Why I Oppose the Ground Zero Mosque, Cordoba House, Park51, whatever you call it

I have nothing against individual Muslims. I believe there is a constitutional right to build a 13 story mosque and Muslim community center 2 blocks from Ground Zero. But just because there is a right to build it, it doesn't mean it IS right, morally. This is the view most Americans have the same view

Siena found 63% of voters oppose the project, compared to 27% who support it

Nearly two-thirds of voters - 64% - think the developers do have a Constitutional right to build the mosque and Muslim community center near Ground Zero, compared to only 28% who say they do not

There is barely a Muslim population in Lower Manhattan, so him building this to serve the Muslim population of lower Manhattan is a joke. Therefore, its size is only going to serve one purpose: being 13 stories and a mosque. There are already 2 other mosques which were built BEFORE September 11 around the area, and not as close to Ground Zero, not within enough distance to pass the mosque coming from one direction and turn your head to see the WTC within a minute.

Second: would you support building a 13 story Serbian Orthodox cultural center in Srebrenica, where Serbs carried out a genocide against Bosnian Muslims (Bosniaks)? Would you support an 13 story American cultural center in My Lai, or Abu Ghraib(where not many people actually died) A 13 story German cultural center in Treblinka? A Turkish cultural center/mosque in Armenia? A 13 story Afrikaner cultural center in Sharpville? I think not. And in all cases, not every member of the offending group supported the actions. But enough did to carry out the acts and support those who were acting on behalf of the offending group. But the matter is that why would you remind the victims who live near (or were exterminated near in the case of Treblinka) the very site of an atrocity committed in the name or a nation (religious or ethnic) everyday about the people who did it by building a large building dedicated to them?

Yes there were Muslim victims, including first responders of 9/11, but they were not attacked as Muslims but as Americans whereas the attackers attacked overtly and expressedly as practicing, devout, pure dedicated Muslims AGAINST Americans. And in honesty, the vast majority of 9/11 victims were not Muslim.

Also, in the Middle East and wider Muslim world, the FACT that, yes, Muslims carried 9/11 out is widely questioned!!! The CIA and the Mossad are named by a large number of Muslims, who aren't even in Al-Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, Jemaah-Islamiya, etc, as the perpetrators. Also, close to the time attacks happened, Osama Bin Laden was very popular in the Muslim world. Although his popularity has declined, the fact remains that the guy was popular in the Muslim world enough to find support and shelter to plan the attacks AND not be captured, as he is being protected by somebody. So the Muslim world would see a Muslim religious site go up near where members of their community, in its name, carried heinous acts while many Muslims cannot accept the responsibility that even individual Muslims had for this attack. I'm not saying all Muslims are responsible, but there are Muslims who did the acts AS Muslims, who are responsible.

This is very different, than say, "Jewish bankers," like Madoff, who did evil things, but he did not do what he did to serve the Jewish People, nor did he ever say he did, so therefore that horrid analogy doesn't apply.

Also, about the Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf: he purports to be a moderate, and his supporters point to the sensitivity training he gave to soldiers during Bush's term. (IRONIC, HUH?) Well, I have no idea why Bush did this, tho he might have close connections with the Saudis, most likely. But he is a radical, not just for his comments that America was an accessory to 9/11. Tho, some did try to blame us for helping Afghanistan resist Communist Occupation, when personally I think its not that we did that, because some of Afghanistan's current government are Russo-Afghan war vets, its that we didn't push for peacekeepers to go there after the war ended. My problem is with him, obviously, saying that, not admitting that Hamas is a terrorist organization, but also, he has some Huffington Post blogs which came long after his 9/11 comments. Heres some samples:

Rauf on Sharia law

Rauf on Fort Hood

Now notice how in his article about Sharia law,

Islamic law is about God's law, and it is not that far from what we read in the Declaration of Independence about 'the Laws of Nature and Nature's God.' The Declaration says "men are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable Rights; that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness...The principles behind American secular law are similar to Shariah law - that we protect life, liberty and property, that we provide for the common welfare, that we maintain a certain amount of modesty...Some aspects of this penal code and its laws pertaining to women flow out of the cultural context. The religious imperative is about justice and fairness. If you strive for justice and fairness in the penal code, then you are in keeping with moral imperative of the Shariah.

