ACT! For America, Jacksonville and Orlando Chapters, caught the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) Orlando Chapteron tape,selling radical Islamist propaganda at their Community Service/Family Picnic two weeks ago at the Central Florida Fairgrounds. Notice how they deny, deny, deny and try to throw the American camera crew off this public space.
The FBI has publicly stated that CAIR along with 80% of Saudi-funded mosques in the USA and Europe support Sayyid Qutb’s “CONVERT TO ISLAM OR BE ELMINATED” Doctrine. Hamas, al-Qaeda, the Taliban, Iran and Syria are the enforcement branch of this doctrine, which CAIR promotes and sells at ‘family gatherings’ on American public property.
evil, proclaimed Muslim preacher of hate Anjem Choudary last night as
he plumbed new depths by delivering his vile attack on the holiest
Christian festival of the year.
The message was posted on Choudary’s website
Islam4UK, which is a group inspired by exiled cleric Omar Bakri that
wants the “flag of Allah” to fly over Downing Street. An article on the
site claimed that Easter was merely a “pagan festival” and “nothing to
do with Jesus”.
And Choudary has nothing to do with reason. Try telling a pagan that Easter is their festival and has nothing to do with Christianity.
Firebrand cleric Choudary, who led the insults against a parade of British soldiers in Luton last month, denied writing the article, but when asked if he believed Easter was evil, he said yesterday: “I think that anything that’s non-Islamic is evil, I do believe that, yes. To attribute a son to God is anathema to Islam and I do believe that it’s an insult to God.”
When it was suggested that Christians might be offended, he said: “It’s not insulting to disagree with people’s beliefs. I’m not saying that Christians are evil.” He said Christians should “accept the final message of Mohammed and come back to the true monotheistic faith”.
He added: “Christianity, like all religions that are not Islamic, is misguided. Anything outside Islam is not good and you have good and you have evil, don’t you?
“Jesus was a messenger of Allah and he will return one day and show the deviations and misconceptions of Christianity. Easter is not in fact part of Christianity in the first place – it has been invented, it’s a pagan festival.”
His rant came as he backed a decision by Muslim-led Tower Hamlets Council in east London to allow extremist Anwar al-Awlaki, who has links to Al Qaeda, to broadcast a series of video messages last night to a conference at the Brady arts centre, Whitechapel, which is publicly owned.
When Americans send their children to school, it is assumed that the school will reasonably protect the student from harm; this includes college. What if this harm is inflicted by an agency of the federal government; an agency that has as part of its mission the protection of individual rights? What if that agency were the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)?
LeHighvalleylive.com reports that the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) is claiming that local colleges are not protecting the rights of predominantly Somali Muslim college students. CAIR claims that it has received “numerous reports” by Muslim students that they are being “interrogated” by FBI agents. The students are being questioned as part of an on-going investigation into the whereabouts of several male Somali students whom have gone missing and are suspected of leaving the US to fight in Somalia’s long-running civil war.
In an article titled, “Pressure by FBI puts Somalis in bind” CAIR’s Minnesota chapter civil rights director Taneeza Islam claims “Students' legal rights need to be upheld and they aren't currently being afforded the only true legal protection they have when talking to the law enforcement-an attorney."
Islam’s concern is confirmed by this example of the FBI’s brutal interrogation methods involving a Muslim student: “In December, one of her friends who works for the University of Minnesota police approached her, saying the FBI would like to talk about her organization. The agent, she said, was polite and made it clear she could refuse to talk. "He wanted to know how we got funded and what activities we do," she said of the 20-minute interview. He also wanted to know "how some of the missing boys were involved in the organization," she said, adding she never felt pressured.”
So, the FBI agent explained she didn’t have to talk and the student stated the agent was polite. Where is the coercion? What “rights” did the FBI agent not explain?
Considering CAIR’s reputation when it comes to providing legal advice; buyer beware. In addition to the numerous proven allegations that CAIR is directly tied to Islamic terrorism and individual Islamic terrorists, CAIR has also been accused of providing shoddy legal advice to the very North American Muslim population it claims to represent and protect.
