This odd one came through Facebook. This “secret supporter” of mine is going to encourage Muslims to attack and stab me. Of course, the overheated rhetoric of Hamas-linked CAIR and other Islamic supremacists is directly responsible for this and a similar message Pamela Geller received from the same person.
Contrary to this message, we do not conceivably have responsibility for actions we don’t condone. The idea that we do share any responsibility at all for the actions of any nutjob who may oppose the Islamic supremacist mega-mosque at Ground Zero is actually a rather transparent attempt to marginalize and silence us. CAIR representatives like Zead Ramadan, on the other hand, know full well that when they charge us with “hatred” and vilify us in such lurid terms, they’re inciting their more bloody-minded coreligionists.
Abdulaziz Sudani 27 August 2010 at 20:13
Subject: Keep up the good work
To everyones knowledge, recently an innocent muslim taxi driver was brutally assulted. The motive of the attacker was a deep hatred for islam and muslims. The story is available on the net for all to read. Personally I do not hold this young man resposible for his actions. I myself look to the roots of events. My analysis is that people Like Pamela Gellar and Robert spencer are the driving factors in generating fanatics like the one who carried out the assult on the taxi driver. I believe crimes should be punished. I am not calling on muslims to harm the young man but I am encouring muslims to retalite my attacking the roots of this ideology of hate; Pamela gellar and Robert spencer. An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth etc. I have launched my campaign in the hope that Pamela Gellar and her aid Robert will suffer similar consequences to that of the taxi driver. In the coming months I will intensify my efforts in hope that someone will respond. I believe 24 hour security etc will not spare the likes of Pamela and Richard.
I am sure you have heard threats like this before and I believe you will hear many more in the near future. Keep up the good work and don’t be put of. Always be on gaurd as these fanatics can strike at anytime. I am well aware that you know their nature and thinking pattern in great detail. Take care.
As the summer of 2010 comes to a close, American tempers are dramatically rising over the Ground Zero mosque.
A fine example of the heat this issue is generating occurred on Wednesday’s "O’Reilly Factor" on Fox News.
In the left corner was Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer. On the right filling in for the usual host was Laura Ingraham.
What ensued was an ideological battle that likely pleased folks on both sides of this contentious debate (video follows with transcript and commentary, h/t our friends at the Right Scoop):
LAURA INGRAHAM, HOST: Scott, let’s talk about this controversy in New York that’s made some people say a slow news month of August, quite chaotic. Mayor Bloomberg has now staked his ground. He’s doubled down. He made that comment about it’s un-American. Just to throw the word un-American out seems to be a little odd. I don’t know anyone who’s conflating law abiding Muslims in the United states with al Qaeda. It’s about the sensitivity of the place at Ground Zero.
SCOTT STRINGER, MANHATTAN BOROUGH PRESIDENT: There’s no doubt about it. As someone who was in Manhattan on that terrible day when the terrorists attacked, we will never forget that. And we will always honor the families and the people in that community, who didn’t walk away from New York. They actually stayed and rebuilt the community.
Having said that, a few very well orchestrated agitators have created a situation where we have now seen Tea Party people going after Jewish American elected officials, Mayor Bloomberg, myself, the speaker of our state assembly Shelly Silver. They’re using this as a national political wedge issue. And I have to tell you something, today we now have a report that a cab driver was stabbed when he told a passenger that he was Muslim.
INGRAHAM: Right, well, we don’t know the details.
STRINGER: But-
INGRAHAM: I mean, throwing out examples like that, we don’t know the details of that, Scott.
STRINGER: -I have to tell you something. It’s building-
INGRAHAM: Well, let me tell you-
STRINGER: -and we should tone this down.
INGRAHAM: You want to do an anecdote like that?
STRINGER: Let’s tone it down.
INGRAHAM: I’m going to throw down to doing anecdote. No, I’m going to keep the temperature up because I think this is important.
STRINGER: Well, you’re keeping the temperature up because you’re just-
INGRAHAM: No, no, no-
STRINGER: -you’re creating something that doesn’t exist.
INGRAHAM: I’m not creating anything.
STRINGER: Well, of course you are.
INGRAHAM: You know what happened down at Ground Zero?
