Recommended Reading

I started reading the Qu'ran. I forced myself to slog through the first nine chapters. Then I returned it to the library. Eventually I will read it all. It is a tough read though. There is very little narrative, but a lot of rules, warnings of what will happen if you fail to follow Allah, and lots and lots of venom against Jews and Christians, but mostly against Jews. For anyone who takes this book seriously, and we know there are a lot of Muslims who do, there can be no other conclusion than Jews are the enemy of Islam.

Muslims are warned not to take Jews or Christians as friends. Jews are responsible, it seems, for rejecting prophets and for trying to turn Muslims away from Islam, at least according to the Qu'ran. I could offer quotes and links, but better you should go and read it on your own. Read it with friends. Form a study group. Rather than take the word of the liars at CAIR, find out for yourself. I know you're busy; we're all busy. Turn off the TV for a while. Take a few days off of Facebook. Read the Qu'ran.

If you want the "Cliff Notes" version, I can't recommend Andrew G. Bostom's book, The Legacy of ISLAMIC ANTISEMITISM highly enough. He has done the dirty work of surveying the history of Islam and reprinting quotes from the Qu'ran, hadiths, conferences, and other Islamic writings concerning Jews. He also quotes Sheikh Yousef Al-Qaradhawi, spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, the new rulers of North Africa. It's not pretty, but that's the way it is when you decide to find the truth.

And while the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt decides whether or not to honor their peace treaty with Israel, which current president of the United States is legitimizing his Jew-hatred by calling on Qaradhawi to mediate talks (speaking of self-defeating insanity) between the U.S. and the Taliban?

Keep that in mind when you are asked to donate to the re-election of our anti-Israel president. It can be argued whether or not Obama has an animus toward Jews or not. What can't be argued is his love and lust for our money.

Let's Blame the Jews

Pat Condell videos have been on Youtube and floating around the web for quite some time now. Here is his latest. Blame the Jews indeed! Watch.

Cowznofski

This is a Leader?

Woody Allen -
- We were married by a reformed rabbi in Long Island. A very reformed rabbi. A Nazi.

First of all, I never knew that the reform movement had a leader. Second of all, once I discovered that fact by reading this article reprinted in the Detroit Jewish News, I began wondering who decides who our "leader" is. I was never consulted, nor was I given the opportunity to vote. Third of all, until now, I wouldn't have cared whether or not there was a reform leader.

After reading about Rabbi Jacobs (who I am not comparing to a Nazi, more on that later), I care. Over the course of the past week, I've reread the article a number of times. I get angrier each time I read it. Rabbi Jacobs talks a good game about how he supports Israel. His actions show a disconnect.

I don't believe that all Israel supporters or members of the Jewish community have to walk in lock-step to prove our "Jewishness" or our loyalty to Judaism or to Israel. We are an opinionated, stiff-necked people, and we are going to disagree with each other. I can live with that. I cannot accept as a leader, however, one who allies himself with organizations, who, no matter how much they deny it, are working solidly, hand in hand, with the worst of Israel's enemies.

After joining in protest sponsored by Sheikh Jarrah Solidarity, Jacobs attempts to comfort us by stating,

he disagrees with 99 percent of what the movement, which has been described by the Jewish Agency for Israel as anti-Zionist, stands for.

One of the complaints of Sheikh Jarrah Solidarity is

Two settlements have been established in the heart of Jaffa in recent years with the declared intent of Judaizing the town.

We can't have cities in Israel being "Judaized" now, can we? And does Rabbi Jacobs support the term "settlements" to describe areas of Jews building in Israel? Gaza is judenrein, and Fatah is demanding the same of their proposed state in Judea and Samaria, where the dehumanizing terms "settlements" and "settlers" are used to describe Jewish neighborhoods and neighbors. But to approve of those terms within Israel? And they're honored by J Street, one of those other rabid - ahem - cough -"pro-Israel" - cough - gasp - choke - organizations.

Speaking of J Street, Fatah's Jewish voice,

“I support the goals and visions of J Street, but I’m not defined by it,” Rabbi Jacobs said,

And this means exactly what? We are supposed to mollified because he ONLY supports J Street, who claim,

Israel’s settlements in the occupied territories have, for over forty years, been an obstacle to peace. They have drained Israel’s economy, military, and democracy and eroded the country’s ability to uphold the rule of law.

