RADARSITE

Tuesday, June 24, 2008

The Thirty Years War: Iran's Uninterrupted War Against America

Cross posted from ACT
http://www.actforamerica.org/

This is a revealing look into the mindset of the militant leaders of Iran – and their views of the West. They are convinced America does not have the political will to do what is necessary to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear power. What’s more, past attempts at “dialogue” have only emboldened President Ahmadinejad and the Iranian mullahs.

Interestingly, as noted in the commentary below, the one action that did cause Iran to suspend part of its nuclear program was our invasion of Iraq. Those who understand that the militant Muslim world respects strength and power are not surprised by this.

Iran cannot be allowed to complete the building of nuclear weapons. An Iran with nuclear weapons is simply unthinkable and unacceptable.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BOMBS AWAY

WHY THE US POLICY ISN'T WORKING - AND IRAN WILL GET NUCLEAR WEAPONS

Why Iran Will Get Nuclear Weapons

June 15, 2008 --

"Hit us and we shall hit you ten times harder!" This is how General Muhammad-Ali Jaafari, the newly appointed commander-in-chief of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard (IRGC) has responded to speculation about a possible attack by the United States and/or Israel on Iran's nuclear installations.

Jaafari replaced General Yahya Safavi last year after the latter made a speech in which he implicitly warned the mullahs that Iran's military was not ready for war against far more powerful enemies.

Those familiar with Iranian military capabilities know that it is Safavi's sober assessment, and not Jaafari's bluster, that reflects the true situation.

The problem is that Jaafari can make his claim because he, and his political masters in Tehran, are convinced there would be no military action against their regime.

In 2005, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the then newly-minted President of the Islamic Republic and darling of the IRGC, unveiled a strategy based on the assumption that once George W. Bush is out of the White House, the United States would bite the bullet and accept a nuclear-armed Islamic Republic as "regional superpower" in the Middle East.

Two events convinced Ahmadinejad that his strategy was correct:

The first came in May 2006 when the Bush administration, then at the nadir of its unpopularity because of the situation in Iraq, joined the line of supplicant Europeans begging Tehran to negotiate a deal.

That unexpected shift in Washington's policy produced the opposite effect.

Far from persuading Ahamdinejad that this was a good time to defuse the situation, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's attempt at nuance and multilateral diplomacy convinced Tehran that the Americans had blinked.

The second event that confirmed Ahmadinejad's belief that "America cannot do a damn thing" came with last year's National Intelligence Estimate (NIE). Using a language of obfuscation, the NIE claimed that Tehran had abandoned key aspect of its nuclear program in 2003. The NIE undermined the whole case brought by the International Atomic Energy Agency against the Islamic Republic.

Whatever one might say about Ahmadinejad, one thing is certain: he plays an open hand. He is convinced that the US does not have the stomach for a fight and that Bush is the last American president to even dream of pre-emptive war.

He thinks the dominant mood in the US, and the West in general, is one of pre-emptive surrender.

Ahmadinejad may well be right: there is not going to be any war against the Islamic Republic.

Here is why: as soon as there are tangible moves, not just threats, leaked through The New Yorker's investigative reporters, that could threaten the existence of he Khomeinist regime, Tehran will announce a temporary suspension of its uranium enrichment program in accordance with three United Nations' Security Council resolutions.

Such an announcement will instantly defuse the situation, break the diplomatic coalition created by Bush, and, possibly, even inspire Nancy Pelosi to praise Ahmadinejad as a man of peace. To launch a war against Iran in such a situation would become politically impossible, even if John McCain is president.

A temporary suspension would not undermine Iran's plans to build a "nuclear surge capacity" - that is to say producing all that is needed for making atomic warheads without actually manufacturing bombs. Iranians, inspired by 3,000 years of history, know the value of patience. They are not in a hurry. They know that weaving a Persian carpet sometimes takes years.

In 2003, Iran did announce a suspension of its uranium program. Now, however, we know that even during that suspension, Tehran was working on other aspects of its nuclear project.

This time, the regime might accept another temporary suspension only if its own survival is at stake.

