Young Iranian Girls, as Young as 9, Getting Married !

A new report on Iran is revealing that an estimated 850,000 young girls there are married -- many of them as young as 9-10 and some of them married off to an ''elderly man'' in payment of debt. The report on this archaic practice was compiled by Y. Mansharof, a research fellow, and A. Savyon, director of the Iranian Media Project. Both are with the Middle East Media Research Institute (http://www.memri.org)   They explain there has been an increasingly intense public debate about the number of social issues inside of Iran. ''One such issue is the phenomenon (?) of marriages involving children, including children under the age 10 -- especially arranged marriages of girls to adult men, or even to elderly men,'' they wrote.

They add further, ''Under Iranian law, girls may marry at 13 and boys at 15, and children under 10 may marry with the approval of their guardian and the court. According to official statistics, about one million children, even under age 10, are married. The statistics also show that 85% of this amount are girls -- meaning that most of them are married to grown men.'' They noted that public figures such as sociologists inside the regime, are bravely warning that the number of children marrying is rising and that creates both health and social risks.

''According to one sociologist, arranging marriages for children, especially girls, is common among poor and uneducated urban families that seek a way out of dire financial straits; that the girls themselves are severely damaged both genitally and psychologically,'' the report stated. Officials of the Islamic government naturally came out and said they were not alarmed. A regime spokesmen have denied the extant of this foul tradition and shrugged off the report saying, ''child marriage is legal in Iran and that preventing it is against Islamic law.''  Islamist law specifies that girls reach maturity at age 9, once menstruation begins, and not accounting for their mental maturity.

This shameful tradition goes back to the time of Muhammad in seventh-century Arabia where his drug-induced (?) messages from the angel Gabrielle were put down as writings to make the Koran (Qur'an). After his first wife, Khadija bint Kewaylid died, he married his second wife, Sawda bint Zam'a. In his late-forties, some misplaced desire arose when he visited the trusted companion's home of Abu Bakr and saw 6 year old Aisha playing in the yard. Soon after, with Abu's consent, Aisha was betrothed to Muhammad. By nine the marriage was consummated as wife number three. Her age reinforced her pre-monarchical status and implicitly, her virginity which gave Mohammad increased stature and respect among his followers. His comments on the joy of  pre-period virginity led to a continuation of this practice amongst his followers down through the centuries. Oh yes, after Aisha was in the fold, he married 10 more women before he died at 63.

The Iranian cultural and scientific website www.Iranvij.ir noted that young girls ''lacked the required physical maturity for pregnancy.'' In an article published on a website identified with Iranian Human Rights activists operating outside Iran, Ali Tayefi warned that ''the early marriage of an immature girl who is not physically ready for sexual relations, particularly with men of advanced age, has many health consequences (for her). Studies have indicated that there is a close link between maternal age and maternal mortality (during pregnancy). In early marriage and pregnancy, at 9 through 14, there are five times more deaths, for mothers and also for infants, compared with older women 20-25. Then there is the infections from husbands carrying STDs contracted during relations they had with other women.''

Change in the law and practice, however, isn't easy.  When a panel discussion was held recently on the damage from child marriages, members called for changes, but they also underlined that the Islamic factor (paedophilia) is an obstacle to legislative and cultural change. Sociologist Gharai-Moghadam said that newer existing law, which sets 13 for girls and 15 for boys as the minimal age for marriage, is not sufficient because it does not address the custom widespread in various parts of the country to arranged marriages for children under the age of 10. He said, ''The law in itself is good, but we must also consider this custom in society, because unfortunately in some of our cities, especially in the east and north, marriage under 10 is considered customary by emulating the Prophet.''

The Way I See It.....after reading the Qur'an twice, I know what it says about marriage: that it is valid only between consenting adults, and that a woman has a right to choose her own spouse. As the living embodiment of Islam, Muhammad's actions reflect his disregard for his own writings on marriage.  Firstly, Aisha didn't choose Mohammad, he choose her at the ripe old age of 6! Then at 9, how could she be considered an adult when she hadn't had her first period yet?  On both counts the Prophet is hypocrite!

Sadly, in many countries, even now in Muslim ghettos in Europe, the imperatives motivating the marriage of young girls are typically economic. In others, they are political. The fact that Iran and its intolerant neighbour, Saudi Arabia, have both sought to use the history concerning Aisha's age as justification of keeping the legal age low, tells us a great deal about the patriarchal and oppressive nature of those regimes or the essential nature of Islam. The stridency of those who lend credence to these literalist interpretations by concurring with their warped view of modern day Islam does not help those Muslims who seek to challenge these aberrations.

Which Brand of Evil Do We Support ?

