harmonicminer

Andrew McCarthy makes the case that The Gitmo Volunteers are no more noble in volunteering to represent the Guantanamo prisoners than a restaurant owner who gave free food to Al Qaeda. It’s all worth reading, and it’s difficult to refute, I think.  He has some especially pointed observations about how the legal profession sees itself as being above the rest of us, particularly the left-liberal wing of it.  Read it all if you can.  Here’s the ending bit:

America’s enemies are no more entitled to counsel in pursuing legal claims than, say, a pro-life group that chooses to file a lawsuit. If I went out of my way to contribute my services for free to a pro-life group, do you suppose the New York Times would have the slightest hesitation about drawing the inference that I was sympathetic to the pro-life cause? Of course not. The Gray Lady wouldn’t pretend that I was just, in the Gillers lexicon, promoting “the administration of justice.” After all, no one would have forced me to take that case. There are countless causes that a lawyer willing to donate his services can find. When you’re a volunteer, you’re doing what you want to do, not what you have to do.

As the law is currently understood, it is legal for a lawyer to volunteer his services to America’s enemies. It is absurd, however, to suggest that we have to applaud that decision. And it is equally ludicrous to suggest that we are forbidden from drawing the obvious conclusion that a lawyer who makes such a decision is predisposed to condemn the United States and to sympathize with America’s enemies on some level.

Here’s the landscape: The Obama Justice Department is staffed with many lawyers who volunteered their services to America’s enemies. Since those lawyers have been running the department, there has been a detectable shift in favor of due-process rights for terrorists, a bias in favor of civilian trials in which terrorists are vested with all the rights of American citizens, a bias against military tribunals, the extension of Miranda protections to enemy combatants, a concerted effort to publish previously classified information detailing interrogation methods and depicting the alleged abuse of detainees, efforts to subject lawyers who authorized aggressive counterterrorism policies to professional sanction, the reopening of investigations against CIA interrogators even though those cases were previously closed by apolitical law-enforcement professionals, and the continued accusation that officials responsible for designing and carrying out the Bush administration’s counterterrorism policies committed war crimes.

You may think this is a coincidence. I don’t. And I’m not going to pretend it is because some lefty lawyer screams “McCarthyism.” This isn’t demagoguery. It is cause and effect. And if it is hurting President Obama politically, that is because he deserves to be hurt for indulging it.

This is one time when I wish that being a bit over the top in predicting the possible future of airline security hadn’t turned out to be more than likely.  I was at least half joking…  but I guess the terrorist have no sense of humor.

Jihadists plan attack with bombs inside their bodies, to foil new airport scanners

Britain is facing a new Al Qaeda terror threat from suicide ‘body bombers’ with explosives surgically inserted inside them.

Until now, terrorists have attacked airlines, Underground trains and buses by secreting bombs in bags, shoes or underwear to avoid detection.

But an operation by MI5 has uncovered evidence that Al Qaeda is planning a new stage in its terror campaign by inserting ’surgical bombs’ inside people for the first time.

Security services believe the move has been prompted by the recent introduction at airports of body scanners, which are designed to catch terrorists before they board flights.

It is understood MI5 became aware of the threat after observing increasingly vocal internet ‘chatter’ on Arab websites this year.

The warning comes in the wake of the failed attempt by London-educated Nigerian Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab to blow up an airliner approaching Detroit on Christmas Day.

One security source said: ‘If the terrorists are talking about this, we need to be ready and do all we can to counter the threat.’

A leading source added that male bombers would have the explosive secreted near their appendix or in their buttocks, while females would have the material placed inside their breasts in the same way as figure-enhancing implants.

Experts said the explosive PETN (Pentaerythritol Tetranitrate) would be placed in a plastic sachet inside the bomber’s body before the wound was stitched up like a normal operation incision and allowed to heal.

A shaped charge of 8oz of PETN can penetrate five inches of armour and would easily blow a large hole in an airliner….

In a refreshing break from its usual mantra of “terrorism is just a natural response to poverty and oppression,” the AP reports that the airline bomb suspect came from an elite family and the best schools.

As a member of an uppercrust Nigerian family, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab received the best schooling, from the elite British International School in West Africa to the vaunted University College London.

