Tuesday, September 18, 2007

Fighting Jihad or Racial Profiling?

Today, I read a story that raised the hair on the back of my neck. That lead to reading some older posts on Michelle Malkin's blog (www.michellemalkin.com) about the same issue. What's the issue?


Mohammed Abu Hannoud, a regular at a Tempe mosque, claimed a hate crime was committed at the mosque on the 6th anniversary on the 9/11 attacks. What was the crime? Three men, all wearing shirts from the same plumbing company (and apparently driving a vehicle emblazoned with the company's logo) walked into the mosque and "insulted" him. He asked the three men to remove their shoes before entering the prayer hall, but they continued to "insult" him, asking him "what [he] hid in the room" while they laughed and made "profane hand gestures." They also "made negative comments about muslim children passing by."

Ahmed Squeirat--the imam at the mosque--took photos of the three men and their vehicle, and the mosque security camera got shots as well. But apart from "obscene language and hand gestures" as described, nothing was done. No physical damage, no outright threats, not even a veiled threat. Three Americans came into a mosque looking for trouble, and without finding any, they left without causing any damage.

But the imam and other mosque leaders are claiming that a hate crime has been committed. They called not only the Tempe PD but also the FBI.
Okay...I'm getting tired of this crap. Hate crime? Three guys come in, verbally insult someone, maybe offer the one-fingered salute, and it's a hate crime? What was damaged? What property was defaced? Who was threatened? Who was assaulted?


Not even one verbal threat was made--not even a veiled one. The three men basically just walked in and made fun of these people. This happens regularly in some churches of other religions; they call the police, make a report and let it go. They don't call it a hate crime, call the FBI and the media, and bitch about it!!!

Remember the six imams removed from a flight from Minneapolis to Phoenix? They later sued not only US Airways, but also three of the so-called "John Does" who complained about their behavior. The imams were reportedly speaking to each other in Arabic, praying loudly, and chanting "Allahu Akbar!" (god is great) after prayers in the terminal. They continued their strange behavior once on the plane, first by continuing to speak to each other in Arabic, then to insist on different seating arrangements (putting them in pairs at various positions in the plane from the front to the back, just as the 9/11 hijackers did), then asking for seat belt extensions--even though not one of them was overweight. One of the "John Does" who complained was another Arabic-speaking Muslim who understood what they were saying and to this day contends that they were talking about how great the hijackers were. They were first asked to leave the plane, then upon refusing, were met by security who escorted them off the plane (no handcuffs) and they were promptly arrested by police (who still didn't handcuff the men).

Note, there were no handcuffs involved--but the imams claimed later that they were handcuffed and "dragged" off the plane. A blatant and outright lie.

CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) represented the imams in several civil suits, one of which named the regular citizens (including the one who understood the Arabic rantings) who told flight attendants they were extremely uncomfortable with the actions of the men. After much public outrage, they dropped the suit against the "John Does;" but they won against the airline, only because the airline settled as it was cheaper than fighting it in court.

That was on 20 Nov 2006. In March of this year, Spc. Craig Perkins, a National Guarsdsman who'd spent a significant amount of time in Iraq, found himself being insulted by young muslim men who lived in the apartment complex where he lived with his girlfriend in Clarkston, just outside Atlanta. He recognized spitting noises, hand gestures, and the showing and waving of the bottom of shoes (all of which are serious insults to infidels in Iraq and other parts of the Mideast) that the young muslim men were doing when he walked by; he was easily recognizable as he lived there while he served in the Guard and was frequently seen in uniform. Then one day in March, two of these young muslims attacked him in the doorway of his apartment; he fired a warning shot to keep them away, then had to shoot one, but shot him in the leg.

The muslims who instigated the attack ran out to the parking lot and told police that's where the shooting took place. Perkins spent 15 hours in jail while police investigated and found blood spatter all over the doorway and down the sidewalk outside Perkins' apartment. The judge, on police advice, released Perkins and police arrested the muslims involved. I still can't find out what the outcome was, but I'd sure as hell like to know. CAIR was planning a lawsuit before the punk who'd been shot had even gotten out of the hospital.

