"A speech given by David Horowitz at the University of Wisconsin during Islamo-fascism Awareness Week. Go to the official website for more information.""The poster above is the official poster advertising the event. The horror that it shows is explained in the full speech and the excerpts below.
[...]
The speaker makes it clear throughout his speech that ‘Islamo-fascism’ is distinct and different from Islam, and is simply a term for absolute-power dictators who use Islam as their excuse/cover/justification for ruling over people’s lives with an iron fist.
These Islamofascists want to dictate what each of us can or cannot do according to their personal, narrow definition of Islam. Whether we are Muslim or not, does not matter - they will impose their way of life on us.
[...]
Horowitz’s full speech details lots of ties between those most infamous of fascists, Hitler and the Nazis, and the roots of modern Islamo-fascism. He also points out the defining trait of anti-Semitism that runs through both types of fascists.
Horowitz also has plenty of scorn for liberals, who in his opinion are hastening along the advent of Islamo-fascist rule over everyone. And when that happens, liberalism will cease to exist (and liberals will cease to live).
It’s absurdly ironic that liberals are so supportive of Islamo-fascists - depsite the fact that Islamo-fascists are brutally against the very things liberals hold dearest, such as homosexual rights, sexual freedom, feminism, freedom of religion, atheism, free speech and free dress!"
———————
[...]
Full speech at Front Page Magazine.:
Excerpt of David Horowitz's Speech:
This evening is not about prejudice against Muslims. On the contrary, this evening is on behalf of all those Muslims who are oppressed by Islamo-Fascism.
[...]
If you want to understand what this week is about, here is the poster we designed to announce our events (above). What it shows is a soccer field in Afghanistan. The figure with the AK-47 is a Taliban soldier. And this poor woman, who is about to have her head blown off at point blank range by an AK-47 has been accused of sexual improprieties, which violate Islamic law.
As you may or may not know, in countries where Sharia, which is Islamic law, is imposed by the state, women cannot be witnesses. So this poor woman had no defense. Nor could other women testify in her behalf. Islamic law forbids it. Every person in this photo is a Muslim. The victim is a Muslim.
[...]
. . .think of the Muslim community in Algeria where between 150,000 and 200,000 moderate Muslims were slaughtered in the 1990s, by an organization calling itself Al Qaeda of the Islamic Maghreb.
Think about the Muslims in the Sudan who are being slaughtered by a Taliban-like regime, simply because they don’t subscribe to the regime’s version of Islam.
In Iran, just last week, the modesty police issued a new edict that couples can’t hold hands in public. If you want the definition of a totalitarian state, it’s a state that controls every aspect of a person’s life.
Religions, and particularly Islam, are concerned with many aspects of a person’s life. Religion is about morality, about the family, and about social relations. So when interpretations of religious law are enforce by the political state that’s the end of all freedom. It means one set of priests is going to have the power state behind their interpretation of what you can and cannot do. The end result of that process is this poor woman in the photo who is about to have her head blown off by an AK-47 for violating a government edict about her sex life.
That’s really what we intended to do with this week, to make people aware of this problem. I have called it “Islamo-Fascism.” That is not a term designed to say that all Muslims or a majority of Muslims are fascists. In fact a majority of Muslims are either victims of Islamo-Fascists or threatened by them.
[...]
But saying that Islamo-Fascism implicates all Muslims make no logical sense. We use the term “Italian Fascism” without assuming that all Italians are fascists. Hitler did not even win a majority of the vote in Germany, yet we use the phrase “German Fascism” without implying that all people of German descent are fascists.
[...]
Everyone in this room has either used the phrase “white racism” or read it without objection. Do you mean to call every white person a racist when you use that term?
[...]
The hateful attacks on this week are, in fact quite stupid, when you think about what they are claiming. If I intended to come on a college platform and say hateful things about all Muslims, I would be hooted off the stage. No campus organization would invite me to say such things and if I did say them I would never be invited by any campus organization again. Since no one on a college campus is prepared to hear hate speech, why bother to protest it in advance. It’s self-discrediting. Yet we live in such Orwellian times that no one laughs when the left makes these preposterous claims.
So, on the one hand, the hate campaign against us is a very stupid campaign, although it is also malicious. On the other, it is quite sinister. When you are called a racist from one end of the country to another, when you are identified as somebody who is preaching hate against a religious or ethnic or racial group, someone is going to believe those charges. The effect, in other words, is to put a target on your back. Which is why there is so much security present tonight.
The term Islamo-Fascism is, in my view, a useful and justifiable term because of the merger of religion and state in the totalitarian ideology we’re facing. It is also historically based. What we are facing is a global religious movement that is a movement within Islam. It is not to be confused with Islam itself. The Islamo-Fascists want you to confuse them with the Muslim community as a whole. They want to hide behind the Muslim community. And they are inflicting great damage on the Muslim community by doing so. When Ahmadinejad speaks or when Zawahiri speaks, they speak in the name of the Muslim ummah, but they do not actually speak for the Muslim ummah. And that distinction has to be made. What we are facing is a radical force within Islam that originated in Egypt in the 1920s, with the Muslim Brotherhood. Hassan al-Banna was the founder of this movement, which is a movement of political Islam to seize control of states and impose Sharia, Islamic law, on their populations.
The Muslim Brotherhood attempted to assassinate Nasser. It assassinated Anwar Sadat, and it would probably like to assassinate the present ruler of Egypt, Mubarak – all of them Muslims.
It is claimed by many that the only reason for the attacks on the United States are its policies towards Israel or because of the war in Iraq, or because of George Bush. Bush created the war on terror has become a mantra in some powerful circles of the Democratic Party around George Soros. But there is no basis in fact for these claims. The first leader of the modern Islamo-Fascist movement and the leader of the first Islamo-Fascist state was the Ayatollah Khomeini. It was Khomeni who declared America the Great Satan, and who led crowds a million strong in chants of, “Death to America,” in 1979. And it was Jimmy Carter – not George Bush — who was president when he did that. But Jimmy Carter was a supporter of the Ayatollah and an enemy of the Shah whom he overthrew. Carter accused the Shah of human rights violations and undermined his rule. Carter persuaded the Shah to release Khomeini’s cohorts from prison, and allow Khomeni to return to Iran. Jimmy Carter made possible the Islamic Revolution.
When people say that the United States and its policies are responsible for 9/11, they’re forgetting this history, Jimmy Carter’s support for the very Islamo-fascists who are now attacking us.
In the past twenty-five years, far from being an imperialist oppressor of Muslims, as the Islamo-fascists and the American left would have you believe, the United States saved the lives of millions of Muslims.
When Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan in 1979, its armies conducted a scorched-earth policy, which means they killed everything in their way. They killed a million Muslims in Afghanistan, until the United States, by providing them with stinger missiles, by providing them with weapons, helped the Mujaheddin to defeat the Soviet Empire. The United States went to war in Kosovo for Albanian Muslims, and saved them from extermination. The United States sent the Army Rangers into Somalia to feed starving Muslims in Somalia, and was attacked there by an Al Qaeda warlord. Al Qaeda and the Islamo-fascist movement have killed more Muslims than all the members of Bush’s “coalition of the willing” and all of Israel’s soldiers put together.
So it is completely absurd to hold Americans responsible for the hatred that is directed against us. It’s completely ridiculous. It is the opposite of the truth.
The hatred against America is hatred of the fact that America is free and supports Muslims who don’t want to submit to the Islamo-fascists’ will.
The Middle East conflict is also misunderstood. The idea is floated about by Jimmy Carter and the Arab haters of Israel that Palestinian Arabs were deprived of their lands, that their lands were stolen, and Palestine is occupied by Israel.
The historical fact is that not only was the land on which Israel was created not part of any Palestinian entity, it wasn’t even controlled by the Arabs themselves. The Middle East adjacent to the Jordan River and extending past the Euphrates was for 400 years controlled by the Ottoman Turks. The Turks, not the Arabs. The Ottoman Empire, which was founded in the 16th Century, came to an end when the Turks picked the wrong side in the First World War — the German side. When you lose a war, the victor gets the spoils. So the imperial powers of Britain and France got to divide up the Ottoman Empire. Britain had promised the Jews the “Palestine Mandate” which they controlled. It was named “Palestine” by the Romans who drove the Jews out and gave the region the name of the enemies of the Jews, the Philistines, who were Greek sailors from the Aegean and not Arab at all. The Arab nomads did not settle in the region of Palestine until centuries later. The British promised this region of the Ottoman empire to the Jews for a national homeland. Jews had lived there for 3,000 years.
The Palestine Mandate was promised to the Jews, but in 1922, Winston Churchill gave 80% of the Mandate to Arabs from the Palestine region. That state is called Jordan. Nearly 70% of the state of Jordan is made up of Palestinians, but they ruled by the Hashemite tribe. You never hear anybody from the Palestinian cause or from the American left, anybody from the ranks of those attacking this event and attacking the state Israel, and attacking the United States calling in the Left – you never hear anyone of them complaining about the oppression of Palestinians in Jordan. Or calling for their liberation. That is because all these attacks on Israel and the United States are motivated by hatred for Israel and the United States, not concern for the Palestinians.
To return to this history, 80% of the Palestine Mandate was given by the Imperial Powers to the Arabs of the Palestine region. The remaining 20% was divided evenly between the Jews living in the Palestine Mandate, and the Arabs living in the Palestine Mandate. The Jewish portion, just 10% of the entire Palestine Mandate and less than 1% of the Arab Midle East, was three little unconnected slivers, the largest of which — 60% of the total – was an arid desert. That was what the UN by an overwhelming majority vote in 1948.
In addition to Israel’s creation by the UN, the Imperial Powers created Jordan Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon. All of these states were artificially created by the Imperial Powers out of the Turkish Empire. So the attacks on Israel for stealing Palestinian land are one big lie whose sole purpose is justify the Islamo-fascist campaign to destroy the Jewish nation.
In 1948, instead of accepting the partition of a tiny portion of the land they had been given, the Arab states – Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Egypty, Iraq, Syria and Jordan attacked Israel in a war which they proclaimed would “push the Jews into the sea.” It was a war of aggression - and they lost. The Arabs have continued that war for the last sixty years.
There were refugees from this war. There were 600,000 Arab refugees. And there were 600,000 Jewish refugees. The Jews fled Iraq, Iran, Morocco and other Arab lands in which they had lived for hundreds of years. In Iraq, the largest ethnic community in Baghdad, for hundreds of years, was the Jews, until the 1930s, when Iraq became a fascist country and massacred the Jews living there and drove the survivors out.
There are over 5 million Palestinian Arabs living in refugee camps today; there are no Jews living in refugee camps. Why is that? Because the state of Israel, re-settled the Jewish refugees, gave them homes, gave them citizenship, and gave them jobs. But the Arab states deliberately kept the Palestinians in refugee camps, refused to allow them to become citizens of Jordan or Saudi Arabia or other Arab countries.
Billions of dollars have been poured into the Arab refugee problem by the United States and Israel and the UN. But all that money has done has been to maintain the refugee problem. There’s a reason for that. It is because the Arab states and the Palestinian leadership want poverty stricken Arabs as cannon fodder for their hateful war against the Jews. That’s what the Middle East conflict is about.
There are one million Arabs who live peacefully in Israel. These Arabs have more rights living in Israel than the Arabs in any Arab state. They vote. They are elected to Israel’s parliament. They have the rights of the only democratic state in the entire Arab world.
Khomeni’s goal was to establish an Islamic state under 7th century Islamic law. Khomeni killed twenty-five times as many Iranians –Muslims — in the first three years of his revolutionary rule than the despised Shah had killed in the 34 years of his. The reason Khomeini hated the Shah is because the Shah allowed women to be educated in Iran for the first time in their history, and allowed them, if they so chose, to remove the veil. The Shah was a dictator, but he was a progressive dictator. And that’s why Khomeini and Islamic fundamentalists hated him, and overthrew him.
This is a warning to you progressives in the audience. This is my gift to you if you will take it. The Islamo-fascists whom you support will devour you in the end.
