And So I Go: Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow

Archive for the ‘Muslim’ Category

First off:  full disclosure:  I am a second generation immigrant.  the legal kind however.  My maternal grandparents came to america in steerage with hardly a dime in the pockets in 1910.    At that time the only government program available to immigrants was   public school classes in English.  A program that by the way was a good one! and therefore was dropped!    Immigrants were on their own to sink or swim or rely on other immigrants  until they found a job.  there was also none of this bringing every relative including kissin’ counsins over once the first immigrant made it into the country.  Damned if my grandparents didn’t make it and even go so far as to thrive without the benefit of tax payer dollars.  How dare they!!?!!

Todays immigrants just don’t have these same amenities to greet them the moment they step off the boat or plan.  Todays immigrants are immediately met by your federal government officials to help them sign up for all the juicy government welfare programs and handouts that we Americans have made available to any new comers to our shores.  AND, this also seems to apply to illegal immigrants.   Yes I know Dear Reader, it isn’t nice and is considered an insult to call these dear people “illegal aliens”  or even “illegal”.  they are instead according to our own State Department to be referred to as “undocumented citizens”.

Now we have our Congressmen busy working to get the immigrants  or Hispanic vote which Obama got 71% of in the 2012 election.  So both parties, Republican and Democrat, are busy trying to out do each other with goodies for these people.  Now please understand,  I know that something has to be done about the illegal aliens we already have in this country.  I also assure you that if I lived in Central America I would be  one of the first to break my butt getting across the Rio Grande River!   Yes I would!  I have been to Mexico and the poverty is so bad that after one week I insisted my husband turn the RV around and head north as fast as possible because I simply could not stand seeing another child with a swollen belly  ( swollen bellies in children is a sure sign of  gross hunger!).    So yes,  I Brenda Bowers would move Heaven and Hell and defy every American in this fabulous country to get over here and be able to get a job and feed my family.  And I would, I am pretty sure, commit a whole lot of the available low level crimes to stay here!
But speaking as an American whose grandparents were among those who left Europe to come to this land of promise and freedom,  we simply can not afford any more of the “starving masses yearning to be free” out there.  We need to seal off our borders RIGHT NOW.  Even if it takes placing our troops on our borders.  As it stands with the drug dealers and  our own government passing out weapons on our borders they are war zones right now anyhow!   Then after sealing our borders we need to do something to get a handle on just how amany and who the people are who are here already.  Not to get them sign up for every government welfare program out there but to get a head count and to see that they begin the process of becoming Americans citizens sometime in the future, but only if they are obeying our laws and contributing to our society.

 

With all of the above in mind I thought perhaps you would find this latest Heritage Foundation article of interest. Sincerely ,   BB

American Families Cannot Afford the Cost of Amnesty

Our nation is going broke, and now is not the time to increase burdens on American families.

The Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act (S. 744)—commonly called the “Gang of Eight bill” after the eight Senators who came up with it, Charles Schumer (D-NY), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Robert Menendez (D-NJ), Michael Bennet (D-CO), John McCain (R-AZ), Jeff Flake (R-AZ), Marco Rubio (R-FL), and Lindsey Graham (R-SC)—includes amnesty for some 11 million unlawful immigrants. That amnesty would further burden taxpayers and weaken our fiscal situation. Congress should not rush to pass the bill without understanding the cost to the American taxpayer, especially when key research identifying and calculating those costs is nearly complete.

We have more than $12 trillion in public debt and tens of trillions of dollars more in unfunded obligations that we have no way to afford, thanks to promises made by past and present politicians. With this in mind, today’s political leaders must consider the fiscal impact of amnesty and a path to citizenship that would enable millions of unlawful immigrants to qualify for costly welfare and entitlement programs.

Simply put, what would this cost taxpayers, present and future? Would this make their burdens lighter, or double down on debt and unaffordable promises to be repaid by future generations?

Leaders from both parties have repeatedly failed to consider properly the long-term effects of their policies. That is why we are in such a predicament. For too many politicians, long-term thinking extends only to the next election, at most six years away. Unfortunately, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the legislative branch’s official scorekeeper, does not help much in this regard, as it often looks at costs for only the next 10 years.

We’ve seen legislative myopia again and again as politicians put off tough choices for the future or make our fiscal picture worse with new and expanded government programs we cannot afford, like Medicare prescription drug benefits or Obamacare. The biggest losers are future generations.

Former House Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-TX) once noted that three groups spend other people’s money: thieves, children, and politicians—and all three need supervision. Robert Rector of The Heritage Foundation helps provide the information needed for the American people to keep watch over politicians playing with immigration laws and our tax money. Rector is most famous for his work pioneering welfare reform and enjoys a sterling reputation as one of the nation’s leading authorities on government social programs.

When he last crunched the numbers during the 2007 amnesty debate, Rector calculated that a general amnesty would cost some $2.5 trillion after considering what legalized immigrants would likely pay in taxes and receive in government assistance. With government only getting bigger (again, see Obamacare), it is likely he will calculate an even higher price tag in 2013. Hishighly anticipated research is nearing completion. His research from five years ago and the anticipated update are a central part of the debate.
Some amnesty proponents are trying to convince themselves that the immigration bill won’t cost much. On the surface, they have some good talking points, noting that “registered provisional immigrants” (the name given to aliens who entered or stayed in the U.S. unlawfully but would get amnesty under the bill) are not eligible for government benefits. Of course that would last only until, at the very latest, they become citizens. (More likely, there will be pressure in future years to speed up both citizenship and eligibility.)

In just a short time, they would be entitled to the same massive array of government programs as everyone else, including expensive retirement income and health programs that are already severely underfunded. The average unlawful immigrant has a 10th grade education, and low-skill immigrants on average take more in government benefits than they pay in taxes at every stage of their lives.

America’s families are already burdened with taxes to support a bloated welfare and overburdened entitlement system that is badly in need of reform. This situation would get far worse under amnesty.

Read the Morning Bell and more en español every day atHeritage Libertad.

