Thursday, March 1, 2012
Andrew Breitbart dead at 43.(Fox).Widely read conservative Internet publisher Andrew Breitbart has died, his attorney confirms.
The websites he founded ran a statement Thursday morning announcing that Breitbart, 43, died "unexpectedly from natural causes" in Los Angeles shortly after midnight.
"We have lost a husband, a father, a son, a brother, a dear friend, a patriot and a happy warrior," the statement said. "Andrew lived boldly, so that we more timid souls would dare to live freely and fully, and fight for the fragile liberty he showed us how to love."Breitbart was a prolific commentator who founded several websites devoted to covering politics, entertainment and everything in between. Earlier in his career, he worked for the Drudge Report before breaking off to start his own outlets -- including Big Government, Big Hollywood and Breitbart.tv. The statement on his sites quoted the concluding passage from his book, Righteous Indignation.
"I love my job. I love fighting for what I believe in. I love having fun while doing it. I love reporting stories that the Complex refuses to report. I love fighting back, I love finding allies, and-famously-I enjoy making enemies. Three years ago, I was mostly a behind-the-scenes guy who linked to stuff on a very popular website. I always wondered what it would be like to enter the public realm to fight for what I believe in. I've lost friends, perhaps dozens. But I've gained hundreds, thousands -- who knows? -- of allies. At the end of the day, I can look at myself in the mirror, and I sleep very well at night," he wrote.
The statement ended: "Andrew is at rest, yet the happy warrior lives on, in each of us."
Breitbart was walking near his house in the Brentwood neighborhood shortly after midnight Thursday when he collapsed, his father-in-law Orson Bean said.
Someone saw him fall and called paramedics, who tried to revive him. They rushed him to the emergency room at UCLA Medical Center, Bean said. Breitbart had suffered heart problems a year earlier, but Bean said he could not pinpoint what happened.Those who knew and worked with him described Breitbart almost uniformly as "fearless," sharply intelligent, witty and devoted to his work.
"He was the modern conservative iteration of a 1960s radical," conservative commentator Jonah Goldberg told Fox News, minutes after Breitbart's death was reported.
"When I say he was the most fearless guy I ever knew, it really is true. I mean, he truly loved the fight," he said. News of Breitbart's death reverberated on Capitol Hill and on the presidential campaign trail. Rick Santorum said he was "crestfallen."
"What a powerful force," Santorum said. "What a huge loss, in my opinion, for our country and certainly for the conservative movement."
Breitbart is survived by his wife Susannah Bean Breitbart, 41, and four children.Source.
- Updated !Earthquakes in the last 24 hours in the world seismic activity situation Japan 5.0 ; Vanuatu 5.0 !More info here.
- Ron Paul, Barack Obama, and Hillary Clinton in agreement over Apology for Qur'an Burning.(BN).Ron Paul is really courting that Muslim vote. I no sooner posted the link to the Big Peace article in which his campaign volunteers posted a flyer in Arabic that touted him as the candidate who would cut-off aid to Israel, when I noticed this.He is in agreement with the apology Obama issued to Hamid Karzai over the Qur'an burnings. He expressed this sentiment while questioning Secretary of State Hillary Clinton at a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing.Via the National Journal: Bringing up the scandal provoked by a viral video depicting American Marines urinating on Taliban corpses, Paul voiced his overall opposition to the war that created thousands of refugees in the country."Does it ever get to the point where apologizing about the Koran is rather minor, considering some of the other problems we have created in [Afghanistan]?" Paul asked.Clinton said she appreciated Paul's measured comments about Obama and other presidents offering apologies "when we are deeply sorry for unfortunate incidents that occur, that were not intentional, and which we know have emotional resonance with people."The premise a vast majority of the Pauliens operate from is one that says the U.S. Government (not Islamic terrorists) is responsible for the 9/11 attacks. As such, the inclination is to believe that the former is a greater threat than the latter. By their own admission, the Pauliens will tell you that the Islamic threat is overrated.Again, the only way these comments by Paul are not viewed as out of bounds is if you believe the government is worse than the terrorists.The 9/11 Truth crowd has found that the springboard for its conspiratorial beliefs is placing them in the camp of America's true enemies.Apparently, as an added bonus, the more Paul talks like this, the more he garners Muslim / anti-Semitic votes.Read the full story here.