Before I finish, I want to say something about the Iraq War. Watching the left mobilize to oppose the war, I was reminded of the Iranian Revolution of 1979. The constant complaint of the left at the time was that the United States supported dictators like the Shah because they were anti-communists. If they followed our foreign policy, we didn’t care what they did to people within their borders. That was the Left’s complaint and you heard it over and over and over again — the United States supports dictators.
So it was quite illuminating to me when George Bush set out to overthrow one of those dictators, one of the true monsters of the 20th Century, a man who had murdered 300,000 people. Who do you think he murdered? He murdered Muslims. He murdered mainly Shi’a Muslims. He dropped poison gas on the Kurds. He put Muslims into plastic shredders. His two sons went on a rape rampage, raping and killing Muslim girls. And then Bush came along and overthrew him. And the left hates Bush for that! I watched all of my former comrades go out in the streets to try to save Saddam Hussein, this fascist dictator and mass murderer, from being overthrown.
Now, what is that about? It is about the left’s hatred for America which is greater than its hatred for oppressors like Saddam Hussein. The reason the Left is in a de facto alliance with the Islamo-Fascists is because the ybelieve what the Islamo-fascists believe — that the United States is the Great Satan; and Israel, of course, is the Little Satan. It is their progressive duty to make the United States lose the War on Terror, so the Khomenis of the Middle East can liberate the Muslim world.
The Left has been on the wrong side of battle for freedom for almost 100 years. I think the War in Iraq has been mismanaged, and so has the war at home. The President has failed to explain the war to the American people. But these mistakes don’t negate the fact that the overthrow of Saddam Hussein was a good deed.
Moreover, the United States cannot afford to lose this war. If we lose the War in Iraq, if we do what Nancy Pelosi or Cindy Sheehan want us to do, which is just to get out, what will happen in Iraq is exactly what happened in Vietnam when we did the same thing. After we left Vietnam to the mercy of the communists, 2.5 million people were slaughtered.
Not only will Moqtadar al-Sadr and the Republican National Guard slaughter every Muslim — every Muslim in Iraq who wanted their freedom, who went to vote, who supported the coalition led by America — but Iraq will wind up in the hands of Ahmadinejad and Iran, and they will go after the other Arab regimes in the region whose Islamic ways are not pure enough.
—————————–
"For some posts related to the points raised in Horowitz’s speech (and need I reiterate, ‘Islamo-fascism’ is distinct and different from Islam, and is simply a term for absolute-power dictators who use Islam as their excuse/cover/justification for ruling over people’s lives with an iron fist):
More Than 23,000 Terrorists Killed (how the Iraq situation is actually preventing Iraqi Muslims and other people worldwide from more terror attacks. For how this is being accomplished, see 72-year-old Iraqi Spots, Stops and Shoots Suicide Bomber, 72-year-old Iraqi Spots, Stops and Shoots Suicide Bomber and Bomblets Frag Terrorists, Spare Dog.
For the motive, see Iraqi Insurgents Used Kids As Cover Then Killed Them (what the Islamo-fascists believe constitute fair, humane and heroic tactics.
Photos of Brutally Murdered Victims of the Southern Thailand Pattani Insurgency (how Islamo-fascists go about ‘winning hearts and minds’ among the innocent local populace - including Muslims)
Iran Prez Ahmadinejad Sez: “There Are No Homosexuals in Iran” (And Why There Ain’t Any) (Iran gives us a taste of how liberals will immediately be treated if the Islamo-fascists they love-so-much ever come to power)
Nahoul the Terror Bee Teaches Animal, Uh… Kindness, Continue to Learn Holy War With Nahoul the Bee and Hi Kids! Let’s Learn Holy War With Farfur the Mouse! (what the Islamo-fascists find more important to teach young children than maths and science)
Narrow Sighted and Single Minded Criminalizing of War (our very own Dr. Mahathir only denounces Israel and not other flagrant human rigths violations)
What Did the Vietnam War Ever Accomplish? (some info about what happened when the Americans stopped selflessly sacrificing themselves for us ungrateful South-East Asians)
And posts about the liberal lies and propaganda which serve to undermine truth in the name of advancing (among other things) Islamo-fascism:
Malaysiakini: Are US News Agencies Biased Against Palestine?
Mainstream Media Dishonesty - 101 Liberal Media Lies
Media Mythbusters Wiki
All Your Fakes Are Belong to Us
Flat Fatima will Make Your News Stories Become The Truth!
Al Gore: High Commander of War & Peace Hypocrisy
Will the Real Hillary Clinton Please Stand Up?
Pro General Petraeus, Anti Betray Us Editorial Cartoons "
Thursday, November 01, 2007
David Horowitz's Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week Speech
What follows is essential information compliments of Scott's Blog . In short, Scott's Blog captured excerpts of David Horowitz's recent speech at The University of Wisconsin along with many related links. I've further condensed the excerpts, leaving still a long article however a MUST READ for one and all. Scott's emphasis' appear in quotation. Excerpt of David Horowitz’s speech appears unquoted. All necessary links provided:
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
Crazy CAT
On February 21, 1989, Yusuf Islam addressed students at Kingston University in London about his journey to Islam and was asked about the controversy in the Muslim world and the fatwa calling for Salman Rushdie’s execution. He replied, “He must be killed. The Qur’an makes it clear - if someone defames the prophet, then he must die.” Newspapers quickly denounced what was seen as Yusuf Islam’s support for the assassination of Rushdie and the next day Yusuf released a statement saying that he was not personally encouraging anybody to be a vigilante, and that he was only stating that blasphemy is a capital offense according to the Qur’an. However, on March 8, 1989, while speaking in London’s Regents Park Mosque, Yusuf Islam was asked by a Christian Science Monitor reporter how he would cope with the idea of killing a writer for writing a book. He is reported to have replied, “In Islam there is a line between, lets say freedom and the line which is then transgressed into immorality and irresponsibility and I think as far as this writer is concerned, unfortunately, he has been irresponsible with his freedom of speech. Salman Rushdie or indeed any writer who abuses the prophet, or indeed any prophet, under Islamic law, the sentence for that is actually death. It’s got to be seen as a deterrent, so that other people should not commit the same mistake again.” Two months later Yusuf Islam appeared on a British television court-room style program, Hypotheticals. In the episode, A SATANIC SCENARIO, Stevens/Islam is videoed having this exchange with the moderator and Queen Counsel Geoffrey Robertson . . .
The Video THAT CRAZY CAT just doesn't want you to see with your own eyes.
Cat Stevens is dead, Islam killed him off looong ago. You can pick up pamphlets in Mosques all across the U.S. promoting "Yusef Islam's" story of why he converted to Islam in his own words. It's the typical Islamic Cult ploy. Yusef Islam, formerly known as CAT STEVENS isn't on the SUSPECT list for nothing. The man is an Islamic tool for conversion and has been a willing propagandist, Jihad funder and will therefore remain one shady CAT.
Thursday, October 25, 2007
Hijab Wearing Bank Robber In N.C.
HIDDENITE, N.C. -- Police are investigating an unusual robbery in Hiddenite.
Someone dressed in a burgundy burka walked into the People’s Bank at 3:45 p.m. Tuesday (October 16, 2007), showed the teller a handgun and demanded money.
The robber then took off down N.C. 90 in a burgundy sport utility vehicle.
Authorities are looking into whether this bank robbery can be connected to one in Morganton.
An androgynously dressed person held up a bank there last week.
Officers aren’t sure whether they’re looking for a man or a woman in either case.
Police also think there is a good chance the burka burglar is working with at least one other person, a getaway driver.
Hat Tip: Mosque Watch
Sunday, September 30, 2007
U.S., Iraqi forces kill 60 insurgents
More stories like these please...
By STEVEN R. HURST, Associated Press Writer
BAGHDAD - U.S. and Iraqi forces killed more than 60 insurgent and militia fighters in intense battles over the weekend, with most of the casualties believed to have been al-Qaida fighters, officials said Sunday.
The U.S. Embassy, meanwhile, joined a broad swath of Iraqi politicians — both Shiite and Sunni — in criticizing a nonbinding U.S. Senate resolution seen here as a recipe for splitting the country along sectarian and ethnic lines.
U.S. aircraft killed more than 20 al-Qaida in Iraq fighters who opened fire on an American air patrol northwest of Baghdad, the U.S. command said.
The firefight between U.S. aircraft and the insurgent fighters occurred Saturday about 17 miles northwest of the capital, the military said.
The aircraft observed about 25 al-Qaida insurgents carrying AK-47 assault rifles — one brandishing a rocket-propelled grenade — walking into a palm grove, the military said.
"Shortly after spotting the men, the aircraft were fired upon by the insurgent fighters," it said.
The military did not say what kind of aircraft were involved but the fact that the fighters opened fire suggests they were low-flying Apache helicopters. The command said more than 20 of the group were killed and four vehicles were destroyed. No Iraqi civilians or U.S. soldiers were hurt.
"Coalition forces have dealt significant blows to Al-Qaida Iraq in recent months, including the recent killing of the Tunisian head of the foreign fighter network in Iraq and the blows struck in the past 24 hours," military spokesman Col. Steven Boylan told The Associated Press.
Iraq's Defense Ministry said in an e-mail Sunday afternoon that Iraqi soldiers had killed 44 "terrorists" over the past 24 hours. The operations were centered in Salahuddin and Diyala provinces and around the city of Kirkuk, where the ministry said its soldiers had killed 40 and arrested eight. It said 52 fighters were arrested altogether.
The ministry did not further identify those killed, but use of the word "terrorists" normally indicates al-Qaida.
In a separate operation, U.S. forces killed two insurgents and detained 21 others during weekend operations "to disrupt al-Qaida in Iraq networks in the Tigris River Valley."
Intelligence led to a raid early Sunday that netted what the U.S. military called 15 rogue members of the Mahdi Army militia at an undisclosed Baghdad location.
The mainstream of the militia, the armed wing of anti-American cleric Muqtada al-Sadr's organization, has been ordered by the religious leader to stop attacks on U.S. and Iraqi forces.
But many one-time members of the group have split off and are acting independently of al-Sadr's control. Some have gone to Iran for training and are receiving weapons and financing from the Islamic regime in Tehran.
The Senate resolution, adopted last week, proposed reshaping Iraq according to three sectarian or ethnic territories. It calls for a limited central government with the bulk of power going to the country's Shiite, Sunni or Kurdish regions, envisioning a power-sharing agreement similar to the one that ended the 1990s war in Bosnia. Delaware Sen. Joseph Biden, a Democrat presidential candidate, was a prime sponsor.
In a highly unusual statement, the U.S. Embassy said resolution would seriously hamper Iraq's future stability.
"Our goal in Iraq remains the same: a united, democratic, federal Iraq that can govern, defend, and sustain itself," the unsigned statement said.
"Iraq's leaders must and will take the lead in determining how to achieve these national aspirations. ... attempts to partition or divide Iraq by intimidation, force or other means into three separate states would produce extraordinary suffering and bloodshed," it said.
The statement came just hours after representatives of Iraq's major political parties denounced the Senate proposal.
The Kurds in three northern Iraqi provinces are running a virtually independent country within Iraq while nominally maintaining relations with Baghdad. They support a formal division, but both Sunni and Shiite Muslims have denounced the proposal.
At a news conference earlier in the day, at least nine Iraqi political parties and party blocs — both Shiite and Sunni — said the Senate resolution would diminish Iraq's sovereignty and said they would try to pass a law to ban any division of the country.
"This proposal was based on the incorrect reading and unrealistic estimations of Iraq's past, present and future," according to a statement read at a news conference by Izzat al-Shahbandar, a representative of the secular Iraqi National List.
On Friday, Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki told The Associated Press that "dividing Iraq is a problem, and a decision like that would be a catastrophe."
Iraq's constitution lays down a federal system, allowing Shiites in the south, Kurds in the north and Sunnis in the center and west of the country to set up regions with considerable autonomous powers.
