Saturday, February 28, 2009

Pakistan - If you read or see nothing else,,,,

thanks to, TROP for the hat tip on this,,

Freedom Under Fire: U.N. Anti-Blasphemy Resolution - With Christopher Hitchens

thanks TROP for this hat tip,,

February 25, 2009 on CNN's Lou Dobbs with Christopher Hitchens

The United Nations Anti-Blasphemy Resolution aims to curtail speech that offends religion, specifically Islam. Critics, religious groups and free speech advocates say the resolution is spreading Sharia law to the Western world. Christopher Hitchens joined Lou.


The New Islamist Tactic: Acts of Staged Controversy

thanks King Rob!!

Posted By: theonlykingrob

Groups like CAIR live to generate Muslim outrage in the hope of securing concessions to Islam.
But is their pattern starting to wear thin?

Are Acts of Staged Controversy an Islamist Strategic Tactic?

by Madeleine Gruen and Edward Sloan
IPT News
February 27, 2009

Through careful study of terrorist incidents and investigations and study of the histories of the terrorist groups, U.S. law enforcement officers, security officials, and intelligence analysts have developed an understanding of the tactics, techniques and procedures used by terrorists preparing for and conducting attacks. Professionals can usually distinguish between a truly suspicious incident and benign behavior. However, there is a third category of non-violent activities that is more difficult to identify, which we will refer to as "acts of staged controversy.

There are some cases where witnesses describe actors' behavior as "odd" yet very overt—behavior apparently designed to attract attention. Viewed under differing prisms, the behavior could be classified as either benign or as some type of terrorist activity. Decision makers and practitioners should consider the possibility that certain incidents are staged or that they are escalated by manipulation of the media and the legal system to create controversy and to provoke a response to serve strategic purposes.

It is very difficult to prove ulterior intentions behind what we are referring to as "acts of staged controversy." Perhaps these acts are deliberately provocative. Or, it is possible these are innocent events that may be seized upon by advocacy groups for political gain. We present this hypothesis to provide an alternative way of analyzing these types of incidents.

Strategic Motivations of Islamist Groups

Islamist groups, such as the Muslim Brotherhood, do not necessarily intend to engage in violence (though some branches of the Muslim Brotherhood are very violent). Nevertheless, they share the same long-term goal as violent jihadist groups: to establish an Islamic society. Part of their strategy is to weaken and dismantle democratic regimes.[1] They endeavor to "Islamize" society using a bottom up approach[2] so that eventually their doctrines are accepted as the norm rather than considered extreme or marginal.

This article offers two cases, both involving the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), which describes itself as a Muslim advocacy organization. These cases are meant to be illustrative of how acts of staged controversy may be implemented by groups with an Islamist agenda.

Many of CAIR's founding members were members of the Muslim Brotherhood[3] and of a support network created by the Brotherhood to benefit Hamas. Some experts believe that CAIR continues to be deeply involved with the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas and supports their objectives.[4],[5] The Muslim Brotherhood is not considered a monolithic organization, and its various branches may disagree on specific tactics, but all are consistent in their commitment to its core ideological principles, including the adoption of their political version of Islam as a governing standard for all Muslims around the world.

In 1991, the Muslim Brotherhood issued a memorandum outlining its strategic goal in North America.
[7] It reads, in part:

"The [Muslim Brotherhood] must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and "sabotaging" its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and Allah's religion is made victorious over all other religions.

Minnesota Imams

On November 20, 2006, six imams boarded a US Airways jet that was about to depart from Minneapolis-Saint Paul International Airport for Phoenix, Arizona. They had attended a three-day conference of the North American Imams Federation. Three only had one-way tickets and no checked luggage.[8] Various witnesses reported observing the group praying in an unusually loud way in the waiting area prior to boarding.[9] One of the witnesses, a clergyman who was familiar with Islamic practices, described their behavior at the gate as "atypical."[10] This same witness was later seated next to one of the imams on the plane and intentionally engaged him in conversation. The imam initially expressed to the witness that he was in the United States to do work related to his Ph.D. Later in the discussion, he admitted he was not doing academic work but instead intended to "represent Muslims in the United States" by generating support for Shari'a law.

Upon boarding the plane, the imams dispersed. Two sat in the front of the plane, two in the middle, and two in the rear.[12] The flight crew and passengers observed them changing seats, and several of the men requested seat-belt extenders.[13] Crew members thought the request was odd, as none of the imams appeared overweight.[14] Although the extenders were provided, they were never used and were left on floor of the plane.[15] One passenger stated that she believed that the imams deliberately acted out as a part of an attempt to intimidate airline employees.[16] Another passenger said, "I can't explain it, but it was like they were definitely trying to raise suspicion."[17] The flight was delayed and the imams were removed from the plane by the airport police, questioned, and released after their plane had already departed.