- Judicial Watch Files Brief with U.S. Supreme Court Challenging Constitutionality of Obamacare.(BG).On February 13, 2012, Judicial Watch filed an amicus curiae brief with the High Court challenging the constitutionality of Obamacare, specifically the “individual mandate.” The Supreme Court has scheduled oral arguments for the Obamacare case on March 26, 27, and 28, 2012.The brief maintains that the “individual mandate” provision of Obamacare, which requires every American citizen to purchase health care insurance or pay a penalty, is unconstitutional – whether considered under Congress’ commerce power or taxing power: Petitioners are trying to defend a provision in an act passed by Congress that exceeds its enumerated powers. Though Congress enacted this provision under the Commerce Clause, Congress’ power under the clause is not broad enough to compel Americans to engage in commerce by purchasing a particular product. Though Petitioners try to rescue the provision by arguing that it is valid under Congress’ taxing power even if it is invalid under Congress’ commerce power, a provision of an act that is not a tax may not be construed as a tax merely to save it from being declared unconstitutional.Judicial Watch lawyers point out that if the Supreme Court affirms the constitutionality of the individual mandate, “it must be willing to hold that Congress’ powers under the Commerce clause are plenary and unlimited, for there remains no principled way to limit Congress’ power if it is stretched as far as Petitioners [the Obama administration] ask.”Florida federal district judge Roger Vinson perhaps put it more colorfully when he struck down the law in its entirety last year. If the government can force American taxpayers to buy health insurance, it can also force them to decide “whether and when (or not) to buy a house, a car, a television, a dinner or even a morning cup of coffee.”The Judicial Watch amicus was filed in support of a challenge to Obamacare by Florida and 25 other states.Demonstrating the importance of the legal battle over Obamacare, the Supreme Court will hear five-and-a-half hours of oral argument, a rare allotment of time in the court’s modern era. (The standard is one hour.) The Supreme Court’s scrutiny will focus on the constitutionality of the Obamacare individual mandate. However, the court will also consider whether other components of Obamacare could take effect even if the individual mandate is ruled unconstitutional, among other issues.In a December 14, 2010, editorial published in The Washington Post, Attorney General Eric Holder and Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius argued that the individual mandate is essential to Obamacare: “Without an individual responsibility provision (or mandate), controlling costs and ending discrimination against people with preexisting conditions doesn’t work.”In other words, not even the Obama administration itself believes the law can survive if the individual mandate is struck down.Judicial Watch has been extremely active in the Obamacare debate right from the beginning. It has fought for transparency over the Obamacare waivers, ultimately discovering that Big Labor was taking in a disproportionate haul. It has exposed the Obama administration’s taxpayer-funded, multi-media propaganda campaign featuring television actor Andy Griffith.Judicial Watch has also fought for records detailing Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan’s involvement in any Obamacare defense discussions when she served as Obama’s Solicitor General. (It uncovered documents that raised questions about her role, causing a national uproar about her continued involvement in the High Court’s Obamacare deliberations.)The time has come for the Supreme Court to put an end to Obamacare once and for all. The President’s socialist healthcare overhaul is an affront to the U.S. Constitution’s provisions for limited government and, as you can see with the anti-religion Obamacare contraception mandate, a fundamental threat to our God-given freedoms.Read the full story here.
- Obama Slashes Soldiers’ Benefits to Pay Back Healthcare Industry Donors,(BG).The Tea Party hit its stride in the summer of 2009 when concerned citizens showed up to town halls across the United States to protest the healthcare takeover law being considered in Congress. The people rightly felt that the bill’s labyrinthine and onerous regulations were corrupt and designed to increase the power of the government, line the pockets of shortsighted insurance companies, and squeeze as much blood from the country’s taxpayer turnip as possible.Just when America believed the US government health scandal couldn’t get worse, President Obama’s handlers go one step further—increasing service members’ and veterans’ medical premiums. This move is designed to push service members and veterans to opt out of Tricare and find a new insurance provider.President Obama’s new medical proposal seeks to save $1.8 billion from the Tricare medical system in the fiscal 2013 budget and $12.9 billion by 2017, the latter amount adding up to 0.99% of the $1.3 trillion deficit for a single year built into Obama’s proposed budget. To accomplish this spending reduction, service members should expect a 30% to 78% increase in Tricare annual premiums for the first year. In five years, service members will expect an increase ranging from 94% to 345%.The average annual salary for a four year single enlistee is approximately $34k. If that service member were married with dependents, the salary increases to approximately $42k. Are those numbers enough to make any sane person want to enlist today, knowing they will likely ship off to some foreign land to fight a losing war like that in Afghanistan? Are those numbers enough to justify risking one’s life–enough to afford an increased medical premium that could be raised by 78% just this year or 345% by the time their initial enlistment is over?Make no mistake; the President is downsizing our military, and this new military medical initiative is one sure way he will see volunteers leave the military knowing their benefits are jeopardized. At a time when Iran threatens the free world, Afghanistan’s violence is on a rise, and North Korea remains unstable, is now the time to play with our service members’ well-being?President Obama has taken an unprecedented action, crippling the livelihoods of our most worthy federal employees–our troops. And it’s easy to see who’s pushing for this change–the very elements that pushed for Obamacare and the recent contraception scandal, the political donors who represent America’s health industry.Our service members should never have to worry about their benefits, but today they do. They selflessly volunteer to place themselves in harm’s way believing in service before self. America must stand up for these warriors and vehemently oppose President Obama and his health industry puppet masters. They have finally crossed the line.Read the full story here.
- Obama Cedes Terror Cases to Civilian Law Enforcement.(BP).From the Wall Street Journal: President Barack Obama issued an order Tuesday giving civilian investigators broad power to handle the cases of U.S. terrorism suspects despite a law passed late last year favoring military custody.The decision is likely to raise hackles among lawmakers who included the provision in the National Defense Authorization Act, and it could provide an election-year issue for Republicans.Mr. Obama signed the bill under protest Dec. 31 and attached a statement saying he intended to disregard portions interfering with his presidential powers.The law requires military detention for non-U.S. citizens accused of planning or carrying out an attack for al Qaeda and associated groups. At the White House’s insistence, it included discretion for the president to waive the requirement if necessary to avoid disrupting terrorism probes led by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.Tuesday’s order takes advantage of that discretion to the fullest, preserving for the FBI and other civilian authorities the leading role in handling terrorism arrests in the U.S. Military detention would be an option in limited cases, largely at the discretion of the attorney general and federal investigators.Mr. Obama’s interpretation of the waiver authority is likely to clash with the wishes of the bipartisan group of lawmakers who pushed the military-custody provision.Republican proponents of the military-detention provision said they would hold a Senate hearing, because they believe the president’s order might violate the spirit of the law. Sens. John McCain of Arizona, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire issued a statement saying they were “concerned that some of these regulations may contradict the intent of the detainee provisions” in the defense bill.Mr. Obama has also come under fire from civil libertarians who said the law could pave the way for the indefinite military detention without trial of U.S. citizens on U.S. soil. Such criticism came both from right-leaning tea-party supporters and groups on the left.Jameel Jaffer, deputy legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union, said the president should have vetoed the law, as signing it “turns the practice of indefinite military detention into a permanent part of American law.”Read the full story here.
