Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com
On April 9, I attended a presentation at UC Irvine entitled, "Education Under Fire", which is the title of a documentary film describing the persecution of the Baha'i religious minority in Iran, a subject of which I have previously written. Briefly stated, the Baha'i faith was founded in Iran in the 19th century and is not recognized in Iran. It is considered as apostasy from Islam. Under the Islamic regime, Baha'i are actively persecuted by the government. They are subject to arrest and imprisonment for "treason". Their homes have been burned. Some have been hanged by the government. In addition, they are denied higher education.
Other smaller Baha'i communities in countries like Egypt and Iraq also suffer varying forms of discrimination.
The film we watched also focused on the efforts of Baha'i to educate their youth in the face of the ban on higher education. This resulted in 1987 in the establishment of the Baha'i Institute of Higher Education (BIHE), a clandestine system of classes throughout the country, largely held in secret in members' homes with homework assignments literally being mailed in to special addresses in different cities and towns. Originally, the subjects were science and math, which branched out into sub-subjects and have now grown to other courses. More recently, with advanced technology, instruction is conducted largely online. Since the entire enterprise is clandestine, those who have completed the study have found that universities in other countries have no knowledge of BIHE. Thus, they do not recognize the credits for admission and further study. (Two departments in Harvard and Stanford have recently agreed to accept credits from BIHE. More on this later.)
I had not anticipated much of a crowd, but upon arriving at the hall, was surprised to find it packed with students and some faculty. The reason was that one of the panelists was a well-known comedic actor named Rainn Wilson (a Baha'i), who appears in a sit-com called, "The Office". (I must confess I had never heard of him or his show.) Also speaking on the panel was Ms. Nezanin Boniadi, an Iranian-born British actress, who is also active with Amnesty International. There was Ms. Safineh Tahmassebi, an Iranian Baha'i immigrant, now a US citizen, who teaches in the UCI Extension with yours truly. In addition, there was a young Baha'i student who himself had completed the BIHE course and spoke of his difficulty getting a US university medical school to accept his class credits.
At the conclusion of the film, Pastor David Woods from San Juan Capistrano spoke for a few minutes then introduced Wilson. Wilson spoke for a few minutes and described how he became active in the Baha'i cause. (As soon as Wilson finished, about 30 or so students got up and left.) Then a panel discussion ensued in which the moderator asked specific questions of each panelist. The topics basically reflected what was shown in the film as to the plight of the Baha'i-particularly in educating themselves. Wilson told a second-hand story told to him by an Iranian Baha'i recounting how as a student, a "cleric" came to speak to the students one day and told them that "it would be OK if the students made sure there were no Baha'i in the school". That day, the Baha'i students were all chased home from school by other students who beat them and spit on them.
"It comes from the top on down", stated Wilson.
Here are some other items I noted down from the speakers and/or the film.
Under the Shah's regime prior to the revolution, Baha'i were persecuted, but to a lesser degree.
Some Muslim professors took the risk of teaching BIHE classes.
The Iranian government has actually carried out raids against the classes and arrested participants. The second such raid took place in May 2011.
Then there was time for question and answer. Myself and about 5-6 others stepped up to the microphone to ask questions. I asked the panelists whether they had received any support from American Muslim organizations like CAIR, the Muslim Public Affairs Council, the Islamic Society of North America or the Islamic Circle of North America, or if they had reached out to these organizations for support, moral or otherwise. I added that these organizations in no way were connected to the events in Iran, but that perhaps they could at least add a moral voice. (I am paraphrasing from memory.)
None of the panelists were aware of any such support or contact. One of them did state that certain Muslims headed human rights organizations which supported the Baha'i cause and mentioned one from an Iranian human rights organization. Wilson emphasized that this was about the actions of the Iranian government and not the one billion peace-loving Muslims in the world.
So what can be done? The panelists had some suggestions. For one, we can support the right of Baha'i to an education, a basic human right. I am enclosing below a link to the Education Under Fire website, where we can all sign a petition to the Iranian government. One may think that the Iranian government cares nothing for world opinion, but the panelists maintain that is not the case.
http://educationunderfire.com
Second, we can support efforts to get US universities to accept BIHE course work for admissions. Most universities are not even aware of BIHE.
Of course, educating others about what is happening is crucial. You don't hear about this in the news media. If you write your elected represntatives, they need to be aware as well. Sadly, many are not.
Finally, I am adding Education Under Fire as a link to this site under, "Worthy of Our Support".
What is happening to the Baha'i in Iran is part of what is happening to religious minorities in varying degrees in many Islamic countries. It is happening to Baha'i and Coptic Christians in Egypt, Christians in Iraq, Christians in Pakistan, Christians and animists in Sudan, Jews in Yemen, and on and on. Mr Wilson pointed out that it doesn't mean that the one billion Muslims in the world are engaged in persecution of other religions. That is true. Yet, religious persecution is taking place on a large scale. It is also happening in Europe, where Jews are being assaulted, insulted and harassed by young male Muslim immigrants (as well as skin-heads and neo-Nazi types). The Europeans have been unable or unwilling to deal with it, largely because they are loathe to name the main culprits. That is the crux of the problem, shall we say, the 800 pound gorilla in the back of the room. If you want to combat persecution, you have to be willing to name the perpetrators.
Thursday, April 12, 2012
Saturday, April 7, 2012
Center for Security Policy Alert on ICNA
Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com
The Center for Security Policy (CSP) has issued the below alert in regards to a campaign by the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA) to promote Sharia in the United States.
http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/p18956.xml
The president and founder of CSP is Frank Gaffney.
Below is ICNA's announcement of the drive.
http://www.icna.org/national-shariah-education-campaign-launched/
ICNA, in my view, is one of the more insidious of the so-called mainstream Muslim organizations in America. This is the same outfit that held that so-called charity dinner in Yorba Linda in February 2010 that drew a large protest. The ICNA speakers were Siraj Wahhaj, who has implicitly called for giving uzis to black ex-cons and turning them loose in the neighborhoods, and Amir Abdel Malik Ali, who has made dozens of incendiary speeches on California campuses in support of suicide bombers, Hamas, Hizbollah, Islamic Jihad, as well as suicide bombers who commit terror against Israel. He has insulted Jews in many of his speeches. These men are both anti-American jihadists. No truly moderate and patriotic organization would have them as speakers.
So now comes this propaganda campaign to convince gullible Americans that sharia law is, as Muslim leaders Abdul Faisal Rauf and Muzammil Siddiqi assure us, perfectly in conformance with the US Constitution.
Wrong.
Killing homosexuals is not in conformance with our Constitution.
Killing apostates or those who criticize any aspect of Islam (blasphemy) is not in conformance with our Constitution.
Wife beating is not in conformance with our Constitution.
Honor killings and stoning women is not in conformance with our Constitution.
Any denial of women to equal rights with men is not in conformance with our Constitution.
Denying women equal weight in court testimony is not in conformance with our Constitution.
Yes, there are aspects of sharia that are innocuous, however, it is the legal code of Islam and governs all aspects of a Muslim's life and sets out punishments which include death. It does not respect separation of the state from the religion.
Yes, they will tell you that Muslims living in a non-Muslim country are to obey the local laws-as long as they do not contradict Islam. However, as the Muslim percentage of the population increases, thus do the demands for accommodation. You need look no further than Europe to see where this is heading.
It is a long-range plan. Contrary to groups like al Qaida, many realize that bringing about a world-wide caliphate under Shariah law is a long term project, which can be achieved peacefully through immigration, demographic change, Da'wa (outreach) and finally, if necessary when Islam holds the power, forced conversions or violence (jihad). Today, in almost every predominately Muslim country, religious minorities are being persecuted.
ICNA is nothing more than another arm of the Muslim Brotherhood and Jamaat e Islam. Like other organizations, such as CAIR, they are engaged in in a massive taqiyya campaign of deception. In addition, they are indoctrinating the jihadists of tomorrow and making sure that Muslim youth in America stay within the fold rather than assimilate and become full-fledged Americans. What is sad is there are Muslims who came here to escape the stifling lives they led in their countries of origin. Now they see an effort right here at home to bring that stifling control here to America. We cannot let that happen. To allow sharia within the US is to tell Muslims that they cannot enjoy the freedoms to change religion, be gay, live your sex life as you wish, leave a marriage (if you are a woman), and other rights that we take for granted.
It is true that so many Muslims in America remain silent out of fear. Unfortunately, that makes them irrelevant to the debate. It is Muslims like Zuhdi Jasser, Stephen Schwartz, Tawfik Hamid, and others who dare to speak out and expose the threat in our midst. Yes, there are painfully few of them, but they deserve our support.
But to the 5th column at ICNA, ISNA, CAIR, MPAC and MAS, we must stand up and say no to sharia. If they want to live in sharia, they know where they can go back to.
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com
The Center for Security Policy (CSP) has issued the below alert in regards to a campaign by the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA) to promote Sharia in the United States.
http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/p18956.xml
The president and founder of CSP is Frank Gaffney.
Below is ICNA's announcement of the drive.
http://www.icna.org/national-shariah-education-campaign-launched/
ICNA, in my view, is one of the more insidious of the so-called mainstream Muslim organizations in America. This is the same outfit that held that so-called charity dinner in Yorba Linda in February 2010 that drew a large protest. The ICNA speakers were Siraj Wahhaj, who has implicitly called for giving uzis to black ex-cons and turning them loose in the neighborhoods, and Amir Abdel Malik Ali, who has made dozens of incendiary speeches on California campuses in support of suicide bombers, Hamas, Hizbollah, Islamic Jihad, as well as suicide bombers who commit terror against Israel. He has insulted Jews in many of his speeches. These men are both anti-American jihadists. No truly moderate and patriotic organization would have them as speakers.
So now comes this propaganda campaign to convince gullible Americans that sharia law is, as Muslim leaders Abdul Faisal Rauf and Muzammil Siddiqi assure us, perfectly in conformance with the US Constitution.
Wrong.
Killing homosexuals is not in conformance with our Constitution.
Killing apostates or those who criticize any aspect of Islam (blasphemy) is not in conformance with our Constitution.
Wife beating is not in conformance with our Constitution.
Honor killings and stoning women is not in conformance with our Constitution.
Any denial of women to equal rights with men is not in conformance with our Constitution.
Denying women equal weight in court testimony is not in conformance with our Constitution.
Yes, there are aspects of sharia that are innocuous, however, it is the legal code of Islam and governs all aspects of a Muslim's life and sets out punishments which include death. It does not respect separation of the state from the religion.
Yes, they will tell you that Muslims living in a non-Muslim country are to obey the local laws-as long as they do not contradict Islam. However, as the Muslim percentage of the population increases, thus do the demands for accommodation. You need look no further than Europe to see where this is heading.
It is a long-range plan. Contrary to groups like al Qaida, many realize that bringing about a world-wide caliphate under Shariah law is a long term project, which can be achieved peacefully through immigration, demographic change, Da'wa (outreach) and finally, if necessary when Islam holds the power, forced conversions or violence (jihad). Today, in almost every predominately Muslim country, religious minorities are being persecuted.
ICNA is nothing more than another arm of the Muslim Brotherhood and Jamaat e Islam. Like other organizations, such as CAIR, they are engaged in in a massive taqiyya campaign of deception. In addition, they are indoctrinating the jihadists of tomorrow and making sure that Muslim youth in America stay within the fold rather than assimilate and become full-fledged Americans. What is sad is there are Muslims who came here to escape the stifling lives they led in their countries of origin. Now they see an effort right here at home to bring that stifling control here to America. We cannot let that happen. To allow sharia within the US is to tell Muslims that they cannot enjoy the freedoms to change religion, be gay, live your sex life as you wish, leave a marriage (if you are a woman), and other rights that we take for granted.
It is true that so many Muslims in America remain silent out of fear. Unfortunately, that makes them irrelevant to the debate. It is Muslims like Zuhdi Jasser, Stephen Schwartz, Tawfik Hamid, and others who dare to speak out and expose the threat in our midst. Yes, there are painfully few of them, but they deserve our support.
But to the 5th column at ICNA, ISNA, CAIR, MPAC and MAS, we must stand up and say no to sharia. If they want to live in sharia, they know where they can go back to.
