current events from a variety of sources.
CONCERN ABOUT IMPORTING BIBLES
6,500 Bibles Confiscated in
8/14/2011 Iran (Mohabat News) –
According to the Iranian
Christian News Agency “Mohabat News” Doctor Majid Abhari, advisor to
issues committee of the parliament in Iran, has announced the seizure
thousand five hundred copies of the holy bible in the way between the
Zanjan and abhar in north-west of Iran.
He also said that “these missionaries
with reliance on huge
money and propaganda are trying to deviate our youth.” In an interview
government news agency *(Mehr) he added: “with regard to the activities
these Christian missionaries to deceive people specially youngsters,
begun a huge campaign by spending huge sums and false propaganda for
He did not present any more details
about the seizure of
6500 gospels and said, “these books were made with the best paper in
in pocket size. He added, “The important point in this issue that
considered by intelligence, judicial and religious agencies is that all
religions are strengthening their power to confront Islam, otherwise
this huge number of bibles mean?
Prior to this, in November of 2010,
police officers and
revolutionary guards seized 300 bibles from a bus after its inspection
and in a
shameful action burned them all in the village of “darishk”.
Insulting the Christian bible is
continuation of an organized campaign by agencies that view
propaganda on the top of their agenda. There have
always been major concerns among Islamic
republic officials about conversions to Christianity among people. This
after three decades of expensive Islamic propaganda and a generation
been grown up in Islamic teaching and is facing this change in thought.
Islamic republic considers itself the responsible guide for people's
So what is their fear of the importation and distribution of
This article was found at mohatat
'Darwinian,' not 'Christian'
manifesto shows Breivik
© 2011 WND
WASHINGTON – A review of Anders Behring
Breivik's 1,500-page manifesto shows the media's quick characterization
Norwegian terrorist as a "Christian" may be as incorrect as it was to
call Oklahoma City
bomber Timothy McVeigh one.
Breivik was arrested over the weekend, charged with a pair of
in and near Oslo, Norway,
including a bombing in the capital city that killed 7 and a shooting
spree at a
youth political retreat on the island of Utoya that killed more
than 80 victims.
Piecing together Breivik's various posts on the Internet, many
have characterized the terrorist – who says he was upset over the
multiculturalist policies stemming from Norway's Labour Party – as a
"right-wing, Christian fundamentalist."
Yet, while McVeigh rejected God altogether, Breivik writes in
that he is not religious, has doubts about God's existence, does not
does assert the primacy of Europe's
"Christian culture" as well as his own pagan Nordic culture.
Breivik instead hails Charles Darwin, whose evolutionary
theories stand in
contrast to the claims of the Bible, and affirms: "As for the Church
science, it is essential that science takes an undisputed precedence
biblical teachings. Europe has always been the
cradle of science, and it must always continue to be that way.
personal relationship with God, I guess I'm not an excessively
religious man. I
am first and foremost a man of logic. However, I am a supporter of a
monocultural Christian Europe."
The terrorist also candidly admits he finds no support within
Catholic or Protestant churches for his violent ideas.
"I trust that the future leadership of a European cultural
hegemony in Europe will ensure that the
current Church leadership are replaced and the systems somewhat
he writes. "We must have a Church leadership who supports a future
with the intention of liberating the Balkans, Anatolia and creating
Christian states in the Middle East. Efforts
should be made to facilitate the de-construction of the Protestant
whose members should convert back to Catholicism. The Protestant Church
had an important role once, but its original goals have been
have contributed to reform the Catholic Church as well. Europe
should have a united Church lead [sic] by a just and non-suicidal pope
willing to fight for the security of his subjects, especially in
While Breivik says he considers himself "100-percent
he also expresses pride in his genealogical roots.
"I am very proud of my Viking heritage," he writes. "My name,
Breivik, is a location name from northern Norway, and can be dated back
even before the Viking era. Behring is a pre-Christian Germanic name,
derived from Behr, the Germanic word for Bear (or 'those who are
And while characterizing himself as "Christian" and
"Protestant," Breivik says he supports "a reformation of
Protestantism leading to it being absorbed by Catholisism." [sic]
Likewise, media reports frequently characterized McVeigh as a
"Christian," though he adamantly denied any religious beliefs or
convictions – placing his faith in science.
Breivik adds, "I went from moderately agnostic to moderately
Religious worship and study is never noted in the manifesto as
Breivik's routine in preparing for his mission of mass murder.
Breivik also points out that his association with Christian
is one of political expedience rather than religious commitment or
"My choice has nothing to do with the fact that I am not proud
own traditions and heritage," he explains. "My choice was based
purely pragmatism. All Europeans are in this boat together, so we must
more moderate platform that can appeal to a great number of Europeans –
preferably up to 50 percent (realistically up to 35 percent)."
Breivik also claims membership in the Freemasons, which many
consider to be a cultic organization. More specifically, he calls
Over and over again, Breivik goes out of his way to make clear
to readers of
his manifesto that he is not motivated by Christian faith.
"I'm not going to pretend I'm a very religious person, as that
a lie," he says. … Religion is a crutch for many weak people, and many
embrace religion for self-serving reasons as a source for drawing
strength (to feed their weak emotional state [for] example during
death, poverty etc.). Since I am not a hypocrite, I'll say directly
is my agenda as well. However, I have not yet felt the need to ask God
Article can be read in its entirety: Terrorist
proclaimed himself 'Darwinian,' not 'Christian' http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=325765#ixzz1TDs4Vp9Q
weapon could sink NY same-sex marriage
By Drew Zahn
© 2011 WND
A pro-family lobbying organization in New York is challenging
the state's new law legalizing
same-sex marriage, claiming improper procedure and back-room payoffs
render the law "null and void."
In a lawsuit filed in the Supreme Court of the State of New
York, officers of New Yorkers for
Constitutional Freedoms argue that the state's Marriage Equality Act
only with the help of suspended voting rules, shady campaign
a violation of the New York State Open Meeting Laws.
"In what many are heralding as a big step forward for gay
the lawsuit charges, "others are questioning whether the corrupt
process by which the Act passed renders the entire Act a nullity."
Josh Vlasto, a spokesman for Governor Andrew Cuomo, blasted
the suit as
"without merit," but Mathew Staver, founder and chairman of Liberty
Counsel and dean of Liberty University School of Law, disagrees.
"Back room tactics were rampant in the passage of this law,"
Staver wrote in a statement announcing Liberty Counsel's assistance in
filing of the suit. "New York
law requires that the government be open and transparent to keep
officials responsible. When government operates in secret and freezes
very people it is supposed to represent, the entire system fails. … The
should be set aside and the process should begin again to allow the
voice in the process."
Specifically, the lawsuit alleges the Act became law through:
- Meetings that violated the
state's open meeting laws, including a closed-door gathering reported
by the New York Times in which billionaire and New York City Mayor
Michael Bloomberg lobbied with Republicans to vote for the Act;
- The suspension of normal Senate
voting procedures to prevent senators who opposed the bill from
- Failure to follow Senate
procedures that require a bill must be sent to appropriate committees
prior to being placed before the full Senate for a vote;
- Governor Cuomo's violation of a
constitutionally mandated three-day review period before the
Legislature votes on a bill by issuing a "message of necessity";
- A private dinner with Republican
senators at the governor's mansion, with the public and press excluded,
in which Governor Cuomo attempted to persuade passage of the Act;
- Fulfilled promises by elected
officials and Wall Street financiers to make large campaign
contributions to Republican senators who switched their vote from
opposing to supporting the Act.
The New York Daily News reported that Bloomberg, indeed,
$10,000 apiece to the campaigns of four Republican senators who voted
of same-sex marriage.
Βloomberg aide Micah Leaher told the paper, "The mayor said he
support Senate Republicans who stood up – and he did."
"It is unfortunate that state senators chose to protect their
interests, rather than the people they were elected to represent," said
Rev. Jason J. McGuire, executive director of New Yorkers for
Freedoms, in a statement. "Some of the players may have changed, but it
looks like same old Albany
game. It is time the curtain be pulled back and the disinfecting light
government shine upon the Cuomo administration and our state
Read more: New weapon could sink N.Y. same-sex
that's intelligent or
informed about Time magazine editor Richard Stengel's article "One
Document, Under Siege" (June 23, 2011). It contains many grossly
statements about our Constitution. If I believed in conspiracies, I'd
Stengel's article is part of a leftist agenda to undermine respect for
founding values of our nation.
Stengel says: "The
framers were not
gods and were not infallible. Yes, they gave us, and the world, a
the protection of democratic freedoms — freedom of speech, assembly,
but they also gave us the idea that a black person was three-fifths of
being, that women were not allowed to vote and that South Dakota should
the same number of Senators as California, which is kind of crazy. And
even going to mention the Electoral College."
My column last week
addressed the compromise
whereby each slave was counted as three-fifths of a person for the
determining representation in the House of Representatives and
College. Had slaves been counted as whole people, slaveholding states
have had much greater political power. I agree the framers were not
were not infallible, but they had far greater wisdom and principle than
The framers held
democracy and majority rule
in deep contempt. As a matter of fact, the term democracy appears in
our founding documents. John Adams said: "Remember, democracy never
long. It soon wastes, exhausts and murders itself. There never was a
yet that did not commit suicide." Stengel's majoritarian vision sees it
anti-democratic that South Dakota and California both have two
the framers wanted to reduce the chances that highly populated states
roughshod over thinly populated states. They established the Electoral
to serve the same purpose in determining the presidency.
recognized that most human
abuses were the result of government. As Thomas Paine said,
even in its best state, is but a necessary evil." Because of their
distrust, the framers sought to keep the federal government limited in
power. Their distrust of Congress is seen in the language used
Constitution. The Bill of Rights says Congress shall not abridge, shall
infringe, shall not deny and other shall-nots, such as disparage,
deny. If the founders did not believe Congress would abuse our
natural, rights, they would not have provided those protections
distrust for government is
found in the Constitution's separation of powers, checks and balances,
several anti-majoritarian provisions, such as the Electoral College,
vote to override a veto and the requirement that three-quarters of
legislatures ratify changes to the Constitution.
Stengel says, "If
the Constitution was
intended to limit the federal government, it sure doesn't say so." That
statement is beyond ignorance. The 10th Amendment reads: "The powers
delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited
by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the
Stengel's article is
five pages online, and
I've only commented on the first. There's also little in the remaining
that reflects understanding and respect for our nation's most important
Walter Williams is a
wise and thoughtful economist and
editorialist who has had
a lot to say about America
and the Constitution over the years. This article can be found in its
or visit the archives of Walter Williams at
'defiance' of Constitution
if the executive branch rules by decree?'
By Bob Unruh
© 2011 WND
An organization that represents the 75 percent of
citizens who want
more control over illegal immigration is calling for the impeachment of
Obama over his involvement in the transfer of weapons to Mexican drug
his efforts to provide amnesty to illegal aliens.
"President Obama is no longer the legitimate president
said William Gheen, president of Americans for Legal Immigration PAC,
calling for the action today.
"By arming drug and human smugglers with assault
used to kill American and Mexican citizens and police forces, and by
amnesty for illegal aliens which has been rejected by both the Congress
American public more than eight times, Obama has committed a form of
against the United States and must be removed from office by Congress,"
His call joins a chorus of other voices who already
expressed the idea.
Those comments have come from a number of columnists and commentators,
member of Congress, a former member of Congress and retired military
Even Vice President Joe Biden, then a senator, at one point said he
support impeachment of a president who misuses the executive power to
nation into a war.
Gheen cited the developing "Operation Gunrunner"
federal agents had gun shops sell weapons to customers suspected of
Mexican drug gangs. He also pointed ot Obama's "recent edict
federal employees to establish a form of amnesty for illegal aliens in
of the Congress, existing federal laws, and the U.S. Constitution."
Gheen noted Obama's ICE director, John Morton, issued
June 17 to all
ICE field office directors, special agents-in-charge and chief counsel,
authorizing them to decline to remove illegal aliens who meet the
qualifications for amnesty under the DREAM Act amnesty – which has
repeatedly in Congress.
He also said congressional investigations have
ATF and Justice Department have been supplying assault weapons to the
cartels that import most of America's
cocaine, methamphetamine, and illegal immigrants."
Americans for Legal Immigration PAC is a national
than 40,000 supporters who represent the majority of Americans who want
existing immigration laws enforced, Gheen said.
He said the issue is that the president "made it clear
public that he does not care what they think, what the current federal
are, what the U.S. Constitution says, or what Congress has ratified."
"Congress must take immediate action to stop Obama or
American Republic will fall. What use are
elections, candidates, or the Congress, if the executive branch rules
decree?" he said.
