Thứ Tư, 1 tháng 5, 2013

Bring it on: Author says Muslim group's $30M libel suit will expose terror ties

  • Gilani1.JPG

    Mubarak Ali Gilani, the shadowy founder of Muslims of the Americas, is believed to be living in Pakistan. (Christian Action Network)

  • Gilani3.JPG

    Christian Action Network vows to bring Gilani, founder of Muslims of the Americas, into a U.S. court if the $30 million defamation suit proceeds. (Christian Action Network)

  • Gilani2.JPG

    Gilani, who is believed to be in his eighties, fires a weapon in a training video made by Muslims of the Americas. (Christian Action Network)

  • Islamville sign.jpg

    Muslims of the Americas has rural bases in several states, including South Carolina and New York.

The shadowy leader of an American Muslim organization accused of running terror training camps in the U.S. could find himself being questioned under oath if his outfit follows through on its $30 million defamation suit against the Christian group that leveled the charges in a best-selling book.

Muslims of the Americas, a group founded in the 1980s by elusive Pakistani Sheikh Mubarak Ali Gilani, is suing the Christian Action Network for defamation and libel following CAN’s recent publication of the book “Twilight in America: The Untold Story of Islamist Terrorist Training Camps Inside America.” Co-authored by CAN founder Martin Mawyer and Patti Pierucci, the book accuses MOA of “acting as a front for the radical Islamist group Jamaat al-Fuqra.”

In the suit, filed this year in federal court in Albany, N.Y., the Muslim group accuses Mawyer, Pierucci and CAN of "malicious, repetitious and continuous pronouncements and publication of defamatory statements against plaintiff."

"We're calling their bluff," said Mawyer. "I would have thought this would have been dropped a while ago, but I guess they feel they have to defend themselves to their own members."

Many of the book’s allegations are based on the claims of a former NYPD undercover informant who spent eight years posing as a member of the Muslim group, which has secretive bases in rural areas around the country, including Hancock, N.Y., and York County, S.C.

“We're calling their bluff.”

- Martin Mawyer, founder of Christian Action Network

The book alleges organized criminal activity on the part of MOA and claims profits from “street crimes, drugs, brothels, unemployment fraud and other offenses” have been funneled to Jamaat al-Fuqra. Part of the money has been used to establish a series of Jihadi training camps on American soil, according to the book.

Both Muslims of the Americas -- made up primarily of African-American converts to Islam -- and the Pakistan-based Jamaat al-Fuqra, are guided by Sheikh Mubarik Ali Gilani, a highly controversial cleric who lived in the U.S. during the 1980s and who was the subject of an investigation by the late Wall Street Journal journalist Daniel Pearl.

In 2002, Pearl was in Pakistan on his way to a pre-arranged interview with Gilani when he was kidnapped by Al Qaeda and eventually beheaded in a brutal case that shocked the world. Gilani was questioned in relation to the investigation but released without being charged.

“Twilight in America” highlights some 17 purported terrorist training camps inside the U.S. Mawyer said he learned of the camps from NYPD informant Ali Aziz, who said one of the camps – often attended by 100 or more followers -- was only 30 miles away from the CAN office in Forest, Va.

Aziz allegedly passed on vital information to authorities about MOA’s plans, its activities across the U.S., and the powerful presence of Gilani.

“If Gilani told everyone, ‘Set yourselves on fire,’ everybody would burn themselves,” Aziz told www.christianaction.org. “This has been going on for 30 years. And people praise him. They give him money. They kiss his feet. It’s crazy.”

Despite the evidence presented in the book, neither MOA nor Jamaat al-Fuqra is currently designated by the U.S. as a terrorist organization.

"The chapters on the former undercover agent really put them over the edge, as their members knew who Ali Aziz was,” Mawyer told FoxNews.com. “It then became very difficult for the leadership to continue to convince the women and children on the compounds that they weren’t associated with terrorists. They had to sue us to protect the wealth that they derive from the thousands of members they have in the U.S. I fully expect us to win this lawsuit.”

