April 15, 2007 — Filmmaker Michael Moore’s production company took ailing Ground Zero responders to Cuba in a stunt aimed at showing that the U.S. health-care system is inferior to Fidel Castro’s socialized medicine, according to several sources with knowledge of the trip.The trip was to be filmed as part of the controversial director’s latest documentary, “Sicko,” an attack on American drug companies and HMOs that Moore hopes to debut at the Cannes Film Festival next month.

Two years in the making, the flick also takes aim at the medical care being provided to people who worked on the toxic World Trade Center debris pile, according to several 9/11 workers approached by Moore’s producers.

But the sick sojourn, which some say uses ill 9/11 workers as pawns, has angered many in the responder community.

“He’s using people that are in a bad situation and that’s wrong, that’s morally wrong,” railed Jeff Endean, a former SWAT commander from Morris County, N.J., who spent a month at Ground Zero and suffers from respiratory problems.

A spokeswoman for the Weinstein Co., the film’s distributor, would not say when the director’s latest expose would hit cinemas or provide details about the film or the trip.

Responders were told Cuban doctors had developed new techniques for treating lung cancer and other respiratory illness, and that health care in the communist country was free, according to those offered the two-week February trip.

Cuba has made recent advancements in biotechnology and exports its cancer treatments to 40 countries around the world, raking in an estimated $100 million a year, according to The Associated Press.

In 2004 the U.S. government granted an exception to its economic embargo against Cuba and allowed a California drug company to test three cancer vaccines developed in Havana, according to the AP.

Regardless, some ill 9/11 workers balked at Moore’s idea.

“I would rather die in America than go to Cuba,” said Joe Picurro, a Toms River, N.J., ironworker approached by the filmmaker via an e-mail that read, “Joe and Mike in Cuba.”

After helping remove debris from Ground Zero, Picurro has a laundry list of respiratory and other ailments so bad that he relies on fund-raisers to help pay his expenses.

He said, “I just laughed. I couldn’t do it.”

Another ill worker who said he was willing to take the trip ended up being stiffed by Moore.

Michael McCormack, 48, a disabled medic who found an American flag at Ground Zero that once flew atop the Twin Towers, was all set to go to.

The film crew contacted him by phone and took him by limo from his Ridge, L.I., home to Manhattan for an on-camera interview.

“What he [Moore] wanted to do is shove it up George W’s rear end that 9/11 heroes had to go to a communist country to get adequate health care,” said McCormack, who suffers from chronic respiratory illness.

But McCormack said he was abandoned by Moore. At a March fund-raiser for another 9/11 responder in New Jersey, McCormack learned Moore had gone to Cuba without him.

“It’s the ultimate betrayal,” he said. “You’re promised that you’re going to be taken care of and then you find out you’re not. He’s trying to profiteer off of our suffering.”

Moore’s publicist did not return calls from The Post. But McCormack played a tape for The Post of a telephone conversation between himself and a Moore producer. The woman is heard apologizing for not taking McCormack, while saying the production company was not offering anyone guarantees of a cure.

“Even for the people that we did bring down to Cuba, we said we can promise that you will be evaluated, that you will get looked at,” said the woman. “We can’t promise that you will get fixed.”

Participants in the Cuba trip were forced to sign a confidentiality agreement prohibiting them from talking about the project, the sources said.

Travel to Cuba is severely restricted from the United States, but Moore’s crew was granted access, the producer told McCormack, through a “general license that allows for journalistic endeavors there.”

Some called the trip a success, at least logistics-wise.

“From what I heard through the grapevine, those people that went are utterly happy,” said John Feal, who runs the Fealgood Foundation to help raise money for responders and was approached by Moore to find responders willing to take the trip.

“They got the Elvis treatment.”

Although he has been a critic of Cuba, Moore grew popular there after a pirated version of his movie, “Fahrenheit 9/11,” was played on state-owned TV.

Additional reporting provided by Jill Culora, Susan Edelman and Ginger Adams Otis

Pat Dollard traded a life of luxury as a Hollywood agent for that of a war journalist dodging bullets and shrapnel alongside the Marines in Iraq. He did it so you could see the truth…his version of the truth.

Islamist Terror Strikes Again in North Africa

Islamist Terror Strikes Again in North Africa

North Africa’s Islamist suicide bombers struck again Saturday, for the third time in a week.

In the bustling port city of Casablanca, Morocco, two brothers wearing explosive belts blew themselves up within moments of each other outside the American consulate and the privately run American Language Center. The buildings are located on the same street, but several blocks apart.

