'cookieChoices = {};'

The Right of the People to be Secure in their Persons, Houses, Papers, and Effects,
Against Unreasonable Searches and Seizures,
Shall Not Be Violated


Saturday, August 14, 2010

Arrogance And Infamy

This and post immediately below sticky for a while. Scroll for newer


Bookmark and Share
posted by midnight rider at permanent link# 10 Comments

RED ALERT: Obama Defends Ground Zero Mosque


You know who else my enemy is? My enemy is someone who think it’s a good idea to advertise the virtues of Islam next door to Islam’s Greatest Hit.  - Ace of Spades

From Director Blue:

President Barack Obama defended the plan to build a mosque near the site of the 2001 terror attacks in New York, telling Muslim guests at a Ramadan dinner at the White House that the nation's commitment to freedom of religion "must be unshakable.''

Mr. Obama's remarks came after weeks of the White House sidestepping the debate that has roiled New York and the nation since developers announced plans to build a $100 million, 13-story mosque and Islamic cultural center just two blocks from the World Trade Center site.

[He said] "But let me be clear: as a citizen, and as president, I believe that Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as anyone else in this country. That includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in lower Manhattan... This is America, and our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakable..."

...A Marist College poll found that 53% of New York City voters oppose constructing the mosque near the former site of the World Trade Center. Just 34% favored the plan.

Debra Burlingame, whose brother Charles Burlingame was the pilot of the plane the terrorists hijacked and flew into the Pentagon, said she was furious over the president's remarks.

"I'm so angry. I believe this president has abandoned the American people,'' she said. "This isn't a fight about religious freedom for Muslims. No one has argued they don't have the property rights. This is about a project led by someone who says he's trying to build bridges and bring the community together and he's chosen probably the worst place in America and the worst way to do it.''

The president's statements are utterly, completely false.

The imam in question has endorsed the implementation of Sharia law in the United States. By his own admission then, the brand of Islam he wishes to practice is not a religion -- it is a political system.

Sharia law is a legal system that completely rejects the Constitution and the American form of government. Thus, there is absolutely no "separation of church and state" issue.

3,000 souls were murdered by Islamists in the name of their political religion on 11 September 2001. Tens of thousands of innocents have perished since then -- killed in beheadings, stonings, executions, hangings, beatings, floggings, suicide bombings and more.

All were murdered in the name of a political system that adopts the guise of a religion.

But as with health care and the economy, President Obama doesn't care what you or I think. Facts, logic, reason and history play no part in his "decision-making". Only ideology matters with this particular breed of hard-left Democrats.

Pamela's comment on Obama and the Ground Zero Mosque is interesting:

I believe he planned it all along. he waited until Ramadan.

He has now turned our Ground Zero protest on 911 into a mega-event

The very idea of a 15-story mega-mosque on hallowed ground in indecent, offensive and outrageous. If Imam Rauf and his wife Daisy really wanted to "reach out" and "heal," they would give the $120 million to the first responders suffering from exposure to the toxic environment at Ground Zero after Muslim terrorists brought down the World Trade Center and slaughtered 3,000 Americans.

Obama knows this is not about religious liberty. No one has suggested abridging the first amendment to stop the mosque. This is not a religious issue. This is a national security issue.

Once again, Obama puts himself directly at odds with the majority of the American people, as is his way and the hallmark of his presidency. This is all explained in detail, in my book.
Think about what she said here. Obama has turned this into a mega-event. As if the American people were not already waking up from their apathetic slumber. As if the American people were not already completely pissed off.

Now, the President has sided with our enemies in the most explicit way yet.

Obama has made a terrible mistake, and we all can thank him for it. He thinks he can pull this off, but he threw his charisma under the bus a long time ago.

As Jim Hoft commented, "Since most of America is against building a mosque at Ground Zero, it only figures then that our radical far left president would join the 20% who believe it’s a good idea."

This man needs to be removed from office.

UPDATE: Dag on Obama, in light of this story:
America is deep to the bones democratic and individualistic, and no one, probably not even me, not I, would accept a maniac murderer as scourge of the nation even if he were me. 

Most Americans are not crazy, though many are sick in the morals because they're stupid and gullible and lazy and afraid to offend their friends in public. But deep down, most Americans are basically normal and decent people who will not tolerate insanity in government. 

Obama will not last. His minions will riot, maybe will kill a few thousand people when he's run out of office, and that will be it.
From Brandy (in the comments section of Atlas Shrugs:
Mr. President, if this is all about tolerance, let me tell you a few things about tolerance:
The American people were tolerant when the first bomb exploded at the WTC.
The American people were tolerant when airplanes filled with innocent people crashed into the WTC on 9/11.
The American people were tolerant when an airplane filled with innocent people crashed into the Pentagon.
The American people were tolerant when an airplane filled with innocent people crashed into a field in Pennsylvania.
The American people were tolerant when our president asked us not to blame all Muslims for 9/11.
The American people were tolerant when four Americans were drug through the street and hung on a bridge.

The American people were tolerant when 13 of their fellow Americans and heroes were killed by someone who was supposed to be helping them.
The American people have shown they are tolerant and good. We ARE better than them.
But Mr. President, we've had enough. A 15 story Mosque built where the ashes of the dead still linger is asking too much. That...we won't tolerate.

from Yid with Lid:

Islamists "Stealing" Ground Zero Are Following Muslim Tradition

To many of us that lived through the tragedy of 9/11 the site of the World Trade Center "Ground Zero" is sacred territory. It should forever serve as a memorial to those whose lives were destroyed in the war against Islamic terrorists. My friend Pamela Geller, has thrown her website Atlas Shrugs, and much of her weight into the fight to prevent a mosque being built on the ground zero site, not because she believes that mosques should not be allowed to be built, but because she feels empathy to the families and victims who see a Mosque on the site of a terrorist attack made in the name of Allah is a deliberate attack on their memory. They feel that the real purpose of the Mosque is to steal the heritage of the site, that Muslim tradition is to place mosques (or even to destroy) the religious, or sacred sites of others to usurp the tradition of others. That is certainly the case in Israel.

A major strategy of the Palestinians in their goal of ultimately taking over all of Israel is to deny Jewish and Christian ties to the land. That's why they hold on to the Temple Mount and destroy artifacts. It is why they burned down Joseph's Tomb and it is why they are now targeting Rachel's Tomb calling it the Bilal Bin Rabah Mosque, and why they have built the al-Hanaqa Mosque adjacent to the Church of the Holy Sepulcher(and the latrine for the mosque on the roof of the church)

According to a May 11, 1997, report in Ha'aretz, "A Waqf internal report, written two weeks ago by the Waqf's Jerusalem engineer, 'Isam 'Awad, confirms many of the Christians' claims in the conflict that has emerged adjacent to the Holy Sepulcher Church regarding construction in the Church. The Church's claim [is] that the Waqf has harmed the historical and architectural substance of the Holy Sepulcher, as a result of a construction addition to the courtyard of the 'Hanaqa,' which leans on the wall of the Holy Sepulcher and even darkens it by its height." 

