Ex-muslim Obama Stymied by Islamic Unrest

The timid Obama administration is at a loss for what to do. Rather than fuel the fires now spreading in the world's Islamic theocracies, Obama is probably looking at his Koran and wondering how to avoid offending Muhammad.

Revolution is in the air but US sticks to same old script

January 29, 2011

Washington appears addicted to propping up tyrants

Events in the Middle East are moving too fast for the Obama administration to think it can get away with Plan A and Plan B reaction strategies according to the regimes or leaders it wants to keep in and out of power.

Consider the response of the US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, to Hezbollah tightening its grip on power in Lebanon this week - Washington might have to pull its funding worth hundreds of millions for Lebanon, her office warned.

But as democracy demonstrators were confronted by thousands of baton-wielding policemen in the streets in Cairo, there was no mention of pulling the $US2 billion-plus cheque that Washington writes for the octogenarian President, Hosni Mubarak, each year.

Instead, a rhetorical nugget that Mubarak's mouthpieces would use in their defence - ''our assessment is that the Egyptian government is stable'' and then some namby-pamby words about how Mubarak was ''looking for ways to respond to the legitimate needs and interests of the Egyptian people''.

That response came on Wednesday - more thugs in and out of uniform in the streets, more tear-gas and 860 more young Egyptians banged up in prison because, Oliver-like, they had the audacity to stand in the streets and to ask for more. Such is stability.

Undaunted, Clinton tried again on Wednesday, when she called on the Egyptian authorities to cease blocking the communications on which the demonstrators relied. But on Thursday the Twitter and Facebook websites were inaccessible and mobile-phone users in Cairo said that it was difficult or impossible to sent text messages.

Clinton uttered the ''stability'' line early in the week - before the seriousness of what is unfolding in the streets of Cairo and Alexandria came in to focus. Consider how it might be interpreted by ordinary Egyptians - the human rights of 80 million people have been trampled for 30 years but what the US Secretary of State is most concerned about is the stability of the state.

And, even as the focus sharpened, the administration refused to tell the truth about the despot upon whom Washington relies - ''Egypt is a strong ally,'' the White House press secretary, Robert Gibbs, replied when asked if the administration still supported Mubarak.

And, in a week in which the Middle East's historic self-started wave of democracy protests came to a head, Barack Obama might have used his State of the Union address to cheer along all the protesters; and perhaps to warn all the leaders, country by country, of the fate that awaits them.

Instead he confined his specific remarks to Tunisia, saying: ''The United States of America stands with the people of Tunisia and supports the democratic aspirations of all people.'' So, in a region of 333 million people, where to varying degrees a good 325 million are under the heel of unelected leaders, the US President addressed only little Tunisia.

The lame excuse offered to reporters was that Cairo erupted late in the drafting process of the speech but that last ''aspirations of all people'' phrase was a recognition that ''what happens in Tunisia resonates around the world''.

By current American thinking it would never do to have Islamists in power in the Palestinian Occupied Territories or in Lebanon and therefore they heed every despot's warning that the Islamists are waiting in the wings across North Africa and the Middle East.

But lost in the lunge to protect US strategic and commercial interests by propping up the region's dictator class is any realisation that that support is what leaves the youth of the region under-educated and under-employed and, thereby, ripe for the picking by Islamist and other underground movements.

In Tunisia the revolutionaries are still searching for a leader who can articulate their demands. And this week a leader flew in to Cairo - searching for a revolution. That was the former International Atomic Energy Agency chief Mohamed ElBaradei, whose return to Egypt underscores a challenge brought on across the region as much by the local community as the international community - the grooming of those who might form a half-decent opposition.

Tracing an arc through Obama's approach to the Middle East, the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies professor Fouad Ajami described the President's foreign policy pragmatism as ''a break of faith with democracy''.

Alluding to the suppression of demonstrations in Tehran after the contested 2009 presidential election, he wrote in Lebanon's Daily Star: ''American diplomacy was not likely to alter the raw balance of power between the regime and its democratic oppositionists. But the timidity of American power and the refusal of the Obama administration to embrace the cause of the opposition must be reckoned one of American foreign policy's great moral embarrassments.''

The Mubarak machine's contempt for popular aspirations and whatever the US might think of them was on full display yesterday when Safwat el-Sherif, the head of the ruling National Democratic Party, feigned obliviousness to the reality of political power in Egypt as he lectured the protesters - ''democracy has its rules and process - the minority does not force its will on the majority''.

Abdel Moneim Said, a stooge government-appointed publisher, echoed Hillary Clinton's midweek ''stability'' comment when he told reporters: ''I can't think of anybody that I know that has any concern about the stability of the regime.''

Finding the right policy mix to influence events without being accused of interfering is a fine balance that some observers have concluded eludes the Obama administration.

''It's about identifying the US too closely with these changes and thereby undermining them; and not finding ways to nurture them enough,'' Aaron David Miller, of the Woodrow Wilson International Centre for Scholars, told The New York Times.

Meanwhile, observers on the ground in the region shake their heads. ''People want moral support,'' said Shadi Hamid, of the Brookings Doha Centre. ''They want to hear words of encouragement - right now they don't have that. They feel the world doesn't care and is working against them.''

His point seems to be this: it is time Washington thought in terms of investing in people in the region, not in dictators.

To Senator Lieberman -- We Must

When the leader of a hostile nation addresses the UN General Assembley with claims that 9/11 was an inside job committed with the knowledge and backing of the previous presidential administration, it's time to admit the US is dealing with a dangerous nut.

When that nut is also on the brink of acquiring nuclear weapons, it's time to act. Clearly Ahmadinejad and the others who lead Iran lack the capacoities necessary for managing a nuclear arsenal. The temptation to detonate a bomb or two will over-ride all their claims of restraint. Moreover, Ahmadinejad has already threatened the US with nuclear annihilation by announcing how he would direct his nation to respond to a US attack on Iran.

Unfortunately, Iran has a long history of murder and terror in the middle east. Through Hezbollah, it's occupier and controller of Lebanon, we know Iran and Ahmadinejad are more than just big-mouthed idiots hoping to intimidate the right people.

Bottom line, the US could wipe out Iran's nuclear and military threat in a matter of hours. It's time.


Lieberman: Military Force Against Iran "If We Absolutely Must"

by Trish Turner | September 28, 2010

Senator Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., in what his staff is billing as "a major policy address" on Wednesday, plans to deliver a sharp warning for Iran's leadership that military action should remain on the table should the authoritarian regime refuse to halt its pursuit of nuclear weapons.

In a speech on "the Future of American Power in the Middle East," to be delivered at the Council on Foreign Relations, the senator, a senior member of the Armed Services Committee, will "up the rhetorical ante against Iran", according to an aide, and discuss the next stage if current sanctions do not work.

