Thursday, October 18, 2007

Wednesday, October 10, 2007

Video Excerpts From Daniel Pipes' Lecture At Wayne State University

The following videos are excerpts from Dr. Daniel Pipes' lecture at Wayne State University on October 8, 2007 (with the exception of the last clip which shows people talking before the event).
Unfortunately, you will see how rude, disrespectful, childish, and offensive certain members of the crowd behaved. This is certainly not acceptable conduct for University students or non-student visitors to campus (like Anti-Racist Action member Mike Staunch who was so disruptive he was ejected from the auditorium- see first clip).


Audience does not like Dr. Pipes' take on the relationship between Islam and slavery: http://antiracistblog.blogspot.com/2007/10/slavery-in-islam.html



Pipes tells a protester that she should learn history, instead of dismissing it as inconsequential: http://antiracistblog.blogspot.com/2007/10/dr-pipes-says-learn-your-history.html



Wayne State students talking before the Pipes lecture express support for the terrorist group Hizbullah: http://antiracistblog.blogspot.com/2007/10/wayne-state-students-defending.html



Please post, discuss, and distribute these important videos. You are also free to use the pictures from anti-Pipes protests at Wayne State and the University of Michigan which can be found here:

Hamsters Overheat, Nation Paralyzed

Charles dropped in to give an explanation for the sudden disappearance of LGF today:

"Something's wrong with the LGF web server -- we're working on it. It's overheating, which means it probably blew a fan..."

Predicted resuscitation time: a coupla hours, give or take.

Meanwhile, most of the editorial newsrooms at Fox, Reuters, CBS and the Washington Post are left completely flummoxed, as their primary source for "tips" is mysteriously absent.

Will this evening's news broadcasts be cancelled?

Dont worry, Jimmah says its not technically genocide

Sudan: Darfur Attack 'Targeted Women And Children'

"The recent attack on Muhajiriya town in South Darfur, in which 45 people died and thousands fled their homes, mainly targeted women, children and the elderly, a rebel faction said.

"The government moved forces into the town two days earlier," Mohammed Bashir, spokesman for the Sudan Liberation Army (SLA), said from Khartoum, the capital. "With air cover, they attacked the town, burnt down half of it and killed mainly children, women and the elderly."

The Sudanese army denied involvement in the 8 October attack, saying violence in Muhajiriya was a result of "tribal fighting between the citizens of the area".
---------
Amnesty International said the attack was supported by an Antonov, which had been painted in white UN colours. Since 2005, Sudan has been prohibited from offensive flights over Darfur and has been criticised for painting aircraft white, it said."

Waiting to hear from the UN and Jimmah on this one.

They hate us, they really really hate us!



The attitude,opinions & knowledge of Europeans towards Americans.
Part one of Six

Sunday, September 23, 2007

We join Columbia and the lefties...


Celebrate Free Speech !
And please don't forget to get rid of the offending Ten Commandments in all public spaces...

Posted by The Beast Is Back at 6.66 hrs

Thursday, September 20, 2007

The daily news that nobody publishes

(IsraelNN.com) Gaza-based terrorists have fired nine mortar shells at Israeli towns and IDF troops in the past hour. Two landed near the Kerem Shalom crossing, formerly the main crossing into Gaza, which has been closed due to terrorist threats. Six shells fell next to a nearby Jewish town, while one landed near Kibbutz Miflasim.

The attacks bring to 11 the number of mortar shells at Israeli soldiers and civilians Thursday afternoon.




Wednesday, September 19, 2007

We need more dialogue...

Via AFP/Google:

Syria blast 'linked to chemical weapons': report

LONDON (AFP) — Iranian engineers were among those killed in a blast at a secret Syrian military installation two months ago, defence group Jane's said Wednesday after claiming that the base was being used to develop chemical weapons.

The July 26 explosion in Aleppo, northern Syria, was reported at the time. The official Sana news agency said 15 Syrian military personnel were killed and 50 people were injured, most of them slightly from flying glass.

The agency said only that "very explosive products" blew up after fire broke out at the facility and that the blaze was not an act of sabotage.

But in the September 26 edition of Jane's Defence Weekly, Syrian defence sources were quoted as saying the explosion happened during tests to weaponise a Scud C missile with mustard gas, which is banned under international law.

Fuel caught fire in a missile production laboratory and "dispersed chemical agents (including VX and Sarin nerve agents and mustard blister agent) across the storage facility and outside.

"Other Iranian engineers were seriously injured with chemical burns to exposed body parts not protected by safety overalls," the publication quoted the sources as saying.

Among the dead were "dozens" of Iranian missile weaponisation engineers, it added.



READ THE REST

.




Tuesday, September 18, 2007

This idiot was the Commander...

Every effort should be made to stop Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons, but, failing that, the world could live with a nuclear-armed government in Teheran, a recently retired commander of US forces in the Middle East said Monday.

John Abizaid, the retired Army general who headed Central Command for nearly four years, said he was confident that if Iran should gain nuclear arms, the United States could deter it from using them.

"Iran is not a suicide nation," he said. "I mean, they may have some people in charge that don't appear to be rational, but I doubt that the Iranians intend to attack us with a nuclear weapon."

The Iranians are aware, he said, that the United States has far superior military capability.

"I believe that we have the power to deter Iran, should it become nuclear," he said, referring to the theory that Iran would not risk a catastrophic retaliatory strike by using a nuclear weapon against the United States.

"There are ways to live with a nuclear Iran," Abizaid said in remarks at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a think tank. "Let's face it, we lived with a nuclear Soviet Union, we've lived with a nuclear China, and we're living with (other) nuclear powers as well."


READ THE REST AT THE JERUSALEM POST:

HERE




Sunday, September 16, 2007

Rumors...noise or music ?

THIS is from JihadWatch, but there are more articles on the JPost...

IT was just after midnight when the 69th Squadron of Israeli F15Is crossed the Syrian coast-line. On the ground, Syria’s formidable air defences went dead. An audacious raid on a Syrian target 50 miles from the Iraqi border was under way.

At a rendezvous point on the ground, a Shaldag air force commando team was waiting to direct their laser beams at the target for the approaching jets. The team had arrived a day earlier, taking up position near a large underground depot. Soon the bunkers were in flames.

