ANOTHER FOOD POISONING ATTEMPT

WE HAVE LEARNED THAT FIVE Muslim soldiers at Fort Jackson in South Carolina were arrested just before Christmas. It is unclear whether the men are still in custody. These five soldiers were part of the Arabic Translation program at the base, and are suspected of trying to poison the food supply at Fort Jackson.

A source with intimate knowledge of the investigation, which is ongoing, told CBN News investigators suspect the "Fort Jackson Five" may have been in contact with the group of five Washington, DC area Muslims that traveled to Pakistan to wage jihad against U.S. troops in December. That group was arrested by Pakistani authorities, also just before Christmas....

Meanwhile, Syrian Jews, of which there are some 100,000 in the New York area alone and whose native language is usually Arabic, are unwanted as translators.

In reply to Jim Foster's question: "Why would our authorities not want native speakers, especially those whose personal experiences would make them ideal partners for combating Islamic terror?"

Spirit of 1683 wrote:

"Political correctness—after all it would be 'racism and bigotry' to hire Christian and Jewish Arabic speakers and not Muslims."

Yep. As I have noted long ago, Christian has become effectively an ethnic category—white—such that even black Nigerian Christians (let alone Middle Eastern Christians) are treated as "honorary whites"—i.e., thrown under the bus to placate Muslims, for Muslims have become, under the mainstream aegis of PC MC, the #1 Most Privileged Ethnic Minority of the world.

Muslims have achieved this distinction for three reasons, which all interlock:

1) the West's mainstream and dominant sociopolitical paradigm, PC MC, favors what it considers "ethnic people" over white Westerners...

2) Muslims are perceived to be an "ethnic people" (or better yet, a wondrously diverse rainbow of different "ethnic peoples"— and there is good reason for this, since over 90% of Muslims around the world indeed look ethnic)...

3) And finally, Muslims are the only ethnic people to consistently threaten violence, plot violence, and often regularly successfully deliver violence on a scale that threatens the security of most nations on Earth. No other ethnic people comes close to Muslims in this regard.

#1 and #2 would explain why the white West would endow Muslims with extra deference and privileges, as the white West tends to do with all "ethnic peoples". But it takes #3 to push the equation further, to explain why it is that Muslims have elbowed their way to the #1 spot in the last decade.

Thanks to the aforementioned JW contributors for this report. For more information of other Muslim-generated food tampering please refer to this article and again here.

ISLAM'S FRANTIC SEARCH FOR PEACE

IT'S INTERESTING THAT those characters who summarily dismiss current affairs around the globe as nothing worth noting while simultaneously lining up to defend Islam against those who dare document the evidence or issue the clarion call of present or inevitable danger, tend to mumble on about the so-called Palestinian land grab. Many also express the need to know just who initiated this conflict between Islam and the West, just like the Islamists themselves.

The emblematic Islamists and their Leftist friends in the West often cite the conflict in Israel as the main cause of current antagonisms, but animated with furious certainty Islamist spokesmen themselves often drag in other old wounds to lick publically as a show of their eternal victimhood, the emotionally-stunted calling card of Leftists everywhere. Shall we recall a few of them?

Let's play spin the bottle, the old kiss and make out game. When did this "war against violence" begin? Was it snapped into place on 9/11, was it during the Taliban uprising, or maybe the claws finally sharpened during Desert Storm, or was it USS Cole? Was it Qadaffi's grievance as Reagan began bombing Libya, killing a son, or was it bombing the US embassy in Lebanon? Was it the Iranian students and the Shah of Iran, or that string of various hijackings and bombings of commercial airliners?

Was it various wars against Israel, was it British and French colonialism, was it Lawrence of Arabia, was it Armenians and Turks, was it Tribal warfare, was it oil, was it the Crusades, was it the destruction and elimination of Buddism from their birthplace in India? How dis Pakistan become Muslim anyhow? Oops, let['s not forget the Barabary pirates, the Somalian pirates, Muslims all. Was it Fort Hood or Fort Dix?

Was it the establishment of the Mafia in Sicily in a 200 year fight to cast out the Moslems, Was it sacking the Vatican, Was it the Moorish conquest of much of Europe and Asia/ Was it Jesus and his disciples speading Christianity long before Mohammed and Islam was conceived? Was it the Romans, the Greeks, the Assyrians, the Pharoahs? Or did some caveman steal another caveman's food.

But let's not forget. Islam is the religion of peace, (submission, and domination).

Mirror, mirror on the wall, tell us please, who among us is truly the most peaceful of all...

The point is that men have always been at war and likely will continue to wage war against each other until the end of time. But right now, right here (everywhere), Islam is on the march seeking domination). That is a fact, no money-grubbing dhimmi-breath weak-spined Western politician or creative class hack can change, and it is a fact no red-blooded Koran-carrying virgin-hungry Islamist would deny.

And yes, it was Islam who started it, when the warlord Muhammed launched his global initiative inspired by the sword. History is very clear about what happened next, religious garb notwithstanding.

