Thursday, March 31, 2011

Jewish ADL Supporting Muslims Against "ACT! For America" Extremists


ADL - Backgrounder: ACT! for America

Posted: March 25, 2011

ACT! for America is an organization dedicated to combating what it describes as “the threat of radical Islam” to the safety of Americans and to democracy. ACT! promotes the idea that Islam is a backward and seditious political ideology and that Muslim immigration to the U.S. must end.

The organization was launched in 2007 and is constructed around the persona of its founder and president, Brigitte Gabriel, who came to the U.S. in 1989. Gabriel’s personal story of growing up Christian in Lebanon and as “a survivor of Islamic terror” is featured prominently in ACT!’s publications and is often cited in speeches by its leadership.

In her writings and public appearances, Gabriel often portrays Islam as a threat. In her book They Must Be Stopped; Why We Must Defeat Radical Islam and How We Can Do It, she wrote, “It is not yet politically correct to talk about a religious war. But this is exactly what we are facing: a religious war declared by devout Muslims….It’s not radical Islam. It’s what Islam is at its core.”

Gabriel claims that 20 percent of all Muslims support a radical form of Islam that justifies suicide terrorism and works for the establishment of a global totalitarian Islamic state. She further claims that “tens of thousands of Islamic militants now reside in America operating in sleeper cells, attending our colleges and universities, even infiltrating our government.”

Gabriel’s views are in line with a growing field of groups that use community concerns about Islamic extremism to stoke fear toward the Muslim community at large. Among other groups that promote an extreme anti-Muslim agenda are Stop Islamization of America (SIOA) and the Society of Americans for National Existence (SANE).

ACT!’s advocacy is focused on combating what it perceives as “Islamofascism” or “cultural Jihad,” and on countering what it describes as a culture of “festering political correctness.” ACT! argues that there is a “rising tide of Islamofascism in our midst” and that it is “political correctness that is aiding its advance.”

The group warns of the dire consequences of loosing a “war against Islamofascism,” which, according to ACT!, will result in a global Islamic state in which Americans will “live under Shari’a Law.” It further claims that the process of Islamization of America is long under way. According to Gabriel, “America has been infiltrated on all levels by radicals who wish to harmAmerica. They have infiltrated us at the CIA, at the FBI, at the Pentagon, at the State Department. They are being radicalized in radical mosques in our cities and communities within the United States.”

Though its leaders have denied being motivated by bigotry against Muslims, the group often argues against the distinction between radical and mainstream Islam. ACT! published a petition titled “Stop Muslim immigration to the United States” which calls for a moratorium on immigration from Muslim countries. An article on the ACT! Web site explains: “WE HAVE NO way of determining which Muslims subscribe to pure Islam. The reason this matters is that pure Islam is seditious…We should stop all immigration into free countries by Muslims while we can.”

ACT!’s national structure, which includes dozens of chapters across the country, enables it to effectively spread its message and work with various groups, including those affiliated with the Tea Party movement. The group claims to be “the largest national security grassroots organization” with “500 chapters and 155,000 members nationwide.”

ACT! has sought to build on its grassroots support through its lobbying efforts and has been involved in legislations to block Shari’a, or Islamic law, at the state level. In Oklahoma, for example, it ran radio advertisements in support of ballot State Question 755, known as “Save Our State,” which was approved by the voters in the November 2010 elections. It is currently promoting similar legislations in other states, including FloridaCalifornia and Pennsylvania.

Seeking to become even more influential in politics, ACT! has produced voter guides and congressional scorecards that focus on candidates’ performances on issues “related to national security and the threat of radical Islam.” It employs a full time lobbyist on Capitol Hill, Lisa Piraneo, who is officially titled ACT!’s Director of Government Relations.

Among its online initiatives is an internet based television show that is anchored by Gabriel and ACT!’s executive director Guy Rodgers, a veteran strategist who has worked with prominent Evangelical leaders. The first guest to appear on the show, which was aired on February 2011, was Congressman Peter King (R-NY), chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee.

The Web sites of local ACT! chapters reflect the views of its leadership. For example, the Web site of ACT! chapter in Space Coast, Florida, has a section titled “Islam is Fire,” which argues that “Islam is Satan’s chief ‘deception’ play…It is not ‘fanatical’, ‘radical’, or ‘extreme’ Islam that we are fighting, but normal, orthodox, canonical, typical, accepted, traditional Islam, straight from the mouth of Muhammad.”

ACT! was formed in 2007 as an outgrowth of a American Congress for Truth, which was established by Gabriel in 2002 as a vehicle to promote her views about Islam and security, as well as her books and public appearances. American Congress for Truth, later renamed as Act! for America Education, continues to operate as a separate non-profit tax-exempt organization. But, as Guy Rodgers explains, “both organizations fulfill functions essential to the vision and long-term objective, which is the rolling back of the threat of radical Islam.”

In recent years, Gabriel has enjoyed a growing popularity, making hundreds of appearances at political gatherings, in churches and synagogues. She has also met with politicians and world leaders and has lectured to mainstream non-sectarian audiences.