But the education he wanted was of a different sort: Nigerian officials say his interest in extremist Islam prompted his father to warn U.S. authorities. As Abdulmutallab was being escorted in handcuffs off the Detroit-bound airliner he attempted to blow up on Christmas Day, he told U.S. officials that he had sought an extremist education at an Islamist hotbed in Yemen.

A portrait emerged Sunday of a serious young man who led a privileged life as the son of a prominent banker, but became estranged from his family as an adult. Devoutly religious, he was nicknamed “The Pope” for his saintly aura and gave few clues in his youth that he would turn radical, friends and family said.

“In all the time I taught him we never had cross words,” said Michael Rimmer, a Briton who taught history at the British International School in Lome, Togo. “Somewhere along the line he must have met some sort of fanatics, and they must have turned his mind.”

At what point will the west, particularly the leftist elites, stop trying to tie terrorism to poverty or “oppression”?  This nonsense arises in part, of course, to find a way to blame the Israelis for defending themselves, and refusing to continue to allow their opponents advantages in land and ability to pre-position forces that nearly led to Israel’s destruction in earlier wars.  The real enemy is a mosque-induced death cult, whatever the economic status of its members.

This 23 yr old wannabe mass murderer had privileges I can only dream about. Something poisoned his mind. That something was radical Islam.

Abdulmutallab is not the only one with such ambitions.  His colleagues in hopeful horror are, like him, “students” from families that are wealthy enough to send them abroad for world-class educations.  The thing they have in common is that they take 7th-century Islam extremely seriously.  They actually believe the words of the “Prophet,” and have chosen to live — and die — in response to that belief.

In the meantime, ever more restrictive airport boarding regulations seem a certainty, and ever more intrusive searches, until we figure out that we have no choice but to identify who is more likely to have evil intent, and give them more scrutiny, because we surely don’t have the resources or the time to give the necessary scrutiny to everyone, including your grandmother in a wheelchair from Peoria, or Trenton, who may choose not to visit you next Christmas due to a distaste for body cavity searches and x-ray glasses (like the ones they used to sell in D.C. Comics, except these will work) in the hands of prurient security types.

The feckless belief that we can solve our security problems by restricting carry-ons and on-board behavior even more than we already have, and by searching everyone even more thoroughly, is yet more “Powerpuff Policy.”

Sooner or later, someone is going to figure out how to make high-explosive dentures and hip/knee replacements.  While Christian “fundamentalists” will be getting only fluoride treatments, young adult male Islamic fanatics will be lining up to have all their teeth pulled and get dental implants made of enamel coated plastique.   I predict an influx of wealthy foreign nationals, of Islamic extraction, into European schools of orthopedic surgery, particularly focusing on lower extremity joint replacements.  Our too-faithful recent oral surgery patients, who will not have flossed much, will enter airplanes with a slight limp.  It’s tough to recover from double knee/double hip transplants, especially when it hurts to eat.

The other passengers will feel sorry for them, briefly.

Eventually, the only people on airplanes will be strip-searched people with no scars, who just endured body cavity searches and had their stomachs pumped.  But they will be very, very safe, wearing their airline-issued flying uniforms.  When they land at their destinations, they will report to the changing room/luggage area, where they’ll get their clothing back, which was sent in a transport plane.   Cost of a ticket from L.A. to Phoenix?  About $1,000.

Coming up next:  explosive hair.

Russian train bombing

A dreadful thing happened last week. One of the fastest express trains of the whole Russia, Nevsky Express, which was going from Moscow to Saint-Petersburg and having more than 600 passengers on its board was blew up. At 9:34 pm, when train was going somewhere near Aleshinka – Uglovka towns, 7 kilos of TNT which were buried under the tracks detonated and as a result of which the train was derailed.

Many photos and story at the link. This was covered pretty sparsely in the USA… but it is a very big deal.

I wonder when Putin and company will catch on that Iran exports terrorism to Russia as much as anywhere else, directly or indirectly.

Abbas accuses Obama of doing ‘nothing’ for peace in the Middle East

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas on Tuesday accused US President Barack Obama of doing “nothing” to achieve peace in the Middle East. Speaking to Argentinian newspaper Clarin, Abbas said he hoped that Obama would “take a more important role in the future.”

He went on to say that the Palestinian people were awaiting US pressure on Israel, “so that it respects international law and takes up the Road Map,” stressing that the peace process could not be restarted without a halt to settlement construction.

