elpisman

Archive for November, 2009

Malik Hasan and Anwar al-Awlaki

In Jihad on November 9, 2009 at 2:36 am

From the Jawa Report:

November 07, 2009

Malik Hasan Tied to 9/11 Hijackers, Radical al Qaeda Preacher

Shocking headline? Well, it’s true. As first reported at the Jawa, Hasan attended the radical Saudi funded mosque in Virginia who’s now oft quoted and shocked-and-horrified imam is also a big supporter of the ISNA.

What we didn’t know was that Hasan attended that mosque at the same time as two of the 9/11 hijackers — Nawaf al-Hamzi and Hani Hanjour.

Did Nidal Hasan know them? Maybe, maybe not.

But the most disturbing part is that the imam of the mosque at the time was Anwar al-Awlaki (pictured right). Awlaki is an American who now lives in exile in Yemen where his website incites Muslims to jihad and who has nothing but praise for al Qaeda.

Awlaki is hands down the most cited English language preacher in the underworld of online jihad.

And what was Hasan’s view of al-Awlaki?

Hasan’s eyes “lit up” when he mentioned his deep respect for al-Awlaki’s teachings, according to a fellow Muslim officer at the Fort Hood base in Texas, the scene of Thursday’s horrific shooting spree.

Any one who knows anything about al-Awlaki knows he is as radical as they come.

A deeper terrorist plot? No indication of that. But those who continue to claim that the attack had nothing to do with a broader goal of jihad really have nothing left to stand on.

Again, let me remind the simple minded that like most human behavior murder is often motivated by many things. Sure, Hasan very well could have been distressed over an impending deployment and perhaps that deployment was a proximate cause. He may also have been bat shit crazy.

However it is also clear that he held the same world view as the vast majority of Islamist terrorists and that this was at least one of his motivations.

Thanks to Jeffrey Imm

UPDATE: Just checked AllahP who quotes a U.S. Intel official:

There is good reason to believe Anwar Aulaqi has been involved in very serious terrorist activities since leaving the United States, including plotting attacks against America and our allies.”

 

The rest of the article – http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/199504.php

Déjà Vue All Over Again

In Jihad, Multi-Culturalism, Uncategorized on November 9, 2009 at 2:33 am

With all of the apologists coming out of the termite ridden woodwork to make excuses for the poor lad who shot up all of those mean soldiers at Fort Hood I thought it might be instructive to remember the dire effects of multi-culturalism and political correctness from the past. The following is an incredible article by Mark Steyn written four years ago. Now that our military has been mugged by reality will they wake up or worry about the potentially deleterious effect this may have on other Muslim soldiers?

HT-http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1449856/posts

Mark Steyn: Mugged by reality?
The Australian ^ | July 25, 2005 | Mark Steyn

 

Mark Steyn: Mugged by reality?

 

July 25, 2005

WITH hindsight, the defining encounter of the age was not between Mohammed Atta’s jet and the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001, but that between Mohammed Atta and Johnelle Bryant a year earlier. Bryant is an official with the US Department of Agriculture in Florida, and the late Atta had gone to see her about getting a $US650,000 government loan to convert a plane into the world’s largest crop-duster. A novel idea.

The meeting got off to a rocky start when Atta refused to deal with Bryant because she was but a woman. But, after this unpleasantness had been smoothed out, things went swimmingly. When it was explained to him that, alas, he wouldn’t get the 650 grand in cash that day, Atta threatened to cut Bryant’s throat. He then pointed to a picture behind her desk showing an aerial view of downtown Washington – the White House, the Pentagon et al – and asked: “How would America like it if another country destroyed that city and some of the monuments in it?”

Fortunately, Bryant’s been on the training course and knows an opportunity for multicultural outreach when she sees one. “I felt that he was trying to make the cultural leap from the country that he came from,” she recalled. “I was attempting, in every manner I could, to help him make his relocation into our country as easy for him as I could.”

So a few weeks later, when fellow 9/11 terrorist Marwan al-Shehhi arrived to request another half-million dollar farm subsidy and Atta showed up cunningly disguised with a pair of glasses and claiming to be another person entirely – to whit, al-Shehhi’s accountant – Bryant sportingly pretended not to recognise him and went along with the wheeze. The fake specs, like the threat to slit her throat and blow up the Pentagon, were just another example of the multicultural diversity that so enriches our society.

For four years, much of the western world behaved like Bryant. Bomb us, and we agonise over the “root causes” (that is, what we did wrong). Decapitate us, and our politicians rush to the nearest mosque to declare that “Islam is a religion of peace”. Issue bloodcurdling calls at Friday prayers to kill all the Jews and infidels, and we fret that it may cause a backlash against Muslims. Behead sodomites and mutilate female genitalia, and gay groups and feminist groups can’t wait to march alongside you denouncing Bush, Blair and Howard. Murder a schoolful of children, and our scholars explain that to the “vast majority” of Muslims “jihad” is a harmless concept meaning “decaf latte with skimmed milk and cinnamon sprinkles”.

