Tribute to the Military

Sunday, March 30, 2008

Muslims more numerous than Catholics: Vatican

Courtesy of

According to the Associated Press, Islam has surpassed Roman Catholicism as the world's largest religion, the Vatican newspaper said Sunday.

"For the first time in history, we are no longer at the top: Muslims have overtaken us," Monsignor Vittorio Formenti said in an interview with the Vatican newspaper L'Osservatore Romano. Formenti compiles the Vatican's yearbook.

He said that Catholics accounted for 17.4 percent of the world population - a stable percentage - while Muslims were at 19.2 percent.

Wednesday, March 26, 2008


Courtesy of The United States Attorney's Office, Western District of Tennessee

March 26, 2008

WASHINGTON, March 26, 2008 — A federal grand jury in Nashville returned a five-count indictment today charging three men for their role in the arson of the Islamic Center in Columbia, Tenn., on Feb. 9, 2008, the Justice Department announced. Eric Ian Baker, Jonathan Edward Stone and Michael Corey Golden were charged with a conspiracy to violate civil rights, destroying a house of worship, possession of a destructive device, use of fire to destroy a building and use of fire to commit a felony.

The indictment alleges that between Feb. 2, 2008, and Feb. 9, 2008, Baker, Stone and Golden, all of whom are said to be members of a white supremacist group known as the "The Aryan Alliance," conspired with one another to burn a mosque known as the Islamic Center in Columbia, Tenn. The indictment further alleges that during the early morning hours of Feb. 9, 2008, Baker drove Golden and Stone to a convenience store in Columbia where they made Molotov cocktails filled with gasoline. According to the indictment, Golden and Stone later hurled the Molotov cocktails into the Islamic Center setting the building on fire while Baker spray painted phrases, which included "White Power," onto the exterior of the mosque.

The case was investigated by the Columbia, Tenn., Police Department; the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives; and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The case is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Hal McDonough and Civil Rights Division Trial Attorney Jonathan Skrmetti.

An indictment is only an allegation, and a defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.

According to Ann Coulter: Hillary is media's honorary Republican

Ann Coulter, in her brand new column today at WND, insists Hillary Clinton is being "swiftboated" on the Bosnia claim.

Writes Coulter: "The reason no one claims Hillary is being 'swiftboated' is that the definition of 'swiftboating' is: 'producing irrefutable evidence that a Democrat is lying.' And for purposes of her race against matinee idol B. Hussein Obama, Hillary has become the media's honorary Republican.

"In liberal-speak, only a Democrat can be swiftboated. Democrats are 'swiftboated'; Republicans are 'guilty.' So as an honorary Republican, Hillary isn't being swiftboated; she's just lying."

Read Coulter's complete column now at
Hillary: Swiftboated

Tuesday, March 25, 2008

House stealing: The Latest Scam on the Block

House under a magnifying glassCourtesy of the FBI

What do you get when you combine two popular rackets these days—identity theft and mortgage fraud? A totally new crime.

Here’s how it generally works:
… The con artists start by picking out a house to steal—say, YOURS. 
… Next, they assume your identity—getting a hold of your name and personal information (easy enough to do off the Internet) and using that to create fake IDs, social security cards, etc. 
… Then, they go to an office supply store and purchase forms that transfer property. 
… After forging your signature and using the fake IDs, they file these deeds with the proper authorities, and lo and behold, your house is now THEIRS. 

There are some variations on this theme…
… Con artists look for a vacant house—say, a vacation home or rental property—and do a little research to find out who owns it. Then, they steal the owner’s identity, go through the same process of transferring the deed, put the empty house on the market, and pocket the profits. 
… Or, the fraudsters steal a house a family is still living in…find a buyer (someone, say, who is satisfied with a few online photos)…and sell the house without the family even knowing. In fact, the rightful owners continue right on paying the mortgage for a house they no longer own. 

House stealing graphic. Here's how it generally works. Step 1, pick a house. Step 2, assume the identity. Step 3, transfer the deed. Variation 1, sell the house. Variation 2, buy the house using false identities.

