Suicidal. "Detroit bomber 'singing like a canary' before arrest," by Philip Sherwell in the Telegraph, January 9 (thanks to Banafsheh):
President Barack Obama is under fire over claims that the Christmas Day underwear bomber was "singing like a canary" until he was treated as an ordinary criminal and advised of his right to silence.The chance to secure crucial information about al-Qaeda operations in Yemen was lost because the Obama administration decided to charge and prosecute Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab as an ordinary criminal, critics say. He is said to have reduced his co-operation with FBI interrogators on the advice of his government-appointed defence counsel.
The potential significance became chillingly clear this weekend when it was reported that shortly after his detention, he boasted that 20 more young Muslim men were being prepared for similar murderous missions in the Yemen.
The lawyer for the 23-year-old Nigerian entered a formal not guilty plea on Friday to charges that he tried to blow up a Detroit-bound airliner on December 25 - even though he reportedly admitted earlier that he was trained and supplied with the explosives sewn into his underwear by al-Qaeda in the Arab state."He was singing like a canary, then we charged him in civilian proceedings, he got a lawyer and shut up," Slade Gorton, a member of the 9/11 Commission that investigated the Sept 2001 terror attacks on the US, told The Sunday Telegraph.
"I find it incomprehensible that this administration is treating terrorism as a law enforcement issue. The president has finally said that we are at war with al-Qaeda. Well, if this is a war, then Abdulmutallab should be treated as a combatant not a criminal."...
Not with this President in power.
This politically correct corrupt government, with the lover of Islam BHO leading it, will
only help to facilitate and enable the cause of Islamic fascism.
All Islamic terrorists found to be guilty, by a Military Tribunal only, should be taken out
and summarily shot.
No civilian courts! No ACLU lawyers!No halal food! No foot baths!
Just a well trained firing squad.
Obama and his advisors are a bunch of clowns.
Read "World War IV: How It Started, What It Means, and Why We Have to Win" by Norman Podhoretz @ http://www.commentarymagazine.com/viewarticle.cfm/world-war-iv--how-it-started--what-it-means---and-why-we-have-to-win-9785
and get educated: Izlam war on the west is being waged for decades now (remember the USS Cole, Beirut, etc.) and a string of US presidents (including Clinton's 8 years watch!!!) did zip to stand up to it...
Anarchy serves well the Obama communist regime.
I'm sure the Taliban, (who really loves us now under Obama) treats its enemies the same...
From a man who bows to ruthless dictators and criticize friends, why am I not surprised.
government-appointed defence counsel
Fine and dandy. We taxpayers are funding this terrorist's defense.
I forget...What is it called when officials give aid and comfort to the enemy?...Is it TREASON?...Or in Rasulullahaha Obama's case, just plain stupidity? Or is it a combination of both... 'stupid treason'. Either way, this guy is not fit to hold office even if he had a birth certificate...
In thinking about why Hussein is treating the Flight 253 Islamic Jihadist like an ordinary criminal - Hussein doesn't want the Muslim to "tell-all."
That would give us an advantage against the Jihadists, and rememeber, as Hussein asserts in his book, he will "stand with the Muslims."
I consider Hussein to be an aider and abettor of the enemy.
The apparent spread of anarchy, terror, fear and restrictions only serve to improve the Obowma admistration's policies of reducing America to a fifth world country in which the sovereign people have lost the protection of the Constitution. The communist dictatorship is firmly on its way.
The apparent spread of anarchy, terror, fear and restrictions only serve to improve the Obowma admistration's policies of reducing America to a fifth world country in which the sovereign people have lost the protection of the Constitution. The communist dictatorship is firmly on its way.
The "MUSLIM" President of the United States should be tried for treason!
By the way Mr. President . . . I'm still waiting for the tape of the AMERICAN (no accent whatsoever) man who accompanied the panty bomber to the gate and got him ON the plane after speaking with management. There are staunch witnesses to this and the public has YET to see this tape. This is the root of the incident. Explain please . . .
If no explanation is available, then perhaps we have been infiltrated at the HIGHEST level.