First off, my biggest problem is his token mention of things like stonings, beheadings, burkas, amputation. But not one paragraph in this article is dedicated to ENDING AT LEAST ONE OF THESE INHUMANE PRACTICES which are enforced by penal code. And then he tries to compare this Sharia to the Declaration of Independence???? ARE YOU SHITTING ME??! This kind of thing is "justice and fairness?" So just that a female rape victim needs 4 male witnesses to prove rape? Stoning for adultery, jail or worse if she takes off her burka so maybe men who will treat her better can see her, if she's in a bad marriage? Amputation for stealing something worth much less than an arm, for which the lesson could be taught by a prison sentence or criminal record which hurts job searches instead? He then says:

The two pieces of unfinished business in Muslim countries are to revise the penal code so that it is responsive to modern realities

So you can tell us how you compare this barbarism to America's pride, but you don't tell us HOW to revise the penal code to fir modern realities? Or maybe the problem is that Sharia, as applied in Muslim countries, IS the penal code, and is prescribed as such in the Quran, Hadith and Sira. Ok, I get that no one wants to violate the Holy Book, but in the West, its done all the time, which is why gay rights, abortion, and divorce are widely legal in the West, and gay marriage is gaining ground in the US and legal in much of Western Europe, and gay marriages done in Cyprus are recognized in Israel. Also, Mr. Rauf, describe the cultural context of Sharia law which you don't condemn.

Lets looks at:

What this unfortunate Army major did was against the laws of Islam, even though news accounts said he was an observant Muslim. It is too early to understand his motivations and mental stability. He obviously was violating his faith when he undertook this act. Killing is as much a sin in Islam as it is in Christianity, Judaism and all the major religions. Taking the law into one's own hands is against Islamic teachings.

We do not know how our soldiers will react under the stresses of war. It is something that we as religious leaders should take seriously as we minister to our troops.

I am concerned that this incident will cause some Americans to react against the Islamic faith and Muslim Americans. Our fellow Americans should understand that every major American Muslim organization has condemned it in no uncertain terms. Thousands of American Muslims serve in the U.S. armed forces, and they are essential to the U.S. goal of bringing peace, stability and democracy to Iraq and Afghanistan. They are supported by millions of American Muslims.

"Take the law into his own hands?" He did not take the law into his own hands, because that means one tries to punish an actual crime when he's not a cop. The people he MURDERED (word is not used once in the piece) were NOT criminals, so he wasn't taking any laws into his own hands, he was breaking laws with his own hands. Also, this is not an acceptable way to crack under the stress of war. It sounds like Rauf is trying to have it both ways: somewhat condemn the act of terrorism but rationalize it. Now he is right that American Muslim soldiers are patriots serving their country and are needed to help us win. But it sounds like he's more concerned with how what people will say about Muslims than about the victims and their families, the effect it will have on the war effort, and the problem with extremism, also another word he fails to use. Also, I see no explicit condemnation on his part about the attack, only those of others.

Also, it MUST be noted that given that, as you saw, many Muslims refuse to believe that individual Muslims carried out the attacks, many also supported the attacks, which is why OBL is was, and still is, so popular in the Middle East, along with Islamist parties in the Muslim world. Also, Islam does have a history of building mosques over sites conquered. This occurred in the Middle Ages and in the dawn of Islam. Islamists would like to return to this glory, the same glory which built the mosque of Cordoba over a visgoth Church in Spain before the reconquista, built the Al-Aqsa Mosque and Dome of the Rock on the Temple Mount, the Lala Mustafa Pasha Mosque over St. Nicolas Cathedral in Cyprus during the early Ottoman years, Hagia Sophia, the Ummayad Mosque in Syria over the church with John the Baptist's remain's which are still there. Islamists would LOVE to see a mosque on the site where landing gear hit from the 9/11 attack, and symbolically located, with full deliberate intent, by Rauf.  Moderate Muslims see why this is wrong:

"Many Muslims fear that the mosque will become a shrine for Islamists, which would remind Americans of what Muslims did on 9/11,” Dr. Gamal Abd Al-Gawad, director of Al-Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies in Cairo told The Media Line..."Some people express concern that if the mosque will be built, it will harm Muslims and Islam in America. It’s not good for Muslims and Islam to be in the heart of such a controversy..."

