Sunday, August 31, 2008

Jihad Inside the United states

from "Six Philly residents arrested in Yemen" at Jihad Watch

The Americans who have been arrested in Yemen attend the same Germantown Masjid which was at the center of the controversy surrounding the killing of Police Officer Stephen Liczbinski. Incidentally, Mustafa Ali -- the ATM killer who executed two retired police officers, as well as the Wal-Mart robbers, also attended this Germantown mosque. They are all Salafis -- "pure" Muslims.

It is known that the Germantown mosque has sponsored "students" going to Yemen to study with the jihadist Sheikh Muqbil -- and after he passed away, another jihadist, Yahya Hajoori. There are a number of jihadist Americans in Yemen as we speak.

Omar Sharif Cash, wanted for murder and rape, is another Muslim convert from the Philadelphia area. With Islamic proselytizing going on so energetically in prisons, this is going to an inevitable result.

"After 1 month, Philly native remains detained in Yemen," by Kitty Caparella for the Philadelphia Daily News [says]:

Continue reading at Jihad Watch

(Note: Look the "COMMENTS" after this post at Jihad Watch, they give more information--from different aspects.)

Saturday, August 30, 2008

What kind of a "Christian" is Barack H Obama?

He "Found Christ" when he met the Rev. Jeremiah Wright at whose feet he sat and for 20-odd years and learned about a black Christ who was crucified by the White Man.

Does that jibe with your Christianity?

Barry? who in Blazes is Barry? why it's (drum roll) . . . ah . . . you gotta read the post & link to find out

Barry Doesn’t Understand The Role Of The Joint Chiefs Of Staff

Who's Barry?

why "Barry Sotero" of course, aka Barack Hussein Obama

http://nosheepleshere.blogspot.com/2008/07/barry-doesnt-understand-role-of-joint.html

Fitzgerald: Muslims and America

"We have a message: Muslim Americans are as American as apple pie” – from this article in The Guardian about Muslims at the Democratic National Convention in Denver
If Muslims are "as American as apple pie," are they as American as pumpkin pie, the pumpkin pie traditionally served at Thanksgiving, which like Independence Day, Memorial Day, and other national holidays, are not to be observed by observant Muslims, for only Muslim holidays, Muslim history, Muslim everything, counts?

And one more question. If Muslims have no trouble at all being "as American as apple pie" then surely they have no trouble viewing the defining document of the American polity, the Constitution of the United States, as worthy of their complete loyalty. And that includes, of course, the guarantees of individual rights in the Bill of Rights. And since the Bill of Rights is so very close, in so many of its key provisions -- freedom of speech, freedom of conscience (which naturally includes the right to apostatize) -- to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, can we conclude that American-as-apple-pie American Muslims find it puzzling that all of the Muslim countries (save for the Shah's Iran, and most temporarily and temporizingly) have failed to subscribe to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and instead have concocted a Muslim version, the so-called Cairo Declaration, which in every essential respect, involving individual rights, fatally vitiates the original, Universal Declaration?

Continue reading "Fitzgerald: Muslims and America"

http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/022450.php#comment

Soft Jihad

Frank Gaffney wrote a piece on soft jihad at the Democratic convention.

Here is Robert Spencer's take on the same event:

"A Victim at the Democratic Convention"
Read it at http://howtostoptheislamicjihad.blogspot.com/2008/08/soft-jihad.html

Friday, August 29, 2008

Jama'at al-Fuqara': A Domestic Threat to the United States?

Jama'at al-Fuqara': A Domestic Threat to the United States?
http://www.actforamerica.org/index.php/learn/recent-news/10-newsmaster/212-jamaat-al-fuqara-a-domestic-threat-to-the-united-states

Barack "The Silencer" Obama's Gangland Assault on Free Speech

Michelle Malkin
Friday, August 29, 2008
http://townhall.com/Common/PrintPage.aspx?g=5b4e26f5-1979-492b-8ab9-db0ef56adcc7&t=c

Where are all the free speech absolutists when you need them? Over the past month, left-wing partisans and Democratic lawyers have waged a brass-knuckled intimidation campaign against GOP donors, TV and radio stations, and even an investigative journalist because they have all dared to question the radical cult of Barack Obama. A chill wind blows, but where the valiant protectors of political dissent are, nobody knows.

On August 11, I called the American Civil Liberties Union national headquarters in New York for comment about the Chicago gangland tactics of one of these groups -- a nonprofit called "Accountable America" that is spearheaded by a former operative of the Obama-endorsing MoveOn outfit.

"Accountable America" is trolling campaign finance databases and targeting conservative donors with "warning" letters in a thuggish attempt to depress Republican fundraising. (You'll be interested to know that the official registered agent of Accountable America is Laurence Gold, a high-powered attorney for the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) who has testified before the Senate complaining about the use of campaign finance laws to stifle the speech of union workers -- a pet cause of the ACLU.)

The ACLU press office failed to respond to my initial call. On August 13, I followed up through e-mail:

"I called on Monday requesting a statement from the ACLU about Accountable America's intimidation campaign against GOP donors. What is the ACLU's position with regard to such efforts? Waiting for your statement..."

ACLU press officer Pamela Bradshaw e-mailed back:

"Michelle, My apologies that I cannot be of more assistance, but we don't have anyone available. Thanks, Pam."

My reply: "Pam -- Does this mean you don't have anyone available today, this week, or for the foreseeable future?"

On August 20, after a week of silence, I forwarded the message again to the ACLU press office. No response.

So, I won't bother asking the ACLU's opinion of the latest wave of speech-squelching moves by the Obama campaign:

On Monday, Obama demanded that the Justice Department stop TV stations from airing a documented, accurate independent ad spotlighting Obama's longtime working relationship with unrepentant Weather Underground terrorist Bill Ayers. Obama summoned his followers to bombard stations, many of them owned by conservative-leaning Sinclair Communications, with 93,000 e-mails to squelch the commercial.

On Tuesday, the Obama campaign sent another letter to the Justice Department demanding investigation and prosecution of American Issues Project, the group that produced the Ayers ad, as well as Dallas billionaire Harold Simmons, who funded it.

And on Wednesday, Obama exhorted his followers to sabotage the WGN radio show of veteran Chicago host and University of Chicago Professor Milt Rosenberg. Why? Because he invited National Review writer Stanley Kurtz to discuss his investigative findings about Obama's ties to Ayers and the underwhelming results of their collaboration on a left-wing educational project sponsored by the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. The "Obama Action Wire" supplied Rosenberg's call-in line and talking points like this:

"Tell WGN that by providing Kurtz with airtime, they are legitimizing baseless attacks from a smear-merchant and lowering the standards of political discourse. ... It is absolutely unacceptable that WGN would give a slimy character assassin like Kurtz time for his divisive, destructive ranting on our public airwaves."

Behind the glowing, peaceful facade lies Barack "The Silencer" Obama and his silent enablers on the left. While mainstream journalists schmoozed with liberal celebrities in Denver, practiced yoga with left-wing bloggers and received massages at the Google convention tent near touchy-feely Barackopolis, Team Obama was on an ugly, aggressive warpath sanctioned by Mr. Civility. While compassionate Obama prepared to stand before thousands of worshipers at Invesco Field, purporting to give voice to the voiceless, his Chicago-schooled campaign machine was working overtime to muzzle conservative critics. "We want it to stop," ordered one pro-Obama caller to WGN.

Welcome to the future: the politics of Hope and Change enforced by the missionaries of Search and Destroy.

Copyright © 2008 Salem Web Network. All Rights Reserved.

And if you want to know
WHY DOES AN ISLAM-RESISTING BLOG WARN AMERICANS AGAINST OBAMA?
Then click on the above and find out!
here is the link once again: http://islamicdanger4u.blogspot.com/2008/07/why-does-islam-resisting-blog-warn.html

Thursday, August 28, 2008

Barack Obama through Muslim Eyes

by Daniel Pipes

FrontPageMagazine.com August 25, 2008



How do Muslims see Barack Hussein Obama? They have three choices: either as he presents himself – someone who has "never been a Muslim" and has "always been a Christian"; or as a fellow Muslim; or as an apostate from Islam.