Taking measures that might hurt the people of Iran won't do the trick. The mullahs are as concerned about the welfare of their people as Saddam Hussein was about that of the Iraqis and Robert Mugabe is of the Zimbabweans. Sanctions already imposed by the UN make life more difficult for the average Iranian but have little effect on the regime.

This means that the Islamic Republic will not, indeed cannot, offer any concessions unless faced with the prospect of regime change.

Ahmadinejad has said as much, albeit in different words.

He has castigated his predecessor Muhammad Khatami for accepting suspension in 2003 when the regime was not in danger. Khatami says he did so because at the time, shortly after the fall of Saddam Hussein in Iraq, he feared that the Americans might make a right turn and march on Tehran as well.

In other words, it was fear of regime change that persuaded the mullahs to accept suspension five years ago. As soon as that fear was gone and Bush appeared to be headed for a political lynching in his own country, the program was resumed at an even faster pace.

The way Western politicians talk about it, one gets the impression that the Iranian nuclear issue is a quirk of the mullahs that could be fixed with the threat of sticks and promise of carrots. It is not.

The Iranian nuclear issue has three layers.

The first concerns the power struggle in Tehran. Ahmadinejad has built his macho image on this issue. If he backs down he will be politically dead.

The second layer concerns the regime's strategy for hegemony in the Middle East. The Islamic Republic needs tactical "nuclear parity" to guarantee it won't be attacked with nuclear weapons as it proceeds to drive the Americans out of the Middle East, help destroy Israel as a Jewish state, and impose Khomeinism on the Arabs in the name of Islamic unity.

The third layer concerns the regime's ambitions, spelled out by Ahmadinejad and others, to create an international coalition to challenge the global system dominated by the United States.

Ahmadinejad has already promised anti-American regimes in Latin America "full support and protection" against the "Great Satan" in Washington. Iran is already laying the foundations for an armaments industry in Venezuela. One day a nuclear-armed Islamic Republic may extend its nuclear umbrella to Venezuela, Nicaragua, Bolivia, Paraguay, Ecuador and, why not, even Cuba.

The Islamic Republic has been at war against the United States and the international system it leads for almost 30 years. This has been a low intensity war because the US and its allies have shied away from full-scale confrontation. The US has shown it has lots of power but not the courage to use even a fraction of it. The Islamic Republic's power, on the other hand, is "tiny," as Senator Barack Obama has noted. But the mullahs have been prepared to use that "tiny" power in full, with already devastating effects.

The issue is not how to avoid war with the Islamic Republic. It is how to end a war that has been going on for almost 30 years.

As in all wars there are three ways to end this one: surrender, make a deal, or win.

A note from Radarsite: This is perhaps the clearest, most concise analysis of the evolving Iranian threat we have yet to come across. "Surrender, make a deal, or win" -- these are our options. Is there really any choice? "An Iran with nuclear weapons is simply unthinkable and unacceptable". I simply cannot believe that we -- the United States or Israel -- will allow Iran to go nuclear. One or the other of us will do what has to be done. And we will do it before November.

However, if I am wrong, if we cannot find the necessary will to act now while we still have a chance to contain this threat, if we prevaricate and procrastinate beyond that inevitable deadline, then, by God, we will justly deserve the righteous contempt of our adversaries, and must then resign ourselves to live with the consequences of our cowardice.

For more on this subject see:
- "Should We Bomb Iran?"
http://radarsite.blogspot.com/2008/05/should-we-bomb-iran.html

- "The Strong Horse and the Weak Horse: America and the Fall of the Roman Empire"
http://radarsite.blogspot.com/2008/05/strong-horse-and-weak-horse-jimmy.html

Monday, June 23, 2008

The Card

Either it's this,

or this

If there was ever really any doubt that the card would be played, you can now set it aside. It's already been played. This afternoon, for example, we came across the following Reader's Article at Real Clear Politics: "The Perfect Site For Racist Obama Haters ". Clicking on the article title brings you to the website of that notorious racist and antisemite David Duke. http://www.davidduke.com/ This, then, is how they will fight.

If anyone still believes that this contest isn't going to be about race, or that the Obama supporters aren't fully prepared to use that proverbial card whenever they see it to their advantage, then they'd better wake up. This is how they intend to fight the fight. These are going to be their tactics. "Racist Obama Haters" -- how comfortably those three words fit together. The message is clear and undeniable, isn't it? Either you're for Obama or you're for racism.