"It is time to retire our ambiguous mantra about all options remaining on the table. Our message to our friends and enemies in the region needs to become clearer: namely, that we will prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapons capability -- by peaceful means if we possibly can, but with military force if we absolutely must," Lieberman is expected to say, according to his staff who provided the excerpt to Fox News.

Iran has steadfastly denied it is seeking nuclear power for nefarious purposes.

Still, these are strong words that echo remarks recently made by a close Lieberman ally, Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.

A respected military lawyer and committee member, Graham last week was the first senator to openly support direct military intervention in Iran, saying, "From my point of view, if we engage in military operations as a last resort, the United States should have in mind the goal of changing the regime...not by invading (Iran), but by launching a military strike by air and sea."

Graham framed the argument as almost an inevitable outcome.

"If you use military force against Iran, you've opened up Pandora's box," Graham warned, but quickly added, "If you allow Iran to get a nuclear weapon, you've emptied Pandora's box. I'd rather open up Pandora's box than empty it."

Pelosi -- Investigate Mosque Critics -- HERE I AM

Nancy Pelosi and most members of Congress need a lot of schooling in two subjects: Economics and islam.

Economics Lesson One: This capitalist economy will grow IF government gets out of the way.

IF Congress were to permit oil & gas drillers to drill where the oil & gas are, THEN the energy industry will hire lots of high-paid American workers to get the oil & gas from the ground to consumers.

IF the government were to get out of the way and permit the nuclear industry to re-start, THEN lots of Americans would get jobs designing and building those plants, which would decrease our use of gas for electricity production.

IF the government were to get out of the auto industry and permit automakers to build any vehicle desired by consumers, THEN the domestic auto industry would hire more people to build those cars -- as long as wage and benefit packages were within reason.

When it comes to islam, Congress needs to understand that islam is a multipurpose system of beliefs. It is a religion, a government and a military, all rolled into one.

IF Congress were to acknowledge islam's role as a government, THEN it would have to ban islam from America because islam stands absolutely and resolutely against all the freedoms granted Americans by the Constitution and Bill of Rights. It's that simple.

Hence, IF taking a stand against a religion/government/military that aims to take away every freedom and right that forms the essence of America makes me suspicious and needing investigation, THEN probe away.

AUDIO - Rep. Pelosi calls for investigation of WTC mosque opposition

August 17, 2010

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, California Democrat, called for an investigation of those who are protesting the building of the Ground Zero Mosque on Tuesday. She told San Francisco's KCBS radio:

AUDIO

"There is no question there is a concerted effort to make this a political issue by some. And I join those who have called for looking into how is this opposition to the mosque being funded," she said. "How is this being ginned up that here we are talking about Treasure Island, something we've been working on for decades, something of great interest to our community as we go forward to an election about the future of our country and two of the first three questions are about a zoning issue in New York City."

Calls to investigate the funding for those proposing the $100 million "Cordoba House" have fallen on deaf ears, though, as New York's Mayor Mike Bloomberg has described such an investigation as "un-American."

Ms. Pelosi called the Ground Zero mosque an "urban development decision" for New Yorkers to work through. Her remarks happened on the heels of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, parting ways with President Barack Obama on the issue. Mr. Reid suggested the mosque should be built somewhere else.

More to come...

The Conversions of Islam

In the same way muslim terrorists converted commercial jetliners into flying bombs, muslims are converting our Freedom of Religion into another weapon of mass destruction. Now they're getting support from our ex-muslim president who has declared that muslims have a right to build a mosque two blocks from Ground Zero.

Last year, when another situation dear to Obama's heart arose he declared "the Cambridge Police Department acted stupidly." When an officer responding to a dispatcher's call informing him a crime of breaing-and-entering was in progress the officer detained a black Harvard professor the president concluded the professor's civil rights have been violated by the officer. As he later conceded, weakly, he was wrong.

Obama is at it again. He has again inserted himself into an issue that clearly shows his willingness to let his emotions rule. This time he wants to allow muslim terrorists another opportunity to gain ground in the US. He is a threat to the republic.


Cordoba or Tours?

Islam is using the values of the West to fight the West.

By Emmanuel Navon

In today’s France, Jewish items are being burnt on the streets again. Not Jewish books by the Church, but Jewish food by the Mosque. Food items are publicly thrown out of stores and burnt on the street if they are imported from Israel or simply if the package indicates that they are kosher. At least, the French Government publicly condemned this phenomenon and Interior Minister Brice Hortefeux promised to prosecute the authors of what he called a criminal act of racial discrimination.

In Britain, by contrast, the court system has capitulated to the hatred and violence.

A few weeks ago, a London court acquitted the members of a gang who broke into a weapons factory and mostly tore it down. Their defense line was that they suspected that this factory had sold weapons to Israel during the Cast Lead Operation. The Judge ruled that their version was acceptable and set them free without even fining them for the damage they had caused to the factory. Similarly, four militants were acquitted by a British court last week for breaking into a retail store of the Israeli company Ahava.

In other words, you are allowed to destroy property (and maybe, tomorrow, to kill) based on political opinions or even based on the unproved suspicion that your victim is acting against your political opinions. This is the rule of intimidation and terror, not the rule of law.

In Norway, it is not the court system but the government itself which has become accomplice to Jihad.

Norway’s Minister of Education Kristin Halvorsen was recently photographed in front of a demonstration sign saying that the US and Israel are the real Axis of Evil. Her boss, Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg, expressed public support for two doctors who helped Hamas during the Cast Lead Operation. Those two doctors are the authors of an anti-Semitic book that has been praised by Norwegian Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr StØre. Norway’s State Secretary for Environment and International Development Ingrid Fiskaa has declared that the UN should bombard Israel.

Europe’s descent into dhimmitude is a tragedy for those who care about Western civilization and about freedom. Alas, even the shining city upon a hill on the other side of the Atlantic no longer seems to be a safe heaven. President Obama’s endorsement of the Ground Zero Mosque indicates that America is capitulating to cynicism in the name of freedom.

On the face of it, President Obama is right: As he said, because America is committed to religious freedom, Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as anyone else in the United States, and that includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in lower Manhattan.

President Obama, however, is missing two points.

The first point is that Islam rejects religious freedom and the founding principles of the US Constitution.

If Islam were not a religion protected by the US Constitution, it would be banned because of its ideology of hatred and discrimination. No other religion has produced 9/11. True, Christianity is responsible for the Crusades and for the Inquisition. But Christianity has integrated some elements of modernity, and it no longer condones murder in the name of faith. Islam does.

