Winds of Jihad

Will the kumbayah never end?

Islamo-Nazi Cat Stevens aka Yusuf Islam in a love-fest with anti- Serbian haters, and all in the name of what exactly?

Link

Video: Cat Stevens Wishes for Salman Rushdie’s Death by Fire

Here’s a rare video of former pop star turned Islamist Cat Stevens (aka Yusuf Islam, aka Yusuf) on British TV in 1989 discussing Salman Rushdie; when asked if he’d go to a demonstration to burn an effigy of Rushdie, Yusuf Islam replies, “I would have hoped that it would be the real thing.” 

“Tiny minority of extremists” update.

Of course his mom and dad and all his relatives will tell us that

“he is really such a nice kid and that he would never do a thing like that”

TERROR SUSPECT: Reigning Australian super flyweight boxing champion Ahmed Elomar, left, pictured beating Thailand’s Denchai Tiabkoon during their IBO Asia Pacific featherweight fight in 2005, is among four Australian Muslims arrested in Lebanon on suspicion of having links to terrorists. 

Richard Kerbaj and Martin Chulov

AUSTRALIA’s reigning superfly boxing champion is one of four Australians detained in Lebanon on suspicion of being part of a terrorist cell.

Ahmed Elomar, who has fought alongside champion Anthony Mundine, was seized near Tripoli last Thursday with former Sydney financial adviser Ibrahim Sabouh, Ahmad Elomar and Mahammad Basal.

Meanwhile it has been reported that a former Sydney cabbie, Omar Hadba, who apparently reported the men when also arrested in the city was discovered at a workshop full of weapons.

Elomar, who fought on the undercard of the Anthony Mundine versus Danny Green bout last year, had left Sydney abruptly just weeks ago.

He also is also the nephew of Mohamed Ali Elomar, one of nine men charged with plotting a terrorist act in 2005.

Lebanese security authorities are interested in questioning former Sydney-based hardline cleric Faiz Mohammed in relation to the men, The Australian newspaper also reports today.

Elomar’s father, Abu Ahmed, has also told the newspaper his son went to Lebanon against his wishes.

“I knew it was the wrong time to travel and the wrong place. But I couldn’t physically stop him,” he said.

Friends said Elomar wanted to visit Lebanon because his wife, Najat, was eager to see her family back home.

Elomar and Najat have two sons – Mamdouh, 7, and Taha, 3.

Elomar’s close friend Fadi Rahman told The Australian that the boxer was one of the country’s most promising young fighters before he suffered an eye injury in a fight last year.

The Australian

Detainee may be terror group chief

A FORMER Sydney taxi driver detained in Lebanon on suspicion of having links to terrorists has been identified as a possible leader of the al-Qa’ida-linked outfit, Fatah al-Islam.

A Tripoli car dealer who rents a shop next to a shed owned by Australian man Omar Hadba – where almost 500kg of military weapons were allegedly found hidden – said security officials had told him his neighbour was a leader of Fatah al-Islam, which has been locked in battle with the Lebanese military for weeks.

More

What the Australian doesn’t tell you:

THE small cell of Australians caught in the violence in northern Lebanon have two things in common.
They all lived in Sydney and were associates or followers of Australian-born Islamic radical cleric Sheik Feiz Mohammed.

At least four Australian passport holders, Ibrahim Sabouh, Ahmad Elomar, Mohammed Basal and Omar Hadba, remain in custody in Lebanon unable to speak with Australian diplomats after their arrest last week.

And officials still can’t confirm another former Sydney man, Bassem al Sayyed, and his Lebanese wife were killed or held when Lebanese troops raided an apartment building on Sunday at Abu Samra, Tripoli.

Sheik Feiz Mohammed is the former head of the Global Islamic Youth Centre at Liverpool in western Sydney and he now lives just a few kilometres from Abu Samra with his wife and six children.

The Sheik, 37, a graduate of Medina University in Saudi Arabia, left Australia after it was revealed he had produced hate videos urging Muslim parents to give up their children as martyrs for jihad.

