Press 4 TRUTH Video Blog

Census Results Empower GOP

2010-12-25T16:52:00.000-05:00

Census Results Empower GOP: "Liberal states lose population to Western and Southern states with better business climates."

California Meltdown

2010-12-25T16:51:00.000-05:00

Editor: The California LEFT machine will be taking over. Will Californians miss Arnold? Will they reduce the debt?

Check out this article

California Meltdown: "Spending faultline could spill Sunshine State into the Pacific."

Happy Hanukkah

2010-12-06T17:36:00.000-05:00

Happy Hanukkah

On behalf of everyone at the ACT! for America family, we extend a warm Happy Hanukkah greeting to our Jewish family, friends and supporters. May the glow of the Hanukkah Menorah keep us ever mindful of the courage and strength of the Maccabees and that goodness does indeed triumph over evil.

Always devoted,

Brigitte Gabriel

New DVD available

2010-12-06T17:35:00.000-05:00

DVD from the 2010 National Conference & Legislative Briefing Now Available

Also available: “Always Remember” 9/11 solid pewter ornament

In case you haven’t seen this on our website, we now have available on DVD the five general session presentations from the 2010 National Conference & Legislative Briefing.

If you would like to get a copy of this information-packed DVD for yourself or as a gift this holiday season, simply click here, choose the “Patriot Partner” or “Contributing Member” option, and then select the giving level that says “2010 National Conference DVD.”

This three and one-half hour DVD contains the following presentations:

“The threat of radical Islam,” presented by Brigitte Gabriel, President, ACT! for America.

“Radical Islam, energy, and our national security,” presented by former CIA Director James Woolsey.

“Civilian courts and the war on terrorism,” presented by Andrew McCarthy, lead prosecutor in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.

“CAIR’s legacy of lies and terror ties,” presented by Paul Sperry, investigative journalist and co-author of Muslim Mafia.

“Asking the right questions. Making the right arguments. Exposing the truth about radical Islam,” presented by Guy Rodgers, Executive Director, ACT! for America.

For those interested in a beautiful, unique keepsake of the 9/11 attack on the World Trade Center, we have available a solid pewter “Always Remember” ornament.
Whether you hang it on your Christmas tree, set it on a mantle, or hang it on the wall, this hand-poured ornament is a poignant reminder that we must never forget what happened on 9/11.

To obtain this one-of-a-kind keepsake, simply click here, choose the “Contributing Member” option, and then select the giving level that says “Pewter 9/11 Memorial Ornament.”

2011 National Conference

2010-12-06T17:33:00.000-05:00

Mark this date on your calendar!
ACT! for America’s 2011 National
Conference & Legislative Briefing

We will be holding our next annual National Conference & Legislative Briefing on June 22^nd and 23^rd, 2011.

The conference will be held at the beautiful Omni Shoreham Hotel in Washington, DC.

More details will follow in the next several weeks, but in the meantime, please mark the date on your calendar!

Last year’s conference included briefings by nearly ten Members of Congress and presentations by experts including:

Brigitte Gabriel, President, ACT! for America

James Woolsey, former CIA Director
Andrew McCarthy, lead prosecutor in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing trial
Paul Sperry, co-author of Muslim Mafia
Guy Rodgers, Executive Director, ACT! for America

Rep. King says prosecute WikiLeaks

2010-12-06T17:32:00.000-05:00

U.S. Rep. Peter King says prosecute WikiLeaks

U.S. Rep. Peter King, in line to be the next chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, has once again demonstrated he’s the right man for the job.

As the story below notes, Rep. King has publicly called for WikiLeaks to be prosecuted under the Espionage Act and designated as a Foreign Terrorist Organization.

In our view Rep. King is correct. The continuing dumps of these classified documents will ultimately damage our ability to successfully prosecute the war on Islamist terrorism, if for no other reason than other countries will feel reluctant to share vital intelligence information with us.

U.S. Rep. King’s determination, his willingness to identify our enemies by name and ideology, and his public criticism of political correctness, deserve our thanks.

If you would like to send Rep. King a short email, thanking him for his efforts to protect our safety and freedoms, please click here. Scroll down to the Action Alerts and click on the top alert titled “Thank you! U.S. Representative Pete King.” That will take you to the text box for the e-mail. Feel free to edit the e-mail as you would like to thank him for his efforts. After you have edited the letter, enter your name and contact information then click send message. Make sure to mention you’re part of ACT! for America!

Please email rather than calling his office. We don’t want to jam his office phone lines with messages of “thank you”!

http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2010/11/29/131664547/wikileaks-is-a-terror-outfit-rep-peter-king

WikiLeaks Is A Terror Outfit: Rep. Peter King

Categories: National Security, White House, Congress

10:01 am

November 29, 2010

Rep. Peter King, a New York Republican, said late Sunday that the unauthorized release of thousands of U.S. diplomatic cables by WikiLeaks, some with sensitive and embarrassing information related to foreign allies, was worse than a terror or military attack and should be dealt with accordingly.

That's saying something coming from King who many in the media view as one of the nation's leading political voices for a region that was intimately affected by the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

King, who represents a Long Island district, is also expected to chair the House Homeland Security Committee when Republicans take over the lower chamber in January which will give him a highly visible perch from which to press his views.

King expressed his opinion on New York City's all-news radio stations Sunday.

An excerpt from an Associated Press/WINS radio report:

“This is worse even than a physical attack on Americans, it’s worse than a military attack,” King said.

King has written letters to both U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton asking for swift action to be taken against WikiLeaks and its founder Julian Assange.

King wants Holder to prosecute Assange under the Espionage Act and has also called on Clinton to determine whether WikiLeaks could be designated as a Foreign Terrorist Organization.

“By doing that we will be able to seize their funds and go after anyone who provides them with any help or contributions or assistance whatsoever,” King said.

“The Attorney General and I don’t always agree on different issues. But I believe on this one, he and I strongly agree that there should be a criminal prosecution,” King told WCBS 880.

King reiterated his views Monday morning on NBC's Today Show.

King's statements indicate the kind of pressure the Obama Administration is likely to come under to use the full extent of executive power against Assange.

Anything short of that could leave the administration open to further charges that it is relatively weak on national security matters. That could allow the administration's critics to build on attacks they made after Obama announced his plans, since frustrated, to close the Guantanamo prison facility and his administration's controversial decision to have civilian trials for some admitted or suspected terrorists.

Both President Obama and Secretary State Hillary Clinton are due to make statements Monday morning to talk about the WikiLeaks release.

Ground Zero Mosque seeks tax dollars!

2010-12-06T17:31:00.000-05:00

Ground Zero Mosque seeking tax dollars!

The “bridge builders” behind the Ground Zero Mosque have elevated their insensitivity to the point of sticking their thumb in the eyes of the 9/11 families and the 70% of Americans who oppose building a mosque at Ground Zero.

According to the CNN story below, “…the developer behind the controversial Islamic community center and mosque…has requested federal funding…”

For years St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church, destroyed on 9/11, has been trying without success to rebuild. According to various news stories the church has been stymied by New York City bureaucrats. This is a travesty.

It’s bad enough that St. Nicholas continues to struggle to rebuild and that Imam Rauf and his backers continue to push their mosque on an unwilling America. But for the Ground Zero Mosque developer to seek an estimated $5,000,000 from us taxpayers to build it—that’s just over the top.

Islamic community center developer seeks federal funding

By Allan Chernoff, CNN Senior Correspondent

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

New York (CNN) -- The developer behind the controversial Islamic community center and mosque planned for Lower Manhattan has requested federal funding through the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation to support the project known as Park51.

The funding would come from money the Department of Housing and Urban Development allocated to help rebuild the neighborhood after the 9/11 attacks.

"Park51 has applied for a Lower Manhattan Development Corporation grant," said Sharif El-Gamal, CEO of SOHO Properties, the developer behind the Islamic center. In a statement, El-Gamal said the money would "in part fund social service programs such as domestic violence programs, Arabic and other foreign language classes, programs and services for homeless veterans, two multi-cultural art exhibits and immigration services."

The Lower Manhattan Development Corporation received more than 265 applications seeking more than $175 million for community and cultural programs, though the LMDC has only $17 million of federal funding to allocate.

"We are now turning to the challenging but important task of sorting through the applications to identify those that address long-standing community and cultural needs," said Avi Schick, chairman of LMDC.

The grants will range from $100,000 to $1 million, according to Julie Menin, chair of Community Board 1 and a member of the LMDC board. Among the criteria used to judge applications, Menin said, are financial viability, job creation, revitalizing the community and a track record of service in Lower Manhattan.

"We have funded museums, public schools, programs to help small businesses hurt after 9/11," said Menin.

An online report said Park51 had requested $5 million, but neither the developer nor LMDC board members would confirm that amount.

The LMDC plans to decide how to allocate the $17 million "towards the end of the first quarter of next year," said Menin.

Park51 has yet to raise significant funds for the community center located two blocks north of Ground Zero, a project that could cost $100-million.

"Park51 has not launched a formal fundraising program and is currently in the process of expanding its Board of Directors to plan, manage and oversee such efforts," said El-Gamal, adding that the project has not yet applied for federal tax-exempt status, but plans to do so "in the coming weeks."

Find this article at:
http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/11/22/new.york.islamic.center/index.html?hpt=T2

Video: Brigitte Gabriel in Lebanon, 1987

2010-12-06T17:29:00.000-05:00

Video: Brigitte Gabriel in Lebanon, 1987

“Thirty-five years
ago this month,
my home was
bombed”

Dear Press For,

As we celebrate Thanksgiving in this land of abundance, we reflect back on all the blessings we have in our lives. For me every Thanksgiving has special significance because it was at the end of November, 1975 that my life was changed forever.

Recently, I showed some friends a video that my husband, a journalist I met in Israel, made about my life to introduce me during our wedding ceremony in America in 1987. My friends said: “Brigitte you should show this, so people can see what you talk about in your book.”

This video was done 23 years ago, before I came to America, well before realizing my mission in life and well before starting ACT! for America. In this video, you will see my home, my parents, and scenes of my life during the war, shot with my mother and my cousin depicting my experience in the very bomb shelter I lived in.

When people ask me why I am so passionate about fighting the threat of radical Islam, and why I am so thankful for America, this is why.

Always devoted,

Brigitte Gabriel
President, ACT! for America

They're enemy combatants

2010-12-06T17:28:00.000-05:00

“Citizen Appeal to the 112^th Congress”

Add your name to this ten-point appeal—
which opposes civilian criminal trials for
enemy combatants

[Editor’s note: Friday’s email included a photo of Guy Rodgers speaking at a podium. The photo should have included this credit: “Courtesy of Jack Kemp, www.ProjectShiningCity.org.” ]

Last week the Obama administration’s attempt to try Ahmed Ghailani in a civilian criminal court proved a failure.

Charged with over 280 counts, he was convicted on only one—thanks in large part to the judge’s exclusion of a key prosecution witness.

The Obama administration appears determined to treat enemy combatants as criminals who deserve more due process rights than a captured enemy soldier would receive under the Geneva Convention.

If you agree with us that trying enemy combatants in civilian courts is foolish and dangerous, add your name to our “Citizen Appeal to the 112th Congress.”

If you saw our email last Friday, the delivery of our 120,000 name Ground Zero Mosque petition to Mayor Michael Bloomberg created quite a stir. 9/11 families at the press conference thanked us profusely for our efforts to successfully arouse public opinion.

We want to deliver just such a strong grassroots message to Congress regarding national security, so they don’t overlook our concerns as they tackle the deficit, taxes, and high unemployment.

It takes so little time to add your name to our “Citizen Appeal.” But it will mean so much. Because when we deliver the petition, Congress will hear us. The more signers of the petition, the better!

Among the ten points in our National Security appeal, we are calling on Congress to…

Secure our border and protect us from the increasing flow of terrorists into America.

Oppose any accommodation to shariah law.

Address the threat of the Muslim Brotherhood and its front organizations in America.

Pressure the Obama administration to accurately define our enemy as “jihadists.”

Oppose civilian criminal trials for enemy combatants.

Amend our humanitarian refugee acts to require that all refugees who enter the United States swear under oath they will not support any theological totalitarian political system, under penalty of deportation.
To read the entire “Citizen Appeal” and to add your name to this grassroots document, click here. Our plan is to deliver this sometime in February, not long after the new Congress is gaveled into session.

And please forward this email to everyone you know. Let your voice be heard!

Media reports delivery of ACT! petition

2010-12-06T17:26:00.000-05:00

ACT! for America delivers Ground Zero Mosque petition at news conference

Numerous media outlets, many 9/11 families, and even some protestors attend!

Yesterday, at a news conference held at New York’s City Hall, ACT! for America Executive Director Guy Rodgers delivered our Ground Zero Mosque petition, signed by over 120,000 people, to Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

Among the media present were the local Fox television affiliate, Reuters, and WNIS Radio. Click here to read the Reuters report and click here to view pictures included in the report filed by DNAinfo, which covers local Manhattan news. (As of this writing other stories had not yet been posted online).

Rodgers delivered a statement describing why ACT! for America launched this petition, that this was not an election year issue, and that the opposition to the Ground Zero Mosque was not going away. Afterwards he answered several questions from the assembled press.

Also making statements to the media were Andy Sullivan, founder of the 9/11 Hard Hat Pledge; Tim Brown, retired New York firefighter and 9/11 survivor; and Rosaleen Tallon, whose brother, a firefighter, died that day.

"The moving stories told by Andy, Tim and Rosaleen brought tears to the eyes of many of those who came to watch this news conference," Rodgers said afterward. "Their pain was a reminder that what ACT! for America launched was a noble and right thing to do."

Spicing up the event were a few protestors who shouted the typical rants we have come to expect.

After the event several 9/11 family members approached Rodgers and Lisa Piraneo, ACT! for America’s Director of Government Relations, to express their thanks for what ACT! for America has done thus far in our opposition to the Ground Zero Mosque.

"You are helping keep the opposition alive," one of them said.

You, the signers of this petition, made this possible. You are helping keep the opposition alive. That message was delivered, loud and clear.

Gabriel speaks out on full-body scanners

2010-12-06T17:24:00.000-05:00

In WorldNetDaily interview, Brigitte Gabriel addresses controversy over full-body scanners and pat downs

RAGE AGAINST THE MACHINES

Expert: TSA scans would let al-Qaida duplicate 9/11

Brigitte Gabriel warns unless U.S. starts profiling, nation is vulnerable

Posted: November 18, 2010
12:10 am Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2010 WorldNetDaily

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=229613

Brigitte Gabriel

A terrorism expert says the invasive screening procedures demanded by the Obama-run Transportation Security Administration would do almost nothing to stop a determined terrorist because they already are experimenting with inserting explosives in a body cavity or even surgically implanting the destructive charges.

The comments come from Brigitte Gabriel, who is the founder of Act! For America, a 150,000-strong group that works to warn Americans against the dangers of militant Islam and the Muslims who follow it.

She also is a member of the board of advisers for the Intelligence Summit, and she lectures internationally on global terrorism.

Join more than 17,000 others in a petition demanding action against the intrusive airport screening procedures implemented by Janet Napolitano and send a letter to Congress, President Obama and others telling them exactly what you think about the issue.

The issue has hit a flashpoint in the last few days as newly installed TSA procedures demand that airline passengers submit to a full-body scanning machine that generates an essentially nude image of the passenger for TSA workers to see, or a full-body pat-down that includes what critics have called "groping" of private parts of the body.

"These procedures are not effective at all with terrorists," Gabriel told WND in an interview today. "If a true terrorist wants to go blow up an airplane, these machines will not detect it."

She said like drug dealers already have proven, substances hidden inside body cavities or even embedded surgically remain undetected by any or all of the TSA's procedures.

"If al-Qaida is planning against the U.S. multiple attacks in a day, in multiple airplanes, it could duplicate 9/11," she told WND. "Al-Qaida is testing inserting breast implants, stuffing breast implants with explosives."

She said a woman then could go into an airplane restroom and use a syringe similar to those used by diabetic patients to trigger an explosion that would disintegrate a modern jet.

"This is what al-Qaida is resorting to, and they're exploring surgery for men," she warned. "They want to implant explosives inside the body.

"Terrorists are conditioned and trained to blow themselves up, to become suicide bombers," she said. "They are ready to die to go to heaven to meet Allah."

It was last February that the special intelligence report Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin documented the same circumstances Gabriel described.

At that time, it was revealed in the special report that intelligence agents for Britain's MI5 service found that Muslim doctors trained at some of Britain's leading teaching hospitals had returned to their own countries to fit surgical implants filled with explosives.

The report documented that women suicide bombers recruited by al-Qaida were known to have had the explosives inserted in their breasts under techniques similar to breast enhancing surgery. The lethal explosives – usually PETN (pentaerythritol Tetrabitrate) – are inserted during the operation inside the plastic shapes. The breast is then sewn up.

The report said similar surgery has been performed on male suicide bombers. In their cases, the explosives are inserted in the appendix area or in a buttock. Both are parts of the body that diabetics use to inject themselves with their prescribed drugs.

The report at the time quoted Jonathan Evans, head of MI5, saying, "Properly inserted the implant would be virtually impossible to detect by the usual airport scanning machines. You would need to subject a suspect to a sophisticated X-ray. Given that the explosive would be inserted in a sealed plastic sachet, and would be a small amount, would make it all the more impossible to spot it with the usual body scanner."

Experts confirmed in the report that a sachet containing as little as five ounces of PETN when activated would blow "a considerable hole" in a jet airliner, guaranteeing a crash.

Gabriel, who has addressed former Australian Prime Minister John Howard, members of Congress, the Joint Forces Staff College, the U.S. Special Operations Command, the FBI and members of the British Parliament, said the only accurate way to spot terrorists is to use the profiling techniques used in Israel, which despite being a major target for terrorism, has a substantially safe airline industry.

"They know how to profile, ask the right questions. This is what it's going to take," she said. "We need to throw political correctness in the garbage where it belongs. This is the time for the public to rise up and demand public officials to come up with ways to identity the threats by name."

Gabriel, who is author of the New York Times best-seller "Because they hate: A survivor of Islamic terror warns America," and "They Must Be Stopped: Why we must defeat radical Islam and how we can do it," was a news anchor for "World News," the Arabic evening news broadcast for Middle East Television seen throughout Israel, Egypt, Syria, Jordan and Lebanon. She covered the Israeli withdrawal from Central Lebanon, the Israeli Security Zone and the Palestinian uprising in the West Bank and Gaza. Her work was international in scope, bringing her in contact with world figures such as Margaret Thatcher, George H. Bush Sr., Itshak Rabin, Shimon Perez and Ariel Sharon.

She moved to the U.S. in 1989 and founded a television production company that worked with "The Today Show," "Oprah," "Dr. Phil" and others.

She told WND in Israel, terror experts are trained to watch for eye movements, breathing rates and other physical indicators that a "passenger" is more than just that.

Even something as simple as a cologne or perfume can be an indicator, she said, because terrorists essentially are preparing themselves to enter heaven.

Those factors can pinpoint a potential terrorist whether they are dark-skinned and named Mohammed or they are six-foot-tall, blue-eyed, blonde holders of American passports, she said.

The current TSA demands "insult our intelligence," she said. "It's nothing more than window dressing. … The American public must come together and revolt against these procedures. The Obama administration has failed in identifying our problem. The administration is not paying attention to terrorism."

She called out Obama even for his decisions to eradicate references such as "Islamic terrorist," "jihad" and "Islamic radicals" from the speech of the government.

"How on earth can we win against the jihadists if we are afraid to identify them by name," she said.

National security appeal to Congress

2010-12-06T17:23:00.000-05:00

“Citizen Appeal to the 112th Congress”

Add your name to this ten-point appeal to
safeguard our National Security

Two weeks ago the American people voted for a change of direction in the Congress.

Today we launch our “Citizen Appeal to the 112th Congress.”

Among our ten point National Security appeal, we are calling on Congress to…

Secure our border and protect us from the increasing flow of terrorists into America.
Oppose any accommodation to shariah law.
Address the threat of the Muslim Brotherhood and its front organizations in America.
Pressure the Obama administration to accurately define our enemy as “jihadists.”
Oppose civilian criminal trials for enemy combatants.
Amend our humanitarian refugee acts to require that all refugees who enter the United States swear under oath they will not support any theological totalitarian political system, under penalty of deportation.
To read the entire “Citizen Appeal” and to add your name to this grassroots document, click here.

We understand that foremost on many voters’ minds were the issues of the economy, the national debt, and what became known as “Obamacare.”

But defending our national security and our freedoms, which should be the top priority of our Congress in its fulfillment of the oath to uphold and defend the Constitution, must not be overlooked.

The good news is we know there are many Members of Congress who agree with us, and some of them will be assuming key leadership positions in the new Congress.

This grassroots “Citizen Appeal” will let them know we support their efforts. For those Members of Congress who are not paying the attention they should to these issues, our appeal will be a trumpet blast reminding them that failure to safeguard our national security is not acceptable to us.

So please read and add your name to this important document. Our plan is to deliver this sometime in February, not long after the new Congress is gaveled into session.

And please forward this email to everyone you know. Let your voice be heard!

CAIR's latest outrageous demand

2010-12-06T17:18:00.000-05:00

CAIR’s latest demand demonstrates once again it wants shariah law in America

Taking off shoes, belts and jewelry. Removing coats. Taking computers out of their cases. Removing any trace of metal from pockets. Being subjected to pat downs and tests for explosives.

This is the ordeal every passenger flying on a commercial airline in America has to endure, thanks to past terrorist acts and the threat of future acts.

We’re sure you’ll be pleased to learn that in February the Fiqh Council of North America issued a fatwa, or religious ruling, that full-body scanners now used at many airports violate shariah law.

According to the report below, CAIR, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, has endorsed this fatwa and issued a travel warning telling Muslim women that they have the right to object to “enhanced pat downs.”

Remember, it is CAIR’s Oklahoma affiliate director that filed the suit to block Oklahoma’s prohibition of the use of shariah law in courts. It was CAIR’s co-founder, Omar Ahmad, who said in 1998 he wanted the Qur’an to be highest authority in America.

CAIR’s latest action should remove any doubt. CAIR’s real agenda is the imposition of shariah law in America.

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/muslim-group-advises-women-wearing-hijab

Muslim Group Advises Women Wearing Hijabs to Allow TSA ‘Enhanced Pat Downs’ Only on Head and Neck Area
Friday, November 12, 2010
By Penny Starr

Muslim women wearing hijabs. (AP Photo)

(CNSNews.com) - The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) has issued a travel warning to Muslim airline passengers on U.S. aircraft in response to the Transportation Safety Administration’s "enhanced pat down" policy that went into effect in late October.

