Mark Bibi is familiar of the tactics of those Leftists who will brook no opposition to their anti-human agenda.

Animal-rights fanatics have figured out that you beat medical research that uses animals not by going after the researchers, but by going after those who do business with the researchers. They cow Wall Street, not by flying into buildings, but by trashing members' clubs.

Bibi knows what it is like to be a target. Anonymous thugs vandalized his house, smashed his car's windshield and made nasty phone calls to his home in the middle of the night.

Skip Boruchin, the only trader who refused to be scared out of business with Life Sciences Research, testified about the relentless intimidation he and his family endured. Activists painted his yard red with slogans such as "Skip is a murderer." On line, they called him a "child pornographer." One Web site instructed people to send sex toys to his ninetysomething mother at an assisted-living home. Another Web site listed the names, phone and Social Security numbers of 19 neighbors, and threatened to publicize information about their credit cards or medical history.

Violence? Well, there were the two bombs set at Chiron's Emeryville offices in 2003. Agents believe the second bomb was timed to go off as first-responders arrived. The FBI also believes the violence is escalating.

And their actions are violent – not limited to harassment or property crimes. And what’s more, they are willing to publicly state – under oath before a Congressional committee – that they endorse homicidal violence as justified against their opponents.

Jerry Vlasak, a Southern California physician who is spokesman for the North American Animal Liberation Press Office, also testified Wednesday. Vlasak dismissed the intimidation of Boruchin and others as "getting a little spray paint on the wall."

Committee Chairman James Inhofe, R-Okla., questioned Vlasak about a statement Vlasak had made defending the assassination of medical researchers. Once again, Vlasak justified violence. For "people who are hurting animals and who will not stop when told to stop," he answered, one option would be murder, a "morally justifiable solution."

Imagine, if you can, the outrage that would exist if mainstream pro-life groups took such a position (they condemn violence) – or if opponents of homosexuality endorsed the killing of homosexuals “who will not stop when told to stop.” There would be loud outrage from the Left – but there is not a word of condemnation when it is their ideological allies engaged in such threats of violence against those involved in legal activities – medical and scientific research designed to improve human lives.

And it isnÂ’t just medical researchers and their associates who get it. Consider this incident from Chicago.

A day after speaking out against the city's proposed ban on foie gras, chef Didier Durand arrived at his River North bistro Wednesday to an unwelcome sight: a shattered window splattered with a liquid resembling blood and busted-up flower boxes strewn on the sidewalk.

Police say Cyrano's Bistrot and Wine Bar at 546 N. Wells was vandalized between 11 p.m. Tuesday and 9:30 a.m. Wednesday.

Durand, who had spoken at a City Council committee meeting Tuesday about the proposed ban, suspects animal rights activists are behind the damage. The Health Committee voted in favor of the ban.

That’s right – not only do they want control of your diet, but they will do their best to punish those who dare to speak against their radical agenda.

The time has come to shut down the “animal rights” terrorists. The freedom of Americans -- and our lives and health – demand it.

Posted by: Greg at 12:05 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 606 words, total size 4 kb.

May she rot forever in a dank dungeon cell for her facilitation of terrorist actions.

The First Amendment provides no refuge for a civil rights lawyer who said she was unfairly convicted of providing material support to terrorists for publicly releasing the message of a notorious jailed terrorist, a federal judge said yesterday.

In a 54-page ruling that recounted key trial evidence, U.S. District Judge John G. Koeltl rejected all of attorney Lynne Stewart's arguments that the Feb. 10 verdict should be tossed out.

Stewart, 65, had argued that her client, Sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman, was engaging in protected speech when he expressed his opinion about a cease fire by Islamic militants in Egypt that Stewart passed along in a 2000 press release.

Koeltl said the fact that the sheik participated in a conspiracy to kill people in a foreign country by communicating words from the prison where he is serving a life sentence did not make his participation constitutionally protected.

"The First Amendment lends no protection to participation in a conspiracy, even if such participation is through speech," he said.

Koeltl cited an earlier ruling Chief Judge Michael Mukasey made on the same issue in 1994 when Mukasey wrote that speech "is not protected by the First Amendment when it is the very vehicle of the crime itself."

In short, you cannot be the messenger for terrorists and then wrap yourself in the First Amendment.

Posted by: Greg at 01:56 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 243 words, total size 2 kb.

Looks like more Brits have been terrorized into "sensitivity" to Muslims. The latest move to dhimmitude involves the announced plans of several banks to discontinue giving away piggy banks

Halifax and NatWest banks have led the move to scrap the time-honoured symbol of saving from being given to children or used in their advertising, the Daily Express/Daily Star group reports here.

