The Muslim Vote

(All emphases by Always On Watch)

From this August 24, 2007 article in the Washington Post:

More than 50 candidates in this fall's elections are expected to appear in Reston tomorrow [August 25] at a political picnic organized by a group of Northern Virginia mosques, and organizers say the heavy turnout underscores the growing influence of Muslim voters in local politics.

The event, the group's seventh annual "family and civic picnic," has a dual purpose, organizers say. Through a voter registration drive, they hope to persuade more Muslims to become involved in local elections. In addition, they hope to show the candidates that "we're here, we care, and we do vote," said Shirin Elkoshairi, a spokesman for the Sterling-based All Dulles Area Muslim Society, which has more than 5,000 members.

"[The turnout] definitely shows that candidates feel that Muslims are voting and are a force at the polls," Elkoshairi said.

So far, nothing remarkable in the article.

Then comes the mention of Mukit Hossain, about whom I have blogged on more than one occasion. An index to those postings is HERE.

According to the following information in my first posting on Hossain back in August of 2005,

For Hossain, helping immigrants, most from Central and South America, is a Muslim issue. Charity is one of the five pillars of Islam. So he raised money from Muslim businessmen in Herndon to buy 400 winter coats for the laborers, brought them food through another charity he started, called Food Source, and even rounded up day laborers to attend a Thanksgiving dinner at an Iraqi restaurant where falafel, not turkey, was served.

"I consider them my neighbors," said Hossain...

[...]

Hossain has not only parlayed giving food and coats to illegal migrants into a federally funded exercise in Da'wa (Islamic propagation), he has assisted those who broke the law with legal aid to help them fight to stay in the US. Hossain exploits his 'charitable' work for furthering his Islamist agenda,and openly proclaims this to be his political mission as well.... Hossain is also active in MAS, the Muslim American Society, the group which is in the forefront of campaiging for the release of jailed presidental assassin wannabe Omar Abu Ali. MAS also lauded Hossain as a 'supporter' of their organisation which is directly linked to ICNA and by extension Al Qaeda. The trustee of MAS's Islamic American University is Sheik Yusuf Qaradawi who proclaimed that Muslim women have an Islamic duty to become suicide bombers.

Apparently, Hossain is quite the advocate for immigration, and it doesn't matter to him whether those immigrants are illegal or not because he ties his advocacy with his Muslim duty.

Returning now to the first-cited link in this posting,

There are about 64,000 Muslims registered to vote in Virginia, with the vast majority of them in the outskirts of Washington, said Mukit Hossain, president of the Virginia Muslim Political Action Committee, which tracks trends and endorses candidates in many local elections.

[...]

Organizers also expect candidates from Loudoun and Prince William counties, which last month approved resolutions aimed at cracking down on illegal immigrants. Although the actions were seen as primarily affecting Hispanics, they have sparked concern among Muslims because of fears that the actions could increase racial profiling and curb civil liberties, Hossain said.

"I think since 9/11, the Muslim community has learned that any community can be attacked," he said. "When someone is attacked unfairly, we have to stand in solidarity with them."

As we approach the sixth anniversary of 9/11, here is Hossain whining about Muslims being targeted.

Excuse me, Mr. Hossain, but nearly 3000 innocent people died during those horrific attacks on the Twin Towers and the Pentagon as well as those stop-the-hijackers patriots about Flight 93, which went down in a field in Shanksville, Pennsylvania. Have you forgotten about those who perished on 9/11? Do you consider the very few verified cases of post-9/11 persecution of Muslims to be more significant than Islamic terrorist attacks? Also, Mr. Hossain, I remind you that Muslim is not a race.

And here is a bit more from Hossain:

Hossain, who has been organizing opposition to the Loudoun and Prince William votes [against illegal immigration], said his group conducted a survey of Virginia Muslims and found that immigration was their top local concern. Education was second, he said, and respect for diversity was third.

Muslims respect diversity? Really? Oh, that's right, Saudi Arabia is one respect-for-diversity country. **snerk**

The article also states the following:

Although Muslims represent a tiny part of the electorate, candidates are beginning to see the value of courting Islamic voters, because small but motivated groups can have a big impact at the polls, he said. That's especially true for off-year elections, which tend to have lower voter turnout. Last fall, more than 86 percent of registered Muslim voters turned out to vote, he said, compared with about 53 percent of the general population.

That has not gone unnoticed among political activists, said Brian Roherty, campaign manager for Michael Firetti, who is running for chairman of the Loudoun County Board of Supervisors.

"Every single vote counts, and smart politicians know that," Roherty said.

Ah, the dhimmitude of politicians, as they cater to the whim of a "tiny part of the electorate"! Somehow, that phrase is reminiscent of another few words: "a tiny portion of extremists," often used to refer to Islamic terrorists.

Even a champion of the battle against illegal immigration in Northern Virginia, Loudoun Supervisor Eugene A. Delgaudio is attending the picnic:

Loudoun Supervisor Eugene A. Delgaudio (R-Sterling), the main sponsor of Loudoun's resolution, said he plans to attend tomorrow's event, partly because the Muslim community reflects his values of being "extremely moral and religious." His district's demographics are among the most rapidly changing in Northern Virginia. For example, Sterling's Park View High School was two-thirds white in 2000; last year, whites made up less than half the school.

"We have a lot of ethnic groups represented here," he said. "Sterling is like the United Nations. It's a very diverse neighborhood."

Oh, yes, Mr. Delgaudio, Muslims are extremely moral. Why don't you do a little reading on the topic? You can start by reading Western Resistance and Dr. Homa Darabi Foundation. Those sites might open your eyes as to certain barbaric customs in Islamic culture.

According to the August 24, 2007 Washington Post article, a good turnout is expected for the pandering to Muslim voters:

Picnic organizers are expecting a broad spectrum of candidates running for the state legislature and boards of supervisors in Loudoun, Prince William and Fairfax counties. The candidates will have a chance to speak to and field questions from the more than 1,000 attendees expected.

Fairfax County Supervisor Penelope A. Gross (D-Mason), whose diverse district in central Fairfax includes two mosques, said her research has turned up more likely voters among Arab Americans than any other minority group.

"Over the past few years we have seen a lot more interest among Arab Americans in the civic culture of our community," said Gross, adding that she tries to go to the picnic each year and plans to attend tomorrow [August 25].

I wonder if CAIR will also attend.

Islamification continues apace on the political front here in Northern Virginia and elsewhere in the United States. As the percentage of Muslims increases, now allied with immigrants legally present or not, expect more of the same types of events and political pandering. Start checking the local section of your newspaper to see what's happening in your area.

More on H.R. 2265: FAQ's

Christine of The Center for Vigilant Freedom has written an important post, which you can read in its entirety below. H.R. 2265 is being presented as a compassionate attempt to rescue Iraqi refugees. But the bill is much more than that!

Christine's article is brilliant. Make time to read it!

From this source, in its entirety, is what Christine has posted:

Here are the Frequently Asked Questions and answers for the dangerous and defeatist Democratic Iraqi refugee bill in the House - H.R. 2265 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:h2265:) (S. 1651), with Kyle Shideler’s more detailed analysis here. It’s being sold as a way to get at-risk Iraqi employees - Iraqi translators, contractors, spouses and kids - into the U.S. as “special immigrants.” But the reality is that the bill seriously undermines provisions in US immigration law, opening immigration to those identified as terrorists or supporters of terrorist groups.

As you’ll see, this bill gives refugee status to broad sections of the Iraqi population, with additional exemptions to all other aliens, and with special favorable treatment for anyone with a terrorist background. It’s as if the Bill assumes only two policy options:

(1) Surrender Iraq to al Qaeda and Iranian forces and blame the ensuing genocide on Bush OR…
(2) Surrender Iraq to al Qaeda and Iranian forces, blame the ensuing genocide on Bush, and create a program (designed to be confusing, poorly managed and dangerous) to get out as many Iraqis as possible, with a proactive effort to include Iraqis with terrorist and anti-American histories of violence.