Cleric bans homosexual nurse from washing and dressing him in jail

By Greig Box Turnbull Greig.Box@Mirror.Co.Uk

HATE preacher Abu Hamza has refused any more treatment from his prison nurse after finding out the man is gay.

* Gimme a break: You mean the guy wiped his ass for more than 2 years and Hamza didn’t know that he was gay? Hamza used to be a bouncer around the strip-clubs in Soho, he can tell gays a mile away… 

* Dirty Harry is actually ‘Queenie’- depicted in Sheik Yer’mami’s song ‘Abu Hamza’ here…

The nurse, nickname Queenie, has been helping to wash and dress the convicted terrorist for more than two years.

A prison source told the Mirror the full-time staffer is openly gay and has a camp voice.

Officers at Belmarsh jail are said to be surprised Hamza, 48, has not noticed before.

Now the cleric is claiming it is against his religion and human rights to be treated by a homosexual. The source said Hamza’s solicitor wrote to the governor demanding his client is given a new regular nurse.

The prison service refused saying it does not discriminate on grounds of sexuality.

The source said: “The nurse is upset about it. He has spent the last couple of years doing everything for Hamza, even wiping his bottom.

“It shows how little respect Hamza has for others. The nurse dresses him, washes him, cleans his teeth, cuts his toenails, trims his beard and applies ointment for his skin disorder.”

Egyptian-born Hamza, serving seven years for inciting murder and racial hatred, requires care because he is limited by his hook hands.

The source said: “His nurse is open about being gay. He even speaks with a camp voice. His nickname is Queenie.

“Hamza has been refusing treatment while he is on duty but he won’t be able to keep that up because it is causing him a great deal of discomfort.”

The prison service said: “We do not comment on individual prisoners.”

No, its not Islam. Not this time. Guess again:

Tom Cruise banned from German military bases

By Tony Paterson in Berlin

Germany has banned Tom Cruise from shooting scenes at military sites for his film about a plot to kill Adolf Hitler because the Hollywood actor is a member of the Church of Scientology.

Cruise was to play the part of Claus von Stauffenberg, a member of the German nobility who attempted to assassinate Hitler in July 1944. The film, entitled Valkyrie, is due to go on release next year and its makers planned to start shooting in Berlin next month.

However, Germany’s Defence Ministry formally banned the actor, who is also one of the movie’s producers, from filming at authentic military sites in the German capital which are central to the movie’s plot.

“The film-makers will not be allowed to film at German military sites if Count Stauffenberg is played by Tom Cruise, who has publicly professed to being a member of the Scientology cult,” Harald Kammerbauer, a Defence Ministry spokesman, said yesterday.

In a further remark which appeared to express utter disapproval at the choice of Tom Cruise for the part, Mr Kammerbauer said: “In general, the German armed forces have a special interest in the serious and authentic portrayal of the events of 20 July 1944 and Stauffenberg’s person.”

The German government usually prides itself on upholding artistic freedoms and normally maintains a position of neutrality when dealing with film projects.

However, the Church of Scientology is regarded with suspicion in Germany, where it is widely considered to be a cult that masquerades as a religion.

* Perhaps the Germans should dig a little deeper. They might find more cults that masquerade as a religion.

The organisation, which opened a European headquarters in Berlin this year, is kept under surveillance by German intelligence services.

Tom Cruise’s character, Claus von Stauffenberg, was opposed to the Nazis’ treatment of the Jews, despite being a German army officer. On the afternoon of 20 July 1944, he went to Hitler’s “Wolf’s Lair” headquarters in East Prussia and planted a briefcase bomb next to the Nazi leader. However, Hitler was only wounded in the attack. Stauffenberg was caught soon after and executed.

His family has not welcomed the decision to use Tom Cruise to play the part. Berthold Maria Schenk Graf von Stauffenberg, 72, von Stauffenberg’s son, dismissed the forthcoming film. “It is unpleasant for me that an avowed Scientologist will be playing my father,” he said. “I had hoped for a long time that the project was just a publicity stunt on the part of Cruise. Clearly that appears not to be the case.”

