Whenever anything like this happens, the same kinds of articles tend to appear in the media and on blogs. There are the articles that, often with a self-righteous tone, wax eloquent about the horrific nature of the act, the despicable character of the attacker, and (often) the pristine innocence of the victims. Given that the victims in this event were IRS employees, little has been said about them in the media.
Then there are those other articles that sympathize with the attacker’s motives, ideology, or political stance, but condemn the attacker’s use of violence. Here again, I haven’t seen much of that this time around. Joseph Stack’s manifesto encompassed such a mixed bag of grievances, accusations, and quotations that it is impossible to tell where in the political spectrum he was coming from. I suspect that he himself had no clear idea.
Finally, there are articles calling out for more and more government legislation, regulation, or law enforcement to prevent any similar incidents from occuring in the future. In this instance, there were acknowledgements that it is all but impossible to prevent this type of suicide attack, but no amount of reasoning or common sense ever seems to stop the flood of demands for draconian repressive measures.
The “Powers That Be” Knew Something Like This Was Bound To Happen
No matter where you live in the world, you know that the worldwide economy has been bad for over two years, and there is no improvement in sight. The rot started in the US, largely due to actions on the part of the US government and various corrupt oligarchs, such as George Soros. The collapse and supposed “bailout” were engineered by various corrupt politicians and financiers to take money out of our pockets and put it into their own. Everything done by the US Congress and the Obama administration has served only to deepen the depression. From here, the economic rot has spread worldwide; two notable examples are Iceland and Greece.
Then there’s the issue of the U.S. economy having been hollowed out by outsourcing, offshoring, and the H-1b visa program. This has had a particularly devastating effect on the American middle class in general, and the American IT worker in particular.
Even with the real unemployment rate in many areas of the US matching or exceeding that of the 1930s Great Depression, it is truly scandalous that the H-1b program remains in effect. This insures that any effort on the part of American IT workers to get jobs, or to retrain themselves for future jobs in the industry, are doomed to come to naught.
The H-1b program never had anything to do with aiding the competitiveness of US firms in global markets; that ship sailed away years ago. Instead, the H-1b program is simply a testimony to the power of multinational technology megabusinesses to deceive, corrupt, and intimidate US elected officials. (Please see IT Business Edge: AFL-CIO Report Takes Critical Look at H-1B Visa Program for more on this issue.)
How is this relevant to the story? The attacker, Joseph Stack, was an unemployed IT worker who was also bedeviled by a long battle with the IRS and, apparently, ensuing difficulties with his home life. I would like to point out that the overwhelming majority of people faced with such situations never “go postal” or resort to any form of violence. But the US government has enough statistics and historical data at its disposal to know that, whenever a large group of people is pushed too far into desperation, a tiny percentage of them will go over the edge.
Let me make it clear that I am NOT claiming that anybody connected with the US government knew ahead of time that this particular individual, Joseph Stack, would do what he did. I said no such thing, nor did I mean to imply it. But I do intend to say that the US government knew that it was only a matter of time before someone whose life had been destroyed by government policies would commit a high-profile violent act.
The “Powers That Be” Could Have Prevented It Without Repressive Measures
The US Congress and the Obama administration could cut unemployment significantly just by eliminating the H-1b program, but they do not. Part of the reason why H-1b remains in effect is simply because the Obama administration not only is thoroughly corrupt, but also is engaged in a covert war to disempower, plunder, and eventually eliminate most of the US middle class. In other words, the Obama administration is not going to do anything to help out a segment of the population that does not provide the Democrat party with significant political or financial support.
But that’s not the only reason. Whenever anyone who is not part of the administration’s political support base reacts to oppression by becoming violent, this violent act provides those in power with a convenient excuse both to discredit their political opponents and to increase government control by cracking down on everybody by any means available.
If Violence Is Not The Answer, What Is?
Supposed “democratic election” or no, recent polls in the US have made it clear that neither the Obama administration nor the US Congress enjoy the consent of the governed, in any sense of the word. The US economy remains in free fall with no recovery in sight, and with the levels of debt and irresponsible spending being what they are, little possibility of recovery in the lifetime of anybody old enough to read this blog. Glenn Beck proclaimed that we don’t need a revolution; we’ve already had one. He is correct that we don’t need a “revolution” in that sense, but incorrect that we have already had one. The American Revolution in 1776 was not really a revolution in the usual sense, but a war of secession. What we need now is not revolution, but secession, and not just one secession, but perhaps fifty of them. And if enough people understand what they want, secession need not involve bloodshed.
Keep watching this blog for more about secession.