First, here are your coordinates to track the Bill’s progress this fall. HR2265 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:h2265:) provides “special immigrant status” for some Iraqis and assists Iraqi refugees living in other countries. It was introduced in May 2007 by Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) and Rep. Christopher Shays (D-CT), and currently is referred to the House Judiciary and Foreign Affairs Committees.

Who gets to be a special immigrant? The “principal alien” group of “Special immigrants” are any Iraqi and his immediate family who has worked alongside the US government, contractors, U.N or U.S.-based non-governmental organizations for at least a year. Presumably this would include all contractors, most members of the Iraqi military and police in units who have fought alongside American troops, Mayors and town councilmen for every single hamlet and village, many a tribal sheikh or construction business owner, their family and employees.

Wait - who will be left to turn out the lights? Isn’t this for people who will be killed if they stay in Iraq? The Bill gets cute here in a left-wing gallows-humor fashion. It states that a principal alien has to be someone who “has a not manifestly unfounded fear of persecution, violence, or harm to the alien or the alien’s family on account of their work.” That’s clear enough…..except then it neatly states that any Iraqi who worked for a year with the U.S., contractors, U.N. or any U.S. based NGO “shall be presumed to satisfy the requirement” of having that fear of persecution. So everyone who has had any employee relationship for a year with any of those entities qualifies.

Even if they work for the U.N.? But we thought the Democrats wanted the U.N. to replace the U.S. in Iraq. Yes, even if they work for the U.N., which makes you wonder about Democratic plans for “peacekeeping” or policing after they force out a real military presence. This Bill defines any Western presence in Iraq including the U.N. as a violent threat to any Iraqis who cooperate with them. According to this bill, Iraqis will have no security of any kind.

You’re sure al Qaeda didn’t draft this Bill - that sounds like their line? No, we think it sounds more like the extreme left-wing of the Democratic party, with a compassionate pretext. But we take your point.

If the NGO they work for has a headquarters in, say, Brussels or Dubai, are their workers safe? Absolutely. This Bill says that only workers for U.S. based NGOs are at risk (plus the U.N. of course…). Al Qaeda in Iraq must have promised the Bill’s sponsors to check the location of the main office address for your NGO before you are bombed.

How many “special immigrants” will enter the U.S.? For four years, from FY 2008 - FY 2011, 15,000 immigrants (”principal aliens”) will enter the U.S. each year, for a total of 60,000 Iraqis in this category. The bill creates more categories of immigrants from Iraq too, but they are not “primary aliens.” These 60,000 principal aliens will be in addition to existing immigration quotas.

What benefits will these “special immigrants” receive? All will be eligible for the same resettlement assistance, entitlement programs, and other benefits as refugees admitted under section 207 of the Immigration and Naturalization Act. This program has serious security and management problems and coming under fire from local communities. This Bill provides “such sums as may be necessary” to accommodate the new refugees. In the private sector we call that a blank check, but this is Congress where it is compassion. The bill also states that the Emergency Refugee and Migration Assistance Fund can exceed its normal legal cap of $100 million during this refugee resettlement process.

I am a principal alien with a not manifestly unfounded fear of persecution. How will you protect me? If you apply and are in imminent danger, the Secretary of State will provide you with protection that may include temporary housing on United States military bases or at provincial reconstruction team offices, or the immediate removal from Iraq of such alien.

But wait - if the Democrats withdraw from Iraq, all 60,000 of us will be in imminent danger (plus our spouses and children, religious minorities and others). That’s 60,000+ people for Secretary Rice to protect right now. How will she do this? She will put you in base housing and in team offices. It might be a little snug.

But if the Democrats withdraw from Iraq, you will not have temporary housing, military bases or provincial reconstruction team offices. They will be in the hands of al Qaeda, the way facilities in Gaza fell into the hands of Hamas when their adversaries withdrew. So how will Secretary Rice protect us? The Bill says she will immediately remove all 60,000+ of you who are in imminent danger. Perhaps she will fly you out.

From where will she fly us out? After the Democrats surrender to al Qaeda, there will not be military bases where airplanes can land. The Bill does not specify how you will be able to leave Iraq, but we remind you that carpooling and bicycling meet Al Gore’s demands for a small carbon footprint.

I have arranged my carpool to flee Iraq under Secretary Rice’s protection after the Democrats surrender the U.S. airbases. Where do I go to apply as a principal alien? The Secretary of State will set up processing facilities in two locations in Baghdad, one location in southern Iraq, and two locations in Iraqi Kurdistan. She will do things to “minimize to the greatest extent practicable security risks” to you.

But all the Iraqi police and military will also be in line with me to flee, by the definition of this Bill, and the Democrats will have removed the U.S. Military. Who will provide security as I wait in line? Secretary Rice will protect you, “to the greatest extent practicable” which under these circumstances will be not at all. The Bill is worded to set up the U.S. Government to fail in protecting former Iraqi employees, but to show the compassion of the Bill’s drafters.

Will I need a passport and visa? The Secretaries of State and Homeland Security will work with the Iraqi government to issue passports to all 60,000+ of you in imminent danger, and will waive all fees. They will do this with careful scrutiny of each of your backgrounds as well, and in cooperation with an Iraqi government that may not exist because the Democrats will have withdrawn all U.S. military support for it.

I trust Secretary Rice and the Democratic Congress to protect me, but my big worry is that this activity will not generate a government report - can you reassure me? You are in luck. “Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the President shall submit to Congress a report on aliens described in this section who worked directly with the United States Government, the United Nations or other international organizations, certified government or international organization contractors or subcontractors, or international nongovernmental organization as a translator for a period of at least one year.”

Wait - the report will cover “other international organizations” or “international nongovernmental organizations” - and it sounds like maybe only translators can leave? You said above that it was only U.S. based NGOs, but other kinds of contractors too. This is confusing! Yes, you are confused.

What about help for other countries housing the refugees? Actually, that’s one of the few sensible sections of the Bill, and should be submitted as separate legislation, to help Iraq, Jordan, Syria, Turkey, and Lebanon with resources to support Iraqi refugees. Sadly this Bill provides no details. However, since Syria has been actively supporting al Qaeda in Iraq, in order to create the instability that has created the refugee situation (H/T Shideler), it seems they should pay the costs of their meddling themselves.

Will you be checking my background? I might have a parking ticket or two. The Department of Homeland Security will create a plan, ninety days after the Bill is enacted, to check the backgrounds of all “principal aliens” and other categories of refugees. Right now these processes are a bottleneck in bringing in the current quota of 7,000 Iraqi refugees, but good intentions and another blank check for funding will theoretically fix everything. The Arabic speaking translators needed to do background checks, who will be first in line to leave Iraq, will somehow not be needed for all the other background checks.

I am still worried there will not be enough bureaucratic reports on this compassionate program, in order to blame the Bush administration when the program fails. Can you reassure me? Yes we can! An annual report will report on the “adequacy and effectiveness of United States and United Nations programs to protect and assist Iraqi refugees and internally displaced persons.” This will provide an opportunity for hearings blaming the Bush administration for the genocide resulting from the Democratic withdrawal of U.S. military from Iraq and the chaos resulting from the provisions of this Bill.

Who else can be a “special immigrant” under this Bill? The bill states that from 2007 to 2008, no fewer than 20,000 other refugees will be admitted.

No FEWER than 20,000? Then the Bill sets no upper limit, only a floor, for other refugees leaving Iraq in 2008 alone? You are correct.

Who is included in this unlimited category? I have many relatives and friends I would like to include in my carpool. Here is the list:

(1) Female-headed households and unaccompanied children.

