Monday, March 31, 2008

Conflict Over The Burkini & Muslima Fashions Take To The Runways

Note that the Al Arabiya news article cited below is dated February 28, 2008. Fitna: The Movie (a working link at the time of this posting) cannot be blamed for the outburst of "Islamophobia."

Via this posting at Sons of Apes and Pigs:


A Dutch Muslim woman was thrown out of a public swimming pool for wearing an Islamic-style swimsuit, sparking a row between pool and municipality officials, German news agency DPA reported on Wednesday.

The woman, a convert to Islam, was wearing a "burkini" -- a combination of burqa (the garment Muslim women wear to cover the whole body) and bikini.

She was asked to leave Hanzebad swimming pool in the eastern Netherlands city of Zwolle, some 120 kilometers from the capital Amsterdam.

The municipality says the pool should allow women to wear the burkini, but pool officials said it does not meet regulations and might "scare off" other visitors, DPA reported.

The pool manager said there are special hours set aside for conservative Muslim women and added that the Dutch lady chose to swim outside ladies hours to make a statement.

Discussions are still underway between pool and municipality officials to resolve the matter, the German news agency said.
What is there to discuss? Special hours have been set aside for Muslim women, and they're still not satisfied? Oh, my mistake. She wanted "to make a statement." And just what might that statement be?

But Muslimah "fashions" are not only for the swimming pool and for making statements. Indeed, according to this story at ABC News, burqa makeovers are for both Muslims and non-Muslims:
The burqa is the wardrobe of choice for many Muslim women. It is worn over a woman's daily clothing, usually covering her from head to toe. Today, the burqa has gone designer, popping up on fashion runways in the West, like at this show by Norwegian designers Marked Moskva in Norway earlier this month....The designers reportedly say they are aiming their collection at Muslims and non-Muslims.
Have a look.

Garbed from head to toe, complete with combat boots:

A camouflage-patterned burqa by Marked Moskva.
(Mattis Sandblad, Scanpix/Reuters)

Something more colorful and sporting some arm:

A model wears Marked Moskva's ballooned burqa.
(Mattis Sandblad, Scanpix/Reuters)

Show a little leg:

A crossover designer burqa inspired by Burberry 's signature plaid by Marked Moskva.
(Mattis Sanblad, Scanpix/AP Photo)

Show more leg but likely not Islamic, at least for streetwear:

A model wears this short and sheer creation.
(Mattis Sanblad, Scanpix/AP Photo)

Additional photos HERE.

So, Ladies, are you going to rush out and buy some of the latest fashions? Gentlemen, don't you just love those new fashions?

I know that, for my part, I can't wait to don the garments of submission. Yeah, right.

Labels: ,

Turn the page ....

Bookmark and Share
posted by Always On Watch @ 3/31/2008 08:31:00 AM  


Saturday, March 29, 2008

Dr. Wafa Sultan Under Death Threat (With Addendum)

Read the information HERE at Brigitte Gabriel's Act! For America.

Right here in America, Dr. Sultan and her family have had to go into hiding!

Here are the videos of Dr. Sultan's appearance on Al-Jazeera Television earlier this month:


Addendum: A little less than two years ago, Time Magazine published the following about Dr. Wafa Sultan:
By so sharply voicing her beliefs, Sultan crystallizes the mission for the rest of us who want to take the slam out of Islam.
Also in 2006, Time Magazine recognized Wafa Sultan as one in "The Time 100: The People Who Shape Our World."

Whatever happened to supporting Dr. Sultan, an American citizen, in her exercise of freedom of speech here in America? A bunch of cartoons got in the way?

Labels: ,

Turn the page ....

Bookmark and Share
posted by Always On Watch @ 3/29/2008 09:58:00 PM  


Blogger Threatened

Norman Rockwell's "Freedom of Speech"

Kevin of The Amboy Times was threatened yesterday — all because he is keeping a running list entitled "The List of Things That Offend Muslims." The following is the threat which Kevin received:

...You know how much I hate to wish that something really bad happen to anyone (though at times I have expressed my desire to have someone I truly hate suffer in death thanks to a speeding bullet train). But I think I have no excuse to pray that the author of this idiotic post have anything good for him or her.

This guy is a real muppet. I couldn't care to dig up his background or where he came from for that matter. Anyone who stirs shit like that deserved to be shot really. This is simply a case of asking for it. Don't even mention terrorists, this chap could be in real trouble even if he bumped into his Muslim neighbour, if he has any....
The Armchair Critic is the web site which published the threat, HERE, where you can read the entire posting.

Part of Kevin's comment about the threat:
This kind of proves the basic thesis of the list, that Westerners have to tip toe around Muslims and hope they don't kill us for holding our own views. The faiths we practice and the traditions that we hold dear are meaningless targets for jihad. The writer, whose blog banner features a revolver with spattered blood, doesn't seem to realize that murder for the sake of his religion is what draws criticism to Islam.
Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch learned of the threat and had this to say about it:
...Never mind that everything on [Kevin's] list is linked, and based on actual events. It doesn't seem to occur to Edroos Alsagoff that it might be perfectly legitimate to point out the ridiculous rage-mongering that all too many Muslims engage in all too frequently, and to call them on it.

It doesn't seem to occur to Edroos Alsagoff [of The Armchair Critic] that the ones who are actually stirring the s*** are the ones who fly into irrational rage at the sight of ice cream cones and sneakers, and that to say that someone who points out the silliness and irrationality of that rage deserves to be shot indicates that he has already surrendered to violent intimidation -- even as he engages in it himself.

Oh, and Kevin, if this Edroos Alsagoff character is right, it may be time for you to add "The List of Things That Offend Muslims" to..."The List of Things That Offend Muslims."
Recently Pastorius published this essay entitled "What to Do If You Are Killed." The prominent blogger mentioned at the beginning of the essay is not Kevin; Pastorius's essay was written before Kevin received the threat (emphases mine):

Word has come to me today that a certain prominent anti-Jihad commentator has had their life threatened by Fatwa. This person has been forced underground. Addresses have been changed. Their words will not be read for now. Voice will not be heard. All contact with the outside world has been snuffed out like a candle, leaving our world that much darker.

Freedom of Speech has been violated. We are one step further from a free society, and one step closer to a fear society.

This person is someone you all know and love. You would all care to know about this person's well-being. You would want to know that they are ok.

But, you won't know, because this person's response is to shut down completely, to go silent.

We could criticize this person and say, "They are not brave enough," but that would be absolutely unfair. This person has stood up, as few in this world have stood up.

And, this person is not the first anti-Jihad warrior to shut up in the face of threats. When an anti-Jihadi shuts up, in any manner, the effect is silence. Therefore, no one knows that anything has happened.

I have often thought that, if I were a black man, and someone burned a cross on my lawn, I would leave the burnt cross there for all to see. I would leave it there to shame my neighbors into helping me track down the people who burnt the cross on my lawn in the first place.

A burnt cross on a lawn is a shame on the whole neighborhood. A life threatened for the exercise of free speech IS A SHAME ON OUR WHOLE SOCIETY. Why is it that we all shut up when we are threatened. Would it not be better to announce the threats, every single one of them, publicly?

Is it not the first responsibility of government to ensure the rights of its citizens? Can we not expect to be protected when we are threatened for exercising our God-granted right to Freedom of Speech?

So, here's my question, why is it that, when we are threatened, we shut up? Why do we choose to shuffle off into silence, as if we are the ones who have done something wrong?

