Monday, May 23, 2011

Sudan: UN urges Khartoum to pullout from Abyei region

 

UN Security Council envoys have urged north Sudan to "withdraw immediately" its troops from the contested Abyei region on the border with South Sudan.

The call was made by the UN diplomats who are on a tour of Sudan.

South Sudan said the Abyei takeover was an act of war, saying civilians and southern soldiers were killed.
South Sudan is due to become independent in July, but Abyei's status remains to be determined after a referendum on its future was shelved.

People in the southern capital of Juba are worried and there is a grim mood on the streets of the capital, the BBC's Peter Martell in South Sudan reports.

The north said it acted after 22 of its men were killed in a southern ambush earlier this week.
Residents flee

"The members of the Security Council call upon the government of Sudan to halt its military operation and withdraw immediately from Abyei town and its environs," the French ambassador to the UN, Gerard Araud, said in Khartoum.

Map locator
"They condemn the escalatory military operation being undertaken by the Sudanese armed forces. This constitutes a serious violation of the CPA (Comprehensive Peace Agreement in 2005)," Mr Araud said.
He was speaking during a joint news conference with his Russian and US counterparts.

Separately, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and EU top diplomat Catherine Ashton condemned the violence in Abyei.

A southern military spokesman earlier told the BBC the north had attacked the area with 5,000 troops, killing civilians and southern soldiers.

Some 20,000 people, almost the whole population of the town, had fled, aid agency Medecins Sans Frontieres (MSF) told the BBC.

Spokesman Raphael Gorgeu said residents had moved to Agok, about 45km (28 miles) south of Abyei, and were fleeing further south.

He said 42 people wounded in the fighting in Abyei had been treated at a local MSF hospital.

Southern 'ambush' criticised

The seizure of Abyei followed two days of skirmishes, artillery fire and at least one air raid.
The BBC's James Copnall in Khartoum says that in a clear demonstration of who is now in charge of Abyei, President Omar al-Bashir issued a decree dismissing the region's administration.

This is a convincing northern military victory, making use of its greater resources.

The key question now is whether the north has, in seizing Abyei, fulfilled its objective.

A northern general, Ahmed Abdalla, told the BBC his men would go up to the river at the south of the region of Abyei.

If this is the case, the north will have de facto control over Abyei.

But southerners must be nervous that this is the start of a larger attack.

Some of the south's most valuable oil fields are just over the border from Abyei.

The UN Security Council is in Sudan, and will surely make it clear no-one wants a new north-south war.
But these are dangerous times in Sudan.

Abyei had been governed by a joint body comprising northerners and southerners, led by a southerner.
Southern military spokesman Col Philip Aguer said the north had committed an aggression, and called for the international community to step in.

"If the international community do not intervene quickly to rescue the situation then this is a complete violation of the comprehensive peace agreement, a complete violation of the ceasefire, and it is a declaration of war by Khartoum," he told the BBC.

The north says it acted after 22 of their men were killed in a southern ambush on Thursday.
The UN said the northern troops who were ambushed were being escorted out of Abyei by UN peacekeepers.

UN officials described the incident as "a criminal attack" and the US called on South Sudan to "account" for the assault.

Washington said the attack was "in direct violation" of the agreement signed by the north and south in January to "remove all unauthorised forces" from Abyei.

South Sudanese forces denied responsibility for the incident.

Tension over Abyei - claimed by a southern group, the Dinka Ngok, and northern nomads, the Misseriya - has been rising since a referendum on its future scheduled for January was postponed.

Since then there have been fears clashes in Abyei could spark a new north-south war, which this latest incident will do nothing to dispel, our correspondent says.

Under the CPA deal, which ended 22 years of civil war, Abyei was granted special status and a joint north-south administration set up in 2008.


Sudan: A country divided

Ivory Coast: Muslims Warn Christians "We're coming for you"


Posted: 22 May 2011 04:21 PM PDT
Muslim Strongman Alassane Ouattara has rewarded the leader of the rebel army Guillaume Soro as his prime minister and defense minister. He is widely expected to give top military posts to former rebel leaders who helped him remove Gbagbo.  Approximately 3,000 Christians were killed and more than a million displaced in the internationally supported coup which installed Ouattara.

"Once we take control we're coming for you." Was the crystal clear message Christians in the Ivory Coast got from Muslims during a long-fought dispute over the nation's presidency.  The election won by a Christian candidate was rife with Muslim voter fraud, but that result was overturned following intervention by the United Nations, France and the United States, who allowed and supported the violent coup in Ivory Coast.


Rumors that Laurent Gbagbo was considering issuing a new currency for Ivory Coast to free the country from its colonial master France is widely believed to be the actual motive uniting France and the US in support of the Arab League Controlled UN's plan to spread Islam worldwide.  The stars were aligned against Laurent Gbagbo and there's a bad moon rising over Ivory Coast...

President Alassane Ouattara is reported to have stopped internet service and began bugging telephones of Christians, a common practice in places where Muslims control the government.

Appointing Muslim militants to government offices, restricting the flow of information in and out of the country and monitoring telephones of Christians has all the ear marks of the early stages of a holy war.  Don't expect them to make a public declaration of Jihad on Christians, that's not the way it works.  Publicly they talk about peace programs and initiatives, what happens behind the scenes is a very different matter.

I worry about the Christians of Ivory Coast, in the same way I that I worry about the Christians in all Muslim countries and those living under other totalitarian systems that understand the threat that Christians pose to evil.

Now that the Islamists have completed their coup in Ivory Coast, it appears they are setting the stage to complete ethnic cleansing of the Christians.  

Christians in Ivory Coast must continue to resist Islamization and never surrender.  Do not abandon your homes or allow your churches to be closed or attacked.  Have faith, band together and defend yourselves...

Which puts Muslims now in control.

A missionary who asked to be called only Pastor Andrew in the Ivory Coast says that the newly inaugurated president Alessane Ouattara, a Muslim, has shut off the Internet and now suspected of tapping the Christians' telephones.

"Just before (the civil war), they were warning the Christians that when we get in power, the first thing we're going to do is come against the church. We're coming to get you," Andrew revealed.

"And so they did. Right at this moment we've been cut off for over a month. They have shut down the Internet so they (the Christians) can't communicate with the outside," Andrew said.

The actions of Ouattara's forces since his installation as president point to the issue of why the international community would support Ouattara. Andrew says there is a threefold reason.

"This has been between the predominantly Muslim north and the Christian south. It has been a mandate of the Islam world to take more control of more land, more people, and more resources and that's part of their mandate," Andrew explained.

Andrew also says that the removal of President Laurent Gbagbo, the incumbent Christian, was nothing less than a coup.

"I watched that whole process take place and I would say that the whole process of putting in Ouattara into the presidency is a plot. According to what I saw and to what I understand, it's not legitimate," Andrew declared.

