January 26, 2009

Fifteen Americans Arrested In Terrorist Raids In Somaliland

All part of the African version of the Taliban, out to stir up more Islamist terror.

Eleven youths suspected of being trained with the hardline Islamist group of Al-Shabaab in the south-central Somalia were arrested. The youths reportedly arrived from Mogadishu to Hargeisaand had lived in the United States.

And

Somaliland security forces arrested five people after they raided a house in Hargeisa. The suspects consist of four men who are said to be from the United States and a woman from Mogadishu, all five suspects were taken into custody yesterday.

Local newspapers reported today that the woman who came from Mogadishu rented a villa in Hargeisa days before the four men arrived from the US. Members of the security forces had received a tip about the terrorist suspects and were ready to move in and arrest them.

Seems to me that we have a terrorist problem right here at home. What does the Obama Administration intend to do about it?

Posted by: Greg at 09:29 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 177 words, total size 1 kb.

Dhimmitude In The House Of Lords

One more example of how Islamists have managed to impose their values on the West, rather than assimilating.

A member of the Lords intended to invite her colleagues to a private meeting in a conference room in the House of Lords to meet the Dutch politician Geert Wilders, an elected member of the Dutch parliament, to watch his controversial movie Fitna and discuss the movie and Mr. WildersÂ’ opinions with him.

Barely had the invitation been sent to all the members of the House when Lord Ahmed raised hell. He threatened to mobilize 10,000 Muslims to prevent Mr. Wilders from entering the House and threatened to take the colleague who was organizing the event to court. The result is that the event, which should have taken place next Thursday was cancelled.

Seems to me that what you have here is that a Muslim has been allowed to impose his values on what other members of the House of Lords may discuss and who they may meet with. Seems to me that this is antithetical to the values that Great Britain used to stand for – but then again, maybe allowing so many Muslims into the UK has weakened the sterner stuff of which the British were once made, resulting in a Britain that is significantly less great than in former days.

On a related note, Geert Wilders and Robert Spencer have a great piece in National Review on the threat to freedom of speech from those who, like Lord Ahmed, would suppress free speech when it is critical of Islam.

If Geert Wilders is silenced, all those who oppose attempts to impose Islamic legal norms upon the West will be silenced also. European nations and the United States should stop appeasing Islam and start fighting together against the rapidly increasing Islamization of Europe. This is a struggle for human rights and human dignity, and for the great heritage of Western civilization that has given so many things to the world, yet whose children and heirs seem curiously embarrassed and reluctant to defend it.

Enough is enough. We must defend our freedom, or we will most certainly lose it.

I encourage you to read the whole thing.

Posted by: Greg at 09:26 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 378 words, total size 3 kb.

January 23, 2009

Oddly, We Do Not Hear Of Such Attacks In Reverse

I’ll agree that not everyone who opposes some aspect of Israeli policy is an anti-Semite. However, those who oppose Israel’s right to defend itself from terrorism – and its right to exist at all – usually anti-Semitism lies at the heart of the issue.

Take, for example, this situation from Canada.

Re: Anti-Zionism Is Not Anti-Semitism, letters to the editor, Jan. 21.

Why don't your letter writers come and tell their analytical garbage to my son's 20-year-old friend, who last week ended up in hospital after being beaten up in Toronto? His "crime"? He was wearing a Magen David (the Jewish, not Zionist, Star of David). As he fell to numerous blows, his attackers shouted, "Jewish [not Zionist] scum. Let's see how strong you are without your army now!"

The police were most helpful: "We will lay charges only if we know who they are."

Now a couple of observations here.

1) This was a hate crime. The attack was upon a man wearing the symbol of his religious faith, and had epithets hurled at him based upon his religion. The scum who attacked him had no way of knowing what his position on Israel or the war in Gaza were – they simply picked out a convenient Jew to assault simply because he was a Jew. They make no distinction between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism – why should we in this instance?

2) The Canadian police and media seem quite unwilling to give this hate crime the treatment it deserves. Maybe that is because they don’t see the difference between Jews and Zionists either. Would the incident have been treated the same way if it were a Muslim attacked for wearing some symbol of his/her faith, and insulted with anti-Muslim slurs during the attack? Or would the incident have been a priority for both as an example of the “growing intolerance” against Muslims?

3) Of course, we don’t see incidents like the hypothetical I proposed above. Maybe that is because Jews, Zionists or otherwise, and those of us who are supportive of Israel are motivated by something other than the hatred that underlies the anti-Semitic ideology of all too many of Israel’s opponents. That’s why in every instance of violence surrounding rallies and demonstration the associated acts of violence were committed not by the supporters of Israel, but rather by the “peace-loving” supporters of the terrorists of Hamas. Similarly, Jews, not Muslims, are regularly the victims of these sorts of incidents – in which the targets of “anti-Zionist” hate are targets because they are Jews, not because they are Zionists..

Now are you sure that you really want to try to argue that antipathy towards Jews as Jews isn’t the underlying motivation behind a significant part of the “anti-Zionist” activity we are assured is not anti-Semitism?

Posted by: Greg at 02:48 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 484 words, total size 3 kb.

FreedomÂ’s Light Dims Again In Eurabia

Apparently even true statements that are arguably true can result in criminal convictions in Europe if they insult Islam.

Austrian far-right parliamentarian Susanne Winter was convicted Thursday of incitement because of her anti-Muslim statements, including the claim that Islam's prophet Mohammed was a paedophile. A court in Winter's home town of Graz also found the 51-year-old politician guilty of humiliating a religion. She was sentenced to a fine of 24,000 euros (31,000 dollars) euros and a suspended prison term of three months, Austrian news agency APA reported.

The politician, who took a seat in parliament last fall for the Freedom Party (FPOe), made the anti-Islamic remarks in January 2008.

Now I have said in the past that I do not necessarily accept the validity of the claim that Muhammad was a pedophile. While Muslim sources do indicate that he did consummate a marriage with a 9-year-old, I’m not willing to go so far as to pass judgment on his psychological health – instead I prefer to simply condemn as evil a man who in his 50s foists himself sexually upon a pre-pubescent girl. If Islam is “humiliated” by such things, I’d argue that the source of that humiliation is the moral degeneracy of its false prophet, not commentary upon that deviancy by non-Muslims.

Following close on the heels of the decision of a Dutch court to order the prosecution of Geert Wilders for daring to speak out against some of the evils committed in the name of Islam based upon the precise language of the Quran, I think it is now safe to say that the spirit of the Enlightenment is being smothered by those who would impose Islamic censorship upon non-Muslims in the name of “tolerance” and “sensitivity”. Should they succeed (as they appear to be doing), how long will the light of freedom be permitted to burn here in America before some future majority of the Supreme Court decides to reinterpret the First Amendment’s guarantees in light of “contemporary world standards” using the judgments of foreign courts to radically alter our liberties forever?

Posted by: Greg at 02:36 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 357 words, total size 2 kb.

January 22, 2009

Obama: No Torture -- Unless I Say OK

In other words, he isn't REALLY banning torture, despite his claims to the contrary.

[Obama's new executive orders] will also prohibit the C.I.A. from using coercive interrogation methods, requiring the agency to follow the same rules used by the military in interrogating terrorism suspects, government officials said.

But the orders leave unresolved complex questions surrounding the closing of the Guantánamo prison, including whether, where and how many of the detainees are to be prosecuted. They could also allow Mr. Obama to reinstate the C.I.A.’s detention and interrogation operations in the future, by presidential order, as some have argued would be appropriate if Osama bin Laden or another top-level leader of Al Qaeda were captured.

In other words, Obama just signed an order that said "I'm banning what I call torture until I decide that I want to un-ban it. It's not illegal or unethical or contrary to American values if I'm the president who orders it."

This does, however, make it pretty clear that there will be no criminal prosecutions of those who were authorized to use harsh techniques against jihadi swine during the Bush Administration. After all, Obama doesn't want a legal precedent that would bind his hands when and if he decides that those same methods were a good idea after all.

Posted by: Greg at 12:27 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 226 words, total size 2 kb.

And The Light Of Freedom Grows Dimmer

Declaring the principles of the Enlightenment to be in violation of contemporary legal and social norms in Europe, a Dutch court has ordered that Geert Wilders stand trial for daring to speak in a contemptuous fashion regarding Islam and the Quran.

MP Geert Wilders, who leads the anti-immigration PVV party, should be prosecuted for discrimination and inciting racial hatred, Amsterdam's appeal court ruled on Wednesday.

