may endure for the night," the Psalmist David wrote,
"but joy comes in the morning." In the case of most
Americans, those nights stretched into very long
years -- a nightmare from which the nation finally
awoke last night with the astonishing news that
voters rejected the continuation of the anti-faith,
anti-family policies of Barack Obama. Instead, a
nation, spurned by almost a decade of a radical
liberalism, turned out with a vengeance -- electing
Donald Trump in perhaps the most stunning political
upset of the modern age. In a year of surprises, the
ultimate outsider delivered the biggest, tapping
into the frustration that pollsters didn't detect
and liberal elites never took seriously.
forgotten men and women of our country will be
forgotten no longer," vowed the president-elect, who
not only overcame the opposition of the Democratic
Party, but his own -- soaring to victory in spite of
a biased media, his own personal baggage, lopsided
polls, and a bevy of Hollywood stars. In disbelief,
pundits watched the electoral map turn into a sea of
red, colored by eight years of disillusionment with
the president's extremist agenda. Fueled by massive
turnout, the highest in history, voters delivered a
stinging repudiation -- not just of Hillary
Clinton's ultra-liberal agenda, but of the entire
Obama era. Tired of the Left's contempt and
unwilling to answer to pollsters, a silent
majority, propelled the GOP to a victory no
one saw coming.
night wasn't just a vindication of Donald Trump. It
was also a validation of the evangelical movement,
which once again overcame the media's narrative of
division to deliver one of the most significant
political messages this country has ever seen. In
nearly every election cycle for the last 40 years,
liberals have tried to bury a movement they wish had
never been born. And last night, they learned just
how impossible that prospect will be. Evangelicals,
many of whom (myself included) backed other
candidates during the primary, quietly assessed the
perilous state of the nation and unified behind
Trump in greater numbers than they had behind the
last three GOP nominees. To the astonishment of
everyone, Trump outperformed John McCain, Mitt
Romney, and even George W. Bush-winning an
overwhelming 81% of the evangelical vote . FRC
was proud to play a crucial role in that surge,
calling or knocking on the doors of more than
264,000 in North Carolina alone. We rolled
through 20 states on our Values Bus with the message
of what was at stake in this election, making more
than 140 stops, and moving the needle on a vital
bloc of voters who undoubtedly helped deliver
media had questions about the influence of the
religious right, they were answered early Wednesday
morning by the greatest coalescence around a
Republican nominee in two decades. Turns out, the
press had about as much success writing the obituary
of the evangelical movement as it had predicting
this election. (And that isn't much!) Anyone who
traveled the country these last few months saw how
values voters connected with Donald Trump, not
because of shared values, but because of shared
concerns over the damage a Clinton Supreme Court
would do to our freedom. Combine that with targeted
videos like ours , and it's no wonder the
number of voters who ranked the Supreme Court as
their most important issue soared to 21 percent by
Election Day (and even higher among evangelicals!).
the night even worse for Democrats, the GOP held on
to its majorities in Congress, giving Donald Trump
the keys to a unified Republican government -- and
ousting a handful of gutless moderates in the
process. Of the Senate's True Bluers (members who
voted with FRC Action 100 percent of the time), 14
out of 14 won -- a feat replicated in the House,
where 139 of 158 also held on to their seats. With
their hands on the levers of power, Republicans
finally have the mandate they need to roll back the
oppression of the Obama era, defund Planned
Parenthood (both of which Congress has done before),
defend the ban on taxpayer-funded abortion, repeal
Obamacare, restore pulpit freedom, appoint pro-life
judges, tear up the Iranian nuclear deal, invalidate
Obama's executive orders, beef up our military,
protect the privacy of women and children in
bathrooms, and so much more. Truly, this is an
unprecedented opportunity to turn back the clock on
a radical administration that was on the cusp of
driving America into the ground. Instead, it seems
Barack Obama decimated his own party, putting
Democrats in a significantly weakened position.
states, where conservatives have made the most
strides under Obama, the GOP continued its
state-level dominance. The historic gains that
started under this president continued, resulting in
another major increase of Republican governors. By
week's end, the GOP will hold at least 33
gubernatorial seats -- up from 22 in 2008 .
Winners included Missouri's former Navy SEAL Eric
Greitens, Vermont's Lieutenant Governor Phil Scott,
Indiana's Lieutenant Governor Eric Holcomb, Utah's
incumbent Gary Herbert, and North Dakota's Doug
Burgum (with Montana still too close to call). The
celebration continued in the Kentucky legislature,
which flipped to Republican control for the first
time in 100 years. Iowa's Senate was next,
leading the New York Times to mourn that, "At least
20 chambers were seen as highly competitive in the
election, and a majority of those are now controlled
the biggest prizes of the night, however, was North
Carolina -- which not only helped push Trump over
the top but also beat back the narrative on H.B. 2,
the state's Public Facilities Privacy & Security
Act. While liberals continue to pump out phony
argument that gender-specific bathrooms will cost
Republicans their majority, nothing could be farther
from the truth! If protecting women and children
were as unpopular as the Left claims it is, why did
the GOP add to their veto-proof majority in both
chambers and reelect Lieutenant Governor Dan Forest
(R), who was the driving force behind the law? While
Governor Pat McCrory's (R) race is too close to
call, there's plenty of evidence that his opponent's
surge had nothing to do with outrage over H.B. 2 and
everything to do with the shady decision of a Durham
County judge to leave the polls open when it was
clear that Roy Cooper (D) was significantly behind.
end, what we witnessed wasn't just the revenge of
the deplorables, but the collapse of the Obama
legacy. After the spectacular failures of Obamacare,
the demoralization of our military, the explosion of
lawlessness, tolerance of corruption, and obsession
with social engineering, Americans finally have the
opportunity to rebuild the country they once knew.
But the election is just the starting gun. Donald
Trump may open the door to America's solutions, but
he was never meant to be the solution. The
true transformation of a society starts in the
hearts and minds of men. And under an administration
with no interest in continuing the eight-year war on
the First Amendment, we may finally see what the
Church is capable of. In the meantime, one thing
about this historic uprising is clear: Americans are
looking for leaders of conviction. And as last
night's results show, they will accept no
Perkins' Washington Update is written with the aid
of FRC Action senior writers.
November 3, 2016
US taxpayers (by way of deficit spending to be
inherited by our children) are footing the bill for
the U.S. State Department's refurbishment of mosques
and setting up of internet service in Muslim countries
of the Middle East.
Those Muslim nations (rightly) views us as
weak, appeasing fools, worthy of contempt.
a look at life after marijuana legalization
Feb 22, 2016
Nestled between a 7-Eleven and a store selling
Broncos jerseys, the door to the generic-looking
retail establishment is easy to miss. But once
inside, the smell is unmistakable.
At Euflora, tables are filled
with glass containers of marijuana next to
interactive tablets describing each strain (“sweet
floral aroma,” “intoxicatingly potent”). An array
of marijuana-infused products beckon behind locked
cases: from energy shots to sour gummies, brownies
to bacon brittle. And if you’re 21 or older, it’s
all legal to buy.
This is Colorado,
where a billion-dollar-a-year legal marijuana
industry has emerged since January 2014. It offers
an early look at what Massachusetts
could face should voters greenlight an expected
ballot question and legalize the drug this fall.
So has legalization been a plus
or a minus?
“Yes,” Colorado Senate
President Bill Cadman replied with a laugh.
The consensus among several top
state officials — who emphasize that their job is
to carry out the will of the voters rather than
mull whether their constituents made the right
choice — is that there have been no widely felt
negative effects on the state since marijuana
became legal, and a crop of retail stores,
cultivation facilities, and manufacturers sprung
up from Aurora to Telluride.
Legalization has ushered in
thousands of new jobs in the burgeoning industry,
brought $135 million into state coffers last year,
and ended the prohibition of a widely used
But police say they struggle to
enforce a patchwork of laws covering marijuana,
including drugged driving. Officials fret about
the industry becoming like big tobacco, dodging
regulation and luring users with slick
advertising. And this state, long a leader in
cannabis use, has the highest
youth rate of marijuana use in the nation,
according to the most recent data available from a
federal drug-use survey.
voters approved a constitutional amendment in
November 2012 legalizing the sale of recreational
marijuana, which began in 2014.
The drug is heavily regulated.
Each plant for sale must be tagged with a radio
frequency identification chip, from an early stage
of its life to sale, to help the state track it.
Marijuana, both in plant form and infused in
products, is required to be tested for potency and
contaminants, and sold in child-resistant
Tourists and locals alike can
buy recreational marijuana as long as they are at
least 21 and can possess up to 1 ounce. Only those
with a medical marijuana “red card,” issued by the
state on the recommendation of a physician, can
possess more at one time.
While the popular image of
marijuana use remains joints and vaporizers, a
significant percentage of marijuana sales in
Colorado — nearly half according to some estimates
— take the form of infused products, such as
edible treats, pills, drops, bath soak, and even
“sensual enhancement oil.”
More than two years into the
still-rapidly growing industry, how do top
officials and their constituents see legalization?
“There are a certain number of
folks, like myself, who were pretty reticent about
it to begin with,” said House Speaker Dickey Lee
Hullinghorst, a Democrat. But “the sky didn’t
fall. Everything seems to be working pretty well.”
That’s in line with the view of
voters, according to a November 2015 survey. The
poll found 53 percent believe legalizing marijuana
has been good for the state, while 39 percent
believe it has been bad.
And Dr. Larry Wolk, the top
medical official in Colorado’s
public health department, said that since
legalization no large troubling public health
trends have cropped up yet. But he noted
sporadic reports of impaired driving and people
getting violently ill from ingesting too much
marijuana in edibles, such as candy bars.
He said this month new data
indicate that the biggest
increases in marijuana hospitalizations have
been seen among out-of-staters, who might be
naive about the drug’s effects.
All marijuana, including
medical, is subject to standard state and local
sales tax in Colorado.
But recreational marijuana is also subject to an
additional 10 percent special state tax, along
with additional local marijuana taxes. And there’s
also a 15 percent excise tax on wholesale
transfers of recreational marijuana, that ends up
raising retail prices.
For producers, the tax picture
is among the many complexities of running a
Sally Vander Veer, president of
one of the state’s largest dispensaries and
cultivation operations, which has 70 employees and
a payroll of about $3.8 million a year, is bullish
on her rapidly expanding business. Medicine Man
has a 40 percent profit margin, she said. But her
company struggles with what she estimates to be an
effective tax rate of nearly 50 percent, as well
as having to deal almost exclusively in cash.
Because marijuana remains illegal under federal
law, access to banking services is severely
The state saw $135 million in
tax and fee revenue last year from the
recreational and medical marijuana industry, money
that has gone to, among other efforts, education
for youth and law enforcement on the drug.
State Representative Jonathan
Singer, a leader on marijuana issues in the House,
said what legalization has done is “allowed
marijuana to pay its own way,” with the cost of
regulation paid for by dispensaries and consumers.
enforcement officials offer a more negative,
chaotic view. They paint a picture of a quickly
evolving array of laws, regulations, and
ordinances that outpace their enforcement tools
for related issues, such as drugged driving.
For one, they say, there’s no
quick, reliable check to see whether drivers are
too high to operate a vehicle safely, as
there is for blood-alcohol level. And there’s no
easy way to determine whether food products in a
vehicle are infused with pot.
“You have no ability to test
the gummy bear laying there on the dashboard,”
said Chief John Jackson of the Greenwood Village,
Colo., Police Department said.
“Edibles pose a problem because
there is no way to tell the potency of it, there
is no way to test it in the field. And no law
enforcement officer is going to lick it and say,
‘Well, there’s marijuana, THC in that.’ ” (THC is
the primary psychoactive compound in marijuana.)
Jackson, former president of
the Colorado Association of Chiefs of Police, and
other police officials said legalization simply
moved much faster than law enforcement officers’
ability to keep up with it.
Jackson, who sounded
beleaguered in an interview, said a fallacy of
legalization is that it would give law enforcement
time back to focus on more serious, complicated
criminal issues and bigger drug problems.
Two years and two months into
full legalization, he said, “we’re not seeing
Another problem with edible
marijuana products, said Dr. Michael DiStefano,
who directs emergency medicine clinical operations
only top-level pediatric trauma center: the
inability of kids to distinguish between normal
products and those infused with THC.
When marijuana is “handled
responsibly, it’s not an issue for children’s
health. The problem is a lot of these edibles,” he
said. “They look like regular candy. . . . There’s
no way to discern what is an edible gummy bear
that has THC in it, versus a regular gummy bear.
In fact, you cannot distinguish them unless
they’re in the package.”
He said he’s seen an uptick in
kids admitted to the ER at Children’s Hospital Colorado
— to about 15 last year — ill from accidentally
ingesting edible marijuana-infused foods since the
drug became legal for recreational use in January
Indeed, the most grinding
concerns and the biggest question marks focus on
kids and young adults. But the effects of
legalization on children remain effectively
unknown with about two years of experience and
Opponents of legalization point
to a federal drug survey that estimates Colorado
had the highest level of any state of 12- to
17-year-olds reporting marijuana use in the last
30 days for 2013-2014. But the change in
Colorado’s youth use rate from 2012-2013 — before
full legalization— to 2013-2014 — partly after —
was not statistically significant. And federal
statisticians say the findings are not sufficient
to draw conclusions about changes in youth
marijuana use patterns as a result of
Wolk, the top doctor at the
state’s public health department, said Colorado
marijuana use has always been high compared with
the rest of the country.
“No pun intended,” he said, “we
started high and stayed high — use hasn’t
increased in a statistically significant way since
legalization. Those that were using before are
still using now, among youths and adults.”
For some opponents, a big
concern isn’t just what has happened so far, but
what’s yet to come. They worry that the burgeoning
marijuana industry, like alcohol and tobacco
before it, could eventually use its profits to
gain clout and subvert attempts at regulation.
Jeffrey Zinsmeister, executive
vice president of Smart Approaches to Marijuana, a
national nonprofit group cofounded by former US
representative Patrick Kennedy that opposes
legalization and commercialization of marijuana,
said there have been several red flags.
“You’re seeing this headlong
rush into another addictive industry without
knowing what widespread marijuana use is going to
do to society,” he warned. “And the signs from Colorado
are not good.”
Officials say their primary
concerns include: adults being
able to legally consume the drug normalizes it
for kids; Joe
Camel-like ads that make pot smoking seem
appealing to kids; and legalization
increasing availability, thus making the barrier
to getting marijuana lower.
“I worry about normalization, I
worry about commercialization, and I worry about
availability,” said Andrew Freedman, who directs
Governor John Hickenlooper’s Office of Marijuana
“What happens to people over
the long term, especially kids over the long term,
as they see marijuana normalized, as they see
people advertising for marijuana, and as
accessibility becomes greater and greater?” he
asked. “Kids who are, right now, saying, ‘No
thanks,’ will that change over time?”
Freedman and other people
deeply involved in the day-to-day oversight of the
new market say it functions pretty smoothly. But they
emphasize the broader question of whether or not
legalization ends up a success will probably
take five or 10 years to answer fully.
can be reached at email@example.com.
Follow him on Twitter @jm_bos. Click here to
subscribe to his weekday e-mail update on
File this Under U S Constitution or Religious
September 22, 2016
A 300 page report
issued by the United States Council on Civil Rights
(USCCR) on 7 September of 2016, has caused a righteous
outcry from many religious and other liberty loving
institutions. You may rightly question the authority
of a commission that blindly ignores the
fundamental liberty of individuals alluded to in the
first amendment of the Bill of Rights of the U.S.
Constitution. The commission, headed by chairman
Martin R Castro, appointed by President Obama in 2011,
suffers a serious blind spot of vision.
The USCCR recommends particular protections for people
who fall within a variety of groups designated by
particular labels adopted over the years, offering these
groups special privileges beyond that of
"regular" Americans, those generic citizens, whose basic
liberties were noted and codified in the founding
documents of our country to be protected from the
encroachment of the rules and restrictions and
regulations of an ever-growing totalitarian government which
has usurped some non-existent power to brand my conscience
and beliefs as "intolerant" or
There is a blind spot on the part of the commission that
does not recognize the freedom of faith-abiding people
of conscience to live by the tenets of their respective
religions, that do not infringe upon health and welfare
There are a number of links to explore- first of all a
link to the report itself, followed by reactions and
comments of a variety of faith-based organizations, as
well as the watchdog groups that recognize the freedoms
that our Constitution attempted to protect.
U.S. Slams Israel for New West Bank Settlement
September 1, 2016
(JTA) — The U.S. State Department condemned the
announcement that an Israeli planning committee
approved the construction of hundreds of housing units
in four West Bank settlements.
“We’re deeply concerned by the government’s
announcement to advance plans for these settlement
units in the West Bank,” State Department Spokesman
John Kirby said Wednesday, in answer to a reporter’s
question during a briefing, hours after reports of the
approval. “Since the Quartet report came out, we have
seen a very significant acceleration of Israeli
settlement activity that runs directly counter to the
conclusions of the report. So far this year, Israel
has promoted plans for over 2,500 units, including
over 700 units retroactively approved in the West
Kirby said that the State Department is “particularly
troubled by the policy of retroactively approving
unauthorized settlement units and outposts that are
themselves illegal under Israeli law. These policies
have effectively given the Israeli Government a green
light for the pervasive advancement of settlement
activity in a new and potentially unlimited way. This
significant expansion of the settlement enterprise
poses a very serious and growing threat to the
viability of the two-state solution.”
“Potentially unlimited” is a recent term used by the
State Department, and seems to indicate that State
believes Israel wants to annex the West Bank.
The Civil Administration’s High Planning Committee on
Wednesday approved construction of 234 living units in
Elkana in the northern West Bank, designated to be a
nursing home; 30 homes in Beit Arye in the northern
West Bank; and 20 homes in the Jerusalem ring
neighborhood of Givat Zeev.
The committee also retroactively legalized 179 housing
units built in the 1980s in Ofarim, part of the Beit
The approval comes less than a week after Nickolay
Mladenov, the U.N. special coordinator for the Middle
East peace process, criticized Israel for continuing
to build in West Bank settlements and neighborhoods in
eastern Jerusalem, going against the recommendations
issued in June by the Mideast Quartet. The Quartet,
made up of the United States, Russia, the European
Union and the U.N., called on Israel in June to stop
building in the settlements and on the Palestinians to
In Saudi Arabia, signs of an effort to break the
By Michael Wilner, Herb Keinon 08/30/2016 21:30
Saudi state-run media appears to be softening its
reporting on Israel, running unprecedented columns
floating the prospect of direct relations, quoting
Israeli officials and filling its news holes with fewer
negative stories on Israel’s relationship with the
The public shift – from outlets such as al-Arabiya and
Riyadh newspaper, among other local or state-owned
outlets – reflects secret, under-the-table contact
between the Arab kingdom and the Jewish state that has
been a work in progress for years.
But media movement marks a new phase in that diplomatic
process, according to some experts on the kingdom, who
see signs of a monarchy effort to prepare Saudi society
for debate that had previously been off limits.
“The key here is that everybody understands this is not
going to turn around overnight, and its probably not
going to convince a lot of people. But that’s not really
the point,” said David Pollock, an expert on the region
at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. “The
point is to establish this as a debatable proposition,
and to break the taboo of even debating about it – about
the prospect of normalizing relations.”
“Once you’ve done that, you’ve made it legitimate,”
Pollock added. “There are suddenly two sides.”
One column called for Saudis to “leave behind” their
“hatred of Jews,” and another said that talks between
the two nations should be direct, without
intermediaries, based on Saudi national interests.
Those national interests appear to align with Israel’s,
primarily on the issue of Iran, which has dominated the
Saudi news cycle in recent months– from Islamic Republic
activities in Lebanon, Syria and Yemen.
Saudi conservative Islamists view Iran, the Shi’ite and
Hezbollah as “much worse than the Jews,” Pollock
commented. “So that kind of takes the edge off – and
actually pushes them in the same direction.”
An official in the Foreign Ministry said there have been
some positive signals from Riyadh – such as an interview
that ambassador to Washington Ron Dermer gave recently
to the Saudi media, and one that Foreign Ministry
Director-General Dore Gold had last year with a Saudi
website – but that there is no sense this is part of an
organized campaign to prepare the ground for better
“These are positive signs, but I would not say they are
game changers,” the official said. “Good things are
But rather than seeing this as trying to prepare the
ground for something, I’d say it is a sign that there is
A source in the Prime Minister’s Office concurred. He
acknowledged a few articles of late from “some pretty
big journalists” against hating Jews, but said that he
knows nothing about it coming from the top as part of an
Quiet talks between Israel and Saudi Arabia began
leaking into public view in June, when a handshake
between Gold and former Saudi government adviser Anwar
Eshki raised eyebrows. Putting to rest any doubt that
the handshake was an isolated affair, Eshki led a Saudi
delegation to Jerusalem the following month that was
Saudi Prince Turki bin Faisal Al Saud also shared a
stage with Israel’s former military intelligence chief,
Amos Yadlin, in 2014.
A similar effort is under way in Egypt, Pollock said.
“I gather from talking to some of the people who are
directly involved with it that there are different camps
– different schools of thought in these countries,” said
Pollock. “There is definitely internal opposition, and
it’s very delicate, and fragile. But in both countries,
the government and the establishment media – and their
spin-offs and allies – are pursuing a deliberate
strategy to do this.”
International org calls for federalization of U.S.
law enforcement to be 'beefed up,' cover all of
by Robert Romano | Updated 04 Aug 2016 at 10:04 AM
“The Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice
has provided oversight and recommendations for
improvement of police services in a number of cities
with consent decrees. This is one of the most effective
ways to reduce discrimination in law enforcement and it
needs to be beefed up and increased to cover as many of
the 18,000-plus local law enforcement jurisdictions.”
That was United Nations Rapporteur Maina Kai on July 27,
a representative of the U.N. Human Rights Council, who
on the tail-end of touring the U.S., endorsed a
little-known and yet highly controversial practice by
the Justice Department to effect a federal takeover of
local police and corrections departments.
The Obama administration has been
pursuing the federal takeover of local police right
under Congress' nose — and Republicans in Congress were
apparently unaware it was happening.
The consent decrees are already being implemented in
Newark, New Jersey; Miami, Florida; Los Angeles,
California; Ferguson, Missouri; Chicago, Illinois; and
Here's how it works: the Civil Rights Division at the
Department of Justice files a lawsuit in federal court
against a city, county, or state, alleging
constitutional and civil rights violations by the police
or at a corrections facility. It is done under 42 U.S.C.
§ 14141, a section of the 1994 Violent Crime Control and
Law Enforcement Act, granting the attorney general the
power to prosecute law enforcement misconduct. The
municipality then simply agrees to the judicial finding
— without contest — and the result is a wide-reaching
federal court order that imposes onerous regulations on
The federal court orders are designed to undo Rudy
Giuliani-style policing tactics that were effective at
reducing crime in big cities in the 1990s and 2000s.
In short, the much-feared nationalization of local
police departments is already being initiated by the
Obama administration's Justice Department. And somehow
Federal requirements include how searches are conducted,
what constitutes legitimate use of force, the mandatory
use of on-body cameras by the police, and so forth. The
agreements impose years-long compliance review regimes,
implementation deadlines, and regular reviews by federal
bureaucrats. This makes local police directly answerable
to the Civil Rights Division at the DOJ.
One example includes a 77-page March 30 consent decree
between the department and the City of Newark, New
Jersey, that resulted from a 2011 investigation, a 2014
series of findings by the Civil Rights Division, and
then finally a federal lawsuit alleging police
misconduct in the U.S. District Court in the District of
The original complaint alleged that the Newark Police
Department (NPD) "has engaged in a pattern or practice
of constitutional violations in its stop and arrest
practices, responses to individuals' exercise of their
rights under the First Amendment, uses of force, and
theft by officers. The investigation also revealed that
the pattern or practice of constitutional violations
stems in part from deficiencies in NPD's systems that
are designed to prevent and detect misconduct, including
its systems for reviewing force and investigating
complaints regarding officer conduct."
The city of Newark, via the consent decree, agreed to
the allegations and to implement a "comprehensive and
agency-wide policies and procedures that are consistent
with and incorporate all substantive requirements of
this agreement," including rules on stops, searches, use
of force, etc. The city has two years to implement, with
the full agreement lasting five years. Meaning — even if
the political parties change power in the city of
Newark, the new mayor and city council would still be
required to implement the court order.
U.S. Cities with Active DOJ Consent Decrees
City State Police
Chicago IL 11944
Los Angeles CA 10000
Miami FL 1259
Ferguson MO 54
Source: Americans for Limited Government
These consent decrees are in essence regulations. That,
is, without the niceties of administrative procedures
requirements, public comments, or even any congressional
Remarkably, congressional offices contacted by this
author were generally unaware of the regulation of local
policing via DOJ consent decrees with cities — even
though the agreements have been implemented for years.
Not a single hearing or word of protest has occurred on
The lack of oversight is pathetic enough — but to make
matters even worse, this could actually be the first
step in a new wide-ranging body of federal rules on
The Department of Housing and Urban Development
regulation "Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing"
(AFFH) actually originated as a consent decree in 2009
against Westchester County, New York, requiring
affordable housing units to be built in the county.
Afterward, Republican Robert Astorino was elected county
executive and yet was still required to implement the
Westchester became the basis for AFFH, where every city
and county in the country that accepts any part of $3
billion of annual community development block grants to
1,200 recipient cities and counties now has to comply
with HUD's dictates on zoning along racial and income
DOJ may very well end up doing the same thing with the
local police — that is, if Congress does not wise up to
what's really happening and defund implementation of 42
U.S.C. § 14141. This is dangerous. What is most chilling
is how far along the Obama Justice Department is in this
process. The breadth of regulation here shatters any
notion of local governance or federalism. The Obama
administration has been pursuing the federal takeover of
local police right under Congress' nose — and
Republicans in Congress were apparently unaware it
No doubt the practice would continue under a Hillary
Clinton administration too. Do you want a Clinton
Justice Department running your local police force? That
is how important the election in November suddenly
becomes — with law and order already hanging in the
balance and police being targeted by domestic terrorists
in the slayings in Dallas and Baton Rouge.
As Americans for Limited Government President Rick
Manning noted in a statement calling attention to the
U.N.'s interest in the DOJ program and urging Congress
to act, "The fact that the U.N. Human Rights Council —
which includes some of the worst abusers of human rights
in the world that hate the U.S. — is cheering for this
DOJ national takeover of the police should tell members
everything they need to know. It's time to support local
police, not render them impotent via federal
restrictions against maintaining law and order. No less
than the very existence of local government is at
Robert Romano is the senior editor of Americans for
Panic Mode: Khizr Khan Deletes Law Firm
Website that Specialized in Muslim Immigration
by Matthew Boyle Breitbart August 2, 2016
Khizr Khan, the Muslim Gold Star father that
Democrats and their allies media wide have been using
to hammer GOP presidential nominee Donald J. Trump,
has deleted his law firm’s website from the Internet.
This development is significant, as his website
proved—as Breitbart News and others have reported—that
he financially benefits from unfettered pay-to-play
Muslim migration into America.
A snapshot of his now deleted
website, as captured by the Wayback Machine which
takes snapshots archiving various websites on the
Internet, shows that as a lawyer he engages in
procurement of EB5 immigration visas and other
“Related Immigration Services.”
The website is completely removed
from the Internet, and instead directs visitors to the
URL at which it once was to a page parking the URL run
The EB5 program, which helps
wealthy foreigners usually from the Middle East
essentially buy their way into America, is fraught
with corruption. U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee
chairman Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) has detailed such
corruption over the past several months, and in
February issued a blistering statement about it.
Islamic State Answers Pope Francis: Ours Is a
Religious War, and We Hate You
breitbart.com Thomas D. Williams, Ph.D. 2 Aug 2016
The Islamic State terror group
has come out publicly to reject Pope Francis’ claims
that the war being waged by Islamic terrorists is not
religious in nature, assuring the pontiff that their
sole motivation is religious and sanctioned by Allah
in the Qur’an.
In the most recent issue of Dabiq, the propaganda
magazine of the Islamic State, ISIS criticizes Pope
Francis for his naïveté in clinging to the conviction
that Muslims want peace and that acts of Islamic terror
are economically motivated.
“This is a divinely-warranted war between the Muslim
nation and the nations of disbelief,” the authors state
in an article titled “By the Sword.”
The Islamic State directly attacks Francis for claiming
that “authentic Islam and the proper reading of the
Quran are opposed to every form of violence,” saying
that by doing this, “Francis continues to hide behind a
deceptive veil of ‘good will,’ covering his actual
intentions of pacifying the Muslim nation.”
Pope Francis “has struggled against reality” in his
efforts to portray Islam as a religion of peace, the
article insists, before going on to urge all Muslims to
take up the sword of jihad, the “greatest obligation” of
a true Muslim.
Despite the obviously religious nature of their attacks,
the article states, “many people in Crusader countries
express shock and even disgust that Islamic State
leadership ‘uses religion to justify violence.’”
“Indeed, waging jihad – spreading the rule of Allah by
the sword – is an obligation found in the Quran, the
word of our Lord,” it reads.
“The blood of the disbelievers is obligatory to spill by
default. The command is clear. Kill the disbelievers, as
Allah said, ‘Then kill the polytheists wherever you find
The Islamic State also reacted to Pope Francis’s
description of recent acts of Islamic terror as
“senseless violence,” insisting that there is nothing
senseless about it.
“The gist of the matter is that there is indeed a rhyme
to our terrorism, warfare, ruthlessness, and brutality,”
they declare, adding that their hatred for the Christian
West is absolute and implacable.
The fact is, even if you were to stop bombing us,
imprisoning us, torturing us, vilifying us, and usurping
our lands, we would continue to hate you because our
primary reason for hating you will not cease to exist
until you embrace Islam. Even if you were to pay jizyah
[tax for infidels] and live under the authority of Islam
in humiliation, we would continue to hate you.
In a recent press conference, Pope Francis told
journalists that the world is at war. “But it’s a
real war, not a religious war,” he said.
“It’s a war of interests, a war for money. A war for
natural resources and for the dominion of the peoples.”
PM draws parallel to attacks
in Israel and across Middle East, says Islamic
terror driven by ‘fanatical hatred’
from Times of Israel by Raoul Wootliff June 16, 2016,
In an English language video
posted to Facebook on Wednesday, Prime Minister
Benjamin Netanyahu said the casualties in Sunday’s
deadly nightclub shooting in Orlando were victims of
homophobia and intolerance and called on people not to
give in to “hate and fear.”
Here is the complete text of his statement:
"In Orlando, a terrorist walks
into a nightclub and murders nearly 50 human beings.
Sons and daughters, brothers and sisters cut down in
They did nothing wrong. They
were dancing with friends, they were enjoying music
with loved ones.
Why did the terrorist murder
Because he was driven by a fanatical hatred.
He targeted the LGBT community
because he believed they were evil.
Now, the murderer wasn't
Regimes and terrorist
organizations around the world ruthlessly persecute
the LGBT community.
In Syria, ISIS throws gays off
In Iran, the regime hangs gays from cranes.
Too many people have remained
silent in the face of this awful persecution.
This week's shooting wasn't
merely an attack on the LGBT community. It was an
attack on all of us, on our common values of freedom
and diversity and choice.
Radical Islamist terror makes
no distinction between shades of infidel.
This week it was gays in
Orlando. A few days before that it was Jews in Tel
Aviv. Before that it was music fans in Paris;
Travelers in Brussels; Yazidis in Iraq; Community
workers in San Bernardino; Christians and
journalists in Syria.
All of us are targets.
We believe that all people are
created in the image of God.
ISIS, by contrast, believes
that all people who aren't just like them deserve to
We will not be terrified into
submission. We will fight back. And we will triumph.
Today I ask you to reach out
to friends in the LGBT community. Comfort them. Tell
them you stand together, we stand together as one.
And that you will always remember the victims. Tell
them they will never be alone, that we are all one
family deserving of dignity, deserving of life.
I have no doubt that those who
seek to spread hate and fear will be defeated.
Working together we will
defeat them even faster.
We need to stand united,
resolute in the belief that all people regardless of
their sexual orientation, regardless of their race,
regardless of their ethnicity, all people deserve
respect, deserve dignity."
Chutzpah: EU Building on Israeli Land, Warning
the JewishPress.com by David Israel Published June 1, 2016
The European Union over the past few years has been
erecting illegal structures in Area C, which according
to the Oslo agreement is under Israeli control. After
several rightwing NGOs have complained, the IDF set out
to demolish some of those structures. By rights, they
should have taken all of them down, what with their
being built without a permit. Israeli media publicized
the demolition of those structures, some of which
actually flew the EU flag — like those mythical cat
burglars who leave their personal business card in the
open safe. But last week the EU chutzpah has reached
unprecedented highs when Lars Faaborg-Andersen, the
Danish diplomat who since 2013 has been the ambassador
of the European Union to Jerusalem, met with Coordinator
of Government Activities in the Territories Gen. Yoav
Mordechai, to warn him that if Israel keeps demolishing
those “Palestinian homes” it would damage relations with
According to a senior Israeli official who spoke to
Ha’aretz, the meeting was tense and loaded. The
ambassador accused Israel of hurting the “weakest
Palestinian populations.” What the senior official did
not share was that those structures are a means by which
the EU has been challenging Israel’s claim to
sovereignty in Area C (the PA is currently in charge in
Areas A and B). It has to do with the diametrically
opposed views of Israel and the EU of what constitutes
the “two-state solution.”
Essentially, the Israeli politicians who are now in
government, as well as more than a few in the
opposition, envision a future peace deal that turns
Areas A and B into an independent Palestinian entity,
either as a state or an autonomy. The same Israeli
leaders envision some permanent legal solution for the
upwards of 400 thousand Jews living in Judea and
Samaria, all of them in Area C, most likely with Israel
annexing the large settlement clusters and giving away
the rest of the land.
Virtually no one outside Israel supports this idea at
the moment. Even Israel’s best friends in the world
envision the ousting of the Jews from Area C, possibly
while allowing Israel to retain eastern Jerusalem. How
would that actually be done—no one cares to say, nor
where would Israel gather the tens of billions of
dollars required for such a move, never mind whether the
settler population would acquiesce or opt instead for
resistance that would make the traumatic evacuation of
8,000 Jews from Gaza’s Gush Katif look like a picnic.
Meanwhile, while Area C in Israel’s view is eventually
going to be annexed as part of a peace deal — to the
Europeans Area C is Palestinian land ready to be
Which is why the EU has been relentless at challenging
Israel’s claim to Area C. And it’s why they’ve come up
with the delusional notion that taking down 531 illegal
Arab structures in 2015, 75 of which had been built by
the EU, was damaging the two-state solution. Because the
two-state solution the Europeans envision is without any
Jews in Area C.
For the same reason, Ambassador Faaborg-Andersen was
complaining that Israel is quick to condemn and demolish
those illegal structures, but at the same time refuses
to give Arabs permits to build legally in Area C.
Because while the Arabs view Area C as soon to be part
of free Palestine, Israelis plan to keep most of it,
thank you very much.
There’s going to be another meeting with the EU envoy,
on June 15, this time at the Israeli foreign ministry.
The Europeans are going to demand a freeze on
demolishing Arab structures in Area C, while at the same
time also demanding a freeze on Jewish construction in
the same Area C. And at some point something will have
About the Author: David writes news at
ISIS Kills Scores of Christians in Retaken Syrian
By Conor Gaffey Newsweek.com 4/11/16
The Islamic State militant group (ISIS) killed scores of
Christians when they captured a Syrian town recently
liberated by the government, a Syrian Christian leader
ISIS swept into the town of Al-Qaryatain in August 2015,
kidnapping at least 230 civilians including dozens of
Christians in the central Syrian town, which lies 104
kilometers (65 miles) southwest of Palmyra. The town had
a population of some 2,000 Syriac Catholics and Orthodox
Christians prior to the outbreak of civil war in Syria
in 2011, but this had dropped to just 300 before ISIS
Al-Qaryatain was retaken by Syrian government forces
with the backing of Russian airstrikes earlier in April
and reports are just beginning to emerge of life under
the extremist group for civilians in the town. Patriarch
Ignatius Aphrem II, the head of the Syrian Orthodox
Church, told the BBC on Sunday that 21 Christians were
murdered when ISIS first captured the city.
Some died trying to escape while others were killed for
violating the terms of contracts they had signed
requiring them to submit to the extremists’
interpretation of Islamic law. Hundreds of Christians in
Al-Qaryatain were reportedly forced to sign so-called
dhimmi contracts, which enabled them to live under ISIS
rule in the town. The patriarch added that five other
Christians are missing and presumed dead, while ransoms
had been paid to ISIS to secure the release of the rest
of the Christians.
The civil war in Syria has had a devastating impact on
the country’s Christian contingent, which made up
approximately 10 percent of Syria’s population before
the outbreak of the conflict. The European Parliament
stated in October 2015 that about 40 percent of Syria’s
Christian population—or 700,000 people—had fled the
NOTE: Jesus Christ was crucified in Jerusalem, was dead
for three days, and rose from the dead, and walked among
us for forty days until his Ascension. After the
Pentecost, when the Holy Spirit came to the Apostles,
they spread out to different areas of the land to spread
the good news, of our salvation. One of the first places
they went to was what is now Syria, which was the home
of Simon Peter. Not only does ISIS eradicate people who
do not bow down to their cult they attempt to erase the
ancient traces of preceding times like in Palmyra which
was a Roman outpost in Syria, from the first or second
century after the year of our Lord. Click
here to view more about that.
R.I.P. Justice Scalia
Feb. 18, 2016
It is hard to imagine a greater
loss to Liberty in America than has occurred in the
passing of Justice Antonin Scalia. His understanding
of the Constitution as a pact between free people
and government, and our protection from oppressive
government, was unparalleled.
The fact that 30% of Americans do not know who he
was, speaks volumes about the state of our Union and
our education system.
My words and thoughts are totally inadequate but you
can easily find more about the great man's life and
here for a link to wikipedia. Or click
here to read the thoughts of the other
Justices on the Supreme Court about him.
R.I.P. Justice Scalia.