CAIR filed a complaint with the Department of Transportation, and a separate civil suit in federal court on behalf of the imams against US Airways and the Metropolitan Airports Commission, citing civil rights violations. CAIR also sued the "John Does" who alerted the aircrew and authorities after becoming alarmed by the imam's behavior in the terminal and on the plane.[18] While the "John Doe" provision of a bill (designed to protect citizens who report possible terrorist-related behavior from being sued, and to protect officers acting in an official capacity to prevent terrorist attacks) was moving through Congress, CAIR persisted with its lawsuit, claiming the right to discover whether the complaints were actually made "in good faith" or if they were racially motivated.

President George W. Bush signed the "John Doe" provision[20] into law on August 3, 2007 and CAIR dropped its claims against the "Does."[21] There may be a residual "chilling effect," however, that would prevent concerned citizens from reporting suspicious incidents for fear of getting sued.[22] Causing reluctance to report suspicious incidents in which Muslims are involved may be an aspect of Islamist strategy to reduce resistance to the Islamization of society.

In January 2009, the U.S. Department of Transportation ruled that US Airways did not discriminate against the imams and that the airline's actions were reasonable. The civil suit is scheduled to go to trial in August, 2009.

Giants Stadium

During a football game September 19, 2005 at Giants Stadium, five Muslim men were questioned by FBI agents after they prayed near the stadium's main air intake duct located in a sensitive area.[24] Former President George H.W. Bush attended the game and security was high. After approximately 20 minutes of questioning, FBI agents determined that the group did not pose a threat and allowed them to return to the game.

This group may have acted completely innocently. The issue, however, was not dropped by the men, and a few weeks later, on November 2, 2005, the group joined forces with the New Jersey-based American Muslim Union and the New York City chapter of CAIR for a joint press conference concerning the incident. At the conference, the men complained that they had been humiliated at Giants Stadium, and that their "main aim [in publicizing the episode] was to bring to light and educate people about what it is we're supposed to do."[25] They also took the opportunity to promote a campaign called "Pray for Understanding,"[26] which the executive director of the New York office of CAIR described as a way to teach people about Islam. The tie-in to the "Pray for Understanding" campaign at the press conference suggests the possibility that the incident at Giants Stadium may have been staged to create a platform to promote an ulterior public relations agenda.

What Islamists Might Gain from "Acts of Staged Controversy"

The Minnesota Imams and Giants Stadium incidents are just two examples where unusual but overt behavior has been investigated, dropped (because there was no clear indication of wrongdoing), and subsequently taken up and intensified by CAIR or by other Muslim groups. Due to the involvement of Islamist advocacy groups, news stories are generated and controversy stirred.

If the objective of Islamist groups, such as the Muslim Brotherhood, is to establish Islam as the dominant global societal doctrine, then how would creating acts of controversy - or seizing on opportunities to create controversy - further their strategy to achieve their objective? If they intend to achieve their objective through non-violent means then it is logical to conclude that they would want Muslims to embrace their perspective and to eschew democratic principles..

For example, acts of staged controversy could be used to:

* Cause Muslims to feel disaffection for the democratic system by promoting feelings of betrayal and abandonment.

* Convince Muslim Americans that they are not accepted as Americans. Acts of staged controversy provoke a response from authorities that can foment an "us vs. them" rift between Muslims and non-Muslims.

* Incite political divides that may ultimately cause political instability.

* Influence legislators to call for laws to outlaw profiling and/or repeal existing laws such as the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and the Patriot Act.

* Draw attention from foreign media in an attempt to show that the U.S. rhetoric about acceptance is hollow.

Acts of staged controversy could also be exploited by groups who seek to use violence.
For example, acts of staged controversy could be used to:

* Desensitize security personnel by making activity that common sense would deem suspicious instead seem routine and not worth any special effort.

* Intimidate security personnel and citizens by threatening lawsuits; making them reluctant to report suspicious behavior.

Handling Acts of Staged Controversy

Unfortunately, hatred, bigotry, and mistrust exist in the United States, and it is the role of civil rights groups to respond appropriately when acts of hatred do occur. It is the duty of responsible officials to monitor political, religious, and social tensions so that violent acts motivated by hatred can be prevented. The long view for homeland security, however, cannot be compromised by hasty responses to ambiguous situations. It is possible that some Islamist groups may exaggerate the occurrence of anti-Islamic discrimination in order to validate the premise that "Islamophobia" is rampant. According to FBI statistics, out of a total 7,624 hate crimes reported in the United States in 2007, 115 were motivated by anti-Islamic bias.[27] By contrast, 2,658 were motivated by bias against blacks, 749 were anti-white, 1,265 targeted people based on sexual orientation and 969 of the hate crimes reported were motivated by bias against Jews.

