The Jihad Doesn't Go Away if You Close Your Eyes

The Dhemmicrats Still don't get it...years after 9/11, thousands across the world killed by Isalmofacists major terrorist attacks thwarted in the United States, Ft. Dix, Kennedy Airport---more, yet throughout all of this the Dhemmicrats think that the war on terror is a laughing matter. Close your eyes--blink--what ever--but when you open your eyes again the terrorist threat will still be there--Read this from the Counterterrorism Blog:

The Dangerous Denial of Jihad's Threat

By Jeffrey Imm

On October 12, Taliban leader Mullah Omar declared that it had reached a "success point" in its "jehad" (sic) against the Karzai government, and called upon other Jihadist organizations to finish the job in the Taliban's attacks on US and NATO forces, and to overtake the Afghan government. UK predictably responded today by standing behind Karzai's efforts to negotiate with the Taliban who seek to overtake the Karzai government, with the belief that it can "split" the Taliban, disregarding the Taliban's Islamist constitution and shared Islamist beliefs of the Taliban ideology, as the UK/UN/NATO/US State Department goal's remain focused on "stabilization" of Afghanistan.

In the United States, also on October 12, U.S. presidential candidate Mitt Romney issued an advertisement stating that his concerns regarding "Jihadism - violent, radical Islamic fundamentalism... [and] Their goal is to unite the world under a single Jihadist caliphate. To do that, they must collapse freedom-loving nations like us."

These comments on Jihad were met with mockery, laughter, and scorn by elements in the mainstream media, blogs, and a spokesman for the Democratic National Committee. Newsweekthe Atlantic called such concerns "ridiculous", bloggers issued text and video mocking comments about the concerns, and Democratic National Committee spokesman Damien LaVera stated that Romney's comments on Jihad showed "no understanding of the threat facing our country".

On October 13, Steven Emerson appeared on FOX cable news and was roundly condemned by Alan Colmes for his "offensive" use of the terms "Islamic Jihad", "Islamic militant", and "Islamic extremist." Two weeks prior, Alan Colmes similarly mocked the Investigative Project's (IPT)Washington Post reported Esam Omeish's justification for "the Jihad Way" as merely calling for "struggle", and reported condemnations of the IPT revelations about Omeish as coming from "a small group of right-wing anti-Muslim bigots."

This continuing dangerous denial of the threats of Jihad, its ideology, and refusal to debate the issues of political Islamism represents yet another fault line in America's national security. When concerns about Jihad and Islamism are a source for mockery by American media and political organizations, then clearly the Jihadists and the Islamists are winning the War of Ideas.

Jihad is not a joke. Its ideology embracing death and causing violence is demonstrated every day throughout the world. Those mocking discussion of the threat and ideology of Jihad continue to undermine the War of Ideas in the United States, and undermine the efforts of moderate Muslims to fight Islamism and Jihadists. The growing denial is a bi-partisan problem that cuts across socio-economic backgrounds and levels of education.

mocked Romney's concerns about Jihad, concerns about ex-Virginia immigration commission member Esam Omeish speeches calling for "the Jihad way" as nothing more than "conservative political correctness". The

Read More »

But the denial is indefensible, regardless of the lack of a coherent strategy on Jihad and Islamism, and such denial must be publicly and vigorously condemned. It is a national disgrace. The apologist gamesmanship with the term "Jihad" is an ongoing propaganda effort that must be addressed by American political leadership.

As pointed out by Dr. Walid Phares, an ongoing propaganda effort has been made to try to redefine "Jihad". However, as Dr. Walid Phares points out in his book "The War of Ideas", "[t]he historical reality of jihad is intertwined with the evolution of the Islamic state since the seventh century. It is emphatically not a modern, recent, and narrow creation by a small militant faction". Moreover, Dr. Walid Phares points out that "democracies cannot recognize ideologies and movements that call for warfare based on theological grounds" and that a "redefinition [of jihad] can only be effective in the wake of a reform in Islam that touches the theological level".