It can get even more complicated than this, as we learned in a recent case out of Los Angeles that we investigated with the IRS. Last year, a real estate business owner in southeast Los Angeles pled guilty to leading a scam that defrauded more than 100 homeowners and lenders out of some $12 million. She promised to help struggling homeowners pay their mortgages by refinancing their loans. Instead, she and her partners in crime used stolen identities or “straw buyers” (people who are paid for the illegal use of their personal information) to purchase these homes. They then pocketed the money they borrowed but never made any mortgage payments. In the process, the true owners lost the title to their homes and the banks were out the money they had loaned to fake buyers. 

So how can prevent your house from getting stolen? Not easily, we’re sorry to say. The best you can do at this point is to stay vigilant. A few suggestions:

  • If you receive a payment book or information from a mortgage company that’s not yours, whether your name is on the envelope or not, don’t just throw it away. Open it, figure out what it says, and follow up with the company that sent it.
  • From time to time, it’s also a good idea to check all information pertaining to your house through your county’s deeds office. If you see any paperwork you don’t recognize or any signature that is not yours, look into it. 

House-stealing is not too common at this point, but we’re keeping an eye out for any major cases or developing trends. Please contact the FBI or your local police if you think you’ve been victimized.

- Los Angeles investigation press release
- Mortgage Fraud: General overview and statistics
- Related story

Tuesday, March 11, 2008

GOP aims to force immigration debate

Courtesy of NumbersUSA Website

GOP aims to force immigration debate

The Washington Times : March 11 , 2008 -- by Stephen Dinan

"Republicans must collect 218 signatures, or a majority of House members, to force the bill onto the floor over the objection of Democratic leaders."

House Republican leaders will introduce a petition drive today to force Democrats to debate immigration this year, using a Democrat-sponsored bill to box them into taking a stand on employers who hire illegal immigrants.

Republican leaders reached the decision yesterday evening to initiate a "discharge petition," a parliamentary move minority parties can use to force issues onto the House floor over objections of the majority. The last successful use was on campaign finance in 2002.

But Republicans' move also puts Sen. John McCain, their party's presumed presidential nominee, in a tough spot. He has consistently opposed enhanced security efforts that weren't also tied to granting citizenship rights to illegal immigrants, and the effort could highlight a deep rift among Republicans.

Republicans are using a bill sponsored by a conservative Democrat, Rep. Heath Shuler of North Carolina, to try to force the issue. The bill would boost the number of U.S. Border Patrol agents and require businesses to check employees' Social Security numbers against a federal database, known as E-Verify. The system is currently voluntary.

"The Shuler discharge petition will be filed tomorrow," a House Republican leadership aide said after the leaders met yesterday. Another aide said the petition will be sponsored by an unspecified Republican in a swing district, to provide a November boost.

Republicans must collect 218 signatures, or a majority of House members, to force the bill onto the floor over the objection of Democratic leaders.

Mr. McCain said he "gets it" that voters want security enhanced before they will accept his plan for a legalization program that would grant citizenship rights to millions of illegal immigrants. But he has yet to take a stand on any specific proposals, and his campaign has gone silent on the immigration issue in recent weeks. He also voted in the 1990s against creating the Basic Pilot Program, the system that has morphed into E-Verify.

A campaign spokesman didn't return repeated messages left over the past five days regarding the discharge petition. But a spokeswoman for House Minority Whip Roy Blunt, Missouri Republican, said the move is not a surprise to Mr. McCain.

"At this stage of the game where we have our Republican nominee, we do have conversations with their campaign to make sure we understand what each other is doing," spokeswoman Antonia Ferrier said. "I can confirm there was a brief conversation just on the subject of immigration."

One House aide who has tracked the issue said the McCain campaign told Republicans, "We understand why you're doing it. We don't necessarily like it, but it gives us no heartburn."

Rank-and-file Republicans for months have begged their leadership to take the step.