CAIR said Muslims who object to full-body scans for religious reasons should know their rights if they are required to undergo a pat-down, including asking for the procedure to be done in a private place. In addition, CAIR offered a “special recommendation” for Muslim women who wear a hijab, telling them they should tell the TSA officer that they may be searched only around the head and neck.

In the “special recommendations for Muslim women who wear hijab,” it states: “Before you are patted down, you should remind the TSA officer that they are only supposed to pat down the area in question, in this scenario, your head and neck. They SHOULD NOT subject you to a full-body or partial-body pat-down.”

It also states: “Instead of the pat-down, you can always request to pat down your own scarf, including head and neck area, and have the officers per form a chemical swipe of your hands.”

The new TSA pat-downs involving “head-to-toe” screening techniques follow recent airliner bombing attempts. Passengers who reject a full-body scan or who are selected for secondary screening may be searched using the enhanced pat-down.

“Pat downs are one important tool to help TSA detect hidden and dangerous items such as explosives,” a TSA statement issued on Oct. 28 stated. “Passengers should continue to expect an unpredictable mix of security layers that include explosives trace detection, advanced imaging technology, canine teams, among others.”

Posted on its Web site under “TSA’s Head-to-Toe Screening Policies,” the agency said how people are dressed may lead to closer inspection, including baggy or loose clothing. Those policies also include individuals being searched by a “professional” of the same sex. “It is TSA's policy that passengers should be screened by an officer of the same gender in a professional, respectful manner,” the policy reads.

In February, the Figh Council of North America, a group of Islamic scholars, issued a fatwa, or religious ruling, that full-body scanners violate Islamic law.

“It is a violation of clear Islamic teaching that men or women be seen naked by other men and women,” the ruling states. “Islam highly emphasizes haya (modesty) and considers it part of the faith. The Qu’ran has commanded the believers, both men and women, to cover their private parts.”

CAIR endorsed the fatwa, according to a Feb. 21 article in the Detroit Free Press.

Did CAIR help our cause?

2010-12-06T17:16:00.000-05:00

Did CAIR Help Our Cause?

Lawsuit against Oklahoma shariah ban will expose America to CAIR’s real agenda and the oppressive nature of shariah law

Last week, after the Oklahoma affiliate of CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) sued to block the Oklahoma amendment that passed with 70% support, we sent out a national email asserting that this lawsuit reveals CAIR’s real agenda—the advance of shariah law.

Investigative journalist and author Paul Sperry, co-author of the expose’ on CAIR entitled Muslim Mafia, recently posted an Investors Business Daily commentary (below, highlights added) that sheds more light on this.

Just as the Ground Zero Mosque controversy became a vehicle for a national discussion about Imam Rauf’s advocacy of shariah law, so will CAIR’s lawsuit. What’s more, the American people will get to see that current and former leaders of CAIR want Islamic law (shariah) to rule America.

We are not going to try to predict what judges will decide on this lawsuit as it works its way through the courts. But we do agree with Sperry’s comment below, regarding a national debate about shariah law: “This is not a debate CAIR wants to have.”

But we do.

Thank you, CAIR.

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/553407/201011101914/Shining-A-Light-On-Shariah-Creep.aspx

IBD EDITORIALS

Shining A Light On Shariah Creep

Posted 07:14 PM ET November 10, 2010

Islamofascism: The Council on American-Islamic Relations may wish it never sued to overturn an Oklahoma ban on Shariah law. Now the entire nation will get to see it and other Islamists' true anti-American colors.

CAIR is thumping its chest over persuading a Clinton-appointed federal judge to temporarily block Oklahoma from enacting a state constitutional amendment that prohibits state courts from considering Islamic law when deciding cases. Fully 70% of Oklahoma voters passed the landmark measure.

But CAIR has ignited a legal firestorm that will likely rage all the way to the Supreme Court. Thanks to CAIR's latest bit of lawfare, Americans will get to hear a long overdue debate not just about the constitutionality of such bans on Shariah law but about the constitutionality of Shariah law itself.

This is not a debate CAIR wants to have, since it ultimately will have to defend the indefensible. It claims in a press release that Shariah law is "a dynamic legal framework" derived from Islamic scripture "and analytical reasoning." In fact, there's nothing reasoned about it. It's a medieval legal code that administers cruel and unusual punishments such as stonings, amputations and honor killings. Think the Taliban.

Shariah can be seen in action this week with Pakistan's death sentence on a Christian woman for blasphemy. Between 1986 and 2009, at least 974 people have been charged for defiling the Quran or insulting the Muslim Prophet Muhammad.

CAIR, which thinks free speech is a one-way street, is working with the Organization of the Islamic Conference on an international blasphemy law that would criminalize "Islamophobia," according to the book, "Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld That's Conspiring to Islamize America."

Shariah also permits wife-beating, something CAIR also knows about. Its sister organization, the Islamic Society of North America, condones it in its fatwas (or religious rulings) for Muslim Americans. More, CAIR distributes a book, "The Meaning of the Holy Quran," which authorizes men to hit their wives.

CAIR says it's just a "civil rights advocacy group." But the Justice Department says it's a front group for Hamas and its parent, the radical Muslim Brotherhood, a worldwide jihadist movement that has a secret plan to impose Shariah law on the U.S.

"From its founding by Muslim Brotherhood leaders, CAIR conspired with other affiliates of the Muslim Brotherhood to support terrorists," said Assistant U.S. Attorney Gordon Kromberg in a recent court filing.

U.S. prosecutors in 2007 named CAIR an unindicted co-conspirator in a criminal scheme led by the Holy Land Foundation to funnel millions to Hamas suicide bombers and their families.

"CAIR has been identified by the government at trial as a participant in an ongoing and ultimately unlawful conspiracy to support a designated terrorist organization, a conspiracy from which CAIR never withdrew," said Assistant U.S. Attorney Jim Jacks, who recently won an award from Attorney General Eric Holder for convicting the Holy Land terrorists.

Federal courts found "ample evidence" linking CAIR to the conspiracy and are expected to unseal the dossier in coming weeks.

The Holy Land revelations prompted the FBI to sever ties with CAIR until it can demonstrate it's not a terror front. "Until we can resolve whether there continues to be a connection between CAIR or its executives and Hamas, the FBI does not view CAIR as an appropriate liaison partner," advised Assistant FBI Director Richard Powers in a 2009 letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

CAIR's leaders don't want a ban on Shariah law, because they have a secret agenda to institutionalize Shariah law in America.

"I wouldn't want to create the impression that I wouldn't like the government of the United States to be Islamic sometime in the future," CAIR Communications Director Ibrahim Hooper let it slip out to a Minneapolis Star-Tribune reporter in 1993, before CAIR was formed.

CAIR's founding chairman, Omar Ahmad, wants Shariah law to replace the Constitution. "Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant," he told a Muslim audience in Fremont, Calif., in 1998. "The Quran should be the highest authority in America."

CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad is an Islamic supremacist who thinks Muslims should run Washington: "Who better can lead America than Muslims?"

Islamizing America also happens to be the agenda of the Muslim Brotherhood the radical, Cairo-based outlaw group the government says CAIR is fronting for. The founding archives of its U.S. branch, seized in an FBI raid and introduced as evidence in the Holy Land trial, reveal a "strategic goal" of "eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and sabotaging its miserable house ... so that Allah's religion is made victorious over all other religions." The Brotherhood calls its plan a "grand jihad." CAIR argues in its suit that "the Shariah ban's purpose is to stigmatize, denigrate and segregate plaintiff's faith in the public's mind as something foreign and to be feared."

No, the goal is to make sure no Oklahoma judge considers Shariah law in rulings on domestic violence, family law, probate, free speech, contracts and other matters, as judges have in other states, to a wider degree in Canada and now on a routine basis in Britain. The ban is to prevent courts from legitimizing a religious legal system antithetical to the U.S. Constitution in the areas of freedom of speech, equality and humane punishment, among other bedrock Western principles.

Thanks to CAIR's lawsuit, all this can now be aired out for the public.

Saluting our veterans

2010-12-06T17:15:00.000-05:00

Saluting Our Veterans

By Brigitte Gabriel

Dear Press For,

Words tremble on my lips and emotions swell in my heart in my attempt to humbly thank you for all the things you do to protect America and the world. Words cannot express my depth of gratitude to your service, to your sacrifice, to all that you leave behind to go forth into the world and protect America’s interests around the globe.

With deep gratitude I thank you for the nights you slept freezing in a tent or sweating in the desert, for the lonely days you spent missing your loved ones, for the hours you spent sick in pain and without someone holding your hand, for the moments of sheer fright in the heat of battle, for the wounds you have suffered fighting evil, for the endless days in hospitals undergoing painful surgeries, for the precious occasions you have missed back at home. For all of these sacrifices I thank you on behalf of millions of Americans who are so grateful for you. We truly appreciate these sacrifices.

A special thank-you is in order to your families, to the parents who raised you and made you be the man or woman you are today. I thank your wives, husbands, and your loved ones who stand by you and support you with their love and dedication.

And for those who returned in eternal sleep, may your legacy be honored for generations to come, may the tears shed over your coffins fertilize the fields of patriotism in our nation to raise a new generation built on strength and honor, able and willing to follow in your footsteps when duty calls to defend America. May your blood not have been shed in vain. May we prove worthy of your sacrifice. May we always honor your parents so they will always know that they are the parents of an American hero.

You are our brave ones, our heroes, and our national treasures. You are the pride of our nation, our strength and our foundation. Thanks to you, millions have been freed around the world. Thanks to you, those who criticize our country, burn our precious flag, and speak ill of you, are able to do so because their freedom is built upon your blood and your sacrifice.

It is because of you that we launched Veteran Defenders of America. We know that veterans still want to serve their country and I encourage you, whether you are a veteran or family member of one, to visit the Veteran Defenders of America website to see what you can do to continue making a difference for America.

I salute you one and all. I bow before you in respect and humility. May God bless you and bless America, land of the free and home of the brave, and the dream that became my address.

Brigitte Gabriel
President, ACT! for America

It's all about sharia

2010-12-06T17:13:00.000-05:00

NPR & Juan Williams; State Question 755 & CAIR; Imam Rauf & the Ground Zero Mosque—It’s all about sharia

Thanks to the national controversy surrounding the Ground Zero Mosque, this year more Americans became aware of a term many had never heard before—sharia law.

This past weekend Human Events published a column (see below) co-authored by ACT! for America president Brigitte Gabriel and executive director Guy Rodgers, dealing with the recent sacking of Juan Williams by NPR and what this means regarding sharia law.
One week ago ACT! for America efforts helped win overwhelming passage of a constitutional amendment in Oklahoma prohibiting its courts from using sharia law when deciding cases.
Two days later, the Oklahoma chapter of CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) filed a lawsuit against the Oklahoma amendment.

These events and more are awakening Americans to the realization that the threat of radical Islam goes beyond the threat of terrorism. Terrorism is but one means to an end, and the ultimate end is the advancement of sharia law around the world, whether through violent jihad or stealth jihad.

When you forward our email alerts, encourage others to sign up for those alerts, make a contribution, or start or join a local chapter, you are helping us continue building the grassroots citizen action network that is effectively pushing back against the threat of radical Islam, both violent and stealth jihad, and its objective—the imposition of sharia law.

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=39797

NPR, Juan Williams, and Sharia Law
by Brigitte Gabriel and Guy Rodgers
11/07/2010

NPR’s sacking of Juan Williams was more than the politically correct act du jour. It was the latest in a series of media and political capitulations to Sharia law.

A central provision of Sharia law is its prohibition against speech that can be construed as “defaming” Islam or the prophet Mohammed. Where Sharia is practiced and enforced, such “defamation” is a criminal offense that can be punished by death.

In other words, what we in America take for granted as free speech is a capital crime in some areas of the Muslim world.

Islamists around the world are seeking to impose Sharia’s muzzling of free speech on free societies. The Organization of the Islamic Conference, composed of 56 Islamic states, has won passage of a United Nations resolution calling on countries to criminalize speech that “defames” religion—clearly referring to Islam. After all, does anyone really expect countries like Saudi Arabia to criminalize speech that “defames” Judaism?

Criminalizing speech that is deemed “defamation” of Islam is tantamount to a backdoor enactment of Sharia law. The law may have a different name or description, such as prohibiting “hate speech,” but the effect on speech is the same as if Sharia law were in place.

The Netherlands and Austria are two countries where such de facto “Sharia-compliant” laws are in effect. Dutch Member of Parliament Geert Wilders is currently on trial for publicly criticizing Islam. Austrian Parliamentarian Susanne Winter was convicted of a similar “crime” in early 2009. And just last week we were informed that Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff, an Austrian who is an ACT! for America member and chapter leader in our expanding international program, will go on trial there for allegedly transgressing the same law.

When newspapers around the world, including most in America, refused to publish the satirical Mohammed cartoons, capitulation to de facto Sharia law occurred. The ostensible reason was to avoid “offending” or “inflaming” the Muslim world. The practical effect was a widespread media self-censorship that was every bit as much a compliance with Sharia law as if Sharia law were the actual law of the land.

Some Muslims and Islamic organizations such as the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) argue that such self-censorship is necessary because without it “Islamophobia” will continue to rise. But there is more here than meets the eye.

Immediately after Juan Williams’ appearance on The O’Reilly Factor, CAIR swung into action and demanded that NPR “address” what Juan Williams said.

Ibrahim Hooper, CAIR spokesman, appeared on Megyn Kelly’s program on Fox News to defend CAIR’s actions. Tellingly, he failed to reiterate his comment made in a 1993 article in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune, in which he said, “I wouldn’t want to give the impression that I wouldn’t like the government of the United States to be Islamic sometime in the future.”

CAIR co-founder Omar Ahmad expressed a similar sentiment in 1998 when he was quoted in two California newspapers maintaining that “the Koran should be the highest authority in America.”

In other words, he wants Sharia law, not the Constitution, to be the supreme law of the land.

Contrast Hooper’s statement with one recently made by moderate and reformist Muslim Dr. Tawfik Hamid:

"Organizations like ACT! for America have come into existence because of the very real threat posed to free people everywhere by what some call “radical Islam” or “Islamism.” Sadly, the response I see from too many in the Muslim world is to reflexively label such efforts as “Islamophobic” rather than [to] conduct a serious evaluation of Islam that asks why so many non-Muslims harbor legitimate fears and concerns. I believe [that] the Muslim world needs to provide a peaceful understanding of the religion that unambiguously rejects the current mainstream teachings in Islam that promote hatred, discrimination, and violence. It is the responsibility of Islamic scholars to provide such alternative teaching to Muslims before asking the world to stop engaging in so-called “Islamophobia.”

Hamid’s reference to the harboring of “legitimate fears” by non-Muslims speaks directly to what Juan Williams was expressing. Don’t shut down free speech. Instead, we should encourage more speech that candidly addresses the threat of radical Islam and what that threat means to Americans, whether they are Muslim or non-Muslims.

It’s clear that NPR decided to make an example of Juan Williams for crossing a line into the Forbidden Zone of political correctness when he spoke out on the “sensitive” issue of Islam. But NPR’s action transcends the boundaries of political correctness. As newspapers did when they self-censored cartoon renderings of the prophet Mohammed, NPR sent an unmistakable message to Islamists worldwide that Sharia law, even when not formally the law of the land, trumps our First Amendment.

Ground Zero Mosque event

2010-12-06T17:12:00.000-05:00

Ground Zero Mosque petition to be
delivered November 18^th

Last chance to add your name to the
over 117,000 who have signed

On November 18, 2010, at 11:00 A.M., ACT! for America will hold a news conference on the steps of New York City Hall to announce the final results of our national petition opposing the Ground Zero Mosque, and to deliver the petition to Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

Guy Rodgers, ACT! for America Executive Director, will be making a statement to the media and then answer media questions.

If you haven’t yet signed the petition, there’s still time to do so before we close the petition in preparation for delivering it to Mayor Bloomberg on November 18^th.

Also, if you live in the New York City area or plan on being in the area on November 18^th, we invite and encourage you to attend the news conference. New York City Hall is located at Broadway and Park Row, and the news conference will be on the City Hall steps.

ACT! for America is proud of the role we played in educating Americans about the Ground Zero Mosque. In addition to our petition and the many emails we put out, Brigitte Gabriel did over 200 radio and television interviews between April and September.

Without question these actions helped created and propel the national groundswell that resulted in 70% of Americans being opposed to the Ground Zero Mosque.

While media coverage of this issue has died down, the opposition isn’t going away.

CAIR sues Oklahoma sharia ban

2010-12-06T17:10:00.000-05:00

CAIR sues to block Oklahoma sharia ban

CAIR’s real agenda revealed

“Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Qur’an should be the highest authority in America.”

Omar Ahmad, CAIR co-founder, quoted in the San Ramon Valley Herald,
July 4, 1998

As the National Journal story reports below, the Oklahoma chapter of CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) has filed suit to block implementation of State Question 755, known as the “Save Our State” amendment.

SQ 755 prohibits Oklahoma courts from using sharia law when judging cases. The amendment was overwhelmingly approved by Oklahoma voters, garnering over 70% support.

ACT! for America played a key role in educating the voters about SQ 755, including two weeks of statewide radio advertising, 600,000 automated phone calls with a message recorded by former CIA director James Woolsey, editorials and letters to the editor, and radio interviews.

Prior to the vote CAIR’s Oklahoma director had argued SQ 755 was unnecessary because there was no chance sharia was coming to Oklahoma.

The CAIR lawsuit now confirms what CAIR leaders have said in the past—CAIR’s real agenda is the importation of sharia law to America.

Consider Omar Ahmad’s quote above. What is he actually saying? That sharia law should govern America.

Consider this 1993 quote from Ibrahim Hooper, CAIR’s current communications director, who told the Minneapolis Star-Tribune: “I wouldn’t want to create the impression that I wouldn’t like the government of the United States to be Islamic sometime in the future.”

What is Hooper saying? That sharia law should govern America.

Not surprisingly, in recent years CAIR has been quiet about this agenda, but now that agenda has been smoked out by SQ 755, a measure which is not discriminatory nor inhibits the practice of religious Islam, but protects non-Muslims and Muslims alike from the tyranny of sharia law.

STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT
Muslim Group Sues Oklahoma Over Sharia Amendment

By Althea Fung

Friday, November 5, 2010 | 8:06 a.m.

A Muslim advocacy group is suing to stop a measure approved by Oklahoma voters on Tuesday that would ban judges in the state from considering Islamic law in court proceedings.

About 70 percent of voters approved State Question 755, which says “the courts shall not consider international law or Sharia Law.”

Muneer Awad, director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations's Oklahoma chapter, filed the suit in U.S. District Court to block officials from certifying the measure. Awad told the Wall Street Journal the measure violates the First Amendment right to practice religion without government intervention.

CAIR legal adviser Gadeir Abbas said SQ755 was "designed to stigmatize Muslims, to turn the Constitution of Oklahoma into a vehicle for oppressing a minority that is currently unpopular."

The "Save Our State Amendment" was proposed by Republican state Sen. Anthony Sykes, who said the amendment isn’t about persecuting Muslims but keeping the Oklahoma judiciary system from “sliding down a slippery slope.”

Former CIA Director Jim Woolsey, who worked to get the amendment passed, said on Fox and Friends this morning that it's about not allowing criminals to use religious code to circumvent the system when they're "prosecuted for beating or assaulting their wives or daughters."

“What we really need to do is make sure people can’t void the impact of criminal law by citing their religious beliefs,” he said.

In New Jersey, a judge declined to place a restraining order on a Moroccan man who forced his wife to have sex. The ruling was later overturned.

A hearing is set for Monday.

OK voters say 'no' to sharia law

2010-12-06T17:09:00.000-05:00

Oklahoma Voters Overwhelmingly

Say “NO” to Sharia Law

The “Power of the Gavel” changes in Washington

A Post-Election Analysis by Guy Rodgers,
Executive Director, ACT! for America

Largely unnoticed amid last night’s story of the Republicans winning back the U.S. House and making significant gains in the Senate was the Oklahoma vote on State Question 755.

SQ 755 was a state constitutional amendment that will prohibit Oklahoma courts from using sharia law in deciding cases. It passed overwhelmingly last night with 70% support!

But this outcome was by no means a foregone conclusion. On October 7th, a poll was released with these results on SQ 755: 45% in favor, 25% opposed, 30% undecided.

Two major newspapers editorialized against it. The CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) affiliate in Oklahoma spoke out repeatedly against it in the media with its shop-worn “Islamophobia” propaganda.

We here at ACT! for America surmised that the high undecided percentage reflected voter misunderstanding of the issue AND confusion as to which way to vote on the initiative. And when voters are confused on a ballot initiative like this, they tend to either not vote on it or vote against it.

On October 18^th ACT! for America launched a two-week statewide radio ad in support of SQ 755. Then, on October 21^st, 26^th, and November 1^st we dropped a total of 600,000 automated calls to Oklahoma voters with a message urging support of SQ 755 from James Woolsey, former director of the CIA.

Additionally, we placed an editorial in one of the state’s major newspapers, sent multiple emails to our members, and conducted several radio and print media interviews.

The 70% support demonstrates that our efforts to educate the voters and clear up any confusion were immensely successful.

This 70% victory was significant because this was the first time voters had a chance to vote in a statewide election on the issue of sharia law. The overwhelming margin sends an unequivocal message to Islamic organizations and Muslims, such as Ground Zero Mosque Imam Rauf, who advocate sharia law for America—sharia law is not welcome here!

As for the other election results, from the ACT! for America perspective the most important consequence is that “the power of the gavel” will switch in the U.S. House of Representatives.

By this I mean key committees, such as the Homeland Security Committee, will likely be chaired by Members of Congress who truly understand the threat radical Islam poses to our national security and who will have a different list of priorities regarding what bills to consider and hearings to hold.

The legislative calendar, controlled by the Speaker of the House, will also reflect different priorities regarding what bills to bring to a vote before the full House.

This is a MAJOR step forward in our legislative efforts on Capitol Hill. Bills we supported this year that didn’t even get a committee hearing will receive the serious and thoughtful consideration they deserve. Prospects for House passage during the next two years of some of our legislative priorities have improved dramatically as a result of last night’s election results.

Without question, most voters were making their decisions based on concerns about the economy, jobs, federal spending and ballooning deficits, and what became known as “ObamaCare.”

But as exits polls I saw revealed, voter concerns about national security were lurking just beneath the surface. Americans are aware of the increase in homegrown jihadism and there is a growing consciousness about the threat of sharia law.