- 'Missiles on Israel preferable to nuclear Iran'.(YNet).The mathematics of war: A missile salvo on the greater Tel Aviv area, thousand of rockets fired at northern Israel, terror attacks against Israeli targets overseas, scores of Israeli casualties and countless others in bomb shelters – that is how a former top Israeli official described Iran's possible reaction to an Israeli strike on its nuclear facilities. According to a Thursday report in Yedioth Ahronoth, the former official – speaking anonymously with the New York Times – detailed the formula by which Israel assessed the magnitude of Tehran's response: "1991 + 2006 + Buenos Aires, times three-to-five."In other words: The combined result of Saddam Hussein's missile attack on Israel in 1991, Hezbollah's missiles attacks on Israel during the 2006 Second Lebanon War and the terror attacks in Argentina's capital in the early 1990s – times three.These attacks claimed the lives of hundreds of Israelis and Jews and the damage to the Israeli economy amounted to billions of dollars. "Forty missiles fired at Israel are no small matter – but it's better that a nuclear Iran," he said. The New York Times said that the assessment is based on the premise that while Iran would aspire to meet any strike with force, it would prefer not to ignite a regional war. US defense experts, however, qualified the statement, saying the West's ability to accurately predict Iran's moves was limited. Washington, the report said, believes that a strike on the Islamic Republic would result in a missile barrage on Israel; but it also believes that Iran would try to somehow disguise its connection to such a counter-attack, possibly by promoting terror attacks on nations who support Israel. The Americans also believe it is likely Iran will use any such strike as a pretext to close off the Strait of Hormuz. US defense sources said that Tehran is likely to try and avoid a direct attack on American interests, because the regime knows that an American military strike will inflict significant damage. Washington does, however, think Iran will opt for an indirect assault against its interests worldwide, or against oil production facilities in the Persian Gulf.US President Barack Obama is set to speak at the next AIPAC conventions in Washington, where he is expected to detail the US' "red lines" on Iran.Hmmmm.........Rumor has it he's colorblind.Read the full story here.
- Ten injured in blast near AKP building in Istanbul.(HD).Istanbul police chief Hüseyin Çapkın said ten people were injured in a blast in Istanbul this morning.Çapkın said the explosion was caused by a bomb that was remotely detonated. A blast shook Istanbul’s Sütlüce district this morning, as at least five police officers were wounded, according to news agencies. The blast took place near a midibus carrying police officers, on the İmrahor Street in a district near the Golden Horn.The location is also very near the Istanbul district office of the governing Justice and Development Party, and the headquarters of the Independent Industrialists and Businessmen’s Association (MÜSİAD). The five were on duty at a building belonging to the Independent Industrialists' and Businessmen's Association (MÜSİAD), which is close to the AKP branch on İmrahor Street in Beyoğlu district’s Sütlüce neighborhood.Read the full story here.
- Egypt Christian man jailed for insulting Prophet.(BM).CAIRO: Egypt has jailed a Christian man for 6 years on charges of showing contempt of religion and insulting the Prophet Mohamed, the country’s state-owned al-Ahram newspaper reported on Thursday.The court, in the southern Egyptian province of Assiut, said that Makram Diab, a school employee, had made offensive remarks against Islam’s prophet, according to the report.The remarks infuriated Diab’s Muslim colleagues, who went on strike until he was arrested and prosecuted.The sentencing comes after a Cairo court earlier this week dismissed a lawsuit against the Christian business tycoon, Naguib Sawiris, who was accused of insulting Islam by tweeting images of Mickey Mouse with a beard and his counterpart Minnie wearing a veil.Sawiris faces two other lawsuits over the same images.Recent parliamentary elections have produced a strong showing for Islamists in Egypt, sparking concerns over freedom among liberals and Christians, who make up around 10 percent of the country’s 80 million population.The ruling has left the Coptic community angered over what a number of Christian activists told Bikyamasr.com was an “attempt to create divisions” between Muslims and Christians in the country.Noha, a political studies student at Cairo University and activist who regularly participates in demonstrations for Coptic rights, argued that the government is “continuing the policy of Mubarak by jailing and even putting these people in front of a court. It is unacceptable for a country where we hoped for free speech.”The Christian community has struggled to figure out the direction of transitional Egypt in the post-uprising atmosphere.In October, a pro-Coptic rights march ended in a bloodbath after the armed forces opened fire on the thousands of protesters and run them over with armored vehicles, leaving at least 27 dead.The ruling military junta said a “third-party” was responsible for opening fire, leaving many Christians questioning if they would receive justice after decades of animosity towards their minority community.Hmmmm......Egypt.....holyday destination?Yeah whatevah.Read the full story here.
- ‘U.S., Iran, Brotherhood’ trio of ‘direct threat’ to Gulf says chief of Dubai’s police.(AA).Chief of Dubai Police Force and Lieutenant General, Dahi Khalfan, warned that the United States, Iran and the Muslim Brotherhood are a threat to the security of the Gulf region, a newspaper reported on Wednesday. Dahi, who was in charge of the investigation of the group suspected of killing a high-ranking Hamas official in Dubai, said in an interview published by the Kuwaiti newspaper, al-Nahar, that the ultimate goal of the Muslim Brotherhood and the Salafists in the region is to be in power. “The Brotherhood does not want the current Gulf regimes to stay,” the newspaper quoted him as saying.Warning of another ‘Sykes–Picot’ in reference to the 1916 agreement that divided the Arab World between France and Britain, the Lieutenant General said that “there is a plan to spread chaos in the region including the GCC region. “Security in the Gulf won’t be achieved only through an agreement between GCC and Iran … Iranian officials have to stop creating political storms from time to time.”The police chief who advised Gulf States to create a confederation of unity to achieve security in the Gulf countries and in the region, showed skepticism over the Arab Spring, saying that it turned into “autumn” and has led to chaos citing Egypt as an example.Hmmmm.......Wait till it turns in to 'Nuclear Winter'.Read the full story here.
video - Egyptian Cleric Sallah Sultan, Founder of the Ohio-Based American Center for Islamic Research: War with the US - Why Not? Allah Is on Our Side, Will Obliterate America
Sallah Sultan: There are media outlets aimed at distracting our young boys and girls with all kinds of… All of this is mentioned in The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Nothing is new.