STRINGER: And the reason I’m on the show is because we have to fight back to let America know that we’re not like this.
INGRAHAM: Do you know what happened at Ground Zero? America disagrees with you vehemently.
STRINGER: America does not disagree.
INGRAHAM: 77 percent of the country disagrees with you.
STRINGER: They do not disagree-
INGRAHAM: They’re not Islamophobic.
STRINGER: -that we should use anti-Semitic slurs-
INGRAHAM: They’re not nasty people. They’re good people.
STRINGER: -that we should go after Muslim-
INGRAHAM: Do you want to know what anti-Semitic was? Let me get in here.
STRINGER: This is your Tea Party friends-
INGRAHAM: -what happened at Ground Zero.
STRINGER: -trying to create an election (INAUDIBLE) when we all know it.
INGRAHAM: And I mean, you dismissed the Tea Parties, but they’re obviously having huge and positive influence in the United States. What happened at Ground Zero-
STRINGER: You don’t believe that.
INGRAHAM: -in these dueling protests, and I think the more protests the better on both sides.
STRINGER: Well, constructive debate is good.
INGRAHAM: I think people should have their — well, it’s not up to you to determine what’s constructive. That’s the elite’s little trick.
STRINGER: No, but I have-
INGRAHAM: That’s the elites trick here.
STRINGER: -an opinion, too. You can call me-
INGRAHAM: You have an opinion, but let me just tell you what else happened, because you raised the issue-
STRINGER: Sure.
INGRAHAM: -of Judaism in this debate. There was also an exchange. And Andrew Breitbart has this posted on his website. You should see it because a pro-mosque protester got in the face of an 83-year-old man, who said he was a Holocaust survivor. He got in his face and he said you don’t know what you’re talking about. You don’t know what the con — I mean, he’s in the face of this old man, who survived the Holocaust who doesn’t want this mosque there.
STRINGER: That is terrible. But I have to tell you something. I’m talking about-
INGRAHAM: How’s that for an example?
STRINGER: -Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich, people trying to divide this country and divide this city of New York.
INGRAHAM: Trying to divide this country?
STRINGER: It’s not going to work because-
INGRAHAM: Do you agree with this imam that America has more blood on its hands than al Qaeda? Do you agree with the imam?
STRINGER: I believe that we should have an opportunity for everybody to come together.
INGRAHAM: How about an opportunity to hear from him?
STRINGER: We don’t go and take away people’s property. We don’t raid people.
INGRAHAM: I’m not saying we have a right to do any of that, no, no, no.
STRINGER: Of course you are. You’re doing that every day.
INGRAHAM: No, no, no, no, no.
STRINGER: You’re doing that every day.
INGRAHAM: They have a right to build this mosque. We have a right-
STRINGER: You-
INGRAHAM: -to raise questions about funding. And you as an elected official-
STRINGER: You started this.
INGRAHAM: You as an elected official should have an obligation to ask this imam-
STRINGER: You told Daisy Khan, you told them on this show in December of 2009, you said you’re doing the right thing.
INGRAHAM: Assimilating, absolutely.
STRINGER: You’re doing great work.
INGRAHAM: Assimilating.
STRINGER: Rabbis support it. You actually-
INGRAHAM: Blood — do you believe America has blood on her hands?
STRINGER: You supported this and then you-
INGRAHAM: You won’t answer the question, will you?
STRINGER: that you left the studio. Well, let me just make point and-
INGRAHAM: No, no, you want — blood on her hands?
STRINGER: You (INAUDIBLE). What did I do?
INGRAHAM: Why don’t you want these questions?
STRINGER: What did I do? I didn’t stick to the talking points. I have to now go back and reverse myself because I need ratings.
INGRAHAM: No, no, no. That’s what I heard. I heard what you don’t want to hear.
STRINGER: You agreed with them.
INGRAHAM: Pipe down. You know what I heard?
STRINGER: Yes.
INGRAHAM: I heard-
STRINGER: I saw you on the show.
INGRAHAM: -blood on our hands. I heard Americans are mean and they’re Islamophobic and they hate Muslims if they disagree. Is that building bridges?
STRINGER: But why did you support the cultural center in December 2009?
INGRAHAM: I absolutely support assimilation.
STRINGER: Okay. So that’s great.
