Displaying posts published in

January 2012



No doubt Deborah Scroggins believes she just published a dual biography of Ayaan Hirsi Ali, former Dutch parliamentarian, and Aafia Siddiqui, jailed al-Qaida terrorist, and so she did. What may surprise the biographer, however, is that she also provided a third study: post-9/11 moral equivalence.

This begins with Scroggins’ outre decision to pair a peaceable writer and politician with a violent al-Qaida scientist who married Khalid Sheikh Mohammed’s nephew and co-plotter after 9/11 as the “Wanted Women” of the book’s title (Wanted Women: Faith, Lies and the War on Terror: The Lives of Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Aafia Siddiqui).

Wanted by whom? Hirsi Ali is wanted for violating Islamic law against apostasy (leaving Islam is a capital offense) and criticizing Muhammad, Islam’s prophet (ditto). Siddiqui was wanted by the FBI as an accomplice of al-Qaida, an operational arm of Islamic law. How to knit the two together? Scroggins writes: “Like the bikini and the burka or the virgin and the whore, you couldn’t understand one without understanding the other.”


Read more at: http://times247.com/ EDITORIAL: Obama’s crony capitalism Washington Times 01/27/2012 12:18 AM Obamacare is a growing burden to American businesses, but not if you have friends in high places. Mr. Obama’s signature and highly unpopular legislative achievement was sold as a measure that would require shared sacrifice but bring lasting benefits to all Americans. […]



If the Republican primaries are any indication, one big debate in the upcoming election will be whether President Obama is pushing the country toward a European-style welfare culture.

Mitt Romney, for example, argues that “over the past three years, Barack Obama has been replacing our merit-based society with an entitlement society.”

Newt Gingrich has taken to calling Obama “the best food-stamp president in American history.”

Obama, in contrast, says the government must play an increasing role — what he likes to call “shared responsibility” — to ensure a society that is fairer.

So is Obama turning the country into a welfare society and away from one focused on opportunity?

While it’s true that the country has been headed in this direction for many years — with the explosion in entitlements since the 1960s and the aging of the population — Obama has, in fact, greatly accelerated the trend. CONTINUE AT SITE



The kerfuffle over the postponement of the highly touted “Austere Challenge 12” joint US-Israel military exercise is over. Officials in both countries are now on the same page: it was a “joint decision” having nothing to do with finances, Iran or politics, just “technical issues.” Regardless of the lid they’ve chosen to cover the pot, it is worth considering where and how the United States and Israel differ in their analysis of the problem posed by Iran’s nuclear activity.

The US and Israel agree on the potential danger and they agree on the unacceptability of a nuclear-armed Iran. They differ, however, on how they assimilate intelligence information; how they assess the pace of Iran’s movement toward weapons capability; and even over whether it is weapons that Iran seeks. The United States factors in more heavily what it believes about Iran’s intent, which it insists remains unclear. Reflecting, perhaps, closer proximity and a smaller margin of error, the Israeli government places greater emphasis on its Iran’s capabilities, which it believes are clear.

The discrepancy appeared as early as 2008. The Bush administration posited “weaponization” of uranium as its red line — a position carried into to the Obama administration by Secretary of Defense Gates. But neither administration appeared to believe — or appears yet to believe — that Iran has taken the decision to make weapons.



David Singer, the Sydney lawyer and foundation member of the International Analysts Network, is by now no stranger to regular readers of this blog.
His petition (please spread the word!) is still open for signing here


The Director of the Division of Public Information at UNESCO – Mr Neil Ford – has made it clear that UNESCO still refuses to approach the Imternational Court of Justice (ICJ) for an advisory opinion on the legality of the admission of Palestine as the 195th Member State of UNESCO…writes David Singer.
‘The Director of the Division of Public Information at UNESCO – Mr Neil Ford – has made it clear that UNESCO still refuses to approach the Imternational Court of Justice (ICJ) for an advisory opinion on the legality of the admission of Palestine as the 195th Member State of UNESCO.

