It was, shall we say, an interesting week in Norway.  On Tuesday, January 17, a video was posted on YouTube that called for Norwegian soldiers to be withdrawn from Afghanistan.  Over images of Norwegian soldiers and of Norway’s prime minister, foreign minister, and crown prince, a text calling for Allah to “destroy them and let it be painful” was read aloud in Arabic, with subtitles in Norwegian.  The video, which concluded with an image of Norway’s flag in flames, urged Muslims to show up for a protest rally on Friday outside the parliament building in Oslo.

The video provoked instant outrage.  On Wednesday, the security police arrested a suspect, but announced that even if the rally organizers proved to be responsible for the video, their permit wouldn’t be withdrawn.  It soon emerged that there were connections between the video and a Facebook group whose members included Arfan Bhatti, one of four men arrested in 2006 for shooting at the Oslo synagogue.  (Bhatti was also suspected by police of plotting to blow up the U.S. and Israeli embassies.)  Another member was Mohyeldeen Mohammed, who at a jihadist rally two years ago threatened Norway with its own 9/11.

And guess who else turned out to be an active member of the Facebook group?  None other than Aisha Shezadi Kausar (20), whom I wrote about a couple of weeks ago – the girl who’s being sent around to schools by the Norwegian literary establishment so she can brainwash kids into thinking the niqab is just dandy.  (Her essay, “You, Me, and Niqab,” has been reprinted in a collection of essays being distributed to students all over the country.)  On Facebook, Kausar clicked “like” on the news of the upcoming rally.

On Thursday, the Communist daily Klassekampen ran a sympathetic interview with Kausar.  When Niqab Girl walked into a café with interviewer Åse Brandvold, the customers emitted audible groans.  Brandvold: “Her garment provokes them….Only the eyes show.  They are radiant.” Kausar: “I want to go over to them and say: Hi, I’m Aisha, and I’m an ordinary person.” Yes, an “ordinary person” who admitted to Brandvold that she planned to take part in the Saturday rally and who, when asked to comment on the video, said: “It’s just a video.” Though Brandvold pressed her (ever so slightly), Niqab Girl refused to condemn the video:  “I’m tired of Muslims always being expected to distance themselves from one another all the time.”

At some point during the week came the stunning announcement by the Norwegian Police Security Service (PST) that Islamists represent the major terrorist threat to the country.  Needless to say, this news should not have been stunning to anybody, but (as I describe in a forthcoming e-book) ever since last July 22, when anti-jihadist Anders Behring Breivik bombed a building in Oslo and massacred several dozen teenagers on the island of Utøya, the Norwegian political and cultural elite has done a very effective job of suppressing criticism of Islam on the grounds that the “lesson” of Breivik’s actions is that ethnic Norwegians must stop saying unpleasant things about Islam and embrace their bold, bearded, berobed, and belligerent fellow countrymen as friends and neighbors.

So it was that PST got slammed on a Thursday night TV debate program by Muslim leaders who called for it to stop demonizing their community and pay more attention to the threat of violence by Islam-hating “Christian terrorist” groups in Norway.  (Never mind that, as a terrorism expert bravely pointed out on the show, there are no such groups in Norway.)  On the same broadcast, the head of the aggressive, fast-growing Islam Net, Fahad Qureshi (whose every comment was greeted by a storm of applause from his followers in the studio audience) attacked a politician for having called the perpetrators of the threatening video “vermin”: instead of being dehumanized, Qureshi insisted, the jihadists who’d made that video should be accorded respect and invited to take part in dialogue.

And Pamela Geller corrects him in this video.

American innovation and freedom have long made our health system the envy (and “medical travel” destination) of the world.  But some new technologies challenge both medical ethics and the respected patient-physician relationship.  In a recent New York Times article, a method known as TeleMedicine (medical consultation and administration done via video conferencing) was explained, with one particularly shocking application.  Consider the following scenario:

You’re pregnant and terrified.  You have to make the problem disappear and know the one place you can go for “help.”  You enter the local Planned Parenthood, fill out some information, get an appointment for your procedure and leave.  Upon your return, you sit in a room with a video screen and a doctor in a remote location speaks.  Then, remarkably, a drawer is triggered open, and your prescription is made available for administration.  You take the pill, listen to some final medical advice from the screen and are on your way.  With brilliant efficiency, your panacea was delivered and your burden lifted. In Iowa, with the same amount of expediency, attention and, perhaps, forethought it takes to get you through the McDonald’s drive-thru for a McNugget fix, you can end a human life.