These election results not only bode well for progress in the Congress on our legislative agenda, they also bode well for increased pressure on the Obama administration to adjust the way it is defining and addressing the threat of radical Islam.

Fake Bomb Plot??? Very suspicious!

2010-10-30T22:26:00.000-04:00

IT STINKS OF HIGH HEAVEN!

I leave you with a thought.

According to Steven Emerson, the "bombs" were found disabled with wires hanging loose. They were found not in the USA - but in Dubai and the UK. In Arabia and England. CNN said the bombs were "operational." I suppose this hype is in concert from instructions from up high. In contrast to terror expert Steve Emerson's opinion.

It was reported that none other than the Saudis notified the Obama Administration about the plot. Natch. The "bombs" had loose wires and were amateurishly constructed. No one knows where the bombs came from. No perps are connected to them other than from allegations from the president. No one took credit for the "bombs." They didn't explode and couldn't explode. No other intel agency is providing information or confirmation of legitimacy to the story. In other words, it seems to be much ado about nothing.

Wherefrom the Saudi Connection?

And why?

Why now, three days before the elections?

ANSWER:

The Jewish Vote and Jewish Money that gets presidents and Democratic congressmen and senators elected.

American Jews have been disappointed by Obama for good reason and have been fleeing the Democratic Party in droves, their numbers dropped from over 80% support in 2008 to below 40% today. It's election time friends. Just a reminder.

Because of Obama's estranging America from Israel to the benefit of the Arabs and no one else - the Saudis to be specific - they are losing the Jewish vote and Jewish funds. Wall Street money for example, supported Obama three to one in 2008. Wall Street today is no longer supporting Obama and "Friends." In fact, among the four major Jewish fund managers who all supported Obama, not one is on his side today. Among those about to lose their seats in Congress are Jewish politicians.

Think of the TIMING for this fabricated "crisis" that began with Saudi notification, the collapsing Israeli-Palestinian "Peace" Talks, the estrangement of Jews from the Democratic Party partially because of Obama's anti-Israeli policies, partially because of his mishandling of the economy and other foreign policy, and the upcoming Tuesday's elections when desperate Democrats will be decimated even as they are about to bus the living-dead to the polls.

NOTE: Nothing was found on the jetliner that was escorted by Canadian and American fighter jets into JFK Airport.

F-15 Fighter just like the two that escorted the Emirates plane into JFK airport.

The news conferences were hastily called to "impress" the public, this accompanied by photographs of the "bombs." Tonight we see reports on CNN showing planes being blown up by bombs. No connection to these non-bombs. This is investigative reporting by innuendo. There is no evidence that these bombs could have done any serious harm, no evidence that they were valid plants by terrorists.

The so-called "targets" were synagogues in Chicago - Obama's home town.

The targets were Jews.

Was this the optimum time for Obama do "do something for the Jews" to deflect criticism and "mend things?"

After all, he stopped Jews from being blown up while worshipping. He "saved": Jewish lives.

I have a bridge to sell you.

You know the answer. I know the answer. Most of America will eventually find out.

This terrorist plot appears to be a hoax. A fabrication. It was conveniently timed for the upcoming elections and aimed at America's Jews who vote. If it was a conspiracy, as it may indeed be, I can't prove it, it was a conspiracy between friends. Not friends of America or the Jews.

Speaking only for myself, this scenario appears to be just like the election of 2008. A con job.

Orchestrated. Media supported Hope and Change.

What I see is shameless sensationalism, a staged production, and the media's willful reluctance to not investigate any of it.

There are no questions. Only answers.

What we have here is a government "story" that the mainstream is happily and cluelessly validating and hyping.

It is propaganda.

Take my word: No perps will ever be found.

- AGB

DHS swears in an Islamist

2010-10-29T15:22:00.000-04:00

DHS swears in an Islamist

Elections have consequences

On the weekend before the crucial mid-term elections, we bring you the juxtaposition of two recent events.

First, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano swore in three new members of the Homeland Security Advisory Council—one of whom, Mohamed Elibiary, was a speaker at a 2004 event honoring the Ayatollah Khomeini!

When a Dallas Morning News reporter exposed Elibiary, Elibiary threatened him. Incredibly, Elibiary is someone Napolitano believes should now be on the Homeland Security Advisory Council.

Second, two weeks ago German Chancellor Angela Merkel, in an obvious reference to the tidal wave of Muslim immigrants to Germany, made the stunning statement that multiculturalism in Germany has “totally failed.”

This is emblematic of the broader pushback against the rising threat of radical Islam that is occurring throughout Europe—except, as celebrated author Melanie Phillips points out, in Great Britain (see story below).

Europe is beginning to understand the threat of radical Islam. More and more of the American people are beginning to understand the threat of radical Islam. Unfortunately, it is clear that much of the Obama administration, as illustrated by Napolitano’s latest blunder, does not.

Elections have consequences. Please remember this when you vote.

http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.7684/pub_detail.asp

October 19, 2010

Britain: Groveling Alone

Melanie Phillips

Angela Merkel has got the point. Multiculturalism has failed, she states flatly, as she surveys western Europe going down under the tide of radical Islam. Rather than liberal society creating the utopia of harmonious cultural pluralism, it is being swallowed whole by the giant predator whose voracious mouth it encourages, in the spirit of tolerance, to open ever wider in the unshakeable belief of western liberals that the jaws about to snap shut around their necks are actually stretched wide in a smile.

All over mainland Europe, a few shoes are belatedly – maybe too late -- starting to drop.

France and Belgium have banned the burqa and other countries are debating doing the same.

Switzerland has banned minarets.

Denmark has imposed ferocious limits on immigration.

In the Netherlands the prosecution in the case against the Dutch politician Geert Wilders for allegedly inciting religious hatred -- through his criticism of Islamic hatred -- has thrown in the towel and asked the judges to acquit him of all charges. See here for an authoritative analysis of the significance of this.

And so what of dear old Blighty, the country which in 1940 stood alone against the threat to democratic life and liberty and the values of western liberalism? Is the shoe of reality starting to drop in the UK too?

A report by Quilliam about City University, central London, states that a hard-line Islamist ideology is being promoted through the leadership of the university’s student Islamic Society, leading to increased religious tensions on campus and to the intimidation and harassment of staff, students and members of minority groups by extremists and increasing the risks of students turning to terrorism.

Ahmadi Muslims in south London have been targeted by Islamists in a hate campaign, and a Muslim woman in Bradford has died after being set on fire (via JihadWatch), underlining the fact that Muslims are themselves front-line victims of Islamic jihadis and sharia law.

And in the Sunday Telegraph, Andrew Gilligan continues to chronicle the remorseless takeover of an entire London borough, Tower Hamlets, by the radicals of the Islamic Forum of Europe using intimidation, infiltration and corruption:

According to one of its own leaflets, the IFE – based at the hardline East London Mosque in Tower Hamlets – wants to change the ‘very infrastructure of society, its institutions, its culture, its political order and its creed … from ignorance to Islam.’ The group is accused by one of the area’s Labour MPs, Jim Fitzpatrick, of infiltrating and ‘corrupting’ his party in a way similar to the Militant Tendency in the 1980s.

The response of other newspapers to what’s going on in Tower Hamlets? As far as I can make out, deafening silence. And what is the response of the rest of the British thinking classes to this and countless other signs of increasing Islamisation and Islamic radicalisation in Britain?

The hitherto resolutely counter-counter-cultural think-tank Civitas, which in the past has produced some outstanding social and cultural analysis, has just published a set of essays on Women, Islam and Western Liberalism in which one author, Alveena Malik, states that the full-face Islamic veil, or niqab, should be regarded

‘...as part of a modern British way of life.’

She continued: ‘The wearing of religious symbols, including the full veil, should be a fundamental human right of an individual in both the public and private sphere. The real test for religious symbols in the public sphere should always be: “Does the wearing of a symbol (such as the kirpan, turban, yarmulke, crucifix and the veil) hinder a citizen’s ability to perform their public civic duties?”’ Britain is in a ‘unique’ position to embrace such a public display of faith because of the role the church plays in the affairs of the state and its ‘multicultural diversity’.

To be fair, the Civitas pamphlet contains other views which profoundly disagree with this. Even so, the idea that advocating as ‘part of the British way of life’ the niqab, which presents such an obvious danger to security as well as intimidating non-radical Muslim women, inciting religious subversion by serving as a symbolic call to arms against western values and destroying the equality inherent in human interaction by virtue of the simple act that we can all see each other’s faces – the idea that this is, as Civitas appears to suggest, a contribution towards liberal diversity, is simply grotesque.

And here’s the thing: the Telegraph also tells us:

Mrs Malik was appointed by last government to a panel of faith advisers for the Department for Communities. She has overseen British Council guidance on ‘intercultural dialogue’.

It looks horribly like, seventy years on, Britain is now once again alone -- this time, though, not standing but grovelling on its knees before those bent upon the extinction of freedom.

U.S. Islamic jurists sanction marital rape

2010-10-29T15:19:00.000-04:00

American Muslim jurists

rule that forcing a wife to
have sex is not rape

Exposing their ignorance, there have been those in the media who have arrogantly dismissed Oklahoma’s proposed amendment that would prohibit its courts from using sharia law in deciding cases.

They assert that there is no threat from sharia to America. We beg to differ.

As our friend and historian Andrew Bostom notes in his column below, the Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America has ruled that a husband forcing his wife to have sexual relations is not rape. Scroll down to the highlighted segment to read their fatwa on this matter.

As you read it, remember—this is the Assembly of Muslim Jurists of AMERICA—not Iran or Saudi Arabia.

If you would like to help out our efforts to win passage of the ballot initiative in Oklahoma, where we have been running a radio ad statewide for nearly two weeks and doing hundreds of thousands of automated calls, please click here.

http://www.andrewbostom.org/blog/2010/10/14/sharia-sanctioned-marital-rape-in-britain%E2%80%94and-north-america/

Sharia-Sanctioned Marital Rape in Britain—And North America

Posted By Andrew Bostom On October 14, 2010

^[1]

Britain’s Sharia Council Avatars of Islamic Misogyny

(Maulana Abu Sayeed being seated second, going from right to left)

As reported in the UK Independent ^[2] (10/14/10), president of the Islamic Sharia Council in Britain, Sheikh Maulana Abu Sayeed, has reiterated alarming comments made during a March, 2010 interview ^[3], sanctioning marital rape.

Sheikh Sayeed was in fact responding to an inchoate effort at modernizing the contracts which govern Muslim marriages in Britain. The good Sheikh, representing Britain’s main Islamic Sharia court, the Islamic Sharia Council ^[4], promptly published a rebuttal of the contract, which included a statement on sexual abuse (page 6 here ^[5]). He opined [3] in the March interview:

Clearly there cannot be any “rape” within the marriage. Maybe “aggression”, maybe “indecent activity.”

He further rejected both the characterization of non-consensual marital sex as rape, and the prosecution of such offenders as “not Islamic.” Sheikh Sayeed, who came to Britain from Bangladesh in 1977, also brazenly expressed his Sharia-supremacism and accompanying disdain for Western, i.e., British Law, stating

…to make it exactly as the Western culture demands is as if we are compromising Islamic religion with secular non-Islamic values.

Sayeed re-affirmed these sentiments to The UK Independent ^[2]:

In Islamic sharia, rape is adultery by force. So long as the woman is his wife, it cannot be termed as rape.

Crowing with pride during his March 2010 interview ^[3], Sheikh Sayeed maintained,

No other sharia council can claim they are so diverse as ours because other sharia councils, they are following one school of fiqh [Islamic jurisprudence]. Ours is diverse –we are hanafi, shafi’i, hanbali.we have Bangladeshi…we have Pakistani, we have Indian, we have Palestinian, we have Somali scholars on our board.

At present there are 16 main sharia courts around Britain, located in Birmingham, Bradford, and Ealing in West London. These institutions are “complemented” by more informal sharia-based tribunals—the think tank Civitas asserting that up to 85 tribunals currently exist ^[6] in Britain.

But for those who naively—and smugly—proclaim such phenomena are absent within the Muslim communities of North America, consider AMJA, the Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America ^[7]. AMJA’s mission statement claims the organization was, “…founded to provide guidance for Muslims living in North America…AMJA is a religious organization that does not exploit religion to achieve any political ends, but instead provides practical solutions within the guidelines of Islam and the nation’s laws to the various challenges experienced by Muslim communities.”

In response to the specific query, “Is there a such thing as Marital Rape?,” the AMJA issued fatwa #2982 ^[8]:

In the name of Allah, all praise is for Allah, and may peace and blessing be upon the Messenger of Allah and his family. To proceed:

For a wife to abandon the bed of her husband without excuse is haram [forbidden]. It is one of the major sins and the angels curse her until the morning as we have been informed by the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace). She is considered nashiz (rebellious) under these circumstances. As for the issue of forcing a wife to have sex, if she refuses, this would not be called rape, even though it goes against natural instincts and destroys love and mercy, and there is a great sin upon the wife who refuses; and Allah Almighty is more exalted and more knowledgeable.

An ocean apart from Britain—now a recognized Western hotbed for “Islamic fundamentalism”—the same Sharia-sanctioned misogynistic bigotry prevails in a North American clerical organization openly advising US and Canadian Muslims.

NPR, tax funding, and sharia law

2010-10-29T15:17:00.000-04:00

Time to stop taxpayer funding of NPR

Sign our Open Letter to Congress today!

Nearly 9,000 have signed so far

Regardless of whether one listens to NPR or not, or likes NPR or not, there’s one thing we should all be able to agree on: NPR’s sacking last week of Juan Williams was an egregious offense to our First Amendment. It was all the more egregious because NPR receives a portion of its funding from us—the taxpayers.

This isn’t about liberal or conservative, Republican or Democrat. As we noted in our Friday email, NPR’s action goes beyond the “usual” political correctness. It is in effect a capitulation to the demands of sharia law that no critique or criticism of Islam or Mohammed be allowed.

NPR’s claim that it doesn’t allow the expression of “opinions” by its commentators rings hollow. Of course it does—so long as they toe a certain politically correct line.

Several Members of Congress have publicly proclaimed that it’s time to stop the taxpayer funding of NPR. We agree. Therefore, we are urging you to click here to read our one-page “Open Letter to Congress,” calling for an end to taxpayer funding of NPR.

Please sign this letter today and forward this email to everyone you know. If NPR wants to kowtow to sharia’s suppression of speech, it should do so without any taxpayer funding.

NPR, Juan Williams, and sharia

2010-10-26T08:09:00.000-04:00

NPR, Juan Williams, and
sharia law

Contact NPR today!

Our email yesterday focused on how sharia law’s prohibition against any critique or criticism of Islam or Mohammed is negatively impacting our nation’s ability to publicly discuss and debate the issue of radical Islam.

Almost as if on cue, National Public Radio sacked commentator Juan Williams because of remarks he made on The O’Reilly Factor Monday.

This goes beyond political correctness. This is a media company, partially financed with our tax dollars, in effect doing the bidding of sharia law. American newspapers that refused to publish the satirical Mohammed cartoons did the same thing.

With these actions they betrayed the first amendment while capitulating to the demands of sharia law.

Particularly disturbing is that there is the appearance that NPR was kowtowing to CAIR, the Council-on American Islamic Relations, which quickly organized a public relations effort demanding NPR “address” Juan Williams’ remarks. (To see the CAIR media release, click here.)

CAIR is the organization whose co-founder, Omar Ahmad, is on record declaring “the Qur’an should be the highest authority in America,” and whose chief spokesman, Ibrahim Hooper, has said he would like the government of America to be Islamic sometime in the future.

We urge you to contact NPR and express your outrage, in a firm but civil tone, at this politically correct assault on freedom of speech.

• NPR “Listener Care” phone number: 202.513.3232.

• Or, click here to send an email.

Let NPR know the American people will not sit idly by while a taxpayer-funded media company runs roughshod over the First Amendment.

And watch for our email on Monday, when we will announce our next action step!

What is Muslim Free Speech?

2010-10-26T08:07:00.000-04:00

Why Islamists suppress
free speech

Recent forum and debate expose this Achilles heel

DAny critique or expose’ of Islam is usually met with name-calling (e.g., “Islamophobia”) from Islamists and their enablers, rather than rational or factual responses and rebuttals.

There are at least two reasons for this.

First, sharia law does not provide for nor protect free speech. Criticism of Islam, Allah or Mohammed is a criminal offense. When Muslims attempt to suppress free speech critiques of Islam they are abiding by sharia law, and insisting that we non-Muslims bow before sharia law as well. They frequently get furious when we refuse to do so.

Second, as two examples below will attest, public discourse and debates about radical Islam reveal the truth that Islamists don’t want Americans to see. Hence, they rant, rave, and name call in the hopes of demonizing those who dare to expose the truth so as to keep the truth from the American people.

Two recent events reveal why Islamists and their enablers avoid genuine debate.

A recent event held in Des Moines, Iowa, entitled “A Forum on Being An American Muslim,” produced a very illuminating exchange, where ACT! for America chapter leader Steve Kirby’s question about sharia law and free speech was completely ignored by the Muslim moderator. The moderator went so far as to prevent Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, a reformist Muslim, from answering the question by taking the microphone from him! To read Steve’s short summary of this incident, please click here. (You will need Adobe Acrobat to open the PDF).

A recent debate was held in New York, debating the motion “Is Islam a religion of peace?” To view this fascinating debate, please click here.

Prior to the debate, the audience members were polled as to their position on the motion.

41% were for the motion
25% were against the motion
34% were undecided

After the debate, the audience was polled again. Check out these eye-popping results!

36% were for the motion (a decrease of 5 percentage points)
55% were against the motion (an increase of 30 percentage points)
9% were undecided

In other words, after seeing only one debate, most of the undecideds and some of those who initially agreed that “Islam is a religion of peace” changed their positions to opposing the motion.

Believe it, new FILM, Barack Obama meets Ronald Reagan and they have a chat!

2010-10-19T23:00:00.001-04:00

FILM!

OBAMA MEETS REAGAN. IN A THEATER NEAR YOU, OPENING TODAY!

Subject: IN THEATERS NOW: "I Want Your Money" - A Movie You CAN'T Afford to Miss

The Nation Magazine

Today, I WANT YOUR MONEY – the highly anticipated, hilarious Obama exposé that everyone is talking about - opens in movie theaters nationwide. If you’re tired of Obama’s big-government-tax-and-spend policies, YOU WILL LOVE THIS MOVIE!

Stephen Moore of the Wall St. Journal called it,
“A must see for Americans!”

MovieGuide called it,
"Hilarious, highly informative and inspiring!"
Former Attorney General Ed Meese called it
a “great film; entertaining and very clever!”

And you don't have to be Christian to enjoy this. You can be a Muslim or a Jew, A Buddhist or Hindu, or believe in nothing and actually learn something! If you're a "liberal" you'll probably sober up without a 12 step program and learn everything you never knew!

Click here to find a theater near you:
http://christianmediaonline.info/dbm83/l.php?225292&4095114

Click here to view the trailer:
http://christianmediaonline.info/dbm83/l.php?225293&4095114
(over 3.5 million people have watched the trailer so far!)

*PLEASE FORWARD THIS EMAIL TO FRIENDS AND FAMILY & SEE THE MOVIE THIS OPENING WEEKEND: Oct 15-17

ABOUT THE MOVIE:
I WANT YOUR MONEY is a controversial new film about the competing economic visions championed by Presidents Reagan and Obama – a duel of speeches, wit, animation and narrative that leaves audiences laughing, cheering, yelling... and engages them in the national conversation about the mounting national debt, and why it matters. After all, IT’S YOUR MONEY THEY ARE SPENDING.

Including insightful interviews with Newt Gingrich, Steve Forbes, Ed Meese, Mike Huckabee, John Stossel, Michael Reagan, Congressmen Tom McClintock, Thad McCotter and former California governor Pete Wilson, among many others, EXPLAINING CLEARLY WHY OBAMA’S PLAN HAS FAILED, AND WHAT WE NEED TO DO TO RECOVER.

WHAT PEOPLE ARE SAYING:

“This is not your usual (boring) political documentary. It’s engaging and funny, even as it conveys a serious message about economics and politics.”
- Hans A. von Spakovsky, National Review

“This film will make all American taxpayers laugh, think and, I hope, act to save our jobs, our economy and our future.”
- Grover G. Norquist, Americans for Tax Reform

“A Tea Party party!”
- Kara Swisher, Wall Street Journal

“Barack Obama meets Ronald Reagan, in the Oval Office!”
- Mark Tapscott, Washington Examiner

"Ray Griggs' I WANT YOUR MONEY has achieved the impossible: making the federal government's insatiable appetite for the fruits of your labor both enlightening and entertaining."
- U.S. Rep. Thad McCotter, Republican House Policy Com mittee Chairman

“Why don’t politicians think like us when it comes to money? Watch I WANT YOUR MONEY to find out -- and do it before the next election.”
- Wendy Wright, President of Concerned Women For America

"I WANT YOUR MONEY exposes the venality of the Obama economic plan, but does so in a playful, lighthearted way. The result is that its humor is as devastating as its factual revelations."
- Colin Hanna, Let Freedom Ring

“A sobering yet humorous look at the damage we are doing to our country by shirking our moral responsibility on fiscal discipline."
- FRC Action President Tony Perkins

“Where's the lefty documentarian Michael Moore? A young conservative Moore wannabe is out with new movie, I WANT YOUR MONEY - pretty good, too!”
- Michael Medved, radio talk show host

"I WANT YOUR MONEY is brilliant, entertaining and very funny. Responsible citizens of voting age should view I WANT YOUR MONEY as required viewing."
- Pete Wilson, former Governor of California, US Senator

“Visually inspiring, spiritually uplifting, bravely accurate and at times hysterically funny.“
- Kerri Houston Toloczko, Institute for Liberty

“A concise, viewable history of how America got into its economic mess and what policies will free our country's citizens to prosper once again.”
- David A Keene, President, American Conservative Union

“Educational yet fresh and entertaining."
- Darla Dawald, National Director of ResistNet.com

Sent with permission by:
Christian Media Updates/BuzzPlant
709 W. Main St.
Franklin, TN 37064

March 29, 2005

Workers of the World Unite!!!

A friend of mine, with whom I often debate the merits of private accounts within Social Security, was recently offended by this portion of a Gregory Mankiw article in The New Republic:

The second reason the left hates personal accounts is that, over the long term, they could destroy one of its favorite battle cries: the alleged conflict between evil capitalists and oppressed workers. (“Workers of the world unite; you have nothing to lose but your chains.”) No ambitious political figure today would be stupid enough to quote Marx, but let’s face it, much of the left’s rhetoric is a less elegant paraphrase of his worldview.