On October 10, 2007, the United States government issued a "National Strategy for Homeland Security". Like its predecessor September 2006 "National Strategy for Combating Terrorism", you won't find the word "Jihad" in it, nor will you find a strategy for addressing Jihad or political Islamism, because neither is addressed as within the scope of the nature of the threat to the United States. The ambiguous terms "extremist" and "terrorist" are used instead, and the result are "strategies" without a precise and agreed-upon definition of the nature of the threat, focusing on tactics and operations instead.

What is the value of such ambiguous terms as "extremist" and "terrorist"? As shown in the documentary Islam versus Islamists, Tempe Wahhabist Imam Ahmad Al Shqeirat views anti-terror Muslims like Dr. Zuhdi Jasser as an "extremist". Iran calls the CIA and the US Army "terrorists". The importance of defining Jihad and political Islamism in our national security strategies is vital.

However, despite the apologist propaganda on Jihad, and the lack of a sufficient strategy, we all share accountability for knowledge. Since 9/11, who in America, regardless of their age, background, or political beliefs, can honestly say that they have no knowledge of the threat of Jihad to this country? Who is genuinely ignorant about Jihad in the United States? Is the dangerous denial of Jihad a fear of accountability? Is that part of the monofocus on tactics, rather than ideology?

The answer to ending this dangerous denial and to beginning an effective counterattack in the War of Ideas remains the task of developing a true blueprint strategy on Jihad and Islamism. But that blueprint strategy does not begin with the disciplining of great minds and analysts, but rather with the national willpower and resolve to face the accountability for what we already know, rather than busying ourselves with distracting arguments on tactics, operations, and politics -- for an enemy that we, as a nation, fear to identify. With great knowledge, comes great responsibility. It is a responsibility that America must accept, and it is a responsibility that America must demand that its governmental leadership and its media accept.

In a subsequent article, I will focus exclusively on the blueprint aspects of our war strategy, and why a use of hybrid methodologies may be necessary to effectively deal with the complex definition and identity of the enemy and the nature of the threat, so that the war blueprint strategy provides the flexibility needed for the global war against Jihadism. Until America's political leadership defines Jihad as a military threat, and defines its position on political Islamism, the War of Ideas will continue to be lost to those who espouse this dangerous denial on Jihad's threat to America and the world... and those who live in fear of the accountability that such knowledge of Jihadism demands of them.


Sources:

October 12, 2007 - AFP: Taliban leader Mullah Omar boasts Kabul forced to bargain with insurgency

October 12, 2007 - AP: Taliban chief Mullah Omar urges Afghanistan's neighbors to help drive out foreign troops

October 15, 2007 - Guardian: UK backs plan to split Taliban from within

May 29, 2006 - Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty: NATO sizes up task in southern Afghanistan

October 12, 2007 - Video of Romney Campaign Ad

October 12, 2007 - Newsweek: The Gaggle: Romney ad - You call this a jihad?

October 12, 2007 - The Atlantic: Romney Versus the Jihadists

October 12, 2007 - DNC: Romney's 'Jihad' Ad Shows Lack of Foreign Policy Credentials

October 12, 2007 - AP - Romney Launches Tough-On-Terrorism Ad

October 12, 2007 - Wonkette: Mitt Romney Launches Jihad on Jihad!

October 13, 2007 - Blogger Video Mocking Romney "Jihadist" Ad

October 14, 2007 - Newsbusters: "Colmes: Offensive to Call Terrorists 'Islamic,' Use 'Books Not Bombs' on Hamas"

October 10, 2007 - National Strategy for Homeland Security

September 2006 - National Strategy for Combating Terrorism

September 29, 2007: Fault Line on Jihad: Why the Omeish Reaction is Important - Jeffrey Imm

September 29, 2007 - Washington Post - Va. Muslim Activist Denies Urging Violence

September 17, 2007 - 9/11 and the Inconvenient Truths about Jihad and Islamism - Jeffrey Imm

July 18, 2007 -- Family Security Matters: Preventing the West from Understanding Jihad -- Walid Phares

The War of Ideas: Jihadism against Democracy by Walid Phares, February 20, 2007, pages 201-202, 205-206

Divide Jerusalem OR ELSE: Condi Rice

It was just last week that US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice that she wouldn't pressure Israel into a deal. Now it seems that statement was just another lie from Ms. Rice. Apparently Rice has told Prime Minister Olmert that Jerusalem MUST be divided---if not she will personally blame Israel for the break up of the "peace talks."