Left to those terms, it's a simple analysis. The life of Christ versus the life of Mohammed. Which de-apotheosized role model would a rational, hopeful person choose if secure from the peer pressures of one's herd? But that's not really the question, now is it? Not unless one side or the other makes it the only decision standing between one's mortal life and imminent death. Even then the shady procurements of afterlife intrude upon rationality. But that's all we have. The god of George Patton versus the god of Old Mo and Andy Choudry. Being a westerner myself, I'll stick with Charles Martel, thank you very much. There, unfortunately, is no third way with regards to the current Islamic assault on the world, an Islamic assault made bold by weak western policies and flush crude oil revenues.

Here is an example of what the mantra that silly appeasers insist on parroting despite the evidence:

You are such a hypocrite, complaining and complaining about muslims.

Let's get this one fact straight, there are over 10 million muslims in america, Islam is the fastest growing religion in America, muslims will be the majority in france by 2020. There are over 1.2 billion muslims in the world, which equates to them being 99.99% peaceful.

ARE THEY ALL OUR ENEMENY???? NO!

You forget that Christians have throughout history murdered 100ks of us jews and yet you keep crying wolf with the FALSE THREAT. Muslims believe in the Old testament, the prophets, like Abraham, moses, david, etc..They are allowed to marry jews and christians.

We jews need to understand that these dumb propoganda sites like this dont really get no where. They just cause more hatred for no reason. And let me remind you for every jihadwatch site out there there ARE 10000's of JEWWATCH(jewwatch.com) sites out there spewing the same JEWISH HATRED as you spew MUSLIM HATRED.

Wake up!

Uh, no they don't, and several of your numbers are suspect. You can find the true nature of Islam elsewhere in this blog, and many other places that are WIDE AWAKE, not merely praticing multiculturalism's political corruptedness, which we actually identify as taqiyya, an Arabic word meaning "it is okay to lie through one's teeth to further the cause of global Islam." But then again, frequently boastful, truth and an Islamic warrior, often merge, as in this citation:

“One day, millions of men will leave the Southern Hemisphere to go to the Northern Hemisphere. And they will not go there as friends. Because they will go there to conquer it. And they will conquer it with their sons. The wombs of our women will give us victory.”

—Houari Mohamed Boumedienne
President of Algeria, 1965 – 1978
in a 1974 speech at the UN

Islamic grievance is matched only by Islamic pride. Together they create a pernicious stew.

SCHEME TO CRIMINALIZE CHRISTIANS

DOZENS OF NATIONS dominated by Islam are pressing the United Nations to adopt an anti-"defamation" plan that would make Christians criminals under international law, according to a United States organization that has launched a campaign to defend freedom of religion worldwide.

"Around the world, Christians are being increasingly targeted, and even persecuted, for their religious beliefs. Now, one of the largest organizations in the United Nations is pushing to make a bad situation even worse by promoting anti-Christian bigotry," the American Center for Law & Justice said yesterday in announcing its petition drive.

The discrimination is "wrapped in the guise of a U.N. resolution called 'Combating Defamation of Religions,'" the announcement said. "We must put an immediate end to this most recent, dangerous attack on faith that attempts to criminalize Christianity."

"They're attempting to pass a sinister resolution that is nothing more than blatant religious bigotry," the ACLJ said in its promotion of its petition. "This is very important to understand. This radical proposal would outlaw Christianity … it would make the proclamation of your faith an international crime."

Around the globe events like these continue to happen:

Award-winning author Mark Steyn has been summoned to appear before two Canadian Human Rights Commissions of vague allegations of "subject[ing] Canadian Muslims to hatred and contempt" for comments in his book, "America Alone," the group said.

In Pakistan, 15 people were accused of blasphemy against Islam during the first four months of 2008, the organization said.

Another Pakistani man sentenced to life in prison for desecrating the Quran was jailed for six years before being acquitted of the charge.

In Saudi Arabia a teacher was sentenced to three years in prison plus 300 lashes "for expressing his views in a classroom."

In the United Kingdom, police announced plans to arrest a blogger for "anti-Muslim" statements.

In the United States, a plaintiff sued his Internet service provider for refusing "to prevent participants in an online chat room from posting or submitting harassing comments that blasphemed and defamed plaintiff's Islamic religion."

Read it all.

NOTES FROM THE BATTLEFIELD

Here's a not too subtle pat on the back from a Hindu observer of Muslims in his own land to the "defenders" of the West:

As a Hindu from India, the Westerners should appreciate the difficulties in managing 200 million Muslims amongst us for over 1000 years. We have managed them and here are a few suggestions:

Go back to Christianity and the Church. It is a good religion and it is worth defending. Defending Christianity is better slogan than defending an abstract like freedom of speech, democracy etc.

Throw out the socialist scoundrels from politics and the left lunatics from the academics

Force the Conservative Party to become Christianity supporting party; it is unlikely that the Church will exert any undue influence in the government and it is a an issue that can be remedied.

Scrap the welfare pay outs except for the aged. Welfare only encourages the unproductives and undesirables.

Make extradition easy and it should be for the entire family; the convict will be jailed say for a period of five years but the family will be thrown out immediately on conviction

Influence the judiciary, by fair and foul means, to give tougher decisions.

The police force should be brainwashed against Muslims and should use violent methods to control. In India the police does and people brush aside the resultant Islamic jingoism.

