Covering Obama, Press Encounters Nation of Islam

By: Byron York

President Obama’s home is in the same Chicago neighborhood as Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan. On Saturday night, the overlapping of Obama’s and Farrakhan’s worlds made for a strange, and sometimes testy, encounter between the Secret Service, the press corps covering the president, and the paramilitary security force, the Fruit of Islam, surrounding Farrakhan.

The encounter was written up — for distribution to the press, not necessarily for publication — by the New York Times’ Jackie Calmes. It began a little after 4:00 p.m. when Obama and his family walked to the nearby home of longtime friend Marty Nesbitt for a backyard cookout. It just so happens that Nesbitt lives across the street from Farrakhan.

A few hours after Obama went to Nesbitt’s home, the press pool, including Calmes, was waiting in a bus parked near 49th Street and Woodlawn Avenue, next to Farrakhan’s mansion. The reporters’ Secret Service minder allowed them off the bus to stretch their legs. As they stood on the sidewalk, some of the journalists inadvertently touched the grass next to the sidewalk, and that is when the encounter began. From Calmes’ report:

Immediately a polite man in jeans and T-shirt emerged to ask us to stay off the grass. Though this grass was the curbside city property, we obliged.

But it turned out that simply staying off the grass was not enough to satisfy the man in the T-shirt. Calmes continues:

Soon, however, he was pacing and talking on a cell phone. He went inside the mansion’s black wrought iron fence, crossed the well-landscaped yard, lifted a water bucket behind rose bushes and, voila!, a walkie-talkie. He was heard to refer to “the CIA” once he began speaking into it.

Soon he approached our [Secret Service] agent, asking him to move the van and its occupants, though your pooler could not hear much else he said. But the agent said, “How is this a security breach?” And he asked if the house was a government property.

The man said something else and at that point the agent stuck out his hand to shake hands and introduced himself as a Secret Service agent. He added, “Sir, I can assure you that we will do nothing to interfere with whatever is going on in there.”

It might be assumed that an assurance from the Secret Service would be enough to satisfy any security-minded guardian of Louis Farrakhan. But not in this case. Calmes continues:

The man is back to pacing and talking on his cell, walkie-talkie in hand.

A co-pooler searched the Internet for the address and found it listed on a Web site called NotForTourists and another called Taxexemptworld.com. Indeed, another pooler found a county Web site that confirmed this property is tax exempt for being a religious institution.

Reinforcements arrived — three men in T-shirts reading “Wide or Die!” One surly man has been staring daggers at us. Asked if this is Minister Farrakhan’s house, he just stared at your pooler. Asked again, he said, “I don’t have no comment.”

At nearly 8 p.m. local time we are still holding while POTUS and family remain at the Nesbitts.

More time passed. The men in T-shirts were joined by even more men, from the Fruit of Islam, Farrakhan’s security force. From Calmes:

It’s 8:45 and nearly dark; your pool has retreated back inside the van. We’re outnumbered now by roughly a dozen Fruit of Islam agents for the Nation of Islam. As each casually dressed man arrives, he exchanges elaborate handshake/hug/double air-kisses with others. Two walked by your pooler chanting “Islam.”

Several have filmed and photographed your poolers, the van and its license plates with their cell phones.

One came and stood close to a couple poolers and OUR [Secret Service] agent. He asked if he could help. No answer. He asked again. The man said no. The agent said, “Secret Service — Please move away from this group of people.”

He did. Soon the agent asked us to go in the bus. We did.

At that point, the Secret Service was badly outnumbered by the Fruit of Islam, who apparently believed that some sort of “security breach” had occurred. Were Farrakhan’s men armed? Were there more on the way? The Secret Service agent called for backup. From Calmes:

9:20 local time and our agent got reinforcements from three Secret Service agents. One shook hands with one of the 22 Fruit members we now can count from the van. After a short discussion the three Secret Service agents walked away again.

No word on when we get to leave. We’re guessing POTUS is watching the Blackhawks game at the Nesbitts’ home.