Abdul Al-Rashid says:

I cannot imagine that Muslims want a mosque on this particular site, because it will be turned into an arena for promoters of hatred, a symbol of those who committed the crime. At the same time, there are no practicing Muslims in the district who need a place of worship, because it is indeed a commercial district.

Why can't the Park51 supporters see this? Who does Rauf think he is fooling? He is a sympathant for terrorism, who clearly does not give a damn less about those who when down with the towers. There American people are a decent, good people, which is why they, along with myself, agree that there is a constitutional right to build it, but also agree why it isn't right. THIS IS NOT A RELIGIOUS FREEDOM ISSUE. That is a smokescreen excuse to ignore the problems, and pretend that any criticism of Islamic extremism or connection between Islam and the 9/11 attackers is racist, which is ridiculous. The 9/11 terrorists attacked us as Muslims for Islam, as expressed by themselves. They see thru this guy, and so do I. So does Harry Reid, and a majority of Americans in both parties.

The fact is 9/11 attacks were part of radical Islam's problem, which is that it requires Muslims to use their religion politically as justification to conquer opponents and, as they seek, territory to gain caliphate, and create a society based on Sharia law, which Rauf doesn't seem to mind. They do it not just against Israelis or Americans, but in every inhabited continent in the world. Rauf may not be a terrorist, but his political outlook, based on his desire to see Islam as the sole source of societal norms (whereas in the West Christianity is not the sole source of society, hence today's decadent liberal societies) is the attitude which gives Islamic terrorists power. Clearly, it will NOT promote tolerance, as yes, some of the haters are genuine bigots, tho most like me are not, but mostly because of the views of Rauf and his ulterior motives. Also, Islamists would see it as a shrine to their brilliant deeds and to hate on Jews, infidels, etc. Has this promoted tolerance since the brouhaha started? I think not.

Most Muslims are peaceful people, and most mosques don't preach radical jihadism. However, there is a large enough portion that do which gives these groups enough power in the Muslim world to operate and gain support. It is a battle within Islamic civilization, not just Radical Islam vs. the West. I'm not against building mosques simply because they are mosques. But the man behind this mosque symbolizes the battle, via his radical views and deliberate decision to provoke this fight. I cannot accept and ideology and a man who condones and doesn't criticize women being forced into burkas, or stoned for adultery, people beheaded for minor crimes, amputated, lashed, and so on. No one, especially if you call yourself "progressive" should accept a man who believes in this stuff.

I hope the Democrats in Congress see this, and start following the lead of Reid, because Obama has made a big mistake. The Democratic Party is in trouble, and given the truth behind this issue, doing a Bloomberg or Obama on this is asking to lose seats. This is one issue, which unlike immigration, health care, jobs, the economy, abortion, gay marriage, and environment, unites Americans.

 

 

 

Coalition Forces Discover $1,000,000,000,000 in Lithium and Other Minerals in Afghanistan

Although Afghanistan has been the target of colonization campaigns from the British to the Soviets, few ever thought they actually had any natural resources. Until now.

The United States has discovered nearly $1 trillion in untapped mineral deposits in Afghanistan, far beyond any previously known reserves and enough to fundamentally alter the Afghan economy and perhaps the Afghan war itself, according to senior American government officials.

The previously unknown deposits — including huge veins of iron, copper, cobalt, gold and critical industrial metals like lithium — are so big and include so many minerals that are essential to modern industry that Afghanistan could eventually be transformed into one of the most important mining centers in the world, the United States officials believe.

An internal Pentagon memo, for example, states that Afghanistan could become the “Saudi Arabia of lithium,” a key raw material in the manufacture of batteries for laptops and BlackBerrys.

 

How does this relate to the war? Well for one it has the potential to perhaps render Afghanistan into an economy beyond opium. This could perhaps bring about a society which can be centered around a civil society. But then again, it could lead the Taliban to fight harder, and maybe get more support, as they could try to call the US liberation campaign a true colonial war in the mold of Europe. They have found Russian charts which depict possible mineral deposits, which might explain why Russia wanted to turn Afghanistan into the Afghan SSR back in the 1979-1989. However, the US could use it as leverage to help get Afghan administrators in line, or it could be used the other way. Lets pray to God that the Taliban can't get control of this, start mineral wars, nor does this start any wars with its neighbors, or bring Pakistan Taliban into the fold even more.