"I'm committed to doing what it takes to secure the borders. I think the only way to get the leadership's attention is to force the petition," said Rep. Tom Feeney, Florida Republican. Rep. Brian P. Bilbray, California Republican, called the Shuler bill the best bipartisan option and a "chance to get something done this year" on immigration.

Republican leaders resisted the petition for months, fearing it could offer political cover to conservative Democrats who signed it, but now see a discharge petition as a way to force those Democrats to take a stand on the bill.

Republican aides said they expect all but a dozen or so of their members to sign the petition, and expect a half-dozen Democrats to sign as well. The Shuler bill itself has 141 co-sponsors, including 48 Democrats. Mr. Shuler has said he would sign the discharge petition, though he still would prefer to have his own party leaders introduce the bill through the regular process.

Democrats are struggling to devise their own plans to have an immigration debate and to counter the discharge petition. Hispanic Caucus members want a bill that includes at least temporary legal status for illegal immigrants, while a bipartisan group wants to expand use of temporary foreign workers.

Technorati tags: Washington Times, Immigration reform, Republicans, House of Representatives, Politics, political pundits, shuler bill, hispanic caucus

The Campaign to Pass the SAVE Act

Courtesy of NumbersUSA Website

SAVE Act Discharge Petition Filed

To Remove the Job Magnet from Illegal Aliens

(March 11) Today, House Republican leaders endorsed a discharge petition for the enforcement-only SAVE Act (Secure America with Verification Enforcement; H.R. 4088). The petition was filed this morning by Rep. Thelma Drake (R-Va.).

If the petition collects 218 House signatures, a simple majority, the bill can bypass the committee process and be placed on the House floor for a vote, regardless of any objections by Democratic leaders. The petition currently has 119 signatures.

The SAVE Act, with 151 bi-partisan signers in the House and Senate, would drive millions of illegal aliens out of their jobs by requiring mandatory employment eligibility verification.

The Washington Times is reporting that Democrats are still working on alternative plans for the immigration debate. Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has been pushing a plan to grant legal work permits for millions of illegal aliens currently holding jobs and huge increases in H-2B and H-1B visas for all types of foreign workers. However, several Democrats -- including SAVE Act sponsor Rep. Heath Shuler (D-N.C.) -- were among the first to sign the discharge petition to go around Speaker Pelosi.

Click here to review faxes you can send for free to Congress.

Click here to read more information about the SAVE Act.


Courtesy of the FBI

To Terrorists, No Less


The USS Benfold. U.S. Navy photo.

The USS Benfold. U.S. Navy photo.

As a bevy of U.S. battleships steamed towards the Middle East in the spring of 2001 on a mission to patrol the Persian Gulf, a sailor aboard one of those vessels was pursuing an entirely different mission. 

His name was Hassan Abu-Jihaad, and he was serving as a signalman aboard the USS Benfold. Little did anyone know at the time, he was also a homegrown radical who was secretly in touch with al Qaeda financiers, sharing classified details about the vulnerabilities and movements of the battleships just six months after al Qaeda operatives had killed 17 Americans aboard the USS Cole in the port of Yemen.

Abu-Jihaad’s traitorous actions were recently recounted in a Connecticut court, leading to his conviction last Wednesday on twin national security crimes: espionage and material terrorism support. 

We learned about Abu-Jihaad in December 2003, when British authorities raided the apartment of Babar Ahmad, a Briton later charged with raising money for al Qaeda through a London-based organization called Azzam Publications. Its former website,, was hosted on servers in Connecticut. 

In Ahmad’s flat was a floppy disk with a password-protected document detailing what was then classified information about the travels and security weaknesses of the USS Benfold and the sister ships in its convoy. That document, it was proved at trial, was sent by Abu-Jihaad while aboard the Benfold, endangering the lives of his own shipmates and countless others.

For More Information at the FBI newscenter website

- Abu-Jihaad conviction
- Abu-Jihaad Indictment
- Shareef guilty plea
- Related case

The investigation—worked jointly by the New Haven Joint Terrorist Task Force and the Connecticut Department of Homeland Security in close cooperation with FBI offices in Phoenix and Chicago and a host of partners in the U.S. and overseas—also uncovered a trail of e-mail messages sent by Abu-Jihaad expressing support for Usama bin Laden, praising the Cole attack, recounting a security briefing on his vessel, and ordering various jihadist videos and other materials from Azzam.

