Tuesday, September 14, 2010
Sunday, September 12, 2010
Burn the Koran or the US Constitution.......?
Daniel Greenfield article: Burn the Koran or the Constitution
Burn the Koran or the Constitution
Posted: 11 Sep 2010 08:03 PM PDT
The media's coverage of the 9th anniversary of the Muslim murder of 3,000 people was overshadowed by their panicked coverage of the possibility that Terry Jones, the pastor of a tiny Florida church, might actually burn the Koran. Last week Newsweek ran Fareed Zakaria's piece insisting that Americans overreacted to 9/11. So instead the media showed us where their priorities lie, by shortchanging the dead, ignoring their killers and instead turning the pastor of a small Florida church into a villain for even talking about the possibility of torching a book, whose contents helped inspire 9/11. It's as if on Holocaust Memorial Day, the key topic of discussion was not the murder of 6,000,000 Jews, but a protester who wanted to get his Bic lighter close to Mein Kampf.
In the weeks leading up to the anniversary, the media had been sanctimoniously lecturing Americans that their sensitivities regarding Ground Zero were irrelevant in the face of a Muslim desire to put up a massive and completely unnecessary Islamic complex in the area. Constitutional freedoms, real or imagined, trumped any sensitivities. But when a Gainesville pastor proposed returning a couple of copies of the Koran back to the environment by way of lighter fluid, suddenly freedom of speech and freedom of religion, and all that other stuff created by dead white men before the age of Walter Kronkite and CNN, were irrelevant in face of Muslim sensitivities.
Time Magazine and USA Today both ran polls asking whether burning the Koran should be criminalized as a hate crime. CNN gave a forum to a Dr. Muhammad Tahir-ul-Qadri to argue that burning a Koran would have been worse than 9/11 and warned that such actions "should be stopped by the U.S. government at any cost". Now Dr. Muhammad Tahir-ul-Qadri shows in his article that while he may not know the difference between "principal" and "principle", or "ensure" and "insure", he understands exactly how to push for the imposition of the horrifying barbarity of Islamic Sharia law in America.
In Dr. Qadri's own words: "any act of an individual or group which... hurts the feelings of 1.5 billion Muslim should be stopped at any cost." There are no details of just what "any cost" would imply, but certainly Dr. Qadri argues that Freedom of Speech cannot be used to protect anything that offends Muslims. And since just about everything from eating on Ramadan to liquor in taxi cabs to ice cream cones that look like Allah, that means for September 11 you can kiss freedom goodbye. Or risk offending 1.5 billion Muslims. And we know what happens every time you offend the peaceful worshipers of the Religion of Peace. Riots, murder, terrorism and of course burning the American flag.
The same media which has consistently opposed a Constitutional amendment that bans flag burning (generally because they tend to agree with the flag burners), has now decided that burning the Koran should be a crime. Because burning the flag or killing thousands of Americans is no big deal-- but burning a Koran, someone should make a law about that.
Given a choice between burning the US Constitution or burning the Koran-- the media happily raises a lighter to the First Amendment. To them nothing American is sacred, but everything Islamic is.
Their defense of the Ground Zero Mosque was never about the Constitution. It was about kowtowing to the morally superior victims of American imperialism, starving in Dubai or Islamabad. If it helps them make their case to the people they think of as "The Great Unwashed", still clinging to their guns and religion, they will invoke the Constitution or the Magna Carta or an instruction manual from IKEA. From Obama on down, centuries of ideas about self-government are nothing but toys that they keep in the attic and bring out whenever particularly dull companies comes over. They don't believe in self-government themselves. That is something they have in common with their brethren ruling with an iron fist beneath the sickle and hammer, or the crescent and star. Ideas, not the referendum or a national legacy of rights and responsibilities, are their source of political power. What the people and the law has to say about it, doesn't matter.
And so we come down to the ugly choice. Burning the Koran or burning the Constitution. The left has already made its choice. You can walk down the streets of Europe's greatest cities and see what remains of centuries of national struggle, republican ambitions and millions dying so that their language and their culture might have the shelter of a nation of their own. Now America is being presented with the same option. Touch your head to the floor or risk offending 1.5 billion Muslims. And what is the value of freedom compared to the feelings of a bunch of followers of Mohammed, with a long string of zeroes trailing after them around the globe.
It isn't about whether burning someone else's sacred book is right or wrong. To appease Muslim sensitivities, the US military burned a large number of Christian bibles last year. The same media which is panting breathlessly at the notion that anybody would dare use a holy book for kindling, smiled approvingly then. Because the issue isn't about burning anyone's holy books, but offending Muslims. That is the one law we are left with, after all the others have been tossed into the fire. Thou Shalt Not Enrage the Mohammedan.