(2) Religious communities of antiquity, including Chaldo-Assyrian Christians, Jews, Sabean Mandeans, Yazidis, Bahais, and others.

(3) Other religious, ethnic, social, or minority groups, including gay and lesbian Iraqis, subject to violence, intimidation, or discrimination by state or non-state actors.

(4) Iraqis with family members in the United States.

Is it possible that category 3 could include the entire Iraqi population, since Sunnis are subject to violence at the hands of Shiites, and Shiites at the hands of Sunnis? Yes, category 3 provides an unlimited number of “special immigrants” and by definition includes the entire Iraq population. The politically correct drafters of the Bill did not want to leave anyone out.

My brother-in-law Hussein engaged in youthful indiscretions with IEDs this spring, but my wife will never stop nagging me if we cannot bring him. Will Secretary Rice help? Hussein is also a lucky guy. The Bill allows the Secretaries of State, Homeland Security, and the Attorney General to determine that the definition of a terrorist does not apply to an individual or a group. Even better for Hussein, that determination will be made with “unreviewable discretion.”

And this is just for Iraqis, this amendment to the Immigration and Nationality Act that allows them unreviewable discretion to let in groups formerly known as terrorists? No, our reading of Section 7 of this Bill is that it uses the Iraqi refugee issue to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to allow this discretion for all aliens, not just Iraqis. We think the Bill’s optimistic drafters are thinking ahead to a future Democratic administration where the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security, and the Attorney General, will have a politically correct and multicultural view of who constitutes a terrorist, regardless of country of origin.

My cousin Ali also did bad things but it was not his fault - he was under duress. Will you let him in? Before this Bill, Ali would have been kept out of the U.S. by the law banning those who commit an act “that the actor knows, or reasonably should know, affords material support, including a safe house, transportation, communications, funds, transfer of funds or other material financial benefit, false documentation or identification, weapons (including chemical, biological, or radiological weapons), explosives, or training.” But this Bill now adds the language “other than an act carried out under duress” to that law, so tell Ali to say he was made to do whatever he did. The drafters of the Bill trust that all applicants will tell the truth about any duress they experienced, and that the Homeland Security background checks will find any fibbers, as long as they speak English since all Arabic translators will have been evacuated.

Ali’s son and wife approved these terrorist actions by Ali, which were done within the last five years (well, last Tuesday and a few dozen times before…). Can they still be special immigrants under this bill? You bet! Before this Bill, it would have been a problem - the old language required that a spouse or child of a terrorist either be unaware, or renounce the terrorist activity, and the terrorist activity could not have been in the last five years. The Bill changes this to exempt any spouse or child of someone who committed a terrorist act in the last five years, regardless of whether they were aware or renounced the act.

The Bill calls this change a “Technical Correction,” but the change is actually substantive. The Bill’s drafters just believe in modest understatement, and were not trying to hide anything.

My cousin Abdullah applied two years ago as a U.S. immigrant and was rejected because of his youthful indiscretions with al Qaeda. Will this new law help him? Yes indeed. The amendments will apply to: “(1) removal proceedings instituted before, on, or after the date of the enactment of this section; and (2) acts and conditions constituting a ground for inadmissibility, excludability, deportation, or removal occurring or existing before, on, or after such date.” Everybody is welcome, because the Bill’s politically correct drafters do not want to exclude anyone. We also think this applies to all alien proceedings, not just Iraqi aliens.

****************

This Bill and its Senate counterpart should die in committee.

I am all for being loyal to our friends. My own extended family fled their various homelands on two continents to survive the Germans in World War II and the Iranian revolution a generation later, years in displaced person camps and then years of drifting from country to country looking for a home. I agree that granting “special immigrant” status to a selected list of Iraqis who are at genuine risk regardless of political outcomes in Iraq is worthwhile. But the best way to make Iraq secure for all Iraqis is to fight to victory over al Qaeda in Iraq, to stop the Iranian subversion of the region, and to build up Iraqis’ own capacity to maintain order among sectarian factions. That requires staying in Iraq just as we stayed in Japan, Germany and Korea.

If left-wing legislators had met this spring with CAIR and representatives of the Muslim Brotherhood to draft a bill, using the pretext of helping a defined group of “targeted” U.S. Iraqi contractors, to create an actual program that could result (no doubt completely inadvertently) in admitting terrorists into the U.S., they might have ended up with similar provisions.

Lest we forget, it has been alleged that lobbyists for this bill are “conservatives” Grover Norquist, founder of the Islamic Free Market Institute (copies of canceled checks funding it from Saudis, Kuwait, Safa Trust and Qatar here) and David Keene, lobbyist for the Carmen Group and new friend of the ACLU. We cannot confirm this information.

Perhaps they are all honorable men. So are they all, all honorable men.

Do you recognize the words in that last paragraph? They come from Shakespeare's Julius Caesar, from Marc Antony's speech in which he sarcastically referred to the conspirators who, in spite of their good intentions, brought Rome to chaos by assassinating Julius Caesar on the steps of the Senate.

Attention, Counter-Propagandists!

(Stuck toward the top through July 27)

From this source:

Bloggers, clear your calendars Sunday, July 22, through Friday, July 27. Some real propaganda bombshells are bound to be dropped, and you’ll want to be there when “several leading Muslim clerics and thinkers from around the globe will participate in an unprecedented online dialogue about their religion, terrorism and human rights.”

The “dialogue,” sponsored by The Washington Post and Newsweek Interactive and presented in conjunction with Georgetown University, has been dubbed “Muslims Speak Out” and will take place at On Faith, a blog operated as a joint effort of the Post and Newsweek.

More at this link.

"We Are All John Doe"

From this source:

Pete King (R-NY) tried hard but the “John Doe” amendment protecting passengers’ rights to report suspicious behavior without being sued by CAIR in its Saudi-funded lawsuit jihad failed.

and

UPDATE (as of 9:30 p.m., July 19): Susan Collins (R-ME) submitted her “John Doe” passenger protection amendment for a vote in the Senate (S.A. 2340) but the amendment failed just 3 votes shy of the 60 needed to pass. Michelle Malkin has the vote roll of aye’s and nay’s here. No Republican voted against it, but Sam Brownback (R-CA) and Obama (D-IL) did not vote.Malkin points out that the final conference report could be a last place to add language protecting passengers who report suspicious behavior from lawsuits - but this is becoming more of a longshot.
So, time to gear up:

— Expect more probes of the 6 Flying Imams variety, especially as we go into the August vacation season.

— Bring a videocamera or video cell phone with you, so you can gather evidence as needed to protect yourself and your fellow passengers, from both terrorism and lawsuits. You can pick one up for less than $100 at Walmart (online price maybe cheaper in the store), Target, or Radioshack.

— It’s time for a Passenger Bill of Rights and Passenger Training. If we have to protect ourselves, so be it. Kyle Shideler did a great post on this on May 3, and I’m reposting it below or link here (A Passenger’s Right To Survive) because it’s even more important now.

How the vote went:

Grouped By Vote Position YEAs ---57 (Protect those who support suspicious behavior)
Alexander (R-TN)
Allard (R-CO)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bayh (D-IN)
Bennett (R-UT)
Bond (R-MO)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burr (R-NC)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Clinton (D-NY)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Coleman (R-MN)
Collins (R-ME)
Conrad (D-ND)
Corker (R-TN)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Craig (R-ID)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Dole (R-NC)
Domenici (R-NM)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hagel (R-NE)
Hatch (R-UT)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Isakson (R-GA)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lieberman (ID-CT)
Lott (R-MS)
Lugar (R-IN)
Martinez (R-FL)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Nelson (D-NE)
Roberts (R-KS)
Schumer (D-NY)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Smith (R-OR)
Snowe (R-ME)
Specter (R-PA)
Stevens (R-AK)
Sununu (R-NH)
Thune (R-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Warner (R-VA)

NAYs ---39 (Those who support suspicious behavior can be sued)
Akaka (D-HI)
Biden (D-DE)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Byrd (D-WV)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cardin (D-MD)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Dodd (D-CT)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feingold (D-WI)
Harkin (D-IA)
Inouye (D-HI)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Kohl (D-WI)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Lincoln (D-AR)
McCaskill (D-MO)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Salazar (D-CO)
Sanders (I-VT)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Tester (D-MT)
Webb (D-VA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wyden (D-OR)

Not Voting - 4
Brownback (R-KS)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Johnson (D-SD)
Obama (D-IL)

Go to THIS LINK for more information from "We Are All John Doe." Lots of internal links!

