00

Years after Sept. 11 attacks, American Muslims look within for terror threats Thursday August 31, 2006 By RACHEL ZOLL AP Religion Writer After the Sept. 11 suicide hijackings, distraught U.S. Muslim leaders feared the next casualty would be their religion. Islam teaches peace, they told anyone who would listen in news conferences, at interfaith services and, most famously, standing in a mosque with President Bush. But five years later, the target audience for their pleas has shifted. Now the faith's American leaders are starting to warn fellow Muslims about a threat from within. The 2005 subway attacks in London that investigators say were committed by British-born and -raised Muslims, and the relentless Muslim-engineered sectarian assaults on Iraqi civilians, are among the events that have convinced some U.S. Muslims to change focus. ``This sentiment of denial, that sort of came as a fever to the Muslim community after 9-11, is fading away,'' said Muqtedar Khan, a political scientist at the University of Delaware and author of ``American Muslims.'' ``They realize that there are Muslims who use terrorism, and the community is beginning to stand up to this.'' Muslim leaders point to two stark examples of the new mind-set: A Canadian-born Muslim man worked with police for months investigating a group of Islamic men and youths accused in June of plotting terrorist attacks in Ontario. Mubin Shaikh said he feared any violence would ultimately hurt Islam and Canadian Muslims. In England, it's been widely reported that a tip from a British Muslim helped lead investigators to uncover what they said was a plan by homegrown extremists to use liquid explosives to destroy U.S.-bound planes. Cooperation isn't emotionally easy, as Western governments enact security policies that critics say have criminalized Islam itself. Safiyyah Ally, a graduate student in political science at the University of Toronto, wrote recently on altmuslim.com that Shaikh, the Canadian informer, went too far. She said the North American Muslim community ``is fragile enough as is'' without members ``spying'' on each other. Leaders should counsel Muslims against violence and report suspicious activity to police but nothing more, she argued. ``We cannot have communities wherein individuals are paranoid of each other and turned against one another,'' Ally wrote. Yet some leaders say keeping watch for extremists protects all Muslims and their civil rights. Salam al-Marayati, executive director of Muslim Public Affairs Council, an advocacy group based in Los Angeles, says working closely with authorities underscores that Muslims are not outsiders to be feared. It also gives Muslims a way to directly air their concerns about how they're treated by the government. ``We're not on opposite teams,'' al-Marayati said. ``We're all trying to protect our country from another terrorist attack.'' In 2004, his group started the ``National Anti-Terrorism Campaign,'' urging Muslims to monitor their own communities, speak out more boldly against violence and work with law enforcement. Hundreds of U.S. mosques have signed on, al-Marayati said. The Council on American-Islamic Relations, a civil rights group, ran a TV ad campaign and a petition-drive called ``Not in the Name of Islam,'' which repudiates terrorism. Hundreds of thousands of people have endorsed it, according to Ibrahim Hooper, the group's spokesman. After the London subway bombings, the Fiqh Council of North America, which advises Muslims on Islamic law, issued a fatwa or edict declaring that nothing in Islam justifies terrorism. The council said Muslims were obligated to help law enforcement protect civilians from attacks. ``I think everyone now agrees that silence isn't an option,'' Hooper said. ``You have to speak out in defense of civil liberties, but you also have to speak out against any kind of extremism or violence that's carried out in the name of Islam.'' But many Muslims say they're being asked to look out for something that even the U.S. government struggles to define: What constitutes an imminent threat? Khan said he has heard of cases in American mosques where imams have expressed extreme views in sermons and worshippers have confronted the prayer leaders about it. ``But beyond that what else can we do?'' Khan said. ``Do we need to hire a private detective to put on this guy? If five guys came to me and said, `Muqtedar, let's get together. Let's blow up this and that,' then I would call the police. But the community does not understand surveillance.'' Imam Muhammad Musri, head of the Islamic Society of Central Florida, said he has tried to address this problem in the eight mosques he oversees in the Orlando area. He regularly invites law enforcement officials to speak with local Muslims and encourages mosque members to come to him with any suspicions, even if they overhear something said in jest. Musri says he also speaks regularly with local FBI and police to establish a relationship in case a real threat emerges. ``Here in Central Florida, talking to most people, they are literally upset by the actions of Muslims or so-called Muslims overseas in Europe and the Middle East, because they say, `We wish they would come and see how we're doing here,''' Musri said. ``We know who the real enemy is someone who might come from the outside and try to infiltrate us. Everybody is on the lookout.'' On the Net: Muslim Public Affairs Council: http://www.mpac.org/ From Here

Emperor Misha takes apart an anti-semitic fool

2006-08-31T11:22:00.000-07:00

And Just Who the Fuck is THIS Anti-Semite Fuckwit?

Filed under: Idiotarians

Reader and LC anomdragon wishes to know, and we wish we could answer.