Wednesday, March 30, 2011

Arizona Bill to Bar Use of Foreign and Religious Law

Banning Islamic Shariah (Law) would also ban the laws of Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, etc.  This means that the proposed law in Alaska to make it illegal to have sex outside of Marriage or commit adultery would be banned automatically.  It is ironic that the same people who are pushing against Shariah Law are not aware that it would ban the practice of their own faiths as well.  If these laws will make it illegal for a Muslim to pray in a Mosque on Friday, a Christian to pray in Church on Sunday, and a Jewish person to pray on Saturday in a Synagogue equally, then I am all for it.  Why?  Because it will not take long to have the same people who tried to ban Shariah Law to go back and try to un-ban it.  However, because we still follow the Constitution of the United States, I can't be for this bill which is un-constitutional and un-American:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." - US Constitution

In regards to using foreign/religious law in our courts, that is already banned in the constitution and is redundant to try to ban it again by focusing on Shariah Law.  

Also, for those who think US Law is based on Christianity or that we are a "Christian Nation":

"Treaty of Tripoli: Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Muslims." - US Treaty of Tripoli

Arizona Bill to Bar Use of Foreign and Religious Law
Eugene Volokh • February 17, 2010 2:15 pm

It’s pretty remarkable: If a contract provides that it is to be decided under, say, English law (or Mexican law), a judge wouldn’t be able to apply that law (see subsection C) — on penalty of impeachment. If a court is trying to decide whether an immigrant was another immigrant’s adoptive parent, a question that now reasonably turns on the law of the place of adoption, it would no longer be able to look to the foreign country’s statutes in determining that (see subsection B(1)). If a court is dealing with a tort claim based on an injury that happened in Canada, and the normal choice-of-law rule would require reliance on Canadian law (understandable), that normal rule would be preempted.

Courts dealing with common-law or common-law based doctrines of contract, tort, and property law would at least be able to consider (see the exception in subsection E(2)) influential English court decisions in those areas, decisions that have often become important parts of American law (and Arizona law) — but not if the decisions are handed down after the effective date of the article, or if they are from Canada or Australia rather than Great Britain. See, e.g., 7200 Scottsdale Road General Partners v. Kuhn Farm Machinery, Inc., 909 P.2d 408 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1995) (noting that “The doctrine of frustration of purpose traces its roots to Krell v. Henry, [1903] 2 K.B. 740,” and discussing this leading case at considerable length). Plus it’s not clear whether even older decisions would be covered, since the exception applies only to principles “inherited from Great Britain”; post-Revolutionary English precedents aren’t exactly “inherited” from Great Britain. Properly ratified treaties, which Article VI of the U.S. Constitution, says are the supreme law of the land, are at least exempted (F(2)). But foreign decisions interpreting such treaties, such as treaties governing foreign service of judicial documents, can’t be cited even as influential.

Are such radical changes to longstanding Arizona law really sensible? There are sensible criticisms of the use of foreign law in interpreting the U.S. Constitution, though even Justice Scalia thinks that such use of foreign law — and not just pre-1787 English law — is acceptable in limited ways. But is it really sound to displace the many subconstitutional rules through which American courts have long tried to accommodate the reality that much commercial and personal life is international?

Here’s the state house version; the senate version is identical:

A. A court shall not use, implement, refer to or incorporate A tenet of any body of religious sectarian law into any decision, finding or opinion as controlling or influential authority.
B. A court shall not use, implement, refer to or incorporate any case law or statute from another country or a foreign body or jurisdiction that is outside of the United States and its territories in any decision, finding or opinion as either:

1. Controlling or influential authority.

2. Precedent or the foundation for any legal theory.

C. Any decision or ratification of a private agreement that is determined, on the merits, by a judge in this state who relies on any body of religious sectarian law or foreign law is null and void, is appealable error and is grounds for impeachment and removal from office.

D. This section applies to a federal court sitting in diversity jurisdiction.

E. This section does not apply to:

1. A statute or any case law developed in the United States and its territories that is based on Anglo-American legal tradition and principles on which the United States was founded.

2. A statute or any case law or legal principle that was inherited from Great Britain before the effective date of this article.

3. The recognition of a traditional marriage between a man and a woman as officiated by the clergy or a secular official of the matrimonial couple’s choice.

F. For the purposes of this section:

1. “Foreign Body” includes the United Nations and any agency thereunder, the European Union and any agency thereunder, an international judiciary, the International Monetary Fund, the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, the World Bank and the Socialist International.

2. “Foreign Law” means any statute or body of case law developed in a country, jurisdiction or Foreign Body outside of the United States, whether or not the United States is a member of that body, unless properly ratified as a Treaty pursuant to the United States Constitution.

3. “Religious Sectarian Law” means any statute, tenet or body of law evolving within and binding a specific religious sect or tribe. Religious sectarian law includes Sharia Law (Islam), Canon Law (Christianity), Halacha (Jewish) and Karma (Hindu) but does not include any law of the United States or the individual states based on Anglo American legal tradition and principles on which the United States was founded.