"One of my contacts warned me just before the war broke out and they overthrew Gbagbo that it was a coup," Andrew related.

Andrew says that Gbagbo had put procedures in place that would have guaranteed a fair election in the country.

"He had these forms that everybody had to fill out; it was a way to prove that you're an Ivorian. The put down who their mom and dad were, what tribe they were from, what village you were from, and what year you were born," Andrew described.

"It could be proven by their dialect that they were Ivorian. So, the rebels fought against that. They didn't want to use that form because they said they were not being treated fairly," Andrew further described.

"What was happening was illegal. There was ballot stuffing. Besides the illegal voting, they also disqualified all of the Gbagbo votes, they got rid of their ballots and they killed [Christians], persecuted them and burned their villages," Andrew added.

"I was getting the reports while it was happening, about whole villages being destroyed, so in most of those areas in the north, there was not one Gbagbo vote. That was impossible and it was so obvious that it was a rigged election," Andrew declared.

Heritage Foundation Africa analyst Brett Schaefer disagrees with that assessment and says that Ouattara is the Ivory Coast's legitimate president.

"Ouattara won the election. I think that's been verified by a number of independent observers. Whether there was some question about the fairness or transparency of the election, no doubt there were some irregularities," Schaefer commented.

Schaefer says that France's intervention in the Ivory Coast were pragmatic actions in defense of their economic interests.

"France's interest in supporting Mr. Ouattara was to demonstrate an ongoing French influence over [what] they consider their sphere of influence in the francophone African countries," Schaefer stated.

"Cote D'Ivoire is obviously historically important to France and they simply want to make sure they're involved in the country going forward," Schaefer said.
But Andrew says that France is slowly losing influence in its former African colonies.

"France has been losing its grip on a lot of these nations and they want it back," Andrew asserted.
Andrew also says that Gbagbo's actions in office attracted French attention.

"Gbagbo was building his nation up and said if we're truly a democratic country to do what we want, then we have the right to trade and commerce with any nation in the world," Andrew related.

"They had trade with Canada and the U. S., but that means that over 90 percent of their trade was with France. Even in their independence, France was having control over the Ivory Coast," Andrew continued.

"So when Gbagbo got in power, he wanted to set his people free. He wanted his people to have trade and commerce and he wanted to build his country," Andrew stated.

Andrew says that Gbagbo's search for trade connections outside the French sphere prompted France to intervene. Andrew adds that the French armed the Muslim rebels in the north from the beginning of the Ivory Coast's civil war.

"When the conflict first came in 2002, all of their arms were from France. From France – all their stuff – because the rebels didn't have anything out there. They were coming in from the Muslim countries like Burkina Faso. They weren't the Ivorian Muslims," Andrew also explained.

"They stirred the Muslim north that they were being treated unfairly and they would promote this takeover and that they would get more freedom and have their families come in from Burkina Faso," Andrew continued. "You'll have your freedom and you have a right to this land and so on."
Andrew says that he received daily briefings during the recent struggle.

"I would get a briefing on what was happening right then, with the bombings, the shootings, the killing of Christians. It was really terrible, and now of course the Internet is shut down," Andrew stated.

The brutality of the recent civil war is one reason the missionary says the French are mistaken if they believe they can control the situation. Andrew believes the French government is going to get a surprise a few years down the road.

Andrew explains that the reason for the coming surprise is that Ouattara is a Muslim, and that ultimately the Ivory Coast's new president's allegiance is to Islam. The missionary says that detail alone makes Ouattara unpredictable.

"We have a cliché that says. 'If you build a monster, you have to feed it.' And I believe they're building themselves a monster. I believe it's going to come back on them," Andrew commented.

"First, with rare exception, African leaders are loathe to relinquish power once they have it. Political allegiance has little to do with real or proposed government policies, and almost everything to do with ethnic allegiance," Hooper explained.
He adds that colonial connections still play a strong role in African politics.

"Those countries in post-colonial Africa which have escaped tribal conflict have managed it through a combination of the threat of brute force, blatant patronage – paying off – of any potential opposition, and maintaining close commercial and geopolitical ties with the former colonial powers," Hooper stated.
Hooper explains that the Ivory Coast is no exception to any of these patterns and that Ouattara's hold on the country is only as strong as his ability to placate Gbagbo's supporters and France's long arm.
"I have to say that unless Ouattara can placate Gbagbo's tribal elders with money and privilege, armed opposition will continue to smolder and occasionally ignite. The major behind-the-scenes player is the French Foreign Ministry," Hooper observed.
"With elections less than a year away, President Sarkozy is under pressure to ensure there is no diminution of influence in Francophone Africa. Foreign policy emanating from the Quai d'Orsay, regardless of the party in power, has always been ruthlessly pragmatic (amoral by American standards), which probably means a combination of quietly deployed military 'advisers' and an increase in foreign aid," Hooper added.
Besides the fatal attacks in Ivory Coast, there also has been such violence in Egypt, Nigeria and Kenya.
Gbagbo had remained in office after he was declared the winner by the nation's own constitutional election process, which had determined there was voter fraud in the Muslim regions of the nation, and that fraud gave the initial election result that Ouattara had won.
"Supporters of the two men are split broadly along the country's geographical, ethnic and religious divide. The predominantly Muslim north largely backs Ouattara, a Muslim from that region, while support for Gbagbo, a Christian, comes from the mainly Christian south. As forces loyal to Ouattara have fought to install their man, Christians, who are associated with Gbabgo, have been particularly targeted; imams have reportedly called on Muslims to attack Christians," the Barnabas Fund reported.

"The country's electoral commission announced Ouattara as the winner of the November poll – with 54 percent of the vote – and this result was backed by the United Nations. But Ivory Coast's Constitutional Council, the body that certifies election results in the country, declared Gbagbo the winner based on valid votes cast. It annulled results in seven northern regions amid reports of electoral irregularities."

Almost immediately, there was a massacre of between 800 and 1,000 people "who were seeking shelter at a Christian mission compound in Duekoue," according to Barnabas Fund. The attackers reportedly were "descendants of immigrant Muslims … loyal to Ouattara."

