"Muslims protest 'age of mockery' as thousands descend on Google HQ" The Telegraph

Thousands of Muslims have pledged a series of protests against Google HQ for a "hateful and offensive" anti-Islam video, saying they now live in an "age of mockery".

The scene outside the Google offices in Buckingham Palace Road, London. Photo: GEOFF PUGH
By Jennifer O'Mahony3:52PM BST 14 Oct 2012
A protest by 10,000 Muslims outside the offices of Google in London today is just the first in an orchestrated attempt to force the company to remove an anti-Islamic film from website YouTube in Britain.
Thousands had travelled from as far afield as Glasgow to take part in the demonstration, ahead of a planned million-strong march in Hyde Park in coming weeks.
Anger over 'The Innocence of Muslims', an American-produced film which insults the Prophet Mohammad and demeans Muslims, according to protesters, remains available to watch on the website YouTube, a subsidiary of Google.
Organiser Masoud Alam said: "Our next protest will be at the offices of Google and YouTube across the world. We are looking to ban this film.

"This is not freedom of expression, there is a limit for that. This insult of the Prophet will not be allowed.
The group's next action was a march Mr Alam hoped would be "a million strong" would take place in Hyde Park "in the next few weeks", he said.
"Until it is banned we will keep protesting," he added.
Today's demonstration was the third organised in a month, and took place on the central London street where the website search giant has its UK headquarters. A demonstration outside the American Embassy in London last month drew little attention as protests in Libya, Tunisia and Yemen dominated headlines, including the storming of embassy in Benghazi, Libya, that led to the death of the US Ambassador to Libya, Christopher Stevens.
Barricades were erected in front of Google's headquarters and a crowd bearing placards with the words "We love our prophet more than our lives" and "Prophet Muhammad is the founder of freedom of speech" had amassed by lunchtime.
Speeches by more than a dozen imams in a mixture of Arabic, Urdu, and English urged Muslims to honour the name of the Prophet and not to back down in the face of Google's continuing reluctance to act, and were met with passionate cries of "God is Great" and "Mohammad is the Prophet of God" in Arabic.
One of the speakers, Sheikh Faiz Al-Aqtab Siddiqui, told The Daily Telegraph: "Terrorism is not just people who kill human bodies, but who kill human feelings as well. The makers of this film have terrorised 1.6 billion people.
"Organisations like Google are key players and have to take responsibility for civility. You can't just say it doesn't matter that it's freedom of speech. It's anarchy."
Sheikh Siddiqui, a barrister from Nuneaton, said he wanted to form a coalition with the Church of England, Catholics, Jewish groups, Trade Unions and even Conservatives to encourage their ranks to join his "campaign for civility".
"We want everyone in society to recognise these people are wrecking our fragile global society. We want the Church, the Synod, Jewish groups and establishment figures involved," he said.
As many as 800 imams in mosques across Britain helped to organise today's protest, which lasted four hours and blocked roads almost up to the Queen's doorstep on Buckingham Palace Road.
Muslims from Blackburn, Birmingham, Glasgow, Luton, Manchester and Peterborough were in attendance. When asked where where the women attending the protest were, one protester replied: "Right at the back".
Self-employed businessman Ahmed Nasar said he was worried the video could lead to violence in Britain in the same way as it had abroad. "If you push people too far," he said, "You will turn the peaceful elements into violence."
A YouTube spokesperson said: "We work hard to create a community everyone can enjoy and which also enables people to express different opinions.
"This can be a challenge because what's OK in one country can be offensive elsewhere. This video - which is widely available on the Web - is clearly within our guidelines and so will stay on YouTube."

Thought Atlas readers would like to see this this correspondence from a Muslim in Pakistan. Everybody knows.....

I am visiting your site from quite some time. I have read your adds. I wonder where is hatred in it. Still I am unable to find it.

I cannot find where is the question of racism in your adds..

 

It is your right to give your opinion.

I feel sad for you. You are facing hard time.

 

your views about jihad is what you are watching, and in my opinion your view are right.

.

You can understand in the middle of jungle I can see what you are thinking over there.

 

I am from Pakistan and English is my second language. By birth i am Muslim.

 

 

My name for you is XXXX  I want to hide my name because I don't want to display it on any website. because it can create problem for me.

