Saturday, January 31, 2009

Another New Radarsite Blog

This newest Radarsite blog is in response to a suggestion from my dear friend and Radarsite supporter, Molly H. As Radarsite approaches one thousand articles, it seems appropriate to come up with some sort of a "Best Of List". Here then are my personal choices for the 50 best articles written by myself, for Radarsite. Such a list is of course purely subjective and may or may not reflect the opinions of my readers. As you all know, Radarsite is blessed to have some great contributors, many of whom have generously taken up the slack since the onset of my illness. For this I am deeply grateful. However, there is no way that I could presume to create such a list from their wonderful contributions.

It is my hope that this "Best Of" blog will prove useful to some of my loyal readers, and perhaps serve as an introduction to Radarsite for any new readers. All comments and suggestions are of course welcome - rg

A Bill to End All Activities Beyond Breathing in Motor Vehicles

By Faultline USA

Today it’s Texas. Tomorrow it could be your state.

Up before the Texas state legislature is another draconian bill designed to eliminate the “inattentive operation” of a motor vehicle. Well actually, the bill is designed to up the fines for accidents to at least twice the minimum fine applicable to any driving offense if “inattentive” behaviors are involved in the offense.

The bill lists a multitude of “inattentive’ behaviors including the consumption of food or beverage, tuning a radio, and even interacting with a passenger. Of course every imaginable behavior that could be deemed as “inattentive” couldn’t be included or the bill would have run on for hundreds of pages, so the sponsor added this little phrase to cover all bases: “engaging in another activity that prevents the operator from safely operating the motor vehicle.”

Since this bill makes every imaginable behavior beyond the act of breathing an “inattentive behavior” wouldn’t the sponsor have been more honest to simply write a bill that doubles all driving fines for offenses of reckless driving laws currently in effect?

Some say that this bill, if passed into law, would be unenforceable, but they are wrong. The police are not going to stop you just because they see you sipping your morning cup of Jo, but if you commit any minor driving violation with even an empty cup of coffee in your cup holder, you will get a double fine. Eventually you will either leave home without your coffee or you will be sure to dump the evidence at your first convenience. The unintended consequences – sleepy drivers and more highway litter!

What would be the point of sponsoring this bill? Perhaps the sponsor just wanted fifteen minutes of fame? Or perhaps this is one of many bills designed to test the waters? Getting people used to accepting seemingly ludicrous or unenforceable laws is a good Orwellian plan. Loading up state legislatures with repressive bills is a kind of socialist lottery. Eventually enough inattentive voters will discover that their own state legislatures actually passed such a bill and then other states will easily fall.

I first heard about this bill on Thursday night when our local TV stations were all a buzz and actually making fun of the bill. None of the news broadcasts mentioned the name or number of the bill or its sponsor.

Naturally, I began to ponder this question: “Who would sponsor such a bill?” My first thought was that it had to be sponsored by a National Socialist (NAZI) hell-bent on dishonest social engineering and someone who actually believes that more government regulation is the answer to all human problems.

I wouldn’t want poor Rep. Chente Quintanilla, Democrat, of El Paso, Texas to be disappointed that his name failed to get mentioned in many of the news broadcasts the other night. Let me give him the fame his bill, 81(R) HB 738, deserves!

If you are a Texan please be sure to drop your state representative a little note about this bill. Tell your representative to “Let it die!!!” If you live in another state check out the bills up before your state legislature today.

ACTION ALERT: CAIR is to meet with members of the House and Senate.

By Findalis of Monkey in the Middle

It is time to contact your Congressmen and Senators again. The Council on Islamic-American Relations (CAIR) is starting to lobby Congress for special considerations for the Muslim community.

ACT! for America members, it’s time to take ACTION !!!


Send emails and faxes, starting today and continuing through the weekend, to your Member of Congress and two Senators asking that they not meet with CAIR given that the FBI has severed contacts with CAIR. Include the story below in your emails and faxes. (Click here to find contact information for your Member of Congress and Senators).


On Monday or Tuesday place a follow-up call to your Member of Congress and two Senators. Ask to speak to their Defense or National Security Legislative Assistant (LA). When you have the LA on the phone, ask (1) if they got your email or fax and the article; (2) if they read it; (3) if the Member of Congress or Senator is aware of the issue. If the LA has not seen or read the email or fax, send it again if necessary.

If you don’t reach the LA, leave a message and phone number, and if you don’t hear back by the next day, call again!


And email us at to let us know what response you get from your contacts to Congress.

The FBI has already cut all ties to CAIR, now it is time for the Congress to do the same.
FBI Cuts Off CAIR Over Hamas Questions

by Mary Jacoby
IPT News
January 29, 2009

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has cut off contacts with the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) amid mounting concern about the Muslim advocacy group's roots in a Hamas-support network, the Investigative Project on Terrorism has learned.

The decision to end contacts with CAIR was made quietly last summer as federal prosecutors prepared for a second trial of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF), an Islamic charity accused of providing money and political support to the terrorist group Hamas, according to people with knowledge of the matter.

CAIR and its chairman emeritus, Omar Ahmad, were named un-indicted co-conspirators in the HLF case. Both Ahmad and CAIR's current national executive director, Nihad Awad, were revealed on government wiretaps as having been active participants in early Hamas-related organizational meetings in the United States. During testimony, FBI agent Lara Burns described CAIR as a front organization.

Hamas is a US-designated foreign terrorist organization, and it's been illegal since 1995 to provide support to it within the United States.

The decision to end contacts with CAIR is a significant policy change for the FBI. For years, the FBI worked with the national organization and its state chapters to address Muslim community concerns about the potential for hate crimes and other civil liberty violations in the wake of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

But critics said the FBI improperly conferred legitimacy on CAIR by meeting with its officials, even as its own investigative files contained evidence of CAIR leaders' ties to Hamas.

Last autumn, FBI field offices began notifying state CAIR chapters that bureau officials could no longer meet with them until CAIR's national leadership in Washington had addressed issues raised by the HLF trial, according to people with knowledge of the notifications.

CAIR spokesman Ibrahim Hooper declined to comment Wednesday when the IPT called for comment. Before hanging up, Hooper said "We're more than happy to cooperate with legitimate media. But we don't cooperate with those who promote anti-Muslim bigotry."

In one letter obtained by IPT News, James E. Finch, Special Agent in Charge of the FBI's Oklahoma City field office, canceled a meeting of the local Muslim Community Outreach Program, a state-federal program designed to enlist Muslims in terrorism prevention and investigate reports of civil liberties violations.

"Regrettably, due to circumstances beyond my control, the meeting will be postponed until further notice as a result of the planned participation by the Oklahoma chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations," Finch's Oct. 8, 2008 letter to Muslim groups in the Oklahoma outreach program said.

Finch made clear the Oklahoma office valued its relationship with local Muslims. He said the stumbling block to further outreach was CAIR's national leadership.

"[I]f CAIR wishes to pursue an outreach relationship with the FBI, certain issues must be addressed to the satisfaction of the FBI. Unfortunately, these issues cannot be addressed at the local level and must be addressed by the CAIR National Office in Washington, D.C.," the letter said.

A spokesman for the FBI's Oklahoma City office referred questions about the letter to the FBI's national press office. In Washington, FBI spokesman John Miller said, "We've certainly been in contact with CAIR chapters" about the un-indicted co-conspirator designation. "The letter speaks for itself."