Refugee Resettlement

From Refugee Resettlement Watch, a site which states as follows on its "About" page:

A few months ago it came to our attention in Washington County MD that a non-profit group (Virginia Council of Churches) had been bringing refugees into the city of Hagerstown (county seat) for a couple of years. Some problems arose and citizens started to take an interest. One of the most startling things we found out about this very quiet effort is that these non-profit groups bring to the US about 25,000 Muslim refugees from the Middle East, Africa, the Balkans, etc, almost completely funded by the US Government through grants and contracts with these non-government agencies. Of the 168 refugees brought to our county since 2004, 125 are Muslim. Although we all have sympathy for persecuted and suffering people there are real questions to be answered about the wisdom of this policy. It turns out that there are hotbeds of this controversy throughout the US. We have identified some of those. We set up this online community organizing center [HERE]. If you have information or questions from your communities about Refugee Resettlement please get in touch with Ann Corcoran at refugeeresettlementwatch@vigilantfreedom.com

From this page at Refugee Resettlement Watch, emphases mine:

Public benefits available to refugees and successful asylees include:

Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) formerly known as AFDC

Medicaid

Food Stamps

Public Housing

Supplemental Security Income (SSI)

Social Security Disability Insurance

Administration on Developmental Disabilities (ADD) (direct services only)

Child Care and Development Fund

Independent Living Program

Job Opportunities for Low Income Individuals (JOLI)

Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP)

Post secondary Education Loans and Grants

Refugee Assistance Programs

Title IV Foster Care and Adoption Assistance Payments (if parents are “qualified immigrants”)

Title XX Social Services Block Grant Funds

Prior to 1980, refugee sponsoring agencies were totally responsible for all refugee needs, including housing, medical care and employment. Today they have virtually no responsibilities. A newly arriving refugee aged 65 can immediately retire on SSI/Medicaid never having worked a day in the U.S.

After 4 months the Volags [voluntary non-government agencies] do not even have to know where the refugees are located. Therefore they have no legal requirements to make sure the refugees are o.k. and are assimilating. One very interesting statistic I noted was that a few refugees actually return to their country of origin which brings up the question of how persecuted were they in the first place. In Washington Co. an Iraqi family left the area soon after arrival telling people the conditions were deplorable.

One area of change suggested by those advocating reform of refugee resettlement is to require Volags to identify sponsoring churches and organizations for each family and to be responsible for the family for a year before accessing welfare programs. Although not a legal contract requirement, VCC did not identify enough sponsors for refugees in Washington Co. and therefore many refugees were not adequately supported causing some of the political friction. Recently VCC stated that existing refugee families could sponsor new families which would not be a desirable solution.

The National Governor’s Assn. was critical of the program in its Policy Position on Refugee Resettlement on March 5, 2007. They are concerned about the lack of consultation by the Volags in placement of refugees and they are concerned about the cost of refugee resettlement (a Federal responsibility) being passed down to state and local governments. * This report is available.

It is often difficult to get accurate information from Volags about the numbers of refugees resettled in a community. VCC has stated publicly that they have resettled over 200 refugees in Washington Co. from Africa and Russia. In fact, the State Department places the number at 168 from 13 different countries. Of the 168, 125 are Muslim. Nationally about 50% of refugees brought to the US are Muslim. There are no Muslim Volags, most are various Christian faiths and one Jewish organization. * List of the major Volags is available.

Employment statistics vary from location to location, but in ORR’s 2004 Report to Congress only 16% of refugees find a job in the first 3 months and at 12 months only 62% nationally have a job. The average hourly wage in a 5 year population sample was $8.90. *This report is available.

The Department of Homeland Security is responsible for determining whether refugees pose any danger to the safety and security of the US, but this authority can be waived by the US State Department. For example, on May 5, 2006 Sec. of State Rice gave approval for the Burmese (Karen) people of the Tham Hin Camp in Thailand to enter the US even though some may be members of (or have given support to) the Karen National Liberation Army, considered a terrorist group by the US govt. Burmese (Karen) comprise the next group of refugees VCC would like to resettle in Washington Co. *Waiver is available.

Some states have another layer of bureaucracy, a kind of go-between office, that helps to facilitate Refugee Resettlement between the Volags and the Federal government. In Maryland, it is the Maryland Office for New Americans (MONA). Although listed as part of Maryland’s Department of Human Services it is funded primarily by grants from the Federal Government.

The cost of translation for such things as medical care, emergency response etc. is according to federal law the responsibility of the local government agency. In Washington Co., VCC says they are working with seven languages at the present time.

I have found no location where a Volag does any formal written reporting about their plans in advance of bringing refugees to a community, or any report to local governments during the program.

Other cities are having problems with Refugee Resettlement. Manchester, NH shut the program down completely after they had to build a wing on to the high school exclusively for English as a Second language students and had a problem with many refugee children having lead poisoning. Lewiston, ME tried to stop the influx of Somali Bantu but failed. Eastern Tennessee is having problems. Cayce, SC is the only town I have found so far that stopped Refugee Resettlement in advance.

Read more, especially the bulleted items at the top of the page for the above-cited information.

So, what's going on in your neighborhood?

[Home page for Refugee Resettlement Watch]

What Is GWB Thinking Of?

Today, President Bush is scheduled to speak at the Washington D.C. Islamic Center, which has ties to Wahhabism. Here, at Vigilant Freedom/910 Blog, in "Sir, Have You No Shame?" is what Baron Bodissey of Gates of Vienna had to say about what our President is doing today (emphases mine):

President Bush has been seduced by the dark side of the Force.

That’s the only explanation I can think of.

He will speak tomorrow at the Washington Islamic Center, the most prominent Saudi-funded mosque in Washington DC. Not to mince words, it’s a Wahhabist mosque.

The speech is at 11:30 AM, so time is short.

Dymphna [also of Gates of Vienna] posted on this topic earlier this afternoon, in an open letter to the President. [Read it!]

Bloggers: we need to blog on this, and have our readers light up the phones at the White House tonight and tomorrow.

Readers: see the contact info at the bottom of this post. The important phone numbers are 202-456-1414 (voice) and 202-456-2461 (fax).

The Administration claims to want to shut down terrorist groups. The groups represented at the President’s speech include CAIR, MPAC, ISNA, etc., which are known cover groups and fronts for the architects and funding sources of the Muslim Brotherhood and related Islamic terror groups. The President must state his firm commitment to shutting down these terror groups.

The President must make the point that Islam as it is practiced by many of these groups is not a religion, but a political ideology which seeks to dominate the rest of us by force.

The groups invited to and/or sponsoring this event must disavow Hamas, Hizbullah, etc. specifically and by name and not just utter generalized mealy-mouthed condemnations of “all kinds of terrorism”. Those who will not join in such a denunciation are de facto apologists and supporters of the jihad groups.

The leaders of these groups have not addressed the criminal and immoral attacks on civilians by Islamic suicide bombers and terrorists. This must change. They must publicly and clearly denounce these attacks as unacceptable and un-Islamic.