What does it say about CAIR when they apparently set off to deliberately commit fraud against American Muslims?
So why would the Somali Muslim students turn to CAIR for legal advice? The simple answer, from the article, is that they didn’t. Nowhere in the article does CAIR make the claim that CAIR supplied any legal advice to any of the students.
Why? Would it be outside the realm of possibility that CAIR completely fabricated that claim that “numerous” students filed complaints with them?
We also learn from the article that apparently none of the students interviewed for the article had anything bad to say about the FBI, except CAIR. None of the students stated that they were abused, denied rights, or forced to answer any questions. None were taken into custody.
For instance, the opening line from the article: “When the FBI approached the young women at the University of Minnesota, they said they didn't mind talking.” Does this sound like abuse, or a case where Muslim Somali students are responding to legitimate FBI concerns?
From the article, “But the women, both second-year students who don't want their names used because they fear for their safety, said the investigation into whether missing Somali men from Minnesota have been recruited by terrorists to fight in their homeland has left many students caught between wanting to help investigators find the truth and facing scorn from some in their community.”
Where is the abuse? Actually, from the statements of the Muslim women, it sounds as if they have more to fear from their own Muslim community than they do from the FBI. Why doesn’t CAIR step up and demand that local law enforcement provide protection to those who want to cooperate in the investigation? Once again, CAIR selectively focus’s “outrage” against not only the college, FBI, but against Muslim students who see nothing wrong with providing information that may help locate fellow missing students.
Just what is CAIR’s game? CAIR recently announced that it is severing ties with the FBI because the FBI, rightly, cut off contact with the terrorist supporting “civil rights” group.
The truth of CAIR’s disdain for the FBI is summed up by Islam’s statement regarding the FBI cut off of contact with CAIR; from the article: “Islam added the FBI’s decision to discontinue its outreach efforts through CAIR “is a huge loss for them”.” However, can anyone remember when CAIR has ever provided genuine, actionable information to the FBI or any other law enforcement agency that resulted in the prevention of a radical Islamic action?
It took the FBI over ten years to end its association with CAIR; an association that contributed absolutely nothing to the FBI’s understanding of peaceful Islam and CAIR calls it a “huge loss for them”. This would be laughable if it weren’t so pathetic.
We can take heart that it appears that none of the students approached CAIR for assistance or took any of CAIR’s “legal” advice. Apparently, the Somali Muslim students simply aren’t aware that the FBI is as bad as CAIR claims them to be. What is left unanswered by CAIR is, “if the FBI is so bad regarding Muslim civil rights, why does CAIR complain about ties being severed?”
This article was an excellent example of CAIR’s waning influence and inability to attract attention to yet another non-event involving American Muslims having their rights “violated”.
It didn’t happen, CAIR knows it, and the students did not support even one of CAIR’s claims.
Perhaps the Somali Muslim students understand the threat of radical Islam and want to do what they can to assist their adopted country in the battle against radical Islam. Maybe they understand, as others do not, exactly how bad radical Islam in practice really is and want no part of it in the USA?
Either way, it is a great win for the FBI and a smack in the face to CAIR’s attempts to butt in where they aren’t wanted or needed.
I was seriously worried about this for a couple of reasons. The first being it was a test of Obama's willingness to stand up to terrorists. He issued the approval for the use of force and that is exactly what was needed to resolve the situation. A sign of weakness would have tipped off extremists worldwide that America was ripe for the plucking and our leader would be hesitant at best.
Secondly, the combination of Obama's silence and the elongated negotiation led me to believe that the pirates would get off with a big fat payoff, thus enabling future piracy.
Thankfully, neither of those concerns have to fruition over Maersk Alabama. Instead, the piracy trade off the coast of Somalia has taken a major hit and the Navy Seals are heroes. Check out Michelle Malkin's tribute to the Seals.
