US, Chinese Military Commanders Disagree on Significance of Provocative Anti-Satellite Test

 

US, Chinese Military Commanders Disagree on Significance of Provocative Anti-Satellite Test

Senior US and Chinese military commanders sharply disagreed Friday on the impact of China’s provocative anti-satellite weapon test in January. The exchange came during a meeting in Beijing between the commander of US forces in the Pacific and the vice chairman of China’s powerful Central Military Commission. VOA Pentagon Correspondent Al Pessin attended the meeting and later interviewed the US commander, Admiral Timothy Keating about the first day of his first visit to China in his new job.

Keating told Chinese General Guo Boxiong many people do not understand why China would test an anti-satellite weapon if it truly seeks a peaceful rise to superpower status, as it claims. The admiral said the test, in which China used a missile to destroy one of its own satellites, sent a “confusing signal” to the United States and the world.

Keating said he hopes China does not pursue its anti-satellite weapon program.

“I’d hope that once demonstrated that they, ‘put it on the shelf,'” he said. “There’s little further scientific data to be derived, in my perspective. They could have done it in the laboratory, if you will. But, it’s done and the debris is there. We can’t unring the bell. And I would hope that they now understand, we all understand, the challenges attendant to introduction of large quantities of large debris into the commons of space.”

When Admiral Keating raised the anti-satellite weapon issue during his meeting with Guo, the general chuckled and said he does not understand why the world reaction to the Chinese anti-satellite missile test has been so “dramatic.” He called the test a normal scientific experiment that had no serious consequences or ulterior motives, and didn’t threaten any country. Guo disputed the view that the test left a large amount of debris in orbit.

Guo tried to change the subject to Taiwan, but Keating insisted on staying on subject for a few more minutes, saying some people in the US military, government and business community believe the test was more than a scientific experiment and that the risk to other satellites posed by the debris is “not insignificant.”

“The explanation provided, that it was a scientific endeavor, in my view is a partially complete answer,” Keating explained. “There are, in my opinion, military overtones to this, if not direct military application.”

When the two senior officers did turn to Taiwan, Guo warned Washington not to trust assurances by leaders on the island that they will not try to declare themselves an independent government, and not to encourage them to do so.

Keating said the US recognizes that there is only one China, but he also noted that the US is committed to help Taiwan defend itself against any attack. He said he is concerned that a series of misunderstandings, possibly fueled by rhetoric during the campaign for Taiwan’s coming election, could lead to a situation neither China nor the US wants.

To avoid that, Keating called for more US-China military contacts at the leadership level, and also at lower ranks. He said that will help lead to better understanding of each country’s strategic intentions, and also to more transparency in China’s defense spending and capabilities.

On Friday, Keating also met with China’s military chief of staff and the vice foreign minister responsible for North American affairs. Over lunch, he had a long discussion with a Chinese admiral about the possibility that China might develop aircraft carriers. [Editor: Why would peacefully rising China need a blue-water navy?]

As his five-day visit continues, Keating will meet with Chinese military scholars and students, and will visit the eastern military region, directly across the straits from Taiwan.

Iran’s Friend in Washington Won’t Give Up

Again we ask: Is Jimmy Carter’s former National Security Advisor, Zbigniew Brzezinski, on Iran’s payroll? Is he an agent of influence? An Iranian stooge? Or simply a miserable old antisemite?

We’ll probably never know the answers to the above questions, though we are entitled to our suspicions, given his perfidious past. It was Brzezinski, after all, who authored America’s covert intervention in Afghanistan–before the Soviet invasion–on the side of the so-called country’s reactionary warlords and Islamist scum. And it was Brzezinski who helped Khomeini and his henchmen to come to power in Iran. The vain, wannabe Kissinger persuaded a self-hating US president to betray the modernizing, pro-American Shah in an unsuccessful, cynical attempt to ride the Islamist tiger.

Nearly three decades later, Brzezinski is still at it–propagandizing for the Islamist cause. Click and view. Vomit bag recommended.

North Korea and Iran Ink Evil Agreement

North Korea and Iran Ink Evil Agreement

As if to mock the efforts of America’s appeasement-advocating, dumbbell diplomats, Stalinist/Kimist North Korea and Islamist Iran (rising China’s vassal and ally, respectively) have reportedly agreed to expand cooperation in political, economic, and cultural fields.

