OOTDnews

Wednesday, May 25, 2011

Anti-Sharia Group to Hold Protest in Dearborn Saturday

Order of the Dragon, the group originally behind the planned Good Friday protest, has announced that they will host a demonstration against radical Islam on May 28 at Dearborn City Hall.

By Jessica Carreras

new

Sacred Heart Pastor Rev. Peter Petroske speaks with

Order of the Dragon Vice President Jammie Bothwell

and President Frank Fiorello at Saturday morning's

meeting with local religious leaders.

Michigan-based group Order of the Dragon, which canceled its April 22 anti-Sharia Law protest in Dearborn after controversial Quran-burning Florida Pastor Terry Jones latched himself onto the event, is heading back to Dearborn this weekend to host another event.

The group announced on its website that they will rally at City Hall at 3 p.m. this Saturday, May 28, for a demonstration “against radical Islam and Sharia.”

The group said they will be joined by representatives from the American Defense League, ACT! For America and David Horowitz’s Freedom Center. All three list one of their organizational goals as fighting radical Islam.

At an April 16 press conference and meeting with religious leaders in Dearborn, Order of the Dragon
President Frank Fiorello and Vice President Jammie Bothwell said that they never believed Sharia was happening in Dearborn, but that the Order saw inklings of it that concerned them. Examples, he said, included the fact that Fordson High School football players practice at night during Ramadan, due to the fact that Muslim players must fast during the day.

“I don’t think Sharia law has been implemented here or anywhere else,” Fiorello said. “I’m just worried about the future.”

The 15-member group’s mission–as stated on their website–is “to come together as a community, help protect the traditional rights of Americans … (and) protect our country from the rise of radical Islam and the implementation of Sharia law.”

At that same April meeting, Fiorello and Bothwell announced that their Good Friday protest had been canceled.

But Pastor Jones–who had planned to continue on with the event–was summoned to court over the matter and, as a result, the Good Friday event never took place. Instead, he was found “likely to breach the peace” by a jury and arrested after refusing to pay a $1 peace bond to the city.

Jones is currently suing the city of Dearborn and Wayne County prosecutor’s office, as well as appealing the ruling.

Jones has not pledged to take part in the May 28 demonstration, but is expected to make an appearance at the Arab International Festival on June 17 in east Dearborn.

http://dearborn.patch.com/articles/anti-sharia-group-to-hold-protest-in-dearborn-saturday?ncid=breaking_news#comments

Terror Attack Scout Tells Jury of Plan to Toss Severed Heads

(Bloomberg) -- David Coleman Headley, a key witness in the U.S. government's case against alleged planners of the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks, told a federal court jury he was "pleased" when he learned they'd been carried out.

He also told the panel of eight women and four men at the Chicago courthouse about a planned assault upon a Danish newspaper in which victims were to be shot and decapitated by attackers who would then heave the heads from office windows. That plot followed the publication in the newspaper of cartoons depicting the Islamic prophet Muhammad.

"Shoot them first and then behead them," were the instructions Headley testified today he was told to relay to the would-be attackers during a meeting in Pakistan's rugged Waziristan region with a man the U.S. says has ties to al-Qaeda, the Muslim terrorist group formerly led by Osama bin Laden.

Headley's testimony came on the second day of the U.S. trial of Tahawwur Rana, a Chicago businessman accused of using his immigration business to provide cover for Headley as he scouted the Mumbai sites where more than 160 people, including six Americans, were killed over three days in November 2008.

Rana, 50, is also accused of providing Headley's pretext for a similar mission to Copenhagen where the never-executed assault on the Morgenavisen Jyllands-Posten newspaper would have been carried out.

Material Support

A Pakistani native and Canadian citizen, Rana is charged with providing material support for the two plots and for Lashkar-e-Taiba, the group believed to have been behind the raids on two Mumbai hotels, a café, a train station and a Jewish center.

He faces a possible life sentence if convicted. Defense attorney Charlie Swift in his opening statement yesterday told jurors his client had been duped by his friend, Headley.

The U.S. government in 2001 labeled Lashkar-e-Taiba, which agitates for the separation from India of the predominantly Muslim state of Jammu and Kashmir, a terrorist organization.

Headley was the first witness called by federal prosecutors in the trial. Last year he pleaded guilty to 12 criminal counts including conspiracy to commit murder and supporting terrorists, and is a cooperating government witness.

"I was pleased," Headley, 50, told Assistant U.S. Attorney Dan Collins today when asked how he reacted to news the Mumbai attack had occurred.