Why is it we don't shout the truth from the rooftops, that fascists are threatening to kill us exactly because we have chosen to exercise our freedom.

So, let me tell you the truth. I have had my life threatened on more than one occasion. And, I shut up about it. I thought about calling the police, or the FBI, but somehow, in my mind, it made sense to ignore the threats. They just didn't seem that big a deal.

I have to wonder, though, if I am simply in denial.

"No," I tell myself. "You just aren't that important, Pastorius. Why would anyone want to kill you? For you to think someone would want to kill you is a kind of self-aggrandizement. It's a way for you to feel special."

And, I am right, and I am wrong.

Truth is, hardly anyone knows or cares what I write, and I am safe behind the bunker of my virtual anonymity.

But, I am not the only person at IBA [Infidel Bloggers Alliance] to have been threatened. Another contributor has had to have police protection on occasion.

Another contributor was threatened with a lawsuit by a high official of a Middle East nation.

Another contributor had their name, address, and telephone number published on a white supremacist website, along with the names of their children, their spouse, the address of their business, the details of their charitable contrbutions, and a helpful Google map to their home.

Through back channels, I know that the close friend of another prominent anti-Jihadi (an organizer) has had his life threatened in very specific manner. Additionally, one of his friends wound up dead under mysterious circumstances. This friend had also been somewhat prominent in organizing the anti-Jihad movement. His family asks that nothing be said about his death.

And, finally, I have noticed that another prominent anti-Jihad blogger appears to have moved to another part of the country, and never said a word about it. The blogger did note, in the comments section, that they had been threatened, but that was all they said publicly. Shortly, thereafter, this blogger seemed to have changed time zones.

And, meanwhile, many of us have been fighting among one another. Backstabbing and sniping and accusing one another of siding with our enemies. I myself have contributed more than my share to that debate.

But, let me ask a question, why is it that we all shut up when we are threatened. Would it not be better to announce the threats, every single one of them, publicly?

Why is it that we tirelessly defend free speech, but then shut up about the fact that our freedom is being directly threatened? The uninitiated might be prone to believe that our paranoia about the loss of free speech is unfounded.

Today's Infidel quote of the day is from Robert Spencer. It says:

Once you declare one group off-limits for critical examination or declare that these people must at all costs not be offended, or that if they are, they’re perfectly within their rights to stone, or lash, or imprison, or kill the offender, then you have destroyed free speech.

In a free society, people with differing opinions live together in harmony, agreeing not to kill one another if their neighbor’s opinions offend them. Whenever offensive speech is prohibited, the tyrant’s power is solidified.

Is not the tyrant's power also solidified when he is free to make threats in the backrooms of our movement?
Ayaan Hirsi Ali has been criticized for going around the world, lecturing people on the fact that her life is under constant threat, and asking for money to pay for her protection. And yes, it is true there would appear to be something unseemly about the way she makes a spectacle of herself.

But, I think she is doing exactly the right thing. When Ayaan Hirsi Ali makes a spectacle of herself, she makes a specatle of her inevitable martydom. Because, ultimately, some of us are going to be killed. Some of us have already been killed. We would be living in denial to think it can not, also, happen to one of us.

And, if some of us are to be killed, then isn't it better that we leave a trail of breadcrumbs leading back to the scene of the crime, so that no one can deny the reason it happened? Isn't it better that we say,

"On this day, I wrote ..., and on this day, I received this threat because of it"?

I am beginning to wonder if we ought to start a website, or maybe an organization, which will announce these threats. The Religion of Peace announces the terror attacks committed by crazy Muslims everyday. And, I'm glad they do, but that is reactive. Should we not also be pro-active? We are pro-active about exposing the madness of the Jihadis, so why are we not willing to expose it when it is directed squarely at us?

We are only the messengers. We have done nothing deserving of shame. We should not slink off into obscurity.

If they threaten the messenger, we ought to expose them. Then, if they do, indeed, one day kill the messenger, the murder will be the message we send, instead of the message they send.

Kevin is not going to shut up. I am not going to shut up. In fact, I'm going to ratchet it up.

Furthermore, on the April 4, 2008 edition of The Gathering Storm Radio Show, Cassandra, WC, and I are going to publicize even further Kevin's "The List of Things That Offend Muslims." Cassandra had planned to mention the list before Kevin received the threat. Now she is going to give the list even more attention. In fact, we're going to turn the spotlight on that list.

In other words, some of us are going to take a stand for free speech in our corners of the blogsphere — while we still have that right. To do anything else would serve to nullify the legacy of freedom strived for by our Founders and, indeed, by all those who fought for the freedoms we enjoy.

Labels: , ,

Turn the page ....

Bookmark and Share
posted by Always On Watch @ 3/29/2008 09:10:00 AM  


Friday, March 28, 2008

Attempts To Ban Fitna The Movie

Transcript from this link:

Islamic leaders in the Netherlands will ask a court later today to ban a film which accuses the Koran of inciting violence. Dutch MP Geert Wilders launched his film on the internet after local distributors refused to release it. Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende added his criticism of the film, saying it was offensive to Muslims.

"The film shows images of violent acts, and holds Islam and the Koran responsible for them. The government condemns such acts and those who commit them. The film equates Islam with violence, and we reject this interpretation. The vast majority of Muslims reject extremism and violence. In fact the victims are often also Muslims."

The film is called "Fitna", a Koranic term sometimes translated as "strife."

It intersperses shots of the 9/11 attacks in New York City, and other bombings blamed on Islamic radicals, with quotations from the Koran.

There have already been widespread protests against the film, and the governments of Pakistan and Iran have made their displeasure very clear.

NATO fears an explosion of Muslim anger
could threaten the security of foreign forces in Afghanistan, which include some 1,600 Dutch troops.
Carl in Jerusalem said the following at his post, where I found the above video:
First of all, as far as I know, LiveLeak is housed on servers in the US or UK. How does anyone think a Dutch court is going to order a server in the US or UK to take it down? They might be able to order a UK server to take it down because of the EU, but I doubt most US-based servers would listen. Then again, given that Network Solutions declined to run the film and took down Wilders' site, I suppose anything is possible.

More important, at this point, I am sure the film has been downloaded to dozens, if not hundreds of computers throughout the world. While I'm not much of techie, there are many other bloggers who are techies, and I am sure they would continue to host the movie. And no Dutch court can stop them.
However, we also have this in yesterday's Washington Post, apparently before the release of Fitna: The Movie:
The top U.N. rights body on Thursday passed a resolution proposed by Islamic countries saying it is deeply concerned about the defamation of religions and urging governments to prohibit it.


The document, which was put forward by the Organization of the Islamic Conference, "expresses deep concern at attempts to identify Islam with terrorism, violence and human rights violations."


The resolution "urges states to take actions to prohibit the dissemination ... of racist and xenophobic ideas" and material that would incite to religious hatred. It also urges states to adopt laws that would protect against hatred and discrimination stemming from religious defamation.
Also, this appeared at Reuters this morning:
It ["Fitna: The Movie"] starts and finishes with a cartoon of the Prophet Mohammad with a bomb under his turban, originally published in Danish newspapers, accompanied by the sound of ticking.

Danish cartoonist Kurt Westergaard, who drew the image, said he planned to take legal action on Friday to have it removed from the film, saying it was taken out of context.