I know we are told that Barry's approval is in free fall but does it really matter? He and Dragon Lady Pelosi control the government and by proxi the media also. I work for the Federal Government and am still unable to critique his actions with many of my associates without being called racist. Many of the blacks I work with claim to be Christians but are Muslim sympathizers who listen to Farakan's poison. I am aware that this is a minority but they are loud and they have the undivided attention of the government and the media. Even if the elections are able to restore some level of sanity back to congress I don't think the PC Machine will allow the white house to fall. I'm just not feeling optimistic. Somebody please tell me where I am either wrong or right.
Sign petition to end Muslim Immigration now. Here is the link, pass it on http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/no-more-Muslim...
If the singing was allowed to continue, Obama would have more of what he needs to do, than what he he wants to do.
People - can anyone help? Is this an abrogated verse?
`to the unbelievers their religion and to you yours.''
What if a terrorist got a judge like James Kaddo?
http://www.scribd.com/doc/24918833/Is-Judge-James-Kaddo-Part-of-the-Terrorist-Support-Network
I agree with you, the president should be indicted for treason. This is really suicidal. It's absolutely crazy. Does Obama want his country to be blown up? I can't understand him.
Wait a minute. I'm really confused!
You mean you DON'T want islamic terrorists hell bent on murdering infidel American men, women and children to please Allah, to be treated like your "uncle Bob" the shoplifter, with equal American Civil and Constitutional Liberties and same due process for both? Well now.
If you voted for CHANGE WE NEED and YES WE CAN, shut your pie hole, stupid, because you're getting just desserts! For the rest of us, we know we are marching into hell, thanks to the Democrats and Liberal fools!
OT a little, but worth it:
http://www.youtube.com/v/HiyqvuTxaEs&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&fs=1
Let's try again:
http://www.youtube.com/v/HiyqvuTxaEs&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&fs=1
http://www.youtube.com/v/HiyqvuTxaEs&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=
0xcfcfcf&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&fs=1
http://www.youtube.com/v/HiyqvuTxaEs&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=
0xcfcfcf&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&fs=1
Sorry, I can't seem to get it to post.
I know we are told that Barry's approval is in free fall but does it really matter? ... Even if the elections are able to restore some level of sanity back to congress I don't think the PC Machine will allow the white house to fall. I'm just not feeling optimistic.
The far left's black/egghead coalition was able to put BHO in the Oval Office because a mass of swing voters panicked over the financial crisis. What the right needs to do is strip away enough of that support to first hobble and then depose him. There is a fairly good prospect of that happening, but folks have to get involved.
elections have consequences, what the right and those wanting freedom must take over the Republican party since the DemocRATS have now fully swung hard facists left.
I've heard no coherent reason as to why any of these major terrorists should be tried in criminal court at great expense & risk. On its face it is so horribly stupid.
I suspect the real reason is mainly so that these terrorists can publicly bash Israel and its "occupation" and make Israel look like the cause of all jihadist attacks & troubles we have endured in hopes of weakening American support for Israel. IMO Obama despises Israel even more than he loves Muslims & Islam. Any other reason makes any sense?
"Just a well trained firing squad."
Why the suggestion that they be well trained? Let them miss a few times, hit in non-lethal locations, and just keep firing until eventually the job gets done.
Darcy...
`to the unbelievers their religion and to you yours.''
I'm never sure about slippery Islam, but I would think that verse would be abrogated by Quran 8:39, 9:5, 9:29, 8:12 and others...
Thanks, swami. I appreciate your input. I know that the "no compulsion in religion" early Meccan verse is definitely abrogated (though the Mohammedans' pretend all the time that it isn't!)
`to the unbelievers their religion and to you yours.''
"I'm never sure about slippery Islam, but I would think that verse would be abrogated by Quran 8:39, 9:5, 9:29, 8:12 and others..."
Mr. Spencer, is that right?
Darcy, there is a simple formula to use when analyzing the Koran as an infidel. If the verse sounds sort of nice, OK in some sense, then you know that it has either been abrogated by a later verse or the meaning of the verse in question is not what it seems to be on its face, that is, other verses before or after, or the general concept of infidel/kafir vs. Muslim, makes the meaning of the verse something bad to the infidel/kafir even if a simple reading of it would at first blush indicate otherwise. There is nothing in the Koran that is good for the infidel. Any good that can be found is only good as compared to being killed altogether, and swimming in a septic tank is "good" compared to being killed altogether.
