Friday, September 28, 2012

Libya: President says Muhammad movie had nothing to do with attack on embassy

The only ones on the planet now who won't let this truth get in the way of the quest for hearts and minds of the Muslims world is Obama and his band of merry knuckleheads.

From NBC September 26

Libyan president to NBC: Anti-Islam film had 'nothing to do with' US Consulate attack

An anti-Islam film that sparked violent protests in many countries had "nothing to do with" a deadly attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi earlier this month, Libya's president told NBC News.

In an exclusive interview with NBC News' Ann Curry, President Mohamed Magarief discounted claims that the attack was in response to a movie produced in California and available on YouTube. He noted that the assault happened on Sept. 11 and that the video had been available for months before that.

"Reaction should have been, if it was genuine, should have been six months earlier. So it was postponed until the 11th of September," he said. "They chose this date, 11th of September to carry a certain message."

SLATE says the first amendment is "overvalued"

Eric Posner wants us to believe that restricting free speech will somehow make us safer.


From Slate September 25 by Eric Posner

The World Doesn’t Love the First Amendment

The universal response in the United States to the uproar over the anti-Muslim video is that the Muslim world will just have to get used to freedom of expression. President Obama said so himself in a speech at the United Nations today, which included both a strong defense of the First Amendment and (“in the alternative,” as lawyers say) and a plea that the United States is helpless anyway when it comes to controlling information. In a world linked by YouTube, Twitter, and Facebook, countless videos attacking people’s religions, produced by provocateurs, rabble-rousers, and lunatics, will spread to every corner of the world, as fast as the Internet can blast them, and beyond the power of governments to stop them. Muslims need to grow a thick skin, the thinking goes, as believers in the West have done over the centuries. Perhaps they will even learn what it means to live in a free society, and adopt something like the First Amendment in their own countries.
But there is another possible response. This is that Americans need to learn that the rest of the world—and not just Muslims—see no sense in the First Amendment. Even other Western nations take a more circumspect position on freedom of expression than we do, realizing that often free speech must yield to other values and the need for order. Our own history suggests that they might have a point.
Despite its 18th-century constitutional provenance, the First Amendment did not play a significant role in U.S. law until the second half of the 20th century. The First Amendment did not protect anarchists, socialists, Communists, pacifists, and various other dissenters when the U.S. government cracked down on them, as it regularly did during times of war and stress.

The First Amendment earned its sacred status only in the 1960s, and then only among liberals and the left, who cheered when the courts ruled that government could not suppress the speech of dissenters, critics, scandalous artistic types, and even pornographers. Conservatives objected that these rulings helped America’s enemies while undermining public order and morality at home, but their complaints fell on deaf ears.

A totem that is sacred to one religion can become an object of devotion in another, even as the two theologies vest it with different meanings. That is what happened with the First Amendment. In the last few decades, conservatives have discovered in its uncompromising text— “Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech”—support for their own causes. These include unregulated campaign speech, unregulated commercial speech, and limited government. Most of all, conservatives have invoked the First Amendment to oppose efforts to make everyone, in universities and elsewhere, speak “civilly” about women and minorities. I’m talking of course about the “political correctness” movement beginning in the 1980s, which often merged into attempts to enforce a leftist position on race relations and gender politics.
Meanwhile, some liberals began to have second thoughts. They supported enactment of hate-crime laws that raised criminal penalties for people who commit crimes against minorities because of racist or other invidious motives. They agreed that hate speech directed at women in the workplace could be the basis of sexual harassment claims against employers as well. However, the old First Amendment victories in the Supreme Court continued to play an important role in progressive mythology. For the left, the amendment today is like a dear old uncle who enacted heroic deeds in his youth but on occasion says embarrassing things about taboo subjects in his decline.

Read it all

Sacramento morning radio team have disappeared after making comments about Islam

Probably not aliens.  We shall see.

From The Sacramento Bee September 26 by Cynthia Hubert

Armstrong & Getty absent from Sacramento live radio amid controversy over Muslims

Popular talk radio show hosts Armstrong & Getty were absent from Clear Channel's live programming Tuesday amid controversy around one of the hosts' on-air comments about Muslims.

KSTE (650 AM) aired a previously recorded "Best Of" morning show on Tuesday instead of its regularly scheduled live program featuring Jack Armstrong and Joe Getty. Officials for theSacramento station and its owner, Clear ChannelMedia and Entertainment, offered no explanation for the change, sparking questions and heated comments among fans on the show's Facebook page.

During an on-air discussion Monday, Armstrong criticized the United States for what he characterized as apologizing for a crude YouTube video that mocked the Prophet Muhammad and sparked anti-U.S. uprisings around the globe. He urged listeners to make their own "anti-Muhammad ads" and post them to Al-Jazeera, the Arabic news network. "We need to bombard them with ads until they grow up," he said.

If blasphemy laws are enacted, this comment would land him in jail.

Armstrong did not return a phone message from The Bee on Tuesday, and Clear Channelspokesman Dave Milner said, "We do not have any information at this time" about the hosts and their future at KSTE.

The program, which airs weekday mornings, features the hosts taking calls from the public and offering social commentary and humorous anecdotes about everything from celebrity sex to politics.

The show's fans spoke out on Armstrong & Getty's Facebook page Tuesday, questioning why they were absent from the live broadcast and accusing the channel of censorship.

"Attention Clear Channel Cowards: Are you really afraid that both Muslims in Sacramento are going to picket the station, or boycott all of your advertisers selling prayer rugs? Really?" wrote one Facebook poster.

If blasphemy laws are enacted, this listener would be put in jail.

He and others said they were prepared to protest if Armstrong and Getty were suspended or fired for Monday's remarks.

Other posters defended the channel's right to censor content that it deemed offensive.

The Sacramento Council on American-Islamic Relations, a civil rights group, has decided to steer clear of the controversy, said executive director Basim Elkarra.

"They're just doing it for ratings," he said of Armstrong's remarks about Muslims.

And that should be the end of it. But it won't be.  

Read it all

Read more here:

Death of Free Speech Report: Indonesia Prez calls for censorship

Geez, these calls for the death of free speech are getting old.

From The Jakarta Post September 26 by Bagus BT Saragih

Yudhoyono touts blasphemy ban at UN

Indonesia is calling on the UN’s member states to adopt a legally binding instrument to ban blasphemy against religious symbols and to promote dialogue between different faiths, civilizations and cultures.

Speaking before hundreds of world leaders at the UN General Assembly, President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono said such an instrument was needed to prevent incitements to violence based on religion.

“This instrument, a product of international consensus, shall serve as a point of reference that the world community must comply with,” Yudhoyono said.

In addition, the President said that a dialogue was needed to build cooperation globally.

“These communities will become bulwarks for peace and they will make it difficult, if not impossible, for any kind of armed conflict to erupt,” Yudhoyono said.

The President said that the defamation of different religions has persisted, mentioning Innocence of Muslims, the US-made film ridiculing the Prophet Muhammad that has caused an international uproar and spawned riots that have claimed several lives.

The President said that the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights underlined that all people must observe morality and public order in exercising their freedom of expression.

Read it all

Israel must be destroyed...Jews must die...kill the West...YAWN!

He's at it again.  I would be disappointed to hear Ahmadinejad say anything else.