Cruise himself was not immediately available for comment.

* Moderate Muslims are breeding Islamic extremists, but it is rare that Islamic extremists breed moderate Muslims. Therefore, the US and other western governments are putting their “infidel” population at risk by allowing Muslims to live among us.

*

The Muslim world does not accept non-Muslim immigrants. In fact, it is becoming more homogenous as Islamic regimes drive out religious minorities or whittle them down through other means of attrition. Even Muslims who feel entitled to life in the West often decry the presence of foreigners in Muslim lands.

But if Muslim lands are for Muslims, then it is all the more reason for insisting that this is where they stay, particularly since the legacy of Islamic immigration into the West is becoming a series of unilateral concessions to appease Muslims that not only go unreciprocated, but are then the new foothold for even bolder demands.

Muslim immigration is a losing proposition for America. At best, it is an unnecessary risk that offers no comparable benefit. At worst, it is suicidal.

Muslims on Coney Island Ave. Brooklyn, NY

Are you aware that CAIR insists that any and all Muslims from around the world are automatically “entitled” to immigrate to America? FSM Contributing Editor Glen Reinsford makes compelling arguments on this issue. Is an ever growing Muslim population an asset or a liability for us?

Muslim Immigration: A Winning or Losing Proposition for America?

By Glen Reinsford

Pardon the crude analogy, but what if someone handed you a revolver with one bullet and five empty chambers and asked you to put it to your temple and squeeze the trigger? Would you indulge them?
If you are a sane person, then you would naturally decline the offer, regardless of the number of empty chambers. Even a one in a hundred chance of doing harm is hardly a reason, in and of itself, for taking an unnecessary risk.

Consider the similarities to Muslim immigration:

1)     In most cases, nothing bad will happen.
2)     In some cases, it will.
3)     The risk increases as the process continues.
4)     There is an utter pointlessness to the whole affair.

First, let’s concede that the majority of Muslim immigrants mean Americans no harm. They have their reasons for not wanting to live in Muslim countries and these aren’t hard to guess. Of the fifty-three Islamic nations on the planet, there is hardly a single one that isn’t characterized by some combination of debilitating corruption, economic blight, third-world standard of living, political repression, or an appalling human rights condition.

Unfortunately, however, more Muslims in America will inevitably result in a more Muslim America, which ultimately means having to deal with the problems that plague Muslim society. If there are tangible benefits that offset the added strain of trying to accommodate a religion that is very much at odds with Western liberal values (including freedom of conscience, social tolerance, democracy, and the equality of women), then they are not immediately apparent.

Even the Council on American-Islamic Relations, one of the most vocal advocates of unfettered Islamic immigration into America rarely bothers to try and make the case that non-Muslim citizens will benefit from an influx of those believing that Islam is meant to be the dominant political, religious and social system that Muhammad required it to be. Instead, CAIR merely implies that Muslims are entitled to America by virtue of the fact that the U.S. accepts other immigrants.

Beyond flirting with cultural catastrophe, there is also the loss of American lives resulting from the domestic terror attacks that will certainly escalate as the U.S. inexplicably imports a fifth column in a time of war.

A Pew Research poll released in May shows that one out of every four Muslims in America either supports al-Qaeda outright or is ambivalent about the terrorists that slaughtered 3,000 fellow citizens in the name of Allah just six short years ago. About the same percentage of younger Muslims also believe that suicide bombings can be justified in “defense of Islam.”

Support for terrorism isn’t just theoretical. The release of the study was sandwiched between news of a shooting rampage plot by Muslims against Fort Dix residents and a separate Fedayeen plot literally to blow up JFK airport in New York. It also follows the murder of five Americans at a Utah shopping mall by a Muslim teenager in February.

 Continued here…

…MSM covers up for her:

* Unscripted remarks about terror group not published by paper

Stuck on stupid with Condi:

The US State Department recognizes Hamas as a terrorist organization. However, to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice it is a “resistance movement.” What’s next, Condi? American aid for Hamas? Khaled Maashal in Washington?