What offends Muslims is anyone who disobeys their laws. And if our laws are to always defer to their sensitivities, then that means we have replaced the United States Constitution... with the Koran.
The media has put on a show of being concerned about US troops as outraged murderous members of the Religion of Peace might try to kill US soldiers in the full fury of their peacefulness, but if the media hadn't focused attention on the story, how would all those peaceful bearded types in Pakistan have even known about the Koran burning? In 2005, Newsweek falsely reported that American personnel in Gitmo had flushed a Koran. There was no actual truth to the report, but still 15 people died in the rioting. Yet the smug blond talking head on CNN who berated Terry Jones for "having blood on his hands", did not accuse Newsweek of having blood on their hands, even though they actually did. Just as there are no "blood on their hands" accusations for the media outlets who broadcast the heavily edited Wikileaks tape, or any of the Bin Laden videos, or leaked sensitive information about US military operation.
Dead US soldiers, like the Constitution, are only of interest when they're a handy talking point. If dead US soldiers were of interest to the media or General Petraeus, perhaps there might be some interest in just how many US soldiers have died in Afghanistan because they were denied proper aerial support or the right to fire on their assailants under McChrystal and Petraeus's Rules of Engagement, which put the focus on appeasing Muslims, over the lives of American boys on the front line.
But like the Constitution, the bodies of American soldiers must burn, in the name of Muslim sensitivities.
In 1987, the National Endowment for the Arts partially funded Piss Christ, an image of a crucifix in urine. Two decades later in 2007, a Koran in a Pace University toilet triggered a 10 month investigation (in New York City, few murder cases are investigated half that long) and finally led to the arrest of one Stanislav Shmulevich on Hate Crime charges. Piss Christ, you see is a work of art. But Piss Koran is a hate crime. Similarly burning the Christian Bible soothes Muslim sensitivities. Burning the Koran inflames them. Killing US soldiers makes Muslims feel good. Killing Muslim terrorists inflames their sensitivities.
The Pace University case, in which a Muslim NYPD detective was assigned to pursue a student for a violation of Muslim law, served as a warning that the media chatter at Time, USA Today and CNN about making burning the Koran into a hate crime should not be taken lightly. Under the Constitution, burning the Koran is completely legal. But the Islamists and their Leftist allies have no regard for the Constitution. No more than they do for the lives of US soldiers or the dead at Ground Zero. They prefer Islamic law, with all its concomitant tyranny and brutality, over the freedoms and values of Americans.
Why do the hate the Constitution of ours so much? Because it is premised on legal equality and self-government, two sets of values anathema to the left and Islam. Under Islamic law, Christians, Jews, Hindus and all others are inferior to Muslims. Women are inferior to men. Koranic experts are superior to ordinary Muslims. First wives are superior to second wives. And so on it goes, a pyramid of discrimination and segregation, sanctioned and approved by Allah, Mohammed and Islam.
Under Islamic law, the sensitivities of Muslims trump the rights of non-Muslims. That is why in the Muslim world, no church or synagogue was allowed to be taller than a mosque. The Twin Towers which dared to be one of the world's tallest buildings, had to be knocked down to make way for Muslim skyscrapers in Dubai and Malaysia. Such is the arrogance and brutality of the Islamic worldview. And such are the horrors that it gives birth to.
Today at Ground Zero, a man did burn the Koran. He gave no interviews, only to say; "Americans should never be afraid to give their opinion". Such a view is not favored by Islam and the Liberal media, which is very determined that people should be afraid to give their opinions. And this last week has been a tremendous exercise in just that. In intimidating Americans. In intimidating America itself, with the threat of 1.5 billion Muslim sensitivities inflamed into a killing rage. Yet again.
But these handful of pages from the Koran were not the first thing burned at Ground Zero. Nine years ago, thousands of human beings were burned alive in the name of the Koran at this place. Pages from their books, their Rolodexes, their memos and their family photographs flew burning into the air, taking wing over the city and drifting down to the place where Imam Rauf and his gang of grinning henchmen would like to erect their symbol of contempt for the dead. The Muslim world did not tremble at the sensitivities of 300 million Americans when they burned 3,000 people at this spot. Like Fareed Zakaria, they either did not care, or they grinned in triumph, and danced in the streets.
Now when the moderate Muslims crawl out of their sewers to warn us that burning the Koran will lead to murder-- all they manage to do is show off their sick and hateful values. A value system that places a higher priority on printed pages than on the lives of non-Muslims. Such a value system cannot and must not be allowed to impose its will on the people of a free nation. Not on this sacred day, and not on any day. Ever.