Any effort to implement the above changes is routinely denounced as “racism” and “Islamophobia”. The President must make clear that opposing political Islam is not any of these things; it is an honorable, patriotic, and morally justified enterprise in defense of human liberty.

These groups must be compelled to acknowledge that extremist and violent Islam is a real, widespread, and serious problem, and not just a figment of the “infidel” imagination. They must be seen publicly to join in the movement to denounce and resist it.

The Islamic groups which encourage their followers not to cooperate with the police, the FBI, and other law-enforcement agencies are not just being unhelpful, they are breaking the law.

The groups involved in this event have routinely denounced the “Zionist lobby”. It should be stated explicitly that this is an unacceptable attack on the pluralism of American society.

The focus on Israel as the putative cause of all Islamic violence must stop.

We call on President Bush to state publicly and forcefully that the Muslim Brotherhood, which is behind many of these “charities” and lobbying groups, is a dangerous, violent, and subversive entity which threatens the security of the United States and the entire Western world. It must be delegitimized and put beyond the pale of acceptable social action.

Contact info:

George W. Bush
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Ave. N.W.
Washington D.C. 20500

voice: 202-456-1414
fax: 202-456-2461
e-mail: president@whitehouse.gov

Get on it, folks! Let the President know that his dhimmitude is unacceptable.

U.S. Aid To Saudi

The House has the right idea. Will the Senate and the President fall into line? I doubt it. They haven't in the past.

From this article:

WASHINGTON, June 22 (Reuters) - The U.S. House of Representatives voted on Friday to prohibit any aid to Saudi Arabia as lawmakers accused the close ally of religious intolerance and bankrolling terrorist organizations.

The prohibition, reflecting persistent tensions with the kingdom after the Sept. 11 attacks on the United States in 2001, was attached to a foreign aid funding bill for next year that has not yet been debated by the Senate.

It also faces a veto threat from the White House because of an unrelated provision.

[...]

In the past three years, Congress has passed bills to stop the relatively small amount of U.S. aid to Saudi Arabia, only to see the Bush administration circumvent the prohibitions....

Read it all.

It's way past time to stop funding our own destruction.

Stand With Israel Rally: June 10

From this source:

Come to Washington DC on June 10, and join us in a rally to support Israel's right to peace, security and defensible borders!

Israel's opponents are on the move: On June 10, 2007, to mark the 40th anniversary of Israel's 1967 war of survival, the extremist groups "United for Peace and Justice" and "Muslim American Society Freedom Foundation" will hold what even the liberal magazine Tikkun called a rally for the "dissolution of the State of Israel." The "United for Peace and Justice" coalition includes such radical organizations as the Socialist Party USA, the Young Communists League, Communist Party USA, and the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee.

Israel's supporters depend on you: We will gather on the North side of Constitution Avenue, just west of the Capitol Reflecting Pool. We are organizing this literally one week before the event, with almost no resources or time. This Counter-Rally truly is the product of a few citizens who are deeply outraged that Israel's opponents might have demonstrated in our nation's capitol without any patriotic opposing voices who will tell truth to counter these lies.
We must stand up to lies and distortions.

We will not have a microphone or a speakers' platform, but we CAN show our support with our signs, flags, patriotic songs and our own strong voices as individual citizens exercising our right to assemble. We are bringing signs and flags for you to hold, sponsored by Stand with Us. Feel free to make your own sign, but please use the messages listed below.

Date: Sunday, June 10

Place: Begin assembling on the North side of Constitution Avenue, apart from the opponents' demonstration, at 1:00 PM. Our exact location may change. Please check here before the rally, and look for our American and Israeli flags on June 10.

Time:

The Counter-Rally: The Stand with Israel Counter-Rally begins at 2:00 PM and lasts until 4:00 PM
The March: The March from the Capitol to the Ellipse begins at 4:00 PM. We plan to march with our signs and flags parallel to, but apart from, the main demonstration.

What to bring: Bring food, water, a hat, and sunscreen

Transportation: Don't drive--there is limited public parking on Capitol Hill. Take the metro to either Union Station on the red line or Capitol South on the orange/blue lines.

More at this web site.

Email contact: standwithisrael@vigilantfreedom.com

Posting Requested by the Washington DC Examiner

This posting was requested via email to me from Lak Vorha, D.C. Online Editor of The Washington Examiner Newspapers.

Picture caption:

(AACE Worldwide Pty Ltd)
An automatic wudu washer, shown here on a promotional brochure manufactured by Australia-based AACE Worldwide, has come under scrutiny as many public institutions have approved their use paying for their installation through tax-funded dollars while turning down other religious groups to install equipment to follow their own faith and service.

Article from the Washington DC Examiner Newspaper:

Editorial: No favors for Muslim students

The principle of separation of church and state in tax-funded institutions has been upheld in more than a dozen Supreme Court rulings. As a result, overtly religious symbols of mainstream religions such as Nativity scenes, the Ten Commandments and menorahs have largely been banished from the public square on the grounds that they offend unbelievers.

But many public colleges and universities have been quietly accommodating some students’ religious activities while ignoring or even trampling on the First Amendment rights of other students.

For example, last year administrators at the Minneapolis Community and Technical College banned a coffee cart operator from playing music “tied to Christmas,” but approved the use of tax dollars to install special basins for Wudu so that Muslims could ritually wash their feet before prayer. College President Phil Davis defended this glaring double standard by absurdly insisting that “the foot-washing facilities are not about religion, they are about customer service and public safety.” At least a dozen other public colleges and universities in the nation have also installed Wudu facilities, including George Mason University in Fairfax.

A GMU spokesman said there were no complaints from other student religious groups when the Muslim Student Association was given permission by administrators to convert a common third-floor meditation room into a makeshift mosque. Would Campus Crusade for Christ be allowed to turn the facility into a makeshift Resurrection scene? The spokesman acknowledged that the other student religious groups have to reserve rooms or meet off campus when they want to pray together. At another state-supported school in Virginia, The College of William & Mary President Gene Nichol recently agreed to return the cross he had removed last year from the college’s historically Christian chapel only after angry alumni threatened to withhold millions in donations.

The paradox strains logic. Church and state remain firmly separated on campuses where the majority of students are Christian, Jewish or of no faith, but administrators toss the principle right out the window to satisfy a minority of Muslim students. Many college officials are granting prerogatives to Muslim students in the United States and Canada that are not permitted to other groups. For instance, the Ontario Human Rights Commission regards failure to make special accommodations for Muslim students, including inserting “Islamic perspectives” into secular curriculums like nursing and finance, as a form of “Islamophobia.” Expect similar political correct demands soon on American campuses.

This Orwellian, some-religions-are-more-equal-than-others approach is both hypocritical and discriminatory. The Constitution, to say nothing of basic fairness, demands that the same rules regarding the public expression of religious faith be applied equally to everybody. And for once wouldn’t it be refreshing to see a college president show some real backbone when faced with unreasonable demands from activist minority students seeking exclusive privileges?

Read Other Articles About Muslims on Examiner.com

Northern Virginia blogs Islam

Source

Afraid To Break Free

(All emphases by Always On Watch)

From this article, which appeared on the front page of the May 8, 2007 Washington Post:

"My husband beat. He show knife. I am scared for him, for all family," said Shamim, 21, the Pakistani bride, who was rescued by police. She is being sheltered and tutored in English at a private home. "They say no money, no call mother at home. I cook for all, I not eat. I not know 911 what is. I think I go crazy."

Here, in the United States. In the D.C. area, hardly a backwater region.

The article goes on to state the following:

A major obstacle to recognizing and fighting abuse, experts said, can be Islam itself. The religion prizes female modesty and fidelity while allowing men to divorce at will and have several wives at once. Many Muslims also believe that men have the right to beat their wives. An often-quoted verse in the Koran says a husband may chastise a disobedient wife, but the phrasing in Arabic is open to several interpretations.