(And the brat walked out of the hospital.)

Our enemies know perfectly well how to get to us, and they're doing it well. They're doing it right under our noses and the news that would alert us to the silent war they're waging isn't even making it to our front lawn. Why? It's politically incorrect to commit the horrid act of "racial profiling."

Someone please tell me...who else is trying to blow us to kingdom come? 80-year-old ladies? Kids on field trips? FBI agents with credentials? No. It's MUSLIMS. I'm sure there are plenty of people who are muslim and don't want America destroyed. But having read both the Qur'an and the Hadith, I'm more inclined to believe that the majority of Mideast muslims support jihad against America.

The three men who walked into the Tempe mosque and openly insulted the imam were wrong for what they did. I don't condone looking for trouble with someone who really hasn't done anything. But the more noise those people make about this, the more they insist that what happened was a "hate crime" punishable by jail time and fines, the more I'm going to believe they're just in it for jihad. Jihad can be fought a lot of different ways, and like it or not, this is one of them.

I'm a lesbian; I get flipped off, cussed out, flashed (often by guys who have nothing to show, believe me), and have even been threatened and assaulted outside gay bars. I know when it's time to call the cops and when it's time to just leave. If these guys were causing such a problem, the thing to do would have been to call the police, ignore the twits, and wait for the police to arrive. Don't cry about it after the fact when a crime has not been committed.

What I like is the FBI's response: "Someone seen as rude does not rise to the level of a federal hate crime unless there was some kind of threat involved." (Deborah McCarley, special agent, FBI)


Monday, September 10, 2007

Adding Insult to Injury: Final Arguments Against Loose Change

Sorry, I just couldn't resist...
We've covered the plane hitting the Pentagon. We've gone over the basics of the collapse of the World Trade Center. We've rehashed the twoofer arguments about the cell phone calls and the crash of Flight 93. One by one, every single argument has been debunked and every ridiculous "theory" has been laughed at.

But those are just the major points. Dylan Avery and his tin-foil hat brigade also claim that all of the 9/11 hijackers are still alive and well; this is a blatant lie. This stems from an issue in the days directly after the attacks when several families with sons who had the same names complained loudly (with the help of Al Jazeera) that their sons were not involved but were, in fact, still alive. These were all cases of mistaken identity. In fact, Mohammed Atta's father praised the 9/11 attacks and said there would be "more to come."

So, Dylan...if the government was involved in making 9/11 happen and was capable of making hundreds of innocent civilians disappear, don't you think they'd make short work of making the 19 "hijackers" disappear just as efficiently? You say that the government attacked the Pentagon with a cruise missile, the Towers were brought down by controlled demolition, and Flight 93 actually landed in Cleveland, but that all of the passengers on these flights are now dead at the hands of a government that plotted the whole thing in order to bring about some kind of revolution? So it goes without saying that they should be able to dispose of the scapegoats, right?


As for the tape Dylan supposedly debunked of Osama bin Laden's confession, he claims that because the video is of poor quality and the man claiming to be Osama eats with his right hand--Osama being left-handed and all--it can't be him. But Osama is eating in accordance with Muslim teachings, which state that Satan eats and drinks with his left hand, so believers should eat with their right. The same video, if watched in its entirety, shows the man's face perfectly clearly--it is Osama bin Laden.

Hey, Dylan, I learned about Muslim culture from the Qur'an. Ever read that book? Didn't think so.

What about the claim that billions in insurance for investors had gone unclaimed? That claim was as of 9/27/2001. Dylan didn't check after that. By December of that year, the insurance money had been claimed.