So if the mass murderer had set-off his undies he would be guilty of terrorism once enough civilian were killed, BUT.....because he didn't die he is now a common Criminal with all the Rights as US Citizens and gets a Free Lawyer.
I get it,when the Terrorism is a failure we hear CAIR cry Racial-Profiling/Islamophobia/Backlash/anti-Muslim from the rooftops because Islam=Peace and you are innocent until proven non-Muslim.
But if the Islamofascist does suceed we hear CAIR assert that they weren't True Muslim but only Misunderstanders with nothing to do with Islam.
Up here in canada we had 240 Canadian civilians murdered by 2 Sikh's from B.C., these savages planted bombs on several Air Planes set to go off on Timers.
The 747 was blown from the sky with a totoal of 329 people and about 40% were GrandChildren born in Canada and going to see relatives back home in India,one bomb didn't go off but a 3rd did in Japan and a delay in the flight caused the baggae to explode and kill workers transfering luggage to a connecting flight.
Basically, the RCMP was watching the Sikh's but Political Correctness made them fear acting too early and get the label of Racist and lose their job. After 20 years and almost $60Million on the Court Case the 2 killers walked free because a Judge claimed they were denied a speedy trial and some of the witness evidence was too old to be reliable.
It's a no-win situation , the RCMP was called Racist anyway for not stoppping it because the victims were not white people and nobody really cared. But when they kept watch on Maher Arar they were accused of Racial-Profiling and Islamophobia because Arar was innocent of any Terrorism acts.
Canada had 240 Civilians murdered on the Altar of Multiculturalism because last year there were several Monuments put up to mark that mass slaughter but they were purged of any link to Sikh's having done it,Canada lost another 24 civilians on 9/11 and our Plaque in Ottawa is purged of any link to Islam or Muslims even though 19 men claimed they were Muslims.
Next time a underwear-bomber is caught onboard a plane, the passengers should hold them until the Military comes and takes him to Gitmo to be "De-Briefed" on video and he can sing for the cameras.
After all, if you were on that plane with your newborn and you saw how the Suicide-Bomber was treated with kid gloves after his failed mass-slaught, would you be cautious next time and hold the killer Hostage on the Plane and tell Obama you WILL NOT release the Islamofacsist thug to the Local cops because he's now a POW afforded the protection of the Geneva Convention until Military Laws , not local Traffic Laws or Airline rules about carrying a bomb onboard .
Your baby could have been slaughter with you on that Plane, and the killers will get a Free lawyer and be treated with the same Rights as Citizens.
Why get Citizenship as a Terrorist when a fail-Bombing give you all the Rights in the USA as Citizens????
The new Maranda card from American express, Don't leave the Jihad Camp without it.
Thanks for your input, too, ThinkThrice.
I get it. Isn't it wonderful, the "resurgence" of Islam? (sarc on)
"Understanding the Resurgence of Islam," by Hugh Fitzgerald:
http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/8724/sec_id/8724
Why the suggestion that they be well trained? Let them miss a few times, hit in non-lethal locations, and just keep firing until eventually the job gets done.
Why waste ammunition?
On a slightly positive note, I had the opportunity a couple of days ago to speak to a Democratic Congressman. We discussed Islam and when I indicated to him than I thought trying Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his ilk in NYC is absolutely the wrong way to proceed in dealing with Islamic terrorists, to my surprise he said he completely agreed with me and has tried to convince the President that doing so is highly unwise. He was quite cognizant that we are in a war and not just some police action. It was refreshing to hear this, especially from a Democrat.
He did however go on to say that he thought that all religions have troubling passages in their holy writings and that Islam is no different from other faiths in this regard and that other religions produce violent extremists as well. Here I as politely and diplomatically as possible said I disagreed with him and asserted that if he were correct in his assessment then one would expect to find approximately as many violent believers per capita from all the major religions. But of course this is not the case, which he readily acknowledged.