Thursday, April 5, 2012
Suppressing the Truth About Anti-Semitism in Europe
Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com
Hat tip to Miggie
One of my readers (Miggie) commented on the latest post about Toulouse and the French reactions by pointing out a 2003 report by the EU that identified Muslims as being among the perpetrators of anti-Semitism in Europe. The report was suppressed by the EU. Here is an article on the story by the Jewish Daily Forward from 2003.
http://forward.com/articles/7158/eu-accused-of-burying-report-on-antisemitism-point/
As you can see, the suppression of the report caused a firestorm of protest even among some members of the US Congress.
On March 31, 2004, the same EU office did release a report on rising anti-Semitism in Europe for the years 2002-2003. In its summary it assigned chief blame to young, disaffected white Europeans and secondary blame to young Muslims of Asian and North African extraction. ("Asian" in European parlance would include the Middle East and the sub-continent including India and Pakistan.)
http://europa-eu-un.org/articles/en/article_3341_en.htm
The entire report is here.
http://fra.europa.eu/fraWebsite/attachments/AS-Main-report.pdf
That was almost a decade ago, and it would be worthwhile to see how these reports have progressed since then. I think it would be safe to say, however, that Muslim anti-Semitism in Europe has, indeed, been under-stated. The case of Malmo is important to point out. As I have reported so many times on this site, the sizable and restive Muslim immigrant population of Malmo, which has created a dangerous "no-go zone" in the neighborhood of Rosengard, is literally driving the Jewish population out of the city, implicitly encouraged by Mayor Ilmar Reepalu, an opponent of Israel.
It is true that certain other elements have participated including skin-heads, neo-Nazis and other disaffected indigenous populations. The participation of the anti-Israeli left, which is much more influential, has contributed as well. Sweden, for example, is a hotbed of anti-Israeli-pro-Palestinian NGOs that have links world-wide.
When it comes to issues of hate, it is crucial that both perpetrator and victim groups be reported accurately and without fear of the results. If whites are guilty of racial or religious persecutions, as they certainly have been over the centuries, it must be reported-and it is. Indeed, there is no fear of blow back in that case. It is when another minority, especially one that is restive, is guilty that people get nervous about stating what is clear to all. We see it not only in Europe, but here in America as well. As the Trayvon Martin case has illustrated, white on black violence is wrong, black on white violence is wrong and black on black violence is wrong. Which gets the bigger play?
Similarly, in Europe, white on immigrant violence is wrong, immigrant on white violence is wrong, Christian on Jew violence is wrong, Muslim violence on Jew is wrong. Which gets the bigger play? Jew violence on Christian or Muslim? Virtually non-existent. That itself should tell you volumes.
If you are unwilling to define the problem, don't expect to ever fix it
Tuesday, April 3, 2012
Just Blame The Jews!
By Findalis
Monkey in the Middle
Those nasty Jews. They are the fault that gas is over $4 a gallon. It is all their fault. So says President Barack Hussein Obama. It is not the fault that this idiot of a President closed the Gulf to US drilling (The Chinese, Mexicans, etc are all drilling away.). It is not the fact that all government controlled lands are closed to drilling and exploration. It is not the fact that he nixed the Keystone Pipeline. No to Barack Hussein Obama it is the fault of the Jews. Those evil Jews of Israel.
Monkey in the Middle
Those nasty Jews. They are the fault that gas is over $4 a gallon. It is all their fault. So says President Barack Hussein Obama. It is not the fault that this idiot of a President closed the Gulf to US drilling (The Chinese, Mexicans, etc are all drilling away.). It is not the fact that all government controlled lands are closed to drilling and exploration. It is not the fact that he nixed the Keystone Pipeline. No to Barack Hussein Obama it is the fault of the Jews. Those evil Jews of Israel.
The Obama administration is blaming Israel for the recent rise in global crude oil prices, according to a Sunday report in The World Tribune. The rise in fuel prices is deemed as harming the U.S. economy and has also hurt Obama in the polls as he seeks re-election in November.I guess that since Barack Hussein Obama has now excepted money from the Evil Oil Companies, he must find another scapegoat to pin his problems on. And Jews are the classic scapegoat for all anti-Semites. And after spending 20 years as a disciple of Jeremiah Wright, screaming AMEN! every time the good 'Reverend' spoke about the destruction of Israel and the genocide of the Jews, we can call this President a rabid anti-Semite bent on finishing the job that his idol Adolf Hitler started.
The report cited a leading U.S. analyst, Robert Satloff, who returned from talks with Israeli officials.
Satloff, executive director of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, said, according to The World Tribune, that the Israeli leadership saw Washington as attributing the higher gas prices to “Israel’s posturing” on Iran.
“They think the Iranians should be held responsible for the higher gasoline prices,” Satloff was quoted as having said.
He added that the officials told him the Obama administration was staging a campaign to undermine Israel.
“I cannot underscore how deep and visceral the [Israeli] comments of the leaking that came out of Washington were,” Satloff said, noting Israel is alarmed by what officials determined were leaks by the administration of U.S. President Barack Obama of purported Israeli preparations to attack Iran.
The Israeli concerns come in the wake of a report in Foreign Policy magazine last week, according to which Israel has purchased an airfield in Azerbaijan on Iran's northern border, prompting the United States to watch very closely.
Journalist Mark Perry wrote that the Obama administration is monitoring Israel's relations with Azerbaijan, particularly its military ties.
The Americans believe Israel may use the site as a springboard for an attack on Iran's nuclear plants, or as a landing and refueling spot following one. The site could also be used for aircraft needed for search, rescue and recovery in the wake of an attack.
“We're watching what Israel is doing in Azerbaijan. And we're not happy about it,” an official told the Foreign Policy writer.
Azeri president Ilham Aliyev later dismissed the speculation and said, “Azerbaijan's territory will never be used to launch an attack against its neighbor, Iran.”
Source
Sunday, April 1, 2012
The Leftist Indoctrination in the University of Claifornia
Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com
Hat tip to Townhall
Debra Saunders, who has been a columnist for many years for the San Francisco Chronicle, has written an important piece that is appearing on Townhall, in which she explains the domination of leftist professors within the University of California system.
http://townhall.com/columnists/debrajsaunders/2012/04/01/ucs_leftist_echo_chamber_drowns_out_diverse_voices
Having been an adjunct teacher at the University of California at Irvine since 1998, I have followed this
phenomena for quite some time-especially as it pertains to the Israel-Palestine conflict, which is the major point of contention on UC campuses-as well as other campuses across North America (including Canada).
As far as the disparity of conservative professors, I think a large part of the problem is that those with a conservative mindset are not usually attracted to an academic career. (I wasn't until I retired from DEA.) They usually go out in the real world to make a living and acquire real life experiences. The liberals who dominate academia usually are those who go from BA/BS to Masters to Doctorate and right into teaching. Do I have the empirical evidence for that at my fingertips? No, but I would bet my mortgage that the above statement would be borne out by any study.
The university is a friendly environment for the left-indeed the far-left. The problem is that it carries over into the classroom, where leftist professors see their job as indoctrinating their students rather than providing them with a balanced or neutral education as to world issues. It used to be bashing conservatism and Republican politicians in order to further the "progressive cause". Now it is also focused on bashing Israel and promoting the Palestinian cause.
But one might ask; why such emphasis on an issue half a world away? It is largely because American universities have accepted millions of dollars from Middle East interests including Saudi Arabia to establish Middle East departments staffed with anti-Israel zealots who use their classrooms as soapboxes to deligitimize Israel as a nation that doesn't even have the right to exist as a Jewish state free from attack from a hostile Arab/Muslim collection of dysfunctional dictatorships that themselves have no regard for human rights. Plus, it also fits nicely into the overall anti-America, anti-Western civilization, post colonial philosophy that is prevalent in virtually all universities. If you criticize it, you are accused of being racist or "Islamophobic."
So what is the result within the UC system, where the problem is acute? Today, we see a collection of campuses with humanities and social sciences dominated by leftist ideologues posing as professional educators. Add to that a collection of feckless chancellors hiding under their desks and supervised from above by an equally feckless president (Mark Yudof), who has allowed his campuses to become places where Jewish students who support Israel and assert their Jewish identity are subjected to intimidation and harassment.
Saunders' article is welcome, but it only scratches the surface of the problem. Here is the scary point: Every single one of our future educators, university administrators, and political leaders are today walking through the hallways of these campuses.
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com
Hat tip to Townhall
Debra Saunders, who has been a columnist for many years for the San Francisco Chronicle, has written an important piece that is appearing on Townhall, in which she explains the domination of leftist professors within the University of California system.
http://townhall.com/columnists/debrajsaunders/2012/04/01/ucs_leftist_echo_chamber_drowns_out_diverse_voices
Having been an adjunct teacher at the University of California at Irvine since 1998, I have followed this
phenomena for quite some time-especially as it pertains to the Israel-Palestine conflict, which is the major point of contention on UC campuses-as well as other campuses across North America (including Canada).
As far as the disparity of conservative professors, I think a large part of the problem is that those with a conservative mindset are not usually attracted to an academic career. (I wasn't until I retired from DEA.) They usually go out in the real world to make a living and acquire real life experiences. The liberals who dominate academia usually are those who go from BA/BS to Masters to Doctorate and right into teaching. Do I have the empirical evidence for that at my fingertips? No, but I would bet my mortgage that the above statement would be borne out by any study.
The university is a friendly environment for the left-indeed the far-left. The problem is that it carries over into the classroom, where leftist professors see their job as indoctrinating their students rather than providing them with a balanced or neutral education as to world issues. It used to be bashing conservatism and Republican politicians in order to further the "progressive cause". Now it is also focused on bashing Israel and promoting the Palestinian cause.
But one might ask; why such emphasis on an issue half a world away? It is largely because American universities have accepted millions of dollars from Middle East interests including Saudi Arabia to establish Middle East departments staffed with anti-Israel zealots who use their classrooms as soapboxes to deligitimize Israel as a nation that doesn't even have the right to exist as a Jewish state free from attack from a hostile Arab/Muslim collection of dysfunctional dictatorships that themselves have no regard for human rights. Plus, it also fits nicely into the overall anti-America, anti-Western civilization, post colonial philosophy that is prevalent in virtually all universities. If you criticize it, you are accused of being racist or "Islamophobic."
So what is the result within the UC system, where the problem is acute? Today, we see a collection of campuses with humanities and social sciences dominated by leftist ideologues posing as professional educators. Add to that a collection of feckless chancellors hiding under their desks and supervised from above by an equally feckless president (Mark Yudof), who has allowed his campuses to become places where Jewish students who support Israel and assert their Jewish identity are subjected to intimidation and harassment.
Saunders' article is welcome, but it only scratches the surface of the problem. Here is the scary point: Every single one of our future educators, university administrators, and political leaders are today walking through the hallways of these campuses.
Wednesday, March 28, 2012
Is MSNBC Inciting a Lynch Mob?
Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com
Last night, MSNBC host Lawrence O'Donnell was leading a panel of like-minded talking heads including the NY Times' Charles Blow and discussing the Trayvon Martin case in Florida. The specific topic was a one Mr. Joe Oliver, an African-American man, who is a friend of George Zimmerman and whom they had just interviewed. Oliver has been interviewed by several outlets. While he was not a witness to the incident, he has spoken out on Zimmerman's behalf against speculation that he is a racist. In return, he was attacked last night by O'Donnell, who stated that according to his "own investigation" (O'Donnell's) Oliver has no credibility.
Then this morning, I caught the last half of Martin Bashir's show on MSNBC. He was interviewing Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX). To make a long story short, they were basically convicting Zimmerman. To them, the facts were simple; Martin was black, he was wearing a hoodie, Zimmerman shot and killed him. He must be arrested. Absent was any mention of the witnesses who described a struggle with Martin on top, Zimmerman's broken nose, bloody face, and grass stains on the back of his shirt. Bashir then closed out his show with his final editorial comment to the effect that Zimmerman killed Martin simply because of the color of Martin's skin without any reference to Zimmerman's (and others') version (s) of the events. Bashir went on to deplore the allegations going around regarding Martin's lifestyle and having gotten repeatedly in trouble, which were being fed to some conservative media outlets. (Never mind a running caption that appeared at the bottom of the screen during the show stating that some conservative media were ignoring the case.)