Shariah Law at work in the Obama Administration
Obama DHS scrubs records of hundreds of Muslim
Published: 7 Feb 2016 World Net Daily Pamela Geller
Not only did the Obama
administration scrub counter-terror programs of jihad
and Islam, now we find out that his administration
scrubbed the records of Muslim terrorists. If the
enemedia were not aligned with the jihad force, this
would be front-page news across the nation.
An agent of the Department of Homeland Security, or DHS,
for 15 years, Philip Haney, reported Friday that after
the Christmas Day underwear bomber, Umar Farouk
Abdulmutallab, tried to blow up a crowded passenger jet
over Detroit, “President Obama threw the intelligence
community under the bus for its failure to ‘connect the
dots.’ He said, ‘This was not a failure to collect
intelligence; it was a failure to integrate and
understand the intelligence that we already had.'”
Haney revealed: “Most Americans were unaware of the
enormous damage to morale at the Department of Homeland
Security, where I worked, his condemnation caused. His
words infuriated many of us because we knew his
administration had been engaged in a bureaucratic effort
to destroy the raw material – the actual intelligence we
had collected for years, and erase those dots. The dots
constitute the intelligence needed to keep Americans
safe, and the Obama administration was ordering they be
What Haney discloses is truly shocking: “Just before
that Christmas Day attack, in early November 2009, I was
ordered by my superiors at the Department of Homeland
Security to delete or modify several hundred records of
individuals tied to designated Islamist terror groups
like Hamas from the important federal database, the
Treasury Enforcement Communications System (TECS). These
types of records are the basis for any ability to
‘connect dots.’ Every day, DHS Customs and Border
Protection officers watch entering and exiting many
individuals associated with known terrorist
affiliations, then look for patterns. Enforcing a
political scrubbing of records of Muslims greatly
affected our ability to do that. Even worse, going
forward, my colleagues and I were prohibited from
entering pertinent information into the database.”
Who gave the order to scrub the records of Muslims with
ties to terror groups?
These new shocking revelations come fresh on the heels
of whistleblower testimony in the wake of the San
Bernardino jihad slaughter, revealing that the Obama
administration shut down investigations into jihadists
in America (and quite possible the San Bernardino
shooters) at the request of the Department of State and
the DHS’ own Civil Rights and Civil Liberties Division.
Haney noted: “They claimed that since the Islamist
groups in question were not Specially Designated
Terrorist Organizations (SDTOs) tracking individuals
related to these groups was a violation of the
travelers’ civil liberties. These were almost
exclusively foreign nationals: When were they granted
the civil rights and liberties of American citizens?”
How is this not impeachable? When did foreign terrorists
get civil rights?
Haney described how he began investigating scores of
individuals with links to the traditionalist Islamic
Indo-Pakistani Deobandi movement, and its related
offshoots, prominently, Tablighi Jamaat.
I have reported on this infiltration for years. I
reported on it extensively in my book, “Stop the
Islamization of America: A Practical Guide to the
Resistance.” Obama has partnered with terror-tied groups
such as the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the
Islamic Society of North America, the Muslim American
Society and others. The stealth jihad in the information
battle-space has led to the vigorous enforcement of
blasphemy laws under the Shariah, as Obama ordered that
counter-terror training materials must avoid all
reference to Islam and jihad. Under Islamic law, it is
prohibited to criticize Islam.
The Obama administration is Shariah-compliant at all
costs. Its number one priority is to protect Islam, even
when it puts American lives at risk. The cold-blooded
slaughter of Americans in the homeland by Muslims has
not tempered Obama’s Shariah enthusiasm. On the
contrary, Garland, Fort Hood, Chattanooga, UCMED, San
Bernardino, etc., have accelerated it.
My civil liberties and your civil liberties are being
abridged in accordance with the blasphemy laws under
Shariah. My organization is engaged in 15 different
free-speech lawsuits against various cities. Our
free-speech lawsuit against Boston is heading to the
Supreme Court, because even though truthful, our ads
violate the laws of Shariah (“do not criticize Islam”).
We are being forced to adhere to Shariah mores, but
jihad murderers are given sanctuary and protection – to
The moral, or in this case the immoral, of the story is
this: Jihad terror works.
Pamela Geller is the publisher of AtlasShrugs.com and
the author of the WND Books title "Stop the
Islamization of America: A Practical Guide to the
Wisconsin firm fires Muslims in prayer dispute
Religious breaks disrupted production at lawn mower,
Published: 02/04/2016 (ABC News) A civil liberties group said
Wednesday that it plans to file federal discrimination
and harassment complaints after a Wisconsin manufacturer
fired seven Muslim employees for violating a company
break policy that doesn’t provide extra time for prayer.
Ariens Co. terminated the workers in a dispute that
began last month when it moved to enforce an existing
rule of two 10-minute breaks per work shift and dozens
of Muslim staffers of Somali descent walked off the job
Of the 53 employees involved, 32 have abided with the
policy, 14 resigned and seven were terminated Tuesday,
according to Ariens spokeswoman Ann Stilp. The news of
the terminations was first reported by WLUK-TV in Green
If shouting 'No!' doesn't work, then swat attacker
World Net Daily Published: 02/03/2016 by Leo Hohmann
A public-service advertisement running on Finland TV
instructs women in the Scandinavian country on how to
fend off a rapist.
But rather than pull out a handgun or even pepper
spray, the women of Finland are taught to confront
their attackers with bare hands and a purse.
Rape epidemics have engulfed Finland, Sweden and
Germany in a sea of fear since the mass influx of
migrants from the Middle East and North Africa began
two years ago.
Alan Gottlieb, executive vice president and
founder of the Second Amendment Foundation, said he
found the video laughable.
Anti-Shariah activist and author Pamela Geller posted
the video on her website earlier this week under the
title "It just gets more absurd."
Netanyahu: Islamic terrorism is flooding the
world from Jakarta to California
The prime minister says the struggle against
terrorism will take time but that Israel is fighting
Jerusalem Post by JPOST.COM STAFF BEN HARTMAN 02/04/2016
Islamic terrorism is flooding the world and inciting
millions from Jakarta to Africa and all the way to
California, said Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
during a trip on Thursday to the Jerusalem hospital
treating a Border Police officer who was injured in
yesterday's attack at the Damascus Gate in Jerusalem's
Netanyahu praised the courage of the security forces
and the courage and strength the Border Police officer
shown during Wednesday's attack. He also expressed his
condolences to the family of Border Police officer
Hadar Cohen who was killed in the combined shooting
and stabbing attack.
Three Arab terrorists wielding machine guns, pipe
bombs and knives carried out the attack on Wednesday
killing Cohen, 19, who died of her wounds shortly
after being rushed to the capital's Hadassa University
Medical Center at Mt. Scopus. Her partner, Ravit, was
seriously wounded and underwent emergency surgery at
the hospital. As of Thursday morning she was
considered to be in moderate condition.
"We are all saddened by the death of Hadar Cohen, a
real hero. We all embrace the family," Netanyahu said.
The prime minister emphasized that a great effort is
being put into the fight against terrorism, during the
lengthy effort to defeat it.
"It will take time, it is a long struggle," Netanyahu
said. "We are in this fight, it is not passing us by,
but we are fighting it with great force and will
continue to do so."
"Kabatiya has been closed off while the IDF and the
Shin bet make widespread arrests of wanted suspects,
we have cancelled many work permits and the
attorney-general informed me yesterday that he has
added a number of houses belonging to terrorists to be
slated for demolition," Netanyahu said of the West
Bank village, from where Wednesday's terrorists
Police Commissioner Inspector General Roni Alsheich
paid a visit to the wounded Border Police officer on
During his visit, Alsheich praised the two teenager
Border Police officers who had recently drafted into
the force for preventing a major terror attack.
Alsheich said “I have no doubt that a terror cell that
comes with an arsenal like this has every intention of
carrying out a massive attack.”
Ravit and Cohen were part of a three-man patrol along
with their commander. They had only been drafted a
couple months before and their deployment at Damascus
Gate in East Jerusalem was part of their training.
Since the attack yesterday, police and the Border
Police have drawn criticism for the fact that the two
women were posted at one of the most dangerous
flashpoints in the country so soon after they were
The three terrorists were responsible for the attack
were identified as Ahmed Rajeh Zakarneh, Muhammad
Ahmed Kmail, and Ahmed Najeh Abu al-Rub. All three
were shot dead at the scene. Their explosives did not
detonate and were later neutralized by a police bomb
No holds barred: Torrent of anti-Israel advice found
in Hillary’s emails
Jerusalem Post - Opinion By Shmuley Boteach 02/01/2016
Clandestinely stirring up potentially violent protests
in an attempt to try and force Israel to go against its
best interests? Advice like this was par for the course
with Clinton’s advisers.
It’s already been established that one of Hillary
Clinton’s most trusted advisers, Sid
Blumenthal, sent her anti-Israel articles, ideas
and advice during her time as secretary of state. But
the stream of anti-Israel advice received by Clinton was
much more comprehensive.
In the entire forced dump of Clinton’s emails, you will
be hard pressed to find a single one sympathetic toward
the Jewish state from any of the people she relied on.
The negative, poisonous approach to Israel throughout
this email expose shows the atmosphere that she had
established around herself. These emails seem to
demonstrate that a huge segment of her close advisers
and confidantes were attacking Israel, condemning Prime
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and strategizing how to
force Israel to withdraw from Judea and Samaria at all
This was occurring against the backdrop of Israel’s
recent Gaza withdrawal, which led to the takeover of
Gaza by Hamas. There is almost zero mention of the huge
risks to Israel’s security in withdrawing as Clinton and
the Obama administration did everything they could to
pressure Israel to capitulate to their demands.
Take a look at a sampling of the advice being sent to
Clinton from her many advisers that we have now become
Berger was Clinton’s foreign policy adviser during
her 2008 presidential campaign. In September of 2010 he
sent her ideas on how to pressure Israel to make
concessions for peace. Berger acknowledged “how fragile
is Abbas’s political position,” and how “Palestinians
are in disarray,” and that “failure is a real
possibility.” Berger was well aware of, and informed
Hillary of, the very real possibility that Israel would
be placing its national security at grave risk in a deal
that would very likely fail and lead to a Hamas
But Berger felt the risks to Israeli lives were worth
He advised the need to make Netanyahu feel “uneasy about
incurring our displeasure....”
Berger emphasizes the need “to convince the prime
minister – through various forms of overt persuasion and
implicit pressure – to make the necessary compromises”
and talks of the “possibility – to turn his position
Astoundingly, Berger seems to accuse the Jews in America
of racism toward Obama. He writes, “At a political
level, the past year has clearly demonstrated the degree
to which the U.S. has been hamstrung by its low ratings
in Israel and among important segments of the domestic
Jewish constituency....” He then adds, “Domestically, he
faces a reservoir of skepticism on this issue which
reflects many factors, including inexcusable prejudice.”
Anne Marie Slaughter was Clinton’s director of policy
planning from 2009-2011. She wrote to Clinton in
September of 2010 and devised a scheme to encourage
wealthy philanthropists to pledge millions to the
Palestinians (which no doubt would have been embezzled
by Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and his
cronies as were other funds).
She wrote: “This may be a crazy idea.... Suppose we
launched a “Pledge for Palestine” campaign... Such a
campaign among billionaires/multi-millionaires around
the world would reflect a strong vote of confidence in
the building of a Palestinian state....”
She adds: “There would also be a certain shaming effect
re Israelis who, would be building settlements in the
face of a pledge for peace.”
Clinton’s response to this email: “I am very interested-
pls flesh out. Thx.”
Russo, one of Clinton’s aides and currently her
campaign’s “director of correspondence and briefings”
sent an email in April of 2012 informing her of
Netanyahu’s father’s death and advising her to give him
a condolence call. Included with Russo’s
email is an extremely biased article attacking both
Netanyahu and his father, describing them as virulently
racist warmongers and calling the elder Netanyahu “a
behindthe- scenes adviser to his son, the most powerful
person in Israel.”
The article noted that “Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu repeatedly denied that his father was a
one-dimensional ideologue. He further emphasized that he
himself was a different person from his father.”
But then it goes on to say, without providing any proof
whatsoever, “Israelis seemed in the dark about the
extent of paternal influence on their leader,” and “To
understand Bibi, you have to understand the father.”
One might be forgiven for questioning Clinton’s sympathy
and sincerity when she later placed the call and gave
Netanyahu her condolences.
Pickering, former US ambassador to Israel, wrote
to Clinton on December 18, 2011, and suggested a secret
plan to stir up major Palestinian protests in an attempt
to force the Israeli government into peace negotiations.
He stated that the protests “must be all and only women.
Why? On the Palestinian side the male culture is to use
Pickering’s goal was to ignite protests that would
engulf the West Bank, “just like Tahrir square.” He adds
that the Palestinian “leadership has shied away from
this idea because they can’t control it,” and they are
“afraid of being replaced.”
This idiotic reasoning that somehow only women would
participate and things would stay peaceful is obviously
absurd. As Pickering himself notes, “Palestinian men
will not for long patiently demonstrate – they will be
inclined over time and much too soon to be frustrated
and use force. Their male culture comes close to
Regardless, Pickering writes that the protests could be
used against Israel “to influence the political
The idea was as dangerous for the Palestinians as it was
for Israel. As Pickering himself admits, widespread
protests could overthrow Abbas’ government, and if
Palestinian men joined in, widespread violence would
inevitably break out. It would obviously be impossible
to prevent men from participating in these
Yet Pickering felt this extreme risk was worth taking,
even if it meant the replacement of Abbas with another
Hamas-led government. And even if meant violence
breaking out across the West Bank leading to a third
intifada and the murder of countless Jews. He also
emphasizes the need to hide all US involvement in this
plot. Clinton forwarded this email to Monica Hanley and
asked her to “pls print.”
Clandestinely stirring up potentially violent protests
in an attempt to try and force Israel to go against its
best interests? Advice like this was par for the course
when it came to Clinton’s advisers.
In a follow-up column we’ll illuminate even more
anti-Israel advice that was given the then-secretary of
state. Sadly, there was just so much of it.
The author, “America’s Rabbi,” is the international
bestselling author of 30 books including his upcoming
The Israel Warrior’s Handbook. Follow him on Twitter @
Senate resolution calls for a US constitutional
Posted: February 3, 2016 at 10:37 am
KFQD Radio Anchorage, Alaska
JUNEAU, Alaska (AP) – An Alaska Senate committee is
set to consider a resolution calling for a convention
of the states to propose a countermand, or veto,
amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
The measure calls on legislators in the other 49
states to apply for a convention as well.
In his sponsor statement, Chugiak Republican Senator
Bill Stoltze says the resolution is meant to restore
the balance of power between the states and the
The resolution calls for a convention of states to
amend the U.S. Constitution and provide states with
the power to vote on nullifying federal laws.
Click here to realize that Alaska is not the
only state that has called for a Constitutional
Turkish Court Rules Government Failed to Protect
Christians Killed in Malatya
Civil suit results in order to pay damages to
relatives of victims.
January 27, 2016
By Our Middle East Correspondent
Morning Star News
ISTANBUL, Turkey (Morning Star News) – A Turkish court
ruled on Tuesday (Jan. 26) that the government was
negligent in its duty to protect three Christians who
were tortured and killed in 2007 and ordered it
to pay damages to the victims’ families.
The Malatya Administrative Court ruled that, nearly nine
years ago, the Interior Ministry and the Malatya
Governor’s Office ignored reliable intelligence that
Turkish nationalists were targeting the three Christians
days prior to the April 2007 killings.
At the present rate, it is doubtful what year money
might actually change hands
Posted By David Barton On 01/27/2016 @ 10:32 pm In Education,Faith,Front
Page,Politics,U.S.,World World Net Daily
Democrats have long heralded Thomas Jefferson (along
with Andrew Jackson) as the founder of their Party.
They traditionally hold annual Jefferson-Jackson Day
fundraising dinners, and President Obama is one of
their most sought after speakers. But this past year,
Democrats began to remove any mention of Jefferson’s
name from their functions. They claim that this
is because Jefferson was a bigoted racist, iii but
this excuse is historically inaccurate, based on an
errant modern portrayal.
If you doubt this, ask yourself why black civil rights
leaders over the past two centuries (such as Frederick
Douglass, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr, Benjamin
Banneker, Francis Grimke, Henry Highland Garnett, and
so many others) openly praised Jefferson as a racial
civil rights pioneer and champion, as did
abolitionists such as John Quincy Adams, Abraham
Lincoln, and others They recognized that Jefferson led
a vocal lifelong campaign to emancipate all slaves in
the United States, but that the laws of Virginia
prevented him from freeing his own slaves. (All of
this is covered in my new book, “The Jefferson
The real reason that Democrats should discard
Jefferson is that he held nearly no policy position
similar to those Democrats hold today. Consider
fifteen major categories where the policies of
Presidents Jefferson and Obama are opposite.
Posted By Jeff Knox On 01/27/2016 @ 7:42 pm
World Net Daily
The occupation of a remote wildlife refuge
turned violent yesterday when federal agents stopped
two vehicles carrying protesters to a town hall
meeting in John Day, Oregon. Victoria Sharp, a
passenger in one of those vehicles, has reported that
federal agents opened fire on the group without
provocation after conflicting and confusing demands
for the protesters to surrender. Sharp reported that
shots were first fired at Ryan Payne as he complied
with orders to show his hands out of the window of the
vehicle in which she was riding, but that the shots
missed. Payne was calling for police to not shoot, as
there were women in the vehicle, and exited the
vehicle, asking that the women be allowed out.
At this point, LaVoy Finicum, one of the spokesmen for
the occupiers, who was driving the vehicle in which
Ms. Sharp was riding, yelled out the window that they
were going to go talk to the sheriff (at the meeting
in John Day), or that agents could just shoot him. He
told the passengers to get down, and drove forward,
precipitating heavy gunfire from the agents, and
crashing the vehicle into a snowbank.
Sharp said that Finicum then exited the vehicle, hands
in the air, yelling, “Just shoot me then!” A volley of
shots rang out, and Finicum fell to his back, hands
still over his head, and was shot several more times
on the ground, Sharp said.
According to Sharp, agents continued shooting at the
car, striking Ryan Bundy in the shoulder as he
shielded her on the floorboard, and deploying tear gas
before finally taking the rest of the group into
custody. She also claims that none of the protesters
fired a shot or even touched a gun during the
The full audio of Victoria Sharp’s account is posted
on YouTube, and comes across as very credible.
Listen to Victoria Sharp’s testimony:
Another report suggested that Finicum "charged" at
police after exiting the vehicle but does not dispute
the claim that his hands were in the air. Cliven
Bundy, father of Ammon and Ryan Bundy, leaders of the
occupation who were both taken into custody during the
incident, has further charged that, not only were
Finicum's hands in the air, but he was not armed at
In interviews during the occupation protest, Finicum,
a soft-spoken rancher and father of 11 from Arizona,
had insisted that he would rather be killed than "put
in a cement box" prison. He said that some things were
more important than life, and that freedom was one of
The occupation was initiated in protest of the
re-incarceration of a pair of Oregon ranchers who had
been convicted of terrorism for starting two
controlled burns on their graze lands back in 2001 and
2005. The ranchers, father and son Dwight and Steven
Hammond, were initially sentenced to, and served short
sentences and fined $400,000 for their actions, but a
federal appeals court later concluded that the judge
in the case had improperly waived a five-year minimum
sentence for the charges, and the two were resentenced
to that minimum and ordered to return to prison.
I reported on the Hammond case and the resulting
protests a few weeks ago in this column, pointing out
that the stated objective of the protest was being
lost in the news coverage of the protest itself. Ammon
Bundy and his compatriots appeared to be more
interested in generating a confrontation with federal
authorities than in drawing attention to the Hammonds
and the abusive practices of federal agencies that led
to their plight.
The death of LaVoy Finicum is a needless tragedy.
Federal authorities had wisely been taking a hands-off
approach to the occupation, denying Bundy and his
friends the opportunity for the tense stand-off they
seemed to be seeking. Unfortunately, politicians like
Oregon's Democrat Gov. Kate Brown, took the occupation
as a personal affront and were calling for law
enforcement to take more aggressive action to put a
stop to the flagrant defiance of federal authority.
The result is a martyr for the fringe and escalation
of the situation from a nuisance to a volatile and
dangerous level. The strategy was clearly to "remove
the head of the snake" by capturing the leaders of the
occupation, but what if those leaders were the cooler
heads that were keeping the protest calm and peaceful?
With the death of Finicum, in circumstances that some
are calling murder, a fuse has been lit, and unless
authorities can and do quickly produce evidence that
their actions were clearly justified, this could blow
up in a very ugly way. And it all could have been
Realistically, what harm were the protesters doing?
They were occupying buildings of a remote wildlife
refuge in a sparsely populated area of the country in
the dead of winter. They were making no threats,
harming no one, and getting less and less attention
from an unsympathetic media. They were not supported
by any national or state militia organizations, and
their whole agenda had pretty well fizzled.
I wish Ammon Bundy had taken my advice, negotiated a
peaceful end to the situation and sent his supporters
home to their families weeks ago. That didn't happen,
and what happens next is anyone's guess. The remaining
occupiers must be concerned about what might happen to
them if they try to leave, especially in light of the
death of Finicum, and by setting up roadblocks and
checkpoints, authorities have now committed manpower
and resources to potentially long, cold, uncomfortable
duty that can't help but engender deeper frustration
and resentment between police and occupiers. Any trust
that might have developed is completely out the
window. Worse, the bloodshed may provoke other groups
to step in and escalate the mess even further.
Perhaps this week's arrests will bring this whole
thing to a close, but I fear that it is more likely
signaling the beginning of something much worse than
protesters occupying a wilderness outpost.
Christian persecution reached record high in 2015,
By William J. Cadigan, CNN Sun January 17, 2016
Christians flee persecution in the middle east
(CNN)Last year was the most violent for Christians in
modern history, rising to "a level akin to ethnic
cleansing," according to a new report by Open Doors
USA, a watchdog group that advocates for Christians.
In total, the survey found that more than 7,100
Christians were killed in 2015 for "faith-related
reasons," up 3,000 from the previous year, according
to the group's analysis of media reports and other
public information as well as external experts. Open
Door's report is independently audited by the
International Institute of Religious Freedom. Open
Doors USA is an organization that works with
Christians worldwide to "equip and encourage" those
living under persecution while also helping churches
in America advocate for the persecuted around the
The group's report defines Christian persecution "as
any hostility experienced as a result of one's
identification with Christ." Open Doors found this
persecution ranged from imprisonment, torture,
beheadings and rape to the loss of home and assets,
the loss of a job, or even rejection from a community.
Speaking at the National Press Club on Wednesday,
David Curry, president and CEO of Open Doors,
introduced the annual ranking of countries based on
their severity of Christian persecution, evaluating
levels of violence worldwide to formulate the global
top 50. The list, now in its 25th year, is topped by
North Korea for the 14th consecutive time. Curry says
that "pariah states" like North Korea are especially
hostile toward Christians.
According to the report, however, much of the
persecution faced by Christians occurs in
predominantly Muslim nations, many of which are
"failed states" that fail to protect any of their
citizens' religious liberty.
The presence of Islamic extremist factions across the
world in 2015 brought religious persecution for not
only Christians, but also Muslims, Yazidis and other
religious minorities, the report found. Notably, Iraq
(No. 2) and Syria (No. 5) are the epicenter of ISIS'
so called "caliphate," while Afghanistan (4), Pakistan
(6), Iran (9) and Libya (10) all have elements of
Curry said that while "Islamic extremism is one of the
driving forces" of Christian persecution,
"peace-loving Muslims can make an impact on that part
of their culture."
ISIS and other extremist groups are spreading, the
report highlights, not just in the Middle East but
around the world. Curry said he hoped the list would
bring attention to the plight of Christians across the
globe as they face a "total lack of religious
freedom," forced migration and even genocide.
In fact, part of the reason for the annual list,
according to Curry, is to highlight for U.S.
policymakers the continued persecution of Christians
by our "geopolitical allies." Countries such as Saudi
Arabia and India are key global partners for the
United States, yet Open Doors ranks both in its top 50
of persecutors of Christians.
"We believe in religious freedom for all," Curry said,
"and that does not happen in countries that we do
business with every day."
Open Doors also seeks to inspire and inform Christians
in America, using the annual watch list "as a clarion
call to pray, advocate and remember their persecuted
Ethics Complaint Says Big Clinton Donors Got
State Dept Access
The Daily Caller Richard Pollock, Reporter 01/10/2016
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton violated
federal ethics statutes by giving “preferential
treatment” to wealthy political campaign donors and
financial supporters of the Clinton Foundation,
according to a formal complaint filed Friday by the
Foundation for Accountability and Civic Trust.
The non-profit government watchdog group filed the
complaint with the Office of Government Ethics, asking
it to conduct a “full investigation” into Clinton’s
“apparent breach of ethics rules.” A copy of the
complaint was exclusively obtained by The Daily Caller
The organization charged Clinton gave “preferential
treatment to individuals with which she had financial
ties” and “regularly granted access” to rich donors,
celebrities, and even powerful foreign nationals.
The FACT complaint follows the State Department’s latest
release of thousands of Clinton emails that she turned
over to the government more than two years after leaving
the office in 2013. She used a private email address and
a home-brew server in her private New York residence to
conduct official government business throughout her
Number of Muslim-Americans born to Middle Eastern
migrants 'off the charts'
Leo Hohmann Published: 1/06/2016
So-called “home-grown” terrorists such as Syed
Farook, who slaughtered 14 people last month in San
Bernardino, or Muhammad Abdulazeez, who gunned down
five U.S. servicemen in Chattanooga last summer, were
both second-generation Muslim-Americans whose parents
emigrated to the U.S.
Most of the terrorists who attacked Paris in November,
killing 130 people with guns and bombs, were also
described by the media as “home grown jihadists” when
in reality they still represented a foreign culture,
born of Middle Eastern parents who migrated to Europe
and never fully assimilated. And now there is fresh
evidence that this segment of the U.S. population is
Buried in the Social Security data is a count of
babies born with the name Muhammad. While offering a
small sample, the Social Security database is able to
shed light on the growth of second-generation Muslims
in America. It is highly reliable and accurate. It
shows a huge growth pattern.
“A boy named Mohammed born here is likely to grow up
in a Muslim environment and, at the same time, be a
U.S. citizen,” North writes. “So we can get a rough
proxy of the growth of the population of
second-generation Muslim immigrants by noting how many
of them carry these names. (Third-generation babies
are also included.)”
The figures show the huge growth in this population
over the last 50 years, starting in 1964 when only 29
baby boys were named after the Islamic prophet who
lived in the seventh century. By 2014 the number had
soared to 2,931, a more than 100-to-one ratio.
Alabama 2nd state to sue feds over refugee
Suit claims program too secretive
Leo Hohmann Published: 01/07/2016
Alabama has become the second state to sue the
federal government alleging that it has failed to
“consult” with state officials while secretly placing
foreign refugees into communities. The suit claims the
Obama administration has violated the terms of the
Refugee Act of 1980, which says the federal government
“shall consult regularly” with states before
A spokeswoman for Gov. Robert Bentley told the
Associated Press the lawsuit was filed Thursday,
following a similar suit by Texas a month ago.
But an expert on the 1980 law governing refugee
resettlement told WND that neither suit stands a
chance of stopping the flow of refugees into Texas or
Alabama. Richard Thompson, president and chief counsel
of the Thomas More Law Center, said his organization
is not involved in either the Texas or the Alabama
cases because he believes there is a stronger case to
be made on the grounds of the 10th Amendment.
“They filed a suit on the grounds that the feds have
failed to consult with the state on the location of
refugees in the state, and failure to consult is a
term that has no real definition to it. Texas has
filed a similar suit that thus far has not gone
anywhere,” Thompson said. “Thomas More Law Center’s
position is that there is a constitutional claim and
that claim is based on the 10th Amendment.”
Bentley is one of more than two-dozen Republican
governors who opposed the settlement of Syrian
refugees in their states after the Nov. 13 jihadist
attacks that killed 130 people in Paris.
About 80 GOP congressmen have also signed on to
co-sponsor a bill by Rep. Brian Babin, R-Texas, which
would halt all refugee resettlement until the program
can undergo a full investigation into its costs and
its risks to national security.
But the U.S. State Department has continued
distributing Muslim refugees into more than 180 U.S.
cities and towns. They come not only from Syria and
Iraq, but from Somalia, Afghanistan, the Democratic
Republic of Congo, Burma and other countries with
active jihadist movements.
A stronger response is ready and waiting for a taker.
The Ann Arbor, Michigan-based Thomas More Law Center
has been working since June to prepare a case that
would challenge the constitutionality of federal
authority over the refugee program. The program is
administered by the U.S. State Department along with
the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
Office of Refugee Resettlement.
Expanding special rights
to the 2% who choose the LGBT lifestyle in
with excerpts from Christopher Hong Jan 13, 2016 Jacksonville Florida Times-Union
"Jacksonville residents crowded Tuesday’s City Council
meeting to voice their stance on the longstanding
question of whether to expand discrimination
protections to the LGBT community...
Tuesday’s meeting saw the formal introduction of two
bills on the issue. Councilman Tommy Hazouri
introduced a bill to expand the discrimination
protections, while Councilman Bill Gulliford
introduced a bill to let voters decide.
Next month, the council will begin debating those two
bills.... the council defeated similar legislation in
2012. Tuesday’s discussion mostly remained civil, with
council members hearing many of the same arguments
voiced years ago and in a series of community meetings
that (Mayor) Curry hosted late last year.
Supporters of expanding the law said the LGBT
community deserves the same rights and protections
afforded to other minority groups and urged the
council to vote on it.
Opponents, many citing their religious beliefs that
homosexuality is morally wrong, said expanded
protections amounted to a special privilege that would
interfere with small business and could allow men into
women’s restrooms. Many urged council members to let
voters decide the issue.
The full council will debate Hazouri’s and Gulliford’s
bills during special meetings scheduled for Feb. 4,
Feb. 18 and March 3."
Has your voice been heard about this expansion of
Special Rights in Jacksonville FL? Contact
your Mayor and your Council Representatives:
The powers not delegated to the United States by
the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the
States, are reserved to the States respectively, or
to the people.
Alabama chief justice tells judges to halt same-sex
Posted By Bob Unruh On 01/06/2016
World Net Daily
Chief Justice Roy Moore of the Alabama Supreme Court on
Wednesday ordered the state’s probate judges, the only
ones in the state who are allowed to issue marriage
licenses, to follow the state’s Sanctity of Marriage
Amendment and its Marriage Protection Act until the full
state Supreme Court rules on the issue.
Please click here to read the article in its entirety
January 7, 2016
Subject: URGENT: Stop the LGBT Law
is URGENT. Please forward this
email to others.
Unless we do something
about it, just 10
City Council members will force a LGBT
favoritism law upon Jacksonville, Duval County,
Florida – a law which will restrict Free
Speech and religious liberties and which will
allow men, claiming to be women, to enter women’s
and children’s dormitories, and dressing, locker
and rest rooms – to view them in all stages of
you can help
prevent this. How? LET THE PEOPLE
DECIDE this issue.
your support for the Public Referendum
proposed by Councilman Gulliford. Complete and
Petition found here,
where there are instructions. The Petition
form can be filled out on your computer and returned
this letter. Email it to as
many people as possible.
Petition signatures. Download
form, print copies and distribute them at
churches and other venues.
fund the campaign. And please
urge friends to donate
here . They will understand that it
takes funding to fight this battle.
key City Council meetings. The
next City Council meeting is January 12, 2016 at
5:00 P.M. Followed by the Finance Committee meeting
on Jan 19 at 9:30 A.M. Click
here to view regularly scheduled City Council
meetings and plan accordingly.
Please act quickly.
Time is short. Please act now to complete the forms
Thanks for all your help,
and for your support in the past.
Non-Muslims encouraged to wear Islamic head scarf at
here to read a thoughtful piece posted by Leo
Hohmann on WND 12/14/2015.This news occurred
courtesy of American educational systems and Muslim
Student Associations (M.S.A.), a known front group for
the Muslim Brotherhood and an unindicted co-conspirator
in the largest terror-financing trial ever held on U.S.
(The above may more be correctly filed under
"How Political Correctness is destroying our nation")
If your blood
pressure is not high enough yet, click
here to read about the Virginia high school
Geography class that passed around the Koran and
included a lesson practicing Arabic calligraphy, or
the California School with the Muslim fight song.
Wonder when is the last time they sang "Onward,
Christian Soldiers" and passed around a Bible.
(Thanks again to wnd.com)
Facebook censors Michael Savage post of Muslims
Photos show demonstrators warning 'Behead those who
Published: 12/10/2015 at 3:38 PM World Net Daily
When Muslims held a demonstration in London in 2006 in
protest of cartoons depicting their founder, Muhammad,
many bore signs warning of beheading and death for
“those who insult Islam.”
Talk-radio host Michael Savage thought that amid a
fierce national debate on whether or not to allow
Muslims to immigrate to the United States, it would be
worth considering what has been happening in Europe.
So, he posted on his Facebook page photographs of the
Feb. 3, 2006, demonstration outside the Embassy of
Denmark in London. The focus of protest was the
publication of editorial cartoons depicting Muhammad in
the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten. Snopes.com
verified that the photographs were taken at the London
demonstration, with the exception of one, which was from
a protest in the English city of Luton (which is 33
Wednesday night, Facebook removed Savage’s post,
explaining the social media site “determined that it
violated Facebook community standards.”
After Muslim Truckers Refuse
to Deliver Beer… Obama Does the Unbelievable
From Top Right News on October
by Bill Callen | Top Right News
Barack Obama just sided with Muslims to enforce
Islamic Sharia Law on an American business, leaving
many outraged and two FoxNews anchors absolutely
Two Muslim truck drivers — former Somali “refugees”
— refused to make deliveries of beer to stores
for their employer. So they were understandably fired.
They claimed it was a violation of their religious
beliefs — even though Islam bars only the consumption
of alcohol. And, as the employer pointed out, the
workers knew they would have to deliver
alcohol before they took the job.
So guess what Barack Obama did.
He SUED the employers it on behalf of the pair,
Mahad Abass Mohamed and Abdkiarim Hassan Bulshale,
claiming religious discrimination.
Obama’s Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)
represented them in the case, providing tens of
thousands of taxpayer dollars in legal support,
judicial filings and court appearances against the
employer who was hopelessly outgunned by the Federal
And this week the Muslims were awarded a stunning
$240,000 by a jury, presided over by an Obama
appointee who stunned analysts by allowing the case to
go forward at all.
Hard to believe, isn't it? Why would someone accept a
job knowing he is unable to perform the work?? This
has been fact checked
at this link and it is, sadly, true.
from the Washington Post (which commentator and
author Mark Levin colorfully refers to as the
San Bernardino suspects identified; probe turns to
What we know about the
shooting in San Bernardino
said heavily armed gunmen killed 14 people and
injured 17 others during a holiday party for
county employees. Here's what we know about the
mass shooting. (The Washington
William Dauber, Sarah Kaplan and Brian MurphyDecember 3 at 9:46 AM
SAN BERNARDINO, Calif. —
Investigators grappled Thursday on two main fronts
after the deadliest U.S. mass shooting since the
Sandy Hook Elementary School bloodshed: Seeking
clues on the motives and apparent commando-style
planning by a couple who turned an office holiday
party into a killing field with at least 14 dead.
“I don’t think they grabbed the guns and tactical
gear on a spur-of-the-moment thing,” said San
Bernardino Police Chief Jarrod Burguan hours after
Wednesday’s rampage and a police shootout that left
both alleged shooters dead several miles from the
In addition, at least 17 people were wounded, some
Bit by bit, profiles emerged of the suspects: Syed
Rizwan Farook, 28, a former county health worker who
was born in the United States,
and a woman described as his Pakistani-born wife,
Tashfeen Malik, 27.
As many as
three people opened fire at a nonprofit facility
Bernardino where a
holiday party for county employees was underway,
killing at least 14 people and injuring 17 others.
Also being pieced together were the hour-by-hour
events before police say the suspects stormed a
conference center wearing black masks and armed with
assault rifles and handguns.
Earlier in the day, the suspects dropped off their
6-month-old daughter with Farook’s mother, saying
they had a doctor’s appointment, said Hussam
Ayloush, executive director of the Council on
American-Islamic Relations in Los Angeles.
Later, Farook attended the office party hosted by
the San Bernardino County Department of Public
Health, where he had once worked as an inspector,
earning more than $71,000 in salary and benefits in
2013. Farook then left the gathering “under
circumstances described as angry or something of
that nature,” said Burguan, the police chief.
Police said Farook then returned with Malik and the
pair opened fire on the crowd before fleeing in a
black SUV, which was later spotted about two miles
from the shooting site with the area under
near-total lockdown. Some unconfirmed reports quoted
police saying the attackers also were outfitted with
A shootout with police left both suspects dead and
the vehicle peppered with bullet holes and with its
“They came prepared to do what they did, as if they
were on a mission,” Burguan said.
Muslim community leader Ayloush described Malik as
a Pakistani-born immigrant who lived in Saudi Arabia
before marrying Farook. Two FBI officials told The
Washington Post that Farook was not under FBI
investigation. It’s not clear whether he had links
to any other people under FBI investigation.
A third person seen fleeing the shootout was also
taken into custody, but it remained unclear whether
there was any link to the suspect.
“Right now, as we continue to drill down our
information, it looks like we have two shooters,”
Burguan said. “We are comfortable that the two
shooters that went into the building are the two
shooters that are deceased.”
But many other questions loomed.
Among them was whether the attack was pre-planned
and why the suspects amassed assault-style gear and
arms in a tidy residential neighborhood about 50
miles east of Los Angeles where the couple was often
seen relaxing in their back yard.
Burguan declined to comment on what may have
precipitated the attack. But, he said, the couple
seemed too well-prepared for the shooting to be
viewed as a spontaneous act.
He added: “We have not ruled out terrorism.”
“I have no idea why he would do something like
this,” Farhan Khan, who is married to Farook’s
sister, said at a news conference. “I cannot express
how sad I am today.”
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and
Explosives said it recovered two rifles and two
handguns and is conducting “urgent traces” on their
An ATF official, speaking on condition of
anonymity, said two of the weapons were purchased
legally, and investigations continued into the other
“Whatever the results of this investigation ... one
thing is clear: Violence like this has no place in
this country,” said Attorney General Loretta Lynch,
speaking at a White House event on incarceration and
Recent mass shootings in the United States
have typically involved a lone gunman, often someone
mentally unstable or consumed with rage.