The second point is that the proponents of the Ground Zero Mosque are being purposely offensive and cynical, and that they intend to set a historical precedent full of symbolical significance.

By building an Islamic site and symbol a few yards away from the place where 3,000 people were murdered in the name of Islam, they are intentionally insulting the memory of these people and are pushing bad taste to its limits. But, mostly, they want to declare victory. That is no speculation or conspiracy theory: The mosque will be called Cordoba. Do you get it? Cordoba was the first European city conquered by a Muslim army (in 711). Then a mosque was built there, and the rest of Spain was conquered. This is an accepted Islamic practice, and the proponents of the Ground Zero Mosque are note even hiding their intentions.

Islam is using the values of the West to fight the West. Saying that is not politically correct, but it is true. 70% of Americans are against the Ground Zero Mosque precisely because they understand that this mosque is not about religious freedom. It is about the use of freedom to fight freedom and to progressively impose an ideology of hatred, discrimination, and violence. Either President Obama doesn’t see that –which is bad. Or he does but lacks the courage to say it –which is worse.

The American people should build a huge Church near Ground Zero and call it the Tours Church. Why Tours? Because Tours is the French city where Charles Martel defeated an invading Muslim army in 732, thus halting the Islamic expansion to Europe (actually, the battle was fought in an area between the cities of Poitiers and Tours, located in north-central France, near the village of Moussais-la-Bataille.

But the battle is known as "Battle of Tours" in English and as the "Battle of Poitiers" in French. Incidentally, "Tours" happens to mean "towers" in French). By doing this, Americans will not only show that they too know History. They will also prove to themselves and to the world that they learned from it.

Treason in Space -- Obama's in Orbit

Our president is out to destroy America. How? By giving muslim terrorists the technology they need to attack any nation on the planet.

Did we learn nothing from 9/11? Muslim terrorists, funded by muslim "moderates", attacked the US after working secretly in the mountains of Afghanistan. Since then, America has had a tough time identifying the enemy. Sure, we were quick to identify Osama bin Laden and his al Qaeda gang. But they have been working on behalf of hundreds of millions of muslims around the world. On behalf of individuals and on behalf of muslim nations. Secretly. Behind the scenes. One way or another muslims have donated money and support to the al Qaeda cause. They have given money and support to other muslim terrorists and their causes.

The muslims were smart enough to know that when the American military strikes, it strikes against nations. Thus, muslim terrorists rightly figured the US would have a lot of trouble striking back against groups with no legitimate connection to sovereign nations. The strategy is clever in its simplicity.

As muslims saw, as the world saw when we rescued Kuwait in 1991 and invaded Iraq in 2003, US forces can destroy muslim national militaries in days. Thus, muslims learned their most effective tactic is to rely on their old practice of causing death by a thousand cuts. Thus, to avoid annihilation, muslim fighters avoid head-to-head fights.

Apparently President Obama is opposed to the lopsided outcomes of these direct battles, and apparently he wants terrorists to have a new platform for launching their attacks. If death by a thousand cuts works, then death by a hundred cuts is better. Hence, he wants to help them build rockets. He wants to help them build better versions of the small rockets Hamas has used against Israel.

Obama wants the US to inspire muslim children to study science and math. He believes if they can join us in exploring space they will collect huge psychological benefits. If muslims behave in their usual manner -- which includes turning technologies that advance humanity into instruments of terror -- how long will it take for muslim terrorists to acquire missile technology and start firing warheads over long distances?

The announcement that NASA is going to teach muslims how to build missiles must have sent a billion muslims to their prayer mats thanking Allah for his help in their war against the infidels.

NASA Chief: Next Frontier Better Relations With Muslim World

Published July 05, 2010

NASA Administrator Charles Bolden said in a recent interview that his "foremost" mission as the head of America's space exploration agency is to improve relations with the Muslim world.

Though international diplomacy would seem well outside NASA's orbit, Bolden said in an interview with Al Jazeera that strengthening those ties was among the top tasks President Obama assigned him. He said better interaction with the Muslim world would ultimately advance space travel.

"When I became the NASA administrator -- or before I became the NASA administrator -- he charged me with three things. One was he wanted me to help re-inspire children to want to get into science and math, he wanted me to expand our international relationships, and third, and perhaps foremost, he wanted me to find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science ... and math and engineering," Bolden said in the interview.

The NASA administrator was in the Middle East last month marking the one-year anniversary since Obama delivered an address to Muslim nations in Cairo. Bolden spoke in June at the American University in Cairo -- in his interview with Al Jazeera, he described space travel as an international collaboration of which Muslim nations must be a part.

"It is a matter of trying to reach out and get the best of all worlds, if you will, and there is much to be gained by drawing in the contributions that are possible from the Muslim (nations)," he said. He held up the International Space Station as a model, praising the contributions there from the Russians and the Chinese.

However, Bolden denied the suggestion that he was on a diplomatic mission -- in a distinctly non-diplomatic role.

"Not at all. It's not a diplomatic anything," he said.

He said the United States is not going to travel beyond low-Earth orbit on its own and that no country is going to make it to Mars without international help.

Bolden has faced criticism this year for overseeing the cancellation of the agency's Constellation program, which was building new rockets and spaceships capable of returning astronauts to the moon. Stressing the importance of international cooperation in future missions, Bolden told Al Jazeera that the moon, Mars and asteroids are still planned destinations for NASA.

Islamic Jihad -- By Any Means Available

The mushroom cloud threatening the world today is not from a nuclear bomb, though that danger is part of the islamic arsenal. The big threat today is from something much closer to the oil leak in the Gulf. Something bad is seeping into the environment. The bad thing is the slow steady spread of islam and sharia law in our part of the world.

The 'peaceful' Jihad in America

June 1, 2010

Most Americans don't realize that jihad is about much more than terrorism.

Even the terrorists don't blow up buildings for the sake of blowing up buildings. There is method in their madness.

Jihad is not mindless mass-murder, nor is it a syrupy "internal struggle to become a better person." No, jihad is the mission to establish and spread sharia.

The installation of Allah's law, believed by Muslims to be a divine injunction, is the necessary precondition to the creation of Islamic societies. While it can, and often is, waged forcibly, Islamists don't resort to violence (or, at least, to more violence) where surrenders, appeasements and capitulations are available.

And al Qaeda is merely an offshoot of the central Islamist group, the Muslim Brotherhood, or Hizb al-Ikhwan al-Muslimin. Founded in 1928, the Ikhwan's motto to this day remains, "Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. The Koran is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope."

In 1991, Mohamed Akram, a US-based chieftain of the Brotherhood, penned a memo for the eyes of the central leadership in Egypt. Later seized by the FBI, this self-described "Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America" outlined the game-plan for what the organization regards as its "civilizational" war against the West:

"The Ikhwan must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and sabotaging its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all other religions."