"(The cartoon) is aimed at the fanatical terrorists that use interpretations of Islam and the Koran as their spiritual dynamite," he told Danish news agency Ritzau on Thursday....
But take heart, infidels. Read this posting at Infidel Bloggers Alliance. Another film, "The Life of Mohammed," is supposed to be released on April 20. Of course, the objections have already begun.

Labels: , , , , ,

Turn the page ....

Bookmark and Share
posted by Always On Watch @ 3/28/2008 09:14:00 AM  


Thursday, March 27, 2008

Fitna: The Movie (UPDATED!)

[Hat-tip to Mark Alexander, who notified me of the film's release]

UPDATE: LiveLeak removed the video on Friday, March 28, 2008, due to threats (and now restored it as of March 31, 2008).

If LiveLeak caves again, try THIS LINK or THIS LINK.

Below is Fitna, from Common Sense Against Islam:

Additional information from Sons of Apes and Pigs:


Dutch MP Geert Wilders has posted his anti-Islamic film, which has sparked wide condemnation and fears of a backlash, on the Internet on Thursday.

The first minutes of the 15-minute movie show a Koran being opened and the text of a sura from Islam's holiest tome, which it translated from Arabic as imploring the faithful to "terrorize the enemies of Allah".

They were then followed by images of airplanes flying into the World Trade Center in New York on September 11, 2001, with soundbits from phone calls to the emergency services on that day.

The film continues with grizzly images of bloodstained bodies in the aftermath of the Madrid train bombings in March 2004 in which 191 people were killed.

Despite pressure from The Hague not to release the movie, Wilders pushed ahead.

Dutch officials fear a repeat of violent protests that erupted when European newspapers printed cartoons depicting the Prophet Mohammed (PBUH)

In comments to the Netherlands' domestic ANP news agency Thursday, Wilders, 44, said he felt "Fitna" is "a decent film".

He added that he can understand that Muslims could be upset about the film, but stressed: "It remains widely within the framework of the law".

"My film was not made to provoke violence," he said, adding that he hoped there would not be riots now that he had posted the film.

The movie includes images of Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh who was killed in 2004 by a Muslim radical for also making a film critical of Islam.

After nearly 10 minutes of selected Quranic verses followed by gruesome images of attacks, beheadings, beatings, and speeches by unidentified Muslim clerics condemning infidels, Wilders turns to the situation in the Netherlands.

The film shows statistics of the growing Muslim population in the Netherlands and shows images of female genital mutilation, a hanging of suspected gay men, beheadings and bloodied children, all following the words: "The Netherlands in future?”

The film ends with someone leafing through the Koran, and a tearing sound is heard.

"The sound you heard was from a page (being torn out) of the phone book. It is not up to me, but up to the Muslims themselves to tear the spiteful verses from the Koran," says a text that appears on the screen.

"Stop Islamisation, Defend our freedom," the film concludes.

Web site for Fitna: The Movie

Labels: , ,

Turn the page ....

Bookmark and Share
posted by Always On Watch @ 3/27/2008 11:58:00 PM  


More Koranic "Science"

Follow-up to this earlier posting of mine....

YouTube Link

Here is the sidebar information from YouTube:

A debate between an Iraqi "Researcher on Astronomy" and a physicist on Iraqi television. Apparently, this is an important question in the Islamic world...

-From the transcript-

Interviewer: Lunar and solar eclipses, sunset and sunrise, and the changing of seasons -- how would you explain all these phenomena, if the Earth is not round, as you claim?

Fadhel Al-Sa'd: The sun circles the Earth because it is smaller than the Earth, as is evident in Koranic verses.

Have you ever seen how the sun moves? I have seen the sun moving. The sun makes one move every 24 hours.

What I say is based on Koranic science. He bases his arguments on the kind of science that I reject categorically -- the modern science that they teach in schools. This science is a heretic innovation that has no confirmation in the Koran. No verse in the Koran indicates that the Earth is round or that it rotates. Anything that has no indication in the Koran is false.
So much for interfaithing. Heh.

(Crossposted at Infidel Bloggers Alliance)

Labels: ,

Turn the page ....

Bookmark and Share
posted by Always On Watch @ 3/27/2008 07:05:00 AM  


Wednesday, March 26, 2008

How To End "Islamophobia"

The conclusion of this article by Robert Spencer in Human Events:
1. Focus indignation on Muslims committing violent acts in the name of Islam, not on non-Muslims reporting on those acts.

2. Renounce definitively not just “terrorism,” but any intention to replace the U.S. Constitution (or the constitutions of any non-Muslim state) with Islamic Sharia law even by peaceful means.

3. Teach Muslims the imperative of coexisting peacefully as equals with non-Muslims on an indefinite basis.

4. Begin comprehensive international programs in mosques all over the world to teach against the ideas of violent jihad and Islamic supremacism.

5. Actively work with Western law enforcement officials to identify and apprehend jihadists within Western Muslim communities.

Do those things, and “Islamophobia” will vanish.
Read it all.
In the same essay, Mr. Spencer also says the following:
Once you declare one group off-limits for critical examination or declare that these people must at all costs not be offended, or that if they are they’re perfectly within their rights to stone, or lash, or imprison, or kill the offender, then you have destroyed free speech. In a free society, people with differing opinions live together in harmony, agreeing not to kill one another if their neighbor’s opinions offend them. If offensive speech had been prohibited in the 1770s, there would be no United States of America, and that is one of the reasons for the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Whenever offensive speech is prohibited, the tyrant’s power is solidified. No less in this case, although the tyrant in question is of a different kind.
Instead of being intimidated by the possibility of offending Muslims, we infidels need to crank it up. Any other reaction to the Islamic threat to our freedoms is dhimmitude.

Labels: , , ,

Turn the page ....

Bookmark and Share
posted by Always On Watch @ 3/26/2008 07:48:00 AM  


Tuesday, March 25, 2008

Robert Spencer On The OIC

Hat-tip to Reliapundit of THE ASTUTE BLOGGERS, where I found the following video, about four minutes in length:

YouTube Link
Additional reading about the OIC, which is brazenly threatening freedom of speech and freedom of the press in the Western world with the organization's push toward litigation-ifada.

Yesterday afternoon, on Fox News Network, I caught an interview of Brigitte Gabriel. The topic was the Pope's recent baptism of Magdi Allam:
VATICAN CITY (AP) - Italy's most prominent Muslim, an iconoclastic writer who condemned Islamic extremism and defended Israel, converted to Catholicism Saturday in a baptism by the pope at a Vatican Easter service.

An Egyptian-born, non-practicing Muslim who is married to a Catholic, Magdi Allam infuriated some Muslims with his books and columns in the newspaper Corriere della Sera newspaper, where he is a deputy editor. He titled one book "Long Live Israel."

As a choir sang, Pope Benedict XVI poured holy water over Allam's head and said a brief prayer in Latin.


Vatican Television zoomed in on Allam, who sat in the front row of the basilica along with six other candidates for baptism. He later received his first Communion....
Magdi Allam took the name Christian for his baptism and later stated the following:
"I realize what I am going up against but I will confront my fate with my head high, with my back straight and the interior strength of one who is certain about his faith."
But cowardice and dhimmitude made their appearance yesterday afternoon, when a Fox News Channel anchor said something like this to Ms. Gabriel: "Don't you think that the Pope's baptism should have been done in a less visible manner? Some people might get upset."

In other words, Christianity should tone itself down so as not to offend Muslims.

Huh? What's that?

Turn the situation around, and just imagine the furor if a news anchor suggested during Ramadan season, "How about toning down the Hajj? It upsets non-Muslims." I can see the reaction in my mind's eye right now.

