Archive for September, 2006

Surprise! Moral movies draw 7 times the fans

Saturday, September 30th, 2006

What?? You mean movie fans want to watch good movies with their kids instead of watching movies filled with smut? Go figure.

A new study is confirming that if you want to make money in the movie business, get out your Bible and read the values it teaches.
According to the report from Ted Baehr, publisher of MovieGuide, Hollywood movies with strong Christian worldviews make two to seven times as much money as those flicks with explicit sex and nudity.
The assessment looked at nearly 2,700 of the top movies at the box office from 1996 through 2005, and said while pundits and advertisers like to believe that sex and nudity sells, nothing could be further from the truth.
“For example, in 2005, movies with a very strong Christian worldview, such as ‘The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe,’ averaged nearly $65 million at the box office, but movies with extreme, explicit sex and nudity, such as ‘Sin City,’ and ‘Inside Deep Throat,’ only averaged $11.2 million or $11.7 million,” the report said.
Movies with less nudity but still strong sexual content, such as “Wedding Crashers,” and “The Ice Harvest,” fared better, but still averaged less than $22 million in 2005, said MovieGuide, which describes itself as a Christian “ministry dedicated to redeeming the values of the mass media according to biblical principles, by influencing entertainment industry executives and helping families make wise media choices.”
As the number of obscenities and profanities rose, the income dropped, it said.
The report said for one reporting period the highest average return for movies with very strong foul language, sex and nudity content was only $27.7 million, and the lowest average for a clean movie was $20.6 million.
The full range for the year in which “The Passion of the Christ” appeared was from $20.6 million to $106.3 million for movies with strong Christian worldviews. For the typically non-family-oriented flick the full range was from $6.3 million to $27.7 million.
“The vast majority of moviegoers, which includes the 141 million Americans who go to church every week, prefer positive Christian movies with morally uplifting content,” the report said.
“If Hollywood executives and filmmakers want to make more money at the box office, they should make more movies that reflect a very strong Christian worldview with very strong moral values,” the study said.
The assessment divided movies into four categories: very strong Christian and redemptive worldview, movies with extreme foul language, movies with strong graphic sexual immorality, and movies with strong explicit nudity.
In that order, 2005 movies averaged $65 million, $24 million, $11 million and $11 million at the box office. The Christian worldview was at $106 million in 2004, but the other three categories dropped to $23 million, $6 million and $6 million.
Results for the latter three categories remained reasonably static over the decade of observation, but the movies with strong moral content have continued to rise from the first year’s $32 million average, the report said.

Original Link.

Bible Verses In Veggie Tales Offensive to NBC, but Madonna on Cross Isn’t

Saturday, September 30th, 2006

Here is the text of an AFA action alert email I received.

Dear Steve,
NBC anti-Christian bigotry continues. This time NBC censored Bible verses and expressions of Christian love from the children’s cartoon Veggie Tales being shown Saturday mornings on NBC.
NBC says comments such as “God made you special and He loves you very much” were offensive and censored them from the show.
In response to the outrage over the allegations that NBC was ordering the removal of any references to God and the Bible from the animated series, the network first issued a flat denial. As reported in Broadcasting & Cable, NBC said they had to “clip off the beginning and ending tags, which are Bible verses, but they were also arguably the easiest cut to make.”
The creator of Veggie Tales, Phil Vischer, said NBC’s excuse for censoring the Bible verses was not true. Vischer said, “Well, that’s kinda funny, because as the guy required to do all the editing, I know that statement is false…The show wasn’t too long, it was too Christian. The show was already cut down to the proper length, so timing had nothing to do with it.”
NBC then backpeddled: “NBC is committed to the positive messages and universal values of Veggie Tales. Our goal is to reach as broad an audience as possible with these positive messages while being careful not to advocate any one religious point of view.” Evidently NBC considers not being truthful as one of their “universal values.”
Vischer said had he known how much censorship NBC would exercise, he would not have signed on for the network deal.
Censored were comments such as: “Calm down. The Bible says we should love our enemies.” And “the Bible says Samson got his strength from God. And God can give us strength, too.”
NBC says using Bible verses or referring to God is offensive to some non-Christians. But NBC doesn’t hesitate to offend Christians by showing Madonna mocking the crucifixion of Christ. Neither do not mind offending Christians in their new program Studio 60 with a segment called Crazy Christians. (Please read the review.)
This will seem a strong statement, and it is: The real reason the religious content is being censored is that the networks are run by people who have an anti-Christian bias. I noticed this anti-Christian bigotry and spoke out against it over 25 years ago. I’m sorry if someone thinks that is too harsh, but I must speak the truth as God leads me to see the truth. (Please click here to read excerpts from a speech I gave to a group of TV officials in September, 1981—25 years ago.)

Take Action
1. Send an email to NBC asking them to end their bias against Christians and stop censoring the references to God’s love in Veggie Tales.
2. Forward this to friends and family so they will know of NBC’s anti-Christian bias. NBC is owned by General Electric.
3. Print out the AFA Pass Along sheet and distribute at your Sunday School class and church. Ask your pastor to encourage members to send an email.

Link to AFA.

The Quelling of Free Speech at the Hands of Islam

Friday, September 29th, 2006

This is a long post, but please take the time to read it, as it contains several different points of common interest.
The Islamic world continues to threaten violence against anyone who challenges any aspect of their faith system. Free speech in Islamic controlled countries is practically nonexistent, while the media in European countries, with large Islamic populations, pull articles critical of Islam and apologize for any supposed slights against Islam.
Islamic Terrorist reside, alive and well, in all these places, as they continue on a course, proven effective by the appeasers, of threatening, violence and death to all who oppose them.

Three European newspapers banned for “offending Islam”

Reporters Without Borders today condemned the Egyptian government’s decision yesterday to ban the sale of three recent issues of European newspapers containing articles which it considered “offensive to Islam.”
“Some people may indeed have felt offended by these articles but censorship is never an acceptable response,” the press freedom organisation said. “It is up to readers to form their own opinions and to have a debate about them, if they want. But it is not the job of the authorities to decide which information may or may not be made available to the public.”
Information minister Anas Al-Fekki issued a decree banning the sale of the 19 September issue of the French daily Le Figaro, the 16 September issue of the German daily Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung and the latest issue of the London-based Guardian Weekly.
Le Figaro’s 19 September issue had already been banned in Tunisia on the same grounds. It contained an op-ed piece by philosopher Robert Redeker headlined: “What must the free world do in the face of Islamist intimidation?”
The ban on the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung was prompted by an article in its cultural supplement on Islam and the recent controversy about Pope Benedict’s comments.