Reports suggests that while Americans generally view the Democratic candidate having had no religion before converting at Reverend Jeremiah Wrights's hands at age 27, Muslims the world over rarely see him as Christian but usually as either Muslim or ex-Muslim.


Lee Smith of the Hudson Institute explains why: "Barack Obama's father was Muslim and therefore, according to Islamic law, so is the candidate. In spite of the Quranic verses explaining that there is no compulsion in religion, a Muslim child takes the religion of his or her father. … for Muslims around the world, non-American Muslims at any rate, they can only ever see Barack Hussein Obama as a Muslim." In addition, his school record from Indonesia lists him as a Muslim.


Thus, an Egyptian newspaper, Al-Masri al-Youm, refers to his "Muslim origins." Libyan ruler Mu‘ammar al-Qaddafi referred to Obama as "a Muslim" and a person with an "African and Islamic identity." One Al-Jazeera analysis calls him a "non-Christian man," a second refers to his "Muslim Kenyan" father, and a third, by Naseem Jamali, notes that "Obama may not want to be counted as a Muslim but Muslims are eager to count him as one of their own."


A conversation in Beirut, quoted in the Christian Science Monitor, captures the puzzlement. "He has to be good for Arabs because he is a Muslim," observed a grocer. "He's not a Muslim, he's a Christian," replied a customer. Retorted the grocer: "He can't be a Christian. His middle name is Hussein." Arabic discussions of Obama sometimes mention his middle name as a code, with no further comment needed.


The symbolism of a major American presidential candidate with the middle name of Hussein, who went to elementary school in Indonesia," reports Tamara Cofman Wittes of the Brookings Institution from a U.S.-Muslim conference in Qatar, "that certainly speaks to Muslims abroad." Thomas L. Friedman of the New York Times found that Egyptians "don't really understand Obama's family tree, but what they do know is that if America — despite being attacked by Muslim militants on 9/11 — were to elect as its president some guy with the middle name ‘Hussein,' it would mark a sea change in America-Muslim world relations."


Some American Muslim leaders also perceive Obama as Muslim. The president of the Islamic Society of North America, Sayyid M. Syeed, told Muslims at a conference in Houston that whether Obama wins or loses, his candidacy will reinforce that Muslim children can "become the presidents of this country." The Nation of Islam's Louis Farrakhan called Obama "the hope of the entire world" and compared him to his religion's founder, Fard Muhammad.


But this excitement also has a dark side – suspicions that Obama is a traitor to his birth religion, an apostate (murtadd) from Islam. Al-Qaeda has prominently featured Obama's stating "I am not a Muslim" and one analyst, Shireen K. Burki of the University of Mary Washington, sees Obama as "bin Laden's dream candidate." Should he become U.S. commander in chief, she believes, Al-Qaeda would likely "exploit his background to argue that an apostate is leading the global war on terror … to galvanize sympathizers into action."


Mainstream Muslims tend to tiptoe around this topic. An Egyptian supporter of Obama, Yasser Khalil, reports that many Muslims react "with bewilderment and curiosity" when Obama is described as a Muslim apostate; Josie Delap and Robert Lane Greene of the Economist even claim that the Obama-as-apostate theme "has been notably absent" among Arabic-language columnists and editorialists.


That latter claim is inaccurate, for the topic is indeed discussed. At least one Arabic-language newspaper published Burki's article. Kuwait's Al-Watan referred to Obama as "a born Muslim, an apostate, a convert to Christianity." Writing in the Arab Times, Syrian liberal Nidal Na‘isa repeatedly called Obama an "apostate Muslim."


In sum, Muslims puzzle over Obama's present religious status. They resist his self-identification as a Christian while they assume a baby born to a Muslim father and named "Hussein" began life a Muslim. Should Obama become president, differences in Muslim and American views of religious affiliation will create problems.


Aug. 25, 2008 update: This is the fourth in a series of articles I have published on Barack Obama's ties to Islam.


The prior three:

"Was Barack Obama a Muslim?" FrontPageMag.com, December 24, 2007. Raises questions about Obama's childhood religion and considers some implications.


"Confirmed: Barack Obama Practiced Islam." FrontPageMag.com, January 7, 2008. Replies to a critique of the previous article by "Media Matters for America."


"Barack Obama's Muslim Childhood." Jerusalem Post, May 1, 2008. Pulls together existing information on Obama's childhood religion.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ACT for America P.O. Box 6884

Virginia Beach, VA 23456

Venezuela Tightens Ties With Iran, Hizbullah










Hizbullah has strengthened its presence in Venezuela, following tightening of Caracas-Teheran ties. Kidnappings of Jews are feared.

27 Av 5768, 28 August 08 01:00

by Hillel Fendel(IsraelNN.com)

International terrorism experts fear that Venezuela will soon become a base for terrorist attack initiatives, in light of the tightening of ties between the South American dictatorship and both Iran and Hizbullah.

A top expert in the war against terrorism, speaking with the Los Angeles Times, said that agents of Hizbullah and the Revolutionary Guard of Iran have formed a special force designed to kidnap Jewish businessmen in South America and smuggle them to Lebanon. He said that Venezuelan employees of the international airport in Caracas have already been recruited to provide information about Jewish tourists who arrive in the country.

The Lebanese terrorist organization Hizbullah, which enjoys close relations with Venezuela, is reportedly building terror strongholds in the country.

Israeli citizens have been warned in general of the danger of kidnapping by Hizbullah terrorists, who claim to still be seeking revenge for the assassination of their #2 leader, Imad Mughniyeh, six months ago. Israel has denied any involvement in the killing, and has evidence that Syria was responsible.

Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez, a rabid anti-American, has forged close diplomatic and commercial ties with Iran. He has visited there several times, and his country is the site of some joint Iranian-Venezuelan business ventures, including a car factory.

The United States has long accused Iran of involvement in the 1992 bombing of Israel's embassy in Venezuela, in which 29 people were killed.

Hizbullah-Venezuela Ties
Two Venezuelans stand accused of aiding Hizbullah in raising funds, and their American assets have been frozen. In addition, a travel agent in Caracas was found to have aided Hizbullah in procuring airline tickets and making plans for terror attacks and kidnappings.

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/
© Copyright IsraelNationalNews.com

MORE . . . BACKGROUND TO VENEZUELA, HEZBOLLAH, OBAMA,
etc., at . . .



OBAMA AND CHAVEZ


Revolution from the Left


TROUBLE FROM THE SOUTH - LATIN AMERICAN DANGER

Lo and behold! A Child Is Born! Halleluyah! The annointed One

"He ventured forth to bring light to the world. The anointed one . . . "

(Click here to enjoy this recounting of the how he"child," the "one we had been waiting for," came as a "blessing upon us all" (sarcasm) [scroll up, if necessary].

Read it on August 28, 2008, when the "chosen one" will be anointed and crowned by the adoring throng. ("King of the Universe?" (blasphemy!] or "A Sad Reminder of What This Country Has Become.")

DEMOCRATIC CONVENTION 2008
Program for August 28, 2008
(the moment the world has been waiting for [you think?])


The theme for the day is “Change You Can Believe In.”
Barack Obama will accept the nomination in a speech at INVESCO Field at Mile High on the 45th anniversary of Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech. He will be joined by Former Vice President Al Gore.





















And once he is in power, the annointed one, peace shall reign all over the Earth. Halleluyah! Halleluyah! Halleluyah!
























Read it here: http://auntygravity.blogspot.com/2008/07/gerard-baker-times-online-july-25-2008.html#links

Wednesday, August 27, 2008

A Way to Defeat Political Islam

One of the best thinkers on the subject of Islam and its threats to non-Muslims is Bill Warner, affiliated with the Center for the Study of Political Islam.

Mr. Warner has recently published a series of commentaries entitled “An Ethical Basis for War Against Political Islam.” We took special note of his latest newsletter in this series, “Strategy – A Way to Defeat Political Islam.”

