Thursday, December 31, 2009

Americans Murdered by Jihadis in Afghanistan

Obama increases the number of troops to Afghanistan only to make sure they are prevented from actually winning. The new rules of engagement have tied the hands of our soldiers, making sure they can't kill the jihadis unless the jihadis shoot first. Incidents such as the latest murder of 8 Americans in Afghanistan will become more frequent. Our soldiers and civilians are sitting ducks.

Afghan suicide blast kills eight U.S. civilians

KABUL, Dec 30 -- Eight American civilians were killed in a suicide attack on a military base in Afghanistan's southeastern Khost province on Wednesday, U.S. officials said.

"We can confirm that there was an explosion in Khost province and eight Americans have been killed," a U.S. official in Kabul said on condition of anonymity.

No U.S. or NATO troops were injured in the blast at Forward Operating Base Chapman in Khost province, said a U.S. defense official who declined to be named.

Attacks in Afghanistan this year have spiralled to their highest levels since the Taliban were overthrown by U.S.-backed Afghan forces in late 2001.

Washington is sending 30,000 extra troops to Afghanistan in an attempt to stem the mounting violence, with NATO allies also contributing thousands more.

Civilian and military casualty tolls have reached record levels this year, with suicide attackers even targeting United Nations employees at a guesthouse in the heart of Kabul.

Khost, on the Pakistani border, is one of the areas of Afghanistan where the Taliban insurgency is strongest, and most foreigners there are troops or working under military protection.

In late September a suicide bomber rammed a car into a military convoy of foreign forces there, killing one American.

The Demise of Europe

A chilling article from Pamela Geller about how the Euro elites are actively facilitating a plan to replace European culture and even the ethnic cleansing of the continent's native population with the importation of 50 million African muslims. The Jews of course will be the first to suffer and had better leave ASAP.

Dooming Europe
By Pamela Geller

"The Europe as you know it from visiting, from your parents, or friends is on the verge of collapsing." Geert Wilders said this in a speech he made in the U.S. last year. He went on: "We are now witnessing profound changes that will forever alter Europe's destiny and might send the continent in what Ronald Reagan called 'a thousand years of darkness.'" This applies not just to Europe, but to America as well.

Been to Europe lately? Thought it was bad? You ain't seen nothing yet. The passage of the Lisbon Treaty, hailed by Barack Obama, nailed the coffin shut on national sovereignty in Europe. The people of Europe fought it, but they were overwhelmed by their political elites and the lack of American leadership in this age of our Marxist U.S. president.

Come January 1, 2010, a disastrous and suicidal pact called the Euro-Med Partnership (referring to Europe and the Mediterranean region) goes into effect with little fanfare or examination. It boggles the mind that such a consequential and seismic cultural shift could be mandated and put into play without so much as a murmur from the mainstream media.

Why should Americans care about this? The reason is that this global gobbledygook is coming to America, thanks to our globalist president.

The European human rights group called Stop the Islamisation of Europe (SIOE) has been working tirelessly to expose the mass Muslim immigration plan of the Euro-Med Partnership. A statement on the SIOE website criticizes the secrecy of the process: "It was shocking to hear about the plans and at the same time knowing that Danish politicians and a [cowardly] Danish press -- who is otherwise proud to be critical -- has told nothing to the Danish people about this project which begins already in January next year. This also showed clearly at the conference. Only very few politicians showed up and no media. Those politicians who showed up had obviously never heard about the Euro-Mediterranean project.

The goal of the Euro-Mediterranean cooperation is to create a new Greater European Union encompassing both Europe and North Africa, with the Mediterranean Sea becoming a domestic Eurabian sea. The goal is to establish a "comprehensive political partnership," including a "free trade area and economic integration"; "considerably more money for the partners" (that is, more European money flowing into North Africa); and "cultural partnership" -- that is, importation of Islamic culture into post-Christian Europe. According to the SIOE, in the Euro-Med plan, "Europe is to be islamized. Democracy, Christianity, European culture and Europeans are to be driven out of Europe. 50 million North Africans from Moslem countries are to be imported into the EU."
Continue reading

Breaking News

Rush Limbaugh has been hospitalized with chest pains while vacationing in Hawaii. His condition is serious. This will no doubt please the left. Let's pray for him to have a full recovery.

Wednesday, December 30, 2009

New Restrictions Won't Make Air Travel Safer

The authorities will issue all sorts of nonsensical measures that won't actually make air travel any safer and will unnecessarily inconvenience passengers rather than dealing with the real source of the problem, which of course is islam. Why don't they simply do profiling of muslims?

New Restrictions Quickly Added for Air Passengers

In the wake of the terrorism attempt Friday on a Northwest Airlines flight, federal officials on Saturday imposed new restrictions on travelers that could lengthen lines at airports and limit the ability of international passengers to move about an airplane.

The government was vague about the steps it was taking, saying that it wanted the security experience to be “unpredictable” and that passengers would not find the same measures at every airport — a prospect that may upset airlines and travelers alike.

But several airlines released detailed information about the restrictions, saying that passengers on international flights coming to the United States will apparently have to remain in their seats for the last hour of a flight without any personal items on their laps. It was not clear how often the rule would affect domestic flights.

Israel Needn't Answer to Obama

This president is a scoundrel. Our military forces are thousands of miles away fighting muslim jihadis but Israel is required to explain the reasons for an anti-terror operation against terrorists right next door? And after a Rabbi was murdered, no less. What is there to clarify?

Washington, not J’lem, needs to issue clarifications


The United States’ recent request for a public clarification from National Security Adviser Uzi Arad following the IDF’s killing of three wanted Al-Aksa Martyrs Brigades terrorists in Nablus is unusual and raises questions.

Arad’s reported need to explain to his US counterparts the defensive nature of the IDF operation several days after the Iranian-backed terror cell’s murder of Rabbi Meir Chai, a father of seven, seems exceptional. This IDF operation was no different than hundreds of other actions against Palestinian terror groups that have murdered well over 1,000 Israeli civilians since the Palestinian Authority launched the Aksa war of terror in 2000.

As a rule, the US has not asked Israel for public clarifications on antiterror operations. Clearly, close communications are important. There are multiple security and intelligence channels between Israel and its closest ally that have been and should be used to handle these types of security queries. The Israeli Embassy in Washington, the US Embassy in Tel Aviv, the US consulate in Jerusalem, military attaches and representatives of respective intelligence agencies are appropriate addresses.

But in this extraordinary case, the US demanded a public clarification on behalf of the PA. This clearly represents heightened US sensitivity to Palestinian protests over the IDF’s “unjust” incursion into Area A of Judea and Samaria/the West Bank, where the PA has overall security responsibility, to net the Fatah-associated terror cell that resulted in its elimination.
Continue reading

Tuesday, December 29, 2009

Israel Still Accused of Occupying Gaza

These anti-Israel zealots need to continue to perpetuate the fallacy that Israel still occupies Gaza in order to blame it for the horrible conditions caused by hamas. Hamas never has to be held accountable as long as their friends in the western media continue to cover for them and shift the blame towards Israel. So hamas can go on purposely keeping their people in misery knowing Israel will be blamed in the western press.

Who 'Occupies' Gaza?

An "expert" in international law, BBC bureau chief Jeremy Bowen, has concluded that Israel is still the legal occupier of Gaza, despite the 2005 disengagement. This statement is his own words:

But Israel, legally speaking, still has the responsibilities of an occupying power, even though it no longer has a permanent military presence in Gaza. These responsibilities include ensuring the welfare of the population, allowing the functioning of medical services, and maintaining respect for private property.

Anti-Semites Take to the Streets

While protesters in Iran are massacred, a genocide is occurring in Sudan and women and non-muslims throughout the islamic world are victims of horrific human rights atrocities, depraved leftists focus their ire at Israel for defending itself. The jihadis are able to succeed in the west because they are being aided and abetted by the left. See pictures and video of the protests.

School Promotes Islam

I'd sure like to know where are all the ACLU types who would certainly raise a ruckus if this were Christianity that was being promoted in a public school.

US: GA Middle School Promoting Islam~Pictures
December 23, 2009
By admin
While many of us are putting in every spare moment that we have trying to fight back against Islam taking over America, we have the Smitha Middle School of Marietta Georgia, actually promoting Islam to the students there. Here are some of the slides that are being shown. This is just outrageous.

Monday, December 28, 2009

Another Unverified Allegation Against Israel

Here's another unverified story published by an msm outlet for the purpose of demonizing Israel and evoking sympathy for the arabs of Gaza. This time a woman claims her dead son's body was used as target practice by Israeli soldiers during Operation Cast Lead.

Only it doesn't cause me to tear up in the least. I wouldn't care if the body was used as target practice. There's no doubt he was a terrorist anyway.

I'm tired of the "palestinians" claiming victimhood even as they vote in hamas and cheer them on as they wage war against Israel. And I'm even more sick of the western media's acquiescence in this charade of the "palestinians" as victims of Israel.

Impossible to Verify, But We'll Publish It Anyway

We can't verify this horrifying accusation, but we'll publish it anyway. That's the gist of this snippet by Daily Telegraph reporter Adrian Blomfield. He writes from Gaza:

But reliving her son's death a year later, there is another, more harrowing detail that preys on Mrs Awaja's mind. She says that as she hid behind a wall while her husband limped away to find help, Israeli soldiers used Ibrahim's corpse, which was lying in a road, as target practice.

"Each time the bullets would hit, his body leapt up off the road a little bit," she said. "It was as though he could still feel the pain even though he was already dead."

It is allegations such as these - almost impossible to verify - that have caused much damage to Israel's international reputation.