Nevertheless, ethnic and sectarian turmoil have snarled hopes of negotiating such measures, especially given deep divisions on sharing the country's vast oil resources. Oil reserves and existing fields would fall mainly into the hands of Kurds and Shiites if such a division were to occur.
Also Sunday, a judge delayed court proceedings for a second U.S. Army sniper accused in the deaths of two unarmed Iraqi civilians a day after a military panel sentenced a 22-year-old specialist to five months in prison for his role in the killings.
Jorge G. Sandoval was convicted Thursday of planting evidence on one of the unidentified Iraqis killed last spring. He was acquitted of two murder charges.
Sandoval had faced five charges in the deaths of the two unidentified Iraqi men. In dramatic testimony during the four-day court-martial, his colleague, Sgt. Evan Vela, testified he had pulled the trigger and killed one of the men Sandoval was accused of murdering.
Vela, 23, said the sniper team was following orders when it shot the men during two separate incidents near Iskandariyah, a Sunni-dominated area south of Baghdad, on April 27 and May 11.
On Sunday, a military judge postponed a pretrial hearing for Vela for at least a month. Vela's civilian defense lawyer had asked that the hearing be closed to the media because of classified information expected to be discussed.
The U.S. military also announced the death of an American soldier killed Saturday in a roadside bombing and gunfire attack in eastern Baghdad.
_Ramadan Mubarek Jihadi Scum__
AP correspondents Qassim Abdul-Zahra, Katarina Kratovac and Kim Curtis contributed to this report.
By STEVEN R. HURST, Associated Press Writer
BAGHDAD - U.S. and Iraqi forces killed more than 60 insurgent and militia fighters in intense battles over the weekend, with most of the casualties believed to have been al-Qaida fighters, officials said Sunday.
The U.S. Embassy, meanwhile, joined a broad swath of Iraqi politicians — both Shiite and Sunni — in criticizing a nonbinding U.S. Senate resolution seen here as a recipe for splitting the country along sectarian and ethnic lines.
U.S. aircraft killed more than 20 al-Qaida in Iraq fighters who opened fire on an American air patrol northwest of Baghdad, the U.S. command said.
The firefight between U.S. aircraft and the insurgent fighters occurred Saturday about 17 miles northwest of the capital, the military said.
The aircraft observed about 25 al-Qaida insurgents carrying AK-47 assault rifles — one brandishing a rocket-propelled grenade — walking into a palm grove, the military said.
"Shortly after spotting the men, the aircraft were fired upon by the insurgent fighters," it said.
The military did not say what kind of aircraft were involved but the fact that the fighters opened fire suggests they were low-flying Apache helicopters. The command said more than 20 of the group were killed and four vehicles were destroyed. No Iraqi civilians or U.S. soldiers were hurt.
"Coalition forces have dealt significant blows to Al-Qaida Iraq in recent months, including the recent killing of the Tunisian head of the foreign fighter network in Iraq and the blows struck in the past 24 hours," military spokesman Col. Steven Boylan told The Associated Press.
Iraq's Defense Ministry said in an e-mail Sunday afternoon that Iraqi soldiers had killed 44 "terrorists" over the past 24 hours. The operations were centered in Salahuddin and Diyala provinces and around the city of Kirkuk, where the ministry said its soldiers had killed 40 and arrested eight. It said 52 fighters were arrested altogether.
The ministry did not further identify those killed, but use of the word "terrorists" normally indicates al-Qaida.
In a separate operation, U.S. forces killed two insurgents and detained 21 others during weekend operations "to disrupt al-Qaida in Iraq networks in the Tigris River Valley."
Intelligence led to a raid early Sunday that netted what the U.S. military called 15 rogue members of the Mahdi Army militia at an undisclosed Baghdad location.
The mainstream of the militia, the armed wing of anti-American cleric Muqtada al-Sadr's organization, has been ordered by the religious leader to stop attacks on U.S. and Iraqi forces.
But many one-time members of the group have split off and are acting independently of al-Sadr's control. Some have gone to Iran for training and are receiving weapons and financing from the Islamic regime in Tehran.
The Senate resolution, adopted last week, proposed reshaping Iraq according to three sectarian or ethnic territories. It calls for a limited central government with the bulk of power going to the country's Shiite, Sunni or Kurdish regions, envisioning a power-sharing agreement similar to the one that ended the 1990s war in Bosnia. Delaware Sen. Joseph Biden, a Democrat presidential candidate, was a prime sponsor.
In a highly unusual statement, the U.S. Embassy said resolution would seriously hamper Iraq's future stability.
"Our goal in Iraq remains the same: a united, democratic, federal Iraq that can govern, defend, and sustain itself," the unsigned statement said.
"Iraq's leaders must and will take the lead in determining how to achieve these national aspirations. ... attempts to partition or divide Iraq by intimidation, force or other means into three separate states would produce extraordinary suffering and bloodshed," it said.
The statement came just hours after representatives of Iraq's major political parties denounced the Senate proposal.
The Kurds in three northern Iraqi provinces are running a virtually independent country within Iraq while nominally maintaining relations with Baghdad. They support a formal division, but both Sunni and Shiite Muslims have denounced the proposal.
At a news conference earlier in the day, at least nine Iraqi political parties and party blocs — both Shiite and Sunni — said the Senate resolution would diminish Iraq's sovereignty and said they would try to pass a law to ban any division of the country.
"This proposal was based on the incorrect reading and unrealistic estimations of Iraq's past, present and future," according to a statement read at a news conference by Izzat al-Shahbandar, a representative of the secular Iraqi National List.
On Friday, Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki told The Associated Press that "dividing Iraq is a problem, and a decision like that would be a catastrophe."
Iraq's constitution lays down a federal system, allowing Shiites in the south, Kurds in the north and Sunnis in the center and west of the country to set up regions with considerable autonomous powers.
Nevertheless, ethnic and sectarian turmoil have snarled hopes of negotiating such measures, especially given deep divisions on sharing the country's vast oil resources. Oil reserves and existing fields would fall mainly into the hands of Kurds and Shiites if such a division were to occur.
Also Sunday, a judge delayed court proceedings for a second U.S. Army sniper accused in the deaths of two unarmed Iraqi civilians a day after a military panel sentenced a 22-year-old specialist to five months in prison for his role in the killings.
Jorge G. Sandoval was convicted Thursday of planting evidence on one of the unidentified Iraqis killed last spring. He was acquitted of two murder charges.
Sandoval had faced five charges in the deaths of the two unidentified Iraqi men. In dramatic testimony during the four-day court-martial, his colleague, Sgt. Evan Vela, testified he had pulled the trigger and killed one of the men Sandoval was accused of murdering.
Vela, 23, said the sniper team was following orders when it shot the men during two separate incidents near Iskandariyah, a Sunni-dominated area south of Baghdad, on April 27 and May 11.
On Sunday, a military judge postponed a pretrial hearing for Vela for at least a month. Vela's civilian defense lawyer had asked that the hearing be closed to the media because of classified information expected to be discussed.
The U.S. military also announced the death of an American soldier killed Saturday in a roadside bombing and gunfire attack in eastern Baghdad.
_Ramadan Mubarek Jihadi Scum__
AP correspondents Qassim Abdul-Zahra, Katarina Kratovac and Kim Curtis contributed to this report.
Friday, September 28, 2007
Full text of the top secret transcript :
So much for the anti-Bush whacko's allegations about him...And Yes, This pretty much proves the WMDs existed...Read it all.
Full text of the top secret transcript of the conversation between US President George W. Bush and Spain’s Prime Minister José Maria Aznar at Crawford, Texas, on February 22, 2003, as printed in the Madrid daily newspaper El PaÃs on September 26, 2007 (translation: José Guardia)
President Bush: We are in favor of pursuing a second resolution by the Security Council, and we would like to have it quickly. We would like to announce it on Monday or Tuesday [March 24 or 25, 2003].
PM Aznar: Better on Tuesday, after the meeting of the European Union’s General Affairs Council. It’s important to keep the momentum of the EU Summit resolution [in Brussels on Monday, February 17, 2003]. We would prefer to wait until Tuesday.
Bush: It could be on Monday afternoon, considering the time difference. Next week, in any case. We envision a resolution that doesn’t contain mandatory elements, that doesn’t mention the use of force, and that states that Saddam Hussein has been unable to comply with his obligations. Such a resolution could be voted for by many. It would be similar to the one for Kosovo [on June 10, 1999].
Aznar: Would it be submitted to the Security Council before, and independently of, a parallel declaration?
Condoleezza Rice: Actually, there wouldn’t be a parallel declaration. We are thinking about a resolution that is as simple as possible, without many details about compliance that could be used by Saddam Hussein as steps not to comply. We are talking with Blix [chief of UN inspection] and others in his team about items that could be in the resolution.
Bush: Saddam won’t change and will keep playing games. The moment of getting rid of him has arrived. That’s it. As for me, from now on, I’ll try to use the most subtle rhetoric I can, while we look for the resolution to be approved. If some country vetoes [the resolution] we’ll go in. Saddam is not disarming. We must catch him right now. We have shown an incredible amount of patience until now. We have two weeks. In two weeks, our military will be ready. I think we’ll achieve a second resolution. In the Security Council, we have three African countries [Cameroon, Angola, Guinea], the Chileans, the Mexicans. I’ll talk with all of them, also with Putin, naturally. We’ll be in Baghdad at the end of March. There’s a 15% chance that Saddam will be dead by then or will have flown. But these possibilities won’t be there until we have shown our resolution. The Egyptians are talking with Saddam Hussein. It seems he has hinted he’d be willing to leave if he’s allowed to take 1 billion dollars and all the information on WMDs. Ghadaffi told Berlusconi that Saddam wants to leave. Mubarak tells us that in these circumstances there is a big chance that he’ll get killed.
We would like to act with the mandate of the UN. If we act militarily, we’ll do it with great precision and focus on our targets to as high a degree as possible. We’ll decimate the loyal troops, and the regular army will quickly know what it’s all about. We sent a very clear message to Saddam Hussein’s generals: we will treat them as war criminals. We know they have stocked big amounts of dynamite to blow up the bridges and other infrastructure, and the oil wells. We are planning to take control of those wells very soon. Also, the Saudis will help us by putting as much oil as necessary on the market. We are developing a very strong aid package. We can win without destruction. We are already working on the post-Saddam Iraq, and I think there’s a basis for a better future. Iraq has a good bureaucracy and a relatively strong civil society. It could be organized as a federation. Meanwhile we’re doing all we can to fulfill the political needs of our friends and allies.
Aznar: It’s very important to have that second resolution. It will be very different to act with or without it. It will be very advisable to have a sufficient majority in the Security Council backing that resolution. In fact, having that majority is more important than whether some country vetoes. We think that the resolution should, among other things, clearly state that Saddam Hussein has squandered his opportunity.
Bush: Yes, of course. That would be better to mention than “the necessary means.”
Aznar: Saddam Hussein hasn’t cooperated, hasn’t disarmed - we should summarize all his non-compliance and make a more elaborate message. That, for example, would allow Mexico to change [its opposition].
Bush: The resolution will be made in a way that can help you. I don’t care much about the actual content.
Aznar: We’ll send you some text.
Bush: We don’t have any text. We only have one goal: that Saddam must disarm. We can’t allow Saddam to drag his heels until the summer. After all, he has had four months in this last stage, and that’s more than enough time to disarm.
Aznar: Such text would help us to be in a position to introduce the resolution [at the Security Council], to be its co-authors, and to convince many people to sign it.
Bush: Perfect.
Aznar: I’m meeting Chirac next Wednesday [February 16]. The resolution will be circulating by now.
Bush: I think this is a great idea. Chirac knows the situation perfectly. His intelligence services have explained it all to him. The Arabs are sending Chirac a very clear message: Saddam Hussein must go. The problem is that Chirac thinks he is “Mister Arab,” and the truth is that he’s making their lives impossible. But I don’t want any rivalry with Chirac. We certainly have different points of view, but I’d like that to be all. Give him my best regards. True! The less rivalry he feels there is between us, the better it’ll be for us all.
Aznar: How will the resolution and the report by inspectors work with each other?