An Ethical Basis for War Against Political Islam
This newsletter is one of a series on the subject-Newsletter #10

Strategy--A Way to Defeat Political Islam

Moral Purpose

Before we discuss strategy, we must declare our moral purpose. Our moral purpose is to defend the very existence of the culture of the Golden Rule, an ethical civilization, from the 1400-year assault by the dualistic ethics of political Islam. We must stop the continued killing of kafirs, the enslavement of humanity and the spread of terror by Islam.

The Situation Islam represents 20% of the world's population and is growing. Islam is united, has a vision, a strategy and successful tactics.

Political correctness and multi-culturalism rule our world. Our government will not help in this war and instead gives aid and comfort to the "minority" Muslims. Our government is staffed by multiculturalists who will give every edge to Muslims. Our schools have been occupied by the Muslim Brotherhood and the dhimmi leftist professors.

Kafirs are divided into Christian, Jew, Hindu, Buddhist, atheist, conservative and liberal. Each of the divisions has further divisions. The relations between the groups is marked by historical rivalries and hatreds. No group comprehends the suffering of others at the hands of Islam. So not only do none of the victims know their own story, they do not know the story of the others.

The Muslims have a great momentum. They are taking over by birth and immigration. We have fewer children while Muslims have huge families. Osama bin Laden has 53 children. Demographic statistics show that France will become Islamic in the year 2020. Run the population numbers.

Islam knows us well. Islam knows our history, secret shame, rivalries and hatreds, weaknesses and divisions. Kafirs don't know anything about Islam. We may fear and dislike it but that is just "feelings", not knowledge. Our so-called experts (none of whom know the actual doctrine of political Islam) make apologies and tell us that all of Islam's problems are caused by our poor governmental policies.

We are filled with cultural self-loathing, demoralized, fatalistic, nihilistic, too fat and too rich. (Wealthy people are weak at war, they have too much to protect.) We have lost the mind of war and feel that "peace" is the moral high ground. We are pacifists in the face of jihad. Our artists extol the virtues of peace with no knowledge about what happens when peaceful people are vanquished.

A Strategy for the Weak

At this stage of our intellectual and emotional development, our strategies are limited. We are too weak to attack Islam and need an opening strategy for now.

First, we must learn the doctrine of political Islam. We must know the enemy. We must also know who our allies are and who are the allies of Islam. We have two sets of enemies-the far enemy, Islam, and the near enemy-those who apologize for Islam, the dhimmis.

The thought of actually attacking Islam is too frightening at this stage of the game. However, we can make flanking attacks on our enemy's allies, the apologists. Even dhimmis can think about attacking or pressuring the near enemy.

We can make a flanking attack on our enemy by attacking his strategies. We must expose Islam through its doctrine from the Koran, the Sunna (the Hadith and the Sira). According to Sun Tsu in The Art of War, attacking your enemy's strategy is the highest level strategy. And Islam's strategy is laid out in the Trilogy. We now have the weapons, the books exposing their strategy.

Another principle of Sun Tsu is to shape the enemy. Islam always poses as a religion to cloak their politics . It is useless to attack a religion, so Islamic politics are under the radar. We must shape Islam as a political doctrine. We must attack the far enemy-political Islam. This means that we attack Mohammed, not Allah.
So we have a slogan for our opening strategy:

Build community [this is the mission of ACT! for America]

Expose the far enemy [this is the mission of American Congress for Truth and part of the mission of ACT! for America]

Attack the near enemy [organize and mobilize through the local chapters]
Community [The objective of ACT! for America is an informed, organized and mobilized community] We must form ourselves into a community.

The term kafir civilization has been used in this work, but this is not an historic fact, it is just a concept. However, we must make ourselves conscious of who we are or we will lose.

When the Orthodox church in Bethlehem was destroyed by the Palestinian jihadists in 2002, no one protested. The American Christians did not protest, the Hindus did not protest, nor did the Jews protest, the TV/print media did not protest. But when a mosque in Iraq got hit by American fire, everyone knew it. All of Islam protested, along with their apologist allies. Moral: the Muslims are organized. Kafirs do not even know they who they are.

This must change. There are many ways for this to change, but one that we need is a Web network community-call it kafir Web community.
The kafir Web community must carry out the functions:

Web site community

We have hundreds of Web sites that speak out against Islam. Each stands alone. There is an informal group of people who may visit different sites and carry information from one site to the other, but each site is an island unto itself. Imagine that all of the anti-Islamic sites were members of a community site list-serve. In this way, Web site owners could communicate among themselves. This could serve two functions. One, we could mobilize, focus and coordinate tactics during special times such as the Mohammed cartoon attacks. Two, there are materials that it would be good for many to publish at the same time. For instance, if this pamphlet were to be spread by the site network to all the sites, then it could be read simultaneously across the globe. You get a much better strategic impact from speed and a broad front.

And who knows what else can happen as site owners communicate with each other?
Personal Community [ACT! for America chapter leaders and chapter activists] At this time most people personally know only a few people from church or another social group who are working in some way against Islam. Even if you wanted to meet someone else from your town how would you do it? This is a geographic grouping. Another grouping could be writers, scholars, translators or jihad history buffs. We need a way to form special communities (actually the Web site community is a special case). We need to use the Web to form local communities.

The Swarm Community [ACT! for America members and our outreaches to other like-minded organizations] We Kafirs usually act as individuals, but we must have ways to unite and attack as a pack or swarm. Islam does this with great effect. When they need e-mails or phone calls, they use the Islamic community, not individuals.

Swarm software would link a community of intellectual warriors with projects. As an example, a project could be to protest the way an event was portrayed in a newspaper. Let's further assume that the event came from a news-wire and so is in many papers. We need a way for one writer to send a letter to all of those who need it.

Local Politics [ACT! for America chapters and their members engaging on a local and community level] You live in a small town and wake up one day to find that Muslims, who moved here a few years ago, are pressuring and making demands to use the school for prayer during Ramadan. The ACLU howls if the Bible is taught in schools, but makes no protest about the Islamic school usage during Ramadan

Or: you live in a city and when reading the paper, watching TV or talking to a friend find out that Muslims are making demands that we change to accommodate Islam. You feel helpless and afraid. Everything about these events seem wrong, but no one in the media or government will even give guidance on how to protect our very civilization.

Multi-culturalism says that even wanting to preserve your culture is biased thinking. Political correctness says that any talk about Islam that is negative or judgemental is hate speech or racist.We really don't even know exactly what it is we are losing, but we are losing. We are losing a war that is not allowed to be spoken of.

We must form a political community. We must have organizations that works at the pure grass-roots.First and foremost, we need ways to teach people what is going on. Islam will make demands on every area of our lives. Education, politics, customs, medicine, art, law, funding will all have demands and pressure to change to be more Islamic.

National Politics [ACT! for America having a congressional lobbyist backed by the national grassroots organization, which will effect change] Saudia Arabia and other Islamic nations spend billions of dollars each year to spread Islam in the US. And what do we have to oppose this multi-billion dollar political organization with a 40-year head start? A few volunteers with no budget and no support. Who is going to win?

We must have national organizations that can support local politics. We must lobby about national issues such as immigration and the massive Federal welfare programs for Muslims.This means money. We must move from amateur status to professional status. We must also have state and local organizations that can deal with lobbying at the state and local level.
Click here to continue reading this article

The "Heller" Gun Rights Supreme Court Decision of June 26, 2008, gives us the right "to keep" arms, with many loopholes for local authorities . . .

. . . but it does not give us the right to "bear arms" as spelled out in the 2nd Amendment,

that reads:

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

But, when we look at the Supreme Court Decision, we find

1. The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a
firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for
traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.

That says nothing about "bearing arms." In other words, you can keep 'em--in the house--but the Court says nothing about "bearing" these arms--outside of the home.

The Founders meant for us to "keep and bear arms," and if you read the Decision, that right is upheld, but then it weasel-words and omits any mention of "bearing (carrying) arms.

