Monday, August 30, 2010

Sign Liberty Counsel's "Vote of No Confidence" Statement concerning President Barack Obama's failed administration

"This is what change looks like."
Barack Obama, after signing health care "reform" into law

There is widespread and growing distrust among Americans of all backgrounds and political affiliations toward Barack Obama and his ideological basis for "change." Liberty Counsel's "Vote of No Confidence" Statement is a practical way for concerned Americans to express their increasing disillusionment with the failed leadership of the Obama presidency. This Statement is a powerful call to stop his agenda of progressive socialism and its destruction of the very foundations undergirding the United States of America.

By signing Liberty Counsel's "Vote of No Confidence" Statement, you will be joining hundreds of thousands of other concerned Americans in resisting President Obama, his administration, and the rubber-stamp 111th Congress, all of whom are pushing aside the clearly expressed will of the people and forcing our country down the road of government expansion and socialism.

Although our "Vote of No Confidence" does not have the power of an official recall or directly relate to beginning Impeachment proceedings under the law, it is a very clear statement of citizen outrage and can lay the groundwork for more binding citizen actions in the future.

When you sign our "Vote of No Confidence" Statement, we will share your views - along with many, many thousands of your fellow concerned Americans - with the administration, the media, other elected officials, and whoever else needs to understand its clear, resolute message.

The "Vote of No Confidence" Statement declares:

As a concerned citizen, I am freely and strongly expressing my "Vote of No Confidence" in: President Barack Obama and his executive administration; his blatant disregard of his oath of office; his issuing of unconstitutional mandates; his rampant, systematic expansion of government; his overt disregard for the clear will of the American people; and his subversion of our Constitution, which he is sworn to uphold.

By signing this statement, I am joining with Liberty Counsel and citizens across the nation who are acknowledging the failure of Barack Obama's presidency and calling for an immediate end to:
The advancement of "Big Brother" policies and the overt takeover of American industries, including misguided bailouts and stimulus packages that have done little or nothing to improve unemployment or our economy.

The bankrupting of America through uncontrolled government spending coupled with the creation of a crippling and insurmountable national debt.

The weakening of the United States through a foreign policy that emboldens America's enemies, kow-tows to other nations' leadership, and intentionally undermines America's image as an exceptional nation.
The liberalizing our courts of law through radical nominees and appointments while promoting international law (including Islamic Sharia law) at the expense of our own legal code.

The nurture of a political environment exhibiting corruption, kickbacks, and pervasive "buying" of congressional votes with special favors and earmarks.

The consistent catering to special interest groups that are advancing the homosexual agenda, funding abortion with our tax dollars, curtailing citizens' free expression of deeply held beliefs, and generally undermining the rights and privileges of American citizenship.

Mr. President,

Your imperial style of leadership, your pervasive socialist agenda, your unconstitutional public policies, and your subversion of our rights are grossly out of touch with the desires and best interests of the vast majority of Americans. I hereby declare my "Vote of No Confidence" in your leadership and call for "change that WE can believe in" !

Click here to sign the petition.

Saturday, August 21, 2010

Three Things About Radical Islam

The video clip that is highlighted in this discussion thread is great; I just wish I would have seen it sooner! It was posted a few weeks ago, but I saw it for the first time yesterday.

Having read some EXCELLENT books explaining the complex history and issues surrounding Islam, namely, The Middle East War Process: The Truth Behind America's Middle East..., The Middle East Explained: Answering the Critical Questions On Amer..., and The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades)., I can assure you that these three books are so incredibly informative & educational, they really should be read by every American. The PIG (Politically Incorrect Guide) is a must-read, and the other two are also must-reads. The PIG focuses more on the violent history of Islam, and doesn't pull any punches; those who are willing to lie for Islam (employing the principle of Taqiyya) will hate and rage against the PIG. The other two are a bit less abrasive in tone, and contain a bit more history, but teach much of the same things, presented in a more historical/anecdotal fashion.

But back to the video clip: it's right on; it presents a tiny bit of the information contained in the above-listed books. Every American should watch this video, and hopefully be motivated to read at least two of the three books listed above. Sadly, the truths contained therein are not in ANY American textbook of which I'm aware.

But such things MUST be taught if we are to avoid being FORCED to submit to radical Islam here in America. The video clip below teaches SOME of the key nuggets of truth about Islam contains, presented in a way which captures the attention of even the most ADHD-riddled individual. Enjoy!

Here's another video clip that really helps expose the threat of Radical Islam, using the sort of video clips from Middle Eastern media outlets we routinely see on Glenn Beck exposing their counterparts within the Obama Regime, called Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against the West:

And here's another video clip, this one from a movie called The Cult of the Suicide Bomber from the author of the book See No Evil: The True Story of a Ground Soldier in the CIA's War on...:

Omerica - My heroes --- Reporters vs. Conservative Black Leaders at Press Conference 8-4-2010

Two reporters engage in a heated exchange with black conservative leaders at a press conference at the National Press Club on August 4, 2010 challenging the NAACP on its charges of racism within the tea party.

Now That’s a President

August 19, 2010

In a letter to Dr. Walter Jones in 1814, Thomas Jefferson, America’s third President (1801-1809), wrote this about the first President of the newly independent United States of America:

“[H]is was the singular destiny and merit, of leading the armies of his country successfully through an arduous war, for the establishment of its independence; of conducting its councils through the birth of a government, new in its forms and principles, until it had settled down into a quite and orderly train; and of scrupulously obeying the laws through the whole of his career, civil and military, of which the history of the world furnishes no other example.”

George Washington was the commander of the Continental Army in the American Revolutionary War from 1775 to 1783. He never used his command for his own advantage. Washington even rebuked his men when they suggested that he become king or that the army assert its control over the civilian authorities. As Commander in Chief, Washington demonstrated his respect for the rule of law by his consistent deference to the elected Continental Congress. When he ended his service at the end of the war, he resigned his commission in 1783 and retired to private life at his plantation in Mount Vernon, thereby proving King George III wrong. George III had asked what Washington would do after the war and was told of rumors that he would return to his farm, prompting the King to state, “if he does that, he will be the greatest man in the world.”

Washington presided over the Philadelphia Convention that drafted the United States Constitution in 1787. Washington was elected the first president, unanimously by the Electoral College, something that has never been repeated in American history.

Washington belonged to no political party and served as America’s first President from April 30, 1789 to March 4, 1797. After two terms Washington thought it was important that he step aside. He believed that a peaceful transition of power to a newly elected president was necessary before his death. He feared that if he died in office and the vice-president ascended to the presidency, it would appear too much like an heir ascending to the throne after the death of a king.

Washington’s farewell address was a primer on republican virtue and a stern warning against partisanship, sectionalism, and involvement in foreign wars. When Washington stepped aside at the end of his second term, George III said that Washington’s retirement from the presidency along with his earlier resignation of Commander in Chief, “placed him in a light the most distinguished of any man living,” and that his relinquishing power made him “the greatest character of the age.”

Washington died in 1799. Henry Lee, delivering the funeral oration, declared Washington “first in war, first in peace, and first in the hearts of his countrymen”. Historical scholars consistently rank him as one of the greatest United States presidents.

[Sources HERE and HERE]

Tears streamed down my face as I wrote this post. We the People are political orphans. Where have all the good presidents gone?


Security Implications? Red Rosa DeLauro's Communist Party Connection

August 19, 2010

U.S. Rep Rosa DeLauro is a powerful and influential woman...

