Bin Ladin! Peacemaker!

Cross posted at Say Anything Blog


Bin Ladin's Son Wants to be Peacemaker



Of course, by the first paragraph, it already starts to smell a little fishy:

Omar Osama bin Laden bears a striking resemblance to his notorious father _ except for the dreadlocks that dangle halfway down his back. Then there’s the black leather biker jacket. The 26-year-old does not renounce his father, al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden, but in an interview with The Associated Press, he said there is better way to defend Islam than militancy: Omar wants to be an “ambassador for peace” between Muslims and the West.

It’s hard to buy the claims of a man who claims to want peace, but who will not renounce his own father’s terorism. That and he believes there’s a “better way than militancy to defend Islam”. Which, of course, implies that militancy is not a bad way...just not the best. Other passages in the article support this:

Omar lived with the al-Qaida leader in Sudan, then moved with him to Afghanistan in 1996.

There, Omar says he trained at an al-Qaida camp but in 2000 he decided there must be another way and he left his father, returning to his homeland of Saudi Arabia.
“I don’t want to be in that situation to just fight. I like to find another way and this other way may be like we do now, talking,” he said in English.

He suggested his father did not oppose his leaving _ and Alsabah interjected that Omar was courageous in breaking away, but neither elaborated.

No doubt they don’t wish to elaborate because the truth shall not, in this case, set them free. He’s trained in al Quida, under the guidance of his father for four years. Then suddenly he has an epiphany? And his father approves? If you’re not buying it, you’re not alone. His own words undermine his “messenger of peace” schtick.

Omar doesn’t criticize his father and says Osama bin Laden is just trying to defend the Islamic world.

“My father thinks he will be good for defending the Arab people and stop anyone from hurting the Arab or Muslim people any place in the world,” he said, noting that the West didn’t have a problem with his father when he was fighting the Russians in Afghanistan in the 1980s.

Omar is convinced a truce between the West and al-Qaida is possible.

“My father is asking for a truce but I don’t think there is any government (that) respects him. At the same time they do not respect him, why everywhere in the world, they want to fight him? There is a contradiction,” he said.

Omar is not a man of peace. He is simply another jihadist trying a different tactic than his father. His rhetoric is no different from his father’s. If only the West would stop being so militaristic, peace could be possible with al Quida. It’s not that Osama is a bad guy...everyone is out to get him! al Quida is standing up for the little guy, while the West is out to crush innocent Muslims everywhere.


What Omar doesn’t mention is what peace with his father will entail. Standing by while Israel is destroyed. Withdrawing from Muslim lands. And converting to Islam.


Omar is a man in his father’s mold. Like the jihadist apologists of the West, he lays blame for the whole situation at America’s feet. And he lies about what peace will entail. It is not that he has renounced violence. It is that he has abandoned it in favor of a better, and more successful tactic. That he is pursuing the same goal, with a different tactic is why his father blessed him leaving the al Quida compund. Omar understands what his father does not. That that corrode of society from within, the slow creep of Sharia from groups like CAIR, that slowly breaks down a society’s resistance as they succumb to the message of a peaceful Islam (all while submitting to it), is more effective than suicide attacks and terrorism, which has proven, time and time again, to strengthen the resolve of America.


That makes Omar bin Ladin a more dangerous man than his father could ever dream of being.

Somalia Found Naked on Crying Woman-NOT Rapist

A truely disgusting story from St. Paul...

Cops: Tape Shows at Least 10 Witnesses Ignoring Minnesota Woman's Cries for Help During Sexual Assault

ST. PAUL, Minn. — A security video from an apartment hallway shows at least 10 witnesses ignored a woman's cries for help for more than an hour as a man beat and sexually assaulted her, prosecutors in Minnesota said.
The surveillance video clearly showed men and women looking out their apartment doors or starting to walk down the hallway before retreating as the woman was assaulted for nearly 90 minutes, police spokesman Tom Walsh said.
Police said they responded to a call of drunken behavior and found Somali immigrant Rage Ibrahim, 25, and a woman lying unconscious in the hallway early Tuesday. The woman's clothing had been pulled up and she had fresh scratches on her face and blood on her thigh, according to the criminal complaint.

Of course, despite being found naked on top of her, he's innocent!

Ibrahim says he is innocent and that the incident was a misunderstanding, according to Omar Jamal, the executive director of the Somali Justice Advocacy Center, who spoke on Ibrahim's behalf.

It's COMPLETELY normal for a man to be asleep, naked, on top of a woman covered in blood, with her clothes ripped off. It's also normal for her to be crying and repeating over and over "I want to die."

Any juror who votes not guilty should be dragged out back of the courthouse and shot.

