Avid Editor's Insights

Archive for the ‘moonbats’ Category

Those Blue Lodge Antisemites Again: Thread Title – “Ahmedinijad’s Alleged Inflammatory Comments”

Posted by Glezele Vayne on December 4, 2009


More on my time at Liberty Forest (RonPaulForums.com). Thanks goes to Rodan of The Blogmocracy for coining the perfect term for what goes on at Liberty Forest, and at the John Birch Society according to some former chapter leaders (See my earlier post Blue Lodge Antisemites). Crypto-antisemitism. Useful term, that. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in America, anti-semitism, moonbats, Progressive-Neo Nazi Alliance | Tagged: , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

The Progressive-Marxist roots of the Nazis

Posted by Rodan on August 16, 2009

Radical Leftwing blogs like Think Progress, Daily Kos, Huffington Post and Little Green Footballs keep claiming that the Nazis were Rightwing/Conservative. However the official name of the Nazis was the National Socialist Workers Party, this name is hardly a “Conservative” term. It is really a Progressive/Marxist name, since Hitler was a man of the Left.

Below is a video that will back up what I am saying. This shatters the Nazis were Rightwing myth than even many Conservatives/Libertarians have fallen for.

Again, can someone explain to me how The Nazis were Rightwing and not Totalitarian Left?

(Cross Posted at LGF2.0)

Posted in anti-semitism, economy, moonbats, Nazi, Nazi Deception | Tagged: , , , , | 11 Comments »

Jihadi Jumping

Posted by Glezele Vayne on March 5, 2009


No, I’m not recommending jumping a jihadi. Seems they have the corner on that market. I was jumping around from one jihadi story to the next today…it’s just amazing what a bunch of trouble these folks are stirring up and how wimpy Western democracies are in response. I think we’re stymied because we are under the impression that what we are confronting are religious fanatics, and whatever we do, we don’t want to stifle freedom of religion.

Get that out of your heads as fast as you can. Islam is not primarily a religion. It is an all-encompassing, all-controlling political system with an inseparable religious component to it. An article by Spengler at the Asia Times gives us some perspective on Islam, defining it as both a religion and a political ideology. Spengler cautions us that it is this combination which makes Islam dangerous.

Another way to view Islam can be found at Jihad Watch, in “Islam 101” by Gregory M. Davis. In his words, it has been “transformed Islam from a relatively benign form of monotheism into an expansionary, military-political ideology that persists to this day.” It is easy to observe, in most cases, that Islam as it is interpreted and practiced today, can’t seem to live alongside or tolerate democratic, representative governments. These elements together make Islam in our day positively toxic.

This does not mean I hate Muslims. The system is the problem. Had I been alive when slavery was an accepted insitution, I would have been an abolitionist. Does that mean I would have hated people of African descent? If this is a comparison that seems a non-sequitur to you, just check this site out, and then watch some videos by Dr. Wafa Sultan, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, or Walid Shoebat. I have some here, or you can peruse the stock at Youtube, or Google Video, or get yourself some good books by any of them.

Islam, as it is packaged and sold by the jihadis, is not the ultimate society, in spite of it’s more fanatical adherents insistence. It is the ultimate fascism.

Jews attacked with a steel bar in Antwerp, Arab bulldozes Jews in Jerusalem, Jews grabbed by a security guard at U of Toronto seminar, threatened with beheading with a saw!! (now that’s rude).

Assault and threats to Jewish student following questions

While last night had higher profile anti-Zionists and anti-Semites, what with Naomi Klein and Sid Ryan, tonight had greater righteous indignation of the “oppressed Fakestinians”.

Notably, with Jews visible in the audience, the audience was repeatedly told from the dias that no photography or recording of any type was allowed by anyone without “media clearance”.

On a number of occasions organizers tried to force me to depart with my camera, though I had not taken even one shot. i told them that when everyone with a cell-phone leaves or gives up their phone i will give up my camera too.

Later, during questions, organizers, ” security”, surrounded the area where visible Jews were seated. A Jew asked a question: “Is Hamas’s charter racist “? That question then become the focus of vitriole, the “security” closed in around the Jews, security then started to push the Jews, then the dias demanded that the Jew leave the room. The Jew replied out loud that he would not depart unless told to do so by the Police. They came in from the lobby, and that ensued.

While this went on, I pulled out my camera and started to shoot. All manner of people closed in around me, and tried to obscure my lens. I got a few shots, and left for the lobby to catch the newly-evicted Jews’ fate. Organizers were demanding my photos, and my name. They got neither, though it will be next to impossible to be anonymous tomorrow.

For my efforts, a Police Sergeant came up to me and pushed me out the front doors using his chest and flack-jacket against my chest. I asked him why i was being pushed out the doors and he said that. “you know why”. Why? Because I look Jewish? Because I was photographing the altercation started by the islamo-fascists? OR, because he is brown ? Oh, but I can’t make that silly, facetious, suggestion, all while being profiled myself ……….