Burn the Koran or the Constitution
Posted: 11 Sep 2010 08:03 PM PDT
The media's coverage of the 9th anniversary of the Muslim murder of 3,000 people was overshadowed by their panicked coverage of the possibility that Terry Jones, the pastor of a tiny Florida church, might actually burn the Koran. Last week Newsweek ran Fareed Zakaria's piece insisting that Americans overreacted to 9/11. So instead the media showed us where their priorities lie, by shortchanging the dead, ignoring their killers and instead turning the pastor of a small Florida church into a villain for even talking about the possibility of torching a book, whose contents helped inspire 9/11. It's as if on Holocaust Memorial Day, the key topic of discussion was not the murder of 6,000,000 Jews, but a protester who wanted to get his Bic lighter close to Mein Kampf.
In the weeks leading up to the anniversary, the media had been sanctimoniously lecturing Americans that their sensitivities regarding Ground Zero were irrelevant in the face of a Muslim desire to put up a massive and completely unnecessary Islamic complex in the area. Constitutional freedoms, real or imagined, trumped any sensitivities. But when a Gainesville pastor proposed returning a couple of copies of the Koran back to the environment by way of lighter fluid, suddenly freedom of speech and freedom of religion, and all that other stuff created by dead white men before the age of Walter Kronkite and CNN, were irrelevant in face of Muslim sensitivities.
Time Magazine and USA Today both ran polls asking whether burning the Koran should be criminalized as a hate crime. CNN gave a forum to a Dr. Muhammad Tahir-ul-Qadri to argue that burning a Koran would have been worse than 9/11 and warned that such actions "should be stopped by the U.S. government at any cost". Now Dr. Muhammad Tahir-ul-Qadri shows in his article that while he may not know the difference between "principal" and "principle", or "ensure" and "insure", he understands exactly how to push for the imposition of the horrifying barbarity of Islamic Sharia law in America.
In Dr. Qadri's own words: "any act of an individual or group which... hurts the feelings of 1.5 billion Muslim should be stopped at any cost." There are no details of just what "any cost" would imply, but certainly Dr. Qadri argues that Freedom of Speech cannot be used to protect anything that offends Muslims. And since just about everything from eating on Ramadan to liquor in taxi cabs to ice cream cones that look like Allah, that means for September 11 you can kiss freedom goodbye. Or risk offending 1.5 billion Muslims. And we know what happens every time you offend the peaceful worshipers of the Religion of Peace. Riots, murder, terrorism and of course burning the American flag.
The same media which has consistently opposed a Constitutional amendment that bans flag burning (generally because they tend to agree with the flag burners), has now decided that burning the Koran should be a crime. Because burning the flag or killing thousands of Americans is no big deal-- but burning a Koran, someone should make a law about that.
Given a choice between burning the US Constitution or burning the Koran-- the media happily raises a lighter to the First Amendment. To them nothing American is sacred, but everything Islamic is.
Their defense of the Ground Zero Mosque was never about the Constitution. It was about kowtowing to the morally superior victims of American imperialism, starving in Dubai or Islamabad. If it helps them make their case to the people they think of as "The Great Unwashed", still clinging to their guns and religion, they will invoke the Constitution or the Magna Carta or an instruction manual from IKEA. From Obama on down, centuries of ideas about self-government are nothing but toys that they keep in the attic and bring out whenever particularly dull companies comes over. They don't believe in self-government themselves. That is something they have in common with their brethren ruling with an iron fist beneath the sickle and hammer, or the crescent and star. Ideas, not the referendum or a national legacy of rights and responsibilities, are their source of political power. What the people and the law has to say about it, doesn't matter.
And so we come down to the ugly choice. Burning the Koran or burning the Constitution. The left has already made its choice. You can walk down the streets of Europe's greatest cities and see what remains of centuries of national struggle, republican ambitions and millions dying so that their language and their culture might have the shelter of a nation of their own. Now America is being presented with the same option. Touch your head to the floor or risk offending 1.5 billion Muslims. And what is the value of freedom compared to the feelings of a bunch of followers of Mohammed, with a long string of zeroes trailing after them around the globe.
It isn't about whether burning someone else's sacred book is right or wrong. To appease Muslim sensitivities, the US military burned a large number of Christian bibles last year. The same media which is panting breathlessly at the notion that anybody would dare use a holy book for kindling, smiled approvingly then. Because the issue isn't about burning anyone's holy books, but offending Muslims. That is the one law we are left with, after all the others have been tossed into the fire. Thou Shalt Not Enrage the Mohammedan.
