Western media coverage of the recent massacre of Coptic Christians in Cairo, Egypt—in which the military killed dozens of Christians and injured some 300—was, as discussed earlier, deplorable. It merely repeated the false propaganda of the complicit state-run media, without checking facts. Since then, further proofs of the lies and brutality surrounding the massacre have emerged; they are compiled in the following report which consists of facts and videos from Arabic sources—many of which have not appeared in the Western media.

This report documents: 1) the activities of the Supreme Military Council of Egypt and de facto ruler; 2) the lies and duplicitous tactics of both the Military Council and its media mouthpiece, Egyptian TV; and 3) the anti-Christian sentiment pervading all aspects of this incident.

The Egyptian Military

Along with a new report by Magdi Khalil asserting that the day before the planned march, a “death squad” of snipers hid atop buildings and shot at protesters, armored vehicles intentionally chased after and ran over protesters, killing and mutilating many:

• Here is perhaps the clearest video; it shows a high-speed armored vehicle willfully plowing over unsuspecting Christian demonstrators.
• This video shows another armored vehicle chasing protesters, and a soldier opening fire into the fleeing crowds.
• This video shows high-speed armored cars running amok in the middle of the crowds, including chasing protesters on the curb, as well as soldiers beating protesters.
• As for eyewitness testimonies attesting to the brutality of the massacre, they are many, and includeMuslims.

The Tactics of the Military Council ( or “War is Deceit”)

After the incident and notwithstanding crushing evidence, Egypt’s Military Council held a news conference wherein senior official, Mahmoud Hegazy, spun lie after lie: he stated that the military would “never, never” run over civilians; that the very idea was “impossible, impossible!” and “Shame on those who accuse the Egyptian military of such things!… Never has our military run over a single person, not even when combating the Enemy [Israel].”

Hegazy portrayed the Christian protesters as the aggressors, attacking and killing “honorable” soldiers. To prove his point, he showed an image of a protester on top of a stalled armored vehicle, throwing a rock at the soldier inside, and a video of a military vehicle—that he claimed was hijacked by a protester—driving wildly into the crowd.

Hegazy’s deceit lies in the fact that the “hijacked” vehicle running amok, and the one stalled and attacked by a protester, were one and the same vehicle: Al Dalil revealed that both vehicles had the same identification number. In other words, when the vehicle in which a soldier was chasing and running over protesters finally stalled, the protesters then attacked it. Egypt’s leaders willfully manipulated the footage to exonerate themselves and portray the Copts as violent aggressors.

Several eye-witnesses, including Muslims, further stated that, to hide the “evidence,” they saw soldiers hurling the mutilated bodies of those run over into the nearby Nile River. Likewise, among the slain, a dead Muslim soldier, whom the military said was killed by protesters, was actually killed by friendly-fire—although there areindications that he may have died elsewhere, and his corpse thrown among the dead for show.

As Copts have long suspected, the “thugs” (al-baltagiyya) who always appear in protests attacking Christians seem to be men whom the military uses to create an excuse to open fire and exercise brutality. Muslim eyewitnesses say they saw the thugs coming with State Security: Al Dalil showed a video clip of a soldier exposed dressed as a civilian, interspersed among Coptic protesters, and other videos showing the thugs cooperating with the military.

Read it all

Pamela Geller has the story. If you value the freedom of speech, start calling and writing the hotel now.

The Hutton Hotel in Nashville, Tennessee is now sharia-compliant.

Steve Eckley, Senior Vice-President of Hutton Hotel, has caved to Islamic supremacist demands and cancelled our entire Preserving Freedom Conference scheduled for November 11th in Nashville.Eckley notified us that they will not honor our contract. Steve said that if we showed up we would not be let in. He said he has been getting threateningletters and calls. We are currently awaiting the written notification of the cancellation.

Steve Eckley’s phone number is 720 318 4238. He said he would not let us in the hotel if we showed up. He was so ugly and hostile, it was shocking.

I was a scheduled keynote speaker, along with Robert Spencer, Wafa Sultan, Mark Durie, William Murray, Father Keith Roderick, and a host of voices for freedom.

This is the second time in no less than a week that a major hotel has capitulated to intimidation and demands to enforce the blasphemylaws under the sharia here in America. Opposing the most radical and extreme ideology on the face of the earth is now forbidden in the war of ideas.