Multiple-shooter events are extremely rare:
According to a recent FBI report on 160 “active
shooter incidents” between 2000 and 2013, all but
two involved a single shooter.
the big questions that will come up repeatedly is:
‘Is this terrorism?’ ” said David Bowdich, assistant
director in charge of the FBI’s Los Angeles
office, said at an earlier news conference. “It is a
possibility. We are making some adjustments to our
investigation. It is a possibility. But we don’t
know that yet. And we are not willing to go down
that road yet.”
The two left behind little in the way of a paper
trail — no apparent criminal record, no Facebook
page or Twitter account.
An online dating profile for a “farooksyed49” from
resembles the suspect described by law enforcement.
The profile, on the “Indian matrimonial and dating
service” iMilap.com, describes a 22-year-old man
from a “religious but modern family.”
“I work for county as health, safety and
environmental inspector,” it reads. “Enjoy working
on vintage and modern cars, read religious books,
enjoy eating out sometimes travel and just hang out
in back yard doing target practice with younger
sister and friends.”
The man in the profile picture is tall and bearded,
posed jauntily in front of a nondescript building
flanked by palm trees and a smooth, green lawn. He
writes that he is interested in “matrimonial.”
Speaking to the Los Angeles Times, co-workers who
knew Farook described him as a quiet and polite man
who held no obvious grudges against people in the
office. They said he recently traveled to Saudi Arabia
and returned with a woman he met online.
The officer had recently held a shower for the
couple’s new baby, and the two seemed to be “living
the American dream,” said Patrick Baccari, a fellow
inspector who shared a cubicle with Farook.
Griselda Reisinger, who worked with Farook before
leaving the agency in May, and other colleagues told
the Los Angeles Times that Farook was a devout
Muslim but not vocal about his religion.
The site of the shooting, the InlandRegionalCenter, is
a three-building complex that houses a conference
center and serves more than 30,000 people with
developmental disabilities. Nearly 700 staff members
work there, according to the organization’s Facebook
page, promoting “independence, inclusion, and
empowerment.” The organization says that it is
committed to eliminating barriers for individuals
with developmental disabilities so that they can
“live a typical lifestyle.”
The center held its own holiday party Tuesday, and
a brief video clip showed staffers and clients in
wheelchairs dancing to the 1980 mega-hit
“Celebration” by Kool & the Gang.
On Wednesday, the city’s public health department
had rented out the conference center’s first-floor
banquet room for a holiday party, complete with
Christmas trees and other decorations. The event was
in full swing when the first reports of gunfire
came, at 10:59 a.m.
Dauber is a freelance writer. Kaplan and Murphy
reported from Washington.
Freelance writer Martha Groves in San Bernardino and
staff writers Joel Achenbach, Mark Berman, Adam
Goldman, Lindsey Bever, Niraj Chokshi, Ann
Gerhart, Sari Horwitz, Elahe Izadi, Wesley Lowery,
Kevin Sullivan, Julie Tate, Justin Wm. Moyer,
Yanan Wang and Alice Crites in Washington
contributed to this report.
Sarah Kaplan is a reporter for
Brian Murphy joined the Post
after more than 20 years as a foreign
correspondent and bureau chief for the Associated
Press in Europe and the Middle
East. He has reported from more
than 50 countries and has written three books.
FROM A CONCERNED
CITIZEN OF JACKSONVILLE
the so-called “Human Rights Ordinance”
(H.R.O.- not to be confused with the Holy
Roman Empire which failed centuries ago), a
second attempt to introduce another
"SPECIAL" group with "SPECIAL" rights
un-accorded to you- the average moral
citizen of our city.
it is notenough to have EQUAL
rights and EQUAL justice... at least
that is what the paid lobbyists trolling
around city hall seem to indicate.
consternation is that as a color-blind, sexual
orientation-blind, class-blind person, now the
city wants to FORCE me to look at the
private sexual inclinations
of others, whether I choose to or not, and
then may misinterpret my response, putting me
at risk of criminal actions against me!
We have inalienable
God-given rights- Life, Liberty
and the Pursuit of Happiness to mention a few.
These are specifically mentioned in the U.S.
Constitution which purpose was to limit
the power and control of general
government. As if that was not enough to
confirm the “fully-worthy” status of all,
there is also a Florida Commission on Human
Relations, and Civil Rights. We need the city
to spend time and our money on this also?
of Jacksonville, Lenny Curry, has mandated
three fact finding meetings, “Community
Conversations”, so that all sides of
the H.R.O. proposal can be heard.
meeting has taken place.... the topic was "Supporting
the Needs and Well-Being of Families"-not
ALL families, evidently- not military families
or racially mixed families or families with
one partner living out of town, or single
parent families. Why a meeting about this
little LGBT segment of families?? Don't all
families have challenges? All households? Is
it the City’s balliwick to give this SPECIAL
consideration, at the expense of our
public safety, roads, and pensions for those
who keep us safe?
meeting was composed of a panel of six, four
of whom were “for” the LGBT Special Privilege
bill. The meeting was attended by several
busloads of LGBT supporters who were shipped
in from outside of the city. Arriving first,
it was only they who were allowed to comment
during the first-come-first served portion of
the meeting. Needless to say, the first
meeting did not prove to be a successful
format to hear “all sides” of the proposal.
Freedoms, Thoughts & Beliefs, Dec.3 at
Auditorium at 1658 Kings Road, Jacksonville, FL32209
Law & its Effects on Business, Dec. 15
at 6 p.m.
Policy Institute at 2800 University Blvd. N.,
is a city struggling to pay the costs
and pensions of our public safety
professionals at JFRD and JSO, to maintain our
infrastructure, and to promote the general
welfare and safety of ALL of our citizens, yet
our elected leaders are spending our resources
discussing how you and I should respond
to the sexual choices of others,
allowing them into public restrooms frequented
by my family and neighbors. If this should
pass, will the city also spend my money to
retrofit bathroom facilities so my kids will
be safe? Will the city require private
businesses to do likewise?
this some thought. It's your city and your tax
you say No No! NO! to this, please contact
your Mayor, Lenny Curry at
This is the time to make your voice and
your priorities for your city of Jacksonville,
Houston faith leaders gear up
for new transgender fight
'We will work with Dallas
pastors to determine how to appropriately respond'
Bob Unruh 11/11/2015
The coalition of pastors
from Houston who defeated lesbian Mayor Annise
Parker’s transgender-rights ordinance – a fight that
included her subpoenas of sermons – now are
volunteering to help pastors in Dallas oppose a
“We will work with Dallas pastors to determine how to
appropriately respond to the wholesale catering by
city council to the radical, anti-faith, anti-family
agenda of the LGBT Human Rights Campaign,” said Rev.
Dave Welch, president of the Texas Pastor Council.
Welch said Dallas’ change to its existing
nondiscrimination ordinance “not only opens but
essentially removes the doors of women’s restrooms,
showers and locker rooms in Dallas, as well as
criminalizes businesses, employees as well as
eventually, churches who attempt to keep men out.”
WND has reported extensively on the Houston fight,
which took nearly two years. It ended last week when
citizens, by order of the state Supreme Court, were
allowed to vote on the measure and soundly rejected
it, 62 percent to 38 percent.
The Houston Equal Rights Ordinance would have banned
discrimination against transgender people, allowing,
for example, men who perceive themselves to be women
to use women’s restrooms, locker rooms and other
gender-specific facilities in the city. Anyone
opposing or obstructing them could have been fined
“Outlasting the Gay Revolution” spells out eight
principles to help Americans with conservative moral
values counter attacks on our freedoms of religion,
speech and conscience by homosexual activists
The Texas Pastor Council’s Welch condemned the change
in the Dallas ordinance as an attack on society’s
“There are many issues that our city governments
should be focused on to improve the city, and this
ordinance patently rejects cornerstones of our
civilization that family is built upon the covenant of
marriage between a man and a woman, that our sex is
embedded in our chromosomes, and this beautiful
created order is a gift from God.”
Welch added, “A bad tree cannot produce good fruit and
a law based on elevating gender confusion to being a
protected class equal with race can only produce harm,
The Dallas law protecting “gender identity and
expression” says the places of public accommodation
that must grant a man who defines his gender as female
full access to women’s facilities are any inn, hotel,
temporary lodging, restaurant, cafeteria, lunchroom,
soda facility, motion picture house, theater, concert
hall, and retail or wholesale establishment selling
goods or services.
The measure, Welch said, is a “bottomless Pandora’s
“Definition A plus Definition B equals exposing girls
and women to violation of their privacy as well as
their safety,” he said.
He said city officials in Dallas should have paid
attention to the Houston vote and learned that pastors
and citizens will react negatively to such a social
“As our very ethnically diverse coalition of pastors
in Houston stated and showed for the last eighteen
months, every one of us are for equal rights for all,
however we cannot allow special rights for a tiny
fraction of society to endanger the safety and freedom
for the rest,” he said.
Stephen Young at the Dallas Observer wrote that Dallas
didn’t pass an ordinance but “adjusted the language of
an ordinance that’s existed since 2002 in a way that
made very little change to how anyone in the city is
He said in Houston, voters denied “protection” to
their fellow residents.
Young said the Dallas ordinance “doesn’t even have the
word restroom in it, and the failed Houston law only
allowed opposite-gender restroom use in a fantasy
world in which trans people don’t exist.”
At the Advocate, Dawn Ennis explained that while
“sexual orientation” has been a protected class for
years, “gender identity” was a class left unprotected.
She noted there was no organized opposition to the
expansion of the sexual identity protections, but
critics say that was because there was very little
notice to the public of the looming change.
Texas Values Action blasted the Dallas law and its
“This Dallas bathroom ordinance will allow men into
women’s bathrooms and that’s why the Dallas city
council is deliberately trying to avoid the people,”
said a statement released by the group’s president,
“Their fast track method of passing this dangerous
bill that threatens the safety of women and children
is the same strategy used in Houston to disenfranchise
voters with their failed bathroom bill. Creating law
behind closed doors and forcing it onto the people the
next morning is a recipe for disaster. These Obama and
D.C. style tactics will not work in Texas. Get ready
for a Texas-sized response.”
“Outlasting the Gay Revolution” spells out eight
principles to help Americans with conservative moral
values counter attacks on our freedoms of religion,
speech and conscience by homosexual activists
The strategy in Houston was to move the ordinance
through the city council quickly. City officials then
tried to invalidate a petition demanding a public
After a months-long court fight, the state Supreme
Court stepped in and ordered the city to repeal the
ordinance or put it on the election ballot in
compliance with the city charter.
Some of the pastors who were targeted by the mayor’s
subpoena have filed a lawsuit charging her with
violating their rights.
It is hard to know where to catalogue the following
... under Politics? Religious Liberties? Islamic
Threat? Christian or Cult? Perhaps "Know They Enemy"?
You be the judge.
40 Mind-Blowing Quotes From
Barack Hussein Obama On Islam And Christianity
by Geoffrey Grider nowtheendbegins.com
Oct 2, 2013
When someone shows you who
they are, believe them
Since 2009, NOW THE END BEGINS has
brought you story after story in detailed accounts of
exactly how Obama feels about Islam, and how he views
Christianity and the Bible. So today, in light of
recent events in Washington, we feel it important that
you know exactly where your president stands in
regards to his faith and his god. Below are 20 quotes
he has made about Islam, and 20 quotes he has made
about Christianity. Nothing edited or mashed up, just
exactly in the context he originally spoke them in
with fully-sourced links so you can see where they
Police Confiscate Mohammed Cartoons At Dutch
by Nick Hallett 9 Nov 2015
Police seized “offensive” Mohammed cartoons during a
demonstration by the Dutch branch of the Patriotic
European Against the Islamisation of the West (PEGIDA)
movement in the city of Utrecht this weekend.
The rally, which attracted around 150 supporters,
criticised the “Islamisation” of the Netherlands, with
demonstrators also expressing their support for the
Freedom Party of Geert Wilders, a noted critic of
DutchNews reports that police arrested 32 people at the
demonstration for a variety of offences including
failing to carry IDs, not following police orders and
displaying “insulting banners”.
One such banner said the “Koran is poison”, while
another claimed “Islamisation is EU-thanasia”.
Video footage emerged of police removing Mohammed
cartoons, although their ultimate fate is unknown.
Utrecht City Council had banned the demonstrators from
marching through the city so they gathered instead in a
park on the outskirts of the city.
The PEGIDA marches started in Dresden, Germany last year
as “evening strolls” through the streets every Monday to
protest against militant and political Islam. The
marches soon grew and spread across the country, but
died down again at the start of this year to point where
most commentators assumed the movement had petered out.
However, as the migrant crisis intensifies in Europe,
especially thanks to German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s
relaxed border policies, the marches have started again
and are growing.
Authorities have hit back, however, charging founder
Lutz Bachmann with hate speech for comments he made in
Facebook posts back in 2014. State prosecutors in Saxony
claim private posts in which Mr Bachmann uses terms such
as “livestock” and “scum” to refer to migrants risked
This weekend in the German capital Berlin, supporters of
the anti-mass migration Alternativ für Deutschland (AfD)
party also held a rally criticising Mrs Merkel’s
immigration policy and calling for her to resign.
The rally passed off largely peacefully, although
violent scuffles broke out between police and
Thousands Of German
People Chant ‘Merkel Must Go’ At Anti-Mass Muslim
by Geoffrey Grider
November 7, 2015
The AFD has seen its popularity surge as Germany
struggles to deal with the huge influx of Muslim
migrants, and is currently campaigning in local
elections in the Saxony-Anhalt region that will be seen
as an indicator of public sentiment on the issue.
The anti-mass Muslim migration Alternativ für
Deutschland (AfD) party held a rally in the German
capital Berlin this afternoon, demanding the resignation
of Chancellor Angela Merkel and calling for the country
to adopt a strong policy on immigration.
German paper Handelsblatt estimates that 5,000 people
joined the rally this afternoon, calling for the
immediate closure of Germany’s borders and introduction
of visa requirements from migrants from the Balkan
states, including Serbia, Bosnia-Herzegovina and
Angry demonstrators chanted “Merkel must go” and
“traitor to the people” under the banner “Asylum has its
limits – red card for Merkel”.
Addressing the crowd, Beatrix von Storch, member of the
European Parliament, accused the German chancellor of
causing "asylum chaos” in Germany.
This was a rally in German from about two weeks ago, as
the German people are being forced to rise up and do
what their government refuses to do.
Although the main protest was largely peaceful, several
counter-protests by pro-migrant activists descended into
violence, with around 40 arrests. Around 800
counter-demonstrators showed up, far lower than
organisers had hoped.
Yesterday, it was reported that the German government
had agreed the downgrade the status of Syrian migrants,
reducing the amount of time they could stay in the
country and banning them from bringing their families.
Today, however, the government did a U-turn on the
Court rules against
Little Sisters of the Poor in Contraceptive Coverage
By Nigel Duara
July 14, 2015
A federal appeals court ruled Tuesday that there is a
limit to how far the government must bend to
accommodate religious objections to the federal
The U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that if
the Colorado-based Little Sisters of the Poor want to
refuse contraceptive coverage to their employees, they
must sign a waiver to be exempted, and that such a
waiver is not a substantial burden on the nuns'
The 2-1 decision is one of the few victories the U.S.
government can claim in defense of the healthcare law
in the contraceptive mandate debate.
Hobby Lobby, a business run by evangelical
Christians, successfully argued before the U.S.
Supreme Court last year that a mandate to provide
contraception to female employees violated their
belief that life begins at conception.
The high court agreed that for-profit organizations
like Hobby Lobby required protection, but did not say
how far such protections would go.
In response, on Aug. 27, 2014, Affordable Care
Act administrators created a waiver for religious
nonprofits that would grant them an exemption from
But the Little Sisters of the Poor, who run the
Mullen Home for the Aged in Denver, argued before a
three-judge panel of the 10th Circuit that the waiver
itself both crosses the nuns’ moral boundary by
endorsing contraceptives and gives control of their
healthcare program to the government.
“Most religious liberty claimants allege that a
generally applicable law or policy without a religious
exception burdens religious exercise,” according to
the decision, noting that most cases begin with
prisoners demanding a religious right.
But in the Little Sisters of the Poor case and
accompanying suits by self-insured religious objectors
and religious universities, the government made clear
attempts to offer a religious exemption, the judges
“Although plaintiffs allege the administrative tasks
required to opt out of the mandate make them complicit
in the overall delivery scheme, opting out instead
relieves them from complicity,” according to the
The judges said the difference between Hobby Lobby
and the Little Sisters of the Poor is that Hobby Lobby
faced fines for every day of noncompliance. Ihe Little
Sisters of the Poor faced no such burden, the judges
10th Circuit Judge Bobby R. Baldock, the lone
dissenter, agreed with the decision on the Little
Sisters of the Poor but said other self-insured groups
were indeed substantially burdened when they faced
fines for refusing to provide contraceptives because
of their religious belief.
May 9, 2015
Dr. Gene A. Youngblood, Pastor
First Conservative Baptist Church
12021 Old St Augustine Rd
Jacksonville, Florida 32258
TO: All news media outlets
It has come to my attention that there are
some in our community, as well as, a few media that
have expressed questions or concerns relating to our
Church-Ministry campus/outdoor marquee, changeable
copy sign and its current message. This marquee
generally has a message change each week. Generally
the message relates in some fashion to those things
and events taking place in our city or nation. As a
pastor and ministry we feel it needful to keep our
citizens informed and at the same time be relevant
through the Word of GOD.
FIRST: Let me state
my deep love and concern for our great city, state,
and nation. I am a Bible believing patriot
with a deep concern over the moral declension. I am
deeply saddened to see the morals and family values
under attack on a national basis. I have invested
the past 50 years of my life in the defense of the
WORD of GOD through religious-theological studies,
pastoral, pulpit, and classroom academic
SECOND: We are profoundly committed to the
preaching-teaching of God’s Word. God’s Word
commands that I “Preach the WORD” (11Tim 4:1-3)
which in the text includes confronting sin. I do not
have the authority OR permission to change any text
of GOD’S Word-THE BIBLE.
THIRD: Our ministry marquee has been used as a tool
to educate, inspire, and caution for over 30 years.
We have dealt with multiple Biblical-Theological
issues that caution and confront sin of whatever
kind. Our prayer is that in our small way we may
make a difference in the lives of all those who pass
by. We do realize that any scriptural absolute may
cause conviction resulting in the attack on the
messenger as well as the message.
FORMALLY: The present message (caution) comes from
the WORD of GOD, The BIBLE as found in a multitude
of Scripture references:
• Romans 1:24-32, deals with
several kinds of Sin, with the focus on those
believing that they are wise and God says that they
are unwise. God then deals with the specific sin of
homosexuality and firmly condemns it.
• I Corinthians 6:9-10, warns that
all (including homosexuals) that commit sin and DO
NOT REPENT will die and go to HELL.
• OTHER text include and is NOT
limited to: Leviticus 20:13, Leviticus 18:22,
Deuteronomy 23:17-18, Galatians 5:19-21, Revelation
21:8, Revelation 22:15
Needless to say, the Scriptures are replete with
GOD’S warnings to all of us that SIN must be
confessed and repented of or HELL is GOD’S judgment
upon sin. The wonder of it all is that God through
Jesus Christ will forgive “ANY” confessed sin that
is repented of.
BECAUSE we love people (yet, as directed in
Scripture to hate the sin), we therefore want to
warn them of the coming Judgment of God on the sin
of Homosexuality (and any other sin that is NOT
repented of). ALL SIN that is not confessed and
repented will cause a person to GO TO HELL (God says
it, I did not originate the Word), God did. In fact,
according to several of the heretofore mentioned
Biblical text remind us of other sin specifically
mentioned in Scripture including; “All Liars,
Prostitutes, Sexually Promiscuous, Idolaters,
Adulterers, Homosexuals, Revilers, Extortioners,
WILL GO TO HELL unless they repent and seek God’s
It is my sincere prayer that perhaps “ONE”
practicing Homosexual will have read our sign and
will REPENT before it is too late and they are cast
into HELL. HELL is a real place and anyone not
believing in the reality of HELL will not change the
temperature of the FLAMES a single degree.
I am eternally grateful to God for allowing me to
preach HIS WORD at a time when our Religious
FREEDOMS are being challenged and FREEDOM of speech
is being challenged, as well as, our (all of us)
Constitutional Liberties are under ATTACK.
Notwithstanding all of the above, I do understand
and sympathize with SOME that are not well
instructed or versed in the BIBLE and thus will
consider our marquee’s message to be incorrect or
un-spiritual. PLEASE allow me to state forthrightly;
we stand on SOLID Biblical TRUTH, therefore we pray
for each person that reads our message (changes
weekly), and prayerfully considers its TRUTH and
FURTHERMORE, I pray that the media will NOT attempt
to thwart or interfere with our FREEDOM OF RELIGIOUS
SPEECH. We also pray that the media will be
cautioned NOT to in any way interfere with or
disrupt ANY worship or other programs or services
conducted in and through FIRST CONSERVATIVE BAPTIST
May God bless and use all in the MEDIA as an
instrument to preserve society and help protect
AMERICA and our great document THE CONSTITUTION.
DR. GENE A. YOUNGBLOOD
Obama blocks Iraqi nun from describing Christian
Posted By Leo Hohmann World Net Daily 05/01/2015 @ 11:52 am In Faith,Front Page,U.S.,World
Sister Diana Momeka is a Dominican Catholic nun
who fled her home in Iraq last August along with 50,000
other Christians and religious minorities escaping ISIS.
A leading conservative is asking why the Obama State
Department is barring a persecuted Iraqi nun from entry
into the United States to share her message about the
brutal treatment of Christians in her country.
Nina Shea of the Hudson Institute’s Center for Religious
Freedom, writes in a National Review op-ed that Sister
Diana Momeka is “an internationally respected and
leading representative of the Nineveh Christians who
have been killed and deported by ISIS.”
Yet this nun is being “barred from coming to Washington
to testify about this catastrophe?”
Sister Diana was the only Christian in the delegation
and the only member blocked from the trip, the
Washington Times reported, leading some of her American
supporters to question why she was singled out.
Shea, in her op-ed titled “With Malice Toward Nun,”
exposed the real reason why Obama denied the visa for
“Sister Diana Momeka of the Dominican
Sisters of Saint Catherine of Siena was informed on
Tuesday by the U.S. consulate in Erbil that her
non-immigrant-visa application has been rejected.
“The reason given in the denial
letter, a copy of which I have obtained, is:
‘You were not able to demonstrate
that your intended activities in the United States would
be consistent with the classification of the visa.’”
Shea further explains:
“She told me in a phone conversation
that, to her face, consular officer Christopher Patch
told her she was denied because she is an ‘IDP’ or
Internally Displaced Person. ‘That really hurt,’ she
said. Essentially, the State Department was calling her
Shea states that the State Department officials made the
determination that the Catholic nun “could be falsely
asserting that she intends to visit Washington when
secretly she could be intending to stay. That would
constitute illegal immigration, and that, of course, is
strictly forbidden. Once here, she could also be at risk
for claiming political asylum, and the U.S. seems
determined to deny ISIS’s Christian victims that
Shea then outlined Sister Diana’s reasons for her visit
and the endorsements she received from two politicians –
one Republican and one Democrat — among others:
“In reality, Sister Diana wanted to
visit for one week in mid-May. She has meetings set up
with the Senate and House foreign-relations committees,
the State Department, USAID, and various NGOs. In
support of her application, Sister Diana had multiple
documents vouching for her and the temporary nature of
her visit. She submitted a letter from her prioress,
Sister Maria Hana. It attested that the nun has been
gainfully employed since last February with the Babel
College of Philosophy and Theology in Erbil, Kurdistan,
and is contracted to teach there in the 2015–16 academic
Sister Diana also submitted an invitation from her
sponsors, two respected Washington-area think tanks, the
Institute for Global Engagement and former congressman
Frank Wolf’s (R., Va.) 21st Century Wilberforce
None of this was good enough for the Obama State
Yet, as Matthew Balan points out in an article for News
Busters, even as the administration denies a visa to a
persecuted Christian nun, it has created a “special
envoy for the human rights of LGBT persons.”
“One wonders if any of the major news media outlets will
pick up the story of Sister Diana,” Balan muses. Just
over a month ago, on 60 Minutes, CBS’s Lara Logan
refreshingly brought new attention to ISIS’s genocidal
campaign against the ancient Christian communities in
Iraq. But since then, there has been scant coverage of
the Islamic extremist group’s persecution of the
religious minority. ”
Sister Diana, along with the town’s 50,000 other, mostly
Christian, residents, were forced out of their homes by
ISIS in the second week of August and fled for their
lives to Kurdish-controlled areas.
“Since then, the 30-something religious woman has served
as a spokesperson for this community, as well as for the
over 100,000 other Christians driven into Kurdistan
under the ISIS ‘convert or die’ policy,” Shea writes.
“Mr. Wolf, who met her in Kurdistan a few months ago,
explained, ‘We had hoped to facilitate her trip to the
States so that she could speak with great candor, as is
her custom, to policymakers. Perhaps just as
significantly, we viewed her as a critical voice to
awaken the church in the West to the suffering of
Christians and other religious minorities in Iraq.’”
congressmen try to boot Islam critic Geert Wilders
Posted By Art Moore On
04/30/2015 @ 7:38 pm In Front Page,Politics,U.S.
Reps. Andre Carson,
D-Ind., Joe Crowley, D-N.Y., and Keith Ellison,
D-Minn., in Washington, D.C., protesting Geert
Wilders visit to the U.S. (Twitter
As one of the world’s most prominent critics of
Islam, Dutch lawmaker Geert Wilders doesn’t go
anywhere without his security detail of as many as
six plainclothes police officers, and he rarely
crosses international borders without causing
political uproar, having already been banned in
Britain at one time.
So it was of little surprise that three U.S.
congressmen urged Secretary of State John Kerry and
Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson to deny
him a visa ahead of his planned visit to the U.S.
this week, due to his alleged ongoing “participation
in inciting anti-Muslim aggression and violence.”
Reps. Keith Ellison, D-Minn., and André Carson,
D-Ind., who both are Muslim, along with Rep. Joe
Crowley, D-N.Y., wrote a letter April 23 citing “the
International Religious Freedom Act which allows the
Department of State to deny entry to a foreign
leader who is responsible for severe violations of
Nevertheless, Wilders – who insists he doesn’t hate
Muslims but believes Western civilization is
threatened by adherents of the Islamic supremacy
taught in the Quran – showed up on Capitol Hill
Wednesday and spoke at two events at the invitation
of Reps. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, and Steve
King’s communications director, Sarah Stevens, told
WND the congressman invited Wilders a month or so
ago to speak at the weekly Conservative Opportunity
Society breakfast he chairs. Wilders spoke Wednesday
on his latest book, “Marked for Death: Islam’s War
Against the West and Me,” and also attended an
evening reception with Congress members and staff
along with representatives of foreign-policy groups
on Capitol Hill.
Ellison, Carson and Crowley showed up Thursday at a
news conference King and Gohmert held for Wilders in
front of the U.S. Capitol and voiced their
opposition to the Dutch newspaper De Telegraaf in a
“Personally, I find it disturbing, but mostly sad,
because, you know, the people of the Netherlands are
a good people, and this is absolutely true, with a
great history of tolerance, great history of giving
art to the world and great gifts,” Ellison said.
“And it’s unfortunate,” the Minnesota congressman
continued, “that someone such as this would come
over here and sort of represent himself as a member
of that society.”
Wilders, for his part, would contend that Ellison
actually is drawing attention to the central issue:
It’s the intolerance of Muslim immigrants and their
refusal to assimilate, Wilders argues, that
threatens the historic Judeo-Christian Dutch culture
that forms the basis of a tolerant, pluralistic
society capable of “giving art to the world and
As for whether or not Wilders represents his
country, in 2009 he remarked: “Half of Holland loves
me and half of Holland hates me. There is no
King was unable to speak to WND due to schedule
constraints, but he was interviewed by the De
Telegraaf reporter in front of the Capitol Thursday,
who asked him for his view of Wilders.
“I think he’s solid and courageous. I introduced
him yesterday as a man who will stand up and speak
the truth – even if he’s under death threats, speak
the truth,” King said in the video interview.
“He’s done that consistently for a decade.”
Wilders is scheduled to be the keynote speaker at
an event Sunday in the Dallas area called the
“Muhammad Art Exhibit and Contest.” Held at the
venue where Muslims hosted a “Stand with the Prophet
in Honor and Respect” conference one week after the
Paris Charlie Hebdo massacre in January, the event’s
organizers, the American Freedom Defense Initiative,
see Wilders as representative of their aggressive
defense of freedom of speech.
ADI is run by author and Atlas Shrugs blogger
Pamela Geller, and author and Jihad Watch Director
Robert Spencer, who themselves have been branded by
Ellison, Carson and their allies as “Islamophobes.”
Geller and Spencer argue their work amounts to
citing the justifications from the Quran and other
Islamic texts used by Muslims who employ violent
acts and other means to assert Islamic supremacy.
Summarizing their complaint, the three protesting
congressmen told Kerry and Johnson that Wilders’
“policy agenda is centered on the principle that
Christian culture is superior to other cultures.”
“He justifies his desire to ban the Quran and Islam
from the Netherlands with depraved comments like,
‘Islam is not a religion, it’s an ideology, the
ideology of a retarded culture.’ We should not be
importing hate speech,” they write.
Wilders’ defenders point out that the Dutch word he
used to describe Islamic culture can be translated
as “backward” rather than “retarded,” insisting that
while Wilders doesn’t mince words, he is no hater of
“I don’t hate Muslims, I hate Islam,” explains
Wilders, the leader of the Party for Freedom, the
fourth-largest party in the Dutch parliament.
That sentiment apparently is of little consolation
to many of the more than 1 billion people who
identify as Muslim, but Wilders contends the
orthodox teaching of Islam derived from Muhammad is
an existential threat to Western civilization.
While he puts the percentage of Islamic extremists
at about 5 to 15 percent of Muslims, he contends
“moderate Islam” doesn’t exist and notes the Quran
itself states that Muslims who accept the Islam’s
holy book in part are “apostates.”
As evidence of the failure to assimilate, in a
speech to parliament last year he cited a study
showing that nearly three-quarters of ethnic Turks
and Moroccans in the Netherlands regard those who
leave the European nation to join jihadists in Syria
as “heroes.” Wilders pointed out that the same
percentage of Dutch Muslims condoned the 9/11
Wilders has been under constant security protection
since November 2004, when two North African Muslims
were accused of planning to murder him and another
outspoken critic of Islam in the parliament, Ayaan
Hirsi Ali. The attack at the Hague came shortly
after the murder of Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh by
a Moroccan national.
Wilders was banned from the U.K. as an “undesirable
person” under Prime Minister Gordon Brown in
February 2009, two days before he was scheduled to
show his short film “Fitna” at the invitation of two
members of the House of Lords. Wilders appealed the
ban to Britain’s Asylum and Immigration Tribunal,
which overturned it in October 2009.
Wilders writings and film “Fitna” warning of the
“Islamization” of the Netherlands and Europe
prompted Turkish, Moroccan and Antillean
organizations in the country to bring charges
against him of criminally insulting religious and
ethnic groups and inciting hatred and
In June 2011, he was acquitted of all charges.
Judge Marcel van Oosten called Wilders’ statements
about Islam “gross and denigrating” but ruled they
didn’t constitute hatred against Muslims and,
therefore, were “acceptable within the context of
Limiting free speech
In their letter, Ellison, Carson and Crowley assert
Wilders’ right to speak freely in the U.S. under the
First Amendment is limited because he allegedly
incites violence and “prejudicial action” against
In the U.S., freedom of speech is a bedrock
principle that distinguishes free societies from
ones living under oppressive regimes. Freedom of
speech, however, is not absolute. It is limited by
the legal and moral understanding that speech that
causes the incitement of violence or prejudicial
action against protected groups is wrong. As Mr.
Wilders continues his pursuit of political power,
granting him entry will embolden him to engage in
further incitement of violence and discrimination
Legal analyst Eugene Volokh noted the incitement
exception to free speech, according to Supreme Court
precedent, is “limited to speech intended to and
likely to produce imminent lawless conduct — conduct
in the coming hours or maybe few days.”
Wilders’ statements, Volokh wrote in a Washington
Post blogpost, appear to be constitutionally
protected, he said, because they “don’t urge any
imminent conduct (or even any criminal conduct, as
opposed to long-term changes in the law). Such
statements’ are “incitement” in the Congressmen’s
opinion only because the Congressmen apparently view
constitutionally unprotected “incitement” (or, as
they term it earlier, “hate speech”) much more
It's hard to say if the following somewhat
abbreviated article should be filed under the truthsthatfree.com
category of Freedom of Speech, Islamic Threat, Israel
and the Land, Religious Liberty or perhaps Politics.
So it is place in our monthly archive.
‘Killing Jews is Worship’ posters will soon
appear on NYC subways and buses
April 22, 2015
‘Killing Jews is Worship’ posters will soon appear on
NYC subways and buses
New Yorkers are used to aggressive advertising.
Banners for breast implants. Billboards for condoms.
But a federal judge’s ruling has opened the door for
far more controversial posters on buses and subways
across the city.
“Killing Jews is Worship that draws us close to
Allah,” reads one such ad next to the image of a young
man in a checkered headscarf. “That’s His Jihad.
The poster is at the center of heated legal debate
over public safety and free speech. On Tuesday, U.S.
District Judge John Koeltl ruled that New York’s
Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) cannot
stop the controversial ad from running on scores of
subway cars and buses.
The MTA has argued that the ad could incite violence
against Jews, but Koeltl rejected that idea.
MTA officials “underestimate the tolerant quality of
New Yorkers and overestimate the potential impact of
these fleeting advertisements,” he ruled. “Moreover,
there is no evidence that seeing one of these
advertisements on the back of a bus would be
sufficient to trigger a violent reaction. Therefore,
these ads — offensive as they may be — are still
entitled to First Amendment protection.”
Making the case all the stranger is that the posters
are not the work of an Islamist group, but rather a
“This is a triumph for liberty and free speech,”
tweeted Pamela Geller, the president of the American
Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI), the group that
purchased the ads and sued the MTA to run them.
New Yorkers are used to aggressive advertising.
Banners for breast implants. Billboards for condoms.
But a federal judge’s ruling has opened the door for
far more controversial posters on buses and subways
across the city.
“Killing Jews is Worship that draws us close to
Allah,” reads one such ad next to the image of a young
man in a checkered headscarf. “That’s His Jihad.
The poster is at the center of heated legal debate
over public safety and free speech. On Tuesday, U.S.
District Judge John Koeltl ruled that New York’s
Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) cannot
stop the controversial ad from running on scores of
subway cars and buses.
The MTA has argued that the ad could incite violence
against Jews, but Koeltl rejected that idea.
MTA officials “underestimate the tolerant quality of
New Yorkers and overestimate the potential impact of
these fleeting advertisements,” he ruled. “Moreover,
there is no evidence that seeing one of these
advertisements on the back of a bus would be
sufficient to trigger a violent reaction. Therefore,
these ads — offensive as they may be — are still
entitled to First Amendment protection.”
Making the case all the stranger is that the posters
are not the work of an Islamist group, but rather a
“This is a triumph for liberty and free speech,”
tweeted Pamela Geller, the president of the American
Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI), the group that
purchased the ads and sued the MTA to run them.
AFDI is not your traditional free speech organization,
however. The “about” section on its Web site starts
out pretty straightforward, then takes a very hard
Whatever you make of the group, AFDI has been
remarkably successful in bringing its message to
America. AFDI has filed at least nine lawsuits across
the country, often against cities or their contractors
that refuse to display their messages.
Those messages include a poster depicting Adolf Hitler
meeting with “the leader of the Muslim world” and
demanding that the United States cut off all aid to
Islamic countries. “In any war between the civilized
man and the savage, support the civilized man,” reads
another AFDI poster. “Support Israel. Defeat Jihad.”
AFDI’s ads have also drawn objections from Muslims.
The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), a
civil liberties group that promotes the rights of
Muslims and better relations between Muslims and
non-Muslims, launched its own public relations
campaign to combat AFDI. In 2012 and 2013, CAIR ran
posters in several U.S. cities promoting peaceful
versions of Islam. “‘#MyJihad is to build friendships
across the aisle.’ What’s yours?” But the ads never
ran in New York due to a disagreement between CAIR and
The poster attributes the “Killing Jews” quote to
“Hamas MTV,” apparently a reference to the Palestinian
group’s odd blend of violence and music videos. The ad
also has a disclaimer at the bottom noting that it is
“a paid advertisement sponsored by” AFDI and “does not
imply MTA’s endorsement.”
But MTA Security Director Raymond Diaz worried that
the poster would nonetheless incite violence,
primarily against Jews. “What matters is not AFDI’s
intent, but how the ad would be interpreted,” he
wrote. The line “What is yours?” could be considered a
“call to violence,” particularly because the CAIR
posters it was mocking never appeared in New York.
When AFDI pointed out that the exact same poster had
not caused any problems in Chicago or San Francisco,
Diaz argued that New York was different because it is
“the prime terror target” and that the “terrorist
security threat” had grown worse since 2013.
On Tuesday, however, Judge Koeltl tossed out those
arguments and sided with AFDI. The ads could not
reasonably be considered an incitement to violence,
even if someone didn’t understand them.
“The defendants admit that the actual intention of the
advertisement is not to advocate the use of force, but
to parody the CAIR ‘My Jihad’ campaign and to
criticize Hamas and radical Islam. However, they argue
that a reasonable New Yorker would not read the
advertisement this way, but would instead read it as
advocating the killing of Jewish people,” Koeltl
wrote. “The defendants’ theory is thoroughly
After AFDI’s victory, Geller posed for photos outside
the federal courthouse while holding the “Killing
“With our NY win, our ads will make their debut on New
York buses in the coming weeks,” AFDI’s Web site
promises above a “donate” button. “We want to run 100.
Help us make that happen.”
But even if the ads don’t incite violence in New York
City, they could overseas. Earlier this month, Egypt’s
top religious authority called AFDI’s posters “racist”
and issued a fatwa, or official edict, against them.