 

ONE MORE NOTE:  the two monsters who killed people in Boston, the so-called Boston Bombers were immigrants.    They and their parent were brought to the United States under our all too generous program for people who felt their lives were in danger in their own country and then given every possible welfare program available.  That was 10 years ago.  The parents returned to Russia so apparently their lives were not that threatened.  The oldest  child a man of 26 who had been in the United States living on welfare all this time and at age 26 bombed and killed and injured Americans!   So much for immigrants to our country in this enlightened age when we tax payers thru our elected officials roll out the welcome mat and pour our hard earned tax dollars into their open palms.  Sincerely, Brenda Bowers

It is my belief that Israel is now taking out Hamas in the Gaza Strip first before they take out Iran.  Sort of a clean up operation on their borders and a warning to the rest of the Arab world to stand down while  they go after Iran.   All of the Middle Eastern countries want Iran taken out and they also want Israel to be the one to do it so they can then raise Holy Hell about it and the inhumanity of killing all the innocent Iranians so brutally.  The bombs to take out Iran’s nuclear program will of necessity have to kill many thousands of Iran’s population because the Iranian government made sure to place the nuclear facilities directly under or in population centers!!   this is very common practice among the Muslims who care nothing for human beings.

The Israelis  will of course have to make a ground advance in order to get the missile sites in Gaza without killing off a lot of civilians.  Israel is concerned for killing children whereas the terrorist use the children (schools and hospitals) as  shields from which to launch their weapons.  To use missiles to take out these missile sites would kill so many, so Israel must send in its soldiers to get the weapons.

As usual the world is against Israel and it’s right to exist.  Obama did his level best to support Hamas  with his  officious statement that “Israel has a right to defend itself” then going on to warn against a ground offensive warning that that would destroy any peace negotiations.  Like these so-called “peace negotiations” have been going on since the 1880’s !!    Yes, I know Israel was not even formed until 1948,   but the talking about a homeland for the dispersed Jews started a century before that.  The homeland that was given to them by God Himself !  If you believe the Bible you must then believe that the Jews were given the land of Canaan by God Himself.  They are the only people whom God Himself gave a homeland of their own and after 5000 years of living on that land except for short periods when they were driven out, they were finally dispersed all over the Earth.    It is long past time for the Jew to return and no man or group on Earth has the right to take away what God has given.  Oddly enough the very people who are denying the Jews claim to believe in the Bible; both the Christians and the Muslims believe in the Old Testament and claim it as the oldest portion of their holy book.  How ironic is that?

Anyhow, the following article is a good summation of what is happening and just by chance happens to back up my own thoughts on the matter  :).  BB

The Escalating Conflict Between Hamas and Israel

By James Phillips

Over the last four days, militants in Gaza have fired more than 840 rockets at Israel. Hamas rockets have reached the outskirts of Jerusalem and Tel Aviv for the first time, thanks to the smuggling of Iranian rockets into Gaza. The increasing range and sophistication of Palestinian rockets has expanded the reach of terrorists, who now can threaten up to half of Israel’s population.

Israel has intercepted 302 of those rockets with its Iron Dome missile defense system, according to the Israel Defense Forces. Iron Dome, on which the U.S. has collaborated, has proven its worth and underscored the importance of missile defense in future U.S. military budgets.

Meanwhile, Iran is seeking—successfully—to keep the pot boiling at Israel’s expense to distract international attention from its nuclear program. A leaked International Atomic Energy Agency report indicates that Iran could soon double the number of centrifuges at its Fordo facility from 700 to 1,400.

President Obama spoke out on the fighting yesterday, saying Israel has the right to defend itself against Hamas’s missile attacks from Gaza. But he urged Israel not to launch a ground assault in Gaza, saying it would put Israeli soldiers, as well as Palestinian citizens, at greater risk and hamper an already vexing peace process.

“If we see a further escalation of the situation in Gaza, the likelihood of us getting back on any kind of peace track that leads to a two-state solution is going to be pushed off way into the future,” Obama said.

This public statement will only strengthen Hamas’s determination to continue its rocket terrorismand reap the propaganda benefits from Israeli retaliatory air strikes, because the President’s statement lowers the perceived risks of an Israeli ground intervention. Moreover, it is continued Palestinian terrorism that is the chief barrier to peace, not Israel’s legitimate efforts to protect its own citizens from indiscriminate Palestinian terrorist attacks.

Egypt, Turkey, and the Arab League have heavily criticized Israel and called for a halt of air strikes. Hamas is an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood and hopes to pull in Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood-dominated regime to tilt the balance against Israel. Egypt’s government will seek to have its cake and eat it, too, in the sense that it will use the crisis to denounce Israel, support Hamas, and play to anti-Israeli sentiments at home while trying to mediate a ceasefire behind the scenes that enhances its influence and justifies continued U.S. and Western aid.

If they genuinely wanted to stop the bloodshed, then these leaders should pressure Hamas to stop the bombardment, which triggered the crisis.

Obama, too, should aim primarily at restraining Hamas, not Israel.

Hamas, as usual, is bent on advancing its radical Islamist agenda at the expense of Palestinian national interests. It is a revolutionary movement more interested in destroying Israel than in building a Palestinian state or protecting Palestinians from another humanitarian tragedy that it has engineered.

Israel has called up 75,000 reservists and massed armor and at least 30,000 troops along the border, underscoring that it is serious about launching a ground intervention if Hamas continues its indiscriminate bombardment of Israeli civilians.

The U.S. needs to stand with Israel against terrorism and support its right to defend itself against a ruthless enemy that hides among Palestinian civilians to launch rockets indiscriminately at Israeli civilians. Hamas routinely uses children as shields. There can be no Israeli–Palestinian peace until Hamas and other Islamists are defeated and discredited.

James Phillips is the Senior Research Fellow for Middle Eastern Affairs in the Douglas and Sarah Allison Center for Foreign Policy Studies at The Heritage Foundation. He has written extensively on Middle Eastern issues and international terrorism since 1978.

Newsletter from  ACT for AMERICA.

August 14, 2012

This couldn’t happen here, could it?

Dear Lew and Brenda,

Yes it could—and is.

In fact, the title of the article below (highlights added), posted at the Gatestone Institute website, could just as easily be “How Political Correctness is Transforming American Education.” 

To find just one example, click here to check out the report we released earlier this year, “Education or Indoctrination: The Treatment of Islam in 6ththrough 12th Grade American Textbooks.”

You’ll learn that the typical textbook fails to note that the 9/11 terrorists were radical Muslims and fails to inform students that the state of Israel was created by a UN resolution in 1947.

