Islam - Spawn of Satan

MOGADISHU, Somalia — Islamic insurgents trying to overthrow the government of Somalia cut off the right hands and left legs of four young men accused of theft on Thursday, bringing their strict brand of justice to the capital for the first time, witnesses said.

Somalia has been reeling from a pitched battle between the transitional government and the insurgents, particularly in the capital, Mogadishu, where hundreds have been killed and tens of thousands displaced in recent weeks alone.

Responding to what he called an urgent request by Somali officials, the State Department spokesman, Ian Kelley, said Thursday that the United States had provided Somalia’s government with weapons and ammunition “to repel the onslaught of extremist forces” that were “spoiling efforts to bring peace and stability” to the nation.

The Shabab, one of the principal Islamic groups fighting to topple the government, was behind the punishment. It has imposed harsh sentences in other parts of the country that it controls and, at least once, stoned to death a teenage girl who said she had been raped, an act that drew international condemnation.

But residents described the amputations on Thursday as the first in the capital since a clan-based Islamic court carried out similar sentences about 15 years ago. Analysts said the Shabab, which is accused of having links to Al Qaeda, might be trying to win popular support in the capital by showing that it could achieve stability in the chaotic nation through a firm enactment of Shariah, or Islamic law.

The issue has emerged as a contentious element in the battle for control. The government is led by moderate Islamists who have, at least officially, agreed to make Shariah the basis of Somalia’s legal system, a move that could politically isolate the more extreme wing of the insurgency by undermining its claims of legitimacy.

But the government’s enactment of Islamic law seems to have been delayed, in part because it is struggling to simply survive, much less carry out new measures. So it remains unclear exactly how the government’s interpretation of Shariah would be practiced.

The amputations of the four young men, who had been accused of stealing items like a cellphone or a pistol, took place near a former animal market in front of a crowd of more than 100 people, many of them women and children. Some shouted “God is great” at the spectacle, witnesses said, while others fell to the ground in shock and fear.

The Shabab said it would care for the men until their wounds had healed.

Close

The author, Lou Pritchett, is a well-known public speaker who retired after a successful 36-year career as the VP World Sales for Proctor and Gamble.

Foremost Leader in Change Management

Lou Pritchett is one of corporate America’s true living legends- an acclaimed author, dynamic teacher and one of the world’s highest rated speakers. Successful corporate executives everywhere recognize him as the foremost leader in change management. Lou changed the way America does business by creating an audacious concept that came to be known as “partnering.” Pritchett rose from soap salesman to Vice-President, Sales and Customer Development for Procter and Gamble and over the course of 36 years, made corporate history.

AN OPEN LETTER TO PRESIDENT OBAMA

Dear President Obama:

You are the thirteenth President under whom I have lived and unlike any of the others, you truly scare me. You scare me because after months of exposure, I know nothing about you.

You scare me because I do not know how you paid for your expensive Ivy League education and your upscale lifestyle and housing with no visible signs of support.

You scare me because you did not spend the formative years of youth growing up in America and culturally you are not an American.

You scare me because you have never run a company or met a payroll.

You scare me because you have never had military experience, thus don’t understand it at its core.. You scare me because you lack humility and ‘class’, always blaming others.

You scare me because for over half your life you have aligned yourself with radical extremists who hate America and you refuse to publicly denounce these radicals who wish to see America fail.

You scare me because you are a cheerleader for the ‘blame America’ crowd and deliver this message abroad.

You scare me because you want to change America to a European style country where the government sector dominates instead of the private sector.

You scare me because you want to replace our health care system with a government controlled one.

You scare me because you prefer ‘wind mills’ to responsibly capitalizing on our own vast oil, coal and shale reserves.

You scare me because you want to kill the American capitalist goose that lays the golden egg which provides the highest standard of living in the world.

You scare me because you have begun to use ‘extortion’ tactics against certain banks and corporations.

You scare me because your own political party shrinks from challenging you on your wild and irresponsible spending proposals.

You scare me because you will not openly listen to or even consider opposing points of view from intelligent people.

You scare me because you falsely believe that you are both omnipotent and omniscient.

You scare me because the media gives you a free pass on everything you do.

You scare me because you demonize and want to silence the Limbaughs, Hannitys, O’Relllys and Becks who offer opposing, conservative points of view.

You scare me because you prefer controlling over governing.

Finally, you scare me because if you serve a second term I will probably not feel safe in writing a similar letter in 8 years.

Lou Pritchett

The Obama administration is preparing to reinstate a fraud-riddled immigration program that has brought over 36,000 Somalis into the United States under questionable circumstances, including two dozen Minneapolis men that the FBI fears may be planning a terrorist attack.

The FBI has launched an “aggressive” manhunt for the men, who have “gone to ground” and have mysteriously disappeared, terrorism experts tell Newsmax. Authorities fear the men may have been recruited by extremists to carry out suicide attacks inside the United States, or abroad.

Critics of the State Department programs that brought the Somalis to America express grave concerns about the practice of admitting refugees from failed nation-states known to harbor extremists. It can be difficult or impossible to verify a person’s identity in such a country, let alone obtain knowledge of their past associations, several experts tell Newsmax.

One Somali refugee who vanished in early November, Shirwa Ahmed, re-emerged in northern Somalia in February behind the wheel of a truck packed with explosives.

Ahmed, whose family immigrated to the Minneapolis area in the mid-1990s, drove his truck into a crowd and triggered a massive explosion that left some 30 persons dead. Ahmed’s case marked the first known suicide bombing conducted by an American citizen, according to FBI director Robert S. Mueller III.

“It appears that this individual was radicalized in his hometown in Minnesota,” Mueller told the Council on Foreign Relations, warning that in the past two years, about two dozen Somali men have disappeared from their residences near Minneapolis.

Authorities say the men may have been recruited by al-Shabab, a terrorist group believed to have ties to al-Qaida. There has been speculation the men were radicalized at mosques in the area.

Ahmed’s recruitment and training, and the subsequent suicide attack, is especially worrisome for the FBI because of the other missing Somali-Americans. “It raised the question of whether these young men will one day come home, and, if so, what might they undertake here,” Mueller said.

Fox 9, a Minneapolis television station, reported that eight local refugees left the Twin Cities area on August 1, and 10 more departed on Nov. 4. The men’s families later found flight itineraries for travel from Dubai to Nairobi and on to Kenya. From there, it is believed they most likely entered Somalia by boat.

Counterterrorism experts worry that operatives who are already familiar with U.S. society and culture would be much more difficult to stop, if they were employed to attack the U.S. homeland.

Terrorism analyst Daveed Gartenstien-Ross recently told CBN: “There’s a concern that … they’re going to training camps and receiving the kind of training they would need to carry out some kind of mischief in the United States.”

Critics of the program that grants immigrants their refugee status, even when their past activities and associations cannot be thoroughly documented, point out that since 1991 Somalia has exhibited the same type of failed-nation status associated with the rise of Islamic extremism in Afghanistan. That nation provided al-Qaida with a safe haven prior to 9/11.

They cite the spate of piracy off the Horn of Africa, including the dramatic rescue of Captain Richard Phillips — who was freed after U.S. Navy SEAL sharpshooters shot and killed three Somali pirates — as evidence that Somalia is a dangerous hotbed of extremism.

Experts disagree over the level of cooperation between the pirates and Somalia’s radical Islamic warlords. A recent Der Spiegel report warned: “The pirates are increasingly working hand-in-hand with Islamists, who are allies of Osama bin Laden’s al-Qaida. It’s a terrifying alliance: the Pirates supply money and arms, while the Islamists have troops and the power on land.”

Jane’s Intelligence Review reports the pirate-Islamist alliance is “fragile.” In some cases, the pirates pay a percentage of their ransom money to al-Shabab units, in return for protection against land-based attacks on their bases.

Jane’s Intelligence also states that pirates have paid for military-style training at the hands of al-Shabab, conducted in terrorist boot camps.

Conservative foreign-policy expert Frank Gaffney, founder and president of the D.C.-based Center for Security Policy, is among those who perceives a definite link between Somali’s pirates and its violent Islamic extremists.

“Shariah-adherent Somali pirates are a threat to the world’s shipping,” Gaffney tells Newsmax. “Their refugee counterparts being dumped into American communities are a threat to our country and its people. It adds insult to potentially enormous injury that, as the State Department has acknowledged, 80 percent of those refugees are here on the basis of fraudulent family-reunification grounds.”

Gaffney says the State Department “imports pirate/jihadist types into this country.”

One major concern: The pirates’ statements following the freeing of Phillips appeared to be couched in jihadist terms. They identified America as their “No. 1 enemy,” and one pirate leader told The Associated Press: “In the future, America will be the one mourning and crying.”

Don Barnett, a fellow with the Center for Immigration Services, tells Newsmax that it is clear some young refugees of Somali extraction have been recruited by extremists, and could now be working with al-Qaida or al-Shabab.

“I think that really should cause us to look at taking any refugees from Somalia with a much more fine magnifying glass,” Barnett says.

There are about 150,000 Somalis now living in the United States, and law-enforcement officials consider the vast majority of them to be peaceful and law-abiding.

Once resettled, the refugees are free to relocate and live anywhere they like.

A State Department official who asked not to be identified says refugees receive U.S. papers that identify them and their status. They are eligible to apply for a green card after residing in the United States for one year. Five years after receiving green cards, the source says, refugees are eligible to apply for American citizenship.

There are three State Department programs that vet and process refugees for admittance:

# The Priority One (P-1) program provides a means for individuals from Somalia and other nations to immigrate to the United States based on referrals from the United Nations, from a U.S. embassy, or from a non-governmental organization (NGO).

# The Priority Two (P-2) program gives refugee status to all members of a specific, persecuted group. In 1999, for example, the State Department granted blanket refugee status to some 12,000 persecuted Somali-Bantus who had been driven from their native country to Kenya.

# The Priority Three (P-3) program awards refugee status specifically for the purpose of family reunification with other refugees already legally residing in the United States.

When a family or individual qualifies for the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program, a Department of Homeland Security agency, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS), conducts an interview with the “refugee applicant” to verify their eligibility and establish they are “otherwise admissible to the United States,” according to a State Department fact sheet about the program.