On his reconnaissance missions, Headley said, he'd carried business cards claiming he was an consultant for Rana's business and had opened a branch office in Mumbai which he said he used as part of his cover.

Mumbai Assault

Headley began testifying yesterday, telling the court how he'd met with agents of the Pakistani Lashkar-e-Taiba, as well as a man he said worked for that nation's Inter-Services Intelligence Agency. Headley also said he told Rana about their preparations for the Mumbai assault.

Today, the American-born Headley described preparations for the planned strike at Jyllands-Posten. In 2005, the paper published caricatures of Muhammad, including one depicting him with a bomb in his turban.

The cartoons touched off protests in Muslim communities worldwide.

"Discussion on this matter has been long overdue," Headley said Rana told him when apprised of the Danish plot. In e-mails shown to jurors today, Headley referred to the revenge attack as the "Mickey Mouse" project.

Newspaper Attack

Ilyas Kashmiri, one of eight men charged in connection with the Headley-Rana case, led the newspaper attack planning and allegedly told Headley it would be carried out by operatives living in the U.K.

Kashmiri commands Harakat-ul Jihad Islami, a Pakistan-based terrorist group with ties to al-Qaeda, according to the U.S. Another defendant, Abdur Rehman Hashim Syed, is allegedly a retired Pakistani army officer, while a third -- identified only as "Major Iqbal" -- also reportedly helped plan the Mumbai assault. None of the three are in U.S. custody.

Nine of the 10 Mumbai attackers died in firefights with responding Indian authorities.

Headley and Collins today took turns reading from the transcript of a telephone conversation between one of Headley's Lashkar handlers and two of the attackers of the Chabad House, a Jewish hostel in Mumbai, on Nov. 27, 2008, regarding the disposition of two hostages there.

"Get rid of them now," handler Sajid Mir reportedly told the attackers. "Place the barrel on the backside of their heads and fire."

Mir is charged with 12 counts in the U.S. case, including the murder of U.S. nationals in India. He isn't in custody.

The trial may last into mid-June, U.S. District Judge Harry D. Leinenweber has said.

The case is U.S. v. Kashmiri, 09-cr-00830, U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois (Chicago).

--Editors: Peter Blumberg, Steve Farr

Feds Issue Threat: No Fly Zone for Texas?

by Connor Boyack, with Brian Roberts and Michael Boldin

Yesterday, the U.S. Department of Justice upped the ante in a high-stakes political game of chicken. Lobbying against pending legislation in the Texas legislature which would criminalize any searches conducted without probable cause, U.S. Attorney John E. Murphy sent a letter to a few high-ranking members of Texas’ government warning against promoting the bill and threatening a complete closure of all flights to and from the state.

“If HR [sic] 1937 were enacted, the federal government would likely seek an emergency stay of the statute,” Murphy wrote. “Unless or until such a stay were granted, TSA would likely be required to cancel any flight or series of flights for which it could not ensure the safety of passengers and crew.”

No doubt written with the threatening intent one reads into it, Murphy added: “We urge that you consider the ramifications of this bill before casting your vote.”

Previous to the federal government’s threat, the Texas legislature had considered the ramifications of the bill. More importantly, they were responding to a clear need to uphold the Fourth Amendment and ensure that each person enjoys the right “to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures” — a right which the U.S. Constitution mandates “shall not be violated.”

Repeated TSA violations of the Fourth Amendment

That need has demonstrated itself in great abundance in past months, as the TSA has aggressively pursued its new policy of invasive searches and seizures at the nation’s airports. The “ramifications” to which the U.S. Attorney refers are evidently an easily dismissed matter of little importance to the federal government; to those affected by these policies, the ramifications of a bill seeking to prevent further occurrences is no doubt a welcome development.

It was less than a month ago at the Dallas, TX airport where former Miss USA Susie Castillo tearfully produced a viral video describing the molestation she had just then endured at the hands of a TSA agent. “I mean, she actually… touched my vagina,” Castillo said through her tears. “They’re making me… choose to either get molested… or go through this machine that’s completely unhealthy and dangerous. I don’t want to go through it, and here I am crying.”

Castillo isn’t the only person who would be protected under this Texas legislation. All other innocent travelers would likewise be shielded. That includes the six year old girl who made the headlines last month for being groped by a TSA agent (an action which the TSA defended as being alright since it “followed the current standard operating procedures”), as well as the eight-month-old infant subjected to a pat down while cradled in the arms of her mother.

