Thursday, June 28, 2007

Bush's Dhimmis

I blew it up so you can see these clowns (click on image).


Makeshift hijabs were the order of the day for Bush's female staffers, but there is one lone dissenter in the background. ("Dhimmi diplomats" just because they covered their heads? No.) Reuters' caption:

Senior White House staff members attend the rededication ceremony of The Islamic Center in Washington June 27, 2007. From L-R are: Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism Frances Townsend, White House Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten, and Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs Karen Hughes. REUTERS/Larry Downing (UNITED STATES)
They really needn't have gone to the trouble to cover their heads. If they hadn't, their friends at unindicted terror co-conspirator CAIR could have just photoshopped the hijabs on.

The Final Roll Call - Know Your Enemies, Know Your Friends


RINOS (THE ENEMIES OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY): Graham (R-SC), Gregg (R-NH), Hagel (R-NE), Kyl (R-AZ), Lott (R-MS), Lugar (R-IN), Martinez (R-FL),McCain (R-AZ), Snowe (R-ME), and Specter (R-PA).

(OUR FRIENDS IN THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY) Hats off to the Dems who voted agains this crap: Bayh (D-IN), Bingaman (D-NM), Brown (D-OH), Byrd (D-WV), Dorgan (D-ND), Harkin (D-IA), Landrieu (D-LA), McCaskill (D-MO), Nelson (D-NE), Pryor (D-AR), Rockefeller (D-WV), Sanders (I-VT), Stabenow (D-MI), Tester (D-MT) and Webb (D-VA).

It should be noted that the following Republicans switched their vote for “Yea” to “Na” from the bill earlier in the week. They include: Bennett (R-UT), Bond (R-MO), Brownback (R-KS), Burr (R-NC), Coleman (R-MN), Collins (R-ME), Craig (R-ID), Domenici (R-NM), Ensign (R-NV), McConnell (R-KY), Murkowski (R-AK), Stevens (R-AK), Voinovich (R-OH) and Warner (R-VA)

There'll be no signing, King Jorge

You will recall a few weeks ago, Bush defiantly said to the opponents of the Shamnesty Bill, "I'll see you at the signing." No, King Jorge, you will not have a bill to sign. Now as you sit alone in your grand oval office, all alone except for your sycophants, you have no friends left. You have alienated everyone. You have blown that precious 'capital' that you said you had earned and intended to spend. Now you are truly a lame duck, a clay pigeon blown into a billion bits. Long live America! The Emperor has no clothes.

Wednesday, June 27, 2007

Have You Signed Sen. Inhofe's Petition ?

Inhofe Secure Our Borders Now Petition.

Here's Sen Inhofe Discussing the Petition. Great Senator who actually LISTENS to his constituency.

Are these King Jorge's Peeps Too?

FROM L.A. Times

1. 40% of all workers in L.A. County ( L.A. County has10.2 million people) are working for Cash and not paying taxes. This is because they are predominantly illegal immigrants Working without a green card.

2. 95% of warrants for murder in Los Angeles are for illegal aliens. !

3. 75% of people on the mos t wanted list in Los Angeles are
illegal aliens!

4. Over 2/3 of all births in Los Angeles County are to illegal alien Mexicans on
Medi- Cal , whose births were paid for by taxpayers.

5. Nearly 25% of all inmates in California detention centers are Mexican
Nationals here illegally.

6. Over 300,000 illegal aliens in Los Angeles County are living in garages.

7. The FBI reports half of all gang members in Los Angeles are most likely
Illegal aliens from south of the border.

8. Nearly 60% of all occupants of HUD properties are illegal.

9. 21 radio stations in L.A. Are Spanish speaking.

10. In L...A. County 5.1 million people speak English, 3.9 million speak Spanish.
(There are 10.2 million people in L.A. County ).

(All of the above are from the Los Angeles Times)

Less than 2% of illegal aliens are picking our crops, but 29% are on welfare.

Over 70% of the United States annual population growth
and over 90% of California , Florida , and New York results from immigration.

29% of inmates in federal prisons are illegal aliens.

Why Islamic terrorists are above criticism

By the Anti Jihadist

News about Islamic terrorism is impossible to avoid these days, even in the sanitised Malaysian media. Unfortunately, it's highly unusual for Muslims in Malaysia to ever criticise their co-religionists, no matter how outrageous their actions are. Muslim terrorists regularly murder women, children, civilians, and non-combatants alike. They execute captured prisoners after the most vicious torture. Terrorists acting in the name of Islam also blow up mosques, murder imams, and even violate oaths taken on the Quran, such as when the Taliban captured the Afghan village of Qala Mussa earlier this year, after having sworn on the Quran to engage in negotiations with the local elders. And yet, there is rarely a hint of outrage in the Muslim world. Malaysia is no exception to this pattern.

For a Malaysian example of this bizarre behaviour, let’s review the Malaysian reactions to the recent (2005) passing of Dr. Azahari Husin, the notorious Malaysian terrorist, committed jihadist, and chief bombmaker for terrorist group Jemaah Islamiyah. Dr. Azahari, as you may recall, was directly implicated in the Bali bombings (both 2002 and 2005), the Australian embassy bombing in Jakarta, and the JW Mariott hotel bombing also in Jakarta. Azahari was in fact an unrepentant mass murderer, responsible for the deaths of hundreds of innocent people. But, as his family and the Malaysian media would have it, he was also supposedly a ‘genuinely warm and caring kind of guy’.

Here is the kind of spin his family put on their ‘fondly remembered’ Doctor Azahari, as was published verbatim in a Malaysian newspaper at the time:

…in his family, he was a respected big brother whose skills in Maths and zest for sports were a source of inspiration to his nine siblings. Azahari Husin’s sister, Suraya, 45, recalled that her brother loved cowboy movies and thought girls were "soppy".

He loved the outdoors and once hitchhiked on a lorry from the premier Malay College (in) Kuala Kangsar, where he studied, to his home in Jasin as a teenager. When he studied in Australia, he took motorcycle excursions across the desert. He loved orchids and sports cars.

The remainder of this media puff piece continues on in the same insufferable vein. And while the family finds plenty of wonderful memories to share with the all-too-willing Malaysian media, there is nary a trace of condemnation of the late doctor's multi-year murder spree.

Azahari's family eventually had this to say about the terrorist Dr. Azahari:
“… our family and friends never interfered with what my brother did. That’s the integrity of our family,” said (a younger sister of Dr Azahari Husin.)

“People can say what they want, but I know my brother,” she said when pressed for comments by newsmen at her house in Jalan Chin Chin here yesterday.

The woman, who lives a few kilometres from her parent’s house, said her father Husin Yaakob, 78, had left home for the time being, to live with one of her siblings, in anticipation of media interest in Dr Azahari’s family.

Azahari also received a hero’s send-off at his funeral in his hometown of Jasin in Malacca state. The ceremony attracted some 600 well wishers, who repeatedly screamed ‘Allahu akbar’ as his coffin was lowered into the ground. Many present at the funeral also voiced scepticism of Azahari’s role as a top terrorist. “Azahari will always have friends here. We shouldn't be asked to believe what is written about him in the newspapers,” said one man who identified himself to reporters only as Yusri.

These are very curious reactions all around, at the very least. Given the multiple opportunities to condemn terrorism, and to pronounce how un-Islamic all this terrorism supposedly is, Azahari’s family, friends and neighbours all refused to so state. Rather the opposite, actually—in particular, Azahari’s sister said for the record that family and friends “…never interfered with what my brother did”. This is a disturbingly noncommittal thing to say about a man intimately involved in carrying out mass murder, and for conspiring to commit even more mass murder. Indeed, it could even be construed as approval.

Compare the (at best) tepid response of the Azahari family to the response of another family that had one of its own become a mass murderer—the family of Cho Seung Hui. Cho, as many no doubt remember, was a Korean American who murdered 32 people just a few months ago at a university in Virginia before taking his own life. In the aftermath of this devastating tragedy, the family issued a powerful and eloquent statement to the world and to the relatives of the victims. This statement reads, in part:
On behalf of our family, we are so deeply sorry for the devastation my brother has caused. No words can express our sadness that 32 innocent people lost their lives this week in such a terrible, senseless tragedy. We are heartbroken.

We pray for their families and loved ones who are experiencing so much excruciating grief. And we pray for those who were injured and for those whose lives are changed forever because of what they witnessed and experienced.

Despite their shock, grief and unimaginable horror, the Cho family managed to compose and release this brief, but articulate public statement. In no uncertain terms, it makes it clear how the Cho family felt about the actions of their loved one, a loved one who, like Azahari Husin, mercilessly slaughtered so many. And still, this one simple statement is light years ahead of anything ever spoken by any of the family or friends of Dr. Azahari.

Why, indeed, did the Azahari family choose to not say anything even remotely similar to this? And for another example, why didn’t any of the families of the 9-11 hijackers issue statements like the Cho family? Why do all of these Muslim families to this day steadfastly refuse to denounce the unspeakable crimes of their loved ones?

It’s not hard to understand why. While a lot of Muslims may talk of peaceful co-existence, they tacitly approve of Islamic terrorists killing non-Muslims. More often than Muslims like to admit, these terrorists, either living or dead, are lionized as heroes in the Islamic world.

Many Muslims know that these attitudes will not play well in the West. Thus, the official policy of Muslim countries like Malaysia is to condemn Islamic terrorism. When need be (often right after a spectacular Muslim terrorist attack), Muslim countries and organisations are quick to release generalised, pro-forma, and mealy-mouthed condemnations of ‘all kinds of terrorism’. Strangely enough, however, they can never get around to disavowing Hamas, Hizbullah, Al Qaeda, etc. specifically and by name. Yet all the while, the mass media and much of the general public in Muslim nations, as seen in the Malaysian media coverage of Azahari’s death, are rather sympathetic to these cold-blooded killers.