Iran’s Foreign Minister Manoucher Mottaki signed the agreement with visiting North Korean Vice Foreign Minister Kim Yong-il on Thursday evening, according to the Iranian Student News Agency.

The US State Department can be expected to downplay the significance of the news; but State is wrong, as usual. In fact, the announced accord is a thin cover for cooperation between the two rogue nations in the development of missiles, nuclear warheads, and chemical and biological weapons.

Science in Quran: Ambiguity of Human Embryology

Science in Quran: Ambiguity of Human Embryology

Although, the world’s history tells us that no religion can boast/demand any credit for the advancement of modern science, at least one religion “Islam” very recently started futile/meaningless propaganda of the possession of scientific theories from the divine source.  This unique and untrue claim has been carefully orchestrated and manipulated by some unscrupulous Muslims with the help of two western medical scientists mainly for three purposes: (a) to continue monopoly business of Saudi Kingdom’s revenue from Hajj pilgrimage; (b) to rejuvenate  Islamic fundamentalism; and (c) to earn easy money by those two western scientists.  Readers please read the NFB’s article, titled: Religion, Science and Bogus claims”, dated Feb. 8, 2000, by Khurshed Chowdhury.  Fact of the matter is, religion and  Science are two completely opposite subjects having rivalry and contradictions from the dawn of the human civilization.  Readers please also read a very well written NFB article, dated: 4/21/00, titled: “Religion and Science” by Mr. Nurul I. Mukul.

However, it is the intention of this essay to examine what exactly was known about the human origin at the time of 7th century period in order to see whether any of the theories expressed in the Qur’an were true or indeed well known before this time.

There are at least 60 verses which deal explicitly with human origin and developmental sequences inside the womb, but these are scattered throughout the Qur’an and many of the them are repeated over and over again, as is common to much of the book. An useful place to begin would be the material out of which we are created.  Although, one would expect the Qur’an to be unambiguous about such an elementary matter, but the verses listed show just how much uncertainty there appears to be in our origins. Note that except where indicated the translation used is the translation of Yusuf Ali (Saudi Revised Edition).

Below are some Quranic Ayats regarding origin of man

Could it be from earth?

11:61 It is He Who hath produced you from the earth

 Or dry clay (Arabic Salsaal)?

15:26,28,33 We created man from sounding clay
17:61 … Thou didst create from clay
32:7 He began the creation of man from clay

Did we come from mud?

23:12 We created man from a product of wet earth (loam) (Pickthall)
23:12 Man We did create from a quintessence (of clay)
38:71 I am about to create a mortal out of mire

 Could it be dust?

3:59 He created (Jesus) out of dust
30:20 He created you from dust
35:11 Allah did create you from dust …. 

The metaphorical description of God making man out of the soil of the earth is ancient and predates the Qur’an by thousands of years; it is found in the Bible in Genesis 2:7. If this was literal it would be in direct scientific conflict with evolutionists who maintain that life was created out of the oceans,

Did we come from nothing?

19:67 We created him before out of nothing

No, we did not!

52:35 Were they created of nothing?  

 (Note the contradiction here).

Or water?

25:54 It is He Who has created man from water 

       21:30  We made you from water

       24:45  And God has created every animals from water

Thew Arabic word Nutfah  was translated as ‘water’ by present day apologetics, but in older translated Quran both in Bengali and English  the word Nutfah was translated as ‘neglected water’ (Tuuchcha pani) meaning semen.

Perhaps we arose from the dead or from one person?

30:19  It is He who brings out the living from the dead
39:6    He created you from a single Person 

         4:1    Your guardian lord, created you from a single person

The drop of fluid or semen

In a number of places we are informed that man is created from a drop of fluid (semen, seed ):

In the verses listed below ‘ nutfah is used when describing the fluid which gushes out during sexual intercourse and clearly this can only refer to semen.