DeLauro has been the co-chair of the House Democratic Steering Committee since 2003, where she makes committee assignments. This position gives Rep. DeLauro the power to determine the make up of powerful House Committees, to stack them with those Congressmen she deems most appropriate.

She is also a member of the far left Congressional Progressive Caucus , which may help to explain why that organization is so well represented on several powerful House Committees.
The representative from Connecticut’s 3rd Congressional District is the second-highest ranking woman in the U.S. House, after her close friend and colleague, Speaker of the house Nancy Pelosi.

Rosa DeLauro's Congressional District is centered on the City of New Haven, which happens to be a stronghold of the Communist Party USA. For many years the Connecticut Communist Party has been very influential in the local labor movement, "peace" movement, city government and the Democratic Party.

The Communist Party's activity, is centered on the New Haven Peoples Center, (established 1937), which houses Party front groups, and hosts Party functions.

Communist Party member Al Marder is president of the Peoples Center, while his comrade Joelle Fishman serves as a board member.

On August 11, the Party allied local chapter of the Alliance for Retired Americans (Joelle Fishman is a board member) hosted a function to celebrate the 75th anniversary of the establishment of Social Security.
Guest of honor was local Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro.

Listening to the first few minutes this speech, makes its very clear that DeLauro is familiar with many of those in attendance.

Photograher at the event , which was well covered in the Peoples World, was long time Party supporter Henry Lowendorf.

Celestino Cordova, at least a Communist Party supporter, presented DeLauro with postcards, calling on Congress to reject any proposals to raise the retirement age or cut benefits.

Cordova serves on the City of New Haven Peace Commission with Party members Al Marder and Joelle Fishman and indicates his support for the Party paper Peoples World on his Facebook page.

In June this year, DeLauro presented Celestino Cordova with medals for his Korean War service at a ceremony at the Fair Haven Elderly Apartments community room.

Rosa DeLauro may have a thing about hugging communists.

Below is a picture taken at the August 11 Peoples Center celebration , of DeLauro embracing confirmed communist Joelle Fishman.

Unfortunately Joelle Fishman is not just any communist. Fishman chairs the Connecticut Communist Party and is a member of the Communist Party USA National Board.

Most importantly however she is Chair of the Party's Political Action Commission. This is an highly important and influential post.

Fishman has the responsibility for organizing Party support for "progressive" Democratic Party candidates at the state, congressional, senate and presidential levels.

This means that Fishman is very important to the Democratic Party, as she has the power to influence where communist led unions, "community groups", churches and "peace" groups throw their money and manpower.
The fact that Fishman clearly has a personal relationship with a key leader of the Democratic Party should be raising eyebrows and ringing alarm bells.

Like virtually all Communist Party USA members, Joelle Fishman actively campaigned for Party "friend" Barack Obama in 2008.

Joelle Fishman wrote in the Connecticut Communist Party's CT People Before Profits Blog November 2 2008:

It was enjoyable to knock on doors and find voters who were enthusiastic and inspired by Obama’s historic candidacy, like the teacher who said her whole family was spreading the word. There were several families of divided opinion and others who declined to say. The most challenging conversations were with voters who did not want to support Obama because they were caught up in the lies and rumors undermining his integrity and patriotism. Those who were ready to discuss appreciated the comparison of McCain’s anti-worker record with Obama’s near perfect score.

It was exciting to be part of the quarter million union volunteers across the country, the biggest election mobilization in labor’s history, which has influenced the political climate in working class swing states and districts, laying the basis for a much larger labor movement.

The example set by labor’s top leaders talking directly with white sisters and brothers about how Obama represents their best chance for a secure future will have a lasting impact...

This year the chance to uproot ultra-right corporate political dominance is much greater. Voters want to be part of history. They see that the policies of the Bush administration, which McCain-Palin would continue, are bankrupting the country and endangering the world.

Labor’s giant effort along with massive organizing by African American, Latino, women’s and youth groups has turned historically Republican states’ House and Senate seats into battlegrounds, including the Senate seat in New Hampshire.

A landslide victory for Obama and Congress will open the door for big new struggles to organize workers into unions and place the needs of working families front and center in this economic crisis.

Incidentally Joelle Fishman is also the daughter-in-law of the late Victor Perlo, an economist and Party member who spied for the Soviet Union inside the U.S. Government in the 1930s and '40s.

Below is a video of Joelle Fishman speaking at the New Haven Peoples Center at the Communist Party's 2009 Amistad award dinner. Listen to Fishman praise Barack Obama and the communist effort to elect him.

At the end, Fishman hands out awards to Party members Brian Steinberg and Dorothy Johnson on behalf of the Connecticut Communist Party.

Rosa DeLauro is no stranger to communist causes.

In the 1980s she was executive director for Countdown ‘87 a national campaign to stop U.S. military aid to the Nicaraguan Contras - who were then fighting the Marxist-Leninist led Sandinistas.

A decade later, Congresswoman DeLauro was a co-sponsor of H.R. 950, the Job Creation and Infrastructure Restoration Act of 1997 . This Bill was promoted by the Los Angeles Labor Coalition for Public Works Jobs and the New York Coalition for Public Works Jobs - both of which were led by Communist Party USA members or supporters.

In recent times DeLauro has co-sponsored, H. Res. (House Resolution) 68, calling for the U.S. to abide by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. This Resolution is supported by several Communist Party USA influenced organizations, including the Greater New Haven Peace Council, which is led by Party linked activists Al Marder and Henry Lowendorf.

The Greater New Haven Peace Council is affiliated to the Communist Party initiated U.S. Peace Council which is in turn affiliated to the communist dominated and former Soviet front World Peace Council.

New Haven's Al Marder is a vice president of the World Peace Council.

Rosa DeLauro clearly has ties to the Communist Party USA, including to Joelle Fishman, the Party official specifically charged with organizing support for "approved" Democratic Party candidates.

We should also not forget that the Communist Party USA maintains close ties to several U.S. adversaries including the governments of China, Cuba, Venezuela and with the still powerful Russian Communist Party - many of which have records of spying on the United States, or attempting to influence internal U.S. policy

DeLauro has the ear of the Speaker of the House and has the power to influence the make up of Congressional Committees.

Should her ties to Joelle Fishman and the Communist Party Party USA, be a cause for concern?

Are there security implications here?

Wednesday, August 18, 2010

NY Times Scrubs Imam Rauf's Controversial Islamic Supremacist Ground Zero Mosque Remark, "New York is the capital of the world, and this location close to 9/11 is iconic"

Back on December 8, 2009, the New York Times ran a puff piece on the proposed Ground Zero mosque at the site of a building hit in the World Trade Center attacks. In that piece the following quote ran:

Despite the potential backlash against an Islamic institution opening so close to ground zero, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, who already leads prayers and reads from the Koran inside the building, said that the location was one of the project's key selling points. "New York is the capital of the world, and this location close to 9/11 is iconic," said the 61-year-old cleric, who is known for being a longtime critic of radical Islam. Being in a building "where a piece of the wreckage fell," he added, "sends the opposite statement to what happened on 9/11 ... We want to push back against the extremists."

I ran the piece back in December, as did a number of other on line journals like this.

Now that quote is gone. Poof.

The NY Times has since scrubbed this telling remark, "New York is the capital of the world, and this location close to 9/11 is iconic," and the paragraph now reads:

The building has no sign that hints at its use as a Muslim prayer space, but these modest beginnings point to a far grander vision: an Islamic center near the city’s most hallowed piece of land that would stand as one of ground zero’s more unexpected and striking neighbors.