Again, I must state that I missed the first half of Bashir's show, so there may have been mention of another disturbing aspect of this case-the outrageous conduct of the New Black Panther Party in calling for Zimmerman's "apprehension" and posting a reward for his capture without any charges being as yet filed. I heard no mention of this from Bashir. I heard no mention of the NBPP man caught on TV calling for the capture of Zimmerman "dead or alive".
So I add Bashir and O'Donnell to their MSNBC colleague Ed Schultz in engaging in a public rush to judgement before all the facts are in and knowing full well that there is a lynch mob mentality out there. I have not even heard what Al Sharpton has said on his own show. Of course, he knows lots about inciting a lynch mob.
As I have said before, it may turn out that Zimmerman acted beyond the law. Depending on what exactly transpired when he and Martin came face to face, who initiated the violence and under what circumstances Zimmerman drew his gun and fired, he may well be prosecuted. Unless he made a decision that he was going to follow Martin and execute him, I don't think he could be guilty of more than manslaughter. But I just don't know, and neither does anyone else who wasn't there.
To continue this conviction in the media in the face of what the New Black Panther Party is calling for is beyond irresponsible.
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com
Last night, MSNBC host Lawrence O'Donnell was leading a panel of like-minded talking heads including the NY Times' Charles Blow and discussing the Trayvon Martin case in Florida. The specific topic was a one Mr. Joe Oliver, an African-American man, who is a friend of George Zimmerman and whom they had just interviewed. Oliver has been interviewed by several outlets. While he was not a witness to the incident, he has spoken out on Zimmerman's behalf against speculation that he is a racist. In return, he was attacked last night by O'Donnell, who stated that according to his "own investigation" (O'Donnell's) Oliver has no credibility.
Then this morning, I caught the last half of Martin Bashir's show on MSNBC. He was interviewing Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX). To make a long story short, they were basically convicting Zimmerman. To them, the facts were simple; Martin was black, he was wearing a hoodie, Zimmerman shot and killed him. He must be arrested. Absent was any mention of the witnesses who described a struggle with Martin on top, Zimmerman's broken nose, bloody face, and grass stains on the back of his shirt. Bashir then closed out his show with his final editorial comment to the effect that Zimmerman killed Martin simply because of the color of Martin's skin without any reference to Zimmerman's (and others') version (s) of the events. Bashir went on to deplore the allegations going around regarding Martin's lifestyle and having gotten repeatedly in trouble, which were being fed to some conservative media outlets. (Never mind a running caption that appeared at the bottom of the screen during the show stating that some conservative media were ignoring the case.)
Again, I must state that I missed the first half of Bashir's show, so there may have been mention of another disturbing aspect of this case-the outrageous conduct of the New Black Panther Party in calling for Zimmerman's "apprehension" and posting a reward for his capture without any charges being as yet filed. I heard no mention of this from Bashir. I heard no mention of the NBPP man caught on TV calling for the capture of Zimmerman "dead or alive".
So I add Bashir and O'Donnell to their MSNBC colleague Ed Schultz in engaging in a public rush to judgement before all the facts are in and knowing full well that there is a lynch mob mentality out there. I have not even heard what Al Sharpton has said on his own show. Of course, he knows lots about inciting a lynch mob.
As I have said before, it may turn out that Zimmerman acted beyond the law. Depending on what exactly transpired when he and Martin came face to face, who initiated the violence and under what circumstances Zimmerman drew his gun and fired, he may well be prosecuted. Unless he made a decision that he was going to follow Martin and execute him, I don't think he could be guilty of more than manslaughter. But I just don't know, and neither does anyone else who wasn't there.
To continue this conviction in the media in the face of what the New Black Panther Party is calling for is beyond irresponsible.
IDF Cancelling All Passover Leaves
By Findalis
Monkey in the Middle
Some thing's up. Chief of Staff Benny Gantz has done something that hasn't been done in many years. He has cancelled ALL leaves for Passover.
Monkey in the Middle
Some thing's up. Chief of Staff Benny Gantz has done something that hasn't been done in many years. He has cancelled ALL leaves for Passover.
Chief of Staff Benny Gantz has ordered all IDF units to cancel their traditional Passover breaks so that they can operate in full capacity over the upcoming holiday, Yedioth Ahronoth reported Wednesday.Every military man will tell you that if you want rumors to run rampant you cancel all leaves. I could speculate for hours on this but I won't. I'll let you, my truth seekers to put 2+2 together. I hope it equals 4.
The implication of the decision is that for the first time in many years, all IDF units will maintain their regular operations and remain on full alert throughout the holiday.
As result of the unexpected decision, thousands of soldiers at various IDF headquarters and bases will have to report for duty as usual in order to allow their units to operate with no interruption.
IDF officials dismissed suggestions that the decision is related to operational circumstances or preparations for military maneuvers. The army said Chief of Staff Gantz made the call after asserting that he does not accept the notion of an army-wide Passover vacation.
However, IDF soldiers who received the news Tuesday could not be convinced that the timing of the decision was arbitrary.
Notably, German Defense Minister Thomas de Maiziere on Tuesday said that after meeting Israeli counterpart Ehud Barak, he was more concerned about the possibility of an Israeli strike on Iran.
Over the years, an army-wide break during Passover became a tradition followed by all major military units, including the Air Force, Navy and intelligence corps. The IDF's headquarters in Tel Aviv is also traditionally deserted during the holiday.
But as noted, the longtime tradition will be broken this year, as soldiers will have to divide their vacation days among themselves in order to ensure that their units maintain their full capacity to operate if needed.
Source
Monday, March 26, 2012
Qaradawi Banned From Entering France by Sarkozy
Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com
Yusuf al Qaradawi
Hat tip to Le Figaro and Gulf News (with reservations)
The below article by Le Figaro (in French) concerns Yusuf al Qaradawi, the leading spiritual mentor of the Muslim Brotherhood, who has been prevented from entering France by French president Nicholas Sarkozy.
http://www.lefigaro.fr/international/2012/03/26/01003-20120326ARTFIG00661-le-cheik-qaradawi-un-televangeliste-controverse.php
The article concerns Qaradawi's "controversial" fatwas and statements on subjects such as women, Shias, Muammar Qaddafi, etc.
Here is an English language report from Gulf News that pretty much says the same things.
http://gulfnews.com/news/gulf/qatar/french-visa-ban-blow-to-al-qaradawi-1.1000137
What is conspicuously missing to both reports is reference to those cozy little proclamations about his wish to die in battle against the infidels and his references to that charming hadith about Jews hiding behind trees, which are calling out for the Muslim to come and kill the Jew and all that. here is what both articles left out:
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com/2010/05/words-of-yusuf-al-qaradawi.html
Suffice to say Qaradawi does not like Jews or Christians, and I guess Shia Muslims as well. To the best of my recollection, he is not on record as to his position on Buddhists. He called for the killing of Qaddafi, which is all well and good, but exalted Saddam Hussein to the rank of "martyr".
In the wake of the Toulouse atrocity last week, having this guy come smokin' into town is the last thing the French need. What was he going to do and say in France? Nobody can predict because Qaradawi is an unpredictable man. Would he sing words of praise for the great Jihadist warrior, Mohamed Merah? Would he tell his audiences from the Union of Islamic Organizations of France that Merah is now cavorting with 72 virgins after having slaughtered a rabbi and three children, ages 3, 6 and 8? Maybe he will call for the murder of Sarkozy.
Kudos to Sarkozy for slamming the door on this hate-monger. France has enough problems on its hands without having to deal with this madman
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com
Yusuf al Qaradawi
Hat tip to Le Figaro and Gulf News (with reservations)
The below article by Le Figaro (in French) concerns Yusuf al Qaradawi, the leading spiritual mentor of the Muslim Brotherhood, who has been prevented from entering France by French president Nicholas Sarkozy.
http://www.lefigaro.fr/international/2012/03/26/01003-20120326ARTFIG00661-le-cheik-qaradawi-un-televangeliste-controverse.php
The article concerns Qaradawi's "controversial" fatwas and statements on subjects such as women, Shias, Muammar Qaddafi, etc.
Here is an English language report from Gulf News that pretty much says the same things.
http://gulfnews.com/news/gulf/qatar/french-visa-ban-blow-to-al-qaradawi-1.1000137
What is conspicuously missing to both reports is reference to those cozy little proclamations about his wish to die in battle against the infidels and his references to that charming hadith about Jews hiding behind trees, which are calling out for the Muslim to come and kill the Jew and all that. here is what both articles left out:
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com/2010/05/words-of-yusuf-al-qaradawi.html
Suffice to say Qaradawi does not like Jews or Christians, and I guess Shia Muslims as well. To the best of my recollection, he is not on record as to his position on Buddhists. He called for the killing of Qaddafi, which is all well and good, but exalted Saddam Hussein to the rank of "martyr".
In the wake of the Toulouse atrocity last week, having this guy come smokin' into town is the last thing the French need. What was he going to do and say in France? Nobody can predict because Qaradawi is an unpredictable man. Would he sing words of praise for the great Jihadist warrior, Mohamed Merah? Would he tell his audiences from the Union of Islamic Organizations of France that Merah is now cavorting with 72 virgins after having slaughtered a rabbi and three children, ages 3, 6 and 8? Maybe he will call for the murder of Sarkozy.
Kudos to Sarkozy for slamming the door on this hate-monger. France has enough problems on its hands without having to deal with this madman
Sunday, March 25, 2012
DOJ Must Investigate New Black Panther Party Now
Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com
The news that the racist New Black Panther Party has put out a $10,000 reward for the "apprehension" of George Zimmerman is beyond troubling. It is something the Department of Justice must investigate and do so now.
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-03-24/news/os-trayvon-martin-new-black-panthers-protest-20120324_1_sanford-black-men-justice
First of all, there is no arrest warrant for Zimmerman and no charges as things now stand (which may change). Zimmerman is in hiding-not from police- but from vigilantes who want him dead. Even Spike Lee has been tweeting Zimmerman's home address. What the Panthers are explicitly calling for is a kidnapping if not a murder. (They have parsed their words carefully calling for Zimmerman to be delivered alive-not dead.)
Whatever one may think of this killing, this is a case of vigilante justice here. It is a case not only for Florida authorities but for the Justice Department to step in. The NBPP is a national organization that is calling nationally for a kidnapping-a federal offense. If DOJ thinks it can step in when state authorities try to enforce immigration violations, they can certainly step in here. The problem is-will they? Eric Holder's corrupt Justice Department has already substantiated accusations that it will not prosecute civil rights violations by minorities. They previously dismissed charges against NBPP members in Philadelphia who were threatening white voters with billy clubs in 2008, when all they had to do was file a final paper with the court to obtain a finding against them.
Once again, our Justice Department is on the hot seat. Let's see what Holder et al will do or not do.
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com
The news that the racist New Black Panther Party has put out a $10,000 reward for the "apprehension" of George Zimmerman is beyond troubling. It is something the Department of Justice must investigate and do so now.
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-03-24/news/os-trayvon-martin-new-black-panthers-protest-20120324_1_sanford-black-men-justice
First of all, there is no arrest warrant for Zimmerman and no charges as things now stand (which may change). Zimmerman is in hiding-not from police- but from vigilantes who want him dead. Even Spike Lee has been tweeting Zimmerman's home address. What the Panthers are explicitly calling for is a kidnapping if not a murder. (They have parsed their words carefully calling for Zimmerman to be delivered alive-not dead.)
Whatever one may think of this killing, this is a case of vigilante justice here. It is a case not only for Florida authorities but for the Justice Department to step in. The NBPP is a national organization that is calling nationally for a kidnapping-a federal offense. If DOJ thinks it can step in when state authorities try to enforce immigration violations, they can certainly step in here. The problem is-will they? Eric Holder's corrupt Justice Department has already substantiated accusations that it will not prosecute civil rights violations by minorities. They previously dismissed charges against NBPP members in Philadelphia who were threatening white voters with billy clubs in 2008, when all they had to do was file a final paper with the court to obtain a finding against them.
Once again, our Justice Department is on the hot seat. Let's see what Holder et al will do or not do.
Thursday, March 22, 2012
The Death of Merah- Many Questions Left Unanswered
Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com
We awoke this morning (PST) to the news that French police finally killed Mohammed Merah in Toulouse in a final assault. Again, I am linking the live blog from the UK Telegraph courtesy of Vlad Tepes, which seems to be the most informative at this point.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/9157126/Toulouse-siege-live.html
The police, of course, wanted to take Merah alive to see if others were involved. It is highly possible others were. Thus, this death is not the end of a tragic story. Aside from the above question, France, Europe and all of us have some serious introspection to do. This will not be the last atrocity committed against innocent Jews in the West.