SAF, CALGUNS SUE OVER CALIFORNIA ‘ASSAULT WEAPONS’ LAW ARREST

 

May 23, 2011 twg2a PitBull
For Immediate Release:   5/23/2011 BELLEVUE, WA – The Second Amendment Foundation and Calguns Foundation have filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in California, seeking to have the state’s definition of so-called “assault weapons” declared unconstitutionally vague. Joining SAF and Calguns in the lawsuit is Brendan John Richards, an Iraq combat veteran who served as a U.S. Marine, and whose arrest and six-day incarceration in the Sonoma County jail – and subsequent dismissal of all charges – was the catalyst for this legal action. Named as defendants are California Attorney General Kamala Harris, the California Department of Justice, the City of Rohnert Park and police officer Dean Becker. Richards was jailed in May 2010 after Officer Becker, investigating a disturbance at a motel where Richards was staying, learned that Richards had two pistols and a rifle, all unloaded, in the trunk of his car. Becker, arrested Richards for unlawful possession of an assault weapon. However, in September of last year, the charges were dismissed by the Sonoma County District Attorney’s office, based on a report from the state Department of Justice that showed none of the guns met the state’s definition of an assault weapon. “California’s law allows possession of a variety of firearms that do not meet the state’s assault weapons definition, which we believe is unconstitutionally vague,” noted SAF Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb. “Mr. Richards was jailed for almost a week, when he had broken no law because a police officer had a conflicting view and the District Attorney’s office believed him.” “California attempts to make a distinction among firearms where no natural one exists,” noted Calguns Executive Director Gene Hoffman. “The generic definition of so-called ‘assault weapons’ was simply an attempt to prohibit possession of guns that look scary.” Plaintiffs are represented by attorneys Don Kilmer of San Jose and Jason A. Davis of Mission Viejo. Kilmer said the case is indicative of the way things have become in California. “Now that the right to keep arms has correctly been recognized as fundamental and applicable to California,” Kilmer said, “gun owners can’t be faced with the practice of ‘arrest them first and let the courts sort it out’ for exercising constitutional rights. That is just how things are done in our country.” The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) http://twg2a.wordpress.com/2011/05/23/saf-calguns-sue-over-california-%e2%80%98assault-weapons%e2%80%99-law-arrest/

Obama at AIPAC: Beneath the Flattery, He Revealed His Indifference to Israel’s Needs and His Tilt Against It

 

May 23, 2011 - by Barry Rubin
I expected President Barack Obama’s AIPAC speech would be a bunch of feel-good clichés to persuade the audience that he is Israel’s best friend. Thus there would be nothing worth analyzing in it. But as I read the speech carefully I was astonished at how thoroughly Obama reveals his underlying miscomprehension, indifference, and even hostility toward Israel.

Examine this speech and you see everything wrong — far more than in his Cairo or State Department speeches on the Middle East — with Obama’s view of Israel and why he cannot be trusted on this issue.
There are some remarkable Freudian slips in his formulations and they have nothing to do with his discussion of the framework for Israeli-Palestinian peace.

He spoke at great length of his support for Israel, how he wants it to be strong and secure, and the common values of the two countries. Yet if he really thinks that, why didn’t he say such things in his State Department speech on the Middle East or elsewhere?
Obama stated:
We also know how difficult that search for security can be, especially for a small nation like Israel in a tough neighborhood….When I went to Sderot, I saw the daily struggle to survive in the eyes of an eight-year old boy who lost his leg to a Hamas rocket. And when I walked among the Hall of Names at Yad Vashem, I grasped the existential fear of Israelis when a modern dictator seeks nuclear weapons and threatens to wipe Israel off the map.
Yet his regional policies have undermined Israel’s security:
  • Without getting anything from Hamas (the group that shoots rockets at Sderot) he pressed Israel to reduce sanctions against Hamas, helped bring into power a pro-Hamas government in Egypt, and sent $400 million in U.S. taxpayer money that objectively strengthens the Hamas regime.
  • By not actively opposing Hizballah and Syria taking over Lebanon, thus increasing the threat on Israel’s northern border.
  • By waiting so long before he moved on Iran sanctions and by failing to support the Iranian democratic opposition.
  • By acting as an apologist for the Syrian terrorist-sponsoring dictatorship.
  • By not keeping U.S. promises to Israel on countering Hizballah’s return to southern Lebanon.
  • By helping create a situation in Egypt that will definitely lead to a radical, anti-American, anti-Israel takeover and probably lead to an Islamist regime there.
  • By becoming an apologist and booster of the most anti-Israel (and Islamist) Turkish government ever he has done nothing to help Israel deal with the enmity of its closest regional ally. Obama quickly capitulated to the Gaza flotilla.
  • By never really criticizing or pressuring the Palestinian Authority on anything at all, even when it rejected his initiatives, broke its promises to him, or made him look foolish. Consider Vice President Joe Biden’s temper tantrum about a Jerusalem zoning board okaying a construction project in the distant future to the administration’s basic indifference to ongoing PA incitement and the naming of things in honor of terrorists who murdered Israelis.
That’s not a complete list.
He may talk a good game on Sderot and Yad Vashem but in practice, his policies have largely ignored the points he made to AIPAC.
Because we understand the challenges Israel faces, I and my administration have made the security of Israel a priority. It’s why we’ve increased cooperation between our militaries to unprecedented levels.
Obama is correct that U.S.-Israel military cooperation remains quite strong, but his policy shows he definitely does NOT understand the challenges Israel faces.
Today, Iran is virtually cut off from large parts of the international financial system, and we are going to keep up the pressure. So let me be absolutely clear – we remain committed to preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.
Nice words, but in fact Iran is finding a lot of loopholes; Obama is not cracking down on Russia, China, and Turkey (to name the three main countries that are helping Iran).
As I said on Thursday, the Iranian government has shown its hypocrisy by claiming to support the rights of protesters while treating its own people with brutality. Moreover, Iran continues to support terrorism across the region, including providing weapons and funds to terrorist organizations. So we will continue to work to prevent these actions, and will stand up to groups like Hezbollah who exercise political assassination, and seek to impose their will through rockets and car bombs.
As you already know, the Obama administration has distinguished itself by the minimum it has done regarding Iran’s repression of the democratic opposition. And how has the U.S. government stood up to Hizballah? In fact, it has most definitely NOT stood up to Hizballah.
And I indicated on Thursday that the recent agreement between Fatah and Hamas poses an enormous obstacle to peace. No country can be expected to negotiate with a terrorist organization sworn to its destruction. We will continue to demand that Hamas accept the basic responsibilities of peace: recognizing Israel’s right to exist, rejecting violence, and adhering to all existing agreements. And we once again call on Hamas to release Gilad Shalit, who has been kept from his family for five long years.
Once again, though, the opposite is true. Up to Obama’s recent State Department speech, the administration’s talking points were NOT to condemn the agreement but to take a wait and see approach.

Even Obama’s discussion of the issue in his major speech did not attack the agreement (much less pressure the PA against doing it), but merely said that they would have to prove to Israel they were going to adhere to the Quartet conditions. Indeed, the PA and Hamas have already come up with clever ways to get around these issues.
As I said to Prime Minister Netanyahu, I believe that the current situation in the Middle East does not allow for procrastination.
In principle, Obama’s idea that we must do something quick to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian issue because of current conditions (I’ve been hearing that exact line for 40 years) sounds nice. In practice, though, here’s what it amounts to: The Palestinians are intransigent. They should not be punished. Israel must make more concessions.