Well, not really, now that we’ve actually read the slobbering snotwit’s drivel, but you get our drift. Ladies and Gentlemen, we give you the retarded rantings of one Eric Margolis:

The latest big lie unveiled by Washington’s neoconservatives are the poisonous terms, “Islamo-Fascists” and “Islamic Fascists.” They are the new, hot buzzwords among America’s far right and Christian fundamentalists.

Read it all here

14 hurt, One dead. The Jihad comes to San Fransisco

2006-08-29T20:50:00.000-07:00

SAN FRANCISCO -- As many as 14 people were injured this afternoon by a motorist who drove around San Francisco deliberately running them down before being arrested by police, who believe the same driver struck and killed a man earlier today in Fremont.

At least one hit-and-run victim remained in critical condition this evening.

Reports of the incidents began pouring in at 12:47 p.m., police said.

Within a half-hour, San Francisco police had cornered and arrested 29-year-old Omeed Aziz Popal, who has addresses in Ceres (Stanislaus County) and Fremont.

Authorities suspect Popal was the same driver who ran over and killed a 54-year-old man in Fremont around noon.

That man, whose name was not immediately released, had been walking in a bicycle lane at Fremont Boulevard near Ferry Lane when he was struck and thrown into a field, where, as of 5:30 p.m., his body remained covered with a tarp.

That crash scene is just blocks from Popal's Fremont address, where he had most recently been living.

San Francisco police spokesman Sgt. Neville Gittens said the attacks in the city occurred at 12 locations over a 20-minute period.

"The hits were intentional,'' he said, noting that police are treating them as assaults.

Gittens had no information about a possible motive.

Popal was arrested after patrol cars boxed in his black Honda SUV, its windshield and right front headlight smashed, outside a Walgreens store on Spruce Street between California and Mayfair in the Laurel Heights area.

A dental office manager, who identified herself only as Kira, watched from a second-floor window as police dragged the driver out of his vehicle.

"He was absolutely indifferent, no fear, no expression,'' she said. "He was like a zombie.''

Architect Jeremy Warms also saw police pull Popal out of the SUV and sit him down on the curb.

"He looked calm and pretty clean-cut, like a normal guy,'' Warms said. "He sat on the pavement for a good 25 minutes. I don't think anyone said anything to him. They put him in a police car and took him away.''

This evening, it was unclear exactly how many people had been injured, and in what order the incidents occurred. The police reported the following injuries:

-- Two people, one of them a child, were seriously injured on the 3500 block of California Street in Laurel Heights.

-- Three people were hit at California and Fillmore streets. Witnesses said they included a man with a broken hip and a woman with a gashed head.

-- Two people were seriously hurt at Bush and Pierce streets.

-- One person was seriously injured at Bush and Buchanan streets.

-- One person suffered minor injuries in an incident at 1850 Fillmore St.

-- Two other people suffered minor injuries when they were hit at Pine at Divisadero streets.

-- Two people were hit and suffered minor injuries at Divisadero and Bush streets.

"It was like 'Death Race 2000,' " firefighter Danny Bright said at California and Fillmore streets as an ambulance stood nearby. "Guys were walking down the sidewalk, and the guy just came up and ran them over. The guy went crazy."

Mayor Gavin Newsom visited five of the victims at San Francisco General Hospital.

"This was so senseless and inexplicable,'' the mayor said afterward.

One man he visited, who identified himself as Jesse, said as he was walking out of the hospital, "The car came after me. I'm lucky to be alive. Life is good.''

Of the other six victims taken to S.F. General, who ranged in age from 18 to 84, four were scheduled to be discharged later in the day, and one was in critical condition in the intensive care unit, said Eileen Shields, spokeswoman for the city Public Health Department.

Three other victims were taken to St. Francis Hospital, one to Kaiser and two to California Pacific Medical Center, authorities said.

Emanule Gowan, 50, said he had been standing on his Steiner Street doorstep around 1 p.m. when an SUV roared by, driving the wrong way down Bush Street, and hit an elderly man in the crosswalk.

"The man must have gone up in the air about 8 feet and landed on the SUV's windshield,'' Gowan said. "He slid off the windshield, and the SUV rolled right over him and took off, leaving the man hollering on the ground.''

After running a stop sign and hitting another pedestrian in a crosswalk on Sutter Street, the driver headed off down Steiner, Gowan said.

"I looked right at him, and he looked at me as he busted down the street," Gowan said. "He was very calm.''

Other witnesses described the SUV as jumping the sidewalk in apparent pursuit of pedestrians.

Jackie Le, owner of J.T. Nails on Fillmore Street, said she was filing a customer's nails around 12:50 p.m. when the woman started screaming, "Oh my God, an SUV on the sidewalk -- it hit a woman on the sidewalk.''

Linda Tuttle, a stylist at a beauty salon on Fillmore between Bush and Sutter, said she saw the driver heading down the sidewalk, sitting close to the steering wheel, an angry look on his face.

Larry Jackson saw the vehicle driving the right direction on Bush Street, slowing at the intersection of Pierce Street as a woman walked in the crosswalk.