Sunday, December 27, 2009

This Week's Haveil Havalim

Edition #249 of the Jewish blog carnival Haveil Havalim is up at I'll Call Baila.

CAIR's Latest Attempt to Stifle Free Speech

This is such an inversion of reality. Far from there being an alarming level of anti-islam hate in this country, we are far too tolerant of islam to our own detriment. It is the muslims who are the biggest purveyors of hate.

CAIR’s One-way Attack on Free Speech
December 26, 2009

By Christopher Logan

Recently the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), had asked Obama to address what they call an “alarming level of anti-Islam hate” in the country. While it is true that the voices against Islam in America are on the rise, CAIR fails to mention that there is a very good reason that our voices are on the rise. What they fail to mention and condemn is what pro-Sharia Muslims are saying across America. You see CAIR is like Islam, a one-way street. Muslims can say whatever they want, but according to them we can only say what they approve of. Which is no criticism of Islam.

Here are some examples of what American Muslims are preaching across the country, with no condemnation by CAIR.

NY Muslims: Koran Says to Terrorize Them, so we Have to Prepare Weapons~Video

Flight 253

Why is it that Rep. Peter King as far as I know is the only member of Congress who dares to ask such a question as to why was a known terror suspect not placed on the no-fly list? If you can believe it, the reason he was not on the list is because his terrorist connections did not involve aviation threats! Here is yet the latest example of political correctness nearly causing another catastrophe because authorities failed to stop someone they knew was involved with terrorists. How many more terrorist attacks or attempted attacks will it take for us to wise up and place the safety of American citizens above avoiding offense to muslims? In fact I would go further and not allow muslims to board planes at all.

A Nigerian man's alleged attempt to ignite an incendiary device on Northwest Airlines Flight 253 as it approached Detroit from Amsterdam has caused airport security to be ramped up during peak holiday travel. The Obama White House has called the incident "an attempted act of terrorism."

While the official threat level has not been raised, "there will be things going on that you don't see and I don't see," Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.), the ranking member on the House Homeland Security Committee, told Politics Daily. U.S. law enforcement agencies "will also be in very close contact with our allies, with all our terrorist agencies operating at full throttle." King predicted "delays will probably be minimal. I think its going to be more surveillance, more watching. I would not expect significant delays."

Homeland Security Press Secretary Sara Kuban said "passengers may notice additional screening measures putting into place to ensure the safety of the traveling public on domestic and international flights."

King told Politics Daily the 23-year-old suspect, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, was not on a terrorist no fly list--but was on the U.S. database of suspected terrorists, King said. Though Abdulmutallab claims to have been acting on direct orders from al Qaeda, ties have not been confirmed and he may have been inspired by, rather than acting in concert with, that particular terror group.
Continue reading

Saturday, December 26, 2009

US Diplomat Car Tried to Run Over Checkpoint Guard in Israel

This incident symbolizes the obama adminstration's disrespect and outright contempt for Israel. You can be sure the US consolate would never dare pull such a stunt in a muslim country.

Israel: US Consulate car tried to run over checkpoint guard


A dispute is rumbling between Israel and the US Consulate in Jerusalem after a US diplomatic car allegedly tried running over a Defense Ministry security guard recently at an IDF checkpoint in the West Bank. The car had been stopped after the occupants refused to present identification papers.

Israel is also furious that one of the consulate cars was found to have transported a Palestinian without permits between Jerusalem and the West Bank.

The identification of American diplomats from the consulate at IDF checkpoints has been a major sticking point for several years.

In January 2008, the Civil Administration of Judea and Samaria filed complaints with the Foreign Ministry after both US Security Coordinator Lt.-Gen. Keith Dayton and then-consul-general Jacob Walles refused to roll down their windows or open their car doors and show identification papers at a checkpoint.

However, Israel’s ire reached a new level after an incident on November 13 in which a five-car convoy of consulate vehicles with diplomatic plates arrived at the Gilboa crossing.

According to a detailed official Israel Police description of the incident obtained exclusively by The Jerusalem Post, the drivers refused to identify themselves or open a window or door. The drivers, according to the report, purposely blocked the crossing, tried running over one of the Israeli security guards stationed there and made indecent gestures at female guards.

The entire incident was documented by cameras at the crossing.
Continue reading

Shalit Deal

Making this deal with hamas to release a massive number of terrorists for Gilad Shalit would make it more likely that other Israeli families would face the same plight in the future.

I believe that there probably is a way to rescue Shalit but the Israeli government won't risk it. This is a country that successfully rescued several hostages on another continent in 1976, but now they are unable to rescue a single soldier being held hostage next door? I don't believe it. I just think Israel has lost its will. At least the political leadership has.

The only other option would be to make the deal with hamas and then when Shalit is safely home, have the IDF target the terrorists released and the rest of hamas for that matter.

Editor's Notes: A nation held hostage
Dec. 24, 2009
Gilad Schalit has become our nation's child - and now the symbol, potentially, of either our heroic, vital humanity or of our essential, self-preserving clear-headedness

"Among the most important policies which must be adopted in the face of terrorism is the refusal to release convicted terrorists from prisons. This is a mistake that Israel, once the leader in anti-terror techniques, has made over and over again. Release of convicted terrorists before they have served their full sentences seems like an easy and tempting way of defusing blackmail situations in which innocent people may lose their lives. But its utility is momentary at best.

"Prisoner releases only embolden terrorists by giving them the feeling that even if they are caught their punishment will be brief. Worse, by leading terrorists to think such demands are likely to be met, they encourage precisely the kind of terrorist blackmail which they are supposed to defuse...

"In the case of a prolonged and sustained [terrorist] campaign lasting months or years, the natural disgust of the public with the terrorist's message begins to break down and is often replaced by a willingness to accommodate terrorist demands. By preparing terrorism-education campaigns... the government can inoculate the population against the impulse to give in when faced with protracted terrorist pressure...

"And once the terrorists know that virtually the entire population will stand behind the government's decision never to negotiate with them, the possibility of actually extracting political concessions will begin to look exceedingly remote to them...

"Terrorism has the unfortunate quality of expanding to fill the vacuum left to it by passivity or weakness. And it shrinks accordingly when confronted with resolute and decisive action. Terrorists may test this resolution a number of times before they draw back, and a government has to be prepared to sustain its anti-terror policies through shrill criticism, anxious calls to give in to terrorists' demands, and even responses of panic. But it is a certainty that there is no way to fight terrorism - other than to fight it."

- From the concluding chapter of the 1995 book "Fighting Terrorism," by Binyamin Netanyahu.

RE-READING THE above argument amid the current national anguish over the Gilad Schalit prisoner exchange, one is struck by the dispassion of its tone.

Netanyahu is right, of course. He was then and he is now. Giving in to terrorism only emboldens it. And Israel has been giving in, more and more disproportionately, further emboldening terrorism, for years.
Continue reading

Friday, December 25, 2009

Obama Grants Interpol Immunity From American Law

Obama is whittling away our nation's sovereignty. He has quietly signed an executive order granting interpol immunity from American law. Where are all of the liberals who wrongly accused president Bush of violating the constitution with the Patriot Act and wiretapping and who are so concerned about the treatment of our terrorist enemies at Gitmo, demanding they be given constitutional rights? Why are they not up in arms over this real and blatant violation of the constitution by Obama? Where is Olbermann and the other malcontents over at MSNBC? In fact this story is nowhere to be found in the msm.

While we pre-occupy ourselves with shopping and watching football, we are losing our country, or I should say our country is being taken from us by the powers that be. Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty and we have not been vigilant.

Why Does Interpol Need Immunity from American Law?
Andy McCarthy

You just can't make up how brazen this crowd is. One week ago, President Obama quietly signed an executive order that makes an international police force immune from the restraints of American law....
On Wednesday, however, for no apparent reason, President Obama issued an executive order removing the Reagan limitations. That is, Interpol's property and assets are no longer subject to search and confiscation, and its archives are now considered inviolable. This international police force (whose U.S. headquarters is in the Justice Department in Washington) will be unrestrained by the U.S. Constitution and American law while it operates in the United States and affects both Americans and American interests outside the United States.
Interpol works closely with international tribunals (such as the International Criminal Court — which the United States has refused to join because of its sovereignty surrendering provisions, though top Obama officials want us in it). It also works closely with foreign courts and law-enforcement authorities (such as those in Europe that are investigating former Bush administration officials for purported war crimes — i.e., for actions taken in America's defense)....

Thursday, December 24, 2009

The Saudi Connection to J Street

How ironic that pernicious saudi lobbyists and registered foreign agents in America speak so often about the supposedly omnipotent Israel lobby and accuse Israel's supporters of the dual citizenship charge even as these same saudi lobbyists work against American interests.

It is obvious that J Street is just another saudi lobbying group but in this case attempting to masquerade itself as "pro-Israel". The thing is, real supporters of Israel aren't fooled.

The Saudis Take a Stroll on J Street

Posted By Lenny Ben-David On December 23, 2009 @ 12:00 am In . Column2 02, Israel, Uncategorized | 3 Comments

Talk about a tough sale. Imagine being Saudi Arabia’s public relations firm in the United States in the months after the 9/11 attacks, which were perpetrated by 19 terrorists, 15 of whom were Saudi nationals. Shilling for a tarnished Saudi Arabia was the daunting task that faced Qorvis [1], a Washington-based PR company. The $14 million contract surely compensated.

In their 2002 contract, Qorvis promised to [2] “draft and/or distribute talking points, press releases, fact sheets, and op-ed pieces in order to promote the [Saudi] Kingdom, its commitment to the war against terrorism, peace in the Middle East, and other issues pertinent to the Kingdom.”

