Archive for September 27th, 2006

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?

( – 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 ( 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

“Jihadists don’t care about logic” by George Jonas

Wednesday, September 27th, 2006

To counter any suggestion that Islam is a violent religion, Muslims attacked churches in the West Bank, Gaza and Basra this week. In Somalia a religious leader named Abubukar Hassan Malin echoed a British religious leader named Anjem Choudary who seemed to be in agreement with a religious leader from India called Syed Ahmed Bukhari that Pope Benedict XVI had to be forced to apologize.

Forced? Bukhari left it open how, but Choudary felt that subjecting the Pontiff to “capital punishment” may be persuasive, while Malin was inclined to think that the situation called for hunting down the Holy Father and killing him “on the spot.” And, perhaps to indicate that these were no idle threats, as the week wore on, an Italian nun was murdered in Somalia, along with two Assyrian Christians in Iraq.

What did the Pope do? As most readers know, he quoted a remark made by the Byzantine emperor Manuel II Palaeologus: “Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.”

Was the anointed of Byzantium on to something? The Pope certainly didn’t say so. He just quoted the beleaguered emperor, who — being squeezed between hostile Turks and demanding Venetians at the time — had vented about the Prophet and his bellicose followers in conversation with a Persian scholar. Little did he suspect that his words would hit the fan nearly 600 years later.

“The infidelity and tyranny of the Pope will only be stopped by a major attack,” announced al-Qaeda from its cave on the Afghan-Pakistani border. Al-Qaeda’s political arm in New York, a.k.a. the United Nations, took no position, only using the opportunity to condemn Israel for one thing or another.

Why do some Muslims have such an uncanny talent for proving the case of their critics? When accused of violence, they threaten violence. Better still, they engage in it. “Call us unruly and we riot,” they say, in essence. “Call us murderers, and we kill you.” Don’t they see that this makes them a joke?

Well, no, they don’t — and they’re right. Saying such things may make someone a joke in a debating society, but Islamofascists fight in a different arena. They don’t care about winning the debate; what they want to win is their Kampf, better known these days as Jihad.

Lo and behold, they’re winning it. By now the whole world tiptoes around the sensibilities of medieval fanatics. We take pains not to offend ululating fossils who cheer suicide bombers. Or raise them. We prop up rickety regimes whose sole contribution to modern times is to nurture ancient grievances and revive barbaric customs. We worry about the feelings — feelings! — of people who stone their loved ones for sexual missteps. We pussyfoot to protect the delicate psyche of oily ogres who amputate the hands of petty thieves, issue fatwas on novelists and cover up their hapless wives and sisters to the eyeballs.

We do this, obviously, not because we’re impressed by the logic of the Islamofascist line — “call us murderers and we’ll kill you” — but because we’re intimidated by it. The Jihadists don’t care about the quality of their argument. One doesn’t have to, if one’s aim isn’t to persuade, but to coerce. The mullahs of militant Islam aren’t worried about proving their critics’ case. So some pundits think we’re proving Benedict XVI or Manuel II right, imams Choudary and Malin might say. Big deal. Logic may be essential for pundits. It isn’t essential for our followers who are willing to blow themselves up to get their way.

Original Link.