"He let her walk by till she got in front of him, and he just punched it," Jackson said. He attended to the woman and, a short time later, the driver roared down Bush in the wrong direction.

The SUV struck two people in front of the Jewish Community Center of San Francisco on California Street, a few blocks from where the rampage ended.

Blood covered the sidewalk in front of the center's gift store entrance, and 50 feet farther down the sidewalk lay a mangled bicycle.

Security cameras in front of the center captured images of the incident, which happened at 1:12 p.m., according to Aaron Rosenthal, spokesman for the community center.

One victim, Pedro Aglugov, 70, was sitting at a table at a sidewalk cafe at California and Fillmore with his head bandaged with gauze, holding an ice pack to one elbow.

"He was going real fast," Aglugov said of the driver. "I was lucky I wasn't hurt more.''

Eliseo Billones Jr., 24, a canvasser for Greenpeace, had been standing on the corner when Aglugov was hit.

"He was going berserk," Billones said of the driver. "It was a red light, and he just ran the red light. I saw him (Aglugov) hit the corner of the bumper and tumble.''

Barclay Lynn, 39, of San Francisco, said she and a friend had been traveling east on Bush when they noticed a black SUV driving away and saw that a motorcyclist had been hit.

"The motorcyclist stood in the intersection trying to signal the driver to stop,'' Lynn said. The SUV then "went speeding in reverse on Bush heading west, weaving in and out of traffic. The whole right side of his SUV was smashed in.''

At Frankie's Bohemian Cafe at Divisadero and Pine, a man named William, who asked that his last name not be used, said he had been walking south on Divisadero when "we heard the thump, turned around, saw bodies flying.''

The driver went down Pine and Bush, "stood on the gas," then a couple of minutes later "came flying up through the bus lane" headed north on Divisadero.

Another man at the cafe, Max Bran, said, "We thought he was going to stop and give up, but instead he just stepped on the gas. It didn't matter, regardless of the lights.''

Bran said he saw a woman knocked down. "She was just crossing the street, just crossing the street," he said. "In fact, I had just crossed the street.''

Authorities suspect that the SUV is the same one that struck and killed a pedestrian in Fremont earlier today.

That victim had been walking north on Fremont Boulevard in the bicycle lane when he was struck from behind and knocked several feet into a field, Fremont Officer Alan Zambonin said.

He was pronounced dead at the scene. The black SUV, a Honda described as a Pilot or a CRV, made no attempt to stop or help the victim, police said.

Zambonin estimated the SUV had been traveling as fast as 50 mph and sped away with a blown out windshield and damage to the right front side.

"It's a good possibility (the incidents) are all connected,'' Zambonin said.

Chronicle staff writers Vanessa Hua, Matt Stannard, Wyatt Buchanan, Jill Tucker, Nanette Asimov, Cecilia Vega and Susan Sward contributed to this report.

2006-08-29T13:49:00.000-07:00

Check out my new American Politics News Search Just input the politician's name and what you'd like to find out about him and voilà! there you have the information

2006-08-27T22:49:00.000-07:00

Just a few things our "Peace loving Friends" The moslems have been up to the last six months. __________________________________________________________________

Muslims take over Somalia and install Sharia Law
The UK plot.
The Sears Tower plot.
The FBI building in Florida plot.
Hezzbollah members arrested for selling illegal cigarettes in the U.S.
Hezzbollah in Lebanon.
Women Muslim basketball team in Illinois saying the will not play road games unless ALL MALES ARE BANNED FROM THE GAMES INCLUDING KIDS.
Muslim's arrested in Mich. on terrorism charges. Said they were going to blow up Walmart's.
Muslim convicted in Colorado on abusing and enslaving his maid. His defense was his culture ok's it. After he is freed he should be deported to an Islamic country, since that is what he believes.
HUGE pro Hezzbollah rallies in Iran, Iraq, Turkey, Lerbanon.
17 Muslim's arrrested in Canada on terrorism charges.
India train boimbing by MUSLIMS, 240 dead.
Taj Ma Hal in India get's bomb threat's.
10,000 Muslim's at pro Hezzbollah rally in Dearborn Mich. The Muslim capital of the U.S.
6 Jew's shot by Muslim in Seattle. Atleast the 3rd time this has happened in the U.S.
The Arab League get's the U.N. to cancel the meeting on Sudan where Muslim's have killed 200,000 Christian's. In other word's, they don't want to face the subject or for the killing to stop.
Iran quickly advancing their nuke program and testing 2 kind's of new missiles including sub to surface.
Muslim arrested in Staten Island N.Y. for supplying the terrorist channel Al Manar to Muslim's. An ILLEGAL channel.
Italy charges a MUSLIM with a so called "honor killing" of his daughter because she had a non Muslim boyfriend and would not stop seeing him.
Lebanese Muslim arrested in Germany for two failed suticase bomb's left in the German subway.

___________________________________________________________________ Just a little Bilet-doux, from me to you Think about this and sleep well.