Muslims do not eat pork, as Islamic culture deems the pig to be an impure animal.

Salim Mulla, secretary of the Lancashire Council of Mosques, backed the bank move.

"This is a sensitive issue and I think the banks are simply being courteous to their customers," he said.

However, the move brought accusations of political correctness gone mad from critics.

"The next thing we will be banning Christmas trees and cribs and the logical result of that process is a bland uniformity," the Dean of Blackburn, Reverend Christopher Armstrong, said.

"We should learn to celebrate our difference, not be fearful of them."

Khalid Mahmoud, the Labour MP for a Birmingham seat and one of four Muslim MPs in Britain, also criticised the piggy-bank ban.
AdvertisementAdvertisement

"We live in a multicultural society and the traditions and symbols of one community should not be obliterated just to accommodate another," Mr Mahmoud said.

"I doubt many Muslims would be seriously offended by piggy banks."

The only problem is that the extremists you folks have fostered and sheltered in your midst DO object to being confronted by the image of a pif -- and they have a tendency to repond explosively.

Posted by: Greg at 12:25 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 262 words, total size 2 kb.

I see the arguments for both sides of the "secret detention" policy that has been adopted with regard to captured terrorists. I understand the need for secrecy, but am troubled by the potential for abuse of the power.

But in the case of this Australian law, I see a government going a step too far.

Proposed legislation in Australia would make it a crime for one parent to tell the other that their child had been detained under anti-terror laws, a report says.

If a youth aged between 16 and 18 was detained, one parent would be informed and allowed to visit for two hours daily during the detention, which could last for two weeks without charge, the Sydney Morning Herald reported.

But if the chosen parent was the father, for example, and he told the mother where the child was, he could be jailed for up to five years.

The opposition Labor Party's spokesman for homeland security, Arch Bevis, scorned the proposal.

"The idea that one parent could see their child and then somehow be fined or imprisoned for telling the other parent is absurd."

Yeah, I'd have to agree with that assessment. Not only that, it is fundamentally immoral to drive that sort of wedge between a husband and wife. And besides, i a parent is such a security risk, then he or she probably ought to be in jail on terrorism charges as well -- especially if they have permitted their kid to be a part of such a group.

I think that the absurdity of the policy was pointed out nicely by the spokesman for the opposition Labour Party.

Using Prime Minister John Howard and his wife Janette as an example, Bevis said: "I suspect Janette would be pretty demanding of John to find out where the kids were. And I'd hazard a guess that John might even buckle under the pressure."

I'd have to agree -- and I'm pretty sure that george would tell Laura.

Posted by: Greg at 02:41 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 338 words, total size 2 kb.

Ghulam Nabi Lone, education minister of India's Jammu and Kashmir state, was murdered yesterday. I wonder who could be responsible for the killing What does the Washington Post have to say about the matter?

Islamic militants shot and killed a local government minister in Indian-controlled Kashmir on Tuesday, part of a surge of recent violence that has dampened hopes for a new era of peace and cooperation in the disputed province following the massive earthquake that devastated the area on Oct. 8.

Ghulam Nabi Lone, education minister of India's Jammu and Kashmir state, was shot inside his home in the highly protected Tulsi Bagh neighborhood in the state's summer capital of Srinagar. His killing came just days after 10 members of two Hindu families were slain by militants in another part of the state.

I guess there is no rest for the "Religion of Peace" in the earthquake-stricken region -- and that it does not matter if you are a governemtn official or a family in your home.

But the excerpt above does leave me asking a question -- why can't the Washington Post bring itself to label these so-called "militants" as the terrorists thye really are?

Posted by: Greg at 11:26 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 203 words, total size 1 kb.

Chuck Colson offers an interesting overview of the threat to national security in our nationÂ’s prisons.

What makes prisons a “prime target” for al-Qaeda are two other things that, unfortunately, are in plentiful supply: a resentful population and people who will preach hate and violence to them.

After three decades of prison ministry, I can tell you that resentment and bitterness are the rule, not the exception, among prisoners. Radical Islam offers them a chance for vengeance against their perceived oppressors.

The incitement to hate and violence is provided by groups like the Al Haramain Islamic Foundation, a Wahhabist group. Its literature, which urges war against Jews and Christians, was primarily sent to prisoners and Islamic prison chaplains.

The Koran they distributed in American prisons included an appendix by the former Chief Justice of Saudi Arabia entitled “The Call to Jihad (Holy Fighting in Allah’s Cause) in the Qur’an.” This appendix urged Jihad against all who refuse to convert to Islam.