Many Westerners believe that all this pro-terrorist talk will go away once economic prosperity comes to the Islamic world. Perhaps. However, it’s important to point out that many, if not most middle and upper class Muslims, share these pro-terrorist attitudes. So let’s just face the fact that, if you are a kafir (and most people on the planet are), a whole lot of Muslims want you dead or converted to Islam…unless you're Jewish, in which case, only dead will do.

But don’t just take my word for it. You can look it up…in the Muslim media.

Tuesday, June 26, 2007

Clay Pigeon for the Dodos

Tonight, the bundled amendments (the 'clay pigeon') was released. Michell Malkin's site has an indexed copy. It's 387 PAGES LONG! And get this. It is in pure legaleze format 'subtitute this', 'substitute that' "change : to ;", etc. You have to have the original side by side to even understand what these 387 pages reference to. Now tell me how in the world any Senator can reconcile this with the bill and understand it in the next 36 hours. This is an awful sham. It is so deceitful. If I was a Senator, I would have a fit. How can any Senator agree to vote yes for something he has been given with no time to digest. Not to even mention the public's right to know. Let me remind you that this shamnesty bill adds 40 million to 100 million legal permanent residents to America, and the vast majority will be Mexican. It is the greatest demographic shift America will ever experience, even greater than what has happened in France and Netherlands and in 1/4 of the time - 10 years. You think diversity and multiculturalism are oppressive today, you haven't seen anything yet.

I did notice in the boilerplate stuff at the rear of this amendment tomb they allow the Oath of Allegiance to be changed significantly if an immigrant's religion does not allow an oath that places the state above his religion. Wonder who that's for? Oh and it creates a huge commission to determine 'remedies' for the unjust treatment of 'latin americans of japanese descents.' They get their 'reparations' and then it's on to the next aggrieved group. There are so many little 'items' in this bill, so much bureaucracy to create. It really is breathtaking. How can anyone understand this bag of goodies. It is 20 bills wrapped into one.

This bill creates a brand new and enormous government organization to handle the amnesty. It is too painful to read. It is government out of control.

I will never forgive Bush for this monstrosity and I will never forgive the Senators and Congressman that attempt to pass this abomination. Stupidity and evil converge.

Here are some of the defects of this shamnesty bill from RedState:

Top 10 Defects of the Amnesty Bill ^ | 6/26/07 | Bluey
Posted on 06/26/2007 3:25:56 PM EDT by rhema
The immigration bill is back on the Senate floor today. To help opponents of the legislation educate their senators about its disastrous consequences, I’m sharing this list of the bill’s Top 10 defects. You’re welcome to use it however you’d like -- share it with family, friends, co-workers, whoever.
1. It repeats the mistakes of the 1986 immigration law.
• Like the 1986 law, this immigration “reform” measure grants amnesty immediately while promising security and enforcement in the future.
• Actually, the old law was tougher. Back then, illegals had to show they had lived in the United States continuously for five years. The new bill would give amnesty to anyone who lived here for the last six months.
• This isn’t fair to those who have “played by the rules” to enter the country illegally. Nor is it fair to those who are currently waiting proper authorization to enter the country.
There are nine more defects on the jump. Read on ...
2. U.S. VISIT exit program is not included in the bill.
• The new immigration bill does not require a border “check in/check out” system that uses biometric proof of ID like fingerprints.
• This check-in/check-out system was first required by Congress in 1996. Its implementation date is well past due.
• Without the U.S. VISIT exit program, the United States cannot ensure that individuals do not overstay their visas.
3. It spends and shuffles money to no apparent purpose.
• To buy support for the amnesty provisions, bill backers sweetened the pot by adding $4.4 billion in new spending—purportedly for enforcement purposes.
• The need for such tremendous additional spending is unclear. Nearly all the money needed to fund the bill’s security features has already been appropriated.
• The extra money must be spent in five years—a hurry-up schedule that all but assures wastefulness.
• Despite the rhetoric, the funds aren’t restricted to security and enforcement uses. They can just as easily be spent on fast-tracking the amnesty bureaucracy required by the bill.
4. It provides precious little additional security.
• Except for a new worker verification program, the proposal essentially reauthorizes security resources and programs already been approved by Congress.
• The bill calls for “100% operational control” of the border, but there is no measurable definition of what that really means. One man’s “100% operational control” is another man’s leaking sieve.
• The bill’s original requirement that DHS get the border under control “within 18 months of enactment” has been changed to “as soon as practicable.”
5. It increases federal intrusion into the workplace.
• The bill requires employers to submit biometric, financial and other personal information about every employee to a new mega-database to be maintained by the Department of Homeland Security
• Every worker in the U.S.—all 130 million of us—will have to be certified by DHS as eligible to work.
• We will have to be DHS-recertified as eligible to work every time we change jobs.
• The new certification process—the Employment Eligibility Verification System (EEVS)—is based on the much more modest PILOT system, which has proved to be flawed and unreliable.
• It’s ridiculous to think that a program that doesn’t work well now will somehow work better when it’s radically expanded to encompass every employer and employee in America.
6. It makes the temporary worker program a mess.
• The bill’s numerous regulations on employers undermine labor market flexibility—the very thing needed to make the program economically viable.
• As a sop to unions, the bill requires employ¬ers to pay temporary guest workers the “prevailing competitive wage” – something that, in many areas, will be higher than the minimum wage offered citizens.
• The program is held hostage to amnesty. Legal temporary workers will not be allowed in until those currently in the country illegally are given amnesty..
• The program is too small and is, itself, temporary. It ends in five years, and is limited to 200,000 participants per year.
7. It will increase “chain migration.”
• Under this bill, the number of people entering via “chain migration” – the practice of immigrants bringing relative after relative into the country behind them – will triple until 2016.
• Though a merit system for immigrants begins immediately, it will not increase the percentage of high-skilled immigrants coming to the United States until 2016 – eight years after enactment.
• The merit system does not apply to Z visa holders.
8. The amnesty section creates a host of problems.
a) It gives a general grant of amnesty.
• An immigrant’s legal violations are waived up front, as a condition of eligibility.
• As in the 1986 legislation, various penalties and requirements do not mitigate the grant of amnesty.
• A “touchback” with a guaranteed re-entry does not mitigate amnesty.
b) The “temporary” Z-Visa may be renewed ad infinitum.
• Legal status is granted 180 days after enactment.
• There is no cap on the total number of people who can get Z visass.
c) The Z-Visa process is highly susceptible to fraud and abuse.
• People can apply for amnesty as long as 18 months after enactment. This long “grace period” will only encourage more people to cross the border illegally so they can “get in” on the amnesty.
• Amnesty is contingent on people presenting “documentation” showing they entered the country sometime before Jan. 1 of this year. But the documentation requirements are laughably lax (e.g., an affidavit signed by a non-family member). The result: new opportunities for criminals and terrorists to “get legal.”
• In the 1986 amnesty, the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) discovered 398,000 cases of fraud. With so many more seeking amnesty this time, the number of fraudulent applications likely will be at least four times larger.
d) It gives the feds next to no time to screen visa applicants.
• Under Section 601(h)(1), the bill allows the government only 24 hours (one business day) to conduct a background check to determine whether an applicant for a probationary Z Visa is a criminal or terrorist.
• DHS can expect to receive, on average, 43,000 applications per day. Good luck with that.
e) It requires no health checks for visa applicants.
• Foreigners visiting our country on legal visas must first meet basic health standards. Yet the only health check required in the Senate bill is restricted to those applying for Legal Permanent Resident status—and they don’t have to undergo the check until eight years after enactment.
• This could allow someone carrying a highly dangerous and contagious disease – TB, bird flu, smallpox – into the country without any real record of where this person entered the United States, where he’s been since entering.
f) It makes gang members and absconders eligible for amnesty.
• Gang members can get amnesty. How? They must renounce their gang membership. [Section 601(g)(2)]
• Absconders—the 630,000+ illegals who have ignored deportation orders and remain in hiding—can gain amnesty by demonstrating that departure from the U.S. “would result in extreme hardship to the alien or the alien's spouse, parent or child.” Section 601(d)(1)(I)
g) It suspends immigration law enforcement.
• If a federal agent apprehends an alien who appears to be eligible for the Z visa (in other words, just about any illegal alien), the agent cannot keep him in custody. Instead, the alien must be released and allowed to apply for amnesty. [Sections 601(h)(1, 5)]
• Same for immigration judges. They must close any proceedings against aliens and offer them an opportunity to apply for amnesty if they are "prima facie eligible" for the Z visa. [Section 601(h)(6)]
• These provisions (and others) will create endless litigation – tying up a legal system that’s already swamped.
h) Illegal immigrants “skate” on back taxes.
• Last year’s bill required long-term illegal aliens to prove they had paid at least three of their last five years’ worth of taxes.
• This year’s Senate bill doesn’t payment of any back taxes owed.
i) It lets illegal immigrants get tax-subsidized college tuition rates.
• Section 616 allows all states to offer in-state tuition rates to any illegal alien who obtains the Z visa and attends college.
• It effectively repeals a 1996 federal law (8 U.S.C. § 1623) that prohibits states from offering in-state tuition rates to illegal aliens unless the state also offers in-state tuition rates to all U.S. citizens. (Ten states are currently defying this federal law with seeming impunity.)
9. It doesn’t help immigrants assimilate into American culture.
• Z-visa holders need not learning English until they seek a second renewal of their visa—8 years after enactment.
• It creates a new bureaucracy, the “New Americans Integration Councils,” which stresses life-skills training (such as how to catch a bus) rather than civics education.
10. It imposes too great a burden on immigration officials.
• For example, it vastly expands the U.S. Citizen and Immigration Services’ workload, but does little to increase the agency’s capacity to handle the task.