2006-08-26T22:20:00.000-07:00

Terror war fans Islamphobia in Britain Regional-UK, Politics, 8/25/2006 Attempts to treat the threat of terrorism as a religious rather than a political issue appear to have hit British perceptions of Islam, according to a new poll carried out for the Telegraph Friday.

Hmmm, 99.99% of the terrorist attacks in the last 30 years are committed by young Moslem men. All of them profess a religious fervor. I suppose the Western world is supposed to just keep their eyes closed to this fact.

The effects have also damaged the image of British Muslims as not being overwhelmingly peaceful and law-abiding citizens and also show support for controversial proposals that the country's 1.8 million community should be targeted to defeat terrorism.
Hmm, I think I’d have to say the damage has been done by. . .young Moslem men, and this time women.
The YouGov poll, conducted in the wake of the latest alleged plot to blow up flights to the US, found that 53 per cent of respondents now felt that Islam posed a major or some threat to Western liberal democracy.

This means that 47% of the British are still being willingly blind.

The number is seven points higher than in the aftermath of last year's London bombings and has grown from 32 per cent following the 9/11 atrocities in the US.

Similarly the view that Islam poses only a small or no threat has declined to only 34 per cent, from 47 per cent in 2005 and from 63 per cent five years ago.

Man there are some blind, deaf, and or dumb people in this world.

This month, the Muslim News condemned the latest rhetoric of the so called war on terror, including the recent call by US President George W Bush's for an all-embracing "war with Islamic fascists" and Prime Minister Tony Blair's war against "reactionary Islam." Last month, it also criticized the "lurid language" used by the press and politicians, saying this was the "fundamental reason why the government is failing to tackle terrorism." "By demonizing Islam, whatever terminology we use - Islamists or Islamic with terrorist, extremist - and using phrases like 'the terrorists are using a deviant form of Islam' etc, Muslims as a whole are being tarred," it warned in its editorial.

Let me see here, you don’t want islam combined with the word terrorist or fascist or extremist but you want your people to keep being all of the above, Look you goat-fellating fools the West is on to your garbage now, you’re about one terror attack from the all-out war of religions for which you have been calling for years. Keep the same old shi’ite going and get ready to say bye bye…can you say Hiroshima?

"The YouGov survey confirms ministers' fears that the country is becoming polarized between Muslims and the rest of the population, which is suspicious of them, and that a belief in 'a clash of civilizations' has taken root," the Telegraph said.

It said that since a similar poll conducted after the July 7 bombings in London, there has been a significant increase in the number of people worried about some of their Muslim compatriots.

There should be, Moslems must always be held under suspicion.

This includes the nearly doubling from 10 to 18 per cent in those who believe that "a large proportion of British Muslims feel no sense of loyalty to this country and are prepared to condone or even carry out acts of terrorism." The number who believe that "practically all British Muslims are peaceful, law-abiding citizens who deplore terrorist acts as much as any- one else" has also fallen from 23 per cent last year to 16 per cent.

But the British, no make that European, Moslems have as much as said that they are Moslems first and feel no loyalty to their countries.

The poll also showed increasing support from 60 to 65 per cent in that the security services should now focus intelligence-gathering and terrorism-prevention efforts on Muslims.

As the old saying goes, “Fish where they’re biting and you’ll catch more fish”

The survey found that an overwhelming 73 per cent of Britons believed that there "actually was a plot to blow up transatlantic airliners." Only 3 per cent suggested that it was organized by Blair's government as a distraction from its current difficulty. A similar number also suggested it was the US and Israel seeking it as a diversion to what was going on in the Middle East.

These 3% are FOOLS!

http://www.arabicnews.com/ansub/Daily/Day/060825/2006082506.html

Russia rules out UN sanctions

2006-08-26T15:32:00.000-07:00

Russia rules out UN sanctions against Iran "for now"

I wonder just how deep they are in Iran's pocket, we know how bad it was with Iraq

Fri. 25 Aug 2006 By Ron Popeski MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russia on Friday rejected any talk for now of sanctions against Iran and France warned against conflict with Tehran, raising doubt whether it will face swift penalties for not halting nuclear work by an August 31 deadline.Responding to an offer of economic incentives to stop enriching uranium, Iran hinted to six world powers on Tuesday it could curb its program as a result of talks to implement the package -- but not as a precondition as they demand.The reply seemed designed to crack the ramshackle united front of four Western powers and Russia and China behind the U.N. Security Council deadline. The West sees Iran's nuclear work as a looming threat to peace. Russia and China do not."I know of no instances in world practice and previous experience in which sanctions have achieved their aim and proved effective," Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov told reporters during a trip to Russia's far east."Moreover, I believe that the question is not so serious at the moment for the U.N. Security Council or the group of six to consider any introduction of sanctions. Russia stands for further political and diplomatic efforts to settle the issue."Ivanov is regarded as close to President Vladimir Putin.

Good God, does this guy live in a vaccuum?