Minnesota law makes it a petty misdemeanor to not give reasonable help to a person in danger of "grave physical harm."
Walsh said it is unlikely police would pursue charges against witnesses in this case because authorities would have to show that witnesses knew the woman was in extreme danger.

For more than an hour, this poor woman sat in the hallway and screamed for help. 10 different people saw the assault and decided not to help. Each and everyone of those people should be charged as an excessory, and prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

And this piece of garbage who proclaims his innocence despite video evidence and being caught in the same position should be given the express lane to jail. And the lawyer (trying this for free...his bullshit argument not even worth repeating) should be jailed for trying to get this human waste off.

The Islamic Moderates

This is from a week or so ago, Robert Spencer, the famous "Islamophobic hate monger", who wrote the Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam and The Truth About Muhammad, is on the Laura Ingraham show debating the leader of the moderate Muslim American Society, Esam Omeish.

Link to the audio clip.

So, that Spencer is a hateful bigot..well, of course. But as dear Esam speaks, one more thing becomes clear about Spencer.
He's 100% right.

During the course of the interview Emar admits the following things:
1. The Muslim American Society has ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas.
2. Emar Omeish and the MAS are working to "educate" Americans about Shari'a law, and are trying to get us to impliment it on ourselves.
3. Emar's female family members wear the habib, and he sees no way for a woman to respect herself while being "uncovered".
4. He has no problem with lying about Shari'a and ridiculously claims that Shari'a law "respects women", despite the fact that, without a single exception, in every country that Shari'a is law...women suffer honor killings, female genetal mutilation and are less than 1/2 a man legally.
5. And Most significantly, he sees no problem with being associated with groups with terrorist ties and FREELY admits, seemingly with pride, that all Muslim groups that matter have ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, or other such groups.

This is a "moderate". Seemingly, the only distinction from the militants is that they wish to slowly introduce this and subvert us while we are unawares until we submit willingly, while the militants wish to kill us til we surrender.

Same goal. Different means.

No wonder people call Spencer a racist. If they had to debate him on the merits...people would start demanding deportations of Muslims en masse.

CAIR Shows it's Fangs

H/T SayAnything:



Ibraham Hooper's nonsense is so bad that even Tucker Carlson has to call him on it. When Carlson won't give him his free pass on the ludicrous claim that CAIR should be able to drag anyone into court for reporting suspicious behavior, because that's "racial profiling" or they have "impure motives", CAIR's head goes off on an insane KKK tirade. Comparing people legitimately in fear of their flying companions' behavior to a violent racist may make leftist fools nod in agreement, but it does naught but alienate rational people.

Tucker hits it right on the head when he claims this is to try and silence those who would speak up against any Muslim. But the comparison has some validity even if he gets it backwards. This is much like David Duke walking onto a plane and making remarks about killing black people, then getting angry when some black guy reports him to the flight attendant.
Unfortunately, if the imams are indeed innocent of the charges against them (doubtful in and of itself), they hurt their case by running to CAIR, and suing the people who they claim erroneously ousted them. If Islam is so misunderstood...why not use this as an example to inform people, instead of file frivilous lawsuits?

It's hard to believe that this was anything other than ANOTHER opportunity to drum up a fake controversy, and intimidate potential opponents. It's all CAIR ever does. From the idiocy that 24 would cause Muslim violence, to the lawsuits against Anti-CAIR, the group does little more than strong arm critics into submission. That the flying imams ran first to CAIR...that tells us exactly what happened on that flight. And it tells us just what the purpose of this whole charade was.

Another Unhappy Muslim

Not that it's a surprise for Muslims to be making demands...

Muslims draft complaint against Swift meatpacking plant

Tension came to a head at a Grand Island meatpacking plant in June, when Jama Mohamed said his desire for 10 minutes to pray at sunset was met with shouting.
After he left the production line and began praying, Mohamed said, supervisors took his prayer mat, pulled him up by his collar and sent him crying to a lead supervisor, who fired him.
"I told him, 'Look, I know I am in America and I know in America there is a freedom of religion for everybody to practice their religion. . . . And as long as you fulfill that — as long as you let me pray — I will always work for you,'" Mohamed, 28, said last week through an interpreter.

Sounds harsh right? What happened to this guy's freedom of religion?!?
Well, he checked it the instant he walked through the door. Despite his heartfelt plee, the 1st Amendment doesn't guarantee respect for your religion from others, nor does it demand employers acquiese to your religious "rights". When you are on the job, you are on the job. You are on company time to do whatever job the company has assigned to you, and, in essence, make them money. If you're not being productive, they have the right to toss you out the door.

