Monday, June 30, 2008

MESSAGE TO OBAMA:

We love our religion, our guns, and our resentment that our country is being turned over to half-asses

such as


Wednesday, June 25, 2008

Obama is too ignorant to be Commander-in-Chief

from
http://www.asininity.com/comments/P3237_0_1_0/

Just how did jailing the fall guys for WTC I help us win the war Radical Islam declared against us?

Beldar Blog takes Obama to task for this mind-bogglingly ignorant claim:

And, you know, let's take the example of Guantanamo. What we know is that, in previous terrorist attacks — for example, the first attack against the World Trade Center, we were able to arrest those responsible, put them on trial. They are currently in U.S. prisons, incapacitated.

And the fact that the administration has not tried to do that has created a situation where not only have we never actually put many of these folks on trial, but we have destroyed our credibility when it comes to rule of law all around the world, and given a huge boost to terrorist recruitment in countries that say, "Look, this is how the United States treats Muslims."

So that, I think, is an example of something that was unnecessary. We could have done the exact same thing, but done it in a way that was consistent with our laws.
Mr. Obama, Sir, if they were incapacitated, how come they pulled off 9/11? Because, Mr. Obama, the Egyptian terrorist group that was responsible for the first WTC attack merged with Osama Bin Ladin's terrorist organization in the 1990s. Osama's deputy, Ayman Al-Zawahiri, came from the Egyptian wing. So, we might have jailed a few of the terrorists but we did not destroy their organization, their sources of funding, or their leadership. Based on your utter ignorance of the history of Al Qaeda, and the direct link between the two World Trade Center attacks, you have proven yourself to be unfit to be Commander-in-Chief.

I know all of America's enemies in the Muslim world are heads down, butt up five, times a day asking Allah to help you become President of the United States. God help America if that happens.

Posted by: Pat on Jun 17, 08 11:59 am

Material from Beldar Blog

[NOTE: Bush has been called an idiot; this guy Obama appears to be the real idiot!]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UNDERSTANDING ISLAM'S WAR AGAINST US

What we are doing to defend ourselves against the Islamic "jihad"

from "Judicious Asininity"
http://www.asininity.com/archives/A2007081/
an excellent website:

The surge in Iraq may be working

But it isn't what is important

The "War on Terror" should be called something like "Resurgent Islam's war on Western Civilization". Iraq is one of the battlefields in that war. So are Thailand, Israel, India, Spain, England, Turkey, Morocco and most countries on the bloody borders of Islam. The enemy is divided into two competing factions. The most prominent, in the public mind, is the Sunni faction, led by Al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations. Just as dangerous is the Shi'ite faction, led by the crazed Mullahs that rule Iran.

Both factions are operating in Iraq with the shared aim of driving out America, and the competing aims of ruling over Iraq after the US has gone. They have discovered that killing each other in large numbers is just as effective as killing Americans when it comes to reducing our nation's will to continue the fight in Iraq.

Under President Bush's leadership, our war aims in Iraq have been limited to establishing a peaceful, democratic government in Iraq. He cites the experience of Japan, a nation thought inhospitable to democracy, even after defeat. But he misses the precondition for Japan's rebirth: defeat.

If the US pacifies Iraq, it will not have defeated Al Qaeda. The terrorists will move to other unstable nations. The Saudi money will still flow to the recruiting grounds in the festering Muslim world. And Al Qaeda will be watching Iraq, waiting for the moment to return. Its spies, agents and sleeper cells will be biding their time. Nor will the US have defeated Iran. The Mullahs will still be pulling the strings on their puppets in Iraq and they will still be building up their military might, nuclear missiles and all.

If the US retreats from Iraq, leaving no substantial military might stationed there, then our enemies will resume their battle to win Iraq and its oil wealth. The only way to stop that from happening is to win the war, not just the battle for Iraq. That means destroying radical Islam just as surely as we destroyed Fascism, Nazism, Japanese imperialism and Soviet Communism. We must fight to win and to hell with anyone on the other side. Muslims who do not join this fight on our side -- and many have joined us -- should fare no better than the civilians killed in German and Japanese cities in World War II.

The real parallel to Iraq is not Vietnam. It is the Spanish civil war, a prelude to a much larger conflict. Stopping that larger conflict from erupting will require the defeat of both radical strains of Islam sooner rather than later, when they have Iraq, nuclear weapons, chemical weapons, biological weapons, and terrorist cells stationed in all our cities.

Posted by: Pat on Aug 29, 07 10:51 pm

Thursday, June 19, 2008

Fitzgerald: The price of oil, and how it got there
from Jihad Watch

The price of oil is now very high, and it became very high very rapidly. Some blame "speculators," without realizing how small is the amount of money that speculators take -- see Philip K. Verleger -- while almost all of the rise in price goes to the oil-producing states. It would hardly be surprising, either, to discover that the Saudis and other Arabs were in fact behind some of these speculators, and were even employing them. After all, the speculators not only run the price up, but become the object of criticism that deflects from fury at this handful of plutocratic states.

These states, by the way, have far tinier native populations than they give out. The real populations of Qatar, with its natural gas, and the constituent parts of the U.A.E., for example, are at most a few hundred thousand, with Qatar being far less. This means the per-capita take is even greater than has been given out. If the real figure were to be known, it might increase the fury against these statelets, and people might begin thinking that all of these places could be taken over by a well-armed Western brigade or two, backed by air support. Saudi Arabia consistently exaggerates its native population, for fear that others would realize just how weak, how vulnerable, and how very very rich, its population is.
Continue reading "Fitzgerald: The price of oil, and how it got there"
Posted by Hugh at 6:16 AM Comments (38)

http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/021438.php

Also, be sure to see . . .

Pissed off by the price of gas?--gasoline, petrol, gasolina?
(click on the post title above)

. . . if you haven't read it yet
tells you all about the Saudis, how they got the oil, etc.

http://islamicdanger4u.blogspot.com/2008/01/pissed-off-by-price-of-gas-gasoline.html

Monday, June 16, 2008

TRASHING THE AMERICAN HERITAGE

Opening the door to Islamic "stealth" invasion and world domination, Islamic Danger is poised to strike . . .

Jihad Watch, Commenter "RBLA" writes:

. . . we are poised to elect as president the abandoned child of a polygamous Muslim and a mother with an obsessive sexual hangup for foreign Muslims. He may not be a Muslim but has been a member for twenty years of a Church that is a fellow traveler of Farrakhan's odd Islamic cult. That, in itself should disqualify him. Obama is the life-long product of affirmative action selected by a clique of lunatic Democrat activists who seized control of a number of small state caucuses. He has no record of any serious intellectual achievements; he is probably just slightly above the average in intelligence. He has no national political experience; he came straight from the corrupt Cook County machine and has not finished even one term in the Senate, an office he attained through the sheer incompetence of his rivals in both parties. Everyone knows that there is one, and only one, reason that he has come as far as he has.
Posted by: RBLA at June 16, 2008 12:08 PM
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/021413.php#c550278

To be fair to RBLA, the Comments starts with "We have just suffered through one offspring of a dysfunctional family followed by a spoiled frat boy with no intellectual curiosity. Now we are poised to elect as president the abandoned child of a polygamous Muslim . . . "
and . . .

11B40 says,

Even more important to me than Senator Obama's Muslim background is his psychological background. And yet, in this land of punditry, no one seems interested in exploring this aspect of his personality or should I say his persona.

It seems to me that he has been abandoned by both his birth parents, first his Kenyan father and subsequently his American mother, then separated from his male Indonesian parent. I cannot imagine that these experiences have not caused some level of psychological infirmity.

When I watch his public poses, chin elevated and staring off into the far distance, I see a little bit of Castro and/or Hitler. When I listen to his snappish responses, I sense a reservoir of anger that someday will bubble up to the surface. When I see him without his tele-prompter, I see a man who knows he is in deep water not knowing how to swim. When I think about someone who has participated in the Saul Alinsky "community organizing," or manipulation if you will, I wonder what is really in the back of his mind.
Posted by: 11B40 at June 16, 2008 1:01 PM
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/021413.php#c550295

while waltc comments,

The reason the Muslim thing always comes up, is because he doesn't come across as a patriotic American.