Mawyer and Pierucci say in the book that MOA has been linked to 10 unsolved assassinations and 17 bombings since the 1980s, including the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.

Gilani, who describes himself as “Vice Chancellor of the International Qur’anic Open University, Imam of the Muslims of the Americas and a direct Descendant of the Holy Last Messenger [the Prophet Muhammed],” has previously been accused of inspiring so-called “Shoe Bomber” Richard Reid and John Allen Mohammed, the Beltway sniper attacker who, with a young accomplice, killed 10 people during a brief reign of terror in October 2002.

Mawyer said if the civil suit goes to trial, he will move to bring Gilani to the U.S. and put him on the stand. For an organization that so jealously guards its privacy, that may be enough to drop the suit.

“I think they hoped that we would not have the money to fight it and it would serve the purpose of telling their own members, ‘See, we took care of that Martin Mawyer fellow,’” Mawyer said. “They say we have declared war on Islam, but I can tell you that is definitely not the case. This group is against Christians, Hindus, Hari Krishna, Jews, and any Imams who do not preach their strict view of Islam.”

MOA officials could not be reached, and the group's attorney, Tahirah Clark, did not return calls. But in a January statement on The Islamic Post website, the group’s official mouthpiece, Gilani denied claims he is a radical. He said he has weeded out militant Muslims who had infiltrated his inner circle, including a man he said was a hitman for the Muslim Brotherhood.

Mawyer and the CAN have no intention of backing out of the legal fight with Muslims of the Americas, a group described by the Anti-Defamation League as “virulently anti-Semitic Holocaust deniers.”

“People’s concerns about home-grown terrorism have obviously been raised by the recent events in Boston,” said Mawyer. “They should know that this is the group that has led the way in the U.S. for 30 years.”

Paul Alster is an Israel-based journalist who blogs at www.paulalster.com and can be followed on Twitter @paul_alster


View the original article here

Firefox maker says British surveillance company has hijacked its brand to help spy on targets

  • Firefox Logo

The maker of one of the Internet's most popular browsers is taking on one of the world's best known purveyors of surveillance software.

The Mozilla Foundation — responsible for the Firefox browser — accuses Britain's Gamma International Ltd. of hijacking the Firefox brand to camouflage Gamma's electronic espionage products.

Researchers have found several samples of Gamma's FinFisher spy software disguised as a Firefox file, apparently in an effort to fool computer users into believing the virus is harmless.

Mozilla says in a statement that it has formally demanded Gamma end the practice, which it calls abusive.

Gamma, based in the English town of Andover, has recently found itself in the spotlight over the surveillance software it markets to governments and law enforcement.

Gamma did not return emails seeking comment Wednesday.


View the original article here

US housing recovery is facing an obstacle: Not enough homes are for sale

Beth Heinen Bell and her husband, Christian, are sick of renting.

They want more space. They'd like to host friends for dinner. And now, having seen the real estate market start to rebound, they want to turn housing payments into long-term equity.

So after a decade as someone else's tenant, the Bells, like a rising number of Americans, are finally ready to buy a home. Yet they're running into an obstacle that's keeping the national housing recovery in check: There aren't enough homes for sale.

The housing shortage around Grand Rapids, Mich., a city known for its furniture industry and sleek downtown hospital complex, is fairly typical of what the country as a whole is facing this spring.

Some markets along the East and West coasts have grown red-hot. A handful of other cities remain depressed nearly four years after the Great Recession ended. But many more places are like Grand Rapids — a metro area of roughly 1 million that is strengthening slowly but steadily.

Like so many others, this Midwestern city 150 miles west of Detroit never experienced either the buyer frenzy or the price collapse that marked the boom and bust. Yet it, too, was affected. Prices fell. Homeowners lost equity. And now, many remain unable or unwilling to sell.

The shortage of homes is occurring just as ordinary Americans want to buy again. More of them feel confident about their job and retirement account. Mortgage rates are near historic lows. And prices are rising again, easing fears that new buyers might lose their investment in a home.

"The last four years have been rough," says Christian Bell, a 31-year-old Presbyterian minister. "But housing prices are starting to come back up."