Law enforcement and security personnel, airline and airport managers, legislators, politicians, media, and private citizens all have roles to play to prevent the spread of extremist ideology, which could lead to radicalization and, ultimately, a possible terrorist event.

Response at the Federal, Law Enforcement and Media Levels

Politicians must acknowledge Islamist ideology is being promoted in the United States, recognize who is promoting it, and understand the subtle tactics used by the Islamist groups before they can introduce effective counter-measures against terrorism. Politicians must realize that Islamist groups are competing for hearts and minds in the United States, so commitment to democratic values cannot be taken for granted.

How does law enforcement play a role in acts of staged controversy if there is no apparent crime committed? It is unlawful to conspire and to deliberately disrupt or interfere with the legitimate activities of law enforcement and security personnel. Engaging in deliberately suspicious behavior in order to distract security and law enforcement authorities is a tactic that has been discussed on Islamist message boards.[29] Of course, in ambiguous situations it is hard to prove the actual intent of the actors. Difficult though it may be, investigations should be conducted and cooperating witnesses sought and developed. The stakes are high, especially when the results of these incidents are considered in the aggregate and not individually.

Associations with terrorists or terrorist groups are not evidence of a crime, but are valuable data points in evaluating the true nature of an incident. If there are nefarious or questionable associations or prior activities that could shed light on possible motivations for ambiguous acts, they should be made known as much as possible. For example, one of the six imams involved in the Minnesota airport case, Omar Shahin, raised money for the Holy Land Foundation and for the Illinois-based KindHearts Foundation, which the government shut down last year for alleged support of Hamas.

Additionally, the media should be aware of the possibility that it is being used to further an Islamist agenda. Media cooperation and extensive coverage is a key element of successful acts of staged controversy. Historically, global political Islamist groups have skillfully manipulated the media as part of their effort to circulate their message.[31] Statements made by spokespeople representing Islamist groups are often taken at face value by the media, and past involvements and associations often go unmentioned. Just as it is for law enforcement, it is important for the media to consider incidents in the aggregate.


It could be that individuals or groups unintentionally behave in a way that is deemed suspicious, and that official response may cause embarrassment. It also is true that innocent events create opportunities for groups like CAIR to influence the public's view of Islam, both politically and ideologically.

Acts of staged controversy or public relations campaigns manipulating otherwise innocent events may be an aspect of Islamist group strategy to Islamize society. Authorities dealing with such incidents should assess the behavior as an aggregate. Their responses should address the root of the problem, rather than potentially allowing such incidents to compel a response that supports the Islamist agenda.

Madeleine Gruen is a Senior Analyst for the NEFA Foundation. She is also a Senior Intelligence Analyst for Mike Stapleton Associates and is a contributor to the Counterterrorism Blog. Previously, she was an intelligence analyst for the New York Police Department's Counterterrorism Division.

Edward Sloan is a detective in the New York Police Department with 35 years of service. He is a Navy Reserve Officer and since 2001 has deployed several times to Afghanistan and the U.S. Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. His views are not necessarily those of the NYPD or the Navy.

[1] Stephen Coughlin, Analysis of Muslim Brotherhood's General Strategic Goals for North America, Statement entered as evidence in U.S. v. Holy Land Foundation, September 7, 2007.

[2] Zeyno Baran, The Muslim Brotherhood's U.S. Network, Current Trends in Islamist Ideology, Vol. 6, Hudson Institute, 2008.

[3] Douglas Farah, Ron Sandee, and Josh Lefkowitz, The Muslim Brotherhood in the United States: A Brief History, NEFA Foundation, October 26, 2007,
(last accessed February 26, 2009)

[4] See: "Government's Memorandum in Opposition to Council on American-Islamic Relations' Motion for Leave to File Amicus Curiae Instanter and Amicus Brief in Support of the Unindicted Co-Conspirators' First and Fifth Amendment Rights," USA v. Holy Land Foundation, 3:04cr240 (TXND September 4, 2007) in which prosecutors say "CAIR has been identified by the Government at trial as a participant in an ongoing and ultimately unlawful conspiracy to support a designated terrorist organization, a conspiracy from which CAIR never withdrew.

[5] "Beware of CAIR" letter from U.S. Reps. Sue Myrick, Pete Hoekstra, John Shadegg, Paul Broun and Trent Franks to other House members. January 30, 2009. It says "There are indications that this group has connections to HAMAS." And, letter from U.S. Rep. Frank Wolf to Michael Heimback, FBI Assistant Director, Counter Terrorism Division, February 2, 2009. Wolf asks about news reports that the FBI has cut off communication with CAIR "amid mounting evidence that it has links to a support network for Hamas.