The Security Council passed a legally binding resolution on July 31 telling Iran to suspend its nuclear enrichment program within 30 days or risk sanctions.Iran says it is enriching uranium solely to generate electricity. The West suspects the Iranian nuclear program is a front for building atom bombs. U.S., French and German leaders said that Iran's 21-page response to the incentives offer was unsatisfactory because it did not specifically agree to stop purifying uranium.European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana said on Friday that Tehran's reply had touched on "many different elements, different from the ones that we had proposed"."For that reason we will have to hold a dialogue session ... or a conversation with the ... Iranians to improve upon some of the expressions and meanings of the subject matter treated in its document," he told Spain's RNE state radio.

In other words, its nothing more than a running circle jerk, just like the UN.

But while Washington, backed by closest ally Britain, has said the six powers will move quickly to adopt sanctions if Iran disregards the deadline, Germany and France have been less conclusive in public and Russia and China have been unwilling. "For the moment, it (the Iranian response) is not satisfactory," French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy said on RTL radio, but added it was important to avoid escalating conflict with Iran and the Muslim world."The worst thing would be to escalate into a confrontation (between the West and) Iran on the one hand, and the Muslim world with Iran...," he said."I'm starting from the principle we should have a dialogue with the Iranians, that we must hold out our hands to them."

When you have a "dialog" with the Devil he takes your soul. When you have a "dialog" with a moslem he takes the truth and kills it.

Read the Rest Here

Our "Great Allies" Iraqis loot base after British leave

2006-08-25T14:15:00.000-07:00

By HAIDAR HANI, Al AP Writer Fri Aug 25, 10:46 AM ET AMARAH, Iraq - Looters ravaged a former British base Friday, a day after the camp was turned over to Iraqi troops, taking everything from doors and window frames to corrugated roofing and metal pipes, authorities said. About 1,200 British troops had been stationed at Camp Abu Naji in Amarah, 200 miles southeast of Baghdad, and the base had come under almost daily attack. The troops pulled out Thursday to redeploy along the border withIran to crack down on weapons smuggling. Shortly after the troops pulled out, Iraqi police managed to disperse looters by firing warning shots into the air, said Dhaffar Jabbar, spokesman for the Maysan provincial governor's office. But the looters returned Friday. "The British forces left Abu Naji and the locals started looting everything," 1st Lt. Rifaat Taha Yaseen of the Iraqi army's 10th Division told AP Television News. "They took everything from the buildings." Men, some with their faces covered, ripped corrugated metal from roofs, carried off metal pipes and backed trucks into building entrances to load them with wooden planks. Several Iraqi soldiers, apparently unarmed, did not seem to make any effort to stop the looting. "There are only few soldiers at Abu Naji camp. Some of the residents were carrying weapons so they (the soldiers) did not want bloodshed and with such a big number, they cannot stop them," Jabbar said. Lt. Tahseen Abid Ali said the Iraqi army had taken up positions in a corner of the camp, but was unable to stop the looting. Another officer, 1st Lt. Ammar Karim Ahmed, said the army had seen "hundreds (of looters) coming toward the camp." "First of all, we tried to stop them, but we saw some them were armed and our forces did not have enough people to stop them," he said. When asked by a reporter why he was taking material from the base, one man, who refused to give his name, said: "This is war loot and we are allowed to take it." On Thursday, Iraqi authorities had complained that the British withdrawal had caught them by surprise. "British forces evacuated the military headquarters without coordination with the Iraqi forces," Jabbar said. The British military rejected the assertion. "The handover of the Camp Abu Naji was coordinated with the Amarah authorities 24 hours in advance," said spokesman Maj. Charlie Burbridge. "It was understood that the governor was likely to use the camp as a police training camp," he said in an e-mail Thursday, adding that Iraqi forces had secured the base after the British soldiers left. Burbridge said Thursday that British authorities could not comment on early reports of looting "because by that stage the camp was the property of the Maysan authorities and Iraqi Forces were in attendance." Read the Rest Here

Video Discloses Alleged Plot To Target Sears Tower

2006-08-25T14:09:00.000-07:00

(CBS) MIAMI Undercover video acquired by CBS 2's Miami sister station, WFOR-TV CBS 4, reveals an inside look at a suspected terror group leader accused in a plot to target U.S. landmarks, including the Sears Tower. The suspected group was based in Miami and was allegedly led by a former Chicagoan. As CBS 2 Chief Correspondent Jay Levine reports, that Chicago suspect was apparently trying to recruit help with his mission when he was busted. The “Liberty City 7”, as they have been dubbed, face terrorism charges after government agents uncovered an alleged plot to blow up buildings, including the Sears Tower, the Miami Federal Courthouse, and the Miami FBI offices, as well as other structures. The undercover video shows Narseal Batiste, and others taking, what prosecutors claim, is an oath to the al Qaeda terrorist organization, as well as conversations in which Batiste tells and FBI undercover agent his plans for blowing up buildings. Read the Rest HERE

Ahmadinejad, would "sacrifice half of Iran for the sake of eliminating Israel,"