What is Islam--the video

Sunday, June 24, 2007

ALIEN NATION Statistics and Bush's Peoples

I was at the local Mexican supermarket buying some fresh corn and greenbeans. All of the young Mexican girls were pregnant or had a new anchor baby. No one spoke English anywhere. As I was in line, a middle aged liberal female buggied up behind me and said cheerfully 'shopping here is like another world.' I said sarcastically, 'yeah, the third world.' You should have seen her face. She mistook me for a liberal. I know I look like one but don't hold it against me! I turned around, paid for my corn and beans, and left snickering to my self. You know I burst her bubble and I'm glad I did.

Bush says we can't have enforcement unless we give him his peeps. We'll see about that.

Are these the people Bush wants?

INS/FBI Statistical Report on Undocumented Immigrants

2006 (First Quarter)
95% of warrants for murder in Los Angeles are for illegal aliens.
83% of warrants for murder in Phoenix are for illegal aliens.
86% of warrants for murder in Albuquerque are for illegal aliens.
75% of those on the most wanted list in Los Angeles, Phoenix and Albuquerque are illegal aliens.

24.9% of all inmates in California detention centers are Mexican nationals here illegally
40.1% of all inmates in Arizona detention centers are Mexican nationals here illegally
48.2% of all inmates in New Mexico detention centers are Mexican nationals here illegally

29% (630,000) convicted illegal alien felons fill our state and federal prisons at a cost of $1.6 billion annually
53% plus of all investigated burglaries reported in California, New Mexico, Nevada, Arizona and Texas are perpetrated by illegal aliens.
50% plus of all gang members in Los Angeles are illegal aliens from south of the border.
71% plus of all apprehended cars stolen in 2005 in Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada and California were stolen by Illegal aliens or "transport coyotes".

47% of cited/stopped drivers in California have no license, no insurance and no registration for the vehicle. Of that 47%, 92% are illegal aliens.
63% of cited/stopped drivers in Arizona have no license, no insurance and no registration for the vehicle. Of that 63%, 97% are illegal aliens
66% of cited/stopped drivers in New Mexico have no license, no insurance and no registration for the vehicle. Of that 66% 98% are illegal aliens.

380,000 plus "anchor babies" were born in the U.S. in 2005 to illegal alien parents, making 380,000 babies automatically U.S.citizens and, under our laws, entitled to invite the rest of their family to join them.
97.2% of all costs incurred from those births were paid by the American taxpayers.
66% plus of all births in California are to illegal alien Mexicans on Medi-Cal whose births were paid for by taxpayers.

The Time for a New Social Contract in Malaysia is Now

My latest column for Malaysia Today.

By the Anti-Jihadist

Much hay has been made as of late in regards to Malaysia’s fabled “Social Contract”, which is essentially the basic laws and bedrock assumptions that underpin Malaysian law and society. Having been in place for some 50-odd years now, this ‘contract’ has assumed something akin to sacrosanct proportions in the minds of Malaysian politicians and the public alike. Touching it is now the ‘third rail’ in Malaysian politics—if you touch it, you will die.

But since when is a contract a suicide pact? When it is plainly obvious that a contract is no longer working, or workable, why should anyone continue to adhere to it?

Malaysia’s much-ballyhooed economic growth is now nothing like it was in the heady days of the 1980s or 1990s, and it is hard to continue placing the blame on foreign speculators like George Soros. The brain drain of the nation’s best and brightest to greener pastures overseas continues apace. Intellectual life is stagnating, as is the country’s education system. As the Lina Joy case and other cases clearly shows, the Syariah courts have in essence supplanted the civil court system as the country’s supreme law. As the destruction of temples and churches amply demonstrates, creeping Islamisation has eroded the rights and benefits to non Muslims and non Malays, who have never had much say in their own affairs in the first place. Now they have even less.

Discontent is rising, tensions are increasing, provocations are coming hard on the heels of each other, and this train seems to have no brakes.

I say it’s time for some drastic surgery--it’s high time to tear up the current dysfunctional social contract. If the present contract ever had its day in the sun, clearly those days are long over.

So what might a new, more modern ‘social contract’ for Malaysia look like? To this end, I humbly submit this baker’s dozen of ideas:

1. Have one set of laws that applies equally to everyone, regardless of skin colour, race, or religion. No more ‘bumi’ privileges, and no more official or unofficial racial quotas—a strict meritocracy should be in place at all levels of government, and eventually Malaysian society in general.

2. Ban all race-based organizations, including race-based political parties.

3. The current ‘dual-track’ legal system needs to be abolished. Civil courts must have the final say in all legal matters. Syariah courts should be minimized, or better yet, completely eliminated. If 20 million Muslims in Europe can live without Syariah courts, then why can 15 million Muslim Malays not make do without them?

4. End NEP and any programmes like it, now and forever. If the government is going to hand out welfare, it should be based on need, not on race or ethnicity.

5. Dump the official faith. Governments have no business running religious affairs or legislating morality. Eliminate funding for all religious-based activities and departments. This would, of course, entail the dissolution of all religious police and religious entities such as JAIS and JAKIM at all levels of government.

6. Freedom of religion must be real and guaranteed for all, rather than just being given pro forma lip service. And get rid of the ‘religion’ field on ‘MyKad’ and any other official ID, so there are no more ‘Lina Joys’. A person’s faith, or lack thereof, is not the business of any earthly authority!

7. Make English an official language of the country, and print all government documents in this language.

8. Make English language classes compulsory for all Malaysians starting from Standard One. Teach all subjects in this language, except for Bahasa Melayu/Malaysia, Tamil, Mandarin, and other languages.

9. Establish English departments at all state-run institutions for higher learning. And open a college in Malaysia specifically for training English teachers. Malaysia desperately needs qualified ones, as the current system is totally incapable of creating enough of them. Bring in as many foreign English teachers as required to accomplish these and other goals.

10. Loosen the rules for foreign business and allow increased foreign investment.

11. Phase out all subsidies. The oil is running out, and so will the largess that allows the government to continue these subsidies. Better a soft landing via a phase-out than a brutal price spike that is otherwise inevitable just a few short years from now.

12. No racial preferences or race-based treatment when awarding government contracts.

13. Practice complete freedom of speech—no more censorship or banning of books, TV shows, magazines, movies, or other media.

Malaysia’s current social contract is in fact fatally flawed, because no country that has built its society on envy, coercion, and racial division can ever succeed in the long term. Malaysia is now at the point where radical surgery is required, or this country will fall not just further behind, but out of the race altogether.

And after all, the global race to compete is a race that countries opt out of at their own peril.

Saturday, June 23, 2007

US Army v. Jihadists in Iraq

WARNING-- Graphic violence shown.

Thursday, June 21, 2007

Wednesday, June 20, 2007

Keep Your Powder Dry! There Is No Rapprochement to Be with the Muslim World!

Beheadings, lapidations, amputations, suicide-bombings, honour-killings, flag-burnings, effigy-burnings – Is there nothing to which these mentally-deranged, half-baked, quasi-pious people won’t stoop?

These misdeeds, of course, are carried out in the name of Allah and his prophet, the prophet Muhammad. Not in God’s name, you understand! But in the name of Allah, the false god, the false deity, in the name of Muhammad, the false prophet.

Muslims believe that Jesus was not the Son of God, for they believe that God begat not, and was not begotten. They believe that Jesus was a mere prophet – a man, like you and me. Further, they believe that Jesus was not crucified, despite plenty of historical evidence to prove that he was. To Muslims, Jesus was simply the penultimate prophet of Allah (not God), and although he was a fine man (and all that), He was inferior to the superior and ultimate prophet of Allah: Muhammad.

The West, in recent decades more especially, has embarked on a journey to liberate people. We have liberated women, bringing them away from the kitchen sink; and we are in the process of liberating homosexuals, bringing them away from the closet. We have given blacks rights, we have given women rights, and we are in the process of giving homosexuals rights, too.

Compare this situation with the deplorable state of women in the Muslim world, a world in which women’s lives count for nothing. They are mere chattels. They exist for the sexual pleasure of men. They have few rights, and even fewer chances of a decent life in this world. They must cover themselves up, and must not leave the home unless they are given permission to do so by their guardians: men!

If someone draws a cartoon of their beloved prophet Muhammad, then Muslims are up in arms. If a woman falls in love with a man that the family deems unfit for her love, then she is killed for the sake of honour. If a man happens to be homosexual (through no fault of his own – naturally God made him that way), then he is thrown off the nearest minaret to a certain death, or if he happens to live in Iran, then he is hanged on a rope. Whichever way it happens to be, it is a grim death.

You tell me how these two worldviews can be reconciled! You tell me how there can be a rapprochement! Fact is our two worlds are headed on two divergent and separate paths: The West is headed in the direction of light; the East is headed in the direction of darkness, even darker than the world they already inhabit!

Last year, we witnessed the furore over the innocuous drawings of the cartoons of the prophet Muhammad in Denmark; in recent days, we have witnessed the furore over the knighthood of Salman Rushdie by Queen Elizabeth II. In Pakistan and in other parts of the Middle East, flag- and effigy-burnings are taking place. And those effigies are of no less a person than our beloved Queen! And they talk of wanting to receive respect. If they really want respect, then it is high time that they showed some!

The truth of the matter is this: Our two worlds are on two separate journeys. We, in the West, want to liberate people; they, in the Muslim world, want to place people in chains. So how can there be a meeting of our two cultures? How can there be a rapprochement? How can there be a coming together? There cannot be, of course.

That is why I say to you today that as sure as night follows day, there will soon be – nay have to be – a clash of these two cultures, ein Zusammenprallen. How can we expect anything else?

We are being led by incompetent fools! This is no time for prissy, pretty little leaders – leaders who worry more about their image than about affairs of state.

