Wednesday, August 27, 2008
Tuesday, August 26, 2008
Baraq Hussein Obama through Muslim Eyes
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.
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.
Accused Jihadist invited to DNC!
PLEASE PAY ATTENTION PEOPLE!
August 25, 2008
Former accused jihadist spy, now DNC delegate: "That they'll now read from the Quran at a national political convention — that shows we have come a long way in this country"
Accused Jihadist Yee
Reversal of fortune
Yee was not exactly cleared. Back in March 2004, AP reported that "in dismissing the charges, Maj. Gen. Geoffrey D. Miller, commander of Joint Task Force Guantanamo, which operates the detention center, cited 'national security concerns that would arise from the release of the evidence' if the case proceeded."
National security concerns would arise from the release of the evidence if Yee's case proceeded? That's a very strange statement, and it cries out for an explanation (none was ever forthcoming, to my knowledge), but it is not quite the same thing as saying, "This man was completely innocent, and should never have been charged." Maybe they just don't want to admit a mistake. But questions persist.
In any case, this article says that Yee saw the Qur'an desecrated at Guantanamo, but in this report, he says of the desecration reports (which he was and is eagerly passing on) that he did not see any desecration himself:
The Korans were thrown on the floor by guards when they conducted cell searches. It has been reported and I have learned now that interrogators also were throwing the Korans on the floor or stomping on it. This was happening when I was there, and this was an issue.
Interviewer: You actually saw this happening?
Yee: I didn't see it because I wasn't a part of the intelligence operation, but I was aware directly from the prisoners, when they came to me with the complaints and concerns.
But now some time has passed, and memories have grown hazy, and lo and behold, he did see the Qur'an desecration:
"Denver latest stop on Yee's unlikely journey," by Danny Westneat for the Seattle Times, August 25 (thanks to all who sent this in):
DENVER — Nobody's come as far as James Yee to be a delegate to this Democratic National Convention.
Five years ago, Yee, an Army chaplain of Muslim faith, was shackled and tossed into solitary confinement for 76 days because the U.S. government felt — wrongly — that he was a terrorist sympathizer and spy.
Now the Olympia man is here, ready to cast his vote as part of the Washington state contingent for Barack Obama.
His story is a useful reminder, he says, of the danger of America chucking aside civil liberties. [...]
"There is some worry that I might be a lightning rod," Yee said Sunday. " 'Accused terrorist spy is national delegate for Obama,' " he intoned, imagining how Fox News might broadcast his story.
Yee, formerly a chaplain at Fort Lewis, is something of a celebrity at the convention. Fox, PBS, The Washington Post all have called. It's because of what happened to him at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, back when America was gripped in a war-on-terror fever.
Yee was no radical. A West Point grad, he was deeply committed to both his Muslim faith and the military — "serving both God and country," he says. He voted for George W. Bush in 2000.
Then he was sent to Gitmo in the fall of 2002, to minister to prisoners and be an unofficial Muslim spokesman for the U.S. military.
By the spring of 2003, though, he was objecting to the treatment of detainees and the "anti-Muslim hostility" that he says pervaded the place. He felt it came down from the top — from the "you're either with us or against us" doctrine that he now describes as "a terrorist mentality."
Some intelligence officers suspected Yee of conspiring with the enemy, and he was arrested that September.
Spying, espionage, mutiny and sedition — all were alleged by the government. Infamously, Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y. — whom Yee will probably meet at this convention — said Yee's arrest was proof that al-Qaida had infiltrated the U.S. military.
"Basically, they said I was a traitor," Yee says.
The case fell apart almost immediately. Eventually all charges were dropped, and in 2005 he quit the Army with an honorable discharge. [...]
"Some of it is because I challenged the system at Guantánamo," he said, "but most of it was because I am Muslim."
So now, in 2008, does he feel welcome in American politics?
It is not far from Yee's mind that the Obama campaign in the spring asked two women wearing Muslim head scarves to move so they wouldn't appear in the TV shots of the crowd behind him.
But Yee says he got active in politics after quitting the Army because he feels Muslims must "speak up, volunteer and engage," or continue to be marginalized.
"I can see why Muslims wanted to go underground after 9/11," Yee said. "But I have found that if you speak up in politics you can have a positive influence." [...]
When he says this, we are sitting outside what's billed as the first-ever "interfaith" event for a Democratic convention. We listen as Christians, Jews, Buddhists and, yes, Muslims, openly profess their faiths.
Then there's a reading from the Quran, the same book Yee says he saw desecrated, as a form of psychic abuse, at Guantánamo. It's a passage about how the true nature of righteousness is more about compassion than "whether you turn your face towards East or West."
Yee taps the passage.
"That they'll now read from the Quran at a national political convention — that shows we have come a long way in this country," he says.
"That I'm here — that shows it, too."
SOURCE: Jihad watch http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/022373.php
August 25, 2008
Former accused jihadist spy, now DNC delegate: "That they'll now read from the Quran at a national political convention — that shows we have come a long way in this country"
Accused Jihadist Yee
Reversal of fortune
Yee was not exactly cleared. Back in March 2004, AP reported that "in dismissing the charges, Maj. Gen. Geoffrey D. Miller, commander of Joint Task Force Guantanamo, which operates the detention center, cited 'national security concerns that would arise from the release of the evidence' if the case proceeded."
National security concerns would arise from the release of the evidence if Yee's case proceeded? That's a very strange statement, and it cries out for an explanation (none was ever forthcoming, to my knowledge), but it is not quite the same thing as saying, "This man was completely innocent, and should never have been charged." Maybe they just don't want to admit a mistake. But questions persist.
In any case, this article says that Yee saw the Qur'an desecrated at Guantanamo, but in this report, he says of the desecration reports (which he was and is eagerly passing on) that he did not see any desecration himself:
The Korans were thrown on the floor by guards when they conducted cell searches. It has been reported and I have learned now that interrogators also were throwing the Korans on the floor or stomping on it. This was happening when I was there, and this was an issue.
Interviewer: You actually saw this happening?
Yee: I didn't see it because I wasn't a part of the intelligence operation, but I was aware directly from the prisoners, when they came to me with the complaints and concerns.
But now some time has passed, and memories have grown hazy, and lo and behold, he did see the Qur'an desecration:
"Denver latest stop on Yee's unlikely journey," by Danny Westneat for the Seattle Times, August 25 (thanks to all who sent this in):
DENVER — Nobody's come as far as James Yee to be a delegate to this Democratic National Convention.
Five years ago, Yee, an Army chaplain of Muslim faith, was shackled and tossed into solitary confinement for 76 days because the U.S. government felt — wrongly — that he was a terrorist sympathizer and spy.
Now the Olympia man is here, ready to cast his vote as part of the Washington state contingent for Barack Obama.
His story is a useful reminder, he says, of the danger of America chucking aside civil liberties. [...]
"There is some worry that I might be a lightning rod," Yee said Sunday. " 'Accused terrorist spy is national delegate for Obama,' " he intoned, imagining how Fox News might broadcast his story.
Yee, formerly a chaplain at Fort Lewis, is something of a celebrity at the convention. Fox, PBS, The Washington Post all have called. It's because of what happened to him at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, back when America was gripped in a war-on-terror fever.
Yee was no radical. A West Point grad, he was deeply committed to both his Muslim faith and the military — "serving both God and country," he says. He voted for George W. Bush in 2000.
Then he was sent to Gitmo in the fall of 2002, to minister to prisoners and be an unofficial Muslim spokesman for the U.S. military.
By the spring of 2003, though, he was objecting to the treatment of detainees and the "anti-Muslim hostility" that he says pervaded the place. He felt it came down from the top — from the "you're either with us or against us" doctrine that he now describes as "a terrorist mentality."
Some intelligence officers suspected Yee of conspiring with the enemy, and he was arrested that September.
Spying, espionage, mutiny and sedition — all were alleged by the government. Infamously, Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y. — whom Yee will probably meet at this convention — said Yee's arrest was proof that al-Qaida had infiltrated the U.S. military.
"Basically, they said I was a traitor," Yee says.
The case fell apart almost immediately. Eventually all charges were dropped, and in 2005 he quit the Army with an honorable discharge. [...]
"Some of it is because I challenged the system at Guantánamo," he said, "but most of it was because I am Muslim."
So now, in 2008, does he feel welcome in American politics?
It is not far from Yee's mind that the Obama campaign in the spring asked two women wearing Muslim head scarves to move so they wouldn't appear in the TV shots of the crowd behind him.
But Yee says he got active in politics after quitting the Army because he feels Muslims must "speak up, volunteer and engage," or continue to be marginalized.
"I can see why Muslims wanted to go underground after 9/11," Yee said. "But I have found that if you speak up in politics you can have a positive influence." [...]
When he says this, we are sitting outside what's billed as the first-ever "interfaith" event for a Democratic convention. We listen as Christians, Jews, Buddhists and, yes, Muslims, openly profess their faiths.
Then there's a reading from the Quran, the same book Yee says he saw desecrated, as a form of psychic abuse, at Guantánamo. It's a passage about how the true nature of righteousness is more about compassion than "whether you turn your face towards East or West."
Yee taps the passage.
"That they'll now read from the Quran at a national political convention — that shows we have come a long way in this country," he says.
"That I'm here — that shows it, too."
SOURCE: Jihad watch http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/022373.php
Monday, August 25, 2008
Obama's domestic terrorist ties
American Issues Project Launches Ad
August 21, 2008
The American Issues Project today announced the debut of a new television advertising campaign examining the relationship between Sen. Barack Obama and unrepentant 1960's domestic terrorist, William Ayers. The ad -- entitled "Know Enough?" -- begins with a simple, yet pointed question: "Beyond the speeches, how much do you really know about Barack Obama?"
Supported by over one hundred pages of back-up documentation and historical accounts, the American Issues Project is using this ad to shed light on Obama's friendship with Ayers, the former leader of an American terrorist group known as Weather Underground.
American Issues Project Click Here
August 21, 2008
The American Issues Project today announced the debut of a new television advertising campaign examining the relationship between Sen. Barack Obama and unrepentant 1960's domestic terrorist, William Ayers. The ad -- entitled "Know Enough?" -- begins with a simple, yet pointed question: "Beyond the speeches, how much do you really know about Barack Obama?"
Supported by over one hundred pages of back-up documentation and historical accounts, the American Issues Project is using this ad to shed light on Obama's friendship with Ayers, the former leader of an American terrorist group known as Weather Underground.
American Issues Project Click Here
Friday, August 22, 2008
Jihad in Academia
Please take a few minutes to check out the below link which tells about the network of deceit by the Islamists who use lies and other tactics to indoctrinate our children and young adults. Especially if you are college or university staff or a parent, you must see how global jihad in your backyard is progressing.