Essentially, a woman may now bypass meeting with an actual physician to receive Mifepristone, formerly known as RU-486, to end their unwanted pregnancy.  While video conferencing is currently used in other medical settings, the Iowa chapter of Planned Parenthood is the first to use the technology to provide one of the already most widely used abortifacients available.  According to the NYT article:

Advocates say the idea offers an answer to an essential struggle that has long troubled those who favor abortion rights: How to make abortions available in far-flung, rural places and communities where abortion providers are unable or unwilling to travel. So far only Planned Parenthood clinics in Iowa use this method, but around the country, abortion providers have begun asking how they might replicate the concept.

An “essential struggle” to make killing humans easier, in more places, faster!   Now without even bothering to have the physical presence of a doctor there for administration.  Are we not compassionate?  Are we not…enlightened?  After reading Peter “Infanticide Advocate” Singer’s recent piece extolling the virtues of (forced) sterilization for the sake of the planet,  linking the history and eugenic ambitions of Planned Parenthood to a future dystopia isn’t all that difficult.

It should surprise none of us that Planned Parenthood is at the forefront of removing yet another barrier, the actual attending physician, in their lust for further “abortion care.”  Many of us have long lamented the ease with which Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers facilitate death, to say nothing of their unethical and illegal tendencies.  Yet their desire to extend their reach to more individuals without even the physical presence of an attending physician confirms the worst stereotypes of a business already built on ending lives.

__

To read more, follow Diane on Twitter or her personal blog.

I didn't post this video only because it came in while I was very busy with preparations for the mosque rally, and by the time I was able to watch it it had already gone viral -- and indeed, you have probably already seen it. But the story now is that Israeli authorities have taken clueless dhimmitude to new heights by actually apologizing for this video, as if it is somehow wrong to mock the Palestinian propaganda machine that does, in fact, con the world. Or is it wrong to mock the self-indulgent rock stars who created "We Are the World"?

"Israel Apologizes for Music Video Mocking Gaza Flotilla," by Mara Gay for AOL News, June 8 (thanks to Pamela Hall):

(June 8) -- The Israeli government has apologized for circulating a satirical video that uses Michael Jackson's hit single "We Are the World" to mock activists from the Gaza flotilla.

"There's no people dying, so the best that we can do is create the greatest bluff of all," one refrain in the parody goes.

Last week nine people aboard the Mavi Marmara, one of six ships carrying aid to Gaza in defiance of Israel's blockade, were killed under hotly contested circumstances during an Israeli raid on the flotilla. In the video, Israelis dressed up as activists offer their own take on the incident through song.

"We con the world, we con the people," the song continues, in an apparent reference to Hamas and the activists aboard the flotilla.

The Israeli Government Press Office distributed footage of the music video to foreign journalists on June 4, but then sent an apology to reporters just hours later, insisting it had been an accident.

"The contents of the video in no way represent the official policy of either the Government Press Office or of the State of Israel," Israel's Government Press Office later told CNN....

Last night, Jon Stewart, who I view as honorable, joined the chorus of people criticizing the justified-as-much-as-something-can-be-justified raid by the Israelis on the flotilla carrying “aid” to Gaza, the home of Hamas. First, he referred to the people involved in the shipment as “activists” and then showed video of some of the ship’s contents—the non-violent aid.

Although Stewart deserves credit for showing the video of the “activists” attacking Israeli soldiers as they landed on the vessel, he mocked the notion that elite soldiers were used against a ship that wasn’t carrying anything dangerous.

Watch the video below:

Now, watch this video after taking something to cool you down so you don’t break something:

Yup, there were weapons on board. And if there weren’t weapons onboard, it actually wouldn’t matter. It is clear that the intent of those involved, which included a Turkish Islamist organization tied to terrorism, was to create a provocation and to ambush the soldiers.

The thing that amazes me the most about this whole controversy is what it implies about Israel. Major media outlets keep framing Israel as the aggressor. The last thing the Israelis would want to do is butcher innocent peace activists and ignite worldwide uproar. What do they get out of doing that? What are these media outlets implying about Israel—that they are hateful and intent on carrying out a genocide against the Palestinians? If that was the case, Israel would have done it by now.

