Golda Meir and Keith Ellison

by Findalis

From the Sderot Media Center.

A strange mixture of a headline. A former Prime Minister of Israel and an avowed Muslim Congressman.

First the Congressman:

US Congressmen Brian Baird and Keith Ellison Visit Gaza and Sderot

by Anav Silverman

Following a day tour in Gaza, members of Congress, Brian Baird (D-Washington) and Keith Ellison (D-Minnesota) spent an hour in Sderot touring the city with Sderot Media Center director, Noam Bedein and staff on Friday, February 20.

In Sderot, the Congressmen met with the Amar family whose home was destroyed in a Palestinian rocket attack in December 2007. Both US President Obama and Senator John McCain had visited the Amars during their tour of Sderot last year.

Congressman Ellison in Sderot

The Congressmen asked many questions during the visit and showed interest in understanding the full impact of rocket fire on Israeli civilians– including children– living in Sderot.

Dr. Adrianna Katz of the Sderot Mental Health Center spoke with the Congressmen at the Sderot Police Station, where hundreds of exploded rockets have been stored away. Representative Baird, a licensed clinical psychologist, was particularly interested in the psychological impact of the rocket fire. Dr. Katz explained that there is a ‘Qassam generation’ of Sderot children who have been born into the rocket fire.

“These kids, who experienced rocket attacks since 2001, know no other reality other than exploding rockets and ‘Tzeva Adom’ (Color Red) alert sirens. Their sense of peace and security has been shattered,” said Dr. Katz.

View the video of Ellison’s visit here.

“The rocket fire has impacted the economic situation, family relationships– all aspects of life here in Sderot. People live in constant fear and terror that a rocket may strike at any moment. Over 5,000 residents have been forced to leave and relocate elsewhere.”

“Israelis living in Ashkelon, Be’er Sheva and Ashdod are now experiencing that same terror for the first time, ” added Dr. Katz.

Accompanying the Congressmen on their visit, were Dr. Nick Palarino and Dr. Catherine Salsman.

Holding a Hamas-fired rocket at the Sderot Police Station, US Representative Ellison, the first Muslim elected to US Congress, commented on its heaviness. “A rocket explosion can impact up to 300 feet,” explained SMC director, Noam Bedein. “The models become more sophisticated and pack more explosives with each passing year.”

Bedein also pointed out that the Grad-model Katyusha rockets come directly from Iran. “Iran supplies Hamas with the rockets that target major Israeli cities. The rockets were smuggled through the tunnels dug between the Egyptian-Gaza border or by ship, during the last ceasefire.” During the war, the Grad rockets were able to target one million Israelis who still remain under Palestinian missile threat.

Both US representatives asked Dr. Katz her view on potential peace with the Palestinians. “Is the hatred towards the Palestinians deep-seeded on the Israeli side? asked Congressman Baird. “There is no hatred for the Palestinian people,” replied Dr. Katz. “Israelis here know that there is an underlying difference between the Hamas government and the average Palestinian citizen.

The two US representatives filmed the tour on their camera phones to share with relevant persons back in the US.

Congressman Ellison, who represents Minnesota, and Congressman Baird, who represents Washington state, had visited Gaza the day previously. It was the first time that anyone from the US government had entered the Gaza Strip since Hamas took power. Their visit to Gaza, according to Representative Brian Baird’s website, was not officially sanctioned by Obama Administration. However, US President Obama has stated in the past that he intends to improve ties with the Muslim world.

Indeed in a joint press release available on Congressman Baird‘s official government website, Congressmen Ellison and Baird spoke primarily of their visit to Gaza and their impressions of the situation there.

And now the Prime Minister:

by Jacob Shrybman

Moments after another “Tzeva Adom” warning siren rang out in Sderot I walked around the Sderot Media Center office wondering why it is that the Jewish nation must continually justify their actions for survival. No matter the measure taken to protect its people from rockets, missiles, bombs, guns, or heavier attack Israel comes under a barrage of condemnations and negative political pressure. It is nearing the 61st year since its establishment, so when will the Jewish state no longer have to defend its existence?

If the reason for these condemnations is because of numbers of casualties from Israel’s vital operations then where was the uproar when Arafat claimed that 10,000-20,000 were massacred in eleven days by the Jordanian army in September of 1970? These numbers, as well as other world conflict casualty statistics, overshadow the inflated number of 1,300 people that Hamas claims were killed by Israel during the three-week Operation Cast Lead.

A playground tube in Sderot.

