THE RATIONALITY BEHIND A CRIMINAL MIND

On July 23, 2002, the IDF dropped a bomb on a Gaza apartment building, killing terrorist leader Salah Shehadeh, commander of the 'Izz Al-Din Al-Qassam Brigades, the military wing of Hamas.

The following interview with Shehadeh was published by Islam Online on May 29, 2002. Aish.com presents the interview as a curious look into a terrorist's mind.

Q: How do you choose who will carry out a martyrdom operation?
Shehadeh: The choice is made according to four criteria: First, devout religious observance. Second, we verify that the young man complies with his parents' wishes and is loved by his family, and that his martyrdom will not [adversely] affect family life ― that is, he is not the head of the family and he has siblings, as we will not take an only child.
Third, his ability to carry out the task assigned [to] him, and to understand its gravity; and fourth, his martyrdom should encourage others to carry out martyrdom operations and encourage Jihad in the hearts of people. We always prefer unmarried [men]. It is the regional leadership of the military apparatus of the Hamas movement that proposes his candidacy, and then decides whether to accept him.

Q: How do you account for the stream of youths [coming] to join the ranks of perpetrators of martyrdom operations? And does this attest to [mental] health, or to escape from the frustration and disappointment among the Palestinians?
Shehadeh: The stream of youths [who seek to] attain martyrdom shows [mental] health and the awareness of Palestinian society, and is not a mistake or an escape from a situation of despair or frustration. Many people come to Jihad, and they are willing to lay down their souls ― which is the most precious thing a man has. There is a vast difference between someone who sacrifices money or an offering, and someone who sacrifices his soul for the sake of Allah to bring happiness to the nation, and to remove its torment and distress.
Nevertheless, we cannot provide everyone with a martyrdom operation because the targets are limited and the enemy positions we want to reach are highly fortified. If some of the youths do not follow the military apparatus's instructions, and [set out on operations on their own] without being linked officially to this apparatus, this proves that the [entire] nation has become a nation of Jihad on the threshold of liberation, and that it rejects humiliation and submission.

Q: How does the military apparatus choose a target?
Shehadeh: We have surveillance groups whose role is to monitor Israeli and settler patrols and the movement of the enemy on the border. We utilize every breach we find in the enemy's security fence. Afterwards we define the target and the nature of the assault on it, whether it is a settlement, a military post, a military vehicle, or anything else. The target is filmed, and then [the video] is shown to a committee appointed by the General Staff of the Military Operations.
After the target is approved, the martyrdom operation's perpetrator is trained... Then the operation is ready to go, after a group of experts approves the plan and determines the factors for its success or failure.

Q: What about killing Israeli citizens?
Shehadeh: We do not target children, the elderly, and places of worship, although these places of worship incite to murdering Muslims. Similarly, we have not targeted schools, because we do not give orders to kill children. The same goes for hospitals, although this is easy for us, and attainable.
We act according to the principles of Jihad to which we adhere. Our motto is: “We are not fighting the Jews because they are Jews, but because they occupy our land. We are not fighting them because of their religion but because they have usurped our land.” If we kill a child it is not intentional...

Q: How much does a martyrdom operation cost?
Shehadeh: The cost of an operation varies... Attack operations with automatic weapons cost the price of the weapon, which hold at least 250 rounds, and of the ammunition, and the price of about 10 hand grenades. But some of the operations cost much more and include transporting [the perpetrator]... buying a car, and bribing Jewish collaborators. There are operations that cost a great deal ― between $3,500-$50,000, in accordance with the target.

Q: How did you develop the weapons that the 'Izz Al-Din Al-Qassam Brigades have come to excel at manufacturing, such as the Al-Qassam 1 and Al-Qassam 2 and the and the Al-Bana [rockets]?
Shehadeh: ...We have scientists who specialize in weapons development, who are today studying and conducting experiments on the Al-Bana rocket, which is a combination of an RPG and a LAW [light anti-tank weapon], and differs from the Al-Qassam 2 because it is designed for moderately thick armor. Hand grenades are manufactured to meet the needs of the apparatus and its members, and they have proved their efficiency, and [even] the Zionist Defense Ministry attests that they are powerful grenades.

The rocket explosives are made from simple raw materials. Even the women can make them at home.

All the grenades and rockets are locally manufactured, easily and simply. The explosives in the Al-Qassam 1 and 2 and the Al Bana are made from simple raw materials. [Even] the women can make them at home...

Q: What about the organizational structure of the 'Izz Al-Din Al-Qassam Brigades?
Shehadeh: In general, the brigades are a small army subject to political decisions, like any [other] army in the world. It has all the kinds of divisions and structures that an army has. We are soldiers. The political apparatus does not tell us, 'Do such and such' and 'Carry out this or that operation'; the political apparatus is sovereign over the military apparatus, and a decision of the political [echelon] takes precedence over the decision of the military [echelon], without intervening in military operations.

The number of dead depends on the will of Allah.

The success of an operation is not defined by the number of enemy dead, but by the extent to which our Jihad fighters managed to reach the target, and by the operation's execution. Good planning is vital for the operation's success. The number of dead depends on the will of Allah.

Q: What are the obstacles that the Al-Qassam Brigades face?
Sh'hadeh: The most significant obstacles are the scarcity of good-quality weapons, such as anti-aircraft and long-range missiles.
Another significant obstacle is the haze obscuring the political position of the National [Palestinian] Authority. This causes confusion in the military wing [because] it does not set a [clear] position regarding the military operations ― that is, whether it is for them or against them. Is it an authority for national liberation, or an authority for autonomy? This matter confuses many Jihad fighters.
In addition, weapons prices have been raised by the bloodsucker arms dealers, so the price of an M-16 has reached $5,000, and each of its bullets now costs $1.50, and a Kalashnikov costs $2,000, and each of its bullets costs $4.00.
The military apparatus has managed to meet the challenge of weapons scarcities by collecting donations from people who love supporting the path of Jihad for the sake of Allah. Similarly, the movement has succeeded in manufacturing some of the intermediate weaponry, thus reducing costs. The cost of a rocket [made by the movement] is less than 1 percent of its cost if we had to buy it.


http://www.aish.com/jw/me/48894712.html

MUSLIM IMBREEDING: Impacts on intelligence, sanity, health and society .

