Protesters took to the streets across Turkey this week, after audio recordings purportedly of Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan ordering his son to dispose of vast amounts of cash amid a graft probe surfaced and went viral on the Internet. Thousands of people demonstrated in 11 cities, including Ankara and Istanbul (Constantinople), shouting anti-government and anti-Erdogan slogans, according to China’s Xinhua news agency. Police in the capital fired tear gas and water cannons to disperse the crowd that chanted, “The government resigns” and “Thief Erdogan.”
In Istanbul, protests were reportedly held at 10 locations, with the biggest demonstration in the district of Kadikoy, where some 5,000 people marched to the district center, carrying banners reading, “Where are the thieves?” and “You will answer to the people.”
As is usual in this part of the globe, Turkey's prime minister on Tuesday accused Israel of being behind the ouster of Egypt's Islamist President Mohammed Morsi, offering as the only evidence for his claim a statement by a Jewish French intellectual during a meeting with an Israeli official, while both Israel and the US State Department reject the claim as baseless and unsubstantiated, also usual in these other two sectors.
In his nationally televised speech, Erdogan also took a swipe at Muslim nations, accusing them of betraying Egypt by supporting the country's military-backed new leaders.
Protests against Erdogan were also held in the cities of Izmir, Antalya, Antakya, Samsun, Trabzon, Eskisehir, Kocaeli, Bursa and Canakkale, according to Xinhua. Clashes between riot police and the crowds were reported in Istanbul, Bursa and Eskisehir.
A chief prosecutor’s office on Tuesday initiated an investigation into the audio recordings in question, Turkish state-run media reported, as opposition parties demanded that the government resign. Erdogan met with Turkey’s intelligence chief shortly after voice recordings of two peoplealleged to be Erdogan and his soncirculated on the Internet on Monday.
As to be expected, the Turkish leader has drawn parallel between Morsi's ouster and a series of anti-government protests in Turkey in June that he has blamed on an international conspiracy to topple his democratically elected government albeit through illegal means, for Erdogan has been slowly rolling back the secular state to allow Islam's theocratic forces to assert themselves against the opposition of the military. This regress to the pre-Ataturkian mindset is causing much consternation among a large population of secular Turks and the West in the run-up to Turkey having its best chance at joining the EU.
Turkey should never be allowed to join the EU. And yes, the West should hasten Erdogan's ouster by diplomatic means if no other. Until Islamic nations recognize and begin admitting the error of their ways, improving the lives of their own people, ceasing hostilities against other faiths, and pushing for a more secularized version of their former selves, the factions of warcivilization against civilizationwill only heat up.
"Now Jesus don't like killin' No matter what the reason's for, And your flag decal won't get you Into Heaven any more." John Prine
"Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. Yeshua the Nazarene
I have been made victorious by terror!" Mohammed
A CIVILIAN EMPLOYEE at the Camp Lejeune Marine Base in North Carolina has won his battle to display anti-Islamic decals on his van while driving on the base.
Jesse Nieto, whose son was among 16 sailors killed in the 2000 terror attack against the USS Cole, had used the windows of his car as a place of tribute to his son. He displayed a gold star (a symbol of death in combat), a combat action ribbon, and the message: “Remember the Cole, 12 Oct. 2000.”
But Mr. Nieto also used his vehicle to express his opinion of those who killed his son. Decals proclaimed: “Islam = Terrorism,” “We Died, They Rejoiced,” and a picture of the US flag with the words: “Disgrace My Countries [sic] Flag And I Will [defecate] On Your Quran.”
He also displayed a decal picture of Calvin (from the Calvin and Hobbes cartoon) urinating on a cartoon illustration of the Prophet Mohammed. The Mohammed illustration was a re-creation of one of the cartoons that provoked Muslim protests against a Danish newspaper and sparked an assassination plot against the cartoonist.
After seven years with these messages on his car, someone on the base complained. Nieto was ordered to remove them. He removed the most offensive decals, but was later cited again for violating a base traffic regulation that prohibits the display of “extremist, indecent, sexist, or racist messages” on motor vehicles.