From Reuters September 24

In New York, defiant Ahmadinejad says Israel will be "eliminated"
Cock-eyed optomist
(Reuters) - Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on Monday Israel has no roots in the Middle East and would be "eliminated," ignoring a U.N. warning to avoid incendiary rhetoric ahead of the annual General Assembly session.

Ahmadinejad also said he did not take seriously the threat that Israel could launch a military strike on Iran's nuclear facilities, denied sending arms to Syria, and alluded to Iran's threats to the life of British author Salman Rushdie.

The United States quickly dismissed the Iranian president's comments as "disgusting, offensive and outrageous."

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has hinted Israel could strike Iran's nuclear sites and criticized U.S. President Barack Obama's position that sanctions and diplomacy should be given more time to stop Tehran from acquiring nuclear weapons.

Iran denies it is seeking nuclear arms and says its atomic work is peaceful and aimed at generating electricity.

"Fundamentally we do not take seriously the threats of the Zionists," Ahmadinejad, in New York for this week's U.N. General Assembly, told reporters. "We have all the defensive means at our disposal and we are ready to defend ourselves."

Ahmadinejad is due to speak at the U.N. General Assembly on Wednesday. U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon met Ahmadinejad on Sunday and warned him of the dangers of incendiary rhetoric in the Middle East.

Ahmadinejad, who has used previous U.N. sessions to question the Holocaust and the U.S. account of the September 11, 2001, attacks, did not heed the warning and instead expanded on his previous rejection of Israel's right to exist. Western envoys typically walk out of Ahmadinejad's U.N. speeches in protest at his remarks.

"Iran has been around for the last seven, 10 thousand years. They (the Israelis) have been occupying those territories for the last 60 to 70 years, with the support and force of the Westerners. They have no roots there in history," he said, referring to the founding of the modern state of Israel in 1948.

"We do believe that they have found themselves at a dead end and they are seeking new adventures in order to escape this dead end. Iran will not be damaged with foreign bombs," Ahmadinejad said, speaking through an interpreter at his Manhattan hotel.

"We don't even count them as any part of any equation for Iran. During a historical phase, they (the Israelis) represent minimal disturbances that come into the picture and are then eliminated."

In 2005, Ahmadinejad called Israel a "tumor" and echoed the words of the former Iranian Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, by saying that Israel should be wiped off the map.

Read it all

Jihad thuggery in NYC: Pro-Israel ads defaced, caught on camera September 25 by Robert Spencer

Watch the video of Mona Eltahawy, leftist thug and facist jihadist using the power of her pink spray paint to deface the ad.  Supposed defender of free speech taking away the right to free speech.  Amazing hypocrisy.

From Jihad Watch September 25 by Robert Spencer

Mona Eltahawy arrested for assaulting pro-freedom blogger while defacing AFDI pro-freedom ad

Pamela Geller has the blockbuster story:

Islamic supremacist journalist Mona Eltahawy was arrested today after assaulting a defender of freedom who caught her in the act of vandalizing one of AFDI’s pro-Israel ads in the New York Subway Stations.

This again proves the Islamic supremacists and the Leftist thugs are dedicated to shutting down free speech. Anti-Israel ads ran all over the country without a murmur of protest; but this pro-Israel ad was hardly up an hour before fascist thugs like Eltahawy went to work to deface it.

At 12:42PM on Tuesday, September 25, Eltahawy tweeted: “Meetings done; pink spray paint time. #ProudSavage#FuckHate.”

Shortly thereafter, she was about to spray paint over AFDI’s pro-Israel ad in a subway station when freelance journalist and pro-freedom blogger Pamela Hall stood between her and the ad. Eltahawy thereupon sprayed Hall with paint; Eltahawy was arrested and Hall is pressing charges.

The attack was witnessed by Georgette Roberts of the New York Post. We look forward to the Post’s full report, since Roberts witnessed this entire incident.

This criminal behavior and fascism will be lauded in Leftist circles.

Eltahawy’s thuggish behavior is a telling indication of how relentlessly opposed the left and Islamic supremacists are to the freedom of speech, and how desperate they are to keep any pro-freedom, anti-jihad message from getting out.

AFDI’s ad reads: “In any war between the civilized man and the savage, support the civilized man. Support Israel. Defeat jihad.”

Eltahawy’s behavior is all the more ironic in light of the fact that she was viciously sexually assaulted by “protesters” in Cairo’s Tahrir Square last year, and subsequently wrote a searching piece about the misogyny that is inherent in Islamic law. But she was roundly attacked by her fellow Islamic supremacist writers for that article, and made a full retreat. Now, in a classic case of Stockholm Syndrome, she is defending the same savages who brutally attacked her in Tahrir Square.

AFDI calls upon the NYPD to prosecute Eltahawy for her assault on Pamela Hall to the fullest extent of the law, and to guard the pro-Israel ads from further Leftist/Islamic supremacist vandalism.

There is more, read it all.

Pakistan: President calls for International blasphemy laws

The louder they yell the more they get to join the team.  Forget about truth, it's the feeling, doncha know.

From DW September 26

Pakistani President blames the West

Asif Ali Zardari has denounced an anti-Islam film in his address to the UN General Assembly and called for an international ban on it. Analysts say that the Pakistani president's demand is hypocritical.
On Tuesday, Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari began his General Assembly speech by denouncing the US-made anti-Islam film "Innocence of Muslims" and asked world leaders to ban the controversial movie and other "hate material" against the Prophet of Islam.

The low-budget movie sparked violent protests in many Muslim countries. Apart from protests in the Middle East, Islamic parties in many South Asian countries held rallies to speak out against the video and the US government.

In Pakistan, the ruling Pakistan People's Party's government - led by President Zardari - announced an official holiday on Friday, September 21, to show solidarity with the Prophet of Islam and to protest against the film. At least 19 people were killed during these protests as violent mobs set public property on fire, also torching a church in the northern city of Mardan, and various US establishments.

Free speech

"President Zardari's comments about the 'Innocence of Muslims' were aimed more towards his own countrymen than the West," Snehal Shingavi, a South Asia expert at the University of Texas in Austin, told DW in an interview. "By appearing to defend Islam, he [Zardari] tries to appease the Pakistanis who feel that the film was blasphemous."
But political observers and rights organizations say that Pakistan's own record against curbing hatred against the country's religious andsectarian minorities is not so envious, and that President Zardari's demand that the movie be banned worldwide is therefore hypocritical.

"By declaring a national holiday in support of the protests against the film, the PPP unleashed a wave of violence that included attacks on minorities ... Zardari gave official cover to right-wing Islamic parties and made things much more difficult for minorities in Pakistan," Shingavi said.

Human rights organizations point out that there is legal and cultural discrimination against religious minorities in Pakistan, which, in their opinion, is one the major causes of discrimination of Pakistani minority groups. They also say that Islamist groups propagate hate material against religious minorities on a regular basis and that Pakistani authorities do nothing to stop it.

But Ali K Chishti, a Karachi-based political analyst, said President Zardari's demand was justified.

"I think there has to be an international law which stops the spread of such hateful material. The President of Pakistan was voicing the sentiments of all Muslims - not only Pakistanis," he told DW.