'This is a black day for me and for freedom of speech,' Wilders told the Telegraaf on Wednesday. 'I had not expected it [this ruling].'

The public prosecution department has received dozens of complaints about Wilders' anti-Islam film Fitna and his statements in the media over the past few years.

But at the end of June last year, the department said it did not have enough grounds to prosecute him and that a healthy legal system should allow plenty of leeway to people involved in political debate.

Newspaper letters

The appeal court said that while freedom of speech was important, there were limits to that freedom.

Several of the complaints relate to articles or letters by Wilders which were published in the Volkskrant newspaper. For example, in August 2007 he called for the Koran to be banned. 'I have had enough of Islam in the Netherlands: no more Muslim immigrants,' the MP wrote. He also compared the Koran to Adolf Hitler's book Mein Kampf.

Lawyer Haroon Raza, one of those who asked the court of appeal for its position, points to the 'massive social unrest' which Wilders has generated and says this is why he should be prosecuted.

Wilders' refusal to debate the issues with Muslims themselves means that those who feel insulted by his comments cannot counter the claims he makes, Raza told the Volkskrant.

In other words, the outrage of Muslims is grounds for suppressing the speech of non-Muslims -- and a refusal to engage in debate with those one views as evil renders one's speech criminal.

Here is Wilders' great offense -- Fitna. In the name of the inalienable right to speak freely, I post it here and challenge any person to try to force me to take it down.

I wonder -- will President Obama have the balls to stand up for human rights when they are being violated by an ally like the Netherlands? Will he stand up to members of the Religion of Terror whose own violence and intolerance leads the government of a nation that was once one of the major centers of Enlightenment thought to repudiate one of its fundamental principles by engaging in a prosecution of one who dares to speak out against what he views as the dangerous nature of the backwards teachings of a false religion? Or will he remain mute, in effect according to the religion of his father and step-father (and, according to Islamic law, his own religion by virtue of his parentage and his public recitation of the shahadah) a level of protection that he would reject if it were accorded to any other faith?

(NOTE TO ILLITERATE LIBERALS -- No, I did not say Obama is a Muslim. I accept his statement that he is a Christian, but do feel it necessary to note his status under sharia. For more info on my position, read these earlier posts.)

H/T Gateway Pundit, Malkin, STACLU, Hot Air

UPDATE: Ezra Levant, a crusader for free speech rights in Canada who has been repeatedly targeted by the Islamic Censorship Machine, fisks the ruling of the court.

Posted by: Greg at 11:43 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 595 words, total size 5 kb.

Gaza Doctor: Hamas Lies About Civilian Deaths!

Confirming just what has always been known by those who are not shills for terrorists.

What really is behind the numbers reported on the number of civilian casualties in the Gaza Strip? Italian newspaper Corriere Della Sera reported Thursday that a doctor working in Gaza's Shifa Hospital claimed that Hamas has intentionally inflated the number of casualties resulting from Israel's Operation Cast Lead.

"The number of deceased stands at no more than 500 to 600. Most of them are youths between the ages of 17 to 23 who were recruited to the ranks of Hamas, who sent them to the slaughter," according to the newspaper article.

In other words, their tactics are not dissimilar to those practiced by the Nazis in the last days of WWII, when they armed members of the Hitler Youth (remember, membership was not voluntary) and placed them in harm's way in a last ditch effort to protect that malign regime from its well-deserved defeat. That is appropriate, given that the Hamas program of anti-Semitism and genocide bears much in common with that espoused by the Nazi Party -- which a number of Hamas' spiritual and political ancestors adhered to during that time.

Posted by: Greg at 11:01 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 211 words, total size 1 kb.

January 16, 2009

Why I Find This Muslim Terrorism Plea Really Disturbing

It isn’t just that we once again find members of the ersatz “Religion of Peace” ready to engage in acts of murder mayhem, and jihad against the United States. Rather it is a tiny detail overlooked by other commenters on the matter.

Two cousins from the Chicago area have pleaded guilty in Ohio to taking part in a plot to recruit and train terrorists to kill American soldiers.
Federal prosecutors say the men had been training and planning to go overseas so that they could kill U.S. soldiers in Iraq or Afghanistan.

Authorities say the men were recruited by three Toledo men organizing the plot. All three were convicted last summer and are awaiting sentencing.

Khaleel Ahmed of Chicago and Zubair Ahmed of suburban North Chicago both pleaded guilty Thursday in U.S. District Court to conspiracy to provide material support to terrorists.

Each faces a maximum of 15 years in prison.

Prosecutors say the two men received training in firearms and counter-surveillance so they could join the insurgency against U.S. troops.

They were alleged to be planning to go abroad – but that little bit that I bolded makes me wonder about a potential problem closer to home.

IÂ’ve been to North Chicago. Indeed, I went to school there and worked there when I was from the time I was 13 until I was 21.

North Chicago, you see, is the community that abuts Naval Station, Great Lakes, where my father was stationed for many years. It is home to the US NavyÂ’s only boot camp, as well as a great many advanced training programs for enlisted personnel in critical specialties. Here's hoping that federal authorities are looking closely at this connection -- and making sure that there is not a cell of terrorists preparing to strike at the heart of our national defense.

H/T Founding Bloggers

Posted by: Greg at 01:49 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 325 words, total size 2 kb.

January 15, 2009

I Guess It WasnÂ’t Unconstitutional After All

Whatever will the liberals do now that their criticism of the wiretapping of foreign calls has been upheld by the courts as constitutional.

A federal intelligence court, in a rare public opinion, is expected to issue a major ruling validating the power of the president and Congress to wiretap international phone calls and intercept e-mail messages without a court order, even when AmericansÂ’ private communications may be involved.

The court decision is expected to be disclosed as early as Thursday in an unclassified, redacted form. It was made in December by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review, which has issued only two prior rulings in its 30-year history.

The decision marks the first time since the disclosure of the National Security AgencyÂ’s warrantless eavesdropping program three years ago that an appellate court has addressed the constitutionality of the federal governmentÂ’s wiretapping powers. In validating the governmentÂ’s wide authority to collect foreign intelligence, it may offer legal credence to the Bush administrationÂ’s repeated assertions that the president has constitutional authority to act without specific court approval in ordering national security eavesdropping.

What this means, of course, is that the Bush Administration was right when it implemented a program of listening in on suspected terrorist phone calls. What’s more, it also bodes well for any challenge to the constitutionality of other warrantless surveillance programs related to national security, including those treasonously disclosed by the New York Times – programs that did nothing more or less than was done by the Roosevelt Administration during WWII.

Posted by: Greg at 02:48 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 267 words, total size 2 kb.

January 13, 2009

Obama To Close Gitmo – Whose Backyard Will They Go To

Hey, liberals – in an effort to guarantee those who would destroy your liberties and murder you in your beds get rights accorded to no enemy captured in time of war anywhere in history, are you willing to volunteer YOUR town as a new home for the most dangerous of the illegal combatants capture during the Islamofascist jihad against the modern world and its freedoms? After all, Barry Hussein is going to order the prison at Guantanamo Bay closed even though he has no idea where to put these terrorists.

Advisers to President-elect Barack Obama say one of his first duties in office will be to order the closing of the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay.

That executive order is expected during Obama's first week on the job — and possibly on his first day, according to two transition team advisers. Both spoke Monday on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly.

Obama's order will direct his administration to figure out what to do with the estimated 250 al-Qaida and Taliban suspects and potential witnesses who are being held at Guantanamo.

So come on, liberals, become a national hero by helping the Obamateur make his first major policy decision related to terrorism – importing terrorists into the territory of the United States.

Posted by: Greg at 10:23 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 239 words, total size 2 kb.

January 08, 2009

Hamas Supporters In US Call For Completion Of Holocaust

Not only calling for genocide, but the national organization that is sponsoring the pro-terrorist demonstration refuse to condemn the call for genocide.

Like many other protests of Israel's campaign in Gaza, this one ended badly — police had to cool an ugly fight between supporters of Israel and Gaza, breaking up the warring sides as their screaming and chanting threatened to turn into something worse.

But some protesters at this rally in Fort Lauderdale, Fla., took their rhetoric a step further, calling for the extermination of Israel — and of Jews.

* * *

But as the protest continued and crowds grew, one woman in a hijab began to shout curses and slurs that shocked Jewish activists in the city, which has a sizable Jewish population.

"Go back to the oven," she shouted, calling for the counter-protesters to die in the manner that the Nazis used to exterminate Jews during the Holocaust.
"You need a big oven, that's what you need," she yelled.