Just take a look at this list of things offensive to Muslims. What doesn't offend them?

Labels: , , , ,

Turn the page ....

Bookmark and Share
posted by Always On Watch @ 3/25/2008 07:40:00 AM  


Sunday, March 23, 2008

The Silencing Of Voices Continues

I didn't play to post anything on this Easter Sunday. But then I saw this posting by Pastorius at Infidel Bloggers Alliance:

Geert Wilders new film is being attacked as a hate crime by anonymous critics who have convinced his webhost, Network Solutions, to take the site down before the film has even been aired.

I guess he is guilty of "Pre-Crime."

Go read the story over at KleinVerzet.

Remember this; religion, business, and government are institutions of power in society. As such, they MUST be criticized.

If we are not allowed to criticize a seminal center of power like religion, then we are left helpless when religion becomes fascistic.

This is about more than Islam, or Wilders movie. This is our Freedom.

If Network Solutions will not play by the rules of Western Civilization, then Network Solutions should be taken down.

If you would like to contact Network Soltutions,
click on this link.

Islam mustn't be disrespected, mustn't be criticized, mustn't be interfered with — no matter how much abiding by the rules of censoring Muslims and Islamophiles violates the freedoms which the West claims to hold dear.

Look here, Western Civilization, you're being threatened. Make a stand, or else fade into dhimmitudinal oblivion.

2008: The Year of Silencing Voices

Labels: , ,

Turn the page ....

Bookmark and Share
posted by Always On Watch @ 3/23/2008 11:50:00 AM  


Saturday, March 22, 2008

Ugandan Christians Insulted — No Riots

I posted yesterday here as to how our U.S. envoy Sada Cumber supports the OIC's litigation-ifada. And of course we know that various U.S. officials, including Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice, are forever declaring how important it is for us infidels to respect Islam and Islamic values (whatever the latter means).

The critical matter of respecting Islam was a key issue at the recent OIC recent. And, of course, Osama Bin Laden has also recently told Europe that the Motoons are morally worse than the slaughter of Mulims. Go figure.

Now we have the following to go along with all the above, via this posting at World Divided:
Uganda has always welcomed its neighbors, like the refugees from Rwanda after the 1994 genocide – the genocide Uganda played a key role in stopping of - or like Colonel Ghaddafi who’s been a very dear guest of Uganda. But apparently, the Colonel reserves very little regard for religious feelings of the people of Uganda: earlier this week he came to their country, he stood on their soil in front of the crowd of thousands of Muslims who gathered at Nakivubo Stadium in Kampala chanting “Allahu Akbar”, he said
Mohammed, the founder of Islam, was the only messenger of God to mankind and the seal of all prophets

The current Bible was not the one revealed to Jesus and the current Old Testament is not the one Allah gave to Moses

Reference to Prophet Mohammed in the Bible could have been deleted

Moses predicted the coming of Mohammed and that Jesus, too, talked of a prophet that would come after him

Any book that doesn’t mention Mohammed isn’t true and is forged.
So much for respect…And all this has been said in the presence of the President of Uganda who is known for being a welcoming host, a good Christian and a true believer in God.

Now, let’s imagine the leader of Christian faith coming to the Muslim country and saying, “Koran is forged”. The flags and effigies would be burnt, the apology would be demanded, the diplomatic ties would be threatened, the churches would be attacked and Christians would get killed. And yet, nobody in the main stream media even dares mentioning Ghaddafi’s slur, and no pseudo-liberal pundit rushes to protect the feelings of the Christians of Uganda.


...I bet if some Christian coming to Uganda said something offensive about Islam, the Uganda Muslim Supreme Council they would be running their mouth off despite the fact that they are not in charge of the visit.
Go read the whole thing over at World Divided to see how well the Ugandan Christians have comported themselves in the face of Ghaddafi's insult to the Bible.

The contrast between those Ugandan Christian-leaders and the ranting, oh-so-sensitive Muslims who are outraged over a bunch of CARTOONS and now are pushing for legal recourse to address any insult to "the prophet" could not be any plainer.

Labels: , ,

Turn the page ....

Bookmark and Share
posted by Always On Watch @ 3/22/2008 08:40:00 AM  


Friday, March 21, 2008

Insult Islam, Get Sued

As I mentioned here at Infidel Bloggers Alliance last week, the OIC (Organisation of the Islamic Conference), is taking a stand against freedom of speech for the West. Apparently our own United States government is supporting the proposal.
Consider the following information from the Center for Vigilant Freedom, and be sure to follow the links:
Sada Cumber, Special Envoy to Enforce Sharia Law in the U.S.

Sada Cumber is the Bush-appointed Special Envoy to the abysmal Organization of the Islamic Conference. The Sada Cumber Watch blog is tracking the OIC, where a meeting this week (March 13 and 14) will vote on the OIC Ten Year Plan. Read more here:
H/T Sada Cumber Watch

The OIC supports the appalling Cairo Declaration of Human Rights (meaning imposition of Sharia Law in violation of all human rights), and the Ten Year Plan Sada Cumber will be agreeing to this week proposes that all countries must protect Muslim minorities’ rights based on the Cairo Declaration definition of those rights.

The Ten Year Plan also proposes “deterrent punishments” for Islamophobia
Now, read the following from Sada Cumber Watch, quoting from
Muslims Nations: Defame Islam, Get Sued?
By RUKMINI CALLIMACHI, The Associated Press

The Muslim world has created a battle plan to defend its religion from political cartoonists and bigots.

Concerned about what they see as a rise in the defamation of Islam, leaders of the world’s Muslim nations are considering taking legal action against those that slight their religion or its sacred symbols. It was a key issue during a two-day summit that ended Friday in this western Africa capital.

The Muslim leaders are attempting to demand redress from nations like Denmark, which allowed the publication of cartoons portraying the Prophet Muhammad in 2006 and again last month, to the fury of the Muslim world.


Delegates were given a voluminous report by the OIC that recorded anti-Islamic speech and actions from around the world. The report concludes that Islam is under attack and that a defense must be mounted.


The report urges the creation of a “legal instrument” to crack down on defamation of Islam.

Read the entire article in the Examiner HERE. There is a lot more to the story.

Considering the latest from Osama Bin Laden — the message in which he says that the Motoons are worse than the slaughter of Muslims — one wonders if the OIC and OBL are in cahoots.

Nah. Couldn't be.

I mustn't let my paranoia kick into overdrive. Right?

Still, Dr. Anis Shorrosh's Twenty Year Plan: Islam Targets America keeps coming to my mind, especially Points 1, 7, and 19:
1. Terminate America's freedom of speech by replacing it with hate crime bills state-wide and nation-wide.

7. Yell, "foul, out-of-context, personal interpretation, hate crime, Zionist, un- American, inaccurate interpretation of the Quran" anytime Islam is criticized or the Quran is analyzed in the public arena.

19. Send intimidating messages and messengers to the outspoken individuals who are critical of Islam and seek to eliminate them by hook or crook.
Litigation is a tool used to silence voices. And sometimes just the threat of litigation is enough to shut people up.

Labels: , , , , ,

Turn the page ....

Bookmark and Share
posted by Always On Watch @ 3/21/2008 01:41:00 PM  


Resurrection Sunday

(This posting stuck here through Easter Sunday)

For I know that my Redeemer liveth, and that He shall stand at the latter day upon the earth:
And though after my skin worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God...
(Job 19:25-26a)

Jesus said..., I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in Me, though he were dead, yet shall he live:
And whosoever liveth and believeth in Me shall never die....
(John 11:25-26a)


Turn the page ....