Soon thereafter, a new organization appeared on the American scene, the “Alliance of Peace and Justice in the Middle East.” In April 2002, the organization ran radio spots [3] on dozens of stations across the U.S. extolling the Arab Peace Initiative proposed by then-Crown Prince Abdullah and attacking Israel’s settlements.

According to one ad: “The [Saudis’] fair plan [would] end the senseless violence in the Mideast.” The plan involved Israel’s “withdrawal from the Palestinian land it has unjustly occupied for years. … There will be no more midnight raids and random searches, no more violence.” “Start the peace — end the occupation” is the phrase that ends the ads. It is followed by the words “paid for by the Alliance of Peace and Justice.”

Who was behind the alliance? One American Jewish activist tracked them back to a Virginia address, which just happened to be the offices of Qorvis.

Eight months later, in documents submitted to the U.S. Justice Department’s Foreign Agents Registration Office (FARA), Qorvis began to fess up. They listed receipt of $679,000 from the Alliance of Peace and Justice for “payment for radio, television, and print ads.”

In a tiny footnote, Qorvis added this classic piece of obfuscation:

Registrant [Qorvis] assisted in the preparation and placement of certain advertisements to promote the Saudi Middle East peace plan that were prepared by the Alliance for Peace and Justice, an American organization concerned about the Middle East peace process. The Alliance paid Qorvis for work on the advertisements. At the time of these payments, the Alliance was funded by a bridge loan from the Embassy of Saudi Arabia. The Alliance received its permanent funding from the Council of Saudi Chambers of Commerce and Industry, through its Committee for the Development of International Trade and the Alliance repaid the loan to the Embassy. The Council, including the Committee, is based in Saudi Arabia, with its principal offices in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. The advertisements prepared by [2] the Alliance for the Council were filed with the Department of Justice on April 29, 2002.

When he was confronted by reporters in 2002, Qorvis CEO Michael Petruzzello told them that [4] the financial backers of the “alliance” included the Arab American Institute (AAI), the U.S.-Saudi Arabian Business Council, and the Arab-American Anti-Discrimination Committee.

In December 2004, the other shoe dropped when the FBI raided several Qorvis offices as part of FARA compliance investigations. A grand jury was convened, but details of their findings were never made public.

Fort Hood Jihadist Plays Victim Card

The slimy lawyer for Fort Hood jihadist nidal hasan plans to file a motion claiming his client's rights are being violated. We won't be defeated by external forces, a foreign military can never defeat us. But we will be defeated from within by political correctness and traitors like the vermin who defend the likes of hasan. Do these lawyers taking these terrorist cases not understand that although the jihadis will gladly use them and our system for their own ends, they still regard John Galligan and his ilk as the infidel enemy? Do they think because they take their side that they will be spared? These lawyers and leftists are the reason police can't raid the jihadi camps and arrest their members lest they be accused of racial profiling and violating their civil rights. What rights would be violated? The right to wage war against us? Apparently to defend our nation and way of life would be considered offensive to muslims.

The lead defense attorney for accused Fort Hood shooter Maj. Malik Nidal Hasan says he will file a motion complaining his client’s civil rights are being violated.

Belton attorney John Galligan told News Channel 25 via phone the restrictions the military has put on his client while he’s confined to his room at Brooke Army Medical Center in San Antonio are illegal.

Hasan is restricted to speaking English only, and the only visitors he can have are his immediate family, and his legal counsel. “But his attorneys and his family can’t be in the room with him at the same time,” Galligan complained.

Galligan was upset that his client was praying on the phone with his brother Friday in Arabic when he said the military interrupted the call.

Wednesday, December 23, 2009

Jihad Training Camps on American Soil

The islamic terror group jamaat ul fuqra is being allowed to conduct paramilitary training at camps around America and the authorities won't touch it.

The left is to blame for the rise of islamic jihadists here and throughout the west. In the first place, for their support of unlimited immigration, multiculturalism and political correctness which renders certain minority groups exempt from criticism. Then there is the left's opposition to profiling when we know that the terrorism is coming from muslims. Authorities also can't investigate mosques, madrassas and other islamic institutions for fear of being accused of bigotry. Then of course there is the whitewashing of islam in schools. Students in public schools and colleges are being taught a false history of islamic peacefulness and tolerance. Then we have the manner of catering to islamic demands like foot baths, taking out time for prayer during the workday, muslim cab drivers refusing to take passengers carrying alcohol and muslim workers in stores like Target saying they can't touch pork and the stores having to comply for fear of being sued for discrimination. These and many other things which have resulted in muslims gaining power are indeed the fault of leftists. The left is collaborating in every way possible with the muslim jihadis as they wage war on America and the west, whether it be through violence or cultural jihad. The left is every bit as dangerous an enemy as the islamic jihadis.

- Northeast Intelligence Network - -

Terrorists in our midst
Posted By Director On December 18, 2009 @ 6:00 am

“Nearly four years after our initial investigative report about a domestic terrorist group was made public, we can provide readers the first in a series of exclusive comprehensive updates about Jamaat ul Fuqra’s presence and activities in the U.S. and Canada. While much has been written about this terrorist group and their ‘training compounds,’ the cold, hard facts are far more disturbing than the Internet folklore they attract.”

By Douglas J, Hagmann

Editors’ note: This is the first installment of updated information a combined investigation between Douglas J. Hagmann, director of the Northeast Intelligence Network and Judi McLeod, founding editor of Canada Free Press.

18 December 2009: Readers of Canada Free Press and the Northeast East Intelligence Network will recall our initial report published in February 2006 about Jamaat ul Fuqra, an Islamic terrorist group operating under the guise of legitimacy by adopting benign sounding identities such as the International Quranic Open University and the Muslims of the Americas. The reality is that Jamaat ul Fuqra is a fully operational Islamic terrorist organization firmly embedded throughout the U.S. and Canada and led by top Pakistani terror leader Shiek Mubarek Ali Gilani of Lahore, Pakistan. Gilani is most well known for his role in the death of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl, a claim denied by Gilani and the subject of an ongoing dispute among terrorism investigators.

Federal investigators confirmed that Jamat ul Fuqra members have been responsible for at least a dozen murders, 17 bombings and fire bombings, and several assassinations and attempted assassinations. The perpetrators of those terrorist acts received their paramilitary training at the Islamberg compound in New York State. In the weeks preceding the 9/11 attacks, nearby residents to the Islamic compound witnessed male residents of the compound, dressed in military type fatigues, running in military style formation on the rural road adjacent to the Muslim owned property. Other residents heard the sounds of gunfire and small explosions coming from the depths of the expansive property.

In our 2006 report, the public was informed of specific activities of this terrorist organization that were taking place on our own soil. Such activities included paramilitary training such as live-fire weapons training, using an elementary school bus as a practice target for weapons and bomb training, repelling, and various forms of urban assault training. It is critically important to understand that our report was a product of a lengthy investigation performed by skilled, veteran investigators with years of field experience in covert surveillance and investigative techniques.

To state that the publication of our investigative findings in 2006 report caused a stir domestically and even internationally would be quite an understatement. Our report was met by a scathing, if not delusional and inherently threatening response by Gilani himself, who claims that our report was the product of a Zionist conspiracy to fuel a holy war by Jews and Christians against Muslims. The report, printed and shown to Jamaat ul Fuqra leaders, called the report a product of “Kosher kids,” and obviously denied every aspect of the report.

Unsurprisingly, our report was also met with skepticism by media pundits and Internet Bloggers who described as “ridiculous” that such Islamic paramilitary training compounds could be permitted to exist in North America. Others felt that if such activity was indeed occurring on American or U.S. soil, authorities would most certainly take the necessary action to protect its citizens. Despite all such skepticism, our report was cited by the Regional Organized Crime Information Center (ROCIC) and gained the attention of several state and federal law enforcement officials in three countries. Additional citations have been included in such reputable law enforcement publications such as The Counter-Terrorist, and have been included in a number of books on Islamic terrorism. Interestingly and somewhat telling to those who understand the nature of law enforcement and government matters, many of the facts taken from our initial report remain classified as “confidential,” “law enforcement sensitive,” and in one case on a federal level, even “classified.”

Five weeks after the issuance of our report, U.S. law enforcement officials personally visited this investigator, stating that an informant admitted Gilani sent instructions to each of the compound leaders in North America, providing specific advice on the methods to use to counter the growing attention to the published report. That international communication also contained my personal information and professional identity, with instructions to prevent any further investigation into their organization. While sympathetic, they said they were powerless to do anything proactive. To add insult to potential injury, they also stated that there were no plans to open an investigation into this organization, a decision that was reportedly made by government officials “at a much higher pay grade.” It was a conversation that I remember well, but not unexpected or surprising based on my previous experience with federal officials.
Continue reading

FGM in the UK

The horrific islamic practice of female genital mutilation is being imported into the west. Cutters are being flown to England for clitorectomies. Those carrying out this vile abuse should be sent to prison for life. There needs to be zero tolerance in the west for FGM. Unfortunately however, no one is being prosecuted in the UK. It's obvious the British authorities fear confrontation with the muslim community. What is it exactly about muslim "men" that makes them so fearful of female sexuality? Perhaps this practice would end if the tables were turned on them.

UK fails to halt female genital mutilation The Independent
Girls are still at risk this Christmas as 'cutters' are flown in from abroad to perform the illegal procedure here

Hundreds of British schoolgirls are facing the terrifying prospect of female genital mutilation (FGM) over the Christmas holidays as experts warn the practice continues to flourish across the country. Parents typically take their daughters back to their country of origin for FGM during school holidays, but The Independent on Sunday has been told that "cutters" are being flown to the UK to carry out the mutilation at "parties" involving up to 20 girls to save money.