Then There Was Light and other sites are carrying the same story.

At the Muslim Day Parade of 2008, this man asks his god god to annihilate Israel with a nuclear holocaust…

Islamic Thinker's Society Sign

Website on sign is http://www.alburuj.com. The site requires a log-in just to visit.

Photo by Urban Infidel at www.urbaninfidel.blogspot.com

Because they’re asking “allah” for a horrific destruction of 6 million Jewish souls, I suppose we’re not to construe this as Muslims threatening Israel. Hm. I wonder who they think “allah” would be  using to carry out his  will. Anybody with ideas…please comment.

You’ll hear that line of reasoning towards the bottom of this post, also found at Wikipedia’s article on the Islamic Thinkers Society. Glenn Beck interviews a guy named Jesse.

I.T.S. threatens jihad against America.

This doesn't look very friendly to me...

Muslim Day Parade, 2007. This doesn't look very friendly to me...

Photo by Urban Infidel at www.urbaninfidel.blogspot.com

Robert Spencer is also threatened by the I.T.S. (that’s a weird one).

“May Allah rip out his spine from his back and split his brains in two, and then put them both back, and then do it over and over again. May He put this friend of shaytaan in the worst part of jahannum. Ameen.”

So, most of us have probably told someone to go to hell, and that is harsh. But I wouldn’t pursue legal action against someone who hopes I go to hell and says so. Hell, I might even laugh at him, slap him on the back. Hard.

Spencer might want to consider it on this one. Isn’t the above threat a bit over the top? I thought death threats weren’t protected speech? Or does the fact that these men pray out loud that their god will do these heinous acts protect them? Do they actually get to hide behind that, when their descriptions are so gruesome??

I was perusing Jihad Watch…and found some links hacked. Same with WorldNetDaily. I notified them, because I actually do believe in freedom of speech. I’m sure those sites are kept busy by the religion of peace. One of the links that was hacked was to a video of the man who called a woman he disagreed with a whore at an I.T.S. demonstration. I have embedded that video below.  He is a Jewish convert to Islam. Sad. So very sad.

Meanwhile, broadcast news continues reporting mostly local soft news, love triangles and such, along with a few bank robberies, and murders. Okay. Some of that is important. I wish the love triangles could remain private matters. If I want to know about that sort of thing, I’ll watch Access Hollywood or read The Globe. But that’s just me…

But what about the fact that several anti-American, openly jihadist, foreign entities, now operate on American soil?

And this isn't even the most updated version....

And this isn't even the most updated version....

Here’s a video on this that will really curl (or straighten, whatever you need) your hair.

These events aren’t newsworthy??

During the course of my reading today, I ran across another organization that keeps tabs on jihadist activities — Militant Islam Monitor.org. Very worthy of our attention.

We’re all watching each other these days aren’t we? Something’s gone haywire. Oh. Yeah. Our constitution isn’t being implemented. The one that the jihadists now openly tell Americans needs replacing with sharia (Islamic law) under a khalifate. That constitution. The constitution that our government officials take an oath to defend, along with “all enemies, both foreign and domestic”. Don’t these people, who call for our deaths, for the end of our chosen method of government — sound like enemies to you???

Of particular interest on the Wikipedia site regarding the Muslim Thinker’s Society is the link on the bottom entitled, “A Glenn Beck interview of a member of the Islamic Thinkers Society. Glenn hits pretty hard. Sorry, it’s a soundfile not a video.

Below is a video and a photo one of the guy’s from I.T.S.  calling a woman a whore. It can be clearly heard at the beginning of the video. In response, the woman tosses coffee on him. One of his buddies begins asking in a demanding tone, repeatedly, “Will you arrest her?” Several witnesses kept insisting that the man called the woman a whore.

This is so typical of Islamic behavior. They start the fight, the victim defends himself, herself, or in the case of groups, nations etc. they then go complaining about the response!! How about let’s not go picking fights guys??

The guy is a Jewish convert to Islam, calling women "whores".

The guy is a Jewish convert to Islam, a member of Islamic Thinker's Society, expressing his thoughts. He calls a woman he is arguing with a whore. Later, in the video, you'll here him call women who are speaking up on the first woman's behalf "children" and "filthy", and claiming they don't know how to have a discussion.

Photo by Urban Infidel at www.urbaninfidel.blogspot.com

I leave you with a quote from my religion. “Pray for the welfare of the non-Jewish government, since were it not for the fear of it men would swallow each other alive.” (Avot 3:2 and Rashi’s commentary.)

