(

Turn the page ....

QUESTION OF THE WEEK: Our Military

(Each "Question of the Week," an idea which I gleaned from A Republic If You Can Keep It, will remain toward the top of the blog until the next question appears, typically for one week although a longer interval may elapse from time to time. The previous Questions of the Week are HERE. Please scroll down for recent postings)

From time to time, we hear that the military draft should be or needs to be reinstated. The following excerpt from this story about the issue comes from 2004, but you may find familiar information therein:

A Republican U.S. senator is calling for a return of the military draft so the cost of the Iraq operation could be borne by people of all economic strata.

Speaking at a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on post-occupation Iraq, Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb., said, "There's not an American ... that doesn't understand what we are engaged in today and what the prospects are for the future."

Hagel, a member of the committee, says all Americans should be involved in the effort.

"Why shouldn't we ask all of our citizens to bear some responsibility and pay some price?" Hagel said, arguing that restoring the draft would force "our citizens to understand the intensity and depth of challenges we face."

The senator also argued re-instituting the draft, which ended in the early '70s, would cause the burden of military service to be spread among all economic classes of people.

"Those who are serving today and dying today are the middle class and lower middle class," he claimed....

Read the rest.

In the past, U.S. Representative Charles Rangel (D-NY) has also weighed in on the military draft, with a different line of reasoning:

Americans would have to sign up for a new military draft after turning 18 if the incoming chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee has his way.

Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., said...he sees his idea as a way to deter politicians from launching wars and to bolster U.S. troop levels insufficient to cover potential future action in Iran, North Korea and Iraq.

"There's no question in my mind that this president and this administration would never have invaded Iraq, especially on the flimsy evidence that was presented to the Congress, if indeed we had a draft and members of Congress and the administration thought that their kids from their communities would be placed in harm's way," Rangel said....

Read the rest.

CLICK HERE to read Rep. Rangel's H.R. 393: Universal National Service Act of 2007


QUESTION OF THE WEEK: Do you favor the military draft? Why or why not?

Turn the page ....

On The Lighter Side

Unless you happen to live there, that is.


There is quite a mess in some of the residential areas surrounding Capitol Hill. The mess is so bad that the mail isn't delivered on some days. The complete story from the front page of the Metro section in the August 26, 2007 Washington Post:

Life Is Pure Hitchcock On Block of Capitol Hill
Annual Starling Invasion Leaves Neighborhood Awash in Filth, Residents Flush With Frustration

By now, the nets were to be shrouding the trees, blocking the birds -- and stopping the bird bombs.

Granted, this was a hopeful deadline. But for Capitol Hill residents on this old, elegant block near Congressional Cemetery, it's been a long summer of starlings -- "rats with wings," as Jennifer Smira calls them -- roosting in the tall, stately trees along the 1600 block of Potomac Avenue SE.

Not only have the birds been dropping a constant whitewash and turning the street and sidewalks into a slippery stinkfest, but the birds' "fecal matter" -- as the District Department of Health indelicately terms it -- makes nearly every parked car on the block look like an ambushed victim from a paintball war. Bird guano clumps trash can lids and handles. It has polka-dotted Nicole Shank's rose garden. It has meant that every time Smira walks her dog, she ends the outing by cleaning Meisha's paws with baby wipes.

Even the U.S. Postal Service has days when it won't deliver the mail.

"It's sort of like the snow, only a different thing entirely," says Postal Service spokesman Deborah Yackley. "Our carriers do have the right to determine that a location is unsafe or hazardous for them to deliver. The mess extends all the way across the sidewalk and into the street, so it's impossible for them to get to the mailbox without going through it. The customers have tried to clean it up, but it comes back overnight. . . . It's slippery. It's hazardous."

The starlings' return to the same block, year after year, is routine bird behavior. Ornithologists call it "site fidelity." Once a few birds start roosting in one place, the offspring hatched there are genetically imprinted to regard the site as home, said Cecilia Riley, president of the Association of Field Ornithologists.

Capitol Hill is not the only place besieged by birds. Huge flocks of crows have settled at various times in Fredericksburg, Hagerstown, Md., and White Flint Mall.

Dislodging them is incredibly difficult. In some places, people have built nests to attract peregrine falcons, hawks and owls; the predators can take out a few of the targeted birds but are of little use against masses. People have tried air horns and recordings of hawks screeching to scare away starlings, to virtually no avail.

"The trouble with starlings is they're incredibly smart," said Terri Coppersmith, operator of Diamonds in the Rough, a wildlife rehabilitation center in Westminster, Md. "They're precocious, and they catch on quickly that it's a fake."

For the past two weeks, staff members from the office of D.C. Council member Tommy Wells (D-Ward 6) have been pinballing from city agency to city agency, looking for solutions.

Wells's chief of staff, Charles Allen, has the telephone demeanor of a very serious man with a very serious job, but who finds himself, these days, repeating the word "poop" with increasing frequency. He's been to the Department of Health -- whose staff could assure him only that the block-long smear of bird droppings is, according to spokesman Phillippa Mezile, "a nuisance, and it could pose a health hazard."

He went to the Department of Public Works, whose staff could promise only, he said, to "get out there by the end of business Thursday [and] clean the street, clean the sidewalk."

He hit the Department of Transportation, where staff misunderstood the whole situation and believed it to involve only one tree. A possible solution, suggested spokesman Erik Linden, would be "procuring a sizable net to throw over the tree." The net would keep out the birds, the birds would go elsewhere and voila! The guano would be gone.

Then Linden actually visited the 1600 block of Potomac Avenue.

"It is more than one tree," he said, sounding almost defeated. Suddenly, the netting solution had become a whole lot more expensive -- and extensive. "This is going to take a deeper investigation than we first thought," Linden said. The only solution he could outright discuss was: "We don't want to cut down the trees."

Meanwhile, the residents of Potomac Avenue are getting antsier and angrier.

The bird droppings, said James Rychner, 45, who works at the University of Maryland as director of development for the Division of Student Affairs, are "very unhealthy and quite a disgusting situation." He has lived on the block for more than five years and calls this year's starling infestation "by far the worst I have lived through." For more than three years, he added, "I have tried . . . to get D.C. government to take some action, and it has always turned into 'pass the buck' between the Department of Health, Public Works, transportation services -- each pointing to the other agencies with no action."

Shank, who four years ago bought her first house on Potomac Avenue and has unfulfilled visions of gardening in the front yard, expects that city agencies will dither long enough for the birds to fly elsewhere, as they've done every year in the past, for the fall and winter.

Late summer is prime time for great flocks of blackbirds and starlings. "The population is huge right now," says Scott Sillett, a research wildlife biologist at the National Zoo, "because you have all the adults, plus all the young who were produced who are now independent."

So even before this season ends, residents such as Shank have given up on this year and are worrying about next year. "The city needs to do something before they nest and have their babies," said the 44-year-old Department of State employee. "Because once that happens, they won't be going anywhere."

And once that happens, the residents will, again, be enduring a similar summer to this one. A summer in which the problem gets so bad -- so acrid that the stench clings to their clothes, their skin and the small hairs lining their noses -- that it will, once again, resist any short-term solutions.

Take the Public Works "flusher" truck that sluiced down Potomac Avenue midmorning on Thursday.

"Now, see?" asked retiree Betty Perkins, glaring at the orange water truck. She has lived on the street for 43 years and has watched the bird situation get worse and worse in the past few years. "What's he washing? The curb." She sounded disgusted, as if all that clumped-up, caked-on mess of fecal matter was way too copious for some quick, drive-by spray to accomplish anything.

"He washes that, and tonight, it'll be messed up again," intoned her brother, James Perkins, rocking on the front porch and looking unimpressed at the splash that did almost nothing about the feathers, feces and swarms of flies coating the sidewalk.

"Have you ever seen 'The Birds'?" asked Betty Perkins, envisioning the dark thunderclouds that hover in the sky when the starlings return to roost each evening. "That's what it's like."

Except that "The Birds," the 1963 film, is Hitchcock horror that ends with the final credits. The birds of Potomac Avenue? That's a recurring horror.

About the only silver lining is this: Bird poop, they say, brings good luck.

No wonder that Congress goes out of town at this time of year.

Here's hoping that tourists to the Capitol Hill area are carrying umbrellas, even on sunny days.

Turn the page ....

Pseudostinian Propaganda

Aimed at children, of course.



From "World In Brief" in the August 25, 2007 edition of the Washington Post,

Hamas is televising a cartoon with a "Lion King"-type character to portray the Islamic group's victory in the Gaza Strip over the Fatah movement. In May, Hamas-run TV used a Mickey Mouse knockoff to preach Islamic domination to children. After an uproar among Israelis and Palestinians, the character was killed off.

VIDEO HERE

[Hat-tip to Roxie America at Independence Lost]

Excerpt from this posting at Jihad Watch:

The piece shows rats trampling over Gaza, burning houses, stepping over homes, uprooting trees, firing at mosques and desecrating the Quran, Islam's holy book.

Their leader is clearly a portrayal of Fatah's former Gaza strongman, Mohammed Dahlan, who has fled Gaza. Wearing a tie and smoking a cigar, the chief rat grabs a microphone and tells the crowd: "Move back and let Hamas shoot me." Dahlan made that comment during the showdown with Hamas, and his voice is dubbed into the scene.

Throughout the video, the lion silently watches the rats, preparing his claws and shaking his mane. When he pounces, the rats flee in terror as he knocks them about with his claws. Injured and limping rats then say: "Off to the West Bank."

Turn the page ....

The Muslim Vote

(All emphases by Always On Watch)

From this August 24, 2007 article in the Washington Post:

More than 50 candidates in this fall's elections are expected to appear in Reston tomorrow [August 25] at a political picnic organized by a group of Northern Virginia mosques, and organizers say the heavy turnout underscores the growing influence of Muslim voters in local politics.

The event, the group's seventh annual "family and civic picnic," has a dual purpose, organizers say. Through a voter registration drive, they hope to persuade more Muslims to become involved in local elections. In addition, they hope to show the candidates that "we're here, we care, and we do vote," said Shirin Elkoshairi, a spokesman for the Sterling-based All Dulles Area Muslim Society, which has more than 5,000 members.

