Can we please stop referring to prostitution as 'marriage' and prostitutes as 'wives' just because we're discussing Muslims? This needs to stop. It's degrading to humankind. Muslims don't marry, nor do they have any concept of marriage. Wives are not, by definition, purchased, as all Muslim females are required to be. That's prostitution. Let's call it what it is. It would be slavery were it not for the john fee ('mahr').

"I am saying that living with a man, taking care of him and being the primary voice he hears every day gives us unique influence."

It's not like that in Islam. Women are to be segregated with the children, away from the men.

Such BS. There is not a single reference to Jesus anywhere in any Islamic text. They do talk a lot about Esau, the son of Miriam, who faked his own crucifixion. Isa is Arabic for Esau (i.e., 'hairy red bastard-reject'). Yeshua is Arabic for Jesus. There is no Yeshua in any Islamic text.

Larry David should have peed on Nihad Awad. Even most Muslims could get down with that.

I just got the news (waaay behind on everything Internet-related). I am so sorry, John. I can't imagine what you guys must be going through. Please know that your family is in my heart and my prayers right now. God bless you guys.

The Camp David Accords are quite possibly the greatest act of treason ever committed in the grand scheme of things. The Camp David Accords are what started the flow of jizya. There was no real precedent for it before that aside from LBJ's deal with Nasser over the Aswan, which LBJ pulled out of because it was simply insane. The Sinai should absolutely be Israel's. The Arabs, especially Egypt, would not have attacked again. They were so demoralized, so humiliated, and their military so utterly destroyed by the Yom Kippur War that they simply couldn't have tried anything until the Reagan era, and they wouldn't have then, not even after Reagan pulled out of Lebanon. I believe that Reagan, while short-sighted with regard to the Middle East, was more pro-Israel than people tend to give him credit for. I also think he knew about and probably even backed the Natanz mission. Without the jizya Egypt's military would still be destroyed. That money has done no good for anyone, not us, not Israel, not the Copts, not even the Arabs. Egypt would be Saudi Arabia's bitch were it not for the jizya and Iran would absolutely be the only military power in the region aside from Israel.

Cornelius, Egypt's idea of 'cold peace' means not only not upholding a single term of the Camp David Accords, but creating, funding, and arming Hamas. Oh, Mubarak wants Egypt's creation out of Egypt, but there's a perpetual one-way flow through the Sinai, not to mention all the state visits with Hamas leaders who leave armed with suitcases full of American jizya. The military option would have never been open to anyone but sorry little Syria, who wasn't much back during the Shah's reign in Iran, and maybe Iraq, who wouldn't have tried it without a few semi-intimidating nations to go along with. What do 'diplomatic relations with Israel' even mean? Not much. Israel needs nothing from Arab pseudo-nations. Never has. That pseudo-diplomacy benefits Egypt and Egypt only by making Mubarak seem semi-legitimate so he can secure extra jizya and have diplomatic relations with real countries. When Egypt is your peace broker in the region you're better off just not dealing with anyone in the region. That sort of diplomacy serve to legitimate an illegitimate regime with zero benefit to Israel.

Make that seven churches.

This is so illegal. Not only can one not try to influence the SCOTUS, but we have laws in place for the express purpose of allowing us to sue bastards like the Saudis. Beowulf sez:

The Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act permits suits against foreign governments for torts which cause injury in the United States. The plaintiffs urged that killing and injuring Americans and destroying their property by the terrorists on 9/11 in NY, Pennsylvania and Washington DC, fit within this definition, and that those who provided them with support should be thus held liable.

The Justice Department, relying on a theory rejected by both the district court and the Second Circuit (as well as all other appellate cases which considered this issue), has taken the position that not only does the injury have to take place in the United States, AND not only does the direct cause of the injury have to take place in the US (e.g., the planes striking the WTC), BUT that all actions (e.g, the funding) have to take place in the US.

Here is the portion of the statue (28 USC Sec. 1605(a)) —- you decide:

a) A foreign state shall not be immune from the jurisdiction of courts of the United States or of the States in any case–

(5) not otherwise encompassed in paragraph (2) above [COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES], in which money damages are sought against a foreign state for personal injury or death, or damage to or loss of property, occurring in the United States and caused by the tortious act or omission of that foreign state or of any official or employee of that foreign state while acting within the scope of his office or employment; except this paragraph shall not apply to–

(A) any claim based upon the exercise or performance or the failure to exercise or perform a discretionary function regardless of whether the discretion be abused, or

(B) any claim arising out of malicious prosecution, abuse of process, libel, slander, misrepresentation, deceit, or interference with contract rights;

Again, where does it say that the tortious act or omission has to take place within the United States?

Maybe Lowes just went the Marriott route and declared the Rubinsteins to be a 'dissident group' because they're octogenarian Jews.

No kidding. We had great security at the place we ended up at. And really cute waiters. Their loss. I would dare some Islamonazi to try anything with Dave Gaubatz and Gmccal there.

Scooped it by 3 days.

http://vladtepesblog.com/?p=8493

I'm off to meet Hugh now. And you're not.

I don't buy it, mostly because I can't accept that Tony Blair might have been right about something.