[See for yourself, the entire Decision can be read at http://islamicdangerfu.blogspot.com/2008/08/people-in-arms-jomini-art-of-war-p31.html]

Here's more about that from Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership (JPFO):

The narrow ruling has already dropped the guard of tens of millions of gun owners.
Gun prohibitionists are regrouping everywhere, at every government level, to overturn
Heller -- and it won’t be that difficult if we stand by and do nothing.

Without a new, dynamic education strategy the Second Amendment movement
will be fighting hundreds of new proposed laws and lawsuits. Heller will indeed become
Hell.

Washington D.C. has already denied the right of Richard Heller, the man who
appealed the D.C. gun ban to the Supreme Court, to register his pistol, based on the
argument that because it accepts a bottom loading magazine, it’s a “machinegun”.

The rest of newly proposed Washington D.C. regulations are equally ridiculous and/or
dangerous -- openly subverting the spirit of the Heller decision. Municipalities around
the country are already looking at these D.C. proposals as a model for their own
post-Heller regulations.

Once again, the media and entertainment industries are doing their part to re-kindle
gun control frenzy, starting with recently touted ammunition controls. For example...

“We need bullet control! I think every bullet should cost
five-thousand dollars. Because if a bullet cost five thousand
dollars, we wouldn’t have any innocent bystanders.”
- Chris Rock, Comedian

A high impact film will...

1. Showcase the unalienable right to defend our lives -- no matter what the
Supreme Court or any other government body says.

2. Detail the in-depth meaning of “shall not infringe”.

3. Confirm why the militia system keeps government in check... and why every
American is part of the militia.

4. Debunk the “collective right” concept and other common gun grabber lies.

5. Expose the racist history of gun control.

6. Demonstrate why military-style arms may indeed be rightfully owned by
civilians -- and that this was the clear-cut intent of the founders

More at
http://www.jpfo.org/alerts02/alert20080817.htm
http://www.jpfo.org/index.htm


Be sure to see and read . . .

The People in Arms: Jomini, The Art of War, p.31
" . . . a people wholly or almost wholly in arms, and making means of resistance out of everything, each individual of whom conspires against the common enemy."

Barack Obama through Muslim Eyes

by Daniel Pipes
FrontPageMagazine.com August 25, 2008
http://www.danielpipes.org/article/5845

How do Muslims see Barack Hussein Obama? They have three choices: either as he presents himself – someone who has "never been a Muslim" and has "always been a Christian"; or as a fellow Muslim; or as an apostate from Islam.

Reports suggests that while Americans generally view the Democratic candidate having had no religion before converting at Reverend Jeremiah Wrights's hands at age 27, Muslims the world over rarely see him as Christian but usually as either Muslim or ex-Muslim.

Lee Smith of the Hudson Institute explains why: "Barack Obama's father was Muslim and therefore, according to Islamic law, so is the candidate. In spite of the Quranic verses explaining that there is no compulsion in religion, a Muslim child takes the religion of his or her father. … for Muslims around the world, non-American Muslims at any rate, they can only ever see Barack Hussein Obama as a Muslim." In addition, his school record from Indonesia lists him as a Muslim.

Thus, an Egyptian newspaper, Al-Masri al-Youm, refers to his "Muslim origins." Libyan ruler Mu‘ammar al-Qaddafi referred to Obama as "a Muslim" and a person with an "African and Islamic identity." One Al-Jazeera analysis calls him a "non-Christian man," a second refers to his "Muslim Kenyan" father, and a third, by Naseem Jamali, notes that "Obama may not want to be counted as a Muslim but Muslims are eager to count him as one of their own."

A conversation in Beirut, quoted in the Christian Science Monitor, captures the puzzlement. "He has to be good for Arabs because he is a Muslim," observed a grocer. "He's not a Muslim, he's a Christian," replied a customer. Retorted the grocer: "He can't be a Christian. His middle name is Hussein." Arabic discussions of Obama sometimes mention his middle name as a code, with no further comment needed.

The symbolism of a major American presidential candidate with the middle name of Hussein, who went to elementary school in Indonesia," reports Tamara Cofman Wittes of the Brookings Institution from a U.S.-Muslim conference in Qatar, "that certainly speaks to Muslims abroad." Thomas L. Friedman of the New York Times found that Egyptians "don't really understand Obama's family tree, but what they do know is that if America — despite being attacked by Muslim militants on 9/11 — were to elect as its president some guy with the middle name ‘Hussein,' it would mark a sea change in America-Muslim world relations."

Some American Muslim leaders also perceive Obama as Muslim. The president of the Islamic Society of North America, Sayyid M. Syeed, told Muslims at a conference in Houston that whether Obama wins or loses, his candidacy will reinforce that Muslim children can "become the presidents of this country." The Nation of Islam's Louis Farrakhan called Obama "the hope of the entire world" and compared him to his religion's founder, Fard Muhammad.

But this excitement also has a dark side – suspicions that Obama is a traitor to his birth religion, an apostate (murtadd) from Islam. Al-Qaeda has prominently featured Obama's stating "I am not a Muslim" and one analyst, Shireen K. Burki of the University of Mary Washington, sees Obama as "bin Laden's dream candidate." Should he become U.S. commander in chief, she believes, Al-Qaeda would likely "exploit his background to argue that an apostate is leading the global war on terror … to galvanize sympathizers into action."

Mainstream Muslims tend to tiptoe around this topic. An Egyptian supporter of Obama, Yasser Khalil, reports that many Muslims react "with bewilderment and curiosity" when Obama is described as a Muslim apostate; Josie Delap and Robert Lane Greene of the Economist even claim that the Obama-as-apostate theme "has been notably absent" among Arabic-language columnists and editorialists.

That latter claim is inaccurate, for the topic is indeed discussed. At least one Arabic-language newspaper published Burki's article. Kuwait's Al-Watan referred to Obama as "a born Muslim, an apostate, a convert to Christianity." Writing in the Arab Times, Syrian liberal Nidal Na‘isa repeatedly called Obama an "apostate Muslim."

In sum, Muslims puzzle over Obama's present religious status. They resist his self-identification as a Christian while they assume a baby born to a Muslim father and named "Hussein" began life a Muslim. Should Obama become president, differences in Muslim and American views of religious affiliation will create problems.

Aug. 25, 2008 update: This is the fourth in a series of articles I have published on Barack Obama's ties to Islam.

The prior three:
"Was Barack Obama a Muslim?" FrontPageMag.com, December 24, 2007. Raises questions about Obama's childhood religion and considers some implications.

"Confirmed: Barack Obama Practiced Islam." FrontPageMag.com, January 7, 2008. Replies to a critique of the previous article by "Media Matters for America."

"Barack Obama's Muslim Childhood." Jerusalem Post, May 1, 2008. Pulls together existing information on Obama's childhood religion.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks to ACT for America P.O. Box 6884
Virginia Beach, VA 23456
http://www.actforamerica.org/

Tuesday, August 26, 2008

THE JIHAD CANDIDATE by Rich Carroll

THE JIHAD CANDIDATE by Rich Carroll
April 7, 2008
Posted: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 09:34:00 +0000

http://auntygravity.blogspot.com/2008/08/jihad-candidate-by-rich-carroll-april-7.html

Conspiracy theories make for interesting novels when the storyline is not so absurd that it can grasp our attention. 'The Manchurian Candidate' and 'Seven Days in May' are examples of plausible chains of events that captures the reader's imagination at best-seller level. 'What if' has always been the solid grist of fiction.

Get yourself something cool to drink, find a relaxing position, but before you continue, visualize the television photos of two jet airliners smashing into the Twin Towers in lower Manhattan and remind yourself this cowardly act of Muslim
terror was planned for eight years.

How long did it take Islam and their oil money to find a candidate for President of the United States? As long as it took them to place a Senator from Illinois and Minnesota? The same amount of time to create a large Muslim enclave in Detroit? The time it took them to build over 2,000 mosques in America? The same amount of time required to place radical wahabbist clerics in our military and prisons as 'chaplains'?