Teacher in hiding after attacking Islam

A French philosophy teacher has gone into hiding under police protection after receiving death threats for an article he wrote attacking Islam and the Prophet Mohammed.
The teacher, Robert Redeker, was writing in response to the angry reactions around the Islamic world to a lecture by Pope Benedict XVI two weeks ago, in which he drew a link between Islam and violence.
His article, describing the Koran as “a book of incredible violence”, sparked death threats against Mr Redeker, and fuelled fears of rising tensions between supporters of free speech in secular western societies and their resident Muslim populations.
These concerns led to the removal of a controversial Mozart opera from the programme of Berlin’s Deutsche Opera this week because of fears the show, adapted to include a scene showing the Prophet Mohammed’s severed head on stage, would be targeted by Islamic extremists.
Dominique de Villepin, France’s prime minister, asked about the death threats against Mr Redeker on French radio, said: “It’s unacceptable and shows that we are living in a dangerous world, too often intolerant, and the extent we must be vigilant to have total respect of others in our society.”
Le Figaro on Friday published a front page editorial declaring: “We condemn as resolutely as possible the serious attack on the freedom of thought and the freedom of speech that this affair has provoked.”
Mr Redeker’s article, entitled “Faced with Islamic intimidation, what should the free world do?” was published in Le Figaro on September 19. In it, he attacked the Prophet Mohammed, saying: “Pitiless war leader, pillager, butcher of Jews and polygamous, this is how Mohammed is revealed by the Koran.” Tunisia and Egypt banned the issue containing the article.
Mr Redeker, who has not returned to his class in Saint-Orens-de-Gameville, a village near Toulouse in south-west France, since his article was published, claims to have received letters saying an order to kill him had been signed and his would-be assassins knew his address.
The philosophy teacher, who has earned a reputation for his outspoken anti-Islam views, complained he had become “homeless in the French republic, while all I did was exercise my constitutional right to freely express my opinion on a religion.”
However, he received only partial support from his boss, Gilles de Robien, education minister, who declared his “solidarity” with Mr Redeker, but argued that “a public employee should be prudent and moderate in all circumstances.”
Dailil Boubakeur, the moderate head of the French Muslim Council, condemned the death threats. “They are not Muslims threatening him, they are extremists, radicals. We leave them to take responsiblity for their threats, they do not represent us,” he said.
But one of Mr Boubakeur’s advisors told the Financial Times that Mr Redeker had a reputation for being “ideologically committed” to the theory of a clash of civilisations between Islam and the west.
As French state schools are part of the domain of the secular state, they are meant to be free of all religious influence. This concept led to France’s controversial ban on students wearing visible religious symbols, including the hijab, or Islamic headscarf.

Here is the English translation of Robert Redeker’s article:

What should the free world do while facing Islamist intimidation?

The reactions caused by Benedict XVI’s analysis of Islam and violence highlight the underhanded maneuver carried out by Islam to stifle what the West values more than anything, and which does not exist in any Moslem country: freedom of thought and expression.
Islam tries to impose its rules on Europe : opening of public swimming pools at certain hours reserved exclusively for women, ban on caricaturing this religion, demands for special diets for Muslim children in school cafeterias, struggle to impose the veil at school, accusations of Islamophobia against free spirits.
How can one explain the ban on the wearing thongs on Paris-Beaches* this summer? The reasoning put forth was bizarre: women wering thongs would risk “disturbing the peace”. Did this mean that bands of frustrated youths would become violent while being offended by displays of beauty? Or were the authorities scared of Islamist demonstrations by virtue squads near Paris-Beaches?
However, the authorization of the veil on the street is more disturbing to public peace than wearing a thong, because it invites complaints against the upholding the oppression of women .This ban represents an Islamization of sensibilities in France, a more or less conscious submission to the diktats of Islam. At the very least it is the result of the insidious Muslim pressure on the minds: even those who protested the introduction of a “Jean Paul II Square” in Paris would not be opposed to the construction of mosques. Islam is trying to force Europe to yield to its vision of humanity.
As in the past with Communism, the West finds itself under ideological watch. Islam presents itself, like defunct Communism, as an alternative to the Western world. In the way of Communism before it, Islam, to conquer spirits, plays on a sensitive string. It prides itself on a legitimacy which troubles Western conscience, which is attentive to others: it claims to be the voice of the oppressed of the planet. Yesterday, the voice of the poor supposedly came from Moscow, today it originates in Mecca! Again, today, western intellectuals incarnate the eye of the Koran, as they have incarnated the eye of Moscow. They now excommunicate people because of Islamophobia, as they did before because of anti-communism.
This opening to others, specific to the West, is a secularization of Christianity that can be summarized thus:the other person must come before myself. The Westerner, heir to Christianity, is the that exposes his soul bare. He runs the risk of being seen as weak. With the same ardor as Communism, Islam treats generosity, broadmindedness, tolerance, gentleness, freedom of women and of manners, democratic values, as marks of decadence. They are weaknesses that it seeks to exploit, by means of useful idiots, self-rigtheous consciences drowning in nice feelings, in order to impose the Koranic order on the Western world itself.
The Koran is a book of unparalleled violence. Maxime Rodinson states, in Encyclopedia Universalis, some truths that in France are as significant as they are taboo. On one hand: “Mohammed revealed in Medina unsuspected qualities as political leader and military chief (…) He resorted to private war, by then a prevalent custom in Arabia (….) Mohammed soon sent small groups of partisans to attack the Meccan caravans, thus punishing his unbelieving compatriots and simultaneously acquiring the booty of a wealthy man.”
There is more: “Mohammed profited from this success by eradicating the Jewish tribe which resided in Medina, the Quarayza, whom he accused of suspect behaviour.” And: “After the death of Khadija, he married a widow, a good housewife, called Sawda, and in addition to the little Aisha, barely ten years old. His erotic predilections, held in check for a long time, led him to ten simultaneous marriages .”
A merciless war chief, plunderer, slaughterer of Jews and a polygamist, such is the man revealed through the Koran.
Of , the Catholic church is not above reproach. Its history is strewn with dark pages, for which it has officially repentaed. The Inquisition, the hounding of witches, the execution of the philosophers Giordano Bruno and Vanini, those wrong-thinking Epicureans, in the 18th century the execution of the knight of La Barre for impiety, do not plead in the church’s favor. But what differentiates Christianity from Islam is obvious: it is always possible to go back to true evangelical values, the peaceful character of Jesus as opposed to the deviations of the Church.
None of the faults of the Church have their roots in the Gospel. Jesus is non-violent. Going back to Jesus is akin to forswear the excesses of the Church. Going back to Mahomet, to the conbtrary, reinforces hate and violence. Jesus is a master of love, Mahomet is a master of hatred.
The stoning of Satan, each year in Mecca, is not only an obsolete superstition. It not only sets the stage for a hysterical crowd flirting with barbarity. Its importis anthropological. Here is a rite, which each Muslim is invited to submit to, that emphasizes violence as a sacred duty in the very heart of the believer.
This stoning, accompanied each year by the acciedental trampling to death of some of the believers, sometimes up to several hundreds, is a rite that feeds archaic violence.
Instead of getting rid of this archaic violence, and thus imitating Judaism and Christianity (Judaism starts when it abandons human sacrifice, and enters civilization; Christianity transforms sacrifice through the Eucharist), Islam builds a nest for this violence, where it will incubate. Whereas Judaism and Christianity are religions whose rites spurn violence, by delegitimizing it, Islam is a religion that exalts violence and hatred in its everyday rites and sacred book.
Hatred and violence dwell in the book with which every Muslim is brought up, the Koran. As in the Cold War, where violence and intimidation were the methods used by an ideology hell bent on hegemony, so today Islam tries to put its leaden mantel all over the world. Benedict XVI’s cruel experience is testimony to this. Nowadays, the West has to be called the “free world” in comparison to the Muslim world; likewise, the enemies of the “free world”, the zealous bureaucrats of the Koran’s vision, swarm in the very center of the frre World.

Link to Le Figaro.

Teacher who attacked Islam: ‘alone and abandoned’

Robert Redeker, 52, is receiving round-the-clock police protection and changing addresses every two days, after publishing an article describing the Koran as a “book of extraordinary violence” and Islam as “a religion which … exalts violence and hate”.
He told i-TV television he had received several e-mail threats targeting himself and his wife and three children, and that his photograph and address were available on several Islamist Internet sites.
“There is a very clear map of how to get to my home, with the words: ‘This pig must have his head cut off’,” he said.