Today, we worry about green issues, we worry about whether people smoke or not, we worry about health issues (when, actually, people are unhealthier than they have ever been), and we worry about the ecology. We worry about all kinds of things; but we do not worry about what is important: Our civilisation!

To be candid with you, I would prefer to vote for a man who smokes, or for a man who has a lover, or for a man who is gay, as long as he is capable of getting us out of this mess with Islam, as long as he is capable of winning the culture war. He can puff away as much as he likes, he can screw himself to death. Just get us out of this mess with Islam!

Let’s get our priorities right.

It should be clear to all good-thinking people by now that there is no meeting of the East and West to be. We must fight for our survival. We must fight for our beliefs. We must fight for our values. As far as I am concerned, war is what they want, and war they will get. I am ready and willing and prepared to make the sacrifice. Are you? I hope your gun powder is dry. If it isn’t, it ought to be. There are tough times ahead of us.

©Mark Alexander

All rights reserved

Tuesday, June 19, 2007

Myths & Movements

All great social movements ... have come about by the pursuit of a myth. To analyze a myth or to inquire whether it is true - even to ask whether it is practicable - is meaningless. For it is essentially an image that can evoke sentiment and that supplies the cohesion and drive to release revolutionary energy. A political philosophy is not a rational guide to action but an incitement to fanatical determination and blind devotion. ... Conceived as a myth[,] philosophy is a vision of life but not a plan, and still less is it a theory that depends on reason. It is rather a release of the deep-lying instincts of a people, inherent in the "life-force" itself, or in their "blood" or "spirit". - Georges Sorel, French Social Philosopher [Source: A History of Political Theory by G. H. Sabine]
I came across this some time ago. It jumped out of the page at me, since it fits Islam to a T.

Muhammad, the prophet, understood much about the ways of the world. He understood very well the above theory put forward by Georges Sorel. He knew how to create a myth, so he set about creating one; he knew the effect that myth would have on the world if people would only start to accept the myth as fact and true, so he fought the people till it was accepted as true. A myth was created, and the rest, as they say, is history!

In Muhammad's case he would retire to a cave, where the Archangel Gabriel is said to have descended upon him, requesting him to recite in the name of the Lord!

People were simpler back then. They must have been able to believe such a myth. Imagine coming home to your own spouse or family member saying that the Archangel Gabriel had visited you in a cave, asking you to recite in the name of the Lord! I know what my family would do! They'd call the doctor to ask him to commit me! My guess is that yours would probably do the same. Alas, way back then, they obviously didn't; otherwise we wouldn't be where we are today: with a great struggle on our hands. We wouldn't be left with the task of rolling back the frontiers lest we be subsumed into Dar ul Islam!

Islam is, however, a very clever myth, since it portrays itself as the perfection of religion for man for all time, deen al kamal. You've got to hand it to Muhammad, he invented something which many find difficult to refute. He also included all the other prophets that went before him, so as to try not to alienate the other believers. That didn't quite come off, but still, the movement has grown around the world like Topsy. There are said to be way over 1.2 billion Muslims worldwide, and we're still counting! This, despite the gruesome nature of attacks on infidels! It never ceases to amaze me what people will fall for.

But then we know that people are gullible and gregarious. Therein lies one of Islam's strengths. I dare say that Prophet Muhammad was well aware of these characteristics of human nature.

These days, the myth has been given a new lease on life because of the oil wealth generated for the home of Islam: the Middle East. Our businessmen, of course, ever ready to make a fast buck, and having little understanding of our own civilization, still less any respect for it, happily and willingly curry favour with the movers and shakers of the oil-rich desert fiefdoms of the desert. One could almost say that they suck up to their masters there. I've seen the fawning that goes on. It's a sickening sight to behold!

The politicians and the businessmen - these are the people who are selling us short. These are the people who lack the spine to behave with more dignity, and, as a result, give away more of our freedoms by the day. Weakness, I tell you, abounds! These people simper and fawn and suck up. It's a case of yes, sir, no, sir, three bags full, sir. After all, the businessman's bottom line - profit - and his bank balance are far more important to him than anything else.

We're in a mess, though, aren't we? A right old pickle! Moreover, it's going to take a complete U-turn to change direction and win back what we have already lost. And it won't come cost-free either.

Isn't it strange how Western leaders have changed in just a few decades? It was less than sixty years ago that we, in Great Britian, were being led by Winston Churchill. He took a dim view of the strictures of Islam. Not so our leaders today. Now they do nothing to keep Islam at bay; instead, they do everything in their power to integrate the Islamic world into our own world, and there are syncretist forces at work to meld our two religions. But this, of course, will not work. Never will they manage to do that! Muslims, for a start, will not allow their message to be changed in any way. They are rigid. Extremely rigid!

Christianity, too, is based on a traditional story, or myth (myths don't have to be untrue): the story that Jesus was the Son of God, and that He was crucified to save our souls, to redeem us. And inasmuch as this was done to Him, He became our Saviour.

This has been an exceedingly powerful story for us, guiding us for over 2000 years. The problem today is that many have ceased to believe in the story, or if they haven't ceased to believe in it, they have become indifferent to it. Because of this, the development of the West, based as it is on this story, is losing steam. As it continues to lose its steam, it will decelerate and weaken. We simply cannot have it all ways. For, as Sorel says: is essentially an image that can evoke sentiment and that supplies the cohesion and drive to release revolutionary energy.

In Islam, the image is still exceedingly strong; in Christianity, it is considerably weakened. We shall, however, have to find a way of strengthening it again, or else we will have nothing to 'fight' for, nothing to 'fight' to maintain, nothing to hold us together! The story of Christ was the buckle that bound us. It was our guiding light, so to speak. Modern day secularism will not be strong enough to stand up to the onslaught of Islam, since it is hard - very hard - to become passionate about a 'nothing'! To my knowledge, no great movement, either religious or political, in the history of the world, has been founded on a non-story. The myth is all important! No myth, no movement!

©Mark Alexander
All rights reserved

Shamnesty Bill Would Entitle 193 Million More Immigrants

If anyone needs anymore proof of the idiocy of this Bush Amnesty BIll, consider the immigration rights this bill will give to the 12 million legalized plus their family immigration rights plus the other increases in other immigration categoies. That's 193 million. And doesn't even include the additional ILLEGAL immigration that this Shamnesty Bill will absolutely cause. This bill must be stopped. If you aren't calling your Senators, I want to know why.

Bill permits 193 million more aliens by 2026
By Charles Hurt
May 16, 2006

The Senate immigration reform bill would allow for up to 193 million new legal immigrants -- a number greater than 60 percent of the current U.S. population -- in the next 20 years, according to a study released yesterday.
"The magnitude of changes that are entailed in this bill -- and are largely unknown -- rival the impact of the creation of Social Security or the creation of the Medicare program," said Robert Rector, senior policy analyst at the Heritage Foundation who conducted the study.
Although the legislation would permit 193 million new immigrants in the next two decades, Mr. Rector estimated that it is more likely that about 103 million new immigrants actually would arrive in the next 20 years.
Sen. Jeff Sessions, Alabama Republican who conducted a separate analysis that reached similar results, said Congress is "blissfully ignorant of the scope and impact" of the bill, which has bipartisan support in the Senate and has been praised by President Bush.
"This Senate is not ready to pass legislation that so significantly changes our future immigration policy," he said yesterday. "The impact this bill will have over the next 20 years is monumental and has not been thought through."
The 614-page "compromise" bill -- hastily cobbled together last month by Republican Sens. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska and Mel Martinez of Florida -- would give illegal aliens who have been in the U.S. two years or longer a right to citizenship. Illegals who have been here less than two years would have to return to their home countries to apply for citizenship.
Although that "amnesty" would be granted to about 10 million illegals, the real growth in the immigrant population would come later.
As part of the bill, the annual flow of legal immigrants allowed into the U.S. would more than double to more than 2 million annually. In addition, the guest-worker program in the bill would bring in 325,000 new workers annually who could later apply for citizenship.
That population would grow exponentially from there because the millions of new citizens would be permitted to bring along their extended families. Also, Mr. Sessions said, the bill includes "escalating caps," which would raise the number of immigrants allowed in as more people seek to enter the U.S.
"The impact of this increase in legal immigration dwarfs the magnitude of the amnesty provisions," said Mr. Rector, who has followed Congress for 25 years. He called the bill "the most dramatic piece of legislation in my experience."
Mr. Rector based his numerical projection on the number of family members that past immigrants have sponsored.
Immigration into the U.S. would become an "entitlement," Mr. Sessions said. "The decision as to who may come will almost totally be controlled by the desire of the individuals who wish to immigrate to the United States rather than by the United States government."

The Shamnesty Effect on McCain's Race to be President

I like going to the intrade site and look at the options betting on the Presidential candidates. A freeper posted the latest McCain, a chart only a conservative could love. McCain should pay them a visit, but I think he doesn't really care because HE KNOWS HE IS RIGHT and we, the backward, stupid, narrowminded Republicans, don't. Et tu, fatuity McCain. Click on image to enlarge. President Contracts

Monday, June 18, 2007

How HiTech Firms Screw American Citizens for Cheap Immigrant Hitech Workers

On YouTube today there is some video from the Cohen & Grosby law firm on how they conspire with America's corporations to deny American citizens high tech jobs and import cheaper workers. I think this says it all how Corporations conspire to shove this new SHAMNESTY bill down our throats. It is really shocking.

PERM Fake Job Ads defraud Americans to secure green cards

Saturday, June 16, 2007

Thanks for the Weapons!

The Hopeless Ralph Peters Still Doesn't Get It

Ralph Peters is a hit or miss type of journalist on Islam and the Middle East. He comes close, but misses in the end.

