Somewhere else I mentioned that I had the bad feeling that Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the Islamic supremacist and jihad-loving unofficial spiritual guide for the Muslim Brotherhood, would soon be making a triumphant return to his Egyptian homeland in a scene reminiscent of Ayatollah Khomeini’s 1979 return to Iran. And we all know how well that turned out.
For the first time since he was banned from leading weekly friday prayers in Egypt 30 years ago, prominent Muslim scholar Yusuf al-Qaradawi will lead thousands in the weekly prayers from Cairo’s Tahrir Square on Friday.
Sources told Al Arabiya that a military force will accompany the head of the International Union of Muslim Scholars from his home to Tahrir Square, provide security for the prayers and accompany him back to his residence.
Al-Qaradawi last delivered a Friday prayer sermon in Egypt in 1981 after the assassination of former President Anwar el-Sadat.
As an estimated 25,000 people flooded the vicinity of the Wisconsin state Capitol on Thursday, Democratic lawmakers fled the state to prevent a vote on a law that would limit the collective bargaining powers of public employees.
The stakes are high nationwide. Wisconsin is the first in a long line of states considering big changes to pay, benefits, work rules and the bargaining power of government workers.
The Wisconsin measure would force public employees to pay more for pension and health benefits while limiting their union’s power to negotiate.
The sergeant at arms was searching for Democratic state lawmakers who had not shown up for a vote on the sweeping legislation, and one Democratic lawmaker said he and his colleagues had left the state.
Sen. Jon Erpenbach told the Associated Press that he and his fellow Democrats hoped to force negotiations over the Republican-backed bill, but he would not say where the group had gone. The state Senate Democrats did not show up when they were ordered to attend a midday vote on the legislation. Though Republicans hold a 19-14 majority, they need at least one Democrat present to vote.
It’s an absolute zoo in the state capitol as the “Gimme mine, and yours, too” union thugs and their mindless followers are standing their ground while Senate Democrats are … AWOL. We’ve seen this pathetic game played before by juvenile elected Democrats at the state level, haven’t we?
As you can see/hear, the Hitler references run wild, and there are several scenes where death threats are made against Republican Governor Scott Walker. Where’s the outrage?
So much for the “New Tone.” Will we see the national media saturate their airwaves, newspapers, and Internet sites with the hateful scenes from this “workers rights” stand off? Don’t count on it. It doesn’t fit with their established narrative.
Say you generally liked Gov. Scott Walker’s move to rein in government labor costs but had a few doubts on his method. The last few days should have cleared that up nicely.
The public-sector union tantrums, meant to make lawmakers wobble, have an inadvertent message for the rest of us: Voters can vote all they want. We can elect a cheapskate governor and a Legislature to match. But come the moment, unions will have the last, loudest word.
They’ll have it if takes marches. They’ll have it if it takes what amounts to an illegal strike, with so many Madison teachers calling in sick Wednesday that the district closed schools. If it takes showing up for a we-know-where-your-family-is protest on Walker’s Wauwatosa lawn while he was at work, the unions are sure they can outshout any election result.
This is exactly why Walker is right to limit the unions’ power over government spending.
Walker, remember, is not removing unions’ fundamental power to bargain for wages. He is demanding that state workers put 5.8% of their wages toward retirement and that they cover 12.6% of their health care premiums, which would still have them paying more than $100 less a month than the average schmoe. He is also proposing that elected officials determine the shape of employee benefits without having to bargain them, and this as much as the added cost has unions crying “unfair.”
Walker’s moves are prompted by the state’s vast deficit. The alternative, he says, is to lay off thousands. Nonsense, charge the marchers: Just raise taxes. Unions and allies have for years been demanding more sales taxes, new business taxes and higher taxes on other people’s incomes, all to keep the state flush and generous. We’re taxed enough already, said a voting majority in November. Not yet, insist the unions that have become the largest players in Wisconsin politics precisely to counter any such voter sentiment.
Never is the duplicity of the Democrat mantra of “caring” so transparent as it is when it comes to union workers and contract negotiations. Union fat cats don’t care about the worker – the big bosses care about increasing the percentage of their slices of the pie while maintaining (or growing) their high positions of influence. And the workers? They just “want theirs” – no matter who foots the bill. Who cares about the many non-union folks who want jobs but do not want to be a part of any union, anyway? Certainly not the party and not the liberal labor orgs, both of who falsely claim to be so passionately on the side of the ”middle class.” It’s all about political payback and power at the expense of the evil private sector, all the while fostering a “gimme mine” mentality amongst rank and file union members.
At the expense of hardworking taxpayers like you and me – and our families. To use a favorite tactic of Democrats, why do union workers in Wisconsin want to take food out of the mouths of babies so they can continue to enjoy “free/cheap” health care and other uber-expensive union benefits while other families have to pay higher taxes while still finding it hard to make ends meet?
These people are nothing but contemptible. Absolutely contemptible.
Wish I could say I was surprised but I’m not. This is what Democrats do when they don’t get their way. Gov. Christie would be having a field day right now if this were happening in his state. I hope Americans – especially those in pro-union states – are paying attention to what’s happening in Wisconsin and wake up to the reality that in order for states and the federal government to get back into the black, hard decisions are going to have to be made by legislators at all levels, and sacrifices will have to be made – even by pampered union employees who think they are owed everything.
A new theme is emerging across America thanks to the 2010 elections, especially in states controlled by Republicans: The era of Business As Usual is Over. It’s about time.