Read it all

Google's Brazil head arrested for not removing videos on YouTube violating election laws and Islam

From longtime reader "Z" comes this article on how creeping censorship is affecting South America's largest country.  Arrested for not removing certain "insulting" videos, Fabio Jose Silva Coelho could face jail-time and hefty fines.  Understand that this is an example of a country bowing to sharia law in ordering the "Innocence of Muslims" video off the net and imposing fines for refusing to comply.  

It is coming to America if we are not vigilant and stand firm for the first amendment.  If we fold, we will be at the mercy of theological tyrants.

From CBS September 26

Google's Brazil chief detained in YouTube case

(AP) RIO DE JANEIRO - Google Inc.'s head of operations in Brazil was detained by the country's federal police Wednesday after the company failed to heed a judge's order to take down YouTube videos that the court ruled violate Brazilian electoral law.
The detention came as another court ordered YouTube to remove clips of an anti-Islam film that has been blamed for deadly protests by Muslims around the globe, both joining a spate of court-ordered content-removal cases against Google's video-sharing website in Brazil.

The arrest of Google executive Fabio Jose Silva Coelho was announced in Sao Paulo. A press release issued by the federal police said he was not expected to remain in jail and should be released later in the day after signing a document promising to appear in court.

(...)Sao Paulo-based judge Gilson Delgado Miranda gave the site 10 days to remove video clips from "Innocence of Muslims," which has angered many Muslims around the world by its depiction of the Prophet Mohammed and his followers as thugs. After the 10-day window, Google will face fines of $5,000 a day for every day the clips remain accessible in Brazil, according to the statement on the court's website.

The company did not respond to requests Wednesday for comment about the case.

The "Innocence of Muslims" ruling resulted from a lawsuit by a group representing Brazil's Muslim community, the National Union of Islamic Entities, which claimed the film violates the country's constitutional guarantee of religious freedom for all faiths.

So the film made Muslims so upset they couldn't concentrate on Friday prayers?
In a statement on the group's website, Mohamad al Bukai, the head of religious matters for the Sao Paulo-based organization, hailed the ruling.

"Freedom of expression must not be confused with giving disproportionate and irresponsible offense, which can provoke serious consequences for society," al Bukai said.

Threat noted. Read it all.

Monday, September 24, 2012

How to identify an expert on Islam

I always thought it was fairly easy; look at the study, research, writings, published papers, all that has been produced by that individual and then judge accordingly.  How wrong I was.  The Muslim Public Affairs Council has the guidelines under which someone can be called an expert, and wouldn't you know it all comes down to where you were schooled.  I may not be the sharpest tool in the box, but I know that neither a lambskin diploma or a fancy degree is any guarantee that the person who's name is on it knows anything at all about the subject listed on the certificate.  The MPAC believes if you have not been formally trained and that training can be verified, anything you say about Islam will be discounted and marginalized.

MPAC lists the top 25 least expert Islamic specialists, most names you will know.  Alas, I am not on it, but maybe one day...

From HNN September 24 by Daniel Pipes

MPAC Calls Me an "Expert on Islam"

Why thank you, Muslim Public Affairs Council, for this endorsement. It’s much appreciated, even if came in a 65-page pamphlet, Not Qualified: Exposing the Deception Behind America’s 25 Top Pseudo-Experts on Islam.

According to MPAC, a leading Islamist group based in Los Angeles, those 25 would be Andrew Bostom, William Boykin, Stephen Coughlin, Nonie Darwish, Steven Emerson, Brigitte Gabriel, Frank Gaffney, David Gaubatz, William Gawthrop, Pamela Geller, John Giduck, Sebastian Gorka, John Guandolo, Tawfik Hamid, David Horowitz, Raymond Ibrahim, Zuhdi Jasser, Andrew McCarthy, Walid Phares, Patrick Poole, Walid Shoebat, Robert Spencer, Erick Stakelback, David Yerushalmi … and me.

The gravamen of MPAC’s analysis is that members of this group overwhelmingly are not what it calls experts on Islam, where this term is defined as

[A]n individual who has formal academic qualifications in Islamic Studies from an accredited institute of higher education in the West or those institutes of higher education in Muslim-majority countries that rank among the world’s top 500 universities. In order to be classified as "expert", as defined above, one’s credentials must also be publicly verifiable.

According to MPAC, "Of the 25 people examined, only 1 (4%) had the qualifications to be considered an ‘expert’ on Islam." That 4% would be me. In another place, MPAC contradicts itself and allows that Raymond Ibrahim also has "the formal and verifiable academic credentials to be classified as an expert." Even more contradictorily, as the pamphlet title implies, MPAC says I am a "pseudo-expert" expert on Islam.

My first question is, why does MPAC chose individuals who make no claim to expertise in Islam (such as John Giduck and David Horowitz), but exclude critics with academic credentials in Islamic studies, such as Fouad Ajami, David Cook, David Forte, Efraim Karsh, Martin Kramer, Bernard Lewis, Michael Rubin, Philip Salzman, and Kemal Silay?

My main objection is to the emphasis on credentials. The field of Middle East studies demonstrates -- only too colorfully -- that possessing a PhD does not guarantee competence. Sadly, it’s almost the opposite.

It’s not where a person went to school in his or her twenties, thelanguages he or she knows, or his or her years living abroad that matters but the capabilities, knowledge, energy, and intelligence he or she subsequently displays. Speaking as someone who has the requisite degrees, languages, and years abroad, I despise this self-serving emphasis on academic pedigree which would exclude non-PhDs from commenting on things Muslim.

Yet the truth is, in most circles that paper on the wall carries enough gravitas where one can use it to go farther than a wall with nothing on it.  I agree with Pipes that academic competence comes from within and must be nurtured and grown until it displays itself as a mature, well reasoned argument.

Read it all

Death of Free Speech Report: Kansas Muslim group calling for blasphemy laws

Yep, it's from the movie.  The Islamic Society of Greater Kansas City has an online petition calling for laws prohibiting saying anything offensive about Islam.  Now remember, when it is Muslims who decide what is offensive there is no limit as to what will be prohibited.  The end result will be the inability to question or analyse Islam or Muslims, their behavior, doctrine or tenets or virtually any aspect of Islam.  We will be unable to counter jihad, creeping sharia and the slow but steady conquest of the globe.

Welcome to The United States of Islam.

From PJ Media September 24

Leaders of Kansas City Muslim group petition Obama to limit free speech of American citizens

The leadership of the Islamic Society of Greater Kansas City have launched an online petition campaign for President Obama to back a bill to limit the free speech of American citizens they deem offensive.

The petition states:

The undersigned Board Of Directors and members of the Islamic Society of Greater Kansas City (ISGKC) urges you to sponsor a bill that outlaws any action that may insult one’s religion. We utterly disagree with the violence that has taken place and the death of United States Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and other members of the United States embassy staff in Libya. We support the apprehension and conviction of those responsible for such acts. We understand the First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights and, as such, prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, etc.,but when the allowance of “free” speech incites violence it should be banned.

The film behind the violence that is occurring in part of the Muslim world, “The Innocence of Muslims”, although it may be amateurish, its contents are very disturbing and insulting to the religion and has ignited an already volatile part of the world. The film is repulsive to the sensibilities of Muslims and offends the religion of Islam in multiple ways; by denigrating the seriousness of Islam, our Prophet and the Muslims in general. We believe that it would be in everyone’s interest to ban such actions from reoccurring.