Read the rest of the article.

Hat Tip: Michelle Malkin.

And I say to the Islamic Terrorist:
“Lan astaslem!!!”
“I will not submit!!!”


Lan astaslem, I will not Submit

California Governor Vetoes Two More ‘Gay Agenda’ Bills

Friday, September 29th, 2006

Well done Folks!! You let Gov. Schwarzenegger know what you thought and he listened.

(CNSNews.com) – California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has vetoed all three “sexual indoctrination” bills passed earlier this year.
Conservative activists said Schwarzenegger was responding to election-year pressure from “irate parents and grandparents.” Advocates for homosexuality said the veto leaves California students “vulnerable to bias and intimidation based on sexual orientation and gender identity.”
Late Thursday, Schwarzenegger vetoed Assembly Bill 606, which would have required that state funds be withheld from any school district that does not adopt a “model policy” prohibiting discrimination and harassment based on sexual orientation and gender identity.
Critics say the bill would have forced schools to promote transsexuality, bisexuality, and homosexuality on school campuses. Supporters called it the “Safe School Act,” and they said AB 606 — in addition to creating a “model anti-discrimination and harassment policy for school districts” — would have required schools to track and document all bias-related complaints brought by students.
AB 1056, also vetoed on Thursday, would have allocated special funds for a Tolerance Education Pilot Program to teach kids about “tolerance and intergroup relations,” including “actual or perceived gender.”
“We thank God that children in California public schools will be protected from this direct assault for one more year,” said Randy Thomasson, president of the Campaign for Children and Families (CCF), a conservative, pro-family organization.
“The Democrat politicians and teacher unions are relentlessly pushing to sexually indoctrinate kids. Schwarzenegger has delayed them for now.”
In his veto messages, Schwarzenegger said he vetoed AB 606 because it was “irresponsible” to create a new state mandate on schools, and he noted that existing laws already deal with discrimination and harassment in the schools.
The governor said he vetoed AB 1056 because it duplicated current efforts to provide “more avenues to teach about tolerance and human rights.”
Earlier this month, Schwarzenegger vetoed SB 1437, which would have changed school textbooks to require positive portrayals of transsexuality, bisexuality, and homosexuality.
The Campaign for Children and Families thanked everyone who called and wrote to the governor. “Cherish the victory and pray to God that these sexual indoctrination bills never, ever return,” Thomasson said.

Original Link.

Survivor of Jihad Issues Challenge to Muslim-Americans

Friday, September 29th, 2006

I have said often that it’s time for the moderate Muslim to rise up and be heard. The silence is deafening. Their either are no moderate Muslims, or they are too scared of the extremist Muslims to air their ideas in public.

(CNSNews.com) – A survivor of Islamic Jihad in the 1970s is challenging Muslim Americans who reject radical teachings to “raise their voices” and to hold demonstrations in public venues across the country denouncing violent behavior.
Brigitte Gabriel is a journalist and news producer who said she had first-hand experience with militant Muslims as a teenager living in Lebanon. The Jihad launched against Christians in Lebanon in 1975 and its relevance to contemporary politics was the focus of Gabriel’s talk at the Heritage Foundation on Wednesday.
She took the opportunity to call on moderate Muslims in the U.S. to take better advantage of the constitutional freedoms that are not available to like-minded moderates in the Middle East.
“This is the only country in the world where they (moderate Muslims) can march in the streets, where they can demonstrate and speak out without being intimidated by radicals. I can understand why they cannot do it in places like Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Libya, Syria and Lebanon,” Gabriel said. “But there is no excuse why Muslims in the U.S. cannot take to the streets and rally and send a message to the radicals in the Middle East.”
That message from American-Muslims, Garbriel continued, should include an unambiguous proclamation of patriotism. “Where are their voices?” Gabriel asked audience members. “They should say we are Americans first, if you kill one of us, you kill all of us.”
Gabriel said she could identify only one American-Muslim who has tried to organize the demonstrations she believes are necessary. Gabriel said Kamal Nawash, president of the Free Muslims Coalition, was opposed by other Muslim organizations when he sought support for organizing anti-terrorism rallies in Washington D.C., last year.
Those Muslims who reject extremism, but choose to remain silent are repeating some of the worst mistakes in history, Gabriel told listeners. She also said Americans must “wake up” and come to terms with the “barbaric” nature of the enemy they face before “Islamo-fascism” can be defeated.
She accused the news media of doing the American public a disservice when it failed to show footage of the beheading of Daniel Pearl and Nick Berg, victims of Muslim terrorists.
While she acknowledged that the majority of Muslim Americans are peaceful, Gabriel said she feels that they do not express themselves with as much energy and vigor as their more radical counterparts. She is particularly concerned about the pro-Hizballah demonstrations held in Dearborn, Mich.
“They were free to demonstrate in our country in support of Hizballah and against the United States of America,” she said. “Yet, we haven’t seen this same passion come out of moderates to defend America.”

Original Link.

New Study Shows Pro-Choicers More Likely to Spread Violence

Friday, September 29th, 2006

This study may have some credence. What I do know to be true, and a simple Google seach of images will prove it, is that generally, Pro-Life demonstrators behave better then Abortion Supporter demonstrators. Before you start emailing me, please remember that I said “generally”. There are some demonstraotrs for Pro-Life who don’t know how to handle themselves in an adult manner.
But as a whole, Pro-Life supporters tend to be less likely to start a problem.
Now with that said, I also want to head off the people who are going to point to the abortion clinic bombers. Understand this:
Anyone who resorts to violence, using God as justification, is NOT following the teachings and Spirit of Jesus Christ.

(AgapePress) – A new research project is raising serious doubt about claims from abortion supporters who say pro-lifers are violent people. The study suggests that, despite their assertions to the contrary, pro-choicers may be the more frequent perpetrators of violence.
Throughout the abortion debate in America, pro-abortion activists have accused pro-lifers of spreading violence; however, Human Life International’s senior analyst, Brian Clowes, has just completed a project that suggests the complete opposite is the case. “Seven murders are carried out by so called pro-life people in the time period 1993 to 1998,” he notes, “and yet we’ve documented over 500 murders done by people who are pro-choice.”
Clowes documented those murders by pro-choicers in three categories: actual murders by abortionists and pro-choice advocates; men who killed their pregnant girlfriends and wives who refused to abort their babies; and other individuals who killed women because they were pregnant.
“For every single instance of so-called ‘pro-life extreme violence’ — which is murder, attempted murder, kidnapping and arson — we have 80 instances of pro-choice extreme violence,” the researcher says. Meanwhile, he points out, “We have a lot of news media that’s directed entirely towards talking about how pro-life people are supposed to be so violent, and the pro-choicers are all mild-mannered, nice people.”
In other words, Clowes explains, “what we have here is a kind of imbalance” between the truth and the common perception. “And I’d like to try to balance this out, showing that the abortion culture is really violent in all of its aspects,” he says. The details of Clowes research project have been made available online. The report can be seen on the website ProChoiceViolence.com.

Original Link.

‘Do-or-Die’ Vote Looming on Parental Notification Legislation

Friday, September 29th, 2006

Please be sure to contact your Senators today, and let them know that you want them to vote for this law.