Condoleezza Rice

By Aaron Klein
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com

JERUSALEM – U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice twice referred to Hamas as a “resistance movement” during a meeting with reporters from the New York Daily News earlier this month, but the newspaper did not report her remarks, WND has learned.

Rice’s interview is transcribed in full on the State Department website.

Rice’s statements mark the second documented time in recent months she called Hamas a “resistance movement” during unscripted chats with journalists.

Hamas is responsible for scores of suicide bombings, shooting attacks and rocket firings. It’s classified by the State Department as a terror organization. The group’s official charter calls for the murder of Jews and quotes widely from the anti-Semitic creed, the “Protocols of the Elders of Zion.”

During the interview June 8 with the editorial board of the Daily News, Rice was asked about the recent history of democratic elections in the Middle East resulting in the rise to power of terror groups, such as Hamas.

Story continues

What Rice should be reading:

Fitzgerald: The Israeli “occupation” and Rashid Khalidi

Hugh Fitzgerald provides context:

The word “occupation” has been accepted, foolishly, by too many in the West. It does not adequately describe Israel’s taking possession, because of its victory in the Six-Day War thrust upon it by Nasser and a runaway Egyptian military, of Gaza and “the West Bank.” (An aside: curious, isn’t it, that the topoynms “Judea” and “Samaria,” though they have been in use all over the Western world since Roman times, and certainly were used by Jesus and the first Christians, suddenly dropped out of use, and the vague placename invented by the Jordanians in 1949, “the West Bank,” was accepted and “Judea” and “Samaria” mocked as “Biblical names used only by Israel’s right-wing” — yet at the same time “Gaza,” a Biblical term for which the Egyptians did not find a replacement, continues to be unembarrassedly used by those in the West who, having no sense of history or logic, who would not be caught dead referring to “Judea” and “Samaria”?)

Israel is not an “occupier” in the sense in which the Germans were occupiers of Occupied France, or of Occupied Paris, or after the war, the Four Powers were in control of Occupied Vienna or Occupied Berlin. Israel has a much deeper, longer claim to those areas — which in the case of Gaza it may not wish to exercise for practical reasons. It is a legal claim based on the intent and terms of the Mandate for Palestine, which in turn is based on a historic and moral claim that the intelligent men who created the League of Nations, and the other intelligent men who staffed the Mandates Commission of that body, found convincing.

Of course, that was in the days before there was oil money from the Arabs sloshing about. The rewriting of history, Middle Eastern history, had not yet given rise to that phrase “the Arab world” which Aramco invented, and which consigned to nothingness both the large indigenous populations of Jews and Christians (Maronites, Assyrians, Chaldeans, Orthodox, Copts, and others) who lived in the Middle East and North Africa (now called “the Arab world”). Their lands were conquered, and they themselves were subjugated. Slowly, over the pressure of the dhimmi system and outright intermittent massacre and forced conversion, the vast indigenous non-Muslim populations were reduced — even as the Christians of Iraq and Gaza and the “West Bank” are being squeezed, harassed, murdered today.

Continue reading…

Fitzgerald rips Rice again… 

Again, she gropes for analogies, finds the wrong ones, and yet never seems troubled by them, never seems to ponder what might be wrong with them…

It is not Bush alone who is paying for her errors of understanding, judgment, and failures of imagination — errors that reinforce those of her admiring boss. It is all the soldiers in Iraq. It is the citizens at home. All of us. 

Giuliani equally deluded: Let’s not be fooled again, let’s help Fatah

Rudy says we must not get fooled again, and fall for someone like Arafat. So, he says…let’s aid Fatah. Hard-nosed and unfoolable as ever, eh, Rudy?