What offends Muslims is anyone who disobeys their laws. And if our laws are to always defer to their sensitivities, then that means we have replaced the United States Constitution... with the Koran.
The media has put on a show of being concerned about US troops as outraged murderous members of the Religion of Peace might try to kill US soldiers in the full fury of their peacefulness, but if the media hadn't focused attention on the story, how would all those peaceful bearded types in Pakistan have even known about the Koran burning? In 2005, Newsweek falsely reported that American personnel in Gitmo had flushed a Koran. There was no actual truth to the report, but still 15 people died in the rioting. Yet the smug blond talking head on CNN who berated Terry Jones for "having blood on his hands", did not accuse Newsweek of having blood on their hands, even though they actually did. Just as there are no "blood on their hands" accusations for the media outlets who broadcast the heavily edited Wikileaks tape, or any of the Bin Laden videos, or leaked sensitive information about US military operation.
Dead US soldiers, like the Constitution, are only of interest when they're a handy talking point. If dead US soldiers were of interest to the media or General Petraeus, perhaps there might be some interest in just how many US soldiers have died in Afghanistan because they were denied proper aerial support or the right to fire on their assailants under McChrystal and Petraeus's Rules of Engagement, which put the focus on appeasing Muslims, over the lives of American boys on the front line.
But like the Constitution, the bodies of American soldiers must burn, in the name of Muslim sensitivities.
In 1987, the National Endowment for the Arts partially funded Piss Christ, an image of a crucifix in urine. Two decades later in 2007, a Koran in a Pace University toilet triggered a 10 month investigation (in New York City, few murder cases are investigated half that long) and finally led to the arrest of one Stanislav Shmulevich on Hate Crime charges. Piss Christ, you see is a work of art. But Piss Koran is a hate crime. Similarly burning the Christian Bible soothes Muslim sensitivities. Burning the Koran inflames them. Killing US soldiers makes Muslims feel good. Killing Muslim terrorists inflames their sensitivities.
The Pace University case, in which a Muslim NYPD detective was assigned to pursue a student for a violation of Muslim law, served as a warning that the media chatter at Time, USA Today and CNN about making burning the Koran into a hate crime should not be taken lightly. Under the Constitution, burning the Koran is completely legal. But the Islamists and their Leftist allies have no regard for the Constitution. No more than they do for the lives of US soldiers or the dead at Ground Zero. They prefer Islamic law, with all its concomitant tyranny and brutality, over the freedoms and values of Americans.
Why do the hate the Constitution of ours so much? Because it is premised on legal equality and self-government, two sets of values anathema to the left and Islam. Under Islamic law, Christians, Jews, Hindus and all others are inferior to Muslims. Women are inferior to men. Koranic experts are superior to ordinary Muslims. First wives are superior to second wives. And so on it goes, a pyramid of discrimination and segregation, sanctioned and approved by Allah, Mohammed and Islam.
Under Islamic law, the sensitivities of Muslims trump the rights of non-Muslims. That is why in the Muslim world, no church or synagogue was allowed to be taller than a mosque. The Twin Towers which dared to be one of the world's tallest buildings, had to be knocked down to make way for Muslim skyscrapers in Dubai and Malaysia. Such is the arrogance and brutality of the Islamic worldview. And such are the horrors that it gives birth to.
Today at Ground Zero, a man did burn the Koran. He gave no interviews, only to say; "Americans should never be afraid to give their opinion". Such a view is not favored by Islam and the Liberal media, which is very determined that people should be afraid to give their opinions. And this last week has been a tremendous exercise in just that. In intimidating Americans. In intimidating America itself, with the threat of 1.5 billion Muslim sensitivities inflamed into a killing rage. Yet again.
But these handful of pages from the Koran were not the first thing burned at Ground Zero. Nine years ago, thousands of human beings were burned alive in the name of the Koran at this place. Pages from their books, their Rolodexes, their memos and their family photographs flew burning into the air, taking wing over the city and drifting down to the place where Imam Rauf and his gang of grinning henchmen would like to erect their symbol of contempt for the dead. The Muslim world did not tremble at the sensitivities of 300 million Americans when they burned 3,000 people at this spot. Like Fareed Zakaria, they either did not care, or they grinned in triumph, and danced in the streets.
Now when the moderate Muslims crawl out of their sewers to warn us that burning the Koran will lead to murder-- all they manage to do is show off their sick and hateful values. A value system that places a higher priority on printed pages than on the lives of non-Muslims. Such a value system cannot and must not be allowed to impose its will on the people of a free nation. Not on this sacred day, and not on any day. Ever.
Friday, September 10, 2010
A Mosque, A Koran and A Preacher...........................