(AgapePress) – Most schools require a parent’s permission for a child to go on a field trip or even take an aspirin while at school. However, a minor girl can cross state lines to have an abortion — without her parents’ knowledge. That, say parental-rights advocates, is exactly why the Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act (CIANA) must be signed into law.
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist has filed cloture on S. 403, which means the U.S. Senate could conduct a cloture vote on CIANA as early as Friday (September 29). It passed the bill once already in July, when it was known as the Child Custody Protection Act, on a 65-34 bipartisan vote. But Democratic leaders had prevented it from going to conference committee with the House, which had passed a similar bill last year. On Tuesday, however, the U.S. House voted 264-153 in favor of S. 403, adding to the Senate’s version a provision that would require abortion providers to notify parents of a minor seeking an abortion at least 24 hours before it takes place.
If 60 senators vote for cloture on Friday, any filibuster attempts would be eliminated and the chamber would be required to conduct an up-or-down vote on the bill before adjourning — which is scheduled for either Friday or Saturday. A simple majority is necessary for passage of CIANA.
Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council in the nation’s capital, is urging concerned citizens to contact their senators — now. “We must get at least 60 of these Senators to vote ‘Yes’ on cloture for CIANA, or the bill dies for the year,” he explains. “Senators are very busy, but they must show up for the actual cloture vote, or we might not achieve 60 votes,” he continues. “Please let them know you want them at the vote — and to vote ‘Yes’ on cloture.”
CIANA would make it a federal offense for anyone to take a minor across state lines for an abortion with the intention of getting around a state law that requires parental involvement in the abortion decision. Perkins notes that polls indicate that upwards of 80 percent of Americans support parental notification laws.
“The Senate must protect the rights of parents and the welfare of minor girls nationwide,” the FRC leader says. “This is the most important piece of pro-life legislation considered by Congress this session, and the Senate must get it done. It’s crunch time.”

Original Link.

“Sacrificing the National Interest” by David Limbaugh

Friday, September 29th, 2006

The New York Times has again selectively leaked sensitive national security information, this time cherry picking an April National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) report to support the left’s template that our attack on Iraq has spawned more terrorism. In response, President Bush declassified other portions of the report to complete the picture.

If anything, on balance the report emphasizes how critical Iraq is to our ultimate victory in the war on terror. But how dare Bush defend himself?

Caught crying wolf again, Democrats have pulled a familiar trick out of their playbooks. They are demanding Bush declassify the entire document, knowing he cannot afford to comply and reveal secrets to the enemy, to create the false impression that he has something to hide. In the meantime, the national interest be d*****. (Language Edit. -ed.)

———-

It’s understandable that they insist on dwelling in the past since they are incapable of offering any alternative policy on Iraq. But what, finally, is the point of their relentless cacophony? How does it contribute, constructively, to our policy on Iraq?

Their obvious point is that we were not justified in attacking Iraq. Does that mean they believe we should withdraw now? Well, they just aren’t sure, are they? They can’t even build a consensus around that issue. So their only purpose in repeatedly leveling the charge is to discredit President Bush and score political points. You see, Democrats believe that if they can show — which they cannot — that our attack on Iraq set back our cause in the war on terror, President Bush and Republicans will be revealed as inept in conducting the war and safeguarding our national security.

But the truth is that we were justified in attacking Iraq for a number of reasons, including that Saddam’s Iraq was a terrorist-sponsoring state and thus a threat to the region, to us and to our allies. We ended Iraq’s support of terrorism when we deposed Saddam.

———-

If Democrats want to cling to the deluded belief that Saddam’s Iraq was innocuous, not pursuing WMD, not violating U.N. and post-war treaties, not a threat to us and the region, let them dwell in the perverse nostalgia of their revised history.

Democrats can remain in denial, but Iraq is part of the war on terror again because the terrorists have chosen to make it so, just like they chose to attack us on 9/11. The April NIE report makes clear that our victory in Iraq is essential to our victory in the war on terror. If you want to spawn more terrorism, try withdrawing precipitously from Iraq and see how that emboldens Al Qaeda’s cause.

How can it reasonably be denied that Democrats are behaving as though they want to hand the terrorists their first major victory?

Original Link.

Suicide bombers follow Quran, concludes Pentagon briefing

Thursday, September 28th, 2006

Well, OK, this is kinda of a “no-brainer” to most of us, but I guess it takes the government longer then most to stumble to the obvious.

With suicide bombings spreading from Iraq to Afghanistan, the Pentagon has tasked intelligence analysts to pinpoint what’s driving Muslim after Muslim to do the unthinkable.
Their preliminary finding is politically explosive: it’s their “holy book” the Quran after all, according to intelligence briefings obtained by WND.
In public, the U.S. government has made an effort to avoid linking the terrorist threat to Islam and the Quran while dismissing suicide terrorists as crazed heretics who pervert Islamic teachings.
“The terrorists distort the idea of jihad into a call for violence and murder,” the White House maintains in its recently released “National Strategy for Combating Terrorism” report.
But internal Pentagon briefings show intelligence analysts have reached a wholly different conclusion after studying Islamic scripture and the backgrounds of suicide terrorists. They’ve found that most Muslim suicide bombers are in fact students of the Quran who are motivated by its violent commands – making them, as strange as it sounds to the West, “rational actors” on the Islamic stage.
In Islam, it is not how one lives one’s life that guarantees spiritual salvation, but how one dies, according to the briefings. There are great advantages to becoming a martyr. Dying while fighting the infidels in the cause of Allah reserves a special place and honor in Paradise. And it earns special favor with Allah.
“Suicide in defense of Islam is permitted, and the Islamic suicide bomber is, in the main, a rational actor,” concludes a recent Pentagon briefing paper titled, “Motivations of Muslim Suicide Bombers.”

Suicide for Allah a ‘win-win’
“His actions provide a win-win scenario for himself, his family, his faith and his God,” the document explains. “The bomber secures salvation and the pleasures of Paradise. He earns a degree of financial security and a place for his family in Paradise. He defends his faith and takes his place in a long line of martyrs to be memorialized as a valorous fighter.
“And finally, because of the manner of his death, he is assured that he will find favor with Allah,” the briefing adds. “Against these considerations, the selfless sacrifice by the individual Muslim to destroy Islam’s enemies becomes a suitable, feasible and acceptable course of action.”
The briefing – produced by a little-known Pentagon intelligence unit called the Counterintelligence Field Activity, or CIFA – cites a number of passages from the Quran dealing with jihad, or “holy” warfare, martyrdom and Paradise, where “beautiful mansions” and “maidens” await martyr heroes. In preparation for attacks, suicide terrorists typically recite passages from six surahs, or chapters, of the Quran: Baqura (Surah 2), Al Imran (3), Anfal (8), Tawba (9), Rahman (55) and Asr (103).

Original Link.

House Approves Act Protecting Freedom of Religious Expression

Thursday, September 28th, 2006

This should get full support from each of us. There is no reason for a city to decide not to fight a lawsuit just because of a fear of having to pay court cost.