While this was happening, word of the standoff apparently got around as a result of Calmes’ pool reports (they were sent out piecemeal by email). Someone who had read the reports got in touch with Farrakhan to let the Nation of Islam leader know that the people waiting outside were just covering Obama. From Calmes:

The power of pool reportage! Standoff ends, apparently with help of intermediary in Detroit:

Your pooler got a call at about 10:15 local time from a pool report reader who identified himself as the Rev. Gary Hunter, a Baptist minister in Motown who writes and blogs for the Detroit Times. He said he had called Minister Farrakhan and his son and asked them to have the Fruit stand down.

“I told him you were good people,” Rev. Hunter said. “He said he didn’t know you all were just waiting for the president.”

As it happens, the Fruit of Islam indeed had mostly gone by then. The Rev. Hunter apparently is remembered by [White House social secretary staffer Samantha] Tubman, and he said he knows our frequent press rustler Ben Finkenbinder from past travels with Obama.

Anyway, at 10:33 we pulled away and we are at the Obama residence. Never saw POTUS at all.

And that was the end of it. Some observers will make light of the whole thing — just a little misunderstanding with those weird Nation of Islam guys — but the fact that Farrakhan’s security force is close to the president’s home is likely a matter of continuing concern to the Secret Service. And on Saturday night, the two forces ran into each other.

Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/covering-obama-press-encounters-nation-of-islam-95214269.html#ixzz0pS0aGv80

Mayor Bloomberg Submits, Sanctions 911 Mosque

by Pamela Geller

The Mayor of New York backs the fifteen-story mega-mosque that is slated to be built near Ground Zero. He said Friday: “I think it’s fair to say if somebody was going to try, on that piece of property, to build a church or a synagogue, nobody would be yelling and screaming. And the fact of the matter is that Muslims have a right to do it, too.” The Mayor is wrong. This mosque is not about freedom of religion. It’s about Islamic supremacism.

This why the Stop Islamization of America (SIOA) June 6th rally against the proposed mega-mosque is so important. The Islamic supremacists must be shamed into withdrawing and not doing a victory dance on the hallowed burial ground of Ground Zero.

Bloomberg also said: “What is great about America and particularly New York is we welcome everybody, and if we are so afraid of something like this, what does that say about us?…If you are religious, you do not want the government picking religions, because what do you do the day they don’t pick yours?”

While I agree that that the government should keep its big fat nose out of religion (separation of mosque and state), I do not agree that the Mayor should publicly take one side if he really believes government should stay out of it. It’s why I believe petitions to the Mayor are a waste of time. New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg has on his New York City Human Rights Commission Omar Mohammedi, the former President of the New York chapter of the unindicted co-conspirator, Hamas-linked Muslim Brotherhood front, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). Terror lawyer Mohammedi represents a number of organizations that are the defendants in a 9/11 lawsuit for the murder of 3000 innocent people. One of the organizations he is working for is the World Assembly for Muslim Youth (WAMY), a Saudi-based group with offices around the globe that publishes incendiary materials against Jews and openly supports Hamas and violent jihad.

Mohammedi has also served as attorney for the Flying Imams, the six imams who were removed from a US Airways flight after passengers complained that they were acting suspiciously. Mohammedi’s lawsuit claimed that when they were removed from the plane, the imams suffered “fear, depression, mental pain and financial injury.” Mohammedi also initially filed suit against the passengers who complained, which would have had a chilling effect on anyone reporting suspicious behavior by Muslims in airports — although that part of the suit was dropped after Republicans in Congress passed legislation to protect the passengers.

SIOA has many times called on Bloomberg to remove Mohammedi from the Human Rights Commission. Yet he still serves. So we know what side of the jihad Bloomberg comes down on. And remember also that before Times Square jihad bomber Faisal Shahzad was caught, Bloomberg offered his opinion: that the would-be car bomber was probably a right-winger who was upset about Obamacare.

So what can be done about the mosque? Many people are holding out hope that New York city’s Landmarks Preservation Commission will stop the mosque, since to build it would require that a building that dates from 1857 would have to be torn down. But don’t count on that. The Mayor controls the landmarks commission.

In a dangerous and increasingly common trend, politicians are ignoring their constituents. All of the New York politicians who have constituents in the area where the mosque is to be built are in lockstep with the Islamic supremacists, as I witnessed at the Community Board meeting Tuesday night, where the Board approved the mosque over the vehement objections of most of the people at the meeting.