 16:4 He created man from a drop of fluid (Pickthall)
16:4 He has created man from a semen( sperm) -drop
32:8 He made his seed from a quintessence of despised fluid
35:11 …then from a little fluid (Pickthall)

53:46 (he created) from a drop of seed when it is poured forth (Pickthall)
53:46 From a sperm-drop when lodged (in its place)
56:58 Have ye seen that which ye emit (Pickthall)
56:58 Do you then see? The (human Seed) that ye emit
75:37 Was he not a drop of fluid which gushed forth (Pickthall)
75:37 Was he not a drop of sperm emitted (in lowly form)?
76:2 We create man from a drop of thickened fluid (Pickthall)
76:2 We created Man from a drop of mingled semen (sperm)
80:19 From a  semen-drop (sperm) He hath created him

 Could any of this have been known to sixth-century Muslims at the time of Prophet Muhammed ?  Surely that procreation involves the emission of a drop of fluid has been well known from the earliest days of civilization.

The verses which describe the origin of life as a drop of emitted fluid are therefore no more than a direct observation as to what is released during the act of sexual intercourse. We hardly need to rely upon divine inspiration to inform us of this fact.   An illiterate man who never heard about Quran can tell about this ‘emitted fluid’ from male, or even a  12 year old boy can tell how and why child is created in the womb of a mother.

 The Qur’an emphatically does not mention sperm or eggs; it simply says nutfah. This can reasonably be translated semen, or at best as germinal fluid – which was a term used as early as Hippocrates [1] who spoke of male and female reproductive fluids (but obviously could not have been aware of the cells contained in the fluids).

Prof. Moore by his wishful intention translated nutfah as germinal fluid, he inadvertently reinforces that the Qur’an is borrowing this term from the Greeks.

Borrowing erroneous Greek ideas

Sura- (86:6-7)  “He is created from a drop emitted – proceeding from between the backbone and the ribs”

Sura- (7:172)  “when thy Lord drew forth from the Children of Adam – from their loins – their descendants” or

Sura- (4:23)    “prohibited to you (for marriage) are … wives of your sons proceeding from your loins”.

In the Quranic translation by Maulana Fazlur Rahman Munshi, the Ayat (86:6-7) were translated as:  semen are produced from the back of a man and from the breasts (mammary glands) of an woman.

Sura 86:6-7 : is interesting since it claims that during the act of sexual intercourse before which a man is created, the “gushing fluid” or semen issues from between the loins and ribs. Semen is apparently coming out of the area around the kidneys and back, which is a real scientific mistake for we know that the testicles are the sites of sperm production (although the ancient Greeks were not so convinced. Aristotle for example amusingly believed that they functioned as weights to keep the seminal passages open during sexual intercourse [2]).

The Greek physician Hippocrates and his followers taught in the fifth century BC that semen comes from all the fluid in the body, diffusing from the brain into the spinal marrow, before passing through the kidneys and via the testicles into the penis [3]. Clearly according to this view sperm originates from the region of the kidneys, and although there is serious scientific error  to this teaching today, it was well-known in the 7th century period, and shows how the Qur’an could contain such an erroneous statement.  So this is  an example of an incorrect ancient Greek idea re-emerging in the Qur’an.

Comments

To resolve the considerable guess works and ambiguity about what exactly we are made of , is like  a Carpenter when he was asked about a wooden table how he made it,  he (Carpenter) then answers:  “This table was made out of wood, out of soil, out of water , out of air, out nitrogen and so on.”   Now, apologist can argue by saying that,, Tree grows in soil, needs water, nitrogen, air etc. so it is O.K. to answer all those (instead of saying I made it from wood).  Or, insincere, blind-folded Mullahs can argue that, these were allegory, and not to be taken literally.  Question is where is the key to decide those so called Allegories?

It is quite plausible to consider that, Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) encountered (during the initial propagation of divine revelations) lots of questions (from sahabis), as to how,  Allah created human beings, and those questions obviously made it necessary to bring those above mentioned Ayats regarding human origin. Now, question can be asked—how an illiterate Prophet could gather such expert knowledge?  In the future essays, I intend to postulate possible means through which Prophet could have received these knowledge.

Among the above mentioned Qur’anic ambiguity, creation of life from water could be taken as something close to modern scientific knowledge. However, Hinduism’s Veda and ancient Greek philosopher/scientist THALES already told the world about it thousands of years before the arrival of the Qur’an.


