by Kathy

and crossposted at The Twin Cities Conservative

It’s appeasement time, but not for any politicians here in the United States in this story. Rather, the appeasement comes from the Gordon Brown camp, United Kingdom Prime Minister. According to the Islamic Republic News Agency, “”I think it’s the view of the prime minister and the foreign secretary that the United Kingdom has to engage with countries like Iran and Syria,” said Michael Williams, who takes up his new post next month.”

“In an interview with BBC Radio Four’s Today programme, he said that unlike the US, the UK government has ‘always had an active policy with regard to Iran.’
As an advisor to former foreign secretary Jack Straw, Williams said that he visited Iran on no less than five occasions between 2001 and 2004.”

Simply put, of course you have, Britain. You have shamefully embraced violent religious extremists and rather than confront terrorism, you would rather engage in appeasement, er, diplomacy. Brown, if you remember, instructed members of his cabinet to utter the words “Islam,” “Muslims” and “terrorism” in the same sentence.

“During his interview, Williams said that ‘no region poses such a substantial threat to international peace and security greater than the Middle East, there’s no doubt about that.’”

“‘Any British government has to have an active foreign policy, above all in this region,’” he said, citing the problems in Iraq and Lebanon as well as ‘Iranian issues.’”

“With regard to the Middle East peace process, Williams warned that Israel must do much more to improve the lives of the Palestinian people.”

“He said that there had been ‘no real moves by Israel,’ citing such issues as its outposts, checkpoints and illegal settlements in the occupied territories.”

“With three months to go before the Middle East peace conference in the US, the envoy said that Palestinian President Abbas needed ‘clearer demonstration of Israel’s support for a continuing peace process.’”

Of course no British diatribe would be complete without a dig at Israel. The underlying message here would be that despite handing the Gaza strip back to the Hamas, released hundreds of Palestinian criminals, prisoners of war, etc, Israel has not really done anything towards advancing peace.

Unfortunately, the truth in his country is as plain as the nose on his face. The U.K. has a potential terrorist problem. Yet, they’re too blinded by the Leftist embrace of multiculturism to fully comprehend the imminent threat.

How many more terrorist attacks, foiled or successful, will it take to wake up Britain?

by Kathy

Surprise, surprise! Unions back Democrats for President in 2008. Senator Chris Dodd receives the endorsement of the International Association of Fire Fighters, while Senator Hillary Clinton captures the United Transportation Union endorsement.

The International Association of Fire Fighters represents more than 281,000 professional firefighters and emergency medical personnel in the United States and Canada. […] The firefighters’ executive board will officially vote and endorse Dodd on Wednesday. Dodd and the firefighters plan a three-state tour, visiting Iowa on Thursday, New Hampshire on Friday and Nevada on Saturday.[…] IAFF President Harold A. Schaitberger said Dodd earned their support because he’s the best candidate, and the 25-year Senate veteran has been a longtime ally of firefighters in Congress.

and the United Transportation Union endorsement for Clinton:

Clinton got the endorsement of the 125,000-member United Transportation Union.

“The UTU has a long history of picking winners early. Hillary will be a president that America’s working families can count on. Time and again, as a United States senator, she has stood with us,” UTU President Paul Thompson said. […] The UTU, which calls itself the largest railroad operating union in North America, represents 125,000 active and retired members in the railroad, bus and public transit industries.

Though the endorsement of Senator Dodd over other Democratic candidate is a bit surprising, what is not is the continuing support of Democrats by Unions. 72% of all IAFF donations went to Democrats. I wonder how many of the rank and file of these unions really support the candidates their leadership regularly endorses.

Posted by Robert Farrow

Mark absolutely rips to shreds anything the twoofers thought they accomplished with their lies and misconceptions. A must read. He begins with a open letter to the firefighter:

My name is Mark Roberts. Over the past year and a half I have spent many hours debunking 9/11 conspiracy theories, particularly those spread by Dylan Avery, Luke Rudkowski, and their associates. These men are the most dishonest people I have ever encountered. In their desperation to find something that will fit their claims, they take the accounts of honest people out of context and sell them as mysteries. They have done this dozens and dozens of times. I'm sorry to say that you are the latest victim of their dishonesty. Rather than choosing to help you understand what you experienced on 9/11, they have chosen to use you and to add to your confusion in order to further their dishonorable cause.

Much of my debunking effort has gone into putting the accounts of 9/11 first responders in context, to undo the damage done by the conspiracists, and to help first responders like you see through the "fog of war" that you experienced on 9/11.

He then goes into detail about those who interviewed John, namely Dylan Avery, Alex Jones, Jason Bermas, Korey Rowe, Luke Rudkowski, and Manny Badillo. Here he is on Dylan:

To my knowledge, Avery has never gotten a significant claim about 9/11 right. He refuses to acknowledge corrections. He lies constantly. I do mean "lies," not "makes mistakes." He has a very serious problem with the truth.

Avery says the U.S. government and military committed the 9/11 attacks. He says Islamic terrorists weren't involved.

Avery says American flight 11 and United flight 175 did not hit the Twin Towers. He doesn't know what happened to those planes, although the remains of numerous victims from both planes were collected at the WTC and positively identified.

Avery says American flight 77 did not hit the Pentagon. He doesn't know what happened to that plane, although the remains of every victim but one were collected there and positively identified, along with the plane's flight data recorder and cockpit voice recorder.