2006-08-25T13:50:00.000-07:00

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, if he ever became the supreme decision maker in his country, would "sacrifice half of Iran for the sake of eliminating Israel," Giora Eiland, Israel's former national security adviser, told The Jerusalem Post on Thursday. At present, Eiland stressed, the ultimate decision maker in Iran was Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, 67, whom he said was "more reasonable." But, Eiland went on, "if Ahmadinejad were to succeed him - and he has a reasonable chance of doing so - then we'd be in a highly dangerous situation." The 49-year-old Iranian president, he said, "has a religious conviction that Israel's demise is essential to the restoration of Muslim glory, that the Zionist thorn in the heart of the Islamic nations must be removed. And he will pay almost any price to right the perceived historic wrong. If he becomes the supreme leader and has a nuclear capability, that's a real threat." Read the Rest Here

Yay! Centanni is Saved! Jackson to the Rescue

2006-08-25T11:07:00.000-07:00

From the skies he comes, ready to swoop down and sweep up any crumbs of press attention he can... its ATTENTION WHORE to the "rescue"

Rev. Jesse Jackson plans another hostage mission to the Mideast By: Associated Press Published: August 24, 2006 The Rev. Jesse Jackson said Wednesday he will lead an ecumenical delegation to the Middle East this week to meet with political and religious leaders about the kidnapping of two Fox News journalists and other recent developments in the region. Jackson, the veteran civil rights leader and head of the Rainbow/PUSH Coalition, said his mission would have three goals: urging the extension of the cease-fire in Lebanon, arranging humanitarian aid in Lebanon and in the Israeli city of Haifa, and inquiring into several hostage situations. He said his delegation would consist of about ten people, representing Jewish, Muslim, Roman Catholic and Protestant groups, and would leave Chicago Friday night en route to meetings in Syria, Lebanon and Israel. "We had been working with the Middle Eastern Council of Churches, but couldn't get in earlier because of the bombings," Jackson said. He said his group is concerned about the fate of Israeli soldiers held hostage by Hezbollah, as well as by the kidnapping of Fox News correspondent Steve Centanni and cameraman Olaf Wiig, who were kidnapped Aug. 14 from their TV van near the Palestinian security services headquarters in Gaza City. Jackson has had success several times in the past in negotiating the release of political hostages, but acknowledged the case of Centanni and Wiig is particularly difficult because so little is known about the militant group holding them. Nonetheless, Jackson said he had hopes that regional leaders could help his group in its quest. "I believe all nations must see the value of releasing prisoners as a means of releasing tensions in the area," Jackson said. Jackson declined to release his planned itinerary because of security concerns. http://web.israelinsider.com/Articles/Briefs/9260.htm

I just love what a high opinion he...um..the world holds him in.

CAIR: Islamists Fooling the Establishment

2006-08-24T11:12:00.000-07:00

CAIR: Islamists Fooling the Establishment by Daniel Pipes and Sharon ChadhaMiddle East QuarterlySpring 2006 The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), headquartered in Washington, is perhaps the best-known and most controversial Muslim organization in North America. CAIR presents itself as an advocate for Muslims' civil rights and the spokesman for American Muslims. "We are similar to a Muslim NAACP," says its communications director, Ibrahim Hooper.[1] Its official mission—"to enhance understanding of Islam, encourage dialogue, protect civil liberties, empower American Muslims, and build coalitions that promote justice and mutual understanding"—suggests nothing problematic. Starting with a single office in 1994, CAIR now claims thirty-one affiliates, including a branch in Canada, with more steadily being added. In addition to its grand national headquarters in Washington, it has impressive offices in other cities; the New York office, for example, is housed in the 19-story Interchurch Center located on Manhattan's Riverside Drive. Read the Rest Here

Write your Congressman about C.A.I.R's terror links!

2006-08-24T11:01:00.000-07:00

It's just a bit foolish to allow C.A.I.R access to security measures at our airports. Please modify and send the sample letter below to your representatives in Washington expressing outrage over this breach of national security. To find your representative go to: http://www.firstgov.gov/Contact/Elected.shtml See the sample letter below or pass this link to others to download it in .doc format. Please edit the sample letter below to send to your reps regarding this issue: -------------------- Honorable XXX Congressmen or Senator U.S. House of Representatives or Senate Hon. XXX I am writing to express my extreme outrage over a recent private tour by the U.S. Dept. of Homeland Security of U.S. airport security and a briefing on what screeners do to catch potential terrorists. The source of my outrage is that this was done for a private interest of a national organization which has ties to terrorism and extremist activities. It was a national organization whose Texas chapter board member, Ghassan Elashi, was recently found guilty of terrorism charges, and whose spokesperson, Ibrahim Hooper, has stated in interviews that he believes America should be under Islamic law rather than democracy. These are just some of many examples of ties to extremism and terrorism for this group. The group is the Council on American Islamic Relations (C.A.I.R.). While no private interest should be receiving guided tours of security, it is sheer foolishness to allow such a tour to the leadership of a terrorist front such as C.A.I.R. This is the exact kind of political correctness that our enemies thrive on. We have a domestic insurgency which uses our laws against us, and whose ultimate goal is the destruction of our nation, and our way of life. Our enemies thrive on taking advantage of our freedoms and establishing sympathetic organizations in this country. For terrorist cells to function, they must have operational, logistical, and financial support from inside the target country. Organizations, such as the Council on American Islamic Relations, are those support organizations. The conviction of Ghassan Elashi is just one of many indicators, but the bottom line is, where there is smoke, there is fire. For the sweet sake of this blessed nation, and as my elected representation in Washington, would you please cry havoc and hold someone accountable for this breach of national security. As the will of the people, let our executive branch know that we will not stand for Islamic extremists to be given guided tours of security, provide sensitivity training, or otherwise subvert our safety. Know for certain, this is my issue at the voting booth far and above all others. Sincerely, Name Address