Rice: Actually there won’t be a report on February 28; the inspectors will submit a written report on March 1, and they won’t appear before the Security Council until March 6 or 7, 2003. We don’t have high hopes about that report. Just like on previous occasions, they’ll cover their bases. My impression is that Blix will be more negative now about the Iraqis’ intention. After they appear at the Security Council, we forecast a vote one week later. Meanwhile, the Iraqis will try to convince that they’re complying. It won’t be true and it won’t be enough, even though they’ll likely announce the destruction of some missiles.
Bush: This is like Chinese water torture. We must put an end to it.
Aznar: I agree, but it would be good to have as many people on board as possible. Be a little patient.
Bush: I’ve run out of patience. I won’t go further than mid-March.
Aznar: I’m not asking you to have infinite patience. I’m just asking you to try as hard as possible to make everything work.
Bush: Countries like Mexico, Chile, Angola and Cameroon must know that it’s US security at play and that they must act according to their friendship to us. [Chilean president Ricardo] Lagos must know that the Free Trade Agreement is pending ratification in the Senate and that a negative attitude on this issue could jeopardize that ratification. Angola is receiving funds from the Millennium Account that could also be compromised. And Putin must know that his position is endangering Russia’s relationship with the United States.
Aznar: Tony [Blair] would like to wait until March 14.
Bush: I prefer March 10. This is like the good cop, bad cop routine. I don’t mind being the bad cop and letting Blair be the good cop.
Aznar: Is it true that there’s a chance that Saddam will go into exile?
Bush: Yes, there is. There’s even a chance that he’ll be assassinated.
Aznar: An exile with some kind of guarantees?
Bush: No guarantees. He’s a thief, a terrorist, a war criminal. Compared to Saddam, Milosevic would be a Mother Teresa. When we go in, we are going to discover many more crimes, and we’ll take him to the International Criminal Court at The Hague. Saddam Hussein believes he has escaped. He thinks that France and Germany have stopped the process of his prosecution. He also thinks that last week’s anti-war demonstrations [Saturday, February 15] protect him. And he believes I’m weakened. But people around him know that things are totally different. They know their future is in exile or in a coffin. This is why it’s so important to keep the pressure up. Ghaddafi is indirectly telling us that this is the only thing that can finish him. Saddam’s only strategy is delay, delay, delay.
Aznar: Actually, the best success would be to win the game without firing a single shot when entering Baghdad.
Bush: To me, it would be the best outcome. I don’t want war. I know what war is like. I know the death and destruction they bring. I am the one who has to comfort the mothers and wives of the dead. Of course, for us [a diplomatic solution] would be the best one. Also, it would save 50 billion dollars.
Aznar: We need you to help us with our public opinion.
Bush: We will do all we can. On Wednesday, I’m going to talk about the situation in the Middle East, proposing a new peace system that you already know about, and about weapons of mass destruction, the benefits of a free society, and I’ll put Iraq’s history in a bigger context. That may help you.
Aznar: What we are doing is a very profound change for Spain and the Spanish citizens. We are changing the last 200 years of the country’s politics.
Bush: I’m guided by a historical sense of responsibility, as you are. When history judges us in a few years, I don’t want people wondering why Bush, Aznar, or Blair didn’t confront their responsibilities. At the end of the day, what people want is to enjoy freedom. A short time ago, in Romania, I was reminded of Ceaucescu’s example: it only took a woman to call him a liar for the whole regime to come crumbling down. It’s the irrepressible power of freedom. I’m convinced I’ll achieve the resolution.
Aznar: That’s better than good.
Bush: I made the decision of going to the Security Council. In spite of some internal disagreements within my administration, I told my people that we needed to work with our friends. It will be great to have a second resolution.
Aznar: The only thing that worries me about you is your optimism.
Bush: I’m optimistic because I believe I’m doing the right thing. I am at peace with myself. We have the responsibility of facing a serious threat to peace. It irks me tremendously to contemplate the insensitivity of Europeans toward the suffering that Saddam inflicts on the Iraqis. Maybe because he’s dark-skinned, distant, and Muslim, many Europeans think that all this doesn’t matter. I will never forget what Solana [European High Representative of the Common Foreign and Security Policy] asked me once: why do Americans think that Europeans are anti-Semitic and unable to confront their responsibilities? That defensive attitude is terrible. I must admit that I have a magnificent relationship with Kofi Annan.
Aznar: He shares your ethical concerns.
Bush: The more Europeans attack me, the stronger I am at home.
Aznar: We should try to bring together your strength with the support of Europeans.
Full text of the top secret transcript of the conversation between US President George W. Bush and Spain’s Prime Minister José Maria Aznar at Crawford, Texas, on February 22, 2003, as printed in the Madrid daily newspaper El PaÃs on September 26, 2007 (translation: José Guardia)
President Bush: We are in favor of pursuing a second resolution by the Security Council, and we would like to have it quickly. We would like to announce it on Monday or Tuesday [March 24 or 25, 2003].
PM Aznar: Better on Tuesday, after the meeting of the European Union’s General Affairs Council. It’s important to keep the momentum of the EU Summit resolution [in Brussels on Monday, February 17, 2003]. We would prefer to wait until Tuesday.
Bush: It could be on Monday afternoon, considering the time difference. Next week, in any case. We envision a resolution that doesn’t contain mandatory elements, that doesn’t mention the use of force, and that states that Saddam Hussein has been unable to comply with his obligations. Such a resolution could be voted for by many. It would be similar to the one for Kosovo [on June 10, 1999].
Aznar: Would it be submitted to the Security Council before, and independently of, a parallel declaration?
Condoleezza Rice: Actually, there wouldn’t be a parallel declaration. We are thinking about a resolution that is as simple as possible, without many details about compliance that could be used by Saddam Hussein as steps not to comply. We are talking with Blix [chief of UN inspection] and others in his team about items that could be in the resolution.
Bush: Saddam won’t change and will keep playing games. The moment of getting rid of him has arrived. That’s it. As for me, from now on, I’ll try to use the most subtle rhetoric I can, while we look for the resolution to be approved. If some country vetoes [the resolution] we’ll go in. Saddam is not disarming. We must catch him right now. We have shown an incredible amount of patience until now. We have two weeks. In two weeks, our military will be ready. I think we’ll achieve a second resolution. In the Security Council, we have three African countries [Cameroon, Angola, Guinea], the Chileans, the Mexicans. I’ll talk with all of them, also with Putin, naturally. We’ll be in Baghdad at the end of March. There’s a 15% chance that Saddam will be dead by then or will have flown. But these possibilities won’t be there until we have shown our resolution. The Egyptians are talking with Saddam Hussein. It seems he has hinted he’d be willing to leave if he’s allowed to take 1 billion dollars and all the information on WMDs. Ghadaffi told Berlusconi that Saddam wants to leave. Mubarak tells us that in these circumstances there is a big chance that he’ll get killed.
We would like to act with the mandate of the UN. If we act militarily, we’ll do it with great precision and focus on our targets to as high a degree as possible. We’ll decimate the loyal troops, and the regular army will quickly know what it’s all about. We sent a very clear message to Saddam Hussein’s generals: we will treat them as war criminals. We know they have stocked big amounts of dynamite to blow up the bridges and other infrastructure, and the oil wells. We are planning to take control of those wells very soon. Also, the Saudis will help us by putting as much oil as necessary on the market. We are developing a very strong aid package. We can win without destruction. We are already working on the post-Saddam Iraq, and I think there’s a basis for a better future. Iraq has a good bureaucracy and a relatively strong civil society. It could be organized as a federation. Meanwhile we’re doing all we can to fulfill the political needs of our friends and allies.
Aznar: It’s very important to have that second resolution. It will be very different to act with or without it. It will be very advisable to have a sufficient majority in the Security Council backing that resolution. In fact, having that majority is more important than whether some country vetoes. We think that the resolution should, among other things, clearly state that Saddam Hussein has squandered his opportunity.
Bush: Yes, of course. That would be better to mention than “the necessary means.”
Aznar: Saddam Hussein hasn’t cooperated, hasn’t disarmed - we should summarize all his non-compliance and make a more elaborate message. That, for example, would allow Mexico to change [its opposition].
Bush: The resolution will be made in a way that can help you. I don’t care much about the actual content.
Aznar: We’ll send you some text.
Bush: We don’t have any text. We only have one goal: that Saddam must disarm. We can’t allow Saddam to drag his heels until the summer. After all, he has had four months in this last stage, and that’s more than enough time to disarm.
Aznar: Such text would help us to be in a position to introduce the resolution [at the Security Council], to be its co-authors, and to convince many people to sign it.
Bush: Perfect.
Aznar: I’m meeting Chirac next Wednesday [February 16]. The resolution will be circulating by now.
Bush: I think this is a great idea. Chirac knows the situation perfectly. His intelligence services have explained it all to him. The Arabs are sending Chirac a very clear message: Saddam Hussein must go. The problem is that Chirac thinks he is “Mister Arab,” and the truth is that he’s making their lives impossible. But I don’t want any rivalry with Chirac. We certainly have different points of view, but I’d like that to be all. Give him my best regards. True! The less rivalry he feels there is between us, the better it’ll be for us all.
Aznar: How will the resolution and the report by inspectors work with each other?
Rice: Actually there won’t be a report on February 28; the inspectors will submit a written report on March 1, and they won’t appear before the Security Council until March 6 or 7, 2003. We don’t have high hopes about that report. Just like on previous occasions, they’ll cover their bases. My impression is that Blix will be more negative now about the Iraqis’ intention. After they appear at the Security Council, we forecast a vote one week later. Meanwhile, the Iraqis will try to convince that they’re complying. It won’t be true and it won’t be enough, even though they’ll likely announce the destruction of some missiles.
Bush: This is like Chinese water torture. We must put an end to it.
Aznar: I agree, but it would be good to have as many people on board as possible. Be a little patient.
Bush: I’ve run out of patience. I won’t go further than mid-March.
Aznar: I’m not asking you to have infinite patience. I’m just asking you to try as hard as possible to make everything work.
Bush: Countries like Mexico, Chile, Angola and Cameroon must know that it’s US security at play and that they must act according to their friendship to us. [Chilean president Ricardo] Lagos must know that the Free Trade Agreement is pending ratification in the Senate and that a negative attitude on this issue could jeopardize that ratification. Angola is receiving funds from the Millennium Account that could also be compromised. And Putin must know that his position is endangering Russia’s relationship with the United States.
Aznar: Tony [Blair] would like to wait until March 14.
Bush: I prefer March 10. This is like the good cop, bad cop routine. I don’t mind being the bad cop and letting Blair be the good cop.
Aznar: Is it true that there’s a chance that Saddam will go into exile?
Bush: Yes, there is. There’s even a chance that he’ll be assassinated.
Aznar: An exile with some kind of guarantees?
Bush: No guarantees. He’s a thief, a terrorist, a war criminal. Compared to Saddam, Milosevic would be a Mother Teresa. When we go in, we are going to discover many more crimes, and we’ll take him to the International Criminal Court at The Hague. Saddam Hussein believes he has escaped. He thinks that France and Germany have stopped the process of his prosecution. He also thinks that last week’s anti-war demonstrations [Saturday, February 15] protect him. And he believes I’m weakened. But people around him know that things are totally different. They know their future is in exile or in a coffin. This is why it’s so important to keep the pressure up. Ghaddafi is indirectly telling us that this is the only thing that can finish him. Saddam’s only strategy is delay, delay, delay.
Aznar: Actually, the best success would be to win the game without firing a single shot when entering Baghdad.
Bush: To me, it would be the best outcome. I don’t want war. I know what war is like. I know the death and destruction they bring. I am the one who has to comfort the mothers and wives of the dead. Of course, for us [a diplomatic solution] would be the best one. Also, it would save 50 billion dollars.
Aznar: We need you to help us with our public opinion.
Bush: We will do all we can. On Wednesday, I’m going to talk about the situation in the Middle East, proposing a new peace system that you already know about, and about weapons of mass destruction, the benefits of a free society, and I’ll put Iraq’s history in a bigger context. That may help you.