Most of what is mentioned below is already beginning to happen in America. For example, a couple years ago students at a Boston-area middle school were taken on a field trip to a mosque. The boys were invited to kneel and pray while teachers stood by and did nothing. Can you imagine the outcry from faculty and the ACLU if this had happened at a Christian church?


How Political Correctness Is Transforming British Education

by Soeren Kern
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/3170/british-education-political-correctness#.UAQtSmOuuGk.facebook

In Cheshire, two students at the Alsager High School were punished by their teacher for refusing to pray to Allah as part of their religious education class.

In Scotland, 30 non-Muslim children from the Parkview Primary School recently were required to visit the Bait ur Rehman Ahmadiyya mosque in the Yorkhill district of Glasgow (videos here and here). At the mosque, the children were instructed to recite the shahada, the Muslim declaration of faith which states: “There is no god but Allah and Mohammed is his messenger.” Muslims are also demanding that Islamic preachers be sent to every school in Scotland to teach children about Islam, ostensibly in an effort to end negative attitudes about Muslims.

British schools are increasingly dropping the Jewish Holocaust from history lessons to avoid offending Muslim pupils, according to a report entitled, Teaching Emotive and Controversial History, commissioned by the Department for Education and Skills.

British teachers are also reluctant to discuss the medieval Crusades, in which Christians fought Muslim armies for control of Jerusalem: lessons often contradict what is taught in local mosques.

In an effort to counter “Islamophobia” in British schools, teachers now are required to teach “key Muslim contributions such as Algebra and the number zero” in math and science courses, even though the concept of zero originated in India.

In the East London district of Tower Hamlets, four Muslims were recently jailed for attacking a local white teacher who gave religious studies lessons to Muslim girls; and 85 out of 90 schools have implemented “no pork” policies.

Schools across Britain are, in fact, increasingly banning pork from lunch menus to avoid offending Muslim students. Hundreds of schools have adopted a “no pork” policy, according to a recent report by the London-based Daily Telegraph.

The culinary restrictions join a long list of politically correct changes that gradually are bringing hundreds of British primary and secondary education into conformity with Islamic Sharia law.

The London Borough of Haringey, a heavily Muslim district in North London, is the latest school district to switch to a menu that is fully halal (religiously permissible for Muslims).

The Haringey Town Council recently issued “best practice” advice to all schools in its area to “ban all pork products in order to cater for the needs of staff and pupils who are not permitted contact with these for religious reasons.”

Local politicians have criticized the new policy as pandering to Muslims, and local farmers, who have pointed out that all schools in Britain already offer vegetarian options, have accused school administrators of depriving non-Muslim children of a choice.

Following an outcry from non-Muslim parents, the town council removed the guidance from its website, although the new policy remains in place.

At the Cypress Junior School, in Croydon, south London, school administrators announced in the school newsletter dated June 1, 2012 that the school has opted for a pork-free menu “as a result of pupil and parental feedback.”

The announcement states: “Whilst beef, chicken, turkey and fish will all feature, as well as the daily vegetarian and jacket potato or pasta option, the sausages served will now be chicken rather than pork.”

In Luton, an industrial city some 50 kilometers (30 miles) north of London where more than 15% of the population is now Muslim, 23 out of 57 schools have banned pork.

In the City of Bradford, a borough of West Yorkshire in Northern England where there are now twice as many practicing Muslims that there are practicing Anglicans, 24 out of 160 schools have eliminated pork from their menus. In Newham (East London), 25 out of 75 schools have banned pork.

Other pork-free schools include Cranford Park Primary School in Hayes (Middlesex), and Dog Kennel Hill Primary in East Dulwich (South London).

The Borough of Harrow in northwest London was among the first in Britain to encourage halal menus. In 2010, Harrow Council announced plans to ban pork in the borough’s 52 state primary schools, following a switch by ten secondary schools to offer halal-only menus.

According to the UK-based National Pig Association, which represents commercial pork producers, “It is disappointing that schools cannot be sufficiently organized to give children a choice of meat. Sausages and roast pork are staples of a British diet and children enjoy eating them. If products can be labeled with warnings that they contain nuts and vegetarian dishes can be made and kept separate from meat dishes, [we] don’t see why the same can’t apply to pork.”

Lunch menus are not the only area in which “cultural sensitivity” is escalating in British schools.

In West Yorkshire, the Park Road Junior Infant and Nursery School in Batley has banned stories featuring pigs, including “The Three Little Pigs,” in case they offend Muslim children.

In Nottingham, the Greenwood Primary School cancelled a Christmas nativity play; it interfered with the Muslim festival of Eid al-Adha. In Scarborough, the Yorkshire Coast College removed the words Christmas and Easter from their calendar not to offend Muslims.

Also in Cheshire, a 14-year-old Roman Catholic girl who attends Ellesmere Port Catholic High School was branded a truant by teachers for refusing to dress like a Muslim and visit a mosque.

In Stoke-on-Trent, schools have been ordered to rearrange exams, cancel swimming lessons and stop sex education during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan. In Norwich, theKnowland Grove Community First School has axed the traditional Christmas play to “look at some of the other great cultural festivals of the world.”

Meanwhile, the politically correct ban on pigs in Britain also extends to toys for children. A toy farm set called HappyLand Goosefeather Farm recently removed pigs in order to avoid offending Muslims.

The pig removal came to public attention after a British mother bought the toy as a present for her daughter’s first birthday. Although the set contained a model of a cow, sheep, chicken, horse and dog, there was no pig, despite there being a sty and a button which generated an “oink” sound.

After the mother complained, the Early Learning Centre (ELC), which manufactures the toy, responded: “Previously the pig was part of the Goosefeather Farm. However due to customer feedback and religious reasons this is no longer part of the farm.”

After a public outcry, however, ELC later reversed its decision: “We recognize that pigs are familiar farm animals, especially for our UK customers. We have taken the decision to reinstate the pig and to no longer sell the set in international markets where it might create an issue.”

Shariah Law on America’s Shores: Townhall Magazine Examines ‘Terror’s Secret Weapon’ | The Blaze.