Continued settlement growth undermines the prospects for peace by making Palestinians doubt Israeli motives and commitment, and by complicating the territorial compromises that will be necessary in final status talks. The arrangements that have been made for the benefit of settlers and for security – checkpoints, settler-only roads, the route of the security barrier* – have all made daily life more difficult for Palestinians, deepening hostility and increasing the odds of violence and conflict. A majority of Israelis have recognized this reality and oppose settlement expansion, yet their views have been outweighed by a small, vocal pro-settlement minority.

If this is a pro-Israel stand, the Manson family took a solid pro-Tate, LaBianca stand. And Rabbi Jacobs doesn't even pretend to be against 99% of what J Street stands for.

He said he wholeheartedly supports the work of the New Israel Fund, a group dedicated to civil rights and religious pluralism in Israel.

Maybe I'm not seeing the same things Rabbi Jacobs or the NIF is seeing, but from what I've been reading and seeing, these people would spend their time more productively in promoting civil rights and religious pluralism in the nations surrounding Israel. But in what must be a concerted effort at self-blindness, NIF says, on Goldstone's retraction of his report,

When the Goldstone Commission began its work, the organizations then called on the government to cooperate with the Commission, out of belief in the importance of transparency, and out of concern for Israel's international image. The government's refusal to set up a commission of inquiry, and then its refusal to cooperate with the Goldstone Commission, altered the findings of the Goldstone Report, with negative results.

So NIF joins Goldstone in blaming Israel for the bit of blood libel that bears his name. History has proven, when in doubt, blame the Jews, or in this case, the Jewish state. This gets the wholehearted support of Rabbi Jacobs. But I suppose it doesn't define him.

Just to show what an actual Israel supporter writes like, read Melanie Phillip's take on Goldstone's mendacity. Unlike Rabbi Jacobs, Phillips is not afraid to take sides and does not use weasel words to hide her feelings or her politics.

On the issue of the BDS (Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions) movement, he said he strongly opposed global BDS, which seeks to eliminate the Zionist state, but drew a distinction between such efforts and those who boycott products made in Jewish communities in the West Bank.

He said the Reform movement has not taken a position yet on the boycott of West Bank settlements but that “we do take positions on the hardest issues.”

Oh, I get it. He doesn't want to eliminate the the Zionist state, he merely wants to weaken it and insure that Judea and Samaria are ethnically cleansed in order to become Islamic terror states unpolluted by infidel Jews. But the Reform movement hasn't taken a stand. I'm not waiting for the Reform movement to tell me how to think. I will fight against BDS without making distinctions.

Getting back to the Woody Allen quote - as I said, I'm neither calling nor comparing Rabbi Jacobs to a Nazi. That line is from one of Allen's 1960s stand-up routines. That was a time when Jews were able to breathe a sigh of relief and ridicule their former unlamented, deceased tormentors. Israel was firmly established. Jews in the United States were taking advantage of their freedom to excel in a multitude of fields. Even in Europe, things seemed to be improving.

Woody Allen, Lenny Bruce, Mel Brooks' The Producers - the list goes on of humor made at the expense of the Seven Year Reich. There was a freedom to laugh out loud and publicly. It came from an absence of fear. And we are still laughing.

As time passed, Jews grew more secure, and in spite of its enemies, Israel grew stronger. We became complacent. Complacency led to a willful blindness so complete that a rabbi who openly colludes with our current genocidal enemies (even though he is against 99% of what they stand for) is being chosen to "lead" the Reform movement.

I don't have to explain our Islamo-Nazi enemies to anyone who has rejected this willful blindness, and it's useless to explain it to those who have accepted it.

During our Passover seders, we remind ourselves that, in every generation, a new enemy arises. Did Rabbi Jacobs and his followers skip this portion of the Haggadah? Do they really not get it?

If Rabbi Jacobs truly doesn't understand that taking both sides of the argument is not leadership, he isn't fit to lead.

If he doesn't understand that he can't stand up to our enemies while standing with our enemies, he's not fit to lead. And if he can't even recognize those enemies, he's dangerous.