Aznar: What we are doing is a very profound change for Spain and the Spanish citizens. We are changing the last 200 years of the country’s politics.
Bush: I’m guided by a historical sense of responsibility, as you are. When history judges us in a few years, I don’t want people wondering why Bush, Aznar, or Blair didn’t confront their responsibilities. At the end of the day, what people want is to enjoy freedom. A short time ago, in Romania, I was reminded of Ceaucescu’s example: it only took a woman to call him a liar for the whole regime to come crumbling down. It’s the irrepressible power of freedom. I’m convinced I’ll achieve the resolution.
Aznar: That’s better than good.
Bush: I made the decision of going to the Security Council. In spite of some internal disagreements within my administration, I told my people that we needed to work with our friends. It will be great to have a second resolution.
Aznar: The only thing that worries me about you is your optimism.
Bush: I’m optimistic because I believe I’m doing the right thing. I am at peace with myself. We have the responsibility of facing a serious threat to peace. It irks me tremendously to contemplate the insensitivity of Europeans toward the suffering that Saddam inflicts on the Iraqis. Maybe because he’s dark-skinned, distant, and Muslim, many Europeans think that all this doesn’t matter. I will never forget what Solana [European High Representative of the Common Foreign and Security Policy] asked me once: why do Americans think that Europeans are anti-Semitic and unable to confront their responsibilities? That defensive attitude is terrible. I must admit that I have a magnificent relationship with Kofi Annan.
Aznar: He shares your ethical concerns.
Bush: The more Europeans attack me, the stronger I am at home.
Aznar: We should try to bring together your strength with the support of Europeans.
Tuesday, September 18, 2007
Wednesday, September 12, 2007
Holy Shiite: Asshats, Moonbats and Eurabia
Use sparingly or for extra credit use sparringly. Your call:
Little Green Footballs Dictionary Here.
The following is a partial list of definitions of familiar terms which I've been known to use across our great wWw. For the full list and links to additional glossaries, go to LGF above.
~Aura
Aura of Arc / On A Clear Day You Can See Forever
Little Green Footballs Dictionary Here.
The following is a partial list of definitions of familiar terms which I've been known to use across our great wWw. For the full list and links to additional glossaries, go to LGF above.
Aloha Snackbar - Absurdist parody of the Islamic prayer "Allah Ackbar" (meaning "God is greater"). Occasionally used mockingly by commenters to poke fun at Islamic fundamentalists who have revealed their incompetence or irrationality.
asshat - An aggressive idiot who insists on expounding foolish opinions (usually of an extreme-leftist nature). Presumably either derived from a combination of "asshole" and "tin foil hat"; or indicating someone who has put his head so far up his own ass that he's wearing it as a hat. First originated in Europe ca. 2000. [First documented use on LGF: 7/18/2002 01:57PM PST] .
demonrats - Insulting term for Democrats, comparing them to both demons and rats. Frequently used by radio host Michael Savage, though it likely did not originate with him. LGFer Malleus Dei claims to have accidentally coined it in a posting he made on Free Republic several years ago. (However, I use my variation more often: Demonicrats. And I might add I started using Demonicrats well before coming across demonrats here or anywhere).
Dhimmi Carter - Insulting nickname for former President Carter, substituting Dhimmi for Jimmy. He earned the nickname by allowing Islamic fundamentalism to gain ascendancy during his watch (in Iran in 1979) and for not seeing through the lies of Arafat during the Arab-Israeli negotiations that led to Carter getting the Nobel Peace Prize.
dhimmi - Ancient Islamic term referring to the second-class citizenship imposed on non-Muslims living in a Muslim state.
dhimmitude - The state of being a dhimmi. Commonly credited as being coined by writer B'at Yeor (no later than 1991, and possibly even earlier).
Eurabia - Sacrastic and pessimistic name for Europe, based on the observation that Muslim immigration and population growth -- coupled with European appeasement of Muslim cultural demands -- will eventually lead the continent to become an Islamic Caliphate. Popularized by writer B'at Yeor in her 2005 book Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis.
FOAD - Fuck Off And Die. Common Internet slang dating back to the early days of the Web in the '90s and BBSs in the '80s.
hat tip - An acknowledgment (by the moderator of a blog or bulletin board) that someone has provided the source or inspiration for a topic of discussion. Its use probably pre-dates the Internet, since tipping hats to acknowledge acquaintances dates back at least to the 19th century.
Hildebeast - Insulting nickname for Hillary Clinton. Coined by talk-show host Neal Boortz during the Clinton administration. (Although I seem to always use Hilabeast. Kooky me.)
Holy Shiite - A sarcastic exclamation of dismay, usually in relation to some event involving Islamic extremists. A combination of "Holy Shit" and "Shiite," a member of the Shia branch of Islam. (Also influenced by "shite," the Cockney spelling and pronounciation of "shit.")
HWSNBN - He Who Shall Not Be Named. A euphemism used for discussing an especially disliked former commenter named Ranbutan without having to actually use his name. After Ranbutan stopped posting on LGF, the phrase He Who Shall Not Be Named was sometimes later used to refer to radio pundit Michael Savage, probably because he frequently complains on air how he is ignored by the media, and because the very mention of his name in most real-world conversations would be enough to start an argument.
Islamofascism/Islamofascist - In general, Islamofascism refers to the notion that Islam is not so much a religion as it is a political ideology that in many ways resembles "fascism" (i.e. the modern common definition of fascism which equates it with totalitarianism, as opposed to the original capital-F Italian-style Fascism). More specifically, Islamofascism is used to describe either the social structure of a society living under strict Islamic shari'a law, or the interpersonal behavior of someone who acts in accordance with true Islam. An Islamofascist can either be an Islamic fundamentalist, or someone who uses violence or bullying tactics to impose Islamic principles on others -- or, more bluntly, a Muslim bigot whose religious beliefs are the source of his bigotry. Radio talkshow host Michael Savage has repeatedly claimed on air that he coined the term "Islamofascist" in his first book, and even offered a reward to anyone who could prove he was wrong. However, the term was first used on LGF at least nine months before Savage's book came out: Robert Crawford 3/2/2002 01:43PM. But in reality "Islamo-fascism" was coined at least a decade earlier; the first known use of the term was on September 8, 1990 by journalist Malise Ruthven in a column about religion for Britain's Independent newspaper, in which Ruthven wrote, ""Nevertheless there is what might be called a 'political problematic' affecting the Muslim world. In contrast to the heirs of some other non-Western traditions, including Hinduism, Shintoism and Buddhism, Islamic societies seem to have found it particularly hard to institutionalise divergences politically: authoritarian government, not to say 'Islamo-fascism', is the rule rather than the exception from Morocco to Pakistan." There may be earlier citations as well.
Islamonazi - A variant of the more common "Islamofascist," but drawing a more direct comparison between Islamic fundamentalism and Nazism in particular, as opposed to the more generalized term "fascism."
joooooos - satirical pronunciation of the word "Jews," in mockery of anti-Semites and conspiracy theorists who blame the Jews for everything. Apparently first used in Usenet groups in the mid-'90s.
Koranimal - Derogatory and somewhat offensive term for Islamic terrorist, or a Muslim who sympathizes with Islamic terrorists. A contraction of "Koran" and "animal." Date of first appearance unknown, though probably predates LGF.
Magic Kingdom - Saudi Arabia; an ironic reference to Disneyland, which in many ways is the exact opposite of Saudi Arabia, where shari'a law ensures that fun is non-existent
moonbat - An unthinking or insane leftist -- in other words, most modern leftists. Moonbat can also be used as an adjective, e.g. a moonbat professor. According to the Wikipedia entry for moonbat, the word was coined in 2002 by the Editor of Samizdata, Perry de Havilland, and was a variation on the name of radical British activist and columnist George Monbiot. Originally, the term "moonbat" was intended to be more politically neutral, and described wackos on the left and the right, but it quickly acquired its current usage of being applied almost exclusively to those on the left. The term also references the moon much in the same way that "lunatic" refers to the insanity-causing powers of the full moon (luna = moon). LGFers occasionally analyze the behavior patterns of various moonbat "species" as if they were actual animals, and even give them satirical Linnaean taxonomical names, such as moonbattus berkeleyensis. According to Charles: "Moonbat was originally coined by Perry at Samizdata, I believe. But LGF probably played a much bigger part in popularizing it." The entry in the Samizdata glossary indicates that Perry originally coined the full phrase "barking moonbat"; apparently "moonbat" is just a subsequent shortened version of "barking moonbat," rather than being a pre-existing term that was lengthened to barking moonbat.
Moonstream Media - Derisive term for the left-leaning media; a conflation of moonbat and mainstream media.
Tin Foil Hat - Referring to a device worn by delusional schizophrenics to protect themselves from mind-control rays; or, more generally, to anyone who believes in an absurd conspiracy theory. Apparently a very old term, possibly dating from the mid-20th century when police would advise crank callers to wear tin-foil hats to defend themselves against psychic attacks.
Zionist hair rays - Magical rays emanating from the hair of attractive Jewish women, with the ability to mesmerize Muslim men and render them sexually enslaved. Based on an Islamic justification of the need for the hijab, which covers women's hair so that it does not inflame the passions of men. Various imams have sermonized about "rays" from women's hair which needed to be avoided, and the notion was exaggerated by female LGFers for satiric purposes.
. . .and my all time favorite, which I NEVER USE but see in use far too often:
RACIST - A statement of surrender during an argument. When two people or disputants are engaged in an acrimonious debate, the side that first says "Racist!" has conceded defeat. Synonymous with saying "Resign" during a chess game, or "Uncle" during a schoolyard fight. Originally, the term was meant to indicate that one side was accusing the other of being racist, but once it was noticed that people only resorted to this tactic when all other arguments had been exhausted, it acquired its new meaning of "indicating one's own concession of defeat."
~Aura
Aura of Arc / On A Clear Day You Can See Forever
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
CAIR is Getting their Come-uppence
This report from the Associated Press further implicates CAIR, and as this trial progresses, we can only hope that one of the outcomes is the marginalization of CAIR, and the suspension of the groups Non-Prophet status.
Enjoy:
Muslim charity trial may shed new light on terror aid
Evidence against Dallas group may link other U.S. organizations to financing for Hamas
By DAVID KOENIG
Associated Press
DALLAS — Prosecutors have produced scores of documents, audio and videotapes, and intercepted phone calls in their attempt to prove that a Muslim charity based in a suburban Dallas office park was actually a fundraising arm of Middle Eastern terrorists.
Much of the evidence has surfaced before in books, newspaper articles and previous trials. But those who track terror-financing say the document haul from the trial of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development has also produced new information.
They say the documents shed light on a web of related organizations of militant Palestinian supporters in the United States, some of whom saw their goal as destroying Western civilization.
The 1991 bylaws of a group called the Palestine Committee say it was created to be the highest authority on "work for the Palestinian cause on the American front." The committee was led by Mousa Abu Marzook, later deported to Jordan and labeled a terrorist by the U.S. government.
The committee oversaw a number of former and current Muslim organizations in the United States.
One was Holy Land, which was shut down in December 2001 and is accused of being a fundraising front for Hamas. Five of its former leaders are on trial in Dallas, charged with sending more than $12 million in illegal aid to Hamas.
Another was the Islamic Association for Palestine, which closed in 2004 after a federal judge found it and then-defunct Holy Land liable in the killing of an American teenager in Israel by Hamas gunmen.
And a third was the Council on American-Islamic Relations, or CAIR, which has emerged as a leading advocacy group for American Muslims.
For the first time, evidence in the case put CAIR's founder, Nihad Awad, at a Philadelphia meeting of alleged Hamas supporters that was secretly watched and recorded by the FBI.
The groups had overlapping rosters of leaders. Documents introduced by prosecutors in the Holy Land trial list several of the charity's leaders as officials in the Islamic Association for Palestine.