Obama doesn’t take the Hamas threat seriously, nor does he take a real tough line on incitement. The only thing he presses the PA on is that it should talk, not that it should give.
Consider this passage carefully:
There is a reason why the Palestinians are pursuing their interests at the United Nations. They recognize that there is an impatience with the peace process – or the absence of one. Not just in the Arab World, but in Latin America, in Europe, and in Asia. That impatience is growing, and is already manifesting itself in capitols around the world.
So Obama doesn’t say that the Palestinians are trying to circumvent negotiations with Israel and mutual compromise! No, their problem is that they are too eager for peace.

Ok. Here’s a quiz for you: If the Palestinians are impatient with the slow pace of progress, who is responsible for the lack of progress? If the Palestinians are so eager to make a deal, the fault must be with…Israel.

That paragraph is a Freudian slip on Obama’s part. Yet since the PA wouldn’t negotiate for two years, including almost nine months during an Israeli construction freeze, that would throw into question its eagerness.

(I recall how in 2000 we were told the same thing about Arafat being in a hurry to make a deal. Then when he refused to negotiate more and went to violence, the same people told us how foolish we were in rushing him!)
But the march to isolate Israel internationally — and the impulse of the Palestinians to abandon negotiations — will continue to gain momentum in the absence of a credible peace process and alternative.
Think about how this is totally in contradiction to the history we lived through. The march to isolate Israel internationally will continue no matter what Israel does, whether it is involved in talks or not. Why? Because the goal of those behind it — mainly the Western leftists and Islamists — is to destroy Israel.

Again, though, there’s a Freudian slip here. For Obama’s failure to recognize the motivation means he doesn’t understand the problem. And Obama has contributed to the delegitimization of Israel. What he’s saying here: Israel hasn’t given enough and made enough concessions to move the peace process forward and that’s the reason for growing hostility to Israel.

That means he doesn’t realize the sacrifices Israel has made for the cause of peace: withdrawing from Sinai, southern Lebanon, the Gaza Strip and much of the West Bank; losing more than 2000 people murdered by terrorism; and so on.

Israelis have drawn the precise opposite conclusion. If years of demonstrating our desire for peace, making concessions, taking risks, and empathizing with Palestinian suffering has only intensified the hostility toward us, perhaps that hostility isn’t our fault and is due to something else.

On that point, Obama is totally clueless. For him, Israel still needs to prove it wants peace. But the PA doesn’t.

One more Freudian slip. Israel isn’t doing enough to keep the Palestinians from abandoning negotiations. So the fact that the PA doesn’t want to make true peace is…Israel’s fault once again. And to keep the PA from abandoning negotiations, Israel must give more. But wait a minute! If the PA is so eager to make a deal why is it also so eager to abandon negotiations? On points of logic like that, Obama’s arguments usually break down.

Incidentally, can you imagine Obama talking about how Palestinian and Arab behavior might create an “impulse” of Israel “to abandon negotiations”? Of course not.

Obama can quote the Talmud but he can’t deal with the impending catastrophe in Egypt. How can he speak at AIPAC and not mention that the most important country in the Arab world is moving quickly to tear up its peace treaty with Israel, end sanctions on Hamas in the Gaza Strip, and create a massive new security problem for Israel! A fitting symbol of his total indifference about, “How difficult that search for security can be.”

On the surface, President Obama’s speech to AIPAC will reassure many about his care and commitment to Israel. Yet a careful reading of the speech shows the exact opposite.




http://pajamasmedia.com/barryrubin/2011/05/23/obama-at-aipac/?singlepage=true

Three Cheers for Terroristine

 
We need a terrorist state. Where the politicians are terrorists, the police are terrorists and even the men sitting at the desk when you come in to drop off a form are terrorists. There are states that support terrorists, and give safe harbor to them, but that's not good enough. We don't want another Pakistan or Iran. We're not half-assing it this time. What we want is the genuine article. Terrorists from the top down. Terrorists everywhere. A state where every branch of government and the entire country is nothing but terrorists.

Terroristine has been an ancient dream since 1973 or was it 1967. A generation of keffiyah draped thugs, KGB operatives and human rights activists have looked out into the darkness and called it into being. It is a vision of a country where everyone is a murderer and children are taught from a very young age that their purpose in life is to die killing people who don't share their religion and way of life.

And now after 20 years of negotiations, treaties, suicide bombings, mutilations, billions of dollars in vanishing into Swiss bank accounts and the death of its Egyptian born leader of AIDS-- Terroristine is closer than ever to coming into being. Only one thing stands in its way. The people whose country is in the way. Who have to be thrown out of their homes so that Terroristinians can plant their rockets on the rubble of their houses, the charred remains of their fields, and point them at their cities.

Trying to end terrorism by creating a terrorist state makes is like trying to put out a fire with more fire. It can't work, but we must try. So that we can say that we tried. Over and over again. We'll keep trying until we run out of land to try with. And people to try with. Until there's nothing left but Terroristines everywhere. Until all the world is Terroristine.

The question is can we make it happen? Yes, we can. Oh sweet Allah, yes we can.

I am proud of Obama for finally standing up to the Israelis and telling them that they must ethnically cleanse hundreds of thousands of Jews, from their ancient towns, villages and cities, to make way for Terroristine. Someone had to say it. And it was either going to be Carter or Obama.

By endorsing the 1967 borders, he endorsed the outcome of the Arab invasion of Israel in 1948. Every time his administration condemns a Jewish house in Jerusalem, he endorses the Jordanian conquest of the city. Why are the borders of the 1948 war, so much better than the borders of the Six Day War? Because the Terroristinians came closer to winning that war. Came closer to driving the Yahood into the sea and ululating over mile after mile of their corpses.

But the dream failed. Farmers armed with outdated rifles. Volunteer pilots from America and Canada. Refitted cargo ships filled with half-dead men, women and children straight from the camps. Used Czech artillery. They held off the armies of seven Terroristinian nations. Farm by farm, they stood off tanks and infantry. In Jerusalem, they fought for every house. And so the Zionist entity survived. Allah curse them. They survived.

But now it's back to 1948 again. Every war undone. Every defeat turned to victory. Cut Jerusalem in two. Drive out the farmers. Burn their land. Dig up their graves. March the borders back to 1948. And fly the Terroristinian flag over dust and rubble.

Had they won in 1948 or 1967 or 1973, there would be no Israel and no Terroristine. The land would have become part of Syria, Egypt and Jordan. And only when the mobs of the faithful would drive out the tyrants to replace them with Islamic states, would there finally be a Terroristine. But now there is hope for a two state solution. A state of civilization on one side and a state of terrorists on the other. Hospitals here, launching pads there. Schools here, bomb factories there. Life here, death here.