One of the purposes of USCIA is to ensure “that no one is admitted who is a threat to public safety,” according to its Web site.

The P-3 program was suspended in October, after reports of fraud led the State Department and DHS to conduct DNA testing on 3,000 applicants. Those tests revealed that as many as 80 percent of the family-reunification claims were false and did not involve relatives.

Officials suspended the program until new procedures — such as DNA testing — could be developed to verify claims of a family relationship. The P-1 and P-2 programs continue to be in effect.

Barnett tells Newsmax that the State Department is prepared to resume the troubled P-3 program in June. He also criticizes the P-1 program, due to U.N. refugee programs he describes as “one big long running fraud.” He adds: “The U.N. referral program itself has been subject to bribery and fraud.”

The State Department spokesman tells Newsmax it is unclear if the P-3 program will be reinstated by June, adding, “We do anticipate that the program will restart. A little later this year, we will have this program reinstated.”

Most critics of the program recognize that some resettlement in the United States is inevitable and probably beneficial. The problem, they say, comes when large numbers of immigrants arrive from chaotic nations known to harbor extremists. It is very difficult or impossible to review the backgrounds of people living in such countries, they say, because documentation and even birth certificates may be nonexistent. Advocates for refugees, on the other hand, point out that those are the very situations where resettlement may be most urgent.

Fred Burton, vice president of counterterrorism and corporate security for Stratfor, a global intelligence firm based in Austin, Texas, tells Newsmax: “Across the spectrum, when you attempt to vet the identify of that person, you have nothing to cross reference it to.”

Burton participated in the arrest of 1993 World Trade Center bombing mastermind Ramzi Yousef, and says the lack of intelligence about Somali extremists is quite serious.

“Whenever you have a suspected intelligence operative, whether it be from an espionage side or the terrorism side — and it’s more foreboding from the terrorism side — you really get a sense of dread, not knowing what he is up to,” he says.

Burton says the FBI is sparing no effort to locate the men who have gone missing in Minneapolis, but adds that it may be difficult.

“Knowing how the process works from a domestic terrorism perspective, there is no doubt the FBI is looking for the individuals involved, and probably very, very aggressively,” Burton tells Newsmax. “But then you go back to what has always been the Achilles’ heel in the counterterrorism business, your lack of human intelligence to tell you where that person is, because you lack the human sources to identify him.”

Burton states “I would certainly say the program appears to be a failure at this juncture.”

He says verifying identity is essential before admitting any refugee into the United States, and adds: “Having participated in several of those State Department meetings for many years, I would say, ‘Well, I’m sure we followed whatever process is in place, but what guarantees do we have that this process is not broken?’”

President Obama will deliver a speech June 4 in Egypt on America’s relationship with the Muslim world, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs announced Friday.

Egypt is “a country that in many ways represents the heart of the Arab world,” Gibbs said.

Obama chose Turkey, a more secular state, as the site of his first presidential speech to a Muslim majority nation, on April 6. He told the Turkish legislature in Ankara that the “United States is not and will never be at war with Islam.”

The Indian Ocean is a slightly safer place today after a gang of gormless Somali pirates were arrested when they accidentally attacked a French warship, the frigate Le Nivose, after mistaking it for a merchant vessel.

The pirates were traveling in three boats, two small skiffs and a nine meter ‘mother ship’. The gang was armed with Kalashnikov assault rifles, a grenade launcher and five grenades. They pursued the French naval vessel after failing to recognize it as such after the captain of the frigate, Lieutenant Commander Jean-Marc le Quilliec, decided to head towards the sun to camouflage the ship’s identity.

As the pirates approached they were astonished to see the ‘merchant vessel’ launch an attack helicopter and two assault dinghies full of highly trained and heavily armed French commandos. The pirates immediately surrendered after the helicopter fired a volley of warning shots.

The 11 pirates, some of whom are believed to be very young, were arrested, searched and taken aboard the Nivose, a French spokesman said. It is unclear what is going to happen to them.

The Nivose is part of the European Union anti-piracy mission Atalanta. It has had mixed results thus far due to the pirates venturing further and further into the Indian Ocean to launch their attacks on merchant vessels and leisure craft.

The biggest scalp the Somali pirates have taken thus far is the VLCC MV Siruis Star belonging to a subsidiary of the Saudi Arabian state-owned energy giant Saudi Aramco. The ship was hijacked in November 2008 and eventually released in January after a ransom, believed to be in the region of US$3 million was paid.

The president appears to be taking his Middle Eastern cues from some unlikely sources.

President Obama last Friday reiterated for the umpteenth time his determination to develop a “new relationship” with the Muslim world. On this occasion, the audience were the leaders of Saudi Arabia, Indonesia and the Philippines.

Unfortunately, it increasingly appears that, in so doing, he will be embracing the agenda of the Muslim Brotherhood - an organization dedicated to promoting the theo-political-legal program authoritative Islam calls Shariah and that has the self-described mission of “destroying Western civilization from within.”

As part of Mr. Obama’s “Respect Islam” campaign, he will travel to Turkey in early April. While there, he will not only pay tribute to an Islamist government that has systematically wrested every institution from the secular tradition of Kemal Ataturk and put the country squarely on the path to Islamification. He will also participate in something called the “Alliance of Civilizations.”

The Alliance is a United Nations-sponsored affair that reflects - as, increasingly do most things the United Nations is involved in - the views of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC). The OIC is made up of 57 Muslim-majority nations. Thanks to support from Saudi Arabia and its proxies, the Muslim Brotherhood has become a driving force within the Conference and their agendas largely coincide.

For example, in 2005 a communique issued after a summit in Mecca declared: “The Conference underlined the need to collectively endeavor to reflect the noble Islamic values, counter Islamophobia, defamation of Islam and its values and desecration of Islamic holy sites, and to effectively coordinate with states as well as regional and international institutions and organizations to urge them to criminalize this phenomenon as a form of racism.”

Ominously, as part of its bid to “criminalize” Islamophobia, the OIC is seeking “deterrent punishments.” It insists that not only freedom of expression but all human rights be circumscribed by the OIC’s 1990 Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam, which concludes with the caveat that, “All the rights and freedoms stipulated in this Declaration are subject to the Islamic Shariah.” Translation: Liberties enshrined in the United Nations’ foundational Universal Declaration of Human Rights are largely rendered null and void.

The demand that no criticism of Islam be permitted is the pre-eminent feature of the Muslim Brotherhood’s efforts in the West. In fact, it is but the leading edge of the Brothers’ bid to suppress public awareness of the threat posed by their program in societies that pride themselves on religious tolerance, thereby facilitating seditious penetration and influence operations by the Shariah-adherent.

A playbook for the latter can be found in a publication issued last fall by the U.S.-Muslim Engagement Project being aggressively promoted to the Obama administration and Congress by a number of its non-Muslim participants. Notably, former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright recently effusively presented to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee the Project’s book titled “Changing Course: A New Direction for U.S. Relations with the Muslim World.” Former Minnesota Rep. Vin Weber did the same at Grover Norquist’s weekly meeting of conservative activists last week.

Underwritten largely by George Soros’ and other left-wing foundations, “Changing Course” seems to reflect predominantly the recommendations of groups the government has established are Muslim Brotherhood fronts, such as the Islamic Society of North America and the Muslim Public Affairs Council. Both are represented in the Engagement Project’s “Leadership Group.” Accordingly, its book calls for:

• “Engagement with groups that have clearly demonstrated a commitment to nonviolent participation in politics” (read, the Brotherhood).
• “Not equat[ing] reform with secularism, nor … assum[ing] that reformers who advocate some form of Shariah as the basis for the rule of law will inevitably abuse human rights or adopt anti-American policies.”
• “Not supply[ing] additional ammunition to extremists by linking the term ‘Islam’ or key tenets of the religion of Islam with the actions of extremist or terrorist groups.”
• Launching “an education program comparable in scale” to “the more than $7 billion” invested in the “post-Sputnik U.S. commitment to math and science education” to “education on Islam and Muslims, sustained over a decade or more, focused on teacher training and curriculum in middle and high schools, and colleges.”

Emboldened by the promise of this influence operation and the apparent willingness of the Obama administration to embrace the Muslim Brotherhood’s agenda - in part, if not in its entirety - the organization’s assorted fronts in America are becoming ever more audacious.

In response to a long-overdue decision taken by the FBI last year to terminate “sensitivity training” of its agents by one of the most prominent of these fronts, the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), assorted Brotherhood groups and operatives reportedly intend to announce that Muslims will henceforth cease any and all cooperation with U.S. law enforcement until CAIR is rehabilitated.

Such a step would call into question the patriotism of the many Muslims in America who do not embrace the Brotherhood’s Shariah agenda - something that would, presumably, be as offensive to them as it would be troubling to the rest of us. It could also expose those engaged in it to criminal charges of “misprision of felony,” conspiring to withhold information from the authorities concerning terrorist operations and activities in the Muslim community.

The message should go forth: Friends of the Muslim Brotherhood are no friends of America. We follow their guidance at our peril.

by Geert Wilders

Why I am in America Fighting for Free Speech?

Freedom of expression is under attack. This is a theme I am addressing here in America this week as part of the Free Speech Summit being held in Florida under the sponsorship of the Florida Security Council. And it is clear that a serious discussion of the threats to our freedoms in the West cannot come too soon.

For example, my friend Rep. Adam Hasner, the majority leader of the Florida House of Representatives was attacked in a press release issued by the national office of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) on Monday for daring to appear at a private event with me this past weekend. Because of that appearance, CAIR is demanding that Rep. Hasner step down or be removed from his position.

This attack on a friend and fellow legislator is of grave concern to me. CAIR’s assault on Rep. Hasner strikes at the very heart of our most basic freedoms. In fact, it is but the latest episode in that organization’s long-running and determined effort to silence its critics. Indeed, CAIR seeks to suppress all those who dare to challenge the theo-political-legal program that authoritative Islam calls “Shariah.” In so doing, they are seeking to impose what amount to Shariah blasphemy codes.

It is especially important to note that Adam Hasner is not only being attacked for comments he made that are deemed offensive by those who seek to impose Shariah in America. His career is now being threatened for comments made by others in his presence – in this case, by me. Thus the Islamists are infringing not only on this country’s constitutionally protected freedom of expression but also freedom of association.

