Thursday, July 31, 2008

Pakistan forewarning al-Qaeda before American strikes, US asserts

from Jihad Watch

Such otherwise traitorous behavior is in complete keeping with several Koranic injunctions which have led to the doctrine of Loyalty (to Muslims) and Enmity (for infidels), such as the following, which both insists Muslims are to have no loyalty to infidels, and also to deceive the latter when necessary: "Allah most high said: 'Let believers [Muslims] not take for friends and allies infidels rather than believers: whoever does this shall have no relationship left with Allah -- unless you but guard yourselves against them, taking precautions' (that is, taqiyya, deceit)." See Ayman Zawahiri's 60 page treatise on Loyalty and Enmity in The Al Qaeda Reader. "U.S. says Pakistani spies forewarn al Qaeda allies," by Zeeshan Haider for Reuters, July 31:

ISLAMABAD (Reuters) - The United States has accused members of Pakistan's main spy agency of tipping off al Qaeda-linked militants before U.S. missile attacks on targets in Pakistani tribal lands, Pakistan's defense minister said.

Defense Minister Ahmed Mukhtar openly acknowledged American mistrust of Pakistan's main military spy agency, the
Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), in remarks aired on Thursday on Pakistani television.

"They think that there are some elements in the ISI at some level that when the government of Pakistan is informed of targets, then leak it to them (militants) at some level," Mukhtar told Geo in Washington, having accompanied Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani on a maiden visit to the United States.

And what do you think, Mukhtar?

"This is an issue on which they were a bit annoyed."

The U.S. no longer gives Pakistan advance notice when it targets militants in tribal areas.

On Wednesday, the New York Times
reported that a top Central Intelligence Agency official confronted Pakistani officials earlier this month with evidence of ISI ties to militants, and involvement in a suicide car bomb attack outside the Indian embassy in Kabul that killed 58 people, including two senior Indian diplomats.

Posted by Raymond at July 31, 2008 8:37 AM


[Hugh Fitzgerald writes]:

Nearly seven years, and more than $30 billion dollars later, the American government begins to allow itself to comprehend what the I.S.I., what the Pakistani government, what the Muslims of Pakistan (with a tiny handful of exceptions, for too long clung too hopefully as the rule), are all about.

What a learning curve. This should be a Case Study, used at business schools around the country. Yes, it has room for all the once-fashionable phrases of Consultating, way back to the good old days of Bruce Henderson at BCG (Boston Consulting Group), when the racket really got going.

And let those business school students, perhaps especially those headed for Bain or McKinsey, to note with amusement (and horror) how the American government for the Pakistanis has played the role of Cash Cow. Yes, America as a Cash Cow for Pakistan, and for Iraq, Afghanistan, Egypt, Jordan, the "Palestinians" -- in short, for any land of Islam that forgot to be born fabulously rich. A Cash Cow, these United States, and with policy-makers, such as Robert Gates, who keeps clinging to this phrase "war on terror" and now tells us "it will last decades" (it will last, in truth, forever, but nonetheless can be reduced to manageable proportions, if the Money Weapon, Da'wa, and demographic conquest are recognized, and dealt with suitably, as instruments of Jihad), can truly be called bovine. These bovine makers of policy, sitting their, chewing their cuds, trying to make sense, as they flick their tails, of the great big world they perceive, so very dimly, around them.

Moo. Moo.

Posted by: Hugh at July 31, 2008 9:50 AM

"victory" in Iraq is what will weaken the Camp of Islam and Jihad

. . . the American military officers are so self-delighted with the "counter-insurgency strategy." Take a bow, all you writers of counter-insurgency manuals who have ignored the larger question -- the question of what exactly it means that we win, what exactly the "victory" in Iraq is that will weaken the Camp of Islam and Jihad, other than a quite different definition of "victory" that I have discussed here so many times*. Take a bow, soft-spoken would-be-novelist thoughtful Col. Nagl. Take a bow, Colonel or is it General McMaster, inventor of the "Ask Your Customer" program, according to which, we learn, American soldiers are asked to treat incarcerated Iraqis as "customers" whose good will they need to earn ("Friendliness Is Job One"). Take a bow, all of you who think that the phrase "in general, insurgencies last ten years" makes any sense at all, instead of being as comical a phrase as "in general, civil wars last 4.7 years" or "in general, wars last 10.3 years." --Hugh Fitzgerald

excerpt from

Read the whole thing! and . . . See the Footnote below:
*Re Hugh Fitzgerald's "Victory in Iraq:"
Fitzgerald: Some key propositions about the war in Iraq
Let me list some of them:

1. The correct definition of "victory" in Iraq should be an outcome that weakens Islam -- the Camp of Islam and Jihad -- not only in Iraq but elsewhere. There is no other justification for spending two trillion dollars, and enduring 4,300 deaths and tens of thousands of wounded.

2. The Administration -- Bush, Rice, et al. -- and everyone who defends the policy of remaining in Iraq, never explains exactly how what is being attempted in Iraq, that is, the attempt to make the Shi'a government and the recently-dislodged-from-power Sunnis come to some accommodation, will make Infidels safer.

3. Those who have called this a "war on terrorism" have done terrible damage, for they have confused a tactic -- terrorism -- with a much larger problem. They have helped to keep Infidels largely unaware of what is going on in Western Europe, and of how the Money Weapon, campaigns of Da'wa, and demographic conquest, are the most effective and dangerous instruments of Jihad.

4. The war in Iraq, similarly, distracts and confuses, because it reinforces the idea that, even though Bush has called this an "ideological war," he still has conducted this war without any attempt at propaganda, or any attempt to exploit the weaknesses of the enemy. Rather, his policy is to repair those very weaknesses, to heal those sectarian and ethnic fissures in Iraq that could, if they were to continue unhealed (as they will, in the long run, in any case), damage the Camp of Islam and Jihad.

5. No one has been asked to explain why the two trillion dollars already spent in Iraq (and this includes the committed total future cost of lifetime care for tens of thousands of wounded) could not have been spent better on propaganda to sow discord in Islamic countries, and to pay for an energy policy -- subsidies to trains and busses, and for solar and wind energy, and for the building, by the government (for only the government can do it quickly, and to serve as the insurer) of dozens of nuclear reactors, that will be essential if the Muslim oil weapon is to sufficiently diminished in time to prevent further Muslim advances all over the world.

6. Many of those who have been forced to fight this war, or some of them, naturally cannot quite allow themselves to recognize what folly, what an ill-considered venture, it has been ever since early 2004. At that time the only legitimate goals -- getting rid of the regime and scouring the country for major weaponry (including that known by the shorthand WMD) -- had been met, and the goal of "bringing freedom" to "ordinary moms and dads" had not yet been fixed upon. That new goal ignored how, in Islam, political legitimacy is defined (it is not defined as being justified because it may express the will of the governed). And this goal was a kind of consolation prize for not having found that weaponry that was the original cause, one was told, for the invasion.

7. The continued American presence in Iraq is damaging, and greatly, the American military. Young officers are leaving the regular army. Those joining the Reserves and the National Guard are not of the same level as those who joined ten years ago, or even five. Recruiting standards -- age, moral record, education -- have all changed, in response to the great difficulty in filling the army's monthly quotas. Nearly half the equipment that the National Guard relies on is in Iraq. Much of the regular military's equipment has, in Iraq, desert-degraded at a rate scarcely conceived of, and pegged by planners at a rate more suitable for non-desert environments. The morale of officers and men, especially of those who have served several times in Iraq, and are aware of the gap between how Bush and his men present the war and the splendid "Iraqi people" and the reality, has plummeted. The reality are the mendacious, meretricious, rapacious, Iraqis who are, on the whole, out to use the Americans against their own domestic enemies. They are also out to acquire whatever weaponry, know-how, and other aid they can manage to inveigle out of the Americans.

But they have no intention of becoming, and could not possibly be, permanent and trustworthy allies of the United States. It isn't possible. Muslims do not become allies and friends of Infidels. Occasionally their interests may overlap, and there can be most temporary collaboration, but that's it.

The colossal folly of Tarbaby Iraq is clear to many, including many officers and men. It is folly not because Islam is not a threat, but because it is.

Posted by Hugh at May 27, 2008 6:50 PM
for COMMENTS to the "Victory in Iraq" post, click on the above

Wednesday, July 30, 2008






23 July 2008

I was due to attend Greyfriars Police station today to answer bail regarding my arrest on ‘suspicion of stirring up racial hatred’ through written material on this blog.

I was advised by my solicitor/lawyer yesterday that he had spoken to DC Holden regarding my attendance at the police station today and he told him that a decision still had not been made concerning me and my case so they are going to be bailing me for a further few months.