These are but a few of the myriad confrontations that occur daily where TSA agents detain, invasively search, and seize items from innocent individuals who are not suspected of any crime whatsoever. Texas’ bill would correct this horrific perversion of the law within its state, but the federal government is clearly interested in justifying and maintaining its statist status quo.

Repeated Threats from the Federal Government

Evidence of that arrogant persistence is found in letters similar to the one penned last night by the U.S. Attorney to Texas officials. Almost two years ago, a similarly threatening letter was sent to Oklahoma by the U.S. Attorney General. In it, the state is warned against pursuing a constitutional amendment to make the English language official. The threat was a termination of appropriated funds to the state.

Another letter was sent in 2009 to both Montana and Tennessee in response to those states passing a Firearms Freedom Act. Rather than an explicit threat of any sort, these letters completely dismissed any constitutional standing or legitimate concern by the states, instead (incorrectly) affirming the federal government’s supreme authority over the issue at hand.

More recently, a U.S. Attorney wrote to the Governor of Rhode Island warning against that state’s implementation of medical marijuana legislation which would constitutionally regulate the manufacture, distribution, and consumption of the plant within the state. The attorney trumpeted the federal laws relating to the “controlled substance” and assured the Governor that the Department of Justice’s full resources would be brought to bear against any state (theirs included) which attempted to oppose the federal government’s complete control.

Rob Natelson, recognized national expert on the founding and adoption of the Constitution, considers these letters to be far more ominous than mere statements. In response to the 2009 letters, he said, “I look at this and I see this letter which gets close to looking like an order from the central government down to a sovereign state legislature, and I say…WOW. This looks like something that (Roman Emperor) Septimius Severus would have sent to the local officials.” He continued, “It reminds one eerily of the kinds of communications that started to come out from the Emperor to the local cities of the Roman Empire, beginning the course of the ultimate destruction of local government.”

Despite Threats, Moving Forward

For now, it appears that the U.S. Attorney’s threat has realized its goal; the sponsor of the Texas bill has decided to concede defeat in this battle, but remains committed to fighting the war. “I will pull HB 1937 down, but I will stand for liberty in the state of Texas,” said Senator Dan Patrick, the bill’s sponsor. As such, as of right now, the bill has died.

This much is clear: the federal government should not consider this a victory. As individuals are being unjustly molested on a daily basis, it is increasingly becoming apparent that there exists a strong, emotionally-charged undercurrent of resistance against the TSA and its invasive searches and seizures.

If anything, the withdrawal of Texas’ legislation last night should be seen as the calm before the coming storm of state-based opposition to the TSA.

Texas is Not Alone

If anything can serve as a rallying cry to unite the states against an oppressive, unconstitutional action on the part of the federal government, it is the institutionalized and fear-based justification of the molestation of innocent men, women, and children. The U.S. Attorney’s stern counsel to consider the “ramifications” of the Texas bill speaks more in support of the state’s actions than against it.

Indeed, when one considers the ramifications of not opposing the federal government on this issue, it is difficult to imagine how many Susie Castillos will be felt up by the feds for no valid reason whatsoever. That unnecessary nightmare is enough to encourage a single state — in this case, Texas — to stand strong in the defense of the individual liberties of its citizens.

But Texas is not alone. Already, four other states are considering similar “travel freedom” legislation. And, sources close to the Tenth Amendment Center tell us to expect at least ten others in 2012. Taken together, it becomes evident that many other states will soon be picking up the baton, together having the courage needed to put the federal government back in its rightful place — which isn’t inside the waistline of innocent passengers.

The TSA’s resident propagandist, Blogger Bob, will have his work cut out for him in the months ahead.

Connor Boyack [send him mail] is the state chapter coordinator for the Utah Tenth Amendment Center. He is a web developer, political economist, and budding philanthropist trying to change the world one byte at a time. He lives in Utah with his wife and son. Read his blog.
Brian Roberts [send him email] is communications director for the Texas Tenth Amendment Center
Michael Boldin [send him email] is the founder of the Tenth Amendment Center. He was raised in Milwaukee, WI, and currently resides in Los Angeles, CA. Follow him on twitter - @michaelboldin - and visit his personal blog - http://www.michaelboldin.com/

Bahrain's Voiceless: How al-Jazeera's Coverage of the Arab Spring Is Uneven

Posted by Aryn Baker

A couple of weeks ago, the Qatari English language daily the Peninsula ran the provocative headline, “Why Are We So Timid?” in its Saturday special issue. “Freedom eludes the Qatari media even as the country's top leadership is keen to promote free expression and has lifted all kinds of restrictions on the local press,” opined the writer in a front-page story.