It was a stunning ending to an Indian Ocean odyssey that began when 53-year-old freighter Capt. Richard Phillips was taken hostage Wednesday by pirates who tried to hijack the U.S.-flagged Maersk Alabama. The Vermont native was held on a tiny lifeboat that began drifting precariously toward Somalia's anarchic, gun-plagued shores.
The operation, personally approved by President Barack Obama, quashed fears the saga could drag on for months and marked a victory for the U.S., which for days seemed powerless to resolve the crisis despite massing helicopter-equipped warships at the scene.
Negotiations with the three pirates were growing heated, Vice Adm. Bill Gortney said.
One of them pointed an AK-47 at the back of Phillips, who was tied up and in "imminent danger" of being killed when the commander of the nearby USS Bainbridge made the split-second decision to order his men to shoot, Gortney said. Navy snipers took aim at the pirates' heads and shoulders, he said. The lifeboat was about 25-30 yards away and was being towed by the Bainbridge at the time, he said.
A fourth pirate had surrendered earlier in the day and could face life in a U.S. prison.
Of course the pirates are upset that thier trade has been disrupted and are making threats.
Angry pirates vowed retaliation for the deaths, raising fears for
the safety of some 230 foreign sailors still held hostage in more than
a dozen ships anchored off the coast of lawless Somalia.
"From now on, if we capture foreign ships and their respective
countries try to attack us, we will kill them (the hostages)," Jamac
Habeb, a 30-year-old pirate, told the Associated Press from one of
Somalia's piracy hubs, Eyl. "(U.S. forces have) become our No. 1
Does that mean they liked us before? Anyway, before all these pirates get too feisty they might want to consider the potential circumstances.
April 13 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. military is considering
attacks on pirate bases on land and aid for the Somali people to
help stem ship hijackings off Africa’s east coast, defense
You might want to start digging your bomb shelters now Blackbeard.
Four Somali pirates, who are demanding a ransom, were ready to kill Capt. Richard Phillips if they are attacked, according to a Somali in contact with the captors.
The high seas drama turned more complex and potentially deadly in its third day as both pirates and American forces rushed reinforcements to the scene several hundred miles off the coast of Somalia. The crisis stemmed from a thwarted attempt to take over the U.S.-flagged Maersk Alabama freighter and is testing the new Obama administration.
The pirates summoned reinforcements, calling in four commandeered ships with hostages from a variety of nations including the Philippines, Russia and Germany, according to the Somali in touch with the pirates.
Obama was asked to comment on the situation several times
by reporters at a White House event on refinancing for
homeowners. Obama, however, stuck closely to the script and
replied that he wanted to remain focused on housing.
Is it time to replace bluewater policing with tactics of Jefferson, who defeated the Barbary pirates on land?
the US needs to target the pirates' bases in Somalia, where they have had free reign to establish
camps in various port cities of the failed state. In a commentary for CNN, Tom Wilkerson of the United States Naval Institute, a nonprofit professional association, also advocates targeting the pirates' home bases, which he says is a lesson "we seem unable to learn from our own history."
1804 President Thomas Jefferson said "Enough" to paying 20 percent of
the US national budget as tribute (jizya) to Barbary pirates. His response was
clear and successful – build a strong naval task force, equip it with a
sizeable contingent of Marines, and send it to attack and defeat the
pirates in their lair. The sailors and Marines sent on that mission did
just that – and in the process wrote a stirring page in our nation's
problem today is that we have refused to take the Jefferson model.
We've confined our anti-piracy efforts to the open seas and left the
pirates' home bases on land as a sanctuary. Thus, the pirates continue
to operate with relative freedom and stealth. We and our allies only
respond, never seizing the initiative.
The Jefferson model is a better answer: Take on the pirates where they are, rather than guessing where they will be. In short,
attack them at their home bases.
We've gone about 200 years without a significant pirate problem since then, maybe Jefferson was onto something.
"Here is a thorough and provocative discussion of the threat of the
global jihad and Islamic supremacism in all its dimensions. Moorthy
Muthuswamy deserves our gratitude for presenting a solidly argued
exposition of what must be done in order to fight, and win, this
conflict on ideological and political grounds, defending human rights
and religious freedom from the threat posed to them by the jihadists.