"Never before in the history of the United States has
the White House displayed less concern for the Constitution and the
rule of law
than Barack Obama. It's about time somebody said it: It's time to
Obama," Farah wrote.
Attorney Larry Klayman, a former Justice Department
prosecutor, founder of
Judicial Watch and now of Freedom Watch, agreed.
Klayman cited Obama's decision to refuse to defend the
Marriage Act, his pursuit of Arizona in court over its decision to
citizens from illegal aliens invading the state, his "visceral hatred
subversion of the state of Israel" and others.
The first statement from a member of Congress on the
came from U.S.
Rep. Trent Franks, R-Ariz., who responded to this question from Think
"I know Newt Gingrich has came out (sic) and said if they don't reverse
course [regarding trials for terror suspects] here, we ought to be
about possibly impeaching either Attorney General [Eric] Holder or even
President Obama to try to get them to reverse course. Do you think that
something you would support?"
Franks replied: "If it could gain the collective
called for Eric Holder to repudiate the policy to try terrorists within
civil courts, or resign. So it just seems like that they have an
ability to get it wrong on almost all fronts."
also reported that former congressman and GOP presidential candidate
Tancredo said for current members of the House and Senate to uphold
to defend the United States against enemies "foreign and domestic,"
they need to file impeachment charges against Obama.
Tancredo wrote in an opinion piece in
the Washington Times that Obama's "refusal to live up to his own oath
of office – which includes the duty to defend the United States against
invasion – requires senators and representatives to live up to their
Members of Congress must defend our nation against all enemies, foreign
domestic. Today, that means bringing impeachment charges against Mr.
Above are just several examples of a long string of voices decrying executive neglect of
upholding the oath to defend, and as
well as abuses of power that point to the impeachment remedy. To read
article in its entirety visit World Net Daily at:
asks IRS to probe 'Muslim Mafia'
Cites letter indicating
sought funding from Libya's
Posted: June 28, 2011
© 2011 WND World Net Daily
Responding to the IRS removal of tax-exempt status for
American-Islamic Relations, a Virginia
congressman has asked the federal agency to investigate whether the
Muslim lobby group has "illegally received or solicited funds from
governments or agents."
Republican Rep. Frank Wolf said in a letter
IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman that he wants to resolve the
whether foreign and potentially hostile governments have funded CAIR,
named an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terror-finance case
in U.S. history.
Wolf brought to the IRS's attention a copy of a
from CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad to Libyan dictator Muammar
which Awad appears to solicit money for a CAIR project.
"I am concerned that Awad and CAIR may be soliciting –
funds from other unsavory foreign governments and organizations,
that may be sponsors of terror," Wolf wrote.
The lawmaker also cited reports that indicate Awad and
representatives may have traveled to Sudan to solicit funds from
President Omar Hassan Bashir, whose hard-line Islamic regime has been
responsible for more than 2 million deaths in a jihad against
animists in the country's south.
IRS earlier this month purged CAIR from its list of
organizations. Donations to the group are no longer tax-deductible,
CAIR continues to claim on its website that contributions are
The gross delinquency raises new suspicions that CAIR
identified in a
recent terror-finance case as a front group for Hamas – is concealing
American public details about its already shadowy financial activities.
CAIR is a regular staple of the cable news programs
claims to be a
"Muslim-American civil rights group."
The Washington-based group receives millions of
pledges and other support from Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates
terror-tied Arab states, as revealed in the bestseller "Muslim
Secret Underworld That's Conspiring to Islamize
As WND has reported, CAIR has filed a lawsuit against
Mafia" co-author P. David Gaubatz and his son, Chris, who collected
thousands of pages of CAIR documents destined for a shredder while
CAIR's complaint asks
to expunge all copies of "Muslim Mafia". A lawyer
defending the Gaubatzes says CAIR is attempting
that could lead to criminal prosecution.
"Muslim Mafia" presents evidence that CAIR spokesman
Hooper has misled Washington
reporters about the source of most of CAIR's financial support.
Although Hooper has repeatedly denied that CAIR
foreign support, smoking-gun
during the Gaubatzes' six-month covert investigation of CAIR indicates
A State Department cable citing Hooper by name,
contradicts Hooper's denials about foreign support, according to
Mafia," which exposes the secret inner workings of CAIR, among other
radical Muslim Brotherhood front groups in America.
CAIR in January 2007 prepared a secret "strategy" memo
what the "Muslim Mafia" authors call a hostile influence operation
against Congress to undermine homeland security and anti-terror
The memo states that CAIR would try to "influence" the
intelligence committees, along with committees dealing with homeland
and justice, while placing interns in "congressional offices."
CAIR has been successful in both endeavors, using
funds free of taxation in the process.
Read article in its entirety at
free speech decision claim praised, faulted
Tuesday, June 21, 2011
The solicitor for Pittsburgh Public Schools says a
Supreme Court ruling
that a former eastern Pennsylvania
police chief couldn't claim free speech in a private employment matter
"I think it represents a common-sense distinction
getting up at
a public meeting and saying, 'I'm an employee, I live here, and taxes
high,' which are matters of general concern, and work-related speech,"
Weiss said of the decision Monday.
labor attorney Joshua Bloom said the ruling is another example of
rights in the courts being chipped away.
"The courts have ruled that people can petition and
but now they're saying it's OK (for governments) to destroy their lives
do it. It makes no sense," Bloom said, adding, "The Supreme Court
seems to be endorsing a culture of tyranny, secrecy and coercion in the
The case originates in the Luzerne County borough of
which fired police Chief Charles Guarnieri in 2003. He filed a union
and after an arbitrator returned him to the job, council drew up 11
for his return, including that he had to have council permission for
The directives were thrown out after Guarnieri filed a second union
and then he sued in civil court, saying the directives were in
the first grievance.
Guarnieri said the retaliation violated the petition
Amendment, which allows citizens to petition the government for redress
In an 8-1 ruling, U.S. Supreme Court justices ruled
Circuit Court of Appeals erred and that Guarnieri should have had to
spoke as a citizen on an issue of public concern, which is what the
Amendment's speech clause requires.
"The right of a public employee under the Petition
Clause is a
participate as a citizen, through petitioning activity, in the
process," Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote. "It is not a right to
transform everyday employment disputes into matters for Constitutional
litigation in the federal courts."
He added, "It is precisely to avoid this intrusion
governmental affairs that this Court has held that, while the First
invests public employees with certain rights, it does not empower them
'Constitutionalize' the employee grievance."
Guarnieri's case has been sent back to the lower court
The ruling hurts not only public employees, Bloom
citizens who depend on government workers to keep an eye on government.
"Public employees are in the best position to speak
corruption, illegalities, incompetence, oppression and waste," he said.
"The Supreme Court recognizes that just because
someone is a
employee, it doesn't give them the right to sue for matters that are
employment-related for First Amendment issues," Weiss said. "If it's
a complaint about their employment status, it's not a whistleblower
This article can be found in its
DAILY EXCLUSIVE COMMENTARY
diagnosis, wrong cure for 'gay' youth
By Linda Harvey
What's worse than asking ninth-graders intrusive and
questions on a school survey, even if they do live in a liberal
It's discovering misbehavior, coming to exactly the
the causes and recommending more harm be done.
report published by the Centers for Disease Control shows that
teenagers in public schools who believe themselves to be homosexual or
are taking more risks all across the board. While this should not come
as a big
surprise to the average American with common sense, it is a stunning
to our psychobabbly federal public health professionals. After all,
even bring themselves to say "Stop it!" to men who have anal sex with
But now that we have this information, it gives an
snapshot, if we
evaluate it appropriately.
However, the CDC researchers jumped to predictable
conclusions. Among the
solutions was the need for "supportive" school environments –
meaning, approval of homosexuality – including more "gay straight
alliance" clubs and pro-homosexual teacher diversity training. Also,
health-care settings and workers need training to be more "open and
The researchers believe these kids just suffer from
self-esteem – which
may be true – but they assume it's the fault of others, including the
social stigmatization of homosexuality. Then, of course, with no
evidence, they apparently adopt the "gay" lobby's position that views
against homosexuality are unwarranted and inevitably provoke bullying
self-harm. Homosexuality is either innate, or benign, or both,
according to the
unsupported, accepted narrative.
Yet let's look at some details of the CDC findings
these conclusions. For instance, are we actually supposed to believe
self-respect or social rejection because of one's homosexual identity
teens to refuse to wear seat belts? That was one of the risk behaviors
among "sexual minority" youth. How about driving after having
consumed alcohol? What about being abused by a date or being forced to
sex? Wouldn't that be "gay-on-gay" violence? This would put at least
some "gay" kids in the category of "bullier/abuser." Whoops!
There goes another talking point.
Seriously, the percentages reporting dating violence
among the "sexual minority" youth. Why aren't we seeing a
proliferation of anti-violence programs aimed specifically at these
Or how about having already, at their tender ages, had
with at least
four people? Is promiscuity a common reaction to real or perceived
discrimination? Or failing to use a condom if they are having sex?
The problem here, of course, is the solutions
discriminatory. Nor would they be applied in comparable situations. For
instance, there's considerable evidence that overweight students
bullying and social rejection more than others. And, these kids
more often attempt
suicide and engage in other risky
conduct. So, where are the obesity-affirmation school programs? Why
As usual, political correctness has swallowed common
This data reveal
troubled kids with issues that often pre-date puberty, heading down a
self-harm. Others along the way may contribute, but the core
doesn't go away by joining a "gay straight alliance."
Ironically, all this is being reported along with
related indicator. From another section of the CDC comes the latest
report with these findings about young males:
MSM [males who have sex with males] aged 13–24 had the
increase (53 percent) in diagnoses of HIV infection from 2006 through
Yet public schools must keep on "affirming" this
educational and medical malpractice. Truly caring adults would be
the big picture, not exploiting already troubled kids for a harmful
agenda. No matter what causes these kids to engage in dangerous
encouraging them to embrace one more – homosexuality – is only going to
more heartbreak and harm into their already complicated lives.
This article has been abbreviated. It may be read
Students Don't Know Much About US
June 14, 2011
by Christine Armario
Just 13 percent of high school seniors who took the
of Educational Progress, called the Nation's Report Card, showed a
of American history. Results released Tuesday showed the two other
didn't perform much better, with just 22 percent of fourth-grade
18 percent of eighth-graders demonstrating proficiency.
The test quizzed students on topics including
Revolution and the Civil War, and the contemporary United States. For
question asked fourth-graders to name an important result of the U.S.
canals in the 1800s. Only 44 percent knew that it was increased trade
"The history scores released today show that student
still too low," Education Secretary Arne Duncan said in a statement.
"These results tell us that, as a country, we are failing to provide
children with a high-quality, well-rounded education."
Education experts say a heavy focus on reading and
the federal No
Child Left Behind law in the last decade has led to lagging performance
other subjects such as history and science.
"We need to make sure other subjects like history,
are not forgotten in our pursuit of the basic skills," said Diane
a research professor at New York University and former U.S. assistant
Of the seven subjects on the national test, students
the worst in U.S. history.
Officials with the National Assessment Governing board, which oversees
tests, say the results aren't comparable to the other tests because
students take each exam in different years.
The scores on the history test did not vary remarkably
years past; in
1994, for example, 19 percent of fourth-grade students scored
better in U.S.
More than 7,000 fourth-grade students, 11,000 eighth
and 12,000 high
school seniors from a nationally representative sample took the test
To be considered proficient, they had to get certain
out of 500. For
fourth-graders, the score was 243. Eighth-graders needed 294, and 12th
had to get a 325.
Judy Brodigan, who was head of the elementary social
the Lewisville, Texas, school district for a decade, said
history and social studies classes aren't as much of a priority for
districts as math and reading. She noted that many states only test
social studies starting in middle school, which means elementary school
students don't get the background they need in the subject.
"When the foundation isn't built in elementary school,
are coming to middle school lacking crucial skills," Brodigan said.
"What it means is that in what is becoming a more and more global
American students are more and more at a disadvantage."
Educators said history is critical to students
learning how to
citizens and understanding how the country's political and cultural
work. Students need to not only recognize leaders like Martin Luther
and Abraham Lincoln, but also understand why they were important to the
of the country.
"Overall the quality and success of our lives can only
enhanced by a
study of our roots," said Steven Paine, former state schools
superintendent for West Virginia.
"If you don't know your past, you will not have a future."
more information on this topic
Judges seem receptive to
health care challenge
See lack of precedent for
June 8, 2011
by Stephen Dinan
President Obama’s health care law received a chilly
a federal appeals court that seemed wary of approving a major expansion
government coercion over the economic activity of millions of Americans.
Acknowledging they are breaking new ground in
three-judge panel of the 11th U.S. Circuit Court
sitting in Atlanta questioned whether there is any precedent in more
centuries in which the Supreme Court has upheld a law that forces
to buy a private good or service - in this instance, the individual
that every American obtain health insurance.