October 2009. Bethlehem – Ma’an Palestinian News-Rachel’s Tomb lies behind Israel’s eight-meter concrete separation wall in a fortified enclave close to the center of Bethlehem. The wall criss-crosses Bethlehem, blocking the main road to Jerusalem, encircling a refugee camp and looming over the upscale Intercontinental hotel.

Right-wing religious groups petitioned Israel’s highest court in 2004 to re-route the wall to include the tomb on the western side. To this day the site, formerly knosquewn as the location of the Bilal Bin Rabah Mosque, is accessible only from the Israeli side.
It didn't take long for the writing to appear on the wall for Mother Rachel. In 2000, after hundreds of years of recognizing the site as Rachel's Tomb, Muslims began calling it the "Bilal ibn Rabah mosque." Members of the Wakf used the name first in 1996, but it has since entered the national Palestinian discourse. Bilal ibn Rabah was an Ethiopian known in Islamic history as a slave who served in the house of the prophet Muhammad as the first muezzin (the individual who calls the faithful to prayer five times a day).When Muhammad died, ibn Rabah went to fight the Muslim wars in Syria, was killed in 642 CE, and buried in either Aleppo or Damascus. The Palestinian Authority claimed that according to Islamic tradition, it was Muslim conquerors who named the mosque erected at Rachel's Tomb after Bilal ibn Rabah, belying the fact that a vast amount of literature written by pilgrims - Jewish, Christian and Muslim - documents the site as Rachel's burial place.

Jews have visited the site for generations, coming to pray, request and plead. The place became a kind of miniature Wailing Wall where suppliant Jews came to pour out their hearts and recount their misfortunes at the bosom of the beloved mother, where they could find consolation and cure.

According to Jewish tradition, Rachel's tears have special powers. Beginning with the first exile of the Jewish people from the Holy Land, tradition says Rachel's weeping convinced God to make the exile a short one:
So says the Lord: A voice is heard on high, lamentation, bitter weeping, Rachel weeping for her children, she refuses to be comforted for her children for they are not. So says the Lord: Refrain your voice from weeping and your eyes from tears, for there is reward for your work, says the Lord, and they shall come back from the land of the enemy. And there is hope for your future, says the Lord, and the children shall return to their own border.
Since its establishment, the State of Israel every single agreement transferring responsibility for Jewish holy places to neighboring Arab or Palestinian rule has been broken.
  • On April 3, 1949, Israel signed an armistice with Jordan. According to Paragraph 8, Article 2 of the agreement, Jordan was to allow Israel "free access to the Holy Places and cultural institutions and use of the cemetery on the Mount of Olives." In practice, not only could Jews not visit the graves of their loved ones on the Mount of Olives, but the site was desecrated. Headstones of Jewish graves were shattered and some were used as paving stones or in construction. Jordan did not allow Jews free access to their holy places, and for 19 years, until 1967, Jews could not go to the Western Wall, Rachel's Tomb, the Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hebron, Joseph's Tomb in Shechem (Nablus), or other sites sacred to Jews which remained in Jordanian hands.
  • In May 1994, Israel signed the Gaza-Jericho Agreement in Cairo. According to Article 15 of Annex II, "the Palestinian Authority shall ensure free access to all holy sites in the Gaza Strip and the Jericho Area," mentioning the Naaran synagogue, the Jewish cemetery in Tel Sammarat, the "Shalom al Israel" synagogue in Jericho, and the synagogue in Gaza City.
  • On September 28, 1995, the Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement was signed on the White House lawn, making the Palestinians responsible for civilian and security matters in additional areas of the West Bank. In accordance with the agreement, Israel withdrew from six Palestinian cities and part of Hebron; the IDF and the civil administration were withdrawn. In addition, Israel withdrew from 450 villages, towns, refugee camps, and other areas throughout the West Bank.The holy sites in those regions, or adjacent regions (access to which passed through or close to Palestinian areas), were designated as "sites of religious significance" or "archaeological sites." The agreement also dealt with the status of 23 places holy to Jews, including the tombs of biblical figures, the ruins of ancient synagogues, and ancient cemeteries. The Palestinians promised to assure freedom of access to those places.
IN EVERY SINGLE CASE the Palestinians either made access extremely difficult for Jews to get to the holy sites or or prevented acesss entirely.
In October 2000, Joseph's Tomb in Nablus was attacked, set ablaze and desecrated. Druze Border Police Corporal Yusef Madhat bled to death on October 4 because Palestinians refused to allow his evacuation. It also became extremely complicated for Jews to reach other, less well-known places, such as the tomb of Avner ben Ner near Hebron, or similar sites, to say nothing of the synagogue in Gaza. Only at the "Shalom al Israel" synagogue in Jericho did the Palestinians generally adhere to the agreement, for a time, until it too was attacked with the outbreak of the second intifada in the fall of 2000. Holy books and relics were burned, and the synagogue's ancient mosaic was damaged. Unfortunately, there has been a discernible deterioration in Palestinian treatment of Jewish holy sites in 2007, including the Tomb of Joshua bin Nun at Kefel Hares.
  • On December 1, 1995, after Rabin's assassination, Bethlehem, with the exception of the enclave of the tomb, passed under the full control of the Palestinian Authority. Rachel's Tomb is now an outpost marking Jerusalem's southern border. It has been massively fortified and Jews can only reach it in bulletproof vehicles under military supervision
The Palestinians are targeting the Jewish sites in the holy land by saying that they were really Muslim sites.  Christians shouldn't feel left out, because they are staking their claims to Christian Heritage sites also. They have even positioned terrorists next to Churches in the hopes that Israel will fire upon and damage holy sites.
Additionally, the Tanzim have chosen positions near churches in Beit Jallah (most notably the Church of St. Nicholas), hoping that Israel's return fire will hit a church. Then the Christian West would read in newspapers that Israel is targeting churches. As it is, even without the Israeli bullets hitting a church, the news cameras almost always show St. Nicholas, delivering a subliminal message that Jews are firing at Christians.
In the holy land, Muslims have been taking over, or trying to destroy Christian and Jewish Holy sites, it does seem very likely that the Ground Zero Mosque is part of that same pattern.

Keep repeating HE ISN'T REALLY A MUSLIM.....










Labels: , ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 35 Comments

Gateway Pundit:

American Socialists Release Names of 70 Congressional Democrats in Their Ranks

The Socialist Party of America announced in their October 2009 newsletter that 70 Congressional democrats currently belong to their caucus.
This admission was recently posted on Scribd.com:

American Socialist Voter–
Q: How many members of the U.S. Congress are also members of the DSA?
A: Seventy

Q: How many of the DSA members sit on the Judiciary Committee?
A: Eleven: John Conyers [Chairman of the Judiciary Committee], Tammy Baldwin, Jerrold Nadler, Luis Gutierrez,
Melvin Watt, Maxine Waters, Hank Johnson, Steve Cohen, Barbara Lee, Robert Wexler, Linda Sanchez [there are 23 Democrats on the Judiciary Committee of which eleven, almost half, are now members of the DSA].

