http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/02/the_jihad_against_bengali.html Every February 21, a little-known observance occurs: International Mother Language Day. Created in 2000 to promote and encourage the diversity of language, this benign and idealistic-sounding commemoration actually marks a bloody day in 1952 when an Islamic minority shot and killed university students protesting the imposition of an Islamic language, Urdu, on a Bengali-speaking […]
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/02/24/obama-administration-sees-rio-20-summit-in-june-as-festival-global-greenness/?test=latestnews#ixzz1nLXSm5yx
With gasoline prices spiking, a presidential election looming in the fall, and recent failures at reaching sweeping global agreements on environmental policy, the Obama Administration is heading into this summer’s Rio + 20 Conference on Sustainable Development with modest goals, looking for areas of broad agreement and civic engagement that can be touted as populist environmental progress.
“We consider it an aspirational meeting,” a U.S. State Department spokesman told Fox News.
“This is a good, positive meeting,” in which “we go forward in as pragmatic a way as possible.”
The apparent aim is to turn the June Rio + 20 Conference –a nostalgic reference to the last environmental summit Rio de Janeiro hosted in 1992– into a festival of global greenness, in order to create the widest possible sense of participation around the planet. In short, something like a global Green Woodstock, this time enhanced on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube.
Nevertheless, the long-term goal of Rio + 20 remains the same: to push the world as fast as possible toward a drastic reordering of social, economic and industrial policies, reorganize global distribution of food and water supplies, and engage in mammoth international financing exercises and new exercises in “global governance” to make the whole scheme work.
http://www.breitbart.com/print.php?id=D9T4129G0&show_article=1
Al-Qaida in Iraq warns of looming war with Shiites By LARA JAKES
BAGHDAD (AP) – A spokesman for al-Qaida in Iraq said Friday that a Sunni Muslim war against Shiites in Iraq is inevitable and threatened relentless waves of attacks like the one a day earlier that killed at least 55 people.
The statement by Abu Muhammad al-Adnani, spokesman for the al-Qaeda-linked Islamic State of Iraq, tap into fears in Iraq and abroad about the country’s future stability and the government’s ability to protect its citizens following the withdrawal of the last U.S. troops in December.
Despite deadly assaults against the Shiite-led government’s security forces and Shiite pilgrims, there has been no indication that Iraq is returning to the sectarian bloodshed of 2006 and 2007 that pushed the nation to the brink of civil war. But Iraqis are increasingly frustrated with the government’s failure to prevent attacks that continue to kill scores of Iraqis every month.
http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/
“Rights do not come from the exercise of government power, but from the restraint of government power. Once an infrastructure is created to redistribute positive outcomes, the only true beneficiaries of that infrastructure will be the organizers and the administrators. Even that system will be built to fail because the administrations only fully benefit from the system when it does not work properly. To the extent that it works properly the administrations will always be on the lookout for more excuses to justify the expansion of their power. More groups to protect. More civil rights to safeguard. Until no one has any rights at all.”
The civil rights movement is a success story, so much so that any and every movement has found that it can borrow the narrative and tactics of it to ram through whatever measures it likes. And so we come to the year 2012 where civil rights means men in dresses having the right to use the ladies room and the right of terrorist groups to be free from police scrutiny– among many other equally insane “rights”.
http://news.yahoo.com/blast-rocks-nigerian-church-volatile-jos-2-killed-084606745.html
JOS, Nigeria (Reuters) – A suicide bomber drove a car packed with explosives into a church in the central Nigerian city of Jos on Sunday, killing two people and wounding 38, the emergency services said, and angry Christian youths reacted by beating two Muslims to death.
A Reuters reporter at the scene of the blast saw two bodies from the explosion, which police said included the suicide bomber, who had rammed his Volkswagen into the church before detonating explosives.
“NEMA (the National Emergency Management Agency) confirms three dead in suspected suicide car explosion in Jos today, including the bomber whose body was shredded to pieces,” NEMA spokesman Yushua Shuaib said by text message.
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/291963/be-or-not-be-muslim-andrew-c-mccarthy
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/291964/does-judge-martins-not-being-muslim-change-bias-argument-andrew-c-mccarthy
“IS HE IS OR IS HE AIN’T”…TO PARAPHRASE AN OLD SONG….THE POINT IS HE DISMISSED AN OPEN AND SHUT AND ADMITTED CASE OF ASSAULT BY A MUSLIM… PLEASE READ BOTH COLUMNS….RSK
Mark Martin is the Pennsylvania state court judge I referred to in two posts (here and here) yesterday — the jurist who, on sharia grounds, dismissed a harassment case against a Muslim man who assaulted an activist atheist whose “Zombie Mohammed” costume the assailant found insulting to Islam.
