| April 2005 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S | M | T | W | T | F | S |
| 1 | 2 | |||||
| 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
| 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 |
| 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 |
| 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 |
Laura Mansfield visited a local mosque in a small town in America. She looks American, but speaks Arabic. She heard violence against America preached in Arabic. Then the next session started, and she heard a message of peace and brotherhood preached to the next group, in English. It was a recruiting session:
It happened again this week. I came out of the office to find a flyer under my windshield wipers inviting me to a special informational presentation on God and family values, and how to bring them back to the forefront in America.
I’m a parent so the flyer caught my interest. But as an analyst for the Northeast Intelligence Network, my eyes were riveted to the address on the flyer: The session was being held at a nearby mosque.
Curiosity got the better of me, and I decided it would be a good time for some onsite investigations of the mosque. In order to not attract undue attention, I dressed conservatively, wearing a navy jumper with a long sleeve white blouse, and low heels. I debated whether or not to put on a hijab (head scarf) then decided not to – after all, I was going to “learn,” not to pretend I was a Muslim.
I checked the mosque schedule on the Web, and discovered there was going to be an Arabic language session an hour before. So I showed up an hour early. The imam met me at the door, and told me that the presentation didn’t start for an hour, and suggested I come back in an hour. Fortunately, I had anticipated this. I explained that since I had quite a bit of reading to do for a class I was taking. “Can I just sit here and read?”
He hesitated a moment, then agreed. I sat in the back of the room, with my book open, and made a mental note to remember to turn the pages every so often, as I listened to the speakers in Arabic.
She heard their real feelings about Americans:
As he expected, he was delayed – he thought it was very amusing that while several TSA personnel were scrutinizing his personal belongings that his classmate from Jordan was able to walk through security, along with his American girlfriend, without any problems whatsoever.
One of the men said, in Arabic: “Blonde Americans are good for something!” Another man advised him to be cautious, since there was an American woman in the room. The imam spoke up and told everyone I didn’t speak Arabic.
That’s a laugh riot.
She heard Muslims joke about pretending to be terrorists on a plane:
At that point, another student took the podium. His name was Khaled, and he began to recount his recent trip to New York City. Khaled and three of his companions had gone to New York for several days in January. He told of how uncomfortable his trip up to NYC had been. He felt like he was being watched, and thought he was the victim of racial profiling.
Khaled and his friends were pretty unhappy about it, and while in New York, they came up with a plan to “teach a lesson” to the passengers and crew. You can imagine the story Khaled told. He described how he and his friends whispered to each other on the flight, made simultaneous visits to the restroom, and generally tried to “spook” the other passengers. He laughed when he described how several women were in tears, and one man sitting near him was praying.
The imam encouraged the group to do more things like that:
The others in the room thought the story was quite amusing, judging from the laughter. The imam stood up and told the group that this was a kind of peaceful civil disobedience that should be encouraged, and commended Khaled and his friends for their efforts.
He pointed out that it was through this kind of civil disobedience that ethnic profiling would fail.
No, it’s through this kind of behavior that we’re going to figure out that we need serious immigration restrictions in this country on people from Islamofascist nations.
This group was also pleased that one of their friends had gone to Iraq to kill Muslims and Americans:
One of the other men, Ahmed from Kuwait, gave a brief account of his friend Eyad, who had finally gone to Iraq. Ahmed was in e-mail contact with Eyad, and hoped by the following week to be able to bring them more information about the state of the “mujahideen” in Iraq.
As the meeting drew to a close, the imam gave a brief speech calling for the protection of Allah on the mujahideen fighting for Islam throughout the world, and reminded everyone that it was their duty as Muslims to continue in the path of jihad, whether it was simple efforts like those of Khaled and his friends, or the actual physical fighting of men like Eyad.
Then that session broke up, Americans arrived, and the English-language session started.
[The woman leading the session] then began to discuss Islam, focusing on the commonalities it has with Christianity. The sales pitch had clearly begun. While in the previous section, the men had quoted over and over again sura from the Quran calling for violent jihad, the women’s session focused on the “gentler” side of Islam.
...It shows clearly that as much as we’d like to pretend it hasn’t, jihad has reached Small-Town, USA. This mosque isn’t in Washington, D.C., or New York City. This is a small mosque in a small town in the deep South.
And if it’s in this tiny little quiet southern town, it’s probably in your hometown, too.
Islamofascists are immigrating to America in large numbers with explicit intentions to do harm here, intentions which they are carrying out on a daily basis. Serious immigration restrictions on people from Islamofascist nations would be advisable.
(Hat Tip to Janet Levy.)