The location was precisely a key selling point for the group of Muslims who bought the building in July. A presence so close to the World Trade Center, “where a piece of the wreckage fell,” said Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, the cleric leading the project, “sends the opposite statement to what happened on 9/11.”

“We want to push back against the extremists,” added Imam Feisal, 61.

They removed the quote. Why?

CNN on Ground Zero Mosque: It's All Geller's Fault!

The Crescent News Network, CNN, is framing the narrative in a most disingenuous way. But I am being too kind. John Roberts filled in for Anderson Cooper tonight and did a puff piece on the mosque, while placing the blame for grief stricken and humiliated Americans at the door of moi. It is so condescending and contemptuous of decent American .... as if they don't think for themselves or know their own minds. On second thought, I just described the CNN viewer.

Echoing Salon, who got their talking point from Daisy Con herself, the left lemmings are off like a pack of wild dogs.

Sick. I am surprised they even had me on ........the opening to this segment is crazy. It takes mental contortionism to come up with such a twisted narrative for what is essentially an absence of common decency and compassion.

The lack of respect and understanding by the Imam, Daisy and the media is radically intolerant.

UPDATE: Unhinged. Check it out.

Friday, August 13, 2010

Obama's US Treasury Department Pushing Zakat (Islamic Donations)

We know that terror is funded through the use of "islamic charities." The most glaring example was the Holy Land terror funding trial, the largest in US history. CAIR, ISNA, MAS, and the MSA were all named fronts for the Muslim Brotherhood and co-conspirators.

I find this statement from the US Treasury department absurd and dangerous. Where in our Constitution does it speak to this?

Obama is aggressively pushing zakat. No one has ever stopped Muslims from giving to Islamic charities. It was "charities" that funded blowing up babies that were the problem.

Obviously the separation of church and state is radically enforced by the likes of the ACLU et al. But what about the separation of mosque and state?

"Muslim outreach" is costing US taxpayer billions. This is all part of the Obama US Muslim Engagement charter, a large-scale effort by the US government to open areas of cooperation (dhimmitude) with the Islamic world in the political, cultural and economic spheres. Read this document US MUSLIM ENGAGEMENT - Changing the Course". I

Who will make sure that zakat doesn't go for jihad, as it has in the past -- the Holy Land Foundation's millions for Hamas?

Obama's State Department and Hillary Clinton welcomed Tariq Ramadan to the US. Ramadan was banned under Bush - one reason being Ramadan's contributions to a "charity" that was funneling money to Hamas.

Treasury Department Statement Marking the Beginning of Ramadan (hat tip Irene)

WASHINGTON – As Muslims in the United States and around the world begin their observance of Ramadan, the U.S. Department of the Treasury recognizes the importance of this period of intense devotion, reflection and charitable giving. Charitable giving and philanthropy are core American values, reflected in many faiths and traditions, and are of particular significance within the Muslim faith during the holy month of Ramadan.

The Treasury Department fully supports the ability of American Muslims – and Muslims worldwide – to fulfill their religious obligations through charitable giving and seeks to advance charitable giving at home and abroad, while protecting the charitable sector from the threat posed by those who seek to abuse this sacred obligation. In recent years, Treasury has strengthened its partnership with the charitable sector and donor community to promote transparency and to safeguard against such abuse.

The Treasury Department will continue to work closely with the charitable sector and Muslim American communities to promote our common goals of safe and effective charitable activity and to protect the sector from exploitation by terrorist organizations. We look forward to the continued development of this partnership.

For information about steps that donors and charities can take to guard against terrorist abuse, visit link.

ICE's Mission Melt 3: Endangering America

By Janice Kephart
August 12, 2010

On June 30, 2010, five days after Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Director John Morton received the unanimous "No Confidence" letter from the union representing ICE detention and removal officers and immigration enforcement agents, Morton issued a memorandum to “all ICE Employees” entitled "Civil Immigration Enforcement: Priorities for the Apprehension, Detention, and Removal of Aliens." Upon a careful review of both documents – the first from the employees outlining their grievances against Morton for basically rendering them incapable of upholding federal immigration law and the second guidance from the director they are complaining about – what is clear is that ICE employees' complaints were both ignored and proven justified by Morton's directive.

Morton's directive justifies the Obama administration's unwillingness to enforce immigration law by stating that ICE "only has resources to remove approximately 400,000 aliens per year, less than 4 percent of the estimated illegal alien population in the United States." (This is ironic considering that senior ICE leadership refuses to ask for more resources, as I discussed in my second blog in this series.) The directive goes on to ask law enforcement officers to exercise a form of prosecutorial discretion, delineating out all minor crimes where no one has been hurt – yet – and not holding these illegal aliens or even pursuing them in any way. Robbers, burglars, identity thieves and con men, drunk drivers and those driving without a license, are all likely free and clear under the Morton rubric. In fact, unless there is national security information of sufficient concern or a violent criminal conviction, all other illegal aliens, even criminal ones, are not to be held or even brought before a judge for a bond hearing.

Okay, so the priority is violent criminal aliens. Got it. That is perhaps a justifiable priority assuming (1) immigration enforcement officers should be making decisions that should be made by prosecutors, and (2) ICE agents and officers, all 7,000-plus of them, should do nothing but chase after the most violent of criminals – who are likely in U.S. jails or detention centers already – leaving ICE officers and agents bound to do close to nothing.

Yet even if Morton is right to prioritize his admittedly limited resources, the success of his priority to only target the "worst of the worst" within the illegal alien population falls squarely into a policy dung heap if you believe his employees, who say that state and local prosecutors across the nation are generally so overwhelmed that criminal aliens are not being prosecuted, but let go. No convictions, perhaps, even for some pretty bad criminal aliens? If there is no conviction, there is no ICE action. This means the whole house of ICE cards depends – ironically – on the state and locals convicting the criminal aliens in their jurisdictions. (Although states are even rethinking this after the head butt Arizona is perceived to have received recently in the SB 1070 partial injunction ruling.) Here is what the ICE labor union said in their No Confidence letter:

Criminal aliens incarcerated in local jails seek out ICE officers and volunteer for deportation to avoid prosecution, conviction and serving prison sentences. Criminal aliens openly brag to ICE officers that they are taking advantage of the broken immigration system and will be back in the United States within days to commit crimes, while United States citizens arrested for the same offenses serve prison sentences. State and local law enforcement, prosecutors and jails are equally overwhelmed by the criminal alien problem and lack of resources to prosecute and house these prisoners, resulting in the release of criminal aliens back into local communities before making contact with ICE. Thousands of other criminal aliens are released to ICE without being tried for their criminal charges. ICE senior leadership is aware that the system is broken, yet refuses to alert Congress to the severity of the situation and request additional resources to provide better enforcement and support of local agencies.

Moreover, according to the No Confidence letter, Immigration Enforcement officers were already "prohibited from making street arrests or enforcing United States immigration laws outside of the institutional (jail) setting." Clearly, Morton's directive was already the policy in operation; the June 30 directive just sealed its fate. Even worse, the employee letter goes onto say: "This has effectively created 'amnesty through policy' for anyone illegally in the United States who has not been arrested by another agency for a criminal violation."

So ICE officers have to sit on their hands, and simply turn a blind eye, or worse, get laughed at, by an illegal criminal population. Perhaps it begs the question to ask, what immigration enforcement mission is left? Endangering America?