Just last week the Hyatt Place in Sugarland canceled a tea party event where I was scheduled to speak. They have since apologized, but that is hardly enough. Free speech, the cornerstone of our constitutional republic, is in serious jeopardy. Under the Shariah, criticism of Islam is blasphemy (punishable by death in Muslim countries living under the Shariah). This is the death of free speech in the continuing Islamization of America. This is yet another shattering demonstration of why I wrote my book Stop the Islamization of America: A Practical Guide to the Resistance.

The silencing of free speech is key to the islamization of America.

Americans must boycott these cowardly enterprises and raise their voices in protest.

Hutton Hotel
1808 West End Ave
Nashville, TN 37203

Tel: 615-340-9333, Fax: 615-340-0010

EMAIL form: http://www.huttonhotel.com/contact_form/contact_form.cfm

Here is the email of the current manager of the Hotel, Steven Andre sandre@huttonhotel.com (hat tip Rob)

Pay up or get out.

Con Ed has given the Ground Zero mosque an ultimatum: Pay the $1.7 million you owe in back rent, or we’ll terminate your lease and take back our property.

Con Ed and mosque developer Park51 have an unusual, uneasy alliance, sharing ownership of a site slated to be one of the most controversial projects in city history.

The utility owns a former substation on the western half of the property, at 51 Park Place, and the mosque developers own a five-story building on the eastern half. The buildings were connected years ago and used to house a Burlington Coat Factory store.

Park51, which leases the substation from Con Ed, wants the two buildings so it can knock both down and build a $100 million, 15-story community center.

But the plan hit a major obstacle in August when Con Ed raised the rent from $2,750 a month, a rate set in 1972, to $47,437 a month, retroactive to July 31, 2008, The Post has learned.

GROUND ZERO MOSQUE DOESN’T HAVE A PAYER

When the mosque failed to fork over the $1.7 million, the utility fired off a letter demanding the money by Oct. 4 and threatening to evict.

Park51 principals responded with a lawsuit to stop the increase, calling Con Ed’s rent demands “outrageous.”

“Whether it is bowing to political pressure or seeking to retain the valuable premises for itself, Con Ed appears intent on proceeding with its wrongful termination,” argued Sharif El-Gamal, the lead Park51 developer.

Gamal said Con Ed’s move also wipes out his ability to eventually buy the substation building, where the Park51 developers have converted the first floor into a prayer space. They turned the first floor of the adjoining building into a cultural center and recently debuted their first event, a photography exhibit.

The modest space is in sharp contrast to the expansive plans unveiled last year that generated worldwide controversy for their proximity to Ground Zero.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hcPkEHWGEeeLGSH5B_aCVcw40hmA?docId=9574cc7b4967457ca73feef9975bfe2d

I wrote this article just a few days after 9/11 (though it had to wait until the first quarter of 2002 to be published in the RTB magazine Facts for Faith). As this month marks the tenth anniversary of the September 11 attacks, I thought it would be a good time to revisit this piece.

*****

Extremist Muslim leaders like the late Ayatollah Khomeini and now the infamous terrorist Osama bin Laden are fond of referring to the United States as “the great Satan.” In the Bible the name “Satan” refers to the powerful angelic creature who stands as the evil enemy of God. To identify America as Satan raises several important questions. Do all Muslims agree with this radical assessment of America? What do Muslims like bin Laden actually mean when they make this accusation? How could anyone come to view America this way? And is there any objective rational justification for such a viewpoint?

Historically, the monotheistic religion of Islam is the youngest of the great world religions, emerging six centuries following the rise of Christianity. Presently considered by some scholars as the fastest growing religion in the world, Islam’s strong intellectual tradition includes notable contributions in the fields of mathematics, philosophy, medicine, and literature. In fact during the early Middle Ages, Islamic culture experienced an intellectual and cultural renaissance through its revival of classic literature while Europeans lived in both intellectual and literal caves.

Traditionally, Islamic culture has maintained a high degree of literacy. As with the Jewish and Christian traditions, one must be literate to read the sacred book, which for Muslims is the Qur’an. With great irony, the present-day rise of Islamic fundamentalism disregards this need for literacy, thereby threatening Islam’s place as a contributor to Western civilization.