When asked what he was willing to concede for peace, Abbas told Clarin that the Palestinian people had “already made concessions.”

He opined that the current government, with Binyamin Netanyahu as prime minister and Avigdor Lieberman as foreign minister, “is not seeking peace,” though he said that 73 percent of Israelis were in favor of peace.

What Abbas wants, of course, is for Obama to be tougher on his (putatively) only friend in the Middle East, Israel, than he is on actual opponents, like Iran, Syria or Hisbullah.

If we needed any reminder of the fact, this illustrates the basic dynamic of all Middle East peace negotiations.  Israel, which has always been the attacked party, must give up land and options that were legitimately earned in acts of national self-defense from Arab aggression, self-defense against incredible odds.  In the meantime, Palestine doesn’t have to give up anything, including the intent to see the end of Israel as a Jewish nation.

Prediction:  Obama will be no more successful than any of his predecessors at convincing Palestinians that their best interests lie in normalizing relations with Israel, with reporting and fighting against the terrorists in their number, and with going about the business of building a functioning economy, without the ridiculous and unachievable destruction of Israel.  Palestinians have exactly the same opportunity now that Israel had 60 years ago, to build something out of nothing in the desert.  Further, they have a potential partner, Israel, which would help, if Palestinians could control their hatred of the Jews.  I’m not holding my breath.

In the meantime, Obama brings a student council president level of understanding to a negotiation where world class diplomats have tried and failed.  I won’t blame him for failing.  I will blame him if he manages to cripple Israel while he is busy failing to engineer an unlikely peace.

November 6, 2009. President Obama comments on the tragedy at Fort Hood, Texas in which an army major gunned down dozens of fellow soldiers:

We don’t know all the answers yet. And I would caution against jumping to conclusions until we have all the facts.”

July 22, 2009. President Obama comments on the arrest of Harvard professor, Henry Louis Gates, arrested in his own home after being mistaken for a burgler:

I don’t know not having been there and not knowing all the facts what role race played in that (incident), but…the Cambridge police acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were in their own home… There is a long history in this country of African-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately, that’s just a fact.

Mr. President, your hypocrisy in the Fort Hood case is glaring.  The way in which you chose to respond to the news of the tragedy was a public disgrace.  And in spite of the efforts of you, your administration and the sycophant press, there will be no denying that yet another mass killing of the helpless has been perpetrated, apparently in the name of Islam.  Our country has a significant history in that respect as well, wouldn’t you agree?

it would appear that there is a pretty clear connection between the Fort Hood murderer and a radical imam who was also influential on some of the 9/11 killers:

Major Nidal Malik Hasan worshipped at a mosque led by a radical imam
said to be a “spiritual adviser” to three of the hijackers who attacked
America on Sept 11, 2001.

Hasan, the sole suspect in the massacre of 13 fellow US
soldiers in Texas, attended the controversial Dar al-Hijrah mosque in
Great Falls, Virginia, in 2001 at the same time as two of the September
11 terrorists, The Sunday Telegraph has learnt. His mother’s funeral was held there in May that year.

The preacher at the time was Anwar al-Awlaki, an
American-born Yemeni scholar who was banned from addressing a meeting
in London by video link in August because he is accused of supporting
attacks on British troops and backing terrorist organisations.

Hasan’s eyes “lit up” when he mentioned his deep respect for
al-Awlaki’s teachings, according to a fellow Muslim officer at the Fort
Hood base in Texas, the scene of Thursday’s horrific shooting spree.

As investigators look at Hasan’s motives and mindset, his attendance
at the mosque could be an important piece of the jigsaw. Al-Awlaki
moved to Dar al-Hijrah as imam in January, 2001, from the west coast,
and three months later the September 11 hijackers Nawaf al-Hamzi and
Hani Hanjour began attending his services. A third hijacker attended
his services in California.

Hasan was praying at Dar al-Hijrah at about the same time, and the
FBI will now want to investigate whether he met the two terrorists.

Charles Allen, a former under-secretary for intelligence at the
Department of Homeland Security, has described al-Awlaki, who now lives
in Yemen, as an “al-Qaeda supporter, and former spiritual leader to
three of the September 11 hijackers… who targets US Muslims with
radical online lectures encouraging terrorist attacks from his new home
in Yemen”….