And when you read those horrible books of his, he hasn't got a single good thing to say about the west, the U.S. and white people in general you can see that. And that is the first warning sign something is very wrong with him.

Then add in his 23 year friendship with the racist and hate monger Reverend Wright and Pfleger. Then there is friendship with the ex-terrorist and Marxist Ayers and Dorhn who got him started in politics. Then there's Khalidi a PLO apparatchick, another one of his buddy.

And then there's the theology of TUCC which is a poisonous mix of Marxism, black supremacism, hatred of white anti-semitism. Its basically a political movement disguised as religion.

Heck you can't find Christianity in TUCC. The fact that they posit that God must be black and only identity with the Black man or not exist at all pretty much excludes TUCC from being a Christian church in even the most liberal definition.

IMO its better to call Obama a Muslim for the simple reason the "Church" he goes to isn't a church but a political movement that has deep ideological ties to NOI and supportative of terrorist groups like Hamas.

Then add his other mentor in Hawaii was Frank Marshall Davis, another communist!.

Its clear Obama is not mainstream either in his friends or his ideology. In fact he's a radical. You do not seek out radicals and terrorists as your friends if you do not agree with their ideologies and goals.
Posted by: waltc at June 16, 2008 1:14 PM
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/021413.php#c550304

Read the whole post and Comments at Fitzgerald: Obama's strategy at http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/021413.php

How long do we as the United States, under our present for of government have? When Marxists join with Islamics, our days appear to be numbered. Only YOU can make a difference. We must consider all possible measures to stop the trend to make us slaves: Don't fail to read "How Long Does the USA Have?"
and Revolution?

Saturday, June 14, 2008

Troubling texts at Va. Islamic school
- Violence against unbelievers

The article and commentary below provide yet one more reason why it is time for Congress to conduct hearings to review extremist materials that have been found in mosques in America.
If you have any doubt about the seriousness of this threat, please read the article below. The Associated Press story is based on a press release from the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF). Following is the title of the press release:
Saudi Arabia: USCIRF Confirms Material Inciting Violence, Intolerance Remains in Textbooks Used at Saudi Government's Islamic Saudi Academy


The report analyzes textbooks found in an Islamic school in Virginia. Note the words “USCIRF Confirms Material Inciting Violence…” This is precisely the rationale for our petition to Congress – that such “speech” incites violence and thus falls outside the bounds of constitutionally protected speech.


If you have not yet signed our petition calling for congressional hearings to review such materials, please click here to do so.




“Report: Troubling texts at Va. Islamic school”- Violence against unbelievers, us
Comment by Jerry Gordon, American Congress for Truth blog editor:


Yesterday the US Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) released a report covering the translations of 17 textbooks used by the Saudi Embassy - backed Islamic Saudi Academy (ISA), a private school using County facilities in McLean, Virginia. Last month the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors extended the lease of the ISA. Nina Shea of the Hudson Institute in Washington, DC, and a Commissioner of the USCIRF, pressed for the translation of these ISA texts. We’re appreciative that she did and have posted on this controversy frequently. As revealed in the USCIRF report, the contents are appalling. The USCIRF had recommended to the State Department that this Saudi-backed institution be closed. State turned a deaf ear, and the Washington Post in an editorial took the USCIRF to task for not being ‘tolerant’. Tolerant???


Note what the USCIRF translations found in the texts used at the ISA in McLean, Virginia:
The commission said it obtained 17 of the academy’s textbooks through a variety of channels, including from members of Congress. The texts did appear to contain numerous revisions, including pages that were removed or passages that were whited out, but numerous troubling passages remained, according to the panel:


The authors of a 12th-grade text on Quranic interpretation state that apostates (those who convert from Islam), adulterers and people who murder Muslims can be permissibly killed.
The authors of a 12th-grade text on monotheism write that “(m)ajor polytheism makes blood and wealth permissible,” meaning that a Muslim can take with impunity the life and property of someone believed guilty of polytheism. According to the panel, the strict Saudi interpretation of polytheism includes Shiite and Sufi Muslims as well as Christians, Jews, Hindus and Buddhists.
A social studies text offers the view that Jews were responsible for the split between Sunni and Shiite Muslims: “The cause of the discord: The Jews conspired against Islam and its people. A sly, wicked person who sinfully and deceitfully professed Islam infiltrated (the Muslims).”
More generally, the panel found that the academy textbooks hold the view that the Muslim world was strong when united under a single caliph, the Arabic language and the Sunni creed, and that Muslims have grown weak because of foreign influence and internal divisions.
The books say it’s OK for Muslims to kill adulterers and converts.


This Wahhabi doctrine is being poured with unrelenting hate into the minds of youngsters attending the ISA. Let us not forget that a Valedictorian in the Class of 1999 of the ISA was convicted for plotting the assassination of President Bush.


Citizens of Fairfax County should be outraged by what the County Board of supervisors is perpetrating. All of us should be enraged that our government permits this doctrinal hatred of us to go on unabated not only at the ISA but at hundreds of Saudi financed Madrassas here in the US.
Here's the News Report:

AP, June 11, 2008


McLEAN, Va. - Textbooks at a private Islamic school in northern Virginia teach students that it is permissible for Muslims to kill adulterers and converts from Islam, according to a federal investigation released Wednesday.


Other passages in the school’s textbooks state that “the Jews conspired against Islam and its people” and that Muslims are permitted to take the lives and property of those deemed “polytheists.”


The passages were found in selected textbooks used during the 2007-08 school year by the Islamic Saudi Academy, which teaches 900 students in grades K-12 at two campuses in Alexandria and Fairfax and receives much of its funding from the Saudi government.
The academy has come under scrutiny from critics who allege that it fosters an intolerant brand of Islam similar to that taught in the conservative Saudi kingdom. In the review, the panel recommended that the school make all of its textbooks available to the State Department so changes can be made before the next school year.(Continue Reading This Article)

Friday, June 13, 2008

HOW LONG DOES THE USA HAVE?

That's up to YOU!
Not to "The Government"
Americans! Apathy is the greatest danger to our freedom

from goodteach7
Col. David Crockett's Speech to Congress
stages of democracy and an interesting speech from 1835; stats on 2000 elections
goodteach7 says:
[Quote]

This is the most interesting thing I've read in a long time. The sad thing about it, you can see it coming.

I have always heard about this democracy countdown. It is interesting to see it in print. God help us, not that we deserve it.

How Long Do We Have?

About the time our original thirteen states adopted their new constitution in 1787, Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of Edinburgh, had this to say about the fall of the Athenian Republic some 2,000 years earlier:

'A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government.'

'A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generou s gifts from the public treasury.'

[See the APPENDIX: Colonel Davy Crockett's Celebrated Speech to Congress on the
State of Finances, State Officers, and State Affairs in General
from http://www.house.gov/paul/nytg.htm]

'From that moment on, the majority always vote for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship.'

'The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years'

'During those 200 years, those nations always progressed through the following sequence:

1. >From bondage to spiritual faith;

2. >From spiritual faith to grea t courage;

3. >From courage to liberty;

4. >From liberty to abundance;

5. >From abundance to complacency;

6. >From complacency to apathy;

7. >From apathy to dependence;

8. >From dependence back into bondage'

Professor Joseph Olson of Hemline University School of Law, St. Paul, Minnesota, points out some interesting facts concerning the 2000 Presidential election:

Number of States won by:
Gore: 19
Bush: 29

Square miles of land won by:
Gore: 580,000
Bush: 2,427,000

Population of counties won by:
Gore: 127 million
Bush: 143 million

Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by:
Gore: 13.2
Bush: 2.1

Professor Olson adds: 'In aggregate, the map of the territory Bush won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens of this great country.