"[The turnout] definitely shows that candidates feel that Muslims are voting and are a force at the polls," Elkoshairi said.

So far, nothing remarkable in the article.

Then comes the mention of Mukit Hossain, about whom I have blogged on more than one occasion. An index to those postings is HERE.



According to the following information in my first posting on Hossain back in August of 2005,

For Hossain, helping immigrants, most from Central and South America, is a Muslim issue. Charity is one of the five pillars of Islam. So he raised money from Muslim businessmen in Herndon to buy 400 winter coats for the laborers, brought them food through another charity he started, called Food Source, and even rounded up day laborers to attend a Thanksgiving dinner at an Iraqi restaurant where falafel, not turkey, was served.

"I consider them my neighbors," said Hossain...

[...]

Hossain has not only parlayed giving food and coats to illegal migrants into a federally funded exercise in Da'wa (Islamic propagation), he has assisted those who broke the law with legal aid to help them fight to stay in the US. Hossain exploits his 'charitable' work for furthering his Islamist agenda,and openly proclaims this to be his political mission as well.... Hossain is also active in MAS, the Muslim American Society, the group which is in the forefront of campaiging for the release of jailed presidental assassin wannabe Omar Abu Ali. MAS also lauded Hossain as a 'supporter' of their organisation which is directly linked to ICNA and by extension Al Qaeda. The trustee of MAS's Islamic American University is Sheik Yusuf Qaradawi who proclaimed that Muslim women have an Islamic duty to become suicide bombers.

Apparently, Hossain is quite the advocate for immigration, and it doesn't matter to him whether those immigrants are illegal or not because he ties his advocacy with his Muslim duty.

Returning now to the first-cited link in this posting,

There are about 64,000 Muslims registered to vote in Virginia, with the vast majority of them in the outskirts of Washington, said Mukit Hossain, president of the Virginia Muslim Political Action Committee, which tracks trends and endorses candidates in many local elections.

[...]

Organizers also expect candidates from Loudoun and Prince William counties, which last month approved resolutions aimed at cracking down on illegal immigrants. Although the actions were seen as primarily affecting Hispanics, they have sparked concern among Muslims because of fears that the actions could increase racial profiling and curb civil liberties, Hossain said.

"I think since 9/11, the Muslim community has learned that any community can be attacked," he said. "When someone is attacked unfairly, we have to stand in solidarity with them."

As we approach the sixth anniversary of 9/11, here is Hossain whining about Muslims being targeted.

Excuse me, Mr. Hossain, but nearly 3000 innocent people died during those horrific attacks on the Twin Towers and the Pentagon as well as those stop-the-hijackers patriots about Flight 93, which went down in a field in Shanksville, Pennsylvania. Have you forgotten about those who perished on 9/11? Do you consider the very few verified cases of post-9/11 persecution of Muslims to be more significant than Islamic terrorist attacks? Also, Mr. Hossain, I remind you that Muslim is not a race.

And here is a bit more from Hossain:

Hossain, who has been organizing opposition to the Loudoun and Prince William votes [against illegal immigration], said his group conducted a survey of Virginia Muslims and found that immigration was their top local concern. Education was second, he said, and respect for diversity was third.

Muslims respect diversity? Really? Oh, that's right, Saudi Arabia is one respect-for-diversity country. **snerk**

The article also states the following:

Although Muslims represent a tiny part of the electorate, candidates are beginning to see the value of courting Islamic voters, because small but motivated groups can have a big impact at the polls, he said. That's especially true for off-year elections, which tend to have lower voter turnout. Last fall, more than 86 percent of registered Muslim voters turned out to vote, he said, compared with about 53 percent of the general population.

That has not gone unnoticed among political activists, said Brian Roherty, campaign manager for Michael Firetti, who is running for chairman of the Loudoun County Board of Supervisors.

"Every single vote counts, and smart politicians know that," Roherty said.

Ah, the dhimmitude of politicians, as they cater to the whim of a "tiny part of the electorate"! Somehow, that phrase is reminiscent of another few words: "a tiny portion of extremists," often used to refer to Islamic terrorists.

Even a champion of the battle against illegal immigration in Northern Virginia, Loudoun Supervisor Eugene A. Delgaudio is attending the picnic:

Loudoun Supervisor Eugene A. Delgaudio (R-Sterling), the main sponsor of Loudoun's resolution, said he plans to attend tomorrow's event, partly because the Muslim community reflects his values of being "extremely moral and religious." His district's demographics are among the most rapidly changing in Northern Virginia. For example, Sterling's Park View High School was two-thirds white in 2000; last year, whites made up less than half the school.

"We have a lot of ethnic groups represented here," he said. "Sterling is like the United Nations. It's a very diverse neighborhood."

Oh, yes, Mr. Delgaudio, Muslims are extremely moral. Why don't you do a little reading on the topic? You can start by reading Western Resistance and Dr. Homa Darabi Foundation. Those sites might open your eyes as to certain barbaric customs in Islamic culture.

According to the August 24, 2007 Washington Post article, a good turnout is expected for the pandering to Muslim voters:

Picnic organizers are expecting a broad spectrum of candidates running for the state legislature and boards of supervisors in Loudoun, Prince William and Fairfax counties. The candidates will have a chance to speak to and field questions from the more than 1,000 attendees expected.

Fairfax County Supervisor Penelope A. Gross (D-Mason), whose diverse district in central Fairfax includes two mosques, said her research has turned up more likely voters among Arab Americans than any other minority group.

"Over the past few years we have seen a lot more interest among Arab Americans in the civic culture of our community," said Gross, adding that she tries to go to the picnic each year and plans to attend tomorrow [August 25].

I wonder if CAIR will also attend.

Islamification continues apace on the political front here in Northern Virginia and elsewhere in the United States. As the percentage of Muslims increases, now allied with immigrants legally present or not, expect more of the same types of events and political pandering. Start checking the local section of your newspaper to see what's happening in your area.

Turn the page ....

Joe Kaufman...

...on Hannity & Colmes on August 23, 2007.

VIDEO HERE, about eight minutes in length, which discusses the upcoming parade and the controversial "Arabic language school" in Brooklyn.



Pamela Geller of Atlas Shrugs has additional information about the parade.

More information about the Khalil Gibran International Academy

And don't miss Urban Infidel's posting about the demonstration in favor of KGIA.

Turn the page ....

Congratulations To A Former Student!

One of my former students and candy maker supreme (recently certified in culinary arts), interviewed on August 22 for a position in the kitchen at Blair House. Yes, this student got the job!

Excerpt from the email I received this afternoon:

This is going to be so great for my resume, I am so close to working at the White House I can almost taste it! I can't wait to start.

Congratulations to a fine former student, who can also make your stomach sing with joy!

Turn the page ....

Weekly Radio Show: August 24

Listen to The Gathering Storm Radio Show, which WC and I cohost. The show broadcasts live every Friday for one hour at noon, Pacific Time.

The call-in number is (646) 915-9870.

Callers welcome!

Friday, August 24: Our guests this week are author Cassandra and blogger Jon Quixote.



(1) Cassandra will be on the air with us at the top of the hour. She is the author of Escape! From An Arab Marriage: Horror Stories of Women Who Fled From Abusive Muslim Husbands. We will be discussing how political correctness leads to dhimmitude. This is Cassandra's second time to be on the show. She is a passionate speaker and always well-sourced.

(2) At the bottom of the hour, we will interview Jon Quixote of the blog Jon Quixote World, which is dedicated to developing and publicizing under-reported and unreported stories, from a liberty-oriented perspective. A fair portion of this blog is devoted to exposing and commenting on the freedom-subverting, anti-American, Jew/Israel-bashing, jihadist-appeasing anti-philosophy that dominates the hard-left in America.

Jon Quixote World has a particularly good feature entitled "Roundup Of Western Government-Enforced Dhimmitude." Go to the top of Jon's homepage to read the latest entry for that feature; other entries can be found on the left sidebar by clicking on the month.

If you are unable to listen live to the radio show, you can listen to recordings of the radio broadcasts later by CLICKING HERE.

Turn the page ....

August 21: Blog Talk Radio

Today on Atlas on the Air, Pamela Geller will interview Robert Spencer. He has just published a new book entitled Religion of Peace? Why Christianity Is and Islam Isn't, and the book will be the topic of discussion. The show begins at noon, Eastern Daylight Time.

[END OF THIS POSTING]

Turn the page ....

Inviting In The Enemy

Our State Department is playing the dhimmi and endangering all of us. Requirements for visas have been relaxed so as to allow Wahhabist-trained imams to come into the United States.

From the August 14-20, 2007 edition of Insight Magazine (subscription required):

Hundreds of Islamic fundamentalist clerics have been allowed to enter the United States to take over mosques in major cities. The clerics come from countries such as Egypt, Jordan and Pakistan and have been influenced by al Qaeda. Many are fresh graduates from Saudi-financed Wahhabi seminaries....

According to the article, hundreds of these imams with radical training are already here and teaching in mosques in our major cities, including locations in New York, New Jersey, Michigan, and the Washington, D.C. area. Several of these imams are graduates of Cairo's Al Azhar University, which has ties to Al Qaeda, and of various seminaries in Pakistan. Furthermore, despite warnings from various law-enforcement officials and the National Intelligence Estimate, our State Department continues to pursue this import-the-imams agenda.

Even our FBI is supportive of bringing in these imams:

At this point, the FBI, which has played down links between Muslim extremists and white supremacists, has not tried to stop the influx of the imams. Instead, the agency has sought to expand its public relations campaign to change Muslim perceptions of U.S. law enforcement and recruit Muslims to the FBI.

"We, within the FBI, are trying to break down a lot of barriers and create a different brand about the FBI within the Arab-American and Muslim American community," said Gwen Hubbard, chief of the FBI's National Recruitment and Marketing unit.

For at least the past three decades, Wahhabism has been funding the building and renovation of mosques throughout the West. Mosques established well before the Wahhabist push have undergone change in their direction and their leadership. A possible tip-of-the-iceberg example, buried in the local secion of the August 16, 2007 edition of the Washington Post:

For over 25 years Farzad Darui [former manager at the Islamic Center of Washington, the city's oldest mosque]...has been dedicated to preventing radical fundamentalists from taking over Washington D.C.'s Islamic Center," one of the briefs begins.