Q: Who are these members of 111th Congress?
A: See the listing below

Hon. Raúl M. Grijalva (AZ-07)
Hon. Lynn Woolsey (CA-06)

Vice Chairs
Hon. Diane Watson (CA-33)
Hon. Sheila Jackson-Lee (TX-18)
Hon. Mazie Hirono (HI-02)
Hon. Dennis Kucinich (OH-10)

Senate Members
Hon. Bernie Sanders (VT)

House Members
Hon. Neil Abercrombie (HI-01)
Hon. Tammy Baldwin (WI-02)
Hon. Xavier Becerra (CA-31)
Hon. Madeleine Bordallo (GU-AL)
Hon. Robert Brady (PA-01)
Hon. Corrine Brown (FL-03)
Hon. Michael Capuano (MA-08)
Hon. André Carson (IN-07)
Hon. Donna Christensen (VI-AL)
Hon. Yvette Clarke (NY-11)
Hon. William “Lacy” Clay (MO-01)
Hon. Emanuel Cleaver (MO-05)
Hon. Steve Cohen (TN-09)
Hon. John Conyers (MI-14)
Hon. Elijah Cummings (MD-07)
Hon. Danny Davis (IL-07)
Hon. Peter DeFazio (OR-04)
Hon. Rosa DeLauro (CT-03)
Rep. Donna F. Edwards (MD-04)
Hon. Keith Ellison (MN-05)
Hon. Sam Farr (CA-17)
Hon. Chaka Fattah (PA-02)
Hon. Bob Filner (CA-51)
Hon. Barney Frank (MA-04)
Hon. Marcia L. Fudge (OH-11)
Hon. Alan Grayson (FL-08)
Hon. Luis Gutierrez (IL-04)
Hon. John Hall (NY-19)
Hon. Phil Hare (IL-17)
Hon. Maurice Hinchey (NY-22)
Hon. Michael Honda (CA-15)
Hon. Jesse Jackson, Jr. (IL-02)
Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson (TX-30)
Hon. Hank Johnson (GA-04)
Hon. Marcy Kaptur (OH-09)
Hon. Carolyn Kilpatrick (MI-13)
Hon. Barbara Lee (CA-09)
Hon. John Lewis (GA-05)
Hon. David Loebsack (IA-02)
Hon. Ben R. Lujan (NM-3)
Hon. Carolyn Maloney (NY-14)
Hon. Ed Markey (MA-07)
Hon. Jim McDermott (WA-07)
Hon. James McGovern (MA-03)
Hon. George Miller (CA-07)
Hon. Gwen Moore (WI-04)
Hon. Jerrold Nadler (NY-08)
Hon. Eleanor Holmes-Norton (DC-AL)
Hon. John Olver (MA-01)
Hon. Ed Pastor (AZ-04)
Hon. Donald Payne (NJ-10)
Hon. Chellie Pingree (ME-01)
Hon. Charles Rangel (NY-15)
Hon. Laura Richardson (CA-37)
Hon. Lucille Roybal-Allard (CA-34)
Hon. Bobby Rush (IL-01)
Hon. Linda Sánchez (CA-47)
Hon. Jan Schakowsky (IL-09)
Hon. José Serrano (NY-16)
Hon. Louise Slaughter (NY-28)
Hon. Pete Stark (CA-13)
Hon. Bennie Thompson (MS-02)
Hon. John Tierney (MA-06)
Hon. Nydia Velazquez (NY-12)
Hon. Maxine Waters (CA-35)
Hon. Mel Watt (NC-12)
Hon. Henry Waxman (CA-30)
Hon. Peter Welch (VT-AL)
Hon. Robert Wexler (FL-19)


Bookmark and Share
posted by midnight rider at permanent link# 0 Comments

What I Really Meant Was. . .


Obama's comments take mosque story national
By: James Hohmann and Maggie Haberman and Mike Allen
August 14, 2010 12:52 PM EDT

President Barack Obama on Saturday sought to defuse the controversy over his remarks on plans to build a mosque near Ground Zero, insisting that he wasn’t endorsing the specific project but making a general plea for religious tolerance toward all.

"In this country we treat everybody equally and in accordance with the law, regardless of race, regardless of religion,” Obama told reporters Saturday when asked about his remarks at a White House dinner marking the start of Ramadan.

“I was not commenting and I will not comment on the wisdom of making the decision to put a mosque there,” Obama continued. “I was commenting very specifically on the right people have that dates back to our founding. That's what our country is about. And I think it's very important as difficult as some of these issues are that we stay focused on who we are as a people and what our values are all about."

But his comments Friday night were widely interpreted as an endorsement of plans to build a mosque a few blocks away from where nearly 3,000 Americans perished at the hands of Islamic terrorists on 9/11 – an interpretation the White House hadn't disputed, up until Obama’s comments in Florida.

Already, though, Obama's comments on the Ground Zero mosque have transformed an emotion-laden local dispute in New York into a nationwide debate overnight, setting nervous Democrats on edge and creating potentially dramatic political implications in the upcoming midterm elections.

Key Republicans had leapt to criticize Obama’s over his comments Friday on the controversial plan, with House Republican leader John Boehner calling them “deeply troubling.”

And Democrats – at least the ones willing to comment at all — could barely contain their frustration over Obama’s remarks Friday night, saying they would further complicate campaign efforts by candidates struggling in an anti-Democratic year, particularly moderates in conservative-leaning districts who already are 2010’s most vulnerable contenders.

“I would prefer the president be a little more of a politician and a little less of a college professor,” former Rep. Martin Frost (D-Tex.), who once ran the House Democratic campaign arm, wrote in POLITICO’s Arena. “While a defensible position, it will not play well in the parts of the country where Democrats need the most help.”

Obama himself had steered clear of the issue for weeks, with his spokesman Robert Gibbs telling reporters that it was primarily a local issue. But at a Friday White House Iftar dinner, Obama said that while he understands Ground Zero is “hallowed ground,” he told a group of Muslims that he believes they have “the same right to practice their religion as everyone else in the country.”

“And that includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in Lower Manhattan, in accordance with local laws and ordinances,” he said. “This is America. And our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakeable. The principle that people of all faiths are welcome in this country and that they will not be treated differently by their government is essential to who we are.”

Obama has put Democrats from coast to coast in the tough position of having to weigh in on an issue they’d rather duck. Prior to his speech, a few candidates tried with limited success to make the proposed mosque an issue outside of the tri-state area around New York City. Now any Democrat facing an election – less than three months away – can be put in the uncomfortable position of being asked to reject the president’s unpopular stand or side with him.

Few national Democrats rushed to embrace the president. An aide to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, for instance, said she wasn't immediately reachable for comment on the mosque issue. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s spokesman also didn’t immediately offer a comment.

Empire State Democrats, known for being outspoken, stayed notably mute in response to Obama’s comments at the Iftar dinner, a community meal to break the fast during Ramadan. Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), who is expected to handily win reelection, has not taken a firm stand on the issue despite weeks of prodding from reporters. There also was no statement from Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, running for governor.

Several New York Democrats either involved with members of Congress or strategists said privately that they are not happy about the speech because it puts them in a bind. A recent CNN polls found two-thirds of Americans oppose building the mosque in the neighborhood around Ground Zero.

Democratic aides say that, at the very least, the president has again knocked his party's candidates off local messages and forced them to talk about a national issue that doesn't appear likely to play well with important swing voters.