From Schmoozing with Elya & Ellie Katz

Posted in America, anti-semitism, audio, Islam, Islamic-Leftist alliance, Islamist, jihad, jihadi propiganda, moonbats | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Flight 93 memorial: Petition picking up steam

Posted by avideditor on April 8, 2008

Blogburst logo, no accident

World Net Daily has a very informative article today about our petition to investigate the Flight 93 memorial. It includes excerpts from Tom Burnett’s letter to the American people; it includes information about the fraudulent Park Service investigation (where an Islamic scholar said not to worry about the half mile wide Mecca oriented crescent because nobody has ever seen a mihrab anywhere near this BIG before); and it reviews the four specific complaints highlighted in the petition (the giant crescent, the Mecca orientation, the Islamic sundial and the 44 blocks).

Those last four links are to graphics that Tom Burnett is going to have on poster-boards when he addresses a Republican convention in Wisconsin at the end of the month. World Net Daily is looking to add video content these days so Tom is going to try to get video of his speech that we can edit down to five minutes of highlights for WND.

The first place we will be delivering the petitions is to the Memorial Project’s public meeting on May 3rd in Somerset PA. It looks like we are going to have quite a few signatures, both from the electronic petition (zooming towards 2000 already), and from the paper petitions (now circulating on the ground in PA).

At least one state legislator from Pennsylvania has signed the petition, and a Congressman has expressed interest in entering the whole thing into the congressional record. That would be a second Congressman coming out publicly against the memorial. (Tom Tancredo asked the Park Service last fall to scrap the crescent design entirely.)

Will any of the big radio radio voices wake up to the evidence that al Qaeda accepted our open invitation to the ENTIRE WORLD to enter our design competition? All they have to do is look at the FACTS.

To join our blogbursts, email Cao (caoilfhionn1 at gmail dot com) with your blog’s url.

Posted in moonbats | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Did Colbert Go too far?

Posted by avideditor on March 4, 2008


I think he did, despite the context. What do you think?

Posted in Media Bias, moonbats, Nazi | 7 Comments »

Graffiti alert!

Posted by avideditor on February 28, 2008

Ezera Makes an excellent point on how the Canadian Jewish community is not addressing the more important issues. What do you think?

Graffiti alert!: “When Warren Kinsella quit the National Post a few weeks ago (though, to be accurate, they were only printing him once a month by that point), he announced that the universe had balanced itself out, in that he had joined the Canadian Jewish Congress’s legal committee. Having sat on my share of Jewish community volunteer committees over the years — including one with Kinsella himself — I can testify that they’re not really the same thing as a paying column in a national newspaper. If there are 350,000 Jews in Canada, I’d estimate that there are about 350,000 volunteer positions to be filled.But I underestimated Kinsella’s impact. Today, the CJC has put out an urgent news release: somewhere in Toronto, a school desk was found to have some anti-Semitic graffiti scribbled on it. If finding a swastika scrawled on a bathroom wall was cause for an Orange Alert, this graffiti — on a desk, people, a desk! — is War Measures Act material.It’s embarrassing to see a once-great institution like the CJC be reduced to issuing red alerts over kids’ graffiti. I’m not in favour of anti-Semitic graffiti, especially on Toronto campuses. That’s vandalism, and it’s also downright rude. But it says something about the CJC that while they’re awfully brave at tackling anonymous graffiti, they dont dare criticize, say, the annual Israel Apartheid Week Jew-bashing festival on Toronto campuses. That would mean butting heads with their more, uh, spirited friends.The ‘hate’ problem in Canada isn’t anonymous swastikas being secretly scrawled by rebellious kids, who likely don’t even know what they’re doing, other than it seems to annoy the grown-ups a lot. The ‘hate’ problem in Canada is a growing body of Canadians who are importing alien values of violence and censorship to support their broader goals of jihad. According to a CBC poll, fully 12% of Canadian Muslims surveyed felt that the 2006 jihadist plot to murder the Prime Minister and bomb Toronto buildings was ‘justified’. That’s tens of thousands of people who haven’t assimilated our western, liberal values.A Canadian Jewish Congress that lived up to its name would give a damn about that. Instead, we’ve got ourselves a very expensive graffiti patrol. Oy vay.  “(Via avideditorla’s shared items in Google Reader.)

Posted in moonbats | Tagged: | Leave a Comment »

Eurabian Court bans deportation of jihad terror suspect

Posted by avideditor on February 28, 2008

Eurabian Court bans deportation of jihad terror suspect: “He would be tortured back home, see. ‘Ministers argued the right of the public to be protected against terrorism should be balanced against a suspect’s rights not to be ill-treated,’ but to no avail.’Court bans deportation of terror suspect,’ by Clare Dyer for the Guardian (thanks to Davida):

Government hopes of deporting dozens of terror suspects to their home countries suffered a serious setback today with the European court of human rights ruling against one such attempt.The grand chamber of 17 judges at the Strasbourg court ruled unanimously that an attempt by Italy to send a man back to Tunisia violated the ban on torture or inhuman or degrading treatment in the European convention on human rights.The case was brought by Nassim Saadi against Italy. The British government intervened in the hope the court would sanction the return of suspects regardless of their home country’s human rights record.Ministers argued the right of the public to be protected against terrorism should be balanced against a suspect’s rights not to be ill-treated.The court ruled that protection against torture is absolute and Saadi cannot be sent back, even though he has been convicted of terror-related offences in both Tunisia and Italy…. 