The Conservative party should accept national security as the main plank

Re-install death penalty

Once in five years there should be riots in which thousands of Muslims will be killed. Sounds barbaric; the alternative is being consumed by barbarism. In India we retaliate and it is called constructive response.

Separate them physically in secluded areas; that is better than to permit them to live in all areas, which they will contaminate. They will never assimilate and do not attempt at it.

Stop Muslim immigration and substitute with Hindu labour; they are law abiding and will integrate admirably well. Hindus are the second richest and most highly educated minority in USA. There is a not a single case of a Hindu being profiled for wrong reasons.

Teach the children to hate the muslims; they any way are doing the same thing.

Follow the Hindu way of life; live life and accept death as inevitable; live for the children and for their future. Sex is only a side attraction and wealth is only incidental.

Consign all the human rights character to Saudi Arabia; tell them human lives are more important than human rights

Get out of EU and preserve your right to protect your country and its culture

In India, we have a main stream political party for protecting the majority rights; create a similar one, since otherwise the secular fanatics will abandon the majority

—Thiagan

SEND THE CLOWNS HOME

Here's something I snagged from my daily reading. No, not the latest Pat Condell video, but the text below. Take it at face value, it won't bite.

So the problem lies not with the Muslims who commit savage acts of violence in the name of Islam, but with the filmmakers who point out that Muslims commit savage acts of violence in the name of Islam? And the solution is to ban freedom of expression in the name of protecting freedom of expression? What a fascinating exercise in double-think!

As a secular person born into the Shiite faith, I say send all those Moslems back to where they came from if they don't like the Western culture of personal freedom and that of free expression. For the life of me I do not understand why Westerners put up with this hypocisy. Do you think they would extend the same courtesy to you? I don't think so.

What Moslems need is the same reformation Christians went through several centuries ago. All religions must be defanged for the sake of sanity and humanity.

NO COMPULSION IN RELIGION, SAYS WHOM

TEL AVIV – Hamas-linked militants kidnapped and forcibly converted to Islam a female Christian professor in the Gaza Strip, according to the professor's family and officials from Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah organization. Hamas members denied the accusations, accusing rival Fatah of spreading lies even though the professor, Sana al-Sayegh of Gaza City's Palestine International University, has indicated she was converted against her will.

Sayegh, head of the university's Science and Technology Department, disappeared June 24, failing to show up at work where she serves as the Gaza Strip's only female doctorate in her field.

After several days, co-workers and Sayegh's parents informed Gaza security officials of the professor's disappearance.

According to sources close to her family, about five days after she disappeared Sayegh caller her parents to say she was being held against her will in order to marry a Muslim man, who was also a professor at the university.

Sayegh's family declined to speak to WND directly, explaining interviews about the matter could endanger the professor.

"Sayegh said she couldn't talk," said a source. "It was very clear she had been abducted and was made to do things she didn't want to do."

A few days later, the family said it received a copy of a conversion document certifying Sayegh had become a Muslim. The document was signed by two witnesses, as required. One witness was Zaher Khail, president of the Palestine International University, who, according to Palestinian security officials is an Islamist close with Gaza-based terror groups, including Hamas and Islamic Jihad.

Fatah officials say Khail assisted in kidnapping Sayegh, whose family stated she would "never" convert willingly to Islam. Fatah officials also accused Hamas leaders directly of overseeing Sayegh's "forced" conversion.

HURT FEELINGS DEFENSE

Faisalabad (AsiaNews) – It is dangerous to say that Christ is the son of God because this declaration “hurts the feelings of many Pakistani Muslims” who “do not want to hear such things, even in Christian Churches”. This warning was delivered by some residents of Punjab to local Christian congregations who “should immediately stop their prayers to the supposed son of God”.

Of course, what he means is when Muslims get their feelings hurt, they get violent and kill and destroy. It's a veiled threat to renounce Christianity or die.

Charles Hamilton, a Christian from Faisalabad, told AsiaNews, “We believe in Jesus, son of God. How can we renounce this belief? What’s more, if we bow to this request, not only will we go against our religious values, we will pave the way for more conditions to be imposed on us, which would destroy us.”

These stories about Muslim "sensitivity" are legion. Muslims must explain why their feeling are more important than others. Muslim's are among the worst human rights abusers in the world. They must explain why this is the case! In the West, Muslims enjoy many many rights, however a Christian is not allowed to even live.

From Great Britain, another writes:

So, it is more important to witness the plight of Christians in Faisalabad, great though it is, than it is to witness the plight of Christians in many of the Western countries to which we all belong.

Forbidden to ring our bells because doing so offends the Muslim minority, forbidden to parade our ancient relics through the streets because doing so offends the Muslim minority, forbidden to take the sign of the cross upon us in public because doing so offends the Muslim minority, forbidden from wearing under or over our clothing any Christian symbol because doing so offends the Muslim minority, forbidden from uttering any of our prayers in public because doing so offends the Muslim minority, forbidden from educating our children in the ways of Christ in the schools which we pay for because doing so offends the Muslim minority, forbidden from having friends drawn from the elder faith (the Jewish faith) because doing so offends the Muslim minority, forbidden from celebrating our own nationality lest in doing so we offend the Muslim minority, forbidden from flying our own flags in case the Muslim minority objects and calls it racist, forbidden from celebrating our ancient festivals—secular, Christian or pagan—in case the Muslim minority find, in our doing so, some objectionable content, forbidden from building new places of worship too close to a mosque because the tiny Muslim minority might be offended: forbidden, in the final analysis, from being English and free because the minority Muslim population of this once greatly free country object!

