In memoriam, September 11, 2001 a.D.

Father Mychal Judge, murdered by devout Muslims practicing their "faith" as Muhammad intended, September 11th, 2001.

Honor those whose lives and loved ones were taken violently from them ten years ago by allowing no one to lie about why those innocents perished.

It was neither American interventionism, European colonialism, poverty, disenfranchisement, the Jews, nor George W. Bush.

It was Islam.

How best to pay tribute to the three thousand slaughtered by Islam on 9/11? Let's build a mega mosque on their grave!

But New York's Mayor Bloomberg says, "If they can't build a mosque, you can't build a temple."  Great.  When Orthodox Jews start flying planes into buildings to shouts of "YHWH is greatest!" Then we can engage in moral equivalency.

Until then, state the facts plainly.  On September 11, 2001, three thousand innocents were slaughtered in accord with Muhammad's example and in obedience to Allah's commands to war against the non-Muslim world "until all religion is for Allah" (Qur'an 8). The Religion of Wanton Bloodlust should not be rewarded with a monument to its "sacralized" carnage anywhere on Earth, let alone the site of one of its most successful "outreach efforts" toward non-Muslims in our history.

The remains of another seventy-two of Muhammad's victims have been discovered:

New York City officials say a renewed search this year of debris in and around the World Trade Center site has recovered 72 human remains.

The sifting of more than 800 cubic yards (612 cubic meters) of debris recovered from ground zero and underneath roads around the lower Manhattan site began in April and ended Friday.

The greatest number of remains – 37 – were found from material underneath West Street, a highway on the west side of ground zero. The new debris was uncovered as construction work made new parts of the site accessible.

The city began a renewed search for human remains in 2006. More than 1,800 remains have been found.

Some have been matched to previously unidentified 9/11 victims.

Remembering 9/11*

While it is fitting and proper that we should remember those who fell on 9/11 and their families and continue to support our political, law enforcement, and military personnel who work to defend us, to continue to lie about or deny why the attack occurred is suicidal.

The command of Allah and the example of Muhammad require the faithful to use [any] means necessary, including violence, to establish the rule of Allah over all mankind (see for yourself here).

Muhammad offered non-Muslims three options: Conversion, slavery as dhimmis, or death.

Nowhere do you hear our political, media, or academic elites state this basic fact. Instead, you've got the president of the United States apologizing to Islam (in a "speech" from Al-Azhar University, whose president endorses suicide bombings), bowing to Muslim tyrants (the Saudi king), and negotiating with Islamic terrorists working to secure nukes (Iran), all while abandoning the only decent, free nation in that part of the world, Israel.

Islamic tyranny and intimidation must be resisted.

Islamic obfuscation and propaganda must be exposed and dispelled.

It is not racism to evaluate a set of beliefs. It is not phobic to state facts about what a text says. It is not intolerant to expose and condemn genocide, murder, pedophilia, rape, slavery, vandalism, extortion, theft, deceit, and religious and gender discrimination [carried out] in the name of a "god."

Many resources are available on-line. Jihad Watch is highly recommended. [I happen to like this site also.]

Here is just a taste of what Muhammad and his allah intend for you, and whether out of ignorance, cowardice, deceit, or simple human decency, the fact that Muslims you know do not advocate such behavior does nothing to negate what Muhammad [commanded] and practiced:

"kill the pagans wherever you find them" (Qur'an 9:5).

"Fight against . . . the People of the Book [Jews and Christians] . . . until they feel themselves subdued and pay the jizya" (Qur'an 9:29).

Remember 9/11, but not with helpless, limp-wristed, self-indulgent expressions of ignorance and confusion.

Remember 9/11 with an accurate understanding of the enemy, an ancient foe which seeks to devour all that you hold dear.

Remember 9/11 and honor our dead by determining to expose, denounce, and punish all who through ignorance, perversion, malfeasance, or deceit would hamper our efforts at effective self-defense.

Fourteen hundred years of global jihad.

Fourteen thousand terrorist attacks in Allah's name since 9/11 alone.

Innocent victims of Muhammad's bloodlust (and lust) cry out around the world.

