February 08, 2012

I'm going with the latter:

The BBC has told its journalists not to call Abu Qatada, the al-Qaeda preacher, an “extremist”.

In order to avoid making a “value judgment”, the corporation’s managers have ruled that he can only be described as “radical”.

Journalists were also cautioned against using images suggesting the preacher is overweight.

January 24, 2012

But she doesn't stop at praising the terrorist, she also decries the pro-Western Ayaan Hirsi Ali.

But, it's pretty much what we've come to expect from the Leftists in the academy. They hate anything that smack of "us" while heaping praise on "them". Even when "they" are trying to kill "us".

January 12, 2012

The guy is an ex-Republican Congressman from Minnessotta and he was hired by an "Islamic charity" to lobby on their behalf. The problem was that this "charity" was really a terrorist funding scheme, the guy's who hired him were foreigners, and he worked on their behalf illegally. He plead guilty back in 2010, but he's only now being sentenced:

A former Michigan congressman and U.S. delegate to the United Nations has been sentenced to a year and one day in prison for lobbying for a Missouri-based Islamic charity that had been identified as a global terrorist organization.

Mark Deli Siljander, 60, a Republican who served in Congress from 1981-1987, pleaded guilty in July 2010 to obstructing justice and acting as an unregistered foreign agent in connection with his work for the Islamic American Relief Agency, based in Columbia, Mo.....

Four co-defendants also were sentenced Wednesday. Among them were former IARA executive director Mubarak Hamed, who sent more than $1 million to Iraq through the charity in violation of U.S. sanctions. He pleaded guilty in June 2010 to illegally transferring the money and obstructing the administration of laws governing tax-exempt charities....

The original indictment alleged the charity sent about $130,000 to help Gulbuddin Hekmatyar [an al Qaeda linked Islamist], whom the United States has designated as a global terrorist. The money, sent to bank accounts in Peshawar, Pakistan, in 2003 and 2004, was masked as donations to an orphanage located in buildings that Hekmatyar owned....

Abdel Azim El-Siddig, of Chicago, Ill., a former fundraiser for the charity, was sentenced to two years of probation for conspiring to hire Siljander to lobby for the charity's removal from the list of those suspected of having terrorist ties, while concealing this advocacy and not registering with the proper authorities.

Ali Mohamed Bagegni, a native of Libya who is a naturalized U.S. citizen and former resident of Columbia, was sentenced to six months of probation for his role in the conspiracy. Bagegni was a member of the board of directors of IARA.

Ahmad Mustafa of Columbia, a citizen of Iraq and a lawful permanent resident alien of the United States, also was sentenced to six months of probation for illegally transferring funds in violation of federal sanctions.

December 09, 2011

Let me say that I think Newt gets a bad rap for some comments he's said in the past which I think were taken out of context and linked in Berger's Foreign Policy piece, but other than that I think he's square on:

It is appropriate for law enforcement and intelligence agencies to single out individuals who possess the inclination and the capability to kill dozens or hundreds of people at a time. That is what drives the use of informants, drones, and other extraordinary tactics. That is why the government pursues al Qaeda and its adherents with such laser focus.

But let's be clear: al Qaeda adherents are targeted because of their tactical focus on mass casualties, not because they are Islamists and not because they are Muslims. The fact that they are found among Muslims is an unavoidable reality, as is the corollary that law enforcement activities countering al Qaeda will take place among Muslims.

Discrimination against Muslims in this country is unfortunately real. And it is unfortunately true that some American Muslims mix their religion and politics in ways that makes other Americans uncomfortable. But neither of these facts is responsible for -- or even all that relevant to -- America's focus on combating al Qaeda.

Unfortunately, the talking points have taken possession of our politicians.

It is unnecessary and counterproductive to treat the broad community of American Muslims as if they are monsters to be feared or children to be placated. It's time to start talking to them as what they are -- Americans who can handle a frank conversation about the safety of Americans.

Let me disagree on one other point and I actually think its much worse than Berger implies. Not only can we not use Islamic terror, but the administration is unable to even use the terms Islamism or Islamist. It's as if these terror groups grew up in a vacuum.

It is not illegal to be an Islamist. We do not target al Qaeda because they are Islamists, as Berger notes, but because they use violence. However, it seems awfully shortsighted to not recognize that the Salaafi way is just a subcategory of Islamism that often disagrees with more "moderate" Islamist groups only as to means but not in ends.

Look, not all white supremacists are violent. But no one tries to exclude racist ideology from the conversation when we discuss neonazi violence. And when we talk about neonazis none of us think that the conversation is pointed toward white people in general.

The fact that some cannot distinguish between Islamists -- those who support the imposition of Islamic law -- and Muslims in general does not mean that those in government and law enforcement should not be trained in the dangers of the latter as a precursor to violence.

Most white people aren't white supremacists. Most white supremacists aren't violent. Nonetheless, one could do worse than scrutinize the Aryan nation for possible violent individuals.

The same goes with Muslims. Most Muslims in America do not support political Islam. Most Islamists in America do not believe in terrorism as a means to their political ends. Yet, one finds that nearly all homegrown terrorists are Islamists of one flavor or another.

If we don't want to offend Muslims, fine. I can live with asking law enforcement to choose their words wisely so as not to offend those who's help is needed.

But when we are not even allowed to identify a political ideology which denies even the most basic human right to individuals as the wellspring from which most homegrown terror springs because we might offend Muslims who are not themselves Islamists, then it's time to throw in the towel.

December 07, 2011

Does context matter? Of course it does. In fact, context is everything.

For instance, a single image posted on two different websites might convey opposite messages.

How is that? Context.

Say the image is of a member of the Taliban murdering a civilian.

On one website, the image is in the context of a post in which the author describes the horror of Taliban rule. The image conveys sick brutality.