A few imams have spoken out:

In Sterling [Viriginia], Imam Mohamed Magid at the All Dulles Area Muslim Society offers counseling to engaged couples, ensuring they understand their mutual rights and duties. In Silver Spring, Imam Faizul Khan at the Islamic Society of the Washington Area holds weekly counseling sessions for troubled couples.

"For many years, our community did not face these issues. Women suffered in silence and fear. Even today, many imams think it could never happen in their mosque," Khan said. "Islam gives equal rights to men and women, but there are myths in Muslim society that men are superior and violence is permitted. This is wrong, and it needs to be said."

Khan and others are also trying to bring men into the debate by forming a group called Muslim Men Against Domestic Violence. But they said recruiting participants is not easy. Even when taken to court on charges of abuse, several experts said, many Muslim men will argue that they were within their rights or are being victimized by vindictive spouses.

Perhaps the following, portions of the Koran not in keeping with the imams' soothing words, explain why Muslim men are not coming forward to support rescuing abused Muslim women:

Sura 2:228 states, "Women have such honorable rights as obligations, but their men have a degree above them." Sale is more to the point in declaring that "the women ought also to behave towards their husbands in like manner as their husbands should behave toward them, according to what is just; but the men ought to have a superiority over them. God is mighty and wise." (p. 32) The superiority is expressed in another fashion toward their wives. "Men are the managers of the affairs of women for that God has preferred in bounty one of them over another, and for that they have expended of their property. Righteous women are therefore obedient, guarding the secret for God’s guarding. And those you fear may be rebellious admonish; banish them to their couches, and beat them. If they then obey you, look not for any way against them." (Sura 4:34)

[...]

The Qur’an declares that a man shall purify himself before prayer, and among those polluting sources are women. (Sura 5:6) It may be worth noting explicitly here that men apparently are not similarly a source of pollution for women. Apparently women are inherently more unclean than men...

More examples at the above link.

Additional information from "Muhammad's Low Opinion of Women":

FACT #1: The Qur’an allows (or, perhaps, commands) men to beat their wives into subservience.

[...]

FACT #2: According to Muhammad, women lack common sense because their minds are deficient.

[...]

FACT #3: Muhammad offered women little hope for the afterlife.

Supporting data for Fact #1, the imams' concern as express in today's Washington Post:

Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women). So good women are the obedient, guarding in secret what Allah hath guarded. As for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge them. Then if they obey you, seek not a way against them. Lo! Allah is ever High Exalted, Great.

Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great.

Men are the protectors And maintainers of women, Because Allah has given The one more (strength) Than the other, and because They support them From their means. Therefore the righteous women Are devoutly obedient, and guard In (the husband’s) absence What Allah would have them guard. As to those women On whose part ye fear Disloyalty and ill-conduct, Admonish them (first), (Next), refuse to share their beds, (And last) beat them (lightly); But if they return to obedience, Seek not against them Means (of annoyance): For Allah is Most High, Great (above you all).

Perhaps the imams mentioned in the Washington Post article are abrogating certain portions in the Koran or advancing a more enlightened interpretation. If they are they should say so — not try to spin what the Koran says.

Sadly, even here in America, Muslim women are trapped, both culturally and physically. According to the Washington Post:

Social workers and government officials said there are numerous programs in the area to help Muslim women who are abused, such as hotlines with links to Arabic and Urdu speakers and shelters that serve meat slaughtered according to Islamic ritual. But if a young woman is brought to the United States, speaking no English and surrounded by in-laws, she might be as far from help as if she were living in a Pakistani or Moroccan village.

"Many women are kept inside, with no one to turn to," said Catherine Juhel, a counselor at the Foundation for Appropriate and Immediate Temporary Help (FAITH), an assistance program for Muslim women in Herndon. "They don't know the language or the laws here, only what their husband tells them. Often they come from a society where if you go to the police, they will bring you right back home. How can they be sure it would be any different here?"

A cudgel often wielded by abusive Muslim husbands in the United States is their power over the legal immigration status of their wives. Many brides arrive with temporary "marriage" visas obtained through husbands who are U.S. residents or citizens. Lawyers and social workers say an angry or demanding husband might threaten to "call immigration" and have the wife deported, raising the horrifying specter of her returning home in shame.

[...]

[E]ven U.S.-educated women can be browbeaten into enduring abuse for fear of shaming their families or facing cruel gossip at the mosque. Organizations that help them escape are viewed by some conservative Muslims here as dangerous saboteurs of Muslim values and family.

In Shireen's case [a professional born in Turkey but reared here in the United States], even a college degree and a good job could not fend off the demands of family and community bent on fitting her into a traditional Muslim mold. Now that she finally has freed herself from an unhappy match, she said, she has become a pariah to the family that once hovered around her.

"I know I was stupid to give in, but you get overwhelmed by all the pressure," she said. "Now I have been totally shunned. I embarrassed my husband in the eyes of the community. It doesn't matter why I left him or what he did to me. Even in America, you can't always get away from home."

Near the end of the Washington Post article, we find this poignant passage:

"Now I am freedom," Shamim said, grinning broadly as she took a tea break recently from her English studies. "I stay America. Not go home. In home, everyone blame woman, it is my culture. Everyone blame me."

May Shireen, Shamim, and others like them find true freedom here in America and break the shackles of Islam!

UAE's Gift To Johns Hopkins

Item from the May 6. 2007 edition of the Washington Post:

Johns Hopkins Gets Major Gift From Sheik

An Arab sheik has made a major gift to Johns Hopkins Medicine and will have a tower at Hopkins hospital named in honor of his father, a founder of the United Arab Emirates, officials announced.

The size of the gift was not disclosed, but Hopkins officials described it as "transformational."

The gift, from Sheik Khalifa bin Zayed Al Nahyan, will support heart research, an AIDS research program in Uganda and a billion-dollar construction project that will replace half of Hopkins Hospital by 2010.The sheik is the ruler of Abu Dhabi and the president of the United Arab Emirates. Hopkins has agreed to name a 355-bed clinic after the sheik's late father, Sheik Zayed bin Sultan Al Nahyan.

Now for some additional information about the sheikh....

Sheikh Kalifa, of equestrian-circles fame, is the head of the Supreme Petroleum Council. An article at Wiki includes the following about his philanthropic donations:

...[C]haritable contributions by Sheikh Khalifa are not from his own wealth but that of his nation's, given the vast sums of the state's wealth accumulated by his father and his family.

The sheikh gets the glory but the funds apparently come from UAE's national treasury.

It seems that the dollars which the West pays for UAE's oil get used for all sorts of purposes. Consider the following information about the Sheik, from this source, emphases mine:

On July 27, 2005, the Palestinian Information Center carried a public HAMAS statement thanking the UAE for it’s “unstinting support.” The statement said: “We highly appreciate his highness Sheikh Khalifa Bin Zayed Bin Sultan Al-Nahyan (UAE president) in particular and the UAE people and government in general for their limitless support…that contributed more to consolidating our people's resoluteness in the face of the Israeli occupation".

The HAMAS statement continued: "the sisterly UAE had… never hesitated in providing aid for our Mujahid people pertaining to rebuilding their houses demolished by the IOF… The UAE also spared no effort to offer financial and material aids to the Palestinian charitable societies." Indeed, as documented by the Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center at the Center for Special Studies (C.S.S), HAMAS charitable societies,” are known as integral parts of the HAMAS infrastructure, and are outlawed by Israel and the U.S.

The HAMAS statement included a special tribute: "One can never forget the generous donations of the late Sheikh Zayed Bin Sultan,” the father of the current UAE president. Sheikh Zayed bin Sultan al Nahayan of Abu Dhabi, was the first Arab leader to understand the importance of waging economic Jihad against the West...

Does Johns Hopkins have a clue about Sheikh Khalifah's and his family's connections to Hamas?

