Norway reveals plot to blow up US, Israeli embassies

US Embassy, Oslo Norway


I didn't choose to report on this, but early last Sunday morning automatic weapons were fired at Oslo's only Jewish synagogue, the latest in a series of attacks on the Jewish community there. Four men have since been taken into custody, and now Norway has revealed there was a plot to blow up the U.S. embassy as well as the Israeli embassy by the same men implicated in targeting the synogogue.

Norwegian Prosecutor Unni Fries told a court the Norwegian secret services had bugged the car of the main suspect and recorded conversations between the men planning the attacks.

"They spoke in detail about how to attack the synagogue and the U.S. and Israeli embassies," Fries said.

Fries said the main suspect was also recorded saying he wanted to use explosives to blow up the synagogue because such an attack would be more deadly than a drive-by shooting.

The Norwegian police have been very careful not to identify the subjects ethnically, identifing them only as men between the ages of 20 and 30. The suspects lawyers,however said their clients were innocent and that one suspect was of Turkish origin, two had Pakistani backgrounds and one was a native Norwegian.

Fancy that. I have a feeling an `Islamophobia' defence is in the making.

Fries, the prosecutor said the main suspect had "expressed extreme Islamist views" and was briefly detained during this summer's World Cup by German police, who found drawings of rockets in his car.

"The charge is based on circumstantial, not hard evidence," John Christian Elden, the lawyer of the main suspect, told reporters. "My client expressed frustration ... about the situation in the Middle East. He has freedom of speech and freedom of religion like everybody else in this country."

The U.S. embassy said in a statement it was watching developments closely.

"We are deeply concerned about the emerging information on these planned terrorist attacks," ambassador Ben Whitney said. "This situation reflects the importance of having the necessary legal tools to prevent terrorism."

Hmmm.

Bush vs. Blitzer on CNN `Our position is very clear to the Iranians...'

My pals at Iran Focus published a transcript of an interview President bush did today with CNN's WolF Blitzer. It still amazes me how clueless someone who alledgedly is an informed journalist can be...simply unbelievable.


Here's a sample:

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: You're here in New York. The president of Iran is here in New York. You have a chance -- I don't know if you still have a chance, but you had a chance to meet with him. Given the stakes involved -- a nuclear confrontation -- what do you have to lose by sitting down with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad?

U.S. PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH: Our position is very clear to the Iranians, that if they want to sit down with American officials, that they first must verifiably suspend their enrichment program. They know our position, the world knows our position, and I clarified it at the United Nations over the past couple of days.

BLITZER: But if it would help -- if it would help to sit down, talk to them and try to convince them. You know, there have been other moments where great leaders have made that major decision, have a breakthrough -- Nixon going to China, Sadat going to Jerusalem. What would be wrong to just sit down with them and tell them, you know what, here are the options before you?

BUSH: Yes, well, he knows the options before him. I've made that very clear. Secondly, Wolf, in order for there to be effective diplomacy, you can't keep changing your word. At an important moment in these negotiations with the EU3 and Iran, we made it clear we would come to the table, but we would come to the table only if they verifiably suspended their enrichment program.

And the reason that's important, that they verifiably suspend, is because we don't want them to have the technologies necessary to be able to build a nuclear weapon. A nuclear weapon in the hands of Iran in the middle of the Middle East would be a very destabilizing and troubling occurrence.

BLITZER: India and Pakistan already have a nuclear weapon. Israel has a nuclear weapon. Why would it be so bad if this Iranian regime had a nuclear weapon?

BUSH: This Iranian regime is -- promotes militias like Hezbollah to create instability. This Iranian regime has made it abundantly clear that they would like to destroy Israel, who is our ally.

BLITZER: Do you think they would drop a bomb or launch a missile on Israel?

BUSH: Wolf, my judgment is you've got to take everybody's word seriously in this world. Again, you can't just hope for the best. You've got to assume that the leader, when he says that he would like to destroy Israel means what he says. If you take -- if you say, well, gosh, maybe he doesn't mean it, and you turn out to be wrong, you have not done your duty as a world leader.

BLITZER: So you take him seriously at that?

BUSH: Absolutely I take him seriously, just like I take al Qaeda seriously when they say they're going to attack us again, just like I take these extremists seriously when they say they're trying to disrupt democracy.

Read the rest here.

Musharraf: `Pakistan was threatened into the war on terror'. Is he lying?

Pakistan's President Musharraf, someone President Bush has always touted as a firm ally in what he still calls `the war on terror' went public today, revealing that after the 9/11 attacks Richard Armitage, then Deputy Secretary of State threatened that if Pakistan did not help the US against al Qaeda and the Taliban that they would be `bombed back to the stone age'. The message was reportedly delivered to General Musharraf's intelligence director with the infamous ISI and relayed to Musharraf.

"The intelligence director told me that (Mr Armitage) said: 'Be prepared to be bombed. Be prepared to go back to the Stone Age,"' he told CBS-TV's 60 Minutes in an interview to be screened this weekend.

It was insulting, General Musharraf said. "I think it was a very rude remark."

But General Musharraf said he reacted responsibly. "One has to think and take actions in the interests of the nation and that is what I did."

Woooo-ie!

Armitage went on CNN and denied that he said anything like that, and President Bush claims that he was unaware of any threat.

"The first I've heard of this is when I read it in the newspaper today," Bush said as he stood next to Musharraf at a news conference. "I guess I was taken aback by the harshness of the words."

Musharraf refused to comment further on the issue, saying he could not comment because of a book deal..believe it or not!

So, who's lying? And why? And why make an issue of it at this point?

Musharraf may be telling the truth, or he may not, but he has a vested interest in saying this now. Musharraf is getting it from all sides.