(For the “legislative findings,” see the linked-to document.) Oh, and I love the reference to the Socialist International, a source that would otherwise be very heavily cited by American courts.

Tuesday, March 29, 2011

Harun Yahya TV: Live Streaming Broadcast

Harun Yahya (Dr. Adnan Oktar) is a Turkish Muslim Scholar and is very popular worldwide for the thousands of books, websites, movies, and other media that he has produced. This is his live TV Channel that can be watched online:

Sex Outside of Marriage Should Be Illegal, Says Parnell Nominee in Alaska

Apparently in the proposed "Christian Republic of Alaska" or "CRA"; home to Sarah Palin and The Ex-Army "Predator" who has disgraced our military; they would like to make a law similar to prohibition that makes it "illegal to have sex outside of marriage".  Are they learning from Iran and Saudi Arabia?  Can you see the Middle East from Alaska? 

This is really interesting, because on the one hand these same people want to make Islamic Law illegal for private practice by American Citizens, which encompasses everything from praying to not drinking alcohol, etc.; however they want to make Christian Law legal for public practice and force it upon all Americans of every race and religion.  This is hypocrisy at it's finest...brought to you by likes of the extremists within the Tea Party and GOP.  (There are good GOP and Tea Party people as well, however they need to be more vocal!)

Sex outside marriage should be illegal, says Parnell nominee
Don Haase was active for years as advocate for socially conservative issues.

Published: March 24th, 2011 05:40 PM
Last Modified: March 25th, 2011 03:37 AM

JUNEAU -- Gov. Sean Parnell's appointee for the panel that nominates state judges testified Wednesday that he would like to see Alaskans prosecuted for having sex outside of marriage.

The candidate, Don Haase of Valdez, also admitted under questioning by members of the Senate Judiciary Committee that his official resume failed to disclose his leadership role in Eagle Forum Alaska, which advocates for social conservative issues. He most recently was president of the organization, but resigned when he learned of his nomination, he said.

Haase, picked by Parnell for one of three public seats on the Alaska Judicial Council, said that he wouldn't let his personal beliefs influence which candidates he'd approve for judgeships.

"It would be a very convoluted process to sit on this board to change the law," said Haase, testifying by telephone. "It would be an inconvenient way to do it."

By the time the hearing on Haase ended -- there was some 40 minutes of questioning by the panel's three Democrats, some questions suggesting that Haase had attempted to scrub clean a record of extreme beliefs -- his nomination may turn on an issue of geography, not personal values.

Haase would replace a member from Ketchikan, whose departure leaves the council without a public representative from Southeast Alaska's First Judicial District. Valdez is in the third district, headquartered in Anchorage.

The state constitution mandates that council appointments be considered by "area representation." That has been interpreted to mean one public member from each of the state's three most populous judicial districts, Larry Cohn, executive director of the council, told the committee. In the 52-year history of the council, Southeast Alaska was without a representative for only two years, he said.

Judiciary Committee Chairman Hollis French, D-Anchorage, closed the hearing without a vote on Haase's nomination, saying he wanted to take a "deeper look" at the constitutional requirement.

A spokeswoman for Parnell said Haase's residency in Valdez should represent adequate geographic diversity.


"There is no mathematical way for all four judicial districts to have representation among the three public seats," Sharon Leighow said in a prepared statement. "The Constitution does not require representation from specific districts but requires the governor to consider geographic distribution. The City of Valdez has never been represented on the council."

The council is a unique feature in Alaska's constitution, designed by the state's founders to avoid the kind of politics that affect judiciaries in states where judges run for office or are picked by governors. The council has three public members who serve six-year terms and three attorneys chosen by the state bar's board of governors. The Chief Justice of the Alaska Supreme Court serves as chair and tiebreaker.

The council vets applicants for district, superior and appellate courts, including the Alaska Supreme Court, and submits at least two names for each vacancy to the governor. When judges go before the voters in nonpartisan retention elections, the council submits its recommendations in the state election pamphlet.

Some governors have complained that the council ties their hands and prevents them from picking judges of their choice. Former Gov. Sarah Palin said she didn't like the weight given by the council to attorney reviews of candidates. Several conservatives sued in federal court to have the council declared unconstitutional but their case was thrown out in 2009.

Palin appointed Kathleen Tompkins-Miller, wife of tea party Senate candidate Joe Miller, to the council in 2009.

Haase -- pronounced "hays" -- has done electrical and mechanical design work at the trans-Alaska pipeline terminal in Valdez since 2000, first working for Veco, then for CH2M Hill. He ran for the Legislature in 2010 but came in second in the Republican primary to Rep. Eric Feige in what was nearly a three-way tie.

His resume listed such extracurricular activities as his roles in producing and starring in local plays for tourists and being a member of the Valdez Snowmachine Club. But it made no reference to the Eagle Forum Alaska. In response to questions from Sen. Joe Paskvan, D-Fairbanks, Haase said he became active in the organization about 2005, eventually taking on responsibility for its blog. "I was only president for a couple of months. I resigned as soon as I got the call that this came up," Haase said.