 

 

The above ad is part of our newly expanded anti-jihad campaign. New government has failed us, say Egypt's Copts

Please read the latest from Dr. Ashraf Ramelah, who is the founder and president of Voice of the Copts, a human rights organization, and a SION Board member.

Living in fear: Coptic Christians in Egypt  Haaretz

As al-Qaida leader Ayman al-Zawahiri calls for renewed protests against the U.S. and Israel in the wake of reaction to the film about Mohammed, it is the ancient Christian community of Egypt, the Copts, who are in the greatest immediate danger. Ashraf Ramelah, a Coptic leader, describes how Copts are dealing with the new Islamist reality in Egypt.

By Dr. Ashraf Ramelah | Oct.14, 2012 |

After a long history of persecution as a minority in Egypt, in these days the nonetheless resilient Copts face a dire moment. The ominously Sharia-leaning Muslim Brotherhood government of Egypt, headed by President Mohammed Morsi, has taken over the country from the oppressive - but slightly more tolerant - Mubarak regime. Adding to this crisis is the absence of spiritual and political leadership for the 18 million-strong Coptic community, namely a Pope. The church is still in the throes of a longstanding selection process to name a new spiritual head to permanently replace the interim administrator, a bishop, who has been the caretaker leader since the death of Pope Shenuda III earlier this year.

Recently, the Copts of Alexandria embarked on a three-day fast (no food, no water), petitioning God to find the leader divinely suited to be the successor of the beloved Pope Shenuda III. The institution of the Pope is of central importance to Copts, since the first Pope was consecrated in the first century AD upon the death of Saint Mark: He guides and directs Coptic life and the Orthodox Church. During the 1,400 years that Islam has dominated Egypt, Copts have been treated by the Muslim authorities as second-class citizens, with minimal rights but maximum duties. The Copts, who see themselves as the rightful inheritors of the land of the Pharaohs, have always found solace in the refuge of the church, insulated and protected by their clergy. 

Representing a culture as much as they embody a religion, Copts constitute roughly 20 percent of Egypt’s nearly 80 million people. Morsi’s rise to power is the result of an 80-year struggle by the Muslim Brotherhood to rule Egypt with aspirations to control the entire Arab-Muslim world. After years of hibernation, the Brotherhood experienced a rebirth during the Arab Spring. And now Egypt's Copts face the brunt of Morsi’s Islamic-supremacist leanings. 

Until now, Copts managed to survive under Muslim dictatorships, even though those dictatorships often covertly fostered crimes against the Coptic community - bombers, snipers and gangs of Muslim thugs - who were assured of receiving favorable court hearings that kept them free and able to commit violence. Meanwhile, repeatedly victimized by deadly attacks, Copts were generally rounded up and thrown into jail and received none of the special judicial privileges or immunity that their attackers did. During the Tahrir Square protests of January 2011, Copts had good reason to rise up against the Mubarak state.

Today, under the new political class of the once-banned Muslim Brotherhood, Copts are already paying a higher price - with their lives and property - for their religious beliefs. They are frequently accused of showing contempt for and insulting Islam, and face related trumped-up charges. It would not be an exaggeration to say that the threatening atmosphere in Egypt for Copts is Nazi-like. Coptic Christians are praying, fasting, and begging for mercy.

Islamist efforts to infiltrate Egypt’s church hierarchy have been ongoing since Islam came to Egypt, but in the past four decades Islamic influence over the church has intensified. This way the governing regimes could guarantee both secular and religious Copts were corralled away from political activism and local organizing, a strategy that worked at least until the autumn of 2010. Over time, this subtle pressure has forced Copts into a dependency on religious leaders to dictate political decisions for the whole body of the community, whether related to local, neighborhood issues or to wider, international ones.

The state political involvement in the church leadership evolved gradually, and has now got to the point where the government is attempting to influence the finances of the church. Under such imposed 'oversight,' the state is attempting to legislate and regulate church donations and expenditures, such as church salaries, schools, charities and maintenance. The Coptic congregation has no state institutional power to resist the intrusion by Egypt's government to intrude upon the church's decisions about how to direct its own financial resources.