While the Muslim Studen Association is primarily located at colleges and universities, more and more high schools are accepting of this jihadist group.
Click here for the video
While the Muslim Studen Association is primarily located at colleges and universities, more and more high schools are accepting of this jihadist group.
Click here for the video
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
Prohibited in Islam
EXAMPLE: From the Top PBS Programming
The Chicagoland-area Ridere String Quartet, comprised of 18-year olds Samantha Bennett, Ryan Meehan, Emma Steele, and Mindy Park, finds that not only do they play well together, but have a wonderful time doing so, and aptly named their group “Ridere”, the Italian word for laughter. The quartet rounds out the episode with a lively performance of Piazzolla’s Tango for Four.
Piazzolla's Tango for Four - CLICK HERE
The Chicagoland-area Ridere String Quartet, comprised of 18-year olds Samantha Bennett, Ryan Meehan, Emma Steele, and Mindy Park, finds that not only do they play well together, but have a wonderful time doing so, and aptly named their group “Ridere”, the Italian word for laughter. The quartet rounds out the episode with a lively performance of Piazzolla’s Tango for Four.
Piazzolla's Tango for Four - CLICK HERE
Sunday, August 17, 2008
The Abomination's No Answer, Answer
Yesterday, August 16, 2008, in front of an audience of thousands and a network audience of millions, Obama was asked by Pastor Warren - 'at what point does a baby get human rights?'. Obama replied 'Answering that question with specificity is above my pay grade.'
You know, I find it the height of irony that Obama's non-answer actually WAS an answer. Unfortunately for Obama, it was an answer to some entirely different questions which he has stubbornly refused to confront since the beginning of his candidacy. Namely, questions of his beliefs.
To begin with it, his non-answer 'answered' the question about whether he is a devout Christian. He isn't. A devout Christian would never equivocate about abortion - devout Christians are against it. Period. The next question his non-answer answered was the question of his moral beliefs. A person of strong moral beliefs (regardless of whether those beliefs are for or against abortion) would reveal that strength by giving a prompt and emphatic answer. That Obama did neither answers the question on that score. Then there's the question of his political beliefs - as a Democrat, Obama's stance [i]must[/i] be that of his party (after all, they've chosen him as their leader). Ergo, he should have instantly supported the Democratic stance on abortion, i.e., that abortion is a 'right' which must be protected at all costs, from the moment of conception up to the very second (and, unfortunately in Illinois, [i]beyond[/i] that second) of live birth. But Obama flatly refused to. And in so doing, answered the question of his politics.
But most astounding of all, Obama 'answered' the question of his own intelligence. Just think of what the answer really means - i.e, the reason Obama gave for not answering a simple question was because it was "..above (his) pay grade'. Folks, there's no way to get around it - Obama was literally admitting he wasn't smart enough to answer. Folks, this is a staggering admission. If there has been ONE constant, incessantly repeated qualification for the presidency which Obama and his followers have literally screamed from the rooftops since his candidacy began, it is the qualification of Obama's vaunted intelligence. He's not just smart, he's [i]damned[/i] smart. Obama was President of the Harvard Law Review, he's a former Law Professor at the University of Chicago. He's written books which have sold millions. In other words, this man is not just smart, he's smart with a capital 'S'. Yet , as a stunned world watched yesterday, Obama looked Pastor Warren straight in the face and in reply to a prepared question which Obama had seen beforehand and had had ample time to prepare for, replied that he wasn't smart enough to answer it.
Yes, it [i]is[/i] ironic, isn't it, that yesterday Obama actually DID answer some questions? Unfortunately, as Obama surely discovered too late afterwards (once Michelle bitch-slapped him offstage), it was an answer to the wrong questions.
http://blogs.reuters.com/trail08/2008/08/16/obama-says-pointed-abortion-query-above-his-pay-grade/
(BTW - if you read the article linked above, please check out the comments. Boy, if [i]their [/i]reactions to Obama's 'above my pay grade' remark are anything to go by, Michelle must be frothing by now.)
Carolyn
BTW dear readers, I am NOT Carolyn.
You know, I find it the height of irony that Obama's non-answer actually WAS an answer. Unfortunately for Obama, it was an answer to some entirely different questions which he has stubbornly refused to confront since the beginning of his candidacy. Namely, questions of his beliefs.
To begin with it, his non-answer 'answered' the question about whether he is a devout Christian. He isn't. A devout Christian would never equivocate about abortion - devout Christians are against it. Period. The next question his non-answer answered was the question of his moral beliefs. A person of strong moral beliefs (regardless of whether those beliefs are for or against abortion) would reveal that strength by giving a prompt and emphatic answer. That Obama did neither answers the question on that score. Then there's the question of his political beliefs - as a Democrat, Obama's stance [i]must[/i] be that of his party (after all, they've chosen him as their leader). Ergo, he should have instantly supported the Democratic stance on abortion, i.e., that abortion is a 'right' which must be protected at all costs, from the moment of conception up to the very second (and, unfortunately in Illinois, [i]beyond[/i] that second) of live birth. But Obama flatly refused to. And in so doing, answered the question of his politics.
But most astounding of all, Obama 'answered' the question of his own intelligence. Just think of what the answer really means - i.e, the reason Obama gave for not answering a simple question was because it was "..above (his) pay grade'. Folks, there's no way to get around it - Obama was literally admitting he wasn't smart enough to answer. Folks, this is a staggering admission. If there has been ONE constant, incessantly repeated qualification for the presidency which Obama and his followers have literally screamed from the rooftops since his candidacy began, it is the qualification of Obama's vaunted intelligence. He's not just smart, he's [i]damned[/i] smart. Obama was President of the Harvard Law Review, he's a former Law Professor at the University of Chicago. He's written books which have sold millions. In other words, this man is not just smart, he's smart with a capital 'S'. Yet , as a stunned world watched yesterday, Obama looked Pastor Warren straight in the face and in reply to a prepared question which Obama had seen beforehand and had had ample time to prepare for, replied that he wasn't smart enough to answer it.
Yes, it [i]is[/i] ironic, isn't it, that yesterday Obama actually DID answer some questions? Unfortunately, as Obama surely discovered too late afterwards (once Michelle bitch-slapped him offstage), it was an answer to the wrong questions.
http://blogs.reuters.com/trail08/2008/08/16/obama-says-pointed-abortion-query-above-his-pay-grade/
(BTW - if you read the article linked above, please check out the comments. Boy, if [i]their [/i]reactions to Obama's 'above my pay grade' remark are anything to go by, Michelle must be frothing by now.)
Carolyn
BTW dear readers, I am NOT Carolyn.
Thursday, August 14, 2008
Crescent of betrayal
World Ahead press release (draft), June 29, 2007
Forthcoming in August 2007, a new book from World Ahead Publishing, Crescent of Betrayal, describes the many Islamic and terrorist memorializing elements in the winning Crescent of Embrace design for the Flight 93 Memorial. Most importantly, a person facing directly into the half mile wide central crescent (still present in the superficially altered Bowl of Embrace redesign) is facing almost exactly at Mecca. A crescent that Muslims face into to face Mecca is called a mihrab and is the central feature around which every mosque is built.
Author Alec Rawls started investigating the crescent site-plans after the winning design was unveiled in September 2005, and spent much of 2006 trying to get the Memorial Project to come to grip with his findings. Every element of the entire crescent design turns out to be a typical mosque feature, realized on the same epic scale as the half-mile wide central crescent. The minaret-like Tower of Voices part of the memorial turns out to be a gigantic Islamic prayer-time sundial. There are 44 memorial glass blocks emplaced along the flight path, exceeding the number of our murdered heroes by the number of their murderers. And on it goes, for over a hundred pages of Mr. Rawls’ 300 page exposé.
Architect Paul Murdoch’s crescent design is only the beginning of the crescent of betrayal. Murdoch’s emergence is actually the easy part of the story to understand. We hosted an open design competition in time of war. Of course the enemy would enter, and try to win a memorial to their heroes instead of ours. What is harder to explain is the year and a half now that the Memorial Project has spent avoiding and then covering up Murdoch’s plot. Those charged with memorializing “the flight that fought back” have struggled mightily to defend and protect their hijacker.
The truth avoiding behavior of the Memorial Project is itself part of a much larger phenomenon. Important parts of our society are only willing to see what they think it is in their interest to see. This failure to trust in truth creates a divorce from reality that allows people to think they are doing right, even as they twist all the way around to directly abetting our terrorist enemies. The same thing is happening on every terror war issue.
PLEASE SEE THE WEBSITE AT http://www.crescentofbetrayal.com/
CAUTION! CAUTION........... This may make you vomit! I suggest writing to the Parks Department and DEMANDING that this memorial to the Islamic murderers be trashed!
Saturday, August 9, 2008
A Voter's Letter to McCain
John McCain 2008
P.O. Box 16118
Arlington, VA 22215
Dear McCain Campaign:
I put a buck in this envelope so someone would actually read this letter. I e-mailed your site, but doubt if anyone will bother to read it or mention it.
You want to defeat Obama? Start by:
1) Making Mitt Romney your Vice President
2) You better get right with the religious folks.
3) STOP running the ad linking Obama with Britney Spears and Paris Hilton. While it’s absolutely correct, the press has so warped the American public, that this ad is not going to be effective.
4) Instead, run ads which clearly show the lies and half-truths the press has covered up for Obama
a) he refused to meet with real soldiers in Afghanistan, just the brass
b) the 200,000 German people who were at his “rally” were actually there for a free rock concert – that’s why the press won’t show you footage
c) hammer on the higher taxes Obama wants versus McCain. Show how those higher taxes will affect us – especially gas taxes
d) hammer on how he opposes offshore drilling and tie in gas taxes. Obama’s so dumb, he thinks if we air up our tires more we won’t need off-shore oil
e) hammer on the fact that Obama doesn’t support voucher schools, yet he spends $40,000 a year to send his children to private schools
f) hammer on the fact that Obama has 143 days of public service yet he wants to lead the greatest country in the world, while McCain has many thousands of hours of public service
g) hammer on the fact that Obama and his racist wife think that “finally” they have some pride in America while McCain spent years in a POW cage in Viet Nam and then came back and devoted his life to public service.
h) instead of celebrating diversity of races and ethnic backgrounds, why the heck don’t we CELEBRATE UNITY. Wow! What a concept!
5) If you really want effective campaign ads, you should use humor WAY MORE than negative ads. Humor makes one seem personable, approachable, and real. Especially if it’s gentle, self-deprecating humor. Remember when Ronald Reagan really took the wind out of his opponent’s sails about the age issue when he said he wouldn’t hold his opponent’s youth and lack of experience against him.
Another example is Bob Dole’s candidacy. For some reason, his handlers wanted to portray him as serious and dedicated. What came across was the image of a dour, lemon-sucking person who hadn’t had a bowel movement in months. Too bad, because evidently Bob Dole was a nice and really likeable guy who could have done a good job.