America is getting dragged into a very, very dangerous proxy war. - and its allies could soon become its better-armed enemies. Washington's decision to arm Syria's Sunni Muslim rebels has plunged America into the great Sunni-Shia conflict of the Islamic Middle East. For the first time, all of America's ''friends'' in the region are Sunni Muslims and all of its enemies are Shitites. Breaking all President Barack Obama's rules of disengagement, with 70% of Americans opposed to helping the rebels, the US is now fully engaged on the side of armed groups which include the most extreme Sunni Islamist movements in the Middle East.

The Independant on Sunday has learned that a military decision has been taken in Iran -- even before last week's presidential -- to send a first contingent of 4,000 Iranian Revoluntary Guards to Syria to support President Bashar al-Assad's forces against the largely Sunni rebellion that has cost almost 100,000 lives in just over two years. America's alliance now includes the wealthiest states of the Arab Gulf, the Sunni territories between Egypt and Morocco, as well as Turkey and the fragile British-created monarchy in Jordan. Up to 3,000 American ''advisors'' are now believed to be in Jordan, and the creation of a southern Syria ''no-fly zone'' -- opposed by Syrian controlled anti-aircraft batteries - will turn a crisis into a hot war.

In the Middle East, there is a cynical disbelief at the American contention that it can distribute arms -- almost certainly including anti-aircraft missiles -- only to secular Sunni rebel forces in Syria represented by the so-called Free Syria Army. The more powerful al-Nusrah Front, allied to al-Qaeda, dominates the battlefield on the rebel side and has been blamed for atrocities including execution of Syrian government prisoners of war, eating the heart of a soldier, beheadings, mutilation

 and the murder of a 14 year old boy for blasphemy (more later). These jihadist scum will be able to take those new American weapons from their Free Syria Army comrades with little effort.

From now on, therefore, every suicide bombing in Damascus -- every war crime committed by the rebels -- will be regarded in the region as Washington's responsibility. The very Sunni-Wahabi Islamist filth who killed thousands of Americans on 11th September, 2001 -- who are America's greatest enemies as well as Russia's -- are going to be proxy allies of the Obama administration. The other lesser enemies include Lebanese Hizballah, the Alawite Shite regime in Damascus and of course Iran. Don't forget Iraq, a largely Shiite nation which America ''liberated'' from Saddam Hussein's Sunni minority in the hope of balancing the Shiite power of Iran, has -- against all US predictions -- itself now largely fallen under Tehran's influence and power. Iraqi Shiites, as well as Hizballah members, have both fought alongside Assad's forces.

Russia has given its total support to Assad, three times vetoing UN Security Council resolutions that might have allowed the West to intervene directly in the civil war. Vladimir Putin puts a rather good argument for not arming the Syrian rebels. He stated; ''One hardly should back those who kill their enemies and, you know, eat their organs. Do we want to support these people? Do we want to supply arms to these savage people?''  It's an argument echoed by Boris Johnson, the Conservative Mayor of London; ''How is it supposed to work? How are we meant to furnish machine guns and anti-tank weapons to one set of opposition forces, without them ending up in the hands of al-Qaeda-affiliated thugs who execute and butcher in the name of their rotten Prophet.''

Just over a week ago, a 14 year old boy called Mohammed Qataa was selling coffee from his stall at Aleppo. A friend of his asked for a cup, and said that he would pay him back later. Young Mohammad said that he didn't take credit, and wanted payment there and then. Indeed, he went on casually to say that even if the Prophet Mohammad had come down, he would not give him credit. Alas, his jocular remark was overheard. Three members of the movement called the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria decided that they took exception. So they kidnapped the kid and took him off to beat him; the next morning they brought him back with whiplash marks on his body and dumped him still alive, by his coffee stand. A member of the brigade made a speech to the gathering crowd, ''Citizens of Aleppo, disbelieving in God and cursing the prophet is polytheism. Whoever it is will be punished like this.''  In full view of the crowd and the boy's parents -- pleading hysterically -- this man fired two bullets into Mohammed head, killing him instantly.

The Way I See It.....these rebels are odious, twisted, hate-filled thugs; arrogant and inadequate creeps, intoxicated by the pathetic illusion of power that comes with guns; poisoned by a perversion of religion into a contempt for all norms of civilised behavior. They are fighting not for freedom but for a terrifying Islamic state in which they would have the whip hand. Already in areas these bastards control they are intimidating the Christian population with threats to convert to Islam, as their foul founder first did, with four options: convert, pay a tax to stay, if not move out or die.