“(Via avideditorla’s shared items in Google Reader.)

Posted in Eurabia, jihad, moonbats | Leave a Comment »

ABC: Foreign Pilots Still Training @ Flight Schools; The Hypocrisy of ABC News

Posted by avideditor on February 28, 2008

It looks like ABC is bipolar. Well at least it exposes the truth some times unlike MSNBC. 

ABC: Foreign Pilots Still Training @ Flight Schools; The Hypocrisy of ABC News: “By Debbie Schlussel

I’m confused, dear readers. Maybe you can help explain this inconsistency to me and make things jibe.Tonight, on ABC’s ‘World News Tonight,’ investigative reporter Brian Ross reports that thousands of foreigners are taking flying lessons at domestic flight schools, and it could be ‘another 9/11.’ ABC’s publicists sent me an alert about the story and told me it’s a ‘9/11 Redux.’ Therefore, I need to be concerned.But the amorphous, general ‘foreigners’ at pilot schools are not necessarily the specific category of those who took flight lessons and downed four planes on 9/11, murdering almost 3,000 Americans. It was ARAB MUSLIM foreigners who trained at flight schools who did it.abcnewstoilet.jpgPhoto From MediaBistroBut, last night, ABC News told me–in an hour-long primetime news special–that if I refuse to service Muslims at my place of business, I’m prejudiced–‘Islamophobic!’ And violating the law, they told all viewers.I’m confused.So, which is it? If I refuse to serve Arab Muslim aliens at flight schools, I’m bigoted. But if I refuse to serve the general ‘foreign pilots,’ then I’m an American hero preventing another 9/11.Sorry, but I’m not the one who is mixed up when it comes to suspicious Muslims at businesses in America.ABC is. If you can’t get it straight, ABC News, don’t lecture us about the manufactured ‘Islamophobic’ Americans who are just Americans that remember who attacked us on 9/11 and well before and ever since.”

(Via Debbie Schlussel.)

Posted in Media Bias, moonbats | Leave a Comment »

Australian Moonbat Lawyer Raves and Equates Jihadis with Jews

Posted by avideditor on February 28, 2008

I think a friend of mine had the best response to the Lawyer equating Jihadis to Jews:”Those who point to the Torah and say it involves violent destruction of cities obviously doesnt understand what the Torah says. The only land the Jewish people must occupy is Israel. There is no command to destroy infidels or to rise up against non-Jewish nations. Those who think otherwise need to re-read what the Torah says. It is obvious this lawyer is a nut-case and is only twisting the words of Torah to suit his twisted world view.”

Australian Moonbat Lawyer Raves:”The United States isn’t the only country plagued with delusional moonbat attorneys: Jury asked to consider ‘America’s evil’.


THE jury in Australia’s largest terrorism case has been asked to consider the ‘evil’ America has done, as a court judges 12 Melbourne men accused of plotting to commit ‘violent jihad’.Opening the defence case today, lawyer Remy van de Wiel, QC, told the jury America had suffered an enormous blow to its pride as a result of the September 11 World Trade Center attack. Mr Van de Wiel described the attacks as ‘evil and shocking’.‘But don’t forget, America has done many evil things too,’ Mr van de Wiel told the court.He also told the Victorian Supreme Court jury to be cautious about forming the opinion that Osama bin Laden, who it has heard was a hero to the leader of the Melbourne group, was responsible for the 9/11 attacks.‘To say this was all orchestrated by Osama bin Laden is also very silly,’ he said. ‘He has never claimed responsibility.’Mr Van de Wiel, who is representing Abdul Nacer Benbrika, the alleged leader of the group, also told the jury similarities existed between the teachings of the Bible and the Koran. He pointed to sections of the Bible which detailed the ‘fanatical destruction of whole cities’ and spoke of a ‘fanatical, vengeful God’.(Via Little Green Footballs.)


Posted in Islamist, Israel, jihad, moonbats | Tagged: | 1 Comment »

More scary things about Obama

Posted by avideditor on February 28, 2008

 With all these scary facts I really hope Obama looses. He probably Islamo-fasict and even if you take the Islam part out he is still a Fascist. Do you think the American people are clueless enough to elect Obama as POTUS? 