The police face growing criticism for failing to prosecute a single person for carrying out FGM in 25 years; new legislation from 2003 which prohibits taking a girl overseas for FGM has also failed to secure a conviction.

Experts say the lack of convictions, combined with the Government's failure to invest enough money in education and prevention strategies, mean the practice continues to thrive. Knowledge of the health risks and of the legislation remains patchy among practising communities, while beliefs about the supposed benefits for girls remain firm, according to research by the Foundation for Women's Health, Research and Development (Forward).

As a result, specialist doctors and midwives are struggling to cope with increasing numbers of women suffering from long-term health problems, including complications during pregnancy and childbirth.

Campaigners are urging ministers to take co-ordinated steps to work with communities here and overseas to change deep-seated cultural attitudes and stamp out this extreme form of violence against women.

The author and life peer Ruth Rendell, who has campaigned against FGM for 10 years, said: "When I helped take the Bill through Parliament seven years ago, I was very hopeful that we'd get convictions and that would then act as a deterrent for other people. But that has never happened and my heart bleeds for these girls. This mutilation is forever; nothing can be done to restore the clitoris, and that is just very sad for them. I have repeatedly asked questions of ministers from all departments about why there has never been a prosecution and why we still do not have a register of cases. But while they are always very sympathetic, nothing ever seems to get done. Teachers must not be squeamish and must talk to their girls so we can try and prevent it from happening."

FGM is classified into four types, of varying severity; type 3 is the most mutilating and involves total removal of the clitoris, labia and a narrowing of the whole vagina.

An estimated 70,000 women living in the UK have undergone FGM, and 20,000 girls remain at risk, according to Forward. The practice is common in 28 African countries, including Somalia, Sudan and Nigeria, as well as some Middle Eastern and Asian countries such as Malaysia and Yemen. It is generally considered to be an essential rite of passage to suppress sexual pleasure, preserve girls' purity and cleanliness, and is necessary for marriage in many communities even now. It has no religious significance.

The most common age for the procedure is between eight and 11 but it can be carried out just after birth or just before marriage. It carries the risk of death from bleeding or tetanus, and long-term problems include urinary incontinence, recurrent infections and chronic pain. Reversal procedures are necessary in order to avoid major problems for a woman and baby during childbirth.

In the UK, some women have to travel hundreds of miles to one of 15 specialist clinics because services and training are so patchy. There are no specialist clinics at all in Scotland, or Wales, and student doctors, midwives and social workers are not routinely taught to recognise or deal with FGM.

A DVD, paid for by Baroness Rendell, which shows health workers how to reverse FGM will be launched in January. She hopes the next generation of health professionals will be better equipped to help affected women, many of whom suffer from long-term psychological effects such as flashbacks, anxiety and nightmares.

Amina, 55, originally from Somalia, underwent type 3 FGM, with no anaesthetic, when she was 11. One of the lucky ones, she suffered no long-term physical health problems but still carries psychological scars.

She has been vilified by practising communities for campaigning against FGM and for refusing to allow four of her daughters to be mutilated; the fifth suffered the procedure while in the care of her grandmother. The government funding that allowed Amina to work with families in Yorkshire, going door to door, to schools and community centres, talking about legal and health risks, ran out in March.

The Somali model Waris Dirie was mutilated at the age of five. She set up the Waris Dirie Foundation in 2002 to help eradicate FGM. She said: "I am worried about the situation in Europe and the US, as FGM seems to be on the rise in these places. In the 21st century, a crime this cruel should not be accepted in a society as developed as England. No one can undo the trauma that is caused by this horrible crime; it stays in your head for ever. So what we should focus on is that there won't be another victim."

Jackie Mathers, a nurse from the Bristol Safeguarding Children Board, said: "These families do not do this out of spite or hatred; they believe this will give their daughters the best opportunities in life. We would like a conviction, not against the parents, but against a cutter, someone who makes a living from this. We have anecdotal information that the credit crunch means people can't go home, so they're getting cutters over for 'FGM parties'.

Democrat Thugs Betray America

The Democratic party proves once again that it is a force for fascism and tyranny. Harry Reid slipped a provision into the disastrous health care bill which would make it permanent, whereby it would be impossible to change it in the future. This bill is unconstitutional and there are lawyers who plan to take it to the Supreme Court.

In a related note, US rep. from Alabama, Parker Griffith has had enough of the Democratic party shenanigans and is switching to the GOP. Like so many other Americans, he feels the democrats do not represent traditional American values and are taking this country in a socialistic direction.

Tuesday, December 22, 2009

Abbas and Obama

Abbas dangles this bait because he understands what a weak, egotistical narcissist Obama is. A man who craves adoration and aggrandizement will easily throw Israel under the bus and pressure it to make dangerous concessions in order to make it look like he has achieved a peace deal. This is what is most frightening about Obama.

The Region: The 'no war, no peace' option
Dec. 20, 2009
We now have Mahmoud Abbas's answer regarding short-term Palestinian Authority strategy. He says that if Israel stops all construction now - in east Jerusalem and the 3,000 apartments being completed - and accepts in advance the 1967 borders, there will be peace within six months. This is the basic story we've been hearing since around 1988: One or more Israeli concessions and everyone will live happily ever after.

This is clearly bait being dangled for President Barack Obama, offering him an "easy" way out of his dilemma of not having any peace talks after almost a year in office: Pressure Israel to give up more and you will look good, with plenty of photo opportunities of you presiding over Israel-PA talks.
Continue reading

Monday, December 21, 2009

The Futility of the Peace Process

I’m so tired of hearing these windbags who the media passes off as “experts” on the Middle East. All you get is the same old same old tripe about what Israel and America have been doing wrong and what they need to do to make things right and bring about peace. It still hasn’t seeped into their thick skulls that neither America nor Israel can bring about peace since the muslims don't want it. There is no peace to be had with the muslim world. The very existence of Israel is an affront to them. And Iran won’t be pressured or negotiated into giving up nuclear weapons. Iran must be physically prevented from gaining nuclear weapons.

Haaretz has asked three experts formerly involved in the Israeli-U.S. and the Israeli-Arab peace process to analyze the United States' policy in the Middle East, assess its relations with Israel and sketch possible lines for a future plan. The three participated this week in the third annual "Security Challenges of the 21st Century" conference at the Institute for National Security Studies at Tel Aviv University.

Dr. Martin Indyk, an adviser to U.S. President Barack Obama, headed the Middle East department at the National Security Council and served as ambassador to Israel during the Clinton administration. Professor Itamar Rabinowitz was Israel's ambassador to the United States and headed the team that held talks with Syria from 1993-96. Dr. Oded Eran heads the INSS and has served as deputy ambassador to the United States and Israel's ambassador to Jordan and the European Union, as well as the head of the Israeli team that held negotiations with the Palestine Liberation Organization during Ehud Barak's first term as prime minister.

When asked why the Israelis don't like Obama, Indyk replies: "The fact that he went to Cairo, Riyadh and Ankara but didn't come to Jerusalem just reinforced that emotional sense [for] Israelis that 'he doesn't love us' like Clinton and Bush did. Israelis got the impression that he wanted to distance the United States from Israel in order to [find] favor with the Arab and Muslim world. Israelis began to feel like the abandoned wife, as the husband went chasing after the other woman. When Israelis are looking at taking calculated risks for peace, they need to know that the president of the United States is going to be in their corner. Obama should invite Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu back to the White House, rather than Netanyahu asking for an invitation. He should put his arm around Netanyahu and say 'Let's start again. But I need to hear from you what it is that you are actually willing to do to achieve a Palestinian state which you now say is your objective."
Continue reading

Netanyahu Should Make no Concessions

The Mideast Peace Deal You Haven't Heard About

by Steven J. Rosen
December 18, 2009

For a year or two at an early stage in his career, I commuted to and from our adjacent offices each morning and evening with Martin Indyk, later a top peace-process official of the Clinton administration at the Camp David negotiations and now vice president for foreign policy at the Brookings Institution. I had just left the Rand Corporation to work at AIPAC, the main pro-Israel lobbying organization in Washington.

Even in those pre-Oslo days of 1982 to 1983, Martin was a True Believer in the idea of a grand land-for-peace bargain between Israel and moderate Palestinians. Reviewing each day the latest installments in the Middle East epic as we rolled down Rock Creek Parkway, we argued all the way. I heaped scorn on any solution that required Israel to trust Palestinian intentions, and I held that Israel's security could only be based on a qualitative military edge and the balance of power. I told Martin that he and our mutual friends Dennis Ross, Aaron Miller, and Dan Kurtzer, though with the noblest of intentions, were pursuing an illusion.

Martin emphatically thought I was wrong about the Middle East, and he also thought I was blind to an enduring reality in Washington. He said that Democratic and Republican administrations of the left and right may come and go, and some presidents will have less confidence in Middle East peacemaking than others, but no U.S. president will be able to sustain a policy of benign neglect of the peace process for long. The American people, the United States' European allies, and U.S. friends in the Arab world all need to have a ray of hope. They need to believe that active diplomacy under U.S. leadership is bringing closer a resolution of the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians, because it is a conflict that roils other American interests and destabilizes U.S. relations in the region and throughout the world. Martin often cited our friend, the late Peter Rodman, who taught us that U.S. policy in the Middle East is a bicycle. You can keep your balance if you roll forward even at a snail's pace, but if you try to stand still you will fall off.