What will you do when they want to put your children in the oven?

*Will Obama be eating ice cream, playing golf, or playing the fiddle?

Update 9/12, 12:29 AM: It turns out he was painting a wall and urging interfaith dialogue,
but not for Muslims until after Ramadan.

9/11 conspiracy theorists blame Bush and the U.S. because they, like OBL, hate professing Christians more than practicing genocidal monsters

How can anyone be so perverse, so hateful, so full of self-loathing that they would blame without evidence any American president for an attack as purely evil as that carried out on September 11th?

Despite Osama bin Laden's videotaped confession and celebration of the crime (transcribed and published by Al Jazeera, which is well-known for its pro-Bush, pro-American, and pro-Conservative Christian biases), some Americans still support the idea that 9/11 was an inside job.

Was President Clinton in on the bombings of the World Trade Center in 1993, Riyadh in '95, the Khobar Towers in '96, our embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in '98, or the U.S.S. Cole in 2000?

How can Muslims celebrate bin Laden's Allah-pleasing victory against the Great Satan if he were not involved?

Why has Osama never said, "Hey, wait a minute! I had nothing to do with 9/11, but even if I did, Bush was in on it!"?

Wouldn't that one declaration have ended the current Crusader/Zionist War Against Islam?

If President Bush really did plan and execute -- or even know of and allow -- the foul deed, why did not John Kerry call him on it during the 2004 campaign? He'd be President Kerry now (and unlike our current Economist-In-Chief, getting credit for "keeping the nation strong in tough economic times").

Senator Kerry didn't mind slandering his fellow servicemen in harm's way during the Vietnam War to advance his own career then; I doubt he'd mind exposing the truth about the worst mass-murderer in American history now. (And a Republican one at that, though for those twisted enough to believe the President had something to do with 9/11, the difference is one of semantics only.)

Here's John Kerry vowing to "destroy" OBL. Why bin Laden, if Bush is guilty of the blood of those three thousand?

According to Al Jazeera:

In a statement, Kerry said he will do whatever it takes to capture or kill "terrorists".

"In response to this tape of Usama bin Ladin, let me just make it clear, crystal clear, as Americans we are united in our determination to hunt down and destroy Usama bin Ladin and the terrorists," Kerry said.

If President Bush really had something to do with 9/11, why has not the Democrat-controlled House impeached him? Why does no rational human being -- even liberal Democrat politicians -- make that argument?

The best that the Rabid Socialist and her (now overtly) Racist Rabid Socialist opponent can come up with is criticism of the War in Iraq, but the Administration has always denied a direct connection between Saddam Hussein and September 11th.

After 9/11, everyone -- even the most hateful, liberal bigots, and then out of fear -- united behind President Bush. After a year or two of no other major attacks, many of those worms crawled out from under their rocks and attacked the President for political gain and out of malice. Of those, not a few wrote books to cash in on their treasonous derangement. Who among them ever said, "By the way, this is what I did to carry out 9/11, and I did it at the President's request"?

The truth is, everyone without an overwhelming compulsion to lie (and even many with one, like Democratic presidential candidates) finds it impossible to advance the absurd notion that President Bush had anything to do with 9/11.

Of course, irrefutable evidence of responsibility for the single greatest slaughter of American civilians (to date) comes directly from bin Laden himself. Just like his "Ideal Man" and prophet, OBL can't help but brag about that of which he should be utterly ashamed, that which makes him uniquely depraved and vile.

Here is the Caliph-In-Waiting in his own words, translated from the original Black Speech of Mordor into English.

(Has anyone else noticed that Arabic is starting to sound a lot like German? Every time I hear the latter spoken I can't help but think of Life is Beautiful, Schindler's List, or The Sound of Music -- and I don't mean the happy parts. I suppose that genocidal, anti-Semitic, totalitarian ideologies do that to the languages in which they are expressed. Two perfectly-good tongues with historic ties to Christianity ruined now.)