Copts represent a major obstacle in the implementation of the Islamist plan for a pan-Islamic umma or Caliphate. By definition, in order to progress the idea of a global Muslim state, the fate of Egyptian Copts is either to convert or be expunged from history. So the destruction of Coptic churches, homes and businesses, kidnappings, forcible marriages of Christian girls to Muslim men, and mob violence instigated by the slightest perceived provocation, keep Copts living in fear.

In today's Egypt even secular people face charges of blasphemy, of insulting Islam, because of their denial of the existence of God. Indeed, Islamists go one step further and charge that secularists are also guilty of insulting Christianity as well. However, this is completely alien to Christian doctrine. Christians do not support any such blasphemy laws, because Christian doctrine teaches that belief cannot be legislated for or against; convictions of the heart should replace the law. Islamists therefore posit a false picture of Christianity, and a false kinship between the two religions with regard to blasphemy, in an attempt to 'play' at inclusivity, in order to appear to be defending all religions. Even more sinister, it is an attempt to Islamize Christianity. Assuming that Muslim juridical principles are equally applicable to Christianity - that Sharia-like legal thinking exists for the Christian faith - is simply not true. 

Needless to say, a tawdry portrayal of the Koran in a video legally produced in California by an unknown person who calls himself a Copt (among other identities) will, of course, be easy ammunition for Egyptian Islamists, on the other side of the world, who have shown their willingness many times to exploit real or invented events to attack Copts. The enforcement of Sharia blasphemy laws against non-Muslims are often based on little more than rumors spread by Muslim religious vigilantes that there has been some insult to Islam. 

The violent fallout from the film controversy is now being borne by Egyptian Copts, the victims for so long of Egypt’s internal and religious politics. It is just the latest expression of an ongoing dynamic of blame and hatred that the Coptic community of Egypt is sadly long used to, as well as an illustration of how far the free world’s free expression is constantly subject to the scrutiny of Arab-Muslim religious and political leaders.

Dr. Ashraf Ramelah is founder and president of Voice of the Copts, a human rights organization. 

Ha! You knew this was coming. Embrace the jihad, infidels! Embrace the killing, the subjugation, oppression and torture. Love the brutality and supremacism. Embrace 9/11, 7/7, 3/11, the Libyan consulate attacks, Beslan, Mumbai, Bali .....

And just for the record.... I do not think "jihadophobia" is just emerging. I think it's been around for 1,400 years of jihadi wars, land appropriations, cultural annihilations and enslavements.

Clearly, the victims of 911 were "jihadophobic," as were the American heroes on Flight 93....

"Emergence of jihadophobia" Kuwait Times

The word jihadophobia is a neologism formed from jihad and phobia, referring to irrational fear of the concept of jihad in Islam. An increase in jihadophobiarelated events is gradually erupting in the west. Some recent examples of these events are: an advertisement that reads “Support Israel. Defeat Jihad” that went on display in 10 New York City subway stations; and a statement delivered by United States representative Michele Bachman calling for a ban on what she calls “jihadi” foods in school lunches in the US. Thus, I found it exceedingly significant to illuminate the true meaning of jihad in Islam. Undoubtedly, jihad is one of those hotly disputed Islamic concepts, having generated so much disagreement and diametrically opposed interpretations.

The taqiya and kitman continue here. Just for knowing, nowhere in the quran does it speak to a "spiritual jihad"; it's all holy war.

And while I find the once notorious playboy Imran Khan a despicable jihadist who played the West like a violin, what he says is true.

"Imran Khan says Taliban's 'holy war' in Afghanistan is justified by Islamic law" The Guardian

[...] Speaking after visiting a hospital in Peshawar where Malala Yousafzai – the 14-year-old activist shot in the head by the Taliban for supporting girls' education – was treated last week, Khan told reporters that insurgents in Afghanistan were fighting a "jihad". Citing a verse from the Qur'an, he said: "It is very clear that whoever is fighting for their freedom is fighting a jihad …

"The people who are fighting in Afghanistan against the foreign occupation are fighting a jihad," he added, according to a video of remarks to journalists.

Afghan politicians have reacted with disbelief, with one parliamentarian suggesting Khan should be arrested. The Ulema Council, a grouping of senior clerics, declared his comments "unislamic".