This is largely the result of the intense and well-organized demonization of Israel by Palestinians and their useful idiots in the West. This is what it has led to. Forget this phony differentiation between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism. The former is merely a cover for the latter.
The Western media, particularly in Europe, has also played a role. They have adopted the Palestinians as their pet victim and contributed to the demonization of Israel. They have downplayed or ignored the anti-Semitic harassment against Jews played out on European streets because they didn't want to condemn their restive, unassimilated Muslim immigrants. Malmo, Sweden is a prime example, where the old Jewish community is leaving because they can't take it anymore. The mayor says, "Goodbye and good riddance" to them because he hates Israel. What Malmo has left is a 25% Muslim population that riots on a more or less regular basis.
Other cities like Paris and Oslo have entire neighborhoods and suburbs where the police don't even go-so-called "No-go zones". European cities, once noted for their safety in contrast with American cities, are now awash in crime, assaults, and rapes.
I have been amazed that the US News media has not given the Toulouse atrocity the attention it deserved-in marked contrast to Europe. The affair has truly rocked France to its core, and to a lesser extent Europe as well. In fact, if you wanted to follow the events, instead of the main stream US media, you had to go to French/European sources including blogs. Once again, the blogs are doing the media's work for them.
There is an article that has been going around the Internet for a few years now by someone identified as Sebastain Vilar Rodriguez entitled, "European life ended in Auschwitz". This person is believed to be fictitious, but the words are thought-provoking. He talks about how Spain and Europe have gotten rid of their Jews-the ones who were contributors to their societies and replaced them with an unassimilated mass of Muslim immigrants, many of whom contribute nothing but crime as they collect benefits from the government and spit on the host country's culture and values. Hateful? Sure. Unfair to the Muslims in Europe who don't cause problems? Sure. But the truth has to be faced squarely. Europe has a massive problem on its hands that will overwhelm them in a couple of decades if the demographic trend continues. It is not a matter of white vs brown. It is a matter of combating not only rising crime, but hatred that manifests itself in what we saw in Toulouse. It is a matter of Europe not only maintaining its identity, but its freedoms as well. Behind all this social train wreck and lack of assimilation is a political ideology/religion that makes no differentiation between religion and state. It has disdain for the freedoms that Europeans exercise, which they think (rightly in some cases) is decadent. Decadent it may be, but it is part of our personal freedoms that may not be in conformance with any religion. A free society does not make its laws conforming strictly to religion.
But what to do? Does Europe throw up its hands and say it is too late? How do you say to an entire population of immigrants that you are not welcome here and should leave? Europe also shares part of the blame in that when they brought all these workers into their countries to do the manual labor they didn't want to do, they didn't care about assimilating them. Then came the so-called political refuges. Now the chickens have come home to roost. Now they are dealing with grown up children of immigrants who hold citizenship-as did Merah-but don't feel themselves European.
But it has gotten worse than merely lack of assimilation. Now Europeans are seeing their children massacred for no reason-other than they are Jewish. What kind of sick mentality shoots a three-year-old child in the head just because she is Jewish? It is the same sick mentality that was on display a year ago in Itamar when a Palestinian massacred an entire family in its home including slitting the throat of a months-old infant in its crib.
We have no need for this type of mentality in a free and civilized nation.
But the question is not yet answered. What to do?
The prime ministers of the UK, France and Germany have all admitted in recent years that assimilation has failed in their countries. A few years ago, the prime minister of Australia told the Muslim community that if they were not willing to accept Australian values, they should leave. It is time for Europe to send that same message. It is time for the Western leaders to hold a summit with Middle East leaders and tell them as politely as possible that until this madness passes from history, more Muslim immigrants cannot be accepted.
This is not a call for Europeans to start rounding up innocent Muslims and shipping them home en masse. It does seem reasonable to begin the process of deporting those non-citizens who are on the public dole and/or have been identified as radicals or criminals.
Here in the US, we have enjoyed remarkably more success with our Muslim immigrants in that most came here as part of the educated class. The problem here is nothing like it is in Europe. But there is concern. We have seen plots thwarted that involved American Muslims. There is a radical element among our college youth. We also have so-called main stream organizations like CAIR claiming to represent American Muslims. What they really represent is stealth jihad, the Muslim Brotherhood, and Hamas-for starters. Most American Muslims are not of concern, but they are still viewed with suspicion. It is unfortunate, but the suspicion has a basis in fact.
It is a harsh message that needs to be sent, and law-abiding Muslims who came to the West to escape sharia and live a better life in freedom will be hurt. Nonetheless, the message has to be: Assimilate, respect our traditions, our laws, our freedoms, our plurality, and leave your hatreds at home. There will be no sharia in the US or anywhere else in the West. If that is the life you prefer-to live under Islamic law- then you know where you can go.
It is time for the West to stand up and deliver that message.
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com
We awoke this morning (PST) to the news that French police finally killed Mohammed Merah in Toulouse in a final assault. Again, I am linking the live blog from the UK Telegraph courtesy of Vlad Tepes, which seems to be the most informative at this point.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/9157126/Toulouse-siege-live.html
The police, of course, wanted to take Merah alive to see if others were involved. It is highly possible others were. Thus, this death is not the end of a tragic story. Aside from the above question, France, Europe and all of us have some serious introspection to do. This will not be the last atrocity committed against innocent Jews in the West.
This is largely the result of the intense and well-organized demonization of Israel by Palestinians and their useful idiots in the West. This is what it has led to. Forget this phony differentiation between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism. The former is merely a cover for the latter.
The Western media, particularly in Europe, has also played a role. They have adopted the Palestinians as their pet victim and contributed to the demonization of Israel. They have downplayed or ignored the anti-Semitic harassment against Jews played out on European streets because they didn't want to condemn their restive, unassimilated Muslim immigrants. Malmo, Sweden is a prime example, where the old Jewish community is leaving because they can't take it anymore. The mayor says, "Goodbye and good riddance" to them because he hates Israel. What Malmo has left is a 25% Muslim population that riots on a more or less regular basis.
Other cities like Paris and Oslo have entire neighborhoods and suburbs where the police don't even go-so-called "No-go zones". European cities, once noted for their safety in contrast with American cities, are now awash in crime, assaults, and rapes.
I have been amazed that the US News media has not given the Toulouse atrocity the attention it deserved-in marked contrast to Europe. The affair has truly rocked France to its core, and to a lesser extent Europe as well. In fact, if you wanted to follow the events, instead of the main stream US media, you had to go to French/European sources including blogs. Once again, the blogs are doing the media's work for them.
There is an article that has been going around the Internet for a few years now by someone identified as Sebastain Vilar Rodriguez entitled, "European life ended in Auschwitz". This person is believed to be fictitious, but the words are thought-provoking. He talks about how Spain and Europe have gotten rid of their Jews-the ones who were contributors to their societies and replaced them with an unassimilated mass of Muslim immigrants, many of whom contribute nothing but crime as they collect benefits from the government and spit on the host country's culture and values. Hateful? Sure. Unfair to the Muslims in Europe who don't cause problems? Sure. But the truth has to be faced squarely. Europe has a massive problem on its hands that will overwhelm them in a couple of decades if the demographic trend continues. It is not a matter of white vs brown. It is a matter of combating not only rising crime, but hatred that manifests itself in what we saw in Toulouse. It is a matter of Europe not only maintaining its identity, but its freedoms as well. Behind all this social train wreck and lack of assimilation is a political ideology/religion that makes no differentiation between religion and state. It has disdain for the freedoms that Europeans exercise, which they think (rightly in some cases) is decadent. Decadent it may be, but it is part of our personal freedoms that may not be in conformance with any religion. A free society does not make its laws conforming strictly to religion.
But what to do? Does Europe throw up its hands and say it is too late? How do you say to an entire population of immigrants that you are not welcome here and should leave? Europe also shares part of the blame in that when they brought all these workers into their countries to do the manual labor they didn't want to do, they didn't care about assimilating them. Then came the so-called political refuges. Now the chickens have come home to roost. Now they are dealing with grown up children of immigrants who hold citizenship-as did Merah-but don't feel themselves European.
But it has gotten worse than merely lack of assimilation. Now Europeans are seeing their children massacred for no reason-other than they are Jewish. What kind of sick mentality shoots a three-year-old child in the head just because she is Jewish? It is the same sick mentality that was on display a year ago in Itamar when a Palestinian massacred an entire family in its home including slitting the throat of a months-old infant in its crib.
We have no need for this type of mentality in a free and civilized nation.
But the question is not yet answered. What to do?
The prime ministers of the UK, France and Germany have all admitted in recent years that assimilation has failed in their countries. A few years ago, the prime minister of Australia told the Muslim community that if they were not willing to accept Australian values, they should leave. It is time for Europe to send that same message. It is time for the Western leaders to hold a summit with Middle East leaders and tell them as politely as possible that until this madness passes from history, more Muslim immigrants cannot be accepted.
This is not a call for Europeans to start rounding up innocent Muslims and shipping them home en masse. It does seem reasonable to begin the process of deporting those non-citizens who are on the public dole and/or have been identified as radicals or criminals.
Here in the US, we have enjoyed remarkably more success with our Muslim immigrants in that most came here as part of the educated class. The problem here is nothing like it is in Europe. But there is concern. We have seen plots thwarted that involved American Muslims. There is a radical element among our college youth. We also have so-called main stream organizations like CAIR claiming to represent American Muslims. What they really represent is stealth jihad, the Muslim Brotherhood, and Hamas-for starters. Most American Muslims are not of concern, but they are still viewed with suspicion. It is unfortunate, but the suspicion has a basis in fact.
It is a harsh message that needs to be sent, and law-abiding Muslims who came to the West to escape sharia and live a better life in freedom will be hurt. Nonetheless, the message has to be: Assimilate, respect our traditions, our laws, our freedoms, our plurality, and leave your hatreds at home. There will be no sharia in the US or anywhere else in the West. If that is the life you prefer-to live under Islamic law- then you know where you can go.
It is time for the West to stand up and deliver that message.
Wednesday, March 21, 2012
The Palestinians Run for Cover
gary fouse
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com
Hat tip to Norway, Israel and the Jews
There is a great article today in Norway, Israel and the Jews. The Norwegian press is reporting that Palestinian Authority Minister Salem Fayyad is pleading with jihadidsts world-wide not to attribute their actions to the Palestinian cause. That is his own way of "condemning" the atrocity in Toulouse. In the post, you can watch the video of their Grand Mufti recently referring to the Jews as apes and pigs and quoting that well known hadith-you know the little ditty that talks about the tree telling the Muslim "there is a Jew hiding behind me-come and kill him". And don't accept that line they tell you about it not being an authentic hadith, as I have heard one Orange County imam explain. It has been authenticated by the Bukhari and Muslim collections, two of the most "respected" Islamic authorities out there as the mufti explains in the video. Follow the links and watch the video of the 2009 anti-Jewish riots in Oslo.
http://www.israelwhat.com/2012/03/21/toulouse-fallout-palestinian-damage-control-pa-pm-fayyad-keep-the-palestinian-cause-separate/
This is so typical of the double-talk we have become used to hearing. The real message is clear; go and kill the Jews wherever you can find them. Just keep our names out of it.
When this is all said and done, there is blood on many hands in Europe. That includes the news medias of countries like France, Norway and Sweden that have engaged in an orgy of pro-Palestinian, anti-Israel reportage over the years that has placed a modern yellow star on the chests of their own Jews as they ignored or downplayed assaults against Jews on their own streets and tolerated vandalized Jewish cemeteries and synagogues- all in the name of tolerance.
I wonder how our own American school textbooks (just exposed this week by Act for America) are going to explain this latest horror away for the 7th-graders. Don't answer that; I know. They will ignore it.