Ten days after the jets reached home, their mission was the focus of intense speculation this weekend amid claims that Israel believed it had destroyed a cache of nuclear materials from North Korea.

Friday, September 7, 2007

They Want What They Cannot Have


Oprah endorses Obama. Has-beens wonder "Why not me?"

THE DEAD THREAD - Home Away from Home




ALL NIGHT LONG!


All night; All night long!


I don't blame you for being cranky. I'm cranky, too!


[Awesome artwork courtesy
Shiplord Kirel,
who I HOPE is on
an awesome vacation somewhere,
as he hasn't been on LGF...]


Anyway, enjoy your FRUIT-CUP-ON-THE-ROAD.



Thursday, September 6, 2007

Flowers For Terrorists

When the Left Cares, and When It Doesn't




September 05, 2007


By Denis Keohane

Left wing artists love to portray themselves as avatars of compassion, and are often praised by the media and cultural establishment for the humanity their political work supposedly demonstrates. But theirs is a highly selective compassion, often ignoring the victims of the groups they supported.

Director Brian DePalma's new film Redacted reportedly stunned the Venice Film Festival and presented "shocking images that left some viewers in tears". The movie Redacted is "about ‘the real-life rape and killing of a 14-year-old Iraqi girl by U.S. soldiers who also murdered her family....

DePalma makes it plain that there is a political purpose to Redacted above and beyond merely telling a horrific and tragic story. According to Reuters:
"Inspired by one of the most serious crimes committed by American soldiers in Iraq since the 2003 invasion, it is a harrowing indictment of the conflict and spares the audience no brutality to get its message across...De Palma, 66, whose Casualties of War in 1989 told a similar tale of abuse by American soldiers in Vietnam, makes no secret of the goal he is hoping to achieve with the film's images, all based on real material he found on the Internet." [emphasis added]
DePalma himself is quoted as saying:
"The movie is an attempt to bring the reality of what is happening in Iraq to the American people.... The pictures are what will stop the war. One only hopes that these images will get the public incensed enough to motivate their Congressmen to vote against this war..."
DePalma went on to equate what he was attempting to accomplish with Redacted with the Vietnam War experience:

"In Vietnam... we saw the images and the sorrow of the people we were traumatizing and killing.... We see none of that in this war...
‘I think that's terrible because now we have not even given the dignity of faces to this suffering people...' De Palma said." [emphases added]
How genuine is DePalma's compassion for these "suffering people"? By the time he made Casualties of War in 1989, the world was well aware of the Vietnamese Boat People, as many as a million or more, who fled after South Vietnam fell to the communists. No one knows how many perished at sea or were killed by pirates, but estimates are as high as a hundred thousand or more. As many as 165,000 Vietnamese died in the brutal re-education camps. Neither DePalma nor any other big Hollywood director, and I use the term "Hollywood" generically for the motion picture industry, made a movie about them.

The Real Victims of the Vietnam War

In 1979 William Shawcross' book Sideshow was published, subtitled "Kissinger, Nixon and the Destruction of Cambodia," esentially blaming the U.S. intervention in Southeast Asia for Pol Pot's and the Khmer Rouge's "killing fields" slaughter in Cambodia, which claimed the lives of between one and three million Cambodians after the U.S. withdrawal. Shawcross had been an outspoken critic of the U.S. war effort in Vietnam. Shawcross, however, is an intellectually honest man, and wrote "Remember: for Cambodia, read Iraq" last March for The UK Times:
"...horror had engulfed all of Indo-China as a result of the US defeat in 1975.... Given the catastrophe of the communist victories, I have always thought that those like myself who were opposed to the American efforts in Indochina should be very humble.... I still believe the overthrow of Saddam Hussein was the correct thing to do - and it was something only the United States could have done. For all the horrors that extremist Sunnis and Shias are inflicting on each other today, the US rid the world of the Pol Pot of the Middle East. So long as the vile Saddam family regime remained in power there was no hope of progress in the region....

In Indo-China the majority of Western journalists (including myself) believed that the war could not or should not be won. Similarly today, for too many pundits hatred (and it really is that) of Bush and Blair dominates perceptions. Armchair editorialists love to dismiss the US effort in terms of Abu Ghraib or Haditha. [snip]

If Iraq collapses, such nihilist killing will spread far wider. As in Cambodia, bloody mass murder is the only alternative to what the US-led coalition is trying to achieve."
Fourteen years after 1975 and the Boat People and killing fields, De Palma made a fictional movie about American atrocities against the Vietnamese, and thirty two years later still invokes the anti-war mantras of the seventies, as though many millions had not suffered and died, brutally, because we didn't prevail in Southeast Asia. Where was and is his concern for those people; where is his movie about that, those graphic images?

The Left Changes Its Tune

It is not just DePalma. There has been a not too subtle change developing over the last few months on the anti-war Democratic left, perhaps best exemplified by Barack Obama's statement that preventing genocide is not a sufficient criteria for military commitment in Iraq . Some of the liberal and far left as well as members of the media have adapted a seemingly fatalistic outlook that a bloodbath is inevitable whether we stay one more year or twenty, and so withdraw, and let the chips fall where they may.

This comes after years of charges by that anti-war side that our intervention in Iraq is misguided and worse - because of the misery, suffering and death it has brought to the Iraqis population!

What has changed?

In the last few months, some things have become more and more obvious, even to the left.

It takes years to build an army from scratch, especially when there is already a fight underway. That was so during our Revolutionary War. In later wars, when the size of our military necessarily grew, there was an established and professional cadre of experienced officers and senior enlisted men in place to oversee and guide the expansion. Iraq did not have any of that except for the Baathist troops we had just defeated.

But the evidence of the last several months has been that the new Iraqi Army is standing up, is in the fight, and is growing more professional and capable.

It has also become obvious in place after place, beginning perhaps with Tal Afar and repeating in Al Anbar and Diyala Provinces, that when the insurgents are forcefully engaged, the local populace, the Iraqi military and the Coalition forces all appear to be something like one team with shared goals. More and more Iraqis themselves seem to be behaving as allies of the Coalition.