2006-08-24T09:54:00.000-07:00

Why They Don't Hate UsBy Christopher Orlet Published 8/24/2006 12:06:25 AM Of the dozens of "Why They Hate Us" articles I've read since 2001, by far the most incredible appeared in last week's L.A. Times. This version was courtesy of the fevered imagination of Julie E. Sweig, senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. In her trademark blame-America-first format, Ms. Sweig ticks off the now familiar list of reasons why "they hate us." Never mind that she doesn't bother saying who "they" are. They never do.Topping the list is the Bush Administration's go-it-alone "tough talk" after 9/11. Apparently the other 19 countries -- and NATO -- that supported our efforts to root out the Taliban and Al Qaeda after 9/11 count for nothing. (If so, that's reason to hate us right there.) In the Iraq War 49 countries publicly committed to the coalition. If that's going it alone, exactly how many hundreds -- or thousands -- of countries does it take to build a coalition? Ms. Sweig faults the president for his tough-talking leadership after the terror attacks of 9/11. Perhaps she would have had Mr. Bush offer an olive branch to Osama bin Laden? Or a white flag perhaps?The rest of the list is as predictable as leg hair on a feminist: contempt for Kyoto, the War in Iraq, secret prisons, Gitmo, Vietnam, pop culture, and globalization. America's domestic policy comes in for a pummeling too: deteriorating public education, the response to Hurricane Katrina, soaring healthcare costs, widening gap between rich and poor. (Note to Ms. Sweig: Haven't you forgotten the death penalty?) Had the authoress done her homework she'd have discovered that anti-Americanism -- in Western Europe especially -- has been around for decades, long before Katrina, Gitmo and the 2000 election. Read the Rest Here

The War on Christmas starts early this year

2006-08-24T09:38:00.000-07:00

Christmas 'ban' prompts Supreme Court petitionPolicy allows recognition of Ramadan, Hanukkah, but not Christian holiday Posted: August 24, 20061:00 a.m. Eastern © 2006 WorldNetDaily.com A petition has been submitted to the U.S. Supreme Court asking the justices to repair damage done by a lower court in a ruling that allows the display in public schools of menorahs and star-and-crescent symbols, but not Christian symbols. At issue is the policy of the New York City public schools that encourages the display of "secular" symbols such as the menorah at Hanukkah and the star and crescent symbol at Ramadan, but bans the Nativity at Christmas because of its religious meaning. Nativity The Thomas More Law Center said the offending policy was instituted by the public schools in New York City, and then approved by a sharply divide opinion from the 2nd U.S. Court of Appeals. And Law Center staff lawyer Robert Muise told WorldNetDaily that a logical, constitutional resolution of this case at the Supreme Court level could impact dozens, maybe hundreds, of other cases. Read More Here

Hezbollah Manipulation of Journalists

2006-08-24T09:19:00.000-07:00

Hezbollah Manipulation of Journalists Typical of Hezbollah's manipulation of the media was the live story Nic Robertson submitted from Lebanon. Robertson was given a tour by "Hezbollah Press Officer" Hussein Nabulsi. Click here to see the CNN report, courtesy of Newsbusters.org. Throughout the interview, Robertson simply accepts Nabulsi's claims that Israel was only attacking civilian areas. "No evidence of military equipment here," Robertson tells CNN's global audience. At several points, Nabulsi actually tells Robertson's cameraman exactly what to film. A week after the report aired, Robertson appeared on CNN's "Reliable Sources" where he admitted that he had no way of confirming what he had just told the world. In Robertson's own words: (Hezbollah) had control of the situation. They designated the places that we went to, and we certainly didn't have time to go into the houses or lift up the rubble to see what was underneath. (Hezbollah) has very, very good control over its areas in the south of Beirut. They deny journalists access into those areas. You don't get in there without their permission. We didn't have enough time to see if perhaps there was somebody there who was, you know, a taxi driver by day, and a Hezbollah fighter by night." Read the Whole Thing Here