The mega-mosque’s organizer, Imam Faisal Abdul Rauf, should withdraw the proposal for the mosque at Ground Zero. It is hurting too many families and patriotic Americans. The war against the West is still being waged. The mega-mosque will be the rallying cry for the universal caliphate — a shrine to jihad at the cherished site of Islamic conquest.

The righteous, decent and tolerant thing to do would be for Imam Faisal and his wife Daisy Khan, a chief advocate of the mosque project, to withdraw their plans for the mosque in the interest of “mutual understanding” and “mutual respect.”

But that won’t happen. And so our protest on June 6th will.

Memorial Day 2010

By: Oliver North

ARLINGTON NATIONAL CEMETERY, Va. — This is the place that receives the most attention on Memorial Day, though it is but one of 141 national cemeteries in the United States and 24 others located on foreign soil. Many of our countrymen will observe this “last Monday in May” holiday with travel, shopping and picnics. But those who take the time to visit one of these hallowed grounds will have an unforgettable experience.

These are the final resting places for more than 3 million Americans who served in our armed forces — as soldiers, sailors, airmen, Guardsmen and Marines — including the nearly 5,500 who have perished in Afghanistan and Iraq.

A visit to one of these quiet memorials is a tribute to those who made history by wearing our nation’s uniform and taking up arms to preserve our liberty and free tens of millions of others from tyranny. In words written on stone markers, these places tell the story of who we are as a people.

Regardless of when they served, all interred in these cemeteries sacrificed the comforts of home and absented themselves from the warmth and affection of loved ones. Since 1776, more than 1.5 million Americans have lost their lives while in uniform.

At countless funerals and memorial services for those who lost their lives in the service of our country, I hear the question, “Why is such a good young person taken from us in the prime of life?” Plato, the Greek philosopher, apparently sought to resolve the issue by observing, “Only the dead have seen the end of war.” I prefer to take my solace in the words of Jesus to the Apostle John: “Father, I will that those you have given me, be with me where I am.”

My sojourns to this “Sacred Ground,” as Tom Ruck calls our national cemeteries in the title of his magnificent book, remind me that among those here are veterans who served with my father and all of my uncles in the conflagration of World War II. Only a handful of those 16.5 million from that “greatest generation” remain. Others resting in these consecrated places were tested just five years later in our first fight against despotic communism — on the Korean Peninsula. They braved stifling heat, mind-numbing cold and an enemy that often outnumbered them 10 to one.

Here are headstones of those who served in the decade between Korea and Vietnam. More than 12 millions young Americans donned military uniforms in what was called “the cold war.” It was only cold for those who didn’t have to fight in it. They served on land, air and sea in lonely outposts, dusty camps, along barbed wire barriers in foreign lands, on guard against those who would have done us harm if they had the chance.

Between 1964 and 1975, more than 7 million young Americans were committed to the bloody contest in Southeast Asia. The names of 58,267 who died from that fight are on the wall of the Vietnam War Memorial — some of them were my Marines and my brother’s soldiers. Headstones in cemeteries all across this land testify to more of their selfless sacrifice — and serve as a reminder that the victory denied in that war should never happen again.

In the three-and-a-half decades since Vietnam, not a single year has passed without Americans in uniform being committed to hostile action somewhere around the globe — including Grenada, Beirut, Panama, the Balkans and Kuwait. We are not a warlike people. But for more than two centuries, ours has been the only nation on earth willing to consistently send its sons and daughters into harm’s way — not for gold or oil or colonial conquest, but to offer others the hope of liberty.

Since Sept. 11, that great legacy has been borne by volunteers serving in the shadows of the Hindu Kush, along the banks of the Tigris and Euphrates, in the Persian Gulf and on anti-piracy patrols in the Indian Ocean. These young Americans are engaged against a merciless enemy who has proven repeatedly that there is no atrocity beneath them — and that they will do whatever it takes to kill as many of our countrymen as possible.

Those now in uniform deserve our thanks, for no nation has ever had a better military force than the one we have today. And no accolade to those presently in our country’s service is greater than honoring the veterans who preceded them on Memorial Day.

Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columns/Memorial-Day-2010-95143364.html#ixzz0pKTmb7lx

Obama and the FTC Plan to Take Over The News Industry and Destroy Free Speech

By: Mark Tapscott

Release of the Federal Trade Commission’s working paper on “reinventing journalism” makes it clear that there is no more time for diplomacy about this issue: Barack Obama is determined to federalize the news industry just as he has banking, autos, and health care.

Everybody who wants independent journalism had better wake up to these three facts about what is going on right now:

* Journalists must understand that there is no way the First Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of the press will survive if the federal government regulates the news industry. Those who accept at face value protests to the contrary or the professions of pure intentions by advocates of government takeover of the news business are, at best, incredibly naive.

* Journalists who remain silent or apathetic about what is being prepared for their profession become unintentional accessories in the strangulation of independent journalism.

* Journalists who support or assist, for any reason, the FTC process are accomplices in the strangulation of independent journalism.

Those in the administration who clearly view independent journalism as an obstacle to “change we can believe in” and their numerous allies in the old media, non-profit activists, and academic community who either share a similar ideological vision or see the FTC process as their salvation against the Internet will no doubt dismiss my assertions as extemism or alarmism.

Fine, call me whatever, but what they cannot deny is what is written in the FTC document and what it clearly tells us about the intention behind the initiative, which is to transform the news industry from an information product collected by private individuals and entrepreneurs as a service to buyers to a government-regulated utility providing a “public good,” as defined by government.

The authors hide this dangerous intention behind expressions of concern for preserving quality journalism and “addressing emerging gaps in reporting and they rationalize their approach of massive government intervention in the news process as simply an extension of what government has always done.

Jeff Jarvis, a veteran of the old media and a pioneer of the Internet-based new media with his Buzz Machine blog, provides a thorough analysis of what the FTC is considering and explicates the dangerous consequences that will follow. He summarizes those recommendations as:

“Antitrust exemptions. The FTC looks at allowing news organizations to collude to set prices to consumers and with aggregators. Isn’t that the precise opposite of what an agency charged with protecting competition for the benefit of customers should be considering? Shouldn’t the FTC recoil in horror at such sanctioned antitrust to protect incumbents’ price advantages? Not here.

“Government subsidies. After saluting the history of government subsidies for the press — namely, postal discounts, legal notice publication, assorted tax breaks, and funds for public broadcasting — the agency looks at other ideas: a journalism AmeriCorps paying journalists; increased funding for public broadcasting; a national fund for local news suggested in Columbia’s report on journalism; a tax credit for employing journalists; citizen news vouchers (a la campaign checkoff); grants to universities for reporting. It also looks at increasing the present postal subsidy (which would only further bankrupt the dying postal service in the service of dying publications); using Voice of America and Radio Free Europe content (aka propaganda) in the U.S.; and enabling the SBA to help nonprofits.

“Taxes. At least the FTC acknowledges that somebody’d have to pay for all this. In one section, the FTC looks at licensing the news: having ISPs levy a fee on us that the government then dolls out to its selected news purveyors — call that the internet tax. It’snothing but a tax and it would support incumbents surely. In another section, it examines the aforementioned iPad tax; a tax on the broadcast spectrum; a spectrum auction tax; a tax on ISPs and cell phones; and a tax on advertising (brilliant: taking a cut of the last support of news in America).

“New tax status. The document spends much space looking at ways to make journalism a tax-exempt activity and suggests the IRS should change its regulations to enable that. It also looks at changing tax law to enable hybrid corporations (“benefit” and “flexible purpose” corporations that can judge success on serving a mission and not just maximizing profits) as well as L3Cs.

“Finally, the document looks at the one thing that should be in its purview as a government agency: getting government to make its information open and accessible to view and analyze. Well, amen to that.”

If that menu doesn’t scare the hell out of every true journalist in America, perhaps this graph from Jarvis will:

“What disturbs me most in this section is that the FTC frets about ‘difficult line-drawing being proprietary facts and those in the public domain.’ Proprietary facts? Is it starting down a road of trying to enable someone to own a fact the way the patent office lets someone own a method or our DNA? Good God, that’s dangerous.”

You got that right, Jeff, but that’s exactly what these people intend to do – put government in position to define who gets to report what and how.

Conservative journalists will do well not to role their eyes impatiently with liberal colleagues who don’t understand that government always expands its control over any activity it either funds or regulates, and therefore must be limited at every level to well-defined, narrowly circumscribed powers that only it can fulfill, as was done by the U.S. Constitution.