Social Security reform could put a stake through the heart of this populism once and for all. After workers develop an equity stake in corporate America, they will start watching CNBC and the “Nightly Business Report.” Their view of how they relate to the economy will fundamentally change. Bush understands this, and it is one reason he talks about an “ownership society.” Democratic leaders understand it as well.Their biggest fear is that a nation of stockholders could easily morph into a nation of Republicans.

The association between Marx and the modern-day left he felt was a cheap shot, and in many ways I agree. It was an easy way for Mankiw to label the opponents of partial privatization, making them guilty by association before any facts were presented.

While I do agree with Mankiw that the flawed ideas of Marx (and Adam Smith for that matter) have had a profound effect on current political philosophies, I believe the case for voluntary personal accounts can stand on its own two feet.

Let's keep the debate to the facts (ala the second paragraph quoted above and the many more good points in the article) and I have no doubt that Americans will be convinced of the benefits of PSAs.

But given the context of the discussion above, I had to laugh when I saw the cover of The Nation as I passed an airport newsstand this weekend:

Do you think The Nation, like Mankiw, would be taken more seriously if they stopped the references to Marx?

October 17: Iraqi PM al Maliki said that Iranian intervention, interference and enabling of terrorism is DESTABILIZING Iraq & the Palestinian Territories!

2010-10-19T22:53:00.000-04:00

Today on Fareed Zakaria on CNN, broadcast world wide, Iraqi PM al Maliki said that Iranian intervention, interference and enabling of terrorism is DESTABILIZING Iraq and the Palestinian Territories! This is coming DIRECTLY from the mouth of the Iraqi PM, a Shiite (Iranian) branch of Islam and a friend of Iran. In other words, American withdrawal from Iraq is, shall I put it mildly, premature. Draw your own conclusions about snatching defeat out of the mouth of victory.

http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/fareed.zakaria.gps/
AL Q'AEDA ADMITS DEFEAT!

MAY OUR SOULS BE SACRIFICED FOR YOU!

Al Q'aeda's new English speaking magazine INSPIRE, a professionally-produced magazine for faithful Jihadists like yours truly, cover and pages reproduced below, admitted that for all intents and purposes al Q'aeda has been defeated with the exception of small operations in Afghanistan. From the magazine you can learn how to make bombs in your mom's kitchen.

The violence in Lebanon, Yemen, and the DISPUTED territories in ISRAEL, according to Iraqi PM al Malaki and every sane person, is promoted by Iran - not al Q'aeda. Al Q'aeda's American spokesman recommends their international cells to give up spectacular operations such as blowing up entire cities, after all they have all failed, and get real: shootings in cafeterias and the use of kitchen knives with which they should go on stabbing sprees. I'm reminded daily why Americans say: Don't bring a knife to a gun fight. It should get really interesting as fifteen Americans with .50 Desert Eagles blow away the towel head as he runs about screaming Allahu Akhbar!

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/american-al-qaeda-proud-traitor/story?id=11855126

Now the only question remaining is, WHO exactly defeated al Q'aeda? Was he this man?:

Or....May I suggest a clue for "liberals" and libertarians who actually believe their own drivel:

LESSON: Never pick up a liberal.
He will either curse you or cry when
the truth is told him!

NEXT: You may have not heard, but before America invaded the Muslim World, there never was war. Muslims never slaughtered Christians or Jews for 1400 years before America was Founded two hundred years ago. And here is TRUTH for ya: Every war America fought for was over lithium batteries for your iPods. Betcha didn't know that!

Two Tin Foil Hat Conspiracy Theories about War: America Wants Control of the World and AA Batteries

2010 October 16

by Lisa Richards

Whether it’s Salon, LewRockwell.com, or the phony has-been wrestler Jesse Ventura, anti-war left-wingers insist America invented every war in existence, because America seeks world dominance and battery power.
These leftists are 9/11 truthers, birthers, and anti-Semites. They are adored by white supremacists, and include every radical fringe element hiding in their mother’s basement.

Here are examples of extremism by two leftists: Glenn Greenwald and Jesse Ventura.

1. War and Terror Never Existed Until George W. Bush

Bush Invented 9/11, Islamic Terror, and War

Radical Libertarian Lew Rockwell published Salon.com Glenn Greenwald’s latest column, “They Hate Us For Our Occupations,” claiming America created violence in the Muslim world by being a war-mongering occupier.

Rockwell advertised the anti-war piece as “What is Wrong with Muslims?” But Rockwell and Salon never discuss the fact that Islam has consistently attacked the West for 1,400 years, attempting world domination and extermination of Jews and Christians; rather, the two spew anti-American hate, calling America an imperialist conqueror justifying illegal wars by using Islamic terrorism as an excuse.

The column starts by rehashing Greenwald’s 2009 Salon piece, “A Rumsfeld-Era Reminder About What Causes Terrorism,”:

The primary rationale for remaining—and escalating [the war]—in Afghanistan is the same all-purpose justification offered for virtually everything the U.S. has done since 2001: Terrorism. Apparently, the way to solve the Terrorist threat is by sending 60,000 more American troops into a Muslim country and committing to at least five more years of war there. That, so the pro-escalation reasoning goes, will make us safer.

Leftists claim it’s anti-American to retaliate against threats and attacks, contending that George W. Bush invented Islamic violence in 2001. Greenwald needs to re-read history. America has been attacked by Islam for 40 years: from the late 1960’s to 9/11, with attacks still continuing. Before 9/11, America negotiated, arrested, and imprisoned as if terrorism is a misdemeanor.

Now we provide terrorists the U.S. court system so they can sue after attacking us.

The Iraq War is considered illegal Bush/Cheney/Obama war-mongering and mass murder, despite Saddam’s decades of mass murdering. No matter, he was never a threat; Saddam pretended to gas, torture, imprison, and bury humans in mass graves. Civilians never died in war until 2001. America is the threat.

Greenwald claims Rumsfeld’s Commission report proves America created Islamic violence:

In 2004, Donald Rumsfeld directed the Defense Science Board Task Force to review the impact …the administration’s policies—specifically the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan—were having on Terrorism and Islamic radicalism. They issued a report in September, 2004…it vigorously condemned the Bush/Cheney approach as entirely counter-productive… worsening the terrorist threat those policies purportedly sought to reduce. The Task Force…[said] the ’underlying sources of threats to America’s national security…’ [are] the ‘negative attitudes’ towards the U.S. in the Muslim world and ‘the conditions that create them…’ what most exacerbates anti-American sentiment, and…the threat of Terrorism? ‘American direct intervention in the Muslim world’ –through our ‘one sided support in favor of Israel…’ and… ‘the American occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan…

The Task Force took sides with Islam over Israel, giving Islamic violence justification as American government officials apologized, yet again, for America fighting evil to save the world.

Typical leftists, be they radical libertarians or Democrats, do not support the prevention of terrorism: to do so is mass murder. Radical libertarians only love America when they fight to lower taxes, end the Fed, and eliminate government excess. Other than that, they are fundamentally anti-American left-wingers.

Greenwald followed up the rant with his latest published in Salon.com and LewRockwell.com. He writes:

[A] new, comprehensive study from Robert Pape, a University of Chicago political science professor and former Air Force lecturer, substantiates what is…already bleedingly obvious and…known to the U.S. Government for many years: namely, that the prime cause of suicide bombings is not Hatred of Our Freedoms or Inherent Violence in Islamic Culture or a Desire for Worldwide Sharia Rule by Caliphate, but rather…foreign military occupations.

So Mohammad was a peaceful warmonger who lovingly slaughtered Jews?
Greenwald says Pape proves Islamic attacks against America are America’s fault:

We have lots of evidence…when you put the foreign military presence in, it triggers suicide terrorism campaigns, … and that when the foreign forces leave, it takes away almost 100% of the terrorist campaign, further saying Obama has made suicide bombings increase with additional troop presence.

Obama increased suicide bombings? No matter who is president, Islam has always attacked non-Muslims, and consistently bombs Israel for conquer.

American Middle East presence does not escalate Islamic terror. America is not 1,400 years-old. Pape may want to research further if he wants an honest assessment of who actually started Middle Eastern and worldwide terror and why it continues to this day.
Greenwald snidely disagrees:

Isn’t Muslim culture just so bizarre, primitive, and inscrutable…they actually seem to dislike it when foreign militaries bomb, invade and occupy their countries, and Western powers interfere in their internal affairs by overthrowing and covertly manipulating their governments, imposing sanctions that kill hundreds of thousands of Muslim children, and arming their enemies. Therefore…the solution to Terrorism is…interfere more in their countries …continuing to occupy, bomb, invade, assassinate, lawlessly imprison and control them… that’s the only way we can Stay Safe. There are people over there…angry at us for what we’re doing in their world…we need …[ more war] to eradicate the anger. That’s the core logic of the War on Terror. How is that working out?

Had America retaliated for prior attacks, perhaps 9/11 could have been prevented and America would not be dealing with threats from an Iranian dictator who massacres Muslims protesting in Tehran streets, while preventing Western coverage, because Islam-loving leftists might see what the Muslim world actually does to human beings.

2. Jesse Ventura’s Conspiracy Theory: America Goes to War for Lithium Batteries

Phony wrestler-turned-failed mayor-turned-failed-governor, Jesse Ventura, can now claim the title Official Leader of Libertarian Tin Foil Capped Conspiracy Theorists.

Ventura’s new theory: war for lithium, and it is by far the looniest.
Ventura knows why America went to war after 9/11: lithium. Ventura claims the United States planned 9/11 in order to create wars against Afghanistan and Iraq “so we could steal their lithium for our batteries and computers.”

On Thursday October 14, 2010, Fox Business News’ Eric Bolling interviewed Ventura about his crazy theories, which proved nuttier by the minute, as Ventura claimed all wars are concocted, going so far as to claim Mainland China never invaded Japan, or vice versa. Rather, Japan was so desperate for war, they made up Chinese invasions as an excuse to invade America, who created Pearl Harbor for the excuse to enter World War II.

The fact Ventura was elected governor of a state proves this country needs to think twice when standing at the polls.

After decades of attacks on Americans and our military by the Muslim world, and 1,400 years of constant war against the Western world, America went to war against Afghanistan for one reason: America needs lithium to power laptops, cell phones, and mp3 players.  That is America’s excuse for fighting terrorism.

I just want to be clear, we did not go to war to stop terrorism or steal oil (we still have yet to acquire from Iraq); we are at war to save the AA batteries.
Ventura could use a different kind of lithium.

If the lithium theory is true, Afghanistan would be second in wealth to Saudi Arabia, making America crawl and beg for battery power.

Ventura is adamant about his leftist libertarian theories: America created 9/11 and blew up the World Trade Center. Listening to Ventura rant about 9/11 conspiracies is no different than listening to Rosie O’Donnell’s steel can’t melt theory, which was debunked by scientists, or other Hollywood elitists, who claim the War On Terror was invented for money and world domination. All leftists, be they Democrat or Radical Libertarian, believe America is the evil empire controlling the world and inventing wars for oil.

Bolling, who witnessed the attacks and lost friends, tried to reason with the nutty Prairie Home Companion to no avail. Bolling said, “3,000 people died on 9/11,” to which Ventura loudly interjected: “That’s right, and who really killed them; who really killed them; who really killed them!”

Bowling replied: “Who really killed them? It was radical Muslims who flew planes in the World Trade Center that killed them.”

Ventura angrily disagreed. Ventura never gave substantial evidence to back up his theories, because none exists; all he did was prove conspiracy theorists are as unhinged as their wild, uneducated conspiracies.

The left-wing, anti-war Ventura needs to remove the tin foil cap and get out of his basement once in a while to see there is a specific group of people on the planet—Muslims— who hate non-Muslims (they murder their own trying to be free of the radical religion).  They have been trying to conquer the West over the last 1,400 years. Islam does not care about oil or lithium; they live solely for Koran verses and the written demands taught to them by Imams.
America did not create Islamic violence or 9/11, history proves this, but Ventura staunchly disagrees.

To prove the U.S. blew up the World Trade Center and not Islam, Ventura pulled out a photo of the collapsing towers, asking Bolling, “what do you see, a collapsing building or a building being blown up?” Bolling said he saw what he witnessed in person on 9/11: “buildings collapsing.” Ventura angrily demanded the buildings “never collapsed, they were blown up by the U.S. government.”

Ventura insists 9/11 was planned: “it was our entrance into Afghanistan, because America needed lithium,” which is apparently abundant in Afghan mines. We were desperate “to power” our American “batteries and computers,” so “America started a war so we could steal their lithium.”

Now it all makes sense to me. George W. Bush was furious, because his TV remote went on the blink, so, he started a war just before the 2001 World Series began. In fact he made sure the first game would be stalled so he could steal enough lithium for TV remotes, that way American men would not lose their minds and be forced to watch Lifetime TV for Women.

Bolling attempted logic with Ventura about the 9/11 attack, terrorism, and wars, but Ventura refused to hear any statistical evidence disproving the theories he needs to promote his new Conspiracy Theory TV show.

Ventura and Greenwald, like all leftists, believe wars are illegal, America invented war, 9/11 is America’s fault, we made it happen, and we are murderers stealing from other nations for super power.

These leftists prefer evil destroy the world they believe is a haven of natural resources America is trying to conquer.  The truth is, the Left needs war to breed Western guilt. It funds expensive anti-war/anti-American protests, Web sites, and conspiracy theory TV shows used to claim America invented terror and Islamic violence.

Good Judgment: Bad Judgment

2010-10-19T22:32:00.000-04:00

Bad judgment is the result of inexperience. Good judgment is the result of experience. One of our leaders has no experience and bad judgment are the results. In that other nation, on top of 4.5% economic growth and a higher ownership of private property, they will tack on another 2% of economic growth for the coming two years. Results cannot be argued.

Here is a plan for America. Just substitute the words, Israeli or Jewish and replace with America and American. Now Obama can use more or less this very same speech and launch America on a new century of prosperity, safety, strength, learning, and morality. We are, as they have always been, EXCEPTIONAL. We Americans are exceptional, and as you can see, we need to apply the very same rules and principles they have outlined for their world, for higher education, control of our borders, uncompromising national security, economic and moral revival, and NO MORE BS! Read on, We Shall be Redeemed as soon as an American Leader learns from the Israeli Leader and STANDS UP FOR AMERICA AS THE ISRAELI HAS. - AGB

http://www.pmo.gov.il/PMOEng/Communication/PMSpeaks/speechkneset111010.htmIt

PM Netanyahu’s Speech at the Opening of the Knesset Winter Session

Translation

11/10/2010

Photo by GPO

It is not by chance that the portrait of the State visionary, Benjamin Zeev Herzl, hangs here, on the wall of the Israeli Knesset. In 1896, Herzl wrote in his book, “The Jewish State”: “The Jews who are seeking a state will have a state. Finally, we will live as free people on our own land.”

I mentioned these things at the beginning of yesterday’s Cabinet meeting, along with several other key sentences from the history of our country, and because of their importance, I would like to repeat them here at the opening of this session of the Knesset of Israel.

In 1947, 51 years after Herzl, on the eve of the establishment of the State of Israel, David Ben-Gurion wrote in his diary: “The state that will be established will be Jewish in its purpose, designation and objective; not a state of those Jews who reside in the country but a state for the Jews, for the Jewish People.”

In 1992, in the Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty, the Knesset determined the following: “The purpose of this Basic Law is to protect human dignity and liberty, in order to establish in a Basic Law the values of the State of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state.”

Members of Knesset,

The State of Israel is, therefore, both the nation-state of the Jewish people and a democratic country for all its citizens, Jews and non-Jews alike, enjoying full equal rights.

There is no country in our region that protects the individual rights of its citizens and the rights of their minorities like Israel’s democracy does.

The Zionist movement established an exemplary democracy and established an exemplary nation-state, a country that balances the national needs of our people with the individual rights of each and every one of Israel’s citizens.

There is no other democracy in the Middle East, and there is no other Jewish state in the world.

The combination of these two values – a Jewish state and a democratic state – expresses the foundation of our existence and the essence of the State of Israel.

I will expand on this point later on.

My fellow Members of Knesset,

During the Knesset Winter Session, we will continue dealing with the great tasks the State of Israel faces.

We intend to pass a second two-year budget in the State of Israel.

We succeeded in returning the economy to the path of growth and stability. An additional two-year budget will help us continue these trends.

We are moving forward with the transportation revolution, developing a road and train network in the Galilee and the Negev. You all travel the nation’s roads. You see this revolution taking shape, the tremendous amount of work being carried out in order to connect the South and the North and to ease traffic jams in the center of the country.

We are beginning to implement the land reform, as a result of which hundreds of thousands of families in Israel will move from leasing their apartments and homes to full ownership of them.

We will continue to advance legislation regarding the planning and construction reform in order to finally alleviate the bureaucratic complications that hinder the increase in the supply of land, and which provide a constant incentive to practice nepotism and corruption.

The land reform, the planning and construction reform and the work being carried out in transportation will provide additional growth of between one and two percent per year, and I believe even more, to the GNP. This means that we will have the resources to invest in the national needs that rightly interest the members of this house, especially two needs: security and education.

We are launching a program to rehabilitate education, including higher education, in Israel. Higher education in Israel is in desperate need of resources. Within six years, we will add NIS 7.5 billion to higher education.

This year, we will establish four centers of excellence at the universities out of the eventual 30 that will be established over the next several years. These centers will gather together the most brilliant minds in Israel and abroad. We are dealing with what is called “returning and nurturing minds” in the fields of the future, four in particular that we decided to focus on: finding fuel alternatives; the computer- and cyber-world; brain research; and unlocking the genetic code in order to cure diseases.

We are beginning to adapt the elementary education system to the 21st century. In the next two years, teleprocessing systems will be introduced into 900 elementary schools in the North and South, with an overall investment of NIS 420 million.

We are not only teaching excellence, but also Zionism. We are beginning the project to restore 150 heritage sites. We have already begun work on historic sites in Jerusalem, Tel Aviv and on kibbutzim, including: at the cemetery near the Kinneret where the poets Rachel and Naomi Shemer are buried; and in the auditorium where the Declaration of Independence was presented, on Rothschild Boulevard in Tel Aviv.

I will visit these two places in the next week. All Israeli children should visit them. As always, knowing our past is the key to our future. However, there is a need to deal with the pressing problems of the present as well.

During the Winter Session, we will begin erecting the land obstacle in the south to prevent the massive infiltration of illegal job-seekers, something that threatens that character and identity of the State of Israel. This is a necessary step to preventing the country from being flooded by parties that undermine our economy, as well as the unique structure we have built here.

In the coming months, we will begin implementing the urban policing plan in order to promote law and order in all areas of the country, first and foremost in Lod.

Last week, I visited Lod. I heard the Jewish and the Arab residents beg for protection from crime families and from violence. They want to send their children to school without fear; they want to go out in the evening without fear for their lives.

They’re right. Every Israeli citizen – Jew and non-Jew – deserves to enjoy personal safety.

Soon the Government will hold a special meeting in Lod.

We already decided to set up a web of cameras there and make it the pilot in the City Without Violence Project. We did these two things in nearby Ramla, and vandalism and violence was reduced by approximately 50%.

At the same time, we will begin investing in developing infrastructure in the non-Jewish sector, investing an overall amount of NIS 800 million. We will invest an additional NIS 250 million in order to create special programs encouraging the non-Jewish sector to acquire higher educations.

As we promised, we are making significant changes to the economy, society, infrastructure, education and domestic safety.

We will, of course, continue to do so and we will continue in our efforts to return our kidnapped soldier, Gilad Shalit, to his family and to his people.

Now, Members of Knesset, I will move on to the political arena.

From the first day of the Government’s tenure, I called on the leaders of the Palestinian Authority to enter into direct peace talks with us without preconditions.

In my speech at Bar-Ilan University, I outlined the principles for a peace agreement with the Palestinians: a demilitarized Palestinian state which recognizes the state of the Jewish people and lives beside it in peace.

I believe that under the right conditions, the establishment of a Palestinian state could bring about peace, but if it is done in an irresponsible manner, the establishment of a Palestinian state could also be the cause for a worsening of the conflict and an increase in terror.

In order for the compromise to lead to peace and not war, it must be accompanied by two fundamental components: recognition and security arrangements.

When I say recognition, I mean Palestinian recognition of Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people. This is not just stubbornness. This is the root of the conflict and therefore a central foundation for resolving it.

For 100 years, the Palestinians have taught entire generations to believe that there is no Jewish people, that this land is their homeland alone.

The refusal to recognize the rights of the Jewish people and its historic connection to its land is the root of the conflict, and without dealing with it, there will be no end to the conflict.

As to security, any peace agreement between the Palestinians and us must be based on strong security arrangements in the field.

We left Lebanon and Gaza without such security arrangements, and we suffered thousands of rockets fired at the Negev and the Galilee.

I am not willing to make do with peace on paper. The citizens of Israel are also not willing to make do with that.

UN Security Council Resolution 1701 from the end of the Second Lebanon War, withdrawal from the Philadelphi Route after the Disengagement, the positioning of international forces in the North and the South – none of these things prevented the firing of thousands of missiles at Israel, and the smuggling of tens of thousands of additional missiles by Iran into hostile territory surrounding us.

I will not allow Iranian missiles to be positioned 500 meters from Kfar Saba, or scant kilometers from Ben-Gurion Airport.

We live in a small country – very small. Our small dimensions pose existential security problems – problems that are unique to Israel.

We must not take these security problems too lightly, and we must not allow ourselves to be tempted by the illusion that a peace agreement, in and of itself, will resolve them.

We once had peaceful, normal relations, relations which included exchanges of delegations, contact between leaders, trade relations, especially of petroleum, with an important country. That country is called Iran.

We also had wonderful, friendly relations with another country, with military cooperation, with full diplomatic relations, with visits by heads of state, with 400,000 Israeli visitors to that country. That country is called Turkey.

I still we can rehabilitate and restore those relations, which have deteriorated against our will. Things have changed in Iran, and unfortunately in other places as well, almost overnight, and no one can promise us that, despite our desire, a similar thing won’t happen after the establishment of a peace agreement with the Palestinians.

Therefore we must insist on strong security arrangements in the field, with determination and without fear, in order to ensure that the peace will be upheld in practice, and also in order to defend our existence in the unfortunate but possible case that the peace is violated.

Peace and security are interwoven, and they are the principles which guide me. I firmly insist on the need for both of them, and I see that an understanding of our security needs has finally begun to penetrate international debate, beyond general statements. I speak of our specific needs. I believe, Members of Knesset, that if we stand together on this front, united around these principles, I am convinced it will help us achieve a peace agreement.