Interviewer: Ah, what happens is mentioned there…
Sallah Sultan: It is a plot to completely distract the youth of our nation from the cause [of Palestine] by applying pressure on these young people through various means – through sex, drugs, play, and games on the Internet. By the grace of Allah, we broke the backs of Hosni Mubarak and his henchmen. Can we not do the same with regard to this gang of cowardly sons of Zion? Allah said about them: "They will not fight you, save from fortified cities or from behind walls."
Interviewer: But if we fight Israel, we would be fighting the US as well…
Sallah Sultan: Why not? Indeed, we will fight Israel and all those who are behind it. Even if Europe in its entirety is behind it… The people of Gaza are wretched, but they are lions. They are real men. Did they not humiliate the US, Europe, and anybody who ever gave weapons, money, and aid to the Zionist entity? They entered Gaza in order to defeat it, but they were defeated themselves. Wasn't Israel defeated in Lebanon and vanquished in Gaza?
Sallah Sultan: Allah is present in this equation, and He is capable of obliterating America and any other oppressor. This is a divine law.
In a lecture in Dallas, America, I was explaining the Shu'ara chapter of the Koran, and I said: Allah destroyed the people in Noah's time for the corruption of their faith, the people of Lot for the corruption of their morality, Jethro's people for the corruption of their economy, the people of Thamud for the corruption of their industry, and Pharaoh's people for the corruption of their politics, so what can we expect when all these forms of corruption are manifest in America? He will deliver a mortal blow at a time when no one expects it.Source Memri.
Saudi Columnist Princess Basma bint Saud bin Abd Al-Aziz Aal Saud Speaks Out against Islamic Extremism: This Is Not What the People Hoped to Achieve through Revolutions
Princess Basma bint Saud bin Abd Al-Aziz Aal Saud: The question that I ask myself now is how come the Islamist movement has arisen in all our countries. It is a very strange phenomenon that the Islamic movement is the only one capable of…
Interviewer: But this phenomenon is logical, isn't it?
Princess Basma bint Saud bin Abd Al-Aziz Aal Saud: In what way?
Interviewer: Because the Islamist opposition was the official, organized against the former regimes. When these regimes fell, along came the ready-made opposition. That was the case regarding the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, in Tunisia, and in Morocco [sic].
Princess Basma bint Saud bin Abd Al-Aziz Aal Saud: True, but is this what the citizen really wants? That is the question. What the citizens hope to achieve through the revolutions is civil power – the power of the individual, of the people, and of democracy. That is what we are hearing – that these revolutions brought democracy, so that the people would have a voice.
Does the people really want the Islamist movement in its present form, in which it spreads terror throughout the world with its extremism? This is what we are seeing today in the websites and messages of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, in Algeria, in Tunisia, in Morocco, and even in Jordan today.
The messages we are hearing are not at all reassuring, because they do not belong to moderate Islam. They are a call to extremist Islam, which has nothing to do with [true] Islam. The Prophet Muhammad brought moderation. Other religions, which exited prior to Islam, became extremist to a terrifying degree. That was why the Prophet of the Islamic nation came – in order to convey a moderate monotheistic message.
Is what we are seeing today a moderate Islam? What we are seeing and hearing today about the agendas of the Salafis, the Islamists, and the Enlightened – are they moderate? In my personal opinion, they are not moderate. Instead, they are turning toward religious extremism, which suppress freedom of any kind, even if it is called by another name. Source Memri.
'US must assure Israel it'll use might to stop Iran'.(JP).The United States must assure Israel that if it delays any military moves against Iran's nuclear program, Washington will use its own might to stop Tehran from weaponizing its nuclear program, former IDF intelligence chief Amos Yadlin wrote Thursday.
US President Barack Obama must "shift the Israeli defense establishment's thinking from a focus on the 'zone of immunity' to a 'zone of trust'" Yadlin wrote in a New York Times op-ed.
Last month, Defense Minister Ehud Barak alluded to Israel's "red line," when it might feel the need to attack Iran, describing that point as when Iran reaches a "zone of immunity" from an effective Israeli attack."What is needed is an ironclad American assurance that if Israel refrains from acting in its own window of opportunity" to stop Iran's nuclear program, it will act itself to stop it.
If Obama does not give Israeli leaders those assurances, Yadlin warned in the New York Times, Israeli leaders "may well choose to act while they still can."The op-ed by the former IDF intelligence chief and Air Force pilot, who participated in the Israeli strike on Iraq's nuclear program in 1981, comes days ahead of a visit by Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to Washington. Scheduled talks between Netanyahu and US President Barack Obama were expected to focus on Iran, and especially on closing gaps between the two countries' definition of what constitutes a "red line" for Iran's nuclear program.
Yadlin also indicated that Israel's capability to effectively strike Iran should not be underestimated. Asserting that the United States was taken by surprise by Jerusalem's ability to destroy Iraq's Osirak reactor in 1981, he said it would be a mistake to once again underestimate the IDF's ingenuity.
Nonetheless, he admitted that the United States has military resources and technologies that allow it more freedom of action and the ability to carry out a deeper and more extensive campaign against Iran than Israel. Those capabilities, Yadlin explained, give Washington the luxury of more time to give sanctions and non-military measures a longer chance to become effective in stopping Iran's nuclear program.Hmmmm.......He doesn't even impose the full sanctions Congress Approved.....Good luck with that.Read the full story here.