“If we uphold the individual mandate in this case, are
any limits on Congress‘
appointed by President George
who seemed most hostile to the Obama administration’s defense.
The other two judges, both appointed by President
each side with questions, but signaled their own concerns about the
specific precedent for upholding this type of mandate.
“I want to know, going back to the first principles,
there that actually suggests that Congress
a private party to buy a private product on the open market if they’re
disposed to do so,” Judge Stanley
Wednesday’s nearly 2 1/2-hour hearing is the third
appeals court has
heard a case on the issue, which all sides believe will eventually end
front of the Supreme Court.
It's your democracy
lawmakers accountable for fair state districts
Now is the time for Florida
voters to hold the Legislature accountable to obey the state
the critical issue of redistricting.
Enshrined in the document since the 2010 elections are
amendments that require lawmakers, using 2010 Census data, to redraw
legislative and U.S.
congressional districts in a nonpartisan way before the 2012 elections.
And end a long, sordid record of politicians drawing
party holds the reins of power, protect incumbents against competition
voters little choice at the ballot box.
Democrats wrongly did it in the 1990s, when they
Tallahassee, and Republicans wrongly do it
Just take a look at Florida House District 29 for
shaped districts that have resulted from the gerrymandering. It trails
a thin strip from North Brevard to rural Indian River County
to maximize the number of Republican votes.
The seat was won by Rep. Tom Goodson in the GOP
August last year.
Predictably, the Cocoa Republican faced no Democratic opposition.
Other districts in the state snake across as many as
far-flung cities or illogically divide communities.
Outrage at the practice led Florida voters
to pass the Fair Districts amendments by 63 percent last year, a margin
mirrored in Brevard County. That showed broad
support across party lines for a less partisan approach to
In a victory for democracy last week, the U.S.
Justice — which
must review election law changes because of previous racial
voting in some Florida
counties — reaffirmed the wisdom of Fair Districts, giving the
The ruling counters false claims by lawmakers, trying
preserve their hold
on power, that Fair Districts would hinder minorities’ voting rights.
It also sends a loud message that tactics to obstruct
reforms must end,
including from Florida
House Speaker Dean Cannon.
The Winter Park Republican joined the House to a
lawsuit to kill
the congressional Fair Districts rules coming from U.S. Reps. Corrine
D-Jacksonville and Mario Diaz-Balart, R-Miami. The suit should be
That lawsuit is only the latest recent attempt by
their power and block the voters’ will. Here is the shabby history:
-- In 2010, then Senate President-designate Mike
Island, and other mostly GOP state lawmakers tried to sabotage the
Fair Districts, voting to put on fall ballots a tricky counter
would have nullified the reform mandate.
In September, the state Supreme Court rightly yanked
-- Three days after taking office this year, Gov. Rick
the routine clearance process for the redistricting amendments,
send them promptly for review by the Justice Department, as required by
The Justice Department’s approval of the Fair
standards is big
step forward, but no time for advocates to rest on their laurels.
Legislative committees are charged with coming up with
boundaries by June 2012.
You can bet there’ll be more attempts to undermine the
requirements that districts be contiguous, compact geographically, and
drawn to favor or disfavor any party or incumbent.
Citizen pressure is needed You can get more informed
Read this article in its entirety at
and Violence in American Mosques
Posted by Mordechai Kedar and David Yerushalmi
Summer 2011, pp. 59-72
How great is the danger of extremist violence in the
Islam in the United States?
Recent congressional hearings into this question by Rep. Peter King
of New York), chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security, have
firestorm of controversy among his colleagues, the press, and the
public. Though similar hearings have taken place at least fourteen
was labeled a latter-day Joe
McCarthy and the hearings called an assault on civil liberties and a
contemporary witch-hunt. Yet the larger dilemmas outlined by both the
congressman and some of his witnesses remain: To what extent are
Muslims, native-born as well as naturalized, being radicalized by
And what steps can those who are sworn to the protection of American
take that will uncover and disrupt the plots of those willing to take
against others for the sake of jihad?
Root Causes and Enabling Mechanisms
While scholarly inquiry into the
supportive of terrorism has accelerated since the September 11, 2001
the United States,
there are few empirical studies that attempt to measure the
between specific variables and support for terrorism. To date, almost
the professional and academic work in this field has been anecdotal
case studies tracing backward through the personal profiles of
the socioeconomic and political environments from which they came.
An item that may help to
the growth of modern jihadism appears in Marc Sageman's 2004 study,
that 97 percent of jihadists studied had become increasingly devoted to
of Salafist Islam highly adherent to Shari'a (Islamic law) while on
to radicalization, despite many coming from less rigorous devotional
during their youths. This increase in devotion to Salafist Islam was
by outwardly observable behaviors such as wearing traditional Arabic,
Pakistani, or Afghan clothing or growing a beard.
When viewed together, a picture emerges that may give
researchers, as well
as law enforcement officials, a way to monitor or potentially to
violent jihad may take root. Potential recruits who are swept up in
movement may find their inspiration and encouragement in a place with
access to classic and modern literature that is positive toward jihad
violence, where highly Shari'a-adherent behavior is practiced, and
society exists that in some form promotes a culture of martyrdom or at
in activities that are supportive of violent jihad. The mosque can be
That the mosque is a societal apparatus that might
serve as a
mechanism for violent jihad may seem self-evident, but for it to be a
means for measuring radicalization requires empirical evidence. A 2007
the New York city
police department noted that, in the context of the mosque, high levels
Shari'a adherence, termed "Salafi ideology" by the authors of the
report, may relate to support for violent jihad. Specifically, it found
highly Shari'a-adherent mosques have played a prominent role in
There is a need for the study and corroboration of a
high levels of Shari'a adherence as a form of religious devotion and
coalitional commitment, Islamic literature that shows violence in a
light, and institutional support for violent jihad. By way of filling
lacuna, the authors of this article undertook a survey specifically
determine empirically whether a correlation exists between observable
of religious devotion linked to Shari'a adherence in American mosques
presence of violence-positive materials at those mosques. The survey
sought to ascertain whether a correlation exists between the presence
violence-positive materials at a mosque and the promotion of jihadism
mosque's leadership through recommending the study of these materials
Identifying Shari'a-Adherent Behaviors
Shari'a is the Islamic system of law based primarily
sources held by
Muslims to be respectively direct revelation from God and divinely
the Qur'an and the Sunna (sayings, actions, and traditions of
are other jurisprudential sources for Shari'a derived from the legal
Islamic scholars. These scholars, in turn, may be adherents of
schools of Islamic jurisprudence. Notwithstanding those differences,
divergence at the level of actual law is, given the fullness of the corpus
juris, confined to relatively few marginal issues. Thus, there is
unity and agreement across the Sunni-Shiite divide and across the
various Sunni madh'habs (jurisprudential schools) on core
Surveyors were asked to observe and record selected
deemed to be
Shari'a-adherent. These behaviors were selected precisely because they
constitute observable and measurable practices of an orthodox form of
opposed to internalized, non-observable articles of faith. Such visible
of conduct are considered by traditionalists to have been either
commanded by Muhammad as recorded in the Sunna and later discussed and
preserved in canonical Shari'a literature. The selected behaviors are
most broadly accepted by legal practitioners of Islam and are not those
practiced only by a rigid subgroup within Islam—Salafists, for example.
Among the behaviors observed at the mosques and scored
were: (a) women wearing the hijab (head covering) or niqab
(full-length shift covering the entire female form except for the
gender segregation during mosque prayers; and (c) enforcement of
prayer lines. Behaviors that were not scored as Shari'a-adherent
women wearing just a modern hijab, a scarf-like covering that
cover all of the hair, or no covering; (b) men and women praying
the same room; and (c) no enforcement by the imam, lay leader, or
straight prayer lines.
The mosques surveyed contained a variety of texts,
printed pamphlets and handouts to classic texts of the Islamic canon.
perspective of promoting violent jihad, the literature types were
ranked in the
survey from severe to moderate to nonexistent. The texts selected were
written to serve as normative and instructive tracts and are not
This is important because a believer is free to understand scripture
figuratively, or merely poetically when it does not have a normative or
gloss provided by Islamic jurisprudence.
The moderate-rated literature was authored by
and/or legal authorities; while expressing positive attitudes toward
it was predominantly concerned with the more mundane aspects of
worship and ritual. The severe material, by contrast, largely consists
relatively recent texts written by ideologues, rather than Shari'a
such as Abul Ala Mawdudi and Sayyid Qutb. These, as well as materials
and disseminated by the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood, are primarily, if
exclusively, aimed at using Islam to advance a violent political agenda.
Mawdudi (1903-79), for one, believed that it was
jihad against "infidel colonizers" in order to gain independence and
spread Islam. His Jihad in Islam, found in many of the mosques
instructed followers to employ force in pursuit of a Shari'a-based
Similarly, Qutb's Milestones serves as the
backbone of the current global jihad movement. Qutb, for example,
violence against those who stand in the way of Islam's expansion:
These materials differ from other severe- and
because they are not Islamic legal texts per se but rather are
seeking to advance a politicized Islam through violence, if necessary.
these authors recognized Shari'a scholars.
The same cannot be said for some classical works that
violence in the name of Islam. Works by several respected jurists and
from the four major Sunni schools of jurisprudence, dating from the
fourteenth centuries, are all in agreement that violent jihad against
non-Muslims is a religious obligation.
The caliph … makes war upon Jews, Christians, and
… provided he
has first invited them to enter Islam in faith and practice, and if
not, then invited them to enter the social order of Islam by paying the
non-Muslim poll tax.
The caliph fights all other peoples until they become
are not a people with a book, nor honored as such, and are not
settle with paying the poll tax.
The Fiqh as-Sunna and Tafsir Ibn Kathir
examples of works
that were rated "moderate" for purposes of this survey. The former,
which focuses primarily on the internal Muslim community, the family,
individual believer and not on violent jihad, was especially moderate
endorsement of violence. Relatively speaking, the Fiqh as-Sunna
expresses a more restrained view of violent jihad, in that it does not
call for a holy war against the West even though it understands the
influence on Islamic governments as a force that is destructive to
Nonetheless, such texts do express positive views
use of violence
against "the other," as expressed in the following:
Ibn Abbas reported that the Prophet, upon whom be
ties of Islam and the principles of the religion are three, and whoever
one of them becomes an unbeliever, and his blood becomes lawful:
that there is no god except God, the obligatory prayers, and the fast
Ramadan." … Another narration states, "If anyone leaves one of [the
three principles], by God he becomes an unbeliever, and no voluntary
recompense will be accepted from him, and his blood and wealth become
lawful." This is a clear indication that such a person is to be killed.
Similarly in Tafsir Ibn Kathir:
Perform jihad against the disbelievers with the sword,
harsh with the
hypocrites with words, and this is the jihad performed against them
The survey's findings, explored in depth below, were
mosques had texts that either advocated the use of violence in the
pursuit of a
Shari'a-based political order or advocated violent jihad as a duty that
be of paramount importance to a Muslim; 30 percent had only texts that
moderately supportive of violence like the Tafsir Ibn Kathir
as-Sunna; 19 percent had no violent texts at all.
This article has been abbreviated, it includes
writings and survey results
that you will find of interest. The article in its entirety can be
Middle East Quarterly
by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu
May 24, 2011
Israel is the only
country that has guaranteed freedom of all faiths in Jerusalem, which
must remain undivided, Prime
Minister Binyamin Netanyahu told Congress Tuesday. In unusually
language, he told members of Congress that Judea and Samaria are
part of the ancient Jewish
homeland that our forefathers walked in and that the 650,000 Jews
there "are not ‘occupying’ the region.” He strongly criticized the
changed versions of history that are being promoted by others.
Interrupted dozens of times
standing ovations, after minutes-long applause
as he entered the chamber, Netanyahu also said that there are 300
in the Middle East, but the only ones who are
free are Israeli citizens.
Prime Minister Binyamin
noted in his opening remarks that the
"ground is still shifting” in the Middle East
and that the uprisings in the Muslim countries represent people’s
He thanked the United States
for helping Israel
reach its defense capabilities despite the “tough” economy. He jokingly
that the United States doesn't
have to help build Israel--it
is already built. More seriously, he said that the United States
doesn't have to send soldiers to defend Israel, because Israel defends
The Prime Minister did
change any of his policies, and put
paid to rumors that he was going to announce new concessions. He
policies in down-to-earth and homey language that clearly enthused the
legislators. U.S. Vice President Joe Biden was on the podium to receive
U.S. President Barack Obama was on his way back to the United States
from a visit to Ireland.