Here we go again, this time with the “Pentagon Shooter”
OK, some of you still don’t get it! We had an Islamic attack on US military base, and the clueless US news media are treating it like an ordinary crime. The reports/commentators are trying to figure out why this Muslim soldier (who happens to wear a US Army uniform) on a suicide mission opened fire on American troops. It was a fairly obvious suicide mission. Just like the suicide bombers in the Middle East and the 911 attack, Muslims have infiltrated the US military and will be doing their best to give comfort and aid to radical Islam, which has declared war on these United States. (For those of you who speak, “Ya’ll,” I do mean all 50 of those States.)
The American media, once again, is proving that it is nothing more then the propaganda arm of the tyrannical dictatorship in Washington, D.C. True, you do get an election to choose the dictatorship’s figurehead for the next four years, and to pick the 535 power-mad flunkies who have let the real governance of the United States fall into the hands of thousands of unelected federal bureaucrats who are accountable to nobody.
Let’s examine the facts. Nidal Malik Hasan, the shooter, is a radical Muslim. He has been an outspoken supporter of radical Islamic causes. He has been in the US Army for a long period of time and knows the system well. He used that knowledge to kill a number of US troops and wound others. To wear a US uniform and support an enemy cause is a clear act of espionage. Of course, in the heavily controlled US press, no one would dare to point out this obvious fact.
Radical Islam is has been openly at war with the US since 1979, if not before. Yes, it has been thirty years since radical Muslims invaded US soil, namely the US Embassy in Iran, and took over 400 Americans hostage. President Jimmy Carter, one of the most clueless men ever to hold that office in US history, pussy-footed around, so that many of those Americans were not released until Ronald Reagan took office.
Reagan, with his hands firmly on the nuclear trigger, kept radical Islam at bay, but in radical Islamic circles, the hatred of America never ended. Reagan focused on “winning the Cold War.” He did so, but instead of using direct conflict, he pressured and cajoled the Soviets into slowly giving up Communism, thus freeing Eastern Europe from the clutches of left-wing tyranny. (On behalf of all non-Communist Slavic people, Mr. Reagan, please accept a “thank you” from this Czech-American.)
From then on, our position with radical Islam went downhill. The supposed “Third Reagan Term” was a dismal failure. Bush 41, sided with Islamic forces, and chose to help “break up the former Yugoslavia.” What that really meant was that after considerable Islamic violence, which he quietly but wholeheartedly supported, many Christians are now living under Islamic tyranny in the Balkans. Of course, the clueless American media, the abysmally corrupt US State Department, and many gullible Americans still believe that the Christian people of Serbian heritage did some horrible things to these “poor defenseless Muslims.” Nearly two decades of State Department and mainstream media efforts to dig up dirt against the Serbs have unearthed no credible evidence. On the contrary, there is overwhelming evidence that radical Islam and other outside influences not only set up this conflict in the Balkans, but also kept it going until they gained a jihadist stronghold in Europe. Thus, while the Roosevelt Administration helped liberate Europe from the Nazis, and the Reagan Administration helped liberate Eastern Europe from the Communists, the first Bush Administration helped the Muslim terrorists get a foothold in re-conquering the Balkans.
The Clinton Administration continued to coddle radical Islam, going so far as to use the US Air Force to aid and abet the radical Muslim terrorists in Bosnia, Albania and Kosovo. In addition, the Clinton Administration suckered and arm-twisted other nations to contribute their own air forces to aid in the terror-bombing of those who opposed the spread of radical Islam in the Balkans. While the controversy raged about the Clinton Administration’s eagerness to populate the US military with out-of-the-closet homosexuals, the public eye was distracted from the fact that radical Muslims were infiltrating the US armed forces. Of course, during the entire eight years of the Clinton Administration, reports of Islamic attacks on the US, and reports of attempted attacks, continued to trickle into the news.
It is likely that the most successful Islamic attack during the Clinton regime was the bombing of the Oklahoma Federal Building. On the day of the bombing, the US media at first focused the blame on Islamic terrorists. But then, the memo must have gone out to the closely government-controlled US media, so that the blame immediately shifted to US patriots who abide by the original intentions of the Framers of the United States Constitution and support their independent state militia. (No, the Framers were NOT referring to the state police or the National Guard.)
So, what was the payoff for twelve years of coddling radical Islam? What was the real legacy of both Bush 41 and Bill Clinton? The 911 attack, of course! By then, the Muslims had another oilman ally back in the White House, but jihadists have a habit of biting the hands that feed them. Bush 43, being both a former governor of the oil-rich state of Texas, and a close friend of the Saudi royal family and even of the bin Laden family, was not about to admit that we were at war with radical Islam. Instead, he declared war on “terrorism.” At the time, one commentator suggested that this would have been as silly as FDR asking Congress for a declaration of war against aircraft carriers on December 8, 1941. Terrorism is a weapon of war, not an enemy that one can declare war against. Radical Islam has declared war on the US several times during the last 30 years. A fatwa, after all, is an open declaration of war that is also an immediate and ongoing mobilization order. If the Muslim jihadists thought they could fight and win a conventional war against the US, they would do just that. Because they cannot, they use terrorism as their weapon instead.
