Archive for March 2nd, 2009

Malaysia Restores ‘Allah’ Ban for Christians

Monday, March 2nd, 2009

More peace and tolerance from the Muslims…NOT!!

KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia — The Malaysian government will issue a new decree restoring a ban on Christian publications using the word “Allah” to refer to God, officials said Sunday.

Home Affairs Minister Syed Hamid Albar said a previous Feb. 16 decree that allowed Christian publications to use the word as long as they specified the material was not for Muslims was a mistake, the national Bernama news agency reported.

The about-turn came after Islamic groups slammed the government and warned that even conditional use of the word by Christians would anger Muslims, who make up the country’s majority.

A senior ministry official confirmed Syed Hamid’s comments, saying there were “interpretation mistakes” in the Feb. 16 decree that led to the confusion.

“‘Allah’ cannot be used for other religions except Islam because it might confuse Muslims. This is the ministry’s stand and it hasn’t changed,” the official, who declined to be named citing protocol, told The Associated Press.

The official said the ministry was likely to issue a new decree to annul the old one and effectively re-impose the ban.

The dispute has become symbolic of increasing religious tensions in Malaysia, where 60 percent of the 27 million people are Muslim Malays. A third of the population is ethnic Chinese and Indian, and many of them practice Christianity.

Malaysia’s minorities have often complained that their constitutional right to practice their religions freely has come under threat from the Malay Muslim-dominated government. They cite destruction of Hindu temples and conversion disputes as examples. The government denies any discrimination.

The Herald, the Roman Catholic Church’s main newspaper in the country, had filed a legal suit to challenge the government ban on non-Muslims using the word.

The Herald argued that the Arabic word is a common reference for God that predates Islam and has been used for centuries as a translation in Malay.

Rev. Lawrence Andrew, the editor of the Herald, said Sunday the publication had not been notified of the government’s change in policy.

“Unfortunately the apparent relief that we imagined we were able to enjoy has been short-lived,” he said.

Original Link.

Global Warming Weather? Whatever the Global Warming Doomsayers Need it to Be

Monday, March 2nd, 2009

Some friends and I were talking about the cold weather that has hit much of the world this year, and I made the comment “Gotta love the global warming”. One of my friends responded with a laugh, “Weather indicating global warming is whatever the global Warming advocates want it to be. Somehow they’ll convince the world that man made global warming is causing the horrible winter much like they said it was causing the terrible summer heat we had”. I agree with my friend. Indications of so-called man made global warming is pretty much whatever the doomsayers want it to be. It does seem a little bit too convenient.

TRENTON, N.J. — A massive late winter snow storm roared out of the Southeast and into the Northeast overnight, idling hundreds of flights and making Monday’s morning rush treacherous as motorists contended with nearly a foot of snow in spots.

Winter storm warnings were issued from North Carolina to New Hampshire, with most areas expected to see 8 to 12 inches of snow and higher amounts possible in northern areas.

“It’s the first of March, which, as you know, is the month that we say comes in like a lion and out like a lamb,” New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg said Sunday. “It’s pretty clear that the lions are getting ready to roar.”

Original Link.

Blindsided By Obama the Radical?

Monday, March 2nd, 2009

In Andrea Tantaros’ article “Blindsided By Obama the Radical“, I’m not sure who Ms. Tantaros was watching during the presidential campaign last year, but to a great many of us, nothing Obama is doing is a surprise to us. We tried and tried to tell people who this man is.
But Obama’s Department of Propaganda (formerly known as the Main Stream Media) taught most of you to hate President Bush, and as an extension, everything Republican, so much that you couldn’t get out and vote for the opposition fast enough. You were going to show the Republicans!! A classic case of “cut off your nose to spite your face”.
Blindsided by Obama the Radical? Only if you were living on Mars and had no communication with the Earth for the past two years. Get a grip.
On our blog alone, between February 12th, 2007, when Obama announced his bid for the White House through November 4th, 2008, we mentioned him almost 200 times. That means on this blog alone, we brought your attention to Obama, on average, once every 3 to 4 days. Almost twice a week. Blindsided by Obama the Radical? Not hardly!! Just admit that you voted for him to spite the Republicans, or you were just too self absorbed to try to find out if the press was lying to you about his character. There’s a reason I call the press “Obama’s Department of Propaganda”. It’s not because of their honesty and objectivity. They shilled for him during the entire campaign, better than anything his best paid campaign worker was capable of. They also did it for free.
You voted a man into the presidency who promised you “Change”. He never outlined how or what he was going to change, but that was fine with you. Your programming was complete; hate Bush; hate the Republicans. It doesn’t matter what this Obama guy stands for, you had been trained to vote for him.
The One, the Obam-messiah, Emperor Obama I of America is here to stay for at least four years. Maybe we’ll get lucky and people will replace the Democate congress and senate with Republicans in two years. Maybe this can be enough opposition to stop the complete destruction of the United States. Maybe we’ll be lucky and have something we can still call the United States after four years. But maybe my moniker of Emperor Obama I of America is not as far off as some people have told me.
In any case, remember this feeling of betrayal you are feeling right now when 2010 rolls around. And by all means, send a Republican back to Washington instead of the Democrat you sent this last time!!
By the way, if you didn’t vote for Obama, you can disregard most of soapbox above.