I wonder how much coverage this connection will get in US media.

H/T:  Robert Spencer

This is the flag memorial put up by a small group of students, funded by a small group of faculty and students, on the campus of Azusa Pacific University, to commemorate the murdered on September 11, 2001, by placing a flag for each murdered person.  These few proactive students are to be commended, for bothering to do something public about the memorial.

When you remember these events, and when you talk about them with other people, remember that who did the killing, and why, is an essential part of the memorial.

It makes no sense to remember “the dead” of 9/11, or “the circumstances of 9/11″ without also discussing who killed them, and exactly who caused those circumstances to come about. Is it possible to have any kind of reasonable memorial of Pearl Harbor and Dec. 7, 1941, without mentioning Japan, emperor worship, and Japanese imperialism?

About the same number of people died in auto accidents in the USA in that same month.  Because the Islamic terrorist attack was an act of war,  and not merely because a few thousand people died, we said, “We will never forget.”  But, of course, most of us have.

So, in case you haven’t considered it lately, because of all the obfuscation of the major media and our politicians:

1) About 3000 innocent Americans were murdered on Sept. 11, 2001.  The American flags are the correct memorial symbol, because the dead were murdered for being Americans.

2) The killers were Muslims who believed that Allah and his designated representatives had given them both permission and instructions to do this murder. In doing it, they quoted the Koran, and the facts of Mohammed’s life that seemed to them to be both justification for and precursors of their acts.  They believed that there are no “innocent people” in the West, particularly America, and that all civilians were legitimate targets, regardless of age, gender, or occupation.  They didn’t particularly care exactly who they killed, as long as the dead were mostly Americans.  The simultaneous destruction of symbols of American power and success was especially sweet to them.

3) Large parts of the Muslim world were thrilled. Some parts of it yawned. Almost none of it was particularly distressed.

4) The Islamic forces in the world who funded the indoctrination of these killers are still in full operation, with no sign of reducing their activities. They are teaching exactly the same brand of hate around the world, including in the USA.   Saudi Arabia is the biggest funding source for the teaching of hatred world-wide.  The Saudi government denies official complicity with this, but doesn’t take the steps necessary to end it.  In the meantime, the Saudis simply own, outright, enormous numbers of American politicians, former politicians (including presidents!), lobbyists, former bureaucrats, academic departments in universities, think tanks, etc., not to mention the majority of American mosques that are funded by the Saudis.  If you’re interested, Iran is number two in funding world wide hatred for the West, possibly because it’s spending a lot of its money on developing nuclear weapons.  Between the two of them, despite their putative differences over the Sunni/Shia divide, they make a powerful tag team, the Saudis funding mostly propaganda and “soft power,” and Iran distributing weapons to anyone who will kill Americans or their allies.

5) The war with radical Islam is nowhere near over. Make no mistake: it IS a war, though it is of a new type, and harder to fight than some have been in the past.  It is not a failure to communicate.  Many Americans have largely forgotten that fact.  Our enemies have not.

Sadly, the American public will be reminded. It’s only a matter of time. When that reminder comes, huge numbers of Americans are going to forget their own foolishness, and in looking for someone (else) to blame, they are going to zero in on the government and the media for their failures to think farther ahead than the next election or ratings season.

I often suspect that, as time goes by, George Bush is going to be given very mixed reviews for his presidency, in particular for his prosecution of the war with radical Islam.

The reviews will be mixed because, by then, he is likely to be seen as not having gone far enough in defending America from its radical Islamist enemies, and their enablers.

But even when America finally wakes up, the dead will still be dead.

Do I sound too pessimistic, too doom obsessed?

That’s exactly what some people were saying about those who were predicting such things on Sept 10, 2001.

What has changed since then that would make anyone think it won’t happen again?

Too many of us talk about it as if a tornado just happened to come through New York and take the towers down, as if it were an “act of God.”

Of course, some parties to the day’s events saw it that way, too.

It has become common for Muslim apologists, responding to the criticism that Muslims don’t condemn terrorism, to quote this imam or that, saying something that seems like a criticism.  Most of us in the west have little ability to determine the worth of these “criticisms.”  Is this something being said one way to the west, when the media are listening, and another way to the Muslim audience?  Is it a carefully worded “sympathy for the families of the dead” or is it a full-throated condemnation of the terrorist act as unIslamic and immoral, without equivocation or ambivalence?  After all, we give sympathy to the families of justly executed murderers.  Such sympathy hardly constitutes condemnation of the judge, the jury, the law or the executioners.