References

(1) Hippocratic Writings (Penguin Classics, 1983) P.320

(2)Aristotle (English trans. A.L. Peck, Heinemann, 1953) Generation of Animals, 717b

(3)Hippocratic Writings , op. Cit., 317-8

(4) The Holy Qur’an (translated by A. Yusuf Ali)

(5) The Holy Qur’an (translated by Pickthall)

In Defense of the Constitution

In Defense of the Constitution

News & Analysis
013/07  May 12, 2007

CAIR: Partners With the Jihadist “Fort Dix Six”?  

The recent arrest of the “Fort Dix Six” has shocked (shocked!) the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), North America’s premier defender of Islamist terrorism in North America.  CAIR, the only Muslim organization in North America certified by Allah to determine just who is and who is not a “True Muslim”, is apparently upset that the Fort Dix Six, without permission from CAIR’s Saudi taskmasters, dared to invoke Islam as justification for the planned attack on Fort Dix:

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2007/05/10/publiceye/entry2785624.shtml

CAIR sent a statement to the press asking:  

“Media outlets and public officials refrain from linking (the Fort Dix) case to the faith of Islam.”

One problem with CAIR’s request is that the suspected terrorists weren’t let in on CAIR’s game plan.  Eljvir Duka, one of the six, was heard in an FBI recording saying: 

“In the end, when it comes to defending your religion, when someone attacks your religion, your way of life, then you go jihad.”

“Jihad”?  What faith is most closely related to this concept?  Christians?  Jews?  Maybe the Buddhists?  How about the Hindu’s? No, could it be that CAIR is upset because, once again, Muslim terrorists have “gone Jihad” and violated CAIR’s copyright on the word? 

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/05/08/ap/national/main2777304.shtml?source=search_story

Of course, far be it to let FACTS get in the way of CAIR’s well Saudi-Oiled spin machine which put out a carefully crafted response to the arrests:

“.it seems clear that a potentially deadly attack has been averted.we applaud the FBI for its efforts and repeat the American Muslim community’s condemnation and repudiation of all those who would plan or carry out acts of terror while falsely claiming their actions have religious justification.”

“FALSELY claiming their actions have religious justification?”

While it comes as a surprise to CAIR, 99.9% of North Americans, including non-CAIR-approved Muslims, realize that Islamic justification is not only a fact, but that it is a deadly fact that has not only murdered in the past, but that does so on a daily basis.with the blessings of CAIR’s perverted version of “Allah”.

CAIR’s noxious propaganda falls flat on its face with the Fort Dix Six.  Investor’s Business Daily details some of the charges in the FBI affidavit:

“It records the men saying they were willing to die killing infidels in the name of Allah. One asks who’ll take care of his family. Not to worry, another responds, “Allah will take care of your wife and kids.” They watched speeches by Osama bin Laden calling for
jihad, videos of jihadi attacks, and videotaped messages from two of the 9/11 “martyrs”.

http://www.investors.com/editorial/editorialcontent.asp?secid=1501

http://www.investors.com/editorial/editorialcontent.asp?secid=1501&status=article&id=263689615601528&status=article&id=263689615601528

The mother of one accused, Fatem Shnewer said her son,  Mohamad Ibrahim Shnewer was targeted by the FBI, “because he’s religious.”

CAIR, once again, is trying doubly hard to cover up a huge, glaring fact: when some Muslims, like the Fort Dix Six, feel as if their religion is “under attack” they turn to violence as a remedy.

The larger question is why would some Muslims living in America, where the median income of Muslims is over $50,000 a year, freedom of expression, the right to peacefully assemble.the right to religious freedoms is guaranteed to all citizens, want to kill fellow Americans?  Just where did the Fort Dix Six get the idea that Islam in under attack in America?

http://www.allied-media.com/AM/default.htm

One possibility is CAIR.  At every opportunity, since its inception, CAIR has set forth the imagery and perception that “Islam is under attack” in the United States of America.

CAIR has gone after numerous radio talk show hosts for daring to speak frankly about Islamic terrorism. They even launched a campaign called “Hate Hurts America” to stop these radio hosts. CAIR’s effort was:

“.based on the premise that the increasing attacks on Islam by talk-show hosts harm the United States by creating a downward spiral of interfaith mistrust and hostility.”