Rice: No Jewish building in eastern city
Says she'll push Israel to divide capital, blame Olmert if he doesn't comply

By Aaron Klein

Condoleezza Rice

JERUSALEM Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, in the region to prepare for an Israeli-Palestinian summit next month, told Palestinian officials yesterday she would pressure Israel against initiating any Jewish construction in eastern sections of Jerusalem, a senior Palestinian negotiator involved in talks with Rice told WND.

The Palestinian negotiator stated Rice singled out Jerusalem areas as becoming part of a future Palestinian state and told his negotiating team she would publicly blame Israel for the failure of next month's U.S.-sponsored summit slated to be held in Maryland if the Jewish state didn't agree to evacuate eastern Jerusalem neighborhoods.

The information follows a flurry of media reports last week Prime Minister Ehud Olmert was contemplating handing over sections of Jerusalem to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah organization.

Vice Premier Haim Ramon, a member of Olmert's ruling Kadima party, last week reportedly mapped out a future partition of Jerusalem under a deal with the Palestinians.

Ramon was quoted by the popular Ynet Israeli website as writing in a letter to Jerusalem City Councilman Nir Barkat that under his plan, "The Jewish neighborhoods (of Jerusalem) will be recognized as Israeli and under Israeli sovereignty. Accordingly, the Arab neighborhoods will be recognized as Palestinian. Passages between the Israeli neighborhoods will be open and secure accordingly the same will be true for the Palestinian neighborhoods."

According to Ramon's reported plan, "There will be special sovereignty over the holy sites, taking into account Israel's unique interests in overseeing them. Within this framework, the Western Wall, the Jewish Quarter and other holy sites in the Jerusalem vicinity will remain under Israeli rule forever."

Ramon's letter as quoted did not single out the fate of the Temple Mount, Judaism's holiest site.

Knesset Member Otniel Schneller, a Kadima party colleague of Olmert and Ramon known for his close relationship to the prime minister, claimed the plan violated the Kadima's platform.

But WND first reported in 2006 it was Schneller who first floated a Kadima plan for dividing Jerusalem.

"The Old City, Mount Scopus, the Mount of Olives, the City of David, Sheikh Jarra will remain in our hands, but [regarding] Kafr Akeb, Abu-Ram, Shuafat, Hizma, Abu-Zaim, Abu-Tur, Abu Dis, in the future, when the Palestinian state is established, they will become its capital," said Schneller at the small Jerusalem debate in May 2006, covered by WND.

Days later, Schneller gave an interview to the Associated Press in which he stated "We will not divide Jerusalem, we will share it."

The Kadima lawmaker told AP most Jerusalem neighborhoods with large Arab populations would be given to the Palestinians.

"Those same neighborhoods will, in my assessment, be central to the makeup of the Palestinian capital ... al-Quds," said Schneller, calling Jerusalem by its Arabic name.

Rice arrived in the region yesterday reportedly to help the Israeli and Palestinian sides formulate a joint statement ahead of November's conference.

Palestinian leaders want the statement to specifically outline a Palestinian state including the Gaza Strip, West Bank and parts of Jerusalem, while Olmert officials have been quoted in recent days stating they prefer more vague commitments.

'Olmert will forfeit Temple Mount'

According to senior Palestinian negotiators, Olmert's team expressed willingness multiple times to divide Jerusalem and place the Temple Mount under pan-Arab control.

WND in August quoted PA sources stating Olmert's office presented the Palestinians a formal plan in which the Jewish state would forfeit the Temple Mount to Muslim control under the joint management of Egypt, Jordan and the PA.

The sources said Olmert's plan called for the entire Temple Mount plaza to fall under Arab sovereignty; Jerusalem's Old City holy sites near the Mount to be governed by a Jewish, Christian and Muslim task force; and the Western Wall plaza below the Mount to be controlled by Israel.