And the myth of the religion of peace rages on!

TERROR ALONG FAMILY LINES

According to an affadavit by Rosine Ghawji, she was first contacted by the FBI in 1991 while she was living in New York with her husband, Maher Ghawji. The couple owned two apartments: one they lived in and one they first rented to diplomats from France—Rosine's native country—and then, later, to diplomats from Syria—her husband's native country.

One day, there was a knock on the door. The FBI agents standing outside wanted to know if she knew anything about the person who was living in the couple's other apartment. She said no, and they told her the tenant was on a list "to hurt this country."

The FBI agents asked: Did she know the relationship between her husband and the tenant?

She didn't. The agents gave her a card and left. Rosine says she told her husband—now a prominent Memphis endocrinologist—about the incident and says he brushed it off as nothing.

But roughly 15 years later, after the couple and their children had moved to a beautiful brick home in Southwind, she came to believe that something was very wrong.

In 2004, Judge Donna Fields granted Rosine Ghawji an emergency restraining order against her husband. Rosine believed her husband wanted to take the couple's sons to Syria and enlist the two teenagers in the Syrian army—or worse.

Thus began a divorce case that has garnered interest nationwide from right-wing blogs and conservative radio programs. It has led to a federal court case against a local judge and a complaint against that same judge with the Tennessee Court of the Judiciary. And it has patients of the Memphis endocrinologist wondering if their doctor could be a terrorist sympathizer.

Before she married Maher Ghawji, Rosine Collin worked with a wine importer in New York. She met the young physician in France, when her mother was one of his patients. Though she was Catholic and he was Muslim, the two fell in love and later married in a New York mosque.

A well-dressed woman in her mid-50s, Rosine comes off as intelligent and sophisticated and her story slightly practiced. According to an affidavit she filed in Circuit Court, she first learned the word "jihad" in 1993, a year after the family moved to Memphis. Maher's younger brother, Haitham, lived in Canada at the time and wrote Maher a letter in Arabic. It was a letter that would come to haunt Rosine for the next 10 years.

"You need to keep the Quran and look forward to the jihad! I want you to swear, this issue of upbringing the kids, (your kids now) whoever will raise them will do so with the law of the Quran, unlike the mother. I would like to know what are your thoughts about the Muslim way of holy war? You should be honest with yourself," reads the translation from Rosine Ghawji's sworn affidavit.

The letter from Haitham goes on to say that Maher has made a mistake marrying a Christian woman and invites him to join the ranks of Muslim soldiers in Afghanistan.

Read it all here.

POPE CRITICIZES GODLESS EUROPEAN UNION

While never a Catholic myself, having been superficially raised as an Episcipalean before finding myself in a state of radical protestantism, I am intrigued to learn that notwithstanding his recent controversies with Islam that Pope Benedict XVI continues his attempt to address the root problems of Europe today in terms of a lack of faith in its own heritage and faith. The pope has issued a powerful plea for the European Union to recognise its Christian identity. He said the denial of Europe’s Christian roots was “a form of apostasy” and a betrayal of the continent’s own nature.

In a veiled reference to the Islamic demographic surge in Europe, the Pontiff also declared that a falling birth rate was leading Europe towards “its twilight in history” stating: “One might even think that the European continent is losing confidence in its future.”  These comments came days before Europe’s leaders agreed to revive talks on the controversial European constitution, a document that is likely to have no reference to Christianity at a conference in Rome organised to discuss the future of the EU.

The Pontiff told bishops, lay Catholics, members of religious orders and European heads of state that it was “unthinkable” the EU could build a “common European house” while ignoring Europe’s identity. “It is a historical, cultural and moral identity even before it is a geographic, economic or political reality. It is an identity built on a set of universal values which Christianity played a role in moulding,” he said, "arguing that if these values were lost Europe would no longer act as a positive force for change in the rest of the world.

Such values constitute Europe’s “soul”, he said, and if they failed, “how could the ‘old’ continent play the role of ‘yeast’ for the whole world?”

In this speech Benedict XVI drew an alarming picture of a Europe that had abandoned essential values and succumbed to a dangerous pragmatism. He also argued that the drift towards secularism and relativism had meant that Christians were “denied the right to intervene in public debates” and urged Europe to beware of the kind of pragmatism “that systematically justifies compromising on essential human values as if accepting an allegedly lesser evil were inevitable”.

NO FOOLING AROUND

The following information is adapted from a newsletter I received from Brigitte Gabriel's anti-jihadist organization—The American Congress For Truth. Ms. Gabriel is a Lebanese-American Christian who grew up in war torn Lebanon, and now speaks out against what she believes is an all out proto-Islamic assault on the West and its core values.

Tradecraft. Persona. Deception. Disinformation. Cover: Western operational terms and techniques. These words and their general meaning and purpose are familiar to anyone familiar with American TV and film spy thrillers. But we should know that Islamic terrorists have their own terms: taqiyya (pronounced tark-e-ya) precautionary dissimulation or deception and keeping one's convictions secret and a synonymous term. And another is kitman, which is mental reservation and dissimulation or concealment of malevolent intentions...