“This hazardous campaign will leave the gate of
confrontation and clashes wide open instead of
exerting efforts towards peaceful coexistence and
harmony,” according to the edict.
Hamas, the group cited on the ads, has not said
whether it approves of the message.
Official Bans Chaplain From Ministering To
Bereaved Families And Sailors
GOOSE CREEK, S.C.,
March 24, 2015
/PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Today, Liberty
Institute announces that Chaplain Modder's commanding
officer, Captain Jon R. Fahs, issued a "no contact"
order to Chaplain Wes Modder (the military version of
a restraining order), forbidding him from counseling
or ministering to members of his unit. The order comes
on the heels of a tragic death in Modder's unit,
banning him from ministering to grieving sailors and
the deceased sailor's family members.
After a sailor in his unit unexpectedly passed away,
Chaplain Modder immediately sprung into action to
fulfill his usual chaplain duties of providing comfort
and support to the deceased sailor's grieving family.
But just as Chaplain Modder was about to perform those
duties, the Navy informed him of the "no contact"
order, banning him from having any contact with any
personnel from his unit, depriving him of the ability
to comfort them during a time of grief and mourning.
Captain Fahs also banished Chaplain Modder from the
Naval base where Modder is stationed on the day of the
memorial service for the fallen sailor. The order also
comes just days after Captain Fahs denied Chaplain
Modder's request for a religious accommodation to
provide pastoral counseling in accordance with his
faith. (See Captain Fahs' denial letter at
"This Navy official is using the 'no contact' order
as a weapon to punish and humiliate a decorated
military chaplain," said Mike Berry, Liberty Institute
Senior Counsel and Director of Military Affairs. "I am
stunned that he would deny Chaplain Modder the ability
to minister to a grieving family and other sailors."
Liberty Institute President and CEO Kelly Shackelford
said, "Of the most critical times for chaplains, the
death of a colleague is near the top of the list. For
this Navy official to bar a chaplain from comforting
and ministering to sailors and families is a
reprehensible violation of religious freedom and
common human decency."
Case Background: Chaplain Wes Modder is a Navy
chaplain and former Marine who previously served as
the Force chaplain for Naval Special Warfare Command.
He has deployed overseas multiple times during the War
on Terror, including in support of Navy SEAL Teams. In
October 2014, Chaplain Modder's commander called him a
"consummate professional leader," "the best of the
best," and said he sets the "clear benchmark" for
chaplain professionalism. Now, the Navy is threatening
Chaplain Modder with career-ending punishment because,
when asked, he expressed faith-based views on marriage
and human sexuality in private counseling sessions.
Liberty Institute is defending Chaplain Modder and
asserts that censoring his religious expression is
unconstitutional religious discrimination. The "no
contact" order comes only days after the Navy
officially denied Chaplain Modder's request for
religious accommodation, in violation of federal law
and Department of Defense (DoD) regulations. (Read
more about Modder's case at https://www.libertyinstitute.org/ModderFacts)
About Liberty Institute
Liberty Institute is the largest nonprofit legal
organization in the nation dedicated solely to
defending religious liberty in America. Liberty
Institute protects freedom of religious expression in
our military, schools, churches, and throughout the
public arena. For more information, visit
March 12, 2015 In mid February of this year Navy Chaplain
Wesley Modder received a "detachment for
cause" letter after commanders concluded he was
"intolerant" and "unable to function in the diverse and
pluralistic environment" of his current assignment. Lt
Cmdr. Modder has served more than 19 years with
commendations as "best of the best" and a "talented and
inspirational leader. Click
here to read the March 11 article in the Military
princess' used Clinton email server
03/11/2015 @ 9:10 pm WND.com In Front Page,Politics,U.S.
Hillary Clinton and Huma Abedin
At least three of Hillary Clinton’s top aides –
including one with ties to the Muslim Brotherhood – used
emails hosted on Clinton’s private server while she was
secretary of state, according to several reports.
At a news conference Tuesday at the U.N., Clinton
directly addressed media about the revelation that she
conducted her business as secretary of state using a
private email account instead of the secure and archived
She acknowledged she deleted thousands of personal
emails and said she turned over hard copies of messages
to the State Department that she deemed to be work
But Clinton apparently wasn’t the only one at the State
Department using private email.
Weekly Standard senior writer Stephen Hayes told Fox
News, “Two of Hillary Clinton’s top aides used personal
email while they were employed at the State Department.”
Hayes specifically named Clinton Chief of Staff Cheryl
Mills and Huma Abedin, who served as Clinton’s longtime
deputy chief of staff. Abedin and Clinton worked closely
together for nearly 20 years.
“The State Department has evidence of this,” he said.
In another report, the gossip website Gawker claimed
both Abedin and Phillippe Reines, Clinton’s
communications strategist, used the private email
The London Daily Mail confirmed one of Abedin’s email
addresses was listed as Huma@clintonemail.com.
Abedin’s emails would be of particular interest because
she has known ties to the Muslim Brotherhood – a group
that’s bent on “destroying Western civilization from
within” – and other Islamic supremacists.
Hayes said, “The question, I think becomes: Were they
emailing with Hillary Clinton from their personal email
addresses to her personal email address about State
Department business, about Benghazi, including sensitive
“Those are questions that I think (Rep.) Trey Gowdy and
the House Benghazi Committee is going to want to look at
What do YOU think? Will Hillary’s email troubles delete
her run for president? Sound off in today’s WND poll
Government watchdog Judicial Watch has filed a lawsuit
against the State Department seeking all emails from
2009 to 2013 between Clinton, Abedin and Nagla Mahmoud,
wife of Muslim Brotherhood leader Mohammed Morsi.
“Now we know why the State Department didn’t want to
respond to our specific request for Hillary Clinton’s
and Huma Abedin’s communications,” Judicial Watch
President Tom Fitton said in a statement. “The State
Department violated FOIA law rather than admit that it
couldn’t and wouldn’t search the secret accounts that
the agency has known about for years. This lawsuit shows
how the latest Obama administration cover-up isn’t just
about domestic politics but has significant foreign
Get the details about what really happened in one of
America’s biggest foreign operations failures, in “The
REAL Benghazi Story.”
Abedin and Clinton worked closely together for nearly 20
years. As WND has extensively reported, the Muslim
Brotherhood and Islamic supremacist connections not only
extend to Abedin’s mother and father, who are both
deeply tied to al-Qaida fronts, but to Abedin herself.
Major news media profiles of Abedin report she was born
of Pakistani and Indian parents, without delving much
further into her family’s history.
As WND reported, a manifesto commissioned by the ruling
Saudi Arabian monarchy places the work of an institute
that employed Abedin at the forefront of a grand plan to
mobilize U.S. Muslim minorities to transform America
into a Saudi-style Islamic state, according to
Arabic-language researcher Walid Shoebat.
Abedin was an assistant editor for a dozen years for the
Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs for the Institute for
Muslim Minority Affairs. The institute – founded by her
late father and currently directed by her mother – is
backed by the Muslim World League, an Islamic
organization in the Saudi holy city of Mecca that was
founded by Muslim Brotherhood leaders.
The 2002 Saudi manifesto shows that “Muslim Minority
Affairs” – the mobilizing of Muslim communities in the
U.S. to spread Islam instead of assimilating into the
population – is a key strategy in an ongoing effort to
establish Islamic rule in America and a global Shariah,
or Islamic law, “in our modern times.”
WND reported Abedin also was a member of the executive
board of the Muslim Student Association, which was
identified as a Muslim Brotherhood front group in a 1991
document introduced into evidence during the
terror-financing trial of the Texas-based Holy Land
At her father’s Saudi-financed Islamic think tank, WND
reported, Abedin worked alongside Abdullah Omar Naseef,
who is accused of financing al-Qaida fronts.
Naseef is deeply connected to the Abedin family.
WND was first to report Huma’s mother, Saleha Abedin,
was the official representative of Naseef’s
terror-stained Muslim World League in the 1990s.
Shoebat previously reported that as one of 63 leaders of
the Muslim Sisterhood, the de facto female version of
the Muslim Brotherhood, Saleha Abedin served alongside
Nagla Ali Mahmoud, the wife of Muslim Brotherhood figure
Mohammed Morsi, Egypt’s now ousted president.
Saleha Abedin and Morsi’s wife both were members of the
Sisterhood’s Guidance Bureau, Shoebat found.
Huma worked with al-Qaida front man
Abdullah Omar Naseef is secretary-general of the Muslim
World League, an Islamic charity known to have spawned
terrorist groups, including one declared by the U.S.
government to be an official al-Qaida front.
The institute founded by Huma Abedin’s father reportedly
was a quiet, but active, supporter of Naseef.
The institute bills itself as “the only scholarly
institution dedicated to the systematic study of Muslim
communities in non-Muslim societies around the world.”
Huma served on the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs’s
editorial board from 2002 to 2008.
Documents obtained by Shoebat revealed that Naseef
served on the board with Huma from at least December
2002 to December 2003.
Naseef’s sudden departure from the board in December
2003 coincides with the time at which various charities
led by Naseef’s Muslim World League were declared
illegal terrorism fronts worldwide, including by the
U.S. and U.N.
The MWL, founded in Mecca in 1962, bills itself as one
of the largest Islamic non-governmental organizations.
But according to U.S. government documents and testimony
from the charity’s own officials, it is heavily financed
by the Saudi government.
The MWL has been accused of terrorist ties, as have its
various offshoots, including the International Islamic
Relief Organization, or IIRO, and Al Haramain, which was
declared by the U.S. and U.N. as a terror financing
Indeed, the Treasury Department, in a September 2004
press release, alleged Al Haramain had “direct links”
with Osama bin Laden. The group is now banned worldwide
by U.N. Security Council Committee resolution 1267.
There long have been accusations that the IIRO and MWL
also repeatedly funded al-Qaida.
In 1993, bin Laden reportedly told an associate that the
MWL was one of his three most important charity fronts.
An Anti-Defamation League profile of the MWL accuses the
group of promulgating a “fundamentalist interpretation
of Islam around the world through a large network of
charities and affiliated organizations.”
“Its ideological backbone is based on an extremist
interpretation of Islam,” the profile states, “and
several of its affiliated groups and individuals have
been linked to terror-related activity.”
In 2003, U.S. News and World Report documented that
accompanying the MWL’s donations, invariably, are “a
blizzard of Wahhabist literature.”
“Critics argue that Wahhabism’s more extreme preachings
– mistrust of infidels, branding of rival sects as
apostates and emphasis on violent jihad –laid the
groundwork for terrorist groups around the world,” the
An Egyptian-American cab driver, Ihab Mohamed Ali
Nawawi, was arrested in Florida in 1990 on accusations
he was an al-Qaida sleeper agent and a former personal
pilot to bin Laden. At the time he was accused of
serving bin Laden, he also reportedly worked for the
Pakistani branch of the MWL.
The MWL in 1988 founded the Al Haramain Islamic
Foundation, developing chapters in about 50 countries,
including for a time in Oregon until it was designated a
In the early 1990s, evidence began to grow that the
foundation was funding Islamist militants in Somalia and
Bosnia, and a 1996 CIA report detailed its Bosnian
The U.S. Treasury designated Al Haramain’s offices in
Kenya and Tanzania as sponsors of terrorism for their
role in planning and funding the 1998 bombings of two
American embassies in East Africa. The Comoros Islands
office was also designated because it “was used as a
staging area and exfiltration route for the perpetrators
of the 1998 bombings.”
The New York Times reported in 2003 that Al Haramain had
provided funds to the Indonesian terrorist group Jemaah
Islamiyah, which was responsible for the 2002 Bali
bombings that killed 202 people. The Indonesia office
was later designated a terrorist entity by the Treasury.
In February 2004, the U.S. Treasury Department froze all
Al Haramain’s financial assets pending an investigation,
leading the Saudi government to disband the charity and
fold it into another group, the Saudi National
Commission for Relief and Charity Work Abroad.
In September 2004, the U.S. designated Al-Haramain a
In June 2008, the Treasury Department applied the
terrorist designation to the entire Al-Haramain
Bin Laden’s brother-in-law
In August 2006, the Treasury Department also designated
the Philippine and Indonesian branch offices of the
MWL-founded IIRO as terrorist entities “for facilitating
fundraising for al-Qaida and affiliated terrorist
The Treasury Department added: “Abd Al Hamid Sulaiman
Al-Mujil, a high-ranking IIRO official [executive
director of its Eastern Province Branch] in Saudi
Arabia, has used his position to bankroll the al-Qaida
network in Southeast Asia. Al-Mujil has a long record of
supporting Islamic militant groups, and he has
maintained a cell of regular financial donors in the
Middle East who support extremist causes.”
In the 1980s, Mohammed Jamal Khalifa, Osama bin Laden’s
brother-in-law, ran the Philippines offices of the IIRO.
Khalifa has been linked to Manila-based plots to target
the pope and U.S. airlines.
The IIRO has also been accused of funding Hamas,
Algerian radicals, Afghanistan militant bases and the
Egyptian terror group Al-Gamaa al-Islamiyya.
The New York Post reported the families of the 9/11
victims filed a lawsuit against IIRO and other Muslim
organizations for having “played key roles in laundering
of funds to the terrorists in the 1998 African embassy
bombings” and for having been involved in the “financing
and ‘aiding and abetting’ of terrorists in the 1993
World Trade Center bombing.”
‘Saudi government front’
In a court case in Canada, Arafat El-Asahi, the Canadian
director of both the IIRO and the MWL, admitted the
charities are near entities of the Saudi government.
Stated El-Asahi: “The Muslim World League, which is the
mother of IIRO, is a fully government-funded
organization. In other words, I work for the government
of Saudi Arabia. I am an employee of that government.
“Second, the IIRO is the relief branch of that
organization, which means that we are controlled in all
our activities and plans by the government of Saudi
Arabia. Keep that in mind, please,” he said.
Despite its offshoots being implicated in terror
financing, the U.S. government never designated the MWL
itself as a terror-financing charity. Many have
speculated the U.S. has been trying to not embarrass the
Huma’s mother represented Muslim World League
Saleha Abedin has been quoted in numerous press accounts
as both representing the MWL and serving as a delegate
for the charity.
In 1995, for example, the Washington Times reported on a
United Nations-arranged women’s conference in Beijing
that called on governments throughout the world to give
women statistical equality with men in the workplace.
The report quoted Saleha Abedin, who attended the
conference as a delegate, as “also representing the
Muslim World League based in Saudi Arabia and the Muslim
The U.N.’s website references a report in the run-up to
the Beijing conference that also lists Abedin as
representing the MWL at the event.
The website posted an article from the now defunct
United States Information Agency quoting Abedin and
reporting she attended the Beijing conference as “a
delegate of the Muslim World League and member of the
Muslim Women’s NGO caucus.”
In the article, Abedin was listed under a shorter name,
“Dr. Saleha Mahmoud, director of the Institute of Muslim
WND confirmed the individual listed is Huma Abedin’s
mother. The reports misspelled part of Abedin’s name.
Her full professional name is at times listed as Saleha
Mahmood Abedin S.
Saleha Mahmood formerly directed the Institute of Muslim
Minority Affairs in the U.K. and served as a delegate
for the Muslim World League, an Islamic fundamentalist
group Osama bin Laden reportedly told an associate was
one of his most important charity fronts.
In February 2010, Clinton spoke at Dar Al-Hekma College
in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, where Abedin was an associate
professor of sociology at the time.
Clinton, after she was introduced by Abedin, praised the
work of the terror-tied professor.
“I have to say a special word about Dr. Saleha Abedin,”
Clinton said. “You heard her present the very exciting
partnerships that have been pioneered between colleges
and universities in the United States and this college.
And it is pioneering work to create these kinds of
“But I have to confess something that Dr. Abedin did
not,” Clinton continued, “and that is that I have almost
a familial bond with this college. Dr. Abedin’s
daughter, one of her three daughters, is my deputy chief
of staff, Huma Abedin, who started to work for me when
she was a student at George Washington University in
The Clarion Project was founded in 2006
by Raphael Shore. It is dedicated to "exposing the
dangers of Islamic extremism while providing a
platform for the voices of moderation and promoting
grassroots activism." Shore produced the 2008
documentary The Third Jihad: Radical Islam's
Vision For America.. (View
at this link.)
The main web page of the Clarion Project is www.clarionproject.org.
They are currently sponsoring an email campaign to
your elected officials "No Nukes For Iran".
As Prime Minister Netanyahu stated in his speech to
the U.S. Congress on March 3, 2015, "for over a
year, we've been told that no deal is better than a
bad deal (with Iran). Well, this is a bad deal. It's a
very bad deal. We're better off without
it." Visit this link to
quickly send an email to your elected
officials in Washington www.acttoimpact.com. ~>~>~>~>~>~>~>~>
File Under the category of
Side effects of a Nuclear Deal with Iran: A Middle East Arms Race?:
According to two FCC commissioners, those new
regulations are bad all around
By Brad Matthews
March 4, 2015
The Obama administration and proponents of the
FCC’s version of net neutrality may be ecstatic
at the passing of regulations that make the
Internet a public utility on Feb. 26th, but not
all FCC members are so sunny in their outlook
for the future.
TechFreedom held a fireside chat on Feb. 27th
with two FCC commissioners, Ajit Pai and Mike
O’Rielly, and the two of them concurred that the
new regulations are far-reaching, largely
unchecked and pose a threat to consumer bills
and to innovation in the industry.
Ajit Pai openly questioned what the problem was,
saying, “There’s never been a systemic analysis
of what the problem with the Internet is. In
this order, you see scattered niche examples
[Comcast and BitTorrent, Apple and FaceTime,
others] all of which were resolved, mind you,
through private sector initiatives.” He
continued, saying that the FCC’s net neutrality
regulatory regime is a solution that won’t work
in search of a problem that doesn’t
exist.” Essentially, this is, contrary to
the assertion of activists and others, a vaguely
justified power grab by a government agency.
Mike O’Rielly added, in a bit of humor that
“there is a problem, and it’s the document we
adopted [Feb. 26].” Neither of them were
reticent in explaining exactly how and why the
document was the problem. For one, the document
was, as Commissioner Pai pointed out, written to
solve a problem that wasn’t readily apparent.
O’Rielly said the document is “guilt by
imagination, trying to guess what will go wrong
in the future”; instead of tackling a readily
apparent and current issue, the FCC proposal is
instead stumbling forward, trying to find
future, hypothetical transgressions to
retroactively justify its own regulations.
This conspiratorial and wide-ranging thinking on
the part of FCC is not a bug, but rather a
feature. O’Rielly openly said that “it’s
intended to catch everybody”. Pai noted that the
FCC was going to centralize powers over what
infrastructure was deployed and where through
the use of statutes and other laws; O’Rielly
mentioned specifically that the FCC was going to
“use Section 201 [of the Communications Act] to
do it’s dirty work.”
Pai continued, saying that the FCC was largely
focused on the ends of Internet regulation
rather than the means, and that “a lot of these
promises of regulatory restraint are pretty
ephemeral.” O’Rielly mentioned that mobile data
policies were likely to be subsumed by the new
regulations into policies on the wider Internet
as a whole. This one-size-fits-all approach
ignores the differences in how mobile data is
used versus the way the Internet is used by a
normal computer or other devices. Many features
of mobile service, the two said, could be
construed as a company favoring one app or one
site over another in terms of data, which would
violate the FCC’s standards.
The consumer will inherit many of these new
costs and burdens. O’Rielly outright told the
audience that “Rates are going to go up because
of this.” The new regulations also fail to
recognize the burden of local telecommunications
taxes, especially in major cities where tax
rates on mobile service are often incredibly
high. The new regulations, combined with the
laws of local governments, stand to impose even
more costs onto consumers.
The outlook the two gave was anything but
bright–the worries of small government advocates
seem justified. The new FCC regulations will, in
concert with other laws and under the directive
of an organization looking for future problems
rather than current problems, give more power to
government, more restrictions to innovators, and
more costs to the people.
Commissioner Pai summed it up best: “This issue
has been largely fact-free for the better part
of a decade, and I think it’s frankly shocking
that decision-making on something as important
as this has been thrown by the wayside in favor
of what I consider to be an ideological agenda.”
The net may be “neutral” but the FCC is most
state: Fears Grow For Abducted Syrian
Christians United Kingdom BBC Wednesday 25 Feb 2015
There are fears that more members of an Assyrian
Christian community in north-eastern Syria were
abducted by Islamic State militants than at first
thought. Initial reports had put the number of missing
at 90, but one activist said as many as 285 people had
been seized on Monday in Hassakeh province. Efforts to
try to negotiate their release are reported to be
Some 1,000 local Assyrian families are believed to
have fled their homes in the wake of the abductions.
Kurdish and Christian militia are battling IS in the
area, amid reports of churches and homes having been
Thousands of Christians in Syria have been forced from
their homes by the threat from IS militants.
In areas under their control, Christians have been
ordered to convert to Islam, pay jizya (a religious
levy), or face death. IS militants in Libya also
recently beheaded 21 Egyptian Coptic Christians.
The Assyrians were seized by the militants as they
swept into 12 villages along the southern bank of the
Khabur river near the town of Tal Tamr before dawn on
The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, a UK-based
activist group, said at least 90 people had been
abducted, most of them women, children and the
However, the Syriac National Council of Syria put the
figure as high as 150, while Afram Yakoub of the
Assyrian Federation of Sweden said sources on the
ground had told him that up to 285 people were
missing, including 156 from the village of Tal Shamran
and 90 from Tal al-Jazira.
"These were peaceful villages that had nothing to do
with the battles," Nasir Haj Mahmoud, a Kurdish
official in the YPG militia in north-eastern Syria,
told the Reuters news agency.
There are conflicting reports as to where the families
have been taken.
Kino Gabriel, a spokesman for the Syriac Military
Council - a Christian militia fighting alongside the
Kurdish Popular Protection Units (YPG) - told the BBC
that it believed the captives had been taken to Abdul
Osama Edward of the Sweden-based Assyrian Human Rights
Network told the AFP news agency that the captives had
been taken to the IS stronghold of Shaddadi, as did
Syria's state news agency, Sana.
Another report said they were in Raqqa, 145km (90
miles) to the west, the de facto capital of the
"caliphate" declared by IS last June.
The BBC's Jonny Dymond in Beirut says the motive for
the seizure of so many Assyrians is not yet clear. Our
correspondent says it may be that the captives are to
be used as part of a swap with the Kurdish forces.
Hundreds of Assyrians who were living in villages on
the north bank of the Khabur river and elsewhere are
reported to have fled following the attack to the
largely Kurdish-controlled provincial capital of
Hassakeh, to the south-east, and Qamishli, another
city to the north-east.
Mr Edward said two historic churches had been burned
down in captured villages - one in Tal Hurmiz and the
other in Qaber Shamiya. The Syrian Observatory also
reported that a church in Tal Shamran had also been
Mr Gabriel said IS had moved a big force into the area
and were trying to take control of Tal Tamr.
The Syriac Military Council had about 400 fighters in
the area and at least four had been killed in clashes
with the jihadists, he added. The YPG has deployed
between 1,000 and 1,500 fighters.
The YPG is also continuing a major offensive launched
on Sunday against IS some 100km (60 miles) to the
east, near the border with Iraq - an area of vital
importance to the jihadists.
beheading of Coptic Christians on Libyan beach
brings Islamists to the doorstep of Europe
United Kingdom The Independent, Thursday 19 Feb 2015
The beheading of 21 Coptic Christians on a beach in
Libya has brought ISIS to the doorstep of Europe.
The mass murder, which provoked a volley of Egyptian air
strikes on the group’s Libyan stronghold of Derna,
realised long-held fears of militants reaching the
ISIS started in Iraq and now controls swathes of
adjoining Syria, including along the Turkish border, as
part of its so-called Islamic State.
Its ideology has spread much further, with pledges of
allegiance from terrorist groups in Egypt, Gaza, Jordan,
Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia, Yemen and now Libya.
Days before ISIS released its gory video depicting the
Egyptians’ beheadings, Libya’s former Prime Minister
warned that the group would soon reach the Mediterranean
and even Europe if order was not restored in the
Ali Zeidan said Libya’s fractured government and easy
access to weapons seized during the fall of Colonel
Gaddafi made it more susceptible to the activities of
jihadists, according to The Times.
“(ISIS) are growing. They are everywhere,” he added.
“In Libya, the situation is still under control. If we
leave it one month or two months more I don’t think you
can control it.
“It will be a big war in the country and it will be here
in Europe as well.”
Libya has seen fierce fighting between rival militias
since Gaddafi was overthrown during the 2011 Arab
Mr Zeidan, who fled to Europe after losing a
parliamentary vote of confidence, reported that ISIS had
a growing presence in some of the bigger cities and was
trying to recruit fighters from rival Islamist groups.
Libya's former Prime Minister Ali Zeidan warned that
Isis would reach the Mediterranean Aref Ali Nayed,
Libya’s ambassador to the United Arab Emirates, also
said Isis’s presence in Libya was increasing
Its military gains last summer sparked a rush by other
Islamist groups in the Middle East and North Africa to
ally themselves with the group by pledging allegiance
and changing their names.
The jihadists behind the beheadings in Libya call
themselves the Tripoli Province of the Islamic State.
As the turmoil in Libya continued last year, they gained
control of the port city of Derna and nearby Sirte,
where Isis seized the murdered Coptic hostages in
December and January.
The location of their murders could not be confirmed but
footage showed them dressed in orange jumpsuits kneeling
on a beach. Behind each of them were masked militants
who wielded their knives to kill the bound hostages
ISIS affiliates have also claimed responsibility for
attacks on the Egyptian military and police in the Sinai
Peninsula, further along the Mediterranean coast between
Egypt and Gaza.
England and Europe's greater concern than the United
States is evident in this article, due to their
proximity to the menacing Radical Islamic peril. Learn
more about this with accompanying links at the UK's INDEPENDENT
website by clicking here.
ISIS burn 45 people to
death in captured Iraqi town of al-Baghdadi as
Islamists attack the homes of security forces'
United Kingdom's Daily Mail
Karen Pickles for Mailonline
February 17, 2015
ISIS burn 45 people to death in captured Iraqi
town of al-Baghdadi as Islamists attack the homes
of security forces' families
Western town al-Baghdadi
captured by ISIS fighters last week
Victims thought to be members
of security forces and their families
Follows barbaric video of
Jordanian pilot Lieutenant Muath al-Kaseasbeh
Attack is only five miles from
air base with 320 US Marines
Militants from Islamic State have burned 45 people to
death in the western Iraqi town of al-Baghdadi,
according to the local police chief.
Col. Qasim al-Obeidi said the motive was unknown but he
believed some of the victims were members of the
He has pleaded for help from the government and
international community and said the compound, which
houses the families of security personnel and local
officials, was now under attack.
It follows the capture of al-Baghdadi, near Ain al-Asad
air base, by ISIS fighters last week.
The unconfirmed reports have haunting similarities to
the video published earlier this month, showing
militants burning alive a Jordanian air force pilot,
whose plane crashed in Syria in December.
Al-Baghdadi had been besieged for months by Islamic
State fighters before its fall. It had been one of the
few towns to still be controlled by the Iraqi government
in Anbar province, where IS and allied Sunni Arab
tribesmen launched an offensive in January 2014.
On Friday, Pentagon spokesman Rear Adm John Kirby,
played down its capture, telling reporters it was the
first time in the last couple of months that the
jihadist group had taken new ground.
But with 320 US Marines stationed just five miles away
at the Ain al-Asad air base, training members of the
Iraqi army's 7th Division, it will cause concern.
The base was attacked by several suicide bombers, on
Friday with the militant repelled by Iraqi troops backed
by US-led coalition aircraft.
In a separate development on Tuesday, the influential
Shia cleric Moqtada Sadr announced he was withdrawing
his forces from an umbrella group of Shia militia
fighting IS alongside the Iraqi army.
He cited what he called the bad behaviour of other
militia within the Popular Mobilisation Forces, whom he
accused of 'wreaking havoc through murdering, kidnapping
and violating sanctuaries'.
Shia militia have been accused of kidnapping and killing
scores of Sunni civilians since Islamic State launched
an offensive in northern Iraq last June that saw it
seize large swathes of the country.
Elsewhere, there are reports at least 35 more
Egyptian Christians are feared to have been kidnapped by
jihadists in retaliation for air strikes on targets in
Militants from the Islamic State and Ansar Al-Sharia are
understood to have rounded up dozens of farm workers in
the wake of bombings by Cairo, it was reported by local
The move is believed to be a direct response to strikes
by Egyptian warplanes yesterday which came after
fanatics released a horrific video showing the beheading
of 21 Christians on a beach.
Netanyahu: Israel is standing by Europe,
Europe must stand by Israel
January 8, 2015
The Jerusalem Post
By HERB KEINON
In meeting with Norwegian FM, Netanyahu says radical
Islam is a "threat to our common
Israel is being attacked by the same forces
attacking Europe, and just as Israel stands with
Europe, so too Europe must stand with Israel, Prime
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Thursday.
Netanyahu, speaking following a meeting with
visiting Norwegian Foreign Minister Børge Brende,
said that Wednesday’s terrorist attack in Paris
“clearly demonstrates the disdain of radical Islam
for the values we hold dear. We cherish freedom and
tolerance; they worship tyranny and terror. And
through this terror they seek to impose a new dark
age on humanity.”
Netanyahu said the terrorists were “part of a global
movement and this necessitates a global response. I
believe that with the strength of our resolve and
the unity of our action, we can defeat this threat
to our common civilization. And what the battle
against terror requires is courage, clarity and
Deputy Foreign Minister Tzahi Hanegbi said in an
Israel Radio interview that precisely that type of
determination has been missing up until now in
France and elsewhere in Europe in the battle against
Hanegbi said the French in the past tried to delude
themselves regarding the true nature of threat,
saying “maybe it was only sporadic incidents, maybe
it is only anti-Semitism, maybe it is only against
He said that the French at times tried to understand
the terrorists motivations, and at other times tried
to downplay their ties to Islam. The sheer brutality
of Wednesday attack, especially the murder of the
policeman on the sidewalk, will compel the French
government to “look at the reality square in the
face” and realize there is a serious danger at their
gates, he said.
Hanegbi predicted that France will be forced, like
the US was after the September 11, 2001 attacks, to
empower the security establishment with tools to
effectively deal with the threats.
“France must deal with the threat coming from
within,” he said. Hanegbi added that Israel,
unfortunately, has quite a deal of experience
dealing with terrorism, and that “anyone who
cooperates with a county as experienced [in dealing
with terrorism] as Israel, only benefits.”
He said that Israel has the capability to help
France a lot more than the French have requested in
the past. Now, he said, France “ will have an
interest in being helped by anyone who can help
them, including israel.”
Foreign Minister Avigdor Liberman, meanwhile, took
the Paris attack and used it to prove a point
regarding domestic Israeli policies.
If there was an important lesson to be learned from
the attack, he said, it is that extremist movements
must be dealt with early, and that there are only
small legal and semantic differences separating
those organizations from terrorist groups.
Those who demonstrate tolerance toward those
organizations, he said, will ultimately pay a high
price in blood, as well as in threats to their very
democracies that allows those organizations to work.
Israel's lesson, he said, must be not to tarry and
to stop the activities of Raed Salah and the
northern branch of the Islamic Movement in Israel.
Liberman said Salah's organization was an
inseparable link in the chain of terrorist
organizations that includes Hamas, Islamic Jihad,
al-Qaida and the Islamic State. He said the
organization “shares exactly the same values of the
perpetrators of the massacre in Paris and its
intolerance of criticism and of anything
inconsistent with its extreme world view.”
Liberman said the the northern branch is a threat to
Israeli democracy and the country's citizens, and
that it needed to be outlawed.
Houston Subpoenas Pastors’ Sermons in Gay Rights
By Sarah Pulliam Bailey
Religion News Service
October 15, 2014
Evangelical leaders are
angry after city officials in Houston subpoenaed
sermons given by local pastors who oppose an equal
rights ordinance that provides protections to the
Houston Mayor Annise Parker, who drew headlines for
becoming the first openly lesbian mayor of a major
American city, led support for the ordinance. The
measure bans anti-gay discrimination among
businesses that serve the public, private employers,
in housing and in city employment and city
Under one of the hotly contested parts of the
ordinance, transgender people barred access to a
restroom would be able to file a discrimination
The ordinance, which exempted religious
institutions, was passed in May, though its
implementation has been delayed due to legal
Opponents were hoping to repeal the ordinance
through a ballot measure and claimed the city’s
attorney incorrectly determined they had not
gathered enough signatures to qualify for a ballot.
Supporters of the repeal reportedly gathered 50,000
signatures, well over the 17,269 needed for
inclusion on the November ballot. Opponents of the
repeal have questioned the validity of the
A group of Christians sued the city. In response,
city attorneys issued subpoenas to five local
pastors during the case’s discovery phase, though
the five pastors were not involved in the lawsuit.
The subpoenas sought “all speeches, presentations,
or sermons related to HERO, the Petition, Mayor
Annise Parker, homosexuality, or gender identity
prepared by, delivered by, revised by, or approved
by you or in your possession,” according to the
“The subpoenas were issued to pastors who have been
involved in the political campaign to organize a
repeal of Houston’s new equal rights ordinance,”
said Janice Evans, chief policy officer to the
mayor, in a statement. “It is part of the discovery
process in a lawsuit brought by opponents of the
ordinance, a group that is tied to the pastors who
have received the subpoenas.”
An Arizona-based religious liberty group, Alliance
Defending Freedom, has filed a motion on behalf of
the pastors seeking to halt the subpoenas. The
ministers call the subpoenas “overbroad, unduly
burdensome, harassing, and vexatious.”
“The pastors made their sermons relevant to the case
by using the pulpit to do political organizing,”
Evans said in her statement. “This included
encouraging congregation members to sign petitions
and help gather signatures for equal rights
ordinance foes. The issue is whether they were
speaking from the pulpit for the purpose of
politics. If so, it is not protected speech.”
The lawsuit is scheduled for trial in January.
“It’s procedural — it’s common to ask for a wide
range of documents — but the mayor is playing real
hardball,” said David Skeel, professor of law at the
University of Pennsylvania. “The fact that she’s
subpoenaing pastors seems quite unusual in a case
that’s mostly about politics, and the fact that
she’s going inside the church is even more radical.
It would be easy enough to get sermons, of course,
but asking for them is clearly meant to send a
City Attorney David Feldman argues the subpoenas are
justified because the churches are where opponents
of the ordinance met to organize.
“We’re certainly entitled to inquire about the
communications that took place in the churches
regarding the ordinance and the petitions because
that’s where they chose to do it,” Feldman told KTRH
News. “It’s relevant to know what representations
and instructions were given regarding these
The issue has angered evangelicals nationwide,
prompting outcry from people such as Russell Moore,
president of the Southern Baptist Ethics and
Religious Liberty Commission.
“The separation of church and state means that we
will render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s, and
we will,” Moore wrote. “But the preaching of the
church of God does not belong to Caesar, and we will
not hand it over to him. Not now. Not ever.”
More than 1,800 pastors participated in ADF’s
seventh annual Pulpit Freedom Sunday event on Oct.
5, daring the Internal Revenue Service to prosecute
them for endorsing political candidates. Under IRS
regulations, tax-exempt churches are not allowed to
engage in partisan politics.
The Khaleej Times
- a daily U.S. language newspaper published in United Arab Emirates.It is the
second most popular English language newspapers
published in the UAE.
3 September 2014
threat is used to deflect attention from
Barack Obama’s recent confession that his country
did not so far have a strategy as far as the
so-called ISIS is
concerned has been pilloried as a gaffe. It could,
however, also be seen as the plain truth.
The United States did not really have a strategy a
decade or so ago either, when the administration of
George W. Bush decided to invade Iraq, evidently
expecting that the various pieces would magically
fall into place once Saddam Hussein was toppled. The
tactic represented a disastrous combination of
hubris and ignorance.
The extent to which the subsequent implosions and
explosions in the region are a direct consequence of
that particular debacle is arguable, but there can
be little doubt that the big picture would have been
decidedly different, and in all probability
considerably less unpleasant, in the absence of that
monumental neoconservative folly.
Of course, what’s done cannot be undone, and the
present crisis demands a resolute response. It’s by
no means undesirable, however, for that response to
take account of all that has gone wrong in the
Obama has come under attack, for instance, for
hesitating to strike Syria
in the early days of the revolt against the Bashar
Al Assad dictatorship, and thereby purportedly
facilitating the expansion of Islamist outfits such
as ISIS and Jabhat Al Nusra. Too many of the critics
are inclined, however, to ignore in this context the
consequences of NATO’s role in Libya.
itself to be catapulted into that conflict, partly
on the basis of Paris
enthusiasm, and NATO’s mission was a success in
terms of achieving the overthrow of Muammar
Gaddafi’s regime. But Libya
today is being torn apart by rival militias, many of
them distinguishable not so much by ideology as by
Under similar circumstances, would the outcome the
have been remarkably different? Who can claim with
any confidence that Assad’s early overthrow would
have prevented Islamist forces from sooner or later
gaining the upper hand?
has lately been thinking aloud about launching
airstrikes in Syria
with the ostensible aim of undermining ISIS rather
than Assad, based on the assumption that Abu Bakr Al
Baghdadi’s troops cannot be quelled by focusing on Iraq
alone. That may be so, but there is the wider
question of whether they can effectively be tackled
at all mainly through air assaults.
There have evidently been some tactical successes
in this respect, beginning with the besieged Yazidis
stranded on SinjarMountain —
most of whom appear to have made it to relative
safety in Iraqi Kurdistan, although the reported
numbers are open to question. Then there was the
recapture of Mosul Dam, and most recently the
apparent rescue of Amerli.
In the latter instance, the US airstrikes were
effectively in aid of Shia militias spearheading the
assault against ISIS — the same militias, with links
that not many years ago were dedicated to
undermining the American occupation of Iraq.
“Should such military actions continue,” The New
York Times noted on Monday, “they could signal a
dramatic shift for the United States and Iran, which have
long vied for control in Iraq.”