On the other website, the image is in the context of a post in which the author describes the blessings of Allah's rule. The image conveys justice.

The same image, two different messages.

I could go on and on with examples like this. But I thought it was important to add that before noting the defense's claim in the Tahrek Mehanna trial:

The lawyer, J.W. Carney Jr., questioned whether there was a difference between Mehanna’s posting of materials on Web forums and the posting of Al Qaeda statements and videos on the website for the Nine Eleven Finding Answers Foundation, for which Kohlmann worked as an investigator.

Kohlmann told prosecutors that “the purpose is to communicate to the general public, to policy makers, academics, law enforcement, to give them an idea of what’s going on with Al Qaeda and extremists.’’

“We were very careful not to put too much information on the website, because we did not want to serve as a mouth piece for Al Qaeda,’’ he said.

But under questioning by Carney, Kohlmann agreed that the website features the same type of materials Mehanna posted, including 37 videos “glorying’’ jihad, most produced by Al Qaeda. The videos were listed under a “Propaganda Videos’’ section.

The site also includes 103 statements by Osama bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri, Al Qaeda’s current leader, and other representatives of the terror organization.

December 05, 2011

A great essay by Steve Emerson on why it's the domestic terrorists we have to worry about:

Those international efforts seem to be working, the story indicates. If that’s the case, it is time to consider a third program aimed at undercutting domestic radicalization. But instead, authorities are ignoring a major threat that leads to terrorism right here in our backyard. They are not doing enough to sideline Islamist groups like the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) and others who propagate the false “war on Islam” narrative.

Apparently, it's not enough to try to kill people.

Good luck to the posse on the Hill tomorrow!

December 02, 2011

If Janet Napolitano, chief incompetent at Homeland Insecurity, says the threat is real and growing then it's time for the Democrats in Congress to grow up and stop crying Islamophobia whenever a Republican makes exactly the same point:

Noting current threats to the United States, [Napolitano] singled out al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula and “the growth of the lone wolf,” a single attacker not part of a larger conspiracy or network.

Deal with it.

December 01, 2011

It's not just black people who can't get a cab on Fridays in New York --- it's everybody!

If you need to catch a cab you may want to try the Upper West Side, since some who live next to the Islamic Cultural Center on Riverside Drive say their neighborhood is being flooded with parked taxis every week.

"They are everywhere, hundreds of them. I joke with my doorman every Friday I can't find a cab," said John Hart, who lives across the street in a high-rise building.

"I have to pray," said a cabbie who did not want to give his name," I have no choice but to break the rules."

The difference is I won't take a job that requires me to work on Sunday. I would never tell my boss that I'll come in on Sunday, and then duck out for a few hours for afternoon prayer. That's just dishonest.

Update by DMartyr:

The mosque in question is on the corner of Riverside Drive and West 72nd Street. This Google map image is dated June, 2011:

(Click on image for fuller view)

November 30, 2011

At first I thought this was the UFC, but it's not. It's the CFC, which I had to look up. It's Australia's version of the UFC, but still, this isn't Lebanon or Iran where the terrorists in Hezbollah might be more welcome.

They're up to CFC 19, and this is from CFC 11, so it's got to be a couple of years old but I hadn't heard about it until Aaron Zelin pointed it out on twitter. He mentions that the match took place in the US, but I'm thinking that the person who wrote the Arabic description of the match probably couldn't tell the difference between an Australian and American accent.

Obviously, the wrong guy got beat down.

Here's a screenshot of the winner holding up the flag. His name is -- get this -- Muhammad Ali. The resolution isn't that great, but the entire video is below.

November 22, 2011

Sometimes little nuggets like this get stuck into legislation without any one noticing. So obscure, in fact, that President Obama signed the bill:

The conferees support the FBI’s policy prohibiting any formal non-investigative cooperation with unindicted co-conspirators in terrorism cases. The conferees expect the FBI to insist on full compliance with this policy by FBI field offices and to report to the Committees on Appropriations regarding any violation of the policy.

More on the implications over at PJMedia.

October 26, 2011

Department of Homeland Security Advisory Council member Mohamed Elibiary has apparently been shopping around official use only type documents to media outlets in hopes that they would run a story accusing the Texas Department of Public Safety of "Islamophobia". The funny thing is even members of the MSM wouldn't take the story since the accusations were apparently groundless.

But Patrick Poole over at PJM seems to think that Elibiary may have been at least partially motivated to discredit Rick Perry. I don't know about that, but the Islamophobe meme has become just mainstream enough that I'm a little surprised the reporters spiked the story.

October 21, 2011

Daily Caller[All emphasis mine]

Top Justice Department officials convened a meeting Wednesday where invited Islamist[radical jihadist...ed] advocates lobbied them for cutbacks in anti-terror funding, changes in agents’ training manuals, additional curbs on investigators and a legal declaration that U.S. citizens’ criticism of Islam constitutes racial discrimination[Umm, Islam is NOT a race...hello..ed].

The department’s “civil rights lawyers are top of the line — I say this with utter honesty — I know they can come up with a way” to redefine criticism as discrimination, said Sahar Aziz, a female, Egyptian-American lawyer.

“I’d be willing to give a shot at it,” said Aziz, who is a fellow at the Michigan-based Muslim advocacy group, the Institute for Social Policy & Understanding

The audience of Islamist [radical jihadist...ed]advocates and department officials included Tom Perez, who heads the department’s division of civil rights.

“We must continue to have the open and honest and critical dialogue that you saw in the robust debate,” Perez responded in an enthusiastic closing speech a few minutes after Aziz made her demands at the event.

“I sat here the entire time, taking notes,” Perez said. “I have some very concrete thoughts … in the aftermath of this.”