So the leash is still around my neck, but it’s more of an extendable leash now, like the one you put your dog on so they can run a little further, rather than a chock chain.

I lost everything because of the drug dealing gangs of Pakistani Moslems from Luton, my home, by business, my way of life and over 18 months of my life.

And I thank God daily for it because my blog now stands as a testimony for others to read about what is going on in Luton & Dunstable, which is Al Qaeda’s frontline within Great Britain, and the Islamic community that has set up camp there.

There are many cowards out there who disrespect me but just remember you’re the one who ran away not me, I’m just taking a rest now.

Let’s not forget that Luton played a central role on 7/7 and during ‘operation crevice’ the biggest anti-terror operation in British history which saw the bomb maker of the plot who was a taxi driver from Dunstable wanting to buy a dirty bomb from the Russian mafia in Belgium, and the Emir of the plot who was also said to be the recruiter of the lead bomber on 7/7 Mohamed Siddique Khan also another Pakistani Moslem known as Q from Bury Park Luton.

All these known factual links to International Islamic Terrorism and Al Qaeda’s War against Great Britain from this one locality of Luton.

My blog is an on the ground assessment of what is happening on the streets of Luton & Dunstable with regards to the paramilitary force of British born Pakistani Moslems, and then beyond what is happening on the streets, out of sight and mind.

Blended into the Bury Park community of Luton, living in the shadows is Al Qaeda in Britain, trained courtesy of Osama Bin Laden and the terror camps of Afghanistan/Pakistan who are now recruiting and commanding their Moslem brothers on our British streets.

Jihad (Holy War) against us and our way of life for Islam is their message.

By the time the British State have decided what they want to do with me I will have lost another year of my life to them, having the stress of these legal proceedings hanging over my head, and then I could lose another year if they finally decide to charge me and all for writing and telling people what I see with regards to Islam’s War within Great Britain and against our Western Civilisation, and calling Moslems savages.

As an uneducated man and not politically correct I think savages fits them quite well after watching beheadings, suicide bombings on buses and trains, flying planes into towers, chopping off peoples limbs for the most trivial of offences, the hatred that is aimed at those outside of the religion, and the hatred towards women and homosexuals and all because of the teachings of the religion. The list could go on and on, these are just a few examples that spring to mind of why I call Moslems savages.

The politically correct term for those who have jobs and careers to protect is - Terrorist

Ok not all Moslems act in that way but if they class themselves as Moslems by carrying the label and embracing the religion then they condone what is at the core of the religion which is the teachings of a 7th Century barbarian who was a bloodthirsty warmongering child molesting paedophile false prophet rapist.

Many who claim the label ‘Moslem’ only do so because it has been passed down from the generations, they don’t know the true heart and soul of the religion because they have never delved into the deepest depths of the pit of the religion. Those who do know the heart and soul are the religious Moslems who are committed to furthering the agenda of the Islamic religion in Great Britain and are the driving force.

Those who profess moderation and peace are a different side of the same coin they just have a different way of achieving the end time goal which is Islamic Rule upon the British Isles. This is the mandate of the Islamic Religion that all Moslems if they are true Moslems must adhere to and carry out, those who profess moderation and peace are taking the long term approach and those conducting Holy War are taking the faster approach, but both have the same end result in mind and they both work in tandem together.

So don’t believe the lies.

If a Moslem doesn’t want to live under Sharia Law then he/she is not a Moslem, it is like me as a Christian saying I don’t believe in Jesus, its that simple, and we have 3+ million Moslems in our Country.

Those who carry the label ‘Moslem’ but know nothing about the heart and soul of the religion know in the back of their minds that if they reject the label then they face a death sentence from religious Moslems as an act of apostasy which is one of the most abhorrent things imaginable and has no place within our civilized society but as with many other things it is an integral part of the Islamic religion.

If a Moslem leaves the religion he/she must be murdered for this offence, and there are many willing Moslem murderers out there willing to please Allah by shedding Apostate blood.

Those who leave Islam should find a place of safety and sanctuary within our land, and the Church is the place where you will find it, then you can break off the shackles that bind you and receive the Love of Jesus Christ from His servants, those like Bishop Nazir Ali who knows all to well about Apostasy among many other things within Great Britain.

He himself is now a target of the military wing of Islam because he dared speak out on behalf of the British people about the Islamification of Great Britain; does this not tell you something that everyone who speaks negatively about Islam has to live under fear of death?

And this is supposed to be a civilized 21st Century democracy in which we live.

No wonder there are so many cowards out there, but what does the future hold for our children and grandchildren with so many cowards in society who are doing nothing about those who are seeking to destroy all of our futures?

We cannot escape the facts in today’s British society and what they mean to our futures although this present government would like to sweep them under the carpet by saying ‘Islam means peace’, ‘Moslem and terrorist are two words that don’t go together’, ‘Islamic terror is anti-Islamic activity’, and it’s a small minority, so as to dupe the gullible British sheep people into a false sense of security by believing the lies about Labours block vote and their pet project, the British Islam they are foolishly trying to create like the deranged Liberals that they are.

You can hear the Islamic World laughing at these spineless treacherous traitors as they take over our Country, who are leading Great Britain into the gutter, surrendering and appeasing at every opportunity to save their cowardly necks from the inevitable, even giving the Islamic Kingdom of Great Britain their first State sanctioned building blocks for their own autonomy upon our Island, and releasing Al Qaeda terrorists back out into our society.

The Liberal Elite and the Islamic Kingdom of Great Britain are working together towards the destruction of the British homeland and the ancient ‘Realm’ in which we have lived for generations in their quest for the unachievable utopian multi cultural dream which is nothing more than social psychosis being inflicted upon British society by those patients with the disease of Liberalism who are now in charge of the Asylum which is Great Britain who have tried their Marxist social engineering project on our society at our expense while they sit back in their tax paid ivory towers.

Over our dead bodies our enemies will have to climb to defeat and destroy the ‘Realm’ is the message from the British people, I am just one of many across the land; we will not let the sacrifices our forefathers made for us be in vain, we will fight for righteousness for the sake of our children and grandchildren who are relying on us.

I put one question to you here; what are you doing about the future for your children apart from sitting on your big behind watching TV, filling your store house for the uncertain future the World faces, and complaining about 21st Century British life.

”What does it profit a man if he gains the whole World yet forfeits his own soul”

Why not make a conscious decision today to do something, even the smallest of things because it is the smallest of things that go towards the bigger picture, just like each individual brick played in building Rome.

’Evil prevails when good men/women do nothing’

If you have read this then the decision is in your hands, decide to act and make a difference in this World in which you live or go back to your cowardly dark slumber that you believe is light because of what it contains and live out the rest of your days under the Lord God Almighty’s gaze but void of His shadow over your life because you reject to help defend His kingdom on Earth, and the innocent, weak and vulnerable people who are relying on those who God has ordained to hold back the darkness.

You are reading this for a reason, each and every person who clicked on this blog today and every other day.

Osama Bin Laden is the Anti-Christ who seeks to defeat America and destroy Christendom in the War he has declared on behalf of Islam, and the Islamic Republic of Iran are seeking Nuclear bombs so they can wipe Israel from the Earth.

How long until the world in which we live changes again forever with this present global conflict going to the next level and phase?

The Islamic Civilisation v The Judeo/Christian Civilisation – Nuclear War

Them or us no middle ground, are you playing your part or are you one of those people in denial of the truth, consumed with other meaningless things pertaining to daily life which are so insignificant in the scale of the bigger things happening within life on Earth.

What will be living through the coming Apocalypse be like and are you preparing?

As I will not be posting on this blog again and I do mean it this time, there is a facebook group
that I have set up that needs some life brought into it so I would ask that those who have contributed here will come and contribute there and bring some life to the group.

It’s up to you though.

There is 18 months worth of video’s, writings, facts, opinions and beliefs on the pages of this blog, so there is enough for people to read who arrive here, and if the police have not got enough to charge me yet based on my whole blog then is it not about time they let me go so I can get on with my life?

These extra few months are not going to change anything, its not like I am going to wake up one morning and start telling people to burn out the Islamic Kingdom and hang the British traitors who are against us from London bridge is it?

My beliefs and opinions are on each page of this blog and I have never once called for murder or violence against others, so why was I arrested?

I breached ‘community cohesion’, and how dare British citizens breach ‘community cohesion’, those newly formed racial hatred units in the police force need to show some work for their funding after all so I was viewed as an easy target for the detected crime statistics considering I was open and honest on my blog.

”Touch not my prophets and do my anointed no harm”

Do the British State want to make me a martyr for my words? They know I would accept it gladly because to be a martyr in any form as a Christian is the highest calling God can place upon our heads and that includes dying for our faith. The only thing different between a Christians joy of dying for his/her faith is that they die out of love for others, where as Moslems die to kill others.

No Christian would ever commit suicide to murder others that it mass murder plain and simple, but Moslems based on their religion wrap it up as martyrdom with the prize of 72 Virgins for their actions.

Islam is nothing more than a creation of the devil as the facts emanating from its heart and soul clearly show, and those who cannot see it are blinded by a different form of devil.

Although I have enjoyed writing my point of view about the Jihad for others to read and hopefully shed some light for those who could not see, blogging does not put food on the table or a roof over your head, and those things are more important to me than writing words for others to read at this point in time.

I will be back at some point in the future but not on this blog, this blog is now finished.

A book is on its way as long as someone will dare publish it and of course you will be in it, my avid readers from Bury Park, how rude would it be of me not to mention you for the world to read after everything.

You think your something because you hunt in packs and have instilled fear in people because of your willingness to commit brutal acts of violence and murder but in reality you aint all that, you just have had longer time to prepare for what is happening now because the British people were oblivious to you and your Islamic intentions.

Now though things are loud and clear.

You switched the light of Almighty God upon yourselves the day your threatened my life. He knew exactly what was going to happen in Great Britain and in Luton & Dunstable that’s why He chose me to let the light of heaven shine through me into the darkness where you devils from the pit inhabit that threaten His people and Kingdom on Earth. I am called and anointed as every other Christian is, to live and serve under His shadow, so how dare you devils in the embodiment of Moslems from Bury Park threaten the Lord’s anointed, a servant and ambassador of Heaven, I serve the King, so take note of your brother Bobby Khan because God knows who each of you are, the very hairs on your head are numbered.

There will be nothing said or done in the darkness that will not be brought out into the light.

One will chase a thousand and two ten thousand and I alone have chased and surrounded the first thousand of you, with you now surrounded on all sides with no where for to run or hide because you sit in your small encampment upon my land, the land my forefathers built for me, so what a liberty for you, our guests to throw our hospitality back in our faces by declaring war, committing acts of war and seeking to take over.

What did you think the response would be?

And those Al Qaeda in the shadows who are nothing more than psychologically twisted human beings who need their perception of life reconfigured now know who I am, and it is my pleasure to say come get me, just like I said to cowardly London flag burners, before the thief come gets you.

You started this, the line in the sand was drawn, you crossed it, and believe me God will finish it.

I can only say open that dark twisted mind, let a little light from above in and repent of your actions, open your heart and allow Jesus Christ the light of life into your life, and into your dark Islamic heart before it is too late for you whoever you are, wherever you are, and your eternal soul ends up in the true lake of fire.

We cannot both be right!

Lionheart of England

P.S I have one more thing I am waiting to post which I have been waiting on for about 4 months, so if it does finally arrive as ‘old news’ then I will post it, so keep checking back, and if not then God knows and its in His hands.

It is “All for the Glory of God” after all.

I am the Lord, that is my name; And my glory I will not give to another’ nor my praise to carved images.

Any posts that I do make from now on that I think are important will be posted on Radarsite.



By Snooper
Cross posted from A Newt One
A Newt One


. . . I believe that I have more insight than most into that which we face in this nation at this current time in the cosmos. Barack Hussein Obama or, Czarbama as I have come to call him, is America's latest Demon. What will we say to our children and our children's children when they ask us, "Why did we sit idly by and allow this cretin to become president and destroy the last hope of freedom in the world?"As this country spirals down into some allusively morphed form of socio-communist-American liberal tyranny, what will you say to the demons as they come to you at night as you lay in bed kicking yourself in the ass for not standing up and fighting?The time has come to choose sides. Will you be a part of the American Awakening or will you sit idly by and let others do the dirty work because it is too inconvenient to turn the TV off? In this era of the pollsters knowing absolutely nothing, will you sit idly by and allow the politicians under a Leftinistra veto-proof Congress with a Marxist Thug Demon as in Czarbama at the helm bring about forced servitude of those between the ages of 18 and 42? Is this your Grand Scheme? And, it is a Good Plan? Not hardly. We saw how well that worked in 2006, didn't we? Why are Conservatives so stupid at times anyway?

* * *

Rick Moran at Right Wing Nut House a few days ago placed an article up entitled, "TOP TEN THINGS THAT CREEP ME OUT ABOUT OBAMA". Whereas he has touched Spot On, I would like to add a few things to that list.


#11) Czarbama has stated publicly that he intends to create a Civilian National Security Force that is just as powerful, just as strong and just as well funded as the United States Armed Forces.

#12) Czarbama has publicly confirmed that he intends to create a Civilian National Security Force that is just as powerful, just as strong and just as well funded as the United States Armed Forces.

#13) Czarbama carries with him at all times his magic wand of indecisiveness, charlatanism and the ability to agree with every point of every issue from every side and has the uncanny ability to have everyone he speaks to think he is the Pied Piper.

#14) Czarbama has stated publicly that he will review and reverse everything that President Bush has done.

#15) Czarbama has publicly presented himself as the New Lenin and all one has to do to confirm that is to gaze upon his posters in Berlin and compare them to the posters from the age of Lenin.

#16) Czarbama doesn't chastise his followers for praising Che Guacamole.

#17) Czarbama associates himself with those that have financed our enemies to fight against us and to kill and wound our Troops in battle.

#18) Czarbama blames the United States for 91101 and he did that eight says after the infamous day when the dust and smoke hadn't even subsided yet.

#19) Czarbama denies that the Troop Surge was an ingenious plan and that it was successful.

#20) Czarbama wants to increase our taxes by $4,000 per household.Is that enough yet? Not quite.

#21) Czarbama wants to add an additional $285 BILLION in taxes to finance the American Global War on Poverty.

#22) Czarbama wants to ratify L.O.S.T..That is all for now. So, tell me again how he will be good for the nation in the long run. Czarbama wants to strip this nation of its sovereignty and surrender to our enemies. Some say that he will be a lame duck from his first day. Consider this.

Czarbama gets into the White House and along with him comes a veto-proof conglomerate and there will be nothing to stop him from reversing all of President Bush's accomplishments, both good and bad. There will be nothing to stop the Fairness Doctrine from becoming a reality. There will be nothing to stop him from raising taxes to the degree of which we have never seen. There will be nothing to stop him from creating his Civilian National Security Forces and there will be nothing to stop the Universal National Service Act. We will no longer have a voice to be heard. Conservative talk shows both professional and BTR will cease to exist. Conservative bloggers and Conservative outlets will vanish.

Czarbama mentioned at one time his presidency would be for 8 to 10 years. So much for the 22nd Amendment and kiss the United States Constitution goodbye because once we are turned over to the One World United Nations Consortium and World Court, the Conservative Voice is history. Remember the List of 45? Have you read it? Have you memorized it? Are you armed? Do you give a damn? If not, why then, did we fight for you? Do you give a damn? If not, why then, should we fight for you again?



Cogito Ergo Sum

Paul Eidelberg

Senator Barak Obama has come a long way since René Descartes, the 17th-century philosopher who famously said, “cogito ergo sum”—“I think, therefore I am.” With Obama, cogito ergo sum has metamorphosed into videor ergo sum, “I am being seen, therefore I am.”

To be fair, however, Senator Obama is simply riding the waves of what I call “Photo-Op Democracy.”—let’s call it “POP Democracy.”

POP Democracy makes nonsense of the “rule of the people.” Of course, one might say the people no longer think, and that this is what makes Obama the media’s presidential candidate.

But it’s not enough for Obama to be seen; he must also be heard. He must utter such mindless slogans as CHANGE or YES WE CAN! Such slogans appeal to youth. They arouse their hormones or overcome their boredom or discontent with humdrum reality. The immature can plug anything they want into CHANGE and YES WE CAN without a moment’s thought about history, about statecraft, about political reality or about Islamic imperialism. Just wish, just hope, just dream—and presto! That’s it kids, that’s all that’s necessary in this spinning world of make-believe.

Yes, Obama is becoming a spin artist. POP Democracy is also “SPIN Democracy.” For example, to make himself appear as a realist vis-à-vis a Iran, he dithers about “tough” negotiations, or “carrot-and-stick” diplomacy with Tehran. Obama is clueless about the revolution that has taken place in that clerical regime, whose mullahs had children walk over and explode mine fields during Iran’s bloody war with Iraq.

SPIN Democracy inevitably producers mindless politicians. After meeting President Shimon Peres, Senator Obama said: “He’s gorgeous!” Mrs. Peres must have felt the same way when Shimon courted her by reading passages from Marx’s Das Capital! Perhaps Obama would say, after meeting Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, “He’s charming!”

But again, let’s be fair: Didn’t President George W. Bush refer to Islam as a “religion of peace” after 9/11? Is it any wonder that 9/11 has become meaningless in America? Did the President ever think of educating the American people (and the media) about Islamic imperialism or about the war Iran has been waging against the U.S, since 1979?

Still, it’s shocking that a Muslim (according to Islamic law) may become America’s next president. Who will then be seen, and who will then be heard? And what will happen to those who say Cogito Ergo Sum?


There is an alliance between the enemies of our country--those who would subjugate us to foreign ideologies: Marxism and Islam.

Today, these two ideologies are working hand-in-glove to gain power over us--over our freedom, our lives.

We are in Danger of Electing the Candidate supported by two of our enemies

Obama, of definite Moslem heritage--which he disavows, as he did the anti-white, Afrocentric "Christianity" of the Rev. Wright--will do anything to gain power--over us.

The love-feast between Socialist-Marxists such as Chavez of Venezuela and our own internal Left and the Islamic forces that want to make us accept Islam as the ruling form of ideology spells an end to our freedom.

There are those amongs us--Americans--who will do anything necessary to prevent submission to either Islam or Marxist socialism--ANYTHING.

ANYTHING means short of NOTHING.

See Lets go over them plans again

[also at]


The Coming Civil War at




. . . Thank GOD for Professor Eidelberg a man that is not AFRAID to say it like it is. He thinks a civil war is coming and so do I, I told you when I wrote you about Corsi, that short of taking up arms against these elitists nothing can be done to stop their socialist agenda from taking hold. This must be the same atmosphere that preceded the French Revolution in France. For those of us in tune with what's going on we all feel something brewing under the surface, but unfortunately most people are MORONS and can't see what's happening. They're buying into Obama's dangerous rhetoric, and following blindly to their demise. I have a plan on what I will do when the Obama government comes knocking on my door, most idiots on the other hand have no clue what's going on. The media over here is just an arm of the socialist agenda that Obama is pushing for. Pravda comes to mind as to how this media over here has become.

Read the whole thing.

A plan by Barack Obama to redistribute American wealth

Obama's Global Tax
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Tuesday, July 29, 2008 4:20 PM PT

Election '08: A plan by Barack Obama to redistribute American wealth on a global level is moving forward in the Senate. It follows Marxist theology — from each according to his ability, to each according to his need.

We are citizens of the world, Sen. Obama told thousands of nonvoting Germans during his recent tour of the Middle East and Europe. And if the Global Poverty Act (S. 2433) he has sponsored becomes law, which is almost certain if he wins in November, we're also going to be taxpayers of the world.

Speaking in Berlin, Obama said: "While the 20th century taught us that we share a common destiny, the 21st has revealed a world more intertwined than at any time in human history."

What the 20th century really showed was a series of totalitarian threats — from fascism to Nazism to communism — defeated by the U.S. military. Hitler's Germany, Mussolini's Italy, Tojo's Japan and the Soviet Union offered destinies we did not share.

Our destiny of peace and freedom through strength was not achieved by a transnationalist fantasy of buying the world a Coke and singing "Kumbaya."

Obama's Global Poverty Act offers us a global socialist destiny we do not want, one that challenges America's very sovereignty. The former "post-racial" candidate obviously intends to be a post-national president.

A statement from Obama's office says: "With billions of people living on just dollars a day around the world, global poverty remains one of the greatest challenges and tragedies the international community faces. It must be a priority of American foreign policy to commit to eliminating extreme poverty and ensuring every child has food, shelter and clean drinking water."

These are worthy goals, but note there's no mention of spreading democracy, expanding free trade, promoting entrepreneurial capitalism or ridding the world of despots who rule and ravage countries such as Zimbabwe and Sudan.

Obama would give them all a fish without teaching them how to fish. Pledging to cut global poverty in half on the backs of U.S. taxpayers is a ridiculous and impossible goal.

His legislation refers to the "millennium development goal," a phrase from a declaration adopted by the United Nations Millennium Assembly in 2000 and supported by President Clinton.

It calls for the "eradication of poverty" in part through the "redistribution (of) wealth of land" and "a fair distribution of the earth's resources." In other words: American resources.

It's a mantra of liberals that the U.S. is only a small portion of the world's population yet consumes an unseemly portion of the planet's supposedly finite resources. Never mentioned is the fact that America's population, just 5% of the world's total, also produces a stunning 27% of the world's GDP — to the enormous benefit of other countries. Nonetheless, their solution is to siphon off the product of our free democracy and distribute it.

We already transfer too much national wealth to the United Nations and its busybody agencies. Obama's bill would force U.S. taxpayers to fork over 0.7% of our gross domestic product every year to fund a global war on poverty, spending well above the $16.3 billion in global poverty aid the U.S. already spends.

Over a 13-year period, from 2002, when the U.N.'s Financing for Development Conference was held, to the target year of 2015, when the U.S is expected to meet its part of the U.N. Millennium goals, we would be spending an additional $65 billion annually for a total of $845 billion.

During a time of economic uncertainty, the plan would cost every American taxpayer around $2,500.

If you're worried abut gasoline and heating oil prices now, think what they'll be like when the U.S. is subjected in an Obama administration to global energy consumption and production taxes. Obama's Global Poverty Act is the "international community's" foot in the door.

The U.N. Millennium declaration called for a "currency transfer tax," a "tax on the rental value of land and natural resources," a "royalty on worldwide fossil energy production — oil, natural gas, coal . . . fees for the commercial use of the oceans, fees for the airplane use of the skies, fees for the use of the electromagnetic spectrum, fees on foreign exchange transactions, and a tax on the carbon content of fuels."

Co-sponsors of S. 2433 include Democrats Maria Cantwell of Washington, Dianne Feinstein of California, Richard Durbin of Illinois and Robert Menendez of New Jersey. GOP globalists supporting the bill include Chuck Hagel of Nebraska and Richard Lugar of Indiana.

Lugar has worked with Obama to promote more aid to Russia to promote nuclear nonproliferation. Lugar also promotes the Law of the Sea treaty, which turns over the world's oceans to an International Seabed Authority that would charge us to drill offshore and have veto power over the movements and actions of the U.S. Navy.

Obama's agenda sounds like defeated 2004 Democratic candidate John Kerry's "global test" for U.S. foreign policy decisions where "you have to do it in a way that passes the test — that passes the global test — where your countrymen, your people understand fully why you're doing what you're doing and you can prove to the world that you did it for legitimate reasons."

Obama has called on the U.S. to "lead by example" on global warming and probably would submit to a Kyoto-like agreement that would sock Americans with literally trillions of dollars in costs over the next half century for little or no benefit.

"We can't drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times . . . and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK," Obama has said. "That's not leadership. That's not going to happen."

Oh, really? Who's to say we can't load up our SUV and head out in search of bacon double cheeseburgers at the mall? China? India? Bangladesh? The U.N.?

In an Obama White House, American sovereignty will become an endangered species. The Global Poverty Act is the first toe in the water of global socialism.

Read about the Coming Civil War at

WHEN IT COMES TO OBAMA - Paul Eidelberg Gets It ! ! !

Subject: Paul Eidelberg gets IT!!!
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 13:16:22 -0400

[This is important--for Israelis as well as Americans
--Leslie White]


I listened to Paul Eidelberg on your July 28th show and he's saying everything that I've been telling people for a year now. Obama is DANGEROUS, Professor Eidelberg hit it when he said who Obama will put into his cabinet when he becomes President. I've been thinking that for the last year, most idiots over here have NO CLUE who these people are that Obama will place in his cabinet. THESE PEOPLE ARE DANGEROUS, not only to us here but, to ISRAEL AS WELL. Obama talks in code, Professor Eidelberg is right on when he says that Obama uses "change" as an inocuous phrase, but in fact, those of us that are students of history know that this is anything but harmless. If you listen to this guy he's always offering something to people in other words "elect me I'll give you something" that is socialism my friends and how it rises to power. Hitler did it, Stalin did it, Musolini did it, now Obama is doing it. Thank GOD for Professor Eidelberg a man that is not AFRAID to say it like it is. He thinks a civil war is coming and so do I, I told you when I wrote you about Corsi, that short of taking up arms against these elitists nothing can be done to stop their socialist agenda from taking hold. This must be the same atmosphere that preceded the French Revolution in France. For those of us in tune with what's going on we all feel something brewing under the surface, but unfortunately most people are MORONS and can't see what's happening. They're buying into Obama's dangerous rhetoric, and following blindly to their demise. I have a plan on what I will do when the Obama government comes knocking on my door, most idiots on the other hand have no clue what's going on. The media over here is just an arm of the socialist agenda that Obama is pushing for. Pravda comes to mind as to how this media over here has become. Professor Eidelberg is right on about Iran too, how can one negotiate with animals that have openly said they want to kill you? Answer, you can't. Israel will have to go it alone I think to stop the new Hitler in Iran. Obama will not help Israel, this is a man who would not even visit our troops in Germany when he was there, he hates the military and hates Israel:--don't be fooled like these phony jews over here in the states have been. The irony is that Obama wants to placate Ahmadinejad and the "jews" over here think that's ok, it amazes me that they really don't seem to give a damn about Israel whether it lives or dies. These liberal jews are phony, like John Stewart or Seinfeld that make fun of their heritage to make money. Rather sickening.

[color emphasis mine. lw]

Read the Paul Eidelberg broadcast transcript at

Read about the Coming Civil War at

Tuesday, July 29, 2008



The answer, my friends, is not blowing in the wind, it is clear:

Lets go over them plans again

[by Redneck Texan]

The name Redneck Texan is almost universally associated with my views that this war can only ultimately be won by committing genocide. And this honest opinion of mine is constantly being thrown back in my face as being “my solution” to every problem, when I have always tried to explain that it was the only conceivable conclusion when you consider the all the factors involved. If you examine human behavioral history, religious and cultural intolerance, and project them forward into a future environment where rocks, stones, and bullets will be replaced by Nuclear, Chemical and Biological means of assuring your religious and cultural views predominate the other societies in the world, its hard to come to another conclusion.

Every human mind has always harbored a degree of intolerance for views that differ from the ones that were instilled into it by our particular local culture of choice. This genetic desire for cultural omnipotence has never been selectively bred out of Homo-sapiens due to the fact that the more violent and cunning have coincidentally been the same ones that survived to plant the seeds for the next generation. If don’t believe me, ask your nearest Neanderthal, Cathar, or Carthaginian neighbor. The native Americans can also attest to our ancestor’s desire for cultural dominance.

But hey, nobody hates war and destruction more than I do. I desire nothing more than world peace. One of my first posts here attempted to explain my willingness to live in peace with all of mankind, yet it obvisiously has fallen on deaf ears. All I require is to not be attacked. I could care less how people on the other side of the planet interact with each other, as long as it doesn’t affect the safety of my family. For millennia that has logic has sufficed, because the physical distance between opposing cultures increased the logistical difficulties involved in waging a foreign war of extermination. The spread of western technological advances into the hands of otherwise harmless religious extremist has fundamentally altered the equation of cultural dominance. And I believe we are entering a chapter in human history where all the tolerance we have learned to exercise in order to peacefully co-exist with each other will have to be temporarily put aside, in order for us not to be destroyed by a lesser but more aggressive and persistent cultural enemy.

So lets re-examine all those “plans” I have mentioned in the past, in an effort to explain exactly where I stand on the correct way to prosecute the global war of ideologies.

First, there is the Liberal Plan which I do not subscribe to. It involves us feeling guilty for the fact that we are more socially, scientifically, and financially advanced that our Islamic counterparts. And that it is somehow “our fault” that they are attacking us. And that if we try to befriend and elevate our enemies to our level of enlightenment they will voluntarily enter into a sustained negotiated peace with us. This plan involves transferring a large amount of our gross domestic product into our enemy’s infrastructure, while also allowing the leaders of our enemies to skim a large percentage of these funds into their personal coffers. This compassionate logic has led to such successful endeavors as helping them build nuclear reactors and altering the local laws of nature by providing free food to the starving populations so that they can survive until we can kill them on a battlefield at a later date. It also involves wasting a lot of energy trying to settle centuries old religious hatred inspired conflicts by attempting to bribe both parties into a negotiated “paper” truce. Under this plan our priorities as a nation are not acted on until we have received the blessing of other nations, after we have agreed to make sure we reimburse them for any profits they may be subject to lose from their business dealings with our enemies. The main objective of this plan is to defer taking any serious actions against our enemies to a future braver administration, so that we can then sit back and critique their more effective methods.

The strategy we are currently utilizing is what I commonly refer to as ”Plan A”(aka the Bush Doctrine), and I currently support it. The catalyst for its enactment was 3000 dead Americans at the hands of 15 Islamic Militants. The destruction of 4 planes, 2 skyscrapers, and a wing of our military headquarters revealed that sporadic gutless retaliation methods were ineffective and counter-productive, and that we needed to be more aggressive in our pursuit of the perpetrators. It involves direct military engagements where we can, without violating the sovereignty of non-belligerent governments, and a social reform attempt where we have maintained occupations. The whole idea is to provide an example of how much better our enemies standard of living can be if they will only follow our cultural example, and hope the surrounding nations attempt to emulate them. This plan will take generations to prove successful, but could immediately be proven a failure if we elected to alter our foriegn policy agenda and withdrew occupying forces before they achieved the desired level of cultural change. And this plan does not address the residual ingrained religiously inspired hatred of the general population. We are trying to teach their children that we are nice people, while those children’s parents and religious leaders are trying to teach them the tenets of their cultural hate that has been handed down for generations in the region. All our attempts to bring the region out of a millennia of poverty and oppression is being resisted by the evil men that currently control the minds of the illiterate populaces.

One day we are going to be victims of a similar coordinated attack on our soil, and it is going to dawn on us that our actions have not been focused on our real enemies. We have no more artificial figureheads to eliminate. Enter my ”Plan B” scenario. When we realize that we can not continue to sustain a conventional campaign against the militant followers of Islam, and finally have the political courage to “name our enemy”. Our politicians and anchormen currently refuse to admit to the American masses that this is the first religious war in the history of America, and that no matter how many follower we kill, we have avoided attacking the source of terrorism which lies in the Islamic clergy. We will have to get over our old notions that all religious based behaviors should be tolerated in a global society. When we don’t have any more belligerent governments in the region to replace with Democracies, we will see that it’s the Mosques and Madrasses that need to be targeted. And every Muslim scholar that is now preaching to his flock that the Russian School Massacre was the work of Israelis and not Muslims will need to be hunted down and euthanized without remorse and their mosques reduced to rubble to avoid a quick replacement.

Then only after all that also proves to be ineffective at providing for our children’s safety, and we look back at all those freely elected Democracies we have installed in the region, and take note of the fact they are still belligerent towards our culture but now they possess weapons of mass destruction, and they have provided them to their like minded terrorist brothers and they have inevitably found their way to America cites and we are now mourning the loss of millions of our children, will I support the execution of ”Plan C”.

Plan C (aka Constructive Genocide) involves admitting that it is the people that make up Islamic society that are our un-reformable enemy, and also involves exploding several nuclear warheads over every population center and Islamic holy site from Morocco to Thailand. And cleaning up all surviving men, women, and children with smaller munitions while spending the next 50 years altering the scorched geography towards suitability of our continued cultural expansion in the future. Then I will go push my grandchildren on the swing knowing the majority of other humans agree with me and sleep with a clear conscience knowing we have done the right thing.

I just wanted to clear that up, thanks.
¶ Posted by Redneck Texan

Lets go over them plans again


Islamic Conquest of the United States!

Unlike other minority immigrant communities that have made their way to America, the Muslims do not want to integrate and adopt America as their home in an emotional and political fashion. Basically, the Muslims want to reshape America in their image rather than themselves be shaped by the reality of America. Of growing importance is the institutionalization of Muslim influence in American public affairs, and this will become an increasing electoral factor in local and national politics. The so-called “Jewish vote” will be overtaken by the role of Muslim voters in Michigan, California, and other states.

The Muslim jihad in all its aspects is now mobilized to redress Islamic losses suffered at the hands of the West centuries ago. The Muslims had earlier impotently witnessed Europe’s arrogant entry into the lands of Islam. By the 19th century, France controlled North Africa while Britain conquered the Nile Valley countries and the Persian Gulf emirates. In the period of World War I and its aftermath, France expanded its Middle Eastern possessions into the Levant, Syria and Lebanon, and Britain captured Iraq and Palestine.

But perhaps the central lesson of Islamic history is that even when the Muslims lose, they are really not defeated. The Crusader interlude in the Holy Land, that began in 1099 and finally ended in 1291, left no impression on Muslim social, political, let alone religious or cultural life. In the modern period, following the termination of European imperialism and colonialism in the Muslim Arab lands of the region, one could not identify any major foreign Western impact on the deeper recesses of Muslim thought and belief, or in the arenas of politics and ideology. Turkey is a special exception whereby secularism is the bedrock constitutional principle since the Republic’s modern founding in 1923. Christianity made hardly a mental dent at all, and secularism was rebuffed by the spiritual sturdiness of Islam.

Virulent anti-Western Arab nationalism as a native ideological sentiment erupted on to the political stage. Under the charismatic leadership of Egyptian President Gamal Abdul Nasser (1953-70), Pan-Arab politics converged comfortably with socialist economies, political dictatorships, and pro-Soviet alliances as their national panoply. Islamic fundamentalism, as another nativist belief-system, proposed a radical program for a comprehensive and integral religious way of life. Iran’s revolution in 1979 illustrated that choosing Islam provided the symbol for opposing the United States. We recall the torturous tale of 50 US hostages held for 444 days in Tehran by revolutionary youth. Donning old “cultural costumes” constituted a way to counter the alien culture of Western civilization.

Fundamentalism was, therefore, not just a return to God but a cultural statement against the godless West.

The Mystery of the Muslim Culture Code

The hard fiber of Islamic faith and proud Muslim identity has defied any disruption or erosion when in contact with other peoples or religions. And it is this formidable fact that will always be the springboard for challenging and threatening the Western world, . . .

Excerpted from The Challenge of Islam
by Mordechai Nisan

Continued at . . .


Barack Obama's Stealth Socialism

Democrat Barack Obama arrives in Washington on Monday. On the campaign trail, Obama has styled himself a centrist. But a look at those who've served as his advisers and mentors over the years shows a far more left-leaning tilt to his background — and to his politics.

By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY Posted Monday, July 28, 2008 4:20 PM PT

Election '08: Before friendly audiences, Barack Obama speaks passionately about something called "economic justice." He uses the term obliquely, though, speaking in code — socialist code.

During his NAACP speech earlier this month, Sen. Obama repeated the term at least four times. "I've been working my entire adult life to help build an America where economic justice is being served," he said at the group's 99th annual convention in Cincinnati.

And as president, "we'll ensure that economic justice is served," he asserted. "That's what this election is about." Obama never spelled out the meaning of the term, but he didn't have to. His audience knew what he meant, judging from its thumping approval.

It's the rest of the public that remains in the dark, which is why we're launching this special educational series.

"Economic justice" simply means punishing the successful and redistributing their wealth by government fiat. It's a euphemism for socialism.

In the past, such rhetoric was just that — rhetoric. But Obama's positioning himself with alarming stealth to put that rhetoric into action on a scale not seen since the birth of the welfare state.

In his latest memoir he shares that he'd like to "recast" the welfare net that FDR and LBJ cast while rolling back what he derisively calls the "winner-take-all" market economy that Ronald Reagan reignited (with record gains in living standards for all).

Obama also talks about "restoring fairness to the economy," code for soaking the "rich" — a segment of society he fails to understand that includes mom-and-pop businesses filing individual tax returns.

It's clear from a close reading of his two books that he's a firm believer in class envy. He assumes the economy is a fixed pie, whereby the successful only get rich at the expense of the poor.

Following this discredited Marxist model, he believes government must step in and redistribute pieces of the pie. That requires massive transfers of wealth through government taxing and spending, a return to the entitlement days of old.

Of course, Obama is too smart to try to smuggle such hoary collectivist garbage through the front door. He's disguising the wealth transfers as "investments" — "to make America more competitive," he says, or "that give us a fighting chance," whatever that means.

Among his proposed "investments":

• "Universal," "guaranteed" health care.

• "Free" college tuition.

• "Universal national service" (a la Havana).

• "Universal 401(k)s" (in which the government would match contributions made by "low- and moderate-income families").

• "Free" job training (even for criminals).

• "Wage insurance" (to supplement dislocated union workers' old income levels).

• "Free" child care and "universal" preschool.

• More subsidized public housing.

• A fatter earned income tax credit for "working poor."

• And even a Global Poverty Act that amounts to a Marshall Plan for the Third World, first and foremost Africa.

His new New Deal also guarantees a "living wage," with a $10 minimum wage indexed to inflation; and "fair trade" and "fair labor practices," with breaks for "patriot employers" who cow-tow to unions, and sticks for "nonpatriot" companies that don't.

That's just for starters — first-term stuff.

Obama doesn't stop with socialized health care. He wants to socialize your entire human resources department — from payrolls to pensions. His social-microengineering even extends to mandating all employers provide seven paid sick days per year to salary and hourly workers alike.

You can see why Obama was ranked, hands-down, the most liberal member of the Senate by the National Journal. Some, including colleague and presidential challenger John McCain, think he's the most liberal member in Congress.

But could he really be "more left," as McCain recently remarked, than self-described socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders (for whom Obama has openly campaigned, even making a special trip to Vermont to rally voters)?

Obama's voting record, going back to his days in the Illinois statehouse, says yes. His career path — and those who guided it — leads to the same unsettling conclusion.

The seeds of his far-left ideology were planted in his formative years as a teenager in Hawaii — and they were far more radical than any biography or profile in the media has portrayed.

A careful reading of Obama's first memoir, "Dreams From My Father," reveals that his childhood mentor up to age 18 — a man he cryptically refers to as "Frank" — was none other than the late communist Frank Marshall Davis, who fled Chicago after the FBI and Congress opened investigations into his "subversive," "un-American activities."

As Obama was preparing to head off to college, he sat at Davis' feet in his Waikiki bungalow for nightly bull sessions. Davis plied his impressionable guest with liberal doses of whiskey and advice, including: Never trust the white establishment.

"They'll train you so good," he said, "you'll start believing what they tell you about equal opportunity and the American way and all that sh**."

After college, where he palled around with Marxist professors and took in socialist conferences "for inspiration," Obama followed in Davis' footsteps, becoming a "community organizer" in Chicago.

His boss there was Gerald Kellman, whose identity Obama also tries to hide in his book. Turns out Kellman's a disciple of the late Saul "The Red" Alinsky, a hard-boiled Chicago socialist who wrote the "Rules for Radicals" and agitated for social revolution in America.

The Chicago-based Woods Fund provided Kellman with his original $25,000 to hire Obama. In turn, Obama would later serve on the Woods board with terrorist Bill Ayers of the Weather Underground. Ayers was one of Obama's early political supporters.

After three years agitating with marginal success for more welfare programs in South Side Chicago, Obama decided he would need to study law to "bring about real change" — on a large scale.

While at Harvard Law School, he still found time to hone his organizing skills. For example, he spent eight days in Los Angeles taking a national training course taught by Alinsky's Industrial Areas Foundation. With his newly minted law degree, he returned to Chicago to reapply — as well as teach — Alinsky's "agitation" tactics.

(A video-streamed bio on Obama's Web site includes a photo of him teaching in a University of Chicago classroom. If you freeze the frame and look closely at the blackboard Obama is writing on, you can make out the words "Power Analysis" and "Relationships Built on Self Interest" — terms right out of Alinsky's rule book.)

Amid all this, Obama reunited with his late father's communist tribe in Kenya, the Luo, during trips to Africa.

As a Nairobi bureaucrat, Barack Hussein Obama Sr., a Harvard-educated economist, grew to challenge the ruling pro-Western government for not being socialist enough. In an eight-page scholarly paper published in 1965, he argued for eliminating private farming and nationalizing businesses "owned by Asians and Europeans."

His ideas for communist-style expropriation didn't stop there. He also proposed massive taxes on the rich to "redistribute our economic gains to the benefit of all."

"Theoretically, there is nothing that can stop the government from taxing 100% of income so long as the people get benefits from the government commensurate with their income which is taxed," Obama Sr. wrote. "I do not see why the government cannot tax those who have more and syphon some of these revenues into savings which can be utilized in investment for future development."

Taxes and "investment" . . . the fruit truly does not fall far from the vine.

(Voters might also be interested to know that Obama, the supposed straight shooter, does not once mention his father's communist leanings in an entire book dedicated to his memory.)

In Kenya's recent civil unrest, Obama privately phoned the leader of the opposition Luo tribe, Raila Odinga, to voice his support. Odinga is so committed to communism he named his oldest son after Fidel Castro.

With his African identity sewn up, Obama returned to Chicago and fell under the spell of an Afrocentric pastor. It was a natural attraction. The Rev. Jeremiah Wright preaches a Marxist version of Christianity called "black liberation theology" and has supported the communists in Cuba, Nicaragua and elsewhere.

Obama joined Wright's militant church, pledging allegiance to a system of "black values" that demonizes white "middle classness" and other mainstream pursuits.

(Obama in his first book, published in 1995, calls such values "sensible." There's no mention of them in his new book.)

With the large church behind him, Obama decided to run for political office, where he could organize for "change" more effectively. "As an elected official," he said, "I could bring church and community leaders together easier than I could as a community organizer or lawyer."

He could also exercise real, top-down power, the kind that grass-roots activists lack. Alinsky would be proud.

Throughout his career, Obama has worked closely with a network of stone-cold socialists and full-blown communists striving for "economic justice."

He's been traveling in an orbit of collectivism that runs from Nairobi to Honolulu, and on through Chicago to Washington.

Yet a recent AP poll found that only 6% of Americans would describe Obama as "liberal," let alone socialist.

Public opinion polls usually reflect media opinion, and the media by and large have portrayed Obama as a moderate "outsider" (the No. 1 term survey respondents associate him with) who will bring a "breath of fresh air" to Washington.

The few who have drilled down on his radical roots have tended to downplay or pooh-pooh them. Even skeptics have failed to connect the dots for fear of being called the dreaded "r" word.

But too much is at stake in this election to continue mincing words.

Both a historic banking crisis and 1970s-style stagflation loom over the economy. Democrats, who already control Congress, now threaten to filibuster-proof the Senate in what could be a watershed election for them — at both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue.

A perfect storm of statism is forming, and our economic freedoms are at serious risk.

Those who care less about looking politically correct than preserving the free-market individualism that's made this country great have to start calling things by their proper name to avert long-term disaster.

Monday, July 28, 2008

Obama And The New American Revolution

Prof. Paul Eidelberg

Much confusion reigns among many Jews, especially in Israel, concerning Senator Barack Obama, should he become America’s next president.

Obama-watchers are worried about is Middle East advisers. Prominent among them is Professor Bzigniev Brzezinski, who was Jimmy Carter’s National Security Adviser. Brzezinski helped orchestrate the fall of America’s ally, the Shah of Iran and the ascendancy of the Ayatollah Khomeini, whose Islamic revolution now threatens Israel and the West.

There is something insidious about Brzezinski—a clue to what underlies Senator Obama’s ascendancy in the Democratic Party. Brzezinski, like George Soros, a billionaire who backed both Obama and Hillary Clinton in the presidential primaries, is a globalist opposed to the sovereignty of the nation state. This attitude conflicts with Judaism, but not with Islam, and sheds light on Brzezinski’s notorious anti-Israel record, a record bordering on Jew-hatred.

That Senator Obama includes among his advisers former U.S. ambassador to Israel Daniel Kurtzer, reputedly an orthodox Jew, is hardly reassuring. Kurtzer not only advocates a Palestinian state with eastern Jerusalem as its capital. He is serving a politician who recently told the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) that he advocates a contiguous Palestinian state, hence one connected with Gaza. This would destroy the geographic continuity of the Jewish state and fatally undermine its security.

Also mentioned among Obama’s advisers is former Secretary of State James Baker, a transparent anti-Semite, who, together with ex-congressman Lee Hamilton, formed the Iraqi Study Group. These political geniuses would have us believe that negotiations can persuade Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to halt Iran’s development of nuclear weapons. As proud Americans, they ignore Ahmadinejad’s stated objective of a world without America—and of course without Israel—hence a world without Christianity and Judaism.

Senator Obama has adopted this see-no-evil, hear-no-evil, and speak-no-evil policy, except that he would qualify the word “negotiations” with the adjective “tough.” He seems to believe that the word “tough” will make him appear as a hard-liner, rather than another muddle-headed Jimmy Carter.

Obama’s Middle East advisers, like Obama himself, lack the intellectual integrity or moral courage to face up to the enormity of evil entrenched in Tehran—an evil rooted in Islam itself, as Dr. Wafa Sultan of Syria and Lebanese-born Brigitte Gabriel have emphasized. You do not negotiate with Muslims committed to your destruction. What is there to negotiate about—the date or manner of your destruction?

In any event, Obama’s choice of advisers must also be understood in terms of domestic politics, and American politics has new levels of significance. Let’s begin on the surface.

Obama defeated Hillary Clinton in the presidential primaries because he outflanked her on the left side of the political spectrum. Of course, he also cultivated a reputation of opposing the war in Iraq, and this multiplied the number of youth that supported his candidacy. Since he was opposed to the war, he had to choose Middle East advisers persons opposed to a preemptive U.S. attack on Iran as the way to stop its development of its nuclear weapons program. But any pundit sees this. Let us therefore examine a second level of the Obama phenomenon.

Everyone knows, by now, that Senator Obama is a glib speaker. It is also becoming increasingly obvious that his slogan of CHANGE is vacuous: he does not articulate a set of basic political principles, nor does he have a well-known record of legislative accomplishments from which one might deduce his basic convictions. Although his voting record in the Senate stamps him a leftist, he strikes many people as an enigmatic phenomenon, which can attract as well as repel.

His 20-year attendance at the church of Jeremiah Wright—an anti-American pastor and unabashed Jew-hater—is suggestive, but his campaign for the presidency has compelled him to equivocate about his guru and then reject him. Obama is nothing if not an ambitious politician whose first priority is to be elected. Nothing new here; but that he should have so long admired an anti-American pastor leads me to the heart of the matter, and this goes beyond Obama.

Pundits fail to explore the significance of a very simple fact: a vote for Obama is also a vote for the Democratic Party. Unless one understands the revolutionary change that has taken place in the Democratic Party, one will not understand the Obama phenomenon. That revolution involves both domestic and foreign policy.

Of course, domestic politics will be Obama’s primary concern if he wants a second term in the White House. Even if he should ignore the soft approach of his Middle East advisers on Iran, a hard policy would be trumped by his need to win congressional support for his domestic program, and that means the program of the Democratic Party.

The Democratic Party has long been committed to Big Government, hence big bureaucracy, welfare state subsidies, high taxation, weakened private sector and diminished entrepreneurial energy.

But today’s Democratic Party is also committed to multiculturalism. Multiculturalism requires America’s retreat from national sovereignty on the one hand, and from superpower status in world affairs on the other. This agrees with Obama’s trite presidential campaign slogan, CHANGE. Now let us illustrate the political revolution that has taken place in America by means of a very new Democratic Party headed by Barack Obama.

It will be sufficient for this purpose to examine how the House of Representatives voted on a bill concerning Islamic Jihad, a bill that conveys the ideological nature of the conflict between America and Islamic terrorism.

On May 8, 2008, Republican Congressman Peter Hoekstra of Michigan attempted to add an amendment on the “terror lexicon” of a House committee bill on intelligence funding (House Resolution 5959).

Hoekstra’s amendment condemned efforts by the State Department, the National Counter Terrorism Center, and the Department of Homeland Security to recommend a “terror lexicon” that prohibits use of words such as “Jihad,” “jihadist,” “Islamist,” “mujahadeen,” “caliphate,” etc.

On July 16, 2008, the bill was presented to the full House of Representatives for debate and adoption, including Congressman Hoekstra’s amendment. The amendment stated that: “None of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act may be used to prohibit or discourage the use of the words or phrases ‘jihadist’, ‘jihad’, ‘Islamo-fascism’, ‘caliphate’, ‘Islamist’, or ‘Islamic terrorist’ by or within the intelligence community or the Federal Government.”

The amendment passed by the margin of 249-180 (with 10 abstentions). All of the 180 Representatives that voted against Hoekstra’s amendment are Democrats!

This suggests that these Democrats have been tainted by moral or cultural relativism. Relativism not only undermines a strong sense of national pride and identity; it also conduces to a soft and non–judgmental attitude toward acts of Islamic terrorism. Moral relativism saps moral outrage and dulls memory even of the monstrous deeds perpetrated by Muslim terrorists: the beheading of American journalist Daniel Pearl in Pakistan; the suicide bombing of Jewish school buses in Jerusalem. Even 9/11 is going down the memory tube, judging from the votes of 180 Democrats.

Relativism corrupts the mind, eviscerates patriotism. For the first time in American history, the Democratic Party vilified America’s Commander-in-Chief while the country was at war. Democrats were thus giving aid and comfort to the enemy, were thus prima facie guilty of treason.

Radical leftwing Democrats will ride on the coattails of Senator Obama in the November 2008 elections. In addition to their powerful influence on domestic policy, they will persist in a policy of appeasement of Islam, a policy that endangers Israel’s existence. Moreover, since Obama has said he will pull American troops out of Iraq within 16 months—an invitation for Iran to move in—I fear that the next Congress, if controlled by the Democrats, will legislate America’s defeat in Iraq and its virtual surrender to Islam.

What also needs to be emphasized, however, is that an insidious political revolution is taking place in America, a revolution pursued under Obama’s seemingly innocuous slogan of CHANGE. That change may well be nothing less than regime change—a change that will eventually terminate American civilization. I say this with two developments in mind: the economic ascendancy of a nuclear-armed China and the resurgence of Russian imperialism, undermining the U.S. by supplying Iran with S-300 long-range anti-aircraft missiles to thwart any attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities.

And so, an Obama presidency may undo the American Revolution of 1776. At stake is the Judeo-Christian heritage underlying that magnificent Revolution.


*Edited transcript of the Eidelberg Report, Israel Nation Radio, July 28, 2008.

The Challenge of Islam

Mordechai Nisan

Islam, as a later and last monotheistic faith appearing in Arabia in the seventh-century, never considered itself just another religion, but the last and final religion totally complete in doctrine and superior in rule.1 The Muslim believers sought power for Islam as the supra-successor faith to Judaism and Christianity, and the ultimately universal faith for all of mankind. The frenzy of religious struggles in history would, from that moment on, set Islam on an ineluctable course to conquer the world. The Qur`an elucidated the religion’s warring spirit by praising those Muslims “who fight for the cause of Allah” (4:95-96) rather than those who avoid the battle and prefer to stay at home. In distinction from Judaism and Christianity, the Muslim community considers that “the holy war is a religious duty because of the universalism of the mission and the obligation to convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force”; and this, added the classical 14th century historian Ibn Khaldun, is because “Islam is under obligation to gain power over other nations.”2

Islam cannot be compared with any other religion or understood by analogy. It bears a unique militant ethic from its origins. This cannot be said of ascetic Buddhism or otherworldly Hinduism. Judaism, though equipped with “commandments for war”, did not promote conquest or experience power in any exceptional way. Christianity was born beset with sin, preaching poverty and practicing withdrawalism by fasting and virginity, pining for martyrdom through persecution.3

Islam evoked a far different collective sensibility. It brandished the sword, yelled Allah Akbar (God is Great) – as at Qadisiyya in southern Mesopotamia/Iraq in 637 – charged into battle, and plundering its spoils with delight.

We live at the beginning of the 21st century when the “return of Islam” has raised the challenge against the Jewish state of Israel, Christianity world-wide, Buddhism, and virtually all and any other belief systems and faith communities. . . .

Continued at . . .

Saturday, July 26, 2008

Debating About Islam - Part 1

A Muslim professor discusses “moderate Muslims.” His definition of this term should be read very carefully. Also notice that he includes the head of the Muslim Brotherhood in Europe, Tariq Ramadan, as one of this group.

China has its problems with jihad. And then there were the bus bombings.

A Muslim doctor on how to take over an American hospital and make it a Muslim one.
Dhimmitude at the Washington Post.

Debating About Islam

Once you know something about Islam and try to talk to others, you may find yourself in a debate. Here are some of the “standards”.


Everyone from Muslims to atheists uses this. The implication is that Arabic is a unique language that can’t be translated and therefore, how could you know what you are talking about? First, the Koran claims to be a universal message for all humanity for all times. If the message is universal, then it must be able to be understood by all. If the message cannot be understood by everybody, then by definition it is not universal. So, which is it?
Another thing to consider is that over half of the Koran is about kafirs and politics. Do you really think that a political message about a kafir cannot be understood by the kafir? If so, what is that message that cannot be understood?

It must be made clear which Arabic is being spoken about. The Arabic of the Koran is classical Arabic which is about as similar to modern Arabic as the English of Chaucer and Beowulf is similar to modern English. Said in another way, not even a modern Arab can read classical Arabic. It is estimated that fewer than a thousand scholars who read classical Arabic can compose a paragraph on a random topic.

And what about the nearly billion Muslims who don’t even understand modern Arabic? If it is necessary to understand classical Arabic to understand what the Koran is about, then how can those billion non-Arabic-speaking Muslims understand the Koran? And if they cannot understand the Koran how can they be Muslims?

Ask the person who presents the argument if they have any opinions about the doctrine of Christianity. Then ask them if they read Hebrew, Aramaic or Biblical Greek? If they do not read those languages how can they form an opinion about something they have to read in translation? Of course they can read it and form an opinion, the same way we can read and understand the Koran.

A secondary question is why would anyone want to believe that the Koran couldn’t be understood? What is the purpose of believing that out of all the books in the world, why would there be one that cannot be translated?

The Koran is only 18% of the total doctrine. Would the questioner believe that the other 82% of the doctrine not be understood as well?


This response usually comes after some grim facts are given about Islam. This is probably the most common response from non-Christians. The best response is to ask if they have a reason that they don’t want to talk about Islam, since they want to change the subject. The average person knows next to nothing about Islam and sometimes this gambit is merely a way to steer the conversation into a familiar ground.

They are just trying to prove that Islam is not any worse than Christianity. At this point, welcome the chance to compare the two. Choose the ground of comparison. The best place to start is the founders. Compare Mohammed to Christ. The other good comparison is in ethics. Compare Islam’s dualistic ethics to unitary Golden Rule ethics.

Another version of this is that the person will compare some failed Christian to a “good” Muslim they know at work. It is fairly useless to do personal comparisons. How do you choose which Muslim out of 1.5 billion Muslims and which Christian do you choose out of a couple billion Christians?

A variation on the “Well, the Christians did …” is “What about the Crusades”? This is the time to say you welcome a comparison of the Crusades to jihad. Start with the question of why the Crusades were needed. Islamic jihad caused the invasion of the Middle East. The Crusades were a response to a cry for help by the tortured and oppressed Christians in their native land. Did the Christians do some very wrong things? Yes, but notice that the Crusades have been over nearly a thousand years. Jihad is active today. And while we are at it, why do academic libraries have many books on the Crusades, which lasted only 200 years, and so few on jihad, which has lasted 1400 years? The West has analyzed the Crusades forever and has never analyzed jihad.


Why is the Muslim your friend knows the only Muslim out of 1.5 billion that makes him the expert on Islam? Remember, the average Muslim knows very little about the doctrine of Islam. Why? Because, historically the imams have acted as the high priests of Islam and they have never made the doctrine simple to understand. That is one way they keep their prestige and power.

But once you know something about the doctrine, you can say that you know also know a Muslim, and his name is Mohammed, and what you say comes from the Sunna. In short, your Muslim, Mohammed, can beat your friend’s Muslim on any issue of doctrine. If the Muslim your friend knows says something about Islam that agrees with Mohammed, then it is right. If what he says contradicts Mohammed, then he is wrong. So this Muslim your friend knows is either wrong or redundant, but never more right than Mohammed.


Probably so. What does that prove about Islam? He may follow the Golden Rule and not Islam. That is, he may be a poor Muslim and a good person.

Now is the time to explain about the Islam of Mecca and the Islam of Medina and which one is the more powerful. It is also time to explain about dualism and how Islam always has two faces.
Stay with doctrine and history of Islam, never get personal and talk about an individual Muslim. Actually, there is one way to talk about any Muslim, show how what they do and say follows the doctrine.

Besides, you know this Muslim and his name is Mohammed. Don’t talk about “Muslims,” talk about Mohammed.


If you are quoting the Koran or the Sunna, then it is the real Islam, by definition. The Koran and the Sunna are Islam, the real Islam. All other Islam, such as is found in the media, is the false Islam. There is only one real Islam, the doctrine of Islam.


This comes after you have revealed some horrific part of the doctrine. What do Muslims call themselves? The believers. What do they believe? The Koran and the Sunna. They say that is what they believe. Really believe.


This is a restating of, “I know this Muslim and he is good man.” He may be a poor Muslim and a good man who follows the Golden Rule.
But, the statement shows that there is no understanding of the duality of Islam. The Koran has both violence and tolerance against the kafirs. Today in America the power of Islam is just getting started, so Islam is still weak. When Mohammed was weak in Mecca, he did not kill anybody. Islam is still in the first phase of jihad here.

But the Koran says that one Muslim can beat two kafirs. It also says that Islam must be the dominant political system. So when Muslims reach a third of the population (that makes it 2 to 1), they will be in the full stage of Medina and violence becomes a standard operation. But even then, we know from the Sira, that many Muslims just don’t have the stomach for the violence. The Sira shows that Muslims can support jihad many ways, besides personal violence. The “peaceful” Muslim you know is commanded to give money to Islamic charities and the charities give the money to the actual fighters.


Look at the violence in the Old Testament. It has two qualities—local and temporary. None of the violence is commanded to be global and eternal. In each case the violence is directed in a political struggle and when it was over it was over.

The violence in the Trilogy is for all Muslims, in all places and for all time. Jihad is to stop only when every kafir submits. Look at Mohammed, the perfect example. He was involved with violence until the day he died. And on his deathbed he directed eternal violence against the kafirs when he said in his last breath: “Let there be neither Christian or Jew left in Arabia.”


The Sira records that when Islam committed violence, it attracted new followers. As Osama bin Laden says: “People like a winning horse.” After 9/11 in the US, new followers joined Islam. Communism was a political system that preached, promised and delivered violence and it attracted many people. Many people love violence. Have you never paid any attention to Hollywood? Violence is piled upon violence and people line up to see it.

Islam is growing rapidly. but most of the growth can be attributed to high birth rates, not conversion. Islam’s growth in kafir countries is due to immigration, not conversion.

Bill Warner

Signup for our weekly newletter.
copyright 2008, CBSX, Inc. dba
Use this as you will, just do not edit and give us credit.