Notice he casts his terrorism in terms of defense of Islam and its adherents (I suppose the only people who can kill innocent women and children are Muslims. Selfish!). Note also that he plagiarizes Michael Moore, which is both poetic justice and a warning to the Blame America Firsters: You're in harmony with a monster:

But I am amazed at you [the American people]. Even though we are in the fourth year after the events of September 11th, Bush is still engaged in distortion, deception and hiding from you the real causes. And thus, the reasons are still there for a repeat of what occurred.

So I shall talk to you about the story behind those events and shall tell you truthfully about the moments in which the decision was taken, for you to consider.

I say to you, Allah knows that it had never occurred to us to strike the towers. But after it became unbearable and we witnessed the oppression and tyranny of the American/Israeli coalition against our people in Palestine and Lebanon, it came to my mind.

The events that affected my soul in a direct way started in 1982 when America permitted the Israelis to invade Lebanon and the American Sixth Fleet helped them in that. This bombardment began and many were killed and injured and others were terrorised and displaced.

I couldn't forget those moving scenes, blood and severed limbs, women and children sprawled everywhere. Houses destroyed along with their occupants and high rises demolished over their residents, rockets raining down on our home without mercy.

The situation was like a crocodile meeting a helpless child, powerless except for his screams. Does the crocodile understand a conversation that doesn't include a weapon? And the whole world saw and heard but it didn't respond.

In those difficult moments many hard-to-describe ideas bubbled in my soul, but in the end they produced an intense feeling of rejection of tyranny, and gave birth to a strong resolve to punish the oppressors.

And as I looked at those demolished towers in Lebanon, it entered my mind that we should punish the oppressor in kind and that we should destroy towers in America in order that they taste some of what we tasted and so that they be deterred from killing our women and children.

And that day, it was confirmed to me that oppression and the intentional killing of innocent women and children is a deliberate American policy. Destruction is freedom and democracy, while resistance is terrorism and intolerance.

This means the oppressing and embargoing to death of millions as Bush Sr did in Iraq in the greatest mass slaughter of children mankind has ever known, and it means the throwing of millions of pounds of bombs and explosives at millions of children - also in Iraq - as Bush Jr did, in order to remove an old agent and replace him with a new puppet to assist in the pilfering of Iraq's oil and other outrages.

So with these images and their like as their background, the events of September 11th came as a reply to those great wrongs, should a man be blamed for defending his sanctuary?

Is defending oneself and punishing the aggressor in kind, objectionable terrorism? If it is such, then it is unavoidable for us.

This is the message which I sought to communicate to you in word and deed, repeatedly, for years before September 11th.

And you can read this, if you wish, in my interview with Scott in Time Magazine in 1996, or with Peter Arnett on CNN in 1997, or my meeting with John Weiner in 1998.

You can observe it practically, if you wish, in Kenya and Tanzania and in Aden. . . . .

[. . .]

So we are continuing this policy in bleeding America to the point of bankruptcy. Allah willing, and nothing is too great for Allah.

That being said, those who say that al-Qaida has won against the administration in the White House or that the administration has lost in this war have not been precise, because when one scrutinises the results, one cannot say that al-Qaida is the sole factor in achieving those spectacular gains.

Rather, the policy of the White House that demands the opening of war fronts to keep busy their various corporations - whether they be working in the field of arms or oil or reconstruction - has helped al-Qaida to achieve these enormous results.

And so it has appeared to some analysts and diplomats that the White House and us are playing as one team towards the economic goals of the United States, even if the intentions differ.

[. . .]

It is true that this shows that al-Qaida has gained, but on the other hand, it shows that the Bush administration has also gained, something of which anyone who looks at the size of the contracts acquired by the shady Bush administration-linked mega-corporations, like Halliburton and its kind, will be convinced. And it all shows that the real loser is ... you.

. . . for the record, we had agreed with the Commander-General Muhammad Ataa, Allah have mercy on him, that all the operations should be carried out within 20 minutes, before Bush and his administration notice.

[. . .]

In conclusion, I tell you in truth, that your security is not in the hands of Kerry, nor Bush, nor al-Qaida. No.

Your security is in your own hands. And every state that doesn't play with our security has automatically guaranteed its own security.