Taqiyya and kitman or "holy hypocrisy" has been diffused throughout Arabic culture for over fourteen hundred years since it was developed by Shiites as a means of defence and concealment of beliefs against Sunni unbelievers. As the Prophet said: "he who keeps secrets shall soon attain his objectives."

The skillful use of taqiyya and kitman was often a matter of life and death against enemies; it is also a matter of life and death to many contemporary Islamic terrorists. As so often in the history of Islam, a theological doctrine became operational.

During the Spanish inquisition, Sunni Moriscos attended mass and returned home to wash their hands of the "holy water". In operational terms, taqiyya and kitman allowed the "mujahadeen" to assume whatever identity was necessary to fulfill their mission; they had doctrinal and theological and later jurisprudential sanction to pretend to be Jews or Christians to gain access to Christian and Jewish targets: "the mujahadeen can take the shape of the enemy".

Taqiyya is common to both Shiite and Sunni Muslim discourse and has significant implications for understanding Islamic fundamentalism and terrorist operations. The theory and practice of counterterrorism would be counterproductive, indeed pointless, and even harmful, without reference to taqiyya and kitman and the crucial role of deception ranging from Islamic jurisprudence to Al Qaeda training manuals, which carry detailed instructions on the use of deception by terrorists in Western target countries.

According to Christian ethics lying is a sin; In Islamic jurisprudence and theology, the use of taqiyya against the unbelievers is regarded as a virtue and a religious duty. "Verily the most honourable of you in the sight of God is the most pious among you; verily, God is knowing, aware!"

Shi'a interpret the phrase above as "he among you who exercises Taqiyya most".

Like many Islamic concepts taqiyya and kitman were formed within the context of the Arab-Islamic matrix of tribalism, expansionary warfare and conflict. Taqiyya has been used by Muslims since the 7th century to confuse and split "the enemy" wherever conflicts arise. A favored tactic was "deceptive triangulation" aimed to persuade the enemy that jihad was not aimed at them but at another enemy. Another tactic was to deny that there was jihad at all. The fate for such faulty assessments by the target was death.

Al Taqiyya is with tongue only; not the heart. A believer can make any statement as long as the "heart is comfortable". The 9/11 terrorists lived and visited in the United States for two years before the 9/11 attacks. How did they acculturate? By the use of taqiyya. Meaning: I hate you but I smile at you - in public.

Outwitting
In contemporary political discourse and debates Islamic spokesmen commonly use taqiyya as a form of "outwitting". The matter under discussion is not to be debated or discussed; rather the opponent is to "outwitted" through taqiyya, by diversion of the subject and obfuscation aided at times with a mystical reference to God or Allah.

The claim that difficulties in translating from Arabic to English make communication with non-Arab speakers difficult or impossible, is another form of outwitting. The tactical use of a translator offers considerable advantage.

Roleplaying As Victim
Claiming to be "the victim" of religious discrimination and intolerance during debate or discussion is another form of distraction and "outwitting".

Manipulating Ambiguity
Sheik Hilaly of Sydney, Australia is on public record as (a) "condemning" the 9/11 attacks in ambiguous terms and (b) praising suicide and martyr operations. However, Islamic spokesmen will rarely condemn a specific act of terrorism and direct questions will be skillfully evaded.

Diversion
For example, questions relating to the 9/11 terrorists attacks will be diverted by a causally irrelevant counter-reference to the plight of the Palestinians, the nefarious role of Israel and US foreign policy and support for Israel as "causes" of terrorism. Anti-Semitism, a core belief of Islamic fundamentalism is also skillfully diverted by misleading and exaggerated historical references to the alleged status enjoyed by Jews and non-believers under Islamic rule, thereby deflecting critical examination of the virulent contemporary Islamic anti-Semitism.

Demanding Evidence
Islamic spokesmen practice a form of taqiyya defined in psychology as "cognitive denial" by repetitive and extreme requests for "evidence" and "proof" of alleged terrorist acts, which they know cannot be disclosed.

Tactical Denial
Rather than admitting that a proposition concerning a state of affairs can be partly true, an Islamic spokesman will deny a claim or proposition in absolute terms. For example, "It is impossible to be a Muslim and a terrorist", which is false and "Islam forbids suicide", which is true, but irrelevant as suicide or martyrdom attacks are not forbidden in the Koran.

Exploiting Cognitive Dissonance
Islamic spokesman tend to be baffle television interviewers and puzzle viewers as they resort to double talk "cliches and platitudes" concerning Islam. A state of cognitive dissonance—holding two contradictory beliefs and attempting to resolve them—is induced in viewers as they attempt to process the claim that Islam is a peaceful religion with the dissonant facts of Islamic terrorist acts and operations.

The Islamic "defense" script
Islamic spokesmen repeat the same predictable platitudes concerning Islam in London as do Islamic spokesmen in Seattle and often appear to follow a prepared script from "Islam is tolerant and peace loving" to the claim by Islamic spokeswomen invariably claiming that wearing the veil offers them more freedom (women in Muslim countries are therefore "freer" than women in western countries), thereby precluding further examination into the real status of women under Islamic rule.