Point #1 the truth behind what the Ground Zero Mosque Imam is saying. Does anyone actually here his words? He is saying that America’s national security will be in jeopardy if the mosque is moved? So what he is actually saying is that Islam is an extremely radical and violent religion?
Point # 2 is that if a pastor in Gainesville Florida burns a Koran he will be putting our soldiers in harm’s way and jeopardize our national security? What we are actually discovering is how Radical and Violent Islam truly is?
"There are two kinds of pain, the pain of discipline and the pain of regret. You can avoid one but not both"
Point # 2 is that if a pastor in Gainesville Florida burns a Koran he will be putting our soldiers in harm’s way and jeopardize our national security? What we are actually discovering is how Radical and Violent Islam truly is?
"There are two kinds of pain, the pain of discipline and the pain of regret. You can avoid one but not both"
Monday, July 5, 2010
NASA Chief: Next Frontier Better Relations With Muslim World...?
NASA Administrator Charles Bolden said in a recent interview that his "foremost" mission as the head of America's space exploration agency is to improve relations with the Muslim world.
Though international diplomacy would seem well outside NASA's orbit, Bolden said in an interview with Al Jazeera that strengthening those ties was among the top tasks President Obama assigned him. He said better interaction with the Muslim world would ultimately advance space travel.
"When I became the NASA administrator -- or before I became the NASA administrator -- he charged me with three things. One was he wanted me to help re-inspire children to want to get into science and math, he wanted me to expand our international relationships, and third, and perhaps foremost, he wanted me to find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science ... and math and engineering," Bolden said in the interview.
The NASA administrator was in the Middle East last month marking the one-year anniversary since Obama delivered an address to Muslim nations in Cairo. Bolden spoke in June at the American University in Cairo -- in his interview with Al Jazeera, he described space travel as an international collaboration of which Muslim nations must be a part.
"It is a matter of trying to reach out and get the best of all worlds, if you will, and there is much to be gained by drawing in the contributions that are possible from the Muslim (nations)," he said. He held up the International Space Station as a model, praising the contributions there from the Russians and the Chinese.
However, Bolden denied the suggestion that he was on a diplomatic mission -- in a distinctly non-diplomatic role.
"Not at all. It's not a diplomatic anything," he said.
He said the United States is not going to travel beyond low-Earth orbit on its own and that no country is going to make it to Mars without international help.
Bolden has faced criticism this year for overseeing the cancellation of the agency's Constellation program, which was building new rockets and spaceships capable of returning astronauts to the moon. Stressing the importance of international cooperation in future missions, Bolden told Al Jazeera that the moon, Mars and asteroids are still planned destinations for NASA.
Though international diplomacy would seem well outside NASA's orbit, Bolden said in an interview with Al Jazeera that strengthening those ties was among the top tasks President Obama assigned him. He said better interaction with the Muslim world would ultimately advance space travel.
"When I became the NASA administrator -- or before I became the NASA administrator -- he charged me with three things. One was he wanted me to help re-inspire children to want to get into science and math, he wanted me to expand our international relationships, and third, and perhaps foremost, he wanted me to find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science ... and math and engineering," Bolden said in the interview.
The NASA administrator was in the Middle East last month marking the one-year anniversary since Obama delivered an address to Muslim nations in Cairo. Bolden spoke in June at the American University in Cairo -- in his interview with Al Jazeera, he described space travel as an international collaboration of which Muslim nations must be a part.
"It is a matter of trying to reach out and get the best of all worlds, if you will, and there is much to be gained by drawing in the contributions that are possible from the Muslim (nations)," he said. He held up the International Space Station as a model, praising the contributions there from the Russians and the Chinese.
However, Bolden denied the suggestion that he was on a diplomatic mission -- in a distinctly non-diplomatic role.
"Not at all. It's not a diplomatic anything," he said.
He said the United States is not going to travel beyond low-Earth orbit on its own and that no country is going to make it to Mars without international help.
Bolden has faced criticism this year for overseeing the cancellation of the agency's Constellation program, which was building new rockets and spaceships capable of returning astronauts to the moon. Stressing the importance of international cooperation in future missions, Bolden told Al Jazeera that the moon, Mars and asteroids are still planned destinations for NASA.
Sunday, June 13, 2010
ISLAMABAD (AFP) – Pakistani Taliban leader Hakimullah Mehsud has vowed to attack major US cities in two purported new videos released months after his reported killing in a US missile strike.
The videos emerged after an attempted car bombing in New York City, for which his faction claimed responsibility in a third video, and provided the most substantial evidence so far that he survived a US attempt on his life.
Mehsud threatened to retaliate against the United States for the killing of Islamist militant leaders, appearing in a nine-minute video allegedly made on April 4, after his supposed death in January.