I went on to inform him that Islam has troubling doctrines that other religions simply do not have, such as the requirement of death for apostasy. I also pointed out to him certain disturbing features about Mohammed himself. Here he seemed to know something about Mohammed's life and agreed with me that Mohammed's "career" is cause for concern as are some of the Islamic doctrines I mentioned to him. I was struck by his civility and also a willingess to learn more. I told him about Winston Churchill's assessment of Islam and specifically mentioned Churchill's The River War (1899) for consultation here. He asked me what year it was published, was surprised that Churchill wrote so early in his life, and said with a sincerity I believed that he was going to make a point of locating a copy of this book and look it over. We departed in good spirits and I couldn't help but think that here is the kind of person who functions among the elite in this country who might, just might, be able to learn what needs to be learned about Islam. Well, just for the record, I thought I would pass this on here at JW.
darcy, unfortunately there's no Pope or central Command Center for Islamic ideology; so to nail down whether a given verse is abrogated, the best you can do is find authoritative sources that say it is -- like good hadiths and/or tafsirs, as well as legal rulings by major Islamic jurists. This elusive complexity of Islamic doctrine allows Muslims to be as slippery as eels -- following something while having plausible deniability when it's convenient.
There should be a new section in the criminal code specifically sdiesigned to dealing with terrorism in any way, shape or form. I wish all of the western countries would get together and come up w/a solution and get tuff w/them terrorists.
I"m not sure if killing them will actually work in this situation as the ultimate goal is to die - that'll only make them martyrs, and certainly not acting as a deterrent, given the Islamic theology. Send'em to labour camps w/o any chance of parole, that way they can't use death as a cop-out.
I am glad that you had that chat with that person. Center-left politicians should not automatically be written off by anyone. There is a great deal of ignorance about Islam in the world, and a paucity of informed reporting or analysis on the subject. This ignorance ,or in some cases duplicity, not only infects the left, but the right as well, as can be illustrated by the case of Grover Norquist. The left has as much to lose as anyone with creeping Islamization. The rights of gays, women, and minorities(racial, ethnic, or religious)would be eliminated under Sharia. Anyone who was not an acceptable Muslim to the regime would have few if any rights(even if formally granted under a constitution)in such a society. Also, any concerns about economic inequality or opportunity would be muted or ignored, since Islam(claims to contrary not withstanding)is supportive of very unequal societies ruled by a small elite that is impervious to shame or criticism. These developments should not be welcome to any informed leftist, unless social democracy is about bringing the world under the umbrella of a reactionary feudal or semi-tribal mode of governance.
It is an absurdity that such cases are treated as matters appropriate for a criminal justice system. Such a system is set up for burglars, armed robbers, drug dealers, as well as other criminal offenders, and not for ideologically/religiously motivated foreign terrorists. Such cases clog up civiian courts with cases that are not contested on the basis of the defendants believing that they are genuinely innocent of the charges, but simply to set up a forum to harangue and engage in dawah. Such proceedings have no deterrent value, and actually are an encouragement to others seeking fame for their terrorist deeds. I hope that the Obama Administration comes to realize this, but I am not hopeful.
In Jerusalem Post there was an interview with Ed Koch, former mayor of NY, who supported Obama and helped him getting 75 % of the Jewish vote.
But Mr. Koch said that that was with the understanding that Obama was to be trusted on a good defense against terrorism, as Obama assured him. Or so I understand. Mr. Koch went on to say that Obama has to deliver on good security and defense, otherwise the democratic party would probably lose it's majority in both Senate and Congress in the next elections.
From the Islamic side it seems there is no letting up, no strategic downsizing of the war now that Obama is president. And if this means that the attacks on Western targets will continue and be more numerous and successful, the Americans and other Western citizens will regard security and defence and a tougher stand against Islam/ Muslims more important and vote accordingly.
And in order to keep votes the Obama administration will have to respond to the desires of the American voters and so be tougher on Muslims. So either the Islamists diminish their attacks or Obama either gets more warlike against Islam or the Democratic party will lose senate, congress, presidency by 2012. I hope for both these possibilities.
The Islamists will probably increase their war on America, and that will cost us, but will also mean that we will be ever tougher on Muslims about their loyalties, support- and protest-patterns.
Wellington,
Nice job. Since politicians are notorious for trying to be all things to all people, it's impossible to know whether or not you actually made an impression, but you certainly get an A for effort.