The meeting at George Washington University showcased the expanding alliance between American progressives and Islamists[radical jihadist...ed], said Andrew McCarthy, a former federal prosecutor in New York.

Progressives “are making these Islamist[radical jihadist..ed] groups into the [political] representatives of Muslims in the United States,” he told The Daily Caller. That elevation of Islamists[radical jihadist..ed] to a leadership role sidelines the majority of American Muslims who don’t want Islamist[radical jihadist..ed] leaders, as well as American Muslims who are female or gay, he said.[Well said..ed]

McCarthy investigated and prosecuted Egyptian-born Imam Omar Abdel-Rahman, dubbed “the blind sheik,” for urging Muslims to kill New Yorkers. Abdel-Rahman was sentenced to life imprisonment in 1996.[More...]

Carry on.. CAIR at #OccupyWallStreet and progressive dhimmis..

h/t Herr Wilson

September 29, 2011

Program launched to teach press about Muslim sensitivities blames 'right-wing activists.'

I thought most journalists already downplay waring jihad. Not enough for Soros/Media Matters/Center for American Progress/etc.. I suppose:

In about 30 pages of text with links to other reports and articles, journalists can go through and read about the history of Islam, Muslims in America, and how to cover stories on Islam. Besides learning basic facts about Muslims and their history, the course adds ways to put ''jihad'' into perspective, attack conservatives, and provide a list of liberal groups that can be contacted for expert advice and quotes.

The pre and post-assessments give a hint as to the nature of the course. One question asked, ''What grievances might sources associated with 'Political Islam' hold against Western journalists?'' The answer is that ''Western journalists are seen as all of the following: ''hostile to Islam,'' ''focus too much on Islamic violence,'' ''viewed as water carriers for Western government agendas,'' and ''thought to be unable to understand Islam unless they embrace Islam.''

Course instructors Lawrence Pintak and Stephen Franklin are both former foreign correspondents. Pintak serves as dean at The Edward R. Murrow College of Communication at Washington State University, which is a partner of the project. He also has two books on journalism and Islam and defends the biased, activist network Al Jazzera English.

This course is ''A project of The Poynter Institute funded by The Knight Foundation.'' Soros's Open Society Foundations have worked closely with The Knight Foundation. They partnered up to start the Investigative News Network, which received $200,000 from the Knight Foundation and $100,000 from the Open Society Foundations. The Knight Foundations President and CEO, Alberto Ibarguen, is also on the board for AOL and yet another key Soros backed group, the progressive investigative reporting start-up ProPublica

September 21, 2011

Predictable

Students at Columbia University say they are “excited” about the prospect of dining with one of the world’s most brutal chief executives, Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Scheduled to speak on 23 September 2011 at his fifth United Nations (UN) General Assembly appearance, Ahmadinejad has somehow been permitted to invite Columbia student members of a group called CIRCA, the Columbia International Relations Council and Association, to a private dinner.

When threatened with civil and criminal legal action by the Israel Law Center, Columbia president Lee C. Bollinger hastened to clarify that the event would not be held on campus. Nevertheless, the failure of Columbia students and faculty to recognize the moral repugnancy of appearing anywhere willingly in public with a man personally responsible for directing the vicious suppression of his own people’s struggle to be free, as well as his country’s Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) programs and global terrorist activities is troubling, to say the least.

As Mona Charen asked plaintively in her 16 September 2011 National Review Online op-ed, “Are leading American universities producing moral illiterates?” Unfortunately, the answer to that question clearly is “Yes”[Continue reading]

September 12, 2011

Patrick Poole

When President Obama hosted his annual iftar dinner in August to commemorate Ramadan, the list of invitees published by the White House was curiously missing the names of several attendees — all of whom are top leaders of organizations known to be purveyors of jihadist ideology. But it was not like they had crashed the party. One of the unlisted, Mohamed Magid, head of the Muslim Brotherhood-linked Islamic Society of North America, was photographed by Reuters sitting at the front table only a few feet from the president as he spoke.

This was just the most recent episode in the federal government’s disastrous attempts at outreach to the Muslim community since the 9/11 attacks. With the release of President Obama’s new strategic plan to combat “violent extremism” by expanding outreach to these same terror-tied groups, the present administration seems intent on compounding the problems wrought by its predecessors.

Misguided outreach activities began long before 9/11, with the best example being the case of Abdurahman Alamoudi.

Alamoudi was the conduit through which much of the U.S. government’s outreach was pursued following the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. Not only was he asked by the Clinton administration to help train and certify all Muslim military chaplains, his organization being the first to do so, but he also was appointed by the State Department in 1997 as a goodwill ambassador to the Middle East, making six taxpayer-funded trips. It is fair to say that during this period, Alamoudi was the most prominent and politically connected Muslim leader in America.

As we now know, Alamoudi was indicted in October 2003 for moving money on behalf of Libyan intelligence in an assassination plot targeting Saudi Prince (now King) Abdullah. The U.S. government has admitted that at the time he was being courted by Democrats and Republicans alike, he was a major fundraiser for al-Qaeda.

However, it is not as if the U.S. government was unaware of Alamoudi’s attachments. As far back as 1993, an informant told the FBI that Alamoudi was funneling regular payments from Osama bin Laden to Omar Abdel Rahman, the “blind sheikh” who was convicted of authorizing terror attacks against New York landmarks. In March 1996, Alamoudi’s association with Hamas leader Mousa Abu Marzook was exposed in the pages of the Wall Street Journal. Two years later, the State Department came under fire by the New York Post for inviting Alamoudi to official events despite his known remarks in support of terrorism and terrorist leaders.

When President Bush took office, Alamoudi was quickly courted by the new administration. In June 2001, the Jerusalem Post reported that Alamoudi was going to be part of a White House meeting with Vice President Cheney despite the fact that Alamoudi was known to have attended a terror confab in Beirut earlier that year featuring representatives from virtually every major Islamic terrorist organization in the world, including al-Qaeda.