 

You  may think the worst of Islam is not here in America but you need to think again.  It is here!  and it is growing with the help of liberal/progressive judges.  another wake up call People.  BB

Shariah Law on America’s Shores: Townhall Magazine Examines ‘Terror’s Secret Weapon’

The impending threat of radical Islam is not one that stops at America’s borders.  A detailed new analysis featured in the April issue of Townhall Magazine, posted here as an online exclusive for Blaze readers, examines how Muslim radicals are aggressively using liberal courts, American businesses and outspoken activists inside our own country to implement Islamic Shariah law — an uncompromising religious code that runs counter to freedoms preserved in the American Constitution.

——————-

The Shariah Threat
by Kathy Jessup

A judge refuses a protection order for a woman raped by her Muslim husband, ruling the man’s abuse is allowed under Shariah law.

(Image: Townhall Magazine)

A cartoonist is in hiding after a tongue-in-cheek “Everybody Draw Mohammed Day” promotion earned her a fatwa death order for violating a Shariah edict banning drawing the Muslim prophet’s image.

A Shariah-compliant investment fund is camouflaged as a charity and funnels more than $12 million to finance Hamas suicide bombers.

Not exactly shocking in some Muslim countries where strict adherence to centuries-old rules, based on Islamic teachings, shines a spotlight on stonings and beheadings.

But these occurred recently in the United States.

Now “honor killings,” publicly funded accommodations for Islamic prayer and billions in Wall Street investments linked to potentially dangerous terror activities are raising political and constitutional questions in America.

Can or should Shariah law co-exist with the Judeo-Christian foundations of U.S. jurisprudence and the Constitution? Will imposition of Islamic-based edicts, enabled by so-called religious tolerance and political correctness, open the door to radical forms of the religion in Western democracies?  (Can anyone really think it possible for Sharia and democracy to co-exist except some liberal bone headed fool?   Any yet these questions are actually being asked  in our colleges and universities and law schools! BB)

A growing number of states are drafting constitutional amendments to prohibit state judges from applying Islamic or international law in deciding cases. But even the 70 percent of voters who passed Oklahoma’s measure in November hasn’t settled the issue for Sooners.

When the director of the Oklahoma chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) challenged the amendment in court, a federal judge granted a preliminary injunction, ruling the amendment could be interpreted to single out Shariah law and discredit Islam, violating the First Amendment.

WHAT IS SHARIAH LAW?

Shariah (meaning “path” in Arabic) codifies the words, practices and teaching of Islam’s Prophet Mohammed, serving as a guide/law for everything from Muslims’ family and religious practices to financial transactions.

Several hundred years after the death of Mohammed, the prophet’s model living practices were assembled into the hadith, initially melding Islam and local customs. Various hadiths eventually developed into four schools of Sunni thought and one that guides Shiites. Each differs in the degree they draw from the Koran, Islamic thought and community practices.

Shariah identifies five hadd offenses, serious charges resolved by an Islamic judge. They are unlawful sexual intercourse (adultery or sex outside marriage), falsely accusing unlawful sexual intercourse, consuming wine (sometimes all alcohol), theft and highway robbery.

Punishments ordered for hadd crimes by conservative Shariah schools—stonings, executions, amputations and beatings—shock Western sensibilities. However, Ali Mazrui, of the Institute for Global Cultural Studies, says less severe penalties are more typically imposed.

Still, Islam has not uniformly banned so-called “honor killings,” genital mutilation, pre-teen marriages, polygamy, and divorce and inheritance rules that undercut the standing of women. Testimony from non-Muslims and even Muslim women is given less weight than that of Muslim men.

The size of a country’s Islamic population and its level of religious orthodoxy typically influence the degree to which Shariah law is inculcated in national legal codes.

A Shariah law officer canes a woman in front of a mosque in Banda Aceh, Indonesia, who violated strict laws forbidding contact between unmarried men and women. (AP)

Conservative Muslim countries including Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Yemen and Iran declare Islam the official religion and Shariah the source of law. In more secular Muslim countries where Islamists are the minority, Shariah has gradually gained legal legitimacy through local customs. Other countries, including Turkey and Azerbaijan, enforce separation of state and religion, sometimes resulting in political clashes.

Some countries operate a dual system where Shariah is applied to family law, while secular statutes govern criminal cases. For example, Britain introduced Shariah tribunals in 2008 that apply Islamic law to inheritance, marriage and divorce disputes where the parties all agree to the jurisdiction.

SHARIAH AND THE UNITED STATES

In 2009, Dalia Mogahed, an Obama administration adviser on Muslim affairs, told a British television audience that the West misunderstands Shariah law, calling its perceptions of Islamic tenants “oversimplified.”

But deaths, abuse and threats involving Muslim women in the United States and Canada have put a Western face on facets of Shariah that had been cloaked in long-standing Middle East practices.

Pakistani-born Muzzammil Hassan was convicted in February for beheading his wife inside the Buffalo, N.Y., television studio the couple had created to promote Islamic cultural understanding. Jurors didn’t buy Hassan’s story that he suffered spousal abuse and killed his wife in self-defense. Hassan had been served with divorce papers the week before, and his children testified he had been the abuser in the couple’s relationship.

In 2008, a New Jersey judge ruled Shariah permitted a Moroccan man to rape his Muslim wife, despite state law making it a crime. The New Jersey Appeals Court overturned that decision and remanded the case, finally allowing the woman to get a restraining order against her husband while she sought a divorce. The appeals court decision said neither Shariah law, giving a husband physical authority over his wife, nor Muslim beliefs on the role of women provided the man an exemption from criminal intent under U.S. statutes.

“[T]he [trial] judge determined to except defendant from the operation of the State’s statutes as a result of his religious beliefs,” the appeals judges wrote. “In doing so, the judge was mistaken.”

Irfan Aleem went to a Pakistani embassy and performed talaq in 2007, exercising Shariah provisions that he said allowed him to divorce his wife Farah by proclaiming his intention three times. Although married several decades earlier in Pakistan, the couple had lived in Maryland for 20 years. Irfan said Shariah allowed Farah no claim on a lucrative pension he would receive from his job with the World Bank.

Maryland judges didn’t agree, ruling the Shariah practices were “contrary to public policy of this state.” The decision set aside the divorce Irfan had quickly proclaimed and afforded Farah a right to claim marital property in a Maryland divorce.

Honor murder victims Amina and Sarah Said of Texas were featured on Stop Islamization of America’s Freedom Taxi campaign in Chicago to raise awareness of the horrors of honor killing. (AP)

The deaths of at least 10 women in the United States and Canada have been linked to so-called Islamic “honor killings” in the last seven years.