A tight supply isn't the only factor slowing what is otherwise shaping up as the strongest spring buying season since the housing boom ended nearly seven years ago. Some Americans have grown to prefer renting. Others who would like to buy lack strong enough credit or a large enough down payment to meet the stricter standards banks now impose.

Part of the reason for the supply problem is that when the housing market collapsed in 2006, many people lost so much equity in their home that they were unable or unwilling to sell. Prices have started to rise, but not enough to restore what many lost. Some still owe more on their mortgage than their home is worth.

Even many who have enough equity to sell want to wait for further price increases.

"Every buyer wants to buy at the bottom, but no seller wants to sell at the bottom," says Stan Humphries, chief economist at real estate information site Zillow. "They've got this hypothetical price that they think the house is worth at the peak, and they don't want to sell below that."

Others don't want to leave. During the depths of the recession, they chose to renovate their house instead of finding a new one. After paying for renovations, they now feel more invested and comfortable in their home.

That leaves many first-time buyers like the Bells — a group that makes up about one-third of buyers — competing for a small number of homes.

Just a few years ago, the housing market was facing an oversupply of homes, one that eventually led prices to collapse. The bubble — and the bust — were worst in areas like Arizona, South Florida, Southern California and Las Vegas where developments kept popping up on vast tracts surrounding cities.

Banks offered absurdly low teaser rates to new homeowners who often bought with no money down. When their loan rates climbed after the introductory period, many were left unable to pay. Banks foreclosed, home values fell and those homes ended up being sold for a fraction of their cost.

In the past two years, hedge funds, banks and other investors entered those markets and helped soak up the supply and lift prices. Now, the country is facing a shortage of homes for sale.

In a few especially hot areas, such as around San Francisco and Seattle, some of the same kinds of bidding wars that inflated the housing bubble are back. Crowds of buyers are creating traffic jams outside open houses.

"People have been wanting to move for a very long time," says Glenn Kelman, CEO of online real estate broker Redfin. "Somebody rang a bell and said the boom is back, and nobody wants to be late to the party."

The market in Grand Rapids is more subdued but still driven by a supply shortage.

The Bells recently toured a 142-year-old home. Calling it a "fixer-up project" would be generous. Floors drooped. Doorways tilted. The master bathroom had a comically low ceiling. The only thing working in the living room was a mouse trap.

It was the only affordable house for sale in the small historic Heritage Hill neighborhood the Bells love. Within walking distance are shops and a church converted to a brewery. Restaurants are packed on weeknights with young professionals snacking on bacon cheddar meatballs, polenta fries and chicken fried livers.

The only thing harder than finding a seat at the bar during happy hour is finding a home for sale nearby.

Nationally, there were just 1.93 million homes on the market in March, down 16.8 percent from the prior year, according to the National Association of Realtors. In a healthy market, there's roughly a six month supply. This March, that number had fallen to 4.7 months — a situation stacked against buyers.

As more would-be buyers bid on fewer properties, prices are being forced up at a rate that might be overstating the market's health. Prices in the top 20 cities have risen 9.3 percent in the past year, according to the S&P/Case-Shiller home price index. That's the fastest year-over-year increase since May 2006.

Homes now sit on the market for just 62 days, down from a median of 91 days last year. Would-be buyers who like a home are being urged to act fast.

The tight supply is a key reason that Susan Wachter, a real estate and finance professor at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School, estimates a full recovery is still three to five years away. Even so, Wachter calls this "a breakout spring." The public now recognizes, she says, that the housing recovery will last.

The Bells have already lost out on one house they liked.

"We wanted a day to think about it," says Beth Heinen Bell, 32, a communications coordinator for a writing festival. "We left the house, and our agent got a call that there was an offer in."

Diane Griffin, CEO of Griffin Properties, which has been helping the Bells search for a home, says a major problem is that many potential sellers aren't being realistic about price. She often has to explain that their property isn't worth what it was during the boom.

"This is the most difficult conversation I have with people," she says. "I have it multiple times a day."