"The main reaction is 'Why? Why now?’" said one House Democratic leadership aide. "It's just another day off message. There have been a lot of days off message."

The chief of staff to one politically vulnerable House Democrat said it "probably alienates a lot of independent voters" and "it's not a good issue to be talking about right now."

He said he suspects "there are a lot of (Democrats) who are spooked in tough districts today" and "a lot of Republicans licking their chops right now."

They're afraid to be up front in the same way as New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who got national press for supporting the mosque but who is not facing a reelection campaign.

Rep. Pete King, a Republican who represents a swing district on Long Island and has been vocally opposed to the mosque, issued a statement Friday night criticizing Obama for bowing to “political correctness.”

"I can just sense that is going to draw a lot of Democrats out. Most Democrats, as far as I know, have not taken a stand, certainly not taken a positive stand, they've taken a neutral stand or said they're not opposed, but almost no one has said they support it,” King said. “It's definitely going to create political problems for some Democrats, there's no doubt about it, and probably more so around the country."

Boehner (R-Ohio) issued a statement, saying, “The decision to build this mosque so close to the site of Ground Zero is deeply troubling, as is the president's decision to endorse it,” Boehner said. “The American people certainly don't support it. We can never forget that terrible day, and the heroes who lost their lives - often in the hope that others might live. We honor their memory and their sacrifice, always."

Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol urged Republican candidates to frame Obama's comments as elitist and out-of-touch.

He urged GOP candidates to react like this: “President Obama should stop condescending to his fellow citizens, and should start listening to us. He thinks we’re traumatized by 9/11. We’re not. But we do remember 9/11, and we don’t think it honors the memory of that day to acquiesce in—or worse, to embrace--this mosque with those sponsors at that place.”

As some Republicans follow his advice, other administration officials want to take a high-minded approach to the issue. They declined Saturday afternoon to assess how the president's comments may play out on the campaign trail.

"This is more important than candidates and elections," said one senior White House official.

Friday’s speech will be one of the most memorable – and debated statements – of the president’s first two years in office.

At best--depending how the issue echoes in coming days--it may remind people of some of Obama's more transcendent moments on the campaign--a politician with a biracial background (whose own father was a Muslim) capable of both challenging Americans and uniting a majority of them on the most sensitive cultural questions.

At worst, it risks being lumped in with moments that have caused the public to reassess their image of him, such as when he weighed in clumsily on how "stupidly" the Cambridge police acted in arresting Henry Louis Gates, or during the campaign, when he said rural voters cling to guns and religion.

Most members of the New York delegation didn't respond to requests for comment or response to the Obama speech, with the exception of mosque proponent Rep. Carolyn Maloney (who is facing a primary opponent in her 14th district).

In a few specific congressional races in New York, especially ones with GOP primaries and the potential for split tickets with one candidate on the third-party Conservative line and another on the Republican line, the mosque has been an issue for several weeks now, and there were some instant reactions to the speech.

In the famed NY-23, where the phrased "Scozzafavaed" was born, Conservative Party nominee Doug Hoffman, who has a primary against better-funded Matt Doheny for the GOP line, immediately put out a statement denouncing the president. In NY-1, Conservative nominee Randy Altschuler sent out a statement asking if incumbent Rep. Tim Bishop, the Democrat, agrees with the president and saying he needs to "end the silence" on his stand.

In NY-13, where Democratic Rep. Mike McMahon won a seat in a district that voted for John McCain in 2008, three aides to the congressman didn't respond to repeated requests for comment.

Several Democratic sources said that some New York delegation members have, in recent weeks, expressed privately their discomfort with the topic.

"This is still like an emotional wound for a lot of people," said one source, adding that many delegation members have said, "I know that there's nothing wrong with it. ... I just kind of wish it wasn't happening (near Ground Zero)."

Labels: , ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by midnight rider at permanent link# 1 Comments

9/11 Families for a Safe & Strong America

9/11 Families for a Safe & Strong America
Statement of Debra Burlingame, Co-founder of 9/11 Families for a Safe & Strong America, in Response to President Obama’s Remarks about the Ground Zero Mosque

9/11 Families Stunned by Presidents Support of Mosque at Ground Zero

New York, NY, Aug. 14 — Barack Obama has abandoned America at the place where America’s heart was broken nine years ago, and where her true values were on display for all to see. Since that dark day, Americans have been asked to bear the burden of defending those values, again and again and again. Now this president declares that the victims of 9/11 and their families must bear another burden. We must stand silent at the last place in America where 9/11 is still remembered with reverence or risk being called religious bigots.

Muslims have worshipped in New York without incident both before and after the attacks of 9/11. This controversy is not about religious freedom. 9/11 was more than a “deeply traumatic event,” it was an act of war. Building a 15-story mosque at Ground Zero is a deliberately provocative act that will precipitate more bloodshed in the name of Allah. Those who continue to target and kill American civilians and U.S. troops will see it as a symbol of their historic progress at the site of their most bloody victory. Demolishing a building that was damaged by wreckage from one of the hijacked planes in order to build a mosque and Islamic Center will further energize those who regard it as a ratification of their violent and divinely ordered mission: the spread of shariah law and its subjugation of all free people, including secular Muslims who come to this country fleeing that medieval ideology, which destroys lives and crushes the human spirit.

We are stunned by the president’s willingness to disregard what Americans should be proud of: our enduring generosity to others on 9/11–a day when human decency triumphed over human depravity. On that day, when 3,000 of our fellow human beings were killed in barbaric act of raw religious intolerance unlike this country had ever seen, Americans did not turn outward with hatred or violence, we turned to each other, armed with nothing more than American flags and countless acts of kindness. In a breathtakingly inappropriate setting, the president has chosen to declare our memories of 9/11 obsolete and the sanctity of Ground Zero finished. No one who has lived this history and felt the sting of our country’s loss that day can truly believe that putting our families through more wrenching heartache can be an act of peace.

We will honor the memory of our loved ones. We will protect our children, whose lives will never be the same. We will not stand silent.


9/11 Families for a Safe & Strong America
Co-founders Debra Burlingame and Tim Sumner
Contact: media@911familiesforamerica.org


Bookmark and Share
posted by midnight rider at permanent link# 0 Comments


The stunning decline of Barack Obama: 10 key reasons why the Obama presidency is in meltdown
By Nile Gardiner

The last few weeks have been a nightmare for President Obama, in a summer of discontent in the United States which has deeply unsettled the ruling liberal elites, so much so that even the Left has begun to turn against the White House. While the anti-establishment Tea Party movement has gained significant ground and is now a rising and powerful political force to be reckoned with, many of the president’s own supporters as well as independents are rapidly losing faith in Barack Obama, with open warfare breaking out between the White House and the left-wing of the Democratic Party. While conservatism in America grows stronger by the day, the forces of liberalism are growing increasingly weaker and divided.

Against this backdrop, the president’s approval ratings have been sliding dramatically all summer, with the latest Rasmussen Daily Presidential Tracking Poll of US voters dropping to minus 22 points, the lowest point so far for Barack Obama since taking office. While just 24 per cent of American voters strongly approve of the president’s job performance, almost twice that number, 46 per cent, strongly disapprove. According to Rasmussen, 65 per cent of voters believe the United States is going down the wrong track, including 70 per cent of independents.