Bank records show financial transactions between both organizations and Marzook, which prosecutors contend shows that Hamas invested seed money in the U.S. groups so they could then raise more funds for Hamas from American Muslims.Douglas Farah, author of Blood from Stones, a book on terrorists' financial networks, said the document trail reveals something he and others had surmised but didn't know for sure — that the groups were part of a coordinated strategy for raising money and support in the United States for radical Islamic groups, including Hamas.
"It's clear these groups grew out of an effort to carry out a specific strategy in the United States," Farah said. "It's in their own words, it's a political infiltration that worked for 40 years."
Parvez Ahmed, chairman of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, denied that his group or its current or former leaders had any ties to Hamas.
"That's one of those urban legends about CAIR," he said. "It's fed by the right-wing, pro-Israeli blogosphere."
Ahmed said the Philadelphia gathering attended by CAIR's founder "was an open meeting of Palestinian activists who came together to discuss the Olso peace accords and their struggle to gain a homeland."
Some of the evidence in the case came from wiretaps, including an FBI recording of the Philadelphia meeting at which participants referred to helping Hamas or Samah — Hamas spelled backward. Much of that material had surfaced in earlier trials of other men accused — and acquitted — of aiding terrorists.
Other information came from Israeli military operations, and some came from a 2004 raid at the Virginia home of a former Marzook aide.
Other evidence was literally unearthed — dug up from the backyard of a home where an unindicted co-conspirator of the Holy Land defendants once lived.
One of the documents is a memo about the goals for the U.S. organization of the U.S. faction of the Muslim Brotherhood, whose members included some of the Holy Land leaders now on trial.
The memo's writer, Mohamed Akram, wrote that members of the Brotherhood "must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within."
But will the inflammatory comments of associates matter in the trial of five leaders of Holy Land Foundation? They are accused of aiding terrorists, conspiracy, money laundering and tax charges.
Joshua Dratel, the attorney for one of the Holy Land defendants, said his client didn't help Hamas and didn't want to see Palestinians or Israelis killed. Defense lawyers said Holy Land raised money for schools and hospitals, not terrorists.
The mountain of documents, including records of dozens of financial transactions between Holy Land and Palestinian charities allegedly controlled by Hamas, won't necessarily translate into convictions against the Holy Land defendants, said Dennis Lormel, who worked on terrorist-financing issues at the FBI and is now a consultant.
"It's difficult to follow," said Lormel, who like Farah has blogged about the trial. "If you're the government, you want to simplify as much as you can."
Two other high-profile cases of men charged with helping terrorists ended in acquittals on the major charges. If that happens in Holy Land, the government will have to rethink its strategy of building cases on mountains of documents, Lormel said.
"The government will have to see if you can get informants and undercover agents, but that's a very difficult thing to do," he said. "Penetrating those groups would be a tremendous challenge."
As with any long running conspiracy, the unraveling of CAIR's web of lies will take time, and patience...We have that.
Enjoy:
Muslim charity trial may shed new light on terror aid
Evidence against Dallas group may link other U.S. organizations to financing for Hamas
By DAVID KOENIG
Associated Press
DALLAS — Prosecutors have produced scores of documents, audio and videotapes, and intercepted phone calls in their attempt to prove that a Muslim charity based in a suburban Dallas office park was actually a fundraising arm of Middle Eastern terrorists.
Much of the evidence has surfaced before in books, newspaper articles and previous trials. But those who track terror-financing say the document haul from the trial of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development has also produced new information.
They say the documents shed light on a web of related organizations of militant Palestinian supporters in the United States, some of whom saw their goal as destroying Western civilization.
The 1991 bylaws of a group called the Palestine Committee say it was created to be the highest authority on "work for the Palestinian cause on the American front." The committee was led by Mousa Abu Marzook, later deported to Jordan and labeled a terrorist by the U.S. government.
The committee oversaw a number of former and current Muslim organizations in the United States.
One was Holy Land, which was shut down in December 2001 and is accused of being a fundraising front for Hamas. Five of its former leaders are on trial in Dallas, charged with sending more than $12 million in illegal aid to Hamas.
Another was the Islamic Association for Palestine, which closed in 2004 after a federal judge found it and then-defunct Holy Land liable in the killing of an American teenager in Israel by Hamas gunmen.
And a third was the Council on American-Islamic Relations, or CAIR, which has emerged as a leading advocacy group for American Muslims.
For the first time, evidence in the case put CAIR's founder, Nihad Awad, at a Philadelphia meeting of alleged Hamas supporters that was secretly watched and recorded by the FBI.
The groups had overlapping rosters of leaders. Documents introduced by prosecutors in the Holy Land trial list several of the charity's leaders as officials in the Islamic Association for Palestine.
Bank records show financial transactions between both organizations and Marzook, which prosecutors contend shows that Hamas invested seed money in the U.S. groups so they could then raise more funds for Hamas from American Muslims.Douglas Farah, author of Blood from Stones, a book on terrorists' financial networks, said the document trail reveals something he and others had surmised but didn't know for sure — that the groups were part of a coordinated strategy for raising money and support in the United States for radical Islamic groups, including Hamas.
"It's clear these groups grew out of an effort to carry out a specific strategy in the United States," Farah said. "It's in their own words, it's a political infiltration that worked for 40 years."
Parvez Ahmed, chairman of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, denied that his group or its current or former leaders had any ties to Hamas.
"That's one of those urban legends about CAIR," he said. "It's fed by the right-wing, pro-Israeli blogosphere."
Ahmed said the Philadelphia gathering attended by CAIR's founder "was an open meeting of Palestinian activists who came together to discuss the Olso peace accords and their struggle to gain a homeland."
Some of the evidence in the case came from wiretaps, including an FBI recording of the Philadelphia meeting at which participants referred to helping Hamas or Samah — Hamas spelled backward. Much of that material had surfaced in earlier trials of other men accused — and acquitted — of aiding terrorists.
Other information came from Israeli military operations, and some came from a 2004 raid at the Virginia home of a former Marzook aide.
Other evidence was literally unearthed — dug up from the backyard of a home where an unindicted co-conspirator of the Holy Land defendants once lived.
One of the documents is a memo about the goals for the U.S. organization of the U.S. faction of the Muslim Brotherhood, whose members included some of the Holy Land leaders now on trial.
The memo's writer, Mohamed Akram, wrote that members of the Brotherhood "must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within."
But will the inflammatory comments of associates matter in the trial of five leaders of Holy Land Foundation? They are accused of aiding terrorists, conspiracy, money laundering and tax charges.
Joshua Dratel, the attorney for one of the Holy Land defendants, said his client didn't help Hamas and didn't want to see Palestinians or Israelis killed. Defense lawyers said Holy Land raised money for schools and hospitals, not terrorists.
The mountain of documents, including records of dozens of financial transactions between Holy Land and Palestinian charities allegedly controlled by Hamas, won't necessarily translate into convictions against the Holy Land defendants, said Dennis Lormel, who worked on terrorist-financing issues at the FBI and is now a consultant.
"It's difficult to follow," said Lormel, who like Farah has blogged about the trial. "If you're the government, you want to simplify as much as you can."
Two other high-profile cases of men charged with helping terrorists ended in acquittals on the major charges. If that happens in Holy Land, the government will have to rethink its strategy of building cases on mountains of documents, Lormel said.
"The government will have to see if you can get informants and undercover agents, but that's a very difficult thing to do," he said. "Penetrating those groups would be a tremendous challenge."
As with any long running conspiracy, the unraveling of CAIR's web of lies will take time, and patience...We have that.
Monday, August 27, 2007
When Islam First Came To India
INDIA - The scale of ‘loss of life’ and ‘social upheaval’ caused by militant Islam may be worse in India than any other land, simply by virtue of the number of individuals involved. By some estimates, over 60 million have died in conflicts with Muslims over the centuries. Jihadists have destroyed all native Hindu, Sikh and Buddhist communities from five of India's provinces (including North Kashmir, now called Pakistan and Bangladesh).
Islam first came into India as a Military force in the year 715 C.E., in the Province of Sindh, but it made inroads into the country proper between 1020 and 1194 after which Mohammedan power became dominant in north India.
The people of Kerala had their violent introduction to Islam in the 18th century, when Tipu Sultan, the usurper of the Mysore Principality marched into Kerala attacking the Zamorin Raja of Calicut and began 'converting' people to Islam.
Tipu went about with a Koran in one hand and a sword in the other giving the subject people of Kerala a choice of accepting Islam or death. Doing this, he marched from Calicut up to Alwaye where he was forced to retreat because of stiff resistance. In 1669 Aurangzeb issued a general order for the destruction of Hindu temples, and it is estimated that about 3000 temples were destroyed and converted into Mosques in the 750 years of Muslim rule in India.
During the sultanate and later under Aurangzeb, many hundreds of thousands of Hindus were forcibly converted to Islam. The sentences of criminals and prisoners of war were ruthlessly executed with mercy and allowances only available to individuals embracing Islam. The Jaziya tax was both a heavy financial burden and a badge of inferiority borne by the Hindu, which also stimulated conversions to Islam.
In the 1860s a Muslim cleric in the Punjab region of India launched a murderous jihad initially against Sikhs, and then against all non-Muslim groups. In South India in 1921, jihadists carried out massacres, the forced conversion of Hindus, and the desecration of Hindu temples.
The number of casualties over the centuries are at least and order of magnitude greater than suffered by the Jews in the holocaust, and the ongoing conflicts have been key to the economic and social disadvantages of Indian society. Although Indians are an industrious and educated people, the social, political, and economic costs of the ongoing conflicts are the cause of its poor economic performance compared to other industrialized nations.
Courtesy of IslamUndressed.com
Islam first came into India as a Military force in the year 715 C.E., in the Province of Sindh, but it made inroads into the country proper between 1020 and 1194 after which Mohammedan power became dominant in north India.
The people of Kerala had their violent introduction to Islam in the 18th century, when Tipu Sultan, the usurper of the Mysore Principality marched into Kerala attacking the Zamorin Raja of Calicut and began 'converting' people to Islam.
Tipu went about with a Koran in one hand and a sword in the other giving the subject people of Kerala a choice of accepting Islam or death. Doing this, he marched from Calicut up to Alwaye where he was forced to retreat because of stiff resistance. In 1669 Aurangzeb issued a general order for the destruction of Hindu temples, and it is estimated that about 3000 temples were destroyed and converted into Mosques in the 750 years of Muslim rule in India.
During the sultanate and later under Aurangzeb, many hundreds of thousands of Hindus were forcibly converted to Islam. The sentences of criminals and prisoners of war were ruthlessly executed with mercy and allowances only available to individuals embracing Islam. The Jaziya tax was both a heavy financial burden and a badge of inferiority borne by the Hindu, which also stimulated conversions to Islam.
In the 1860s a Muslim cleric in the Punjab region of India launched a murderous jihad initially against Sikhs, and then against all non-Muslim groups. In South India in 1921, jihadists carried out massacres, the forced conversion of Hindus, and the desecration of Hindu temples.
The number of casualties over the centuries are at least and order of magnitude greater than suffered by the Jews in the holocaust, and the ongoing conflicts have been key to the economic and social disadvantages of Indian society. Although Indians are an industrious and educated people, the social, political, and economic costs of the ongoing conflicts are the cause of its poor economic performance compared to other industrialized nations.
Courtesy of IslamUndressed.com
Hat Tip: Aura of Arc
Attorney General Gonzales resigns: NY Times
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has resigned, the New York Times reported on Monday, citing a senior administration official.
The official said an official announcement would be made later in the day.
They failed to mention that there was a Bright RED BANNER HEADLINE, and that THE LIBERAL MEDIA IS SO EXCITED THAT THEY MUST BE GETTING READY TO EJACULATE.
Gimmie a break...
The official said an official announcement would be made later in the day.
They failed to mention that there was a Bright RED BANNER HEADLINE, and that THE LIBERAL MEDIA IS SO EXCITED THAT THEY MUST BE GETTING READY TO EJACULATE.
Gimmie a break...
Sunday, August 26, 2007
Terrorism Strikes India Again
India suffers from yet another coordinated terror bombing, and officials in Hyderabad can only guess who is responsible. Tensions between Hindus and Muslims are such that either side might have done this.