Nor was there anything new about this "grand jihad." During a post-9/11 raid, Swiss authorities found a similar smoking gun -- a methodical plan for the long-term "cultural invasion" of the West -- written by Brotherhood theorists in 1982.

As a matter of fact, this sabotage strategy has been in place for nearly half a century. Its bottom-up elements stress Islamist domination of Muslim education, mosques and community centers. From these bases of operation in every city, the Brotherhood's method is not terrorize but to slipstream behind Islamist terrorists, assuming the posture of "moderates."

The goal is to seep sharia -- Islam's totalitarian legal code that governs not just the spiritual realm but all aspects of life -- into our politics, law, financial system, educational institutions, labor negotiations, familial relations, and all facets of our domestic and foreign policy, from health care to engagement with Iran.

Yes, 31 years after the Iranian revolution, 17 years after Islamists declared war on the United States by bombing the World Trade Center and nine years after the 9/11 atrocities, the American people are still in the dark about the daunting challenge we face. Under jihadist siege for decades, we still don't even get what jihad is and why it isn't just about "violent extremists" -- the politically correct term now used by government officials in their desperation to bleach the Islam out of Islamist terror.

Two years ago, I wrote about this ethos of conscious avoidance in "Willful Blindness." But that was a memoir about trying to confront international terrorism as a federal prosecutor in the 1990s. The forces arrayed against us are much more extensive and insidious than al Qaeda, and they are not just pressing the limitations of our criminal-justice system.

The game-plan being executed against us targets American constitutional democracy itself, taking aim at its core principles of individual liberty.

Lavishly backed by Saudi billions thanks to a decades-old partnership with the kingdom, the Brotherhood is now raising, in our midst, its third generation of operatives and sympathizers. Its tentacles include such high-profile organizations as the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the Islamic Society of North America and the Muslim American Society (the Brotherhood's semi-official American branch).

Our opinion elites are only too happy to take at face value the claims of these groups to be "moderate." Indeed, our government, media and academies are reluctant to discuss Islam honestly, let alone Islamist ideology.

And effectively allied with the jihadists is the hard left across the West. For all their differences (e.g., on abortion and the rights of women and homosexuals) Islam and the Left are in essential harmony when it comes to their vision of authoritarian government and their perception of the immediate obstacle to their designs: American constitutional democracy.

What the global Islamist project is doing, and how, are the subjects of my new book, "The Grand Jihad: How Islam and the Left Sabotage America," published last week. It is the story of the ideology that not only fuels anti-American terror but stokes a sedulous jihadist campaign to Islamicize our society -- not without firing a shot, but by capitalizing on the shots that have already been fired.

A grand jihad is hell-bent on sabotaging America. We ignore it at our peril.

Bring on the anti-islamic Hooligans

How do you stop muslim terrorists from disrupting the World Cup? Send in the soccer hooligans and set them loose.

Meanwhile, early warnings about terrorist attacks, especially early warnings from the terrorist group itself, are odd. If the US had had a similar warning about the events scheduled for 9/11, our security forces would have stopped the terrorists. By appearing to telegraph their plans, al-Qaeda shows it has learned a valuable lesson: It's possible to create massive turmoil among non-muslims simply by issuing threats through the media. The islamic terrorists have learned they can scramble entire cities with a few brief words about terror attacks that most likely are nothing but talk.

Seems like a Red Herring Alert to me. As a result of al-Qaeda's Public Service Announcement, security agents in South Africa, itself a relatively lawless place, will work fulltime from now till the World Cup competition is over. In other words, if planning for actual attacks is underway, then those attacks will occur in countries other than South Africa. If one were tossing out a guess about the site of the actual attacks the US -- NY City -- should probably appear on the list. Maybe London.

A good bet is any sub-Sahara African nation with a muslim population that is growing in number and power. Perhaps Nigeria, which, due to Nigeria's importance to global oil supplies, offers terrorists a bonus tied to oil prices.

AL-QAEDA have vowed to bomb the World Cup - with England players top of their hitlist.

The terror group pledged to target the match between England and the USA in South Africa in June, warning "hundreds" of fans could die.

A branch of al-Qaeda which last year killed British hostage Edwin Dyer, 61, in Mali made the threats.

Security ... England ace Lampard

They also vowed to target resorts, hotels and car parks used by supporters during the tournament. And they claimed explosive devices which cannot be detected by security scans would be used.

The threats appear on al-Qaeda-linked websites. A statement said: "How beautiful would the game between England and the USA be when broadcast live from a stadium full of spectators - when the sound of an explosion rumbles through the stands. The resulting death toll is in the dozens and hundreds - Allah willing."

Security around England stars such as Frank Lampard is likely to be stepped up as they play in Cape Town and other cities.

The threats from al-Qaeda's North African network were last night being taken seriously by terror experts.

Neil Doyle said: "They have a track record for violence."

America -- Safe Haven for Muslims

What's Not Happening to American Muslims

To hear Hollywood and the media tell it, American Muslims were the ultimate victims of 9/11. What nonsense.

It can't have come as a surprise that one of the now entrenched myths about America—namely, its ongoing victimization of Muslims—should have been voiced again by a leading citizen of our myth-producing capital, Hollywood. The citizen was Tom Hanks, and the occasion his March interview in Time Magazine in which he declared that our battle with Japan in World War II was one of "racism and terror." And that, he noted, should remind us of our current wars.

The comments caused a furor. But Mr. Hanks, who had made them during a publicity tour—he's the producer of the HBO series, "The Pacific"—saw the issue in perfectly clear terms, which he went on to explain several times more in subsequent media appearances. We can only ponder the joy this must have brought to the hearts of HBO executives.

The Hanks mini-seminar was only one of the many distortions of our still unbearably raw recent history—never mind World War II—encouraging Americans to view themselves as oppressors and racists. The latest reflection of this trend, grown steadily since the attacks of Sept. 11, came with a three-page spread in the Washington Post on March 24 about the tribulations of a Muslim soldier who reported being subjected to slurs, various other insults, and also a threatening note.

His commander suggested he might do well to move to housing off base. The base in question was Fort Hood, where, last November, army psychiatrist Maj. Nidal Hasan murdered 13 fellow American soldiers.

The pain of these confrontations was undoubtedly great, as such treatment always is. Ask the members of religious and racial minorities who served, say, in World War II, when it wasn't unusual to hear slurs like "kike" and such hurled at them.

Ask black Americans who had the incomparably worse experience of serving in a racially segregated military, where they were relegated to the worst duties. Not to mention being made witness—in parts of the country—to the sight of German POWs held in the U.S. eating in restaurants barred to black Americans in uniform, and otherwise being accorded respect that those Americans could not hope to receive.