Find a candidate who can get away with lying about their father being a 'freedom fighter' when he was actually part of the most corrupt and violent government in Kenya 's history. Find a candidate with close ties to The Nation of Islam and the violent Muslim overthrow in Africa, a candidate who is educated among white infidel Americans but hides his bitterness and anger behind a superficial toothy smile. Find a candidate who changes his American name of Barry to the Muslim name of Barak Hussein Obama, and dares anyone to question his true ties under the banner of 'racism'.

Nurture this candidate in an atmosphere of anti-white American teaching and surround him with Islamic teachers. Provide him with a bitter, racist, anti-white, anti-American wife, and supply him with Muslim middle east connections and Islamic monies. Allow him to be clever enough to get away with his anti-white rhetoric and proclaim he will give $834 billion taxpayer dollars to the Muslim controlled United
Nations for use in Africa .

Install your candidate in an atmosphere of deception because questioning him on any issue involving Africa or Islam would be seen as 'bigoted racism'; two words too
powerful to allow the citizenry to be informed of facts. Allow your candidate to employ several black racist Nation of Islam Louis Farrakhan followers as members of his Illinois Senatorial and campaign staffs.

Where is the bloodhound American 'free press' who doggedly overturned every stone in the Watergate case? Where are our nation's reporters that have placed every
Presidential candidate under the microscope of detailed scrutiny; the same press who pursue Bush's 'Skull and Bones' club or ran other candidates off with persistent
detective and research work? Why haven't 'newsmen' pursued the 65 blatant lies told by this candidate during the Presidential primaries? Where are the stories about this
candidate's cousin and the Muslim butchery in Africa? Since when did our national press corps become weak, timid, and silent? Why haven't they regaled us with the long list of socialists and communists who have surrounded this 'out of nowhere' Democrat candidate or that his church re-printed the Hamas Manifesto in their bulletin, and that his 'close pastor friend and mentor' met with Middle East terrorist Moammar Gaddafi, (Guide of the First of September Great Revolution of the Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya)? Why isn't the American press telling us this candidate is supported by every Muslim organization in the world?

As an ultimate slap in the face, be blatant in the fact your candidate has ZERO interest in traditional American values and has the most liberal voting record in U.S. Senate history. Why has the American main stream media clammed-up on
any negative reporting on Barak Hussein Obama? Why will they print Hillary Rodham Clinton's name but never write his middle name? Is it not his name? Why, suddenly, is ANY information about this candidate not coming from main stream media, but from the blogosphere by citizens seeking facts and the truth? Why isn't our media connecting the dots with Islam? Why do they focus on 'those bad American
soldiers' while Islam slaughters non Muslims daily in 44 countries around the globe? Why does our media refer to Darfur as 'ethnic cleansing' instead of what it really is; Muslims killing non Muslims! There is enough strange, anti-American activity surrounding Barak Hussein Obama to peek the curiosity of any reporter.
WHERE IS OUR INVESTIGATIVE MEDIA!?

A formal plan for targeting America was devised three years after the Iranian revolution in 1982. The plan was summarized in a 1991 memorandum by Mohamed Akram,
an operative of the global Muslim Brotherhood. 'The process of settlement' of Muslims in America , Akram explained, 'is a civilization jihad process.' This means that members of the Brotherhood must understand that their work in 'America is
a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and sabotaging its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all
other religions.'

There is terrorism we can see, smell and fear, but there is a new kind of terror invading The United States in the form of Sharia law and finance. Condoning it is civilization suicide. Middle East Muslims are coming to America in record numbers
and building hate infidel mosques, buying our corporations, suing us for our traditions, but they and the whole subject of Islam is white noise leaving uninformed Americans about who and what is really peaceful. Where is our investigative press? Any criticism of Islam or their intentions, even though Islamic
leaders state their intentions daily around the globe, brings-forth a volley of 'racist' from the left-wing Democrat crowd.

Lies and deception behind a master plan - the ingredients for 'The Manchurian Candidate' or the placement of an anti-American President in our nation's White House? Is it mere coincidence that an anti-capitalist run for President at the
same time Islamic sharia finance and law is trying to make advancing strides into the United States ? Is it mere coincidence this same candidate wants to dis-arm our
nuclear capability at a time when terrorist Muslim nations are expanding their nuclear weapons capability? Is it mere coincidence this candidate wants to reduce our military at a time of global jihad from Muslim nations?

Change for America ? What change? To become another 'nation of Islam'?


Also see The Jihad Candidate II (Click on him!)
http://islamicdanger4u.blogspot.com/2008/09/vetting-candidate-whether-manchurian-or.html

Why Obama makes people nervous - by Hugh Fitzgerald





















Obama and the Moslem* Representative Keith Ellison (D Minnesota)
(The O-man also hung with Louis Farrakhan, "Nation of Islam" Leader - What is it they say again about "Birds of a Feather?")

Photo and Caption NOT from the Hugh Fitzgerald article, added by Leslie White to elucidate the reason as to "Why Obamam Makes People Nervous"


Obama makes people nervous - by Hugh Fitzgerald

from Jihad Watch

It would be silly for Barack Obama and his advisers not to recognize that there are many people in this country who are anxious about his Muslim background, his Muslim name, and his Muslim supporters getting out the vote for someone whom, they, at least, in this country, and abroad, are convinced is deeply sympathetic to Islam and to its aims. This does not go away by declaring oneself a Christian. And it does not go away after the election, whether Obama wins -- in which case the anxiety only increases -- or if he loses, and plans to run four years from now.

It is humanly understandable. How strange it is to think of a President Barack Obama after Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Lincoln, and others of that ilk. The fact that Obama is mentally superior to Bush and morally superior to Clinton cuts little ice among those who, like the King in "Now We Are Six" who did "want a little butter for his bread," would in these disturbing (or "great" kraussian times) want just a little cultural continuity, even in the names of our presidents. Many don't like such sudden shifting, even nymic shifting, under their feet.

His views on Islam we do not clearly know, but we have a right to suspect they are not clear to him either. He has not done enough studying or thinking or consulting except with the usual esposito-armstrong-rashidi apologists (that is, the venal, the stupid, and the islamochristian Arab propagandist). He has no idea about the scandal of MESA Nostra (which google, and consult for detail Martin Kramer's analysis of the teaching about Islam and the Middle East in this country). He should begin with, say, The Dhimmi and Islam and Dhimmitude and then for textual analysis of the Qur'an, Hadith, and Sira, the books of Robert Spencer -- pay no attention to the "conservative" publishing house and stick unswervingly to the contents. And it would be wonderful if Obama could start looking at websites conducted by former Muslims, who are so knowledgeable, helpful and impassioned in a way that inspires.

His remarks, or almost asides, about Islam, are clouded by sentimentality and childhood memories: sentimentality in particular about an absent father (and the search for "roots" and for "identity," by now a banal theme, but one that was all Barack Obama had to work with when, at a little over thirty, he decided My Life So Far is worth a book). He learned a little more, or thinks he did, in that most unrepresentative of Muslim countries, more easygoing and not-entirely-Muslim Indonesia -- compare Indonesia to Iran or Saudi Arabia or Pakistan. Indonesia, with its Hindus in Bali, its Christians in the Moluccas, still enjoys the afterglow of the post-Dutch nationalist leaders who really were secular, such as Suharto and Sukarno, or were sui generis, as is the truly Muslim "moderate" Wahid. Wahid had been greatly affected by his time as a student in Baghdad, when he befriended, and was befriended by, an Iraqi Jew working in the same office, who was one of the very last Jews in Iraq, and someone who apparently made a deep impression on Wahid for the better.

Until Obama has spent a few days on the Qur’an, Hadith, and Sira, and applied his mind to them -- he has a good mind, but the wrong instincts about the world -- and until he has at least consulted, in person or on paper, the most piercing commentators on Islam (both non-Muslims and defectors from the Army of Islam now living in this country, such as Ibn Warraq, Wafa Sultan, Ayaan Hirsi Ali), he should remain silent.

