Well, that settles it

August 16, 2010

One of top medieval psychos in Hamas has endorsed the mosque planned for Ground Zero in New York City, saying it has to be built there:

A leader of the Hamas terror group yesterday jumped into the emotional debate on the plan to construct a mosque near Ground Zero — insisting Muslims “have to build” it there.

“We have to build everywhere,” said Mahmoud al-Zahar, a co-founder of Hamas and the organization’s chief on the Gaza Strip.

“In every area we have, [as] Muslim[s], we have to pray, and this mosque is the only site of prayer,” he said on “Aaron Klein Investigative Radio” on WABC.

The Ground Zero mosque: Wahhabi-funded, terrorist-approved.

(via Sister Toldjah)


Now I’m confused: Can Muslims be Islamophobic?

August 9, 2010

I mean, that’s the only explanation why two Muslims would call the mosque to be built just a few hundred feet from Ground Zero a provocation, and that every Muslim knows that’s what it is, isn’t it?

New York currently boasts at least 30 mosques so it’s not as if there is pressing need to find space for worshippers. The fact we Muslims know the idea behind the Ground Zero mosque is meant to be a deliberate provocation to thumb our noses at the infidel. The proposal has been made in bad faith and in Islamic parlance, such an act is referred to as “Fitna,” meaning “mischief-making” that is clearly forbidden in the Koran.

The Koran commands Muslims to, “Be considerate when you debate with the People of the Book” — i.e., Jews and Christians. Building an exclusive place of worship for Muslims at the place where Muslims killed thousands of New Yorkers is not being considerate or sensitive, it is undoubtedly an act of “fitna”

And the Iranian Muslim-American woman who lost her mother when United 175 slammed into the South Tower, she must be an Islamophobe, too:

When I am asked about the people who murdered my mother, I try to hold back my anger. I try to have a more spiritual perspective. I tell myself that perhaps what happened was meant to happen — that it was my mother’s destiny to perish this way. I try to take solace in the notion that her death has forced a much-needed conversation and reevaluation of the role of religion in the Muslim community, of the duties and obligations that the faith imposes and of its impact on the non-Muslim world.

But a mosque near Ground Zero will not move this conversation forward. There were many mosques in the United States before Sept. 11; their mere existence did not bring cross-cultural understanding. The proposed center in New York may be heralded as a peace offering — may genuinely seek to focus on “promoting integration, tolerance of difference and community cohesion through arts and culture,” as its Web site declares — but I fear that over time, it will cultivate a fundamentalist version of the Muslim faith, embracing those who share such beliefs and hating those who do not.

The Sept. 11 attacks were the product of a hateful ideology that the perpetrators were willing to die for. They believed that all non-Muslims are infidels and that the duty of Muslims is to renounce them. I am not a theologian, but I know that the men who killed my mother carried this message in their hearts and minds. Obedient and dutiful soldiers, they marched toward their promised rewards in heaven with utter disregard for the value of the human beings they killed.

Liberal multiculturalists and “Big L” Libertarians tell us we’re being intolerant and somehow slighting the principles on which the US was founded when we say a mosque shouldn’t be built at Ground Zero, that it will only cause strife and be a symbol of victory for those Muslims who support the jihad against the West. They imply that we’re being bigoted, ignorant, and Islamophobic.

Yet when lifelong Muslims themselves say the same things, shouldn’t we listen?

LINKS: More from Hot Air.


Best response yet to the “Ground Zero mosque”

August 9, 2010

Of all the responses I’ve seen yet to the mosque slated to be built just yards from the ruins of the World Trade Center, Greg Gutfeld has come up with the best.

Build a bar next door. But not just any bar – a bar that caters to closeted gay Muslims:

As you know, the Muslim faith doesn’t look kindly upon homosexuality, which is why I’m building this bar. It is an effort to break down barriers and reduce deadly homophobia in the Islamic world.

The goal, however, is not simply to open a typical gay bar, but one friendly to men of Islamic faith. An entire floor, for example, will feature non-alcoholic drinks, since booze is forbidden by the faith. The bar will be open all day and night, to accommodate men who would rather keep their sexuality under wraps – but still want to dance.

Bottom line: I hope that the mosque owners will be as open to the bar, as I am to the new mosque. After all, the belief driving them to open up their center near Ground Zero, is no different than mine.

Genius.


Ground Zero Mosque: should CBS have rejected this ad?