If a high-ranking public official – elected by the people and appointed to his leadership position by his peers – cannot speak honestly and openly about his concerns, and do so in places and the company of his choosing, without fear of suppression or other retribution, who among us is safe?

I know these threats firsthand. Even before the international release last year of my short documentary film, Fitna, I have faced constant death threats and protests. My name has appeared on assassination lists. I have been subject of an Al-Qaeda death fatwa. I will be charged with blasphemy and contempt of Muslims by Jordanian prosecutors. I face prosecutions in my own country and elsewhere. I was recently banned from the United Kingdom because the Home Secretary believed my mere presence in the country constituted a national security threat.

In this trying time let us recall that in the darkest hours of World War II, when the world faced a global threat from German Nazism, Italian Fascism and Japanese Imperialism, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill challenged his people to rise to the occasion and fight. He told them, “Never, never, in nothing great or small, large or petty, never give in except to convictions of honor and good sense. Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy.”

This is why I am in America this week talking about the fight we now must wage in the West to defend our liberties. Freedom of association is one of the basic liberties guaranteed not only by the US Constitution but by the European Convention of Human Rights. And yet CAIR wants to silence and punish Rep. Hasner for associating with me. If America needs a poster child for the threat to our freedoms from Islamic extremism, no better example than CAIR could be found.

This episode underscores that the threat to freedom posed by creeping Shariah imposed by CAIR’s type of stealthy jihad is not just a problem in the Middle East, or Europe. It is also a problem in America.

I will not be bullied by Islamic thugs who want to use our freedoms to destroy those very same freedoms. And I will not stand by as they seek to do it to others.

Founded and directed by members of the international network of the Muslim Brotherhood, CAIR has an explicit agenda to subvert our freedoms and impose Islamic Shariah law on non-Muslims. This is not speculation on my part. This is the testimony of one of CAIR’s founders and chairman emeritus, Omar Ahmed, who told a California audience in 1998 that this was their agenda. “Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant,” he said. “The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth.” When CAIR officials say that this is their ultimate objective, we should believe them.

In just the past few weeks, the Council on American Islamic Relations has sought to silence another courageous lawmaker, Rep. Peter King, the ranking member on the Homeland Security Committee in the US House of Representatives. His “offense”? Rep. King correctly observed that CAIR and other Muslims were not providing enough assistance to the law enforcement authorities in combating terrorism-related activities in American mosques.

CAIR has attempted to silence other critics, as well. They have sued bloggers; they have defamed journalists who have asked too many questions about their terrorist ties; and they have tried to intimidate publications that have published articles challenging their putative “civil rights mission.” If they get away with it, CAIR will seek to threaten the careers of more politicians with the courage to say things and associate with those of challenge Shariah and the effort to impose it in this country.

It is utterly hypocritical that, on the one hand, CAIR claims to be defending freedom of religion in attacking Rep. Hasner when, on the other, they actively seek support from Islamic regimes that are among the worst of the worst human rights abusers on the planet – and notorious for suppressing religious freedoms.

I have been told that in an Arabic News article that CAIR officials have solicited and received financial support from Saudi Prince Al-Walid Bin Talal, whose country outlaws any religious expression except its own Wahhabi strain of Islam. You can’t even own a Bible or wear a cross in the country run by their patrons, and yet CAIR wants to lecture us about religious freedom?

The land for CAIR’s Capitol Hill office in Washington D.C. was purchased with a $250,000 donation from the Saudi-backed Islamic Development Bank and the deed to their headquarters is held by the foundation of United Arab Emirates Defense Minister Gen. Sheik Mohammed Bin Rashid Al-Maktoum. Sheik al-Maktoum’s country prohibits any non-Islamic religious proselytizing and threatens anyone caught with distribution of non-Muslim religious literature with imprisonment.

In September 2006, CAIR hosted an exclusive dinner with former Iranian President Mohammed Khatami. Under Khatami’s regime religious minorities were severely persecuted, non-Muslims were regularly harassed, and hundreds of student protestors murdered. The fact that CAIR chose to honor this dictator who is still a senior member of the Islamic theocracy in Iran tells us much.

Whether it is in America or back home in my own country, we are under attack by groups like CAIR who aim to silence their critics. This is why I am here in America. I aim to continue to fight regardless of the threats and intimidation and I am asking Americans to join with us. And when they attack good men like Rep. Adam Hasner, we must realize that they are attacking each and every one of us and the freedoms that we hold dear.

JEDDAH – A 50-year old Saudi man has agreed to divorce his 9-year-old bride, media reported on Thursday, after the marriage drew international criticism.

The decision, reported by newspapers Alwatan and Al-Riyadh, came after months of court hearings, criticism from the United Nations and an international media frenzy about Saudi Arabia’s human rights practices.

“This is a good step and I think the man did it because he was in a lot of pressure from everyone,” Wajeha Al-Huaider, founder of the Group for Women’s Rights in Saudi Arabia, told Reuters by telephone.

Al-Huaider, who campaigned for the child, said she hoped the pressure generated by the case would eventually lead to a law banning child marriages.

The child’s mother, who opposed the marriage which took place when the girl was 8 years old, took the case to court last year. The court in the small town of Onaiza upheld the marriage on condition that the husband did not consummate it until the girl reached puberty.

In Saudi Arabia’s patriarchal society, which applies an austere version of Sunni Islam, fathers have the right to decide whom their daughters marry.

“We will convey,” said Barack Obama to the Turkish Parliament Monday, “our deep appreciation for the Islamic faith, which has done so much over the centuries to shape the world — including in my own country.”

Undeniably the Islamic faith has done a great deal to shape the world – a statement that makes no value judgment about exactly how it has shaped the world. It has formed the dominant culture in what is known as the Islamic world for centuries. But what on earth could Obama mean when he says that Islam has also “done so much” to shape his own country?

Unless he considers himself an Indonesian, Obama’s statement was extraordinarily strange. After all, how has the Islamic faith shaped the United States? Were there Muslims along Paul Revere’s ride, or standing next to Patrick Henry when he proclaimed, “Give me liberty or give me death”? Were there Muslims among the framers or signers of the Declaration of Independence, which states that all men – not just Muslims, as Islamic law would have it – are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, including life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? Were there Muslims among those who drafted the Constitution and vigorously debated its provisions, or among those who enumerated the Bill of Rights, which guarantees – again in contradiction to the tenets of Islamic law – that there should be no established national religion, and that the freedom of speech should not be infringed?

There were not.

Did Muslims play a role in the great struggle over slavery that defined so much of our contemporary understandings of the nature of this republic and of the rights of the individual within it? They did not. Did the Islamic faith shape the way the United States responded to the titanic challenges of the two World Wars, the Great Depression, or the Cold War? It did not. Did the Islamic faith, with its legal apparatus that institutionalizes discrimination against non-Muslims, shape the civil rights movement in the United States? The Civil Rights Act of 1964 mandated equality of access to public facilities – a hard-won victory that came at a great cost, and one that Muslim groups have tried to roll back in the United States recently. One notable example of such attempts was the alcohol-in-cabs controversy at the Minneapolis-St. Paul international airport, when Muslim cabdrivers began to refuse service to customers who were carrying alcohol, on Islamic religious grounds. The core assumption underlying this initiative – that discrimination on the basis of religion is justified – cut right to the heart of the core principle of the American polity, that “all men are created equal,” that is, that they have a right to equal treatment in law and society.

Surveying the whole tapestry of American history, one would be hard-pressed to find any significant way in which the Islamic faith has shaped the United States in terms of its governing principles and the nature of American society. Meanwhile, there are numerous ways in which, if there had been a significant Muslim presence in the country at the time, some of the most cherished and important principles of American society and law may have met fierce resistance, and may never have seen the light of day.

So in what way has the Islamic faith shaped Obama’s country? The most significant event connected to the Islamic faith that has shaped the character of the United States was the attack on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on September 11, 2001. Those attacks have shaped the nation in numerous ways: they’ve led to numerous innovations in airline security, which in generations to come – if today’s politically correct climate continues to befog minds — may be added to future versions of the fanciful “1001 Muslim Inventions” exhibition. The Islamic faith has shaped the U.S. since 9/11 in leading to the spending of billions on anti-terror measures, and to the ventures in Iraq and Afghanistan, and to Guantanamo, and to so many features of the modern political and social landscape that they cannot be enumerated within the space of a single article.

Of course, it is certain that Obama had none of that in mind. But what could he possibly have had in mind? His statement was either careless or ignorant, or both – not qualities we need in a Commander-in-Chief even in the best of times.

Geert Wilders’ speech at Chapman University, California on April 4:

Watch it as a video at Jihad Watch.

“Ladies and gentlemen.

It is really great to be here in California. It is very kind of you to give me the opportunity to escape from the wind, cold and rain in my own beautiful country, the Netherlands. I thank the David Horowitz Freedom Center for inviting me.

Ladies and gentlemen, free speech is no longer a given in Europe. What we once considered a natural element of our existence, our birth right, is now something we once again have to battle for. To exercise free speech has become a dangerous activity.

As you may know, I will be prosecuted in the Netherlands, because of my short documentary, Fitna, and my view concerning what some call ‘a religion of peace’. On top of that, also France and Jordan are considering to prosecute me for my view on Islam and the United Kingdom government did not allow me to enter their country. And the President of Indonesia declared that I will never be allowed to enter Indonesia as long as I live.

So a special thanks to the United States border police for letting me enter this country. It feels good to be allowed entering a country once in a while.

But ladies and gentlemen, before I talk about freedom of speech, I will say a few things about Islam and Sharia law first.

Allow me to give you a brief introduction to Islam, an Islam 101. The first thing everyone needs to know about Islam is the importance of the Koran. As you probably know the Koran calls for submission, hatred, violence, murder, terrorism and war. The Koran calls upon Muslims to kill non-Muslims. The Koran describes Jews as monkeys and pigs. The biggest problem is that the Koran is to be considered as Allah’s personal word, with orders that need to be fulfilled regardless of place or time. That’s the reason why the Koran is not open to discussion or interpretation. It is valid for every Muslim and for all times. Therefore, there is no such thing as moderate Islam. Sure, there are a lot of moderate Muslims, but a moderate Islam does not exist. As the Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan once said: “There is no moderate Islam, Islam is Islam”. For once I have to agree with this Islamist Turkish Prime Minister.

