Saturday, November 29, 2008
Mumbai photographer: I wish I'd had a gun, not a camera. Armed police would not fire back - World news, News - Belfasttelegraph.co.uk
Armed policemen refuse to fire back at terrorist? Sounds like too much sensitivity training or perhaps the are acting under some very strange rules of engagement. Perhaps they knew these are still only "suspected" gunmen and must convicted as such by a judge and jury before they would be allowed to shoot back.
Monday, November 24, 2008
There is debate on how effective a floating bomb would be.
While some analysts have said ships carrying crude oil or liquefied natural gas (LNG) could be captured and detonated, Storey noted that crude is not very flammable and LNG carriers are robustly constructed and include significant safety features.
Ships carrying ammonium nitrate are a bigger concern -- the fertilizer is highly explosive when mixed with fuel oil and was used in the Oklahoma City and Bali bombings.
When a fire detonated around 2,300 tons of ammonium nitrate aboard a vessel in Texas City's port in 1947, the blast caused a 5-meter tidal wave that swept through the town. At least 567 people were killed and more than 5,000 injured. Hundreds of homes were destroyed and two small planes were blown out of the sky.
Holy Land Foundation defendants guilty on all counts | News for Dallas, Texas | Dallas Morning News | Latest News
The Holy Land Foundation was found guilty of money laundering by funneling money to Hamas. C.A.I.R. was an indicted co conspirator in this case.
Sunday, November 23, 2008
SaneWorks.us - Society of Americans for National Existence , CAIR Sued by Former Clients for Racketeering, Fraud, & Breach of Fiduciary Duties
"November 24, 2008 – Washington, DC: Four clients of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) have filed a federal civil complaint alleging criminal fraud and racketeering against CAIR, a self-described public interest civil rights law firm. The lawsuit also names CAIR’s national leadership as individual defendants."
Looks like the chief apologist organization for Islamo-fascism is facing a civil action under R.I.C.O. laws in the U.S. This is a story worth following.
Friday, November 21, 2008
Well it is the religion of pedophiles after all.
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
It has always been a Muslim tradition to rob and loot caravans, after all that is how the Prophet Mohammad got his start, so seaborne piracy is just a logical extension. Al Qaeda has been promising something bigger than 9/11 and their number two man was critical of Barrak Obama for his apostasy. A great deal of ransom money has been extorted from ship owners and no doubt some pirate loot will be used to finance terror.
2 January 2009 is a good guess as any as a time for the next big one. The where should be somewhere around the Horn of Africa. Perhaps a radiological bomb contaminating some oil field in the Middle East would be another good guess.
Monday, November 17, 2008
TO: The Chair of the 2009 UN World Conference Against Racism
AND TO: The Chair of the Human Rights Council
AND TO: Louise Arbour -UN Commissioner for Human Rights
AND TO: UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon
We the undersigned hereby declare and state as follows by this Petition:
- 1. Freedom of speech, freedom of beliefs, respect for minorities, and separation of religion from government are the foundations of democracy. Shariah law undermines, seeks to limit, and weakens these foundations.
- 2. “Islamophobia” is defined as the defamation of Islam. Muslim nations seek to include on the agenda of the 2009 UN World Conference against Racism a discussion of “Islamophobia” as a form of racism and intolerance, and seek to find practical solutions to deal with this issue.
- 3. We submit that any discussion of “Islamophobia” and the defamation of Islam must also include a discussion as to the truth regarding statements made about Islam. In most jurisdictions around the world, truth is a defense to defamation. Similarly any discussion regarding defamation of Islam must also include a discussion of whether statements were made in good faith with a reasonable belief that they were true, whether they were opinion rather than a statement of fact, and if they were statements made with an honest belief in their truth as a matter of public interest. Again such enquiry is a defense against defamation in most jurisdictions.
- 4. “Kuffarphobia” is defined as the defamation and loathing of all things non-Islamic and of all non-Muslims. If the 2009 UN World Conference Against Racism includes on the agenda a discussion of “Islamophobia”, then it must also include a discussion of “Kuffarphobia”. The discussion regarding “Kuffarphobia” should also include the items mentioned in point #3 above.