Nonetheless, I resent the fact that the Jewish people and Israel need to constantly prove to the world that we have a right to defend ourselves and that we are not blood-thirsty monsters like often portrayed. More so I resent the fact that in order to bolster my case for Israel’s legitimacy I have to research and compare numbers of people killed by other nations versus numbers killed by the Jewish nation. Could the world truly think that Israel likes having to send its country’s youth into an extremely hostile urban combat setting where around every corner could be a booby-trapped explosive or kidnapping trap? Could the world truly think Israel’s self-centered politicians like suspending their election campaigns to handle the emergencies that come along with a military operation?

The world must understand that Israel cannot have 1 million of its citizens under the daily immediate threat of rockets.

Last week while guiding an afternoon tour of Sderot for American students Sderot resident and mother Shula Sasson showed the group of 18 year-olds how her family’s mattresses were leaning against the wall behind their couch in the first floor living room because her family hasn’t slept or lived on the second floor of their house for years because it is simply too far from their sheltered room.

When one of the students asked Shula if she was optimistic about the since there is currently a ceasefire with Hamas, she calmly but sternly replied, “Do not believe it (ceasefire).” She then emphasized to the students that their visit to Sderot was more important than a meaningless ceasefire so they can convey the situation to their schools and communities. Shula wished the students goodbye saying, “You will be the ones to save us. Not a ceasefire.

Over the past eight years, since the rocket fire began in January 2001, Israel has attempted various methods to bring an end to these terrorist attacks in order to put off a major military operation. Even when Israel is forced to carry out the difficult task of thwarting terrorists embedded in one of the most densely populated areas in the world, it goes to unprecedented lengths to prevent loss of civilian life. It is unheard of other militaries around the world to call and text message civilians warning them of the imminent military attack.

But yet the Tzeva Adoms continue and I am sitting in Sderot agitated and on edge; in the only region in the world where civilians are consistently targeted by rockets, less than a mile a way to a territory controlled by a terrorist organization committed to the destruction of the Jewish State. So, I resent the fact that I have to defend Israel’s legitimacy for existence when it is forced to target terrorists that the world knows are using families’ home and hiding behind human shields.

As former Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir said after the Six Day War, “When peace comes we can forgive the Arabs for killing our children but we cannot forgive them for forcing us to kill theirs.

Two different stories, one dealing with the anger that Israelis feel in having to justify their existence. The other about a couple of US Congressmen. They looked and listened to the stories of Sderot, but the words fell upon deaf ears.

Normally at this point I would ask you my reader to donate to the Sderot Media Center, sign up for the Code Red Alerts, and of course pray for the people of Sderot. This time I don’t urge you to do that. Instead, send the people of Sderot a message of support. It is free, takes only a few minutes of your time and is easy to do:

by Sderot Media Center

In light of the war on southern Israel, Sderot Media Center has now opened a special page for Sderot supporters. Please share your thoughts, comments, and words of support for Sderot residents. Thereafter, your comments will be published in local Sderot newspapers and will be shared with the Sderot community.

Please mention your name and location!

Thank you.

To send a message click here.

An “Honest” Terrorist Writes: “No Muslim Can Pledge Loyalty to the Constitution”

The Keith Ellison swearing-in controversy continues to rage. The focus of this controversy should not be about which holy book should or should not be used, or if and when any book should be used, but rather it should focus upon questioning the adequacy of our American Constitution (specifically the two clauses of the First Amendment concerning the relationship of government to religion: the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause). Does our American Constitution, which offers blanket and unquestioning protection of religious freedom, create the very means by which the destruction of American sovereignty can be accomplished?

Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Read closely the words of deported terrorist linked Dr. Jaafar Sheikh Idris

Islam cannot be separated from the state because it guides Muslims through every detail of running the state and their lives. Muslims have no choice but to reject secularism for it excludes the laws of God. . . . No Muslim could become president in a secular regime, for in order to pledge loyalty to the constitution, a Muslim would have to abandon part of his belief and embrace the belief of secularism — which is practically another religion. For Muslims, the word ‘religion’ does not only refer to a collection of beliefs and rituals, it refers to a way of life which includes all values, behaviors, and details of living.

Here’s the bio on the deported Dr. Jaafar Sheikh Idris:
Former professor and director of the Research Center at the Institute of Islamic & Arab Sciences
Jaafar Sheikh Idris was a professor of Islamic Studies and the director of the Research Center at the
Institute of Islamic & Arab Sciences (IIAS) in Fairfax, Virginia. The IIAS wasa nonprofit educational institution affiliated with the Wahhabist al-Imam Muhammad Ibn Saud Islamic University in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Idris was also the president of American Open University in Alexandria, Virginia.
Idris was deported in January 2004, along with 15 others affiliated with the IIAS, during a massive crackdown on Saudi extremism within the United States. He also founded the Islamic Foundation of America.
The IIAS was shut down by federal authorities on July 1, 2004 because of its links to terrorism.