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com
Hat tip to Norway, Israel and the Jews
There is a great article today in Norway, Israel and the Jews. The Norwegian press is reporting that Palestinian Authority Minister Salem Fayyad is pleading with jihadidsts world-wide not to attribute their actions to the Palestinian cause. That is his own way of "condemning" the atrocity in Toulouse. In the post, you can watch the video of their Grand Mufti recently referring to the Jews as apes and pigs and quoting that well known hadith-you know the little ditty that talks about the tree telling the Muslim "there is a Jew hiding behind me-come and kill him". And don't accept that line they tell you about it not being an authentic hadith, as I have heard one Orange County imam explain. It has been authenticated by the Bukhari and Muslim collections, two of the most "respected" Islamic authorities out there as the mufti explains in the video. Follow the links and watch the video of the 2009 anti-Jewish riots in Oslo.
http://www.israelwhat.com/2012/03/21/toulouse-fallout-palestinian-damage-control-pa-pm-fayyad-keep-the-palestinian-cause-separate/
This is so typical of the double-talk we have become used to hearing. The real message is clear; go and kill the Jews wherever you can find them. Just keep our names out of it.
When this is all said and done, there is blood on many hands in Europe. That includes the news medias of countries like France, Norway and Sweden that have engaged in an orgy of pro-Palestinian, anti-Israel reportage over the years that has placed a modern yellow star on the chests of their own Jews as they ignored or downplayed assaults against Jews on their own streets and tolerated vandalized Jewish cemeteries and synagogues- all in the name of tolerance.
I wonder how our own American school textbooks (just exposed this week by Act for America) are going to explain this latest horror away for the 7th-graders. Don't answer that; I know. They will ignore it.
Monday, March 19, 2012
May G-d Avenge Their Blood!
By Findalis
Monkey in the Middle
You go to pick up your children from school. A man on a moped stops, opens fire upon the students, then takes off. A massacre has occurred. And you know that the gunman will never be caught. This is what happened today in Toulouse, France.
Monkey in the Middle
You go to pick up your children from school. A man on a moped stops, opens fire upon the students, then takes off. A massacre has occurred. And you know that the gunman will never be caught. This is what happened today in Toulouse, France.
I will wager you that the gunman in this case is a Muslim, is in the pay of Iran, and that this is the start of a reign of terror to the Jewish people. In fact, former Counterterrorism Bureau chief Brig.-Gen. (res) Nitzan Nurielis warning Jewish institutions to beef up their security immediately.Rabbi Sandler of Kiryat Yovel in Jerusalem and his sons Aryeh, 6, and Gavriel, 3.5, were murdered in Toulouse Monday morning, as was 8 year-old Miriam Monsonegro, daughter of the director of Ozar HaTorah Toulouse, Yaacov Monsonego.
Binyamin Toati, Head of the France Desk of Bnei Akiva, told Arutz Sheva before the names were published that there are reports that the man who was killed is a rabbi who served as an Israel shaliach (emissary) at the school and that two of his children were killed with him.
French press reported that two children were among at least three people killed in a shooting outside a Jewish school. Two other children are reported fighting for their lives. The French news reports said the dead are a teacher and two children, and that two other children were badly wounded.
They said a man opened fire on people waiting at a school drop-off point and then fled on a motorcycle. The gunman used two weapons – one with a caliber of 9mm, the second with a caliber of 11.43 mm. France's Interior Ministry ordered increased surveillance around Jewish schools, and Interior Minister Claude Gueant said he will visit the school on Monday morning.
The Chief Rabbi of France, Gilles Bernheim, said he was "horrified" by what happened in Toulouse. "I am bruised in my body and my soul," he added.
The shooting comes three days after three French paratroopers were shot dead by a man 30 km. from Toulouse. AP reported that two French paratroopers were shot in the town of Montauban, near Toulouse, on Friday, when a gunman on a black motorbike pulled up at a cash machine and opened fire. An 11.43 mm. weapon was used in that attack as well, according to the news reports.
Police saw a connection between those killings and to another deadly shooting of a soldier in Toulouse just over a week ago.
Source
I fear that this is just the start of terror attacks on Jews around the world. And that these deaths are just the first of many more to come.Israelis and Jews around the world are under a growing threat from Islamic terrorists and need to demand that local authorities provide better security, former Counterterrorism Bureau chief Brig.-Gen. (res) Nitzan Nuriel said Monday, hours after a gunman killed four people outside of a Jewish school in France.
Nuriel told The Jerusalem Post that a coalition of jihadist organizations have made a decision to attack Israeli and Jewish targets wherever they may be without distinction. "They attack whoever they can and wherever security is lax," he said.
According to Nuriel, who stepped down from his post several months ago, Iran and terror groups are trying to deter Israel from taking action against them by carrying out these attacks overseas. He said it was possible that the attack against the school in France was not terror related, but he did draw a direct line between the recent spate of bombings plots in India Georgia, Thailand and Azerbaijan.
Nuriel urged Israelis who travel overseas to take extra precautions and to be more vigilant in the face of the terror threat.
"It makes no difference for the terrorist if the target is a representative of the Jewish Agency, an Israeli tourist or a local Jew," he stated.
When choosing accommodations abroad, Nuriel said that Israelis should not make the decision based solely on the quality of the hotel or hostel, but rather they should also take into consideration whether there is security at the facility or building.
Secondly, he said Israelis should not post pictures of their trips on Facebook and other social media websites, since photographs could then be used by terrorists to track them, as well as to identify targets frequented by large numbers of Israelis.
Source
Sunday, March 18, 2012
Karen Lugo on LA Sheriff Lee Baca
Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com
Hat tip to Townhall
"Sharia is no threat to the US, right Buffalo Bob?"
Karen Lugo has written a piece for Townhall on LA County's "Sheriff to the Stars", Lee Baca, who, when he's not having luminaries like Lindsey Lohan and Paris Hilton in his jail facility for tea and crumpets, is hanging around with questionable Islamic leaders and doing their bidding. In this below piece, Lugo compares Baca to NYPD Chief Ray Kelly and refers to Baca's recent appearance at the Orange County Islamic Center, an event at which I was present.
http://townhall.com/columnists/karenlugo/2012/03/17/nypds_ray_kelly_vs_la_sheriff_lee_baca
It gets worse. At the Orange County event, Baca and LAPD chief of the Counter-Terrorism Unit Michael Downing sat on a panel as the panelists, including Democrat congresswomen Maxine Waters, Loretta Sanchez and Judy Chu lambasted Republicans like Peter King and turned the event into a partisan political affair. Also singled out for criticism were the NYPD and FBI-all while Baca and Downing sat there silently.
Moreover, after the event, I spoke with Downing one-on-one and informed him that in 1992, the Blind Sheikh, Omar Abdel Rahman, had spoken at the same mosque as a guest of head imam Muzammil Siddiqi and had given a sermon on violent jihad, which was interpreted in real time by Siddiqi. His response?
"Well, Gary, you know some people change over time."
When I mentioned the name of Zuhdi Jasser (mentioned in the Lugo article) to him as an example of a true moderate Muslim, he didn't even know who he was. He asked me if Jasser were connected to people like Steve Emerson and David Horowitz.
This is what is protecting us from terror?
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com
Hat tip to Townhall
Karen Lugo has written a piece for Townhall on LA County's "Sheriff to the Stars", Lee Baca, who, when he's not having luminaries like Lindsey Lohan and Paris Hilton in his jail facility for tea and crumpets, is hanging around with questionable Islamic leaders and doing their bidding. In this below piece, Lugo compares Baca to NYPD Chief Ray Kelly and refers to Baca's recent appearance at the Orange County Islamic Center, an event at which I was present.
http://townhall.com/columnists/karenlugo/2012/03/17/nypds_ray_kelly_vs_la_sheriff_lee_baca
It gets worse. At the Orange County event, Baca and LAPD chief of the Counter-Terrorism Unit Michael Downing sat on a panel as the panelists, including Democrat congresswomen Maxine Waters, Loretta Sanchez and Judy Chu lambasted Republicans like Peter King and turned the event into a partisan political affair. Also singled out for criticism were the NYPD and FBI-all while Baca and Downing sat there silently.
Moreover, after the event, I spoke with Downing one-on-one and informed him that in 1992, the Blind Sheikh, Omar Abdel Rahman, had spoken at the same mosque as a guest of head imam Muzammil Siddiqi and had given a sermon on violent jihad, which was interpreted in real time by Siddiqi. His response?
"Well, Gary, you know some people change over time."
When I mentioned the name of Zuhdi Jasser (mentioned in the Lugo article) to him as an example of a true moderate Muslim, he didn't even know who he was. He asked me if Jasser were connected to people like Steve Emerson and David Horowitz.
This is what is protecting us from terror?
Friday, March 16, 2012
Israeli Apartheid?
Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com
Hat tip to Elder of Ziyon and Het Vrije Volk
I know you are hearing about Israeli apartheid, but I thought this series of posters might put it in better perspective.
ttp://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/p/eoz-posters-for-apartheid-week.html
Keep those images in mind the next time your local professor or campus Muslim Student Association/ Students for Justice in Palestine tell you about Israeli apartheid.
It's BS.
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com
Hat tip to Elder of Ziyon and Het Vrije Volk
I know you are hearing about Israeli apartheid, but I thought this series of posters might put it in better perspective.
ttp://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/p/eoz-posters-for-apartheid-week.html
Keep those images in mind the next time your local professor or campus Muslim Student Association/ Students for Justice in Palestine tell you about Israeli apartheid.
It's BS.
Wednesday, March 14, 2012
Elizabeth Holtzman Speaks at UC Irvine
Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com
On March 13, 2012, former Congresswoman Elizabeth Holtzman gave a presentation at UC Irvine on the idea of impeaching / prosecuting George W. Bush and Dick Cheney. Since it was right next door, I popped in and amused myself.
Holtzman, a former DA of Kings County (Brooklyn) is hawking a book called "Cheating Justice- How Bush and Cheney Attacked the Rule of Law. Plotted to Avoid Prosecution-and What We Can Do About it". She was introduced by the Dean of Student Services Elisabeth Schroeder, who met Holtzman in college and later worked for her when Holtzman was in the House of Representatives. Schoeder gave a bio on Holtzman and described how she defeated the incumbent representative, Emanuel Cellar, in the 1972 Democratic primaries. Schoeder described Celler as being unconnected with his constituents and their concerns.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emanuel_Celler
Holtzman was a member of the House committee during the Nixon Watergate hearings. I remember watching her on TV. Although I firmly accept that Nixon was guilty of impeachable offenses and deserved to lose his office, I recall vividly that some members of the committee seemed to have made up their minds on Day One. One of them was Elizabeth Holtzman.
Anyway, after expressing her belief that everybody should be accountable under the law no matter what office they hold, Holtzman outlined her theory and reasons why George W. Bush and Dick Cheney should be brought to justice. "They broke the law", she said. "Not secretly, but in public".
Holtzman explained all the "lies" that Bush and Cheney told to the public and to Congress about Iraq in the run-up to the Iraq war . (She never told the audience that virtually every security and intelligence agency with whom we work had told the administration that Iraq had or was developing weapons of mass destruction).
"Why did Bush do this?" she asked? "Was it for oil? For his father? For re-election? We don't know", the former DA concluded. (Oh well, you don't need to prove motive, you know, but I would have said, "to protect the country from any future attacks after 9-11".)
Holtzman gave us laws and statutes that, in her view, had been broken (by Bush and Cheney).
First was a crime to defraud the US (by their "misrepresentation" of the need to attack Iraq). She quoted 18 USC 371.
This is 18 USC 371
http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title9/crm00923.htm
Second was Foreign Intelligence Wiretaps violations.
Holtzman did not make the differentiation between ordinary criminal wiretaps that require a normal court order and national security wiretaps. She merely stated that Bush decided he didn't need to obey the law about getting court orders. I'll give her the benefit of the doubt and assume she was including the FISA court.
Third was mistreatment of detainees and violation of anti-torture statutes in accordance with the Geneva Convention and the War Crimes Act (1996).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Crimes_Act_of_1996
Holtzmann stated that Bush and Cheney took us out of the Geneva Convention. (She later amended that to state in regards to the Taliban and Al Qaida.). She described the involvement of DOJ attorney John Yoo, who wrote a legal opinion that allowed them to get around torture. (Yoo's name was mentioned twice, and both times it brought chuckles from a few audience members.) She mentioned a memo that Bush received from Alberto Gonzalez advising him to get the US out of the Geneva Convention to reduce the "likelihood that we would be prosecuted later"( under the War Crimes Act of 1996).
So, according to Holtzman, it was a prima facie case that Bush and Cheney could be prosecuted, which I guess, is the thesis of her new book.
