One of the world’s most famous children’s toys, Barbie, has been given a makeover – wearing a burkha.

Wearing the traditional Islamic dress, the iconic doll is going undercover for a charity auction in connection with Sotheby’s for Save The Children.

More than 500 Barbies went on show yesterday at the Salone dei Cinquecento, in Florence, Italy.

Wait, was that about saving the children with a doll wearing clothing that is designed to be repressive in the Muslim world?

The company director of Laird Assessors from The Wirral, Cheshire, said: ‘Bring it on Burkha Barbie, I think this is a great idea.

‘I think this is really important for girls, wherever they are from they should have the opportunity to play with a Barbie that they feel represents them.

There are so many things wrong with that statement, I do not even know where to begin. I guess all the young girls will be able to learn what it is like to live in the coming European Caliphate. At one time, long ago when Arabs mostly lived in the desert, it might have made sense. Both men and women wore them to protect from the sun and sand, and so that it would be easier to hide who one was during warfare. Now, it simply stands for repression and subjugation of women.

Crossed at Pirate’s Cove

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post

Two-thirds of Americans disagree with the Obama administration’s decision to try Khalid Sheik Mohammed in a civilian court rather than a military court, according to a new national poll.

But, you know what? All you folks who oppose Obama and Holder’s idea are raaaaacists. And mean. And hate our Constitution. Or something like that.

But six in 10 people questioned in a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey released Monday say that the alleged mastermind of the 9/11 attacks should be tried in the United States, as the administration plans to do, rather than at a U.S. facility in another country.

I have to wonder how that would have changed had the question said Guantanamo Bay rather than at a U.S. facility in another country.

“The decision to bring Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in front of a civilian court is universally unpopular – even a majority of Democrats and liberals say that he should be tried by military authorities,” says CNN Polling Director Keating Holland. “Despite that, most Americans say that he will get a fair trial in the U.S.”

So, in private, where the Obamazombies do not have to push their talking points, a majority think the Obama/Holder idea is dumb as a bag of rocks. Figures.

“Nearly eight in 10 favor the death penalty if that happens – including one in five who say they normally oppose the death penalty, but would support it in this case,” adds Holland.

Notice how Democrats tend to drop their beliefs in a heartbeat, depending on which way the wind blows?

Shockingly, the only left leaning site that seems to be sort of kind of covering this is TPM. No, wait, they are only pointing out the NY Gov. Paterson is against the plan. I’m waiting with bated breath for some of the bigger supports, who went down the insult people road when the plan was announced Friday morning, such as The Moderate Voice (snicker) and Alan Colmes, to post the survey.

Crossed at Pirate’s Cove

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post

Related: President Obama Urges Congress To Halt Ft. Hood Probe

President Barack Obama on Saturday urged Congress to hold off on any investigation of the Fort Hood rampage until federal law enforcement and military authorities have completed their probes into the shootings at the Texas Army post, which left 13 people dead.

On an eight-day Asia trip, Obama turned his attention home and pleaded for lawmakers to “resist the temptation to turn this tragic event into the political theater.” He said those who died on the nation’s largest Army post deserve justice, not political stagecraft.

“The stakes are far too high,” Obama said in a video and Internet address released by the White House while the president was flying from Tokyo to Singapore, where Pacific Rim countries were meeting.
…
Rep. Howard McKeon, R-Calif., said he wanted to go ahead with an investigation from the House Armed Services Committee, where he is the top Republican. He said he wanted an investigation that wouldn’t compromise law enforcement or military investigations that were continuing on separate tracks.

In the Senate, Sen. Joe Lieberman, a Connecticut independent, said his Homeland Security Committee was opening an investigation.

Obama said he was not opposed to hearings — eventually. But he strongly pressed lawmakers to hold off until the probes now under way are completed.

“There is an ongoing investigation into this terrible tragedy,” Obama said. “That investigation will look at the motives of the alleged gunman, including his views and contacts.”

“We must compile every piece of information that was known about the gunman, and we must learn what was done with that information. Once we have those facts, we must act upon them.”
Source

Also see POWIP

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post

Roland Emmerich’s new end-of-the-world disaster film 2012 has a rollicking good time destroying every monument to man’s architectural genius in the world. The Sistine Chapel goes kablooie, as does the Vatican and the giant Christ the Redeemer statue in Rio de Janeiro. The White House gets flattened, too. All man’s most well known landmarks get turned to dust by Emmerich’s over-the-top movie effects team.

But by the time the year 2012 rolls around, director Roland Emmerich is obviously saying that Islam has already been wiped off the face of the Earth before the end came. There are no Saudi scenes of mayhem and destruction in his film. No Iranian landmarks get caved in, no destruction of Mecca and Medina are shown in Emmerich’s mashup masterpiece.