6) And answer me this: Why does everyone think a racist is someone who is white and lives below the Mason-Dixon Line or in Northern Idaho? Obama and his wife are two of the biggest racists I’ve ever seen. Read his book! Read her thesis!
7) It would be nice if all you RINOs would stand together. As far as I can see, the RNC is only interested in one thing -- raising money. If there is a platform of any type, it’s hidden. Every Republican candidate has a different take on things. So why aren’t you Republicans UNITED? Why didn’t the Republicans in Congress refuse to vote for a recess and stay around DC until the energy bill got brought to the floor? C’mon! You RINOs (and especially the long-term representatives and senators) are smart enough to come up with more than one way to outwit Pelosi and her band of thieves. Or are you all just not that bright? Think about it!
8) why can’t you RINOs get together and CELEBRATE UNITY instead of being so diverse? You’re so busy spreading yourselves thin trying to address every different ethnic group you are losing sight of the greatness of unity. Why do you think so many people try to get to America? It’s a great place! No one is trying to emigrate to China, or Sri Lanka, or Peru, or Rwanda.
9) By the way, I’m tired of being ignored because I’m Caucasian, I live here legally, I’m a small business owner, and I pay my taxes.
You don’t have to pay attention to me. I’m just your normal average conservative voter who is so pissed off that McCain got the Republican nod, that I wasn’t even going to VOTE until Obama got the Democratic nod.
DON’T BOTHER TO ASK ME FOR MORE MONEY. I’m too busy trying to convince other pissed off conservative voters to vote for McCain. They don’t like McCain either, but would rather LEAVE America rather than vote for a Muslim racist.
Vicki
P.O. Box 16118
Arlington, VA 22215
Dear McCain Campaign:
I put a buck in this envelope so someone would actually read this letter. I e-mailed your site, but doubt if anyone will bother to read it or mention it.
You want to defeat Obama? Start by:
1) Making Mitt Romney your Vice President
2) You better get right with the religious folks.
3) STOP running the ad linking Obama with Britney Spears and Paris Hilton. While it’s absolutely correct, the press has so warped the American public, that this ad is not going to be effective.
4) Instead, run ads which clearly show the lies and half-truths the press has covered up for Obama
a) he refused to meet with real soldiers in Afghanistan, just the brass
b) the 200,000 German people who were at his “rally” were actually there for a free rock concert – that’s why the press won’t show you footage
c) hammer on the higher taxes Obama wants versus McCain. Show how those higher taxes will affect us – especially gas taxes
d) hammer on how he opposes offshore drilling and tie in gas taxes. Obama’s so dumb, he thinks if we air up our tires more we won’t need off-shore oil
e) hammer on the fact that Obama doesn’t support voucher schools, yet he spends $40,000 a year to send his children to private schools
f) hammer on the fact that Obama has 143 days of public service yet he wants to lead the greatest country in the world, while McCain has many thousands of hours of public service
g) hammer on the fact that Obama and his racist wife think that “finally” they have some pride in America while McCain spent years in a POW cage in Viet Nam and then came back and devoted his life to public service.
h) instead of celebrating diversity of races and ethnic backgrounds, why the heck don’t we CELEBRATE UNITY. Wow! What a concept!
5) If you really want effective campaign ads, you should use humor WAY MORE than negative ads. Humor makes one seem personable, approachable, and real. Especially if it’s gentle, self-deprecating humor. Remember when Ronald Reagan really took the wind out of his opponent’s sails about the age issue when he said he wouldn’t hold his opponent’s youth and lack of experience against him.
Another example is Bob Dole’s candidacy. For some reason, his handlers wanted to portray him as serious and dedicated. What came across was the image of a dour, lemon-sucking person who hadn’t had a bowel movement in months. Too bad, because evidently Bob Dole was a nice and really likeable guy who could have done a good job.
6) And answer me this: Why does everyone think a racist is someone who is white and lives below the Mason-Dixon Line or in Northern Idaho? Obama and his wife are two of the biggest racists I’ve ever seen. Read his book! Read her thesis!
7) It would be nice if all you RINOs would stand together. As far as I can see, the RNC is only interested in one thing -- raising money. If there is a platform of any type, it’s hidden. Every Republican candidate has a different take on things. So why aren’t you Republicans UNITED? Why didn’t the Republicans in Congress refuse to vote for a recess and stay around DC until the energy bill got brought to the floor? C’mon! You RINOs (and especially the long-term representatives and senators) are smart enough to come up with more than one way to outwit Pelosi and her band of thieves. Or are you all just not that bright? Think about it!
8) why can’t you RINOs get together and CELEBRATE UNITY instead of being so diverse? You’re so busy spreading yourselves thin trying to address every different ethnic group you are losing sight of the greatness of unity. Why do you think so many people try to get to America? It’s a great place! No one is trying to emigrate to China, or Sri Lanka, or Peru, or Rwanda.
9) By the way, I’m tired of being ignored because I’m Caucasian, I live here legally, I’m a small business owner, and I pay my taxes.
You don’t have to pay attention to me. I’m just your normal average conservative voter who is so pissed off that McCain got the Republican nod, that I wasn’t even going to VOTE until Obama got the Democratic nod.
DON’T BOTHER TO ASK ME FOR MORE MONEY. I’m too busy trying to convince other pissed off conservative voters to vote for McCain. They don’t like McCain either, but would rather LEAVE America rather than vote for a Muslim racist.
Vicki
The Trans Caucasian Islamist Movement at work in Abkhazia (Georgia)
Remember the Islamic Jihadists murdering school children in Breslan? Yes, folks, this is this region's adherents of peace, followers of the pedophile, Big Mo at work again, or rather STILL. Part of the Chechnyan Islamic Movement, stirring up their religion as demanded by the Qur'an.
Their leader, Movladi Udugov quoted a Chechen proverb which says "A man is not one who knows how to fight, but one who knows who his enemies are," or words to that effect. OH IF ONLY OUR OWN WESTERN GOVERNMENTS WOULD HEED THIS ADVICE!
''Two ideologies can never get along peacefully on the same territory'' Udugove further says in an interview with a reporter from http://www.kavkazcenter.com/eng/ that Muslims do not distinguish personal enemies from Muslim enemies. Sound familiar? Wot? They couldn't be saying this in American mosques, could they?
From a May 2008 publication, Deputy Commander of Shali Sector of Eastern Front, Caucasus Emirate Armed Forces, Amir Muslim said ''I prayed to Allah, asking for beginning of this Jihad…'' He is one of the six Mujahideen brothers from Elistanzhi village in Vedeno District of Chechnya. His older brother is Amir Husain (born in 1970). Husain is the head of the Islamic Jamaah in Elistanzhi village and the Commander of the Shali Sector of the Eastern Front of the Caucasus Emirate.
These mujahideen are most likely also joining forces with the Islamic Party of Turkistan who just this week have threatened the Olympics.
You may remember that the famous seraglio beauties known as Circassians were kidnapped by the Ottoman Turks from this area. Many of the Ottoman janissaries, kinaped young boys made to serve the Islamic Sultans were from this area as well.
The domino effect of global jihad in this region of the world further threatens the stability of the western world. How will our leaders react? Quite the dilema for a world that refuses to accept or even acknowledge the global Islamic movement for world domination through any and all means.
Their leader, Movladi Udugov quoted a Chechen proverb which says "A man is not one who knows how to fight, but one who knows who his enemies are," or words to that effect. OH IF ONLY OUR OWN WESTERN GOVERNMENTS WOULD HEED THIS ADVICE!
''Two ideologies can never get along peacefully on the same territory'' Udugove further says in an interview with a reporter from http://www.kavkazcenter.com/eng/ that Muslims do not distinguish personal enemies from Muslim enemies. Sound familiar? Wot? They couldn't be saying this in American mosques, could they?
From a May 2008 publication, Deputy Commander of Shali Sector of Eastern Front, Caucasus Emirate Armed Forces, Amir Muslim said ''I prayed to Allah, asking for beginning of this Jihad…'' He is one of the six Mujahideen brothers from Elistanzhi village in Vedeno District of Chechnya. His older brother is Amir Husain (born in 1970). Husain is the head of the Islamic Jamaah in Elistanzhi village and the Commander of the Shali Sector of the Eastern Front of the Caucasus Emirate.
These mujahideen are most likely also joining forces with the Islamic Party of Turkistan who just this week have threatened the Olympics.
You may remember that the famous seraglio beauties known as Circassians were kidnapped by the Ottoman Turks from this area. Many of the Ottoman janissaries, kinaped young boys made to serve the Islamic Sultans were from this area as well.
The domino effect of global jihad in this region of the world further threatens the stability of the western world. How will our leaders react? Quite the dilema for a world that refuses to accept or even acknowledge the global Islamic movement for world domination through any and all means.
Wednesday, August 6, 2008
STOP THE SO-CALLED "Fairness Doctrine"
STOP THE "FAIRNESS DOCTRINE" which is anything but fair!
This is more censorship, this time by our very own Congress and their shameful Marxist leaning leader, Nancy Peloser.
SIGN THE PETITION TODAY ...........we are fast approaching George Orwell's 1984!
WAKE UP AMERICA! Take a stand for liberty before it is too late.
Thank you.
This is more censorship, this time by our very own Congress and their shameful Marxist leaning leader, Nancy Peloser.
SIGN THE PETITION TODAY ...........we are fast approaching George Orwell's 1984!
WAKE UP AMERICA! Take a stand for liberty before it is too late.
Thank you.
Book Burning
They're burning the books. They're not doing it with bonfires this time - but that only makes it worse because in the past the crackling flames and the stench of smoke at least warned us what was happening. And we saw it as well - pictures of jack-boots tossing in Thomas Mann, Kierkegard, Hermann Hesse, etc. as they sang the "Horst Wessel". I mean, there was proof, sight, sound, smell, etc., that the books were disappearing.
But this time we hear nothing. Worse, this time we haven't even been allowed to see the books first before they're tossed in the flames. In the past, when they burned 'Buddenbrooks' or 'Magic Mountain' by Thomas Mann or 'All Quiet on the Western Front' by Erich Marie Remarque - we at least had the chance to first hold them in our hands, smell the leather binding, turn the pages with our fingers, so that even as their physical being was incinerated in flames, their memory still remained in our hearts and minds.