Obama is "The Manchurian Candidate" and the Trojan Horse rolled into one. He is here to destroy the United States. It's his duty as a Muslim. When seen in that context everything he does, and why he does it, is crystal clear.
politicans need to kick butt, not kiss butt - and represent their constituents, not mislead them
Posters may not be aware that we have a character in here in UK called Professor Richard Dawkins, a biologist and militant atheist. He is a very popular with the MSM and particularly the BBC as the liberal response to jihad is to be generally anti-religion because they lack the courage to be anti-Islam. In his case it has been noted that he goes easy on islam not because he favours it, but because he values his skin.
Nevertheless this morning on BBC Radio 4 he said with some exasperation one-third of Muslim students in British universities believe it is all right to kill for your religion so why should we not profile them?
With direct reference to Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab he asked,
"Why are we always being told these bombers are quiet and devout men as though such behavior was out of character and quite extraordinary? It is the quiet and devout people who believe that by blowing people up they will end up in Paradise forever that we most need to watch!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Whatever one may think of him a blindingly obvious point.
The problem is the MSM cannot get it into their thick skulls that quiet and devout Muslims do not work the have the same philosophy and values as quiet and devout Christians. To say muslims are “Quiet and devout” obscures the fact that to them the ultimate act of devotion is blowing themselves into paradise while simultaneously blowing as many kuffurs as possible into hell.
Damn typo
" quiet and devout Muslims do not have the same philosophy and values as quiet and devout Christians."
Amen. But don't hold your breath.
Darcy,
There is an interesting story behind this verse. This is a Meccan verse. Meccans, who at the time were in a stronger position, offered a compromise to Mohammed.
The deal was, we will follow your religion for one year, and you follow ours for one. Allah told Mo to not make any such compromises.
So we have this verse, where Mo is telling the kafirs (who are more powerful and generous than him), that "you follow your religion, and I will follow mine".
Taken out of context, this sounds like Mo is generously "allowing" disbelievers to follow their religion. As a matter of fact, it is always explained in Islamic literature as an example of how "a muslim should NEVER compromise in his faith". Never, as an example of how they should "allow" kafirs to follow their religion.
Darcy wrote:
People - can anyone help? Is this an abrogated verse?
`to the unbelievers their religion and to you yours.''
....................
It is actually usually translated as: "To you your religion, and to us ours", and is frequently trotted out by Muslim apologists and credulous Infidels to indicate how "tolerant" Islam is.
I have often seen this identified as a Qu'ranic verse, but I can't find the specific verse (I've read the Qu'ran, but it's been awhile)—neither can I find it in the Hadith—hmmm...
"...you are innocent until proven non-Muslim."
haha! love it!
don't you just love "hope and change"??? i "hope" we can "change" presidents as quicly as possible! like yeaterday!!
"Why waste ammunition?"
thats something i'd be happy to see my tax money "wasted" on..terrorizing terrorists!
great story Wellington. that's the kind of things i like to hear. it gives me hope.
For Darcy . . .
Perhaps Robert or another visiting scholar could elaborate, but I think the verse your referring to [`to the unbelievers their religion and to you yours.'] could be classified under "Dar al Hudna" (Sp?) . . . I believe it means "House of Calm."
Basically, if the Kafirs were more powerful at the time (or, for example, the US Christians today), then a "truce" is instilled for a period of 10 years WHILE Muslims are considered the minority population. All bets are off when they take positions of power and majority.
Could be wrong though . . . hopefully, we'll get an answer.
The verse in discussion is from Surah 109, the unbelievers or al-kafirun. I have described the background of this verse.
Also verify with Robert Spencer's commentary on Quran. Or you can search for "Al-Kafirun Tafseer".
Thanks everybody for the info.
AJ, that's an interesting interpretation. Well, as it's a Meccan verse, then I KNOW it's abrogated.
Someone should publish a Koran absent the abrogated Meccan verses. Then everyone could easily see the Koran for what it is: A War Manual written by a Warlord.
To Muslims: "allah" did not abrogate - MOHAMET did. As wise Aisha remarked to her pedophile husband: "It seems to me that your Lord hastens to satisfy your desire." Sahih Muslim vol.2:3453-3454 p.748-749.