 

 

How Israel is America's greatest foreign asset

recent, a guy named Anthony Cordesman made a claim that Israel is a strategic liability to the US. This is in the vein of Mearsheimer and Walt, etc. Well, that should raise some eyebrows, and this has been countered:

 


The plain truth is that Israel is the US’s greatest strategic asset in the Middle East.

Indeed, given the strategic importance of the Middle East to US national security, Israel is arguably its greatest strategic asset outside the US military.
As a democracy, unlike every Arab state, the US does not need to worry a change in leadership in Jerusalem will cause it to abandon its alliance with the US. This of course is what happened in Iran, which until 1979 was the US’s most important ally in the Persian Gulf. As Egyptian dictator Hosni Mubarak ages, the US faces the prospect of a post-Mubarak Egypt led by the Muslim Brotherhood similarly abandoning its alliance with America.

The fact that the US and Israel share the same foundational values also guarantees that the alliance is stable. No government in Jerusalem will ever sway the Israeli people away from America as has happened in Turkey since the Islamist Erdogan government took office in 2002.

Cordesman grudgingly allows that Israel provides intelligence to the US. But he refuses to acknowledge how important that intelligence has been. Since September 11, 2001, US military and intelligence officials have repeatedly admitted that Israeli intelligence has been worth its weight in gold for US security operations in the region and around the world.

Cordesman also notes that Israeli technology has contributed to US defense, but again, undervalues its significance. The very fact that pilotless aircraft – first developed by Israel – are the lead force in the campaign in Afghanistan and Pakistan gives lie to his tepid admission of Israel’s technological contribution to US security.

LIKE MANY on the [far] Left, Cordesman ignores the fact that Israel’s enemies are the US’s enemies.

But his failure to note that the same people who call for Israel to be destroyed also call for the US to be destroyed does not make this fact any less true. And since the US and Israel share the same foes, when Israel is called on to fight its enemies, its successes redound to the US’s benefit.

In many ways, Israel – which has never asked the US to fight its wars – has been the catalyst for the US’s greatest triumphs. It was the Mossad that smuggled out Nikita Khrushchev’s secret speech acknowledging Stalin’s crimes at the 20th Communist Party Conference in 1956. The publication of Khrushchev’s speech in the West was the first turning point in the Cold War.

So too, Israel’s June 1982 destruction of Syria’s Soviet-made anti-aircraft batteries and the Syrian air force was the first clear demonstration of the absolute superiority of US military technology over Soviet military technology.

Many have argued that it was this demonstration of Soviet technological inferiority that convinced the Reagan administration it was possible to win the Cold War.

Beyond politics and ideology, beyond friendship and values, the US has three permanent national security interests in the Middle East:

• Ensuring the smooth flow of affordable petroleum products from the region

• Preventing the most radical regimes, substate and non-state actors from acquiring the means to cause catastrophic harm

• Maintaining its capacity to project its power in the region

A strong Israel is the best guarantor of all of these interests. Indeed, the stronger it is, the more secure these primary American interests are. Three permanent and unique aspects to Israel’s regional position dictate this state of affairs.

First, as the first target of the most radical regimes and radical substate actors in the region, it has a permanent, existential interest in preventing these regimes and substate actors from acquiring the means to cause catastrophic harm.

The 1981 IAF strike that destroyed Iraq’s Osirak nuclear reactor prevented Iraq from acquiring nuclear weapons. Despite US condemnation at the time, the US later acknowledged that the strike was a necessary precondition to the success of Operation Desert Storm 10 years later. As Richard Cheney has noted, if Iraq had been a nuclear power in 1991, the US would have been hard pressed to eject Saddam Hussein’s army from Kuwait and so block his regime from asserting control over oil supplies in the Persian Gulf.

Far from destabilizing the region, a strong Israel stabilizes it by deterring the most radical actors from attacking.

In 1970, Israel blocked Syria’s bid to use the PLO to overthrow the Hashemite regime in Jordan. Its threat to attack Syria not only saved the Hashemites then, it has deterred Syria from attempting to overthrow the Jordanian regime ever since.
Similarly, Israel’s neighbors understand that its purported nuclear arsenal is a weapon of national survival and hence they view it as nonthreatening. This is the reason the alleged nuclear arsenal has never spurred a regional nuclear arms race.

In stark contrast, if Iran acquires nuclear weapons, a regional nuclear arms race will ensue immediately. Indeed, it has already begun. Turkey, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and other states have all signed contracts to develop nuclear installations.