The question comes at an interesting point in time for the tiny peninsular nation just of the coast of Saudi Arabia. Qatar, of course, is home to satellite news broadcaster al-Jazeera, hardly a shrinking violet when it comes to attention grabbing reporting from some of the world's hottest hot zones. Already the go-to option for news in a Middle East seeking an alternative to the Western perspectives of the BBC and CNN, the station gained world-wide prestige for its ground breaking coverage of the Egyptian revolution, and even earned a place in the Time 100 rankings of the world's influentials, twice. It wouldn't be out of line to suggest that the station's passionate embrace of the young Egyptian revolutionaries helped, in part, to unseat
President Hosni Mubarak. Within days of his fall, an online petition demanding that US cable operators start distributing the channel made the rounds. Longtime critics, who derisively labeled it “al Qaeda TV” back when it questioned the U.S. role in Iraq, have started reconsidering the value of a station that now appears to be on the side of free speech, democracy and human rights. In an interview with Time's Ishaan Tharoor, al Jazeera's DC Bureau Chief Abderrahim Foukara answered the question of why it was important to have a different perspective:

For Americans, what happens in Egypt is of immense consequence to the U.S. and its interests in that part of the world. And it was really interesting to see all sorts of Americans, including the intelligence community, scratching their heads, trying to understand how this came about, what the ramifications were and how they'd deal with it. Simultaneously, you had this detailed coverage on Al Jazeera. I think our coverage of Egypt has been crucial in demonstrating to people that there are certain stories integral to world peace and stability that require access to a channel like Al Jazeera English. It has made the investment, has the presence, the perspective, the expertise and the knowledge to properly tell a story like Egypt.

Similarly, Al Jazeera leads the way when it comes to coverage of Libya's ongoing rebellion. Within a week of the protests that launched President Muammar Gaddafi's crackdown on his own people, the station started using the rebel tricolor to mark its coverage, instead of the green Libyan flag. I asked Al Anstey, Al Jazeera English's Managing Director, about the station's use of such a loaded symbol. I was trying to make a point about balanced coverage of a complicated uprising. He responded that there was no such thing as balance when it came to a tyrannical regime that threatened to go house to house in search of dissenters to eradicate like rats. “We chose the tricolor because Illustrates the dynamic of the story,” he said. “There are so many people challenging the authority of a dictator who has been in power for 42 years, and using the old flag is a symbol of the challenge to that regime.”

“Giving a voice to the voiceless” is how Anstey described the station's operating logic. And when it comes to victims of earthquakes, floods, and oppressive regimes, al Jazeera largely succeeds. Except, perhaps, in the case of Bahrain, Qatar's tiny island neighbor to the north, where a Sunni minority monarchy has cracked down brutally on a largely Shia pro-democracy uprising. Over the past three months the authorities have embarked upon a devastating campaign of repression, intimidation and torture that wouldn't look out of place in Libya or Mubarak's Egypt. Yet the coverage on Al Jazeera has been largely limited to brief mentions and a backstage examination of why the world's media has been so slow to cover the events there.

As the program well points out, Bahrain's government has adeptly blocked major coverage simply by preventing journalists' entry. But the excuse rings hollow, especially coming from Al Jazeera, which usually takes such blockades as a challenge to a duel, not a reason for retreat. Is there a double standard in effect? Qatari troops are in Bahrain, part of a Saudi-led Gulf Cooperation Council effort to quash any notions of democracy in a region defined by Sunni monarchies. And Al Jazeera is largely funded by Qatar's Sunni ruling family. Which leads us back to the Peninsula's headline: Why are we so timid? Anstey swears that the station is absolutely independent, and if a story merits news, no matter how controversial, it will be covered.

Compared to coverage of Syria, where not only are journalists banned, but an Al Jazeera correspondent was kidnapped and delivered to Iran, reporting on Bahrain is insipid at best. As the Washington Post reported a few weeks ago, Bahrain simply didn't merit the international importance of a story out of Egypt, Libya or even Yemen, according to the station's news directors. Still, the situation in Bahrain marks a potentially explosive Sunni-Shia conflagration that most certainly will embroil the neighborhood. So is self-censorship to blame? It could be. As one independent Qatari media consultant told me, “no one likes to air out their dirty laundry in public.” And Qatar's role in quashing dissent in Bahrain, even as part of a grudging alliance with Saudi, would certainly go against Al Jazeera's much vaunted support for human rights and self determination.