First of all Pakistan is under increasing pressure by the US because of a recent deal Musharraf made with tribal chiefs in Wazirastan that essentially guarantees that
Pakistan is not going to try to oust the Taliban or al Qaeda. Musharraf is insisting that Pakistan will not allow foreign forces to enter its territory in search of Osama bin Laden and Taliban leaders.

Asked in a CNN interview this week whether he would send troops into Pakistan if he received good intelligence on Osama bin-Laden's whereabouts, US President George W. Bush said: "Absolutely, we would take action necessary to bring him to justice."

India is also ramping up the pressure on General Musharraf ; reports began circulating in New Delhi yesterday that investigators probing the July 11 terror bomb blasts in Mumbai have clearly linked the attack to al-Qa'ida and Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Toiba. And Indian intelligence has already established that the bombers trained in Pakistan-controlled Kashmir.

And to add to the mix, Pakistan is under pressure because of the resurgent Talibanin Afghanistan...who have bases and sanctuaries in the very areas that Musharraf has placed off limits to any intervention.

Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai, who is onrecord as saying that Pakistan is soft on terrorism and not doing enough.

Karzai has said coalition forces in Afghanistan could not end the Taliban onslaught unless "terrorist sanctuaries" outside the country were destroyed - a clear reference to Pakistan.

Karzai said "outsiders", whom he did not name, were behind the Taliban attacks, adding: "Military action in Afghanistan alone, therefore, will not deliver our shared goal of eliminating terrorism."

And the top US commander overseeing military operations in Afghanistan, General John Abizaid, was quoted yesterday as saying Taliban military activity was being organised from and supported by Pakistan.

I read Musharraf's statements to day as both a way of hitting back at this pressure and warning Bush that Pakistan can only be pushed so far and as trying to finesse a position more acceptable to the hardline jihadist elements in his government. Pakistan does provide a lot of support to Islamic terrorism, on a sort of `don't ask, don't tell' basis, and it amazes me that Musharraf has managed to walk this particular line for as long as he has.

I wouldn't count on him doing it much longer. Maybe the book deal he mentioned is his retirement money. Pakistan is NOT a US ally, whatever the Bush Administration would have you believe. And this will become more and more evident as time goes on.

As for Armitage, well, as we've seen, he's hardly the most reputable person in the world. Maybe he said this, maybe he didn't..or maybe something just got garbled in translation by the head of the Al Qaeda and Taliban friendly ISI.

If he DID say it, I guarantee you that President Bush was fully aware of it. Regardless of what the President might want us to believe now.

Watcher's Council Results, 9/22/06

The Council has spoken! Complete results can be found here on the site of our fearless leader, Watcher of Weasels.





This week's winner for Council Posts was:

Done With Mirrors: You'll never know what we did Callimachus' fine trubute to the civilian contractors in Iraq. As I said in my links round up, I'm so-oo glad somebody finally wrote a piece like this. Congrats, Callimachus!


Second place went to:

Gates of Vienna: That Was Not a “Blunder.” It’s Just An Excuse to Kill Infidels Dymphna's excellent essay on the Pope's remarks. A typically erudite and well done job by Dymphna.


For non-council posts, the winner was:Joee Blogs - Just outside Westminster Cathedral today... The source of those amazing photos and a first hand acount of the Islamic hate fest in Londonistan over the Pope's statements.

Second place, and very well deserved went to: What did you do this summer?: Murdoc Online a photo essay on how some of the brave men who defend our freedom spent their summer.




Hearty kudos to all the winners!

A real peace proposal for the Middle East

As I promised you yesterday, there is a way to achieve peace in the Arab Israeli conflict..or at least reveal what the real obstacles are, as opposed to the PR. Believe it or not, the solution is in the so-call Saudi Peace Plan of 2002, which has been endorsed by every member of the Arab League.

Now, I could be cynical (and I have been) over the real motivations of the Saudi plan..but I think the time has come for Israel to take this seriously, as an opening gambit to resolve the Arab Israeli conflict and respond in kind.

The Arab-Israeli conflict has been used as a rationale for Muslim attacks on the west for 60 years. Are the Arab nations serious about resolving it - or is it just an excuse and a means of hoodwinking their own people and gullible westerners?

It's time we found out.

I doubt Ehud Olmert has either the intelligence, the requisite manhood or the courage to do so, but if I were Israel's Prime Minister, here's the proposal I'd make...and it would either be a major breakthrough or reveal whether the Arab nations, once and for all, were serious about peace in the Middle East with Israel:

"Salaam Aliekem, to our Arab brothers. I, the Prime Minister of Israel owe you an apology. You proposed a peace plan through the Arab League that you all have endorsed, and our country has been discourteous enough not to respond. I will do so now, in the hope and belief that you seriously want to end the differences between us.

This plan, endorsed by the entire Arab League in Beirut says, essentially, that if Israel retreats back to the pre-1967 borders including Jerusalem and allows all of the Palestinians who claim to be refugees and their descendants to return to Israel, you will respond with what you define as `normal relations.'

I think your proposal addresses all of the main issues between us that need to be dealt with; Jerusalem, the issue of borders, and justice for the refugees. I recommend that we address each one of them in a fair manner, with compassion and with a sense of justice.

I fully support a settlement for the refugees of the Arab Israeli conflict. We must, finally, have justice for the refugees who have been created because of the strife between us. There can be no peace without it.

We Jews know only too well the plight of being a refugee and the bitter pain of losing one's home. It has happened to us too many times in our history. It happened to some 400,000 of the Arabs living in what is now Israel, and it happened to 800,000 Jews living in the Arab world in the years between 1948-1967.

There is no possibility now, after all that has happened of those Jews returning to their homes in the Arab world, just as there is no possibility of Arabs returning to their homes in what is now Israel. For either side to insist on this is not only to perpetuate this conflict between us, but to condemn us to interminable war in the future.