If he doesn't understand that a leader must have the fortitude to take a strong stand, or he will only lead his followers into the abyss, he is not fit to lead.

Where Rabbi Jacobs is leading, I have no interest in going.

by Cowznofski

Freedom of Speech - Muslims - Yes! The Rest of Us - No!

The recent successful assault on the First Amendment in the trial of Pastor Jerry Jones in Dearborn surely illustrates to what lengths many will go in order to bow to Muslim “sensitivities” in the spirit of tolerance. The verdict was based upon the premise that his peaceful, but perhaps misguided demonstration would have incited violence. The question is who would be doing the violence? It would certainly not be the handful of people participating in his gathering. I watched the video of the in-your-face vitriolic insults hurled at him and his partner after the trial. Where were the Dearborn police when that angry pack belligerently crowded around the defendants? Why did they not intercede to keep the mob at a distance?

Unfortunately, what seems to have been overlooked in all this is the attendance of certain rabbis and Christian clergy meeting at the mosque in solidarity with Muslim clergy to promote understanding and tolerance. Surely, before joining in solidarity, these “let’s all get along” clergy first must ask those Muslim clergy to disavow the many intolerant, hateful, and odious passages in the Koran and Hadith being taught in the mosques and Islamic schools. Space does not permit listing all the passages, so here are three samples (read the books yourself, they are not out of context):
• Quran 9:5: So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters [non-Muslims] wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.
• Quran 5:51: O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people.
• Bukhari-Hadith Volume 4, Book 52, #176: Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah's Apostle said, "The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. ”O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him."

Are the “reach-out” clergy simply ignorant of the content of those religious documents, or do they willfully overlook them? It is time for concerned Jews to speak out and question their rabbi’s position on this.

A Question Worth Asking

I did not come with this. Someone who has nothing to do with this blog did. So I'm going to rephrase it.

Question: Why are our Muslim neighbors only now discovering and making noise about the despotic regimes throughout the Middle East and North Africa? I've been reading in our local papers how upset local Muslims are about how their family members who weren't lucky enough to join them in the Land of the Free and Home of the Brave, are suffering under various tyrants in their former home nations. Why did they wait until now to hit the streets in protest? Why hadn't they been lobbying their representatives to put pressure on the dictators who are now facing the wrath of their own citizens?

OK, so that was more than one question, but all with the same theme.

As I recall, before this awakening of revolutionary change against oppressive kleptocrats, our Muslim neighbors only raised their voices and made posters decrying the only non-authoritarian country in that entire region, you know, Israel, that tiny Jewish state that's surrounded by a ring of hostile Islamic dictatorial regimes. Now that the news media is being forced to show the world the true face of the Islamo-fascist regimes, the "Zionist Entity"doesn't look too bad.

For those whose anti-Semitism - uh - I mean anti-Zionism has so poisoned their mind with hatred, that they still refuse to acknowledge the truth, I have one more question up my sleeve. But it's not really mine. I stole it and I'm reprinting it as it was asked:

How do you explain the whole Arab world raising against dictators, sacrificing lives in thousands.. everywhere except PA and Israeli Arab sector? - ..these ones are supposed to be first victims of "Zionist genocide".

Great question if you're walking the streets of Dearborn these days.
By Cowznofski

Mordechai Kedar in Detroit

Remember this video? It's been around for a few years and around the world a few times, but it's fun to watch occasionally as the al-Jazeera stooge - uh - I mean anchorman withers under an attack of indisputable facts from Mordechai Kedar.
Mr. Kedar is going to be in the Detroit area this Wednesday. He will speak at Young Israel of Oak Park at 6:30 PM. His topic will be, "Understanding Islam: Is it Radical Islam, or is Islam Radical?" Earlier in the day, down at the Wayne State University Law School, Mr. Kedar will debate Osama Siblani, publisher of The Arab American News. Nolan Finley of the Detroit News will be the moderator, and the action begins at 12:10. Since it is in the afternoon, I won't be there. I will be at work.