For those who still somehow held out hope that the other side wouldn't actually sink that low, that they wouldn't attempt to reduce this immensely important presidential race to a showdown between blacks and whites for racial hegemony, all one has to do is recall the disillusioning travesties of the Rodney King or the OJ Simpson trials to be disabused of those unreasonable expectations. Did those ludicrous charades have anything whatsoever to do with justice? Or were they just about a black man standing up to the white man's system? And now that the stakes are even higher -- as high as they could possibly be -- can we expect the battle to be any less ferocious, or the tactics any less ruthless? Can we reasonably presume that this great national contest will be solely concerned with electing the best candidate for the job regardless of race? Not anymore. The card has been played; it's on the table.

Now more than ever, isn't this November going to be about a black man standing up to the white man's system? A black man standing up to the Racist Obama Haters?

Of course, to even pose such a question is to automatically be indicted of the crime. And this, my friends, is precisely why, despite its inherent absurdity, that overused card is such a formidable tactic. The opposition is effectively silenced.

Was the OJ Simpson trial about a cold-blooded double murder, or about racial retribution?

One can only wonder, what will November's Obama trial be about?

Sunday, June 22, 2008

From Other Sites on the Line: 23 Jun 08

Obama's Endorsements From Our Enemies

Cross posted from Highly-Opinionated.com
http://highly-opinionated.blogspot.com/2008/06/endorsements-from-our-enemies-why-cant.html

Sunday, June 22, 2008
Endorsements from our Enemies: Why Can't Barack Obama Catch a Break from them?

Presidential candidates often seek out endorsements from prominent figures not only nationally, but throughout the world, during election years. What, however, does it say for a candidate when a nation's enemies endorse a candidate?
It's a conspiracy theorists dream situation that Barack Hussein Obama finds himself facing.

The Democratic party front-runner and likely nominee in the upcoming Denver national convention has overcome the Clinton machine, rising through the ranks quickly to go from Congress into not even a full term in the Senate, into the launching position to become, possibly, the President of the United States.

His quick rise to fame and popularity is a tale straight out of the Brothers Grimm; a fairy tale ascension to power from the local to the national level, with a somewhat Messianic appeal to the public that hasn't been seen since the 1930's in Germany. Captivating audiences initially with his message of hope and change, Obama quickly soared into position to take on the "inevitable" Hillary Clinton campaign, ultimately defeating her and ending her hopes of becoming the first woman to gain the White House in the 2008 election cycle.

But at what cost to the nation does the rise of Obama bring? His campaign catch phrases, "hope and change," have done little, really, to address a hope in what, or a to address what changes that he intends for the nation, other than mentions of higher taxes and the promise to bring our combat forces home from Iraq within the first year and a half of his administration.

Perhaps, in seeking the true nature and character of the man, candidate Barack Hussein Obama, one should begin by looking at his list not of detractors, but at his list of supporters, and examine the causes they represent.

Jesse Jackson - political activist and civil rights activist. Very spotty record since the King days in his methods of promoting social and political change. Jackson has also been called a "shadow senator" from the District of Columbia.

Jane Fonda - actress and war protester who posed with North Vietnamese forces in a photo-op during the Vietnam War.

Danny Glover - actor cum political activist known for his support of Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez.

Bill Maher - Comedian and political commentator host of Politically Incorrect (which it is anything but), known for his anti-American and anti-Christian remarks.

Spike Lee - actor, political activist, director, known for his controversial race relations films and statements.

Mayor Douglas Wilder - Mayor of Richmond, Virginia, and former Governor of Virginia, who called for riots at the Denver DNC if Obama was not the party nominee.

And many others, listed here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Barack_Obama_presidential_campaign_endorsements

But this is just barely the tip of the iceberg in controversial figures endorsing Obama, and all of the above mentioned are Americans. What about his endorsements from overseas groups? This past week, Obama has received endorsements from two groups who have been and are stated enemies of the United States.

While Sen. Barack Obama sought to improve his relationship with the Jewish community today by meeting with leaders in Philadelphia, comments by a Hamas political adviser this weekend could potentially hurt the Democratic presidential candidate.