(AgapePress) – Conservative groups are commending the U.S. House of Representatives for passing a bill on Tuesday that would cut off financial awards for lawsuits successfully filed against religious displays on government property.
The Public Expressions of Religion Act (PERA) (H.R. 2679) would deny the awarding of attorney’s fees or monetary damages to a party that wins an Establishment Clause court case — that is, one based on the so-called “separation of church and state.” Backers of the legislation note that local and state governments often give in to demands to remove religious displays for fear of incurring costly attorney’s fees. Opponents, on the other hand, consider the legislation a waste of time by Republicans who they say are anxious to shore up their conservative base before Election Day. They also note there is no companion Senate bill.
But Concerned Women for America, a major pro-family group in Washington, DC, is praising the 244 House members who voted in favor of PERA, calling the vote “a tremendous victory for Americans who value their constitutional and religious freedoms.” Eliminating monetary awards in Establishment Clause cases, says CWA, will free up citizens who are often reluctant to stand up for those freedoms because they are intimidated by the potential of “crippling judgments” for attorney’s fees.
“The House has shown leadership by advocating on behalf of their constituents’ rights,” says Lanier Swann, CWA’s director of government relations. “The Senate now needs to heed that duty.”
Senate approval, according to Swann, would give Americans the confidence they need to stand up to legal challenges brought by groups like the American Civil Liberties Union, a group that often sues — or threatens to sue — communities and other entities for allegedly violating the Establishment Clause.
“Americans who wish to contest violations such as the refusal to allow the display of the Ten Commandments, the denial for the Boy Scouts of America to meet on public property, the omission of the words ‘under God’ in the Pledge of Allegiance, or the ban on student prayer at football games will have one less hindrance to protecting their rights,” says Swann. She also believes passage of PERA will mean fewer attacks on religious freedom in the United States.
The president of the National Clergy Council agrees with Swann that the ACLU will be less inclined to pursue supposed religious rights violations if they know they will have to foot their own legal bill.
“The ACLU has for too long terrorized communities by menacing them with lawsuits over Nativity scenes and Ten Commandments displays, then profiting at the expense of taxpayers,” says the NCC’s Rev. Rob Schenck. He describes what he calls the “clever scam” often employed by the ACLU in such cases.
“The ACLU rolls out huge fundraising programs based on these suits, takes in millions of dollars to supposedly cover their costs, then uses the federal courts to double dip on reimbursements out of the public treasury,” says Schenck.
Several conservative groups, including both CWA and the National Clergy Council, are urging the Senate to act on the legislation, saying there is no valid reason to delay a vote.

Original Link.

Suicide Bombers Just Following Quran

Thursday, September 28th, 2006

Breaking News: Muslim suicide bombers are simply following what the Quran orders them to do. Wait a minute….that’s not news. The US government has been so careful to sugarcoat the religion of Islam in public, but now they have officially read the Quran and believe it encourages violence. Duh. Now can we call it what it really is? There is nothing peaceful about Islam and it’s high time our government and our people started saying so.

With suicide bombings spreading from Iraq to Afghanistan, the Pentagon has tasked intelligence analysts to pinpoint what’s driving Muslim after Muslim to do the unthinkable.

Their preliminary finding is politically explosive: it’s their “holy book” the Quran after all, according to intelligence briefings obtained by WND.

In public, the U.S. government has made an effort to avoid linking the terrorist threat to Islam and the Quran while dismissing suicide terrorists as crazed heretics who pervert Islamic teachings.

“The terrorists distort the idea of jihad into a call for violence and murder,” the White House maintains in its recently released “National Strategy for Combating Terrorism” report.

Original Link

Fear of offending Islam spurs hot debate in Europe

Thursday, September 28th, 2006

As I’ve noted here time after time, history shows that appeasement has never stopped tyrants and conquerors from eventually taking what they wanted or doing what they wanted to do.
Many of us Bloggers have warned that appeasement would only lead to more appeasement. But eventually, appeasement is not enough for these tyrants, these bullies.
I believe that my readers are far above average intelligence, so I try to refrain from sharing cute little stories to illustrate points. So please forgive me for this, but here is a story to illustrate my point.
During my first year of Junior High, at lunch break one day, a well known bully decided that he wanted to “terrorize” some of us. He proceeded to take out a lock blade knife and ask us if we wanted to fight him. He proceeded to poke it up against everyone’s strums (breast bone) as he threatened us. Each person responded with only scared silence…until he came to me.
Normally, I would have responded the same way as the rest of the group. My goodness, he had a knife, how could I do otherwise? Well, for lack of a better explanation, I guess that I had just had enough of this character and his antics. Twenty minutes after placing the knife at my strum, nursing a sprained wrist, he was summoned to the principal’s office, shown his knife that I had delivered there ten minutes earlier, and advised that he was suspended for ten days.
I never had to worry about this bully bothering me again.
So with all that said, here is the parallel I am trying to draw:
Islam is the bully. They are going to threaten, cajole and maybe even hurt people, for no reason at all. It is only by standing up to the bully that one can make him stop. It is only by declaring to the bully (Islam) that “we will not submit” and backing that statement up by force, if necessary, that we will make the bully leave us alone.

LONDON (Reuters) – Four canceled performances of a Mozart opera have reignited an anxious and heated debate in Europe over free speech, self-censorship and Islam.
By canning its production of “Idomeneo,” fearful of security threats because of a scene that might offend Muslims, Berlin’s Deutsche Oper provoked front-page headlines across the continent and found itself fending off charges of cowardice.
The controversy centered on a scene in which King Idomeneo is shown on stage with the severed heads of Buddha, Jesus, Mohammad and the sea god Poseidon.
“Here we go again. It’s like deja vu…This is exactly the kind of self-censorship I and my newspaper have been warning against,” said Flemming Rose, culture editor of Denmark’s Jyllands-Posten paper, which met a storm of Muslim protest after publishing satirical cartoons of the Prophet Mohammad last year.
He said bowing to fears of a violent Muslim reaction would only worsen the problem: “You play into the hands of the radicals. You are telling them: your tactics are working. This is a victory for the radicals. It’s weakening the moderate Muslims who are our allies in this battle of ideas.”
The drawings, including one showing Mohammad with a bomb in his turban, triggered violent demonstrations throughout the Muslim world but were defended by the newspaper as an expression of free speech and a challenge to religious taboos.
Berlin security officials had warned that staging the opera “Idomeneo” would pose an “incalculable security risk.”

GUNS AND BOMBS
The decision to cancel the production even before any protests had materialized was singled out for criticism.
“To do it in advance of any actual protest I think invokes the next protest, because the radicals in any community are aided and abetted by that,” said Lisa Appignanesi, a novelist and deputy president of the writers’ group PEN in England.
“We don’t want to end up in a situation where we don’t dare to speak up. What we do not want is a society where one is constantly fearful about what the people holding the bombs or the guns might say.”
European countries, rocked by a series of events including Islamist bombings in Madrid and London and widespread rioting in French immigrant communities last year, are struggling to find better ways of integrating their Muslim minorities. (They don’t want to integrate, they want to conquer. -ed)
The latest controversy follows a furor in the Muslim world over comments by
Pope Benedict this month in which he cited a medieval emperor who associated Islam with violence. He has since distanced himself from the quotations and assured Muslims of his respect, although without directly apologizing.
Some analysts fear a climate is developing in which people are afraid to speak out publicly. In a speech to the annual conference of think-tank Oxford Analytica last week, its head, David Young, said political correctness posed a threat to free expression for journalists, politicians and academics alike.
Nirjay Mahindru, an Asian playwright who runs a theater company in Britain, told Reuters: “British Asian writers are without a shadow of a doubt not writing what they want to write about or what they feel is reflective of what is out there. They are writing what is now expected of them.”
“This has been going on for at least two or three years and it’s almost like a coalition of fundamentalist forces, whether they are Christian or Muslim or Hindu or whoever. I just wish more members of the artistic community would be brave.”