[...]

According to Darui's filings, the Saudi government was funneling money secretly to Khouj. The filings don't explicitly give a reason but assert a Saudi desire to control the influential mosque.

Photo from WhiteHouse.gov
In his June 2007 speech at the D.C. Islamic Center, President Bush took off his shoes and stated the following, which gives credence to some of the content in the Insight article:

...Today I am announcing a new initiative that will improve mutual understanding and cooperation between America and people in predominately Muslim countries.

I will appoint a special envoy to the Organization of the Islamic Conference. This is the first time a President has made such an appointment to the OIC. (Applause.) Our special envoy will listen to and learn from representatives from Muslim states and will share with them America's views and values. This is an opportunity for Americans to demonstrate to Muslim communities our interest in respectful dialogue and continued friendship....

In my own experience, when I drive around the D.C. area and travel to other areas of the United States I have noticed the proliferation and renovation of mosques and hal-al markets sprouting up all over the place. I suspect that you've noticed the same in your area and in your travels.

Not so long ago, I met with a Jordanian who told me of a mosque he had visited in our Heartland. The mosque had been built several decades ago and had recently undergone a huge renovation. And guess what was on the materials table? Books and videos of Wahhabist orientation, even though the imam at that particular mosque was clearly not a Wahhabist. Apparently the funders of the renovation attached some strings to the financing of the upgrading of the mosque.

Getting back now to the content of the first link in this posting....If indeed America is importing Wahhabist imams, then radicalization of young Muslims will pick up speed within our borders. We're already noted the progression of Europe toward Eurabia as homegrown terrorists become a significant threat to national security. Importing Wahhabists to the United States will lead to the same radicalization here.

Turn the page ....

Recital Tonight

Tonight I'll be attending a recital given by one of my homeschool graduates. He plays like nobody you've ever heard! After all the dhimmitude last week, I need some J.S. Bach to lift my spirits to a higher realm.

[END OF THIS POSTING]

Turn the page ....

Cassandra's Letter To CAIR

Regular readers here know that I'm not much of a ranter on my own blog, though I often rant at home and occasionally at others' blogs. But I know a good rant when I see one.
-------------------------
Enjoy this rant written by Cassandra, author of Escape! From An Arab Marriage: Horror Stories of Flight from Abusive Arab/Muslim Husbands:

Sent: Aug 13, 2007 11:08 PM
To: info@cair-net.org
Subject: Your Asinine Accusations about Robert Spencer and Rudy Giuliani

Ibrahim Hooper:

You low-class, egotistical, subversive, terrorist, lying, traitorous convert to Islam.

Who are you to make accusations about two Americans, Robert Spencer and Rudy Giuliani, who are staunchly defending the best interests of this country!?

It was nineteen of your ignorant, bestial, self-centered Saudi scum who flew into the Twin Towers in New York, kllling 3,000 innocent people.

It is your genocidal adopted countrymen and fellow Muslims who systematically murder, rape, sodomize, and torture millions of people worldwide and then have the Chutzpah to think of yourselves as "superior people".

Your laughable claim to superiority rssts only on the statement by the psycho-pedophile Muhammed that his Arab butchers were "the best of people" because they did what he told them to do and then claimed that it was your backward god of violence who made the statement. And that is the sole basis on which you have claimed superiority? That is PATHETIC.

Furthermore, it indicates a moronic level of intelligence.

And you claim to own the entire universe? Based on the remark Mo made at the battle of Kaybar that "the land is owned by Allah and his prophet Muhammed"?

Did greed raise its little head in the breast of "the best of men"? I am surprised you have not claimed that Time itself is your possession. Talk about gullible!

Talk about grasping at straws! No wonder! Look at the glorious record Muslims have of no accomplihments for CENTURIES--except, of course, for new ways to murder and steal from everyone else since you are too damn lazy and incompetent to create and accomplish for yourselves achievements of real and intrinsic value such as 90% literacy in the Muslim world, the publishing of books, the discovery of new knowledge, and bathrooms which are more than cesspools in the ground swarming with flies.

It is easier to steal from others, isn't it--just like all your terrorist henchmen are trying to do to our country which we built with the sweat of our brows and with our own hands.

Who is that idiot Saudi prince to make cracks about Rudy Giuliani!? The man had the integrity to refuse money from the very people who financed the Twin Towers attacks and you well know this.

Lie all you want. The truth is the truth.

Go, and take all CAIR personnel from every office, to the Middle East, and sow your poisonous, diseased thinking among the members of the Muslisms' already failed societies.

Islam is a cancer/advanced syphilis, both of which destroy everything and everyone they come in contact with.

You are contemptible.

By the way, I have a hard copy of "Alms for Charity and Terrorism in the Islamic World" and I am going to share it with EVERYBODY.

Cassandra

Both David Horowitz through his special Jihad Watch Defense Fund (HERE and background information HERE) and Daniel Pipes's The Legal Project (HERE, or email Matthies@MEForum.org) are taking donations right now to fund Robert Spencer's defense against the lawsuit which CAIR is attempting.

Turn the page ....

Restrictions During Ramadan

And the dhimmitude keeps on coming. I cannot keep up with all the developments! Below is another to add to other postings I've done this week:

From this pdf file, dated May 4, 2007:

...In Brussels, the capital not only of Belgium but the adminstrative centre of the European Union, policemen have been enjoined by their superiors not to eat or drink anything during the day in the month of Ramadan while patrolling the predominantly Muslim area of the city, for fear of offending the population....But fear of what, exactly? Social disorder, perhaps, or fear of terrorist attack, or even of merely ideological criticism and the charge of being culturally sensitive and perhaps racist?...

Can't you just imagine the outcry if a similar enjoining had been propounded for the religious observances of any group other than Muslims?

I don't recall there ever being a similar push to force the restrictions of Ramadan upon the general population of non-Islamic nations.

Something is being tested right now. And little by little, the inroads of Islamification are being accomplished throughout the West. Sure, the Islamification is more obvious in Europe, but in Europe there exists a greater percentage of Muslims in the population of many countries.

Here in the States, we're in the earlier stages of Islamification. Give America another ten years (maybe less), and we'll see the same egregious appeasement of Muslims here.

Turn the page ....

Syncretism

Definition:

Syncretism consists of the attempt to reconcile disparate or contradictory beliefs, often while melding practices of various schools of thought. The term may refer to attempts to merge and analogize several originally discrete traditions, especially in the theology and mythology of religion, and thus assert an underlying unity

Excerpt from "Pray to Allah, Dutch Bishop Suggests," an August 14, 2007 article from Catholic World News (emphases mine):

Amsterdam, Aug. 14, 2007 (CWNews.com) - A Dutch Catholic bishop has suggested that Christians should refer to God as "Allah" to promote better relations with Muslims.

Bishop Martinus "Tiny" Muskens of Breda told the "Network" television show that "God doesn't really care how we address Him."

Pointing out that "Allah" is a term already used by Christians who speak Arabic, Bishop Muskens said that humans are needlessly divided over such terminology. God, the bishop said, is above such "bickering."

The Dutch bishop admitted that his suggestion was not likely to gain widespread acceptance. But he predicted that within a century or two, Dutch Catholics would be addressing prayers to "Allah."...

Pamela Geller of Atlas Shrugs has also blogged about the above. Her commentary:

If this don't beat all. This is an enormous victory for Islam. Notice how this dhimmi has the audacity to suggest all religions speak to G-d allah.

[...]

...Christians stand up!

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: "Allah is not my God, and Muhammad the Pedophile is not my prophet." Can I have my fatwa now?

Don't be a dhimmi, Bishop (and other interfaithers). Sing along with me, as if you mean it:

They tried to tell me
my religion was wrong.

They tried to tell me
to follow Islam.

They said their "Prophet"
was a righteous dude,

But I found out
none of their words were true.

I read the Qur'an
and I read the Hadith,

And the sickness of Mohammed
was apparent to me.

He justified perversion
in the name of Allah,

When he married a girl
too young for a bra.

She was playing with dolls
when the "Prophet" came.

Her childhood was stolen
in Allah's name.

Aisha was nine
when he took her to bed.

Don’t tell me that fool's
not sick in the head.

I ain’'t gonna follow no child molester, sex offender, Prophet pretender.
I ain’'t gonna follow no child molester! Islam's not for me!
Islam's not for me!

The sickness of
the Islamic mind,

Has caused some mullas
to be blind.

To justify their "Prophet"
they will justify sin,

So the sins of the "Prophet"
are repeated again.

All over the world
in Islamic states,

Nine year old girls
suffer cruel fate,

Sold into marriage
to twisted men,

And Aisha’s sad story
is repeated again.

I ain't gonna follow no child molester, sex offender, Prophet pretender.
I ain't gonna follow no child molester! Islam's not for me!
Islam's not for me!

Do you care about women
all over the world?

Do you care about those
little girls?

Better stand up and fight
for human rights,

Speak out against
the laws of Islam!

I ain't gonna follow no child molester, sex offender, Prophet pretender.
I ain't gonna follow no child molester! Islam's not for me!
Islam's not for me!
Islam's not for me!

Turn the page ....

In The Lunchroom

A little update on Muslims in the UK...

First, it's the fear of pork fumes, now this: "Doctors Give in to Muslims." Indeed! Full article, from the Daily Express (emphases mine):

DOCTORS and health workers have been banned from eating lunch at their desks - in case it offends their Muslim colleagues.

Health chiefs believe the sight of food will upset Muslim workers when they are celebrating the religious festival Ramadan.

The lunch trolley is also to be wheeled out of bounds as the 30-day fast begins next month.

But staff and politicians branded the move political correctness gone mad and warned that it was a step too far.

Bill Aitken, the Scottish Conservative justice spokesman, said: “This advice, well-meaning as it may be, is total nonsense.

“It is the sort of thing that can stir up resentment rather than result in good relations.”

The new guidance comes in the wake of the failed terror attacks on Glasgow and the death of suspect Kafeel Ahmed, 27.

Health chiefs in Lothian and Glasgow will give all employees time off to pray and to celebrate Eid, which marks the end of Ramadan.