Massive inbreeding within the Muslim culture during the last 1.400 years may have done catastrophic damage to their gene pool. The consequences of intermarriage between first cousins often have serious impact on the offspring's intelligence, sanity, health and on their surroundings

The most famous example of inbreeding is in ancient Egypt, where several Pharaonic dynasties collapsed after a couple of hundred years. In order to keep wealth and power within the family, the Pharaohs often married their own sister or half-sister and after a handful of generations the offspring were mentally and physically unfit to rule.

Another historical example is the royal houses of Europe where royal families often married among each other because tradition did not allow them to marry people of non-royal class.

The high amount of mentally retarded and handicapped royalties throughout European history shows the unhealthy consequences of this practice. Luckily, the royal families have now allowed themselves to marry for love and not just for status.

The Muslim culture still practices inbreeding and has been doing so for longer than any Egyptian dynasty. This practice also predates the world's oldest monarchy (the Danish) by 300 years.

A rough estimate shows that close to half of all Muslims in the world are inbred: In Pakistan, 70 percent of all marriages are between first cousins (so-called "consanguinity") and in Turkey the amount is between 25-30 percent (Jyllands-Posten, 27/2 2009 More stillbirths among immigrants"

Statistical research on Arabic countries shows that up to 34 percent of all marriages in Algiers are consanguine (blood related), 46 percent in Bahrain, 33 percent in Egypt, 80 percent in Nubia (southern area in Egypt), 60 percent in Iraq, 64 percent in Jordan, 64 percent in Kuwait, 42 percent in Lebanon, 48 percent in Libya, 47 percent in Mauritania, 54 percent in Qatar, 67 percent in Saudi Arabia, 63 percent in Sudan, 40 percent in Syria, 39 percent in Tunisia, 54 percent in the United Arabic Emirates and 45 percent in Yemen (Reproductive Health Journal, 2009 Consanguinity and reproductive health among Arabs.).

A large part of inbred Muslims are born from parents who are themselves inbred - which increase the risks of negative mental and physical consequenses greatly.

The amount of blood related marriages is lower among Muslim immigrants living in the West. Among Pakistanis living in Denmark the amount is down to 40 percent and 15 percent among Turkish immigrants (Jyllands-Posten, 27/2 2009 More stillbirths among immigrants".).

More than half of Pakistani immigrants living in Britain are intermarried:

The research, conducted by the BBC and broadcast to a shocked nation on Tuesday, found that at least 55% of the community was married to a first cousin. This is thought to be linked to the probability that a British Pakistani family is at least 13 times more likely than the general population to have children with recessive genetic disorders." (Times of India, 17/11 2005 Ban UK Pakistanis from marrying cousins).

The lower percentages might be because it is difficult to get the chosen family member to the country, or because health education is better in the West.

Low intelligence

Several studies show that children of consanguineous marriages have lower intelligence than children of non-related parents. Research shows that the IQ is 10-16 points lower in children born from related parents and that abilities related to social behavior develops slower in inbred babies:

"Effects of parental consanguinity on the cognitive and social behavior of children have been studied among the Ansari Muslims of Bhalgapur, Bihar.

IQ in inbred children (8-12 years old) is found to be lower (69 in rural and 79 in suburban populations) than that of the outbred ones (79 and 95 respectively). The onset of various social profiles like visual fixation, social smile, sound seizures, oral expression and hand-grasping are significantly delayed among the new-born inbred babies." (Indian National Science Academy, 1983 Consanguinity Effects on Intelligence Quotient and Neonatal Behaviours of nsari Muslim Children").

The article "Effects of inbreeding on Raven Matrices" concludes that "Indian Muslim school boys, ages 13 to 15 years, whose parents are first cousins, were compared with classmates whose parents are genetically unrelated on the Raven Standard Progressive Matrices, a nonverbal test of intelligence. The inbred group scored significantly lower and had significantly greater variance than the non-inbred group, both on raw scores and on scores statistically adjusted to control for age and socioeconomic status." (Behaviour Genetics, 1984).

Another study shows that the risk of having an IQ lower than 70 goes up 400 percent from 1.2 percent in children from normal parents to 6.2 percent in inbred children: "The data indicate that the risk for mental retardation in matings of normal parents increases from 0.012 with random matings to 0.062 for first-cousin parentage." (Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, 1978 Effect of inbreeding on IQ and mental retardation"). The study A study of possible deleterious effects of consanguinity concludes, that "The occurrence of malignancies, congenital abnormalities, mental retardation and physical handicap was significantly higher in offspring of consanguineous than non-consanguineous marriages."

Mental and physical diseases and death

The risk of stillbirth doubles when parents are first cousins (Jyllands-Posten, 27/2 2009 More stillbirths among immigrants). One study analyzed the risk of perinatal death (the child dies during its own birth), infant death (child dies while still infant) and autosomal recessive disorders (serious and often deadly genetic diseases such as cystic fibrosis and spinal muscular atrophy):

Perinatal mortality in the Pakistani children was 1.5 times higher than that in the Norwegian children, and infant mortality in the Pakistani children was more than double that in the Norwegian children. Deaths due to autosomal recessive disorders were 18 times more common in the Pakistani children. Similarly, deaths due to multiple malformations, which may be part of unrecognized autosomal recessive syndromes, were 10 times more common.

(BMJ, 1994 Infant death and consanguineous marriage.

There are also evidence suggesting that inbred people has a higher risk of developing mental disorders: "The clinical observations indicated that depression is very high in some communities where the consanguinity of marriages is also high." (Indian Journal of Psychiatry, 2009 "Relationship between consanguinity and depression in a south Indian population".

Another study focused on the relationship between intermarriage and schizophrenia: "The closer the blood relative, the more likely was there to be a schizophrenic illness." (American Psychiatric Press, 1982 The role of genetic factors in the ethiology of the schizophrenic
disorders.

The increased risk of insanity among children of marriages between cousins might explain why immigrant patients are stressing the psychiatric system and are strongly overrepresented among insane criminals: "In Sct. Hans Hospital, which has the biggest ward for clinically insane criminals in Denmark, more than 40 percent of the patients have an immigrant background." (Kristeligt Dagblad, 26/6 2007 Ethnic minorities overrepresented among the criminal insane).

Implications for the Western and the Muslim World

The consequences for offspring of consanguineous marriages are unpleasantly clear: Death, low intelligence or even mental retardation, handicaps and diseases often leading to a slow and painful death. Other consequences are:

Limited social skills and understanding, limited ability to manage education and work procedures and painful treatment procedures. The negative cognitive consequences also influence the executive functions. The impairment of concentration and emotional control most often leads to anti-social behavior.