One can only conclude that Roland Emmerich has decided that Islam has been wiped out by an enraged western civilization before the year 2012. Emmerich is obviously saying that all Muslims have been put to death and all Muslim holy sites will have been erased from the earth long before 2012 comes to end all of civilization.

Well, what other conclusion can you come to when it is realized that director Emmerich has decided not to show any Muslim sites being destroyed in his film about the end of the world? I mean, if everything is being destroyed and he doesn’t show any Muslim sites getting mushified, he MUST be saying that there aren’t any Muslim sites left to mush by the time 2012 rolls around… right?

So, there you have it folks. Director Roland Emmerich is positing a total genocide of all Muslims and a complete erasure of their history from the planet before the year 2012.

Either that or Roland Emmerich is just another boring self-hating, Hollywood coward that delights in wishing destruction and death to be visited upon the very civilization that brings him fortune and fame. And, gosh… we don’t want that to be true, do we?

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post

If you have been reading us for any length of time, you know that we used to make fun of “Dubya” nearly every day…parroting the same comedic bits we heard in our Democrat circles, where Bush is still, to this day, lampooned as a chimp, a bumbling idiot, and a poor, clumsy public speaker.

Oh, how we RAILED against Bush in 2000…and how we RAILED against the surge in support Bush received post-9/11 when he went to Ground Zero and stood there with his bullhorn in the ruins on that hideous day.

We were convinced that ANYONE who was president would have done what Bush did, and would have set that right tone of leadership in the wake of that disaster. President Gore, President Perot, President Nader, you name it. ANYONE, we assumed, would have filled that role perfectly.

Well, we told you before how much the current president, Dr. Utopia, made us realize just how wrong we were about Bush. We shudder to think what Dr. Utopia would have done post-9/11. He would have not gone there with a bullhorn and struck that right tone. More likely than not, he would have been his usual fey, apologetic self and waxed professorially about how evil America is and how justified Muslims are for attacking us, with a sidebar on how good the attacks were because they would humble us.

Honestly, we don’t think President Gore would have been much better that day. The world needed George W. Bush, his bullhorn, and his indomitable spirit that day…and we will forever be grateful to this man for that.

As we will always be grateful for what George and Laura Bush did this week, with no media attention, when they very quietly went to Ft. Hood and met personally with the families of the victims of this terrorist attack. …

We hope someday to be able to thank George W. and Laura in person for all they’ve done, and continue to do. They didn’t have to head to Ft. Hood. That was not their responsibility.

The Obamas should have done that.

But didn’t.

Wouldn’t.

Thank goodness George W. is still on his watch, with wonderful Laura at his side.

Somehow I doubt that when the current nightmare is over, anyone is going to look back with new found appreciation of the decency and patriotism of the crew we’ve got in the White House now.

On a tip from Antara. Cross-posted at Moonbattery.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post

The Iranian-owned skyscraper, The Piaget Building in midtown Manhattan, along with mosques, schools and Islamic centers around the country, had a Federal civil “complaint” filed today, leading to their seizure by the U.S.

The Piaget Building is managed by the Alavi Foundation and owned by the Iranian government. An amended complaint “seeking the Foundation’s “majority stake” in the building located at  650 Park Avenue, New York, New York.

[Alavi] working with a front company known as Assa Corp., illegally funneled millions in rental income to Iran’s state-owned Bank Melli. Bank Melli has been accused by a U.S. Treasury official of providing support for Iran’s nuclear program, and it is illegal in the United States to do business with the bank

Bank Melli Iran is reported to have $48 billion in Shariah-compliant assets, with Iran holding more Islamic assets than all other countries. Iranian banks account for 6 of the top 10 Islamic Institutions worldwide.

In their amended complaint, U.S. prosecutors alleged Alavi has been providing numerous services to Iran’s government, including managing the building, running a charitable organization for the Iranian government and transferring funds from the building’s management company to Bank Melli.

While all of the properties under forfeiture may remain open as proceedings go forward, and no Iranian spokesman or mosque leader would speak of the action, neither would they open their doors:

At the Islamic Institute of New York, a mosque and school in Queens, two U.S. marshals came to the door and rang the bell repeatedly. The marshals taped a forfeiture notice to the window and left a large document sitting on the ground. After they left a group of men came out of the building and took the document.

Mosques are located in Queens, NY, and schools in Huston and Rockville, Maryland and an Islamic center in Carmichael, California. In Virginia, a 100-acre property.

This minute on FOX, Alavi is denying any part of their operation is owned by the Iranian government. While one earlier report said no action was taken today at the properties, FOX News’ Eric Shawn just reported that boxes were removed from the Piaget Building today.