A bystander was slightly injured by the blasts; security barriers prevented the bombers from getting close to their targets. There were no other casualties.

Last Tuesday, three Islamist suicide bombers in Casablanca–Morocco’s largest city–blew themselves up after a confrontation with police.

The next day, in neighboring Algeria, 33 people were killed when car bombers attacked the Government Palace in the capital, Algiers, and a suburban police station (see story below).

Intelligence experts warn that terrorists are likely to strike again–soon–in both countries.

“The potential for violence against American interests and citizens and other Western targets remains high in Morocco,” the US consulate in Casablanca said in a statement.

“Moroccan authorities continue to disrupt groups seeking to attack US- or Western-affiliated targets and arrest individuals associated with international terrorist groups.

“Establishments which are readily identifiable with the United States are potential targets for attacks. These may include facilities where US citizens and other foreigners congregate, including clubs, restaurants, places of worship, schools, hotels, movie theaters and other public areas.”

The consulate said US government personnel in Casablanca were advised to “remain at home.”

Islamism is on the rise in North Africa. In Algeria, where 200,000 people died in an Islamist-led civil war, the military is the key to saving the country from an Islamist revolution. The same is true for most countries in the region: absent an iron fist, Islamists will take power.

America’s foreign policy establishment, unfortunately, disagrees. From the State Department to the Council on Foreign Relations, there is a growing consensus that represssion is the “root cause” of Islamist terror, and that liberalization is the answer to addressing the “legitimate grievances” of the terrorists.

Instead of a war on Islamism, or Radical Islam, the appeasement and accommodation camps are pushing the line that the movement is not monolithic. The tendency is to “engage” so-called moderate Islamists with whom the US can supposedly do business (as usual).

The thinking is decades old, dating to the fall of the Shah of Iran, whom the Carter administration pressured into liberalizing at precisely the wrong time. Encouraged by US diplomatic signals–and back-channel discussions–opposition Islamists smelled blood and sensed that victory was within their grasp.

It was, and the rest is history, as the saying goes.

Are US policy-makers doomed to repeat the lessons of Iran in North Africa?

«All Women Should Wear A Veil»

«All Women Should Wear A Veil»

According to Mostafa Chendid of the Danish Islamic Society (Islamisk Trossamfund), not only Muslim women but other women too should wear a veil. Why? Because five up to ten percent of all men can’t control themselves when they see a woman without a veil.

Mostafa Chendid is considered to be the successor of Ahmad Abu Laban, one of the imams who was involved in the affair around the notorious Danish cartoons. Ahmad Abu Laban was one of the leaders of the delegation that traveled around the Middle East and that had added three drawings to the original cartoons in its report to «give a clearer picture of the climate against Muslims in Denmark». Mostafa Chendid is doing well to become just as famous as his predecessor, and the interview that he recently gave to the Danish weekly newspaper Weekendavisen certainly isn’t going to reduce the controversy around his person.

Earlier he had already succeeded to draw attention to himself by saying to Jyllands-Posten (that’s right: the newspaper with the cartoons) that not only Muslim women, but all other women too, should wear a veil, on… International Women’s Day. Of course, this resulted in a lot of reactions, and as a matter of fact his remarks in Jyllands-Posten were the direct reason for the interview with Weekendavisen, where he repeated them once more and commented on them. He said for example that wearing the veil is a woman’s duty to God, because that’s what’s written in the Koran. However, that doesn’t mean that he thinks that a woman with a veil is a better person than a woman without a veil.

According to him the veil also serves as a signal: women with a veil are «not for sale». Moreover, the veil protects against rapes, he says: in the US for example, every half minute a woman is raped, and according to him that’s because women continuously tempt men by going onto the streets without a veil. Maybe not all men have a problem to control themselves when they see a woman without a veil, and perhaps there’s only a problem with five to ten per cent of the men, but he says that’s nevertheless enough for all women to wear the veil.

When asked whether men shouldn’t cover themselves too, so they don’t seduce women either, the imam basically evaded the question. But maybe the journalist should have gone even further and asked if it wouldn’t be much simpler if the men would stay inside and weren’t allowed to go out unless accompanied by their wife or a female family member. After all, it’s the men that are the problem, not the women, and to me it seems rather bizarre that women should walk around with a veil because men can’t control themselves. No doubt, it there wouldn’t have been a prophet but a prophetess, Mostafa Chendid never would have set a step outside his door! Maybe it would have been better for Islam’s image too if he wouldn’t do that anyway.