For so far those who read the tea-leaves have good reason to worry about his understanding. Yes, he is against the war in Iraq, and claims, not quite accurately I’m afraid, that he has been so steadily. In fact, once the war began he wavered, and after he was against it he was for it and then he was against it again. But that is not enough. We need to know why he was against it. Was it because we merely anger Muslims, and we must do nothing to do that, but must instead come to some conceivable accommodation with them, one largely based on throwing others -- i.e., Israel and possibly the Christians of the Middle East -- to the wolves by forcing them to give up their legal, moral, historic rights, whatever those rights might be? (We hardly hear about those rights. All we hear about is strangely-neutral “processing” as in “peace-processing,” as if the “process” itself will lead with certainty to a “solution” -- which again implies that there is a discrete “problem” to which there is a “solution,” a most naïve, and some might cruelly suggest naively American, notion).

He thinks that every enemy can be “talked to” and “without preconditions,” and that the mere fact of this talk is a Good Thing. No. Sometimes such talk legitimizes a regime on its uppers. Sometimes such talk allows a regime to engage in tactics of delay, delay, delay -- see the regime in Khartoum, hoping always to get in another good month or six of mass-murder, before it happens to call it a day; see the regime in Teheran, that hopes to buy time to finish the “project” about which we all know. If it is engaged in “talks,” the American government is unlikely -- so those who rule the Islamic Republic of Iran correctly conclude -- to do what it must and should have done six months or a year ago. Now it seems to be both waiting to see if permanently imperiled and brave little Israel will take on the difficult task -- one that would be so much easier for the Americans to do, with their vast airpower and spy satellites and other resources. They seem to want the Israelis to do this for the Infidels of this world, as it has before. And at the same time, they’re trying to pressure Israel not to do so, for supposed fear of the “headache” this would cause American military planners, who already have their “hands full” in the Middle East. So Israel has to risk being decapitated, because Admiral Mullen and others, having been bogged down in Tarbaby Iraq through the sole folly of the American government, might suffer a “headache.”

But Obama doesn’t talk about any of that, as he might, and score all kinds of unanswerable points. No, instead he talks about “talks.”

At least Obama should understand why people are made nervous, and why he has to say, and then do, very dramatic things to show not only that he is not a Muslim, but that he truly -- unlike Bush, and unlike McCain up to now -- studied, and grasps, the meaning and menace of Islam.

For if he doesn’t, and if he does nonetheless manage to become President, those who do know all about Islam will make mincemeat of him. And all kinds of things that should be done will not be done. Above all, those who are most interested in reducing the use of fossil fuels because of their desire to deprive those conducting Jihad of the Money Weapon, will continue not to have sufficient influence, at the very moment when, if their "concerns were addressed," they could constitute a powerful ally of alarmed environmentalists, in a Grand Alliance to cut back the use of fossil fuels. And that alliance might be just what the doctor ordered, in order to efface or diminish left-right attitudinizing and hostility, as both sides work, with different emphases and promptings, toward exactly the same goal: a reduction in the world-wide use of fossil fuels. It would help if Obama, anointed champion of that left, would articulate why the "war on terrorism" is actually a Jihad and that among the instruments of that Jihad is not only terrorism but also Da'wa, and demographic conquest, and -- undergirding all three of the others -- the Money Weapon.

Yes, Obama can point out -- unless McCain beats him to the punch -- that the Money Weapon is so much more effective, at this point, than terrorism in promoting the goal of removing all obstacles to the spread, and then the dominance, of Islam. And he can grandly reach out, he with his "improbable" life story and his race-and-nation-bestriding impulse, to create that Grand Alliance that will "harness the energies" of "both left and right." But Obama can't do it if he doesn't recognize Arab and Muslim oil revenues as a Money Weapon, and is unable to connect that instrument of Jihad, the Money Weapon, to support for other instruments of Jihad, including Da'wa, and demographic conquest and, yes, that terrorism to which such dangerously exclusive, even monomaniacal, attention has been given by the benighted Bush Administration.

Everything connects. Or, to put it in a way that the Obama campaign might like, and as a way of proving that I once was forced to study the rudiments of another, "foreign," language, just as candidate Obama says more Americans should: Tout se tient.

[Tout se tient - everything holds together.lw]

Posted by Hugh at July 15, 2008 7:39 AM

Read COMMENTS at http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/021770.php#more

______________________
* Rep. Keith Ellison continued his efforts as an unofficial American ambassador on a recent trip to Africa. For Ellison, it was also an emotional trip of personal discovery.
***
The Minneapolis Democrat, known around the world as the first Muslim in Congress, just completed his ninth trip abroad, returning this week from Africa, where he was part of a seven-member congressional delegation.
***
Ellison, almost always ebullient, said he was pumped by the nascent democracies he saw taking hold across sub-Saharan Africa, from war-torn Liberia to Kenya, which just emerged from a violent election crisis.
***
The 10-day journey . . . culminated in a July 4th reception at the U.S. ambassador's residence in Nairobi, Kenya, where Ellison met Sarah Hussein Onyango Obama, the grandmother of presidential candidate Barack Obama.
***
But of more urgent interest to Ellison, flipping through detailed notes on the trip, was the sense of fostering a connection between the political aspirations of Africans in their own continent and those in the rapidly growing immigrant community in the Twin Cities.
***
"The people of the 5th Congressional District [his own] know that, in this globalized world, to have peace and security relies on other people having a modicum of peace and security," he said.

[bold andcolor emphasis mine. Leslie White]

http://www.startribune.com//24284064.html

Monday, August 25, 2008

WHEN IT COMES TO OBAMA - Do You Get It? I mean, do you know what he has in store for us?

WHEN IT COMES TO OBAMA - Here is one person who Gets It ! ! !

A LISTENER WRITES:
Subject: Paul Eidelberg gets IT!!!

Tamar,

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 http://thejewinyellow.blogspot.com/2008/07/obama-and-new-american-revolution.html

Read about the Coming Civil War at http://islamicdangerfu.blogspot.com/2008/01/civil-disobedience-or-civil-war-why-we.html

WHY DOES THIS BLOG SPEAK UP AGAINST OBAMA?

There is an alliance between the enemies of our country--which is the USA under its Constitution (our country, that is). The enemies are 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.

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.

The Obama Decline: From Agent of Change to Hesitant Politician

by (more by this author)
Posted 08/25/2008 ET

Updated 08/25/2008 ET


The choice of Senator Joseph Biden (D-DE) for his vice presidential running mate is one more step in the decline of Barack Obama.


Obama's decline has taken him from an Oprah Winfrey-endorsed, "change we can count on" trendy leader to a normal politician.


From Waffling on Drilling to Carter-esque Uncertainty in the Russia Crisis


Senator Obama's first step on his long, downward slide may have been repudiating Reverend Jeremiah Wright, his pastor of twenty years.


Then, Senator Obama waffled on drilling offshore to ease the energy crisis, first supporting a blanket prohibition even to the extent of actively seeking to withhold from the public the results of government surveys of America's offshore oil and gas reserves. This was followed by his expression of "openness" to some undefined "limited" drilling. Why? Because the voters were increasingly unhappy with Obama's leadership on anti-energy extremism. His lead had collapsed.


Next, Senator Obama handled the Russian assault on Georgia with an uncertainty eerily reminiscent of President Carter. He sent three different messages to the American people (and the world) in the same number of days (while getting tougher and clearer as he went along, he reminded everyone that while he was the campaigner in chief, he was not really ready to be commander in chief, and the damage was done).


Picking the Candidate Who Got Nine Thousand votes Instead of the Candidate Who Got 18 Million


Last week former federal prosecutor and National Review Online Contributing Editor Andy McCarthy documented the degree to which Senator Obama has been dishonest about his record of opposing legislation in the Illinois State Senate that would have protected babies who survived a failed abortion. This is a position, by the way, which puts him in opposition to over 90 per cent of all Americans, including liberal Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) as well as 99 other members of the U.S. Senate, who voted in favor of the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act in 2002. Americans almost universally believe that live-born infants must be afforded full legal rights under law, regardless of their stage of development or whether their live births occurred during a failed abortion.