CLASH OF VALUES
The opera cancellation was just the last of a series of incidents in recent years where religious sensitivities and artistic expression have clashed.
In 2004, Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh was murdered after outraging Muslims with a film accusing Islam of promoting violence against women, and a British play featuring sexual abuse and murder in a Sikh temple was canceled after protests.
Last year London’s Tate Britain museum removed a sculpture by John Latham which it feared would offend Muslims and a British tour of “Jerry Springer – The Opera” was temporarily canceled when conservative Christian groups complained.
Such tensions are not new, although artists argue they have become more common since September 11, 2001. In 1989 British author Salman Rushdie was forced into hiding after Iran issued a fatwa calling for his death after he wrote “The Satanic Verses.”
“You can’t be afraid of constantly watching your back in the arts,” PEN’s Appignanesi said. “One is in the business of provoking response. Otherwise there is no art.”

Original Link.


Lan astaslem, I will not Submit

“To Change the Subject, Ask for Something You Can’t Get” at Power Line

Thursday, September 28th, 2006

The Democrats evidently aren’t happy with the release of the “key judgments” of the National Intelligence Estimate on global terrorism, because now they’ve demanded that the White House release the entire report.

That will get them what they’re looking for, i.e., headlines like this one: “White House refuses to release full NIE.” The Democrats knew, obviously, that the administration can’t release the entire document without both endangering agents and compromising the ability of intelligence analysts to write candid assessments without worrying that their work product will wind up in the newspaper. But for now, at least, they can change the subject.

Ted Kennedy weighed in with the most surreal attack:

“The American people deserve the full story, not those parts of it that the Bush administration selects,” said Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass.

That would be hilarious, if it were not so contemptible. When Democrats in the bureaucracy illegally leaked misleading portions of the NIE’s “key judgments” in hopes of influencing the election, that was fine with Kennedy. But when the administration declassified the entire “judgments” section so that the American people can read it all and judge for themselves, now Kennedy complains that the voters aren’t getting “the full story.” Absolutely outrageous, but typical of the Democrats’ ever more hysterical campaign.

PAUL adds: And key elements of MSM continue to work alongside the Dems, declaring that the administration has released “part” of the NIE report. Liberal journalists and liberal media outlets (such as some Newsweek correspondent who appeared on NPR yesterday and the Washington Post) want to convey the impression that the administration selectively picked the portions of the report to be released. In truth, of course, the administration released the entire conclusions portion — the good, the bad, and the meaningless. It was, in fact, liberal organs like the Washington Post that, in first reporting on the NIE, hand-picked for content (or allowed their anti-administration collaborators to hand-pick for them) which portions to reveal.

Original Link.

“But gentlemen, what if you’re wrong?” at Jerusalem Watchman

Thursday, September 28th, 2006

To President George W. Bush, Prime Minister Tony Blair and Prime Minister John Howard
Your excellencies,
All of you, great leaders of three of the most right-thinking nations on earth, are committed to doing everything possible during what is left of your respective terms in office to securing a “two-state solution” to the Arab-Israeli conflict.
You all give the same reason for embracing this policy, asserting that the creation of a Palestinian state “alongside Israel” will help bring peace to the Middle East and, by extension, to the world.

———-

With all due respect, I’d like to pose the following questions:
· What if, after your irreversible plan has successfully been implemented, it turns out you were wrong?
· What if the creation of Palestine, and the immediate and enthusiastic recognition it will receive from the entire international community, does not bring peace to the Middle East?
· What if, with “Palestine” securely in their hands, millions of Arabs try to do what they vow even now they will ultimately do, and utilize their new state to complete the destruction of Israel?
· What if American, British and Australian Muslims continue to be recruited to Al-Qaeda, the Hizb’allah or Hamas, and persist in perpetrating violence against the little sliver of land which is all that Israel will be left with?
· What if international terrorism rages on unchecked and undiminished after Palestine is born?
· What if, after they have gobbled up the “Little Satan” – Israel – terrorists continue to decry America as the Great Satan, and heartened by what they will see as their immense success in the Middle East, carry out another mega terror attack on the United States?
· What if the creation of Palestine does nothing to stabilize the oil market, instead encouraging the victorious Arab states to wield their weapon of blackmail with even more determination than before?
Gentlemen, what your plan amounts to is a readiness to coerce Israel into giving up the most highly-prized and militarily-strategic parts of the only land that is rightfully hers, in a terrible gamble all the evidence insists she, and you, cannot win!
Setting aside for a moment the issue of what right you have to offer up another country for “the greater good” (we remember other statesmen who thought they had the right to decide what was “best” for Europe and offered up Czechoslovakia), I want to repeat the question: What if you are wrong?
What if your two-state solution fails to solve anything at all?

Original Link.

“IS IT TOO LATE?” by Fern Sidman

Thursday, September 28th, 2006

In 1979, Rabbi Meir Kahane, ZTK”L, wrote a book entitled, “They Must Go”. This book generated an enormous amount of controversy as it spoke of the concept of transferring the Arab population of Israel to any of the 22 Arab countries in the Middle East. The essential premise of this book, as had been expressed by Rabbi Kahane for a number of years prior to the book’s publication, was the preservation of the State of Israel as a Jewish state.

Rabbi Kahane, in his tremendous foresight and wisdom saw a demographic time bomb ticking away in Israel. As the Arab birthrate skyrocketed and the Jewish birthrate plummeted, Rabbi Kahane predicted that in a matter of decades, the Arabs would be a majority in Jewish State. He also posited that in a democracy the majority rules, and as such this could portend the very real scenario of the Arab population quietly and democratically voting Israel out of existence. The main question put forth to readers in this remarkable and groundbreaking treatise was the clear choice that was before us. Either we choose a western democracy or a Jewish State. It was clear that both could not co-exist. Rabbi Kahane sounded a clarion call to Jews to wake up and act now, before the proverbial knife was at our collective throats.

As we know, the ceaseless tirade of condemnations, denunciations and diatribes that followed the book’s publication consisted of nothing less than an organized attempt to quash and eradicate this idea and to lambaste and excoriate Rabbi Kahane for promulgating such views. The abject fear that was felt by this message was not limited to the Jewish world, however the greatest resistance to this idea and the subsequent hostilities emanated from the global Jewish community. In the religious or Orthodox Jewish world, Rabbi Kahane was branded as a purveyor of anti-Torah thoughts, an upstart that could endanger world Jewry. In the secular, liberal, left wing bastions of the Jewish world, he was labeled as a rabid racist, a horrific and dangerous fascist, a xenophobe of mammoth proportions.

Rabbi Kahane and his message quickly became a pariah in the Jewish world, and actions were successfully taken to ban him and his message. The concept of free speech that was so warmly embraced by Jews, apparently did not apply to Rabbi Kahane. The same Jews who boasted of being proud, card-carrying members of the American Civil Liberties Union, and who fought for the rights of free speech for every Jew hater under the sun, suddenly found themselves in a hypocritical dilemma. While they could not deny Rabbi Kahane his right of free speech, they could organize a concerted effort to marginalize and isolate him from any manner of intelligent and scholarly discourse on this idea. It had become increasingly clear that the world would live up to the old adage “shoot the messenger, if you don’t like the message”.

And now in the year 2006, as the free world stands on the brink of domination by Islamic forces, we have witnessed grandiose and heinous forms of terrorism spawned by hate filled Arab and Islamic teachings. We have witnessed the rise of Hamas to power and the resurgence of the might of Iranian and Syrian backed Hezbollah terrorists. We have witnessed thousands of Jewish lives being impacted by the plethora of Arab suicide bombers in Israel, known as “Shahids”, martyrs for Palestine.