He also claims that more than $900 million in gold was believed to be in the WTC on 9/11, and that it was found "inside a 10-wheel truck accompanied by several cars." Wrong again. All of the gold stored in WTC 4 was recovered by emergency crews, watched by heavily armed federal agents, and it was dug from underneath a 10-wheel truck and several cars that had been crushed by falling debris. Another case of taking a truth and twisting it.

Aaaaand, there was only $230 million, every bit of it accounted for. Where'd Dylan get that $900 million figure? He must've pulled it out of his ass. The cars were empty...because the people who owned them were all in the building!

Uh-oh! 'Nother oopsie!

And he keeps spewing these billion-dollar figures as if it's fact, but he's not revealing where he got these figures. Truth is, all of the gold was accounted for. Period. The logs matched what they found. And yes, I'd say it's pretty normal to have a heavily-armed guard when you're digging more than two million bucks' worth of gold out of a vault beneath a massive crime scene.

And thermite? Ha...one of Dylan's favorite fellow twoofers, Steven Jones of Brigham Young University, wrote a paper claiming that thermite was used by the military as the "explosive" material that brought the buildings down. Surely he jests...thermite is not an explosive material. It's an incendiary, yes, but not an explosive. It is NEVER used in demolition. Oh, yeah--BYU wants absolutely nothing to do with Jones' paper, nor his claims. Not one expert on construction engineering or demolition and chemistry reviewed his paper before it went public. And the twoofers herald it with great fanfare.

So why does a group of people do something like this? Dylan Avery isn't alone. He's the one everyone knows best. His two cohorts, Jason Bermas and Korey Rowe, are just like him: they eat it all up. They love the exposure. Korey Rowe, in fact, was arrested on July 25 of this year for desertion of the US Army. If you go to Dylan's MySpace page, you find hundreds of pictures of him and his buddies in their many public appearances.

They "dedicate" their film to "the lives we lost on September 11, 2001," and they claim to be supporting the living victims. But have you ever seen these goons in action? I've seen video footage (not hard to find--you can get it on YouTube) of these little pricks openly insulting firefighters and police officers at Ground Zero. Why? Because the people they're arguing with won't buy their slipshod theories. Anybody who doesn't immediately and without question follow their insanity is ignored, or worse. One one occasion, a poster on Dylan's blog openly and vividly threatened the life of a 9/11 survivor, mentioning "if I find you..." To which Dylan promptly responds by telling the poster that his subject is at Ground Zero every weekday, and the hours he works there.

Sure...they care about the victims. They care so much that they accuse Bernard Brown, father of Bernard Brown II, of "sending his son to die"--Bernard Sr. was a chief petty officer in the US Navy and worked in the Pentagon, and his 11-year-old son was on Flight 77 when it was flown into the building.

So, I guess Dylan is offering yet another scenario--maybe a plane did hit the Pentagon, but the military set the whole thing up, including CPO Brown, who supposedly "sent his son to die." That is a claim that I find not only disgusting, but deeply disturbing. Only a group of complete lunatics could be so desperate to prove their wacknut ideas that they would go as far as to attack the victims.

I have learned an important lesson in watching these people: it's all about emotion. I've watched lone, intelligent people stand up to them and nearly get lynched by groups of these fanatics. They protest and shout and scream until they're hoarse, and they don't put up with anyone attempting to debate with them. The very instant a sane, rational person attempts to do what they're demanding ("ask questions, demand answers" is their war cry), they gang up and shout them all down. They don't want to hear the truth. They want to believe that the "official story" as they call it is a big lie; it's what they live for. And they get very personal and very emotional when you try to have an intelligent conversation with them.

This all goes back to a post I wrote last year, "Everybody Loves a Train Wreck." We love drama. We live for it. And we will go to great lengths to make something simple into something more complex, just for the entertainment value. Then, when someone comes along and tries to burst our proverbial bubble, we become openly outraged and intensely defensive. It's the same thing here.