I would rather be at the debate, but since I do have a family to support, I can't be there. So, just to be rude, here is a question: Hey, Mr. al-Jazeera anchor man, I forget. How many times is Jerusalem mentioned in the Qu'ran? Oh yeah, that's right: zero!
by Cowznofski

The Mosque "Bomber" is a Muslim

In a previous post, I wondered aloud if there was any real danger from the man who was arrested for threatening to blow up a Dearborn mosque. Since then, there has been new information on Mr. Roger Stockham, the alleged plotter. It seems that,

Roger Stockham is/was a convert to Islam who goes by the name of Hem Ahadin.

and

Stockham fired his court-appointed attorney Mark Haidar, saying Haidar was a "Shi'ite" and a "patron of the [targeted] mosque".

The link above was sent to me by a friend, and it has a link to this fascinating 1979 article from the Merced Sun-Star on one of Stockham's previous violent criminal episodes. He has a long history of violence. Today's Detroit Free Press gives an overview of his violent past and his current situation. The article also doesn't try to hide his conversion to Islam or the fact that he's fired his court-appointed attorny, Mark Haidar, for being a Shi'ite, the same branch of Islam practiced by the mosque Stockham was allegedly going to destroy with his large cache of toy caps and smoke bombs.

The Detroit News does a poorer job than the Free Press. First, they lead off with the misleading headline, Mosque bomb suspect rejects Muslim lawyer, trying to divert us from the fact that Stockham is a Muslim while causing the reader to suspect him of being a dreaded, monstrous, scorned in polite company: "Islamphobe". They further try to mislead us, saying,

A hearing for a California man accused of plotting to set off explosives outside Metro Detroit's largest mosque was postponed Friday after he rejected his court-appointed attorney for being a Muslim.

Later in the article however,

But during the hearing, Stockham objected to the man appointed to represent him, Mark Haidar of Northville, claiming Haidar is a member of the Shiite sect of Muslims.

"I reject Mr. Haidar's appointment as counsel. He is a Shiite," Stockham said. "He is a patron of the mosque."

There is a difference between rejecting the lawyer because he's a Muslim, and rejecting him because he's a Shiite, which is what really happened. There is some unacknowledged interIslamic hatred going on here, along with either sloppy or deliberately misleading reporting.

Questions I have about this case:

How will CAIR and other Islamic grievance mongers twist this into an anti-Islamic "hate crime?" They already have help from the Detroit News.

Will Stockham's conversion to Islam be downplayed in order to garner sympathy against an "anti-Islamic backlash?

Will they find a way to label Stockman as an "Islamophobe", or will they have to settle for him merely being a "Shiaphobe?"

Will Stockham's conversion be used as a symptom of his mental illness? Will the mental illness defense be accepted? After all, we're always and continuously lectured that Islam is a religion of peace and that every attempted terrorist is mentally ill.

I will be staying tuned. But I'm still not sure I can take Stockham's attempt at terrorism seriously.

by Cowznofski

California man jailed in alleged attempt to blow up Dearborn mosque

I don't mean to minimize the latest attempted terrorist attack in Dearborn. This could have turned into a very dangerous situation. Somebody could have had an eye put out. This is, I'm sure going to get a lot of news time in order to demonstrate the rising tide of Islamophobia in our nation. According to the Detroit Free Press,

A California man is in jail on a terrorism charge after he was arrested in Dearborn for allegedly trying to blow up the biggest mosque in metro Detroit, Dearborn officials said today.

The suspect was arrested in the parking lot of the Islamic Center of America in Dearborn on Monday, while hundreds were inside the mosque that sits along Ford Road, police said. He came to the city because of its large Arab-American and Muslim population, police said.

Roger Stockham, 63, was arraigned Wednesday on one count on a threat of terrorism or false report and one count of explosive-possession of bombs with unlawful intent for possession of Class C fireworks, Dearborn Police said.

Class C fireworks, eh? According to Section 750.243a of the Michigan Penal Code,

“Class C fireworks” means toy smoke devices, toy caps containing not more than .25 grains of explosive mixture, toy propellant devices, cigarette loads, trick matches, trick noise makers, smoke candles, smoke pots, smoke grenades, smoke signals, hand signal devices, Very signal cartridges, sparklers, explosive auto alarms, and other similar devices.