The economic costs and consequences for society of inbreeding are of course secondary to the reality of human suffering.

However, inbreeding among Muslims has severe implications for both the Western societies and the Muslim world.

Expenses related to mentally and physically handicapped Muslim immigrants drains the budget for other public services: "When cousins have children together, they are twice as likely to have a disabled child - it costs municipal funds dearly. Disabled immigrant children costs Danish municipalities millions. In Copenhagen County alone, the number of disabled children in the overall increase of 100 percent at 10 years. ... Meredith Lefelt has contacted 330 families with disabled children in Copenhagen. She estimates that one third of their clients have a foreign cultural background." (BT, 10/11 2003 Immigrants inbreeding costing one million.

On top come the expenses for Muslim immigrants who - because of different consequences of being born from blood related parents - are not able to live up to the challenges of our Western work market: Muslim immigrants and their descendants in Europe have a very high rate of unemployment.

The same goes for Muslims in USA, where the Gallup Institute made a study involving 300.000 people concluding "The majority of Muslims in USA have a lower income, are less educated and have worse jobs than the population as a whole." (Berlingske Tidende, d. 3. marts 2009: Muslims thrive in USA.

The cognitive consequences of Muslim inbreeding might explain why non-Western immigrants are more than 300 percent more likely to fail the Danish army's intelligence test than native Danes: "19.3% of non-Western immigrants are not able to pass the Danish army's intelligence test. In comparison, only 4.7% of applicants with Danish background do not pass." (TV 2 Nyhederne, 13/6 2007 Immigrants flunk army test.

It probably also explains - at least partly - why two thirds of all immigrant school children with Arabic backgrounds are illiterate after 10 years in the Danish school system: "Those who speak Arabic with their parents have an extreme tendency to lack reading abilities - 64 percent are illiterate. ... No matter if it concerns reading abilities, mathematics or science, the pattern is the same: The bilingual (largely Muslim) immigrants' skills are exceedingly poor compared to their Danish classmates." (Rockwool Foundation Research Unit, May 2007: Ethnic students does not make Danish children worse.

The high expenses on special education for slow learners consumes one third of the budget for the Danish schools. "Immigrant children are clearly overrepresented on Copenhagen's schools for retarded children and children with physical handicaps. ... 51 percent of the children on the three schools in Copenhagen for children with physical and mental handicaps har immigrant back ground and on one of the schools the amount is 70 percent. ... These amounts are significantly higher than the share of immigrant children in the municipality, which is 33 percent. The many handicapped children are a clear evidence that there are many intermarried parents in the immigrant families." (Jydske Vestkysten, 4/4 2009 Tosprogede i overtal på handicapskoler).

Our high level of education may also make it harder for inbred students to follow and finish their studies: "Young people with minority backgrounds have a significantly higher dropout rate at secondary schools than youth with a Danish background. For trade school education, the dropout rate among immigrants is 60 percent, twice as high among adolescents with a Danish background....

There is great variation in educational outcomes when compared with national origin. For example, dropout among young people with Lebanese or Iranian background is far greater than among people of Vietnamese background." (Center for Knowledge on Integration in Randers, May 2005 "Youth, education and integration"). "Among immigrant children that are born and raised in Denmark, more than a third has no education. Among native Danes it is less than one fifth that do not get an education. (Statistics Denmark: "Indvandrere i 2007".

The negative consequences of inbreeding are also vast for the Muslim world. Inbreeding may thus explain why only nine Muslims ever managed to receive the prestigious Nobel Prize (5 of them won the "Peace Prize" - for peace that turned out not to last for very long).

The limited ability to understand, appreciate and produce knowledge following a limited IQ is probably also partly the reason why Muslim countries produce 1/10 of the World average when it comes to scientific research: "In 2003, the world average for production of articles per million inhabitants was 137, whereas none of the 47 OIC countries for which there were data achieved production above 107 per million inhabitants. The OIC average was just 13." (Nature 444, p. 26-27, 1. November 2006 "Islam and science: The data gap".

The lack of interest in science and human development in the Muslim World is also clear in the UN Arab Human Development Reports (AHDR). AHDR concludes that there have been fewer books translated into Arabic in the last thousand years than the amount of books translated within the country of Spain every year:

"The Arab world translates about 330 books annually, one fifth of the number that Greece translates. The cumulative total of translated books since the Caliph Maa'moun's [sic] time (the ninth century) is about 100,000, almost the average that Spain translates in one year." (Eugene Rogan "Arab Books and human development". Index of Censorship, vol. 33, issue 2 April 2004, p. 152-157). "70 percent of the Turkish citizens never read books."(APA, 23 February 2009 ")

Conclusion

There is no doubt that the wide spread tradition of first cousin marriages among Muslims has harmed the gene pool among Muslims. Because Muslims' religious beliefs prohibit marrying non-Muslims and thus prevents them from adding fresh genetic material to their population, the genetic damage done to their gene pool since their prophet allowed first cousin marriages 1,400 years ago are most likely massive. The overwhelming direct and indirect human and societal consequences have been explained above.

Compassion for the health of future generations should be enough to ban intermarriage among first cousins. The economic and societal consequences do also count. Such a ban would also lessen Muslim immigration to the West because many Muslim families would like to be able to continue their practice of intermarriage in order to live up to cultural and religious traditions and keep wealth and power inside their family.

A legislative ban on first cousin marriages is a logical and compassionate imperative for both the Muslim world, for EU and our Western national governments.

Other articles by Nicolai Sennels:

• Interview to EuropeNews, marts 31st 2009
  "Danish psychologist: "Integration of Muslims in Western societies is not possible".
• Interview to The German Review of Books, December 2009: The one thing Muslim immigrants fear is being deported
• Interview to the Finnish Hommaforum, December 17th 2009: An interview with Nicolai Sennels
• Gates of Vienna, April 11th 2010: The Stigmatization Fallacy
• Article in New English Review, May 2010: Muslims and Westerners: The psychological differences
• Review on Gates of Vienna, May 8th 2010: Islam Means Never Having to say you're sorry
• Interview in FrontPage Magazine, May 5th 2010: Among Criminal Muslims
• Conference on FrontPageMagazine, June 21st 2010: A psychiatric Conference on Truthful Girl
• Article on Europenews.dk, 5. februar 2010: Sexual abuse widespread among Muslims
• 180Grader, europenews.dk, GatesofVienna etc., July 28th 2010: Open letter to David Cameron regarding Turkey

http://www.rightsidenews.com/2010081111313/life-and-science/culture-wars/muslim-inbreeding-impacts-on-intelligence-sanity-health-and-society.htmlNicolai Sennels is a psychologist and author of “Among Criminal Muslims. A Psychologist’s Experiences from Copenhagen Municipality.”