But Greater Glasgow and Clyde as well as Lothian NHS boards also issued the advice, warning workers not to take working lunches, and said all vending machines should be removed from areas where Muslims work.

One senior consultant said: “What next? Are we going to have advice on how to deal with Catholics during Lent?

“This kind of thing does more harm than good.”

The guidance, which was sent round many organisations, was produced by Glasgow consultancy Meem, which advises on Muslim issues and counts the Scottish Parliament among its clients.

Na’eem Raza, a senior consultant with the firm, said he was thrilled that the health boards had formally adopted the guidance.

He added: “The idea is to get faith in the workplace out in the open.

“In the current climate, people need to understand where communities are coming from and what people are feeling.

“After the Glasgow attack this is very important. This is about educating people and making them more aware and more confident when dealing with issues surrounding the Muslim community.

“People have stopped talking over the garden fence and we need to break down the barriers so that people can talk comfortably to each other.

“It would never stir up resentment. Faith is an important issue. Why not have guidance on all of the issues that affect us, including different faiths?”

Health chiefs defended their use of the guidance and said it was important to promote a positive and tolerant culture at work.

A NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde spokesman said: “As a large organisation we recognise that many of our staff, patients and visitors will be participating in Ramadan.

“We have therefore made information available to our staff to raise awareness of Ramadan and help to answer any questions they may have.”

NHS Lothian said: “We have recently agreed a quality and diversity strategy and as a responsible and pro-active employer we will continue to promote a positive culture which recognises and respects diversity both in our workforce and in the people we serve.”

In the UK today. In America tomorrow?

[Hat-tip to Raven, who alerted me to this article]

Turn the page ....

Student's Essay

Last spring, several students in my high-school composition course voluntarily entered a large nationwide essay-contest which received over 10,000 entries. One of my students has received the prestigious distinction of honorable mention — an award bestowed upon fewer than .07% of the entries. That student's essay is reproduced below, without the title (A clever one!) so as to protect the student's identity:

Have you ever battled for your life alongside a Musketeer? Have you ever watched in agony as your best friend was executed on the guillotine? Have you ever fallen in love with a handsome sea captain only to have him arrested and sentenced to prison for twenty years?

I have. I have visited exotic places, crossed swords with masters, almost drowned trying to escape from a sinking ship, and traveled as far as my imagination could possibly take me.

A cynic might say, “That’s impossible. You weren’t alive then, and you can’t travel back in time.”

But I have traveled back in time and to imaginary places, too. I have met my ancestors, trailed murderers with Sherlock Holmes, and raced for my life from hungry, genetically created velociraptors – all through paper pages bound in cardboard.

I was five years old when my mother taught me to read. At the moment when I looked at the black marks on the page and they transformed into words, I entered into a world full of fabulous places and colorful people. I have traveled to Troy with Odysseus, to England with Hercule Poirot, and to France during the Reign of Terror with Sydney Carton. Every time I open a book, I use my imagination and passion for reading to transport myself into the story.

When I was young, my mother read to me constantly and, in that way, kindled my passion for books. She read each book out loud to me, progressing by several chapters a day. Each time we finished a cliff-hanger chapter, I begged her to read just a tiny bit more. Little did I know that Mom, to ensure my attention the next day, intentionally stopped at those cliff-hanger endings. In those early years, as I listened to my mother’s lilting voice, I spun webs with Charlotte, battled the White Witch with Peter and Aslan, and played with dolls in a log cabin alongside Laura and Mary.

By the time I turned eight, I was reading all day long on my own. As a result I grew impatient about waiting for Mom to finish the next chapter in our read-aloud books. Eventually I became so frustrated with her stopping after each chapter and forcing me to wait for the next day that I begged to take the book so as to finish the story myself.

Since the time I discovered that books are a doorway to another world, I have hungered for new stories. Clearly the best place for all readers is the library. Whenever I visit there, I carry with me a giant tote bag to hold all the books I want to take home. And my family has two library cards as we occasionally go over the fifty-book limit.

Even my home illustrates my passion for books. The basement contains wall-to-wall bookshelves crowded with colorful characters from Dr. Dolittle to Dr. Frankenstein. When my father occasionally works late, a special treat in our house consists of a “reading dinner,” when my mother, brother, and I each choose books and eat alongside Jekyll and Hyde, Edmund Hillary, or Bilbo Baggins.

Because I love to read so much, fourteen-hour car trips for family vacations are no problem as I welcome the chance to visit with Atticus Finch and Jonas the Giver. The hours fly by as I read and converse with the Invisible Man and Maniac Magee.

All my life I have loved reading, not only because books have entertained me but also because they have transformed me. As a sixteen-year-old preparing for life, I am so thankful for a passion affecting every area of my life. Books have improved me in many ways: everything from acquiring a better vocabulary as I prepare for SATs to empathizing with the agony experienced by African-Americans as they endured prejudice and segregation, from learning about the dangers of scientific creativity without conscience to glimpsing how the settlers struggled to build their homes and lives as the West was won.

I am addicted to exploring the written word and can never get enough. At one point, my mother – who homeschools me – was forced to curtail my reading habits because books were interfering with my schoolwork. By forbidding me from reading until I finished my homework, however, my mother unwittingly forced me to broaden my reading horizons. At breakfast I reviewed the nutrition facts of milk and mused over the ingredients of Cheerios. While I brushed my teeth, I pondered the deep facts posted on the label of the toothpaste tube. Seeking solitude in the bathroom, I sneaked a book in with me and read until my mother realized I had disappeared for half-an-hour and I was ordered to, “Put the book down, Grace.”

Everybody from my church and soccer team joke about Grace, the bookworm, because I read in every spare minute of my time. Yet, through all the good-natured ribbing of friends and family, I have never lost my love for reading. I am addicted to books. That craving has shaped my life. When I have children, I will do my utmost to instill in them the same love of reading that my mother developed in me.

I will read to my children constantly and leave them hanging at the end of chapters during our read-aloud time. I will haunt used book stores and yard sales and library sales to make sure my home is wallpapered with wonderful reading material. And I will make sure I check the bathroom every thirty minutes during school hours. I hope to transfer this same joy of reading to my own sons and daughters because it has been such a gift to me.

And now, if you will excuse me, I must hurry away, for I hear the call of Ivanhoe. I know he will need me in his anxious search to rescue Rebecca, and I must prepare for a long journey.
—Submitted by G.R.

Congratulations on a job well done, G.R.! And in a few short weeks, we'll be back in class for another year of writing contests, regular writing-assignments, and timed essays.

Would that every student I teach love reading as much as G.R. does!

Turn the page ....

Weekly Radio Show: August 17

Listen to The Gathering Storm Radio Show, which WC and I cohost. The show broadcasts live every Friday for one hour at noon, Pacific Time.

The call-in number is (646) 915-9870.

Callers welcome!

Friday, August 17: We have two interviewees scheduled this week: (1) Ann Corcoran of Refugee Resettlement Watch and (2) Foe Hammer of Foehammer's Anvil.

----------------------------

Our first guest, Ann Corcoran, exposes to the light of day information relating to the immigration of Muslims to the United States. According to "About" at Refugee Resettlement Watch, this very quiet effort is that these non-profit groups bring to the US on average each year 25,000 15,000 (FY90-FY03) Muslim refugees from the Middle East, Africa, the Balkans, etc, almost completely funded by the US Government through grants and contracts to these non-government agencies.

Our second scheduled guest, who will be with us at the bottom of the hour, is Foehammer. His state-of-the-art blog carries the header "Truth, not Islam" and just below states the following: Welcome to the Anvil. You’re about to enter the fight in a way that most are too afraid to even discuss. This is not a site for the faint-hearted infidel, so if the idea of discovering the truth about Islam and the ‘Long War’ frightens you, turn back now. Otherwise, come on in and make use of the information here, participate, learn and educate. Frequenters of Jihad Watch often see Foe Hammer's fearless comments there.

If you are unable to listen live to the radio show, you can listen to recordings of the radio broadcasts later by CLICKING HERE.

Turn the page ....

Al Qaeda's Camps Have Emptied (Plus Video)

It's a beautiful Sunday morning here in the Washington, D.C. area, but I'm taking time to post this link, with the full article below (links in the original). Decide for yourself what the story means.

Pakistan: Concern over nukes as al Qaeda camps empty

US intelligence investigates Pakistan's nuclear security and the military’s loyalty to Musharraf as the Northwest Frontier Province spins further out of control

As the security situation in the Northwest Frontier Province continues to deteriorate and President Pervez Musharraf's political stock continues to drop, the US military intelligence community is "urgently assessing how secure Pakistan's nuclear weapons would be in the event President Gen. Pervez Musharraf were replaced." Meanwhile, the Taliban and al Qaeda have dispersed operatives from the training camps in the Northwest Frontier Province and are preparing to fight on their own terms.

With the Pakistani government facing a robust Taliban insurgency in the Northwest Frontier Province, a significant al Qaeda presence inside the country and a violent cadre of homegrown Islamist extremists, the security of Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal has taken on an elevated importance. The US intelligence community believes it has a handle on the location of Pakistan’s nuclear warhead, but there are questions over who controls the launch codes in the event of Musharraf’s passing.

The US is also looking past the issue of the security of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal. The loyalty of the conventional Pakistani military to President Musharraf is in question, according to CNN. "Musharraf controls the loyalty of the commanders and senior officials in charge of the nuclear program, but those loyalties could shift at any point," CNN reported on August 10. "There is also a growing understanding according to the U.S. analysis that Musharraf's control over the military remains limited to certain top commanders and units, raising worries about whether he can maintain control over the long term."

On the same day of the release of news on concerns over the security of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal and the loyalty of the Pakistani military, the Asia Times' Syed Saleem Shahzad reported al Qaeda and Taliban camps in North and South Waziristan have emptied, the Taliban and al Qaeda are expanding into the settled districts of the Northwest Frontier Province, and are reorganizing in both Afghanistan and Pakistan for a major fight.

The Fourth Rail interviewed a senior US military intelligence official and a US military officer, both of whom are familiar with the situation in the Northwest Frontier Province and wish to remain anonymous. The sources confirmed Mr. Shahzad's information concerning the al Qaeda and Taliban camps in North Waziristan and the Taliban’s reorganization is accurate. Both sources are particularly concerned about the implications of the emptying of the camps.