[6] See The Muslim Brotherhood's English-language web site,

[7] The Muslim Brotherhood's document outlining their strategy in North America and analysis of the document can be found on the NEFA Foundation web site:
See Exhibit GX 4-21 (last accessed February 26, 2009).

[8] Minnesota Airport Police Incident Report, OCA # 06004536, November 20, 2006.

[9] Katherine Kersten, Ordering Imams Off Flight Was Reasonable Act, Minneapolis-St. Paul Star-Tribune, December 7, 2006.

[10] Minnesota Airport Police Incident Report, OCA # 06004536, November 20, 2006.

[11] Ibid.

[12] Ibid.

[13] Ibid.

[14] Ibid.

[15] Ibid.

[16] Ibid.

[17] Ibid

[18] Steven Huntley, Travelers Need Shield From Lawsuit, Chicago Sun-Times, July 29, 2007.

[19] Ibrahim Hooper, National Communications Director for CAIR, appearance on "Tucker," MSNBC, July 29, 2007.

[20] The Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 (H.R.

[21] Audrey Hudson, Imams Drop Lawsuit Against Doe Passengers, Washington Times, August 23, 2007.

[22] See Congressman Peter King appearance on Fox News Channel, July 20, 2007,
(last accessed February 24, 2009).

[23] David Hanners, Feds Refute Imams' Bias Case Against US Airways, Twin Cities Pioneer Press, February 18, 2009.

[24] A Place to Pray During Games, New York Times, November 23, 2005.

[25] Jeff Diamant and Russell Ben-Ali, Meadowlands to Add Worship Area, Newark Star Ledger, November 22, 2005.

[26] Ibid.

[27] Federal Bureau of Investigations, 2007 Hate Crime Statistics,
(last accessed on February 24, 2009).

[28] Ibid.

[29] U.S. Department of Homeland Security, HSIA 04-0042, September 2, 2004.

[30] Ibid.

[31] Madeleine Gruen interview with former high-ranking member of Hizb ut-Tahrir, December 8, 2008. Also see Habib's Get Rich Quick Schemes, Manchester Evening News, December 18, 2008.

news articles for 2/28 = Operation Rooster

Sign WorldNetDaily's petition to block Congressional attacks on freedom of speech and press (the fairness doctrine) by clicking here.

Here are the latest articles added to

Military Police Officer Basic Course graduation at An Numaniyah
AN NUMANIYAH, Iraq - The Iraqi Military Police Academy at An Numaniyah Military Training Base continues to professionalize the Iraqi Officer Corps. Eight Military Police officers from six different Iraqi Army divisions graduated from the Military Police Officers Basic Course here Feb. 25.

GoI Opening Classrooms, Opening Minds
FOB WARRIOR — The Government of Iraqi’s (GoI) commitment to progress is continuing in the form of three new classrooms which opened at the Hegna Primary School, Feb. 15. The additional classrooms will allow younger children to focus on educational fundamentals.

Irbil facility to serve city’s most vulnerable residents
Irbil, Iraq – February 12 was a day of celebration in the 4,300-year-old city of Irbil in the northern Kurdish region of Iraq. The Kurdistan Regional Government, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Gulf Region Division and contract partners gathered to celebrate the completion of the Irbil Orphanage and Senior Center.

Marines Strengthen Ties with Iraqi Village
CAMP AL TAQADDUM — U.S. Marines recently visited the a village of Kem Esbani to strengthen the rapport Coalition forces established with the town since the U.S. entered Iraq in 2003.

Afghan, Coalition Forces Detain Militants, Find Weapons
WASHINGTON, Feb. 27, 2009 – Coalition and Afghan forces detained eight militants and seized enemy weapons stockpiles in recent operations, military officials reported.

Hope is Victory in Afghanistan, PRT Commander Says
FORWARD OPERATING BASE GARDEZ, Afghanistan, Feb. 27, 2009 – A trip along a bumpy, dirt road deep into the eastern Paktia province gives way to village after village of mud and straw “qalats,” or fortresses, that have served as refuge for generations of extended Afghan families.

Cross to families of fallen Marines
MARINE CORPS BASE QUANTICO, Va — The Secretary of the Navy presented the naval services highest award for valor to family members of two Marines for actions in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Face of Defense: Veteran Submariner Garners Coveted Neptune Award
WASHINGTON, Feb. 27, 2009 – Navy Master Chief Petty Officer Korey Ketola recalled that he was uneasy when he embarked on his first submarine patrol in 1983.

'Tea parties' denounce spending trillions
Frustrated citizens in more than 30 cities across the country gathered in a national "tea party" protest today to denounce the trillions of dollars in taxpayer money the federal government is doling out in the name of financial bailouts and economic "stimulus.