Assets are believed to total more than $500 million, with mosques, schools and Islamic centers in Maryland, California, Houston and New York, including a 36-story office building in New York, and more than 100 acres in Virginia.

The receipts from the Piaget Building funds mosques, Islamic Centers and schools.

Confiscating the properties would be a sharp blow against Iran, which has been accused by the U.S. government of bankrolling terrorism and trying to build a nuclear bomb.

The sleek, modern building, last valued at $570 million to $650 million in 2007, has served as an important source of income for the foundation over the past 36 years. The most recent tax records show the foundation earned $4.5 million from rents in 2007.

Rents collected from the building help fund the centers and other ventures, such as sending educational literature to imprisoned Muslims in the U.S. The foundation has also invested in dozens of mosques around the country and supported Iranian academics at prominent universities.

If federal prosecutors seize the skyscraper, the Alavi Foundation would have almost no way to continue supporting the Islamic centers, which house schools and mosques. That could leave a major void in Shiite communities, and hard feelings toward the FBI.

It’s about time radical Islam has a problem with the FBI. The article says Alavi Foundation has been suspected of terrorist ties for THREE DECADES. This is not good news for the three young Americans held hostage in Iran for crossing the border from Iraq. Sarah Shourd, Shane Bauer and Joshua Fattal were charged this week with espionage and will be tried in Iran. We’ll see if the Iranian mosques and schools become bargaining chips for the release of Shourd, Bauer and Fattal.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post

But this hasn’t left the Left at a loss to explain Nidal Malik Hasan’s horrific killing spree. It was caused by all the things liberals don’t like — guns, for example. To quote Chicago Mayor Richard Daley, whose corrupt machine politics helped produce our Community Organizer in Chief:

Unfortunately, America loves Guns. We love guns to a point where that uh we see devastation on a daily basis. You don’t blame a group.

Likewise, it was America’s unfortunate love of air travel that caused Hasan’s colleagues to fly passenger airliners into buildings full of innocent people on September 11. You don’t blame a group, unless that group is normal Americans.

If anything good can come of the Islamic atrocity at Fort Hood, it is that liberals in both the government and the media have now squandered the absolute last of their credibility. It simply isn’t possible for them to deny any longer that their depraved ideology puts them on the side of the savages who are trying to destroy us.

On a tip from Charlie G. Cross-posted at Moonbattery.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post

The jihadi movement has never made any bones about the fact that it intends to destroy western civilization from within using the West’s own principles as weapons against it. This is why, for instance, that radical Islamists have been angling to institute Sharia “law” inside England and Canada and to a lesser extent in the U.S.A. But this effort isn’t even necessary when, in the U.S. for instance, a large part of the political class cannot even agree upon what the word “sacrifice” means for its own, much less find themselves able to define the terms of enemies to their civilization. What does terrorism, Sharia, or radicalism mean when Democrats cannot even properly understand what “sacrifice” means in the context of what happened at Fort Hood, Texas?

On November 7, it was reported by the New York Daily News that President Obama shamefully exploited the murderous Hasan’s crime in Texas in an effort to flog his healthcare bill in Congress.

According to the Daily News President Obama “invoked the Fort Hood shootings in an emotional appeal to Democrats to pass health care reform.” The Daily News followed this statement up with a quote from New Jersey Democrat Rob Andrews.

“He was absolutely inspiring. In a very moving way, he reminded us what sacrifice really is,” said New Jersey Rep. Rob Andrews, estimating the persuader-in-chief turned several votes.

“Sacrifice is not casting a vote that might lose an election for you; it is the sacrifice that someone makes when they wear the uniform of this country and that unfortunately a number of people made this week,” said Andrews.

This is an astonishing disconnect with reality, an execrable failure to understand even simple definitions. These soldiers murdered by Hasan didn’t “sacrifice” their lives for their country in this incident. Those that were killed didn’t get a chance to “sacrifice” their lives as they died. They were cruelly and criminally gunned down without being given the opportunity to make a conscious choice at the moment of their demise. Yes, their lives have been sacrificed, taken away in colloquial terms, but these soldiers were not in a place where they might have expected a life or death situation. They were purportedly safely at home in the care of doctors and nurses charged with ensuring the health of our uniformed personnel.

In the same way, we cannot say that those nearly 3,000 that lost their lives on 9/11/01 sacrificed their lives for their country or civilization. A sacrifice is an offering and these people had no notion on their way to work that fateful morning that they’d soon be in a situation where they might be killed by radical Islamists. In truth a sacrifice requires a surrender of something for the sake of something else. This all implies a conscious offering not a sudden extraction of a thing (such as a life taken by criminal actions). Neither the victims of 9/11 nor the soldiers innocently going about their lives at Fort Hood were offered the chance to make that sacrificial bargain.