Mr. Shahzad reported there were 29 al Qaeda and Taliban camps in North and South Waziristan, and all but one "have been dismantled, apart from one run by hardline Islamist Mullah Abdul Khaliq." [Note: on October 4, 2006, The Fourth Rail reported "there are over 20 al Qaeda and Taliban run training camps currently in operation in North and South Waziristan."] While The Fourth Rail sources verify the camps' existence, they noted the camps have not been dismantled and the infrastructure is still in place. "The physical infrastructure (camps and the like) still exist, they haven't been dismantled. They've just been abandoned or are being operated by skeleton crews," the senior military intelligence source said, while noting "the Khaliq camp is only churning out Taliban, not al Qaeda."

The al Qaeda and Taliban personnel abandoned the 28 camps after "the US had presented Islamabad with a dossier detailing the location of the bases as advance information on likely US targets," Mr. Shahzad reported. "All other leading Taliban commanders, including Sirajuddin Haqqani, Gul Bahadur, Baitullah Mehsud and Haji Omar, have disappeared,” said Mr. Shahzad.

"Similarly, the top echelons of the Arab community that was holed up in North Waziristan has also gone," reported Mr. Shahzad. Pakistan's military and intelligence agencies are believed to have leaked information to the Taliban and al Qaeda in the past, and appears to have done so again.

The emptying of the camps is a cause for great concern in the military and intelligence communities. "We don't know where they went to or who was in the camps," the military officer told The Fourth Rail. "They are well trained, these aren't your entry level jihadis. They are dangerous."

"This is one of the reasons that we are worried about a major CONUS [Continental United States] attack," the senior military intelligence source told The Fourth Rail, noting the recent influx of news of terror cells attempting to penetrate the US. "If they evacuated their bases, they almost certainly did so out of fear of more than just the Pakistani army."

Mr. Shahzad also reported Ayman al Zawahiri, al Qaeda's second in command, along with the Shura Majlis, is currently based out of the village of Jani Khel village in the settled district of Bannu. Sirajuddin Haqqani and the Taliban Shura are operating in the eastern Afghan provinces of Khost and Gardez.

A spillover of al-Qaeda's presence in Jani Khel is likely to spread to Karak, Kohat, Tank, Laki Marwat and Dera Ismail Khan in Pakistan. Kohat in NWFP is tipped to become a central city in the upcoming battle, as the office of the Pakistani Garrison commanding officer is there and all operations will be directed through this area. In addition, Kohat is directly linked with a US airfield in Khost for supplies and logistics.
A second war corridor is expected to be in the Waziristans, the Khyber Agency, the Kurram Agency, Bajaur Agency, Dir, Mohmand Agency and Chitral in Pakistan and Nanagarhar, Kunar and Nooristan in Afghanistan.


The Fourth Rail has repeatedly identified Bannu, Kohat, Tank, Laki Marwat, Dera Ismail Khan, Khyber, Kurram, Dir and Mohmand as Taliban controlled or influenced territory over the course of the past two years.


Quetta. Satellite Town is in the southwest corner.

According to Mr. Shahzad, the Afghan Taliban has reorganized its leadership and devolved its command structure away from senior, regional leaders to local leaders after the death of senior Taliban commanders Mullah Akhtar Usmani and Mullah Dadullah Akhund. The Taliban leadership has been decimated by NATO and Afghan strikes in southern Afghanistan over the past year, and have regrouped in Satellite Town in Quetta, the provincial capital of Baluchistan. Quetta has long been identified as a Taliban command hub. Pakistani security forces captured Mullah Obaidullah Akhund, a former Defense Minister and member of the Shura Majlis, in a hotel in Quetta.

According to the senior US military intelligence source, senior Taliban leaders are hesitant to enter southern Afghanistan due to NATO successes against the Taliban command structure, and have devolved control to the regional commanders out of necessity.

Mr. Shahzad postulates the Pakistani military will move in force into the Northwest Frontier Province after the Pakistan-Afghanistan tribal jirga concludes. But the existing evidence does not support this theory at this time. While the Pakistani government claims it has moved additional forces into the tribal areas, these troops have been subjected to brutal suicide attacks, roadside bombs, ambushes, and mortar and rocket attacks. Over 200 military personnel have been killed since mid-July, while the Pakistani military’s previous foray into North and South Waziristan from 2004 to 2006 resulted in upward of 3,000 soldiers killed. The Pakistani military has done little other than press for more negotiations with the Taliban while conducting retaliatory strikes, largely using artillery and air power.

On August 10, 16 Pakistani troops were kidnapped in South Waziristan. Yet Pakistani military spokesman Maj. Gen. Waheed Arshad confirmed the military is still in a defensive posture, reacting to attacks. "There is no planned operation going on in North Waziristan but we are responding with greater force against militant attacks on security forces now," said Arshad.

Also, the end of the summer is approaching and the Pakistani military has yet to launch the purported campaign. Winter is fast approaching in some of the most inhospitable terrain on the planet, where al Qaeda and the Taliban are dug in and have deep ties with the local residents. The ideal time for the military to launch operations would have been the spring, leaving the summer open to conduct a campaign that will be difficult and bloody enough without battling the terrain and elements.

Here is the must-see video, about six minutes in length:


YouTube Link

Turn the page ....

Canning The Koran

On August 8, 2007, Andy Whitehead of Anti-CAIR released this statement entitled "My Turn on Civil Rights." Excerpt:

Stanislav Shmulevich of Brooklyn has been arrested on charges of criminal mischief and aggravated harassment for allegedly placing a Koran (Islam's Holy Book) in a toilet at Pace University.

While most Americans can agree that placing a book in a toilet is disrespectful, is it really a crime?

[...]

Shmulevich put a book in the toilet. But did he call for his religion to be dominant in America? Did he publicly call for support for terrorists who are killing American citizens? Did he salute terrorists who commit suicide attacks? Did he trample our flag in the street?

What Shmulevich did was in bad taste, it was insulting, but it was no crime.

Freedom of speech is my birthright as an American citizen; it is a gift from God codified by our founding fathers in our great Constitution.

To silence my voice would be to silence my soul; no man has, or ought to have, that power.

If we won't stand up for Shmulevich, who will stand up for us when the time comes ... ?

Read the entire essay.

Steve Harkonnen has also blogged about this article. Comments there have gotten interesting, and I advise that you take a look. Mr. Whitehead himself has made a comment specifically about the law suit which CAIR filed against him and which was dismissed with prejudice.

This morning, I happened across this article in the American Spectator (emphases mine):

Stanislav Shmulevich, the student at New York's Pace University arrested for desecrating a stolen Koran, probably did not realize he was committing a felony hate crime. There is after all no statute criminalizing the desecration of the U.S. flag, the Torah, or the Bible. New York's galleries are filled with defiled and despoiled Christian symbols that are considered by critics to be ingenious works of art. Perhaps on his way to class Shmulevich admired some of these works. Perhaps he did not consider his desecration of the holy Koran an example of protected free expression so much as a clever bit of conceptual art. Besides, Shmulevich, a Ukrainian immigrant, was now in America, a nation that boasted of its separation of church of state and long tradition of free speech. Indeed, the 22-year-old student was at first arrested for misdemeanor vandalism, and it was not until the application of significant pressure (some might say intimidation) from Islamic groups that the charge was upped to a hate crime.

Ignorance of the law, however, is no excuse, even when such statutes are applied or prosecuted arbitrarily. In the case of hate crimes, the rule of thumb seems to be that what is a crime for one group is protected speech for another. The difficulty is determining whether you are "one" or "another." As Jacob Sullum writes: hate crime statutes treat "perpetrators of the same crime differently because they hold different beliefs."

Allow me to clarify the rules.

It is not a crime to desecrate Christian symbols, but it is a crime to desecrate other religious symbols, unless you are a Muslim desecrating Jewish symbols which is not a crime, but protected "speech."

While it is no crime to desecrate the American flag, it would be (in New York, at least) a crime to desecrate the flag of an Islamic country. The Saudi flag bears the Islamic declaration of faith "I testify that there is no god but Allah, and Muhammad is his messenger," a reminder that in Arab countries church and state are inseparable. Burn a Saudi flag and you will not only get tossed in a New York slammer in a New York minute, you will be starting an international incident and worldwide jihad that would make the second intifada look like a tiff over who rides shotgun.

The New York statute reads in part: "A person commits a hate crime when he or she commits a specified offense and...intentionally commits the act or acts constituting the offense...because of a belief or perception regarding the...
...religion [or] religious practice...of a person, regardless of whether the belief or perception is correct."

Hate crimes legislation, created by timid, cowardly, and pressure-group-influenced legislators, therefore coopts and renders null and void the freedom of expression clause of the First Amendment, which was designed by courageous legislators, true revolutionaries who had put their necks on the line to protect the criticism of religion.

But it is not hate crime statutes that prevent many Westerners from criticizing Islam, rather it is intimidation. As Christopher Hitchens has said, dumping the Koran in the toilet is not intimidation. Supporting the assassination of Salman Rushdie is. The former offends Muslim lobbying groups like the Council of Islamic-American Relations. The latter does not. It was intimidation by radical Muslims that prevented Western TV stations and newspapers from showing the very newsworthy Danish newspaper cartoons of a few years ago, though the media pretended their decisions were based on a reluctance to give offense. CNN admitted as much when it said it declined to show the cartoons because it did not want to put journalists in its foreign bureaus at risk. Such intimidation is not solely limited to Islam. You may recall that Seinfeld episode a few years back when Kramer accidentally set alight a Puerto Rican flag, then tried to put out the flames by stomping on it? That episode caused such consternation among Puerto Rican-Americans that NBC never again aired that particular show, and it is seldom seen in syndication. And Puerto Rico is part of the U.S.!