I propose the following solution to the problem of refugees: that Israel and the Arab nations cooperate together in setting up a joint committee to arbitrate, process and compensate the claims of all of the actual refugees from the conflict, Jewish and Arab, who lived either in what is now Israel or who were expelled from the Arab world as a result of the Arab Israeli conflict and who can also provide legal evidence to substantiate a claim from whichever nation expelled them.

There are numerous precedents for this kind of settlement of refugee issues in history, and they provide a model for us to use to move forward and finally address this. We must provide justice to all the refugees, and we must do it within the framework of the law.

Next, let us turn to the issue of borders, and the desire of the Arab nations to see Israel return to those borders that prevailed before the 1967 war, including half of our capitol, Jerusalem. Since Israel has settled its borders with Egypt and Jordan and has already returned over 80% of the land captured in that conflict, it is obvious that any further land demanded from Israel is intended for a 2nd Arab Palestinian State on our borders.

After much careful thought, I must respectfully say that a second Arab Palestinian state on our borders is an unacceptable risk to peace for us at this time. We wish it were not so, but we must deal with the reality of the last 60 years. So much blood has been shed, and so much hatred voiced that we do not feel that a second Palestinian state living in peace next to Israel is possible.

AT Oslo, Israel took a major risk for peace and provided the Palestinians with land for a state...perhaps not all that they wanted, but land, nevertheless. We have come to the conclusion that this was a mistake. There is simply not room for two antagonistic countries to live next to each other in the small area available, and it is simply a set up for failure.

In the interests of peace between us, we would prefer that the areas of Gaza and the West Bank now occupied by the Palestinian Authority be the subject of final settlement talks between Israel, Egypt and Jordan, with the idea of providing secure and final borders between our nations, establising homogeneous areas and integrating the Palestinian populations in Gaza and the West Bank, respectively, as part of Egypt and Jordan. We enjoy peaceful relations with both nations, and according to Jordanian law all Arabs residing in the West Bank are already de facto Jordanian citizens, so this is by no means impossible.

This is particularly fair in our eyes since a substantial part of the land where Jews now live in what we call Judea and Samaria and you call the West Bank - among them the Ariel and Gush Etzion areas - was legally purchased through the Jewish National Fund from its Arab owners prior to 1948, and seized after that time with no compensation to the owners. We think it would be unfair to dispossess them of their homes a second time. I am certain thatyou also would recognize the unfairness and injustice of doing so.

Should Egypt and Jordan agree with this proposal, Israel is prepared to do its share to help with the logistic and financial issues involved. Others, such as the US, the UN and the EU who have expressed a desire to assist in promoting peace in our region would undoubtedly be prepared to help with these matters as well.

Should this be unacceptable, a second alternative we would be willing to discuss would be for the Arab nations to provide at least as much land for a future Palestinian State as Israel has provided for a Palestinian state ,preferably away from our borders to eliminate any future conflict. Such generosity from the Arab world towards the Palestinians would be a major contribution towards peace in our region and a better life for the Palestinian people.

Jerusalem is the ancient capitol of Israel. It is the single most holy site of our religion, and the spiritual center of our nation and our people. Dividing it would be the equivalent of asking you to divide Mecca with non-Muslims. Yet, for the first 20 years of Israel's rebirth, we were faced with exactly that situation. After 1948, Jews were ethnically cleansed from East Jerusalem, old and historic synagogues were desecrated and destroyed and Jews were forbidden to access their holiest sites.

It is exactly that history, and the modern desecration of holy sites like the tomb of the ancient prophet Joseph and synagogues in Gaza that make us adamant that Jerusalem shall never be divided again.

We recognize that Jerusalem is holy to other faiths besides ours, and we have tried to honor that. I remind you that after 1967, not a single mosque in Jerusalem was destroyed or desecrated in retaliation for what happened 20 years before, and that the waqf in charge of the al Aksa mosque was allowed to remain in control of that area.

Unfortunately, the al Aksa mosque, which is the chief Muslim religious site in Jerusalem has become a symbol of the conflict between us. Erected as a symbol of conquest in the 7th century on the site of our destroyed Holy Temple, as long as it stands where it is Jerusalem will never be accepted by you as the capitol of Israel.

I propose that as part of a peace settlement between us, the al Aksa mosque be moved to a place of your choosing, and that Israel pay the cost and provide the labor to do so. As part of this settlement, Israel will also waive compensation and claims for the many synagogues that have been destroyed in the Arab world. Let the new location of the al Aksa mosque become a shrine to peace between our peoples.

Not only will this sacrifice for peace on your part be a major symbol of good will between us, but it will allow us to rebuild the Beit Hamikdosh, the Third Holy Temple and thus fulfill the words of a prophet that Muslims also revere, Isaiah: "They shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation shall not rise up against nation, neither shall they learn war any more".

Let us make this come true now, and in our time. Let us sit down together like brothers and end this conflict, pursue justice and make a better future for our two peoples. Let us,the children of Abraham, provide an example to the world.

My heart is open, and I await your answer."

No money for the Palestinian people...but millions for terrorism

The Shin Bet and Israeli security pulled off major raids yesterday that netted NIS 6 million , about $1.4 million US, that was earmarked for financing terrorist attacks, purchasing weapons and explosives, training terrorist cells, assembling explosive belts and car bombs, and manufacturing Qassam rockets.

The money was being handled by Palestinian money changers, and mostly came from Iran.

The raids took place in Jenin, Nablus, Tulkarm, Ramallah. According to Palestinian reports, five money changing posts were destroyed. In Nablus, the raid focused on one of the banks in the city.