Still, there were no instances of those enduring this treatment undertaking mass murder of other American servicemen. There was rage, and there were some riots, but no cases of U.S. soldiers enlisting in the service of the enemy as Maj. Hasan had. (Hasan, it was explained after he had cut down those unarmed servicemen and women packed into that room in Ft. Hood, had suffered prejudice-related pressures as a Muslim in the armed services.)

There were, in World War II, no watchdog groups like the ones cited in the Washington Post story, no agencies keeping lists of harassment complaints, or name-calling suffered by members of the U.S. military, or of the number of soldiers, like those mentioned in the story, who called crying on the phone. There were back then plenty of officers given to convenient cover-ups. But, it's a good bet, few like Maj. Hasan's superiors—so addled by raised consciousness and worries about appearing insensitive to Muslims in the service that they ignored even the most extreme expressions of his enmity to the United States and its military, his praise of suicide bombers, his jihadi contacts.

Since the events of Sept. 11, we've seen the growth of a view that American Muslims became prime victims of those terror attacks—isolated, fearful, targets of hostility. President George W. Bush, who went to Washington D.C's Islamic Center a few days after the terror assaults, told his audience that Islam was about peace and warned that the nation's Muslims must be free to go about without fear or intimidation by other Americans—remarks he doubtless thought were called for under the circumstances.

It had not, of course, been necessary to remind Americans of who they were and were not. No menacing hordes, then or later, ever threatened American Muslims—and it has been an insult to the nation to have been lectured to the same way after every attempted terror attack, as though wild mobs of citizens might actually run through the streets attacking Muslims.

Even as the ruins of the World Trade Center and the Pentagon still smoldered, countless Americans had reached out to their Muslim neighbors to reassure them.

No matter. Every report of any activity bearing resemblance to anti-Muslim sentiment became, in short order, essential news. Every actual incident, every report of a nasty sign, fitted the all-consuming theme taken up by large sectors of mainstream media: that the country's Muslims were now hapless targets, not only of the national rage at the atrocities committed by Islamic fundamentalists, but also of racism.

It was a view especially well in accord with those of a generation schooled in colleges and universities where pathological extremes of sensitivity to claims of racial, religious or sexual insult or charges of gender bias are considered perfectly normal and right.

Reporters ran with the theme in part because the media's appetite for victim stories of any kind is inexhaustible. But this was, in addition, the kind journalists pride themselves on as socially responsible. It was also one that didn't lack for willing subjects. For American Muslims in considerable numbers apparently subscribed to the view that theirs was the abiding suffering that had been inflicted by the 9/11 attacks.

There was no missing the steady supply of Muslims available to tell inquiring reporters of their feelings of alienation and persecution.

Each FBI terrorist sting that went awry or seemed to, each wild goose chase of a home-grown jihadi threat, spurred a new portrait of besieged American Muslims. When such plots turned out to be true, and their threat enormous—most recently in the case of Najubullah Zazi, a jihadist who planned to set explosives off in the New York subway—the portrait and the theme remained the same. Since alienated American Muslims were forced to live in fear as second-class citizens, it was explained, more and more of them chose extremism and violence.

In short, whether the charges of terrorist activity were false or whether they were true, American society was to blame.

There are other faces of Muslim America. Five years or so after the terrorists drove their planes and passengers into the twin towers and the Pentagon, a cab driver from Pakistan remarked, as we drove past the rubble where the towers had stood, that he could never pass this place without trying to see them again in his mind. A painful effort, for all that it brought back. What was not painful, he added, was the memory of certain people in his neighborhood—a mixed but mostly white area of Queens, with many Italian-Americans, some Jews, and he thought some Irish. After the attacks, some of the men had come to him.

"My wife doesn't go out without a head cover," he explained. The men had come to tell him that if anyone bothered her, or his family, he must come to them.

"I must tell them and must not be afraid. Do you know," he said, in a voice suddenly sharp, "what would have happened if Americans had done this kind of attack in my country? Every American—every Christian, every non-Muslim—would have been slaughtered, blood would have run in the streets. I know the kind of country this is. Thanks be to God I can give this to my children."

Countless American Muslims would, like generations of immigrants of all kinds, say the same. Theirs, of course, is not the face of Muslim America suitable for the continuing chronicle of the victimized American Muslim.

Global Warming? How About Islamic Warning!

Dismissing existential threats to Western Civilization: It's the only thing many of today's Europeans do better than Jew-hatred

Geert Wilders is today's Winston Churchill in a world full of Neville Chamberlains and Grima Wormtongues, clueless cowards and treasonous snakes typified by people like Rory Graycrow Underclass, who asks in response to the heroic Wilders' warnings to the West regarding its Islamic Enemy Within:

In 1400 years Islam has failed to take over Europe. Why is he so afraid it will happen now?

Such a question betrays a suicidal ignorance of nearly one and one-half millennia of jihad in Europe.

After Muhammad's death, his armies exploded out of Arabia and into the Holy Land, North Africa, Persia, Greater India, etc., nation after nation throughout Africa and Asia falling to Allah's butchers. Formerly Christian, Jewish, Buddhist, Hindu, Zoroastrian, animist, and other non-Muslim societies were obliterated, consumed, mutilated, and subsumed by the Religion of Insatiable Bloodlust.

Neither was Europe spared. The fact is, Islamic tyranny in Europe goes back to its beginnings. In the west, Spain fought for eight hundred years to regain its freedom from its Islamic overlords, succeeding finally in 1492. If not for Charles Martel ("The Hammer"), who stopped Islam's advance into France and the heart of Europe at the Battle of Tours/Poitiers in 732, western Europe would have fallen to Allah. (And that would have meant no Michelangelo, no Beethoven, no Isaac Newton, no Albert Einstein, no Christopher Columbus, no George Washington, no Magna Carta, no Mayflower Compact, no Declaration of Independence, no Bill of Rights.)

The coastal areas of the British Isles and the Mediterranean also suffered jihad's depredations, both directly and by proxy. Part of the Vikings' notorious malevolence was due to their contribution to the Islamic slave trade. Italy, Sicily, Greece, and other coastal European regions suffered at the hands of Muslims themselves.

Eastern Europe fared no better than the rest. Turkey is the epitome of why Geert Wilders is concerned about Islam. Before it was forcibly secularized by Kemal Ataturk, Turkey was the Ottoman Empire; before that it was part of Byzantium, the great Christian empire. After centuries of jihad, the Byzantine Empire was overthrown finally in 1453 when its great city Constantinople -- the "Rome of the East" -- and its magnificent church Hagia Sofia -- the jewel of Christendom -- fell to jihad.