July 7, 2010

CBS has refused to air the following ad from the National Republican Trust, which I assume is a  Republican Party-affiliated group, opposing the construction of a large mosque just yards from Ground Zero, the site of the most devastating of the September 11th attacks. Before commenting further, I’ll let you watch it. Tito, roll tape!

It’s powerful and intense, no doubt. And anyone who’s followed this blog knows my feelings about Islam and the jihad against the West. And I do oppose building that mosque. But two questions remain.

Does this ad cross the line into religious prejudice and smear Muslims in general? No, I think it stays just this side of that. The message it conveys is true: there is a religiously-inspired war against us, that war is being fought in the name of Islam’s god and for the supremacy of Islam, and the massacre of 3,000 of us was launched by a Muslim group and carried out by Muslims for Allah’s sake:

Lo! Allah hath bought from the believers their lives and their wealth because the Garden will be theirs: they shall fight in the way of Allah and shall slay and be slain. It is a promise which is binding on Him in the Torah and the Gospel and the Qur’an. Who fulfilleth His covenant better than Allah? Rejoice then in your bargain that ye have made, for that is the supreme triumph.

(Qur’an sura 9, verse 111)

It’s also true that a mosque is a symbol of conquest and the supremacy of Islam. To place one at Ground Zero would be interpreted inevitably in the Islamic world as a victory marker. So the ad is right to object for this reason, too.

The other question revolves around CBS’s right to refuse to carry it. Recalling what’s happened in the last few years when someone has “offended Islam” (riots against cartoons, the murder of a filmmaker, a professor getting his hands cut off for asking the wrong question), one can understand if the managers there are afraid of the reaction to this ad. And they are a publicly-traded private company and can freely choose which commercials to accept and which to reject. So I think Big Peace is wrong to characterize this as a “ban,” which implies censorship. The ad is free to run elsewhere, such as YouTube.

But I still wish they had accepted it, because this ad raises important issues for both New York City and the nation that should be freely discussed. I suspect its rejection was born largely of fear, and it is the resulting surrender of the right of free speech and the tacit acceptance of dhimmitude that makes CBS’ rejection wrong. The corporation has both a moral duty and a self-interest in the defense of that right, and it should change its mind and run the ad.


No mosque at Ground Zero

June 5, 2010

The great Pat Condell with words for Americans on the prospect of a mosque being built just yards from where Muslim jihadists killed thousands of our people in 2001:

I admit this is a difficult issue for me, since, as an American, anything that smacks of abridging freedom of religious expression gets greeted with great skepticism. As it should.  And yet, this case is different: a mosque is a symbol of Islamic domination and, per sharia law, becomes a permanent possession of the Islamic ummah, or community. It is no longer American soil, but part of the Dar ul-Islam, the House of Submission.  This is as much a part of Islamic law as the call to jihad, that same called that resulted in so many deaths on 9-11.

I’ll have more to say about this some other day, but, for now, I think the mosque should be blocked. It’s not an act of “reaching out” or “building cultural ties.” No, by placing it at the site of Islam’s “great victory,” it’s an act of conquest and domination – of cultural jihad.

RELATED: (via Hot Air) By the way, did you know that the imam of this proposed mosque, Feisal Abdul Rauf, belongs to a group that is the largest donor to the group that organized the Gaza “aid” flotilla? What a coincidence. Hmmm…  Thinking


He was an industrious little jihadi…

May 18, 2010

Via Threat Matrix, we read about would-be Times Square car-bomber Faisal Shahzad’s follow up plans, should the bomb have gone off:

Times Square Bomb Suspect Had Multiple Targets, Source Says

Alleged Times Square bomber Faisal Shahzad had multiple targets in the New York area, and was planning to wreak havoc in four other locations if his first, botched attack had been successful, a source told MyFoxNY.com

Shahzad, who authorities say left a car bomb in Times Square on May 1, had also hatched plots against other high-profile targets in and around New York City: Rockefeller Center, Grand Central Terminal, the World Financial Center — just across from Ground Zero — and the Connecticut-based defense contractor Sikorsky.

A source told MyFoxNY that Shahzad picked out the exact date and time to maximize the effect of the bomb by watching streaming videos online from Times Square. Shahzad determined that the landmark attraction is busiest on Saturday nights at 6:30 p.m., and planned an alternate date for Saturday, May 8.

At least he was thorough.