It is simply amazing, after all the rhetoric about the `suffering Palestinians' that killing Jews and enabling a bunch of mafioso terrorists to rule them for fun and profit seems to be more important to the average Palestinian then ensuring a decent life for their children.

Actually, I just defamed the mafia. In areas that were mob controlled,like Brownsville in Brooklyn, New York or Ciciro in Illinois, one of the benefits the residents enjoyed was almost complete freedom from ordinary street crime. The Palestinian Authority and Hamas aren't even willing to give the unfortunate population under their control even that much.

The Stones Roll On!!

Four decades old, and still rockin'..

The Rolling Stones are in the second leg of their US tour, and according to a couple of the Freedom Fighter's correspondants are showing an energy and verve that belie their years and put many younger bands to shame.

It's been a tough year for the Stones..they had to delay their European summer tour after Keith Richards suffered a concussion after falling from a tree while on vacation in Fiji, Mick Jagger has had recurrent bouts with laryngitis, Ron Wood ended up in rehab, and Charlie Watts has been diagnosed with throat cancer.

But they continue to keep on going, animated somehow by the music inside them. I remember Mick saying once in an interview that his ambition was to go out like Howlin' Wolf and Muddy Waters, who continued play music right up until the end.

This could be the last time, maybe the last time, I don't know...but they're making the most of it. More power to `em.

Bush and Abbas meet..and Bush calls Arafat II `a man of peace'.

First Bush calls says that the UN was priviledged to have Kofi Annan to serve for ten years..now he says that Mahmoud Abbas is `a man of peace' and that he will push for Palestinian state .






Both of which are proof that Dubbya has learned very little about some things in the last 6 years.

Just as Kofi Annan was symptomatic of the terminal problems with the UN, the Palestinians are symptiomatic of the problems with Middle East peace.

The real ramping up of the conflict occurred after Bill Clinton talked Israeli Prime minister Yitzhak Rabin into the notion that empowering Yasir Arafat and allowing him to create a terrorist enclave right next door to Israel was somehow going to lead to `peace' for Israel and the Palestinians.

For a lot of people, both dead Jews and dead Arabs, the peace was terminal, if you know what I mean.

Until Oslo, there was actually a chance that the conflict would `age out'. Israel had peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan, a stalemate with Syria, and Arafat was a forgotten murderous has been thug rotting away in Tunis. Bill Clinton, with the willing assistance of Yitzhak Rabin and the Leftist Israeli Labor Party changed all that, with the result that there has been a generation and a half thoroughly indoctrinated by Arafat on the necessity of killing every Jew in Israel, no matter how corrupt, violent and futile their lives are in the meantime. And Abbas,`the man of peace' was along for the entire ride.

The only chance for a second viable Palestinian Arab state in the tiny area we're talking about (Jordan is the first Arab Palestinian state, established in 1923, ruled by the Hashemite dynasty and 80% Palestinian) would be for the Arabs to drive the Jews into the sea or for the Palestinians to live in total peace and harmony next door to Israel, and to have an almost complete economic union with the Jewish State. Thanks to Mr. Bill, Rabin and especially Arafat, that isn't going to ever happen, not in our lifetimes.

As a matter of fact, putting a second impoverished Palestinian State with people raised on Jew hatred, Islamism and violence from their earliest beginnings next door to Israel is a sure bet for continued war in the Middle East. There is no way that peace can result from that attitude, no matter what kind of papers get signed or how much land changes hands.

Of course, there is a way to end the Arab Israeli conflict, or at the very least clarify the issues involved and reveal who the really intransient and aggressive parties are.

But that would involve actually confronting the real issues: Jerusalem, the refugee problem and the fact that a second Arab Palestinian state exacerbates the conflict rather than solves it.

The answer's a little lengthy - and I promise I'll get to the details tommorow or Friday.

More news on the Thai coup..not good.

Charles at Little Green Footballs has the story that the new Thai prime minister installed by the army, General Sondhi Boonyaratkalin is a Muslim who wants to negotiate with the jihadis in the South, as opposed to Thaksin, who had more of a hard line approach.

This could be premature, as Sondhi is, after all, head of the Thai army, and has promised elections in October 2007,but I'll be watching this closely...

Former recipient of LA County humanitarian award returns his - in protest over award to Islamic Jew hater and Israel basher

I wrote here yesterday on the Los Angeles Commission on Human Relations' controversial decision to honor terrorist apologist and Jew hater Maher Hathout with a humanitarian award.

The controversy ramped up a bit when a former recipient past recipient returned his own award in protest.

Steven Windmueller, interim dean of Hebrew Union College and a 1995 honoree, said the commission's selection of Maher Hathout denigrated the legacy of the award's namesake, John Allen Buggs.

"Buggs understood the art of negotiation, the value of integrity and the need for transparency. These themes should, in my judgment, reflect those who are so honored to receive this recognition. Sadly, I return this piece of art as my statement that in this instance the Commission has not met the standards set for us by John Allen Buggs," Windmueller wrote in a letter included with the award, which he returned by mail Tuesday afternoon.

More revealing - and saddening - is the commission's apparent motivation for choosing someone like Hathout. Check this pathetic quote out, by Commission President Adrian Dove. who asked Hathout to withdraw `for the sake of harmony' and was told to go pound sand:

"We were looking to find anybody from the Muslim community that was discouraging terrorism, that was encouraging engagement in the dialogue and that was a potential bridge. While you may not have perfection, it is a starting point you can build upon," Dove said.

"I challenge you to find another party in Los Angeles who is a practicing Muslim leader who would be less controversial."


In other words, they felt the need to pick a Muslim, any Muslim.....and this was the best they could do!

What does that say about the Muslim community, that Hathout was the best they could find?

Security Breach

Animal Bordellos - yep! or should I say yip!!!

a Danish animal owner offers his horse to a Danish journalist claiming to be interested in animal sex.