A Kabul foreign ministry spokesman said Khan was "either profoundly and dangerously ignorant about the reality in Afghanistan, or he has ill will against the Afghan people.

"Our children are killed on daily basis, civilians killed and our schools, hospitals and infrastructure attacked on a daily basis. To call any of that jihad is profoundly wrong and misguided."

Hamid Karzai, the Afghan president, has written to all of Pakistan's political leaders, including Khan, saying: "We must ask why we have been unable to counter the terrorism that is attacking our people, and the promise of a better future for our children."

Khan has also courted criticism by saying he will not publicly name the Taliban while criticising the men who attempted to kill Malala, because he feared it would put his party's supporters at risk.

The row with Kabul highlights the awkward political situation Khan has found himself in recent days. He has long blamed the rise of the Taliban in the country on the US, saying its military operations in Afghanistan and the CIA drone strikes in Pakistan's tribal belt are responsible for the upsurge in militancy.

But his populist position has been challenged by the almost unprecedented public anger against the Pakistani Taliban triggered by the attempt to kill Malala as she sat in a van with her classmates in Swat last Tuesday.

While many observers fear the mood of national outrage will ultimately change little, the country's media continues to cover the saga intensively while the country's powerful military chief called on the nation to "unite and stand up to fight" against extremism.

The vile Jew-hatred in the Muslim community is a crime against humanity. What is utterly contemptible and unforgivable is how this evil is made possible by the sanction of the media, law enforcement and political quislings.

Dearborn Fordson High School principal called the police on me for driving with 2 Israeli flags on my truck Blazing Cat Fur

Dearborn Fordson High School principal called the police on me for driving with 2 Israeli flags on my truck.

Welcome Instapundit Readers!

Update: I have spoken with the reader who sent this in to me, it is legit. I expect to receive the film footage itself within a few days. It appears the police consider it "provocation" to drive with Israeli flags in Dearborn. A VP at Fordson declined comment but did provide a contact with the district school board, who I have been unable to reach...
***

"On 9-14-2012, Dearborn Fordson High School principal called the police on me for driving with 2 Israeli flags on my truck.

"The Dearborn police were one car behind me when this student threw a bottle on my windshield. The police did not stop the student, but instead stopped me for 30 minutes asking me why I would display Israeli flags on my truck."

"The Fordson High principal filed an incident report and so did I. However, Dearborn police refuse to release either report. Incident #: 12-49143, Incident #: 12-49503."

In addition, I am a 1988 Fordson High School graduate.

Peace,"
XXXXXXX

 I have the phone no. of the reader  and will verify this incident.

The reader involved in this incident alerted  Niraj Warikoo, religion reporter for the Detroit Free Press, he dismissed the incident and accused the reader of "taunting" the students and explained that a student had merely "spilled" some pop on an Israeli flag.  The reader involved was driving in front of the high school as it let out. He was backed up in traffic, a police car immediately behind him. He had Israeli flags on truck.

When the students began their assault he rolled down his window asking them to stop. After they pulled him over the police used the rolled down window as a pretext to accuse him of instigating the altercation.  While being questioned by the police in front of the high school the reader received death threats. The police denied hearing them though the individuals involved were only a few feet away.


From the comments: Rich Vail

"I used to live in Taylor, just to the south of Dearborn. I am Jewish, and observant, so I wear a yarmulke (the funny little round hat). Something similar happened to my wife and I as we drove through Dearborn on our way to the synagogue in Southfield. From that point on, I began wearing a hat when I left the house.

We moved to MD after 2 miserable years in MI...and I haven't looked back."

Photo: Ambassador Stevens being paraded through the keffiyeh-clad streets of Benghazi, Libya on September 11, 2012

Despite the lies and blame-game of the Obama administration, we finally have an accurate account of what really happened during the jihadist attack on our consulate in Benghazi, from two two senior State Department officials. 

It was, without question,  a full-out military attack on the US.

The Obama administration knew from the start that this was a very well-organized jihadist attack. Blaming our freedoms, our first amendment rights for the jihadist attack, was a second attack on the American people (perhaps even more frightening) perpetuated by the Obama administration.

The transcript is frightening and deeply disturbing. The Obama administration is at war with the American people, and Americans are dying because of it. This is surely impeachable. Romney ought to be shouting this from the mountain tops.