INGRAHAM: I don’t support founders of an organization-
STRINGER: So that’s great.
INGRAHAM: -who actually believe that America is the equivalent of al Qaeda when destroying Muslim lives..
STRINGER: Then you know what? Let’s go to the FBI and Homeland Security. If you have information I don’t know, we should hear. But in the meantime-
INGRAHAM: Read the 2005-
STRINGER: -December 2009-
INGRAHAM: You apparently don’t care what he says. You just don’t care.
STRINGER: You supported this before Michael Bloomberg, before anybody else.
INGRAHAM: I supported assimilation. You better believe it.
STRINGER: You said what they were doing was the right thing.
INGRAHAM: And professor, you got short shrift here. Do what you need to do and ask the questions. Ask questions.
STRINGER: I’m just endorsing what you said what should happen.
INGRAHAM: That’s so weak. Do you actually get elected with that kind of line? Ask questions.
Yikes. Someone throw some water on the contestants.
That said, Stringer like so many on his side of this debate greatly misrepresented Ingraham’s interview with Daisy Khan last December.
It’s been characterized by most liberal media members that Ingraham on that occasion agreed with the location of this mosque.
Here’s the video of that segment along with a full transcript. You decide if that’s what actually happened:
INGRAHAM: In the "Impact" segment tonight, some controversy surrounding Islamic mosque and cultural center in the works at Ground Zero. The imam responsible for this project, Feisal Abdul Rauf, has conducted some post-9/11 sensitivity training for the FBI, but he’s also made some questionable remarks about America’s behavior towards Muslims.
Joining us now from New York, the imam’s wife, Daisy Khan, the executive director of the American Society for Muslim Advancement.
And Daisy, before we get into this, I know you were listening to our previous segment about the culture war with the — the war against Christmas and these ads, and you wanted to comment.
DAISY KHAN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR MUSLIM ADVANCEMENTS: Yes. I was most intrigued, because I don’t think that there is a war between people who are believers. I think our real issue is bringing people who disbelieve and, you know, have absolutely no notion of what God is and believe in the existence of God.
And this is what our faith community should be doing together to work on a common platform to remove this kind of ignorance against God.
INGRAHAM: All right. I like the — I like the backup you’re giving me on that.
Let’s talk about the Islamic center at Ground Zero. Questions, I can’t find many people who really have a problem with it. Bloomberg for it. Rabbis in New York saying they don’t have a problem with it. Why near Ground Zero? Why did you choose that space?
KHAN: Well, I think the closeness of the center to Ground Zero, first and foremost, is a blow to the extremists. And you know, we Muslims are really fed up, Laura, of having to be defined by the actions of the extremists. You know, we are law-abiding citizens. We are faithful people. We are very good Americans. And we need to project a different message of Islam, one of tolerance, love and the kind of commonalities we have with different faith communities.
And the center will be dedicated to promoting what it needs to be Muslim and what it also means to be Americans, and that is the real message that needs to get out.
INGRAHAM: When you see surveys, and I know your group takes a moderate approach to Americanizing people, assimilating people, which I applaud. I think that’s fantastic.
But when you see — when you see Pew’s survey, the global survey that came out — what is that, 18 months ago or so — global opinions of Muslims, especially younger male Muslims on a number of issues, including whether jihad is morally justifiable, the figures are disturbing to me. And I was wondering what your thoughts were.
KHAN: Well, once again, our faith has been defined by people who have political agendas. And what they do is they use religion as a veneer to mobilize people.
And what we have to do is talk about what is the central core of all faiths, which is the love of God. And this is a message, and this is why we want to create a center so close to Ground Zero: to promote a different message, one that most majority of Muslims live.
I mean, the extremists are a fraction of a fraction of a fraction. And they don’t represent the majority view. And what we are afraid of is that they become the center and the majority. And we have to stop that.
INGRAHAM: The problem is — we’re going to get to your husband’s comment from back in 2004 in a minute. But Pope Benedict has asked for parity, kind of a reciprocity. Look, we’ll have a mosque in Rome. Absolutely, a mosque in Rome, freedom of religion. But let’s have a cathedral or a Catholic church in Saudi Arabia. How far do you think he got with that? I mean, or Lebanon today. Try to build a new church in Lebanon. You know, previously a hot bed of Christianity. And you don’t get anywhere.