Bookmark and Share
posted by Always On Watch @ 3/21/2008 01:00:00 PM  


Thursday, March 20, 2008

Obama The Hypocrite (With Addendum)

Barack Hussein Obama is not only inconsistent. He is a hypocrite. Via this posting by Reliapundit at THE ASTUTE BLOGGERS:
April 11, 2007 -- "I understand MSNBC has suspended Mr. Imus," Obama told ABC News, "but I would also say that there's nobody on my staff who would still be working for me if they made a comment like that about anybody of any ethnic group. And I would hope that NBC ends up having that same attitude."

Primary source: ABC News

ABC News also points out the following: Obama was the first in the Presidential campaign to call for the firing of Don Imus.

Here's a thought. Maybe Three Dog Night's "Liar" should be Obama's new theme music:

YouTube Link

VIDEO ADDENDUM (about 5 minutes in length): Obama and the New Black Panther Party

(Hat-tip to Infidel Bloggers Alliance for the second of the above videos)

Labels: ,

Turn the page ....

Bookmark and Share
posted by Always On Watch @ 3/20/2008 10:52:00 AM  


Cooking The Books

(All emphases by Always On Watch)

The Fairfax County real-estate assessors deny any cooking of the books, of course. But many of us residents don't believe the county's official explanation: the application of new "appraisal theory," never mind that nobody — neither residents nor county officials — seems to have a clear understanding of the so-called theory being applied.
The original 2008 assessments arrived several weeks ago and shocked property owners, who, with the downturn in the real-estate market for both houses and land, were expecting an overall reduction in the county's assessment of their property. Instead, even though the values of structures were reduced for nearly every homeowner, the assessed value of the lots was raised proportionately, thus making the 2007 and 2008 assessments identical in most cases — including my own.

This article in the March 20, 2008 edition in the Washington Post provides the details about Fairfax County's juggling of the numbers:

Fairfax County will begin mailing revised 2008 property assessments to about 180,000 households today, moderating the steep cuts in land values that triggered a furor when the first set of notices went out last month.

The revisions will not change overall real estate assessments, which have squeezed residential property values down by an average of 3 percent countywide.

But county officials said the adjusted notices will address what in many cases were dramatic swings in how values were allocated, with houses plunging and the soil under them surging.
The following example is representative of what happened with the original 2008 assessments:
In one instance, a three-bedroom house in McLean assessed at $266,590 in 2007 was valued by the county this year at $63,930, a drop of 76 percent. The lot, placed at $301,000 last year, soared 66 percent to $501,000. ...
A $200,000 house in McLean, one of the most desirable and most prosperous locations in Fairfax County, would be a rare find.

In my own case, the value of my house on the original 2008 assessment dropped to $88,000. I haven't seen ANY house in Fairfax County priced at $88,000 for decades! Respectable garages this close to Washington, D.C., cost more than that amount! As a basis for comparison, in 2007, my house had been assessed at $160,000 — a value determined before any of the recent improvements made to the property here.

This part of the Washington Post article is particularly amusing:
Officials sensed that they had an incipient debacle on their hands the morning of Feb. 25. That was the day County Executive Anthony H. Griffin presented his proposed budget for fiscal 2009 to the board, and new residential assessments were posted on the county Web site.

Officials also released, as is the custom, residential assessments for supervisors and other top county officers. When Greenlief saw that the overall housing assessment for Supervisor Linda Q. Smyth (D-Providence) had tumbled 22 percent and that a vacant lot owned by Chairman Gerald E. Connolly (D) had appreciated by 45 percent, he pressed subordinates for more information.

At 7:20 a.m., he messaged David T. Stevenson, assistant director of his department's real estate division: "What's the per sq. ft value for Connolly's vacant land? Do you know the countywide average?"


...[A]nxiety about Connolly's reaction continued to reverberate through the Government Center.

"Just an FYI," Deputy County Executive Edward L. Long Jr. wrote to Greenlief and Coldsmith at 9:28 a.m. Feb. 26. "Word is the Chairman is not happy about the 46% increase on his land. You should get ready to explain when the call comes. Are we having fun yet???"

Coldsmith replied..."We needed some fun in our lives!"


...[T]here was internal disarray over how to best communicate the situation to supervisors and the public.

"Please help me to be less confused," Long wrote to Greenlief and Coldsmith on Feb. 27. "What is the plan????"
Perhaps, just perhaps, Chairman Connolly's reaction carries more weight these days. He is getting more than the usual amount of attention right now because he is running for the Democratic Party's nomination for the 11th Congressional District of Virginia.

Back to those cooked assessments. One thing led to another, and the county announced the new 2008 assessments — new assessments which will not change the earlier 2008 assessments, which will be identical to the 2007 assessments, even though few here can sell a home for the value listed on the assessment.

In neighboring counties, assessments have been significantly and realistically lowered. At the same time, real-estate tax rates have been raised, resulting in even higher real-estate tax bills for 2008.

Why am I reminded of a snippet from the lyrics of The Who's "Won't Get Fooled Again"?
Meet the new boss
Same as the old boss.

Labels: , ,

Turn the page ....

Bookmark and Share
posted by Always On Watch @ 3/20/2008 09:44:00 AM  



(Each "Featured Question," 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. The previous QUESTIONS are HERE. Please scroll down for recent postings)

Washington Post columnist E.J. Dionne, Jr., draws the following comparison between Jeremiah Wright, Barack Hussein Obama's mentor and spiritual advisor, and Martin Luther King, Jr.:
Let's ask the hard question about the Rev. Jeremiah Wright: Is he as far outside the African American mainstream as many of us would like to think?


One black leader who was capable of getting very angry indeed is the one now being invoked against Wright. His name was Martin Luther King Jr.
Mr. Dionne uses the following to support his thesis statement:
An important book on King's rhetoric by Barnard College professor Jonathan Rieder, due out next month, offers a more complex view of King than the sanitized version that is so popular, especially among conservative commentators. In "The Word of the Lord Is Upon Me," Rieder -- an admirer of King -- notes that the civil rights icon was "not just a crossover artist but a code switcher who switched in and out of idioms as he moved between black and white audiences."

Listen to what King said about the Vietnam War at his own Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta on Feb. 4, 1968: "God didn't call America to engage in a senseless, unjust war. . . . And we are criminals in that war. We've committed more war crimes almost than any nation in the world, and I'm going to continue to say it. And we won't stop it because of our pride and our arrogance as a nation. But God has a way of even putting nations in their place." King then predicted this response from the Almighty: "And if you don't stop your reckless course, I'll rise up and break the backbone of your power."

If today's technology had existed then, I would imagine the media playing quotations of that sort over and over. Right-wing commentators would use the material to argue that King was anti-American and to discredit his call for racial and class justice....
Mr. Dionne provides his disclaimer in the very next paragraph:
I cite King not to justify Wright's damnation of America or his lunatic and pernicious theories but to suggest that Obama's pastor and his church are not as far outside the African American mainstream as many would suggest. I would also ask my conservative friends who praise King so lavishly to search their consciences and wonder if they would have stood up for him in 1968.