In fact, it is the West's failure militarily to support the Syrian National Coalition (SNC) and its principal military counterpart, the Free Syrian Army (FSA), that is strengthening the hand of al-Qaeda in Syria. The SNC is formally committed to the establishment of a ''democratic and pluralistic civil state'' and is recognised by Britain, the US, the EU and the Arab League as legitimately representing the Syrian people. Yet demoralised by their shortage of arms, soldiers of the FSA have been defecting to the al-Qaeda affiliated Jabhat al-Nusra milta, which is, according to some sources, the best equipped rebel force in Syria. The double-headed monster traditionally oppressing the Arab world -- brutal dictatorships in power and opposition channelled into Islamist extremism and terrorism is alive in Syria. My mind boggles with the thought that the US would want to play any part in it. Oh yes Barack, these people really represent a very TOLERANT religion.......NOT!!!

No Grief For the Great Barrier Reef, Only For the Warmists !

Oh God....spare us from the inflated, brain-dead predictions of Australia's biggest global warmist dickhead!  You know who I'm talking about by now if you've been a regular reader of my blog postings over the 3 and half years.  Yes.....Tim Flannery, Australia's very own Climate Commissioner. The man who was given the job by another douche bag, our very own inept Prime Minister, Julia Gillard. Tim, ambles into the Climate Commission Office only 3 days a week and takes home his ill-gotten gains of $180,000 per. So now his office has a new Climate Report released and I see this fellow (right) again this morning spreading his climate alarmism on channel 9s TODAY SHOW duping, the also not so smart, Karl Stefenovic into believing that there still is global warming going on, the seas will rise and the Great Barrier Reef is bleaching and will die if we ignore his dire warnings. He needs a good Bitch-Slapping!

Let's get to the real truth. Not the fabricated, government grant-induced conclusions that another alarmist residing at The University of Queensland has maintained over and over again. He's enjoyed earning that largess swimming around the Reef for the past thirteen years at $80,000-$100,000 per year. Ove Hoegh-Guldberg is the Director of the Global Change Institute and Professor of Marine Science he heads a large research laboratory (over 30 researchers and students) that focus on how global warming and ocean acidification are affecting and will affect coral reefs. Obviously, living in his ''Ivory Tower'' he hasn't read anything in the last 9 months that would make him shockingly aware that there hasn't been any appreciable warming (0.03 degrees) in the last 17 years!  Coral reefs are recovering from bleaching and acidification isn't a problem for sea creatures in general. Ove, you've got to read more, not just the crap your fellow deluded warmists have been publishing!

Here' some of Ove's warming alarmist claims over the past 13 years:  2000 - ''Reef building corals are likely to become very rare if warming continues. We now have more evidence that corals cannot fully recover from bleaching episodes as the overall damage is irreparable.''  2006 - ''No-one with any credibility in this field is doubting that we're seeing the signs bleaching as a major change to an ecosystem due to climate change. About 30 to 40% of coral on the Great Barrier Reef could die within a month.'' (By this time there was no warming for 9 years)  2009 - ''As we've seen CO2 rising, the Great barrier Reef has started to slow its calcification.''  (Implying that acidification of the oceans has started)  2011 -  ''We will see large-scale mortality of reef-building corals (30% or more) and many other organisms of reefs. Reefs in will take more than 10 years to recover.''  2013 -  How does Professor Hoegh-Guldberg respond to people who contrast his predictions with reality? Andrew Bolt was subjected to baseless slander and called a bad journalist, and a climate denialist for deliberately misleading Australians by listing Ove's dud predictions. So much for Truth for Truth's sake, if you can't take the heat...stay out of the water. ( low left )

However, now a government-run research body has found in an extensive study of corals spanning more than 1000km of Australia's coastline that the past 110 years of ocean warming has been good for their growth. ( see my June 19, 2011 posting: "Warming Gives Us More reefs !) The findings undermine the blanket predictions of Ove Hoegh-Guldberg and Tim Flannery that global warming will devastate coral reefs, and add to a growing body of evidence showing corals are more resilient than previously thought and recover from bleaching sooner than expected. The study by the commonwealth-funded Australian Institute of Marine Science (AIMS), peer-reviewed findings of which are published in the leading Journal of Science Today, examined 27 samples from six locations from the West Australian coast off Geraldton to offshore from Darwin.

The researchers found that, contrary to their own expectations, warmer waters had not negatively affected coral growth. Quite the opposite, in fact: for their southern samples, where ocean temperatures are the coolest but have warmed the most, coral growth increased most significantly over the past 110 years.. For their northern samples, where waters are the warmist and have changed the least, coral growth still increased, but not by as much. ''Those reefs have actually been able to take advantage of the warmer conditions, and that would also apply to the Great Barrier Reef'' said Janice Lough, a senior AIMS research scientist and one of the study's authors. Maria Byrne, a professor of marine biology at Sydney University, said after reading the paper that its findings ''made perfect sense''. She added, ''Temperature rules metabolism, so it's a no-brainer that if you get more temperature you will get more metabolism.''  Yesterday's denialism is today's no-brainer....hmmm!