The RealClearPolitics average of polls now has President Obama at over 50 per cent disapproval, a remarkably high figure for a president just 18 months into his first term. Strikingly, the latest USA Today/Gallup survey has the President on just 41 per cent approval, with 53 per cent disapproving.

Related link: The Obama presidency increasingly resembles a modern-day Ancien Régime
There are an array of reasons behind the stunning decline and political fall of President Obama, chief among them fears over the current state of the US economy, with widespread concern over high levels of unemployment, the unstable housing market, and above all the towering budget deficit. Americans are increasingly rejecting President Obama’s big government solutions to America’s economic woes, which many fear will lead to the United States sharing the same fate as Greece.

Growing disillusionment with the Obama administration’s handling of the economy as well as health care and immigration has gone hand in hand with mounting unhappiness with the President’s aloof and imperial style of leadership, and a growing perception that he is out of touch with ordinary Americans, especially at a time of significant economic pain. Barack Obama’s striking absence of natural leadership ability (and blatant lack of experience) has played a big part in undermining his credibility with the US public, with his lacklustre handling of the Gulf oil spill coming under particularly intense fire.

On the national security and foreign policy front, President Obama has not fared any better. His leadership on the war in Afghanistan has been confused and at times lacking in conviction, and seemingly dictated by domestic political priorities rather than military and strategic goals. His overall foreign policy has been an appalling mess, with his flawed strategy of engagement of hostile regimes spectacularly backfiring. And as for the War on Terror, his administration has not even acknowledged it is fighting one.

Can it get any worse for President Obama? Undoubtedly yes. Here are 10 key reasons why the Obama presidency is in serious trouble, and why its prospects are unlikely to improve between now and the November mid-terms.

1. The Obama presidency is out of touch with the American people

In a previous post I noted how the Obama presidency increasingly resembles a modern-day Ancien Régime, extravagant, decaying and out of touch with ordinary Americans. The First Lady’s ill-conceived trip to Spain at a time of widespread economic hardship was symbolic of a White House that barely gives a second thought to public opinion on many issues, and frequently projects a distinctly elitist image. The “let them eat cake” approach didn’t play well over two centuries ago, and it won’t succeed today.

2. Most Americans don’t have confidence in the president’s leadership

This deficit of trust in Obama’s leadership is central to his decline. According to a recent Washington Post/ABC News poll, “nearly six in ten voters say they lack faith in the president to make the right decisions for the country”, and two thirds “say they are disillusioned with or angry about the way the federal government is working.” The poll showed that a staggering 58 per cent of Americans say they do not have confidence in the president’s decision-making, with just 42 per cent saying they do.

3. Obama fails to inspire

In contrast to the soaring rhetoric of his 2004 Convention speech in Boston which succeeded in impressing millions of television viewers at the time, America is no longer inspired by Barack Obama’s flat, monotonous and often dull presidential speeches and statements delivered via teleprompter. From his extraordinarily uninspiring Afghanistan speech at West Point to his flat State of the Union address, President Obama has failed to touch the heart of America. Even Jimmy Carter was more moving.

Read more »


Bookmark and Share
posted by midnight rider at permanent link# 0 Comments

Maxine Waters : Bush ate my homework

President George W. Bush shakes the hand of He...

Image via Wikipedia

Facing Ethics Charges, Rep. Waters Points Finger at Bush Administration

Embattled Rep. Maxine Waters on Friday blamed the Bush administration for her ethics problems -- saying she had to intervene with the Treasury Department on behalf of minority-owned banks seeking federal bailoutfunds -- including one tied to her husband -- because the Treasury Department wouldn't schedule its own appointments.

The California Democrat said in a Capitol Hill news conference -- an event rarely held during a congressional recess -- that she reached out to then-Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson in late 2008 when his department failed to respond to the National Bank Association's request for a meeting.

"The question at this point should not be why I called Secretary Paulson, but why I had to," she said. "The question at this point should be why a trade association representing over 100 minority banks could not get a meeting at the height of the crisis."

Actually, I think the real problem is all the crack the FBI, CIA and Oliver North invented to addict the 'blacks' of Watts that she is smoking.

Enhanced by Zemanta
Bookmark and Share
posted by Epaminondas at permanent link# 0 Comments


Even the Poor Are Abandoning Obama, According to Gallup Poll Data
Friday, August 13, 2010
By Terence P. Jeffrey, Editor-in-Chief

CNSNews.com) - In every week of his presidency until now, Barack Obama has enjoyed a majority approval rating in the Gallup Poll from people earning less than $2,000 per month. But that changed in the Gallup survey conducted from Aug. 2-8, when only 49 percent of Americans in that income bracket said they approve of the job Obama is doing.

This marks the first time since Obama was inaugurated on January 20, 2009, when Americans in all four of the income brackets reported in Gallup’s weekly survey of presidential approval gave Obama less than 50 percent approval.

For the week of Aug. 2-Aug. 8, only 42 percent of Americans earning $7,500 per month or more said they approve of the job Obama is doing. Forty-four percent of those earning between $5,000 and $7,499 said they approve of the job he is doing. And forty-six percent of those earning between $2,000 and $4,999 said they approve of the job he is doing.

The higher the income bracket an American occupies, the sooner he or she was likely to stop approving of the job Obama was doing and the more likely he or she was to stop approving of the job Obama was doing.

The last time Obama had majority approval from people earning $7,500 or more per month was the week of April 19-25. The last time Obama had majority approval from people earning $5,000 to $7,499 was the week of May 3-9. The last time Obama had majority approval from people earning $2,000 to $4,999 was the week May 10-16. And the last time Obama had majority approval from people earning less than $2,000 was the week of July 26-Aug. 1.

Obama’s approval peaked at 76 percent among Americans earning less than $2,000 per month in the weeks of April 20-26, 2009 and May 4-10, 2009.

In May 2009, when Obama's approval rating was at its peak among those earning less than $2,000 per month, the national unemployment rate was at 9.4 percent. It is now at 9.5 percent.

In a poll released today, Gallup asked Americans that they thought was the most important problem facing the country. The top two problems cited were the economy in general and unemployment and jobs. Thirty percent said the economy in general was the most important problem, while 28 percent said it was unemployment and jobs.

The third ranking problem in the poll was dissatisfaction with government, Congress and politicians, which was rated as the most important problem by 12 percent of respondents.


Bookmark and Share
posted by midnight rider at permanent link# 3 Comments


Arizona Sheriff: Border Patrol Has Retreated from Parts of Border Because It’s ‘Too Dangerous’
Friday, August 13, 2010
By Terence P. Jeffrey, Editor-in-Chief

(CNSNews.com) - Sheriff Larry Dever of Cochise County, Ariz., one of four Arizona counties contiguous with the U.S-Mexico border, said Friday that the U.S. Border Patrol has pulled back from parts of the border in his and neighboring counties because manning those areas has become too dangerous.

“And you frankly have Border Patrolmen--and I know this from talking to Border Patrol agents—who will not allow their agents to work on the border because it is too dangerous,” Dever told CNSNews.com in a videotaped interview. “Now what kind of message is that for crying out loud?”