Gore's territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in government-owned tenements and living off various forms of government welfare...' Olson believes the United States is now somewhere between the 'complacency and apathy' phase of Professor Tyler's definition of democracy, with some forty percent of the nation's population already having reached the 'governmental dependency' phase.

If Congress grants amnesty and citizenship to twenty million criminal invaders called illegal and they vote, then we can say goodbye to the USA in fewer than five years.

[Close Quote]

If we the people get the government we deserve, then there's no time for lollygagging. Because, we are in danger of getting a real doozy!


















But I'll take the best remedy for depression, I'll have me another banana . . . or two . . . or three . . . DEPRESSED BY WHAT'S GOING ON? Try a Banana!


and ponder a few thoughts . . .

"Liberty has never come from the government. Liberty has always come from the subjects of government. The history of liberty is the history of resistance. The history of liberty is a history of the limitation of governmental power, not the increase of it."- Alexis de Tocqueville

“The will of men is not shattered (by the welfare state), but softened, bent, and guided. Men are seldom forced by it to act, but they are constantly restrained from acting. Such a power does not destroy, but it prevents existence. It does not tyrannize, but it compresses, enervates, extinguishes, and stupefies a people, until each nation is reduced to be nothing better than a flock of timid and industrious animals, of which the government is the shepherd.”
- Alexis de Tocqueville

“Democracy extends the sphere of individual freedom, socialism restricts it. Democracy attaches all possible value to each man; socialism makes each man a mere agent, a mere number. Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word: equality. But notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude.”
- Alexis de Tocqueville

Sun Tzu (500-320 B.C.)
Chinese Author and Military Strategist:

“All warfare is based on deception”

“There is no instance of a country having benefited from prolonged warfare.”
[NOR FROM LOSING A WAR THAT IS BEING FOUGHT FOR THE BENEFIT OF OTHERS, NOT TO DEFEAT THE REAL ENEMY. lw. See Just War Theory, The Forward Strategy for Failure, What Real War Looks Like, and No Substitute for Victory - The Defeat of Islamic Totalitarianism]

Quotes in red from:
http://www.onpower.org/quotes/t.html

doozy: Something extraordinary or bizarre - http://www.bartleby.com/61/29/D0342900.html




Barack Hussein Obama

and

Raila Odinga







When Obama visited Kenya his praise of the Luo and Raila Odinga was so great that the Kenya government denounced Obama. They called him Raila Oginga's "stooge."

Luo is Odinga and Obama's African tribe. They constitute 13% of the population of Kenya. Odinga wants to be the president of Kenya but lost the election. His cousin, Obama is his inspiration. When he becomes president, Odinga wants all Kenyan Christians subjected to Sharia law. He has vowed to implement Islamic Sharia law if he becomes president.

Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. Hussein is a Muslim name, which comes from the name of Ali’s son–Hussein Ibn Ali.
http://inyourface.info/ArT/Iota/NeWT.shtml

"I've always been a Christian," and he has adamantly denied ever having been a Muslim. "The only connection I've had to Islam is that my grandfather on my father's side came from that country [Kenya]. But I've never practiced Islam," he wrote

Obama does not need to deny he is a Muslim. The mass media consistently denies it for him as they wet their pants in excitement over finally assuaging their white guilt. White liberals and 90% of African-Americans will not be enough to elect him unless the money and the TV and radio pundits do it for him. If this is the plan, here we go. We're almost there. All that remains is to change our name to AMERABIA.
Hank Roth
http://inyourface.info/ArT/Delta/AMer.shtml



Muslims want Obama to become the American president. The US-Islamic forum in the Gulf backs Obama. Delegates to a US-Islamic forum on Feb 18, 2008, in a mock election by more than 200 of the American and Muslim delegates at the US-Islamic World Forum in Qatar [were flat out for Obama]. About 280 public figures and academics from 32 countries, which included Afghan President Hamid Karzai and the US ambassador to the United Nations, Zalmay Khalilzad, attended this fifth edition of the forum.
http://inyourface.info/ArT/Iota/NeWT.shtml

As the Investor’s Business Daily has reported, Obama's half-brother Abongo ‘Roy’ Obama is a Luo activist in Kenya and a militant Muslim who argues that the black man must ‘liberate himself from the poisoning influences of European culture’ and urges Barack to embrace his African Muslim heritage.

Odinga is an Islamic Jihadist. Obama has questionable ties to his cousin. They speak often over the telephone. Are we to believe that is all there is to it?
















Obama supporters claim there is NOTHING to it. But they are not thinking rationally. Obama family in Kenya is Muslim.

They embrace Sharia law. They embrace the customs of Muslims and we can see the intolerance demonstrated everywhere where Muslims live. Are we ready for a visit to the White House by his Muslim family from Kenya? You know it will happen if he is elected president. Will they sleep in the Lincoln bedroom?
http://inyourface.info/ArT/Iota/NeWT.shtml



Jihadwatch on Obama's pal Odinga

In two books that he wrote--Dreams of my Father and Audacity of Hope--Barack Obama made some revealing statemnents:

Dreams of my Father: "The person who made me proudest of all, though, was [half brother] Roy .. He converted to Islam."

Audacity of Hope: "I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction."

Dreams of My Father: "I found a solace in nursing a pervasive sense of grievance and animosity against my mother's race".

Dreams Of My Father: "I never emulate white men and brown men whose fates didn't speak to my own. It was into my father's image, the black man, son of Africa, that I'd packed all the attributes I sought in myself..".

Mr. Obama, most of America doesn't believe you. We believe you have lied to our faces to cover your butt. You probably would have gotten out of this with less damage if you would have admitted that you knew about some of the hate filled crap that your pastor was spewing, but then tried defending him on his positive points that I've heard about him, like being a U.S. Marine, or the work that he and your church tries to do in the Chicago community.


from "An Open Letter to Barack Obama"
by Dustin James
http://inyourface.info/ArT/Alpha/OpE.shtml

It is clear now Mr. Obama, that you could only keep this charade up for so long. Nearly all the comments on the news message boards are things along these lines:

"My feelings for Obama have definitely changed. I really think the people of United States have an obligation to research Senator Obama and what he believes before they give him an office to lead all the people in the country."

"Obama must be the only church goer who does not know what his preacher preaches. With this sort of attention to main themes I dont think he should run for office any longer."

"I found Mr. Obamas responses to be questionable. My support for Obama is in jeopardy. It is very hard to belive that after 20 years Barack could be surprised by the Pastors comments."
I could go on, but you can go on to ABC News, CNN, and MSNBC and read them for yourself. They are overwhelmingly distrustful of you and your statement. And this is from the internet community who traditionally is your best demographic; who has defended you to the end on past issues.

It is now clear Mr. Obama, that the jig is up, and you have let your candidacy be permanently damaged. You have provided overwhelming fodder for Republicans in the general election. This lie, Mr. Obama, has ended any chance of myself or most Americans being able to support you. It is not the racist statements of your supporter, Mr. Obama, it is this lie that you have told with self-conviction that you did not know your pastor said any of these statements
http://inyourface.info/ArT/Alpha/OpE.shtml

Instead Obama compounded his original sin by hiding it and then lying about it. He pretended that his church was a mainstream church. Then he pretended that Reverend Wright did not make the sort of ghastly sermons that evidence later showed that he did. Then Obama pretended that he never attended the church when Wright made one of his hate America and hate white people sermons.

Obama did have a way out of his moral crimes. He could have said something like this: Yes, I did attend a church that preached hatred of whites and hatred of America. Yes, what I did was wrong. It was also wrong of me not to tell the American people about my relationship with this church before I ran for president. I will not try to excuse what I did, I simply admit that what I did was wrong. I have learned my lesson. I will never allow myself to be morally compromised like that again.