David Baker, a spokesman for Olmert, would neither confirm nor deny the prime minister offered the Temple Mount.

I URGE YOU FROM THE BOTTOM OF MY HEART TO STOP THIS TRAVESTY TODAY, Here are some things you can do:

Campaign to save Jerusalem, the capital of Israel From Israpundit

“If I forget thee, Oh Jerusalem…”

By Elyakim Haetzni

The Quartet, into whose hands Sharon and his government entrusted our destiny, convened in New York to ensure that the conference – obliquely referred to as “the Peace Conference” by the hostile Israeli media - will force Israel to assume irrevocable legal and international obligations that nullify our rights to the heritage of our forefathers in the Land of Israel. This goal is to be attained, in diametrical opposition to the conditions stipulated even in the pernicious Roadmap, by reversing the order of these conditions. First, the establishment of a Palestinian State as an irreversible political fact, and then, “Inshallah”, this Palestinian State will dismantle the terrorist organizations (Abu-Mazen will dissolve the Hamas in Gaza!…), collect their arms etc., etc. etc.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Natan Sharansky of One Jerusalem is leading the charge. Please go to their site and sign the Petition.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

At this second Munich in Annapolis, Olmert intends to establish a Palestinian State regardless of the fact that there has been no cessation in the Kassams launched from Gaza, that the bomb belts keep finding their way to Tel-Aviv, and that battles rage in the areas surrounding the Gaza Strip and within Judah and the Shomron. The conference will continue to pursue its agenda, impervious to the non-stop flow of arms through the southern border, breached thanks to the disengagement. The USA’s Secretary of State, Condoleeza Rice, too, who does not even bother hiding her unreserved identification with the Arabs, visits Israel for the purpose of ensuring that the Palestinian entrapment will be irremediable.

Do not buy the illusion that the conference is not a serious matter, and “nothing will come out of it”. Those placating us require this illusion in order to justify, to others as well as to themselves, their absence of motivation and the depletion of their energy.

The silence emanating from the settlers and the remnants of the national camp is not merely inactivity; it has a tangible negative effect. It radiates, both internally and externally, that there is no one to oppose the historical catastrophe about to be inflicted upon us – the public surrender by the Jewish people of its homeland, and the total eradication of all Jewish life in the land of the Bible.

This negativity creates its own momentum, exponentially enhancing the power of the destroyers.

When Ehud Barak planned to divide Jerusalem, the biggest demonstration in the history of the State of Israel took place. More than 400,000 demonstrators crowded together, from the foot of the Tower of David up to the entrance of Jerusalem from Tel Aviv. An atmosphere of crisis, a determination to save the Holy City of Jerusalem, enveloped all those present. One of the speakers was Judge Moshe Landau, the former President of the Supreme Court.

Why hasn’t such a demonstration taken place yet in light of this new threat? Most probably because the failure to thwart the destruction of the 25 settlements, and to prevent the expulsion of the settlers, instilled a belief that democratic protests would not change anything.

But this attitude is a mistake. It is true that demonstrations, instead of active resistance while criminal ethnic cleansing by a government is taking place, is no more than a joke; not so huge demonstrations on the eve of governmental decisions, which are a necessary foundation for further actions. They are also essential to put pressure on the MKs of Shas, Yisrael Beitaynu and the indifferent MKs of the Likud. After all, the participants in the demonstrations are their voters, who could retaliate at the polls.

We’ve lost precious time, but it is not too late. We have a few weeks before the gates to the Land of Israel are, God Forbid, irrevocably locked. The following are some of my thoughts, and you are all welcome to add to them.

My proposals

1. Jerusalem must be at the heart of the campaign, the Holy City that still elicits deep feelings in the hearts of most Jews. The words “If I forget you, O Jerusalem” shall be the campaign’s motto, displayed on banners ( orange – two blue stripes with “If I Forget Thee” between them), stickers, badges, and bracelets. The prevention of the division of Jerusalem has the extra benefit that it will deadlock the talks over any other part of Eretz Israel.