We all know the story. Olive trees and bomb belts. Rocks and dead families in burning cars by the side of the road. Children with their throats cut. A dream. A nightmare. Who even knows anymore.

Why do we need Terroristine? Peace. There can be no peace without a terrorist state. Not a chance of it. The only way we'll ever have peace is to give the terrorists a country of their own. A country dedicated to terrorism. Only then will the Terroristinians finally give up on all the killing, and dedicate themselves to medical research, quantum physics and the arts. It hasn't happened yet to. But it's bound to.

After almost two decades as an autonomous territory, spreading death and destruction, it's time for Terroristine to finally be recognized as an independent state. With contiguous borders cutting Israel in half. It is the only hope for peace in the region.

Would Kaddafi or Assad be killing protesters in the streets if there was a Terroristinian state? Would there be turmoil in Tunisia or Egypt? Would Saudi tanks be rolling over Shiites and Coptic churches burning if there was a Terroristine? Assuredly not. The moment the flag of Terroristine rises above the wounded hills, and its peaceful anthem, "Palestine is My Revenge" is heard in the land, then a great echoing sigh will rise up from the mouths of one billion Muslims. And the violence will cease.

The international community is impatient. Damn impatient. They want Terroristine and they want it now. The negotiations must lead to immediate productive results. Whatever Israel has offered in the past, it isn't enough. It must offer more and more. Whatever it takes.

We know the Terroristinians want their own state. Every time they walk out of negotiations or end them with a round of terrorist attacks, it shows their deep and abiding passion for a state. They want it so badly they aren't willing to make a single concession for it. So committed are they to Terroristine. And who can blame them?

Have any people suffered the way the Terroristinians have? (Besides the Jews, Kurds, Armenians and pretty much everyone else that is.) Have any other people been wholly subsidized by a UN agency dedicated only to them? Have any other people inspired such a stylish fashion statement?

No more excuses. The world demands Terroristine. Middle East peace demands Terroristine. How much longer can Israel expect to draw out negotiations with weak justifications about terrorism. We know they're terrorists. That's why we're giving them a state. If they weren't terrorists, they could go to the back of the line with the Jews, Kurds and Armenians.

From one corner of the Muslim world to the other, a cry goes out. "We Are All Terroristinians." They cry it it Cairo and Damascus, in Tehran and Islamabad, in Dubai and Paris. They mosques go up, the asses go up and the bombs go off. And off to the peace negotiations we go. Everyone is impatient. Everyone is on fire. Especially the Terroristinians.

Jewish store windows are smashed in London, outside Joseph's Tomb, the Terroristinian police open fire on Jewish worshipers  Terroristinian male models prepare bombs for synagogues. And the crowds cheer. "We Are All Terroristinians Now."

It is a great day, I tell you. A great day for negotiating. The majority of Pakistan grieves for Bin Laden. In Afghanistan the word goes out, "We are the Taliban, we are the Afghan people, we are Terroristinians."  In Egypt and Turkey, they cry, "Khaybar Ya Yahood". Hamas mourns for Bin Laden. Cairo mourns for Hamas. Turkey sends out flotillas. Churches burn. Soldiers die. The smoke rises to heaven. A man waits in line at the airport. His passport is Dutch, Welsh, German, American, it doesn't matter. He is a Terroristinian.

Yallah. One day the borders of Terroristine will stretch from Spain to Pakistan. Or beyond Why settle for Jerusalem, when we can have London, Paris and Hamburg too. Why settle for anything at all? Allah is generous to the believers. Our people are in Africa. Even China. The Great Satan himself bows toward Mecca. The old governments are falling. The Arab Spring is here. The pawns of the Kufir are fleeing before our eyes. We are all Terroristinians now. There is no other book on our shelves than the Koran. No law but Sharia in our hearts. And no nation but Terroristine.

The ghost of Chamberlain stands outside No. 10 Downing Street. It is raining, but the drops pass right through his umbrella. He holds up a soggy piece of paper. "Shalom," he says. "Shalom in our time." But no one understands him. Rockets sail through the sky. The crowd cheers. Hip Hip Hooray. Hierosylma Est Perdita. Three cheers for Terroristine.

Inside, Outside, Upside Down

 

A new Assistant United States Attorney was sworn in Monday for the Eastern District of Michigan, Abed Hammoud, formerly of the Wayne County Prosecutor’s Office, where he led mortgage fraud prosecutions.

And I may add, currently of the ADC (Arab-American Anti-Discrimination Committee).

And AAPAC (Arab American Political Action Committee).

And the CAAO (Congress of Arab American Organizations).

Glenn Beck’s blackboard could come in real handy right now.

Okay, maybe my flow charts aren’t tight enough for Glenn. But I still find it most disturbing that the same Department of Justice that’s supposed to be handling terrorism prosecutions in this area has just welcomed to its team a man actively involved in three organizations that are on record for supporting Hezbollah and Hamas.

Item: Following the 2006 Israeli incursion into Lebanon, Hammoud was right out front in protest rallies in downtown Dearborn organized by the CAAO, of which he was then chairman.

An article from Dearborn’s pro-Hezbollah newspaper, the Arab-American News, triumphantly reported on the protests (“Michigan: 10000 March to Protest Israeli Attacks”):

As the crowd continued down the road, thundering cries of “Israel out of Lebanon!” “Down, down Israel!” and “Death to Israel!” rang out. As the rally continued its move down Schaefer, more and more people came running. They were joining in from back alley-ways, jumping out of cars and sprinting down sidewalks to take part in the rally.

“Other than our own leaders, Israel pulls us together like no one else can,” said Abed Hammoud as he helped lead the rally down the road. Hammoud is chairman of the Congress of Arab American Organizations (CAAO).
Hatred for Israel pulls us together, that is. Hatred for Israel and devotion to Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah can be very powerful motivators around here. At the time, NPR was reporting on the CAAO rallies:

At one recent demonstration organized by the Congress of Arab-Americans, about 1,000 people attended. College-age men asked, in call and response fashion, "Who is your army?" Protestors responded: "Hezbollah." "Who is your leader?" they were asked. "Nasrallah," the chanters responded. Many carried placards of the Hezbollah leader.
A few days earlier at an even larger demonstration, more than 15,000 turned out, about half of Dearborn's Arab community. . . . "Oh, Jews, remember Khaibar," the marchers chant. "The army of the Prophet will return."

Hammoud came here from southern Lebanon some time around 1990. He told NPR that his “hometown is just a few miles from the Israeli border. His day job is assistant county prosecutor, but his passion is advocating on behalf of the Congress of Arab-American organizations.”
They say it’s healthy to have a hobby. But does Hammoud’s passion for advocacy require shouting allegiance to Hezbollah, and death to Israel?

Hammoud told NPR
he regards Israeli airstrikes as “war crimes and atrocities” — attacks he does not hesitate to compare with Nazi Germany.