Letters with similar wording were sent in other states, people with knowledge of the matter said. It is not known how many letters were issued, but the FBI has had strong working relationships with CAIR chapters in states including Ohio, Michigan, Arizona and Florida.

Hamas was formed in 1987 as the Palestinian wing of the Muslim Brotherhood, the global Islamic political movement that aims to spread the rule of Shariah, or Islamic law, throughout the world.

A North American branch of the Brotherhood supervised HLF, CAIR and other organizations to build political, financial and public relations support for Hamas, evidence at the HLF trial showed.

The U.S.-based Brotherhood formed a Palestine Committee, headed by Hamas official Mousa Abu Marzook, in 1988 during the first intifada uprising in Palestinian territories against Israel. Hamas's stated policy is for the destruction of Israel.

CAIR co-founders Ahmad and Awad were early active members of the Palestine Committee, evidence showed. Wiretaps recorded the two CAIR leaders participating in strategy meetings of the committee in the 1990s, and both were also on a phone list of its members, the evidence showed.

The first HLF trial in Texas ended in a mistrial in October 2007. In November 2008, the second trial resulted in convictions of five former HLF officials on all counts of providing material support to Hamas.

It is unclear what changed between the first and second HLF trials to make the FBI rescind its policy of outreach to CAIR. The un-indicted co-conspirator designations were made on May 27, 2007 in connection with the first HLF trial. Moreover, much of the evidence linking the CAIR officials to Hamas was aired in an earlier public trial in 2006.

CAIR, however, vigorously challenged the un-indicted co-conspirator designation as a violation of its First and Fifth Amendment rights, accusing the government of "demonization of all things Muslim" in a brief filed in the summer of 2007 with the US District Court for the Northern District of Texas.

The co-conspirator designation is "particularly insidious and ironic as CAIR is an organization dedicated to fostering acceptance of Muslims in American society and protecting the civil liberties of all Muslim Americans," CAIR's brief read.

The government filed a brief on Sept. 4, 2007 opposing CAIR's filing, arguing the group lacked standing to challenge the co-conspirator designation and that the matter was moot, as the evidence was already entered into the public record. The judge never ruled on CAIR's request.

The HLF trial showed that CAIR was formed to covertly influence US opinions of the Palestinian conflict and Islam, but without revealing its connections to Hamas.

Read the full article here.
To allow CAIR access to members of Congress to discuss security issues would be like allowing the Mafia to discuss issues about organized crime with members of Congress.

To find and contact your Congressman or woman go here.
To find and contact your Senator go here.


Ask to speak to their Defense or National Security Legislative Assistant (LA). When you have the LA on the phone, ask (1) if they got your email or fax and the article; (2) if they read it; (3) if the Member of Congress or Senator is aware of the issue. If the LA has not seen or read the email or fax, send it again if necessary.

Send a copy of the article and remember to always be polite.

Friday, January 30, 2009

Celebs Make Pledge to Obama and Mankind

By Maggie at Maggie's Notebook

Demi Moore

A few weeks ago, some celebrities got together, made a video and made their pledge to do good and neighborly things.

Jason Bateman's pledge is to "flush only after a deuce and never after a single." An unknown young Black man (unknown to me - I'm sure he's wildly popular) pledges to consider himself an American and not an African American. Another pledges to sell a culture of intelligence instead of a culture of ignorance.

Demi Moore and Ashton Kutcher, (husband and wife) pledge to fulfill the "200 year old promise to end slavery," "the abolition of 21st Century slavery" and "to free one million people from slavery in the next five years."

Moore and Kutcher end the video with: I pledge to be a servant to all mankind and to our President.

These are just a few of the pledges. I think some are excellent and worthy, some full of self-absorption, some predictable and at least one hilarious. The problem is, Hollywood doesn't realize that most of us practice the worthy ones every single day, and never give it a thought - would never considering making a "pledge,"...because it just isn't necessary.

If you've seen this video, scroll down to find out what comes next, because something definitely comes next.

Big Hollywood says that Moore directed and Kutcher "starred." The central theme of the video is being more neighborly and knowing and helping your neighbors, and it ended with the duo pledging their "service to all mankind." Here's the rest of the story:

Ashton Kutcher

So Ashton is awakened one morning recently, about 7:30 a.m., somewhere in the Hollywood Hills, by construction from the repair of his neighbor's home.

The following, says Big Hollywood, is some of Kutcher's tweeting:

“this SOB owl feces cougar placenta jack bone dick!”

“Jack ass 7am building a goddamn fort next to my house f’in up my view and noise polluting the entire f’in neighborhood with pounding steal”

“holy moly I’m gonna lose it!”

“this ass clown has another thing coming!”

“I’m gonna kill my neighbor”

Video seen here.

Big Hollywood tells an interesting story, coming from the LA Times: something about the house Kutcher lives in taking about 10-years to complete, and the neighbors just sucking it up. Read the entire store there's more. Oh, yeah, I almost forgot: there's something about Demi referring to Kutcher as "calm and gentle baby." Can that possibly be true?

Demi and Kutcher caught my attention with their mission to free slaves. I know a little about bonded slavery around the world and it heartbreaking. I also know that Hollywood, and feminist organizations, have turned their backs on the slaves that we are most familiar with, at this moment in time. I'm speaking of the freeing of Muslim woman and girls, and boys too. The fact that thousand of girls are now attending school in Iraq is one way we have freed the slaves of Saddam Hussein. Women everywhere in Muslim countries need our help...but that's a conservative issue - not at all attractive to these free and unencumbered American women.

This idea of ending slavery, and I assume they mean around the world, is a good one. We need an "example," and I'll be watching Demi and Ashton to see exactly what they do about freeing 21st Century slaves. Maybe we can all follow their example.

Thursday, January 29, 2009

Pro-Hamas Rally at UC-Irvine

Cross-posted by Gary Fouse

Amir Abdel Malik Ali at a previous appearance at UCI.

Today, I was caught quite by surprise to learn at the last minute that the Muslim Student Union was having another anti-Israel rally at UC-Irvine. In fact, I just happened to read an e-mail that Imam Amir Abdel Malik Ali was speaking at the flag poles at 12 noon. I was already 10 minutes late! By the time I arrived, Ali was already 20 minutes into a one hour talk. After the speech, I spoke with him for about 20 minutes. (Note) Ted Bleiweis of the Orange County Independent Task Force on Anti-Semitism heard the entire speech and will be reporting on it as well.

Ali's speech was the standard, fiery anti-Israel rant that he always gives, spiced with anti-American rhetoric, calling George Bush an idiot, and referring to certain blacks-and Mahmoud Abbas as "poop-butt Uncle Toms" (I think I have that right.) Near the end, he called upon the Muslim students in the audience from other countries to spread the word back home to boycott all American products. How patriotic!

When his talk concluded at 1pm, I approached and asked if Ali was taking questions. I was told no, but that I could speak with him directly. So I walked over and introduced myself. We then proceeded to have a civil but spirited debate on various points for about 15 minutes as some 30 or so students gathered around to listen in. My question was this; in recent anti-Israel demonstrations in Ft Lauderdale, Los Angeles and other places, some demonstrators had made comments such as,"Go back to the ovens", "you need a bigger oven", "long live Hitler", "Hitler rest in peace". Further that some posters had contained swastikas over the Star of David. I asked him if he would condemn those expressions. He replied in the affirmative except for the swastikas over the Star of David, which he considered a means of equating what the Israels are doing to the Palestinians to what the Nazis did to the Jews. (Later in the discussion, I suggested that he let his audiences know in his speeches that references to Hitler and ovens were wrong.)