Until the London bombings. Something about this particular set of circumstances – British subjects, born and bred, weaned on chips, fond of cricket, but willing to slaughter dozens of their fellow citizens – seems to have momentarily shaken the multiculturalists out of their reveries. Hitherto, they’ve taken a relaxed view of the more, ah, robust forms of cultural diversity – Sydney gang rapes, German honour killings – but Her Britannic Majesty’s suicide bombers have apparently stiffened even the most jelly-spined lefties.

At The Age, Terry Lane, last heard blaming John Howard for the “end of democracy as we know it” and calling for “the army of my country … to be defeated” in Iraq, now says multiculturalism is a “repulsive word” whereas “assimilation is a beaut” and should be commended. In the sense that he seems to have personally assimilated with Pauline Hanson, he’s at least leading by example.

Where Lane leads, Melbourne’s finest have been rushing to follow, lining up to sign on to the New Butchness. “There is something wrong with multiculturalism,” warns Pamela Bone. “Perhaps it is time to say, you are welcome, but this is the way it is here.” Tony Parkinson – The Age’s resident voice of sanity – quotes approvingly France’s Jean-Francois Revel: “Clearly, a civilisation that feels guilty for everything it is and does will lack the energy and conviction to defend itself.”

And yet, The Age’s editor Andrew Jaspan still lives in another world. You’ll recall that it was Jaspan who objected to the energy and conviction of certain freed Australian hostage, at least when it comes to disrespecting their captors: “I was, I have to say, shocked by Douglas Wood’s use of the ‘arsehole’ word, if I can put it like that, which I just thought was coarse and very ill-thought through … As I understand it, he was treated well there. He says he was fed every day, and as such to turn around and use that kind of language I think is just insensitive.”

And heaven forbid we’re insensitive about terrorists. True, a blindfolded Wood had to listen to his jailers murder two of his colleagues a few inches away, but how boorish would one have to be to hold that against one’s captors? A few months after 9/11, National Review’s John Derbyshire dusted off the old Cold War mantra “Better dead than red” and modified it to mock the squeamishness of politically correct warfare: “Better dead than rude”. But even he would be surprised to see it taken up quite so literally by Andrew Jaspan.

Usually it’s the hostage who gets Stockholm Syndrome, but the newly liberated Wood must occasionally reflect that in this instance the entire culture seems to have caught a dose. And, in a sense, we have: multiculturalism is a kind of societal Stockholm Syndrome. Atta’s meetings with Bryant are emblematic: He wasn’t a genius, a master of disguise in deep cover; indeed, he was barely covered at all, he was the Leslie Nielsen of terrorist masterminds – but the more he stuck out, the more Bryant was trained not to notice, or to put it all down to his vibrant cultural tradition.

That’s the great thing about multiculturalism: it doesn’t involve knowing anything about other cultures – like, say, the capital of Bhutan or the principal exports of Malaysia, the sort of stuff the old imperialist wallahs used to be well up on. Instead, it just involves feeling warm and fluffy, making bliss out of ignorance. And one notices a subtle evolution in multicultural pieties since the Islamists came along. It was most explicitly addressed by the eminent British lawyer Baroness Kennedy of the Shaws, QC, who thought that it was too easy to disparage “Islamic fundamentalists”. “We as western liberals too often are fundamentalist ourselves. We don’t look at our own fundamentalisms.”

And what exactly would those western liberal fundamentalisms be? “One of the things that we are too ready to insist upon is that we are the tolerant people and that the intolerance is something that belongs to other countries like Islam. And I’m not sure that’s true.”

Hmm. Kennedy appears to be arguing that our tolerance of our own tolerance is making us intolerant of other people’s intolerance, which is intolerable. Thus the lop-sided valse macabre of our times: the more the Islamists step on our toes, the more we waltz them gaily round the room. I would like to think that the newly fortified Age columnists are representative of the culture’s mood, but, if I had to bet, I’d put my money on Kennedy: anyone can be tolerant of the tolerant, but tolerance of intolerance gives an even more intense frisson of pleasure to the multiculti masochists. Australia’s old cultural cringe had a certain market rationality; the new multicultural cringe is pure nihilism.

Mark Steyn is a regular contributor to The Australian.

Boxer and Pelosi:What Are They Good For ?

In Socialism, ruling elites and power on November 7, 2009 at 4:02 am

Say it again – absolutely nothing ! Notice – two radical democrats from California. Their word is their bond, well,whenever it suits them. The following articles are from Jim Hoft over at Gateway Pundit,an excellent source of reliable information.Here is the link – http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/

Pelosi Breaks Pledge– Will Not Post Bill Online for 72 Hours Before Voting to Nationalize Health Care (Video)

Friday, November 6, 2009, 5:07 AM

Jim Hoft

Nancy Pelosi breaks her pledge…
Democrats will not post their 2,000+ paged bill online for 72 hours before voting to nationalize the American health care system.
The House Democrats will vote on Saturday to swallow one-sixth of the nation’s economy.