During an interview on WABC radio Sunday, top Hamas political adviser Ahmed Yousef said the terrorist group supports Obama’s foreign policy vision.

“We don’t mind–actually we like Mr. Obama. We hope he will (win) the election and I do believe he is like John Kennedy, great man with great principle, and he has a vision to change America to make it in a position to lead the world community but not with domination and arrogance,” Yousef said in response to a question about the group’s willingness to meet with either of the Democratic presidential candidates.

This endorsement brings back up the resignation earlier this year of Obama adviser Rob Malley over controversy surrounding his ties to Hamas. Seeking to put an end to any rumors or speculation of any links to Hamas by Obama, Malley stepped down in an attempt to shed the campaign of such speculations, speculations with have revived with the endorsement of Obama by Hamas leadership this week.

To compound the situation facing the Obama team in light of the Hamas endorsement, Obama received another dubious endorsement this week, this time coming from North Korea.

The Chosun Sinbo, the mouthpiece of North Korea’s Japanese front organization Chongryon and often for the North Korean regime itself, has announced its preference for Obama over McCain, whom it calls “a variant of Bush” and “nothing better than a scarecrow of neoconservatives,” which is a bit odd considering that the Bush Administration’s giveaway diplomacy is better for Kim Jong Il than even Clinton’s awful performance.

So what does this say of the character of candidate Obama, that he receives endorsements from at least two of our nation's enemies? Are there expectations of Obama from these endorsements, or are they merely well wishes from foreign nationals who have interests that are not in the interest of the American people? Given the record of flip-flopping that has been characteristic of Obama of late, and the support of members of the Democratic party being withheld from his campaign, could it be that there are, at this late stage of the election cycle, important issues that we, the voting public are unaware of but that are known to these groups overseas who are endorsing him? Could it be that there is information being gleaned from Barack Hussein Obama's Muslim Kenyan half-brother Malik to which we are not privy?

Whatever the answers, for some reason, two of America's enemies are interested in seeing Barack Hussein Obama elected to the office of the President. Why can't Obama catch a break in endorsements from our enemies? Perhaps it's because he doesn't deserve one...

Posted by HCdL
Once and Always, an American Fighting Man

A note from Radarsite: Bravo! Our good friend and fellow blogger Hawk has come up with an indictment of Barack Hussein Obama worthy of a Federal Grand Jury. If a person is known by the company they keep, then BHO is well known to us. There could be no more damning evidence against this most dangerous of candidates than this list of traitors and anti-Americanists who earnestly support him. How can any reasonable person even consider supporting such a potentially disastrous candidate?

Unfortunately, we know the answer to this question, don't we?

There are those who remain unmoved by even the most blatant evidence against him. They are smitten. They will happily cast their votes for their own doom regardless of our protestations and warnings. They are immune to logic and reason. They are utterly convinced that they are ushering in a New Age of Tolerance and Goodwill to all. They are, they firmly believe, in the vanguard of a new world movement that will banish racism and prejudice from the planet forever. These hapless creatures are beyond hope. We will not move them.

Then there are those others, of course, whose motives are more surreptitious and sinister. These are the hard leftists, the elitist ideologues, the New Age Communists, the One World advocates, for whom all traces of democratic capitalism must be eradicated and replaced with their supercessionist dream. They, too, are untouchable. They will never abandon their ideologies, no matter how many times their bleak and discredited system has been proven to be an unworkable abject failure.

But thankfully there are others. There are all of those good people out there who have not yet committed themselves. They are waiting to be convinced -- one way or the other. They are the ones we could still stand a chance with. They are, in the final analysis, our only hope. Perhaps the world's only hope. And it is for these good people we must continue the fight to the very end.