Actions as such should not be tolerated as they are very offensive. The violence that has taken place as a result of this film is very alarming. As Muslims, violence of any sort is prohibited in our religion. Those people who are carrying out these acts cannot possibly call themselves devout Muslims as they are acting out of pure rage and not out of religious duties. We condemn the violence and feel that, in spite of the First Amendment of the U. S. Constitution, action may be necessary to pass such a bill or, at least, censure such actions in order to calm the current situation as well as prevent future re-occurrences.

American Muslims are hard-working, law abiding, and tax paying citizens. Everyone respects freedom of speech and the First Amendment in general, however, when freedom of speech results in defaming and insulting others and provokes the killing of innocent people, it should be outlawed. In light of the recent situation, the Islamic Society of Greater Kansas City hopes you may take up this cause and urge other representatives to do the same. We appreciate your time and efforts.

ISGKC Board of Directors:
Board Member: Abdul Gafoor Akram
Board Member: Raqibul Huq
Board Member: Rushdy El-Ghussein
Board Member: Dr. Mohammed Kohia
Board Member: Russel Mohammad
Board Member: Ibrahim Morad

Lest anyone think that the ISGKC board has gone rogue, a link to the petition is featured prominently on the group’s website, stating:

ISGKC is sponsoring an online petition to establish a law against insulting one’s religion. Please click the link below and sign the petition. Thanks for your support.

The position of ISGKC is particularly curious, and outright hypocritical, since they have hosted internationally renowned hate sheikh Khalid Yasin. When Yasin started his 2010 Kansas City tour, he began at ISGKC:

Sh Khalid Yasin started the tour with a Khutbah at the Islamic Society of Greater Kansas City (ISGKC) Masjid on Friday followed by a lecture, “The Challenges facing the Muslim family and community in America” after Maghrib prayer at the Masjid. The attendance exceeded all expectations with about 350 people for the lecture. The Sheikh stressed on the importance of the Muslim community in the west and how to safeguard themselves against the social evils that the western world offers to Muslims especially our youth.

Among Yasin’s positions:
Yasin says that the US government was behind the 9/11 attacks. (“Khalid Yasin: The New Voice of Islam?” Sunday, October 9, 2005)
Yasin claims that AIDS was invented at a US government lab and spread by Western governments through UN agencies and Christian missionaries. (“Khalid Yasin: The New Voice of Islam?” Sunday, October 9, 2005)
Yasin advocates for the death penalty for homosexuality. (“Home Grown”, Sixty Minutes, Channel Nine, July 24, 2005)
Yasin justified the terrorist bombings in Bali because of years of alleged Western oppression. (“Khalid Yasin: The New Voice of Islam?” Sunday, October 9, 2005)
Yasin says that the Quran permits wife-beating and that equal rights for women is a “delusion” and “foolishness”. (cited in “Undercover Mosque”, Channel 4 [UK], January 15, 2007)

Read it all

The Anti-free speech crowd gets restless, attacks Pamela Geller for ads denouncing jihad

It's funny how those who claim to be the most ardent supporters of free speech are also the first in line to decry speech they feel is insulting or demeaning.  They have no problem drawing a line in the sand, a line by which anything crossing it is immediately and loudly refuted, refutation based in nothing more than a gut, a wave of nausea that tells them it must be wrong.  No rational thought, no critical thinking, no analysis based in sound context, only a demand that "It hurts so get rid of it."  It is a classic picture of that famous river in Egypt, flowing everlast to the sea without ever wetting what it touches.

Truth hurts, and Muslims want nothing less than the removal of truth, blinding us to the continuous creep of Islam and the slow but steady advance of the sharia.  If questions and criticism of Islam is outlawed, then only Islam will have the law.

From The Jewish Press September 24 by Lori Lowenthal Marcus

Savaged For Daring To Name Savagery: Pamela Geller Attacked by Critics of Free Speech

Pamela Geller, conservative commentator and blogger provocateur, is the executive director of the American Freeedom Defense Initiative. AFDI created and paid for an ad campaign to run in several urban transit systems, in response to anti-Israel ads that ran in the same spaces.

The AFDI ads contain a paraphrase from the philosopher Ayn Rand: “In any war between the civilized man and the savage, support the civilized man.” It concludes with: “Support Israel. Defeat Jihad.”

The ads are already running on the sides of San Francisco buses, they began running today, September 24th, in New York City, and they were scheduled to begin appearing in the Washington, D.C. metro system. However, the DC system balked, citing the violent rioting by Muslims allegedly inflamed by a YouTube video which presents an unflattering view of Mohammad, so Geller initiated an emergency court action at the end of last week to enforce her First Amendment rights.

Because there is so much misinformation both about Geller and her ad, The Jewish Press asked her to explain what her ad means, why it is scheduled to run this week, what the responses to it have been and, most importantly, why she continues to express her views so publicly, when she is repeatedly condemned by virtually the entire spectrum of mainstream media and even by other Jewish and pro-Israel groups.

First, let’s get the chronology and the geography straight.

2010, Seattle

In late 2010, in Seattle, Washington, anti-Israel groups sought to run advertisements on the side of municipal buses reading: “Israeli War Crimes: Your tax dollars at work.” Just before the anti-Israel ads were about to go up, the county executive crafted a new policy banning all non-commercial advertisements. The new policy enabled the municipality to reject not only the anti-Israel ad, but also two counter-ads that had been submitted, one of which was one proposed by Geller, the other one offered by the David Horowitz Freedom Center.

September, 2011, New York

Last September, another series of anti-Israel ads went up in various transit systems including the one in New York City. This ad shows two smiling dads – one Israeli, one “Palestinian,” with their young daughters. The ad copy: “Be on our side. We’re on the side of peace and Justice. End U.S. military aid to Israel.” In other words, American tax dollars is being used to support Israeli militancy and injustice. These ads ran in 18 NYC subway stops for a month, in Manhattan, Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx.

That same month, Geller’s organization, AFDI, submitted the anti-Jihad ad. The MTA refused to run it, claiming the ad violated its advertising standards because it “demeans[s] an individual or group of individuals.” AFDI claimed that rejection violated the U.S. Constitution. On September 227, 2011, AFDI, Pamela Geller, and AFDI’s associate director, Robert Spencer, filed suit against the MTA claiming that the transit agency’s no-demeaning standard constitutes “viewpoint discrimination” and is unconstitutional and therefore the MTA’s rejection of AFDI’s ad unlawfully restricted their free speech.

On July 20, 2012, Judge Englemayer, the federal district court judge in New York before whom the matter was heard, ruled that the MTA’s prohibition on “demeaning” language is unconstitutional and the ad must run. Significantly, the court ruled that

the AFDI Ad is not only protected speech—it is core political speech. The Ad expresses AFDI’s pro-Israel perspective on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict in the Middle East, and implicitly calls for a pro-Israel U.S. foreign policy with regard to that conflict. The AFDI Ad is, further, a form of response to political ads on the same subject that have appeared in the same space.   As such, the AFDI Ad is afforded the highest level of protection under the First Amendment.

While AFDI was the victor in the case, Judge Engelmayer threw more than a few crumbs to the ad’s opponents.

For example, there was a fundamental disagreement over the use of the term “savage” – Geller claims it refers only to those committing acts of barbarism against innocent victims in the name of Islam. Judge Englemayer, however, held that a reasonable person could conclude the term referred simply to Muslims.