Egypt - Freedom and Justice party Tourism Boosting Initiative Major Success.(IW).Positive feedback continued pouring in, on the Freedom and Justice Party (FJP) program regarding tourism which was presented by Dr. Tarek Wafik, general supervisor of the FJP Tourism Committee, during 'The Future of Tourism in Egypt' conference which was organized under the auspices of the Egyptian Ministry of Tourism, attended by representatives from international tourism agencies and experts.
The party's program is focused on encouraging private sector and foreign investment in tourism, promoting and marketing tourism products and services in the Arab region and worldwide, in addition to stimulating domestic tourism.
According to Tarek Shalabi, Vice Chairman of Marsa Alam Investment and Tourism Association (MAITA), the FJP's program astounded all attendees.
Shalabi asserted that the FJP’s message was very clear and transparent, and genuinely prioritized tourism investment, placing right at the top of its agenda, for the near future, by promoting all types of tourism in Egypt without exception.Shalabi explained that the FJP’s clear vision allayed all former fears of foreign tour organizers regarding Egypt and its future in the tourism industry, who promised to relay this reassuring message abroad.
Further, Shalabi highlighted the importance of all other political parties and state institutions joining hands with the FJP in order to guarantee the success of its program.
He expressed hope that Egypt's economy will be revived and public debt paid off within 6 months only, once tourism has recovered.
On a further note, Mohamed El-Sawy, Chairman of the PA’s Culture, Information and Tourism Committee, confirmed that the PA is preparing a ‘Tourism Document’ in all living languages of the world, announcing the Egyptian people's stance on tourism, and their commitment to respecting visitors of all faiths, and protecting human rights.
He called on all ministries and the government to support the tourism industry.
One of the delightful outcomes of the conference was the promise by leading tourism companies such as Thomas Cook and Tui Travel to put Egypt back in their tourist itineraries as soon as possible, praising the FJP’s program and expressing hope that it would improve Egyptian Tourism in a record time, if the country implemented the FJP program, which shows respect and appreciation for foreign tourists and promotes all types of tourism in Egypt.Hmmmm........Do their brochures mention 'Groping' included in the price?Read the full story here.
Turkish Women’s Shelter Foundation claims new Bill will not protect women.(HD).The Mor Çatı (Purple Roof) Women’s Shelter Foundation has said the new draft bill designed to prevent domestic violence is not capable of protecting women, but will only protect “women’s place within the family.”
“The draft bill doesn’t aim to protect women, it only aims to protect the traditional status of women, while five women are murdered by men related to them every day,” volunteer Özlem Özkan said at a press conference organized by the Mor Çatı Women’s Foundation. Lack of shelters:
Özkan said Mor Çatı provided support to 850 women who had been subjected to domestic violence between April 2010 and December 2011.
She went on to say that even though there was an article in the law requiring local administrations to provide women’s shelters, there were still not enough shelters available for women.“Most of the women affected lack social security and they are not economically independent. This makes it much more difficult for them to get out of violent environments,” Özkan said.
She also said that one of the biggest reasons for continuing domestic violence was the attitude of policemen, judges, prosecutors, and social service workers, who cling to a mentality that protects men rather than women. “Public officials generally have the sexist mentality which is common in society. This is why they question women who come to the police station or prosecutor with domestic violence complaints. These public officials have to be educated about domestic violence,” Özkan said.
Özkan added that 236 women’s associations had come together to prepare a draft for the new domestic violence law, but their input was completely ignored by the Family and Social Policies Ministry.Hmmmmmm...........According to official numbers of the General Police Directorate (EGM), 78,488 incidents of domestic violence were registered in the 19 months between February 2010 and August 2011. Considering that these are the incidents that were officially reported, it means that domestic violence in Turkish families happened once every ten minutes.Read the full story here.
Rumors that three Israeli soldiers would be stationed at the NATO radar site in Kürecik Stirr up protests.
Rumors that three Israeli soldiers would be stationed at the NATO radar site in Kürecik Stirr up protests.(HD).A total of 50 U.S. soldiers have arrived at a new NATO radar defense site in the village of Kürecik in the eastern province of Malatya.The soldiers are currently being housed in hotels, but will move to a 150-apartment residential complex that will be built for them near the radar site. The radar defense site is located in Kürecik, a town 64 kilometers from Malatya’s provincial center.
The main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP) Malatya provincial head, Enver Kiraz, said the government was expected to announce the total number of U.S. soldiers that would be stationed at the site. “As local residents, it is our right to know the number of troops that will be stationed here.” He also said there were rumors circulating that three Israeli soldiers would be stationed at the radar site and would allegedly make key decisions there.
“Malatya’s security is in danger. We do not want this radar or U.S. troops here. It is not our job to protect Israel,” Kiraz said.
The opposition Felicity Party’s Malatya provincial head, Mehmet Asiltürk, also criticized the establishment of the radar site in Turkey, saying, “Turkey is being used to protect Israel.” Asiltürk said his party would investigate whether any Israeli soldiers would actually be stationed at the radar site. The site is currently being protected by the 2nd Military Command of the Turkish Army.The
50 US soldiers will be responsible for internal security at the Kürecik radar base.Hmmm.....Sounds like it will be surely needed with such 'allies'.Read the full story here.
U.S. warns against military action on Iran, imposes no new sanctions on Tehran.(AA).The White House warned on Wednesday that any military action against the Islamic Republic would create “greater instability” that could threaten the safety of Americans in Afghanistan and Iraq.
The warning came days before a planned March 5 meeting between President Barack Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.“Any military action in that region threatens greater instability in the region,” said White House spokesman Jay Carney.
