Dogs, Donkeys and Women, Oh My!

A newly created group dedicated to fighting the “Islamization of America” will be walking the streets of Washington DC on September 25th engaging passers-by in a “dialogue” about Islam in America.

The group, Stop Islamization of America (SIOA), stands out for its extensive ties to far-right bloggers in the US and Frank Gaffney’s Center for Security Policy. It also has links to the European Far Right and Nazi apologists.

The choice of September 25 as the launch date is designed to coincide with “Jumah Prayer on Capitol Hill: A Day of Islamic Unity,” a gathering of Muslims on the National Mall. Its organizers say:

“The objective of this gathering is to invite the Muslim Communities and friends of Islam to express and illustrate the wonderful diversity of Islam. We intend to manifest Islam’s majestic spiritual principals [sic] as revealed by Allah to our beloved prophet Muhammad (PEACE BE UPON HIM) of Arabia. Likewise; we intend to inspire a new generation of Muslim to work for the greater good of all people. We shall serve all people, regardless of race, religion or national origin.”

SIOA, however, takes a dim view of what it calls “the doctrine of Islam, jihad, and Sharia (Islamic law),” especially in the United States.

“Islamic law and jihad are brutal, misogynist, and fundamentally contrary to our Constitution and to our concepts of human rights and freedom. Tolerance for ideologies that are opposed to our principles of individual freedoms and our Constitution is indefensible,” reads SIOA’s website.

The new group’s September 25 launch will include a number of high-profile guests, including Robert Spencer, Pamela Geller and Christine Brim.

Both Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller were present at the 2007 CounterJihad Europa Conference in Brussels which was co-sponsored by the Belgian far-right Vlaams Belang (VB) party whose platform, among other things, calls for pardoning Belgians convicted of collaborating with the Nazis. Spencer, Geller and Brim have also been strong supporters of far-right Dutch MP Geert Wilders and helped facilitate his fund-raising trips to the US. (Ali Gharib, Daniel Luban and I have written about Wilders and his American hosts here, here and here) Wilders has gone so far as to suggest that the Koran should be banned, along with Mein Kampf, as examples of hate speech.

Spencer, Geller and other attendees at the Brussels conference have denied that they’re allied with Nazi apologists, insisting that their European contacts in VB and Wilders’ Party for Freedom are totally unrelated to the fascists of the 1930s. By loudly claiming their affection and support for Israel, the new European Far Right has tried to distance itself from that era and, in so doing, has succeeded in gaining the support of some neoconservatives.

SpinWatch recently published an excellent article that details the development of the European far-right’s relationship with U.S. neoconservatives.

In 2007 Christine Brim, whose group Center for Vigilant Freedom helped organize the Brussels conference (along with VB) and who is listed as a speaker at the SIOA kickoff next week, elaborated on the neoconservative relationship with the European far-right in 2007.

“If such parties specifically state pro-Israel positions, and take real actions opposing anti-Semitism and disavowing previous positions – and reach out to Jewish constituents and encourage Jewish participation in party positions – these are real actions to observe, and to approve.”

Brim also serves as a senior vice president at Frank Gaffney’s Center for Security Policy.

Encouraging far-right political parties in Western Europe to reject anti-Semitism–formerly a tenet of their often fascistic views towards immigrants and non-Christians–is a positive step. But the willingness of U.S. neoconservatives such as Brim, Gaffney or far-right US bloggers, such as Geller and Spencer, to embrace politicians who have substituted Muslims as targets for their xenophobia and hate they once (and probably still, at some level) directed at Jews seems like a devil’s bargain. (Of course, this is not entirely new: prominent neo-conservatives, including Midge Decter and the late Irving Kristol, staunchly defended the murderous military junta in Argentina from the late 1970s until the 1982 Falklands/Malvinas War against charges by Jacobo Timmerman and human-rights activists that it had a special affinity for Hitler and Nazi paraphernalia.)

Arutz Sheva called attention to SIOA’s “brainstorming” blog posts that suggested that donkeys, dogs and women should be brought to the group’s launch in order to interfere with the Jumah Prayer event on the Mall.

SIOA president D.L. Adams responded to accusations that such provocations were “extreme”.

“Because the Arutz Sheva article picked up on some of SIOA’s creative brainstorming posts to use humor and a bit of theatrics involving the things that are thought to disrupt prayer for Muslims – dogs, donkeys and women – some are already calling this loving group of people “extreme.”

I take the opposite viewpoint and contend that drawing attention to the Muslim belief that ”dogs, donkeys, women” (and don’t forget breaking wind) are the things that interfere with their prayers being received, rather than spiritual matters like insincerity of heart, highlights the essential materialism of this so-called religion.

Neither our Founding Fathers, nor Lao Tse, Confucius, Gautama Siddartha, Saint Paul, Jesus, Isaiah, Moses, nor Abraham would recognize Islam as a bona fide religion, but would instantly understand it as the massive intellectual fraud that it is. Our cowardly leaders, in both Church and State, who claim it doesn’t matter what people believe, are fools. It matters that Muslims believe non-Muslims are inferior human beings. It matters that Muslims believe women are inferior to men. It matters that Muslims believe obedience and worship are the same thing and that conformity is the same as morality. It matters that Islam requires territorial sovereignty. It matters that Muslims believe that leaving Islam is equivalent to high treason. It matters what Muslims believe just as it matters what communists believe and what neo-Nazis believe.”

SIOA’s kickoff will be followed by a “saunter” to “engage in conversations with our fellow citizens who might happen to be there on the same day on matters of moment.”