- 5. Advocating or promoting genocide and the public incitement of hatred against any identifiable group by willfully promoting hatred should be outlawed. This not only applies to “Islamophobia” but also applies with respect to “Kuffarphobia”, and therefore both should be explored by the UN. It is our contention that it is “Kuffarphobia” that promotes and willfully incites hatred. Criticisms of Islam do not promote and willfully incite hatred but rather educate and enlighten others regarding the goals and aspirations of Shariah and a worldwide Caliphate which are incompatible with democratic principles.
- 6. Where free speech does not advocate or promote genocide and where free speech does not incite hatred by willfully promoting public incitement against an identifiable group, it should not be suppressed or diminished in any manner. Free speech is the cornerstone of any democracy, and it should be guarded and defended vigorously. However, all speech that incites others to kill or oppress others in the name of God or religion must be unequivocally condemned.
- 7. Kuffarism as disseminated by Islamists is a form of racism. Those who seek to establish a worldwide Caliphate by abolishing all non-Islamic culture and beliefs and imposing Shariah law above all other laws are guilty of racism and should be condemned. It is a contemporary manifestation of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance to permit the dissemination of an ideology that preaches its dominance over all others. An ideology that is intolerant of differing beliefs, that does not permit freedom of religion, and does not tolerate or accept as equal those individuals wishing to convert to a different religion is a manifestation of racism. Equally an ideology that does not adhere to the principles of dignity and equality inherent in all human beings is a racist ideology and should be condemned by the UN.
- 8. Furthermore an ideology that does not promote and encourage universal respect for the observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion is contrary to the very principles embodied in the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination adopted and ratified by the General Assembly of the UN, and should be condemned. Practical solutions to deal with this issue should be explored by the 2009 UN World Conference Against Racism.
- 9. Any statement, condemnation, action or otherwise concerning “Islamophobia” must A Priori include the same statement, condemnation, action or otherwise concerning “Kuffarphobia”. To do otherwise would not only be hypocritical, but would actually promote the very racism that is sought to be eliminated.
- 10. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights adopted and proclaimed by the UN General Assembly states in Article 18: “Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.”
The principles of Shariah, the doctrine of “Kuffarphobia”, and many of the teachings of Islam are contrary to this article, and this racism should be addressed by the 2009 UN World Conference Against Racism.
- 11. The International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination states that any doctrine of superiority based on racial differentiation is scientifically false, morally condemnable, socially unjust and dangerous and without justification. As many of the tenets of Shariah and Islam advocate a doctrine of superiority this should be addressed by the 2009 UN World Conference Against Racism as well. Such beliefs and tenets encourage and foster racism.
- 12. Certain individual rights are enshrined in the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. Among those rights are the rights to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. Also included are the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association. In light of these rights, the 2009 UN World Conference Against Racism should explore and examine the infringement of these rights with respect to the concepts of “Islamophobia” and “Kuffarphobia”. It is our submission that Shariah laws and “Kuffarphobia” contravene these enshrined principles and rights and therefore should be addressed by the Conference. It is also our submission that it is not Islamophobic to illuminate that Islam does not respect these rights and freedoms.
In conclusion, any discussion of “Islamophobia” must include a discussion of “Kuffarphobia”. Each must be analyzed as to whether any defamation exists in either concept. It is submitted that if there is truth and justification for such statements, then they are not defamatory. Exploring “Islamophobia” alone gives one a myopic view, as only half of the picture can be seen. Therefore if the 2009 Conference is to have any meaning, any rational, or any effect, then it must explore all aspects of both “Islamophobia” and “Kuffarphobia”.
Free speech should be a sacred and inalienable right. Any doctrine or ideology that purports to limit, infringe upon or diminish such a right should be condemned. Any ideology that uses intimidation and threats of violence against those exercising their free speech should also be condemned. It is our contention that “Kuffarphobia”, Shariah, and many of the tenets of Islam as an ideology are incompatible with the principle of free speech. As such they contravene the principles of the UN, and the UN should address this fact.
Where there is truth and justification and where there is no incitement to genocide or public incitement of hatred in a willful manner, then free speech should prevail. If one bans criticism of Islam, then one must ban criticism by Islam as well. Furthermore, it is our submission that criticisms and opinions should not be banned. Accordingly, the 2009 Conference should also deal with the issues of intimidation and violence against those who speak out against Islam and Shariah. It is the responsibility of the UN and all governments around the world to ensure that free speech is protected and those that use this right are protected from harm and intimidation. This too is enshrined in the UN Charter, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.