Israel has given mixed messages in recent weeks on the possibility it might attack Iran to halt its controversial nuclear development program.Iran “borders both Afghanistan and Iraq,” Carney said during his daily press briefing. “We have civilian personnel in Iraq. We have military personnel as well as civilians in Afghanistan.”
So far, the United States has no conclusive evidence the Iranians are building a nuclear weapon, he said.The Obama administration is advocating for a political solution to the crisis that includes International Atomic Energy Agency monitoring of Iran’s nuclear program.“We continue to ratchet up the pressure on Tehran,” Carney said. “And I think it’s important to note that, while Tehran does not and has not lived up to its international obligations... we do have visibility into their programs.”
The Iranian government insists it is developing nuclear energy only for peaceful purposes, such as electrical generation and cancer treatment. The Iranians deny they plan to make nuclear weapons.The Israeli government has been vocal in contesting Iran’s claims that it seeks only peaceful use of nuclear energy.Carney said the lack of evidence of Iranian nuclear weapons has given the United States the “time and latitude to continue the policy we have applied since the president took office.”
The policy has focused on isolating Iran, such as through economic sanctions, until its government gives up its nuclear program.So far, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has said he plans to continue his country’s nuclear program. However, he has sent negotiators to discuss the issue with Western countries.
Iran’s nuclear program will be the “main topic” of discussion when Obama and Netanyahu meet at the White House Monday, according to the Israeli prime minister.A congressional deadline for the Obama administration to begin enforcing new financial penalties on foreign firms that do business with Iran passed Wednesday with no fresh action from Washington.
While some congressional authors of a bill Obama signed December 31 expected the administration to announce new punishments on foreign banks, the Treasury Department said it did not have the authority to take that step now.
Some in Washington expected Obama to strengthen his position ahead of the high-stakes meeting by announcing fresh economic penalties that went into effect Wednesday. The penalties were included in a law Obama signed on December 31.
But the administration chose not to immediately take action, and officials disagreed about when they could. A Treasury official said the administration has been identifying financial institutions that may be involved with transactions that could be sanctioned so they would be prepared to act following the deadline.A senior Senate aide involved in Iran sanctions said that by not announcing new penalties Wednesday, the administration had failed to comply with the law as it was intended.
Both officials requested anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly.The legislation said that “beginning on the date that is 60 days after the date of the enactment of this act, the president shall prohibit” any privately owned foreign financial institutions from engaging in significant non-oil transactions with Iran’s Central Bank. Oil sanctions would be added later under the same legislation.Hmmmm......Lets see the Obama Administration and the Muslim brotherhood gets Syria from Russia and Russia gets a get out of jail card for Iran?Read the full story here.
Two Bibles 'containing terror codes' found hidden in Bin Laden compound as it is demolished.(DM).Pakistani security officials have found two copies of the Bible at the house where Al-Qaeda chief Osama Bin Laden was killed.
The Christian holy books were discovered this week when demolition crews were sent in to tear down the compound in Abbottabad.
They were so well hidden that security personnel had previously overlooked them.It is thought the English-print editions contain coded clues to future terror attacks, The Sun reported.
Pakistan's ISI security service also found two radio sets in a final sweep of the compound before demolition.
The English-language Bibles - a bizarre find in the home of the world's most famous Islamic fundamentalist - contained pages that are folded-over and highlighted texts.
An ISI commanding officer told The Sun: 'The Bibles were in English and we cannot be sure why they were there. These copies were found as we checked the rooms for the final time before demolishing the building.
'The radios are in working condition and will be given with the Bibles to the investigators. Some pages were folded and we will see later what was of most interest to Bin Laden.
'Maybe he was looking for teachings of jihad.'
Bin Laden was killed at the compound by U.S. Navy SEALs last May after the biggest manhunt in history.On Tuesday, reports that bin Laden had been in contact with members of Pakistan’s spy agency, according to secret emails published by Wikileaks, had been rebuffed by a Pakistani military spokesman.
An email, which was sent by an analyst at a global intelligence firm, Stratfor, suggested that up to 12 officials in Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) had known of the al-Qaeda leader’s hideout
But spokesman for the army, General Athar Abbas, said the allegations surrounding the ISI were baseless. “They are nonsense and not credible,”Hmmm.....Let me guess the highlighted passage was:" Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword." ~ Matt 26:52.Read the full story here, more here.
Moscow Seeking to Lift All Anti-Iran Sanctions.(Fars).Tehran - A high-ranking Russian diplomat said that Moscow is seeking to remove all the UN Security Council and the West's unilateral sanctions against Iran.
Russian Consul-General in Iran's Northern City of Rasht Maxim Baranov said that a relevant proposal is going to be put forward by Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin in an editorial in Moszkowski Novosti next Monday.
As regards the details of the article, Baranov said that the Russian premier will offer a removal of all sanctions against Iran in return for the International Atomic Energy Agency's tight control over all Iranian nuclear activities.
Putin, he said, will also caution the world, and specially the West, against the catastrophic outcomes of any possible military attack against Iran. "I am sure that the issue can be resolved through peaceful means and we (Russia) will propose that Tehran's right to continue peaceful nuclear program be accepted," Putin will say in his Monday article, according to Baranov.
But all these should take place in return for the IAEA's tight control over Iran's nuclear program, Baranov said. "All the existing sanctions against Iran, including unilateral sanctions, should be lifted and in return all Iran's nuclear activities should come under the assured and all-out control of the IAEA (over Iran's nuclear program)," Baranov added, elaborating on Putin's proposal.
Despite the rules enshrined in the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) entitling every member state, including Iran, to the right of uranium enrichment, Tehran is now under four rounds of UN Security Council sanctions for turning down West's calls to give up its right of uranium enrichment.
Tehran has dismissed West's demands as politically tainted and illogical, stressing that sanctions and pressures merely consolidate Iranians' national resolve to continue the path.