Better to explain once again that the original intention of the Founders with respect to the media – “Congress shall make no law respecting … the freedom of the press” – is the key to saving independent journalism today.

And remind them that the adversarial relationship that is supposed to exist between journalists and public officials must apply no matter who those public officials might be or what political party or ideological school of thought they represent. Elected officials’ first thought is always about re-election, while career government workers’ is job security.

A journalist’s first thought is supposed to be getting the facts. To that end, we’re supposed to be adversaries, not co-conspirators, partners, favored “stakeholders,” or beneficiaries. That’s why the Constitution made us independent.

Military Should Have Final Say on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”

March 25: Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen take questions on the 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' policy at a media briefing in Washington. (Reuters Photo)

Fox News

The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said Sunday he supports a repeal of the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy but he would like Congress to wait on a vote until after the Pentagon completes its review about the impact of allowing gay troops to serve openly.

Adm. Mike Mullen told “Fox News Sunday” that the military brass is working hard to “understand what’s going on with our troops,” and so he would like the legislation to wait until the review is complete. But he acknowledged he has no control over Congress’ actions.

“I don’t manage the legislative calendar,” he said, adding that it could “be many more months before this legislation is passed.”

A House voted Friday to repeal the ban. But the vote also gives the Pentagon until year’s end to study how to make that happen. A Senate committee approved the change Thursday, but the full Senate isn’t expected to act for months.

Mullen said he doesn’t want to inject the military forces into the middle of the debate because he doesn’t want to “electrify this force in the middle of two wars, for the length of time we’ve been at war.”

Greek disease in the House

By: Larry Kudlow

One day Team Obama announces a plan for enhanced rescission authority to impound wasteful spending, and the next day the House surfaces a plan for $200 billion in “stimulus” spending on transfer payments for welfare, even more unemployment compensation, still more Medicaid and a bunch of special-interest subsidies.

So are we to believe that President Obama will rescind the excess appropriations? Hardly. And since pay-go is dead, most of this new spending will not be offset. It will add to deficits and debt.

It’s the Greek disease. The welfare state run amok. Right here at home.

And in true class-warfare style, a small portion of the $200 billion is supposed to be offset by jacking up capital-gains taxes for investment partnerships. If passed, this would reduce investment, jobs and economic growth, and enlarge the deficit. Higher spending and investment taxing is a true austerity trap.

This business of raising the tax rate on investment partnerships would be a particularly onerous burden on American entrepreneurs. And it would put this country at a decided disadvantage to our competitors in China and elsewhere in Asia (outside of Japan).

Increasing the tax rate on the investment portion of these partnerships (i.e., the capital gains) would boost the penalty rate from 15 percent to 38 percent — and that includes the Obamacare payroll tax on investment scheduled for 2013.

So, instead of keeping 85 cents on the extra dollar earned from high-risk investment, the House proposal would drop the return to only 62 cents — a whopping 27 percent incentive rollback. And by the same amount, it would raise the cost of new capital, draining investment liquidity from the private sector in order to finance government transfer payments.

Nothing could be worse. This is spread-the-wealth in its most crass form.

And if all that weren’t bad enough, the House proposal would tax the so-called enterprise value of these firms by applying the same penalty-rate structure on the sale of all or part of an investment partnership. In other words, it would make real-estate, venture-capital and private-equity firms the only businesses in the country that are ineligible for long-term capital-gains treatment when they are sold in full or part.

One private-equity partner tells me that this would “tear apart the incentives for innovation that have been at the foundation of American enterprise since 1921, when the capital-gains differential vis-a-vis ordinary personal tax rates was first created.”

Compounding matters, we read in USA Today this week that private-sector personal incomes are at an all-time low, while government benefits as a share of income stand at an all-time high. I believe this is called redistribution.

And then comes a study from the Harvard Business School that states: “Stimulus Surprise: Companies Retrench When Government Spends.” What a shocker. (Hat tip to economist Don Luskin.)

House Democrats apparently don’t read newspapers from Greece or the United States. And they sure don’t read Harvard B-School studies.

Examiner Columnist Larry Kudlow is nationally syndicated by Creators Syndicate.

Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columns/Greek-disease-in-the-House-95119989.html#ixzz0pFxlB7Mp

Muslim preacher of hate is let into Britain

akir Naik says the 9/11 attacks were an 'inside job' by the US

David Leppard

HE home secretary, Theresa May, is facing a stiff test of the Conservative party’s claims to oppose radical Islam after her officials chose to allow a misogynist Muslim preacher into Britain.

Zakir Naik, an Indian televangelist described as a “hate-monger” by moderate Muslims and one Tory MP, says western women make themselves “more susceptible to rape” by wearing revealing clothing.

Naik, who proselytises on Peace TV, a satellite television channel, is reported to have called for the execution of Muslims who change their faith, described Americans as “pigs” and said that “every Muslim should be a terrorist”.

In a recent lecture, he said he was “with” Osama Bin Laden over the attacks on “terrorist America”, adding that the 9/11 hijackings were an inside job by President George W Bush.

In opposition, David Cameron and other senior Tories led criticism of the Labour government for allowing radical preachers into Britain to stir up hatred on lecture tours. While in opposition, Cameron also campaigned to get Yusuf al-Qaradawi, an Egyptian radical, banned from Britain.

Cameron and May now face a political test over Naik, whose inflammatory comments have led some moderate Muslims to call him a “truth-twister”.

One well-placed insider said: “Zakir Naik is a nasty man who makes al-Qaradawi look like a participant at a teddy bears’ picnic. He shouldn’t be allowed into the country to stir up hatred.”

The Home Office indicated that it was not planning to ban Naik, however.

Although Naik makes it clear he does not support specific acts of terrorism, his inflammatory speeches have included one, currently on YouTube, in which he states: “Beware of Muslims saying Osama Bin Laden is right or wrong. I reject them … we don’t know.

“But if you ask my view, if given the truth, if he is fighting the enemies of Islam, I am for him.

“I don’t know what he’s doing. I’m not in touch with him. I don’t know him personally. If he is terrorising the terrorists, if he is terrorising America the terrorist … I am with him. Every Muslim should be a terrorist.”

According to reports in the Indian media, his organisation, the Islamic Research Foundation in Mumbai, was where Rahil Abdul Rehman Sheikh, suspected of being commander of a series of train bombings in Mumbai, and other alleged terrorists spent much of their time before the attacks.

The American terror suspect Najibullah Zazi, arrested last year for planning suicide attacks on the New York subway, is said to have been inspired by Naik’s YouTube videos. There is no suggestion Naik had any knowledge of terrorist plotting.

The UK Border Agency said: “Each case is considered on its own merits. When assessing a visa application, we will consider the previous conduct of the individual and we will ensure the UK does not provide a platform for the promotion of violent extremism.

“We reserve the right to revoke someone’s visa if they are found to be promoting extreme views which are contrary to UK values.”

Naik will be appearing at Wembley Arena in London and in Sheffield on his British tour. When he last came to Britain in 2006, his visit was condemned by David Davies, the Tory MP for Monmouth, who described him as a “hate-monger”.

A doctor by profession, Naik has distinguished himself from dozens of other “mad mullahs” through his intellect and his ability to recite verbatim extended sections of the Koran.

Peace TV has a huge following in the Muslim neighbourhoods of Mumbai, Naik’s native city. He has been named as the third most popular spiritual guru in India.

Last year he was ranked 82nd in a list of India’s most powerful people.

Since the 9/11 attacks, he appears to have developed a particular hatred of America. He is reported to have said: “The pig is the most shameless animal on the face of the Earth. It is the only animal that invites its friends to have sex with its mate.

“In America, most people consume pork. Many times after dance parties, they have swapping of wives. Many say, ‘You sleep with my wife and I will sleep with your wife’. If you eat pigs then you behave like pigs.”

Sermons of malice

“Western society has actually degraded [women] to the status of concubines, mistresses and social butterflies, who are mere tools in the hands of pleasure seekers and sex marketeers”

“People who change their religion should face the death penalty”

“It is a blatant secret that this attack on the twin towers was done by George Bush himself”

“If he [Osama Bin Laden] is terrorising the terrorists, if he is terrorising America the terrorist … I am with him. Every Muslim should be a terrorist”