Yet just days after the 9/11 attacks, Alamoudi was one of the Muslim leaders asked to appear with President Bush at the Islamic Center of Washington, D.C. That same week, one of Alamoudi’s close associates, Muzammil Siddiqi, was asked to deliver an Islamic prayer and to represent the entire Muslim-American community at the national prayer service mourning the fallen.[Continue reading]

September 10, 2011

Via Andrea

Two mind sets. Neither will ever forget 9/11/01. One mourns. One celebrates. And the hate continues unabated at YouTube.

This video, a year old is just one example. Have no doubt the song is not of mourning.[Lashkar e taiba]...Editor note: The video is one of thousands by supporters of LeT which Howie posted regarding YouTube ignoring our flagging]

Why does this matter? Note the recent arrest of Jubair Ahmad for his work aiding the Pakistani terrorist group Lashkar-e-Taiba. Lashkar-e-Taiba and its front group Jama'at-ud-Da'wah have a huge presence on Youtube. Also they are both specially designated terrorist entities. While Youtube removed the obvious accounts connected to this person, we've been quietly flagging a few videos and reporting some users behind the scenes in order to get a handle on Youtube's reaction. They've not taken down a single video or user we've looked at. NOT. A . SINGLE. ONE.

Of course its against the law to knowingly provide hosting to Jama'at-ud-Da'wah and Lashkar-e-Taiba. While we applaud the arrest of the individual the US Dept of Treasury has never ever pursued prosecution of a provider for knowingly providing these services. NOT. A. SINGLE. ONE. (please please super please correct me if I'm wrong on this)

This video 17 months up, glorifies India's "911" - the Mumbai terror attack[lashkar-e-taiba.wmv]

Both are uploaded by a supporter of the terrorist organization, Lashkar-e-Taiba. And then LoonWatchers, another supporter of jihad, defends these videos as "pure political speech." To a LoonWatcher ONLY pro islam speech is "free."

The entire " Islamophobia movement" has but one purpose, to deflect attention from the jihad for khilafah. Flippin's sole purpose is to expose the jihad, in particular it's use of social media. LoonWatchers et al are Flippin's natural prey.

Flippin has gone beyond reasonable lengths to afford LoonWatchers et al the opportunity to tell the whole truth.[on twitter..ed] To some that seemed "a waste of time", a polite version. However, by going to such lengths, Flippin has confirmed beyond a reasonable doubt that LoonWatchers et al are NOT innocents. Flippin's Graphic Dept. is therefore "Weapons Free".

Enjoy or dismay as you choose.[More...]

UPDATE: YT user above finally OWND!! Aaron has a list of "its" friends/subscribers here.

Related:
Loonwatch: Jesus Loves His Enemies...and Then Kills Them
Rickie Martin of WaPo, Loon Watch & Mollie Norris
The DOJ's escalating criminalization of speech[<--Loon Watch]

September 09, 2011

Kamal Said Hassan has been released from jail and given house arrest. He's the last of three Somalis who went off to fight the jihad for the al Qaeda linked al Shabaab movement before returning home. The other two are were freed earlier.

Call me crazy, but I was under the impression that terrorism was a serious offense? I guess I had that all wrong.

Vestibulum ut dulce Jane Novack

September 06, 2011

Here's the deal: I haven't talked much about the anti-shariah movement in the US because I just don't think it's a large enough problem to devote my time to it. I just don't see courts rushing to use foreign sharia law to decide cases. You can find a single court here and there that considered sharia, but that's one or two court out of thousands and on appeal those courts were smacked down.

You can find solitary cases of a lot of crazy things, even in courts. Solitary cases are not what trends are made of.

If I did think that sharia was coming to the US I'd spend a lot more time on it. I think I've made my stance on sharia clear: I don't like it, even in so-called "moderate" forms.

I just don't think that it's coming here. Let the crazies try to adopt it, it aint going to happen.

In Europe? That's much more of a danger. But here? Not going to happen. At least, not within my lifetime. And the future threat here is dim given current immigration patterns.

So, all these antisharia bills at the legislative level are just a waste of time.

However, I don't think these bills say anything about islamophobia as their critics have argued. You cannot equate wasting time with islamophobia since most of what state legislatures do is a waste of time.

Given that, I'm not sure why the American Islamic Leadership Coalition is supporting a Michigan bill to ban sharia. Whatever their motivation, I'm pretty sure islamophobia isn't it:

Washington, DC (September 2, 2011) – A coalition of diverse American Muslim leaders has announced support for a proposed bill in the Michigan State Assembly, HB 4679, that is intended to bar Michigan courts from enforcing any foreign law, if doing so violates any rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution and/or the state of Michigan’s constitution.

Like many Americans, members of the American Islamic Leadership Coalition (AILC) have been observing the efforts of a growing number of state legislatures, which are seeking to address the incompatibility of various shari‘ah court systems around the world with the principles and foundations of our Constitutional republic and its laws. As American Muslims, we believe that the law should treat people of all faiths equally, while protecting Muslims and non-Muslims alike from extremist attempts to use the legal instrument of shari‘ah (also known as Islamic jurisprudence, or fiqh) to incubate, within the West, a highly politicized and dangerous understanding of Islam that is generally known as “Islamism,” or “radical Islam.”

We see no evidence that statutes like HB 4769 will adversely impact the free exercise of our personal pietistic observance of Islam, which is not in conflict with the U.S. or Michigan constitutions. We recognize that not only Muslims, but also Jews, Christians and all people of faith need the government to protect their right to peaceful assembly, mediation and arbitration free of coercion, but also within the bounds of American constitutional principles. Therefore, we stand together as a diverse coalition in support of any legislation that serves to protect and integrate our communities into the fabric of this great nation, by strengthening our accountability to the laws of the land, and the constitutions of the various states in which we live.