Using court-authorized wiretaps, we monitored Abu-Jihaad’s conversations following his honorable discharge from the Navy. Among what we learned:

  • In one conversation, Abu-Jihaad said that he hadn’t “been in the field of making meals” for more than four years; “meals” was his code word for his ability to provide inside information on U.S. military targets. He also warned associates not to talk about jihad over the telephone or Internet because they were “tapped.” 
  • In Chicago, Abu-Jihaad roomed with Derrick Shareef, who later pled guilty to plotting to attack a suburban mall using hand grenades during the 2006 holiday season. Our wiretaps revealed that Abu-Jihaad discussed attacking military targets in Phoenix and San Diego with Shareef.

It was fortunate that the information Abu-Jihaad provided to terrorist supporters didn’t lead to the loss of any American lives. But it well could have…and Abu-Jihaad will now face up to 25 years in prison for his radically inspired actions.

Headline Archives FBI newscenter Website

Friday, March 07, 2008

America's Terror Fighters thwarting plots

Courtesy of Fox News

Without fanfare, America's terror fighters are thwarting dozens of homegrown plots aimed at domestic targets, but warn: terrorists only have to be lucky once.


Courtesy of the FBI

And 20 Children Rescued Worldwide


“Mala is to die for in those pigtails,” read one message.

“I have a few 5yo [year old] Taras that you do not have,” read another.

“Just dropping in for a hot minute … to help out the dry spell, and to give everyone something to do for an afternoon,” said still one more.

They’re hard comments to read—when you know that they were posted in a massive secret child pornography newsgroup on the web. 

That sordid network was exposed this week, thanks to a global law enforcement operation spanning five countries, three continents, and 11 U.S. states. As part of the continuing investigation, a total of 22 men have been arrested, including 14 in America, four in Germany, and two each in Australia and the U.K. 

Even more satisfying: over the course of the international operation, about 20 victims have been rescued. Investigative efforts to identify and rescue more victims are continuing. 

Innocent Images Accomplishments, 1996-2007, Cases opened, totals: 20,134; Arrests/Locates/Summons, Totals: 9,469

See the full breakdown of statistics.

The international investigation was groundbreaking in three main ways: 

1) It dismantled one of the largest (more than 400,000 images and videos were posted, traded, and trafficked) and most sophisticated child exploitation rings we’ve ever come across. For example, the group used powerful encryption tools to keep the operation secret and a multi-layered system to vet new members. “These people went to a lot of trouble to keep from being discovered,” said Steve Tidwell, the FBI Executive Assistant Director who oversees our national criminal programs. “They had a level of operational security that we’ve not seen before.”  

For More Information From the FBI newscenter

- Indictment press release
- Innocent Images website
- Innocent Images overview
- Innocent Images statistical accomplishments
- Innocent Images International Task Force

2) It marked the first use in the United States of the “child exploitation enterprise” provisions of the Adam Walsh Act of 2006. The ring, in fact, was run very much like a business, with various players handling different roles, direction coming from the top down, and the sadistic images serving as currency. Again, a sophisticated operation.

3) It involved extensive real-time and high-level global cooperation, with countries sharing not only information and intelligence but actual investigators. The operation began in January 2006 when an officer of the Queensland Police Services in Australia learned about the group. Since a number of the members were living in the U.S., Queensland authorities came to the FBI that June; we launched our investigation two months later, working through our Innocent Images National Initiative. The officer who infiltrated the ring came to U.S. and worked with us directly through our International Innocent Images Task Force in our command center in suburban Maryland. We sent agents to Australia as well. Also participating in the investigation were the BKA Child Pornography Unit in Germany, the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre in the United Kingdom, and the Toronto Police Department in Canada. 