I believe that the unity surrounding these principles, which are so basic, so important and so real, can greatly advance our ability to achieve a peace agreement.

Although the Palestinians did not answer my call to begin direct negotiations for over a year, we took action.

We removed hundreds of roadblocks and checkpoints. We encouraged impressive growth in the Palestinian economy – impressive by any standards, especially given the fact that at the same time the entire world was mired in recession and economic crisis.

And as you know, we also suspended new construction in the Jewish settlements for ten months. We did so with a heavy heart.

We knew that this step would weigh heavily on our brothers and sisters, good and loyal Israeli citizens, taxpayers, participants in the Reserves, law-abiding citizens. As the U.S. Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, stated, it was an unprecedented move that no other government in Israel had taken before.

But we said we would do it and we did it. We enforced the moratorium with determination and without compromise. For ten months.

Unfortunately, the Palestinians wasted those ten months as well.

Now they demand that we continue the moratorium as a condition to continuing the talks. I hope they are not doing so to avoid making the real decisions necessary for a peace agreement.

Because they too will have to make difficult decisions. I don’t belittle that. I know what kind of decisions we will have to make, but I also know what kind of decisions they will have to make. The only way to reach a peace agreement is to try, through direct talks, to bridge the gaps and make decisions.

However, as Prime Minister of Israel, I am committed and want to advance towards an agreement, one that will bring an end to the conflict and achieve peace between us and our Palestinian neighbors.

I know, Members of Knesset, that one can argue a great deal as to the path to achieving peace – but there is no argument that we will not achieve peace if we do not try.

During the past several weeks, I have explored every path to ensuring the continuation of the talks. I asked myself – what could convince the government and, more so, the citizens of Israel, that the Palestinians are truly ready to live with us in peace? What would show that there has been a genuine change on the Palestinian side – something that would demonstrate to us, the majority of the public, that they are not only demanding concessions by Israel, not only issuing dictates, but that they are ready to take a meaningful step towards us.

There is one thing. I transmitted the message through quiet channels during the past month, and I am now saying it here, publicly: if the Palestinian leadership will unequivocally say to its people that it recognizes Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people, I will be ready to convene my government and ask for another suspension of construction for a fixed period.

Because the Palestinians expect us to recognize the Palestinian state as their nation-state, we can expect them to recognize the Jewish state as our nation-state.

I am not insisting that this recognition serve as a precondition for talks. We will continue the negotiations in any event, without any conditions.

However, there is no doubt that such a move by the Palestinian Authority would serve as a trust-building step, one that would open up a new horizon of hope and trust among broad sections of the Israel public who, in light of the events of the past decade, have lost their confidence in the Palestinian’s desire to end the conflict.

Unfortunately, so far the Palestinians have not answered this call, and the United States is attempting other means to ensure that the talks take place.

The United States has made various suggestions, and we are seriously and responsibly considering them, in accordance with Israel’s national interests, first and foremost security.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

We do not lack for difficulties and challenges, but I am convinced that we will overcome them. We must only think of the obstacles we have overcome since Herzl expressed his vision.

The ancient Jewish people, so experienced in suffering, returned to its historic homeland at the turn of the previous century and found it destroyed, neglected and desolate, full of swamps and malaria.

For over one hundred years, we built it through sweat and blood, and we established a magnificent country.

Those reverberating words of the Declaration of Independence, read by David Ben-Gurion, still touch our souls today: “We hereby declare the establishment of a Jewish state in the land of Israel to be known as the State of Israel.”

This is the secret to our national existence, and recognition of this has always been and will always be the true foundation for peace.

Fallibilism is the philosophical doctrine that all claims of knowledge could, in principle, be mistaken. Then again, I could be wrong about that.

WESTERN TOLERANCE OF SHARIA IS A SUICIDE PACT!

Pallywood! A new industry in the Mideast

2010-10-19T22:09:00.001-04:00

A new industry in the Mideast has been "exporting" entertainment for you.

So friends, all along you thought that resurrection was only for the religiously obsessed and delusional? For Muslims, unlike for most of us who are not nearly so lucky, or delusional, resurrection is not only real. It is predictable because it happens every day in the Holy Land as you will see in the video below. With your own eyes. Now think about it.

You can still convert and wake up at 5 am to pray every day on a hand made carpet and you too might get resurrected. And, if you join the Jihad, even your blown-to-smithereens pieces can be put together and you live another day. It is Amazing!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zTX3CZqDyOA&feature=player_embedded#!

For a detailed explanation of this true story, one reporter tries to correct the record. See waht he encountered here. From Ralph G.

I know Phillipe Karsenty and have seen his presentation of the facts three times.

The alleged al Dura killing allegedly by the Israelis is a modern day Blood Libel against the Jewish people.

For more background on the truly mind boggling activities of the "Palestinian" (sorry but the very notion is part of the hoax) propaganda movie industry called Pallywood please see:

http://www.theaugeanstables.com/reflections-from-second-draft/pallywood-a-history/

Pallywood: A History

For more on Pallywood, including extensive raw footage revealing some of its most pervasive activity, see The Second Draft’s dossier.

Philippe Karsenty, Middle East Reporting: The Liars Are Still Active, Hudson Institute, 14 October 2010.

http://www.hudson-ny.org/1602/middle-east-reporting-liars

European politicians want to force Israel to make concessions to its enemies, so they need to demonize Israel. European media outlets have therefore constructed a narrative in support of these politicians' agenda; and any facts not in keeping with it are ignored.

In the United States there are media-monitoring groups such as the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting, but organizations like this would not work in France.

Why? Because in France, Jews would not be trusted to monitor news about the Middle East: they would be considered biased. In France, monitoring work on the Middle East done by a Jew would be treated as irrelevant. So I created Media-Ratings in France to monitor the press – and it is treated as irrelevant.

In 2002, when I understood, thanks to Israeli and American researchers, that the Mohammed al Dura news report – the image of the 12-year-old Palestinian boy huddling against his father, who were said to have been shot by Israelis -- was a hoax. I tried to raise awareness about it, but no one would listen. There is no blood anywhere in the footage after the alleged shooting; a forensic investigation of the bullet holes showed they could not have come from the Israeli position, and only witness was the Palestinian cameraman who shot the footage, the most crucial part of which, the shooting itself, is still missing.

People told me: "We don't listen to Holocaust deniers, so we won't listen to you."

The French public TV station, which was responsible for creating and airing the Al Dura hoax, would not engage in any debate about their news report.

Consequently, I had to find a proper way to participate in the debate, and enter the stage by creating a watchdog organization, which would monitor all media outlets on all topics.

This is why and how, in 2004, Media-Ratings was created.

We were very careful not to deal with Israeli topics, ignoring the solicitations of some of our readers.

Very quickly, I received some invitations to appear on TV in France to critique the media.

As soon as it was established, we received coverage in the mainstream media.

Six months after our creation, I was "part of the club."

Our information and corrections about French media mistakes relating to French politics, some media outlets increasingly picked up economics or foreign issues.

So, in November 2004, after I was partially accepted in the mainstream media, I decide to be provocative and expose the al Dura fabrication by publishing a confrontational article against the French public TV: I wrote that the Al Dura news report was a staged hoax.

By asserting that the French public, government-owned, TV, France 2, had fabricated an international story, I tried to force them to engage in a public debate.

As soon as my accusations became public, I was immediately boycotted by the mainstream media: I had breached the unwritten agreement that Israel-bashing is not only the rule, but acceptable, even -- or especially -- if untrue.

Simultaneously, as I expected when I published my article exposing the Al Dura blood-libel, I was sued for defamation by France 2.

My trial took place in September 2006 and went well. I presented some evidence to defend my accusations, whereas France 2 presented some testimonials and a very powerful letter from Jacques Chirac, at that time the French President, who claimed that the journalist responsible for the al Dura hoax, Charles Enderlin, was a credible and reliable journalist.

At the end of the trial, the Prosecutor said that I had presented enough evidence of a hoax and that I should be found not guilty of defamation.

A month later, however, I was found guilty of defamation… probably the influence of Chirac's letter.

Immediately I appealed, and my second trial began in September 2007.

Instead of lasting only one afternoon as expected, the trial was abruptly interrupted and postponed: the judges asked to see the raw footage originally shot and used in France 2's news report.

This was the turning point.

Two months later, 18 minutes of raw footage were screened at the court of appeal in Paris.

It proved damning to France 2.

The final hearing, seven hours long, took place on February 2008; three months later, I won the case on appeal and was found not guilty of defamation.

It was a big relief.

A week later, however, hundreds of French journalists representing all the French media outlets -- I insist all of them -- signed a petition in which they compared me to a Holocaust denier because I had said that the death of Muhammad was a hoax.

Last year, the French authorities lead by Sarkozy, presented the Legion of Honor to Charles Enderlin, the journalist responsible for the hoax.

Although ten days ago, we celebrated the 10th anniversary of the al Dura hoax, France 2 has still not reported the truth.

Nevertheless, I am optimistic.

Since I have been engaged in this fight, I have always believed the truth would come out the following week. Our sources are valid. They have never been contested anywhere in the world, neither by any court of justice, nor even by our opponents at France 2.

The al Dura hoax is important: it was the starting point of a new campaign of the escalating campaign to demonize Israel.

The al Dura hoax is still important: its image has become the major icon used by our enemies to denigrate Israel, and to stir up incitement against the Jews and the whole Western world, The media is not only a reflection of our society; it is an opinion-maker.

It has, therefore, a huge influence in creating world hostility both to the Jewish people and to Israel, the state of the Jews.

By reporting inaccurately and by faking the news, by using wrong concepts and twisting the words to depict the situation on the ground, the media outlets have largely contributed to the "denial of legitimacy" campaign currently in high-gear against the State of Israel.

My solution to fight this bias was, and still is, to identify an emblematic symbol of Jew-hatred and Israel bashing - - the al Dura hoax -- and to fight constantly against it for the past eight years, exposing it as a media hoax.

The French media outlets have been fighting me through both ad hominem attacks and denials of the truth.

I have been presenting the evidence to individuals, influential politicians, and journalists to convince them of the dangers of an irresponsible media, which has the power to alter the course of history.

My goal is to have France 2, the entire French society, and, finally, the whole world admits that the al Dura story is a hoax.

Lies can be fought by the truth.

The issue is to get access to the public and to have the truth heard by a large audience, not just friendly and captive audiences.

Now it seems that the truth will soon be publicly acknowledged.

At least, I hope so.

The liars are still active.

Three days ago, Charles Enderlin, the French journalist responsible for the hoax, published a book on al Dura -- "A Child Was Killed" -- and all the French media outlets are reviewing it most positively -- all of them.

I hope we are on the verge of a final victory: we have gained -- one by one -- many allies in the media, the intellectual sphere and in the political community.

But I still have one frustration.

I have pursued this case without the full support of the Israeli government even if I did receive help from individuals like Natan Sharansky and many other supporters in the Israeli intellectual and political spheres.

In September, a prestigious French magazine interviewed me at length. The journalist who conducted the interview was Robert Ménard of Reporters Without Borders… an organization which not really a good friend of Israel's.

After having been supportive of the al Dura blood-libel for years, Ménard had seen the evidence of the al Dura hoax; and said he had finally understood the nature of the scandal, which was why he wanted to give me the opportunity to show my argument in his magazine.

Ménard said he understood why it was so difficult to have the truth revealed in France, but he said he did not understand why I never received the support of the Israelis.

I am aware of the difficult situation Israelis face on the ground.

I realize that their battles can be very destructive and that they do not have the resources to respond to every accusation thrown against them all around the world: it would probably be a full time job for the Israeli government to respond to every attack.

However, there is a media battle, which influences world opinion, being waged against Israel; Israel would do well join that battle in her own defense.

One of the most important things to me is to expose and reveal to the whole world the true nature of the al Dura blood-libel: It is being used as the ultimate weapon against Israel.

It turns Israel's friends into enemies; and it turns Jews against themselves, and against the state of Israel.

After all, no decent human being can knowingly embrace a nation that enjoys killing innocent, defenseless children.

Al Dura was the first blood libel of the 21st Century. But, it has launched a thousand others, all aimed at the destruction of the Jewish state.

Therefore, it must be shown for what it is: a staged hoax.

Until France apologizes for its defamation of the Jewish people and the state of Israel, I will not rest.

Originally presented at a conference of the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting (www.CAMERA.org

) at Boston University, October 10, 2010

European Life Died in Auschwitz

2010-10-19T21:56:00.001-04:00

Written by Sebastian Vilar Rodrigez, Spanish Writer. This is a translation of an article from a Spanish newspaper.

All European Life Died In Auschwitz
I walked down the street in Barcelona, and suddenly discovered a terrible truth – Europe died in Auschwitz. We killed six million Jews and replaced them with 20 million Muslims.
In Auschwitz we burned a culture, thought, creativity, talent. We destroyed the chosen people, truly chosen, because they produced great and wonderful people who changed the world. The contribution of this people is felt in all areas of life: science, art, international trade, and above all, as the conscience of the world. These are the people we burned.
And under the pretence of tolerance, and because we wanted to prove to ourselves that we were cured of the disease of racism, we opened our gates to 20 million Muslims, who brought us stupidity and ignorance, religious extremism and lack of tolerance, crime and poverty due to an unwillingness to work and support their families with pride.
They have turned our beautiful Spanish cities into the third world, drowning in filth and crime. Shut up in the apartments they receive free from the government, they plan the murder and destruction of their naïve hosts. And thus, in our misery, we have exchanged culture for fanatical hatred, creative skill for destructive skill, intelligence for backwardness and superstition.
We have exchanged the pursuit of peace of the Jews of Europe and their talent for hoping for a better future for their children, their determined clinging to life because life is holy, for those who pursue death, for people consumed by the desire for death for themselves and others, for our children and theirs.
What a terrible mistake was made by miserable Europe.

Was this racism, or are Muslims just like the Jews? I mean, all people are the same.

MUSLIMS: http://www.answeringmuslims.com/2009/01/muslim-response-to-muslim-atrocities.html

JEWS: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/12/opinion/12brooks.html?_r=1
Yup, just like the Left says, people are the same, cars are the same, animals are the same, intelligence is the same, all hamburgers taste the same, and the results are the same.

Video - sharia and wife beating

2010-10-06T00:21:00.000-04:00

Video: Sharia and wife beating

On September 16^th, we emailed you a video taken at a Boston mosque showing 6^th grade public school students on a field trip. (If you missed that email, please click here to see this shocking video.)

The video reveals that this particular mosque, the Islamic Society of Boston Cultural Center, provides instruction to its members regarding sharia law’s provision for wife beating. So much for the naysayers who insist concerns about sharia in America are much ado about nothing!

Recall the New Jersey judge who ruled a Muslim man had no intent to commit a crime when he was beating and raping his wife because he was practicing his Islamic beliefs (sharia). If a member of this mosque follows what the mosque teaches regarding sharia law and wife beating, could we see a Massachusetts judge make the same ruling?

This illustrates why the mission of ACT! for America is so important. You can help—by forwarding emails like this to others, starting a local chapter, or making a contribution.

Courtesy of MEMRI, we bring you now an amazing video of a Muslim cleric asserting that Allah instituted wife-beating to honor women, though he does make it clear the only time a man can beat his wife is when she refuses to have sex with him. You have to see this to believe it—sharia law in all its glory!

FBI now defending inviting Mustapha!

2010-10-06T00:18:00.000-04:00

FBI now defending
inviting Mustapha!

Contact Congress Today!!

On Wednesday, FBI officials berated numerous ACT! for America members, insisting that the story about Kifah Mustapha being invited to tour the top-secret National Counterterrorism Center was a “lie” or a “fabrication.”

To quickly recap, Mustapha was an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terrorism financing trial; has documented ties to Hamas; and was dismissed from the Illinois State Police chaplaincy program because he failed a background check.

When an ACT! for America staff member called the FBI, he was told by the FBI official that the story was “fabricated” and the photo of the group that took the tour, which included Mustapha, must have been “doctored.” (Untrue.)

Yesterday (Thursday), the FBI story changed. According to a Fox News report (see below, highlights added), “Paul Bresson, an FBI spokesman told FoxNews.com that the agency knew who Mustapha was before he was allowed to participate.” Bresson proceeded to defend inviting Mustapha to tour the facility.

So why did FBI officials initially call the story a “lie” and a “fabrication”?
Why did FBI officials falsely allege the photo was “doctored”?
Why did FBI officials berate ACT! for America members who called inquiring about this matter?
Why was Mustapha allowed into a top-secret counterterrorism facility?

We encourage you to contact your Member of Congress to bring this to his or her attention and request answers to these questions. Here’s how.

Step One: Please click here to contact your Member of Congress. This link will take you to our new Contact Congress page on our website.

Step Two: Please click on the first link titled “FBI now defending inviting Mustapha” in the “Action Alerts” box found in the middle of the page.

Step Three: This will take you to the letter. Scroll down to fill in your information and click “Send.” Your message will be delivered!

National Security Hawks Call for Brennan's Resignation

Published September 29, 2010

| FoxNews.com

An independent group of national security professionals deeply critical of the Obama administration is calling on National Security Adviser John Brennan to resign for what the group says is a coordinated effort to prevent "identifying, understanding and countering" threats posed by Islamic law, known as shariah.

Center for Security Policy chief Frank Gaffney, a former Reagan administration official, held a news conference Wednesday to argue that Brennan failed in his "duty to know his enemy" when he allowed a sheik with "known ties" to Hamas through his work at the Holy Land Foundation, the charitable group whose leaders were convicted of funding the Palestinian terror group, to participate in a six-week long FBI outreach program to the Muslim community.

Sheik Kifah Mustapha of Chicago participated in the government-sponsored "Citizens Academy" hosted by the FBI this year. As a participant, he was able to get a tutorial on the National Counterterrorism Center, other secure government facilities and FBI's training center at Quantico Marine base in Virginia.

The FBI defended its invitation to Mustapha in an interview with FoxNews.com, saying there was no reason to worry about his credentials or what he may learn during his participation.

But Gaffney said at an afternoon news conference that Brennan is guilty of either "willful blindness at best" or a form of treason at worst.

"The FBI gave a guided tour of one of our most sensitive counter-terrorism facilities to a known Hamas operative," Gaffney continued. "It is clear that the cluelessness fostered by Mr. Brennan is causing an empowering of the wrong sorts of Muslims in America and endangering the American people."

Gaffney added that he sees a "host of others who are similarly either failing to know or rendered incapable of acting on what they do know is going on in this country in a form of civilization jihad and perhaps the precursor to violent forms of jihad."

The White House did not respond to a request for comment.

The FBI says on its website that the Citizens Academy teaches how the agency tracks down spies and terrorists and how it collects and preserves evidence, and they can see what its like to fire a weapon. Businesses, civic and religious leaders who are at least 21 without prior felony convictions are eligible to attend, the website says.

Paul Bresson, an FBI spokesman, told FoxNews.com that the agency knew who Mustapha was before he was allowed to participate.

"He's a prominent figure in the community," Bresson said, adding that the sheik has not been convicted of a crime. "It's not like we gave him secret access or classified information."

Gaffney, which led the group called "Team B II" released a report earlier this month called "Shariah: The Threat to America." Team B II, inspired by the CIA's Team B exercise in 1976 to ferret out weaknesses in U.S. response to the Soviet threat, presented the findings to two Republican members of Congress earlier this month.

The group, which says it sees parallels between today's efforts to engage radical Muslim groups and 1970s efforts to engage the Soviets, says Brennan is allowing a "grave threat" to grow against the U.S., its Constitution, government and freedoms.

FBI denials; here's the truth

2010-10-06T00:17:00.000-04:00

In spite of denials by FBI officials,

yesterday’s story was accurate!

ACT! members berated by FBI officials
Contact Congress today!!

Yesterday’s email about the FBI inviting a sheikh with connections to Hamas on a tour of a top-secret counterterrorism facility led to hundreds of patriotic, concerned ACT! for America members calling the national FBI office.

But instead of “thank you’s,” many encountered belligerent FBI officials who berated them, insisted the story was a “lie” and a “fabrication,” and in at least two instances made snide, derogatory comments about ACT! for America.

After we had received numerous emails and some phone calls from ACT! members describing the shameful way they were treated, a member of our staff placed a call to the FBI and was told that the story was a “fabrication” and that the photo of the tour participants was “doctored.”

Well, folks, here’s the truth: THE STORY WAS ACCURATE.

The FBI did invite Sheikh Kifah Mustapha on a VIP tour of the top-secret National Counterterrorism Center.
The picture of those on the tour, which included Mustapha, was NOT doctored.
According to a Daily Herald news story which ran over three weeks ago, earlier this year Sheikh Mustapha flunked an Illinois State Police background check and was dismissed from the police chaplaincy program.
Patrick Poole, whose story we emailed you yesterday, posted a follow-up this morning on Big Peace (see below) that asserts that a Department of Homeland Security official told him Mustapha is on “the highest watch list we have.” YOU ABSOLUTELY MUST READ POOLE’S STORY BELOW.

THIS ISSUE IS OUTRAGEOUS ON MULTIPLE FRONTS!

Why did the FBI invite Mustapha, a man on terrorist watch lists who failed an Illinois police background check, on a tour of a top-secret counterterrorism facility?
And when this outrageous act of politically correct “outreach” was exposed, the response by FBI officials to concerned, patriotic Americans was to bully them and insist the story was a lie!

We know there are many FBI field agents who are as upset about these kinds of actions by FBI leadership as we are. It’s time for concerned Americans to blow the whistle on this and Congress to investigate this.

Enough is enough.

Please contact your Member of Congress’s Washington, DC office TODAY to inform them of this and insist they take action which will lead to a congressional investigation. To contact by phone, dial the Capitol switchboard, 202/224-3121, and ask for your Senator or House Member of Congress. To email, click here, look for the “Get Involved” tab on the right, and you’ll be able to obtain your Member’s DC office email address. You could even email them this email!

http://bigpeace.com/pspoole/2010/09/30/fallout-plugs-had-to-be-pulled-on-our-system-to-clear-hamas-operative-to-tour-top-secret-nctc-the-nctc-has-kifah-mustapha-on-the-highest-watch-list-we-have/

FALLOUT: ‘Plugs had to be pulled on our system’ to clear Hamas operative to tour Top-Secret NCTC, ‘The NCTC has Kifah Mustapha on the highest watch list we have’

Posted by Patrick S. Poole Sep 30th 2010 at 7:31 am in Featured Story, Islamic extremism | Comments (6)

The fallout continues in response to my Big Peace article filed on Monday concerning a known Hamas operative and unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terrorism finance trial in U.S. history who was given a VIP tour of the top-secret National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) and the FBI training center at Quantico as part of a six-week FBI Citizen Academy arranged by the FBI Chicago Field Office.