He said he didn't think it was important enough to merit mention in his resume. He didn't list his church membership either, he said.

One blog post on the Eagle Forum Alaska site praised efforts at criminalizing adultery in Michigan, and Paskvan asked Haase if he thought it should be a felony in Alaska.

"I don't see that that would rise to the level of a felony," Haase said.

Paskvan: "Do you believe it should be a crime?"

Haase: "Yeah, I think it's very harmful to have extramarital affairs. It's harmful to children, it's harmful to the spouse who entered a legally binding agreement to marry the person that's cheating on them."

Paskvan: "What about premarital affairs -- should that be a crime?"

Haase: "I think that would be up to the voters certainly. If it came before (the state) as a vote, I probably would vote for it ... I can see where it would be a matter for the state to be involved with because of the spread of disease and the likelihood that it would cause violence. I can see legitimate reasons to push that as a crime."

Haase then asked why those questions were relevant.

"You are injecting yourself into the judicial system and so I think it's fair inquiry," Paskvan replied. "If you have a motivation to limit who would be advanced to a judgeship ... then your beliefs and attitudes are important," Paskvan said.

Haase said he opposed judicial activism, and cited the U.S. Supreme Court's decision legalizing abortion in Roe v. Wade as an example. In his campaign for state House last year, Haase made his opposition to abortion a central theme. Abortion is also a prominent theme on the Eagle Forum Alaska blog.

But he testified he wouldn't have an anti-abortion litmus test in choosing state judges, whom he said rarely touched major political issues.

"Their case laws are going to be dealing with traffic violations, domestic disputes, petty crimes, small claims, things of that nature," Haase said. "I'd be wasting my time to try to affect any of these (political) issues through this process."

French reminded him that the judicial council doesn't just nominate judges to lower courts.

"You will have the opportunity to shape the field of candidates who would be seated on the Alaska Court of Appeals and the Alaska Supreme Court, and those questions come before the Supreme Court on a regular basis -- parental notification, choice issues, and so forth," French said.

Read more:

Sunday, March 27, 2011

Ohio Groups to Ask School to Drop Anti-Islam Tea Party Speaker


Ohio Groups to Ask School to Drop Anti-Islam Tea Party Speaker
Usama Dakdok says all Muslims are 'demons,' 'there is no good Muslim'

(CLEVELAND, OH, 3/27/11) - On Monday, March 28, the Ohio chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR-Ohio) will join with the NAACP and other civil rights and interfaith groups at a news conference outside the Board of Education in Mansfield, Ohio, to address the negative impact a speech by an anti-Muslim Tea Party speaker will have on district students. The groups will ask the board to rescind its approval to hold the event in a school facility.

WHAT: Groups to Ask School Board to Rescind Approval for Hate Event
WHENMonday, March 28, 11 a.m.
WHERE: Mansfield Board of Education Office, 856 West Cook Road, Mansfield, OH

CONTACT: CAIR-Cleveland Executive Director Julia Shearson, 216-830-2247 or 216-440-2247, E-Mail:

The anti-Islam speaker, Usama Dakdok, claims all Muslims are "demons" and that "there is no good Muslim." He is scheduled to speak Monday evening at Mansfield Senior High School at an event sponsored by the Mansfield North Central Ohio Tea Party Association.

Tea Party Event Freedom or Surrender 

Participants in the news conference will outline how the perception of official endorsement of hate speech violates both the school board's "core principle" of providing a "safe learning environment" and its rental policy that prohibits use by groups that would "interfere with the educational program of the schools."

According to the school board's "Use of District Facilities" policy, "Under no circumstances shall the grounds or facilities be used to raise funds for political purposes." Despite that prohibition, a Mansfield North Central Ohio Tea Party Association organizer of the event told the Mansfield News Journal that "donations will be accepted."

"The promotion of anti-Muslim hate in a public school facility sends the message to students that the Islamophobic views of the speaker have official endorsement," saidCAIR-Cleveland Executive Director Julia Shearson.

Shearson also called on national Tea Party leaders to repudiate the hate-filled actions of their local affiliate.
ACTION REQUESTED: (Be POLITE and respectful.)
Contact Mansfield City Schools
Tel: 419-525-6400 (press 9)
Copy to:  (Mansfield North Central Ohio Tea Party) (optional)
CAIR is America's largest Muslim civil liberties and advocacy organization. Its mission is to enhance the understanding of Islam, encourage dialogue, protect civil liberties, empower American Muslims, and build coalitions that promote justice and mutual understanding.