MAY 21, 2011 came and passed, and Harold Camping proved to be a nut.

Harold Camping, the popular evangelical radio host predicted that the world would end on May 21, 2011. As you can see, nothing happened. What are the lessons we can draw from this disgraced "prophet"? First of all, no man on earth, no matter how "Christian" he is, can, accurately, prophesied the exact day of the end of the world or the coming of Jesus. Jesus himself said, "No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father." (Mat. 24:36). In other words, Jesus told his disciples that the time of his second coming and the end  of the world  is hidden from men, it is God the only one who knows about the Judgment Day.

Second, it is a complete nonsense and a mockery to the Christian faith to pretend to know the date of the second coming of Christ and of the end of the world. Camping has made of himself a no-credible person in both spheres, Christian and non-Christian. Because of him, many mockers and anti-God will have a picnick-day attacking the Christian faith and laughing at Christians.

And lastly, the fact that Harold Camping's "prophecies" did not come true, it does not mean that the prophecies about the second coming of Jesus and the end of the world will not happen. Jesus will come to earth again, he said it; the end of this human system will end, the Hebrew prophets say that. When? How? we do not know, in the meantime we need to live according to the will of God.

 

CORRUPT DICTATOR HUGO CHAVEZ AND HIS SUPPORT FOR TERRORISM

Since 1979, the U.S. has maintained a list of nations it judges to be state sponsors of terrorism.

The list is a regular reminder of the enduring threat to international peace and security posed by the

secretive alliances between non-state terrorist organizations and states run by dangerous leaders who employ or support violence against their enemies.

Operating outside the norms of international law and disregarding shared obligations to work for common security, these “terror list” nations ruthlessly support terrorists as proxies to advance their interests. In the 21st century, terrorism has become a regular means for waging “asymmetrical” warfare against militarily superior enemies or for backing clients in other countries. Globalization allows transnational networks to routinely link parties that are committed to terrorism, violence, and criminality, and are a major threat to U.S. security.

As of 2009, the U.S. listed four nations—Syria, Cuba, Sudan, and Iran—as state sponsors of terrorism.

A fifth country, Venezuela, merits a place on this list because of its support for acts of terrorism and subversion committed by the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) and because of its strategic alignment with the other four state sponsors of terrorism, particularly Iran.

...Venezuela has forged closer ties with Syria and Sudan, associated with anti-Israel extremists, and endorsed Iran’s efforts to become a regional and global nuclear power. Chávez has proclaimed his readiness to work with Iran to defeat “the [American] empire and its lackeys.

...Washington is all too familiar with Chávez’s readiness to align himself with all current state sponsors of terrorism and to fan the flames of turmoil in the Middle East and the Americas. He has risen to high stature as an international firebrand and a dedicated leader of the anti-Americanism of the 21st century. Placing Venezuela where it belongs, on the list of state sponsors of terrorism, will not resolve every challenge the U.S. faces with regard to Venezuela, but it will send a powerful signal that the American people understand that oil,  extremism, terror, and anti-Americanism make a dangerous mixture, whether in the Middle East or

the Americas.


(For a complete report, click the link below)

http://s3.amazonaws.com/thf_media/2010/pdf/bg_2362.pdf

CORRUPT DICTATOR HUGO CHAVEZ AND HIS CONNECTIONS WITH THE NARCOS

The record will show that the May 9 extradition by Colombia of Walid Makled Garcia to Venezuela constitutes a major lost opportunity for the Obama Administration to interrogate and prosecute a Venezuelan drug kingpin with close ties to high-level Venezuelan officials and to expose the depth of narco-corruption within the Hugo Chavez regime in Venezuela.

Makled’s extradition follows the decision by Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos and the Colombian courts to honor the Venezuelan request for extradition over a similar request made by the U.S. In exchange for Makled, the Colombians are banking on closer commercial and security ties, including reduced support for the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), with the imperious and unpredictable Chavez.

The relationship between Chavez and the narco-terrorists of the FARC is again the subject of careful international scrutiny following release of a detailed examination and analysis of links between the FARC and Venezuela by the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS). The study includes the most complete set of documents recovered from the laptop of Raul Reyes, the FARC’s chief of staff, who was killed during a daring military strike by Colombian forces in March 2008 in his safe haven on Ecuador’s soil.
The study reviews the long record of collaboration by Chávez and his top confidants with the FARC, which they viewed as “an ally that would keep U.S. and Colombian military strength in the region tied down in counterinsurgency, helping to reduce perceived threats against Venezuela.”

(For a complete article, click the link below)

http://blog.heritage.org/2011/05/10/weakness-on-chavez-drugs-and-terror-plague-obama%e2%80%99s-latin-america-policy/

From one dictator to another dictator to another: Venezuela, Iran, North Korea

The Berlin-based daily Die Welt published a news story on May 13 citing “Western security sources” who reported that Venezuela’s authoritarian strongman Hugo Chavez secretly met in February 2011 with the chief of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard’s Air Force, Amir al-Hadschisadeh.

The pair, according to Die Welt, finalized the location for a missile base, said to be located on the Peninsula de Paraguana, a jut of land 120 kilometers from the Colombian border. Engineers from the Iranian state-owned construction agency Khatam al-Anbia, Die Welt added, have already begun preliminary work on the base.
Thus far there has been no response from the Obama Administration.

Chavez has long expressed interest in acquiring Russian-made missiles. He has purchased and showcased hundreds of shoulder-fired IGLA surface-to-air missiles and has been in the market for Russian S-300 missiles, the same powerful weapon that Russia has thus far denied to Iran. Chavez claims that U.S. aggression is his number one security threat.

More than one report on Iran’s missile intentions surfaced late last year. With the help of North Korea, Iran continues to extend its missile range capability and may now have weapons with sufficient capacity to reach the U.S. Add a nuclear weapon or WMD and one has a prescription for another Cuban missile crisis.

The central question that must be asked with increased urgency is: To what lengths will Chavez go to demonstrate the operational commitment of his alliance with Iran? Is this alliance one of rhetorical convenience filled with venom and bluster but little concrete action? Or is it an increasingly cooperative and operational venture that aims at accumulating military power, sharing resources (including access to uranium), and exploiting petroleum ties that will, as Chavez routinely promises, “hasten the end of U.S. imperialism”?