Dever, a native of Cochise County, has been in local law enforcement in the county for three decades. He was elected the county sheriff in 1996.

Dever stressed that the Border Patrolmen are ready and willing to perform their mission of securing the border, but that Border Patrol managers had determined that in “some places” the danger was too great and they wanted to avoid the risk of an international incident such as a cross-border firefight.

“Now, I am telling you, the agents, you give them a mission, you tell them what you want them to do, they will go do it,” said Dever. “I mean, these guys for the most part are warriors, they are soldiers.

“Then you have middle management and upper management that says: No, it’s too dangerous right there and we’re going to cause an international incident if there’s shooting across the line, back and forth,” said Dever.

“Well, I say: Come, bring it on. Let’s cause the international incident,” he said.

Dever said there were places where the Border Patrol had pulled back from the border in his county and in neighboring areas both in Arizona and New Mexico.

He pointed out that in Pinal County, 70 miles north of the border, the Bureau of Land Management has put up a sign along a drug smuggling corridor to warn American citizens away from the region because it is too dangerous.

CNSNews.com provided Customs and Border Protection with a transcript of Sheriff Dever's statement about the Border Patrol pulling back from parts of the border in his area because it is too dangerous.

"There are areas down there in the Tucson Sector where for officer safety reasons, officers aren’t up on the line. For whatever reason--it may be a remote area," said a CBP spokesperson. "We still have the means to detect entry, whether it is a sensor or a scoped vehicle. So the entry is detected, but the apprehension of the undocumented migrant isn’t affected until they reach a safe area.”


Bookmark and Share
posted by midnight rider at permanent link# 0 Comments

Looking for another change

Wall Street Journal

Democratic Seats Vulnerable on Jobs


ALBION, Mich.—Michelle Rena Jones cheered when candidates Barack Obama and Joe Biden visited south-central Michigan in 2008. She supported Mr. Obama that November along with a slate of Democrats, including Mark Schauer in the 7th congressional district.

Job creation is one of the top issues among voters. In districts with high unemployment, that could spell trouble for a host of Democrats in tight congressional races. WSJ's Neil Hickey reports.

Now, the 40-year-old is rethinking her lifelong support for the party. She has been without steady work for two years, lost her home and car and began receiving cash assistance from the state for the first time. This year, she says, "I'm willing to take a chance on something different." Another possibility, she says, is that she won't vote at all.

Ms. Jones is part of an unmeasured, agitated mass: unemployed Americans who don't believe the Obama Administration and Congress have done enough to produce jobs. With elections coming up, their unease is especially troublesome for the Democrats, who control both chambers.

A poor economy never bodes well for incumbents. Cook Report, the nonpartisan political newsletter that tracks congressional races, estimates that 73 House seats are vulnerable—including Mr. Schauer's. This group has two things in common. Almost all (66 of 73) are held by Democrats, and most include counties that have unemployment rates exceeding the national average, according to data assembled by The Wall Street Journal.

In the seven counties of Mr. Schauer's district, for example, the unemployment rate ranges between 9.3% and 15.4%. In only one is it below the national average of 9.5%. Last Tuesday, voter malaise was apparent here: The primary contest drew roughly 28% of the voters who turned out for the general election in 2008.

"The jobless are the new swing voters," says Rick Sloan, acting executive director of UCubed, a community service project of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers. "You can talk about deficit reduction, health-care reform—you can talk about all those things but you're talking past the jobless voters."

Unemployment in the individual congressional districts "is the leading factor in determining the November elections," says Mark Gersh, one of the Democrats' top voting analysts. "The hope of the administration is it's trending down when the elections are held, but they're running out of time."

According to the latest Wall Street Journal/NBC poll, conducted this month, only 34% of poll respondents think the economy will get better in 2011—13 percentage points less than last September.

Read more »


Bookmark and Share
posted by midnight rider at permanent link# 0 Comments

Video of Obama's Remarks On The Ground Zero Mosque

From Brian at Weasel Zippers:

Here is video of President Obama speaking to a group of Muslims at the White House last night, where he defended Islam, and inserted himself into the issue of whether a Mosque should be built near Ground Zero – where nearly 3,000 Americans were killed at the hands of Muslim terrorists. Obama defended the right of the mosque to be built, completely ignoring the propriety of it being built so close to where the attack occurred, and also ignoring the questions of where the money for the mosque is coming from. The Imam behind the Ground Zero Mosque has made statements attacking the United States in the past, and his sources of funding for the project are unknown.

But Obama did here what you would expect from him. He sided with the radicals, as he has done time and time again over his career. His radical associations were all but ignored by the media during the 2008 campaign, and sadly by too many of the American people.

What Americans must come to grips with is that Barack Obama does not only associate with radicals – he is a radical. He has been, and will continue to be, on the wrong side of every major issue facing the nation. Only the American people can say – enough! It must happen this Fall, and in 2012.
Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 0 Comments

Asserting our RIGHT to build the Cordoba House Mosque at Ground Zero

Our President Barack Hussein Obama, blessed be his name, endores our mosque!
Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 1 Comments

What Is Ramadan?

Ramadan 2010 began on or around August 11 and will end on or about September 10. Muslims, ever contentious about nearly every matter, even disagree among themselves as to when Ramadan should begin.

What does Ramadan really celebrate, particularly Eid ul-Fitr, which marks the end of Ramadan? If one understands the history of Islam and, especially, that of Ramadan, one will come to understand that such a commemoration, including iftar dinners at the White House, should be unacceptable to all those who oppose Islamic supremacism.

Ramadan involves more than prayers, fasting, and the giving of alms — all of which are part of the month long observance but which are also the outward signs of another message. By literal definition, of course, Ramadan commemorates Allah's "revealing" the Qur'an to Muhammad. But history clearly indicates that the "revelations" from Allah to Muhammad began around 610, some fourteen years earlier than 624.

Those earlier passages, sometimes referred to as the Meccan verses, are the oft-quoted peaceful verses in the Koran. Contrary to what one might expect, however, the last day of Ramadan does not celebrate the actual date of the earliest peaceful "revelations" of Allah to Muhammad but rather the Battle of Badr, the first significant military victory by the forces of Muhammad.

The Battle of Badr of March 17, 624, is one of the few military conflicts specifically mentioned in the Qur'an and holds a great deal of significance in Islam. Eid ul-Fitr, the final portion of Ramadan, has as its origin the aforementioned battle. Furthermore and most importantly, this battle marked the turning point for Islam, both politically and ideologically.

Having earlier fled to Medina along with followers who accepted him as their prophet whereas most of the tribes of Mecca did not, early on that morning in 624 Muhammad got word that a rich Quraish caravan from Syria was returning to Mecca. He therefore assembled the largest army he had ever been able to muster, some 300 men, with the original intent of raiding the caravan. After his men successfully overtook the caravan and brought back the booty, Muhammad then conveniently received a new "revelation" from Allah — a "revelation" which not only included rejoicing in having captured an enemy's caravan but which also called "proved" that Muhammad had been preaching the true way all along. Fulfilling Destiny, Muhammad and his forces proceeded to trounce the Quraish as punishment for having earlier rejected the prophet's teachings. From this source:
In the name of Allah, the Beneficient, the Merciful.