What was not mentioned in any of this was 9-11.
Solutions?
According to Holtzman, we need to revise the statute of limitations; we need a special prosecutor; and we need to re-instate the War Crimes Act. In summary, justice for all, rich and poor, no matter their position with no immunity for those who happen to be top officials.
Well, that sure sounded reasonable to me, so when Q and A came, I raised my hand and asked her why she didn't support impeachment for President Bill Clinton, when he committed perjury while in office. I told her that I seemed to recall her being interviewed about it, and that she pooh-pooed the idea of impeaching Clinton.
"I still do," she answered then went on to state something to the effect that crime and impeachment were two different things. She began talking about how there was a move to impeach Nixon for tax evasion. At that point, I said that the question was about Clinton.
She didn't like that. Her voice rose; she pointed her finger at me and said, "I am answering it, but I will answer it in my own way".
According to her own way of answering the question, Holtzman seemed to draw a line on perjury because the impeachable office had to be an abuse of office. I guess that meant that perjury by a sitting president is not an abuse of office. So much for accountability.
When I asked for a follow-up, she cut me off with a curt, "No, you've had your question" (or something like that).
My feelings were hurt.
Another questioner asked if President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder should be impeached for having an American citizen killed in Yemen (Anwar al-Awlaki). Holtzman said that she had not studied that since her study was on Bush and Cheney, that she was troubled by it, but she couldn't answer that.
Another questioner wanted to know if Bush and Cheney could be brought to trial in a foreign court. To that Holtzman remarked that the "US is not playing an enlightened role in this area". She mentioned the example of Pinochet, who was brought to trial 27 years after he was violating human rights in Chile. She mentioned that Poland was investigating the secret prisons in its territory where detainees were taken. She expressed the hope that actions abroad might wake us up (US).
Another questioner wanted to know if Bush and Cheney could be impeached even after leaving office. To that, Holtzman explained that their pensions could be taken away.
That was pretty much it since the event only lasted an hour. At that point the audience adjourned to another room to buy Holtzman's book. (I did not.)
Here is what I took away from this event. As I had always suspected, Holtzman has a partisan bent when it comes to impeachment. She's all gangbusters when it comes to Republicans, but not when it comes to Democrats. That is based on what I will call my 4 for 4 formula. Impeach Nixon and Bush? Yes. Impeach Clinton? No. Impeach Obama? "I don't know anything about it". Elizabeth Holtzman is quite selective in her outrage in my book.
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com
On March 13, 2012, former Congresswoman Elizabeth Holtzman gave a presentation at UC Irvine on the idea of impeaching / prosecuting George W. Bush and Dick Cheney. Since it was right next door, I popped in and amused myself.
Holtzman, a former DA of Kings County (Brooklyn) is hawking a book called "Cheating Justice- How Bush and Cheney Attacked the Rule of Law. Plotted to Avoid Prosecution-and What We Can Do About it". She was introduced by the Dean of Student Services Elisabeth Schroeder, who met Holtzman in college and later worked for her when Holtzman was in the House of Representatives. Schoeder gave a bio on Holtzman and described how she defeated the incumbent representative, Emanuel Cellar, in the 1972 Democratic primaries. Schoeder described Celler as being unconnected with his constituents and their concerns.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emanuel_Celler
Holtzman was a member of the House committee during the Nixon Watergate hearings. I remember watching her on TV. Although I firmly accept that Nixon was guilty of impeachable offenses and deserved to lose his office, I recall vividly that some members of the committee seemed to have made up their minds on Day One. One of them was Elizabeth Holtzman.
Anyway, after expressing her belief that everybody should be accountable under the law no matter what office they hold, Holtzman outlined her theory and reasons why George W. Bush and Dick Cheney should be brought to justice. "They broke the law", she said. "Not secretly, but in public".
Holtzman explained all the "lies" that Bush and Cheney told to the public and to Congress about Iraq in the run-up to the Iraq war . (She never told the audience that virtually every security and intelligence agency with whom we work had told the administration that Iraq had or was developing weapons of mass destruction).
"Why did Bush do this?" she asked? "Was it for oil? For his father? For re-election? We don't know", the former DA concluded. (Oh well, you don't need to prove motive, you know, but I would have said, "to protect the country from any future attacks after 9-11".)
Holtzman gave us laws and statutes that, in her view, had been broken (by Bush and Cheney).
First was a crime to defraud the US (by their "misrepresentation" of the need to attack Iraq). She quoted 18 USC 371.
This is 18 USC 371
http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title9/crm00923.htm
Second was Foreign Intelligence Wiretaps violations.
Holtzman did not make the differentiation between ordinary criminal wiretaps that require a normal court order and national security wiretaps. She merely stated that Bush decided he didn't need to obey the law about getting court orders. I'll give her the benefit of the doubt and assume she was including the FISA court.
Third was mistreatment of detainees and violation of anti-torture statutes in accordance with the Geneva Convention and the War Crimes Act (1996).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Crimes_Act_of_1996
Holtzmann stated that Bush and Cheney took us out of the Geneva Convention. (She later amended that to state in regards to the Taliban and Al Qaida.). She described the involvement of DOJ attorney John Yoo, who wrote a legal opinion that allowed them to get around torture. (Yoo's name was mentioned twice, and both times it brought chuckles from a few audience members.) She mentioned a memo that Bush received from Alberto Gonzalez advising him to get the US out of the Geneva Convention to reduce the "likelihood that we would be prosecuted later"( under the War Crimes Act of 1996).
So, according to Holtzman, it was a prima facie case that Bush and Cheney could be prosecuted, which I guess, is the thesis of her new book.
What was not mentioned in any of this was 9-11.
Solutions?
According to Holtzman, we need to revise the statute of limitations; we need a special prosecutor; and we need to re-instate the War Crimes Act. In summary, justice for all, rich and poor, no matter their position with no immunity for those who happen to be top officials.
Well, that sure sounded reasonable to me, so when Q and A came, I raised my hand and asked her why she didn't support impeachment for President Bill Clinton, when he committed perjury while in office. I told her that I seemed to recall her being interviewed about it, and that she pooh-pooed the idea of impeaching Clinton.
"I still do," she answered then went on to state something to the effect that crime and impeachment were two different things. She began talking about how there was a move to impeach Nixon for tax evasion. At that point, I said that the question was about Clinton.
She didn't like that. Her voice rose; she pointed her finger at me and said, "I am answering it, but I will answer it in my own way".
According to her own way of answering the question, Holtzman seemed to draw a line on perjury because the impeachable office had to be an abuse of office. I guess that meant that perjury by a sitting president is not an abuse of office. So much for accountability.
When I asked for a follow-up, she cut me off with a curt, "No, you've had your question" (or something like that).
My feelings were hurt.
Another questioner asked if President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder should be impeached for having an American citizen killed in Yemen (Anwar al-Awlaki). Holtzman said that she had not studied that since her study was on Bush and Cheney, that she was troubled by it, but she couldn't answer that.
Another questioner wanted to know if Bush and Cheney could be brought to trial in a foreign court. To that Holtzman remarked that the "US is not playing an enlightened role in this area". She mentioned the example of Pinochet, who was brought to trial 27 years after he was violating human rights in Chile. She mentioned that Poland was investigating the secret prisons in its territory where detainees were taken. She expressed the hope that actions abroad might wake us up (US).
Another questioner wanted to know if Bush and Cheney could be impeached even after leaving office. To that, Holtzman explained that their pensions could be taken away.
That was pretty much it since the event only lasted an hour. At that point the audience adjourned to another room to buy Holtzman's book. (I did not.)
Here is what I took away from this event. As I had always suspected, Holtzman has a partisan bent when it comes to impeachment. She's all gangbusters when it comes to Republicans, but not when it comes to Democrats. That is based on what I will call my 4 for 4 formula. Impeach Nixon and Bush? Yes. Impeach Clinton? No. Impeach Obama? "I don't know anything about it". Elizabeth Holtzman is quite selective in her outrage in my book.
Friday, March 9, 2012
Farrakhan at UC Berkeley-What Mark Yudof Must Do
Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com
Hat tip Daily Californian
The Daily Californian, UC Berkeley's campus paper, is running an op-ed by Rabbi Adam Neftalin-Kellman, executive director of Berkeley Hillel on tomorrow's speaking appearance at UC Berkeley by Louis Farrakhan.
http://www.dailycal.org/2012/03/09/farrakhans-presence-demonizes-jews-and-others/
In addition, here is another op-ed by Daily Californian staff writer Jason Willick.
http://www.dailycal.org/2012/03/07/farrakhan-and-uc-berkeleys-free-speech-fallacy/
Another report by CBS San Francisco:
http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2012/03/09/kcbs-cover-story-farrakhan-uc-berkeley-appearance-stirs-debate-protests/
Let me say this: A petition to bar a speaker is a dangerous thing. Today it is Farrakhan; tomorrow it is Rush Limbaugh; then it is who knows who. (No, I am not comparing Limbaugh to Farrakhan in any way.) I think this should be handled as I have advocated for the notorious UC Irvine events held by the Muslim Student Union every May. When a hateful speaker comes, he or she has the First Amendment right to speak and speak without being disrupted. If they make an inflammatory statement that leads directly to someone being assaulted then they can be held liable. Other than that, there isn't much we can do. Yet, others have the right to be present and peacefully protest. They can hold signs. They can pass out leaflets. Most importantly, they can participate in the question and answer session. If time does not allow, they can ask for the speaker to stick around for some questions and dialogue. If they desire, their question can be a statement though a long diatribe of a speech will be cut off by the moderator.
This is what I would encourage the opponents of Farrakhan to do.
And there is no person at UC Berkeley more appropriate to do that than UC President Mark Yudof, who just yesterday, issued a UC-wide statement condemning racist and anti-Semitic expressions on his campuses. Yudof, who is himself Jewish and whose office is in the Bay area, should be at that event. He should monitor what Farrakhan says and after that, he should stand up and tell Farrakhan in no uncertain terms what he thinks of him. He should also tell the Black Student Union that they should be ashamed of themselves for inviting such an odious character to speak and that they have lost any credibility should they ever want to complain about racism.
No excuses, Mr Yudof. If you are out of town, get back right away. If you have other commitments, cancel them. This is the most important task you have had to date in your tenure. You have taken a lot of heat for the way you have handled -or not handled these problems. You have an extraordinary opportunity tomorrow to start setting the UC ship right and be taken seriously.
Don't blow it.
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com
Hat tip Daily Californian
The Daily Californian, UC Berkeley's campus paper, is running an op-ed by Rabbi Adam Neftalin-Kellman, executive director of Berkeley Hillel on tomorrow's speaking appearance at UC Berkeley by Louis Farrakhan.
http://www.dailycal.org/2012/03/09/farrakhans-presence-demonizes-jews-and-others/
In addition, here is another op-ed by Daily Californian staff writer Jason Willick.
http://www.dailycal.org/2012/03/07/farrakhan-and-uc-berkeleys-free-speech-fallacy/
Another report by CBS San Francisco:
http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2012/03/09/kcbs-cover-story-farrakhan-uc-berkeley-appearance-stirs-debate-protests/
Let me say this: A petition to bar a speaker is a dangerous thing. Today it is Farrakhan; tomorrow it is Rush Limbaugh; then it is who knows who. (No, I am not comparing Limbaugh to Farrakhan in any way.) I think this should be handled as I have advocated for the notorious UC Irvine events held by the Muslim Student Union every May. When a hateful speaker comes, he or she has the First Amendment right to speak and speak without being disrupted. If they make an inflammatory statement that leads directly to someone being assaulted then they can be held liable. Other than that, there isn't much we can do. Yet, others have the right to be present and peacefully protest. They can hold signs. They can pass out leaflets. Most importantly, they can participate in the question and answer session. If time does not allow, they can ask for the speaker to stick around for some questions and dialogue. If they desire, their question can be a statement though a long diatribe of a speech will be cut off by the moderator.
This is what I would encourage the opponents of Farrakhan to do.
And there is no person at UC Berkeley more appropriate to do that than UC President Mark Yudof, who just yesterday, issued a UC-wide statement condemning racist and anti-Semitic expressions on his campuses. Yudof, who is himself Jewish and whose office is in the Bay area, should be at that event. He should monitor what Farrakhan says and after that, he should stand up and tell Farrakhan in no uncertain terms what he thinks of him. He should also tell the Black Student Union that they should be ashamed of themselves for inviting such an odious character to speak and that they have lost any credibility should they ever want to complain about racism.