Harsh? Maybe. Unfair? Not at all. As the supervisor told him:

"And he said, 'No, that's not acceptable — your prayers are not acceptable here. You're here to work, not pray.'"

And:

A Minneapolis attorney for the Greeley, Colo.-based Swift said unscheduled breaks can force unplanned shutdowns of lines.
"That is a significant number of employees, and there is not much of a way to accommodate that consistent with keeping the production online," Donald Selzer said.

The company pays you to do your job, not to pray. Or to call home and tell your kids you love them, take time out to cheer up a coworker, study for a GED, or write poetry. Not that any of those are less than admirable goals, but they're not things the company should have to deal with. The company has made it clear that walking off the line-therefore killing productivity-is a no-no...for whatever reason. If the people were doing it to tell their kid a bedtime story (and being a good parent) we'd completely understand the firing, but inject religion, and everyone loses their mind.

As the article later goes on to detail, several of the Muslims didn't like the arrangement and quit...well within their rights. If it's not good for both parties, either side has the right to walk away. But no! Muslims aren't getting what they want! Call the ACLU! Call CAIR! There's lawsuits in the air.

As the article also states:

Kapitan said Swift rejected her group's suggestion to allow the Somalis who work evenings to leave in small shifts to avoid disrupting lines. The prayer must be done within a 45-minute window surrounding sunset, according to Muslim prayer rules.
Selzer and Hoppes said the company suggested phasing evening workers to shifts earlier in the day that don't interrupt prayer times.

So the company even offers to change their shift (generous I feel), but that's not good enough.

The complaint reprises concerns that boiled over in May, when 120 Somali workers abruptly quit when they were not allowed to pray at sundown. About 70 of them returned to the plant a week later, but union officials worried the issue would resurface as sundown inched later each day through the spring.
Later sunsets run past evening breaks meant to keep workers from long stretches on production lines.
"For three days it was all good and we were praying — there was no hassle, no interference, nothing at all," Ali Schire said through an interpreter. Schire, 30, said he was among the 70 who quit and later returned.
"All of a sudden after three days . . . they were suspending people, they were firing people," Schire said. "Some of the people even had to give up praying at all for fear of being fired."
Mohamed Rage, chairman of the Omaha Somali-American Community Organization, said: "They are treating (the Somalis) like criminals now — anyone who prays is a criminal."

You're kidding? So, because some days breaks coincided with sundown, and prayer time, letting Muslims pray while on break...on the days it doesn't, the Muslims must be allowed to pray still, or it's unfair mistreatment? That's akin to saying "I'm allowed lunch at noon, when the ice cream guy used to come around. Now he comes around at 1, so the company has to change my lunch hour. It's not fair that I used to get ice cream, and now I can't." Tough.

I'm getting damned tired of hearing Muslims expect everybody to bend over backwards for them, but will offer no give in return. We expect universities, airports, businesses, and even the government to work around the poor wittle Muslims, but heaven forbid they even give an inch to the mile they're being given.

Christians are expected to work on Sundays, and, if they own a pharmacy, carry Birth Control and Emergency Contraceptive, even if it violates their religious principals, but heaven forbid the Muslims pray on their own time.

Who Needs Protection for Doing the Right Thing?

Democrats seek to water down provisions that would protect whistle blowers against lawsuits from those they report.

From the Washington Post:

Democrats are trying to pull a provision from a homeland security bill that will protect the public from being sued for reporting suspicious behavior that may lead to a terrorist attack, according to House Republican leadership aides.

This John Doe Legislation was proposed after the Flying Imams incident, and the subsequent threatened lawsuit. The idea being that anyone who reported suspicious behavior shouldn't be able to be sued after the fact.

“Democrats are trying to find any technical excuse to keep immunity out of the language of the bill to protect citizens, who in good faith, report suspicious activity to police or law enforcement,” Mr. King said in an interview last night.
...
“I don't see how you can have a homeland security bill without protecting people who come forward to report suspicious activity,” Mr. King said.

But in true Democrat fashion-being Politically Correct is more important than keeping the public safe:

Rep. Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi Democrat and chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, initially opposed the legislation for fear it would lead to racial profiling.

Of course, MUSLIMS MUST BE PROTECTED! AT ALL COSTS!
You know, even if they're acting illegally, or just to terrify the other passengers.
This is so stupid it makes my head hurt. People who are acting suspiciously should be reported. And if they're doing nothing wrong, it teaches them not to act like that in the future. It MAY be that the guy next door is just looking in the window of your neighbors house to see if their best friend is home. They also could be a robber looking to steal everything they own.

But if you can get sued for being wrong...will you call the cops?