Naturally, neither Washington
is keen to emphasise this aspect of the emerging
situation. Matters are further complicated by the
fact that some of the militias betray a penchant for
sectarian brutality that, although no match for the
revolting atrocities that ISIS
is so keen to broadcast, nonetheless provides cause
The United Nations this week decided to investigate
“acts of inhumanity on an unimaginable scale” by ISIS, as well as atrocities
by Iraqi government forces. Whether or not such an
investigation serves any practical purpose in the
murkily unfolding circumstances, the ostensible
even-handedness of the approach is interesting.
Meanwhile, there has been considerable concern
across several nations in Europe as well as in the US and Australia over
young Muslim citizens’ tendency towards jihadist
adventurism, with thousands — the numbers are again
uncertain — travelling to Syria or Iraq
as Islamist volunteers.
This is hardly a novel trend — it can be traced
back at least to Afghanistan
in the 1980s. The worries over it are
understandable, although there is thus far no clear
evidence of returnees planning domestic acts of
terrorism. It is at the same time difficult to
altogether dispense with the notion that projecting
ISIS as an
unprecedented global threat helps some Western
governments to deflect attention from domestic woes.
The ISIS threat
should not be underestimated, but exaggerations can
have the perverse effect of increasing its cachet
both within and outside the region. Nobody has a
clear idea of precisely how this story will unfold,
let alone end. But there’s not much value in
pretending it portends some kind of Armageddon.
The Western insistence on “no boots on the ground”
is open to interpretation as insufficient commitment
or even cowardice. But in fact it’s a welcome
augury, not least in the light of recent experience.
When, since the Second World War, have Western boots
on the ground produced positive consequences in the
Middle East (or,
for that matter, anywhere else)?
The ideal response to the
regional dilemmas of the moment would be an
unprecedented level of cooperation, coordination and
collaboration between Middle Eastern states,
notwithstanding longstanding rivalries in some
cases. That, unfortunately, cannot be described as
an imminent prospect, despite the tentative
emergence of intriguing alliances. But there’s never
been a better time for it.
by Martin Chulov
Thursday 7 August 2014
Thousands of Yazidi and Christian people flee to Erbil
after the latest wave of Isis advances. Photograph:
Anadolu Agency/Getty Images
Iraq's largest Christian city was all but abandoned on
Thursday as the jihadist advance through minority
communities in the country's north-west rampaged towards
the Kurdish stronghold of Erbil.
UN officials said an estimated 200,000 new refugees were
seeking sanctuary in the Kurdish north from Islamic
extremists who had pursued them since the weekend. The
city of Qaraqosh, south-east of Mosul, home to around
50,000 Christians was the latest to fall, with most
residents fleeing before dawn as convoys of extremists
Other Christian towns near Mosul, including Tel Askof,
Tel Keif and Qaramless have also largely been emptied.
Those who remained behind have reportedly been given the
same stark choice given to other minorities, including
Yazidis: flee, convert to Islam, or be killed.
Christians, Yazidis and Turkmen have been at the
frontlines of Iraq's war with the Islamic State (Isis)
ever since the jihadist group stormed into Mosul and
Tikrit and mid-June. The Iraqi army capitulated within
hours, with at least 60,000 officers and soldiers
fleeing on the first day of the assault alone.
Ever since, the jihadists have continued to make
advances, while Iraqi troops have concentrated on
defending Baghdad and the Shia south, leaving the
defence of minorities in the north to the Kurdish
However, even the much vaunted Kurdish forces were no
match for the heavy weapons wielded by the jihadists as
they advanced in recent days. Peshmurga officers ordered
troops to withdraw to areas administered by the Kurdish
regional government – a clear sign of priorities and of
where the battle lines are being drawn.
Without any protection, Yazidis, Christians and Turkmen
are being uprooted from communities they have lived in
for millennia and the geo-social fabric of Iraq is being
While those who have managed to flee the Christian areas
have so far had a relatively safe passage to Erbil, tens
of thousands of Yazidis remain besieged on a mountain
top near Sinjar, with little food or water.
The UN said on Thursday it was able to get some supplies
overland to the stranded hordes – avoiding Isis fighters
who have surrounded most of Mount Sinjar. Turkish
foreign minister Ahmet Davutoglu announced that Turkish
helicopters had dropped food and water on the mountain
top. Iraqi helicopters have also made food drops, but
stranded Yazidis say they do not have enough to survive.
The Chaldean archbishop of
Kirkuk, Joseph Thomas, described the situation in
northern Iraq as "catastrophic, a crisis beyond
imagination". He demanded urgent intervention to save
what remained of the area's Christian heritage.
Kurdish officials on Thursday demanded more help in
catering for refugees. The Kurdish administered areas
have seen staggering numbers cross their notional border
since the original Isis onslaught two months ago. In the
first week alone, some 500,000 people are thought to
have fled towards Erbil.
The capital of the Kurdish north is already home to a
new Chaldean Christian community, which fled Baghdad in
the wake of an Isis-led massacre inside a cathedral in
October 2010. Many fleeing Christians have headed for
the Ainkawa neighbourhood, which is home to Baghdad's
The past 11 years of war and insurrection since the US
invasion have led to most of Iraq's Christians fleeing.
Numbers have plummeted starkly from an estimated one
million before 2003 to around 150,000 now. A large
number of those who remain are now displaced.
Miriam Dagher, 53, from Qaraqosh, said churches in the
city had already been torched and religious insignia
smashed. "We stayed as long as we could," she said. "But
nothing could save us. This is the end of our community.
If the federal government were a person, if Congress
were subject to the laws they create, they would face
fines, prison or both for many of their actions. The
ENLIST Act, being touted as a “pathway” to citizenship
for illegal aliens may be one of those actions. It could
be argued that the very act itself violates federal law.
Immigration law, 8 US Code 1324 states that it is a
crime to, either knowingly or recklessly, “conceal,
harbor, or shield from detection, or attempt to conceal,
harbor, or shield from detection… transport, or move or
attempt to transport or move” or to even “encourage or
induce” an illegal alien “to come to, enter, or reside
in the United States, knowingly or in reckless disregard
of the fact that such coming to, entry, or residence is
or will be in violation of law.”
It is not only a crime to actually commit these
offenses, but it is a crime to even attempt to do so.
Anyone found guilty of violating 8 US Code 1324 is
subject to fines, prison or both. However, if it can be
proven that this person has committed this act for
personal gain, the fines go up and the prison sentence
can be as much as ten years.
By David Boaz From The Cato Institute May 8, 2014 2:19PM
In the Washington Post, Paul Kane reports that
recent experiences with ultra-conservative Senate
candidates have made Republican leaders fearful of
candidates like Rep. Paul Broun in Georgia. There
may be reasons for party leaders or voters to have
doubts about Broun, but I hope they aren’t actually
concerned about the purported problem that Kane
Broun is prone to fiery speeches invoking the
Founding Fathers and applying those 1789 principles
to issues 225 years later.
Seriously? He thinks the Constitution is still the
law of the land? And that the framework it
established for individual rights and limited
government is still relevant today? Do
Republican leaders really think that’s a bad
message? Or does the Washington Post?
Thomas Jefferson and his followers hailed “the
principles of ‘76” or “the spirit of ‘76” in their
battles with Federalists. As historian Joseph Ellis
put it, “Jefferson’s core conviction was that what
might be called ‘the spirit of ‘76’ had repudiated
all energetic expressions of government power, most
especially power exercised from faraway places,
which included London, Philadelphia or Washington.”
Good thing there isn’t an actual Jeffersonian
But the principles of 1789, or actually of 1787,
also protect freedom from government power and are
just as essential today as they were at the
Founding. The Framers knew their history. They knew
that people with power tend to abuse it and to
restrict freedom. In his last letter, 50 years after
the Declaration of Independence, Jefferson wrote:
All eyes are opened, or opening,
to the rights of man. The general spread of the
light of science has already laid open to every view
the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not
been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored
few booted and spurred, ready to ride them
legitimately, by the grace of God.
Because they feared the exercise of power, the
Framers wrote a Constitution that established a
government of delegated, enumerated, and thus
limited powers. Then the people insisted on a Bill
of Rights to further protect their rights even from
the very limited federal government established in
the Constitution. Then, after identifying specific
rights that individuals retained, they also added,
“for greater caution,” as James Madison put it, the
Ninth Amendment to clarify that “The enumeration in
the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be
construed to deny or disparage others retained by
One would hope that all members of Congress – and
voters, and political reporters – believe that those
principles and those constitutional rules should be
applied to issues of today. Surely the First
Amendment remains relevant. And the Fourth. And the
limits on unconstrained power in the basic structure
of the Constitution. The merits of any particular
candidate aside, support of the Constitution and the
principles it embodies seems like a good, even
minimal, qualification for public office.
"Thus saith the LORD,
Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old
paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye
shall find rest for your souls." Jeremiah 6:16
Dr. Robert G Lee was the pastor of Bellevue Baptist
Church in Memphis, Tennessee for thirty-two years.
During his lifetime he was a strong leader in the
Southern Baptist Convention, known as a preacher’s
preacher, and was highly respected among his peers. This
sermon has been accepted as a classic by all that have
heard and read it, and through its message, the Lord
still speaks to mankind.
Dr. Lee originally published the following message in
1926. It is said that he developed it following the
suggestion of a deacon at a prayer meeting in 1919 and
that he preached it at least once a year at his home
church. All total, it is related that he preached the
messsage over 1,000 times. Like many Baptists, Lee was
known more as a preacher than a theologian but his
doctrine was sound to the core. Lee believed in and
preached a doctrine often overlooked in our day, that of
the necessity of regeneration.
Ala. Supreme Court:
'Unborn Child Has Inalienable Right to Life From
its Earliest Stages
| Apr 23, 2014
In a case
about a pregnant woman who used cocaine and
endangered her unborn child, the Alabama Supreme
Court affirmed (8-1) that the word "child" includes
"an unborn child," and that the law therefore
"furthers the State's interest in protecting the
life of children from the earliest stages of their
In his concurring opinion, Alabama Chief Justice Roy
S. Moore wrote that "an unborn child has an
inalienable right to life from its earliest stages
of development," and added, "I write separately to
emphasize that the inalienable right to life is a
gift of God that civil government must secure for
all persons - born and unborn."
The court decision on April 18 was in reference to
Sarah Janie Hicks v. State of Alabama. Hicks had
been charged in 2009 with violating Alabama's
chemical-endangerment statute, which in part says
that a "person commits the crime of chemical
endangerment" by "knowingly, recklessly, or
intentionally causes or permits a child to be
exposed to, to ingest or inhale, or to have contact
with a controlled substance, chemical substance, or
drug paraphernalia," a felony.
In Hicks' case, she was charged with using cocaine
while pregnant. Her child, "J.D.," tested positive
for cocaine "at the time of his birth," reads the
In January 2010, Hicks pleaded guilty to the crime
but also "reserved the right to appeal the issues"
she and her attorneys had presented earlier in
trying to get the charges dismissed. Hicks got a
three year suspended prison sentence and was placed
Hicks appealed to the Court of Criminal Appeals in
Alabama, arguing that because the
chemical-endangerment statute did not specifically
use the words "unborn children" or "fetuses," the
law was ambiguous and could not have applied to her
The Appeals Court ruled against Hicks, stating that
"the plain language of 26-15-3.2
[chemical-endangerment statute] was clear and
unambiguous and that the plain meaning of the term
'child' in [the statute] included an unborn child or
Hicks then petitioned the Alabama Supreme Court in
2012 to review the Appeals Court decision.
Last Friday's ruling affirmed the judgment of the
Court of Criminal Appeals.
In their conclusion, eight of the nine Alabama
Supreme Court justices said: "Consistent with this
Court's opinion in Ankrom [a similar
chemical-endangerment case], by its plain meaning,
the word 'child' in the chemical-endangerment
statute includes an unborn child, and, therefore,
the statute furthers the State's interest in
protecting the life of children from the earliest
stages of their development."
The law to protect the life of unborn children "is
consistent with many statutes and decisions
throughout our nation that recognize unborn children
as persons with legally enforceable rights in many
areas of the law," said the justices.
In his own concurring opinion, Chief Justice Moore
argued that natural rights come from God, not from
the government. He cited the Declaration of
Independence that there is a "self-evident" truth
that "all Men are created equal, [and] that they are
endowed by their creator with certain unalienable
rights," particularly "life."
The Declaration of Independence "acknowledges
as 'self-evident' the truth that all human
beings are endowed with inherent dignity and the
right to life as a direct result of having been
created by God," said Chief Justice Moore.
He also cited Sir William Blackstone's Commentaries
on the Laws of England, which says, "This law of
nature, being co-eval [beginning at the same time]
with mankind and dictated by God himself, is of
course superior in obligation to any other. It is
binding over all the globe, in all countries, and at
all times: no human laws are of any validity, if
contrary to this."
Chief Justice Moore went on to explain how at the
Nuremburg Trials at the end of World War II, Nazi
criminals could not argue that they were only
following orders or just following the laws of the
German government because there is a higher law, the
"very law of nature."
"Although the Nuremberg defendants were following
orders and the laws of their own officials and
country, they were guilty of violating a higher law
to which all nations are equally subject: the laws
of nature and of nature's God," wrote Justice Moore.
That law binds all nations, including the State of
Alabama, said Justice Moore. "In 2006, the
AlabamaLegislature amended the homicide statute to
define 'person' to include 'an unborn child in utero
at any stage of development, regardless of
viability," he wrote, "thus recognizing under the
statute that, when an 'unborn child' is killed, a
'person' is killed."
In conclusion, he wrote, "The Equal Protection
Clause of the 14th Amendment provides that a state
may not 'deny to any person within its jurisdiction
the equal protection of the laws. Unborn children
are a class of persons entitled to equal protection
of the laws."
"States have an obligation to provide to unborn
children at any stage of their development the same
legal protection from injury and death they provide
to persons already born," wrote Justice Moore.
"Because a human life with a full genetic endowment
comes into existence at the moment of conception,
the self-evident truth that 'all men are created
equal and are endowed by their Creator with certain
unalienable rights' encompasses the moment of
"Legal recognition of the unborn as members of the
human family derives ultimately from the laws of
nature and of nature's God, Who created human life
in His image and protected it with the commandment:
'Thou shalt not kill,'" wrote Chief Justice
Moore. "Therefore, the interpretation of the
word 'child' in Alabama's chemical-endangerment
statute, § 26-15- 3.2, Ala. Code 1975, to include
all human beings from the moment of conception is
fully consistent with these first principles
regarding life and law."
Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair
gave a landmark speech yesterday calling on the world
to unite against Islamism.
Tony Blair, the Former British Prime Minister,
delivered a keynote speech at Bloomberg HQ in London
entitled 'Why the Middle East Still Matters.' In it he
described radical Islam as the greatest threat facing
the world today.He argued "there are four reasons why
the Middle East remains of central importance and
cannot be relegated to the second order."
Blair rapidly moved on to the fourth and most
important reason: Islamic extremism also known as
He identifies the conflict in the Middle East as one
between an open and tolerant viewpoint and a
fundamentalist Islamist ideology. He said "wherever
you look – from Iraq to Libya to Egypt to Yemen to
Lebanon to Syria and then further afield to Iran,
Pakistan and Afghanistan – this is the essential
Addressing those who regard these conflicts as
distinct he said "there is something frankly odd about
the reluctance to accept what is so utterly plain:
that they have in common a struggle around the issue
of the rightful place of religion, and in particular
Islam, in politics." It is this central point that he
hammered home again and again over the course of his
40 minute speech.
He argued that this struggle does not end at the
borders of the region. Rather, "The reason this
matters so much is that this ideology is exported
around the world."
Attacks on the Freedom of Speech, In the Form of Religious
Of our Air Force Cadets
From The Traditional
this month, an Air Force Academy cadet was forced to
remove a Bible verse on his personal white board
after the Military Religious Freedom Foundation
have been crucified with Christ, and I no longer
live, but Christ lives in me. The life I now live in
the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who
loved me and gave himself for me." - Galatians 2:20
President Michael "Mikey" Weinstein, self proclaimed
"undisputed leader of the national movement to
restore the obliterated all separating church and
state" in the military, described the student's
white board quoting of scripture as pouring
"fundamentalist Christian gasoline on an already
raging out-of-control conflagration of
fundamentalist Christian tyranny, exceptionalism,
Air Force Academy complied with Weinstein's demands,
having the scripture removed. But that's not enough
-- Weinstein is demanding that not only should the
cadet be punished, but that their entire chain of
command should be as well.
one, especially those who volunteer to risk their
lives to defend our freedoms, should be denied their
constitutional rights and religious freedoms. Groups
like the Military Religious Freedom Foundation are
seeking to silence those who profess their faith,
stripping them of their religious liberties in the
name of political correctness.
Constitution protects the free exercise of religion.
Yet that doesn't seem to be enough for some groups.
The Clash of
Law: Parsing the Modern War against Catholics,
Catholicism and the Church
ByDr. Jeff Mirus
Date March 25,
Opposition to Catholicism in the modern West is
brought to a head almost universally through the
pressure of today’s legal systems. .... what bother
us are the increasing restrictions on the exercise
of our Christian duties by bureaucratic laws and
regulations, administered by people who otherwise do
not care much about our religious identity one way
This is the result of a utopian vision of the
future implemented at the highest levels of the
social order. It is not the cruel and
unthinking persecution of those who have simply been
raised, in their local enclaves and neighborhoods,
to hate Catholics. It is rather a relatively high
brow and carefully orchestrated process of civic
improvement. As such, the anti-Catholic prejudice
today wears a mantle of utter reasonableness and
courtesy. Whatever is done is portrayed as necessary
for the noblest of reasons, to serve an exalted
vision of human good. As we will see shortly, this
is a deception which even its proponents probably do
Consider how varied are the pressure points which
have been attacked in exactly this way. There is the
progressive public pressure for Catholic social
service agencies to conform to the values of our
secular elites. There is the growing impossibility
of running Catholic organizations as a part of
student life on college campuses. There are the
battles over freedom of conscience in an
ever-widening array of professions, beginning with
doctors, nurses and pharmacists and extending now to
anyone who might provide business services to
same-sex couples. There are escalating battles over
religious liberty. There is the HHS Mandate in the United States
and similar rules in other Western nations which
force even private individuals to actively
participate in mandated actions which they find
Meanwhile, in another part of the world, there is
the unending pressure against Catholic life imposed
by the theocratic laws of Islamic states, called
Shari’a law. This alternative form of coercion is in
the process of entering the West through Europe, where the presence
of high percentages of Islamic immigrants raises the
question of alternative legal systems for different
communities and regions. Almost nowhere can we any
longer find a legal system which is not
essentially hostile to Catholicism, with its own
transcendent source of moral knowledge.
A Striking Parallel
Interestingly, in his Regensburg Address in 2006,
Pope Benedict XVI drew a close parallel between the
habits of thought which underlie Islamic law and
those that lie at the basis of contemporary European
(or Western) law. Benedict saw that neither
Islam nor the contemporary West (any longer) assigns
to reason the role of identifying natural moral
principles which can allow people of different
beliefs and cultural backgrounds to share a common
good and a common polity. Islam believes Shari’a Law
covers all of life and is rooted purely in the will
of God, completely unbound by any rational
characteristic of consistency or fairness.
Similarly, the old natural law tradition of the
West—in which rational consistency and fairness were
perhaps the most easily-grasped components—has given
way to the sovereignty of the human will to remake
reality according to whatever happens to be desired
by those who have political, social and cultural
One of the greatest Christian gifts to the world
has been the distinction between two fonts of
law which arise without any possible contradiction
from the same profoundly rational Divine source. On
the one hand, there is the natural law, which is
accessible to human reason and which opens to the
human community a common ground of morality as the
basis for human flourishing in the social order. On
the other hand, there is the law derived from
Revelation, equally rational but containing
mysteries which are accessible only by faith. While
in no way conflicting with the natural law—and in
fact presupposing it in the created order—this
Revelation enables the believer to rise to greater
perfection through grace, in a direct relationship
with God Himself, expressed in voluntary service to
Fortunately, reading through the material has at
least enabled me grasp the central issue more
clearly, and to stress three important principles
which might be used to guide our thinking and our
response to the characteristic anti-Catholic
pressures of our time. First, the practical points
of serious clash and conflict are now primarily
creations of law. Second, when it comes to law, the
primary problem is not an attack on Faith but an
attack on reason—the presumption that law derives
its authority from the specific will of those in
power, and is not limited by clear and consistent
natural or supernatural principles. Third, and
precisely because rational consistency is
lacking, it will take great creativity to
navigate this increasingly repressive legal
In closing, I should emphasize one even deeper
truth: The will darkens the intellect by ordering it
to cease its independent explorations in order to
serve what the will desires. This is not something
that we can expect to counteract naturally; it is in
fact the mechanism which human nature uses to refuse
cooperation with grace. Yet paradoxically the
pandemic loss of the recognition of reason, and
even of nature itself, must be remedied by grace.
And so, in the midst of growing suffering and
sacrifice for Catholics, it is not only arguments
and creativity that we need, but prayer.
From The Canada Free Press
By Jim Yardley
Thursday, March 20, 2014
Checking to make sure that there was an easily
understandable definition of the word, the dictionary
defines Constitution as “the fundamental political
principles on which a nation-state is governed,
especially when considered as embodying the rights of
the subjects of that nation-state and the statute
embodying such principles.”
One would think that the President of the first nation
to create that very thing, a legal statute that embodied
the fundamental political principles, and who also was a
college level lecturer on the topic of the Constitution,
would have absolutely no problem in dealing with the
Unfortunately for us, and for several other nations, Mr.
Obama seems to view constitution to be infinitely
malleable, and are subject to change upon a change in
his whims of the day.
As far back as 2001, Barack Obama said in a radio
interview with Public Radio station WBEZ-FM that the
U.S. Supreme Court (under Chief Justice Earl Warren)
“…didn’t break free from the
essential constraints that were placed by the founding
fathers in the Constitution, at least as it’s been
interpreted and Warren Court interpreted in the same
way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of
negative liberties. Says what the states can’t do to
you. Says what the Federal government can’t do to you,
but doesn’t say what the Federal government or State
government must do on your behalf…”
So even at that time, the President announced clearly
that he disagreed with the judgments of the Founding
Fathers and two centuries of successfully working within
the framework of the U.S. Constitution. He had a
different view of how the Constitution should have been
written, and that had he been alive in 1789, he would
have made sure it was different.
Of course he would have been limited to having only a
pen at that time, since his Blackberry wasn’t even a
science fiction fantasy at that time.
Apparently Obama’s disdain for Constitutions is not
limited to only home grown ones, or limited to only with
regard to “negative liberties.” Fast forward to
June 2009 and look at Honduras.
Manuel Zelaya, who was then in his second term as
president of Honduras, violated that country’s
Constitution (specifically Article 239) which bans
presidents from holding office if they even propose to
alter the constitutional term limits for presidents.
Apparently Mr. Zelaya really liked being president of
Honduras, and wanted to change his country’s
Constitution so that he could continue in the job.
Note again that any president of Honduras loses the
right to serve as president if he even proposes a change
like that. The Honduran Supreme Court, expressly
had the right to remove the president for seeking to
alter the constitutional term limit, under Article 272
of the Honduran Constitution.
But apparently this made Obama upset, so he declared the
Constitutional crisis in Honduras to have been a
“coup”. It wasn’t, of course. Sadly, for Obama, if
he were to snivel that he didn’t like that part of the
Honduran Constitution it probably would have been a
public relations nightmare for him.
One might infer that Obama personally wanted that
presidential term limit article to be ignored by the
citizens of Honduras because it might set a bad
precedent if he wanted to run for a third term
himself. Then Senator (and now Secretary of State)
John Kerry agreed with Obama’s idea that the removal of
a president who had acted contrary to the clear language
of his nation’s Constitution must have been a
“coup.” This view was vocally supported by the
then Secretary of State, Hillary Rodham Clinton who
lusts after the idea of being Obama’s replacement.
Mr. Obama’s disdain for the U.S. Constitution has been
demonstrated on a continuing basis over the five years
that he has been in office, with “recess appointments”
to the NLRB when the Senate was not in recess, the
innumerable delays, waivers, interpretations and so on
related to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care
Act, and so on.
Given Obama’s disdain for any constitutional limits on
doing whatever pops into his head at any time, his
reaction to the situation in Ukraine becomes almost
comical. Sadly, even the always irreverent magazine The
Onion couldn’t have seen the idea that Obama would leap
to the defense of Ukraine by saying that the Crimean
referendum was illegitimate and (wait for it)
unconstitutional. Even Nancy Pelosi was probably
tempted to ask “Are you serious?”
The idea that Barack Obama would demand deference to any
nation’s constitution is on a par with, well, nothing
readily comes to mind.
Well perhaps it would be like seeing Dr. Jack Kervorkian
leading a Right-to-Life rally, or perhaps seeing Willy
Sutton doing an infomercial telling people how safe
It’s possible I suppose that Obama’s defense of
Ukraine’s constitutional authority would be equivalent
to listening to Bill Clinton lecturing on the benefits
of sexual abstinence.
They are still at it. I am thankful for the
newsletters of people like Dave Gaubatz who report
current affairs that are ignored or overlooked by most
news sources. It is hard to imagine how people like
Dave can be so vilified for reporting well
documented FACTS. Although the truth may set one free
it can also become tiring to be a target and cause
grey hairs and ulcers. But enough about the
messenger.... on to the message.
There are many Muslim organizations in America,
raising money that sometimes end up supporting known
terrorist organizations (viz: the well documented CAIR
connections). Recently a united alliance of these
organizations was formed, with the purpose of becoming
more influential. Our presidential election of 2016
was the example cited, once a consensus would be
agreed upon by individual members.
Dave's recent newsletter linked to the report about
this new alliance at religiousnews.com. Click
here to read it.
While I wouldn't bet the farm on it, my prayer is
that the uniting voice of American Muslims is the
foremost recognition of individual freedom and
opportunity that has drawn so many families to
America. EACH individual's freedom of beliefs,
associations, and speech (to mention a few of our
inalienable God-given freedoms) are worthy principles
that all Americans should recognize, be thankful for,
and do our level best to protect and preserve. In the
meantime I will continue to "Trust, but verify."
To find Mr
Gaubatz blogspot, click
and you can send him an email to
subscribe to his newsletter.
The Brave German Woman
February 14, 2014
can recognize that sometimes well meaning
people and institutions can err in the side of
trying to "be nice". However the mentality of
automatic acceptance and accommodation, when
institutionalized, can, and has, placed free
societies in peril; it is the dangerous side
of "political correctness." Please
click here to view the video of Heidi
Mund, who has become known as "The Brave
German Woman" for speaking the truth. If
more people spoke the "Truths that Free" we
would go far in ridding this old world from
the inroads of the evil tentacles of that
totalitarian philosophy that goes by the name
of Islam, which does not condemn murder in the
name of Allah.
Many of us are aware of
hostility toward Christians in foreign
But has there even been a more
Biblically-hostile administration in Washington
DC, towards its own citizens? David Barton of
WallBuilders doesn't think so.
After reading his list (and documentation) of
the many dozens of offensive hostile acts
towards Bible believers in America ask yourself-
how can this be? We are a God fearing
people living in a free country that was founded
on the recognition that our life and liberty
originates from God (NOT at the whim of
some officeholder or bureaucrat!)
The encroachment by the current
administration does not resemble actions of a
government "of the People, by the People,
and for the People". Offer a prayer for
protection by our Father above. Ask Him to throw
light upon the hearts and minds of those in
power and those who elect some of those
bureaucrats. Be vigilant and protect our
children and their future. Click
here to read David Barton's December article
Military Priests Face Arrest
For Defying Shutdown And Celebrating Mass
religious freedom the latest casualty of the
Some priests are being
actively prevented from ministering to service
members and their families, even on a volunteer
basis, and they run the risk of arrest if they
disobey. As a result, military families serving at
home and abroad who depend on the government for
their religious services, are now actively being
denied communion on bases that are served by
civilian priests. Active-duty priests are still
John Schlageter, General
Counsel for the Archdiocese for the Military
Services, wrote in an op-ed, "With the government
shutdown, many GS and contract priests who
minister to Catholics on military bases worldwide
are not permitted to work – not even to volunteer.
During the shutdown, it is illegal for them to
minister on base and they risk being arrested if
they attempt to do so. "
He told The Huffington Post
that many civilian priests had contacted him to
say that Mass had been cancelled on their local
installations, because non-active-duty priests are
deemed "non-essential personnel" under the terms
of the shutdown. Schlageter wrote the op-ed in
order to encourage members of the faithful to
contact Congress and get their attention about the
issue, which he called "a residual effect of the
government shutdown that no one contemplated."
His efforts have not been in
vain, as the House of Representatives passed a
resolution on Saturday 400 to 1 which will allow
GS and contract priests to return to work once passed
by the Senate.
Schlageter went on to explain
in his op-ed that the First Amendment guarantees
the "free exercise" of faith, and because military
personnel are considered a "captive audience," the
laws requires the government to provide access to
their faith. This particularly applies to military
families stationed abroad who may not be able to
attend services regularly, depending on the
religious rules of their host country. Those that
have active-duty chaplains will not be affected.
"Until the Federal Government
resumes normal operations, or an exemption is
granted to contract and GS priests, Catholic
services are indefinitely suspended at many of
those worldwide installations served by contract
and GS priests," Schlageter wrote. He told the
Huffington Post that some priests that contacted
him had been informed that they could be arrested
if they returned to base to administer services
during the shutdown.
The Antideficiency Act
prevents those on furlough from volunteering their
services, and violators may be subject to
disciplinary action, suspension, fines, and
imprisonment. It was passed in 1870 in order to
stop the government from "incurring any monetary
obligation for which Congress has not appropriated
not delegated to the United
by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to
the States, are reserved to the States
respectively, or to the people.”
NEW STATE LAW
FROM COOPERATING WITH FEDS ON INDEFINITE
also applies to other laws that violate
Constitution or state law
October 7, 2013
– In a rare show of bipartisanship, Governor
Brown has signed into a law that passed the
Legislature almost unanimously. The
measure makes California
the third state to nullify provisions of the
National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)
allowing indefinite detention of citizens.
law goes farther, banning state cooperation with
federal authorities on enforcement of any
federal law that violates the U.S. Constitution,
the California Constitution or California
law. The bill also prohibits use of state
funds for such purposes.
Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood
to Coptic Christians: Convert to Islam, or pay
The Muslim Brotherhood and its supporters have
began forcing the roughly 15,000 Christian Copts
of Dalga village in Egypt
to pay a jizya tax as indicated in Koran 9:29,
author and translator Raymond Ibrahim reported on
Jizya is the money, or tribute, “that conquered
non-Muslims historically had to pay to their
Islamic overlords ‘with willing submission and
while feeling themselves subdued’ to safeguard
their existence,” Mr. Ibrahim explained.
According to Fr. Yunis Shawqi, who spoke
yesterday to Dostor reporters in Dalga, all Copts
in the village, “without exception,” are being
forced to pay the tax.
“[The] value of the tribute and method of payment
differ from one place to another in the village,
so that, some are being expected to pay 200
Egyptian pounds per day, others 500 Egyptian
pounds per day,” Mr. Shawqi said, according to the
In some cases, families not able to pay have been
attacked. As many as 40 Christian families have
now fled Dalga, Mr. Ibrahim reported.
The taxes are not unique to Egypt
Just over the weekend Syrian rebels went into a
Christian man’s “shop and gave him three options:
become Muslim; pay $70,000 as a tax levied on
non-Muslims, known as jizya; or be killed along
with his family,” Christian Science Monitor
Egypt's Christians under attack
since Morsi's ouster
Rights groups say Egypt
not doing enough to stop the violence.
Special for USA
TODAY August 15,
– Stained glass windows generated a luminous glow
inside a Coptic Christian church one recent morning as
prayers were chanted in steady hums and incense wafted
through the nave, soothing worshipers.
But the serenity only masked the unease here. Since
the July 3 coup that ousted former president Mohammed
Morsi of the Muslim Brotherhood, Christians have faced
a spike in violent attacks that Egyptian authorities
have not prevented, rights groups allege.
"I'm very afraid, and I'm afraid for my daughter,"
said Mona Roshdy, 55, as she left the church with her
She had reason to be. On Wednesday, as the police in
assaulted two protest camps of the Muslim
Brotherhood's, Morsi supporters directed their anger
Churches, houses, monasteries, orphanages, schools
and businesses belonging to Copts were attacked in
nine provinces "causing panic, losses and destruction
for no reason and no crimes they committed except
being Christians," the Maspero Youth Union, a Coptic
activist group, said Thursday.
As if sensing trouble, just two days before
Wednesday's violence, Egypt's
Coptic Orthodox Pope Tawadros II called on all
Egyptians to prevent bloodshed.
"With all compassion I urge everyone to conserve
Egyptian blood and ask of every Egyptian to commit to
self-restraint and avoid recklessness and assault on
any person or property," Tawadros wrote on his
official Twitter account Monday.
Youssef Sidhom, editor-in-chief of the Christian
weekly Watani, said the recent attacks are
painful and vicious but it could be worse if they are
allowed to divide the two faiths.
"Christians shouldn't be moved by this, shouldn't be
dragged to fulfill the target that lies behind this,
which is segregating the national solidarity between
Christians and Muslims in the very difficult time
Egypt is passing through," Sidhom said.
Christians make up about 8 million of Egypt's
population of 80 million and have been victims of
Muslim attacks for years. Some Christians were worried
when Islamists took over Egypt's
in 2012 and relieved when the military ousted them
from power last month.
But the ancient Coptic communities here that predate
Islam by centuries say they now see a new wave of
violence against them since the ouster.
In Upper Egypt – a swath of arid land from south of
Cairo to Sudan that is home to many hard-line Islamist
Egyptians – four Christians were killed when a mob of
several hundred people in the Luxor governorate
attacked with knives, tree limbs and hammers two days
days after the overthrow of Morsi, Amnesty
They also vandalized Christian homes and set
properties on fire, Amnesty said.
In a village in Upper Egypt's province of Minya, an
argument erupted between Muslim and Christians over a
pro-military song playing in a coffee shop last week.
The next day thousands of people ransacked Christian
homes and stores, the Associated Press reported.
And in the north Sinai
Peninsula, a hotbed for growing militant
activity, an orthodox priest was murdered last month.
There were attacks in Port Said and
Marsa Matrouh as well.
On Wednesday, Interior Minister Mohammed Ibrahim said
Morsi supporters damaged or torched seven churches
nationwide. They also stormed 21 police stations, he
Many Christians participated in massive protests
against Morsi at the end of June, and Tawadros sat
with a row of officials behind Gen. Abdel Fattah
Al-Sisi when the army chief gave his speech that
In a 15-minute audio recording posted online earlier
this month, al-Qaeda chief Ayman al-Zawahri accused
Coptic Christians, the military and secular-minded
elites of conspiring against Morsi because he is an
human rights groups accused Egypt's
Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamists of inciting
Ibrahim said incendiary speeches indicate Islamist
leaders think Copts were heavily involved in
"I'm not scared, but I'm very sad about the situation
in the country – the relationship between Muslims and
Christians," said Margaret Naby as she walked into
church on Sunday. "There is so much fanaticism."
is home to wider sectarian unease that authorities
don't control. In June, four Shiite Muslims were
beaten to death by a mob of Sunni Muslims, apparently
for their beliefs, in a village near the capital, in Giza.
"The Egyptian government should make ending sectarian
violence a priority, or risk letting this deadly
problem spiral out of control," Nadim Houry, acting
Middle East director of Human Rights Watch, said in a
recent report about attacks on Christians.
"Prosecutors should thoroughly investigate and
prosecute those responsible, including security
forces, if they want to show they are capable of
preventing future bloodshed," he said.
Last week, 16 human rights groups condemned rhetoric
used by the Muslim Brotherhood and its allies that the
organizations said incited violence and religious
hatred for political gain. They also denounced state
agencies for failing to protect Christians, confront
sectarian attacks and enforce the law by holding
responsible parties or individuals accountable.
"This negligence reveals that the pattern of impunity
which spread during the Mubarak era and remained in
place throughout the rule of the Muslim Brotherhood
continues to this day, even after both of these
regimes were overthrown," a statement by the groups
Cairo, which was a Christian stronghold until the
7th-century rise of Islam, Zarour Ayzut Dawoud propped
her son on her hip as she visited the place where
Mary, Joseph and baby Jesus are believed to have
stayed when they escaped King Herod's execution of
young male children in the vicinity of Bethlehem.
"I want to go to America,"
Dawoud. "The situation in Egypt
is no good."
Peter Fakhry, 22, said the feeling is shared by
"Many people want to leave – Christians and Muslims,
too, because of the situation and lack of work," he
"Do you see this? There are no tourists," he said
about the Coptic site that is no longer as much a
residential space as it is a place for visitors, who
come to see relics of an almost forgotten past in
was dominated by Christians.
Amendment on August 5, 2013 in Featured, Founding Principles
by Jacob Hornberger, Future of
Keep in mind that this amendment is
directed to federal officials, specifically those in
the executive and congressional branches. Our
American ancestors knew that the federal government
would inevitably attract the types of people who
would do the things proscribed by the amendment.
Thus, to deal with that threat our ancestors made it
clear that whoever was elected or appointed to
federal office would be prohibited from engaging in
the type of conduct prohibited by the amendment.
What does the Fourth
Amendment do? It prohibits federal officials from
searching people’s homes, businesses, and personal
effects indiscriminately. If a crime has been
committed, the feds cannot simply go out and search
every house and business in the neighborhood to seek
out evidence of the crime. And they cannot search
everyone’s things with the aim of preventing a crime.
Instead, the Fourth
Amendment requires that to conduct a search of a
person’s home or business, they have to first go to a
member of the third branch of the government— the
federal judiciary — and seek out a search warrant from
a judge or magistrate. In order to get such a warrant,
law-enforcement officers have to swear out an
affidavit specifying the exact nature of the evidence
that is being searched for. Moreover, they have to
provide sworn evidence that rises to the level of
“probable cause” for the judge to consider. If they
fail to do those two things, the judge’s
responsibility is to deny the application for the
Like it or not, that’s
the system that our American ancestors put into place
with the Fourth Amendment.