Boehner: 'Spending barrage' starting >
House Minority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) told conservatives Friday that a "spending barrage" from President Barack Obama is the first step toward an American brand of socialism.

Radio chip coming soon to your driver's license?
Privacy advocates are issuing warnings about a new radio chip plan that ultimately could provide electronic identification for every adult in the U.S. and allow agents to compile attendance lists at anti-government rallies simply by walking through the assembly.

South Korea: North Testing Radar, Ahead of Planned Launch
South Korean news media say North Korea is testing radar and other monitoring equipment in preparation for what Pyongyang says will be a satellite launch. South Korea, the United States and other countries fear North Korea is actually planning to test a long-range ballistic missile.

Arsonists Torch Berlin Porsches, BMWs on Economic Woe
Feb. 27 (Bloomberg) -- When Berlin resident Simone Klostermann returned from vacation and couldn’t find her Mercedes SLK, she thought it had been towed. Police told her the 35,000- euro ($45,000) car had been torched.

For more news and info you need to know from America and around the world go to

You can catch my updates on "Texas Fellowship" Saturday night through Thursday night (12:00 am eastern/9:00 pm pacific) by going to

You can also listen to past shows.

Feel free to (and please) pass along to others anything in this bulletin or on the site.

To repost this bulletin with the links (links take you to the entire article): hit the “reply to poster” button below the bulletin, copy this bulletin, paste into your new bulletin.

U.S. to Boycott UN Racism Conference

I am so happy Canada did too!

thanks King Rob,,

Posted By: King Rob,

Official: U.S.
to Boycott UN Racism Conference
Some countries, including Israel, have already decided to boycott the World Conference Against Racism, which is set to be held in Geneva, Switzerland in April.

Friday, February 27, 2009

The Obama administration will not participate in the United Nations controversial conference on racism because of concerns it will be used by Arab nations and others to criticize Israel, a senior U.S. official told FOX News on Friday.

Israel and Canada have already announced that they will boycott the upcoming World Conference Against Racism in Geneva from April 20-25, known as Durban II, but President Obama's administration decided to assess the negotiations before making a decision on U.S. participation.

"We're not going to participate in any further negotiations on the text that's being circulated nor will we be able to participate in the Geneva conference," the official told FOX News. "However, we'll be observing developments in Geneva and see if a balanced and not biased outcome document emerges.

The Obama administration would reconsider its position if the document improves in a number of areas including dropping references to any specific country, references to defamation of religion which the U.S. views as a free speech issue, and language on reparations for slavery. It also wants a shorter text and does not want the final document for Durban II to reaffirm the final document from the 2001 Durban conference, the U.S. official said.

The conference is a follow-up to the contentious 2001 conference in the South African city of Durban which was dominated by clashes over the Middle East and the legacy of slavery. The U.S. and Israel walked out midway through that eight-day meeting over a draft resolution that singled out Israel for criticism and likened Zionism -- the movement to establish and maintain a Jewish state -- to racism.

Last week, the State Department sent two U.S. representatives to Geneva, where the final document to be issued by conference participants at the end of the conference is being negotiated, the U.S. officials said, speaking on condition of anonymity because an official announcement has not yet been made.

The representatives -- Betty King, a former U.S. ambassador to the U.N. Economic and Social Council, and Felice Gaer, the chair of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom -- held 30 meetings with representatives of different countries and attended the negotiations, the U.S. official said.

While the U.S. presence was warmly welcomed, the U.S. official said that in the negotiations, a bad document got worse.

The United States has decided that it will not participate in further negotiations on the outcome document and will not participate in the conference itself on the basis of the latest text, the U.S. official said.

Further details on the issues in question were not available as the latest version of the final document being negotiated in Geneva has not been released.

European nations have expressed hope that the conference can go ahead with a final text that is acceptable. But they have also drawn lines they say may not be crossed.

French diplomat Daniel Vosgien said in December that his country was firmly opposed to the idea of banning criticism of religion. Dutch Foreign Minister Maxime Verhagen said at the time that the Netherlands would walk out unless anti-Israel statements were scrapped.

from NY to Israel Sultan Reveals The Stories Behind the News

Afternoon Roundup - an Orwellian Deficit, the Racist Ball and the Border
That Isn't There

Posted: 27 Feb 2009 02:16 PM PST

White Houses Announces Plan to Cut Deficit, by using Deficit Spending
Triple the National Debt.

Does that make any sense to you? Because it sure doesn't make any sense to me.
In George Orwell's Animal Farm, the 7 rules that the animals lived by continued
to change by Napoleon's fiat, even as none of the other animals could remember
what they used to be.
So "Two Legs Bad, Four Legs Good" became
"Four Legs Good, Two Legs Better."