In his closing of his article In Gaza's Shadow regarding the Gaza disaster and the sobering facts about the civil war we are in the middle of in Irag, he writes "We're stuck in Iraq, and it sucks. But were we to leave in haste, far more blood than oil would flow in the Persian Gulf. The disaster in Gaza's just a rehearsal for the Arab-suicide drama awaiting its opening night in Iraq. "

First of all we are not STUCK in Iraq. Bush has decided to stick us there. We can leave anytime we want. Second, when we leave, why should we care how much MUSLIM blood will flow? What's with all this altruism? That we must sacrifice more American lives and pay more jizya; is that what is right, Ralph Peters? Bush got us into Iraq because he refuses to understand Islam. Ralph Peters wants to keep us there because he refuses to understand Islam.

Islam is the enemy, these fatuitous 'experts' on the Middle East can't see the obvious because their brain is in a box, a political correct, multicutural moral equivalency box. To admit Islam should be treated as nazism, mocked, ridiculed and circumsribed, that goes too far. And that is why we will have to put up with the misery Islam causes in the world, and the belligerence and demands of the fifth column that have colonized dar al harb and the sudden jihad outbursts derived from having a Muslim presence in the West.

June 14, 2007 -- WONDER what Iraq would look like if we left to morrow? Take a look at Gaza today. Then imagine a situation a thousand times worse.

We need to stop making politically correct excuses. Arab civilization is in collapse. Extremes dominate, either through dictatorship or anarchy. Thanks to their dysfunctional values and antique social structures, Arab states can't govern themselves decently.

We gave them a chance in Iraq. Israel "gave back" the Gaza Strip to let the Palestinians build a model state. Arabs seized those opportunities to butcher each other.

The barbarity in Gaza has become so grotesque that not even the media's apologists for terror can ignore it (especially since Islamist fanatics began to target journalists).

Over the weekend, Hamas gangbangers-for-Allah grabbed a Fatah functionary and dropped him from the roof of a high-rise to check out the law of gravity (the only law that still obtains in Gaza). Tit-for-tat, Fatah gunmen grabbed a Hamas capo and gave him the same treatment.

Thereafter, cooler heads prevailed and both sides returned to their everyday routines of kidnapping, torturing and assassinating each other's leaders, gunning down teachers and doctors and, of course, murdering women, children and stray pedestrians.

Educated Palestinians flee, if they can. Civilians cower, wondering where the next rocket-propelled grenade will hit. And, amid the carnage, students risk death to take their final exams so they can qualify to study abroad - and get out. The indiscriminate violence is the Palestinian version of democracy: Every citizen gets a chance to be killed.

And there's humor in Hell: The Islamist madmen behind Hamas call Fatah fighters "the American Jew Army." We've come a long way, boychick, when fellow Arabs anoint the late Yasser Arafat's thugs as tools of the Great Satan and the Lesser Satan.

In Iraq, terrorists returned to Samarra to finish the job of destroying the Golden Mosque - the 2006 bombing of which ignited months of gruesome Shia-Sunni violence. Under attack from fellow Sunnis disgusted with their excesses, al Qaeda-in-Iraq sought to get the Shia fired up again to force a return to Sunni unity.

Meanwhile, back home, the get-out-now crowd pretends that, if only we pull out our troops, Iraqis will magically settle their internal grievances (presumably, the way the Palestinians have).

The left doesn't care how many Iraqis die, as long as President Bush can be humiliated. Four years ago, the neocons fantasized about a post-Saddam Age of Aquarius. Now the Murthacrats insist that, once we bail out, Atlantis will rise from the Tigris and Euphrates. The willful naivete is identical. The only differences are the timing and who gets blamed.

Look at Gaza, at the orgy of self-destructive savagery, the macho idiocy, the junkyard-dog religion and the murder-suicide cult sweeping Arab civilization. Then note that, barring a few fringe players, only two sides are fighting in the Gaza Strip.

In Iraq, we have foreign terrorists fighting everybody, Sunni Arabs fighting Shia, Shia fighting Shia, Sunni fighting Sunni, Christians and other minorities persecuted by Sunni and Shia, Kurds struggling to preserve their patch of civilization, with American troops and our allies in the middle . . . on a quiet day.

Of course, not only the Arabs are to blame: We went to Baghdad with a fantasy instead of a plan; Israel tried to compromise with genocidal killers; media commissars abetted terrorists, and our generals placed more emphasis on ducking blame than on defeating our enemies. But for all that, it's the Arabs who failed themselves, again and again and again.

When Lebanon tried to achieve a semblance of democracy, Syria embarked on a killing spree that, to this day, has had no tangible consequences for the Assad regime.

When elections came to the Palestinian territories, the Palestinians voted for terrorists. When elections came to Iraq, the Iraqis voted for ethnic separatists or demagogues.

And while Prince Bandar reportedly was raking in billion-dollar bribes between tennis matches with U.S. pols, our Saudi "pals" were spending their oil wealth to ensure that no Muslims will ever live under a tolerant government that regards women as human. Is there any good news at all?

Yes. Earlier this week, Capitol Hill saw a small miracle: A U.S. Army general told the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. As fine an officer as we've got in uniform, Lt. Gen. Martin Dempsey refused to pander to anyone. Instead, he laid out the grim situation in Iraq and detailed the minimum commitment required for any hope of even a flawed success.

Dempsey placed integrity, our country and our troops above self-interest. He described the padded payrolls in Iraq's national police, the sectarianism of local police forces and the long-term effort needed to get the Iraqi army on its feet and fit to fight (think years, not months). Security requirements demand 50,000 more Iraqi soldiers and cops-this year alone.

The general even pointed out that some Iraqis are nostalgic for the order of Saddam's regime: We failed to deliver the No. 1 good, security.

The testimony was sobering, to say the least. And therein lies reason for hope. After years of obfuscation and outright lies from the Rumsfeld-era generals, our troops are finally led by officers who realize we're at war-and that winning is more important than promotions.

We're stuck in Iraq, and it sucks. But were we to leave in haste, far more blood than oil would flow in the Persian Gulf. The disaster in Gaza's just a rehearsal for the Arab-suicide drama awaiting its opening night in Iraq.
Ralph Peters' new book, "Wars of Blood and Faith," hits stores July 25.

It Just Didn't Click.

You know, I think Bush has this problem. His brain doesn't 'click', it may clicketyclack but it just doesn't click. Isn't it amazing how defense attorneys will just go on and on, clicketyclacking long after the game is up. mmmm....that sounds like King George....

Disiplinary committee finds Duke prosecutor broke ethics rules
The Associated PressPublished: June 16, 2007

RALEIGH, North Carolina: A North Carolina prosecutor broke several rules of professional conduct during his disastrous prosecution of three white Duke University lacrosse players falsely acussed of raping a black stripper, a disciplinary committee ruled Saturday.

The committee must now decide if the longtime prosecutor, who tearfully pledged Friday to resign his post as district attorney, should be stripped of his law license. That decision was expected later Saturday.

"My community has suffered enough," Nifong said Friday at his trial. [boo hoo]

State prosecutors would later conclude the three players innocent victims of a rogue prosecutor's "tragic rush to accuse."

The North Carolina State Bar alleged Nifong withheld DNA test results from the players' defense attorneys, lied to the court and bar investigators and made misleading and inflammatory comments about the three athletes who had been charged with raping a stripper at a team party in March 2006.

The committee, after deliberating for a little more than an hour, unanimously agreed with the bar on almost every charge, including the most serious allegations — that Nifong's actions involved "dishonesty, fraud, deceit and misrepresentation."

Nifong's attorneys admitted Saturday that their client made "multiple, egregious mistakes." But they insisted none of his mistakes were made intentionally.

"It didn't click," Nifong's attorney, Dudley Witt, said as he tried to explain away one of Nifong's errors. "His mind is just his mind. That's the way it works. It just didn't click."

Bar prosecutor Douglas Brocker told the disciplinary committee that "Mr. Nifong did not act as a minister of justice, but as a minister of injustice."

Nifong on Friday said he wanted to own up to his mistakes, but that he did not make all the mistakes alleged by the bar. [li'l late for that, don't you think.]

"I will go to my grave being associated with this case. And that's OK," Nifong said.

Nifong said he regretted some of his statements, including a confident proclamation that he would not allow Durham to become known for "a bunch of lacrosse players from Duke raping a black girl."

The DNA tests found genetic material from several males in the accuser's underwear and body, but none from any lacrosse player. Aware of those results, Nifong pressed ahead with the case and won indictments against the players.

Bush and Condi's $60 Million in Arms to Fatah in Gaza Are Now in Hamas Hands

Clueless Condi and King Jorge insisted that the US give $60 millions in arms, vehicles and other millitary goods to Abbas to defend Abbas and Fatah in Gaza. That was in April of this year. Condi assured Congress that this arsenal would not fall into the hands of Hamas (..she wanted $89 million but was only 'confident' that $60 million would not fall into Hamas hands). Bush pushed for this and the appeasing Congress went along. Sound familiar? Bush is now telling lies about his shamnesty bill. Will America be fooled again by the Continentalists?

Condi and Georgie Give $60 Million To Hamas - Tammi Bruce

Just this past April, Condi and the geniuses in Congress thought it would be a grand idea to send $60 million dollars to terrorist group Fatah so the "president" of the so-called Palestinians could improve his security structure. That's now got to be the joke of the year. How long did it take Hamas to destroy Fatah and take over the entire Gaza Strip? 48 hours? I noted my disgust at this insane act by Congress back in April, with the post, Congress Funds Terrorists But Not Our Own Troops.

So, the geniuses in Washington decided that pouring $60 mil down the terror hole would make some sort of a difference. Well, it will now. Hamas will be able to kill more Jews than ever before. This is also another glaring indication of the absolute failure of any reliable international intelligence we have on anything going on in the Middle East. We approved and sent this money just two months prior to the complete route of Arafat's terrorist Fatah group by Iran's terrorist Hamas group. We had no clue, 8 weeks prior, that such a violent and complete takeover was being planned and would be implemented.