But not these new books. There's no memory of them because they've never lived.
http://www.city-journal.org/2008/18_3_conservative_books.html
This is City Journal's warning of those 'ghost' books. Books which have never been allowed to be published. Why? Well, Harry Stein's excellent (and chilling) article on 'The Future of Conservative Books' explains it all. Instead of jack boots and Goebbels, it's now the leftists doing the filthy job. And they're so damned efficient at it. Stein chills you with endless examples of how the publishing world ruthlessly, remorsely refuses to print books by conservatives. And even those that it does print are done so with violent animosity, ruthless stonewalling. "The Bell Curve", "Closing of the American Mind", "The Way Things Ought To Be", etc., had to axe their way through the rock solid wall of resistence by the publishing houses. Bernard Goldberg's 'Bias' was turned down by EVERY major publishing house. And here's the chilling fact - every single one of the publishers admitted it was beautifully written, knew it would top the best seller lists, etc. But they all flatly refused to publish it. Why? Because in the publishing world, ideology is more important than profitability. As Stein explains it:
"...the New York publishing world clearly remains a liberal stronghold, uncomprehending of, when not outright hostile to, conservative ideas—and authors. Mainstream media outlets that conventional publishers rely on to tout books have just as little enthusiasm for conservative titles."
This is how the jack boots treat those books we conservatives desperately want to read. And how do the same boots treat us when we are forced to read books we don't want to? Well, read the book "Stalin's Vanishing Commissars' for a scary clue. And then read this link below:
http://www.bucksright.com/amazon-deleting-negative-pelosi-book-reviews-en-masse-304
It seems that last week Drudge carried a headline that Pelosi's book had tanked at Amazon. When I curiously logged on to Amazon to check it out, I found that of 165 ratings, 161 were the lowest - one star. Even people who 'admired' Nancy said the book was garbage.
But where where are those negative ratings today - those comments by conservative readers? Well, read this chilling excerpt:
"Users on the Amazon customer discussion board for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s failed book Know Your Power are reporting that Amazon is censoring negative reviews of the book through mass deletion.
A user posted a screen shot image from yesterday showing a one-star rating for the book based on 139 customer reviews. Today, the book is shown to have a two-star rating based on 42 reviews. 97 seemingly negative reviews have been thrown down the memory hole. Some users are reporting having seen a greater disparity in the number of reviews over time, with up to 200 reviews reported to have gone missing."
Yes, the books are burning, people. But this time it's silent.
Like an oven.
Carolyn
But this time we hear nothing. Worse, this time we haven't even been allowed to see the books first before they're tossed in the flames. In the past, when they burned 'Buddenbrooks' or 'Magic Mountain' by Thomas Mann or 'All Quiet on the Western Front' by Erich Marie Remarque - we at least had the chance to first hold them in our hands, smell the leather binding, turn the pages with our fingers, so that even as their physical being was incinerated in flames, their memory still remained in our hearts and minds.
But not these new books. There's no memory of them because they've never lived.
http://www.city-journal.org/2008/18_3_conservative_books.html
This is City Journal's warning of those 'ghost' books. Books which have never been allowed to be published. Why? Well, Harry Stein's excellent (and chilling) article on 'The Future of Conservative Books' explains it all. Instead of jack boots and Goebbels, it's now the leftists doing the filthy job. And they're so damned efficient at it. Stein chills you with endless examples of how the publishing world ruthlessly, remorsely refuses to print books by conservatives. And even those that it does print are done so with violent animosity, ruthless stonewalling. "The Bell Curve", "Closing of the American Mind", "The Way Things Ought To Be", etc., had to axe their way through the rock solid wall of resistence by the publishing houses. Bernard Goldberg's 'Bias' was turned down by EVERY major publishing house. And here's the chilling fact - every single one of the publishers admitted it was beautifully written, knew it would top the best seller lists, etc. But they all flatly refused to publish it. Why? Because in the publishing world, ideology is more important than profitability. As Stein explains it:
"...the New York publishing world clearly remains a liberal stronghold, uncomprehending of, when not outright hostile to, conservative ideas—and authors. Mainstream media outlets that conventional publishers rely on to tout books have just as little enthusiasm for conservative titles."
This is how the jack boots treat those books we conservatives desperately want to read. And how do the same boots treat us when we are forced to read books we don't want to? Well, read the book "Stalin's Vanishing Commissars' for a scary clue. And then read this link below:
http://www.bucksright.com/amazon-deleting-negative-pelosi-book-reviews-en-masse-304
It seems that last week Drudge carried a headline that Pelosi's book had tanked at Amazon. When I curiously logged on to Amazon to check it out, I found that of 165 ratings, 161 were the lowest - one star. Even people who 'admired' Nancy said the book was garbage.
But where where are those negative ratings today - those comments by conservative readers? Well, read this chilling excerpt:
"Users on the Amazon customer discussion board for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s failed book Know Your Power are reporting that Amazon is censoring negative reviews of the book through mass deletion.
A user posted a screen shot image from yesterday showing a one-star rating for the book based on 139 customer reviews. Today, the book is shown to have a two-star rating based on 42 reviews. 97 seemingly negative reviews have been thrown down the memory hole. Some users are reporting having seen a greater disparity in the number of reviews over time, with up to 200 reviews reported to have gone missing."
Yes, the books are burning, people. But this time it's silent.
Like an oven.
Carolyn
Obama's and Google's Dirty Tricks
Anti-Obama Bloggers Say They Were Silenced - Election 2008
By ANNA PHILLIPS, Special to the Sun | August 5, 2008
Web loggers who are campaigning against Senator Obama's presidential run are accusing Google and Obama supporters of silencing them after their Web logs were marked as spam and their accounts temporarily frozen.
On Thursday, hours after publishing a post about an online petition demanding that Mr. Obama publicly produce his birth certificate, an associate professor of business administration at Brooklyn College, Mitchell Langbert, found that he could no longer access his Web log.
Google's Blogger hosting service had suspended "Mitchell Langbert's Blog," which Mr. Langbert describes as "two-thirds academic stuff I'm working on and one-third politics," until it could verify the Web log was not a "spam blog," or a site designed solely to increase the page views of associated Web sites.
A day later Google lifted the block on the account, but the incident and earlier Web log freezes in late June have led Mr. Langbert and other anti-Obama bloggers to accuse the Illinois senator's supporters of intentionally identifying their blog addresses to Google as spam blogs. They also say the company has reflexively suspended the sites.
"These tech-savvy smart alecks have figured out that if you report a blog you don't like, you can do some damage to a person," Mr. Langbert said.
A spokesman for Google, Adam Kovacevich, said in a statement that an overzealous antispam filter was responsible for the blocks.
"We believe this was caused by mass spam e-mails mentioning the 'Just Say No Deal' network of blogs, which in turn caused our system to classify the blog addresses mentioned in the e-mails as spam," he said. "We have restored posting rights to the affected blogs, and it is very important to us that Blogger remain a tool for political debate and free expression."
Several of the blogs that were blocked, including hillaryorbust.com and comealongway.blogspot.com, are part of the "Just Say No Deal" network of anti-Obama blogs. But Mr. Langbert's blog is not, leading him to conclude that Obama supporters had targeted him.
On her right-leaning blog "Atlas Shrugs," Pamela Geller keeps a list of blogs that Google has temporarily blocked. "The blockings do come in waves," she said. "The last wave was this past week, and now it got very quiet."
Some writers have had their blogs unblocked, while others have moved them to WordPress, a rival blog host.
"I don't think" Google has "malicious intentions at all, it's just that spammers can literally overrun a service if you're not careful, so their defenses have become overzealous," a spokesman for WordPress, Matthew Mullenweg, said in an e-mail.
"We always have human review before turning off an active blog," he said. "People invest so much time into their blogs, to treat it with anything less than the utmost respect is criminal."
Source:http://www.nysun.com/national/anti-obama-bloggers-say-they-were-silenced/83179/
By ANNA PHILLIPS, Special to the Sun | August 5, 2008
Web loggers who are campaigning against Senator Obama's presidential run are accusing Google and Obama supporters of silencing them after their Web logs were marked as spam and their accounts temporarily frozen.
On Thursday, hours after publishing a post about an online petition demanding that Mr. Obama publicly produce his birth certificate, an associate professor of business administration at Brooklyn College, Mitchell Langbert, found that he could no longer access his Web log.
Google's Blogger hosting service had suspended "Mitchell Langbert's Blog," which Mr. Langbert describes as "two-thirds academic stuff I'm working on and one-third politics," until it could verify the Web log was not a "spam blog," or a site designed solely to increase the page views of associated Web sites.
A day later Google lifted the block on the account, but the incident and earlier Web log freezes in late June have led Mr. Langbert and other anti-Obama bloggers to accuse the Illinois senator's supporters of intentionally identifying their blog addresses to Google as spam blogs. They also say the company has reflexively suspended the sites.
"These tech-savvy smart alecks have figured out that if you report a blog you don't like, you can do some damage to a person," Mr. Langbert said.
A spokesman for Google, Adam Kovacevich, said in a statement that an overzealous antispam filter was responsible for the blocks.
"We believe this was caused by mass spam e-mails mentioning the 'Just Say No Deal' network of blogs, which in turn caused our system to classify the blog addresses mentioned in the e-mails as spam," he said. "We have restored posting rights to the affected blogs, and it is very important to us that Blogger remain a tool for political debate and free expression."
Several of the blogs that were blocked, including hillaryorbust.com and comealongway.blogspot.com, are part of the "Just Say No Deal" network of anti-Obama blogs. But Mr. Langbert's blog is not, leading him to conclude that Obama supporters had targeted him.
On her right-leaning blog "Atlas Shrugs," Pamela Geller keeps a list of blogs that Google has temporarily blocked. "The blockings do come in waves," she said. "The last wave was this past week, and now it got very quiet."
Some writers have had their blogs unblocked, while others have moved them to WordPress, a rival blog host.
"I don't think" Google has "malicious intentions at all, it's just that spammers can literally overrun a service if you're not careful, so their defenses have become overzealous," a spokesman for WordPress, Matthew Mullenweg, said in an e-mail.
"We always have human review before turning off an active blog," he said. "People invest so much time into their blogs, to treat it with anything less than the utmost respect is criminal."
Source:http://www.nysun.com/national/anti-obama-bloggers-say-they-were-silenced/83179/
Free Speech GO TO Hell Thank you Saudis
This is a disturbing article in the publishing world. Books that are critical of Islam are destroyed based on libel laws in different countries
http://www.nysun.com/foreign/libel-suit-leads-to-destruction-of-
books/59706/ Libel Suit Leads to Destruction of Books
By GARY SHAPIRO,
Staff Reporter of the Sun | August 2, 2007
Cambridge University Press has agreed to destroy all unsold copies of a 2006 book by two American authors, "Alms for Jihad," following a libel action brought against it in England, the latest development in
what critics say is an effort by Saudis to quash discussion of their alleged role in aiding terrorism.
In a letter of apology to a wealthy Saudi businessman, Sheikh Khalid
Bin Mahfouz, Cambridge University Press acknowledged that allegations
made in the book about his family, businesses, and charities
were "entirely and manifestly false." The publisher wrote, "Please
accept our sincere apologies for the distress and embarrassment this
has caused."