And that's the problem for the left, and why they no longer care about them. They only ‘seemed' to care for the Iraqis when they could be made out to be our victims. As our allies, they have betrayed the left and forfeited the left's concern.

A Choice of Images

DePalma speaks of using graphic images found on the internet in his film. How many other such graphic images could he have found from Iraq, ones that did not relate to an isolated brutal crime committed by Americans but were of those committed by the Saddam Hussein regime? Might that have offered context? The mass graves, the amputees, the pictures of some of the thousands of dead Kurds in the villages attacked with nerve gas. How many graphic images might DePalma have found of mass executions, beheadings and atrocities committed routinely by Al Qaeda in Iraq and other insurgencies?

Last June the intrepid embedded blogger and former Special Forces soldier Michael Yon posted on his blogsite "Bless the Beasts and Children," about his experience with American and Iraqi troops coming across a lifeless village where the people and even the livestock had been slaughtered by Al Qaeda. Children had been beheaded. The big media has not picked up the story, though Yon even provides photographs. I doubt that DePalma will ever make a movie from those graphic images.

Downplaying the Risks of a Pullout

In his 1971 appearance before Senator Fulbright's Senate Foreign Relations Committee, the young John Kerry was asked about Vietnamese who were our allies and might be in danger from the communists if we withdrew and South Vietnam fell, and Kerry answered:
"... I think, having done what we have done to that country, we have an obligation to offer sanctuary to the perhaps 2,000, 3,000 people who might face...political assassination or something else..." [emphasis added]
Kerry has never expressed any remorse for that gross underestimation of how many of our former allies would suffer. Once we had left, they were evidently immaterial. In a sense, by being our allies, they had brought it on themselves. Only victims of America count as genuine victims. Our allies don't. The more the Iraqis appear to be our allies, the less they matter.

In 1965, journalist and war correspondent Marguerite Higgins wrote the book Our Vietnam Nightmare, a prescient work that gloomily predicted ultimate disaster for America in the war that had just begun to heat up. Among the reasons Higgins, who had covered the French defeat in Vietnam in 1953, saw that things would turn out badly for America were two that bear directly on our current experience in Iraq:

America was not getting the real story. While she spent months traveling the South Vietnam countryside, she said that most of the journalists in Vietnam spent all of their time in the hotel lounges and bars of Saigon, getting their information from local informants. Higgins saw that the communists understood this, and that many of those informants were agents working for the Viet Cong and North Vietnamese, and were feeding propaganda to the reporters. That sounds eerily like the Green Zone reporters in Iraq and their ‘stringers'.

The nature of the Viet Cong insurgency was not understood by Americans. Again and again as she traveled the rural areas of South Vietnam where the Viet Cong were gaining strength, she came upon atrocity after atrocity. Village leaders, teachers, entire families, even entire villages killed. Family members murdered while the rest of the family was forced to watch. She asked an editor why these things were not being reported, and the answer she received is illustrative. He told her that Viet Cong atrocities were routine, as they gained territorial control and held it through terror. As such, Viet Cong atrocities were the dog biting the man, not really news. Everybody somehow just knew they did things like that! What would be news, though, would be an atrocity committed by Americans, because that would be the man biting the dog, the news that is news because it is an exception.

Three years later, at My Lai, the man bit the dog, and the press dutifully and correctly reported it, but it was reported in a vacuum, one that did not place that dismal and horrific occurrence in the context of an aberration.

Horrific crimes are always with us, because there will always be in the population that tiny minority who are capable of such, willing to act and will sometimes take the opportunity to do so. That even happens with soldiers, in war or while at peace. It is why, for instance, the military has prisons.

When such atrocious crimes are committed in war, it is reasonable and even necessary to ask whether they were the isolated actions of one or a few that will and do happen among any large body of people, even college and high school students, or systematic of widespread behavior, or at worst case, a policy or regular practice condoned or even encouraged by some authority.

Fake Atrocities

For all the talk of Abu Ghraib or Haditha being evidence of systematic of abuse by American soldiers in Iraq, that has never been shown by anyone to be the case. The reported execution style murders or sytematic executions widely charged at Haditha have now been shown, in the text of the presiding judge's opinion dismissing charges against LCpl Sharratt and the investigating officer's recommendation to dismiss charges against LCpl Tatum, to have been fabrications. No matter what the outcome of the hearings and trials of the remaining two Marines (Tatum and Wuterich), it has clearly been established that there was no rampage and no execution style killings, as was widely charged and reported!

Yet many of the anti-war left and such as DePalma very much want to make us and others believe that our soldiers and Marines are regularly committing atrocities, and that this is somehow sytematic or even policy.

Ralph Peters, writing in the New York Post, compares crimes statistics of American cities to those of soldiers serving in Iraq and finds that our military personnel, even under the pressures of combat, when it comes to serious crimes, are behaving as a group better than the citizens of many of our cities.

DePalma is going for emotions, pure and simple, and as an accomplished director, knows how that is done. But it is cynical, and it is not based on a genuine compassion for the Iraqi victims and people. DePalma is using those dead as props.

Real Compassion

We understand that our troops in Iraq are seeking to win the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people. What we don't seem to understand as well, though Yon and other milbloggers embedded in Iraq do and have reported on it, is that the Iraqi people have also been winning the hearts and minds of our soldiers. The feigned and opportunistic faux compassion of the anti-war left stands in stark contrast to the genuine compassion of the soldiers in Iraq.

Our soldiers in Iraq, men and women, are many of them hard, as they are trained to be hard. They are armed, and many and probably most will, should the need arise, kill without hesitation or perhaps minimal hesitation. They will aim a weapon at other human beings and pull a trigger.

Yet they will also put their own lives on the line by standing between terrorist killers and their intended Iraqi victims. They will smile at Iraqi children and receive smiles in return. They will see, in Iraqi families, children, mothers, father, and even young Iraqi soldiers, representations of those they have compassion for, and that compassion will and does grow to include those Iraqis, real people. When South Vietnam fell, there was no group of Americans more disheartened and crushed than the Vietnam Vets who clearly understood the horror that had befallen people whom they had come to know, and cared about.

There is more genuine compassion in the average American warrior than in a dozen Hollywood anti-war activists patting each other on the back for their "bravery" in dissenting from a war fought by truly brave men and women enduring hardship and separation from loved ones to protect our freedoms and our civilization, whose fruits are bestowed so lavishly on the likes of Brian DePalma.