Both were craven criminal acts. Acts of terrorism. It was not “sacrifice.” It was murder. And it was motivated by a hateful, radical religious tenet that holds such cowardly acts as a means to an end.

Worse, what we have here is a clueless Democrat and his president using this senseless act of terror as cover to get a healthcare bill passed. Obama is using these murders as fodder to push a mere legislative effort. It is stunningly disgusting.

But, it does illuminate why Democrats in general and Obama in particular simply have no logical basis by which to understand the real sacrifice that our soldiers choose to make when they enter national service and subsequently perform their duties in all branches of the military. Democrats don’t even understand the most basic premise of what sacrifice means so it is no wonder that Rep. Andrews was so surprised that Obama might mention that sacrifice isn’t just making a “hard” vote in Congress. Andrews was stunned with a definition of sacrifice that seemed not to have occurred to him.

And therein lies a major problem between the left and the right. Simple definitions cannot even be agreed upon at this point. If even so simple a thing as the definition of the word sacrifice cannot be agreed upon, we are at loggerheads to define our civilization.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post

Our world is upside-down. Democratic leaders say they do not share the concerns of the Republican members of the House Intelligence Committee that Nidal Hasan’s red flags were, perhaps, ignored.

Just a few short months ago, Speaker Nancy Pelosi called the CIA liars, offered no proof and then refused to talk about it again – leaving the stain on the agency’s  credibility in full view for the world to see.

Yesterday, Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-MI) accused Obama of withholding “critical” information. The House Intelligence Committee, chaired by a Democrat, dismissed Hoestra’s concerns.

Rep. Hoekstra went even farther and effectively said the President was not truthful when he claimed that Hoekstra and other intelligence committees had been “briefed:”

Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-MI) is blasting President Obama for withholding from the Congressional intelligence committees information on the Fort Hood killings suspect, while at the same time acknowledging the leaders of those panels — including Hoekstra himself — have indeed been briefed on Nidal Malik Hasan.

In his statement, Hoekstra repeated Obama’s plea that we not “jump to conclusions” about the alleged Fort Hood killer:

…but the administration is in possession of critical information related to the attack that they are refusing to release to Congress or the American people,” Hoekstra said

Hoekstra said he was concerned that more information had been provided, piecemeal, to the news media by anonymous sources than had yet been provided to the Committee. He criticized the Obama administration for not being more immediately forthcoming with details and specifically requested information, and for restricting the limited information provided so far to the so-called “Gang of Eight.”

So perhaps the Gang of Eight is the problem? No. Hoekstra is a member of the Gang of Eight. Members are Nancy Pelosi, John Boehner Harry Reid, Mitch McConnell, Silvestre Reyes, Pete Hoekstra, Diane Feinstein and Kit Bond. So what is going on? Was Hoekstra appropriately briefed as Obama claims, or was he not? And how about Pelosi and Reid? What do they know?

This is the height of hypocrisy and the culmination of evil. The administration and Democrats are salivating over Eric Holder’s investigation into CIA so-called torture of Guantanamo prisoners - after promising the Bush administration that they would drop that atrocious idea.

But today, with the Fort Hood memorial tribute still on the calendar, they have no concern that intelligence and the U.S. Army may have put troops side-by-side with a radical jihadist – with red flags flaring.

Democrats know Americans are fed up with their politically correct posture. We know Americans are dying in this country, in Afghanistan and still yet in Iraq because military fears the wrath of Congress, and the administration, loathes any attempt to profile or point a knowing finger at an extremist. In the video below, Hoekstra speaks about preventing terrorism and keeping soldiers safe…February 2008. Listen as he talks about homegrown terrorism. Democrats told him the “threat is not real.”

Pete Hoekstra  “threat not real”

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post

U.S. intelligence agencies were aware months ago that Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan was attempting to make contact with people associated with al Qaeda, two American officials briefed on classified material in the case told ABC News.

It is not known whether the intelligence agencies informed the Army that one of its officers was seeking to connect with suspected al Qaeda figures, the officials said.

Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-MI), the ranking Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, said that he requested the CIA and other intelligence agencies brief the committee on what was known, if anything, about Hasan by the U.S. intelligence community, only to be refused.

For a long time, ever since 9/11, people have been asking the government to “connect the dots.” Much of the connecting of the dots is stopped by political correctness. Or inter-agency turf wars. Failure of government in one of the main duties it is charged with by the Constitution. Lord help anyone in government who sat on this information and/or anyone telling someone to sit on the intelligence.

Tons of others at Memeorandum.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post