The press also published a separate apology on its web site
(http://www.cambridge.org/about/apology.htm), and wrote that it would
pay substantial damages and contribute to legal costs. A press
release by Sheikh Mahfouz's London-based law firm, Kendall Freeman,
said Cambridge University Press was also writing to over 200
libraries around the world asking them to withdraw the book from
shelves. The total press run was about 1,500 copies.
The director of the Middle East Forum, Daniel Pipes, noting that
Sheikh Mahfouz has been successful in as many as four prior lawsuits
against authors, said that Cambridge University Press's apology
had "ominous implications" into researching the financing of
terrorism.
A professor at Emory University, who won a libel suit in Britain
brought against her and Penguin, Deborah Lipstadt, likewise told The
New York Sun that this action by Cambridge University Press was
a "frightening development." She said that it seemed to her that the
Saudis were "systematically, case by case, book by book" challenging
anything critical of them or anything that linked them to terrorism.
She said that she could not think of any publisher that would now
accept a manuscript critical of the Saudis. "This affects not only
authors but readers," she said, adding that "ideas are being chased
out of the marketplace."
The director of the New York-based American Center for Democracy,
Rachel Ehrenfeld, said that Cambridge University Press "capitulated"
and "didn't even try to fight." Sheikh Mahfouz sued her for her 2003
book "Funding Evil: How Terrorism is Financed — and How to Stop It."
Rather than contesting the case in Britain, Ms. Ehrenfeld has taken
to the American courts. In June, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of
Appeals ruled unanimously in her favor, finding that if an American
writer is sued for libel in a foreign court, that person can appeal
to an American court to request that a British decision not be
enforceable here.
Libel law in England is more advantageous to the litigant than is
American law, which has stronger First Amendment protections.
One co-author of "Alms for Jihad," Robert Collins, who is a professor
emeritus of history at the University of California, Santa Barbara,
told the Sun that he could not comment until he heard from Cambridge
University Press. The other co-author, a former a former State
Department employee and intelligence analyst, J. Millard Burr, told
the Sun that their book mentioned Sheikh Mahfouz 13 times, and in no
place had they labeled him a terrorist. He said that within a week of
Cambridge University receiving a letter charging defamation, he and
his co-author prepared and sent supporting documents to Cambridge
University Press. The authors were not themselves named parties in
the suit.
In the apology letter, which is dated July 30, the intellectual
property director at Cambridge University Press, Kevin Taylor wrote
to Sheikh Mahfouz saying the co-authors relied on a so-called "Golden
Chain" document that "has been long discredited as a reliable
source." Mr. Burr told the Sun he disagreed that such document has
been discredited, and said the document was used in a trial in
Chicago.
The U.S. office of Cambridge University Press was unable to respond
by press time.
But the Chronicle of Higher Education yesterday quoted Mr. Taylor
saying "these were very serious charges" and there had already been
at least two other British High Court rulings supporting Sheikh
Mahfouz's position on such matters.
Another similar case in America involves KinderUSA, a charity that is
suing Yale University Press, charging that a book published last year
by Michael Levitt called "Hamas: Politics, Charity and Terrorism in
the Service of Jihad" (2006) linked the non-profit to support of
terrorism.
Mr. Burr said of his co-authored book now, "Buy it, if you can find
one," since it was now a collector's item.
The press release from Sheikh Mahfouz's law firm said he would donate
the money from the settlement to the United Nations Children's Fund.
Forbes magazine lists the sheikh's fortune at $3.1 billion, much of
which derives from a sale of National Commercial Bank to the Saudi
government in 2002.
I say Skeikh Mahfouz YOU GO TO HELL!
http://www.nysun.com/foreign/libel-suit-leads-to-destruction-of-
books/59706/ Libel Suit Leads to Destruction of Books
By GARY SHAPIRO,
Staff Reporter of the Sun | August 2, 2007
Cambridge University Press has agreed to destroy all unsold copies of a 2006 book by two American authors, "Alms for Jihad," following a libel action brought against it in England, the latest development in
what critics say is an effort by Saudis to quash discussion of their alleged role in aiding terrorism.
In a letter of apology to a wealthy Saudi businessman, Sheikh Khalid
Bin Mahfouz, Cambridge University Press acknowledged that allegations
made in the book about his family, businesses, and charities
were "entirely and manifestly false." The publisher wrote, "Please
accept our sincere apologies for the distress and embarrassment this
has caused."
The press also published a separate apology on its web site
(http://www.cambridge.org/about/apology.htm), and wrote that it would
pay substantial damages and contribute to legal costs. A press
release by Sheikh Mahfouz's London-based law firm, Kendall Freeman,
said Cambridge University Press was also writing to over 200
libraries around the world asking them to withdraw the book from
shelves. The total press run was about 1,500 copies.
The director of the Middle East Forum, Daniel Pipes, noting that
Sheikh Mahfouz has been successful in as many as four prior lawsuits
against authors, said that Cambridge University Press's apology
had "ominous implications" into researching the financing of
terrorism.
A professor at Emory University, who won a libel suit in Britain
brought against her and Penguin, Deborah Lipstadt, likewise told The
New York Sun that this action by Cambridge University Press was
a "frightening development." She said that it seemed to her that the
Saudis were "systematically, case by case, book by book" challenging
anything critical of them or anything that linked them to terrorism.
She said that she could not think of any publisher that would now
accept a manuscript critical of the Saudis. "This affects not only
authors but readers," she said, adding that "ideas are being chased
out of the marketplace."
The director of the New York-based American Center for Democracy,
Rachel Ehrenfeld, said that Cambridge University Press "capitulated"
and "didn't even try to fight." Sheikh Mahfouz sued her for her 2003
book "Funding Evil: How Terrorism is Financed — and How to Stop It."
Rather than contesting the case in Britain, Ms. Ehrenfeld has taken
to the American courts. In June, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of
Appeals ruled unanimously in her favor, finding that if an American
writer is sued for libel in a foreign court, that person can appeal
to an American court to request that a British decision not be
enforceable here.
Libel law in England is more advantageous to the litigant than is
American law, which has stronger First Amendment protections.
One co-author of "Alms for Jihad," Robert Collins, who is a professor
emeritus of history at the University of California, Santa Barbara,
told the Sun that he could not comment until he heard from Cambridge
University Press. The other co-author, a former a former State
Department employee and intelligence analyst, J. Millard Burr, told
the Sun that their book mentioned Sheikh Mahfouz 13 times, and in no
place had they labeled him a terrorist. He said that within a week of
Cambridge University receiving a letter charging defamation, he and
his co-author prepared and sent supporting documents to Cambridge
University Press. The authors were not themselves named parties in
the suit.
In the apology letter, which is dated July 30, the intellectual
property director at Cambridge University Press, Kevin Taylor wrote
to Sheikh Mahfouz saying the co-authors relied on a so-called "Golden
Chain" document that "has been long discredited as a reliable
source." Mr. Burr told the Sun he disagreed that such document has
been discredited, and said the document was used in a trial in
Chicago.
The U.S. office of Cambridge University Press was unable to respond
by press time.
But the Chronicle of Higher Education yesterday quoted Mr. Taylor
saying "these were very serious charges" and there had already been
at least two other British High Court rulings supporting Sheikh
Mahfouz's position on such matters.
Another similar case in America involves KinderUSA, a charity that is
suing Yale University Press, charging that a book published last year
by Michael Levitt called "Hamas: Politics, Charity and Terrorism in
the Service of Jihad" (2006) linked the non-profit to support of
terrorism.
Mr. Burr said of his co-authored book now, "Buy it, if you can find
one," since it was now a collector's item.
The press release from Sheikh Mahfouz's law firm said he would donate
the money from the settlement to the United Nations Children's Fund.
Forbes magazine lists the sheikh's fortune at $3.1 billion, much of
which derives from a sale of National Commercial Bank to the Saudi
government in 2002.
I say Skeikh Mahfouz YOU GO TO HELL!
Tuesday, August 5, 2008
Steve Emerson speaks before Congress
Score ONE for reason and not caving into terrorist supporting groups lies and threats. Steve Emerson was not prevented from speaking to the US Congress about the Islamic threat in our country. All the whinning and threatening of the Islamic Societies intent on changing and subverting our Constitution to barbaric and inhumane Shar'iah Law lose!
Once again, calls by ACT! for America friends and members and anyone with brains to Congressman Brad Sherman were successful in NOT halting the testitmony of Steve Emerson.
Below is the beginning of a post on this blog, talking about what the Islamic crybabies, liars and terrorist supporters tried to do, by calling the TRUTH about Islam, Islamophobia!
*****************************************
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
Call Congressman Brad Sherman TODAY
ACTION ALERT! Time Sensitive
Call Congressman Brad Sherman today
DO NOT ALLOW MPAC & ISNA to silence testimony on terrorism. Please read the alerts below demonstrating the efforts of ISNA (Islamic Society of North America) and MPAC, the Muslim Public Affairs Council to prevent such testimony. Pre-empt its effort. Please call Congressman Brad Sherman by phone or fax, thanking him for inviting Steve Emerson to testify; he is one of the most knowledgeable experts in terrorism and one of our most important voices against terrorist proliferation. This is yet another example of how Islamist groups like MPAC & ISNA are trying to silence and undermine anyone who dares to speak out against terrorism in this country by attacking their credibility and accusing them of "Islamaphobia."
********************************************
Click here for the PDF file on Steve Emerson's testimony
********************************************
I'd like to encourage all of you now to contact Congresman Brad Sherman and thank him for not giving into terrorism, intimidation and the hate and plan of world domination by the likes of MPAC and ISNA.
Washington, D.C. Office
2242 Rayburn Building
Washington, DC 20515-0524
Phone: (202) 225-5911
FAX: (202) 225-5879
****************************************
THANK YOU CONGESSMAN, BRAD SHERMAN! KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK FOR THE SAKE OF AMERICAN FREEDOM AND OUR CHILDREN'S FUTURE. GOD BLESS YOU.
Once again, calls by ACT! for America friends and members and anyone with brains to Congressman Brad Sherman were successful in NOT halting the testitmony of Steve Emerson.
Below is the beginning of a post on this blog, talking about what the Islamic crybabies, liars and terrorist supporters tried to do, by calling the TRUTH about Islam, Islamophobia!
*****************************************
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
Call Congressman Brad Sherman TODAY
ACTION ALERT! Time Sensitive
Call Congressman Brad Sherman today
DO NOT ALLOW MPAC & ISNA to silence testimony on terrorism. Please read the alerts below demonstrating the efforts of ISNA (Islamic Society of North America) and MPAC, the Muslim Public Affairs Council to prevent such testimony. Pre-empt its effort. Please call Congressman Brad Sherman by phone or fax, thanking him for inviting Steve Emerson to testify; he is one of the most knowledgeable experts in terrorism and one of our most important voices against terrorist proliferation. This is yet another example of how Islamist groups like MPAC & ISNA are trying to silence and undermine anyone who dares to speak out against terrorism in this country by attacking their credibility and accusing them of "Islamaphobia."