We have witnessed the forced expulsion of Jews from their homes in Gaza and in Judea and Samaria, only to see this G-d given Jewish land being used as staging areas for rocket attacks on Jewish settlements in Israel proper by Arab terrorists. We have witnessed the kidnapping of Jewish soldiers and the defeat and humiliation of the once “invincible” Israeli army, as the ineptitude of the government of Israel reaches dangerous levels. We are plagued with vapid, empty and abysmally ignorant Israeli leaders who spend their time concocting further plans to hand over Israeli territory to the Arab enemy, as calls for their resignation resound throughout the country.

At this critical juncture in the future of the Jewish nation and the State of Israel, we now hear sounds of Rabbi Kahane’s message being spoken not only by his supporters but by certain Israeli leaders. According to a recent news report, “MK Effie Eitam (National Union-NRP) has repeated his call for the State of Israel to consider the transfer of hostile Arabs from Judea and Samaria. Speaking with Army Radio’s Razi Barkai Wednesday morning, Eitam was asked to explain his terming Israeli Arabs a “fifth column” and his call for Israel to encourage the transfer of PA Arabs from Judea and Samaria. “Look, in the wake of this war, the people of Israel need to begin to say the truth,” Eitam said. “The deceptive myths must end. The myth that we can abandon territory without it becoming a launching ground for attacks on us and the myth that this struggle is over the outcome of the [1967] Six Day War.

“The days of viewing our territory as a checkbook – through which we can buy off the rejection of our existence here – have ended. We therefore must be honest with ourselves – if we can’t give the land away and we can’t keep the land with this hostile nation upon it – we must encourage them to emigrate.”

Eitam said he was coming from a recent trip to the United States, where he discussed his ideas with Attorney General John Ashcroft. Eitam said Ashcroft was very receptive to the ideas, due to the lessons of September 11th. “The assertion that the world will not allow transfer to occur is another deception,” Eitam said. After the Eitam interview concluded, Barkai brought former Meretz chairman Yossi Sarid on the air, and asked him whether he did not share Eitam’s concern for the future of the Jewish state. Sarid said that he was not sure what scared him more, the threats facing Israel or Eitam’s world view. Sarid compared Eitam’s statements to those of Neo-Nazi and fascist politicians in Europe. “If they would say those things we would object, so we must object when Eitam says them,” Sarid posited.

It is apparent that not much has changed since Rabbi Kahane spoke of these ideas so long ago. While MK Eitam should be commended for seeing the truth and having the courage to give voice to it, one wonders if this is too little, too late. While MK Sarid still echoes the same condemnations that he did years ago when Rabbi Kahane espoused this idea, one wonders if the Bolshevik left wing in Israel is still mired in anachronistic ideology while remaining blind to the threats that loom over the future of Israel.

Rabbi Kahane’s views are ideas that should have been supported and implemented decades ago. Those who now give credence and validity to these ideas either initially denounced them with the same fervor normally reserved for leftists or remained silent and apathetic to the crucial message embedded in these ideas.

Let us take this time to review the ideas and words of Rabbi Kahane. “Of course, the ultimate threat is that of the Arabs quietly achieving national majority, which will allow them to take control of the Knesset and legally abolish the Jewish state. The population figures are all in their favor”. (They Must Go, 1981, p. 113)

“Long before the arrival of an Arab majority in Israel, there will be prior demands – all gaining force through the annual, immutable growth of Arab population: demands for greater political power and representation in Knesset and cabinet; demands for ‘autonomy’ in the Galilee and Triangle; demands for the annexation of those areas to any ‘Palestine’ state that might arise; demands for the return of the “Palestinian’ refugees to their homes and property in Israel”.(They Must Go, 1981, p. 115)

“The Muslims are bitterly anti-Israel and anti-Jewish. They combine fervent anti-Zionist nationalism with the even more fervent Islamic creed. That the Arab youth of Israel are undergoing an Islamic revival is admitted by one and all”. (Israel: Revolution or Referendum?, 1990, p. 47)

The words spoken by MK Eitam are the words of a frightened person. A person, who justifiably has the right to be frightened by an ever-increasing hostile and violent Arab population. In essence, MK Eitam is saying that Rabbi Kahane’s views are now resonating for a vast majority of Jews.

In these final days before Yom Kippur, when the Almighty will render His verdict on the Jewish people, both individually and collectively, let us raise our voices in prayer to the G-d of Israel, who is our King, Helper, Savior and Shield. Let us resolve to have the courage to speak the Torah truth without fearing the opinions of the world. Let us embark on a course of true repentance, prayer and charity, as these measures are necessary in order to tip the balance of the scales of justice in our favor. Our future is hanging in the balance.

———————————————-

Fern Sidman holds a B.A, in political science from Brooklyn College. She was the educational coordinator for the Betar Youth Movement in the late 1970s and early 1980s. She was national director of the Jewish Defense League from 1983-1985. She was a researcher for several books written by Rabbi Meir Kahane, ZTK”L. She was the managing editor of the publication entitled, The Voice of Judea, and is a regular contributor to its web site. She is currently a writer and journalist living in New York City. Her articles have appeared in The Jewish Press, The Jewish Advocate, The Jewish Journal of Los Angeles, and numerous Jewish and general web sites including, Front Page Magazine, Daniel Pipes and Michael Freund.
We are pleased to have Ms. Sidman as a regular contributor to the Jesus is Lord, A Worshipping Christian’s Blog.

GOP Again Seeks to Prohibit Interstate Abortions

Wednesday, September 27th, 2006

Take special note of this statement:
“Children can’t get their ears pierced in this country without parental consent, but they can get an abortion”.
This is just one argument against abortion that I totally agree with. Abortion is a major surgical process, yet in many states, children can get an abortion without parental consent when they can’t get their ears pierced without it. This defies logic on every level.
Are we, as a nation, so obsessed with giving abortions, that we don’t even possess the most rudimentary logic in regards to this medical process and the need to notify parents and guardians beforehand?
Have we really sunk that low?

(CNSNews.com) – In a last ditch effort before the upcoming congressional recess, Republican members of the House re-introduced a bill Tuesday to require parental notification for minors seeking abortions out of state.
According to the Guttmacher Institute, 34 states have either parental consent or notification laws (Utah has both), but there is no national law prohibiting a minor from traveling from one state where a notification or consent law exists to another state where there is no statute in order to get an abortion.
Rep. Steve Chabot (R-Ohio) called the federal status quo “awful.”
“Children can’t get their ears pierced in this country without parental consent, but they can get an abortion,” he said.
Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, who wrote the bill, initially introduced the legislation in February 2005. It was passed by the House, but died in the Senate.
“We as parents have a right to know what is going on in our daughters’ lives with regard to a potentially life-threatening medical procedure,” Ros-Lehtinen said before reintroducing the “Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act” on Tuesday.
She said the bill “seeks to put an end to the abortion clinics and family planning organizations that exploit young, vulnerable girls by luring them to recklessly disobey state laws.”
The bill, she said, “is a vital component towards changing the way abortionists do business and will have significant impact on how abortionists deal with girls seeking an abortion.”
“Protecting young girls from a life-threatening procedure is not something to be compromised,” Ros-Lehtinen said.

Original Link.

‘See You At The Pole’ on Wednesday

Wednesday, September 27th, 2006

Please support this event and encourage your children to attend. If possible, join them “at the pole”.