The videos spotlight the Islamist militant threat in nuclear-armed Pakistan, which the United States has put on the front line of the war on Al-Qaeda and where Pakistani troops have waged multiple offensives against the Taliban.
"The time is very near when our fedayeen will attack the American states in the major cities," said Mehsud, who was seen flanked by two armed and masked men in the video released by the SITE and IntelCenter monitoring groups.
The video is the first showing Mehsud since January and was issued on the heels of a claim by Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan that it was behind the attempted bombing in New York's Time Square on Saturday.
US officials believed Mehsud was likely killed in a US drone strike in northwestern Pakistan on January 14, but the Taliban denied his death and Pakistani intelligence officials said last week that he had survived.
The Islamist leader, who took over leadership of the TTP last August, rubbished reports of his death as an "open lie and propaganda".
"Inshaallah (God willing) very soon in some days or a month's time, the Muslim ummah (world) will see the fruits of most successful attacks of our fedayeen in USA," Mehsud said.
He made similar remarks in an audio message in another TTP video that was apparently recorded on April 19 and features Mehsud's face next to a map of the United States showing multiple explosions across the country.
IntelCenter, a US-based group that monitors Islamist websites, said it believed all the TTP videos issued since the New York bomb scare were credible and said there was a "high threat of further attack" in days and weeks ahead.
But the authorities in New York discounted an Al-Qaeda link and police said they were hunting a white man seen near the bomb in Times Square.
The TTP claim of responsibility also met with scepticism in Pakistan, where the military has claimed the faction's capability was dented following an offensive against its South Waziristan nerve centre last year.
If the allegation -- made by the TTP's master trainer of suicide bombers Qari Hussain and broadcast in a video on YouTube -- was authenticated, it would be the first attack by the TTP against a target in the United States.
Mehsud assumed leadership of Pakistan's Taliban, which is blamed for the deaths of thousands of people in attacks at home, after his predecessor Baitullah Mehsud was killed in a US drone strike in August 2009.
The January US missile attack was launched after Mehsud appeared in a video alongside the Jordanian double agent who blew himself up on a US base in eastern Afghanistan in December that killed seven CIA agents.
Islamabad has offered a reward of 50 million rupees (about 590,000 dollars) for information leading to the militant's capture, dead or alive.
Mehsud, believed to be aged about 31, also warned members of NATO and other allies to abandon the United States, telling them: "You will face even worse humiliation, destruction and defeat than America itself."
The videos coincided with a visit to Pakistan by General David Petraeus, the commander of the US wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, who held talks with Pakistan's army chief of staff General Ashfaq Kayani, officials said.
The Pentagon said last week Mehsud was no longer running the TTP.
Rahimullah Yusufzai, one of Pakistan's most prominent experts on the tribal belt where the Taliban are holed up, said the emergence of Mehsud in the videos was embarrassing for the US and Pakistani security establishments.
"He and the TTP are closely now aligned with Al-Qaeda and they're making efforts for joint attacks, so he should be taken seriously. Although I don't think he alone or TTP has the capacity to launch attacks in the US," he said.
Meanwhile, a US drone strike on Monday killed two militants in a vehicle in Marcikhel, an Al-Qaeda and Taliban stronghold in Pakistan's northwest tribal belt, local security officials said.
The videos emerged after an attempted car bombing in New York City, for which his faction claimed responsibility in a third video, and provided the most substantial evidence so far that he survived a US attempt on his life.
Mehsud threatened to retaliate against the United States for the killing of Islamist militant leaders, appearing in a nine-minute video allegedly made on April 4, after his supposed death in January.
The videos spotlight the Islamist militant threat in nuclear-armed Pakistan, which the United States has put on the front line of the war on Al-Qaeda and where Pakistani troops have waged multiple offensives against the Taliban.
"The time is very near when our fedayeen will attack the American states in the major cities," said Mehsud, who was seen flanked by two armed and masked men in the video released by the SITE and IntelCenter monitoring groups.
The video is the first showing Mehsud since January and was issued on the heels of a claim by Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan that it was behind the attempted bombing in New York's Time Square on Saturday.
US officials believed Mehsud was likely killed in a US drone strike in northwestern Pakistan on January 14, but the Taliban denied his death and Pakistani intelligence officials said last week that he had survived.
The Islamist leader, who took over leadership of the TTP last August, rubbished reports of his death as an "open lie and propaganda".
"Inshaallah (God willing) very soon in some days or a month's time, the Muslim ummah (world) will see the fruits of most successful attacks of our fedayeen in USA," Mehsud said.
