First Word: What is ‘Human Rights Watch’ watching?

The Jerusalem Post Internet Edition

First Word: What is ‘Human Rights Watch’ watching?

When it comes to Israel and its enemies, Human Rights Watch cooks the books about facts, cheats on interviews, and puts out predetermined conclusions that are driven more by their ideology than by evidence. These are serious accusations, and they are demonstrably true.

Consider the following highly publicized “conclusion” reached by Human Rights Watch about the recent war in Lebanon between Hizbullah and Israel:

“Human Rights Watch found no cases in which Hizbullah deliberately used civilians as shields to protect them from retaliatory IDF attack.”

No cases!

Anyone who watched even a smattering of TV during the war saw with their own eyes direct evidence of rockets being launched from civilian areas. But not Human Rights Watch. How could an organization, which claims to be objective, have been so demonstrably wrong about so central a point in so important a war? Could it have been an honest mistake? I don’t think so.

Despite its boast that “Human Rights Watch has interviewed victims and witnesses of attacks in one-on-one settings, conducted on-site inspections … and collected information from hospitals, humanitarian groups, and government agencies,” it didn’t find one instance in which Hizbullah failed to segregate its fighters from civilians.

Nor apparently did HRW even ask the Israelis for proof of its claim that Hizbullah rockets were being fired from behind civilians, and that Hizbullah fighters were hiding among civilians.
Its investigators interviewed Arab “eyewitnesses” and monitored “information from public sources including the Israeli government statements.”
Human Rights Watch ignored credible news sources, such as The New York Times and The New Yorker.
“Hizbullah came to Ain Ebel to shoot its rockets,” said Fayad Hanna Amar, a young Christian man, referring to his village. “They are shooting from between our houses.”

…Mr. Amar said Hizbullah fighters in groups of two and three had come into Ain Ebel, less than a mile from Bint Jbail, where most of the fighting has occurred. They were using it as a base to shoot rockets, he said, and the Israelis fired back.

– Sabrina Tavernise, “Christians Fleeing Lebanon Denounce Hizbullah,” The New York Times, July 28, 2006.

Near the hospital, a mosque lay in ruins….

A man approached and told me that he was a teacher at the Hariri school. I asked him why he thought the Israelis had hit a mosque, and he said, simply, “It was a Hizbullah mosque.” …

A younger man came up to me and, when we were out of earshot of others, said that Hizbullah had kept bombs in the basement of the mosque, but that two days earlier a truck had taken the cache away.

– Jon Lee Anderson, “The Battle for Lebanon,” The New Yorker, August 8, 2006.

Even if the location of UN posts were known to Israeli commanders, that doesn’t rule out the possibility that Hizbullah fighters used one as a shield from which to unleash fire. They’ve done so in the past, says Maj.-Gen. Lewis MacKenzie (ret’d.), who witnessed the technique while on peacekeeping assignments in the area. “It’s the same as if you set up your weapons systems beside a mosque or a church or a hospital.”

– Carlie Gillis, “Diplomacy Under Fire,” MacLean’s, August 7, 2006.

The surgeon led a group of journalists over what remained: mangled debris, shredded walls and a roof punched through by an Israeli shell.

“Look what they did to this place,” Dr. Fatah said, shaking his head. “Why in the world would the Israelis target a hospital?”

The probable answer was found a few hours later in a field nearby. Hidden in the tall grass were the burned remnants of a rocket-launcher.

Confronted with the evidence, Dr. Fatah admitted his hospital could have been used as a site from which to fire rockets into Israel.

– Sonia Verma, “Hizbullah’s Deadly Hold on Heartland,” National Post, August 5, 2006.

[Samira] Abbas said, she heard from relatives that her house in Bint Jbeil had been destroyed. She said Hizbullah fighters had gathered in citrus groves about 500 yards from her home.

– Mohamad Bazzi, “Mideast Crisis – Farewell to a Soldier; Reporting from Lebanon; Running Out of Places to Run,” Newsday, July 28, 2006

“What that means is, in plain English, ‘We’ve got Hizbullah fighters running around in our positions, taking our positions here and then using us for shields and then engaging the (Israeli Defense Forces),'” said [Lewis] MacKenzie, who led Canadian peacekeepers in Bosnia.

– Steven Edwards, “UN contradicts itself over Israeli attack,” CanWest News Service, July 27, 2006.

It was also reported that Hizbullah fired from the vicinity of five UN positions at Alma Ash Shab, At Tiri, Bayt Yahoun, Brashit, and Tibnin.

– United Nations interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL), Naqoura, July 28, 2006 (Press Release).

While these pictures have escaped the ravaged country, other images and footage taken by local newspaper and television teams are routinely
seized by armed Hizbullah fighters at road blocks.

In one image a group of fighters, including youths, are preparing to fire an anti-aircraft gun just metres from an apartment block with laundry sheets drying on a balcony.