- END -

CONTACT: CAIR-Cleveland Executive Director Julia Shearson, 216-830-2247 or216-440-2247, E-Mail:; CAIR National Communications Director Ibrahim Hooper,202-744-7726, or 202-488-8787, E-Mail:; CAIR Communications Coordinator Amina Rubin, 202-488-8787202-341-4171,

So, who is Usama Dakdok?  Apparently he is the same guy behind the Rifqa Bary video in Florida, he is the guy Rifqa turns to for "Honor Killing" advice, because he is the one that brainwashed her in Florida.  What Rifqa said is word for word the same as this man...just listen to these videos where he even admits to the brainwashing.  Also, please note that he also approached Rifqa's father and tried to coerce and intimidate him to give up his daughter: 

Usama Dakdok gloating about Rifqa Bary:

Usama Dakdok hating Muslims and how we are all Demons and that there are no such thing as good Muslims: 

Rifqa Bary Before she went to Florida to be brainwashed by Usama Dakdok:

Rifqa Bary After she went to Florida to be brainwashed by Usama Dakdok: 

Rifqa Bary's Family in response to this coercion, intimidation, and virtual kidnapping:

Here is some information I found about this Charlatan "Missionary":


The Usama Dakdok Scandal on ABN SAT

Meet Pastor Usama Kamel Dakdok and his Hatred

Never heard of him? Me too, till I saw him drop a few clangers on Samar Gorial’s show on ABNSat . This “Christian” missionary worked himself into a frenzy of hatred; a frenzy which apparently culminated into Usama Dakdok spouting a foul word*. Yes, we bring you ANOTHER scandal from an ABN show. Why do some fundamentalist Christians keep us so busy with their debauched  and money-hungry ways?

Who is Usama Dakdok?

He is from Egyptian stock and functions out of “thestraightway” ministry. His claim to fame is his “translation” of the Quran - which he is selling on his site for a whopping £24.95 dollars. For those in the know concerning classical Arabic; Usama Dakdok is far from qualified to translate such a text. I guess his lack of expertise and study has not stopped him from entering such an enterprise; I wonder if it as financially lucrative as he first imagined.

If you have bought his translation, which he styles as the only “true” translation then you have well and truly been duped. Dakdok does not fit ANY of Von Denffer’s educational requirements for translating the Quran in English.

Here is Usama Dakdok Demonstrating his Ineptness via Video (warning bad language):

The Synopsis of Usama Dakdok’s address to Shadeed Lewis on ABN’s “Jihad Exposed”

I know the show seems to have a bizarre title but let’s leave that for now and concentrate on the foul mouth of Usama Dakdok. On the show he is confronted by a caller (MDI’s Shadeed Lewis) and Dakdok just goes off the handle.

Was Usama Dakdok possessed?

Really? Have a look at the footage yourself. He starts calling all Muslims deceivers, loses his composure and is generally ranting and raving whilst insulting Islam and Muslims.

Usama Dakdok’s bigotry, insults and bad language*

Dakdok suggests, in his shaky English, all Muslims following the Quran are Jihadists and ALL Muslims are demons, he calls Allah (God) and the Prophet deceivers.

In the end it appears as though Dakdok called Lewis an “a**” whilst strangling his expression (LATER CLARIFIED AS "ASK" BY DAKDOK, SEE BELOW). The other guest (Anjem Choudry) on the show accuses Usama Dakdok of “barking like a dog”; such was Dakdok’s crazed manner!

The big evangelical con

Does Usama Dakdok really want to be taken seriously as a translator? Nobody in the academic community considers him to be credible and those in the lay community have realised the man seems to have some real issues which point him out to be the charlatan the academic community consider him to be.

*Usama Dakdok contacted me, on the bad language issue he said:
"You have accused me of speaking foul language and I assure you that I never have or never will use any foul language. If you listen carefully to the video you posted you will hear that the word I said was "ask" not "a**" as you claimed." 

NOTE: I believe Usama Dakdok's explanation as I received a comment from an individual claiming Dakdok said "let's ask" and not "this ask", his accent is pretty heavy at times. Nevertheless, he did not use bad language. Thus we can disregard that particular critique.

I do notice  he refrained from commenting on the rest of the outburst; he called all Muslims "demons" and went on a general insult spree!

My thanking the commenter: 
Ahh makes sense now. If the "this" is "lets" then it makes sense. I have listened to it a few times to check for your explanation and it seems to hold water. For that reason I will private the video; and reupload an edited one.
I really appreciate your fairness. May Allah reward you with more good

More info on ABN:

Learn about Islam:


Tags: jihad exposed and genocide, abnsat dakdok, translation of quran, money, dollars, straight way ministries, Egyptian colloquial Arabic, fraud, cash, fundamentalist misinformation, debate, manu, shaded lewis, anjem choudry, islam4uk, Aramaic broadcasting network, arab Christian deceiving Americans, deception, donate,


Republican Hippies

Recently when I was listening to NPR radio, I heard that one of the members of President Bush's cabinet was a self admitted 'Hippie' when he was younger, so I was rather intrigued by this statement and I did some research to find that it opened a virtual "Pandora's Box" of information to why the religious right is the way it is:

"The hippie era was short-lived but energetic and infectious, at least to a large segment of peers of their global generation. Just as Christians from throughout the world journeyed to Los Angeles in 1905 to partake of the Pentecostal fervor on Azusa Street, and take it back home, youth from throughout the world journeyed to San Francisco’s Haight-Asbury district in the late 1960s to partake of the hippie experience and likewise take it back home. What happened to that countercultural energy, that world-rejecting, world-transforming impulse? Shires argues that evangelical Christianity captured it. To explain this, Shires backs up to discuss Christianity in post-World War II America. In rejecting their parents’ values, the hippies also were also rejecting mainstream, liberal Christianity and Judaism. They saw these religious expressions as lifeless and irrelevant.  How the hippie vanguard wound up among the leadership of the Religious Right is a fascinating story well worth telling, and Shires has done a great job of it..."