I also called his attention to the mock wall that was back at the scene and that last year, it had contained a caricature of Ariel Sharon in the old Nazi style of depicting Jews (Der Stuermer). He said he was not aware of it. (Apparently, it had been on the wall earlier that morning, but had been taken off according to a statement made by a Muslim student to a Jewish professor-who relayed it to me.) I also reminded him of his last appearnce at UCI when he had referred to Obama's Jewish advisors, "Rahm Israel Emanuel, Madelyn Albright and David Axelrod-a Zionist". He stated that they were indeed "Zionists". My point was that he himself had made remarks that could be interpreted as anti-Semitic (which brought up an exchange over who is "Semitic"). He pointed out that he had never made negative remarks about Jews-only "Zionist" Jews, at which point, I noted sarcastically that putting the word "Zionists" in front of it made it all right.

The debate went back and forth about Israel, the US, Middle Eastern Jews who were driven out of Arab countries after 1948, etc. He asked if I supported Israel, I stated that I did and supported Israel's right to exist and defend itself. I pointed out to him that at no time, does he ever talk about peace between the Israelis and Palestinians or a negotiated settlement with two states, which is actually the policy of the US Government. As I asked that question, he nodded in silent acknowledgement.

I also expressed to Ali that, in my opinion, he was poisoning the minds of his young audience, leading them to believe that America was an evil country. When I expressed my love for America, he told me America was an empire, and asked me if I believed that (I said no). There was also an exchange over the meaning of Zionist, which I still consider an imprecise term. When he mentioned that there was a "witch hunt" on-going in the country against people who believed like he did, I reminded him that no one was dragging him off to jail for his statements. He replied that people in America were being arrested and held without charges in some cases for saying something in mosques. He brought up the name of Sami al Arian. I replied that Sami al Arian belonged in jail, and if released, should be deported.

One thing I have learned about Ali is that he believes in conspiracies. He believes that the FBI was involved in the murder of Martin Luther King and "influenced" the Nation of Islam to murder Malcolm X (previous talks). When I raised the question of the almost one million Jews driven from Arab lands after 1948, he passed it off as happening because some unspecified people had arranged to move them to someplace which I believe he was referring to Israel.

As I said, the conversation was civil and the students listened silently. As I left, a young man said to me that if I favored peace why did I support the IDF's actions in Gaza. My reply to him was to imagine if the Cuban Government were lobbing rockets into Miami-what would the US do? His answer?

"We would deserve it."

My response to that was simply if that is what he believed, there was no point for further discussion.

So that was pretty much it as I recall the conversation. Depending on your point of view and bias, you might have different opinions on who carried the day and made the best points. Ali, though he believes in some far-out conspiracies, is a formidable adversary. In our final exchange, he told me that the government was destroying America, at which time I stated that I agreed with him on that point, but for entirely different reasons. With that, I told him I had to teach a class and I looked forward to our next encounter. Whether anyone else stepped in to challenge him, I don't know.


Cross posted by Findalis of Monkey in the Middle

From the Sderot Media Center

Sderot Student, 23, Addresses UN Human
Rights Council in Geneva

Liraz Madmony, 23 of Sderot,
grew up under Palestinian rocket fire for eight years of her life. Although a
rocket has never directly hit her home, Liraz has experienced the terror of
rocket explosions countless times. "We don't have a bomb shelter in our house,"
she recently told SMC. "Every time, the Tzeva Adom is set off, our family races
to the shower, the only room that is most 'secure' from a rocket attack."

Liraz Madmony with Israeli
representative to the UN.

Liraz is a law student in a Ramat Gan college in central
Israel and is heavily involved with student organizations such as WUJS (World
Union of Jewish Students). "Many times I've missed my law classes and student
activities because of the rocket attacks. It's almost impossible to lead a
normal life when you are forced to live under with warning alerts and raining

While Liraz admits that balancing life as a college student
and a resident in a war-zone can at times be very difficult, she recently found
the time to share her story with the world community.
Thanks to a trip
coordinated by UN Watch two weeks ago, Liraz Madmony addressed the UN Human
Rights Council Special Session on Gaza in Geneva, on behalf of the European
Union of Jewish Students (EUJS) on January 12, 2009.

View at YouTube

"It was a very moving moment for me," says Liraz. "Here I was standing in
front of all these people--in Geneva, Switzerland--representing the people of
Sderot and all our years of suffering and terror."

Read the rest here.

Liraz is just a normal person, leading a normal life, wanting only the rockets to stop. In the last 8 years dozens of UN resolutions were passed condemning Israel. Not one has ever been passed condemning Hamas. And yet Israel is suppose to accept all the resolutions passed by the UN.

From 90210 to Sderot: Get the Story Right!

I just returned from a two week visit to Israel. I spent
my last weekend in Sderot and the Western Negev. One year out from volunteering
in Sderot, I have written this piece on the international media's lack of
context in covering the current conflict between Israel and Hamas.

Hundreds of journalists from all over the world just left Sderot and
the surrounding areas covering the current conflict between Israel and Hamas.
Where were they one year ago? Where were they four years ago, eight years ago? I
spent six weeks volunteering in Sderot exactly one year ago, and I can tell you,
the journalists were no where to be found.

Unfortunately for Israel,
it took eight years for the international community to understand that innocent
civilians in a western democracy live daily under the current threat of rocket
fire. During this time, the range of the threat expanded from a tens of
thousands to over one million innocent Jewish and Muslim Israeli citizens.

In these eight years, has the UN Security Council ever condemned
nearly a decade of rocket fire on innocent civilians of one of its member
states, Hamas’ use of human shields, and its use of schools, hospitals, and
mosques to store and launch rockets at Israel?

Are you laughing at
me for even thinking to ask such a question? Well you should be, because why
would anyone assume the international community to be, um, sensible?

Maybe they could be just a little rational? Nah, that’s just too silly!

Furthermore, has any news organization mentioned the fact Israel is the
only western democracy in the entire world that has a significant - let alone
any - part of its population living under the threat of daily rocket fire?

“Oh it’s just Israel, who cares right?” “They can take it?” Or rather,
“Maybe they deserve it, right?”

Well you know what I have to say that...

I’d also like to thank the international media for providing ZERO
context for the humanitarian issues of the Palestinian people.

Let me
describe to you a little bit of Israel’s commitment to helping the Palestinians
suffering from the wrath of their authoritarian, fanatical terrorist rulers,

From the beginning of Operation Cast Lead, December 27, 2008,
until January 12, 2009:

- 926 truckloads (22,046 tons) of humanitarian
aid were delivered to Gaza

- 449 dual nationals were evacuated from Gaza

- 3000 units of blood were donated by Jordan and transferred into Gaza

- 5 ambulances were donated by Turkey and transferred into Gaza

- 5 ambulances were transferred from the West Bank to Gaza on behalf of
the Palestinian Red Crescent Society

- 34 people were evacuated to
Israel for medical needs

On Jan. 7, 2009, the IDF decided it would
ceasefire for three hours each day in order to let humanitarian aid reach
civilians in the Gaza Strip.