What’s more, the judge practically wrote a recipe for the MTA to follow for rewriting its advertising policy so that a ban on an ad like AFDI’s could, in the future be upheld by a court.

But it would be wrong to conclude that while AFDI may have won the (legal) battle, it lost the war, because AFDI’s ad was specifically created to counter anti-Israel ads. If there is an MTA policy that constitutionally prohibits AFDI-like ads, presumably it will also cover anti-Israel ads. If not, AFDI will surely respond with another counter to any such permissible anti-Israel ads.

AFDI’s ads began running today, as the MTA conceded that under its “existing ad standards as modified by the injunction, the MTA is required to run the ad.” However, there were numerous reports that the MTA is planning on revising its standards in an executive sessions scheduled for this week.

San Francisco, August – September, 2012

The San Francisco Bay Area Transit system also played host last year to ads that called for an end to U.S. aid to Israel, claiming Israel to be unfair and unjust. AFDI’s anti-Jihad ads began running on the sides of buses in San Francisco on August 7, at least in part based on the New York federal judge’s July 20 decision.

However, two things have since happened. First, the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency announced it will give all of the proceeds from AFDI’s ads to the San Francisco Human Rights Commission to support “educational activities.” Secondly, although the Muni is apparently convinced that banning AFDI’s ads would violate the First Amendment, yesterday it began running a disclaimer ad next to every one of AFDI’s ads, which is, according to Geller’s website Atlas Shrugs,  
a first in outdoor advertising history, next to our pro-freedom, anti-jihad ads. Their disclaimer reads: “SFMTA Policy Prohibits Discrimination Based On National Origin, Religion and Other Characteristics and Condemns Statements That Describe Any Group As Savages.” Really? Were the Nazis savages? The Taliban? Hamas? Al Qaeda? Boko Haram? Daniel Pearl’s beheaders? The Fogel family’s cold blooded murderers?

Never one to rest on her laurels, Geller’s AFDI immediately responded with ads placed on the sides of San Francisco buses stating: “Why is the city of San Francisco enforcing Sharia law? San Francisco is running disclaimers next to our pro-Israel ads. Why didn’t they run them next to vicious anti-Israel ads? Stop Anti-Semitism in San Francisco government.”

Washington, D.C., September 2012

Washington, D.C. is another transit system in which anti-Israel ads ran last year. AFDI chose to run its anti-Jihad ad in the District, and on September 6 entered into a contract with the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority to run the ad beginning on September 24. However, on September 18, Geller was contacted and informed that “due to the situations happening around the world at this time, we are postponing the start of this program to a future date to be determined.”

The “situations happening around the world” are the violent riots by Muslims which were set off, some claim, by the airing on YouTube of the video, “The Innocence of Muslims.” That video depicts the Islamic prophet Mohammed as a pedophile and a violence-loving man which is considered blasphemy by strict Muslims.

Although the WMATA is refusing to run the ads, out of “concern for public safety,” the New York City police department spokesperson Paul Browne told a reporter that they “were not anticipating adding any security” to the subways while the ads are up, and that they had “not received any threats or reports of violence relating to them.”

Read it all

A brief spell of clarity

The Obama White House has quietly cancelled a visit with Egypt's new President Morsi.  Fearing unrest in Egypt and other "Islamic Winter" countries has damaged Obama's claim of having a handle on foreign policy is the given reason behind the cancellation.

From The Daily Caller September 24 by Neil Munro

Obama cancels election-season meeting with Egyptian Islamist Morsi
President Barack Obama has quietly cancelled a politically risky plan to meet this week with Egypt’s new Islamist president.

The plan was cancelled amid a wave of riots and attacks in Arab countries that have damaged Obama’s campaign-trail claim to foreign policy competence.

In 2011, Obama had “bilateral” meetings with 13 Arab and world leaders during the annual U.S. summit. This year, amid the foreign policy meltdown, his schedule shows no so-called “bilats” with any foreign leaders.

The cancelled visit with Morsi was mentioned in a Sept. 23 New York Times article about Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi, an Islamist who now governs the Arab region’s most important country.

Despite critical 2011 support from Obama for the revolt that removed Hosni Mubarak, Morsi is now demanding restrictions on U.S. free speech that is critical of Islam, demanding more U.S. support for the anti-Israeli Islamist governments in Gaza and the West Bank, and more financial aid to help the cash-strapped Egyptian government buy food and fuel for its population of 82 million people.

More jizya, more demands and more threats.  And we will pay, as we bow and scrape to our new Islamic overlords.

Iran: no to war, yes to pre-emptive strike on Israel

But...they only want nuclear power for peaceful purposes, right?  They say they don't want to hurt anyone (well, except the Jews) and that all will be well if they can just get rid of Israel.

Seems hypocritical to me.

From Reuters September 23 by Zahra Hosseinian and Rania El Gamal

Iran could launch pre-emptive Israel strike-commander

(Reuters) - Iran could launch a pre-emptive strike on Israel if it was sure the Jewish state was preparing to attack it, a senior commander of its elite Revolutionary Guards was quoted as saying on Sunday.

Amir Ali Hajizadeh, a brigadier general in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, made the comments to Iran's state-run Arabic language Al-Alam television.

"Iran will not start any war but it could launch a pre-emptive attack if it was sure that the enemies are putting the final touches to attack it," Al-Alam said, paraphrasing the military commander.

Hajizadeh said any attack on Iranian soil could trigger "World War Three".

"We can not imagine the Zionist regime starting a war without America's support. Therefore, in case of a war, we will get into a war with both of them and we will certainly get into a conflict with American bases," he said.

"In that case, unpredictable and unmanageable things would happen and it could turn into a World War Three."

Read it all

You knew it was coming; Iran's Ahmadinejad blames the Jews for the movie

Of course.  Everyone knows about the IZCTTOTW* and their plans for world domination.  Don't they?

From The Jerusalem Post September 21

Ahmadinejad: Anti-Islam film an Israeli ploy

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad accused Israel of being behind the anti-Islam film that has sparked violent protests in the Muslim world, AFP reported on Friday.

Speaking at a military parade in Tehran, Ahmadinejad called the film an Israeli plot "to divide (Muslims) and spark sectarian conflict."

The parade, displaying military hardware, marked the anniversary of the 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq war. According to Iranian state media, the military displayed Shahab 3, Sejjil, Qadr, Sahab and Zelzal missiles during the parade.

Iran has claimed the Shahab 3 has a range that can reach Israel and they have reportedly experimented with integrating a nuclear warhead onto the missile.

Ahmadinejad's comments on the anti-Islam film came after Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said earlier this week that the American-made video is tied to "Islamophobic policies of arrogant powers and Zionists."

Khamenei added that it is incumbent upon Western governments to prove to the Muslim world that they are against attacks against Islam. "Leaders of [the US and European countries] must prove that they were not accomplices in this big crime in practice by preventing such crazy measures,” he said.

Read it all

Pakistan: government minister offers bounty for film producers

These are our friends for whom we send jizya in the amount of billions.  Our dear leaders just refused to stop jizya to Pakistan and thus the carnage will continue.  As will the calls for censorship and blasphemy laws.

From BBC News September 22

Anti-Islam film: Pakistan minister offers bounty

A Pakistani government minister has offered a $100,000 (£61,616) reward for the death of the maker of an anti-Islam film produced in the US.