We can pretty much guess that millions in cash went into the pockets of various Fatah "officials" (including top terrorist Abbas) and the rest, a cash and weapons treasure-trove, is now securely in the hands of one of the world's most vicious terrorist death squads.

Great effing work Condi and Georgie! Great effing work.


What would Mohammed Do?

In response to my previous column at Malaysia Today, one Muslim left this comment:

“…if Muslims who followed Prophet Mohamed was [sic] in charge, anyone including theantijihadist would be unrestricted in raising their voice.”

So, if I understand this commenter correctly, in his views, the ideology founded by Mohammed, i.e. Islam, enshrines freedom. In particular, he alleges that Islam values and protects freedom of speech, freedom of thought, freedom of skeptical enquiry and the freedom to question authority. The commenter, of course, does not provide any evidence or support to back up his claims.

However, it seems the Muslim who made this comment has views that are not universally accepted by Muslims.

Sheikh Omar Bakri Mohammed, an open supporter of Osama bin Laden and a preacher of armed jihad in the UK for many years, had this to say:
“…in Islam, God said, and the messenger Mohammed said, whoever insults the prophet, he must be punished and executed” (emphasis added) [1].
The British Jihadist group Al-Ghurabaa published a similar statement, referring to incidents in Mohammed’s life to justify its position:
At the time of the Messenger Mohammed (saw)[2] there were individuals like these who dishonoured and insulted him upon whom the Islamic judgment was executed. Such people were not tolerated in the past and throughout the history of Islam were dealt with according to the Shariah (Islamic law). Shortly after these incidents the people began to realize that insulting the Messenger of Allah (saw) was not something to be taken lightly and doing so could get you killed, a concept that many seem to have forgotten today. [3]

Al-Ghurabaa is quite specific about Mohammed’s example:

Ka’ab ibn Ashraf was assassinated by Muhammed ibn Maslamah for harming the Messenger Muhammed (saw) by his words, Abu Raafi’ was killed by Abu Ateeq as the Messenger ordered in the most evil of ways for swearing at the prophet, Khalid bin Sufyaan was killed by Abdullah bin Anees who cut off his head and brought it to the prophet for harming the Messenger Muhammed (saw) by his insults, Al-Asmaa bintu Marwaan was killed by Umayr bin Adi’ al-Khatmi, a blind man, for writing poetry against the prophet and insulting him in it, Al-Aswad al-Ansiwas killed by Fairuz al-Daylami and his family for insulting the Messenger Muhammed (saw) and claiming to be a prophet himself. This is the judgment of Islam upon those who violate, dishonour and insult the Messenger Muhammed (saw). [3]

When Mohammed entered Mecca as conqueror in A.D. 630, he also had Abdullah bin Khatal executed, whose crime was apostasy; al-Huwayrith bin Muqaydh, who had insulted Mohammed, and some others. [4]

Simply put, the claims that Mohammed was a man who valued, or practiced freedom, are not in accord with the facts of Mohammed’s life.

1. “Cleric calls on Mohammed cartoonist to be executed,” The Telegraph, Feb 6 2006
2. ‘Saw’ stands for “Salla Allahu aalayhi Wasallam,” which translates as “May the blessing and the peace of Allah be upon him.”
3. “Kill those who insult the Prophet Mohammed (saw),” Al-Ghurabaa,
4. Muhammed Ibn Ishaq, “Sirat Rasul Allah” 550-551

Friday, June 15, 2007

Burn The Radios! Trent Lott

From FreeRepublic comments Click on image to enlarge.-

Islamic Fascism

Mark Alexander

Thursday, June 14, 2007

Jorge Bush - The New Hoover

William Gheen at ALIPAC wrote an incredibly incisive article about King Jorge Bush today. It is a must read. We will fight them in the Senate, and if we cannot defeat the Continentalists there, we will fight and destroy their evil child in the House. We will not fail. This abomination will be stopped.

Exclusive: The Great Illegal Immigration Depression. Bush is Hoover!
Posted on Thursday, June 14 @ 17:03:13 CDT
Topic: George Bush President immigrants
The Great Illegal Immigration Depression. Bush is Hoover!

June 14, 2007

by William Gheen
President, Americans for Legal Immigration PAC (ALIPAC)

It is my belief that America's illegal immigration crisis is happening because large corporations have used their influence on the Bush administration to open our borders and practically suspend the existing immigration laws of the United States.

It leaves one to wonder what other regulatory laws designed for the protection of American citizens Bush has decided not to enforce. Could this same deprivation of self-governance be a factor in the high gas prices and the toxins being imported in our food?

By unilaterally choosing to suspend, under-enforce, or pretend to enforce our existing immigration laws, President Bush is in violation of his oath of office and the US Constitution.

In fact, when the President does not enforce the popularly-supported laws that exist, every Congressional election has been nullified and every American’s vote has been rendered meaningless. This country’s illegal immigration crisis is the sign of a deeper constitutional crisis that goes to the very heart of our nation!

That is why so many Americans are calling the president "King George," and that is why the words "traitor," "treason," "impeach," and "resign" are flowing freely on the web and talk radio. These expressions show the deep sense of betrayal that Americans of all races, genders, and political persuasions feel at this moment in history.

Illegal aliens are being used as a lever in an attempt to force all Americans into a way of life and a ruled subservience to corporate powers. We are being told we must accept this because the illegals are “here and not going anywhere.” The examples of this corporate-sponsored and corporate-facilitated invasion make the news regularly, and they are violations of federal law.

For those Americans who actually made the mistake of voting for George W. Bush – myself included – we miss the days of the Lewinsky scandal. How nice it would be to return to something as harmless as that. This crisis makes many of us long for the days of Richard Nixon's resignation. Bush’s resignation would be greeted with loud applause and cheers from the American public. In fact, we would all prefer to be talking about a break-in versus the mass invasion of America by corporate-sponsored illegal aliens who are coming by the millions!

Before this is all done, President Bush will go down as either the most despised president in the history of the United States or as one of the last presidents of the United States!

His polling numbers are racing to the bottom, joining Senator Majority Leader Harry Reid, who has reached levels of 19% or less. He is also joining Sen. John McCain, who has plummeted to the back of the GOP pack in the presidential contest. Numbers for Congress are falling like a stone as the conspirators and traitors in Washington push for the final measures of their "SPP," "North American Union," "North American Community," or whatever you want to call this plan.

Should the American Republic survive this assault – and we all hope and pray it will – our citizens will have to look through history to find a president as unpopular as Bush is becoming. We will have to look to the days of President Herbert Hoover because our illegal immigration crisis is the largest corporate and presidential scandal in American history!

This is no surprise to me.

History repeats itself, and the actual study of how history repeats itself is called phylogeny.

I believe that for history to repeat itself, those who are living and remember the horrible mistakes of the past must depart this world. The living memory and living history must pass.

And that is the situation today with those who were alive and old enough to remember the Great Depression, the things that caused it, and what was done to prevent another from ever happening.

When the Republicans came to power in 1994, they worked behind the scenes to dismantle many of the economic regulatory laws that were put in place to prevent another Great Depression in America.

It all started when the federal government had to shut down in the spring of 1996 during the budget impasse between President Bill Clinton and the Republican Congress and Senate. I remember how the stock market took off for the sky!

For the next five years, the stock market ballooned much faster than our real economic growth because the global corporations knew they could get almost anything they wanted from the federal government and ignore many of the Federal laws because the government would either not enforce them or rewrite them to suit the corporate elite!

Does this sound familiar? It should, because this is exactly what the supporters of Scamnesty Bill S. 1348 are doing today. They are not enforcing existing laws and rewriting them to please Global corporate elites! These corporations are no longer happy with the de facto amnesty, open borders, SPP, and North American Community provided by President Bush.

The Big Money is unhappy because over 35 states have passed laws to crack down on illegals and hundreds of cities and towns are moving to protect our communities by doing the same. The big corporations need S. 1348 to try and stamp out the political revolt on the local level.

Americans are in a state of political revolt against the sellouts in Washington and the US Chamber of Commerce that are trying to force a continental economic union upon the unwilling American electorate!

These big corporations as well as many smaller companies are addicted to illegal immigration because of the increased consumerism and cheaper labor the illegals bring to them. To hear them cry about immigration enforcement, they speak as if their companies would die and the crops would rot in the fields without the illegals.

These companies sound like alcoholics, drug addicts, and smokers trying to quit. They will not perish without illegal immigration, but there will be pain. That pain is preferable to the death of this nation, and that will be the end result if we do not stop their evil plans for us all!

By 2000, the economic reading in America reached a level not found since the 1920s just prior to the stock market collapse of 1929. The Q-Value of the markets (real worth vs. trading prices) was more out of balance than at anytime in American history except for the late 1920s. The economic correction heading toward America due to these economic excesses was blamed on the 9/11 attacks, when in fact we were overdue for “The Big One”.

Even Former US Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan has confirmed my theory by stating that without illegal immigration, America would be in the midst of another Great Depression!

I believe that corporate America and their puppets in Washington have been intentionally opening the borders and under-enforcing our existing immigration laws to try to prevent the full collapse of the American economy, which is due to their actions.

By hyper-inflating consumer and labor markets, they are propping up the banks, the housing market, and many other industries.

While this may seem like a great short-term fix for the economy and the corporations, it is against the law, against the US Constitution, and against the will of the vast majority of America's legal citizens. They are importing millions of people that do not like America!

President Bush occupies the same place in the repeats of history as President Hoover, however we have a boogeyman to blame for the economic failures instead of the politicians and corporate elites in America.

Just like President Hoover, Bush is going to blast the GOP back to the place they were in during the 1930s.

When Bush was elected in 2000, this was the first time since the late 1920s that the Republicans controlled the Presidency, Congress, and the Senate.