For the Obama Administration—which has for the most part refused to take the Chavez challenge seriously and consistently downplays potential strategic security threats in the Western Hemisphere—another unconfirmed press report may be easy to ignore.

This would be the wrong approach. The Administration should be open, frank, and authoritative in responding to an issue of high security importance.

http://blog.heritage.org/2011/05/17/chavez-iran-and-missiles-a-dangerous-step/

Osama bin Laden may have died but Al Qaeda is still active!

After Osama bin Laden’s death, it is clear that the war on terrorism is not over.

Ayman al-Zawahiri, the former al-Qaeda’s number two, may take over as bin Laden’s heir, unless the interim operations leader Saif al-Adel, the former Egyptian commando with Iranian ties, gets the job. In the meantime, al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), the most active and dangerous of al-Qaeda affiliate terrorist organizations, has embarked upon expanding the global reach of its supporters.

AQAP recently translated al-Qaeda’s online journal Inspire into Russian in an effort to attract the jihadis from the embattled North Caucasus and other Muslim-populated parts of Russia.

North Caucasus terrorists have been using radical Salafi Islam to recruit disgruntled youth who grew up on the battlefields of the two Chechen wars (1994–1996 and 1999–2004). One of the first to do that, Shamil Basayev, was the mastermind of the Dubrovka and Beslan hostage takings. His successor, Doku Umarov, managed to strengthen the ties with local Islamic communities and claimed the establishment of the “Caucasus Emirate,” a pan-Caucasus terrorist group fighting “jihad against the infidels” and for an Islamic emirate consisting of all the North Caucasus.

Umarov launched an even greater terror campaign and is allegedly behind for the suicide bombing at the Domodedovo Airport in January, two suicide bombings in Moscow in March 2010, and the Nevsky Express bombing in November 2009. The Caucasus Emirate is one of the most active terrorist battlefronts today and is responsible for the daily attacks on innocent civilians, police stations, and government offices throughout Russia and the Caucasus.

The North Caucasus has been on al-Qaeda’s radar screen for a decade and a half. Zawahiri visited the region in mid-1990s and was arrested (and subsequently released) by the Russians—for reasons which are still unclear. He identified the Caucasus as one of the primary fronts in the war against Russia and the West.
...
After bin Laden’s death, al-Qaeda is clearly committed to expand its theaters of operations and reaching out to affiliates, including those in Russia. This is hardly surprising, as Chechen terrorists fight in Afghanistan alongside al-Qaeda and were even jailed in Guantanamo.

It is time for the Kremlin to recognize this threat and stop the usual propaganda narrative of anti-Americanism. As for the United States, we should continue our commitment to the war on terrorism and prevent al-Qaeda affiliates to find a new safe haven and new allies in the poorly governed North Caucasus.


(for a complete report, click the link below)

http://blog.heritage.org/2011/05/20/after-bin-laden%e2%80%99s-death-al-qaeda-turns-to-the-north-caucasus/

THE "NON-INTERVENTIONISM" DOCTRINE IS NOT AN AMERICAN PRINCIPLE

Those who advocate strict non-interventionism usually intend it to mean that America should remain militarily uninvolved abroad except when there is a clear and imminent threat to U.S. territory. But this isolationist doctrine of non-interventionism is not in keeping with the founding principles of America’s early foreign policy.

The Founding Fathers, whose foreign policy some non-interventionists claim to champion, were no strangers to difficult foreign policy decisions. When faced with the choice to allow attacks on American ships of commerce by Barbary pirates in the Mediterranean Sea or to punish the perpetrators of those attacks, President Thomas Jefferson and his Secretary of State James Madison chose the latter.

In 1801, just thirteen years after the Constitution was ratified, the United States built six frigates and dispatched a naval squadron to seek out and punish the Muslim pirates who had been attacking American merchants and endangering the life and property of American citizens. Soon the U.S. Navy attacked the port of Tripoli (pictured above) and landed Marines on the Barbary Coast of North Africa, who then captured the Ottoman city of Derma. This series of battles inspired a line of the U.S. Marine Corps’ Hymn (“to the shores of Tripoli”).

The Tripolitan War blatantly violated the sovereignty of the Ottoman Empire, in order to carry out a U.S. foreign policy objective that was in keeping with America’s guiding principles of maintaining independence abroad, ensuring freedom, and preserving peace. It did so without officially declaring war. Interestingly, America’s cause in this conflict was also understood by the Jefferson administration to be punishing the Barbary States’ violations against the Law of Nations.

Strict non-interventionists would apparently object to this historical deployment of the Marines on foreign soil to ensure Americans’ safety in another hemisphere; for the doctrine of non-interventionism is conspicuously dogmatic and inflexible. Indeed, it is reminiscent of the isolationist views of the 1930s and bears little resemblance to the Founders’ foreign policy approach. Even though there was disagreement among the Founders on certain policies, there was an overwhelming agreement that abroad America should vigorously maintains it independence and pursue its interests while standing for the idea of political freedom across the globe.

While a policy of non-intervention is sometimes appropriate, the doctrine of non-interventionism is an isolationist policy which limits the options available to America. It is a limitation that the Founders clearly did not adopt: in the years 1783-1860, the U.S. engaged in military action nearly sixty times at locations around the globe. Like the Tripolitan War, these military actions in the service of America’s interests and principles were both defensive and, at times, interventionist.

The true consistency of American foreign policy is to be found not in its policies, which ought to prudently change and adapt, but in its guiding principles, which should be unchanging and permanent. Those who advocate strict non-interventionism are not representing a traditionally American foreign policy approach; for it excludes the statesmanlike virtue of prudence and ignores many instances in early American history when the U.S. did intervene, even militarily, in order to defend America’s interests and advance its political principles.



—Marion Smith is a graduate fellow in the B. Kenneth Simon Center for American Studies at the Heritage Foundation. This post is the second in a series on the Founders’ understanding of military engagement.

http://blog.heritage.org/2011/05/20/the-founders-on-intervention-american-military-action-abroad-1783-1860/

OBAMA GETS IT WRONG ON EDUCATION

Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Yet when it comes to education, that’s one lesson the federal government hasn’t learned. Maybe it’s time to put some history teachers on the case. They would have to look no further than President Barack Obama in writing their lesson plan.
Yesterday the President delivered a commencement speech at a high school in Memphis, Tenn., in recognition for its achievement in his Race to the Top Commencement Challenge, a competition for schools to demonstrate their commitment to preparing students for college. While applauding the students, the President also took time to pat his Administration on the back for its education policy — which amounts to another truckload of spending and further concentration of power over education in Washington:

Ever since I became President, my Administration has been working hard to make sure that we build on the progress that’s taking place at schools like this. We’ve got to encourage the kind of change that’s led not by Washington, D.C., but by teachers and principals and parents; by entire communities; by ordinary people standing up and demanding a better future for their children.