Loose Change isn't the only group of wingnuts out there. The best I've heard so far--you'll love this--is from Sophia Shafquat, a batty twoofer whose theory is so outrageous it's funny. Her argument against the "pancaking collapse" theory about the Towers is to tell you to say "clunkety-clunk" 110 times and see how long it takes you. That, to her, proves that it had to be controlled demolition.

Conspiracy Theory radio talk show host Alex Jones compares himself to Galileo (major points in the kook index for that one), saying, "...they put him in jail for saying the world was round. Here we are saying, 'the world is round,' and we're being persecuted for it." No...you're being laughed at because you're hysterically stupid.

It gets even more hilarious when Sophia says, "I know I'm not crazy, and I know there are other people out there who know I'm not crazy..."

Hehehehe...you folks just keep tellin' yourselves that. As long as it helps you sleep at night.

Thursday, September 6, 2007

Shutting Down The Tin-Foil Hat Brigade: Flight 93 DID Crash in Shanksville

This is the issue raised by Loose Change that I find particularly disgusting. While this blog will be shorter than the others, I will also be far less forgiving.

Loose Change starts its portion on Flight 93 by claiming that, in reality, Flight 93 landed in Cleveland. It quotes a news report from WCPO, released around 11:45 a.m. on 9/11/2001, that United Airlines Flight 93--which had been reported as hijacked--had safely landed.

I suppose the very first reports about an incident are always correct, right, Dylan? I love how you can quote this stuff when it suits you, but you turn right around and blast the media in the same breath. To add insult to injury, the AP discovered their flub in a matter of minutes and pulled the link quickly--the Twoofers picked up on it because the story wasn't taken down as quickly.

Avery goes on to quote the coroner, Wally Miller, who said, "I stopped being a coroner after about 20 minutes, because there were no bodies there...I have not, to this day, seen a single drop of blood. Not a drop." This is yet another case of Dylan Avery and company taking the words of an investigator and completely twisting them to suit their agenda. Wally Miller is mortified (pardon the pun) that his words have been used by the 9/11 Truthers ("Twoofers"); in his words (yes, I do quote):

"What I was saying was I stopped being a coroner after 20 minutes because it was already clear what the cause and manner of death was going to be. It was a plane crash, but it was a homicide because the hijackers crashed the plane and killed the people...(off-camera: "so it was a misquote?")...yes, it was a misquote, because the point I was trying to make was after that, it became a large funeral service."

In essence, he wasn't a coroner anymore because he didn't have to identify the cause of death. He was just recovering and identifying remains (and more than 1500 were found). No wonder Dylan wasn't accepted to college.

Then, the General of the tin-foilies claims, "it's the second time in history, on one day, that an airplane and its passengers disappears upon impact." Ooooo-kay. Tell that to the people who had to clean up the crash of Pan Am 103, after it was blown up over Lockerbie, Scotland. Sure, they recovered the nose...it crashed separately from the rest of the craft, which almost completely disappeared into the crash site.

Holy shit, Batman!

He goes on to expound on his Cleveland landing theory, and is right about one thing: the Cleveland airport was evacuated, but nobody was allowed to drive because an airplane believed to be hijacked was about to land. Unfortunately for the Twoofers, it was Delta flight 1989. Dylan's claim that a second plane was evacuated and searched comes from--get this--an internet message board.

Wow. Way to use that journalistic talent there, Dylan. Dan Rather would love you.

And I just love how he claims that 200 people were evacuated from Flight 93. The passenger list, the actual list of people who boarded that flight, the manifest from the originating airport, was only 44. (Luk, ma, I kan kownt!)

It gets better, ladies and gentlemen. Now comes the shoot-down scenario. This is the part where you all cock your head to the side and go, "whatdafuck???" Didn't I just get through detailing Dylan's strong belief that Flight 93 didn't crash, but landed safely?