What Happened In Benghazi Powerline, October 13, 2012

Photo: Bloody fingerprints indicate at least some Americans were still alive when dragged from the embassy building.

The State Department has released a transcript of a briefing that two high-ranking department officials gave to a number of reporters via conference call on October 9 (Tuesday). I am not certain about this, but I believe the transcript was only made public today. You should read it in its entirety; it is the most detailed description I have seen of the events in Benghazi on September 11.

While this is by no means clear, it appears that the State Department may have released the transcript as part of the escalating conflict between Barack Obama and Joe Biden and the Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton. In their desperation to avoid responsibility for the Benghazi debacle, Obama and Biden have pointed fingers in two directions: at the intelligence community for reporting incorrectly that the incident was a protest over a YouTube video clip, and at the State Department for not providing adequate security for the Ambassador.

Here are some excerpts from the narrative:

A few minutes later – we’re talking about 9 o’clock at night – the Ambassador retires to his room, the others are still at Building C, and the one agent in the [Tactical Operations Center]. At 9:40 p.m., the agent in the TOC and the agents in Building C hear loud noises coming from the front gate. They also hear gunfire and an explosion. The agent in the TOC looks at his cameras – these are cameras that have pictures of the perimeter – and the camera on the main gate reveals a large number of people – a large number of men, armed men, flowing into the compound. One special agent immediately goes to get the Ambassador in his bedroom and gets Sean, and the three of them enter the safe haven inside the building. …

They turn around immediately and head back – or the two of them, from Building B, turn around immediately with their kit and head back to Villa C, where the Ambassador and his colleagues are. They encounter a large group of armed men between them and Building C. I should say that the agent in Building C with the Ambassador has radioed that they are all in the safe haven and are fine. The agents that encounter the armed group make a tactical decision to turn around and go back to their Building B and barricade themselves in there. So we have people in three locations right now.

And I neglected to mention – I should have mentioned from the top that the attackers, when they came through the gate, immediately torched the barracks. It is aflame, the barracks that was occupied by the 17th February Brigade armed host country security team. I should also have mentioned that at the very first moment when the agent in the TOC seized [sic -- apparently should read "sees"] the people flowing through the gate, he immediately hits an alarm, and so there is a loud alarm. He gets on the public address system as well, yelling, “Attack, attack.” Having said that, the agents – the other agents had heard the noise and were already reacting.

Okay. So we have agents in Building C – or an agent in Building C with the Ambassador and Sean, we have two agents in Building B, and we have two agents in the TOC. All – Building C is – attackers penetrate in Building C. They walk around inside the building into a living area, not the safe haven area. The building is dark. They look through the grill, they see nothing. They try the grill, the locks on the grill; they can’t get through. The agent is, in fact, watching them from the darkness. He has his long gun trained on them and he is ready to shoot if they come any further. They do not go any further.

They have jerry cans. They have jerry cans full of diesel fuel that they’ve picked up at the entrance when they torched the barracks. They have sprinkled the diesel fuel around. They light the furniture in the living room – this big, puffy, Middle Eastern furniture. They light it all on fire, and they have also lit part of the exterior of the building on fire. At the same time, there are other attackers that have penetrated Building B. The two agents in Building B are barricaded in an inner room there. The attackers circulate in Building B but do not get to the agents and eventually leave.

A third group of attackers tried to break into the TOC. They pound away at the door, they throw themselves at the door, they kick the door, they really treat it pretty rough; they are unable to get in, and they withdraw. Back in Building C, where the Ambassador is, the building is rapidly filling with smoke. The attackers have exited. The smoke is extremely thick. It’s diesel smoke, and also, obviously, smoke from – fumes from the furniture that’s burning. And the building inside is getting more and more black. The Ambassador and the two others make a decision that it’s getting – it’s starting to get tough to breathe in there, and so they move to another part of the safe haven, a bathroom that has a window. They open the window. The window is, of course, grilled. They open the window trying to get some air in. That doesn’t help. The building is still very thick in smoke. …