Warning: You might want to skip this if you're sensitive. Or enjoy Danish dairy, bacon or ham.

Okay, a cut below what's usually onsite here, but I found this interesting, in terms of the culture watch...in Scandanavia, where gay marriage is legal, so is bestiality. And why not? Isn't it just another `life choice'?

From there it's only a hop skip and a jump to Animal bordellos .

Apparently, there is a large - er- market in animal bordellos in Denmark that draw foreign clientle, including many from Norway, where this article originated. Both countries have loopholes in the laws that make such establishments perfectly legal.

The one prohibition either Denmark nor Norway on sex with animals is that the animals do not suffer.

I suppose it all comes down to your definition of suffering...

On the Internet, Danish animal owners advertise openly that they have sex with animals for sale, and it's pefectly legal, so there's no intervention from police or other authorities, Danish newspaper 24timer reports.

In interviewing the animal owners, the newspaper was told that the animals involved have many years of experience and that the animals themselves wanted sex. The cost to the client varied from DKK 500-1,000 (about $85-$170 American).

What I want to know is, who asked the animals if they wanted sex with humans? And did the animals talk back in Danish?

The Norwegian Food Safety Authority's section chief for animal welfare, Torunn Knævelsrud, could not rule out that such a bordello could be legal in Norway as well.

"It is difficult to say yes or no," Knævelsrud told Aftenposten.

As long as the basics like shelter, feed and care are in place, and there's no evidence of injury or suffering to the animal, an animal bordello is pefectly legal in both Denmark and Norway under existing Norwegian law.

Incidentally, Norway is one of those enlightened countries where shehita - Kosher ritual slaughtering - is outlawed becaused of `cruelty'!

"It could be that the animals don't really care," Knævelsrud said. "But I think it is in the nature of the case that animals will often be victims of injury, stress or suffering in connection with sexual acts with humans. Either that they are held fast, or frightened, or suffer pain or physical injury," Knævelsrud said.

A new Norwegian Animal Protection Act is being considered, and there have been proposals from the Norwegian Animal Welfare Alliance among others, that sexual intercourse with animals be forbidden.

"The acts provoke moral disgust. The question is whether immorality should be made illegal. The FSA group discussing the new animal protection act has been in disagreement about this," Knævelsrud said.

According to the Danish 24timer report, Germans, Dutchmen, Swedes and Norwegians visit the Danish bordellos, and a web site devoted to bestiality claimed that many of Denmark's animal sex clients stem from Norway.

A farmer who sells animal sex said he is extremely surprised that foreigners are ready to travel so far for it.

"But the clients tell us that it is much simpler to buy animal sex in Denmark than in their own country," a horse owner from Nord-Jylland told the newspaper.

A new report from the Institute of Criminology at the University of Oslo showed that Norwegian veterinarians are aware of at least 124 cases of animal sex abuse in Norway. The paper reports that 22 percent of Norwegian veterinarians suspect or are sure that they have treated animals that have been sexually abused by humans.

I am NEVER eating anything originating in Scandanavia again. Period!

British Home Secretary shouted down, called `an enemy of Islam'

Britain's Home Secretary, John Reid was heckled, shouted down and called `an enemy of Islam' when he visited the Muslim neighborhood of Waltham Forest to call on Muslim parents to do more to prevent terrorism. He started out visiting the Noor-ul-Islam mosque in Leyton High Road and then gave a speech to Muslim parents.

His `crime'? Actually calling on Muslim parents to monitor their children closely and act swiftly if they suspect they were being victimized by Radical Islam.

Imagine that.

He said: "There are some circumstances when you need to intervene, to challenge your children, to protect them from harm.

"There are dangers of drugs and street crime, but there are others. There are fanatics who are coming to groom and brainwash children in this community.Grooming them to kill themselves in order to murder others. Look for the tell-tale signs now and talk to them before their hatred grows or you risk losing them forever."

How dare he say such an untruth! Dr Reid's speech was interrupted by hecklers shouting shouted "shame on you" and calling Reid a "tyrant".














One of them, Abu Izzadeen, began a tirade, saying: "How dare you come to a Muslim area when over 1,000 Muslims have been arrested?" he said. "You are an enemy of Islam and Muslims, you are a tyrant. Shame on all of us for sitting down and listening to him."


The Home Secretary stood and watched as police officers ushered him out of the room, followed by hoards of cameras, photographers and reporters. Continuing his diatribe, Izzadeen accused the Government of state terrorism and said Mr Reid, Tony Blair and George Bush with their crusade could "all go to hell".

When Reid tried to speak again, another well known Muslim `activist' Anjem Choudary, stood up and began yelling at the Home Secretary.

"Muslims do not need British values," he said. "We believe Islam is superior, we believe Islam will be implemented one day. It is very rich for you to come here and say we need to monitor our children when your Government is murdering people in Iraq and Afghanistan."

There didn't appear to be too much support for Reid in the room...to say the least.

It appears there is something of a disconnect between what non-Muslim society considers `radical Islam and terrorism' and how a substantial part of Muslim society defines those terms.

Any wonder that more and more non-Muslims have such a negative view of Islam?

Like the howling rage over Pope Benedict's taken out of context comments and the Motoons riots, this is just another easy to read signpost along the road. It's only a matter of time until most reasonable people are going to assume that any kind of rational dialogue with Muslims to try and resolve these issues is simply a waste of time, and the way to deal with the problem is unilateral action.

The sad part is that many peaceful, hardworking and good people who happen to be Muslims are going to get caught up in that nasty maelstrom...because too many of them lack the courage to speak up and out the jihadis in their midst hiding among them.

Ahmadinejad at the UN

Wooo-wie! Mahmoud Ahmadinejad held forth in front of the UN General Assembly last night for an excrutiating thirty minutes.