At every step, instead of coming clean with the American people and asking forgiveness, which is what he should have done, Barack Obama tried to trick the American people and to finesse his own moral shortcomings through his undeniable charm and eloquence. But America does not need charming, eloquent liars in the White House. America does not need morally flawed leaders who are quite unwilling to admit their moral flaws, almost adamant even when confronted with those flaws that the flaws themselves do not exist.
http://inyourface.info/ArT/Alpha/SuB.shtml

(Obama) "flatters himself as a man of the future transcending the anger of the past as represented by his beloved pastor. Obama then waxes rhapsodic about the hope brought by the new consciousness of the young people in his campaign. Then answer this, senator: If Wright is a man of the past, why would you expose your children to his vitriolic divisiveness? This is a man who curses America and who proclaimed moral satisfaction in the deaths of 3,000 innocents at a time when their bodies were still being sought at ground zero. It is not just the older congregants who stand and cheer and roar in wild approval of Wright's rants, but young people as well. Why did you give $22,500 just two years ago to a church run by a man of the past who infects the younger generation with precisely the racial attitudes and animus you say you have come unto us to transcend?" (Charles Krauthammer, Columbia Daily Tribune - April 1, 2008)

Charles Krauthammer says this about Obama's racism speech: "This contextual analysis of Wright's venom, this extenuation of black hate speech as a product of white racism, is not new. It's the Jesse Jackson politics of racial grievance, expressed in Ivy League diction and Harvard Law nuance. That's why the speech made so many liberal commentators swoon: It bathed them in racial guilt while flattering their intellectual pretensions. An unbeatable combination." (Krauthammer)
http://pnews.org/ArT/ZuLu/TranS.shtml

"I've always been a Christian," and he has adamantly denied ever having been a Muslim. "The only connection I've had to Islam is that my grandfather on my father's side came from that country [Kenya]. But I've never practiced Islam," he wrote

. . . as President of Kenya, Raila [Odinga] agrees to 14 actions, listed a) through n) on page two. Read them all, and be sure you're sitting down.


Here's a sample:
b) Within 6 months re-write the Constitution of Kenya to recognize Shariah as the only true law sanctioned by the Holy Quran for Muslim declared regions.
c) With immediate effect dismiss the Commissioner of Police who has allowed himself to be used by heathens and Zionists to oppress the Kenyan Muslim community.
g) Within one year facilitate the establishment of a Shariah court in every Kenyan divisional headquarters. [Note: everywhere in Kenya, not just in "Muslim declared regions."]
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2008/01/jihad-in-kenya.html

Jihadwatch on Obama's pal Odinga





IT'S UP TO US!

TO ACT

DO NOT EXPECT ANYTHING FROM THE GOVERNMENT









APPENDIX












"Not Yours To Give"
from http://www.house.gov/paul/nytg.txt
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally published in "The Life of Colonel David Crockett," by Edward Sylvester Ellis.
Provided as a courtesy by US Rep. Ron Paul (http://www.house.gov/paul/)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Not Yours To Give"
Col. David Crockett
US Representative from Tennessee

One day in the House of Representatives a bill was taken up appropriating money for the benefit of a widow of a distinguished naval officer. Several beautiful speeches had been made in its support. The speaker was just about to put the question when Crockett arose:

"Mr. Speaker--I have as much respect for the memory of the deceased, and as much sympathy for the suffering of the living, if there be, as any man in this House, but we must not permit our respect for the dead or our sympathy for part of the living to lead us into an act of injustice to the balance of the living. I will not go into an argument to prove that Congress has not the power to appropriate this money as an act of charity. Every member on this floor knows it.

We have the right as individuals, to give away as much of our own money as we please in charity; but as members of Congress we have no right to appropriate a dollar of the public money. Some eloquent appeals have been made to us upon the ground that it is a debt due the deceased. Mr. Speaker, the deceased lived long after the close of the war; he was in office to the day of his death, and I ever heard that the government was in arrears to him.

"Every man in this House knows it is not a debt. We cannot without the grossest corruption, appropriate this money as the payment of a debt. We have not the semblance of authority to appropriate it as charity. Mr. Speaker, I have said we have the right to give as much money of our own as we please. I am the poorest man on this floor. I cannot vote for this bill, but I will give one week's pay to the object, and if every member of Congress will do the same, it will amount to more than the bill asks."

He took his seat. Nobody replied. The bill was put upon its passage, and, instead of passing unanimously, as was generally supposed, and as, no doubt, it would, but for that speech, it received but few votes, and, of course, was lost.

Later, when asked by a friend why he had opposed the appropriation, Crockett gave this explanation:

"Several years ago I was one evening standing on the steps of the Capitol with some members of Congress, when our attention was attracted by a great light over in Georgetown. It was evidently a large fire. We jumped into a hack and drove over as fast as we could. In spite of all that could be done, many houses were burned and many families made houseless, and besides, some of them had lost all but the clothes they had on. The weather was very cold, and when I saw so many children suffering, I felt that something ought to be done for them. The next morning a bill was introduced appropriating $20,000 for their relief. We put aside all other business and rushed it through as soon as it could be done.

"The next summer, when it began to be time to think about election, I concluded I would take a scout around among the boys of my district. I had no opposition there but, as the election was some time off, I did not know what might turn up. When riding one day in a part of my district in which I was more of a stranger than any other, I saw a man in a field plowing and coming toward the road. I gauged my gait so that we should meet as he came up, I spoke to the man. He replied politely, but as I thought, rather coldly.

"I began: 'Well friend, I am one of those unfortunate beings called candidates and---

"Yes I know you; you are Colonel Crockett. I have seen you once before, and voted for you the last time you were elected. I suppose you are out electioneering now, but you had better not waste your time or mine, I shall not vote for you again."

"This was a sockdolger...I begged him tell me what was the matter.

"Well Colonel, it is hardly worthwhile to waste time or words upon it. I do not see how it can be mended, but you gave a vote last winter which shows that either you have not capacity to understand the Constitution, or that you are wanting in the honesty and firmness to be guided by it. In either case you are not the man to represent me. But I beg your pardon for expressing it that way. I did not intend to avail myself of the privilege of the constituent to speak plainly to a candidate for the purpose of insulting you or wounding you.'

"I intend by it only to say that your understanding of the constitution is very different from mine; and I will say to you what but for my rudeness, I should not have said, that I believe you to be honest.

But an understanding of the constitution different from mine I cannot overlook, because the Constitution, to be worth anything, must be held sacred, and rigidly observed in all its provisions. The man who wields power and misinterprets it is the more dangerous the honest he is.'

"'I admit the truth of all you say, but there must be some mistake. Though I live in the backwoods and seldom go from home, I take the papers from Washington and read very carefully all the proceedings of Congress. My papers say you voted for a bill to appropriate $20,000 to some sufferers by fire in Georgetown. Is that true?

"Well my friend; I may as well own up. You have got me there. But certainly nobody will complain that a great and rich country like ours should give the insignificant sum of $20,000 to relieve its suffering women and children, particularly with a full and overflowing treasury, and I am sure, if you had been there, you would have done just the same as I did.'

"It is not the amount, Colonel, that I complain of; it is the principle. In the first place, the government ought to have in the Treasury no more than enough for its legitimate purposes. But that has nothing with the question. The power of collecting and disbursing money at pleasure is the most dangerous power that can be entrusted to man, particularly under our system of collecting revenue by a tariff, which reaches every man in the country, no matter how poor he may be, and the poorer he is the more he pays in proportion to his means.

What is worse, it presses upon him without his knowledge where the weight centers, for there is not a man in the United States who can ever guess how much he pays to the government. So you see, that while you are contributing to relieve one, you are drawing it from thousands who are even worse off than he.

If you had the right to give anything, the amount was simply a matter of discretion with you, and you had as much right to give $20,000,000 as $20,000. If you have the right to give at all; and as the Constitution neither defines charity nor stipulates the amount, you are at liberty to give to any and everything which you may believe, or profess to believe, is a charity and to any amount you may think proper. You will very easily perceive what a wide door this would open for fraud and corruption and favoritism, on the one hand, and for robbing the people on the other. 'No, Colonel, Congress has no right to give charity.'