STIMULUS -- REAL OR FAKE: Can you tell which of these government spending projects are real? (Brilliant Video With The Beautiful Rebel Economist) »

Joke-telling robots, expensive walking turtle tunnels, Blackberries for smokers, and training American prostitutes to drink responsibly. What do these things have in common? They're all questionable government spending projects in a time when our economy is struggling and people can't get jobs....or, maybe we just made them up.

Put yourself to the test. See if you can outwit the Rebel Economist before she stumps you. So what is it: REAL or FAKE?

Want to learn more about the projects featured in the video, the waste in your state and hundreds more examples? (Even better: want to do something about it?) Try our Spending #FAIL Map, which allows you to choose the spending projects of your (dis)liking, share the facts with others on Facebook, and call and tweet your member of Congress:

Thursday, August 12, 2010

Vaughn & State Plus 8

It may be only a matter of hours before a higher court intervenes, but after hearing arguments, Judge Vaughn Walker has ordered the state to issue same-sex "marriage" licenses as early as next week. The decision to shove Proposition 8 aside so quickly only heaps more outrage on a judge who should have never been allowed to consider the case in the first place. By lifting the "stay" on marriage licenses, he's attempting to plunge the state- and, by extension, the country--into deeper legal chaos just to satisfy his own radical agenda. Even supporters of counterfeit marriage like John Yoo argue that Walker is traumatizing the country by elevating himself above "the collective wisdom" of millions. Once again, this judge has disregarded the will of the people by interpreting the U.S. Constitution in a way that imposes his own personal beliefs on the state.

Fortunately, the attorneys expected this after his wild ruling and have already filed an emergency motion with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals asking for them to intervene. If the judges stick by Walker's order, our side will immediately file a motion with Supreme Court Justice Kennedy, who is the Circuit Justice over the Ninth Circuit. The odds are good that Kennedy will grant the stay or that the full Court would grant the stay. Either way, Judge Walker's dream of forcing same-sex "marriage" on the state by August 18 is a distant one. Few courts--including the liberal Ninth Circuit--should see Walker's decision as anything but irresponsible.

Ed Whalen, the judicial guru behind NRO's "Bench Memos" says the chances of thwarting today's order are strong. "If the [Ninth Circuit Court] refuses to impose a stay pending appeal, then it will be up to the Supreme Court to, once again, put an end to Walker 's lawlessness--this time, I would think, unanimously." Like so many legal experts, Whalen warned about Walker's impartiality before the original ruling was ever handed down. From the judge's push to televise the case to allowing same-sex activists to serve as "expert witnesses," his personal agenda has been clear from the very beginning. If Walker has a long-term male partner (as the LA Times confirmed eight weeks ago), "then the question arises whether Walker himself has any interest in entering into a same-sex marriage in California," Whalen says. "If he does, then the provisions of federal law requiring that a judge recuse himself when he knows that he has 'any other interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding.'"

Even the ultra-liberal San Francisco Chronicle, which broke the story on Walker 's sexuality, agrees. In an op-ed published this week, law professor John Eastman argues that this judge compromised the "public's confidence in the judicial process." His "failure to disqualify himself or at least to disclose his potentially disqualifying relationship to the parties requires that the opinion in the case be vacated and a new trial conducted before a different judge... Judge Walker has unilaterally neutered the votes of more than seven million Californians. A contentious step under the best of circumstances, such a decision should only be rendered, if at all, by a judge whose impartiality is beyond reproach. Judge Walker's, unfortunately, is not."

Rancher claims Mexican cartels takeover Texas ranch -Police blotter confirms story is not a hoax

August 10, 2010
San Diego County Political Buzz Examiner

After 16 days of denials by Laredo law enforcement and local officials regarding a Mexican drug cartel takeover of a Laredo area ranch, a Texas police blotter proves the alleged incident did in fact happen and that multiple agencies responded to the scene of a seized U.S. ranch.

Think about it for a moment.

One of the most brutal drug cartels operating in Mexico crossed the U.S. border and took a ranch from its lawful owner.

Intimidation has arrived along the southern border.

The police blotter tells the story of the events that unfolded on July 23rd;

“On Friday 7-23-10 Laredo Webb informed that their county SWAT Team is conducting an operation in the Mines Rd. area. According to LT. Garcia with LSO (Laredo Sheriff Office) received a call from a ranch owner stating that the Zetas had taken over his ranch. As per the 17 (reporting person) he informed them that they stated La Compania (area name for Zetas) was taking the ranch and no one was permitted on the ranch without permission. SO (Sheriff Office) will have an unmarked green Ford Taurus with two officers stationed at Los Compadres and a white Chevy Tahoe with two officers stationed at Mineral Rd. The LSO (Laredo Sheriff Office) will maintain surveillance in the area and advise if action is taken. Susp (suspect) Veh (vehicle) are described as a gray or silver Audi, a BLK (black) Escalade or Navigator and a van truck with a logo of a car wash spot free on the side. Border Patrol also has their response team on scene. Also known info of BMW’s and Corvettes entering and leaving the area. Auth LT Lichtenberger if assistance is requested LPD (Laredo Police Department) will secure the outer perimeter. (07/24/10 07:42:10 NR1873)”

Cartels have crossed the sovereign borders of the United States causing multiple agencies to respond and the end result was a media blackout. It’s well documented that media blackouts in Mexico are happening because the cartels are threatening reporters and news outlets with bodily harm. The question is why American law enforcement agencies are giving reporters the “We can neither confirm nor deny the incident happened line?”

It was a law enforcement officer on the scene that also confirmed the incident in fact happened and officers on the ground said they “considered this an act of war.”

The cover-up surrounding this story has reverberated throughout other federal law enforcement agencies. A recently retired ICE veteran, John Sakelarides had plenty to say about the latest U.S. incursion.

“What do you call an invasion by foreign nationals who are armed and occupy territory belonging to a sovereign nation? An act of war. If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it's a duck. Anyone who is denying this is what has occurred and that it constitutes an act of war is either an idiot or is somehow involved in this act of war.”

He continues to say, “If they (those covering-up the story) are elected representatives or government officials and they are aware that an act of war has been perpetrated against the United States, and refuse to admit it has occurred, much less do anything about it, is violating their oath of office.”

The approximate location of the U.S. ranch taken by the Zetas was 10 miles northwest of I-35 off Mines Road and Minerales Annex Road.

The Los Zetas drug cartel is an offshoot of the elite Mexican military trained in special ops, many of whom were trained by the U.S. military. The mercenary organization is said to include members of corrupt Mexican Federales, politicians as well as drug traffickers. The group was once part of the Gulf cartel, but has splintered and now directly competes with the Gulf cartel for premium drug smuggling routes in the Texas region.

The leader of Los Zetas cartel is Heriberto “El Lazca” Lazcano and the Zetas are considered the most violent paramilitary group in Mexico by the DEA. These drug cartels routinely kidnap tourists, infiltrate local municipalities and smuggle large quantities of narcotics into the U.S. marketplace.

A media firestorm ensued after this reporter posted a story on Saturday July 24, 2010. Now that the story is corroborated, it will be up to local media to track down what events took place after the Zetas seized a U.S ranch.

Lt. Col. Allen West’s battle cry: “Come and get it!”

August 11, 2010

West gives a speech to staffers at the opening of a new campaign office that sounds more like a battle cry. It’s amazing. I mean really. I am so motivated after hearing this speech that I want to go down to Florida and work for him.