Others show a Hizbullah fighter armed with a nickel-plated AK47 rifle guarding no-go zones after Israeli blitzes.

Another depicts the remnants of a Hizbullah Katyusha rocket in the middle of a residential block, blown up in an Israeli air attack.

The Melbourne man who smuggled the shots out of Beirut told yesterday how he was less than 400m from the block when it was obliterated.

“Hizbullah came in to launch their rockets, then within minutes the area was blasted by Israeli jets,” he said.

“Until the Hizbullah fighters arrived, it had not been touched by the Israelis. Then it was devastated.

“After the attacks they didn’t even allow the ambulances or the Lebanese Army to come in until they had cleaned the area, removing their rockets and hiding other evidence…

The fighters used trucks, driven into residential areas, as launch pads for the rockets, he said.

Another image shows a line of decimated trucks sitting behind a 5m crater. The tourist who smuggled the images back to Melbourne said the trucks had been carrying rockets.

The release of the images comes as Hizbullah fighters face increasing censure for using innocent civilians as “human shields.”

– Chris Tinkler, “Revealed: How Hizbullah puts the innocent at risk; They don’t care,” Sunday Mail (Australia), July 30, 2006.

HOW COULD Human Rights Watch have ignored – or more likely suppressed – this evidence from so many different sources? The only reasonable explanation is that they wanted there to be no evidence of Hizbullah’s tactic of hiding behind civilians. So they cooked the books to make it come out that way.

Even after the fighting ended and all the reports of Hizbullah hiding among civilians were published, HRW chief Kenneth Roth essentially repeated the demonstrably false conclusions that “in none of those cases was Hizbullah anywhere around at the time of the attack.” So committed is Human Rights Watch to its predetermined conclusions that it refused to let the facts, as reported by objective sources, get in its way.

Many former supporters of Human Rights Watch have become alienated from the organization, because of, in the words of one early supporter, “their obsessive focus on Israel.”

Within the last month, virtually every component of the organized Jewish community, from secular to religious, liberal to conservative, has condemned Human Rights Watch for its bias. Roth and his organization’s willful blindness when it comes to Israel and its enemies have completely undermined the credibility of a once important human rights organization. Human Rights Watch no longer deserves the support of real human rights advocates. Nor should its so-called reporting be credited by objective news organizations.

What did you do in the war, UNIFIL?

What did you do in the war, UNIFIL?
You broadcast Israeli troop movements.
by Lori Lowenthal Marcus
09/04/2006, Volume 011, Issue 47

DURING THE RECENT month-long war between Hezbollah and Israel, U.N. “peacekeeping” forces made a startling contribution: They openly published daily real-time intelligence, of obvious usefulness to Hezbollah, on the location, equipment, and force structure of Israeli troops in Lebanon.

UNIFIL–the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon, a nearly 2,000-man blue-helmet contingent that has been present on the Lebanon-Israel border since 1978–is officially neutral. Yet, throughout the recent war, it posted on its website for all to see precise information about the movements of Israeli Defense Forces soldiers and the nature of their weaponry and materiel, even specifying the placement of IDF safety structures within hours of their construction. New information was sometimes only 30 minutes old when it was posted, and never more than 24 hours old.

Meanwhile, UNIFIL posted not a single item of specific intelligence regarding Hezbollah forces. Statements on the order of Hezbollah “fired rockets in large numbers from various locations” and Hezbollah’s rockets “were fired in significantly larger numbers from various locations” are as precise as its coverage of the other side ever got.

This war was fought on cable television and the Internet, and a lot of official information was available in real time. But the specific military intelligence UNIFIL posted could not be had from any non-U.N. source. The Israeli press–always eager to push the envelope–did not publish the details of troop movements and logistics. Neither the European press nor the rest of the world media, though hardly bastions of concern for the safety of Israeli troops, provided the IDF intelligence details that UNIFIL did. A search of Israeli government websites failed to turn up the details published to the world each day by the U.N.

Inquiries made of various Israeli military and government representatives and analysts yielded near unanimous agreement that at least some of UNIFIL’s postings, in the words of one retired senior military analyst, “could have exposed Israeli soldiers to grave danger.” These analysts, including a current high ranking military official, noted that the same intelligence would not have been provided by the U.N. about Israel’s enemies.

Sure enough, a review of every single UNIFIL web posting during the war shows that, while UNIFIL was daily revealing the towns where Israeli soldiers were located, the positions from which they were firing, and when and how they had entered Lebanese territory, it never described Hezbollah movements or locations with any specificity whatsoever.

Compare the vague “various locations” language with this UNIFIL posting from July 25:

Yesterday and during last night, the IDF moved significant reinforcements, including a number of tanks, armored personnel carriers, bulldozers and infantry, to the area of Marun Al Ras inside Lebanese territory. The IDF advanced from that area north toward Bint Jubayl, and south towards Yarun.

Or with the posting on July 24, in which UNIFIL revealed that the IDF stationed between Marun Al Ras and Bint Jubayl were “significantly reinforced during the night and this morning with a number of tanks and armored personnel carriers.”

This partiality is inconsistent not only with UNIFIL’s mission but also with its own stated policies. In a telling incident just a few years back, UNIFIL vigorously insisted on its “neutral ity”–at Israel’s expense.

On October 7, 2000, three IDF soldiers were kidnapped by Hezbollah just yards from a UNIFIL shelter and dragged across the border into Lebanon, where they disappeared. The U.N. was thought to have videotaped the incident or its immediate aftermath. Rather than help Israel rescue its kidnapped soldiers by providing this evidence, however, the U.N. obstructed the Israeli investigation.

For months the Israeli government pleaded with the U.N. to turn over any videotape that might shed light on the location and condition of its missing men. And for nine months the U.N. stonewalled, insisting first that no such tape existed, then that just one tape existed, and eventually conceding that there were two more tapes. During those nine months, clips from the videotapes were shown on Syrian and Lebanese television.

Explaining their eventual about-face, U.N. officials said the decision had been made by the on-site commanders that it was not their responsibility to provide the material to Israel; indeed, that to do so would violate the peacekeeping mandate, which required “full impartiality and objectivity.” The U.N. report on the incident was adamant that its force had “to ensure that military and other sensitive information remains in their domain and is not passed to parties to a conflict.”

Stymied in its efforts to recover the men while they were still alive, Israel ultimately agreed to an exchange in January 2004: It released 429 Arab prisoners and detainees, among them convicted terrorists, and the bodies of 60 Lebanese decedents and members of Hezbollah, in exchange for the bodies of the three soldiers. Blame for the deaths of those three Israelis can be laid, at least in part, at the feet of the U.N., which went to the wall defending its inviolable pledge never to share military intelligence about one party with another.

UNIFIL has just done what it then vowed it could never do. Once again, it has acted to shield one side in the conflict and to harm the other. Why is this permitted? For that matter, how did the U.N. obtain such detailed and timely military intelligence in the first place, before broadcasting it for Israel’s enemies to see?

Lori Lowenthal Marcus is president of the Zionist Organization of America, Greater Philadelphia District.

Defying U.N., Iran Opens Nuclear Reactor

Defying U.N., Iran Opens Nuclear Reactor


 Email this Story

Aug 26, 7:58 AM (ET)

By ALI AKBAR DAREINI KHONDAB, Iran (AP) – An Iranian plant that produces heavy water officially went into operation on Saturday, despite U.N. demands that Tehran stop the activity because it can be used to develop a nuclear bomb. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad inaugurated the plant, which
Tehran says is for peaceful purposes.
The announcement comes days before Thursday’s U.N. deadline for
Iran to stop uranium enrichment – which also can be used to create nuclear weapons – or face economic and political sanctions.
Tehran has called the U.N. Security Council resolution “illegal” and said it won’t stop enrichment as a precondition to negotiations.
Mohammed Saeedi, the deputy head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, said the heavy water plant is “one of the biggest nuclear projects” in the country, state-run television reported. He said the plant will be used in the pharmaceutical field and in diagnosing cancer. The plant’s top official, Manouchehr Madadi, said the facility has the ability to produce up to 16 tons of heavy water a year.
Iran has been a building a heavy water reactor near the plant for two years, but the reactor is not scheduled for completion until 2009. Nuclear weapons can be produced using either plutonium or highly enriched uranium as the explosive core. Either substance can be produced in the process of running a reactor. Reactors fueled by enriched uranium use regular – or “light” – water as a “moderator” in the chain reaction that produces energy. Reactors using “heavy water” contain a heavier hydrogen particle, which allows the reactor to run on natural uranium mined by
Iran, foregoing the enrichment progress.
But the spent fuel from a heavy water reactor can be reprocessed to extract plutonium for use in a bomb. The West’s main worry has been uranium enrichment. Iran on Tuesday responded to an incentives package presented by the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council plus Germany aimed at getting
Tehran to roll back its disputed nuclear program.
Iran said it would be open to negotiations but did not agree to the West’s key demand for
Tehran to halt uranium enrichment as a precondition to talks.

Islamic Courts Consolidates Power in Somalia

Counterterrorism Blog

Islamic Courts Consolidates Power in Somalia

By Bill Roggio

Somalia continues the slide into the darkness of a radical Islamist state. Sheikh Hassan Dahir Aweys, the al-Qaeda linked leader of the Islamic Courts is consolidating power in Somalia by taking control of vital lines of communications, organizing the army of the Islamic Courts, and instituting shariah law throughout the areas it controls.

As Daveed Gartenstein-Ross has noted, the Islamic Courts have taken control of the port cities of Harardhere, Eldher and Hoyobo, as well as Beletuein on the border with Ethiopia. The flights of arms shipments from Kazakistan reported by Douglas Farah continue to fly into Mogadishu’s airport to this day.

The Islamic Courts, using money funneled from the Arabian peninsula, is arming its fighters with new weapons, and sending its fighters to receive professional training. “This is the beginning, but thousands of other gunmen will be trained. You are the ones who will disarm civilians, restore law and order and help enforce Sharia law,” Aweys said to a group of 600 fighters at the Hilweyne military camp. As the army of the Islamic Courts ramps up, soldiers of the Transitional Federal Government (TGF) continue to defect. Over 100 TGF fighters stationed near Baidoa have defected to the Islamic Courts, and 500 total have defected since the Islamic Courts grabbed power in July.

The Islamic Courts is further consolidating power by instituting a program to disarm Somalis not affiliated with the Islamists. They are disarming any potential rivals. The imposition of strict shariah law continues. Three Somalis caught in possession of marijuana were publicly whipped in Mogadishu. The Islamic Courts are organizing “a national forum to chart the lawless country’s future,” further eroding the power of the Transitional Federal Government. A Hezbollah-styled aid program is being set up to gain the loyalty of the Somalis.

The Ethiopian government is looking upon the rise of the Islamic Courts in Somalia with dismay, and continues to pour troops into the country. Ethiopian troops started reinforcing the failing Transitional Federal Government in Baidoa at the beginning of July, and this effort continues. Over 300 heavily armed Ethiopian troops have passed through the border town of Awdiinle and are reported to be heading to Baidoa. The Guardian reports Ethiopian “troops entered the town of Galkayo, driving seven pickup trucks mounted with machine guns and six trucks loaded with boxes.” The Ethiopian government denies any incursions into Somalia, but Ethiopian forces have been in and around Baidoa for two months now.

Both the Ethiopians and the Islamic Courts appear to be waiting for the other to make the first move and spark the war. The Islamic Courts continues to call for Jihad “against ‘the enemy of Somalia'” and warned African peacekeeprs from deploying to Somalia. The Islamic Courts may be setting their sights on the Puntland region in central Somalia before dealing with the Ethiopians. In the mean time, the Islamic Courts consolidates their hold on power in Somalia, and the 17 terror training camps continue to churn out new fighters for the Islamic Courts and al-Qaeda.

Israel may ‘go it alone’ against Iran

Israel may ‘go it alone’ against Iran

Israel is carefully watching the world’s reaction to Iran’s continued refusal to suspend uranium enrichment, with some high-level officials arguing it is now clear that when it comes to stopping Iran, Israel “may have to go it alone,” The Jerusalem Post has learned.

One senior source said on Tuesday that Iran “flipped the world the bird” by not responding positively to the Western incentive plan to stop uranium enrichment. He expressed frustration that the Russians and Chinese were already saying that Iran’s offer of a “new formula” and willingness to enter “serious negotiations” was an opening to keep on talking.

“The Iranians know the world will do nothing,” he said. “This is similar to the world’s attempts to appease Hitler in the 1930s – they are trying to feed the beast.”

He said there was a need to understand that “when push comes to shove,” Israel would have to be prepared to “slow down” the Iranian nuclear threat by itself.

Having said this, he did not rule out the possibility of US military action, but said that if this were to take place, it would probably not occur until the spring or summer of 2008, a few months before President George W. Bush leaves the international stage. The US presidential elections, which Bush cannot contest because of term limits, are in November 2008.

Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, in a meeting in Paris with French Foreign Minister Phillippe Douste-Blazy Wednesday, said Iran “poses a global threat” and needed to be dealt with by the whole international community.

“The first thing they need to do is stop the enrichment of uranium,” Livni said. “Everyday that passes brings the Iranians closer to building a nuclear bomb. The world can’t afford a nuclear Iran.” She said the Iranian reply to the Western incentives was just an attempt to “gain time.”

Government officials said Israel’s role at this time is to warn the world of the dangers of an Iranian nuclear potential. Some government officials are sending the message to their counterparts abroad that the firm implementation of UN Security Council Resolution 1701 on Lebanon will send a strong message to Iran – which is testing the world’s resolve – that it is serious about implementing Security Council resolutions.

Meanwhile, the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) reported Wednesday that the Iranian news service Al-Borz, which it said is known to have access to sources in the Iranian government, predicted that President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad would announce what the news service called Iran’s “nuclear birth” on the first anniversary of his government later this month.

In addition, an article Tuesday on the Teheran Times Web site, considered to be affiliated with the Foreign Ministry, implied that Iran’s nuclear technology had already reached the point of no return. “If the West is seeking to impede Iran’s nuclear industry, it should realize that Iran has passed this stage,” the report read.

Diplomats from Europe, the US, Russia and China were poring over details of Iran’s counterproposal to the Western nuclear incentives package Wednesday. Initial comments from Russia and China made clear Washington is likely to face difficulty getting at least those nations to agree to any tough sanctions against Iran.

In Paris, however, Douste-Blazy made clear that his government was sticking by the UN demand for Iran to halt enrichment by the end of this month as a precondition to further talks. Israeli officials said France has consistently advocated a firm position with Iran regarding the nuclear issue.

“I want to point out again that France is available to negotiate, and to recall that, as we have always said… a return to the negotiating table is linked to the suspension of uranium enrichment,” Douste-Blazy said.

However, Russia’s Foreign Ministry said it would continue to seek a political, negotiated solution to the dispute with Iran. China appealed for dialogue, urging “constructive measures” by Iran but also urging other parties to “remain calm and patient, show flexibility, stick to the orientation of peaceful resolution and create favorable conditions for resuming talks as soon as possible.”

In London, a British Foreign Office spokesman predicted “some hard discussions” when the Security Council takes up the Iran issue in the coming weeks.

Iran said Tuesday it was ready for “serious negotiations” on its nuclear program and cast the counterproposal as a new formula to resolve the crisis with the West. But a semiofficial news agency said the government was unwilling to abandon uranium enrichment.

The world powers, the five permanent UN Security Council members plus Germany, have given Iran until August 31 to accept the incentives package.

New Yorker arrested for broadcasting Hizbollah TV

New Yorker arrested for broadcasting Hizbollah TV
Thu Aug 24, 2006 11:08 AM ET

NEW YORK (Reuters) – U.S. authorities have arrested a New York man for broadcasting Hizbollah television station al-Manar, which has been designated a terrorist entity by the U.S. Treasury Department, prosecutors said on Thursday.Javed Iqbal, 42, was arrested on Wednesday because his Brooklyn-based company HDTV Ltd. was providing New York-area customers with the Hizbollah-operated channel, federal prosecutors said in a statement.

It did not say how long Iqbal’s company had been providing satellite broadcasts of al-Manar, which the U.S. Treasury Department in March had designated as Specially Designated Global Terrorist entity, making it a crime to conduct business with al-Manar.

Iqbal has been charged with conspiring to violate the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, the statement said. Federal authorities searched HDTV’s Brooklyn office and Iqbal’s Staten Island home, where Iqbal was suspected of maintaining satellite dishes, the statement said.

The U.S. Treasury Department froze U.S. assets of al-Manar in March, saying it supported fund-raising and recruitment activities of Hizbollah, a Shiite Muslim group backed by Syria and Iran that has been at war with Israel in southern Lebanon.

Scientology 101: Definitions and Facts About Scientology


Scientology 101: Definitions and Facts About Scientology

Aug. 23, 2006


Aug. 23, 2006 — – A definition of Scientology1 is hard to pin down. Basically, it’s a system of beliefs, teachings and rituals originally established as a secular philosophy by L. Ron Hubbard2 . His 1950 book Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health3 , provided the core principles of what would later become Scientology.

Scientologists regard the publication of the book as a seminal event, and celebrate its publication date — May 9, 1950 — as a religious holiday.

A central belief of Scientology is that a person is a mortal, spiritual being (called a “thetan”), basically good, and has lived through many past lives.

The ultimate goal of Scientology is “true spiritual enlightenment and freedom for the individual.” Stored memories of Thetans’ past lives can cause problems in the present.

Consumer Alert: Scientologists “unqualified”

“Scientology is evil; its techniques are evil; its practice is a serious threat to the community, medically, morally, and socially; and its adherents are sadly deluded and often mentally ill… (Scientology is) the world’s largest organization of unqualified persons engaged in the practice of dangerous techniques which masquerade as mental therapy.”
– Justice Anderson, Supreme Court of Victoria, Australia, quoted at What judges have to say about Scientology4

Scientology Kills5

Scientologists believe that the “reactive mind” (the portion that works on a totally stimulus-response basis, not under the control of the individual) commands one’s awareness, purposes, thoughts, body and action. Through counseling called “auditing,” Scientologists believe they can reduce and ultimately erase the power of the reactive mind, a source of irrationality, fears and nightmares. Before a person is audited they are considered “Pre-Clear.”

Those that reach the higher teachings called OT (Operating Thetan) III, a state of being beyond the initial “Clear” state, within the Church of Scientology are said to learn about Xenu, the intergalactic ruler who implanted thetans, or alien spirits, in Earth’s volcanoes 75 million years ago. But details of teachings at these higher levels are sketchy.

Since it was founded in 1954, Scientology has grown to include more than 5,100 churches, missions and groups in 156 countries.

Symbols of Scientology include an eight-pointed cross and an “S” between two triangles.

Celebrated holidays include Hubbard’s birthday (March 13), the date of Dianetics’ publication (May 9) and Auditors’ Day (second Sunday in September).

Scientologists are opposed to mind-altering drugs, psychiatry and psychiatric drugs. Narconon is Scientology’s drug rehab program. Treatment includes an intensive program of running, massive doses of vitamins and very long sauna sessions designed to “run out” drugs and radiation from the body.

Some of the celebrities identified as followers include Tom Cruise, John Travolta, Kelly Preston, Kirstie Alley, Isaac Hayes, Chick Corea, Lisa Marie Presley, Jenna Elfman and Ann Archer.

HISTORY TEST Copy this and email it to your friends


     Please pause a moment, reflect back, and take the following multiple choice test. The events are actual cuts from past history They actually happened!!!

    Do you remember?

    -1968 Bobby Kennedy was shot and killed by
   a. Superman
   b. Jay Lenno
   c. Harry Potter
d. Muslim male extremist between the ages of 17 and 40

   1. In 1972 at the Munich Olympics, athletes were kidnapped and massacred by
    a. Olga Corbett
    b. Sitting Bull
    c. Arnold Schwarzenegger
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

   2. In 1979, the US embassy in Iran was taken over by:
   a. Lost Norwegians
   b. Elvis
   c. A tour bus full of 80-year-old women
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

    3.During the 1980’s a number of Americans were kidnapped in Lebanon by:
   a. John Dillinger
   b. The King of Sweden
   c. The Boy Scouts
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

   4. In 1983, the US Marine barracks in Beirut was blown up by:    a. A pizza delivery boy
   b. Pee Wee Herman
   c. Geraldo Rivera
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

    5. In 1985 the cruise ship Achille Lauro was hijacked and a 70 year old American passenger was murdered and thrown ove rboard in his wheelchair by:
    a. The Smurfs
    b. Davy Jones
    c. The Little Mermaid
. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

    6.In 1985 TWA flight 847 was hijacked at Athens, and a US Navy diver trying to rescue passenger s was murdered by:
    a. Captain Kidd
    b. Charles Lindberg
    c. Mother Teresa
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

   7.In 1988, Pan Am Flight 103 was bombed by:
    a. Scooby Doo
    b. The Tooth Fairy
    c. Butch Cassidy and The Sundance Kid
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

   8. In 1993 the World Trade Center was bombed the first time by:
    a. Richard Simmons
    b. Grandma Moses
    c. Michael Jo rdan
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

   9.In 1998, the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were bombed by:
    a. Mr. Rogers
    b. Hillary Clinton, to distract attention from Wild Bill’ s women problems
    c. The World Wr estling Federation
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

   10.On 9/11/01, four airliners were hijacked; two were used as missiles to take out the World Trade Centers and of the remaining two, one crashed
        into the US Pentagon and the other was diverted and crashed by t he passengers.Thousands of people were killed by:
    a. Bugs Bunny, Wiley E. Coyote, Daffy Duck and Elmer Fudd
    b. The Supreme Court of Florida
    c. Mr Bean
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

   11.In 2002 the United States fought a war in Afghanistan against:
    a. Enron
    b. The Lutheran Church
    c. The NFL
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

    12. In 2002 reporter Daniel Pearl was kidnapped and murdered by:
     a . Bonnie and Clyde
     b. Captain Kangaroo
     c. Billy Graham
 d. Muslim male extremist s mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

      13. 2004 – Spain Railwayy bombings.
        Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40


      14. 2005 London Railway bombings
Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

    Nope, I really don’t see a pattern here to justify profiling, do you?

    So, to ensure we Americans never offend anyone, particularly fanatics intent on killing us, airport security screeners will no longer be allowed to profile
    certain people. They must conduct random searches of 80-year-old women, little kids, airline pilots with proper identification, secret agents of the President’s
    security detail, 85-year old Congressmen with metal hips, and Medal of Honor winning and former Governor Joe Foss, but leave
Males between the ages 17 and 40 alone because of profiling.

    Let’s send this to as many people as we can so that the Gloria Aldreds and other dunder-headed attorneys along with Federal Justices that want to thwart
    common sense, feel doubly ashamed of themselves – if they have any such sense.

    As the writer of the award winning story “Forrest Gump” so aptly put it, “Stupid is as stupid does.”

      Come on people wake up!!!
    Keep this going. Pass it on to everyone in your address book.
    Our Country and our troops need our support and prayers.

Why this man should give us all nightmares

Why this man should give us all nightmares

By ANN LESLIE 23:44pm 22nd August 2006

Iran’s president Almadinejad: Threatened to wipe
off the map

Why shouldn’t
Iran have nuclear weapons? We have them, so has America, France, Russia, Israel, China, Pakistan, India and possibly
North Korea. So why make such a fuss about

After all, we gulped, but then decided to accept Pakistan’s and
India’s nuclear bombs. Why? Because we recognised that their bombs are, essentially, a continuation of the Mutually Assured Destruction doctrine which, as a deterrent, kept us from nuclear Armageddon throughout the Cold War.

In fact, it could be argued that, not long ago, the M.A.D. doctrine actually kept Pakistan and India from going to war yet again over

So why shouldn’t Iran have nuclear bombs to deter attack from the ‘Great Satan’, America, let alone the two ‘Little Satans’, Israel and Britain? Sounds reasonable. But that pre-supposes that the Iranian regime is reasonable.

The mullah-mafia lied through their teeth for 18 years, denying they had a nuclear programme, despite their obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

And all the evidence shows that they are lying now when they say they only want nuclear power for ‘peaceful energy purposes’, despite sitting on some of the largest oil reserves in the world.

But, alas, there’s nothing which we would recognise as ‘reasonable’ about President Ahmadinejad, the small, bearded blacksmith’s son from the slums of Tehran – who denies the existence of the Holocaust, promises to ‘wipe Israel off the map’ and who, moreover, urges Iranians to ‘prepare to take over the world’.

The UN gave him until August 31 to reply to its package of proposals designed to stop his nuclear programme. Significantly he chose yesterday to, in effect, reject the UN ultimatum because yesterday was a sacred day in the Islamic calendar.

It is the day on which the Prophet Mohammed made his miraculous night flight from
Jerusalem to heaven and back on Buraq, the winged horse.

As one Iranian exile told me yesterday: ‘The trouble with you secular people is that you don’t realise how firmly Ahmadinejad believes – literally – in things like the winged horse. By choosing this date for his decision, he is telling his followers that he is going to obey his religious duty.

‘And he believes that his religious duty is to create chaos and bloodshed in the “infidel” world, in order to hasten the return of the Mahdi – the Hidden Imam. So don’t expect him to behave, in your eyes, “reasonably”.’

So who is this Hidden Imam? He was a direct descendant of the Prophet Mohammed who, at the age of five, disappeared down a well around AD940. He will only return after a period of utter chaos and bloodshed, whereupon peace, justice and Islam will reign worldwide.

When I was in
Tehran, Ahmadinejad was its mayor, and an Iranian friend with links to the city council told me: ‘He’s instructed the council to build a grand avenue to prepare for the Mahdi’s return.

‘I wouldn’t mind that, because our roads are rotten – it’s just that the motivation for this expensive avenue strikes me as completely crazy.’

On coming to power, in order to hasten the return of the Hidden Imam, the Iranian President allocated the equivalent of £10m for the building of a blue-tiled mosque at Jamkaran, south of the capital, where the five-year-old Hidden Imam was said to have disappeared down the well.

When the President drew up a list of his cabinet ministers, he’s rumoured to have dropped their names down the well in order to benefit from its alleged divine connection.

Previous Iranian negotiators from the mullah-mafia elite were corrupt, sinuous and deceitful – but, when necessary, could be pragmatic. You could, to a certain extent, do business with them.

Many of these mullahs would not – despite their rhetoric – welcome the bloody destruction of the Western world, not least because they have stuffed their wealth into secret ‘infidel’ bank accounts overseas.

The Western-educated nephew of one such wealthy mullah said to me: ‘Ahmadinejad’s fruitcake theology scares us as much as it should scare you!’

But according to the political editor of
Iran’s Resalat newspaper, the President’s apocalyptic mindset ‘makes you very strong. If I think the Mahdi will come in two, three, or four years, why should I be soft? Now is the time to stand strong, to be hard’.

Warm and welcoming

Of course ordinary Iranians are not, on the whole, apocalyptic types: they are warm, welcoming to ‘infidels’ like me and, frankly, deeply fed up.

They don’t obsess about the return of the Mahdi, they don’t want nuclear weapons, and they certainly don’t want an apocalyptic world war.

As one young Tehrani told me: ‘I don’t know why we are spending so much time antagonising he West. We’re just getting more and more isolated, and our economy is in a complete mess.’

The young are not even that interested in religion: a recent poll of young Iranians showed that only 5 per cent watched religious programmes, and only 6 per cent said that they were interested in religion at all.

Seventy per cent of Iranians are under the age of 30, and what they want is to be able to have fun, to travel and, above all, to have jobs.

But the puritanism, corruption, cruelty and incompetence of the regime induces fatalisticdepression and drives all too many of them to drugs:
Iran now has (and, surprisingly, has acknowledged) one of the highest drug addiction rates in the world.


So why is Ahmadinejad – as a result of this stand-off with the West – suddenly so popular among the grassroots?

It’s partly a matter of Persian nationalist pride: Iranians – who are not Arabs – remember how they once possessed a great empire and were the supreme power in the
Middle East.

They share with Ahmadinejad the yearning that they should be so once again. And they remember how the Western powers exploited and manipulated them in the past and fear they may do so again.