"'Individual members may give as much of their own money as they please, but they have no right to touch a dollar of the public money for that purpose. If twice as many houses had been burned in this country as in Georgetown, neither you nor any other member of Congress would have Thought of appropriating a dollar for our relief. There are about two hundred and forty members of Congress. If they had shown their sympathy for the sufferers by contributing each one week's pay, it would have made over $13,000. There are plenty of wealthy men around Washington who could have given $20,000 without depriving themselves of even a luxury of life.'

"The congressmen chose to keep their own money, which, if reports be true, some of them spend not very creditably; and the people about Washington, no doubt, applauded you for relieving them from necessity of giving what was not yours to give. The people have delegated to Congress, by the Constitution, the power to do certain things. To do these, it is authorized to collect and pay moneys, and for nothing else. Everything beyond this is usurpation, and a violation of the Constitution.'

"'So you see, Colonel, you have violated the Constitution in what I consider a vital point. It is a precedent fraught with danger to the country, for when Congress once begins to stretch its power beyond the limits of the Constitution, there is no limit to it, and no security for the people. I have no doubt you acted honestly, but that does not make it any better, except as far as you are personally concerned, and you see that I cannot vote for you.'

"I tell you I felt streaked. I saw if I should have opposition, and this man should go to talking and in that district I was a gone fawn-skin. I could not answer him, and the fact is, I was so fully convinced that he was right, I did not want to. But I must satisfy him, and I said to him:

"Well, my friend, you hit the nail upon the head when you said I had not sense enough to understand the Constitution. I intended to be guided by it, and thought I had studied it fully. I have heard many speeches in Congress about the powers of Congress, but what you have said here at your plow has got more hard, sound sense in it than all the fine speeches I ever heard. If I had ever taken the view of it that you have, I would have put my head into the fire before I would have given that vote; and if you will forgive me and vote for me again, if I ever vote for another unconstitutional law I wish I may be shot.'

"He laughingly replied; 'Yes, Colonel, you have sworn to that once before, but I will trust you again upon one condition. You are convinced that your vote was wrong. Your acknowledgment of it will do more good than beating you for it. If, as you go around the district, you will tell people about this vote, and that you are satisfied it was wrong, I will not only vote for you, but will do what I can to keep down opposition, and perhaps, I may exert some little influence in that way.'

"If I don't, said I, 'I wish I may be shot; and to convince you that I am in earnest in what I say I will come back this way in a week or ten days, and if you will get up a gathering of people, I will make a speech to them. Get up a barbecue, and I will pay for it.'

"No, Colonel, we are not rich people in this section but we have plenty of provisions to contribute for a barbecue, and some to spare for those who have none. The push of crops will be over in a few days, and we can then afford a day for a barbecue. 'This Thursday; I will see to getting it up on Saturday week. Come to my house on Friday, and we will go together, and I promise you a very respectable crowd to see and hear you.

"'Well I will be here. But one thing more before I say good-bye. I must know your name."

"'My name is Bunce.'

"'Not Horatio Bunce?'

"'Yes

"'Well, Mr. Bunce, I never saw you before, though you say you have seen me, but I know you very well. I am glad I have met you, and very proud that I may hope to have you for my friend.'

"It was one of the luckiest hits of my life that I met him. He mingled but little with the public, but was widely known for his remarkable intelligence, and for a heart brim-full and running over with kindness and benevolence, which showed themselves not only in words but in acts. He was the oracle of the whole country around him, and his fame had extended far beyond the circle of his immediate acquaintance. Though I had never met him, before, I had heard much of him, and but for this meeting it is very likely I should have had opposition, and had been beaten. One thing is very certain, no man could now stand up in that district under such a vote.

"At the appointed time I was at his house, having told our conversation to every crowd I had met, and to every man I stayed all night with, and I found that it gave the people an interest and confidence in me stronger than I had ever seen manifested before.

"Though I was considerably fatigued when I reached his house, and, under ordinary circumstances, should have gone early to bed, I kept him up until midnight talking about the principles and affairs of government, and got more real, true knowledge of them than I had got all my life before."

"I have known and seen much of him since, for I respect him - no, that is not the word - I reverence and love him more than any living man, and I go to see him two or three times every year; and I will tell you, sir, if every one who professes to be a Christian lived and acted and enjoyed it as he does, the religion of Christ would take the world by storm.

"But to return to my story. The next morning we went to the barbecue and, to my surprise, found about a thousand men there. I met a good many whom I had not known before, and they and my friend introduced me around until I had got pretty well acquainted - at least, they all knew me.

"In due time notice was given that I would speak to them. They gathered up around a stand that had been erected. I opened my speech by saying:

"Fellow-citizens - I present myself before you today feeling like a new man. My eyes have lately been opened to truths which ignorance or prejudice or both, had heretofore hidden from my view. I feel that I can today offer you the ability to render you more valuable service than I have ever been able to render before. I am here today more for the purpose of acknowledging my error than to seek your votes. That I should make this acknowledgment is due to myself as well as to you. Whether you will vote for me is a matter for your consideration only."

"I went on to tell them about the fire and my vote for the appropriation and then told them why I was satisfied it was wrong. I closed by saying:

"And now, fellow-citizens, it remains only for me to tell you that the most of the speech you have listened to with so much interest was simply a repetition of the arguments by which your neighbor, Mr. Bunce, convinced me of my error.

"It is the best speech I ever made in my life, but he is entitled to the credit for it. And now I hope he is satisfied with his convert and that he will get up here and tell you so.'

"He came up to the stand and said:

"Fellow-citizens - it affords me great pleasure to comply with the request of Colonel Crockett. I have always considered him a thoroughly honest man, and I am satisfied that he will faithfully perform all that he has promised you today.'

"He went down, and there went up from that crowd such a shout for Davy Crockett as his name never called forth before.'

"I am not much given to tears, but I was taken with a choking then and felt some big drops rolling down my cheeks. And I tell you now that the remembrance of those few words spoken by such a man, and the honest, hearty shout they produced, is worth more to me than all the honors I have received and all the reputation I have ever made, or ever shall make, as a member of Congress.'

"Now, sir," concluded Crockett, "you know why I made that speech yesterday. "There is one thing which I will call your attention, "you remember that I proposed to give a week's pay. There are in that House many very wealthy men - men who think nothing of spending a week's pay, or a dozen of them, for a dinner or a wine party when they have something to accomplish by it. Some of those same men made beautiful speeches upon the great debt of gratitude which the country owed the deceased--a debt which could not be paid by money--and the insignificance and worthlessness of money, particularly so insignificant a sum as $20,000 when weighed against the honor of the nation. Yet not one of them responded to my proposition. Money with them is nothing but trash when it is to come out of the people. But it is the one great thing for which most of them are striving, and many of them sacrifice honor, integrity, and justice to obtain it."

***

Col. Crockett later died defending liberty in the Battle of the Alamo, in the War for Texas Independence.


Remember the Alamo!











from stiffrightjab.wordpress.com/.../

American Minute with Bill Federer: Remember the Alamo!
http://stiffrightjab.com/2008/03/03/american-minute-with-bill-federer-remember-the-alamo/

The Alamo mission at San Antonio was in its 7th day of being assaulted by thousands of Santa Anna’s troops. By the 13th day, Santa Anna’s “take-no-prisoner” policy had all 189 defenders killed, including Jim Bowie and former U.S. Congressman Davy Crockett. The only Texas army left in the field was Col. James Fannin’s. It departed Goliad to rescue the Alamo but was surrounded in open ground and captured. Santa Anna ordered all 350 prisoners executed. When the Mexican officer hesitated, Santa Anna sent another officer who carried out the order. Had Fannin’s troops been left in prison, Texas would have been disheartened, but instead Santa Anna’s cruelty aroused world outrage. The Texas Declaration of Independence, signed MARCH 2, 1836, stated: “General Antonio Lopez Santa Anna…demanded us to deliver up our arms, which are essential to our defense-the rightful property of freemen-and formidable only to tyrannical governments…has, through its emissaries, incited the merciless savage, with the tomahawk and scalping knife, to massacre the inhabitants of our defenseless frontiers…We fearlessly…commit the issue to the…Supreme Arbiter of the destinies of nations.”