Read the words of Supreme Court Justice Harry A. Blackmun in the Lee v. Weisman ruling, 1992.

“When the government puts its imprimatur on a particular religion it conveys a message of exclusion to all those who do not adhere to the favored beliefs. A government cannot be premised on the belief that all persons are created equal when it asserts that God prefers some.”

I submit that the corollary to Blackmun’s statement might go like this:

(1) When a government fails to define what constitutes a religion it conveys a message to all that any ideology can pass for religion, and that freedom of religious expression supercedes all other freedoms and overrules all duties of government – specifically the primary duty of government to protect its citizens from harm.

(2) When a government fails to define what constitutes a religion, any ideology with intent to destroy the very constitutional protections it enjoys can hide in plain view while actively undermining the very system of government that gives it protection.

Read What is a Religion?

Here’s an excerpt:

If it is unconstitutional to establish a religion, then it might sometimes be important to determine whether something is a “religion” for Establishment Clause purposes. For example, Malnak v Yogi (3rd Cir.) considered whether SCI/TM (scientific creative intelligence/transcendental meditation), offered as an elective course in New Jersey public schools, was a religion. If so, offering such a course–even on an elective basis–might be unconstitutional. Those challenging the course produced evidence that instructors told students that “creative intelligence is the basis of all growth” and that getting in touch with this intelligence through mantras is the way to “oneness with the underlying reality of the universe.” They also pointed out that students received personal mantras in puja ceremonies that include chanting and ritual. On the other hand, supporters of the course showed that SCI/TM put forward no absolute moral code, had no organized clergy or observed holidays, and had no ceremonies for passages such as marriage and funerals. Is SCI/TM a religion? Judge Adams of the Third Circuit applied these three criteria before answering the question in the affirmative:
1. A religion deals with issues of ultimate concern; with what makes life worth living; with basic attitudes toward fundamental problems of human existence.

2. A religion presents a comprehensive set of ideas–usually as “truth,” not just theory.

3. A religion generally has surface signs (such as clergy, observed holidays, and ritual) that can be analogized to well-recognized religions.

Unfortunately our constitution was not designed to deal with a religion that is also a system of laws (Sharia) as well as a system of government that is inimical to the American Constitution.

Read: The Saudi Arabian Legal and Social Structure is Examined

By way of the Establishment Clause, the United States has built a system that inherently creates a certain degree of separation between religion and state.47 This degree of separation should not be taken for granted. For example, countries operating under Shar’ia, or Islamic Law, have little to no separation between religion and state, leaving most Islamic nations under a theocratic type of government.48 In order to make a valid comparison of the different degrees of separation and the role it plays in society, a basic understanding of the Islamic legal and social structure must be achieved.

Last month I suggested a proposed amendment to the Constitution in my article Keith Ellison, Islam, American Sovereignty : Should we Amend the Constitution?

Here’s an excerpt:

Perhaps it’s time for a constitutional amendment?I submit for example: “No person shall hold any office or public Trust under the United States who adheres to or gives allegiance to any religion, ideology, or organization which by word, nature, association, or action has shown intent to undermine the sovereignty of these United States!”

Let us all begin to discuss this issue!

Today’s “Someday We’ll Laugh” Open Trackback

Linkfest Haven, the Blogger's Oasis

Trackposted to Is It Just Me?, Perri Nelson’s Website, The Random Yak, Don Surber, The Bullwinkle Blog, Conservative Cat, Pet’s Garden Blog, Rightwing Guy, Outside the Beltway, Faultline USA, The HILL Chronicles, third world county, Wake Up America, stikNstein… has no mercy, Pirate’s Cove, Dumb Ox News, and Right Voices, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Permalink: An “Honest” Terrorist Writes: “No Muslim Can Pledge Loyalty to the Constitution”

Trackback URL:

Keith Ellison, Islam, American Sovereignty : Should we Amend the Constitution?

The issue of Rep. Keith Ellison’s decision to be sworn into office on the Koran debate is still raging in the blogosphere. Regardless of whether or not a U. S. Representative is or is not required to swear on anything, and because Ellison himself brought it up, this is an important issue that must be addressed.