More unexpected news!  ''Global warming could actually mean fish breed better,'' says a new paper published in Global Change Biology.  Author, Gabrielle M. Miller adds, ''Increased CO2 stimulates reproduction in coral reef fish. This discounts what many marine experts kept saying, that ocean acidification is predicted to negatively impact the reproduction of many marine species, either by reducing fertilization success or diverting energy from reproductive effort.'' I guess CO2 is like Viagra for fish. These researchers investigated the effects of near-future levels of pCO2 on the reproductive performance of two types of Anemone-fish from the Great Barrier Reef. Breeding pairs were held under three CO2 treatment levels (Present-day Control (430atm), Moderate (585atm) and High (1030atm) for a 9 month period that included the summer breeding season. The increased CO2 dramatically stimulated breeding activity that resulted in pairs in the High CO2 group having their reproductive output 82% higher than the Control group and 50% higher than the Moderate group.

Well the BEAT (of the ''No Warming'' drum) goes on. Last month the diehard warmists running the British Broadcasting Company finally conceded what the Australian Broadcasting Company still can't.  They announced, ''We concede that since 1998, there has been an unexplained 'standstill' in the heating of the Earth's atmosphere.''  Mind you, this was 2 months after their own British Meteorological Office came out to admit the reality of no warming staring them and their data in the face. Now, to add the coup de grace to the global warming movement, Professor Judith Curry, chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology, says the question now is not whether global warming has paused, but whether global cooling has started.

She writes, ''Attention in the public debate seems to be moving away from the 15-17 year ''pause'' to the actual cooling trend since 2002. This period since 2002 is scientifically interesting, since it coincides with the 'climate shift' (circa 2001/2002) posited by Tsonis and others. This shift and the subsequent slight cooling trend provides a rationale for inferring a slight cooling trend over the next decade or so, rather than a flat trend from the 15 year pause with CO2 playing no part at all.'' Christopher Monckton, who has been consistently mocked for his anti-warming stance over the past decade, declares the climate models of warmists are now broken!  Looking at the temperature chart , by superimposing the temperature curve and its least-squares linear-regression trend demonstrates that there has been no statistically-significant warming in 17 years and 4 months.

The Way I See It.....it is better to focus on the ever-widening discrepancy between predicted and observed warming rates. The IPCC's forthcoming Fifth Assessment Report backcasts the interval of 34 computer models'' warming projections to 2005. Since then the world should have been warming at a rate equivalent to 2.33C/century. Instead, it has been cooling at a rate equivalent to a statistically, somewhat insignificant 0.87C/century. I'd like to see Al Gore choking on those stats.

Lord Monckton confirms the cooling but says the real issue is the discrepancy between the ''science is settled smugness, the debate is over'' climate models and the real ''inconvenient truth'' revealed by the data. The graph above asserts that the difference between the models and reality is now statistically significant. To those dogmatic warmists shouting ''I accept the science'' we can only respond: ''I wish you would.'''

Is Obama Helping Resurrect the Ottoman Empire ?

Turkish PM Erdogan and Obama confer

Is Barack HUSSEIN Obama helping to advance a grand plan by Turkey, with the support of Germany, to restore the Ottoman Empire, the Islamic caliphate that controlled much of southeast Europe, Western Asia and north Africa for more than six centuries?  That is the question posed by historian Robert E. Kaplan in lucid article titled ''The U.S. Helps Reconstruct the Ottoman Empire.''  (http//www.gatestoneinstitute.org/3728/germany-new-ottoman-empire) 

Kaplan, a historian with a doctorate from Cornell University, specializing in modern Europe, says history suggests a possible partnership between Turkey and Germany, which has seen influence over Turkey as a means of influencing Muslims worldwide for its own interests. He asks why the U.S. government ''would actively promote German aims,'' including the destruction of Yugoslavia in the1990s and the recreation of the Ottoman Empire through the ''Arab Spring.'' It's no secret that the Muslim Brotherhood have been promoting this idea since its inception in Egypt in 1928 by Hassan a-Banna. Kaplan points to Obama's support of the Muslim Brotherhood, the ultimate victor in the ''Arab Spring'', the U.S. backing of the radical Islamic ''rebel'' groups in Libya with ties to al-Qaida, and current support for similarly constituted Islamic ''rebel'' groups in Syria aligned with al-Qaida.

Each of these U.S. military interventions occurred in areas that were under the original Ottoman Empire. Kaplan sees a similarity between the Clinton-era attacks against the Serbs and the Obama administration hostility to well-established regimes in Libya and Syria. He writes; ''Since the mid-1990s the United States has intervened militarily in several internal armed conflicts in Europe and the Middle East, bombing Serbs and Serbia in support of the Izetbegovic's Moslem Regime in Bosnia in 1995, bombing Serbia again in support of KLA Moslems of Kosovo in 1999, bombing Libya Gaddafi regime in support of rebels in 2010. Each intervention was justified to Americans as motivated by humanitarian concerns.''