As American Muslims we are conscious of the fact that Muslim Brotherhood legacy groups and other Islamists and their surrogates in the U.S. are trying their best to portray any opposition to manifestations of shari‘ah law as “racism” and “discrimination against Muslims.” However, as a coalition of traditional, liberal and secular Muslim Americans, we denounce this fear-mongering and playing of the race card, which only serves to mask the Islamists’ highly politicized agenda. According to AILC member C. Holland Taylor, “the Islamist agenda threatens not only the well-being of the United States and its inhabitants, but also undermines and distorts the highest principles of Islam itself.”

“Michigan House Bill 4769 seeks to ensure that American Muslims can live in freedom and safety, in accordance with our constitutional principles, and not be enveloped by the tentacles of medieval, man-made laws that have been falsely accorded divine status,” said the AILC.

“To equate Bill 4769 to racism is not only dishonest, but is a poor and clumsy attempt at making ordinary Muslim Americans feel alien in their own homeland, while creating a rift between Muslims and the rest of our country,” said AILC member Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser.

Michigan House Bill 4769 states:

“[To] …limit the application and enforcement by a court, arbitrator, or administrative body of foreign laws that would impair constitutional rights; to provide for modification or voiding of certain contractual provisions or agreements that would result in a violation of constitutional rights; and to require a court, arbitrator, or administrative body to take certain actions to prevent violation of constitutional rights.”

The AILC statement reinforces the American Muslim community’s commitment to the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause and the separation between religion and state. Unfortunately, Islamist groups would like to compromise this separation and provide cover to medieval, misogynistic and homophobic laws that no Muslim is obligated to demand as public law.

“Shari‘ah law, wherever it has been applied in the public domain, be it in Iran, Saudi Arabia or Pakistan, has resulted in untold misery and oppression of Muslims, in particular Muslim women, by Islamists and dictators who invoke shari‘ah law to justify their rule,” said AILC member Manda Ervin. “Many of us fled the Muslim world to escape shari‘ah law and to practice Islam in our personal lives, by moving to the USA and other western countries. We do not wish these laws to follow us here,” she concluded.

The Michigan state senators are not alone in expressing concern about foreign laws creeping into North America under the guise of religious freedom. Many Muslim academics, religious scholars and human rights activists have voiced their concern.

The contrast between what has occurred in Britain and in Canada provides a roadmap for how the U.S. may address these legal issues. In Britain, shari‘ah arbitration courts have been allowed to assume virtually unchecked control of legal arrangements in many Muslim communities. This is creating a ghettoized, medieval and separatist state within Britain. In Canada, however, local Muslims led strong opposition to the Islamists’ shari‘ah agenda and were successful in preventing its implementation, thereby sparing our Northern neighbor the fate of so many Muslims in the United Kingdom, where women are commonly subjected to forced marriage and the denial of basic human rights.

“We Muslims in Canada defeated an attempt by Islamists to sneak shari‘ah law into Ontario,” said AILC member Tarek Fatah, who has been on the front lines of this struggle for many years. “We recognized the damage shari‘ah had inflicted on Muslims in the UK, and its oppressive nature in Muslim-majority countries, and decided to oppose it. We urge American Muslims not to succumb to the Islamists’ propaganda, and to back the Michigan Bill, which will protect Muslims and non-Muslims alike from the impact of foreign laws that violate the U.S. or Michigan constitutions.”

September 01, 2011

The Daily Caller

Sen. Joe Lieberman, the independent Connecticut chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, said Thursday that the Obama administration has refused to use the term “violent Islamist extremism,” arguing that the White House’s overly cautious word parsing constitutes a refusal to ”speak honestly.”

Sen. Lieberman, an independent who caucuses with Democrats, also said this makes the global fight against Islamic terrorism “harder” for the United States.

Lieberman focused his criticism on a recent report issued by the administration, titled “Empowering Local Partners to Prevent Violent Extremism in the United States,” saying that it “suffers from several significant weaknesses.”

“The administration still refuses to call our enemy in this war by its proper name — violent Islamist extremism. [More..]

10 years after 9/11 and many of us are still living in a pre-9/11 world.

Perry/Lieberman 2012?

UPDATE: ZIP reminded me of this: Flashback May 2008: Lieberman to YouTube: Remove al Qaeda videos. Over 3 years later and Google's YouTube still hasn't changed. Google's Schmidt is Obama's "tech czar" so take it for what it's worth.

August 30, 2011

Patrick Poole rightly noted that Dr. Salah Sultan was an antisemetic racist five years ago. For that he was called a racist, a bigot, and an Islamophobe.

Sultan is the same guy that last week called for the assassination of the Israeli Ambassador to Egypt.

An Islamophobe. Right.

Which reminds me of a joke.

A racist, an Islamophobe, and a victim of Islamophobia walk into a bar.

The bar blows up.

Real funny, huh?

If you think that all Muslims are terrorists or Islamist supremacists then you are an Islamophobe.

If you think that none of them are? Well, then you're just an idiot.

I got this as a bleg in the mail today to link a campaign to be nice to Muslims. As unnecessary for adults as an anti-racist campaign would be. It reminds me of the Getting Gay with Kids episode of South Park. You know, the kind of thing you should have learned in the 1st grade: be nice.

Of course Muslims are part of the fabric of society. Of course Muslims are our first defense against terrorism.

But the latter is only true because it is from within the Muslim community that most domestic terrorists arise.

So, don't be a d*ck to Muslims. But don't give them a free pass either.

Just treat them like you would all human beings. Which means holding them to the same standards, including calling them extremists if they support things like sharia law. Which, by the way, most Muslims in America don't support.