The place was only about half full this time, so some of the delegates probably felt the need to blink. Or figured they'd heard it all before. The US was represented by a single note taker. He must have upset his boss or something.

There were a few interesting riffs, which I'll deal with here. Ahmadinejad, frankly is not only a bigot and a Jew hater, but a liar of the first order.

He started out with an invocation to the Hidden Imam, of course saying that today's world "above all longs for the perfect righteous human being and the real savior who has been promised to all peoples." He asked Allah for return of "the perfect human being promised to all by You", and that Allah "make us among the Hidden Imam's followers and among those who strive for his return and his cause."

Lovely.

He then began his main riff, stating that that the UN is losing its clout and its legitimacy because it has been "taken over" by several major powers who have appointed themselves as "judge, jury and executioner."

He had a good time returning to this theme of injustice and non-democratic nature of the UN Security Council.

Mr. A perhaps didn't consider what we all know to be true...Iran itself is a theocracy controlled by an unelected Supreme Leader and a council of `guardians' that restricts human rights severely and , among other things, tightly controls which candidates are allowed to run in elections - like our friend Ahmadinejad. As a matter of fact, the UN General Assembly itself passed a resolution on this, which we'll get to later on .

His solution? Hand more power to countries from the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) and the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) - who, like Iran, are almost all entirely non-democratic themselves. Now there's a recipe for fairness and justice! I'd be willing to agree, provided it meant evicting the UN from New York and severely curtailing if not eliminating our membership.

He then went into Iran's nuclear program, and said "We are under the watchful eyes of the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency - the UN atomic watchdog) so what is the problem?"

Gee, Mo....could it be because of the clandestine secret program Iran's been carrying on for a decade? The blatant lying to IAEA inspectors that even your stoodge El Baradi couldn't cover up any longer? The secret sites at places like Neyboushar? The violations of the Non-Proliferation Treaty Iran signed? Your threatening to wipe another sovereign nation off the map? Ya think?

Ahmadinejad talked about "truth" and referred 33 times in his speech to the word "justice" -- yet his regime was found by the IAEA to have been lying for years about its nuclear program, and has been guilty repeatedly of the most blatant injustice, including phony trials, which have covered up the torture and killings of any one who gets on the wrong side of the Mullahs, like Jews arbitrarily accused of `spying for the Zionists', or like Canadian photo-journalist Zahra Kazemi, who was beaten and tortured to death while in custody in Iran by the regime.

Ahmadinejad referred to U.S. military in Iraq as "invaders who have come from thousands of miles away," and actually had the gall to add that Iraqi security was a concern to "all countries in the region"....when Iran not only allows terrorists to cross its border with impunity, but armed and trained the Shiite militias in Iraq and continues to be the main force behind actively promoting sectarian violence and division to keep Iraq unstable.

Of course, he mentioned Lebanon and the Palestinians, complaining that Israel could only "commit crimes in Lebanon and Palestine" because it is "backed by a major power in the security council."

But Mo didn't care to bring up the little fact that Iran is a major sponsor of Hamas and Islamic Jihad terrorism, and has been actively involved in trying to undermine every attempt for a peaceful, two-state resolution, from the Oslo agreements to the Road Map.

As for Lebanon, it was Iran's Hezbollah client militia who, as even Kofi Annan said, attacked Israel across the UN-certified blue line in Israeli territory and then unleashed missiles on Israel's civilian population, backed by Iranian Revolutionary Guards, all in clear defiance of a UN resolution passed by the very folks he was speaking to!

And Mr. Ahmadinejad had a whole lot to say about notions of "freedom and human rights." And he did it with a straight face, without breaking out in wild laughter. And once again, the very people he was speaking to, the General Assembly- which, in Ahmadinejad's own words, "as the highest organ of the United Nations, must be respected" - earlier this year condemned Iran as one of the world's greatest violators of human rights. According to GA Resolution 60/171, adopted in March, these include the following systematic violations by the Tehran regime:

"continuing harassment, intimidation and persecution of human rights defenders, non-governmental organizations, political opponents, religious dissenters, political reformists, journalists, parliamentarians, students, clerics, academics and webloggers";


"restrictions on the freedoms of assembly, opinion and expression, the use of arbitrary arrest, targeted at both individuals and their family members, and the unjustified closure of newspapers and blocking of Internet sites";


"the absence of many conditions necessary for free and fair elections, including by the arbitrary disqualification of large numbers of prospective candidates, including all women, during the presidential elections of June 2005" -- indeed, the very ballot that elected Ahmadinejad;

"the persistent failure to comply fully with international standards in the administration of justice and, in particular, the absence of due process of law";

"the refusal to provide fair and public hearings, the denial of the right to counsel and access to counsel by those detained, the use of national security laws to deny human rights, the harassment, intimidation and persecution of defense lawyers and legal defenders";

"the continuing use of torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment such as flogging and amputations";

"continuing violence and discrimination against women and girls in law and in practice"; and

"continuing discrimination, and other human rights violations against ethnic and religious minorities," specifically citing Arabs, Kurds, Baluchis, Christians, Jews, Sunni Muslims, and particularly the Bahai.

Whoopsie.

Ahmadinejad's little screed would have made great stand-up comedy...except that he thought he was being serious.

It's high time we stomped on these cockroaches. We'd be doing the world a favor.

Watcher's Council Nominations, 9/20/06

Every week, the Watcher's Council nominate two posts each, one from the Council members and one from outside for consideration by the whole Council. The complete list of this week’s Council nominations can be found at our fearless leader's site Watcher of Weasels

It was an interesting week, and there was a lot of great stuff, mainly dealing with the Islamic fury over Pope Benedict's speech.