Martin never did succeed in converting me to the peace camp, but over time I saw the undeniable evidence that he was right about the imperatives of U.S. foreign policy. Sooner or later, every president turns to the peace process, and the Mideast advisors who move to the president's inner circle are the ones he thinks have the best ideas about how to move forward toward a contractual peace between Israelis and Palestinians.

I think Benjamin Netanyahu has gone through a personal evolution a little like my own. He continues to be profoundly skeptical that signing a piece of paper can put an end to this conflict. He is a fierce advocate of defensible borders and military strength as the true guarantors of Israel's security. Nevertheless, he has come back to a second term as prime minister with a deeper appreciation of the reality that his relations with the United States, Europe, and moderate Arab neighbors depend on the perception that he can be a partner in the search for diplomatic progress with the Palestinians. And he certainly knows that many harbor doubts about him.

That is why Bibi agreed to do something unprecedented, something that six previous Israeli prime ministers since the 1993 Oslo Accords (Rabin, Peres, Barak, Sharon, Olmert, and Netanyahu himself in his previous term) refused to do. Very much against the will of his party and coalition, Netanyahu consented to putting a freeze on "natural growth" of settlements. He has drastically curtailed the volume of construction starts, even in the "consensus" settlement blocs that he believes were conceded to Ariel Sharon by George W. Bush.

Now, below the radar, Netanyahu is making a series of additional concessions to Barack Obama and his Mideast peace envoy, George Mitchell. Their current priority is negotiating "terms of reference" to permit the resumption of Israeli-Palestinian negotiations (TORs in negotiators' vernacular). Dismissed by some as mere "talking about talking," TORs are in fact vital elements to create the parameters for serious negotiations. For example, then-Secretary of State James Baker shuttled around the region for eight months to negotiate the TORs that made the 1991 Madrid conference possible. All that was done just to phrase a letter of invitation that all sides could accept. The result was far from trivial; it was a framework that opened the way to all the direct negotiations that followed over the ensuing two decades.

Mitchell's challenge today is to define such a framework that can bridge differences between Netanyahu and his Palestinian counterpart, Mahmoud Abbas. Defying skeptics who say you can bridge a river but not an ocean, Mitchell keeps going at it, and his perseverance is paying off. While no one was watching, Netanyahu has in fact agreed to language that Mitchell can accept. With the Israeli agreement in his pocket, Mitchell is now working to bring Abbas around, according to sources close to the discussions.

The issues are not small. Abbas wants to enshrine the 1967 boundary as sacrosanct, even though that line was merely a military demarcation after the war that ended in 1949 and had never been recognized by the Palestinians or anyone else as a legal border. Reflecting the Israeli consensus, Netanyahu insists that future agreed frontiers have to meet Israel's security imperatives and reflect post-1967 demographic realities, whether or not they diverge from the former armistice line. But Netanyahu has accepted a solution based on Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's formulation: "an outcome which ends the conflict and reconciles the Palestinian goal of an independent and viable state based on the 1967 lines, with agreed swaps, and the Israeli goal of a Jewish state with secure and recognized borders that reflect subsequent developments and meet Israeli security requirements."

Abbas wants Israeli territorial concessions in Jerusalem as a precondition for negotiations. Netanyahu has accepted that the Palestinians will bring their claims for Jerusalem to the table, but he is not going to make this or any other concession just to bring Abbas to negotiate. Mitchell's TORs will include implementation of all existing agreements between the parties, as well as the 2003 "Roadmap" for a two-state solution. These already define Jerusalem as a subject for discussion.

Abbas wants an absolute two-year deadline for the achievement of a permanent agreement. Netanyahu is accepting target dates for agreements, but he does not believe achievement can be guaranteed. Mitchell has the language he needs for the TORs regarding target dates.

Abbas wants language that obliges Israel to repatriate and compensate descendents of Palestinians who lost their homes in the upheavals before 1949. Netanyahu has agreed to participate in multilateral solutions for this "refugee" problem, provided these solutions do not include an obligation that will dilute Israel's own Jewish majority. Mitchell will point out that a solution to the refugee question is already incorporated in the documents to which the TORs will refer.
The arabs are exclusively responsible for these refugees, end of story. Israel is under no obligation to repatriate and compensate them. The “upheavals” referred to were the multiple arab countries which attacked Israel and on top of that ordered arabs to leave in their belief that they would wipe out the Jews and annihilate Israel from its inception. And these same arab states purposely have left them as stateless refugees for all of these decades instead of absorbing them into their own countries in order to be used as a weapon against Israel.

Every other refugee population in the world was resettled. Also the UN has a seperate organization which administers to “palestinian” refugees instead of simply using the one which takes care of the rest of the world’s refugees. Why do you think that is? It is quite obvious that the UNRWA exists for the sole purpose of keeping these people as perpetual refugees to be used as pawns against Israel. Why are people so gullible as to fall for the ploy that pro-palestinian activists around the world actually care about their plight?

Americans and Israel

The moral clarity which characterizes Americans makes us stand apart from the rest of the world. Our uniqueness is what makes us great and something we should be proud of, yet Obama and the liberals instead see our being different from the rest of the world as proof that something is wrong with US and something to be ashamed of. Therefore they want to change us into being like every other country. They do not believe in American exceptionalism. Liberals believe that if the rest of the world feels one way about a particular issue and Americans see it differently, then we must be in the wrong because how can the overwhelming majority be the ones wrong, according to them. This is most especially true with regard to the Middle East. But I say that in fact we are the ones who are right and everyone else is wrong, as hard as that is for liberals to grasp.

Why are Americans so Pro-Israel?
by Jeff Jacoby

Four reasons that put Americans sharply at odds with the rest of the world.

Why are Americans so pro-Israel?

Of all the ways in which the United States marches to the beat of its own drummer, few are more striking than the American people's consistent and deep-rooted support for the Jewish state. In a recent nationwide survey, the Gallup organization asked Americans: "In the Middle East situation, are your sympathies more with the Israelis or more with the Palestinians?" For the fourth year in a row, 59 percent -- nearly 6 in 10 -- said their sympathies were with Israel, while just 18 percent sided with the Palestinians. When respondents were asked for their opinion of various countries, 63 percent said they had a favorable view of Israel (21 percent said very favorable), compared with just 15 percent who thought highly of the Palestinian Authority.

Conversely, only 29 percent of Americans told Gallup that their opinion of Israel was negative, even as a whopping 73 percent expressed a negative attitude toward the Palestinians.

This overwhelmingly positive feeling for Israel is normal for the United States, but it puts Americans sharply at odds with the rest of the world. At the United Nations, for example, nothing is more routine than the castigation of Israel. Similarly, any time Israel is forced to use its military power in self-defense, it comes under the harsh glare of the international media, which subject it to a scrutiny far more unforgiving than any other country receives. It was only a few years ago that a poll commissioned by the European Union found that a plurality of Europeans regarded Israel as the greatest threat to world peace -- more menacing than even North Korea or Iran.

So what makes Americans different?
Continue reading

Sunday, December 20, 2009

The Latest Haveil Havalim

This week's edition of the Jewish blog carnival Haveil Havalim is up at Frume Sarah's World.

Mosque to be Built Near Ground Zero

Muslim jihadis knock down the Twin Towers and now a mosque and islamic center will be built near where they once stood. We as a nation have become so meshuga in the belief that we must be tolerant of even those sworn to our destruction. We have lost the confidence, sense of pride and self-respect that we once had. Is it any wonder that muslims are certain that they can conquer us. This is a slap in the face to all Americans and especially the families of those who lost loved ones on 9/11.

Islamic mosque built at 9/11 Ground Zero
Muslim business leader: 'This has hand of the divine written over it'
Posted: December 17, 2009
8:10 pm Eastern

By Chelsea Schilling
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

A new Islamic mosque will open its doors just steps from Ground Zero where Muslim terrorists murdered 2,751 people in the name of Allah on Sept. 11, 2001 – and its leading imam, who conducts sensitivity training sessions for the FBI, has reportedly blamed Christians for starting mass attacks on civilians.

The five-story building at Park Place, just two blocks north of the former World Trade Center site, was the site of a Burlington Coat Factory. But a plane's landing-gear assembly crashed through the roof on the day 19 Muslim terrorists hijacked the airliners and flew them into the Twin Towers in 2001.

Now Muslim worshippers currently occupy the building, and they plan to turn it into a major Islamic cultural center.

"The men and women stand up, raise their hands on either side of their head, murmur 'Allahu akhbar,' bow and kneel again," reports Spiegel Online.

"Only in New York City is this possible," Daisy Khan, executive director of the American Society for Muslim Advancement, or ASMA, told the magazine. Khan is the wife of Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, founder of ASMA.

They have leased the new prayer space as an overflow building for another mosque, Masjid al-Farah, at 245 West Broadway in TriBeCa, where Rauf is the spiritual leader.

Get "Why We Left Islam" now from the people who published it – WND Books.

The building – vacant since that fateful day when time stood still as millions of Americans grieved the loss of loved ones, friends, family members, co-workers and strangers – was purchased in July by real-estate company Soho Properties, a business run by Muslims. Rauf was an investor in that transaction.

Just down the street, the Museum of Jewish Heritage honors victims of the Holocaust, and St. Peter's Church, New York's oldest Catholic house of worship, is located around the corner.
Continue reading

Obama's Weak Iran Policy

If Obama is too feckless to do anything to stop Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons, the least he should do is stay out of Israel’s way as it takes care of business.

Obama’s Iran Policy Falls Short

Gordon G. Chang, FORBES

Diplomats say the darnedest things. Take our secretary of state, Hillary Clinton. This week, she blurted out the following about America’s Iran policy: “I don’t think anyone can doubt that our outreach has produced very little in terms of any kind of a positive response from the Iranians.”