Kaplan observes that neither Presidents Clinton nor Obama ever mentioned the reconstitution of the Ottoman Empire as a justification for military intervention. The U.S. offered Americans other reasons for intervening in Serbia, including a desire to gain a strategic foothold in the Balkans, to defeat communism in Yugoslavia, to demonstrate to the world's Muslims that the U.S. is not anti-Muslim, and to redefine the role of NATO in the post-Cold War era. It's important to be reminded that at its height in 15th and 16th centuries, the Ottoman Empire stretched from its capital in Istanbul, Turkey, through areas of North Africa, Iraq, the Arabian peninsula and parts of the Balkans. (see map)

In hindsight, you can see that since the 1990s, each European and Middle Eastern country that experienced American military intervention in its internal conflict or an ''Arab Spring'' has ended up with a government dominated by previously suppressed Islamists of the Muslim Brotherhood or an al-Qaida variety that fits nicely with the idea that these events represent a return to Ottoman-type rule. Kaplan sees a recurring pattern to each U.S. military action. First there is an armed uprising with the country, the American news media heavily reports the conflict. The ''good guys'' are the rebels while the existing regime, the ''bad guys'', are brutally anti-democratic, committers of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. Secondly, with public figures, NGOs, and international organizations calling for support for the rebels, the third phase is now easy with the president ordering logistical support and arms to the rebels. Finally, under the auspices of NATO you get a military attack supporting the rebels and replace the secular government with an Islamist one.

Germany found an excuse to partner with American meddling in 2012. Reporter, John Rosenthal, published in the Asian Times, information that disclosed reports prepared by the German foreign intelligence service, the BND, attributing the massacre in the town of Houla on May, 2012, to the Syrian government. Rosenthal linked the conclusions of the BND regarding the Houla massacre to the policy of the German government to reinforce the support of the Syrian rebellion and its political arm, the Syrian National Council. Recalling that Germany invaded Syria in both World Wars and actively sought the destruction of Yugoslavia in the Cold War era, Kaplan wonders if the Obama administration's joining with Germany in bombing Libya, and aiding Syrian rebels as well, is an effort to help Germany fill its foreign policy objective of restoring the Ottoman Empire. In November, 2011 Germany's Prime Minister, Angela Merkel had private talks at the White House. No doubt some mention of the idea of an Ottoman resurgence in the Middle East was discussed. (below)


Kaplan notes that the Obama administration's foreign policy requires it to downplay the Muslim Brotherhood and al-Qaida terrorist threat to U.S. national security. On Nov 1, 2012, CNSNews reported that Obama had described al-Qaida as having been ''decimated and on the path to defeat and bin Laden is dead!'' or some other variation at least 32 times since the attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi. Obama also has advanced a narrative expressing U.S. acceptance of Islam. He foolishly describes it as a peaceful and tolerant religion. In June, 2009, he proudly exclaimed he had known Islam ''on three continents before coming to the region where it was first 'revealed'''.

While meeting with Turkeys President Abdullah Gul at Cankaya Palace in Ankara, Turkey, on April 6, 2009, Obama repudiated the U.S.s history since George Washington by declaring the United States is not a Christian country: ''And I've said before that one of the many strengths of the United States is -- although we have a large Christian population -- we do not consider ourselves a Christian nation or a Jewish nation or a Muslim nation, we consider ourselves a nation of people bound by ideals and a set of values.'' Yet despite Obama's attempt to establish a narrative in which Islamic terrorism is not a threat to U.S. national security, the evidence bounds that the radical Islamic rebels responsible for opposing Gadhafi in Libya and Assad in Syria have strong links to al-Qaida.

The Way I See It.....top level al-Qaida operatives are functioning with impunity in Libya under a NATO-established provisional government. I brought out the fact in my May 21st posting titled ''The Real Reason behind Benghazigate'' that ambassador Chris Stevens played a central role in recruiting jihadists to fight the Syrian regime with Turkey's support. Also that special mission was used to coordinate Arab arms shipments from Qatar and Saudi Arabia and other aid to rebels who are known to be saturated by al-Qaida an other Islamic terrorist groups. I also reported that the attack which killed Stevens and three other Americans was an al-Qaida revenge killing that took place one day after al-Qaida chief Ayman al-Zawahiri called for retaliation for a U.S. drone strike that a top Libyan al-Qaida leader.