And when the spokesman for the organizing group was contacted about such shouts, he couldn’t bring himself to condemn anti-Semitism or the genocidal rantings of some of the protesters – but he could certainly condemn Israel.

The protest organizers, asked to comment on the woman's overt call for Jewish extermination, said she was "insensitive" but refused to condemn her statement.


"She does not represent the opinions of the vast majority of people who were there," said Emmanuel Lopez, who helped plan the event, one of many sponsored nationwide on Dec. 30 by the ANSWER (Act Now to Stop War and End Racism ) Coalition.

Lopez, a state coordinator for ANSWER, admitted there is a problem with anti-Semitism within his organization's ranks. But then he went on to call the supporters of Israel across the street "barbaric, racist" Zionist terrorists.
"Zionism in general is a barbaric, racist movement that really is the cause of the situation in the entire Middle East," Lopez said.

Let’s see – 2000 rockets were launched from Gaza by Hamas during 2008, but it is Israel that is condemned by these folks as “barbaric” and “terrorists”? Seems to me that Lopez is implicitly supporting the calls for genocide with his non-condemnation. But why should that surprise us – Hamas itself has called for the murder of Jews.

Posted by: Greg at 01:14 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 401 words, total size 3 kb.

January 06, 2009

Which Side Supports Genocide?

Israel is acting to stop a continuous stream of war crimes by Hamas. The Hamas official, on the other hand, has made it very clear that he wants to see war crimes stepped up to include genocide and the intentional murder of children.

[Hamas spokesman Mahmoud Az-Zahar] called to murder Israelis and Jews worldwide, including children. “The Israelis have sentenced their children to death... They have legitimized the killing of their people all over the world,” he said. Hamas' platform calls for all Jews to convert to Islam or be killed, based on an Islamic saying (Hadith), and the group has not refrained from targeting children in the past.

Now letÂ’s see how long the anti-Semitic advocates of moral equivalence take to agree with him.

But on the other hand, Zahar has indicated that Hamas will consider a ceasefire provided that Israel refrain from defending its people from terrorism and Hamas is allowed to openly import the weapons used to commit its war crimes against Israeli civilians by sea and freely send terrorists into Israel by land without fear of discovery by IDF checkpoints.

And lest you think that the Zahar is alone in his views, consider the views of one Hamas leader recently dispatched to Hell by the IDF.

There is no chance that true Islam would ever allow a Jewish state to survive in the Muslim Middle East. Israel is an impossibility. It is an offense against God.“ (H/T Founding Bloggers)

So if you think that this is a case of Israel crating terrorists with its policies, think again – these jihadi swine seek the destruction of Israel and the murder of its people based upon their sense of religious duty growing out of Islam.

Posted by: Greg at 01:50 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 291 words, total size 2 kb.

January 02, 2009

Why Israel Must Stop The Rocket Attacks

Let's put this into perspective -- these are the areas of Israel that the Terrorstinians can now attack from Gaza. That range, 40 km, is the equivalent about 25 miles -- and some 1/8 of Israel's population lives within the attack zone, which is within the internationally-recognized pre-1967 borders of Israel.

beershebamap.jpg

And the word is that Hamas may have bought missiles from Iran that give the Terrorstinians the possibility of targeting even more civilians in the rest of Israel.

supportisrael.jpg

Posted by: Greg at 03:58 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 93 words, total size 1 kb.

About Israel's "Disproportional" Efforts In Gaza

R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. offers this observation.

It is dreadful that Gaza, one of the most densely populated places on earth, is under heavy aerial bombardment from Israel. Yet Hamas, the governing entity in Gaza, has been lobbing shrapnel-filled missiles into Israel on a regular basis for months. Two weeks ago, Hamas arbitrarily broke its six-month ceasefire with Israel, and the danger to Israeli life and property has gotten worse. How many missiles is Israel to suffer before it is warranted to defend its territory and its people?

Now that word "disproportional" is being raised among foreign policy elites. Israeli air strikes since Saturday have killed several hundred Palestinians and injured several thousand. So we are hearing that the Israeli actions are "disproportional."

* * *

I have no idea how many Hamas strikes against civilians warrant how many Israeli acts of retribution. Frankly, such calculations seem to me as beside the point. The real question is how many Israeli strikes are needed to close down Hamas? That is what is necessary. The Israelis have at their border a violent, unprincipled enemy that has vowed to destroy Israel. Hamas not only vows to destroy Israel, it bombards Israel and expects the world to object when Israel counterattacks.

Now let me begin by noting that the very concept of proportionality in warfare is absurd. Following Pearl Harbor, the US was not limited to a "proportional response" against Japan and its Axis partners. Following 9/11, no one expected the US to stop fighting al-Qaeda and the Taliban after we inflicted three thousand enemy casualties (and no one tried to calculate the military equivalent of four hijacked jetliners so that we didn't exceed the force initially used against us).

Besides, Tyrrell is correct in noting that he (and, by implication, we) do not know what a proportional response is. Indeed, it would appear that the Terorstinian leadership of Hamas is the only group that does know what a proportional response is -- for when it is reached, Hamas will stop firing missiles into Israel, indiscriminately hitting homes, schools, and shops with no military significance. Given that Hamas continues to attack despite over 400 dead this week, it is clear that Israel has yet to inflict sufficient damage for the response to be proportional to the goal -- the end of Terrorstinian rocket attacks on civilians. It may be that the proper proportion is 100, or even 1000, dead Terrostinians for every dead Israeli -- but it is only Hamas that can set the figure, not Israel or the international community.

supportisrael.jpg

Posted by: Greg at 03:12 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 439 words, total size 3 kb.

January 01, 2009

About That Mosque

If Islam is the "Religion of Peace", why was the mosque a munitions dump and a site for rocket launches?

On Wednesday, The IAF reported that it had hit 25 terror-related targets including the offices of Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh and a mosque in the city of Gaza where Hamas activists were hiding, and which had been used as a weapons storehouse.

Rockets had also been fired at Israel from the mosque.

Shin Bet security service officials said that over the last few days, Palestinian militants have been seen carrying Katyusha and Qassam rockets, as well as a large supply of other weapons, around the vicinity of the mosque. The Shin Bet said that these weapons were destroyed in the IAF strike.

We Christians do not use our churches as storehouses for weapons to be used in terrorist attacks. Jews do not use their synagogues that way. Indeed, most religions practiced in the world today treat their houses of worship as demilitarized zones, and international law tends to recognize them as such. But when such houses of worship are used for military purposes, they lose any legitimate claim of protection they might have. And when we see members of the same faith using their houses of worship for purposes of military and terrorist attacks time and again, it does lead one to question whether it is legitimate to call it a religion of peace.

supportisrael.jpg

Additional news coverage on this issue from AP, Guardian, Haaretz, Jerusalem Post

Posted by: Greg at 03:46 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 253 words, total size 3 kb.

China Supplying Weapons To Hamas Terrorists Who Attack Schools

How do we know?

The Terrorstinian scum lobbed one into an Israeli school in the middle of a civilian neighborhood -- that's how.

The army official said the rocket that struck the school in Beersheba was manufactured in China, is heavier than the Qassam and can "potentially cause much greater damage." He said the rocket contains metal pallets that can spread out across a radius of up to 100 meters (about 328 feet) from the point of impact.

Now for those of you who are confused, let me explain the purpose of those metal pellets. They are an anti-personnel feature designed to cause maximum human casualties in the area around the impact site, up to the length of a football field in all directions from the point of impact.

In other words, this weapon was sent into the middle of a civilian area -- a school where there would usually be children present -- with the goal of killing and wounding as many non-combatants as possible. Unlike the Israelis, who have made great efforts to avoid civilian casualties in the recent fighting, the Terrorstinians made an intentional effort to kill and maim as many children as possible.

Will the world hold China accountable for supplying weapons to terrorists who will use them in violation of international law? Or are only the US and Israel subject to condemnation by the international community when the Jewish state exercises its legitimate right to self-defense?

Debbie Schlussel has more on this matter -- including information and photos from relatives whose children attend the damaged school and who would likely have been among the victims of this war crime.

hamasrocketbeershevaschool[1].jpg -- Image from DebbieSchlussel.com
karenschlisselsschool[1].jpg -- Image from DebbieSchlussel.com

I teach in a school here in America -- and as I look through the gaping hole into that classroom, I see a sight that could be my own classroom. I praise God that I don't have to worry about things like this happening on a daily basis, and I pray that God will consign those who willfully and intentionally perpetrate such deeds to the deepest bowels of Hell (along with those who aid and abet them).

supportisrael.jpg

Posted by: Greg at 03:30 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 369 words, total size 3 kb.