And Allah is our Guardian and Helper, while you have no Guardian or Helper. All peace be upon he who follows the Guidance.

My help is in YHWH, Who made heaven and earth.

Freedoms of Speech and of the Press threatened by CAIR, apologists for Allah

A California judge cites Freedom of Speech to defend CAIR's efforts to destroy that very right.

Besides Larry Elder and Michael Savage, what major talk-show host has demonstrated the intellectual integrity and moral fortitude to tell the truth about Islam? Not Rush, not Hannity, not Glenn Beck, not Hugh Hewitt (though a good friend tells me he's getting closer to the truth).

What politician? Sue Myrick, Geert Wilders, and (formerly) Ayaan Hirsi Ali.

Whether or not you appreciate Savage, it is not one person or one radio program under attack by apologists for Allah.

Your very rights to Freedom of Speech and of the Press are threatened, and their enemies must be defeated decisively or every other Right you cherish will eventually fall.

How can CAIR and their cohorts (ISNA, MSA, MPAC, the 75% of American mosques preaching hate against non-Muslims, etc.) be allowed any quarter at all in any non-Muslim nation? How can any non-Muslim defend such tyrants?

A judge in California has taken under advisement a request by the Council on Islamic-American Relations to dismiss a lawsuit filed by radio talk show host Michael Savage.

The San Francisco-based talker originally accused the organization of copyright violations, but later amended the action to include allegations the group "has consistently sought to silence opponents of violent terror through economic blackmail, frivolous but costly lawsuits, threats of lawsuits and abuses of the legal system."

The action in U.S. District Court in Northern California also charges CAIR with using extortion, threats, abuse of the court system, and obtaining money via interstate commerce under false and fraudulent circumstances – calling it a "political vehicle of international terrorism" and even linking the group with support of al-Qaida.

The federal government, in fact, recently named CAIR, based in Washington, D.C., as an unindicted co-conspirator in an alleged scheme to funnel $12 million to the terrorist group Hamas.

The lawsuit was the subject of court hearing today, and according to a report from the Associated Press, U.S. District Judge Susan Illston said she was "leaning toward tossing out" the action.

She did say she likely would allow Savage's lawyer to submit a revised complaint to keep the case alive, the report said.

Savage's attorney Daniel Horowitz said the copyright claim was valid because CAIR used Savage's material "for purely commercial purposes," but the judge said she found free speech arguments persuasive.

As WND has reported, CAIR has been associated with a disturbing number of convicted terrorists or felons in terrorism probes, as well as suspected terrorists and active targets of terrorism investigations.

"Groups like CAIR have a proven record of senior officials being indicted and either imprisoned or deported from the United States," said U.S. Rep. Sue Myrick, R-N.C., co-founder of the House Anti-Terrorism/Jihad Caucus.

Savage and Horowitz, a celebrity civil rights attorney, are trying to use the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act to make the case that "CAIR and its co-conspirators have aided, abetted and materially sponsored al-Qaida and international terrorism."

CAIR launched a campaign against "The Savage Nation," as the program is called, using extended audio clips of the show to make the case that advertisers who supported the talker were actually endorsing "hate speech" against Muslims.

Savage turned the tables on the activist group by initially suing for copyright violation of the show's material, then expanding the case.

Among the charges is that CAIR is "part of a deliberately complex and deliberately confusing array of related organizations" and that its "organizational structure is part of a scheme to hide the illegal activities of the group, funding, the transfer of funds and to complicate investigation of the group."

Other highlights of the suit:

* "CAIR is not a civil rights organization and it never has been. - CAIR was and is a political organization that advocates a specific political agenda on behalf of foreign interests."

* "The copyright infringement was done to raise funds for CAIR so that it could perpetuate and continue to perform its role in the RICO conspiracy set forth in Count Two and to disseminate propaganda on behalf of foreign interests that are opposed to the continued existence of the United States of America as a free nation."

* "CAIR would have to register as a foreign agent if their activities were not hidden under the false claim that they are a civil rights organization that enjoys tax-exempt status."