Davy Crockett using "Old Betsy" musket as a club at the Alamo.

Stiff Right Jab contributing editor, William J. Federer, is a best-selling author. His latest book is What Every American Needs to Know about the Quran: A History of Islam and the United States.”
Obsession: Radical Islam’s War Against the West






OR































































Thursday, June 12, 2008

The Jihad Candidate
by Rich Carroll


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 number s and building hate
infidel mosques, buying our corporations, suing us for our
tradit ions, 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 in gredients 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?

"It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God or the Bible."
--- George Washington

www.amazon.com/Terrorists-Crossing-Rich-Carroll/dp/1413779115 - 179k -

APPENDIX:

MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD
*
Mohamed Akram (Who he is)
From: Counterterrorism Blog
The Muslim Brotherhood’s “Military Work” in the US
By The Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT)

The Holy Land Foundation (HLF) trial is already proving to be a watershed event in terms of exposing the inner-workings of the Ikhwan, or the Muslim Brotherhood, in the United States. The exhibits released by the U.S. district court in Dallas paint the picture of a semi-secretive organization bent on recruitment, expansion, subversion, and – as Doug Farah pointed out in his excellent post - The Smoking Gun on the Muslim Brotherhood's Agenda, transforming the United States into an Islamic state. One of the documents released, quoted by Farah, is a strategy memo by Mohamed Akram (Adlouni), (More on Akram below) that explains that the Brotherhood in America wages:

...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.If there are any questions about what sort of American jihad is envisioned by the Brotherhood, Zeid al-Noman (aka Zaid Naman) lays it out for us. Al-Noman (listed in the personal phone books of both convicted PIJ leader Sami al-Arian and Hamas deputy political bureau chief Musa Abu Marzook), was introduced as Masul or “official” of the Executive Office of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood before a speech he gave in the early 1980s on the Brotherhood in America somewhere in Missouri – likely in Kansas City. In this fascinating speech, al-Noman explained the history of the Movement, going into detail about its roots in the Muslim Students Association (MSA) and the establishment of other front-organizations.

However, perhaps the most disturbing information revealed by al-Noman was the “special activity” of the Brotherhood in America, which was one of thirteen goals outlined in his speech. Another was “securing the group.”

An audience member later asked the question:

Um [Unidentified Male]: By “Securing the Group”, do you mean military securing? And, if it is that, would you explain to us a little bit the means to achieve it.[sic]

Ze [Zeid Al-Noman]: No. Military work is listed under “Special work”. “Special work” means military work. “Securing the Group” is the Group’s security against outside dangers. For instance, to monitor the suspicious movements on the…,which exist on the American front such as Zionist; Masonry…etc. Monitoring the suspicious movements or the sides, the government bodies such as the CIA, FBI…etc, so that we find out if they are monitoring us, and we are not being monitored, how can we get rid of them. That is what is meant by “Securing the Group.”The next question was why the North American Brotherhood did not have different organizational methods from the Brotherhood in the Islamic world. Al-Noman disagreed with that assessment, as an example of different organizational methods, he said:
If the asking brother is from Jordan, for instance, he would know that it is not possible to have military training from Jordan, for instance, while here in America, there is weapons training in many of the Ikhwan’s camps.

Al-Noman continued, detailing the travels of Ikwhan members to campsites and conducting training:
In some of the regions when they go to a camp, they take two things, they would request a camp which has a range, a shooting range and one which has a range to shoot, one which has a range which they use for shooting. You would find that in some of the camps. They would get an advanced permit for that.Al-Noman reported the difficulty of training in Oklahoma due to suspicious authorities, but noted that in Missouri they had found a more inconspicuous santuary for their subversive militancy.

The importance of these camps? Al-Noman gave the audience an example of a good sister, (in this case, the wife of an Ikhwan member), as a woman who:
...had just gave birth, just delivered two or three days ago and her husband leaves her and attend Ikhwan camps. If he tells her, “I will stay and take care of you”, she would tell him. “no.” She does not accept.There has been much debate over the nature of the Muslim Brotherhood. Some contend that the movement has become peaceful, while others say it is inherently violent. The strategy memo and this discussion of weapons training formally conducted by the Muslim Brotherhood within the United States should cause those involved in that debate to sit up and take notice.

Who is Mohamed Akram (Adlouni)? Akram was on the initial board of directors of the United Association of Studies and Research (UASR), a HAMAS front that was based in Northern Virginia from approximately 1991 through 2004. UASR, an unindicted co-conspirator in the HLF case, was headed by Ahmed Yousef who now serves as political advisor to head of HAMAS in Gaza, Ismail Haniya.

By The Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT) on August 2, 2007 12:13 PM
http://counterterrorismblog.org/2007/08/the_muslim_brotherhoods_milita.php
[color and emphasis mine. lw]

The Muslim Brotherhood's American Goals
by Daniel Pipes
Wed, 25 May 2005
updated Sat, 4 Aug 2007 at 12:00 AM
http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/2005/05/the-muslim-brotherhoods-american-goals.html

I wrote about the Muslim American Society in "The Islamic States of America?" and how it seeks to replace the Constitution with the Koran. Daveed Gartenstein-Ross takes this further today in "MAS's Muslim Brotherhood Problem," where he looks closely at the MAS Minnesota website and notes that it calls on members to fulfill their "duties as outlined in the Message of the Teachings by Imam [Hasan] Al-Banna." Gartenstein-Ross then takes a look at The Message of the Teachings and finds that it instructs Muslims that they must work on reforming their government so that it may become a truly Islamic government. … By Islamic government I mean a government whose officers are Muslims who perform the obligatory duties of Islam, who do not make public their disobedience, and who enforce the rules and teachings of Islam.

Al-Banna also instructs that Muslims should "Completely boycott non-Islamic courts and judicial systems. Also, dissociate yourself from organisations, newspapers, committees, schools, and institutions which oppose your Islamic ideology." Al-Banna also condones in this book spreading Islam with violence: "Always intend to go for Jihad and desire martyrdom. Prepare for it as much as you can."

The universality of Islamic law comes up repeatedly. MAS requires adjunct members to read To Be a Muslim by Fathi Yakun, which states that: "Until the nations of the world have functionally Islamic governments, every individual who is careless or lazy in working for Islam is sinful." Adjunct members also must read Sayyid Qutb's Milestones, which makes jihad a central obligation of Muslims.

Comment: Those of us who watch the growth of radical Islam in the United States tend to focus on the noisy organizations like CAIR, MPAC, and ISNA. The Muslim American Society, which claims 53 chapters and 10,000 members, tends to go about its work quietly; it is none the less dangerous – and perhaps more so – for that. (May 25, 2005)

Aug. 1, 2007 update: In "Finally, The Smoking Gun," Douglas Farah examines one of the exhibits presented by the prosecution in the Holy Land Foundation case currently taking place in Texas. The document in question is a Muslim Brotherhood memorandum by Mohamed Akram, dated May 22, 1991, titled "Understanding the role of the Muslim Brother in North America."[**] It outlines the Muslim Brotherhood's plan to convert the United States into a Muslim country. Farah considers it "the smoking gun of the Ikhwan's long-standing efforts to destroy the Western world."

Akram writes:
The process of settlement is a ‘Civilization-Jihadist Process" with all the word means. The Ikhwan 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 ad God's religion is made victorious over all other religions. …

Without this level of understanding, we are not up to this challenge and have not prepared ourselves for Jihad yet. It is a Muslim's destiny to perform Jihad and work wherever he is and wherever he lands until the final hour comes, and there is no escape from that destiny except for those who chose to slack.