Another response is to say that the west is just as morally ambivalent about its own failings.  This article compares Muslim reluctance to condemn clear moral failure on the part of other Muslims to the tendency by modern Americans (including in the North) to whitewash the Confederate role in the Civil War, to call great generals of the South “heroes,” etc., when in fact they were fighting for a “state’s right” to protect the chattel ownership of human beings.  Of course, that war ended 145 years ago… there was less tendency in the North to be ambivalent about it at the time.  And this highlights another tendency of Muslim apologists, to point at western history, because there isn’t much they can point to now that compares to bombing African embassies, 9/11, the London Tube bombings, the Spanish train bombings,  the incredible carnage wrought in Iraq by Al Qaeda, the BATH killers, the Shia killers, the Indonesian Islamist killers, the Pakistani killers in Mumbai, etc., etc., etc., ad endless nauseam.

Occasionally something like this appears: Indian Muslims under pressure in Mumbai aftermath

“We strongly believe terrorists have no religion and they do not deserve a burial,” said Maulana Zaheer Abbas Rizvi of the All India Shia Personal Law Board, a body for framing Muslim laws.

This is good, but it’s in the same league as the pastor of a large church in Oklahoma condemning Timothy McVeigh, with perhaps tepid support from his denomination, but not much from a national umbrella church organization like the National Council of Churches or the National Association of Evangelicals, let alone wider Christendom.   The Shia are a distinct minority in India at about 10% of the approximately 100 million Muslims.

It’s tempting to put all Muslim denunciations of terrorism in the same category, but it’s a mistake.  It is not unusual for (especially) moderate Muslims to denounce the murder of other Muslims by Islamists.   How many of those same people say anything about rocketing Israeli civilians?

Even CAIR “denounces” terrorism, all the while it supports it via the Holy Land Foundation’s funneling of cash to Hamas.  Denunciations of terrorism, lacking specifics of who did what to whom, are cheap.  Ask CAIR to condemn a specific jihadi’s murder of innocents and all you usually get is, “We condemn all terrorism.”  And that’s code for, “We’re not going to name names.  And Israel is a terrorist nation.”   A ringing moral condemnation does not begin with, “Yes, but…”

So regarding Muslim denunciations of bad behavior by Muslims, some discernment is required.  Yes, you can find the occasional scholar or Imam who denounces it (though it often lacks those specifics).  But is it a scholar who is important in the Muslim world, or merely one who is popular with western elites as a “moderate spokesperson”?  It is well documented that many Muslim spokespeople say one thing in English to western media, and something else entirely to their own people, in their own language.  When a “Christian” murders an abortionist (which happens about once every ten years in the USA), virtually EVERY Christian leader speaks out against it instantly, in practical terms, including very conservative anti-abortion activists, both Protestant and Catholic.  You don’t need to look for “moderate Christians,” or “Christian scholars,” or something.  The Jerry Falwells, James Dobsons, Bishop Chaputs, the Popes, Pat Robertsons, Christian leaders of every stripe, Christian academics, the National Council of Churches, the National Association of Evangelicals, virtually every pro-life group and conservative talk-show host will condemn in unison the murder of the abortionist “in the name of Christ.”  And this is the response to only ONE person’s murder “in the name of Christ,” about every ten years.

Is it possible to contend that there is anything even remotely close to this in the Muslim world?  Instead, we see people dancing in the street at the murder of thousands.  We see a “compassionately released” terrorist, reponsible for the deaths of hundreds, greeted as a conquering hero by national leaders and clerics (most recently in Lybia, but it’s a common pattern, isn’t it?).   Imagine if Timothy McVeigh had driven his diesel-laced fertilizer truck up to the Al-Hussein Mosque in Cairo, instead of the Federal Building in Oklahoma City, and said God told him to do it.  When the Egyptians released him on “compassionate parole” in 30 years (you’re laughing hysterically, right?), do you think his return would be celebrated by the President of the USA, national religious leaders, an adoring press, and public acclaim?