As you can see, this is pretty serious stuff. Besides getting an eye put out, think of all of the dangerous smoke that may have been inhaled.

"He's very dangerous," Dearborn Police Chief Ron Haddad told the Free Press. "We took his threat to be very serious."

See? Dangerous, very dangerous. If the Dearborn police chief says so, it's got to be true.

Even the most inept of Islamic terrorists at least tries to put together some sort of effective explosive device. They travel to exotic places like Yemen and Afghanistan to learn how to build IEDs, truck bombs, underwear bombs, and other nasty things. This demented schmuck had a carload of toy caps and smoke bombs.

I will do my best to take this threat seriously, but it's not going to be easy.

by Cowznofski

Will the Real Imam Rauf Please Stand Up?

            Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, in his continuing bid to brand himself as a moderate Muslim, one interested only in peaceful outreach to those of other faiths here in the United States, will be barnstorming the country on his “Meet the Imam” Charm Offensive. His other motive in traveling the nation is to solicit donations for his Cordoba Initiative, you know, the proposed 13 story Islamic center near Ground Zero, the one we’re not supposed to refer to as the “Ground Zero Mosque.”

            Other aspects of this project we’re not supposed to question are: Where are they going to get the million  of dollars they need to build this project? Who will really be served, as there are so few Muslims in the surrounding communities? The main question that we’re not allowed to ask is: Why has there been so little investigation of Imam Rauf by the American mainstream press? Are they so ready to accept their dhimmi status according to Sharia law, that they accept whatever Imam Rauf and his supporters dish out? Is “speaking truth to power” only done when there are no consequences?

            Fortunately, our Talking Tachlis crack investigative team has taken the time that the MSM has been too afraid to do to discover whether Rauf is telling the truth, or if he is indulging in taqqiya. We want to get the skinny on Rauf’s real motives behind this initiative.

            After a simple survey of some of  the available knowledge on Imam Rauf, it’s easy to conclude that we should remain suspicious of the imam. Just a few of the documented facts discovered by Alyssa Lappen of ACT! for America that the mainstream press doesn’t think are important enough to report:

In 2001 on 60 Minutes, Rauf called U.S. policies “an accessory to the crime that happened,” and said, “In ... the most direct sense, Osama bin Laden was made in the USA.”

In the fiscal year ended Jun. 30, 2009, Feisal's ASMA accepted at least $1.3 million, including $576,312 from Qatar,13 whose government stands accused of funding international terrorism, has long harbored terror financiers, and for decades hosted Muslim Brotherhood spiritual chief Yusuf al-Qaradawi. Rauf is quite friendly with Qaradawi, a large, founding shareholder in terror-funding al-Taqwa Bank who champions sharia law, wife beating and suicide bombing.

Rauf seeks more U.S. legal “leeway” for sharia --- to put Muslims above the law --- by “[Inviting] voices of all religions to join the dialogue in shaping the nation’s practical

life, [and allowing] religious communities ... to judge ...according to their own laws.

In March 2010, also in Arabic, Rauf stridently denounced interfaith discussions. “I don't believe in interfaith dialogue,” he said in an article that highlighted his statement in its headline.

            There is much more, including Rauf’s connections to Hamas and The Muslim Brotherhood. And the fact that he has completely, and without challenges from those who should know better, misrepresented the contents of his book. The American edition is called, What’s Right with Islam Is What’s Right with America. The earlier Malaysian edition though, was printed under the title, A Call to Prayer from the World Trade Center Rubble: Islamic Dawa in the Heart of America Post-911. “Dawa”, like “jihad” is a word we need to understand. Dawa means to invite non-Muslims to accept the truth of Islam . . . by any means necessary.

Others have already done the digging. It’s up to us to read what they found and add our voices to those already informing the public and protesting this Islamic insult to our nation especially since, when Rauf does come to Dearborn on January 15, we can depend on both the Detroit News and Free Press to fawn over this alleged model of moderateness.

It’s interesting that Rauf’s first event on his tour will be the First Annual ISNA Diversity Forum, organized by the Islamic Society of North America. Diversity, eh? Will this be the Helen Thomas brand of diversity? Or will it be even worse?
by
Cowznofski