Illegal Mosque Next to Jewish Holy Graveyard

So.....tear it down - just like the houses in Migron. (9-11 Do more then never forget Stop Islam) Illegal construction of a mosque continues just feet from an ancient Jerusalem graveyard. Illegal construction continues at a Jerusalem mosque immediately adjacent to an ancient and holy Jewish graveyard, Jerusalem activists have reported. Workers continue to expand the mosque on the Mount of Olives despite official orders ruling that they must stop. The illegal extension will be located just feet from the graves of revered Rabbi Tzvi Yehuda Kook and former Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin. Senior city officials recently pledged to put a stop to the illegal building, but activists say work continued over the Rosh Hashanah holiday. The latest work included uprooting a stretch of sidewalk, and the destruction of some Jewish tombs recently restored after they were vandalized months earlier.
Veteran Jerusalem activist Aryeh King visited the scene and took pictures showing new work and new construction materials that had been brought in. Also brought in were Arab laborers from Judea and Samaria, who lacked work permits, King said.
“We are facing a nightmare that will all but deny Jews access to graves on the holiest and oldest Jewish cemetery in the world,” said Avrohom Lubinsky of the Committee for the Preservation of the Mount of Olives. He accused city officials of failing to enforce stop work orders.
Jeff Daube, head of the Israel office of the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA), termed the ongoing problem “an outrage.”
“We are so concerned about the legal status of three buildings in Migron and will make every effort to tear those down, and in the meantime the Arabs are permitted to continue to build illegally with impunity right next to what, outside the Maarat Hamachpelah [Tomb of the Patriarchs – ed.], is the holiest graveyard in Jewish history,” he told Arutz Sheva.

German Multiculturalists Declare War on Critics of Islam

(Hudson New York) Spiegel magazine has worked hard to portray all critics of Islam as belonging to the "far right" even though opinion polls overwhelmingly show that voters from across the political spectrum are concerned about the spread of Islam in Germany.....An opinion survey called "Perception and Acceptance of Religious Diversity," which was conducted by the sociology department of the University of Münster in partnership with the prestigious TNS Emnid political polling firm, shows that the majority of Germans disagree. In an effort to reverse this tide of public opinion, the guardians of German multiculturalism have been working overtime to regain the initiative, mostly by trying to intimidate the critics of Islam into silence.

The media campaign has been led by the Frankfurter Rundschau, a financially troubled daily newspaper based in Frankfurt am Main, the Berliner Zeitung, and the leftwing Spiegel, a newsmagazine based in Hamburg that has long served as the mouthpiece for German multiculturalism. A particular object of wrath is a highly popular German-language Internet website called Politically Incorrect (PI), which over the years has grown into a major information resource for people concerned about the spread of Islam in Germany. PI's motto reads "Against the Mainstream, Pro-American, Pro-Israel, Against the Islamification of Europe" -- which represents everything the German left abhors. Not surprisingly, many German media elites want PI shut down. Over the past several weeks, several German newspapers have used a stock of more than 10,000 stolen private emails to insinuate that the people behind PI are "undemocratic" and pose a threat to the German constitutional order. They are demanding that the PI website, as well as the counter-jihad movement (referred to as "Islamophobes") more generally, be subject to surveillance by the domestic German intelligence agency, the Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz (BfV).(MORE PAIN)

Crime plummets in Chicago and DC after handguns re-legalized

The McDonald v. Chicago amicus brief for the International Law Enforcements Educators & Trainers Association (and other law enforcement organizations, and criminologists) showed that after Chicago enacted its handgun ban, its violent crime rate rose sharply. Pre-ban, Chicago had a violent crime rate 1.12 times greater than the violent crime rate of the 24 other largest cities. (That is, Chicago’s violent crime rate was 12% higher than that of the 24 other cities.) Post-ban, Chicago’s crime rate soared immediately, and remained 67% higher than the other large cities. The possibility that Chicago’s sudden and long-standing deterioration compared to other large cities is less than 1 in 100,000. Details are presented at pages 17–22 of the brief, and the appendices. John Lott, in an opinion column ....PS The wording above is tricky... not sure I got it.... Gun crimes also fell more than non-gun crimes. Robberies with guns fell by 25%, while robberies without guns have fallen by eight percent. Assaults with guns fell by 37%, while assaults without guns fell by 12%.

Criminal behavior continues... I don’t see that as a point. The point is that we allow criminal behavior into the system and acknowledge it is a reality and do our best to take the most detrimental element out of the act. Knowing that law abiding citizens will also carry guns will force criminals to not take the risk of facing life and death. Beating up old ladies will continue until the old ladies clarify their intent to use arms. Once the old ladies arm themselves then the criminal’s best bet is to catch one off guard and run before a gun is acquired. The idea is to make crime a situation where perhaps property can be taken, but property is taken from those who don’t protect themselves. The problem is still there, it just is less devastating... and that is a good thing. I used to be against gun control because it became apparent that there was a proportion a person could protect himself with. Does the average person need a warhead let alone a grenade launcher? The person to protect himself from tyranny needs to have the ability to immediately respond with a punitive act. A need for ballistics becomes questionable due to it’s immediacy limits. Cameras as evidence... (sadly not evidence in all states and frankly a crime in some states if one records the police) then does the rest to protect from tyranny and record the reason for the punitive response.