A Speech Every American High School Principal Should Give

If every school principal gave this speech at the beginning of the next school year, America would be a better place.

To the students and faculty of our high school:

I am your new principal, and honored to be so. There is no greater calling than to teach young people.
I would like to apprise you of some important changes coming to our school. I am making these changes because I am convinced that most of the ideas that have dominated public education in America have worked against you, against your teachers and against our country.

First, this school will no longer honor race or ethnicity. I could not care less if your racial makeup is black, brown, red, yellow or white. I could not care less if your origins are African, Latin American, Asian or European, or if your ancestors arrived here on the Mayflower or on slave ships.

The only identity I care about, the only one this school will recognize, is your individual identity -- your character, your scholarship, your humanity. And the only national identity this school will care about is American. This is an American public school, and American public schools were created to make better Americans.

If you wish to affirm an ethnic, racial or religious identity through school, you will have to go elsewhere. We will end all ethnicity-, race- and non-American nationality-based celebrations. They undermine the motto of America, one of its three central values -- e pluribus unum, "from many, one." And this school will be guided by America's values.

This includes all after-school clubs. I will not authorize clubs that divide students based on any identities. This includes race, language, religion, sexual orientation or whatever else may become in vogue in a society divided by political correctness.

Your clubs will be based on interests and passions, not blood, ethnic, racial or other physically defined ties. Those clubs just cultivate narcissism -- an unhealthy preoccupation with the self -- while the purpose of education is to get you to think beyond yourself. So we will have clubs that transport you to the wonders and glories of art, music, astronomy, languages you do not already speak, carpentry and more. If the only extracurricular activities you can imagine being interesting in are those based on ethnic, racial or sexual identity, that means that little outside of yourself really interests you.

Second, I am uninterested in whether English is your native language. My only interest in terms of language is that you leave this school speaking and writing English as fluently as possible. The English language has united America's citizens for over 200 years, and it will unite us at this school. It is one of the indispensable reasons this country of immigrants has always come to be one country. And if you leave this school without excellent English language skills, I would be remiss in my duty to ensure that you will be prepared to successfully compete in the American job market. We will learn other languages here -- it is deplorable that most Americans only speak English -- but if you want classes taught in your native language rather than in English, this is not your school.

Third, because I regard learning as a sacred endeavor, everything in this school will reflect learning's elevated status. This means, among other things, that you and your teachers will dress accordingly. Many people in our society dress more formally for Hollywood events than for church or school. These people have their priorities backward. Therefore, there will be a formal dress code at this school.

Fourth, no obscene language will be tolerated anywhere on this school's property -- whether in class, in the hallways or at athletic events. If you can't speak without using the f-word, you can't speak. By obscene language I mean the words banned by the Federal Communications Commission, plus epithets such as "Nigger," even when used by one black student to address another black, or "bitch," even when addressed by a girl to a girlfriend. It is my intent that by the time you leave this school, you will be among the few your age to instinctively distinguish between the elevated and the degraded, the holy and the obscene.

Fifth, we will end all self-esteem programs. In this school, self-esteem will be attained in only one way -- the way people attained it until decided otherwise a generation ago -- by earning it. One immediate consequence is that there will be one valedictorian, not eight.

Sixth, and last, I am reorienting the school toward academics and away from politics and propaganda. No more time will devoted to scaring you about smoking and caffeine, or terrifying you about sexual harassment or global warming. No more semesters will be devoted to condom wearing and teaching you to regard sexual relations as only or primarily a health issue. There will be no more attempts to convince you that you are a victim because you are not white, or not male, or not heterosexual or not Christian. We will have failed if any one of you graduates this school and does not consider him or herself inordinately lucky -- to be alive and to be an American.

Now, please stand and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag of our country. As many of you do not know the words, your teachers will hand them out to you.

Wednesday, August 11, 2010

What Makes Islam So Successful?

IF YOU WANTED to deliberately design a collection of ideas with the purpose of making one that might eventually out-compete every other religion or political system on earth, you would be hard-pressed to do better than Islam.

Let's look at some of the individual ideas within the collection, keeping in mind that many of the ideas enhance each other. In other words, adding one idea to the others can make the whole collection more effective because some ideas work synergistically.

Here are some of the key components of the package of ideas (or bundle of beliefs) known as Islam:

1. A standardized version of the idea-collection is written down. This is something basic to several religions and isn't an Islamic invention, but it is an important factor in the success of Islam.

Something only transmitted orally can change over time, but something written will be identical a thousand years from now, and with modern printing presses, can be reproduced in the millions, giving it an enormous advantage in spreading identical copies of the idea-collection.

2. The Qur'an includes instructions for its own spread. It tells believers they must spread Islam. It is their holy duty to bring Mohammad's warnings and Islamic law to every corner of the world.

3. The idea-collection includes instructions for its own preservation, protection, and duplication. The Qur'an, the most important of the Islamic holy books, directly tells its followers that they can never change or modify or "modernize" any of the teachings within the idea-collection. It is perfect as it is. It is a capital sin to try to change it. This idea ensures the preservation of the whole collection.

These first three ideas are pretty standard for several successful religions. But now it gets interesting...

4. Islam commands its followers to create a government that supports it. This may be one of the most ingenious ideas in the whole collection. Islam is the only religion that uses it. Other groups of religious people have had political aspirations, but no other major religious group orders its followers — as a religious duty — to create a government that follows its own system of law.

Islam has a system of law, called Shari'a, and all Muslims are obligated to continually strive to make their government — wherever they are — follow it. Because of some of the other ideas added to Islam, you will see that this political addition to the idea-collection has significant consequences.

Many people are under the impression that the goal of Islam is to convert everyone to Islam. This is not so. The prime directive of Islam is to bring all people on earth under the rule of Islamic law.

5. Permission to spread the religion by war. This is another successful innovation. Although some other religions have spread themselves using force, they had very little justification from their own religious doctrines to do so.

Not so with Islam. Expanding by conquest is very much accepted and encouraged by the idea-collection. Islamic teachings present it this way: The non-Muslims need to be saved from the sin of following laws other than Allah's. If they won't voluntarily change their laws to Shari'a, then it is a Muslim's duty to insist. The world cannot be at peace until every government on earth follows the laws of Allah.

Mohammad's own experience showed the example — an example, says the Qur'an, that every Muslim should follow. At first, Mohammad tried to spread Islam by peaceful means. After thirteen years he'd gained 150 converts.

But then he changed tactics and started using caravan raids, warfare, executions, ransoming captives, and assassination, and within ten years he converted tens of thousands. After he died, his followers used the same tactics and converted millions. And by now it is one and a half billion.

The use of warfare combines synergistically and powerfully with the instruction to create an Islamic state. So Islam spread quickly as their armies got bigger. They conquered and set up Islamic states, most of which have lasted to this day, and the laws within an Islamic state make Islam very difficult to dislodge. The laws also make it very advantageous to convert to Islam.

This is one of the most effective methods ever invented for getting an idea-collection followed by huge numbers of people. It's a method of control and indoctrination similar to those used successfully in communist and totalitarian states. But as you'll discover below, Islam makes unique use of the power of the law to enforce complete conversion to the religion.

Islam started under unique conditions. All other major religions were started within an already-existing state. Islam is an historical exception to this rule.