And let it be clear to anyone: I have no problem with Muslims, my fight is not against any person or group of persons. However, I have enormous problems with the dangerous and violent Islamic ideology.

The second thing everyone needs to know about Islam is the importance of the prophet Muhammad. His behaviour is an example to all Muslims and cannot be criticized. Well, let me tell you the truth about this so-called prophet anyway. Muhammad was a warlord, a conqueror, a pedophile and a mass-murderer. Islamic tradition tells us how he married and consummated the young girl, Aisha, long before she was ten years of age and how he fought in battles, how he murdered his enemies, how he slaughtered the Jewish tribe of Banu Qurayza. For millions of Muslims the Koran and the life of Muhammad are not ancient history but an inspiration. And if you criticize either the Koran or the Prophet or Islam as such, you better be prepared to face the consequences. You will receive death threats from all over the world and will be taken to court all over the world. Your national flag will be burned and your embassies might be set on fire, your country could face economical boycotts and the political leaders of your own home country will not support you but appease Muslims and Muslim governments, join them in their political correct outrage and label you as a radical or xenophobe. When criticism becomes unpleasant freedom of speech has to take another lane.

About Islam. Let no one fool you about Islam being just a religion. Sure, it has its God – Allah – a holy book - the Koran -, temples - mosques - and even a here-after. If you murder enough Jews you might even get 72 virgins. But in its essence Islam is a political ideology and a totalitarian ideology. It is a system that lays down detailed rules for society and the life of every man and woman. Islam wants to dictate every aspect of life and society and prohibits individual, political and religious rights and freedoms. Islam is not compatible with our Western civilization or democracy, nor will it ever be, because Islam doesn’t want to coexist, it wants to submit and set the entire agenda. Islam means submission from Muslims over non-Muslims - kafirs - like you and me, so there cannot be any mistake about its goal. Islam’s end goal, for all time, is to dominate, to dominate and once again dominate and establish a world ruled by Islam.

That, ladies and gentlemen, that is why Winston Churchill compared the Koran to Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as the famous Italian writer Orianna Fallaci did and why the brave Californian psychiatrist dr. Wafa Sultan rightfully said about the clash between the West and Islam that it is a clash between civilization and backwardness, between the civilized and the primitive, between rationality and barbarity.

As you know, the current Islamization of Europe is not an invasion like those we have seen in the past. This time it is not a military invasion with swords, this time we have to deal with a stealth invasion. Nowadays, the armies are replaced by cultural relativism and mass-immigration. It is this dangerous cocktail that is the main cause of the Islamization and is responsible for the introduction of Sharia law in Europe.

As you know, Sharia is Islamic law, effective in barbaric countries such as Saudi-Arabia and Iran. Beheadings, hangings, chopping off hands and feet, stoning to death, lashings, it all happens because Sharia law prescribes it. Now, radical Muslims want to implement Sharia law into our Western societies. And they are very successful in doing so, helped by the Western cultural relativists – the ‘useful idiots’, as former Soviet leader Vladimir Lenin described the unknowingly who helped his cause. In my favourite country Britain, Sharia courts are now officially part of the legal system. Very few people over here are aware of that. They have been empowered to adjudicate on financial disputes, divorces and domestic violence. And there are much more examples of the rising of Sharia in Europe: Halal food is served in many schools and universities, more women every day are forces to wear the burqa or niqaab, Islamic banks are mushrooming and polygamy, female genital mutilation, honor killings and Muslim men who refuse to shake women hands are all part of 2009-Europe.

A few weeks ago a British Muslim leader told of his vision of Britain under Sharia law. According to the British Evening Standard Anjem Choudary wants a pure Islamic state with Sharia law in Britain, ‘the flag of Allah’ flying over Downing Street. Ladies and gentlemen, this would mean the end of our precious liberties even though with Gordon Brown in office one might not easily see the difference.

Sharia means the end of our hard won freedom, for Sharia law denies the equality of men and women and Muslims and non-Muslims, it does not allow Muslims to leave Islam, renegades, apostates must be killed according to Islam as you know. Sharia advocates slavery and does not recognize democracy. As a matter of fact sharia is exactly the opposite of democracy.

Unfortunately, among European Muslims the support for this creeping Sharia law is substantial. Last year the British Center for Social Cohesion released a survey held under British Muslim students. Some outcomes were horrifying: 32 percent said killing in the name of religion can be justified and 40 percent supported the introduction of Sharia law into British law.

But please be aware, also the USA is in the process of Islamization. There are numerous examples. For instance: Muslim cab drivers who refuse to transport passengers possessing alcohol or guide dogs. Muslim students demanding separate housing on campus, and separate hours for Muslim women in gyms and swimming pools. USA journalist who self-censor themselves afraid of being sewed and taken to court.

As I said, these Muslims are aided by present-day ‘useful idiots’. A classic example is the former Dutch Attorney General, Mr. Donner. After Dutch film maker and Islam criticaster Theo van Gogh was murdered by a Jihadist in the streets of Amsterdam, he was of the opinion that blasphemy should no longer be a dead letter, and a few years later he even said the Netherlands should introduce Sharia law if a two third majority would support it.

Fortunately some politicians are not giving in. Former Republican US Congressman Tom Tancredo is one of those heroes. Last year he introduced his counter-Sharia ‘Jihad Prevention Act’. This bill would bar the entry of people who advocate Sharia law. This is exactly what the West needs: Brave leaders who have the courage to do something against the growing Islamization.

Ladies and gentlemen, we have to stop the Islamization of the West. Because if we don’t, we will roll back centuries, it will mean the end of our civilization. If we don’t act now, we will betray our Western values, we will lose our culture, we will lose our democracy and we will lose the dearest of our many liberties: the right to speak our mind.

The biggest disease of Europe today is cultural relativism. The fault concept of political correct liberals that all cultures are equal. Well let me tell you: they are not. Our Western culture based on Christianity, Judaism and humanism is far better than the barbaric Islamic culture,

Let me also tell you that Israel is one of us. The jihad against Israel is a jihad against the entire West. Its not a territorial dispute and the Islamic jihad will not stop after territorial concessions. We all should support Israel, the only democracy in the entire Middle East.

Unfortunately, as I stated in the beginning of my short lecture, free speech already is no longer a given in Europe.

Last February, I tried to visit Britain, a fellow EU country. I was invited to give a speech in the House of Lords. However, upon arrival at Heathrow airport, I was refused entry into the UK, and sent back to the Netherlands. I would have liked to be able to remind the audience of a great man who once spoke in the British House of Commons. In 1982 President Ronald Reagan – former Governor of this great state, California – gave a speech that very few Europeans appreciated. Reagan called upon the West to reject communism and defend freedom. He introduced a new phrase: ‘evil empire’. Reagan’s speech stands out as a clarion call to preserve our liberties. I quote: “If history teaches anything, it teaches self-delusion in the face of unpleasant facts is folly”. What Reagan meant is that you cannot run away from history, you cannot escape the dangers of ideologies that are out to destroy you. Denial is not an option.

Just like the British ban, the decision of the Amsterdam Court of Appeals to prosecute me for Fitna and my views on Islam, is a major blow dealt to freedom of speech in Europe. They are full-fledged attacks on freedom of speech in order to appease Muslims. Both are major victories for Islam and for all who hate freedom of speech.

Whether or not I end up in jail is not the most important issue. I gave up my freedom more than 4 years ago. I am under full-time police protection ever since, because of death threats from Muslims and terrorist groups linked to Al Qaeda. In the last few years, I lived in different safe houses, army barracks and yes, even in prison cells in order to be safe. But it’s not about me, it is not about Geert Wilders. The real question is: Will free speech be put behind bars?

We have to defend freedom of speech. I propose the withdrawal of all hate speech legislation in Europe. I propose a European First Amendment. In Europe we should defend freedom of speech like you Americans do. Recently I showed Fitna in the heart of your great democracy, in the US Senate at the invitation of Senator Kyle, while the European Parliament banned my film twice both in Strasbourg and Brussels. Europe should take America as a model. In Europe, freedom of speech should be extended, instead of restricted.

Besides a European First Amendment, I propose a boycott of the UN Human Rights Council. And not just because the worst violators of human rights are member of this council. Recently this terrifying Council—even Saudi-Arabia has a seat—adopted a resolution that attempts to kill free speech and the concept of human rights. The resolution on ‘Combating defamation of religions’ does not protect individuals, but shields Islam from criticism. It calls upon UN member states to provide legal protection against defamation of religions. Of course this resolution initiated by the Organisation of Islamic Conference (OIC) is about Islam. The true goal of this resolution is to silence people who criticize Islam. Let there be no mistake about it: The UN Human Rights Council is a threat to free speech in the Western world.

Ladies and gentlemen, it is a few minutes to 12. In 2009-Europe, Islam is calling for our destruction and free speech is already on trial. If we go on like this, we are heading for the end of European civilization.

Fortunately, many people think like you and me about freedom and liberty. Millions know that liberty is the most precious of gifts. Freedom loving people have not yet forgotten to whom we owe our liberties. These were not offered to us on a silver platter, but were bitterly fought for. American soldiers fought, bled and died for the freedom of Europe. We owe something to these men and women. Their legacy cannot be squandered and given away. American soldiers did not die for an Islamized Europe. They died for a free Europe.

Ladies and gentlemen, if we want to defend our freedom, if we truly want to withstand the evil forces of Islam, if we want to survive, we need less cowards and more heroes. We need to prevail and therefore we have to elect new leaders, brave leaders. Leaders who will protect our values, our culture, leaders who will defend our freedom, leaders who will stop cultural relativism and mass immigration from Islamic countries, leaders who will defy Islam. Leaders who are fighters like Churchill, Thatcher or Reagan instead of appeasers like Chamberlain and Gordon Brown. We have too many Chamberlains and Browns in world politics today. To many politicians who are giving in and giving up and bargaining our freedom away for political or economical benefit.