More Snakes for Israel

2006-08-24T09:00:00.000-07:00

Another Israeli-Arab Caught Spying For Hizbullah 16:50 Aug 24, '06 / 30 Av 5766by Ezra HaLevi Another Israeli-Arab was arrested for spying on Israel for Hizbullah, having passed information to the terrorist group just before the war broke out. A top Hamas commander was arrested in Gaza. The Israeli citizen, Mahmoud Shaaban Mahmad Hattib, is a resident of the village of Rajar, on the Israel-Lebanon border. He was arrested on July 31st in a joint police and Shabak (General Security Service) operation. The media blackout on the arrest was lifted Wednesday.Hattib admitted that for two months leading up to the war, he had been passing information regarding IDF deployment and operations in the region to his Hizbullah handler, Abu Mahmad, and to a journalist for Hizbullah’s Al-Manar satellite station, Ali Shaayib. Prior to the indictment issued Wednesday at the Nazareth Court, Hattib admitted to having had extensive telephone contact with Shaayib. He was also supposed to hand over a map, presumably with notations marking IDF positions, to Abu Mahmad.The Shabak says that contact with Al-Manar journalists is a common way by which Hizbullah handlers are put in touch with Israeli-Arabs sympathetic to their cause.Earlier this month, an Israeli Bedouin Arab, 30-year-old Riad Mazariv from Beti Zarzir, was also indicted for spying on behalf of Hizbullah. Mazariv had asked a Bedouin tracker serving in the IDF to help him smuggle drugs. When the tracker contacted the Lebanese dealer, he was told that Hizbullah would only supply the drugs in return for intelligence information.Mazariv agreed and proceeded to report the locations of Katyusha missile impacts. He described in detail IDF troop movements to Hizbullah and passed on intelligence information from Bedouin friends serving in the IDF as well. Read the rest here

Snakes in the Grass

2006-08-24T08:57:00.000-07:00

Only 1/4 of Israeli-Arabs Supported Israel in War, as Predicted 16:20 Aug 24, '06 / 30 Av 5766by Hillel Fendel Though some media headlines blared "Only 18% Supported Hizbullah," poll numbers show that 73% of the Israeli-Arab public refused to say they supported Israel in its war against Hizbullah. The complete results of the poll taken by pollster Mina Tzemach's Dachaf Institute will be released tonight, on Knesset Television Channel 99. The numbers that have been publicized thus far have been interpreted in various ways. Eighteen percent of the Israeli-Arab respondents said they favored Hizbullah in the recent war, while 27% said they favored Israel; another 36% of the Arab citizens said they didn't favor either side. The remaining 19% were not accounted for.At the same time, the Israeli public was also polled as to how they felt the Arabs sided. 55% said that most or all of the Arab public supported Hizbullah. The other 45% of the Jewish public was divided roughly in half: Half thought that half the Arabs supported Hizbullah, while the other half felt that less than half supported Hizbullah Read the rest here

Eight killed in pre-dawn raid in Afghanistan

2006-08-24T08:51:00.000-07:00

Eight killed in pre-dawn raid in Afghanistan Updated Thu. Aug. 24 2006 7:31 AM ET CTV.ca News Eight people, including a child, have been killed in a pre-dawn raid by U.S. and Afghan forces in eastern Afghanistan, the U.S. military said. The coalition forces said seven of the men killed in the raid in Kunar province were suspected al-Qaeda members. But local officials in the eastern Afghanistan village disputed the claim, saying those targeted were tribal elders who had congregated to resolve a dispute. U.S. forces launched the raid Thursday to capture a "known al Qaeda facilitator" at a compound in Asmar village the military said in a statement. The suspected al Qaeda facilitator was being sought for involvement in attacks on coalition forces, the military said. "Afghan and coalition forces came under direct fire when approaching the compound and defended themselves with return fire," the U.S. statement said. "All of the men killed were engaging Afghan and coalition forces with hostile fire." The statement also said that another four people were detained and that soldiers seized multiple weapons, ammunition and grenades. There were no coalition casualties. It's unclear if the suspected al Qaeda facilitator is believed to be among those killed or detained. Kunar is an unstable region bordering Pakistan where the Taliban and forces loyal to an anti-government warlord operate. More than 1,000 people, mostly militants, have died in the last three months in the country's worst rash of violence since U.S.-led forces toppled the Taliban regime in late 2001. The raid come as the body of a Canadian killed in a suicide attack in Afghanistan was sent home. That same day, an Afghan boy who was shot and killed by a Canadian soldier was returned to his parents. Canadian Cpl. David Braun was killed on Tuesday when a suicide attacker struck a Canadian convoy in Kandahar. Three other soldiers were injured in the accident. Meanwhile, an investigation will be held into the shooting of the 10-year-old Afghan, who was killed shortly after a suicide attack that killed Braun. Several hours after the bombing, an Afghan teenager and the young boy on a motorcycle ran through a cordon that had been set up around the perimeter of the attack site. Soldiers were fearful of another suicide attack and fired on the motorcycle after several warnings to stop, NATO said in a statement. The shooting will be investigated by the military's National Investigation Service.