Nieto, a Marine combat veteran, decided to fight back. In a lawsuit filed in federal court in North Carolina he claimed a First Amendment free speech right to express his opinion of Islam and Islamic terrorists.
Government lawyers countered that a military base is not an open public forum like a town hall meeting or a public park. The base commander is entitled to enact and enforce reasonable restrictions on speech when open debate or protests might disrupt the military’s mission, they argued.
Nieto’s lawyer, Robert Muise of the Thomas More Law Center, countered that government restrictions of speech must be viewpoint neutral and not just aimed at silencing speech critical of Islam. He argued that the base regulation would not ban decals praising Islam, only those critical of Islam. Last week, Senior US District Judge Malcolm Howard ruled for Nieto. He said the base regulation was not being enforced in a neutral manner and was therefore unconstitutional as applied to Nieto.
“The fact that [Nieto’s] message may be extremely offensive to some is not a sufficient basis for banning [his] decals,” Judge Howard wrote.
“While the military may have greater leeway in restricting offensive material in furtherance of securing order and discipline among its troops,” he said, “it may not do so in a manner that allows one message while prohibiting the messages of those who can reasonably be expected to respond.”
To Nieto, the fight was about more than just protecting free speech, Muise said. “Here is a Marine dad who lost his son to terrorists,” the lawyer said. “It is not just the First Amendment, for him it is more. For him it is the way he is mourning the loss of his son.”
Muise said the case was a result of “political correctness run amok” on a military base. “What is refreshing, is that the judge saw through this political correctness nonsense and applied the law straight up,” he said.
Reprinted with relish from the April 7, 2010, online issue of the Christian Scientist Monitor. Author is Warren Richey.
And a special thanks to the continuing good work emanating from the Thomas Moore Center in its legal fight and push back for free speech against the CAIR-backed Islamicists who seek to destroy the West from within.
Judge Malcolm Howard is also to be commended for his perceptive decision in the Nieto case. Seems simple, but in this poisonous PC multiculturalist environment, even the simple is being turned on its head in order to weaken in the struggle against the advancing enemies of statism and Islam. We must turn back the beast.
As plain as day. But still our military intelligence corps stumbles all over itself trying to downplay the obvious as if liberalism is teh cure for what ails us. Such immense self-loathing in the broad and toothy grin of an army of jihadists so cocksure of its own righteous endeavors, that every makeshift soldier we capture in vain usually sings chapter and verse like a canary before, during, and after an attack, giving up precisely the reason why they are attacking, and still we do not believe.
Or they invent one on the spot from the latest headlines, knowing how much we the enemy will grieve over our own successes, knowing gleefully by heart the Qu'ran gives them carte blanche to kill the infidels just as a matter of manifest destiny as the West remains deaf, dumb, and moronic in dealing with its adversaries, like a drunken but broken empire already on its knees...
This fellow apparently was a slow learner.
MEMPHISA Tennessee man accused of killing a US soldier outside a Little Rock, Arkansas military recruiting station last year has asked a judge to change his plea to guilty, claiming for the first time that he is affiliated with a Yemen-based affiliate of Al Qaeda.
In a letter to the judge presiding over his case, the accused killer, Abdulhakim Muhammad, calls himself a soldier in Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula and calls the shooting “a Jihadi Attack” in retribution for the killing of Muslims by American troops.
“I wasn’t insane or post traumatic nor was I forced to do this Act,” Mr. Muhammad said in a two-page, hand-printed note in pencil. The attack, which he said did not go as planned, was “justified according to Islamic Laws and the Islamic Religion. Jihadto fight those who wage war on Islam and Muslims.”
It remains unclear whether Mr. Muhammad really has ties to Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, which President Obama has said is behind the attempted Christmas Day bombing of an American plane by a Nigerian man. But if evidence emerges that his claim is true, it will give the June 1, 2009, shooting in Little Rock new significance at a time when Yemen is being more closely scrutinized as a source of terrorist plots against the United States.