It has become jaw-droppingly clear that Barack Obama seeks to radically shift the alignment of this country — tying its citizens to their government in a dramatic leftward lunge the likes of which America has never seen before.

Obama deceitfully billed himself a pragmatist on the campaign trail. He was marketed as a “moderate.” After his November victory, pundits predicted he’d govern from the center. — They couldn’t have been more mistaken. Barack Obama is an extremist progressive who seeks to molest our fiscal values and pumps up our reliance on fruitless government programs.

Obama certainly will be successful in his mission for unparalleled historic recognition. But don’t expect his face on the dollar bill in the future.

On its face, this appears to confirm that Obama is a tax-and-spend liberal with a heavy socialist marbling. But it’s much more complex than that. Though Obama has proclaimed that “this has never been about me — it’s about you” on the stump, these very actions are all about him and his increasingly apparent obsession with exaltation and a delusional quest for historic grandeur.
[Emperor Obama I of America…I’m telling you now that’s what he’s after. -ed.]

The cult of personality created by the leftist trifecta of academia, media and the entertainment industry has overtaken Obama’s own self-image. And he believes the hype. Most politicians possess a swollen sense of self-worship. But Obama believes he is the superhero of fanatical Democratic extremism, the green lantern of progressive precept, the Will Smith of left-wing indoctrination.

Obama certainly will be successful in his mission for unparalleled historic recognition. But don’t expect his face on the dollar bill in the future. His notoriety will leave a legendary imprint for all the wrong reasons.

Original Link.

Don’t Tread on Me – Take Back the United States of America

Monday, March 2nd, 2009

Dont' Tread on Me

In my own way of showing support for the Tea Party, I have added a new link to the sidebar. It is in the form of the Gadsden flag; “Don’t Tread on Me”. I feel that in this day and age, that we, the people, are more and more like the Thirteen American Colonies under the thumb of an uncaring King George III, our federal government. Despite our representatives in congress and our senators, a majority of the people of this country feel that we are facing Taxation without Representation.
From the spirit of my ancestors, I declare to the federal government:
“DON’T TREAD ON ME!!”

The American Tea Party

See The American Tea Party Website.

Update:
The Tax Day Tea Party is a national collaborative grassroots effort to protest the bankrupt liberal agenda of the White House Administration and Congress. Specifically, the flawed “Stimulus Bill” and pork filled budget.
Slated for April 15th, Tax Day, in cities all across the nation, the Tax Day Tea Party will bring thousands of like valued people together to show our displeasure of our out of control federal government. See their website for locations. Check back often as this list is always changing.

Silent No More - Tax Day Tea Party

The Nationwide Tax Day Tea Party.

Obama Breaks Campaign Promise – Will Sign Bill Laden with Millions in Earmarks

Monday, March 2nd, 2009

We can continue to expect more of this from “The One”, Emperor Obama I of America.

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama will break a campaign pledge and sign a budget bill laden with millions in lawmakers’ pet projects, administration officials said.

Administration budget chief Peter Orszag and White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel both downplayed the $410 billion spending bill and signaled Obama would hold his nose and sign it. Orszag said: “We want to just move on. Let’s get this bill done, get it into law and move forward.

Said Emanuel: “That’s last year’s business.”

The House last week passed the measure that would keep the government running through Sept. 30, when the federal budget year ends. Taxpayers for Common Sense, a watchdog group, identified almost 8,600 specially sponsored projects totaling $7.7 billion; Democrats say the number is $3.8 billion.

Either way, it is far more than Obama promised as a candidate. He refused “earmarks” for the economic stimulus package he championed and a children’s health bill.

He similiarly pledged to reject tailored budget requests that let lawmakers send money to their home states. Orszag said Obama would move ahead and overlook the time-tested tradition that lets officials divert millions at a time to pet projects.