“The Nazis used to kill, especially Jewish people, using the ovens and the concentration camps,’ he says. “The Israelis use F-16s and burning bombs and smart bombs. I'm sorry. A death of a child is a death of a child.”

I’d be sorry too if I tried out an argument like that. Reflexively playing the Nazi card is a trick favored by the ADC.

Hammoud has shared leadership duties at AAPAC and CAAO with Osama Siblani, who publishes the Arab-American News, the current issue of which is calling for a “
Third Intifadah” against Israel. Siblani is an outspoken supporter of Hezbollah and Hamas, whom he considers “freedom fighters.” Hezbollah has such deep support in Dearborn that the local feds have had to spend a lot of time, or anyway, used to spend a lot of time, trying to keep track of all the money launderers, cigarette smugglers, mortgage fraudsters, and tax cheats wiring proceeds to fund Nasrallah’s rocket arsenal. In 2006 Siblani as good as dared federal investigators to try and do anything about it.
“If the FBI wants to come after those who support the resistance done by Hezbollah, then they better bring a fleet of buses,” said Osama Siblani, publisher of the local Arab-American News and an outspoken activist. “I for one would be willing to go to jail.”
You can talk big like that when you know the FBI has been warned to leave you alone.

Hammoud has also used his position as a prosecutor a time or two to try to put the kibosh on speech he didn’t like. That could be a handy skill right now when government efforts to “right-size” the First Amendment are all the rage in Michigan. In 2006 Hammoud was displeased about what he called a “smear” by an anonymous poster on the Russ Gibb online forum, Russ Gibb at Random, alleging that the president of the Life for Relief and Development charity, Khaleel Jassemm, was an AAPAC member. The Life for Relief organization had recently been raided by the FBI for suspected financial support to Hamas.

In his post, Hammoud denied that Jassemm was ever a member of AAPAC. I guess that’s true. (But, in fairness to the original poster, who was first in the members list at CAAO? Life for Relief). (And, while we're at it, who is 16th on the list but the MAS Political Action Committee, a front group for the Muslim Brotherhood.) Hammoud concluded his angry post with this creepy threat:

“I do however like to remind everyone that we all live under the law and that writing and posting falshoods (sic) can be punished. We also know that the great technology that allows people to smear others while they hide under screen names allows us to find out who they are if there is a need for a legal action. Thank you.” (Italics in original).
Kind of heavy-handed for an anonymous post on a blog mostly of local interest, wouldn’t you say? Now who on Earth ever heard of a county prosecutor trying to use his office to punish someone for saying something he doesn’t like?

And while we're on the subject of Kym Worthy, Hammoud’s boss as the Wayne County Prosecutor's Office since 2004, did you know she also had close ties with the ADC even before she sent Terry Jones to jail for the crime of visiting Dearborn?

Could use that chalkboard right about now.

Hammoud also once lent his professional support to an ill-advised Michigan House effort, Resolution 214, to censure Detroit News editor and columnist Nolan Finley for describing Palestinians as lusting for Jewish blood. The Resolution was a screed directly aimed at enforcing an Islamic speech code in Detroit’s mainstream press. (Sample language: “Whereas, A state that prides itself on the diversity of its people should speak out against statements that foster hatred and intolerance;”).

Dearborn’s State Representative Gino Polidori, who signed on as co-sponsor to this resolution at the same time he was paying his jizya tax, explained himself to a concerned constituent this way:

This resolution is an expression of our support for free speech yet against discriminating opinions. While we must respect Mr. Finley's right to free speech, we must also recognize that we endure this same right.
That’s pretty clear. The legislature is for free speech, just against opinions they don’t share. Is there any wonder these rubes can't balance a budget? Between these guys and Jack O’Reilly, it’s a good bet Michigan license plates won’t soon be bearing the motto: “The First Amendment State.”

And as for Hammoud’s free speech, he’s certainly entitled to his opinions, no question. Nor has he been stingy with them before this. And as far as his landing that new federal job goes, it’s strictly verboten for DOJ officials to consider the political points of view of career attorneys in hiring and firing decisions. Who can forget how that was stressed to us all those years when Democrats like Pat Leahy and Carl Levin were getting so emotional about it (they called it, “politicizing the Justice Department”). It was a moral infraction slightly below serial oil-drilling. At least right up until Eric Holder was appointed Attorney General.

So it isn’t that I think Mr. Hammoud should have been denied employment with DOJ just he holds strong political opinions that disagree with mine.

But Hammoud’s heavy involvement with Hezbollah-supporting organizations is more than just a political viewpoint. It’s the basis for a conflict of interest in a federal district where the majority of terror-related prosecutions are against criminals engaged in lucrative crimes, while fully committed to sharing their ill-gotten proceeds with Hezbollah.

And we shouldn’t forget how Hammoud told NPR that, while being an assistant prosecutor was his day job, “his passion is advocating on behalf of the Congress of Arab-American organizations.” And remember how Hammoud’s CAAO organized 1000 protestors in Dearborn, who were asked, “Who is your army?” to which protestors responded: "Hezbollah."? Why weren't red flags popping up during this guy's security clearance review?

Hezbollah’s status as a terrorist organization is more than one party’s political opinion. That’s the judgment of the State Department and official U.S. policy. It’s the job of the U.S. Attorney’s Office to prosecute terrorists and supporters of terrorism, including those who materially support Hezbollah and Hamas.

Are we to believe that that kind of passion vanishes the moment you get sworn in as a new Assistant United States Attorney?
#

Senate Passes Bill Strengthening Tennessee's Anti-Terrorism Law



The following was posted Saturday by Pamela Geller:
(NASHVILLE, TN) May 21, 2011 — The State Senate today voted 26 to 3 to approve an anti-terrorism bill that updates the Tennessee Terrorism Prevention Act that was passed shortly after the 9-11 terrorist attacks and was approved unanimously in both the House and Senate. The "Material Support to Designated Entities Act of 2011" now makes the provision of "material support" a Class A felony and helps to close the prevention gap left by the 2002 statute.
"After discussions with all interested parties the bill was rewritten to achieve a fiscally responsible way to cut off "material support" that assists those planning to commit terrorist acts in Tennessee since it is the support that typically makes the acts more likely to occur," said Senator Bill Ketron (R-Murfreesboro), sponsor of the bill. "This bill is very timely, in view of the fact that an August 2010 background report showed 21 U.S. citizens were charged in terrorist cases in 2009 and another 20 were charged in 2010 between January and August."
The trajectory of cases of homegrown terrorism includes actors such as Memphis Carlos Bledsoe who attempted to firebomb the home of a Nashville rabbi and went on to murder 24-year old Private William Long in Arkansas. Secretary Janet Napolitano has called out to states to become more active and engaged in counter-terrorism measures.
The new amendment eliminates designation of terrorist entities by the state authorities and instead, defers to designations already made by the U.S. Secretary of State and the Department of the Treasury. The bill supports the work of the Joint Terrorism Task Force in continuing the collaboration between federal and state law enforcement authorities.
Ketron said the bill is an even handed and non-discriminatory counter-terrorism measure. The bill specifically declares that it does not target the peaceful practice of any religion. It, however, prohibits using religious doctrine as a justification for terrorist acts in Tennessee.
"It should be a priority of ours to protect the citizens of our great state — there will be no prosperity without security," he concluded.
The bill now goes to Governor Bill Haslam for his signature.
This is an important victory for the counterjihad movement in the heart of America. Read more about this bill and what events led up to it at Atlas Shrugs.
And read a personal account of what has been happening in Nashville at the Patriot's Corner. One of the things that made the most difference in achieving this victory was an excellent video called Losing Our Community, which you can watch at the Tennessee Freedom Coalition here.