Ivory Coast Muslims: Accuse and Threaten Neighboring Christian Ghana

Never content or satisfied with the massacres that they have lead or instigated the Mohamedist's lust for non-Muslim blood, territory and wealth is insatiable.

It's the same old story all over again; Muslims invent a non-existent offense as justification for violence. The use of straw man arguments to incite violence is as old as Islam itself. As anyone that has studied the structure of the Koran knows, the later verses written after the death of Mohamed's first wife are primarily dedicated to justifying either preemptively or retroactively the violence that Mohamed intended to practice and nothing has changed.

In the case of Ivory Coast and Ghana, the government of neighboring Christian dominated Ghana is being accused of harboring pro-Gbagbo militants intent on overthrowing the current government of Ivory Coast. The violence inciting accusations caterwauling out of Ivory Coast come despite adamant denials and assurances that they will not permit militant activity from the government of Ghana.

Even more revealing is that these claims out of the new Muslim government amidst its own efforts to hunt down members of the previous government and put them on trial accusing them of having their hands soaked in blood, when it was his own military aggression that resulted in the civil war and slaughter of his opponents supporters.

Not surprisingly, the new president's calls for peace are just as laughable as the claims that Islam is a religion of peace, because they are in fact one and the same. Islam is of course the biggest mass murderer on the face of the planet out-pacing the combined efforts of Socialism/Marxism and Communism which run a distant second and also claim to be the only path to peaceful coexistence.

The accusations by Ivory Coast's newly installed government are already inciting violence against people from neighboring Ghana working in Ivory Coast. In case you're new to the whole ethnic cleansing process, this is exactly how it's done. Situations are created which incite the Muslim population to violence against the Christian population and forces them out of their homes.

It is reported that many Ghanaian nationals in Ivory Coast are living in constant fear of possible attacks from some Ivorians who are said to be angered by reports that the Ghanaian government is harbouring some Ivorian dissidents who are allegedly plotting to overthrow the Ouattara government. The report was yesterday confirmed by one Ghanaian national who said on Accra based Citi FM that Ghanaians in La Cote d'Ivoire had become targets for possible attack because some Ivorians, mainly from the North of the country, had been threatening to kill them.

It is important to recall that it was massive illegal immigration and voter fraud that gave the current Islamist government an excuse to conduct a coup and illegally take control of the government in the first place. In this light we see clearly that the presence of foreign persons is only tolerable if they are Muslims and violence as a tool to displace that rightful owners is acceptable if they are Christians.

Within days of being inaugurated the Islamist government of Ivory Coast has started both an official and unofficial witch hunt for members of the previous legal and legitimate government, accused their neighbor of harboring persons actively plotting to overthrow the government of Ivory Coast, incited violence against persons from Ghana working in Ivory Coast, and threatened to attack them if they don't solve a non-existent problem.

This isn't rocket science people.... The problem is Islam, always has been and always will be until the world does something about it. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did, and it never will. Outtara used the power of Islam to take control of Ivory Coast, he now clearly has his eyes on Ghana. Is anybody else watching?

Hamas' New Social Media Push

IPT News

May 23, 2011http://www.investigativeproject.org/2889/hamas-new-social-media-push

[Image]"We call for adopting a strategy on the basis of resistance and the upholding of our rights and constants," Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri stated in an official message on Twitter. While statements in support of "resistance" may be old and established, Hamas' leadership is capitalizing on the social media craze to try reaching a new crowd.

The power of social media hasn't been lost on Hamas. During the past year, young Palestinians in the Gaza Strip used Facebook, Twitter, and other similar sites to rally for a unified Palestinian government. The protests, which initially were suppressed, ultimately brought Hamas to the table with its Fatah rival, and were a Palestinian expression of pro-democracy movements in the Arab World.

Hamas' new media push includes accounts on Youtube, Flickr, Twitter, and Facebook, as well as a website (http://www.hamasinfo.net/) for the group's "Information Office." Notably, Facebook and Youtube have actively removed websites tied to terrorists and violence due to over content violations, while Twitter's terms of use seem more flexible. Launched over the course of the past year, these new outlets will join the Palestinian Information Center and the Ezzedeen al-Qassam Brigades Information Office in touting the group's official line.