So that’s what kind of upsets Christians, especially with what’s happening to Christians in Iraq and Iran and places like that.
KHAN: Well, I completely agree with you. Because if you look at the history of Muslims and you look at, you know, the pluralism that existed within Islamic history over the last 1,400 years, there used to be great mosques and great cathedrals and churches and synagogues in every place.
What has happened is there is a new interpretation that has crept in: one of intolerance and one of non-acceptance. And this, we have to push back against that and bring back what, you know, our religion says: there is no compulsion in religion. Which means you can disbelieve and believe, and believe in other faith communities, because…
INGRAHAM: Daisy…
KHAN: Yes.
INGRAHAM: … let’s get into what your husband said in 2004, because this is a sticking point with a lot of people. Sydney Morning Herald interview, he was quoted as saying it was Christians in World War II who bombed civilians in Dresden and Hiroshima, neither of which were military targets. He placed some blame on Christians for starting mass attacks on civilians.
That disturbs a lot of people. A lot of American soldiers died liberating Muslims around the world in Kuwait and Bosnia, and they didn’t appreciate that.
KHAN: Well, I don’t think he meant it that way. I think what was trying to say is that, you know, when we take — when we have a small crime, and then there is such a huge response to that, where there’s a calamity on such a large scale, that, you know, we have to look at what the law says. And Christians — Christianity is defined by love. When things are done in the name of Christianity like, you know…
INGRAHAM: Well, we didn’t — we didn’t wage World War II in the name of Christianity.
KHAN: No, I’m not…
INGRAHAM: That’s a difference. I mean, our fighter pilots weren’t screaming, "Allah Akbar," you know, or the equivalent in English, "Praise be to God."
KHAN: Yes.
INGRAHAM: I think — I’d amend that if I were he. I’d kind of go back and re-do that statement.
But I like what you’re trying to do, and Ms. Khan, we appreciate it. And come on my radio show sometime.
KHAN: Yes. We need the support of people like you, seriously. So we…
INGRAHAM: OK, take care. All right, Daisy. Take care.
Big surprise. “Another ‘Moderate’ GZ Mosque Supporter Can’t Bring Himself to Call Hamas a Terrorist Organization,” by the peerless Andrew C. McCarthy at National Review, August 25:
Last night, I was on David Asman’s Fox Business Channel show, Scoreboard, debating Imam Dawoud Kringle of the New York State prison system, a GZ mosque supporter. Imam Kringle, who seems like a nice enough fellow, reeled off the usual talking points about how Islam forbids terrorism and, therefore, if someone commits an act of terrorism that act is, by definition, un-Islamic.
Then came the moment of truth: the very simple question, “Is Hamas a terrorist organization?” Have a look at the YouTube clip below. Like his friend Imam Feisal Rauf, Imam Kringle won’t answer the question. I pressed him, pointing out that it is a very simple question. And it is: Quite apart from the fact that Hamas is formally designated as a terrorist organization under U.S. law, Hamas’s own charter makes abundantly clear — indeed, wears like a badge of honor — that Hamas exists solely for the purpose of driving Israel out of Palestine by violent jihad. Yet the imam cannot bring himself to say Hamas is a terrorist organization….
In a stunning display at a protest over the Ground Zero mosque, a Holocaust survivor was berated by a mosque supporter. The mosque supporter spews vulgarities at the holocaust survivor and at one point even says he "didn’t learn his lesson". Content warning, we did not bleep out the profanities.
Recently Eyeblast went to New York City to interview people on the street about the Ground Zero mosque. One of the people we interviewed was a Muslim supporter of the mosque who tells Americans they need to "get over" 9/11.
For more information on this interview and for other Eyeblast interviews on the Ground Zero mosque make sure you visit this post.
On Aug. 1, I reported here and on BigGovernment.com the fact that Bobby Schilling, the Republican challenger to Democrat incumbent U.S. Rep. Phil Hare in Illinois’ 17th Congressional District, had received the endorsement of Army Sgt. John F. Baker Jr., a Medal of Honor recipient from Illinois. Now, it appears, at least one female supporter of the stumbling, bumbling Hare thinks Baker’s endorsement means little.