My latest post on Obama: Obama will kill all the Jews: He will be worse then Hitler or Stalin

 B. Hussein Obama: Call to [Muslim] prayer is “one of the prettiest sounds on Earth at sunset”: ”      

Less than a year ago, he said this during the interview with The New York Times op-ed columnist Nicholas Kristof:‘I was a little Jakarta street kid,’ he said in a wide-ranging interview in his office […]. He once got in trouble for making faces during Koran study classes in his elementary school, but a president is less likely to stereotype Muslims as fanatics — and more likely to be aware of their nationalism — if he once studied the Koran with them.Mr. Obama recalled the opening lines of the Arabic call to prayer, reciting them with a first-rate accent. In a remark that seemed delightfully uncalculated (it’ll give Alabama voters heart attacks), Mr. Obama described the call to prayer as ‘one of the prettiest sounds on Earth at sunset.’That just freaking blows your mind, doesn’t it?”   

(Via avideditorla’s shared items in Google Reader.) 


Hints Obama is a Muslim won’t affect his presidential candidacy says Rep Keith Ellison: “

The AP reported the first Muslim elected to Congress, U.S. Representative Keith Ellison, believes a Muslim could be elected as President of the United States: U.S. Representative Keith Ellison says suggestions that Barack Obama is Muslim won’t have any effect on his presidential candidacy.Ellison is the first Muslim member of Congress. He says that’s because Americans are not bigoted and won’t be swayed by such suggestions. Obama is Christian.    Ellison, a Minnesota Democrat, says he has ‘no doubt’ that a Muslim could be elected president.MyFox Twin Cities     

“(Via avideditorla’s shared items in Google Reader.)

Extremist Islamic links on Obama web site: ”     

Obama’s allegiances become increasingly clear.Islamic links on Obama web site stir criticism (CNSNews) A page for Muslim supporters of Sen. Barack Obama hosted on Obama’spresidential campaign Web site promotes events sponsored by controversialIslamic groups. The Muslim Americans for Obama 08 was created on Obamas maincampaign site where users can create their own page through a ‘My Obama’ option.The Muslim Americans for Obama page also links to a Web site that featureslectures by people who have expressed radical Islamic views in the past.Theportion of the Muslim Americans for Obama page lists proposals to establish aMuslim American advisory group on U.S. foreign policy; provide prayer areas inpublic places such as malls, airports, universities and government buildings;institute a law to allow Muslim employees to take time from their work day forprayer; and institute a law against harassment of Muslim women in public areas.The Obama campaign’s press office did not respond to numerous phone calls ande-mail messages from Cybercast News Service on this matter.      

“(Via avideditorla’s shared items in Google Reader.)

UPDATE: I forgot about what Nadar said about Obama on Meet the Press

Lebanese Nader Calls Obama Pro-“Palestinian”: ” 

Imagine ….even Nader calls out Obama’s ‘Pro-Palestinian’ Past (and Nader is Lebanese. His parents, Nathra and Rose Nader, were Lebanese immigrants. Rose and Nathra Nader’s native language is Arabic)  

Washington, D.C.(February 25, 2008) –‘ After remarks made by Ralph Nader yesterday on’Meet the Press,’ RJC Executive Director Matt Brooks said, ‘Ralph Nader added tothe debate on Senator Obama’s views on Israel and the Middle East and raisedserious doubts and questions about the true leanings of Senator Obama on theseimportant issues.’During his interview on ‘Meet the Press,’ Nader said that Sen.Obama had reversed his positions on Israel.’ Nader said Sen. Obama’s ‘betterinstincts and his knowledge have been censored by himself’ and that Sen. Obamawas ‘pro-Palestinian when he was in Illinois before he ran for the state Senate’and ‘during the state Senate.” ‘ Sen. Obama has caught criticism forpro-Palestinian, anti-Israel statements and sentiments before.’ In March 2007,Sen. Obama was criticized for saying that ‘Nobody is suffering more than thePalestinians.” Obama has also been criticized for stocking his campaign withseveral controversial advisors including Zbigniew Brzezinski, Robert Malley,Samantha Power and Susan Rice.’ ‘‘People should be very skeptical ofBarack Obama’s shaky Middle East policies.’ When a long-time political activistlike Ralph Nader, with a well-documented, anti-Israel bias, claims that SenatorObama shares this anti-Israel bias, that is alarming,’ said RJC ExecutiveDirector Matt Brooks. ‘If Senator Obama supports Ralph Nader’s policies, whichconsistently condemn Israel’s right to defend itself against terrorism, and ifSen. Obama has only reversed his positions to run for president, it once againraises serious questions about his grasp of the geo-political realities of theMiddle East and puts into doubt his commitment to the safety and security ofIsrael.’ These are important questions we in the Jewish community will beasking.” ‘   

Posted in America, Islamist, Israel, jihad, moonbats, Obama | Tagged: , , , | 6 Comments »

Hollywood’s New Treason Chic

Posted by avideditor on February 28, 2008

It is too bad Hollywood forgot about 9-11. They are now supporting the terrorist at gitmo. There actions are begging for another terrorist attack. Do you think they will wake up then?