He made similar remarks in an audio message in another TTP video that was apparently recorded on April 19 and features Mehsud's face next to a map of the United States showing multiple explosions across the country.
IntelCenter, a US-based group that monitors Islamist websites, said it believed all the TTP videos issued since the New York bomb scare were credible and said there was a "high threat of further attack" in days and weeks ahead.
But the authorities in New York discounted an Al-Qaeda link and police said they were hunting a white man seen near the bomb in Times Square.
The TTP claim of responsibility also met with scepticism in Pakistan, where the military has claimed the faction's capability was dented following an offensive against its South Waziristan nerve centre last year.
If the allegation -- made by the TTP's master trainer of suicide bombers Qari Hussain and broadcast in a video on YouTube -- was authenticated, it would be the first attack by the TTP against a target in the United States.
Mehsud assumed leadership of Pakistan's Taliban, which is blamed for the deaths of thousands of people in attacks at home, after his predecessor Baitullah Mehsud was killed in a US drone strike in August 2009.
The January US missile attack was launched after Mehsud appeared in a video alongside the Jordanian double agent who blew himself up on a US base in eastern Afghanistan in December that killed seven CIA agents.
Islamabad has offered a reward of 50 million rupees (about 590,000 dollars) for information leading to the militant's capture, dead or alive.
Mehsud, believed to be aged about 31, also warned members of NATO and other allies to abandon the United States, telling them: "You will face even worse humiliation, destruction and defeat than America itself."
The videos coincided with a visit to Pakistan by General David Petraeus, the commander of the US wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, who held talks with Pakistan's army chief of staff General Ashfaq Kayani, officials said.
The Pentagon said last week Mehsud was no longer running the TTP.
Rahimullah Yusufzai, one of Pakistan's most prominent experts on the tribal belt where the Taliban are holed up, said the emergence of Mehsud in the videos was embarrassing for the US and Pakistani security establishments.
"He and the TTP are closely now aligned with Al-Qaeda and they're making efforts for joint attacks, so he should be taken seriously. Although I don't think he alone or TTP has the capacity to launch attacks in the US," he said.
Meanwhile, a US drone strike on Monday killed two militants in a vehicle in Marcikhel, an Al-Qaeda and Taliban stronghold in Pakistan's northwest tribal belt, local security officials said.
Friday, May 28, 2010
Tickets................................!
This was written by a Mexican who is now a naturalized US Citizen, and I think it's a great explanation of the illegal immigration issue.
Here is the quote:
"If you had tickets to a sports event, concert, Disneyland, or for an airline flight, and when you got to your assigned seat you found someone else was in that seat, what would you do? You would call for a person in charge of ticket checking and have the person in your seat removed. You would properly be asked to show your ticket, and you would gladly and proudly do so, for you have bought and paid for that seat. The person in your seat would also be asked for a ticket, which they would not be able to produce. They would be called “gate crashers” and they would properly be removed.
Now in this huge stadium called the USA we have had millions of gate crashers. We have been asking security to check for tickets and remove the gate crashers. We have been asking security to have better controls in checking at the door. We have asked security to lock the back doors. Security has failed us. They are still looking the other way. They are afraid to ask to see the tickets. Many people say there is unlimited seating, and whether there is or not, no one should be allowed in for free while the rest of us pay full price!
In “section AZ”, of “Stadium USA”, we have had enough of the failures of Security. We have decided to do our own ticket checking, and properly remove those who do not have tickets. Now it seems very strange to me that so many people in the other 49 “sections”, and even many in our own “section” do not want tickets checked, or even to be asked to show their ticket! Even the head of Security is chastising us, while not doing his own job which he has sworn to do.
My own ticket has been bought and paid for, so I am proudly going to show it when asked to do so. I have a right to my seat, and I want the gate crashers to be asked to show their tickets too. The only reason that I can imagine anyone objecting to being asked for their ticket is that they are in favor of gate crashing, and all of the illegal activities that go with it, such as drug smuggling, gang wars, murder, human smuggling for profit, and many more illegal and inhumane acts that we are trying to prevent with our new legislation. Is that what I am hearing from all of the protestors such as Phoenix Mayor Gordon, US Rep. Grijalva, even President Obama? If you are not in favor of showing tickets, (proof of citizenship, passport, green card, or other legal document) when asked, as I would do proudly, then you must be condoning those illegal activities."
Written by a US Citizen, Globe, Arizona.
Here is the quote:
"If you had tickets to a sports event, concert, Disneyland, or for an airline flight, and when you got to your assigned seat you found someone else was in that seat, what would you do? You would call for a person in charge of ticket checking and have the person in your seat removed. You would properly be asked to show your ticket, and you would gladly and proudly do so, for you have bought and paid for that seat. The person in your seat would also be asked for a ticket, which they would not be able to produce. They would be called “gate crashers” and they would properly be removed.