Islamic platitudes are also echoed uncritically by Western politicians. For example "A small group of fundamentalists have hijacked a great religion". The timely, skilful, misleading and diversionary theme of the "hijacking" of Islam was introduced into public, political and media discourse by an Islamic 'spokesmen" in the United States shortly after the 9/11
terrorist attacks.

The "Islam has been hijacked" diversionary theme is now a conventional media and political reference deflecting attention from empirical and historical examination of the doctrinal, political and religious continuity of Islamic terrorism. A related theme that a small minority of Muslims are engaged in terrorism is utterly irrelevant as Islamic terrorism is always perpetrated by 'small minorities" or more accurately" small groups".

Australia television viewers noted that interviews with terrorist suspects raided by security authorities invariably featured veiled women holding small children or a baby as they protested their husband's innocence and attested to his innate goodness. Trembling fingers pointed to "damage" to the family residence. In some interviews the suspect/father holds the child, whilst denying involvement or knowledge of terrorism in any sense of the word: an example of taqiyya in the age of impressions and perception management.

The contemporary political meaning of jihad is clear: it is Jihad of the sword. Egyptian-based Islamic fundamentalists, from whom Bin Laden recruited his key operatives, believe jihad is the fourth pillar of Islam and is a binding belief and integral to the faith. Claiming that Jihad is a subjective and psychological state of personal struggle is taqiyya. In contemporary terms, Jihad means—holy war—against unbelievers and it in this context that Al Qaeda training manuals refer to Jihad as "Holy War" against infidels.

The study of taqiyya and kitman is crucial to an understanding of Islamic fundamentalism and terrorism ranging from the issuing of false terrorist threats, operational and strategic disinformation issued by Al Qaeda in the form of "intelligence chatter" to the use of taqiyya and kitman by terrorists during interrogation and the use of systematically misleading expressions concerning Islam and terrorism by Muslim 'spokesmen".

All in all, this sounds eerily similar to typical American political speech patterns. But look again. This is our enemy's speech. It is being used against us. To infiltrate us, and take us down from within. The trojan horse approach, get it? And as noted above, our own greedy leadership parrots most of it right back to us, and tells us to swallow it, or else be condemned as a race baiter or worse. And the politically correct are too mushy mushy to notice what all this means to them down the road when all the blinders are off.

Something is radically wrong here.

SAVE ETHIOPIA FROM THE WOLVES

Posted on Jihad Watch by Hugh Fitzgerald, the following article makes clear YET AGAIN the ridiculous posture American and other Western politicians have taken toward Muslim aggressors anywhere they find them across the global with one notable exception—Afghanistan—and that was only a quarter measure of the necessary response because these same leaders were too busy planning an attack on Iraq instead of focussing on a clean victory in Taliban territories. But I digress:

Talk to Ethiopian Christians in the West. Ask them about their fears. Not fears or memories of this or that regime, of Mengistu and the DERG, or complaints about Zenawi, but fears about Islam. Many may be hesitant at first, thinking perhaps you might be a Muslim or a supporter of Muslims, but if you forthrightly declare your own views, see what you are told in return, what a torrent may follow.

The demographic conquest of the last redoubt of Christianity, the famous Christian Kingdom of Ethiopia, so famous that when the inhabitants of Western Christendom, under constant Muslim attack, with raids up and down the coasts of Europe as far as Ireland and on one occasion, even as far as Iceland, sought and found a comforting myth of the powerful Christian king, beyond the lands of Islam, who would help the Christians of Europe fight the menace of Islam. At first this mythical kingdom of Prester John was located in Asia, in distant India, but later became identified in the minds of many in Europe with Ethiopia as the new Kingdom of Prester John.

Here is how one blogger at an Addis Ababa site expresses his fears:

"Ethiopia is at a crossroads. In fact it was headed for this crossroad no matter who was prime minister. It is a lion cub being hunted by the sabre of Islam. Islam is at odds with democracy, freedom and human liberty. It will ultimately oppose Ethiopia, even in violation of its own Koran.

I have been traveling & working in Ethiopia for several years now. There have been many changes. While the politics of Meles may be brought into question. Any situation beats the DERG and I would say the current status, though far from perfect beats an Islamic state any day. Ethiopia faces the loss of a developing democracy to the enemies of freedom and liberty.

Where Isalm is the minority they are as lambs, where they are equal in power they are like a fox, when Islam is the majority they are as wolves.

What's going on is not merely political or philosophical, it is a war of ideology. The sovereignty of Ethiopia is at stake. Shore up her borders and then tackle the internal issues, as a parlimentary democracy—there is less freedom in an Islamic-fascist state. Just visit Somalia or Eritrea."

One might also note the views of Muslim apologists who do not want the Americans helping Ethiopia precisely because it is seen as a "Christian" state, and this would offend Muslims, who apparently are free to wage Jihad, but we who are not Muslims must not extend aid to fellow non-Muslims lest this put a "religious" cast on what, of course, is already a religiously-prompted war.

This absurd argument can be found in a piece that appeared in a Houston paper, of which an excerpt is given below:

There are several reasons why aligning with Ethiopia on Somalia would be a bad idea that might even jeopardize the current coalition and undermine the long-term objectives of the war against global terrorism.