LINK

Friday, August 31, 2007

UFF DA , FJORDMAN!




Who Are We, Who Are Our Enemies - The Cost of Historical Amnesia


By FJORDMAN


"The Jihad, the Islamic so-called Holy War, has been a fact of life in Europe, Asia, Africa and the Near and Middle East for more than 1300 years, but this is the first history of the Muslim wars in Europe ever to be published. Hundreds of books, however, have appeared on its Christian counterpart, the Crusades, to which the Jihad is often compared, although they lasted less than two hundred years and unlike the Jihad, which is universal, were largely but not completely confined to the Holy Land. Moreover, the Crusades have been over for more than 700 years, while a Jihad is still going on in the world. The Jihad has been the most unrecorded and disregarded major event of history. It has, in fact, been largely ignored. For instance, the Encyclopedia Britannica gives the Crusades eighty times more space than the Jihad."

The quote is from Paul Fregosi's book Jihad in the West from 1998. Mr. Fregosi found that his book about the history of Islamic Holy War in Europe from the 7th to the 20th centuries was difficult to get published in the mid-1990s, when publishers had the Salman Rushdie case in fresh memory.

A few years later, an even more comprehensive book, The Legacy of Jihad, was published by Andrew G. Bostom. Bostom has written about what he calls "America's First War on Terror."

Thomas Jefferson and John Adams, then serving as American ambassadors to France and Britain, respectively, met in 1786 in London with the Tripolitan Ambassador to Britain, Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja. These future American presidents were attempting to negotiate a peace treaty which would spare the United States the ravages of Jihad piracy – murder and enslavement emanating from the so-called Barbary States of North Africa, corresponding to modern Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, and Libya.

Andrew Bostom notes that "an aggressive jihad was already being waged against the United States almost 200 years prior to America becoming a dominant international power in the Middle East." Israel has thus nothing to do with it.

The Barbary Jihad piracy had been going on since the earliest Arab-Islamic expansion in the 7th and 8th centuries. Francisco Gabrieli states that:

"According to present-day concepts of international relations, such activities amounted to piracy, but they correspond perfectly to jihad, an Islamic religious duty. The conquest of Crete, in the east, and a good portion of the corsair warfare along the Provencal and Italian coasts, in the West, are among the most conspicuous instances of such "private initiative" which contributed to Arab domination in the Mediterranean."

[SNIP]

Wednesday, August 29, 2007

Turkish Islamist Happiness Party: "Jews are Bacteria. A Disease"



Antisemitism and the Turkish Islamist "Milli Gorus" Movement: Zionists/Jews "Bacteria," "Disease"

All Infidel Nations Are One Zionist Entity; Jews Want To Rule From Morocco to Indonesia
A Turkish Flash TV interview with former Turkish prime minister Prof. Necmettin Erbakan, who is the founder and leader of the Islamist movement Milli Gorus, was aired July 1, 2007 as part of a pre-election program.

Erbakan is the leader and mentor of the ruling AKP leadership, including both Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and presidential candidate Abdullah Gul – both of whom have in the past been active members of Erbakan's political parties, filling mayoral, ministerial, and parliamentary posts. All of Erbakan's parties have been banned by Turkish court orders.

In his campaign to promote his Islamist Happiness Party (SP) prior to the July 22, 2007 general elections, Erbakan reiterated antisemitic statements in this interview, as well as in interviews with other TV channels. In his public speeches, he expanded on these views, frequently referring to "Zionists" (meaning, in fact, the Jews) as "bacteria" and "disease," to crowds of tens of thousands, at every stop on his campaign trail, including Ankara and Istanbul, and especially in Anatolian cities such as Konya, Elazig and Trabzon.

The following are excerpts from the Flash TV interview:

All Infidel Nations Are One Zionist Entity; Jews Want To Rule From Morocco to Indonesia

Interviewer: "Dear Mr. Erbakan, we are going to elections at the end of a five-year-long rule by your students [in AKP]. You say that these elections are of vital importance, that they are about 'to be or not to be' for Turkey. Why do you think this way, especially when the country is being ruled by your own disciples?"

Erbakan: [following greetings and prayers] "These elections are about whether we will be, or we will cease to be. I'll tell you where this is coming from, and for this we have to first demonstrate the infrastructure. [...] The right path to the happiness of all humanity is our path, the Milli Gorus way.

"Our Prophet was sent with love and compassion, and our goal is the happiness of all six billion people in the world. We are Muslims, and our civilization has brought happiness to the entire world. This is the good, but there also is evil. Our religion says that the infidels are one nation [Millah]. That means evil is run by one control center.

See more at the new MEMRI Turkish Media Blog! This will be one to watch closely.

8/29/07 Morning Blogglewanky DT



HAT TIP: Killgore Trout

Monday, August 27, 2007

Whores of the Brave New World



Three days later, like turkey buzzards settling on a corpse, the reporters came.



CNN's "spokeswoman for al-Qaeda" Christiane Amanpour Mouths-Off

by News Wire

(November 21, 2003)

[CapMag.com] The Guardian [September 16, 2003] has some interesting insight into CNN's Christiane Amanpour who has claimed that CNN,

...was "intimidated" by the Bush administration in its coverage of the war in Iraq. Amanpour said CNN was "muzzled" by a combination of the White House and the high-profile success of the controversial pro-war news network, Rupert Murdoch-owned Fox News.

No Amanpour. A "muzzle" is what Saddam would do to those who spoke against him, i.e., cut their tongues off, have their daughters raped, etc.

Neither is "high-profile success" a muzzle--it is the result of viewers judging Fox News's war-coverage as being more objective.

"...certainly television - and perhaps to a certain extent my station - was intimidated by the administration and its foot soldiers at Fox News. And it did, in fact, put a climate of fear and self-censorship in terms of the kind of broadcast work we did."

When asked by the interviewer if there had been a story that she had was "muzzled" from reporting on Amanpour said,

"It's not a question of couldn't do it, it's a question of tone. It's a question of being rigorous. It's a question of really asking the questions."

Talk about evading the question. In other words: No there was no censorship.

Truth is there were stories that CNN did not report on. Not out of deference to George Bush and the American government, but out of deference to Saddam Hussein and his Tyranny in Iraq (See Saddam Hussein's Real Ministers of Disinformation Come Out of the Closet).

...Jim Walton, president of CNN Newsgroup, denied that the network had been subject to undue influence. He is reported to have had a "private conversation" with Amanpour following her comments...A Fox News spokeswoman said: "It's better to be viewed as a foot soldier for Bush than spokeswoman for al-Qaeda."

Amanpour, who was embedded with the military during the Iraq conflict, was seen in a BBC documentary, Fighting the War, raging at British army chiefs because roving correspondents were getting better pictures than she was. "If you wish to go [with them] you can, but we won't re-embed you if you come back," she was told. Amanpour replied: "[That means] play by the rules or f??? off."

Tuesday, August 21, 2007

Teach me tonight....




FROM THE AUSTRALIAN

Warning to West on 'evil of Islam'


Richard Kerbaj | August 21, 2007


THE West was still underestimating the evil of Islam, an influential Muslim thinker has warned.

On a two-week "under the radar" visit to Australia, Syrian-born Wafa Sultan secretly met both sides of federal politics and Jewish community leaders, warning them that all Muslims needed to be closely monitored in the West.

He insisted that Australia and the US have been duped into believing there is a difference between the religion's moderate and radical interpretations.

In an interview with The Australian, Dr Sultan -- who shot to recognition last year following an interview on al-Jazeera television in which she attacked Islam and the prophet Mohammed -- said Muslims were "brainwashed" from an early age to believe Western values were evil and that the world would one day come under the control of Sharia law.

The US-based psychiatrist -- who has two fatwas (religious rulings) issued against her to be killed -- warned that Muslims would continue to exploit freedom of speech in the West to spread their "hate" and attack their adopted countries, until the Western mind grasped the magnitude of the Islamic threat.

"You're fighting someone who is willing to die," Dr Sultan told The Australian in an Arabic and English interview. "So you have to understand this mentality and find ways to face it. (As a Muslim) your mission on this earth is to fight for Islam and to kill or to be killed. You're here for only a short life and once you kill a kafir, or a non-believer, soon you're going to be united with your God."

Dr Sultan, who was brought to Australia by a group called Multi-Net comprised of Jews and Christians, met senior politicians, including Attorney-General Philip Ruddock, Foreign Minister Alexander Downer and Labor deputy leader Julia Gillard.

Private security was hired for Dr Sultan, who left Australia yesterday, and state police authorities were also made aware of her movements in the country.

The organisers of her visit asked the media to not publish anything about her stay until she had left the country because of security-related concerns. Dr Sultan said Islam was a "political ideology" that was wrongly perceived to have a moderate and hardline following.

"That's why the West has to monitor the majority of Muslims because you don't know when they're ready to be activated. Because they share the same basic belief, that's the problem," said the 50-year-old, who was last year featured in Time magazine's list of the 100 most influential people in the world.

Dr Sultan, who was raised on Alawite Islamic beliefs before she renounced her religion, began to question Islam after she witnessed her university teacher get gunned down by Muslim hardliners in Syria in 1979.

The mother of three, who migrated to the US in 1989, said the West needed to hold Muslims and their leaders more accountable for the atrocities performed in the name of Islam if they wanted to win the war on terror.

But while she considered the prophet Mohammed "evil" and said the Koran needed to be destroyed because it advocated violence against non-believers, Dr Sultan struggled to articulate her vision for Muslims, whom she said she was trying to liberate from the shackles of their beliefs.

"I believe the only way is to expose the Muslims to different cultures, different thoughts, different belief systems," said Dr Sultan, who is completing her first book, The Escaped Prisoner: When Allah is a Monster.

"Muslims have been hostages of their own belief systems for 1400 years. There is no way we can keep the Koran."

Wednesday, August 15, 2007

Here's a "just in case" Thread

Just in case MuthaShip goes blogglewanky while no one is here to put a thread up....


Friday, August 10, 2007

TESTING HALOSCAN

Shalom Lost Lizards

The commenting system has been changed to HaloScan

This is so we can track any trolls and ban their IP's if we need to.


Thank you!



Clip from : Ginn

Thursday, August 2, 2007

Is It Time To Republish Mein Kampf in Germany?

The copyright to Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf (My Struggle, translated) belongs to the German state of Bavaria and expires on December 31, 2015. Bavaria does not allow the book to be reprinted, although possession of Mein Kampf is not illegal in Germany.

Although the expiration of copyright is eight years away, Horst Möller, a German historian and director of the Munich Institute of Contemporary History, has stoked raw emotions by calling for the book to be published in a scholarly edition before the expiration of the copyright, Reuters reported this week. Möller’s thesis is that with the expiration of the copyright and the book reverting to the public domain there will be a feeding frenzy among publishers that may bring undeserved sensationalism to Hitler’s anti-Semitic work. He believes it’s best to publish a carefully annotated edition before 2015 that will expose Hitler’s theories as bogus. "You can be sure it will be sold as a sensation," in 2015, Möller told Reuters. "You could prevent that happening," said Möller, "if an academic edition of the book was already available."

Full article here.

Tuesday, July 31, 2007

Berlin names street after Frank Zappa



ARTICLE LINK FROM PEACEKEEPER



BERLIN - Berlin has named a street honoring Frank Zappa.

Zappa’s brother, Bobby Zappa, said the Grammy-winning rocker, who died in 1993, would have been pleased, in a letter of thanks.

Frank-Zappa-Strasse or Frank Zappa Street — formerly Street 13 — lies on the eastern outskirts of Berlin amid empty industrial buildings in what was communist East Germany.

The street is home to Orwo Haus, a former Communist-era film factory that now provides practice studios for more than 160 bands.

Musicians at Orwo Haus campaigned for two years to have the street’s name changed. Eighteen bands, including the Frank Zappa cover band Sheik Yerbouti, celebrated the renaming this weekend with an all-night concert for more than 2,800 people.

The Orwo Haus association said it wanted Zappa’s name for its street because “he was without taboo, musically versatile, provocative, and didn’t allow himself to be captured by capitalistic enterprises.”

