There should be an element by that name, w/ an atomic number in the 120s. Very unstable, very short half life

What JJ probably had in mind was Radio Liberty. During the Cold War, Radio Free Europe & Radio Liberty used to broadcast behind the Iron Curtain, making sure that the Western message got to the people under Communist regimes. After the US occupation of Iraq, they put up an ostensibly similar Arabic language radio station called al Hura, but that station is a competitor to al Jazeera and al Arabiya, and has featured Jihadi spokesmen in its roster. Besides, the message that the US is a wonderful country to live in, while appropriate for freedom-loving people living in the Communist bloc in the 80s, is totally inappropriate for Muslims living in Sadr City, Basra, Mosul, al Anbar or indeed anywhere else in dar ul Islam.

I've never figured out what's worse - NYT, BBC, Reuters, AFP, CNN, PMSNBC, et al nor did I even try. It's like trying to determine which is tastier - horse poop, dog poop, cat poop, pig poop or whatever other is there. Speaking of poop, here is what the Reliance of the Traveller, an Al Azhar publicaion, has on the analogy I just spelt out above: Fiqh-ul Sunnah. Version 1.05 - By Sayyid Saabiq Volume 1 >> Fiqh 1.11 a: The urine and stools of animals that are permissible to eat Both of these are considered impure. Ibn Mas'ud related that the Messenger of Allah, upon whom be peace, went to answer the call of nature. He asked 'Abdullah ibn Mas'ud to bring three stones. 'Abdullah said, "I could not find three stones, so I found two stones and animal dung and brought them to him. He took the two stones and threw away the dung saying, 'It is impure."' The hadith is related by al-Bukhari, Ibn Majah, and Ibn Khuzaimah. In one narration it states, "It is impure. It is the stool of a donkey." A little amount of it is pardoned though, as it is very difficult to completely protect one's self from it. Al-Waleed ibn Muslim says, "I said to al-Auza'i, 'What about the urine of animals whose meat is not eaten, like the mule, donkey and horse?' He said that they used to come into contact with these during their battles, and that they did not wash it off their bodies or clothes. As for the urine and stools of animals whose meat is permissible, Malik, Ahmad and a group of the Shaifiyyah says that it is pure. Commenting on the subject, Ibn Taimiyyah says, "None of the companions held that it is impure. In fact, the statement that it is impure is of recent origin and not from the early generations of the companions." Said Anas, "A group of people from the tribes of Ukul or 'Uraina came to Madinah and became ill in their stomach. The Prophet ordered them to get a milking she-camel and drink a mixture of its milk and urine." This hadith is related by Ahmad, al-Bukhari and Muslim and points to a camel's urine as being pure. Therefore, by analogy, other permissible animals' urine may also be considered pure. Says Ibn al-Munzhir, "Those who claim that that was permissible only for those people are incorrect. Specification is only confirmed by some specific proof." He also says, "The scholars permit, without any objection, the sale of sheep's stools and the use of camel's urine in their medicine, both in the past and in the present, again without any objection. This shows that they are considered pure." Says ash-Shaukani, "Apparently, the urine and stools of every living animal permissible to eat is pure." There is nothing to prove otherwise.

Well, if he can't even surrender, wonder what options he has left?

The Jews should do to al Aqsa what the Hindus did to the Babri Masjid (Mosque of Babur) in Ayodhya. That mosque was built after demolishing a temple commemorating the birthplace of Rama, an incarnation of Lord Vishnu. What did the Hindus do to that mosque? Level it!

Back up. From what he says, this time, it wasn't a DOS attack. Maybe JW could use mirror servers, and locate some in the Islamosphere, like Malaysia, Pakistan, UAE, Morocco, and so on ;-) Not physically, but just have servers physically outside it, but with addresses pointing as though they originated there, so that hackers and jihadis would be hunting for such locations ;-)

Atlas Let's say you are right. But what evidence do you have that the Iranians who are demonstrating want an end to Islam in their country? Anything short of that, and they are not worth our support. If at the end of the day, a 'revolution' is successful, but a majority of Iranians remain Muslims, there is nothing to guarantee against another 1979 some day in the future. The support that anyone in Iran needs is to stoke the embers of a civil war, so that what we have there is something along the lines of a Hamas vs Fatah, or Tehrik-e-Taliban vs Zardari regime, or Ikhwan vs Mubarak. We do not need to hospitalize demonstrators in Western embassies in Teheran that are stupid enough to exist in the first place. The goal: complete chaos in Iran, not 'freedom', unless and until the evidence is there that Islam will cease to be the religion of a majority of Iranians, and that they'll go to either Zoroastrianism or Christianity

Instead of all this handwringing, the Bermudan authorities should call the Chinese envoy in the island (assuming there is one) and hand them over. Poke a stick in the eye of the big O

Mega India is a net arms importer from Israel. As far as defense goes, India gets support from Israel, not the other way around. Unless you want Indian troops there. But Israel should start being a customer of Russia, and a big one. If Israel offers them more than Iran and Syria does, the Kremlin may jump. Their interests in this are 2-fold - mercenary, and anti-US. So if the US switches to the Pali side, that won't bring Russia and US closer - it will only drive Russia to Israel

One thing to note here - until the Iranian people prove their anti-Islamic credentials by mass apostasy, they are untrustworthy as allies, and undeserving of our support

Pamela One question. In Netanyahu's previous government, Caroline Glick was one of his advisors. Is she one again in his current administration?