“Giuliani Calls for Increasing American Support for Fatah,” by Marc Santora for the New York Times (thanks to JW)

VIRGINIA BEACH, June 26 — Rudolph W. Giuliani addressed Israeli-Palestinian discord on Tuesday, saying it was pointless for the United States to negotiate with Hamas, the Islamic group that has seized control of the Gaza Strip, and that Washington should work with Egypt and Jordan to bolster Fatah and its control over the West Bank.
As he advocated active American engagement, Mr. Giuliani urged caution and broadly criticized the Clinton administration’s approach in the 1990s, trying to broker peace with Yasir Arafat, the Palestinian leader.

“Let’s not become like starry romantics like we were with Arafat, where he was leading us down the primrose path and we were helping him get the Nobel Peace Prize,” Mr. Giuliani said in a speech here at Regent University, which Pat Robertson, the evangelist, founded.

Setting out a position that largely tracked Bush administration policy and the positions of Egypt, Israel and Jordan, Mr. Giuliani suggested that the best course was to bolster Fatah, which Mr. Arafat controlled until he died and is now run by Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian president.

“Let’s see if we can’t get Jordan and Egypt to help us try and create something with Abbas in the West Bank,” Mr. Giuliani said.

Hey, great idea, Rudy. You may recall that Jordan ruled the West Bank from 1948 to 1967, and there was no Palestinian nationalist movement then. Now, why was that?

Read it all…

Rediscovering our backbones

There you go: Who said that two females are only worth half of a man?

A single Janet Albrechtsen proves that she can take down most of the leftards and half-assed girlie-men from the PC-right with one shot from the hip:

The West is now well versed in this Muslim drama. First act: enter Muslims claiming hurt feelings. Second act: enter Muslims issuing a death-to-Western-heathens diktat. Cue Pakistan’s Religious Affairs Minister Mohammed Ijaz-ul-Haq: “If someone exploded a bomb on his body he would be right to do so unless the British Government apologises and withdraws the sir title.” Meanwhile, Pakistani students burned effigies of the Queen and Rushdie chanting “kill him, kill him”.

It’s a routine that travels. Iranian leaders wept tears, claiming it was a clear sign of Islamophobia. Honouring a hated apostate would hurt the feelings of the Islamic community, said the foreign ministry spokesman Mohammed Ali Hosseini. The Headquarters for Honouring the Martyrs of Islam World Movement increased the bounty on Rushdie’s head.

There’s no point in arguing with a country complaining about hurt feelings while it promises to wipe out Israel or with its citizens who want to “bestow kisses on the hands of whomsoever is able to execute this apostate”. But it’s worth checking whether the protagonist in the third act of this horror play will stick to the script. That’s where the West capitulates, apologising for Western values in the name of protecting Muslim sensibilities. Values such as freedom of speech: the right to voice opinions that are offensive. And freedom of religion: the right to disagree without copping a fatwa.

In 2004, after Dutch filmmaker Theo Van Gogh was murdered for his movie, Submission, artist Chris Ripke reacted by painting a mural on a wall. It featured a dove (representing peace) with the words “thou shalt not kill” written in Dutch. The head of a nearby mosque complained to Rotterdam police that the mural was offensive and racist. Rotterdam police duly sent in city workers to remove the mural. When a message of peace is regarded as racist, you know Western values are just not what they used to be.

Last year when Muslims were offended by a bunch of silly Danish cartoons featuring the prophet Mohammed, some Muslims reacted by burning the Danish flag to the tune of bomb threats, boycotts and $14 million fatwas on the head of the cartoonists. The intimidation worked. Western leaders fell over themselves in the race to condemn the cartoons. Muslim feelings had to be spared such hurt. Many Most newspapers refused to publish the cartoons. A French editor was sacked for publishing them. The wankers from the Australian argued publishing them would add nothing to the debate.

With another chapter of Muslim intimidation unfolding over Rushdie’s gong, it is becoming increasingly clear this is a debate we have to have. Not only with Muslim countries. But also with those living in the West who openly reject Western values.

Read it all, its a good one…!

Not, in this view, “to coexist peacefully as equals with non-Muslims on an indefinite basis.”