In 2004, a 14-year-old girl who had been raped in Newfoundland was strangled by her father and brother to “restore the family honor.” A 20-year-old daughter of Afghan parents was shot dead in 2006, allegedly because she had moved in with her fiancé before their wedding. The killer was her brother.

In Ontario, a 16-year-old was stabbed to death in 2007 by her father while her mother held her down. The teenager had reportedly fought with her parents over wearing a hijib, a Muslim head covering. In another Canadian case, three teenage girls were drowned in their father’s car in 2009. Also found dead was their father’s first wife, who relatives say he never divorced. The father, his current wife and the girls’ 18-year-old brother were all charged with first-degree murder. Relatives told the media the killings were precipitated by one daughter’s dating decisions.

A Muslim father in Texas shot his two teenage daughters, Amina and Sarah Said, to death in January 2008. The murders allegedly were prompted by the girls having “unsanctioned boyfriends.” Later that year, a Pakistani man beat his 25-yearold daughter to death in Atlanta, reportedly because she opposed her arranged marriage.

Rifqa Bary, an Ohio teenager, made headlines in 2009 when she fled to Florida and foster care, saying she feared she would be the victim of a Muslim “honor killing” for her decision to convert to Christianity. She continued her religious choice a year later when she turned 18.

In a situation much like the 2008 Muslim assassination order against Danish cartoonist Kurt Westergaard, Seattle cartoonist Molly Norris went into hiding at the FBI’s recommendation last spring after her “Everybody Draw Mohammed Day” hit Facebook. A Seattle newspaper said Norris is “essentially wiping away her identity” in reaction to a fatwa urging her killing issued by Anwar al-Awlaki, the radical Muslim cleric connected to the Fort Hood killings, the attempted Christmas Day airline bombing over Detroit and the failed Times Square bombing.

And in February, radical Muslims announced plans to take their demand for American Shariah to the White House, calling for thousands of Islamists to rally on Pennsylvania Avenue March 3. But just hours before the rally was scheduled to begin, its organizer, British Muslim cleric Anjem Choudary, called it off, alleging the cause had been “distorted by the media.”

Choudary said the demonstration was merely “postponed until we gather even more Muslims;” no new rally date was announced.

In an online video statement, Choudary said Muslims are obligated to implement Shariah law “immediately, wherever we are in the world,” and he said America can reverse “poverty, child abuse, rape, robberies, theft, crime and anarchy-type scenarios” only after the United States embraces the Islamic code for living. In the meantime, Choudary predicted “the dollar will soon lose its status.”

British Muslim Cleric Anjem Choudary (AP)

“We believe the whole of the world must be under Shariah,” Choudary said. “America is not blessed by God. The American dream has become a nightmare.” Other elements of America’s Shariah debate are more nuanced. Some, like CBSNews.com’s political reporter Brian Montopoli, believe Shariah fears are “overblown at best,” and Jeffry Goldberg, The Atlantic’s national correspondent, said, “A Martian takeover of New Jersey is more likely than the imposition of a caliphate, or of Muslim law, on America.”

Ibrahim Hooper, a spokesman for CAIR, says the enjoined Oklahoma amendment is “an indication of growing anti-Muslim sentiment.” Hooper said CAIR has “not found any conflict between what a Muslim needs to do to practice their faith and the Constitution or any other American laws. We are, in fact, relying on the Constitution as our last line of defense.”

But conservative Jewish blogger Pamela Geller delivers an aggressive “creeping Shariah” warning: “It’s a drip, drip, drip, drip, drip. [In] the mosqueing of the workplace where you’re imposing prayer times on union contracts, non-Muslim workers have to lengthen their day. It’s wrong.”

Consider the political reaction Americans would have seen if these Muslim accommodations had instead been made for Christians:

  • The Christian Science Monitor reported a California elementary school made accommodations when it absorbed Muslim students from a shuttered charter school, including revising its instructional schedule to add a 15-minute “recess” after lunch to allow Muslim students to pray in a separate room. The school district’s attorney defended it, saying “the Muslim faith requires specificity of prayer obligations … that most other religions do not,” a claim questioned by even some Muslims. Pork also was removed from school-lunch menus, according to media reports.
  • In Massachusetts, where a firehouse was ordered to take down a “Merry Christmas” greeting, public middle school students took a “cultural diversity” field trip to a local mosque, where the boys participated in Islamic prayers while girls were excluded.These public school incidents are not isolated instances.

    “Starting about two years ago, school attorneys have been asking more and more questions about accommodations for Muslim students,” said Lisa Soronen, senior staff attorney for the National School Boards Association.

  • Four Christian evangelists attending a July Muslim cultural festival in Dearborn, Mich., were arrested for “disorderly conduct to ensure they did not provoke violence from others attending,” according to a Detroit media report. The four said they were attempting to engage in a dialogue about faith. Shariah law prohibits Christians from engaging Muslims about Christianity.
  • The University of Michigan-Dearborn, where about 10 percent of students are Muslim, spent $25,000 to install two foot-washing stations on campus to accommodate ablutions before Islamic daily prayers. The university said it is one of about 18 U.S. higher education institutions providing the unusual facilities, calling its decision “a reflection of our values of respect, tolerance, and safe accommodation of student needs.”

The Michigan Civil Liberties Union mounted no challenge, saying the foot baths have “no [religious] symbolic value.”

“They’re in a regular restroom and could be just as useful to a janitor filling up buckets, or someone coming off the basketball court as to Muslim students,” said Kary Moss, MCLU director.

  • Thomas More Law Center, a conservative, public-interest law firm headquartered in Michigan, is challenging the constitutionality of federal bailout money to investment firm AIG, claiming AIG’s involvement in Shariah-compliant financing violated the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause. A federal district judge in Michigan ruled that despite the fact the bailout gave the federal government an 80 percent ownership in AIG, there was no evidence the government’s money had funded “religious indoctrination.” And if there were evidence, the court said the $153 million of federal bailout money used to support Shariah compliance was an insignificant portion of the total $47.5 billion the government provided AIG.

That ruling is being appealed.

THE POWER OF MONEY

Conservative author Dick Morris says airplanes may have taken down the Twin Towers, but he predicts Shariah-compliant investing of billions in Western financial markets has the potential to “hijack our institutions, our social policies and ultimately our values in the name of Islamic rule.”