One “out” that is sometimes taken is to say that there is “no recognized single leader” in Islam.  But there isn’t in Christianity, either.  If you consulted with the Pope, the Archibishop of Canterbury, the National Council of Churches, the National Association of Evangelicals, maybe some worldwide Protestant denominations and a few national Orthodox churches, and they all agreed, you could reasonably say “Christianity has spoken.”  And they all condemn the murder of abortionists, even though most are pro-life (with the notable exception of the National Council of Churches organizations, of course, which mostly represent dying denominations).

As I understand it, there are four “schools” of Islamic jurisprudence in Sunni Islam, and two in Shia Islam.  Those schools have well-known leaders, perhaps two or three important ones in each case.  It would be most persuasive if THOSE leaders spoke in unison that the murder of non-Muslims by jihadis is immoral and unIslamic.  But people in the west don’t listen clearly.  Some of these guys have “expressed sympathy” for the families of the killed on 9/11.   That is not the same thing as a ringing condemnation of the acts of the terrorists, and the public assurance to their own people, in their own people’s native languages, that the acts were sin, were unIslamic, would have been condemned by Muhammed, and did not earn the perpetrators a place in paradise.  Has THAT happened?  Or should we accept the PR statements of “moderates” who know that they’re talking to the western media in English or French?  Does Islam even teach that it is a sin to lie to non-Muslims for the sake of protecting the reputation of Islam?   Google “Al-taqiyya.”  (Qur’an 3:28: “Let not the believers take for friends or helpers unbelievers rather than believers. If any do that, in nothing will there be help from Allah; except by way of precaution, that ye may guard yourselves from them”.  This verse has been used, it seems, to justify lying to infidels in the defense of Islam.)

Let’s be really clear.  Imagine that 20 “Christians” hijacked four airliners filled with people from Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt and Iran, and flew them into, say,

1) the Masjid al-Haram mosque in Mecca at full occupancy,

2) the Prophet’s Mosque in Medina during the hadj, and maybe

3) the Haghia Sophia in Istanbul during Friday prayers, along with aiming one at

4) the palace of the Saudi family in Riyadh.

The entire Christian world would rise up in breathless horror.  Can you imagine the SCOPE of the reaction, the revulsion, the utter shame, and the rejection by the Christian world that this had anything to do with Christ or Christianity?  Can you imagine the thousands of recriminations that Christians would direct at each other, the self-examination, the zillions of study sessions to reinforce traditional Christian teaching on murder that would result in churches, christian schools and colleges, etc.?

Would we be willing to settle for a nice statement from the pastor of the First Baptist Church in Dayton and an obscure professor of “Christian studies” somewhere that “we’re sorry for the victims’ families”?  Would we immediately put out PR statements hoping that this wouldn’t lead to “Christophobia” and “hate crimes” against innocent Christians?  Would we have to look for cherry picked Christian spokesmen to say “moderate” sounding things to the media?  And let’s be clear:  would Christians in ANY Muslim plurality nation be anywhere near as safe as Muslims have been in the USA after 9/11?

And would even the most conservative Bible Belt town in the South have a spontaneous dance of joy in the public square over the murder of those godless infidels, by right-thinking American boys with scout knives who hijacked airliners full of unbelievers?

I am waiting for an Islamic cleric in a prominent position in one of those six schools of Islamic jurisprudence to say that the killers of 9/11 are most likely in Hell, and belong there under Islamic teaching, as do those who are now emulating them.

And the notion that all six schools’ major representatives will make such a statement?  I suspect the Lord will return first.

Animal activists torch home of Novartis chief

Anti-vivisectionists in Austria are thought to be behind a string of attacks on the Swiss-based pharmaceuticals giant Novartis.

In the most recent attack, on Monday in the Austrian town of Bach, activists are believed to have set fire to the holiday home of the company’s chief executive officer, Daniel Vasella. A fire accelerant was found at the scene, suggesting it was started deliberately, reports Reuters.

Last week, activists desecrated the graves of Vasella’s parents, stealing an urn containing the remains of his mother. That echoes a similar incident in the UK in 2004, when activists dug up a coffin and stole the remains of a woman whose family had run a business breeding guinea pigs for research.

If this had been done to an abortionist, it would have made major headlines around the world, accompanied with bloodcurdling cries of “terrorist!” and dark comparisons to “religious fundamentalists” who have violent tendencies.  Of course, in this case, since the religion in question is earth-worshipping paganism, and the target was the CEO of an evil corporation (never mind that abortion is ALSO big business, VERY big business, but one that is considered holy by some people), no such connections will be made.