Congratulations to the hardworking, freedom-loving patriots of Nashville, Tennessee!

Obama's AIPAC speech gets mixed reviews in Israel

 

 

Obama's AIPAC speech gets mixed reviews in Israel

US President Barack Obama felt his remarks regarding the Israeli-Palestinian peace process over the past few days were misrepresented, and so he sought to set the record straight at the annual America Israel Public Action Committee (AIPAC) conference on Sunday.

Addressing the 10,000 AIPAC attendees, Obama insisted he is a "real friend" to Israel, despite accusations that his call last week for Israel to surrender the 1967 borders had put him firmly in the Arab camp.
Israeli officials remained skeptical.

In Sunday's AIPAC speech, Obama pointed out that his administration has advanced military cooperation with Israel, has imposed heavy sanctions on Iran, took Israel's side in the Goldstone Report affair, and has strongly opposed Palestinian efforts to unilaterally declare statehood at the UN later this year.

Regarding his speech last week at the State Department in which Obama insisted Israel must make peace with the Palestinians based on the 1967 borders, the president was adamant that he had been "misrepresented several times."

Obama agreed that Israel could not go back to the 1967 borders as they were, and that "mutually agreed" land swaps would be necessary. However, he continued to suggest that Israel's actions were creating delays that were unacceptable to the international community.

"We cannot afford to wait another decade, or another two decades, or another three decades, to achieve peace," said Obama.

An aide to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who is still in Washington, told Israel's Ynet news portal that Netanyahu was "pleased" with Obama's clarification regarding the 1967 borders.

Following Obama's State Department speech last week, Netanyahu had publicly rejected the idea that Israel would surrender every inch of Judea and Samaria in a peace deal, noting that the pre-1967 borders had invited several full-scale wars and unending terorism against the Jewish state.

Other members of Netanyahu's ruling Likud Party were less forgiving.

Obama "is zigzagging in accordance with whatever will bring him more votes and justify his Nobel Peace Prize," rising Likud star Danny Danon told Israel National News..

Danon insisted that "Israel will not pay [Obama's] private tuition as he tries to understand the essence of the conflict."

Other Likud lawmakers credited Netanyahu's firm stance with slightly changing Obama's mind, and forcing the American to understand that Israel can hold just as firmly to its demands as the Palestinians.

But many Israeli commentators warned that Obama's stated policies, even after his conciliatory AIPAC speech, remain dangerous, and should not be accepted by Israel.

Most importantly, Obama is still working off the premise that Israel must surrender an equal amount of territory to that liberated in 1967. But, UN Resolution 242, which the Palestinians use as the basis for their claims, does not explicitly define the amount of territory Israel must exchange for peace. And the document's authors have repeatedly stated that the ommission was deliberate.

Gamal Helal, a former adviser to US presidents on Middle East affairs, told the Arabic newspaper Asharq Al-Awsat that what Obama has done is adopt the Arab line concerning negotiations.

Helal noted that for the Arabs - from the Egyptians to the Jordanians to the Palestinians - the 1967 borders have always been the starting point for any peace process, since they don't believe they should lose any territory as a result of their past efforts to destroy Israel.

"The US stance in all the past years has been to agree to the solutions agreed by the sides through the negotiations without the United States stipulating anything so that this stipulation would not be an obstacle at the negotiations," said Helal.

He continued: "This new thesis, which President Obama presented in his Thursday's speech, supports the Arab viewpoint, and is a basic hindrance for the Israeli side, which links the size of Israel before 1967 to the ability to defend it, as the Israelis say that if Israel is of small area, it will be difficult to defend it."

Helal further explained that up until now, the Palestinians had been forced to reluctantly accept that the 1967 borders would be achieved at the conclusion of successful negotiations. Now, Obama has helped them to once again make the 1967 borders the starting point of Arab demands.




http://www.israeltoday.co.il/tabid/178/nid/22798/Default.aspx

Iraqi Youth Challenge Extremists on Facebook

2009 Killer Of Army Recruiter William Long Being Tried As ‘Street Thug’

A Muslim convert guns down army recruiters, declares jihad as his motive, claims he wanted to start a terror cell. Does the government call him a terrorist? No, he is a “street thug” who committed a drive-by shooting.
In June 2009 two army recruiters were gunned down in front of their recruiting office in Little Rock. Pvt. Quinton Ezeagwula was wounded. Pvt. William Long was killed. Abdul Hakim Mujahid Muhammad, a convert to Islam, was arrested. Although there was ample reason to believe the shooting was politically and religiously motivated, the media was ho-hum about the story. President Obama addressed the crime only after a public outcry over his silence.
This was Obama’s statement in its entirety:
“I am deeply saddened by this senseless act of violence against two brave young soldiers who were doing their part to strengthen our armed forces and keep our country safe. I would like to wish Quinton Ezeagwula a speedy recovery, and to offer my condolences and prayers to William Long’s family as they mourn the loss of their son.”
The media generally reported Muhammad as “upset” with the military but it was all kind of vague as to what was bothering him. The Army Times was more forthcoming in their reporting. Muhammad may have been seeking out Jewish and Christian targets as well as military targets.
New info released on recruiting center suspect
A joint FBI-Homeland Security intelligence assessment obtained by The Associated Press said officers found maps to Jewish organizations, a child-care center, a Baptist church, a post office and military recruiting centers in the southeastern U.S. and New York and Philadelphia.
Abdulhakim Muhammad, 23, of Little Rock had targeted soldiers “because of what they had done to Muslims in the past,” authorities said, saying he had said he wanted to “kill as many people in the Army as he could.”
Justice is still pending after two years. Muhammad sent a letter to the judge last Friday demanding to be tried in a federal court rather than a state court. He says he wanted to start a terror cell. The shooting occurred at a federal facility and he was initially under federal investigation. Why is the case being tried in state court?
Murder suspect says he wanted to start terror cell
“The facility where the shooting took place was a federal building. The Army recruiters outside that federal building were federal employees,” Muhammad wrote. “I was under federal investigation at the time of the shooting by the FBI. Why then is this a state case in state court?”
Why indeed. The prosecuting attorney for Pulaski County says—
“I mean, his claims are just ridiculous. He’s nothing but a street thug and this is just a drive-by shooting. That’s our position and we’re sticking to it,” Jegley said.
Never mind that minutes after the arrest Muhammad said he was on a jihad in retaliation for what he saw as a war on Islam. He told AP that the shooting was revenge for Americans killing Muslims and he therefore doesn’t believe he is guilty of any crime.