In reality, the President’s strategy isn’t about empowering teachers and communities. It’s about increasing the federal government’s authority over schools. The Heritage Foundation’s Lindsey Burke writes:

Despite his assertion that education change must be led “by teachers and principals and parents” – not by Washington, D.C. – the Obama Administration’s track record on education policy begs the contrary. His Administration has continued the education spending spree, taking it to new heights thanks to a $100 billion bonus provided to the Department of Education through the so-called “stimulus” in 2009.
Moreover, the President is eager to consolidate more power in Washington by requiring states to comply with national standards as a part of No Child Left Behind reauthorization, driven by the belief that education reform can happen top-down from Washington. President Obama has called for the law’s reauthorization before the start of the next school year.

(click the link below for a complete article)

http://blog.heritage.org/2011/05/17/morning-bell-teaching-obama-a-lesson-on-education/

WHY AMERICA NEEDS ISRAEL IN THE MIDDLE EAST

When Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu visits President Barack Obama at the White House today for three hours of meetings, he will likely ask the President a very important question: Do you stand by the long-standing U.S. commitments to Israel’s future as a Jewish state?
He’s right to ask the question. In a speech yesterday on U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East following the “Arab Spring” uprisings, President Obama broached the subject of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Notably, he stated that, as part of finding peace between Israel and Palestine, the two parties should return to their 1967 borders. The Heritage Foundation’s James Phillips explains that the President’s proposal is a “misreading of the past” and an “underestimation of the terrorist threat” that Israel faces:

Israel’s 2005 withdrawal to its 1967 border with Gaza led not to peace but to expanded terrorism after Hamas staged a bloody coup in 2007 and transformed Gaza into a base for launching rockets against Israeli civilians. Israel cannot afford to return to its 1967 border with the West Bank unless it has ironclad guarantees that any territory relinquished will not again be transformed into a base for future terrorist attacks. This is impossible as long as Hamas, committed to Israel’s destruction, remains a potent force.

Understandably, President Obama’s statement yesterday drew a sharp response from Netanyahu, who said, “The viability of a Palestinian state cannot come at the expense of Israel’s existence.” What’s more, the prime minister’s office requested a “reaffirmation from President Obama of U.S. commitments made to Israel in 2004, which were overwhelmingly supported by both Houses of Congress.” Those affirmations reference a letter to then-Prime Minister Ariel Sharon from President George W. Bush, which stated that under the circumstances, returning to the 1967 borders would not be possible “in light of new realities on the ground” — specifically, already existing major Israeli population centers in the West Bank.
House Republican Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA), too, sharply condemned President Obama’s position, stating, “This approach undermines our special relationship with Israel and weakens our ally’s ability to defend itself.” And given Palestine’s track record, Israel has legitimate cause for concern over its security and defense. Heritage foreign policy experts explain in a recent paper, “After bin Laden: Top Five Agenda Items for Obama’s Middle East Speech“:

Palestinians are hardly the best partner for peace—they have partnered with Hamas, a terrorist group that denies the right of the Israeli nation to exist and mourns the demise of Osama bin Laden.

(Click the link below for a complete report)

http://blog.heritage.org/2011/05/20/morning-bell-standing-strong-with-israel/

Is There a "Gay Gene"?

Many laymen now believe that homosexuality is part of who a person really is ­ from the moment of conception.

The "genetic and unchangeable" theory has been actively promoted by gay activists and the popular media. Is homosexuality really an inborn and normal variant of human nature?

No. There is no evidence that shows that homosexuality is simply "genetic." And none of the research claims there is.Only the press and certain researchers do, when speaking in sound bites to the public.


How The Public Was Misled
 

In July of 1993, the prestigious research journal Science published a study by Dean Hamer which claims that there might be a gene for homosexuality. Research seemed to be on the verge of proving that homosexuality is innate, genetic and therefore unchangeablea normal variant of human nature.
 

Soon afterward, National Public Radio trumpeted those findings. Newsweek ran the cover story, "Gay Gene?" The Wall Street Journal announced, "Research Points Toward a Gay Gene...Normal Variation."
 

Of course, certain necessary qualifiers were added within those news stories. But only an expert knew what those qualifiers meant. The vast majority of readers were urged to believe that homosexuals had been proven to be "born that way."

In order to grasp what is really going on, one needs to understand some littleknown facts about behavioral genetics.

(click the link below for more information)
http://www.narth.com/docs/istheregene.html

A state law signed by Arnold Schwarzenegger in 2009 calls upon all K-12 government schools to teach children as 5 years old to honor homosexual activist and sexual predator* Harvey Milk.
It's up to teachers and schools to decide every May whether kids will perform pro-Milk "exercises" (the week before or after May 22, Milk's birthday). There is NO parental permission or notification.
Q: What is Harvey Milk Day and why should I be concerned?
Despite the outcry of parents and concerned Californians, in 2009 Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed into law SB 572, which establishes every May 22 as "Harvey Milk Day" in K-12 public schools in California. But for all practical purposes, "Harvey Milk" activities could occur in classrooms and on campuses between May 16 and 27.
Teachers, schools and school districts that participate will teach children to admire the life and values of late homosexual activist Harvey Milk, of whom the bill states: "...perhaps more than any other modern figure, Harvey Milk's life and political career embody the rise of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) civil rights movement in California, across the nation, and throughout the world."

Under SB 572, children will perform "suitable commemorative exercises," remembering the "life," "accomplishments," and "contributions" of Harvey Milk -- in other words, the entire homosexual-bisexual-transsexual agenda for which Milk advocated.
There is no definition or limit to these "exercises," which, at participating schools, could include gay-pride parades, cross-dressing contests and mock gay weddings, or anything else Milk supported.
Every teacher or school or school district that opts to celebrate Milk Day is endorsing
Milk’s values to impressionable children as young as kindergarten!
Learn more about SB 572 and why Harvey Milk is a horrible role model »
See how homosexual activists are promoting Harvey Milk Day to educators »

Q: When is Milk Day and is parental permission required?
May 22, Harvey Milk's birthday, falls on a Sunday this year, but the danger period is May 16 to 27. It's up to teachers, principals, and school districts whether to promote Harvey Milk's homosexual-bisexual-transsexual agenda to impressionable children. And Harvey Milk Day exercises and activities will occur behind parents' backs because the law does not require teachers or school officials to seek your permission or even notify you. This is why parents have to quiz teachers and principals to see whether Harvey Milk will be honored in classrooms, in a school assembly, through a school-wide announcement, etc.