Well, he espouses the notion that a white jet, seen flying over the area after the crash, was a fighter jet sent to shoot the plane down. Nnnnnope. The FAA, getting reports that 93 had crashed, asked the closest craft still in the air on the way to follow grounding orders to turn around and fly over the area and pinpoint the location. It happened to be a small, private jet--and yes, it was white. So Avery took something with a tiny grain of truth in it and "twooferized" it--he blew it up to be something it never was.

What makes me howl is how Avery rounds the whole thing out by quoting Osama Bin Laden. Bin Laden had claimed to Al-Jazeera that the leaders of Afghanistan wouldn't allow him to execute such attacks, and thus, he had nothing to do with it.

Okay...okay...lemme regain my composure...damn, that's funny. What Avery's sayin' here is that the experts, so far, are liars, but the world's most wanted terrorist is telling the truth? Holy flyin' sheep shit. That's just about the funniest thing I've heard so far.

He claims that cockpit voice recorders can't be destroyed, but that's false; it's happened before. At least two of the black boxes were destroyed on 9/11, but other voice recorders were recovered and yielded a great deal of evidence, all of which is available to the public. He quips that flight 11's black box was destroyed, but a passport belonging to one of the hijackers was found. He jokes, "a voice recorder, made of the most resilient materials known to man, is destroyed, yet a passport, made of a material known as paper, managed to survive? Who writes this stuff?" (Resilient? That's an awfully big word for you, Dylan. Keep that dictionary handy, buddy!)

What about the other items that survived--like the hundreds of bones found atop the Deutsche Bank building, seat cushions, life jackets, and other documents believed to be aboard flight 11? It was a plane crash, Dylan. I'm pretty sure the loose materials on the plane moved. DUH.

Now comes the part I despise the most: Dylan's claim about the cell phone calls from the flights, mainly Flight 93. This is the part of Loose Change that actually physically churns my stomach. He says that what catches his attention is the "fact" that most callers call, say a few words, then hang up and call back later. Okay...what's his point? His attention span is about that of a fruit fly, because he moves on to Betty Ong, an attendant on Flight 11.

Dylan has the balls to mock the recording they have of the call: "does this sound like a woman on a hijacked plane who has seen people murdered in front of her? Why is no one screaming?"

The nerve of this asshole...

It has actually been reported that Ong, who'd been assigned to the coach section (away from the melee), as well as the passengers and crew with her believed there was a routine medical emergency in business class. Then Dylan starts nitpicking; he claims that Madeline Sweeney, another attendant on Flight 11, "allegedly" called her ground manager and gave a false report of how many hijackers there were and where they were seated.

Why don't we argue about the number of rocks in my front yard? This shit is just about as stupid!

I'm fairly certain that under stressful circumstances, a mistake can be made on how many people are attacking you and where they came from. I've made that mistake myself before, even in controlled scenarios. But it's also believed that Sweeney may have been in coach with Ong, thus relying on secondhand information from colleagues who were just as confused.

He goes even further into the hole he's digging. He jokes about Mark Bingham's call to his mother, saying, "when was the last time you called your mother and used your full name?" (Mark did do that.) What's his mother's response? It wasn't the first time Mark had used his full name with her; he was a businessman, and he was used to introducing himself on the phone with his full name. "...He was trying to be strong and level-headed and--strictly business." Alice Hogland, Mark Bingham's mother, knows that it was her son who called her.

It floors me just how brazen Dylan Avery and his ilk are when discussing this issue. He even states, as if it were true, that the calls were never released to the public. Once again, I call bullshit. This is another flagrant lie. They have been released.

His final gesture in this fiasco is to claim that the cell phone calls couldn't have taken place. Here, though, is where he shoots himself in the foot: all but one of the calls were made on airfones, the little handsets you sometimes see in the seatbacks on airplanes. What's more is that Dylan even points out that Mark Bingham's call was on an airfone. (Are we lost yet?)