I wouldn't hesitate calling a white supremacist a racist, we shouldn't hesitate to call an Islamist supremacist a fascist.

There is such a thing as an Islamophobe just like there are racists. But the word Islamophobe is thrown around in much the same way that the word racist is thrown around. The phenomenon is overblown and over hyped. It's a way to cut off discussion when a person has no other argument.

And, frankly, the word is used so much that it makes those using the word just look like a bunch of whiny pansies.

I grow tired of those using it.

Maybe my childhood was unique but my parents taught me something about sticks and stones may break my bones, etc, etc.

I had to learn that one early because I, like Muslims, grew up as a religious minority who often got crap from the other kids at school.

And now as an adult I realize that that's just part of life. Just learn to deal with it. If stupid remarks from stupid people are your biggest problems than count yourself luckier than most.

August 28, 2011

Well, not offending their modesty, just documenting them and others at From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free aka Jerusalem Day aka BDS aka Al Quds Day rally complete with Hizbollah flags. The Park Guard was way out of line trying to stop this, and not too bright to boot!

Scaramouche, Sassywire and I (Blazingcatfur) were asked not to film the Muslimas attending the Al Quds Rally at Queen's Park in Toronto by a Queen's Park "Special Constable" which is a fancy name for security guard.

We were told it would offend the modesty of the Israel hating crowd. Evidently it's just fine for Muslims to wave Hezbollah Flags and hurl Blood Libels at Jews, but god forbid you film the chick waving the the flag of a banned terrorist group in Canada.

UPDATE: Must read: Snippet

Ontarians who were under the impression that they live in a free society where they can use cameras in public places may be surprised to learn they are not free from harassment by agents of the Province.

Well-known Canadian political blogger Blazing Cat Fur was at Queen's Park Sunday afternoon to record the al Quds Day rally held by CASMO, a Khomeinist hate group that has posted anti-Israel videos to its website by the neo-Nazi former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke.

A Queen's Park Security Guard, an employee of the Provincial civil service, attempted to get BCF to stop filming since it was "offensive" to the Muslim women who had gathered to denounce and vilify Israel in front of the provincial legislature while waving the flag of a banned terrorist organization.

August 25, 2011

When I first saw the headline in this article, I couldn't believe it. I was expecting to find allegations that the CIA is covertly monitoring Muslims in America, which is the insinuation:

With CIA Help, NYPD Moves Covertly In Muslim Areas

Any one other than the many paranoids within Muslim communities who falsely believe that their every action is monitored by big brother. And who fuels these conspiracy theories? CAIR, natch:

"These revelations send the message to American Muslims that they are being viewed as a suspect community and that their constitutional rights may be violated with impunity," said Ibrahim Hooper, spokesman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations. "The Justice Department must initiate an immediate investigation of the civil rights implications of this spy program and the legality of its links to the CIA."

The CIA trained a police detective at the Farm, the agency's spy school in Virginia, then returned him to New York, where he put his new espionage skills to work inside the United States.

But it gets worse:

And just last month, the CIA sent a senior officer to work as a clandestine operative inside police headquarters.

Which sounds an awful lot to me like he was helping the NYPD do their job since traditionally local law enforcement agencies are not trained for intelligence gathering activities.

I was under the impression that the 9/11 Commission Report blamed the intelligence failures leading to the the attacks on the fact that the CIA, FBI, and local law enforcement agencies did not sufficiently share information? Now CAIR wants us to believe that any sharing of information between the CIA and local law enforcement agencies is a bad thing.

If CAIR gets its way then we will go back our pre-9/11 stance.

The original AP article had such little merit that the copy version that NPR linked to yesterday -- which I was sent and which I planned to write about today -- was yanked from its servers. It was little more than a CAIR press release. The same link at NPR now leads to a story about how some Muslims feel victimized by law enforcement.

I would suggest that such feelings of victimization can only be overcome when groups like CAIR stop making ridiculous accusations against our nation's law enforcement community. There is no conspiracy against Muslims. They are not out to get you.

The fact remains, though, that the vast majority (but not all), of planned or executed terrorist acts within the US over the last ten years have been from Muslims. Most of these were thwarted because law enforcement officials were able to set up covert sting operations, the very thing it seems the CIA is trying to help the NYPD with.

CAIR objects to these successful counter-terror methods precisely ... why?

If I was as paranoid as CAIR I might make an insinuation that they wanted these acts of terror to succeed. Which I actually don't think is the case.

CAIR claims that Muslim communities are our first line of defense against terror. This is true.

What they constantly forget to mention is that this is the case precisely because it is from within some of these communities that terrorists emerge.

What they and the media also forget is that no one made CAIR the spokesmen for Muslims in America.

And the fact that they feed the paranoia which makes it less likely that Muslims will cooperate with law enforcement means that they are not part of the solution. In fact, they are a very big part of the problem.

UPDATE by SH: CAIR twitter feed:

August 19, 2011

She's in the US. She's breaking US law. I don't see why we don't arrest her? At the very least, send her back to Saudi Arabia:

An Alkhobar woman studying in the United States is taking credit for destroying 23 Danish websites that denigrated the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him)...

Nouf Rashid told the Arabic newspaper she was hacking into Danish websites having references to cartoons of the Prophet along with other sites that had questionable content in her view.

We can't arrest every hacker, there are just too many of them. But when a hacker tries to impose a narrow political ideology on the rest of the world through criminal behavior, then the action rises above what I view as the acceptable limits of our toleration.

Send her to jail or deport her ass back to a country that wants to limit freedom of religion and freedom of speech.