Now a Homeland Security official (requesting anonymity for fear of retaliation by superiors) has contacted Big Peace saying that “the plugs had to be pulled on our system” in order to allow Kifah Mustapha to enter the NCTC and that “the NCTC has Kifah Mustapha on the highest watch list we have. There’s no way from a systems point-of-view that this could be an accidental oversight, unless they didn’t bother checking at all as they are required to do.”

The DHS official added, “It’s as if we haven’t learned anything from twenty years of reaching out to the wrong people in the Muslim community.”

My report on Monday was prompted by a WLS ABC7-Chicago story over the weekend by news anchor Ben Bradley describing his participation in the FBI’s Citizen Academy with Kifah Mustapha. As I noted then, curiously absent from Bradley’s story was any mention of his Hamas travel partner’s terror-tied background. Even more curious, ABC7 had aired an investigative report back in March about Mustapha, along with several subsequent reports about his de-certification by the Illinois State Police as a Muslim chaplain after failing a background check. Mustapha is currently suing the State Police claiming discrimination with the help of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), identified by FBI Special Agent Lara Burns during the 2008 Holy Land Foundation trial as a Hamas front group.

What makes Bradley’s silence about Kifah Mustapha’s activities in support of Hamas all the more odd is that one of his own ABC7 colleagues, Chuck Goudie, published an editorial three weeks before Bradley’s story aired contrasting the Illinois State Police’s de-certification of Mustapha and the FBI’s open embrace of the Hamas operative.

Mustapha’s terrorist support activities are laid out in court documents filed by federal prosecutors in the Holy Land Foundation case:

- Kifah Mustapha was personally named unindicted co-conspirator (#31) in the case, identifying him as a member of the Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestine Committee that federal prosecutors say was formed to raise money for Hamas and was “committed to the globalization of Islam and violent jihad.”

- Holy Land Foundation records confiscated by the FBI indicate that he was a longtime employee of the group and was paid more than $154,000 between 1996 and 2000 when the group’s financial support for Hamas was at its peak.

- FBI Agent Lara Burns testified during the trial that Mustapha was a member of the notorious Al-Sakhra Band sponsored by the Holy Land Foundation and the Islamic Association for Palestine (another Hamas front group that was the parent group to CAIR) that regularly featured songs about murdering Jews and glorifying Hamas. The leader of the singing group, Mufid Abdelqader, was convicted and sentenced to 20 years in prison.

- In a deposition in a civil case filed against the Holy Land Foundation and other Islamic groups by the parents of a Chicago teenager murdered by Hamas at a bus stop in Israel (the groups were found liable in a $156 million judgment), Mustapha admitted that he was the registered agent for the Holy Land Foundation’s Illinois office. His Chicago-area office was specifically named by the U.S. Treasury when the group was listed as a specially designated global terrorist group in December 2001.

- The Bridgeview Foundation, the mosque where Mustapha is presently an imam, was identified by the Chicago Tribune in 2004 as a national hot-spot for Hamas fundraising and terrorist support.

Click here to read the full article.

FBI gives Hamas operative access

2010-10-06T00:15:00.000-04:00

“FBI escorts known Hamas
operative through top-secret
counterterrorism center”

File the story below under “it’s so unbelievable it can’t be true.”

Stunningly, it is.

Let your voice heard. Let government officials and candidates for elected office know you’re outraged about this. Take one or both of the recommended actions below. YOUR VOICE COUNTS!

Contact the national FBI office to register your strong disapproval of this and demand an investigation as to how this could have happened. Phone: 202/324-3000

Talk to candidates running for office in your area and educate them on this as an example of government actions motivated by political correctness that are jeopardizing our national security and putting us all at greater risk. (Members of Congress are heading to their districts tomorrow to campaign. This is a great opportunity to bring this to their attention when they are in your area.)

FBI Escorts Known Hamas Operative Through Top-Secret National Counterterrorism Center as “Outreach” to Muslim Community

Posted by Patrick S. Poole Sep 27th 2010 at 3:52 am in Featured Story, Islamic extremism | Comments (75)

Sheikh Kifah Mustapha (third from left) touring the National Counterterrorism Center
(Photo: FBI)

A known Hamas operative and unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terrorism financing trial in U.S. history – Kifah Mustapha – was recently escorted into the top-secret National Counterterrorism Center and other secure government facilities, including the FBI’s training center at Quantico, during a six-week “Citizen’s Academy” hosted by the FBI as part of its “outreach” to the Muslim Community. The group was accompanied by reporter Ben Bradley of WLS-Chicago (ABC), who filed a report on the trip to Washington D.C. on Sunday, who observed:

Sheik Kifah Mustapha, who runs the Mosque Foundation in Bridgeview, asked some of the most pointed questions during the six week FBI Citizens’ Academy and trip to Washington. He pushed agents to fully explain everything from the bureau’s use of deadly force policy to racial and ethnic profiling. “I saw a very interesting side of what the FBI does and I wanted to know more,” Sheik Mustapha explained after returning from D.C. He hopes the FBI’s outreach runs deeper than positive public relations.

Yes, I bet he wanted to know everything about the FBI’s policies.

Curiously, Bradley’s report on the Citizen’s Academy fails to make note Mustapha’s extensive terrorist ties and support for Hamas, including his former employment with the Holy Land Foundation, which was listed as a specially designated terrorist group by the U.S. government in December 2001, and whose executives were convicted of terrorism support in 2008 and sentenced to lengthy prison terms. Mustapha was personally named unindicted co-conspirator (#31) in the case and employment records submitted by federal prosecutors during the trial showed that he received more than $154,000 for his work for the Holy Land Foundation between 1996 and 2000. During the trial, FBI Special Agent Lara Burns testified that Mustapha also sang in a band sponsored by the Holy Land Foundation that regularly featured songs dedicated to killing Jews and glorifying Hamas. In a deposition he gave in a civil trial concerned with the murder of a Chicago teenager killed by Hamas while waiting for a bus in Israel, Mustapha admitted that he was the registered agent for the Holy Land Foundation in Illinois, and also to his involvement with other Hamas front groups, including the Islamic Association for Palestine. He was later hired as an imam by the Mosque Foundation in Bridgeview, which the Chicago Tribune reported in 2004 has long been a hotbed of Hamas support.

Bradley’s omission of this information about Kifah Mustapha in his report on Sunday is all the more curious since his own station aired an extensive investigative report of Mustapha’s terrorist ties earlier this year.

The WLS investigation into Mustapha’s terrorist ties was prompted by a report published by the Investigative Project on Terrorism in January, which noted that Mustapha had been selected and trained as a chaplain by the Illinois State Police despite his documented terrorist support. The State Police eventually withdrew Mustapha’s appointment as chaplain and just last month he filed a lawsuit against the agency claiming discrimination aided by the Council on American-Islamic Relations, another FBI-identified Hamas front group.

There are several obvious problems with this episode, the first being the FBI’s “outreach” to a known Hamas operative (identified as such by federal prosecutors) and walking him through some of our country’s most sensitive counter-terrorism facilities. Why should terrorist operatives have to covertly case potential targets when the FBI will happily escort them and taken them into areas they would never be able to reach on their own? Who’s next on the FBI’s “outreach” calendar, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his fellow GITMO detainees?

This ongoing “outreach” to terror-linked individuals and leaders of known terrorist front groups by senior leaders of our national security, homeland security and law enforcement agencies is the kind of behavior criticized by my colleagues and I in the Team B II’s report released earlier this month, “Shariah: The Threat to America“. As I observed last week here at Big Peace, Matt Duss of the Center for America Progress and ThinkProgress.org demands that we continue this insane national policy of embracing the same individuals and organizations who have been caught openly cheerleading for Islamic terrorists and have called for the destruction of the U.S. and Western Civilization.

The other glaring problem is that a reporter working in one of the largest media markets in the country can travel to such an event and be unaware of or unwilling to mention his own station’s reporting on his travel partner’s terrorist support activities. Such is the state of the establishment media today.

Texas warns book publishers

2010-10-06T00:12:00.000-04:00

Texas State Board of
Education warns book
publishers about biased
treatment of Islam

Late Friday afternoon we sent a text message to everyone on our text messaging service telling them about the watershed vote cast that afternoon by the Texas State Board of Education. (If you would like to receive such breaking news text messages please click on the image above.)

As the WorldNetDaily story notes below, the Texas State Board of Education passed a resolution calling on school textbook publishers to stop giving preferential treatment to Islam in their books.

Brigitte Gabriel addresses this issue everywhere she goes, referring to a specific curriculum module that instructs students to memorize verses from the Qur’an and to pray the “shahada,” the prayer acknowledging Allah as one’s god. What we are seeing in school textbooks ranges from a whitewashing of Islam’s violent history to a kind of proselytizing for Islam that would never be tolerated by the ACLU if it were done in the name of Christianity or Judaism.

Because Texas is the largest purchaser of school textbooks in the country, this resolution is a loud and clear warning to textbook publishers.

Next year, our “sister” organization, American Congress for Truth, will be publishing a report on the bias and errors contained in school textbook treatment of Islam.

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=207577

BRAVE NEW SCHOOLS

Texas warns book publishers: 'No more white-washing Islam'

State board adopts resolution calling for fairness regarding world's religions

Posted: September 24, 2010
5:30 pm Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2010 WorldNetDaily

The elected Texas Board of Education today adopted a resolution that warns textbook publishers to be careful and provide fair treatment of the world's religions – or face being snubbed by the state that buys more textbooks than any other.

The resolution, introduced by former Texas school board member Randy Rives, states: "Resolved, That the SBOE will look to reject future prejudicial social studies submissions that continue to offend Texas law with respect to treatment of the world's major religious groups by significant inequalities of coverage space-wise and/or by demonizing or lionizing one or more of them over others."

The resolution, adopted on a 7-6 vote, declares that "pro-Islamic/anti-Christian half-truths, selective disinformation, and false editorial stereotypes still roil some social studies textbooks nationwide," including some "politically correct whitewashes of Islamic culture and stigmas on Christian civilization."

The resolution included pages of footnotes documenting the specific offenses discovered in various textbooks, including "patterns of pejoratives toward Christians and superlatives toward Muslims, calling Crusaders aggressors, 'violent attackers,' or 'invaders' while euphemizing Muslim conquest of Christian lands as 'migrations' by 'empire builders.'"

Jonathan Saenz, director of legislative affairs for the non-profit legal advocacy group Liberty Institute, told WND the vote "sends a strong message that Texas state board members, and really speaking on behalf of the people they represent, care about keeping textbooks accurate."

"They are against religious discrimination. That sends a message," he said.

Publishers, he said, "will have to live up to standards."

Saenz said the board, whose members are elected by voters, are serving their responsibility to be a "check" on the products used in the state's schools.

The resolution discusses world history textbooks officially adopted for use in Texas between 1999 and 2002, which may still be in some classrooms. The resolution also discusses textbooks used in other parts of the country. In Texas, world history textbooks are used at the high school level.

The resolution pointed out grounds for board concerns.

"In one instance, devoting 120 student text lines to Christian beliefs, practices, and holy writings but 248 (more than twice as many) to those of Islam; and dwelling for 27 student text lines on Crusaders' massacre of Muslims at Jerusalem in 1099 yet censoring Muslims' massacres of Christians there in 1244 and at Antioch in 1268, implying that Christian brutality and Muslim loss of life are significant but Islamic cruelty and Christian deaths are not."

Another point of contention is book authors "spending 139 student text lines on Christian beliefs, practices, and holy writings but 176 on those of Islam; claiming Islam 'brought untold wealth to thousands and a better life to millions,' while 'because of [Europeans' Christian] religious zeal … many peoples died and many civilizations were destroyed;' and contrasting 'the Muslim concern for cleanliness' with Swedes in Russia who were 'the filthiest of God's creatures.'"

The resolution noted the state's law requires reinforcement of "the basic democratic values of our state and national heritage," along with the requirement that "no instructional material may be adopted that contains content that clearly conflicts with the stated purpose of the Texas Education Code."

One book that was examined was "World History, Patterns of Interaction" published by McDougal. The footnotes noted that it has been reported that the Dubai royal family was a "major shareholder" in the Education Media and Publishing Group, which controls textbook publisher Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.

"We're just trying to protect the school children of Texas," Rives told WND in preparation for the vote. "We have documented that in the past there was some pro-Islamic and anti-Christian literature in some of our textbooks. We want to put textbook companies on notice that if this happens again, it can cause your textbooks to be rejected."

Rives also noted the prominent national role Texas plays in textbook disputes.

"We are the largest buyer of textbooks in the United States, and publishers like to try to get others states to accept the same version [we use]. What we do in Texas influences the rest of the nation, and we need to take that seriously and make sure an agenda isn't pushed through the textbooks."

Rives told Alana Goodman of the Alexandria, Va.-based Culture and Media Institute, "In the social studies books we need to make sure that our democratic values are depicted and that's not just my opinion, that's what the Texas education code says."

Much to the dismay of the Dallas Morning News, the resolution also warns that "more such discriminatory treatment of religion may occur as Middle Easterners buy into the U.S. public school textbook oligopoly, as they are now doing."

DMN's Terrence Stutz reported that the resolution "offered no specific evidence of such investments," despite the footnote regarding the Dubai royal family.

As WND reported, American public school textbooks have been used to promote Islam, and publishing company executives are primarily responsible for the content of the texts.

Video: The Muslim Brotherhood

2010-10-06T00:10:00.000-04:00

Video: The Muslim
Brotherhood

All we’re going to say about this video is, you’ll want to see it!

The 'McCarthyism' epithet

2010-10-06T00:09:00.000-04:00

The “McCarthyism” Epithet

By Guy Rodgers

Executive Director

Go to any playground in America and you’ll find children engaging in typical childish “conflict management.” They try to shout each other down. They call names, “you’re a poopy!” They put their hands over their ears and scream “I can’t hear you!”

And it’s exactly the kind of behavior we see regularly on display from the politically correct enablers of radical Islam.

Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson has unveiled the latest, and predictable, name-calling tactic intended to put us in our place—we’re all supposedly engaging in “McCarthyism.”

In a September 21^st column, Robinson belittled Newt Gingrich for painting “Islam as the new Red Menace.” He dismissed any concern about a “stealthy insinuation of sharia into America’s legal system because no such thing is happening.”

And the kicker: “The ‘stealth jihadis,’ I suppose, must be like the ‘known communists’ on the list in Sen. Joseph McCarthy's hand.”

Robinson claims there is only one example of sharia here in America, the case of the New Jersey judge who ruled that a Muslim man committed no crime while beating and raping his wife, because he was acting consistent with his Islamic “practices.”

Robinson’s arrogance is exceeded only by his ignorance.

Sharia has penetrated our financial system, in the form of sharia-compliant financial instruments offered by the likes of Citi Group and AIG. In an example of government accommodating sharia, Minnesota offers sharia-compliant mortgages for Muslims.
Muslim prison employees, law enforcement officials, and even a Disneyland employee, have sued for the right to wear the hijab as part of their uniforms.
Muslim parents in New Jersey are demanding private prayer rooms for their children in the PUBLIC elementary schools.
According to a National Public Radio report in 2007, as many as 100,000 Muslims are living in polygamous marriages here in America.
Harvard provided women-only gym hours to accommodate the demands of Muslims.

Of course, I could go on and on.

The Ground Zero Mosque imam was touted by politically correct elites as a paragon of interfaith tolerance. Now America knows Imam Rauf believes any government that does not practice sharia law is “unjust.”

Twenty years ago, those in the UK who spoke out against the coming of sharia were also ridiculed. Today there are some 85 sharia courts in the UK.

The playground antics of enablers like Robinson, who insist on calling names, conjuring up the demon of McCarthyism, and engaging in a foolish “see no sharia, hear no sharia, speak no sharia” will not change these facts nor diminish the threat.

But every time they launch into their sanctimonious condemnations of anyone who dares to expose the threat of stealth jihad, Islamists laugh at them behind their backs for being such dupes.

Ground Zero Mosque changed the debate

2010-10-06T00:07:00.000-04:00

How the Ground Zero Mosque
controversy has changed the
debate

Petition now over 112,000 names.

On September 16^th Human Events published a column by Brigitte Gabriel entitled “Waking Up to Radical Islam” (see below, highlights added).

Interestingly, just six days earlier, Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, a reformist Muslim for whom we have a great deal of respect, penned a column for The Wall Street Journal, entitled “Questions for Imam Rauf from an American Muslim.”

In his column he wrote:

In your book, "What's Right With Islam," you cite the Brotherhood's radical longtime spiritual leader Imam Yusuf Qaradawi as a "moderate." Reformist American Muslims are not afraid to name Mr. Qaradawi and his ilk as radical. We Muslims should first separate mosque and state before lecturing Americans about church and state.

We applaud Dr. Jasser for his courageous stand against sharia law and his call for the separation of mosque and state, and we know there are other Muslim reformists in America who agree with him. So why do so many in our government and the media insist on shining their spotlight on Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated organizations like CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations), ISNA (Islamic Society of North America), and MAS (the Muslim American Society)??

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=39006

Waking Up to Radical Islam

by Brigitte Gabriel (more by this author)

Posted 09/16/2010 ET

In spite of Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf’s recent New York Times op-ed written to calm American concerns about the Ground Zero mosque, as the bright light of public scrutiny shines on this proposed mosque, Americans are discovering elements of radical Islam previously unknown to them.

The controversy has led countless Americans, puzzled and disturbed by the motivation and insensitivity of Imam Rauf and his backers, to begin evaluating the threat of radical Islam beyond the isolated context of terrorism.

Islam’s history has shown, for example, there is powerful symbolism in choosing where to construct mosques. Built on sites of military victories, mosques have traditionally symbolized the triumph and supremacy of Islam over all other religions and people: Al-Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem was built on top of Solomon’s Temple; the Umayyad mosque in Damascus is over the church of St. John the Baptist; more than 2,000 mosques are on the footprints of Hindu Temples in India.

While America does not have a religious center per se, in the eyes of radical Islam our “religion” is capitalism and the destruction of the World Trade Center was like the sack of Constantinople.

Does Ground Zero mosque Imam Rauf view his proposed mosque through this lens? Honestly, we can’t know for sure.

But even if he doesn’t, there is no doubt that many in the Muslim world will regard the construction of a mosque at Ground Zero as a tribute to Islamic victory over “infidel” America. Islamist leaders worldwide will employ the symbolism of a mosque at Ground Zero as a recruiting tool to jihad, swelling their ranks and escalating the threat against America.

This debate is forcing the American people to take a long- overdue look at the harsh reality of a political ideology which is in its very nature antithetical to the fundamental values of liberty and justice as practiced in America and Western societies.

People are asking the kinds of questions I had to confront decades ago: What exactly is “sharia law?” Why is there such an increase in homegrown jihadists today than ten or even five years ago? Who are the “moderate” Muslims, and why aren’t they speaking out more aggressively against the “radicals?”

Rauf and his supporters certainly did not anticipate the degree and intensity of the blowback they are getting. On the contrary, he quietly greased the skids for this project, meeting behind the scenes with various elected officials and opinion leaders to get their blessing.

Unfortunately, those he met with failed to do the due diligence that would have exposed his real agenda. They accepted at face value his soothing platitudes of tolerance and interfaith dialogue, platitudes for which he has shown contempt in writings and statements in the Arabic world.

Imam Rauf repeats these platitudes in his lengthy New York Times op-ed, clearly hoping that Americans will believe him. But thanks to probing investigations done by investigative reporters, bloggers and watchdog organizations, a robust debate has surrounded the proposed mosque.

More Americans now know that Rauf, as recently as March, said in Arabic that he opposes interfaith dialogue. They know he is a vocal supporter of sharia law, that he says governments which do not employ sharia law are “unjust” and that he has refused to label Hamas a terrorist organization. They know he has refused to sign the “Freedom Pledge,” issued by Former Muslims United, which pledges to oppose retaliation and punishment toward Muslims who leave Islam. The more Americans learn, the more concerned they become.

As a Lebanese immigrant I am as proud to be an American as at any time since I arrived in this great nation. Grassroots America is rising up in opposition to this symbol of Islamist victory, ignoring the hectoring and name-calling of our politically-correct “elites.”

Undoubtedly there are different reasons for why 70% of Americans oppose the building of the mosque. But whether the motivation is concern for the 9/11 victims or concern about the advance of sharia law that Imam Rauf advocates, the American people are saying “enough is enough.”

That is the only language Islamists understand.

Terrorists are only one manifestation of radical Islam. As Americans look even closer they will come to realize that the same ideology that produces a terrorist also produces a seemingly moderate Muslim who is dedicated to the advancement and imposition of sharia law. They will learn that the Islamist in a suit and tie, who wants to replace the Constitution with sharia law, differs from the terrorist only in the means to the end, not the end itself.

Brigitte Gabriel is an international terrorism analyst and a two-time New York Times best-selling author of Because They Hate and They Must Be Stopped. She is the president of ACT for America.org, the largest national security grassroots movement in the U.S.

Sharia report challenges establishment

2010-10-06T00:05:00.000-04:00

Sharia report challenges
political establishment

A powerful new “Team B” report on sharia law, published by the Center for Security Policy, challenges the political establishment’s notions regarding the nature of the threat we are fighting.

The report team included two of our speakers at the ACT! for America 2010 National Conference & Legislative Briefing, James Woolsey and Andrew McCarthy.

According to a column authored by Woolsey and McCarthy, which appeared last week in The Washington Times:

It is time for a "Team B" approach to Islamist ideology. The strategy has worked before, against a similarly determined threat to freedom. In 1976, George H.W. Bush, then director of central intelligence, invited a group of known skeptics about the strategy of detente to review the classified intelligence regarding Soviet intentions and capabilities. The point was to provide an informed second opinion on U.S. policy toward the Kremlin.

The conclusions of this experimental Team B study differed sharply from the government's regnant theory. The skeptics found that, pursuant to its communist ideology, the Soviet Union was determined to secure the defeat of the United States and the West and to tyrannize the globe. Thus, not only was detente unlikely to succeed, but national-security policies undertaken in its pursuit exposed the nation to grave danger. The study was particularly persuasive to former California Gov. Ronald Reagan, who would use it not only to challenge the detentist policies of the Ford and Carter administrations but to build the strategy that ultimately brought down the "Evil Empire."