Pro-secular Turks stage ‘Solidarity with Republic’ rally

Pro-secular Turks stage ‘Solidarity with Republic’ rally

Saturday, April 14, 2007

Hundreds of thousands participate in the rally organized to protest a possible run for presidency by Islamic-rooted Prime Minister Erdoğan.

ANKARA – TDN with agencies

Hundreds of thousands of pro-secular Turks protested against a possible run for president by Turkey’s Islamic-rooted prime minister Saturday, demonstrating the intense opposition he could face from Turkey’s secular establishment. Protesters called on the government to resign and chanted slogans including, “We don’t want an imam as president.” Turkey’s secularists fear that if Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan – or someone close to him – wins the presidency next month, the government will be able to implement an Islamist agenda without opposition. The secular elite, which includes army generals and judges, fear Erdoğan as president would try to undermine Turkey’s strict separation of state and religion. President Ahmet Necdet Sezer said on Friday the country’s secular system of government faced its gravest danger since the founding of the republic in 1923, in comments seen as a direct attack against the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP). Erdoğan denies any Islamist agenda and says he has broken with his past and is now a conservative democrat. Analysts said Saturday’s rally was the last opportunity for the secular establishment to pressure the AK Party to pick a compromise candidate for the head of state, a seat which carries great symbolic weight in Turkey. The AKP  has a big enough majority in parliament to elect Erdoğan, or anybody else it chooses, to the seven-year post as head of state. The party is expected to name its candidate on April 18. Parliament is due to vote in May. Pressure on AKP mounts: Pressure on the AKP to pick a compromise candidate has intensified in recent weeks, although party members have increasingly lobbied in public for Erdoğan to stand. “The road to Çankaya (presidential palace) is closed to sharia (Islamic law),” a group of youths chanted at the rally in a reference to Islamic law practiced in many Muslim countries. Erdoğan and his ruling AKP have repeatedly stressed that they are faithful believers in secularism, which combines a strict separation of state and religion but also carries heavy undertones of nationalism and a strong central state. Critics say efforts by the AKP  to remove a ban on Islamic-style headscarves, to liberalise religious Islamic teachings, appoint religiously minded members to senior positions in the Turkish bureaucracy and to ban alcohol beverages from local municipalities point to the contrary. Despite the large turnout, the secular establishment – which includes the army – has no real power to prevent Erdoğan from running, or winning: His party was elected to an overwhelming majority in parliament and can appoint whomever it wants to the presidency. Hundreds of thousands traveled from across the country overnight to attend the rally in downtown Ankara. Police deployed around 10,000 officers and cordoned off the meeting area – near the Mausoleum of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, the revered founder of modern, secular Turkey. The crowds visited the mausoleum after the rally to pay their respects to Atatürk, who is the symbol of Turkey’s secular identity. Turkey is 99 percent Muslim, but its laws strictly limit the influence of religion on politics. Even wearing an Islamic-style headscarf in government buildings or schools is illegal. Erdoğan, who has made no secret of his strong religious convictions while at the same time pushing Turkey toward European Union membership, represents a challenge to the secularists’ traditional approach to government, and many here are suspicious of his motives. He has not yet announced whether he will run for the presidency. Many residents in the capital hung Turkish flags out of their balconies or windows in support of the rally. Police helicopters hovered overhead, and all major roads in the capital were blocked. Protesters, many of them draped in flags and carrying Atatürk posters, shouted slogans including, “Turkey is secular and will remain secular” and “We respect belief, but not radicalism.” They also shouted slogans warning Erdoğan not to “try our patience.” Sezer: Fundamentalist threat at all time high: Turkey’s staunchly pro-secular president, Ahmet Necdet Sezer, said Friday that the threat Islamic fundamentalism poses to the country’s secular establishment is higher than ever – a warning directed at Erdoğan. “For the first time, the pillars of the secular republic are being openly questioned,” Sezer said in an address to officers of the country’s military, the self-appointed guarantor of the secular regime. “We are aware of the danger,” the pro-secular Cumhuriyet newspaper headlined on Saturday in white letters printed against a red background. Erdoğan’s government denies it has an Islamic agenda, but pro-secular Turks say the government is slowly moving the country toward increased religious rule. Since taking power, Erdoğan has shown his commitment to future European Union membership by enacting sweeping reforms that allowed the country to start accession talks in 2005. But he has also stoked secularist concerns by speaking out against restrictions on wearing Islamic-style head scarves in government offices and schools and taking steps to bolster religious schools. He tried to criminalize adultery before being forced to back down under intense EU pressure. Some party-run municipalities have taken steps to ban alcohol consumption. The government is widely accused of appointing Islamist-leaning officials to key state positions. Most recently an alleged suggestion by Culture Minister Atilla Koç to add Arabic letters to the Turkish alphabet – which is based on the Latin script – had fueled concerns from secularists. Sezer steps down on May 16. Parliament, which is dominated by lawmakers from Erdoğan’s party, will elect the new president early next month. Erdoğan’s party was expected to announce its candidates for the position this month. Army urges loyalty to secularism: “As a citizen and as a member of the armed forces, we hope that someone who is loyal to the principles of the republic – not just in words but in essence – is elected president,” Gen. Yasar Büyükanıt, chief of the military, said Thursday. Büyükanıt’s words were widely interpreted as a warning to Erdoğan not to run. The military views itself as the protector of Turkey’s secular identity. The fiercely secular generals have staged three coups between 1960 and 1980, and in 1997 led a campaign that pressured a pro-Islamic government out of power. The rally was organized by Şener Eruygur, president of the Atatürk Thought Association and former commander of Turkey’s paramilitary forces. Although largely ceremonial, the presidency has become a symbol for secularism under Sezer. A former Constitutional Court judge, Sezer has vetoed a record number of laws he deemed to be in violation of the secular constitution and has blocked government efforts to appoint hundreds of reportedly Islamic-oriented candidates to important civil service positions. 