December 31, 2008

Religion Of Terrorism Strikes In Europe

After all, they must kill Jews wherever they are found -- even if all they are doing is selling cosmetics.

Palestinian Authority Arab terrorists attacked a group of young Israelis at a stand in a Danish mall early Wednesday evening.

Local police said the attack took place at approximately 3:20 p.m. at the Rosengirdscentret Center, one of the largest shopping centers in the city of Odense, located about 200 kilometers from Copenhagen.

According to Foreign Ministry spokesman Yossi Levi, an undetermined number of Palestinian Authority gunmen approached the group of young Israelis at a "basta", or stand which sells Dead Sea products and other items from Israel and opened fire "with guns or rifles."

I'm curious -- how long until the world is willing to acknowledge that there is something fundamentally dysfunctional within the so-called "religion of peace" that leads its followers to be decidedly unpeaceful?

Posted by: Greg at 03:52 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 158 words, total size 1 kb.

December 29, 2008

CAIR Condemns Israeli Acts Of Self-Defense -- Never Condemned Hamas Attacks

The terrorist front that is the Council on American Islamic Relations has spoken out on the current conflict in the Middle East. As expected, they sided with the Hamas terrorists rather than Israel.

A prominent national Islamic civil rights and advocacy group today condemned Israeli attacks on the Gaza Strip that left more than 200 people dead and called the death toll a “massacre carried out using U.S. taxpayer-funded weapons.” More than 700 people, including women and children, were injured in the attacks.

I won't quote further, and will only note that they use all the standard buzzwords found in the statements of terrorism supporters whenever the victims of terrorism fight back. Indeed, they claim to base their position, in part, on their respect for the sanctity of human life.

A quick perusal of their website, however, will show that not a single word critical of the years of rocket attacks from Gaza exist there. Apparently they view dead and wounded Jews as less significant than dead Terrorstinians. Could it be that the folks from CAIR, with its long history of connection to anti-Semitic Islamic terrorist groups in the Middle East do not view Jews as human beings?

Of course, it shouldn't be surprising that CAIR would speak out on behalf of Hamas -- the organization was an unindicted co-conspirator in the recently concluded trial related to illegal terrorist fundraising activities on behalf of Hamas.

Posted by: Greg at 10:09 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 257 words, total size 2 kb.

December 28, 2008

Another Attrocity In The Name Of Islam And Terrorism

In an effort to make sure that the laws of the Terrorstinian Anarchy conform with sharia law, the Hamas government has passed a law authorizing the use of crucifixion.

The Hamas parliament in the Gaza Strip voted in favor of a law allowing courts to mete out sentences in the spirit of Islam, the London-based Arab daily Al Hayat reported Wednesday.

According to the bill, approved in its second reading and awaiting a third reading before the approval of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, as the Palestinian constitution demands, courts will be able to condemn offenders to a plethora of violent punitive measures in line with Sharia Law.

Such punishments include whipping, severing hands, crucifixion and hanging. The bill reserves death sentences to people who negotiate with a foreign government "against Palestinian interests" and engage in any activity that can "hurt Palestinian morale."

Interesting, isn't it, that those who complain that playing rock music to annoy terrorists or putting women's undies on their heads constitutes torture can't find their voices when it comes to the authorization of a truly cruel form of torture and death when it is authorized BY terrorists.

After all, consider this description of what crucifixion does to a person.

The length of time required to reach death could range from a matter of hours to a number of days, depending on exact methods, the health of the crucified person and environmental circumstances.

Death could result from a variety of causes, including blood loss and hypovolemic shock, or infection and sepsis, caused by the scourging that preceded the crucifixion or by the nailing itself, and eventual dehydration. A theory attributed to Pierre Barbet holds that, when the whole body weight was supported by the stretched arms, the typical cause of death was asphyxiation. He conjectured that the condemned would have severe difficulty inhaling, due to hyper-expansion of the chest muscles and lungs. The condemned would therefore have to draw himself up by his arms, leading to exhaustion, or have his feet supported by tying or by a wood block. Indeed, Roman executioners could be asked to break the condemned's legs, after he had hung for some time, in order to hasten his death. Once deprived of support and unable to lift himself, the condemned would die within a few minutes.

Experiments by Frederick Zugibe have revealed that, when suspended with arms at 60° to 70° from the vertical, test subjects had no difficulty breathing, only rapidly-increasing discomfort and pain. This would correspond to the Roman use of crucifixion as a prolonged, agonizing, humiliating death. Zugibe claims that the breaking of the crucified condemned's legs to hasten death, as mentioned in John 19:31-32, was administered as a coup de grâce, causing severe traumatic shock or hastening death by fat embolism. Crucifixion on a single pole with no transom, with hands affixed over one's head, would precipitate rapid asphyxiation if no block was provided to stand on, or once the legs were broken.

I don't know about you, but this certainly sounds like torture to me. But I guess when terrorists (even elected terrorists like Hamas) use such methods, torture doesn't seem like a big deal to the "no torture for terrorists" crew.

And lest you doubt that this penalty is in keeping with the dictates of Islam, consider this Quaranic injunction allegedly revealed to the false prophet Muhammad.

'The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter.' Surah 5:33

Just call this effort to bring back one of the more barbaric aspects of Islam one more reason to hold the Terrorstinians -- and Islam -- in utter contempt.

Posted by: Greg at 12:19 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 668 words, total size 4 kb.

December 21, 2008

Why Would Anyone Equate Islam And Terrorism

Certainly not after the head of the Organization of Islamic Countries gets the UN to again condemn "defamation of religion"

The world's top diplomat for Islam called on Friday for an end to what he termed efforts to equate the religion with terrorism and said the 'demonization' of Muslims around the world must be fought.

But speaking soon after the U.N. General Assembly passed an Islamic-sponsored resolution condemning "defamation of religion" for the fourth year in a row, Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu said his group was committed to respecting freedom of expression.

There was a "rising tide of incitement to religious hatred and discrimination and intolerance targeting Muslims," he told a meeting called by the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) at the United Nations in Geneva. The 57-nation OIC, based in Saudi Arabia, represents 1.5 billion Muslims.

"Attempts to equate Islam with terrorism should be stopped. Stereotyping and demonization of Muslims should be combated," said Ihsanoglu, a Turkish history professor who became OIC Secretary-General in 2005.

Frankly, I wish that we didn't have to link Islam and terrorism. Unfortunately, these folks do.

mostwantedposter.JPG

Given that each and every one of these indicted terrorist fugitives is a Muslim, I don't see how we can avoid making a connection between their religion and terrorism -- especially when they themselves make that connection, claiming to engage in their foul acts under the rubric of "jihad", which is the duty of every Muslim.

For that matter, there is this comment, too -- making a clear statement about how terrorism will get you into heaven if you are a Muslim, from a spokesman from a major Muslim organization.

The Muslim Public Affairs Committee (MPAC) is one of the media's favourite Muslim organisations - radical and outspoken but not extremist, we're led to believe. One of its spokesmen, Asghar Bukhari, is a particular favourite of the BBC, whose Asian Network describes how he has "set up Media response workshops to educate and engage Muslims about dealing with the media" .

So I was interested to see how Bukhari would "deal" with me when I rang him to ask about an interesting discovery by The Centre for Social Cohesion, in my opinion the most formidable of the think-tanks monitoring Islamic extremism, which has been rooting around Facebook discussions.

In one recent thread, Bukhari says: "Muslims who fight against the occupation of their lands are 'Mujahadeen' and are blessed by Allah. And any Muslim who fights and dies against Israel and dies is a martyr and will be granted paradise ... There is no greater oppressor on this earth than the Zionists, who murder little children for sport."

Well, Bukhari didn't evade the question. He confirmed that the Facebook discussion was authentic, and said: "I stand by that [his comments], and I think any Muslim in the world stands by that ... if you think I'm going to tap dance for you and say 'These Muslims are really bad and should sort their own house out', then I'm not going to."

Indeed, he added, if that was my view then I could "p--- off".

Seems like this Bukhari shares a view of Islam with the terrorists above, but not with the OIC.

But I'm prepared to make a deal with Professor Ihsanoglu -- when his religion quits producing the overwhelming majority of terrorists and its apologists, I'll quit drawing a connection. Until then, I'll stand by the position that there is clearly something dysfunctional in a faith that produces a disproportionate number of terrorists.