Is this an issue of religious freedom, as protected under the constitution, or is this an issue of national tradition and cultural unity? The answer is that it is both. One of the first lessons I learned in seminary is that you cannot divorce religion from culture. Every religion carries with it the mark of the culture that gave it birth. Either religions will adapt to cultural change, or the culture will adapt to religious change. Change one and you change the other. It’s as simple and as complex as that.

This nation was founded upon Judeo-Christian principles. The left is very fond of revisionist history and tells us that because our founding fathers were primarily Diests, they would have welcomed into this religious freedom any ideology that claims to pass for religion. Well, those Diests adhered to Judeo-Christian principles and they would not have gotten very far without the support of the Christian people who pioneered this country. Our nation’s founders never envisioned a time when issues of religious freedom would extend very far beyond differences in Judeo-Christain sects and denominations. They could not have envisioned such a dilemma when the constitution was written.

None the less, we are now a pluralistic country with many competing religions. So the question has to do with national unity, national sovereignty, national tradition vs. personal freedom, and what constitutes a religious test?

One Country Voice has written a good article “Article VI of the Constitution states: “…no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.” It seems like everyone is just seeing the words “no religious test” and NOT reading the rest of the sentence!!”

Kobayashi Maru presented a very thought-provoking article which asks: “How long can we continue to exist as a nation when the fundamental basis on which public officials agree to uphold the responsibilities of office is allowed to vary based on each person’s point of view?”

Perhaps it’s time for a constitutional amendment?

I submit for example: “No person shall hold any office or public Trust under the United States who adheres to or gives allegiance to any religion, ideology, or organization which by word, nature, association, or action has shown intent to undermine the sovereignty of these United States!”

If we had such an amendment to our constitution, Islam would come under direct scrutiny. Why, you ask?

This is from an interesting article, “The Koran Commands Endless 911’s”:

“The Koran Chapter Sura 9:29-30 states clearly, “Make War on the Christians and the Jews…Do battle with them!” “Kill those who join other Gods with Allah wherever ye shall find them, and lay wait for them with every kind of ambush: but if they shall convert to Islam then let them go their way.” (Koran Sura 9:5) For this you shall be rewarded with eternal paradise in Heaven with Allah, crystal clear streams, 72 virgins, wine without side effects, and the Garden of Eden forever. (Koran Sura 56). The Koran clearly and expressly commands all of the 1.3 billion Muslim people to engage in Holy War, Jihad, to conquer the world for Islam, for Allah. (Everyman, The Koran, Translated from the Arabic by J.M. Rodwell, J.M. Dent, Orion Publishing Group, London, 1994).”

Why not read the book, Islam Will Conquer All Other Religions And American Power Will Diminish : Read How Allah (God’s) Prediction Will Soon Come To Pass (Paperback) by Mohamed Azad and Bibi Amina

Read Zawahiri: “The Reinstatement Of Islamic Rule … Is The Individual Duty Of Every Muslim … With Every Land Occupied By Infidels.”

Visit Project Open Book: Documenting the Persecution of Christians in the Islamic World

Read About the about the rights of non-Muslims who are subjugated to the rule of the Islamic law in Answering Islam.

Wing-Nuts and Loose Bolts

The left, in their ever cutesy and demeaning fashion, have taken to calling conservatives “Wing-Nuts.” Now if we think about it, the actual use of a wing-nut is to keep bolts from flying off into space. And as we all know, the left is full of very spacey free-flying loose bolts. Be proud Wing-nuts, we keep this Nation held together!

Here are some typical Loose Bolt comments on the Ellison debate from the Taylor Marsh “LB” blog on the “LB” Huffington Post. . .

“Can you imagine what a stink this would raise should a wiccan be elected to office.I can see it now, religious talking heads yapping on and on about the pro-wiccan agenda they are trying to promote.”

Our Answer: Yes it just might raise a little stink among the “religious talking heads”!

“Every American should be free to choose which work of fiction he or she places a hand upon when taking an oath.”

Our “Here’s your life after death answer”:

(Oh, you didn’t see anything? Get used to it.)

This is from a blogger, The Buddhist, who gives Buddhism a very undeserved bad name:

“What the f–k? Are these Babble thumpers morons for real? . . .Since when has our country be run by hillbilly Christians who treat the Bible like a fetish? Enough of these jerks. We the people need to tell the little brats to go home and take their black leather Bibles with them. What part of, “Get your sorry religion out of the religions of other decent Americans” don’t they understand?”

Our answer: Not only have you failed Buddhism 101, you haven’t got a clue as to what a decent American is!!!