There is a reason for this. People blamed the Republicans for what happened in the 1930s just like American citizens are rightfully blaming President Bush and his top Republican allies in the Senate for illegal immigration.

The Democrats dominated American politics for the next 50 years in what was called the “FDR Coalition”!

The problem today is that American citizens have no arms to run to with the Democrats. The Democrats have abandoned their progressive economic messages of the past. They no longer stand up for the American worker, a progressive tax structure, or the little guys and gals in America. Democrats are too focused on gender, sexual orientation, and race issues while abandoning their populist economic policies of the past!

President Franklin D. Roosevelt deported a huge amount of illegal aliens from America who had come in during the 1920s, just like we have today. Does anyone think that Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama will crack down on illegal immigration like President Roosevelt or President Dwight Eisenhower?

The answer to that question is a resounding NO!

So where are Americans to go now that the Democrats as a party are not a viable solution and the upper echelons of both parties are bought off by big business?

The pressure is growing and we must all find a place for that pressure to go because we are at a very dangerous time in American history, which resembles the Great Depression.

We could call it the Illegal Immigration Great Depression, and George Bush could be President Hoover II.

Tuesday, June 12, 2007


The Ten Reasons:

10. Awards Amnesty -- Offers amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants.

9. A Favor to Mexico's Government -- Amnesty deal follows the U.S.-Mexico Social Security Totalization Agreement.

8. Cuts Border Security in Half -- Last Congress, we promised the American people 700 miles of fence and today only two miles of that fence have been constructed. What's even more troubling is that this new amnesty sellout is going to cut that border security promise in half to less than 400 miles of fence.

7. That's Trillion with a "T" -- Heritage Foundation President Robert Rector estimates the total cost of the bill to be in the TRILLIONS of dollars.

6. No Assimilation Required -- There is no requirement that illegal immigrants know a word of English to get amnesty.

5. Fails to Address Anchor Babies -- For a so-called 'comprehensive' fix, this legislation fails to address the major problem of illegal immigrants crossing our borders to have children that become automatic U.S. citizens.

4. Amnesty for Absconders and Gang Members -- Bill gives amnesty to dangerous criminals and repeat offenders

3. Invites Fraud -- Z Visas Invite Document Fraud and Create a False Sense of Security

2. Reduces Job Opportunities for Working Class Americans

1. The LARGEST Single Increase in the Government Welfare State in American History -- Illegal immigrants will get Social Security numbers, which will in turn permit them to use entitlement programs available to law-abiding Americans.

Monday, June 11, 2007

The Bush White House Now Considers Talk Radio Its Enemy

And now we come full circle. The White House continued its attack against talk radio this weekend. Does the White House not seen the bitter irony of their traitorous action? The one media that consistently protected him, defended him, helped put Bush IN the White House is now their enemy. On Tuesday, the Republican Senators must choose. Do they give into Bush and agree to limited and token amendments to this amnesty abomination and assure the destruction of the Republican Party and America, or do they tell him there will be no immigration bill. It will be decided by the next adminstration. Do they dare tell him? Do they believe they are 'conservatives' or are they globablists just like Bush?

Saturday, June 09, 2007

Calling a Spade a Spade

My latest Malaysia Today column. Apologies for the length:

From the Anti Jihadist--Calling a Spade a Spade

In one of my past columns at Malaysia Today, I quoted one Ghazi al-Qusaibi, a former Saudi ambassador to London, and who is now a senior minister in the Saudi government. If you recall, he said:

“…flogging, stoning, and amputations are, in Muslim eyes, the core of the Islamic faith.”

Of course, as frequent Malaysia Today writer Mr. Farouk Peru would have it, this minister’s opinion on his own religion is simply the mad, misguided ravings of a lone nut case. Certainly, says Mr. Farouk, how could Mr. al-Qusaibi ever get such quaint, misguided ideas about Islam?

Very well then. Let’s consult the opinions of other well-known and respected authorities in Islam, and see what they have to say about their own religion.

Let’s start with Ayatollah Khomeini, revered and beloved by millions of Muslims.

“We are at war against infidels. Take this message with you. ‘I ask all Islamic nations, all Muslims, all Islamic armies, and all heads of Islamic states to join the Holy War. There are many enemies to be killed or destroyed. Jihad must triumph… Muslims have no alternative… to an armed Holy War against profane governments… Holy War means the conquest of all non-Muslim territories. It will be the duty of every able-bodied adult male to volunteer for this war of conquest, the final aim of which is to put Quranic law in power from one end of the earth to the other.’”

Khomeini, if you remember, was the supreme leader of Islamic Republic of Iran from 1979 until his death in 1989. This is the country where ‘Death to America’ is not just a catchy slogan, it’s official policy. And how many times has the OIC, the Arab League, or any other Muslim organization censured Iran for their decidedly ‘extremist’ positions and rhetoric? Zip, zero, zilch, nada. Quite the opposite, actually.

Now consider this quote from the Saudi ruling family’s favorite imam, al Buraik. He’s a prominent Muslim cleric who, among other things, helps to raise money for the families of terrorists. Prior to a recent telethon hosted to enrich the families of Palestinian suicide bombers, this esteemed cleric said:

“I am against America. She is the root of all evils and wickedness on earth. Muslims, don't take Jews and Christians as allies. Muslim brothers in Palestine, do not have any mercy or compassion on them, their blood, their money, or their flesh. Their women are yours to take, legitimately. Allah made them yours. Why don't you enslave their women? Why don't you wage jihad? Why don't you pillage them?”

This distilled hatred was spewed by a senior licensed cleric in Saudi Arabia, the home of the Two Holy Mosques. Do you think he’s misunderstanding his holy book, his religion as well?

And then there’s Dr. Ahmad Bahar, the acting Speaker of the Palestinian Legislative Council, who had this to say earlier this year on official Palestinian TV:

“… our people was afflicted by the cancerous lump, that is the Jews, in the heart of the Arab nation… Be certain that America is on its way to disappear, America is wallowing [in blood] today in Iraq and Afghanistan, America is defeated and Israel is defeated, and was defeated in Lebanon and Palestine… Make us victorious over the infidel people… Allah, take hold of the Jews and their allies, Allah, take hold of the Americans and their allies… Allah, count them and kill them to the last one and don’t leave even one.”

Let’s hear from Dr. Ahmad Abu Halabiya, Rector of Advanced Studies at the Islamic University in Gaza and a member of the Sharia Rulings Council. Surely this man, so educated in the ways of the Quran and Islam, would agree with Mr. Farouk, yes? In an official televised sermon in October 2000, Dr. Halabiya said:

“The Jews are Jews, whether Labor or Likud, the Jews are Jews… They do not have any moderates or any advocates of peace… They are all liars… They must be butchered and must be killed… The Jews are like a spring as long as you step on it with your foot… it doesn’t move but if you lift your foot from the spring, it hurts you and punishes you.”

So, I ask you, have *all* of these well-known and learned Islamic scholars, leaders, and clerics somehow misinterpreted their own religion, Islam? Have they all somehow tragically misunderstood the teachings of their purported holy book and prophet? Mr. Farouk would certainly like you to think so.

Are there any Muslim leaders, or organizations, anywhere, that are willing to go on the record to condemn these statements or confront the barbarous, retrograde and primitive ideology behind these statements? Is there any organized Muslim opposition to armed jihad?

MR. FAROUK: I hereby, clearly and unequivocally condemn all acts of terrorism by Muslims… I even go further to say that, Quranically, these people are not muslims (sic).

Yes, there are *so many* misunderstanding Muslims out there. And not just the average “Mohammeds” in the streets of Gaza, Cairo, or Karachi, but learned and powerful Muslim leaders too. What would happen if Mr. Farouk went to his Palestinian brothers and tried explaining to them that their lust to kill Jews and other sundry infidels is “against the Quran”? Do you think the Palestinians would suddenly ‘see the light’ and change their minds about armed jihad? Regardless, I’m not expecting Mr. Farouk to jump on a plane to go enlighten his wayward Muslim brothers in the Middle East anytime soon.

Strangely enough, Mr. Farouk has found ample time in his writing here at Malaysia Today to criticize, in his words, the ‘Bush Regime’ (the use of that word, ‘regime’, tips his hand as to where his real sympathies lie) and other foreign policy decisions of the US that he disagrees with (i.e. Iraq). But there’ve still been no words from him at all against any terrorists by name—i.e. Bin Laden and his ilk. None! And 9-11 happened almost six years ago.

So, Mr. Farouk, are you only NOW going to finally get around to condemning specific Muslim terrorists and terror groups? Do you mean to tell me (and the readers) that you, with all your education and study and debating others with similar viewpoints to mine, that the idea of you publicly condemning specific ‘misguided’ Muslims never, ever occurred to you before now? Not even once? Well, no need to rush to do it now on my account!

Why is Mr. Farouk so quick to criticize, nay, insult questioning sceptical infidels (i.e. yours truly), or infidel leaders, but only reluctantly promises to condemn his murderous Islamic brethren by name? Well, once you yourself have confronted the uncomfortable and unpleasant truth about Islam, you’ll stop wondering.

I say Mr. Farouk should put his money where his mouth is. After all, talk is cheap! Here’s an idea for Mr. Farouk. The next time an apostate risks appearing in one of Malaysia’s civil courts--or worse yet, one of the Shariah courts--to beg for permission to be recognized as a non-Muslim, Mr. Farouk should show up at the trial himself to speak on behalf of the apostate’s rights. Or better yet, he should do not only that, but also contribute generously to help pay for the apostate’s legal costs, all openly and publicly. Of course, Mr. Farouk and his pals somehow missed the chance to do this with Lina Joy during her *seven year* legal battle… but rest assured, other apostate cases are already wending their ways through Malaysia’s convoluted legal system. So fear not, Mr. Farouk, there will be other opportunities for you to tangibly demonstrate your bona fides. Actions, as we all know, speak louder than words.