Hollywood’s New Treason Chic: HT JAWA”Brainless glitterati like Paul Haggis and Julie Christie ‘heart’ terrorists. Why don’t you?1hollywoodtreason2.jpgFrom New York Fashion:Did you notice the orange ribbon pinned to Julie Christie’s dress and Paul Haggis’s lapel at the Oscars? It was a lovely little accessory to show their support for the closing of the Guantánamo Bay prison because of the U.S. government’s controversial interrogation tactics there. The orange represents the jumpsuits worn by the prisoners and is also the color of a rubber bracelet worn by Haggis that reads ‘torture+silence=complicity’ included in the Oscar swag bag. Organizations like the ACLU, which sponsors the Close Guantanamo campaign, ask stars to don these stamps of activism well in advance so that they have enough time to consult with their stylists.’Included in the Oscar swag bag?’ And these idiots wonder why nobody wants to watch their mutual backslapping extravaganza anymore?Note that ‘haggis’ is the national dish of Scotland. It’s a bunch of guts cooked in a sheep’s stomach. How appropriate.


Posted in moonbats | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Canada gives welfare for Muslim polygamists?

Posted by avideditor on February 27, 2008

Canada gives welfare for Muslim polygamists?:I missed this story from a couple of weeks ago, originally in the Toronto Sun:

Hundreds of GTA [Greater Toronto Area] Muslim men in polygamous marriages — some with a harem of wives — are receiving welfare and social benefits for each of their spouses, thanks to the city and province, Muslim leaders say.Mumtaz Ali, president of the Canadian Society of Muslims, said wives in polygamous marriages are recognized as spouses under the Ontario Family Law Act, providing they were legally married under Muslim laws abroad.”Polygamy is a regular part of life for many Muslims,” Ali said yesterday. “Ontario recognizes religious marriages for Muslims and others.”He estimates “several hundred” GTA husbands in polygamous marriages are receiving benefits. Under Islamic law, a Muslim man is permitted to have up to four spouses.However, city and provincial officials said legally a welfare applicant can claim only one spouse. Other adults living in the same household can apply for welfare independently.The average recipient with a child can receive about $1,500 monthly, city officials said.In addressing the issue of polygamous marriages, the preamble to the Ontario Family Law Act states: “In the definition of ‘spouse,’ a reference to marriage includes a marriage that is actually or potentially polygamous, if it was celebrated in a jurisdiction whose system of law recognizes it as valid. R.S.O. 1990, c. F.3, s. 1 (2).””There are many people in the community who are taking advantage of this,” Ali said. “This is a law and there’s nothing wrong with it.”Immigration officials said yesterday that polygamous marriages aren’t allowed in Canada, but that contradicts the provincial law.”Canada is a very liberal-minded country,” Ali said. “Canada is way ahead of Britain in this respect.”He said Britain recently began permitting husbands to collect benefits for each of their wives.The British government recently admitted that nearly a thousand men are living legally with multiple wives in Britain. Although the families are entitled to claim social security for each wife, the department for work and pensions said it has not counted how many are on benefits.In Canada, Ali said, the man and his main wife and children enter Canada as landed immigrants. The other spouses are sponsored or arrive as visitors to join their husband to share one home.The families receiving benefits didn’t want their identities released because it can lead to questions by authorities on how they entered Canada and can mean an end to their benefits, Ali said.Brenda Nesbitt, the city’s director of social services, said benefits are only paid to one spouse and names and addresses are cross-checked for possible fraud.”There may be polygamous cases we are not aware off,” Nesbitt said yesterday. “They can apply as single people and we won’t know.”

Posted in Islamist, moonbats | Leave a Comment »


Posted by avideditor on February 27, 2008

Senator Obama’s Coming Out Party in ClevelandBy Ed LaskyThere has been a great deal of controversy generated over Senator Barack Obama’s views towards Israel and the America-Israel relationship. The arguments  have revolved around his close associations with people who harbor problematic views toward Israel, his list of foreign policy advisers, and some of his own views on the course of America’s foreign policy.American Thinker has run a series of articles on this topic. Supporters have rallied to Barack Obama’s defense. As we have said before, we hope these supporters are correct, but we have our doubts. These doubts have increased in the wake of comments the Senator made this past Sunday to Jewish leaders in Cleveland.