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=39651

When the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development was shut down for channeling funds to Hamas, CAIR asserted that freezing HLF assets could give the perception that “.there has been a shift from a war on terrorism to an attack on Islam.”

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=26545

Anti-CAIR revealed in court documents that CAIR was consistently banging the drum of Muslim oppression, discrimination, and victimization by Islamophobic Americans and an oppressive government. By painting American Muslims and Islam as being “under attack” in America, CAIR was, and is, intentionally playing a dangerous game: 

http://www.anti-cair-net.org/press_029_06

The evidence will show that under Moslem law, “attacks against Islam” must be countered with violence. CAIR’s intentional and repeated use of the “attack” imagery is, therefore a potential call to violence.”

By warning the press not to equate the Fort Dix Six actions with religion, CAIR is trying to deflect the fact that it has been Islamist organizations like CAIR who have been fanning the flames for jihad in America, pushing the propaganda of “Islamophobia”, and insisting that Muslims in America are treated unjustly and in huge numbers – as Nihad Awad recently asserted during a meeting at the Adams Center where he said:

“There were 196 cases reported by the Justice Department for Muslims in civil rights cases. There were over 1,008 cases reported by the Jewish faith. We need to do a much better job not only in recognizing our civil rights but also in reporting it to the government.  [It] is very critical and very important. … We really feel our community is more targeted.  Fifty-four percent — this is one of CAIR’s surveys — 54 percent of all Muslims surveyed said they had been subject to discrimination. Fifty-four percent, which if you put numbers down, we’re talking about tens of thousands of cases, not dozens, as is reported in the Justice Department’s annual report.”

http://washingtontimes.com/commentary/20070507-102427-8093r.htm

What Awad fails to mention is that it would be far more surprising if the survey showed less than 50% discrimination, considering the kinds of Muslims that associate with CAIR.

Dr. M.Zuhdi Jasser of the American Islamic Forum For Democracy makes it clear that CAIR and other radical, political Muslim groups like CAIR are a clear and present danger to America:

“Muslim organizations should understand that only Muslims hold the keys to the way to overwhelm and counter the ideology which fuels these radicals.  Muslim organizations should be clamoring to expose and infiltrate the ideology and sources which drove these traitors to sprout their radical cell.  We need an Islamic vaccine (the separation of spiritual Islam from political Islam) to the virus which afflicted these men.   Until Muslim anti-Islamists can defeat Islamism (political Islam) as an ideology, we will not make any headway at preventing the germination of the next cell.   We will only be left waiting, praying, for the FBI to help us, yet again, dodge the next bullet.”

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MTA5MzQzOGQyZjUzOGVmNDcxMmJhZWE4MDUwNDJ
jMTM=

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MTA5MzQzOGQyZjUzOGVmNDcxMmJhZWE4MDUwND
JjMTM=&w=MQ&w=MQ==

CAIR refutes all facts that “real” Muslims would commit violence in the name of the Islamic religion – even while CAIR insists that America is growing into a horrible place to be a Muslim.  So horrible in fact, that CAIR Officer and convert Ismail Royer, an original employee of CAIR, decided to wage Jihad  – while working for CAIR – by aiding and abetting terrorists:

http://www.anti-cair-net.org/press_015_03

CAIR’s response to Royer’s terrorist activities was that Royer was not an employee at the time.a lie exposed by Anti-CAIR.

Anti-CAIR unfortunately predicts more such plots by Muslims in America such as the Fort Dix Six as a result of CAIR’s relentless propaganda on behalf of radical Islam.  Could radical Imam’s and Islamist groups like CAIR be largely responsible for the Muslim terrorist attacks?  Is it possible that CAIR aids and abets Islamic terrorism by both failing to condemn Muslim terrorists and apologizing for them at the same time?

Is “Islam under attack” in America? 

No, it isn’t; in our opinion, nothing CAIR says can change this fact that is making CAIR so uncomfortable.CAIR needs Americans to attack Islam, to burn down Mosque’s, to attack peaceful Muslims and their customs in order to foment civil discourse that would further the Islamist agenda of world domination under the disgusting Wahhabi cult of Islam. 