Any organized government will, of course, put a stop to violent uprisings of a rebellious political group — especially one that wants to wage war and apply its own system of law. Christianity arose within the Roman Empire, for example. If Christianity had been a militant or political uprising, Rome would probably have killed or imprisoned the followers. Probably many military or political religions did start up then, but we've never heard of them. They couldn't get off the ground.

But Islam arose in Arabia when there was no central ruling power. The whole area was comprised of individual tribes. Under those circumstances, conversion by war and the use of force was possible.

6. Lands must be conquered. Lands that Islam has lost must be reconquered (Spain and Israel, for example). The Islamic empire must continually expand. Contraction is bad; expansion is good. So if a land was once Islamic and now it is not, that's contraction, and must be remedied.

According to Islamic teachings, the earth is Allah's. If there are parts of the earth not following Islamic law, it is the duty of the faithful to gain control of that land and establish Shari'a. It is a sin to let it be.

7. The idea-collection provides new soldiers by allowing polygamy. According to Sharia law, a Muslim man can marry up to four wives, and he can have sex with as many slave girls as he wishes.

The Qur'an especially encourages men to marry widows. This is an important idea to add if you are going to be losing a lot of soldiers in war. You need some way of replenishing your army. Otherwise the idea-collection could die out from a lack of offspring.

8. It is a punishable offense to criticize Islam. You can see why this one is a good supporting idea for the collection. It helps suppress any ideas that would reduce the authority of Islamic ideas. This idea is in the Quran, and Mohammad set a fierce example of punishing people who criticized him or Islam.

9. You can't leave Islam once you're in. This is an interesting one. It is actually illegal in Islamic states to convert out of Islam. This is a critical part of Shari'a law. Someone who has rejected Islam who was once a Muslim is an "apostate." This is a crime and a sin, and the punishment for it is death (and eternal damnation in hell thereafter).

Obviously, you can see why this idea has been included in the collection, but this one has actually caused Islam a problem because those who are following Islam to the letter consider more "moderate" Muslims (those who want to ignore or alter the more violent passages of the Qur'an) to be apostates. Since the punishment for apostates is death, fundamentalist Muslims are fighting modernizing Muslims all over the world, and keeping many rebellious, modernizing Muslims from speaking up for fear of death.

Every time a group of Muslims decides that maybe Islam should be updated for the 21st century and maybe women should have some rights and maybe the government should be more democratic, the devout Muslims call them apostates and try to kill them.

In this and in many other ways, Islam protects its own fidelity (in other words, the original idea-collection cannot be altered).
Another idea in Shari'a law says it's against the law for anyone to try to convert a Muslim to another religion.

10. Islam must be your first allegiance. You are a Muslim first, before any allegiance you give to your family, your tribe, or your country.

This does two things: It causes a unity of people across borders which allows the group to grow bigger than any other entity. In other words, the "Nation of Islam" can grow bigger than any country, no matter how large (which gives the group a massive numerical advantage).

11. Dying while fighting for Islam is the ONLY way to guarantee a man's entrance into Paradise. This belief creates fearless, enthusiastic warriors, especially given the Qur'an's vivid descriptions of the sensuous delights of Paradise.

A Muslim man has a chance of getting to Paradise if he is a good Muslim, but it is not guaranteed. However, if he dies while fighting for Islam, he is guaranteed to get in, and that's the only thing he can do to guarantee it.

12. You must read the Qur'an in Arabic. This unites believers by language, and language has a very powerful unifying influence. For added incentive to learn Arabic, another basic Islamic principle says you can't go to Paradise unless you pray in Arabic.

So Muslims all over the world share a language. This makes it easier to coordinate far-reaching campaigns of protest, political pressure, and war.

13. You must pray five times a day. This is one of the five "pillars" — that is, one of the five central practices — of Islam. Within an Islamic state, this practice is enforced by law. Every Muslim must pray five times a day. The practice helps Islam dominate a Muslim's life, filling his daily rhythm with Islam.

It would be impossible to forget anything you deliberately do so often. Five times a day, every day, a Muslim must bow down and pray to Allah.

Research has shown that the more effort a person expends for a cause, the more he is likely to believe in it and value it. So this is a good way to eventually make believers out of people who became Muslims through coercion.

Islam completely takes over every aspect of Muslims' lives. Not only are they required to pray five times a day, they have to go through a washing ritual beforehand. Islam dictates the laws, and the laws cover many public and private behaviors. In an Islamic state, it is impossible to be a casual Muslim.

14. The prayers involve moving together in time. When Muslims pray, they all face the same direction, they bow down, get on their hands and knees, and put their face on the mat, all in unison, and then rise back up. Again and again.

When people move together in time, whether dancing or marching or praying, it creates a physical and emotional bond between them. That's why all military training involves close-order drill (marching in unison), even though it has been a long time since military groups have actually marched into combat. There is no longer a need for the skill, but military training retained the practice because it is so effective at creating a strong feeling of unity between soldiers.

The same is true of any physical movements people make in unison. So the method of prayer in Islam helps Muslims feel unified with each other.

15. A woman is in a thoroughly subordinate position. This idea really helps support other ideas in the collection. If women had too much influence, they'd try to curb the warring. Women in general don't like to send their husbands and sons off to war. But if women have no say in the matter, then the rest of the ideas can express themselves without interference. By subordinating women, the idea-collection prevents their effective vote against war, violence, and conquest.

The rules and laws within Islam that keep women subordinate are numerous. For example, she is not allowed to leave her house unless she is accompanied by a male relative. Under Islamic law, a woman is forbidden to be a head of state or a judge. She can only inherit half of what a man can inherit. In court, her testimony is only worth half of a man's. She is not allowed to choose where she will live or who she will marry. She is not allowed to marry a non-Muslim or divorce her husband. He, however, can divorce her with a wave of his hand. And according to Shari'a, he can (and should) beat her if she disobeys him.

All of these ideas keep her subordinate, which helps keep the war machine going unimpeded by domestic rebellion.

16. The only way a woman can guarantee her passage into Paradise is if her husband is happy with her when she dies. When I read about this one, I thought, "Mohammad, you are a crafty one."

This idea obviously helps with the subjugation of women. It gives her a strong incentive to subordinate her wishes to her husband's, because while she might have a chance to get into Paradise if she's a good Muslim, the only way she can guarantee she will go to Paradise (and avoid eternal suffering in hell) is to make sure her husband is happy with her when she dies.

17. Allah gives Himself permission to edit his own work. This is an interesting one. It says in the Qur'an that if a passage written later contradicts an earlier passage, then the later one is the better one. The Qur'an was written in sections (each section is one of Mohammad's revelations, known as a sura or chapter) over a period of 23 years. The circumstances of Mohammad's life and his religion changed quite a bit over those 23 years.

One of the ideas in the Qur'an is "this is the word of Allah." People had already memorized his earlier revelations, and it would seem a little strange for the all-knowing, infinitely wise Allah to change something He had already said. But with this idea that later revelations abrogated or overwrote earlier revelations when they contradicted, the newer ideas could be accepted. Allah could edit His work.
As I pointed out earlier, in his first 13 years of peacefully preaching, Mohammad only managed to win 150 followers. But as a military leader and violent conqueror, he was able to subjugate all of Arabia to Islamic law in less than 10 years. The peaceful ways were slow. Conversion by conquering and establishing Shari'a was faster and more efficient.

The bad news for non-Muslims is that the later, violent, intolerant verses abrogate the earlier peaceful, more tolerant passages.