Whether she was criticizing the ayatollahs or the Obamas is hard to tell–Mrs. Clinton reportedly dislikes both groups intensely–but it is undeniable that she has put her finger on something. The United States, unfortunately, has had little influence over the Iranian leadership this year. Obama’s campaign pledge to meet the world’s top despots, including the ones dwelling in Tehran, has not in fact generated good will in Iran’s abhorrent theocracy.

No one can blame the new president for wanting to extend the proverbial “open hand,” but now that he has received the “clenched fist” in response, the American leader needs to change course–and fast.

Events looked grim at the end of last month when the French talked about Iran’s “last chance.” Now everything looks worse. Last week, for instance, we heard a report that Iranian technicians have been testing a “neutron initiator,” a device that sets off a nuclear warhead. There are no peaceful uses for such a gizmo.

And Iran is getting close to making a bomb. This week, the chief of Israeli intelligence, whose group has consistently produced the best assessments of Iran’s weapons program, disclosed that the regime is close to a “technological breakthrough.” The clerics, should they decide to go for broke, are only nine months from possessing the ultimate weapon in history. Maybe they do already, especially if they have bought fissile material on the nuclear black market as persistent rumors indicate.

The Iranians, characteristically, are not doing anything to relieve the concerns of the international community. They first said all their testing is for peaceful purposes . . . and then this week they fired off a missile, the Sajjil-2.

What response does this test deserve? More than it is getting. The ability to deliver a nuclear weapon thousands of miles downrange–the Sajjil-2, with a range of 1,200 miles, can hit targets in Israel and southeastern Europe–poses an existential threat to the international system. Iran is building missiles whose only conceivable payload is a nuclear warhead, yet Washington is full of analysts who heroically find the bright side of all the adverse developments. American proliferation expert Joseph Cirincione, for example, said on CNN that it was possible the Iranians tested their missile because they were merely putting on “a show of strength before they make a concession.”

It’s much more likely that they were perfecting their missile so they can land a payload in Tel Aviv or Athens, something they can do today. It’s just a matter of years before the theocracy can destroy Rome, Paris, London and Washington as well. Perhaps the Italians, French and English can rest easy, but not the Americans because the mullahs have promised to “bake” the United States along with Israel–”Sajjil,” by the way, is translated as “baked clay.”

Many argue we can deter the Iranians because we deterred the Soviets. Perhaps that will prove to be true, but at this moment it would be imprudent to assume that is the case. After all, we should take Iranian leaders, who have repeated for years that they intend to kill us, at their word.

“If Iran is working on weapons, it means there is no diplomatic solution,” said Mark Fitzpatrick of the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London in the last few days. Ehud Barak, Israel’s defense minister, disagrees. He said at the beginning of this week there is still time left for diplomacy on Iran.

Barak is correct, but only in the narrowest sense. The White House, if it showed substantially more vigor and strength, could disarm Iran without the use of force. Yet President Obama has shown no inclination to try more coercive measures, and, as his secretary of state has noted, his policies have not worked. The Chinese have emerged in the last month as Iran’s principal backer, and the American leader has been unwilling to confront Beijing on this or other proliferation issues. We are at one of those times when what is necessary is not, in the American capital, considered practical.

That means, unless Obama changes course, Iran will get the bomb. And once the ferociously aggressive and deeply insecure clerics put their hands on an atomic weapon, it is virtually certain the world will never be the same. Almost all the assumptions we make about geopolitics today could–and probably will–become obsolete.

Gordon G. Chang is the author of The Coming Collapse of China.He writes a weekly column for Forbes.

Saturday, December 19, 2009

Copenhagen's Marxist Agenda

Our old friend hugo chavez was ranting against capitalism in Copenhagen to the wild applause of the audience. This is the skunk that oliver stone and most of the rest of the hollywood WEALTHY elite celebrate. These are people who have thrived because of the American capitalist system and for some pathological reason, want to destroy it.

The world's dictators and tyrants want to destroy capitalism precisely because it brings freedom and prosperity to the masses, therefore empowering them. Freedom, empowerment and self-determination is not something these evil malcontents such as chavez, ahmadenijad, morales, mugabe et al want for their people. What they want is to control and oppress them to keep themselves in power. This farce in Copenhagen is nothing more than about pushing marxism and destroying American sovereignty, our way of life and standard of living.

Losers Of World Unite — In Denmark

Posted 12/17/2009 07:46 PM ET

Venezuela's Hugo Chavez brought delegates to their feet in Copenhagen when he said capitalism is the "road to hell." APView Enlarged Image

Copenhagen Conference: The United Nations summit was promoted as a serious effort to mitigate climate change. But it's turned into an attack on capitalism. So what does the U.S. do? It pledges money.

Any international meeting that invites Venezuela's Hugo Chavez, Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Zimbabwe's Robert Mugabe to speak has no legitimacy. But that's not the worst of it.

When these fellows spoke in Copenhagen, their asinine remarks were cheered and applauded by attendees who seemed to think they were in the presence of great men. Surely the world now gets what the global warming alarmists are about.

Doesn't it?

For reasons that remain a mystery to us, Chavez was celebrated as if he were a popularly elected president who has led his country toward greater freedom and prosperity instead of a socialist who rigged his election to be president for life, crushed civil liberties and wrecked his nation's economy.

Nevertheless, "President Chavez brought the house down," according to newspaper the Australian, when he addressed the U.N. Climate Change Conference on Wednesday. "When he said there was a 'silent and terrible ghost in the room' and that ghost was called capitalism, the applause was deafening."

Socialism, Chavez told the fawning audience, is "the way to save the planet" while "the destructive model of capitalism is the eradication of life." And: "Capitalism is the road to hell. ... Let's fight against capitalism and make it obey us."

For that nugget of nonsense, Chavez received a standing ovation.
Continue reading

Brazil and Anti-Americanism

I am really infuriated that Brazil continues to keep David Goldman's son away from him. And the worst part about it is that obama does absolutely nothing about it. He could influence the Brazilian authorities if he wanted to.

Recall that the leader of Brazil made that comment about blue-eyed white devils. I honestly believe the Brazilian court's actions are motivated purely by anti-Americanism and anti-Semitism. It may sound paranoid to some, but there is a global war being waged on white America and Jews. Take what is happening in Copenhagen as American capitalism is coming under assault. And hussein obama is partaking in all of it.

Friday, December 18, 2009

The EU's Increasing Hostility Toward Israel

Europe, especially Britain, is a lost cause. Israel ought to end diplomatic relations with most of these countries. They clearly do not have Israel's interests at heart and ought to be seen as part of the enemy camp. The hostility toward Israel will only become more extreme as European officials attempt to placate the muslim populations overrunning and overwhelming their societies.

EU's new foreign relations chief criticises Israel


16.12.2009 @ 09:35 CET

EUOBSERVER / BRUSSELS - The EU's new foreign relations chief, Catherine Ashton, criticised Israel in her first speech on the Middle East and unveiled plans to visit the region in the New Year.

Described recently by one Israeli lobbyist as a "tabula rasa" who will be easy to influence because of her lack of foreign policy experience, Ms Ashton came down hard on the Israeli government in an address to MEPs in Strasbourg on Tuesday (15 December).

Ms Ashton came down hard on the Israeli government (Photo: European Parliament)

"East Jerusalem is occupied territory together with the West Bank. The EU is opposed to the destruction of homes, the eviction of Arab residents and the construction of the separation barrier," she said on Israeli activity in the city, which is holy to both Jews and Muslims.

Ms Ashton called Israel's recent decision to temporarily freeze settlement growth outside Jerusalem a "first step," in a cooler tone than EU foreign ministers who last week took "positive note" of the move.

"We're deeply concerned about the daily living conditions of people in Gaza," she added on Israel's blockade of aid shipments to the strip. "Israel should reopen the crossings without delay."

Her speech, which fits in with the Arab-friendly British foreign office tradition, was also significant for what it left out: Ms Ashton did not say that Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East, that it faces a security threat from Palestinian "terrorists" or that Palestinians should immediately return to formal peace talks - the classic tenets of Israeli supporters.

The EU's new foreign relations chief had a dig at the Quartet's special envoy to the region, Tony Blair, who has been markedly invisible in the job.

"The Quartet [a special group set up by the US, EU, UN and Russia] must demonstrate that it is worth the money, that it is capable of being reinvigorated. I have talked about this with both sides in Jerusalem, to Mr Blair and the [US] secretary of state," she said.
Continue reading

The Delegitimization Campaign Against Israel

With the help of western leftist skunks, the arabs are able to succeed in their delegitimization campaign against Israel.

Those who compare Israel's security fence with the Berlin wall are not naive, they are mendacious. One would have to have been living on another planet not to be aware that Israel was faced with arab-muslim suicide bombers which created the need for the security fence.

And finally, I don't hold Israeli diplomats responsible for Israel's negative image. Most countries, whether because of dependency on arab oil or fear of muslim terrorism, Europe's need to placate their increasing muslim populations out of fear or for their votes, or just plain old anti-Semitism, it is obvious why Israel is not getting a fair shake internationally.

Yaalon: Arabs resorting to propaganda after losing wars

Israel's enemies turn to de-legitimization after realizing they can't defeat Israel on battlefield, deputy PM says
Roni Sofer

Israel's Arab enemies have resorted to a propaganda campaign after realizing they cannot defeat the Jewish State on the battlefield, Deputy Prime Minister Moshe (Bogi) Yaalon says.

"When the Arabs realized they cannot defeat us with their armies, they turned to terrorism and rockets," Yaalon told Ynet in a special interview Wednesday. "Now they are realizing that they cannot defeat us this way either, so they are taking the path of de-legitimization."