Q: What were Harvey Milk's values?**
1. Harvey Milk supported the entire homosexual, bisexual, and cross-dressing agenda
2. Milk refused to acknowledge sexually transmitted diseases spread by this behavior
3. Milk was a sexual predator of teenage boys, most of them runaways with drug problems
4. Milk advocated having multiple sexual relationships at the same time
5. Milk promoted lying to get ahead
Whether taught directly or indirectly, these values are wrong to teach to children as acceptable!

Q: What were Harvey Milk's values?**
1. Harvey Milk supported the entire homosexual, bisexual, and cross-dressing agenda
2. Milk refused to acknowledge sexually transmitted diseases spread by this behavior
3. Milk was a sexual predator of teenage boys, most of them runaways with drug problems
4. Milk advocated having multiple sexual relationships at the same time
5. Milk promoted lying to get ahead
Whether taught directly or indirectly, these values are wrong to teach to children as acceptable!


http://savecalifornia.com/harvey-milk-day.html

THE DEFINITION OF ISLAM BY A WORLWIDE MUSLIM LEADER

Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini

"Those who know nothing about Islam pretend that Islam counsels against war. Those people are witless. Islam says: 'Kill all the unbelievers just as they would kill you all!' Does this mean that Muslims should sit back until they are devoured by the infidel? Islam says: 'Kill them, put them to the sword and scatter them.' Islam says: 'Whatever good there is exists thanks to the sword.' The sword is the key to Paradise, which can be opened only for the Holy Warriors! Does all this mean that Islam is a religion that prevents men from waging war? I spit upon those foolish souls who make such a claim."

Why the LEFT hates America?

Daniel Flynn's book offers answers to a question that has long perplexed many of us: Why does the Left hate America?  Flynn says that today's anti-Americanism began when the Industrial Age of the late 19th century created a wealthy, leisured class of intellectuals who became enamored of the Marxism brought into the country by immigrants from Europe. These intellectuals believed that their unearned wealth and educational superiority proved they were truly fine fellows, of a rare excellence seldom found on the earth, and fully equiped to create a Marxian Utopia in America. 

Despite their declared high IQs the Left is not terribly bright --  its policies always destroy the very wealth they want to control (see: the U.S.S.R., Communist China, North Korea, Cuba, Zimbabwe, etc). And even the most dimwitted among us Americans chafe at the idea of self-styled "superior" beings intruding into everything we choose to do or plan, hemming us about with meaningless, petty rules and laws, demanding (at last count nationally) close to half what we earn via tax piled upon tax, and driving our jobs away by endless regulations

In America, the Left started its assault on us with soapboxes and pamphlets, but finding difficulty articulating its message, resorted to bombs and bullets.  In 1886,  they murdered policemen and  investors on Wall Street, and made attempts on the lives of governors, U.S.Senators and various business leaders. Their violence was not successful then nor later in the 1960s when the "New Left" strove to overthrow the U.S. government with killings and  bombings.  As the anti-American Left developed, "more mainstream methods of persuasion supplanted the guns-and-bombs approach." 

http://oregonmag.com/Whitcomb103.htm

"Separation of Church and State?"

Thomas Jefferson would disagree with the left and he, for sure, would be charged with “violation of the first Amendment” and “religious intolerance” toward others faith, especially Islam. However, the truth is that our founders did not believe what the LEFT believes or try to make us believe:

• Jefferson urged local governments to make land available specifically for Christian purposes; (Letter of Thomas Jefferson to Bishop Carroll on September 3, 1801 (in the Library of Congress, #19966))
• In an 1803 federal Indian treaty, Jefferson willingly agreed to provide $300 to “assist the said Kaskaskia tribe in the erection of a church” and to provide “annually for seven years $100 towards the support of a Catholic priest.” He also signed three separate acts setting aside government lands for the sole use of religious groups and setting aside government lands so that Moravian missionaries might be assisted in “promoting Christianity.” (American State Papers, Walter Lowrie and Matthew St. Claire Clarke, editors (Washington, D. C.: Gales and Seaton, 1832), Vol. IV, p. 687; see also Wallace v. Jaffree, 472 U. S. 38, at 103 (1985), Rehnquist, J. (dissenting); see also, The Public Statutes at Large of the United States of America, Richard Peters, editor (Boston: Charles C. Little and James Brown, 1846), Vol. VII, p. 79, Article III, “A Treaty Between the United States and the Kaskaskia Tribe of Indians,” December 23, 1803; Vol. VII, p. 88, Article IV, “Treaty with the Wyandots, etc.,” 1805; Vol. VII, p. 102, Article II, “Treaty with the Cherokees,” 1806.)
• When Washington D. C. became the national capital in 1800, Congress voted that the Capitol building would also serve as a church building. (Debates and Proceedings of the Congress of the United States (Washington: Gales and Seaton, 1853), Sixth Congress, p. 797, December 4, 1800.)
• President Jefferson chose to attend church each Sunday at the Capitol  and even provided the service with paid government musicians to assist in its worship. Jefferson also began similar Christian services in his own Executive Branch, both at the Treasury Building and at the War Office. (See the records recently reprinted by James Hutson, Chief of the Manuscript Division of the Library of Congress. Religion and the Founding of the American Republic (Washington, D. C.: Library of Congress, 1998), p. 84.)
• Jefferson praised the use of a local courthouse as a meeting place for Christian services. (Thomas Jefferson, The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Albert Bergh, editor (Washington, D. C: Thomas Jefferson Memorial Association, 1904), Vol. XV, p. 404, to Dr. Thomas Cooper on November 2, 1822.)
• Jefferson assured a Christian religious school that it would receive “the patronage of the government”; (Letter of Thomas Jefferson to the Nuns of the Order of St. Ursula at New Orleans on May 15, 1804, original in possession of the New Orleans Parish)
• Jefferson proposed that the Great Seal of the United States depict a story from the Bible and include the word “God” in its motto; (Thomas Jefferson, The Papers of Thomas Jefferson, Julian P. Boyd, editor (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1950), Vol. I, pp. 494-497, from “Report on a Seal for the United States, with Related Papers,” August 20, 1776.)
• While President, Jefferson closed his presidential documents with the phrase, “In the year of our Lord Christ; by the President; Thomas Jefferson.” (For example, his presidential act of October 18, 1804, from an original document in our possession.)