On Jan 3, (2013) WND reported that the Muslim Brotherhood has penetrated the Obama White House, with several American Muslim leaders who work with the Obama administration identified as Muslim Brotherhood operatives who have significant influence on Team Obama's foreign and domestic policies. Arguably, the Obama government's policy of siding with the rebels in Syria may reflect the aim of isolating Shite-dominated Iran from the rest of the Sunni Islamic world. In February, President Obama's nominee to head the CIA, John Brennan, converted to Islam a few years ago in Saudi Arabia. It sounds like a form of high level ''stealth jihad'' going on in Washington/

Obama's Emptiest Benghazi ''Talking Point'' !

On September 12, 2012, President Barack Obama vowed to ''bring to justice'' the perpetrators of the deadly attack in Benghazi, Libya. On October 26, 2012, Obama said his ''biggest priority'' was bringing the ''folks'' in Libya responsible for murdering four Americans ''to justice.''  Tick, tock, tick, tock....

While White House press secretary Jay Carney sneers at the Republicans ''obsession'' with what went wrong at the besieged Libyan consulate, Obama continues to ply his emptiest talking point. On May 13th, 2013, more than eight months after the bloody disaster, Obama snippily reminded reporters that he had told them all back in September that ''we would find out what happened, we would make sure that it didn't happen again, and we would make sure that we held accountable those who had perpetrated this terrible crime.''  Woulda, coulda, shoulda. Justice delayed is justice denied. A little more ''obsession'' from this administration with hunting down the jihadist killers would be a good thing. How about a little more anger directed at the perpetrators and a little less rage aimed at the conservative press (the only ones asking the really hard questions)? Nah. Team Obama seems more singularly focused on blaming its opponents, smearing whistleblowers and deriding those who are trying to hold the president to his words, words, words.

Perhaps, with their newfound skepticism toward the lying liars of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, the former lapdogs of the White House press corps will start asking questions like this: Where the hell is Abu Sufian bin Qumu?  Qumu, a suspected Libyan Islamic Fighting Group militant with ties to the financiers of the 9/11/01 attacks, was held at Guantanamo Bay for six years. The Bush administration foolishly handed him over to the Gadhafi regime on the promise that he would remain imprisoned. In 201o, Qumu was granted amnesty and released. Contrary to the delusions of the International Gitmo Bleeding Hearts Fan Club, the supposedly poor and oppressed Qumu did not content himself with writing poetry or farming potatoes. A week after the 9/11/12 attack, the Ansar al-Sharia leader was named as a possible chief plotter in the deadly assault on the consulate personal, staff and private security contractors in Benghazi.

Two weeks ago, the FBI finally got around to publicizing photos and names of three of five individuals at the Benghazi murder scene who are wanted for questioning (left). Congressional and intelligence sources have said the probe has moved at a snail's pace. There been a ''near total lack of progress,'' House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers said in early January. It's all par for this administration's foot-dragging course. Remember: The FBI conducted a ''drive-by'' investigation last October, flying in and out of Libya after a paltry 12 hours on the ground. What difference did the phony YouTube narrative plied by U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice, Hillary Clinton and President Obama make? As former deputy chief of mission, Greg Hicks testified that the damage done was ''immeasurable'' because it delayed the FBI probe. Classified documents were left unsecured at the compound. Critical time and evidence was squandered.

As Hicks explained, the YouTube fable publicly contradicted Libyan President Mohammed Magariaf, who had immediately reported after the 9/11/12 attack in Benghazi that ''this was an attack by Islamic extremists.'' The nonsense YouTube talking points Team Obama repeated ad- nauseum for 12 days ''affected cooperation with the Libyans,'' Hicks said.  ''I firmly believe that the reason it took us so long to get thew FBI to Benghazi is because of those Sunday talk shows by Rice.'' Meanwhile, the Washington Free Beacon's Bill Gertz reports, Qumu's Ansar al-Sharia goons ''continue to operate freely in Benghazi'' and spread jihadist ideological crap.

Instead of keeping as many terror operatives as possible off the streets and out of commission, the Obama administration is once again stupidly vowing to shut down Guantanamo Bay (not before you gas the scum inside...I say). Attorney General Eric ''Fast and Furious'' Holder, whose former law firm Covington and Burling represented 18 Gitmo detainees demanding freedom, announced ''a renewed effort to close Guantanamo'' this week. This despite the chilling disclosure by the office of the director of national intelligence that 28% of the 599 former detainees released from Gitmo were either confirmed or suspected of later engaging in jihadist attacks. That's a ''2.9% rise over a 25% aggregate recidivism rate''  reported by the Reuters.

Closing Gitmo, I should point out, just happens to be the top policy goal of the left-wing ratbag Center of Constitutional Rights (CCR). (A high sounding name with a phony context to hide their treason.) The CCR is the U.S. group of jihadi-sympathizing white, Jewish lawyers who helped spring none other than Benghazi terror plotter Abu bin Qumu from Guantanamo. These Jewish fools forget that the vermin they free won't give a second thought to cutting their throats if they were found on a Middle Eastern street. So, social justice for Qumu and the Gitmo Goon Squad. No justice for the Benghazi Four. When it comes to Obama's vow to hold the killers accountable, there is no there there.