The truth is that Israel is fine with aid reaching Gaza, provided it is inspected and not delivered directly in, which any country would do in their situation. The Israelis sure do tolerate a lot for being an evil, oppressive state that wants to commit ethnic cleansing against the Palestinians.

The IDF has released two more videos from the incident Monday morning on the Mavi Marmara, the largest in the Turkish-organized six-ship flotilla that challenged Israel’s blockade of Gaza, and the only one to prepare a violent ambush. One of these two videos is even more dramatic than the one released on Monday, now viewed by over a million on YouTube, that shows Mavi Marmara “peace activists” among other things beating the soldiers with iron bars.

The relatively less dramatic of the two newly released videos shows the “activists”—actually jihadists seeking “martyrdom”—attacking the soldiers with a stun grenade, a box of plates, and water hoses as they try to board the ship. The other newly released video is actually almost purely audial footage of a frenetic exchange between soldiers on the Mavi Marmara and the nearby IDF ship. The former, in a state of acute panic, shout that they need reinforcements, are being fired at from all directions, and have to be evacuated immediately. For a while the jihadists can be heard chanting something in the background.

The iron-bars video was released only late Monday afternoon after the “Israel kills peace activists” media-storm had already swept through the world for eight or nine hours, and some in Israel have bitterly charged that releasing it a good deal earlier, if not immediately, could have saved Israel much of the media and diplomatic damage. The reason for the delay was a concern for military morale: seeing soldiers of the Naval Commandos—one of the most legendary of all IDF units—being abjectly beaten, and in one case thrown over the side of the boat, is not the sort of imagery the IDF and Israel itself want to project of these fighters.

But if the iron-bars video is problematic in that regard, the new one in which the soldiers shout, in panic, for their lives is even more so. Why, then, was it released now, when the UN Security Council, with President Obama’s acquiescence, has already condemned Israel over the incident, the UN Human Rights Council is preparing another Goldstone-type “investigation,” and Israel has generally been dragged through another worldwide round of condemnation? This new video proves beyond a doubt to any reasonable human being that the soldiers finally opened fired, killing nine of their attackers, solely to save their own lives. But what good could it do at this point?

The answer is that Israel realizes its troubles from this incident are not over and indeed are just beginning. Another ship, the Rachel Corrie (named after the young anti-Israeli activist accidentally killed by an IDF bulldozer in 2003), is already on its way to Gaza from Malta; while carrying only fifteen activists, Irish prime minister Brian Cowen has described it as Irish-owned and is calling on Israel to let it through. A group called the European Campaign to End the Siege on Gaza claims to be planning a new, much larger flotilla than the one intercepted by Israel this week. Newly elected British prime minister David Cameron is calling on Israel to lift the Gaza blockade altogether.

In other words, the democratic world is now getting into the act too—with a vengeance. It was one thing for increasingly-Islamist, Iran- and Syria-friendly, Hamas-supporting Turkey to send the first flotilla. It is quite another thing—and well beyond the usual, de rigueur, but shameful cooperation with Arab-, Islamic-, and “nonaligned”-bloc calumny against Israel in the UN—for Western governments to start getting on this bandwagon as well.

It was in response to the increasingly alarming situation that Israeli prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu gave a brief, terse statement to the nation Wednesday night in which he said: “The state of Israel faces an attack of international hypocrisy. This is not the first time we have faced this; two years ago we faced a massive attack of missiles fired by Hamas who hid behind civilians. Israel went to great lengths to avoid civilian casualties; but whom did the UN condemn? It condemned Israel.”

Noting that “It is our right according to international law to prevent arms smuggling to Gaza and that is why the naval blockade was put in place,” Netanyahu pointed out that two ships intercepted by the Israeli navy in recent years—the Francop in 2009 and the Karine-A in 2002—were carrying hundreds of tons of Iranian-supplied weapons, and that while the smuggling of Iranian weapons into Gaza through tunnels continues, what can be delivered by sea is incomparably vaster and would result in an Iranian port in Gaza threatening not only Tel Aviv but also “other countries in the region.”

Turning finally to the uproar over the Mavi Marmara, Netanyahu, noting that he had talked personally with the wounded soldiers and heard firsthand accounts of how their lives were endangered, stated:

The soldiers defended their lives with incomparable restraint. What would any other country do?… I ask the international community, what would you do instead? We’ll continue to defend our citizens and assert our right to self-defense, which is my first duty as prime minister.