While Al Haramain was shut down by federal authorities, there is, according to the Weekly Standard, “reason to believe that the literature [it] distributed . . . is only the tip of the iceberg of what has reached and may still be reaching U.S. prisons.”

I had to highlight that one part – one group has included material by a senior Saudi jurist justifying violent jihad against those of us who have the audacity to reject Islam.

Our prisons are a seedbed of potential Islamic extremism. What are authorities doing to put a stop to the problem?

Posted by: Greg at 11:37 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 267 words, total size 2 kb.

Why are two defense contractors apologizing for an ad depicting a mosque -- remember, they are being used by Islamists to attack Americans -- being assaulted by US troops in a helicopter?

Bell Helicopter and Boeing Co. have issued apologies after an advertisement for their V-22 Osprey aircraft infuriated a major Islamic group.

The ad in the Sept. 24 issue of National Journal, a political affairs publication, depicts U.S. special operations troops rappelling out of a Bell/Boeing-built CV-22 Osprey in an assault on a mosque.

"It descends from the heavens. Ironically it unleashes hell," reads the ad headline.

Bell, Boeing and the National Journal made their apologies after the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) fired off a protest to Bell and Boeing.

Bell spokesman Mike Cox said the ad, developed by the company's agency, TM Advertising in Irving, Texas, was supposed to have been pulled by all publications after it ran one other time nearly a month ago.

The ad content had not been approved by all the people who were supposed to approve it, Cox told the Fort Worth Star-Telegram. "The first time the ad ran, we pulled it immediately."

"We took immediate action to cancel any insertions that had been placed and provided explicit instructions for its removal. Despite our directive to the National Journal to replace the ad, it was not replaced as requested, which resulted in its publication this week," Cox said in the company's official statement.

"We recognize that some organizations and individuals may have been offended by its content and regret any concerns this advertisement may have raised. Bell and our partners are evaluating creative processes to prevent this from happening again."

Oh, that's right -- the terrorist apologists from CAIR have complained -- and we don't want them getting their turbans in a knot (actually, I do want them getting their turbans in a knot -- around their necks). After all, they might protest and make the companies appear "insensitive" And we cannot have insensitive defense contractors, can we?

My question is very simple -- when will people quit apologizing for depicting the enemy as the enemy?

Posted by: Greg at 01:45 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 378 words, total size 2 kb.

Would someone care to explain what happened yesterday at http://michellemalkin.com/">the University of Oklahoma?

Here's the press report.

One person was killed in an explosion near a packed football stadium at the University of Oklahoma on Saturday night in what authorities said appeared to be a suicide.

The blast, in a traffic circle about 100 yards from Oklahoma Memorial Stadium, could be heard by some in the crowd of 84,000, but university President David Boren said no one inside the stadium was ever in danger.

"We are apparently dealing with an individual suicide, which is under full investigation," Boren said in a statement. There was no information about the person who was killed, and no reports of any other injuries.

A police bomb squad detonated explosives found at the site of the blast. The area near the stadium was searched by bomb-sniffing dogs.

Hold on -- more than one bomb, and the one detonating in the parking lot of a packed stadium. Doesn't this raise red flags for anyone else. The police expalantion sounds totally bogus!

And then there is this from Free Republic -- not my favorite source, but potentially intersting.

To: bahblahbah

I just got home from the game. They are calling it a suicide bomber and they found another bomb unexploded. One of my son's fraternity brothers was within about 30 yards of the blast and felt the heat on his face outside the science hall which is also near the stadium.

The police were interviewing him and one of the girls that was over at the fraternity (I park there) because she saw two men run in the stadium after the explosion and separate.

It was so loud. I told my son and daughter along with my son's friend that it sounded like a bomb. We didn't have any confirmation until the girl behind us got a call as it had scrolled across the screen.

Last I heard, they were looking for two more suspects, they blew up the second bomb, have bomb dogs all over campus going through the buildings that were open, and they couldn't tell if the person blown up was a man or woman.

Our news has very few details other than FBI is on the scene. Think every Norman cop from the looks of it is on the campus. We had to exit through the east and north sides and walk around as they had the south oval closed off from Lindsey to the Library.

What a scarey situation -- it was so freaky to hear that loud explosion and then absolutely zero news but we could see police cars all around from where we sit in the stadium. Didn't hear a word until the 4th quarter when the lady behind us received a call!

Uh -- this sounds really suspicious IF ACCURATE.

What I want to know is who the bomber was. Is he a foreign Muslim student? Is that why there is no name released yet?