All Iranian nuclear activities, notably uranium enrichment at Natanz and Fordo, are under the full supervision and monitoring of the International Atomic Energy Agency. Russian officials have on various occasions reiterated their country's strong opposition to fresh sanctions against Iran, and urged a negotiated end to the differences between Iran and the West. Read the full story here.
Ossuaries in first century Jerusalem tomb could be a direct link to Jesus.(GM)(TJD)..A team of international scholars claims to have found the first archaeological evidence dating from around the time Jesus lived, and which could be linked directly to his earliest followers.
Exploring a previously unexcavated tomb three kilometres south of Jerusalem, the researchers discovered burial boxes, or ossuaries, decorated with early Christian iconography.
Dropping a flexible, robotic camera into the cave, they found two limestone ossuaries decorated with carvings of a large fish that appears to be swallowing a man.
Until now, the earliest known Christian art, located in catacombs beneath the city of Rome and in Coptic caves in the Egyptian desert, dates from the late third or early fourth century AD.
The majority of the Rome images depict the Biblical story of Jonah and the whale, presumably because the term ‘the sign of Jonah’ is used by Jesus in the gospels of Matthew and Luke.
The fish image was adopted by Jesus’ disciples to signal a belief in resurrection.
They believed that Jesus, like the prophet Jonah in the Biblical account, was miraculously reborn after three days.
The new discovery, the scholars said, would appear to move the evidentiary clock back by at least 200 years if, as the scholars suggest, they date from before 70 AD, when Jerusalem was destroyed by the Romans.
On another box in the tomb they found a Greek inscription which, translated, calls on God or Jehovah to rise up or to raise up, an apparent reference to resurrection.
The research team included Israeli archaeologist Rami Arav, of the University of Nebraska, and James Tabor, chair of the department of religious studies at the University of North Carolina.Read the full story here.
Update on Previous Post - Egypt lifts travel ban on pro-democracy workers.(BM).Egypt on Wednesday lifted a travel ban preventing 19 American and two German pro-democracy activists currently on trial in Cairo from leaving the country, judicial sources told dpa.
“Egypt’s general prosecutor ordered the cancelling of the travel ban on all activists,” the source said.A total of 43 activists are facing charges of receiving illegal foreign funding, meddling in politics and operating in Egypt without licenses. The non-governmental organizations involved include Germany’s Konrad Adenauer Foundation and the Washington-based International Republican Institute (IRI).Only seven of the US nationals were still in Egypt, where they have sought refuge at the American embassy in Cairo.It was not immediately clear when any of the activists involved in the case would leave the country.
US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton told lawmakers in Washington that the US had not yet received confirmation that the travel ban had been lifted, but was working with Egyptian authorities on the matter.The move came just hours after the panel of judges hearing the trial resigned from the case.
Presiding Judge Mohamed Shukri did not give a reason for his decision to request the appointment of a new panel, according to local television reports.However, experts noted that in Egypt judges can resign while hearing a case if they conclude that prevailing circumstances are not conducive to a fair trial.Shukri’s decision was made after Egyptian authorities reportedly asked him to drop the travel ban on the 43 defendants, according to local media reports, citing unnamed sources.
The case has caused a rift between Egypt and Western powers, with the United States threatening to withhold 1.3 billion dollars in annual military aid to Egypt, its key Arab ally, if the activists were put on trial.On Tuesday, Clinton appeared to anticipate events by saying Washington and Cairo were moving toward a resolution “very soon.”
The trial opened in a Cairo criminal court on Sunday and was adjourned to April 26 after the defence asked for more time to prepare.Read the full story here.
Egypt Demands Prisoner Swap: Terrorist Detainees for NGO Civilians.(BP).
Are the bitter fruits of Senator John McCain’s “diligent diplomacy” a humiliating prisoner “exchange”—innocent US NGO workers, for hardened jihadists, including the notorious “Blind Sheikh” Umar ‘Abd-al-Rahman, who orchestrated the murderous 1993 World Trade Center bombing?
My colleague at Translating Jihad has fully translated an Arabic Al-Arabiya story entitled (pathognomonically), “ ‘Umar ‘Abd-al-Rahman at Forefront of Egyptian-American Prisoner Exchange Deal.”
The Egyptian government began taking steps to respond with the American offer to release 50 Egyptians being held in American prisons–including Shaykh ‘Umar ‘Abd-al-Rahman—in exchange for the release of 19 Americans accused in the case of foreign funding of civil society organizations. This is according to what was confirmed by Major General Muhammad Hani Zahir, an expert in military studies and international counterterrorism.Zahir in comments to the newspaper ‘al-Masriyun’ said it was necessary for Egypt to exploit America’s weak position, especially after condemning its citizens in cases affecting Egyptian sovereignty over its territory. He added that Egypt should not permit this exchange to take place unless the American administration agrees to release more than 500 Egyptians being held in American prisons, of whom the Egyptian foreign ministry knows nothing.If the crux of this story is accurate, it will represent a modern variant of capitulation to the anti-modern dictates of jihad warfare. Jihad, this ancient, but vibrant Islamic institution grounded upon hatred of the non-Muslim infidel, has long used captured infidels—including, prominently, non-combatants seized as “booty” during endless, unprovoked incursions into the lands of the infidel—to ransom in exchange for captured murderous jihadists.Read the full story here.
Goodbye, First Amendment: 'Trespass Bill' will make protest illegal.(RT).
Just when you thought the government couldn’t ruin the First Amendment any further: The House of Representatives approved a bill on Monday that outlaws protests in instances where some government officials are nearby, whether or not you even know it.
The US House of Representatives voted 388-to-3 in favor of H.R. 347 late Monday, a bill which is being dubbed the Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011.