The Way I See It.....American investigators believe they have enough information implicating the men who led to the deadly attack in Benghazi to justify having the military seize them. However, I have learned that the Obama administration would prefer to put them on trial in a civilian court. I thought....hold on, am I reading this correctly???  President ''DroneStrike'', who's been known to liquidate people from the air in places like Pakistan with no more evidence than that their movements show the ''signature'' of a terrorist, now won't go in and grab five jihadis whom the Feds have reason to believe murdered a U.S. ambassador?

Not for a minute do I believe that Obama wants these guys tried in federal court. His whole M.O. has been to kill suspected jihadis on sight so that he doesn't have to deal with the headache of housing and trying them. If he sends in the SEALS to grab the five and they succeed, suddenly Gitmo and military tribunals and Jewish lawyers are back front and center. Of course the other reason for holding back is to make sure any unilateral kill/capture mission could fray relations with the fledgling Libyan government and cause it to collapse. In the meantime, the U.S. is keeping the suspects under electronic surveillance and seeing if it can get some local ''friendly'' militants to help apprehend them.

Islamists ''Staking Claim'' with Maryland ''Cultural Center'' !

What is it?  Typical American political correctness, commercial real estate greed, or just the Obama government's ostrich-like head-in-the-sand stupidity?  Most Americans probably don't realize that Turkey's Islamist government is being allowed to build a colossal mosque in the United States' state of Maryland, a short distance from Washington, D.C. This building project has the input of several branches of a group known as the parent organization of Hamas and al-Qaeda. It's an alarming revelation unlikely to receive coverage in the ''lamestream'' media. The $100 million mega-mosque will be erected in Lanham, Maryland and is expected to ''become the largest and most striking example of Islamic architecture in the western hemisphere.'' when it is finished in late 2014.

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayip Erodogan, an anti-Semite, who is slowly transforming his country from a secular democracy to an Islamic state, said his government chose the site because of its location in ''free territory'' (?). At the groundbreaking of the 15-acre site, Erodogan led a delegation of Turkish government officials whose obvious goal included increasing Islamist influence in America. One official proudly stated, ''It will be a place that will help counter an epidemic of Islamophobia in the United States. This place will feature five buildings, including a neo-Ottoman mosque that can hold 750 worshipers.''  The delegation was met by leaders of the two entities of the U.S. branch of the Muslim Brotherhood. They include Naeem Baig, president of the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA) and Mohamed Magid, president of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA).

At the groundbreaking ceremony (left), Erdogan thanked President Obama (who scandals made him unable to attend), the State Department and Maryland Governor, Martin O'Malley then finished up with; ''The mosques are our barracks, the domes our helmets, the minarets our bayonets and the faithful our soldiers.''  Those seemingly colourful words were alarming to a number of analysts, including former Palestinian operative Walid Shoebat, who says the West doesn't realize the significance of what Erdogan was saying. Shoebat said Erdogan's true mission is to claim land for Islam. He pointed out that, ''The west is is unaware that in Islam, a mosque is an embassy and Turkey is acting stealthily, which is why the project is not arousing much alarm. Turkey is quietly spreading its influence across the America.''

It is not surprising, since any real interpretive reporting on the growth of  Islamic cultural influence in the U.S. is commonly ignored by the liberal press. After all, we should progressive ideologues give a hoot about Islamic leaders like INCA president Baig?  To them he should be embraced regardless of  his ties to terror and Baig's public comments like; ''our work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within'' are ''taken out of context'' leading to Islamophobic misunderstandings. Yeah...right!  Let's face it, whether here or abroad Islamic cultural centers are not a model of civic multicultural charity. They only serve Muslims. Welcoming these stealth jihadists' compounds financed by leaders that condemn Israel and America, is nothing short of seditious.

It has been reported by Islamist-Watch.org that Erdogan's AKP Party ''desires to re-establish the Caliphate and unify the Middle East -- and later the world -- under Turkish Islamic rule and hegemony.''  Islam analyst and blogger Pamela Geller agrees, ''Most Americans don't know that the plans showcase Turkey's long-held territorial dream. Erdogan through much deception is fulfilling one of his spiritual mentor's dreams, Sheik Nazeem Kibrisi.  While Turkey paints its version of Islam to be Sufi, which the West believes is moderate, the Sheik is anything but moderate.''  Shoebat quotes a speech he gave to Turkish students in Germany a few years ago; ''Your forefathers made the earth tremble. You are the grandsons of the Ottomans who will make the world tremble again. If the Ottomans do not come back the unbelievers will never be brought down to their knees. History is made of recurrences, certainly our glorious era has come, the day being born belongs to Islam....as long as we have Allah we do not need America, nor do we need the unbelievers here in Europe, nor do we need the unbelievers in other corners of the world.''  There's no way this rant is taken-out-of-context!