THE IMMEDIATE DIFFICULTY with New York's case is that Shmulevich did not commit his act against "a person" but "an ideology." There were no witnesses to his "illegal" actions. He was apprehended only after he was observed pilfering the holy books by the university's ubiquitous security cameras. Besides, if Shmulevich had really insulted Muslims he would have been prosecuted under the Fighting Words Doctrine, which criminalizes "insulting or 'fighting words,' those that by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace." But Shmulevich was not accused of violating the doctrine, doubtless because the U.S. Supreme Court has held that mere offensiveness does not qualify as "fighting words," which makes sense or people like me would pretty much get arrested every time we opened our mouths or wrote a column.

Shmulevich told his captors that he had tossed the Koran in the can following a row with Muslim students. His actions were then a reaction to something the Muslim students had said. What is unclear. Perhaps it was something about infidel Christians. Whatever it was, Shmulevich seems to have found it hateful or insulting. One wonders why he did not contact the authorities and have the Muslim students charged with a hate crime. On second thought, it is fairly obvious why. The authorities would have laughed in his face and told him to get a life, something they would never have said to the Muslim students.

In America, none of us has the Constitutional right not to be offended. In fact, the exercise of certain of our freedoms, particularly that of freedom of speech and freedom of the press, often offends someone else. Whatever happened to "Stick and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me"?

Yes, words can be psychologically hurtful, but in my view we have gone too far with the concept of psychological abuse. Indeed, some want to codify psychological abuse as a crime. Worse, as the article in the American Spectator states, a double standard is being applied, particularly for Muslims as certain groups such as CAIR flex their legal and lobbying muscles. Allowing Muslims in America to perpetuate a specialness is not the American way.

Turn the page ....

Breaking News! Almontaser Has Resigned!

Last week, WC and I interviewed Pamela Hall of the Stop the Madrassa. Looks as if her coalition has managed a victory!

Almontaser, named as the principal of the Khalil Gibran International Academy (aka the New York City Madrassa), has resigned.



The story from Fox News, on Friday, August 10:

A New York City principal who came under fire for controversial comments about an "intifada" T-shirt that seemed to condone terrorism has resigned.

On Friday, Mayor Michael Bloomberg accepted the resignation of Debbie Almontaser, principal of the Khalil Gibran International Academy, an English-Arabic school set to open next month in Brooklyn, N.Y.

Almontaser had come under fire for comments she made to the New York Post about an "Intifada NYC" T-shirt that is sold by an activist group that shares an office with the Yemeni-American association that Almontaser represents.

The day before she condemned the T-shirt message's connection to Palestinian terrorism, Almontaser told the Post that "intifada" means "shaking off" and the shirts represented women "shaking off" oppression.

The comments infuriated the city's United Federation of Teachers president, Randi Weingarten, who called the message "war-mongering."

“That’s something that ought to be denounced, not be explained away,” she told the paper.

Click here to read the Post's story.

The New York Post reported Friday that the school had attracted only a handful of Arabic-speaking students.

Who says that we bloggers cannot make a difference?

Turn the page ....

QUESTION OF THE WEEK: Just For Fun

(Each "Question of the Week," an idea which I gleaned from A Republic If You Can Keep It, will remain toward the top of the blog until the next question appears, typically for one week although a longer interval may elapse from time to time. The previous Questions of the Week are HERE. Please scroll down for recent postings)

One of the regular features at the Washington Post is "What Bugs Me." From the blurb at the Washington Post:

Life is full of little annoyances. Sometimes they are of the two-legged variety. Often they are faceless institutions, dubious policies or things that just refuse to work right.

Readers write in and communicate some of the little annoyances which drive them nuts. HERE, HERE, and HERE are a few examples. I particularly enjoy what people had to say in that last link!

One example from the first of that group of links:

Gratuitous Expressions of Gratitude: No, Thanks

Maybe you've heard from dozens of readers bugged by being thanked in advance, but like campfires in the woods, this trend can't be doused and stomped on too often.
Whether explicit ("Thanks in advance for your contribution!") or implicit ("Thank you for not smoking"), advance thanking says one or more of the following:

"We take it for granted you'll comply with our rule or request, so why waste a 'please'? We'll just calm you with a 'thanks.' "

"Your contribution probably won't be important enough for us to acknowledge or even remember, so accept our gratitude upfront."

"I'm really too busy to keep track of whether you do what I ask, much less send an individual reply."

"Our studies show that customers respond favorably to being thanked, so we decided to do it now while you're still making up your tiny mind."

I once had a rubber stamp made reading "Thank You For Not Thanking Me In Advance" but soon realized that if advance thankers didn't understand why their practice might offend me, they wouldn't get the stamp message, either.

Although I appreciate your having read this, I hope you'll understand if I don't thank you until after it actually runs.

-- Robert L. Miller, Washington

Not all letters are as long as the one above.

If Mr. AOW were to speak his mind as to what bugs him, his first pet peeve would be "Drivers who don't use their turn signals, or use a turn signal and make a turn in the opposite direction."



QUESTION OF THE WEEK: What little annoyance drives you over the edge? Feel free to name more than one. I've been thinking about my answer and will post it later in the comments section.

Turn the page ....

Worn Out

The weather here in the D.C. area has been stifling. To add to my misery, on Monday I picked up a touch of the gastrointestinal miseries.

I feel better now, but not quite up to my usual pace.

For the second night in a row, I'm turning in early. I want to be alert for tomorrow's radio show. I need sleep!

I'll catch up with blog rounds and backlogged emails when I feel a bit better.

Turn the page ....

"Saudis Sue for Secrecy"

The complete article from the August 8. 2007 edition of the NY Post (emphases mine):

THE Saudis' efforts to keep a veil of secrecy over their support for al Qaeda and Hamas got a shot in the arm last week, as a British publisher opted to suppress a controversial book on the financing of terror.

Facing the mere threat of a lawsuit from Saudi billionaire Khalid bin Mahfouz, Cambridge University Press agreed to pulp all the unsold copies of "Alms of Jihad: Charity and Terrorism in the Islamic World," issue a public apology to Mahfouz and pay his legal expenses and substantial undisclosed damages.

The prestigious publisher - the world's oldest publishing house - had carefully vetted the book before publishing it last year. Yet now it has asked more than 200 libraries worldwide to pull the work off their shelves.

Bin Mahfouz never sued the authors, J. Millard Burr and Robert O. Collins, both U.S. citizens, who had provided their publisher with all the sources to back their allegations that bin Mahfouz, his family and his former bank, the National Commercial Bank of Saudi Arabia, funded Hamas and al Qaeda. Yet Cambridge University Press still caved - and even asked the authors to join its apology to bin Mahfouz. (They rightly refused.)

Since March 2002, bin Mahfouz has sued or threatened suit in England at least 36 times against those who've linked him to terrorism, including many American authors and publications. Everyone settled with bin Mahfouz - except me.

He sued me in London in January 2004, shortly after my book "Funding Evil: How Terrorism is Financed - and How to Stop It" was published in the United States. I refused to acknowledge a British court's jurisdiction over a book published here; the court then ruled in bin Mahfouz's favor by default. It enjoined British publication of "Funding Evil," awarded bin Mahfouz $225,900 in damages and expenses and ordered that I publicly apologize and destroy the book. I still refuse to acknowledge the British Court and its ruling.

The data in both "Alms for Jihad" and "Funding Evil" is all well-documented by the media and the U.S. Congress, courts, Treasury Department and other official statements. Further corroboration comes from French intelligence officials at the General Directorate of External Security (DGSE), as reported in the French daily, Le Monde. For example, the DGSE reported that, in 1998, it knew bin Mahfouz to be an architect of the banking scheme built to benefit Osama bin Laden, and that both U.S. and British intelligence services knew it, too.

British libel law favors suits such as bin Mahfouz's, so I chose to fight his false claims here in America. I've sued him in a New York federal court, seeking a declaration that his English default judgment is unenforceable in the United States and repugnant to the First Amendment.

Prominent civil-liberties lawyer Harvey Silverglate described it as "one of the most important First Amendment cases in the past 25 years."

On June 8, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously declared my case is "ripe" for hearing in a U.S. court, noting that the case has implications for all U.S. authors and publishers, whose First Amendment rights are threatened by foreign libel rulings.

That ruling thus established that all U.S. writers and publishers sued in the United Kingdom for libel can ask U.S. courts to rule the foreign decisions unenforceable here - provided they have jurisdiction over the person who sued for libel overseas. (The New York Court of Appeals will hear arguments on that issue in my case this fall.)

These important legal rulings have weakened bin Mahfouz's ability to threaten or sue U.S. authors and publishers; they're likely why bin Mahfouz failed to sue Burr and Collins in London.

Bin Mahfouz and fellow Arabs alleged as terror financiers, known as "libel tourists," have made the English libel bar rich, leading the London Times to declare Britain the "libel capital of the Western world." English lawyers now refer to the "Arab effect" to describe the surge of English libel actions by wealthy, non-resident Arabs accused of funding terrorism.

Of course, U.S. legal actions can't change British laws. But judging by the impact my case has had already, one can hope that U.K. writers and publishers would demand changing their libel laws, to allow the freedom of responsible publications without the fear of intimidating, expensive lawsuits.

Rachel Ehrenfeld is the director of the American Center for Democracy.

[Hat-tip to Steve and to Warren, both of whom provided me with the above link]

I have twice before posted on a related story, HERE and HERE. Right now, many of us Americans might be comforting and congratulating ourselves that our laws would not permit such a thing to happen here in the States. But laws can change, you know. And freedom of speech and freedom of the press can be insidiously eroded, particularly in the guise of hate-crimes legislation.

Sound far-fetched? I wouldn't be too sure of that. As the Mark Twain quote states in the header of this blog,

Apparently there is nothing that cannot happen today.

Meanwhile, watch for a downloadable pdf file for Alms for Jihad: Charity and Terrorism in the Islamic World, whether or not the mainstream media covers the story of the book's recall and destruction.

Turn the page ....

Follow-Up: Alms for Jihad

To this posting. I originally left an almost identical comment at the above link, but have now decided to place it front-and-center.


From this source (emphases mine):

Here’s a story with huge implications for freedom of speech (all negative), and it’s apparently gone almost entirely unreported in the mainstream press. According to the Chronicle of Higher Education (subscription required), under threat of a law suit, Cambridge University Press has just agreed to pulp all unsold copies of the 2006 book, Alms for Jihad: Charity and Terrorism in the Islamic World. According to the Chronicle, this is the fourth such book on terrorism funding to be pursued by a libel action. The Chronicle quotes Rachel Ehrenfeld, director of the American Center for Democracy, whose own book, Funding Evil: How Terrorism is Financed–and How to Stop It is one of the four books.