Two possibilities: 1. Having lived in Kenya & Indonesia and taken Islamic subjects in school, he knows that his wife & girls are expected to be FGM'ed, and so, he's avoiding taking them during the Islamic stretch of the tour. Other possibility - he doesn't want to give away his daughters in marriage as yet. 2. He is respecting Islamic sensibilities that require women to be barefoot and pregnant, and out of sight. Even if they ain't the first 2, they sure can be the 3rd.

Well, wouldn't he have to apologize on behalf of the Joooooos if he were to apologize for 9/11? After all, don't all Mohammedans know that the Joooooooos did it, even though during the moments that they forget to deny that Muslims did 9/11, they don't hesitate to celebrate the 'Magnificient 19'?

What???!!! You mean to say that Obama does not support Pyongyang going nuclear?

Pamela You hit the nail on the head. The only way to resolve this is for Japan to go nuclear - and I'm talking weapons. That will scare the you-know-what out of Beijing, and make them more serious about Pyongyang's nuclear ambitions. Of course, Obama doesn't have half the brains to realize that this is the solution. Unfortunately, neither did Bush.

why is so much of Europe seemingly in self destruct mode? Posted by: Dawning | Wednesday, May 13, 2009 at 12:23 AM B'cos they are anti-US, who they see as an upstart former colony supplanting them, despite having a much shorter (and therefore poorer) history, and thereby worth disdaining. Despite all this, the US is the #1 power, both economically (the economy notwithstanding) and militarily, while Europe is in decline. Hence the envy. How does this apply to Islam, you may ask. Well, Europe is anti-US and Muslims are anti-US as well, and therefore, Europeans conclude that Muslims are pro-Europe. Hence, they do everything within and beyond their power to protect Muslims, despite all the evidence that Muslims do not think of themselves as Europeans, but rather at Europe as territory to be conquered. There is also the pcmc factor, which is even stronger in Europe than in the US.

Poor thing! Only 6 kids? Looks like she'll no longer be able to do her bit towards the demographic jihad. Bummer!!!

Makes my blood boil ............. please spare the comparisons to the "prophet" Muhammad's 6 year old wife Aisha: Okay! This Palestinian was more perverted than even his dear rasool: Mohammed didn't rape Aisha @ 6, he 'only married' her @ 6, but raped her @ 9 - isn't that sooooo much better? Allahu-Akbar!!!

Apparently the problem in the Pakistan military is within the junior ranks of the army - right up to Majors. There are many who will not take up arms against the Taleban, "seen as 'kindred' souls - in the struggle against the West in general, and the US in particular. To that extent the army is reverting to its post Zia identity as a guardian of the Islamic faith and according it a higher priority than the defence of national sovereignty, territorial integrity and the values enshrined in Pakistan's constitution." Since this is true of the Paki military, I disagreed w/ you that BO did the wrong thing in rooting for Musharraf's ouster. Not because a Zardari or Nawaz Sharif regime would be any better, but b'cos no Paki government can be an US ally, period! As long as Musharraf was in charge, the practice of taquiyya was easier, and you had Pakistan playing both sides. No longer. It's high time we rid ourself of the illusion that Pakistan is an ally at all. Same goes for Afghanistan or Iraq - at least any democratic government there. Since the people there are Muslims, as a people, they'll always be hostile to the West, since we are a part of dar ul Harb. Simply declare Pakistan an enemy, take out their nukes and pummel them until all their people are on their last legs, unarmed and incapable. Oh, and for Pete's sake, don't try re-building the country, Iraq style - in fact, have zero boots on the ground. No more nation-building exercises, no more 'winning of hearts & minds' - in fact, how does one win the hearts & minds of people who have neither?

There are two problems with the above: No Muslim at this rally ought to be taken seriously. I'm disappointed that Tawfiq Hamid is entertained as a speaker. We need to stop trying to co-opt Muslims to sell our case, particularly former Jihadis who haven't gone all the way in bailing out of Islam. How do we know that this former Jihadi is not practicing taquiyya? The only former Jihadis who might be acceptable would be ex-Muslims, like Walid Shoebat The above banner about the next hero lost me by showing Gandhi there. Gandhi was the ultimate panderer to Islam - he supported the Caliphate Movement in India in 1917, he did what he could during the riots in 1946 to prevent Hindus from killing Muslims, while letting Muslims kill Hindus, and he campaigned for all sorts of compromises to new born Islamocracy - Pakistan. And on Jews? Gandhi advised a group of Jews visiting him to demonstrate against Hitler and sacrifice themselves in order to shame him. Gandhi belongs right there with Mohammed and Hitler, and not with any hero, not even MLK. It's sad that such demonstrations for Human Rights have to be contaminated with such scum in order to be more 'appealing'. Appalling is more like it.

Kevin In your list above, under Hindus, you could add Hindu temples in Hindu holy cities like Ayodhya, Mathura, Varanasi Also, as Robert Spencer points out, you could also add "The List of Things That Offend Muslims" to..."The List of Things That Offend Muslims." http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/020479.php