In Austria, the activists also left the message “Drop HLS Now” on the headstone of Vasella’s mother’s grave, a warning for Novartis to cease funding animal experiments at Huntingdon Life Sciences – a company in the UK that conducts animal experiments for pharmaceutical companies.

Huntingdon Life Sciences has been the focus of a huge campaign by activists whose leaders are now mostly in jail following trials last year. But Novartis says it has not worked with HLS for years.

About three weeks ago, graffiti attacking Novartis and Vasella was scrawled over the church in Vasella’s village of Risch in central Switzerland. According to CNBC, messages have also been left on roads (with video) near Vasella’s home, including: “Vasella is a killer”, “We are watching you”, “Death to Vasella”, and “We’ll be back”.

What’s really crazy: this sort of talk wouldn’t even qualify as “hate speech” under the USA hate speech laws that the Democrat congress is trying to ram through. That’s because people who support basic medical research that saves lives are not a protected group.

Exit question: did you hear about this story ANYWHERE else in the media? If you did, did it get anything like the play it would have gotten if it was about something done to an abortionist? This post is going to be posted about two weeks after the events. So there will have been plenty of time for the coverage to happen…. if anyone cares.

Class dismissed.

The American Islamic Conference, an organization that promotes western style pluralism to Muslims, and is an example of what a truly moderate Muslim organization looks like, has called on us to Boycott Nokia for Iran Crackdown

Nokia recently provided the Iranian regime with a “monitoring center” that enables security forces to tap cell phones, read e-mails, scramble text-messages, and interrupt calls. Nokia’s new surveillance system has enhanced the regime’s ability to crack down on dissent during recent protests. The monitoring technology is being deployed on a massive scale, with hundreds arrested thanks to Nokia’s technology.

From Google to Nokia, we have a problem with multinational communications companies aiding repressive regimes, apparently just to do more business.  Signup for the Nokia boycott here, and send a personalized message to Nokia at the same time.

For a broader approach to “divesting terror,” i.e., ceasing financial support of companies and organizations that do business with terror-related organizations, start your reading here.

Michael Yon has a really unique perspective on the US military and the war on Islamic terror in the Philippines. Here are several articles, with LOTS of photos, in the order he posted them. This is a war where US forces rarely fight, yet play a crucial role in helping and training local forces, and building bonds with the local citizenry. This, too, is the war on terrorism.  As usual, I’m very proud of our military.

If you want to have more background on this type of mission for our military, check out the book “Imperial Grunts” by Robert Kaplan.  In the meantime, hot off the presses from Michael Yon, with LOTS of fascinating photos at the links below:

Continue reading “Michael Yon on the war in the Philippines”

THE CASUALTY CON

Lying about civilian casualties is the one sure way to impede or even halt US (or Israeli) operations, to force such tight restrictions on our troops that they can’t win.

The casualty con’s so effective as both propaganda and tactic that terrorists everywhere have adopted the technique. It’s been so successful that our enemies long ago transitioned to the next phase: creating civilian casualties and blaming us.

It works. The media love the charge. Our troops and pilots are always guilty — even if proven innocent. Because so many on the left want us to be guilty.

Read it all. And approach future civilian casualty counts with appropriate skepticism.

The Rally for Human Rights and Freedeom

Times Square in Manhattan will be the site of a mass gathering of human rights leaders and organizations this coming Sunday, May 3rd, at noon. The gathering will call for defeat of radical Islam and heighten awareness about the danger radical Islam poses to human rights across the globe.

The “Rally for Human Rights and Freedom,” will be attended by Christian, Jewish, Buddhist, Hindu, Sikh and Muslim leaders and organizations. Sponsored by the Human Rights Coalition Against Radical Islam (HRCARI) and dozens of other partner organizations, the event will feature a special ceremony to honor the US Military, Homeland Security, police, firefighters, emergency workers and others who have defended the United States from terror. Peter Gadiel of the 9/11 Families.who lost his son on 9/11 will be present, as will a retired NYC police officer who lost his son-in-law on 9/11.