********************************************
Click here for the PDF file on Steve Emerson's testimony
********************************************
I'd like to encourage all of you now to contact Congresman Brad Sherman and thank him for not giving into terrorism, intimidation and the hate and plan of world domination by the likes of MPAC and ISNA.
Washington, D.C. Office
2242 Rayburn Building
Washington, DC 20515-0524
Phone: (202) 225-5911
FAX: (202) 225-5879
****************************************
THANK YOU CONGESSMAN, BRAD SHERMAN! KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK FOR THE SAKE OF AMERICAN FREEDOM AND OUR CHILDREN'S FUTURE. GOD BLESS YOU.
Monday, August 4, 2008
Oh oh! BUSTED!: Illegal Obama donors: Middle Eastern Arabs
My considered guess is this is only the TIP OF THE ICEBERG....follow the money folks! Didn't you ever wonder how this racist, lying, Marxist Revolutionary has raised so much money?
ELECTION 2008
Illegal Obama donors: Middle Eastern Arabs
Gazan brothers' illicit contributions listed in government campaign filings
By Aaron Klein
© 2008 WorldNetDaily
JERUSALEM – Palestinian brothers inside the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip are listed in government election filings as having donated $29,521.54 to Sen. Barack Obama's campaign.
Donations of this nature would violate election laws, including prohibitions on receiving contributions from foreigners and guidelines against accepting more than $2,300 from one individual during a single election, Bob Biersack, a spokesman for the Federal Election Commission, told WND in response to a query.
The contributions also raise numerous questions about the Obama campaign's lax online donation form, which apparently allows for the possibility of foreign contributions.
Last week, the Atlas Shrugs blog outlined a series of donations in 2007 made to Obama's campaign from two individuals, Monir Edwan and Hosam Edwan, totaling $29,521.54.
In an online form on Obama's campaign site, the Edwans listed their street as "Tal Esaltan," which they wrote was located in "Rafah, GA."
Rafah is not a city in Georgia. The Atlas blog immediately raised concerns that the money may have been donated from the Gaza Strip town of Rafah.
The Edwans' donations are listed in both FEC filings and other election filing sites, such as CampaignMoney and donordata.org.
Monir made 20 donations ranging from $717 to $2017.50 from October through November 2007. His donations totaled $24321.41. Hosam made seven donations ranging from $508.63 to $1725.96, totaling $5,200.13, all in October 2007.
A WND investigation tracked down the Edwans, who are brothers living in the Tal Esaltan neighborhood of Rafah, a large refugee camp in the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip.
The Edwans are a large clan that include top Hamas supporters.
Speaking to WND, the two brothers praised Obama and admitted giving the money online to his campaign. They said they are not U.S. citizens or green card holders but are citizens of "Palestine."
The Edwans denied they are affiliated with Hamas. Palestinian sources in Gaza confirmed the Edwans in question are secular, but could not say whether they supported Hamas.
Monir and Hasam Edwan denied their financial transactions online – listed as donations in U.S. government election filings – were actual donations to Obama's campaign. Instead they claimed they purchased about $30,000 in Obama T-shirts from the presidential candidate's online store – a contention that did not hold up during a WND interview, when they changed their story several times.
"My brother Hosam and I knew that Obama will be a big hit even before he became a candidate. We knew the guy would be a celebrity in Gaza so we decided to invest the amount of $29,000 to buy Obama T-shirts from his website and sell them in Gaza," Monir Edwan told WND, speaking by cell phone from Gaza.
"I know on the back of this story Obama rivals will present our business as a donation and they will try to use this story to let Obama fall, but I'm telling you, we bought T-shirts," Edwan maintained.
Edwan said any profit made from purportedly selling the Obama T-shirts was not returned to the Obama campaign.
"We have nothing to do with the Obama campaign. We just like Obama and believe he will be the best for the Palestinians and for the world."
At first Monir Edwan claimed he sold the T-shirts in Gaza for around $9 and that a profit was made.
"Some young men even bought the T-shirts for 60 shekel ($17.29), which is a lot to spend in Gaza on a T-shirt, but that is how much Gazans like Obama," Edwan claimed.
But it was pointed out to Edwan the T-shirts for sale on Obama's website are listed as $20.08 and that selling the merchandise for less would not yield a profit.
"Maybe we sold the shirts for a lot more. I can't remember now," said Edwan.
Asked why he would purchase T-shirts at such a high rate and pay the cost of shipping when he could pay a company to produce T-shirts for less, Edwan replied, "We wanted the shirts to come from the campaign."
But Edwan could not explain how he managed to get shipments of T-shirts into the Gaza Strip during the months he claimed to have purchased the merchandise, since Israel imposed a tight closure of the Gaza Strip starting in June 2007 that lasted until June 2008, when the Israeli government agreed to a cease-fire with Hamas in Gaza.
"We don't want to cause any damage to Obama's campaign," was Edwan's reply.
Edwan said he wants Obama to be president.
"Not just the people in Gaza but people from all over the world are rooting for this great (??????)(notice they do not call him an apostate!) man," he told WND.
FEC spokesman Biersack told WND contributions from overseas are allowed if the donations are coming from U.S. citizens or green card carriers. But he said accepting money from foreigners would violate election provisions. (also, not being born in the US is a violation of elligibility!)
He said there are strict guidelines against accepting more than $2,300 from one individual during a single election.
"I am not familiar with the particulars of the case, so I am commenting in general. The FEC will have to examine all the circumstances before determining any wrongdoing," Biersack clarified.
Obama's campaign did not return WND phone calls or e-mail queries. (Quick Baraq Hussein, call your lying spin doctors and your Marxist and Chicago Terrorist buddies for help!)
That the Edwans were able to contribute any money to Obama's campaign from Gaza opens questions into the methods used by the presidential candidate's website to accept online donations.
The website donation form asks each donor to affirm he or she is a U.S. citizen and is above the age of 16 but doesn't require donors to prove their citizenship status, such as providing a social security number. The form further requires the donor to affirm the contribution is not coming from a corporation, political action committee or lobby group.
Source: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=71431
ELECTION 2008
Illegal Obama donors: Middle Eastern Arabs
Gazan brothers' illicit contributions listed in government campaign filings
By Aaron Klein
© 2008 WorldNetDaily
JERUSALEM – Palestinian brothers inside the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip are listed in government election filings as having donated $29,521.54 to Sen. Barack Obama's campaign.
Donations of this nature would violate election laws, including prohibitions on receiving contributions from foreigners and guidelines against accepting more than $2,300 from one individual during a single election, Bob Biersack, a spokesman for the Federal Election Commission, told WND in response to a query.
The contributions also raise numerous questions about the Obama campaign's lax online donation form, which apparently allows for the possibility of foreign contributions.
Last week, the Atlas Shrugs blog outlined a series of donations in 2007 made to Obama's campaign from two individuals, Monir Edwan and Hosam Edwan, totaling $29,521.54.
In an online form on Obama's campaign site, the Edwans listed their street as "Tal Esaltan," which they wrote was located in "Rafah, GA."
Rafah is not a city in Georgia. The Atlas blog immediately raised concerns that the money may have been donated from the Gaza Strip town of Rafah.
The Edwans' donations are listed in both FEC filings and other election filing sites, such as CampaignMoney and donordata.org.
Monir made 20 donations ranging from $717 to $2017.50 from October through November 2007. His donations totaled $24321.41. Hosam made seven donations ranging from $508.63 to $1725.96, totaling $5,200.13, all in October 2007.
A WND investigation tracked down the Edwans, who are brothers living in the Tal Esaltan neighborhood of Rafah, a large refugee camp in the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip.
The Edwans are a large clan that include top Hamas supporters.
Speaking to WND, the two brothers praised Obama and admitted giving the money online to his campaign. They said they are not U.S. citizens or green card holders but are citizens of "Palestine."
The Edwans denied they are affiliated with Hamas. Palestinian sources in Gaza confirmed the Edwans in question are secular, but could not say whether they supported Hamas.
Monir and Hasam Edwan denied their financial transactions online – listed as donations in U.S. government election filings – were actual donations to Obama's campaign. Instead they claimed they purchased about $30,000 in Obama T-shirts from the presidential candidate's online store – a contention that did not hold up during a WND interview, when they changed their story several times.
"My brother Hosam and I knew that Obama will be a big hit even before he became a candidate. We knew the guy would be a celebrity in Gaza so we decided to invest the amount of $29,000 to buy Obama T-shirts from his website and sell them in Gaza," Monir Edwan told WND, speaking by cell phone from Gaza.
"I know on the back of this story Obama rivals will present our business as a donation and they will try to use this story to let Obama fall, but I'm telling you, we bought T-shirts," Edwan maintained.
Edwan said any profit made from purportedly selling the Obama T-shirts was not returned to the Obama campaign.
"We have nothing to do with the Obama campaign. We just like Obama and believe he will be the best for the Palestinians and for the world."
At first Monir Edwan claimed he sold the T-shirts in Gaza for around $9 and that a profit was made.
"Some young men even bought the T-shirts for 60 shekel ($17.29), which is a lot to spend in Gaza on a T-shirt, but that is how much Gazans like Obama," Edwan claimed.
But it was pointed out to Edwan the T-shirts for sale on Obama's website are listed as $20.08 and that selling the merchandise for less would not yield a profit.
"Maybe we sold the shirts for a lot more. I can't remember now," said Edwan.
Asked why he would purchase T-shirts at such a high rate and pay the cost of shipping when he could pay a company to produce T-shirts for less, Edwan replied, "We wanted the shirts to come from the campaign."
But Edwan could not explain how he managed to get shipments of T-shirts into the Gaza Strip during the months he claimed to have purchased the merchandise, since Israel imposed a tight closure of the Gaza Strip starting in June 2007 that lasted until June 2008, when the Israeli government agreed to a cease-fire with Hamas in Gaza.
"We don't want to cause any damage to Obama's campaign," was Edwan's reply.
Edwan said he wants Obama to be president.
"Not just the people in Gaza but people from all over the world are rooting for this great (??????)(notice they do not call him an apostate!) man," he told WND.
FEC spokesman Biersack told WND contributions from overseas are allowed if the donations are coming from U.S. citizens or green card carriers. But he said accepting money from foreigners would violate election provisions. (also, not being born in the US is a violation of elligibility!)
He said there are strict guidelines against accepting more than $2,300 from one individual during a single election.
"I am not familiar with the particulars of the case, so I am commenting in general. The FEC will have to examine all the circumstances before determining any wrongdoing," Biersack clarified.