I love when this gets mentioned, and they
say three hours is simply not enough. So, Israel should stop defending its
civilians all together, fully commit itself to giving aid to the other side, and
allow terrorists to fire rockets at it and threaten one million of its

Do you find it a tad bit odd that Israel is forced not only
to defend its own citizens, but those of its enemies as well? Well I don’t...I
mean, isn’t every western democracy supposed to do that during wars? Duh!

I got a question for you Mr. and Mrs. International Media.

Israel is the bad guy? Are you kidding me!

What does Hamas do
for Israeli civilians? Oh yeah, they’ve been terrorizing them with rockets for
the last eight years!

What other country, when immersed in a full scale
war, commits itself to providing humanitarian aid to their enemy? Oh yeah,

Read the rest here.

I am suppose to accept that the world media isn’t biased against Israel. And then I am suppose to acknowledge the Tooth Fairy and Easter Bunny too. Right. If it was not so tragic, I would laugh.

An Illusion of Normalcy?

An uncertain calm rests upon Sderot at the moment. The sounds of war have disappeared, replaced by the sounds of a city slowly coming back to life. The click of the intercom followed by the voice that repeatedly stated Tzeva Adom, followed by the rocket explosion a few seconds later seems to be something of the past.

But daily news reports on Palestinian terror activity from Gaza are constant reminders to Israelis in Sderot and the western Negev that the calm remains seemingly temporarily.

Israel declared a unilateral ceasefire on Saturday night, January 17 at 2:00 am, which ended Operation Cast Lead, a 3-week offensive against Hamas. It was Israel's longest offensive against Hamas in the Gaza Strip, following two brief military offenses in the Gaza Strip in 2004 and 2006 in response to Qassam attacks that killed two Israeli girls, and wounded several other civilians.

Sderot children play around protected shelters.

Two day after the ceasefire was declared; Palestinian terrorists fired 8 mortar rockets at Israel on Tuesday morning, January 20. Palestinian militants also opened fire on IDF soldiers in Gaza. On Tuesday evening, the last of the IDF troops had pulled out of Gaza before the inauguration of US President Barack Obama at 6 PM. Israel time.

On Tuesday, January 27, Palestinian terrorists carried out the first deadly attack on Israel since the ceasefire concluded. An Israeli soldier was killed on Tuesday morning when an explosive device set at the Kissufim crossing along the Gaza Strip border exploded as an IDF force patrolled the area. Another officer was seriously injured, with one leg amputated and another severely damage. Two other soldiers suffered from extensive shrapnel wounds, but were categorized as lightly hurt. They remain hospitalized.

Read the rest here.

And on Wednesday, rockets again flew into Israel from Gaza.

IAF jets struck a weapon manufacturing site in the Rafah area late on Wednesday
night, in response to a Kassam rocket fired from the Gaza Strip at Israel
several hours earlier.

t was the IDF's first attack on a building inside
the Strip since the end of Operation Cast Lead.

The Kassam was fired at
southern Israel a day after Gaza operatives breached the cease-fire with a
deadly bomb attack along the border.

The rocket hit an open area in the
Eshkol region, causing no casualties or damage.

Hamas can violation a cease-fire and the world says nothing. Israel strikes back and there are riots in the streets. Can anyone see a double standard here? I do.

Like always, Israel will do what it has to do to survive. And like always I once again send out a plea for donations for the Sderot Media Center. The donation you give goes directly to the victims of the terror. To donate either click the logos on the top or bottom of the page or go here. The people of Sderot will be very grateful.

What Hamas teaches the children of Gaza

Cross-posted by Gary Fouse

This film is from Palestinian Media Watch. It shows what Hamas is teaching the children of Gaza. I suggest that those of you who feel the need to protest Israel in the streets of America for fighting Hamas (and Hizbollah) take a few minutes to watch this video. Hopefully, it will give you pause.

Wednesday, January 28, 2009

The "Stimulous Package"- Oinkers Aweigh!!

Cross-posted by Gary Fouse

"Now that's what I call stimulation."

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan. That's what this obscene boondoggle of a spending bill that is winding its way through Congress has been named. For one thing, any time you see the government using the term "investment"-or in this case-"reinvestment", it's time to hold on to your wallet. Translation= tax and spend.

Of course, President Obama and the Democrats are telling us that the purpose of this bill is "to stimulate the economy". They tell us that the situation is so urgent that the bill must be passed immediately. Translation= We want it passed before it is held to public scrutiny because it is so flawed that if the people could really understand what the bill is about, they would never accept it. This is the same reasoning that we heard about the urgency to confirm Tim "Turbo-Tax" Geithner as Treasury Secretary and get him working to save the American economy-this the man who used Turbo-Tax do do his taxes and wound up owing the Government over $34,000.

Today, the bill, now totaling some $825 billion, passed the House with all Republicans voting against it along with a dozen Democrats.

As I write this piece, I am gazing down the list of proposed expenditures. What this is is simply a massive spending/welfare bonanza-and for what?

* Note that there may have already been changes in the below expenditures as the bill goes through Congress.

The first thing I see is some 140 billion going to Infrastructure; roads, school construction and repair, upgrade parks. That doesn't sound too bad, but then I think about how the folks in Congress are going to be fighting to get bridges and federal buildings built in their districts so they can get their names on them. Robert Byrd (D-WV) of course, is the master of this. There must be a few hundred bridges, schools, roads, highways, and public restrooms named after him in West Virginia. John Murtha (D-PA) isn't far behind.

The Infrastructure heading also lists 2.25 billion dollars for the HOME Investment Partnerships Program Block grant "to enable state and local governments, in partnership with community-based organizations, to acquire, construct, and rehabilitate affordable housing and provide rental assistance to poor families."

Then there is 5 billion dollars to the public housing capital fund "to enable local public housing agencies to address a 32 billion backlog in capital needs-especially those improving energy efficiency in aging developments."

2.1 billion for full-year payments to owners receiving Section 8 project-based rental assistance.

Neighborhood Stabilization Fund- 2.25 billion for the redevelopment of abandoned and foreclosed homes.

How about the Homeless Prevention Fund 1.5 billion for homeless prevention "activities"?

How about 1.4 billion to the National Science Foundation (NSF) for scientific research, infrastructure and competitive grants?

So much for the "Infrastructure". Now we move to Education and Training.

There is 13.9 billion to increase the Pell Grant maximum award and pay for increased program costs..........

There is 13 billion to "help close the achievement gap and enable disadvantaged students to reach their potential."

Under Training, we see the following:

A total of $3.4 billion for "job training including formula grants for adult, dislocated worker and youth programs".

Vocational Rehabilitation State Grants- $500 million for state formula grants "to help individuals with disabilities prepare for and sustain gainful employment.

Employment Services Grants-$400 million to "match unemployed individuals to job openings through state employment service agencies and allow states to provide customized reemployment services."

Under Energy, we see a total estimated expenditure of 51 billion "to provide INVESTMENTS in the development of "clean, efficient, American energy......."

More specifically, $40 billion to the Department of Energy to do whatever they do to develop "clean, efficient, American energy."