Thanks for supporting Antiwar.com, by buying on Amazon

Last month we got a record $1700 from readers who bought stuff on Amazon.com by clicking on the Antiwar.com Amazon link on the front page (or by bookmarking our auto-link to Amazon).

When you click on the Antiwar.com link to Amazon, everything you buy on that visit nets Antiwar.com a commission, ranging from 4-15%.

In addition to books, Amazon sells an amazing array of stuff, free of sales tax and often with free shipping.

Last month, our sales have included the following (our reports tell us what is being bought, but never tells us who bought it):

Mosquito Net Safari Hat
Lingerie
Munchkin Mozart Magic Cube
Notebook computers
Complete Sherlock Holmes Collection DVD (in Russian)
The latest IPOD
A very high-end Desktop Computer at a great price
Video Camcorder
Cat Food
Chewing Gum
Coffee
Heinz Canned Beans
Organic Honey
Vegan Jerky
Dr. Bronner’s Soap
Toothpaste
Essential Oils
Electric Shaver
Fishing Lures
Jewelry
Toilet Paper
Quesadilla Maker
Vacuum Cleaner
Pasta Maker
Music CDs
Office Furniture
Music Downloads
Movie Downloads
Video Game Downloads
Computer Software
Magazine Subscriptions
Shoes
Binoculars
Canoe Hoist
Hedge Trimmer
Battery Pack
Luggage Lock
Toys
Games

One person even bought 13 External Hard Drives. If you buy for a company, you can really help us by checking Amazon’s prices and buying via our link.

Civility, 2007-Style: Hanging George Bush

Some people who are outraged by anti-Obama placards have forgotten that, only a few years ago, many people were condemning George Bush in terms as harsh or harsher.

Here is a picture I took at an antiwar rally in Washington in January 2007. The sign – “What’s good for the goose….. gandar” – refers to the recent hanging of Saddam Hussein had been hung after a kangaroo trial. (Saddam was guilty as hell of many things, but the trial process was a disgrace to the United States and to Iraq). The Bush administration was in such a sweat to use the Saddam trial to influence the US congressional midterm elections that the Iraqi government announced Hussein’s sentence – death by hanging – even before they had officially released the sentence (which was not released until after the US election).

The artist’s representation of George Bush could have been better, but so could the photograph itself. Some people may have been offended by the title I added to the photo: “Bush Swings by Congress.” (The full size version of the photograph is available at my Flickr site here).</a>

Bush Swings by Congress

Daniel Ellsberg: The Most Dangerous Man in America

More like The Most Heroic Man in America. Daniel Ellsberg is the subject of a new documentary: Most Dangerous Man in America: Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers.

The movie is opening today in selected theaters.

Democracy Now!’s Amy Goodman interviewed Ellsberg this morning about the movie. Joining Ellsberg is his wife, Patricia, and the co-director, Judith Ehrlich.

The interview is available as a video stream, an audio stream, an MP3 download, or a transcript (at this time, only a partial rush transcript is available). Other formats are also available.

Military to share classified intel with state and local fusion centers

Correct me if I am wrong, but this must spell an unprecedented level of domestic intelligence sharing. One wonders, is the sharing between the DoD and fusion centers — which incorporate local, state and federal law enforcement and homeland security agencies — both ways? Again, a big disappointment coming from a new President who promised all sorts of sunshine into the creepy darkness of Bush-era law enforcement/domestic security policies, but seems to be instead pushing forward into the gloaming of his own administration full throttle. Considering his justice department has announced it is pretty much all settled to extend the three controversial Patriot Act provisions set to expire at the end of the year, and now this story out of DHS, it is really hard to make out the sliver of sunlight between Obama and his predecessor.

From the ACLU tonight:

Fusion Centers To Obtain Access To Classified Military Intelligence

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
September 15, 2009
CONTACT: Mandy Simon, (202) 675-2312; media@dcaclu.org
WASHINGTON – The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced Monday that it was giving state and local fusion centers access to the classified military intelligence in Department of Defense (DOD) databases. The federal government has facilitated the growth of a network of fusion centers since 9/11 to expand information collection and sharing practices among law enforcement agencies, the private sector and the intelligence community.
Allowing fusion centers access to DOD classified information appears to be a shift in policy. The New York Times reported in July that “Janet Napolitano, the homeland security secretary, said … that fusion centers were not intended to have a military presence, and that she was not aware of ones that did.”
The American Civil Liberties Union has long warned the government about the dangers posed by fusion centers without proper oversight and, in 2007, released a report entitled, “What’s Wrong With Fusion Centers?” The report, which was updated last year, identifies specific concerns with fusion centers, including their ambiguous lines of authority, the troubling role of private corporations, the participation of the military, the use of data mining and their excessive secrecy.
According to DHS, there were 70 fusion centers in the United States as of February 2009. It is unknown how many include military personnel.
The following can be attributed to Michael Macleod-Ball, Acting Director of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office:
“As fusion centers gain more and more access to Americans’ private information, the information about them being made available to the American public remains woefully inadequate. There is a stunning lack of oversight at these fusion centers and, as we’ve seen, these centers are rapidly becoming a breeding ground for overzealous intelligence activities. Opening the door for domestic law enforcement to gain access to classified military intelligence coupled with no guidelines restricting the military’s role in fusion centers is a recipe for disaster.
“Congress must take the necessary steps to ensure that a thorough and rigorous oversight mechanism is in place to ensure that Americans’ most sensitive information is protected. Without proper guidelines, fusion centers will continue to threaten our privacy while doing nothing to improve security.”
To read the ACLU’s report, “What’s Wrong With Fusion Centers,” go to: www.aclu.org/fusion