I reported that Judge Martin is a convert to Islam, based on a published report corroborated by the audio of the court proceeding (quoted in the published report), in which the judge seemed to assert (while lecturing the victim about his purported provocation of the assault), “I’m a Muslim, I find it offensive.”
A member of the judge’s staff yesterday stated without equivocation that Martin is not a Muslim. So why did he say otherwise in the court proceeding? I now believe, though I’m not a hundred percent certain, that he probably did not say otherwise.
The audio sounds clear enough on YouTube streamed through your computer. But I’ve now listened to the sentence in question many times, wearing a good set of earphones with the volume amplified a bit. Based on that, it’s entirely possible that what Martin said was, “F’Im a Muslim, I’d find it offensive” — as in If I were a Muslim, I would find it offensive. The “F” sound before the word “I’m” is almost inaudible, even with good equipment; the “d” sound that changes “I” to “I’d” is more perceptible, but you have to work a bit to hear it.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4194551,00.html
Soldiers nearly lynched by Arabs in Haifa Arab Israelis viciously assault two soldiers in civilian clothing early Saturday; one victim’s head ‘engraved’ by knife-wielding assailant; attackers use bats, rocks
THESE HOODLUMS ARE EMBOLDENED BY THE BOYCOTT AND DIVEST GROUPIES AND THEIR “APARTHEID” PROPAGANDA. …RSK
Two IDF soldiers in civilian clothing were viciously attacked by a group of Arab-Israeli men early Saturday near Haifa’s Rambam Hospital, with guards deployed in the area narrowly averting a lynching.
Police forces detained four suspects on suspicion of taking part in the assault and expect to make more arrests.
The uncle of one of the soldiers said the assailants asked the victims whether they were Jewish before attacking them.
“They beat the hell out of them, using bats and stones, and resorting to kicks,” the uncle said.
http://mideasttruth.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=10881
An historical twist–to say the least… Towards the end of the 19th century, France accused an assimilated Jewish captain in the army of espionage. It was later proven that Alfred Dreyfus was innocent and shamelessly framed. Much later, after disgraced, sent to Devil’s Island, etc., he was finally exonerated.
The Dreyfus Trial became the cause celebre of the era, and the prominent writer, Emile Zola, wrote his open letter, J’Accuse (“I Accuse”), which was published in L’Aurore on January 13, 1898.
Among those covering the trial after 1894 was another assimilated Jew, Theodore Herzl, from Hungary.
While the religiously-inspired, age-old anti-Semitism of the masses was regrettable (but understandable) to such men, it was the virulent Jew-hatred which remained even after the so-called Age of Enlightenment among the educated classes which became the most troubling.
The rise to power of such folks as the anti-Semitic demagogue, Karl Lueger, in Vienna in 1895 combined with the Parisian Dreyfus Affair to convince Herzl that there was no hope left for the Jew outside of the resurrection of Israel. Herzl soon wrote Der Judenstaat–the Jewish State–in response, and while others before him wrote of such things as well (Dr. Leo Pinsker’s Auto-Emancipation is especially haunting), Herzl became known as the Father of modern political Zionism as a result.
Jewish Self-Hatred and the Olive Tree Initiative Posted By Janet Levy http://pjmedia.com/blog/jewish-self-hatred-and-the-olive-tree-initiative/ The phenomenon of Jews embracing the hateful and mendacious rhetoric of those committed to their annihilation has been so commonplace throughout history that a body of psychological literature on “Jewish self-hatred” emerged decades ago. This maladaptive response to antisemitism has been compared to the […]
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/291919/perversion-rights-mark-steyn
They’re now gifts that a benign king graciously showers upon his subjects.
CNN’s John King did his best the other night, producing a question from one of his viewers:
“Since birth control is the latest hot topic, which candidate believes in birth control, and if not, why?”
To their credit, no Republican candidate was inclined to accept the premise of the question. King might have done better to put the issue to Danica Patrick. For some reason, Michelle Fields of theDaily Caller sought the views of the NASCAR driver and Sports Illustrated swimwear model about “the Obama administration’s dictate that religious employers provide health-care plans that cover contraceptives.” Miss Patrick, a practicing Catholic, gave the perfect citizen’s response for the Age of Obama:
“I leave it up to the government to make good decisions for Americans.”
That’s the real “hot topic” here — whether a majority of citizens, in America as elsewhere in the West, is willing to “leave it up to the government” to make decisions on everything that matters. On the face of it, the choice between the Obama administration and the Catholic Church should not be a tough one. On the one hand, we have the plain language of the First Amendment as stated in the U.S. Constitution since 1791: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”