* "CAIR was tied to terror from the day it was formed. The group was incorporated on or about 1994 by Omar Ahmad and Nihad Awad. Both men were officers of a terror organization known as the 'Islamic Association of Palestine.'"

* "CAIR's parent group, IAP, was founded in or about 1982 by Musa Abu Marzook. Marzook was IAP's ideological leader and controlling director from the date of its founding until shortly after his deportation from the United States in 1997. At all time relevant, Marzook was an operative of, and/or affiliated with, the 'Harakat al-Muqawamah al-Islamiyyah,' or 'Hamas.' Hamas is an international terrorist organization."

* In 1998, "CAIR demanded the removal of a Los Angeles billboard describing Osama bin Laden as 'the sworn enemy,' asserting that this depiction [was] 'offensive to Muslims.'"

* In 1998, "CAIR denied bin Laden's responsibility for the two al-Qaida bombings of American embassies in Africa. CAIR's leader Ibrahim Hooper claimed the bombings resulted from 'misunderstandings on both sides.'"

* "On October 5, 2001, just weeks after 9/11, CAIR's New York office sent a letter to The New York Times arguing that the paper had misidentified three of the hijackers and suggesting that the attacks may have been committed by people who were impersonating Arab Muslims."

* "CAIR further exploited 9/11 as it put on its website a picture of the World Trade Center in flames and below it a call for donations that was linked to the Holy Land Foundation website." The Holy Land Foundation, the suit charges, is "a terror organization."

* "CAIR receives significant international funding. For example, in 1999 the Islamic Development Bank gave a $250,000 grant to CAIR to purchase land for a national headquarters. In 2002, the World Association for Muslim Youth, a Saudi government-funded organization, financed distributing books on Islam free of charge and an advertising campaign in American publications. This included a quarter page in USA Today each Friday, for a year, estimated to cost $1.04 million. In 2003, Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal donated $500,000 to distribute the Koran and other books about Islam in the United States. In 2005, CAIR's Washington branch received a donation of $1,366,466 from a Saudi Arabian named Adnan Bogary. In 2006, Sheikh Hamdan bin Rashid Al Maktoum, deputy ruler of Dubai and UAE minister of finance and industry, financed the building of a property in the U.S. to serve as an endowment for the organization. This gift is thought to generate income of approximately $3 million a year."

* "The role of CAIR and CAIR-Canada is to wage PSYOPS (psychological warfare) and disinformation activities on behalf of Wahabbi-based Islamic terrorists throughout North America. They are the intellectual 'shock troops' of Islamic terrorism."

* "The Council on American-Islamic Relations is a Muslim Brotherhood front organization. It works in the United States as a lobby against radio, television and print media journalists who dare to produce anything about Islam that is at variance with their fundamental agenda."

* "CAIR has links to both Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood. Terrorism expert Steven Emerson has stated before Congress that CAIR is a front for Hamas."

Savage's case also cites another suit against CAIR filed by the estate of John P. O'Neill, the former head of security for the World Trade Center. It alleged a RICO conspiracy involving CAIR led to the 9/11 attack.

"Throughout this period," the Savage suit alleges, "CAIR conspired to support terrorism and to obfuscate the roles of the various participants and conspirators in Radical Muslim Terrorism, and/or al-Qaida and/or the International Islamic Front for the Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders, which conspiracy culminated in the 9/11 attack."

It continues: "The pattern of racketeering activity conducted by CAIR is separate from the existence of Radical Muslim Terrorism, and/or the al-Qaida, and/or the International Islamic Front for the Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders, but was a necessary component of the 9/11 attack. The RICO enterprise conducts terrorism all over the world; the racketeering activity conducted by CAIR funds that activity, which activity culminated in the 9/11 attack."

CAIR has claimed a host of companies have stopped advertising on Savage's show as a result of its boycott campaign.

However, an investigation by WND shows some of those boycott victories are questionable. In one announcement claiming Universal Orlando Resorts "drops 'Savage Nation' ads," CAIR stated: "Advertisers that have already stopped airing, or refuse to air commercials on 'Savage Nation' include AutoZone, Citrix, TrustedID, JCPenney, OfficeMax, Wal-Mart and AT&T."