2. We will paint the streets that Olmert has designated to be the borders between Jewish and “Palestinian” Jerusalem. To accentuate the message, signs, displaying “Border in front of you” and “Warning, you may be shot from the top of the walls”, shall be hung up along these streets.

3. Brochures and signs will be positioned on Mount of Olives warning: “This area is to be transferred to the Arabs: Where are the dead to be transferred?”

4. Signs will be put up in front of the District Court and the Ministry of Justice on the Salah-a-din street in Jerusalem: “Residence the Palestinian Temple of Justice”.

5. Posters and brochures to be distributed on Mount Zion and David\s city ( Ssilwan) displaying: “The Zionist State is relinquishing Zion to the enemy”.

6. Posters shall be hung up in the Old City: “To be delivered to Foreign rule!”
7. Applying pressure on the Attorney General, Mazuz, to stop the dawdling in the processing all the criminal cases still pending against Olmert. At any rate, to prevent Olmert from taking decisive political decisions while the criminal charges are hanging over his head. Distributing stickers and posters underscoring Olmert’s corruption.

8. Pickets in front of the “Orient House” which is about to be returned to the P.L.O.,thereby initiating the Palestinian takeover of East Jerusalem. Likewise, before all other P.L.O. offices which Olmert intends to reopen.

9. Patrols in front of the “President’s Residence” under the motto: “Peres divides Jerusalem” and “The last president of the independent State of Israel.”

10. Patrols in front of Olmert’s house: Signs displaying the names of his criminal cases, as well as :“He who forgets Jerusalem, shall forget his right hand”.

11. Distribute at the Kotel HaMaravi/Wailing Wall notes to be placed between the stones with wishes such as: “Repeal the evil decree to deliver the Kotel into captivity, our heritage to strangers”.

12. Distribute leaflets to drivers on the roads to Jerusalem warning of the imminent division of Jerusalem.

13. Demonstrate at the location (in the hills of Jerusalem) where the huge atomic shelter, designated for senior government officials, is being built. Brandish signboards: Stop building. It’s a waste of money. Who needs shelter 2 kms from the border?

14. Distribute posters, leaflets and brochures in Sderot and the Western Negev: “Relax, you’re not alone anymore! Jerusalem and even Tel-Aviv will soon be border cities, just like Sderot!”

15. Apply pressure on Netanyahu, Lieberman, and the leaders of Shas: “Your silence makes you collaborators.”

16. Distribute leaflets in Arabic in the Arab neighborhoods of Jerusalem detailing what they can expect under a PLO-Hamas regime.

17. Conduct a poll in the Arab population in Jerusalem, and publish the results.

18. Conduct a public trial against those planning to divide Jerusalem.

19. Sign up hundreds of thousands on a petition opposing the division of Jerusalem (use the internet , newspaper ads): “A National Rollcall”.

20. Conduct a public opinion poll: Do you support or oppose the division of Jerusalem?

21. Demonstrations in front of the municipality, demanding that the fathers of the city make clear statements as to their position.

22. Utilize the Internet for a worldwide campaign, faxes, telephone, and letters to the editor, call up radio programs etc.

23. Distribute leaflets against Ramon: “You destroyed the Histadrut, you destroyed your Party, you destroyed Israel’s medical system, and now you seek to destroy Israel”.

24. Establish the “Order of the Troublers of Israel” to whom medals will be awarded, such as: “Destroyer of Jerusalem” medal, “Expulsion medal”, “Kassam medal”, “Defeat medal”, “Terrorist Palestine medal”. The reasons for awarding such medals will be made clear to the “winners” in appropriate ceremonies.

The above points relate to the field work that is a pre-requisite for the huge hundreds of thousands demonstration, to take place at the Tower of David, which shall be the apex of the campaign.

The goal of all these efforts is to force Shas, Yisrael Beitaynu and MKs from other parties to bring down the government by dissolving the coalition.

At the same time, a similar campaign, using other means, shall be initiated abroad. Inter alia, demonstrations in front of Israel’s embassies and consulates under the placard: “If I forget thee, Oh Jerusalem…”, a reminder of other days, when Jews stood in front of Soviet embassies with banners:” Let My People Go!”