Yeesh…


But he was only an amateur terrorist

May 10, 2010

For those inclined to dismiss the Times Square jihadi as an “amateur” or with some other words meant to pooh-pooh him as nothing to really have worried about, consider the likely effect had the bomb gone off:

If you wanted to do a lot of damage with a well-rigged car bomb, the junction of West 45th Street and Broadway in midtown Manhattan, where Times Square narrows into an asphalt bottleneck, would be the place to pick. If the bomb planted in a green 1993 Nissan Pathfinder SUV on the evening of May 1 had exploded, here’s what would have happened, according to retired New York police department bomb-squad detective Kevin Barry. The car would have turned into a “boiling liquid explosive.” The propane tanks that the bomb comprised would have overheated and ignited into “huge blowtorches” that could have been ejected from the vehicle. The explosion, lasting only a few seconds, would have created a thermal ball wide enough to swallow up most of the intersection. A blast wave would have rocketed out in all directions at speeds of 12,000 to 14,000 ft. per sec. (3,700 to 4,300 m per sec.); hitting the surrounding buildings, the wave would have bounced off and kept going, as much as nine times faster than before. Anyone standing within 1,400 ft. (430 m) — about five city blocks — of the explosion would have been at risk of being hit by shrapnel and millions of shards of flying glass. The many who died would not die prettily. A TIME reporter familiar with the ravages of car bombs in Baghdad describes how victims appeared to be naked because a fireball melted their clothing onto the surface of their skin.

And, contra the President’s fool of a counterterrorism adviser, the only reason Times Square didn’t come to resemble downtown Baghdad circa 2006 was a combination of the bomber’s incompetence and the alertness of some street vendors and a homeless guy. The Department of Homeland Security and the rest of the security services had nothing to do with it, just as they had nothing to do with defeating the guy who tried to blow up NWA 253 over Detroit. We were lucky and incompetent; he was unlucky and incompetent.

But what happens when the luck turns?

(via Gabriel Malor on Twitter)

RELATED: Tim Cavanaugh at Reason wants DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano fired, unless she can demonstrate some heretofore missing competence.

LINKS: Sister Toldjah on AG Holder’s sudden discovery “homegrown” Islamic terrorism.


How can we fight an an enemy we can’t name?

May 5, 2010

Political correctness has already gotten Americans killed. The refusal to identify Major Nidal Hasan as a jihadist driven by his devotion to Islam contributed to the deaths of 13 people at Fort Hood. Even when people thankfully  don’t die in a terrorist attack, as in the Christmas Day attempt to blow up a plane over Detroit or the attempted car-bombing in Times Square this weekend, the media and American officials rush to direct the blame anywhere but where it belongs: Muslim terrorists waging war in the name of Allah – jihad fi sabil Allah.

At Pajamas Media, Roger L. Simon asks a question I’ve asked many times, myself: How on Earth can we hope to effective fight an enemy if we do not allow ourselves to bluntly talk about him and the ideology motivating him, or even to plainly name him at all?

It’s the jihad, stupid!

If you were listening to Geraldo on Sunday night (okay, I apologize), you would have thought the would-be Times Square bomber was either the illegitimate son of Timothy McVeigh or an evangelical minister overdosed on steroids looking for an abortion clinic. Geraldo was practically fulminating at the mouth — it’s a white man, it’s a white man — in nostalgia for the good old days when the true enemy was some evil Ku Kluxer waving his hangman’s noose.

Well, it wasn’t. At least the man currently under arrest, Faisal Shahzad, a Pakistani-American, is no evangelical Christian and wasn’t seeking vengeance against our federal government. I’m willing to bet right now he is a believer in jihad and, if he’s seeking vengeance against anything, it’s Western Civilization — our way of life.

Yet only months after the Ft. Hood massacre, our government and leaders refuse to name our enemy. In fact, as a recent PJTV video reminds us, they are running the other way. Words like “jihad,” “Islamic fascism,” etc. — the very ideologies cited by the 9/11 Commission as the causes of September 11 — have now been expunged from the lexicon of our government and even our military.

Times Square reminds us how dangerously self-destructive that is.  Were it not for our concerned citizenry and smart law enforcement, our civilization would be on its way out. Many of our leaders are evidently ready to hand it over.

Until we rip off the blinders of political correctness and are honest with ourselves about the enemy waging war on us -Muslims waging jihad against infidels in obedience to the Islamic-supremacist imperative embedded in the Qur’an and the hadiths- we are fighting with one hand behind our backs and our eyes averted.

And many more of us will die needlessly because of it.

LINK: Mike Opelka on the media’s refusal to use the M-word.


They’re still trying to kill us, a continuing series

May 4, 2010

I haven’t commented yet on the attempted car-bombing of Times Square over the weekend, partly because plenty of people already were, and I didn’t have much to add, but also because I wanted to wait and see what developed over the investigation. My first suspicion was that this was a terrorist operation by jihadists bent on sacrificing innocent people for the glory of Allah, but there was no firm evidence before the public, yet.  It could, after all, have been a lone, home-grown psycho acting out for reasons that had nothing to do with Islam. The bomber might have been one of those crazed, hate-filled Tea-Partiers, or maybe someone upset over health-care reform. So, I waited.

Turns out my suspicions were correct.

The FBI has detained a Pakistani-American suspect who was wanted for his involvement in the failed May 2 car bomb attack at Times Square in New York City.

Authorities arrested Shahzad Faisal on Long Island on Monday night after discovering he was behind the purchase of the SUV used in the Times Square attack. Shahzad and two other men, who have not been identified, were detained at JFK Airport while attempting to leave the US, the Associated Press reported. The men were on board a flight bound for Dubai that had just left the gate. The two othe rmen questioned by the FBI were released from custody, The New York Times reported.

Faisal has since claimed he acted alone, but Pakistani intelligence sources told Fox News that a suspect who was involved with the failed bombing was detained in Karachi.

Faisal is a naturalized American citizen who is originally from Pakistan. He recently returned from Pakistan after spending five months there. While the exact movements of Faisal are not yet known, US intelligence officials contacted by The Long War Journal believe he spent time in al Qaeda or Taliban training camps in North Waziristan.

Waziristan is the heart of Taliban-controlled territory in Pakistan, and the Taliban and al Qaeda maintain numerous training camps there and elsewhere in the region. And now the would-be mujaheddin has admitted he trained at a camp in Waziristan. And, contra Senator Schumer, it turns out the brave, brave jihadi who was trying to blow up children had accomplices: up to eight were arrested within the last day in Pakistan.

This wasn’t a lone psycho. It wasn’t someone upset over domestic policy or the color of our President’s skin. This was an act of war by people who have declared war on us and who have a far different concept of innocent bystanders than we.

It’s been nearly nine years since 9/11, and they’re still trying to kill us. We’d do well to remember that.

RELATED: Sadly, some in the mainstream media were disappointed that the real enemy wasn’t behind this plot. Idiot.


No, he wouldn’t. Would he?

January 28, 2010

Yes, he would.

Barack Obama wants to deny money to help 9-11 rescue workers who developed health problems because of what they were exposed to that day:

The Obama administration stunned New York’s delegation Thursday, dropping the bombshell news that it does not support funding the 9/11 health bill.

The state’s two senators and 14 House members met with Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius just hours before President Obama implored in his speech to the nation for Congress to come together and deliver a government that delivers on its promises to the American people.

So the legislators were floored to learn the Democratic administration does not want to deliver for the tens of thousands of people who sacrificed after 9/11, and the untold numbers now getting sick.

“I was stunned — and very disappointed,” said Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, who like most of the other legislators had expected more of a discussion on how to more forward.

“To say the least, I was flabbergasted,” said Staten Island Rep. Mike McMahon.

I can think of a lot worse words to use. But this is a family show, so I’ll restrain myself.

Dear Mr. President: You’re a JACKASS!!

You were willing to blow nearly $800 billion on a stimulus bill that was a monument to waste. You want to take over one-sixth of the American economy, a move opposed by nearly two-thirds of the nation, at a cost of … what is it these days, a trillion dollars? You have flushed down the toilet tens of billions on auto and mortgage bailout programs that have netted the Republic nothing. And that’s only in your first year!

But you can’t spare $11 billion over 30 years to help people who risked their own health to save others on the worst day this nation experienced since Pearl Harbor? This is how you choose to pretend you’re serious about fiscal restraint? On the backs of people who breathed in God knows how much asbestos and released chemicals from collapsing buildings?

You slimy, hypocritical punk.

Congratulations, Mr. President. You’ve just earned my heartfelt contempt.

I hope the voters of New York remember this in 2010 and 2012. I know I will.

You betcha.

(via Allahpundit)

RELATED: This is, after all, the same man who administration floated the idea of saving money by having soldiers wounded in combat pay for their own insurance.


What could go wrong?

November 14, 2009

The big news yesterday was the decision by Attorney General Eric Holder that Khalid Sheikh Muhammad, the confessed, proud mastermind of the 9-11 attacks that killed nearly 3,000 of our people and foreign guests, would be tried in a civilian court in New York City, just blocks from Ground Zero:

The Obama administration said Friday that it would prosecute Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the self-described mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks, in a Manhattan federal courtroom, a decision that ignited a sharp political debate but took a step toward resolving one of the most pressing terrorism detention issues.

The decision, announced by Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr., could mean one of the highest-profile and highest-security terrorism trials in history would be set just blocks from where hijackers for Al Qaeda destroyed the World Trade Center, killing nearly 3,000 people.

Mr. Holder said he would instruct prosecutors to seek death sentences for Mr. Mohammed and four accused Sept. 11 co-conspirators who would be tried alongside him.

I can’t decide if this is some sort of continuation of Holder and his boss’s war against the Bush Administration and the CIA, monumental stupidity and incompetence on their part, or both. Do these two geniuses realize that trying KSM and his buddies in Manhattan invites every jihadi in the world to strike the city again, either to rescue them or avenge them? Do they comprehend what a circus and a farce this will become? This is the ultimate act of reverting to a pre-9/11 mentality, which for the length of the 90s assured us that law enforcement was the proper venue for handling terrorists.

And we saw what that bought us.

This is depressing and disturbing on so many levels, I can’t even work up a good rant. Others however, had plenty to say. Let’s start with my hero of that terrible day and first choice for President in 2008, Rudy Giuliani:

Part 1

Part 2

Let me repeat Hizzoner’s trenchant observation: the decision to try KSM in New York is “frighteningly incompetent.”

Michael Mukasey was George W. Bush’s last Attorney General and had been the presiding judge at the trial of the Islamic terrorists who attacked the World Trade Center in 1993. If anyone should know why the civilian court system is not competent to handle cases of jihadist terrorism, it is he:

The difficulty of trying terror suspects through civilian courts, he said, is that the discovery process, the public presentation of evidence, and other elements of a trial “could turn a criminal proceeding into a cornucopia of information for those still at large and a circus for those in custody.”

He pointed out that when capturing the enemy combatants, pieces of information “were not gathered, nor was evidence gathered, on the assumption that they would be presented in a federal court.”

There would also be tremendous security issues involved with making sure that courthouses, jails, the judge and jury, were all safe.

“It would take a whole lot more credulousness than I have available to be optimistic about the outcome of this latest experiment,” Mukasey said at the conclusion of his formal remarks.

Somehow, I think Judge Mukasey was understating his misgivings. (via Hot Air)

Finally, former Governor Sarah Palin weighed in on her Facebook page, calling it an “atrocious decision:”

It is crucially important that Americans be made aware that the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks may walk away from this trial without receiving just punishment because of a “hung jury” or from any variety of court room technicalities. If we are stuck with this terrible Obama Administration decision, I, like most Americans, hope that Mohammed and his co-conspirators are convicted. Hang ‘em high.

I’m with ya, Governor.

LINKS: Fausta calls it a suicidal move. Jimmy Bise wonders if Obama is committing political suicide. Baseball Crank, a Manhattan attorney, is seeing red. The Weekly Standard explains why this is a very risky proposition for the Democrats. Connecticut’s lone honorable Senator politely told Attorney General Holder and President Obama to think again. Debra Burlingame, via William Kristol, reminds us of what Khalid Sheikh Muhammad said when he was captured.


Yet another WTF moment

September 29, 2009

The Chinese Communist government is responsible for the deaths of roughly 50-60 million of its own people, thanks to its brutal rule and economic incompetence. (For example, the so-called Great Leap Forward of 1958-61 was officially estimated to have killed 14 million.) This is also a regime that wickedly cracked down on pro-democracy demonstrators in the Tiananmen massacre of 1989. (An event approved of by President Obama’s first nominee to head the National Intelligence Council.)

So, naturally, New York is set to honor the 60th anniversary of this monstrous dictatorship by bathing the Empire State Building in red and yellow light, the national colors of China:

New York’s iconic Empire State Building will light up red and yellow Wednesday in honor of the 60th anniversary of communist China.

The Chinese consul, Peng Keyu, and other officials will take part in the lighting ceremony which will bathe the skyscraper in the colors of the People’s Republic until Thursday, Empire State Building representatives said in a statement.

I realize they do this for all sorts of occasions, but, guys, this is just indecent. They may hold massive amounts of our debt, but let’s not hold a party on the graves of their victims, shall we?

(Source: The Weekly Standard)