The battle of Badr was the most important among the Islamic battles of Destiny. For the first time the followers of the new faith were put into a serious test. Had victory been the lot of the pagan army while the Islamic Forces were still at the beginning of their developments, the faith of Islam could have come to an end.

No one was aware of the importance of the outcome of the Battle as the Prophet (S.A.W.) himself. We might read the depth of his anxiety in his prayer before the beginning of the Battle when he stood up supplicating his Lord:
God this is Quraish. It has come with all its arrogance and boastfulness, trying to discredit Thy Apostle. God, I ask Thee to humiliate them tomorrow. God, if this Muslim band will perish today, Thou shall not be worshipped.

This battle laid the foundation of the Islamic State...
In other words, victory at the Battle of Badr proved to Muhammad and his adherents that Islam should from that time forth take on a militant aspect because such is the will of Allah. From the day of the Battle of Badr on, the tone of the verses in the Qur'an changed. These more recent "revelations," sometimes referred to as the Medinan verses, abrogated the earlier and peaceful Meccan ones. Because preaching and tolerance had not brought Muhammad the following which he needed in order to establish himself and Islam as political forces to be reckoned with, Allah, via a military victory, showed the prophet a more effective way to spread Islam. Therefore, Muhammad's victory at the Battle of Badr symbolizes both the way to bring about the will of Allah and the will of Allah itself.

In sum, Ramadan is, in and of itself, a statement advocating submission to Islam and to the will of Allah. Ah, the dhimmitude and submission of all Western leaders when they send Ramadan greetings to the Islamic world!

Labels: , , , , , ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by Always On Watch at permanent link# 5 Comments

Yes but will he honor Bokonon, the real god?


Obama to host Ramadan meal

By Elise Viebeck - 08/13/10 08:36 AM ET

President Obama will host an iftar -- the special evening meal observed during Ramadan -- on Friday night in the White House dining room.

Obama participated in a similar gathering last year.

Celebrations like iftar dinners "remind us of the principles that we hold in common, and Islam's role in advancing justice, progress, tolerance and the dignity of all human beings," Obama wrote in a statement Wednesday.

"Ramadan is a celebration of a faith known for great diversity and racial equality ... a reminder that Islam has always been part of America and that American Muslims have made extraordinary contributions to our country."

The dinner comes amid a growing controversy over the proposed construction of an Islamic cultural center in downtown Manhattan, near the site of the World Trade Center. A CNN poll released Wednesday found that 68 percent of the public opposes the project.

Meanwhile, the White House -- which has made great efforts to reach out to the Muslim community -- has been silent on the issue.

"This is rightly a matter for New York City and the local community to decide," White House press secretary Robert Gibbs told reporters on Aug. 3.

Ramadan began on Wednesday and will end around Sept. 10.


As opposed to all this bokononism is based on the concept of foma, which are defined as harmless untruths. The primary tenet of Bokononism is to "Live by the foma that make you brave and kind and healthy and happy." Many of the sacred texts of Bokononism were written in the form of calypsos. The foundation of Bokononism is that all religion, including Bokononism and all its texts, is formed entirely of lies; however, if you believe and adhere to these lies, you will at least have peace of mind, and perhaps live a good life. Bokonon, is the founder of the religion. He was born Lionel Boyd Johnson and attended the London School of Economics and Political Science, only for his education to be cut short by World War I. "Bokonon" was the way the natives of San Lorenzo, the Caribbean island-nation where the shipwrecked Johnson started his religion, pronounced his family name in their unique dialect of English. Bokonon established Bokononism with Earl McCabe, his partner in ruling the island, when all the duo's efforts to raise the standard of living on the island failed, as a means to help the poor islanders escape their miserable reality by practicing a simple religion. Arranging with McCabe that Bokononism be outlawed and eternally persecuted by the government, he went living into the jungle, hiding, thus trying to lure the population into Bokononism as a kind of forbidden fruit.

I know many of you out there are part of my grandfalloon, and I wish to thank all of you for your help and guidance. Alas I cannot join any karass, as I am already part of a duprass
Enhanced by Zemanta
Bookmark and Share
posted by Epaminondas at permanent link# 0 Comments

Obama Endorses The Ground Zero Mosque

I know that Pastorius has already posted about this. But I have to weigh in with own post!

Are any of the regular readers here at IBA surprised? I'm not!

Obama simply waited until this year's White House Ramadan dinner on August 13 to offer his support of building the towering Cordoba House which, if built, will overlook the site where 3000 Americans were murdered by Islamic terrorists on 9/11. The symbolism of the timing of Obama's announcement of support resonates with the ummah, ever in search of the elusive will of Allah!

It was the president's first public remarks about the mosque controversy. The White House previously called the matter solely a local one.
The President of the United States is advocating sacrilege at Ground Zero! From this recent column by Charles Krauthammer:
A place is made sacred by a widespread belief that it was visited by the miraculous or the transcendent (Lourdes, the Temple Mount), by the presence there once of great nobility and sacrifice (Gettysburg), or by the blood of martyrs and the indescribable suffering of the innocent (Auschwitz).

When we speak of Ground Zero as hallowed ground, what we mean is that it belongs to those who suffered and died there -- and that such ownership obliges us, the living, to preserve the dignity and memory of the place, never allowing it to be forgotten, trivialized or misappropriated.

That's why Disney's 1993 proposal to build an American history theme park near Manassas Battlefield was defeated by a broad coalition that feared vulgarization of the Civil War (and that was wiser than me; at the time I obtusely saw little harm in the venture). It's why the commercial viewing tower built right on the border of Gettysburg was taken down by the Park Service. It's why, while no one objects to Japanese cultural centers, the idea of putting one up at Pearl Harbor would be offensive.

And why Pope John Paul II ordered the Carmelite nuns to leave the convent they had established at Auschwitz. He was in no way devaluing their heartfelt mission to pray for the souls of the dead. He was teaching them a lesson in respect: This is not your place; it belongs to others. However pure your voice, better to let silence reign.


Location matters. Especially this location. Ground Zero is the site of the greatest mass murder in American history -- perpetrated by Muslims of a particular Islamist orthodoxy in whose cause they died and in whose name they killed.


America is a free country where you can build whatever you want -- but not anywhere. That's why we have zoning laws. No liquor store near a school, no strip malls where they offend local sensibilities, and, if your house doesn't meet community architectural codes, you cannot build at all.

These restrictions are for reasons of aesthetics. Others are for more profound reasons of common decency and respect for the sacred. No commercial tower over Gettysburg, no convent at Auschwitz -- and no mosque at Ground Zero...
Not only is Obama advocating sacrilege at Ground Zero. He is advocating Islamic supremacism under the guise of religious freedom.

I don't for a moment believe that Obama doesn't know what he's doing. He's been "reaching out" to Moslems since the moment he took office. From this year's sycophantic official White House statement about Ramadan:
These rituals remind us of the principles that we hold in common, and Islam’s role in advancing justice, progress, tolerance, and the dignity of all human beings. Ramadan is a celebration of a faith known for great diversity and racial equality. And here in the United States, Ramadan is a reminder that Islam has always been part of America and that American Muslims have made extraordinary contributions to our country.