This approach was suggested by me to UNESCO in a detailed submission on 1 December last – following what I considered to be an inadequate response to my concerns first raised with UNESCO on 5 November – five days after Palestine’s admission to UNESCO.

On 31 December – and only after considerable prodding – I was advised by Ms Suzanne Bilello – Senior Public Information and Liaison Officer with the UNESCO Office in New York – that UNESCO had no comment to make on my submission.

I then started a petition to in the hope of persuading UNESCO to review its decision.

I wrote to Ms Bilello on 2 January in the following terms:

“I can only take UNESCO’s refusal to comment further to mean that:

UNESCO cannot legally justify the decision to admit Palestine as a full member of UNESCO since a two thirds majority vote of 130 member states required by Article II (2) of the Constitution was not met – as I claimed in my email to you dated 1 December 2011

UNESCO is not prepared to supply me with a copy of the recommendation of the Executive Board to the General Conference to admit Palestine to membership of UNESCO and any reports that formed part of that recommendation or were considered by the Executive Board prior to making that recommendation

If I am mistaken in drawing the above conclusions – please advise me why within the next seven days.”

Ms Bilello did not respond.

Surprisingly however – Mr Ford sent me an email on 18 January – but it failed to comment on my detailed submission. Instead Mr Ford sought to justify the legal correctness of a statement issued by UNESCO that I had criticised in various articles and blog posts.

Mr Ford was quite peremptory in again letting me know that UNESCO would provide no further comment on the subject.

Undeterred. I asked him to confirm whether he had seen my detailed submission sent to Ms Bilello and asked him two further questions that required simple “Yes” or “No” answers.

True to his word he refused to comment. A three-word email was obviously too hard to draft and send for the UNESCO Director of Public Information.


Answering Obama’s Israel Lies Posted By Arlene Kushner

URL to article: http://frontpagemag.com/2012/01/27/answering-obamas-israel-lies/

On January 19, President Barack Obama’s campaign staff released a video, “America and Israel: An Unbreakable Bond” – a piece rife with half-truths and distortions. As patently false as it seems to anyone with a properly jaundiced eye, it nonetheless requires a response. For one suspects that those American Jews eager to find a reason to vote for Obama may be all too ready to stand convinced of what they are being told.

Recently elected NY Congressman Bob Turner gave an interview in Israel last week, in which he said, “I think American support militarily has been more an investment in our own defense..” It was a refreshingly honest and significant observation that directly applies here.



‘Peace Now’ Faults Israel For Palestinians’ Genocidal Urges Posted By P. David Hornik

Last week Palestinian Media Watch revealed that the Mufti Muhammad Hussein, top cleric of the Palestinian Authority, had approvingly quoted a hadith calling for the genocide of Jews. Hussein, who was appointed to his post by PA president Mahmoud Abbas, did so at a ceremony marking the 47th anniversary of the Fatah movement. The moderator at the ceremony chimed in that “Our war with the descendants of the apes and pigs [i.e., Jews] is a war of religion and faith.” As for Mufti Hussein, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu ordered Israel’s attorney-general to investigate him for incitement.

Palestinian Media Watch now reports that the mufti’s words have drawn international condemnation. This, actually, doesn’t amount to much—far less than, for instance, the typical round of condemnations when Israel announces plans to build homes in parts of Jerusalem that the enlightened world thinks should be Judenrein.

Alistair Burt, the UK minister for the Middle East, said: “I condemn the inflammatory words used by the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem and others…. To refer to the Jewish people in such a way and to talk of killing Jews is anti-semitism, pure and simple.” More surprisingly—seemingly—Palestinian Media Watch also offers a quote from Americans for Peace Now. This organization, founded in 1981 to drum up support for its Israeli parent-organization, Peace Now, states that it

strongly condemns the belligerent anti-Jewish comments made by the Palestinian Authority’s Mufti of Jerusalem at a public event in the West Bank earlier this month…. “We are appalled by these comments, coming from the most senior Muslim cleric on the Palestinian Authority’s payroll,” said Debra DeLee, APN’s President and CEO. DeLee added, “What we find particularly disturbing is that these vile comments were broadcast on the Palestinian Authority’s official television channel, amplifying their inciting [e]ffect.”