“We want to make sure that earmarks are reduced and they’re also transparent. We’re going to work with the Congress on a set of reforms to achieve those,” said Orszag, director of the Office of Management and Budget.

Obama’s top hands assigned responsibility to their predecessors and President George W. Bush.

Blaming Bush-era proposals for deficits, Obama wanted to set up his own budget that would start Oct. 1, which he proposed last week with a bold goal of cutting the deficit by half within his four-year term.

“First, this is a $1.7 trillion deficit he inherited. Let’s be clear about that. We inherited this deficit and we inherited $4 trillion of new debt,” Emanuel said. “That is the facts.”

Facts, aides said, would be the cornerstone of the administration’s public relations push. Officials faced a tough haul, even as Orszag and others said the proposal would raise taxes on wealthy Americans and increase energy costs.

Emanuel said energy costs are too low, anyway. U.S. car companies relied too long on gas-guzzling autos and failed to invest in alternative energy vehicles, he said. The time for new auto fuels is now, he contended.

“They never invested in both alternative energy cars. They got dependent on big gas guzzlers. …They have a health care cost structure that’s outdated,” Emanuel said, repeating the administration’s premise that health costs must come under control or else risk breaking all other pieces of the budget.

Republicans were not persuaded. Rep. Eric Cantor, their No. 2 in the House, said Obama was failing on his promises.

“Listen, I mean, the president was elected by the people of this country to institute change in Washington and to finally demand a federal government that is accountable to the people,” he said. “The fact that there are 9,000 earmarks in this bill and the fact that the vetting process just doesn’t take place the way it should, we ought to stand up and draw the line right now and stop the waste.”

Original Link.

Seattle Tea Party at Westlake Center

Monday, March 2nd, 2009


Message to the Federal Government – Don’t Tread on Me (Click Here to Learn More)

Ben and Jennifer Rast, our great friends who run the “Contender Ministries” website and “Scriptorium” blog, have photos from the Seattle “Tea Party” event.

For those who do not know, the Tea Parties are a grassroots effort, by primarily conservative individuals, to protest the massive spending, bailouts and socialism being forced on us by Obama and the liberal Democratic congress. These demonstrations are starting small, but growing larger with each event. Getting little to no attention from Obama’s Department of Propaganda (formerly known as the Main Stream Media), the movement has depended mostly on word of mouth.
One outspoken activist of the Tea Party is conservative commentator, Michelle Malkin. You may see her blog, which has a lot of information about the demonstrations here. Search for “tea party” if she doesn’t have anything on the main page about them.

Take a look at the Seattle Tea Party photos here.

Original Link.

“Crusader Clinton Heading Our Way” by Stan Goodenough

Monday, March 2nd, 2009

As US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton sets out for the Middle East this week (she arrives in Israel Monday evening) two influential newspapers in Israel ran telling reports transparently crafted to cause a confrontation between the Obama administration’s top diplomat and Israeli Prime Minister-designate Binyamin Netanyahu.

The hope on the Israeli left is that the “Ice Woman” will stare down the incoming Israeli leader, pushing him to a place where he will be forced to either acquiesce to, or outright reject, the demand to create a Palestinian state in the land of the Jews.

If he falls into the trap, and greenlights this state, Barack Obama will hold “Bibi” to his word.

If he sticks to his guns and resists the effort, relations with America could slide.

Like their counterparts in the west, Israel’s journalists are overwhelmingly leftist, and in the vanguard of those pushing “land-for-peace.”

Pulling no punches, Ha’aretz – mouthpiece of the “intellectual elites” – ran as top headline on its English-language website the provocative prediction: “US and Israel on collision course as Clinton reiterates vow to create Palestinian state ahead of Israel visit.”

Unlike Clinton, who in a Voice of America interview Friday declared her resolve to emphasize Washington’s commitment to the “two-state solution,” Netanyahu was vacillating.

The Likud leader was being “ambiguous,” complained Ha’aretz, and would not “confirm or deny a belief in the two-state solution.”

Ynetnews, the web presence of Israel’s largest circulation daily, Yedi’ot Ahronot, was somewhat clumsier:

“Clinton is scheduled to meet with … Netanyahu, who is expected to assure her that he will comply with the obligations agreed to by his predecessors,” it asserted, adding that “nevertheless, Netanyahu is unlikely to state he will strive to advance the two-state solution.”

What’s the story here?

While the ins and outs appear complex, the issue itself is not.

Simply – but damningly – put, world leaders will not rest until an Islamic Arab state called Palestine has arisen on the ruins of the Jewish hope to return home.

Nurtured by millions for thousands of years, it was for the realization of this hope that tears flooded the Exile, and prayers without number rose to God’s throne.