Now Senator Obama has nominated as his running mate a man who received 9,000 votes for president and withdrew.


Obama could have picked Hillary Clinton, who received 18,000,000 votes. (He would have done so, by the way, without sacrificing his desire to have a Vice President with strong national security and foreign policy credentials on the ticket.)


That works out to 2,000 votes for Clinton for every one vote Senator Biden got.


On Foreign Policy, Biden is Closer to McCain Than Obama


Obama could have picked a moderate who would have tempered his big tax increase, big bureaucracy policy positions - someone like Governor Tim Kaine or former Governor Mark Warner of Virginia, Governor Kathleen Sibelius of Kansas or Senator Evan Bayh of Indiana.
Senator Biden brings some foreign policy knowledge to the Democratic ticket, although on that front, he has often been closer to Senator John McCain than to Senator Barack Obama.
On domestic policy, Biden is a reliable liberal whose big tax, big spending positions will be totally comfortable for Obama.


Biden - Not the Change Voters had in Mind


But, Biden is not a figure of change. If anything, he is a lifetime member of the Washington establishment. He is the reassurance for the establishment that whatever changes Senator Obama might bring will not threaten Washington's entrenched interests -- the very thing the voters want changed.


This was a choice to try to compensate for weakness (on foreign and national security policy) and to reassure voters, who were unnerved by Senator Obama's confused reaction to events in Georgia.


A Choice That Will Remind Voters of the Sad Decline of the Once Self-Confident Candidate
The selection of Senator Biden actually reinforces the notion that the change Senator Obama talked about in general terms was not the change voters had in mind. Senator Obama's choice for Vice President reminds people of the sad decline of a charismatic, self-confident, almost hubristic performer (remember that Obama confidently told 200,000 Germans that he was a fellow "citizen of the world" just before his lead and his self-confidence began to collapse).


The Biden choice was the choice of a different Barack Obama, one who is more cautious and less self-confident than the Barack Obama who won the Democratic nomination.
It will be interesting to see which Obama shows up for the acceptance speech Thursday night in Denver-the agent of change or the hesitant politician-and whether he can regain the jaunty self-confidence which enabled him to beat Hillary Clinton for the nomination.


The Democrat's Party Platform: Where's the Drilling?


The party platform that the delegates to the Democratic National Convention will vote on this week has planks entitled "New American Energy" and "Establish Energy Security," but nowhere-not once in the 94-page, 45 thousand word document-do the Democrats mention drilling for more American oil and natural gas in order to lower prices. It's just not there.
If Democrats had taken the time to consult another platform - the Platform of the American People - they would know that their platform does NOT reflect the opinion of their rank and file. Overwhelming majorities of Americans-including majorities of Democrats-favor using more of America's energy resources, including oil and coal.


From the Platform of the American People:


We want our elected leaders in Washington to focus on increasing the energy supplies of the United States and lowering the costs of gasoline and electricity. (71 to 18)
With appropriate safeguards to protect the environment, we should drill for oil off America's coasts to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. (73 to 23)


Delegates to the Democratic convention, as well as any other American who is interested, can read the entire Platform of the American People here.


Report: Increase in U.S. Natural Gas Production Upends Anti-Energy Left's Conventional Wisdom


Democratic delegates who are still convinced that the notion that increased American oil and gas production will push down energy prices is a "hoax" (to quote House Speaker Nancy Pelosi) should read a new report in the International Herald Tribune.


This is the headline: "A U.S. drilling boom revives hopes for natural gas."
And here's the lead:
American natural gas production is rising at a clip not seen in half a century, pushing down prices of the fuel and reversing conventional wisdom that domestic gas fields were in irreversible decline.


The new drilling boom uses advanced technology to release gas trapped in huge shale beds found throughout North America-gas long believed to be out of reach.


Increased supply utilizing new technology is pushing down prices? Now, where have we heard that before?


And if it works for natural gas, increased supply will work for oil, coal and nuclear.
Is it a Hoax to Believe in the Laws of Supply and Demand? This is the Question that the Democrats will have to Answer in Denver


A reporter recently asked Speaker Pelosi if she supported offshore drilling. She responded: "I will not allow Republicans to have a hoax on the American people that if you drill offshore the price at the pump will come down."


Pelosi's comment represents the strange predicament that many anti-energy Democrats have gotten themselves into; they have boxed themselves into denying some very basic economic laws of supply and demand. Led by Pelosi, anti-energy Democrats are saying that increases in supply afforded by opening up new areas to drilling won't affect the price of energy, even as gas prices are dropping in response to very clear indications that the American people are increasingly determined to support more drilling offshore.


It is well established in economics that long-term increases in supply of a commodity will affect current prices of the commodity. Changing U.S. law to permit expanded drilling offshore and in Alaska would immediately increase long-term oil supplies that the market would have to take into account in its pricing and thus have an impact in lowering oil prices today.
One of the great open questions for the Democratic Party in Denver this week is whether it will follow Speaker Pelosi's lead in ignoring the economic laws of supply and demand to suit the political agenda of an anti-energy elite.


Oprah's Favorite Doc Talks about Center's Healthcare Success


Speaking of Oprah, "America's Doctor" Mehmet Oz, renown for his appearances on Oprah, conducted an interview with me about the success of the Center for Health Transformation.



During the interview, I outline the four strategic questions CHT is working to answer in our effort to create a 21st Century Healthcare System that will save lives and save money for future generations: 1) How do we empower individuals to take personal responsibility for their health? 2) How do we change the society and culture? 3) How do we make hospitals and doctors more efficient? 4) How do we pay for it? Click here to listen to the interview or visit HealthTransformation.net to review our 4-box model.


Your friend,Newt Gingrich


P.S. -- You can learn more about reducing energy prices by pre-ordering my new book due out in September. "Drill Here Drill Now Pay Less: A Handbook for Slashing Gas Prices and Solving our Energy Needs"


P.P.S. -- A Word of Thanks: A long-time friend and colleague Matt Towery has some very gratifying things to say about how we've been able to influence the debate over the years, from welfare reform to the "Drill Here, Drill Now" campaign. You can read his column here.


Mr. Gingrich is the former speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives and author of "Winning the Future" (published by Regnery, a HUMAN EVENTS sister company). Click here to get his free Winning the Future e-mail newsletter.


Michelle Obama's Senior Thesis at Princeton - It's all about race, folks!

[quoting Michelle Obama]

"The purpose of this study is to examine various attitudes of Black Princeton alumni in their present state and as they are perceived by the alumni to have changed over time. ..."These experiences have made it apparent to me that the path I have chosen to follow by attending Princeton will likely lead to my further integration and/or assimilation into a White cultural and social structure that will only allow me to remain on the periphery of society; never becoming a full participant. This realization has presently, made my goals to actively utilize my resources to benefit the Black community more desirable."

[close quote]

the foregoing is from Steve Sailer's iSteve Blog
http://isteve.blogspot.com/2008/02/michelle-obamas-thesis-unblockaded.html

It starts with:
The Obama camp has now released Michelle Obama's senior thesis at Princeton. So far, I've read the Dedication and the first couple of pages of the Introduction, and that's plenty. You've got to be impressed with how ruthless Senator Obama is -- he'll humiliate his poor wife by releasing her semi-literate college graduation maunderings just so he can say, "Let's move on."

And

From Politico:

Michelle Obama's senior year thesis at Princeton University, obtained from the campaign by Politico, shows a document written by a young woman grappling with a society in which a black Princeton alumnus might only be allowed to remain "on the periphery." Read the full thesis here: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4.

"My experiences at Princeton have made me far more aware of my 'blackness' than ever before," the future Mrs. Obama wrote in her thesis introduction. "I have found that at Princeton, no matter how liberal and open-minded some of my white professors and classmates try to be toward me, I sometimes feel like a visitor on campus; as if I really don't belong. Regardless of the circumstances underwhich I interact with whites at Princeton, it often seems as if, to them, I will always be black first and a student second.