Indian officials are still trying to sort this out. Other recent bombings in India have been blamed on Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Tayyaba, (Army of the Pure) one of more than a dozen Islamic insurgent groups fighting to oust India from Muslim-majority Kashmir. Pakistan has denied charges of training and supporting the militants.
Indian media reports, quoting unnamed security officials, named the Bangladesh-based Harkatul Jihad Al-Islami organization. Harkatul, which is banned in Bangladesh, wants to establish strict Islamic rule in the Muslim-majority nation governed by secular laws. Bangladesh's Foreign Ministry said Dhaka had not been informed of the allegations.
Meanwhile, though only two bombs actually detonated, killing at least 42 and wounding another 60 or so, authorities also found explosives at 16 other locations in and near Hyderabad, said Y.S.R. Reddy, chief minister of Andhra Pradesh state. Was this only a part of what was to be a much larger attack? Last year Lashkar-e-Tayyaba attacked 7 commuter trains in Mumbai, India, so to speculate that they might be involved is a pretty short putt.
With all that has transpired over the last decade, with all we have witnessed from "The Religion of Peace", how can we give them the benefit of the doubt? How do intelligent people look beyond prior attacks that establish a pattern and the fact that Islamic Jihad has stayed true to it, and wait for evidence that provides proof of Islam's guilt or innocence in this attack.
It is a case of "Cry Wolf", and too late for reconciliation in the case of Islam. No other ideology that embraced such extreme violence has ever been so universally accepted in history...Communism, Fascism, Nazism, Thuggism, all extremist doctrines, and None with the traction that Islam has. But now, a growing minority of people are educating themselves, and then others to the threat the ideology poses. Also, a increasingly globalized media has made it more and more difficult to conceal atrocities, so now when we see a restaurant bombing, or a school massacre...A shooting spree at a mall, or a suicide bombing, the reaction is automatic. We don't know who did this yet, but which is the likely answer to this mystery? Will you be shocked to find that Muslims did this?
Friday, August 24, 2007
Thursday, August 23, 2007
An Open Letter to Ahmed Bedier
Director of Communications for the Council on American Islamic Relations
Ahmed Bedier,
What are you up to, and why were your stooges smiling in their mugshots?
What nice looking young men right? No way those were PIPE BOMBS in their possession as they were apprehended speeding towards a Naval Base in SC...(Actually, They Were)
What is your plan, to make it a crime to report a suspicious character, or (God Forbid) stop a Muslim from committing a terrorist act? (Which in all likelihood is what just happened in South Carolina.) We understand that the vast majority of Muslims aren't terrorists, but that isn't stopping the ones who Are from killing innocents, and it's time you directed your outrage, and connivance at Them, and not the country to which as a citizen, you have pledged allegiance to. We wont allow our congress to change our laws to afford Muslims special privileges. You misjudge America if you believe that. Just as Americans blocked the passage of the "Amnesty Bill", we will block passage of any bill that makes it a crime to ridicule those who deserve it, and report, arrest, and prosecute those who would attack us on our soil.
I hope those two men you sent on your errand are prosecuted to the full extent of the law, and are imprisoned for a very long time. Then, you may hold them up as "martyrs", and let their suffering eat at your conscience for the rest of your life. These men were in this country as guests of America, why were they approaching a U.S. Naval Base with explosives? Everyone must assimilate into American culture or be condemned to live here in exile. You, by your action, condemn Muslims to that fate Bedier. By separating Muslims from the fabric and culture that made us great, you exile them in their own country. You doom Islam in America by your actions, and the sooner your CAIR is marginalized, the better for all.(Especially American Muslims)
What nice looking young men right? No way those were PIPE BOMBS in their possession as they were apprehended speeding towards a Naval Base in SC...(Actually, They Were)What is your plan, to make it a crime to report a suspicious character, or (God Forbid) stop a Muslim from committing a terrorist act? (Which in all likelihood is what just happened in South Carolina.) We understand that the vast majority of Muslims aren't terrorists, but that isn't stopping the ones who Are from killing innocents, and it's time you directed your outrage, and connivance at Them, and not the country to which as a citizen, you have pledged allegiance to. We wont allow our congress to change our laws to afford Muslims special privileges. You misjudge America if you believe that. Just as Americans blocked the passage of the "Amnesty Bill", we will block passage of any bill that makes it a crime to ridicule those who deserve it, and report, arrest, and prosecute those who would attack us on our soil.
I hope those two men you sent on your errand are prosecuted to the full extent of the law, and are imprisoned for a very long time. Then, you may hold them up as "martyrs", and let their suffering eat at your conscience for the rest of your life. These men were in this country as guests of America, why were they approaching a U.S. Naval Base with explosives? Everyone must assimilate into American culture or be condemned to live here in exile. You, by your action, condemn Muslims to that fate Bedier. By separating Muslims from the fabric and culture that made us great, you exile them in their own country. You doom Islam in America by your actions, and the sooner your CAIR is marginalized, the better for all.(Especially American Muslims)
No Salutation,
A First Generation American
Homeland Security
Some say America's not fertile ground for jihadists, that all the radicals are overseas. The arrest of two Muslims near a South Carolina Naval base with pipe bombs reminds us such thinking is wishful.
Two college students from Tampa — Ahmed Mohamed and Yousef Megahed — were caught speeding toward the Goose Creek naval weapons station. Police found lead pipe bombs in their trunk. They've been charged with possession of explosives, and the FBI is investigating them as possible "terrorists," say neighbors interviewed by agents.
These cases seem to pop up every few months. For those paying attention, it spells a trend. But you'd never know it from the spotty news coverage they receive. If they are covered, the media plays them almost as random crime stories.
Terror plots and arrests on the other side of the pond, however, get major play. To hear pundits, Europe has the Islamic terror problem, not us. The Christian Science Monitor says "European-style homegrown terror cells" are just not seen here.
In fact, we've had more homegrown terror. You just don't hear about it as much because we've already had our 9/11.
In addition to the Muslim snipers who terrorized the Washington area for weeks on the first anniversary of 9/11, the U.S. has been plagued by dozens of terror attacks or disrupted plots over the past several years, including:
• The "Lackawanna Six" from upstate New York who were caught training for terror with al-Qaida overseas.
• The Columbus, Ohio, trucker who helped al-Qaida case the Brooklyn Bridge for attack.
• The Los Angeles man who fatally shot two and wounded three at an Israeli airline ticket counter at LAX.
• The New Yorker found guilty of plotting to blow up a Manhattan subway station.
• The Lodi, Calif., native who trained with al-Qaida in Pakistan to blow up fellow Americans at supermarkets.
• The three black Muslim converts from Torrance, Calif., jailed for plotting to attack Army recruiting stations and synagogues.
• The Virginia jihadists busted for training to kill U.S. soldiers overseas.
• The San Francisco Muslim who took his SUV on a hit-and-run killing spree.
• The black Muslim cell in Miami which plotted to attack the Sears Tower.
• The jihadist who went on a shooting rampage at a Jewish community center in Seattle, announcing "I'm a Muslim American; I'm angry at Israel."
• The Fort Dix Six who planned to penetrate the New Jersey base as pizza delivery men, then open fire on troops.
• The black Muslim converts who recently plotted to blow up JFK airport.
• The honors student-turned-jihadist who rented an SUV and rammed it into a crowd at the University of North Carolina.
• The pro-Taliban operatives caught training for jihad in the Oregon woods.
• The shotgun-toting 18-year-old Muslim who murdered five shoppers inside a Salt Lake City mall.
• The black convert recently busted for plotting to blow up Illinois shopping malls with grenades.
And on and on.
Some argue that these cases, as many as there are, are isolated and don't add up to the kind of intense radicalism seen in Britain. They say our Muslims are moderate by comparison. A recent Pew poll, however, reveals that more than one in four young Muslim Americans favors suicide bombing as a way to even scores.
Some pundits also claim our mosques don't preach hatred. It's fairly common for imams to preach assimilation, claims pro-Arab lobbyist James Zogby. That's not as true in Europe, where sermons can be laced with extremism, he says.
"The success of Saudi-inspired religious zealotry in Europe was in large part because the Saudis put up the money to build mosques and pay for imams," says Ian Cuthbertson, a counterterrorism expert at the World Policy Institute at the New School for Social Research. "The American Muslim community was rich enough not to require Saudi money to build its mosques."
In fact, eight in 10 mosques in America are funded and controlled by the Saudis.
The notion that America doesn't have a radical Muslim problem unfortunately is a myth. Pundits need to quit fooling people. That is the mission of this blog. It is our hope here to stimulate discussion, in the hope that understanding Militant Islam; It's Origins, History, and Motivation, can lead to defeating it.
Two college students from Tampa — Ahmed Mohamed and Yousef Megahed — were caught speeding toward the Goose Creek naval weapons station. Police found lead pipe bombs in their trunk. They've been charged with possession of explosives, and the FBI is investigating them as possible "terrorists," say neighbors interviewed by agents.
These cases seem to pop up every few months. For those paying attention, it spells a trend. But you'd never know it from the spotty news coverage they receive. If they are covered, the media plays them almost as random crime stories.
Terror plots and arrests on the other side of the pond, however, get major play. To hear pundits, Europe has the Islamic terror problem, not us. The Christian Science Monitor says "European-style homegrown terror cells" are just not seen here.
In fact, we've had more homegrown terror. You just don't hear about it as much because we've already had our 9/11.
In addition to the Muslim snipers who terrorized the Washington area for weeks on the first anniversary of 9/11, the U.S. has been plagued by dozens of terror attacks or disrupted plots over the past several years, including:
• The "Lackawanna Six" from upstate New York who were caught training for terror with al-Qaida overseas.
• The Columbus, Ohio, trucker who helped al-Qaida case the Brooklyn Bridge for attack.
• The Los Angeles man who fatally shot two and wounded three at an Israeli airline ticket counter at LAX.
• The New Yorker found guilty of plotting to blow up a Manhattan subway station.
• The Lodi, Calif., native who trained with al-Qaida in Pakistan to blow up fellow Americans at supermarkets.
• The three black Muslim converts from Torrance, Calif., jailed for plotting to attack Army recruiting stations and synagogues.
• The Virginia jihadists busted for training to kill U.S. soldiers overseas.
• The San Francisco Muslim who took his SUV on a hit-and-run killing spree.
• The black Muslim cell in Miami which plotted to attack the Sears Tower.
• The jihadist who went on a shooting rampage at a Jewish community center in Seattle, announcing "I'm a Muslim American; I'm angry at Israel."
• The Fort Dix Six who planned to penetrate the New Jersey base as pizza delivery men, then open fire on troops.
• The black Muslim converts who recently plotted to blow up JFK airport.
• The honors student-turned-jihadist who rented an SUV and rammed it into a crowd at the University of North Carolina.
• The pro-Taliban operatives caught training for jihad in the Oregon woods.
• The shotgun-toting 18-year-old Muslim who murdered five shoppers inside a Salt Lake City mall.
• The black convert recently busted for plotting to blow up Illinois shopping malls with grenades.
And on and on.
Some argue that these cases, as many as there are, are isolated and don't add up to the kind of intense radicalism seen in Britain. They say our Muslims are moderate by comparison. A recent Pew poll, however, reveals that more than one in four young Muslim Americans favors suicide bombing as a way to even scores.
Some pundits also claim our mosques don't preach hatred. It's fairly common for imams to preach assimilation, claims pro-Arab lobbyist James Zogby. That's not as true in Europe, where sermons can be laced with extremism, he says.
"The success of Saudi-inspired religious zealotry in Europe was in large part because the Saudis put up the money to build mosques and pay for imams," says Ian Cuthbertson, a counterterrorism expert at the World Policy Institute at the New School for Social Research. "The American Muslim community was rich enough not to require Saudi money to build its mosques."
In fact, eight in 10 mosques in America are funded and controlled by the Saudis.