Today, the United States faces a similarly insidious ideological threat: Shariah, the authoritarian doctrine that animates the Islamists and their jihadism. Translated as "the path," Shariah is a comprehensive framework designed to govern all aspects of life. Though it certainly has spiritual elements, it would be a mistake to think of it as a "religious" code in the Western sense because it seeks to regulate all manner of behavior in the secular sphere - economic, social, military, legal and political. That regulation is oppressive, discriminatory, utterly inimical to our core constitutional liberties and destructive of equal protection under the law, especially for women.

Please click here to view a copy of the report. Even if you only have time to read the Executive Summary, your time will be well-spent.

Video - 6th graders praying at mosque!

2010-10-06T00:03:00.000-04:00

Video shows public school students on field trip praying at a mosque!

Please click here to view a shocking video that contains footage of a 6^th grade public school field trip to a Boston mosque. (See background story below.)

The video, released by Americans for Peace and Tolerance reveals, among other things, students participating in Muslim prayer—and not a single teacher objecting or trying to stop it!

Brigitte Gabriel has been warning Americans about inappropriate and potentially unlawful activities that promote Islam in our public schools. Last December we told you about a furor that erupted in an Indiana elementary school where students were being prepped to sing a song praising Allah during the “winter festival.”

Please forward this email to everyone you know!

School Trip to “Moderate” Mosque: Inside Video Captures Kids Bowing to Allah
Wednesday, 15 September 2010 23:35

http://www.peaceandtolerance.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=129:
school-trip-to-moderate-mosque-inside-video-captures-kids-bowing-to-allah&catid=7:
our-statements&Itemid=39

Today, Americans for Peace and Tolerance released a video showing 6^th graders from Wellesley, MA as they rise from prostrating themselves alongside Muslim men in a prayer to Allah while on a public school field trip to the largest mosque in the Northeast. Teachers did not intervene. Parents have not been told.

The video was taken inside the Islamic Society of Boston Cultural Center – Boston’s controversial Saudi-funded mega-mosque – during a Wellesley Middle School social studies trip to the mosque, ostensibly taken to learn about the history of Islam first-hand. Yet the video reveals that the students are being blatantly mis-educated about Islam. A mosque spokesperson is seen teaching the children that in Mohammed’s 7th century Arabia women were allowed to vote, while in America women only gained that right a hundred years ago. This seems to be an increasingly recurring theme in American schools – the denigration of western civilization and the glorification of Islamic history and values. In fact, just recently, the American Textbook Council revealed that the New York State high school regents exam whitewashes the atrocities that occurred during the imperialistic Islamic conquest of Christian Byzantium, Persia, the African continent, and the Indian subcontinent, even as it demonizes European colonialism in South America.

The mosque spokesperson also taught the students that the only meaning of Jihad in Islam is a personal spiritual struggle, and that Jihad has historically had no relationship with holy war. As far as we know, the school has not corrected these false lessons.

For the past three years we’ve been sounding the alarm about the radical leadership and Saudi funding of the Boston mega-mosque and the organization that runs it, the Muslim American Society, which has been labeled by Federal prosecutors as “the overt arm of the Muslim Brotherhood in America.”

The Islamic Society of Boston was founded by Abdulrahman Alamoudi, who is currently serving 23 years in jail on terror charges. For years, its board of trustees included Yusuf al Qaradawi, the spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood who was banned by Bill Clinton from the United States in 1999. Qaradawi now chairs the Muslim American Society’s university, which offers classes inside the mosque. Over half the mosque’s $15.5 million price tag was funded by wealthy Saudis and since it opened, several of its leaders, donors and members have been implicated in Islamic extremism.

Oussama Ziade, a big donor to the mosque, is now a fugitive in Lebanon after being indicted in 2009 for dealing in the assets of an Al Qaeda financier. Ahmad Abousamra, the son of the Boston Muslim American Society’s former vice-president Abdulbadi Abousamra, is now a fugitive in Syria, fleeing the country before being indicted in 2009 on charges of aiding Al Qaeda. One of the mosque’s imams, Abdullah Faaruuq, was captured on tape in 2010 telling followers to “pick up the gun and the sword” and to defend another local terrorist Aafia Siddiqui from the U.S. government. Siddiqui, who was one of the imam’s congregants, is an MIT graduate and Al Qaeda member awaiting sentencing for attempting to murder FBI agents in Afghanistan while shouting “death to America.”

The mosque leadership continues to be embraced by top Massachusetts political and religious leaders. These include Boston Mayor Thomas Menino, Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick, as well as a group of local progressive rabbis and Christian clergy, who all insist despite evidence to the contrary that the mosque is moderate and its critics are just bigots.

Indeed, this is a familiar refrain by leaders nationwide in response to the increasing public realization that Islamic leaders are not as moderate as they present themselves. Radicalism is growing and many moderate Muslims have been silenced. In various parts of the country, public schools are allowing Muslim extremists to promote Islam to our children. Something’s broken here. Our leadership is failing. It’s now up to ordinary citizens to fix it.

U.S. has no strategy for homegrown terror

2010-09-14T21:13:00.000-04:00

U.S. has “no strategy”
for homegrown terror

The National Security Preparedness Group has released a new study (see story below, highlights added) showing the U.S. is unprepared to combat the threat of homegrown terrorism.

As one member of the group put it: “The United States has failed to fundamentally understand and prepare for these threats.”

Certainly there are a number of reasons for this, but from our perspective one stands out: the failure to link the ideology of Islamism (“radical Islam”) to acts of jihad.

Jihadists do what they do because they believe in the call to jihad. This is ideologically driven. The belief that they will “assimilate” or become part of our “melting pot” is wishful thinking. Thus, a national security strategy of “see no jihad, hear no jihad, speak no jihad” is doomed to fail.

U.S. Has 'No Strategy' to Confront Homegrown Terror, Security Group Warns
Published September 10, 2010
| FoxNews.com

The report:
http://bipartisanpolicy.org/sites/default/files/Final%20NSPG%20Threat
%20Assessment%20Report%20Sept%202010%20report%20w%20cover.pdf

The government has failed to anticipate the danger from homegrown terrorists, some of whom immigrated to the United States, and now faces the most complex set of threats since the Sept. 11 attacks, analysts on an organization headed by the two 9/11 Commission co-chairmen warned Friday.

Unveiling a new report a day before the nation marks nine years since the 2001 attacks, members of the National Security Preparedness Group said Al Qaeda and other terror groups are increasingly turning to U.S. citizens to carry out attacks on the United States. They cited examples where recruiters went after Somali populations and other groups living in the United States, saying that while the U.S. at one time may have thought its cultural "melting pot" would provide a "firewall" against radicalization from within, that assumption turned out to be false.

"The United States has failed to fundamentally understand and prepare for these threats," group member Bruce Hoffman said. "Terrorists may have found our Achilles' heel. We have no strategy to deal with this growing problem and emerging threat."

The report said U.S. authorities failed to realize that Somali-American youths traveling from Minnesota to Somalia in 2008 to join extremist Muslim groups was not an isolated event. Instead, the movement was one among several instances of a broader, more diverse threat that has surfaced across the country.

As a result, there remains no federal agency specifically charged with identifying radicalization or working to prevent terrorist recruitment of U.S. citizens and residents, said the report.

The group, headed by former 9-11 commission leaders Tom Kean and Lee Hamilton, laid out a detailed description of domestic terror incidents such as the Fort Hood shooting spree last year in which 13 people died; the attempt to crash an airliner in December as it was landing at Detroit, Michigan; and last May's botched vehicle bombing in New York City's Times Square. Kean told Fox News that Al Qaeda is serious about recruiting U.S. citizens and "non-traditional terrorists" to carry out its attacks.

"The threat is real, coordinated. It's something Al Qaeda wants to do now," he said. "They're moving to these smaller attacks. ... Everything becomes more possible if you have an American passport."

He said the United States needs to respond better to this evolving threat.

"We've got to attack it with the same energy and concerns and verve that we have ... in the past," Kean said.

During the past year, terrorism experts and government officials have warned of the threat posed by homegrown radicals, saying terror recruits who go abroad could return to the United States to carry out attacks.

But the United States, the report said, should have learned earlier from Britain's experience.

Before the 2005 suicide bombings in London's transit system, the British believed that Muslims there were better integrated, educated and wealthier than their counterparts elsewhere.

Similarly, U.S. authorities believed that its melting pot of nationalities and religions would protect it from internal radical strife, the report said.

The terrorists, it said, may have discovered America's "Achilles' heel in that we currently have no strategy to counter the type of threat posed by homegrown terrorists and other radicalized recruits."

U.S. officials have acknowledged the need to address the radicalization problem, and for the first time, the White House added combating homegrown terrorism this year to its national security strategy. The FBI, meanwhile, has worked to reach out to the Somali communities in an effort to counter the radicalization of the youth.

The report also points to an "Americanization" of the leadership of Al Qaeda and its allied groups, noting that radical cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, who encouraged the U.S. soldier accused in the Fort Hood shooting and others, grew up in the state of New Mexico. And Chicagoan David Headley played a role in scoping the targets for the Lashkar-e-Taiba attacks on Mumbai in late 2008 that killed more than 160 tourists and others.

Abroad, Al Qaeda, its affiliates and other extremist groups have splintered and spread, seeking havens in undergoverned areas of Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia and places in North and East Africa. That diversified threat has intensified as militants reached out to potential recruits through the Internet.

Assessing future threats, the report lists potential future domestic targets, including passenger jets, Western or American hotel chains, Jewish or Israeli sites and U.S. soldiers, even at their own bases in America.

It also warns that it is no longer wise to believe that American extremists will not resort to suicide bombings. They point to Maj. Nidal Hasan's alleged shooting spree at Fort Hood as an example, saying he had written about suicide operations in e-mails, and that his attack appeared to be one.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/09/10/strategy-confront-homegrown-terror-security-
group-warns/

Hezbollah and our southern border

2010-09-14T21:10:00.000-04:00

Hezbollah and our
southern border

Short video asks why
Napolitano refuses to
act

U.S. Rep. Sue Myrick, Co-chair of the House Anti-Terrorism Caucus, penned an op-ed in The Washington Times recently (below) regarding the presence of Hezbollah on our southern border.

She also posted a short, 2:30 video that we encourage you to view and forward to your friends and family. Brigitte Gabriel has been warning America for some time now that Hezbollah is infiltrating our southern border and establishing terror cells here in the U.S.

The threat of Hezbollah terrorism coming across our southern border continues to grow—while Department of Homeland Security director Janet Napolitano ignores calls for a task force to investigate this threat.

MYRICK: Hezbollah car bombs on our border

Why isn't Obama's Department of Homeland Security concerned?

By Rep. Sue Myrick

The Washington Times

An indictment was handed down Aug. 30 by the Southern District Court of New York that shows a connection between Hezbollah - the proxy army of Iran and a designated terrorist organization - and the drug cartels that violently plague the U.S.-Mexico border.

In short, a well-known international arms dealer was trying to orchestrate an arms-for-drugs deal in which cocaine from FARC - the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, which works with Mexican drug cartels to take cocaine into America - would be traded for thousands of weapons housed by a Hezbollah operative in Mexico.

This most recent case brings up several questions: Why would a member of Hezbollah be in Mexico? Why would Hezbollah need thousands of weapons in Mexico? Why are members of Hezbollah willing to work with FARC? Perhaps to exchange weapons for drugs? If Hezbollah has guns in Mexico and wants drugs, isn't it logical to assume that it is trading with more accessible Mexican drug cartels?

This is just the most recent incident in which it's clear that Hezbollah may have a presence in Mexico and along our southern border. There have been more incidents - which have been ignored by the Obama administration and the Department of Homeland Security.

On June 23, I sent a letter to Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano asking her to establish a task force to investigate the presence of Hezbollah along the U.S.-Mexico border.

The evidence is there: Hezbollah's cooperation with countries across South America. Highly sophisticated tunnels for transferring drugs across the U.S.-Mexico border, ones very similar to the tunnels dug by Hezbollah into Israel. The close relationship between Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez and the increase in Iranian nationals traveling through Venezuela to receive false documents, which they use to cross into the United States. Mexican officials raising concerns about Hezbollah operatives possibly training Mexican drug cartel enforcers in making car bombs.

Michael Braun, a former Drug Enforcement Administration chief of operations, has even been quoted as saying, "Hezbollah relies on the same criminal weapons smugglers, document traffickers and transportation experts as the drug cartels. ... They work together; they rely on the same shadow facilitators. One way or another, they are all connected."

Only a few weeks after I sent this letter, it was reported that Jameel Nasr, a Mexican national with ties to Hezbollah in Lebanon, "entrusted with forming a base in South America and the United States to carry out operations against Israeli and Western targets," was arrested by the Mexican government. Days later, a cell-phone-detonated car bomb - the first of its kind reported used by Mexican drug cartels - was deployed just across the U.S.-Mexico border in Juarez. On Aug. 27, another car bomb exploded in a U.S.-Mexico border state. These car bombs show an evolution in the tactics being used by the drug cartels and bear a strong resemblance to those employed by Hezbollah, raising questions as to who trained the cartels.

Doesn't the protection of the American public deserve answers? The primary role of the federal government is to protect its citizens. Unfortunately, the administration continues to sit by idly while security threats go uninvestigated. And that's all I'm requesting - an investigation to find out what's going on along our southern border.

To date, I have not received a response from the Department of Homeland Security informing me of any decision to investigate. How much more is it going to take?

Your tax dollars building mosques

2010-09-13T00:34:00.000-04:00

Your tax dollars
building mosques

The Ground Zero Mosque controversy continues to stir up new revelations.

Now we learn that tax dollars have been used to build mosques around the world (see column below).

And yesterday, Fox News reported that the Ground Zero Mosque imam has rejected an offer by New York Governor David Paterson to help move the mosque to another location. What does this tell us about the imam’s alleged commitment to interfaith bridge building? About his “sensitivity”?

A CNN poll this week revealed that 68% of American voters now oppose the Ground Zero Mosque! Driven by new revelations and increasing media coverage, this is an increase of nearly 10 points in the past 30 days. For example, since April Brigitte Gabriel has conducted nearly 200 radio and TV interviews about the Ground Zero Mosque! The rising opposition of public opinion certainly contributed to Paterson’s decision to try to mediate a solution and get the mosque moved.

You can help fuel this rising opposition by signing our petition if you haven’t yet done so AND forwarding this email to everyone you know!

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/aug/10/tax-dollars-to-build-mosques/

Tax dollars to build mosques

U.S. underwrites fundraising tour for Islamic shrine at Ground Zero

By THE WASHINGTON TIMES

-

The Washington Times

7:46 p.m., Tuesday, August 10, 2010

Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, executive director of the Cordoba Initiative, addresses a gathering as groups planning a proposed mosque and cultural center near Ground Zero in Lower Manhattan to be named Cordoba House showed and spoke about their plans for the center at a community board meeting in New York Tuesday, May 25, 2010. Community members both for and against the plan spoke during the meeting. (AP Photo/Craig Ruttle)

The State Department is sending Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf - the mastermind of the Ground Zero Mosque - on a trip through the Middle East to foster "greater understanding" about Islam and Muslim communities in the United States. However, important questions are being raised about whether this is simply a taxpayer-funded fundraising jaunt to underwrite his reviled project, which is moving ahead in Lower Manhattan.

Mr. Rauf is scheduled to go to Saudi Arabia, Dubai, Abu Dhabi, Bahrain and Qatar, the usual stops for Gulf-based fundraising. The State Department defends the five-country tour saying that Mr. Rauf is "a distinguished Muslim cleric," but surely the government could find another such figure in the United States who is not seeking millions of dollars to fund a construction project that has so strongly divided America.

By funding the trip so soon after New York City's Landmarks Preservation Commission gave the go-ahead to demolish the building on the proposed mosque site, the State Department is creating the appearance that the U.S. government is facilitating the construction of this shameful structure. It gives Mr. Rauf not only access but imprimatur to gather up foreign cash. And because Mr. Rauf has refused to reveal how he plans to finance his costly venture, the American public is left with the impression it will be a wholly foreign enterprise. This contradicts the argument that a mosque is needed in that part of New York City to provide services for a burgeoning Muslim population. If so many people need the mosque so badly, presumably they could figure out a way to pay for it themselves.

Americans also may be surprised to learn that the United States has been an active participant in mosque construction projects overseas. In April, U.S. Ambassador to Tanzania Alfonso E. Lenhardt helped cut the ribbon at the 12th-century Kizimkazi Mosque, which was refurbished with assistance from the United States under a program to preserve culturally significant buildings. The U.S. government also helped save the Amr Ebn El Aas Mosque in Cairo, which dates back to 642. The mosque's namesake was the Muslim conqueror of Christian Egypt, who built the structure on the site where he had pitched his tent before doing battle with the country's Byzantine rulers. For those who think the Ground Zero Mosque is an example of "Muslim triumphalism" glorifying conquest, the Amr Ebn El Aas Mosque is an example of such a monument - and one paid for with U.S. taxpayer funds.

The mosques being rebuilt by the United States are used for religious worship, which raises important First Amendment questions. U.S. taxpayer money should not be used to preserve and promote Islam, even abroad. In July 2009, the Office of the Inspector General published an audit of U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) faith-based and community initiatives that examined whether government funds were being used for religious activities. The auditors found that while USAID was funding some religious activities, officials were "uncertain of whether such uses of Agency funding violate Agency regulations or the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution" when balanced against foreign-policy objectives.

For example, our government rebuilt the Al Shuhada Mosque in Fallujah, Iraq, expecting such benefits as "stimulating the economy, enhancing a sense of pride in the community, reducing opposition to international relief organizations operating in Fallujah, and reducing incentives among young men to participate in violence or insurgent groups." But Section 205.1(d) of title 22 of the Code of Federal Regulations prohibits USAID funds from being used for the rehabilitation of structures to the extent that those structures are used for "inherently religious activities." It is impossible to separate religion from a mosque; any such projects will necessarily support Islam.

The State Department is either wittingly or unwittingly using tax money to support Mr. Rauf's efforts to realize his dream of a supersized mosque blocks away from the sacred ground of the former World Trade Center, which was destroyed by Islamic fanaticism. This ill-considered decision will raise the ire of millions of Americans and illustrates the limits of what the denizens of Foggy Bottom know about diplomacy.

Is your local mosque 'moderate'?

2010-09-13T00:33:00.000-04:00

Is Your Local Mosque “Moderate”?

The Ground Zero Mosque controversy has stirred up a lot of discussion and debate about what is a “moderate” Muslim and whether or not the Ground Zero Mosque imam is a “moderate.” We are convinced he is not, and in the next few days we will email an extensive dossier on Imam Rauf.

Below, our friend and colleague Dr. Tawfik Hamid, himself a Muslim, has provided us answers to the question, “what is a moderate Muslim?”

Ground Zero Mosque update: Last Saturday we sent out a special email reporting on New York City’s transit authority censoring ads opposing the Ground Zero Mosque. After being threatened with a lawsuit, we’re pleased to report the transit authority has reversed its decision. To read more, click here. To sign our petition opposing the Ground Zero Mosque, click here.

Is Your Local Mosque 'Moderate' or 'Radical'?
(Please circulate)

Ask the Imams of Mosques, the Muslim leaders, and the Islamic organizations in the US and worldwide to sign this declaration (See below)

by Tawfik Hamid

www.tawfikhamid.com

After the problem of Ground Zero Mosque has escalated it becomes an urgent necessity to distinguish 'Moderate' from 'Radical' Islam. Without making such a distinction the US and the rest of the world will remain divided regarding this issue. Debates about the issue can be endless unless we define the words 'radical' and 'moderate'.

Mosque leaders, Islamic scholars, and organizations who want to be considered Moderates MUST clearly and unambiguously declare the following declaration in their media outlets and on their websites.

I suggest that you send this declaration to Mosque leaders and the Islamic organizations inside the US and worldwide to see if they are ready to accept such a declaration or not.

Please feel free to circulate this newsletter so that we can start a process that allows us to distinguish radical from moderate Islam.

Declaration of Beliefs of Muslim Moderates -

I (We) are Muslims who want contemporary understandings of Islam to replace currently predominant harsh and radical (Salafi/Wahabbi) interpretations of our religion. We therefore declare that:

1-    Redda Law, the Sharia Law that allows the killing of Muslims who convert to other faiths, must be banned in Islamic teachings and in Sharia legal doctrine. Islamic countries that practice Sharia must stop the practice of this law and must admit that Freedom of belief and the right to convert to other faith or believe is a basic right that must be given to all Muslims.

2-    Current mainstream Sharia doctrines justify the use of violence against women. They encourage men to beat their wives to discipline them. They allow women accused of adultery to be stoned to death. These doctrines are barbarically inhumane, non-egalitarian, and teach Muslim children to be violent. These teachings must be ended by reinterpreting the Islamic text that justifies such violence.

3-    Traditional Sharia doctrines teach Muslims that they must engage in war so that Islam will dominate the world. When Islam becomes dominant, Non-Muslims are offered three options: to convert to Islam, to pay Jizzia (a humiliating tax), or to be killed. These doctrines run contrary to modern respect for diversity and for personal freedom of speech and belief. This understanding of Jihad that seeks domination of Islam over other peoples must no longer be regarded as an Islamic value and its teaching as a duty for Muslims must end.

The early Islamic wars known as "Futohaat Islameia" were fought to implement this doctrine of Jihad. These wars therefore should now be regarded as un-Islamic and un-justifiable.

4-    Jews are individuals who deserve the same respect accorded to all individuals. They should not be called "pigs and monkeys." The Islamic teaching that Muslims must fight and kill all Jews before the end of days is totally incorrect and unacceptable as it does not exist in the Quran. All teachings that encourage anti-Semitic attitudes, violence or disrespect toward Jews must be declared un-Islamic.

5-    Slavery is a crime against humanity. All Sharia laws that justify slavery in our modern times must not be taught any more. Muslim scholars must have a clear and loud voice against slavery.

6-    Islamic Sharia laws currently permit the killing homosexuals. These laws also are advocating a crime against our fellow human beings. They must be declared un-Islamic and their implementation must be considered criminal.

Signed,

Dr. Tawfik Hamid

Comment:

The above violent teachings, which currently are taught in mainstream Islamic books in America, are implemented in countries that allow governance according to Sharia Law. Future Muslim generations must be protected from these destructive doctrines, interpretations and customs.

These violent Sharia doctrines must be replaced with clear and unconditional explanations of why they no longer are valid.

Anything short of a fully clear and unequivocal stand against these doctrines indicates passive approval. Therefore, all Islamic leaders who genuinely consider themselves to be Muslim moderates must post these principles in English and in Arabic in full public view on their websites and declare them in their media outlets.

Failure to publically post and support these principles should be interpreted as clear evidence that a leader's mosque or Islamic organization must be considered radical.