Prices here bottomed in October 2011, after falling 24.5 percent during the prior 5½ years. They have since risen 7.6 percent, to a median of $114,400, giving many buyers enough confidence to come into the market. Yet even so, home values remain 17.2 percent below the peak, according to Zillow. If prices continue to rise, they will eventually help more sellers come off the sidelines.

Maureen and Bruce Hart are one of those couples who aren't ready to sell.

They've been in their house in East Grand Rapids since July 1990. Their two grown kids have moved out. Moving into a smaller home — with a smaller mortgage — makes sense. Yet the couple just spent more than $100,000 on renovations. There's a new kitchen, new roof, new bathroom, new windows and the addition of a porch.

"We really thought we were going to stay," says Maureen Hart. Then a house down the road sold for nearly half a million dollars. "That was a real eye-opener."

A real estate agent suggested listing the home, in a suburban neighborhood with packs of after-work joggers and cyclists, for $393,000. The Harts feel it's a good price. Still, they hesitate because they wouldn't recoup the money they spent on renovations.

Their other hesitation, Maureen Hart says, is that "we haven't really found anything we would be comfortable moving into."

In many ways, the Harts need more homeowners like themselves to offer their properties for sale.

Some relief will also eventually come from faster construction. Builders broke ground on homes in March at the highest annual rate since June 2008. But construction firms aren't yet ready to return to the even greater levels of building needed to fill the housing shortage. They're worried about rising costs for materials and labor. And many have had trouble finding skilled workers.

The overall pace of homes under construction rose to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 1.04 million in March, the Commerce Department reported. March's pace was nearly 46 percent higher than in the same month in 2012.

Analysts say prices and sales still need to climb further before builders ramp up construction. The prices that new homes are selling for still don't match the cost of construction.

For now, that leaves would-be buyers with few options. Agents urge their clients to act fast, knowing how fierce the competition is. But often, it's not quick enough.

Grand Rapids real estate agent Michelle Gordon says that on Monday mornings, she typically gets a list from her clients of six or seven homes they want to tour that Saturday.

By the time the weekend comes around, Gordon says, "I'm lucky if I have two to show."

__

Scott Mayerowitz can be reached at http://twitter.com/GlobeTrotScott.


View the original article here

Eric Holder and the Obama administration's omerta on Islam and terrorism

  • 030613_hn_holder_640.jpg

It is a sad sight to watch a man grapple with a world that fails to meet his expectations. Unless that man is Eric Holder. Then it is simply infuriating.

The attorney general, warped by his own prejudice, is confused because his fellow citizens are better people than he imagines.

Holder sees white bigots around every corner, and can’t handle the truth that very few Americans actually hate Muslims. So, like Elmer Fudd hunting “wascally wabbits,” Holder’s shots usually backfire.

Eric Holder sees white bigots around every corner, and can’t handle the truth that very few Americans actually hate Muslims.

His Monday speech to the Anti-Defamation League was a classic case of twisted thinking. With his FBI fumbling a chance to stop the Boston bombers, he bizarrely stressed his determination to punish anyone who discriminates against Muslims.

Of course, he didn’t admit that the bombers were Islamists. That would violate the Obama administration’s omerta on linking Islam to terrorism.

To continue reading Michael Goodwin's op-ed in the New York Post, click here.

Michael Goodwin is a Fox News contributor and New York Post columnist.


View the original article here

Would you buy a used 2013 Boss 302 Mustang for nearly $200,000?

  • pricey-mustang-660.jpg

The 2012-13 Ford Mustang Boss 302 is by many accounts the best variant ever built during the first 49 years of the original pony car. As good as the Boss might be, though, would you pay close to $200,000 for one? Gene Butman Ford of Ypsilanti, MI sure hopes someone will, because they’re currently asking $189,999 for the last Boss they have in stock.

This particular Boss 302 Laguna Seca is part of Butman’s pre-owned inventory and it has an interesting history that goes beyond the information in the description. The original owner of this pre-production 2013 Boss was Ford’s marketing department, where the car was initially used for product photography before going into the press fleet. The dealer’s listing highlights that the car was the subject of much of the magazine photography seen over the past year.