No excuses, Mr Yudof. If you are out of town, get back right away. If you have other commitments, cancel them. This is the most important task you have had to date in your tenure. You have taken a lot of heat for the way you have handled -or not handled these problems. You have an extraordinary opportunity tomorrow to start setting the UC ship right and be taken seriously.
Don't blow it.
Sunday, March 4, 2012
Bull Sh*t Upon The Jews!
Book of Obama Chapter 14
Upon the 4th day of the month of March, in the year of 2012 (10 Adar 5772) The Anointed One returned to Assembly of AIPAC and spoke.
I bring you greetings, My brothers and sisters.
I bring you My words of peace (and appeasement).
Now is not the time for war. It is not the time of attack.
We can attack Iran in October. (When I will need the boost in my poll numbers to win re-election.)
All the Israelis need to do is trust in Me.
For I will protect them.
I am their savior, their rock, their greatest fan.
For without Me there is no Israel.And the Assembly of AIPAC sat there, clapped politely, but did not cheer for Him. They looked to each other and would not believe the words of The Anointed One. He had lied to them many times before.
(Even with Me there is no Israel.)
I will do the right thing. I am the Chosen One.
I will stop your enemy Iran from making nukes.The Assembly of AIPAC kept their wallets shut. No money for thee they said. And as for the big stick The Anointed One spoke of, they know it is nothing more than a small putter.
I will give more arms to Israel.
I will no longer force the issue on Jerusalem.
My diplomacy against the evil Iran will work.
I speak softly but I carry a big stick.
Will you not support Me?
My coffers are bleeding dry.
(Give Me your money.)
By Findalis of Monkey in the Middle
Saturday, March 3, 2012
Exposing Anti-Israel Indoctrination on Campus
Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com
Amir Abdel Malik Ali at UCI chatting with yours truly
with MSU toughies in background
Charles Jacobs and Avi Goldwasser, co-founders of the David Project, have written an important article for The Forward. It concerns the anti-Israel indoctrination that is going on within our universities.
http://www.forward.com/articles/152224/
I heartily concur with what Messers Jacobs and Goldwasser have written. The biggest issue of contention on college campuses today is the Israel-Palestinian conflict. It is undeniable that the left and the pro-Palestinian forces are dominating the discussion. It is part of a world-wide effort to discredit and deligitimize the Jewish state.
One might ask, "Why is this issue so prevalent on college campuses?" It is because this is where the future leaders of our country are walking the hallways as we speak. Why is there no comparable discussion of the horrors occurring daily in the Middle East and places like Iran and Pakistan? Why is there no discussion of the religious persecution that is on-going in almost every Muslim country? Why Israel? I think Jacobs and Goldwasser have provided most of the answers.
The Jewish community, especially those that have children attending college, need to wake up to this serious issue. They need to closely examine their Jewish organizations that they have heretofore supported and ask why they are not speaking out. When your Jewish leaders tell you everything is fine on the local campus, go and see for yourself. Attend the MSA-sponsored events and listen to the anti-Semitic words of many of their speakers (as I have). Don't be afraid to speak out and defend your own point of view. Don't be afraid to write to your university president and local politicians to complain when you hear hate speech on campus. Don't be afraid to ask left-wing Jewish activists why they have joined with the forces that want to destroy Israel and drive the Jews into the sea.
Finally I say, wake up to the realities. Anti-Semitism is on the march and has made its way back into the mainstream. There are many Gentiles who stand with you. But you have to get involved.
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com
Amir Abdel Malik Ali at UCI chatting with yours truly
with MSU toughies in background
Charles Jacobs and Avi Goldwasser, co-founders of the David Project, have written an important article for The Forward. It concerns the anti-Israel indoctrination that is going on within our universities.
http://www.forward.com/articles/152224/
I heartily concur with what Messers Jacobs and Goldwasser have written. The biggest issue of contention on college campuses today is the Israel-Palestinian conflict. It is undeniable that the left and the pro-Palestinian forces are dominating the discussion. It is part of a world-wide effort to discredit and deligitimize the Jewish state.
One might ask, "Why is this issue so prevalent on college campuses?" It is because this is where the future leaders of our country are walking the hallways as we speak. Why is there no comparable discussion of the horrors occurring daily in the Middle East and places like Iran and Pakistan? Why is there no discussion of the religious persecution that is on-going in almost every Muslim country? Why Israel? I think Jacobs and Goldwasser have provided most of the answers.
The Jewish community, especially those that have children attending college, need to wake up to this serious issue. They need to closely examine their Jewish organizations that they have heretofore supported and ask why they are not speaking out. When your Jewish leaders tell you everything is fine on the local campus, go and see for yourself. Attend the MSA-sponsored events and listen to the anti-Semitic words of many of their speakers (as I have). Don't be afraid to speak out and defend your own point of view. Don't be afraid to write to your university president and local politicians to complain when you hear hate speech on campus. Don't be afraid to ask left-wing Jewish activists why they have joined with the forces that want to destroy Israel and drive the Jews into the sea.
Finally I say, wake up to the realities. Anti-Semitism is on the march and has made its way back into the mainstream. There are many Gentiles who stand with you. But you have to get involved.
Tuesday, February 28, 2012
Ethicists Argue for Acceptance of After Birth Abortions
By Findalis of Monkey in the Middle
Hat tip to Iggymom
When is a child a person? At conception? Viability? Birth? In the last case it is none of the above. According to Alberto Giubilini of Monash University in Melbourne and Francesca Minerva at the Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics at the University of Melbourne if you don't want the child and give birth, you have the right to kill it.
The American Declaration of Independence states this:
How a society treats the least and most helpless of its citizens shows how civilized, how mature it is. This goes against all the rules of society. But I fear it will be forced on us by those on the left. First the "mother" choosing to kill her child, then the government forcing women to kill their children. Especially those children who do not measure up to the government's idea of perfection.
Hat tip to Iggymom
When is a child a person? At conception? Viability? Birth? In the last case it is none of the above. According to Alberto Giubilini of Monash University in Melbourne and Francesca Minerva at the Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics at the University of Melbourne if you don't want the child and give birth, you have the right to kill it.
Two ethicists working with Australian universities argue in the latest online edition of the Journal of Medical Ethics that if abortion of a fetus is allowable, so to should be the termination of a newborn.I suppose this is the next step by the left to "empower" a woman. Why should anyone be "burdened" or "saddled" with a child. The child has no value. It cannot ask work, dress itself, feed itself. It is nothing to these so-called ethicists. Ethics? These two don't know the meaning of the word. They feel as long as the "mother" doesn't want the child, she should have the right to kill it.
Alberto Giubilini with Monash University in Melbourne and Francesca Minerva at the Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics at the University of Melbourne write that in “circumstances occur[ing] after birth such that they would have justified abortion, what we call after-birth abortion should be permissible.”
Alberto Giubilini
The two are quick to note that they prefer the term “after-birth abortion“ as opposed to ”infanticide.” Why? Because it “[emphasizes] that the moral status of the individual killed is comparable with that of a fetus (on which ‘abortions’ in the traditional sense are performed) rather than to that of a child.” The authors also do not agree with the term euthanasia for this practice as the best interest of the person who would be killed is not necessarily the primary reason his or her life is being terminated. In other words, it may be in the parents’ best interest to terminate the life, not the newborns.
The circumstances, the authors state, where after-birth abortion should be considered acceptable include instances where the newborn would be putting the well-being of the family at risk, even if it had the potential for an “acceptable” life. The authors cite Downs Syndrome as an example, stating that while the quality of life of individuals with Downs is often reported as happy, “such children might be an unbearable burden on the family and on society as a whole, when the state economically provides for their care.”
Francesca Minerva
This means a newborn whose family (or society) that could be socially, economically or psychologically burdened or damaged by the newborn should have the ability to seek out an after-birth abortion. They state that after-birth abortions are not preferable over early-term abortions of fetuses but should circumstances change with the family or the fetus in the womb, then they advocate that this option should be made available.
The authors go on to state that the moral status of a newborn is equivalent to a fetus in that it cannot be considered a person in the “morally relevant sense.” On this point, the authors write:
Both a fetus and a newborn certainly are human beings and potential persons, but neither is a ‘person’ in the sense of ‘subject of a moral right to life’. We take ‘person’ to mean an individual who is capable of attributing to her own existence some (at least) basic value such that being deprived of this existence represents a loss to her.Giubilini and Minerva believe that being able to understand the value of a different situation, which often depends on mental development, determines personhood. For example, being able to tell the difference between an undesirable situation and a desirable one. They note that fetuses and newborns are “potential persons.” The authors do acknowledge that a mother, who they cite as an example of a true person, can attribute “subjective” moral rights to the fetus or newborn, but they state this is only a projected moral status.
Merely being human is not in itself a reason for ascribing someone a right to life. Indeed, many humans are not considered subjects of a right to life: spare embryos where research on embryo stem cells is permitted, fetuses where abortion is permitted, criminals where capital punishment is legal.
The authors counter the argument that these “potential persons” have the right to reach that potential by stating it is “over-ridden by the interests of actual people (parents, family, society) to pursue their own well-being because, as we have just argued, merely potential people cannot be harmed by not being brought into existence.”
And what about adoption? Giubilini and Minerva write that, as for the mother putting the child up for adoption, her emotional state should be considered as a trumping right. For instance, if she were to “suffer psychological distress” from giving up her child to someone else — they state that natural mothers can dream their child will return to them — then after-birth abortion should be considered an allowable alternative.
The authors do not tackle the issue of what age an infant would be considered a person.
Read the full story here
The American Declaration of Independence states this:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed…Have we forgotten those words? Have we forgotten the simplest commandment of G-d:
Deuteronomy Chapter 5Why should a child, born into the world, be MURDERED for the reason that it is inconvenient for the woman. She should have thought of the consequences of her actions 9 months earlier when she decided to engage in sexual activity.
16. Thou shalt not murder.
How a society treats the least and most helpless of its citizens shows how civilized, how mature it is. This goes against all the rules of society. But I fear it will be forced on us by those on the left. First the "mother" choosing to kill her child, then the government forcing women to kill their children. Especially those children who do not measure up to the government's idea of perfection.
Another Take on the Garden Grove Mosque Townhall
Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com
Hat tip to Red County (Colony Rabble)
Steve Amundson, who also attended the town hall at the Islamic Center of Orange County on February 19, has written his own account of the event in Red County.
http://redcounty.com/content/town-hall-shariah-and-us-constitution
I heartily concur with Steve's description of the event. It was disgraceful.
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com
Hat tip to Red County (Colony Rabble)
Steve Amundson, who also attended the town hall at the Islamic Center of Orange County on February 19, has written his own account of the event in Red County.
http://redcounty.com/content/town-hall-shariah-and-us-constitution
I heartily concur with Steve's description of the event. It was disgraceful.
Friday, February 24, 2012
Don't Attack Iran! I'll Lose The Election!
Is the cry coming from the Obama
A military strike by Israel against Iran’s nuclear facilities has emerged as one of the biggest threats to the U.S. economic recovery and could roil the November elections.If there ever was a rational for Binaymin Netanyahu to go it alone, this is it. No longer would President Obama have to deal with Netanyahu. In fact President Obama would have more time for golf. A lot more time.
The Obama administration and economic experts have warned a pre-emptive attack by Israel could send the economy into a slump, which would change the trajectory of campaigns for the White House and Congress.
Economic and energy experts say an attack could cause an oil shock, which sent the United States into recession in the late 1970s. In the early '90s, a similar shock occurred when the OPEC oil embargo and the Iraq invasion of Kuwait sent prices soaring.
“If Iran is to retaliate against Israel or other U.S. targets, it’s really unpredictable. It’s safe to say there would be a big shock to oil prices,” said Adam Hersh, an economist at the Center for American Progress.
“The oil price shock and domestic politics in the United States are my biggest concerns for disrupting the economic recovery we’ve been seeing,” he said.
Tensions with Iran will serve as a backdrop for the emerging battle over energy policy between the White House and congressional Republicans, who are seizing on high gas prices to build political momentum.
Read it all here.