Arab propaganda efforts had an effect mostly in Europe and in some parts of the United States, the deputy PM said.

"The success of Israel's de-legitimization stems from several elements, such as the new anti-Semitism, which at this time is manifested through anti-Israel sentiments in practice," he said. "There is another group, the liberals, some of whom are radicals while others are naïve. People who compare our security fence to the Berlin Wall, for example, are naïve."

'Flawed British policy'
Yaalon said he believes that Israel's diplomats across the world are at fault for the current situation.

"For years we neglected public diplomacy. We haven't done enough," he said. "Not always those who represent us are worthy of representing us, especially when we examine the manner in which they do so. During my travels I encountered some people who simply cannot be representing us. This is why the government decided to travel and speak across the world. Ministers, including myself, are traveling abroad and explaining our position."

Addressing the recent arrest warrant issued against former Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni in England, Yaalon said he warned former British Prime Minister Tony Blair more than two years ago about the "flawed policy in respect to arrest warrants against myself and other senior Israeli officials."

"To my regret, nothing had been then since then, and now Britain is the only state where we are facing such problem," he said. "We need to tell the Brits that we're in the same boat, as their commanders in Iraq and Afghanistan clearly say."

Thursday, December 17, 2009

The Left's Relentless Assault on Israel

In yet another indication of England's moral decay, an arrest warrant was issued for Tzipi Livni for her role in Operation Cast Lead. The muslim world may not be able to defeat Israel militarily, but with the aid of western leftist monsters, they have devised a political strategy for their genocidal aims of destroying the Jewish state.

Miliband 'shocked' at Livni's warrant

British Foreign Secretary David Miliband called Kadima head Tzipi Livni and Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman Tuesday evening in an apparent effort to prevent the diplomatic crisis stemming from a British arrest warrant issued against Livni from spinning completely out of control.

Israeli officials react to Livni's UK arrest warrant

According to a statement put out by Livni's office, Miliband expressed his "shock" at the arrest warrant and promised to work immediately to ensure that a similar occurrence would not happen in the future against Livni or other Israeli leaders. Miliband told Lieberman that the warrant was "completely unacceptable."

While Israel has heard such promises numerous times over the last five years, there was a sense in Jerusalem Tuesday night that the wall-to-wall outrage in Israel that accompanied news of the warrant against Livni had registered in London.

Britain's outgoing ambassador Tom Phillips bore the brunt of Israeli anger over the matter, being summoned to the Foreign Ministry and having a conversation on the matter with National Security Council head Uzi Arad.
Analysis: Most ministers would face arrest in UK
Editorial: We're all Tzipi Livni
Video: 'There is fertile ground in Eurabia for allegations against Israel'

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's office issued a statement saying he instructed Arad to deliver a "clear message" to Phillips that Israel expected the British government to "act against this immoral phenomenon which is trying to impair Israel's right to self-defense."

"We will not agree to a situation in which Ehud Olmert, Ehud Barak and Tzipi Livni will be summoned to the defendant's bench. We will not agree that IDF commanders and soldiers, who - heroically and in a moral fashion - defended our citizens against a brutal and criminal enemy, will be condemned as war criminals. We reject this absurdity outright," Netanyahu said.

Israel has for the last five years - spanning the administration of three different prime ministers - continuously brought up to British government officials the threat of legal action against IDF officers and political leaders visiting Britain.

According to diplomatic officials, the British - from former foreign secretary Jack Straw onward - have all pledged to close the gap in British law that allows for this type of occurrence, but nobody has actually taken action.

Since such a move necessitated legislation, one official said, the British have always said it was not the right time. "They said this in 2006 after the war in Lebanon, and again earlier this year after the Gaza operation," one official said.
Continue reading

Brit Royals Banned From Making State Visits to Israel

The hypocrisy and moral bankruptcy of the British government is disgusting. While the Queen is allowed to visit arab and muslim dictatorships and terror states, countries ruled by vile misogynist sultans and potentates which forbid the practice of any other religion but islam and regularly violate human rights, Queen Elizabeth is banned from making state visits to Israel.

Queen Elizabeth banned from making state visit to Israel, says historian 14 December 2009 hat tip Marion

The eminent historian Andrew Roberts has said that the British government had a de facto ban in place on state visits by Queen Elizabeth II to Israel. "The true reason of course, is that the FO [Foreign Office] has a ban on official royal visits to Israel, which is even more powerful for its being unwritten and unacknowledged. As an act of delegitimization of Israel, this effective boycott is quite as serious as other similar acts, such as the academic boycott, and is the direct fault of the FO Arabists. It is, therefore, no coincidence that although the queen has made over 250 official overseas visits to 129 different countries during her reign, neither she nor one single member of the British royal family has ever been to Israel on an official visit,” Roberts told a gala dinner in London.

The historian’s work includes biographies of former British prime ministers Winston Churchill and Neville Chamberlain, as well as Hitler and Roosevelt. Roberts said that Britain had been at best "a fair-weather friend" to Israel, and even though Queen Elizabeth’s mother-in-law, Princess Alice of Greece, had been recognized as a Righteous Among the Nations for sheltering a Jewish family in her Athens home during the Holocaust, and is buried on the Mount of Olives, Prince Philip had not been allowed to visit his mother’s grave until 1994 – "and then only on a private visit."

"Perhaps her majesty hasn't been on the throne long enough, at 57 years, for the Foreign Office to get round to allowing her to visit one of the only democracies in the Middle East. At least she could be certain of a warm welcome in Israel, unlike in Morocco, where she was kept waiting by the king for three hours in 90-degree heat, or at the Commonwealth heads of government meeting in Uganda the time before last, where they hadn't even finished building her hotel,” Roberts remarked.

Wednesday, December 16, 2009

The Guardian's Latest Blood Libel Against Israel

Even as their own country is going down the tubes, the British press nevertheless is obsessed with making up vicious lies about and demonizing Israel.

Guardian Ed: "In Israel They Murder Each Other a Great Deal"

"The Israeli Defense Forces murder people because they don't like their political style..."

What does the IDF have to do with the recent assault on Italian PM Sylvio Berlusconi? Absolutely nothing. But that didn't stop The Guardian's Associate Editor Michael White from making the following comment during a discussion on BBC Radio London's Breakfast Show concerning the physical vulnerability of political leaders:

In Israel they murder each other a great deal. The Israeli Defense Forces murder people because they don't like their political style and what they've got to say and it only means that people more extreme come in and take their place.
Continue reading

Wealthy Celebs Promote Marxism and Anti-Americanism to Kids

The irony is that these creeps were given the opportunity to succeed because of America's capitalist system. These are among the most greedy, hedonistic, selfish people around and yet they are always preaching compassion, environmentalism and socialism. I'm waiting for these celebrities to voluntarily redistribute their wealth and move out of their mansions and stop driving around in expensive cars and limos and just live with basic necessities. I'm sure that we can expect them to alter their lifestyles any time now for the sake of the environment and the poor.

Celebs to kids: America stinks!
'55 rich white men drafted Constitution to protect their class – slaveholders'
Posted: December 14, 2009
8:49 pm Eastern

By Drew Zahn
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

Actress Marisa Tomei

Hollywood celebrities and education gurus have teamed together to distribute to schools across the country a dramatic new curriculum that casts American history as an epic march of victims seeking to shrug off the shackles of the warmongering, racist, capitalist, imperialist United States.

The History Channel's airing of the "The People Speak" last night marks the public coming-out party of a movement that has been in place since last year to teach America's school children a "social justice" brand of history that rails against war, oppression, capitalism and popular patriotism.

The television special featuring performances by Matt Damon, Benjamin Bratt, Marisa Tomei, Don Cheadle, Bruce Springsteen and others condemns the nation's past of oppression by the wealthy, powerful and imperialist and instead trumpets the voices of America's labor unions, minorities and protesters of various stripes.

The accompanying curriculum guide for schools that show "The People Speak" in classrooms, for example, highlights an 1852 reading from abolitionist Frederick Douglass:
What, to the American slave, is your 4th of July? I answer; a day that reveals to him, more than all other days in the year, the gross injustice and cruelty to which he is the constant victim. To him, your celebration is a sham; your boasted liberty, an unholy license; your national greatness, swelling vanity; your sounds of rejoicing are empty and heartless; your denunciation of tyrants brass fronted impudence; your shout of liberty and equality, hollow mockery; your prayers and hymns, your sermons and thanksgivings, with all your religious parade and solemnity, are to him, mere bombast, fraud, deception, impiety, and hypocrisy – a thin veil to cover up crimes which would disgrace a nation of savages. There is not a nation on the earth guilty of practices more shocking and bloody than are the people of the United States, at this very hour.

The program and discussion guide is the most ambitious resource among many offered to America's schools by the Zinn Education Project, a collaboration of Rethinking Schools and Teaching for Change, as part of a push to encourage history instruction based on educator Howard Zinn's 1980 tome exposing the abuses of America's past, "A People's History of the United States."
Continue reading

Liberals Aid and Abet Our Enemies

I'm sickened, ashamed and disgusted with liberals who are making it easier for our enemies to wage war against us. Can anyone explain what infects the minds and spirits of these liberal groups which motivates them to hate their own country and culture and aid sworn enemies who would just as easily murder them and their families as they would any other Americans?

Murder by Lawfare - How Liberal Lawsuits are Taking American Lives
The thirteen US soldiers murdered at Fort Hood were killed by the bullets fired by Malik Nidal Hassan, but there were those who helped Nassan fire his bullets, who did everything but hold his gun and pull the trigger for him. The initial FBI review has found that the Justice Department guidelines for opening a criminal investigation were too high, in turn investigators have said that it now requires a very high standard of evidence in order to convict a terrorist plotter.