We can only hope that our political leaders and those of all the
nations that are threatened by the jihad will heed his wise counsel
before it is too late."
"In his book Defeating Political Islam: The New Cold War
Moorthy Muthuswamy gives an excellent analysis of the threat the
Islamic ideology poses to the West....With this book, Muthuswamy not
only identifies and analyzes the problem civilized democracies face
with Islam, but he also aims to give possible ways to deal with it as
well. This book is a must-read for everyone and an eye-opener for those
who are not yet aware of the threat Islam poses to our Western
and Andrew Bostom.
“Muthuswamy's lucid analysis
identifies the axis of global jihadism - Iran, Saudi Arabia, and
Pakistan. His succinct discussion further elaborates a practical
geopolitical strategy to thwart their odious political Islamic agenda.
This thoughtful and frank book should be read by all concerned with
preservation of free democratic societies threatened by a resurgent
onslaught of totalitarian jihad.”
Here's a synopsis.
Al Qaeda and its sympathizers are often viewed as isolated fanatics
outside of the mainstream Muslim population—outlaws not only in the
West but also in respectable Muslim nations. This book argues just the
opposite: that in fact terrorism is the logical outgrowth of an
international Islamic political agenda that is endorsed and funded by
Islam’s major players—Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Pakistan. Author Moorthy
S. Muthuswamy labels these nations the “Axis of Jihad”. For decades, he
says, they have been devoted to extending their spheres of influence in
the name of religion.
Utilizing a recent groundbreaking
statistical analysis of Islamic doctrines and an analysis based upon
the outlook of Muslims, he discusses the possibility that Islam is less
a religion and more an ideology of conquest.
Muthuswamy urges US
policymakers to rethink the War on Terror along the lines of the
successfully waged Cold War against communism. The nuclear
physicist-author makes the following main point:
Like the Cold
War, this war is more a contest of ideas than armed conflict. Rather
than placing the emphasis on military might and costly wars abroad, the
West should invest the bulk of its effort in a science-based
ideological war, one that is directed at discrediting the simplistic,
conquest-oriented theological roots of Islamist indoctrination and
Muthuswamy also emphasizes the importance of
a largely non-Muslim India in the War on Terror, in view of its
location and size. The India-born author gives a fascinating
description of modern Islamic conquest in South Asia. His insights into
the Islamist siege and subversion of Indian democracy should be
revealing for the citizens of western democracies.
asserts that the West needs India in dealing with the conundrum that is
Pakistan, as they both share language, culture, and more with each
This fresh perspective on the ongoing threat from
Islamist terrorism offers much to ponder about the future course of US
foreign policy initiatives.
Ben Smith-The White House is denying that the president bowed to King Abdullah
of Saudi Arabia at a G-20 meeting in London, a scene that drew
criticism on the right and praise from some Arab outlets.
"It wasn't a bow. He grasped his hand with two hands, and he's
taller than King Abdullah," said an Obama aide, who spoke on the
condition of anonymity.
The Washington Times called
the alleged bow a "shocking display of fealty to a foreign potentate"
and said it violated centuries of American tradition of not deferring
to royalty. The Weekly Standard, meanwhile, noted
that American protocol apparently rules out bowing, or at least it
reportedly did on the occasion of a Clinton "near-bow" to the emperor
"Obama wished to demonstrate his respect and appreciation of the
personality of King Abdullah Bin Abdulaziz, who has made one of the
most important calls in the modern era, namely the call for inter-faith
and inter-cultural dialogue to defuse the hatred, conflict and wars,"
wrote the columnist, Muhammah Diyab.
The video shows Obama dipping toward the king as G-20 leaders greet one another at the ExCel Centre in London.
It seems odd that a denial would be issued a near week after the incident occured. It's even more bizzare that the explanation is just a flat denial in face of video and cameras.What arrogance. The media ia already in Obama's hip pocket, so why bother with a denial?