Perceptions Of Crime

I previously posted on H.R. 1592, now S. 1105. Sure enough, CAIR supports the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007, a measure which would expand the federal definition of hate crimes.

In its entirety, the following is a recent CAIR Alert, emphases mine:

(Washington, DC 4/24/2007)-The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) today called on American Muslims and all people of conscience to support the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007 (HR 1592).

If passed, the bill would allow the Attorney General to provide federal assistance to local law enforcement to aid investigations of crimes motivated by “…prejudice based on the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin…” of the victim.

In a statement made while introducing the Senate version of the bill, Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA) said: “Our legislation is supported by a broad coalition of over 210 law enforcement, civic, religious and civil rights groups…” and “The absence of effective legislation has undoubtedly resulted in the failure to solve many hate-motivated crimes.

“Victimizing a human being simply because of their race, faith, or other traits is simply unacceptable,” said CAIR National Legislative Director Corey Saylor. “America will be a brighter place when such discrimination is a thing of the past.”

Pamela of Atlas Shrugs, whom WC and I interviewed yesterday on The Gathering Storm Radio Show (We had a few technical difficulties at the start of the show, but the sound comes on after a minute or two), has also blogged on the subject of this measure and points out that President Bush has indicated that he will veto the bill if it reaches his desk. Although the President has rarely wielded the veto pen, of late he seems to have discovered its power.

The Democratic Party, too, is discovering the power of the Presidential veto. Today, the Washington Post ran this article on the front page, above the fold. Excerpt:

In the heady opening weeks of the 110th Congress, the Democrats' domestic agenda appeared to be flying through the Capitol: Homeland security upgrades, a higher minimum wage and student loan interest rate cuts all passed with overwhelming bipartisan support.

...Not a single priority on the Democrats' agenda has been enacted, and some in the party are growing nervous that the "do nothing" tag they slapped on Republicans last year could come back to haunt them.

The Democratic Party's promises not kept could be a good thing for America. Ah, the wisdom of a checks-and-balances system!

At Dhimmi Watch, Robert Spencer points out the following in "Finnish Police Will Question Blogger Under 'Incitement Against Groups' Law":

It is apparently illegal in Eurabia to speak the truth about the fact that Muslims who wage war in the name of Islam, and oppress women and non-Muslims in the name of Islam, have copious Islamic texts to which they can and do refer to justify their actions -- even though this would be the first step to any authentic Islamic reform.

Read the rest. The interrogation of a particular Finnish blogger is not a hypothetical case! Further information at Gates of Vienna.

Hugh Fitzgerald, also of Dhimmi Watch, has written a thoughtful essay on the folly of thought-crime legislation and states the following:

What they [Muslims] cannot stand is that Infidels should dare to read, dare to quote, dare to write the exact same things, in a spirit not of blind and submissive worship, but in a spirit rather of inquiry into what Muslim texts teach Muslims about Muhammad -- about what he said, and what he did, and what he wished for, and what he counselled Muslims.

Mr. Fitzgerald goes on to discuss the story of Muhammad's marriage to nine-year-old Aisha and concludes his essay with the following:

The Jihad will not be weakened if, all over the Western world, thoughtcrime legislation is permitted to pass. It must not.

Read the rest, in which Mr. Fitzgerald points out that telling the truth about Islam could well constitute a hate crime.

Contact your elected officials in Congress, and voice your objection to The Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007 (H.R.1592 and S.1105).

[Hat-tip to Eleanor of Sixth Column for some of the links-trail above]

Even the WaPo Decries Pelosi!

Due to personal circumstances, I've barely been able to read the newspaper for the past two weeks. Shameful, I know. But real life comes first.

Today, now that I'm once again able to make blog rounds, I spotted this commentary about a recent editorial in the Washington Post. Excerpt from "The Erosion of Our Constitution":

Once in a while, the Washington Post doesn't align with the Democratic Party, as shown by the lead editorial in the April 27, 2007 edition. The subtitle of the editorial, a commentary on Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi's recent trip to Syria, sets the tone:

Having finished hosting U.S. politicians, Syria's dictator has returned to jailing dissidents and sponsoring terrorism.

Ostensibly, Ms. Pelosi visited Syria to stop the flow of terrorists from Syria into Iraq, to promote the release of political hostages, and to further the idea that the road to peace is through Damascus. A Pollyanna fantasy if there ever was one!

Read the rest at Praesidium Respublicae (Latin for "Guardians of the Republic").

The Killer At Virginia Tech

Snippet from the Washington Post web site:

Law enforcement sources said that Cho died with the words "Ismail Ax" in red ink on one of his arms, but they were not sure what the words meant.

Definitions of "Ismail."

How did our local representatives vote? HR 1640: Anti-dhimmitude From Congress

A followup to Northern Virginiastan: HR 1640: Anti-dhimmitude From Congress:

Cheers (voted Aye):
Tom Davis (R-VA, 11th District)
Jim Moran (D-VA, 8th District) - !!!
Frank Wolf (R-VA, 10th District) - extra props for sponsoring the bill

Jeers (voted No):
Steny Hoyer (D-MD, 5th District)
Chris Von Hollen (D-MD, 8th District)

HR 1640: Anti-dhimmitude From Congress

Now, for some news which is bound to rile up CAIR.

Excerpt from the March 27, 2007 Washington Times:

House Republicans tonight surprised Democrats with a procedural vote to protect public-transportation passengers from being sued if they report suspicious activity -- the first step by lawmakers to protect "John Doe" airline travelers already targeted in such a lawsuit.

After a heated debate and calls for order, the motion to recommit the Democrats' Rail and Public Transportation Security Act of 2007 back to committee with instructions to add the protective language passed on a vote of 304-121.

Check out the roll-call vote and other updates at The Jawa Report.

UAC Rallies: March 31

(This announcement stuck at the top through March 31)

Photo from United American Committee

2nd Annual
Rally Against Islamofascism Day

Saturday March 31st 2007

On Saturday March 31st Americans of all ethnicities and of all religious backgrounds are urged to take to the streets in peaceful protest of Islamic radicalism. The primary locations of the rallies will be in front of several offices of the Council on American Islamic Relations deemed by many as a radical Islamist front organization.

Rallies are scheduled in New York City; Boston, Massachusetts; Orlando, Florida; Columbia, Missouri; and Anaheim, California. CLICK HERE for details.

The following is the press release from The United American Committee (emphases mine):

A prominent educational and action group today announced the date set for a second annual Rally Against Islamofascism Day, with rallies planned for various locations across the United States, as well as around the world.

(LOS ANGELES, CA, 12/13/2006) - With the successful execution of simultaneous rallies against Islamic militancy held across the United States in early 2006, the United American Committee today announced a second Rally Against Islamofascism Day (R.A.I.D.), this time international, set for Saturday March 31st, 2007. The event, described on the UAC's website at www.unitedamericancommittee.org will be a joint effort of organizations in a common goal of educating others to the dangers posed by radical Islam. “This is an opportunity for people of all walks of life to come together, setting aside political or religious differences.” remarks United American Committee Chairman Jesse Petrilla, who also noted that Muslims are especially encouraged to join in the rallies.

Prior to the announcement, the UAC reached out to an array of organizations to build a coalition to ensure the success of the rallies. While many organizations joined in support, one organization in particular refused to unite in the effort. CAIR, the Council on American Islamic Relations, when asked by the United American Committee if they would join in the rallies, refused by not answering e-mails from the group's members, and even hung up on UAC officials when the United American Committee attempted to contact CAIR's Washington DC offices. CAIR has been criticized by many prominent individuals including U.S. Senators Richard Durbin, and Charles Schumer, due to CAIR's documented ties to the militant group Hamas as well as their engagement in what many view as suspect activities. Some individuals have gone as far as stating that CAIR is a front for supporting Islamic terror.