From World Net Daily:
The largest local union of Border Patrol agents in the country has declared its support for the Minuteman Project in Arizona, while at the same time slamming both the American Civil Liberties Union and President Bush.
According to its website, the U.S. Border Patrol Local 2544, which covers the Tucson sector of the agency, the volunteers involved in the border-monitoring Minuteman Project have been nothing but supportive.
“We want to make it clear – because we’ve had a lot of questions about this – we have not had one single complaint from a rank-and-file agent in this sector about the Minutemen,” says a statement on the site. “Every report we’ve received indicates these people are very supportive of the rank-and-file agents; they’re courteous. Many of them are retired firefighters, cops, and other professionals, and they’re not causing us any problems whatsoever.”
The group blames the ACLU for setting off ground sensors in the area of the Minutemen activities:
“Reports of [Minutemen] causing ‘ground sensors’ to go off are exaggerated because most of those are being set off by the ACLU sneaking around trying to find the Minutemen doing something wrong.”
This is part three in a series of three articles. Part one of the series is here.
Earlier today I speculated:
...by 2105 the world may change again so much as to make the whole current question of terrorism utterly irrelevant. I even think that it’s likely to change so much.
Currently we face a potentially deadly threat from terrorists who want to destroy our country and our way of life. Until about 40 years ago, any people in history with the power to do so would have responded by devastating the nation or nations from which such a threat originated. But we forbear to do so. In democracies there have always been appeasers and those reluctant to go to war, but this is different. When America was attacked at Pearl Harbor, we quickly united. In today’s case, the country has been similarly attacked, but did not fully unite to defend the safety of this nation and remove the ability of the attackers to do further harm.
Certainly mainstream media has a great responsibility for this, by suppressing so much of the news that supports Conservative views.
But I will speculate that there’s a bigger reason. Specifically, that Western nations are trying to evolve so as to be part of a world that is free of warfare. “War is wrong,” goes the Liberal refrain. And in that pursuit we are risking destruction by the people who haven’t signed onto the “war is wrong” program.
We’re in a very unusual situation in the history of the human race, in which a society is directly attacked, tremendous damage is done, and yet many members of that very society oppose removing the enemy’s ability to do further harm.
From Victor Davis Hanson:
Modern Western man is faced with this awful dilemma, from which he recoils: real peace and successful reconstruction are in direct proportion to the degree that an enemy is humiliatingly defeated and so acknowledges it—the aim being that he will come to feel that he cannot go on being what he has been. To that end, absolute victory may encompass everything from Hiroshima to bombing downtown Belgrade as the price for tranquillity and a democratic and humane postbellum Japan and the Balkans. Not finishing off a defeated Republican Guard in 1991 or sparing looters in April 2003 or breaking off the siege of Fallujah in April 2004 only ensures that more corpses will pile up later. President Bush’s so-called Axis of Evil in 2002—Iraq, Iran, and North Korea—all had in common unfinished business with the U.S. military that had led to a bellum interruptum of sorts. In contrast, the Grenada communists, Noriega, Milošević , and the Taliban were all defeated, and only after that were their societies rebuilt—and thus Grenada, Panama, Serbia, and Afghanistan now do not belong to the axis of anything. Perhaps for all the debate over how to fight irregular wars in an age of global terrorism, we would do best to recall the realistic, if inelegant, words of the owner of the Oakland Raiders, the infamous Al Davis: “Just win, baby.”
In terms of human history, we’re in a rare circumstance, in which many in our society would rather risk continued attacks, rather than to respond decisively so as to remove the enemy’s ability to do more harm. I believe this is an anomaly, a bubble, that will not last. I have no doubt that in 100 years, and probably far sooner, society will reach a consensus that war is wrong, except when the alternative to war is far worse—in which case some devastation of those who are trying to kill you, goes a long way.
Terrorists depend on the current willingness of Western nations to respond with great restraint. But as Victor Davis Hanson notes, in some cases some lack of such restraint is just what is needed to protect society.
This is part two in a series of three articles. Part one of the series is here.
Earlier today I posted:
There is a reasonable question regarding how civilization is supposed to survive a century or two from now, when weapons like this will be much smaller and could fall into the hands of terrorists. On the plus side, things could easily change so much by then that such a question could be irrelevant.
After all, things have changed quite that much in the past 100 years.
Imagine Orville and Wilbur at Kitty Hawk in 1903, waiting for a break in the weather to try out their plane.
Wilbur: Orville?
Orville: Yes, old sport.
Wilbur: Supposing this works, all right?
Orville: Yes, right right. Well?