The Islamic Paradise of the Needle and Powder Posted By Daniel Greenfield

The world’s largest drug field was formerly in the Bekaa Valley where the land is warm and moist. Reflecting the poor state of agriculture in the Muslim world, some of the most arable land in Lebanon where the Romans raised acres of wheat was turned over to cannabis and opium production. In the ’90s the situation was so bad that 80 percent of the world’s cannabis came out of the valley. The valley helped finance the PLO, Hezbollah and the Syrian army which invaded Lebanon partly to get in on the drug trade.

The Clinton Administration cut deals with the Taliban in Afghanistan and the Syrian occupation of Lebanon to try and cut down on production. Officially production went down, unofficially the party never really stopped.

STEVE EMERSON: The New York Times Collaborates with Hamas Front Group to Suppress the Truth

The New York Times cites the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) as a credible source, while continuing its policy of never mentioning that CAIR was founded by the Muslim Brotherhood, and operates as a Hamas support group.

* NYT also suppressed the facts that CAIR was named an unindicted co-conspirator 2007 Holy Land Foundation conspiracy trial, which resulted in the FBI cutting off all formal contact with the group and that an FBI official has described CAIR as a “front for Hamas.”
* NYT primarily relies on two sources for comments: Zead Ramadan of CAIR-NY, and Faiza Patel, of the Brennan Center of Justice, but which the Times deliberately fails to mention that both of whom represent organizations that have repeatedly refused to condemn Hamas and other Islamic terrorist groups or have blamed the FBI for fabricating Islamic terror plots.
* An IPT investigator videotaped Ramadan at a press event refusing to answer her questions as to whether Hamas is a terrorist organization.
* The Times cites CAIR’s Zead Ramadan as a legitimate source of criticism of the film but fails to report that Ramadan contributed $1,000 to Viva Palestina, an organization led by noted anti-Semite George Galloway, that supports Hamas financially and politically, in 2010.
* Patel of the Brennan Center has long been a critic of law enforcement’s attempts to counter terrorism, even denouncing the NYPD’s operation that resulted in the arrest of accused lone-wolf jihadist Jose Pimentel, charged with plotting to bomb U.S. soldiers returning from Iraq and Afghanistan.
* The Times failed to report that their only two sources for their story–CAIR and the Brennan Center, who are made to seem independent and impartial are actual apologists for Islamic terrorist groups. In fact, the Times failed to report that the Brennan Center received CAIR’s “Safe While Free” Award in 2009.
* The Times failed to report one actual flaw in the film but based its demonization of the film based largely on emails it did not disclose that it received from CAIR, a Hamas front group




In the aftermath of the Tunisian Jasmine revolution, Salafists, as in Egypt, are taking advantage of the new freedoms to be a threat to the growth of democracy. Islamist groups are now flourishing and are trying to transform Tunisia into an Islamic emirate. For now, they did not manage to take over big cities, however they are expanding their control over the Tunisian town of Sejnane with its 5000 inhabitants, located in the country’s northwest. According to Tunisian media, a group of about 250 individuals managed to “talibanize” Sejnane , imposing their hardline Islamic rule, without being in any way contravened by the country’s security forces.

Famous for its pottery artifacts, Sejnane is not different from many other Tunisian towns, in its sidewalk cafés, small shops, a few mosques and dusty roads. However, in Sejnane about 80% of the population lives under the poverty line; unemployment is almost 60% with no sign that this situation may get any better. In this environment, for the last few months a group of Salafists, most of them young, have been imposing Islamic law .

Salafist gangs of young individuals have begun terrorizing people, in search of “disbelievers.” There have been countless episodes of intolerance and violence — including a man beaten after the mosque service for having argued that tobacco was not haram (forbidden); another man wounded in his leg while buying cigarettes; a wine vendor having his fingers broken; and a young girl attacked at school for not wearing a veil.