The press under Obama has switched to enthusiastically braying, "Deficit
Reduction Good, Deficit Spending Better."

For anyone who wondered how to tell when the Orwellian age was here, it
would be when the press describes a politician's plan to triple the national
debt using deficit spending, as a plan to cut the deficit. All the better
because the politician's first wave of campaigning involved a commercial
secretly done by one of his own employees and planted as a "viral video"
that exploited Orwell in order to criticize his opponent as manipulative
and totalitarian.

Obama's spending plan has all the economic wisdom of a teenager shopping
for electronics and paying for it with one credit, while paying the credit card
bill with another credit card. That kind of inability to understand the
consenquences of spending money you don't actually have, helped get
us into this mess in the first place.

Meanwhile however taxpayers will be dunned billions for the "virtual
nationalization" of Citigroup, a bank whose largest shareholders are Saudi
Prince Alaweed Bin Talal and the Abu Dhabi Investment Authority. Can
Sharia finance be far behind?

Mississippi Democratic Congressman Gene Taylor has wisely pointed out that
Mississippi Democratic Rep. Gene Taylor blasted the budget outline
President Obama submitted to Capitol Hill today, saying “I don’t like it…
change is not running up even bigger deficits that George Bush did.”

“That’s what George Bush did very well. Apparently that’s what President

Obama is doing.”As a member of the Armed Service Committee, Taylor

noted the budget only gives the Defense Department a “small increase,”

which he said would barely cover the cost of living adjustments for the


Taylor pointed to President Obama’s inaugural address that called for

Americans to make sacrifices, saying “It’s certainly not reflected in his budget.”

But it's asking too much to expect the press to ask the tough questions. Not

when they can instead report on such vital breaking stories as which dog

Obama picked, and how to get toned arms like Michelle Obama. Who has the

time to contemplate the impact of 20+ Trillion dollar deficit on our children,

when we can instead look at new photos of Sasha or read about some

lunatic who sent supposed AIDS tainted blood to Obama.

Four legs good, two legs better.

Of course that situation is hardly limited to the United States. Melanie Philips

points out that the cost of a conventional political system ignoring a real crisis is
the rise
of something explosive.

While the media minutely scrutinise Harriet Harman’s ambition, Jacqui

Smith’s expenses and David Cameron’s taste in clothes, a lower form

of political pond life altogether is expanding like duck-weed.

Last week, the British National Party won a council seat in Sevenoaks, Kent.The

reason for its increasing success is obvious. Like all populist, neo-fascist parties,

the BNP is opportunistically exploiting the failure by the political establishment

to address issues of pressing and legitimate concern to the public.


At a more profound and altogether more explosive level, however, is the fact

that all three parties not only refuse to address the issues that concern the

public most deeply and emotionally, but also demonise those who express

such anxieties as racists or fascists.

In particular, they have colluded in a refusal to acknowledge that

nationalism — or attachment to one’s own country and its values —

is a perfectly respectable, even admirable, sentiment. Instead, anyone

who maintains that British culture and identity are rooted in the history,

language, literature, religion and laws of this country — and must be

defended as such against erosion, undermining or outright attack — is

vilified as a racist or xenophobe.

This effectively presents such people with a choice — between being

demonised as racists and standing silently by as their culture evaporates.

For Britain is changing before our very eyes. As a result of the current

rate of immigration, within half a century the projected steep increase in

the UK’s population will be entirely made up of people not born in Britain —

most of whom will have come from the Third World.

Meanwhile, the fanatically imposed doctrine of multiculturalism has

brought about the erosion or denigration of Britain’s history, religion

and identity, leaving generations of children — both indigenous and

immigrant — appallingly ignorant of the common culture they need

to share.

It is entirely reasonable to want one’s country to express its own

culture through its institutions, laws and practices. Yet those who

defend this principle are called ‘racist’.

Britain is witnessing an alarming growth of
separate Muslim enclaves ruled by a parallel Islamic
Sharia law.

It is entirely reasonable to want one system of law for all.

Yet those who say so are called ‘Islamophobic’.

And that of course is inevitable. When the powerful combination of
the press and the political
enstablishment marginalize and
denounce a mainstream and widespread idea in order to create

enforced "moderation", there will always be those who hop on
board and cultivate them.

If you denounce legitimate criticism of Islam or the cost of immigration as

racist or fascist, you wind up with the issue in the domain of real racists and


Whether it's the BNP in the UK or Le Pen in France or Avigdor Lieberman

in Israel, when mainstream parties are timid, they put the ball in the court

of parties and politicians who are not afraid of being denounced as racists

or fascists. Often because that's exactly what they are. The same

phenomenon has not quite happened in America yet, mainly because the

far right still hates Jews more than it worries about Muslims, but it has

already ably exploited America's huge problem with debt and the

expanding Federal government, as Ron Paul's candidacy


Immigration in the US, as in the UK, is a populist area that Republicans

too often shun, leaving it in the hands of the far right.