I'm a liberal, and I loathe the anti-American things Wright said precisely because I believe that the genius of our country is its capacity for self-correction....
The essay concludes as follows:
Obama understands the anger of whites as well as the anger of blacks, but he's placed a bet on the other side of King's legacy that converted rage into the search for a beloved community. This does not prove that Obama deserves to be president. It does mean that he deserves to be judged on his own terms and not by the ravings of an angry preacher.
You can read Mr. Dionne's entire essay HERE.

FEATURED QUESTION, in two parts: (1)
Is Mr. Dionne's comparison of Wright and King valid? (2) Is America today dividing even more along racial lines and thus heading in the wrong direction?

Note: I highly recommend that you read my dear friend Mustang's essay entitled "The Race Card."

Labels: ,

Turn the page ....

Bookmark and Share
posted by Always On Watch @ 3/20/2008 01:00:00 AM  


Wednesday, March 19, 2008

Video: Money As Debt

(With a hat-tip to Foehammer's Anvil)

I don't usually post videos as long as this one (about 47 minutes). But with the present situation with our economy and our financial institutions, I strongly encourage you to watch the following film:

(Click twice on the play button; the film will begin in about 15 seconds)

Web link to video

Discussion encouraged, of course.


Turn the page ....

Bookmark and Share
posted by Always On Watch @ 3/19/2008 06:24:00 AM  


Tuesday, March 18, 2008

The Fed Reserve's Wrong Moves?

I'm not feeling well enough right now to write lengthy posts, but I thought that this article is worth reading and considering as right now we're hearing talking heads talk opine as to how the Fed Reserve is making all the right moves or all the wrong moves (emphases mine):
Fighting Recession With Panic
By John L. Chapman
Tuesday, March 18, 2008

Why the Federal Reserve’s aggressive monetary easing is the wrong solution to America’s economic woes.

After a weekend in which the collapse of Bear, Stearns & Co., the fifth largest investment bank in the United States, prompted the Federal Reserve to make an unprecedented loan to JPMorgan Chase, the Fed’s Open Market Committee holds its regular six-week review meeting today. There is wide anticipation that interest rates will be cut yet again, amid signs that the U.S. economy is slowing after several years of respectable growth, technology-led productivity gains, a booming stock market, low unemployment, expanding international trade, and low inflation. But can economists at the Federal Reserve Board and the U.S. Treasury prevent a recession?

Let’s start by going back to the summer of 1929. Following the 1921 recession, real GDP growth had averaged 4.8 percent per year, and the consumer price level had been virtually unchanged (meaning there was no inflation). By the end of the decade, unemployment stood at just over 3 percent. Massive changes in transportation and communications technologies had fed an industrialization that had radically increased productivity; and as a result, real wages and corporate profits exploded: the stock market index grew by more than 23 percent per year during the 1920s, reaching an all-time high on September 3, 1929.

On that fateful day, however, no one could have guessed that the Dow Jones Industrial Average would not see this level again for a quarter century—not until late 1954—or that unemployment would triple in one year’s time. By 1933, unemployment stood at 24.9 percent, real GDP had declined by a fourth, and rising protectionism had cut world trade in half.

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke knows this history well: he is perhaps the world’s foremost living authority on the Great Depression. Bernanke has asserted that such a catastrophe could not happen again, because our understanding of trade and fiscal and monetary policy tools is far superior today. For example, Bernanke argues that a passive Fed was too restrictive in terms of money supply growth back then. As a result, 40 percent of all U.S. banks failed in the 1930s, contributing significantly to the contraction. This would never happen today.

Perhaps with that history in mind, the Fed has responded proactively to news of falling home prices, a credit crunch, two consecutive months of job losses to begin 2008, and now an insolvent Wall Street firm. Indeed, it has cut benchmark interest rates repeatedly and announced a $400 billion monetary infusion to shore up the credit markets. With many economists now expecting a recession this year, the Fed has moved aggressively to pump more liquidity into the U.S. banking system.

Bernanke also endorsed the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008, which was signed into law on February 13. This stimulus bill calls for $168 billion to be funneled into the economy, primarily via tax “rebates” (which include some outright transfers) to an estimated 128 million Americans in lower- and middle-income tax brackets. Another $50 billion is allocated for business tax breaks. Meanwhile, separate legislation has been proposed to aid troubled mortgage lenders.

Can the combination of monetary easing and fiscal stimulus serve to jump-start a sagging economy? The 1920s and 1930s provide us with two big lessons to consider.

Lesson 1: Recessions are often a case of monetary mismanagement.

The 1920s were a time of significant growth in the money supply. This did not show up in consumer prices only because of technology-induced productivity gains throughout the economy—that is, the increasing supply of goods and services kept prices low. But monetary ease resulted in artificially lower interest rates, which led to a boom in capital investment. This led to a quintupling of the stock market in eight years and highly leveraged asset prices: between the end of 1927 and October 1929, broker loans for equity purchases increased by 92 percent. Clearly the 1929 crash was the bursting of an asset bubble driven by easy credit.

We are now on the precipice of a new era of stagflation: a time of slow growth and inflation, with sharply higher interest rates. This storyline parallels the current era. Over the past decade, the MZM (“Money of Zero Maturity”) money supply, which measures the most liquid funds available for spending, grew from $3.5 trillion to $8.2 trillion, which translates into an average annual growth rate of 8.8 percent. Tremendous gains in productivity—as well as heightened global competition—have kept pressure on consumer prices. However, following the 2001 recession, artificially-low interest rates induced easy credit and a boom in housing and highly-leveraged home buying. As in the 1930s, the de-leveraging and the liquidation of irresponsible capital investment will cause economic pain.

Unlike in the 1930s, however, the U.S. dollar is now (and has long been) the de facto international reserve currency, a role formerly held by gold. This has led to strong demand for dollar-denominated instruments, and effectively has allowed the United States to borrow, run fiscal deficits, and “export” inflation abroad. This game can work as long as the U.S. economy is growing and the Fed is seen as a force for anti-inflation stability. But when the economy slows and the Fed becomes an engine of easy money, the U.S. dollar will weaken, which only exacerbates inflation.

Such is the case today. Consumer prices have spiked dramatically in the last twelve months, rising by 4.5 percent. We are now on the precipice of a new era of stagflation: a time of slow growth and inflation, with sharply higher interest rates.

Lesson 2: Fiscal measures designed to promote growth without inducing increased production are doomed to fail.

In the 1930s, economist John Maynard Keynes advocated “building pyramids and digging holes in the ground,” if need be, to stimulate spending. But America’s economic slump persisted, because government itself can never create wealth; it is purely an agent of redistribution.

That basic fact seems lost on advocates of the 2008 stimulus bill.
The tax “rebates” are not being distributed pro rata to all taxpayers, but instead via a redistributive formula to lower- and middle-income households, some of whom paid no federal income taxes in 2007. This will merely redistribute wealth from current and future taxpayers to rebate recipients. Additionally, the tax “rebate” funds will be borrowed in the current year, thereby expanding the fiscal deficit and, at the margin, crowding out job-creating investment. This all serves to increase downward pressure on the dollar. It does nothing to encourage the entrepreneurship and capital formation so necessary to GDP expansion and real wage growth.

A society becomes wealthier when more goods are produced per unit of resource input. Increased consumption is thus an effect of increasing wealth, and not a cause, as Keynes argued. Incentives to produce are optimized when monetary policy yields a currency which maintains its value. Stable money promotes saving, capital formation, trade, and entrepreneurial risk-taking, all of which spur job creation and economic growth.