Okay. We’ve got the agent. He’s opening the – he is suffering severely from smoke inhalation at this point. He can barely breathe. He can barely see. He’s got the grill open and he flops out of the window onto a little patio that’s been enclosed by sandbags. He determines that he’s under fire, but he also looks back and sees he doesn’t have his two companions. He goes back in to get them. He can’t find them. He goes in and out several times before smoke overcomes him completely, and he has to stagger up a small ladder to the roof of the building and collapse. He collapses. …

The agent in the TOC, who is in full gear, opens the door, throws a smoke grenade, which lands between the two buildings, to obscure what he is doing, and he moves to Building B, enters Building B. He un-barricades the two agents that are in there, and the three of them emerge and head for Building C. There are, however, plenty of bad guys and plenty of firing still on the compound, and they decide that the safest way for them to move is to go into an armored vehicle, which is parked right there. They get into the armored vehicle and they drive to Building C.

They drive to the part of the building where the agent had emerged. He’s on the roof. They make contact with the agent. Two of them set up as best a perimeter as they can, and the third one, third agent, goes into the building. This goes on for many minutes. Goes into the building, into the choking smoke. When that agent can’t proceed, another agent goes in, and so on. And they take turns going into the building on their hands and knees, feeling their way through the building to try to find their two colleagues. They find Sean. They pull him out of the building. He is deceased. They are unable to find the Ambassador. …

At this point, the quick reaction security team and the Libyans, especially the Libyan forces, are saying, “We cannot stay here. It’s time to leave. We’ve got to leave. We can’t hold the perimeter.” So at that point, they make the decision to evacuate the compound and to head for the annex. The annex is about two kilometers away. My agents pile into an armored vehicle with the body of Sean, and they exit the main gate. …

[T]hey take fire almost as soon as they emerge from the compound. They go a couple of – they go in one direction toward the annex. They don’t like what they’re seeing ahead of them. There are crowds. There are groups of men. They turn around and go the other direction. They don’t like what they’re seeing in that direction either. They make another u-turn. They’re going at a steady pace. There is traffic in the roads around there. This is in Benghazi, after all. Now, they’re going at a steady pace and they’re trying not to attract too much attention, so they’re going maybe 15 miles an hour down the street.

They come up to a knot of men in an adjacent compound, and one of the men signals them to turn into that compound. They agents [sic] at that point smell a rat, and they step on it. They have taken some fire already. At this point, they take very heavy fire as they go by this group of men. They take direct fire from AK-47s from about two feet away. The men also throw hand grenades or gelignite bombs under – at the vehicle and under it. At this point, the armored vehicle is extremely heavily impacted, but it’s still holding. There are two flat tires, but they’re still rolling. …

As the night goes on, a team of reinforcements from Embassy Tripoli arrives by chartered aircraft at Benghazi airport and makes its way to the compound – to the annex, I should say. And I should have mentioned that the quick reaction – the quick reaction security team that was at the compound has also, in addition to my five agents, has also returned to the annex safely. The reinforcements from Tripoli are at the compound – at the annex. They take up their positions. And somewhere around 5:45 in the morning – sorry, somewhere around 4 o’clock in the morning – I have my timeline wrong – somewhere around 4 o’clock in the morning the annex takes mortar fire. It is precise and some of the mortar fire lands on the roof of the annex. It immediately killed two security personnel that are there, severely wounds one of the agents that’s come from the compound.

At that point, a decision is made at the annex that they are going to have to evacuate the whole enterprise. And the next hours are spent, one, securing the annex, and then two, moving in a significant and large convoy of vehicles everybody to the airport, where they are evacuated on two flights.

Barack Obama, meanwhile, was jetting off to Las Vegas for a fundraiser.

It was obvious to the reporters on the call that this narrative blows Obama’s evasions sky high:

First question is from the line of Anne Gearan with the Washington Post. Please go ahead.

QUESTION: Hi. You said a moment ago that there was nothing unusual outside, on the street, or outside the gates of the main compound. When did the agents inside – what – excuse me, what did the agents inside think was happening when the first group of men gathered there and they first heard those explosions? Did they think it was a protest, or did they think it was something else?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO: The agent in the TOC heard the noise, heard the firing. Firing is not unusual in Benghazi at 9:40 at night, but he immediately reacted and looked at his cameras and saw people coming in, hit the alarm. And the rest is as I described it. Does that help?