For those skeptics who ask where the money will come from, I would like to point out that when the issue is urgent, lights fire in peoples’ bones, and a feasible plan is presented – money too will become available.

It is a time for action!!

Defending Ann Coulter

Not that Ann Coulter needs my help but a lot has been written since last week when I gave my opinion (see Ann Coulter is NOT an Anti-Semite) on the Ann Coulter/Donny Deutsch adventure, I feel compelled to rejoin this particular fray. Personally I got a mixed reaction--some of you agreed with me most passionately, others thought I was a raving lunatic (but enough about my family). My Favorite was the person from Philadelphia with the IP address 151.197.17.96 who said I was a coward for writing that post. The Funny thing about Mr./Ms. IP 151.197.17.96 is that the comment was anonymous so in truth who is the coward?

Today I checked out the ADL site and saw that Abe Foxman has condemned Ms. Coulter. Thank God Abe Foxman doesn't speak for Jewry. And neither does Donnie Deutsch. In fact:

Donny Deutsch is to Jewry as the Olive Garden is to Italian Food.

Jay D. Homnick makes the point below that Coulter was not calling for pogroms, she was not calling for forced conversions, what she was saying was that according to her religion one is not perfected unless they believe that Jesus is their savior. What is wrong with that, according to my religion if you believe Jesus is your savior you are not perfect...and the point is?

Let me suggest that if it was a Democrat saying what Ann Coulter said it would be no big deal and we would be done fighting. But Ms Coulter like Rush Limbaugh the week before, is a icon of evil to those of the more liberal persuasion---since their is nothing good coming out of congress and the news out of Iraq continues to improve the Democrats have no policy to argue about--so they waste their time on Radio Hosts and Pundits.

In Defense of Ann Coulter By Jay D. Homnick

Published 10/15/2007 12:07:29 AM

A couple of years ago, the girls' volleyball team of Seattle Hebrew Academy's junior high (where Michael Medved's children attend) went undefeated, dominating the parochial school league in that area. One team from a Catholic school came to play them for the first time and Principal Rivy Poupko Klitenik greeted their bus on arrival. "And what is the team name?" she asked. "We are the Crusaders." She gulped. "Well, I hope this time turns out better than the last." Which brings us to the curious case of Donnie Deutsch, his nasty ambush of Ann Coulter, his real or pretended thick-headedness about the relationship between Jews and Christians, and the subsequent piling-on of Ann for utterly inoffensive remarks. I watched the video clip of the entire exchange carefully and those are my considered conclusions. Here is what happened. Ann is promoting a book and in those circumstances she accepts all invitations, even into hostile territory. She came on Deutsch's CNBC show,The Big Idea, the interview appearing over a chiron reading: "Being Extreme Makes Millions." The host is a blow-dried pretty boy who wears half-glasses down on his nose to create a kind of Michael-Landon-meets-Erkel effect. He asked Ann what her ideal America would look like and she answered: "All the Democrats would be like Joe Lieberman and all the Republicans like Duncan Hunter." He countered that he meant what kind of place America would be generally, not politically. A joyful place, she responds, safe and prosperous. More tolerant? Yes, definitely, like the mega-churches she lectures in where they are thoroughly diverse and integrated in an unself-conscious way. "What, a Christian America? No Jews, no Buddhists?" In the course of the next few sentences of repartee, Ann makes a number of points. 1) That a Christian views himself as a perfected Jew. 2) That a Jew has to obey the Law to be in Heaven, but Christians believe they have a "fast track." 3) That this is basic to anyone familiar with the New Testament. 4) That there is nothing offensive in this to Jews. Deutsch, for his part, claims to be a practicing Jew, but says he finds this personally offensive, more appropriate for a Prime Minister of Iran than for an educated woman like Ann. In fact, the only one exposing blind spots in his education was the host. If he does not know that Christians believe Jews are lacking something by not accepting Jesus as a savior, if he does not know that Jews believe Christians are to one degree or another in error by believing Jesus can save them, he is ignorant of the most basic facts of religious life. By the same token, at this stage in history both sides have concluded that they will not settle the theological differences short of a prophetic or Messianic intervention. The serious people on both sides also know that they share a broad set of overlapping moral values along with an interest in a wholesome, family-oriented society and culture. If they stand on ceremony and refuse to work together because the other is not catechumenically correct, the result will be that the forces of depravity will divide them and conquer the street. In the meantime, each side chuckles to themselves that they have the spiritual edge. (Ann's view is more amicable than most; many Christians believe the Jews lost their Covenant entirely.) I once saw a transcript of one of the forced debates that were common in the 13th century, where the king would compel a Jewish scholar to debate a Christian scholar. This particular manuscript did not identify the rabbi involved, but he was pretty fearless, pointing out the excesses of the Crusaders. At one point the priest says to him: "What if you are wrong and on Judgment Day God is angry at you for not accepting Jesus?" He answers: "What if you are wrong and on Judgment Day God is angry at you for accepting Jesus? The answer is that as long as you make your best judgment in a sincere way, it is unlikely that a perfectly intelligent and just God will be angry." To imply that Ann Coulter violated an intellectual norm, a religious norm, a social norm, by explaining the things she did in the manner she did, is simply misinformed -- if not crude religion baiting. It just ain't so. Indeed the contrast between Ann's Christianity and Ahmadinejad's Islam is particularly "striking," to use her adjective of preference. Remember who she used as an example in the sentence before to describe the ideal Democrat? None other than Joseph Lieberman, the most traditionally practicing Jew in the history of the United States government. Jay D. Homnick, commentator and humorist, is a frequent contributor to The American Spectator. He also writes for Human Events.