“I am absolutely certain that he would be very proud to have his name as an address for so many musicians,” Bobby Zappa wrote.

Thursday, July 26, 2007

Tuesday, July 17, 2007

Bwahhahhaa the 4 million dollar outage...... Mutha Ship kablooey


Bush and Islamofascists Détente in DC?

by Jerry Gordon (July 2007)

This was the week not to be believed in our Nation’s Capitol: a President buttering up Islamists in full view of a feckless press six years after 9/11 and hundreds of billions spent on a war without a name.

Eli Lake in his New York Sun article of June 20th pointed out the current Bush push to make nice with the Islamists began last fall, when newly elected Democratic House Majority Leader, Steny Hoyer of Maryland made an inspection trip to Egypt and found himself in the garden of the U.S. Embassy chatting it up with leaders of the Moslem Brotherhood.

Witness the tableau of President Bush going once more to the Islamic Center of Washington to preside over a new initiative: becoming a Dhimmi. Yes, that’s what I said, a Dhimmi. Someone who obsequiously abides by the rules of subjugation under Muslim Sharia law. How did he do it? For starters he went to the Islamic Center of Washington - a Saudi financed and built Dawa institution - on the occasion of its 50th anniversary to make several important announcements.

One announcement was that Muslims were really tolerant folks just like the Jews, Presbyterians and Buddhists whose sanctuaries lay within a stone’s throw of this Islamic Center on Massachusetts Avenue in Washington, DC.

Then he reminded the audience of the findings of the recent Pew Research Center Survey of American Muslims:

We must encourage more Muslim leaders to add their voices, to speak out against radical extremists who infiltrate mosques, to denounce organizations that use the veneer of Islamic belief to support and fund acts of violence, and to reach out to young Muslims — even in our country and elsewhere in the free world — who believe suicide bombing may someday be justified.

The second message was the ‘importance’ of resolving the Israeli -Palestine conflict.

The third was announcing the appointment of a Special Envoy to the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) composed of 56 Islamic states around the globe. Bush said:

“We admire and thank those Muslims who have denounced what the Secretary General of the OIC called ‘radical fringe elements who pretend that they act in the name of Islam.’ The special envoy’s mission,” Bush said, “would be to listen and learn”.

As Steve Emerson has chronicled in a National Review On-line Op ed, “Radical Outreach” the OIC has supported Palestinian and Hezbollah terrorists, welcomed Hamas military leaders and provided Iranian President Ahmadinejad with a special platform for his anti-Israel, anti-Semitic rants such as “wiping Israel and Jews off the map of the world.” This is the same OIC that perennially votes as a block in the U.N. General Assembly to adopt anti-Israel, some would say, anti-Semitic resolutions every session, year in and year out.

Cheering the President’s remarks about the outreach to OIC Islamists were the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) . Both of these are Moslem Brotherhood fronts according to our Justice Department. They are also listed as unindicted co-conspirator in a major terrorist financing plot.

The buzz among policy wonks around Washington this week concerned what candidate the White House would choose. This proposed Special Envoy to the OIC will be as one wonk opined “either weak or powerful” as the President wanted to make him. Among the ‘better’ names mentioned were:

Zhudi Jasser; moderate Muslim, former Naval officer, physician and columnist and president of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy;
Amir Taheri, Iranian born noted journalist, author and syndicated columnist;
Fouad Ajami , renowned Majid Khadduri Professor of Middle East studies at John Hopkins Washington, DC Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies, noted author and commentator;
Farid Ghadry, head of the Reform Party of Syria

The last time we saw Bush at the Washington Islamic Center was six years ago just after 9/11, when another tableau showed The President in the company of ‘suits’: Muslim professionals-doctors, dentists, community leaders, all espousing a doctrine of “Islam as the religion of peace”. The White House spinmeisters thought the Islamic Center photo-op would be viewed by newspaper readers as Muslims are really people like us. All this touchy feely stuff on display at the Washington Islamic Center, while 15 of the 9/11 perpetrators were Saudi nationals. Meanwhile, the White House secretly gave the ‘all clear’ to send large numbers of Saudi nationals home via chartered flights without so much as a bye your leave from the befuddled FBI. Some of these flights we now learn may have been chartered by Osama bin Laden to get kith and kin out of harm’s way.

So yes, this was hugger mugger week for Muslims in our Nation’s Capitol. Hugger mugger you say. What’s that? It’s the term you probably read as a child in those Beatrix Potter stories meaning disorderly clandestine confusion.

It was not the only event of Muslim hugger mugger this week. There was the exquisite timing of the release of a report by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs on being ‘sensitive’ to the needs of domestic Muslims. The Report was launched with great flourish at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars . The Chicago Council on Global Affairs report unveiled at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington had recommendations such as “sensitivity training for Homeland Security, military and the FBI”. Conspicuous by his presence at the unveiling of this report was Salam Al-Marayati, Executive Director of the Muslim Public Affairs Council. Al Marayati is your average terrorist supporter and Muslim fundamentalist. The President of the Wilson Center is none other than Lee Hamilton , former venerable foreign affairs expert in the U.S. House of Representatives before his retirement, vice-chair of the 9/11 Review Commission and co-chair of the Iraq Study Group with James Baker, III.

This was followed by a panel before Senator Lieberman’s Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee composed of Chicago Council on Global Affairs co-task force directors, former Secretary of Labor Lynn Martin and Ethan Allen, Inc. CEO, Farooq Kathwari, a Kashmiri Muslim.

Business Week in October 2001 profiled Kathwari. He spoke about the loss of his young ‘romantic’ son Ifran in Afghanistan in 1992. According to one report he was “believed to have joined with Jihadists (who were connected to either Jaish Mohammed or Lashkar e Taibar), and died while carrying out an attack in Afghanistan”. Then, there was Kathwari’s castigation of Nina Shea’s report on Saudi texts in American Mosques released by Freedom House in 2005, when he was on the board. Kathwari resigned in a huff about Shea’s analysis as being ‘untrue’ and ‘racist’. The directors at Freedom House scrambled to ask him to return and Shea decamped to the Washington office of the Hudson Institute.

How do troubled observers of this mating dance between official Washington and the Islamist both here and abroad view this development?