Wilbur: Well, supposing 100 years from now, there are super-powered planes, and someone flies them into a giant building and destroys it.
Orville: Seems quite absurd.
Wilbur: Well, but why do you say that, old man?
Orville: Well, it’s just so damned inefficient, isn’t it? I mean, why a plane? I suppose by that time if they have super-planes, they’ll have super-weapons of all sorts. I mean to say, if someone did that to us, we’d just blast their whole country to bits, wouldn’t we?
Wilbur: I suppose you’ve got something there, old bean.
The point being that 100 years ago, the notion that we’d be attacked as we were on 9-11, and wouldn’t respond by devastating the country or countries that threatened further such attacks, if it were in our power to do so, would have been unthinkable. All the way through World War II, war always included devastation of civilian populations. Today’s thinking in Western nations, that civilian casualties are to be avoided wherever possible, is surely to our credit.
If the world can change that much in 100 years, by 2105 the world may change again so much as to make the whole current question of terrorism utterly irrelevant. I even think that it’s likely to change so much. For the reason why, tune in to part three of this series, posting later today.
For a video of the Wright Brother’s first glider flight, click here.
For Orville Wright’s article, “How We Made the First Flight,” click here.
Bad guys do not want one of these pointed at them:
(CBS) U.S. scientists are on the verge of creating a laser weapon that could give American forces an awesome advantage on the battlefield, but would also raise tough questions for Pentagon war planners, a newspaper reports.
After 40 years of work, the Pentagon may have a solid-state laser in its arsenal within a decade, reports the Oakland Tribune.
...Once fully developed, the Tribune reports, solid-state lasers could shoot down mortars and artillery shells, explode ordnance in enemy depots and even wipe out ballistic missiles 500 miles away. They would strike with incredible speed and could be retargeted instantly.
...Nor will lasers be holster-sized — the smallest to date is the size of a commercial jetliner.
...How will U.S. doctrine accommodate a weapon that can strike without detection possibly hundreds of miles away at relatively little cost? Since no other country is anywhere near developing a militarized solid-state laser, under what circumstances would the U.S. use it in a war?
It appears to me that such a weapon would change the balance of power still further in favor of the U.S. Terrorist facilities could be targeted and wiped out at low financial and political cost. The accuracy and speed of these lasers would be far greater even than existing cruise missiles. A weapon such as this would, it appears to me, be devastating to Islamofascists.
There is a reasonable question regarding how civilization is supposed to survive a century or two from now, when weapons like this will be much smaller and could fall into the hands of terrorists. On the plus side, things could easily change so much by then that such a question could be irrelevant.
After all, things have changed quite that much in the past 100 years. For more, check back for part two of this series, posting later today.
This is part one in a series of three articles.
Peace ‘Irreversible’, India, Pakistan Soften Kashmir
NEW DELHI (Reuters) – Declaring their peace process irreversible, nuclear rivals India and Pakistan agreed Monday to open up the heavily militarized frontier dividing Kashmir, capping a successful visit by President Pervez Musharraf.
I would just like to brag that in early February I blogged regarding an oil pipeline running from Iran to India, through Pakistan, and noted:
Just last year there was great concern about the possibility of a nuclear confrontation between India and Pakistan. Yet here, India and Iraq are both relying on Pakistan not to destroy this pipeline. Surely this is a favorable indication regarding the possibility of peace between India and Pakistan.
From Daniel Williams and Alan Cooperman at the Washington Post:
ROME, April 12—After two decades of contact and dialogue with the Islamic world under Pope John Paul II, the Vatican is rethinking an outreach program that critics say is diluting Catholicism and has brought almost no benefits to beleaguered Catholic minorities in Muslim countries.
The Church is finally taking notice of the oppression of non-Muslims in Islamic nations:
...Archbishop Michael Fitzgerald, president of the Pontifical Council for Inter-Religious Dialogue, said the next pope might more emphatically demand rights for Christian minorities in Islamic countries and the freedom of all people to choose their faith.
“There may be a greater insistence on religious liberty,” said Fitzgerald, the church’s point man on Islamic relations.
...Justo Lacunza Balda, who heads the Pontifical Institute for Arab and Islamic Studies, a Vatican research group, said criticism was focused on the lack of reciprocal goodwill gestures in many Muslim countries. “Humanly speaking, it is of course important to see some payback,” he said.
The Church is taking notice of the Islamofascist goal of destroying the Judeo-Christian tradition:
...One Turkish newspaper, Hurriyet, said the pope had not apologized for the Crusades and that Muslims were waiting. Radical Islamic Web sites sometimes predict that Muslims will conquer Europe and set up headquarters in the Vatican.