Railways Minister Ghulam Ahmad Bilour said he would pay the reward for the "sacred duty" out of his own pocket.

A government spokesman condemned the remarks and said it was considering taking action against Mr Bilour.

The comments came a day after at least 20 people died in clashes between anti-film protesters and Pakistani police.

Friday's violence occurred in cities throughout Pakistan, with Karachi and Peshawar among the worst hit.

"I will pay whoever kills the makers of this video $100,000," the minister said. "If someone else makes other similar blasphemous material in the future, I will also pay his killers $100,000.

"I call upon these countries and say: Yes, freedom of expression is there, but you should make laws regarding people insulting our Prophet. And if you don't, then the future will be extremely dangerous."

His ANP party, which is part of the governing coalition, told the BBC this was a personal statement, not party policy, but added that it would not be taking any action against him.

The prime minister's press secretary, Shafqat Jalil, told the BBC that the government absolutely dissociated itself from Mr Bilour's statement.

"He is not a member of the PPP, he is an ANP politician and therefore the prime minister will speak to the head of the ANP to decide the next step. They are not ruling out action against him but say he will stay in his post for now."Tear gas and batons

The film, denigrating Islam's Prophet Muhammad, has sparked violent protests throughout the Muslim world in recent weeks.

Scores of people were reported to have been injured on Saturday in a clash in Bangladesh's capital Dhaka between police and hundreds of demonstrators.

Police fired tear gas and used batons to disperse stone-throwing protesters who set several vehicles alight, the Associated Press news agency reports.

Special Report: film protests continue in Greece

"Banners were displayed in English...One told President Barack Obama "we are all with Osama," referring to Osama bin Laden..."

From Chron September 23

Prophet film protesters clash with Greek police

ATHENS, Greece (AP) — Greek riot police used tear gas and pepper spray to disperse Muslim protesters who clashed with officers Sunday during a rally against a film produced in the U.S. that denigrates Islam's Prophet Muhammad. No injuries were reported.

A general strike in Bangladesh shut down schools, transportation and businesses, while a few hundred people peacefully marched in Pakistan. Iranian students burned flags in Tehran to protest the recent publication of lewd caricatures of Muhammad by a French satirical weekly.

In Athens, six people were detained during the demonstration at a central square, police said. About 600 people attended the rally, which featured heated speeches, but was mostly peaceful.

The crowd then wanted to march to theU.S. Embassy, which is about three kilometers (two miles) away from Omonia Square. Some tried to break through police lines several times, but riot officers pushed them back.

The violence occurred at the end of the rally, when small groups of protesters threw objects at police. Three cars were damaged and three storefronts smashed.

Read it all

Libya: finally, an appearance of moderate Muslims

We know they are out there, the problem is when they raise their heads the get chopped off.  It is good to see Muslims rally for America, and stand for universal rights and freedoms, those same rights and freedoms Obama and Islamic apologists/water-carriers want squelched.

From CNN September 22 by Arwa Damon

Decrying attack, protesters overtake Islamist group's HQ in Benghazi

Benghazi, Libya (CNN) -- Ten days after four Americans were killed in their Libyan city, hundreds marched in Benghazi and took over the headquarters of a radical Islamist group tied to the attack.

Thousands of protesters had taken to the street earlier Friday, loudly declaring that they -- and not those behind last week's deadly attack -- represent the real sentiments of the Libyan people.

"I am sorry, America," one man said. "This is the real Libya."

In the evening, an offshoot of several hundred people then headed toward the headquarters for Ansar al-Sharia, a loosely connected radical Islamist group.

As militia members fled, the protesters torched a vehicle and took over the group's building without firing a single shot. Some of those involved claimed to have freed at least 20 captives held inside, and expressed their intent to assume control over other Ansar al-Sharia buildings.

Army General Naji al-Shuaibi said the citizens, whom he referred to as "revolutionaries of the February 17 uprising," later asked that the Ansar al-Sharia headquarters be handed over to the Libyan army.

"Indeed, we rushed here and we will now take it over," said the general. "There are also other places that we intend to take over (which belong to armed groups) if the revolutionaries and the people allow us to do so."

But some of the protesters gathered at locations that house forces loyal to the national authority, he said, including the headquarters of the Rufallah al-Sihati battalion. Gunfire could be heard at the headquarters, but it was not initially clear who was responsible.

Mohamed al-Magariaf, president of Libya's General National Congress, thanked the protesters for helping evict "armed groups. He also said the Rufallah al-Sihati brigade was actually "under the command of -- and committed to -- the national authority," the case appeared to be one of mistaken identity. Magariaf asked demonstrators to stop their activities and go home.

There was widespread speculation that anti-national authority groups capitalized on the euphoria after the takeover of the Ansar al-Sharia headquarters and pushed protesters to move toward locations under the control of the army and the police force.

Read it all

Sunday, September 23, 2012

Death of Free Speech Report: prominent American calls for free speech restrictions

A close friend of Chris Christie and someone who represents the voices of many NJ Muslims.  Calling for censorship, cleric Mohammad Qatanani says Americans have the freedom to speak what is on their mind, but as to rights we Americans “have no right to [talk about Muslim] holy issues“ as it will incite ”hatred or war among people.”

A direct threat that no one will pay any attention to.  

From The Blaze September 20 by Tiffany Gabbay


Imam Mohammad Qatanani Tells TheBlaze That Free Speech Mocking Islam Should Be Pursued by Dept. of Homeland Security
(Photo Credit: Carmine Galasso / The Record)

There are religions that promote turning the other cheek even when mocked, but it appears Islam is not one of them. According to one of the most prominent imams in North America, Islam never condones violence, but it also, under no uncertain terms, “everaccepts” speaking ill of the Prophet Muhammad.

In fact, so grave is mockery of the prophet considered, that the cleric – Mohammad Qatanani, who leads one of the largest mosques in New Jersey – even believes free speech that criticizes Islam poses a national security threat to the U.S. and that those responsible should be investigated by the Department of Homeland Security.

“We, as Americans, have to put limits and borders [on] freedom of speech,” Qatanani, leader of the Islamic Center of Passaic County (ICPC), told TheBlaze. He explained that while Americans may ”have the freedom“ to speak their mind, ultimately, they “have no right to [talk about Muslim] holy issues“ as it will incite ”hatred or war among people.”

Qatanani said he thinks agitators who slander Islam, or, more specifically, the Prophet Muhammad, incite violence and hence, pose a national security risk that threatens the safety of Americans at home and abroad. Thus, America should disregard its First Amendment as it is typically applied and instead act in accordance with sharia law for the ultimate “good” of society.

And I am the one who is accused of being anti-Muslim and Islamophobic, instead of this American imam being discredited and shamed for his myopic and Islamic supremacist viewpoints.

In an exclusive interview with TheBlaze, the cleric, who was nearly deported in 2008 for failing to disclose his former ties to the terrorist organization Hamas on a 1996 Green Card application, explained that Muslims are required by Islam to respect the law of the land in their host-countries. He followed up that statement, however, with a treatise on how those who slander the prophet be pursued legally.

While some leaders within the Muslim community have spoken out against the anti-America driven violence in the Middle East, many have qualified their condemnation with moral equivalence, treating a film dubbed “Innocence of Muslims” (which some claim served as the catalyst for the attacks), with even harsher disdain than they do murder. Qatanani said the Obama White House should take legal action against the filmmakers.