Al Aqsa Martyr's Brigade LOVES Sean Penn

The Germans Love David Hasselhoff, the French Love Jerry Lewis but the Islamic Terrorists LOVE their Sean Penn.

Muslim terror leaders are hailing statements by actor Sean Penn regarding Iran, the war in Iraq and the global war on terror, stating militants have "deep respect" for Penn and urging Americans to listen to the outspoken Hollywood activist immediately. Penn the self-styled foreign minister of Hollywood. Terror chiefs from Islamic Jihad and Al Aqsa Martyr's Brigades, two of the most deadly terror organizations in the world, praise Penn's stance on Iran, Iraq and the war on terror. The terror leaders go so far in the adoration of Penn that they are tapping as the official spokesman of their terror rings.

"I tell Penn that we don't have the money that the Zionists have, therefore we don't own and we don't have access to your media, and we hope you would ... represent our pain and our cause," stated Abu Hamed, northern Gaza Strip commander of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades Palestinian terrorist organization.

Other terror leaders echo the praise for Penn and other far left-wing American celebrities like Richard Gere and Rosie O'Donnell in the new book, " Schmoozing With Terrorists. The book's author, journalist Aaron Klein (WND), read some of Penn's speeches and statements about Iran and Iraq to the terror leaders.

Let me tell you something about Iran, because I've been there and you haven't. Iran is a great country. A great country. Does it have its haters? You bet. Just like the United States has its haters. Just like the United States has a corrupt regime. Does it want a nuclear weapon? Maybe. Do we have one? You bet," stated Penn.

Penn goes on to refer to the war in Iraq as an "occupational war [I think he means war of occupation and not the fact that everyone in the war has a job] ... . In that country of 25 million, these children have now suffered a rainstorm of civilian death around and among them totaling the equivalent of 200 September 11ths in just four years of war. Two hundred 9/11s. Two hundred 9/11s."

Ala Senakreh, West Bank chief of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades terror group stated he feels "deep respect for Penn and people like him that prove that America is not only the country that sponsors the Israeli terrorists and all evil forces in the world, but also a country of brave people who want a different policy based on justice and peace."

Ramadan Adassi, chief of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades in the northern West Bank Anskar refugee camp, said Penn's words "express dignity, express a deep humanitarian sense and this doesn't surprise me when it comes from an actor who has had to develop the sense of feeling.

"We hope Penn is somebody who can design a different public opinion. Penn must continue in his battle, which is very important because it is rare to see important people who criticize Bush, who is planning now to throw the American soldiers in the Iranian hell," stated Adassi.