That’s obviously not the
system that we have been living under for many years,
given the massive secret surveillance scheme that has
now come to light thanks to former NSA employee Edward
Snowden. We now know that the U.S.
national security state is doing — and has been doing
— precisely what the Fourth Amendment was designed to
prohibit. It has been gathering and compiling massive
amounts of information about the private affairs of
hundreds of millions of people, most of whom, needless
to say, have never made the target of a specific
search warrant request.
officials say that such a massive surveillance scheme
on everyone is necessary to keep Americans “safe.”
Well, let’s see. If we
go back and read the Fourth Amendment, we immediately
notice one important thing: Our American ancestors did
not provide an exception to the restrictions based on
keeping Americans “safe.”
That is, the amendment
doesn’t have the following sentence at the end of it:
“The provisions of this amendment are null and void in
cases where the government is keeping people ‘safe.’”
If our ancestors had
added such a provision, then the NSA and its
supporters might have a point. But they didn’t.
Is there anything to
prevent the advocates of the NSA’s surveillance scheme
from seeking a constitutional amendment that modifies
the Fourth Amendment to include such a safety
No, there isn’t. Then
why shouldn’t the supporters of such a scheme be
required to go that route — the route of seeking a
“keep people safe” amendment to the Fourth Amendment,
rather than the super-secret, illegitimate route that
they have taken?
Proponents also say that
the 9/11 terrorist attacks provided the feds with the
authority to avoid the Fourth Amendment.
Well, let’s see. If we
go back and read the amendment, we notice something
else important: There is no exception for terrorist
attacks in the amendment.
If the amendment had
provided such an exception, then the proponents of the
NSA’s massive secret surveillance scheme might have a
point. But they didn’t. Our ancestors provided no
exceptions for terrorist cases or any other crime. So,
if proponents of such a scheme don’t like what our
ancestors did, why shouldn’t they be required to seek
a constitutional amendment seeking the modification of
the Fourth Amendment?
Our American ancestors
knew exactly what they were doing. When you see people
like Barack Obama, Dianne Feinstein, Peter King, Mike
Rogers, and others who are coming to the defense of
the massive, secret NSA surveillance scheme that is
searching, gathering, and compiling personal
information on millions of innocent Americans, you are
seeing precisely the types of people that our
ancestors knew would end up serving in the federal
government and doing the types of things the Fourth
Amendment expressly prohibits. You are also seeing
precisely why our ancestors believed the Fourth
Amendment was absolutely necessary to our freedom,
privacy, and well-being.
Remember the wise and
immortal words of Justice Louis Brandeis in his
dissent in the case of Olmstead v. United States:
Experience should teach
us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the
government’s purposes are beneficent. Men born to
freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their
liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to
liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal,
well-meaning but without understanding.
Constitution (Amendment I) says:“Congress
shall make no law respecting an establishment of
religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;
or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press;
or the right of the people peaceably to assemble,
and to petition the government for a redress of
grievances.” AMENDMENT #2-“And the
Right to Keep and Bear Arms!”
Our Constitution: 56 men who pledged
their Lives, Fortunes, and Sacred Honor.
gentlemen, our government, under the
leadership of Obama’s
socialist agenda that is determined to shred our
beloved Constitution, thus destroying our freedoms
We live in
a very dark era, our national media have
determined not to present real truth in news, or
they report with such bias as to nullify
We are watching
Senate give right-of-way
to the Executive
Branch of Government to control our
nation, out of the White House! ILLU:
National Scandals as IRS, NSA, Benghazi, etc.
We now have
to by about 200
un-elected czars that are proud
socialists and/or active
help us to stand
up, speak up,
and act as the ethical,
nation we once were.Believers are to be “salt”
We have seen the
IRS,BATF, HOMELAND SECURITY,
FBI, and other Federal
Americansand Demandus to Bow
FREEDOM?Where do we get our freedoms?
God has given us
our freedoms and we have codified them in our
Constitution, “...All men are
created equal and endowed by their creator with
certain unalienable rights, that among these are
life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness...”
gentlemen, God has provided us with the greatest
nation and Constitution on the face of the
has charged us with the responsibility of vigilance,
commitment and involvement in the protection of our
– A raw milk
farmer not fearful of the Gestapo
breaking into his home.
– praying in Jesus’
name without fear or intimidation.
– a child that can take a sack lunch
to school without fear
of it being taken.
– being able to fly the
breaking a law.
– to be able to read the
Bible in a public classroom without
– being able to rejectShariah
Law as unconstitutional
able to make
a phone call, without the
without the Feds Tracing
– to be able to go to bed at
night without fear
officials under the NDAA,
which will give the president sole authority without
Congress’ approval, if deemed a “national
– to have openness in Washington in
our government, not “provda-style”
12.FREEDOM IS—Allowing the
Moral Majority to be Heard!
13.FREEDOM IS—Having aRight to
– to be able to decide our own food menu,
our own diet and medical
– to allow every child conceived
to have “life”
under our Constitution.
Enforcement AgentsStealing our
it to Islamic
that Honors God, and OurConstitutionalControls
to PubliclyStandon IssuesWithout Fear
is Afraidof the People
by our Government,Directed
by the President!
– to live in a land where the governmentcannotintrude
into the church.
of church and state is Biblical.
found in our Constitution.)
entered into the temple
to offer sacrifice (81 priests begged
him not to).It is the duty and responsibility
of the church—Uzziah
did it anyway, and God
killed him, therefore,we must
off God’s church, stop the
marginalization of believers.
– to be able to render to
Caesar what belongs to
Caesar, and render
what belongs to God, without the government—(city, state or
national)using back door fees
to rob God’s
be today without our churches?
– to have a government that is restrained
by the U.S. Constitution: American law
and NO international,
law in our courts.SB-58
351 Defeated by Pressure
Lawmakers by Islamic
– to have our educational
back to our state
and local leaders, NOTczars in Washington.
– to not
have the government mandate faith/religious,
people to have to choose between conscience,
by government.Our churches, church schools and universities
to provide abortion
against our Biblical,
– not to be forced
to provide murder
by abortion at taxpayer’s expense.
56 MillionMurdered since
–Roe vs Wade!
– is to have presidential candidates provide a legitimate
birth certificate and proof of citizenship
running for office.
to Go to a
Public Park, Beach,
Venue and ProclaimTruth,
– knowing that we have the Constitutional
Amendment right to keep and bear
– knowing that our children in school are being taught
American History without
of Islam in our textbooks.
that our fee
simple title deeds
to our properties are securewithout
fear of the EPA
it to protect a snail
– in the final analysis knowing God, through His son,
Jesus Christ, and NOT being fearful
to call the
name of Jesus from the highest
apologizing for breaking
things and killing
people in a just
Daniel Chapter 3 tells us of three young
men that refused
to a law.They
in the fiery
furnace, but because
of their faith
in God, they wouldNOTburn!
They Did NotBow to
Law, When Threatened
They Did Not
Bend, and Throwninto
the FurnaceThey Did
oDaniel was thrown
into the den
of lions for refusing to obey
law.The lions became
delivered him! (Daniel,
·Ladies and Gentlemen—may I read you some quotes from
our founding fathers:
·“Without freedom of thought there
can be no such thing as libertywithoutfreedomofspeech.”
·“Those who wouldgive upessentialliberties to purchasetemporary
safety deserveneither liberty nor
·“If it be asked, What is the most
sacred duty and the greatest source of our
security in a republic?The
answer would be an inviolable respect for
the Constitution and laws—the firstgrowing out of the last---a sacredrespect for the Constitutional law
is the vitalprinciple, the sustainingenergy of a free government.”
·“When the people fear their government
there is tyranny; when government
fears the people, there is “liberty.””
·“The price of freedom
is eternal vigilance.”
·“In matters of style, swim
with the current.In matters
of principle, standfirmlikearock.”Thomas
Gentlemen—let’s send a message to
AND CLEAR—“We the People.”
oWe will notsurrender
on the account
oWe will notsacrifice
on the altar of coercion.
oWe will notsubmit
rights to the rule
of unelectedczars in Washington.
oWe will not
and allow socialism
oWe will bevigilant,
and vote in
oWe will have “revolution”
at the “ballot”
is very clear (Acts 5:29) we ought
to obey Godrather
GOD BLESS YOU AND MAY GOD BLESS AMERICA!
4 Ways the Fourth Amendment's
Already Being Pummeled in a Non-Top Secret Way
The government will
always insist it's acting within the law.
June 11, 2013
Last week The
Guardian and The Washington Post
reported that the National Security Agency collects
information on the phone and Internet habits of
millions of Americans. Since then we've seen President
Barack Obama argue against the strawman of
combining “100 percent privacy and 100 percent
security.” We've seen the Director of National
Intelligence and apologists point to federal
statutes that allegedly permit the behavior. And, on
the brighter side, we've seen Sen. Rand Paul
introduce the Fourth Amendment Restoration Act.
Our View: Illinois, meet U.S.
Journal Star article
Posted May 20, 2013
Last update May 21, 2013
So Chicago doesn’t
want concealed carry of handguns to be the law in the
Nonetheless, last time we checked, Chicago is a city
in the United States of America, which has a Second
Amendment that permits the citizens of this country —
even those living in Chicago — the right to gun
ownership. The U.S. Supreme Court specifically told Chicago so in 2010 in striking
down its ban on guns (McDonald v. City of Chicago).
Then late last year, the U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of
Appeals informed the state of Illinois, in which
Chicago sits, that its prohibition on guns carried
outside the home also was unconstitutional.
We have not always been thrilled by the prospect of
people packing heat everywhere you go, either, but
fundamentally, the federal courts carry a bigger gavel
than the city of Chicago
and the state of Illinois here.
The June 9 deadline established by the court for state
government to come into compliance with the U.S.
Constitution is a solid one.
Yet that has not stopped Chicago-area legislators
from doing everything they can to drag this thing out
and neuter it as much as possible. Case in point is
state Sen. Kwame Raoul, D-Chicago, sponsor of the
concealed carry measure (House Bill 183, which is
sponsored by Lou Lang, D-Skokie, in the House).
Raoul initially wanted to give Chicago’s police chief
and county sheriffs the authority to veto these gun
permits, with applicants having to show “proper
reason” for carrying and “good moral character” to get
law enforcement’s “endorsement.” He has since dropped
the latter, but the former remains. In any case, who
defines “proper reason” or “moral character,” and
how do you implement that on a consistent basis? Those
are so vague as to be unworkable, if also ripe for
abuse. The Second Amendment doesn’t say that “the
right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be
infringed ... unless the police chief or some other
government official says so.” It really is no wonder
that the National Rifle Association objected to that.
Moreover, it’s hardly in keeping with the spirit of
the federal appellate court’s ruling that “to confine
the right to be armed to the home is to divorce the
Second Amendment from the right of self-defense.”
Meanwhile, Raoul also wants to give home-rule
communities — like Chicago and Peoria — the ability to
expand the state’s list of gun-free zones, which
critics have charged would create a “patchwork” of
regulations that virtually no one can follow and that
risks making criminals of people who are not. We feel
strongly that any concealed carry law should be
uniform throughout the state.
(Reuters) - Prime Minister David Cameron said the
brutal killing of a soldier who was hacked to death in
by two men shouting Jihadist slogans was a betrayal of
"We will never give in to terror or terrorism in any
of its forms," Cameron told reporters outside his Downing Street residence on
"This was not just an attack on Britain
and on the British way of life, it was also a betrayal
of Islam and of the Muslim communities who give so
much to our country. There is nothing in Islam that
justifies this truly dreadful act."
calling the Fort Hood Texas incident over three
years ago, of
Major who yells 'AllahuAkbar’ fires, and
kills twelve soldiers and one civilian “Workplace
modern Western “Civilizantion” is in deep
Top Senate Democrat: DOJ
action against AP ‘inexcusable’
By Chris Moody, Yahoo News,
Tue, May 14, 2013
While the White House
remains quiet about whether the Justice Department was
right to seize the phone records of Associated Press
reporters, on Capitol Hill the top Democrat in the
Senate was unequivocal about his opposition.
In his weekly press
briefing on Tuesday, Senate Majority Leader Harry
Reid, D-Nev., blasted the DOJ for its behavior, which
included tracking reporters' phone records within the
House press gallery over a leak related to an
attempted terror plot last year.
"I have trouble
defending what the Justice Department did in looking
at the AP," Reid said. "I really believe in the First
Amendment. I think it's one of the great things we
have as a country. I don't know who did it or why it
was done, but it was inexcusable. There is no way to
justify this. In my career, I've stood consistently
for freedom of the press."
Reid added that he would
make a determination about whether "legislative
action" is needed in response.
Attorney General Eric
Holder on Tuesday defended the department's tactics,
saying that the AP's reporting about a foiled airline
bomb plot in 2012 "put the American people at risk."
He called the information the AP received from
undisclosed sources the “top two or three most serious
leaks I’ve ever seen.”
Punishable by Court-Martial
Thursday, May 02, 2013
The Pentagon says soldiers can be
prosecuted for sharing their faith.
The Defense Department released the
statement to Fox news, which reads, "Religious
proselytization is not permitted within the Department
of Defense" and punishments can include
This comes after Pentagon officials
met with Mikey Weinstein of the Military Religious
Freedom Foundation, who said even the presence of a
Bible on a desk can amount to proselytizing.
He added that even a Christian
bumper sticker on an officer's car or a Bible on a
desk can amount to "pushing this fundamentalist
version of Christianity on helpless subordinates."
Retired Lt. Gen. Jerry Boykin told
CBN News he believes there's an agenda to get
Christians out of the military.
"It's not just about officers or
commanders sharing their faith, it's about every
individual soldiers, sailor, airmen or marine being
able to exercise their faith," Boykin said.
"The First Amendment talks about the 'free exercise,
thereof,' speaking of our faith. This will destroy our
military because mom and dad in the central part of
are not going to want Johnny and Janie to join the
military knowing that they would not be able to
exercise their faith at the same time that they are
protecting those constitutional rights to do so," he
Rhetoric heats up in
debate over proselytizing in the military
By Matthew Brown, Deseret News
Published: Wednesday, May 1 2013
A war over the religious freedom of military
chaplains and the troops they serve is being waged in
The latest salvo came this week when conservative
blogger Todd Starnes wrote on Fox News and the
Christian Post that the Pentagon confirmed that
"religious proselytization is not permitted within the
Department of Defense."
The regulation is not new. In August, the Air Force
issued a policy telling its chaplains that they must
balance an airman's right to religious exercise with a
prohibition against government establishment of
religion. A violation of the policy could result in a
What is new is a
recent demand to enforce the rule. It came
after a private meeting last week between Pentagon
officials and Larry Wilkerson, former chief of staff
to Colin Powell, former Ambassador Joe Wilson and
civil rights attorney Michael L. "Mikey" Weinstein.
Conservative Christians are particularly upset that
the Department of Defense is taking advice from
Weinstein, who heads the Military Religious Freedom
"God help us now when someone with such visceral
hatred of conservative Christians — literally tens of
millions of Americans — who says sharing this gospel
is 'spiritual rape' is helping develop policies for
how to deal with Christians in the military," wrote
Ken Klukowski, director of the Center for Religious
Liberty at Family Research Council.
He draws his conclusions about Weinstein's view of
Christianity from a Huffington Post blog in which
Weinstein referred to so-called fundamentalist
Christians as monsters, bigots, bandits and evil,
among other things.
Weinstein told Washington Post columnist Sally Quinn
that “there is systematic misogyny, anti-Semitism and
Islamophobia in the military.” He called such a
culture "a national security threat. What is happening
(aside from sexual assault) is spiritual rape. And
what the Pentagon needs to understand is that it is
sedition and treason. It should be punished.”
Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research
Council, reacted by saying the military meeting with
Weinstein on religious freedom is "like consulting
on how to improve human rights."
The FRC has launched a petition drive urging Defense
Secretary Chuck Hagel to "not to proceed with the
purge of religion within the ranks called for by
anti-Christian activists." (Click
here to sign petition)
Ron Crews, the executive director of the Chaplain
Alliance for Religious Liberty, told the Christian
Post that deciding "a service member cannot speak of
his faith is like telling a service member he cannot
talk about his spouse or children.
"I do not think the Air Force wants to ban personnel
from protected religious speech, and I certainly hope
that it is willing to listen to the numerous
individuals and groups who protect military religious
liberty without demonizing service members."
Two other stories this week signaled that military
chaplains are on edge over what they can and cannot
say to the troops they advise. Barry Black, the U.S.
Senate chaplain and a former military chaplain, said
military chaplains could be accused of "hate speech"
for teaching what scripture says about homosexuality,
according the Christian Post.
"I can see many military chaplains having some
problems because, to teach the passages of Paul with
exegetical integrity would mean being accused of
engaging in hate speech," Black told a Heritage
Foundation audience. "So, this is a challenge that I
think we're going to have to deal with going forward."
Same-sex marriage may affect more than what a
chaplain preaches, says a candidate for the
chaplaincy, who wrote under a pseudonym in American
Thinker for fear of hurting his chances to become a
"What will happen when a military chaplain turns down
gay soldiers who want the chaplain to marry them?" he
asked hypothetically. "The military has already seen a
major shift in policy towards homosexuals as well as
significant rules towards political correctness. If
the Army decides that gay marriage is more valuable
than the religious beliefs of their chaplains there
will likely be a significant change to the Chaplain
The United States Army
has blocked the website of the Southern Baptist
Convention from some of its computers — a move that
family values groups say is a disturbing
continuation of the Pentagon’s hostile attitude
Department insists the blocking is a “glitch’’ in
the system which is being corrected.
But the American
Family Network, which is affiliated with the
American Family Association, says the issue comes
just weeks after an Army email called Christian
ministries like the Family Research Council and
American Family Association “domestic hate groups.’’
“This is just
another example of the Christian faith coming under
attack in the military,’’ Tim Wildmon, president of
American Family Network,’’ told The Tennessean
newspaper, which broke the story.
Roger Oldham, a
spokesman for the Southern Baptist Convention, said
he has been assured the problem is “a random event
with no malicious intent.’’
But he added:
"This is deeply disturbing . . . The First Amendment
exists to protect the church from governmental
censorship of or infringement upon religious speech
and the free exercise of religion."
Damien Pickart, a department of defense spokesman,
told the newpaper the military is working to resolve
the problem and is “not intentionally blocking
Association Notified: U.S.
Army Now Labels Southern Baptist Convention ‘Hostile’
April 25, 2013
Congressman Speaks out on Behalf of Christians
The United States Army
has blocked the website of the Southern Baptist
Convention from government computers, saying the
Christian site contains “hostile content.”
An Army officer assigned to a U.S.
base said he tried to access SBC.net from his
government computer, but instead, he got a message
that said the site was being blocked by “Team CONUS.”
The message he received read:
site you have requested has been blocked by Team CONUS
(C-TNOSC/RECERT-CONUS) due to hostile content.
Team Conus is the Department of Defense management and
computer network overseer of the military’s
Continental US Theater Network Operations and Security
Center (CTNOSC) Regional Computer Emergency Response
“So the Southern Baptist Convention is now considered
hostile to the U.S. Army…it just corroborates the
recent string of events highlighted by AFA,” the
officer wrote in an email to American Family
According to Tim Wildmon, president of American Family
Network, “This is just another example of the
Christian faith coming under attack in the military.
Earlier this month, an Army email labeled prominent
Christian ministries like the Family Research Council
and American Family Association as ‘domestic hate
groups.’ Their list continues to grow as is evidenced
by their new addition of the Southern Baptist
Convention as ‘hostile.’”
This prompted Congressman Randy Forbes (R-VA) to
question Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel about religious
liberty issues during a House Armed Services Committee
meeting just two weeks ago.
For more information on American Family Association,
visit www.afa.net .
set to enact life-starts-"at fertilization" abortion
| Apr 6, 2013
(Reuters) - Kansas is set to
enact one of the most restrictive abortion laws in the
nation which defines life as beginning "at
fertilization" and imposes a host of new regulations.
The Kansas House of Representatives passed the bill
90-30 on Friday night, a few hours after the Senate
backed it on a 28-10 vote. Strongly anti-abortion
Republican Governor Sam Brownback is expected to sign
it into law. Republicans hold strong majorities in
In addition to the provision specifying when life
begins, the bill prevents employees of abortion
clinics from providing sex education in schools, bans
tax credits for abortion services and requires clinics
to give details to women about fetal development and
abortion health risks. It also bans abortions based
solely on the gender of the fetus.
The Kansas bill
comes on the heels of anti-abortion measures passing
in states across the country, including one in Arkansas banning abortions in
the 12th week of pregnancy and a law in North Dakota
that sets the limit at six weeks.
language stating that life begins "at fertilization"
is modeled on a 1989 ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court,
said Kathy Ostrowski, legislative director of Kansans
for Life, anti-abortion group.
Ostrowski said the language protects the rights of
the unborn in probate and other legal matters.
If the bill is signed into law, Kansas will
become the eighth state declaring that life begins at
fertilization, said Elizabeth Nash, state issues
manager of the pro-choice Guttmacher Institute, which
researches abortion-related laws nationwide.
While it would not supplant Kansas law
banning most abortions after the 22nd week of
pregnancy, it does set the state up to more swiftly
outlaw all abortions should the U.S. Supreme Court
revisit its 1973 ruling making abortion legal, Nash
"It's a statement of intent and it's a pretty strong
statement," Nash said. "Should the U.S. Supreme Court
overturn Roe v. Wade or should the court come to some
different conclusion, the state legislature would be
ready, willing and able to ban abortions."
States that already have such language are Missouri, Kentucky, Arkansas, Illinois, Louisiana, North Dakota and Ohio,
bill prohibits use of public funds, tax preferences or
tax credits for abortion services. It prevents
state-provided public health-care services from being
used in any manner to carry out abortions, according
to a summary.
Taking away tax benefits would amount to 12 tax
increases for abortion providers, women and their
families, said Elise Higgins, Kansas
coordinator for the National Organization for Women.
Even abortions to save a mother's life would not be a
deductible cost, she said.
The bill bars school districts from letting abortion
providers offer, sponsor or furnish course materials
or instruction on human sexuality or on sexually
transmitted diseases. Higgins said that creates an
unfair stigma for employees of abortion providers.
by Kevin Murphy; Editing by Greg McCune, Doina Chiacu
and Gunna Dickson)
House church accused of being religious cult raided
By: Release International
1 April 2013
Christians in remote Xinjiang province have been
interrogated on suspicion of being a cult after a
violent armed raid on their house church.
One Christian named as Sister Xu remains in detention
after being arrested during a raid in which police
armed with guns and electric batons ransacked her home
and seized property.
Another Christian, house church leader Brother Shen,
was summoned for interrogation separately, which
caused him to suffer an 'episode' relating to a heart
condition, says Release partner China Aid. A second
leader named as Sister Cao fled the area, fearing she
too would be detained.
All three are members of a house church in QimoCounty, Kurla city, in
On March 15, 21 Public Security Bureau officials
visited Sister Xu's home while she was hosting a
prayer meeting. The 14 assembled Christians did not
answer the door and officials departed without forcing
entry 90 minutes later.
However, that evening, armed police arrived. As well
as confiscating property, they took fingerprints and
blood samples from Xu, her son and husband, and took
all three to the local police station for written
statements. It was there that Xu's husband saw
information on a computer alleging links between the
house church and a Chinese religious cult.
Xu's son and husband were both released the following
day, after the latter claimed he was not a Christian.
Brother Shen, who was interrogated on March 18, was
released within three hours, after his health
deteriorated. 'The police made his family guarantee
that there was nothing seriously wrong with his
health,' says China Aid.
Israeli-Palestinian tensions rose sharply on
Wednesday, with a resumption of clashes at the Gaza border as Palestinian
prisoners in Israeli jails declared a three-day hunger
strike to protest a fellow inmate’s death, saying Israel
In response to rockets fired from Gaza into southern Israel, apparently in
support of the Palestinian prisoners, the Israeli
military said it carried out an airstrike in Gaza
late Tuesday night, its first since a cease-fire that
ended eight days of fierce cross-border fighting in
November. Warplanes struck two open areas in northern
causing no damage or casualties, the military said.
Sami Abu Zuhri, a spokesman for Hamas, the Islamic
militant group that controls Gaza, called the
airstrikes a clear violation of the cease-fire. “We
call on international parties to intervene immediately
to end the Israeli escalation and also the violations
against the prisoners,” he said in a statement.
The rocket fire from Gaza
was the third such violation of the cease-fire
brokered by Egypt
in November, evidence of its fragility. There have
also been several episodes of Israeli gunfire directed
at fishermen and farmers approaching newly relaxed
security perimeters, sometimes with deadly
An Islamic extremist group in Gaza, the Mujahedeen
Shura Council — Environs of Jerusalem, claimed
responsibility for the rocket fire, saying in a
statement that it was in support of the Palestinians
held by Israel. The group criticized other Palestinian
factions for their inaction on the prisoner issue.
On Wednesday morning, Gaza
militants fired two more rockets into southern Israel.
One landed at the entrance of the Israeli border town
according to the police, and the other fell on open
ground. No one was hurt.
The death of the prisoner has also stirred unrest in
the West Bank. On
Wednesday night, a Palestinian youth was fatally shot
and three others were wounded in a clash with Israeli
soldiers near the West Bank town of Tulkarem,
according to Palestinian news reports.
The Israeli military said that several Palestinians
had attacked a military post with firebombs and that
soldiers responded with live fire. A spokeswoman said
the episode was being reviewed.
The United Nations special coordinator for the Middle East peace process,
Robert H. Serry, called the situation volatile and
said it was “of paramount importance to refrain from
violence in this tense atmosphere and for parties to
work constructively in addressing the underlying
Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon of Israel
said in a statement on Wednesday, “We will not allow
shooting of any sort, even sporadic, toward our
citizens and our forces.”
He added, “As soon as we identify the source of the
fire, we will take it down without hesitation, as we
did last night and in previous cases.”
But analysts said that neither Israel
nor Hamas appeared eager to escalate the situation and
that both sides were acting to restore the calm.
The highly charged issue of Palestinian prisoners
came to the fore again after the Palestinian
leadership accused Israel
of deliberately delaying the treatment of the prisoner
who died, Maysara Abu Hamdiya, 64. He had received a
diagnosis of throat cancer two months ago and died in
an Israeli hospital on Tuesday.
Mr. Hamdiya, a resident of the West Bank city of Hebron and a retired general in
the Palestinian Authority security services, was
detained by Israel
in 2002, at the height of the second Palestinian
uprising, and was serving a life term for attempted
murder after sending a suicide bomber to a cafe in Jerusalem,
Israeli officials said. The bomb failed to detonate.
Mr. Hamdiya’s death came amid efforts by the
Western-backed Palestinian leadership to place the
prisoner issue high on the diplomatic agenda, with
Secretary of State John Kerry expected in the region
next week to press for a renewal of peace talks.
Emotions over the prisoner issue have been running
high among Palestinians in recent months, leading to
protests in support of prisoners on hunger strikes and
over the death of a prisoner in February under
of Health said in a statement that an autopsy, held on
Wednesday in the presence of a Palestinian expert of
forensic medicine, showed that Mr. Hamdiya had died
from complications of cancer and noted that he had
been a heavy smoker, a factor that it said contributed
to throat cancer.
The Palestinian Authority distributed a copy of an
affidavit that it said was signed by Mr. Hamdiya’s
lawyer, Rami Alami, who visited him in jail on March
12. Mr. Alami said he found Mr. Hamdiya to be tired
and weak and unable to walk without help.
New U.N. arms treaty faces
rough road in U.S.
| Wed Apr 3, 2013
(Reuters) - The new global arms trade treaty was
overwhelmingly approved by the United Nations, with
backing, but it was clear on Wednesday it faces a
tough fight for ratification by U.S.
senators who contend it could affect Americans' gun
The 193-nation U.N. General Assembly approved the
pact by a vote of 154-3 on Tuesday, with 23
abstentions, many by major weapons exporters.
Washington was one
of the 'yes' votes, but to go into effect for the United States
it must win at least 67 votes - a two-thirds majority
- in the 100-member Senate. Last month, the Senate
supported a measure calling for the treaty's rejection
even before U.N. negotiations on its text were
The powerful National Rifle Association gun industry
lobby promised to fight against ratification. Several
senators, mostly Republicans, quickly issued
statements opposing the pact.
The United States
is the world's largest gun exporter, accounting for 30
percent of global volume. Russia,
No. 2, accounts for 26 percent. Moscow,
which along with China
abstained from the U.N. vote, said it would take a
hard look at the treaty before deciding whether to
The treaty, the first of its kind, seeks to regulate
the $70 billion business
in conventional arms and keep weapons out of the hands
of human rights abusers.
commitment to the treaty is important to get China,
and other big arms producers on board, diplomats and
The United States
is already in compliance with the treaty's terms
because of its weapons export and import laws, they
said, but U.S.
approval could put pressure on other nations to adopt
The White House said on Wednesday it had not yet
decided whether President Barack Obama would sign the
pact, and gave no timeline for doing so. Such a
signing seems likely, however, given White House
support for the pact at the United Nations.
If Obama signs, government agencies would review the
treaty before the administration decides whether to
seek ratification by the Senate.
"Timelines for the treaty review process vary and
given that we're just beginning the review, I wouldn't
want to speculate about when we'll make a decision,"
said Caitlin Hayden, spokeswoman for the National
The Senate voted 53-46 on March 23 for a nonbinding
amendment to its budget resolution calling for the
treaty's rejection. Supporters said they were worried
it would infringe on U.S.
'DON'T EXPECT A CAKEWALK'
Winning 67 votes for ratification would require the
support of all Democrats, including eight who voted
for the amendment, as well as at least 12 Republicans,
or a quarter of the entire Republican caucus, which
strongly opposes almost any limits on gun sales.
"Don't expect a cakewalk," one Democratic Senate aide
The U.S. Senate has often been skeptical of
international treaties, seeing them as limiting U.S.
power. Among the unratified pacts signed by a U.S.
president is the 1996 Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty,
which bans all nuclear explosions.
As with some other unratified treaties, however, Washington
has implemented that treaty's terms, refraining from
Several senators issued statements after the U.N.
vote reiterating their opposition.
"The U.N. Arms Trade Treaty ... would require the United States
to implement gun-control legislation as required by
the treaty, which could supersede the laws our elected
officials have already put into place," said Senator
James Inhofe, the top Republican on the Senate Armed
Services Committee, who sponsored the budget
He, fellow Republican Jerry Moran and Democratic
Senator Max Baucus issued a press release objecting to
the treaty after the U.N. vote.
(Additional reporting by Lou Charbonneau at the
United Nations and Doug Palmer and Roberta Rampton in
Editing by Warren Strobel and Mohammad Zargham)
Islamist terrorists and
fanatics are methodically exterminating the
2,000-year-old Christian civilization of the Middle East through
oppression, threats, appropriations and deadly
Our media ignore the
intensifying savagery against Christians in Muslim
Unconfirmed reports assert that, last month, Muslim
Brothers dragged Christian protesters to a mosque and
tortured them — but our reporters won’t look into an
Islamist Abu Ghraib.
For a century and a
half, the varied strands of Middle East Christianity
have faced increasingly fierce pogroms and, for the
Armenians, outright genocide. But with the rise of
Wahhabi and Salafist terror, the long, slow-motion
attack on Egypt’s
10 million Coptic Christians: Firemen dousing a blaze
at a New Year’s car bombing outside a Coptic church.
romanticize barbaric cultures but have no interest in
the destruction — before their averted eyes — of a
great and brilliant religious civilization. It’s as if
they accept the Islamist creed that Christians don’t
belong in the realms of Islam.
But the Middle East was more than just
Christianity’s birthplace. The faith we know matured
in the Middle East and North Africa, from Ephesus and Antioch to Alexandria and
beyond. St. Augustine,
the most influential church father after St. Paul,
was a North African.
Rome was a
latecomer to Christian authority. Through the Middle
Ages, substantially more Christians lived east of
Constantinople (now Istanbul)
than in Europe, the
faith’s backwater, whose northern reaches had yet to
thinkers, greatest monuments and greatest triumphs for
its first 1,000 years rose in the Middle East. Even the Muslim
conquest and relative servitude could not dislodge
Christianity. In the worst of times, Christianity
turned the other cheek and endured. Some Christians
Today, the end is in
In Iraq, cities such as
and Saddam’s hometown, Tikrit, were once vital centers
of Christianity. But the country’s Christian
population, estimated at up to 2 million a decade ago,
has fallen by half — perhaps by three-quarters.
Over 2 million
Christians in Syria
dread Islamist terror and religious cleansing so much,
they lean toward the vicious Assad regime, which at
least shielded minorities. Those who can, flee the
Christians were early
supporters of Arab nationalism. One of the fiercest
Palestinian leaders, George Habash, was a Christian,
as was the wife of Yasser Arafat. Their thanks?
Two-thirds of the West Bank’s and more of Gaza’s
Christians have been driven out. They’re now a small
minority even in Bethlehem.
has the region’s largest remaining Christian
population, at least 10 million Copts. With rare
exceptions, they’ve long been confined to squalid
quarters and treated as third-class citizens. Now the
Salafist fanatics have been unleashed. The nation’s
Muslim Brotherhood rulers could put a stop to
anti-Christian violence, but appear willing to let the
Salafists do the dirty work for them. They’re playing
bad cop, not-so-bad cop.
And we’ll send the
regime at least a billion dollars this year — with no
stipulations or conditions except that
military-related funds must purchase US-made or
US-licensed equipment. With Egypt’s
economy in desperate straits and the Brotherhood’s
popularity fading, we’re propping up
Christians in Iran?
Almost gone. Saudi Arabia?
The once-thriving Christian and Jewish populations of
Mecca and Medina
were finished off centuries ago.
And in Lebanon, the only
Middle East country that until recently had a
Christian majority, Christian rights have been so
threatened by Sunni fanaticism that some Christians
have reached out to Shia Hezbollah in their desperate
hunt for allies.
Far to the east, in Pakistan,
Christians face trumped-up charges of insulting Islam
or rape, beatings, murder and church bombings. And we
still pour billions into Pakistan.
It’s the end of a world
as we know it.
If Islam is a “religion
of peace,” it’s time to show the evidence to the
endangered Christians of the Middle
Of course, not all
Christians are angels, nor are all Muslims demons.
Most humans of any faith just want to get through the
day. And some Christians have collaborated with odious
Baathist regimes (usually, to ensure their community’s
survival). Nor are most Muslims active supporters of
the religious cleansing of Christians from their
But disappointingly few
Muslims actively defend religious minorities. It’s not
unlike Nazi Germany, where most Germans didn’t want to
murder Jews, but were complicit through their silence.
If a Michigan mosque is defaced with
graffiti, it makes national news and the Justice
Department views it as a hate crime. It’s time for
our government and media to apply the same standard
abroad on behalf of Christians.
When the government demands silence -- the
ugliness of the Patriot Act
Andrew P. Napolitano
March 21, 2013
In 1798, when John Adams was president of the United States,
the feds enacted four pieces of legislation called the
Alien and Sedition Acts. One of these laws made it a
federal crime to publish any false, scandalous or
malicious writing -- even if true -- about the
president or the federal government, notwithstanding
the guarantee of free speech in the First Amendment.
The feds used these laws to torment their adversaries
in the press and even successfully prosecuted a
congressman who heavily criticized the president.
Then-Vice President Thomas Jefferson vowed that if he
became president, these abominable laws would expire.
He did, and they did, but this became a lesson for
future generations: The guarantees of personal freedom
in the Constitution are only as valuable and reliable
as is the fidelity to the Constitution of those to
whom we have entrusted it for safekeeping.
We have entrusted the Constitution to all three
branches of the federal government for safekeeping.
But typically, they fail to do so. Presidents have
repeatedly assaulted the freedom of speech many times
throughout our history, and Congresses have looked the
other way. Abraham Lincoln arrested Northerners who
challenged the Civil War. Woodrow Wilson arrested
Americans who challenged World War I. FDR arrested Americans he
thought might not support World War II. LBJ and
Richard Nixon used the FBI to harass hundreds whose
anti-Vietnam protests frustrated them.
In our own post 9/11 era, the chief instrument of
repression of personal freedom has been the
government’s signature anti-terror legislation: the
Patriot Act. It was born in secrecy, as members of the
House of Representatives were given 15 minutes to read
its 300 pages before voting on it in October 2001, and
it operates in silence, as those who suffer under it
cannot speak about it.
The Patriot Act permits FBI agents to write their own
search warrants and gives those warrants the patriotic
and harmless-sounding name of national security
letters (NSLs). This authorization is in direct
violation of the Fourth Amendment to the U.S.
Constitution, which says that the people shall be
secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects
from unreasonable searches and seizures, and that that
security can only be violated by a search warrant
issued by a neutral judge and based upon probable
cause of crime.
The “probable cause” requirement compels the feds to
acquire evidence of criminal behavior about the person
whose records they seek, so as to prevent politically
motivated invasions of privacy and fishing expeditions
like those that were common in the colonial era.
Judges are free, of course, to sign the requested
warrant, to modify it and sign it, or to reject it if
it lacks the underlying probable cause.
The very concept of a search warrant authorized by
law enforcement and not by the courts is directly and
profoundly antithetical to the Constitution -- no
matter what the warrant is called. Yet, that’s what
Congress and President Bush made lawful when they gave
us the Patriot Act.
When FBI agents serve the warrants they’ve written
for themselves -- the NSLs as they call them -- they
tell the recipient of the warrant that he or she will
commit a felony if he or she tells anyone -- a lawyer,
a judge, a spouse, a priest in confessional -- of the
receipt of the warrant. The NSLs are typically not
served on the person whose records the FBI wants;
rather, they are served on the custodians of those
records, such as computer servers, the Post Office,
hospitals, banks, delivery services, telephone
Because of the Patriot Act’s mandated silence, the
person whose records the FBI seeks often never knows
his or her records have been seized. Since October
2001, FBI agents and other federal agents have served
more than 350,000 search warrants with which they have
authorized themselves to conduct a search. Each time
they have done so, they have warned the recipient of
the warrant to remain silent or be prosecuted for
telling the truth about the government.
Occasionally, recipients have not remained silent.
They have understood their natural and
constitutionally protected right to the freedom of
speech and their moral and fiduciary duty to their
customer or client, and they have moved in federal
court either to suppress the warrant or for the right
to tell the customer or client whose records are being
sought that the FBI has come calling. Isn’t that odd
-- asking a judge for permission to tell the truth
about the government?