But let me end with some good news. The good news is that normal people in Europe like in my own country The Netherlands are increasingly fed up with politicians ignoring our fight for freedom. A growing amount of people want to stop the Islamization of our societies. A growing amount of people want to fight for the freedom of speech and want to preserve our precious free societies, rule of law and democracy for our children and their children. The old political elite is losing support. New political parties who fight for freedom are gaining strength in many European countries. Like my own party - the Freedom Party - we started as a new party and took part in the national Dutch elections for the first time two and a half years ago. Then we became the fifth party in our ten party parliament with 9 seats out of the 150-seats our parliament has. But in the polls today we are the nr 1 party of the Netherlands with not 9 but 32 parliamentary seats. An enormous increase of support. Many politicians of the old ruling parties in my country almost get a nervous breakdown by the idea that I might be the next Prime Minister of the Netherlands.

There is panic indeed in and between the old ruling political parties who thought they would never be challenged. Who thought that they would always be in power.

Well let me tell you they should be in panic. Because it will only get worse for them. Because we will not stop anymore. Not today, not tomorrow, old times are gone. The public want new politics and new vision and what they will get.

And we will never stop fighting for freedom. As a matter of fact, the more they threaten us with death threats, fatwas or their legal jihad, the more determined we become to continue.

My message to those who oppose our fight for freedom is as follows:

1. We will never compromise on freedom.
2. We will never compromise on liberty.
3. We will never appease to Islam.
4. We will never give in, never give up, never submit to totalitarianism again.

Ladies and gentleman we should all make a difference.

Because every individual has a responsibility to make a difference when our freedom is at stake.

And we can make a difference, we have the privilege to live in a democracy, and we should never take that for granted. We are responsible to preserve our freedom and we have to take that responsibility at whatever price it may cost.

For losing our freedom in no alternative.

Freedom is the most precious gift we can and must give to generations to come.

Ladies and gentleman thank you so much for kind attention.

It was a privilege for me to speak to you.

Thank you so much.”

Homeland Security Contracts for Vast New Detention Camps

Note: A little-known $385 million contract for Halliburton subsidiary KBR to build detention facilities for “an emergency influx of immigrants” is another step down the Bush administration’s road toward martial law, the writer says.

Also see: FEMA Concentration Camps: Locations and Executive Orders - Friends of Liberty (undated) 3sep04

BERKELEY, CA — A Halliburton subsidiary has just received a $385 million contract from the Department of Homeland Security to provide “temporary detention and processing capabilities.”

The contract — announced Jan. 24 by the engineering and construction firm KBR — calls for preparing for “an emergency influx of immigrants, or to support the rapid development of new programs” in the event of other emergencies, such as “a natural disaster.” The release offered no details about where Halliburton was to build these facilities, or when.

To date, some newspapers have worried that open-ended provisions in the contract could lead to cost overruns, such as have occurred with KBR in Iraq. A Homeland Security spokesperson has responded that this is a “contingency contract” and that conceivably no centers might be built. But almost no paper so far has discussed the possibility that detention centers could be used to detain American citizens if the Bush administration were to declare martial law.

For those who follow covert government operations abroad and at home, the contract evoked ominous memories of Oliver North’s controversial Rex-84 “readiness exercise” in 1984. This called for the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to round up and detain 400,000 imaginary “refugees,” in the context of “uncontrolled population movements” over the Mexican border into the United States. North’s activities raised civil liberties concerns in both Congress and the Justice Department. The concerns persist.

“Almost certainly this is preparation for a roundup after the next 9/11 for Mid-Easterners, Muslims and possibly dissenters,” says Daniel Ellsberg, a former military analyst who in 1971 released the Pentagon Papers, the U.S. military’s account of its activities in Vietnam. “They’ve already done this on a smaller scale, with the ’special registration’ detentions of immigrant men from Muslim countries, and with Guantanamo.”

Plans for detention facilities or camps have a long history, going back to fears in the 1970s of a national uprising by black militants. As Alonzo Chardy reported in the Miami Herald on July 5, 1987, an executive order for continuity of government (COG) had been drafted in 1982 by FEMA head Louis Giuffrida. The order called for “suspension of the Constitution” and “declaration of martial law.” The martial law portions of the plan were outlined in a memo by Giuffrida’s deputy, John Brinkerhoff.

In 1985, President Reagan signed National Security Decision Directive 188, one of a series of directives that authorized continued planning for COG by a private parallel government.

Two books, James Mann’s “Rise of the Vulcans” and James Bamford’s “A Pretext for War,” have revealed that in the 1980s this parallel structure, operating outside normal government channels, included the then-head of G. D. Searle and Co., Donald Rumsfeld, and then-Congressman from Wyoming Dick Cheney.

After 9/11, new martial law plans began to surface similar to those of FEMA in the 1980s. In January 2002 the Pentagon submitted a proposal for deploying troops on American streets. One month later John Brinkerhoff, the author of the 1982 FEMA memo, published an article arguing for the legality of using U.S. troops for purposes of domestic security.

Then in April 2002, Defense Dept. officials implemented a plan for domestic U.S. military operations by creating a new U.S. Northern Command (CINC-NORTHCOM) for the continental United States. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld called this “the most sweeping set of changes since the unified command system was set up in 1946.”

The NORTHCOM commander, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld announced, is responsible for “homeland defense and also serves as head of the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD)…. He will command U.S. forces that operate within the United States in support of civil authorities. The command will provide civil support not only in response to attacks, but for natural disasters.”

John Brinkerhoff later commented on PBS that, “The United States itself is now for the first time since the War of 1812 a theater of war. That means that we should apply, in my view, the same kind of command structure in the United States that we apply in other theaters of war.”

Then in response to Hurricane Katrina in Sept. 2005, according to the Washington Post, White House senior adviser Karl Rove told the governor of Louisiana, Kathleen Babineaux Blanco, that she should explore legal options to impose martial law “or as close as we can get.” The White House tried vigorously, but ultimately failed, to compel Gov. Blanco to yield control of the state National Guard.

Also in September, NORTHCOM conducted its highly classified Granite Shadow exercise in Washington. As William Arkin reported in the Washington Post, “Granite Shadow is yet another new Top Secret and compartmented operation related to the military’s extra-legal powers regarding weapons of mass destruction. It allows for emergency military operations in the United States without civilian supervision or control.”

It is clear that the Bush administration is thinking seriously about martial law. Many critics have alleged that FEMA’s spectacular failure to respond to Katrina followed from a deliberate White House policy: of paring back FEMA, and instead strengthening the military for responses to disasters.

A multimillion program for detention facilities will greatly increase NORTHCOM’s ability to respond to any domestic disorders.

There is a sick excuse given when Muslims are interviewed about why Muslims would commit the September 11 attacks and other terror attacks. It goes something like “Islam was hijacked” by the terrorists who carried out the attack. This is a lie and those who offer it are either lying to themselves or are living in a world devoid of the reality that lives all around them.

Certainly the 19 hijackers thought that they were attacking the US in the name of Allah. Osama bin Laden surely does not consider himself a hijacker of Islam. Surely, many people consider him a Muslim prophet. There is no shortage of Osama supporters. Then there is the Taliban. There is no evidence that they thought that he hijacked Islam. That certainly would have been reason enough to hand him off to the US or at least execute him in the middle of one of their soccer stadiums for the crime of bringing discredit upon the Muslim faith. (Perhaps they wanted to but were too busy trimming Buddhist statues to conform to Islam)

Lets say that the 19 September 11 terrorists hijacked Islam along with Osama bin Laden, all of al-Qaeda, the Taliban and all of Afghanistan somehow hijacked Islam. Not for anything but that doesn’t look like the actions of an extreme fringe of the religion. Lets add all the Muslims who are on jihad to this list of hijackers of Islam. The September 11 Hijackers were certainly on jihad as are those who have been busy chopping the heads off foreigners in Iraq and the heads of Christian schoolgirls in Indonesia.

Not for anything, but there appears to be Muslims all over the planet hijacking Islam for their sick cause.

If Islam has been hijacked, then why haven’t the rest of the Muslims who must therefore also be victims done anything about this. This is one of five questions asked by Dennis Prager:

“Why are you so quiet? There are a billion Muslims in the world. How is it possible that essentially none have demonstrated against evils perpetrated by Muslims in the name of Islam?”

The question also is related to a bigger one, if Islam has been hijacked by these maniacs, why haven’t good Muslims turned in other Muslims who are also attempting to hijack Islam by planning future terror attacks?

Take a look at the initial reaction of the Muslim community in Britain after the subway bombings. The reaction did not even claim that these murders had hijacked Islam at all, but that they were somehow being wrongly accused, and were guilty of nothing more that being Muslim. How embarrassing it was for the Muslim community for the taped confession of one of the suicide bombers to be released confirming that they were willing participants in an act of terror against their own country.

If Islam has indeed been hijacked, then it is not only the terrorists who have hijacked it, but also those who rape in the name of Islam. Look at what the following ‘prominent’ Muslims have said concerning rape of western women by Muslims in public:

“rape victims had no one to blame but themselves. Women, he said, who wore skimpy clothing, invited men to rape them.” - Sheik Faiz Mohammed of Lebanon

“women who did not wear a headscarf were asking to be raped.” - Islamic mufti and scholar, Shahid Mehdi speaking in Copenhagen

“female rape victims should be punished if they were dressed immodestly when they were raped” - Egyptian scholar Sheik Yusaf al-Qaradawi

These statements are coming from those within the Muslim community that speak to other Muslims from a position of authority. If the comments above are what they are telling non-Muslims, what are they telling their followers?

In Australia, at least one rapist explained why he thought his actions were acceptable:

“his victims had no right to say no, because they were not wearing a headscarf.” – Pakistani Rapist, in Australian Court, Dec 2005.

Think Muslim rape is a non-issue? Think again.

In Norway and Sweden, journalist Fjordman warns of a rape epidemic. Police Inspector Gunnar Larsen stated that the steady increase of rape-cases and the link to ethnicity are clear, unmistakable trends. Two out of three persecutions for rape in Oslo are immigrants with a non-Western background and 80 percent of the victims are Norwegian women.