By Findalis of Monkey in the Middle
Thursday, February 23, 2012
My Letter to the US Attorney in Los Angeles
Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com
Below is the text of a letter I have written to Mr. Andre Birotte Jr., US Attorney for the Central District of California in Los Angeles. The letter concerns a townhall last Sunday at the Islamic Center of Orange County, in which Mr. Birotte spoke.
---------------------------------------------------------
Dear Mr Birotte,
I appreciate your taking the time to chat with me and listen to my concerns last Sunday at the Islamic Center of Orange County in Garden Grove. As promised, I am sending you the information I talked about regarding Imam Muzammil Siddiqi, his past words, as well as his past and present associations. In preparing this, I found it easier to retrieve the information from my own blog postings, which refer to the appropriate sources. The below links are in chronological order, past to most recent. The final link is my own posting and summary on the Garden Grove event.
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com/2011/04/muzammil-siddiqi-omar-abdel-rahman.html
http://www.investigativeproject.org/2782/orange-county-misguided-award
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com/2011/04/muzammil-siddiqi-humanitarian.html
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com/2011/04/friends-of-muzammil-siddiqi.html
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com/2011/04/abdul-alim-musa-and-muzammil-siddiqi.html
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com/2011/04/muzammil-siddiqi-more-troubling.html
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com/2011/04/muzammil-siddiqi-and-more-friends.html
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com/2011/04/isna-conference-of-1998.html
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com/2011/05/stephen-schwarz-speaks-out-on-phony.html
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com/2012/02/book-browsing-at-mosque.html
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com/2012/02/town-hall-at-islamic-center-of-orange.html
The point of these links is to show that Imam Siddiqi is not what he represents himself to be and what our leaders have thought him to be. I have met Mr Siddiqi, and I know he comes across as a soft-spoken gentleman. He speaks of equality, tolerance and peace. The above links, however, show that there is much more to his persona.
One of the themes of the event Sunday was that there is a climate of hate against American Muslims. While there is some truth to that, it does not speak for the people who are sincerely concerned about what is happening all over the world and here in America. It does not speak for those that I work with. I do not hate Muslims. The Muslims I know love this country and appreciate the freedoms they enjoy here-freedoms they didn't enjoy in their countries of origin. I do not wish to see innocent Muslims labeled as terrorists or extremists and targeted for discrimination or attack. With certain exceptions, I think Americans have done well in that regard in not holding all American Muslims responsible for what terrorists and jihadists are doing. In fact, speaking as a Christian, I have come to the belief that the group most vulnerable to hate in this country and the world now is Jews. I have seen it first hand while working the past 14 years as an adjunct teacher at UC Irvine. It is what led me to become an activist. To me, it is not a question of practicing hate and intolerance. It is a question of fighting hate and intolerance. That is the direction from which I come.
Yet, there is a problem that we cannot ignore. Aside from terrorist attacks, non-Muslim minorities are subject to hate and violence in Muslim nations like Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, Yemen and many others. At the same time, there is a subversive movement afoot among some Muslims in America, including organizations like CAIR who pose as "moderates". They use the label, "Islamophobia" as a weapon to try and silence their critics. Honest and open discussion of what is happening here and around the world is not "Islamophobia", however one wants to define that tricky term. The issue of Islam can be discussed without resorting to hate against Muslims themselves. At the same time, our freedom of speech to discuss these issues cannot be trampled upon.
As for the much-discussed Sharia law, there is no way that it can be called compatible with the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights. We must recognize that Islam is more than just a religion; it is also a political ideology-a totalitarian one at that. Its legal tool is Sharia. For Siddiqi to state that Sharia is compatible with the US Constitution is to say the Earth is flat. No code that calls for death to homosexuals or apostates can be compatible with our laws and rights. As you well know, these horrors are actually being committed in many Muslim lands as we speak. Last Sunday, Imam Siddiqi read the statement from the Fiqh Council of North America, of which he is the director. I would encourage you to read the complete statement-carefully- and note how craftily
it is worded.
I would never begrudge Muslims their right to worship. I believe in freedom of religion for all. Nor am I against immigrants. I am married to one and have myself lived in three other countries. What I do believe in is assimilation, as I am sure you do as well having come from Haiti. This does not mean that one has to leave his or her religion when they come to America. Yet, if there are certain traditions or aspects that are in conflict with our concept of equality and rights for all, then immigrants have to know that there must be an accommodation on their part-not on the part of their adopted country. It also means that American Muslims must have all the protections our Constitution guarantees for all including gays and those wishing to change religions.
Nor do I begrudge the effort of law enforcement to work within the Muslim community. Surely, there are many who want to cooperate, possibly because they themselves came to America to escape Sharia. It is a valid investigative tool, one I used myself while in DEA. Having said that, I detected a certain skepticism when I attempted to explain my views to the LAPD officers present. In that vein, I would suggest that you and your colleagues explore true Muslim moderates, people like Dr Zuhdi Jasser of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy, Stephen Schwartz of the Center for Islamic Pluralism and another newly created organization, the American Islamic Leadership Coalition. Here you will find the type of Muslims that our government should be working with-but has largely ignored. They will tell you the truth about organizations like CAIR and others. They recognize that there is a radical threat right here at home.
That leads me to my final observation. The three politicians who were present used the event to push their own political agenda against a rival party. Were I a law enforcement officer, I would have been most uncomfortable participating at such an event that featured partisan politics-especially when other law enforcement agencies were being singled out for attack (FBI-NYPD).
At any rate, I appreciate your allowing me to send you this rather voluminous information. My purpose is two-fold: First, our law enforcement agencies and officials need to be aware of the facts (in this case, Siddiqi and his associations). Secondly, those of us who are speaking out are not all a bunch of extremist bigots. On the contrary, I feel that I am fighting against hate and
intolerance.
I thank you for your time.
Gary Fouse
DEA-retired
PS: I will be posting this letter on my blog. Accordingly, I will be happy to post any response you care to give.
Wednesday, February 22, 2012
Book Browsing in a Mosque
Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com
This past Sunday, as reported, I attended a town hall event at the Islamic Center of Orange County. Prior the start of the event, I had a chance to drop into the mosque book store and do some browsing. My time was limited, but I did happen find an interesting book called "West vs. Islam" by Margaret Marcus (aka Mayam Jameelah). The entire text of the book can be accessed at the below link.
http://www.scribd.com/islamicbook/d/32350504-West-Versus-Islam
Marcus was born to a Jewish family in New York in 1934. As a young woman, she converted to Islam and moved to Pakistan, where she lived with the family of the famous founder of the Islamic party Jamaat e Islami, Maulana Abul Ala Maududi. Eventually, Maududi arranged a marriage for her. She became a prolific writer on Islam and is a well known figure in Islamic literary circles, Much of her writing reflects a condemnation of Western society and a strict interpretaion of Islam. Below is her Wikipedia entry
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maryam_Jameelah
A critical book about Marcus and her extremism was written by Deborah Baker. It is called, "The Convert"
Below is a wikipedia entry for Maududi, which includes his views on Jihad and Sharia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abul_Ala_Maududi
Below is a wikipedia entry for Jamaat e Islami. The article appears to be written by a non-English native speaker and seems favorable to the party.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jamaat-e-Islami
If I may summarize, the writer of "West vs Islam" is a woman who apparently had psychiatric problems in her life, converted to Islam, moved to Pakistan and holds very negative opinions about Western culture. I noted in one part of her book while I was in the bookstore that she does not believe that Muslims in the West should adopt Western ways in areas such as dress and others.
Maududi's version of Islam was very strict in terms of Islam ruling Muslim countries, Sharia, and status of non-Muslims. The party he founded reflects those views. Marcus apparently does as well.
To sum up, I ask myself, why the Islamic Center of Orange County, whose imam, Muzammil Siddiqi, is a well-known religious figure in the American Muslim community, would have this book in their store? This is hardly a book that encourages American Muslims to assimilate into Western society.
Is the ideology that Muzammil Siddiqi subscribes to? Is this something that is compatible with American society, pluralism, liberty, and our Constitution? On that day, I heard a lot of speakers proclaim that Sharia law is perfectly in harmony with the US Constitution. I suggest that the non-Muslim speakers who participated in Sunday's event do their homework.
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com
This past Sunday, as reported, I attended a town hall event at the Islamic Center of Orange County. Prior the start of the event, I had a chance to drop into the mosque book store and do some browsing. My time was limited, but I did happen find an interesting book called "West vs. Islam" by Margaret Marcus (aka Mayam Jameelah). The entire text of the book can be accessed at the below link.
http://www.scribd.com/islamicbook/d/32350504-West-Versus-Islam
Marcus was born to a Jewish family in New York in 1934. As a young woman, she converted to Islam and moved to Pakistan, where she lived with the family of the famous founder of the Islamic party Jamaat e Islami, Maulana Abul Ala Maududi. Eventually, Maududi arranged a marriage for her. She became a prolific writer on Islam and is a well known figure in Islamic literary circles, Much of her writing reflects a condemnation of Western society and a strict interpretaion of Islam. Below is her Wikipedia entry
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maryam_Jameelah
A critical book about Marcus and her extremism was written by Deborah Baker. It is called, "The Convert"
Below is a wikipedia entry for Maududi, which includes his views on Jihad and Sharia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abul_Ala_Maududi
Below is a wikipedia entry for Jamaat e Islami. The article appears to be written by a non-English native speaker and seems favorable to the party.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jamaat-e-Islami
If I may summarize, the writer of "West vs Islam" is a woman who apparently had psychiatric problems in her life, converted to Islam, moved to Pakistan and holds very negative opinions about Western culture. I noted in one part of her book while I was in the bookstore that she does not believe that Muslims in the West should adopt Western ways in areas such as dress and others.
Maududi's version of Islam was very strict in terms of Islam ruling Muslim countries, Sharia, and status of non-Muslims. The party he founded reflects those views. Marcus apparently does as well.
To sum up, I ask myself, why the Islamic Center of Orange County, whose imam, Muzammil Siddiqi, is a well-known religious figure in the American Muslim community, would have this book in their store? This is hardly a book that encourages American Muslims to assimilate into Western society.
Is the ideology that Muzammil Siddiqi subscribes to? Is this something that is compatible with American society, pluralism, liberty, and our Constitution? On that day, I heard a lot of speakers proclaim that Sharia law is perfectly in harmony with the US Constitution. I suggest that the non-Muslim speakers who participated in Sunday's event do their homework.
Is He Alive?
By Findalis of Monkey in the Middle
Reports out of Iran is that an Order of Execution may have been written and signed for Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani. Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani was arrested for being a Christian Minister and has been living in prison under an execution threat since 2009. The father of 2 sons, Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani has been tortured to renounce Christianity and embrace Islam. Yet he has refused. He has gathered strength in his faith while living in close supervision and in isolation from all others but his tormenters.
UPDATE: It is official. A warrant of execution has been issued for Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani. It is not known on whether or not the execution of Pastor Nadarkhani has taken place.
Reports out of Iran is that an Order of Execution may have been written and signed for Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani. Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani was arrested for being a Christian Minister and has been living in prison under an execution threat since 2009. The father of 2 sons, Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani has been tortured to renounce Christianity and embrace Islam. Yet he has refused. He has gathered strength in his faith while living in close supervision and in isolation from all others but his tormenters.
Will you lend your voice to many others and sign this petition to free Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani. He is living in the Lion's Den and like Daniel of old he has the same protector. But for how long?We are hearing reports from our contacts in Iran that the execution orders for Christian Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani may have been issued.
Pastor Youcef’s situation – an innocent man convicted and sentenced to death for becoming a Christian – has not been this dire since we first brought his case to your attention last year.
It is unclear whether Pastor Youcef would have a right of appeal from the execution order. We know that the head of Iran’s Judiciary, Ayatollah Sadegh Larijani, must approve publicly held executions, but only a small percentage of executions are held public—most executions in Iran are conducted in secret.
There has also been a disturbing increase in the number of executions conducted by the Iranian regime in the last month.
Iran is actively violating its human rights obligations by sentencing and detaining Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani. We call on the Iranian government to release Pastor Youcef immediately.
We are continuing to work to help spare the life of Pastor Youcef, and will provide additional updates on his situation as we are able.
Please continue to pray, share his story, and call for his release.
Source
UPDATE: It is official. A warrant of execution has been issued for Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani. It is not known on whether or not the execution of Pastor Nadarkhani has taken place.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.BMP)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