The May 3rd event will mark the kick-off event for a new grassroots global action network that is taking on the fight against Radical Islam. A HRCARI spokesperson notes, “As part of this initiative, we intend to educate elected officials to helps prevent the spread of Shariah Islamic law. We will work to publicize the threat of Radical Islamic terrorist groups and their allies, and endeavor to protect the right to freedom of religion, and freedom of speech in the face of those who seek to silence advocates of human rights against the threat of Radical Islam.”

HRCARI believes that Radical Islam is a worldwide threat against commonly accepted human rights and is the most urgent topic of our generation.

The HRCARI rally coalition (still in formation) includes the 911 Families, ACT Manhattan, Aish Center, Americans for a Safe Israel, Alliance for Interfaith Resistance, AMCHA-Coalition for Jewish Concerns, Americans for Peace & Tolerance, American Center for Democracy, Arabs for Israel, Atlas Shrugs, Chinese Community Relations Council, The David Project, Fordham University School of Law’s National Security and Law Society, Foundation Nepalese, Gathering of Eagles-NY, Hindu Human Rights Watch, Indian American Intellectuals Forum International Foundation of Bangladeshi Hindus, Iraq Model, Israpundit, Jewish Action Alliance, Mothers Against Terrorism, Muslims Against Sharia, Namdari Sikh Foundation, R.E.A.L Courage, Sikh Recognition Trust, Snapped Shot, StandWithUS, Sudan Freedom Walk, Women United: Code Red, Zionist Organization of America.

Let’s see, which groups are NOT protesting Radical Islam and joining in the Rally for Human Rights and Freedom.

1) ACORN
2) MoveOn.org
3) Most universities except Fordham
4) Any mainstream political party
5) Code PINK

This strikes me as something everyone should be able to get behind.  It would be lovely to see more Christian organizations.

More at the link above.

I was puzzled this morning while listening to the radio news.  That moral beacon for our time, Janet Napolitano, was issuing a statement concerning the recent outbreak of the new swine flu strain.  What puzzled me is why the Department of Homeland Security would be issuing statements concerning disease outbreaks.  Don’t we have a Federal Department of Health & Human Services, and under it’s auspices the Centers for Disease Control?  Call me silly but if there is going to be a government statement about a disease outbreak wouldn’t it come from the CDC?  Without doing any checking the whole thing seemed a bit strange to me.

So I decided to visit the Department of Homeland Security website and try to find an explanation.  This led me to a link called “National Strategy for Homeland Security”.  All well and good.  I find that there is overlap between CDC and Homeland Security, which I suppose makes sense in case of a biological or chemical attack (though I don’t think that is the case with swine flu).  What I found was more than an explanation about disease.  What I found was rather chilling, in fact.  At the bottom of the document was this statement:

In this spirit, it is important to acknowledge that this Strategic Plan is a living document and will be revised as needed to guide a dynamic Department and its ever-changing requirements.

I think I know what the government means when they call something a “living document”.  It means the government can interpret it to be anything they want it to be, anytime they want. (Similar applications have been used by members of the judiciary to find things in the Constitution that don’t exist.)

This certainly explains Napolitano’s statement about the swine flu.  It also explains her statement about “Right-Wing Extremists”. But I must admit I get a chill when I see the Department of Homeland Security also has a hand in immigration (wait.. don’t we have a Department of Immigration & Naturalization?).  Given this administrations propensity toward centralized governmental control, (read as “tyranny”)  is it unreasonable to think the Department of Homeland Security might simply declare amnesty for all illegal aliens claiming it would make it safer and easier to reduce potential illegal activity by members of the immigrant community?  That would certainly avoid those pesky votes required to pass amnesty legislation.  And I get a bigger chill when I read about these 70 new data collection centers known as Fusion Centers going up in every state, (do we have terrorist cells in every state?).  It is, after all,  just one small step to go from collecting data on potential terrorists to collecting data on dissenters, (or right-wing extremists – see my previous post).

Couple this with Obama’s almost entirely ignored campaign comment about a “civilian national security force” and I begin to understand a little more about how people become conspiracy theorists.

I admit I may still be suffering from a lingering case of post-election frustration.  Or do I see the framework of an Orwellian Big Brother system in the making that rivals anything the Soviet Union ever had?

Someone please tell me I’m paranoid and delusional!  (You don’t have to tell me I’m an extremist – Napolitano already took care of that!)