Pursuing charges before all the evidence is in hand can backfire – suspects have sued authorities before, claiming they were falsely imprisoned victims of witch hunts... Five Muslim immigrants were convicted last year of conspiring to kill U.S. soldiers at Fort Dix in New Jersey, but they were acquitted of attempted murder after prosecutors acknowledged they were probably months away from acting.

In January 2006, agents watched as a young man suspected of links to terrorists walked out of an Atlanta Home Depot with materials that could be used to make a bomb.

They knew Syed Haris Ahmed had researched bombmaking techniques online and shaved his head, as some jihadis have done before an attack.

However, they decided to wait to arrest him and keep building a stronger case – and risk a potential terror attack.

Not being able to stop a terrorist before he strikes. Not being able to remove Muslims who are engaging in threatening behavior on a plane. Not able to take action against a terrorist plot for fear that the terrorists will be allowed to walk free. That is what the domestic version of the War on Terror looks like today.

Those are the wages of Lawfare, the legal campaign on behalf of terrorists waged by well known liberal legal advocacy groups such as the ACLU, and the much wider base of liberal organizations and newspapers who lobbied on behalf of captured terrorists and republished every single one of their claims of torture... to the extent that the Al Queda manual made it a default for captured terrorists to cry abuse once on trial.

Salim Ahmed Hamdan, Osama bin Laden's bodyguard and driver, who was captured together with Al Queda operatives, became a cause celebre for liberals and liberal groups from Amnesty International to People for the American Way to the American Jewish Committee to George Clooney who was interested in making a movie about him and starring as his lawyer. They turned Salim Hamdan into a martyr and breathlessly repeated every single one of his statements. And they won. They won with Hamdan vs. Rumsfeld. And they won again at trial. Hamdan was freed a few months after sentencing to return to Yemen.
Continue reading

Tuesday, December 15, 2009

Geert Wilders Favored By the People

While Geert Wilders is despised and persecuted by the elites in his country, ordinary people love him. This is because he speaks out against the islamization of Holland and the traitorous people in power who are aiding and abetting the islamists. The Euro elite apparently feel that if they sell-out their countries and countrymen to these islamists, they themselves will be spared.

Wilders, Loved and Loathed Radio Netherlands

Dutch anti-Islam politician Geert Wilders has come in second in two polls for politician of the year. A panel of Dutch television viewers said he is the second best politician this year, while Mr Wilders' colleagues in parliament named him the second worst.

Quite a discrepancy. But, actually, not so surprising. It is yet more evidence of the gap between the public and the elite.

Next prime minister
Geert Wilders has made the disillusionment of many Dutch voters his reason for being. He is always ready to fight the establishment in the name of the little guy.Politican of the Year -- Best and Worst
Elite's choice: chosen by the 150 members of lower house of parliament

Best: Conservative VVD leader Mark Rutte
Worst: Proud of the Netherlands' Rita Verdonk

Public's choice: Eenvandaag television news magazine, 32,000 viewers were polled

Best: Democrat 66 Alexander Pechtold
Worst: Freedom Party Geert Wilders

Part of the success of his Freedom Party movement comes from his style of speaking directly to the public. The simple, sometimes crude, language he uses on the floor of parliament has brought reprimands from his colleagues, and praise from his followers.

And it's his followers that have put Mr Wilders and his Freedom Party in a very strong position: second in European elections last spring, the largest party in the country for the last six months, according to one national opinion pollster. Mr Wilders himself openly speculates about becoming the next prime minister.

Anti-Islam ticket
Other political parties are having a tough time dealing with that scenario. The Freedom Party has been accused of having just one issue: anti-Islam. And it is precisely his fervent, if not radical, opposition to outward displays of Islam that brings condemnation from other politicians.

For instance, when Mr Wilders proposed a tax on women who wear a Muslim headscarf, calling it a 'rag-head tax', other politicians felt Mr Wilders had finally gone too far.
A blogger subtitled Geert Wilders' speech in parliament criticising the Dutch government's 2010 budget.

Monday, December 14, 2009

Brit Government Has Lost its Marbles

More orwellian newspeak from Britain's Home Office instructing ministers not to use words like "muslim extremists" and "jihadis" when referring to muslim extremists and jihadis. How long before the country is renamed the islamic republic of Britain?

Don’t Call Extremists ‘extremists’ | by GRAEME WILSON at The Sun via Creeping Sharia

MINISTERS have been BANNED from using words like Islamist and fundamentalist – in case they offend Muslims.

An eight-page Whitehall guide lists words they should not use when talking about terrorism in public and gives politically correct alternatives.

They are told not to refer to Muslim extremism as it links Islam to violence. Instead, they are urged to talk about terrorism or violent extremism.

Fundamentalist and Jihadi are also banned because they make an “explicit link” between Muslims and terror.

Ministers should say criminals, murderers or thugs instead. Radicalisation must be called brainwashing and talking about moderate or radical Muslims is to be avoided as it “splits the community”.

Islamophobia is also out as it is received as “a slur that singles out Muslims”.

The guide, produced by the secretive Research, Information and Communications Unit in the Home Office, tell ministers to “avoid implying that specific communities are to blame” for terrorism. It says more than 2,000 people are engaged in terror plots.

The guidance was branded “daft” last night by a special adviser to ex-Communities Secretary Hazel Blears. Paul Richards said: “Unless you can describe what you’re up against, you’re never going to defeat it. Ministers need to be leading the debate on Islamic extremism and they can’t do that if they have one hand tied behind their back.”

The Home Office said: “This is about using appropriate language to have counter-terrorism impact. It would be foolish to do anything else.”

Sunday, December 13, 2009

This Week's Haveil Havalim

Edition # 247 of the Jewish blog carnival Haveil Havalim is up at The Israel Situation.

Saturday, December 12, 2009

UK's Latest Anti-Israel Move

The UK and Europe in general have lost any moral compass if they ever even had any at all. The British government seeks to require labeling Israeli products which come from Judea and Samaria. As if there should be some stigma attached to products coming from Jews living, working and running businesses in certain parts of their own homeland which the emasculated Euroweenies deem Jews should be forbidden because that's what the arab-muslim racists demand. Meanwhile the UK has no problem doing business with barbaric arab regimes which regularly violate human rights and are truly racist, apartheid states. These are countries which practice religious, racial and gender apartheid.

UK catering to Israel-haters

Ronny Gordon - Dec 11, 2009
American Thinker

The UK government is on the verge of requiring labels on products coming from Judea and Samaria, enabling political boycotts. The Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) is recommending that food labels for products made in Judea and Samaria say either "Israeli settlement produce" or "Palestinian produce." Israel's Foreign Ministry has vehemently denounced this move.
Spokesman Yigal Palmor of the Foreign Ministry said, "It looks like it is catering to the demands of those whose ultimate goal is the boycott of Israeli products." Chairman Dani Dayan of the Yesha Council, which represents the Jewish communities, said the decision was the "latest hostile step" from Britain. He added, "Products from our communities in Judea and Samaria should be treated as any other Israeli product." Israeli officials said they feared this was a slide towards a broader boycott of Israeli goods. It is a matter of concern."

In my opinion this is the equivalent of marking Jewish shops in the thirties. The UK seems to have no qualms though about using unmarked oil from a country that sentences women to death for being raped.

Friday, December 11, 2009

General Praised Islam

If this General is a typical example of the mindset that pervades the upper echelons of our military, then we are in serious danger as a nation. This is how Fort Hood was able to happen. Major General Jeffery hammond has called islam a beautiful religion. Now just what about islam does he consider beautiful? Is it the beheadings, stonings, lashings, female genital mutilation, "honor" murders, marrying little girls off to old men, suicide bombings, the disfigured women after having acid thrown in their faces et al.? It's hard to believe we have people responsible for safeguarding our nation who don't even understand the enemy we face. Should someone who endorses the ideology of our enemies continue to be allowed to serve in the armed forces? Let's hope his viewpoint is not typical in our military apparatus.

Fort Carson leader works to foster better understanding of Islam
By News Desk on June 26, 2009

Representatives of the Islamic Society of Colorado Springs met Thursday with Fort Carson military leaders at the Army base to discuss ways to improve cultural awareness and an understanding of Islam among deploying soldiers.

Maj. Gen. Jeffery Hammond, commanding general of the 4th Infantry Division, initiated the meeting in hopes of developing a better cultural-awareness program for the thousands of soldiers already at Fort Carson and the hundreds expected to arrive this summer.

“We want to talk to (soldiers) about this beautiful religion,” Hammond said at the one-hour meeting, attended by local Islamic leaders Arshad Yousufi, Farouk Abushaban and Dawud Salaam; 4th Infantry Division cultural adviser Al Azim; and four other Army leaders.

Yousufi, who has participated in previous cultural awareness programs at Fort Carson, told the general those programs weren’t taken seriously enough.

“The weakness of those programs was that they were informal and occasional,” Yousufi said.

Meanwhile, a new family of thousands of soldiers were officially welcomed on Thursday morning.

The 1st Brigade Combat Team, 4th Infantry Division uncased their colors at a ceremony at Fort Carson on Thursday. The tradition signifies the brigade’s official arrival to the post. The 1BCT Raiders spent the past 13 years at Fort Hood, Texas.

The Army Corps of Engineers also presented an award to the brigade, honoring their new headquarters building for being energy efficient and environmentally friendly.

The brigade’s arrival brings about 3,500 soldiers and their families to the Colorado Springs community.
h/t Logans Warning