It is important that we stay united on this issue, which is a matter of life and death.

The questions Netanyahu raised are indeed very much open. It is no longer clear whether the international community, including its democratic component, is prepared to tolerate the soldiers of the Jewish state shooting back when shot at by a mob, and no longer clear whether it is prepared to countenance the Jewish state defending itself, or existing, at all. Israel, meanwhile, is still trying to make its case, hardly confident that it makes a difference.

This could very well be the best, and most important, video of the Freedom Flotilla farce. It proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the “peace activists” of the IHH, not the IDF were the cause of the violence.

As the IDF explain on their YouTube channel, in the “footage captured on the Mavi Marmara, activists are seen attacking the soldiers with a stun grenade, a box of plates, and water hoses as the soldiers attempt to board the ship. the activists are also waiving around metal rods and chains later used to attack the soldiers with. The IDF soldiers were armed with paint ball guns (used for riot dispersal) and pistols which they were ordered to use only as a last resort.

“In the early hours of the 31st of May 2010, IDF soldiers boarded the ships of the “Free Gaza” Flotilla, after the ships refused to redirect their course. Aboard the Mavi Marmara the soldiers encountered serious violence when, in a preplanned attack, the activists on board lynched the soldiers with knives, metal rods and stole two of their guns. As a result 7 soldiers were injured and 9 activists were killed.” It is, frankly, unbelievable that most members of the mainstream media continue to defend these so-called peace activists. As you can see in the video, they were anything but. They attacked soldiers who didn’t come to fight but only to check their cargo. They had no reason to throw a stun grenade at the soldiers, nor to attack them with knives and metal bars, let alone with rifles.

Watch it:

In any future agreement with the Palestinians, Israel has a critical need for defensible borders. Watch this new video, produced by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, that outlines the threats to Israel from terrorist rockets, ballistic missiles, and conventional ground and air threats from the east:

June 6
Outside Zuccotti Park in lower Manhattan
Be there!

(Thanks to Atlas for the video.)

Thanks to Banafsheh for the video.

From May 21. This was an hour-long program, and this is only a tiny fragment of it.

Here is full video -- with subtitles! -- of my address on Islamic law at Florida State University Law School, March 30. Many thanks to Eric McCullough for the video.

Rome, 26 May (AKI) - The Nigerian man accused of a failed attempt to blow up a US passenger jet in December last year is featured in a new Al-Qaeda video released on Wednesday. Footage of Umar al-Farouk Abdulmutallab, who is currently in US custody facing terrorism charges, is included in the documentary-style video posted on jihadist websites.

He is accused of attempting to blow up a passenger jet above Detroit on 25 December 2009.

The 54-minute documentary also features former Guantanamo prisoner, Uthman al-Ghamdi, and Fahd al-Quso, a suspect in the 2000 USS Cole bomb attack, SITE intelligence reported.

Seventeen American sailors were killed, and 39 were injured in the suicide attack against the USS Cole in the Yemeni port of Aden in the deadliest attack against a US naval vessel since 1987.

The video, released by Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, focuses on what it sees as American intervention in Yemen and the US role in airstrikes on suspected Al-Qaeda camps.

One of the leaders from the Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, Anwar al-Awlaqi, last month claimed he had trained Abdulmutallab .

Al-Awlaqi also claimed he had trained radical Islamist Nidal Hassan, an American doctor of Palestinian descent who in November 2009 shot dead 13 people and wounded 30 others at the Fort Hood US military base in Texas....

I've heard direct accounts of this several times over the years from people who live along the border in Arizona and Texas.

Thanks to The Right Scoop for the video.

This is a campaign video; Jihad Watch is a 501c3 organization and we never endorse political candidates. However, I certainly endorse Barber's message here about the 9/11 Mosque.

Visit NewsReal Blog

Remember in our most recent video from UCSD when David Horowitz  said to the cleverer-than-thou college communist, “Enough. Enough. It’s boring. You’re boring”? That sentiment keeps repeating in my head these days.

Socialist journalist Chris Hedges writing at New Left Marxist Robert Scheer’s online magazine Truth Dig:

The oil pouring into the Gulf of Mexico, estimated to be perhaps as much as 100,000 barrels a day, is part of our foolish death march. It is one more blow delivered by the corporate state, the trade of life for gold. But this time collapse, when it comes, will not be confined to the geography of a decayed civilization. It will be global.