Huge oil profits and unease with their own Middle Eastern financial institutions brought Islamic investors to Wall Street in the 1990s in search of special funds that would meet Shariah restrictions. But it was complicated turf for bankers who knew investing but not Shariah.

Enter Sheikh Muhammad Taqi Usmani, a former Pakistani Shariah Appellate Court justice, hired by Dow Jones in 1999 to help establish a process that could attract trillions of investment dollars, generating handsome commissions and agency earnings.

In just a decade, most major U.S. and European investment firms have retained Shariah advisors and paid them millions. Those advisors assure Muslim investors their gains are not connected to interest charges, pork farming, alcohol, pornography or Western defense industries—all activities prohibited by Shariah.

But are those adviser fees—paid to highly placed Muslims—or the billions of dollars in “donations” financial institutions must contribute to specified Islamic “charities” in exchange for an investment’s Shariah stamp of approval actually bankrolling deadly extremist activities? Morris followed the money in his 2009 book “Catastrophe,” reporting that the U.S. government shut down at least three of the largest charities for financing terrorism.

The seal of the Muslim Brotherhood

In a 2008 article titled “Jihad Comes to Wall Street,” Alex Alexiev, vice president for research at the Center for Security Policy, called Shariah-compliant investing “an essential part of radical Islam’s efforts to insinuate itself into Western societies in order to destroy them from within.”

It’s also been a bumpy road for some of those hired consultants. Dow Jones severed ties with Usmani after the Center for Security Policy detailed some of Usmani’s writings, including one that urged Muslims living in the West to “conduct violent Jihad against the infidels at every opportunity.”

The CSP identified another paid Shariah investment advisor, Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, as a member of the Muslim Brotherhood.

According to Morris, Shariah-compliant funds must donate a small percentage of annual earnings to Islamic charities designated by the advisory boards. Those amounts are not inconsequential. For example, a typical 2.5 percent contribution can amount to billions of dollars.

And if a Shariah-compliant fund is found to have earnings from an outlawed investment activity, the advisors can “purify” those gains by donating more to the approved charities. Morris calls some of the charities “thinly veiled fronts for terrorist organizations such as Hamas and Hezbollah.”

Is the lure of trillions of dollars from Muslim portfolios strong enough to open civil law to expanding Shariah influences?

Consider Great Britain where, just a few years ago, then-Prime Minister Gordon Brown said he wanted London to become the world’s Islamic-finance capital. Britain’s most senior judge subsequently proclaimed the country’s Muslims can use “Islamic legal principles” as long as the punishments and divorce rulings comply with English law.

According to Morris, that’s already made U.K. Muslims eligible for extra benefits if they have more than one wife, even though polygamy—allowed under Shariah law—is illegal in Britain.

TOLERANCE: AN ASSET OR A WEDGE?

Janet Levy, a prolific writer on Islam and national security, asks why Islam “is sacred, supreme and beyond reproach” in the United States, while other religions are “freely criticized, lampooned in cartoons and denigrated in artwork?” She concludes America is already embracing de facto Shariah law.

“Our uniquely American virtues of tolerance and freedom have worked against us to produce intolerance and oppression,” Levy says. “This has led to the stealthy introduction of Shariah law and a climate in which criticisms of Mohammed and Islam are no longer possible without serious repercussions.”

Are political correctness and moves to cool the osmosis of the American melting pot fundamentally changing us? Is the arena of ideas—where Americans have historically tested competing beliefs—being shut down so as not to offend?

Recall 1960 when Americans considered it fair game to question Democrat John F. Kennedy about whether he would look first to his Catholicism or to the Constitution in making presidential decisions. Former Massachusetts Republican Gov. Mitt Romney’s Mormon faith has come under scrutiny during his political campaigns, sans shouts of profiling.

European nations that have led the West’s embrace of Shariah law have recently begun to retreat from their policies of “multiculturalism,” suggesting failure to maintain a single national identity has actually cultivated Islamic extremism in countries like Britain.

In a February speech at the Munich Security Conference, British Prime Minister David Cameron argued European “multiculturalism has been a failure” that’s fostered Islamic extremism, adding that the West has been “cautious, frankly even fearful” of standing up to it.

“We have even tolerated these segregated communities behaving in ways that run completely counter to our values,” Cameron said. “This hands-off tolerance has only served to reinforce the sense that not enough is shared. … What we see—and what we see in so many European countries—is a process of radicalization.”

(Image: Townhall Magazine)

Something also gets jumbled in the translation when East/West cultures talk about democracy and its relationship with religion.

In 2008 polling conducted by the University of Maryland’s Program on International Policy Attitudes, 82 percent of Egyptians said a democratic political system should govern their nation. At the same time, 73 percent said they supported stronger application of Islamic law in Egypt.

Of those, 68 percent said Egypt’s government should apply Shariah law to regulate moral behavior; 64 percent supported using traditional punishments like stoning for adulterers; 62 percent want the government to police women’s dress; and 59 percent said Shariah rules should be used to provide for Egypt’s poor.

So what does this all mean for Shariah in America?

The U.S. Constitution does not assign superiority to a particular religion. However, the idea that liberty is man’s God-given—not government-granted—right is a Judeo-Christian principle. America is exceptional because the people—regardless of how or whether they embrace God—allow government limited power.

America does not vest all authority in a theocratic government, where law and even daily life is dictated by a single religious code. But that does not mean the United States is Islamophobic, says New Jersey blogger George Berkin.

“[S]upporting the [Oklahoma amendment] does not make one anti-Islamic. But not being anti-Islamic does not mean that we should not insist that American legal principles—not foreign ones—apply here.”

Kathy Jessup is an award-winning, veteran journalist in Michigan whose writing career has focused on government, politics and criminal justice.

Received this from a friend who has the same problems with Islam as I do.  This would be a solution for the mosque on hallowed Ground Zero in New York  City:

Please donate to your local “Plant A Pig Foundation” today. Not tax deductible, but well worth the effort.
In Spain , at Seville some local people found a way to stop the construction of another mosque in their town. They buried a pig on the site, making sure this would be known by the local press. Islamic rules forbid erecting a Mosque on “pig soiled ground”. The Muslins had to cancel the project…this land had been sold to them by government officials… No protests were needed by the local people … and it worked!!
Not dummies …. the Spaniards. They found a solution !!! No protests needed!
In Texas they have an over abundance of feral pigs. They could send them all over the country and just plant them everywhere!  After all…contaminated soil would surely drift and they could create new job programs by having soil testers to determine where contaminated soil existed.  Of course, high on the mountain tops of the Rockies or other mountain ranges they  might find some uncontaminated soil, but then…building a mosque there would pose some problems…Americans…put on your thinking caps and let’s find a solution to this problem of a spreading menace to the American way of life!  If pigs are the answer…let’s do it!