As McCain and now Jindal are aptly demonstrating, the Republicans

cannot win by being a tame moderation party that eschews anything

but some imaginary center. Cameron has demonstrated that in the UK.

As the Likud has in Israel. You can't win by giving up your principles.

At best you can win a battle and lose the war.

Fortunately there are plenty of Republicans who continue to hold strong

positions on these issues. And Obama's Reign of Economic Terror is

making questioning the size of the Federal government and the

national debt, more mainstream than ever in the Republican party.

Now that just needs to be translated into party strategy.

Melanie Philips' column, the rise of the BNP or Yisrael Beiteinu however

should be fair warning to the epublican party that if it insists on being a

RINO party, it will see its own equivalent of the BNP rising to steal its

thunder. Ron Paul was only an opening shot. If the GOP doesn't embrace

its priniciples now when it has the chance, it will be far more difficult to

do so when it's losing former red states to a third party.

Speaking of Israel meanwhile, the coalition talks continue to drag on

endlessly, with every site playing its usual hand, with the predictable

and inevitable outcome. Kadima ironically enough, wants to be in the

Opposition, though it has no actual principles or ideas. Labor's Barak,

who actually has some ideas if not principles, wanted
to be in a coalition, but was forbidden by his own party.

That drags everything back into a drawn out struggle over Lieberman

and the religious parties. Just the sort of thing to make the Israeli public

disgusted with everyone involved. That being the usual outcome in

Israeli politics.

Lieberman's article supporting the creation of a Palestinian Arab state

naturally should have surprised no one, as in the Huckabee mold, his

nationalistic bark has always been louder than his liberal bite. But it's

part of Lieberman's strategy to sell himself to a wider audience, bringing

closer his ambition to become Prime Minister.

Lieberman has repeatedly told people over the years that he wants to be
PM, and playing
the nationalist, is only one strategy of many he's used to

bring himself closer to that stage. The genuinely depressing part is that he

may make it yet.

Looking over the blogsphere, Maggie's Notebook blogs on the
developing crisis on the Mexican
border, with Texas Governor

Perry asking for troops.

The escalating border violence has prompted Texas Governor
Rick Perry to ask for troops to guard the
border. This
week Juárez Mayor Jose Reyes Ferriz moved his family to El Paso for

According to Tuesday's El Paso Times, El Paso police are investigating the

possibility that elements of the Juárez drug cartel may cross the border

into the United States to come after Juárez Mayor Jose Reyes Ferriz and

his family.

With Pheonix already as the kidnapping capital of the US, the situation

will only get worse. Ferriz moving his family across the border is no

solution, because the truth is that there is no border anymore.

The Mexican border is a formality, because Mexico exists on both sides

of the Rio Grande. The Mexican flags waved at immigration rallies, the

rising presence of the cartels and cartel related violence on this side of

the border, and the formal use of Spanish, are all statements that

Mexico exists in the US as well. Mexico's second greatest source of

revenue remains money sent from the US to back home.

The only difference is that Mexico does not have actual sovereignity

on the US side of the border, but it's up in the air whether Mexico will

have any sovereignity on their side of the border, or whether we'll have

sovereignity on our side of the border either.

Neo Con Express meanwhile has the Obama budget deficit graph, displayed

Via Dragon Dirt, an essay asking Where's the Outrage About Saudi Arabia

Whew, what a relief to no longer have a president so intimately tied to the

Saudi royal family. Thanks to a whole cottage industry of New York Times

bestsellers like Craig Unger’s House of Bush, House of Saud and hit movies

like Michael Moore’s Fahrenheit 9/11, the nefarious relationship between

“the world’s two most powerful dynasties” was exposed.

Surely, now that we’re empowered to recognize a Saudi-controlled White

House, people like Craig Unger and Michael Moore will have no problem

rallying their fans, through more books and films, to reject President

Obama’s suspicious obsequiousness toward the Saudis: Obama gave

his first official interview as president to the partially Saudi-owned

Al-Arabiya network. During that interview, he singled out Saudi

Arabia’s King Abdullah for his “great courage.” Obama has since selected

as head of the National Intelligence Council a former U.S. ambassador to

Saudi Arabia named Chas Freeman. Freeman has acknowledged

the “generosity of Crown Prince Abdullah” in helping him in such

endeavors as peddling a Saudi textbook full of nasty lies about Israel.

It will be interesting to see intrepid journalists and media mavens hot

on the case of the Obama-Saudi connection.