In short, government fosters economic growth when its policy mix includes low taxes on capital, income, and profits; sensible regulation and low barriers to trade; and stable money. Therefore, the stimulus bill, the Fed’s recent monetary easing, and the growing threats of trade protectionism are all unhelpful errors that portend harder economic times ahead.

John L. Chapman is an NRI fellow at the
American Enterprise Institute.
In my view, the steps taken by the Fed Reserve and the economic-stimulus package will serve only to postpone the inevitable and deepening recession. Whereas the Fed Reserve used to serve as the lender of last resort for commercial banks, with the J.P. Morgan-Bear Stearns deal, the Fed Reserve has assumed the financial burden for a different kind of financial institution.

Those of us who have lived frugally and within our means will be paying for the failures of those who didn't use financial discretion. Are we seeing the early stages of the redistribution of financial wealth — a redistribution which will affect the majority of Americans?


Turn the page ....

Bookmark and Share
posted by Always On Watch @ 3/18/2008 09:18:00 AM  


Monday, March 17, 2008

A Quick Explanation

Very early this morning, I had another round of prolotherapy injections.

The good news is that my sacroiliac ligament is growing. That means progress and, hopefully, a full recovery down the line! But that progress and recovery are of the no-pain-no-gain variety.

I hope to feel better shortly and will then catch up with making rounds and responding to comments.


Turn the page ....

Bookmark and Share
posted by Always On Watch @ 3/17/2008 08:45:00 PM  


Saturday, March 15, 2008

Obama's Inconsistency

From Reliapundit over at THE ASTUTE BLOGGERS:
Reliapundit cites this essay by Rich Lowry and includes this quotation from Obama's bestselling autobiography The Audacity of Hope:
“It is this world, a world where cruise ships throw away more food in a day than most residents of Port-au-Prince see in a year, where white folks’ greed runs a world in need, apartheid in one hemisphere, apathy in another hemisphere…That’s the world! On which hope sits!”

And so it went, a meditation on a fallen world. While the boys next to me doodled on their church bulletin, Reverend Wright spoke of Sharpsville and Hiroshima, the callousness of policy makers in the White House and in the State House.
Reliapundit points out,
I found the following video, about seven minutes in length, over at The Amboy Times.

YouTube Link

In the above film footage, we see Obama's denial of knowing that Jeremiah Wright is an America hater and a racist. Notice all of Obama's head tilting and eye blinking, both of which were even more pronounced in another video HERE at FNC's Hannity & Colmes on March 14; if you haven't seen the video, about four minutes in length, it is worth watching, but the load time is quite long.

In the YouTube footage embedded in this posting, Obama states that he never heard "such incendiary language" when he was "in the pew." Do you believe him?

In my view, Obama's denials are not plausible. After all, his autobiography places emphasis on the influence of Jeremiah Wright in his life. And, judging from statements by Michelle Obama, I believe that Wright has also influenced her views about America.

Will Obama's association with Jeremiah Wright ruin Obama's run for the White House? Maybe not:

YouTube Link

(Hat-tip to Nanc for the video Obama - Building a Religion)

Labels: , ,

Turn the page ....

Bookmark and Share
posted by Always On Watch @ 3/15/2008 10:06:00 AM  


Friday, March 14, 2008

Motoons An Issue At The OIC

The letters "OIC" stand for the Organization of the Islamic Conference, which just wrapped up a two-day summit in Dakar Senegal.

From the AP article "Muslims Nations: Defame Islam, Get Sued?":
The Muslim world has created a battle plan to defend its religion from political cartoonists and bigots.

Concerned about what they see as a rise in the defamation of Islam, leaders of the world's Muslim nations are considering taking legal action against those that slight their religion or its sacred symbols. It was a key issue during a two-day summit that ended Friday in this western Africa capital.

The Muslim leaders are attempting to demand redress from nations like Denmark, which allowed the publication of cartoons portraying the Prophet Muhammad in 2006 and again last month, to the fury of the Muslim world....
Read the entire AP article HERE.

Apparently a larger group than Islamic activists in Jordan may resort to some form of litigation-ifada.

At the summit, Sada Cumber, the U.S. envoy to the OIC emphasized how much America respects Islam.

2008 grinds on as the The Year of Silencing Voices.

Additional reading on the topic of the OIC.

Labels: , , ,

Turn the page ....

Bookmark and Share
posted by Always On Watch @ 3/14/2008 10:59:00 PM  


Video: Mapping The Islamist Threat

In the following video, about 3 minutes in length, note the mention of Luton, about which blogger Lionheart has been speaking for some time as a center of Al Qaeda activity:

YouTube Link

In the video, notice the concern about how Muslims might object to the tracking of extremists. And Dhimmi Gordon Brown is concerned that mapping extremists could interfere with winning the hearts and minds of Muslims. Furthermore, "a raft" of programs also gets a mention.

Still, it looks as if the UK is ahead of the States on the mapping of extremists. As the video mentions, a plan for the similar mapping of the Los Angeles area was dropped because Muslims objected.


Labels: ,

Turn the page ....

Bookmark and Share
posted by Always On Watch @ 3/14/2008 09:55:00 AM  


Thursday, March 13, 2008


(Each "Featured Question," 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. The previous QUESTIONS are HERE. Please scroll down for recent postings)

Are our days as anonymous bloggers limited? Not yet, but Kentucky lawmaker Tim Couch has proposed such a bill in his state legislature.
From this source on March 5, 2008:
Kentucky Representative Tim Couch filed a bill this week to make anonymous posting online illegal.

The bill would require anyone who contributes to a website to register their real name, address and e-mail address with that site.

Their full name would be used anytime a comment is posted.

If the bill becomes law, the website operator would have to pay if someone was allowed to post anonymously on their site. The fine would be five-hundred dollars for a first offense and one-thousand dollars for each offense after that.

Representative Couch says he filed the bill in hopes of cutting down on online bullying. He says that has especially been a problem in his Eastern Kentucky district.


Some said they felt it was a violation of First Amendment rights. Others say it is a good tool toward eliminating online harassment.

Represntative [sic] Couch says enforcing this bill if it became law would be a challenge.

FEATURED QUESTION, in two parts: (1) Would you still blog, including both posting articles and making comments, if you had to reveal your true identity? (2) Is legislation proposed by Tim Couch a violation of freedom of speech, or does such legislation protect Internet users?

(Hat-tip to Nanc for emailing me the link for this FEATURED QUESTION)

Labels: ,

Turn the page ....

Bookmark and Share
posted by Always On Watch @ 3/13/2008 01:00:00 AM  


Wednesday, March 12, 2008

Islamic Group In Jordan Objects... (With Update)

(All emphases by Always On Watch) the Danish Motoons. From Velvet Hammer, citing the Associated Press:

AMMAN, Jordan (AP) - A group of Islamic activists in Jordan says it plans to file lawsuits against nearly 20 Danish newspapers and magazines for republishing a cartoon of the Prophet Muhammad.

The group says it also plans to sue the editor-in-chief of the Danish newspaper that first published the drawings in 2005 and the daily’s cartoonist.

Last month, Denmark’s leading newspapers reprinted 1 of the 12 original cartoons after Danish police said they had uncovered a plot to kill the cartoonist. The papers said the reprint was meant to promote freedom of speech.

The group says it will file the lawsuits in Jordanian courts because the country’s penal code says publicly slandering religious figures is an offense that carries up to three years in prison.
Velvet Hammer's post goes on to give more history on the Muslim ire at the Danish Motoons. Apparently, the flag-burning, fire-throwing cartoonifada has graduated to litigation-ifada.