The speech was meant to reassure pro-Israel supporters, but should also raise concerns about Senator Obama. He did make a series of comforting comments regarding Israel (e.g., a commitment to the security of Israel, his goal to work towards peace while recognizing Israel has its enemies, and that our relationship is based on shared values and shared history).  The reliably pro-Obama JTA website provides a rundown of his speech. He calls for talks with Iran and aggressive diplomacy, and he said that he would not take the military option off the table (but would remove our forces from Iraq). These and other comments he made are often made by other politicians appearing before groups of Israel supporters. Senator Obama’s comments are thus most welcome.
Nevertheless, other parts of his speech were far from reassuring, and once again cast substantial doubt on his views not just toward Israel but also specifically toward supporters of the America-Israel relationship here at home. Senator Obama believes words matter; it is a mantra of his candidacy. Therefore, it is only fair to look at the words he used in Cleveland to divine his views.
He seems to be adressing many supporters of Israel in America who have questions regarding his views and his plans. He finds fault with them:
“I think there is a strain within the pro-Israel community that says unless you adopt a unwavering pro-Likud approach to Israel that you’re anti-Israel and that can’t be the measure of our friendship with Israel”.
Senator Obama characterizes those who have concerns about policies he might follow as President as being Likud-supporters. This has been a charge propagated by the fiercest opponents of Israel, who have often slipped into conspiracy theories regarding American supporters of Israel. (Try googling Likudnik and “dual loyalty” or “conspiracy theory”; Likudnik has become a term of opprobrium. As David Berstein notes“Likudnik has gradually become a general anti-Semitic term for Jews whose opinions one does not like.”
One wishes Senator Obama would be bit more sensitive going forward when he uses such a term. After all, the Likud Party has not been in power for years, and Americans should feel free to express their concerns without being characterized as that party’s supporters, with its suggestion of dual loyalty. The suggestion that supporters of Israel who express their concerns are subscribers to the view of the Likud Party of Israel is simply not grounded.  After all, supporters of Hillary Clinton have also expressed qualms regarding Senator Obama’s views of Israel. Are they supporters of Likud, too?
Haaretz columnist  Shmuel Rosner raises an additional reason to have qualms. Will a President Obama be supportive of an Israel headed by a Prime Minster who hails from the Likud party? Does this statement by Senator Obama risk interfering with Israeli politics? 
It is important to note that Likud did give up the Sinai and that Ariel Sharon — a former Likud leader — did remove all the settlements from the Gaza Strip. So one wonders why Senator Obama is so anti-Likud to begin with? Does he not know the history of this volatile region? Who has he been his counsel when he chooses to use such a term?
Senator Obama also sought to distance himself from Zbigniew Brzezinski, whose anti-Israel views are well known.  However, he made no mention of two other advisors with a long record of hostility toward Israel: Robert Malley and Samantha Power. Power, in particular, is very close to the Senator and is a key foreign policy adviser . Why the omission of any mention of both?
But in trying to disentangle himself from Brzezinski, Senator Obama engaged in some rhetoric that is unsettling:
“Frankly some of the commentary that I’ve seen which suggests guilt by association or the notion that unless we are never ever going to ask any difficult questions about how we move peace forward or secure Israel that is non military or non belligerent or doesn’t talk about just crushing the opposition that that somehow is being soft or anti-Israel, I think we’re going to have problems moving forward.
Senator Obama apparently views Israel as a “belligerent” and perhaps wants to see America’s support for Israel’s military reduced. This is hardly reassuring. Israel is not a belligerent, it only defends itself.  It is a tiny sliver of a nation of a few million people surrounded by 300 million people who have made quite clear over the past 60 years that they desire its destruction.  Few supporters of Israel indeed think that the only way to bring peace to the region is for Israel to crush all the opposition. Israel herself, since her founding, sought — and sometimes fought — for peace. These steps did not involve crushing all the opposition. Israel has taken great risks in it steps towards peace (leaving Lebanon — which led to the rise of Hezbollah; leaving Gaza — which led to the rise of Hamas; allowing Yasser Arafat to come to the West bank, where he set up a terrorist regime and brainwashed Palestinian children to hate.  A leading Presidential candidate all but accuses Israel of being “belligerent” — is that unsettling to anyone?
Also unsettling is the implication that may lie behind his statement that we are going to have “problems moving forward” if critics raise questions about his views. Is this a statement meant to forestall discussion? If so, it would be similar to the views expressed by Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer, who abhor the role that pro-Israel Americans (including Christians) sometimes play in the foreign policy discussion.
These statements are difficult to square with his position that he has a long record of support for Israel. If he is perturbed by critics and indicates questions may cause problems in the future regarding his policies and actions, then perhaps people have legitimate reasons to be concerned about the depth of his support for the America-Israel relationship and the role of Americans in the foreign policy discussion.