In the bill, Congress officially makes it illegal to trespass on the grounds of the White House, which, on the surface, seems not just harmless and necessary, but somewhat shocking that such a rule isn’t already on the books. The wording in the bill, however, extends to allow the government to go after much more than tourists that transverse the wrought iron White House fence.
Under the act, the government is also given the power to bring charges against Americans engaged in political protest anywhere in the country.
Under current law, White House trespassers are prosecuted under a local ordinance, a Washington, DC legislation that can bring misdemeanor charges for anyone trying to get close to the president without authorization. Under H.R. 347, a federal law will formally be applied to such instances, but will also allow the government to bring charges to protesters, demonstrators and activists at political events and other outings across America.
The new legislation allows prosecutors to charge anyone who enters a building without permission or with the intent to disrupt a government function with a federal offense if Secret Service is on the scene, but the law stretches to include not just the president’s palatial Pennsylvania Avenue home. Under the law, any building or grounds where the president is visiting — even temporarily — is covered, as is any building or grounds “restricted in conjunction with an event designated as a special event of national significance."
Covered under the bill is any person protected by the Secret Service. Although such protection isn’t extended to just everybody, making it a federal offense to even accidently disrupt an event attended by a person with such status essentially crushes whatever currently remains of the right to assemble and peacefully protest. Hours after the act passed, presidential candidate Rick Santorum was granted Secret Service protection. For the American protester, this indeed means that glitter-bombing the former Pennsylvania senator is officially a very big no-no, but it doesn’t stop with just him. Santorum’s coverage under the Secret Service began on Tuesday, but fellow GOP hopeful Mitt Romney has already been receiving such security. A campaign aide who asked not to be identified confirmed last week to CBS News that former House Speaker Newt Gingrich has sought Secret Service protection as well. Even former contender Herman Cain received the armed protection treatment when he was still in the running for the Republican Party nod.
In the text of the act, the law is allowed to be used against anyone who knowingly enters or remains in a restricted building or grounds without lawful authority to do so, but those grounds are considered any area where someone — rather it’s President Obama, Senator Santorum or Governor Romney — will be temporarily visiting, whether or not the public is even made aware. Entering such a facility is thus outlawed, as is disrupting the orderly conduct of “official functions,” engaging in disorderly conduct “within such proximity to” the event or acting violent to anyone, anywhere near the premises. Under that verbiage, that means a peaceful protest outside a candidate’s concession speech would be a federal offense, but those occurrences covered as special event of national significance don’t just stop there, either. And neither does the list of covered persons that receive protection. Outside of the current presidential race, the Secret Service is responsible for guarding an array of politicians, even those from outside America. George W Bush is granted protection until ten years after his administration ended, or 2019, and every living president before him is eligible for life-time, federally funded coverage. Visiting heads of state are extended an offer too, and the events sanctioned as those of national significance — a decision that is left up to the US Department of Homeland Security — extends to more than the obvious. While presidential inaugurations and meeting of foreign dignitaries are awarded the title, nearly three dozen events in all have been considered a National Special Security Event (NSSE) since the term was created under President Clinton. Among past events on the DHS-sanctioned NSSE list are Super Bowl XXXVI, the funerals of Ronald Reagan and Gerald Ford, most State of the Union addresses and the 2008 Democratic and Republican National Conventions. With Secret Service protection awarded to visiting dignitaries, this also means, for instance, that the federal government could consider a demonstration against any foreign president on American soil as a violation of federal law, as long as it could be considered disruptive to whatever function is occurring. When thousands of protesters are expected to descend on Chicago this spring for the 2012 G8 and NATO summits, they will also be approaching the grounds of a National Special Security Event. That means disruptive activity, to whichever court has to consider it, will be a federal offense under the act. And don’t forget if you intend on fighting such charges, you might not be able to rely on evidence of your own. In the state of Illinois, videotaping the police, under current law, brings criminals charges. Don’t fret. It’s not like the country will really try to enforce it — right? On the bright side, does this mean that the law could apply to law enforcement officers reprimanded for using excessive force on protesters at political events? Probably. Of course, some fear that the act is being created just to keep those demonstrations from ever occuring, and given the vague language on par with the loose definition of a “terrorist” under the NDAA, if passed this act is expected to do a lot more harm to the First Amendment than good. United States Representative Justin Amash (MI-03) was one of only three lawmakers to vote against the act when it appeared in the House late Monday. Explaining his take on the act through his official Facebook account on Tuesday, Rep. Amash writes, “The bill expands current law to make it a crime to enter or remain in an area where an official is visiting even if the person does not know it's illegal to be in that area and has no reason to suspect it's illegal.”
“Some government officials may need extraordinary protection to ensure their safety. But criminalizing legitimate First Amendment activity — even if that activity is annoying to those government officials — violates our rights,” adds the representative. Now that the act has overwhelmingly made it through the House, the next set of hands to sift through its pages could very well be President Barack Obama; the US Senate had already passed the bill back on February 6. Less than two months ago, the president approved the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012, essentially suspending habeas corpus from American citizens. Could the next order out of the Executive Branch be revoking some of the Bill of Rights? Only if you consider the part about being able to assemble a staple of the First Amendment, really. Don’t worry, though. Obama was, after all, a constitutional law professor. When he signed the NDAA on December 31, he accompanied his signature with a signing statement that let Americans know that, just because he authorized the indefinite detention of Americans didn’t mean he thought it was right. Should President Obama suspend the right to assemble, Americans might expect another apology to accompany it in which the commander-in-chief condemns the very act he authorizes. If you disagree with such a decision, however, don’t take it to the White House. Sixteen-hundred Pennsylvania Avenue and the vicinity is, of course, covered under this act.It’s not just the president who would be spared from protesters, either. "Dictatorship naturally arises out of democracy, and the most aggravated form of tyranny and slavery out of the most extreme liberty". ~ Plato.Read the full story here.