Now in this huge stadium called the USA we have had millions of gate crashers. We have been asking security to check for tickets and remove the gate crashers. We have been asking security to have better controls in checking at the door. We have asked security to lock the back doors. Security has failed us. They are still looking the other way. They are afraid to ask to see the tickets. Many people say there is unlimited seating, and whether there is or not, no one should be allowed in for free while the rest of us pay full price!
In “section AZ”, of “Stadium USA”, we have had enough of the failures of Security. We have decided to do our own ticket checking, and properly remove those who do not have tickets. Now it seems very strange to me that so many people in the other 49 “sections”, and even many in our own “section” do not want tickets checked, or even to be asked to show their ticket! Even the head of Security is chastising us, while not doing his own job which he has sworn to do.
My own ticket has been bought and paid for, so I am proudly going to show it when asked to do so. I have a right to my seat, and I want the gate crashers to be asked to show their tickets too. The only reason that I can imagine anyone objecting to being asked for their ticket is that they are in favor of gate crashing, and all of the illegal activities that go with it, such as drug smuggling, gang wars, murder, human smuggling for profit, and many more illegal and inhumane acts that we are trying to prevent with our new legislation. Is that what I am hearing from all of the protestors such as Phoenix Mayor Gordon, US Rep. Grijalva, even President Obama? If you are not in favor of showing tickets, (proof of citizenship, passport, green card, or other legal document) when asked, as I would do proudly, then you must be condoning those illegal activities."
Written by a US Citizen, Globe, Arizona.
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Mexican President out of line Democrats applaud……..!
Rep. Tom McClintock (a Republican Congressman from CA) gave this speech in response to President Calderon's lecture to Congress, given in the House Chamber in Washington, DC on May 20, 2010.
M. Speaker:
I rise to take strong exception to the speech of the President of Mexico while in this chamber today.
The Mexican government has made it very clear for many years that it holds American sovereignty in contempt and President Calderon's behavior as a guest of the Congress confirms and underscores this attitude. It is highly inappropriate for the President of Mexico to lecture Americans on American immigration policy, just as it would be for Americans to lecture Mexico on its laws.
It is obvious that President Calderon does not understand the nature of America or the purpose of our immigration law.
Unlike Mexico's immigration law -- which is brutally exclusionary – the purpose of America's law is not to keep people out. It is to assure that as people come to the United States, they do so with the intention of becoming Americans and of raising their children as Americans. Unlike Mexico, our nation embraces immigration and what makes that possible is assimilation.
A century ago President Teddy Roosevelt put it this way. He said: "In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an American and nothing but an American...There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language ... and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."
That is how we have built one great nation from the people of all the nations of the world. The largest group of immigrants now comes from Mexico. A recent RAND study discovered that during most of the 20th Century, while our immigration laws were actually enforced, assimilation worked and made possible the swift attainment of the American dream for millions of immigrants seeking to escape conditions in Mexico.
That is the broader meaning of our nation's motto, "E Pluribus Unum" - from many people, one people, the American people. But there is now an element in our political structure that seeks to undermine that concept of "E Pluribus Unum." It seeks to hyphenate Americans, to develop linguistic divisions, to assign rights and preferences based on race and ethnicity, and to elevate devotion to foreign ideologies and traditions, while at the same time denigrating American culture, American values and American founding principles.
In order to do so, they know that they have to stop the process of assimilation. In order to do that, they must undermine our immigration laws.
It is an outrage that a foreign head of state would appear in this chamber and actively seek to do so. And it is a disgrace that he would be cheered on from the left wing of the White House and by many Democrats in this Congress.
Arizona has not adopted a new immigration law. All it has done is to enforce existing law that President Obama refuses to enforce. It is hardly a radical policy to suggest that if an officer on a routine traffic stop encounters a driver with no driver's license, no passport, and who doesn't speak English, that maybe that individual might be here illegally.
And to those who say we must reform our immigration laws - I reply that we don't need to reform them - we need to enforce them. Just as every other government does. Just as Mexico does!
Above all, this is a debate of, by and for the American people. If President Calderon wishes to participate in that debate, I invite him to obey our immigration laws, apply for citizenship, do what 600,000 LEGAL immigrants to our nation are doing right now, learn our history and our customs, and become an American. And then he will have every right to participate in that debate.
Until then, I would politely invite him to have the courtesy while a guest of this Congress to abide by the fundamental rules of diplomacy between civilized nations not to meddle in each other's domestic debates.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