Those who carry out this global genocide—men like BP’s Chief Executive Tony Hayward, who assures us that “The Gulf of Mexico is a very big ocean. The amount of oil and dispersant we are putting into it is tiny in relation to the total water volume’’—are, to steal a line from Ward Churchill, “little Eichmanns.” They serve Thanatos, the forces of death, the dark instinct Sigmund Freud identified within human beings that propels us to annihilate all living things, including ourselves. These deformed individuals lack the capacity for empathy. They are at once banal and dangerous. They possess the peculiar ability to organize vast, destructive bureaucracies and yet remain blind to the ramifications. The death they dispense, whether in the pollutants and carcinogens that have made cancer an epidemic, the dead zone rapidly being created in the Gulf of Mexico, the melting polar ice caps or the deaths last year of 45,000 Americans who could not afford proper medical care, is part of the cold and rational exchange of life for money.

I’ve confronted many of my “progressive” friends with the video of Jumanah “Genocide Girl” Albahri and the Palestinian Nazi assault to destroy Israel that it represents. The answer I get back from them is some variant of: well this is bad but there are plenty of extremists out there. Then they start talking about abortion clinic bombers, anti-gay cult leader (and registered Democrat) Fred Phelps, and violence in the Old Testament.

Next they start berating me for not focusing more on the “fat cats” on Wall Street and the horrific things that the super rich are allegedly doing to America. I ask them to tell me which books they’ve read on the economic crisis that I need to read too so I can become as enlightened as them. And they have no recommendations because all they’ve actually done is imbibed the articles of neo-communists like Hedges, Scheer, and their MSNBC representatives.

And… I… am… so… bored…

We are defined by who we choose to make our enemies. It’s a simple question that ultimately defines who we are politically: what is the single most dangerous threat today?

To leftists the answer is white collar criminals on Wall Street, corporations who accidentally pollute the planet, and anyone who stands in the way of universal healthcare (in other words, conservatives and Tea Partiers.) These are the Nazis, the “Little Eichmanns.” And what the neo-communist Left and the more moderate, “liberal Left” share is that both fundamentally agree on this point. The only difference is the methods each faction utilizes.

Genuine conservatives committed to the survival of free societies have a different answer to the question: those who are self-confessed Nazis, who display the Swastika, lionize Hitler, and are quite frank in their desire to enslave the world under the yoke of Sharia law.

And my progressive friends — who have not studied history or Islam since they’re so busy chronicling the excesses of capitalism — will then ask why.

And I’ll answer by conceding a point to them: the West certainly is like ancient Rome. If you want to call us an “empire,” fine. But remember why the Roman empire actually fell, who was responsible for it, and what Western civilization endured as a result. Barbarian hordes — who were far less advanced — sacked Rome and plunged Europe into centuries of darkness.

If we are Rome then Islamofascism is the barbarian at the gate. And just because we are more advanced technologically it’s no reason to think we are invincible. History clearly demonstrates otherwise. Brains will not save us. As the great Howard Bloom wrote in his must-read first book The Lucifer Principle,

Never forget the pecking order’s surprises. Today’s superpower is tomorrow’s conquered state. Yesterday’s overlooked mob is often the ruler of tomorrow. Never underestimate the third world. Never be complacent about barbarians.

Gee, this guy must be some kind of right-wing, Zionist Islamophobe-- no, wait... "Yemeni cleric advocates killing US civilians," by Maamoun Youssef for the Associated Press, May 23:

CAIRO - An American-Yemeni cleric whose Internet sermons are believed to have helped inspire attacks on the U.S. has advocated the killing of American civilians in an al-Qaida video released Sunday.

Anwar al-Awlaki has been singled out by U.S. officials as a key terrorist threat and has been added to the CIA's list of targets for assassination despite his American citizenship. He is of particular concern because he is one of the few English-speaking radical clerics able to explain to young Muslims in America and other Western countries the philosophy of violent jihad.

The U.S.-born al-Awlaki moved to Yemen in 2004 and is in hiding there after being linked to the suspects in the November shooting at an Army base in Fort Hood, Texas, and the December attempt to blow up a U.S. jetliner bound for Detroit.

"Those who might be killed in a plane are merely a drop of water in a sea," he said in the video in response to a question about Muslim groups that disapproved of the airliner plot because it targeted civilians.