MR. FAROUK: What we should wonder is why this SEEMS SO to you. The day after 9/11, there was a rally for ‘peace and justice’ by Muslims in the town where I work. The day after 7/7, there was a protest by a local mosque near where I live… I actually witness Muslim anger at terrorism.

A rally for “peace and justice”? Is this the best you can do? Is this supposed to be how Muslims demonstrate against Islamic terrorism, against armed jihad? Unlike the low-key Muslim ‘anger at terrorism’ (assuming it’s genuine) I clearly recall the many well-publicized and well-attended Muslim demonstrations against whatever mischief the evil infidels were supposedly up to--the American intervention in Iraq, for instance. And we cannot forget the worldwide rage Muslims everywhere rapidly mobilized against the Motoons, Abu Ghraib, the alleged Quran flushings, etc. etc.

But perhaps Mr. Farouk is right, and that there really is Muslim anger at ‘terrorism’. The better question to ask here is how do Muslims define ‘terrorism’?

For a clue to the answer to this question, let’s examine the record of the “Perdana Global Peace Organisation”, a Malaysian-Muslim-leftist ‘anti-war’ group that enjoys favorable publicity and quasi-official backing from the Malaysian authorities. Perdana has had lots of things to say about Western leaders like Bush, Blair, and Howard—calling them ‘war criminals’ and worse. Well, fair enough, I cannot deny them the right to say these things. So, have the Perdana folks condemned anything done by Bin Laden, Mullah Omar, or Ahmadinejad? Bin Laden’s deliberate targeting and mass murder of civilians? The Taliban’s deliberate destruction of schools and use of civilian shields? Ahmadinejad’s repeated calls for genocide? In response to these heinous acts, Perdana has only silence… not uttering one word against them, not even one perfunctory public statement. But don’t take my word for it…go to their website and look for yourself.

In fact, Perdana has a curious one-way slant to their ‘anti-war views’. If Muslims commit an atrocity (i.e. terrorism, persecution of the kuffir, armed jihad, etc.), Perdana not only doesn’t talk about it, it’s completely off their moral radar. Some nearly 10,000 Muslim terrorist attacks in the past six years (by one estimate), and this doesn’t worry Perdana in the slightest! As far as they’re concerned, it seems that Muslims can do no wrong…and even when they do, it’s the infidels’ fault. And it’s not just Perdana that has these myopic views, but many other ‘anti-war’ or so-called ‘peace’ groups as well. ‘Terrorism’, according to these people, is an exclusively infidel activity.

Now, Mr. Farouk refers to the Muslim quest for ‘peace’. So, naturally, one wonders what the Islamic notion of ‘peace’ may be. To shed some light on this, I will quote the following from an anonymous writer, a long-time resident of the Islamic world who (wisely) wishes to remain anonymous:

After much research and thought, I have come to understand the Islamic concept of peace as something like this:

Peace comes through submission (Islam). This submission, of course, is submission to Muhammad and his concept of Allah in the Quran, in other words, Islam.

Theoretically, peace exists inside Dar ul-Islam, the House of Submission. I say theoretically, because we all know that Muslims, even though they are not supposed to, do fight fellow Muslims… recent examples are the civil war in Afghanistan between the Pushtuns on one side and the Northern Alliance (Uzbeks, Tajiks, etc.) on the other… the Iraqi attack on Iran, the Iraqi attack on Kuwait, the West Pakistani attack on East Pakistan which subsequently became Bangladesh, the Yemeni Civil War with Egypt and Saudi Arabia interfering, the civil war in Algeria, the war between Morocco and Algeria over the Saharan Republic, etc.

To say that Islam is a religion of peace is not true. Islam is committed to war by both the example of Muhammad who fought on until he subdued Mecca and then other tribes, and by the Quranic teaching itself, plus numerous references in the Hadith.

The Quran, by the way, teaches that Muslims are never to initiate war. But Islam has a strange way of explaining this. For example, Muslims are supposed to offer non-Muslims an opportunity to embrace Islam. If the non-Muslims refuse, the Muslim thinking is that they have committed aggression against Allah and Islam. Therefore, the Muslim is allowed to fight these aggressors against Allah and Islam until they become Muslims or are killed.

Perhaps the greatest proof that Islam is not a religion of peace is the interpretation of Quran 4:89 that says if anyone wants to leave Islam (turns renegade) he is to be put to death. This makes it the religion of fear, not peace.

There will be war in the world as long as people believe in Muhammad, his example and his teaching.The Islamic concept of peace, meaning making the whole world Muslim, is actually a mandate for war.

Now that we all have a better idea what the Islamic notion of ‘peace’ is, is that really peace? Is that the kind of peace you want for yourself, or for your family?

MR. FAROUK: Why do you then keep saying Islam and Muslims without mentioning these exceptions to that opinion? Isn’t that like saying ‘all members of a race are so and so’ without mentioning exceptions?

Islamic apologists like Mr. Farouk frequently point out that Islam is not a monolith and that there are differences of opinion. That is true, but, while there are differences, there are also common elements. Just as Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholic, and Protestant Christians differ on many aspects of Christianity, still they accept important common elements. So it is with Islam. One of the common elements to all Islamic schools of thought is jihad, understood as the obligation of the Ummah to conquer and subdue the world in the name of Allah and rule it under Sharia law. The four Sunni Madhhabs (schools of fiqh [Islamic religious jurisprudence]) -- Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi'i, and Hanbali -- all agree that there is a collective obligation on Muslims to make war on the rest of the world. Furthermore, even the schools of thought outside Sunni orthodoxy, including Sufism and the Jafari (Shia) school, agree on the necessity of jihad. When it comes to matters of jihad, the different schools disagree on such questions as whether infidels must first be asked to convert to Islam before hostilities may begin (Osama bin Laden asked America to convert before Al Qaeda’s attacks); how plunder should be distributed among victorious jihadists; whether a long-term Fabian strategy against Dar al-Harb is preferable to an all-out frontal attack, and so on.

MR. FAROUK: …‘al-kaafiroon’… refers to people who create mischief in the land… These individuals are not people do not call themselves Muslims but rather criminals, troublemakers etc.
What exactly is the meaning of ‘mischief’ and who, to Muslims, are ‘troublemakers’ or ‘criminals’ exactly? This is left unsaid. So, let us look at the Islamic world today, and see what sort of acts that Muslim countries have deemed illegal. What sort of ‘mischief’ do Muslim countries consider a crime? What sort of ‘troublemakers’ do Muslims fight?

In Malaysia, it’s illegal for non-Muslims to proselytize to Muslims. In Iran, it’s unlawful for non Muslims to hold most positions in government. In Pakistan, blasphemy against the Quran is a capital crime. In Egypt, the government has essentially banned all repairs on churches. The mere holding of a passport issued in Israel is enough to be banned from entering most Muslim countries. In Saudi Arabia, Christianity is forbidden. Even trying to take a Bible into the Saudi kingdom is a crime. In Turkey, converts from Islam to other faiths face up to three years in jail. Algeria punishes proselytizing to Muslims with fines of US$7,000 to $14,000, and prison terms of two to five years.

Then there’s Sudan. Sudan’s Islamic government engages in ruthless oppression of Christians and animists, the widespread destruction of hundreds of churches, the forced conversions of Christians to Islam, placing non Muslims in concentration camps, the systematic rape of women, enslavement of children, torture of priests and clerics, burning alive of pastors and catechists, and the crucifixion and mutilation of priests. The governing Sudanese jihadists are so systematically brutal, that they make their Sunni terrorist brethren in Iraq look like mere amateurs.

How many Muslims have even known about these atrocities, these miscarriages of justice, let alone protested them? Why are no Muslims objecting to any of this? When is the next scheduled protest going to be held at the embassies of any of the above mentioned offending countries? Funny how Muslims in Malaysia keep going to the same embassies on Fridays to protest one thing or another—but their destination is almost always the American one, the Australian one, or the British one. You think Mr. Farouk would be able to scrape together at least a few friends to go stand outside (for example) the Saudi embassy on Jalan Ampang to protest that country’s barbarism in the name of his religion. But alas, Mr. Farouk, or any other Muslims, can never seem to get around to doing it, for one excuse or another.

So, isn’t it obvious who Muslims collectively consider the real ‘troublemakers’ and ‘criminals’ to be?

MR. FAROUK: It is sad that from your little hole, you only spout what the hate-mongers tell you.

If there’s one piece of evidence in this whole exchange that I find particularly damning, it’s Mr. Farouk himself. Mr. Farouk’s whole attitude in his columns against me can only be summed up as patronizing, arrogant, and defensive. He has labeled me personally, and repeatedly, ‘a racist’, ‘a hatemonger’, ‘a fascist’, and so on, and has insinuated less than charitable things about my intelligence. You might think, since Islam is supposedly tolerant and peaceful, that Mr. Farouk would welcome any and all such questions such as mine, that he would relish the opportunity to prove his benevolence and the goodwill of his faith. Instead, there is an unmistakable whiff of condescension about Mr. Farouk in his dealings with me. Can you imagine a senior religious leader of, say, the Catholic Church acting like Mr. Farouk? Can any of you visualize (for instance) the Pope viciously calling someone a ‘racist, fascist, hatemonger’ etc. etc. because that person did not agree with Catholicism or Christianity? The very idea is laughable. A Christian, when confronted with such a person who disagrees with them, will most likely say something to the effect of, “I’ll pray for you,” and leave it at that.

But Muslims get away with Mr. Farouk’s kind of name-calling and ad hominem attacks, time and time again. Not only do they get away with it, but when Muslims act like Mr. Farouk does, they are proclaimed to be ‘moderate’ and ‘peace-loving’. I think not!

At least I’m one ‘najis kufir’ who is willing to call a spade a spade.