2.6 billion to "replace older motor fleet vehicles owned by the Federal Government, with alternative fuel automobiles that will save on fuel costs and reduce carbon emissions." (New G-cars for federal employees).

$6 billion for "Green Buildings" to repair federal buildings using green technology...."

$1.3 billion for grants or loans to "owners" for energy and green retrofit investments. (What owners?)

$613 million to DOD for energy efficiency upgrades and construction of "alternative energy projects" including wind and solar power..."

400 million for rural businesses initiatives including development of renewable energy.

* At this point, the reader might want to take a breath and ask, "What is being stimulated here?".

But there is more.

Under the Heading, Protecting the Vulnerable, we have;

$16.5 billion for additional Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits (formerly the Food Stamp program).

500 million for Special Supplemental Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC). 150 million for food banks.

Helping Children-
$4.6 billion to increase investments in early childhood programs.


Community Development Financial Institutions- 250 million "to immediately provide capital to qualified community development financial insttuions (CDFIs) to invest in the development of under served communities."

Social Services Block Grant- 400 million for "states and local non-profits to deliver critical services to unemployed and low-income individuals struggling with the effects of the recession."

Under Health (total expenditure-16 billion dollars)

- $5 billion to "jump start efforts to computerize health records..."

This is not a complete list of the expenditures, and the final bill will probably look different in some ways. I think you get the idea however that this is not only a gigantic pork barrel scam, but it also reflects more government involvement in our lives, a return to government welfare-and has little to do with stimulating the economy. It is nothing more than a huge government spending program that would make Lyndon B Johnson blush.

"I heard that!!"

And who is going to pay for this 800 plus billion dollar program? We are, that's who. There is only one way to pay for all this irresponsible government spending, and that is by raising taxes.

I would urge you to follow this bill and pull up the latest version on-line as it proceeds to final passage. It's our money, folks.

Rethinking the GWOT: Maximalists versus Minimalists

The terms "maximalism" and "minimalism" are used with great regularity in biblical studies [primarily by Middle Eastern Archaeologists to refer to the degree of their acceptance of the biblical narrative as historical truth. Those who believe that the Bible is mostly figurative and contains very few reliable historical references refer to themselves as Minimalists. Whereas those researchers who believe that the Bible is actually an archaeologically-substantiated historical record describe themselves as Maximalists]. To the best of my knowledge, these terms were coined by William W. Hallo in his 1989 Presidential Address to the American Oriental Society, published as "The Limits of Skepticism" in the Journal of the American Oriental Society 110 (1990): 187-199.
A note from Radarsite: For the purposes of the following article I have borrowed the terms Minimalism and Maximalism from the biblical archaeologists. It is my hope that by reframing the concept of this Global War On Terror (GWOT), we can gain a more meaningful appreciation of what we are actually up against: that is, whether or not we are actually in a war, and if we are in a war, what this war actually is and is not. I believe that these two terms more accurately define the true nature of our national differences than do our present inadequate and often confusing labels of Democrats or Republicans, Liberals or Conservatives, Pacifists or Warmongerers. Here then is a new paradigm. We begin with the Minimalists. - rg

The Minimalists

There are two diametrically opposed views on our current "War on Terror", what it is, and how it should be prosecuted. The minimalists hold the view that the problems issuing from Islam are not representative of Islam as a whole, but are rather discreet and episodic criminal actions, perpetrated by a fanatical few. Therefore, they believe, that the proper response to these provocations should likewise be discreet and contained. By no means should we reproach, hold responsible, or punish all Muslims for the actions of a few. It is the minimalists' fundamental belief in the inherent goodness of all humankind that drives them and sustains their worldview. With a few rather negligible exceptions, for the past four decades American foreign policy has been directed by the minimalists. Beginning with the Islamic Revolution in Iran of 1979 (and, arguably, even some centuries before this event) we have treated these ongoing and escalating Muslim attacks against the West in general and Americans in particular as isolated criminal activities -- as opposed to what many believe are clearly acts of war. Our responses have therefore been -- to be somewhat kind and euphemistic -- 'measured'. Our national response to the Iranian Hostage Crisis of 1979, for example, was one failed and pathetically ill-advised helicopter attack. And that was it. And since 1979? Here is a partial list of what followed, together with our subsequent responses.

1993 World Trade Center bombing, New York. Truck bomb set off in basement of 110 story tower blocks holding up to 50,000 people. 6 killed, 1,000 injured but tens of thousands of civilians escape down stairs.
Law enforcement and Intelligence Response: tracks down and convicts some members of Osama Bin Laden's gang on US soil, including 'blind Sheik' Omar.

1995 Operation Bojinka (Airliner hijack, bomb) plots foiled by US intelligence, Bin Laden believed responsible.
multiple airliners intended hijacked over Pacific.
Arrest of Ramzi Youssef yields his computer with good intelligence.

1996 Khobar towers barracks bombed in Saudi Arabia, killing 19 US troops.
Protective response: since intelligence was hard to come by, the US moved and secured its barracks more carefully.

1998 US Embassy bombings in Kenya, Tanzania: 224 killed, many civilians wounded outside. Intelligence believed Bin Laden was responsible.
Military Response: Clinton administration ordered bombings of a pure drugs factory in Sudan and a bunker headquarters in Afghanistan. Neither holding any terrorists, the retaliation was unsatisfactory.

2000 USS Cole, guided missile destroyer, bombed in Aden harbor by small boat with suicidal crew; 17 killed but ship is saved; intelligence indicates Bin Laden responsible. Owing to military target, probably not to be defined as terrorism.

2000 millennial bombings plotted but foiled by US intelligence. Several major incidents are found in captured plans. Plotters have links to Al Qaeda.
Law enforcement: 2000-2001 some plotters from previous Al Qaeda bombings tried and convicted in US courts.

The Clinton Administration offers us a perfect example of the minimalist response to Islamist terrorist attacks against Americans. Here is an excerpt from National Review's excellent Q&A by Kathryn Jean Lopez with Richard Miniter, "Clinton's Loss?". Richard Miniter is a Brussels-based investigative journalist. His new book, Losing bin Laden: How Bill Clinton's Failures Unleashed Global Terror has just been released by Regnery.

How [did] the previous [Clinton] administration fumble on bin Laden?
1. Did not follow-up on the attempted bombing of Aden marines in Yemen.
2. Shut the CIA out of the 1993 WTC bombing investigation, hamstringing their effort to capture bin Laden.
3. Had Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, a key bin Laden lieutenant, slip through their fingers in Qatar.
4. Did not militarily react to the al Qaeda bombing in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. 5. Did not accept the Sudanese offer to turn bin Laden.
6. Did not follow-up on another offer from Sudan through a private back channel.
7. Objected to Northern Alliance efforts to assassinate bin Laden in Afghanistan.
8. Decided against using special forces to take down bin Laden in Afghanistan.
9. Did not take an opportunity to take into custody two al Qaeda operatives involved in the East African embassy bombings. In another little scoop, I am able to show that Sudan arrested these two terrorists and offered them to the FBI. The Clinton administration declined to pick them up and they were later allowed to return to Pakistan.
10. Ordered an ineffectual, token missile strike against a Sudanese pharmaceutical factory.
11. Clumsily tipped off Pakistani officials sympathetic to bin Laden before a planned missile strike against bin Laden on August 20, 1998. Bin Laden left the camp with only minutes to spare.
12-14. Three times, Clinton hesitated or deferred in ordering missile strikes against bin Laden in 1999 and 2000.
15. When they finally launched and armed the Predator spy drone plane, which captured amazing live video images of bin Laden, the Clinton administration no longer had military assets in place to strike the archterrorist.
16. Did not order a retaliatory strike on bin Laden for the murderous attack on the USS Cole.