Posted by: Greg at 12:16 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 597 words, total size 4 kb.

December 04, 2008

Obama Policy Speech in Muslim World?

Well, that is the word out of the New York Times. The newly elected president wants to give such a speech sometime in the first hundred days of his term -- possibly in Cairo

President-elect Barack ObamaÂ’s aides say he is considering making a major foreign policy speech from an Islamic capital during his first 100 days in office.

So where should he do it? The list of Islamic world capitals is long, and includes the obvious —Riyadh, Kuwait City, Islamabad — and the not-so-obvious — Male (the Maldives), Ouagadougou (Burkina Faso), Tashkent (Uzbekistan). Some wise-guys have even suggested Dearborn, Mich., as a possibility.

Clearly it would be cheating for Mr. Obama to fly to Detroit, talk to DearbornÂ’s 30,000 Arab residents and call it a day. And Male and Ouagadougou, while certainly majority Muslim, canÂ’t really be what Mr. ObamaÂ’s aides have in mind when they talk about locales for a high-profile speech that would seek to mend rifts between the United States and the broader Muslim world.

In other words, look for a kow-tow. The dhimmification of America will be in full swing with such a speech. After all, these are folks who aren’t happy with the fact that the US dared to strike back against al-Qaeda after 9/11. These are folks who aren’t happy that the US dared to remove Saddam Hussein from power after multiple violations of UN resolutions and the brutal oppression of his people. These are the folks who are unhappy about our support for Israel. These are thepeople who want our civil liberties and human rights be curtailed lest they be offended by the free expression of non-Islamic views. How do we “mend rifts” with those who insist that we have been wrong to defend ourselves, oppose dictatorship, support our allies, and live in freedom without repudiating things that are quintessentially American?

But if Obama is going to a Muslim capital to speak, he ought to carry a message of freedom. He ought to speak out against authoritarianism and oppression, and in favor of democracy and liberty. He ought to speak out on behalf of women who are relegated to subservience in much of the Muslim world. He ought to call for full respect for the rights and dignity of non-Muslims in the Muslim world, including freedom of speech and religion. WhatÂ’s more, he ought to speak out against the application of sharia law to those who Islam calls apostates due to their decision to reject Islam in favor of another faith or none at all.

And should Barack Obama be so courageous and honorable as to give such a speech in the Muslim world, it ought to be given in the Saudi Arabian capital of Riyadh, in the presence of the ruler who is also custodian of the holiest sites in Islam. After all, the only terms on which America can legitimately mend the rifts that exist are those that echo the clarion call of freedom that is central to our founding documents – and one which offers no apology for exercising, protecting, and promoting the inalienable rights with which we are endowed by our Creator.

H/T Don Surber (who proposes the speech be in Baghdad), Hot Air (Ed would like Mumbai, but would settle for Dubai), Commentary's Contentions (where Abe Greenwald notes that Obama's "ability to move mountains by speechifying hit its career high exactly one month ago, when it got him elected President of the United States of America.")

Posted by: Greg at 02:22 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 591 words, total size 4 kb.

Hitchens And Sullivan Sullivan Come Out For Imperialism

Sullivan quotes Hitchens approvingly, and therefore indicates his intent to call the city victimized by Islamist terrorists last week Bombay rather than by its proper modern name, Mumbai. Their argument is that it is illegitimate for brown-skinned to change the names given to their cities by their British masters during the colonial era – especially if that name change reflects the cultural heritage of the majority.

When Salman Rushdie wrote, in The Moor's Last Sigh in 1995, that "those who hated India, those who sought to ruin it, would need to ruin Bombay," he was alluding to the Hindu chauvinists who had tried to exert their own monopoly in the city and who had forcibly renamed it—after a Hindu goddess—Mumbai. We all now collude with this, in the same way that most newspapers and TV stations do the Burmese junta's work for it by using the fake name Myanmar. (Bombay's hospital and stock exchange, both targets of terrorists, are still called by their right name by most people, just as Bollywood retains its "B.")

In effect, the two British expatriates argue that the Indians must accept the decisions of those who colonized their nation and attempted to suppress their religion and culture. I guess that is a sign of the arrogance that still runs deep in British culture – the sun may have long since set upon the British Empire, but they want to pretend that they still rule the world anyway.

Sullivan, though, in a fit of intellectual honesty, does publish a dissent by one of the uppity Indians who insists upon defending their right to give an Indian city a proper Indian name.

I'm a fourth-generation Mumbaikar who loves reading your blog, but your post about the name Mumbai (linked to Hitchens) left me seething.
Hitchens is completely wrong. As someone whose roots go back many generations in Mumbai, let me assure you that we've always called the city Mumbai in our local language Marathi. The name Bombay was given to the city by the British. What do you think the city was called before the Europeans arrived? It was called Mumbai.

No word yet on whether or not either of these Brits will repent of their cultural imperialism and acknowledge that the name change to Mumbai is every bit as legitimate as the decision of Chinese authorities to rename their capital Beijing, or for the Russians to strip the names of Communist dictators from Saint Petersburg and Volgograd.

Posted by: Greg at 02:15 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 427 words, total size 3 kb.

November 20, 2008

Muslim Lawyer In Egypt Urges Use Of Rape As Weapon

A female Muslim lawyer at that.

On October 31, 2008, an Egyptian female lawyer by the name of Nagla Al-Imam suggested on the Arab TV channel “Al-Arabiya” that Arab men should sexually harass Israeli women, stating: “Leave the land so we won’t rape you.” She then argued that Israeli young girls and women are fair game for all Arab men and that there is nothing wrong in using this kind of threat as a form of resistance.

Does Ms. Al-Imam know the consequences of her message to sexually repressed young Muslim men? Does she have any human feelings towards the suffering of a woman being raped, even if she is an enemy? Isn’t she worried about the impact of this ‘license to rape’ on the character of young Muslim men and its impact on society as a whole?

DoesnÂ’t her suggestion confirm the existence of Muslim Sharia laws that allow the sexual slavery of captive women in time of war? DoesnÂ’t she know that such statements and action by Muslim men will increase the worldwide fear of Islam?

I’ll take it a step further – doesn’t she know that she is urging an action that constitutes a crime against humanity, perhaps even genocide, under international law? After all, such actions were prosecuted in international courts of law when they were directed against Bosnian Muslim women by Serb combatants after the dissolution of Yugoslavia. Decent folks of all faiths applauded such actions against the despicable perpetrators of violence against women.

So let me pose some questions to Nagla Al-Imam:


  1. Was it wrong for the international community to try Serb fighters for rape used as a tactic to force Bosnian Muslims to leave land claimed by the Serbs?
  2. Should those rapists of Bosnia Muslim women be released from prison because se women were “fair game”?
  3. If not, should she be arrested, tried and imprisoned for publicly advocating these violations of human rights?
  4. Would she support the IDF making the same threat against Palestinian Arab women – leave or face rape at the hands of Israeli soldiers?

I believe, however, that we can all surmise the answer to all of these questions – Al-Imam would be horrified that the rapists of Muslim women would be freed, that the IDF would rape Muslim women, and that she would face charges for her words. But given the anti-Semitism rampant in Islam, this is just par for the course.

Posted by: Greg at 03:22 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 423 words, total size 3 kb.

November 10, 2008

Like This Is A Bad Thing?

Gee – one would hope that the United States would have a commitment to tracking down and eliminating our terrorist enemies any time and any place. Indeed, one would think that any person who loved this country and wished to see her secure would be ecstatic about such a policy.

And yet the New York Times reports on this like it is a bad thing – breaking the story in a manner that once again discloses classified national security information to our enemies.

The U.S. military has conducted nearly a dozen secret operations against Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups in Syria, Pakistan and other countries since 2004, The New York Times reported Sunday night.

Citing anonymous U.S. officials, the Times story said the operations were authorized by a broad classified order that then-Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld signed and President George W. Bush approved in spring 2004. The order gave the military authority to attack Al Qaeda anywhere in the world and to conduct operations in countries that were not at war with the U.S.

One such operation was an Oct. 26 raid inside Syria, the Times reported.

Washington has not formally acknowledged the raid, but U.S. officials have said the target was a top Al Qaeda in Iraq figure. Syria has asked for proof and said eight civilians were killed in the attack.

In another mission, in 2006, Navy SEALs raided a suspected terrorist compound in Pakistan's tribal areas.

The raids have typically been conducted by U.S. Special Forces, often in conjunction with the Central Intelligence Agency, the newspaper said. Even though the process has been streamlined, specific missions have to be approved by the defense secretary or, in the cases of Syria and Pakistan, by the president.