In an interview on Monday, Ms. Ehrenfeld characterized as "despicable" Cambridge's decision to settle this week, a move the press has defended as necessary and just. Ms. Ehrenfeld, who is a friend of Mr. Burr's [one of the authors of Alms for Jihad], said that, as she understands it, press officials "caved immediately."

"They didn't even consider the evidence that the authors had given them," she said. "They received a threatening letter, and they immediately caved in and said, Do whatever it takes. Pay them whatever they want. Ban the book, destroy the book, we don't want this lawsuit."

Go HERE for internal links.

So, was there an actual law suit or the THREAT of one? If the latter, then legal discovery and consideration of the evidence in the book were not involved.

Turn the page ....

Twenty-first Century Book-Burning

(Another of my long reads. Settle in! What you're going to read here affects you and your posterity)

In his 1953 novel Fahrenheit 451, Ray Bradbury published a story about a dystopian society in which all books are burned. According to one review at Amazon.com,

In Fahrenheit 451, Ray Bradbury's classic, frightening vision of the future, firemen don't put out fires--they start them in order to burn books. Bradbury's vividly painted society holds up the appearance of happiness as the highest goal--a place where trivial information is good, and knowledge and ideas are bad. Fire Captain Beatty explains it this way, "Give the people contests they win by remembering the words to more popular songs.... Don't give them slippery stuff like philosophy or sociology to tie things up with. That way lies melancholy."

Another review states the following:

The disturbing thing about the book is that, unlike many other books that deal with the distant future, "Fahrenheit 451" (written in 1953) hasn't been proved wrong simply by time itself. Not at all. Actually, what is shocking to realize is that we've come quite close to the society Bradbury writes about. Perhaps books haven't been banned yet, but it is indeed the entertainment industry that controls people's minds, the political correctness has reached ridiculous levels...

Coincidentally, early last spring I chose Fahrenheit 451 as one of the readings for my World Literature class for the 2007-2008 school term. At the time, I didn't realize just how important the reading of Bradbury's classic was going to be.

Now comes the story about the recall and destruction of Alms for Jihad: Charity and Terrorism in the Islamic World, a book published just last year and now becoming scarce at the behest of Sheikh Khalid bin Mahfouz. From this source:

I’ve gotten numerous reports from readers who have attempted to purchase Alms for Jihad from Books a Million and elsewhere, only to have the purchase denied because that title is currently unavailable. That’s because, as Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld and I discussed earlier this week, Khalid bin Mafouz has successfully bullied the Cambridge University Press into pulping the book. Cambridge has even sent out notices to have it removed from some libraries...

According to the above source, Alms for Jihad is becoming increasingly difficult to obtain (at any price, according to Cassandra, who phoned me last night), even via digital download. At the moment, the hard copy of Alms of Jihad is unavailable at Amazon.com, although the site has a link for digital download. I don't know if that link still works.

Mark Steyn has written a commentary about the disappearance of Alms for Jihad. His commentary is reproduced below in its entirety (emphases mine):

How will we lose the war against "radical Islam"?

Well, it won't be in a tank battle. Or in the Sunni Triangle or the caves of Bora Bora. It won't be because terrorists fly three jets into the Oval Office, Buckingham Palace and the Basilica of St Peter's on the same Tuesday morning.

The war will be lost incrementally because we are unable to reverse the ongoing radicalization of Muslim populations in South Asia, Indonesia, the Balkans, Western Europe and, yes, North America. And who's behind that radicalization? Who funds the mosques and Islamic centers that in the past 30 years have set up shop on just about every Main Street around the planet?

For the answer, let us turn to a fascinating book called "Alms for Jihad: Charity And Terrorism in the Islamic World," by J. Millard Burr, a former USAID relief coordinator, and the scholar Robert O Collins. Can't find it in your local Barnes & Noble? Never mind, let's go to Amazon. Everything's available there. And sure enough, you'll come through to the "Alms for Jihad" page and find a smattering of approving reviews from respectably torpid publications: "The most comprehensive look at the web of Islamic charities that have financed conflicts all around the world," according to Canada's Globe And Mail, which is like the New York Times but without the jokes.

Unfortunately, if you then try to buy "Alms for Jihad," you discover that the book is "Currently unavailable. We don't know when or if this item will be back in stock." Hang on, it was only published last year. At Amazon, items are either shipped within 24 hours or, if a little more specialized, within four to six weeks, but not many books from 2006 are entirely unavailable with no restock in sight.

Well, let us cross the ocean, thousands of miles from the Amazon warehouse, to the High Court in London. Last week, the Cambridge University Press agreed to recall all unsold copies of "Alms for Jihad" and pulp them. In addition, it has asked hundreds of libraries around the world to remove the volume from their shelves. This highly unusual action was accompanied by a letter to Sheikh Khalid bin Mahfouz, in care of his English lawyers, explaining their reasons:

"Throughout the book there are serious and defamatory allegations about yourself and your family, alleging support for terrorism through your businesses, family and charities, and directly.

"As a result of what we now know, we accept and acknowledge that all of those allegations about you and your family, businesses and charities are entirely and manifestly false."

Who is Sheikh Khalid bin Mahfouz? Well, he's a very wealthy and influential Saudi. Big deal, you say. Is there any other kind? Yes, but even by the standards of very wealthy and influential Saudis, this guy is plugged in: He was the personal banker to the Saudi royal family and head of the National Commercial Bank of Saudi Arabia, until he sold it to the Saudi government. He has a swanky pad in London and an Irish passport and multiple U.S. business connections, including to Thomas Kean, the chairman of the 9/11 Commission.

I'm not saying the 9/11 Commission is a Saudi shell operation, merely making the observation that, whenever you come across a big-shot Saudi, it's considerably less than six degrees of separation between him and the most respectable pillars of the American establishment.

As to whether allegations about support for terrorism by the sheikh and his "family, businesses and charities" are "entirely and manifestly false," the Cambridge University Press is going way further than the United States or most foreign governments would. Of his bank's funding of terrorism, Sheikh Mahfouz's lawyer has said: "Like upper management at any other major banking institution, Khalid Bin Mahfouz was not, of course, aware of every wire transfer moving through the bank. Had he known of any transfers that were going to fund al-Qaida or terrorism, he would not have permitted them." Sounds reasonable enough. Except that in this instance the Mahfouz bank was wiring money to the principal Mahfouz charity, the Muwafaq (or "Blessed Relief") Foundation, which in turn transferred them to Osama bin Laden.

In October 2001, the Treasury Department named Muwafaq as "an al-Qaida front that receives funding from wealthy Saudi businessmen" and its chairman as a "specially designated global terrorist." As the Treasury concluded, "Saudi businessmen have been transferring millions of dollars to bin Laden through Blessed Relief."

Indeed, this "charity" seems to have no other purpose than to fund jihad. It seeds Islamism wherever it operates. In Chechnya, it helped transform a reasonably conventional nationalist struggle into an outpost of the jihad. In the Balkans, it played a key role in replacing a traditionally moderate Islam with a form of Mitteleuropean Wahhabism. Pick a Muwafaq branch office almost anywhere on the planet and you get an interesting glimpse of the typical Saudi charity worker. The former head of its mission in Zagreb, Croatia, for example, is a guy called Ayadi Chafiq bin Muhammad. Well, he's called that most of the time. But he has at least four aliases and residences in at least three nations (Germany, Austria and Belgium). He was named as a bin Laden financier by the U.S. government and disappeared from the United Kingdom shortly after 9/11.

So why would the Cambridge University Press, one of the most respected publishers on the planet, absolve Khalid bin Mahfouz, his family, his businesses and his charities to a degree that neither (to pluck at random) the U.S., French, Albanian, Swiss and Pakistani governments would be prepared to do?

Because English libel law overwhelmingly favors the plaintiff. And like many other big-shot Saudis, Sheikh Mahfouz has become very adept at using foreign courts to silence American authors – in effect, using distant jurisdictions to nullify the First Amendment. He may be a wronged man, but his use of what the British call "libel chill" is designed not to vindicate his good name but to shut down the discussion, which is why Cambridge University Press made no serious attempt to mount a defense. He's one of the richest men on the planet, and they're an academic publisher with very small profit margins. But, even if you've got a bestseller, your pockets are unlikely to be deep enough: "House Of Saud, House Of Bush" did boffo biz with the anti-Bush crowd in America, but there's no British edition – because Sheikh Mahfouz had indicated he was prepared to spend what it takes to challenge it in court, and Random House decided it wasn't worth it.

We've gotten used to one-way multiculturalism: The world accepts that you can't open an Episcopal or Congregational church in Jeddah or Riyadh, but every week the Saudis can open radical mosques and madrassahs and pro-Saudi think-tanks in London and Toronto and Dearborn, Mich., and Falls Church, Va. And their global reach extends a little further day by day, inch by inch, in the lengthening shadows, as the lights go out one by one around the world.

Suppose you've got a manuscript about the Saudis. Where are you going to shop it? Think Cambridge University Press will be publishing anything anytime soon?

The following is some additional information about Alms for Jihad. According to this source, the book:

is properly sourced, with hundreds of references. And Burr and Collins provided Cambridge University Press with all their materials on bin Mahfouz’ al Qaeda and Hamas financing, contrary to the false statements by both bin Mahfouz’ and Cambridge University Press attorneys.

Incredibly, the publishing arm of the world’s second oldest English speaking university (est. 1209), completely capitulated to bin Mahfouz, offering a comprehensive apology and substantial damages, according to an agreement read in the U.K. High Court on July 30, 2007. Cambridge University Press also promised to pulp the books, publish a detailed apology on its website and contribute to bin Mahfouz’ legal costs.

[T]hese authors’ statements and data were all previously well documented by the media and U.S. Congressional, Court, Treasury Department and other official statements.

These reports were further corroborated by French intelligence officials at the General Directorate of External Security (DGSE), and published in the French daily, Le Monde. The DGSE reported that in 1998, they knew bin Mahfouz to be an architect of the banking scheme built to benefit Osama bin Laden; both U.S. and British intelligence services knew it, too.