“My position is that White House has to say strong in its condemnation [of the filmmakers] and take this person to court. If he is innocent, we will accept that… The government has strong case against this person.”


When asked what can be done to prevent future attacks, Qatanani invoked Homeland Security again, suggesting that the department actually step-in to prevent artists, composers, movie-makers, or satirists (among others), from producing works critical of Islam and the Prophet Muhammad. He believes it is in America’s best interest to quell this kind of free speech as it “ruins” America’s image abroad and will ultimately hurt people.


Qatanani’s statements make it appear that, in so many words, the cleric is advocating for the U.S. to operate by sharia law – the religious law of Islam – when it comes to freedom of speech as it relates to Islam. If so, it would seem to echo comments in a previous report on TheBlaze outlining Islamists’ “10-year plan” to make slandering Islam unlawful on an international level. 

There is no appearance, it is as clear and crisp as a new fall morning.  Sharia law is coming, and it is coming through people like imam Qatanani.

American freedom versus Islamic freedom

One of the most revealing insights made by the controversial faith leader came when he juxtaposed American freedom with the type of freedom permitted under sharia law.

The imam acknowledged that observant Muslims view freedom only through the lens of that which is permitted by the Quran and Sunnah, the two sacred texts of Islam, and is therefore much different from the way Americans view freedom.

“They [Muslims] think our [American] freedoms are too much,” Qatanani said. “The freedom of the American people is so different from their [Muslims'] freedoms. We believe freedoms have limits and rules, otherwise we will get people into trouble…Freedom according to Islam must be according to the Quran and Sunnah. You can do [anything] you like within the teachings of these two resources. This is the difference and main reason [for the conflict].”

Read it all

"...the United States needed to fundamentally change its approach to the Arab world, showing greater respect for its values and helping build a Palestinian state, if it hoped to overcome decades of pent-up anger"

Demands for the new dhimmi, which will, hopefully be ignored.  Remember this when Obama finally throws Israel under the Islamic bus.

From MSNBC September 23

NYT: US must respect Arab values, says Egypt’s Morsi

CAIRO — On the eve of his first trip to the United States as Egypt’s new Islamist president, Mohammed Morsi said the United States needed to fundamentally change its approach to the Arab world, showing greater respect for its values and helping build a Palestinian state, if it hoped to overcome decades of pent-up anger.

A former leader of the Muslim Brotherhood and Egypt’s first democratically elected president, Mr. Morsi sought in a 90-minute interview with The New York Times to introduce himself to the American public and to revise the terms of relations between his country and the United States after the ouster of Hosni Mubarak, an autocratic but reliable ally.

He said it was up to Washington to repair relations with the Arab world and to revitalize the alliance with Egypt, long a cornerstone of regional stability.

If Washington is asking Egypt to honor its treaty with Israel, he said, Washington should also live up to its own Camp David commitment to Palestinian self-rule. He said the United States must respect the Arab world’s history and culture, even when that conflicts with Western values.

And he dismissed criticism from the White House that he did not move fast enough to condemn protesters who recently climbed over the United States Embassy wall and burned the American flag in anger over a video that mocked the Prophet Muhammad.

“We took our time” in responding to avoid an explosive backlash, he said, but then dealt “decisively” with the small, violent element among the demonstrators.

“We can never condone this kind of violence, but we need to deal with the situation wisely,” he said, noting that the embassy employees were never in danger.

Mr. Morsi, who will travel to New York on Sunday for a meeting of the United Nations General Assembly, arrives at a delicate moment. He faces political pressure at home to prove his independence, but demands from the West for reassurance that Egypt under Islamist rule will remain a stable partner.

'Not appropriate for Egypt'
Mr. Morsi, 61, whose office was still adorned with nautical paintings that Mr. Mubarak left behind, said the United States should not expect Egypt to live by its rules.

“If you want to judge the performance of the Egyptian people by the standards of German or Chinese or American culture, then there is no room for judgment,” he said. “When the Egyptians decide something, probably it is not appropriate for the U.S. When the Americans decide something, this, of course, is not appropriate for Egypt.”

He suggested that Egypt would not be hostile to the West, but would not be as compliant as Mr. Mubarak either.
Read it all

Death of Free Speech Report: Egypt's Morsi demands blasphemy laws, movie to blame

Closer we get to a time when no speech will be allowed which questions or criticizes Islam or Muslims.  Closer we get to a time when those liberties of our forefathers who pledged their fortunes, lives and sacred honor will be relegated to the dustbin of history.  Closer we get to the time of silence against the encroaching threat of Islamic hegemony.

Close to the close.

From The Daily Star September 24 by Marwa Awad

U.N. urged to criminalize Islam insults

CAIRO: Egypt’s president and other Muslim leaders should demand the U.N. criminalize contempt of religion after the release of an anti-Islamic film and cartoons which demonstrate growing racism, said the leader of the biggest ultra-orthodox Islamist party. Despite doctrinal and political differences with President Mohammad Mursi’s Muslim Brotherhood, the Salafist Nour Party played a key role in supporting it during presidential elections in June.

Led by Emad Abdel Ghaffour, it now ranks as the second-largest party in parliament and plays a formidable force in Egypt’s new politics.

“We call for legislation or a resolution to criminalize contempt of Islam as a religion and its Prophet,” Ghaffour, one of four permanent assistants to the president, said Saturday.

So their call for blasphemy laws is not to cover ALL religions, just Islam.  OK, now the truth is told.

“The voice of reason in the West will prevail if there is mutual respect, dialogue and efficient lobbying for this critical resolution,” he said in an interview.

The recent violent unrest in some Muslim countries caused by anger at the anti-Islam film made in California and the French cartoons published by satirical weekly Charlie Hebdo is expected to be a closely watched theme.

“A proposal to look into the root causes of the obvious racism against Muslims and Arabs as the recent fierce campaign against their Islamic beliefs shows is much needed,” Ghaffour said.

What race are Muslims again?

Read it all

Friday, September 21, 2012

Obama used the Muslim Brotherhood as security at the Benghazi Consulate where Ambassador Stevens was murdered

This is one of those articles that makes me ashamed to be an American.  With all the evidence that shows the Muslim Brotherhood to be the driving force, and the greatest threat to our security and safety, for Obama to trust that the lives of Americans will be safe in the MB hands is treason.  The best evidence to show to what degree the MB is a true and real enemy, look at their 1991 memo which spells out the grand plan for conquest and subjugation of America.  Here is but one passage, the most chilling for our future.

"Understanding the role of the Muslim Brother in North America: The process of settlement is a "Civilization-Jihadist Process" with all the word means. The Ikhwan 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 God's religion is made victorious over all other religions."

There can be no doubt what the Muslim Brotherhood has in store for us, and Obama dares to place the lives of Americans into these jihadists who want nothing less than to destroy the West from within.  I have much stronger words for Obama but being the gentleman I won't repeat them.  They start with letters like "A" and "M" and "B" and "K" though...

From FrontPageMag September 21 by Daniel Greenfield 

US Relied on Muslim Brotherhood for Benghazi Consulate Security

The more we learn about what happened in Benghazi, the clearer things become.

Two U.S. intelligence officials told The Daily Beast that the intelligence community is currently analyzing an intercept between a Libyan politician whose sympathies are with al Qaeda and the Libyan militia known as the February 17 Brigade—which had been charged with providing local security to the consulate. 