In Sweden, according to translator for Jihad Watch, Ali Dashti, “Gang rapes, usually involving Muslim immigrant males and native Swedish girls, have become commonplace.” A few weeks ago she said, “Five Kurds brutally raped a 13-year-old Swedish girl.” – Front page mag

In addition to all the hijackers of Islam above, we have the newest hijacker, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Of course he is not the only Iranian who has hijacked Islam in his country, but there is a whole bunch of Mullahs running the country with him. Just as the Taliban destroyed the anchient buddahs, Iran has been getting ready to destroy the World Heritage Site of Cyrus the Great. Then there is the banning of Western Music, and plans to segregate men and women on different sides of the street, amoung other things. Is this the hijacking of Islam, as he is rapidly trying to replicate a Taliaban-type state. Then of course are his comments concerning Israel? which part of Islam do those comments come from? If he has hijacked Islam, does this mean that the West should stop him? (How many governments have put a bulls-eye on this guy?)

For you Muslims who still believe that I am wrong and that I somehow fail to grasp the reality that Islam has indeed been hijacked in ALL of these cases, I have the following statement for you to consider:

Scores of people die (or are raped) every time that Islam is Hijacked. It is your duty to protect your religion. It is time you should consider launching your own jihad against the hijackers within your ranks. After all, eventually they will be after you too. If for some reason you think that you need to do nothing, then perhaps you should reconsider your believe that your religion has been hijacked. Because in that case, You sure don’t sound hijacked to me. It’s one thing when a hijack victim can’t do anything because there is a gun to their head. Who is holding the gun to yours?

This makes me wonder, if it is ok for a Muslim man to rape a woman because she is not covering her head, is it then ok for non-Muslims to treat a Muslim man as a possible terrorist / rapist simply because he is a Muslim man?

In Australia, Norway, Sweden and other Western nations, there is a distinct race-based crime in motion being ignored by the diversity police: Islamic men are raping Western women for ethnic reasons. We know this because the rapists have openly declared their sectarian motivations.

When a number of teenage Australian girls were subjected to hours of sexual degradation during a spate of gang rapes in Sydney that occurred between 1998 and 2002, the perpetrators of these assaults framed their rationale in ethnic terms. The young victims were informed that they were “sluts” and “Aussie pigs” while they were being hunted down and abused.

In Australia’s New South Wales Supreme Court in December 2005, a visiting Pakistani rapist testified that his victims had no right to say no, because they were not wearing a headscarf.

And earlier this year Australians were outraged when Lebanese Sheik Faiz Mohammed gave a lecture in Sydney where he informed his audience that rape victims had no one to blame but themselves. Women, he said, who wore skimpy clothing, invited men to rape them.

A few months earlier, in Copenhagen, Islamic mufti and scholar, Shahid Mehdi created uproar when – like his peer in Australia – he stated that women who did not wear a headscarf were asking to be raped.

And with haunting synchronicity in 2004, the London Telegraph reported that visiting Egyptian scholar Sheik Yusaf al-Qaradawi claimed female rape victims should be punished if they were dressed immodestly when they were raped. He added, “For her to be absolved from guilt, a raped woman must have shown good conduct.”

In Norway and Sweden, journalist Fjordman warns of a rape epidemic. Police Inspector Gunnar Larsen stated that the steady increase of rape-cases and the link to ethnicity are clear, unmistakable trends. Two out of three persecutions for rape in Oslo are immigrants with a non-Western background and 80 percent of the victims are Norwegian women.

In Sweden, according to translator for Jihad Watch, Ali Dashti, “Gang rapes, usually involving Muslim immigrant males and native Swedish girls, have become commonplace.” A few weeks ago she said, “Five Kurds brutally raped a 13-year-old Swedish girl.”

In France, Samira Bellil broke her silence – after enduring years of repeated gang rapes in one of the Muslim populated public housing projects – and wrote a book, In the hell of the tournantes, that shocked France. Describing how gang rape is rampant in the banlieues, she explained to Time that, “any neighborhood girl who smokes, uses makeup or wears attractive clothes is a whore.”

Unfortunately, Western women are not the only victims in this epidemic. In Indonesia, in 1998, human rights groups documented the testimony of over 100 Chinese women who were gang raped during the riots that preceded the fall of President Suharto. Many of them were told: “You must be raped, because you are Chinese and non-Muslim.”

Christian Solidarity Worldwide reported that in April 2005, a 9-year-old Pakistani girl was raped, beaten with a cricket bat, hanged upside down from the ceiling, had spoonfuls of chillies poured into her mouth, and repeatedly bashed while handcuffed. Her Muslim neighbours told her they were taking revenge for the American bombing of Iraqi children and informed her they were doing it because she was an “infidel and a Christian.”

In Sudan – where Arab Muslims slaughter black Muslim and Christian Sudanese in an ongoing genocide – former Sudanese slave and now a human rights’ activist Simon Deng says he witnessed girls and women being raped and that the Arab regime of Khartoum sends its soldiers to the field to rape and murder. In other reports, women who are captured by government forces are asked; “Are you Christian or Muslim?” and those who answer Christian, are gang raped before having their breasts cut off.

This phenomenon of Islamic sexual violence against women should be treated as the urgent, violent, repressive epidemic it is. Instead, journalists, academics, and politicians ignore it, rationalize it, or ostracize those who dare discuss it.

In Australia, when journalist Paul Sheehan reported honestly on the Sydney gang rapes, he was called a racist and accused of stirring up anti-Muslim hatred. And when he reported in his Sydney Morning Herald column that there was a high incidence of crime amongst Sydney’s Lebanese community, fellow journalist, David Marr sent him an e-mail stating, “That is a disgraceful column that reflects poorly on us all at the Herald.”

Keysar Trad, vice-president of the Australian Lebanese Muslim Association said the gang rapes were a “heinous” crime but complained it was “rather unfair” that the ethnicity of the rapists had been reported.

Journalist Miranda Devine reported during the same rape trials that all reference to ethnicity had been deleted from the victim impact statement because the prosecutors wanted to negotiate a plea bargain.

So when Judge Megan Latham declared, “There is no evidence before me of any racial element in the commission of these offences,” everyone believed her. And the court, the politicians and most of the press may as well have raped the girls again.

Retired Australian detective Tim Priest warned in 2004 that the Lebanese gangs, which emerged in Sydney in the 1990s – when the police were asleep – had morphed out of control. “The Lebanese groups,” he said, “ were ruthless, extremely violent, and they intimidated not only innocent witnesses, but even the police that attempted to arrest them.”

Priest describes how in 2001, in a Muslim dominated area of Sydney two policemen stopped a car containing three well-known Middle Eastern men to search for stolen property. As the police carried out their search they were physically threatened and the three men claimed they were going to track them down, kill them and then rape their girlfriends.

According to Priest, it didn’t end there. As the Sydney police called for backup the three men used their mobile phones to call their associates, and within minutes, 20 Middle Eastern men arrived on the scene. They punched and pushed the police and damaged state vehicles. The police retreated and the gang followed them to the police station where they intimidated staff, damaged property and held the police station hostage.

Eventually the gang left, the police licked their wounds, and not one of them took action against the Middle Eastern men. Priest claims, “In the minds of the local population, the police are cowards and the message was, ‘Lebanese [Muslim gangs] rule the streets.’”

In France, in the banlieues, where gang rape is now known simply as tournantes or ‘pass-around,’ victims know the police will not protect them. If they complain, Samir Bellil said, they know that they and their families will be threatened.

However, Muslim women in the French ghettos are finally fighting back against gang rape and police non-action. They have begun a movement called, “We’re neither whores nor doormats.” They are struggling against the intrinsic violence that plagues their neighbourhoods and the culture that condones it.

In most French prosecutions, the Muslim rapists state that they do not believe they have committed a crime. And in a frightening parallel with the gang rapists in Australia, they claim the victim herself is to blame and accuse her of being a “slut” or a “whore.”

According to The Guardian, during the recent French riots, a Saudi Prince with shares in News Corporation boasted to a conference in Dubai that he had phoned Rupert Murdoch and complained about Fox News describing the disturbances as “Muslim riots.” Within half an hour he said, it was changed to “civil riots.”

Swedish translator, Ali Dashti, stated that in Sweden when three men raped a 22-year-old woman recently, they said one word to her. “Whore.” Such stories, according to Dashti, are in the Swedish newspapers every week. And, the politically correct “take great care not to mention the ethnic background of the perpetrators.”

Sweden’s English newspaper The Local reported in July that Malmo police commander Bengt Lindström had been charged with inciting racial hatred. He sent e-mails from his home computer to two city officials. To the head of healthcare, he wrote: “You…treat old Swedes who have worked hard building up the fatherland like parasites and would rather give my taxes to criminals called Mohammed from Rosengärd.”

In Malmo, the third largest city in Sweden, the police have admitted, Dashti says, that they no longer control the city. “It is effectively ruled by violent gangs of Muslim immigrants.” Ambulance personnel are regularly attacked and spat upon and are now refusing to help until a police escort arrives. The police are too afraid to enter parts of the city without backup.

In early 2005, Norwegian newspapers reported that Oslo had recorded the highest ever number of rape cases in the previous twelve months. However, Fjordman explained, the official statistics contained no data regarding “how immigrants were grossly over represented in rape cases”, and the media remain so strangely silent.

Oslo Professor of Anthropology, Unni Wikan, said Norwegian women must take responsibility for the fact that Muslim men find their manner of dress provocative. And since these men believe women are responsible for rape, she stated, the women must adapt to the multicultural society around them.

The BBC pulled a documentary scheduled for screening in 2004, after police in Britain warned it could increase racial tension. “In these exceptional circumstances… Channel 4 as a responsible broadcaster has agreed to the police’s request…” The documentary was to show how Pakistani and other Muslim men sexually abused young, white English girls as young as 11.

The number of rapes committed by Muslim men against women in the last decade is so incredibly high that it cannot be viewed as anything other than culturally implicit behaviour. It is overtly reinforced and sanctioned by Islamic religious leaders who blame the victims and excuse the rapists.

In three decades of immigration into Western countries, Islam has caused social upheaval and havoc in every one of its host countries. No other immigration program has encountered the problems of non-assimilation and religious ambiguity.

Everywhere in the world, Muslims are in conflict with their neighbours. And as Mark Steyn recently said, every conflict appears to have originated by someone with the name of Mohammed.