-----

Also from Road & Track

Exclusive first drive: 2014 Porsche 911 GT3

9 Things you need to know about the new Porsche 911 Turbo

10 roads that challenge you

-----

However, in between photo shoots, this car was driven by the media and they’re typically not the most gentle operators, especially with track-oriented cars like the Boss. This Boss may only have 4,190 miles on the clock, but given its provenance, it has likely spent a disproportionate amount of its young life on race tracks and drag strips.

The Boss 302 in question almost certainly got a thorough refurbishment, including a new clutch and tires, before heading to the auction block a couple of months ago, so it may well be in better shape than a brand-new Mustang and it is still covered by the original 3-year/36,000 mile factory warranty.

On Monday, the car was also listed on eBay Motors and as of this writing, the bidding remains somewhere shy of the reserve price with a top bid of $60,099.


View the original article here

Where cupcakes and booze go together

Do you want wine or beer with your cupcake?

That’s what Marlo Scott, the owner and founder of Sweet Revenge, a delightful little bar and restaurant in downtown Manhattan, will ask you when you visit.  Scott’s fine establishment pairs the most delectable cupcakes with wine and beer. 

Swear.  Didn't think they really go together?  Here's a taste:

Her signature peanut butter cup with a little chocolate ganache in the middle is paired with the Region 1 Malbec, from Spain and it tastes like an adult PB&J. Or her “Dirty” cupcake, a dark chocolate lovers dream, is paired with the Sweet Smaak Rose Moscato, from South Africa, so you get that fruit bubbly-ness to cleanse your palate after the decadent chocolate. 

And since we last spoke with her, she's added breakfast to the menu. Imagine, Red Velvet Belgian waffles, with whipped cream cheese, salted caramel syrup and raspberry sauce – paired with a raspberry bellini.

I can’t think of a better way to treat Mom this Mother’s Day. (Kids? Are you reading this?)

In her life pre-Sweet Revenge, Scott worked for corporate America or “The Man” as she says, and after a bunch of awful experiences including some layoffs she decided to get “sweet revenge” and follow her dreams.

But she has no formal wine or culinary training. She just has a passion in her eyes that has allowed her to succeed.  And for every person that knocked her down, Scott wants to uplift 10 more.  In addition to the store, she is beginning to offering motivational and entrepreneurial classes, and even a food pairing class that she says again – requires no formal training.

She’s my kind of girl – approachable, fun and ambitious.  And no wonder.  Imagine if your livelihood depended on tasting cupcakes and wine all day. 

So follow your heart.  Do what you love.

Go have a cupcake. Pair it with your favorite wine and I’ll pass it on to Scott.

Cent’ Anni.


View the original article here

Justice Department to appeal judge's ruling to eliminate age limits on Plan B pill

DEVELOPING: The Justice Department is appealing a judge's decision lifting all age limits on the Plan B morning-afer birth control pill and a cheaper generic.

The federal government says the judge who issued the ruling had exceeded his authority and that his decision should be suspended while the appeal is underway.

U.S. District Judge Edward Korman of New York had given the Food and Drug Administration until Monday to lift all age limits on Plan B and cheaper generic. The judge mandated that emergency contraception be sold just like aspirin.

On Tuesday, the FDA said anyone 15 or older could begin buying one brand, Plan B One-Step, without a prescription -- two years younger than the current age limit of 17.

EARLIER VERSION OF THE STORY:

Selling the morning-after birth control pill right next to condoms, even if limited to buyers 15 or older, marks a big societal shift in the long battle over women's reproductive rights. Backed into a corner by a federal court, the Obama administration is considering how to proceed after what looked like a stab at compromise just made both sides madder.

The politically volatile debate reflects a reality that's difficult for parents, including the president, to swallow: Quite a number of teenagers have sex. So how easily should they be able to get a pill that prevents pregnancy if taken soon enough after sex?

On Tuesday, the Food and Drug Administration made it a little easier, saying anyone 15 or older could begin buying one brand, Plan B One-Step, without a prescription -- two years younger than the current age limit of 17 -- and that the pill no longer has to be locked behind pharmacy counters.