The fact remains: there is no country on the planet more welcoming, understanding, and sympathetic to Islam than the United States.and CAIR knows this to be true.  No where on earth will Muslims find their civil rights better protected than here in America.and this is something that even CAIR, with all its oily millions, cannot change if we are willing to stand up to them.

Let’s not allow CAIR to destroy Islam in America.

Andrew Whitehead
Director
Anti-CAIR
ajwhitehead@anti-cair-net.org
www.anti-cair-net.org

Note: 

Effective immediately, Anti-CAIR will no longer use the term “ACAIR” to describe our group.  We use “Anti-Council on American-Islamic Relations” as our full name and “Anti-CAIR” as an abbreviation.  We ask anyone referencing our group to use these terms.

ADVISORY:
Subscribers are warned that the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) may contact your employer if CAIR believes you are using a work address to receive any material that CAIR believes may be offensive.  CAIR has been known to shame employers into firing employees CAIR finds disagreeable.  For that reason, we strongly suggest that corporate e-mail users NOT use a corporate e-mail account/address when communicating with ACAIR or CAIR.  We make every reasonable effort to protect our mailing list, but we cannot guarantee confidentiality. ACAIR does not share, loan, sell, rent or otherwise publicize our mailing list.  We respect your privacy!

TIPS:
All persons are invited to submit tips and leads.  ACAIR will acknowledge receipt of all tips/leads, but we will NOT acknowledge the source of ANY tip or lead in our Press Releases or on our web site. Exceptions are made for leading media personalities at the discretion of ACAIR and only on request of the person(s) submitting the tip or lead.

Islamberg, New York: “You can hear gunfire up there. I can’t understand why the FBI won’t shut it down”

Islamberg, New York: “You can hear gunfire up there. I can’t understand why the FBI won’t shut it down”

pwilliams0511-2.jpg
Paul Williams at Islamberg

The intrepid Paul Williams has a report in Canada Free Press (thanks to all who sent this in) about his visit to Islamberg, New York, a camp run by the jihadist Jamaat ul-Fuqra group. The inhabitants wouldn’t let him into the compound, but he talked to some of the locals, and found out a good deal:

Islamberg is not as benign as a Buddhist monastery or a Carmelite convent. Nearly every weekend, neighbors hear sounds of gunfire. Some, including a combat veteran of the Vietnam War, have heard the bang of small explosives. None of the neighbors wished to be identified for fear of “retaliation.” “We don’t even dare to slow down when we drive by,” one resident said. “They own the mountain and they know it and there is nothing we can do about it but move, and we can’t even do that. Who wants to buy a property near that?”The complex serves to scare the bejeesus out of the local residents. “If you go there, you better wear body armor,” a customer at the Circle E Diner in Hancock said. “They have armed guards and if they shoot you, nobody will find your body.”

At Cousins, a watering hole in nearby Deposit, a barfly, who didn’t wish to be identified, said: “The place is dangerous. You can hear gunfire up there. I can’t understand why the FBI won’t shut it down.”

Islamberg is a branch of Muslims of the Americas Inc., a tax-exempt organization formed in 1980 by Pakistani cleric Sheikh Mubarak Ali Gilani, who refers to himself as “the sixth Sultan Ul Faqr,” Gilani, has been directly linked by court documents to Jamaat ul-Fuqra or “community of the impoverished,” an organization that seeks to “purify” Islam through violence.

Though primarily based in Lahore, Pakistan, Jamaat ul-Fuqra has operational headquarters in New York and openly recruits through various social service organizations in the U.S., including the prison system. Members live in hamaats or compounds, such as Islamberg, where they agree to abide by the laws of Jamaat ul-Fuqra, which are considered to be above local, state and federal authority. Additional hamaats have been established in Hyattsville, Maryland; Red House, Virginia; Falls Church, Virginia; Macon, Georgia; York, South Carolina; Dover, Tennessee; Buena Vista, Colorado; Talihina, Oklahoma; Tulane Country, California; Commerce, California; and Onalaska, Washington. Others are being built, including an expansive facility in Sherman, Pennsylvania.

Read it all. And then contact your congressman.

Test from pocket pt

Democratic house and senates polls show the American public is not pleased