In July 2005, Melbourne Sheik Mohammad Omran told Sixty Minutes that “…we believe we have more rights than you because we choose Australia to be our home and you didn’t. “

In the same interview visiting Sheik Khalid Yasin warned “There’s no such thing as a Muslim having a non-Muslim friend, so a non-Muslim could be your associate but they can’t be a friend. They’re not your friend because they don’t understand your religious principles and they cannot because they don’t understand your faith.”

Despite being told over and over by Islamic scholars, and witnessing massive influxes of Islamic crime, Western countries continue to believe in the reality of assimilation and moral relativism.

In Australia, Lebanese Christians have assimilated and become a respected part of our community. The Premier of Victoria is a Lebanese Christian as is the Governor Of New South Wales. However, Lebanese Muslims have encountered serious problems because of their refusal to accept our right to live our way of life. Nothing so clearly demonstrates that it is not an issue of race — but of culture.

A Yemeni court ordered the marriage of an eight-year-old girl terminated on Tuesday because she had not reached puberty.

The court also ordered the child’s family to pay about $250 in compensation to the 30-year-old ex-husband.

The girl’s lawyer and human rights activist Shatha Nasser said the minor had filed a suit in April asking for divorce and told the court that her husband had been physically abusing her and forcing her to have “sex with him after hitting her.”

One of the people attending the trial volunteered to pay the compensation, the lawyer said, but did not explain the reason why the court ordered the compensation.

The ruling terminated the marriage instead of granting a divorce to prevent the husband from seeking to reinstate the marriage, according to the lawyer.

Many minor girls in Arab countries that observe tribal traditions are married to older husbands but not before puberty. Such marriages are also driven by poverty in countries like Yemen, one of the poorest countries outside Africa.

If you like them young it helps to be a raghead.

Minnesota Madrassa? - HUMAN EVENTS
Can you imagine a public school founded by two Christian ministers, and housed in the same building as a church? Add to that — in the same building — a prominent chapel. And let’s say the students are required to fast during Lent, and attend Bible studies right after school. All with your tax dollars.

Inconceivable? Sure. If such a place existed, the ACLU lawyers would descend on it like locusts. It would be shut down before you could say “separation of church and state,” to the accompaniment of New York Times and Washington Post editorials full of indignant foreboding, warning darkly about the growing influence of the Religious Right in America.

But such a school does exist in Minnesota, in a different religious context, and so far the ACLU has uttered nary a peep.

Tax dollars are currently at work funding the Tarek ibn Ziyad Academy, a popular, rapidly growing K-8 charter school with campuses in Inver Grove Heights and Blaine, Minnesota. According to the Minnesota Department of Education, as a Minnesota charter school implementing a statewide “performance and professional pay program” known as Q-Comp, Tarek ibn Ziyad Academy pocketed $65,260 in state money for the 2006-07 school year. The school’s website, meanwhile, boasts that it offers a “rigorous Arabic language program” and an “environment that fosters your cultural values and heritage.” Whose cultural values and heritage? According to the indefatigable investigative reporter Katherine Kersten of the Star Tribune, “there are strong indications that religion plays a central role” there.

ABC News: Buried in Eloquence, Obama Contradictions About Pastor
Buried in his eloquent, highly praised speech on America’s racial divide, Sen. Barack Obama contradicted more than a year of denials and spin from him and his staff about his knowledge of Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s controversial sermons.
Video
Is Obama’s Pastor a Liability?

Similarly, Obama also has only recently given a much fuller accounting of his relationship with indicted political fixer Antoin “Tony” Rezko, a longtime friend, who his campaign once described as just one of “thousands of donors.”

Until yesterday, Obama said the only thing controversial he knew about Rev. Wright was his stand on issues relating to Africa, abortion and gay marriage.

“I don’t think my church is actually particularly controversial,” Obama said at a community meeting in Nelsonville, Ohio, earlier this month.

“He has said some things that are considered controversial because he’s considered that part of his social gospel; so he was one of the leaders in calling for divestment from South Africa and some other issues like that,” Obama said on March 2.

His initial reaction to the initial ABC News broadcast of Rev. Wright’s sermons denouncing the U.S. was that he had never heard his pastor of 20 years make any comments that were anti-U.S. until the tape was played on air.

But yesterday, he told a different story.

The “Islam” that Muslim activists introduce to the West these days is completely different from the Islam we knew and experienced in the Middle East. This is a new edition -revised, modified, expanded and abridged- of the real Islam. A major facelift operation has been taking place here. To their credit, I must acknowledge that the International Islamization movement, in recent years, has grown much in both intelligence and sophistication. They lacked power, so they decided to be smart. Since they could no longer use the sword to conquer the world, as they once did, they decided to use more cunning methods. Nevertheless, this undertaking of converting the West to Islam is not going to be easy. Muslim activists are faced with the big task of changing people’s perception of Islam, and convincing them of the legitimacy of that religion. This, at a time when Western citizens are held hostage by Muslims, airplanes are hijacked, and a death sentence is issued against a popular writer just because he dared to criticize Islam. The following are some of the methods Muslim activists are now adopting:

1. Change Of Identity
They avoid referring to teachings that may offend the Western citizen. They never mention the Islamic code of punishment. They stress that they believe in Moses and Jesus. They no longer call Jews and Christians infidels, nor would they call them “Zionists” or “Crusaders”. The last thing they want to do is to shock people. They’ll have a Muslim host on their T.V. program with a Christian name like “Paul”. Names like Mohammed, Mustafa and Omar are too strong to swallow. They use the term “Sunday School” in place of “Friday Class”, and they end their speeches with the Christian expression, “May God bless you”. They brag about being Americans, and have the American flag visible in the background of their program set. This is the same flag Muslims burned in their daily rituals in Iran, calling America “The great Satan”.

2. Change Of Vocabulary
They are using now a completely new terminology. Words like “love” and “grace” are now part of their vocabulary. Theological Christian terms such as “salvation”, “justification”, and “sanctification” are now part of their teachings. They change Quranic translations to hide some of Islam’s harsh teachings. An example is the new French translation of the Quran which has caused a tremendous furor among Muslim fundamentalists because it attempted to please the Jews by modifying some verses of the Quran that condemn Jews, such as a verse that used to read, “The people of Israel, after sowing corruption twice on earth for the purpose of dominating other people, will push themselves up into a position of extreme power before being punished by God.” The new translation reads just the opposite: “The people of Israel will be twice destroyed as an innocent victim, and God will reward them by elevating them to great heights”.

3. Change Of Strategy
Their new strategy lies in trying to be accepted, included and involved in all activities; religious, social and political. They are now becoming active in partisan functions in order to have a say in party platforms. They conduct letter campaigns to members of congress to influence legislation. They run for public offices in hope of reaching a position of authority. They make full use of their voting power to get concessions in their favor. They try to be represented on educational committees for the purpose of changing educational programs to go in line with their beliefs.

The Stage Of Weakness And The Stage Of Gihad (Holy War)
It seems that these new tactics we discussed are not without precedent in Islamic history. Mohammed Hassanein Heikal, the noted Egyptian author, refers to this concept in his book “Autumn Furor”. He states, “So, the element of Gihad emerged in the ideology of Abul Alaa Almauroody. He went on to differentiate between two separate stages a Muslim community goes through: The stage of weakness -In it a Muslim community is unable to take charge of its own destiny. In this case, according to his thinking, they must withdraw for the purpose of preparing themselves to be capable of executing the secong stage. The Gihad stage -The time will come when the Islamic community has completed its preparedness and is ready to come out of its issolation to take charge, through Gihad. Abul Alaa Almauroody also compares the two stages of weakness and Gihad with Mohammad’s struggle in Mecca then in Medina.

The Mohammad Of Mecca And Mohammad Of Medina
Historians agree that there is a big difference between Mohammed’s personality in Mecca and his personality after his migration to Medina. In Mecca, Mohammed was weak, struggling to be accepted, often mocked at and ridiculed. He tried to appeal to them by being like Jesus, compassionate and loving. His teachings condemned violence, injustice, and neglect of the poor. However, after he moved to Medina and his followers grew in strength and number, he became a relentless warrior, intent on spreading his religion by the sword. This change in Mohammad’s personality becomes apparent by comparing the Meccan and Medinan surahs. The following are some examples: In Surah 73:10 God tells Mohammed to be patient with his opponents, “Be patient with what they say, and part from them courteously”. While in Surah 2:191 God orders him to kill his opponents, “kill them wherever you find them, and drive them out from wherever they drove you out.” In Surah 2:256 God tells Mohammad not to impose Islam by force, “There is no compulsion in religion”, while in verse 193 God tells him to kill whoever rejects Islam, “Fight (kill) them until there is no persecution and the religion is God’s”. In Surah 29:45 God tells Mohammad to speak nicely to people of the Book (Christians and Jews), “Argue with people of the book, other than evil doers, only by means of what are better! and say, we believe in what has been sent down to us and sent down to you. Our God is the same as your God, and we are surrendered to Him.” While in Surah 9:29 God tells him to fight the people of the Book, “Fight those who do not believe in God and the last day… and fight People of the Book, who do not accept the religion of truth (Islam) until they pay tribute by hand, being inferior”. To justify this sudden change in the Quran’s mood from peaceful to militant, conciliatory to confrontational, Mohammad claimed that it was God who told him so. It was God who abrogated the peaceful verses and replaced them with harsh ones. However the truth of the matter, as Almauroody puts it, is that Mohammad became strong enough to move from the stage of weakness to the stage of Gihad. Today, in the West, we are witnessing the Islamic stage of weakness, but let’s not be fooled, the stage of Gihad is coming sooner or later. This meek little lamb will turn out to be a ravening wolf, and the sweet melodious “Baa Baa” will change to a thunderous roar.