Zuhdi Jasser had an excellent piece in the WSJ yesterday decrying the political correctness inside the US military that granted Naser Abdo conscientious objector status months before Abdo was caught in the final stages of planning for a terrorist attack on or near Fort Hood, Tx. WSJ:

[T]he theological underpinnings of Islamist radicalization remain ignored by military officials, who fear appearing to discriminate against Muslim soldiers. That fear has been bolstered by leading Muslim Brotherhood legacy groups in America. Their platform of political Islam teaches Islamic revivalism and an aversion to the separation of mosque and state.

Salah Al-Sawy of the Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America (AMJA) concluded in a 2008 online fatwa, "As for optionally obtaining citizenship of a non-Muslim country it is definitely prohibited without a doubt, moreover it could be a form of apostasy." An AMJA paper in 2009 stated that, "the basic conflict between the declaration of faith and testimony that there is no God except Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah and the declaration and pledge of Allegiance of the USA is irreconcilable."

These ideas need to be confronted. There are many Muslim leaders who can lead that defense of liberty and of the need to separate mosque and state. We must take their side over that of the Islamists.

August 18, 2011

People, this is good news indeed:

The Abu Dhabi Gallup Center asked Muslim-Americans which group represented them, if any. The Council on American-Islamic Relations had the highest level of support, with 12 percent of men and 11 percent of women choosing it. The Islamic Society of North America came in second, with four and seven percent of men and women choosing it, respectively. The Muslim Public Affairs Council came in third, with six percent of men and one percent of women. The Islamic Circle of North America came in last, with 2 percent of men choosing it and less than one percent of women choosing it.

Altogether, that means only 24 percent of Muslim-American men and 19 percent of Muslim-American women feel represented by one of the above five Muslim Brotherhood fronts. Of these, a significant portion are likely unaware of their favored organization’s ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas. The ability of these groups to jointly mobilize this minority of Muslim-Americans in order to influence the political process, as well as the rest of the Muslim-American community, is not to be overlooked. However, the survey shows that a majority of Muslim-Americans do not look to the Brotherhood network for leadership, and it is susceptible to a challenge from within the community if enough resources are available.

And for all of you who keep telling me I'm wrong about separating Islam from Islamists, here's some cannon fodder for you.

the survey found that only 50 percent of Muslim-Americans take the Koran entirely literally.

The stats aren't all glass-half-full, but I'll let you cruise over the the story for your daily dose of pessimism. The teaser is that the stats might suggest that foreign born Muslim immigrants are less radical than their native born counterparts.

August 17, 2011

Cowards! I hope Trey and Matt do an episode about whoever it was who made the decision to censor the South Park Season 14 DVD sets which do not include either of the episodes featuring the Muslim prophet Muhammad.

If you bought your box set in the US, the episodes are there. Anywhere else? You're out of luck:

Episodes 200 and 201 are missing from the Australian edition...

The episodes are also missing from all editions other than the US box set released in April. The reason? They were deemed unsafe to broadcast.

And why aren't we hearing more about this? I'm pretty sure the Simpsons answered that one ....

August 16, 2011

Oops, I meant aid to elite IDF units:

Senator Patrick Leahy claims Shayetet 13 unit, undercover Duvdevan unit, and the Israel Air Force Shaldag unit are involved in human rights violations in occupied territories.

Leahy says legislation doesn't aim at Israel, but could hit it.

Senator Leahy does not discuss private conversations he has had for decades with Israeli leaders.

However, the Haaretz article contains significant inaccuracies. He has not proposed legislation to withhold U.S. aid to units of the Israel Defense Forces.

By way of general background about the Leahy Amendment, the law applies to U.S. aid to foreign security forces around the globe and is intended to be applied consistently across the spectrum of U.S. military aid abroad.

Remember recently the Homeland Insecurity erroneously, so they say, put Israel on a list of 36 nations which

“have shown a tendency to promote, produce, or protect terrorist organizations or their members.”

Who's next to make a mistake?

Related: White House cleanses Israel from website

h/t @DougPologe

UPDATE: Daniel Pipes must read: White House mischief

When HAMAS-linked CAIR asked West to surrender his fight against stealth jihad by cutting ties with some purveyors of uncomfortable and politically incorrect truth, Congressman LTC Allen West replied:

"Nuts!"

God, I love this man. Why couldn't HE have been our first black President?

Hat Tip: Jihad watch. Image of letter below the fold.

June 30, 2011

Hedy Epstein has joined the rest of Islams useful idiots on the boat to Gaza. Hamas especially like people like her, makes for good publicity and/or a human shield. I'm sure the radical Islamists mingling among the other activists will keep a good eye on her. Old woman, self-hating Jew, her life doesn't mean a damn to them.

Stupid old woman.

The following is a must read:

Israeli Soldiers Mother

My message to Hedy Epstein as she sails to Gaza:

Your participation, in the flotilla brings shame to you and worse is a betrayal of your family, those that died in Auschwitz. It is hard to comprehend how distorted your view of life, of Judaism, and of Israel must be to bring you to the point that you sail against your own people. Yes, you’ll say you sail for human rights, for humanity and some such nonsense but last year’s flotilla – and very likely this one, displayed the worst of humanity.[...]

As a Jew, as an Israeli, I am deeply ashamed of you and believe you have betrayed all that they died for. I have little doubt you will rationalize this away as something honorable, it isn’t; as something brave, it isn’t. There was a reason why your parents worked so hard to get you on that children’s transport that saved your life…whatever that reason was – it was not so you could betray the people they were, the religion they held.

Shame on you, Hedy Epstein and may you parents find comfort not in you, but in so many of the other children who survived as you did – but who came to live in Israel to build it, not to destroy it; to honor it, not to betray it. Indeed, Hedy Epstein – shame on you.

I didn't want to just link Jim Hoft's post

The headline is all that was needed.

Now go read about the dick err, I mean Obi One

Kinda dick related:

But I Thought Obama Was Kind of a Dick Every Day

June 21, 2011

I'm not opposed to conscientious objector status in principle. The problem is with it in practice in today's military.