" The thesis, titled "Princeton-Educated Blacks and the Black Community" and written under her maiden name, Michelle LaVaughn Robinson, in 1985, has been the subject of much conjecture on the blogosphere and elsewhere in recent weeks, as it has been "temporarily withdrawn" from Princeton's library until after this year's presidential election in November. Some of the material has been written about previously, however, including a story last year in the Newark Star Ledger.
Read the rest at http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8642.html

Leader of Muslim Brotherhood-linked organization gets standing ovation at Democratic Convention

http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/022372.php

View the full article

Some background:

Leader of Muslim Brotherhood-linked Group to Speak at Democratic Convention
Political Correctness; Posted on: 2008-08-23 16:31:30 [ Printer friendly / Instant flyer ]

Multi-religious multicultural Democratic Convention includes unindicted co-conspirator in federal probe


Ingrid Mattson is a Canadian convert to Islam and president of the Islamic Society of North America, which was named an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terror funding case. ISNA was also named as a “friend” of the Muslim Brotherhood in the infamous May 1991 Brotherhood memorandum that spoke of Muslim organizations in the U.S. being dedicated to “a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands ... so that ... God’s religion [Islam] is made victorious over all other religions.”

Mattson herself has spoken out against Geert Wilder's Fitna in terms that could lead to free speech restrictions.


She has claimed, improbably, that Islam treats women as the "spiritual equals" of men -- a view which turns a blind eye to the real oppression of women that is sanctioned by Islamic law.The interfaith gathering will be held at 2:00 pm MT, Sunday, August 24 at the Wells Fargo Theater, inside the Colorado Convention Center in Denver.Bishop Charles E. Blake, Presiding Prelate of the Church of God In Christ, Inc. and pastor at the West Angeles Church of God in Christ; Dr. Ingrid Mattson, President of the Islamic Society of North America; social activist Sister Helen Prejean and Rabbi Tzvi Weinreb, Executive Vice President of the Orthodox Union, will keynote the event. Musical selections will be performed by Grammy® award winning gospel artist Richard Smallwood & Vision, The Spirituals Project of Denver and The Trinity United Methodist Church Choir....Source
News Source: jihad watch

Are We Ready for Hybrid Wars?

It may be that the fight ahead will include many “Small Wars,” fought amidst the remains of the old Islamic Caliphate.
--General Conway

In February [2008] SWJ posted an entry “Are We Ready for Hybrid Wars?”
From that post: This new model argues that future conflicts will blur the distinction between war and peace, combatants and noncombatants.

Rather than distinct modes of war, we will face “Hybrid Wars” that are a combination of traditional warfare mixed with terrorism and insurgency.



Are We Ready for Hybrid Wars? - Revisited
In February SWJ posted an entry “Are We Ready for Hybrid Wars?” From that post: This new model argues that future conflicts will blur the distinction between war and peace, combatants and noncombatants. Rather than distinct modes of war, we will face “Hybrid Wars” that are a combination of traditional warfare mixed with terrorism and insurgency. Conflict in the 21st Century: The Rise of Hybrid Wars, by Frank Hoffman, summarizes the background and analysis of the changing character of warfare in our time. Examining the debate over the past decade about the evolution of modern warfare in the post Cold-war world, several thinkers have claimed that we were in the midst of a “Revolution in Warfare.” Hoffman takes this discussion to a new and much more mature level by recognizing that we are entering a time when multiple types of warfare will be used simultaneously by flexible and sophisticated adversaries. These adversaries understand that successful conflict takes on a variety of forms that are designed to fit one’s goals at that particular time - identified as “Hybrid Wars” in Conflict in the 21st Century. Hoffman notes that it is too simplistic to merely classify conflict as “Big and Conventional” versus “Small or Irregular.” Today’s enemies, and tomorrow’s, will employ combinations of warfare types… This short roundup – more of a compilation of hybrid threat and environment items - revisits this issue for several reasons. The assumption that our future adversary will employ multiple types of warfare simultaneously - state or non-state- is gaining traction amongst those charged to develop concepts, doctrine and capabilities to confront future threats – and – regardless of traction and the trend for the buzz-word crowd (see EBO) to be temporarily enamored with the latest – well, buzzword – hybrid is exactly what we will encounter on the battlefields of the 21st Century. There is much work to be done in regards to maturing the concept of hybrid wars and the threat associated with that environment. And, much like the current and potential hybrid threat adapts to counter our efforts; we must be honest, adaptive and creative as we push through defining the national security and foreign policy capabilities required to defeat this threat. It won’t be easy – but it is a critical necessity. So now I’ll get off my SWJ soapbox and offer up several items regarding hybrid war and enjoin our readership to add to the discourse...
Posted in SWJ Blog on August 24, 2008 12:39 AM
Friday Night Read
Hybrid Wars by Greg Grant at Government Executive with a hat tip to Frank Hoffman for the pointer.

What if the battles of the future are neither conventional nor irregular, but a combination of both?
The October 1973 Arab-Israeli War featured some of the largest set-piece battles fought since the end of World War II. For American defense planners, the conflict provided a bounty of information on the performance of the latest military hardware from Western and Soviet arsenals that had been sold to the Israeli and Arab armies, respectively. After the war, U.S. defense officials went to Israel and picked over the battlefields, searching out lessons from the fighting.
The United States was busy extricating itself from the disaster of Vietnam, and many in the U.S. military, particularly in the Army, saw the big battles fought on the Golan Heights and in the Sinai as an opportunity to refocus their intellectual efforts away from fighting shadowy guerrillas in jungles and back to the conventional, big battles they preferred. The 1973 war displayed the lethality of new precision weaponry. It was the first war to feature large numbers of guided missiles, launched from both the air and the ground. Egyptian and Syrian troops, for example, used vast numbers of Soviet-built Sagger portable anti-tank missiles to savage attacking Israeli tanks.
Now, in a touch of déjà vu, American defense planners are examining another Arab-Israeli clash - this one from 2006, when Israel's army faced off against fundamentalist Muslim organization Hezbollah in southern Lebanon. In a war that lasted 34 days, Hezbollah fought the vaunted Israeli Defense Forces, considered one of the most technologically advanced militaries, to a standstill. The outcome sent shock waves through the world's military establishments, particularly the Pentagon. Ever since, Defense Department planners have been trying to discover how Hezbollah guerrillas could have defeated a conventional army outfitted with U.S. equipment.Much more at Government Executive. Nothing follows.
Posted in SWJ Blog on May 2, 2008 9:06 PM
Are We Ready for Hybrid Wars?
The Potomac Institute for Policy Studies has just released a new monograph that presents an alternative view of the character of warfare in the 21st Century. This new model argues that future conflicts will blur the distinction between war and peace, combatants and noncombatants. Rather than distinct modes of war, we will face “Hybrid Wars” that are a combination of traditional warfare mixed with terrorism and insurgency. Conflict in the 21st Century: The Rise of Hybrid Wars, by Research Fellow Frank Hoffman, summarizes the background and analysis of the changing character of warfare in our time. Examining the debate over the past decade about the evolution of modern warfare in the post Cold-war world, several thinkers have claimed that we were in the midst of a “Revolution in Warfare.” Hoffman takes this discussion to a new and much more mature level by recognizing that we are entering a time when multiple types of warfare will be used simultaneously by flexible and sophisticated adversaries. These adversaries understand that successful conflict takes on a variety of forms that are designed to fit one’s goals at that particular time—identified as “Hybrid Wars” in Conflict in the 21st Century...
Posted in SWJ Blog on February 2, 2008 2:10 PM
Are We Ready for Hybrid Wars? - Revisited

See
http://islamicdangerfu.blogspot.com/2008/08/training-hybrid-warrior-at-infantry.html
http://islamicdangerfu.blogspot.com/2008/08/lessons-from-lebanon-hezbollah-and.html