This is why we need a strong Israel. Israel fought with America against another illiberal ideology which oppressed over a billion people, which was Soviet Communism. It fights radical jihad, which subjugates women, gays, minorities, freedom of political expression, etc.

 

 

Ship named after suicide victim Rachel Corrie headed for Gaza

A ship named after the girl who threw herself under a bulldozer, Rachel Corrie, is headed for Gaza.

The MV Rachel Corrie, a converted merchant ship bought by pro-Palestinian activists and named after an American woman killed in the Gaza Strip in 2003, set off on Monday from Malta, organizers said. It was carrying 15 activists including a northern Irish Nobel Peace laureate. "We are an initiative to break Israel's blockade of 1.5 million people in Gaza. Our mission has not changed and this is not going to be the last flotilla," Free Gaza Movement activist Greta Berlin, based in Cyprus, told Reuters.


An Israeli marine lieutenant, who was not identified, told Israel's Army Radio his unit was prepared to block the ship.

"We as a unit are studying, and we will carry out professional investigations to reach conclusions," the lieutenant said, referring to Monday's confrontation in which his unit shot nine activists aboard a Turkish ferry.

Its appropriate that they'd name a ship after Rachel Corrie, after the activists on the last ship opened fire on Israel soldiers, attacked them with knives, and tried to throw one overboard, and then some got killed by those defending themselves. It sounds similar to Rachel's suicide mission, in which she threw herself under a bulldozer to defend terrorist tunnels in Gaza.

This guy says it best:

I was deeply saddened at the outcome of the so-called 'peace' flotilla, which turned out to contain a large contingent of violent thugs whose only interest it was to provoke Israel. Still, nine dead is a terrible tragedy. We mourn this painful outcome.

But once again the world's hypocrisy and double standards vis-à-vis Israel are on full display. In Kingstown, Jamaica scores of civilians have tragically died over the last few days as government forces battle violent killers intent on protecting a drug lord. Would anyone suggest the government allow its soldiers to be mowed down by cartel killers?

Like any government, Israel's first priority is to protect its citizens from brutality and murder. It has no choice but to defend itself against violent protesters who try and murder its soldiers by attacking them with knives and clubs and hurling them thirty feet to near-certain death. Facts are stubborn things and the videos of the assault against Israel's soldiers are posted on the Internet for all to see.

No government is going to order its soldiers to remain idle while they are torn limb from limb. In America Monday was Memorial Day today. We reflect on those who paid the ultimate price for American freedom. But we also recommit to protecting the lives of those who continue to battle so that the rest of us can remain free.

The sad fact is that Hamas is a terrorist organization hell-bent on killing as many Israeli men, women, and children as possible. It would be suicide for Israel to lift the naval blockade on Gaza and allow weapons and war materials to enter so that they can be used to blow up babies. Is there any country on earth that would allow guns and missiles to be delivered to its doorstep to slaughter its citizens?

Sadly, rather than choose to build necessary infrastructure in Gaza that would benefit the Palestinians, Hamas has turned Gaza into a giant terrorist launching pad for rockets against Israel.

Israel withdrew every one of its citizens and soldiers from Gaza five years ago. But Hamas used the withdrawal not to build hospitals, universities, and schools but to turn Gaza into a terrorist rocket launching pad.

Hamas is a cruel and violent organization that regularly lynches, without even the semblance of a trial, Palestinians whom it accuses of working with Israel. It is a murderous gang whose commitment is not to helping Palestinians but to killing Jews. Israel must continue to ensure that no arms reach Hamas. And until such time as Hamas renounces their violent intent to exterminate the Jewish state, incidents like these, in which enemies of Israel stage violent demonstrations under the guise of peace will no doubt continue.

If there is to be peace in Israel and the Palestinian Territories, then it can only happen when these far-leftists, the useful idiots for Islamists, and the PA accept Israel legitimacy, stop using double standards, and build up a society, rather than to try to tear other's down.

More EU Parliament Members Quit One-Sided "Peace Delegation"

The European Union is infamous for its one-sided view of the Israel-Palestinian conflict. They routinely belittle the Jewish state and her legitimate concerns against terrorism and act as if Palestinians can do no wrong.

Well some are fed up with it. Today, even more EU Parliament members have ditched this pathetic "peace delegation."