But AutoZone told WND the CAIR campaign had nothing to do with its advertising decision, and it had chosen not to advertise on any radio talk shows – of all parts of the spectrum – years before the CAIR effort.

CAIR officials declined to respond to WND queries about why it is listing companies as part of its boycott campaign that say they have not participated in the boycott.

Officials of Talk Radio Network, Savage's syndicator, confirmed to WND that companies including AutoZone and JCPenney never advertise on such programs.

"We do not sponsor syndicated radio talk shows," AutoZone spokesman Ray Pohlman told WND. "We have customers of all shapes and sizes and political persuasions. For us to sponsor [any radio talk shows] wouldn't make any sense."

But that policy is years old, and wasn't changed at all by CAIR's effort, he said.

"What I will tell you is the CAIR organization did, in fact, contact the marketing department [of AutoZone.] We responded with our full advertising policy which clearly states that we do not advertise on radio talk shows," he told WND.

The clip used by CAIR from Savage's material included: "I'm not gonna put my wife in a hijab. And I'm not gonna put my daughter in a burqa. And I'm not getting' on my all-fours and braying to Mecca. And you could drop dead if you don't like it. You can shove it up your pipe. I don't wanna hear any more about Islam. I don't wanna hear one more word about Islam. Take your religion and shove it up your behind. I'm sick of you."

The Savage suit says comments like that are taken out of context.

The suit seeks damages equal to the ongoing donations from CAIR supporters "who expect CAIR to act in this manner in exchange for continuing financial support" as well as "actual damages according to proof."

Perhaps this is the context to which Savage's suit alludes:

"the Messenger of Allah . . . would say: 'Fight in the name of Allah and in the way of Allah. Fight against those who disbelieve in Allah. Make a holy war. . . . When you meet your enemies who are polytheists, invite them to three courses of action. . . . Invite them to (accept) Islam; if they respond to you, accept it from them and desist from fighting against them. . . . If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah's help and fight them . . .'" (Muslim Book 19, Number 4294).

"fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war) . . . " (Qur’an 9:5).

"Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued" (Qur'an 9:29).

"Allah's Apostle said: 'I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah's Apostle . . . '" (Bukhari Volume 1, Book 2, Number 24).

A little historical irony

The more things change, the more they stay the same.
It's time for another Crusade.

Lies the only way to hurt President Bush

I happened to be perusing a few articles at The Guardian, a UK news site.

The ultra-liberal bent obvious in just the first two articles I saw was nauseating. Because it was so blatantly dependent on outright lies, one article in particular deserves comment:

The author claims that both President Bush and Prime Minister Blair lied their nations into war. One must conclude this author is either intellectually-deficient or a liar.

If President Bush lied us into war in Iraq, he wasn't the only one (and I'm not referring to the esteemed Prime Minister) ...

-President Clinton in 1998 repeatedly referred to Saddam's nuclear threat and other WMD; indeed, he believed the threat so credible that he bombed Saddam.

-The United Nations also lied us into war by reporting that a large number of Saddam's Weapons of Mass Destruction were missing.

-The Democrats of the United States Congress, who voted to give President Bush the power to go to war against Iraq months before the president gave his State of the Union Address, also warned of the danger of Saddam Hussein's weapons.

-It was apparently France's intelligence regarding Iraq's attempts to acquire African uranium which became a part of the British intelligence to which Mr. Bush referred in the State of the Union.

Those who are actually lying regarding the war in Iraq are those gutless, self-serving wretches whose political success depends on President Bush's failure (and, therefore, our enemies' success).

After 9/11, the realization of their own mortality caused sane people to support President Bush's actions against the jihadists.

Once enough time passed and people saw it was safe again to be liberal (read: "weak, appeasing, and treacherously self-serving") -- and that a Presidential Election was coming up -- they crawled out from under their rocks.

We are at war, and those elected to defend our lives and liberties lie about the Commander-in-Chief in order to harm him politically.

That's Treason.