‘Islamic’ Paterson, N.J., otherwise known as ‘Little Ramallah’ to a heavily Muslim population, is well known in Homelabd Security Counter-terrorism circles as a mecca for Hamas terrorist supporters and related money laundering.

North Jersey Amid Palestinian flags, Patterson celebrates ‘Palestinian American Day,’ bringing to mind the way the Palestinians celebrated the 9/11 Terrorist Attacks in the streets of Patterson back in 2001.

The raising of the Palestinian flag at City Hall on Sunday (truly a jaw dropper) was like any of the dozen or so similar events held in the city each year in a nod to its supposed diversity. Except it wasn’t.

Israeli settlers on their morning commute got quite the eyeful Monday morning when they saw a swastika-emblazoned red flag flying near a mosque in Beit Omar, a Palestinian village outside of Hebron.

Thousands of residents of Jewish settlements near Hebron and Bethlehem in Judea (the southern West Bank) drive to and from work on the road from which the flag was visible.

The Tazpit News Agency, which photographed the flying Nazi flag, reports residents “were astounded” to see the symbol under which millions of Jews were massacred during World War II now being prominently displayed by residents of a Palestinian town.

That demented, hate-filled terrorists could build bombs and detonate them in a crowded public place should not have come as news to anyone. That's what terrorists have been doing around the world for decades - centuries. That it could be done in the U.S. by people we had welcomed with open arms, should also have been no surprise. Islamist extremists have been promising, and perpetrating attacks in the US since the 1970s. Other extremists, from anarchists, to White supremacists, to Puerto Rican separatists, to anti-abortion activists, to radical leftists have perpetrated acts of terror on our soil since the foundation of the republic. Indeed, American revolutionaries of the 1700s were considered terrorists by the British. The use of violence as a means of advancing a social or political goal is as old as society itself. How it is remembered generally depends on who wins and is around to write the history. Nonetheless acts of terror, particularly when perpetrated against civilians, generally backfire and engender hate and loathing for the assailant’s cause rather than sparking the desired changes in policy.

As the Syrian civil war continues to tear that country apart, with possible use of chemical weapons (by somebody) reported and certain commission of atrocities on all sides, calls for Western and especially U.S. intervention are mounting.

Some want a “no fly zone” so that Bashar al-Assad’s forces can be prevented from aerial bombardment of his people, civilians and rebels alike. Some want the Obama administration to arm the rebels directly (or at least more directly than it already has been for the last year or more). Some, like U.S. Senators John McCain (R-AZ) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC), want both a no-fly zone and more weapons for the rebels. Sen. Graham has even pushed for the insertion of U.S. ground forces into the Syrian conflict.

The trouble is that most U.S. lawmakers realize there just aren’t a lot of good candidates among the rebels whose victory would actually advance core U.S. national security interests in the region. Where in Syria is there a capable, credible rebel force openly dedicated to anything but Sunni Islam and Islamic Law?

A proposal to ban the recognition of Islamic Sharia law in North Carolina courts is headed for the Senate after winning final House approval Thursday.

Rep. Rick Glazier, D-Cumberland, said House Bill 695 is unnecessary, would conflict with constitutional due process rights and would damage North Carolina's image in the eyes of the international business community.

Bill sponsor Rep. Chris Whitmire, R-Transylvania, disagreed.

"Take it as fact that this is a very, very present threat that must be dealt with," Whitmire said. "We are making sure that the most fundamental basis on which we exist is protected."

Rep. John Blust, R-Guilford, disagreed with arguments that the state and federal constitution already protect citizens against foreign law.