Saturday, March 26, 2011

Replacing Democratic "Big Government" with Republican "Theocratic Big Business"

Gov. Kasich of Ohio wants to cut funding for public servants like Police...The Republicans want to hire private religious fanatic people like Blackwater instead of the public peace keepers. Our Police, FBI, Military, CIA may eventually be fully replaced by private Republican big business...reducing the size of 'big government' and replacing it with 'theocratic big business republicans'. 

This idea of a Theocratic Republican "Big Business" (Bazaar) model has been tried before...ironically in Iran.  

Read "American Theocracy" 

Sectarian Cleansing in Bahrain

Sayed Mahdi al-Modarresi does a great job of explaining the situation in Bahrain and the genocide that is taking place there: 

Friday, March 25, 2011

Stairway to Heaven - Rebuilding the Minbar of Saladin

For anybody that appreciates ancient arts and architecture, this is a wonderful documentary on the sacred geometric arts in Islam:

Documentary chronicling the restoration and re-installation of the Minbar of Saladin, at Jerusalem's holy Islamic Al-Aqsa mosque. Originally installed on the orders of Saladin in 1187, the structure was made of ivory and hand-crafted wood, with Arabic calligraphy, geometric designs and floral motifs inscribed in its woodwork. After its destruction by a fanatic in 1969, it was replaced with a much simpler structure later deemed to be inappropriate.

Thursday, March 24, 2011

Democrat Announces Alternate Hearings On U.S. Muslims

By Richard Yeakley - Religion News Service

WASHINGTON (RNS) Barely two weeks after House Republicans held hearings on the threat posed by radicalized American Muslims, the Senate’s No. 2 Democrat announced his own hearings on threats to American Muslims’ civil rights.
Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., made no mention of the March 10 hearings by the House Homeland Security Committee that reduced the first Muslim elected to Congress to tears.
Instead, Durbin cited a spike “in anti-Muslim bigotry,” including the burning of Qurans and an increase in hate crimes and hate speech toward Muslims. Durbin will convene the hearings on March 29 as chairman of the Senate Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Human Rights.
“During the course of our history, many religions have faced intolerance,” said Durbin, the assistant Senate majority leader, in announcing the hearings on Tuesday (March 22).
“It is important for our generation to renew our founding charter’s commitment to religious diversity and to protect the liberties guaranteed by our Bill of Rights.”
The Council on American-Islamic Relations, which helped lead the opposition to the House hearings convened by Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., welcomed the change in tone from the other end of Capitol Hill.
“This is a very positive development,” said CAIR spokesman Ibrahim Hooper, who called the civil rights of Muslims “a necessary topic to discuss.”
Recent years have seen a rise in negative reactions toward Muslims, Hooper said, citing opposition to building the Park 51 Islamic community center near Ground Zero, arson attacks and the bombing of a mosque in Jacksonville, Fla. A civilized discussion on the civil rights of all Americans is long overdue, he said.
And although Durbin did not bill his hearing as a direct response to King’s, “it will be perceived that way,” at least among U.S. Muslims, Hooper said.
Scheduled witnesses for the hearing include Farhana Khera, president and executive director of San Francisco-based Muslim Advocates; retired Washington Cardinal Theodore McCarrick; Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Tom Perez and Alex Acosta, who held the same position under former President George W. Bush.

Ann Coulter: Go Fukushima Yourself!

Just when you thought Ann Coulter couldn't be a bigger idiot, she really takes idiocy "to an 11" by writing a column about the Fukuskima nuclear disaster in which she touts the health benefits of radiation...O'Reilly is even stunned!

This is coming from one of the most famous Islamophobes, who aggressively persecutes Muslims and American Muslims. How does the right wing rely on such loons?

If you want to catch more loons, go to

Now, to see the real thing that can happen that the right wing exremists don't believe in:

Wednesday, March 23, 2011

Was America founded as a Judeo-Christian Nation?

This is a great video to watch if you want to get a better understanding of seperation of Church and State and how the USA was not founded as a Judeo-Christian Nation. 

"Treaty of Tripoli:  Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Mussulmen (Muslims)"

Californians Protest Hate Speech Against Muslims

This is real America!

Islamic Shariah & The Treaty of Tripoli

Treaty of Peace and Friendship between the United 
States and the Bey and Subjects of Tripoli of Barbary

Authored by American diplomat Joel Barlow in 1796, the following treaty was sent to the floor of the Senate, June 7, 1797, where it was read aloud in its entirety and unanimously approved. John Adams, having seen the treaty, signed it and proudly proclaimed it to the Nation.