First, such partnership with a nation that portrays itself as "a Christian" nation against a Muslim neighbor, which is a member of the Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC) and the Arab League, and based on little and tainted information, would give the war a religious color, thereby undermining President Bush's core message right from the start: that the war is against terrorism, not against Islam.

Historically, Ethiopia viewed itself as a "Christian island surrounded by a Muslim sea." As a result, Islam has historically been perceived as a major threat to this country, and Ethiopian Muslims, though they constitute at least half of the population, have had an invisible presence in the country. A former U.S. ambassador to Ethiopia wrote: 'Islam in Ethiopia has confined itself entirely to the spiritual realm. It has shown no interest in politics, though it is keenly aware that it comprises at least half the population and probably more.'

Furthermore, Ethiopia's unshakable image in the eyes of the world is that of a Christian nation. The recent U.S. Department of State classification of all the main Horn of Africa nations in the region, except Ethiopia, as either predominantly Arab or Muslim, also reinforces that image. Apparently, this has nothing to do with being "predominantly Arab or Muslim."

The transparent argument here is that Christians are not allowed to help fellow Christians lest the war be perceived, as it is declared to be by the Muslims in Somalia and by all the non-Somali Muslims who will help them, as a war between Muslims and Chrsitians.

About one thing the writer is correct: there are many Muslims in Ethiopia, and its Christian character is threatened by the missionary efforts, and the usual overbreeding by Muslims. That is another problem, and it is a problem that needs to be recognized and not ignored but dealt with, because it is in the interests of the entire non-Muslim world that Ethiopia remain a Christian country and not succumb to Islam. And whatever that takes—:including the transfer of some Muslims into Somalia—should be considered.

IF EUROPE HATES ITSELF

The optimism as regards the victory of the European element, which Arnold Toynbee was still able to uphold at the beginning of the sixties, looks strangely outdated today. “Of the 28 cultures we have identified…18 are dead and nine out of the ten remaining—in fact all except our own—show that they are already mortally wounded.” Who would still repeat these words today? And in general, what is our culture, what’s left of it? Is the civilization of technique and commerce spread victoriously throughout the world actually European culture? Or was this not perhaps rather born, in a post-European way, from the end of the ancient European cultures? I see here a paradoxical synchrony.

The victory of the techno-secular post-European world; with the universalization of its model of life and of its way of thinking, is linked throughout the world, but especially in the strictly non-European worlds of Asia and Africa, to the impression that Europe’s world of values, its culture and its faith, that on which its identity is based, has reached the end and has actually already left the stage, that now the hour of other worlds’ values has arrived, of pre-Colombian America, of Islam, of Asian mysticism.

Europe, precisely in this its hour of maximum success, seems to have become empty inside, paralyzed in a certain sense by a crisis in its circulatory system, a crisis that puts its life at risk, resorting, as it were, to transplants that cannot but eliminate its identity. To this interior failure of its fundamental spiritual powers corresponds the fact that, even ethnically, Europe appears to be on the way out.

There is a strange lack of desire for a future. Children, who are the future, are seen as a threat for the present; the idea is that they take something away from our life. They are not felt as a hope, but rather as a limitation of the present. We are forced to make comparisons with the Roman Empire at the time of its decline: it still worked as a great historical framework, but in practice it was already living off those who would dissolve it, since it had no more vital energy.

With this point we have reached the problems of the present day. As regards the possible future of Europe, there are two opposite diagnoses. On one hand there is the thesis of Oswald Spengler, who believed he could define a kind of natural law for the great cultural expressions: there is a moment of birth, the gradual growth, the flourishing of a culture, then the on-come of weariness, old age and death. Spengler embroiders his thesis impressively, with documentation taken from the history of cultures, in which this law of natural evolution can be discerned.

His thesis was that the West had reached its final epoch, which is moving inexorably towards the death of this cultural continent, despite all efforts to avert it. This thesis, labelled as biologistic, found ardent opponents in the period between the two world wars, especially in Catholic circles. Arnold Toynbee, too, reacted against it in a striking way, with postulates that, of course, today find little hearing. Toynbee points out the difference between material-technical progress on one hand and real progress on the other, which he defines as spiritualization. He admits that the West—the western world—is in crisis, and he sees the cause for this in the decline from religion to the worship of technique, of nation, of militarism. Ultimately, for him, the crisis means secularism.

If we know the causes of the crisis, then we can find a way to cure it: the religious factor has to be reintroduced. In his view, part of this is “ the religious heritage of all cultures, but especially what is left of western Christianity.” He opposes the biologistic vision with a voluntaristic vision, which rests on the power of creative minorities and on exceptional individual personalities.

So the question is: is this diagnosis correct? And if so, is it within our power to reintroduce the religious moment, in a synthesis of residual Christianity and mankind’s religious heritage? In the end, the question between Spengler and Toynbee remains open, because we cannot see into the future. But independently of that, we must face up to the task of asking ourselves what the future can guarantee us, and what is able to keep alive the interior identity of Europe through all the historical metamorphoses. Or even more simply, what promises, for today and tomorrow, too, to impart human dignity and an existence that conforms to that dignity?