Speaking of Freeman, Melanie Philips continues her coverage of him,

and cites this blog as well Chas W Freeman has now been confirmed as

Obama’s pick for the chairmanship of America’s National Intelligence

Council. This appointment, to a post which oversees production of

America’s National Intelligence Estimates and shapes America’s

understanding of the threat posed by the world’s rogue regimes

and terror organisations, has caused even Obama supporters to

choke into their cappuccinos.

For Freeman is not simply, as I wrote here, in the pocket of Saudi
Arabia, with ties to the bin Laden family after 9/11. Seven months
after 9/11, he told the Washington Institute:

I accept that al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden almost certainly

perpetrated the September 11 attacks.

Note the "Almost Certainly" part of this.

Via NavyVet48, in the comments, the local CBS affiliate's Marcia Kramer
has a hard hitting story on the Jewish reaction to Hillary Clinton's
transformation on Israel.

"I'm a very strong supporter of Israel," Clinton said back in
February 2000.

On Thursday, as Secretary of State she had yet another about face
in the form of angry messages demanding Israel speed up aid to Gaza.
Jewish leaders are furious.

"I am very surprised, frankly, at this statement from the United States
government and from the secretary of state," said Mortimer Zuckerman,
publisher of the New York Daily News and member of the NYC Jewish
Community Relations Council.

"I liked her a lot more as a senator from New York," Assemblyman
Dov Hikind, D-Brooklyn, said. "Now, I wonder as I used to wonder
who the real Hillary Clinton is."

The answer of course, like most politicians, is she is who she needs to
be at a given moment.

Elder of Ziyon has more insight into that transformation in
The Water in the State Department.

Islamic Danger to Americans has the text from an
Yes, you can see a day where every Saudi, every Egyptian, Syrian,
Iranian, and Pakistani has the same opportunity. But that needs real
change, real education, real human rights. It is time for the Muslim
world and its nations to honor the rights and opportunities of every
one of its citizens who happen to come from outside the tribes in

Every human being living in Saudi Arabia should have the right to
build a house of worship, not only Muslims. Theocrats have enabled
a shar'ia based legal system which is an anathema to liberty and
basic human rights –all in the name of the religion of Islam.

Of course as the appointment of a Saudi lobbyist demonstrates,
it will always be an imaginary speech.

Meanwhile Atlas Shrugs features Part Two of How Muslim Theory
Suppresses Women Long before the U.S. declared itself a nation,
however, America gave women at large great respect. The Uxbridge,
Mass. town fathers in 1756 granted the young widow Lydia Taft the
right to vote in local matters, for example. America again showed its
respect for women in 1789 when the states ratified the U.S. Constitution,
inferring rights to women amongst "We the people of the United States,"
when early 19th century suffragette Abby Kelley Foster first sought
votes for women, and in 1869 when Susan B. Anthony's formed the
National Woman Suffrage Association.

Voting rights would never have accrued to American women,
moreover, without their basic and universal right to free speech and
their right "peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government
for a redress of grievances," as guaranteed in the First Amendment,
drafted and ratified in 1791.

Nowhere in the world, by contrast, does Islam grant such rights to
women, either political or religious.

Far from it. Current Islamic teaching more or less parallels that of the
7th century original. In October 2006, for example, former Australian
Mufti Sheikh Taj Aldin al-Hilali described women as "uncovered meat"
in a sermon at Sydney's Lakemba mosque. Similarly, Muslim Brotherhood
spiritual chief Yusuf Qaradawi, widely recognized as Islam's "greatest"
living scholar, in the Status of Women in Islam derides any
woman having "free rein to assert herself, promote her personality,
enjoy her life and her femininity... mix with men freely, experience
them closely where they would be together and alone, travel with them,
go to cinemas or dance till midnight together."


The global Muslim war on free speech is best exemplified by verbal and
legal attacks on Dutch freedom fighter and Member of Parliament Geert
Wilders, who has for years required non-stop personal security protection,
now faces trial at home for his truthful statements quoting the Qur'an, and
was recently barred entry to the U.K. This is all the work of advocates for
global shari'a rule.

As we've previously noted at Right Side News, several large North
American Muslim organizations also advocate global imposition of
Islamic law, which prohibits "defamation" of Islam and Mohammed.
For Muslims who leave the faith or "blaspheme" against Islam or
Mohammed, the punishment is death, a statute on the books in
several Muslim states, and widely enforced by mob rule in others.
Non-Muslims may not criticize Islam or Mohammed, either. Pakistan's
hudud code enforces shari'a laws on everyone, Muslims and non-Muslims
alike. Iran, Saudi Arabia and Sudan also enforce hudud laws. According to
Islamic scholars, these statutes apply to all of mankind.