Annals of Congress, 5th Congress

    Article 1. There is a firm and perpetual peace and friendship between the United States of America and the Bey and subjects of Tripoli, of Barbary, made by the free consent of both parties, and guarantied by the most potent Dey and Regency of Algiers.
    Art. 2. If any goods belonging to any nation with which either of the parties is at war, shall be loaded on board of vessels belonging to the other party, they shall pass free, and no attempt shall be made to take or detain them.
    Art. 3. If any citizens , subjects, or effects, belonging to either party, shall be found on board a prize vessel taken from an enemy by the other party, such citizens or subjects shall be set at liberty, and the effects restored to the owners.
    Art. 4. Proper passports are to be given to all vessels of both parties, by which they are to be known. And considering the distance between the two countries, eighteen months from the date of this treaty, shall be allowed for procuring such passports. During this interval the other papers, belonging to such vessels, shall be sufficient for their protection.
    Art. 5. A citizen or subject of either party having bought a prize vessel, condemned by the other party, or by any other nation, the certificates of condemnation and bill of sale shall be a sufficient passport for such vessel for one year; this being a reasonable time for her to procure a proper passport.
    Art. 6. Vessels of either party, putting into the ports of the other, and having need of provisions or other supplies, they shall be furnished at the market price. And if any such vessel shall so put in, from a disaster at sea, and have occasion to repair, she shall be at liberty to land and re-embark her cargo without paying any duties. But in case shall she be compelled to the land her cargo.
    Art. 7. Should a vessel of either party be cast on the shore of the other, all proper assistance shall be given to her and her people; no pillage shall be allowed; the property shall remain at the disposition of the owners; and the crew protectedand succored till they can be sent to their country.
    Art. 8. If a vessel of either party should be attacked by an enemy, within gun-shot of the forts of the other , she shall be defended as much as possible. If she be in port she shall not be seized on or attacked, when it is in the power of the other party to protect her. And when she proceeds to sea, no enemy shall be allowed to pursue her from the same port, within twenty-four hours after her departure.
    Art. 9. The commerce between the United States and Tripoli; the protection to be given to merchants, masters of vessels, and seamen; the reciprocal right of the establishing Consuls in each country; and the privileges, immunities, and jurisdiction, to be on the same footing with those of the most favored nations respectively.
   Art. 10. The money and presents demanded by the Bey of Tripoli, as a full and satisfactory consideration on his part, and on the part of his subjects, for this treaty of perpetual peace and friendship, are acknowledged to have been received by him previous to his signing the same, according to a receipt which is hereto annexed, except such as part as is promised, on the part of the United States, to be delivered and paid by them on the arrival of their Consul in Tripoli; of which part a note is likewise hereto annexed. And no pretense of any periodical tribute of further payments is ever to be made by either party.
   Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Mussulmen (Muslim); and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan (Muslim) nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.
   Art. 12. In case of any dispute, arising from a violation of any of the articles of this treaty, no appeal shall be made to arms; nor shall war be declared on any pretext whatever. But if the Consul, residing at the place where the dispute shall happen, shall not be able to settle the same, an amicable referrence shall be made to the mutual friend of the parties, the Dey of Algiers; the parties hereby engaging to abide by his decision. And he, by virtue of his signature to this treaty, engages for himself and successors to declare the justice of the case, according to the true interpretation of the treaty, and to use all the means in his power to enforce the observance of the same.
    Signed and sealed at Tripoli of Barbary the 3d day of Junad in the year of the Hegira 1211— corresponding with the 4th day of November, 1796, by
    JUSSOF BASHAW MAHOMETBey. MAMETTreasurer. AMETMinister of Marine. SOLIMAN KAYA. GALILGeneral of the Troops. MAHOMETCommander of the City. AMETChamberlain. ALLYChief of the Divan. MAMETSecretary.
Signed and sealed at Algiers, the 4th day of Argill, 1211—corresponding with the 3d day of
January, 1797, by
And by the agent Plenipotentiary of the United States of America,

Shaykh Hamza Yusuf: Is 'Democracy' compatable with Sharia Law?

Part 1

Part 2

Monday, March 21, 2011

Holy Qur'an burnt in Florida Church!

(AFP) – 7 hours ago
GAINESVILLE, Florida — A controversial US evangelical preacher oversaw the burning of a copy of the Koran in a small Florida church after finding the Muslim holy book "guilty" of crimes.
The burning was carried out by pastor Wayne Sapp under the supervision of Terry Jones, who last September drew sweeping condemnation over his plan to ignite a pile of Korans on the anniversary of September 11, 2001 attacks.
Sunday's event was presented as a trial of the book in which the Koran was found "guilty" and "executed."
The jury deliberated for about eight minutes. The book, which had been soaking for an hour in kerosene, was put in a metal tray in the center of the church, and Sapp started the fire with a barbecue lighter.
The book burned for around 10 minutes while some onlookers posed for photos.
Jones had drawn trenchant condemnation from many people, including US President Barack Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, over his plan to burn the Muslim holy book in September.
He did not carry out his plan then and vowed he never would, saying he had made his point.
But this time, he said he had been "trying to give the Muslim world an opportunity to defend their book," but did not receive any answer.
He said he felt that he couldn't have a real trial without a real punishment.
The event was open to the public, but fewer than 30 people attended.
Life in the normally quiet city of Gainesville is centered around the University of Florida. And while there were public protests against Jones' 9/11 activities, this event was largely ignored.
Jadwiga Schatz, who came to show support for Jones, expressed concern that Islam was growing in Europe.
"These people, for me, are like monsters," she said. "I hate these people."
Jones said he considered this event a success.
"This is a once-in-a-lifetime experience," he said.