Let’s face it – our enemy is not a traditional nation-state as in times past. Instead they are members of an autonomous group that extends across international boundaries, at times without the knowledge and/or cooperation of the nations within which they operate. Indeed, as I pointed out some time back, the best historical analogy for terrorists is the pirate – considered the enemy of all mankind under international law and subject to the authority and jurisdiction of all nations wherever they may be found. As such, the order in question is appropriate – if one wishes to see the United States prevail in the war on terrorism…

Posted by: Greg at 04:00 PM | Comments (10) | Add Comment
Post contains 409 words, total size 3 kb.

October 20, 2008

Some Sense From The Pentagon

Too bad the political appointees, PC Homeland Security officials and State Department weenies are unlikely to embrace this common sense acknowledgment of the reality of the enemy we fight.

A U.S. military "Red Team" charged with challenging conventional thinking says that words like "jihad" and "Islamist" are needed in discussing 21st-century terrorism and that federal agencies that avoid the words soft-pedaled the link between religious extremism and violent acts.

* * *

"The fact is our enemies cite the source of Islam as the foundation for their global jihad," the report said. "We are left with the responsibility of portraying our enemies in an honest and accurate fashion."

Using the terms in question is simply a matter of intellectual honesty. While one can debate whether or not al-Qaeda and other terrorist organizations accurately represent orthodox Islam in their ideology, what cannot be denied is that they claim to base their ideology upon Islam. To refuse to use the terms that they use themselves makes understanding them much more difficult, if not impossible. Those members of the Islamic community who insist that the terms not be used by our government are, whether intentionally or not, hindering the war on terror by cutting off what are fruitful discussions of the motivations of the terrorists themselves. We simply cannot allow ourselves to be held hostage to political correctness.

Posted by: Greg at 01:18 PM | Comments (132) | Add Comment
Post contains 235 words, total size 2 kb.

October 02, 2008

Buy This Book Monday!

After an act of jihadi terrorism in the UK has stalled British publication of a book about MuhammadÂ’s pre-pubescent child-bride Aisha, its American publisher has decided to push the release date up by nine days to this coming Monday.

With British publication in doubt for Sherry Jones' "The Jewel of Medina," the U.S. publisher of her controversial novel about the Prophet Muhammad has moved up the release date from Oct. 15 to Monday.

"By speeding up the publication, we wanted to reduce or eliminate the chance of violence," Eric Kampmann, president of Beaufort Books, said Thursday, noting that three men were arrested in London last weekend for a fire-bomb attack on the offices of publisher Gibson Square.

"What had occurred in London, we didn't want to have occur here. We wanted people to have a chance to read the book. Once they read the book, we thought the violence part of this story would disappear and people would be focusing on the story, and the book and Sherry."

Publication in this country was stalled once by an Islamic backlash ginned up by a professor from the University of Texas in the People’s Republic of Austin. We must act to guarantee that such books can be freely published here – and one way to do so is to purchase them when they are published. I don’t have a lot of spare cash, but I will guarantee you that I will be seeking a book at my local book store four days from now, on October 6. I urge the rest of you to do the same – it is important.

And to any Muslim who feels obliged to respond violently to the exercise of a human right protected by the First Amendment, I can only say “Allahu screw you!”

Posted by: Greg at 01:03 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 306 words, total size 2 kb.

September 29, 2008

A Reminder About The Nature Of Islam

Once again, we see a bit of barbarism by the Muhammadans when others dare to exercise their inalienable human rights.

Three men arrested in north London on suspicion of terrorism continue to be questioned by police.

They are suspected of attempting to set fire to a publisher's office in Lonsdale Square, Islington.

The publisher, Gibson House, is due to release a controversial novel about the Prophet Muhammad and his child bride, entitled The Jewel of the Medina.
The three men were arrested by armed officers from the Metropolitan Police in a planned operation.

The men, aged 40, 22 and 30, were arrested under the Terrorism Act 2000 and are being held at Paddington Green police station.

Two were arrested outside the property in Lonsdale Square, and the third following an armed vehicle stop near Angel Tube station on Upper Street at 0225 GMT on Saturday.

A small fire was put out at the property, which is used as a home and office by publisher Martin Rynja, who is due to publish the controversial book.

All of which raises the question – if a religious group is continually involved in the wholesale violent violation of the human rights of non-believers, does it cease to be religion and instead become a criminal conspiracy to violate the rights of others? And if the answer is yes, does the preservation of human rights require that Islam be identified as such and suppressed in the name of preserving the rights of rest of humanity? I don’t know where the balance is – but given the continued threats coming from Muslim sources, we need to ask the question and consider the very real need to stamp out the very real threat to liberty that Islam apparently constitutes, and which we in the West should have been recognizing for at least the last twenty years (since the Rushdie fatwa).

Posted by: Greg at 01:59 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 326 words, total size 2 kb.

September 10, 2008

In Memoriam -- 9/11/2001

Originally Posted on September 11, 2004 -- As is my custom, I repost it today.

So many died that horrible day.

One was my classmate at Washington and Lee University, Commander Robert Allan Schlegel.

I would love to tell you he and I were close. That would be a lie.

I would love to share stories of great times together. I don't have any.

What I can tell you is that I remember Rob Schlegel as a good guy, a friend of some friends. I remember him as being a bright guy, sitting a couple rows over and a couple seats back in a US History class. One of those classmates you later wish you had gotten to know when you had the chance.

Rest in Peace.

May all the victims of September 11 and the many men and women of our armed forces who have died fighting terrorism since that day rest in peace.

And let us not forget those heroes who still live.

Posted by: Greg at 09:08 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 173 words, total size 1 kb.

September 01, 2008

Outrage Over Taliban Being Held In Dog Pens By Aussies

It's hard out there for an Islamist terrorist.

SUSPECTED Taliban militants arrested by Australian special forces in Afghanistan have been detained in "dog pens" in actions that have left Australian Muslim groups outraged and prompted a protest from the Afghan ambassador in Canberra.

The empty dog pens were used to hold overnight four suspected Taliban insurgents who were arrested in a raid by special forces soldiers on April 29.

The raid - in response to the fatal shooting two days earlier of Sydney-based commando Lance Corporal Jason Marks - resulted in allegations of mistreatment of Afghan prisoners.

An army inquiry last week rejected those claims, saying they were not supported by medical evidence.

But Colonel David Connery, appointed by the deputy chief of the Defence Force, Lieutenant General David Hurley, to examine the charges, found evidence of "cultural misunderstandings" and noted "the use of the former dog pens".

You know, I'm disturbed by their having done this. It just isn't right. It is positively inhumane.

I mean, they might need to use those pens for dogs at some future point. And your average dog is much more clean, better smelling, and better behaved than your average Islamist terrorist scum.

Oh, and those protesting Muslims? Screw 'em.

H/T RightPulse

Posted by: Greg at 09:07 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 228 words, total size 2 kb.

August 15, 2008

Evil Americans Sic Vicious Dogs On Religion Of Peace Members

Well yes, they were members of the Taliban fleeing US troops, but that won't matter to the supporters of Islamist terror.

U.S. coalition dogs bit two fleeing suspected Taliban militants during an operation in eastern Afghanistan in which a total of eight insurgents were detained, the coalition said Friday.

The raid Thursday in the Muslim country's Paktika province targeted a Taliban subcommander wanted for kidnapping, killing Afghan soldiers and involvement in roadside attacks, it said.

During the operation, ''two militants attempted to flee and were pursued by coalition military working dogs,'' the coalition said in a statement. ''Both militants received dog-bite injuries, one of which required treatment on scene by coalition medical personnel.''

No doubt we will soon be hearing demands for the following things from the Leftists who support the Taliban over their own country.


  1. An end to the use of dogs in the Crusade Against Islamist Terrorism because the enemy considers the animals unclean.
  2. A public apology by the President and US commanders for the use of dogs in the Crusade Against Islamist Terrorism.
  3. A paid lawyer and early court date for a civil suit by the Taliban against the US military and the dog-handlers for the injuries received when they were bitten.
  4. War crimes charges against the dog for biting the fleeing terrorists.

Posted by: Greg at 03:19 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 236 words, total size 2 kb.

August 14, 2008

What's Wrong With This Picture?