Certainly sounds like a good idea to me.  Hope someone from New York City reads this and just tosses a dead pig in the alley behind the planned mosque on Ground Zero then calls the news  media while also videoing the act themselves so there is a record that can not be denied..   I suggest the alley in hopes there is some “ground” there rather than concrete.  Concrete may be considered to protect the “ground”.

Am I evil?  No!  tossing a dead pig may be a bit gross but it certainly isn’t evil.  At least not anywhere near the evil of a mosque on Ground Zero to celebrate the death of  Americans innocently going about their work.   So this may be a solution because nothing else has helped so far such as buying the building from them, trading the property for another piece in the city a block away, and many more offers that have all been turned down.  The mosque  MUST be on Ground Zero in order for Islam to WIN!   BB

I received this from a reader as a comment, but feel it is never wrong to reiterate the dangers to us of the hate filled religion of Islam.  Over the last four years I have blogged on most of this information and can verify that it is correct.  A great deal is known about Muhammad which followers of his dictates refuse to accept.  He was indeed a pedophile and he condones this despicable act  in the Koran.  I have stated that I can not understand how any human being can follow this man and this religion.  They must be truly sick people or deluded people to accept this cess.  BB

____________________________________________________

From a reader and commenter:

 

wdednh

Hello Brenda , I pray and Hope that ALL is well with you, I have to cut antd paste the followings for im not that smart to write articulate the truth in writting….

Letter to the Reader

To Muslims
May the Truth Set You Free

Islam is a caustic blend of regurgitated paganism and twisted Bible stories. Muhammad, its lone prophet, conceived his religion solely to satiate his lust for power, sex, and money. He was a terrorist. And if you think these conclusions are shocking, wait until you see the evidence.

The critics of this work will claim that Prophet of Doom is offensive, racist, hatemongering, intolerant, and unnecessarily violent. I agree – but I didn’t write those parts. They came directly from Islam’s scriptures. If you don’t like what Muhammad and Allah said, don’t blame me. I’m just the messenger.

Others will say that I cherry-picked the worst of Islam to render an unfair verdict. They will charge that I took the Islamic scriptures out of context to smear Muhammad and Allah. But none of that is true. Over the course of these pages, I quote from almost every surah in the Qur’an – many are presented in their entirety. But more than that, I put each verse in the context of Muhammad’s life, quoting vociferously from the Sunnah as recorded by Bukhari, Muslim, Ishaq, and Tabari – Islam’s earliest and more trusted sources. I even arrange all of this material chronologically, from creation to terror.

Predicting what he called the “Day of Doom” was Muhammad’s most often repeated prophecy. While it did not occur as he foretold in 1110 A.D., it nonetheless came true. Muslims and infidels alike have been doomed by Islam.

To discover why, we shall dive into the oldest surviving written evidence. These official works include: the Sira, Ta’rikh, Hadith, and Qur’an. Ishaq’s Sira, or biography, called Sirat Rasul Allah, provides the lone account of Muhammad’s life and the formation of Islam written within 200 years of the prophet’s death. While the character, message, and deeds portrayed within its pages are the antithesis of Yahshua’s and his disciples, the Sira’s chronological presentation is similar in style to the Christian Gospels. The Ta’rikh is the oldest, most trusted and comprehensive history of Islam’s formation and Muhammad’s example, called Sunnah. It was written by Tabari. His History of al-Tabari is formatted like the Bible. It begins with Islamic creation and ends with the acts of Muhammad’s companions. Tabari is a compilation of Hadith quotes and Qur’an passages. As such, it provides the best skeleton upon which to flesh out the character of Muhammad and the nature of fundamental Islam. A Hadith is an oral report from Muhammad or his companions. Muslims believe that Hadith were inspired by Allah, making them scripture. The most revered Collection was compiled in a topical arrangement by Bukhari. Allah’s Book, the Qur’an, lacks context and chronology, so to understand it, readers are dependent upon the Sira, Ta’rikh, and Hadith.

All that can be known about Muhammad’s deeds, means, motives, god, and scripture is enshrined in these books. In their pages you will see them as they saw themselves. My only point of departure from Ishaq and Tabari will be the comprehensive review of the early Meccan surahs, a period in which they had very little to say. Our paths will join again as we approach Islam’s midlife crisis: the Quraysh Bargain, Satanic Verses, Night’s Journey, and Pledge of Aqaba – a declaration of war against all mankind. At this point, the Sunnah speaks more clearly than the Qur’an.

So that there will be no confusion, I have set the passages from Islam’s scripture in bold-faced type . When quoting from the Qur’an and Hadith, I have elected to use a blended translation. No language transfers perfectly – one word to another. Five of my twelve translations of the Qur’an were combined to create the most accurate conveyance of the message possible. However, the writing quality is so poor, the proofreaders of this manuscript suggested that I help Allah and Muhammad out by cleaning up their grammar, punctuation, and verbosity. So for clarity and readability, I have trimmed their unruly word patterns and meaningless repetitions, being careful not to alter the meaning or message of any passage. Insertions within parenthesis (like this) were added by the Arabic translators to fill in missing words or to clarify the text. Insertions within brackets [like this] represent my observations.

I have elected to present Islam’s original source material in juxtaposition to my evaluation of its veracity. This format is similar to that used by the first English translators of Mein Kampf as they attempted to warn America about the dangers lurking in Hitler’s manifesto. They, as I, found it necessary to hold the author accountable. A great deal was at stake then, as it is today. The last time the world was ignorant of such a hateful and violent doctrine, 55 million people died. If we don’t shed our ignorance of Islam, many more will perish.