Here is a sample of what some of them said:

Steve Emerson in his National Review On line piece had this comment:

In his wrongheaded outreach to the OIC, the president aligns with those who think the West is responsible for Islamic terrorism. It was the fascist Muslim Brotherhood that gave birth to terrorist groups like al Qaeda and Hamas, and it is the absence of a reformation that keeps the Muslim world boiling and in regression.

Diana West in a Washington Times op-ed entitled “Dhimmification on the March” had this comment:

There Imam Bush goes again. I am astonished by President Bush when he claims there is nothing in the Qu’ran that justifies jihad violence in the name of Islam. Jailed Jihadi cleric Abu Qatada said under similar circumstances almost six years ago. “Is he some kind of Islamic scholar? Has he ever actually read the Qu’ran”?

No. He’s just leader of the Free World, a Free World that has become less free and more dhimmified on his severely myopic watch.

Then there’s this from moderate Moslem Zhudi Jasser, who was denied a slot on the U.S. International Religious Freedom Commission by domestic Islamists because of his heterodox non-Sharia views:

Mr. President… The words of encouragement and admonition to Muslim organizations to lead the charge against radicalism are too vague. The reality is that the priorities, ideologies, and minority politics of the current agenda of the Islamic organizations the administration has courted and which attended last Wednesday’s press conference are far from being on the right page in this conflict.

Walid Phares, noted Middle East authority on Jihad,had this comment in a Front Page symposium “Strategies of Death”:

There are still politicians and opinion-makers…who do not perceive the conflict as with Jihadism. Such a systemic error of analysis is having an impact on understanding the strategies of the Jihadists; actually it is helping the latter strategically.

What should anyone make of this sudden opening to Islamofascists by the Bush Administration? One thing is self evident, the appalling ignorance of core beliefs of Radical Islam including intolerance of ’the Other’. Basic civil and human liberties are what we cherish here in America. ‘The war with no name’ is the 21st Century War against Islamofascism. The Executive and Congressional leaderships are like the blind feeling the elephant in the room fearful of calling it what it is. Strange for me personally, I witnessed 9/11 in Manhattan six years ago and I knew instantly what it was: a War by Jihadis against us. Mired as we are in political correctness and tolerance, we are fearful of people who harbor primordial hatred of us. Where is the ghost of filmmaker Frank Capra, the Hollywood director, when we need someone like him? Capra put out those stirring “Why we Fight” propaganda films during WWII. Given what has occurred in Washington we need a Capra to tell this story before it is too late. Up to now few have done that effectively.

Let’s get to work to defeat them.



Sunday, July 15, 2007

Buzz This, Nahoul!

BEWARE THE IDES OF JULY!

I think Charles said he was almost ready to transfer everything to the new servers. (And if you think I know what I'm talking about...FOOLED YA!) NEW THREAD:

Wednesday, July 4, 2007

HAPPY BIRTHDAY, AMERICA !

I know, LGF is happily up and running...but...you know...
HAPPY BIRTHDAY, FREEDOM !

Tuesday, June 26, 2007

Tuesday Evening Open Thread:

YOU asked for it, YOU got it!

Help yrselves, Lizardoids!

/enjoy!

Saturday, June 23, 2007

The Antidote to Keith Olbermann?

Found somebody podcasting as Keith Oldermann, and he hits several nails on the head...

'Big deal' you say? Well, he spins Olbermann from an anti-American into a very clear-headed, America-loving sort...

But then, he IS Keith Oldermann!

Give him a FallBackLGF welcome!

Never heard of "Keith Olbermann"? Dig this: 1-900-REA-LITY

Wednesday, June 20, 2007

Magazine Publisher Stupidly Uses Inflated Propaganda Statistics as Basis for Business Model

On June 18, the San Francisco Chronicle ran an article about a new magazine called Muslim Girl. I wrote a letter-to-the-editor about the article, but -- needless to say -- the Chronicle didn't run it. But I think the letter raises some important points, so I'll post it here!

San Francisco Chronicle Editors --

In Joe Garafoli's article about Muslim Girl magazine is this passage:
Editors estimate that roughly 400,000 Muslim teenage girls live in the United States, part of the estimated 6 million to 8 million Muslims living in the country. The magazine's Toronto-based publisher, execuGo Media (some of the small editorial staff is in Chicago), believes much of its target market comes from affluent, well-educated families possessing untapped consumer spending power.
I find it totally pitiable and almost sad that execuGo Media could based its entire business plan on a statistic that is known to be propaganda.

Activist groups like CAIR have famously inflated their pronouncements as to the number of Muslims in the US, rising by a million practically every time they issue a new press release. Eventually, they reached the laughable plateau of "8 million."

Why are these advocacy groups padding the numbers like this? To exaggerate the importance of Muslim-Americans as a voting bloc, and to increase the perception of their political importance.

But everybody who's paying atention knows it's a lie.

In fact, the latest Pew Research Center poll -- the most trusted and accurate polling institution in the country -- shows that the actual number of Muslims in the United States is (brace yourself) only 2.35 million:
Based on data from this survey, along with available Census Bureau data on immigrants' nativity and nationality, the Pew Research Center estimates the total population of Muslims in the United States at 2.35 million.
The fraudlent statistics of "8 million Muslims" bandied about by groups like CAIR are not meant to be taken seriously by Muslims themselves -- the stats are intended purely as propaganda for lazy politicians to cite. (See this essay at the "Miss Kelly" blog for some good analysis.)

How tragic, then, how absolutely laughable that a publishing company like execuGo Media would not only swallow the inflated numbers hook line and sinker, but use them as the basis of an actual business plan. I can only shake my head in pity.

They should count themselves lucky to have even gotten 25,000 subscribers, much less their fantasy of 100,000.

A further look at the Pew data shows an ever grimmer picture for execuGo's bottom line:

Of the 2.35 million Muslims in the US, only 40% attend mosque, and only 60% pray every day, which means that approximately only half of US Muslims are "observant." Also, about half (according to the Pew poll) think that Muslims "should adopt American customs" and should assimilate as much as possible. Which means that only half of those 2.35 million would have any interest in an "identity politics" magazine like Muslim Girl.