Our 'moderate Muslim' problem

2010-09-13T00:30:00.000-04:00

Our “Moderate Muslim” Problem

True reformers ignored

Bret Stephens’ recent column in The Wall Street Journal (below, highlights added) is a must-read. Thanks to the controversy surrounding the Ground Zero Mosque, more and more Americans, as well as many in the media, are beginning to focus on the threats radical Islam poses to America beyond those who are the actual terrorists.

In a recent appearance on the Michael Savage radio program, ACT! for America president Brigitte Gabriel went into great detail about the “moderate Muslim” problem Stephens discusses below. We have seen this “moderate Muslim” song and dance many times before, where government officials ignore the true Muslim reformers while spotlighting the likes of Imam Rauf. Think Abdurahman Alamoudi, touted as a paragon of moderation, feted at the White House—until he was convicted on terrorism related charges. He is now serving a 23 year prison sentence.

Here’s a question for those insisting Ground Zero Mosque Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf is a “moderate.” Why won’t he sign the “Freedom Pledge” sent to him by Former Muslims United? All it asks is that Muslim leaders oppose retaliation against Muslims who leave Islam. Rauf’s refusal to sign a pledge opposing any kind of retaliation against “apostates” proves that his words about “tolerance” are a sham designed to fool the gullible.

There are true Muslim reformers in America. Rauf isn’t one of them.

Our 'Moderate Muslim' Problem
The Ground Zero mosque imam earns wide congratulations while true reformers go ignored.

• By BRET STEPHENS

Items of interest in the news media's coverage of "moderate Muslims":

• The New York Times, Oct. 19, 2001: "Imam Anwar Al-Awlaki, spiritual leader at the Dar al-Hijra mosque in Virginia, one of the nation's largest. . . . is held up as a new generation of Muslim leader capable of merging East and West."

• NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams, Dec. 9, 2004: "It's the TV industry's newest experiment, 'Bridges TV,' billing itself the 'American-Muslim lifestyle network,' featuring movies, documentaries, cartoons. . . . It's the brainchild of Aasiya Hassan, an architect, and her husband, Muzzamil Hassan, a banker, who are disturbed that negative images of Muslims seem to dominate TV, especially since 9/11."

• Boston Globe editorial, Aug. 4, 2010: "The simple fact is there's nothing threatening about the proposed Islamic center, which is being spearheaded by Feisal Abdul Rauf, one of the most respected moderate Muslim leaders in the country."

See where this is going?

Most readers probably know of Awlaki as the U.S.-born imam who presided over the mosque attended by two of the 9/11 hijackers. Awlaki also served as theological mentor to Fort Hood killer Nidal Malik Hassan, would-be Christmas Day bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, and Times Square bomber Faisal Shahzad. President Obama has authorized the military to assassinate Awlaki, now thought to be living in Yemen.

Associated Press

Al Qaeda Imam Anwar al-Awlaki, former poster child of moderate Islam.

As for Bridges TV, the saccharine story told by Brian Williams and reporter Ron Allen (complete with scenes of the family's domestic bliss in their modest home in Buffalo, N.Y.), came to an abrupt end in February 2009, when Mr. Hassan beheaded his wife after she had filed for divorce, evicted him from their home, and won an order of protection. Last week, Mr. Hassan's attorney defended her client on the grounds that he was, of all things, a "battered spouse."

Now we have the controversy over the Ground Zero mosque, opponents of which are being widely branded as bigots. As, no doubt, some of them are: There are bigots in any crowd.

Then again, is it bigoted to oppose bigots? Consider an interesting historical antecedent. In 1993, a controversy similar to the current one unfolded when residents of a Washington, D.C., suburb sought to use zoning laws to shut down the local mosque, ostensibly on grounds that it was a traffic nuisance. "Worshipers of many faiths said closing the popular mosque . . . would amount to discrimination against one of the area's fastest growing religions," the Washington Times reported at the time.

The mosque in question? None other than the Dar al-Hijra, later to be known as the "9/11 mosque." So were the petitioners who sought to shut it down bigots? Or is it that they got a whiff of its extremism, and didn't like the smell? "We are appalled at the ill will and friction," the paper quoted one Sylvia Johnson, "who said mosque-goers have yelled at her and blocked her driveway."

Here, of course, the argument will be made that, unlike Awlaki, Mr. Rauf really is a moderate. And that might well be so—by the standards of his native Kuwait. But a man who claims to condemn all forms of terrorism yet refuses to call Hamas a terrorist group is not a moderate by American standards, which happen to be the relevant ones when you're trying to build a mosque two blocks from Ground Zero. Mr. Rauf still has a perfect legal right to go ahead with his scheme. But his supporters need to choose between defending him on grounds of his alleged moderation (in which case his views are relevant), or on the principle of religious liberty (in which case they're not). They can't have it both ways.

Which brings me to the fundamental problem with too many self-described moderate Muslims. A few years ago, my friend Irshad Manji made the point to me that "moderate Muslims denounce terror that's committed in the name of Islam but they deny that religion has anything to do with it." [Editor’s Note: Exactly what CAIR representatives do.] By contrast, she noted, "reform-minded Muslims denounce terror that's committed in the name of Islam and acknowledge that our religion is used to inspire it."

That's a distinction worth pondering. It's also a considerable comfort to know that there are Muslims in the U.S. like Irshad who are working, tirelessly but mainly out of view, toward the cause of reform. They could use more support and recognition. As for the professional charlatans and secret radicals who claim to be moderate, it would be well if their cheerleaders in the media could inspect their credentials a little more carefully before lavishing them with praise. Because, when it comes to heralding the arrival of the long-awaited moderates, there's nothing more embarrassing than a case of premature congratulation.

Which Islam will prevail in America?

2010-09-13T00:28:00.000-04:00

“Which Islam Will Prevail
in America?”

Andrew McCarthy, lead prosecutor in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, was one of our featured speakers at the 2010 ACT! for America National Conference and Legislative Briefing. He is the author of the compelling book The Grand Jihad.

His recent commentary (below, highlights added) is well worth taking a few minutes to read.

Our petition opposing the Ground Zero Mosque now has over 104,000 signers. Have you signed yet?

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/244349/which-islam-will-prevail-america-andrew-c-mccarthy

Andrew C. McCarthy

Which Islam Will Prevail in America?
That is the real question at hand in the Ground Zero mosque debate.

The real battle for religious freedom lurks beneath the Ground Zero mosque controversy. It is sadly ironic that our public debate presents the mosque proponents as the partisans of liberty: That includes everyone from imam Feisal Rauf, the project’s sharia-touting sponsor, to President Obama, Mayor Bloomberg, and the rest of the Islamist-smitten Left, to the GOP’s own anti-anti-terrorist wing. Yet, wittingly or not, when they champion this mosque and its sponsors, it is the agenda of an alien and authoritarian Islam that they champion — an Islam against which many American Muslims chafe.

When it comes to liberty, no one in this society has been given a wider berth than the Islamists, the purveyors of this authoritarian Islam, which is the mainstream Islam of the Middle East. Their vise grip on the American Muslim community has been cinched for two decades by the government, the media, and the academy. For our post-American ruling class, “Islamic outreach” means prostituting themselves for Saudi largesse; it means putting the “moderate” label on the Muslim Brotherhood — the Saudi-backed saboteurs whose American operatives boldly promise to “eliminate and destroy Western Civilization from within.”

The victims of this lethal charade include American Muslims. They, too, crave religious liberty and Western enlightenment. Our elites abandon them to the sharia-mongers. That freedom destroyers have been allowed to pose as freedom defenders ought to tell mosque opponents something: We have done a poor job of explaining the stakes.

In 1993, I headed up a prosecution team that was preparing to try the “Blind Sheikh” Omar Abdel Rahman and eleven other jihadists for conducting a terrorist war against the United States. The case revealed this country’s Muslim divide.

On one side were patriotic American Muslims, without whom successful prosecution would have been impossible. Not only did they infiltrate the terror cells, they helped us shape the resulting evidence into a compelling narrative. On the other side were the Muslim Brotherhood’s satellites. These included outfits like CAIR (the Council on American-Islamic Relations), which was formed in 1994 by the Brotherhood’s Hamas-support wing, with seed money from an Islamic “charity” — the Holy Land Foundation — later shut down for financing foreign terrorist organizations. These Brotherhood satellites purport to speak for American Muslims. In fact, they speak for anti-American Muslims, most of whom are outside the United States. They demagogued the case as a phobic criminalization of Islam itself, just as they have libeled America since 9/11 as being “at war with Islam.”

Translating evidence into English turned out to be a Herculean challenge during our trial preparation. Most of our evidence was in Arabic, because almost all of our defendants had immigrated here from Egypt and Sudan, hotbeds of anti-American Islam. The resulting mounds of documents, wiretap recordings, and inflammatory sermons overstretched the Justice Department’s thin Arabic-language capacity. To ease the strain, we tried to retain some civilians as private contractors. A number of local Muslims expressed interest, but in the end they turned us down.

BROTHERHOOD ISLAM vs. AMERICAN ISLAM
Mind you, they wanted to help. They were as offended as anyone by what the terrorists had done. These folks were Americans. They were the kind of Muslims you’re never exposed to, given the media’s preference for jihad apologists who, when not applauding him, claim Osama bin Laden was “made in the U.S.A.” But the would-be translators wanted ironclad assurance that their assistance to the prosecution would be kept confidential. It was an assurance I was not in a position to give, so they politely declined.

Here’s the most depressing part: It wasn’t really a matter of safety. There was surely some element of that — it goes with the territory in terrorism cases. But these people were mostly worried that they and their families would be ostracized in their communities as traitors to Islam.

In Muslim communities, I learned, many people — especially American Muslims — were supportive of our investigations. Of course they didn’t like the light of suspicion being shined on Muslims, not any more than Italian Americans liked the attention our mafia cases thrust on their communities. Yet they tuned out the CAIR chorus, just as most sensible people tune out the grievance industry. They reserved most of their resentment for the malevolent, anti-American actors in their midst. They understood that public safety is the government’s highest obligation. As long as they could do it quietly, they were willing to help.

But doing it quietly was imperative. Most American Muslims are not instinctively different from other Americans. But American Muslim communities are peculiar. In many of them, the leadership of the mosques and Islamic centers is foreign (or at least foreign-influenced). This leadership tends to be anti-Western and arrogant, claiming an Islamic authenticity Americans are said to lack. Many American Muslims are intimidated into silence. They are cowed by the specter of being condemned as too American. In Islam, there is no more grievous offense than causing disunity through infidelity. It is no small thing when community leaders frame a Muslim as insufficiently loyal to the ummah, the notional Islamic nation.

American Muslims are also taken aback by the ease with which their community leaders straddle the line between preaching Islam and cheerleading for terrorists. Why, they wonder, does their government, the U.S. government, consistently elevate America-bashing Islamists who can’t give a straight answer when asked about Hamas and Hezbollah? Why not highlight Muslims who are pro-American and unambiguously anti-terrorist — Muslims who desperately need the support?

Most of the mosques and Islamic centers in our country are controlled, to a greater or lesser degree, by the Muslim Brotherhood and its satellites. The North American Islamic Trust (NAIT) was established in the early Seventies to buy up property for the establishment of American mosques and “Islamic centers,” the latter being what the Brotherhood calls “the axis” of the Islamist movement in America. The Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) supplies literature and vets imams. Both NAIT and ISNA, along with CAIR and other Brotherhood groups, were identified by the Justice Department as unindicted coconspirators in the recent Hamas-financing prosecution against the Holy Land Foundation. These Islamists owe their vision to the Brotherhood. Just as important, they owe their livelihood, influence, and power to moneyed Middle East patrons, particularly the Saudis.

The Kingdom and the Brotherhood have combined for a half-century to put American Muslim communities in a stranglehold. They proselytize a fundamentalist interpretation of Islam — an amalgam of Saudi Wahhabism and Brotherhood Salafism — that is virulently anti-Western. Its instruction to Muslims in the United States, Canada, and Europe is voluntary apartheid: Immigrate but don’t integrate, infiltrate but don’t assimilate.

SHARIA OR RELIGIOUS FREEDOM?
This brand of Islam is designed to create parallel Muslim enclaves, resistant to America’s freedom culture and to Western civilization, just as it created the liberty-killing “no-go zones” now sprouting up throughout Europe. It is designed to snuff out religious freedom, pressuring American Muslims to adopt the Islamists’ social mores, financial practices, and anti-Western outlook. And the authoritarian device it uses to establish and control these enclaves is sharia, Islam’s legal and political framework, which aspires to control of all aspects of life — not just spiritual life, but all of life.

It is the Brotherhood’s objective to thread sharia through American law and culture. This mission drives imam Feisal Rauf’s work, as documented by the Center for Security Policy’s Christine Brim in an eye-popping report at Andrew Breitbart’s Big Peace website.

Since 2006, Rauf has been developing the “Sharia Index Project.” His partners in this venture include longtime Muslim Brotherhood honcho Jamal Barzinji, a top official at the International Institute of Islamic Thought. The IIIT, a major backer of the convicted terrorist Sami al-Arian, is one of the Brotherhood satellites that republished Rauf’s book, What’s Right with Islam Is What’s Right with America, the book that was released in Malaysia under the more telling title, A Call to Prayer from the World Trade Center Rubble: Islamic Dawa in the Heart of America Post-9/11. (The other Brotherhood organization behind the republication of Rauf’s book was the aforementioned ISNA.) As Ms. Brim explains, the purpose of Rauf’s Sharia Index Project is “to benchmark” every country’s compliance with sharia, with an eye toward pressuring them to adopt and enforce more.

The United States is not going to become a sharia state anytime soon. That obvious fact has commentators pooh-poohing the encroaching peril, even as we watch Europe succumb before our eyes, as if no-go zones, honor killings, the Balkanizing of society, and the strangulation of freedom could never happen here. On Tuesday, for example, in an otherwise insightful column on the Left’s incoherence in the mosque controversy, the Wall Street Journal’s James Taranto took an offhanded swipe at the “fringe right’s ravings about ‘Shariah.’” But are the concerns really “ravings,” and are they truly confined to a right-wing “fringe”?

It so happened that in the same day’s Journal, Bret Stephens penned a sharp essay about Muslim “moderates” who turn out not to be so moderate. As his counterpoint, he offered a courageous, progressive Muslim reformer, Irshad Manji. Rather than pretending that Islamic doctrine has nothing to do with terrorism, Ms. Manji is forthrightly confronting the doctrine and working to change it. What is it that needs change? As illustrated in her spellbinding book, The Trouble with Islam Today: A Muslim’s Call for Reform in Her Faith, much of what ails Islam is sharia sclerosis. Sharia, she elaborates, represents the legal opinions of classical Muslim jurists, frozen a millennium ago and, ever since, impervious to critical inquiry.

Frozen it remains thanks to atavistic zealots, prominent among them the Muslim Brotherhood, an organization founded by fundamentalists in the 1920s and lavishly funded by the Saudis since the 1950s, an outfit Manji correctly describes as “the al-Qaeda of its generation.” These Islamists are the true enemies of religious liberty. It is they who foreclose modern Muslims from the right to reason independently, to evolve.

Whether Ground Zero mosque proponents realize it or not, the cause they are advancing — against the will of the American people, and, perversely, under the guise of “religious freedom” — is the Islamist cause. It is the Brotherhood, not American Muslims, insisting that this monument must be imposed on this sacred spot.

It is a “considerable comfort,” Mr. Stephens writes, “to know that there are Muslims in the U.S. like Irshad who are working, tirelessly but mainly out of view, toward the cause of reform. They could use more support and recognition.” But, of course, their tireless work must happen “out of view,” because the Islamists have made it too dangerous for them to work openly. And they are denied support and recognition because the post-American ruling class has made its bed with sharia salesmen like Rauf, who blame America for 9/11 and can’t bring themselves to say Hamas is a terrorist organization.

By contrast, American Muslims grasp that 9/11 was an attack on their country, too. Their emerging leaders, such as Zuhdi Jasser and Steven Schwartz, have started organizations — respectively, the American Islamic Forum for Democracy and the Center for Islamic Pluralism — that promote freedom and offer Muslims an escape from the Brotherhood’s clutches. As Messrs. Jasser and Schwartz relate, American Muslims understand the significance of Ground Zero to our nation, to the families of those who were slaughtered, and to the enemy against whom we are still fighting. They know that, in contrast to the innate intolerance of sharia states, the United States opens its arms to people of all faiths, including Muslims. Like Ms. Manji, they are struggling, against daunting opposition, to forge an Islam that embraces Western values, that reveres religious faith but denies it temporal authority.

The Ground Zero mosque controversy is not about religious liberty for Muslims. It is about which Islam will thrive in the United States: the one that is fighting Americans, or the one American Muslims are fighting for.

Imam issues a not-so-veiled threat

2010-09-13T00:26:00.000-04:00

Imam issues a not-so-
veiled threat

Have you signed our
petition?

In a series of interviews the past two days, Ground Zero Mosque Imam Feisal Rauf significantly raised the stakes.

The self-described “bridge builder” has proven to be anything but, warning America that dire consequences await us if the mosque is not built.

In doing so, he described those who oppose the mosque at Ground Zero as “radicals,” a description one Fox News analyst termed “insulting.” In effect, he is asserting that 71% of Americans must yield or we will inflame the Muslim world.

Brigitte Gabriel participated in a heated debate with a friend of this imam on Sean Hannity’s radio program yesterday. The imam’s friend went so far as to say that the “smoke” caused by this controversy will cause “fire” against America.

Click on this link: “Brigitte Gabriel and Jehan Harney Audio File” to listen to the debate.

Imam Rauf’s true colors continue to become more visible to the American people. Recall that he said, shortly after 9/11, that America was an “accessory” to the attack.

Now, to argue that America must capitulate or face the consequences, Rauf actually makes the case for ACT! for America’s core mission—rising up against the threat of radical Islam in whatever form that threat takes.

We will stand for freedom and our national security. We will not be intimidated.

'L'Shana Tova' from ACT! for America

2010-09-13T00:25:00.000-04:00

To our Jewish family and friends from your ACT! for America family.

Mosque funder and Hamas

2010-09-13T00:23:00.000-04:00

Mosque funder
and Hamas

Petition nearing
109,000 names

So now we learn that a key funder of the Ground Zero Mosque is a former supporter of the Holy Land Foundation!

Yes, that Holy Land Foundation, which was shut down because it was funding Hamas. In the largest terrorism financing trial in American history, 108 guilty verdicts were handed down against Holy Land Foundation leaders.

No wonder Imam Rauf refuses to name Hamas a terrorist organization!

http://www.newyorkpost.com/p/news/opinion/editorials/more_mosque_revelations_
yMtNnRzphiKKAGJQAksoQN

More mosque revelations

Posted: September 03, 2010

So now it transpires that a key money- man behind the proposed Ground Zero mosque is a one-time supporter of a group shut down by the feds because it was a front for Hamas.

No wonder the mosque's principal imam, Feisal Abdul Rauf, refuses to discuss the project's finances.

Or, for that matter, refuses to speak harshly of Hamas -- an Iranian cat's-paw that's long been one of the deadliest Islamist terrorist organizations operating in the Mideast.

It was reported last night that Hisham Elzanaty -- an Egyptian-born businessman from Long Island -- provided a big chunk of the $4.8 million needed to buy the building that will be demolished to make way for the mosque.

AFP/GETTY IMAGES

Feisal Abdul Rauf

Among other things, Elzanaty runs a Bronx-based medicial supply company that had to refund more than $300,000 in Medicaid payments in 2004-2005.

In 1999, he donated thousands to the Holy Land Foundation, later shuttered by the feds because of its Hamas ties.

All of this is, as they say, enough to give one pause.

But we doubt it will truly surprise any among the 71 percent of New Yorkers found this week by Quinnipiac University pollsters to oppose the mosque.

Mayor Mike and others think they are bigots, but most seem to have asked -- and answered to their own satisfaction -- a fair question:

How close to the scene of that deadly Islamist attack on America is too close to build a mosque?

Answer: The proposed site was close enough to have been hit by a landing-gear assembly from one of the crashed airliners on 9/11 -- and that's way too close.

They're also nervous about the project's backers -- even before Elzanaty popped up -- deciding that, with those folks involved, anywhere might be too close.

As The Post reported yesterday, Rauf has been catching iffy tax breaks since 1998 for an organization run from his wife's Upper West Side apartment.

How'd he do it? By telling the IRS the one-bedroom digs were actually a mosque where 500 people prayed daily.

These are only the latest revelations about the mosque's backers, who've run up a cumulative record of petty crime, slumlording and tax-scamming.

And that's being generous.

Rauf, who's due back in New York this weekend after a long trip abroad, has plenty of explaining to do to the people he's been thumbing in the eye for weeks.

First there is Elzanaty's role, of course.

Then there's the elephant in the room: Whence the $100 million needed for the mosque?

And then there is this.

At a forum in Dubai on Tuesday, Rauf appeared to call the 71 percent of New Yorkers who oppose his project religious "extremists."

"The battlefront . . . is not between Muslims and non-Muslims," he said. "It is between moderates [and] extremists and radicals of all faith traditions."

We'd guess 71 percent of New Yorkers would include a representative cross-section of "all faith traditions."

Are they "extremists" for opposing the mosque?

New Yorkers hardly ever agree on any thing -- but they agree it's inappropriate.

Are they "radicals?"

If Rauf thinks so, then New York ain't the town for him.

Nor is there room for his mosque at Ground Zero.

Gabriel denounces Koran burning

2010-09-13T00:21:00.000-04:00

ACT! for America Denounces Koran Burning

A message from Brigitte Gabriel, President
and CEO of ACT! for America

We at ACT! for America denounce and condemn, in the strongest terms, the upcoming Koran burning event organized by Pastor Terry Jones and members of the Dove World Outreach Center in Gainesville, Florida. Their proposed event is ill-conceived, counter-productive and unwelcome in a world where ideas and philosophies are best debated in the context of the issues and the facts. We find this an archaic act that serves no useful purpose, and as such is a regrettable instance of an inability or unwillingness to discuss the issues facing us in a reasonable and constructive manner.

ACT! for America is, and has always been, committed to exposing the threat of the political ideology of radical Islam and its sharia law through constructive debate, illumination of the facts, and a reasoned analysis of the implications of the threat.

Pastor Jones and his congregation are stooping to the tactics of and joining the inarticulate who express their anger and opposition through destructive and spiteful acts of denigration. What is the difference between his actions and the actions of Islamists destroying synagogues in Gaza or churches and Bibles in Lebanon, Bosnia and Egypt? We are better than that as Americans.

Always devoted,

Brigitte Gabriel