Senator Obama also said that supporting the view that only by defeating its Islamic foes can Israel enjoy any semblance of peace and security “can’t be the measure of our friendship with Israel.”. This is disconcerting. How firm and deep will President Obama’s support for Israel be when it comes to dealing with terrorists? Israel needs to defeat its Islamic foes who seek its destruction and who celebrate martyrdom for peace to reign. Even Palestinian moderates will feel constrained in making peace deals with Israel until these Islamic extremists are defeated. Wouldn’t Israel be justified in stopping Islamic foes that are calling for another Holocaust?
Would President Obama feel the same towards Islamic foes who target America?
Senator Obama also indicated that siding with those who seek the dividing of Israel does not make him anti-Israel.  This is true. Most supporters of Israel now understand there will need to be a viable Palestinian state and that Israel will need to make territorial concessions. He stated that backing the Jews’ biblical, historical and legal claim to all of the land in question also can’t be the measure of our friendship with Israel. Of course, Israel has already made such concessions: the result is Hamasstan in the Gaza, which has become a center for terror directed daily against Israel. As Israel moved its forces out of the West Bank, those areas became centers of terrorist activity. 
Senator Obama has already telegraphed his views regarding land, which seemed to prejudge the final outcome . But it might be wiser from a diplomatic point of view if he does not signal to opponents of negotiations his position if he becomes President. Also, violence has ensued when Israel voluntarily withdrew from lands; the world has remained silent and expresses very little sympathy for Israeli victims. Is counseling the division of land now something a friend would do?
Notably, the word “Jerusalem” is entirely absent from Senator Obama’s remarks. Surely that is not inadvertent. Does Senator Obama support or oppose the division of Jerusalem? Is Senator Obama aware of the destruction of Jewish and Christian religious sites when Jerusalem had been divided previously? Is he aware of how Jews were denied access to their religious sites when the city was divided? If Senator Obama does support the division of Jerusalem, how would it be divided? American Jews certainly cannot evaluate the Senator’s views on Israel when in a lengthy speech to Jewish leaders he keeps his views on Jerusalem to himself.  
Senator Obama also stated that a full withdrawal from Iraq would strengthen America’s ability to deal with Iran. This logic is difficult to see. How would that happen? A precipitous withdrawal would embolden Iran. There would be no fear of American forces near its borders and its Shiite allies within Iraq would be strengthened. If anything, Iran would be empowered by such a retreat. How leaving would help us deal with Iran is opaque.
Senator Obama also sought to dispel rumors of anti-Semitism within his church (American Thinker has never made this accusation; nor do we support this allegation). Within the speech was this nugget:
But I have never heard an anti-Semitic comment made inside of our church.And I suspect there are some of the people in this room who have heard relatives say some things that they don’t agree with. Including, on occasion, directed at African-Americans — that’s maybe a possibility that’s just, I am not suggesting that’s definitive.”  
This is a Clintonesque statement if there ever were one.  Senator Obama has never heard anti-Semitic statements “inside his church.” How about members who may have made such comments outside the church?  How about his pastor’s relatively recent written anti-Israel statements that he excuses on the ground of Israel’s former relationship with South Africa. This also conveniently elides the fact that his Church’s magazine very recently gave an award to Louis Farrakhan, one of the most infamous anti-Semites in America.
In an attempt at self-justification, Senator Obama relegates his pastor, who is his spiritual mentor, and who inspired the title of his book The Audacity of Hope, as something like a crazy old uncle in the attic. Worse, he suggests that Jewish leaders may themselves have relatives who have made remarks that might be considered anti-African American.  That is entirely irrelevant. There is a substantial difference between relatives who make private (or even public) comments that are disagreeable, and a relationship with a pastor that was sought out and supported, praised, and regarded as a mentor for two decades.  Although one can distance oneself from relatives, it’s not so easy to resign from them. The same is not true of a pastoral affiliation.
Undoubtedly, the Jewish community would expect a presidential candidate to resign from a church whose pastor publicly supported David Duke and whose magazine gave him an award. The community would hope that Senator Obama would have taken such a step many years ago. Some may consider it disingenuous of the Senator to excuse his own voluntary association on the ground those Jewish listeners might have family members who harbor private prejudices.
Senator Obama’s speech occurred in the wake of comments made by Ralph Nader on Meet The Press. Nader claims that Senator Obama is too pro-Israel these days and remarked that the Senator was pro-Palestinian for years before he began his campaign for higher office. While some may view this as a reflection of Senator Obama’s evolving views (certainly his supporters will), others might question the coincidence  of changing his views when he sought to garner support for his campaign.

Now that he has racked up a string of victories and vast amounts of financial support, he apparently feels comfortable in articulating some views regarding Israel and supporters of Israel in America that may give comfort to Ralph Nader but might leave others with even more questions than before. 

Posted in Israel, jihad, moonbats, Obama | Tagged: , | 9 Comments »

%d bloggers like this: