This content is from an ACT! for America email that I received. Once again, evidence that the Moozlums are not hiding their attempts to use our tolerance, political correctness and laws against us in their religious war:
Muslim leaders urge DOJ to criminalize criticism of Islam!
Please sign the petition to protect your state from sharia law
A particularly dangerous and noxious doctrine within sharia law is the prohibition against “blasphemy” or “defamation” of Islam and the prophet Mohammed.
This is a direct affront to our cherished first amendment right of free speech, as it silences any critique or criticism of Islam.
European countries are already prosecuting people for “hate speech” against Islam, in effect implementing the sharia prohibition. ACT! for America chapter leader Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff is one of those people. Canada’s Human Rights Commission went after author Mark Steyn. Could this eventually happen in the U.S.?
Consider the latest. Some Muslim leaders, including the head of ISNA (Islamic Society of North America, a Muslim Brotherhood front organization), recently urged Department of Justice officials to take steps to criminalize criticism of Islam (see article below, highlights added). They are calling criticism of Islam “discrimination” and “racist.”
Couple this with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s apparent recent embrace of the OIC (Organization of the Islamic Conference) push for a UN resolution calling for governments to criminalize defamation of religion.
This is serious folks! Can you see why we are putting so much emphasis on combating sharia law? They’re trying to confiscate our first amendment rights!!
You can help us fight back by signing the pledge of support to stop sharia in your state. If you haven’t yet done so, please do so today! Acting today could well protect your right to act tomorrow.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Muslims tell DOJ to find a way to crimalize criticism of Islam!
Posted on October 24, 2011
http://creepingsharia.wordpress.com/2011/10/24/muslims-tell-doj-to-find-a-way-to-crimalize-criticism-of-islam/
And cut back anti-terror funding amongst other things. Neil Munro with a very disturbing piece with absolutely unimaginable consequences when it becomes reality. And it will if we the People do not start protecting our freedoms.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Top Justice Department officials convened a meeting Wednesday where invited Islamist advocates lobbied them for cutbacks in anti-terror funding, changes in agents’ training manuals, additional curbs on investigators and a legal declaration that U.S. citizens’ criticism of Islam constitutes racial discrimination.
The department’s “civil rights lawyers are top of the line — I say this with utter honesty — I know they can come up with a way” to redefine criticism as discrimination, said Sahar Aziz, a female, Egyptian-American lawyer.
“I’d be willing to give a shot at it,” said Aziz, who is a fellow at the Michigan-based Muslim advocacy group, the Institute for Social Policy & Understanding.
The audience of Islamist advocates and department officials included Tom Perez, who heads the department’s division of civil rights.
“We must continue to have the open and honest and critical dialogue that you saw in the robust debate,” Perez responded in an enthusiastic closing speech a few minutes after Aziz made her demands at the event.
“I sat here the entire time, taking notes,” Perez said. “I have some very concrete thoughts … in the aftermath of this.”
The meeting at George Washington University showcased the expanding alliance between American progressives and Islamists, said Andrew McCarthy, a former federal prosecutor in New York.
Progressives “are making these Islamist groups into the [political] representatives of Muslims in the United States,” he told The Daily Caller. That elevation of Islamists to a leadership role sidelines the majority of American Muslims who don’t want Islamist leaders, as well as American Muslims who are female or gay, he said.
McCarthy investigated and prosecuted Egyptian-born Imam Omar Abdel-Rahman, dubbed “the blind sheik,” for urging Muslims to kill New Yorkers. Abdel-Rahman was sentenced to life imprisonment in 1996.
Progressives ally with the Islamic lobby because “they think it will be a political voting bloc that will be reliably Democratic,” said Robert Spencer, an author and expert on Islam.
None of the Islamist advocates of civil rights officials in attendance, including Perez, objected to Aziz’s call for free-speech restrictions.
The event did not include Zuhdi Jasser, an Arizona Muslim, former naval officer and a co-founder of a coalition of modernist Muslim groups, the American Islamic Leadership Coalition. “The Islamist groups’ victimology feeds into the left’s propaganda that the right is anti-minority and anti-Muslim, so there’s a mutual political benefit there,” said Jasser, who clashes with Spencer over rival responses to the Islamist groups.
Nor did the conference include any influential critics, such as McCarthy and Spencer, who argue that Islamist terror attacks are partly motivated by Islamic texts. These texts include the Koran’s verse 9:5, which says “when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them.”
Aziz, however, used her invitation to argue that Americans’ fear of Islamists’ bombs has evolved into racism towards dark-skinned men.
The word “Muslim,” she said, “has become racialized. … I don’t accept this formalistic cop-out that this is all about religion.”
Aziz did not offer any evidence for her claim, which she said justifies the use of Title VI anti-discrimination laws against institutions and individuals who argue that Islamic texts spur Islamic violence.
This legal redefinition, she said, would also “take [federal] money away from local police departments and fusion centers who are spying on all of us.”
Aziz also argued against the commonplace police practice of informally talking with people in communities, including Muslim communities. “This has been a real problem with this outreach stuff,” she said. Muslims “are acting in good faith, and then they find their imams, who were going to outreach meetings, were being spied on,” she complained. “Some have been deported. Some have been prosecuted.”
In March, Afghan-born New York Imam Ahmad Wais Afzali was ordered deported after he admitted he lied to the FBI about warning a suspected Muslim terrorist that he was being investigated. That terrorist, Najibullah Zazi, admitted that he was planning to place bombs in the New York City subway. The imam learned about the investigation because he had offered to work with local police to help identify potential terrorists in his congregation.
“People are going in good faith” to talk with police, Aziz said. “They’re being very honest about what their grievances are. They’re telling the government, ‘This what we want you to do … [and] we want you not to spy on our community.’”
Dwight Holton, a Justice Department legal counsel based in Oregon, said the threat of criminal gangs or terror attacks justifies routine police contacts with locals. “When we go to a barber shop to talk to the community, we don’t tell them you can have a lawyer,” he said.
“You should,” Aziz immediately replied.
Aziz’s advocacy was supported by a second Islamist advocate, Islamic Society of North America president Mohamed Magid. He argued that “teaching people that all Muslims are a threat to the country… is against the law and the Constitution.” [Editor’s note: no one we know of, including ACT! for America, is teaching that “all Muslims are a threat to the country.”]
Magid asked Perez to change the federal government’s rules governing terror investigations, for more private meetings with top justice department officials, for the reeducation of FBI agents, and for more people to oppose criticism of Islam, which he labelled “religious bigotry and hate.”
[CONTINUE READING FULL ARTICLE HERE]
Sunday, October 30, 2011
Arab Spring Islamist Fall
Arab Spring Islamist Fall by Ken Blackwell
Reuters’ Paul Chapman has filed a report from Tunis. There have been elections there, less than one year after an uprising ousted dictator Zine al Abidine Ben Ali. The former Tunisian strongman is said to be enjoying his retirement in Saudi Arabia. There, Ben Ali doubtless has seen news coverage of the bloody end of his neighboring desert despot, Muammar Gaddafi. Ben Ali is probably offering prayers of thanks that he got out of Dodge in time.
Election returns from Tunis show that the Ennahda party is the big winner. Ennahda won 90 of 217 seats in the country’s new legislative assembly. It’s not an outright majority, but it may prove sufficient for the Islamist party to form coalitions and rule the country.
Everyone from the White House and the State Department to the prestige press has hailed the “Arab Spring.” This regional uprising began when a street vendor set himself afire last December to protest the grinding oppression of the Ben Ali regime. The man, Mohammed Bouazizi, 26, despaired of getting justice. Ben Ali’s police had seized the young father’s little stock of fruits and vegetables. Said to be a college graduate and reduced to selling his pitiful wares on the street, the poor man could not pay off the thug cops of a thuggish regime. Our hearts must indeed break for Boazizi. And for millions of his fellow Arabs condemned to live under such despicable governments.
The Scriptures tell us that the ruler does not bear the sword for nothing, but to be a terror to evildoers. In vast swaths of the Arab world, however, the ruler is the evildoer. Most of those countries—each of which has a vote in the UN General Assembly—are ruled by the most adventurous and brutal of colonels or tribal chieftains.
The dictators of Syria and Yemen are taking note, no doubt, of the unenviable fate of Gaddafi. Dictator chic is suddenly out of fashion—and out of Vogue. That famous journal of the hip and cool has “disappeared” a puff piece they did recently on the First Couple of Syria.
The King and Queen of the Supermarket Tabloids, Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie, had traveled to Damascus for a goodwill visit back in 2009. Angelina is an ambassador of sorts for the UN’s High Commissioner for Refugees. No problem with that. And it was certainly a good thing to highlight the plight of Iraqi refugee fleeing from Iraq’s Islamist rulers. Thousands of Assyrian Christians have been driven from their homes in a land where they have lived a precarious existence the days of the Apostles.
But Brangelina made the gross error of consorting with Syria’s bloody Bashar al-Assad and his most photogenic wife, Asma al-Assad. Vogue’s writers had profiled the fun couple of the Middle East in gushing terms:
[They] described Asma al-Assad as “glamorous, young, and very chic–the freshest and most magnetic of first ladies,” and said of her husband that he is “a precise man who takes photographs and talks lovingly about his first computer.”) At the time, [Vogue editor Chris] Knutsen stood by Buck’s story and Vogue‘s decision to publish it, saying “We felt that a personal interview with Syria’s first lady would hold strong interest for our readers…The piece was not meant in any way to be a referendum on the al-Assad regime. It was a profile of the first lady.”
Okay, Bashar and Asma are not exactly Adolf Hitler and Eva Braun, but they are still young. Bashar holds the office of “president” of Syria only because his late father, Hafez al-Assad, didn’t blanch at shooting down 20,000 anti-government protesters in the city of Hama in 1982. Poppa Hafez leveled their town—including Sunni Mosques--and reportedly paved a road over their bodies. Perhaps Brangelina even rode over that highway while they were in Syria goodwill hunting.
It would be wonderful to get rid of the Assad clan. They have been cats’ paws for Tehran and fully complicit in the murders of Lebanon’s elected leaders. They have aided Hezbollah as that overtly terrorist outfit targets Israel’s northern border towns.
Still, after the Arab Spring has come this Islamist Fall. The Muslim Brotherhood [MB] is almost universally described in the liberal press as “moderate.” Well, when compared with Saddam, Gaddafi, and the Assads, they surely are moderate.
Still, the idea that MB-dominated governments voted in by purple fingers will give any regard to human rights is questionable. They openly avow their objective is to institute Sharia law wherever they rule. This brand of religious totalitarianism affords only one option to
minority Christians, the few remaining Jews, or Baha’i believers: Submission. Wherever MB holds sway, Christians are reduced to the status of dhimmis—not exactly slaves, but certainly not citizens. Think of a fiddler on the roof.
This is what the Arab Spring is yielding during this Islamist Fall. It is a profound misunderstanding of democracy to think that merely by staging elections and showing off purple fingers of voters we can bring on a new order in Muslim lands. Edmund Burke said it well: “Men of intemperate minds cannot be free; their passions forge their fetters.”
Intemperate minds are what we see at work in the Arab Middle East. Opinion surveys throughout the region confirm that, by overwhelming majorities, the “voters” for these sham democracies believe that those who convert from Islam must be put to death. As long as this grim reality exists, there will be no democracy in the region.
Facile comparisons to occupied Germany and Japan after World War II break down upon examination. It is precisely because we had demanded unconditional surrender of those warlike nations and occupied them with irresistible armed might that we were able to dictate the terms of their re-entry to the community of civilized states.
We should be proud of what we accomplished in Japan and Germany, both of which nations are mainstays today of the world economy and, with some salient exceptions (e.g. Germany’s persecution of homeschoolers) models of democratic legitimacy. We de-militarized and de-Nazified these vanquished regimes. We forced changes in their constitutions and in their educational systems. We shaped their economies.
We attempted no such changes in Iraq, Afghanistan, or in any of the other countries in the forever turbulent Mideast. That is why, tragically, any claims of hope and change in this region—especially when based on American dollars—are fatally flawed. We are building our houses upon sand.
Reuters’ Paul Chapman has filed a report from Tunis. There have been elections there, less than one year after an uprising ousted dictator Zine al Abidine Ben Ali. The former Tunisian strongman is said to be enjoying his retirement in Saudi Arabia. There, Ben Ali doubtless has seen news coverage of the bloody end of his neighboring desert despot, Muammar Gaddafi. Ben Ali is probably offering prayers of thanks that he got out of Dodge in time.
Election returns from Tunis show that the Ennahda party is the big winner. Ennahda won 90 of 217 seats in the country’s new legislative assembly. It’s not an outright majority, but it may prove sufficient for the Islamist party to form coalitions and rule the country.
Everyone from the White House and the State Department to the prestige press has hailed the “Arab Spring.” This regional uprising began when a street vendor set himself afire last December to protest the grinding oppression of the Ben Ali regime. The man, Mohammed Bouazizi, 26, despaired of getting justice. Ben Ali’s police had seized the young father’s little stock of fruits and vegetables. Said to be a college graduate and reduced to selling his pitiful wares on the street, the poor man could not pay off the thug cops of a thuggish regime. Our hearts must indeed break for Boazizi. And for millions of his fellow Arabs condemned to live under such despicable governments.
The Scriptures tell us that the ruler does not bear the sword for nothing, but to be a terror to evildoers. In vast swaths of the Arab world, however, the ruler is the evildoer. Most of those countries—each of which has a vote in the UN General Assembly—are ruled by the most adventurous and brutal of colonels or tribal chieftains.
The dictators of Syria and Yemen are taking note, no doubt, of the unenviable fate of Gaddafi. Dictator chic is suddenly out of fashion—and out of Vogue. That famous journal of the hip and cool has “disappeared” a puff piece they did recently on the First Couple of Syria.
The King and Queen of the Supermarket Tabloids, Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie, had traveled to Damascus for a goodwill visit back in 2009. Angelina is an ambassador of sorts for the UN’s High Commissioner for Refugees. No problem with that. And it was certainly a good thing to highlight the plight of Iraqi refugee fleeing from Iraq’s Islamist rulers. Thousands of Assyrian Christians have been driven from their homes in a land where they have lived a precarious existence the days of the Apostles.
But Brangelina made the gross error of consorting with Syria’s bloody Bashar al-Assad and his most photogenic wife, Asma al-Assad. Vogue’s writers had profiled the fun couple of the Middle East in gushing terms:
[They] described Asma al-Assad as “glamorous, young, and very chic–the freshest and most magnetic of first ladies,” and said of her husband that he is “a precise man who takes photographs and talks lovingly about his first computer.”) At the time, [Vogue editor Chris] Knutsen stood by Buck’s story and Vogue‘s decision to publish it, saying “We felt that a personal interview with Syria’s first lady would hold strong interest for our readers…The piece was not meant in any way to be a referendum on the al-Assad regime. It was a profile of the first lady.”
Okay, Bashar and Asma are not exactly Adolf Hitler and Eva Braun, but they are still young. Bashar holds the office of “president” of Syria only because his late father, Hafez al-Assad, didn’t blanch at shooting down 20,000 anti-government protesters in the city of Hama in 1982. Poppa Hafez leveled their town—including Sunni Mosques--and reportedly paved a road over their bodies. Perhaps Brangelina even rode over that highway while they were in Syria goodwill hunting.
It would be wonderful to get rid of the Assad clan. They have been cats’ paws for Tehran and fully complicit in the murders of Lebanon’s elected leaders. They have aided Hezbollah as that overtly terrorist outfit targets Israel’s northern border towns.
Still, after the Arab Spring has come this Islamist Fall. The Muslim Brotherhood [MB] is almost universally described in the liberal press as “moderate.” Well, when compared with Saddam, Gaddafi, and the Assads, they surely are moderate.
Still, the idea that MB-dominated governments voted in by purple fingers will give any regard to human rights is questionable. They openly avow their objective is to institute Sharia law wherever they rule. This brand of religious totalitarianism affords only one option to
minority Christians, the few remaining Jews, or Baha’i believers: Submission. Wherever MB holds sway, Christians are reduced to the status of dhimmis—not exactly slaves, but certainly not citizens. Think of a fiddler on the roof.
This is what the Arab Spring is yielding during this Islamist Fall. It is a profound misunderstanding of democracy to think that merely by staging elections and showing off purple fingers of voters we can bring on a new order in Muslim lands. Edmund Burke said it well: “Men of intemperate minds cannot be free; their passions forge their fetters.”
Intemperate minds are what we see at work in the Arab Middle East. Opinion surveys throughout the region confirm that, by overwhelming majorities, the “voters” for these sham democracies believe that those who convert from Islam must be put to death. As long as this grim reality exists, there will be no democracy in the region.
Facile comparisons to occupied Germany and Japan after World War II break down upon examination. It is precisely because we had demanded unconditional surrender of those warlike nations and occupied them with irresistible armed might that we were able to dictate the terms of their re-entry to the community of civilized states.
We should be proud of what we accomplished in Japan and Germany, both of which nations are mainstays today of the world economy and, with some salient exceptions (e.g. Germany’s persecution of homeschoolers) models of democratic legitimacy. We de-militarized and de-Nazified these vanquished regimes. We forced changes in their constitutions and in their educational systems. We shaped their economies.
We attempted no such changes in Iraq, Afghanistan, or in any of the other countries in the forever turbulent Mideast. That is why, tragically, any claims of hope and change in this region—especially when based on American dollars—are fatally flawed. We are building our houses upon sand.
Religious War at Our Doorstep
Those with commone sense have long known that Moozlums are using our tolerance, political correctness and laws against us to force their backwards 7th Century religion and beliefs on us. Here's proof. They are no longer hiding their agenda, but attacking our Judeo-Chritian values outright. Only libtards would give their complaints any consideration.
______________
Muslims Miffed That Catholic University Has Catholic Imagery by Doug Giles
Last week I was asked to lend my aging mug and highly attuned smart mouth for a documentary film regarding how the “religion of peace”—via political correctness in the public school system—is anesthetizing our kids to Islam’s malevolence toward all things American.
Like a good trooper I acquiesced (to the producer’s delight) and gave my best shot at trying to wake dull parents up to the fact that their dense kids are getting a steady diet of “Christianity, Judaism and America suck” and “Islam is awesome” from their local Marxist schoolmarm on a Monday through Friday basis. The director says there’s already a pre-Oscar buzz surrounding my performance. I am beautiful. Christina Aquavelva said so.
Anyway, no sooner did that week end than a new week began with a fresh ladle of Muslim petulance tossed in America’s face. It seems that an investigation has been sparked by Muslim “outrage” against a Catholic university (called Catholic University) for being, well, Catholic. Evidently Muslim students feel their human rights have been violated by not getting special digs on campus, minus Catholic imagery, to do their daily prayers on college grounds.
Let’s see, what can I compare this situation to? Hmmm. Dig deep, Doug, dig deep. Channel your inner Dennis Miller. I’ve got it! That’s like going to Hooters and being offended at all the bodacious hooters bouncing about. People don’t go to Hooters for their chicken wings; it’s called Hooters. Hoot-ers. Hooters. Geez, people. What the heck did you expect, students? It’s called Catholic University for a reason.
Human rights violated? That’s rich. Yes, let’s talk about human rights violations with Islam, shall we? How many Christians were killed in Egypt this week?
In the latest installment of how Islam is enacting their not-so-stealthy-any-longer jihad on America via our schools, Muslims are now taking on Catholic University for their Catholic art and imagery that insults delicate Muslim sensibilities.
This is nonsense. It’s another test to see how far we’ll bend over and take it like Europe has (to their own demise). It will not end with this one college, I guarantee. Who’s next? I’m thinkin’ Notre Dame.
Look, I’m not a Catholic and don’t work for good old CU, but if I did I’d be ticked and would stand my Catholic ground. I’d start swinging incense pots like a ninja warrior working a working a pair of nunchucks at any group trying to eradicate our cherished traditions and vision for our established university.
Here’s a thought: If you, as a Muslim, don’t like Catholic stuff, you might not want to go to Catholic University. Similarly, when I was seeking out an institution at which to do my grad work I immediately scratched Rosie O’Donnell University off my list.
Why? Well, I didn’t care to look at the paintings of her and her bulbous neck scattered about the campus, nor did I want to pay money to hear her bogus thoughts regarding how the world should tick peddled in the classroom.
This common sense approach to school selection makes me highly suspicious of this special treatment Muslims are demanding in our institutions and what their charges are really—really—all about. Stand your ground, Catholic U.
____________
Moozlums Hope to Take Over Catholic University
Some Muslims are getting smart. They’ve learned some lessons from the Communists, especially Antonio Gramsci (1891–1937). Gramsci broke from the revolutionary methods of the early Marxists. Today’s smarter Muslims don’t want to blow up stuff. Like the Gramsci Communists before them, they are working to take over our culture from the inside by using our laws against us. No shot needs to be fired. No building needs to be blown up. They are going after the foundational institutions: schools, media, politics, and the courts. This was Gramsci’s contribution to the cultural revolution. While Gramsci remained a committed Communist, he was a new-breed Communist.
To change the culture, Gramsci argued, “would require a ‘long march through the institutions’ — the arts, cinema, theater, schools, colleges, seminaries, newspapers, magazines, and the new electronic medium [of the time], radio.”[1] Catholic World News reports that Muslims attending Catholic University of America are using our nation’s anti-discrimination laws against the University:
Muslim students have lodged a complaint against the Catholic University of America, claiming that they are the victims of illegal discrimination because the school does not set aside space for Islamic prayer.
The complaint to the human-rights commission of the District of Columbia is backed by John Banzhaf, a law professor at neighboring George Washington University. Banzhaf has already filed a complaint against Catholic University, alleging sex discrimination, in response to the school’s decision to abolish coed dorms.
So why would Muslims attend a Catholic University? To take it over. You don’t believe me? Why did humanists attend Christian colleges like Harvard and Yale? To take them over. The early mottos of Harvard were “Truth for Christ and the Church” and “For the Glory of Christ.” When a student entered Harvard, he would have been introduced to the school’s foundational principles:
“Let every Student be plainly instructed, and earnestly pressed to consider well, the main end of his life and studies is, to know God and Jesus Christ which is eternal life (John 17:3) and therefore to lay Christ in the bottom, as the only foundation of all sound knowledge and Learning. And seeing the Lord only giveth wisdom, let every one seriously set himself by prayer in secret to seek it of him (Prov. 2:3).”
Why would an unbeliever go to Harvard? Certainly to get a good education, but others went to transform the college. Today, Harvard is a bastion of secularism.
We first saw these new Muslim tactics when a group of students at Trinity University in Texas wanted the words “in the year of Our Lord” removed from their diplomas. “A diploma is a very personal item, and people want to proudly display it in their offices and homes,” Sidra Qureshi, a Muslim and president of Trinity Diversity Connection. “By having the phrase ‘In the Year of Our Lord,’ it is directly referencing Jesus Christ, and not everyone believes in Jesus Christ.”
The debate started in 2009 when Isaac Medina, a Muslim convert from Guadalajara, Mexico, noticed the wording when he saw pre-made diploma frames in the Trinity bookstore. Muslims have been attacking Christianity since the inception of their religion. They’ve spotted a weakness in our system, the attempt to be diverse at any cost, even if it costs us the one thing that made this nation great — its Christian foundation. Muslims understand this; many Christians don’t. The Muslim demand for diversity is a wedge to get in the door, open it wide enough for others to follow behind, then once in they will pool their collective energies and force Christians out.
Notes:
1.Patrick J. Buchanan, Death of the West: How Dying Populations and Immigrant Invasions Imperil Our Country and Civilization (New York: St. Martin’s Press/Thomas Dunne Books, 2001), 77.
______________
Muslims Miffed That Catholic University Has Catholic Imagery by Doug Giles
Last week I was asked to lend my aging mug and highly attuned smart mouth for a documentary film regarding how the “religion of peace”—via political correctness in the public school system—is anesthetizing our kids to Islam’s malevolence toward all things American.
Like a good trooper I acquiesced (to the producer’s delight) and gave my best shot at trying to wake dull parents up to the fact that their dense kids are getting a steady diet of “Christianity, Judaism and America suck” and “Islam is awesome” from their local Marxist schoolmarm on a Monday through Friday basis. The director says there’s already a pre-Oscar buzz surrounding my performance. I am beautiful. Christina Aquavelva said so.
Anyway, no sooner did that week end than a new week began with a fresh ladle of Muslim petulance tossed in America’s face. It seems that an investigation has been sparked by Muslim “outrage” against a Catholic university (called Catholic University) for being, well, Catholic. Evidently Muslim students feel their human rights have been violated by not getting special digs on campus, minus Catholic imagery, to do their daily prayers on college grounds.
Let’s see, what can I compare this situation to? Hmmm. Dig deep, Doug, dig deep. Channel your inner Dennis Miller. I’ve got it! That’s like going to Hooters and being offended at all the bodacious hooters bouncing about. People don’t go to Hooters for their chicken wings; it’s called Hooters. Hoot-ers. Hooters. Geez, people. What the heck did you expect, students? It’s called Catholic University for a reason.
Human rights violated? That’s rich. Yes, let’s talk about human rights violations with Islam, shall we? How many Christians were killed in Egypt this week?
In the latest installment of how Islam is enacting their not-so-stealthy-any-longer jihad on America via our schools, Muslims are now taking on Catholic University for their Catholic art and imagery that insults delicate Muslim sensibilities.
This is nonsense. It’s another test to see how far we’ll bend over and take it like Europe has (to their own demise). It will not end with this one college, I guarantee. Who’s next? I’m thinkin’ Notre Dame.
Look, I’m not a Catholic and don’t work for good old CU, but if I did I’d be ticked and would stand my Catholic ground. I’d start swinging incense pots like a ninja warrior working a working a pair of nunchucks at any group trying to eradicate our cherished traditions and vision for our established university.
Here’s a thought: If you, as a Muslim, don’t like Catholic stuff, you might not want to go to Catholic University. Similarly, when I was seeking out an institution at which to do my grad work I immediately scratched Rosie O’Donnell University off my list.
Why? Well, I didn’t care to look at the paintings of her and her bulbous neck scattered about the campus, nor did I want to pay money to hear her bogus thoughts regarding how the world should tick peddled in the classroom.
This common sense approach to school selection makes me highly suspicious of this special treatment Muslims are demanding in our institutions and what their charges are really—really—all about. Stand your ground, Catholic U.
____________
Moozlums Hope to Take Over Catholic University
Some Muslims are getting smart. They’ve learned some lessons from the Communists, especially Antonio Gramsci (1891–1937). Gramsci broke from the revolutionary methods of the early Marxists. Today’s smarter Muslims don’t want to blow up stuff. Like the Gramsci Communists before them, they are working to take over our culture from the inside by using our laws against us. No shot needs to be fired. No building needs to be blown up. They are going after the foundational institutions: schools, media, politics, and the courts. This was Gramsci’s contribution to the cultural revolution. While Gramsci remained a committed Communist, he was a new-breed Communist.
To change the culture, Gramsci argued, “would require a ‘long march through the institutions’ — the arts, cinema, theater, schools, colleges, seminaries, newspapers, magazines, and the new electronic medium [of the time], radio.”[1] Catholic World News reports that Muslims attending Catholic University of America are using our nation’s anti-discrimination laws against the University:
Muslim students have lodged a complaint against the Catholic University of America, claiming that they are the victims of illegal discrimination because the school does not set aside space for Islamic prayer.
The complaint to the human-rights commission of the District of Columbia is backed by John Banzhaf, a law professor at neighboring George Washington University. Banzhaf has already filed a complaint against Catholic University, alleging sex discrimination, in response to the school’s decision to abolish coed dorms.
So why would Muslims attend a Catholic University? To take it over. You don’t believe me? Why did humanists attend Christian colleges like Harvard and Yale? To take them over. The early mottos of Harvard were “Truth for Christ and the Church” and “For the Glory of Christ.” When a student entered Harvard, he would have been introduced to the school’s foundational principles:
“Let every Student be plainly instructed, and earnestly pressed to consider well, the main end of his life and studies is, to know God and Jesus Christ which is eternal life (John 17:3) and therefore to lay Christ in the bottom, as the only foundation of all sound knowledge and Learning. And seeing the Lord only giveth wisdom, let every one seriously set himself by prayer in secret to seek it of him (Prov. 2:3).”
Why would an unbeliever go to Harvard? Certainly to get a good education, but others went to transform the college. Today, Harvard is a bastion of secularism.
We first saw these new Muslim tactics when a group of students at Trinity University in Texas wanted the words “in the year of Our Lord” removed from their diplomas. “A diploma is a very personal item, and people want to proudly display it in their offices and homes,” Sidra Qureshi, a Muslim and president of Trinity Diversity Connection. “By having the phrase ‘In the Year of Our Lord,’ it is directly referencing Jesus Christ, and not everyone believes in Jesus Christ.”
The debate started in 2009 when Isaac Medina, a Muslim convert from Guadalajara, Mexico, noticed the wording when he saw pre-made diploma frames in the Trinity bookstore. Muslims have been attacking Christianity since the inception of their religion. They’ve spotted a weakness in our system, the attempt to be diverse at any cost, even if it costs us the one thing that made this nation great — its Christian foundation. Muslims understand this; many Christians don’t. The Muslim demand for diversity is a wedge to get in the door, open it wide enough for others to follow behind, then once in they will pool their collective energies and force Christians out.
Notes:
1.Patrick J. Buchanan, Death of the West: How Dying Populations and Immigrant Invasions Imperil Our Country and Civilization (New York: St. Martin’s Press/Thomas Dunne Books, 2001), 77.
Sunday, October 23, 2011
Ground Zero Mosque Doomed for Back Rent
Sorry, I can't write, I can't stop laughing my ass off!!!!
_______________
The Patriot Post
Digest · October 21, 2011
Around the Nation: Back Rent for Ground Zero Mosque
Con Edison keeps the lights of New York City shining, but now the utility giant may also accomplish what millions of angry Americans could not: prevent the Ground Zero mosque from opening. This won't be accomplished as the mosque's power supply company, however, but as its landlord.
The dispute concerns the piece of prime Manhattan real estate on which the mosque is to be built. The developer, Park 51, owns a five-story building on the eastern side of the property, while Con Ed owns a former substation on the western side. Park 51 had eventually planned to purchase the Con Ed building, knock down both structures, and construct its $100 million, 15-story "community center." In the meantime, Park 51 had a lease under which rent was $2,750 a month; this rate was set in 1972 and is unheard of in present day New York. Now Con Edison has raised the rent to a whopping $47,437 a month, retroactive to July 31, 2008. When Park 51 refused to pay the $1.7 million in back rent, Con Ed threatened to terminate the lease and evict. This would effectively kill the plans for the controversial project.
Park 51's lead developer, Sharif El-Gamal, has speculated that the utility company is caving in to "political pressure"; this is an interesting statement, considering that both Barack Obama and New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg publicly support the project. A hearing is set for Nov. 17, and until then a court enjoined Con Ed from terminating the lease.
The Patriot Post www.patriotpost.us/subscribe/
_______________
The Patriot Post
Digest · October 21, 2011
Around the Nation: Back Rent for Ground Zero Mosque
Con Edison keeps the lights of New York City shining, but now the utility giant may also accomplish what millions of angry Americans could not: prevent the Ground Zero mosque from opening. This won't be accomplished as the mosque's power supply company, however, but as its landlord.
The dispute concerns the piece of prime Manhattan real estate on which the mosque is to be built. The developer, Park 51, owns a five-story building on the eastern side of the property, while Con Ed owns a former substation on the western side. Park 51 had eventually planned to purchase the Con Ed building, knock down both structures, and construct its $100 million, 15-story "community center." In the meantime, Park 51 had a lease under which rent was $2,750 a month; this rate was set in 1972 and is unheard of in present day New York. Now Con Edison has raised the rent to a whopping $47,437 a month, retroactive to July 31, 2008. When Park 51 refused to pay the $1.7 million in back rent, Con Ed threatened to terminate the lease and evict. This would effectively kill the plans for the controversial project.
Park 51's lead developer, Sharif El-Gamal, has speculated that the utility company is caving in to "political pressure"; this is an interesting statement, considering that both Barack Obama and New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg publicly support the project. A hearing is set for Nov. 17, and until then a court enjoined Con Ed from terminating the lease.
The Patriot Post www.patriotpost.us/subscribe/
Libya Ends While Another Conflict Begins
Listening to Michael Savage's radio show last week was an epiphany. He spoke about how the libtard media, who continually rail against the death penalty and sympathizes with rapists, murderers and terrorists on death row, celebrate the death of a head of state with no trial. I thought it was the policy of the U.S. to not assassinate heads of state, which is one reason why these despots have been ruling their countries for the last 40+ years. Along comes BHO and his commitment to use NATO to topple Gadafi receives complete approval from the libtards in the media. Had George W. Bush done this, the libtards would have screamed injustice. The hypocrisy of liberalism knows no bounds!
________________
The Patriot Post
Digest · October 21, 2011
Libya Ends While Another Conflict Begins
The present administration has a curious way of looking at warfare. In situations where the United States is at least indirectly threatened by the specter of radical Islam, Barack Obama is tripping over himself looking for a way out. But if he has a chance to take out the leader of a country that poses no threat, well, Obama is all over it. Just ask Moammar Gadhafi.
Well, you could if Gadhafi were still alive. Libya's longtime brutal dictator was killed by fighters who overtook his hometown of Sirte Thursday. Deposed and forced from Tripoli in August, Gadhafi had fled to Sirte as a last refuge. As his enemies closed in, he attempted to flee once more, but was taken alive by revolutionary forces before being killed. With his death and the fall of the last of his regime's strongholds, the National Transitional Council will move to consolidate power and reunify the nation. Memo to Moammar: Sic semper tyrannis!
Historian Victor Davis Hanson summed it up: "The Middle East is a very different place than it was on 9/11: Saddam dead, Osama bin Laden dead, Qaddafi dead, Mubarak near dead, and Assad reeling. Much of this transition is due to the decision after 9/11 to push for radical change in the Middle East, started by George Bush and more or less continued uninterrupted by Barack Obama. After the capture of Saddam, Qaddafi saw a glimpse of his own fate; one wonders how many Middle East despots are doing the same as they view the ghoulish pictures of a seemingly dead Qaddafi that are now all over the Internet."
Meanwhile, Obama has sent U.S. forces to Uganda to oppose Joseph Kony, the leader of a ragtag group of miscreants calling themselves the Lord's Resistance Army. The group, primarily child soldiers forced into taking up arms and led by Kony's iron fist, has been terrorizing central Africa for a number of years, though it cannot be construed as a threat to American national security. Now Kony, by all accounts a scoundrel of the highest degree, finds himself the target of 100 American military advisers deployed to Uganda last week in a "non-combat role." U.S. forces were sent to help regional military units fight off this guerrilla group and take care of Kony once and for all. While Congress has allowed the president plenty of leeway in dealing with Kony through a resolution passed in 2010, military force wasn't specifically authorized.
The Patriot Post www.patriotpost.us/subscribe/
________________
The Patriot Post
Digest · October 21, 2011
Libya Ends While Another Conflict Begins
The present administration has a curious way of looking at warfare. In situations where the United States is at least indirectly threatened by the specter of radical Islam, Barack Obama is tripping over himself looking for a way out. But if he has a chance to take out the leader of a country that poses no threat, well, Obama is all over it. Just ask Moammar Gadhafi.
Well, you could if Gadhafi were still alive. Libya's longtime brutal dictator was killed by fighters who overtook his hometown of Sirte Thursday. Deposed and forced from Tripoli in August, Gadhafi had fled to Sirte as a last refuge. As his enemies closed in, he attempted to flee once more, but was taken alive by revolutionary forces before being killed. With his death and the fall of the last of his regime's strongholds, the National Transitional Council will move to consolidate power and reunify the nation. Memo to Moammar: Sic semper tyrannis!
Historian Victor Davis Hanson summed it up: "The Middle East is a very different place than it was on 9/11: Saddam dead, Osama bin Laden dead, Qaddafi dead, Mubarak near dead, and Assad reeling. Much of this transition is due to the decision after 9/11 to push for radical change in the Middle East, started by George Bush and more or less continued uninterrupted by Barack Obama. After the capture of Saddam, Qaddafi saw a glimpse of his own fate; one wonders how many Middle East despots are doing the same as they view the ghoulish pictures of a seemingly dead Qaddafi that are now all over the Internet."
Meanwhile, Obama has sent U.S. forces to Uganda to oppose Joseph Kony, the leader of a ragtag group of miscreants calling themselves the Lord's Resistance Army. The group, primarily child soldiers forced into taking up arms and led by Kony's iron fist, has been terrorizing central Africa for a number of years, though it cannot be construed as a threat to American national security. Now Kony, by all accounts a scoundrel of the highest degree, finds himself the target of 100 American military advisers deployed to Uganda last week in a "non-combat role." U.S. forces were sent to help regional military units fight off this guerrilla group and take care of Kony once and for all. While Congress has allowed the president plenty of leeway in dealing with Kony through a resolution passed in 2010, military force wasn't specifically authorized.
The Patriot Post www.patriotpost.us/subscribe/
Warfront With Jihadistan: Leaving Iraq
Like I said in my previous post, BHO is a career politician who's first concern is how to keep his taxpayer funded job. He doesn't care who he throws to the wolves in order to do it - be it Coptic Christians in Egypt, or the U.S. troops who have sacrificed valiantly in Iraq. Pulling out of Iraq gives him bragging rights to his left wing cadre of wackos that he kept his promise to end the war. But at what cost? The money and lives we've invested will be wasted, but that cost matters little to a political animal like BHO.
_________________
The Patriot Post
Digest · October 21, 2011
National Security
Warfront With Jihadistan: Leaving Iraq
As previously reported, the Obama regime's Iraq policy has been one of withdrawal and surrender. Last month the Pentagon announced plans to have at least 27,000 troops remain in Iraq at year's end. When the White House later ordered that number lowered, U.S. commanders replied through gritted teeth that they could make do, barely, with 10,000 troops. When the White House came back with, "Yeah, how about 3,000?" U.S. commanders were reportedly "livid." Now it appears Obama is abandoning all pretense of caring about Iraq and will bring all but 160 -- that's one hundred sixty -- of the currently deployed 45,000 troops home by the new year. The remaining troops will serve as a protective force for the U.S. embassy.
If implemented, this decision will end more than eight years of U.S. involvement in the Iraq war, despite uncertainty about that country's security forces and political stability. Although Iraq's armed forces have made significant progress, they still require U.S. aid for training, air and naval support, intelligence and counterterrorism operations, and logistics. Unfortunately, Iraq's government is not helping. Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, concerned about looking like an American puppet as well as antagonizing Iran, is ignoring his own military, which supports an extended American military presence. Additionally, during negotiations for an extended presence, Iraqi leaders in parliament have refused to give U.S. troops immunity from prosecution in Iraqi courts. The U.S. cannot stay without such immunity, exposing American soldiers to the whims of an Islamic judicial system.
Politically, Obama will finally get to say he ended "Bush's war" (even as he takes military action of his own in Libya, Uganda and Yemen) just in time for the 2012 campaign. As for Iraq, only time will tell if it succeeds or ultimately succumbs to the murderous political dementia that is endemic to the region. America has fought nobly and sacrificed greatly to give an Arab Islamic country a shot at freedom. It will be up to the Iraqis to keep it.
The Patriot Post www.patriotpost.us/subscribe/
_________________
The Patriot Post
Digest · October 21, 2011
National Security
Warfront With Jihadistan: Leaving Iraq
As previously reported, the Obama regime's Iraq policy has been one of withdrawal and surrender. Last month the Pentagon announced plans to have at least 27,000 troops remain in Iraq at year's end. When the White House later ordered that number lowered, U.S. commanders replied through gritted teeth that they could make do, barely, with 10,000 troops. When the White House came back with, "Yeah, how about 3,000?" U.S. commanders were reportedly "livid." Now it appears Obama is abandoning all pretense of caring about Iraq and will bring all but 160 -- that's one hundred sixty -- of the currently deployed 45,000 troops home by the new year. The remaining troops will serve as a protective force for the U.S. embassy.
If implemented, this decision will end more than eight years of U.S. involvement in the Iraq war, despite uncertainty about that country's security forces and political stability. Although Iraq's armed forces have made significant progress, they still require U.S. aid for training, air and naval support, intelligence and counterterrorism operations, and logistics. Unfortunately, Iraq's government is not helping. Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, concerned about looking like an American puppet as well as antagonizing Iran, is ignoring his own military, which supports an extended American military presence. Additionally, during negotiations for an extended presence, Iraqi leaders in parliament have refused to give U.S. troops immunity from prosecution in Iraqi courts. The U.S. cannot stay without such immunity, exposing American soldiers to the whims of an Islamic judicial system.
Politically, Obama will finally get to say he ended "Bush's war" (even as he takes military action of his own in Libya, Uganda and Yemen) just in time for the 2012 campaign. As for Iraq, only time will tell if it succeeds or ultimately succumbs to the murderous political dementia that is endemic to the region. America has fought nobly and sacrificed greatly to give an Arab Islamic country a shot at freedom. It will be up to the Iraqis to keep it.
The Patriot Post www.patriotpost.us/subscribe/
You Are Paying Others to Murder Christians!
Certainly the argument can be made that BHO's supposed Christianity and Hillary's mean little or nothing to them. They are career politicians who's first concern is to protect their job of living off the taxpayer. Their second concern is to further their leftist political idealogy, which includes coddling and cozying up to radical Moozlums. If the aid they give the radical Moozlums happens to result in the killing of Christians, well, that is an acceptable casualty rate to them in the furtherance of their political goals.
____________
If you’ve been watching the news and following any of the ‘Arab Spring’ stories coming out of the Middle East, you may have seen your tax dollars at work as armored personnel carriers mowed down protesters in Egypt.
These protesters were conducting a peaceful protest asking for their right to protection from persecution. They were not abdicating the overthrow of the government or anything to do with violence of any kind. All they were asking for was to be treated equally the same as other Egyptians. In the midst of this peaceful protest, the Egyptian government sent in the police to stop the protest by whatever means possible.
What you may not be aware of is that the protesters killed were Coptic Christians and that US funds have been helped to pay for the armored vehicles and the police driving them. Reports surfaced that there were some yelling that they would kill any Christians they can get their hands on. Just last week the Egyptian newspaper Al Ahram reported that 36 Coptic Christians had been killed so far.
The US endorsed the ouster of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and has since been supportive of the military regime running the country. Part of that military regime is made up with members of the Muslim Brotherhood, which is known to be a more militant and radical group with a history of using terrorism and threats of terrorism to advance their agenda.
At this time, the Obama administration continues to pump millions of dollars into Egypt’s military regime, the same military regime that intentionally killed the peacefully protesting Christians. Trying to buy Egyptian friendship, even though the new regime has terrorist ties, is more important to the White House than to defend the Christian and human rights of fellow believers in Jesus Christ.
As a Christian, I am appalled that our tax dollars are going to support the Muslim persecution and murder of fellow Christians. Obviously, the Christian faith that President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton, mean little to nothing to them. They would rather support Muslim terrorists than preserve the peaceful lives of real Christians.
Source: Godfather Politics
____________
If you’ve been watching the news and following any of the ‘Arab Spring’ stories coming out of the Middle East, you may have seen your tax dollars at work as armored personnel carriers mowed down protesters in Egypt.
These protesters were conducting a peaceful protest asking for their right to protection from persecution. They were not abdicating the overthrow of the government or anything to do with violence of any kind. All they were asking for was to be treated equally the same as other Egyptians. In the midst of this peaceful protest, the Egyptian government sent in the police to stop the protest by whatever means possible.
What you may not be aware of is that the protesters killed were Coptic Christians and that US funds have been helped to pay for the armored vehicles and the police driving them. Reports surfaced that there were some yelling that they would kill any Christians they can get their hands on. Just last week the Egyptian newspaper Al Ahram reported that 36 Coptic Christians had been killed so far.
The US endorsed the ouster of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and has since been supportive of the military regime running the country. Part of that military regime is made up with members of the Muslim Brotherhood, which is known to be a more militant and radical group with a history of using terrorism and threats of terrorism to advance their agenda.
At this time, the Obama administration continues to pump millions of dollars into Egypt’s military regime, the same military regime that intentionally killed the peacefully protesting Christians. Trying to buy Egyptian friendship, even though the new regime has terrorist ties, is more important to the White House than to defend the Christian and human rights of fellow believers in Jesus Christ.
As a Christian, I am appalled that our tax dollars are going to support the Muslim persecution and murder of fellow Christians. Obviously, the Christian faith that President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton, mean little to nothing to them. They would rather support Muslim terrorists than preserve the peaceful lives of real Christians.
Source: Godfather Politics
#289 of 365 Ways to Drive A Liberal Crazy
This entry poignantly exposes how faulty is the libtard ideology. It also exposes how hypocritical it is. Under President George W. Bush, the libtard controlled media couldn't stand any of his policies designed to protect our nation. Under BHO, the same policies are glibly ignored.
__________
Tell a liberal how much you admire the lofty neutrality and commitment to truth at all costs of their house journal the New York Times.
NO. 5.
Praise the Grey Lady for its principled decision in 2005 to expose President Bush's Terrorist Surveillance wiretap program. Of course, there are conservative fools who witter on about stuff like national security, but liberals understand otherwise. Say to your liberal friend that you would rather a thousand innocent New Yorkers were blown to tiny pieces on the subway than live in a country where government attempts to eavesdrop on potentially innocent jihadists; you're so proud that the crusading zeal and moral certitude for which the New York Times is so justly renowned has made that possible.
-- 365 Ways to Drive a Liberal Crazy by James Delingpole
__________
Tell a liberal how much you admire the lofty neutrality and commitment to truth at all costs of their house journal the New York Times.
NO. 5.
Praise the Grey Lady for its principled decision in 2005 to expose President Bush's Terrorist Surveillance wiretap program. Of course, there are conservative fools who witter on about stuff like national security, but liberals understand otherwise. Say to your liberal friend that you would rather a thousand innocent New Yorkers were blown to tiny pieces on the subway than live in a country where government attempts to eavesdrop on potentially innocent jihadists; you're so proud that the crusading zeal and moral certitude for which the New York Times is so justly renowned has made that possible.
-- 365 Ways to Drive a Liberal Crazy by James Delingpole
Tuesday, October 18, 2011
"...Islam has always been a part of America 's story."
This is an email that I get several times a year. It's worth posting here to demonstrate what liars politicians are. They'll lie outright to pander to their base, or to further their political agenda. Anyone with any common sense or a rudimentary knowledge of history can recognize BHO's lie. Question everything a politician says, especially if they are telling you that Islam is a "religion of peace."
_________________
Barack Obama, during his Cairo speech, said:
"I know, too, that Islam has always been a part of America 's story."
AN AMERICAN CITIZEN'S RESPONSE:
Dear Mr. Obama:
Were those Muslims that were in America when the Pilgrims first landed? Funny, I thought they were Native American Indians.
Were those Muslims that celebrated the first Thanksgiving day? Sorry again, those were Pilgrims and Native American Indians.
Can you show me one Muslim signature on the United States Constitution?
Declaration of Independence ?
Bill of Rights?
Didn't think so.
Did Muslims fight for this country's freedom from England ? No.
Did Muslims fight during the Civil War to free the slaves in America ? No, they did not. In fact, Muslims to this day are still the largest traffickers in human
slavery. Your own half brother, a devout Muslim, still advocates slavery himself, even though Muslims of Arabic descent refer to black Muslims as "pug nosed slaves." Says a lot of what the Muslim world really thinks of your family's "rich Islamic heritage," doesn't it Mr. Obama?
Where were Muslims during the Civil Rights era of this country? Not present.
There are no pictures or media accounts of Muslims walking side by side with Martin Luther King, Jr. or helping to advance the cause of Civil Rights.
Where were Muslims during this country's Woman's Suffrage era? Again, not present. In fact, devout Muslims demand that women are subservient to men in the Islamic culture. So much so, that often they are beaten for not wearing the
'hajib' or for talking to a man who is not a direct family member or their husband. Yep, the Muslims are all for women's rights, aren't they?
Where were Muslims during World War II? They were aligned with Adolf Hitler. The Muslim grand mufti himself met with Adolf Hitler, reviewed the troops and accepted support from the Nazi's in killing Jews.
Finally, Mr. Obama, where were Muslims on Sept. 11th, 2001? If they weren't flying planes into the World Trade Center , the Pentagon or a field in Pennsylvania killing nearly 3,000 people on our own soil, they were rejoicing in the Middle
East. No one can dispute the pictures shown from all parts of the Muslim world
celebrating on CNN, Fox News, MSNBC and other cable news networks that day. Strangely, the very "moderate" Muslims who's asses you bent over backwards to kiss in Cairo , Egypt on June 4th were stone cold silent post 9-11. To many Americans, their silence has meant approval for the acts of that day.
And THAT, Mr. Obama, is the "rich heritage" Muslims have here in America.
Oh, I'm sorry, I forgot to mention the Barbary Pirates. They were Muslim.
And now we can add November 5, 2009 - the slaughter of American soldiers at Fort Hood by a Muslim major who is a doctor and a psychiatrist who was supposed to be
counseling soldiers returning from battle in Iraq and Afghanistan.
That, Mr. Obama is the "Muslim heritage" in America.
EVERY AMERICAN MUST READ THIS !!
Muslim Heritage, my ass.
_________________
Barack Obama, during his Cairo speech, said:
"I know, too, that Islam has always been a part of America 's story."
AN AMERICAN CITIZEN'S RESPONSE:
Dear Mr. Obama:
Were those Muslims that were in America when the Pilgrims first landed? Funny, I thought they were Native American Indians.
Were those Muslims that celebrated the first Thanksgiving day? Sorry again, those were Pilgrims and Native American Indians.
Can you show me one Muslim signature on the United States Constitution?
Declaration of Independence ?
Bill of Rights?
Didn't think so.
Did Muslims fight for this country's freedom from England ? No.
Did Muslims fight during the Civil War to free the slaves in America ? No, they did not. In fact, Muslims to this day are still the largest traffickers in human
slavery. Your own half brother, a devout Muslim, still advocates slavery himself, even though Muslims of Arabic descent refer to black Muslims as "pug nosed slaves." Says a lot of what the Muslim world really thinks of your family's "rich Islamic heritage," doesn't it Mr. Obama?
Where were Muslims during the Civil Rights era of this country? Not present.
There are no pictures or media accounts of Muslims walking side by side with Martin Luther King, Jr. or helping to advance the cause of Civil Rights.
Where were Muslims during this country's Woman's Suffrage era? Again, not present. In fact, devout Muslims demand that women are subservient to men in the Islamic culture. So much so, that often they are beaten for not wearing the
'hajib' or for talking to a man who is not a direct family member or their husband. Yep, the Muslims are all for women's rights, aren't they?
Where were Muslims during World War II? They were aligned with Adolf Hitler. The Muslim grand mufti himself met with Adolf Hitler, reviewed the troops and accepted support from the Nazi's in killing Jews.
Finally, Mr. Obama, where were Muslims on Sept. 11th, 2001? If they weren't flying planes into the World Trade Center , the Pentagon or a field in Pennsylvania killing nearly 3,000 people on our own soil, they were rejoicing in the Middle
East. No one can dispute the pictures shown from all parts of the Muslim world
celebrating on CNN, Fox News, MSNBC and other cable news networks that day. Strangely, the very "moderate" Muslims who's asses you bent over backwards to kiss in Cairo , Egypt on June 4th were stone cold silent post 9-11. To many Americans, their silence has meant approval for the acts of that day.
And THAT, Mr. Obama, is the "rich heritage" Muslims have here in America.
Oh, I'm sorry, I forgot to mention the Barbary Pirates. They were Muslim.
And now we can add November 5, 2009 - the slaughter of American soldiers at Fort Hood by a Muslim major who is a doctor and a psychiatrist who was supposed to be
counseling soldiers returning from battle in Iraq and Afghanistan.
That, Mr. Obama is the "Muslim heritage" in America.
EVERY AMERICAN MUST READ THIS !!
Muslim Heritage, my ass.
Chris Christie: Incoherent on Islamism
While I'm not too concerned with what Chris Christie does in NJ, Lugo's article does nicely expose the tactics the Islamists employ to implement Sharia Law. It is also very eye opening to learn that the Moozlums Christie is appointing to the bench have ties to Hammas and radical Islam. I also learned from Lugo that NJ has one of the largest Moozlum populations in the U.S. and that "some have compared Jersey’s Passaic County to France with its "no-go zones," where the local authorities, non-sharia-practicing Muslims and outsiders are all unwelcome." Is Christie jsut another politician pandering to a vocal minority to secure re-election?
Chris Christie: Incoherent on Islamism
by Karen Lugo
The bold, bombastic style that has earned New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie much acclaim in the political bullpen excited conservatives when he used it to battle the unions and biased media agents. Now that Christie’s wrath is being vented on American citizens with legitimate concerns about political Islam and sharia law, however, there are questions about the principles driving the political star’s moral indignation.
First, Christie’s cognitive dissonance on the issue of Islamist activists is startling when compared to his fiery public employee union showdowns. Where Christie is apparently willing to overlook the organized and duplicitous tactics of the Islamists, he confronts the unions for utilizing the very same methods. Common to both movements is the lack of popular support for their initiatives, meaning coercive measures have become the most effective means to their ends. Both operations skillfully utilize grievance-driven political warfare that also promises a second wave of retaliatory action if the resistance is not subdued after the first assault.
While Christie is willing to call the unions on their extortionist tactics, he defiantly denies the similar Islamist methods. All who have the temerity to confront the Islamist plan to deploy sharia – as first expressed in the Muslim enclaves – bear the brunt of Christie’s public ridicule and are dismissed as “absolutely ignorant” or “crazy.” He has even declared the entire subject a no-go zone by dismissing concerns about the “sharia law business [a]s crap.”
Days ago, Christie again vented against those who criticized his appointment of a Muslim New Jersey superior court judge with questionable Islamist ties by taking a long-arm swipe at his detractors while endorsing Mitt Romney. The governor went so far as to stretch a comparison of any who would question Romney’s Mormon faith to those who “disparaged” his judicial appointment of American Muslim Union board member Sohail Mohammed. Among other suspect associations, as investigated by respected researchers and currently reported by Andrew McCarthy, Sohail was a legal defender of Hamas-enabler and Muslim Brotherhood member Mohammed Qatanani.
Christie directly endorsed Qatanani as "a man of great goodwill" and "a constructive force," and -- also while he was New Jersey Assistant U.S. Attorney -- Christie offered one of his associate attorneys to testify on behalf of Qatanani. This high-level character witness countered the Department of Homeland Security’s effort to deport Qatanani for lying about detention in Israel for supporting Hamas.
Yet Christie steadfastly dismisses any criticism of Qatanani’s actions, as well as criticism of his appointment of Judge Sohail Mohammed, saying to oppose the appointment is akin to imposing an unlawful religious test; moreover, one that he says would not be indicative of leadership ability.
While deriding critics as being driven by something like religious bigotry, Christie evades the question of what responsibility public officials have to scrutinize the record of Muslims with past radical associations before trusting them with great legal authority. His stonewalling and bluster whenever questioned about this duty only prompt greater concern.
Christie governs a state with one of the largest Muslim populations in the United States. Some have compared Jersey’s Passaic County to France with its "no-go zones," where the local authorities, non-sharia-practicing Muslims and outsiders are all unwelcome. As in much of Western Europe, separate Muslim communities are embedded and are expanding. Politicians who pander to these political Islamists betray American traditions of individual liberty and rule of law. They also abandon the majority of Muslims in America who embrace our constitutional principles.
Even if there was no reason to fear alarming levels of radicalization and home-grown terror in the homeland, there is every reason to heed the critical mass reached by Islamists in Western Europe as a dire warning to Americans.
Before committing more critical errors, Christie should consider very recent developments in our Western sister societies across the pond. First, France is trying to take back public streets that were being commandeered for Friday prayers. After providing temporary fire department mosque space for prayers until a new mosque opens in two years, Interior Minister Claude Gueant announced that the government would enforce a ban on street prayers. Muslims reacted with street riots including threats of violence against France as well as the forbidden anti-Semitic “death to Jews” slurs. There was a media blackout on coverage of this mob response but citizen action group Riposte Laique was there with video cameras.
In Great Britain, Russia Today, a 24-hour English language news channel is reporting that sharia zones in London are being enforced by Islamist vigilantes. Rumors that women must be covered and sharia rules regarding pornography and drinking were being imposed had been circulating but now there is video footage. The notorious Anjem Choudary is shown publically calling on Muslims to establish an Islamist caliphate, beginning with London. Some report that the posters declaring “you are entering a sharia law zone” in some of the hamlets are being taken down as fast as they are posted but law enforcement efforts to confront the imposition of sharia laws are hamstrung by the numbers and coordination of the militant Islamists.
American Muslim Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, a patriot and thoughtful Islamic reformer, recently wrote poignant account of his fears that his children will grow up in an America where they will be subjected to great pressure to radicalize.
The next time that Chris Christie is tempted to get all prickly about efforts to confront Islamist radicalization efforts in America, he should consider the courage and determination that it takes to withstand the Muslim Brotherhood front group charges of hate and Islamophobia. Most that are standing against this assault on American values are well-intentioned and motivated by justified concern over the trends in Europe – as well as the level of disinterest demonstrated by leaders like Governor Christie.
Chris Christie: Incoherent on Islamism
by Karen Lugo
The bold, bombastic style that has earned New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie much acclaim in the political bullpen excited conservatives when he used it to battle the unions and biased media agents. Now that Christie’s wrath is being vented on American citizens with legitimate concerns about political Islam and sharia law, however, there are questions about the principles driving the political star’s moral indignation.
First, Christie’s cognitive dissonance on the issue of Islamist activists is startling when compared to his fiery public employee union showdowns. Where Christie is apparently willing to overlook the organized and duplicitous tactics of the Islamists, he confronts the unions for utilizing the very same methods. Common to both movements is the lack of popular support for their initiatives, meaning coercive measures have become the most effective means to their ends. Both operations skillfully utilize grievance-driven political warfare that also promises a second wave of retaliatory action if the resistance is not subdued after the first assault.
While Christie is willing to call the unions on their extortionist tactics, he defiantly denies the similar Islamist methods. All who have the temerity to confront the Islamist plan to deploy sharia – as first expressed in the Muslim enclaves – bear the brunt of Christie’s public ridicule and are dismissed as “absolutely ignorant” or “crazy.” He has even declared the entire subject a no-go zone by dismissing concerns about the “sharia law business [a]s crap.”
Days ago, Christie again vented against those who criticized his appointment of a Muslim New Jersey superior court judge with questionable Islamist ties by taking a long-arm swipe at his detractors while endorsing Mitt Romney. The governor went so far as to stretch a comparison of any who would question Romney’s Mormon faith to those who “disparaged” his judicial appointment of American Muslim Union board member Sohail Mohammed. Among other suspect associations, as investigated by respected researchers and currently reported by Andrew McCarthy, Sohail was a legal defender of Hamas-enabler and Muslim Brotherhood member Mohammed Qatanani.
Christie directly endorsed Qatanani as "a man of great goodwill" and "a constructive force," and -- also while he was New Jersey Assistant U.S. Attorney -- Christie offered one of his associate attorneys to testify on behalf of Qatanani. This high-level character witness countered the Department of Homeland Security’s effort to deport Qatanani for lying about detention in Israel for supporting Hamas.
Yet Christie steadfastly dismisses any criticism of Qatanani’s actions, as well as criticism of his appointment of Judge Sohail Mohammed, saying to oppose the appointment is akin to imposing an unlawful religious test; moreover, one that he says would not be indicative of leadership ability.
While deriding critics as being driven by something like religious bigotry, Christie evades the question of what responsibility public officials have to scrutinize the record of Muslims with past radical associations before trusting them with great legal authority. His stonewalling and bluster whenever questioned about this duty only prompt greater concern.
Christie governs a state with one of the largest Muslim populations in the United States. Some have compared Jersey’s Passaic County to France with its "no-go zones," where the local authorities, non-sharia-practicing Muslims and outsiders are all unwelcome. As in much of Western Europe, separate Muslim communities are embedded and are expanding. Politicians who pander to these political Islamists betray American traditions of individual liberty and rule of law. They also abandon the majority of Muslims in America who embrace our constitutional principles.
Even if there was no reason to fear alarming levels of radicalization and home-grown terror in the homeland, there is every reason to heed the critical mass reached by Islamists in Western Europe as a dire warning to Americans.
Before committing more critical errors, Christie should consider very recent developments in our Western sister societies across the pond. First, France is trying to take back public streets that were being commandeered for Friday prayers. After providing temporary fire department mosque space for prayers until a new mosque opens in two years, Interior Minister Claude Gueant announced that the government would enforce a ban on street prayers. Muslims reacted with street riots including threats of violence against France as well as the forbidden anti-Semitic “death to Jews” slurs. There was a media blackout on coverage of this mob response but citizen action group Riposte Laique was there with video cameras.
In Great Britain, Russia Today, a 24-hour English language news channel is reporting that sharia zones in London are being enforced by Islamist vigilantes. Rumors that women must be covered and sharia rules regarding pornography and drinking were being imposed had been circulating but now there is video footage. The notorious Anjem Choudary is shown publically calling on Muslims to establish an Islamist caliphate, beginning with London. Some report that the posters declaring “you are entering a sharia law zone” in some of the hamlets are being taken down as fast as they are posted but law enforcement efforts to confront the imposition of sharia laws are hamstrung by the numbers and coordination of the militant Islamists.
American Muslim Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, a patriot and thoughtful Islamic reformer, recently wrote poignant account of his fears that his children will grow up in an America where they will be subjected to great pressure to radicalize.
The next time that Chris Christie is tempted to get all prickly about efforts to confront Islamist radicalization efforts in America, he should consider the courage and determination that it takes to withstand the Muslim Brotherhood front group charges of hate and Islamophobia. Most that are standing against this assault on American values are well-intentioned and motivated by justified concern over the trends in Europe – as well as the level of disinterest demonstrated by leaders like Governor Christie.
Sunday, October 16, 2011
#289 of 365 Ways to Drive A Liberal Crazy
Explode another liberal myth:
Mock the notion that Saladin was any less cruel or more civilized than his Christian opponents. Recall how he treated Crusaders captured at Hattin on July 4, 1187,when Saladin ordered that they should all be beheaded—in accordance with the Koran—and watched, "his face joyful," while his followers slaughtered the infidels.
-- 365 Ways to Drive a Liberal Crazy by James Delingpole
Mock the notion that Saladin was any less cruel or more civilized than his Christian opponents. Recall how he treated Crusaders captured at Hattin on July 4, 1187,when Saladin ordered that they should all be beheaded—in accordance with the Koran—and watched, "his face joyful," while his followers slaughtered the infidels.
-- 365 Ways to Drive a Liberal Crazy by James Delingpole
Saturday, October 15, 2011
Destruction of Copts Is Islamically Correct
Destruction of Copts Is Islamically Correct by Diana West
I am looking at a reproduction of an old engraving of Jerusalem's Church of the Holy Sepulcher. It is in Bat Ye'or's book "The Dhimmi," which collects primary documents from history to chronicle the impact of Islamic law on non-Muslims through the centuries.
What is notable about the image, which is based on an 1856 photograph, is that the church, said to be at the site of Jesus Christ's crucifixion and burial, has no cross and no belfry. Stripped of its Christian symbols, the church stood in compliance with the Islamic law and traditions of the Ottoman (Turkish) Empire, which ruled Jerusalem at the time.
I went back to the book to find this image for a reason. It had to do with last weekend's massacre of two dozen Coptic Christians in Cairo by Egyptian military and street mobs, which also left hundreds wounded. The unarmed Copts were protesting the destruction of yet another church in Egypt, St. George's, which on Sept. 30 was set upon by thousands of Muslim men following Friday prayers. Why? The trigger was repair work on the building – work that the local council and governor had approved.
Does that explanation make any sense? Not to anyone ignorant of Islamic law. Unfortunately, that criterion includes virtually all media reporting the story.
Raymond Ibrahim, an Islam specialist, Arabic speaker and author of "The Al Qaeda Reader" (Broadway, 2007), catalogs the key sequence of events that turned a church renovation project into terror and flames. With repair work in progress, he writes online at Hudson New York, "It was not long before local Muslims began complaining, making various demands, including that the church be devoid of crosses and bells – even though the permit approved them – citing that 'the cross irritates Muslims and their children.'"
Those details drove me to re-examine the de-Christianized 19th-century image of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher – no cross, no bells. It becomes a revealing illustration of Islamic history repeating itself in this "Shariah Autumn," the deadly but natural harvest of the grotesquely branded "Arab Spring."
Given our see-no-Shariah media (and government), we have no context in which to place such events. That context is Shariah society, advanced (but by no means initiated) by "Arab Spring," where non-Muslims – "dhimmi" – occupy a place defined for them by Islamic law and tradition. Theologian, author and Anglican pastor Mark Durie elaborates at markdurie.com: "Dhimmi are permitted to live in an Islamic state under terms of surrender as laid out in the 'dhimma' pact." Such terms, Durie writes, "are a well-established part of Islamic law and can be found laid out in countless legal text books." When non-Muslims violate these terms, they become subject to attack.
To place the dhimmi pact in comparable Western terms is to say the West has its Magna Carta, Islam has its Pact of Umar. Among other things, this seminal pact governing Muslim and non-Muslims relations stipulates, Durie notes, the condition that Christians "will neither erect in our areas a monastery, church or sanctuary for a monk, nor restore any place of worship that needs restoration."
Thus, this anti-Coptic violence, which for the moment has caught world attention, is Islamically correct. This is the piece of the puzzle Westerners fail to grasp. But Durie takes us through the theological steps: "For some pious Muslims in Egypt today, the act of repairing a church is a flagrant provocation, a breach of the peace, which amounts to a deliberate revocation of one's right to exist in the land." As such, it "becomes a legitimate topic for sermons in the mosque (where) the faithful are urged ... to uphold the honor of Islam." In Islamic terms, then, the destruction of the church is no injustice, as Durie writes. It is "even a duty to destroy the church and even the lives of Christians who have the temerity to repair their churches." That's because dhimmi who take to the streets to protest the Islamically just destruction of the church "are also rebels who have forfeited their rights (under the pact) to 'safety and protection.'" As violators of the "dhimmi" pact, they become fair game.
It's quite simple, but the theology eludes us. Why? I think the answer is that to expose the facts about Shariah in the Western milieu is to invite their criticism. Such criticism is forbidden under Shariah. So, we remain silent – which is what good "dhimmi" do.
________
I received this from ACT! for America on 10/14/11, which mentions the above article and highlights American's ignorance of the history of Islamic conquests, and the resulting sharia-based subjugation of Christians and Jews:
Sharia, dhimmitude, and the Copts
Diana West’s concise, compelling column below brings recent events in Egypt into clear perspective.
Most Americans have little knowledge of the 13 century history of Islamic conquests, and how these conquests resulted in the deaths of hundreds of millions of people and the enslavement of tens of millions.
Nor do most Americans understand the sharia-based subjugation of Christians and Jews as “dhimmis,” who became third-class citizens in their own lands after they were conquered by the Muslim empire.
We are nearing the completion of an 18 month analysis of how Islam is presented in 38 middle and high school textbooks. One of the most egregious errors we have found, repeated over and over again, is how “tolerant” the Muslim conquerors were of those they conquered, with some textbooks going so far as to outrageously claim that the Muslim conquerors allowed Jews and Christians “full religious freedom.”
This rewrite of history must be exposed if Americans are to ever understand not only what happened 1,000 years ago, but to understand why the persecutions of Christians and Jews in Muslim lands continues to this day—and why the threat posed by the supremacist ideology of radical Islam is one we must take seriously.
Update 10/17/11:
The Patriot Post - Brief · October 17, 2011
Faith & Family
"While the potentates of the press were paying homage to pot-smoking protesters demanding 'economic justice,' supporters of religious freedom were being massacred in Egypt. On Sunday, Oct. 9, more than 1,000 Coptic Christians held a vigil at the state television building in Cairo to pray for protection against radical Islamists burning their churches, homes, schools and businesses. According to Amnesty International, violent Islamist attacks against Egypt's Christian community -- which predates Islam by more than six centuries -- have increased exponentially since Hosni Mubarak was ousted in February. The peaceful gathering was attacked by armed Muslim militants and Egyptian army units. In the ensuing melee, at least 20 Copts were killed, and more than 75 were wounded. Eyewitnesses recorded victims being beaten, stabbed, shot, crushed by military vehicles and dragged through the streets of Cairo. Dr. Walid Phares of Fox News, one of the first to report the incident, rightly says, 'International news agencies, including AP, were late in reporting the real casualties.' So, too, was the White House in noting that the atrocity even happened. Apparently, Christians being brutalized in Egypt doesn't fit the O-Team's 'Arab spring' campaign theme song." -- columnist Oliver North
The Patriot Post (www.patriotpost.us/subscribe/
I am looking at a reproduction of an old engraving of Jerusalem's Church of the Holy Sepulcher. It is in Bat Ye'or's book "The Dhimmi," which collects primary documents from history to chronicle the impact of Islamic law on non-Muslims through the centuries.
What is notable about the image, which is based on an 1856 photograph, is that the church, said to be at the site of Jesus Christ's crucifixion and burial, has no cross and no belfry. Stripped of its Christian symbols, the church stood in compliance with the Islamic law and traditions of the Ottoman (Turkish) Empire, which ruled Jerusalem at the time.
I went back to the book to find this image for a reason. It had to do with last weekend's massacre of two dozen Coptic Christians in Cairo by Egyptian military and street mobs, which also left hundreds wounded. The unarmed Copts were protesting the destruction of yet another church in Egypt, St. George's, which on Sept. 30 was set upon by thousands of Muslim men following Friday prayers. Why? The trigger was repair work on the building – work that the local council and governor had approved.
Does that explanation make any sense? Not to anyone ignorant of Islamic law. Unfortunately, that criterion includes virtually all media reporting the story.
Raymond Ibrahim, an Islam specialist, Arabic speaker and author of "The Al Qaeda Reader" (Broadway, 2007), catalogs the key sequence of events that turned a church renovation project into terror and flames. With repair work in progress, he writes online at Hudson New York, "It was not long before local Muslims began complaining, making various demands, including that the church be devoid of crosses and bells – even though the permit approved them – citing that 'the cross irritates Muslims and their children.'"
Those details drove me to re-examine the de-Christianized 19th-century image of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher – no cross, no bells. It becomes a revealing illustration of Islamic history repeating itself in this "Shariah Autumn," the deadly but natural harvest of the grotesquely branded "Arab Spring."
Given our see-no-Shariah media (and government), we have no context in which to place such events. That context is Shariah society, advanced (but by no means initiated) by "Arab Spring," where non-Muslims – "dhimmi" – occupy a place defined for them by Islamic law and tradition. Theologian, author and Anglican pastor Mark Durie elaborates at markdurie.com: "Dhimmi are permitted to live in an Islamic state under terms of surrender as laid out in the 'dhimma' pact." Such terms, Durie writes, "are a well-established part of Islamic law and can be found laid out in countless legal text books." When non-Muslims violate these terms, they become subject to attack.
To place the dhimmi pact in comparable Western terms is to say the West has its Magna Carta, Islam has its Pact of Umar. Among other things, this seminal pact governing Muslim and non-Muslims relations stipulates, Durie notes, the condition that Christians "will neither erect in our areas a monastery, church or sanctuary for a monk, nor restore any place of worship that needs restoration."
Thus, this anti-Coptic violence, which for the moment has caught world attention, is Islamically correct. This is the piece of the puzzle Westerners fail to grasp. But Durie takes us through the theological steps: "For some pious Muslims in Egypt today, the act of repairing a church is a flagrant provocation, a breach of the peace, which amounts to a deliberate revocation of one's right to exist in the land." As such, it "becomes a legitimate topic for sermons in the mosque (where) the faithful are urged ... to uphold the honor of Islam." In Islamic terms, then, the destruction of the church is no injustice, as Durie writes. It is "even a duty to destroy the church and even the lives of Christians who have the temerity to repair their churches." That's because dhimmi who take to the streets to protest the Islamically just destruction of the church "are also rebels who have forfeited their rights (under the pact) to 'safety and protection.'" As violators of the "dhimmi" pact, they become fair game.
It's quite simple, but the theology eludes us. Why? I think the answer is that to expose the facts about Shariah in the Western milieu is to invite their criticism. Such criticism is forbidden under Shariah. So, we remain silent – which is what good "dhimmi" do.
________
I received this from ACT! for America on 10/14/11, which mentions the above article and highlights American's ignorance of the history of Islamic conquests, and the resulting sharia-based subjugation of Christians and Jews:
Sharia, dhimmitude, and the Copts
Diana West’s concise, compelling column below brings recent events in Egypt into clear perspective.
Most Americans have little knowledge of the 13 century history of Islamic conquests, and how these conquests resulted in the deaths of hundreds of millions of people and the enslavement of tens of millions.
Nor do most Americans understand the sharia-based subjugation of Christians and Jews as “dhimmis,” who became third-class citizens in their own lands after they were conquered by the Muslim empire.
We are nearing the completion of an 18 month analysis of how Islam is presented in 38 middle and high school textbooks. One of the most egregious errors we have found, repeated over and over again, is how “tolerant” the Muslim conquerors were of those they conquered, with some textbooks going so far as to outrageously claim that the Muslim conquerors allowed Jews and Christians “full religious freedom.”
This rewrite of history must be exposed if Americans are to ever understand not only what happened 1,000 years ago, but to understand why the persecutions of Christians and Jews in Muslim lands continues to this day—and why the threat posed by the supremacist ideology of radical Islam is one we must take seriously.
Update 10/17/11:
The Patriot Post - Brief · October 17, 2011
Faith & Family
"While the potentates of the press were paying homage to pot-smoking protesters demanding 'economic justice,' supporters of religious freedom were being massacred in Egypt. On Sunday, Oct. 9, more than 1,000 Coptic Christians held a vigil at the state television building in Cairo to pray for protection against radical Islamists burning their churches, homes, schools and businesses. According to Amnesty International, violent Islamist attacks against Egypt's Christian community -- which predates Islam by more than six centuries -- have increased exponentially since Hosni Mubarak was ousted in February. The peaceful gathering was attacked by armed Muslim militants and Egyptian army units. In the ensuing melee, at least 20 Copts were killed, and more than 75 were wounded. Eyewitnesses recorded victims being beaten, stabbed, shot, crushed by military vehicles and dragged through the streets of Cairo. Dr. Walid Phares of Fox News, one of the first to report the incident, rightly says, 'International news agencies, including AP, were late in reporting the real casualties.' So, too, was the White House in noting that the atrocity even happened. Apparently, Christians being brutalized in Egypt doesn't fit the O-Team's 'Arab spring' campaign theme song." -- columnist Oliver North
The Patriot Post (www.patriotpost.us/subscribe/
Friday, October 14, 2011
The Plight of Middle East Christians
The Patriot Post
Digest · October 14, 2011
Warfront With Jihadistan: The Plight of Middle East Christians
Ten years after the United States freed the Afghan people from the Islamist Taliban regime, and months after the "Arab Spring" supposedly brought more freedom to many Arab states, the reality on the ground, especially for religious freedom, continues to deteriorate. According to the U.S. State Department's latest International Religious Freedom Report, for example, there is not a single public Christian church left in Afghanistan despite the deaths of more than 1,700 U.S. troops and $440 billion spent to win freedom for the Afghan people. The last public Christian church in Afghanistan was razed in March 2010, according to the report, which also notes that "there were no Christian schools in the country."
Meanwhile in Egypt, ground zero for the Arab Spring, the allegedly secular military government has actively joined the country's majority Muslim population in brutally persecuting Egypt's Coptic Christians. This week alone, Egypt's armed forces killed more than 25 people and wounded hundreds when they brutally dispersed Coptic Christians gathered in front of the state broadcasting building to protest a church burning in Aswan. It is now feared that anti-Christian mobs will take the military's active repression as license to further terrorize the Copts.
Finally, religious freedom fares no better in Iran, where that nation's Supreme Court has ordered a retrial for the high-profile case of Yousef Nadarkhani, the 32-year-old pastor who was sentenced to death for converting to Christianity. Iranian authorities later changed their story to say that Nadarkhani had committed rape and other crimes. Sadly, for all the talk of freedom in the Muslim world, there is still little evidence it exists.
The Patriot Post www.patriotpost.us/subscribe
Saudis arrest Colombian footballer for exposed tattoos
The libtards think that it is perfectly fine to allow sharia law in the U.S. to show the Moozlums how tolerant we are. Here is an example of how they will accept our tolerance. Once sharia law takes hold, it's a downhill ride for society. This Infidel says sport that Christian tats whenever you can. Show the world Jesus and the Blessed Virgin, and don't forget to remind them of John 3:16.
______________
Saudis arrest Colombian footballer for exposed tattoos
Thu Oct 13 05:10pm EDT
By Brooks Peck
According to reports, Colombian winger Juan Pablo Pino was arrested by the Saudi moral police when fellow shoppers in a Riyadh mall complained about the exposed tattoos on his arms, which include the face of Jesus and other religious symbols. Pino joined Saudi club Al Nassr on loan from Galatasaray at the end of August and apparently was not aware that showing his tattoos by wearing a sleeveless shirt in public would cause him any problems.
From Colombia Reports:
Saudi Arabia is one of the most conservative countries in the Muslim world, and according to one of the country's most respected clerics, Nayimi Sheik Mohammed, Saudi law prohibits tattoos, no matter what their form, and every player has to abide with these rules.
The cleric went on to stress the importance of respecting the status of "Sharia" (Islamic law) and that the tattoos must be covered at all times.
Pino, who plays in the Saudi league, has expressed "deep sorrow" for his actions and said he respects the laws of the country. He was released from custody when a team delegate arrived and discussed the matter with the police.
Gulf News reports that a Saudi Football Federation official "sent a circular to all clubs asking them to advise their professionals and players to respect Saudi traditions and not show their religious symbols in a way disregarding Saudi customs and traditions" after a cross tattoo on the arm of a Romanian player for Al Hilal caused controversy last year.
It's unclear whether Al Nassr informed Pino of this in his short time with the club, but he'll probably be investing in some long-sleeve shirts now.
Photo: Getty
Sunday, October 9, 2011
Boy Scouts infiltrated by Moozlum Brotherhood?
This is what we've come to. The progressives/communists/socialists have so instilled fear of lawsuits from tools like the ACLU into our society, that under the guise of political correctness, the Moozlum Brotherhood is now able to use an organization like the BSA to further their poisonous and deadly ambitions.
Boy Scouts infiltrated by Muslim Brotherhood?
By Aaron Klein
© 2011 WND
The Boy Scouts of America maintains scouting partnerships with Islamic groups closely tied to the Muslim Brotherhood, WND has learned.
The Boy Scouts of America welcomes major religions, including Islam. It has incorporated under its banner a group called the National Islamic Committee on Scouting, or NICS, which provides Muslim scouts an opportunity to earn badges or emblems by participating in religious activities.
The NICS scouting emblems include an "Allahu Akbar" emblem, which means "Allah is greatest" in Arabic.
Formed in the 1920s after the demise of the Ottoman Islamic empire, the Muslim Brotherhood is the parent of most of the major jihadist groups in the world, including al-Qaida and Hamas. The prosecution of a terror-finance scheme in Texas presented evidence of the Brotherhood's aim to destroy Western civilization and establish an Islamic society under the rule of the Quran.
The NICS's chairman is appointed annually by the president of the Boy Scouts of America, which routinely advises the Islamic scouting group in an official capacity.
The NICS is partnered with the Islamic Council on Scouting of North America, or ICSNA, which works officially with the Boy Scouts of America, as well.
The ICSNA was chaired by Muzamil Siddiqui, an Islamic scholar who served as chairman of the Religious Affairs Committee of a Muslim Brotherhood-founded organization, the Muslim Students Association.
Siddiqui faced criticism for issuing a fatwa on islamonline.net that called for the establishment of an Islamic state in the West.
He told the website, "By participating in a non-Islamic system, one cannot rule by that which Allah has commanded. But things do not change overnight. Changes come through patience, wisdom and hard work."
Continued Siddiqui: "I believe that as Muslims, we should participate in the system to safeguard our interests and try to bring gradual change for the right cause, the cause of truth and justice. We must not forget that Allah's rules have to be established in all lands, and all our efforts should lead to that direction."
Siddiqui's Muslim Student Association, or MSA, is the largest Muslim college student group in the U.S.
WND previously attended an MSA event at which violence against the U.S. was urged by speakers.
"We are not Americans," shouted one speaker, Muhammad Faheed at Queensborough Community College in 2003. "We are Muslims. [The U.S.] is going to deport and attack us! It is us versus them! Truth against falsehood! The colonizers and masters against the oppressed, and we will burn down the master's house!"
The Saudi-funded MSA in 1981 founded the Islamic Society of North America, or ISNA. The two groups are still partners.
The Boy Scouts of America, meanwhile, sanctions another scouting program with ISNA.
BSA states regarding its relationship with the Islamic Society of North America: "ISNA has had a relationship with the Boy Scouts of America for over a decade, and the ISNA secretary general recently signed the relationship document in the ISNA's annual convention at Chicago."
WND reported on ISNA's annual convention in July.
That event included a panel with Tariq Ramadan, grandson of the notorious founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, and Siraj Wahhaj, who was named as a possible co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. Wahhaj has also defended the convicted WTC bomb plotters and has urged the Islamic takeover of America.
ISNA is an unindicted co-conspirator in a scheme to raise money for Hamas.
ISNA was named in a May 1991 Muslim Brotherhood document – "An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America" – as one of the Brotherhood's like-minded "organizations of our friends" who shared the common goal of destroying America and turning it into a Muslim nation, according to Discover the Networks.
In December 2003, U.S. Sens. Charles Grassley and Max Baucus of the Senate Committee on Finance listed ISNA as one of 25 American Muslim organizations that "finance terrorism and perpetuate violence."
The U.S. government released a list of approximately 300 unindicted co-conspirators" and "joint venturers" in the 2007 Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development trial, the largest terrorist financing scheme in American history, in which the groups were accused of raising money for Hamas.
Islam scholar Stephen Schwartz describes ISNA as "one of the chief conduits through which the radical Saudi form of Islam passes into the United States."
According to terrorism expert Steven Emerson, ISNA "is a radical group hiding under a false veneer of moderation" that publishes a bi-monthly magazine, Islamic Horizons, that "often champions militant Islamist doctrine."
The group also "convenes annual conferences where Islamist militants have been given a platform to incite violence and promote hatred." Emerson cites an ISNA conference in which al-Qaida supporter and PLO official Yusuf Al Qaradhawi was invited to speak.
Emerson further reports that in September 2002, a full year after 9/11, "speakers at ISNA's annual conference still refused to acknowledge bin Laden's role in the terrorist attacks."
Also, ISNA has held fundraisers for terrorists, notes Discover the Networks. After Hamas leader Mousa Marzook was arrested and eventually deported in 1997, ISNA raised money for his defense. The group also has condemned the U.S. government's post-9/11 seizure of Hamas' and Palestinian Islamic Jihad's financial assets.
With research by Danette Clark
The Religion of Peace by Michael Youssef
Youssef makes a great point about Europe caving to Islam as soon as they start beheading infidels. Well, I have a 1st Amendment constitutional right to speak my mind, and a 2nd Amendment constitutional right to defend myself from those who demand my "total surrender."
Evil walks this earth, liberals coddle evil in the name of tolerance, and Satan will use both evil and liberals to persecute and kill Christ's followers and God's chosen people. Stay strong, have faith, and pray for peace. When that doesn't work, reach for your gun.
The Religion of Peace by Michael Youssef
Immediately after September 11th, 2001, President George W. Bush rushed into a local D.C. Islamic Mosque and declared that Islam was a “religion of peace.”
Many Muslim propagandists in the West have deliberately twisted the meaning of the word “Islam” and say that it comes from the word “salam,” which means “peace.” These deceptions are laughed at by anybody with a mere elementary knowledge of the Arabic language.
“Islam” in its purest form means “ total surrender.” The image that word holds is of a vanquished army on its knees before the vanquisher.
Recent news from Iran of a pastor sentenced to death by hanging– Youcef Nadarkhani – have presented the “religion of peace” in its most accurate and true form. This barbaric act is what both Sunni Wahhabis as well as Shiites are calling to be the norm in all Islamic countries…and they speak hopefully of applying it to Europe. So much for the “religion of peace.”
Elam Ministries, a UK-based organization that serves the Christian church in Iran, revealed that the arrest of Christians in Iran solely for worshipping Christ has been on the increase. Under the noses of the one who is the darling of many foolish Western organizations, President Ahmadinejad of Iran has arrested 220 Christians between June 2010 and January 2011. As of January 2011, only 33 remained in prison.
When I watch videos or read speeches by Islamists in Europe, I cringe at how they speak optimistically about the implementation of these barbaric actions in the future in Europe. One of the clerics said, “It is a matter of time, when we, with our birthrate,will overwhelm the white Europeans and thus will be able to take control of all of Europe.”
As Sharia Courts spread across Europe like a noose slowly being tightened around that venerable continent, one can foresee how Catholic priests, Protestant pastors, or even Jewish rabbis will be brought before these courts with all sorts of false accusations of blaspheming Islam or their prophet. It will only take a few hangings or beheadings before most of the French and European former-Christian landscape surrenders to the power of the sword.
When Pastor Nadarkhani was asked to repent he said, “Repent means to return, what should I return to? To the blasphemy that I had before my faith in Christ?”
I cannot help but wonder if pastors, priests, and rabbis in Europe would have such courage?
To bring it even closer to home – would we have many American pastors with such courage?
Would I have such courage?
May God have mercy on His children before such a time, but if it does come, every true Christian must ask themselves the question: What would I do?
The only answer for a complete change of heart from barbarism to love is the Gospel of Christ. Two thousand years ago that Gospel transformed a well-known terrorist’s heart by the name of Saul of Tarsus and he became Paul the Apostle.
That same old Gospel has been transforming hearts ever since…but the problem is that most Christians are not living by the powerful Truth of that Gospel nor are they seeking to take that Gospel to the ends of the earth with all their heart.
Evil walks this earth, liberals coddle evil in the name of tolerance, and Satan will use both evil and liberals to persecute and kill Christ's followers and God's chosen people. Stay strong, have faith, and pray for peace. When that doesn't work, reach for your gun.
The Religion of Peace by Michael Youssef
Immediately after September 11th, 2001, President George W. Bush rushed into a local D.C. Islamic Mosque and declared that Islam was a “religion of peace.”
Many Muslim propagandists in the West have deliberately twisted the meaning of the word “Islam” and say that it comes from the word “salam,” which means “peace.” These deceptions are laughed at by anybody with a mere elementary knowledge of the Arabic language.
“Islam” in its purest form means “ total surrender.” The image that word holds is of a vanquished army on its knees before the vanquisher.
Recent news from Iran of a pastor sentenced to death by hanging– Youcef Nadarkhani – have presented the “religion of peace” in its most accurate and true form. This barbaric act is what both Sunni Wahhabis as well as Shiites are calling to be the norm in all Islamic countries…and they speak hopefully of applying it to Europe. So much for the “religion of peace.”
Elam Ministries, a UK-based organization that serves the Christian church in Iran, revealed that the arrest of Christians in Iran solely for worshipping Christ has been on the increase. Under the noses of the one who is the darling of many foolish Western organizations, President Ahmadinejad of Iran has arrested 220 Christians between June 2010 and January 2011. As of January 2011, only 33 remained in prison.
When I watch videos or read speeches by Islamists in Europe, I cringe at how they speak optimistically about the implementation of these barbaric actions in the future in Europe. One of the clerics said, “It is a matter of time, when we, with our birthrate,will overwhelm the white Europeans and thus will be able to take control of all of Europe.”
As Sharia Courts spread across Europe like a noose slowly being tightened around that venerable continent, one can foresee how Catholic priests, Protestant pastors, or even Jewish rabbis will be brought before these courts with all sorts of false accusations of blaspheming Islam or their prophet. It will only take a few hangings or beheadings before most of the French and European former-Christian landscape surrenders to the power of the sword.
When Pastor Nadarkhani was asked to repent he said, “Repent means to return, what should I return to? To the blasphemy that I had before my faith in Christ?”
I cannot help but wonder if pastors, priests, and rabbis in Europe would have such courage?
To bring it even closer to home – would we have many American pastors with such courage?
Would I have such courage?
May God have mercy on His children before such a time, but if it does come, every true Christian must ask themselves the question: What would I do?
The only answer for a complete change of heart from barbarism to love is the Gospel of Christ. Two thousand years ago that Gospel transformed a well-known terrorist’s heart by the name of Saul of Tarsus and he became Paul the Apostle.
That same old Gospel has been transforming hearts ever since…but the problem is that most Christians are not living by the powerful Truth of that Gospel nor are they seeking to take that Gospel to the ends of the earth with all their heart.
Saturday, October 8, 2011
“media work is half of the jihad.” -- Nasir al-Wahayshi (aka Abu Basir)
The jihadists realized the importance of the media to their ideological cause as early as 1996 when they created azzam.com, which also became a fundraising tool. They've also successfully recruited most of the american mainstream media who adore the jihadist movement as their new communist cause du jour. I fail to understand how our government cannot shut down the websites and web hosts of these jihadists. Yes, they'll pop back up, but we should instantly shut them down again and disable their progoganda machine on the internet. Scott's article is excellent and contains many hot links, which I have not reproduced. Click the link below to see the article with hot links.
Yemen: Fallout from the al-Awlaki Airstrike by Stewart Scott
U.S.-born Yemeni cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, an ideologue and spokesman for al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), al Qaeda’s franchise in Yemen, was killed in a Sept. 30 airstrike directed against a motorcade near the town of Khashef in Yemen’s al-Jawf province. The strike, which occurred at 9:55 a.m. local time, reportedly was conducted by a U.S. unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) and may have also involved fixed-wing naval aircraft. Three other men were killed in the strike, one of whom was Samir Khan, the creator and editor of AQAP’s English-language magazine Inspire.
Al-Awlaki has been targeted before; in fact, he had been declared dead on at least two occasions. The first time followed a December 2009 airstrike in Shabwa province, and the second followed a May 5 airstrike, also in Shabwa. In light of confirmation from the U.S. and Yemeni governments and from statements made by al-Awlaki’s family members, it appears that he is indeed dead this time. We anticipate that AQAP soon will issue an official statement confirming the deaths of al-Awlaki and Khan.
As STRATFOR noted Sept. 30, the deaths of both al-Awlaki and Khan can be expected to greatly hamper AQAP’s efforts to radicalize and equip English-speaking Muslims. The group may have other native English speakers, but individuals who possess the charisma and background of al-Awlaki or the graphics and editorial skills of Khan are difficult to come by in Yemen. The al Qaeda franchise’s English-language outreach is certain to face a significant setback.
The deaths of al-Awlaki and Khan and the impact they will have on AQAP’s outreach efforts provide an opportunity to consider the importance of individuals — and their personal skill sets — to militant organizations, especially organizations seeking to conduct transnational media and ideological operations.
Bridging the Gap Between Militant Ideology and Operations
When considering militant groups with transnational objectives and reach such as AQAP, we need to recognize that there are several components necessary for such groups to conduct successful operations, including finances, logistics, planning, training and intelligence. But at a higher level, there is also the distinction between those elements of the group that are dedicated to operations on the physical battlefield and those who are focused on operations on the ideological battlefield. While physical operations are important for obvious reasons, the ideological component is also critically important because it allows a group to recruit new members, maintain the ideological commitment of those already in the group and help shape public perception through propaganda. Because of this, the ideological component is especially important for the long-term viability and continuity of a group or movement.
Groups such as the al Qaeda core and AQAP appreciate the importance of the ideological struggle. Published three days before the airstrike against Khan and al-Awlaki, the seventh edition of Inspire contains an article written by Khan titled “The Media Conflict,” wherein he quotes AQAP leader Nasir al-Wahayshi (aka Abu Basir) as stating, “media work is half of the jihad.”
The role of the media in propagating militant ideology has been revolutionized by the Internet, which allows small groups in remote corners of the globe to produce and broadcast material that is almost instantly available to people all around the world. Indeed, jihadists have succeeded in radicalizing and recruiting people from disparate countries. Products such as Inspire or the video and audio recordings of militant leaders such as al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri are a giant leap forward from the way militants communicated 25 years ago, when groups like November 17 would send communiques to the newspapers and Hezbollah would release videos via major television networks of Western hostages they had kidnapped.
Interestingly, militant groups quickly recognized the significance of this media democratization and were early adopters of the Internet. By the mid-1990s, white supremacists in the United States had established Stormfront.com, and in 1996, jihadists inaugurated azzam.com, a professional-looking website that allowed them to provide inspiration, news and instruction to adherents to their ideology and to potential recruits. Azzam.com eventually became an important mechanism through which funds for jihadist groups could be raised and willing volunteers could find ways to link up with jihadist groups in places like Afghanistan, Chechnya and Bosnia.
Thus, the Internet began to serve as a bridge that connected the ideological battlefield with the physical battlefield. When we look back at AQAP’s media activities, we can see that they, too, were intended to bridge this gap. For example, the group’s Arabic language magazine Sada al-Malahim (meaning “Echo of Battle”) regularly contained not only articles intended to propagate and defend the jihadist ideology but also articles designed to give practical and tactical guidance. And when al-Wahayshi in October 2009 began advocating that jihadists in the West practice a leaderless-resistance style of operations rather than traveling to places like Yemen or Pakistan for training, they promoted that tactical shift via Sada al-Malahim.
Khan’s and Al-Awlaki’s Significance for Inspire
In July 2010, AQAP launched the first edition of Inspire magazine. Khan, a longtime publisher of jihadist material, was chosen to spearhead the Inspire project for AQAP. (Khan was born in Saudi Arabia to Pakistani parents but raised in the United States.) Shortly after the 9/11 attacks, Khan began to publish an English-language pro-jihadist blog and eventually established jihadist websites and an Internet magazine called Jihad Recollections. It was the artistic similarities between Jihad Recollections and Inspire that helped identify Khan as the editor of Inspire. Khan left his parents’ home in Charlotte, N.C., in 2009 to move to Yemen after he learned the FBI was investigating him for his connections to jihadist groups.
Inspire was established intentionally to help further al-Wahayshi’s vision of jihadists adopting the leaderless resistance model. Its stated purpose was to radicalize and recruit young, English-speaking Muslims and then inspire and equip them to conduct attacks in the West.
Khan was only 16 years old when he began his jihadist propaganda activities in 2002, and he essentially grew up on the ideological battlefield. By the time he immigrated to Yemen in 2009, he was an experienced cyber-jihadist. In addition to his advanced computer security skills, Khan also energized the Inspire magazine project, and his youth, colloquial American English competency, graphic design flair and knowledge of American pop culture gave Inspire magazine an edgy quality that appealed to young, English-speaking Muslims.
Notably, Khan did not produce most of the written content for Inspire. In fact, he relied heavily on the speeches of al Qaeda figures such as al-Zawahiri and Osama bin Laden, the books of Abu Musab al-Suri and interviews with AQAP figures such as al-Wahayshi and al-Awlaki. However, it was the way in which Khan packaged these materials that made them so appealing. Certainly, there may have been others working with Khan to produce Inspire, and other people undoubtedly can continue to translate portions of al Qaeda speeches or interview AQAP leaders, but Khan was the driving creative force behind the project. His death thus likely will have a substantial impact on the content and feel of Inspire — if the magazine continues at all.
AQAP’s Arabic-language propaganda efforts suffered a blow in December 2010 when Nayf bin Mohammed al-Qahtani, the founder and editor of Sada al-Malahim and the founder of Malahim media, was killed in a battle with Yemeni security forces. Sada al-Malahim had been publishing an edition roughly every two months since its inception in January 2008. However, since the release of its 16th edition in February 2011, possibly an edition al-Qahtani had worked on, the promised 17th edition has yet to be published. It is possible Inspire will meet the same fate.
However, Khan was not the only American-born jihadist living in Yemen who possessed unique talents that were useful to AQAP’s outreach efforts to English-speaking Muslims. Al-Awlaki had been the imam of congregations in Denver, San Diego and Falls Church, Va., but left the United States in 2002 after being investigated for his ties to two of the 9/11 hijackers and links to a number of other jihadist figures and plots. Al-Awlaki initially moved to the United Kingdom, where he continued to preach, but as authorities began to clamp down on radical preachers in what has been termed “Londonistan,” al-Awlaki moved to Yemen, his ancestral homeland, in 2004.
During his years in the United States and the United Kingdom, al-Awlaki had become a high-profile imam known for his intellect, charisma and ability to appeal to young, English-speaking Muslims. His sermons became very popular, and audio recordings of those sermons were widely distributed on the Internet via his personal website as well as several other Islamic websites. (Thousands of these videos have been posted to YouTube and have received tens of thousands of hits.) Despite his being under investigation by the U.S. government, in 2002 al Awlaki was asked to lead a prayer service at the U.S. Capitol and to speak at the Pentagon on the topic of radical Islam. These engagements reflected al-Awlaki’s popularity and added to the mystique that surrounded him. He was seen as a bit of a celebrity in the English-speaking Muslim world, and his presence in Yemen undoubtedly played a big factor in al-Wahayshi’s decision to expand AQAP’s outreach to al-Awlaki’s audience.
Through his work on the ideological battlefield, Al-Awlaki was able to draw men to the physical battlefield. These men could be sent on on suicide missions, such as would-be Christmas Day bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, or encouraged to conduct simple attacks where they live, as in the case of Fort Hood shooter Nidal Hasan.
It is important to remember that al-Awlaki was not AQAP’s primary theological authority. The group’s mufti, Suleiman al-Rubaish, a Saudi cleric with a degree in Islamic law, fought with al-Wahayshi and bin Laden at Tora Bora in 2001 before being captured and spending five years in captivity at Guantanamo Bay. After being returned to Saudi Arabia in 2006, al-Rubaish completed the Saudi rehabilitation program and then promptly fled the country to Yemen after his release. Moreover, AQAP’s Shariah Council, of which al-Awlaki was a member, is chaired by a Yemeni cleric named Adel bin Abdullah al-Abab.
Al-Rubaish maintains serious credibility among jihadists because of his friendship with bin Laden, his survival at Tora Bora and his time served in Guantanamo, and al-Abab is a respected Yemeni cleric. However, neither of the men possesses the native-English language ability of al-Awlaki. They also lack the ability to culturally relate to and motivate Muslims in the West in the same way that al-Awlaki did — and continues to do, via his messages that live on in cyberspace. Because of this, al-Awlaki will not be easily replaced.
AQAP’s Operational Ability Intact
This brings us to the ideas of leadership and succession in militant groups. Some have argued that arresting or killing key members of militant networks does not impact such groups, but experience seems to indicate that in many cases the removal of key personnel does indeed make a difference, especially in the near term and if pressure is maintained on the organization. This dynamic has been reflected by the ongoing post-9/11 campaign against the al Qaeda core and their inability to conduct their oft threatened, and purportedly more deadly, follow-on attacks to 9/11. It has also been demonstrated by the operations mounted against regional jihadist franchise groups in Saudi Arabia and Indonesia. The removal of key personnel such as Saudi leader Abdel Aziz al-Muqrin and Indonesian jihadists Hambali and Noordin Top have had substantial impacts on those regional franchises.
Of course, while AQAP’s English-speaking outreach will be severely crippled following Khan’s and al-Awlaki’s deaths, the core of its physical battlefield operational leadership remains intact. Al-Wahayshi is a competent and savvy leader. His military commander, Qasim al-Raymi, is an aggressive, ruthless and fierce fighter, and his principal bomb maker, Ibrahim Hassan al-Asiri is creative and imaginative in designing his innovative explosive devices. There were rumors circulating that al-Asiri had been killed in the airstrike directed against al-Awlaki, but they proved to be unfounded. If al-Asiri had been killed, the airstrike would have impacted both the ideological and operational abilities of the group.
The recent increase of U.S. airstrikes, including the one that killed al-Awlaki and Khan, will serve to keep AQAP’s leaders focused on survival, as will the conventional warfare in which the group is currently engaging as it fights for control over areas of Yemen. However, the AQAP leadership undoubtedly still desires to attack the United States and the West — perhaps even more so now to avenge their fallen comrades. If they are given the time and space to plot and plan, the AQAP leadership will continue their efforts to attack the United States. They certainly retain the capability to do so, despite the loss of two ideological leaders.
Yemen: Fallout from the al-Awlaki Airstrike is republished with permission of STRATFOR
Yemen: Fallout from the al-Awlaki Airstrike by Stewart Scott
U.S.-born Yemeni cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, an ideologue and spokesman for al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), al Qaeda’s franchise in Yemen, was killed in a Sept. 30 airstrike directed against a motorcade near the town of Khashef in Yemen’s al-Jawf province. The strike, which occurred at 9:55 a.m. local time, reportedly was conducted by a U.S. unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) and may have also involved fixed-wing naval aircraft. Three other men were killed in the strike, one of whom was Samir Khan, the creator and editor of AQAP’s English-language magazine Inspire.
Al-Awlaki has been targeted before; in fact, he had been declared dead on at least two occasions. The first time followed a December 2009 airstrike in Shabwa province, and the second followed a May 5 airstrike, also in Shabwa. In light of confirmation from the U.S. and Yemeni governments and from statements made by al-Awlaki’s family members, it appears that he is indeed dead this time. We anticipate that AQAP soon will issue an official statement confirming the deaths of al-Awlaki and Khan.
As STRATFOR noted Sept. 30, the deaths of both al-Awlaki and Khan can be expected to greatly hamper AQAP’s efforts to radicalize and equip English-speaking Muslims. The group may have other native English speakers, but individuals who possess the charisma and background of al-Awlaki or the graphics and editorial skills of Khan are difficult to come by in Yemen. The al Qaeda franchise’s English-language outreach is certain to face a significant setback.
The deaths of al-Awlaki and Khan and the impact they will have on AQAP’s outreach efforts provide an opportunity to consider the importance of individuals — and their personal skill sets — to militant organizations, especially organizations seeking to conduct transnational media and ideological operations.
Bridging the Gap Between Militant Ideology and Operations
When considering militant groups with transnational objectives and reach such as AQAP, we need to recognize that there are several components necessary for such groups to conduct successful operations, including finances, logistics, planning, training and intelligence. But at a higher level, there is also the distinction between those elements of the group that are dedicated to operations on the physical battlefield and those who are focused on operations on the ideological battlefield. While physical operations are important for obvious reasons, the ideological component is also critically important because it allows a group to recruit new members, maintain the ideological commitment of those already in the group and help shape public perception through propaganda. Because of this, the ideological component is especially important for the long-term viability and continuity of a group or movement.
Groups such as the al Qaeda core and AQAP appreciate the importance of the ideological struggle. Published three days before the airstrike against Khan and al-Awlaki, the seventh edition of Inspire contains an article written by Khan titled “The Media Conflict,” wherein he quotes AQAP leader Nasir al-Wahayshi (aka Abu Basir) as stating, “media work is half of the jihad.”
The role of the media in propagating militant ideology has been revolutionized by the Internet, which allows small groups in remote corners of the globe to produce and broadcast material that is almost instantly available to people all around the world. Indeed, jihadists have succeeded in radicalizing and recruiting people from disparate countries. Products such as Inspire or the video and audio recordings of militant leaders such as al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri are a giant leap forward from the way militants communicated 25 years ago, when groups like November 17 would send communiques to the newspapers and Hezbollah would release videos via major television networks of Western hostages they had kidnapped.
Interestingly, militant groups quickly recognized the significance of this media democratization and were early adopters of the Internet. By the mid-1990s, white supremacists in the United States had established Stormfront.com, and in 1996, jihadists inaugurated azzam.com, a professional-looking website that allowed them to provide inspiration, news and instruction to adherents to their ideology and to potential recruits. Azzam.com eventually became an important mechanism through which funds for jihadist groups could be raised and willing volunteers could find ways to link up with jihadist groups in places like Afghanistan, Chechnya and Bosnia.
Thus, the Internet began to serve as a bridge that connected the ideological battlefield with the physical battlefield. When we look back at AQAP’s media activities, we can see that they, too, were intended to bridge this gap. For example, the group’s Arabic language magazine Sada al-Malahim (meaning “Echo of Battle”) regularly contained not only articles intended to propagate and defend the jihadist ideology but also articles designed to give practical and tactical guidance. And when al-Wahayshi in October 2009 began advocating that jihadists in the West practice a leaderless-resistance style of operations rather than traveling to places like Yemen or Pakistan for training, they promoted that tactical shift via Sada al-Malahim.
Khan’s and Al-Awlaki’s Significance for Inspire
In July 2010, AQAP launched the first edition of Inspire magazine. Khan, a longtime publisher of jihadist material, was chosen to spearhead the Inspire project for AQAP. (Khan was born in Saudi Arabia to Pakistani parents but raised in the United States.) Shortly after the 9/11 attacks, Khan began to publish an English-language pro-jihadist blog and eventually established jihadist websites and an Internet magazine called Jihad Recollections. It was the artistic similarities between Jihad Recollections and Inspire that helped identify Khan as the editor of Inspire. Khan left his parents’ home in Charlotte, N.C., in 2009 to move to Yemen after he learned the FBI was investigating him for his connections to jihadist groups.
Inspire was established intentionally to help further al-Wahayshi’s vision of jihadists adopting the leaderless resistance model. Its stated purpose was to radicalize and recruit young, English-speaking Muslims and then inspire and equip them to conduct attacks in the West.
Khan was only 16 years old when he began his jihadist propaganda activities in 2002, and he essentially grew up on the ideological battlefield. By the time he immigrated to Yemen in 2009, he was an experienced cyber-jihadist. In addition to his advanced computer security skills, Khan also energized the Inspire magazine project, and his youth, colloquial American English competency, graphic design flair and knowledge of American pop culture gave Inspire magazine an edgy quality that appealed to young, English-speaking Muslims.
Notably, Khan did not produce most of the written content for Inspire. In fact, he relied heavily on the speeches of al Qaeda figures such as al-Zawahiri and Osama bin Laden, the books of Abu Musab al-Suri and interviews with AQAP figures such as al-Wahayshi and al-Awlaki. However, it was the way in which Khan packaged these materials that made them so appealing. Certainly, there may have been others working with Khan to produce Inspire, and other people undoubtedly can continue to translate portions of al Qaeda speeches or interview AQAP leaders, but Khan was the driving creative force behind the project. His death thus likely will have a substantial impact on the content and feel of Inspire — if the magazine continues at all.
AQAP’s Arabic-language propaganda efforts suffered a blow in December 2010 when Nayf bin Mohammed al-Qahtani, the founder and editor of Sada al-Malahim and the founder of Malahim media, was killed in a battle with Yemeni security forces. Sada al-Malahim had been publishing an edition roughly every two months since its inception in January 2008. However, since the release of its 16th edition in February 2011, possibly an edition al-Qahtani had worked on, the promised 17th edition has yet to be published. It is possible Inspire will meet the same fate.
However, Khan was not the only American-born jihadist living in Yemen who possessed unique talents that were useful to AQAP’s outreach efforts to English-speaking Muslims. Al-Awlaki had been the imam of congregations in Denver, San Diego and Falls Church, Va., but left the United States in 2002 after being investigated for his ties to two of the 9/11 hijackers and links to a number of other jihadist figures and plots. Al-Awlaki initially moved to the United Kingdom, where he continued to preach, but as authorities began to clamp down on radical preachers in what has been termed “Londonistan,” al-Awlaki moved to Yemen, his ancestral homeland, in 2004.
During his years in the United States and the United Kingdom, al-Awlaki had become a high-profile imam known for his intellect, charisma and ability to appeal to young, English-speaking Muslims. His sermons became very popular, and audio recordings of those sermons were widely distributed on the Internet via his personal website as well as several other Islamic websites. (Thousands of these videos have been posted to YouTube and have received tens of thousands of hits.) Despite his being under investigation by the U.S. government, in 2002 al Awlaki was asked to lead a prayer service at the U.S. Capitol and to speak at the Pentagon on the topic of radical Islam. These engagements reflected al-Awlaki’s popularity and added to the mystique that surrounded him. He was seen as a bit of a celebrity in the English-speaking Muslim world, and his presence in Yemen undoubtedly played a big factor in al-Wahayshi’s decision to expand AQAP’s outreach to al-Awlaki’s audience.
Through his work on the ideological battlefield, Al-Awlaki was able to draw men to the physical battlefield. These men could be sent on on suicide missions, such as would-be Christmas Day bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, or encouraged to conduct simple attacks where they live, as in the case of Fort Hood shooter Nidal Hasan.
It is important to remember that al-Awlaki was not AQAP’s primary theological authority. The group’s mufti, Suleiman al-Rubaish, a Saudi cleric with a degree in Islamic law, fought with al-Wahayshi and bin Laden at Tora Bora in 2001 before being captured and spending five years in captivity at Guantanamo Bay. After being returned to Saudi Arabia in 2006, al-Rubaish completed the Saudi rehabilitation program and then promptly fled the country to Yemen after his release. Moreover, AQAP’s Shariah Council, of which al-Awlaki was a member, is chaired by a Yemeni cleric named Adel bin Abdullah al-Abab.
Al-Rubaish maintains serious credibility among jihadists because of his friendship with bin Laden, his survival at Tora Bora and his time served in Guantanamo, and al-Abab is a respected Yemeni cleric. However, neither of the men possesses the native-English language ability of al-Awlaki. They also lack the ability to culturally relate to and motivate Muslims in the West in the same way that al-Awlaki did — and continues to do, via his messages that live on in cyberspace. Because of this, al-Awlaki will not be easily replaced.
AQAP’s Operational Ability Intact
This brings us to the ideas of leadership and succession in militant groups. Some have argued that arresting or killing key members of militant networks does not impact such groups, but experience seems to indicate that in many cases the removal of key personnel does indeed make a difference, especially in the near term and if pressure is maintained on the organization. This dynamic has been reflected by the ongoing post-9/11 campaign against the al Qaeda core and their inability to conduct their oft threatened, and purportedly more deadly, follow-on attacks to 9/11. It has also been demonstrated by the operations mounted against regional jihadist franchise groups in Saudi Arabia and Indonesia. The removal of key personnel such as Saudi leader Abdel Aziz al-Muqrin and Indonesian jihadists Hambali and Noordin Top have had substantial impacts on those regional franchises.
Of course, while AQAP’s English-speaking outreach will be severely crippled following Khan’s and al-Awlaki’s deaths, the core of its physical battlefield operational leadership remains intact. Al-Wahayshi is a competent and savvy leader. His military commander, Qasim al-Raymi, is an aggressive, ruthless and fierce fighter, and his principal bomb maker, Ibrahim Hassan al-Asiri is creative and imaginative in designing his innovative explosive devices. There were rumors circulating that al-Asiri had been killed in the airstrike directed against al-Awlaki, but they proved to be unfounded. If al-Asiri had been killed, the airstrike would have impacted both the ideological and operational abilities of the group.
The recent increase of U.S. airstrikes, including the one that killed al-Awlaki and Khan, will serve to keep AQAP’s leaders focused on survival, as will the conventional warfare in which the group is currently engaging as it fights for control over areas of Yemen. However, the AQAP leadership undoubtedly still desires to attack the United States and the West — perhaps even more so now to avenge their fallen comrades. If they are given the time and space to plot and plan, the AQAP leadership will continue their efforts to attack the United States. They certainly retain the capability to do so, despite the loss of two ideological leaders.
Yemen: Fallout from the al-Awlaki Airstrike is republished with permission of STRATFOR
Iranian Pastor Yousef Nadarkhani Update
10/7/11 Update: email from ACJL
We are at a critical juncture in the fight to save Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani’s life. We expect the Iranian court to release its written verdict regarding his execution sentence for converting from Islam to Christianity as early as Monday.
It is absolutely critical that we continue to speak loudly and actively call on the Iranian regime to spare Pastor Youcef’s life and release him. We need your voice today.
Please sign our petition urging Secretary of State Clinton to call for Pastor Youcef’s immediate release. It is critical that our top diplomat take a stand for this innocent man, whose only “crime” is that he is a Christian.
When asked to recant his faith in Christ – under the threat of death – Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani replied, “I cannot.”
Together we can help save his life through our prayers, our voices, and by pressing our diplomatic leaders to call on Iran to spare his life.
10/8/11 Update: Iranian Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani and the Berlin Wall by Karen Lugo
We are at a critical juncture in the fight to save Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani’s life. We expect the Iranian court to release its written verdict regarding his execution sentence for converting from Islam to Christianity as early as Monday.
It is absolutely critical that we continue to speak loudly and actively call on the Iranian regime to spare Pastor Youcef’s life and release him. We need your voice today.
Please sign our petition urging Secretary of State Clinton to call for Pastor Youcef’s immediate release. It is critical that our top diplomat take a stand for this innocent man, whose only “crime” is that he is a Christian.
When asked to recant his faith in Christ – under the threat of death – Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani replied, “I cannot.”
Together we can help save his life through our prayers, our voices, and by pressing our diplomatic leaders to call on Iran to spare his life.
10/8/11 Update: Iranian Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani and the Berlin Wall by Karen Lugo
A Decade at War by Oliver North
Finally, some positive statistics on the war against Jihadistan in Afghanistan - none of which came from M3.
A Decade at War by Oliver North
WASHINGTON -- Ten years ago this week, America went to war in Afghanistan. At 1 p.m. Eastern time on Oct. 7, 2001, President George W. Bush told the world, "On my orders, the United States military has begun strikes against al-Qaida terrorist training camps and military installations of the Taliban regime in Afghanistan." At the conclusion of his seven-minute broadcast from the White House Treaty Room, he pledged: "The battle is now joined on many fronts. We will not waver; we will not tire; we will not falter; and we will not fail. Peace and freedom will prevail." Now, a decade later, his successor will determine whether that pledge is kept.
The fight that began just 26 days after the 9/11 terror attacks started with nearly simultaneous raids on Taliban air defenses, command, control and communications nodes, and al-Qaida bases by sea-launched Tomahawk cruise missiles, B-1 and B-52 bombers from Diego Garcia, and U.S. Navy and Marine aircraft operating from carriers in the Arabian Sea. B-2 Spirit stealth bombers conducted scores of 14,000-mile-round-trip missions from their bases in Missouri, dropping precision-guided munitions on Taliban and al-Qaida positions. From bases in Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, the CIA's Special Activities Division and U.S. special operations personnel entered Afghanistan to support Northern Alliance troops intent on unseating the Taliban. On Nov. 12, they liberated Kabul.
Thirteen days later, SAD officer Johnny "Mike" Spann -- a former U.S. Marine captain -- became the first American to die at the hands of the enemy in Afghanistan. He was shot and killed during an uprising at a Taliban detention center near Mazar-e-Sharif after interrogating an American jihadist, named John Walker Lindh. Since then, more than 1,700 Americans have been killed in action or died of wounds inflicted in Afghanistan. Other Americans, such as Anwar al-Awlaki and Adam Gadahn, became radical Islamists and joined the jihad. And now, commander in chief Barack Obama -- who once called Afghanistan "the necessary war" -- simply wants to abandon the fight and get out. Apparently, most of our countrymen agree.
According to a recent CBS News poll, 58 percent of Americans believe we should not be fighting in the shadows of the Hindu Kush. This week, the Pew Research Center released a survey showing that only 50 percent of veterans who have served in the military since the attacks of 9/11 believe the war in Afghanistan has been worth the cost in lives and treasure. The Obama administration, ever sensitive to public opinion, is wedded to the notion that "unmanned drones" (correctly named, remotely piloted aircraft) are sufficient to prevent a 9/11-like attack. The president insists that all 33,000 American "surge" troops must be withdrawn by next summer and that U.S.-NATO combat operations will cease in 2014.
Office seekers, incumbents and pundits across the political spectrum claim that the demise of Osama bin Laden means we can "bring the boys home." That's a great slogan for politicians who weren't in office when the fight started and those who opposed U.S. involvement from the beginning, but it's never been a formula for victory in a war.
Despite anti-military bias in the mainstream media, poll-driven political rhetoric and pseudo-intellectual drivel about America's "failure" at "nation building," the war in Afghanistan is being won. The metrics for such an assessment are widely ignored by opponents of American exceptionalism. But here are some key indicators:
When U.S. (and British) forces arrived in Afghanistan 10 years ago, the national illiteracy rate was 75 percent, and fewer than 1 million boys -- and no girls -- were enrolled in schools that taught anything more than Islamic religious studies. Today there are more than 6 million children in school -- a third of them girls.
Afghan national security forces were nonexistent a decade ago. Tribal and regional warlords had private armies, and the Afghan National Police was hopelessly corrupt. Fewer than 10 percent of the soldiers and cops could read or write. Thanks to the U.S.-led NATO Training Mission-Afghanistan, there are now 172,000 well-trained and -equipped troops in the Afghan army and 135,000 police officers, and all new recruits are being taught to read and write.
Afghan troops and police are now responsible for security in nearly 30 percent of the country. Though Taliban-affiliated terrorists still occasionally launch spectacular suicide strikes from sanctuaries in Pakistan, overall enemy-initiated attacks against U.S. and NATO troops are down 20 percent from a year ago.
As U.S. and NATO troops pull out of the fight, Pakistan's support for the Taliban insurgency remains the primary threat to a peaceful outcome in Afghanistan. That's why Afghan President Hamid Karzai now insists that any future "peace talks" must include representatives from Islamabad. This week, Karzai went to New Delhi and closed a deal for India to increase security assistance to the Afghan national security forces when the Americans withdraw.
The Karzai overture to New Delhi is seen as "provocative" at the White House. It's actually a vote of "no confidence" in our commander in chief and his vacillating, ambivalent commitment to a stable, secure and economically viable Afghanistan. As New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie put it this week, Obama has "failed the leadership test."
A Decade at War by Oliver North
WASHINGTON -- Ten years ago this week, America went to war in Afghanistan. At 1 p.m. Eastern time on Oct. 7, 2001, President George W. Bush told the world, "On my orders, the United States military has begun strikes against al-Qaida terrorist training camps and military installations of the Taliban regime in Afghanistan." At the conclusion of his seven-minute broadcast from the White House Treaty Room, he pledged: "The battle is now joined on many fronts. We will not waver; we will not tire; we will not falter; and we will not fail. Peace and freedom will prevail." Now, a decade later, his successor will determine whether that pledge is kept.
The fight that began just 26 days after the 9/11 terror attacks started with nearly simultaneous raids on Taliban air defenses, command, control and communications nodes, and al-Qaida bases by sea-launched Tomahawk cruise missiles, B-1 and B-52 bombers from Diego Garcia, and U.S. Navy and Marine aircraft operating from carriers in the Arabian Sea. B-2 Spirit stealth bombers conducted scores of 14,000-mile-round-trip missions from their bases in Missouri, dropping precision-guided munitions on Taliban and al-Qaida positions. From bases in Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, the CIA's Special Activities Division and U.S. special operations personnel entered Afghanistan to support Northern Alliance troops intent on unseating the Taliban. On Nov. 12, they liberated Kabul.
Thirteen days later, SAD officer Johnny "Mike" Spann -- a former U.S. Marine captain -- became the first American to die at the hands of the enemy in Afghanistan. He was shot and killed during an uprising at a Taliban detention center near Mazar-e-Sharif after interrogating an American jihadist, named John Walker Lindh. Since then, more than 1,700 Americans have been killed in action or died of wounds inflicted in Afghanistan. Other Americans, such as Anwar al-Awlaki and Adam Gadahn, became radical Islamists and joined the jihad. And now, commander in chief Barack Obama -- who once called Afghanistan "the necessary war" -- simply wants to abandon the fight and get out. Apparently, most of our countrymen agree.
According to a recent CBS News poll, 58 percent of Americans believe we should not be fighting in the shadows of the Hindu Kush. This week, the Pew Research Center released a survey showing that only 50 percent of veterans who have served in the military since the attacks of 9/11 believe the war in Afghanistan has been worth the cost in lives and treasure. The Obama administration, ever sensitive to public opinion, is wedded to the notion that "unmanned drones" (correctly named, remotely piloted aircraft) are sufficient to prevent a 9/11-like attack. The president insists that all 33,000 American "surge" troops must be withdrawn by next summer and that U.S.-NATO combat operations will cease in 2014.
Office seekers, incumbents and pundits across the political spectrum claim that the demise of Osama bin Laden means we can "bring the boys home." That's a great slogan for politicians who weren't in office when the fight started and those who opposed U.S. involvement from the beginning, but it's never been a formula for victory in a war.
Despite anti-military bias in the mainstream media, poll-driven political rhetoric and pseudo-intellectual drivel about America's "failure" at "nation building," the war in Afghanistan is being won. The metrics for such an assessment are widely ignored by opponents of American exceptionalism. But here are some key indicators:
When U.S. (and British) forces arrived in Afghanistan 10 years ago, the national illiteracy rate was 75 percent, and fewer than 1 million boys -- and no girls -- were enrolled in schools that taught anything more than Islamic religious studies. Today there are more than 6 million children in school -- a third of them girls.
Afghan national security forces were nonexistent a decade ago. Tribal and regional warlords had private armies, and the Afghan National Police was hopelessly corrupt. Fewer than 10 percent of the soldiers and cops could read or write. Thanks to the U.S.-led NATO Training Mission-Afghanistan, there are now 172,000 well-trained and -equipped troops in the Afghan army and 135,000 police officers, and all new recruits are being taught to read and write.
Afghan troops and police are now responsible for security in nearly 30 percent of the country. Though Taliban-affiliated terrorists still occasionally launch spectacular suicide strikes from sanctuaries in Pakistan, overall enemy-initiated attacks against U.S. and NATO troops are down 20 percent from a year ago.
As U.S. and NATO troops pull out of the fight, Pakistan's support for the Taliban insurgency remains the primary threat to a peaceful outcome in Afghanistan. That's why Afghan President Hamid Karzai now insists that any future "peace talks" must include representatives from Islamabad. This week, Karzai went to New Delhi and closed a deal for India to increase security assistance to the Afghan national security forces when the Americans withdraw.
The Karzai overture to New Delhi is seen as "provocative" at the White House. It's actually a vote of "no confidence" in our commander in chief and his vacillating, ambivalent commitment to a stable, secure and economically viable Afghanistan. As New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie put it this week, Obama has "failed the leadership test."
Debt Ceiling Analagy
Here's another way to look at the Debt Ceiling – it’s called common sense – something those in DC lack:
Let's say you come home from work and find there has been a sewer backup in your neighborhood....and your home has sewage all the way up to your ceilings.
What do you think you should do ……
Raise the ceilings, or pump out the shit?
Your choice is coming Nov. 2012
Hopefully the black community, the majority of whom voted for BHO because of his skin color, not because of his qualifications ( or lack thereof) or voting record, will have a choice between a white liberal (BHO) and a black conservative (Cain). I’m confident that the majority of the black community, when presented with the positions/agendas of the two, will see that their core values align with Cain, who was correct when he said people have been brainwashed. The black community has been brainwashed for 60 years by the Demoncractic party. If they give Cain, a black conservative, a chance, we’ll all see our lives improve dramatically. Maybe they’ll also listen to the chairman of BET, Robert Johnson, who said this:
BET founder Robert Johnson on the "FOX News Sunday" program: "Well, I think the president has to recalibrate his message. You don't get people to like you by attacking them or demeaning their success. You know, I grew up in a family of 10 kids, first one to go to college, and I've earned my success. I've earned my right to fly private if I choose to do so.
"And by attacking me it is not going to convince me that I should take a bigger hit because I happen to be wealthy. You know, it is the old -- I think Ted and Fred and I we both sort of take the old Ethel Merman approach to life. I've tried poor and I tried rich and I like rich better. It doesn't mean that I am a bad guy.
"I didn't go in to business to create a public policy success for either party, Republican or Democrat. I went in business to create jobs and opportunity, create opportunity, create value for myself and my investors. And that's what the president should be praising, not demagoguing us simply because Warren Buffet says he pays more than his secretary. He should pay the secretary more and she will pay more."
Story here
Let's say you come home from work and find there has been a sewer backup in your neighborhood....and your home has sewage all the way up to your ceilings.
What do you think you should do ……
Raise the ceilings, or pump out the shit?
Your choice is coming Nov. 2012
Hopefully the black community, the majority of whom voted for BHO because of his skin color, not because of his qualifications ( or lack thereof) or voting record, will have a choice between a white liberal (BHO) and a black conservative (Cain). I’m confident that the majority of the black community, when presented with the positions/agendas of the two, will see that their core values align with Cain, who was correct when he said people have been brainwashed. The black community has been brainwashed for 60 years by the Demoncractic party. If they give Cain, a black conservative, a chance, we’ll all see our lives improve dramatically. Maybe they’ll also listen to the chairman of BET, Robert Johnson, who said this:
BET founder Robert Johnson on the "FOX News Sunday" program: "Well, I think the president has to recalibrate his message. You don't get people to like you by attacking them or demeaning their success. You know, I grew up in a family of 10 kids, first one to go to college, and I've earned my success. I've earned my right to fly private if I choose to do so.
"And by attacking me it is not going to convince me that I should take a bigger hit because I happen to be wealthy. You know, it is the old -- I think Ted and Fred and I we both sort of take the old Ethel Merman approach to life. I've tried poor and I tried rich and I like rich better. It doesn't mean that I am a bad guy.
"I didn't go in to business to create a public policy success for either party, Republican or Democrat. I went in business to create jobs and opportunity, create opportunity, create value for myself and my investors. And that's what the president should be praising, not demagoguing us simply because Warren Buffet says he pays more than his secretary. He should pay the secretary more and she will pay more."
Story here
Sunday, October 2, 2011
Cheeseburger...I Mean Terrorists in Paradise
Anwar al-Awlaki & Samir Khan were killed last week. We can breath a little easier knowing that these jihadists are no longer prowling God's creation planning their next mass murder.
Here is an email I received on 9/30/2011 from ACT for America. While I like their reporting, I must disagree with their statement that "there are clear signs that we have turned the tide against radical Islam here in the U.S." We have a very lax (due to political correctness) Dept. of Homeland Security and just last week the FBI arrested another home-grown jihadi. It is unfathomably to me that al-Awlaki preached at mosques in Virginia for 18 months prior to the 9/11 attacks, that 3 of the 9/11 murders attended his mosque and preaching, and the U.S. didn't freeze his assets until 2010! We're soft and stupid, and the terrorists smell our weakness and are encouraged:
"September 30, 2011
"Another one bites the dust
"The latest blow to radical Islam
"The killing of Anwar al-Awlaki is the latest blow to the ideology of radical Islam. Additionally, according to the news story below, Samir Khan, a Saudi-born U.S. citizen from North Carolina who was the brains behind al Qaeda’s English language “Inspire” magazine, was also killed.
"This is a significant blow to more than terrorism. It is a blow to the jihadist ideology that drives terrorism. The message to jihadists around the world echoes again—you can run but you can’t hide.
"As we have noted in our emails recently, the advance of stealth jihad and sharia in the U.S. is also being successfully confronted. For instance, our successful efforts to pass “American Laws for American Courts” have our opponents reacting with fear and fury.
"We join in rejoicing with freedom-loving patriots across the world at the justice that has been served with the killing of al-Awlaki. But let us not be fooled. While there are clear signs that we have turned the tide against radical Islam here in the U.S., our enemies, whether they be violent jihadists or stealth jihadists, are committed and tenacious.
"Now is not the time to let up. Now is the time to redouble our efforts."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Radical American cleric al-Awlaki killed in Yemen, officials say
GOP's Peter King praises Obama over death of a man he describes as 'more dangerous even than Osama bin Laden'
NBC News and news services
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44727191/ns/world_news-mideast_n_africa/?GT1=43001
SANAA, Yemen — Anwar al-Awlaki, an American-born radical cleric linked to al-Qaida who led an organization labeled as one of the most serious threats to U.S. security, was killed by an airstrike in Yemen Friday, according to the country's defense ministry and U.S. officials.
"The terrorist ... has been killed along with some of his companions," the Yemen defense ministry said in a statement sent by text message to journalists, Reuters reported.
The Yemen Defense Ministry announced later Friday that another American in al-Qaida, Samir Khan, was killed with al-Awlaki.
A Yemeni security official told Reuters that al-Awlaki, who is of Yemeni descent, was hit in a Friday morning air raid in the northern al-Jawf province that borders oil giant Saudi Arabia.
He said four others killed with him were suspected al-Qaida members.
NBC News reported that U.S. officials had confirmed that an unmanned American drone had launched the airstrike. A U.S. drone aircraft targeted but missed him in May.
Story: Plenty of al-Qaida targets remain after Osama bin Laden's death
U.S. Rep. Peter King, a Republican who is chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security, hailed al-Awlaki's death as "a great success in our fight" against al-Qaida and its affiliates in a statement sent to NBC News.
"For the past several years, al-Awlaki has been more dangerous even than Osama bin Laden had been. The killing of al-Awlaki is a tremendous tribute to President Obama and the men and women of our intelligence community," he added.
'We must remain vigilant'
King, however, warned that "we must remain as vigilant as ever, knowing that there are more Islamic terrorists who will gladly step forward to backfill this dangerous killer."
Al-Awlaki was considered such a threat to the U.S. that the Obama administration took the unprecendented step of putting him, an American, on the U.S. military's and CIA's "kill or capture" target list.
U.S. intelligence officials told NBC News that the fact he was an American made him an even more insidious threat.
"As an American he knows how we think, how we react, and how to push all our buttons," one told NBC News.
However, some U.S. military officials were hesitant to confirm al-Awlaki's death, because they have no forces on the ground to positively identify the body, NBC reported. It was wrongly reported that al-Awlaki was killed in an airstrike in December 2009.
Al-Awlaki was implicated in the so-called underwear bombing attempt on a U.S.-bound plane on Christmas Day in 2009.
He was one of the top officials at Al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), which was also thought to have been behind the plot to send printer cartridges packed with explosives to the U.S.
AQAP usually confirms the deaths of its members or affiliates on Internet posts a few days after the attack.
Propagandist
Al-Awlaki was not the leader of AQAP — that role belonged to Nasser al-Wuhayshi — but he ranked as its most gifted English-language propagandist.
He preached at mosques in northern Virginia and San Diego attended by three of the Sept. 11 hijackers in the 18 months before the attacks.
In 2010, U.S. officials designated him an individual who had committed or was likely to commit a terrorist act and froze his assets.
[CONTINUE READING FULL ARTICLE HERE]
Here is an email I received on 9/30/2011 from ACT for America. While I like their reporting, I must disagree with their statement that "there are clear signs that we have turned the tide against radical Islam here in the U.S." We have a very lax (due to political correctness) Dept. of Homeland Security and just last week the FBI arrested another home-grown jihadi. It is unfathomably to me that al-Awlaki preached at mosques in Virginia for 18 months prior to the 9/11 attacks, that 3 of the 9/11 murders attended his mosque and preaching, and the U.S. didn't freeze his assets until 2010! We're soft and stupid, and the terrorists smell our weakness and are encouraged:
"September 30, 2011
"Another one bites the dust
"The latest blow to radical Islam
"The killing of Anwar al-Awlaki is the latest blow to the ideology of radical Islam. Additionally, according to the news story below, Samir Khan, a Saudi-born U.S. citizen from North Carolina who was the brains behind al Qaeda’s English language “Inspire” magazine, was also killed.
"This is a significant blow to more than terrorism. It is a blow to the jihadist ideology that drives terrorism. The message to jihadists around the world echoes again—you can run but you can’t hide.
"As we have noted in our emails recently, the advance of stealth jihad and sharia in the U.S. is also being successfully confronted. For instance, our successful efforts to pass “American Laws for American Courts” have our opponents reacting with fear and fury.
"We join in rejoicing with freedom-loving patriots across the world at the justice that has been served with the killing of al-Awlaki. But let us not be fooled. While there are clear signs that we have turned the tide against radical Islam here in the U.S., our enemies, whether they be violent jihadists or stealth jihadists, are committed and tenacious.
"Now is not the time to let up. Now is the time to redouble our efforts."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Radical American cleric al-Awlaki killed in Yemen, officials say
GOP's Peter King praises Obama over death of a man he describes as 'more dangerous even than Osama bin Laden'
NBC News and news services
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44727191/ns/world_news-mideast_n_africa/?GT1=43001
SANAA, Yemen — Anwar al-Awlaki, an American-born radical cleric linked to al-Qaida who led an organization labeled as one of the most serious threats to U.S. security, was killed by an airstrike in Yemen Friday, according to the country's defense ministry and U.S. officials.
"The terrorist ... has been killed along with some of his companions," the Yemen defense ministry said in a statement sent by text message to journalists, Reuters reported.
The Yemen Defense Ministry announced later Friday that another American in al-Qaida, Samir Khan, was killed with al-Awlaki.
A Yemeni security official told Reuters that al-Awlaki, who is of Yemeni descent, was hit in a Friday morning air raid in the northern al-Jawf province that borders oil giant Saudi Arabia.
He said four others killed with him were suspected al-Qaida members.
NBC News reported that U.S. officials had confirmed that an unmanned American drone had launched the airstrike. A U.S. drone aircraft targeted but missed him in May.
Story: Plenty of al-Qaida targets remain after Osama bin Laden's death
U.S. Rep. Peter King, a Republican who is chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security, hailed al-Awlaki's death as "a great success in our fight" against al-Qaida and its affiliates in a statement sent to NBC News.
"For the past several years, al-Awlaki has been more dangerous even than Osama bin Laden had been. The killing of al-Awlaki is a tremendous tribute to President Obama and the men and women of our intelligence community," he added.
'We must remain vigilant'
King, however, warned that "we must remain as vigilant as ever, knowing that there are more Islamic terrorists who will gladly step forward to backfill this dangerous killer."
Al-Awlaki was considered such a threat to the U.S. that the Obama administration took the unprecendented step of putting him, an American, on the U.S. military's and CIA's "kill or capture" target list.
U.S. intelligence officials told NBC News that the fact he was an American made him an even more insidious threat.
"As an American he knows how we think, how we react, and how to push all our buttons," one told NBC News.
However, some U.S. military officials were hesitant to confirm al-Awlaki's death, because they have no forces on the ground to positively identify the body, NBC reported. It was wrongly reported that al-Awlaki was killed in an airstrike in December 2009.
Al-Awlaki was implicated in the so-called underwear bombing attempt on a U.S.-bound plane on Christmas Day in 2009.
He was one of the top officials at Al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), which was also thought to have been behind the plot to send printer cartridges packed with explosives to the U.S.
AQAP usually confirms the deaths of its members or affiliates on Internet posts a few days after the attack.
Propagandist
Al-Awlaki was not the leader of AQAP — that role belonged to Nasser al-Wuhayshi — but he ranked as its most gifted English-language propagandist.
He preached at mosques in northern Virginia and San Diego attended by three of the Sept. 11 hijackers in the 18 months before the attacks.
In 2010, U.S. officials designated him an individual who had committed or was likely to commit a terrorist act and froze his assets.
[CONTINUE READING FULL ARTICLE HERE]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