Minimalists base their threat assessments on mostly secondary sources, i.e., their stable of policy experts, popular pundits, authors, and MSM reports. These appreciations tend to align with their pre-disposed, all-encompassing liberal worldview: All people are basically good, and want the same things. It is only a matter of dealing with the few 'bad apples' amongst them. To the minimalists, the threat itself is suspect, often the product of the maximalist's overactive imagination, or, more menacingly, a total fabrication contrived by the maximalists in order to achieve more power. For the minimalists, the less we do the better.

The Maximalists

How do the maximalists perceive the threat of Islamic terror? Unlike their ideological opponents, the maximalists base their appreciation of the Muslim world threat on primary sources: the Koran, the Hadiths and the Sura; the writings of the terrorists and their mentors themselves; the clearly-stated objectives of the various Islamist terror organizations, such as Hamas, Hezbullah, the Muslim Brotherhood, etc. The maximalists believe that the problem begins and ends with Islam itself; that the lure of victimization is bringing more and more Muslims to answer the call for Jihad. The maximalists believe that Muslim aggression against the Infidel, rather than being a logical reaction to some recent Western outrage, is an historical core precept of Islam. By its very nature, the free and democratic West is, was, and always will be the sworn enemy of Islam. This latest incarnation of Muslim holy war against the West is a continuation of this age-old war of pre-ordained conquest. Here is a relatively concise example of the maximalist's view of our Islamic enemies:

Ideology and Goals
The principal stated aims of al-Qaeda are to drive Americans and American influence out of all Muslim nations, especially Saudi Arabia; destroy Israel; and topple pro-Western dictatorships around the Middle East. Bin Laden has also said that he wishes to unite all Muslims and establish, by force if necessary, an Islamic nation adhering to the rule of the first Caliphs.

According to bin Laden's 1998 fatwa (religious decree), it is the duty of Muslims around the world to wage holy war on the U.S., American citizens, and Jews. Muslims who do not heed this call are declared apostates (people who have forsaken their faith).
Al-Qaeda's ideology, often referred to as "jihadism," is marked by a willingness to kill "apostate" —and Shiite—Muslims and an emphasis on jihad. Although "jihadism" is at odds with nearly all Islamic religious thought, it has its roots in the work of two modern Sunni Islamic thinkers: Mohammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab and Sayyid Qutb.

Al-Wahhab was an 18th-century reformer who claimed that Islam had been corrupted a generation or so after the death of Mohammed. He denounced any theology or customs developed after that as non-Islamic, including more than 1,000 years of religious scholarship. He and his supporters took over what is now Saudi Arabia, where Wahhabism remains the dominant school of religious thought.

Sayyid Qutb, a radical Egyptian scholar of the mid-20th century, declared Western civilization the enemy of Islam, denounced leaders of Muslim nations for not following Islam closely enough, and taught that jihad should be undertaken not just to defend Islam, but to purify it.

Here is more from the eminent Brigitte Gabriel.

During this first month of the New Year 2009, we have seen some stunning
developments that, considered together, should leave absolutely no doubt about the rising radical Islamic threat on our doorsteps in America.
I have been warning Americans since 2002 about this threat, and that the threat is not just confined to terrorism. This is not a "war on terror." Terror is a tactic, one of many in the arsenal of radical Islamists.
I have been declaring, to anyone who would listen, that Islamists are well on their way to subverting and transforming Europe, and they are riding that wave here to America.

I have told my personal story, of how Islamists, step by step, took over my country of Lebanon. How they used our freedoms and commitment to tolerance and multiculturalism against us to further their ultimate ends. And how they are using the same strategies and tactics against us in the West. In just the past three weeks we have seen:. A violent Islamic protest in Britain, where an angry mob shouting "Allahu Akbar" chased - yes, chased - dozens of British policemen for blocks. You must see this video to believe it! (Please be warned - there is offensive language and profanity). Click here<> to see this shocking video.

Pro-Hamas, anti-Israel Muslims conducting demonstrations here in America, shouting praises to Hitler for what he did to the Jews, yelling "go back to the ovens," and at times physically attacking counter-protestors. The Amsterdam Court of Appeals ordering the prosecution of Dutch parliamentarian Geert Wilders because he has made statements
deemed "insulting" and harmful to "the religious esteem" of Muslims. Austrian parliamentarian Susanne Winter convicted of "incitement," <> because of public statements she has made, including the claim that the prophet Mohammed was a pedophile.

Muslim protest marches in Italy that ended with the protestors, in an obvious act of intimidation, conducting mass prayer vigils directly in front of Catholic places of worship.. The release of an official U.S. government report<> stating that Hezbollah is forming terrorist cells here in the U.S.that could
become operational.

The UN continuing to move ahead with the "Durban II" conference and its document that is little more than an anti-Israel rant that calls for suppressing public "defamation" of religion - notably Islam. This has
run parallel to an effort by the Organization of the Islamic Conference to get the UN Human Rights Commission to pass a resolution condemning public"defamation" of Islam.

My friends, the handwriting is clearly on the wall. Radical Islam is on the march, and it is growing stronger and bolder with every passing day. What elected official in Europe or the UK will now have the courage to speak out against this threat? Certainly the actions against parliamentarians Wilders and Winter will ultimately have a chilling effect on American elected officials as well. How many more "no-go zones," Muslim enclaves here non-Muslims and even police officers fear to go, will appear in Europe? We're already seeing such enclaves develop here in America right now. There's a reason why Dearborn, Michigan, is frequently referred to as "Dearbornistan."

What will happen in America when 50,000 ranting, chanting Islamist
demonstrators attempt to aggressively back down and chase police officers trying to maintain order? Will the police use the force necessary? If they do, we can expect howls from groups like CAIR (the Council on American-Islamic Relations).
How will government officials respond? And if the police back down and run, as they recently did in Britain, what message is being sent to radical Islamists?
With the recent announcements by the Obama administration regarding ending the use of certain coercive interrogation practices, will this administration have the courage and use the tools necessary to protect us from Hezbollah, Hamas and al Qaeda terrorist cells in our midst?It is becoming crystal clear that 2009 is going to be a critical year in our effort to roll back the rising tide of Islamofascism.

Obviously, Brigitte Gabriel is a maximalist.

While, as we have seen, for the minimalists, less is better, the maximalists see the present GWOT in a much larger frame of reference. The combat in which we are presently engaged in Iraq and Afghanistan and elsewhere, is perceived to be just battles in this monumental Clash of Civilizations, this existential war of barbarism against civilization. The repercussions of this great clash are truly global. Our enemies, and our allies alike, are watching this great contest unfold and shaping their future foreign policy on how they perceive our strengths and weaknesses. It is no accident, that by our wavering on our military commitment in Iraq, we are showing these watchers our weaknesses, our adolescent impatience, and our lack of will, and consequently the Russians, the Chinese, and even the puny potentates of the world, like Hugo Chavez and Kim Jong Ill are beginning to rattle their sabers. Thus, we maximalists view this GWOT as an immense struggle with huge stakes involved. In our view, this great struggle has just begun, and our collective future will be formed by the efficacy of our response.