The Facts
–Men are superior to women.
“And women shall have rights similar to the rights against them, according to what is equitable; but men have a degree over them”. Surah 2:228
–Women have half the rights of men
A. In court witness “And get two witnesses out of your own men, and if there are not two men, then a man and two women such as ye choose for witness.” Surah 2:282 B. In inheritance “To the male a portion equal to that of two females”. Surah 4:11
–A man may punish his wife by beating her
“…as to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them, refuse to share their beds, beat them…” Surah 4:34
–A man may marry up to four wives at one time
“…Marry women of your choice two, or three or four”. Surah 4:3
–A wife is a sex object for her husband
“Your wives are as a tilth unto you, so approach your tilth when or how ye will”. Surah2:223
–Muslims must fight until their opponents submit to Islam
“But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the pagans wherever ye find them…and lie and wait for them…; but if they repent and establish regular prayers and practice regular charity then open the way for them”. Surah 9:5
–Christians and Jews are cursed according to Islam
“The Jews call Uzair a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. Allah’s curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the truth”. Surah 9:30
–A Muslim apostate must be killed
“But if they violate their oath after their covenant, and taunt you for your faith, fight (kill) ye the chiefs of unfaith: for their oaths are nothing to them”. Surah 9:12
–Stealing is punished by amputation of the hands
“As to the thief, male or female, cut off his or her hands: A punishment by way of example from Allah…” Surah 5:41
–Adultery is punished by public flogging
“The women and the men guilty of adultery or fornication, flog each of them with a hundred stripes…” Surah 24:2
–Resisting Islam is punished by death, crucifixion or the cutting off of hands.
“The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Apostle, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of the hands and feet from opposite sides or exile from the land…” Surah 5:36
–Every Muslim will pass over Hell
“Not one of you but will pass over it…” Surah 19:71
–Heaven, in Islam, is the place where a Muslim will be reclining, eating meat
and delicious fruits, drinking exquisite wines, and engaging in sex with virgins. “They will recline on carpets whose inner linings will be of rich brocade: the fruit of the gardens will be near. In them will be (Maidens), Chaste, restraining their glances, whom no man or Jinn before them has touched (virgins).” Surah 55:54-46

Adolf Hitler Alive and Flying a UFO in Texas
Adolf Hitler, a German dictator from 1934 to 1945, was spotted at the helm of an enormous flying saucer hovering over southern Texas this week. The appearance of the dictator surprised many, since he has not been seen since 1945 in a bunker during World War II, where he purportedly took his own life. History is being remade in the Texas atmosphere, and Inebriated reporter Mickey Spillane is there and reporting.

“Locals here in Smalltown Texas recognized Hitler through the window of a glowing orb hovering in space about the size of either a huge Chevy SUV or a Toyota Hybrid, depending upon which car salesman you’re talking to,” said Inebriated reporter Spillane, looking slim and fit, having cut down on trans fats and alcohol following his death in 2006. “Eye witnesses say Hitler was a little green looking but was still wearing the old swastika arm band, had the ugly patch-mustache and looked psycho. Sounds like the guy alright.”

Man cooked parts of slain woman, police say - Crime & courts- msnbc.com
TYLER, Texas - A man killed his girlfriend, then filleted and cooked parts of her body before calling police to tell them what he was doing, authorities said Sunday.

Christopher Lee McCuin, 25, called 911 on Saturday and told an emergency dispatcher he had killed Jana Shearer, 21, and was boiling her body parts at his mother’s home, said Smith County Sheriff J.B. Smith.

When authorities arrived at the home, they found Shearer’s mutilated body, one ear boiling in a pot of water on the stove and a fork sticking out of some human flesh sitting on a plate on the kitchen table.

Bush Kisses Nigger ass
The United States is honoring the slain civil rights leader Martin Luther King, Junior, on the national holiday that bears his name. VOA White House Correspondent Paula Wolfson reports President Bush marked the occasion with a visit to the Martin Luther King, Junior, Memorial Library in Washington, D.C.

He traveled a few blocks from the White House to the main Washington, D.C. library. During a visit to the children’s reading room, he joined a librarian who was discussing the significance of Reverend King’s life and legacy with a group of boys and girls of various races and religions.

Why not just kiss them niggers back smelly ass

San Jose Mercury News - Women, Latinos boost Clinton
Women, Latinos boost Clinton
VICTORY IN NEVADA SIGNALS STRENGTHS IN CALIFORNIA RACE
By Mary Anne Ostrom
Mercury News
Article Launched: 01/20/2008 01:39:43 AM PST

I wonder how many mexicans Hillary had to suck (remember sucking isn’t sex) to pull this off.

LAS VEGAS - Women and Latino voters helped Hillary Clinton pull out a win in Nevada caucuses Saturday, a sign that her campaign can count on those groups when the race moves on to California in just over two weeks. To cheering supporters gathered at Planet Hollywood casino on the Strip, she said, “I guess this is how the West was won.”

Index Journal | Greenwood, SC | News
Huckabee first in Lakelands, McCain second
Saturday, January 19, 2008 10:50 PM EST
Voters in the Lakelands closely mirrored their counterparts throughout the Palmetto State in Saturday’s Republican presidential primary.

Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee and Arizona Sen. John McCain ran neck and neck in the region, with McCain holding a slight edge.

Former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson was a distant third. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney was the fourth-leading vote-getter, with Texas Rep. Ron Paul rounding out the top five. Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who largely ignored South Carolina to focus on the upcoming Florida primary, finished sixth in the Lakelands.

Across the Lakelands, Huckabee edged McCain in Greenwood County.

*
In a hotly contested race, Huckabee garnered 2,295 votes in Greenwood, while McCain picked up 2,262 votes. Connie Moody, director of elections and voter registration, said Huckabee slipped past McCain toward the end of the vote tallying.

“McCain looked like he had it the whole time,” Moody said. “Then, at the end, Huckabee slipped right on in there.”

A total of 6,807 votes were cast on a cold and rainy Saturday in Greenwood.

Former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson placed third in the county, netting 1,057 votes. Moody said the results will be certified at 10 a.m. Thursday at Park Plaza.

Others receiving votes included Thompson 1,057, Romney 847, Paul 220, Giuliani 97, Duncan Hunter 25, John Cox 2 and Tom Tancredo 2.

IN SALUDA COUNTY, McCain beat Huckabee 778-589. Thompson was a distant third with 279 votes. Romney garnered 200 votes, and Paul rounded out the top five with 73 votes.

Other vote-getters included Giuliani 19, Cox two and Hunter one. Tancredo was on the ballot, but didn’t receive any votes.

IN ABBEVILLE COUNTY, which is considered the birthplace of the Confederacy, Huckabee placed first with 905 votes. The former Baptist minister was the only Republican front-runner not to call for the removal of the Confederate flag from the state capitol grounds - an issue that has drawn national attention, as well as an NAACP boycott, for years here.

“You don’t like people from outside the state coming in and telling you what to do with your flag,” Huckabee told supporters Thursday in Myrtle Beach. “In fact, if somebody came to Arkansas and told us what to do with our flag, we’d tell ’em what to do with the pole, that’s what we’d do.”

McCain earned 540 votes. Thompson had 355, Romney 207, Paul 102 and Giuliani 11.

IN McCORMICK COUNTY, McCain won with 411 votes. Huckabee finished second with 237 [ only six votes more than Romney. Thompson was fourth with 181. Guiliani received 33 votes and Paul 21.

Visalia Times-Delta | Tulare Advance Register - www.visaliatimesdelta.com -

If you vote in the upcoming primary, please consider the future of my generation.

America is nation building and policing the world with money borrowed from nations like China.
Rep. Ron Paul of Texas stated on the floor of the House last year that Selective Service officials admit running a check of their list of available young men.

If the draft is reinstated, Rep. Paul said, we probably will include a kind of enslavement.

Instead of testing the efficacy of the Selective Service System and sending more troops, as well to serve the god of equality.

Conscription is slavery, plain and simple, and it was made illegal under the 13th amendment, which prohibits involuntary servitude. We should repeal the Selective Service Act. A free society should never depend on compulsory conscription to defend itself.

We get into trouble by not following the precepts of liberty or obeying the rule of law. Preemptive, undeclared wars fought under false pretenses are a road to disaster. If a full declaration of war by Congress had been demanded as the Constitution requires, this war never would have been fought.

I ask you to vote for life and liberty of future Americans, vote Ron Paul for president 2008.

Drug-resistant staph found to be passed in gay sex

Been needing something to delete a few queers!

SAN FRANCISCO - A drug-resistant strain of potentially deadly bacteria has moved beyond the borders of U.S. hospitals and is being transmitted among gay men during sex, researchers said on Monday.

They said methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, or MRSA, is beginning to appear outside hospitals in San Francisco, Boston, New York and Los Angeles.

Sexually active gay men in San Francisco are 13 times more likely to be infected than their heterosexual neighbors, the researchers reported in the Annals of Internal Medicine.
A 2005 colorized scanning electron micrograph shows clumps of the methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bacteria. A drug-resistant strain of potentially deadly bacteria has moved beyond the borders of U.S. hospitals and is being transmitted among gay men during sex, researchers said on Monday.

“Once this reaches the general population, it will be truly unstoppable,” said Binh Diep, a researcher at the University of California, San Francisco who led the study. “That’s why we’re trying to spread the message of prevention.”

According to chemical analyses, bacteria are spreading among the gay communities of San Francisco and Boston, the researchers said.

“We think that it’s spread through sexual activity,” Diep said.

This superbug can cause life-threatening and disfiguring infections and can often only be treated with expensive, intravenous antibiotics.

It killed about 19,000 Americans in 2005, most of them in hospitals, according to a report published in October in the Journal of the American Medical Association.

About 30 percent of all people carry ordinary staph chronically. It can be passed by touching other people or by depositing the bacteria on surfaces or objects.

The bacteria can cause deep-tissue infections if they enter the body through a wound in the skin.

Of those people who carry staph, most carry it in their noses but community-based MRSA also can live in and around the anus and is passed between sexual partners.

Incidence of MRSA is rising along with the resurgence of syphilis, rectal gonorrhea, and new HIV infections partly because of changes in beliefs about the severity of HIV and an increase in risky behaviors, such as illicit drug use and having sex that abrades the skin, Diep’s team wrote.

“Your likelihood of contracting each of these diseases increases with the number of sexual partners that you have,” Diep said. “The same can probably be said for MRSA.”

Staph infections often look like raised red dots on the skin. Left untreated, the areas can swell and fill with pus.

The best way to avoid infection is by washing the hands or genitals with soap and water, Diep said.