Mr. Muhammad, 24, a Muslim convert from Memphis, spent about 16 months in Yemen starting in the fall of 2007, ostensibly teaching English and learning Arabic. During that time, he married a woman from south Yemen. But he was also imprisoned for several months because he overstayed his visa and was holding a fraudulent Somali passport, the Yemen government said.
Under pressure from the United States government, Yemen deported Mr. Muhammad in late January 2009. But just four months after his return, Mr. Muhammad used a semiautomatic rifle to gun down two soldiersPvt. William A. Long and Pvt. Quinton Ezeagwulawhile they were standing outside a military recruiting station in Little Rock, killing Private Long and wounding Private Ezeagwula.
LET US ENGAGE IN A SIMPLE thought experiment (an adaptation):
A young man erupts in rampage, shooting over 100 rounds into a crowded reception center on a military base, killing over a dozen and wounding many more. Afterwards, it is learned that the shooter was a soldier himself, a fairly high ranking officer in fact. It is also discovered that he has long held Nazi sympathies, and has posted on Neo-Nazi websites. Journalists uncover evidence that he had been distributing Nazi leaflets and copies of "Mein Kampf" on the morning of the attack. When the press finally gets around to interviewing survivors of the incident, they confrim that the shooter shouted "Heil Hitler" as he opened fire.
Given this forensic data would there be any question about whether or not the shooter's actions were ideologically driven?
Would the reportage weave a narrative of his supposed victimization, or would it raise alarms at the presence of avowed Neo-Nazis in our miltary ranks?
Would we be warned "not to jump to conclusions" by our political leaders, or would we be told to fear the threat of an oncoming wave of similar attackers spawned by right-wing radio?
Would his neighbors and superiors have been more likely to report his rantings to the authorities?
More than the attack of one lone jihadi, the answers to the above questions are the bullets that truly scare me...
Aside from the fact that when Muslims kill in the name of their religion and the first thing Muslims en masse (plus those useful idiots like Geraldo Rivera) then do is worry what sort of blowback will happen to them, while going "postal" to my knowledge has never been done in the name of Jesus, Yahweh, etc. These secular tragedies are not motivated by religious sentiments as are killings committed by Muslims the world over in the name of Islam. It's apples and oranges here.
As I've often opined, when the day comes again that Presbyterians, Lutherans, Buddhists, Jews or just about any group of believers but Muslims start committing heinous crimes in the name of their religion, I'll rethink matters on the ground. Until then, I observe only one religion out there that inspires people to kill in its name. You know which one. I know which one. Even many of the PC folks out there on the nip tuck know but won't even admit it to themselves. Stupid world.
WITH THE OH SO HISTORIC INAUGARATION now just a week away, many Americansfearful about the economy and uncertain about the futureare desperately pinning their hopes on Barack Obama and his "historic new New Deal."
But hopeful rhetoric, new programs with massive price tags, massive cuts to military budgets, and "green investments" are not the solution, says bestselling author and syndicated columnist Tony Blankley. The solution lies in us; the solution lies in American Grit.
American Grit, Blankley's controversial new book, calls for a bold new nationalismbased on hard work, sacrifice, and policies that put America firstto tackle the global and domestic challenges facing our nation. Blankley warns that Obama's socialist and environmentally sensitive agenda will weaken our embattled nation and invite new threats to America's economic and national security. Instead, Blankley prescribes his own compelling plan, calling upon the U.S. to implement:
A universal military draft to instill the unity, toughness, and cultural purpose lacking in America
An energy security policy where we become oil exporters and expand our diplomatic and economic options in the Middle East and around the world
A proactive, real-world communications strategy that showcases America as the true defender of freedom and opportunity
A new attitude that accepts the duties of citizenship instead of simply demanding more "rights" and "hand outs."