And that doesn't include centuries of jihad in the Balkans. Christian boys were kidnapped by Muhammad's monsters, forcibly converted, twisted into devils, and sent back to enslave and slaughter their own people. Forget neither the Siege of Vienna in 1683, where Jan Sobieski repelled the last flagrant attempt by the ummah to conquer Europe.

What does any of that have to do with today? Only this: Islam has not changed, its adherents are rediscovering what their god and prophet require of them, and rather than champions like Charles Martel and Jan Sobieski crushing jihad and halting the Islamization of their homelands, people like Rory Graycrow Underclass import the Religion of Pedophilia, Female Genital Mutilation, and Wife-beating. They implement shari'a courts. They obfuscate for, and punish criticism of, the barbaric ideology.

Why is Geert Wilders "so afraid it will happen now"?

Because it is happening now.

Dot Coma

Bumbling Bunglers. That's what they are. That's what our lawyer-limited security personnel have become. All textbook, no action.

On November 5, 2009 muslim terrorist Major Malik Hasan murdered 13 members of the US Army and wounded 29 more at Fort Hood. Before firing over 100 shots at targets in the facility he chose for his killing grounds, he exchanged a series of 18 e-mails with radical Yemeni cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, the same fanatical imam who advised Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab.

The contact between Hasan and imam al-Awlaki went back more than a year and during that time they discussed jihad and whether God permits the murder of innocent people in suicide attacks.

About two weeks after Major Hasan committed his terrorist attack on US soil against members of the US military, the father of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab called the US embassy in Nigeria to report that his son has become radicalized in Yemen. The father is a respected Nigerian banker.

As a result, Abdulmutallab's name is entered into the National Counterterrorism Center's terrorist database.

On December 16, 2009, Abdulmutallab bought a roundtrip airline ticket to travel from Accra, Ghana to Detroit. He paid cash.

His flight departed December 25, 2009. Remarkably, he was traveling without luggage. He had paid for his ticket with cash.

Those two factors should have triggered a personal interview with security people. But that did not happen. However, after considering the additional factor of Abdulmutallab's father informing US Embassy personnel that his son had become radicalized in Yemen, an arrest should have been made at the Ghana airport.

Last week seven CIA agents were murdered when they believed they had found a muslim to work for them as a double agent. Instead, he turned the tables and detonated a bomb he carried. Why did he succeed? The CIA agents made the fatal mistake of trusting him. He had gained their confidence and exploited that confidence to commit a terrorist act of murder. Worse, he had been involved in security in Jordan, which suggests anti-American activities are underway in Jordan.

The answer to the detection problem is already available. Israel knows how to spot and deter airborne terrorists. Moreover, the US appears to have conderable expertise when it comes to finding, indentifying and arresting people with an interest in child pornography. You would think the same strategies would work when the quarry is a terrorist.

Unfortunately, the Obama administration, defined by its depraved incompetence, now wants to re-invent the wheel. When it comes to stopping terrorism, it is suffering from the Not-Invented-Here syndrome. Worse is the fact the Obama team is trying to re-invent this wheel with bad science.

Our security program is focused on spotting weapons. Hence, there must be a growing collection of knives, ice picks, knitting needles, and large bottles of shampoo accumulating at every airport. If we were smart -- like the Israelis -- we would focus on the terrorists themselves. Not the equipment they might possess. Israel profiles behavior. We should too. A passenger who pays cash is suspicious. A passenger on a transatlantic flight who flies without luggage is suspicious. A passenger whose father has called the US Embassy to report his son's Islmaic radicalization in Yemen is exactly what he appears to be -- a muslim terrorist.

In the Abdulmutallab episode, no one needed to Connect the Dots. In this episode, security people needed to step back as this bowling ball of terroristic plans landed in their offices.

Tracking Terrorist Packages

UPS and FedEx have great systems for tracking packages. Those parcels might be in the air, on the ground, at the start of their journey, or at the end. But both companies know the status and location of virtually every item they handle. The same can be done for human cargo.

Meanwhile, what percentage of airline tickets are purchased with cash? Maybe it is time to prohibit cash purchases. The New York City subway system will not take bills larger than $20. Maybe people who want to buy airline tickets with cash should be photographed and subjected to an on-the-spot background check. In the US, instant background checks are used by gun sellers. Sellers at gun shows are expected to use the instant checks. Why not create something similar for those with a sudden need to fly to the US without luggage?

Terrorism Report Cites Human Errors, Lack of Tracking System

Jan. 7 -- A combination of human errors and lack of a system to track leads contributed to the U.S. failure to block a man from trying to bomb an airliner on Christmas Day, according to a review ordered by President Barack Obama.

“There was not a comprehensive or functioning process for tracking terrorist threat reporting and actions taken” that would hold agencies “accountable for running down all leads associated with high-visibility and high-priority plotting efforts,” said the report released today.

Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, a 23-year-old Nigerian man, has been indicted on charges of trying to destroy a Northwest Airlines plane carrying 290 people as it approached Detroit on Dec. 25. The plot was foiled when the explosives he was carrying failed to ignite and passengers and crew aboard the flight subdued the suspect.

Abdulmutallab’s name had been in a federal database of individuals with possible extremist ties.

The government today released a declassified version of the review Obama ordered of intelligence and security procedures following the incident.

Muhammad -- Mad Bomber

Muhammad is the clown who has inspired suicide bombers for the last 30 years. That is an amazing feat for a 7th-century schizophrenic.

Muhammad: The 'Banned' Images

Gary Hull - Dec 9, 2009

For many decades now, Western intellectuals and politicians have cowed to threats of violence from Islamic radicals. Today we must all take a stand for freedom of speech and reasoned discourse.

The following is an excerpt from the introduction to Gary Hull's new book Muhammad: The “Banned” Images. Learn more about the book at www.MuhammadImages.com.

In August 2009, a New York Times headline announced: “Yale Press Bans Images of Muhammad In New Book.” The book referred to in this headline, The Cartoons that Shook the World by Brandeis professor Jytte Klausen, discusses the events around the cartoons of Muhammad that were published by the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten in 2005. After their publication, sundry Muslim hordes “expressed” their displeasure by rioting, looting, firebombing.

Yale University Press, claiming it did not want to stoke more violence abroad, removed the cartoons, along with other images of Muhammad, that are the very subject of Klausen’s book. Its press renounced the very principles it depends on for its survival — the First Amendment and reasoned discourse — to placate the riotous behavior of nihilists.

The West has a decades-long track record of appeasing and emboldening terrorists. It started in the 1950s when the U.S. allowed Iran to confiscate Western oil.