We the undersigned demand that the UN and all world governments stand for what is right, fair, and just. We demand that both “Islamophobia” and “Kuffarphobia” be examined according to the issues outlined in this petition.
Saturday, November 15, 2008
The Prince caused controversy within the Anglican church when he floated the idea several years ago of becoming Defender of the Faiths in an attempt to embrace the other religions in Britain.
In a compromise he has now opted for Defender of Faith which he hopes will unite the different strands of society, and their beliefs, at his Coronation"
Damion Thompson goes on to say "On the face of it, the loss of a definite article from a title carried by every English monarch since Henry VIII might seem a harmless gesture. It is nothing of the sort. The edited formula will cause tremendous harm, not least because “Defender of Faith” is too vague a phrase to interpret clearly.
“The Faith” in the original title is Christianity, originally Catholic, then Protestant; in recent decades it has been understood to mean Christianity in general. The Monarch’s title is a specific recognition of his or her responsibility to preserve the unique, sacred status of Christianity in our society. To be sure, its importance is symbolic, but there are few more powerful things than national symbols.
In contrast, what does “Faith” without a definite article mean? Sociologists are still unable, after 200 years, to agree on a definition of religion. The same goes for faith.
Prince Charles’s intention is to extend his symbolic protection to members of minority religions - Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism and Islam. Especially the latter, one suspects. How many times does the Prince have to be told that the pure form of Islam utterly rejects the notion of true religious diversity?
And where, Your Royal Highness, do we draw the boundaries of the “Faith” you defend? Is Scientology a proper faith? Is Spiritualism? Is the Church of Jesus Christ of Aryan Nations? How are you going to tiptoe through the theological and constitutional minefield created when unscrupulous, bizarre or extreme religions demand Royal protection - as they will?
It’s a shame to have to say this on the Prince’s birthday, but this whole idea has a whiff of vanity about it. It’s as if the heir to the throne is saying: “Britain is a multi-cultural society, so aren’t you lucky that I contain multitudes?”
As our report points out, this change to the Monarch’s title can be made only by rewriting the Royal Titles Act. Alas, we can have no confidence that Parliament will do its duty - that is, to refuse to enact a “subtle but hugely symbolic shift” in our nation’s constitutional identity. Nothing would give Labour, Liberal Democrat and trendy Tory MPs greater satisfaction than to delegitimise Christianity in this fashion.
Has the Archbishop of Canterbury sanctioned this plan? if so, shame on him. “Defender of Faith” sounds jolly grand; it trips off the tongue. But don’t be misled: it is the Royal equivalent of replacing the word “Christmas” with “Winterval”. Not for the first time, I find myself hoping that our Queen will live even longer than her mother, fortified by her undiluted Christian faith."
Thursday, November 13, 2008
"Lawsuit filed in defence of Marine vet’s anti-Islam decals. Ann Arbor, Nov 13, 2008 / 06:56 am (CNA).- A Marine veteran whose anti-terrorist and anti-Islam vehicle decals hindered him in visiting the grave of his fallen son at Arlington National Cemetery has filed a federal lawsuit challenging the military order which rebuked his display of the decals.
Jesse Nieto, a 25-year Marine veteran, served two combat tours in Vietnam. His youngest son, Marc, was one of the seventeen sailors killed in the terrorist bombing of the U.S.S. Cole in October of 2000"
This item comes from the Catholic News Agency. It proves that "military intelligence" is an oxymoron in this case.
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Click on Wolfgang Bruno for an essay on Taqiyya: the art of deception. Muslims understand some words to mean different things than to infidels. A few examples are quoted below.
- Peace: "Peace" in Islam equals submission to the will of Allah through his divine and eternal law, sharia, and the extension of the Dar al-Islam – or 'House of Islam' – to cover the entire world. The absence of sharia is the absence of peace. Since it is the will of Allah that Islam will rule the entire planet, entering non-Muslim lands to subjugate the population and wipe out their corrupt, infidel culture is not seen by Muslims as "waging war," but as spreading peace.
- Freedom: Hurriyya, freedom, means freeing all people from being slaves of the laws of men and making them live in perfect slavery, in submission to the will of Allah and his laws.