“We have nothing but gratitude for the FBI and its Innocent Images program,” said Chief Superintendent Ross Barnett of the Queensland Police Services. “This operation wouldn’t have been a success without the investigative expertise and support the Bureau brought to the table.” 

And we, in turn, thank Chief Superintendent Barnett and our other global partners for a truly seamless operation that helped take down, in the words of one of the defendants, “the greatest group of pedos to ever gather in one place.”

Wednesday, March 05, 2008


Courtesy of Rick Roberts, KFMB San Diego 
March 5th, 2008


Sorry, folks!!!

The talk radio topic queen (otherwise known as Senator Hillary Clinton) isn’t dead… yet.

Or… is she?

Several conservative pundits are pushing for fellow right-wingers to vote for her. Perhaps they’re responsible for her win last night?

Who knows… Who cares?

It’s nothing more than a mere talking angle to generate gasps and attention…

Any conservative in their right mind knows that Hillary would be the most devastating of the three heavy players.

As you’ve been hearing, it was a great night for the She-Beast… it really was. After a double-digit losing streak she won three of the four states by wide margins on Super Tuesday 2.

And guess who else helped put her over the top in these states?

Hispanic voters. What a shocker. She sure did a lot of campaigning by the border… I wonder if all of them were legal?

Last I checked everyone (including identity-stealing illegal immigrants) do not have to show ID in primaries, or to vote at all.

Hillary, who will never mention a loss, couldn’t wait to rub her little bump in numbers into the face of fellow socialist Barrack Obama.

The Obama chant ‘yes we can’ has now been lifted– in a way– by Hillary. Last night she began chanting “Yes we will.” If Obama was as low (or at least, as desperate) as Hillary he would have begun shrieking cries of plagiarism immediately after her victory speech!

But I digress…

If you listened to the news coverage this morning you’d think that Hillary Clinton was the second coming… The ’second come-back kid,’ as the media has dubbed her…

The math, however, is NOT in her favor.

Several experts are saying that it doesn’t matter how well Hillary did last night, she could win the next 16 states in a row and would STILL lose the nomination.

They’re right.

Unless she casts the suspicious Clinton spell onto the precious superdelegates–or, if they suspiciously die as many who step in front of the Clinton freight train do– Obama already has the nod.

Comments posted at KFMB Rick Roberts Show»

Monday, March 03, 2008

Child Beheaded, Wonder What the Attacker’s Religions Is?

Courtesy of my friend Big Dog

Child Beheaded, Wonder What the Attacker’s Religions Is?

Posted at 09:40, at Big Dog's Weblog, Category: Religion of Peace

A man walked into a supermarket in Jeddah Saudi Arabia, picked up a 15 month old child and cut the boy’s head off with a knife. Shoppers watched in horror as the man raised the boy and hacked through his throat until his head came off. The man who did this was Syrian and he was the boy’s uncle. He did it because he had some dispute with his sister and her husband.

People were horrified and some fainted while others had to go to the hospital for treatment of shock. This happened in Saudi Arabia and the attacker was Syrian so is there any question as to the religion of the man involved? Only people of the religion of peace go around and lop off the heads of their relatives because of a dispute. Only a coward kills a defenseless child and this coward was no doubt a follower of the child molester Mohammad.

“No one could bear the gruesome sight of the boy’s decapitated body lying on the floor,” said Muneer, a Turkish car mechanic, who works at a garage close by. “How could someone do such a thing? I just can’t understand it… I still can’t believe it,” he said, shaking his head. Arab News

This is a low life thing to do and yet these people bring about this kind of behavior. They find it acceptable for adherents to their prophet to cut the heads off people who have committed the crime of being Jewish. These are the same kind of people who cheer as blood thirsty savages hold up the severed heads of contractors captured in Iraq. These are the people who cheer when contractors are burned to death and hung from a bridge and who cheer when American soldiers are disemboweled and butchered.

I think this is a horrible crime and that the man should be put to death but I blame his religion and his society for devaluing human life to such an extent that people kill their own relatives because of a dispute. How many of the horrified shoppers never bat an eyelid when some fanatic sets off a bomb that kills children in Iraq? How many of these idiots feel that it is perfectly OK to be martyred for the cause of Mohammad?