The current Administration is an abomination. (Perhaps that should be spelled O-b-a-m-a-N-a-t-i-o-n.) A foreign-born immigrant from Africa serves as the United States President, illegally. He is allowed to hide behind his dark skin because all his critics are automatically accused of “racism.” So if you dare criticize his social agenda that is somewhere to the left of Karl Marx, or if you question his coddling of radical Islam, or even if you could not in good conscience vote for him because of his position on abortion, you run the risk of being labeled “racist.” (Note that the author of this article has been much harsher on Obama’s three white processors in this piece, but nevertheless, liberal propagandists with their “bigot” label will be complaining about this article).
Of course, all four of these administrations have used these Islamic attacks as just another pretext to restrict the freedoms of US citizens. Recently, I took my first airline flight since the 911 attack. The way I was treated was totally unbecoming a citizen of the US. Being disabled and unable to walk through metal detectors, I was made to balance precariously while being publicly patted down like a common criminal. The search was so invasive that the lady travelers in my party were aghast.
So, expect more Muslims in the US military to “go postal.” After all, this Nidal Malik Hasan is being passed off as a crazy man who lost control because he was being deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan. Expect the US media to continue to pass off these Islamic attacks on US soil as “random acts of violence.” Expect the US military forces to fight in Islamic countries, supporting one group of Muslims over another. Expect the US media and US government to continue side with Muslim terrorists in Eastern Europe, as they have in both Russia and the Balkans. And, of course, if you are a US citizen, expect to lose more of your rights and freedoms.
The US people should be demanding the following actions:
1. That the United State Congress declare war on radical Islam;
2. That a Constitutional Amendment be ratified declaring that Islam is not a religion, but an enemy ideology, and that it is not to enjoy the protection of the First Amendment or of any other law guaranteeing unabated religious freedom;
3. That no Muslim immigration into the US be allowed until the war against radical Islam has been won;
4. That all Muslims in the US military should be investigated intensively and be required to state publicly that their belief in Islam shall never be used to disobey any order or to commit any act against the US, and that they be required to renounce all individuals, by name, such as Osama bin Laden, who oppose the non-Islamic world and all organizations, such as al-Qaeda and Hamas, who support violence against non-Islamic countries (anyone refusing to do so is obviously a danger to the US military);
5. That dangerous radical Muslims be interned, similar to the detainment of radical Japanese nationals and Japanese-Americans who openly declared their loyalty to the Emperor of Japan over that of the US during World War II;
6. That the rights and freedoms of non-Muslim US citizens be restored;
7. That their respective States each declare its sovereignty; or declare independence from the US federal government.
Flight 93 is the symbol of our woken vigilance. We are supposed to be alert now, to jihadist enemies that hide amongst us, pretending to be trustworthy friends.
Those charged with the memorialization of Flight 93 have instead embraced an anti-spirit of Flight 93, regarding vigilance as somehow beyond the pale even of contemplation.
Listen to the words of Clay Mankamyer, one of the founders of the Flight 93 Memorial Project, describing the Project’s reaction to warnings of Islamic symbolism in the Crescent of Embrace design. They asked the accused architect Paul Murdoch about it. They agreed with him that it was "too big a stretch" to think that he had conspired to intentionally include Islamic symbolism, and so they decided that: "we’re just not going to address the issue." They made an up-front decision NOT to look at the facts.
Here is the audio (50 seconds) followed by a transcript:
The controversy then arose. When I first heard it, it was a street preacher who had drawn attention to the similarities to the red crescent, and when you heard what he had to say about it, and looked at the design, there were without a doubt some striking similarities. He went to, I went to, Paul Murdoch and expressed some concern and wondered what they were going to do about it. Their decision was that, well, certainly everybody is going to see that any similarity is going to be just coincidental and it’s too big a stretch to think that anybody conspired to create anything but a memorial to the heroes who WON the battle that fateful morning, and so they decided that, ‘we’re just not going to address the issue.’
Mankamyer is not ideologically disposed to be politically correct. He is a conservative Christian patriot, speaking in this instance to a Christian Coalition meeting (recorded by Bill Steiner, with the knowledge and permission of those in attendance, 9-18-2007, Greensburg PA). What seems to be operating here is a generous spirit of goodwill, unwilling to believe anything bad about this architect they had all worked with and put their trust in.
Goodwill only towards the man accused of an enemy plot
The problem is that Mankamyer et al. failed to similarly give the benefit of the doubt to those who were issuing warnings about the design. If they had treated the critics as credible people too, they would have let the facts decide, and Murdoch’s dishonesty would have been quickly exposed.