Muhammad asked to fire his attorneys but the judge turned down his request. His attorneys plan to use the insanity defense. Muhammad points out he was examined by state doctors and found to be competent to stand trial.

There is something crazy about what’s happening here and it isn’t Muhammad. Our government is whitewashing an act of terror against members of the military just as they hope to do with the Fort Hood shooting. (The latest on that case.)

We are watching.

CAIR Asks Napolitano to Probe Use of Islamophobic Trainers

 

Renewed request comes following use of ethnic stereotypes in Minn. airport drill

WASHINGTON, May 23, 2011 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- A prominent national Muslim civil rights and advocacy organization today called on Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano to conduct an agency-wide investigation of the use of outside trainers who offer hostile, stereotypical and grossly inaccurate information about Muslims and Islam to the nation's security personnel.

That request by the Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) came after revelations that ethnic stereotypes were used as part of a controversial security drill at the Minneapolis-St.

Paul International Airport. During the drill, Transportation Security Administration (TSA) personnel used a person "who appeared to be Middle Eastern in descent or Indian/Pakistani" to test screening procedures.

SEE: TSA Used Man of 'Middle Eastern Descent' with Fake Bomb to Test MSP Security
http://www.startribune.com/local/122446774.html

Over the weekend, it was also revealed that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) paid a notorious Islamophobe $5,000 for a recent appearance at a conference sponsored by the South Dakota Department of Public Safety (DPS).

The speaker, Walid Shoebat, claims "Islam is the devil" and that President Obama is a Muslim. Shoebat once told a Missouri newspaper that he sees "many parallels between the Antichrist and Islam" and "Islam is not the religion of God -- Islam is the devil." (Springfield News-Leader, 9/24/07) CAIR asked DPS to drop its endorsement of the conference.

SEE: Controversial Speaker Paid $5,000 for Rapid City Appearance
http://tinyurl.com/3olxevp

CAIR Asks S.D. Agency to Drop Conference Featuring Islamophobe
http://tinyurl.com/3s5es62

In a letter sent today to Secretary Napolitano, CAIR National Executive Director Nihad Awad wrote in part:
"The use and funding of Islamophobic private trainers harms our nation's safety and security and contradicts both DHS policy and your public statements on improving relations with the American Muslim community. Promoting anti-Muslim hostility only serves to tear down hard-won trust and spread unjustified fear and suspicion.

"The fact that repeated calls for government investigations of this disturbing trend have gone unanswered sends a very negative message to American Muslims and to the larger society.

"Islamophobic trainers are undercutting your efforts and those of President Obama, who repeatedly states that our nation is not at war with Islam or Muslims."

CAIR has in the past called on the Obama administration, DHS, the Department of Defense, and Congress to provide oversight for apparently widespread anti-Muslim bias in the training of law enforcement and security and military personnel nationwide.

Video: CAIR Decries Anti-Muslim Police Trainers
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RxX5y7zX8RU

New Concern About Bias in Counterterror Training (NPR)
http://tinyurl.com/4tpxvzy

Islam-Bashing Bigots Train Counterterrorism Agents
http://tinyurl.com/29bsgc9

Trainers for American military personnel have included Islamophobes such as Robert Spencer, co-founder of Stop the Islamization of America (SIOA). SIOA has been designated as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center.

CAIR: Muslim-Basher Trains U.S. Military Personnel in Kentucky
http://tinyurl.com/3wbjv4z

Active Anti-Muslim Groups
http://www.splcenter.org/node/3502/activegroups

CAIR's renewed request for oversight comes following the release of an 80-page report, titled "Manufacturing the Muslim Menace: Private Firms, Public Servants, & the Threat to Rights and Security," released by Political Research Associates (PRA) that details a systemic failure to regulate content in counterterrorism training.

Manufacturing the Muslim Menace
http://tinyurl.com/4qeretq 

Washington Monthly magazine also published a major investigative article showing similar anti-Islam attitudes by private trainers of law enforcement agencies.

SEE: How We Train Our Cops to Fear Islam
http://tinyurl.com/4ajnx3h

CAIR's New York chapter (CAIR-NY) called on the New York Police Department (NYPD) to investigate how a notorious anti-Muslim propaganda film came to be used in mandatory counterterrorism training.

SEE: NYPD Cops' Training Included an Anti-Muslim Horror Flick
http://tinyurl.com/5vyc4fs

CAIR made a similar request of counterterrorism and military leaders not to employ Muslim-bashers as trainers following a Washington Post investigative report on post-9/11 government surveillance, which stated: "Seeking to learn more about Islam and terrorism, some law enforcement agencies have hired as trainers self-described experts whose extremist views on Islam and terrorism are considered inaccurate and counterproductive by the FBI and U.S. intelligence agencies."
SEE: Monitoring America (Wash. Post)

http://tinyurl.com/2b6eetr

Last year, the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) acknowledged that an anti-Islam film should not have been used in training offered to security personnel by that military law enforcement agency.

CAIR contacted NCIS after receiving a report that a three-day NCIS surveillance detection course at the U.S. Naval Observatory in Washington, D.C., included the viewing of a propagandistic anti-Islam film.

SEE: CAIR Seeks Probe of Anti-Islam Bias in Military Training
http://tinyurl.com/2awmz5n 

CAIR is America's largest Muslim civil liberties and advocacy organization. Its mission is to enhance the understanding of Islam, encourage dialogue, protect civil liberties, empower American Muslims, and build coalitions that promote justice and mutual understanding.

Become a Fan of CAIR on Facebook
http://www.facebook.com/CAIRNational

Subscribe to CAIR's E-Mail List
http://tinyurl.com/cairsubscribe

Subscribe to CAIR's Twitter Feed
http://twitter.com/cairnational

Subscribe to CAIR's YouTube Channel
http://www.youtube.com/cairtv

CONTACT: CAIR National Communications Director Ibrahim Hooper, 202-744-7726, E-Mail: ihooper@cair.com; CAIR Communications Coordinator Amina Rubin, 202-488-8787, 202-341-4171, E-Mail: arubin@cair.com

SOURCE Council on American-Islamic Relations


Read more: http://www.sacbee.com/2011/05/23/3648258/cair-asks-napolitano-to-probe.html#ixzz1NDZXGuTF