Wall Street Journal economic analyst Steve Moore and Greta Van Susteren discussed this latest travesty last night.
Share/Bookmark

SEN. BOXER BREAKS SENATE RULES… Passes Cap-&-Tax Out of Committee Without Single GOP Member in Attendance

Thursday, November 5, 2009, 9:42 PM

Jim Hoft

Senator Barbara Boxer Breaks Senate Committee Rules…
The liberal California senator passed the dem’s cap-&-tax legislation out of committee without a single GOP member in attendance. This is against the rules and the first time it has ever happened.

Senator Jim Inhofe (R-OK) discussed the outrageous move by the democrats:

The Politico reported:

The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee approved climate change legislation Thursday with no Republicans voting for the bill or even participating in the process.

With Republican boycotting the proceedings, Committee Chairman Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) relied on a little used interpretation of committee rules to move the legislation. Traditionally, two minority members are required to conduct committee business.

Boxer said that she passed the bill “in full accordance with long-standing committee and Senate rules.”

“This is not a procedure we wanted; it’s a procedure that’s available to us,” said Boxer. “The majority has to be able to do its work…otherwise the whole Senate could come to a screeching halt.”

Republicans called Boxer’s move the “nuclear option,” warning that it violated decades of committee precedent.

“I am here to appeal to you and the members of the committee,” Sen. Jim Inhofe, the top Republican on the committee, said in a brief statement. “In the history of this committee, we have not been able to find a time when the bill has been marked up without minority.”

But, to Boxer and the democratic majority, rules were meant to be broken– especially when a $3.6 trillion gas tax is on the line.

Communists Fearful of Evangelicals

In Christianity, atheism on November 4, 2009 at 1:45 pm

Atheists invariably attempt to suppress Christians and Christian ideas. Communist societies insist on total control of media,education,the arts,and religious activities.  If their ideas were so persuasive you would think they would want to encourage debate. The paranoia runs deep doesn’t it?

http://wwrn.org/article.php?idd=31813

Russia & the CIS – Russia – Christianity – Evangelicals

 


“The Russian state wants to restrict the activities of Evangelicals”
(“AsiaNews”, November 3, 2009)
Moscow, Russia – The Russian Ministry for Justice has proposed amendments to the law on “Freedom of Conscience and Religious Organizations” that, if adopted, will introduce stronger restrictions on the activities of Evangelicals in the country. The community is on alert: If the proposal becomes law, among other things the evangelicals can no longer pray freely without a permit and people with a “criminal record” will not be allowed become members of their communities. The latter condition, which also concerns other religious groups because it would clear the path for state interference in the individual freedom of conscience.
The document that first appeared in mid-October at the Ministry for Justice – later reported by Gazeta.ru – contains, for the first time, a precise definition for “evangelical activities”; the text speaks of ‘activities of a religious association aimed at spreading its confessional beliefs among people who are not members with the intent to attract these people to the association itself. “
The evangelical communities are known for their aggressive proselytizing in war zones and even at the risk of their own life. In Russia, on the other hand, the Orthodox Church has always been very careful to protect its sphere of influence, and opposed to all forms of proselytizing.
According to the proposal of the Ministry of Justice, only the leaders of evangelical organizations will have the right to preach. All the others (for the evangelicals every believer is also a priest, ed) will need a permit from the authorities. Even foreigners will be required to have written authorization to spread their teaching. The document prohibits preachers, both Russian and foreign, from leading prayers in churches and monasteries of other communities, offering material or social benefits to potential new recruits and the use the use of force, psychological pressure or manipulation of consciences.
If the amendments are adopted, in the declaration to register as a religious community, information about leaders must be provided to authorities. A fundamental requirement is the exclusion of persons from the community who are convicted of inciting religious or ethnic hatred and other crimes of extremist nature. “The problem is that you may not know the criminal background of all the faithful – says Deacon Andrei Kuraev, professor at the Moscow Ecclesiastical Academy – nor on the other hand can you close the door on him.” “In this way – complains Kuraev – the state will decide who is entitled or not to belong to a religious organization”.
Penalties for any offenders are mostly financial: those who involve children in religious activities without parental consent, must pay a fine of between 2 and 5 thousand rubles. Evangelical worship without authorization will cost up to 7 thousand rubles. Those who, despite a criminal conviction for extremism, continue to preach will be fined from 7 to 10 thousand rubles. Those who allow evangelical activities to take place in the churches of other communities, hospitals or government buildings will be sanctioned with fines of up to 15 thousand rubl

 

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]