What’s even more odd is that the same section of the
Patriot Act that criminalizes speaking freely about
the receipt of an agent-written search warrant also
authorizes the FBI to give the recipient of the
warrant permission to speak about it. How un-American
is that -- asking the FBI for permission to tell the
truth about the government?
Last week in San Francisco, U.S. District Court Judge
Susan Illston held that the section of the Patriot Act
that prohibits telling anyone about the receipt of an
FBI agent-written search warrant and the section that
requires asking and receiving the permission of the
FBI before talking about the receipt of one profoundly
and directly infringe upon the freedom of speech
guaranteed by the First Amendment. And the government
We all know that the whole purpose of the First
Amendment is to encourage open, wide, robust debate
about and transparency from the government. Our right
to exercise the freedom of speech comes from our
humanity, not from the government. The Constitution
recognizes that we can only lose that right by consent
or after a jury trial that results in conviction and
But we can also lose it by the tyranny of the
majority, as Congress and the president in 1798 and
2001 have demonstrated.
Obama urged: act
tough on Israel
or risk collapse of two-state solution
McGreal, US correspondent
Barack Obama begins his first
official visit to Israel
on Wednesday amid growing warnings among some of
its leading supporters in the US that the
president needs to act more forcefully to save Israel
The White House has played
down expectations that Obama will put any real
effort into pressing Israel
toward the creation of a Palestinian state after
he was burned by an attempt early in his first
term to pressure the prime minister, Binyamin
Netanyahu, into halting Israeli settlement
construction in the occupied territories.
But there is increasing
concern among some of Israel's backers
in the US
that without White House intervention the much
promised two-state solution is doomed – and that
will endanger Israel.
Among those sounding the
warning is the US
secretary of state, John Kerry, who said earlier
this year that "the possibility of a two-state
solution could shut on everybody and that would be
disastrous, in my judgment".
The inclusion of hardline
pro-settler ministers in Netanyahu's new
government, who are expected to press for the
continued expansion of Israel's colonies in the
West Bank, has heightened concerns in Washington
that physical realities on the ground are making
the prospect of a negotiated agreement ever more
Others have pointed up a
recent Hebrew University demographic study, which
showed that Jews are now in a minority in the
territory covered by Israel, Gaza and the West
Bank – suggesting that Israel's democratic and
Jewish character are threatened by its reluctance
to give up territory to an independent Palestine.
That led David Aaron Miller –
a negotiator in efforts by the Clinton
administration to broker an Israeli-Palestinian
agreement and an adviser on Middle East policy to
six US secretaries of state – to advise Obama to
"take a quick tour around Israel's demographic
neighbourhood" in order to understand the issue
that might be most persuasive in pressuring
Israeli leaders to take negotiations with the
"Demographic trends mean that
can't have it all. It can't be a Jewish state, a
democratic state*, and a state in control
of its whole historical land. It can only have two
of its objectives at a time," he wrote
in Foreign Policy.
"The demographic imperative
probably appeals to Obama, a rational thinker who
understands the importance of acting in the
present to avoid future catastrophes. He has at
least once referred to the demographic realities
in his speeches on the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict. But the president also knows from his
own political choices that getting politicians to
take risks now to prevent disasters and gain
rewards later isn't so easy."
It is a warning echoed earlier
this month by S Daniel Abraham, a US billionaire,
confidante of American and Israeli leaders, and
founder of the Center for Middle East Peace in
Washington, who chided the president for not using
his visit to press Israel's
to confront the looming "tipping point".
"Obama should realize that Israel's
continued presence in the West Bank is an
existential threat to its continuity as a
democratic, Jewish state — and time is not on Israel's side,"
he wrote in the Atlantic.
"Right now – not in five or 10
years, but right now – only 50% of the people
living in the Jewish state and in the areas under
its control are Jews. The dreaded tipping point –
which advocates of the two-solution have been
warning about for years – has finally arrived."
That is a warning reinforced
by an Oscar-nominated documentary, The Gatekeepers
– in which former heads of the Israel's internal
security organisation, the Shin Bet, warn that the
occupation is endangering Israel – which has
shaken up the assumptions among some in the Jewish
community and among Israel's other supporters in
Martin Indyk, a former US ambassador to
and now vice-president of the Brookings
Institution, said it is clear there is a growing
sense of alarm among some policymakers in the US.
But he said it may be misplaced.
"My sense is that this is the
view of Secretary Kerry – that there's an urgency
to try to not just resume negotiations but to
resolve at least some of the critical issues in
the conflict because the two-state solution is in
danger of cardiac arrest. I think there is an
urgency, but I don't actually think that if the
window closes it can't be prised open again," he
"The simple reason for that is
there is no alternative to the two-state solution
– except no solution. And no solution for the time
being may suit both sides… in preference to the
kind of compromises and the hard decisions that
have to be made in order to achieve a solution. We
are fond of saying, and our leaders are fond of
saying, the status quo is not sustainable. But if
you go out there on both sides, especially
compared to what is going on around them – in
Syria to the north and Egypt to the south – the
status quo, it's OK."
Indyk said there will not be
movement until leaders on both sides are prepared
to make hard decisions, and that Obama is probably
unwilling to force that after his "searing
experience" of dealing with Netanyahu over the
Jewish settlements four years ago.
"I think that there is
something achievable, and I actually think it's
very important. And that is that President Obama
has the opportunity to reintroduce himself to the
Israeli public. The first time he introduced
himself to them was in Cairo,
wherein he gave his speech in June 2009, which
was, of course, addressed to the Arab world and
not to Israel
… And (Israelis) got the impression that he wants
to distance the United
States from Israel
in order to curry favour with the Arab world," he
"It is hard to imagine that
the president himself is going to do much more
than make this visit. There are greener pastures
that beckon him in Asia, and you can see, from a
variety of other actions that he's taken or hasn't
taken in the Middle East,
that he would rather turn away from this region.
John Kerry has exactly the opposite instinct. He
wants to engage in the Middle
East and, in particular, he wants to
take on the Israeli-Palestinian challenge, and
it's a high priority for him."
word and argument. Forget Democracy. How about a
Republic? where people as diverse as the people
spanning the United States can live in relative
peace and freedom. Caveat: A Republic can only
work to the extent that The People have the
ability to think and access information and
knowledge, an emphasis that is fading from the
government educational system.
Ian Black's analysis after the President’s key
speech of his trip
"It was a very clever
speech” says the Guardian’s Middle
East editor Ian Black.
First he pressed all
the buttons that matter to a mainstream Israeli
Jewish and Zionist audience. He went to great
lengths to recognize the legitimacy of the Zionist
He attacked all of Israel’s enemies:
Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran.
He made a link, very interestingly, between Iran’s
nuclear program and the holocaust something that the
Israeli prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu often
But having done all
that, he then moved to the second message of trying
to achieve a just and viable solution for the
must recognize the right of Palestinian self
determination, he said. It should look at the world
through Palestinian eyes ... He talked about settler
violence that went unpunished. All very very
hot-button issues. Again cleverly using a phrase
that’s very resonant for Israelis, he said
Palestinians have a right to be a free people in
their homeland. That’s a phrase that is taken
directly from the Israeli national anthem.
There was nothing in
this speech that gives us any practical pointers as
to how the long-stalled peace process can be revived
... It gave positive messages to Israelis, it made
important points about the need to resolve the
conflict with the Palestinians, it provided no
obvious ways forward, but will I am sure have
created a positive mood in Israel towards the
message he was trying to put across.
He set out quite a
compelling vision of a country that needs to come to
terms with an existential problem for itself, and a
matter of fundamental justice for the people who are
suffering from it at the moment.
This “Truths That Free” section of “Ethics” has not
been updated for quite some time... that is not for
want of material. Located in Jacksonville,
Florida, in the United States,
one doesn’t have to look far to find corruption, among
elected or appointed officials and/or leaders or local
organizations. That includes organizations with the
power to arrest, detain and generally make your free
Growing up with my parents included
“larning” that honesty
and abiding by the law were virtues to be cultivated
if at all possible. “if at all possible” has caveats.
or neglect the value and importance of CIVIL
disobedience or as Gandhi called it, “satyagraha” nonviolent
resistance, or obedience to truth- THE TRUTH AND RIGHT IS-
independant, inalienable, and proceeding before all
institutions of people- although no one said that was
always easy or convenient.
Why do citizens have an expectation
of good character and ethical behavior from those we
elect or appoint to govern or to head
unions, or to populate our many civic departments?
Surely part of the reason is that we are their bosses,
we pay their salaries (often higher than their
counterparts in the private sector) and they are
accountable to us.
you have not felt your blood pressure rise, or your
anger mount often enough today here are a couple links to a few
articles about our finest in Jacksonville
and the state of Florida.
After reading these articles
consider shooting off (er... maybe that is not a good
metaphor anymore) sending
an email or making a phone call to one of your
representatives and let them know that you back their
honest effort (in a few rare cases) or that you demand
that they make an effort to discourage graft,
dishonesty, waste, and corruption from among their own
Hearing on Religious
Freedom Next Week
By Peter Kirsanow
from The National Review
March 13, 2013
The U.S. Commission on Civil
Rights will hold a public hearing next week on recent
developments involving the intersection of religious
freedom and anti-discrimination laws. The hearing will
take place on Friday March 22, at 9:30 a.m. at the
Commission’s headquarters, located at 1331 Pennsylvania
Avenue in Washington,
Witnesses will address, among other things, the HHS
mandate, the implications of Christian Legal
Society v. Martinez and Hosanna-Tabor v.EEOC, and religious-liberty claims under
First Amendment provisions other than the religion
Interested members of the public are invited to
attend. Further, members of the public may also submit
comments until April 21 on any of those topics by
sending them to the above address or emailing them to
This may be one of the few opportunities members of
the public will have to address comments on the
above topics to an agency of the federal
government. Note that there’s no page limit on
comments — they may range from a short paragraph to a
Debating the 'religious
freedom' bill Rejection would be serious blow
the Religious Freedom Act (HB 279) has been passed by
both chambers of the state legislature and is now on
Gov. Steve Beshear’s desk awaiting his signature. The
bill would return long-standing legal protections to
people of faith that the Kentucky Supreme Court took
away in a decision last October. But some groups are
urging Gov. Beshear to veto it.
The campaign against the bill being conducted by the
ACLU, the Fairness Alliance, and a small minority of
lawmakers has sadly turned into an ugly and virulent
campaign of hateful rhetoric and misinformation.
If there had been no evidence before of the
anti-religious sentiment that now threatens religious
freedom in Kentucky,
these groups have provided it.
The Religious Freedom Act is a response to a decision
last year in which the state’s high court ruled
against several Amish men who were being forced to put
brightly colored orange reflectors on their buggies in
violation of their religious strictures. The court
ruled against them. In doing so, the justices
announced that the former standard courts applied to
religious freedom cases, called “strict scrutiny,”
would now be replaced by a lower standard.
They made it easier for the government to violate
someone’s First Amendment right to free exercise of
Previously, the government had been required to show
that it had a compelling interest in overturning
someone’s religious rights. It also required the
government to use the least restrictive means to
accomplish its purposes. This bill would simply
restore these requirements.
The bill’s language is almost identical to the
language in the Religious Freedom Restoration Act,
passed by the U.S. Congress in 1993 after the U.S.
Supreme Court lowered the religious freedom standard
in a 1990 decision.
RFRA, whose protections were later limited only to
the federal government, was passed almost unanimously
by the U.S. Congress, signed by Bill Clinton,
sponsored by Ted Kennedy — and supported by the ACLU.
Given what this bill is really about, it is sad and
disappointing that the groups opposing it have chosen
to misrepresent the nature of the bill to the public
and to malign the many good people involved in
supporting the legislation.
When HB 279 passed the State House in a bipartisan 82-7
vote, Rep. Kelly Flood, D-Lexington, took to the floor
and attacked the Catholic church, charging them with
wanting to protect abusive priests. And when the state
Senate passed the measure in a 29-6 vote, state Sen.
Kathy Stein, D-Lexington, charged that the bill would
The ACLU and several gay rights groups also argue
that the bill would be used to gut civil rights
But if this is true, then why did none of this ever
happen before Oct. 25 of last year, when the standard
this bill reinstitutes was in force? If there were any
such cases, these groups would have produced them, but
they haven’t — and they can’t.
Because they don’t exist.
The bill has absolutely nothing to do with
the sexual abuse of children and nothing to do with
federal civil rights protections. In fact, the U.S.
Supreme Court has already ruled that preventing racial
discrimination is a compelling state interest — the
very standard used in this bill.
No one supporting the bill has used one hateful word
in arguing for it. Not a single person speaking for
the bill has maligned the character of those who
oppose it. And not a single supporter has
misrepresented the nature of the bill.
the group leading the charge against the bill, the
ACLU, was the very group who represented the Amish
in the case before the Supreme Court four months
ago. They argued their case under the standard
of strict scrutiny, the same standard they are now
If Gov. Beshear succumbs to pressure from the ACLU
and other groups and vetoes HB 279, it will be a
serious blow to religious freedom in Kentucky.
Homeland Insecurity: The attorney general
says the threat from local jihadists is now worse than
terrorist plots hatched overseas. He warned Americans
not to grow "complacent." Tell it to the media.
The major news gatekeepers have ignored the jihadist
element in no fewer than four recent cases of
sensational killings of non-Muslims by mostly young
Muslim men inside the U.S.,
• Yusuf Ibrahim, a 27-year-old Egyptian immigrant who
on Feb. 5 allegedly beheaded two Coptic Christians
living in New
• Ali Syed, a 20-year-old Muslim who allegedly
randomly killed three people in Southern
California on Feb. 18 before killing
• Ammar Asim Faruq Harris, a 26-year-old reported
black Muslim convert who on Feb. 21 is said to have
killed three people in Las Vegas.
• Ali Salim, a 44-year-old Pakistan-born doctor who
is accused of raping and killing a pregnant woman and
her 9-month-old fetus last year in his Ohio office.
This rash of homicides by Muslims has triggered a
giant media yawn, despite telltale signs of jihadist
motive. Jihad? What jihad? Reporters seemed to be
collectively shrugging in another fit of extreme PC.
Here's another key piece of information denied the
average American watching the evening news: the
majority of convicted terrorists in the U.S.
are American citizens. A study found the terrorist
threat is increasingly in our backyard.
Equally stunning, more than half of the 171 terror
convicts analyzed by the London-based Henry Jackson
Society are college-educated. Many are black converts.
Nearly half were born and raised here, according to
the report prefaced by former CIA director Mike
Yet they want to kill fellow Americans simply because
they believe that's what their creed tells them to do.
But instead of confronting this homegrown threat, our
society is fig-leafing it, even glorifying it.
Even in red-state Texas, educators
are indoctrinating kids into the Islamic faith. At
Lumberton High School, a geography class was recently
told to dress up in Islamic garb — including burqas —
and refer to the 9/11 hijackers not as terrorists but
as "freedom fighters."
This isn't an isolated event. There's a coordinated
effort by leftist do-gooders and multiculturalists to
de-link Islam from violence and terror and rewrite
When educators, journalists and politicians hear no
Islamic violence, see no Islamic violence and report
no Islamic violence, beware, it's Sept. 10, 2001,
tells feds to make sequester as painful as promised
by Stephen Dinan March 5, 2013 The Washington Times
The White House announced Tuesday that it is
canceling tours of the president’s home for the
foreseeable future as the sequester spending cuts
begin to bite and the administration makes good on its
warnings of painful decisions.
Announcement of the decision — made n an email from the
White House Visitors Office — came hours after The
Washington Times reported on another administration
email that seemed to show at least one agency has been
instructed to make sure the cuts are as painful as
President Obama promised they would be.
In the internal email, Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service official Charles Brown said he asked
if he could try to spread out the sequester cuts in his
region to minimize the impact, and he said he was told
not to do anything that would lessen the dire impacts
Congress had been warned of.
“We have gone on record with a notification to
Congress and whoever else that ‘APHIS would eliminate
assistance to producers in 24 states in managing
wildlife damage to the aquaculture industry, unless
they provide funding to cover the costs.’ So it is our
opinion that however you manage that reduction, you
need to make sure you are not contradicting what we
said the impact would be,” Mr. Brown, in the internal
email, said his superiors told him
Neither Mr. Brown nor the main APHIS office in
Washington returned calls seeking comment, but
Agriculture Secretary Thomas J. Vilsack, who oversees
the agency, told Congress he is trying to give
flexibility where he can.
“If we have flexibility, we’re going to try to use it
to make sure we use sequester in the most equitable
and least disruptive way,” the secretary told Rep.
Kristi L. Noem, a South Dakota Republican who grilled
Mr. Vilsack about the email. “There are some
circumstances, and we’ve talked a lot about the meat
inspection, where we do not have that flexibility
because there are so few accounts.”
Ms. Noem told Mr. Vilsack that the email made it
sound like the administration was sacrificing
flexibility in order to justify its earlier dire
“I’m hopeful that isn’t an agenda that’s been put
forward,” the congresswoman told Mr. Vilsack.
bill would require anger management courses for
bullet buyers By Joshua
Rhett Miller Published March 5,2013 Fox News
A Florida legislator wants anyone trying to buy
ammunition to complete an anger management program
first, in what critics say is the latest example of
local lawmakers reaching for constitutionally-dubious
solutions to the problem of gun violence.
The bill filed Saturday by state Sen. Audrey Gibson,
D-Jacksonville, would require a three-day waiting
period for the sale of any firearm and the sale of
ammunition to anyone who has not completed anger
management courses. The proposal would require ammo
buyers to take the anger management courses every 10
“This is not about guns," Gibson said. "This is about
ammunition and not only for the safety of the general
community, but also for the safety of law
Gibson said she’s concerned with citizens stockpiling
ammunition, potentially creating dangerous situations
should those individuals ever come in contact with law
enforcement agencies or criminals.
“It’s about getting people to think, really, about
how much ammunition they need,” Gibson said. “It’s a
step, I think, in a safer direction. It’s about
getting people to think before they buy.”
Benghazi Documents Reveal
White House 'Specifically Warned of Imminent
March 6, 2013 Jason Howerton The Blaze
CBS News investigative journalist Sharyl
Attkisson on Tuesday night reported that the Obama
adminsitration has turned over documents relating to the
Benghazi terrorist attack to the Senate Intelligence
Committee. She made a number of revelations that don't
bode well for the White house via her official Twitter
She also reported that an “official familiar with the
docs” said there were advanced warnings in the days
leading up to the attack, including ones that
“specifically warned of an imminent attack on the U.S. compound in Benghazi.”
The CBS reporter also
referenced another source familiar with the Benghazi documents that said
nearly all communication between Libya and Washington,
since the attack began referenced al-Qaeda as being
the likely “instigators.” That portion is significant
because there are still unanswered questions as to why
the Obama administration initially blamed the attack
on an anti-Muslim YouTube video.
“A source who viewed
the docs says the few that mentioned a protest” on
night of Benghazi
“were not first hand references,” Attkisson reports.
Christian Science Teacher
Fired Over Creationism to Head to Ohio
By Leonardo Blair , Christian Post
February 26, 2013|
A 20-year Ohio
middle school science teacher who was fired in 2011
for teaching creationism in his class will have his
day in the Ohio Supreme
Court on Wednesday when his lawyers will argue that
his firing was a violation of his First and
Fourteenth Amendment rights to free speech and
"In oral arguments
before the Ohio Supreme Court tomorrow, February 27,
The Rutherford Institute will defend the right to
academic freedom of a science teacher fired for
encouraging students to think critically about the
school's science curriculum, particularly as it
relates to evolution theories," said the Rutherford
Institute in a statement released in response to
questions from The Christian Post on Tuesday.
"In coming to veteran
science teacher John Freshwater's defense, Institute
attorneys argue that the Mount VernonCitySchool District
violated John Freshwater's academic freedom rights –
and those of his students – by firing him in January
2011," said the statement.
The Mount Vernon School
Board had spent almost $1 million fighting John
Freshwater's case when they decided to end his
contract, according to a report in the Mount Vernon
News. Board president Margie Bennett told the Mount
Vernon News at the time that Freshwater's fired was a
appealed his termination in state court arguing that
the firing violated his rights under the First and
Fourteenth Amendments and constituted hostility toward
religion. The Board's decision was upheld by a Common
Pleas judge as well as the Fifth District Court of
Appeals. But according to the Rutherford Institute,
these decisions were made without an analysis of the
constitutional claims. The appeal was made to the Ohio
Supreme Court to examine theme. According to the
Institute, the Mount Vernon School Board attempted to
have the court strike the First Amendment claim from
the lawsuit but they were unsuccessful.
"Academic freedom was
once the bedrock of American education. That is no
longer the state of affairs, as this case makes
clear," said John W. Whitehead, president of The
Rutherford Institute, in the release. "What we need
today are more teachers and school administrators who
understand that young people don't need to be
indoctrinated. Rather, they need to be taught how to
think for themselves. By firing John Freshwater for
challenging his students to think outside the box,
school officials violated a core First Amendment
freedom – the right to debate and express ideas
contrary to established views."
In June 2008, the Mount
Vernon City School District Board of Education in Ohio
voted to suspend John Freshwater citing concerns about
his conduct and teaching materials, particularly as
they related to the teaching of evolution. Freshwater,
who had served as the faculty appointed facilitator,
monitor, and supervisor of the Fellowship of Christian
Athletes student group for 16 of the 20 years that he
taught at the school, was ordered to remove "all
religious items" from his classroom. Freshwater agreed
to remove the items except for his Bible, which
spurred a sequence of events that led to his eventual
Institute is a nonprofit civil liberties
organization that provides legal assistance at no
charge to individuals whose constitutional rights
have been threatened or violated.
December 3, 2012
The Hawaian Reporter
By Stephen Zierak
This lesson is taught by Dr. Thomas West, the
Paul & Dawn Porter Professor of Politics at HillsdaleCollege.
Dr. West teaches courses in American politics,
focusing on the U.S. Constitution, civil rights,
foreign policy, and the political thought of the
American Founding. He also teaches the
political philosophy of Aquinas, Hobbes, and
Locke. Dr. West is a Senior Fellow of the
Claremont Institute, and he has previously taught at
He received his BA from Cornell, and his PhD from ClaremontGraduateUniversity.
Those interested in seeing and hearing this lecture,
or any of the others in the series, may register at
constitution.hillsdale.edu. There is no fee.
The Founders believed that the purpose of government
was to secure the unalienable rights of American
citizens to life, liberty, and the pursuit of
happiness by protecting against violations by foreign
or domestic enemies. The Progressives believe
that the purpose of government is to give you the
benefit of government programs, while changing you
into a more socially responsible individual.
As we watch the Founder’s vision slip away with the
advent of big government and the welfare state, we
might wonder what went wrong. Some American
conservatives blame the language of the
Founding. They believe that the equality and
rights talk has led to Obama, that Progressivism was
derived from expressions in our revolutionary
documents. Actually, nothing could be farther
from the truth. Progressivism was a radical
departure from the Founding, as can be seen in
comparisons around six points of contrast:
(1) What is freedom? (2) Purpose of
government? (3) Domestic policy?
(4) Foreign policy? (5) Consent of
the governed? (6) Government limited or
Open Doors: Violence
Targeting Christians Increasing in Syria
Contact: Jerry Dykstra, Open Doors USA, 616-915-4117,
SANTA ANA, Calif., Nov. 1,
2012 /Christian Newswire/ -- The targeting of
Christians in war-torn Syria
is increasing, according to Open Doors sources.
"The car bomb in Jaramana was targeting the Christian
and Druze community as a group, since the area has no
political ties or buildings," a local Christian source
explained about the large bomb blast in the Damascus
suburb on Monday.
According to contacts in the neighborhood, 11
Christians where killed and one Muslim killed in the
explosion. The blast left 69 people, all Christians,
wounded. Twenty are in critical condition.
Open Doors' country coordinator for Syria
says: "The attack took place during the final day of
Eid al-Adha (Muslim holiday). Observers hoped the
four-day holiday would mark a temporary ceasefire, but
that hope proved to be false. I see this as another
example that Christians are increasingly targeted."
A believer from Damascus reports
that last Sunday a car bomb was found in a Christian
neighborhood in the old part of the city. The car was
parked next to two churches, a Maronite and Latin
church. The two churches were warned and church
officials instructed all their parishioners to go home
in case the bomb exploded. Authorities were successful
in disabling the bomb.
Situation in Aleppo, Homs
An Open Doors contact in Aleppo reports
that, "the situation is not getting any better, but we
are hoping the situation will cool down."
Last week Open Doors received a report from a
believer in Aleppo,
the largest city in Syria,
that about 100 insurgents infiltrated a main street in
a Christian area of the city. Aleppo is one of
the hot spots in the 21-month civil war between rebels
and the Syrian government. According to the report,
the Syrian army quickly surrounded the insurgents and
drove them out.
Another believer reports that in some of the
predominantly Christian villages in the Homs
area there is not a threat against the entire
Christian community, however, individual Christians
are being targeted.
In a village in the ChristianValley, a
region west of Homs
three Christian men were kidnapped and one killed.
"One of my contacts is stuck there, waiting to find a
way back to Damascus.
The roads are the worst now," the believer shares.
The Open Doors country coordinator for Syria
adds: "The violent situation deeply hurts the entire
Syrian population, the Christian community as well as
other people groups. But about two or three weeks ago
we observed an increase of violence that specifically
is targeting Christians or Christian neighborhoods.
Bombs now are placed in Christian areas where there is
no strategic or military target at all. We are deeply
concerned about our brothers and sisters and call all
churches and all Christians to continue praying for
this dangerous situation for Christians."
Jerry Dykstra, media relations director for Open
Doors, says the request for prayer from Syrian
Christians comes as the International Day of Prayer
for the Persecuted Church (IDOP) will be observed in
the United States
on Sunday, Nov. 11.
All politics is local, even the US
election as seen by Kenyans
Villagers in the home village
Obama's father are cheering on the Democrat, while
Kenyan Mormons are excited by challenger Mitt
Kenyans are closely watching the US
presidential election, with two groups in particular
rooting for each of the candidates.
US President Barack Obama’s reelection bid is
preoccupying the people in Nyang’oma Kogelo, his
Kenyan father’s home village, as challenger Mitt
Romney’s run is invigorating Mormons in the East
Mr. Romney’s candidacy has thrust the Christian group
into the spotlight here, with its leaders on
Monday unveiling a website called Kenya Mormon
Newsroom to help answer questions ignited by the
American political process. Leaders say the church
maintains a firm political neutrality.
“In the most recent past, questions have been asked
about who we are. The reasons is we have a member of
the church running as president of the UnitedState of America,”
Elder Hesbon Usi, an official here with the Mormons'
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day
Saints. “Since people do not have the right
source of information and truth they are looking for,
a lot tend to go to other websites that are
misleading. They get information that is not correct.”
Elder Thomas Hatch, a former Utah state
senator who now serves as the church’s deputy director
of public affairs for the region, said questions the
church has encountered have prompted leaders to share
more through a network of websites.
Hatch says Mormons would relish the idea of a Romney
presidency, hoping it would bring the church out of
obscurity. However, he cautioned that there could be
many downsides as well as upsides, since presidents
have to make tough decisions.
“If Mr. Romney is seen as a Mormon president,
there could be retaliation by other countries against
our church and missions,” he says.
Meanwhile, in Nyang’oma Kogelo, the western Kenyan
village that is home to the president's
step-grandmother, Sarah Obama, the community is
organizing daily prayers for Obama, with special
prayers reported in churches and mosques. Often
gathering in small groups to listen to news and
discussions on FM radios from mobile phones, the
residents say they have learned Obama was facing a
“We would like to organize bigger meetings to show
support, but we fear the security is not good.
Terrorists may attack us because of our Obama links.
The threats and attacks in Kenya
make use very cautious,” says Vitalis Ogombe, the
chairman of a community group called the Obama Kogelo
For them, the interest in the American election is
driven by pride more than economic or material gains,
since Obama is viewed as a grandson there.
“We are proud because we have seen he can make a good
global leader. People now know us globally because of
him. We are praying that he continues,” says Mr.
But since Obama’s election in 2008, Kogelo can also
count material gains. Electricity has been installed
in the area and infrastructure improved. Micro-finance
organizations and nongovernmental organizations have
also moved here to help improve the community’s living
standards. The local people say they are better since
he became president.
For Jesse Mugambi of the University of Nairobi,
America foreign policy on Africa
remains the same, irrespective of whoever is the
“The voters out there will decide what is good for
them, and Kenyans will put up with whoever wins. That
is what democracy demands,” he says.
Some analysts have also considered an Obama loss.
Charles Onyango-Obbo, in an opinion in the Daily
Nation today, analyzed why an Obama loss would be good
for him and the world.
“Obama has the energy and smarts to be an influential
international citizen and non-state actor to join
Clinton and Gates as the non-white face at the top of
international NGO priesthood. To do that, he has first
to lose the election,” wrote Mr. Onyango-Obbo.
Sixty Percent of US Muslims
Reject Freedom of Expression
Thursday, 01 November 2012
violent Muslim reactions to the amateurish “Innocence
of Muslims” video, which simply depicted a few of the
less salutary aspects of Muhammad’s biography,
international and domestic Islamic agendas have openly
converged with vehement calls for universal
application of Islamic blasphemy law. This demand to
abrogate Western freedom of expression was reiterated
in a parade of speeches by Muslim leaders at the UN
General Assembly. The US Muslim community echoed such
admonitions, for example during a large demonstration
and in a press release by the Islamic Circle of North
Now the results of polling data collected by Wenzel
Strategies during October 22 to 26, 2012, from 600 US
Muslims, indicate widespread support among rank and
file American votaries of Islam for this fundamental
rejection of freedom expression, as guaranteed under
the US Constitution. The first amendment states,
Congress shall make no law respecting an
establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free
exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press;
When asked, “Do you believe that criticism of Islam
or Muhammad should be permitted under the
Constitution’s First Amendment?, 58% replied
“no,” while only 42% affirmed
this most basic manifestation of freedom of speech,
i.e., to criticize religious, or any other dogma.
Indeed, oblivious to US
constitutional law, as opposed to Islam’s Sharia, a
largely concordant 45% of respondents agreed “…that
those who criticize or parody Islam in the U.S.
should face criminal charges,” while 38% did not, and
17% were “unsure”. Moreover, fully 12% of this
Muslim sample even admitted they believed in
application of the draconian, Sharia-based punishment
for the non-existent crime of “blasphemy” in the US
code, answering affirmatively, “…that Americans who
criticize or parody Islam should be put to death.”
Also, consistent with such findings 43% of these US
Muslims rejected the right of members of other faiths
to proselytize to adherents of Islam, disagreeing,
citizens have a right to evangelize Muslims to
consider other faiths.” Additional confirmatory data
revealed that nearly two-fifths (39%) agreed “…that
Shariah law should be considered when adjudicating
cases that involve Muslims,” while nearly
one-third (32%) of this American Muslim sample
believed “…Shariah law should be the supreme law of
the land in the US.”
These alarming data remind us that despite
intentionally obfuscating apologetics, Sharia, Islamic
law, is not merely holistic, in the general sense of
all-encompassing, but totalitarian, regulating
everything from the ritual aspects of religion, to
personal hygiene, to the governance of a Muslim
minority community, Islamic state, bloc of states, or
global Islamic order. Clearly, this latter political
aspect is the most troubling, being an ancient
antecedent of more familiar modern totalitarian
systems. Specifically, Sharia’s liberty-crushing and
dehumanizing political aspects feature: open-ended
jihadism to subjugate the world to a totalitarian
Islamic order; rejection of bedrock Western
liberties—including freedom of conscience and
speech—enforced by imprisonment, beating, or death;
discriminatory relegation of non-Muslims to outcast,
vulnerable pariahs, and even Muslim women to
subservient chattel; and barbaric punishments which
violate human dignity, such as amputation for theft,
stoning for adultery, and lashing for alcohol
And the US Muslim data mirror global Islamic trends.
Previously, the 57-member Organization of the Islamic
Conference (subsequently renamed the Organization of
Islamic Cooperation [OIC])—the largest voting bloc in
the UN, which represents all the major Muslim
countries, and the Palestinian Authority—had sponsored
and actually navigated to passage a compromise U.N.
resolution insisting countries criminalize what it
calls “defamation of religion.” Though the language of
the OIC “defamation of religion” resolution has been
altered at times, the OIC’s goal has remained the
same—to impose at the international level a
Sharia-compliant conception of freedom of speech and
expression that would severely limit anything it
arbitrarily deemed critical of, or offensive to, Islam
or Muslims. This is readily apparent by reading the
OIC’s supervening “alternative” to both the US Bill of
Rights and the UN’s own 1948 Universal Declaration of
Human Rights, i.e., the 1990 Cairo Declaration, or
Universal Declaration of Human Rights in Islam.
The opening of the preamble to the Cairo Declaration
repeats a Koranic injunction affirming Islamic
supremacism (Koran 3:110, “You are the best
nation ever brought forth to men . . . you
believe in Allah”); and its last articles,
24 and 25, maintain [article 24], “All the rights and
freedoms stipulated in this Declaration are subject to
the Islamic Sharia”; and [article 25] “The Islamic
Sharia is the only source of reference for
the explanation or clarification to any of the
articles of this Declaration.” The gravely negative
implications of the OIC’s Sharia-based Cairo
Declaration are most apparent in its transparent
rejection of freedom of conscience in Article 10,
Islam is the religion of unspoiled nature. It is
prohibited to exercise any form of compulsion on man
or to exploit his poverty or ignorance in order to
convert him to another religion, or to atheism.
Ominously, articles 19 and 22 reiterate a principle
stated elsewhere throughout the document, which
clearly applies to the “punishment” of so-called
apostates from Islam, as well as “blasphemers”:
There shall be no crime or punishment except as
provided for in the Sharia. Everyone shall have the
right to express his opinion freely in such manner
as would not be contrary to the
principles of the Sharia. Everyone shall have the
right to advocate what is right, and propagate what
is good, and warn against what is wrong and evil
according to the norms of Islamic Sharia.
Information is a vital necessity to society. It
may not be exploited or misused in such a way as may
violate sanctities and the dignity of Prophets,
undermine moral and ethical values or disintegrate,
corrupt or harm society or weaken its faith.
Institutional Islam in North
America—epitomized by the Assembly of
Muslim Jurists of America (AMJA)—also endorses and
promotes this Sharia supremacism. AMJA’s mission
statement maintains that the organization was,
“founded to provide guidance for Muslims living in North America. . . . AMJA is a
religious organization that does not exploit religion
to achieve any political ends, but instead provides
practical solutions within the guidelines of Islam and
the nation’s laws to the various challenges
experienced by Muslim communities. ” It is accepted by
the mainstream American Muslim community, and
regularly trains imams from throughout North America. Notwithstanding
this mainstream acceptance, AMJA has issued rulings
which sanction the killing of apostates,
“blasphemers,” (including non-Muslims guilty of this
“crime”), and adulterers (by stoning to death);
condoned female genital mutilation, marital rape, and
polygamy; and even endorsed the possibility for
offensive jihad against the U.S.,
as soon as Muslims are strong enough to wage it.
Finally, it should be noted, 81% of this sample of
Muslim Americans were either “definitely for Obama,”
or “leaning Obama”.
shot by Taliban in Pakistan
remains in critical condition, and local government
posts reward for attackers' capture
11 October 2012
A Pakistani schoolgirl fighting for her life after
being shot by Taliban gunmen has been transferred to a
specialist hospital in the army garrison town of Rawalpindi.
Malala Yousafzai, 14, was unconscious and in a
critical condition after being shot in the head and
neck as she left school in the Swat region on Tuesday,
but doctors said she had moved her arms and legs
On Wednesday surgeons at an army hospital in the
regional capital, Peshawar, removed
a bullet from Malala's head. She has been taken to the
Armed Forces Institute of Cardiology in Rawalpindi
for further treatment."Pray for her," her distraught
uncle, Faiz Mohammad, said before the ambulance left Peshawar.
Two British doctors who were attending a seminar in Pakistan
at the time of the attack joined local surgeons in
treating Malala on Thursday. One of the two other
girls shot with Malala is out of danger, the other
remains in a critical condition.
A Taliban spokesman said Malala had been targeted for
trying to spread western culture, and that they would
try to kill her again if she survived. Malala's
father, Ziauddin Yousafzai, who runs a girls' school,
said his daughter had defied threats for years,
believing the good work she was doing for her
community was her best protection.
The regional governor, Masood Kausar, said officials
had identified the attackers. The local government has
posted a 10m rupee reward for their capture. "The
security agencies are closely working with each other
and they have a lot of information about the
perpetrators. We hope they will soon capture them and
bring to justice," Kausar said.
The attack outraged many in Pakistan,
and there were small, impromptu rallies in many
cities. Schools closed across Swat in protest over the
shooting, and a small demonstration was held in her
home town, Mingora. Pakistan's
prime minister and the heads of various opposition
parties joined the human rights group Amnesty
International and the United Nations in condemning the
Malala had spent the last three years campaigning for
girls' education after the Taliban shut down girls'
schools. She received Pakistan's
highest civilian award but also a number of death
threats. In 2009 the army pushed the Taliban out of
Mingora, but the attack showed the militia's ability
to strike even inside heavily patrolled towns.
A dark feeling of
betrayal and stunned disbelief washed over me as I
read the newspaper headline, "Jordanians press for
democratic reforms" in the October 6, 2012 Orlando
The Myth of Islamic Democratic Reforms
The mainstream media,
U.S. State Department, and President Obama fed us a
steady stream of news in 2011 that Egyptian youth were
protesting in the streets for an Arab Spring of
democratic reforms in Egypt.
Fast forward to 2012 and we learned The Muslim
Brotherhood orchestrated the propaganda of democracy
to get support from the Obama Administration in the
ousting of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak.
While the press was
printing gallons of ink reporting the Muslim
Brotherhood would pursue democratic reforms in Egypt,
Mohammad Morsi was consolidating his political base
with the Salafi Islamist fundamentalist, whose
objective was to institute a Sunni led Shariah
compliant Islamic State in Egypt by overthrowing the
colonialist dictator and friend of the United States,
The utopian mantra from
the liberal left of democratic reforms blooming in Egypt
on a warm and sunny Arab Spring day were proven
wrong. Now these same journalists and
politicians are falling for the same lie again out of
When will our mainstream
press learn that Shariah compliant political Islam and
our Jeffersonian democracy are not compatible?