In a letter to the editor of the Quad Cities Online® web site, Janet Casillas Ortiz wrote that she was not impressed by Baker’s endorsement of Schilling, because Baker no longer lives in Illinois. In addition, she inferred that Baker’s endorsement is no more meaningful than the endorsement of any other veteran — her husband, daughter and brother, included. Finally, she wondered in writing if “a puppeteer named ‘Bill’ was pulling Mr. Baker’s strings.”
While I appreciate the fact that members of the Ortiz family have served in the military, I must take issue with Mrs. Ortiz — who, it appears, did not serve her country in uniform — and her willingness to discount the value of the service of Baker, a retired Army sergeant and Vietnam veteran who earned his nation’s highest honor for service above and beyond the call of duty on Nov. 5, 1966.
Perhaps, Mrs. Ortiz should read the award citation that President Lyndon B. Johnson read in the East Room of the White House when he paid honor to Baker.
It included the following language:
“Sgt. Baker’s selfless heroism, indomitable fighting spirit, and extraordinary gallantry were directly responsible for saving the lives of several of his comrades, and inflicting serious damage on the enemy. His acts were in keeping with the highest traditions of the U.S. Army and reflect great credit upon himself and the Armed Forces of his country.”
Perhaps, Mrs. Ortiz should ask veterans at the Quad Cities chapter of Vietnam Veterans of America — the guys who spearheaded the effort to have a bridge dedicated in Sergeant Baker’s honor — if Sergeant Baker’s endorsement holds, or should hold, more weight than the average veteran.
Perhaps, Mrs. Ortiz should watch the video below that shows Congressman Hare telling Adam Sharp that he doesn’t care about the Constitution.
Perhaps, after reviewing the issue, Mrs. Ortiz will realize how wrong she is and retract her letter to the editor. After all, she is wrong. By a wide margin. By the width of a Hare.
Former radio talk show host and political activist Melanie Morgan is planning a protest outside the glitzy Jerry Brown fundraiser hosted by Jodie Evans, the cofounder of the anti-American group Code Pink this Saturday night. In her announcement of the protest, Morgan asked if Brown is a terrorist sympathizer, “Or is he just whoring himself out to people who fund thugs and rapists, support killers and send aid to people who murder U.S. servicemen?, a reference to Jodie Evans’ well-documented history of working with terrorists and state sponsors of terrorist against the United States.
“Jerry has always surrounded himself with politically active people and some of them continue to be politically active. But the rhetoric that Melanie Morgan is using is counter-productive and insulting to voters,” Clifford said.
If not for her pro-terrorist record, Jodie Evans hosting a fund-raiser for Brown would not be controversial, as they have a decades – long political history.
While a law student, Jodie Krajewski (as she was then known) Evans worked as Brown’s deputy finance director during his 1978 gubernatorial campaign, and following his election signed on as his director of administration in the Governor’s Office.
The seemingly indispensable Jodie Evans later served as Brown’s treasurer on his 1980 Presidential Campaign, finance director for his 1982 failed Senate campaign, executive director of his post Senate PAC, managed his 1992 Presidential Campaign, and addressed the 1992 Democrat National Convention.
Jodie Evans produced Brown’s “We The People” radio show, and later worked on Brown’s Mayoral Inaugural festivities after he was elected mayor of Oakland. She later contributed nearly $ 25,000 to his campaigns for California Attorney General and his latest attempt to return to the governor’s office.
Is Jerry Brown aware of what Jodie Evans has been doing for the last eight years? Does he know she’s been consorting with enemies of America? Does he agree with the Code Pink founder, terrorist supporter, and Democrat party activist?
Does Jerry Brown truly believe that it is “counter-productive and insulting to voters” to ask Brown why he is taking money from a woman who has the blood of American soldiers on her hands?
The following are questions that the news media should be asking.
Does Jerry Brown agree with Jodie Evans that Iran’s Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a “man of peace and human rights?”
Is Jerry Brown comfortable with Jodie Evans acting as an agent of influence for the anti-American governments of Iran, Cuba and Venezuela, as well as Middle Eastern terrorists?
Does Jerry Brown agree with Jodie Evans that Osama bin Laden had “valid arguments” for the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks that murdered nearly 3000 Americans and foreign nationals?