A few final thoughts.

Unfortunately, the line between the maximalists' worldview and that of the minimalists is often blurred and indistinct. It cannot be neatly delineated by party affiliation. There are maximalists and minimalists on both sides of the aisle. Immediately following 9/11, President Bush himself described Islam as a "religion of peace", hijacked by a few fanatics -- a perfect expression of minimalism. Thus, even this brave president who brought the GWOT to the terrorists ( and paid a huge political price for doing so) has, by his often inscrutable statements, helped to muddy the waters, and drain our collective will to fight.

Is it any wonder then that the American public is so torn apart and confused? When our own leaders have so often shown an astonishing ignorance of the true nature of our enemies, how can we expect more from a grossly-misinformed, or purposely-manipulated public?

Finally, however, there is such a thing as personal responsibility. It is no longer feasible to claim ignorance; there is just too much information out there. It is no longer a valid excuse to say that you are too busy to study the issues involved. It is no longer morally conscionable to walk the fence between these two diametrically opposed views of our world. We must understand the differences between the two and we must choose. Our future will be determined by which path we take.

Ominously, by our choice this past November, we have, it seems, embraced the dangerous delusions of the minimalists. Is it too late to change course? Is it too late for the Western World?

God only knows - rg

The Handwriting on the Wall
By Brigitte Gabriel
Courtesy of Naomi Ragen

Comment to this article transposted from StopThe ACLU:
AirborneVet on January 29th, 2009 6:16 pm
As a person with a degree in Middle East Studies, and over 10 years experience teaching and dealing with this subject and with Islam, I very much enjoyed your assessment here concerning minimalists and maximalists. It fits the GWOT concept very well. Only in the end, will we find out which approach was best. Personally, I agree with the Maximalist point of view.

For more see:
And this latest from Iran

Blinded by Hope, Abandoned by Reason: A Post-Election Update

"This Is A War Of Destiny
Between Infidelity And Islam."
(Text Of Bin Laden's Audio Message To Muslims In Iraq, Posted On Jihadist Websites, 12/28/04)

"Those who know nothing of Islam pretend that Islam counsels against war. Those [who say this] are witless. Kill all the unbelievers just as they would kill you all!"
Islam Is Not a Religion of Pacifists
(1942)-- Ayatollah Ruhallah Khomeini

In 1996 and then again in 1998 Osama bin Laden issued two fatawa -- that Muslims should "kill civilians and military personnel from the United States and allied countries until they withdraw military forces from Islamic countries and withdraw support from Israel.

Bin Laden: "The Whole World Is Watching This War And The Two Adversaries; The Islamic Nation, On The One Hand, And The United States And Its Allies On The Other.

What is there, my friends, in these simple, direct and unequivocal messages that remains obscure? What is there here that lends itself to misinterpretation? Could these undeniable experts be any less ambiguous in their pronouncements? This is, they tell us quite plainly, "a war between Infidelity and Islam", a war between "the Islamic Nation and the United States and its Allies." And, even more clearly, "Islam is not a religion of pacifists".

Yet we will not listen. We will not heed their warnings. We refuse to acknowledge the weight of their solemn words. Blinded by Hope, abandoned by Reason, we steadfastly refuse to understand their meaning.

It has been six and one half years now since the catastrophe, and incredibly we have not yet found the political or moral courage to identify our true enemies. We distort and obfuscate the overwhelming evidence to support our insupportable optimism. Confronted by Naked Evil, we refuse to recognize its presence and retreat into the temporary comfort of our pitiful rationalizations and our misleading euphemisms. We cling desperately to our hopelessly outdated discredited theories and our wishful thinking. We continue to denigrate the power and the determination of our adversaries -- not because we know it to be true, but rather because we will it to be true and because it makes us feel better. Our old familiar list of comforting illusions still somehow sustains us:

All religions are basically the same.

All religions are centered on the search for Peace and Love.

All people are basically the same; they are all searching for Peace and Love.

If violence comes from a particular religion, then it necessarily follows that the basic tenets of that particular religion have been perverted: the religion itself cannot be faulted, it is merely the work of a few misguided fanatics, who can be found in any religion -- even Christianity.

These are the falsehoods we cling to even as the enemy approaches. Yes, we tell ourselves, our enemies are troublesome, but they are merely a fanatical minority. Islam itself is a peaceful religion. It has been hijacked by a few crazy people. But our war is not with Islam. Definitely not with Islam...

"This is a war of destiny between Infidelity and Islam"

There is nothing here, my friends, but crystal clarity. There are no disclaimers or qualifications. No possibilities here for misinterpretation. Yet -- incredibly, and disastrously -- we persist in our denial. We are drunk with denial. While our enemies are cold sober with hatred.

An undercover survey of more than 100 mosques and Islamic schools in America has exposed widespread radicalism, including the alarming finding that 3 in 4 Islamic centers are hotbeds of anti-Western extremism. "We have too many mosques in this country," said Rep. Pete King, R-N.Y. "There are too many people who are sympathetic to radical Islam. We should be looking at them more carefully." Sunday, February 24, 2008 HOMELAND INSECURITY
---------------------------------------------------- ---------------

An update - 5 Oct 08: It is now more than seven years since that catastrophic Muslim attack on our nation, and unbelievably, incredibly, there are still those blind or delusional fools out there who continue to come to the defense of Islam or of Muslims because they do not, or will not, understand the threat. They have remained unconvinced and obdurate, steadfastly refusing to educate themselves. Have they bothered to research the vast amount of literature available on this critical subject? Have they studied the Qur'an, the Hadith and the Sira as carefully as those of us who are warning of this imminent disaster have done before coming to the defense of this cult of death which is Islam? Of course not, because of their innate wisdom studying the subject is unnecessary. They self-righteously continue to frame this monumental crisis in the misleading and erroneous terms of bigotry and prejudice: to even question the morality of Islam, they tell us, is a sign of Islamophobia. To even question the obviously compromised allegiance of Muslims in America is nothing but overt racism of the worst kind.

Somehow, if it is still possible, before it really is too late, we must reach these deluded collaborators -- sorry, but that is exactly what they are. We must somehow make them understand that their high-minded stance against prejudice and racism is totally irrelevant to the existential threat we face from a reinvigorated and militant Islam. Not only are these fools fighting the wrong war, but they are hampering our efforts to fight the right one.

It's not just that Islam is incompatible with the Judeo/Christian democratic world; it is, always has been, and always will be, diametrically opposed to it. Since its inception in the Seventh Century Islam by its very nature is the sworn enemy of freedom and democracy; therefore it always has been and always will be the sworn enemy of the West in general and the United States in particular. To not understand this fundamental fact is to not understand Islam; and these lazy misunderstandings and naive misinterpretations are putting us all in jeopardy. Simply put, to blindly come to the defense of Islam or of Muslims because they do not, or will not, understand the enormity of the threat involved is aiding and abetting the enemy.