Thus we are faced with the question: how are things to go ahead? In the violent turbulence of our time, is there a European identity that has a future and for which we can commit ourselves with our whole being? I am not prepared to enter into a detailed discussion on the future European Constitution. I would just like to indicate briefly the fundamental moral elements, which to my mind should not be missing.

The first element is the “unconditionality” with which human dignity and human rights must be presented as values that precede any jurisdiction on the part of the state. These basic rights are not created by the legislator, nor conferred on the citizens, “but rather exist in their own right, are always to be respected by the legislator, are given previously to him as values of a superior order.” This validity of human dignity, previous to every political action and to every political decision, refers back ultimately to the Creator: only He can establish values that are founded on the essence of man and that are intangible. That there be values that cannot be manipulated by anyone is the real, true guarantee of our freedom and of man’s greatness; Christian faith sees in this the mystery of the Creator and of the condition of the image of God that He conferred upon man.

Now, almost no one these days would directly deny the precedence of human dignity and basic human rights over all political decisions; the horrors of Nazism and its racist theories are still too recent. But in the concrete sphere of the so-called progress of medicine there are very real threats to these values: whether we think of cloning, or of the conservation of human foetuses for organ donation, or of the whole field of genetic manipulation—no one can ignore the gradual erosion of human dignity that threatens us here. Added to this are the growth in the traffic of human persons, of new forms of slavery, trafficking in human organs for transplant. Good ends are always adopted in order to justify what is unjustifiable. In these sectors there are some hard and fast rules in the Charter of basic human rights we can be happy with, but on some important points it is still too vague. And it is precisely here that we jeopardize the seriousness of the principle at stake.

The second point in which the European identity appears is marriage and the family. Monogamous marriage, as the basic structure of the relationship between man and woman and, at the same time, as the cell of the formation of the state community, is derived from biblical faith. This has given Western Europe as well as Eastern Europe, its own particular face and its own particular humanity, precisely because the form of fidelity and self-denial set out here had always to be conquered, over and over again, with much effort and suffering. Europe would no longer be Europe if this fundamental cell of its social structure were to disappear or be essentially changed.

The Charter of Fundamental Rights speaks of the right to marriage, but does not express any specific protection for marriage—either juridical or moral—nor give it a more precise definition. And we all know how threatened marriage and the family are at present—on one hand by eroding their indissolubility through easier forms of divorce, and on the other hand by means of a new and more and more widespread lifestyle, the cohabitation of man and woman without the juridical form of marriage.

In stark contrast to all this is the request for communion of life between homosexuals, who paradoxically now demand a juridical form having the same value as marriage. This tendency marks a departure from the system of mankind’s moral history, which, notwithstanding all the diverse juridical forms of marriage, always recognized that marriage is, in its essence, the particular communion of man and woman that is open to children and thus to the family.

This is not a question of discrimination, but rather the question of what the human person is, as man and woman, and of how the togetherness of man and woman can be given a juridical form. If on one hand their togetherness is more and more detached from juridical forms, and on the other hand, homosexual union is seen more and more as having the same value as marriage, then we are before a dissolution of man’s image that can have only extremely grave consequences.

My last point is the religious question. I do not want to enter into the complex discussions of recent years, but to focus on only one aspect that is fundamental for all cultures: respect for what the other holds sacred, and in particular respect for the sacred in the highest sense, for God, something that we can legitimately suppose to find even in one who is not disposed to believe in God. Wherever this respect is denied, something essential in a society is lost. In our present-day society, thank God, whoever dishonours the faith of Israel, its image of God or its great personalities, is fined.

Whoever scorns the Koran and the basic convictions of Islam is fined, too. Instead, with regard to Christ and to what is sacred for Christians, freedom of opinion seems to be the supreme good, and to limit this would seem to threaten or even destroy tolerance and freedom in general. Freedom of opinion, though, finds its limit in this, that it cannot destroy the honour and the dignity of the other; it is not freedom to lie or to destroy human rights.

The West reveals here a hatred of itself, which is strange and can be only considered pathological; the West is laudably trying to open itself, full of understanding, to external values, but it no longer loves itself; in its own history, it now sees only what is deplorable and destructive, while it is no longer able to perceive what is great and pure.

By Joseph Ratzinger—May 14, 2004

SEPARATE BUT EQUAL?

From BB in Europe...

Turkey, once known as Asia Minor, is a land that was once highly Christianized. The locations of the seven churches who received messages in Chapters 2-3 of Revelation all were located in this land. Today, it is over 99% Muslim—though I understand it is more secular than many of the Taliban-type Muslim lands. We met some wonderfully "nice" Turks when we were on a cruise ship one time. With over 80 nationalities on board—the Turks had above average representation—and may I say—all were extremely kind.

I am aware that Christians are highly persecuted there—so none of this is really new as info in general. Yet I am glad that we are being reminded of this injustijce on Dhimmi-Watch as the EU was just debating inclusion of this country (I think I read that it got shot down—help me folks??). Should nations that relegate Christians and or Jews to second class status be major trading partners with us?

1-3 years in prison is pretty harsh for simply having a belief in Christ—but compared to what we read about the young 14 year old martyr in Iraq who was Islammed by BEHEADING 2 weeks ago because of his Christian ID badge notation—I suppose this is mild by comparison.

ISLAM—coming soon to a location near you!