Does Jerry Brown know and approve that in February 2003, Jodie Evans and Code Pink traveled to Baghdad as a guest of Saddam Hussein’s government where they lobbied the world to keep the state sponsor of terrorism in power?
Does Jerry Brown know and approve that after the liberation in the summer of 2003, Jodie Evans returned to Iraq where she set up Occupation Watch, an effort to smear the U.S. with ginned up charges of atrocities and to get troops in Iraq to quit the war?
Does Jerry Brown know and approve that Jodie Evans relayed terrorist propaganda to a communist newspaper, falsely accusing American soldiers of wantonly slaughtering Iraqi women and children?
Does Jerry Brown know and approve that Jodie Evans and Code Pink delivered over $ 600,000 in cash and humanitarian aid to what Code Pink called “the other side” in Fallujah as the U.S. was waging a hard-fought battle to clear the terrorist safe haven of al Qaeda in Iraq and other Sunni terrorists?
Does Jerry Brown know and approve that the delivery of aid to “the other side” in Fallujah was facilitated by Sen. Barbara Boxer and Reps. Henry Waxman, Dennis Kucinich and Raul Grijalva?
Does Jerry Brown know and approve that six months later, Jodie Evans proclaimed her support for the armed “resistance” in Iraq while attending the World Tribunal on Iraq?
Does Jerry Brown know and approve that just one year later, Jodie Evans and Code Pink met with pro-terrorist Iraqi parliamentarians in Jordan who urged them to seek recognition for the so-called Iraqi resistance?
Does Jerry Brown know and approve that Jodie Evans and Code Pink also made a mysterious stop in Damascus, Syria on that trip? Members of Code Pink, sans Jodie Evans, went from Syria to Lebanon to give propaganda support to Hezbollah in its war with Israel that summer.
Does Jerry Brown know that in 2006, Jodie Evans and Code Pink traveled to Venezuela and met with Hugo Chavez. Does Jerry Brown agree with Jodie Evans that Chavez is a “sweetheart?”
Does Jerry Brown know and approve that Jodie Evans traveled to Cuba in 2007 and worked with the Castro government to propagandize against the U.S.?
Does Jerry Brown know and approve that in September 2008, just a couple of weeks after meeting Obama at a big money Hollywood fundraiser at the historic Greystone mansion in Beverly Hills, Jodie Evans met with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in New York City? Does Jerry Brown agree with Jodie Evans that Ahmadinejad is “really about peace and human rights and respecting justice?”
Does Jerry Brown know and approve that in November 2008, weeks after Obama won the presidential election, Jodie Evans and Code Pink traveled to Iran at the personal invitation of Ahmadinejad? And that Jodie Evans had previously visited Iran in 2005?
Does Jerry Brown know and approve that top Obama donor and fundraiser Jodie Evans met with the Taliban in Afghanistan on a recent trip there? And that she lauded the Taliban in a wide-ranging interview released by MIPtalk, for bringing what she characterized as “peace and justice” to Afghanistan while accusing the U.S. of failing to deliver either?
Does Jerry Brown know and approve that Jodie Evans and Code Pink have organized pro-Hamas propaganda visits to Gaza? In June 2009, Code Pink hand-carried a letter out of Gaza written to Pres. Obama from Hamas leaders that equated Israel’s defensive actions to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
Does Jerry Brown know and approve that Jodie Evans and her terrorist sympathizing group Code Pink provoked a violent crisis in Egypt over an attempt to deliver ‘humanitarian aid’ to Hamas-run Gaza to mark the one-year anniversary of Israel’s response to repeated provocations by Hamas terrorists? And that Evans was joined in Cairo by Obama pals Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dorhn, both former terrorists with the Weather Underground?
Jerry Brown should be held to account for allying himself with Jodie Evans, even if, in the bizarro world of California politics, she is considered a respected power-player in the Democratic party.
After California voters become aware of Jodie Evans, perhaps it is they who will find Jerry Brown’s permissive attitude towards a terrorist supporter to be “counter-productive and insulting to voters.”
[Note: This is the latest segment in an ongoing series about Code Pink and its co-founder Jodie Evans. Click here to read earlier articles.]