Two more European Parliament members withdrew their participation Thursday in a controversial European Parliament delegation visit to the Middle East because they view the program as being “too one-sided.” 

The delegation of 25 parliamentarians from the foreign affairs, development and humanitarian aid committees, is due to visit Israel and the Palestinian territories next week.

In their statement, Italian Fiorello Provera, vice-chairman of the foreign affairs committee and Dutch Bastiaan Belder, chairman of the European Parliament delegation with Israel said: “We think that the delegation’s program is too one-sided, and for this reason it is extremely unhelpful to the cause we all wish to promote, at a crucial moment, when the government of Israel and the Palestinian Authority are restarting indirect talks.”

“Recent controversy on the nature of next week’s official delegation of the European Parliament to Israel and the Palestinian territories led us to conclude, regrettably, that we are left with no other choice but to withdraw our participation from this mission.”

They said their presence “could lend legitimacy to a mission that stands contrary to what we were elected for – to promote dialogue, reconciliation and to seek a better understanding of the complexities and the difficult challenges that the parties face on the road to peace.

“Regarding the planned visit of the delegation to Gaza through Egypt, we share the concerns of those who see these political visits as a legitimization of Hamas, an organization included in the EU terrorist list,” they added.

Its shameful that Europe, the continent which gave us fascism and communism, along with appeasement, chooses to appease Islamic terrorism, example being in Britain, where terrorists aren't deported. Hamas terrorizes its own people with violence, forces women into veils which make them property of their men, stones them for adultery, kills homosexuals, and oppresses non-Muslims, along with calling for Caliphate and support Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons. Glory to those who stand up to this evil! Doesn't Europe see that Radical Islam threatens the free way of life which America gave them in the 1940s? You don't bring peace in Israel/Palestinians by supporting the radical parties. You should support the more moderate parties, with attainable and fair goals, instead of genocide and empire, which Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Ayatollah seek.

 

UCSD student and Hezbollah supporter supports genocide of Jews

In the I/P debate, all too often anti-Semitic racism rears its ugly head. Yesterday its biggest proponents were the Nazism, and the Communists soon followed. Today, its the Jihadists. This is clearly what is getting in the way of Middle East peace and an integral part of the jihadist ideology.

We thought we were safe from this in America, but we're not. Unfortunately, Jihadism is gaining ground as a credibile political idelogy, grounded sometimes in "anti-imperialism," despite calls for terrorist empire.

Now I'm not a fan of most of David Horowitz's views. however, as free speech is America's number one value, he does have a right to express his opinion, as did neo-Marxist pro-Islamists like Said and Khalidi.

During the question and answer period, he fielded a question from a young woman associated with UCSD's Muslim Student Association. Fairly or not, he asked the young lady whether she supported Hamas. She hedged. He then went on to say that he had recently asked another member of the MSA at a different campus whether that student supported Hezbollah. Horowitz claims that the student said that the answer to such a question was simply too complex. So Horowitz said the following:

‘Okay, I’ll put it to you this way. I am a Jew. The head of Hizbollah has said that he hopes that we will gather in Israel so he doesn’t have to hunt us down globally. For or Against it?

the young woman said that she is "for it."

While campus liberalism 50 years ago did help produce women's rights, civil rights gains and end the Vietnam war, sometimes it can get radical, and too radical which is not helping anything today. Today, its being on the far left just to be on the far left, Islamic terrorists and their supporters are falsely painted as "the oppressed," "colonized," blah blah blah. Israel is "Apartheid South Africa" and a "Nazi state." Colleges are supposed to be where people grow into maturity through knowledge, and now they are being hijacked. Its amazing how the college didn't do anything about her and how views are allowed to thrive like that.

Furthermore, we are seeing some student groups at college support murder against those who dare make fun of religions that aren't Christianity or Judaism.

For God's sake: WE SAW GENOCIDE CONDONED AND APPROVED BY ONE OF THE WORLD'S POTENTIAL "LEADERS!" What kind of college allows this?

Again, its amazing how the far left mirrors the far right in anti-semitism, anti-Americanism, and totalitarian tendencies. These contradict the true values of liberalism, of which I am a follower. Hezbollah, Hamas, etc. are not oppressed peoples, but are ideologues who oppress women, gays, minorities, etc. We must work to stop proliferation of pro-jihad views on campus, and fight bigotry and racism.