When the controversy over the crescent name and shape first erupted, Murdoch denied that his giant crescent had the same shape as an Islamic crescent:
Theirs is a lunar crescent. Ours isn’t based on that.
Oh yeah? Zombie posted a "throbbing crescent" animation (no longer active) that showed otherwise, and Michelle Malkin broadcast it to the online masses. Here is a three panel re-creation:
"Throb on" shows the Tunisian crescent, matching the geometry of the Crescent of Embrace almost exactly: about 2/3rds of a circle of arc, with a circular inner arc. (Most definitely NOT a lunar crescent, which covers half a circle of arc and has an elliptical inner arc.) "Throb off" shows bare crescent site plan. (Click pic for larger image.)
All that people like Mankamyer had to do was actually look at what people were telling them and they would have known immediately that Murdoch was deceiving them. Instead, they explicitly decided that they were NOT going to look at the facts. They extended good will only to the man who was accused of perpetrating an enemy plot, while extending nothing but ill will towards his accusers.
"A shrine to Micky Mouse"
Mankamyer’s presentation includes some wrenching examples of just how willfully blind he and others have become as they continued down their chosen fact-free path. Listen to the crazy excuse he comes up with for not being concerned about the Mecca orientation of the giant crescent (ten seconds):
You see what we are up against though. I could come in here and say… I could draw a point from this window to that window, and it goes right to Orlando Florida and this is a shrine to Micky Mouse. [laughter]
This is clever? A Mecca-oriented crescent or arch shape is the central feature around which every mosque is built. A line across two windows does not orient anything, and the scumbags who hijacked Flight 93 did not pray to Micky Mouse five times a day.
Of course Mankamyer was intentionally offering the stupidest example he could concoct as a way of suggesting that it is just as stupid to be concerned about planting a giant Mecca-oriented crescent on the Flight 93 crash site. If he had said that directly everyone in the room would have been disgusted, so instead he made the most disingenuous comparison he could come up with.
This is what their spirit of goodwill has degenerated into: pure malignant bias.
They all know about the Mecca orientation of the giant crescent
Notice that Mankamyer does not deny the Mecca orientation of the giant crescent. This squares with what Flight 93 Advisory Commission member Tim Baird told Alec Rawls in July 2007: that everyone involved in the Memorial Project is fully aware that the giant crescent does in fact point within two degrees of Mecca. They all just have excuses for why they are not concerned about it.
"I won’t be concerned unless you can prove intent," Baird said, "and it is impossible to prove intent." i.e. Baird does not care what the facts are. There is absolutely nothing that could ever wake him up from his anti-vigilant slumber.
They all know that the public would never accept a giant Mecca oriented crescent on the crash site, regardless of whether it was intentional or not, so they lie about it. One project spokesman after another keeps declaring that factual claims like the Mecca orientation of the crescent are false and "preposterous."
How long before one of these fine upstanding citizens recognizes that it is wrong to keep lying to the public about explosive information that they all know to be true?
Mankamyer says that he would like to see a Congressional investigation
The scenes are quite astounding. Clay Mankamyer, a conservative Christian, manages to get a Christian Coalition meeting laughing about the Mecca orientation of the Flight 93 crescent. How do you ever live that down?
You start by trying. In the question and answer part of the meeting, Bill Steiner asked for an independent investigation, and Mankmyer said he would join Bill in that (10 seconds):
Bill Steiner: "The only concerns we have is that this design be fully vetted by a Congressional investigation before it goes any further."
Bill talks over Mankamyer’s reply, but Mankamyer repeats himself enough to be heard: "And I would like … I would join you in that."
If Mr. Mankamyer would insist publicly on a Congressional investigation, it would go a long ways. So would admitting to the public that he and others in the Project are aware of the factual accuracy of the Mecca-orientation claim.
Tom Burnett Sr. is asking everyone to help him get state and Congressional investigations started. It would certainly help if at least a few people from inside the Memorial Project would start telling the truth.
"I came into this world to be a witness for truth"
The heroes of Flight 93 did not obfuscate. They faced the harsh truth of their situation and acted as love required. Mankamyer understands that. He is a genuine patriot, who dedicated himself to the memorialization of Flight 93.
Somehow–apparently at the urging of architect Paul Murdoch–he let himself be guided by presumption, finding excuses to avoid unpleasant truths. (It was in talking to Murdoch that Mankamyer and others decided it was "too big a stretch to think anyone conspired" and they should therefore "not … address the issue.")
Facing threat of death, Jesus told Pilate that he "came into the world to be a witness for truth" (Jn 18:37). This is his most fundamental instruction to his followers: trust in truth. Never EVER put presumption ahead of witness. For those who make this mistake, it is never to late to undo it.