© 2005 Dogan Daily News Inc.

Fred Thompson For President

Islamic Indoctrination in American Classrooms

Islamic Indoctrination in American Classrooms
Adrian Morgan – 4/14/2007
The First Amendment to the US federal constitution was written in 1789, and was ratified by the States in 1791. It states: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” The interpretation of the First Amendment and in particular its first clause, referred to as the “Establishment of Religion” or “Establishment” clause, has a direct bearing on how federally- funded public schools can teach religion. Alan Brownstein, a constitutional law expert from the University of California at Davis’ School of Law states: “From a constitutional perspective, schools can’t teach the truth or falsity of religious belief, and atheism would fall in that parameter.”

Public schools can teach about religions, but can neither denigrate one religion nor promote another. When 9/11 happened, children were confronted with the spectacle of Muslim terrorism on their TV screens. Sadly, for children growing up in America, their understanding of why Islamic terrorism takes place is not likely to be explained at school. There are “problematic” verses in the Koran, advocating violence against “unbelievers”. These include Sura 8:12: “I am with you: give firmness to the Believers: I will instill terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them.”

Sura 3:151 states: “Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority: their abode will be the Fire: And evil is the home of the wrong-doers!” Sura 9:25 declares: “But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practice regular charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.”

Sura 9:29 states: “Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.” (Jizya was a tax which non-Muslims had to pay to their Muslim overlords).

The First Amendment was originally designed to prevent the conflicts which (Christian) religion had caused in Europe. Now, it is being employed by the politically correct to present an anodyne and inaccurate portrayal of Islam in US public schools. Sura 4:34 specifically states that a husband has the right to beat his wife if she is not submissive. Problematic Suras such as this are not likely to even be mentioned in public schools, for fear of being seen to break the terms of the First Amendment by “denigrating” Islam.

Already schools in America are being taken to task by Muslim activists who perceive that their religion is not treated with enough “respect”. In December 2006 Baltimore County School Board in Maryland was accused of inaccuracy in its teaching of Islam. The claim was made by Bash Pharoan, who is president of the local American Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee and head of Baltimore County Muslim Council.

Pharoan was complaining about resource sheets given to students in seventh and tenth grade. He has been whining for three years that the sheets do not show respect to Mohammed, founder of Islam, because they merely call him “Mohammed.” “Omitting the word prophet is disrespectful”, Pharoan claimed.

He also objected to the description in the resource sheets of “jihad”. He accepted that the sheets refer to its meaning as “struggle” but objected to the statement: “Muhammad justified his attacks to his followers by explaining that to weaken those who opposed the spread of God’s word was a virtue, and that those who fell in battle would be rewarded in heaven. Thus the idea of the jihad became the holy war of the Muslims against ‘the unbelievers.”