This exchange is priceless:

OPERATOR: The next question is from the line of Brad Klapper with AP. Please, go ahead.

QUESTION: Hi, yes. You described several incidents you had with groups of men, armed men. What in all of these events that you’ve described led officials to believe for the first several days that this was prompted by protests against the video?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO: That is a question that you would have to ask others. That was not our conclusion. I’m not saying that we had a conclusion, but we outlined what happened. The Ambassador walked guests out around 8:30 or so, there was no one on the street at approximately 9:40, then there was the noise and then we saw on the cameras the – a large number of armed men assaulting the compound.

So Hillary Clinton and the State Department unequivocally reject the account that Barack Obama and Joe Biden have given. It is hard to imagine what “intelligence” reports Obama could have received that blamed the YouTube video. He is lying, evidently.

I have received this letter countless times from Atlas readers who wrote to the WMATA in support of our anti-jihad ads. The WMATA just assumes that everyone who writes will be opposed to our ads. They are wrong. Let them know.

From: <csvc@wmata.com>
Date: Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 6:49 PM
Subject: Rail - Advertising (Jihad)

Dear XXXXXX:

Thank you for your recent email to the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (Metro) regarding an advertisement currently displayed in the Metro system.

Metro does not endorse the opinions of advertisers on its system, and the ¿Defeat jihad¿ ad does not reflect the views of the agency.  In fact, Metro had sought to defer the AFDI ad out of a concern for public safety, given recent world events.  However, on Friday, October 5, a U.S. District Judge ruled that the ads must be displayed on the Metro system no later than close of business on October 8.  Metro has complied with the Court order, and the ads will remain in four rail stations for one month.

Metro cannot selectively accept certain ads and reject others, as the Court has deemed the Metro advertising program a public forum protected by the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.  There are very few limits placed on freedom of speech and, unfortunately, the language used in the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI) ad is not included under those few exceptions.

Again, thank you for taking the time to let us know your views on this matter. Your comments are important to us.

Sincerely,

Mrs. Chowdhry
Consumer Representative
Office of Customer Relations
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority
When responding to this email, please perform a reply with history so that the following conversational identifier "[THREAD_ID:983002]" is included in your response.

Right wing blogosphere impresario John Hawkins sounds off on our anti-jihad ad camapaign:

"A Kind Word For Pamela Geller And Her Pro-Israel Ad Campaign"

Written By : John Hawkins
October 12, 2012

Let’s say a Muslim came up to you and said, “Pamela I’m against terrorism. I don’t want Sharia in this country. I don’t want to see Israel destroyed. I consider myself to be a moderate. But, I keep hearing people in the news claim you hate people like me. So I want to hear it straight from you. Is that true?” What would you tell that person?

Pamela Geller: “I love people like you and I hope that you and I will fight together this oppression, this gender apartheid,” and if this moderate knows anything about me, he or she knows that I fight for the moderates. I fight for people that are leaving Islam. I’ve created a gateway, a network of information, safe houses, and other people, other resources for Muslims in trouble to go to because it is so hush-hush. I do not hate people. It’s why I do what I do.

I do have a problem with the ideology that inspires Jihad. I do have a problem with gender apartheid and the oppression of women. I do have a problem with hatred of infidels and the non-Muslims. And we have seen in the 20,000 attacks since 9-11, Islamic attacks across the world, each one with the imprimatur of a Muslim cleric, that there is a problem with the ideology that inspires Jihad and all men and women that love freedom must fight it. — From a RWN interview with Pamela Geller on October 10, 2010

A lot of people talk about free speech, supporting Israel, and refusing to kowtow to radical Islamists. It’s good that they do because those are all important things. However, I want to take a moment to say a kind word about one of the few people who is DOING SOMETHING about those issues.

My friend, Pamela Geller is running these ads in subways.

Israel is a tiny, civilized, vibrant Western Republic that’s friendly to the United States and the home of millions of Jews (along with their ancestors) who’ve been driven out of Europe, Russia, and the Middle East by people who want to kill them. They have proven time and time again that they are willing and able to live at peace with their neighbors, but unfortunately, their very existence is considered provocative to the nations around them. In other words, if you’re wondering why they’re hated and you cut through all of the rhetoric, it’s really because they’re Jews who continue to breathe in proximity to people who consider that unacceptable.