Richard Goldstone-MASS MURDERER apartheid hangman

Some thought the KKK was the only group to specialize in hanging blacks.

Wrong.

Recently, it has been discovered that Richard Goldstone , the man the UN is allowing to be the judge and the jury against Israel for defending itself in January 2009, was not only a judge appointed by the apartheid regime and its PM-turned-State President Pieter Willem (PW) Botha and served the purpose of apartheid, or "good neighborliness" in the words of apartheid leaders.

Goldstone ruled against the 1986 appeal of a 13-year-old boy who had been sentenced to jail for disrupting school as a protest against apartheid and increasingly draconian "emergency laws" used to preserve order and squelch opposition to the government. Goldstone, according to The New York Times, provided no comment to his decision to uphold the sentence of the lower court. 

In a similar case that year, Judge Goldstone ruled against two appellants who had been convicted for possession of a cassette tape that had a recording of an interview with Oliver Tambo. Tambo, along with Nelson Mandela, was a founding member of the ANC Youth League and later served Secretary General of the ANC itself.

The case, brought before the Transvaal Provincial Division of the Supreme Court, on which Goldstone sat, centered on whether the two young men had attempted to disseminate the tape on behalf of the ANC, thereby violating the Internal Security Act No. 74 of 1982 -- a piece of legislation that some human rights scholars have called a crucial weapon in the regime's "arsenal of terrorism legislation."

Goldstone commented in that case that Mr. Tambo's opening words on the recording indicated "beyond a reasonable doubt that the cassette in question was published or disseminated under the direction or guidance or on behalf of the African National Congress," -- a fact that, in Golstone's opinion, was sufficient basis to uphold the convictions of the two young men.

Not only this, but recently, YNet just discovered even more about this shady self-hating hypocrite.

During his tenure as sitting as judge in the appellant court during the 1980s and 1990s sentenced dozens of blacks mercilessly to their death.

Yedioth Ahronoth's findings show that Goldstone sentenced at least 28 black defendants to death. Most of them were found guilty of murder and sought to appeal the verdict. In those days, he actually made sure he showed his support for the execution policy, writing in one verdict that it reflects society's demands that a price be paid for crimes it rightfully views as frightening.

Even when it came to far less serious offenses, Goldstone sided through and through with the racist policies of the Apartheid regime. Among other things, he approved the whipping of four blacks found guilty of violence, while he acquitted four police officers who had broken into a white woman's house on suspicions that she was conducting sexual relations with a black man – something considered then in South Africa as a serious crime.

 

In another incident, Goldstone sentenced two young black men merely for being in possession of a video tape showing a speech given by one of the senior officials in Nelson Mandela's party.

 

 

Shame on anyone who would give this guy credibility. Who is he to tell a country that they are the "new Afrikaners," when he himself supported himself by supporting apartheid and killing others? There's really not much difference between this guy and German judges who upheld Nazism. He was "just following orders."

Another instance of Israel's enemies being shady and morally decrepid characters. Even the anti-Israel nutties cannot credibily even really defend Goldstone. They just continue to do what they're good at: spewing hateful tripe.

So Richie, next time you get on the bench, you might wanna wear your robe. Your all white one. Don't forget the hood either.

Israeli Jews oppose banning minarets

We all know about that ridiculous minaret ban approved in Switzerland late last year. While I oppose Islamic law and Islamism being propagated in Europe, as I support freedom both from and of religion, I oppose government bans on building a religious structure.

But what about those imperialist racist colonial Muslim-oppressing Israelis, who like the imperialist capitalist West engage in the "War on Islam?"

There's more...

Alan Dershowitz's common sense approach to airline security

On Christmas 2009, we almost saw another Islamic terrorist attack on the United States suceed and hundreds get killed. This after terrorist Nidal Malik Hasan shot up Fort Hood in the name of Allah. And all of this after September 11. Now I don't wanna see airline security so inept that either terrorists get thru easily, or people who pose no threat get stopped constantly. If our civil liberties are stifled, terrorism wins.

There's more...

Exporting Palestinian Racism to America

With all the talk about "Zionism is racism," its time to shed light on some of the [http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1262339423118&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull racism] against the Jews, done by too many in the Palestinian community, which impedes the peace process.

There's more...

Diaries

Advertise Blogads