May God’s peace be upon you.
Since when has Islam "always been part of America"? Were Moslems at Jamestown or aboard the Mayflower? As Dr. Paul Williams recently stated in one of his essays:
Sorry, Mr. Obama, but there were no Muslims among the passengers on the Mayflower or the settlers at Jamestown. Muslims were conspicuously absent from the ranks of George Washington’s Army of the Revolution and played no role in the creation of the American republic – - save for the fact that the new country’s first declaration of war was against the forces of Islam in the form of the Barbary pirates.
Read the entire essay HERE.

Furthermore, that closing sentence from this year's White House statement on Ramadan is very close to ṣalawāt:
a phrase that practising Muslims often say after saying (or hearing) the name of a prophet of Islam.
Caliphate-yearning and shari'a-desirous Muslims have stated in the past that they're going to use America's freedoms to take down our nation. And I have to hand it to them: they're strategy is succeeding, with even the President of the United States as one of their means of doing so.

I ask you this: Two years ago, could you even have imagined that anyone would support building a mosque to overlook the sacred soil of Ground Zero?

I also ask you this: Can you this day imagine that the mosque won't be built, never mind the outcries against doing so?

Dhimmitude and political correctness have overtaken America. How far we have fallen!

Note to readers: My next post, whenever I can get to it, will delineate the true meaning of Ramadan.

Labels: , , , , ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by Always On Watch at permanent link# 3 Comments

Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 0 Comments

Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 3 Comments

Is Obama a fucking moron, or is he criminally stupid? Or is he a fucking criminal?

If I had my way, I'd throw Obama in prison for treason. I'd hang many of his advisers. I'd deport millions of his supporters to Muslim nations and other nasty shit-hole pseudo-nations. I would have no mercy. In this war, there is no room for such sentimentality. But I have no such power. All I can do is fume.

More, with many nifty photographs, at:

Bookmark and Share
posted by Dag at permanent link# 6 Comments

Denial: Brooklyn Muslims Deny Knowing AlQaeda's New Terrorist Leader "Dirty Bomber" Adnan Shukrijumah

adnan shukrijumah_alqaeda.jpg
Brooklyn Paper
Muslims living and worshipping in Downtown are refuting an FBI report that Adnan Shukrijumah, a top al-Qaeda terrorist leader, sprouted from Atlantic Avenue’s close knit Islamic community and worshipped in a neighborhood mosque where his father was an imam.

“No one here knows him. … We don’t lie,” said Mohammad Ali, the current imam at the Al-Farooq Mosque on Atlantic Avenue between Third and Fourth avenues, where Shukrijumah’s father allegedly led prayer services in the 1990s. “No one who has been here for the last 30 years knows him.”
Click on the title to read the whole story.
Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 1 Comments

Mohammed Bary To Rifqa's Counselor: "There are a lot of crazies out there ... bad things can happen to you"

Police report available on threats made by "Wouldn't Hurt a Fly" "No Abuse to be Found" Mohamed Bary against Rifqa's counselor, who believes that Mohamed Bary "is capable of harming her and is concerned by his statements"

Earlier this week Jawa reported how Franklin County prosecutor Ron O'Brien had informed his staff that he would not be pressing charges against Rifqa Bary's father, Mohamed Bary, for witness intimidation and menacing because "it would negatively impact the Muslim community". Because of the threats made by Mohamed Bary against Rifqa's state-appointed counselor, Jennifer Dorn, she refused to testify on Rifqa's behalf in a scheduled hearing last week.

See, O'Brien had made statements early in the case discounting Rifqa's version of the events even before they had been investigated. And the Muslim community had fully backed Mohamed Bary, claiming that he would never, ever engage in violence. So filing charges against Mohamed Bary now would make Ron O'Brien look like a complete tool, which he isn't about to do.

As criticism mounted this week in response to Jawa's story, O'Brien's office reversed course and publicly announced that they were "still investigating the matter". (PS - a shout out to everyone who contacted O'Brien's office.)

Well, while they're investigating (and will probably do so until everyone forgets about it), we thought you should take a look at the police report filed by Rifqa's counselor. The police report, filed on July 29th and available on the Columbus Police Department's website (case #100656789), provides the following narrative:
The victim states that she was informed by the listed witness (W1) that the listed suspect had threatened her. The victim states that the suspect told W1 to tell her if she (the victim) doesn't make the recommendation I (the suspect) want, I'll take legal action against her (the victim). The suspect also told W1, bad things could happen to her (the victim) because there are a lot of crazies out there. W1 told the victim that the suspect then clarified that comment by saying, it is the christians she (the victim) should be worried about. The victim believes the suspect is capable of harming her and is concern by his statements.

Go read the whole thing.
Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 2 Comments

Friday, August 13, 2010

The Band &
Gladys Knight & the Staples
The Weight

Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by midnight rider at permanent link# 0 Comments

Will Israel Bomb Iran?

A close reading of Jeffrey Goldberg's Atlantic article.

Jeffrey Goldberg's article in the latest Atlantic, on whether Israel will (or should) attack Iran's nuclear facilities in the coming months, is the best article I've read on the subject—shrewd and balanced reporting combined with sophisticated analysis of the tangled strategic dilemmas.

Whatever you think should be done about the Iranian program to build an A-bomb (and Goldberg describes his own position as one of "deep, paralyzing ambivalence"), read his piece before thinking about it much more.

Based on interviews with dozens of Israeli, Arab, and U.S. officials, Goldberg puts the odds of an Israeli strike by next July—involving 100 or so F-15E, F-16I, and F-16C aircraft dropping munitions on the uranium-enrichment facilities at Natanz and Qom, the nuclear-research center at Esfahan, and maybe the Bushehr reactor, among other sites—at "better than 50 percent."

He fully itemizes the risks and possible catastrophes of such a move: lethal reprisals from Hezbollah, if not Iran itself; a full-blown regional war; a cataclysmic spike in oil prices; a rupture of U.S.-Israeli relations; a rash of terrorist strikes against Jews worldwide; and—not least and most likely—a solidification of the mullahs' rule in Tehran.

Yet there are also considerable risks in letting Iran go ahead and build a small nuclear arsenal. I don't think (though many Israelis, understandably, do) that the mullahs would nuke Jerusalem, once they had the means to do so; Israel has about 100 A-bombs and the means to deliver an obliterating response. (The mullahs may finance suicide bombers, but they aren't so suicidal themselves.)

Still, a nuclear-armed Iran would provide cover (a "nuclear umbrella" of sorts) for Hezbollah and other militant proxies to step up their aggressiveness; it may draw smaller countries in the region into Iran's orbit (and certainly deter them from doing anything against Iranian interests); it could sap the credibility of a subsequent U.S. policy to "contain" Iran (if we declined to use force to stop Iran from building a bomb, some might doubt we'd use force to stop it from using one); and, for this reason, it could spur others in the region to build their own bombs, thus sparking a new nuclear arms race.

Read more »
Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 6 Comments

Older Posts Newer Posts