To join our blogbursts, email Cao (caoilfhionn1 at gmail dot com) with your blog’s url.
Thanx to the despicable Willie Cl*tman, who bombed the Christan Serbs in order to curry favor with Arab-Muhammedans, the Balkan-Mujaheddin will now move towards the final solutionFor now, we run these articles again:
Why are the Serbs - whom apart from the Jews were the major victims of the Holocaust during World War 2 - being cast as the perpetrators of genocide while the real perpetrators of genocide - the Islamofascists loyal to Alija Izetbegovic - are being cast by the corporate media, the US, NATO and EU governments as “the victims”?
Why was Naser Oric - the Islamofascist commander of Srebrenica and perpetrator of a massive genocide against Serbian men, women and children in Srebrenica from 1992 to 1995 - given only a 2 year sentence for this monumental crime against humanity and allowed to walk free from NATO’s Scheveningen ICTY prison: the former Nazi SS dungeon for patriotic Dutch resistance fighters against the Germans during World War 2 in The Hague, Holland?
‘I’m not sure whose side to root for in the ethnic Albanian, Kosovo-Serbia morass—there are killers on all sides—and today’s news from Kosovo leaves me with mixed feelings: Kosovo declares independence from Serbia.’
May as well join the Koz Kidz, Charles, what’s the difference?
If the Lizard King doesn’t know which way to root that means the Lizard Army is rooted, no?
A Lizard comment:
‘They seem to be very pro-America.’
America enabled them. Just because they wave American flags means exactly nothing. Now just go there and wave some Muhammad cartoons, and watch them love you…
Strong American support for the independence of Kosovo is detrimental to Israeli interests. The US position is based on the view that a solution to long-standing conflict can and should be imposed on the parties by outside powers. In addition, the new state’s creation seeks to award part of a nation’s territory to a violent ethno-religious minority; futilely hopes to curry favor with the Islamic world through appeasement; effectively gives a fresh impetus to the ongoing growth of Islamic influence in Europe; and denies the fact that the putative state’s leaders are tainted by terrorism, criminality, and well-documented links with global jihad. Most importantly, it betrays a cynically postmodern contempt for all claims based on the historical rights and spiritual significance of a land to a nation. (More…)
WARNING: This video contains some strong language and graphic elements. It is intended for a mature audience.
Each day, I see events unfolding around the globe that cause me concern. Yet most of the people I encounter seem to be oblivious, or at best, only peripherally aware of the grave threats facing our nation - and civilization as a whole.
Our enemies are counting on our short attention spans, our over-confidence and our stubborn complacency to keep the blinders on our eyes until it’s too late.
Each day, the future of freedom and democracy in Europe seems bleaker… and the United States is already taking steps down the same path.
1389 Blog has posted this video because it makes many vital points - especially about the failure of the US and other western nations to acknowledge, investigate, and respond to suspicious incidents.
That said, we vehemently disagree with George W’s handling of foreign policy - though not for the same reasons as the liberals disagree with it. We claim - and we have repeatedly provided the facts to back up this claim - that GWB has, all too often, appeased jihadists when he should have stood against them.
Hesham Islam, if you recall, is the Islamist mole who maneuvered his patron and mentor, Gordon England, into firing Steve Coughlin, the Pentagon’s only expert on Islamic law.
In a stunning turn of events, a high-level Muslim military aide blamed for costing an intelligence contractor his job will step down from his own Pentagon post, WND has learned.
Meanwhile, his rival, Maj. Stephen Coughlin, a leading authority on Islamic war doctrine, may stay in the Pentagon, moving from the office of the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to the office of the secretary of defense. However, sources say a former U.S. ambassador to Turkey is trying to block his new contract.
The top Pentagon aide, Egyptian-born Hesham H. Islam, came under a cloud of suspicion after reports raised doubt about his resume and contacts he had made with radical Muslims. He is expected to leave the government next month, officials say.
Islam and Coughlin recently quarreled over intelligence briefings Coughlin presented showing a close connection between the religion of Islam and terrorism. Coughlin’s contract with the Joint Chiefs, which ends in March, was not renewed.
The Power of the Bloggers:
But as a result of the ensuing firestorm that played out in the conservative press – led by Washington Times Pentagon reporter Bill Gertz – Islam was put under a microscope, and questions were raised regarding his background…
Hesham Islam has been in the new recently. Well, not really. He has been covered by conservative news sites like World Net Daily, NRO and The Washington Times but there’s been precious little MSM coverage outside of that. Bloggers have also covered the news.