Al-Awlaki used the 45-minute video to justify civilian deaths -- and encourage them -- by accusing the United States of intentionally killing a million Muslim civilians in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere.

American civilians are to blame, he said, because "the American people, in general, are taking part in this and they elected this administration and they are financing the war."

He added that the Prophet Muhammad also sent forces into battles that claimed civilian lives.

Whose prophet? That said, this AP writer gets a "E" for "Effort" for actually using the term "jihad" above.

The video was produced by the media arm of al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula, though the exact nature of al-Awlaki's ties with the group and possible direct role in it are unclear. The U.S. says he is an active participant in the group, though members of his tribe have denied that.

For its part, al-Qaida appears to be trying to make use of his recruiting power by putting him in its videos. Its media arm said Sunday's video was its first interview with the cleric.

In the months before the Fort Hood shooting, which killed 13 people, al-Awlaki exchanged e-mails with the alleged attacker, U.S. Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan. Hasan initiated the contacts, drawn by al-Awlaki's Internet sermons, and approached him for religious advice.

Yemen's government says al-Awlaki is also suspected of contacts with Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the Nigerian accused in the failed attempt to blow up the Detroit-bound airliner on Christmas Day. Abdulmutallab traveled to Yemen late last year, and U.S. investigators say he told them that he received training and his bomb from Yemen's al-Qaida offshoot.

In Sunday's video, al-Awlaki praised both men and referred to them as his "students."

Speaking of Hasan, the cleric said, "What he did was heroic and great. ... I ask every Muslim serving in the U.S. Army to follow suit."...

The world should be thanking Jumanah Imad Albahri, the by now infamous Hezbollah and Hamas supporting MSA student at University of California San Diego who, at a recent David Horowitz lecture, publicly demonstrated the true face of anti-Israel activism on campuses.

As universities around the globe wrap up for the summer, many students will leave unaware that the liberalism they claim to stand for is often quite false. Case in point: The Middle East Forum has reported that the Saudi government has spent $87 billion spreading radical Islam in the last decade. As a clear product of this activity, we have seen a frightening increase in campuses around the globe hosting “Israel Apartheid Week.” More non-Muslim students have become active in these events in conjunction with the Muslim Student Association (MSA), the Pan-Arab radical Islam organization that is the derivation of these Saudi funds.

When watching the short YouTube video of the MSA student at UCSD (that proved to the world how MSA actively supports terrorism) I remembered back a year ago when my Sderot Media Center event at DePaul University was hijacked by MSA and Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) along with their following of false liberals. As I described a year ago in the Jerusalem Post article, Shell-shocked in DePaul, what these so-called liberals were preventing was free speech and what they were promoting was everything that liberalism has historically fought against. Due to the radical response of these MSA students and false liberals, this incident made the Anti-Defamation League’s top four 2009 anti-Semitic campus events of the year.

Even more telling of the true face of this false liberalism is the short video of Cartoonist Lars Vilks, who created the cartoons of the Muslim prophet Mohammed published in a Denmark newspaper, being attacked at Uppsala University in Sweden. Leave aside the multiple death threats Vilks has received and the price Al Qaeda has put on his head, and watch in the video how students physically attack him during a lecture on free speech. As the police try to wrestle down the attacking mob, the students are chanting “Allah hu Akbar!” In this type of liberalism, freedom of speech and press are not allowed but the infamous Muslim jihadist mantra, of course, is.

This false liberalism stands beside the sword of Mohammed that has spread across every continent in the form of student organizations like MSA and SJP. This false liberalism clearly supports Islamic terrorist organizations such as Hamas, Hezbollah, and Al Qaeda. This false liberalism stands against freedom of speech and freedom of the press. This false liberalism supports honor killings such as the Said sisters that were murdered in Texas by their father for dating non-Muslims. This false liberalism supports the lynching of homosexuals. This false liberalism stands against the progression of women and for the oppression seen on the streets of the radical Islamic territories of the Gaza Strip and Iran. This false liberalism that silenced me in Chicago laughed at live footage of Jewish children running from missiles in Sderot. What has been masked on university campuses worldwide as liberalism is only masked radical Islam.