Thank you Hawk for giving us some powerful and much-needed ammunition for this crucial battle. We need all the help we can get. -rg

See this article in WVW News.net
http://www.wvwnews.net/story.php?id=5011

American's Fat Lazy Butts and Britain's Immigration Problems

To my readers: On June 1, 2008, Radarsite cross posted an article from the Daily Mirror titled "Britain's Immigration is Out of Control".
http://radarsite.blogspot.com/2008/06/britains-immigration-is-out-of-control.html
Following the article Radarsite posted our usual commentary. The following exchange from the comments thread is one reader's response to our commentary and our reply. We have posted a final comment to all of this from our now-famous friend Lionheart.- rg

Here's the original commentary:

A note from Radarsite: Nowhere could the major cultural battles that are taking place throughout the West be more visible and instructive than those currently being fought out in Britain. The multiculturalist PC Government's "open door" immigration policy has, not surprisingly, proven ruinous to the country, both economically and culturally. Despite their repeated, and one might say, cynical and devious attempts to put a good face on it and fudge the figures, the results are in and they are deeply troubling. The situation is much worse than originally thought. The British Isles are in serious trouble, and we all know who is to blame, don't we?

How on earth does one justify giving away an ancient and noble culture -- to a lesser, more backward culture? How does one rationalize "opening the doors" to thousands upon thousands of unskilled and often 'culturally-conflicted' immigrants whose arrival will unquestionably have a "dramatic [and negative] effect on the nation's services", and on the nation's character? How does one defend the act of ruining a country, while supposedly in the service of that country?

This is the war we are in. These are the battles. This is the nature of the enemy we face.

We here in America are now being advised by our knowledgeable British friends to "not go to London". To "steer clear" of one of the most famous and beautiful capitols in the world. And why? Why are they warning us away? Because, in their own words, London has changed so much that it has become almost unrecognizable. It has begun to take on all the mean characteristics of a Third World city, with an appropriately out of control Third World crime rate. It isn't the immigrants who live in isolated pockets now; it's the Brits.

This is where your vaunted liberal multiculturalism has brought us, you fools, you multiculturalist PC morons. Are you proud of yourselves now?

As we watch this epic drama unfold from across our pond, we shake our heads in disbelief and sadness. But we comfort ourselves with the knowledge that what is happening over there in England could not happen here. Here, we are protected by our American laws and our American Constitution. A foreign culture -- or several foreign cultures, just couldn't come over here and take over the whole damn country -- could they? We are different here -- aren't we? I mean, no American Government would allow such a thing to take place here -- would they?

The answer, my friends, is just a little over five months away.

Here's our reader's comment:

The answer, my friends, is just a little over five months away.
Yes, don't vote for Obama or the browns will kill us all! Sigh.
Look, despite all the fearmongering, assimilation still works. Yes, immigration puts pressures on our society, causes ethnic, religious, and economic conflicts, and threatens the purity of suburban culture. But immigrants overwhelmingly are becoming American and even succeeding dramatically at work and school where native-born students and workers are failing. Hopefully competition from immigrants will get some Americans off their fat lazy butts and force them to sweat a little. Obama for President isn't going to be the end of the world. And you better get used to the idea anyway, because McCain doesn't really have a snowball's chance in hell.
June 22, 2008 12:43 AM

Radarsite's reply:
To [name withheld by Ed.] -- Other than a deeply held conviction in your own self-importance, and your abysmal lack of knowledge of the subject, you seem to share one other trait with your fellow libs -- that inevitable persistent and annoying complacency, coupled with that affected disdain.

Assimilation works?? What country are you referring to -- not Britain I hope, not the now-infamous Londonistan, not the virtually ruined northern industrial cities which have become culturally unrecognizable and whose crime rates have soared exponentially since your wonderful immigrations? Certainly not the Britain of our good friend and contributor Lionheart? Ask him about how well integration has worked in Luton, where he has been forced to live in fear of his life from the "assimilated" Pakistani drug gangs. But of course you know better, don't you? Your pitiful attempt at condescension falls flat at the feet of your hopeless ignorance.

Foolishness and complacency -- why do they always seem to go hand in hand with the liberal leftist persona? And add to that thoroughly unattractive mix that fashionably nasty anti-Americanism, which you are so proud to display.
And you have the gall to suggest that immigrants "will get some Americans off their fat lazy butts and force them to sweat a little." What the hell America are you talking about? Certainly not the America and the Americans I know. Your arrogant self-centered contempt makes me ill. Why do I suspect that you are the one with the fat butt?