Akram then goes into detail about the Muslim Brotherhood's role in achieving this goal:
As for the role of the Ikhwan, it is the initiative, pioneering, leadership, raising the banner and pushing people in that direction [the Jihadist process]. They are then able to employ, direct, and unify Muslims' efforts and powers for this process. In order to do that, we must possess a master of the art of "coalitions," the art of "absorption" and the principles of "cooperation." … We must say that we are in a country [i.e., the United States] which understands no language other than the language of the organizations, and one which does not respect or give weight to any group without effective, functional and strong organizations.

Anticipating criticism that this U.S. focus distracts from establishing a global caliphate, Akram replies, first, that "The success of the Movement in America in establishing an observant Islamic base with power and effectiveness will be the the best support and aid to the global Movement project." Second, he points out that the global Muslim Brotherhood movement has not "succeeded yet in distributing roles to is branches, stating that what is needed from them as one of the participants or contributors to the project to establish the global Islamic state. The day this happens, the children of the American Ikhwani branch will have a far-reaching impact and positions that make the ancestors proud." The document concludes with a list of groups the MB should coordinate, including Islamic Society of North America, Islamic Circle of North America, and the International Institute of Islamic Thought. (The Council on American-Islamic Relations did not exist in 1991.)

Farah comments on this document, noting
. . . the breadth of ambition, the conviction of ultimate success and the care with which the campaign we see today was being thought about 16 years ago. So is the the clarity of the ultimate objective of ending our years as a functioning democracy, built on the rule of secular law, minority rights and freedom of religion, press etc. The infiltration of the government by members and sympathizers, the coordinated role of the organizations in pursuing specific objectives, the recruitment of the best and the brightest into the movement, and other objectives are far advanced, perhaps further than the author could have imagined in so short a time.

[color and emphasis mine. lw]

Muslim leaders in America claim that Islam is a peaceful religion and that its followers simply want to live in peace with their neighbors. FSM Contributing Editor Douglas Farah, however, notes a startling document from the Muslim Brotherhood that indicates the MB has other plans.

The Smoking Gun on the Muslim Brotherhood’s Agenda
By Douglas Farah

One of the most fascinating exhibits presented by the prosecution in the Holy Land Foundation case (provided by researchers for the NEFA Foundation) is a memorandum on the Muslim Brotherhood’s multifaceted plan to convert the United States to an Islamic nation. It is the smoking gun of the Ikhwan’s long-standing efforts to destroy the Western world as we know it.
The most interesting exhibit is a Muslim Brotherhood memorandum by Mohamed Akram, dated May 22, 1991, where he outlines the Ikhwan vision of the future. He leaves no ambiguity as to the nature of the Ikhwan calling. (The exhibits will be posted and written about more completely in the NEFA website in coming days).

Under the heading “Understanding the role of the Muslim Brother in North America,” he writes:
The process of settlement is a ‘Civilization-Jihadist Process’ with all the word means. The Ikhwan 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 ad God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.

But wait, there is more:

Without this level of understanding, we are not up to this challenge and have not prepared ourselves for Jihad yet. It is a Muslim’s destiny to perform Jihad and work wherever he is and wherever he lands until the final hour comes, and there is no escape from that destiny except for those who chose to slack.

Akram then spells out in some detail the role of the Brotherhood in moving the project forward:

As for the role of the Ikhwan, it is the initiative, pioneering, leadership, raising the banner and pushing people in that direction (the Jihadist process). They are then able to employ, direct, and unify Muslims’ efforts and powers for this process. In order to do that, we must possess a master of the art of ‘coalitions,’ the art of ‘absorption’ and the principles of “cooperation.”
The document then gives rationale for setting up Ikhwan organizations across the country:
We must say that we are in a country which understands no language other than the language of the organizations, and one which does not respect or give weight to any group without effective, functional and strong organizations.

The document also deals with the criticism among the Brothers that the focus on the United States will drain support for the establishment of the global caliphate. The response is two-fold:

1) The success of the Movement in America in establishing an observant Islamic base with power and effectiveness will be the best support and aid to the global Movement project.

2) The global (Ikhwan) movement has not “succeeded yet in distributing roles to its branches, stating that what is needed from them as one of the participants or contributors to the project to establish the global Islamic state. The day this happens, the children of the American Ikhwani branch will have a far-reaching impact and positions that make the ancestors proud.”

The document ends with a list of Ikhwan groups trying to coordinate, including all the usual suspects (ISNA, ICNA, IIIT etc.).

What is so interesting about the document is the breadth of ambition, the conviction of ultimate success, and the care with which the campaign we see today was being thought about 16 years ago. So is the the clarity of the ultimate objective of ending our years as a functioning democracy, built on the rule of secular law, minority rights, and freedom of religion, press etc.

The infiltration of the government by members and sympathizers, the coordinated role of the organizations in pursuing specific objectives, the recruitment of the best and the brightest into the movement, and other objectives are far advanced, perhaps further than the author could have imagined in so short a time.

The rationale for those like Lieken et al, who want play footsie with these groups bent on our destruction, is truly mindboggling. I don’t think the Brothers who have been on the cusp of the new PR campaign, from Ramadan to Akef, have bothered to spell this out like the Brothers do for themselves.

But here we have it, in their own words, written by their own hands. There is much more to say, and I will revisit the topic as more information comes in.
Will anyone pay attention?
# #
FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor Douglas Farah is an award-winning investigative journalist, author of “Blood From Stones:The Secret Financial Network of Terror”, and Senior Fellow in Financial Investigations and Transparency at the International Assessment and Strategy Center. He blogs on the Counterterrorism Blog.

If you are a reporter or producer who is interested in receiving more information about this writer or this article, please email your request to PR@FamilySecurityMatters.org.

http://bsimmons.wordpress.com/2007/08/02/the-smoking-gun-on-the-muslim-brotherhoods-agenda/

. . . even if he identifies strongly as a Christian, and even if he despised the behavior of his father (as Obama said on Oprah); is a man who Muslims think is a Muslim, who feels some sort of psychological need to prove himself to his absent Muslim father, and who is now moving in the direction of his father’s heritage, a man we want as President when we are fighting the war of our lives against Islam? Where will his loyalties be?

--Debbie Schlussel
From:
Barack Hussein Obama: Once a Muslim, Always A Muslim
By Debbie Schlussel
http://bsimmons.wordpress.com/2007/01/18/debbie-schlussel-barack-hussein-obama-once-a-muslim-always-a-muslim-is-obama-a-muslim-manchurian-candidate/


Wednesday, June 11, 2008

IF IT WALKS LIKE A DUCK AND QUACKS LIKE A DUCK, COULD IT BE THE MESSIAH?

From http://inyourface.info/ArT/Iota/NeWT.shtml
by Hank Roth

. . . Muslims want Obama to become the American president. The US-Islamic forum in the Gulf backs Obama. Delegates to a US-Islamic forum on Feb 18, 2008, in a mock election by more than 200 of the American and Muslim delegates at the US-Islamic World Forum in Qatar [backed Obama]. About 280 public figures and academics from 32 countries, which included Afghan President Hamid Karzai and the US ambassador to the United Nations, Zalmay Khalilzad, attended this fifth edition of the forum.
***
All that money being spent on the election and so much of it coming in from private contributions makes you wonder where they really got the money? Is there so much loose change laying around for an election? I'm not downplaying the heightened emotions they feel about their candidate, but when times are hard and there is so much money, you have to ask yourself how is that possible? Of course a lot of it is bundled money and it comes from somewhere else. So where is that money coming from?
***
There are other questions which will certainly be raised in a general election. Why did Barack Hussein Obama change his name from Barry (or Barrie) to Barack? Aren't names important? They also signify association, if not real, at least emotionally. So, does Barack feel more like a Barack than a Barry? Obviously, he does.

Does he have the Muslim vote because his first name is Barack, not Barry? Or is it his middle name, Hussein, which brings in the money and the support of Muslims (and it doesn't hurt with African-Americans) who for some strange reason relate best to Muslims and fundamentalist/radical (and pentacostal) Christians.
***
Obama spend much of his life blending in. His associations may tell another story. His intentions may not be those stated and if Obama was true to his words he would not be associating with the people who also have connections which reach all the way to Iraq and to Indonesia.
***
You don't think they call himBarack [not Barry] Hussein Obama for nothing in Kenya, do you?