Yes, it's that simple. And with all due respect to Mr. Blankley, I prefer to call this a radical centrist approach to fixing America. Thanks Mr. Blankley for your contribution to this vital reckoning of our times. America definitely needs to toughen up, or those who are tough (Russia, China, Middle East, Israel) will soon enslave the weak and despondent self-obsessed people we have become.
"Some of us are wearing combat boots in a flip flop world..."IT SEEMS TO ME that since the United States, with at least one hand tied behind its back in politically correct restraints, is fighting an agitating people that lives and thinks in 7th century terms, US leadership needs to come to a reckoning that its forces need and should fight like it is still the 7th century. Or perhaps they might ask themselves how the Roman Empire would have handled this strategic flummoxing that Afghanistan and Iraq have been? Perhaps someone in high command should ponder the question of how might the Babylonians have handled these invasions, retaliatory or otherwise? These ancient powers would have broken the countries up into little manageable pieces. They would have wiped out any town that had insurgency problems.
Until the West is willing to take the extreme measures that are required to reach the objectivedefeating unconditionally the terrorist mindsetit must either leave or embrace what the military situation requires. Of course, the West will not wipe out villages. The PR would cause pandemonium within our own cultures, peacelovers that we are. And the West would certainly lose access to oil imports from unsympathetic nations and their allies.
So since the West can't win under these terms, it should get the hell out. Forget this nation-building agenda. Other Muslim countries don't give a damn about Muslims killing Muslims, only about the infidels killing Muslims. Set up a bloody puppet regime in Afghanistan and Iraq to restore temporary order, and leave, saving our own people much valuable human resources and treasure, leaving these impossibly backward tribes to hash out their own fates the only way they seem prepared to acceptunder the brutality of increasingly radicalizing Islamic despots.
When a military entity enters into war it enters to win, not play political games or try to assuage the enemy's hurt feelings or those of the spineless here at home. WWII was the last war the United States has entered where we were in it to win it. Since then every skirmish American troops have been put on the line has been a political endeavor. Primarily, this strategy has been the result of the liberal agenda which maintains the fantasy that all ideologies and cultural policies are equal, except when America itself can be blamed.
There hasn't been much discussion, almost nothing in fact, concerning the details of the what and the why of this whole war crisis America finds itself funding way beyond its means. The candidates speak of some nebulous threat without putting the pigment and the masterful stroke into the line drawing. In fact, this same understatement of facts and passions seems to be the same sorry course of much of the political and battlefield agenda being batted back and forth by the two major candidates, much to the chagrin of the American people. Don't We The People deserve better?
DEMOCRATS AKIMBO HAVE BEEN STUMBLING all over themselves in the last few days, trying to somehow stop the inevitable bump that McCain has already gotten from naming Sarah Palin as his VP pick. Unlike Obama’s VP choice, Joe Biden, who actually had him lose points in all of the relevant polling, Sarah Palin has given an initial 2 point bump for McCain, and today’s number will show an even better prospect. After trying to paint Palin as an “inexperienced” candidate, a clearly ridiculous attempt since their main candidate fares far worse than her in this aspect, they are now trimming down their attack to only one complaint: “She doesn’t have ANY National Security experience!”
Apparently, they had to get specific with their attacks when they realized that the majority of people still see her as better suited to be President than both Democratic candidates, all thanks to her 13 years of executive experience (no matter how minimal, since they have NONE). The question then is: Is this new line of attack and criticism accurate? NO!
It turns out that the attacks are NOT consistent with her record:
Alaska is the first line of defense in our missile interceptor defense system. The 49th Missile Defense Battalion of the Alaska National Guard is the unit that protects the entire nation from ballistic missile attacks. It’s on permanent active duty, unlike other Guard units.
As governor of Alaska, Palin is briefed on highly classified military issues, homeland security, and counterterrorism. Her exposure to classified material may rival even Biden’s. She’s also the commander in chief of the Alaska State Defense Force (ASDF), a federally recognized militia incorporated into Homeland Security’s counterterrorism plans.