In 1979, President Carter redoubled the appeasement by capitulating when the Islamic regime in Iran kidnapped U.S. diplomats and called for jihad against the U.S. The West submitted again in 1989 when Khomeini issued a fatwa that declared “blasphemous” Rushdie’s novel The Satanic Verses.

Islamists terrorized many Western bookstores into not carrying the book. President Bush, Sr. did nothing. And here are the consequences.

In the spring 1989, some Collets and Dillons bookstores that carried the novel were bombed. Bombs were discovered at numerous other bookstores. Two bookstores in Berkeley, California were firebombed. In July 1991, the Japanese translator of the novel was stabbed to death at his university in Tokyo. In 1993, the novel’s publisher in Norway, William Nygaard, was shot. In July that year, 37 Alevi intellectuals were burned to death in a hotel that was hosting a conference being attended by another translator of Rushdie’s novel.

In November 2004, Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh was murdered while riding his bicycle to work. He was considered a blasphemer because his movie Submission portrayed Muslim women being brutalized by Islamists.

Inaction by Western leaders encouraged the Islamists’ assault on free speech and reasoned discourse. Public endorsement gave them a moral sanction.

Shortly after the publication of the Danish cartoons in 2005, a spokesman for the State Department said that “Inciting religious or ethnic hatreds in this manner is not acceptable.” While in Qatar, Bill Clinton described the cartoons as “these totally outrageous cartoons against Islam.” British Foreign secretary Jack Straw outdid Neville Chamberlain: “I believe that the republication of these cartoons has been unnecessary. It has been insensitive. It has been disrespectful and it has been wrong.”

Rather than being denounced for acting like barbarians, the marauders were told that they have a moral right to feel aggrieved. And aggrieved they acted. The Danish journalists and cartoonists were terrorized. Numerous embassies in Syria were attacked and set on fire. There were violent demonstrations in Denmark. Churches were torched, and hundreds around the world were killed in riots.

The destruction of life and property, the violence to reasoned discourse and civilized behavior are the result of a long chain of events, and could have been avoided if both the Iranian hostage-taking and the Khomeini fatwa had been treated by the West as the declarations of war that in fact they were.

Iran, the world’s greatest state-sponsor of terrorism, should have been dealt with accordingly. As should have been the September 11 attacks, in which almost 3,000 Americans were murdered.

Instead, the West has engaged in eight years of mealy-mouthed policy statements (with the most outrageous being Bush’s statement that Islam is “a religion of peace”), tiptoeing around theocrats, pleading with the U.N., misdirected and anemic military responses (with the biggest joke being a protracted “war” in Afghanistan). Meanwhile, the orchestrators of world-wide terrorism in Iran remain untouched, growing more belligerent and powerful.

Tragically, the Obama presidency is even more appeasing than were previous administrations. The President saw fit to comment on an insignificant conflict between a policeman and a university professor at Harvard, but remained silent when Yale mauled the First Amendment.

A president who understands his responsibilities to the Constitution should use his moral authority to encourage Yale to publish the book in its entirety. Rather than using his power to berate American businessmen, he should denounce the pillagers of our freedoms.

He should state publicly that Yale — its employees, property, faculty, and students — will be protected fully by every security agency under his authority. And that if a foreign leader so much as mentions the words “fatwa” and “Yale” in the same sentence, that country will have three days to surrender unconditionally — or face, not the umpteenth U.N. resolution, but the righteous and unrestrained use of America’s armed forces.

George Washington warned that “If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.”

Ours is becoming a self-inflicted dumbness and silence — not “taken away,” but rather given away by those who are ashamed of everything that free speech stands for.

Frank Capra -- Why We Fight

Most of us know or have heard that Frank Capra was a movie man connected to the making of "It's A Wonderful Life." Some know he made some documentary films for the US Military around the World War II years. One of his films, "Why We Fight" is probably the best. One segment, titled "Prelude to War," won an Oscar.

In this film, a popular Japanese slogan appears. It says "To Die for the Emperor is to Live Forever."

Sounds eerily similar to the Islamic belief that dying in a suicide bombing in which non-muslims are murdered is an act that will earn the killer more sexual opportunity in an eternal paradise than even Tiger Woods can imagine.

Unfortunately, our president is doing his best to protect the leaders of the muslim terrorists most determined to destroy the US, the West and Israel.

Our Muslim in Washington

"Achmed. This is better than I could have predicted. Praise Allah. I must consult the Koran."

"What is it, Abdul?"

"We have conquered the American infidels. The Great Satan has fallen. The non-believers asked a Muslim to lead them and he is. They have surrendered to Allah."

"Allahu akbar, Abdul. Forty years to conquer them. Only 40 years."

"With the Great Hussein Obama putting the American infidels in the hands of Allah, it will take no time to drive the Jews from Palestine. Praise Allah, Achmed. Praise Allah. Jihad, Achmed. Jihad has carried us to the top. We have defeated the infidels and it took only 19 martyrs in four jets to do it. Allahu ackbar.


ANKARA, Turkey (AP) - Barack Obama, making his first visit to a Muslim nation as president, declared Monday the United States "is not and will never be at war with Islam."

Calling for a greater partnership with the Islamic world in an address to the Turkish parliament, Obama called the country an important U.S. ally in many areas, including the fight against terrorism. He devoted much of his speech to urging a greater bond between Americans and Muslims, portraying terrorist groups such as al Qaida as extremists who did not represent the vast majority of Muslims.

"Let me say this as clearly as I can," Obama said. "The United States is not and never will be at war with Islam. In fact, our partnership with the Muslim world is critical ... in rolling back a fringe ideology that people of all faiths reject."

The U.S. president is trying to mend fences with a Muslim world that felt it had been blamed by America for the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

"America's relationship with the Muslim world cannot and will not be based on opposition to al Qaida," he said. "We seek broad engagement based upon mutual interests and mutual respect."

"We will convey our deep appreciation for the Islamic faith, which has done so much over so many centuries to shape the world for the better, including my own country," Obama said.

Our Man in Washington

"Abdul"

"Yes, Achmed."

"Did you see the headline, Abdul?"

"No, Achmed. What does it say?"

"It says Hussein Obama has commanded his country to accept Islam. Praise Allah."

"Then we have won, have we not, Achmed?"

"Yes. We have won. And the infidel nation shall accept the will of Allah. Hussein Obama shall lead them. It is a great day."

Obama Tells Turkey U.S. Is ‘Not at War With Islam’

April 6 (Bloomberg) -- President Barack Obama used an address in the Turkish capital to stress that the U.S. isn’t “at war with Islam,” as he pledged to ease tensions between the West and the Muslim world.