More efforts to impede the anti-jihad resistance by playing on Western phobias about “bigotry”: “West funds elite unit to destroy Islam: hardliners,” by Mark Forbes for the Brisbane Herald via Jihad Watch

INDONESIAN Muslim hardliners have called for the Australian-backed anti-terrorism squad Detachment 88 to be abolished because they say it is financed and trained by foreign countries to destroy Islam.
Islamic leaders including the cleric Abu Bakar Bashir, the alleged former leader of the terrorist network Jemaah Islamiah, and lawyers for terrorist suspects recently arrested by the squad, made the demand at a press conference yesterday.

Throwing down the gauntlet to authorities after the capture of two JI leaders, Kholil Ridwan, of the Islamic Community Forum, said Detachment 88 was a US tool to “stigmatise Islam”.

“We call on the Indonesian Government to stop co-operation with the United States and its allies in the global war on terror,” Mr Ridwan said. “The United States’ war on terror, with the help of its sheriff, Australia, and deputy sheriff, Singapore, is a war against Islam.”

It most certainly is nothing of the kind. But this just shows that all the blather about the Religion of Peace, and all the efforts to emphasize that this is not a war against Islam, have accomplished nothing. We would have been much better off had Western leaders spoken forthrightly about this effort as a defense against the global jihad, and called upon peaceful Muslims to reject the ideology of the jihadists, instead of ignoring it and denying it exists.

Bashir denied terrorists existed in Indonesia, saying: “Those who did bombings, they are just doing counter-terrorism. They are holy warriors to defend Muslims terrorised in other countries.” The real terrorist was America, he said, though it was a mistake for bombers to target peaceful areas….
Dujana told CNN the group would continue its fight for Islamic rule but he wanted it to limit civilian casualties….

A team of 13 lawyers will today file a lawsuit demanding Detachment 88 be disbanded on behalf of Muslim activists who say they have been wrongfully arrested. “We don’t want any more arrests taking place,” said one lawyer, Munarman.

He said the unit was torturing holy warriors who were trying to defend Islam.

Bashir warned all Muslims against helping the squad. “We know that Detachment 88 is a tool of Americans and Jews and any Muslim who helps infidels is an apostate,” he said….

All Muslims should fight to create an Islamic state, he urged. “There are only two options for Muslims; to win or to die.”

On September 17, 2001, six days after the worst Islamic terror attacks ever on US soil, President Bush stood next to CAIR’s Nihad Awad at the Islamic Center of Washington DC, and pronounced ‘Islam is Peace’.

Get ready people, because the last speech took our shoes and socks off:

Nihad Awad is second from the right. Here’s an excerpt from the President’s speech:

The face of terror is not the true faith of Islam. That’s not what Islam is all about. Islam is peace. These terrorists don’t represent peace. They represent evil and war. …

Women who cover their heads in this country must feel comfortable going outside their homes. Moms who wear cover must be not intimidated in America. That’s not the America I know. That’s not the America I value.

I’ve been told that some fear to leave; some don’t want to go shopping for their families; some don’t want to go about their ordinary daily routines because, by wearing cover, they’re afraid they’ll be intimidated. That should not and that will not stand in America.

* Spoken by GW Bush, dislexic child of privilege, clueless about history and politics, and most of all ignorant,willfully stupid about Islam.

There is more, read it if you can stand it…

In other news:

Fareed Zakaria from Newsweek is telling us to go back to sleep:

True or False: We Are Losing The War Against Radical Islam

July 2-9, 2007 issue – Republicans and Democrats, conservatives and liberals, are strangely united on one point: the threat from global jihad is growing dangerously. Republicans use that belief as a way to remind the American people that we live in a fearsome world—and need tough leaders to protect us. For Democrats, the same idea fortifies their claim that the Bush administration has failed to deal with a crucial threat—and that we need a new national-security team. Terrorism experts and the media add to this chorus, consciously or not, because they have an incentive to paint a grim picture: bad news sells. Amid the clamor, it is difficult to figure out what is actually going on.