1. J O S H U A P U N D I T: Bush & Ahmadinejad - live in concert at the UN!! I chose to point out the ridiculous nature of Bush and Ahmadinejad's dog and pony show at the UN with a little satire.

2. Gates of Vienna: That Was Not a “Blunder.” It’s Just An Excuse to Kill Infidels Dymphna makes the same point I did in my own examination of Pope Benedict's speech; that, far from being a blunder, it was intellectually rock solid and a rather clever way for the Pope to give Muslims a chance to either open a serious dialogue on the issues he raised or react violently and prove that 14th Century Byzantine Emperor entirely correct in his characterization of Islam and Mohammed. Three guesses on what the adherents of the `religion of peace' chose!

3.Done With Mirrors: `You'll Never Know What We Did' I'm so-oo glad somebody wrote this. Callimachus writes about the uncelebrated heroes of one of the few good things to develop out of the Iraq war - the civilian contractors and their sincere aid to the Iraqi people, including contractors from the much maligned Halliburton.


4. ShrinkWrapped: Pope Benedict, Islam, and Reason ShrinkWrapped, as always, goes for the deeper motivation on this story, and correctly points out that Pope Benedict extended an invitation to the Muslim world to engage the issues he brought up with reasoned dialogue. Their response is a matter of record.


5.AbbaGav - An Israeli Dad Blogs Israel, the Mideast and the World Abbagav's take on the Islamic fury over the Pope's remarks examines what was said in detail...and finds very little for Muslims to be rationally upset about. Though of course, that key word is `rational'!

Key quote from his piece: `I am not anti-Islam; I'm anti-Jihad. The fact that so many AK-47 wielding masked Muslims object to the second position as if it is identical to the first is a big problem..' Guess what, Abbagav? if you read the Qu'ran and the Hadiths they are identical, for the most part. Islam without jihad is like Christianity without the Resurrection. And yeah, it's a big problem...

6. Right Wing Nut House: THE POPE’S DILEMMA A fine, fine piece by Rick Moran as always on what he considers both Pope Benedict's and the west's dilemma; whether or not to engage Muslims by challenging them or try and address their grievances and appease them. Rick makes the point that the Pontiff has chosen the latter. I agree.

7. The Sundries Shack: A Letter to Eugene Robinson In one of the few `non-Pope' pieces this week, Jimmie writes an open letter to a columnist who was bloviating on the horrors of the `torture' legislation in Congress this week. As Jimmie cogently points out, the real debate is not on whether torture is wrong - it is- but on the definition of torture. great job.

8.Rhymes With Right: Benedict Quotes Fourteenth Century Emperor -- Muslims Enraged Greg examines the Pope's remarks in typical no-nonsense fashion, and points out that violent jihad and intolerance for any deviation has always been a part of Islam. I agree.

9. Soccer Dad: Between the canary and the alligator Soccer Dad is on a roll; last week's post was a superb analysis of three major factors that led to 9/11 and are still very much with us, this week he takes on the role of the Jews - the canary of western civilization - and the interaction of the Jews with the appeasors of the west who want to feed them to the alligator in Winston Churchill's often quoted definition: `An appeasor is one who hopes that the alligator will eat him last.' Killah piece.


10. The Glittering Eye � Blog Archive: Not arbitrary or inconsistent Dave continues to examine the history and motivation of the US role in the Middle East. As he points out, The United States is frequently accused of being arbitrary or inconsistent in its policies in the region..none of which is true. An interesting, well done read.

11.Where the New York Times is coming from : Socratic Rhythm Method Matt examines the motivation of the New York Times in criticizing Pope Benedict's remarks and shilling for radical Islam.

12. The Education Wonks: Students Suspended For Wearing 9/11 Shirts: A Bad Call? EdWonk writes about teenagers in Michigan being suspended for wearing patriotic shirts on 9/11 to school as a violation of school dress codes.

Considering what else the Michigan schools allow when it comes to Islam, this does seem a bit much.

Enjoy!

Quote O' The Day...

"We need to raise our glasses to 10 years of extraordinary service and be thankful that a man such as Kofi Annan was willing to stand up and serve the cause of justice and peace."

-President George W. Bush, at the UN luncheon toasting Kofi Annan after Bush's speech before the General Assembly.

Pass me the barf bag.

Today's Short Takes, 9/17/06

JoshuaPundit has inagurated a new feature : Short Takes. This will encompass stuff I see that I think merits the attention of Joshua's Army members and that I will embellish with a few lines of the wit, wisdom, insight and written insurgency you've come to expect from your pal Freedom Fighter.

This is an attempt to cover more ground in less time and compress a lot into a small space, rather like the young gentleman seen above. This is as opposed to longer pieces, which will continue to be devoted to what I consider are larger and more important stories and issues. This is an experiment, so let's see how it goes. And of course, let me know if this format is to your liking:

• As usual, President Bush talks a good game, but is curously lacking in the action department. Today, amid remarks about Iran and Syria enabling and supporting Islamic terrorism, the President noticeably gave some ground on nuclear talks with Iran in his speech at the UN, stating tha he supported continued talks with the EU3 and Iran, but that Iran couldn't `string the EU3 along forever and time was of the essence.' He also assured the UN crowd that America wasn't at war with Islam. Same ol' stuff, different day.

Of course, appeasors like the UN's Javier Solana continue to tout` real progress' being made - while meanwhile, the Iranians still do exactly what they want and are rushing ahead with their nuclear weapons program. Ahmadinejad made a point of skipping the President's remarks..which shows that the Iranian leader, if nothing else appreciates the value of his time.

• Now that UNIFIL 2 is in place, Israel is scheduled to withdraw all it's troops by the weekend. I'm sure Hezbollah appreciates the opportunity to step up its arms shipments from Iran and Syria.
  