Here is my reply, lifted from a previous article written in response to another self-satisfied and ignorant critic of American industry:
"And why is it that this crass, unlettered public of ours, who is only interested in what brand of shoes they wear, works harder and puts in more hours and takes less vacations than any of those feeble and declining unionized socialistic European workers wallowing in their increasingly failing and stagnant economies could ever conceive of?"

I cannot bear to engage self-centered and hopelessly ignorant America haters any longer. Your empty-headed attacks just make me ill. If you have any more bile left to spew out save it for some other more like-minded site because you have already worn out your welcome here. No room here for ignorant anti-Americanists. Sorry.

PS" Obama will join the unhappy ranks of Al Gore and John Edwards.

June 22, 2008 1:46 AM
Lionheart said...
Well put Roger.

God bless
June 22, 2008 6:46 AM

Saturday, June 21, 2008

Follow up: Orthodox-led Backlash Against Agriprocessors

A Just Retribution

Follow up to our original article:
http://radarsite.blogspot.com/2008/05/blips-on-screen-28-may-08.html

Hat tip to Findalis of Monkey in the Middle

http://findalismonkeyinthemiddle.blogspot.com/

Iowa meat plant taken to task for abusive practices

From Jerusalem Post

By MICHAL LANDO - NEW YORK
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1213794295213&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Jewish summer camps have returned shipments of expired meat, an Orthodox-led boycott is under way, contractors have pulled out and an increasing number of Jewish organizations are joining in protest against the largest US kosher meatpacking company, which has been under intense scrutiny since being raided last month.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents arrested nearly 400 Agriprocessors workers last month at the firm's plant in Postville, Iowa.

This week Camp Ramah Wisconsin and Camp Interlaken JCC, also in Wisconsin, returned meat that was well past its expiration date. The two summer camps, both part of a consortium that buy food together, told their agent to find alternate sources of kosher meat.

And, in a petition effort organized by Uri L'Tzedek, an American Orthodox social justice group, more than 1,300 signators have agreed to refrain from buying meat from Agriprocessors until it meets a list of conditions.

Among them are agreeing to pay employees the federal minimum wage ($5.15 per hour), abiding by laws pertaining to worker safety, sexual harassment and physical abuse, and recognizing the right to collective bargaining. Uri L'Tzedek also called on the company to establish a department to address these concerns to be monitored by an objective third party.

At a meeting last week between company representatives and Uri L'Tzedek, Agriprocessors executives agreed to produce a document within 48 hours that explained Agriprocessors' worker protection policies and to detail the role of Jim Martin, the former US attorney for the Eastern District of Missouri hired by the company as a compliance officer.
A week later, the document has yet to arrive. But the company did put leaders of Uri L'Tzedek in touch with Martin.

Their impression: "He seems like a person of integrity," said Shmuly Yanklowitz, founder and co-director of Uri L'Tzedek. But at this point the company is acting to avoid indictment and it remains unclear whether Martin will be authorized to address the reforms the group is demanding, Yanklowitz said.

"He intends to let the company know where the problems are and urge changes, but because they are avoiding indictment, it's not clear his role will address concerns we have," said Yanklowitz. "To ensure it will, he needs to not only inform the company but also the consumers."

If the owners of Agriprocessors avoid indictment, it remains unclear whether they would return to their current practices "once they are in the clear," said Yanklowitz. "That's why we wanted a third party in place for monitoring."
This week, Ameinu, the US arm of the World Labor Zionist Movement, joined the fray. It is urging Jewish groups not to buy meat from Agriprocessors, and on Thursday evening Ameinu co-sponsored an event at Manhattan's Ansche Chesed Synagogue titled "When is Kosher Meat Treif? A First Hand Account of the Agriprocessors Meat Packing Story."

Avram Lyon, a longtime activist in the Jewish community and the labor movement, was to share his experiences visiting Postville in the wake of the Immigrations and Customs Enforcement raid. He spoke with Agriprocessors workers and heard troubling stories of their treatment by the managers and owners of the facility.

The fact that there were 18 children picked up in the recent raid was reason enough to respond, Lyon said.

"You don't have to wait to know that there were children working at the plant; their ages are not something that can be contested," Lyon said. "What else do you have to wait for? Do you think food produced by a 15-year-old kid is kosher?"