Blinded by your own egos, you have made an enormous mistake. You are not what you perceive yourselves to be. You are not the courageous defenders of our imperiled Constitution, or of our endangered Civil Liberties, our Freedoms of Speech, or our Freedoms of Religion; you are not the noble champions of the poor and oppressed victims of racism and intolerance in America and the world.
You are simply fools and traitors.
From Radarsite: A post-election update. It's the end of January, and the American people have voted. All of our dire warnings have been ignored, and a majority of voters have spoken. 49% of those voters polled during the last days of this election cycle placed the economy at number one on the list of threats America faces. The next level of threat below the economy was the threat of terrorism, which came in at an incredible 9%. So it will be more delusion and denial, appeasement and conciliation. By this fateful vote we have just confirmed our national weakness. We have accepted responsibility for the ills of this world and we have vowed to change. And what of our implacable foes? How have they responded to this olive branch? With cynical exploitation. In our enemies eyes, we have just formalized and validated our national lack of will and strengthened their resolve. Close Gitmo. Withdraw our troops from Iraq. Reach out to our bloodthirsty adversaries. Abandon Israel to her fate. This is just the beginning. Blinded by hope, abandoned by reason, we have stepped off the cliff.

Here, as reported today, 1/28/09, in Reuters is Iran's official response to our limp-wristed outstretched hand.

Tuesday, January 27, 2009

Barney Frank and OneUnited Bank

Cross-posted by Gary Fouse

Barney Frank

Not surprisingly, Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) is back in the spotlight. This time, the chair of the Financial Services Committee is attracting attention for interceding with the Treasury Department and arranging 12 million dollars in Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) funds to be directed to OneUnited Bank of Massachusetts-even though the bank doesn't seem to meet the guidelines for bailing out banks.

This tiny bank in Massachusetts is the only minority-owned bank in the state. The bank's capital has been depleted, and it suffered a loss of $54.3 million from its holding of preferred stock in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. It is currently under a cease and desist order from the FDIC for its unsound practices in lending and executive compensation. The bank has been ordered to cut financial ties to a California-based liability company that possesses a beachfront home in Santa Monica worth 6.4 million. The bank also pays for Porsche for the personal use of its president Kevin Gohee.

So why did Frank personally intercede on OneUnited's behalf and steer 12 million to the bank? According to Frank, it would have been tragic if the only black-owned bank in Massachusetts were allowed to fail. He also stated that it was not OneUnited's fault that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac ran into problems.

It has been reported by the Wall Street Journal (1-27-09) that in addition to Frank, one other member of Congress was contacted by the bank for assistance. That would be Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA). Just coincidentally, Waters' husband, Sidney Williams, was a director of the bank until this past spring. Just a coincidence, mind you.

However, I am confident that President Barack Obama, in his promised era of change and transparency, will clean up this behind-the-scenes process that is anything but transparent.

Besides, Barney Frank is on the job.

The Hypocrisy of Maxine Waters

Cross-posted by Gary Fouse

Representative Maxine Waters, (D-CA)

There are few people in Congress more odious than Maxine Waters (D-CA). A member of the Congressional Black Caucus, Waters, who represents a district on the outskirts of LA, specializes in racial politics. One of her favorite issues is racial profiling, yet she also paints herself as a drug warrior trying to protect the inner city from the scourge of drugs. In that vein, in 1996, she launched into an attack on the CIA based on allegations that the agency was facilitating the flow of cocaine into inner city neighborhoods. Yet, her "concern" about the drug problem is contradicted by her intervention in a DEA Houston drug investigation in 1999.

Following a 1996 article in the San Jose Mercury that alleged the complicity of the CIA in the crack epidemic of the 1980s in Los Angeles, Waters called for an investigation. The Justice Department was unable to find any evidence to support the allegations. Not satisfied, Waters dragged CIA Director John Deutch to a "town hall" forum in South Central Los Angeles to answer the charges in a hall full of hostile community members who verbally abused Deutch. (Security for Deutch was extremely heavy due to the volatile nature of the event.) Waters,having already convicted the CIA, stated at the time the following,

"I’m gonna make somebody pay for what they’ve done to my community and to my people."

Of course, the allegations proved groundless.

Waters' outrage about drug trafficking did not extend to DEA's Houston office in 1999when she learned that they were investigating a certain James Prince, the head of Rap-a-Lot Records in Houston's Fifth Ward. The years-long investigation was being conducted by the local task force composed of DEA and Houston PD drug investigators.
Prince contacted Waters in August of 1999 stating that he feared his life was in danger from DEA. He claimed that he and his associates had been followed, stopped and intimidated by DEA agents on numerous occasions. As a result, Waters, on August, 20, wrote a letter to Attorney General Janet Reno, a letter that was forwarded to DEA and on to the Houston Field Office. Waters' letter alleged racial profiling, racial slurs and harassment.

At this point it might be fair to ask why Prince chose to contact Waters, who represented a district in California as opposed to his own Texas representative. Answer? Well, it seems that Prince was a childhood friend of Waters' husband (Sidney Williams). That's why.

But I digress. After Houston Special Agent in Charge Ernest Howard received the letter, he informed the task force officers (DEA-Houston PD) that the investigation against Prince and his organization was being shut down. Subsequently, the lead DEA investigator, Jack Schumacher, was transferred to a desk job. An internal DEA (OPR) investigation was started into the agents' behavior which exonerated them. Not surprisingly, the agents and officers reacted with surprise followed by anger.

One of Prince's recording artists, Brad (Scarface) Jordan, subsequently cut a record, "Look me in my eyes", mocking DEA and claiming that they (Rap-a-Lot) had been able to kill the case.

Eventually, as the news became public, Congressional hearings into Waters' conduct ensued. In 2000, all the involved law enforcement personnel including Schumacher, Howard and then-DEA Administrator Donnie Marshall were subpoenaed to the House Committee on Government Reform chaired by Dan Burton (R-IN). Transcripts from the hearings of December 6-7, 2000 can be read at the site below:

It is here that accounts differ. The agents testified that Howard had mentioned a letter and politics as being the reason the case was being shut down. Howard (who is also African-American) testified that the reason he intervened in the investigation was because he did not want to subject his agents to false accusations and public/media abuse. He also testified that the case had not actually been closed, but that he had dictated that no further "pro-active" investigation (undercover, surveillance, ect) be conducted without prior authorization. Yet, he later sent an internal agency e-mail to HQs explicitly stating that the case had been closed due to political pressure. In his testimony, Howard stated that he had worded the message in that manner as to cause an immediate response from his counterparts in HQs so that he could "vent his anger". In his testimony, Marshall denied that DEA would close any case due to political pressure.

Much of the questioning in the hearings broke down along partisan lines. While Burton (R) wanted to get to the bottom of the mess, some of the Democrats, like Henry Waxman (D-CA) and Elijah Cummings (D-MD), seemed more interested in defending Waters, who Cummings referred to as the most courageous drug-fighter in Congress-someone who had put her life on the line. Schumacher was questioned about the number of shootings he had been involved in during his law enforcement career and how many people he had killed.

In effect, Marshall, Howard and other DEA managers testified that Waters had not ordered them to terminate the investigation and that the investigation was still on-going. And that was the end of that. As we all know, Maxine Waters is still in Congress today. Not surprisingly, Waters was listed on the 2005 and 2006 lists of the "Most corrupt members of Congress" by the organization, Citizens for Responsibility for Ethics in Washington (CREW) for her "exercise of her power to financially benefit her husband, daughter and son."