That little boy did nothing wrong and the coward who killed him should suffer the most painful death available. However, there will continue to be these kinds of killings until such time as the radicals who espouse killing for Islam are found and eliminated.

The mother of this boy and the shoppers at the store now know how Daniel Pearl’s family and our nation (and the balance of the civilized world for that matter) felt when radicals sawed his head off. Until they fight back against this kind of brutality, nothing will change.

God have mercy on the soul of this child and may his attacker rot in hell.

Big Dog salute to Sonnabend

Big Dog

Wesley Clark, utter nonsense

Courtesy of my friend Big Dog. BD and I are friends and he is not a member of the forum. So, I thought to post his comments regarding good old Weasely Clark.

Wesley Clark: Hillary More Qualified than McCain on Military Matters

General Wesley Clark, a man who has had his nose up the Clinton’s rear ends (he must be hoping for the SECDEF job) has made a completely asinine statement with regard to John McCain and Hilary Clinton. According to Clark, Clinton is better qualified to be the Commander in Chief by virtue of her jet setting around the world while First Lady than is McCain who actually served for several decades.

In the national security business, the question is, do you have — when you have served in uniform, do you really have the relevant experience for making the decisions at the top that have to be made? Everybody admires John McCain’s service as a fighter pilot, his courage as a prisoner of war. There’s no issue there. He’s a great man and an honorable man. But having served as a fighter pilot — and I know my experience as a company commander in Vietnam — that doesn’t prepare you to be commander-in-chief in terms of dealing with the national strategic issues that are involved. It may give you a feeling for what the troops are going through in the process, but it doesn’t give you the experience first hand of the national strategic issues.
If you look at what Hillary Clinton has done during her time as the First Lady of the United States, her travel to 80 countries, her representing the U.S. abroad, plus her years in the Senate, I think she’s the most experienced and capable person in the race, not only for representing am abroad, but for dealing with the tough issues of national security. Source: NRO

Now, according to Clark, the issue is having relevant experience to make the decisions at the top that have to be made. Clark believes that McCain had the wrong kind of military experience so he would not be good s the CINC. Hillary, on the other hand, would be wonderful because she has NO MILITARY EXPERIENCE. Instead, she gained her qualifications by visiting 80 countries while First Lady. General Clark was a military man and he believed that he had what it takes to be the CINC. That is why he ran for the presidency in the last election. However, using his criteria, every First Lady in modern history would be more qualified than Clark, McCain or any other military man simply because they jetted around to other countries. By this standard, Laura Bush is just as qualified as Hillary so we should ask her to run because she is evidently more qualified than McCain and a hell of a lot more pleasant than Clinton.

I wonder if this jackass ever thinks before he speaks. He was with that dipstick Captain at the Kos convention trying to intimidate a soldier who happened to attend while in uniform. The soldier was not participating in a rally or supporting a candidate and Clark was unaware of military regulation. Now he is saying that McCain’s military experience makes him less qualified than Hillary who has absolutely no military experience and has spent her life with a general loathing of the military. She treated the military working in her husband’’s White House horribly and somehow Clark thinks this makes her more qualified than McCain.

I am not saying McCain would be the best president in the word or that he does not have flaws. I am sure there are issues the other candidates might have a better grasp of than he but one thing is absolutely certain. John McCain has more experience than both of the others put together and he has far more experience needed to be the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces. John McCain has forgotten more about the military than these two will ever know so if they want to pick on him they should try something that actually makes sense.

Having Wesley Clark make stupid statements about the right kind of military service is not helpful and should Hillary miraculously win and decide that Clark will be the SECDEF we would have to question any statement he made because he has already proven he is incompetent and, like the Clinton’s, will say anything to get a win.

It is Big Dog's opinion that Wesley Clark is a moron who has no clue as to what it takes to lead as demonstrated by his ridiculous statements regarding McCain and Clinton. What do you think?