It's also not the first time that Hamas has used the latest technology in disseminating its message. In April 2010, the Hamas' Ezzedeen al-Qassam Brigades produced its first 3D video, focused on the failure of the Israeli government to secure the release of kidnapped soldier Gilad Shalit.

Hamas' new push creates a web of ways to broadcast information. At the center is the news website Hamasinfo.net, which shows the latest speeches, statements, and information from Hamas' leaders. It also hosts important older speeches regarding the group's ideology. For example, to clarify the terrorist group's opposition to creating an Islamic Emirate in Gaza, the Information Office re-released a 2007 interview of leader Mahmoud al-Zahhar on Al-Jazeera Talk.

New releases on its website are broadcast on Twitter and Facebook, where people can comment or link back to original articles and videos. More than 240 people have "liked" the official Hamas Facebook profile since its launch on May 15th. Hamas has also endorsed violent marches of Palestinian refugees on Israel's borders, in the "likes and interest" section of its Facebook profile.

The group's Flickr page shows favorable pictures of its leadership, such as Hamas leader Khalid Meshaal meeting with senior political figures or attending Hamas rallies. Other pictures from its Facebook page show Meshaal visiting Palestinian hospitals.

Its Youtube account, which is not yet fully functional, also will feature interviews and clips from the group's website.

Through social media sites like these, Hamas can show two sides to its organization. On one hand, Hamas presents the image of a group with broad appeal, working for Palestinian unity, and rallying for independence. On the other, the speeches on its new website show that the group hasn't given up extremist positions, despite selectively omitting statements like Hamas' opposition to the assassination of Osama bin Laden. These include a recent announcement by spokesman Al-Zuhri that America is no longer a friend to the region and will fail to force it into ever recognizing Israel.

Before the launch of official social media, communication between Hamas members and the public relied on web forums. One such forum run by the Ezzedeen al-Qassam Brigades, Al-Qassam English Forum, continues to provide an official English-language outlet for discussion, multimedia, and advocacy on Hamas' behalf. It also includes photos of 'martyrdom operations' and videos honoring suicide attackers.

However, unlike al-Qaida-style groups which thrive in the unregulated web forums, Hamas shut down the al-Qassam Forum's Arabic section last year. With little control over the message put out on these websites, many posts focused solely on jihad and hate towards Israel and Jews. Hamas hasn't lost the violent tinge to its writings, but its articles refer more to the "right of resistance," and other euphemisms for terror.

http://www.investigativeproject.org/2889/hamas-new-social-media-push

"Focus Your Operations On Oil"

IN AN ARTICLE entitled Osama's Oil Obsession, Daveed Gartenstein-Ross writes:

One early indication of a shift in jihadist thinking on attacking oil facilities was Rashid al-Anzi's The Laws of Targeting Petroleum-Related Interests and a Review of the Laws Pertaining to the Economic Jihad, a treatise posted online in March 2004. Anzi, a noted jihadist thinker, called the widespread availability of oil the factor that "enabled America to dominate the world," and explained how attacks on the oil supply could harm the jihadists' foes. He claimed that rising oil prices hurt industrialized countries more than others, and that they were particularly devastating to the United States, the world's largest consumer.

Bin Laden came around to the same basic ideas in an audio recording entitled "Depose the Tyrants," which was released on Dec. 16, 2004. In the recording, the al Qaeda leader asserted that "the biggest reason for our enemies' control over our lands is to steal our oil." He explained that oil prices were too low, and even the trading of oil on the free market constituted a theft by Western countries. For this reason, the jihadist movement should take the situation into its own hands. "Focus your operations on [oil]," he said, "especially in Iraq and the Gulf, for that will be the death of them."

Bin Laden is dead, but the attacks continue and the threat remains. We must make ourselves less vulnerable. One well-placed jihadi strike could totally destroy the economy of the West. Why? Because our entire economy rests on oil. Why? Because at the pump we have no choice. The backbone of the economy — transportation — requires oil.

The Open Fuel Standard is the answer we've been looking for. Please sign up for updates at Open Fuel Standard Act and take the recommended actions. The actions don't take a lot of time, but a lot of us need to participate to make it happen. This is it! This is the opportunity we've been waiting for, and we have no time to lose.

ACT! for America members, this should be your central objective until it's done — to get your representative to co-sponsor the bill. Make this your relentless war cry at every meeting. We have a year and a half to get 211 more co-sponsors. Now is the time to deny orthodox Muslims the unbelievably excessive wealth they use as a weapon against us. Let's get it done.