Obama's campaign did not return WND phone calls or e-mail queries. (Quick Baraq Hussein, call your lying spin doctors and your Marxist and Chicago Terrorist buddies for help!)
That the Edwans were able to contribute any money to Obama's campaign from Gaza opens questions into the methods used by the presidential candidate's website to accept online donations.
The website donation form asks each donor to affirm he or she is a U.S. citizen and is above the age of 16 but doesn't require donors to prove their citizenship status, such as providing a social security number. The form further requires the donor to affirm the contribution is not coming from a corporation, political action committee or lobby group.
Source: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=71431
Headlines - Muslims in Action
CAIR demands Abercrombie & Fitch hire new employee with headscarf
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=prnw.20080731.DC29362&show_article=1&catnum=3
16 police killed in grenade attack in Chinese Muslim region
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26003627/
Palestinian infighting in Gaza escalates, 9 killed
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/n/a/2008/08/02/international/i113712D32.DTL
Ahmadinejad defies deadline,claims nuclear power is Iran's 'right'
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080803/D92AHU5G0.html
Afghan journalist could face death for blasphemy
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,394522,00.html
www.michaelsavage.com
Taliban-trained Muslims infiltrating Britain
British Muslims fighting alongside Taliban, al-Qaeda in Afghanistan
The Islamic world and explosions #1, 2, and 3: Algeria
Kuwait criminalizes "insulting Islam" on the Internet
Afghanistan: 5 year olds being recruited for jihad and "martyrdom"
"Islam does not distinguish between the American people and the American government, since both are in a state of war with Islam"
http://jihadwatch.org/
Iran Threatens To Shut Straits of Hormuz
www.lucianne.com
Gang-rape victim blamed for the crime
http://barenakedislam.wordpress.com/
After Action Report: Groups Take Stand Against Saudi Arabia
Saturday, August 2, 2008, a diverse group of patriotic Americans involved in the anti-jihad Resistance from many different organizations took a strong and firm stand against Saudi Arabian influence in America. During a protest a group of individuals brought a Saudi flag and threw it on the ground in front of the Saudi consulate in Los Angeles. Individuals, including women and children, proceeded to stomp on the flag. Emotions were high since the latest spike in petroleum costs has only further enabled the Saudi government to fund the spread of radical Islam throughout the world under the blind eye of all too many American politicians under Saudi influence. See the fantastic events on streaming video:
Sunday, August 3, 2008
Obama's Lost Years
There's a reason they're lost. If Obama's years between 1996 and 2004 were found, they'd scare the hell out of the mainstream American voters he desperately needs to win the White House.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/015/386abhgm.asp?pg=1
As the above (incredibly detailed) piece by Stanley Kurtz for "The Weekly Standard" makes clear, Obama's legislative work in those 8 years reveals the reason why he and his campaign are so nervously quiet about those missing years. They reveal the political and psychological mindset of Obama more than anything - a mindset obsessed most of all with two things - race and socialism.
Though Obama's mouth chews arugula and his body lives in a mansion, his mind is firmly set in the socialist 'paradise' of Karl Marx. And black Liberation theology. Both of them go hand in hand - as proven by the article's revelation that Obama's ties with the unrepentent husband and wife terrorists, William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn. From the first Ayers and Dohrn loudly and strongly supported Obama - they were one of the first to hold fund raisers for him and later, after he was elected, they stood shoulder to shoulder with him in their mutual cause - destroying the criminal system in Illinois. Naturally, Ayers and Dohrn have no love for law enforcement since both spent their early adulthood (as members of the terrorist underground movement, the Weathermen) desperately eluding police who were trying to stop Ayers and Dohrn from killing huge numbers of people with bombs. Obama, also, has no love for law enforcement either - but his opposition is based on race. Obama firmly believes that the only reason many of his Black brothers and sisters are arrested is because of their race - they're Black. Neither Obama, Ayers and Dohrn give credence to the notion of 'guilt' - (Ayers certainly sees no need for it in his own life - when asked if he felt guilty about igniting bombs in his youth, he promptly responded that his only regret was that he didn't ignite more.). In particular, none of the three ascribe any guilt to young felons. Obama sees them as victims of racism while Ayers and Dohrn see them as childlike victims of societal inequities such as poverty, etc. Ayers' book "A Kind and Just Parent" stresses this. In court, he stresses it just as vehemently - which made for a really bizarre anecdote:
"Testifying at the trial of a young felon he'd been tutoring, Ayers calls him "nervous, a little shy...eager to please." (Please note the prosecutor's pithy response:) "Would you call shooting someone eight times at close range 'eager to please?'"
Obama's obsession with race resulted in him passing legislation which prevented Chicago police from using racial profiling at traffic stops. To Obama's delight, the level of arrests plummeted after this happened. Unfortunately, something else went in the opposite direction - auto thefts. Once car thieves realized cops couldn't stop them any longer, thefts of autos went through the roof. This result, however, was something which Obama - and Ayers and Dohrn - are stone silent on. (Though I'm sure the owners of the stolen cars would make quite a noise if given the chance.)
This article finely details Obama's obsession with race - proving with facts, quotes, data, etc., that Obama's lie that he is above race is just that. Race literally is how Obama defines himself. Over and over again. And never is that more surely proven than in those missing years of legislation in Illinois which he is so damned silent about.
Finally, Obama's obsession with socialism is extensively outlined in this excellent article. In a nutshell, spend spend spend on social policies such as welfare, affirmative action, set asides, socialized medicine, etc. And when that results in massive debt crippling the state - well, Obama has a neat solution. Spend even more.
All in all, this revelation of Obama's mindset, of his politics, of his actions once he's given the least bit of power is ample proof of why he and his followers are damned nervous about the rest of the country finding out about this. Any American voter reading this article would be scared to death to vote for him. (Especially those with cars.)
Please read. It's quite lengthy. But worth the effort.
Carolyn
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/015/386abhgm.asp?pg=1
As the above (incredibly detailed) piece by Stanley Kurtz for "The Weekly Standard" makes clear, Obama's legislative work in those 8 years reveals the reason why he and his campaign are so nervously quiet about those missing years. They reveal the political and psychological mindset of Obama more than anything - a mindset obsessed most of all with two things - race and socialism.
Though Obama's mouth chews arugula and his body lives in a mansion, his mind is firmly set in the socialist 'paradise' of Karl Marx. And black Liberation theology. Both of them go hand in hand - as proven by the article's revelation that Obama's ties with the unrepentent husband and wife terrorists, William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn. From the first Ayers and Dohrn loudly and strongly supported Obama - they were one of the first to hold fund raisers for him and later, after he was elected, they stood shoulder to shoulder with him in their mutual cause - destroying the criminal system in Illinois. Naturally, Ayers and Dohrn have no love for law enforcement since both spent their early adulthood (as members of the terrorist underground movement, the Weathermen) desperately eluding police who were trying to stop Ayers and Dohrn from killing huge numbers of people with bombs. Obama, also, has no love for law enforcement either - but his opposition is based on race. Obama firmly believes that the only reason many of his Black brothers and sisters are arrested is because of their race - they're Black. Neither Obama, Ayers and Dohrn give credence to the notion of 'guilt' - (Ayers certainly sees no need for it in his own life - when asked if he felt guilty about igniting bombs in his youth, he promptly responded that his only regret was that he didn't ignite more.). In particular, none of the three ascribe any guilt to young felons. Obama sees them as victims of racism while Ayers and Dohrn see them as childlike victims of societal inequities such as poverty, etc. Ayers' book "A Kind and Just Parent" stresses this. In court, he stresses it just as vehemently - which made for a really bizarre anecdote:
"Testifying at the trial of a young felon he'd been tutoring, Ayers calls him "nervous, a little shy...eager to please." (Please note the prosecutor's pithy response:) "Would you call shooting someone eight times at close range 'eager to please?'"
Obama's obsession with race resulted in him passing legislation which prevented Chicago police from using racial profiling at traffic stops. To Obama's delight, the level of arrests plummeted after this happened. Unfortunately, something else went in the opposite direction - auto thefts. Once car thieves realized cops couldn't stop them any longer, thefts of autos went through the roof. This result, however, was something which Obama - and Ayers and Dohrn - are stone silent on. (Though I'm sure the owners of the stolen cars would make quite a noise if given the chance.)
This article finely details Obama's obsession with race - proving with facts, quotes, data, etc., that Obama's lie that he is above race is just that. Race literally is how Obama defines himself. Over and over again. And never is that more surely proven than in those missing years of legislation in Illinois which he is so damned silent about.
Finally, Obama's obsession with socialism is extensively outlined in this excellent article. In a nutshell, spend spend spend on social policies such as welfare, affirmative action, set asides, socialized medicine, etc. And when that results in massive debt crippling the state - well, Obama has a neat solution. Spend even more.
All in all, this revelation of Obama's mindset, of his politics, of his actions once he's given the least bit of power is ample proof of why he and his followers are damned nervous about the rest of the country finding out about this. Any American voter reading this article would be scared to death to vote for him. (Especially those with cars.)
Please read. It's quite lengthy. But worth the effort.
Carolyn
Saturday, August 2, 2008
"Give us money or we'll call you an Islamophobe"
"Give us money or we'll call you an Islamophobe"
Congressman Brad Sherman (D-CA), Chairman of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, Subcommittee on Terrorism, Nonproliferation, and Trade, responded yesterday to attempts by the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) to discredit a panel on State Department outreach to Islamic groups that appear moderate but which seem likely to be anything but (including MPAC itself). He declared:
"This hearing will go on. We need to make sure that the State Department is not giving U.S. tax dollars to those on the other side in the war on terrorism." He added "The Muslim Public Affairs Council should apologize for the statements of its executive director on September 11, 2001."
MPAC, ISNA and a constellation of other radical groups and individuals have been supported by the State Department. Perhaps Thursday's testimony will signal a turning point, seeing the State Department implement stricter guidelines to avoid past mistakes and embarrassments, which have damaged America's national security.
It is encouraging to see someone in Sherman's position take the issue on so fearlessly and directly.
"I think one of the greatest fears of people in the United States is somebody may call you a racist...they may call you an Islamophobe," he said in the hearing. "And what we've seen with some of these organizations is their message is clear: ‘Give us money or we'll call you an Islamophobe'...that's what they say to the State Department. What they say to us in Congress is ‘Don't question the fact that we're getting money or we'll call you an Islamophobe.'"
Bravo, Sherman! Read it all: "Emerson Exposes Radical Ties of State Department Outreach Partners," from IPT News, July 31 (thanks to Andrew Bostom).