Hesham is a close friend, confidant and advisor to Gordon England. England is the #2 man at the Department of Defense. The problem is that Hesham is also something of a mystery. Despite a DoD published biographical profile which described his early life as akin to a Hollywood thriller, there was more to Islam than met the eye. It all came to light after Hesham Islam used his influence to punish Stephen Coughlin, possibly the best Islamic analyst at the Pentagon. Coughlin’s contract was not renewed after Islam described him as a “Christian zealot with a poison pen”. That statement came after Coughlin’s Pentagon reports became increasingly alarmist with respect to Islamic activity which precipitated an ideological conflict with Hesham Islam…
Blogosphere Victory for Ezra Levant
Ezra Levant has been prosecuted by the Alberta Human Rights Commission for having published the Muhammad cartoons.
Excellent! Chalk one up for freedom of speech. Also, Ezra Levant says he is going to sue Syed Soharwardy for the thousands of dollars in legal fees! Go get ‘em, Ezra!!!
Muslim leader drops Ezra Levant cartoon complaint
Western Standard publisher plans to launch a civil lawsuit
Graeme Morton, Canwest News Service February 12, 2008
National Post —CALGARY — Calgary Muslim leader Syed Soharwardy says he is withdrawing his Alberta Human Rights Commission complaint against former Western Standard publisher Ezra Levant.
The complaint was launched in February 2006, after the Western Standard and the Jewish Free Press reprinted cartoons from a Danish newspaper that many in the Muslim world felt insulted the prophet Muhammad. The cartoons sparked violent protests in a number of countries…
Today Syed Soharwardy told the Calgary Herald editorial board that he is withdrawing his human rights complaint against me that he filed two years ago when I published the Danish cartoons of Mohammed. (Seriously, if you haven’t done so, you’ve really got to look at his hand-scrawled complaint here. I know dyslexic ten-year-olds with ADD who are more coherent.)
If he’s really withdrawing the complaint, this is the first I’ve heard about it; and when I spoke with my lawyer this afternoon, the complaint was still proceeding against me.
It might be a lie — it wouldn’t be Soharwardy’s first, but then again, lying to an infidel newspaper isn’t immoral to someone like Soharwardy. It’s called taqqiyah.
But even if Soharwardy withdraws his complaint against me, an identical complaint filed by the Edmonton Muslim Council still proceeds.
So why would Soharwardy do this — and why now?
The answer lies in another Arabic word: hudna. A hudna isn’t a peace treaty. It’s a temporary truce called by a Muslim warrior who’s losing in battle. It’s pretty easy to understand how hudnas work by watching Israel fight Hamas and Hezbollah. Those two terrorist groups lob rockets and send suicide bombers into Israel for months; then, every once in a while, Israel deploys its military and flattens Hamas and Hezbollah, who then call for a hudna. The UN intervenes, saving Hamas and Hezbollah to fight another day. That’s a hudna: a tactical truce for a strategic advantage.
Soharwardy wants a hudna because he’s osing badly. Not financially: he hasn’t spent a penny to further the complaint against me — that has been done courtesy of Ed Stelmach’s government and the taxpayers of Alberta, to the tune of $500,000, I’d guess. Nor has Soharwardy had to spend hundreds of hours battling against me at the commission — Alberta government employees do that for him. It’s because over the past two years — and the past month in particular — Soharwardy has become known for what he is: an Islamofascist imam, who’s trying to bring Saudi values to Canada. Though I’m being pummelled in a kangaroo court, he’s being pummelled in the court of public opinion. He didn’t expect it, and he hates it.
He hates that hundreds of bloggers ridicule him. He hates that my video clips, in which I describe his illiberal nature, have been viewed almost 500,000 times. He hates that his own enemies within his mosque have taken advantage of this media coverage to shine a light of scrutiny on the way he runs his mosque - from his financial irregularities, to his abusive treatment of women.
By Patrick Goodenough CNSNews.com International Editor February 11, 2008
(CNSNews.com) - The death penalty given to an Afghan journalist accused of insulting Islam has more to do with judges’ interpretation of the country’s laws than with a constitutional provision entrenching Islamic primacy, according to a leading scholar in Islamic law.
The Afghan government has reiterated its assurance that President Hamid Karzai will “find a just solution” to the case of Sayed Parwez Kambakhsh. A statement released by the Afghan Embassy in Washington said that this would be done “in accordance with Afghan law and our nation’s international obligations.”
A three-judge court in northern Afghanistan on January 22 sentenced the 23-year-old to death, after he was accused of distributing to students an online article questioning why Muslim men may have more than one spouse while women may not…
Mapleton LLC is the group that bought these stations from Citadel Broadcasting. A key factor in this sale was the termination of the Mark Fuhrman Show.
Not available on the Net yet but from the today’s S-R’s Business
Section:
S-R to broadcast on Mapleton Stations
The Spokesman-Review will begin producing radio news reports that will be broadcast over stations owned by Mapleton Communications LLC in
Spokane under an agreement announced Tuesday.