1854 US Congress recognized God as the source of blessings of the USA

For example, in the House Report on March 27, 1854, it noted:

There certainly can be no doubt as to the practice of employing chaplains in deliberative bodies previous to the adoption of the Constitution. We are, then, prepared to see if any change was made in that respect in the new order of affairs. . . . On the 1^st day of May [1789], Washington’s first speech was read to the House, and the first business after that speech was the appointment of Dr. Linn as chaplain. By whom was this plan made? Three out of six of that joint committee were members of the Convention that framed the Constitution. Madison, Ellsworth, and Sherman passed directly from the hall of the [Constitutional] Convention to the hall of Congress. Did they not know what was constitutional? . . . It seems to us that the men who would raise the cry of danger in this state of things would cry fire on the 39^th day of a general deluge. . . . But we beg leave to rescue ourselves from the imputation of asserting that religion is not needed to the safety of civil society. It must be considered as the foundation on which the whole structure rests. Laws will not have permanence or power without the sanction of religious sentiment—without a firm belief that there is a Power above us that will reward our virtues and punish our vices.

        "Whereas, the people of these United States, from their earliest history to the present time, have        been led by the hand of a kind Providence and are indebted for the countless blessings of the past and present, and dependent for continued prosperity in the future upon Almighty God; and whereas the great  vital and conservative element in our system is the belief of our people in the pure doctrines and divine truths of the gospel of Jesus Christ, it eminently becomes the representatives of a people so highly favored to acknowledge in the most public manner their reverence for God: therefore, Resolved, That the daily sessions of this body be opened with prayer and that the ministers of the Gospel in this city are hereby requested to attend and alternately perform this solemn duty" House of the Judiciary.

http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles.asp?id=121

Mosque in Cordoba (article originally posted in Daniel Pipes website)

Submitted by Caesar M. Arevalo (United States), Jan 1, 2007 at 18:04

There is no doubt that there exists in Europe a clash between civilization and barbarism, between civilization and Islam. Europe is digging its own grave in the name of "multiculturalism." The problem is that the values that made Europe the bastion of cultural and intellectual enlightenment is being replaced by a backward culture which values are contained in a book that teaches intolerance, bigotry, violence, murder, deceit, prejudice, racism, and ignorance.

As Oriana Fallaci said in her book the "Rage and the Pride" on the attitude of Muslim in Europe, "…they will become always more and more. They will demand always more and more, they will vex and boss us always more and more. Till the point of subduing us. Therefore, dealing with them is impossible. Attempting a dialogue, unthinkable. Showing indulgence, suicidal. And he or she who believes the contrary is a fool." Oriana Fallaci is gone, but her words are true more than ever.


http://www.danielpipes.org/comments/71363

Muslim Insanity (Comment originally posted in Daniel Pipes)

Submitted by Caesar M. Arevalo (United States), Aug 2, 2007 at 13:51

The problem is the ideology behind the garments Muslim women must wear at risk of being beaten and killed by faithful Muslims.

This ideology is based in the interpretation Muslims have from the Koran and Islamic traditions. Islamic traditions is purely Arabic traditions and culture. These poor women has not right at all, except the ones impossed by their Muslim partners.

It is a sad fact that when these disgraced women come to America, they are still slaves of cultural and senseless Islamic tradition. These women are not happy at all. Actually, since America is the icon of liberty, any vestige or symbol of women oppression must be outlawed.

Where is the National Organization of Women protesting this inhuman symbol of exploitation? they are busy attacking Bush, the military, working honest American men, mocking Christian values, and promoting immoral homosexual behaviour and the continual killing of innocent babies what they call abortion.

http://www.danielpipes.org/comments/105316

All I Want For Christmas Is You-Vince Vance & The Valiants + lyrics

I love this song....for Christmas...it's romantic and beautiful..

The West should not fear Islam

This is an article I wrote in Daniel Pipes website.

Submitted by Caesar Arevalo (United States), Oct 9, 2006 at 15:24

The inability of our leaders in the West to deal sternly and effectively against the advance of Islamic terrorism in Europe and America has been the reason why we are now facing the ongoing threat of losing our freedoms. It is our leaders' fault, ultimately, and their politics of appeasement that open the doors to Muslims to control the political and religious affair worldwide.
Western leaders are living in denial. Particularly, those who call themselves "progressives" and "liberals" are responsible for the spreading of Islamic terrorism into America and Europe. Our western leaders have renounced the fight for our survival. They have capitulated to Islam. In other words, there is not a single leader in the West to face these Islamic terrorists with not apology and guilty feeling. Even president Bush along with the Pope are silenced by the intolerance and intimidation of Muslims to the point that they have to apologize every time Muslims are "offended." It is really a disgrace what is going in the West.

The concept of freedom of speech, religion, press and conscience is absent in the political philosophy of Islam. When we hear from our leaders saying and repeating over and over that Islam is a religion of "peace," we wonder if they really care for the survival of our civilization. It is a historical and theological fact that Islam is NOT a religion of peace. Islam is a religion that generates fanaticism that incites the murder of innocent of children, women, and men who are do not fit the ideal concept of being a Muslim. Therefore, we need to demand from our leaders and government to stop acting under the dictates of "tolerance," "diversity," and "multiculturalism," and start taking serious steps to the preservation of our dearest constitutional rights of freedom of speech, religion, and press.

Not a single religion is above criticism, and Islam is not the exception. At this point Islam has lost the respect of the civilized world. Islam as religion has been found impotent to elevate the human spirit to values as altruism, forgiveness, love, peace, and tolerance.

Therefore, in the name of those who are still enslaved and captives in this evil ideology, we, in the West, must continue denouncing openly and with not fear the brutality, murder, injustice, and oppression of millions of people under the sword of Islam. We must continue make use of our liberties and freedom to publish, confront, debate, challenge, and exposed the ugliness of Islam, and this includes caricatures, cartoons, movies, songs, and any other mean of communication. Muslims have to understand that they are victims of their own religion and the best way to be free from the bondage of that barbaric ideology is through critical exposition of Islam.

---

http://www.danielpipes.org/comments/59401