He jokingly noted that
is larger than the Delaware, Biden’s home
state, and larger than Rhode Island,
“but that’s about it.”
Prime Minister Netanyahu
that the entire length of the Washington
Beltway is larger than the width of the Israel that the
Authority demands, which would be 9 km. wide, hardly "strategic
He made it clear that he is
to agree to borders for a Palestinian
Authority country that would place some Jews outside of Israel’s
borders, but did not mention that this would be only in
blocs and gave the impression of giving up less, rather than
Netanyahu also stressed that
borders must be negotiated because Israel “will
not return to the indefensible borders of 1967.” He relied on his
interpretation of U.S. President Barack Obama’s statement that any
borders of Israel
will not be identical with the 1949 Armistice Lines that existed until
Six-Day War in 1967. He repeated his insistence that the Jordan River
Israeli Army presence, remarking that in the MIddle East,
peace depends on the ability to defend oneself.
The president has called for
swaps,” a concept that Prime Minister
Netanyahu did not mention and one which has little chance of getting
ground because Israeli Arabs have little interest in giving up their
and economic security as Israeli citizens.
The vast majority of Jews
beyond the 1949-1967 borders live
in greater Jerusalem
and greater Tel Aviv,” the Prime Minister said in his address. “These
other places of historic, strategic and national importance will be
incorporated into the final borders of Israel," he asserted.
Prime Minister Netanyahu
the issue of “refugees,” meaning the
Arabs who either fled Israel
in the wars in 1948 and 1967, or their descendants.
"Jews around the world have
to immigrant to the only Jewish
state, and Arabs around the world should have the right to immigrate to
Palestinian state.” he told Congress.
In case anyone doubted his
intentions, he added, “This means that the
refugee problem will be solved outside the borders of Israel".
Repeating that the obstacle
is not the creation of a Palestinian State
to which six successive Israeli Prime Ministers agreed, but the
acceptance of the existence of a Jewish State, Netanyahu called to
to tell Palestinians clearly that Israel has a right to exist.
Meanwhile, he said, incitement continues in PA school curricula,
are named after terrorists and the only reward Israel
got for leaving Lebanon and Gaza was 12,000 rockets
fired at its children.
"Imagine a siren sounding
you 60 seconds to find shelter
before a missile strikes. You couldn't live with that. No one can live
that,” he said emphatically, adding, "Israel
is not what is wrong in the Middle East. Israel is the only thing that
is right in the Middle East."
topic, click here
Obama wants more 'death
April 25, 2011
By Bob Unruh
© 2011 WorldNetDaily
Most of the legal challenges to Obamacare, the
legislation that allows the federal government to take over health-care
decision-making, focus on the "unconstitutional individual mandate"
that defines sitting in one's living room as "interstate commerce" and
demands the purchase of government-approved health
However, there's a new round of alarms developing over
described as the ultimate "death panel," concerns that have been
raised because Barack Obama himself suggested giving an
board more authority.
It's the idea of Obama's Independent Payment Advisory
which is one of
150 board and commissions established by Obamacare but is the most
because it would be made up of 15 Obama-appointed individuals and would
dictate Medicare policy affecting millions
disabled Americans with essentially no congressional or judicial
It was during Obama's recent speech in which he
plan to cut the
deficit by Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., he referenced Obamacare and its
"What they'll say is, well, you know what, that will
it's government imposed and it's bureaucracy and it's government
there are death panels," the president said. "I still don't entirely
understand the whole 'death panel' concept. But I guess what they're
somehow some remote bureaucrat will be deciding your health care for
Obama then specifically said his panel's authority
in at an
earlier time than it already is scheduled to become the law.
U.S. Rep. Michael
has authored "Doctor
in the House" on the issue of the nationalization of health care,
the IPAB was a bad idea when ex-Sen. Tom Daschle, D-S.D., proposed it
voters removed him from office, and it hasn't gotten better.
"Now for the first time ever the primary party for
seniors, Medicare, is going to be able to tell you what kind of care
get, where and when you can get it and worst of all, when you've had
enough," he told WND today.
"If all you're looking to do is be able to figure how
old people cheaply, this is the way to go," he said. "If what you
want to provide is meaningful medical care, why would you set up or
system that leads to waiting lists and rationing?"
He cited Obama's recent comments, and said the board
central command and control system" and the "primary tool" to
limit, ration, reduce or restrict treatments.
Among other reactions was Stanley
Online, who followed Obama's vague references
"They're back. Rationing, death panels, socialism, all
words that helped bring Republicans victory
in 2010 …
They're back because of IPAB. Remember that acronym. It stands for The
Independent Payment Advisory Board. IPAB is the real death panel, the
of rationing, and the royal road to health-care socialism.
"Policy wonks and political junkies may know a bit
health-care rationing panel, but most Americans have barely heard of
has got to change," he wrote.
Sarah Palin, the 2008 GOP vice presidential candidate,
initially referred to
"death panels" in Obamacare referencing the end-of-life instructions
that originally were included.
"But IPAB is the real death panel (as Palin herself
body of unelected bureaucrats with the power to cut off care through
rules based on one-size-fits-all cost calculations," Kurtz wrote.
It was in Obama's speech decrying Ryan's money-saving
that he suggested
expanding the authority of the individuals he would expect to pick.
procedure or the
of days spent in a hospital, but with new incentives for doctors and
to prevent injuries and improve results. And we will slow the growth of
Medicare costs by strengthening an independent commission of doctors,
medical experts and consumers who will look at all the evidence and
the best ways to reduce unnecessary spending while protecting access to
services that seniors need," he said.
There were a multitude of similar alarms being raised
that speech, but
those actually taking action on the issue are those at the Goldwater
Institute in Phoenix.
Its attorneys have filed a lawsuit over the provision,
in the Constitution is the concept of an all-powerful and
"No possible reading of the Constitution supports the
unelected, stand-alone federal board that's untouchable by both
the courts," said Clint Bolick, litigation
director for Goldwater.
The organization describes the authority Obama
wouldn't have to follow the basic steps for adopting and enforcing
administrative rules. Its payment schedules and policies couldn't be
by courts and automatically would become law unless amended by Congress
a difficult and complex procedure. And even if Congress would repeal
in 2017, Obama's strategy automatically delays the effectiveness of
The Institute's lawsuit in federal court opposes IPAB
unconstitutional – and it apparently is the only lawsuit challenging
on this crucial argument.
'Protecting any new federal agency from being repealed
to be unprecedented in the history of the United States," said Diane
Cohen, the Goldwater Institute's lead attorney in this case.
The Goldwater Institute
for Constitutional Litigation represents a number of clients in this
including U.S. Reps Jeff Flake, Trent Franks and John Shadegg of
Arizona. The congressmen
have supported repeal of the Independent Payment Advisory Board.
Other reactions to Obama's plans include:
Journal said, "Mr. Obama … is relying on the so far
unidentified technocratic reforms of 15 so far unidentified geniuses
who are supposed to give up medical practice or academic research for
the privilege of a government salary. Since the board is not allowed by
law to restrict treatments, ask seniors to pay more, or raise taxes or
the retirement age, it can mean only one
thing: arbitrarily paying less for the services seniors receive, via
"Now Mr. Obama wants to give the board the additional power of
automatic sequester to enforce its dictates, meaning that it would have
the legal authority to prevent Congress from appropriating tax dollars.
In other words, Congress would be stripped of any real legislative role
in favor of an unaccountable body of experts."
Times noted that both Democrats and Republicans "fear" and
oppose the board.
"Mr. Obama said he wanted to beef up the board's cost-cutting powers in
unspecified ways should the growth of Medicare spending exceed certain
goals. Supporters say the board will be able to make tough decisions
because it will be largely insulated from legislative politics.
Lawmakers do not agree."
It cited statements from Ryan, Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, and Rep.
Allyson Schwartz, D-Pa.
Morris wrote, "The IPAB will be, essentially, the rationing board
that will decide who gets what care. Its decisions will be guided by a
particularly vicious concept of Quality Adjusted Life Years … If you
have enough QUALYS ahead of you, you'll be approved for a hip
replacement or a heart transplant. If not, you're out of luck.
Kurtz, "Obama promised tax hikes for 'the rich,' and vaguely
alluded to plans to expand IPAB's powers as deficits mount. Of course,
even as he laid the groundwork for strengthening IPAB, Obama gave no
real hint of the massive health-care rationing that would imply.
Meanwhile, Obama officials have granted 1,040 waivers
already, because many groups, especially unions who supported Obama,
companies, contend they simply cannot meet its requirements, so
The total prompted a video commentary on Obama
The site is sponsored by Let Freedom Ring, Americans
Reform, CWA, 60
Plus, Independent Women's Voice and the College
Republican National Committee. It allows visitors to e-mail the Obama
administration asking for their own waivers. Visitors can select
want to ask for exemptions from the law's $500 billion in tax
taxpayer funding of abortion or the individual health insurance
In the federal courts, Obamacare already has been
by at least two federal judges and it appears en route to a decision by
U.S. Supreme Court. Also, numerous state legislatures are considering
legislation that simply would exempt their state's citizens from its
requirements. One state had a proposal to make it a crime to try to
more about this subject, click here
refuses to stop
'imminent' threat against Jews
By Aaron Klein
© 2011 WorldNetDaily
JERUSALEM – The new Egyptian government
has refused to share
important intelligence information with Israel, including details of a
terrorist plot against Israelis thought to be imminent, WND has
Last week, officials in Jerusalem warned of
the possibility of Hezbollah terrorist attacks against Israeli targets
overseas, saying "a planned attack is already in motion," Israel's
Channel 2 reported.
Security officials here
Hezbollah is not
planning an attack so large that it would lead to another war with
they said the Iranian-backed group would attempt a hard hit on overseas
targets in the immediate future.
In light of the immediate threat, Israel
requested an exchange of information on Hezbollah with Egypt's
intelligence apparatus, but Cairo refused to cooperate,
according to security officials here who spoke to WND.
The officials said such information sharing was
regime of President Hosni Mubarak.
The officials said Egypt
is thought to have an important bank of information on Hezbollah cells,
particularly in the Sinai desert following the arrests and
several months ago of a major Hezbollah cell accused of plotting
reported the vast majority of that cell escaped from Egyptian
February amid the chaos then engulfing Mubarak's regime.
Members of the cell were arrested in June 2009. At the
Egypt's public prosecutor, Abdel-Magid Mohammed,
announced the country had arrested 13 alleged Hezbollah agents on
planning attacks inside Egypt.
In 2009, WND
was first to report Iranian soldiers aiding the Hezbollah members
nabbed in Egypt.
A senior Egyptian security
official, speaking from
Cairo, told WND in 2009 his country had information Hezbollah cells –
with the Iranian Revolutionary Guard – had been coordinating terrorist
activities inside Egypt with al-Qaida elements known to be present in
The accusation that Iranian-backed agents were working
not be verified by Israeli security officials. If accurate, it would
major turning point for Hezbollah, which has openly clashed with
ideology. Hezbollah espouses a strict Shiite Islamic belief system,
while al-Qaida adheres to fundamentalist Sunni Muslim beliefs.
Al-Qaida has been blamed for a string of major, deadly
the past few years mostly targeting hotels and other tourist sites. The
Egyptian government previously has admitted it was likely al-Qaida was
operating in the Sinai.
The Egyptian security official speaking to WND said
agents in Egypt
were working with al-Qaida to plot attacks against tourist sites,
those known to be popular with Israelis.
According to separate informed security officials with
the situation, Hezbollah, working directly with Iran,
began setting up cells inside Egypt
at least two years ago. The cells consisted of well over 80 agents,
The goals of the cells operating in the country
destabilize the Egyptian regime to advance Iranian interests, planning
against Israelis at tourist sites, aiding Hamas in Gaza
and establishing a base of Iranian operations along the strategic Suez
The pan-Arab daily Asharq al-Awsat reported Egypt
chief of the
Hezbollah cell, identified as Sami Shehab. The newspaper claimed Shehab
confessed his cell monitored tourist sites in the Egyptian resort
Taba, Dahab and Sharm el-Sheikh, and tracked Israeli ships passing
through the Suez Canal.
Latest signs of Egyptian militancy
The purported refusal of Egypt
to share intelligence information with Israel comes amid fears in the
country of the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood.
The Brotherhood seeks to restore the Islamic
that once ruled the Middle East. Both Hamas
and al-Qaida are Brotherhood offshoots.
Earlier this month, former International Atomic Energy
ElBaradei, who had previously announced his intentions to run for the
presidency of Egypt, said
"if Israel attacked Gaza we would declare war
against the Zionist regime."
The same day, Egypt's
foreign minister said Cairo was ready to
re-establish diplomatic ties with Tehran after a
break of more than 30 years, signaling a clear shift in Iran policy
since the fall of Mubarak.
"The Egyptian and Iranian people deserve to have
reflecting their history and civilization," said Foreign Minister Nabil
Elaraby after meeting with Iranian official Mugtabi Amani.
Days after Mubarak stepped aside, Egypt
allowed the passage of two Iranian warships through the strategic Suez
Canal for the first time since 1979.
Also WND reported
the Egyptian military command met with Hamas to discuss ways to build a
relationship with the Islamist organization.
unilateral actions of its own if U.N. declares Palestinian state
© 2011 WorldNetDaily
If the United Nations unilaterally declares a
state, Israel should respond by immediately annexing
the Jewish communities in the strategic West Bank,
declared a Knesset member from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's
Danny Danon, the deputy speaker
Israel's parliament, pointed out the 1993 Oslo
Accords restrict both Israel
and the Palestinian Authority from taking unilateral action outside of
However, he contended that if the PA follows through
seeking a U.N.
declaration of a Palestinian state, and the international body approved
motion, the Jewish state should take unilateral measures of its own.
"We should (then) announce that we are annexing the
in Judea and Samaria,
immediately. The same way (Prime Minister) Menachem Begin did it with
Heights and we did it in Jerusalem, we should do
the same with the Jewish communities of Judea and Samaria."
Danon was speaking in a radio interview with Aaron
WND's Jerusalem bureau chief who hosts an investigative
New York's WABC 770 AM Radio.
The Likud Knesset member was referring to the Israeli
annexation of the
eastern sections of Jerusalem, which contain the
Temple Mount, after it recaptured the territory
in the 1967 Six Day War.
Also, Israel in 1981
annexed the Golan Heights, which looks down on Israeli population
after neighboring Syria
twice used the plateau to mount ground
the Jewish state.
Danon told Klein that any U.N.-created Palestinian
a state on Facebook."
"They will get a lot of 'likes,'" he said. "People
support them. Countries will support them. But on the ground we will
make sure that we control the borders. We control the security
He warned a Palestinian country would be a "state of
that would be controlled by Iran.
Judea and Samaria, commonly referrer to as
the West Bank, contains large Palestinian cities as well as Israeli
communities, some in biblical cities, such as Beit El and Hebron.
The Palestinians seek a state in the pre-1967 borders,
Bank, Gaza Strip and eastern Jerusalem.
The PA been saying for at least two years they may
seek a vote
at the United
Nations Security Council for the declaration of a Palestinian state.
Previously, PA officials stated the Obama
not veto a
U.N. Security Council resolution calling for a Palestinian state.
In 2009, Ahmed Qurei, former PA prime minister and
Liberation Organization executive committee,
in an interview that the PA "reached an understanding with important
elements within the administration" to possibly bring to the U.N.
Council a resolution to unilaterally create a Palestinian state.
Asked to which "elements" he was referring, Qurei
they were from the Obama administration.
In a clear attempt to pave the way for a U.N. vote on
international body announced last week the PA possesses the capacity to
as a state.
"In six areas where the U.N. is most engaged,
now sufficient for a functioning government of a state," stated a U.N.
report released last Tuesday.
The six areas were "governance, rule of law and human
livelihoods; education and culture; health;
infrastructure and water."
Still, the report cautioned, "The key constraints to
successful functioning of the institutions of a potential state of
Palestine arise primarily
from the persistence of occupation and the unresolved issues in the
The reference to "occupation" is controversial, since
territories were never part of any previous Palestinian state, and
Israel is historically tied to the West Bank.
information on this topic, click here
government has no strategy to deal with Muslim Brotherhood
The Washington Times
Myrick was particularly concerned about the role the Muslim
Brotherhood plays in the United States.
The federal government has no strategy to counter the
Brotherhood at home or abroad, according to the chairwoman of the
panel that oversees counterintelligence and terrorism.
“The federal government does not have a comprehensive
for dealing with the Muslim
Brotherhood and its affiliated groups in America,” Rep.
Wilkins Myrick said during a hearing Wednesday. “Nor does it have a
strategy for dealing with the Brotherhood
in Egypt or
The North Carolina Republican is chairwoman of the
subcommittee on terrorism, human intelligence, analysis and
said at the hearing that she planned on scheduling closed classified
on the Muslim
Brotherhood this session with government officials.
Established in 1928 in Cairo,
Brotherhood is widely considered the first organization to push for
political Islam or Islamism,
a movement that seeks to replace civil law with Islamic or Shariah law.
Islamists were repressed for decades by the
countries such as Egypt
Brotherhood may be poised to try to assume political power in those
countries for the first time.
At the hearing, during which nongovernment experts
on this point differed.
To read more of this article, visit:
How legislators and governors
nationwide are challenging a rogue president
© 2011 WorldNetDaily
While millions of outraged Americans protest what they
a lawless and
power-mad Obama administration, many wonder how much clout individuals
really have in reining in a wildly out-of-control government.
But suppose, in addition to citizens with little power
those standing up to the federal government were named Virginia, Texas,
Arizona, Utah, Wyoming, New Hampshire, Tennessee, Montana, Maine, South
– and many more?
Incredibly, though under-reported by the establishment
what is happening right now, as the April issue of Whistleblower
in-depth, in "STATES
A wide-ranging rebellion is indeed under way – by a
majority of states
– against what they claim are intolerable and blatantly
encroachments by the federal government. And they are seriously intent
declaring such unconstitutional laws null and void in their
Here's how Thomas E. Woods Jr., author of the
"Nullification: How to resist federal tyranny in the 21st century,"
succinctly lays out the issue in the April
Nullification begins with the
point that a federal
law that violates the Constitution is no law at all. It is void and of
effect. Nullification simply pushes this uncontroversial point a step
If a law is unconstitutional and therefore void and of no effect, it is
the states, the parties to the federal compact, to declare it so and
refuse to enforce it. It would be foolish and vain to wait for the
government or a branch thereof to condemn its own law. Nullification
shield between the people of a state and an unconstitutional law from
Take Obamacare: Most people know the GOP-led House of
repealed it (though the Democrat-controlled Senate almost certainly
nor will Obama ever sign it). And many also know 27 states are
Obamacare in court. But what few understand is that at least 11 states
attempting to legislatively nullify Obamacare within their
far, an act to nullify the entire federal health-care law has become
in Montana and Idaho,
has been approved by one house in North Dakota,
and introduced in eight other states – New Hampshire,
Wyoming, South Dakota
What about the federal government's labyrinthine gun
Eight states have
already passed laws – signed by their governors – telling Washington
its firearms regulations are not
valid in those states for weapons manufactured
purchased in-state. Many other states are on the same legislative
There's much more: Utah
last month became the first state to make gold and silver legal tender
state. Twenty-four states are defying Obama by copying Arizona's
immigration law – the one the Obama Justice Department sued Arizona
over. Lawmakers in 40 states are
working to halt the epidemic of "anchor babies" establishing
"birthright citizenship." And 13 states are considering laws that
would require every presidential candidate – including Barack Obama –
he is a natural-born citizen before his name can be placed on that
ballot in presidential elections.
Read more: STATES OF REBELLION http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=283237#ixzz1JJx80vpj
Supremes asked to restore fallen
shouldn't diminish the sacrifice of officers'
Posted: April 21, 2011
1:00 am Eastern
By Bob Unruh
The U.S. Supreme Court is being asked to bring a
the 10th U.S.
Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver into
alignment with its precedents in a dispute over cross memorials to
fallen Utah state highway
Officials with the Alliance
Defense Fund today said they have filed a petition with the U.S.
Court that asks the court to affirm the constitutionality of roadside
crosses honoring the fallen officers.
The high court last year concluded
of fallen members of the military was constitutional.
ADF argues that the precedent also should apply to the
"One atheist group's agenda shouldn't diminish the
made by Utah highway patrol
officers and their families. We are asking the Supreme Court to allow
families of the fallen to honor their loved ones through these
permissible memorials," said ADF Senior Counsel Byron Babione.
"The Supreme Court recently signaled that
crosses honoring fallen troopers simply do not amount to a government
establishment of religion. That guidance applies directly to this
A district court judge affirmed the constitutionality
when the dispute was elevated to the Denver
court, the judges condemned the crosses on the narrowest of margins,
The four judges who dissented raised strong objections
that the decision appeared to impose.
"The goal of avoiding governmental endorsement does
eradication of all religious symbols in the public realm," the Supreme
wrote in its 2010 decision regarding a cross memorial in the Mojave
Desert. "A cross by the side of a public highway marking, for
instance, the place where a state trooper perished need not be taken as
statement of governmental support for sectarian beliefs. The
not oblige government to avoid any public acknowledgment of religion's
brief, "The 10th Circuit's decision conflicts with this
court's Establishment Clause precedent. The 10th Circuit invalidated
challenged roadside memorials by (1) fixating on their cross shape, (2)
ignoring most of their features, history, and context, and (3) opining
Establishment Clause forbids such displays unless the overall setting
any religious significance."
However, "This court … has denounced each of these
In short, the 10th Circuit's approach, if allowed to stand, will
government from accommodating public displays of religious symbols,
widely embraced means of commemorating fallen heroes on public
manifest an unconstitutional hostility toward religion."
ADF warned that if the Utah crosses are
disallowed, the result "could jeopardize similar memorials honoring
fallen heroes across the nation, including 14 crosses on Colorado's
Storm King Mountain where firefighters lost their
lives in a 1994 wildfire."
The case originated with complaints from American
sued the Utah
Highway Patrol and the Utah Transportation Department, alleging the
are a government establishment of religion.
That claim was pursued even though the memorials are
by a private group, the Utah Highway Patrol Association, which supports
officers and their families.
columnist David Limbaugh, when the earlier ruling banishing the
released, blasted the judiciary for its "allergy" to Christianity.
"Our politically correct-intoxicated culture is so
expressions and symbols of Christianity that our courts leap to absurd
conclusions to cordon off the chief allergen: Christianity," he wrote
"The egregious constitutional infraction here is not
government put up the signs, which it didn't, but that the memorials
placed along public roads. Thus, 'reasonable' passing motorists – as
guess, to those afflicted with anti-Christian road rage – might well
that the government is endorsing the Christian religion. Horror of
gosh, what would the largely Christian founders think?"
He continued. "I don't think it's a reasonable
the government is making a religious statement by permitting
placement of these memorials along the public highway. On the other
think the government would be (and is) making a statement against
by denying this group access because of its paranoia about going into
Christian-spawned anaphylactic shock."
The memorials have remained in place during the court
future depends entirely on the high court accepting the case and
lower court's decision.
to read more about this subject
Breaks Up Christian Worship Services
Peter Simpson | Beijing April
Plainclothes security personnel film
gather to load
detained worshippers onto a waiting bus near a building that leaders of
unregistered Shouwang house church had told parishioners to gather in
April 10, 2011
Police in China
detained hundreds of Christian worshippers as they gathered for
outdoor service in Beijing.
The detentions are the latest in a crackdown on individuals and groups
by the government to pose a threat to social stability.
The worshipers were from the unregistered, Christian, Shouwang
Their church leaders asked them to gather at an open-air venue for
services, after they were evicted from their usual place of worship
Hundreds of uniformed and plain clothes police officers were deployed
the outdoor service.
Around 200 Christian worshippers were rounded
and some were physically
intimidated by plain clothes police.
Shouwang Church Pastor Yuan Ling told reporters Sunday he was unable to
the venue because police had put him under house arrest Saturday night.
The director of the Britain-based China Aid Association, Bob Fu, says
worshipers feel this is the price they will pay gladly for what
describes as their faith and their freedom.
"We have seen the government use very harsh tactics against believers,
including extra-legal procedures, like forced disappearance, kidnapping
the most prominent Christian human-rights activists," said Bob Fu.
The round up of Christian worshipers is the latest in a far-reaching
on individuals and groups the government says may pose a threat to
stability. The communist government has been worried about
similar to those in the Arab world taking hold in China, following
calls for demonstrations.
Prominent activist, lawyers, writers and artists - including
renowned artist Ai Weiwei - have recently been detained and charged
variety of crimes including subversion and tax evasion.
BRAVE NEW SCHOOLS
money, but censoring Christians?
challenges decision to edit messages on project bricks
Posted: January 25,
By Bob Unruh
A lawsuit has been filed
School in Palm Desert, Calif., of taking money from
Christians who bought paving stones as part of a fund-raiser, but then
refusing to include them in the final project because of the Christian
"verbiage" the stones contained.
A spokeswoman for the
the Desert Sands Unified School
District told WND that it was an outside organization, the parent
teacher organization, that was running the fundraiser and the school
did not have a responsibility.
"We were surprised
ADF had brought the issue forward to us [and we] were reviewing it to
see what we could do. We're very sensititve to the First Amendments
rights to speech and religion," said Cindy McDaniel
But the accusations were spelled out in
filed just days ago in the U.S. District Court for the
Central District of California Eastern Division-Riverside by the the
Alliance Defense Fund.
It explains that small
stones were sold for $100 and large ones for $250 in the school
fund-raiser, and purchasers were allowed to include messages such as:
- Be the change that you want to see in the world.
- God bless you babe
- Dream big
- Make it happen
- Carpe Diem
But two Christians who
stones, one was the purchase of five small stones for $500 and the
other was the purchase of one large stone for $250, were refused
permission to have their stones displayed along with the others.
According to the lawsuit, Lou Ann Hart bought five
pavers and had inscribed Bible verses including:
The lawsuit explains the
told that there was a complaint from within the school about the
"religious verbiage" on their pavers, so they would not be included in
the project. Nor was their money refunded.
- Tell everyone about God's power, Psalm 68:34
- No one can serve two masters, Luke 17:13
- If God is for us, who can be against us? Romans 8:31
- …the old life is gone. A new one has begun, 2CO.
- …be kind to each other ... forgive one another.
"The government cannot
Christians because their religious viewpoint does not coincide with
campus orthodoxy," said ADF Senior Counsel David Cortman. "Christians
have the same First Amendment-protected rights as everyone else does on
public school campuses, and their messages are no less worthy of
exposure than other individuals'."
The project was launched
February 2010 by the Palm Desert parent teacher organization. It was
approved by the principal, board and superintendent.
"No limitations were
given as to
the content of the messages on the pavers – other than the length – and
the fundraiser policy stated that the messages could be used to pay
tribute, create a legacy, commemorate a special event, or give
recognition to various entities," the ADF explained.
Hart and Sheryl Caronno
later made their purchases, "for which they later paid."
Then in August the bricks
made, but the two purchasers "were notified that their pavers'
inclusion on the walkway was denied because they quoted Bible verses,"
District officials cited
perception of the "separation of church and state" as a reason,
presuming "erroneously" that the Bible verses would establish an
unconstitutional establishment of religion, the ADF said.
The ADF said the district
however, accept other religious messages, such as a Hindu quote from
Mahatma Gandhi and even a Bible quote, "Yes, it is possible," in
It was a memo from Karen
Rohrbaugh of the parent teacher organization that raised concerns about
the "religious verbiage."
The principal, Patrick
agreed. "We need to respectfully decline the donation of bricks quoting
scripture from the bible," he wrote. "I'm sure most parents will
understand the constitutional protections regarding the separation of
church and state."
The paving stones then
handed over to the purchasers, the case explains.
information on this
topic, Click Here
Ground Zero imam:
'True' Muslims implement Shariah
must pay 'ultimate price' to see paradise
by Aaron Klein
posted January 30, 2011
Muslims who enter the highest levels of Muslim paradise are those who
pay the ultimate price of sacrifice for the goal of implementing
Shariah Islamic law, declared the imam who has become the new face of
the proposed Islamic cultural center near Ground Zero in New York City.
a recent mosque sermon obtained by WND, Imam Abdallah Adhami opens with
an Islamic prayer declaring the supremacy of Allah over the universe.
stated the message of the Quranic figure Muhammad "is the continuity
and the culmination of all the messages of all the prophets before him,
from Adam to Noah to Abraham and Moses and Jesus and everyone in
"And that message is the supremacy and
dominion of the lord [Allah] of the world," he stated.
his sermon, Adhami discussed Islamic oral tradition regarding "true"
Muslims worthy of entering "Jannah," or the Islamic paradise.
Adhami: "You have to pass all your tests, and the only time that you
know you are truthful in implementing the change that Shariah sought
for you to implement is when you have paid the ultimate price of
Later in the lecture, Adhami states
Muslims have more
of a right than do Jews to the biblical prophet Moses.
love Moses more than them. We are more worthy of loyalty to Moses, more
than they are. We love him more than they do," he stated.
This seems to be a theme for Adhami.
Two week ago, WND
story that Adhami declared in a separate lecture that
Muslims have "more of a right" than Jews to the biblical prophet Moses.
In the same lecture, Adhami urged
"compete" with other religions.
Meanwhile, others have been
Writing at the NewsReal blog writer
Adhami was a guest speaker at the annual convention of the Islamic
Association for Palestine in 200o. T he theme of the convention was
"All Palestine is Sacred!"
was reportedly joined at the speakers' rostrum by Dr. Sami Al-Arian,
who pled guilty in 2006 to conspiracy to contribute services to or for
the benefit of the Palestine Islamic Jihad.
IAP went defunct in 2005. It was
established in 1981
by Hamas political operative Mousa Abu Marzook.
the ISNA, the IAP was named in a May 1991 Muslim Brotherhood document —
titled "An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the
Group in North America" – as one of the Brotherhood's 29 likeminded
"organizations of our friends."
run by blogger and activist Pamela Geller, found Adhami has expressed
appreciation for Islamic cleric Siraj Wahhaj, who was named as a
possible co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.
Adhami has called Wahhaj "Our Beloved
Imam" and the
"voice of the spirit of Islam in America and its pride."
Adhami's website, Sakeenah, hailed Wahhaj for his "devoted leadership
to the community" and his role "as a pioneer in the American Muslim
the 1970s, Imam Siraj has tirelessly laid the foundations for many
scholars and leaders that would follow him," the website stated. "From
activism to challenges, to the Nation of Islam to revolutions, follow
Imam Siraj as he retraces the footsteps of his life."
information on this
topic, Click Here
of 'infecting' children
March 16th, 2011
By Bob Unruh
© 2011 WorldNetDaily
An attorney for a
faced religious discrimination in their request to provide foster care
says there’s no point in appealing a stunning decision that accused
them of “infecting” children with their beliefs, because the nation’s
legal system is skewed against Christianity.
But Paul Diamond, who served as
barrister to the Johns family in the dispute in the United Kingdom over
the nation’s mandatory promotion of homosexuality to foster children,
said there is a solution: The people need to reverse the nation’s surge
toward treating homosexuals as a privileged class.
WND reported on the court
Christians who want to provide foster care for needy children must
promote homosexuality to them, and that there is only a “qualified”
right to exercise their Christian beliefs.
The judgment came in a
and Owen Johns that their biblical beliefs in opposition to homosexual
behavior were being used by the government to discriminate against them
regarding their application to be foster parents.
The couple previously
care and had applied to resume their work but suddenly were rejected
because they expressed their Christian beliefs regarding homosexuality.
“Back Fired,” by William
shows how the faith that gave birth to tolerance is no longer tolerated!
According to the
Centre, which also posted online the decision in the landmark High
Court case, the judges refused to say the Johns should be allowed to
provide foster care.
“There now appears to be
stop the increasing bar on Christians who wish to adopt or foster
children but who are not willing to compromise their beliefs by
promoting the practice of homosexuality to small children,” the
information on this
topic, Click Here
Memo to Congress: It's called freedom of speech
Defense counsel takes on case of woman arrested for
Posted: January 20, 2011
1:00 am Eastern
© 2011 WorldNetDaily
who burst out with "except Obama" when New
Democratic Rep. Frank Pallone was reading in Congress the
Constitution's requirement that the president be a "natural born
Citizen" was simply exercising her free speech rights, according to a
law team representing her.
"This case is not about President Obama's eligibility
Theresa Cao's affiliation with the birther movement – it's about free
speech in its purest sense," said John W. Whitehead, president of the
Whitehead told WND he's helping Cao defend against
violated a congressional code against conduct intended to impede,
disrupt or disturb sessions of Congress, for which she faces potential
fines of up to $500 and/or six months in jail.
"The sad irony here is that Ms. Cao was arrested for
constitutional right to free speech at the very moment that Congress
was making a show of reading aloud the Constitution," Whitehead said.
"One can't help but wonder whether Congress actually
anything that they read," he said.
reported, Cao was arrested Jan. 6 by Capitol police, given a
court date and then released. She told WND in a telephone interview
after her release, while
she was standing in front of the Hart Office Building near the Capitol,
that the only hope for the United States is a return to the faith of
the Founding Fathers.
And that direction, she said, is opposite from the one
leading the nation. Cao contends Obama is moving America toward
"socialism," citing his health-care plan and the takeover of private
banks, insurance companies and
She said she had come to the U.S. House chambers to
of the new Congress under the leadership of the Republicans. She was
overwhelmed, she said, when the Constitution was being read, which came
about as part of an effort by the new GOP majority to return the nation
to its founding principles.
Rep. Frank Pallone, D-N.J., was reading Article II,
regarding the requirement that the president be a "natural born
Citizen," when she burst out, "Except Obama."
"Literally if this question of the natural born
question does not get answered, then I am allowing a tyrannical
dictator – the spirit of the anti-Christ, the new world order system
that has their plans right this second to collapse the U.S. economy,
and we know their plan, the new world order system's plan is to
literally destroy humanity," she told WND at the time.
Whitehead told WND it's a troubling sign of the times
when someone is arrested for saying a couple of words when the response
from the House was a much greater disruption.
The Rutherford Institute statement said the House was
"symbolic gesture" of reading the Constitution "to acknowledge that the
United States is a nation of laws, not men."
Cao told WND she obtained tickets for the House gallery a day before
the Jan. 6 event. She was hoping the GOP majority would be dedicated to
doing the "will of the people" after California Democratic Rep. Nancy
Pelosi's tenure as speaker, which included pushing through Obamacare
even though a majority of Americans oppose it.
was almost a year ago when Cao was profiled in WND as a lone woman
evangelist delivering the message that "heaven is offering a 'bailout'
far greater than dollars."
At the time, Cao told WND, "I have a standard location
right in front of the White House" – encouraging people to follow the
Bible to see God's miracles on earth and its companion warning of
punishment for those who disobey."
The message applies not only to individuals but to
"Most Americans really are asleep concerning what's
she said then. "People are willing to hand over their God-given rights
and the Constitution to the prevailing wicked forces."
Cao has her
ministry work posted at GotHeavensBailout.blogspot.com.
The reading of the Constitution was described by
Slate.com as a
"fetish" in her article, "Read It and Weep: How the tea party's
fetish for the Constitution as written may get it in trouble."
"The way some people rub Buddha and they think the
off, I think there's a longstanding tradition in this country. We're
awfully religious about the Constitution," she later told MSNBC. "I
think there is this sort of fetishization that is of a piece with the
sort of need for a religious document that's immutable and perfect in
Syndicated columnist and commentator Charles
News that the objection to reading the Constitution aloud by many on
the left "is truly astonishing."
He said that in the 1960s, "Liberals got in trouble
wrong side of the flag," and are now in danger of being on the wrong
side of the Constitution, which he called "the essence of America."
For liberals to think there's an advantage in
reading of the document "is real bad politics," Krauthammer said.
WND has reported on dozens of legal challenges to
a "natural born citizen." The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1,
states, "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the
United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall
be eligible to the Office of President."
Some of the challenges question whether he was
Hawaii, as he insists. If he was born out of the country, Obama's
American mother, the suits contend, was too young at the time of his
birth to confer American citizenship to her son under the law at the
Other challenges have focused on Obama's citizenship
father. Some assert he was born a dual citizen because he father was a
Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom. The cases
contend the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from
qualifying as natural born.
Obama wrote in his own book that he was born a dual
U.S. and Great Britain due to the fact his father was a subject of the
Several of the cases have been appealed to the U.S.
but justices have declined even to hear arguments. Among the other
cases turned down without a hearing at the high court have been
petitions by Mario Apuzzo, Philip Berg, Cort Wrotnowski, Leo Donofrio
and Orly Taitz.
Complicating the issue is Obama's decision to spend
in the hundreds of thousands of dollars to avoid releasing a state
birth certificate that would
put to rest the questions.
information on this
topic, Click Here
detained over 'extremist' bumper
Tread on Me' puts driver in 'watch'
category in DHS report
A Louisiana driver was stopped and
having a "Don't Tread on Me" bumper sticker on his vehicle and warned
by a police officer about the "subversive" message it sent, according
to the driver's relative.
The situation developed in the
small town of Ball,
La., where a receptionist at the police department told WND she knew
nothing about the traffic stop, during which the "suspect" was
investigated for "extremist" activities, the relative said.
It followed by only a few weeks
the release of a
Department of Homeland Security report, "Right-wing
Recruitment", which prompted outrage
legislators and a
The report, which cites
individuals who sport certain
bumper stickers on their vehicles as suspect, was delivered to tens of
thousands of local law enforcement officers across the nation.
WND is withholding the driver's
name and the
relative's name at their request.
However, the situation
According to the relative, it
happened this way: Her
brother-in-law was driving home from work through the town, which has a
local reputation for enhancing its budget by ticketing speeders. He was
pulled over by police officers who told him "he had a subversive
survivalist bumper sticker on his car."
"They proceeded to keep him
there on the side of the
road while they ran whatever they do to see if you have a record,
keeping him standing by the side of the road for 30 minutes," she told
Finding no record and no reason
to keep him, they
warned him and eventually let him go, she said.
The company that sells the
bumper sticker is The
Operating Officer Jay Taylor told WND the woman had told his staff
about the situation while ordering more bumper stickers.
"It's rather shocking," he
said. "We supposedly have
freedom of speech in our country.
Gadsden Flag here!
"We joke around every now and
then how our spouses
will come to visit us in jail," he continued, citing his products that
say, "The Audacity of Nope," "Taxed Enough Already," "Born Free, Taxed
to Death," "Bring Home Our Troops: Send the Democrats" and "I'll Keep
my Guns and Money, You Keep the 'Change'."
"We hope people realize this is
serious," he said.
American Vision noted the
"background check" that was
done on the driver.
"Why? [He] had purchased and
displayed a conservative
'Don't Tread on Me' bumper sticker.""
The commentator wrote, "The
bumper sticker is based
on the famous flag designed by American Revolution era general and
statesman Christopher Gadsden. The yellow flag featured a coiled
diamondback rattlesnake ready to strike, with the slogan 'Don't Tread
on Me!' underneath it. Benjamin Franklin helped make the rattlesnake a
symbol of Americans' reluctance to quarrel but vigilance and resolve in
defense of their rights. By 1775 when Gadsden presented his flag to the
commander-in-chief of the Navy, the rattlesnake was a symbol of the
colonies and of their need to unite in defense of threats to their
God-given and inherited rights. The flag and the bumper sticker
symbolize American patriotism, the need to defend Americans' rights,
and resistance to tyranny's threats to American liberty. Those threats
included-and include-illegal taxation, profanation of Americans'
rights, and violation of the fundamental principles of American law."
American Vision continued: "The
of Homeland Security memo, which was apparently based on the infamous
Missouri State Police Report that described supporters of presidential
candidates Bob Barr, Ron Paul, and Chuck Baldwin as 'militia'-type
potential extremists and potential terrorists, is not the first effort
of leftist radicals to slander their political opponents as
"'Liberals' and other leftists
have been calling
defenders of traditional American limited, constitutional government,
free enterprise, and individual liberty 'extremists' since at least the
1964 election," the Vision America statement said. "Small town police
misled by phony left wing 'reports' are bad enough. Federal government
agencies and their armed agents under the direction of leftist radicals
are exponentially worse."
earlier on the DHS report, which advised about the "extremism" that
could be expected from returning veterans, those who support
homeschooling and oppose abortion, post certain bumper stickers on
their vehicles and other factors.
The DHS not only issued that
report, but also an
earlier memo defining dozens of groups, members of animal rights
organizations, black separatists, tax protesters and others as
That item, the "Domestic
reportedly was rescinded almost immediately, but Benjamin Sarlin of The
Beast recently obtained and published online a
memo, dated March 26, 2009.
It defines the "tax resistance
movement" – also
referred to in the report as the tax protest movement or the tax
freedom movement – as "groups or individuals who vehemently believe
taxes violate their constitutional rights. Among their beliefs are that
wages are not income, that paying income taxes is voluntary, and that
the 16th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which allowed Congress to
levy taxes on income, was not properly ratified."
It states that tax protesters
"have been known to
advocate or engage in criminal activity and plot acts of violence and
terrorism in an attempt to advance their extremist goals."
Apparently, the DHS analyzes
the "threat" level of
Internet news websites like WorldNetDaily, for the lexicon defines
"alternative media" as "a term used to describe various information
sources that provide a forum for interpretations of events and issues
that differ radically from those presented in mass media products and
information on this
topic, Click Here
Private terror probe: 50
mosques in 50 days
special agent visiting each U.S.
state to assess threat
A Middle East expert and former Air Force special
agent is set
to launch a "counter-terrorism
America in which he plans to visit a mosque in each
state in 50 days to assess their threat to the nation's security.
Dave Gaubatz told WND the ultimate aim of his project,
begins April 16, is to shut down Islamic centers "that advocate
violence against America" and to prosecute the Islamic leaders "for
sedition or treason if they are encouraging their worshippers to attack
America from the 'inside.'"
"This objective will only be met if American citizens
involved in their communities and say 'no more,'" Gaubatz said.
He said he receives contact almost daily from citizens
complain that law enforcement officials are not listening to their
In fact, he said, intelligence on the Islamic centers
to visit has been provided by concerned Christian, Jewish and Muslim
Gaubatz said many law enforcement officers that
Islamic threat are hindered by political red tape that prevents them
from conducting timely investigations.
"Most counter-terrorism intelligence collected is filed away and never
shared with the public," Gaubatz said. "An objective of this project
will be to bring counter-terrorism issues to the attention of the
public; and they, in turn, should demand their respective law
enforcement departments and elected officials focus on protecting their
families and our country."
His assessment of each mosque will be based on
written materials, study material provided for children, discussions
with Islamic leaders and observations based on his 25 years of
Gaubatz, a U.S. State Department-trained Arabic
counter-terrorism specialist, has more than two decades of experience
in the Middle East, including Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Jordan and Iraq. He
was deployed to Nasiriyah, Iraq, in 2003, where he collected
intelligence on weapons of mass destruction and espionage.
Gaubatz said he will declare his intentions at each of
pre-selected mosques in a professional manner, hand the leaders his
card and confront them on any violent material he observes or on any
information they distribute that advocates an Islamic state in the U.S.
"It is important to understand not all mosques and
leaders advocate violence against the U.S., but initial research and
intelligence obtained from sources indicate many do," he said.
reported, Gaubatz was engaged in a similar endeavor, though on a
much larger scale, in a project called Mapping
The objective of the mapping project, which stopped
lack of funding, was to systematically classify every known mosque in
the U.S. in a rigorous, scientific fashion, based on the premise that
the more a mosque or community of Muslims adheres to Shariah, or
Islamic law, the greater its threat to U.S. national security.
During his upcoming 50-day journey, Gaubatz plans to
relevant information his finds available to law enforcement, and he
the public abreast of his travels with photos, video and audio uploaded
on his website.
"The public needs this information right now," he
or without public funding, I will conduct the assessment."
His previous charting of about 100 mosques showed "the
adherent the mosque is to Shariah, the more likely you are going to
find the material to back that up."
Gaubatz found, for example, at the Islamic Center of
Jersey in Palmyra – where three Muslims charged with terrorism
regularly worshipped – a strict, Shariah-adherent leadership that
eagerly distributed jihadist materials supportive of seminal Shariah
proponents such as Sayid Abul Maududi, the founder of the radical
Pakistani party Jamaat-e-Islami, and Syed Qutb, whose ideas shaped
Gaubatz discovered that the mosque tied to the Muslim
on a shooting rampage at Salt Lake City's Trolley Square mall in 2007
ranked high in Shariah adherence. In Blacksburg, Va., he met the imam
who was asked to pray at the nationally televised service for slain
students at Virginia Tech and discovered he leads a Shariah-compliant
mosque that backs the genocidal Islamist regime in Sudan.
Gaubatz contends many Islamic groups and organizations
a legal and peaceful veneer in English-speaking settings but often
preach quietly in Arabic, Farsi and Urdu "a very violent and
Virtually all Islamic leaders in the U.S. have been
particularly careful since the 9/11 attacks about what they say
publicly, Gaubatz said. But many Shariah-compliant mosques and schools
distribute materials supporting or calling for violent jihad.
Gaubatz has spent a considerable amount of his time
investigating the Washington, D.C.-based Council on American-Islamic
Relations, or CAIR, which has enjoyed access to the White House, the
State Department, Homeland Security and other branches of government
despite evidence of its ties to Hamas and other radical groups.
Gaubatz noted CAIR has a campaign to put
materials into American libraries.
"I've gone to several hundred public libraries and
material is in there," he said. "People don't realize what it is until
you start looking at the author, and it came from Saudi Arabia, sent to
CAIR. And CAIR is putting it into our public libraries."
reported, Gaubatz publicly served CAIR leaders last November with
legal notice of a lawsuit on behalf of Muslims who claim the group
victimized them in a fraud scheme involving a lawyer who is unqualified
Gaubatz said his group has been told by many
Muslims that to minimize the threat of another attack, authorities
should ask foreigners seeking entry into the U.S. if they agree with
"If they agree, according to the Muslims who have told
this, then they should probably not even be given entry here," he said.
"It's so easy. You can't agree with Shariah law and
you are peaceful," Gaubatz continued. "You can't do it. Now there are
Muslims in the United States who do. They say, we don't agree with
Shariah law, we don't want Shariah law. But then, to the pure Muslim,
they are not Muslim."
Some Muslims want to reform Islam, he said, and retain
"That's fine, but then you are not pure Muslim,"
information on this
topic, Click Here
testing above grade levels
A North Carolina judge has
ordered three children to
attend public schools this fall because the homeschooling their mother
has provided over the last four years needs to be "challenged."
The children, however, have
tested above their grade
levels – by as much as two years.
The decision is raising
eyebrows among homeschooling
families, and one friend of the mother has launched a website to
The ruling was made by Judge
Ned Mangum of Wake
County, who was handling a divorce proceeding for Thomas and Venessa
A statement released by a
publicist working for the
mother, whose children now are 10, 11 and 12, said Mangum stripped her
of her right to decide what is best for her children's education.
when contacted by WND, explained his goal in ordering the children
to register and attend a public school was to make sure they have a
"more well-rounded education."
"I thought Ms. Mills had done a
good job [in
homeschooling]," he said. "It was great for them to have that access,
and [I had] no problems with homeschooling. I said public schooling
would be a good complement."
The judge said the husband has
not been supportive of
his wife's homeschooling, and "it accomplished its purposes. It now was
appropriate to have them back in public school."
Mangum said he made the
determination on his guiding
principle, "What's in the best interest of the minor children," and
conceded it was putting his judgment in place of the mother's.
And he said that while he
expressed his opinion from
the bench in the court hearing, the final written order had not yet
However, the practice of a
judge replacing a parent's
judgment with his own regarding homeschooling was argued recently when
a court panel in California ruled that a family would no longer be
allowed to homeschool their own children.
alarming homeschool advocates nationwide because of its potential
Ultimately, the 2nd Appellate
District Court in Los
Angeles reversed its own order, affirming the rights of California
parents to homeschool their children if they choose.
The court, which earlier had
opined that only
credentialed teachers could properly educate children, was faced with a
flood of friend-of-the-court briefs representing individuals and
groups, including Congress members.
The conclusion ultimately was
that parents, not the
state, would decide where children are educated.
The California opinion said
state law permits
homeschooling "as a species of private school education" but that
statutory permission for parents to teach their own children could be
"overridden in order to protect the safety of a child who has been
In the North Carolina case,
Adam Cothes, a spokesman
for the mother, said the children routinely had been testing at up to
two years above their grade level, were involved in swim team and other
activities and events outside their home and had taken leadership roles
in history club events.
On her website, family friend
Robyn Williams said
Mangum stated his decision was not ideologically or religiously
motivated but that ordering the children into public schools would
"challenge the ideas you've taught them."
Williams, a homeschool mother
of four herself, said,
"I have never seen such injustice and such a direct attack against
"This judge clearly took
personal issue with
Venessa's stance on education and faith, even though her children are
doing great. If her right to homeschool can be taken away so easily,
what will this mean for homeschoolers state wide, or even nationally?"
Williams said she's trying to
across the nation to defend their rights as Americans and parents to
educate their own children.
Williams told WND the public
school order was the
worst possible outcome for Ms. Mills, who had made it clear she felt it
was important to her children that she continue homeschooling.
According to Williams' website,
the judge also
ordered a mental health evaluation for the mother – but not the father
– as part of the divorce proceedings, in what Williams described as an
attack on the "mother's conservative Christian beliefs."
According to a proposed but
as-yet unsigned order
submitted by the father's lawyer to Mangum, "The children have thrived
in homeschool for the past four years, but need the broader focus and
socialization available to them in public school. The Court finds that
it is in the children's best interest to continue their homeschooling
through the end of the current school year, but to begin attending
public school at the beginning of the 2009-2010 instructional year."
The order proposed by the
father's lawyer also
conceded the reason for the divorce was the father's "adultery," but it
specifically said the father would not pay for homeschooling expenses
for his children.
The order also stated,
"Defendant believes that
plaintiff is a nurturing mother who loves the children. Defendant
believes that plaintiff has done a good job with the homeschooling of
the children, although he does not believe that continued homeschooling
is in the best interest of the children."
The website said the judge also
said public school
would "prepare these kids for the real world and college" and allow
Williams said the mother
originally moved into a
homeschool schedule because the children were not doing as well as she
hoped at the local public schools.
California, the ruling
released was praised by pro-family
"We're pleased the appeals
court recognized the
rights of parents to provide education for their children," said Jay
Sekulow, chief counsel for the American Center for Law and
"This decision reaffirms the constitutional right that's afforded to
parents in directing the education of their children. It's an important
victory for families who cherish the freedom to ensure that their
children receive a high quality education that is inherent in
"Parents have a constitutional
right to make
educational choices for their children," said Alliance Defense
Senior Counsel Gary McCaleb. "Thousands of California families have
educated their children successfully through homeschooling. We're
pleased with the court's decision, which protects the rights of
families and protects an avenue of education that has proven to benefit
children time and time again.
The North Carolina ruling also
resembles a number of
rulings handed down against homeschool parents in Germany, where such
instruction has been banned since the years of Adolf Hitler's rule.
Wolfgang Drautz, consul general for the Federal Republic of Germany,
has commented previously on the issue, contending the government "has a
legitimate interest in countering the rise of parallel societies that
are based on religion."
"The minister of education does
not share your
attitudes toward so-called homeschooling," said a government letter in
response. "... You complain about the forced school escort of primary
school children by the responsible local police officers. ... In order
to avoid this in future, the education authority is in conversation
with the affected family in order to look for possibilities to bring
line with the
unalterable school attendance requirement."
recently when a German appeals court tossed out
three-month jail terms issued to a mother and father who homeschool
their children. But the court also ordered new trials that could leave
the parents with similar penalties, according to the Home
Dudek of Archfeldt, Germany, who
last summer received formal notices of their three-month sentences.
The 90-day sentences came about
when Hesse State
Prosecutor Herwig Muller appealed a lower court's determination of
fines for the family. The ruling had imposed fines of about 900 euros,
or $1,200, for not sending their children to school
Muller, however, told the
parents they shouldn't
worry about any fines, since he would "send them to jail," the HSLDA
HSLDA spokesman Michael
Donnelly warned the
homeschooling battle is far from over in Germany.
"There continue to be signs
that the German
government is cracking down on homeschooling families," he reported. "A
recent letter from one family in southern Germany contained threats
from local school authorities that unless the family enrolled their
children in school, they would seek fines in excess of 50,000 euros
(nearly $70,000), jail time and the removal of custody of the
HSLDA officials estimate there
are some 400
homeschool families in Germany, virtually all of them either forced
into hiding or facing court actions.
information on this
topic, Click Here
information on this
topic, Click Here
allows governments to decide which
markers to display in public parks
The U.S. Supreme Court today ruled
in the U.S. are not required to post or display every statement offered
by private organizations.
The ruling came in a case
stemming from a dispute in
Utah in which a religious organization called Summum demanded the city
of Pleasant Grove display a monument containing its seven "aphorisms."
Summum argued the city already had accepted a donated monument
displaying the Ten Commandments in a city park.
Lawyers with the American
Center for Law
and Justice, who defended the city, said a requirement that
governments display any message offered was "scary" and would lead to
"The Minutemen in
Massachusetts? We need a Redcoat. A
George Washington statue? Why not George the 3rd. A Holocaust memorial?
How about a Hitler memorial?" said the ACLJ's Frank Manion in a
previous interview with WND.
The non-profit legal group also
had suggested that
according to Summum's logic, the nation could be required to allow a
"Statue of Tyranny" in New York Harbor to accompany the Statue of
The Supreme Court's ruling
concluded those fears are
At the 10th U.S. Circuit Court
of Appeals in Denver,
judges had ruled that Summum was entitled to have its monument
displayed by the city.
The ACLJ contended Ten
nationwide were the real targets of the legal action, because in many
circumstances, cities or other governments likely would order such
monuments removed rather than order acceptance of others.
Today's decision, ACLJ chief
counsel Jay Sekulow told
WND, is a "huge victory."
"This decision allows
government to convey messages
about its own history of its community, and includes religious
monuments," he said. "Religious monuments are not treated differently
than others. Most significantly, the government get to make the
The ACLJ, which has worked on
the case with the
Center, explained the Constitution "does not empower
private parties to force permanent displays into a park, crowding out
the available physical space and trumping the government's own vision"
for the parks.
A monument is not the same as a
message delivered in
a public forum, either, the opinion said.
"Speakers, no matter how
long-winded, eventually come
to the end of their remarks; persons distributing leaflets and carrying
signs at some point tire and go home; monuments, however, endure. They
monopolize the use of the land on which they stand and interfere
permanently with other uses of public space. A public park, over the
years, can provide a soapbox for a very large number of orators –
often, for all who want to speak – but it is hard to imagine how a
public park could be opened up for the installation of permanent
monuments by every person or group wishing to engage in that form of
expression," said the court.
"There may be situations in
which it is difficult to
tell whether a government entity is speaking on its own behalf or is
providing a forum for private speech, but this case does not present
such a situation. Permanent monuments displayed on public property
typically represent government speech," the opinion said.
government-financed monuments speak for the government so do privately
financed and donated monuments that the government accepts and displays
to the public on government land … We think it is fair to say that
throughout our Nation's history, the general government practice with
respect to donated monuments has been one of selective receptivity."
The majority opinion was
written by Justice Samuel
Alito Jr., who was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices
John Paul Stevens, Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas,
Ruth Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer. David Souter filed an opinion
concurring in judgment.
arguments to the high court, Sekulow said another ruling in the
case would "create havoc in America over how local, state and federal
governments choose to memorialize significant events."
He suggested the basic question
is whether a city
gets to decide which permanent, unattended monuments, if any, to
install on city property. The answer is 'Yes,'" he said. "The fact is
that government speech means the government can control its message.
For example, accepting a Statue of Liberty does not compel a government
to accept a Statue of Tyranny."
"Summum's assertion of a right
to force its monument
upon the city has no legitimate basis in Supreme Court case law,"
Summum, founded in Salt Lake
City in 1975, calls
itself a church. The group sued Pleasant Grove in federal court,
alleging that because the city had a donated Ten Commandments monument
in a city park, the First Amendment required the city to accept and
display a monument to Summum's seven aphorisms.
The aphorisms, according to the
predate the Ten Commandments and include: The principles of
psychokinesis, correspondence, vibration, opposition, rhythm, cause and
effect, and gender.
The "church" claims the
aphorisms were written on the
original stone tablets given by God to Moses, which he broke when he
saw the Israelites had manufactured a golden calf idol during his
absence. The organization says the tablets were broken because Moses
realized people couldn't understand the aphorisms, so he came down a
second time with the Ten Commandments.
information on this
topic, Click Here
'They said he was born in Hawaii,
but I haven't seen any birth certificate'
"Well, his father was Kenyan and they said he was born
Hawaii, but I haven't seen any birth certificate," Sen. Richard Shelby,
R-Ala., told constituents in Cullman County. "You have to be born in
America to be president."
the proof Barack Obama was born in the U.S. or that he fulfills the
"natural-born American" clause in the Constitution? If you still want
to see it, join more than 250,000 others and sign up now!
WND has reported on multiple legal challenges to
status as a "natural born citizen." The Constitution, Article 2,
Section 1, states, "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a
Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this
Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President."
Some question whether he was actually born in Hawaii,
insists. If he was born out of the country, Obama's American mother,
the suits contend, was too young at the time of his birth to confer
American citizenship to her son under the law at the time.
Other challenges have focused on Obama's citizenship
his father, a Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom
at the time of his birth, thus making him a dual citizen. The cases
contend the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from
qualifying as natural born.
Here is a partial listing and status update for some of the cases over
- New Jersey attorney Mario Apuzzo
has filed a case on behalf of Charles Kerchner and others alleging
Congress didn't properly ascertain that Obama is qualified to hold the
office of president.
- Philip J. Berg, a Pennsylvania Democrat, demanded
courts verify Obama's original birth certificate and other documents
proving his American citizenship. Berg's latest appeal, requesting an
injunction to stop the Electoral College from selecting the 44th
president, was denied.
- Leo Donofrio of New Jersey
filed a lawsuit claiming Obama's dual citizenship disqualified him from
serving as president. His case was considered in conference by the U.S.
Supreme Court but
- Cort Wrotnowski filed suit against Connecticut's
of state, making a similar argument to Donofrio. His case
was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court, but was
denied a full hearing.
- Former presidential candidate Alan Keyes headlines
of people filing a suit in California, in a case handled by the United
Justice Foundation, that asks the secretary of state to refuse to
allow the state's 55 Electoral College votes to be cast in the 2008
presidential election until Obama verifies his eligibility to hold the
office. The case is pending, and lawyers
are seeking the public's support.
- Chicago attorney
Andy Martin sought legal action requiring Hawaii Gov. Linda Lingle to
release Obama's vital statistics record. The case was dismissed by
Hawaii Circuit Court Judge Bert Ayabe.
- Lt. Col. Donald Sullivan sought a temporary
order to stop the Electoral College vote in North Carolina until Barack
Obama's eligibility could be confirmed, alleging doubt about Obama's
citizenship. His case was denied.
- In Ohio, David M. Neal sued to force the secretary
to request documents from the Federal Elections Commission, the
Democratic National Committee, the Ohio Democratic Party and Obama to
show the presidential candidate was born in Hawaii. The case was denied.
- In Washington state, Steven Marquis sued the
state seeking a determination on Obama's citizenship. The case was
- In Georgia, Rev. Tom Terry asked the state Supreme
authenticate Obama's birth certificate. His request for an injunction
against Georgia's secretary of state was denied by Georgia Superior
Court Judge Jerry W. Baxter.
- California attorney Orly Taitz has brought a case,
Lightfoot vs. Bowen, on behalf of Gail Lightfoot, the vice presidential
candidate on the ballot with Ron Paul, four electors and two registered
other cases cited on the RightSideofLife blog as raising questions
about Obama's eligibility include:
- In Texas, Darrel Hunter vs. Obama later was
- In Ohio, Gordon Stamper vs. U.S. later was
- In Texas, Brockhausen vs. Andrade.
- In Washington, L. Charles vs. Obama.
- In Hawaii, Keyes vs. Lingle, dismissed.
senior reporter Jerome Corsi had gone to both Kenya and Hawaii prior to
the election to investigate issues surrounding Obama's birth. But
his research and discoveries only raised more questions.
The governor's office in Hawaii said there is a valid
certificate but rejected requests for access and left ambiguous its
origin: Does the certificate on file with the Department of Health
indicate a Hawaii birth or was it generated after the Obama family
registered a Kenyan birth in Hawaii, which the state's procedures
allowed at the time?
information on this
topic, Click Here
for 'offending Islam'
says Muhammad killed Jews, had
sexual relations with 9-year-old
JERUSALEM – Two newspaper
executives were arrested
yesterday on charges of "intent to outrage" the "religious feelings" of
Their alleged crime?
Republishing an article that
refers to Islam as "oppressive" and states the religion's prophet,
Muhammad, had sex with a 9-year-old girl and ordered the murder of
The incident unfolded in India,
where Ravindra Kumar,
an editor, and Anand Sinha, publisher of the country's Statesman
newspaper, turned themselves into police following complaints from
local Muslims. The complaints cited a law that makes illegal the
"malicious intent" to "outrage religious feelings." The two were
released on bail today.
The Statesman had republished
an article Feb. 5
originally printed in Britain's Independent newspaper titled, "Why
should I respect these oppressive religions?" The author, columnist
Johann Hari, was lamenting what he said was the erosion of rights to
"I don't respect the idea that we
should follow a
'prophet' who at the age of 53 had sex with a 9-year old girl and
ordered the murder of whole villages of Jews because they wouldn't
follow him," Hari wrote.
Although the piece prompted
little outcry in Britain,
angry Muslims reportedly have been demonstrating in front of the
Statesman's offices. Baton-wielding police broke up several protests
the past two weeks.
Kumar already issued a public
apology for reprinting
"The essential ingredient of
the law under which we
are charged is malicious intent," Kumar told reporters today.
"But how could we anticipate
the protest when the
article generated no controversy in Britain, which has substantial
Muslim population, after it was carried originally by the Independent?"
India, the world's second most
populous country, is
mostly Hindu. About 13 percent of the population is Muslim.
is no hindrance to marriage under Islam, and sex at age 9
"There is no minimal age for
You can have a marriage contract even with a 1-year-old girl, not to
mention a girl of 9, 7, or 8. This is merely a contract [indicating]
consent. The guardian in such a case must be the father, because the
father's opinion is obligatory. Thus, the girl becomes a wife," said
Ahmad Al-Mu'bi, an officiant for marriages.
World Net Daily
information on this
topic, Click Here