“I know that the trust that binds us has been strained, and I know that strain is shared in many places where the Muslim faith is practiced,” Obama said in a speech today to the Turkish parliament in Ankara. “Let me say this as clearly as I can: the United States is not at, and will never be, at war with Islam.

Obama, on the first stop of a two-day trip to Turkey, his first as president to a Muslim country, stressed the cultural ties and shared history between the U.S. and Turkey in an alliance that has made the world “more secure.” The two can use that partnership to bridge the religious and cultural divide between the West and the predominantly Muslim east, he said.

He pledged to lend U.S. support to combat the “terrorist activities” of the Kurdish separatist movement, the PKK. The U.S. is prepared to be a partner to help work through the issue of Armenian massacres in 1915, and “strongly supports” Turkish membership of the European Union, Obama said.

“Turkey is bound to Europe by more than bridges over the Bosporus,” he said. “Turkish membership would broaden and strengthen Europe’s foundation once more.”

NATO Objections

Obama also championed Turkish EU membership yesterday in Prague during a U.S.-EU informal summit, one day after he helped overcome Turkish objections to Denmark’s Anders Fogh Rasmussen as the next head of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

“Turkey is key to Washington’s design to improve relations with the Muslim world,” said Josh Landis, co-director of the Center for Middle East Studies at the University of Oklahoma in Norman.

Obama told the Turkish lawmakers that a “partnership with the Muslim world is critical.”
Obama, 47, is meeting with Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan after earlier holding talks with President Abdullah Gul. He will travel to Istanbul tomorrow.

“The struggle with terrorism is one of the important issues for both countries,” Gul, 58, told reporters after the talks. “We will advance our partnership to a new level. We are determined to be hand-in-hand on a range of issues.”

Street Protests

Turkish police arrested 15 people as several hundred demonstrators protesting U.S. policies tried to march on the parliament in Ankara, NTV television reported.

Inside, Obama said that for America to address a global economic crisis, religious extremism, climate change and weapons proliferation, it will need the help of its allies.

“No one nation can confront these challenges alone,” he said. “That is why we must listen to one another, and seek common ground.”

During his presidential campaign, Obama vowed to undertake a vigorous “public diplomacy program” that would distinguish his approach to foreign relations from that of former President George W. Bush.

Relying on international help will be “the approach of the United States of America going forward,” Obama said, as he continued to distance himself from his predecessor.

The president’s visit to Ankara and Istanbul is noteworthy also because Turkey, the only mainly Muslim member of NATO, angered the Bush administration by refusing to allow the U.S. to use its soil as a staging ground for the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

Iran Energy Accord

Bilateral tensions escalated further after the Turkish government reached an energy accord with Iran over American objections and criticized Israel’s December incursion into Gaza.

Obama said the U.S. will “continue to support your central role as an East-West corridor for oil and gas.” On Iraq, he asked for countries to set aside their differences on how the war began and instead work to end it. He said the U.S. will engage with “all of Iraq’s neighbors” to “forge a new dialogue that reconciles differences and advances our common security.”

He urged Palestinians and Israelis to work together for statehood, reiterating his support for a two state solution.

“Both Israelis and Palestinians must take the steps that are necessary to build confidence,” he said.

He also continued his outreach to Iran, which borders Iraq, calling it a “great civilization.”

‘Model Partnership’

Speaking to reporters after talks with Gul, Obama said the U.S. Turkish relationship could develop into a “model partnership” that lays “the foundation of a modern international community that is respectful, that is secure, that is prosperous.”

Campaigning for president, then-U.S. Senator Obama called the 1915 conflict between Turks and Armenians a “genocide.” He declined to use that language today, saying at the press conference that “I have not changed views.” In his speech, he acknowledged that “the United States is still working through some of our own darker periods,” mentioning the treatment of Native Americans.

Obama, stressing the need for engagement based on “mutual interests and mutual understand,” said the U.S. will present specific programs relating to the Muslim world in the coming months.

“When people look back on this time, let it be said of America that we extended the hand of friendship,” he said in parliament.

Muslim Cuts Off Wife's Head -- in the US

There's probably a little more to the story than the financial problems of the husband. Maybe the wife was having an affair. She seems to be very good looking and he looks as though he's been eating far too many of the sweets that are account for much of the muslim diet. His butchery reveals the worst of his temperament. A murderous mean streak. A documented history of domestic violence, say the cops.

But he cut off her head. He cut off her head. Is it possible to account for his crime as the act of a psychopath? Or did he act in a way that is consistent with his religious and cultural upbringing? Chopping off heads and limbs is part of the Islamic penal code. It seems he imported the spirit of Koranic law and carried out the sentence after convicting her of a crime -- in his mind.

He's from a culture that punishes people with traumatic amputations. It appears he believes his religious law trumps America's civil and criminal law. This is a problem.

BEHEAD NIGHTMARE -- $$ WOE SPURRED SLAY: COPS



'HAPPY' COUPLE: Muzzammil Hassan, beset by financial woe, allegedly decapitated estranged wife Aasiya.

An upstate TV exec who set up a channel promoting Muslims as peace-loving people was stressed about his failing business in the days before he allegedly chopped off his estranged wife's head, a friend of the couple said yesterday.

An order of protection barring Muzzammil Hassan, 44, from the couple's upstate home had been taken out by his wife, Aasiya, 37, less than a week before she died.

The couple was in the process of divorcing after bouts of domestic violence, her lawyer told the Buffalo News.

Hassan, who founded Bridges TV in 2004 to counter anti-Islam stereotypes following 9/11, turned himself in to cops Thursday in the Buffalo suburb of Orchard Park. Police later found his beheaded wife in the TV studios.

He was charged with murder.

"He was worried about the station's future," said Dr. Khalid Qazi, a friend of the couple and president of the Muslim Public Affairs Council of Western New York, who last spoke to the Hassans a week ago.

"He was stressed, but this has left me absolutely shocked. I still cannot believe it."

Police have still not found the weapon used in the killing, an officer said yesterday.

Bridges TV was set up with $10 million in backing from more than 50 investors. Two years ago, Hassan told Arab News magazine he needed another $5 million and was reaching out to supporters in Saudi Arabia.

Hassan, a father of four who moved to the United States from Pakistan 25 years ago, worked as a banker in Buffalo before quitting to start up the station.

The family home was empty yesterday. A police note stuck to the door five hours before Aasiya's body was found asked her to contact cops.

Nobody at the Orchard Park Police Department yesterday could explain why officers wanted to speak to her.

Qazi said the killings went against the teachings of Islam and damaged the image of Muslims that Hassan worked to promote.

"Domestic violence is despicable, and Islam condones it in no way whatever," he said.

Murders are being committed in the US every day by people of all faiths."