When Obama visited Kenya his praise of the Luo and Raila Odinga was so great that the Kenya government denounced Obama. They called him Raila Oginga's "stooge."

Luo is Odinga and Obama's African tribe. They constitute 13% of the population of Kenya. Odinga wants to be the president of Kenya but lost the election. His cousin, Obama is his inspiration. When he becomes president, Odinga wants all Kenyan Christians subjected to Sharia law. He has vowed to implement Islamic Sharia law if he becomes president.
***
Obama's cousin is Raila Ondinga. There is more about this in the Crypt - Crypt. Read it there.

Ondinga is an Islamic Jihadist. Obama has questionable ties to his cousin. They speak often over the telephone. Are we to believe that is all there is to it?

Obama supporters claim there is NOTHING to it. But they are not thinking rationally. Obama family in Kenya is Muslim.

They embrace Sharia law. They embrace the customs of Muslims and we can see the intolerance demonstrated everywhere where Muslims live. Are we ready for a visit to the White House by his Muslim family from Kenya? You know it will happen if he is elected president. Will they sleep in the Lincoln bedroom?

We are waging war against Muslims who live by a strict interpretation of Sharia Law. Obama's family adheres to strict interpretations of Islamic laws and traditions. How much does Obama also believe in Islamic law? How much can he separate himself from his own family? Even his pastor, who he was late to condemn - who he still considers as-if he were an uncle is a radical misanthrope who hates America and preaches a firey brand of fundamentalist Black Christian Liberationism which is antithetical for someone who wants to be president to also be or to have been associated with him.

Hank Roth
http://inyourface.info/ArT/Iota/NeWT.shtml
DOES OBAMA UNDERSTAND FOREIGN POLICY?

http://inyourface.info/ArT/Gamma/JuDG.shtml

Excerpt:

Obama is dangerously naive in failing to understand the need in international crises to blend tough diplomacy with the other foreign policy tools at our disposal to achieve a strong national security posture.

Judgment and leadership in foreign policy are not intuitive. They are learned through experience. Obama's long and close relationship with the anti-American hate-monger Wright, his inattention to his responsibilities in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and his careless approach to Iraq all suggest that he would benefit from more experience. We should ask whether we want those lessons to be learned in the White House.

(Joseph C. Wilson IV is a former diplomat and U.S. ambassador. He was senior director for African Affairs in the Clinton administration. In 2003 he wrote a New York Times opinion piece, "What I didn't find in Africa," challenging the Bush administration's use of intelligence to justify the war in Iraq.)

Joseph C. Wilson IV
http://inyourface.info/ArT/Gamma/JuDG.shtml
[color emphasis mine. lw]
The Bad War?

By Victor Davis Hanson
Normandy, France

An excerpt:

. . . The thousands of Americans lying beneath the rows of white crosses at Normandy Beach, at Hamm, Luxembourg, and at St. Avold in the Lorraine probably did not debate the Versailles Treaty or worry too much whether a B-17 took out a neighborhood when it tried to hit a German railyard.

Instead, our soldiers were more worried that they had few options available to stop Nazi Germany and imperial Japan — other than their own innate courage and valor. The American dead in European cemeteries never bragged that they were eagerly fighting a “good” war; they were reluctantly finishing a necessary war that someone else started.

Those GIs and the leaders who sent them into the carnage of World War II knew that Americans could do good without having to be perfect. In contrast, the present critics of the Allied cause enjoy the freedom and affluence that our forefathers gave us by fighting World War II, while ignoring — or faulting — the intelligence and resolve that won it.

Gen. William Tecumseh Sherman once scoffed at the peacetime wisdom of postwar critics that came across as mass-produced, feel-good “bottled piety.” Others might call it ingratitude.

Victor Davis Hanson is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution and a recipient of the 2007 National Humanities Medal.
© 2008 TRIBUNE MEDIA SERVICES, INC

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MzI5YjIxOTQ5NDQ2MmIwNDM2ZTk1ODFjYjc4YmQwY2M=&w=MQ==

Obama Rules

Ten new regulations for the 2008 election
by Victor Davis Hanson
PajamasMedia.com

Barack Obama is a gifted politician who has led an exemplary life. His run for presidency for many offers redemption that America has finally moved beyond race. But that laudable proposition is beginning to foster surreal rules of campaigning from both the media and Obama himself that do no one any good.

1. The 2008 campaign must stick to concrete issues and detailed policies. That said, Barack Obama can continue to speak only in vague terms of “hope and change.”

2. Rev. Wright’s racist tirades must be contextualized and only understood in their proper historic milieu of white racism — that is, unless he suddenly turns on Barack Obama, in which case one is now free to deride him as “mean-spirited,” “malicious” and on a “vendetta.”

3. Rev. Wright is like “an old uncle” and his church “not particularly controversial.” Those who insist otherwise are using “snippets” and “loops” out of context for cheap political advantage. But should the Rev. repeat his serial lunacies at the National Press Club on national television, and insult the sympathetic liberal DC press corps, then he is suddenly expendable and inexplicably not the same pastor that Barack Obama knew for 20 years — and so now to be freely derided as a “spoiler.”

4. It is assumed that Barack Obama’s exotic middle name Hussein can provide authentic multicultural fides and hope of projecting a new, more globally sympathetic American image abroad, but to voice ‘Hussein’ aloud is assumed to be nefarious.

5. It is legitimate to appeal to, and thus win en masse 90% of African-Americans of all classes over a rival liberal candidate, but it is absolutely illegitimate and a sign of a racialist strategy should someone else win two-thirds of that total of the white working-class vote — and, worse, acknowledge it as such.

6. John McCain can be written off as “losing his bearings” and wanting U.S. troops in Iraq for “100 years.” But to repeat the fact that a Hamas advisor has praised Obama, or that one of his own foreign policy advisors has met with officials of that terrorist organization, is “divisive,” “a distraction,” and the “old politics as usual.” McCain’s fuzzy references to Shiite/Sunni terrorist cooperation are signs of his senility. Obama’s repeated confusion over how many states there are in the Union (48? or is it 58?) is proof of exhaustion and lack of sleep.

7. Racial generalizations of any type in connection with the candidacy of Barack Obama are out of order. Barack Obama is free to characterize his grandmother as a “typical white person” and to lump the middle-class voters of Pennsylvania together as nativists, racists, and superstitious in their reliance on religion and guns. Only endemic white racism — never anger over Obama’s overt racialist stereotyping of the white middle class and his Reverend’s slurs — can explain that group’s rejection of him at the primary polls.

8. Substantial campaign contributions and the money nexus in politics are pernicious, proof of the “old politics” with a long history of distorting campaigns. The record fund-raising and enormous war-chest of Barack Obama are instead proof of a healthy American democracy and preclude any need for public campaign financing.

9. If a zealous pastor endorses John McCain, then his past illiberal talk about Catholicism demands a formal rebuke. If Barack Obama’s spiritual advisor of some twenty years addresses a meeting of a branch of the NAACP and announces that blacks and whites have genetically different brain chemistries and learning abilities, then one simply keeps quiet about it.

10. For conservatives to have suggested that the media was biased in favor of the Clintons in the 1990s was McCarthyesque. For Clintonites to suggest that it is now even more biased toward Obama is even more McCarthyesque.

This is the new political landscape that we are in, and those who object to it should expect to face hysterical outrage — in the manner of anyone who suggests that a messiah should at least try to practice what he preaches. And the problem is that those he will face as President — whether an Iranian religious nut, a Hamas terrorist, a Chinese communist, a Castro, Chavez, or North Korean extortionist — will follow no such Obama rules.

©2008 Victor Davis Hanson

http://victorhanson.com/articles/hanson051608.html

COMMENT: Any opposition to Barack Hussein Obama is, and will be, considered racially motivated and politically incorrect.
Leslie White