Now, professing friendship at every turn, Crusader Clinton is coming to dash the dream.

Preparing the way before her are self-despising journalists who dismiss their countrymen’s faith in their calling as at best a politically-untenable fantasy, at worst a shameful blot on their national past.

Netanyahu, who is being urged by many to withstand these pressures, is trying to walk a fine line. He is certainly able to make a strong case against the viability of two-states-for-two-peoples (sic). Example after example are available for him to prove that surrendering territory to Arabs cannot and will not secure peace for the Jews.

Naturally enough, he does not want to embark on his second term in office already at loggerheads with the new most powerful man in the world. He has been there before. He knows, too, the value of the American Alliance Asset that Israel values and has long sought to protect.

Times have moved on since Clinton’s husband occupied the White House. The new president is an entirely different kettle of fish. And he has a whole administration, together with a well-weighted Capitol Hill, to back his engagement in the Middle East.

As Hillary comes barreling in, Bibi is likely hoping for all the prayers he can get.

May there be many.

Original Link.

“What’s Behind The Enormous Denial That Beheadings Are Related To Islam?” by Phyllis Chesler

Monday, March 2nd, 2009

Hard on the heels of the Buffalo beheading, the mainstream and feminist media hosted many Islamic clerics, Muslim, Jewish, and Christian religious writers, as well as liberal, secular feminists, all of whom insisted that honor killings are no different than domestic violence; that both are crimes; and that honor killings have nothing to do with Islam just as domestic violence has nothing to do with religion.

Even so, everyone also said that an anti-Muslim bias (or “Muslim baiting”), controlled the perception of honor killings in general, and saw honor killings even when they did not exist–for example, in the case of the Buffalo beheading.

Pace, Soheila Vahdati in Womens eNews and Aziz Poonawalla in Beliefnet: No one is arguing that an honor killing is not a crime or even that it is the greatest of crimes. On the contrary. However, an honor killing may certainly deserve a much harsher sentence than a domestically violent beating; in certain cases, where torture or premeditation is involved, an honor killing/femicide might deserve a harsher sentence than a spontaneous, unpremeditated murder which did not involve any torture.

There is also this: In many cases of domestic violence/femicides, drugs and alcohol are often involved. Such murderers often kill themselves at the scene of the crime. In honor killings, this is rarely the case. These are potentially important differences that will be overlooked if we rush to claim that honor killings are the same as domestic violence or as domestic violence/femicide.

In order to prosecute an honor killing, we would first have to recognize it as a different kind of femicide. Perhaps it is more like the ritual murders perpetuated by serial killers, or berserk killers, mainly against strangers, not close kin, in which bodily mutilation, including beheadings play a part. Or, perhaps an honor killing, which may be preceded by years of verbal, physical, and sexual abuse, is more like the highly ritualized killings of “disobedient” or enemy Muslims–by other Muslims.

Recently, Bill O’Reilly had a segment about honor killings in which he interviewed Dr. Dawn Pearlmutter, an expert in ritual murder. She confirmed much of what I have written before, namely, that beheading is rampant in the Islamic world; that it is accepted as a practice by moderate as well as radical Muslims; that jihadic beheadings are videotaped; that there is a thin line between the public beheadings and the more domestic varieties. Dr. Pearlmutter said that beheadings are highly symbolic, are always about “restoring honor” or “purity” to the beheader. Depending on which interpretation of the Qu’ran is followed, a beheading may also prevent the beheaded Muslim from entering Paradise.

According to my colleague, the psycho-analyst and Arabist, Dr. Nancy H. Kobrin:

“There is a communicative circuit of beheadings: The serial killer in the West who beheads prostitutes is no longer visible in our consciousness. There was a bizarre fascination with the jihadic videos that showed the beheadings of Daniel Pearl and Nicholas Berg; it appealed to perverse sado-masochistic emotions. Now, the beheading of Aasiaya Z. Hassan has had an almost opposite effect. Most people are rushing to insist that how she was killed is somehow not important. It is being minimized, and de-contextualized.”

I’ll say. No one has tried to do this more expertly than Aloysious Mowe in the pages of Newsweek/Washington Post.

Father Mowe, (he is a Jesuit priest), begins his article by giving us five random examples of other beheadings as if to say that what happened to Aasiya Z. Hassan in Buffalo is common, not unusual to America, and that it has nothing to with Islam. In fact, he thinks it may be related to being Chinese! Thus, although beheading was abolished in China in 1905, Mowe claims that the communists have revived the custom for capital crimes. If so, this information cannot be easily found on most websites.