Unlike, as Daniel Pipes proves, the popular avoidance of the usage of the terms “terrorist” or “terrorism” following the attacks in Mumbai and Ft. Hood, when the unpopular pro-Israel opinion is voiced, it is deemed right-wing, extreme, fanatical, conservative, fascist, close-minded, and other exacerbated connotations. I received many responses to an article about removing the terrorist organization of Hamas from Twitter, an apolitical article that readers would undoubtedly agree with.

Some of the responses included:

• You Guy are wrong Hamas is a resistance organization who are defending their small-left land called GAZA… HAMAS has the right to resist until it liberates all Palestine [sic.]

• WHO is a terrorist? Yet a Terrorist. Isael has been taught a small lesson by the Hesbollah and Hamas and they will teach again and again untill those settlers Including Jacob Shrybman should go back to America and where they Came from (sic).

• Jacob Shrybman is a Settler who came from America and occupied a piece of Palestine (sic).

• Jacob, Do you think that trying to silence one of the few voices this imprisoned people have is going to make Israel look less a jailer (sic)?

• Hamas was also a response to the Israeli occupation of Palestine, and the ethnic cleansing that has gone with that occupation. So, I state again that given Israel’s sixty years of state sponsored and condoned terrorism, attacking Hamas without acknowledging Israeli crimes is hypocritical.

While all five comments vary in their extremity, they all point to the same thing. Each comment in some way excuses or encourages the terrorists’ action using this false liberalism and then bastardizes the democratic state of Israel.

Looking at examples from just this month of the MSA student in San Diego publicly voicing her support for Hezbollah’s dream of gathering all the Jews in Israel to kill them all in one place; of a student mob in Sweden attacking a controversial cartoonist at his lecture on free speech while chanting “Allah hu Akbar,” and the commonality of the five article comments above, we clearly see this false liberalism as only a mask for collusion with radical Islam.

Jacob Shrybman is the Assistant Director of the Sderot Media Center. He hosts elected officials from around the world and international media visiting the Sderot/Gaza region. He has been published in The Jerusalem Post, The Huffington Post, YNet News, and has appeared on several international television and radio stations.

Kudos to The New York Times for exposing the truth-challenged Attorney General Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, a Democrat running to become Connecticut’s next U.S. Senator.  Mr. Blumenthal has been saying that he had served in Vietnam when, in fact, he never did.  Instead, he received five military deferments and ended up enlisting in the Marine reserve where he served only on the U.S. mainland.

In a press conference yesterday to try and explain what he had said about serving in Vietnam, Blumenthal  regretted his “few misplaced words” which he claimed were “totally unintentional.”

Really?  Here are samples of those “few misplaced words”:

We have learned something important since the days that I served in Vietnam  (2008)

When we returned from Vietnam, I remember the taunts, the verbal and even physical abuse we encountered  (2008)

During his service in the Marine reserve, Blumenthal  worked on projects like a Toys for Tots Drive – a worthy cause no doubt but hardly one that would have exposed him to “the taunts, the verbal and even physical abuse” that the veterans who actually did return from Vietnam encountered.  Maybe Blumenthal is confusing the times when the tots did not like the toys they were receiving and threw them back at him.

Almost as disturbing as the video evidence of Blumenthal’s untruths themselves are his efforts to wiggle out of the corner in which he put himself.  For example, he accuses the Times of “outrageous distortion” in the article that included what he said in the video about “the days that I served in Vietnam.”  Was that not Blumenthal speaking?   Were his listeners supposed to read the Attorney General’s mind and understand that he meant only that he served “during Vietnam” rather than “in Vietnam?”

This wasn’t an isolated incident of garbled syntax, as the normally eloquent and master of precise language Attorney General would have us believe.  One of his friends and admirers, former Connecticut Representative Christopher Shays, saw a disturbing pattern:

He just kept adding to the story, the more he told it.

Blumenthal should have come completely clean yesterday and admitted that he made up his narrative about service in Vietnam.  He should have provided a full explanation of why he departed so dramatically from the truth on a number of occasions, without having corrected the record before the Times story broke.

The American people are forgiving of mistakes that are completely owned up to. People might have understood how someone as concerned with veterans’ issues as Blumenthal has been during his entire public life can get carried away in the emotion of the moment when speaking with veterans about today’s wars.

However, Blumenthal chose the route of obfuscation and deflected responsibility.  He continues the lie by insisting that he is guilty only of an inadvertent poor choice of words which the media is blowing way out of proportion.  We already have too many politicians like that in Washington. It is time for this truth dodger to leave the Senate race.