He quotes "Project Achilles," performed by Key Dudney (writer of yet another Twoofer site), claimed that at 32,000 feet, cell phones couldn't have worked. Here's the problem: Dudney used two dinosaur-age Motorola cell phones on board a Diamond DA-20 Katana--a little two-seater plane--and did so over London, Ontario, a much larger area than Shanksville with more cell traffic. The airfones used by the passengers on board the Boeing 757 over Shanksville were made to make clear calls from 40,000 feet.

Oops. 'Nother boo-boo.

Then there's the passenger aboard Delta 1989 (forced to land in Cleveland...remember?) who testified that there was suspicious activity in the cabin: a passenger was talking urgently on his cell phone despite repeated orders from the crew to shut the thing off.

THEN, Dylan the Genius points out the military's work on voice-morphing technology. What he claims is "real time" actually isn't; the morpher could only work for recordings. But even Dylan Avery points out that the technology requires a 10-minute recording of a person's voice in order to work.
I suppose his next brilliant theory is going to be that every single one of the passengers on board the hijacked planes were part of the conspiracy and voluntarily gave recordings of their voices to be used.

Dylan's way beyond being too big for his britches here. Now he's into territory he has no business being in. What is still playing in the back of my brain is one of the very first screenshots: "Dedicated to the lives we lost on September 11, 2001." What a crock.

Here's another humdinger for ya, buddy: if Flight 93 didn't crash in that field in Shanksville, then what, pray tell, created the smoldering wreckage hauled away? And a repeat of a previous question: what happened to all the people?!?

Wait, I already said it--they're part of the conspiracy, too.

I'm irritated. I need my naptime.

Sunday, September 2, 2007

"Mexico Does Not End at the Border."

Wanna know who said that? Felipe Calderon, the new president of Mexico. I hate to get off-subject for two blogs in a row, but this pissed me off so bad I had to blog about it.

Why would such a statement piss me off? Apparently, Calderon doesn't care that it's not just workers coming across that border. He hasn't read the news reports about Mexican nationals committing robbery, rape and murder in America. I know he doesn't care, because when Mexican nationals are brought to justice for those crimes here, he and others running the government demand that we give those people "human rights."

You mean the same human rights they took from their victims?

Calderon blasted the US government for its crackdown on undocumented workers, but failed to address the bigger problem: the criminals that are coming across the border disguised as workers. They all say they're just working. Walk into any jail or prison, and every dumb shit in there will swear up and down that they're innocent. EVERYONE who commits a crime says they didn't do it. But the one thing they all miss is one pure truth that nobody seems willing to voice:

If a man can kill, steal, and rape...he can lie!

Holy shit! What a concept!

Calderon said, "wherever there is a Mexican, Mexico will be there." No, you will NOT. This is AMERICA, motherfucker. Not Mexico. You wanna provide legal counsel for your people when they are caught committing crimes here? Fine! It'll save us the time and expense! But Mexico ENDS where America BEGINS. You will NOT take over any part of my country. I will die before I see America turn into Mexico.

You're pandering to your people, Mr. Calderon; they want to hear you talk smack to the big, bad USA. Americans, however, are bigger, stronger, and bitchier than you, and the majority of Americans don't like your people taking our country over. So take a lesson, sir--don't push your luck. Push us hard enough and we'll do more than push back. We'll knock you on your self-righteous ass.

America may occasionally forget who she is, but it doesn't take long to remember. Respect our laws and our sovereignty. If you truly want us as an ally, respect us as a people. Until then, I absolutely refuse to do business with any restaurant, store, gas station or any other moneymaking venture that knowingly hires illegal immigrants. I will wash my own damn truck, cook my own damn food, and will even help my friends with their landscaping just to make sure Mexicans aren't supported by any of my business or money. Anyone who feels the way I do can join me. (Yes, I will help you do any sort of work just to make sure that none of my friends hire illegal workers!)

Some people will read this and think it a joke; I'm not joking. I'm just one person, but it's gotta start somewhere.

(Want more news on illegals? Go to www.immigrationwatchdog.com for more than what I can post here!)