- Religious freedom: Subjugation of non-Muslims to religious apartheid and second class citizenship in their own country under Islamic rule. This option is only available to Christians and Jews, not Hindus, Buddhists or others, who have only the choice between embracing Islam or death. Muslims should practice sharia. Since these laws require the subjugation of non-Muslims, "freedom of religion" for Muslims essentially means the freedom to make others unfree.
- Jihad: Peaceful, inner struggle that has killed up to 80 million people in the Indian subcontinent alone, and enslaved or killed tens of millions, perhaps hundreds of millions of people on three continents for 1350 years. It can also be violent, but only for defensive purposes, such as the Muslims who defended their way from the Arabian Peninsula to the borders of China, wiping out the indigenous cultures along the way.
- Aggression: When non-Muslims do anything to preserve their culture and resist the Islamization of their country. Even when this "aggression" is non-violent, such as publishing a cartoon critical of Islam, this intolerable insult to Islamic supremacy on earth can be answered with violence by Muslims. Since a refusal to submit to sharia is a rebellion against Allah, the very existence of non-Muslim communities can be viewed as an act of aggression.
Sunday, November 9, 2008
- OSAMA bin Laden is planning an attack against the United States that will "outdo by far" September 11, an Arab newspaper in London has reported.
And according to a former senior Yemeni al-Qaeda operative, the terrorist organisation has entered a "positive phase", reinforcing specific training camps around the world that will lead the next "wave of action" against the West.
The warning, on the front page of an Arabic newspaper published in London, Al-Quds Al-Arabi - and widely reported in the major Italian papers - quotes a person described as being "very close to al-Qaeda" in Yemen.
The paper is edited by Abdel al-Bari Atwan, who is said to be the last journalist to interview Osama bin Laden in 1996. According to the report, bin Laden is himself closely following preparations for an attack against the US and aims to "change the face of world politics and economics". Jihad Watch
- On 2 January 1492, Granada was surrendered. In most sumptuous attire the royal procession moved from Santa Fe to a place a little more than a mile from Granada, where Ferdinand took up his position by the banks of the Genil. With the royal banners and the cross of Christ plainly visible on the red walls of the Alhambra: ...the Moorish king with about eighty or a hundred on horseback very well dressed went forth to kiss the hand of their Highnesses. The Moorish King and the Moors who were with him for their part could not disguise the sadness and pain they felt for the joy of the Christians, and certainly with much reason on account of their loss, for Granada is the most distinguished and chief thing in the world. Nation Master
- Battle of Zenta: (Sept. 11, 1697), decisive military victory of Austrian forces over an Ottoman army at Zenta (now Senta, Yugos.) on the Tisa River during a war (1683–99) between the Ottoman Empire and the Holy League (Austria–Poland–Venice–Russia), a victory that made Austria the foremost power in central Europe. Encyclopedia Britannica
Osama bin Laden decided upon 11 September as a date for attacking the United States for a reason. Something is up with al-Qaeda so a likely date will be 2 January, 2009 because Osama has a penchant for choosing anniversaries of famous battles where Islamists were soundly defeated by Christians.
Saturday, November 8, 2008
"November 8, 2008
Hate Muslims? Of course not
If you speak honestly and accurately about the Islamic jihad doctrine and the Islamic supremacist agenda, and even confine your case entirely to quotes from authoritative Islamic sources and spokesmen, you will still be accused of "hating Muslims." This is the constant refrain of apologists for jihad and their useful idiots in the West -- and they constantly have recourse to it because they know that it is effective: it turns the Left and much of the squishy Right away from the message of the "hater," regardless of how outlandish and unjust the charge is.
Myself, I don't hate Muslims. I love Muslims. Telling the truth is not an act of hate. I am not "Islamophobic," I am Islamorealistic. I tell the truth about Islam and work to defend Western civilization and society from the encroachments of a legal and societal system that oppresses Muslims and non-Muslims alike."
So here is an Islamorealistic thought: Barak Obama a.k.a. Barry Obama who attended an Islamic school as a child in Indonesia might have been considered a Muslim by some at the time. Now President-Elect Obama insists that he is a Christian, so if he is to be taken at his word that means he must be regarded as an Apostate from the Islamic faith. It is common knowledge that the Quran mandates death for apostasy so hopefully the Secret Service is aware of this.
It is not often that justice is meted out to the guilty but here is a rare example. Perhaps death by firing squad is too dignified, hanging would be more appropriate, but the result is the same.