Penn has fallen in with a powerful group after all the Al Aqsa Martyr's Brigade is run by Palestinian president Abbas and over the past few years they claimed responsibility for over 300 attacks which killed scores of Israeli civilians, a number of foreign nationals which included some Americans. They are also one of the parties that are firing rockets and mortars in to the Negev communities---way to go Sean, you have really made a name for yourself---as someone with no conception of reality.

Bollinger is White Supremacist says Columbia Professor

Looks like there still is a tad of bad feeling over Columbia President Lee Bollinger "welcoming" remarks to Iranian President Ahm-a-shithead last month. Hamid Dabashi, a professor of Iranian studies wrote in an Egyptian newspaper

"Only Lee Bollinger's mind-numbing racism when introducing Ahmadinejad could have made the demagogue look like the innocent bystander in a self-promotional circus," Mr. Dabashi, who was born in Iran and contributes frequently to Al-Ahram, writes.

Professor Dabashi, Bolloinger is NOT a racist, an idiot for allowing Ahmadinejad to visit YES. A lousy host for blasting the Iranian Tyrant when he showed up....yes----Racist, white supremest? By using the word too much it becomes----trite.

Professor at Columbia Attacks Bollinger

In a flare-up of old tensions between the Department of Middle East and Asian Languages and Cultures at Columbia University and the school's administration, a leading Iranian scholar at the university is labeling its president, Lee Bollinger, a white supremacist whose harsh rebuke of President Ahmadinejad of Iran reeked of "mind-numbing racism."

Hamid Dabashi, a professor of Iranian studies and comparative literature, writes in an article published this week in an Egyptian newspaper, Al-Ahram, that the introduction Mr. Bollinger extended to the visiting Iranian leader included "the most ridiculous clichés of the neocon propaganda machinery, wrapped in the missionary position of a white racist supremacist carrying the heavy burden of civilizing the world."

The Columbia president's opening statement, Mr. Dabashi writes, is "propaganda warfare … waged by the self-proclaimed moral authority of the United States."

Mr. Bollinger's remarks last month, in which he called the Iranian a "petty and cruel dictator" who lacked the "intellectual courage" to offer real answers on denying the Holocaust, persecuting women and scholars in Iran, calling for the destruction of Israel, and funding terrorism, were greeted by a fierce backlash from Columbia students and faculty. Some of them said he employed "schoolyard taunts" to insult an invited guest and world leader.

Mr. Dabashi's categorization of the president as a racist, however, is perhaps the most severe public indictment yet of Mr. Bollinger's behavior.

"Only Lee Bollinger's mind-numbing racism when introducing Ahmadinejad could have made the demagogue look like the innocent bystander in a self-promotional circus," Mr. Dabashi, who was born in Iran and contributes frequently to Al-Ahram, writes.

One professor at Columbia said yesterday that Mr. Dabashi's article was "sheer demagoguery."

"I was not favorably impressed by what either party said in the event, but attributing President Bollinger's remarks or behavior to racism is absurd," a professor of epidemiology at Columbia who is the co-coordinator of Scholars for Peace in the Middle East, Judith Jacobson, said in an e-mail message.

Messrs. Dabashi and Bollinger clashed in the past, when pro-Palestinian Arab professors were accused of intimidating Jewish students in class.

In 2005, Mr. Bollinger called Mr. Dabashi's viewpoints "deeply personally offensive," to which Mr. Dabashi reportedly responded: "I find him 10 times more outrageous."

When asked about the professor's recent outburst, a Columbia spokesman, Robert Hornsby, said the administration would not comment.

The accusation of racism on campus comes on the heels of a racially charged incident last week at the Teachers College, where a noose was found hanging on the office door of a black professor, Madonna Constantine.

"At this point, whoever did it seems irrelevant. It's opened up broader issues," a professor at the Teachers College, George Bonanno, said yesterday.

"I suspect it was from a disgruntled student," a professor of psychology and education at the Teachers College, Warner Burke, said.

Police officials have not identified a suspect in the noose incident.