And here is the outline of what he covers, in depth, in his response:

Regarding your experience on 9/11, these are the main points I will cover in this letter:

1) The people who you saw with burns inside and outside of the north tower were burned by jet fuel that cascaded down the elevator shafts and ignited in fireballs. Overpressure from those fireballs, and falling elevators, is what caused the lobby damage you saw when you arrived. The fires on multiple floors upstairs were also caused by these elevator shaft fireballs. I will provide you with numerous witness accounts that confirm this happening in both towers.

2) As you were about to head upstairs from the north tower lobby, you did hear an elevator falling, and you did hear and see and exploding fireball, but those two events were likely not connected. The explosion and fireball happened outside, and were caused by the impact of United flight 175 on the south tower. This is confirmed by people who were with you.

3) When you were on the 23rd floor, the event that rocked the north tower was not flight 175 hitting the south tower at 9:03 a.m. It was the collapse of the south tower at 9:59 a.m. This is confirmed by people who were with you (and can be confirmed independently of witness accounts, by piecing together the timeline of events). Your interviewers failed to correct you about this important point.

4) There were warnings about a possible incoming plane when you were upstairs. In fact there were several false alarm warnings about planes from different sources that morning.

5) When you had descended to the lower floors, the stairwell was in such bad shape because it had been damaged by the collapse of the south tower. The core of the building below the sixth floor was in an exposed atrium. When you made it to the lobby, it looked like "everything was blown up, exploded" because south tower debris had torn through it. You believed the FDNY command post had been moved to WTC 2, when it in fact had been moved across West Street. Your interviewers failed to clarify these important points for you.

6) You said that when you were outside, first the north tower collapsed, and then, as you were heading up North End Avenue, the south tower collapsed. As I mentioned above, the south tower collapsed while you were on the 23rd floor of the north. Your interviewers twice failed to correct you about this important point.

7) In your video interview, you and your interviewers raise several other questions which I will answer since your interviewers cannot or will not do so. In answering those questions I will point out more dishonesty by your interviewers.

8) The confusion you experienced in the midst of that battle, and your difficulty in piecing together the events, is common to 9/11 first responders. I will provide you many examples of people who had similar trouble making sense of their 9/11 experiences. When put in context, your account exactly confirms the "official story" of the attacks and collapses.

And he backs all that up with some awesome research, links, pictures, and facts. This is one guy you don't want to spin a 9/11 conspiracy story to.

For those who need a laugh……

A study conducted by UCLA’s Department of Psychiatry has revealed that
the kind of face a woman finds attractive on a man can differ depending on where she is in her menstrual cycle.

For example: If she is ovulating, she is attracted to men with rugged and masculine features. However, if she is menstruating or menopausal, she tends to be more attracted to a man with duct tape over his mouth and a spear lodged in his forehead while he is on fire.

No further studies are expected.

I found this article on the Media Monitors Network.

I was so dumbfounded and speechless with its message that I had to reread it, in its entirety, twice. This diatribe, from one “M.T. Akbar” is indicative of the obsence double standard that occurs through Muslim countries.

Christians or Jews living in a Muslim theocracy are often subject to third or fourth class citizenry. They cannot own land. cannot worship freely without reprisal, and basically must endure any injustice that a Muslim cares to dole on them.

Yet, Akbar has the audacity to dicate special rights to the citizens of the United States. No stranger, you do not have special rights. We do have to pay for public foot baths for you, or use taxpayer money to pay for madrassas. Nor will we feel pressure NOT to report any suspicious behavior on the part of your radical brethren.

You will not stifle us. Unlike the fundamentals, we value our lives and cherish our loved ones.

Furthemore, we will not allow you to espouse violence and hatred against Christians and Jews while you demand no one speak ill of your religion. This the crux of my analysis. You demand our respect, yet choose not to respect anyone not adhering to your intolerant, narrow-minded, backwards sect.

“We are Not Done With Racism – Yet
by M. T. Akbar

(Monday, August 27, 2007)

“One of the most enduring qualities of America is its ability to bring together different cultures and allow them a space to settle into the fabric of this nation. It is the secret of our success as a nation, yet it is increasingly under attack from those who espouse a mono-cultural America. We need to take a shared responsibility and give voice to a consistent message, that hate speech and marginalization of any group must not be tolerated.”

There is a new racist dogma that is taking hold in this country that if allowed to fester any further will result in the greater marginalization of minority groups and increase the prevalent atmosphere of fear and mistrust. The most glaring manifestation of this phenomenon is the unbalanced and intellectually impoverished discourse about Islam and American Muslims.

America’s last accepted form of racism tolerates statements about Muslims that would be unacceptable if referring to other groups. In this paradigm multiculturalism is a threat to the foundations of democracy and those voices who espouse a contrary view are opposed to freedom of speech. The great American melting pot is conspicuously thrown to the wayside.

This school of thought is brought to its logical and most radical end in such destructive and violent actions as occurred recently in Florida. On July 6th 2007, a Bosnian Muslim family who were on vacation had their home torched and the words “F*** Islam” spray painted over all their walls. This family moved to America for the express purpose of leaving their war torn nation for safer shores. When the wife was asked “if this reminded her of back home?” she replied “Pretty much.” If the occupants of that home had been part of any other race or religion there is no doubt that the media coverage would have been much larger.

Pop culture personalities such as Don Imus, Glenn Beck, and Anne Coulter feed the hysterical atmosphere of racism and Islamophobia that lead to such tragedies as the one in New York. Don Imus is known as the radio host who for 36 years made his name known as a shock jock with a wide audience and influence. He was heavily courted by politicians for support and endorsements until recently when he ‘finally’ stepped over the line by making demeaning racist and sexist comments about the female Maryland basketball team. While this comment rightly got him fired, it wasn’t the first time he had made outrageous racist statements.

Muslims, one of his most consistent targets have invariably been called “ragheads,” “goat humping weasels,” “filthy animals,” and he has even suggested that they “all be killed.” The question is: where was the outcry, the suspensions and the apologies when these racist and xenophobic statements were being made. Most glaringly, why are they tolerated when it comes to one group and not to another?
Syndicated talk show host Glenn Beck has made bashing Islam a major objective of his show. When the first Muslim elected to Congress, Keith Ellison, was interviewed on Beck’s show he was asked to “[p]rove to us you are not working for the enemy.” Aside from the condescending tone of this question, it reveals the extent to which suspicion is automatically magnified by a mainstream media personality onto anyone associated with Islam. It also raises a critical point about the psychology of difference that is deeply rooted in the thinking of individuals such as Beck. It is the height of absurdity to ask such a question to an individual whose family has been in America since the early 18th century as Ellison’s has.

Anne Coulter, a regular guest on the cable networks and lecture circuit has famously been quoted stating “we should invade their (i.e. Muslims) countries, kill all their leaders, and convert them to Christianity.” Yet she continues to be invited to appear on TV networks, at universities, and organizations in effect legitimizing Islamophobia as a part of the overall discourse on Islam and American Muslims.

In the midst of this growing phenomenon there are a few voices that are noticeably missing. The most deafening silence comes from liberals and conservatives who seek true understanding and espouse American values of human rights, freedom and tolerance for multiculturalism. It may be that they are dismissive of these radical personalities or hope that by ignoring them they will just go away, but if that is the case it is not working.

In the age of consumerism, where people get their information on the go and rarely pause to contemplate on the subtleties of complex issues, one must ask the question: “who is doing the talking?” By remaining silent in the face of hate speech and demagoguery, well-intentioned liberals and conservatives allow their voices to be drowned out by radicals.

One of the most enduring qualities of America is its ability to bring together different cultures and allow them a space to settle into the fabric of this nation. It is the secret of our success as a nation, yet it is increasingly under attack from those who espouse a mono-cultural America. We need to take a shared responsibility and give voice to a consistent message, that hate speech and marginalization of any group must not be tolerated.”

The bottom line is this: our perceived Islamophobia is due to the endless attacks that occur in the name of God at your hands. Furhtemore, average American citizens, who comprise a vast multicultural spectrum shall include you, but not grant you SPECIAL requests at the behest of other religions or faith-based groups.

When Christians and Jews are not referred to as “Crusaders” and “apes and pigs,” respectively, when non-Muslims are granted reciprocity in your lands, will a true dialog emerge.

Until then, do not demand ANYTHING from us.

Of course he did…

According to Fox News.com, Democratic Senator Chris Dodd has defended the Daily Kos website

You’ve undoubtedly heard of “The Kos,” the progressive, venom-spewing, vitriolic liberal blog that traffics any unadultered hate toward all things Bush and the Right.

Actually, this report consists of a transcript from last night’s O’Reilly Factor, where erstwhile host interviewed Dodd regarding a blatantly offensive photo of President Bush and Senator Joe Lieberman which appeared on the Daily Kos website. Moreover, the Daily Kos convention occurs this week and most Democratic presidential candidates are planning to appear.

The transcript of O’Reilly’s interview is pretty telling. Here are some of the highlights:

1.) “SEN. CHRIS DODD, (D) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Well what I’m stunned at, Mr. O’Reilly, is the fact that you spend as much time here going after an online community gathering where there are 500,000 people visit who visit that site on a daily basis here, to identify five, six, seven, objectionable offensive cartoons or comments that people are making here. I find that stunning to be quite honest, here.”

Dodd immediately changes the direction of the conversation at this juncture of the interview. Rather than defend his friend, Joe Lieberman, he immediately sides with the Daily Kos and the mind-boggling amount of offensive material that appears there. Furthermore, later in the interview, he attempts to paint O’Reilly as an offensive man.

2.) DODD: You suggested that we ought not to participate in the convention.
O’REILLY: Correct. Distance yourself from them.
DODD: Because six or seven or eight or 10 people have said something on the site that’s objectionable.
O’REILLY: What are you crazy? There are thousands of vile postings on that Web site. Thousands.
DODD: Don’t suggest this is a real debate you are having about Daily Kos. You object to the ideology and are using a few instances that everyone would find objectionable as a way of suggesting we ought not participate. That’s terribly wrong in my view.
O’REILLY: OK. I want everybody to go to that site and remember what Senator Dodd said and make up your own mind.

What’s pretty telling is that Senator Dodd is either a complete phony or living in a cave. He repeatedly states that only a “few people” are posting offensive statements, comments, cartoons. He mistakenly cites the “few bad apple” analogy here. The Daily Kos is completely saturated with people so angry with George Bush that they are willing to sell the country down the river, all for the President’s embarrassment.

3.) O’REILLY: Look, you are a propagandist, senator. You’re a propagandist. I used to respect you. I don’t have any respect for you. And if I were Joseph Lieberman I would never talk to you again. Because this is vile and you’re legitimizing it.
DODD: You are not Joseph Lieberman. If you would just be honest about your criticism rather than focusing on a few specific instances that everyone I know would find objectionable. That’s not the issue here.
O’REILLY: The idea is that you are legitimizing a hateful Web site.
The bottom line is this: Dodd and his Democratic presidential ilk continue to pander to groups like the Daily Kos because of their perceived strength. Frankly, this is merely a matter of whomever screams the loudest will be heard.

Fight the Kos…

crossposted at The Twin Cities Conservative

by Kathy

Finally the Iraqi government is make some progress on benchmarks.

IRAQ’S top Shiite, Sunni Arab and Kurdish leaders overnight announced they had reached consensus on some key laws that Washington views as vital to fostering national reconciliation.

The appearance of Shiite Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki on Iraqi television with the other leaders was a rare show of public unity amid crumbling support for the prime minister’s government.

The other officials at the news conference were President Jalal Talabani, a Kurd; Sunni Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi; Shiite Vice President Adel Abdul-Mahdi, and Masoud Barzani, president of the semi-autonomous Kurdistan region.

Iraqi officials said the leaders had signed an agreement on easing restrictions on former members of Saddam Hussein’s Baath party joining the civil service and military.

“They signed a new draft on debaathification,” said Yasin Majid, a media adviser to Mr Maliki.

Other officials said consensus had been reached on holding provincial elections and releasing many detainees who have been held without charge, a key demand of Sunni Arabs since the majority are members of their sect.

Mr Majeed said the leaders also endorsed a draft oil law, which has already been agreed by the cabinet but has not yet gone to parliament.

The law is seen as the most important of a package of measures that have been stalled by political infighting in Mr Maliki’s government between the political parties, who have been reluctant to compromise.

Sept 15th is nearly here and only now within a few weeks of the report coming due does the Iraqi’s finally begin to give consessions to on another. The Democrats will still use the lack of political progress as their reason to cut and run; there may finally be forward movement, It just may be too little too late.

Crossposted from Flopping Aces

Wouldn’t you know it, the story about a Republican politician getting arrested for disorderly conduct is making big news in the media and the lefty blogs as proof that the man is gay and a hypocrite.

Denying that he did anything wrong and stating emphatically that "I am not gay," Sen. Larry Craig asked the people of Idaho on Tuesday to forgive him for being arrested two months ago in a police sting in a men’s room at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport.

Craig, who was taken into custody on June 11 by a plainclothes officer investigating reports of lewd conduct in the restroom, said he pleaded guilty to a disorderly conduct charge in an effort to suppress a story — pursued by his home-state newspaper — that he has secretly engaged in gay trysts.

Craig said the story has been following him for nearly a year.

"For eight months leading up to June 11th my family and I had been relentlessly and viciously harassed by the Idaho Statesman. If you saw the article today, you know why. Let me be clear: I am not gay. I never have been gay," Craig said in a news conference in his hometown of Boise.

For all those people who don’t know what Senator Craig is being charged for here it is in a nutshell:

• Put a duffel bag at the front of his stall
• Peering through a crack into an adjoining stall
• Tapped his foot
• Moving his shoe over until it touched an officer’s
• And he ran his fingers along the underside of the stall divider.

And this is a sex crime?  Wtf planet are we living on again?  Disorderly conduct:

One who knowingly “[e]ngages in offensive, obscene, abusive, boisterous, or noisy conduct or in offensive, obscene, or abusive language tending reasonably to arouse alarm, anger, or resentment in others.

Was any of his conduct obscene?  Not in a million years.  His conduct after the arrest was quite bad and something which pisses me off whenever a Dem or Rep does it.  But to make this into some kind of sex crime is typical leftist tripe. 

Plus, when a Dem gets into trouble everything is downplayed.  Protein Wisdom has so valiantly pointed out the the continuing bias by our media on these stories today.  When these DEMOCRAT politicians were busted for various things the word DEMOCRAT was never printed.  (from Protein Wisdom)

Ex-MD State Sen. Tommy Bromwell, US Rep. Bob Filner, TN State Sen. John Ford, Fmr. GA Gov. Lester Maddox, Rep. James Traficant, Rep. Gary Condit, former LA Gov. Edwin Edwards, former NC district court judge Garey Ballance and former U.S. Rep. Frank Ballance, San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, former NC state House Speaker Jim Black, Former Newark Mayor Sharpe James, NOLA Councilman Oliver Thomas, US Rep. Kendrick Meek, Atlanta Councilman Jim Maddox, and Revere city councilor Mark Casella, Los Angeles mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, Minnesota state Senate President James Metzen, and these three from The Jawa Report.

But a Republican gets into trouble and you better watch out.  Anchors fall all over themselves in their attempt to see who can say Republican or Conservative the most.  Want more examples?  Go check out Media Mythbusters and get some knowledge on this ongoing attempt by our MSM to ensure that any Republican who runs afoul of the law is quickly and thoroughly trashed while minimizing any Democrat who does the same. 

By Robert Farrow

It’s all how you sell it guys. It’s a lesson that every good used car salesman and “journalist” has learned well. Lead with this, leave out that, and utterly change the perception of the situation. Case in point:

Since the start of the war on terror in Iraq and Afghanistan, the sacrifice has
been enormous. In the time period from the invasion of Iraq in March 2003
through now, we have lost over 3000 military personnel to enemy action
and accidents.

As tragic as the loss of any member of the US Armed Forces is, consider the
following statistics.

Annual fatalities of military members while actively serving in the armed forces
from 1980 through 2004:

1980 ………. 2,392 1994 ………… 1,075

1981 . 2,380 1996 ………. 974

1982 ………. 2,318 1995 ……….., 1,040

1983 ……… .2,465 1997 ………. 817

1984 ………. 1,999 1998 ……… 826

1985 ……… 2,252 1999 ………. 795

1986 ………. 1,984 2000 ………. 774

1987 ………. 1,983 2001 ………. 890

1988 ………. 1,819 2002 ………. 1007

1989 ………. 1,636 2003 ………. 1,410 —– 534*

1990 . 1,508 2004 ………. 1,887 —– 900*

1991 . 1,787 2005 ……… 919*

1992 ………. 1,293 2006 . 920*

1993 ………. 1,213

* Figures are Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom
fatalities only.

Does this really mean that the loss from the two current conflicts in the
Middle East are LESS than the loss of military personnel during Mr. Clinton ‘s
presidency? Were we at war? (more…)

Keith Ellison watch, 8/26 – 9/2
And this year’s Grand Marshall is…

I came across this story from the Canada Free Press (CFP). Minnesota Congressman, Democrat Keith Ellison, will serve as the Grand Marshal of the 22nd Annual Muslim Day Parade in New York City.

Here’s the date to watch: Sept. 9th. This particular parade, which usually runs on the last Sunday in September, has been creeping closer to 9/11 the last five years. The CFP notes, and I agree, that this particular event very well could be a medium for disgruntled terrorists proclaiming their hatred for America.

Here’s the article:

“First Muslim elected to congress Keith Ellison will be Grand Marshal of the 22nd Annual Muslim Day Parade, in New York City. The parade is taking place two days before the sixth consecutive anniversary of 9/11—news totally ignored by what talk show radio giant Rush Limbaugh calls the “drive-by media”.

Ellison’s role as Grand Marshal would have been totally ignored were it not for the courage of a single freelance journalist: Joe Kaufman who writes for FrontPageMagazine.com.

Do politically correct times keep the mainstream media from asking why it is that for almost twenty years, the United American Muslim Day Parade, held the last Sunday of September, has crept up on the calendar to Sept. 9, this year?

‘They feel they have to walk a very fine line in the mainstream media. If it weren’t for Front Page Magazine, very few would know that Ellison is leading this year’s parade,’ Kaufman told Canada Free Press in a telephone interview. ‘Questioning anything the organizations behind the parade do comes with being branded a racist.’

But Ellison, who gets a free ride from the mainstream media for participating in anti-American activity, pales in comparison to outrageous parade marshals of other years.

Past parades have included accused death squad leader Ashrafuzzaman Khan, unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. Siraj Wahhaj, and Dhabah (‘Debbie’) Almontaser who recently resigned her position as Principal-designate of the Khalil Gibran International Academy (KGIA) children’s school for openly defending t-shirts calling for an Intafada in New York.
The annual parade, expected to draw a cast of thousands, is run by the Muslim Foundation of America (MFA) and co-sponsored by the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA).

Masquerading as free speech in action, this year’s parade is what Kaufman calls ‘a pre-9/11 celebration of sorts taking place in New York City.’

The MFA, an organization located in the Astoria section of Queens, was founded in 1983, around the time of the first annual parade.
‘In reality, both the MFA and the parade appear to be one and the same entity with different names,’ says Kaufman. The MFA’s website, since it was first created in October of 2003, has been devoted almost entirely to discussing the parade.”

Parade Grand marshals hail from the Rogue’s Gallery of radical Islam.
The Grand Marshal for the 2006 parade was Siraj Wahhaj, a Brooklyn imam who is known for his fiery speeches, including those that have been considered threatening to the United States. In February of 1995, Wahhaj was named—along with such people as Osama bin Laden and bin Laden mentor, Abdullah Azzam—as a potential co-conspirator to the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center.
Another Grand Marshal of a past parade was Muzzamil Siddiqi, the former President of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), a mosque umbrella organization that was recently named a co-conspirator to the financing of millions of dollars to Hamas. Siddiqi, like his sidekick Wahhaj, has also verbally threatened the United States, stating in October of 2000, ‘America has to learn. If you remain on the side of injustice, the wrath of G-d will come.’
Another parade stalwart is Ashrafuzzaman Khan, ex-Secretary General of the Islamic Circle of North America, parade sponsor and a top donor to a Pakistani charity that has been providing tens of thousands of dollars to the head of Hamas, Khaled Mashaal. Khan is accused of being a death squad leader for Al-Badr, the Muslim Brotherhood of Pakistan’s former paramilitary wing, during the 1971 massacre that led to Bangladesh’s independence, and believed to be personally responsible for the cold-blooded murders of seven Bengali teachers at Dhaka University.

Americans Against Hate will be conducting a peaceful counter-protest at the parade to call attention to the hatred that will be on display by the organizations and individuals involved, about which Kaufman said, ‘We cannot sit idly by, while the memory of the 3000 Americans that died on 9/11 gets trampled on. It is a tragedy that New York City is allowing this event to go on just two days prior to the anniversary of the attacks.’
Meanwhile, Congressman Keith Ellison can be judged by the company he keeps.

crossposted at The Twin Cities Conservative

Michael Lind of The Guardian, in another liberal column, clearly misdiagnoses President Bush’s speech to the Veterans of Foreign Wars last week.

“Critics of the Iraq war have called it George Bush’s Vietnam. Now, it appears, President Bush himself agrees. In a speech to the Veterans of Foreign Wars last week, the president sought to increase support for his policy by drawing parallels between the consequences of the US departure from Indochina in the mid-1970s and possible consequences of a US withdrawal from Iraq. In Vietnam, the president stated, “the price of America’s withdrawal was paid by millions of innocent citizens, whose agonies would add to our vocabulary new terms like boat people, re-education camps and killing fields”. Similar suffering would follow from US withdrawal in the midst of continuing conflict in Iraq. In addition, the president argued, the US itself would lose much of its credibility and suffer a defeat in the global ideological struggle against jihadism.”

First of all, the author is correct. Liberals have accused the President of trapping the military in a quagmire akin to Vietnam. Furthermore, the Left has also referred to the Iraq War as either “Bush’s War” or “Bush’s Vietnam.” So in this respect, the author is spot-on.

Second, President Bush was correct in invoking memories of Vietnam in his speech last week. The comparisons between the late ‘60’s and the present is that a sizeable anti-war Left has waved the white flag, displayed no resolve or will whatsoever, and implored the government to abandon a people. The comparison again, is spot-on.

“About one thing the president is undoubtedly correct: Osama bin Laden and other jihadists would be emboldened by a US withdrawal. Doubtless they would take credit for having humbled the “world’s only remaining superpower”, even if Sunni and Shia insurgents who are not jihadists were primarily responsible for forcing the US out. The jihadists could point to the US withdrawal from Iraq, following Israel’s withdrawal from Lebanon and the Soviet Union’s withdrawal from Afghanistan, as proof that non-Muslim powers can be defeated by Islamic militants.”

Lind is correct when he states “Doubtless they would take credit for having humbed the ‘world’s only remaining superpower.’” In addition to the massive refugee crisis that would undoubtedly occur as a result of the portending civil war, allies could very deduce that the United States has neither the strength, resolve, or will to “stay the course,” as the President is wont to say. Pakistani President Pervez Musharaff, after the 9/11 attacks and the subsequent U.S. invasion of Afghanistan, was understandably concerned that the United States would abandon the Afghani theater before eradicating the country of the Taliban. What evidence did he have from which to draw? 1993 Somalia, 1982-83 Lebanon, 2000 Yemen, etc.

What would happen if the Left succeeded in forcing a massive troop withdrawal? Besides the carnage and massive loss of life, our reputation as a “paper tiger” would emerge QUITE intact, if not reinforced. Yet, in this piece, the author attempts to declare that “Iraq withdrawal will not hand victory to Bin Laden.”

On one hand, the author states, “Perceived US defeat in Iraq could strengthen the contemporary wave of Sunni Muslim radicalism and make it more dangerous. Indeed, as the president pointed out, Bin Laden himself has cited Vietnam as evidence of America’s weakness.”

So it would seem the author contradicts himself.

“During the cold war, American statesmen were seriously concerned that US defeats in symbolic proxy wars with the Soviet bloc in Korea, Indochina and Afghanistan could lead major allies like West Germany and Japan to doubt the ability of the US to protect them and to appease the other superpower. But in the case of the jihadist revolution, there is no other superpower. There is not even a minor power on the other side. With the fall of the Taliban and Pakistan’s alignment with the US after 9/11, al-Qaida lost its only state sponsors. It has no official support from the Sunni regimes it aims to topple, or from what it regards as the Shia heretics in Tehran.”

“Here, the greatest difference between Vietnam and Iraq is apparent. When the US pulled out of Indochina, communists came to power in Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia. But if the US pulls out of Iraq, jihadists will not come to power there. Either a Shia majority regime will consolidate a new Iraqi state or de facto partition will result in three regions ruled by Shias, Sunnis and Kurds.”

Can we safely disagree that the terrorists could very well use Iraq as a superhaven? Yes, the country may be partitioned. Although we’ve heard of the Sunni population attempting to usurp al Qaeda, will terrorists not find a sympathetic population in the Sunni region? I would contend that it would.

by Kathy

More censorship of cartoons by the MSM because it might offend radical Islamists.

From Foxnews

The Washington Post and several other newspapers around the country did not run Sunday’s installment of Berkeley Breathed’s “Opus,” in which the spiritual fad-seeking character Lola Granola appears in a headscarf and explains to her boyfriend, Steve, why she wants to become a radical Islamist.

The installment did not appear in the Post’s print version, but it ran on WashingtonPost.com and Salon.com. The same will hold true for the upcoming Sept. 2 strip, which is a continuation of the plotline.

Salon.com is still running the complete “Opus” strip here.

WaPo decided to test the reaction to the comic strip by showing it to Muslim staffers.

Sources told FOXNews.com that the strips were shown to Muslim staffers at The Washington Post to gauge their reaction, and they responded “emotionally” to the depiction of a woman dressed in traditional Muslim garb and espousing conservative Islamic views.

There was also considerable alarm over the strip at the highest echelons of The Washington Post Co., according to the sources.

Lago said she flagged some of the syndicate’s newspaper clients for two reasons: because of the possibility that the jokes about Islam would be misconstrued and because of the sexual innuendo in the punchline.

Another shining of example of Freedom of speech…. as long as it doesn’t offend the Muslims.

Crossposted from Flopping Aces

So the big news this morning is that the Attorney General appears to be done.  Remember that it was only a few weeks ago that the new Chief of Staff Josh Bolten told members of Bush’s staff that if they did not intend to stay through the end of his term they needed to leave by Labor Day.  Guess this is a sign he never intended to stay:

After Rove’s resignation senior administration officials said White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten had told senior aides that if they intended to stay after Labor Day, plan to remain for the rest of Bush’s term through January 2009.

And here is the Times being triumphant:

Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales, whose tenure has been marred by controversy and accusations of perjury before Congress, has resigned.

~~~

The official said that the decision was Mr. Gonzales’s and that the president accepted it grudgingly. At the same time, the official acknowledged that the turmoil over his tenure as Attorney General had made continuing difficult.

"The unfair treatment that he’s been on the receiving end of has been a distraction for the department," the official said.

Accusations of perjury which the NYT’s made regularly, and falsely I might add.  Now granted, he did not do so well defending the Administration when the firing news came out by explaining the firings with an excuse that didn’t hold up.  That being their performance.  All he had to say was that it was the President’s privilege and that they needed no excuse.  But the Democrats had a plan and they would have made a circus out of it either way.  Would any other past AG have done better?  Think Reno would of?

Of course Reno never had to go through this when EVERY federal prosecutor was fired by Clinton because the Republicans understood that this was the Presidents privilege. 

Be that it may it appears many think its Chertoff job to lose. 

If the Administration could avoid a protracted confirmation bloodletting — a very big if — I think that replacing Alberto Gonzales with Michael Chertoff would be a very positive step.

Recess appointment?

Why Chertoff? Officials say he’s got fans on Capitol Hill, is untouched by the Justice prosecutor scandal, and has more experience than Gonzales did, having served as a federal judge and assistant attorney general.

Interesting.  Didn’t Chertoff piss off a few conservatives with his stance on immigration?

That may be the plan to try to get him through the confirmation, put up an experienced fellow with a history of agreeing with Dem’s on some issues.  Somehow, I still see the confirmation becoming a circus run by the Democrats:

ROBERTS: Safe to say any confirmation hearing will be an opportunity for democrats to air years worth of grievances about a number of different issues revolving around the department of justice?

SEN. SCHUMER: Let me say this – and I’m speaking for myself – I’d rather look forward than look back. I’d rather look at somebody who can straighten out some of the problems in the future rather than finger point in the past. When I called for the Attorney General to step down – I think I was the first one – it was because I was so upset at how the Justice Department was being run with the u.S. Attorney’s investigation, with what has happened with wiretaps and so many other different kinds of issues. And so I think our number one goal is not to look back and finger-point. It’s to, rather, look forward and find an Attorney General who can get the Justice Department working in the way it’s always worked, under democratic and republican administrations alike, which is rule of law first.

Yeah, we are still waiting with bated breath for you Democrats to stop looking back on all the other issues.  But on this one you really will?  Give me a break Chuckie.

So will it be Chertoff?  Many think so but I’m seeing rumblings it may be the Solicitor General Paul Clement.  We shall see.

Don’t know who wrote this, but I wish he WOULD say this on his last day.

BUSH’S RESIGNATION SPEECH

Normally, I start these things out by saying “My Fellow Americans.” Not doing it this time. If the polls are any indication, I don’t know who more than half of you are anymore. I do know something terrible has happened, and that you’re really not fellow
Americans any longer.

I’ll cut right to the chase here: I quit. Now before anyone gets all in a lather about me quitting to avoid impeachment, or to avoid prosecution or something, let me assure you: There’s been no breaking of laws or impeachable offenses in this office.

The reason I’m quitting is simple. I’m fed up with you people. I’m fed up because you have no understanding of what’s really going on in the world. Or of what’s going on in this once-great nation of ours. And the majority of you are too damned lazy to do your homework and figure it out.

Let’s start local. You’ve been sold a bill of goods by politicians and the news media. Polls show that the majority of you think the economy is in the tank. And that’s despite record numbers of homeowners, including record numbers of MINORITY homeowners. And while we’re mentioning minorities, I’ll point out that minority business ownership is at an all-time high. Our unemployment rate is as low as it ever was during the Clinton administration. I’ve mentioned all those things before, but it doesn’t seem to have sunk in.

Despite the shock to our economy of 9/11, the stock market has rebounded to record levels and more Americans than ever are participating in these markets. Meanwhile, all you can do is whine about gas prices, and most of you are too damn stupid to realize that gas prices are high because there’s increased demand in other parts of the world, and because a small handful of noisy idiots are more worried about polar bears and beachfront property than your economic security.

We face real threats in the world. Don’t give me this “blood for oil” thing. If I were trading blood for oil I would’ve already seized Iraq’s oil fields and let the rest of the country go to hell. And don’t give me this ‘Bush Lied; People Died’ crap either. (more…)

Now that the political differences in Iraq appear to be working themselves out will the Democrats flip-flop back to complaining about military progress?

Iraq’s top Shi’ite, Sunni Arab and Kurdish political leaders announced on Sunday they had reached consensus on some key measures seen as vital to fostering national reconciliation.

The agreement by the five leaders was one of the most significant political developments in Iraq for months and was quickly welcomed by the United States, which hopes such moves will ease sectarian violence that has killed tens of thousands. …

Maliki’s appearance on Iraqi television with the four other leaders at a brief news conference was a rare show of public unity.

The other officials present were President Jalal Talabani, a Kurd; Sunni Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi; Shi’ite Vice President Adel Abdul-Mahdi, and Masoud Barzani, president of the semi-autonomous Kurdistan region.

Iraqi officials said the five leaders had agreed on draft legislation that would ease curbs on former members of Saddam Hussein’s Baath party joining the civil service and military.

Consensus was also reached on a law governing provincial powers as well as setting up a mechanism to release some detainees held without charge, a key demand of Sunni Arabs since the majority being held are Sunnis.

And here all of us Americans were complaining about the Assembly taking a month vacation.  Little did we know Maliki and the other parties were hard at work behind the scenes. 

President Bush gave the green light to the surge which quieted down some of the worst areas in Iraq, which then gave Maliki room to do some behind the scenes diplomacy while relegating Sadr to the trashbin.  Ed Morrissey:

That [the surge] forced Maliki to look for Shi’ite support apart from radical cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, who not only opposed the surge but also served as an Iranian stooge in Iraq. Once Sadr fled to Iran, Maliki started building a coalition of other Shi’ites and Kurds to replace him — and when Sadr yanked his followers from Maliki’s government, he wound up surviving the crisis.

Eleven days ago, Maliki went to Tikrit. Saying that Shi’ites take their lives in their hands there is a bit of an understatement. He went to meet with Sunni leaders after apparently spending several weeks paving the road for some agreement on the reforms. The work Petraeus did in quieting the Sunni provinces has allowed the tribes to coordinate on their own political aims and to build some unity of purpose.

Meanwhile Allah thinks Allawi is the best bet for the United States as PM of Iraq.  Maliki is working quite well but I have to agree with Allah here (it’s quite rare when I agree with him so mark your calenders) Allawi looks to be quite strong.

UPDATE

And look at Maliki coming out of the ring swinging at the Democrats:

Iraq’s prime minister has hit back at senior US politicians who have called for him to be removed from office. Nouri Maliki singled out senators Hillary Clinton and Carl Levin.

He said the Democratic senators were acting as if Iraq was "their property" and that they should "come to their senses" and "respect democracy".

Analysts say Mr Maliki is fighting to hold his government together. His words come days before a report to Congress on the US Iraq "surge" strategy.

The BBC’s Mike Wooldridge, in Baghdad, says the already heated political situation inside and outside Iraq has now got even hotter.

Crossposted from Flopping Aces

More proof you don’t know the whole news till you read the blogs.

Emerson: The HLF-CAIR Connections

It’s disgraceful how little coverage the Holy Land Foundation trial—the largest terror financing trial in history, implicating some very high-profile Islamic advocacy groups—is getting in US mainstream media, and Steven Emerson tries to fill some of the gaps: HLF and CAIR, a Supplement to Mainstream Reporting.

CAIR was founded by high ranking officials of the Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP), a Hamas front group effectively shut down after losing a $156 million civil judgment in a case brought by the parents of an American teenager murdered by Hamas terrorists. HLF was also a defendant in that case, and the ties between CAIR, IAP and HLF run very deep.

Ghassan Elashi, a defendant in the HLF trial, also a participant in the 1993 Philadelphia meeting of Hamas activists (along with CAIR founders Nihad Awad and Omar Ahmed), founded CAIR’s Texas chapter. In a previous criminal trial, Elashi has already been found guilty of laundering money for top Hamas official Mousa Abu Marzook, as well as violating sanctions against state sponsors of terrorism. He was sentenced to nearly 7 years in prison.

Earlier in the week, Elashi caused a stir in the courtroom, yelling about how the trial was part of a “Zionist conspiracy,” which is nothing new for Elashi and CAIR. When FBI agents raided Elashi’s company, Infocom, CAIR issued a press release complaining of an “anti-Muslim witch hunt,“ and – in typical CAIR fashion – purporting to speak for all American Muslims, which stated:

American Muslims view yesterday’s action as just one of a long list of attempts by the pro-Israel lobby to intimidate and silence all those who wish to see Palestinian Muslims and Christians free themselves of a brutal Apartheid-like occupation. We believe the genesis of this raid lies not in Washington, but in Tel Aviv.

As I noted above, Koenig reported that CAIR members were at the 1993 Hamas meeting. But evidence introduced during the trial implicated CAIR in the conspiracy even further, as documents from the trial link CAIR to the other U.S.-based Hamas front organizations, and demonstrate CAIR’s extensive ties to the Muslim Brotherhood – specifically the Palestine Committee.
(more…)