But it's far from clear whether that will happen. U.S. District Judge Edward Korman of New York had given the FDA until Monday to lift all age limits on Plan B and a cheaper generic, mandating that emergency contraception be sold just like aspirin. Instead, by requiring that buyers prove their age at the cash register, the FDA decided to treat it like beer.

The Justice Department hasn't said whether it will appeal Korman's order and thus back FDA's new approach, and that leaves the whole issue in limbo.

"This is a truly bizarre and unprecedented situation," said American University law professor Lewis A. Grossman, a specialist in food and drug law.

On Wednesday, doctors' groups, led by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, urged the Obama administration not to let the FDA action be the last word.

Any over-the-counter access marks a long-awaited change, but it's not enough, said Dr. Cora Breuner of the American Academy of Pediatrics, which supports nonprescription sale of the morning-after pill for all ages.

"We still have the major issue, which is our teen pregnancy rate is still too high," Breuner said.

Even though few young girls likely would use Plan B, which costs about $50 for a single pill, "we know that it is safe for those under 15," she said.

Most 17- to 19-year-olds are sexually active, and 30 percent of 15- and 16-year-olds have had sex, according to a study published last month by the journal Pediatrics. Sex is much rarer among younger teens. Likewise, older teens have a higher pregnancy rate, but that study also counted more than 110,000 pregnancies among 15- and 16-year-olds in 2008 alone.

The White House sought Wednesday to put much as much distance as possible between President Barack Obama and this political hot potato.

"The president, the White House, did not weigh in on this decision," White House spokesman Jay Carney said of the FDA's move.

Obama must balance his own instincts as the father of two school-age daughters with the wishes of numerous political constituencies, including women's groups whose influence runs deep within the Democratic Party. It was just last week that Obama became the first president to address Planned Parenthood in person, telling the abortion rights group that as long as women must fight to make their own health choices, "you've also got a president who's going to be right there with you fighting every step of the way."

Contraception advocates see a double standard. No one is carded when buying a condom, but under the FDA's decision they would have to prove their age when buying a pill to prevent pregnancy if that condom breaks.

"This isn't a compromise. This is wrong," said Cynthia Pearson of the National Women's Health Network.

Likewise, social conservatives were outraged by the FDA's move, saying it was important for parents and medical professionals to be involved in such decisions involving teens.

"This decision undermines the right of parents to make important health decisions for their young daughters," said Anna Higgins of the Family Research Council. She added that removing the prescription requirement meant "teens and women will avoid necessary medical screenings" that could detect serious problems.

The FDA had been poised to lift all age limits and let Plan B sell over the counter in late 2011, when Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, in an unprecedented move, overruled her own scientists. Sebelius said some girls as young as 11 were physically capable of bearing children but shouldn't be able to buy the pregnancy-preventing pill on their own.

Ruling earlier this month in a lawsuit challenging that decision, Korman blasted the Obama administration for letting election-year politics trump science. The judge called the morning-after pill "among the safest drugs sold over the counter," and gave the government 30 days to lift all age limits.

Obama aides bristled at the suggestion that the FDA decision was an attempt at political compromise, insisting the FDA merely responded to an application filed by Plan B's manufacturer which sought the 15 age limit and over-the-counter sales.

At the same time, Carney signaled that a policy allowing 15-year-olds to buy the pill off the shelf would be more palatable to Obama than the prospect of 11-year-olds having unfettered access. Pointing to Obama's comments in support of Sebelius back in 2011, Carney said, "he referred to younger girls, and I believe so did Secretary Sebelius."

If a woman already is pregnant, the morning-after pill has no effect. It prevents ovulation or fertilization of an egg. According to the medical definition, pregnancy doesn't begin until a fertilized egg implants itself into the wall of the uterus. Still, some critics say Plan B is the equivalent of an abortion pill because it may also be able to prevent a fertilized egg from attaching to the uterus, a contention that many scientists -- and Korman, in his ruling -- said has been discredited.


View the original article here