According to Ali Sina, founder of Faith Freedom International, ridicule is exactly what is needed, whether Muslims like it or not:
o Muslims committed the huge blunder of revealing their vulnerability [cartoon flap]. Now the world knows what hurts them. When you find your opponent's weak spot, it is exactly where you want to hit him. If Islam is ridiculed publicly and systematically, it will be defeated.

o Muslim psychology is all pomposity and bravado. I give you my word that if Islam is ridiculed publicly and systematically, it will be defeated. Shame is a great motivator as well as deterrent. Do not underestimate the power of ridicule. This is serious stuff not a laughing matter.

o How much ridicule is enough? Until it hurts. The pain of shame must become bigger than the comfort of clinging to this false fetish. When you see their eyes are popping out of their eyeballs, their veins bulging in their necks, foam forming at their mouths, and they are ready to explode, you know that the remedy is working. Give them more. They will either die of heart attacks or they will come to their senses and recover from this insanity.

o Every one of us must become a cyberwarrior and mock Muhammad, Islam and the Muslims. Use your talent. Draw cartoons based on the hadith and the Quran. You can find tons of ridiculous stuff in these books to lampoon. Write articles, lyrics, jokes, plays, do whatever you can to ridicule Muhammad the prophet pretender and Muslims. Don't heed to their howls and cries.
The West has a long tradition of satire and in the form of cartoons. Thomas Nast is but one famous example of such a cartoonist:
In general his political cartoons supported American Indians, Chinese Americans and advocated abolition of slavery. Nast also dealt with segregation and the violence of the Ku Klux Klan, which was detailed in one of his more famous cartoons called "Worse than Slavery", which showed a despondent black family having their house destroyed by arson, and two members of the Ku Klux Klan and White League are shaking hands in their mutually destructive work against black Americans. His cartoons frequently had numerous sidebars and panels with intricate subplots to the main cartoon. A Sunday feature could provide hours of entertainment and highlight social causes.
One has to ask, "Why are Muslims so incensed about a bunch of CARTOONS?" After all, if Muslims don't like the Motoons, they don't have to look at those images. After all, most of the Western press has refused to publish the illustrations, although fearless Denmark will.

As far as Jordan is concerned, how many Jordanians read the Danish press, anyway.

Muslims seem to feel that they have the RIGHT not to be offended. Since when is that "right" a Western one? In fact, the West is famous, or infamous, for exactly the opposite.

Make the following your mantra, and stand up for Western freedoms, while you still have them:

UPDATE via a comment by Krishna at Velvet Hammer's site, from this source:
...[T]he Egyptian Newspaper Al Fagr had published the Danish cartoons of Mohamed - back in October 2005, in the middle of Ramadan, and nothing happend. There was no outrage, no protests, nothing in the way of a Muslim reaction:

Egyptian Sandmonkey says that this proves once again that the entire campaign "of outrage" was instigated by the Danish imams and our arab islamic governments for their own political purposes....

...In other words, we've been had, and the American media bought it all - hook," lying," and sinker!!!...

Labels: , , ,

Turn the page ....

Bookmark and Share
posted by Always On Watch @ 3/12/2008 10:19:00 AM  


Tuesday, March 11, 2008

Promoting Islam At Georgetown University

(All emphases by Always On Watch)

From The Avid Editor's Insights, on March 10, 2008:
Check out this amazingly illuminating post by konservo

“Researchers” From Gallup Center for Muslim Studies and Georgetown University Publish a “Study”:

Georgetown University has been hard at work producing a new ‘study’ to show us infidels how it is really our fault that Islam has been given a bad name.
After all, we are not respecting Islam, and Muslims are a sensitive bunch.

Here are some key points:

• Muslims and Americans are equally likely to reject attacks on civilians as morally unjustifiable.

• Large majorities of Muslims would guarantee free speech if it were up to them to write a new constitution and they say religious leaders should have no direct role in drafting that constitution.

• Muslims around the world say that what they least admire about the West is its perceived moral decay and breakdown of traditional values — the same answers that Americans themselves give when asked this question.

• When asked about their dreams for the future, Muslims say they want better jobs and security, not conflict and violence.

• Muslims say the most important thing Westerners can do to improve relations with their societies is to change their negative views toward Muslims and respect Islam.

You see, according to the ‘research’ gathered for this ‘study,’ it turns out that if we, as Freedom-loving Westerners, had merely turned a blind eye to the atrocious actions and ideological reasoning behind Islamic terrorism around the world along with the concomitant lack of denunciation (which is easily interpreted as quiet approval) from Muslim groups (e.g. MAS and CAIR supporting HAMAS), and rather if we had decided to give up that Freedom which we so cherish and instead submit and give out respect to a religion that has been spread by the sword since its conception, that is what it would take to improve relations between Americans and Muslims, and again, this is according to the ‘research’ found in this ‘study.’

Oh… also,

About Georgetown University:

A $20 million gift from a Saudi Arabian prince to a Georgetown University academic center has not affected its scholarly work, Georgetown’s president said in response to questions from a U.S. congressman

U.S. Rep. Frank Wolf (R-VA), wrote to DeGioia Feb. 14, saying he was concerned about Prince Alwaleed’s gift to Georgetown’s Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding (which was renamed in the prince’s honor) and the affect it had on research. Has anyone at the Center conducted research critical of Saudi educational or human rights policies? Wolf also asked whether the money fueled any of the school’s training of current and prospective U.S. Foreign Service personnel.

‘[A]ll of us at Georgetown University take very seriously the importance of protecting academic freedom,’ DeGioia wrote. ‘I want to assure you that I am completely confident that the Center’s work, to borrow your words, ‘maintains the impartiality and integrity’ that we expect of all research conducted at Georgetown University.’

The response misses the point, said Martin Kramer, former director of the Moshe Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies at Tel Aviv University and a fellow at Harvard and the Washington Institute for Near East Policy…

‘No one at such a center could possibly specialize in contemporary Saudi policy, because to do so objectively would not sit well with the Saudi princes who make the gifts,’ Kramer said in an e-mail exchange. ‘Replicate this a hundred-fold across academe, at universities that would also like $20 million for Islamo-this-or-that, and you have killed off the critical study of Saudi Arabia in the academy. This is no small achievement: the political structure and social norms of the Kingdom are not of the sort that endear themselves to the ‘progressives’ in our universities. But the academics are silent, because they hope and pray that someday, their prince will come.’

Investigative Project on Terrorism

It seems to me that the ‘study’ could very well be the result of Saudi-funded Islamo-this-or-that in an American university. Such a shame.
It's a shame, all right. In fact, it's worse than a shame.

Funded by bucks from Saudi, the home of Wahhabism, we are training the next generation in Islamophilia and continuing the whitewash of Islamism at one of our most respected institutions of higher learning. And we're selling out Western civilization in the process.

It's later than we think, folks.

We in the United States need not look across The Pond and gloat that we are smarter than Europe with regard to the Islamification of the West. We're standing idly by and allowing the camel's nose into the tent right here. Dhimmis and politically-correct people that we've become, we're letting more than the camel's nose intrude into the tent. It seems to me that the camel will take over the entire tent not too far in the future — oh so quietly.

Labels: , , , ,

Turn the page ....

Bookmark and Share
posted by Always On Watch @ 3/11/2008 07:26:00 AM