18. The Qur'an uses the carrot and stick to reinforce behavior. Throughout the book are vivid descriptions of hell, where sinners and non-Muslims have to drink boiling, stinking water, are thrown face down into a raging fire, and have to be there for eternity, suffering endless torments in agony.

There are also vivid descriptions of Paradise. In Paradise, believers wear green silk robes and recline on plush couches. Trees shade them, fruit dangles nearby. Believers have tasty food and refreshing drinks served to them in silver goblets.

But to have a chance of reaching Paradise, they must be devout Muslims. To guarantee it, they must die in jihad (for men) or make sure their husbands are always happy with them (for women).

19. Islam provides a huge and inspiring goal. Leaders of countries, companies, and religions have all discovered that you can get the most motivation and enthusiasm from your followers if you provide them with an expansive vision — an enormous goal. In the Islamic idea-collection, the goal calls for a continuous effort to expand the domain of Islamic law until the entire world is subjugated to it.

Many religions have the goal of converting others to the faith, but Islam has a method available nobody else has: To expand by seizing and converting governments to Shari'a, or using the method of gaining one small, incremental concession or accomodation after another until Sharia law is being followed.

Once the whole world is following Islamic law, peace will reign. That's why even terrorists can say with complete sincerity, "Islam is a religion of peace."

The Qur'an says it's better if non-believers accept Islam and become Muslims without force. But if they refuse, then you must do what you can to at least get them to live by the laws of Allah.

So Muslims have been given quite a mission: To create a one-world government. An Islamic world. World peace. It is an enormous and inspiring and motivating goal, and creates a strong unity of purpose.

20. Non-Muslims must pay a large tax. Once a country is following Sharia law, non-Muslims are given the choice between becoming Muslim or becoming a dhimmi. Dhimmis are allowed to practice their non-Muslim religion if they pay the jizya (a tax). If they convert to Islam, they no longer have to pay the jizya. This obviously creates a practical incentive to convert.

This is ingenious. The tax takes money away from non-Muslims and their competing religions and gives that money to support Islam. The income from these taxes (usually a 25% income tax) helped fund the Islamic conquests during the first two major jihads. They conquered vast lands, most of them already filled with Christians and Jews, many of whom did not convert at first, and their jizya poured huge sums of money into the Islamic war machine.

Eventually, the numbers of Christians and Jews in those countries dwindled down as they converted or escaped (or in some cases, were massacred), until now, in most Islamic countries, Jews and Christians are very small minorities.

The tax-the-non-Muslims idea helps the Islamic idea-collection make more copies of itself by suppressing competing religions and financially supporting Islam.

Several ideas within Shari'a law extend this effect. For example, non-Muslims are not allowed to build any new houses of worship. They're not even allowed to repair already-existing churches or synagogues. This puts the houses of worship of any competing religion in a state of permanent decline.

Also, non-Islamic prayers cannot be spoken within earshot of a Muslim — again, preventing Muslims from being infected by a competing religion. No public displays of any symbols of another faith may be shown either.

All of this prevents the spread of any competing ideas, and makes competing religions die out over time. That's why today there are so many "Muslim countries." Almost every other country in the world is made up of different religions, but because of these principles, Islam tends to displace all other beliefs and cultures wherever it becomes established.

21. A Muslim is forbidden to make friends with a non-Muslim. A Muslim is allowed to pretend to be a friend, but in his heart he must never actually be a friend to a non-Muslim. This is one of the best protections Islam has against Muslims leaving the faith because conversions a new religion are usually made because a friend introduced it. Being forbidden to make friends with non-Muslims helps prevent that from happening. (See Quran quotes about this.)

22. The Qur'an counsels the use of deceit when dealing with non-Muslims. Mohammad instructed one of his followers to lie if he had to (in order to assassinate one of Mohammad's enemies). This set a precedent, and the principle was clear: If it helps Islam, it's okay to deceive non-Muslims.

This principle has served Islamic goals very well through history. And it serves those goals today. On the DVD, Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against the West, you can watch real-life examples of Islamic leaders saying one thing in English for the Western press, and saying something entirely different to their own followers in Arabic a few days later.

Deceiving the enemy is always useful in war, and throughout history generals have used it. Islamic teachings consider Islam to be in a permanent state of war with the non-Islamic world until the whole world follows Shari'a law (read more about that here). All non-Muslims living in non-Islamic states are "enemies." So deceiving Westerners is totally acceptable because deceiving an enemy in a state of war is totally acceptable. It is encouraged if it can forward the goals of the spread of Islam.

And so we have the strange phenomenon covered by Steven Emerson in Terrorists Among Us, where organizations in America were ostensibly raising money for orphans, but really giving the money to terrorists. They deceived good-hearted Western non-Muslims into giving money to organizations that were actively killing Western non-Muslims.

As it says in the Qur'an, "War is deceit." This idea gives Islam a tremendous advantage over idea-collections that encourage indiscriminate truthfulness.

23. Islam must always be defended. This idea is a primary linchpin that gives justification for war with almost anybody, as you'll see in the idea below. After the enemy is defeated, of course, Muslims must establish an Islamic state.

24. Islamic writings teach the use of pretext to initiate hostilities. The Qur'an devotes a lot of time complaining about people who did not support Mohammad when he first started his religion, with Allah often condemning them to torment in hell in the hereafter.

Mohammad was somewhat pushy and insistent with his religion, and when others felt intruded upon and protested, Mohammad took that to mean they were trying to stop Allah's holy prophet from bringing the revealed word of Allah to the world, so he was justified to fight them and destroy them as Allah's enemies. This is a demonstration of the principle of pretext.

Non-Muslims of the world need urgently to become aware of this principle. Of all the ideas in the Islamic collection, this is the most dangerous to the West because it removes1 our natural self-preserving defenses. The use of pretext tends to make the West defenseless against Islamic encroachments. And it tends to make the West confused about how to respond to violent Muslim reactions.

The use of pretext means you need only the barest excuse to begin hostilities. It means actually looking for an excuse, and even trying to provoke others into striking the first blow ("starting" the hostilities).

If the only way to get to Paradise is dying while fighting for Islam, you need hostilities. And if it is your holy duty to make all governments use Shari'a law, you need to conquer non-Islamic governments. But you don't really want to look like the aggressor. Appearances count. All throughout the Qur'an, Mohammad tries to justify his aggression as defending Islam.

The Qur'an repeats over seventy times that followers of Islam should use Mohammad as a model and imitate him. So Muslims the world over try to find or create grievances, so they can recruit new warriors, so they can get a holy war started, so they can fight and die in Allah's cause.

And because of the rise of multiculturalism (respect for all other cultures) in the West, the use of pretext is very effective against people who are unfamiliar with Islam. Many Westerners are concerned that al Qaeda is angry at the West for having troops in Saudi Arabia, for example. That's merely a pretext. They want all non-Muslims out of the Middle East. Then they say they will cease hostilities. It is a ridiculous and impossible goal, so they are justified in permanent war against the West to "defend" Islam.

It's surprising that so many Westerners accept this particular pretext because it flies in the face of a fundamental Western principle: Equality. What Osama bin Laden is saying is, "infidels are so undeserving, their very presence somewhere in Arabia defiles the entire country." Wow. What does that say about the non-Muslims?

Why doesn't this kind of racism or prejudice or infidelphobia (or whatever you want to call it) outrage more Westerners? Instead, many think we ought to pull out of the Middle East so we stop offending these poor Muslims.