Three weeks ago, Lyon met a 15-year-old from Mexico who was hired by Agriprocessors, on condition that he buy a $3,500 car from the company. The boy reportedly told the supervisor he could not afford the car, and was told he could pay a small amount each week. At the time, the boy did not know how to drive, nor did he have a license or insurance.

Lyon said certifying agencies such as the Orthodox Union were culpable for maintaining that the Agriprocessors meat was kosher and refraining from taking action until the government concluded its investigation.

"The position of the OU has been that the only thing they are interested in is how the animal is slaughtered and whether there are imperfections in the meat," Lyon said. "Postville is a poster child of failure of that kind of approach to kashrut. It's proof you can't separate one part of Jewish law from other parts of Jewish law."
The fact that there were 18 children picked up in the recent raid was reason enough to respond, he said.

A note from Radarsite: Just as our friend Findalis correctly predicted back in May, the most damaging retribution for these immoral and/or criminal violations of trust on the part of Agriprocessors would come from the Orthodox Jewish community itself. And so they have. Even if the owners actually succeed in avoiding indictment, whether they can survive this major backlash from their primary customer base remains to be seen. -- rg

Feeling Besieged Lately?

California gays launch effort to stop marriage referendum

Cross posted from One News Now.com
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Business/Default.aspx?id=148550

Lisa Leff - Associated Press Writer - 6/21/2008

SAN FRANCISCO - Gay activists asked California's highest court Friday to keep off the November ballot a citizens' initiative that would again ban gay marriage.

Lawyers for Equality California filed a petition arguing that the proposed amendment to the California Constitution should be invalidated because its impact was not made clear to the millions of voters who signed petitions to qualify the measure before the state Supreme Court legalized same-sex unions."This court has recognized that gay and lesbian couples have a fundamental right to marry and, as of June 16, such couples have been getting married across the state," the petition states.

The petition also claims the so-called California Marriage Protection Act should be disqualified because it would revise, rather than amend, the state Constitution by altering its fundamental guarantee of equality for all - in essence writing a law the state high court has already found unconstitutional into the constitution."If enacted, it would alter the underlying principles on which the California Constitution is based and make far-reaching changes in the nature of our basic government plan, by severely compromising the core constitutional principle of equal citizenship (and) ... by destroying the courts' quintessential power and role of protecting minorities," it states.

The petition names Secretary of State Debra Bowen and the measure's sponsors, a coalition of religious and social conservative groups called ProtectMarriage.com, as defendants. Since Bowen's office already has certified the amendment for the fall election, a spokeswoman says she can remove it only through a court order."She has a ministerial duty to certify any initiative when they qualify through the petition process, and she can't remove an initiative without a judge's order," said Kate Folmar, a spokeswoman for the secretary of state.

The last time the state Supreme Court was asked to decide if a proposition should remain on the ballot was 2005, when it did so twice. In both decisions, the propositions were allowed to stay on the special election ballot.In both 2005 cases, the state Supreme Court overturned lower courts who had taken the propositions off the ballot. The propositions were a redistricting initiative backed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and another that would have re-regulated the state's electricity market.

The Arizona-based Alliance Defense Fund, which represents the measure's sponsors, called the petition a desperate move it would fight."This is just another attempt to force a radical political agenda upon the people of California," said Defense Fund senior counsel Glen Lavy. "The opponents of marriage are willing to use any means necessary to impose their will."

A note from Radarsite: I don't think that I am alone in feeling besieged by the activist left. Somewhere along the way, the fight for equal rights has morphed into an aggressive campaign of intimidation and bullying tactics worthy of the Third Reich.
I would venture to guess that most Americans feel that gays -- or any other group of American citizens should not be subjected to unfair discrimination. But this is not what this is all about. Not anymore. This is all about power. And I for one am getting tired of being labeled bigoted or a homophobic simply because we disagree with your ever-increasing demands. And, yes, to a lot of us it does appear that you are out to destroy the very fabric of our society. We gave an inch, and then you wanted a foot. Now you want to change our lives.
Well, enough is enough. You have overplayed your hand, and even those who basically supported your cause are becoming alarmed now. Perhaps you should think about quiting while you're ahead. - rg

Friday, June 20, 2008

What Happened?