As to the Palestinians, they are willing to blow up their own children in order to murder Israeli civilians as part of a campaign that they hope will lead to genocide. If you don’t believe that, just listen to Hamas because Hamas openly admits it. Calling people like this savages isn’t an insult to them; it’s an insult to savages. The fact that it upsets far left-wingers, the politically correct, anti-Semites, and people who are afraid radical Islamists will show up and cut their heads off doesn’t make it less true.

That last grouping is particularly important now that we have people in other nations threatening violence if we don’t eviscerate our free speech in order to make it acceptable to radical Islamists who believe in Sharia law, stoning gays, and refusing to allow women to leave the house unless they’re covered head to toe.

It’s one thing to tell people like that to take a long walk off a short pier, but it takes more guts to go to court in order to defend the 1st Amendment. It’s easy to say a few nice words about God’s chosen people, but it takes courage to put up ads defending them when you’re going to be vilified for it by apologists for suicide bombers. It’s easy to condemn radical Islam; in fact many of Pamela Geller’s most strident critics do the same thing and then turn around and attack her. You see, the difference between Pamela Geller and many of them is, she isn’t just saying it because she thinks she feels like it’s a political necessity; she means it.

Last but not least, I’ve known Pamela for years, long before most of her fans and detractors today had ever heard of her. I’ve talked to her by chat, on the phone, by email, and in person and I have never once heard her condemn Islam. I have never once heard her express hatred for all Muslims. If she did or I thought she felt that way, then I wouldn’t support her. Moreover, what Pamela is doing is important work. If even Christians and Jews are too intimidated to speak up strongly for Israel or against radical Islam, how in the world can we expect moderate Muslims to do it? If Pamela is willing to be at the tip of the spear, if she’s willing to be vilified, smeared, attacked, and threatened for saying things that radical Islamists and their apologists don’t want to hear, then I think she deserves support. I hope more bloggers will speak up on her behalf, donate to her cause, and patronize her website.

 

The worsening jihad by Muslims against non-Muslims in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Their successful and continuing ethnic cleansing of non-Muslims from parts of the former Yugoslav Republic is owed largely to Bill Clinton's war in Bosnia, sold to the clueless Clinton administration by the notorious EU dhimmis.

The Bosnian capital of Sarajevo, once a symbol of ethnic diversity, has become an entirely Muslim city. 

Christians flee Bosnia amid discrimination, Islamization Jihadwatch

But, but the Muslims in the Balkans are all supposed to be "moderates" who love America and abhor Islamic supremacism! "Report: ‘Christians Flee Bosnia Amid Discrimination, Islamization,’" by Stefan J. Bos for BosNewsLife, October 12 (thanks to Lachlan):

SARAJEVO, BOSNIA-HERZEGOVINA (BosNewsLife)-- Christians are massively leaving post-war Bosnia-Herzegovina amid mounting discrimination and Islamization, according to a new report released Friday, October 12.

"Many believers leave the country since war raged 20 years ago," said Netherlands-based advocacy and aid group Kerk in Nood, or 'Church in Need', in the report obtained by BosNewsLife.

There are just 440,000 Catholics left in the Balkan nation, half the prewar figure, the group said.

The report came on the heels of talks between the cardinal of Sarajevo, Vinko Puljic,and European Council President Herman van Rompuy about difficulties faced by Bosnia's Christians.

MOSQUES BUILD

Puljic reportedly complained that while dozens of mosques were build in the Bosnian capital Sarajevo, no building permissions were given for Christian churches.

"The cardinal already waits 13 years on permission to build just a small church," Church in Need said. Authorities so far refused to return hundreds of nationalized church buildings, despite a ruling by the European Court of Human Rights to do so, according to Christian officials.

Additionally tens of thousands of people, many of them Catholic Croats, have been prevented from returning home following the war, Church in Need said. These obstacles violate the Dayton peace accords that ended the 1992-1995 Bosnian War, which split the nation between a Serb republic and a Muslim-Croat federation.

"Time is running out as there is a worrisome rise in radicalism," Puljic said, who added that the people of Bosnia-Herzegovina were "persecuted for centuries" after European powers "failed to support them in their struggle against the Ottoman Empire."...