The issue of how Islam is taught in schools has become a political hot potato. In California one school, the Excelsior Elementary, took its teaching of Islam to seventh graders to extremes. School pupils were made to dress up in Islamic clothing, to memorize Koranic verses and even to fast during their lunch hour to mimic Muslim behavior during Ramadan. The Five Pillars of Islam were to be learned, pupils were encouraged to say “Allahu Ackbar” and using dice, the children played a “jihad game”. The materials employed at the school stated: “From the beginning, you and your classmates will become Muslims.”

The games were neither new, nor exclusive to Excelsior. In 1994 the Joseph Kerr Junior High School in Elk Grove, California displayed a banner stating “There is one God, Allah, and Mohammed is his prophet” while children ran around in Islamic garb. In summer of 2002, Byron Union School District, which governs Excelsior, became subject of a lawsuit. This suit was brought by the Thomas More Law Center (TMLC), based in Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Law Center said of the Islamic sessions at Excelsior: “No federal court would have permitted a class where public school students were taught to ‘become Catholics’ for three weeks, selected a saint’s name, wore identification tags that displayed their new name and a Crucifix, and engaged in Catholic religious practices. Here, however, students were subjected to Islamic religious indoctrination and propaganda and the courts turned a blind eye. The Supreme Court missed an opportunity to demonstrate that the Establishment Clause is to be applied the same to all religions and is not just a weapon to be used only against Christians.”

On 10 December 2003 U.S. District Judge Phyllis Hamilton issued a 22 page ruling which claimed that Excelsior was not violating the constitution as it was not indoctrinating students into Islam. TMLC pointed out that the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals had ruled the words “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance to be unconstitutional in 2002.

The simulations of Islam as practiced by Excelsior Elementary School were recommended in a textbook published by Houghton Mifflin, entitled “Across the Centuries”. The publishers have defended this book, claiming one major critic had not read the book. William J. Bennetta of the Textbook League has read the book, and still condemns it. “Across the Centuries” is one of several controversial text books available in US schools.

The book “Across the Centuries” was republished after it was reviewed by Susan L. Douglass, an American-born Muslim who works for the Council of Islamic Education (CIE) which was founded in 1990. She is also associated with the International Institute of Islamic Thought, whose president declared that jihad was the only way to liberate Palestine.

CIE describes Douglass as “an American-born Muslim social studies educator and author, with experience in teaching, curriculum and instructional design. She has a Master’s Degree in Arab Studies (History) from Georgetown University and a B.A. in History from the University of Rochester. Ms. Douglass is an independent consultant who has served as CIE’s principal researcher and writer, contributing to projects involving textbook review, analysis of curriculum and standards, teacher training, and development of supplementary materials.”

For nearly a decade, up until 2003, Douglass taught at the Saudi-funded Islamic Saudi Academy in Alexandria, Virginia. In 1993 the Islamic Assembly published “Answers to Common Questions to New Muslims.” In this a question was posed: “Now that I am Muslim, can I keep my non-Muslim friends that I have known all my life?” The answer was given: “You should try to remain away from mixing with non-Muslims because mixing with them removes your religious zealousness and pride from your heart and may lead you to having love and compassion in your heart for them. …it is obligatory upon a Muslim to be free of the people of infidelity and to hate them for the sake of Allah.”

The agendas of those who maintain that religions are discriminated against should always be examined. Bash Pharoan, who maintains that Baltimore County School Board is not respectful of Islam, has demanded that Jewish school holidays be banned. This move was made in June 2006 after his three-year campaigns to have the Muslim holidays of Eid al-Fitr and Eid al-Adha introduced into school calendars was not accepted. He described his vindictive proposal thus: “This issue is about equality, about equity.”

On June 13, 2006, the school board ruled that there would not be official Muslim holidays. The reasons were purely financial. There are very few Muslim students and teachers, and the Baltimore County School Board already allows these to stay at home on their holidays. Only when more teachers in the county were taking Muslim holidays (with substitute teachers costing $59.66 to $103.05 per day) would these holidays become universal. Bash Pharoan, unable to get his own way, then argued that there should be no religious holidays for anyone.

A similar situation arose in 2005 in Hillsborough county in Florida. Here the politicking was manipulated by Ahmed Bedier of the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR). In October 2005, Hillsborough County School Board approved a calendar for 2006 to 2007 which had removed holidays for Yom Kippur and Good Friday. Since December 2004, Bedier had argued that Eid al-Fitr should be included as an official school holiday. On November 8, the school board took another vote, and religious holidays were reinstated, though with no Eid holiday. Bedier said: “I’m disappointed but I’m satisfied. We’re back at square one. If others are getting their holidays, it gives us hope we’ll get ours as well someday.”

Issues of holidays are trivial compared to the material which purports to educate students about Islam. If such material is of itself biased, then the primary duty of education is undermined. In 2004, Georgetown University hosted a seminar for teachers, federally funded under Title VI of the Higher Education Act. The university (already a recipient of $20 million from Saudi Prince Alaweed Bin Talal to “educate” the West about Islam) is one of 18 centers of learning that provide resources to educationalists.

Among the study materials on offer is the “Arab World Studies Notebook”, which makes some bizarre claims, such as Muslims arrived in the Americas before Columbus and spread through the Caribbean and into Canada. This preposterous claim was later removed, but other contentious passages remained, including comments suggesting Jews have no claim to Israel. The book is edited by Audrey Shabbas, who has hosted more than 268 seminars for teachers in 155 cities since 1987. A joint publisher of the book is Dar al Islam, based in New Mexico. According to JTA, Susan L. Douglass is an associate of Dar al Islam’s Teachers Institute.

Books which promote Islamic radicalism have made their way into school districts through donations. In 2001, the Omar Ibn Khatab Foundation made a donation of 300 Korans, entitled “The Meaning of the Holy Quran”, to Los Angeles city school district. In 2002, these copies of the Koran had to be removed, as it was found that they contained anti-Semitic footnotes, such as: “The Jews in their arrogance claimed that all wisdom and all knowledge of Allah was enclosed in their hearts. Their claim was not only arrogance but blasphemy.”

The public schools in America are partially protected from Islamist indoctrination by the First Amendment. Though imperfectly applied and interpreted, the Establishment Clause prohibits religious indoctrination from entering the classroom. Through the efforts of Susan L Douglass and the Council of Islamic Education, a biased assessment of Islam is entering public schools via textbooks produced by mainstream publishers.

The extreme and uncompromising form of Islam known as Wahhabism is still being taught in the numerous Saudi-funded schools that exist in North America. Being independent of the US government, such establishments are not subject to the terms of the Establishment Clause. The Saudi-funded Islamic Academy in Virginia, where Susan L. Douglass formerly taught, has already produced three graduates who were jailed in 2002 on suspicion of planning a terrorist act.

Parents should make themselves aware of what their children are being taught about Islam in school. Demand to see study sheets. Demand a list of approved textbooks, and check these out in your local library. Talk to teachers, principals, or write to your local school board. If you think your child is being indoctrinated, write to your Congress representative. You have a Constitution which prevents religious indoctrination by government bodies. For this privilege you should feel fortunate.

Adrian Morgan is a British writer and artist who regularly contributes to Islam Watch, Family Security Matters, Western Resistance, Spero News and He has previously contributed to various publications, including the Guardian and New Scientist and is a former Fellow of the Royal Anthropological Society. His Global Politician articles deal with issues relating to Islam and terrorism.

Why is Islam Afraid of History?

Pete Fisher
Author: Pete Fisher
Source: The Family Security Foundation, Inc.
Date: April 13, 2007

Recent events around the globe suggest that Islamists are waging a deliberate campaign to abolish all vestiges of our
Western Judeo-Christian heritage. FSM Contributing Editor Pete Fisher reports on this alarming agenda. This is vital information for all who are concerned about the survival and preservation of our heritage…and our future.




   Why is Islam Afraid of History?

 By Pete Fisher

Muslims are protesting again in Israel over rumors that the Jews are trying to take over the

Mount. The prevalent belief that somehow a Jewish temple never existed on that site has become nothing more than a reason to jihad.

I suppose it was ok to destroy millennia old Buddhist statues in Afghanistan, countless holy places in India, and even underneath the

Mount. We saw when Palestinians desecrated the
Church of
The Nativity in
Jerusalem by using it as a base for snipers and desecrating the insides while doing so. No big deal. After all, it is a holy site of infidels, not a cartoon of Mohammed. Why waste a good rampage on infidels?

Like Communism banning music and religion, or Nazi book burning, Islam has a way of trying to create its own past and future. The entire world outside of Islam knows that there were Jewish temples on that site. Ancient Babylonian and Roman references to them exist, as well as the actual artifacts beneath the old
Temple site. The same artifacts Arafat tried to destroy. Now the Muslims have concocted a story that those Israelis who are unearthing Jewish and Roman artifacts of the time the last temple stood, are plotting to sink the Dome of The Rock. Why would they do this? Because in the huge piles of rubble left by desecrating Palestinians, the Israelis have unearthed more proof that they existed there long before the Palestinians.

Egypt there are sites the government refuses access, banning archaeological digs at those locations, simply because they do not desire anyone else to find what they already know. That Jews existed in those areas. Not just as bands of wandering nomads, but as civilized and metropolitan people.

Turkey refuses people access to Ararat, the famed site of Noah’s
Ark. Maybe there is something to it if they do not want the fact published that the Jewish Bible was correct in its passages concerning the

Along with the changing of this past, many Muslims believe that the

Mount is sacred to their faith. If Mohammed went to the Far Mosque, it certainly had to be located somewhere else. The Dome of The Rock was not even built until 60 years after Mohammed died. So the Dome of The Rock cannot be the place where Mohammed went, as there was no mosque in place there when he died. In fact, the expectation that it would become another Mecca or
Medina fizzled out, and it went into disrepair less than 20 years after its completion.


Muslims never showed an interest in a Hadj to that place. It was not a Muslim holy place back then, and in my opinion is not one today as far as history is concerned. It has become nothing more than a rallying point for jihad, and a political bargaining chip. In fact, the Quran even says that Allah gave that area to the Jews. So by trying to take it away, they disobey their own god and prophet. They transgress their own holy book. Why would Mohammed claim that
Jerusalem is holy, yet turn his back towards the city when he prayed? Muslims are fighting for something that their own prophet turned his back on. Interesting, isn’t it?

However, it is a holy place for the Jews. It has been since before the temple was first built by Solomon, after the captivity in
Babylon, and throughout the ages. The Wailing Wall is evidence that it once stood. The tunnels beneath, the ramps, the ritual baths, and other artifacts show that it existed when the Bible says it did, and used for the sole purpose of Jewish rituals. The site and the architecture are detailed in the Bible, not the Quran. But somehow it has become a bone of contention to Muslims who claim otherwise.

It is sacred as well to Christians, yet they make no claims to the mount or its ruins. Nor do they protest when
Israel decides to as they wish with it. No jihad is waged, no threats, no wars begin over it. Other than the usual stops for touring pilgrims that show places as detailed in the Bible, it is never an issue. To dent that would be to deny ones own faith in Christianity.

So I have to wonder what is it about Islam that thinks it can destroy other religious artifacts, and make claim to sites that they never had any claim to? Just ask those in
India who see a mosque sitting atop the site where their temple used to sit. I think Muslims are afraid of history because as it is will show them things they do not want to see.
  They do not want to see the holes in their own dogma. They do not want to see that the reason they kill Jews is no reason at all. They do not want to admit that the excuse they have been using all these years to exterminate Jews is based on falsehood. And they do not want to have to sit around and find another way to impose Islam on a global level beginning with the Jews.

I think history and archaeology have shown what the rest of the world never really doubted. That Israel has its history and its faith in Jerusalem and on that
Temple mount. The heart and soul of Judaism rests in those places, and no matter how many artifacts you destroy, or how many fables you concoct to make people believe otherwise, that will never change the truth. It is similar to the lies of the Holocaust deniers. Their lies will never cover up the branded flesh and great loss of life.

Muslims can believe Mohammed was ignorant enough to visit a mosque that did not exist. They can believe the Jews never had a temple there. They can believe that Islam has the rights to that place. But in the end, it will never change the truth.


Mount always has and always will be Jewish. Just ask Allah or Mohammed. They said the same thing.



                                                                                                       Contributing Editor Pete Fisher is a concerned citizen in the
Chicago area who has written several articles on the economy, educational system, politics, and religion. He has been featured on several sites such as,,,, The, and has been circulated on various other sites worldwide. He is a 6 year veteran of the Armed Forces. Pete can be contacted at:


© 2003-2007 All Rights Reserved

If you are a reporter or producer who is interested in receiving more information about this writer or this article, please email your request to


Note — The opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions, views, and/or philosophy of The Family Security Foundation, Inc.


 Click here to support Family Security Matters

Europe — Your Name is Cowardice

Europe — Your Name is Cowardice

Thomas Lifson
That’s the title of a document written by Mathias Dapfner, CEO of the massive German publishing house Axel Springer (AG) and published in Germany’s largest newspaper Die Welt. Our contributor Paul Jackson calls attention to this document, remarkable both for its content and its author, today in his Sunday column in the Calgary Sun.

Dapfner… noted a week or so ago, commentator Henry Broder wrote in the German newspaper Welt am Sonntag an article entitled Europe — your family name is appeasement.
It’s a phrase, says Dapfner, one can’t get out of one’s mind.
“Appeasement cost millions of Jews and non-Jews their lives, as England and France, allies at the time, negotiated and hesitated too long before they noticed Adolf Hitler had to be fought, not bound to toothless agreements.”
Dapfner doesn’t stop there.
“Appeasement legitimized and stabilized communism in the Soviet Union, then East Germany, then all the rest of Eastern Europe, where for decades, inhuman suppressive, murderers were glorified as the ideologically correct alternatives to all other possibilities.”
Dapfner also points out rather than protecting democracy in the Middle East, today European appeasement, hiding behind the “fuzzy” term “moral equivalency” countenances suicide bombings in Israel by fundamental Palestinians.

I don’t want to be a Pollyanna, but I am heartened that more voices in Europe are being heard warning of the mass folly in the birthplace of Western Civilization.

Fitzgerald: Learning about Islam should be part of essential military training

Fitzgerald: Learning about Islam should be part of essential military training

Part of the essential training of soldiers, those going to Iraq, and those going elsewhere or remaining at home, ought to be about Islam. Not fake Islam. Not the Islam of the Muslim apologists whom too many in the government think are just the people to teach about Islam. Remember that nice Egyptian man, who joined the U. S. Army and was put in charge of teaching about Islam and cultural sensitivity to soldiers, and then turned out to have been involved in the first attack on the World Trade Center?

There should be lectures for this audience, this captive audience of hundreds of thousands, on how non-Muslims are regarded in Islam, how they were treated under the Shari’a, what the Muslim worldview is, and why this belief-system has such a hold on its adherents, why Believers are not allowed to get out but treated, if they dare to question or leave Islam, as traitors.

The Army has not done this. No doubt it fears suits by CAIR, and the reaction of those few Muslim troops (almost entirely black Muslims). But it has somehow to overcome its timidity, just as the C.I.A. and F.B.I. and local police forces need to stop being so protective — fearful, rather — of Muslim sensibilities that they dare not speak truthfully about Islam. We can only hope that on their own, in the interstices of life, those whose duty it is to protect this country will somehow, catch-as-catch-can, learn a little here and a little there about Islam.

It is possible to construct courses that will set out the doctrines of Islam, relying heavily, almost exclusively, on what is to be found in the Qur’an, Hadith, Sira, and in the commentators who are themselves Muslim. It can and should be done.

Meanwhile, the army should make sure that the “training” includes enough to ensure that the soldiers are no longer surprised, shocked in fact, at how those whom they have come to help are never going to regard those Americans as anything other than Infidels, that is, with essential hostility that transcends, or survives, any temporary accommodation for the purposes of self-interest. While they may be eager to use the Americans for their own ends (getting the Americans to fight their internal wars, or soaking them for the very last dollar in aid they can get), those Sunni tribes in Anbar Province who have apparently now turned on Al-Qaeda are not our “friends” and never could be. They have fallen out with Al Qaeda not because Al Qaeda attacks the Americans, but because Al Qaeda has been too zealous in its imposition of its own ways on them, and has killed local sheiks and their relatives.

One reason for the very high degree of demoralization among the most aware and thoughtful troops — the ones who reflect upon their experience — is the gap between what they were told about Islam and about Iraq and their own experience of it.

This cannot go on.

At the various camps in which soldiers are trained, there is a chance to allow hundreds of men to learn something about Islam, something about the 1350-year history of Islam, something about the central duty of Jihad, and the various instruments of Jihad that go far beyond mere “terrorism” or indeed, combat (qitaal). And finally, those officers and men should be required to learn something as well about the fissures — ethnic, sectarian, and economic — within the Camp of Islam.

So far, more than four years into this mistaken campaign, this Tarbaby Iraq, there is not the slightest sign that either the military or the civilian leadership (including members of Congress) have begun to recognize that those who presume to lead us (to “take a leadership role”), those that is whose task is to both instruct and protect us, have a duty to themselves learn about Islam, its tenets, its attitudes, its atmospherics, and about the 1350-year history of Islamic conquest and subsequent subjugation of non-Muslim peoples.

This is not a duty that can be foresworn. It must be fulfilled. Lives, countries, whole ways of life, depend on enough people in our ruling elites, in North America and in Western Europe, learning enough, and in time, and then acting sensibly and appropriately on that basis.