In a post yesterday I argued that the gang-rape of CBS reporter Lara Logan in Cairo was a product both of Islamic misogyny and Islamic antisemitism. Regarding the latter, the invaluable Dr. Andrew Bostom, author of The Legacy of Jihad and The Legacy of Islamic Antisemitism, takes a far more detailed look at antisemitism in Egypt and traces it from bedrock Islamic traditions over a thousand years to the present day to explain why her attackers would call Logan a “Jew” while attacking her. An excerpt:
Such virulent Muslim Jew-hatred, inspired by the core, profoundly Antisemitic motifs of Islam’s foundational texts—the Koran hadith, and sira—dates from at least the 11th century as documented by Jews under living Muslim rule then, in Egypt, and neighboring areas of the Middle East. S.D. Goitein’s seminal analyses of this primary source documentary record of letters revealed a unique strain of Islamic Jew hatred was extant at this time (i.e., up to a millennium ago). The Jewish victims of this Muslim hatred created
…a special word for it and, most significantly, one not found in the Bible or in Talmudic literature (nor registered in any Hebrew dictionary), but one much used and obviously coined in the [11th century] period. It is sin’?th, “hatred,” a [Muslim] Jew-baiter being called s?n?, “a hater.”
Incidents of such Muslim Jew-hatred documented by Goitein were particularly frequent in Egypt.
All of the following events which wrought tremendous devastation to Egyptian Jewry under Muslim rule, up to a millennium before the advent of the modern bogeymen of the Muslim Brotherhood in 1928: the murderous persecutions of al-Hakim during the early 11th century, one of which was timed for Passover in 1012; Jews in Alexandria and Cairo being pogromed and plundered in 1047, 1168, 1265, and 1324; and Sultan Baybars in the 13th century blaming Jews for starting a plague, and subjecting them to extortion, massacre, and expulsion.
Bostom brings this forward to the modern era by discussing the gross antisemitism of the Muslim Brotherhood and of the recently deceased Sheikh Tantawi, formerly head of Al Azhar, the most revered center of learning in Sunni Islam. It is well worth reading in full to understand some of the context of the atrocity committed against Ms. Logan.
RELATED: At Big Peace, Gal Luft makes an interesting observation of how Egyptian dictators, including Mubarak, used that vein of antisemitism to channel the people’s anger away from themselves and toward Israel and Jews, making that the acceptable outlet. Even at the fall of the tyrant, their reacted in accord with their conditioning, ancient and modern.
UPDATE: Edited because Bostom actually mentions the Brotherhood only in passing, instead dwelling at length on Sheikh Tantawi.
A $200-million wind farm in northern New Brunswick is frozen solid, cutting off a supply of renewable energy for NB Power.
The 25-kilometre stretch of wind turbines, 70 kilometres northwest of Bathurst, has been shut down for several weeks due to heavy ice covering the blades. GDF Suez Energy, the company that owns and operates the site, is working to return the windmills to working order, a spokeswoman says.
“We can’t control the weather,” Julie Vitek said from company headquarters in Houston.
Let’s see. Wind power has been sold to us by the Green Statists as one of the perfect solutions for a problem that does not exist, anthropogenic global warming. Trouble is, wind turbines are no good when the wind is too slow or too fast. They still require old-fashioned electrical power stations to be online constantly as backups. They are sound neither from an economic nor an engineering standpoint. The need lavish subsidies to turn a profit at all.
And now they can’t keep the heat running when you need it most.
What you see is the international boundary that separates the United States from Mexico and what authorities on this side of the border seem to think is a truck packed with armed men crossing into the United States. The video clearly shows a large military-transport vehicle drive north on the Anzalduas bridge over the international boundary.
We counted at least a dozen armed men in the back of the truck. The vehicle travels down the bridge toward the U.S. Customs checkpoint. Its driver makes a U-turn just before reaching the lines of cars there. It then starts back south toward Mexico. The men pull over and search a vehicle for a few minutes then resume their trek south. The presumed soldiers then cross back over the boundary toward Mexico.
If they had come near the checkpoint and turned around to head straight back home, I’d have said this was an honest mistake — no harm, no foul. But they stopped a vehicle and searched it on our side of the border, when they had to have known they were on the wrong side. That tells me they knew exactly what they were doing.
This isn’t the first time Mexican troops have crossed the border, of course. It’s happened in Arizona, California, and New Mexico. In the last case, they appeared to be trying to collect on a bounty offered by a cartel boss for the capture of a Border Patrol agent.
The question is whether this incident on the Anzalduas bridge was an authorized crossing or not — or even, as the New Mexico case suggests, a rogue operation not ordered by Mexican authorities. There’s no way of knowing from the video, and the Mexican denial that anything occurred could mean either that they were covering their own actions, or were caught by surprise, too. That much, at least, is a Rumsfeldian “known unknown.”
What we do know, however, is that armed forces of another nation cross into our territory with some regularity. The American public has a right to know whether this is with US permission and why such permission has been granted. Is it some sort of a cooperation agreement?
This would controversial enough, even if there is some sort of joint program. But, if there is none, if foreign troops are crossing onto our soil without our permission, well, that is an act of war, regardless of how many are involved. And who were those people in the vehicle stopped by Mexican forces? Were they Mexican citizens? Were they Americans? Are Americans being stopped and questioned by a foreign military in our territory? The problems apparently dates back before the Obama administration (Who knows how far?), but they’re the ones responsible now. The Texas congressional delegation, especially in the House, might want to start asking some very pointed questions about why these incursions are happening and why the Mexican government hasn’t been told “ya basta!”