In the intercept, the Libyan politician apparently asks an officer in the brigade to have his men stand down for a pending attack—another piece of evidence implying the violence was planned in advance. The Martyrs of the Feb. 17 Revolution Brigade is Islamist and linked with the Muslim Brotherhood. It was repeatedly accused of engaging in atrocities during and after the Libyan Civil War.

Many more-secular politicians in Libya are suspicious of Mr. Bukatef and his brigade because of their own Islamist reputation. He has been a member of Libya’s branch of the Muslim Brotherhood, and one of his group’s commanders reporting to him is Ismail al-Salabi, who leads a group of Islamist fighters and is the brother of Libya’s most prominent Islamist thinker, Ali al-Salabi.

The State Department puts its faith in the Islamists… and the Islamists repaid them the way they always do.

Read it all

"Muhammad isn’t sacred to me...I don’t blame Muslims for not laughing at our drawings...(but) I live under French law; I don’t live under Koranic law"

Bravo Charlie Hebdo and its editor, Charb.  Nothing is sacred to Muslims except Islam, but they want and demand we see it the same way.  No thanks, I will keep Jesus.

From The National Post September 19 by Nicholas Vinocur

‘I’m not the one going into the streets with stones and Kalashnikovs’: Charlie Hebdo editor rejects responsibility for violence over naked Mohammad cartoons

The editor of French magazine Charlie Hebdo has said that when his magazine ridiculed the Prophet Mohammad on Wednesday by portraying him naked in cartoons, he and his organization were not responsible for fuelling the anger of Muslims around the world who are already incensed by a video depicting him as a lecherous fool.

The editor, Stephane Charbonnier, also known as Charb, rejected criticism. “We have the impression that it’s officially allowed for Charlie Hebdo to attack the Catholic far-right but we cannot poke fun at fundamental Islamists,” he said.

“It shows the climate. Everyone is driven by fear, and that is exactly what this small handful of extremists who do not represent anyone want: to make everyone afraid, to shut us all in a cave,” he told Reuters.

“Muhammad isn’t sacred to me,” he said in an interview at the weekly’s offices on the northeast edge of Paris. “I don’t blame Muslims for not laughing at our drawings. I live under French law; I don’t live under Koranic law.”

Charbonnier said he had no regrets and felt no responsibility for any violence.

“I’m not the one going into the streets with stones and Kalashnikovs,” he said. “We’ve had 1,000 issues and only three problems, all after front pages about radical Islam.”

One cartoon alluded to the scandal over a French magazine’s publication of topless photos of the wife of Britain’s Prince William. It showed a bare female torso topped by a beard with the caption “Riots in Arab countries after photos of Mrs Mohammad are published”.

The drawings risked exacerbating a crisis that has seen the storming of U.S. and other Western embassies, the killing of the U.S. ambassador to Libya and a deadly suicide bombing in Afghanistan.

Riot police were deployed to protect the paper’s Paris offices after it hit news stands.

It featured several caricatures of the Prophet showing him naked in what the publishers said was an attempt to poke fun at the furore over the film. One, entitled “Mohammad: a star is born,” depicted a bearded figure crouching over to display his buttocks and genitals.

The French government, which had urged the weekly not to print the cartoons, said it was shutting embassies and schools in 20 countries as a precaution on Friday, when protests sometimes break out after Muslim prayers.

Charlie Hebdo is no stranger to controversy. Its Paris offices were firebombed last November after it published a mocking caricature of Mohammad, and Charbonnier has been under police guard ever since.

Speaking outside his offices in an eastern neighbourhood with many residents of North African origin, Charbonnier said he had not received any threats over the latest cartoons. In a message on its Twitter account, Charlie Hebdo said its website had been hacked, but referred readers to a blog it also uses.

Read it all

Death of Free Speech Report: Germany bows to Islamic threats, postpones placing posters for fear of more attacks

Nothing like cowering in the corner and hoping that you will be eaten last.

From Al-Arabiya September 20

Germany postpones posters aimed at countering radical Islam
Germany’s Interior Ministry has postponed at the last minute a poster campaign advertising a hotline aimed at countering radical Islam because of fears it could have incited violence by extremists.

Western governments are keen to avoid exacerbating Muslim anger after a film made in California ridiculing the Prophet Mohammad surfaced on the Internet and ignited violent protests around the world, some of them deadly.

The posters had been due to go up in German cities with large immigrant populations from Friday. They were aimed at those who suspected that a friend or family member might be drifting towards radical Islam.

“With everything that is going on right now, we’re afraid that it wouldn’t take much to trigger more religiously motivated violence,” an interior ministry spokesman said.

“We’re talking specifically about fanatic individuals who could use events they perceive as being Islamophobic as an opportunity to take action.” The spokesman said the ministry had no reason to believe such an attack was imminent.

The very existence of non-Muslims is an event that can be used to justify taking action.  After all, we are talking about the religion of the perpetually insulted.

Protesters angered by the California-made film stormed the German embassy in Sudan on Friday and Berlin withdrew some staff.

Sudan had criticized Germany for allowing a protest last month by far-right activists carrying caricatures of the Prophet Mohammad and also for giving an award to a Danish cartoonist whose depiction of the Prophet in 2005 sparked global protests.

Some Muslim groups had criticized the planned poster campaign because they said it stigmatized them.

The stigmatization comes from those of your co-religionists who believe it is mandated for them to attack any non-Muslim, not from those pointing out said activities.

Read it all

Death of Free Speech Report: Egyptian jihadists demand French officials do something

And that something amounts to the same thing wanted by Muslims world-wide; a permanent ban through legal channels prohibiting any questioning of Islam.

From the Egypt Independent September 20

Egypt Islamists demand French action on cartoons

Egypt's influential Muslim Brotherhood demanded Thursday that France act against cartoons mocking the Prophet Mohamed in the same way as against the topless pictures of Prince William's wife Catherine.

Its political arm, the Freedom and Justice Party, called for "firm and rapid measures against the (French) magazine" Charlie Hebdo which printed cartoons mocking the prophet on Wednesday.

The movement, from which President Mohamed Morsy emerged, pointed out that "the French judiciary has taken dissuasive measures against a magazine which published the photographs" of the former Kate Middleton, the British royal.

French authorities on Tuesday banned the magazine Closer from any further publication or resale of the pictures and launched a criminal investigation into how they were obtained.

The FJP also stressed "the tough stand (of French authorities) against those who deny the Holocaust" in France.

Those European countries that criminalize free speech regarding the Holocaust are wrong; denying the right to ask questions about any religion, belief or historical claim is censorship.

France has been bracing for a backlash following the publication of the Mohamed cartoons — two of which portray the founder of Islam naked — by Charlie Hebdo, a satirical weekly.

In anticipation of potential protests on Friday, the Muslim day of prayer, Paris said it would shutter its diplomatic missions, cultural centers and French schools in around 20 Muslim countries.

French Prime Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault has said anyone offended by the cartoons could go to court, but he also stressed that in France "freedom of expression is guaranteed, including the freedom to caricature."

Obama, call Ayrault and have him lesson you on the fine points of free speech.

Charlie Hebdo's editor, Stephane Charbonnier, accused the French government of pandering to its critics by criticizing the magazine for being provocative.