• Today, Hamas gunmen attacked the offices of the Palestinian WAFA news agency, which is basically a propaganda outlet staffed by Abbas' Fatah hacks. The Hamas goombahs destroyed all of the equipment and furniture and administered a severe beating to one reporter. Not all poems are written with a pen.
  

Hamas, for their part warned Abbas not to "give in to US", holding a major mustering of the faithful in Gaza. Abbas is in new York at the UN General Assembly. All talks of a unity government are on hold.

• Now I'm really nervous. Bush and Chirac have apparently come to a meeting of the minds on Iran. and are now expressing unity on Iranian nukes. Or, in the words of Le President Chirac `we now see eye-to -eye' on this matter. Ewwwww.
  

Military Coup takes over in Thailand

Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra was ousted in a military coup on Tuesday evening by an opposition movement backed by conservative elements and military commanders close to the Thai palace.

Troops loyal to Thai army commander General Sonthi Boonyaratklin, a palace loyalist, led the coup and surrounded Government House and parliament with tanks and troops. Thaksin was traveling in the United States.

A military official, wearing a Western style suit and a royal insignia pin, announced on national TV that the army had temporarily suspended the “irresponsible” civilian government and would soon return power to the people. The Thai military used similar justification to overthrow the democratically-elected government led by Chatichai Choonhavan in 1991. All Thai television stations were placed under military control and played continuous footage in honor of King Bhumibol Adulyadej.

A subsequent military announcement broadcast on all Thai television stations formally dismissed the government, revoked the 1997 constitution, and declared the provisional authority's loyalty to the monarch. The official statement also ordered all military personnel based in Bangkok to remain in their appointed positions.

Sources close to Sonthi said that two palace loyalists were being considered to take over the provisional military authority. One candidate was Sumet Tantivejkul, Secretary General of the Chai Pattana Foundation, which is under royal patronage. The other was privy councilor Palakorn Suwannarat, who had been removed by Thaksin from his post in the interior ministry in 2001.

A great deal of the coup involves friction between Thaksin and the royal family and Thaksin's attempt to put officers loyal to him in control of the military, but an underlying theme was Thaksin's failure to preserve law and order and deal effectively with the Muslim jihad in Thailand's southern provinces..which has claimed almost 2,000 lives.

The Palestinians speak - `Hating Israel and killing Jews is more important than a decent life'

Today, the results of a recent poll were released by the the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip during September 14-16, 2006 were released.

The poll showed that:

* A majority of 54% is dissatisfied with the overall performance of the Hamas government versus 42% who describe themselves as satisfied. Dissatisfaction with the Hamas government on economic issues, such as salaries and poverty rockets to 69% and satisfaction stands at 26%

* There are 84% who say that the situation of the Palestinians today is bad or very bad with only 5% describing Palestinian conditions today as good or very good. 80% say they and their families do not feel safe or secure in the Palestinian areas.

* 89% feel that the Palestinian Authority is corrupt, while 72% believe that jobs these days are largely obtained through wasta (personal and family connections) .

* Yet, despite the widespread dissatisfaction with the performance of the Hamas government, the percentage of those who say that they would vote for it if new elections are held today remains essentially unchanged since the last poll, standing at 38% compared to 39% three months ago.

* And a majority (67%) does not think that Hamas should accept the demand of the donor community to recognize Israel...only 30% believe it should!

Proof indeed that constant indoctrination through the schools, mosques and media can convince people to vote even against their own best interests.

" There will be peace when the Arabs love their own children more than they hate the Jews."

- Golda Meir, ex-Prime Minister of Israel

Want to win a humanitarian award in L.A.? Be a terrorist apologist and Jew hater

Maher Hathout is the chairman of the Islamic Center of Southern California and a senior advisor for those well known Islamic `moderates, the Muslim Public Affairs Council. The Los Angeles County Human Relations Commission voted Monday to reaffirm its selection of Hathout for the county's John Allen Buggs Award. After a tulmultous hearing, only four of the 14 commission members voted to support Hathout, with five members abstaining and four absent..but since there's no quorum requirement, the award stood.

Hathout is on record as saying that Israel is an `apartheid state' run by butchers' and has praised Hamas and Hezbollah as `freedom fighters'. He was also caught ontape by Steve Emerson saying "the United States is under Israeli occupation," that Arab governments which have had contacts with Israel would be "flushed down in the cesspools of history of treason," and that American bombing of Afghanistan and the Sudan after the 1998 attacks on the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were "acts of terrorism...illegal, immoral, inhuman, unacceptable, stupid and un-American."

Hathout was selected without the mandatory public notification, and everything was preceding in real kumbaya dhimmi fashion until The New Republic Online ran a story Aug. 31 that included the 2000 speech Hathout gave in a park across from the White House which included some of the above remarks, and a few other tidbits voiced by this man who is now an official honoree for `interfaith relations'.

Since this information on this supposedly `moderate' Muslim came to light, the commissioners tried to find a way out of the impasse.

Commissioner Donna Bojarsky, for instance, proposed that the commission honor Hathout not by granting the award, which she said had become tainted with controversy, but by featuring him as a keynote speaker at the commission's award event scheduled for next month.

"This is clearly not the environment we want for the Human Relations Commission and county," she said, adding that the last 12 days had been "one of the most difficult" in her life. She ended up abstaining.

Commissioner Vito Cannella, a 24-year veteran of the human relations body, asked Hathout if he would withdraw in the interest of harmony.

He told them to gopound sand, and threatened that if the award were withdrawn it would `probalamatical' for him...which could mean anything from a lawsuit to a few church burnings.

The commission then chose to do a quickie,emergency revote to satisfy the public notification problem and confirmed Hathout's award.

If Hathout is what passes for a `moderate Muslim' here in America, Islam is in a lot more trouble than even I thought.