The principle of pretext means you try to provoke a hostile reaction and then use the hostile reaction as a reason to escalate hostilities. It's the same method schoolyard bullies have used for thousands of years.

25. The explicit use of double standards. Islam has one standard for Muslims, and a different standard for non-Muslims, which always gives the advantage to Muslims and within a Muslim country, it provides incentives to convert.

For example, Islam must be spread by its believers, wherever they are. But when others try to spread their religions, Muslims are supposed to see it as an aggression against Islam — an act of aggression that must be "defended." Islam must always be defended.

As another example, when Islam is defamed in any way, Muslims should violently defend it. Even in a cartoon. But Muslims can and should defame Jews and Christians in Muslim newspapers and television, and they should defame any infidel or enemy, as they defame the U.S. today.

Here's another example: The Islamic supremacists of Saudi Arabia are pouring money into building mosques all over the free world. But according to Shari'a law, which is the law in Saudi Arabia, no non-Muslim religious structures are allowed to be built.

Yet Muslims all over the world protest loudly and violently when anyone in Europe or America resists the building of more mosques in their countries.

Islamic supremacists don't see the irony in it. They don't feel strange having such an obvious double standard.

They are, after all, Allah's followers and everyone else is deluded. Fairness and equality with such unworthy infidels would seem very out of place. A double standard seems completely appropriate from that perspective.

The double standard principle is a key part of the idea-collection, and it has been a great advantage in the spread of Islam (and the suppression of competing religions).

26. It is forbidden to kill a Muslim (except for a just cause). It is not forbidden to kill a non-Muslim. This causes a bond between Muslims, fear in non-Muslims, and motivation to become Muslim. This is also another example of an explicit Islamic double standard.

27. If Muslims drift away from Mohammed's teachings, Allah will end the world. That makes converting others and promoting Islam a matter of survival. It also motivates Muslims to prevent each other from losing faith.

WHAT SHOULD we do with this information about Islam? That's a good question. For some, the solution is to hate Muslims, but that doesn't make any sense. Most Muslims had no choice in their religion, and many of them don't know as much about their own religion as you now do.

I think the best thing any of us can do is to simply help other non-Muslims learn about Islam.
Because Islam is so successful, its teachings are becoming more and more influencial on the world stage, and some of its built-in aggressiveness should be curbed. But the only way it can be curbed is if enough people know about it. The way we understand Islam will determine what policies we collectively endorse or reject about it.

So first, learn more about it. And then share what you know with others. And let them know what they can do about it too. To learn more, I suggest you first read the Qur'an. This is the version I recommend.
If you'd like to do something more, start here: What Can You Do About It?

Friday, August 06, 2010

Bringing Shirley Sherrod’s Past Into the Light

By: Terresa Monroe-Hamilton
August 6, 2010

Shirley Sherrod - Made Infamous from the NAACP Video Controversy and Andrew Breitbart

Over the last 2 weeks I have been doing research into the Shirley Sherrod controversy which you can read about here... More to dig into, especially her affiliations, so stay tuned on that front. I guarantee you have not heard the whole story from the mainstream media.

Oh, what a tangled web Sherrod has woven for herself. Selectively cherry picking recounts of her so-called civil rights work in the 60s and 70s. Painting herself as a victim while smearing Fox News and Glenn Beck, who I might add, oddly enough was the FIRST one to come to her defense. Definitely would not want her anywhere behind me in a fight.

Lost in the NAACP controversy and Sherrod's claim to be a 'reformed racist,' is the story of her time at New Communities Inc. During her time in her role there, it would seem there are those that claim she held an ostensibly elitist and anti-black-labor viewpoint. Along with her cohorts at NCI, Sherrod underpaid, mistreated and fired black laborers, many of which were under 16 years of age. She did so in those very same fields of southwest Georgia that her ancestors labored under the yoke of slavery.

Ron Wilkins at CounterPunch tells a decidedly different story of Sherrod's deeds back in the 1970s. He is a former organizer for the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee and worked with Sherrod at NCI during that time. According to Wilkins, Sherrod's history is rife with abuse towards black laborers and underage workers. From CounterPunch:

If confession is good for the soul, then Mrs. Sherrod took a first step toward her redemption by admitting the error of her ways in her earlier attitudes toward poor white farmers. Mrs. Sherrod says she began to see poverty as more central than race. So, should indigent black child farm laborers warrant less reflection by Mrs. Sherrod? What lessons does she have to share from her tenure as management when she had power over her own people working under deplorable conditions at the same New Communities

Inc.(NCI) identified in the current issue? Shirley Sherrod could have included this chapter of her history in the same confession speech. Justice and integrity require at least as much accountability from Mrs. Sherrod to the poor black farm workers of NCI as to the white farmers she came to befriend. This lack of full disclosure of the whole truth is a “sin of omission” that trivializes the suffering of poor black farm workers and exacerbates the offenses of NCI.

Shirley Sherrod was New Communities Inc.'s store manager during the 1970s. As such, Mrs. Sherrod was a key member of the NCI administrative team, which exploited and abused the workforce in the field. The 6,000 acre New Communities Inc. in Lee County promoted itself during the latter part of the 1960s and throughout the 70s as a land trust committed to improving the lives of the rural black poor. Underneath this facade, the young and old worked long hours with few breaks, the pay averaged sixty-seven cents an hour, fieldwork behind equipment spraying pesticides was commonplace and workers expressing dissatisfaction were fired without recourse.

Eventually, loan discrimination and relentless creditors did take down New Communities Inc. in 1985. But NCI's, and Sherrod's, unfair labor practices and incompetent leadership were equally, if not more so, to blame for the company's failure.

Zombie has written a magnificent piece detailing these events. Here is a list from the article at Pajamas Media of items that Wilkins has accused Sherrod of being guilty of - and I believe him:

Combined, the new 2010 allegations and the original 1974 allegations accuse Shirley and Charles Sherrod of:

• Paying farm workers as little as 67¢ per hour, far below minimum wage for the era.

• Employing underage children to perform hard labor.

• Compelling their employees to work in unsafe conditions, including getting sprayed with pesticides.

• Firing any workers who acted as whistleblowers.

• Forcing employees to work overtime in the fields at night with practically no advance notice.

• Having a capricious payscale under which employees doing the exact same jobs were paid different amounts according to the whims of the managers.

• Being unwilling to address the abuse even after it was raised by union representatives.

• Seriously mismanaging the farm to such an extent that it went bankrupt.
Sherrod cries foul to the government concerning their treatment of black farmers, all the way to the bank I might add. But she never once addressed the fact that said treatment was undeniably under her management and by her own hand.

United Farm Workers’ newspaper El Malcriado on September 28, 1974, also weighed in against Sherrod:

 All of this while accusing Andrew Breitbart of wanting Blacks to get “stuck back in the times of slavery.” He only showed excerpts that were given him and I contend that Sherrod is still a racist despite the lipstick she has slapped on Pigford.

The Sherrods' New Communities farm received $13 million from the USDA to compensate for the loss of their land as part of the “Pigford v. Glickman” settlement. Shirley and Charles Sherrod personally received $300,000 for “pain and suffering.” Now Pigford II is in the works to rip off America even more.

Much, much more can be found in Zombie's Piece: Slave-labor conditions at Sherrods’ farm?

Shirley, you've really done your family proud by promoting slavery of your fellow African Americans while displaying traitorous elitism and monstrous graft. Well done...