Today’s Islam is not a purely monolithic religion. Certainly not all the world’s estimated 1.2 billion Muslims think alike, just as not all the world’s estimated 2 billion Christians (Catholics, Orthodox, and Protestants) think alike. Historically, Islam is divided into two major branches. Sunni Muslims (almost 80% of Islam) represent traditional or “orthodox” Islam and emphasize the written traditions (Qur’an, Hadith). This branch seeks a consensus of Islamic thought.

The Shi’ite Muslims (almost 20% of Islam) represent Islam’s largest minority sect and emphasize individual authorities called Imams over consensus. The major dispute between these two branches historically centers on the issue of religious authority. The question of who should be considered the legitimate successor to Muhammad (AD 570–632), also known as the prophet of Allah (literally translated “the God”), lies at the core.

Islam involves moderates and extremists on both political and religious grounds. The Sunnis historically distinguish between civil and religious authorities; however, the Shi’ites combine the two roles of mosque and state. One reason for the current growth of Islamic fundamentalism may be that many Islamic countries, as totalitarian theocracies, deny their people basic civil rights—such as freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and freedom of religion. Thus, Islamic fundamentalist propaganda deeply shapes the view of America held by many millions of Muslims in the Middle East and elsewhere. Many Muslims around the world therefore lack an objective view of America.

Bin Laden, though a Sunni Muslim by birth (born in Saudi Arabia), possesses an extremist mentality. His terrorist organization, Al-Qaeda, blends a radical political agenda with a militant approach to Islam. They promote a platform designed to bring about a jihad (“holy war”) against so-called enemies of Allah. In this scheme, America stands as enemy number one—the “great Satan” who must be destroyed.

What could possibly generate such hatred toward America? Why would anyone call for an attack killing thousands of American citizens, mostly civilians, in the World Trade Center, at the Pentagon, and on United Flight 93? The following dogmas motivate Al-Qaeda’s desire for a holocaust within the boundaries of the United States.

1. Zionism promotes the establishment of an Israeli state. Bin Laden incites anger with the view that Western colonial and imperialist powers (the United States and Great Britain) took Islamic land away from Palestinians and gave it to Islam’s enemy, the Jews. The Israelis espouse different religious beliefs and simply represent an extension of a greater evil, that evil being America.
   Extremist Muslim beliefs regarding the Israeli-American relationship take two different forms. In one interpretation Muslim extremists hate America because America helps Israel. The other explanation declares that Muslim extremists hate Israel because Israel is America’s puppet. This agenda characterizes Israel as a demon and America as the great Satan.
2. Viewed as a colonial/imperialist nation, America flexes its power and imposes its will and political ideas on innocent Islamic people. America unduly exercises economic and political influence on autonomous Islamic nations and thus weakens their Islamic identity and independence.
3. Al-Qaeda views the West, and particularly America, as embracing a decadent philosophy of life, especially in the area of moral values. They fiercely resent the West’s permissive view of sexuality. In addition, followers of bin Laden deplore American democracy and the freedoms it offers, especially the freedom and equality afforded to women.
4. Bin Laden recognizes Islam’s decline as a world power. He wants to restore militant Islam to a place of dominance on the world scene. However, his organization knows that against America’s military might, they are stymied. In light of this frustration, they choose terror, the only effective tactic they can conceive.

These four dogmas reflect a tortured interpretation of the facts and a fractured and inadequate worldview. Imaging America as the great Satan conveniently ignores America’s remarkable altruistic actions over the past hundred years.

America entered World War I in 1917, not for colonial or imperialist purposes, but to defend democracy. The United States’ involvement proved a determining factor in the allies’ ultimate victory. President Woodrow Wilson sought not the spoils of war, but rather to promote democracy among America’s former enemies.

Prior to entering World War II, America sent millions of dollars worth of weapons and goods to England and the Soviet Union in the Lend-Lease policy to aid them in the war against Germany. The United States then entered World War II in 1941 to counter the tyranny and oppression of the Axis powers—Germany, Japan, and Italy. Again this action proved the decisive factor in the Allies’ victory. Following World War II, America emerged as an undisputed superpower. With more than eleven million men in arms, a three-ocean navy, and the only nuclear weapons on Earth, if America had indeed pursued imperialist goals it could have oppressed and devoured virtually any nation.

Instead, through the Marshall Plan, America spent billions of dollars rebuilding Western Europe and restoring Western Germany to positions of political and economic stability. The same type of aid went to Japan. America gave billions of dollars, shared technology, provided a market f