The Way I See It.....it would appear that former Muslim allies in Turkey might not be so tolerant after all. Presently, in Turkey, college admissions have been changed to favour religious students, the military has been gutted of its secular generals (with 1 in 5 currently in prison under dubious charges) and women have been routed out of top government jobs. Honor killings in Turkey increased 1,400% between 2002 and 2010. Persecution of artists and journalists has become common place as opponents are charged with vague crimes like ''denigrating Islam'' or ''denigrating the state.''

Prime Minister Erdogan is aggressively pursuing his pro-Islamic agenda within America's borders and not much is is being done to prevent foreign and domestic born Islamists from strengthening their subversive activities. Obama's government is once again asleep at the wheel while anti-American pro-Sharia influences work to radicalize Muslim youth. I wonder what historic calamity awaits America. Regardless, I am sure it will result in more unconstitutional infringement and privacy loss. After all, when it comes to terrorism, Washington rarely learns life's lessons. To quote future (God forbid) Presidential contender Hillary Clinton, ''What difference does it make?''

Erdogan: No More, Mr Popular Guy !

Kasimpasa, the hardscrabble Istanbul neighborhood where Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan grew up, is known for producing men who have a prickly sense of honor, are easily offended and like to fight. Erdogan brought that assertive, take-no-prisoners style into politics, and it has helped him keep his friends in line and his critics cowed. No longer: the tens of thousands of Turks who have poured onto the streets in the past week are telling their Prime Minister they are really tired of the Kasimpasa leadership style.

Many Turks hoped they had left that style behind when, more than a decade ago, they finally manage to consolidate democracy and curb the power of autocratic generals who had long ruled their country from behind the scenes. The leader who brought them to this promised land was Erdogan. But more recently, buoyed by his success at the polls and by the utter lack of a coherent political opposition, Erdogan has reverted back to type, acquiring the image of a headstrong, arrogant bully. He seems perpetually angry, eager to threaten his critics but rarely ready to hear them. He does not wear a uniform, but he believes he can take Turkey wherever he wishes and he recalls the harsh, dour generals.

Remarkable transformations have reshaped Turkey over the past two decades. The long-troubled economy is booming, and Turkey has a dramatically increased role in world politics. But perhaps the most radical transformation of all is the fact that Turks no longer accept the arrogance of power and Endogan's showing deference to his Islamic base by leaning toward a growing Islamisation of his country. What started as protest over a few trees grew into a full blown national crisis. Angry environmentalist and leftist activists camped out at a sliver of greenery off Istanbul's iconic Taksim Square called Gezi Park, which city planners intended to raze to make way for a shopping mall. Demolishing Gezi Park's grove for another commercial development was just the last straw. Soon the protest spread to the capital, Ankara, and some smaller cities.

While it seems Erdogan's support has suffered, his AKP party, which is pro-business, still has an overwhelming mandate from last year's election, with a strong support among the growing middle class and in the Anatolian hinterland. The protesters, now from a range of ethnic, economic and political backgrounds, share a fear that their elected government is slipping back into the authoritarian mode. The mall plan would not in itself have set off such a strong reaction but many decisions, small in themselves, added up. Like restricting evening alcohol sales, naming a new bridge after a murderer of members of the Alevi sect who make up 15% of Turkey's population. Every month brings what seems to be a tightening of political space. Journalists criticize the government at their peril. Dozens were arrested over protest Tweets, accused of inciting ''hatred.''

Worst of all, in the eyes of many Turks, is the prospect that Erdogan is building a lifetime power base. He is maneuvering to change the constitution to greatly strenghten the office of the President, for which he intends to run. His tenure as Prime Minister is up next year and can't be renewed. He has gone so far as the suggest that he wants to be in power when Turkey celebrates its 100th birthday in 2023. It will be interesting to see if Ataturk's secular society hasn't been turned into another autocratic Islamic Republic by then. Still, the protesters are not backing down to Erdogan's threats to ''to settle accounts with these extremist elements and make them pay for their lawlessness!'' Last night  the largest crowd in the twelve days of protest assembled in Gezi Park. It is estimated that over 100,000 came together to show their defiance.

The Way I See It....Erdogan is an elected leader whose achievements are indisputable. But his Kasimpasa style is putting his legacy at risk. He should heed his own Foreign Minister, Ahmet Davutoglu, who was more conciliatory and warned that the protests ''would damage the reputation of our country, which is admired both in the region and the world.''  Tellingly, Davutoglu made his comment on Twitter.