More…

Muslim Speaker at Church: ‘Touch Mohammed and There Will Be Riots’

Interesting stuff from a so-called ‘interfaith-outreach’ program:

Here’s an interesting report on an “interfaith outreach” program at a church featuring a Muslim speaker; ever notice that these “outreach” programs only seem to reach in one direction? Muslim Speaks at My Church, Calls Me “Naive.” Also “Tough.”

I asked him about Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the former Dutch MP, former Muslim and self-described “Muslim atheist” who left Holland after being evicted from her apartment so that her neighbors would be safer from Islamic threats to her life. He responded that her situation is “contrived,” that she’s not in any danger, “it’s all to sell books,” “you watch,” she’ll live long and make lots of money. And on further reflection, he decided that I am “naive” for believing her tales. Who would bother with her, he asked rhetorically.

Naturally I then asked about the murder of van Gogh. Our speaker’s response: “An aberration.” Surely the stated target for murder of even an “aberration,” as Ms. Ali was targeted by van Gogh’s killer and has been publicly marked for death in the last three months, must be in danger? No, it’s all contrived.

But how can it be contrived or an aberration when so many rioted over the Danish cartoons? His answer: “Touch Mohammed and there will be riots.”

The burning of the profit Muhammed Update

Bush: Stuck on Stupid

Bush wants Muslims to denounce terror

* Forrest Gump: Stupid is as stupid does

Gee, that would be nice, now nearly six years after 9/11. But it isn’t nearly enough. Muslim leaders of all kinds have already denounced “terror.” The problem here is that no one is defining these terms; rather, everyone is assuming that we all mean the same things by them whenever we use them. By “terror” does one mean “an unprovoked attack against innocent civilians with the intention of causing undifferentiated mayhem”? Muslim leaders will have no problem denouncing that. But if one means “actions carried out in order to advance the program of Islamic supremacism that advances through both nonviolent and violent jihad,” that is quite another matter. No one is being specific enough. No one is speaking about “the jihad ideology of Islamic supremacism” and asking Muslims to denounce that. No one dares.

“Bush wants Muslims to denounce terror,” by Jon Ward for the Washington Times (thanks to JW):

THE WASHINGTON TIMES – President Bush will challenge Muslim leaders to denounce acts of terrorism committed in the name of Islam during a speech today at the same Washington mosque he visited days after the September 11 attacks.
Mr. Bush will commemorate the 50th anniversary of the Islamic Center of Washington, a half-century after President Eisenhower spoke at its dedication on June 28, 1957.

The president’s speech will focus on “the importance of religious freedom in the Middle East, and how securing that freedom requires Muslims to stand up to extremists,” according to a White House briefing document released yesterday evening.

Mr. Bush also will thank Muslim leaders who have spoken out against terrorism.

Although the president will emphasize that “the face of terrorism is not the true face of Islam,” he brings a different message with him to the mosque than he did six years ago.

On Sept. 17, 2001, Mr. Bush, seeking to prevent acts of retaliation against American Muslims after the September 11 attacks, said, “Islam is peace.”

But since then, the president’s rhetoric about Islam and terrorism has shifted. In 2005, he spoke about “Islamic radicalism,” specifying that the enemy in the war on terrorism is a certain brand of Islam.

James Phillips, a Middle East analyst at the Heritage Foundation, said Mr. Bush was distinguishing between “an ideology and a religion.”

Great. But this is an artificial distinction, imposed from without, and having no basis in traditional Islam.

Read it all

After Beirut woman and Green Helmet Man the MSM continues to manufacture the news for you:

* What’s amazing is that MSM is being duped again by islamist propaganda artists and don’t even recognize it! These are scripted and choreographed theatrical productions, not legitimate
demonstrations…

If you follow the link, you will be treated to some scenes from the strenuous life of a professional Muslim protester in the Kashmiri city of Srinagar. Over the last few years, there have been innumerable opportunities for him to demonstrate his piety and his pissed-offness. And the cameras have been there for him every time. Is it a fatwah? Is it a copy of the Quran allegedly down the gurgler at Guantanamo? Is it some cartoon in Denmark? Time for Rage Boy to step in and for his visage to impress the rest of the world with the depth and strength of Islamist emotion.