And by the way, what about this report from last week, pointed out by Liberty?

On September 26, 2005 an Oklahoma University student pleaded guilty to bringing an explosive device to the airport. In August he was arrested after police found an improvised pipe bomb in his backpack. He told officials he had forgotten the device was in his bag. He faces up to a year in prison and up to $100,000 for the charge

Are these two incidents somehow connected?

UPDATE: Then again, maybe there is less to this than meets the eye -- except for the fact that suicide by explosive is unusual outside of the context of a terrorist attack. Why did John Henry Hinrichs III kill himself, and why did he choose this method and this location?

Posted by: Greg at 01:36 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 645 words, total size 4 kb.

I'm a supporter of the war in Iraq. And while anti-American moonbats like Cindy Sheehan may think I don't care about the lives of soldiers who die in this war, I'd argue that my upbringing in a military family is the key reason that I do care about those deaths.

Each death is a tragedy, no matter how right or noble the cause.

Cpl. David Kreuter had a new baby boy he'd seen only in photos. Lance Cpl. Michael Cifuentes was counting the days to his wedding. Lance Cpl. Nicholas Bloem had just celebrated his 20th birthday.

Travis Williams remembers them all all 11 men in his Marine squad all now dead. Two months ago they shared a cramped room stacked with bunk beds at this base in northwest Iraq, where the Euphrates River rushes by. Now the room has been stripped of several beds, brutal testament that Lance Cpl. Williams' closest friends are gone.

For the 12 young Marines who landed in Iraq early this year, the war was a series of hectic, constant raids into more than a dozen lawless towns in Iraq's most hostile province, Anbar. The pace and the danger bound them together into what they called a second family, even as some began to question whether their raids were making any progress.

Now, all of the Marines assigned to the 1st Squad, 3rd Platoon, Lima Company, 3rd Battalion, 25th Regiment, based in Columbus, Ohio, are gone except Williams. They died in a roadside-bomb set by insurgents on Aug. 3 that killed a total of 14 Marines. Most of the squad were in their early 20s; the youngest was 19.

"They were like a family. They were the tightest squad I've ever seen," said Capt. Christopher Toland of Austin, Texas, the squad's platoon commander. Even though many did not know each other before they got to Iraq, "They truly loved each other."

All that is left are photos and snippets of video, saved on dusty laptops, that run for a few dozen seconds. As they pack up to return home by early October, the Marines from Lima Company including the squad's replacements sometimes huddle around Williams' laptop in a room at the dam, straining to watch the few remaining moments of their young friends' lives. Some photos and videos carry the squad's adopted motto, "Family is Forever."

The sacrifices of these young men must not be in vain.

I urge you to read about the lives of 11 American soldiers, ended too soon by Islamist terrorist swine, and of their comrade left behind.

Posted by: Greg at 12:51 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 435 words, total size 3 kb.

I like fur, and have no problem with it being worn.

At the same time, i have no problem with those whose moral/philosophical beliefs lead them to refuse to wear fur and to oppose others wearing it. I think they are misguided, but I respect their right to voice such belieft.

What I do not respect is their right to terrorize and threaten those of us who do not buy in to their belief system.

Sadly, that is precisely what has happened to Elle Macpherson, who is trying to get out of a contract to be a contract to promote fur.

Elle Macpherson is trying to get out of a $2.3 million contract to promote fur after receiving a threat from animal rights activists.

The 42-year-old model, who signed on as the new "face" of Blackglama mink in July, believes she will be terrorised by anti-fur extremists.

She has asked her lawyers to negotiate the cancellation of her contract with the US fur manufacturer, despite the fact the new autumn campaign has already been shot and is set to run in the world's leading fashion magazines.

Her decision comes in the wake of increasingly fierce campaigns by anti-fur crusaders, whose latest target was yesterday's Roberto Cavalli show in Milan. As the Italian designer sent models down the runway, a protester from People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals briefly claimed front of stage, waving an anti-fur placard.

Macpherson, a mother of two, recently received a letter from PETA vice-president Dan Matthews, warning that she would become a "target" for agreeing to promote Blackglama.

"By making yourself the new face of fur for Blackglama you are also making yourself a top target for PETA and animal activists around the world," Mr Matthews wrote. "When you take money from such a violent industry you also must carry their baggage."

Ms. Macpherson says she fears for the safety of herself and her children, based upon threats of violence made against htem.

I think it is high time that we start rounding up the so-called "animal rights" activists who make such threats of violence and house them along side the al-Qaeda terrorists with whom they morally share so much in common.

Posted by: Greg at 12:11 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 373 words, total size 2 kb.