In short, Cambridge University Press had nothing for which to apologize....

The pre-existing British intelligence knowledge of bin Mahfouz’ terrorist ties render the British High Court announcement all the more appalling an infringement of free speech...

Libraries here in the United States are not legally obligated to remove Alms for Jihad from their stacks. This morning, I noted that the Fairfax County Public Library system does not have the book; however, I do not know if the Fairfax system ever carried the book, but if so, voluntary censorship, resulting from fear of litigation, is afoot. You might want to check the library system in your area. Also, check your local bookstores. Cassandra told me yesterday that she couldn't find the book in her area. Is the book being pulled here in the United States?

After all, libel suits are costly affairs. Jeffrey Breinholt of the Counterterrorism Blog recently compiled the following list of legal actions attempted or taken against books unfavorable to Islam, Muslim organizations, and individual Muslims (emphasis mine):

Two news flashes on August 1, 2007. First, the lawyers representing the so-called Flying Imams in their lawsuit against US Airways announced that they were not going after the unnamed passengers whose concerns prompted the men to be pulled off the Arizona-bound flight (here). I suppose that is good to know, now that the long-term policy implications of their lawsuit are about to justify (literally) an act of Congress. Second, Cambridge University Press announced that it was going to destroy all copies of the 2006 book Alms for Jihad: Charity and Terrorism in the Islamic World, in response to a libel claim filed in England by Khalid bin Mahfouz, a Saudi banker (here).

And let's not forget the recent dust-up between CAIR and the Young America's Foundation, when the group scheduled Robert Spencer to speak.

Continuing now with the piece from the Counterterrorism Blog:

Connected? Absolutely. Each story involves people who do not like how information flows these days. Each chose litigation as the means to try to get their way.

[...]

DATELINE - BOSTON 2003
The Boston Herald reported on community concerns with the generous land deal between the city and the Islamic Society of Boston (ISB), based on suspicions that ISB had connections to terrorists in the Middle East. ISB sues the Herald and various people who provided it information for libel. Islamic Soc. of Boston v. Boston Herald, Inc.,21 Mass.L.Rptr. 441, Not Reported in N.E.2d, 2006 WL 2423287, Mass.Super. 2006.

DATELINE - WASHINGTON DC 2003
A sitting U.S. Congressman finds himself having to explain why he has chosen not to run for re-election, after public reports that he and his wife are having marital problems. To redress public concerns, he speaks by phone to a reporter from the Charlotte Observer, and describes how living in Washington no longer appeals to him, especially across the street from the headquarters of the Council for American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) after the events of 9/11 and the rumor he heard that CAIR is a fundraising front for Hizballah. CAIR sues the congressman for libel. CAIR v. Ballenger, 444 F.3d 659 (D.C. Cir. 2006)

DATELINE - SAN FRANCISCO 2002
The Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith (ADL) posts a letter on its website calling for an investigation of Khadja Ghafur, the former superintendent of public charter schools, based on indications that public schools under his supervision are teaching religion and are associated with a controversial Pakistani organization. Ghafur sues the ADL for libel. Ghafur v. Bernstein, 131 Cal.App.4th 1230, 32 Cal.Rptr.3d 626, Cal.App. 1 Dist.,2005.

DATELINE - CHICAGO 2001
The New York Times and other news organizations report that Global Relief Foundation (GRF) is the target of an investigation based on suspicions of its terrorist fundraising. GRF sues the news organizations for libel. GRF v. NY Times, 390 F.3d 973 (7th Cir. 2003)

DATELINE - OMAHA 2001
Radio personality Rick Dees makes some on-air statements that are offensive to Muslims. Durkhan Iqraa Jihad Mumin and two other people sue Dees and his station for libel. Mumin v. Dees, 266 Neb. 201, 663 N.W.2d 125 Neb. 2003.

DATELINE - VIRGINIA 1998
America Online (AOL) permits chat rooms dealing with the the Qu’ran and the beliefs of Islam, and this generates posts that Muslims consider harassing and blasphemous. One Muslim visitor to the chat room user sues AOL for libel. Noah v. AOL, 261 F.Supp.2d 532 (E.D. Va. 2003)

DATELINE - NEW YORK 1994
The New York Post publishes an interview of Dr. Betty Shabazz, the widow of Malcolm X, suggesting complicity of Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan in the assassination of her husband. Farrakhan sues the Post for libel. Farrakhan v. N.Y.P. Holdings, Inc.,168 Misc.2d 536, 638 N.Y.S.2d 1002, N.Y.Sup.,1995.

DATELINE - BOSTON - 1993
The Wellesley College journal Counterpoint publishes an article about professor Tony Martin, who is believed to be associated with the Nation of Islam, suggesting that the decision to grant him tenure was based on threats of litigation. Martin sues Counterpoint for libel. Martin v. Roy, 54 Mass.App.Ct. 642, 767 N.E.2d 603, Mass.App.Ct., 2002.

DATELINE - BOSTON - 1984
The Boston Globe publishes an article about Yusuf Islam, the popular musician formerly known as Cat Stevens, describing how he had embraced Islam and moved to Iran. Islam sues the Globe for libel. Globe Communications Corp. v. R.C.S. Rizzoli Periodici, S.p.A., 729 F.Supp. 973 (S.D.N.Y.1990).

DATELINE - NEW YORK - 1983
Newsweek publishes an article suggesting that Pakistani businessman Mahmoud Khan is associated with the CIA. Khan sues Newsweek for libel. Khan v. Newsweek, Inc, 160 A.D.2d 425, 554 N.Y.S.2d 119, N.Y.A.D. 1 Dept.,1990.

DATELINE - ARIZONA - 1981
A student religious journal Al-Ittihad publishes an unfavorable review of a translation of the Qu’ran by Rashad Khalifa, using the words “charlatan” and “mental imbalance.” Khalifa sues the journal for libel. Khalifa v. Muslim Students' Ass'n of U. S. and Canada, Inc., 131 Ariz. 328, 641 P.2d 242, Ariz.App., 1981

DATELINE - SAN FRANCISCO - 1980
A California television station broadcasts “Death of a Princess,” a film depicting the public execution of a Saudi Arabian princess for adultery. Prince Khalid Abdullah Tariq Mansour Faissal Fahd Al Talal, on behalf of 600 million Muslims throughout the world, sues the television station for libel. Khalid Abdullah Tariq Mansour Faissal Fahd Al Talal v. Fanning, 560 F. Supp. 186 (N.D. Cal. 1980)

DATELINE - WASHINGTON D.C. 1964
The Evening Star newspaper publishes an article describing political activist Dolphin Thomas as a chief spokesman for Malcolm X and his Black Muslim Mosque. Thomas sues the Star for libel. Thompson v. Evening Star Newspaper Co., 394 F.2d 774 (D.C. Cir. 1968).

DATELINE – BIRMINGHAM 1935
The Birmingham Post reports that an Arab sheik is interested in acquiring an American bride for his harem, and describes what he is looking for and some of his good attributes. The newspaper is sued for libel. White v. Birmingham Post Co., 233 Ala. 547, 172 So. 649, Ala. 1937.

Legal efforts to control how Muslim organizations and individuals are portrayed is not limited to public statements. They extend to non-public statements about Muslim employees’ job performance. This list above does not contain other lawsuits that are more akin to the recent US Airway litigation: Muslim employees who sued for their employers for libel, alleging that their employers spoke about their job performance to state licensing boards created to assure quality health care, or government agents or persons employed by the university or company responsible for investigating the employment discrimination allegations that arose from the libel actions themselves. Mawaldi v. St. Elizabeth Health Center, 381 F.Supp.2d 675 (N.D. Ohio 2005); Shabazz v. PYA Monarch, LLC, 271 F.Supp.2d 797 (E.D.Va. 2003); Obu v. Ohio Dept. of Aging,119 Ohio Misc.2d 131, 774 N.E.2d 812, Ohio Ct.Cl.,2002; Ahmed v. Gelfand,160 F.Supp.2d 408 (E.D.N.Y. 2001); Naeemullah v. Citicorp Services, Inc., 78 F.Supp.2d 783 (N.D.Ill. 1999); El-Ghori v. Grimes, 23 F.Supp.2d 1259 (D.Kan.1998); Al-Khazraji v. Saint Francis College, 523 F.Supp. 386 (W.D. Pa. 1981). In all of these lawsuits, the libel complaints were dismissed by the court, which ruled that the employee had no action. There must have been some very disappointed lawyers.

These cases may be the tip of the iceberg. Although truth is a defense to libel lawsuits, it generally takes thousands of dollars to establish the truth sufficiently to achieve a dismissal. Settlement is sometimes the best option, no matter how unmeritorious the allegations. When that happens, there will be no court opinion. Thus, we do not know how many more cases are out there in which someone facing steep legal bills chose to quietly settle. For those defendants, they will probably never mention the word Islam again in public. Who loses then? In the long run, fear of discussion has costs to society’s search for the truth. Some of us like the fact that information flows so efficiently, and we want to keep it that way.

Moreever [sic], the truth is not always obvious when the lawsuit is being pursued. It often takes many years and much more lively American dialogue to get there. That means the use of litigation to control the flow of information should matter to those all who appreciate the gradual pace at which knowledge develops. There is now no question that GRF was under investigation - it has since been designated as a terrorist financier by President Bush. Cat Stevens’ conversion to Islam and his relocation to Iran is now common knowledge, as is the CIA‘s involvement in Afghanistan through Pakistani intermediaries. Historically, with some libel actions, we sometimes look back years late and wonder how anyone could have questioned the information then at issue, either because it is so obviously true or because our mores have changed. Then we feel dirty.

...[O]f these cases I list above, there was only one that was not dismissed in favor of the defendants - the oldest one, involving the Arab Sheik looking to acquire an American wife. In that 1937 case, the Alabama judge refused the dismiss the libel action...

Read the entire article.

Litigation jihad — another of the tactics used to accomplish the Islamification of the West and to silence the critics of Islam. Is the blogosphere next on their hit-list?

[Hat-tip to Maccus Germanis for providing me this link]

Turn the page ....