There is no draft, which means that each and every person who is in the military volunteered for it. This includes thousands of Muslim men and women who have served honorably for their country in Afghanistan and Iraq.

But in every large organization there will be asshats. Even in the military. This is a given based on statistical laws of large numbers.

We can't account for every nutjob and asshat who gets through the rigorous weeding out process that goes into selecting people for the military.

So, I don't blame the military for letting this anti-American asshat into the ranks. But I do blame military lawyers for allowing him to use the I'm-a-Muslim excuse for receiving conscientious objector status.

Even Cassius Clay had a better argument for why he couldn't serve in the military, using the same argument: he was being drafted.

But this guy? This guy signed up for the military voluntarily and after we were already in two wars in Muslim countries.

And the military is now saying that Muslims can get out of their voluntarily signed service contracts based on the fact that they are Muslims? I think Poole's most important point is this one:

the U.S. Army has tacitly endorsed a religiously bigoted position that it is perfectly fine for Muslim service members to kill non-Muslims, but killing their co-religionists is totally out-of-bounds and is grounds for an honorable discharge. READ THE REST.

As Poole further points out in his article there are many Muslim organizations that say it's okay to serve in the US military. Those organizations that issue fatwas against serving in the US military I think we would all agree are, in fact, radicals.

So has the US military now legitimized the arguments of radical Islamists? The same radical Islamists that we are fighting? Yes it has.

And unless I'm missing something here, it's an insult to the thousands of Muslims who have served honorably in the GWOT.

Or something. It's written in Australian, not English, so it's a little confusing.

But on the bright side, at least she's allowed to drive: Muslim woman escapes jail by remaining behind her burqa.

Maybe they should deport her to Suadi Arabia where this wouldn't be such a problem?

June 20, 2011

June 15, 2011

I don't think this will come as a shock to any one, but CAIR has been funneling OIC money for "anti-Islamophobia" events on college campuses. I'm not for Islamophobia -- the irrational fear of Islam. I'm totally against it.

Unfortunately the word is used to describe any one the least bit critical of any Muslim or even the underlying ideologies that spurn many Muslims into doing so many bad things in the world.

What's ironic, though, is that the OIC wants to ban all criticism of Islam. Their goal is to use the power of the state to punish those that disagree with them. Which scares me. I don't think that's irrational nor does it make me afraid of Islam.

Especially given that the OIC already has its way in nearly 100% of Muslim majority countries, where blasphemy or something akin to it is already illegal. Even in "moderate" and "secular" Muslim majority countries.

I do fear fascism in all its forms when such fascism poses a real danger. And unfortunately for Muslims one of the embodiments of fascism in the Muslim world is political Islam. And it is on the march.

June 14, 2011

NY groups gather to oppose King's Muslim hearing

King has scheduled a Wednesday hearing in Washington focusing on U.S. prisons.

A coalition of civil rights, religious and interfaith groups met Tuesday on New York's Long Island. They're decrying what they say is the stereotyping of both Muslims and prisoners.[More ]

While Rep. Peter King is spreading fear and anti-Muslim bias throughout the nation, a group of Long Islanders will gather to share a voice of reason and acceptance.

On Tuesday, a coalition of civil rights, religious, and interfaith groups, will protest the Long Island congressman’s upcoming so-called radicalization hearing targeting the American Muslim community by hosting a counter-hearing on religious freedom (Scroll down for details).

The coalition, Long Island Neighbors for American Values, recently formed to promote diversity and tolerance and to counter attempts to discriminate or otherwise target individuals or groups based on religion or ethnicity. It is made up of more than two dozen social justice organizations and interfaith groups.[ Read the rest to see who the coalition members are]

Islams useful idiots out in full force...

June 12, 2011

Double feature!

BTW, did you know the US boat to Gaza is called The Audacity of Hope? [HA Green Room must read]

To see list of passengers on the Audacity click here. <----please click, official website, maybe they will enjoy the above videos!

Sea Hitler" related:

Random Furballs ...Mister we could use a man like Prince Philip again
Sea Hitler Lawsuit – Canada’s Gaza Boat Sued For A Cool Million
"Your tax dollars ensure the "Sea Hitler" Fundraiser is held in a safe place!"

June 10, 2011

youtube.com/user/str1v1n2martyrdom a repeat offender via Andrea

A request for reconsideration of suspension of BlazingCatFur's YouTube account resulted in this -

Dear Blazingcatfur:
Thank you for submitting your video appeal to YouTube. After further review of the content, we've determined that your video does violate our Community Guidelines and have upheld our original decision.
We appreciate your understanding.
Sincerely, — The YouTube Team

For the umpteenth time in four years I am going to point out a few YouTube users who violate the Y/T community guidelines, and I shall raise the question, again for the umpteenth time - Where the hell are your morals/your ethics Google/YouTube?
I'll let you, the audience, be the judge of which account/s should be suspended[...][my choice...ed but be sure to see the rest]:

StriveForMartyrdom currently has at least four accounts. We have gotten 21 of his other accounts suspended to date, and yet, YouTube ONLY goes after him if we bring attention to him

UPDATE: Legionnaire of the banned sez:

If calling al-Qaeda "depraved savages" earns Blazing Cat Fur an immediate ban, yet enormous amounts of complaints are required to get Google to pull blatantly pro-terrorist videos, a sane Justice Department would be investigating Google for "providing material support to terrorists".

Too bad we don't have a sane Justice Department...

June 01, 2011

Via PJM and TheBlaze:

Islams useful idiots will be tossed aside once they are no longer needed...

May 25, 2011

2 words, domestic dhimmis

Interesting comment on video:

I, for one, have not castrated anyone unless you count.....

h/t dagawker