But Mowe is comparing apples and oranges, peaches and pears, melons and grapes.

When last I looked, the Chinese were not threatening to behead non-Chinese people, not even foreign capitalists, not even foreign communists. The communist Chinese are not kidnapping non-Chinese people and videotaping their beheadings. Muslim terrorists and Muslim national leaders are doing precisely that.

Further, honor killings, by definition, are mainly male on female crimes and are mainly of a female family member or intimate. Mowe’s examples, which are meant to be definitive, or to overwhelm, are really quite superficial.

Read the rest of the article here.

“It Just Keeps Getting Worse” by David Limbaugh

Monday, March 2nd, 2009

Remember when liberals were wringing their hands and accusing President George W. Bush of being a dictator and a king? Of course, that was breathtakingly absurd, but what’s really ironic is that these people actually want a king, provided they get to pick him.

As Barack Obama feverishly presses forward with his socialist agenda, one wonders whether any act of executive overreaching might cause the compliant, nay, conspiratorial Democratic congressional majorities to pause or, better yet, to resist.

I think not. Every assault Obama inflicts on the budget is met by Congress with: “Thank you, sir. May I have another?”

I realize liberals take umbrage at the pejorative terms “Marxist” and “socialist,” but in invoking them, my purpose is neither to exaggerate nor to provoke. If the terms bother you, could you please tell me how Obama would be behaving differently if he were a socialist or Marxist just elected in this country?

Better yet, given the policies Obama and Congress are cramming down our throats, please tell me why you even mind those terms? Why not wear them proudly?

Just before the election, I wrote: “With (Obama’s) ideas about spreading the wealth, entrepreneurial selfishness … (and) the inherent evil of corporation… are you not concerned at just how far Obama might go if he’s got a nearly veto-proof Democratic majority at his back… Before our very eyes, America stands poised to elect as president the most radical man ever to run for this office credibly. Don’t say we didn’t warn you.”

Some, including certain highbrow right-wingers, accused me of hyperventilating. They told us knuckle draggers that Obama is pragmatic and centrist and that we should just calm down and give him a chance. We responded that we didn’t have the luxury of being calm, because if we let our guard down, Obama would rush through his agenda before we had time to react.

Tell me, now that we’re five weeks into this administration, which of us has egg on his face?

It’s not just elitist conservatives. I’d also like to know how self-professed conservative Democrats, who have always vehemently denied their liberalism, would explain their blind faith today. At this point, I swear they’d walk off a cliff for Obama if he told them to.

Even if some on both sides of the aisle are slow to grasp this, what we’re really witnessing here is the fury of liberal power unleashed. In the name of compassion and fairness, they are exerting increasing control over our lives and using the economic crisis as cover, as they seek federal power to:

–Further dictate our children’s education curricula. “In this budget, we will end education programs that don’t work.” Where did we get the idea that Washington is better-suited for this than our local school boards?

–Increase their control over Americans’ private health care decisions.

–Run banks and set salary caps for corporate CEOs — something that ought to horrify free market adherents everywhere, even those suspicious of excessive corporate salaries.

–Prohibit corporate perks and private-jet trips while sanctioning their own taxpayer-sponsored ones.

–Decide who is worthy of being relieved of irresponsible home-purchasing decisions.

–Discourage charitable giving with their further phasing out of charitable deductions.

–Dole out money to “worthy” municipalities in order to position themselves as micromanaging federal enforcers: “Nobody messes with Joe Biden.”

–Replace the free market as the engine of economic growth. You can’t watch Obama operate without concluding he truly believes that government, not the private sector, generates wealth in this nation.

–Be the arbiter of income distribution for all citizens.

–Impose paralyzing cap and trade mandates on private corporations based on dubious, disputed, non-consensus-based “science,” which amounts to nothing more than another tax on private industry and flies directly in the face of Obama’s promises to be friendly to small business.

Almost as alarming as the foregoing, President Obama is engaged in what seems to be a deliberate effort to talk down the economy for the presumed purpose of ensuring our panic mode represses a stock market recovery long enough to fuel his frantic agenda.

Adding insult to injury, at a time when these liberals are growing government in areas never contemplated by our Founders nor authorized by the Constitution, they are eviscerating the defense budget, relaxing our foreign policy toward enemy dictators and, in effect, unilaterally declaring the war on terror over and forcing us to revert to our pre-9/11 mode of treating the war as a law enforcement matter.

If we could afford to let down our guard and sleep during this period, I’d be inclined to do so and ask whether someone would please be so kind as to awaken me when this nightmare is over.

Original Link.