Cross posted from ACT
http://www.actforamerica.org/

In yet another example of how school textbooks are painting a whitewashed, sanitized picture of Islam, the story below describes how a defender of this approach defines “jihad.”

Reza Aslan, a “religion scholar,” defines “jihad” as “to do one’s best to resist temptation and overcome evil.” She goes on to say, “how you interpret [jihad] is based on whatever your particular ideology, or world viewpoint, or even prejudice is.”

Indeed! And those like Aslan are doing everything they can to cover up how the holy books of Islam “interpret” jihad.

Here are just a few examples from one of the two most authoritative Hadith (Sahih Bukhari), the sayings and traditions of Mohammed. This Hadith is regarded as holy in Islam. Let’s see how Mohammed “interpreted” jihad.

“The man who fights so that Islam should dominate is the man who fights for Allah’s cause.”
“To battle non-Muslims in jihad for even one day is greater than the entire earth and everything on it.”
“I have been directed to fight the non-Muslim until every one of them admits, 'There is only one god and that is Allah.'”
“Anyone who arms a jihadist is rewarded just as a fighter would be…”
“If a man, motivated by belief in Allah and the promises Allah makes, gives a horse to be used for jihad, he will be rewarded on Judgment Day…”
Do these sound like exhortations to struggle against "temptation" to you?
These quotes above can be found in the book, The Political Traditions of Mohammed. You can get a copy of this book, as well as a copy of the film “Obsession,” by becoming an ACT! for America Patriot Partner and giving $40 per month.
You can receive “Obsession” by becoming a Patriot Partner and giving $20 per month. To become a Patriot Partner simply click here.
We must be armed with the truth and be well-organized to resist the kind of re-write of history and Islamic doctrine described below.
Council: Montgomery schools cave to pressure with Islam bookLeah Fabel, The Examiner 2008-06-07 12:21:05.0 http://www.examiner.com/a-1429570~Council__Mongtomery_schools_cave_to_pressue_with_Islam_book.html

Washington, D.C. -
A new report issued by the American Textbook Council says books approved for use in local school districts for teaching middle and high school students about Islam caved in to political correctness and dumbed down the topic at a critical moment in its history.

"Textbook editors try to avoid any subject that could turn into a political grenade," wrote Gilbert Sewall, director of the council, who railed against five popular history texts for "adjust[ing] the definition of jihad or sharia or remov[ing] these words from lessons to avoid inconvenient truths."

Sewall complains the word jihad has gone through an "amazing cultural reorchestration" in textbooks, losing any connotation of violence. He cites Houghton Mifflin's popular middle school text, "Across the Centuries," which has been approved for use in Montgomery County Schools. It defines "jihad" as a struggle "to do one's best to resist temptation and overcome evil."

"But that is, literally, the translation of jihad," said Reza Aslan, a religion scholar and acclaimed author of "No god but God: The Origins, Evolution, and Future of Islam." Aslan explained that the definition does not preclude a militant interpretation.

"How you interpret [jihad] is based on whatever your particular ideology, or world viewpoint, or even prejudice is," Aslan said. "But how you define jihad is set in stone."
A statement from Montgomery County Public Schools said that all text used by teachers had been properly vetted and were appropriate for classroom uses.
Aslan said groups like Sewall's are often more concerned about advancing their own interpretation of Islam than they are about defining its parts and then allowing interpretation to happen at the classroom level.

Sewall's report blames publishing companies for allowing the influence of groups like the California-based Council on Islamic Education to serve throughout the editorial process as "screeners" for textbooks, softening or deleting potentially unflattering topics within the faith.

"Fundamentally I'm worried about dumbing down textbooks," he said, "by groups that come to state education officials saying we want this and that - and publishers need to find a happy medium."

Maryland state delegate Saqib Ali refrained from joining the fray. "The job of assigning curriculum is best left to educators and the school board, and I trust their judgment," he said.

A note from Radarsite: "United we stand" United we stood... What happened? Where did it all go? Who took it all away? Why did we let them take it away? We were taught to love our mothers and fathers and to love our country. We were taught to believe in God. We were taught to believe in ourselves. We were taught. United we stood...