At least four daily
newscasts, plus a weekend talk show and a week-in-review program, will be broadcast from the Spokesman-Review building . . .
Isn’t it enough that it is estimated the Cowles Co control 80% of the local media in our market? As I write in a reply (draft form) to the new Spokesman-Review Ombudsman:
Because of the significant amount of property that the Cowles Co owns or controls in Downtown Spokane and along the Spokane River to the Idaho border, there inherently is a conflict of interest regarding its involvement in development projects and reporting by the S-R. A close analogy is the period genre movie Chinatown. River Park Square is only one of several projects where there is a similar pattern and practice in quasi public/private developments where the public was defrauded.
Friends of Mark Fuhrman Radio Show
The unofficial fan site of Mark Fuhrman Radio Show that was squelched in my opinion by the "usual suspects." This list is dedicated to pursuing among other things the River Park Square fraud et al in Spokane, WA and other related topics that you will never read about in the Spokesman-Review. Read regular updates from Fuhrman Show regulars, Larry Shook, Tim Conner, Cherie Rodgers, former Spokane Mayor John Talbott, Dick Adams, "Ron the Cop" and others.
A complaint for the new S-R Ombudsman To the Citizens of Spokane - Time to take a stand! An Army of Davids Strikes - Spokane, WA
"All that is required for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing"
As many of you now know the Mark Fuhrman Radio Show was axed by KGA1510 AM (Citadel Broadcasting) in Spokane, WA. . . . I have information from a reliable source that the Fuhrman Show was in play from the very first contact by Mapleton representatives with Citadel about purchasing KGA. IMHO this was a "hit" plain and simple by a criminal enterprise to cover its ongoing robbery of the citizens of Spokane. This criminal enterprise has so thoroughly and systemically corrupted the political and governmental bodies in Spokane to a level I’ve never witnessed before in my entire thirty-five year law enforcement career. . .
Dr. Daniel Griffith (”anything can point to Mecca, because the earth is round“) is still trying to convince the press that the Flight 93 crescent does not point to Mecca. In an email to the Park Service and the press this week, he tried to make it sound as if Alec Rawls is calculating the orientation of the crescent by using techniques that can be manipulated to achieve any desired result:
Based on Alec’s arguments, one could claim that the memorial is oriented toward the Vatican.
The Flight 93 crescent can indeed be seen as pointing to the Vatican, for the simple reason that the Vatican sits on the great circle line between the crash site and Mecca.
This is what Griffith represents as some concocted method for calculating the orientation of the crescent: the great circle method!
This “shortest distance” or “straight line” direction to Mecca (curving only in the over the horizon direction) is the relevant direction because this is the way that Muslims calculate the direction to Mecca. (There was a debate about it in the 1980’s and 90’s, largely settled by this nondescript looking analysis.)
Here is the great circle line from the Flight 93 crash-site to Mecca:
(Click-pic for larger image. Great circle calculator here.)
Here is the great circle line from the crash-site to the Vatican:
This calculator rounds to the nearest degree, so Mecca and the Vatican both are presented as lying on the great circle line that, from the crash site, proceeds 55° clockwise from north.
Of course a person who faces Mecca is also facing everything else that happens to lie in the direction of Mecca. When Griffith acknowledges that the crescent points to the Vatican, he is not debunking of the Mecca-orientation of the Flight 93 crescent, but confirming it.
Reductio ad Hitlerum
Griffith pulled the same trick last July, telling reporter Kirk Swauger of the Johnstown Tribune Democrat that the crescent can be seen as pointing to a Nazi concentration camp if you want:
Griffith said Rawls suggested memorial organizers would be outraged if the crescent pointed to a Nazi concentration camp instead, the professor said it actually could be done.
Of course Rawls never suggested that anyone should care if the crescent pointed at a concentration camp. Is there a worldwide religion of facing Nazi concentration camps for prayer? Was Flight 93 hijacked by people who face Nazi concentration camps for prayer?
An unpublished report that Griffith wrote for the Pittsburgh Tribune Review in 2006 clarifies his concentration camp reference. It notes that there was a Nazi concentration camp (Drancy) located just outside of Paris, which as you can see on the maps above is also (like the Vatican) on the great circle line between the Flight 93 crash-site and Mecca. In his 2006 report, Griffith acknowledges that the crescent points to the Drancy camp, yet is still unwilling to acknowledge that it points to Mecca. Somehow, the crescent points to everything on the line to Mecca except Mecca.
When Griffith told Swauger that you can see the crescent as pointing to a Nazi concentration camp if you want, he was clearly trying to mislead Swauger into thinking that you can see the crescent as pointing wherever you want. This dishonest intention was made clear by another statement that Griffith made to Swauger (not reported by Swauger, but related by Swauger to Alec Rawls at the time). Griffith told Swauger that: “You can face anywhere to face Mecca.”