"The reason that some of us will support Palin, even though we may not agree with all of her political positions, is that she is not an illegitimate candidate. She did not steal votes from her opponent. She did not smear us with charges of racism. She actually has a lot in common with some of us (mother, businesswoman, athlete, et cetera). And the man who will be her boss showed us that he is at least listening and aware of our presence. He didn’t flick us off his shoulder and tell us we weren’t needed. He didn’t play the abusive boyfriend and say “where else are you gonna go babe?”.
Palin is privy to military and intelligence secrets that are vital to the entire country’s defense. Given Alaska’s proximity to Russia, she may have security clearances we don’t even know about. According to the Washington Post, she first met with McCain in February, but nobody ever found out. This is a woman used to keeping secrets. She can be entrusted with our national security, because she already is.
In other words, her security clearance and experience in these matters exceeds even Mr. Biden’s, who parades himself as a “National Security Expert”. Of course, this by far surpasses Mr. Obama, who can only find out about National Security matters by watching CNN and/or by Googling the pertinent terms on his laptop.
Howard Dean and his cohorts want to remake the Democratic party by ending the New Deal coalition and courting small business and high-tech workers instead of labor. The strategy is to cultivate the West and jettison those bitter white working class losers in the South and places like Ohio and Pennsylvania:
There is an irony in the party of the downtrodden becoming the party of America’s economic winners, but in fact Democrats are doing better among voters in places that are prospering, like Colorado and New Mexico, and losing ground among voters in regions that are experiencing hard times, such as West Virginia or parts of Pennsylvania and Ohio. A Democratic turn toward the West would accelerate this trend.
A party of the Western megapolitans and resort communities would be a party less and less like the party of FDR, Truman, Kennedy, and LBJ. It would be more oriented to the haves than to the have-nots. It would rely more on educated voters. Its approach to social issues would be more matter-of-fact, and candidates would be less fearful of alienating the most reactionary evangelicals.
It would be more oriented toward small businesses and thus more skeptical of workplace regulations. It might become a party that puts more emphasis on achieving energy independence and combatting global warming than on providing universal health care and social justice.
“It’s a party that becomes more Hispanic, and less African-American,” Kenneth Baer, the co-founder of Democracy: A Journal of Ideas, said. “More oriented toward high-tech workers and less towards labor. It’s the end of the New Deal coalition.”
But let's keep it sane (even if there is some pernicious blood-sucking conspiracy bigger than GOD behind all this madness.) The Confluence states, "The reason that some of us will support Palin, even though we may not agree with all of her political positions, is that she is not an illegitimate candidate. She did not steal votes from her opponent. She did not smear us with charges of racism. She actually has a lot in common with some of us (mother, businesswoman, athlete, et cetera). And the man who will be her boss showed us that he is at least listening and aware of our presence. He didn’t flick us off his shoulder and tell us we weren’t needed. He didn’t play the abusive boyfriend and say “where else are you gonna go babe?”
Because it doesn't stop there.
Barack Obama contends that he is more experienced in executive matters than Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin because he has managed his presidential campaign for the past 18 months. Speaking on a cable news channel Monday night, the Democratic presidential nominee said he is better prepared to handle a disaster like Hurricane Gustav because of his pursuit of the White House.
“Well, my understanding is that Governor Palin’s town of Wasilla has, I think, 50 employees. We’ve got 2,500 in this campaign. I think their budget is maybe $12 million a year. You know, we have a budget of about three times that just for the month. So I think that our ability to manage large systems and to execute I think has been made clear over the last couple of years,” Obama said.
John McCain’s spokesman called the suggestion “laughable.”
“For Barack Obama to argue that he’s experienced enough to be president because he’s running for president is desperate circular logic and its laughable. It is a testament to Barack Obama’s inexperience and failing qualifications that he would stoop to passing off his candidacy as comparable to Governor Sarah Palin’s executive experience managing a budget of over $10 billion and more than 24,000 employees,” said spokesman Tucker Bounds.