Or is there anything wrong with it?

musliminspectsnun[1].jpg

After all, we have had a serious problem with convents and Catholic churches being used to plot terrorist attacks in this country at the behest of Catholic religious leaders and theologians, so why shouldn't masked Muslims (whose religion is the only one in the world not connected to terrorism, according to the US government and Muslim religious leaders) be performing routine screenings of elderly women religious in American airports?

H/T Debbie Schlussel

Posted by: Greg at 12:29 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 89 words, total size 1 kb.

August 07, 2008

US Publisher Caves To Islamist Threats

No book that fails to defer to Islamist sensitivities may be published in America, according to Random House. There is just too much danger of violence and murder.

Starting in 2002, Spokane, Wash., journalist Sherry Jones toiled weekends on a racy historical novel about Aisha, the young wife of the prophet Muhammad. Ms. Jones learned Arabic, studied scholarly works about Aisha's life, and came to admire her protagonist as a woman of courage. When Random House bought her novel last year in a $100,000, two-book deal, she was ecstatic. This past spring, she began plans for an eight-city book tour after the Aug. 12 publication date of "The Jewel of Medina" -- a tale of lust, love and intrigue in the prophet's harem.

It's not going to happen: In May, Random House abruptly called off publication of the book. The series of events that torpedoed this novel are a window into how quickly fear stunts intelligent discourse about the Muslim world.

And it looks like Denise Spellberg, a faculty member at the University of Texas, is right in the middle of stirring up the radicals who led to this act of censorship.

Seems to me that we taxpayers here in Texas should quit paying her to engage in unAmerican activities during her classroom time.

I demand that Random House either change its name to Dhimmi House or immediately publish The Jewel of Medina -- or surrender its rights at no cost to any publisher willing to do so.

Posted by: Greg at 03:43 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 260 words, total size 2 kb.

August 05, 2008

Good Morning

Some introductions are in order, IÂ’m sure. While Greg is on vacation he asked if I wanted to fill in on Rhymes With Right and I jumped at the offer. So who am I? IÂ’m David M and IÂ’m the Editor of The Thunder Run, a denizen of Castle Argghhh!, and a new contributor at Milblogs.

Having just been locked out of my own blog by Blogger, for reasons not yet fully explained to my satisfaction, I jumped at the offer, and here I am. Of course my blog has been turned back on by Blogger and IÂ’m back to posting like normal at my regular home but that doesnÂ’t mean I canÂ’t help out a friend in need.

If you stop on over at The Thunder Run youÂ’ll see my style is a lot different than you are accustomed but IÂ’m sure weÂ’ll get along nicely.

What am I going to talk about first? Bruce Ivins, the accused Anthrax Killer.

Yesterday Richard Spertzel, wrote in the WSJ Bruce Ivins Wasn't the Anthrax Culprit, where states his claim that Mr. Ivins couldnÂ’t possibly be the anthrax killer, or at least he could not have acted alone. Spertzel states in his case:

In short, the potential lethality of anthrax in this case far exceeds that of any powdered product found in the now extinct U.S. Biological Warfare Program. In meetings held on the cleanup of the anthrax spores in Washington, the product was described by an official at the Department of Homeland Security as "according to the Russian recipes" -- apparently referring to the use of the weak electric charge.

The latest line of speculation asserts that the anthrax's DNA, obtained from some of the victims, initially led investigators to the laboratory where Ivins worked. But the FBI stated a few years ago that a complete DNA analysis was not helpful in identifying what laboratory might have made the product.

He then ends with the very critical statement:

The FBI spent between 12 and 18 months trying "to reverse engineer" (make a replica of) the anthrax in the letters sent to Messrs. Daschle and Leahy without success, according to FBI news releases. So why should federal investigators or the news media or the American public believe that a lone scientist would be able to do so?

Why indeed? WeÂ’ve seen this investigation turn into a scene from the Marx Brothers as one suspect Stephen Hatfill is hounded for years only to win a lawsuit against the government for their part in the botched investigation and now this, another scientist from Fort Detrick hounded by the government only this time the investigation ends in suicide.

Now The FBI is ready to consider the case solved but still open:

[A]fter nearly seven years — much of which was spent pointing the finger at the wrong suspect — the FBI is ready to end the "Amerithrax" investigation by outlining its evidence against Ivins, according to two U.S. officials. They spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the case publicly.

And yet the profile of Bruce Ivins that is emerging is far from the psychotic murderer he is being portrayed as. Even as families of victims were to get the first glimpse inside the case at the morning FBI briefing, the Justice Department, is expected to ask a federal judge to unseal documents revealing how the FBI closed in on Ivins.

It is hoped by many that, that evidence will answer many questions in the bizarre investigation. And yet some of us will be looking at this information to see just what it is that linked Ivins to the murder plot and convinced the FBI they had their man.

As news reports indicate, the case may turn on a couple of key points, including:

An advanced DNA analysis that matched the anthrax used in the attacks to a specific batch controlled by Ivins. It is unclear, however, how the FBI eliminated as suspects others in the lab who had access to it.

Ivins' purported motive of sending the anthrax in a twisted effort to test a cure for it, according to authorities. Ivins complained of the limitations of animal testing and shared in a patent for an anthrax vaccine. No evidence has been revealed so far to bolster that theory.

Why Ivins would have mailed the deadly letters from Princeton, N.J., a seven-hour round trip from his home. In perhaps the strangest explanation to emerge in the case so far, authorities said Ivins had been obsessed with the sorority Kappa Kappa Gamma for more than 30 years. The letters were sent from a mailbox down the street from the sorority's offices at Princeton University.

Investigators can't place Ivins in Princeton but say the evidence will show he had disturbing attitudes toward women. Other haunting details about Ivins' mental health have emerged, and his therapist described him as having a history of homicidal and sociopathic thoughts.

As some are wont to sayÂ….developing.

Up next, Bruce Ivins the man.

Posted by: DavidM at 11:54 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 841 words, total size 5 kb.

August 03, 2008

"Animal Rights" Terrorists Engage In Property DestruCtion, Attepmted Murder in California

They appear to be so interested in saving the lives of animals that the lives of human beings are unimportant.

Two University of California-Santa Cruz research scientists were targets of firebombs early Saturday, a troubling sign authorities said of escalating violence against university researchers who use animals in their labs.

Law enforcement labeled the incidents "acts of domestic terrorism."

In the off-campus incident, a well-known molecular biologist and his family, including two small children, were forced to escape a smoke-filled house using a second-story ladder after a firebomb was intentionally set, Santa Cruz police said. One family member sustained injuries requiring brief hospitalization, and police are calling the firebombing, which occurred shortly before 6 a.m., a case of attempted homicide.

About the same time, a car belonging to a researcher parked at an on-campus home was also firebombed, destroying the vehicle.

The scary thing is that these sick freaks consider scientists who use animals in the search for cures for cancer, AIDS, and other diseases to be the equivalent of those who committed atrocities at Auschwitz. It shows that they have no moral compass -- and place no value on the lives of people.

And what's even more sickening, these punks don't even have the courage to blow themselves up like your average Hell-bound jihadi. They are more than willing to kill others -- researchers, their families, and those dying from the research they disrupt -- but not to risk their own lives in the process.

H/T Malkin

Posted by: Greg at 11:40 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 270 words, total size 2 kb.

Al -Qaeda Confirms A Successful Cockroach Stomp


There has been a great deal of speculation that a recent US airstrike in Pakistan just over the Afghan border severely injured Osama bin-Laden's number #2,Sheik Ayman Zawahiri. According to CBS News,(which means you can take it with a grain of salt) they supposedly saw a letter from 'unnamed sources' in Pakistan in which a Taliban leader urgently requested medical attention for him.

I personally think this is bogus, and I doubt we managed to get Zawahiri. But the raid definitely had some good results.

Al-Qaeda itself confirmed that four of its 'heroes' ended up on the wrong side of one of our Hellfire missiles. The 'heroes' in this particular cockroach stomp included Abu Khabab al-Masri, a senior Al-Qaeda commander known as a top explosives and poisons expert as well as three other lesser known 'commanders'.

Al-Masri was an Egyptian whose real name was Midhat Mursi. He had a $5 million price on his head from the United States. Among the other high points on his resume,he was believed to have trained the homicide bombers who killed 17 American sailors when they attacked the USS Cole in Yemen back in 2000.

He was also believed to have helped run al-Qaida's Darunta training camp in eastern Afghanistan until he and the boys were run out by the US invasion in 2001. He was famous for conducting experiments in chemical and biological weapons, using dogs as test animals. For that alone I hope he and his pals suffered sufficiently and his death wasn't a quick and painless one.