Without boring you with the details, the Pew stats (and other official stats) show that a significant minority number of Muslims in the US are college students here with student visas -- almost all of whom are male. And amongst that half of observant Muslims, a certain percentage are extremely observant (i.e. fundamentalist), and would never allow their daughters to read anything even closely resembling Muslim Girl.

Which leaves us with only about 1 million non-assimilated, non-fundamentalist, non-single-male Muslims living in middle class familes in the US (execuGo's market group). In any family, there will be a mother and a father, and for simplicity's sake we'll just say an equal number of daughters and sons -- which would leave us with only 1/4 of a million, or 250,000 potential customers (Muslim daughters) for the magazine.

But wait! Not all of those daughters are teenagers. Some are babies, some are toddlers, some are grade-schoolers, and some are college students or even adults. Being generous, we could estimate that there are in fact only 100,000 teenage Muslim girls who even identify as religiously Muslim in the United States.

So, what execuGo is projecting, is that they would get a 100% total market saturation for their magazine -- 100,000 subscribers out of 100,000 grand total potential customers. Which of course is ludicrous.

They're living in a dream world! How could they possibly have been so misinformed as to believe the inflated propaganda population statistics and use them as the basis of an actual real-world business model?

Someone need to go back to Business 101.

And I think Mr. Garafoli's article would have more incisive and would have actually counted as "journalism" if he had pointed out any of this. Instead, all we're left with is another fact-free puff piece.

Tuesday, June 19, 2007

Bush’s Favorite Muslim Fanatic







When is a moderate Muslim not a moderate Muslim? How about if he is an employee of a Saudi Wahhabi organization that has been
identified by the Senate Finance Committee as one of a long list of Islamic charities that “finance terrorism and perpetuate violence”?

Last month, the White House appointed Talal Eid, an imam from Quincy, Massachusetts, to the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, a bipartisan panel that, according to the Boston Globe , “monitors religious freedom in countries around the world and recommends policies to the president, State Department, and Congress.” Eid is also participating in goodwill missions overseas for the State Department. Ishan Bagby, a University of Kentucky professor and member of the board of directors of the Islamic Society of North America, was pleased with the appointment : “It’s a very good sign that a mainstream, moderate Muslim leader like Imam Eid can be appointed to such a position.” Ibrahim Hooper of the Council on American Islamic Relations was pleased also, saying that Eid would bring “valuable perspective” to the Commission.




Eid was forced out of his position as imam of the Islamic Center of New England’s mosque in Quincy in July 2005, some said because he was too moderate. The Bush Administration has been determined since September 11, 2001 to find moderate Muslims with whom it could work and to whom it could show public support; unfortunately, however, in this quest it has sometimes been less discriminating than it should have been, and the case of Talal Eid is a prime example of this.




Talal Eid, reported the Globe in January 2007, “no longer has a mosque.” However, “he still has the original appointment from the Muslim World League, a theological and cultural entity in Saudi Arabia that certifies imams, that sent him to Boston in 1982.” The scrutiny from the Senate Finance Committee is just one of many things about the Muslim World League that should have raised red flags for the Administration when considering Eid’s appointment. Alex Alexiev of the Center for Security Policy told a U.S. Senate Subcommittee on Terrorism, Technology and Homeland Security in 2003 that “there is conclusive evidence from Saudi sources” that the League was “tightly controlled by the [Saudi] government.”


Given that the League’s stated purpose is to “to disseminate Islamic Dawah [proselytization] and expound the teachings of Islam,” this means that it is a vehicle for the propagation of the House of Saud’s Wahhabism, the virulent school of Islamic thought that teaches, in words that appeared on the website of the Saudi Embassy in Washington, D.C. until November 2003 , that “the Muslims are required to raise the banner of Jihad in order to make the Word of Allah supreme in this world, to remove all forms of injustice and oppression, and to defend the Muslims.” Waging jihad in order to make the Word of Allah supreme in this world means fighting against non-Muslims in order to impose Islamic law, Sharia, over them. Evgenii Novikov of The Jamestown Foundation notes, moreover, that the League’s publications are “often radical and vehemently anti-American.”




Nor has the Muslim World League contented itself with promoting jihad by words alone. A jihadist who played a part in an al-Qaeda cell in Boston before 9/11, Nabil al-Marabh, claimed to have worked for the League in Pakistan ; while this may have been his attempt to whitewash his record, also involved with the League in Pakistan was Mohammed Jamal Khalifa, Osama bin Laden’s brother-in-law and self-described “best friend,” who at another time worked to set up al-Qaeda front groups in the Philippines.




Does all this mean that Talal Eid is a jihadist and a supporter of Osama bin Laden? No, it doesn’t. But his connection to the Muslim World League is not the only troubling item on his resume. Eid has proposed “five solutions for the unique problems of Muslims in America,” including “the establishment of Sharî‘ah courts which would manage the family affairs of American Muslims and mediate their religious affairs within the scope of American law.”

A similar initiative to introduce Sharia courts for mediation of personal disputes and marriage cases into Canada was defeated in 2005; Muslim women’s groups spearheaded the opposition because of Sharia’s institutionalized subjugation of women. In the thick of the battle, Alia Hogben of the Canadian Council of Muslim Women declared : “We’ve had a flood of e-mails from people asking, ‘How can we help stop what is so dangerous to Muslim women?’” In introducing a motion to disallow Sharia in Quebec in 2005, legislator Fatima Houda-Pepin saw an even greater threat: “The application of Sharia in Canada is part of a strategy to isolate the Muslim community, so it will submit to an archaic vision of Islam. These demands are being pushed by groups in the minority that are using the Charter of Rights to attack the foundation of our democratic institutions.”




Will the U.S. now do what Canada drew back from doing, and introduce private Sharia courts, despite the harm they will cause Muslim women and the encouragement they will provide to establishing the Muslims in the U.S. as a separate, self-governing enclave? Apparently, if Talal Eid gets his way, yes. And that’s why he has no business being on the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom. The Bush Administration should reconsider this appointment, or at very least call upon Eid to renounce any desire to introduce Sharia in any form into U.S. law, as well as all ties to the Muslim World League. After all, George W. Bush said it best: You’re either with the terrorists or with us.


Source Link



SEE ALSO