Even the most pro-Western of those I have met were horrified at the thought of
America attempting to bomb their nuclear plants, let alone mount an invasion.

Ahmadinejad is triumphant about the ‘victory’ over Israel in Lebanon by
Iran’s proxy, Hezbollah.

But ordinary Iranians – while shocked at the devastation caused by Israel – have long felt resentful about the amounts of money, let alone weaponry, that Iran shovels into Hezbollah’s armed ‘state-within-a-state’ in southern Lebanon.

After Friday prayers in Tehran one day, which included the ritual ‘Death to Israel!’ chants, one young graduate, with no hope of a job, told me: ‘Look, I don’t care about
Israel. That’s a problem for the Arabs, not for us.’

At a union May Day rally this year, one placard daringly read: ‘Forget about
Palestine! What about us?’

So what happens next? Sanctions, probably. But the kind of sanctions which hurt ordinary, poverty-stricken Iranians too much would be counterproductive. Those which most hurt the elite would be preferable: international banking restrictions will damage the corrupt mullahs, and a form of oil sanctions may also put pressure on them.

Despite those massive oil reserves,
Iran actually has to import over 40 per cent of its refined oil because, thanks to its incompetence, it never got around to building enough refining capacity.

There are no easy answers. But nuclear-weapon technology in the hands of an Iranian President obsessed with ‘ fruitcake theology’ and the destruction of all ‘infidels’ is something which should keep us all awake at night.


ISLAM: What the West Needs to Know

ISLAM: What the West Needs to Know

An examination of Islam, violence, and
the fate of the non-Muslim world.

98 minutes

Virtually every major Western leader has over the past several years expressed the view that Islam is a peaceful religion and that those who commit violence in its name are fanatics who misinterpret its tenets. This claim, while widely circulated, rarely attracts serious public examination. Relying primarily on Islam’s own sources, this documentary demonstrates that Islam is a violent, expansionary ideology that seeks the destruction or subjugation of other faiths, cultures, and systems of government.

The documentary consists of original interviews, citations from Islamic texts, Islamic artwork, computer-animated maps, footage of Western leaders, and Islamic television broadcasts. Its tone is sober, methodical, and compelling.

Outline of the Documentary

We hear from prominent Western leaders that Islam is peaceful and that those who commit violence in its name are heterodox fanatics.

Part 1: ‘There is no God but Allah and Muhammad is his Prophet’
Our interviewees affirm their belief that Islamic violence is entirely orthodox behavior for Muslims and stems directly from the teachings and example of the Prophet Muhammad and the commands of the Koran. We learn that the example of Muhammad is one of a violent warlord who killed numerous people. The Koran – the verbatim words of Allah – prescribes violence against non-Muslims and Muhammad is the perfect example of the Koran in action.

Part 2: The Struggle
We learn that jihad, while literally meaning ‘struggle’, in fact denotes war fought against non-Muslims in order to bring the rule of Islamic law to the world. Violent death in jihad is, according to the Koran, the only assurance of salvation. One of our interviewees tells of his personal involvement in terrorism and his leaving Islam.

Part 3: Expansion
Following the death of Muhammad, his ‘rightly-guided’ successors carried his wars to three continents, fighting, enslaving, and massacring countless Christians, Jews, Zoroastrians, Hindus, and others. Islam did not spread through evangelism or through its natural appeal, but through aggressive wars of conquest. The Crusades were largely a belated response on the part of Christian Europe to rescue Christians in the Holy Land suffering under Muslim oppression. The Muslim world today, while no longer the unified empire of the Caliphs, is exceptional for being responsible for the vast majority of conflicts around the world and for almost all of international terrorism.

Part 4: ‘War is Deceit’
A great problem with Western efforts to understand Islam is due to the Islamic principle of ‘religious deception’, which enjoins Muslims to deceive non-Muslims in order to advance the cause of Islam. Muslim groups today in the West employ deception and omission to give the impression that ‘Islam is a religion of peace’, an utter fiction.

Part 5: More than a Religion
The most important characteristic of Islam not understood by the West is that it is more a system of government than a personal religion. Throughout its history, Islam has never recognized a distinction between the religious and the secular/political. Islamic law governs every aspect of religious, political, and personal action, which amounts to a form of totalitarianism that is divinely enjoined to dominate the world, analogous in many ways to Communism.

Part 6: The House of War
Islamic theology divides the world into two spheres locked in perpetual combat, dar al-Islam (House of Islam – where Islamic law predominates), and dar al-harb (House of War – the rest of the world). It is incumbent on dar al-Islam to fight and conquer dar al-harb and permanently assimilate it. Muslims in Western nations are called to subvert the secular regimes in which they now live in accordance with Allah’s command. Due to political correctness and general government and media irresponsibility, the danger posed by observant Muslims in the West remains largely unappreciated.