My quest to understand Islam began on the morning of September 11th 2001. I wanted to know why Muslim militants were killing us. So I went off to Ground Zero for Islamic terror – Israel. The West Bank is home to more suicide bombers per capita than anywhere else on earth. I arranged to meet with the terrorists themselves. I asked members of al-Qaeda, Islamic Jihad, al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigade, and Hamas why they were killing us. They said, “Islam. We are following Muhammad’s orders.” That adventure is recounted in Tea With Terrorists . It covers a wide range of material and serves as a companion volume, connecting fundamental Islam to terrorism. Prophet of Doom focuses strictly on what the Islamic scriptures have to say.

So, could it be? Could a prophet and a religion be responsible for today’s terrorist attacks? I invested 10,000 hours in pursuit of that answer. I wish everyone had. But knowing that not all are able, I have distilled what I discovered into these pages.

Now for a word of caution: this journey of discovery is ordered chronologically. It is not prioritized by relevance. Explaining the root cause of Islamic terror is the biggest priority; yet it is not exposed until the last half of the book. I want you to know Muhammad, Allah, and Islam before you judge their legacy. So to keep you turning pages, I have endeavored to make Islam’s early years as entertaining as possible. While Prophet of Doom is meticulously researched, documented, and accurate, it’s written as if you and I were old friends having a lively chat about the most important and lethal issue of our day.

One last thought before you head down this perilous path. I pray that when you have reached the journey’s end, you will share my heart for the plight of Muslims. I want nothing more than to free them from Islam, and in so doing, free us from the terror their doctrine inspires.

Craig Winn
November 2003
ProphetOfDoom.net

Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf predicts violence.

Talk about inciting riots  among the ignorant Muslim mobs around the world!  The Iman Feisal Abdul Rauf, back from his US tax payer tour of the Muslim countries to  drum up support and money to build his edifice to Muslim Victory over the Infidel, sure knows how to stir up trouble.  He told the head of the relatives of the victims of 9/11  group the “demands” would  inflame the Muslim world.   He went on to say that if the mosque was not built on that site then American troops would be in danger.  As if American troops are not already in danger trying to protect the very Muslim butt heads who would be rioting and trying to kill American troops!  And yes, I have no doubt that the Muslims mobs will  march thru the streets of their cities and burn American flags and effigies of  those who are simply asking that the Muslims in charge of building the Mosque consider another location as this is the Muslim request to any action or request for a bit of civility.    A simple request for some consideration and sensitivity to the feelings of the relatives of the victims of September 11, 2001 and the rest of the citizens of the United States who consider  Ground Zero as sacred ground.  This is BLACKMAIL!

He has made  that mosque a matter of victory not only to celebrate the violence of Muslims killing Infidels as THEY ARE TOLD TO DO IN THEIR HOLY BOOK THE KORAN, it will be another victory of Muslims being able to do anything they want to do on American soil!

Do I dislike Muslims? Well just so you know where I stand:  Yes, I consider any human beings who knowing follow a religion   whose  holy book the Koran  states all thru the book ( yes I have indeed read it!) that Muslims are to kill, rape and destroy all humans who do not follow the teachings of their Koran are inhuman creatures.  I harbor no liking for creatures of any kind and Muslim are among the worse.

I have yet to hear individuals like Rauf or the CAIR crowd categorically condemn violence and loudly proclaim that it is anathema to Islamic law

Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf predicts violence

By Klaus Rohrich  Thursday, September 9, 2010

I know that everyone was shocked and surprised that Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf told Soledad O’Brien on CNN yesterday that if the “Cordoba Initiative” mosque adjacent to Ground Zero were to be relocated, then violence would surely follow throughout the Muslim world.  Who’d have thought it?  Violence committed by Muslims?

But then, the good Imam is playing this by The Book in threatening that Islam would be offended if it couldn’t build a victory mosque next to the former World Trade Center site.  The Book, in this case, is the playbook Muslims have learned to use against the West, ever since the Nancyboy liberal elites asked, “Why do they hate us so?” on Sept 12, 2001.

The thing that makes the Imam’s admonition so ominous is that we know Islam appears to be the only world religion currently advocating violence against its enemies and non-believers (infidels).

Surely there are “moderate” Muslims who abhor violence.  But they don’t seem to be getting the press these days, as news reports of suicide bombings, beheadings, stonings, honor killings and all sorts of other barbaric crimes committed on behalf of some form of Islam creep their way into our consciousness.

Already there are violent and rabid demonstrations against Christians throughout the Muslim world protesting the Rev. Terry Jones’s plans to burn Korans on Saturday as an act of remembrance of the 9/11 victims.  Jones may be a whack job from the far reaches of the lunatic fringe, but like Rauf who has a legal right to build a mosque next to Ground Zero, Jones has the right to burn as many Korans as he can legally acquire.

Rauf’s admonition that violence might ensue should the mosque be moved, was made with the same clear-eyed innocence as the warnings put forth by American Muslims against Matt Stone and Trey Parker, the creators of the South Park ‘Muhammad’ issue, which was subsequently censored by Comedy Central, the cable channel carrying the show.

“We’re not advocating violence.” they say, “We’re just concerned that there might be violence.”  And of course violence will follow each and every time these wide-eyed innocents warn of its possibility.

I have yet to hear individuals like Rauf or the CAIR crowd categorically condemn violence and loudly proclaim that it is anathema to Islamic law and I don’t recommend that anyone hold their breath waiting for them to do so.  What you will hear is some politically correct drivel, such as is found on the Cordoba Initiative’s web site.

“In recent years the global public has shown an increased interest in Islam and the Muslim world. Many facets of Islamic life, religious, cultural and artistic, remain underrepresented and misunderstood. The Muslim community must provide an opportunity to educate individuals about Islam through education and organized experiences of art, culture and entertainment.”

I can readily understand why in recent years the global public has shown increased interest in Islam and the Muslim world.  Don’t quote me, but I think it has to do with bombings in Places like London, Madrid, Bali, New York, Washington and numerous other locales.  People would be quite foolish if they did not display “increased interest” in a movement, religious or secular, that could lay claim to as many deaths as can be attributed to Islam in the last decade or two.

I believe Rauf to be an agent provocateur who presents a perfectly reasonable and smiling face to those whom he despises.  I doubt that the mosque he wishes to build will ever become a reality.  But then again, maybe this whole thing isn’t so much about building a mosque as it is about inciting more hatred against America.  (A possibility!  BB)



See topic cloud at bottom of page for specific topics.

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 97 other followers

BB’s file cabinet