In any event, a nice job of pest control by our warriors...G-d speed the good work and all that stuff.

-Robert@JoshuaPundit-

Posted by: RobertM at 06:50 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 291 words, total size 3 kb.

July 22, 2008

Instant Jihad's Gonna Get You

Another terrorist, another bulldozer.

Sixteen people were wounded, one of them moderately, as a bulldozer driver went on a rampage in central Jerusalem Tuesday afternoon in an apparent attempt to recreate the terror attack in the capital earlier this month.

The vehicle reportedly left a construction site near the Yemin Moshe neighborhood and set off towards Liberty Bell Park (Gan Hapa'amon), near the corner of Keren Hayesod and King David streets. It drove a distance of approximately 160 meters, attempting to overturn a bus and crashing into four other vehicles - one of which it flipped over. The man was then shot dead by a civilian and a border policeman.

The wounded were evacuated to hospitals in the capital.

Police spokesman Micky Rosenfeld said police sealed off possible escape routes into east Jerusalem, and were searching for two suspects who fled the scene.

Thank's be to God that there were no fatalities this time.

But remember, folks -- it is all the fault of the evil JOOOOOOOS!

Oh, as an interesting side note -- the attack occurred just down the street from where Obama will be staying tonight.

H/T Soccer Dad

Posted by: Greg at 03:36 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 201 words, total size 1 kb.

July 21, 2008

Brit PM Embraces Terrorist, Trashes Israel

Yeah -- the problems in the Middle East are all the fault of the JOOOOOOOOOS!

British Prime Minister Gordon Brown demanded Sunday that Israel cease settlement construction and promised more money to jump-start the battered Palestinian economy.

In his first trip to Israel and the Palestinian territories as Britain's leader, Brown repeatedly stressed that economics are key to Mideast peace and said Israel should ease travel restrictions in the West Bank that have hindered commerce.

But his strongest comments were reserved for the settlements: "I think the whole European Union is very clear on this matter: We want to see a freeze on settlements.

"Settlement expansion has made peace harder to achieve. It erodes trust; it heightens Palestinian suffering; it makes the compromises Israel needs to make for peace more difficult," Brown said at a news conference with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas in the West Bank town of Bethlehem.

Abbas went further in his criticism of Israel's construction in disputed east Jerusalem and the adjacent West Bank, telling Brown that Israel lacks commitment to the "principles and spirit" of Mideast peace efforts. He singled out stepped-up construction of homes for Jews in areas of Jerusalem the Palestinians claim for their capital.

Now let's remind Prime Minister Brownstain that Israel gave up all settlements in Gaza a few years back, to making the area every bit as Jew-free as Hitler wanted the Third Reich. The result? Continued terrorist attacks on Israel from the abandoned territory. So we have seen how well "no settlement" and "land for peace" has worked -- but Brownstain still wants Israel to try it some more. Isn't the definition of insanity doing the same thing over and over in the hopes that next time it will have a different result?

And, of course, Prime Minister Brownstain wants to give the government of terrorist leader Abu Mazen more money -- yeah -- money for terrorists is sure to bring down the level of violence and promote peace and stability.

Because remember -- it's all Israel's fault.

Posted by: Greg at 03:08 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 350 words, total size 2 kb.

July 02, 2008

Jerusalem Terror Attack

Caught live by a mobile phone camera.

The terrorist was a Palestinian with a residence card and work permit to be in the capital of Israel. It may be time for Israel to rethink that policy.

The Palestinian driver of a huge, yellow construction vehicle went on a rampage in central Jerusalem Wednesday, ramming several cars and two buses before a police officer clambered onto the careening vehicle and shot him dead, police and witnesses said.

Officials said at least three people were killed and more than 30 were injured.

The episode spread panic as the driver used the Caterpillar construction vehicleÂ’s massive serrated scoop to overturn the bus from the Egged public transport company and leave a swath of tangled wreckage 300 yards long, plowing over at least five cars and colliding with a second bus.

Police believed the driver may have planned to crash the construction vehicle into a crowded market nearby.

“It could have been a lot worse,” said Micky Rosenfeld, a police spokesman.

I have since come across a report that four people were killed in the attack, though I have been unable to confirm that. The jihadi swine operating the backhoe was also killed by police in an attempt to prevent his from slaughtering any more defenseless civilians.

May God bring the souls of the innocents murdered this day into his eternal presence -- and may their murderer be cast into the deepest pits of Hell, there to suffer for all eternity.

Posted by: Greg at 02:42 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 253 words, total size 2 kb.

June 12, 2008

Supreme Court Screws The Pooch

Today the US Supreme Court created an entirely new principle under the United States Constitution -- that it applies to enemy combatants captured on the field of battle by the US military, who are not either citizens or residents of the US, and who have not even entered the United States!

The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that foreign terrorism suspects held at Guantanamo Bay have rights under the Constitution to challenge their detention in U.S. civilian courts.

In its third rebuke of the Bush administration's treatment of prisoners, the court ruled 5-4 that the government is violating the rights of prisoners being held indefinitely and without charges at the U.S. naval base in Cuba. The court's liberal justices were in the majority.

Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing for the court, said, "The laws and Constitution are designed to survive, and remain in force, in extraordinary times."

Kennedy said federal judges could ultimately order some detainees to be released, but that such orders would depend on security concerns and other circumstances.

The White House had no immediate comment on the ruling. White House press secretary Dana Perino, traveling with President Bush in Rome, said the administration was reviewing the opinion.

It was not immediately clear whether this ruling, unlike the first two, would lead to prompt hearings for the detainees, some of whom have been held more than 6 years. Roughly 270 men remain at the island prison, classified as enemy combatants and held on suspicion of terrorism or links to al-Qaida and the Taliban.

Now here's the problem with the decision.

Never, ever, in the history of the United States have those captured by the military during the course of combat operations been entitled to habeas corpus. Not even during the War of 1812 (when the bulk of the combat took place on US territory) and the Civil War (when those captured were, by the logic of the Union position on the right of states to secede, American citizens) have we allowed such individuals access to civilian courts. Indeed, at the height of WWII the Supreme Court ruled that enemy combatants captured on US territory had no habeas rights in Ex Parte Quirin. Under the Geneva Conventions, enemy soldiers are not entitled to access to the civilian courts, and indeed may not be tried by a civilian court -- but the Supreme Court has miraculously ruled that those who violate the laws of war are entitled to greater protection than those who follow it!

Over at Patterico's Pontifications, we get a wonderful view of the the dissent by Justice Scalia, who positively disassembles the logic of the majority in this case. Most notably, Scalia refused to use the traditional phrase "I respectfully dissent" at the end of his opinion, choosing instead to indicate his profound disagreement with the majority by using the much less collegial "I dissent". The most important line of the dissent, however, is this: "The Nation will live to regret what the Court has done today."

Read the opinions here.

H/T Malkin, Hot Air, Flopping Aces

Posted by: Greg at 05:06 AM | Comments (22) | Add Comment
Post contains 518 words, total size 4 kb.

June 02, 2008

A Bit Of Good News

There are at least some peacemakers in the religion of Peace.

A Muslim Indian seminary which is said to have inspired the Taliban has issued a fatwa against terrorism, insisting that Islam is a religion of peace.

Senior clerics from the 150-year-old Darul Uloom Deoband issued the edict saying they wished to wipe out terrorism. "Islam rejects all kinds of unjust violence, breach of peace, bloodshed, murder and plunder and does not allow it in any form," said the rector, Habibur Rehman, to the cheers of thousands of students. Many held placards saying "Islam means peace", while others chanted.

"The religion of Islam has come to wipe out all kinds of terrorism and to spread the message of global peace," Mr Rehman added.

The Deoband institute was established in the aftermath of the 1857 uprising against British rule, an uprising that was brutally suppressed by the imperial forces. Highly influential, it controls thousands of smaller seminaries and madrassas around the world, from Britain to Afghanistan.

Of Britain's 1,400 mosques, about 600 are run by Deobandi-affiliated clerics. Seventeen of the UK's 26 Islamic seminaries follow Deobandi teachings, which produce about 80 per cent of all domestically trained Muslim clerics.

Now, if only the terrorists will listen. After all, given the decentralized nature of Islam, there is no Pope to issue decrees that are binding upon all the faithful. In this particular case, I certainly wish there were.

Posted by: Greg at 10:23 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 246 words, total size 2 kb.

<< Page 2 of 17 >>
286kb generated in CPU 0.0474, elapsed 0.3192 seconds.
74 queries taking 0.2863 seconds, 418 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.