The UAC has engaged in past activities which it will tie into the March 31st rallies. In July of 2006, the United American Committee issued a challenge to patriotic American Muslim leaders to issue a fatwa, or Islamic edict, calling for condemnation and denunciation of Osama bin Laden and other terrorists by name. This was in response to a previous fatwa supported by The Council on American Islamic Relations which according to the UAC ambiguously defined terrorism without naming specific terrorists. CAIR was personally sent the challenge for the new fatwa by the UAC, and has as of yet not issued a letter of support for such an edict. “Why won't they [CAIR] issue a fatwa against bin Laden? Against Ayman al-Zawahiri? Or against other terrorists by name? They issue a fatwa condemning the killing of innocents, but who is innocent? Are the infidels innocent to them?” said homeless activist and UAC Board Member Ted Hayes. When the UAC's challenge was taken to the Saudi funded King Fahd Mosque in Culver City, California the leaders of the mosque refused to entertain the idea, so on September 10th, 2006 the United American Committee staged a protest outside of the mosque where they hung an effigy of Osama bin Laden from makeshift gallows, inviting all of the mosque's members and leaders to join in the rally. While some members of the mosque came out and stood alongside UAC members hitting and throwing shoes at the dummy, the leadership of the mosque remained on the opposite side of the road where a counter protest was staged. “The hanging of bin Laden in effigy was an opportunity to hold the mosque leaders' feet to the fire for not supporting the fatwa, and I believe this Rally Against Islamofascism Day will be an opportunity to hold CAIR's feet to the fire.” said UAC Chairman Petrilla. The UAC stated that by CAIR's refusing to support the fatwa, and by their nonsupport of the Rally Against Islamofascism Day, that CAIR has unwittingly chosen the location of the rallies. The United American Committee plans on setting the location of the March 31st rallies to take place in front of many of CAIR's 32 nationwide offices. “I want to see effigies of Osama bin Laden hung at all of these rallies, let the terrorists know we are on the offense, and let those who are with us join with us.” said Petrilla, urging those who will be organizing rallies to include a hanging of bin Laden in effigy at each event if possible.

Some members of Islamic groups have expressed concern over the set date of the rallies against Islamofascism, March 31st, 2007 being the Islamic holiday Mawlid al-Nabi, the Islamic prophet Mohammad's birthday. United American Committee officials contend that this is purely by coincidence, saying the last Saturday in March was chosen for its generally good weather and the fact that most people will be off work on a Saturday and available to attend a rally. UAC has assured that the rally will stride forward to be held on the date set.

Individuals are encouraged to organize rallies in their areas on the date of the Rally Against Islamofascism Day, and may contact the United American Committee via the UAC's web page which will post the locations of rallies as they are formed at www.UnitedAmericanCommittee.org

##

Contact:
United American Committee
P.O. Box 3301
Burbank, CA 91508
info@unitedamericancommittee.org

Lawyers Against CAIR!

Eavesdropper over at Maverick News Media has posted a list from Power Line Blog. These attorneys are pro bono and are offering to defend the "John Doe" passengers in the Six-Flying-Imams case.

That's not all!

Check out HR 1640 (Protecting Americans Fighting Terrorism Act), pdf file, introduced as follows by Representative Pearce of New Mexico:

It is a sad day in America when our own institutions of freedom are being used against us in the battle against terrorism. When I first heard about the lawsuit brought by the 'imams' in Minnesota, it was clear to me that this was an injustice against Americans who were simply trying to protect themselves. These brave citizens should be recognized as heroes for their efforts to report suspicious activity, particularly activity that has been associated with previous terror attacks.

As Americans, we must not allow ourselves to be bullied by individuals who seek to disrupt our way of life. We can not allow the sympathizers of terrorism to make Americans wonder if they could be sued before reporting possible terrorist activity. Whether it is an intimidation tactic or a full scale attack, Americans have the right and responsibility to protect themselves and their fellow citizens. I introduced this legislation to protect Americans... as they serve on the front line in our battle against terrorism here in America.

The following House Representatives are co-sponsors: Rep. Bill Shuster (PA-9), Rep. Rob Bishop (UT-1), Rep. John Kline(MN-2), Rep. Geoff Davis (KY-4), Rep. Frank Wolf (VA-10), Rep. Trent Franks (AZ-2), Rep. Lynn Westmoreland (GA-3), Rep. Dan Burton (IN-05), Rep. Thad McCotter (MI-11), and Rep. Howard P. "Buck" McKeon (CA-25).

Note that Virginia Rep. Moran is not on the list. No surprise there, of course.

Sounds Fine At First, But...

Here is a stunner, from Gates of Vienna. Excerpt:

The event sounds innocuous enough — “A First Freedom Project Seminar: Federal Laws Protecting Religious Freedom” — but the significance of the occasion is revealed by the inordinate interest in it displayed by MPAC and other Muslim advocacy groups. The fact that these organizations are anxious to get their members to this meeting and intend to have an impact on it tells you a lot about what they hope to accomplish.

[...]

The upshot is that Justice Department policy on religious discrimination is being guided by leaders from CAIR, ISNA, MAS Freedom Foundation (co-sponsors with ANSWER of the March 17 demonstration against the war), and MPAC.

As I’ve said before, this is a Trojan horse being rolled into the heart of the United States Constitution, and we have to make our voices heard if we want to stop it.

[...]

The Department of Justice’s The First Freedom Project on religious liberty, starting next week with a March 29 public meeting in Kansas City, Missouri, may be monopolized by Islamist organizations. Other seminars will be held in Tampa, Florida, on April 25, 2007 and Seattle, Washington, on May 10, 2007. If members of other religions attend these DOJ meetings, a more balanced view can be presented. Criticism of other religions should not be criminalized, including criticism of Islam or the Koran.

"Win The War Or Lose To Jihad"

The title for this posting reflects one sign which participants in A Gathering Of Eagles were carrying yesterday. For my husband and me, as well as for others who were part of A Gathering of Eagles, those words sum up what's at stake for all of Western civilization.

This video will give you an idea as to what we saw and heard yesterday:



See all those American flags? All those American flags waving in the strong breeze made it easy to locate where we supposed to assemble yesterday once we arrived to the general area for our rally of Eagles.

A few of the anti-war protesters were carrying our nation's flag. But many were not; instead, they opted to carry peace signs or the signs of other nations. Furthermore, many of the protesters wore Muslim face-scarves. Carrying his sign saying "Veteran," my husband harassed some of the protesters who were clearly not those who love America: "Why are you wearing a mask? Ashamed to show your face? You should be!"

At the Gathering of Eagles Rally, for the first time since his service long ago in the army, my husband had strangers come up to him and thank him for serving. I can't tell you the emotions which that simple "Thank you" evoked in my husband's heart!

My back problems forced me to leave the downtown area before the Communists and other moonbats marched to the Pentagon. But others with whom we went — including Steve Harkonnen, cofounder of Anti-CAIR, Eavesdropper, and Maccus Germanis — stayed all day long. We reunited afterwards at the house of one of the 910 Group's members for chili and good company including that of Baron Bodissey, who joined us for dinner. Baron's first report, with excellent photographs, is HERE. Don't miss it! Also be sure to visit Mike's America for several reports. He has pictures too!

I want to thank Steve, Eavesdropper, Maccus Germanis, The City Troll, and Monica (and others who came with them) for taking the time yesterday morning to gather at my house before catching Metro to go downtown to A Gathering of Eagles. Patriots all!

According to this source, 30,000 Eagles gathered yesterday, and

Fox News reported today that the anti-war protesters had significantly less than they expected. However, they are erroneously reporting that the Eagles were there in “equal numbers”. The truth is that we outnumbered them [ANSWER] by at least three to one!

Yes, mission accomplished!