Cenk Uygur: My "Muslim Apostate" Hero

Cenk Uygur is a Turkish-American Muslim "Apostate" and he is alive and well. In fact, most Muslims I know including myself think he is the "Cat's Meow". He is amazing and very well balanced. Go Cenk!

Sunday, March 20, 2011

Cathleen Falsani: One Nation Under Allah

Cathleen Falsani: One Nation Under Allah

It isn’t a crime to practice Islam in the United States of America.
At least, not yet.
On Monday (March 14), Missouri state Rep. Don Wells introduced a proposed constitutional amendment aimed at blocking Sharia — the Islamic legal code — from being used in state courts. Another Missouri lawmaker introduced a bill to ban the use of any foreign laws in state courtrooms.
Wells said he introduced the Sharia ban out of concern that there is a global push to accept Islamic laws that he views as oppressive to women and as calling for violent punishment for minor offenses.
“I think it’s just absolutely a guarantee to my children and grandchildren that in the future they will live under the same laws that I grew up under,” Wells told The Associated Press.
Earlier this month, Tennessee lawmakers began consideration of a bill that would make the practice of Sharia law a felony. The bill was introduced by conservative legislators with ties to ongoing efforts to block the construction of an Islamic center near Ground Zero in New York City and the expansion of a mosque near Nashville.
Similar laws have been proposed in a dozen other states, including Oklahoma, where last November voters approved a constitutional amendment banning the use of Shariah law in state courts. That ban has since been challenged as unconstitutional in federal court.
The moves come amidst controversy over congressional hearings on the spread of “radical” Islam in the United States. Proponents say their efforts are a reaction to what they see as a move to have Sharia supersede U.S. civil law.
But critics say those efforts amount to little more than blatant anti-Muslim bigotry and fly in the face of the First Amendment’s protection of the “free exercise” of religion.
Some called the congressional hearings a “witch hunt” and compared them to those convened by Sen. Joseph McCarthy in the 1940s and `50s to ferret out Communists and their sympathizers.
“Today, millions of Muslim Americans are subjected to thoughtless generalizations, open discrimination, and outright hostility because of a tiny minority whose acts of violence deny the teachings of the Quran and are denounced by other Muslims,” said the Rev. Michael Kinnamon, general secretary of the National Council of Churches.
A poll last August by the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life found that Americans remain deeply conflicted about their opinions of Islam in the U.S. The study found that only 30 percent hold a “favorable” opinion of Islam, a drop of more than 10 percent since 2005.
Thirty-five percent of those surveyed said they believed Islam “encouraged” violence compared to other religions, while 42 percent said it did not, according to the Pew poll.
Testifying at the hearings convened by House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Peter King, Rep. Keith Ellison, D-Minn., the first Muslim elected to Congress, conceded that some individuals, “including some who are Muslims, are violent extremists.”
“However,” he added, “these are individuals, not entire communities. When you assign their violent actions to the entire community, you assign collective blame to a whole group. This is the very heart of stereotyping and scapegoating.”
Sharia is a set of guiding principles derived from the Quran, which were then interpreted over centuries by Islamic religious scholars. Sharia addresses a broad spectrum of issues, from crime and economics to hygiene and sexuality. While most Muslims accept Sharia as sacred, its interpretation and application vary widely depending on religious, cultural and geographic points of view.
Viewing Sharia as one set entity is akin to viewing the Bible and Christians’ interpretation thereof as a singular thing. There are as many ways to view the Bible and its teachings (and laws) as there are Christians.
American Islam, like American Christianity, is not a monolith.
“It’s anything but,” Syracuse University professor Gustav Niebuhr, author of “Beyond Tolerance: Searching for Interfaith Understanding in America,” told the PBS program “Religion & Ethics NewsWeekly” recently. “There are people who are wealthy. There are people who are white-collar. There are all sorts of professionals. There are blue-collar people. There are people who have been here since the 1960s, people who’ve recently arrived.
“At the very time that you’ve got people fighting for freedom and human rights in North Africa, you have internationally televised hearings questioning the patriotism of at least some American Muslims,” Niebuhr said. “What’s hopeful is that people … have stood with Muslims — and stood with Muslims as Americans — in this country. And I hope that the latter is received more strongly than the former, at least for American interests abroad.”
Original post: One Nation Under Allah