He is doing the same thing when he tells the Park Service now that the crescent can be seen as pointing to the Vatican, without being clear that this is because the Vatican sits on great circle line to Mecca.
Pecksniff
In his email, Griffith complains that Rawls has been trying to bully him into changing his analysis. Nobody is trying to bully Griffith into changing anything. We are trying to expose him as a fraud.
Griffith is practically in tears about being called a Pecksniff (a character from Martin Chuzzlewit “who lies and cants whether he is drunk or sober”). It is the perfect epithet. Look in the dictionary under Pecksniff and you will see Daniel Griffith’s picture.
Not that anyone should bother to read Griffith’s email, but if anyone wants to, it puts front and center another astounding example of Griffith’s free-form dishonesty.
Griffith quotes Rawls’s January 2006 report to the Memorial Project as saying that:
…the orientation to Mecca “take[s] a short cut over the North Pole … even though Mecca is south of Shanksville.”
From this supposed quote, Griffith goes on to construct an elaborate fantasy about how, since the great circle line between the crash-site and Mecca does not actually go over the North Pole, it was really Rawls, not he, who started this idea that you can face different directions to face Mecca.
But Rawls’s report to the Memorial Project did not say that a person facing the north pole from the crash site is facing Mecca. Rather, it includes an aside explaining why the shortest-distance line to Mecca “points in a northeasterly direction” (not due north), even though Mecca is south of Shanksville. The reason is because both are in the northern hemisphere. To illustrate, the report includes the simplest possible example: “The shortest distance between points on the opposite sides of the northern hemisphere will take a short cut over the North Pole.”
Griffith quotes only the second half of this sentence, omitting the part about connecting points “on the opposite sides of the northern hemisphere.” That allows him to pretend that the points referred to are the crash-site and Mecca. Of course Shanksville and Mecca are not on opposite sides of the hemisphere. Mecca is about 2/3rds of the way around the hemisphere from the crash-site.
Having misrepresented Rawls as saying, not just that a person facing into the giant crescent is facing Mecca, but also that a person facing due north from the crash site is facing Mecca, Griffith then writes:
I fail to be convinced that only 2, rather than the infinity of possible, arcs are acceptable to Muslims.
Bwahahahaha! Griffith just finished saying how wrong it is to think that a person facing north from Shanksville is facing Mecca. Then he turns around and uses this face-north-to-face-Mecca claim (misattributed to Rawls) as justification for saying that a person facing any direction is facing Mecca. Just how much peck has this idiot been sniffing?
To join our blogbursts, email Cao (caoilfhionn1 at gmail dot com) with your blog’s url.
Maj. Steve Coughlin, the expert on terrorism who was fired from the Pentagon at the behest of a jihadist mole, is back to work, and with a well-deserved promotion. Great news!
But we still have some work to do - we need to hold our officials’ feet to the fire, so that they do a thorough housecleaning at the Pentagon to remove Hesham Islam and other jihadist moles, along with those who aid and abet their careers.
I love good news and this is a very good news story. Coughlin was not only saved, he was promoted. Score one for the free world. By the way, where’s Heshie?
The Congresswoman has been investigating the reported firing (see here, here, here) of Major Stephen Coughlin (USAR) by the Department of Defense (DOD) Joint Staff.
First and foremost, Rep. Myrick confirms that Major Coughlin will now be retained by the DOD, and “…associated with another office program within the Office of the Secretary of Defense where he will continue to spread his message.”
The Congresswoman, one of the handful of stalwart individuals on jihadism in either the House or Senate, also highlights in her statement, the seriousness of what she terms, “…the nature of the radical Islamist enemy that we face today and how they are seeking to infiltrate all elements of our society.”
Rep. Myrick further lavishes deserving praise upon Major Coughlin’s thesis, “Major Coughlin’s
thesis must be read by everyone responsible for ensuring the safety of America,” for which we now learn he has been retained, and arguably even promoted, within the DOD.
But Congresswoman Myrick’s statement also evidences a curious if not disturbing cognitive dissonance about her expressed concern over jihadist “infiltration,” when it comes to Hesham Islam. Specifically, the Congresswoman:
without adducing any hard evidence to contradict Bill Gertz’s steadfast, repeated allegations blithely dismisses Hesham Islam’s putative role in Coughlin’s reported travails,
including the failure torenew Coughlin’s original contract, i.e., his reported firing
and ignores Mr. Islam’s intellectually shoddy, unhinged 1992 thesis which epitomizes the bigoted and paranoid jihadist tendency to frame any efforts to counter jihad encroachments in the Middle East, in particular, as the machinations of a nefarious Jewish cabal
Sadly, Rep. Myrick apparently chooses to ignore a man who seems to embody the very process of “infiltration” about which she claims to be so concerned.