Bat Ye’or’s message is getting out. For 30 years she has been warning of how Islamofascists wage Jihad by immigrating to a target nation in large numbers, and then refusing to assimilate. It appears that the Church is finally aware of this danger:
...Now, the large Muslim minorities that have emerged in historically Christian European cities have engendered suspicion from the majority populations.
This is extremely good news.
(Hat Tip to Kate Wright. )
The Pigs Do What Now?
From the Washington Post:
A pair of piglets compete in the “Pig Olympics” at Heping Park in Shanghai, China. The Olympic events include running, hurdles, hoop-jumping, diving and swimming. The piglets start training a month after birth and compete until they are one year old.
From China Economic Net:
Pigs can’t fly, but they can run, swim and dive, as proven by contestants in the Pig Olympics.
Thousands of locals have made their way to Hongkou District’s Heping Park to watch some 20 pig athletes from Thailand take part in sporting events over the past month.
“It’s incredible. I never thought that a pig could be so clever, dexterous and versatile,” [8-year-old audience member Tan yizhou] said.
Hey—that kid sounds pretty smart. He sounds like that brainy kid from The Simpsons.
Finally—School Protesters Arrested for not Letting an Invited Speaker Talk:
Six people, including one juvenile, were arrested Wednesday night after protesting David Horowitz’s speech at Townes Hall at the UT School of Law. The Texas Federalist Society hosted the meeting and invited Horowitz, a right-wing advocate and author of the Academic Bill of Rights, to speak.
Opposition groups were holding signs and speaking out during Horowitz’s speech on Wednesday, but when they were told to stop speaking, some took out noisemakers to mark their disapproval of the speaker. Three females and three males were arrested and then jailed under charges of disrupting a meeting or procession - a Class B misdemeanor. The subjects were not UT students.
Many colleges and universities have become places where people are not permitted to express Conservative, pro-America views. It’s very encouraging to see one such school take steps away from that.
DiscoverTheNetwork has received over 700,000 visitors in its first two months. This site identifies the major players on the Left, and specifies their actions taken in support of their views.
I find it shocking that Dean, the chairman of the DNC, actively teaches impressionable high school students that U.S. politics are “corrupt”:
“The reason we need you to give money is because the political process on both sides – but particularly on the Republican side – has been utterly corrupted by people who give huge amounts of money from large corporations,” Dean told a high school audience in Vancouver, Oregon.
The top Democrat made no mention of donors like George Soros or Peter Lewis, who spent upwards of $50 million between the two of them to defeat George Bush last year.
The wealthiest GOP donors, meanwhile, were only able to pony up a small fraction of that amount.
bin Laden and all the enemies of this country are surely pleased by such a speech. How can the leaders of the Left condone such an attack on our nation? How can they not be ashamed and embarrassed by such a thing, coming from their leadership?
My guess is that many of the high school students themselves knew enough to tell that was inappropriate behavior for a leader of this country.
Dean is far beneath what the American Left rightfully needs in its leadership.
Restriction of Freedom of Speech at Colgate University:
Now comes this prohibition from the administration against “mass emails” that would allow students to organize in their interests:
“This email will serve as a reminder to you that it is against Colgate University email policy to send unauthorized mass emailings: Individuals should not attempt to circumvent the approval process by manual manipulation of recipient lists, or by other means of sending email to entire segments of the Colgate community. The entire policy can be viewed at http://computing.colgate.edu/policy/appa.asp. Senders of unauthorized mass emails are subject to sanctions that could include suspension of computing privileges and disciplinary action from the Dean of the College.”
Seriously, what is the deal? This is an unambiguous attack on free speech. How can it be happening at a University such as Colgate?
Cost of a personal ‘Luxurious Undersea Vehicle’—Your Own Personal Sub: Just a Low, Low $78 million.
(via GeekPress. )
X-Men Movie Logo, and the Logo for the New Mac OS, Tiger.
I’ve already ordered my copy of Tiger. It is expected to rock.
From Big Pharoah: Al Fayhaa Interviews Saddam Hussein.
Al Fayhaa: What do you think of the court that will judge you?
Saddam: Bush should be the one judged.
Al Fayhaa: What did Bush do to be judged?
Saddam: He occupied Iraq.
Al Fayhaa: We are not talking about occupation here but about the crimes that were committed by you against the Iraqi people. The mass graves, the killings.
Saddam: These are all fabrications. There isn’t a single evidence to prove that I killed anyone or pulled the trigger on anyone. These are all lies.
Al Fayhaa: There are tones of papers with your signature on them. They all prove that arrests and murders were committed after your command.
Read the whole thing.