(AgapePress) – A law firm that protects the constitutional rights of Christians says public school officials nationwide should be aware that students have a constitutional right to pray during “See You At The Pole” observances on Wednesday.
Tomorrow (Today actually. -ed.) (Sept. 27) millions of students will gather around their school flagpoles for SYATP rallies. The students will pray for their schools, fellow classmates, teachers, the nation, and the world. The now annual observance began in 1990 when a group of high school students in Burleson, Texas, gathered spontaneously around their school flagpole to pray for their classmates who did not have a relationship with Jesus Christ.
Students around the country have typically met with resistance from school officials who are not educated about constitutional rights. Anita Staver is president of Liberty Counsel, a firm that has defended many of those students — and encourages others who encounter resistance to contact the firm immediately. She explains that students do not lose their religious freedoms when they step onto school grounds.
“The students certainly have the constitutional right to gather around their flagpoles and pray together, and we just encourage the students to do this,” says Staver, who emphasizes the observance is neither parent- nor teacher-led. “Certainly teachers and parents can go in other places and gather together and pray, but this is specifically a student-initiated, student-led event — and we think it’s wonderful that the students will be gathering together and revival can break out across the land led by these youth,” she says.
The rallies, which annually number in the thousands and typically occur early in the day, before classes begin, fall well within constitutional guidelines, adds Staver. And that, she stresses, is something school administrators need to know.
“There is a lot of ignorance [regarding students’ religious rights], especially on behalf of school officials,” she says. “And sometimes the school officials have to take affirmative action in order to educate themselves about the students’ First Amendment rights, rather than just acting out of bias or ignorance.”
The U.S. Department of Education’s “Guidelines on Religious Expression in Public Schools” states that students have a right to take part in SYATP as a protected act of religious expression.
The theme for this year’s “See You At The Pole” observance is “Be Still. Know God.” The event’s official website (http://www.syatp.org) encourages students to submit online reports about what happened at their school.

Original Link.

“Islam’s Silent Inroads”, Olive Tree Ministries

Wednesday, September 27th, 2006

As Islamic expert Avi Lipkin recently told me, Islam will make inroads in quiet ways as well as revolutionary ways. The quiet or evolutionary means will be by gaining power in high places in America and elsewhere and changing the nation and the world from within without firing a shot.
The United Nations is seeking a successor to the throne of the corrupt Kofi Annan whose term expires the first of the year. There are numerous candidates, some named and some who have not yet been presented. They are saying the next Secretary General must have zero tolerance for corruption and mismanagement. Annan has appeased some of the world’s most vile men, in a sense confirming the U.N.’s “unique legitimacy” on them to show how “fair” he is. Doing so with Saddam Hussein, Fidel Castro, Hezbollah leader Nasrallah, and Iran’s Achmadinejad has created a “throw the bum out” attitude and get someone who can properly lead, though the corruption and dictator-coddling is rampant throughout the entire U.N.

There are many in the running and some who will emerge in the coming weeks and months. However, the frontrunner is from Jordan, and a Muslim. He is a cousin to King Hussein, Prince Zeid al-Hussein. Stop and comprehend a Muslim leading the world as you watch the bizarre, and as Avi Lipkin calls it, the “psychosis of Islam” in present and past temper tantrums that kill innocent nuns and riot over every imagined offense. Even America’s U.N. ambassador, John Bolton, favors al-Hussein.

On a lower level, my raging blue state of Minnesota and our Democratic Party have just nominated for U.S. Congress a “former” member of the Nation of Islam who has defended membership in the Bloods street gang and called cop-killer Abu-Jamal and Sara Jane Olson “freedom fighters.” His name is Keith Ellison-Hakim, and he would represent Minnesota’s fifth district.

Ellison-Hakim has ties to Louis Farrakhan’s anti-Semitic Nation of Islam. He has already accrued at least an estimated $35,000 in funding from CAIR, the Council on American Islamic Relations, a dangerous outfit designed to make Islam in America look benign. He calls for the impeachment of President Bush and is, frankly, a Muslim radical. And it is projected that he will win this liberal district.

———-

Islam is making inroads in all levels of government including homeland security. The Left embraces them and even praises them, and is such a state of delusion that they cannot see truth. To have Islamic leaders running the U.N. or entering the U.S. House of Representatives is just a step in the process of the Islamization of America and the world through “evolutionary means” rather than “revolutionary means.”

Original Link.

“Intimidating the West, from Rushdie to Benedict” by Daniel Pipes

Wednesday, September 27th, 2006

The violence by Muslims responding to comments by the pope fit a pattern that has been building and accelerating since 1989. Six times since then, Westerners did or said something that triggered death threats and violence in the Muslim world. Looking at them in the aggregate offers useful insights.

*1989 – Salman Rushdie’s novel, The Satanic Verses prompted Ayatollah Khomeini to issue a death edict against him and his publishers, on the grounds that the book “is against Islam, the Prophet, and the Koran.” Subsequent rioting led to over 20 deaths, mostly in India.

*1997 – The U.S. Supreme Court refused to remove a 1930s frieze showing Muhammad as lawgiver that decorates the main court chamber; the Council on American-Islamic Relations made an issue of this, leading to riots and injuries in India.

*2002 – The American evangelical leader Jerry Falwell calls Muhammad a “terrorist,” leading to church burnings and at least 10 deaths in India.

*2005 – An incorrect story in Newsweek, reporting that American interrogators at Guantánamo Bay, “in an attempt to rattle suspects, flushed a Qur’an down a toilet,” is picked up by the famous Pakistani cricketer, Imran Khan, and prompts protests around the Muslim world, leading to at least 15 deaths..

*February 2006 – The Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten publishes twelve cartoons of Muhammad, spurring a Palestinian Arab imam in Copenhagen, Ahmed Abdel Rahman Abu Laban, to excite Muslim opinion against the Danish government. He succeeds so well, hundreds die, mostly in Nigeria.

*September 2006 – Pope Benedict XVI quotes a Byzantine emperor’s views that what is new in Islam is “evil and inhuman,” prompting the firebombing of churches and the murder of several Christians.

These six rounds show a near-doubling in frequency: 8 years between the first and second rounds, then 5, then 3, 1, and ½.

Original Link.

OperaRage: Idomeneo and Islam

Wednesday, September 27th, 2006

Michelle Malkin made some good points in her post “OperaRage: Idomeneo and Islam“.

The first thing to remember when reading about the cancellation of Mozart’s Idomeneo in Germany and the opera house Deutsche Oper’s kowtowing to Islamic bullies is that jihadists hate Western art and music.

They hate love songs.

They hate Muslim female pop stars.

They hate church frescos. And poems. And illustrations of poems. And, uh, you know how they feel about cartoons.

So it doesn’t take much to get them worked up.

The now-cancelled production of Mozart’s opera, directed by provocateur Hans Neuenfels, includes a scene in which King Idomeneo is shown staggering on stage next to the severed heads of Buddha, Jesus, Poseidon and the Prophet Mohammad, which sit on chairs. It was an equal-opportunity insult of religions. But it doesn’t matter. When Mohammed is insulted, you know the consequences.

The dhimmi opera house director reports that Berlin’s top police official had phoned her in mid-August and warned her of dire consequences if the opera house proceeded with its plan to show “Idomeneo.” Needless to say, the dire consequences did not involve Buddhists and Christians and admirers of Poseidon threatening to behead the opera singers.


Lan astaslem, I will not Submit