The notion that America doesn't have a radical Muslim problem unfortunately is a myth. Pundits need to quit fooling people. That is the mission of this blog. It is our hope here to stimulate discussion, in the hope that understanding Militant Islam; It's Origins, History, and Motivation, can lead to defeating it.
As seen at Cox & Forkum
"If you haven't seen it yet, I highly recommend the new The History Channel documentary debunking the 9/11 "truth" movement: 9/11 Conspiracies: Fact or Fiction. The show airs twice more this weekend: Saturday, August 25 at 8:00 PM and Sunday, August 26 at 12:00 AM.
Examines the various conspiracy theories espoused on the Internet, in articles and in public forums that attempt to explain the 9/11 attacks. It includes theories that the World Trade Center was brought down by a controlled demolition; that a missile, not a commercial airliner, hit the Pentagon; and that members of the U.S. government orchestrated the attacks in hopes of creating a war in the Middle East. Each conspiracy argument is countered by a variety of experts in the fields of engineering, intelligence and the military. The program also delves into the anatomy of such conspiracies and how they grow on the Internet.
Debunking 9/11 Myths: Why Conspiracy Theories Can't Stand Up To The Facts by David Dunbar and Brad Reagan, both editors at Popular Mechanics, is the must-read book on the subject.
See the Screw Loose Change blog for the latest information about leaders of the "truth" movement and the conspiracy film "Loose Change." They also have links to other debunking sites."
Examines the various conspiracy theories espoused on the Internet, in articles and in public forums that attempt to explain the 9/11 attacks. It includes theories that the World Trade Center was brought down by a controlled demolition; that a missile, not a commercial airliner, hit the Pentagon; and that members of the U.S. government orchestrated the attacks in hopes of creating a war in the Middle East. Each conspiracy argument is countered by a variety of experts in the fields of engineering, intelligence and the military. The program also delves into the anatomy of such conspiracies and how they grow on the Internet.
Debunking 9/11 Myths: Why Conspiracy Theories Can't Stand Up To The Facts by David Dunbar and Brad Reagan, both editors at Popular Mechanics, is the must-read book on the subject.
See the Screw Loose Change blog for the latest information about leaders of the "truth" movement and the conspiracy film "Loose Change." They also have links to other debunking sites."
Death of a Journalist
Chauncey Bailey
1949 -Aug. 2, 2007
SPERO Chauncery Bailey was shot several times by a lone gunman in Oakland, at around 7:30 am, as he went to work.
The following day, 19 people from the Black Muslims' "Your Black Muslim Bakery" were arrested. Those arrested included Yusuf Bey IV, the 21-year old heir to the Black Muslim's business rackets. 
An update from NBC11 News and an article from the Tri Valley Herald confirm that Chauncery Bailey had been writing an article about the Black Muslims, who own the "Your Black Muslim Bakery".
An employee of Your Black Muslim Bakery confessed to police that he had shot Chauncery Bailey. 19-year old handyman Devaughndre Broussard said he had been angered by stories Chauncery had written about the Black Muslims, the bakery, and its employees.
According to authorities, Mr Bailey had been working on a story about the finances of the group.
Chauncey Bailey
Chauncey Bailey
Chauncey Bailey
Courtesy of Aura of Arc
Grape Leaves
There is no eating just one here. Double or triple the recipe to make a boat-load. Enjoy!
Place the stuffed leaves in a circular pattern on the bottom of a large 6-8 quart pot. Leave enough room between them to expand a bit as the rice cooks. Layer them until they are all in the pot, then add 1 cup of lemon juice and 6 cups of water. Water should be even with the top of the leaves. Place a flat plate over the leaves to weigh them down and keep them in place. Bring the water to a boil and then simmer for 15-20 minutes until they are tender and rice is cooked. Serve hot or cold.
*Addt'l ingredients: raisins, ground beef or diced chicken.
Courtesy of Aura of Arc
- 2 dozen grape leaves, fresh or jarred
- 1 cup rice
- 1/2 onion, finely diced
- 6 tbsp chopped fresh parsley
- 1 1/4 cup lemon juice
- 1 generous pinch salt
- 6 cups water
Place the stuffed leaves in a circular pattern on the bottom of a large 6-8 quart pot. Leave enough room between them to expand a bit as the rice cooks. Layer them until they are all in the pot, then add 1 cup of lemon juice and 6 cups of water. Water should be even with the top of the leaves. Place a flat plate over the leaves to weigh them down and keep them in place. Bring the water to a boil and then simmer for 15-20 minutes until they are tender and rice is cooked. Serve hot or cold.
*Addt'l ingredients: raisins, ground beef or diced chicken.
Courtesy of Aura of Arc
Monday, August 20, 2007
Sunday, August 19, 2007
German captive freed in Afghanistan
KABUL, Afghanistan -
Afghan police freed a female German hostage from a Kabul neighborhood and arrested a group of kidnappers early Monday, an Interior Ministry spokesman said.
The 31-year-old aid worker was freed during a raid in the western part of the capital not far from the restaurant where she was seized Saturday while dining with her husband, Zemary Bashari said. The woman's husband was not abducted.
"A group of kidnappers were arrested," Bashari said.
Amrullah Saleh, the head of the Afghan intelligence service, said the men were part of a criminal gang whose leader was freed from a northern Afghan prison two months earlier.
In Berlin, a spokeswoman for Germany's Foreign Ministry confirmed the woman was "in safety at the German Embassy" in Kabul.
On Sunday, Afghan television broadcast what it said was video of the woman calling for the release of unspecified prisoners while being prompted by a man on what to say.
The woman on the tape identifies herself as Christina Meier and holds up what appeared to be a German identification card with her name on it. Officials have not confirmed the woman's identity.
Police have said Taliban militants were not behind her brazen daytime abduction even though the group has been linked to the recent kidnappings of 23 South Koreans and two German men.
In the video, the woman was shown sitting on the floor inside a room, her head covered with a white scarf. She said "I am OK" and then read a letter in the Afghan language, Dari, calling for the release of unknown prisoners.
She was prompted to make remarks in English and in Dari by a man speaking in broken English.
The private Tolo TV, which broadcast the video, did not say how it obtained the material.
"I am fine. There are not threats against me. I want from my country to do what it can for my release," she said in Dari, reading from a piece of paper while seated, occasionally looking up toward the camera.
A male voice off-camera prompted her to say, "to help" and he told her to use the word "urgent."
"Please help for my release, and help me," she said.
A man, his head covered with a scarf and wearing sunglasses inside a room, appeared afterward in the video and demanded the Afghan government release a number of unknown prisoners. He said a member of the group would provide the government with the list.
"We are not bad people. We are a special network," the man said at the end of the video. He did not identify the group or say whether it is linked to the Taliban or other insurgents operating in Afghanistan.
In recent weeks, the Taliban have offered media interviews with their foreign hostages, apparently hoping to appeal to public sentiment and thereby pressure the Afghan government to release Taliban prisoners. In such cases, the hostage's comments and message are controlled by the captors and the statements are made in that context.
Germany's Foreign Ministry declined to comment on the video.
Ali Shah Paktiawal, head of police criminal investigations in Kabul, ruled out involvement of the Taliban in the abduction, but would not say who was responsible.
In Saturday's kidnapping, four men pulled up to a restaurant in a gray Toyota Corolla, and one went inside and asked to order a pizza, intelligence officials investigating the incident said.
They said two other men waited outside, while another remained in the car.
The man in the restaurant pulled out a pistol, walked up to a table where the couple was sitting and took her from the restaurant, the officials said on condition of anonymity due to agency policy.
Police spotted the speeding car and opened fire, but hit a nearby taxi and killed its driver.
The woman and her husband, also a German, have worked for the Christian organization Ora International in Kabul since September 2006, said Ulf Baumann, a spokesman for the group.
Baumann did not disclose the woman's name or her husband's. He said she was fluent in Dari.
Abduction fears have risen after 23 South Koreans and two Germans were taken hostage in separate incidents last month in central Afghanistan.
One of the German men was shot to death. The other remains in captivity.
Two of the South Koreans were shot to death, and two were freed. A Taliban spokesman said Saturday that negotiations for their release had failed.
In southern Afghanistan, a NATO soldier was killed escorting a convoy in southern Afghanistan on Sunday, while four Afghan security guards died in a suicide attack.
Violence has risen sharply during the last two months in Afghanistan. This year more than 3,700 people — most of them militants — have died, according to an Associated Press tally of casualty figures provided by Western and Afghan officials.
Afghan police freed a female German hostage from a Kabul neighborhood and arrested a group of kidnappers early Monday, an Interior Ministry spokesman said.
The 31-year-old aid worker was freed during a raid in the western part of the capital not far from the restaurant where she was seized Saturday while dining with her husband, Zemary Bashari said. The woman's husband was not abducted.
"A group of kidnappers were arrested," Bashari said.
Amrullah Saleh, the head of the Afghan intelligence service, said the men were part of a criminal gang whose leader was freed from a northern Afghan prison two months earlier.
In Berlin, a spokeswoman for Germany's Foreign Ministry confirmed the woman was "in safety at the German Embassy" in Kabul.
On Sunday, Afghan television broadcast what it said was video of the woman calling for the release of unspecified prisoners while being prompted by a man on what to say.
The woman on the tape identifies herself as Christina Meier and holds up what appeared to be a German identification card with her name on it. Officials have not confirmed the woman's identity.
Police have said Taliban militants were not behind her brazen daytime abduction even though the group has been linked to the recent kidnappings of 23 South Koreans and two German men.
In the video, the woman was shown sitting on the floor inside a room, her head covered with a white scarf. She said "I am OK" and then read a letter in the Afghan language, Dari, calling for the release of unknown prisoners.
She was prompted to make remarks in English and in Dari by a man speaking in broken English.
The private Tolo TV, which broadcast the video, did not say how it obtained the material.
"I am fine. There are not threats against me. I want from my country to do what it can for my release," she said in Dari, reading from a piece of paper while seated, occasionally looking up toward the camera.
A male voice off-camera prompted her to say, "to help" and he told her to use the word "urgent."
"Please help for my release, and help me," she said.
A man, his head covered with a scarf and wearing sunglasses inside a room, appeared afterward in the video and demanded the Afghan government release a number of unknown prisoners. He said a member of the group would provide the government with the list.
"We are not bad people. We are a special network," the man said at the end of the video. He did not identify the group or say whether it is linked to the Taliban or other insurgents operating in Afghanistan.
In recent weeks, the Taliban have offered media interviews with their foreign hostages, apparently hoping to appeal to public sentiment and thereby pressure the Afghan government to release Taliban prisoners. In such cases, the hostage's comments and message are controlled by the captors and the statements are made in that context.
Germany's Foreign Ministry declined to comment on the video.
Ali Shah Paktiawal, head of police criminal investigations in Kabul, ruled out involvement of the Taliban in the abduction, but would not say who was responsible.
In Saturday's kidnapping, four men pulled up to a restaurant in a gray Toyota Corolla, and one went inside and asked to order a pizza, intelligence officials investigating the incident said.
They said two other men waited outside, while another remained in the car.
The man in the restaurant pulled out a pistol, walked up to a table where the couple was sitting and took her from the restaurant, the officials said on condition of anonymity due to agency policy.
Police spotted the speeding car and opened fire, but hit a nearby taxi and killed its driver.
The woman and her husband, also a German, have worked for the Christian organization Ora International in Kabul since September 2006, said Ulf Baumann, a spokesman for the group.
Baumann did not disclose the woman's name or her husband's. He said she was fluent in Dari.
Abduction fears have risen after 23 South Koreans and two Germans were taken hostage in separate incidents last month in central Afghanistan.
One of the German men was shot to death. The other remains in captivity.
Two of the South Koreans were shot to death, and two were freed. A Taliban spokesman said Saturday that negotiations for their release had failed.
In southern Afghanistan, a NATO soldier was killed escorting a convoy in southern Afghanistan on Sunday, while four Afghan security guards died in a suicide attack.
Violence has risen sharply during the last two months in Afghanistan. This year more than 3,700 people — most of them militants — have died, according to an Associated Press tally of casualty figures provided by Western and Afghan officials.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)