Source: www.jihadwatch.com
THANK YOU CONGRESSMAN, BRAD SHERMAN FOR NOT CAVING IN TO THESE TERRORIST SUPPORTING THUGS!!! ACT FOR AMERICA MEMBERS AND FRIENDS, WE CAN, WILL AND DO MAKE A DIFFERENCE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PHONE CALLS TO THE CONGRESSMAN!
mpa GO TO HELL, YOU TERRORIST THUGS!!
Congressman Brad Sherman (D-CA), Chairman of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, Subcommittee on Terrorism, Nonproliferation, and Trade, responded yesterday to attempts by the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) to discredit a panel on State Department outreach to Islamic groups that appear moderate but which seem likely to be anything but (including MPAC itself). He declared:
"This hearing will go on. We need to make sure that the State Department is not giving U.S. tax dollars to those on the other side in the war on terrorism." He added "The Muslim Public Affairs Council should apologize for the statements of its executive director on September 11, 2001."
MPAC, ISNA and a constellation of other radical groups and individuals have been supported by the State Department. Perhaps Thursday's testimony will signal a turning point, seeing the State Department implement stricter guidelines to avoid past mistakes and embarrassments, which have damaged America's national security.
It is encouraging to see someone in Sherman's position take the issue on so fearlessly and directly.
"I think one of the greatest fears of people in the United States is somebody may call you a racist...they may call you an Islamophobe," he said in the hearing. "And what we've seen with some of these organizations is their message is clear: ‘Give us money or we'll call you an Islamophobe'...that's what they say to the State Department. What they say to us in Congress is ‘Don't question the fact that we're getting money or we'll call you an Islamophobe.'"
Bravo, Sherman! Read it all: "Emerson Exposes Radical Ties of State Department Outreach Partners," from IPT News, July 31 (thanks to Andrew Bostom).
Source: www.jihadwatch.com
THANK YOU CONGRESSMAN, BRAD SHERMAN FOR NOT CAVING IN TO THESE TERRORIST SUPPORTING THUGS!!! ACT FOR AMERICA MEMBERS AND FRIENDS, WE CAN, WILL AND DO MAKE A DIFFERENCE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PHONE CALLS TO THE CONGRESSMAN!
mpa GO TO HELL, YOU TERRORIST THUGS!!
Friday, August 1, 2008
"Islam Does Not Distinguish Between the American People and the American Government"
"Islam Does Not Distinguish Between the American People and the American Government"
http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=SD200008
On July 21, 2008, Pakistan's independent television network Geo News aired an exclusive interview with Mustafa Abu Al-Yazid, Al-Qaeda's No. 3 man and top commander in Afghanistan. The interview, conducted in Arabic, was broadcast on Geo News with a voiceover in Urdu. It was later posted on Islamist websites, and its content was published in Pakistani newspapers.
Abu Al-Yazid, also known as Sheikh Sa'id, is a 52-year-old Egyptian with two wives and 14 children. In 1981 he was arrested in Egypt for involvement in the assassination of Egyptian president Anwar Al-Sadat, but was released a year later. In 1988, after heading various militant groups, he joined Al-Qaeda and shifted his base of operations to Afghanistan. In 1991 he worked for Osama bin Laden in Sudan as an accountant, and later became director of Al-Qaeda's financial affairs. He has also been a member of Al-Qaeda's Shura Council, in charge of financial planning, organizational affairs, and public relations.
The following are excerpts from the Geo News interview:
Pakistan Caused Great Damage to Al-Qaeda by Supporting U.S.
In the interview, Abu Al-Yazid stated that Al-Qaeda was responsible for the attack on the Danish Embassy in Islamabad last June. He said that the bomber was a Saudi, and added: "We are proud to have carried out [this operation], and we congratulated our brothers for completing this task. We timed the attack in such a way that no Muslims were in the vicinity." Abu Al-Yazid also stated that Al-Qaeda had been responsible for the 1998 bombings of the U.S. Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. On a previous occasion, he claimed that the organization had carried out the December 27, 2007 assassination of former Pakistani prime-minister Benazir Bhutto.
Referring to the permissibility of suicide bombings, Abu Al-Yazid said that eminent Islamic scholars around the world had issued fatwas sanctioning them. He added: "Suicide attacks are justified by Islamic shari'a. [However, Islamic] scholars [who are affiliated with] governments issue whatever fatwas they are told to issue... However, suicide attacks inside mosques are forbidden."
About the role of the Pakistani government in the U.S.-led war on terror, the Al-Qaeda commander remarked: "The Pakistani government is the government that has caused the greatest damage to the mujahideen. It was [Pakistani President] Pervez Musharraf...who caused the most damage to his neighbors, the mujahideen [of the Taliban], though it was [only] thanks to their sacrifice that the USSR did not invade Pakistan [in the 1980s]."
Abu Al-Yazid praised Khaled Sheikh Muhammad, the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks, who is currently on trial in the U.S., saying: "Khaled is a fearless man of whom the entire Muslim nation can be proud."
"The Allegation that Al-Qaeda Is Promoting U.S. Interests Is a Lie"
Asked about a conspiracy theory that has gained currency in Pakistan, namely that Al-Qaeda was created by the U.S. in the 1980s with the purpose of fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan, Abu Al-Yazid said: "This is a lie and falsehood, and was exposed as such years ago... when Sheikh Osama bin Laden declared jihad against the U.S. Since then, [Al-Qaeda has carried out] a series of operations against the U.S... first the attacks on the U.S. Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, then the attacks on U.S. targets in Yemen and Somalia, and culminating in the pious action of 9/11. This series of attacks on the U.S. is clear proof that this allegation - [namely] that Al-Qaeda is promoting U.S. interests - is [nothing but] a lie and falsehood."
Abu Al-Yazid added: "Al-Qaeda is waging jihad against the U.S. because it is the head of the infidels and the pharaoh of our times. The U.S. is the flag-bearer of the new modern crusade... against the Muslim nation. We are [also] fighting the U.S. because it is standing by Israel and providing it with all sorts of assistance and power..."
"Islam Does Not Distinguish Between the American People and the American Government"
Abu Al-Yazid stressed: "Islam does not distinguish between the American people and the American government, since both are in a state of war with Islam. After all, these are the people who elect the [American] governments, and who even elected [President George] Bush for a second term in office, despite their awareness of his agenda against Islam. Despite witnessing Bush's many brutal [actions] against the Muslims, these people re-elected him. They are the ones who pay the taxes that enable the American government and army to wage war and spill the blood of Muslims..."
Abu Al-Yazid added that Al-Qaeda's attacks on the U.S. forces in Afghanistan were becoming more frequent, and that the government of Afghan President Hamid Karzai would not last. He also emphasized that Al-Qaeda receives no support from any Muslim government.
http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=SD200008
On July 21, 2008, Pakistan's independent television network Geo News aired an exclusive interview with Mustafa Abu Al-Yazid, Al-Qaeda's No. 3 man and top commander in Afghanistan. The interview, conducted in Arabic, was broadcast on Geo News with a voiceover in Urdu. It was later posted on Islamist websites, and its content was published in Pakistani newspapers.
Abu Al-Yazid, also known as Sheikh Sa'id, is a 52-year-old Egyptian with two wives and 14 children. In 1981 he was arrested in Egypt for involvement in the assassination of Egyptian president Anwar Al-Sadat, but was released a year later. In 1988, after heading various militant groups, he joined Al-Qaeda and shifted his base of operations to Afghanistan. In 1991 he worked for Osama bin Laden in Sudan as an accountant, and later became director of Al-Qaeda's financial affairs. He has also been a member of Al-Qaeda's Shura Council, in charge of financial planning, organizational affairs, and public relations.
The following are excerpts from the Geo News interview:
Pakistan Caused Great Damage to Al-Qaeda by Supporting U.S.
In the interview, Abu Al-Yazid stated that Al-Qaeda was responsible for the attack on the Danish Embassy in Islamabad last June. He said that the bomber was a Saudi, and added: "We are proud to have carried out [this operation], and we congratulated our brothers for completing this task. We timed the attack in such a way that no Muslims were in the vicinity." Abu Al-Yazid also stated that Al-Qaeda had been responsible for the 1998 bombings of the U.S. Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. On a previous occasion, he claimed that the organization had carried out the December 27, 2007 assassination of former Pakistani prime-minister Benazir Bhutto.
Referring to the permissibility of suicide bombings, Abu Al-Yazid said that eminent Islamic scholars around the world had issued fatwas sanctioning them. He added: "Suicide attacks are justified by Islamic shari'a. [However, Islamic] scholars [who are affiliated with] governments issue whatever fatwas they are told to issue... However, suicide attacks inside mosques are forbidden."
About the role of the Pakistani government in the U.S.-led war on terror, the Al-Qaeda commander remarked: "The Pakistani government is the government that has caused the greatest damage to the mujahideen. It was [Pakistani President] Pervez Musharraf...who caused the most damage to his neighbors, the mujahideen [of the Taliban], though it was [only] thanks to their sacrifice that the USSR did not invade Pakistan [in the 1980s]."
Abu Al-Yazid praised Khaled Sheikh Muhammad, the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks, who is currently on trial in the U.S., saying: "Khaled is a fearless man of whom the entire Muslim nation can be proud."
"The Allegation that Al-Qaeda Is Promoting U.S. Interests Is a Lie"
Asked about a conspiracy theory that has gained currency in Pakistan, namely that Al-Qaeda was created by the U.S. in the 1980s with the purpose of fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan, Abu Al-Yazid said: "This is a lie and falsehood, and was exposed as such years ago... when Sheikh Osama bin Laden declared jihad against the U.S. Since then, [Al-Qaeda has carried out] a series of operations against the U.S... first the attacks on the U.S. Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, then the attacks on U.S. targets in Yemen and Somalia, and culminating in the pious action of 9/11. This series of attacks on the U.S. is clear proof that this allegation - [namely] that Al-Qaeda is promoting U.S. interests - is [nothing but] a lie and falsehood."
Abu Al-Yazid added: "Al-Qaeda is waging jihad against the U.S. because it is the head of the infidels and the pharaoh of our times. The U.S. is the flag-bearer of the new modern crusade... against the Muslim nation. We are [also] fighting the U.S. because it is standing by Israel and providing it with all sorts of assistance and power..."
"Islam Does Not Distinguish Between the American People and the American Government"
Abu Al-Yazid stressed: "Islam does not distinguish between the American people and the American government, since both are in a state of war with Islam. After all, these are the people who elect the [American] governments, and who even elected [President George] Bush for a second term in office, despite their awareness of his agenda against Islam. Despite witnessing Bush's many brutal [actions] against the Muslims, these people re-elected him. They are the ones who pay the taxes that enable the American government and army to wage war and spill the blood of Muslims..."
Abu Al-Yazid added that Al-Qaeda's attacks on the U.S. forces in Afghanistan were becoming more frequent, and that the government of Afghan President Hamid Karzai would not last. He also emphasized that Al-Qaeda receives no support from any Muslim government.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