Understanding the PLO's failed coup of Jordan in the 1970's
will help you to see what Jordan
can expect from the Muslim Brotherhood in
Black September in Jordan
In September of 1970,
the Nobel Peace Prize recipient Yasser Arafat, nephew
of Nazi collaborator Grand Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini,
tried unsuccessfully to violently overthrow the Kingdom
from King Hussein.
organization lost over 2,000 Muslim men in the
attempted Black September coup of their Jordanian
Muslim brothers and were violently expelled from their
History seems to be
repeating itself again, except now The Muslim
Brotherhood is making a play to wrestle control of Jordan from the
colonialist dictator and friend of the United
If King Abdullah II
tries to appease The Muslim Brotherhood he will find
himself either dead or in exile wondering how he lost
his throne. King Abdullah II need look no
further than Qaddafi, Mubarak, and Assad to see his
future, if he continues on his current path.
Understanding The Islamic Threat Doctrine
Islamic Threat Doctrine is essential in predicting
events as they unfold on the ground and anticipating
what to expect will happen in the future.
Fortunately for the American people, our Islamist
adversaries are more than happy to tell us exactly
what their doctrine and objectives are.
We will now learn the
Islamic Threat Doctrine from a well respected Islamic
Jihadist who was tops in his class amongst his Jihadi
peers. Today's teacher of the doctrine is Sheikh
Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi or by his title, "Emir of Al
Qaeda in the Country of Two Rivers." On June 7,
2006 Mr. Zarqawi was killed when a USAF F-16 dropped
two 500 pound guided bombs on his safe house in Baqubah, Iraq
prematurely ending his career of violence and butchery
to achieve his political objectives.
Shortly before his
death, Mr. Zarqawi conducted an in depth interview
with the Al-Furican Foundation for Media Production,
an entertainment arm of Al-Qaeda. Hidden deep in
the interview Mr. Zarqawi explains clearly what the
Islamic Threat Doctrine is and it's objectives.
These two paragraphs
below should change your life forever and how you view
the world around you. Al-Qaeda terrorist Musab
fight in the way of Allah, until the law of Allah
is implemented, and the first step is to expel the
enemy, then establish the Islamic state, then we
set forth to conquer the lands of Muslims to
return them back to us, then after that, we fight
the kuffar (disbelievers) until they accept one of
have been sent with the sword, between the hands
of the hour"; this is our political agenda."
is necessary to accept the fact that it is an
obligation for every Muslim to rush to help each
other and it is also very necessary to agree that
the houses of Muslims are just one house. The
enemies (the disbelieving nations) have imposed
boundaries and divided the lands of Muslims to
tiny nations however we do not believe in them and
the boundaries of Sax Bacon do not restrict us.
We, the Muslims are one nation and the lands of
Islam are one land, we fight for the sake of
"there is no god but Allah".
The Muslim Brotherhood
in the Middle East and Northern Africa are "expelling
the enemy" and establishing an Islamic State as they
did in Egypt.
and the Muslim Brotherhood consider the muslim
colonialist dictators as enemies of Shariah compliant
The Islamic Threat
Doctrine Mr. Zarqawi articulated above is being
implemented in coordinated steps to achieve their
short term objective of unifying, "Muslims to rush
to help each other...and Muslims are of one house."
The coordinated attacks on 9/11/12 on U.S. interests
in the Middle East and Northern Africa was the real
warning to America, not the red herring of an internet
When the Islamist
enemies of the United States
tell you exactly what they want to do and why -
believe them. When the soldiers of Allah
conducted 20+ coordinated attacks on U.S. interests in the
Middle East and Northern Africa
on 9/11/2012, they were telegraphing they can
recreate these coordinated attacks at any time of
their choosing -- in law enforcement circles they call
that a clue, as John Guandolo likes to say.
What Our Islamist Enemies Fear Most
The one thing our
Islamist adversaries fear most is an American public
that understands the basics of The Islamic Threat
Doctrine. Thomas Jefferson read the Qur'an to
fight and defeat the Muslim Barabary Pirates in Tripoli
back in 1801. Now you must learn The Islamic
Threat Doctrine to understand the Islamists who
attacked our embassy in Tripoli on
The future of America rests on how many
Americans learn The Islamic Threat Doctrine as
articulated by Mr. Zarqawi. Then you must
teach your friends, family, and community what Mr.
Zarqawi and his Islamist ideological brothers
consider their definition of Victory.
the Muslims are one nation and the lands of Islam
are one land, we fight for the sake of "there is
no god but Allah".
What we believe as
Americans and our man made laws is of small concern to
our Islamist enemies. The followers of Islam
believe "there is no God but Allah and Muhammad is his
messenger" and that was the message on the black flags
that flew above our overrun embassies and consulates
when they were attacked on 9/11/2012.
God Bless America
and God Bless Our Troops.
Family Security Matters Contributing Editor Alan
Kornman is the regional coordinator of The United
West-Uniting Western Civilization for Freedom and Liberty.
His email is: firstname.lastname@example.org
By Babette Francis
- posted Thursday, 4
and political debate
polls on the US
presidential elections show that Obama is leading
Romney by a few percentage points, and crucially is
leading in the "swing" states, notably Ohio, which Romney needs to
win to have any hope of becoming President of the US.
Obama gets 95% or more of the African-American vote,
which is understandable given the US
history of slavery and discrimination against
African-Americans. However what is not so
understandable is why Obama in recent polls appears to
be leading among Catholic voters, despite the US
Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) having lobbied
strenuously against Obama's Health Care mandate
pointing out its moral flaws and attack on religious
freedom and conscience rights.
Perhaps the USCCB needs to take some responsibility
for the confusion among Catholic voters, so many of
whom seem to be willing to vote for the most
pro-abortion President in US history - and the first
to support same-sex "marriage" - because the message
from the bishops has been somewhat mixed.
In April before Congressman Paul Ryan (Republican,
Wisconsin's lst District) was chosen by Mitt Romney to
be his Vice-Presidential candidate in the US November
elections, Ryan proposed a budget plan which was
adopted by the Republican-majority House of
Representatives Budget Committee, 21-9. However, the
US Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) was been
critical of Ryan's budget implying that it 'failed a
basic moral test':
....The Catholic bishops of the United
recognize the serious deficits our country faces,
and acknowledge that Congress must make difficult
decisions about allocating burdens and sacrifices
and balancing resources and needs. However, deficit
reduction and fiscal responsibility efforts must
protect and not undermine the needs of poor and
vulnerable people. The proposed cuts in the budget
fail this basic moral test.
The USCCB was specifically concerned about
alterations to the Child Tax Credit to exclude
immigrant families (it is not clear whether this cut
is targeted primarily at illegal immigrants), cuts in
the food stamps and the Social Services Block Grant.
While the USCCB mentions serious deficits, I wonder
if they can get their heads around the 16 TRILLIONS of
debt, and that some economists estimate that by 2020
the US may
be unable to pay the interest on this debt. I have
difficulty in imagining a trillion but then I am just
a housewife who knows one cannot "spend one's way out
of debt" - a strategy which appears to be President
Obama's rescue plan.
Not all bishops agree with the USCCB statement.
Bishop Boyea, Lansing, said
“There have been some concerns raised by Catholic
economists about what was perceived as a partisan
action against Congressman Ryan’s proposed budget ....
Statements that endorsed specific economic policies
revealed a lack of humility. We need to learn far more
than we need to teach in this area. We need to listen
more than we need to speak...."
Archbishop Joseph Naumann, Kansas City,
agreed the USCCB committee neglected the principle of
subsidiarity which calls for solutions to be provided
close to people in need. He suggested drafters of the
statement needed to rethink a tendency to advocate for
government assistance, and USCCB proposals should not
ignore the ballooning national deficit. “Sometimes
we’re perceived as just encouraging government to
spend more money, with no realistic way of how we’re
going to afford this”.
Archbishop Allen Vigneron, Detroit, echoed
Archbishop Naumann’s suggestion that the proposed
document focus more on the family as the central
social institution and spoke of how the
“disintegration of the family” had fueled the demand
for government assistance.
Warm support for Paul Ryan came from Cardinal Dolan
of New York who described Ryan as a "great public
servant" and praised his “call for financial
accountability, restraint and a balanced budget” as
well as his “obvious solicitude for the poor.” He
emphasized there are differences in “prudential
judgment” over how to assist the poor.
Ryan's diocesan Bishop Morlino, Madison, wrote:
... I am proud of Paul Ryan's accomplishments as
a native son, and a brother in the faith, and my
prayers go with him and his family as they endure
the unbelievable demands of a presidential campaign
sentiment in America troubles Muslims
By Moni Basu, CNN
Sept. 5, 2012 (CNN) – When the nation pauses
to remember 9/11 next week, a group of Tennesseans
will gather at the Embassy Suites Hotel in Franklin
for a commemoration. But it will be more than that.
On the program, called "The Threat in Our Backyard,"
is a lecture on Islam in public schools and a short
film on Sharia finance.
It's a program organized by people who feel the
American way of life is threatened by Islam - in
particular, Sharia, or Islamic law.
Sharia would bring ruin to America, says Greg
Johnson, vice president of the 9/12 Project Tennessee,
a sponsor of the event that advocates for shifting
government back to the intent of the Constitution's
He says he has nothing against Muslims, but he takes
issue with the tenets of Islam.
Sharia, he believes, would mean that practicing
homosexuals would be put to death, women would not be
educated and would be married off to men chosen by
their fathers, and non-Muslims would become kafirs -
nonbelievers - relegated to second-class citizenship.
"And I don't want that coming to America,"
He's not alone in his fears.
A tide of anti-Islam sentiment has been swelling
across America in recent months, strong enough to
prompt one imam to wish for the days immediately after
the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks when
President George W. Bush declared that Muslims were
not our enemies; that the war on terror was against a
select few who acted upon their hate for America.
"In the 11 years since, we have retreated," says
Abdullah Antepli, the Muslim chaplain at DukeUniversity
who likes to call himself the Blue Devil Imam.
Muslims make up less than 1% of the U.S.
population. Yet, say Muslim advocates, they are a
Hate crimes against Muslims spiked 50% in 2010, the
last year for which FBI statistics are available. That
was in a year marked by Muslim-bashing speech over the
Islamic center near ground zero in Manhattan
and Florida Pastor Terry Jones' threats to burn
Antepli likens the current climate to McCarthyism.
Left unchecked, he says, anti-Muslim fervor, like
racism and anti-Semitism, has the potential to evolve
into something dangerous.
This year's holy month of Ramadan, which ended August
19, was marred by a spate of violence at U.S.
Islamic centers that included a fire, a homemade bomb
and pig parts. The incidents were unprecedented in
scale and scope, says the Council on American-Islamic
At least seven mosques and one cemetery were attacked
in the United States
during Ramadan, according to the council and other
groups that track such incidents.
Particularly visible on the anti-Muslim radar has
been the state of Tennessee, where
a mosque opened during Ramadan after two years of
controversy. The new Islamic center in Murfreesboro
opened a few weeks ago after delays caused by legal
wrangling, community protests and vandalism.
Also in Tennessee,
incumbent congresswoman Diane Black found herself
publicly opposing Sharia after her opponent Lou Ann
Zelenik made it a campaign issue.
State senatorial candidate Woody Degan's website also
"VOTE CONSERVATIVE! VOTE Anti-Sharia, VOTE Against
Internet Taxes, Vote FOR Gun Carry Rights! VOTE for
your PERSONAL RIGHTS!"
And Gov. Bill Haslam recently came under fire for
hiring lawyer Samar Ali, a Muslim woman from Tennessee,
to work in the international division of the state's
economic development department.
Ali's critics called her Sharia-compliant and a
website called Bill H(Islam) attacked the governor for
pursuing "a policy that promotes the interest of
Islamist (sic) and their radical ideology."
The website links to another that discusses, among
other things, Islamic infiltration of public schools.
"I cannot stress enough the seriousness of their push
to spread their religion to all non-Muslims throughout
our country," says website author Cathy Hinners,
another speaker at next Tuesday's 9/11 event in Franklin.
"Why? Why are Muslims so adamant that we accept their
religion? The answer is simple. The answer is in black
and white. The answer is in the Muslim brotherhoods
"Strategic Goal for North
America." It's called a global
caliphate. One religion, one government, one law...
In November 2010, more than 70% of voters in Oklahoma
approved a ballot initiative to amend the state's
constitution that banned courts from looking at "legal
precepts of other nations or cultures. Specifically,
the courts shall not consider international law or
The amendment died after a federal court ruled it
"That was very explicitly anti-Islamic," says Glenn
Hendrix, an Atlanta
lawyer who specializes in international law. "It
specifically referenced Sharia."
This year, 33 anti-Sharia or international law bills
were introduced in 20 states, making it a key issue.
Six states - Louisiana,
South Dakota, Kansas, Arizona,
Louisiana and Tennessee
- adopted such laws prior to 2012.
lawmakers attempted to pass a bill this year that
would have made it a felony to practice Sharia, but it
The Council on American-Islamic Relations says the
anti-Sharia bills are based on draft legislation
promoted by David Yerushalmi, an anti-Islamic lawyer
Yerushalmi founded the Society of Americans for
National Existence, an organization devoted to
promoting his theory that Islam is inherently
seditious and Sharia is a "criminal conspiracy to
overthrow the U.S. government," according to the
Southern Poverty Law Center, which tracks hate groups.
"Ideally," says the center, "he would outlaw Islam
and deport its adherents altogether."
Hendrix says anti-Sharia legislation is not necessary
courts ultimately are beholden to U.S.
But it sends a strong message to the Muslim
The American Bar Association, which opposes federal
or state laws that impose blanket prohibitions on
foreign laws, says such legislative initiatives
stigmatize an entire religious community and "are
inconsistent with some of the core principles and
ideals of American jurisprudence."
Valarie Kaur, a legal advocate and hate crimes
specialist, says proponents of anti-Sharia bills are
battling an imaginary threat.
"There is no push to install Sharia law in the U.S.,"
she says. "Anti-Sharia bills target the religious
principles of Muslim Americans and fuel anti-Muslim
rhetoric and bias. As a Sikh American whose community
has too often become the target of hate, I believe
it's time to stand against all forms of racism and
An attack at a Wisconsin Sikh temple last month
killed six people. Many believe the shooter mistook
Sikhs for Muslims. A Sikh gas station attendant in Arizona
was the first victim of reprisal after the 9/11
Kaur blames tough economic times and an amplification
of hateful speech for incidents like the temple
shooting and the momentum behind the anti-Sharia
For Muslims, Sharia - which means "path to the
watering hole" in Arabic - is the divine law revealed
centuries ago in the Quran that governs all aspects of
life. More often than not, it's the most sensational
parts of Sharia - like cutting off a thief's hand -
that garner the most publicity.
courts bump up against it in cases of divorces,
inheritance, child custody, enforcement of money
judgments and commercial disputes or tort actions.
A trial court in New Jersey, for
instance, ruled that a husband, who was Muslim, lacked
the criminal intent to commit sexual assault on his
wife because Sharia permits a man to have sex with his
wife whenever he wants.
That's the kind of ruling that fuels anti-Sharia
health-care investor Andrew Miller says there's no
room for democracy within Islamic ideology. All you
have to do is look to any Islamic state, he says.
"If you wanted to pray to a large rock and that was
your God, I could care less," he says. "But the minute
you want to put a gun to my head and say you will pray
to this large rock and your family will or you will
pay the price, that's when I see a bully. I see an
overbearing ideology that wants to force and coerce
Miller describes himself as a tolerant person but not
when it comes to people dictating how others will
"That's antithetical to the freedoms that we value,
the liberty we value," he says.
The message that Islam is evil has been repeated so
many times - sometimes directly, sometimes in a more
subtle fashion - that it has sunk in as reality in the
hearts and minds of many Americans, says Antepli, the
Part of it is fear of the unknown, he says.
"I, too, would have a monstrous image of Islam if I
did not know any better."
But another part of it is orchestrated, he says,
referring to "well-organized and polished" anti-Islam
websites that have sprouted in recent years. Marry
that with ignorance and the end result is lethal,
The Center for American Progress, a liberal research
and advocacy organization, published a report last
year that attributed the rise of Islamophobia to a
"small, tightly-networked group of misinformation
The report called "Fear, Inc." lists seven
foundations that gave $42.6 million to think tanks to
promote anti-Islamic thought.
It describes "deeply intertwined individuals and
organizations" that "manufacture and exaggerate
threats of 'creeping Sharia,' Islamic domination of
the West, and purported obligatory calls to violence
against all non-Muslims by the Quran."
The issue of Sharia, say some Muslims, has become a
political hot potato in an election year.
GOP candidates Newt Gingrich and Michele Bachmann
mentioned Sharia in their campaign speeches. This
year's Republican Party platform makes mention of
"Subjecting American citizens to foreign laws is
inimical to the spirit of the Constitution. It is one
reason we oppose U.S.
participation in the International Criminal Court.
There must be no use of foreign law by U.S.
courts in interpreting our Constitution and laws. Nor
should foreign sources of law be used in State courts'
adjudication of criminal or civil matters."
That's the message Miller hopes people will take away
from next week's 9/11 meeting; that the tenets of
Islam go against the constitution of the United States.
It's diametrically opposed to what people like
Antepli and Kaur will be saying as America
remembers the horror of terrorism. Hateful sentiment,
they say, is not the answer.
The Strategy Page
September 4, 2012: Despite all the publicity about
increased defense spending, there is much less talk on
how to solve the growing problem with Islamic
terrorism. This is a war going on inside Russia
and it has been getting worse in the last decade.
There are over eight million Moslems in Russia, most of them
outside the Caucasus
(where most of the Islamic terrorist activity is
taking place). But Islamic conservatism and radicalism
is becoming more popular with Russian Moslems, and
this is the usual precursor for the formation of
Islamic terror groups. There are also a growing number
of Moslem migrants from Central Asian countries that
were part of the old Soviet Union but are now
independent and less well off than Russia.
These illegal economic migrants are not welcome and
have become fertile recruiting grounds for Islamic
terror groups. Russians tend to be hostile to Islam,
mainly because of centuries of conflict between
Christian Russia and various Moslem states. This has
created a culture of resentment among Russian Moslems,
which is made worse by the pervasive corruption.
August 29, 2012: In the Caucasus (Dagestan) a female suicide
bomber killed Sheikh Said Afandi, a prominent Moslem
leader who opposed Islamic terrorism. Six others died
in the explosion.
August 28, 2012: In the Caucasus (Ingushetia) several
police raids left three Islamic terrorist dead,
several more arrested, and large quantities of weapons
and ammunition seized.
Also in the Caucasus, a group of Islamic terrorists
crossed the border from Dagestan into Georgia
and kidnapped ten villagers. Georgian police responded
and in a gun battle killed 11 of the invaders, with
the loss of three policemen. The captives were freed.
It's unclear why the Islamic terrorists crossed the
border and sought to kidnap people from a foreign
country. For many years Georgia
tolerated Chechen rebels hiding out in northern Georgia, just across
the border from Chechnya.
But a decade ago the U.S.
persuaded the Georgians to expel the Islamic
terrorists and other foreign gunmen. For the last nine
years the foreigners have been absent, or very covert
if they were there. Now there is this incident, which
has so far been unexplained.
August 27, 2012: A Russian shipyard launched the
first of six Kilo class submarines Vietnam
ordered three years ago.
August 26, 2012: In a rural part of southern Siberia several people were
infected with Anthrax, and one of them died. Anthrax
is found naturally in this area and several infected
animals (who pick up the disease while grazing in
areas where the Anthrax spores are active) were
destroyed. Anthrax is also found in some parts of the
States and other
parts of the world where climate and geographic
conditions are right for it. In rural areas of the United
Anthrax is found, people liable to be exposed are
usually vaccinated against the deadly disease. Animals
are also vaccinated, as it is the cattle and sheep
that usually spread Anthrax to humans. Vaccination is
much less common in Russia
but over a hundred people and all animals in the area
were vaccinated in order to contain this outbreak.
August 22, 2012: In the United States there was
an unsubstantiated news story about a Russian Akula
class nuclear submarine cruising through the Gulf of Mexico undetected for
several weeks in July. The United States
does not monitor submerged submarine activity in that
area and the American Department of Defense responded
that it had no record of any Akulas in the area. The
Russian Navy refused to comment.
August 21, 2012: In the Caucasus (Kabardino-Balkaria)
an Islamic terrorist died in a gun battle with police.
In nearby Dagestan,
two policemen were killed by Islamic terrorists.
Religious Freedom Means
“Sticking up for All Believers”
Ken McIntyreAug. 21,
The crowd erupted into disarmed laughter when Kevin
J. “Seamus” Hasson got to the point. “I have to say
when it comes to religious freedom and the other great
constitutional questions at the moment that are at
stake: However bad you think things are, however bleak
it looks, however dire it may seem—it’s almost
certainly worse than you think.”
That’s as good a reason as any to be better equipped
for the debates ahead. Hasson, founder and president
emeritus of the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty,
made those remarks nearly four months ago upon
receiving The Heritage Foundation’s Salvatori Prize
for American Citizenship.
His acclaimed 2005 book, The Right to Be Wrong:
Ending the Culture War Over Religion in America,
is just out in a timely paperback reprint from Image
(with a new afterword).
Examples of government’s intolerance toward personal
faith in the public square have multiplied since
Hasson’s “it’s almost certainly worse” crack—from
Obamacare’s Health and Human Services (HHS) mandate
that employers get over their faith and provide
employees with “free” abortion-inducing drugs, to
elected officials who threaten to make an
entrepreneur’s religion a reason to deny a building
permit in their cities.
Hasson’s The Right to Be Wrong, overflowing
with real-life cases and reflecting the life’s mission
of this Notre Dame-trained lawyer and theologian, is
about why we need to protect religious freedom from
tyranny in all shapes and sizes.
“We are manning the believer’s side of the barricades
against the forces who believe in nothingness,” the
essayist and scholar said in accepting the Salvatori
Prize during an April 26 luncheon in Colorado Springs
opening Heritage’s 35th annual Resource Bank
gathering. He added:
“Therefore, we need to
defend the rights of other people who believe in
something—even if we think they believe the wrong
thing. In so doing, we are sticking up for all
believers against the nihilists. We are standing
tall for those who are convinced there is a truth,
against those who are opposed to the very idea of
anybody making truth claims in public. That is the
fight that we are in the middle of—repelling an
assault by people who believe in nothing against the
very idea of believing in anything.”
Administration's War On Persecuted Christians
Friday, 03 August 2012 Right Side News
The Investigative Project on Terrorism
The Obama administration's support for its Islamist
allies means a lack of U.S. support for their enemies
or, more properly, victims—the Christian and
other non-Muslim minorities of the Muslim world.
Consider the many recent proofs:
According to Pete Winn of CNS:
The U.S. State Department removed the sections
covering religious freedom from the Country Reports on
Human Rights that it released on May 24, three
months past the statutory deadline Congress set for
the release of these reports. The new human
rights reports—purged of the sections that discuss
the status of religious freedom in each of the
countries covered—are also the human rights
reports that include the period that covered the Arab
Spring and its aftermath.
Thus, the reports do not
provide in-depth coverage of what has happened to
Christians and other religious minorities in
predominantly Muslim countries in the Middle East that saw the rise
of revolutionary movements in 2011 in which Islamist
forces played an instrumental role. For the first
time ever, the State Department simply eliminated
the section of religious freedom in its reports
covering 2011… (emphasis added).
The CNS report goes on to
quote several U.S.
officials questioning the motives of the Obama
administration. Former U.S.
diplomat Thomas Farr said that he has "observed during
the three-and-a-half years of the Obama administration
that the issue of religious freedom has been
In "Obama Overlooks
Christian Persecution," James Walsh gives more
examples of State Department indifference "regarding
the New Years' murders of Coptic Christians in Egypt
and the ravaging of a cathedral," including how the
State Department "refused to list Egypt as 'a country
of particular concern,' even as Christians and others
were being murdered, churches destroyed, and girls
kidnapped and forced to convert to Islam. "
And the evidence keeps
mounting. Legislation to create a special envoy for
religious minorities in the Near East and South
Central Asia—legislation that, in the words of the Washington
Post, "passed the House by a huge margin," has
been stalled by Sen. James Webb, D-Va.:
In a letter sent to Webb Wednesday night, Rep. Frank
Wolf [R-Va, who introduced the envoy bill] said he
"cannot understand why" the hold had been placed on a
bill that might help Coptic Christians and other
groups "who face daily persecution, hardship,
violence, instability and even death."
Yet the ultimate source of
opposition is the State Department. The Post
Webb spokesman Will
Jenkins explained the hold by saying that "after
considering the legislation, Senator Webb asked the
State Department for its analysis." In a position
paper issued in response, State Department officials
said "we oppose the bill as it infringes on the
Secretary's [Hillary Clinton's] flexibility to make
appropriate staffing decisions," and suggested
the duties of Wolf's proposed envoy would overlap with
several existing positions. "The new special envoy
position is unnecessary, duplicative, and likely
counterproductive," the State Department said
But as Wolf explained in
his letter: "If I believed that religious minorities,
especially in these strategic regions, were getting
the attention warranted at the State Department, I
would cease in pressing for passage of this
legislation. Sadly, that is far from being the case.
We must act now…. Time is running out."
There was little doubt
among the speakers that, while Webb is the front
man, Hillary Clinton—who was named often—is ultimately
behind the opposition to the bill. (Videos of all
speakers can be accessed here; for information on the
envoy bill and how to contact Webb's office, click
Even those invited to
speak about matters outside of Egypt,
such as Nigerian lawyer and activist Emmanuel Ogebe,
wondered at Obama's position that the ongoing
massacres of Christians have nothing to do with
religion. After describing the sheer carnage of
thousands of Christians at the hands of Muslim
militants, lamented that Obama's response was to
pressure the Nigerian president to make more
concessions, including by creating more mosques (the
very places that "radicalize" Muslims against infidel
In light of all this,
naturally the Obama administration, in the guise of
the State Department, would oppose a bill to create an
envoy who will only expose more religious persecution
that the administration will have to suppress or
Bottom line: In its
attempts to empower its Islamist allies, the current U.S.
administration has taken up their cause by waging a
war of silence on their despised enemies—the
Christians and other minorities of the Islamic world.
Federal Court finds Obama
appointees interfered with New Black Panther
July 30, 2012
A federal court in Washington, DC, held last
week that political appointees appointed by President
Obama did interfere with the Department of Justice’s
prosecution of the New Black Panther Party.
The ruling came as part of a motion by the
conservative legal watchdog group Judicial Watch, who
had sued the DOJ in federal court to enforce a Freedom
of Information Act (FOIA) request for documents
pertaining to the New Black Panthers case. Judicial
Watch had secured many previously unavailable
documents through their suit against DOJ and were now
suing for attorneys’ fees.
Obama’s DOJ had claimed Judicial Watch was not
entitled to attorney’s fees since “none of the records
produced in this litigation evidenced any political
interference whatsoever in” how the DOJ handled the
New Black Panther Party case. But United States
District Court Judge Reggie Walton disagreed. Citing a
“series of emails” between Obama political appointees
and career Justice lawyers, Walton writes:
The documents reveal that political appointees within
DOJ were conferring about the status and resolution of
the New Black Panther Party case in the days preceding
the DOJ’s dismissal of claims in that case, which
would appear to contradict Assistant Attorney General
Perez’s testimony that political leadership was not
involved in that decision. Surely the public has an
interest in documents that cast doubt on the accuracy
of government officials’ representations regarding the
possible politicization of agency decision-making.
In sum, the Court concludes that three of the four fee
entitlement factors weigh in favor of awarding fees to
Judicial Watch. Therefore, Judicial Watch is both
eligible and entitled to fees and costs, and the Court
must now consider the reasonableness of Judicial
Watch’s requested award.
The New Black Panthers case stems from a Election Day
2008 incident where two members of the New Black
Panther Party were filmed outside a polling place
intimidating voters and poll watchers by brandishing a
billy club. Justice Department lawyers investigated
the case, filed charges, and when the Panthers failed
to respond, a federal court in Philadelphia
entered a “default” against all the Panthers
defendants. But after Obama was sworn in, the Justice
Department reversed course, dismissed charges against
three of the defendants, and let the fourth off with a
narrowly tailored restraining order.
“The Court’s decision is another piece of evidence
showing the Obama Justice Department is run by
individuals who have a problem telling the truth,”
Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said. “The
decision shows that we can’t trust the Obama Justice
Department to fairly administer our nation’s voting
and election laws.”
High court allows
president discretion in upholding law or not
The Washington Times
By Andrew P Napolitano
Wednesday, June 27, 2012
When the Obama
administration decided it had no interest in
preventing the movement of undocumented aliens from Mexico into the
States, Arizona decided
to take matters into its own hands. Based on a novel
theory of constitutional law - namely, that if a state
is unhappy with the manner in which federal law is
being enforced or not being enforced, it can step into
the shoes of the feds and enforce federal law as it
wishes the feds would - Arizona enacted
legislation to accomplish that.
The legislation created two
conflicts that rose to the national stage. The first
is whether any government may morally and legally
interfere with freedom of association based on the
birthplace of the person with whom one chooses to
associate. The second is whether the states can
enforce federal law in a manner different from that of
Regrettably, in addressing
all of this earlier in the week, the Supreme Court
overlooked the natural and fundamental freedom to
associate. It is a natural right because it stems from
the better nature of our humanity, and it is a
fundamental right because it is protected from
governmental interference by the Constitution. Freedom
of association means that without force or fraud, you
may freely choose to be in the presence of whomever
you please, and the government cannot force you to
associate with someone with whom you have chosen not
to associate, nor can the government bar anyone with
whom you wish to associate from associating with you.
Without even addressing the
now-taken-for-granted federal curtailment of the right
to associate with someone born in a foreign country
and whose presence is inconsistent with arbitrary
federal document requirements and quotas, the Supreme
Court earlier this week struck down three of the four
challenged parts of the Arizona statute, which
attempted to supplant the federal regulation of
freedom of association with its own version. It did so
because the Constitution specifically gives to
Congress the authority to regulate immigration, and
Congress, by excluding all other law-writing bodies in
from enacting laws on immigration, has pre-empted the
The court specifically
invalidated the heart and soul of this misguided Arizona
law by ruling definitively that in the area of
immigration, the states cannot stand in the shoes of
the feds just because they disapprove of the manner in
which the feds are or are not enforcing federal law.
The remedy for one’s disapproval of the manner of
federal law enforcement is to elect a different
president or Congress; it is not to tinker with the
Federal law cannot have a
different meaning in different states, the court held.
And just as the feds must respect state sovereignty in
matters retained by the states under the Constitution
(though they rarely do), so too, the states must
respect federal sovereignty in matters that the
Constitution has unambiguously delegated to the feds.
The court neither upheld
nor invalidated Section 2B of the Arizona statute -
which permits police inquiry of the immigration status
of those arrested for non-immigration offenses -
because the court found that, just as when the police
stop a person for a violation of state or local law
they may check their computers for outstanding
warrants for the person they have stopped, so, too,
they may check their computers for the person’s
Shortly after the opinion
came down, the Obama administration announced that it
will cease providing Arizona police with the
immigration status of persons in that state, and it
will not detain anyone arrested by Arizona police for
immigration violations unless those violations rise to
the level of a felony, which undocumented presence in
the United States is not. Thus, this constitutional
rebuke to Arizona
has become a personal license for the president. He
has demonstrated that he will not faithfully enforce
federal law as the Constitution requires. He will only
enforce the laws with which he agrees.
So, because the Arizona police cannot arrest
and incarcerate anyone for undocumented presence and
because they cannot deliver anyone so arrested to the
feds, what legitimate governmental purpose will be
served by what remains of Arizona’s law?
None. But the police still will harass any
dark-skinned person in Arizona as they
Have we lost sight of the
perpetual tension between human freedom and human law?
Either freedom is integral to our nature, as Thomas
Jefferson wrote in the Declaration of Independence, or
it comes from the government, as the president and the
Supreme Court demonstrated they think this week. If it
is integral to our nature, no government can tell us
with whom we may freely associate. If it comes from
the government, we should abandon all hope, as the
government will permit the exercise of only those
freedoms that are not an obstacle to the contemporary
exercise of its powers.
Andrew P. Napolitano, a
former judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey, is
the senior judicial analyst at Fox News Channel. He
is the author of “It Is Dangerous to Be Right When
the Government Is Wrong: The Case for Personal
Freedom” (Thomas Nelson, 2011).
What do you think
about this article? Does the Judge glide over the
governments enumerated responsiblity to "protect and
defend" at the expense of individual sovereignty?
See the article at the Washington
and see readers reactions.
Overlooks Christian Persecution
24 May 2012
have resided in Egypt since the 1st century A.D.,
some 600 years before Muhammad began preaching and
630 years before he solidified Islam in the Arabian Peninsula.
Muslims entered Egypt in the year 639 and by the
13th century, Islam had taken over. By the 20th
century, Christians, who formed only 10 percent of
the Egyptian population, were finding themselves
victims of on-again-off-again pogroms conducted by
current turmoil in Egypt
is increasing the number of Egyptian Christians
seeking asylum in the West and especially in America.
Most of these asylees are educated men and women
who are professionals and entrepreneurs. Banking
historically has been in the hands of Christians.
Even so, under Sharia (Islamic law), non-Muslim
“infidels” have to pay a tax called the Jizya for
living in a Muslim country, even those whose
families predated the Muslims.
Egyptian Christians and U.S. citizens of Egyptian
ancestry feel abandoned by the United States,
which currently refuses to acknowledge persecution
of Christians by Muslims, lest it offend the
President Barack Obama banks on Egyptian
Christians being too genteel to take to the
streets in protest as the radical leftists do.
On June 4, 2009, when President Obama delivered
his “New Beginnings” speech in Cairo,
he addressed the Islamic world. As with his other
speeches, this one had an air of campaign rhetoric
well-delivered with apology, empathy, and
accolades for Islam.
“We love you” chants for Obama in Cairo,
however, cannot erase the terrorist acts committed
against Christian “infidels.” These terrorist acts, which began
in earnest in the 1970s, escalated to a crescendo
during the Arab Spring of 2011-2012 in Egypt
and other Muslim countries. The chant in Egyptian
streets is now “Allah Akbar” (God is great) and
“We love death,” as radical Islamists take center
stage. In February 2011, then Presidential
Press Secretary Robert Gibbs pulled an Obama
two-step by deflecting to the U.S. State
Department questions regarding the New Years’
murders of Coptic Christians in Egypt and the
ravaging of a cathedral. The State Department’s answer was
silence. Human Rights Watch, however, did note
growing religious intolerance and violence against
Christians in Egypt
— after additional murders of Christians and
burning of churches. The 2011 State Department Annual
Report on International Religious Freedom refused
to list Egypt
as “a country of particular concern,” even as
Christians and others were being murdered,
churches destroyed, and girls kidnapped and forced
to convert to Islam. The Obama administration
played politics by failing to acknowledge this
terrorist behavior. In May 2012, Christians fear that
Islamists will be the finalists in the field of 13
presidential candidates for the June presidential
run-off election. The candidates who happen to be
Islamists are supported by the Muslim Brotherhood
and the Salafists. The Salafists and the MB seek
Islamic law as the basis for a new Egyptian
constitution, which will consider all non-Muslims
as infidels subject to persecution as third-class
citizens. During the Obama presidency, 31
major Islamist attacks have occurred worldwide,
not counting those in Israel, India, and Russia.
Yet the Obama administration and the Democrat
Party continue to mislead U.S.
citizens, claiming the need for empathy to assuage
Muslim sensibilities. It is time for a new foreign
H. Walsh was
associate general counsel with the U.S.
Department of Justice Immigration and
Naturalization Service from 1983 to 1994.
The framers of the U.S. Constitution were admirably
clear, or so they and we thought, when they wrote in
the Fifth Amendment that no person shall "be deprived
of life, liberty or property, without due process of
Note that the framers didn't specify that the person
had to be a U.S.
citizen. And by "due process" they meant the right to
be formally charged, to challenge those charges before
a judge and to have defense counsel present.
So important was this right to due process that the
14th Amendment reiterated that its protections also
applied to the states.
Clear enough? Perhaps not.
The U.S. House recently affirmed the government's
power to detain indefinitely in military custody
suspected terrorists, even if they are U.S. citizens on U.S.
soil, without charge or trial. All that is required is
This provision does away with the presumption of
innocence. If the detainee is deemed an "illegal
combatant," the prisoner is 90 percent of the way
toward being declared guilty without the technicality
of a trial.
A coalition of Democrats and tea party-movement
Republicans, skeptical about the ever-increasing power
of a central government, failed to roll back that
power, their amendment losing by the dismaying margin
of 238 to 182.
Basically, the House reaffirmed a provision in a
defense bill that President Barack Obama signed on
In a statement accompanying the bill, Obama wrote,
"My administration will not authorize indefinite
military detention without trial of American citizens.
Indeed, I believe that doing so would break with our
most important traditions and values as a nation."
That's a commendable notion. But a right is not truly
a right when someone else gets to decide whether and
when that right should apply.
The Associated Press noted, "In a face-saving move,
the House voted 243-173 Friday for an amendment that
reaffirms Americans' constitutional rights."
It says something about our current crop of lawmakers
that 173 of them would vote "no" on the Bill of
Rights. Maybe for the past 220 or so years, the
Constitution wasn't as clear as we thought.
Dale McFeatters’ column is distributed by the
Scripps Howard News Service.
Moral Constitutional Patriots Speak
Response By Dr. Gene A. Youngblood
Council Meeting of 5/22/2012
council has introduced ordinance 2012-296.This bill
is cloaked under the disguise of equal
opportunity and non-discrimination in the
bill states that the city of Jacksonville
seeks to build a reputation as a welcoming
community for bright and talented
members of the workforce, and seeks to be
competitive in attracting new industries to
the bill seems to focus only on a “special class,”
ignoring the U.S.
Constitution and religiousliberties.
Jacksonville, Florida as well as other cities and
states across America already have multiple
layers of federal, state and local laws,
boards, and commissions that prohibit
discrimination based on race, religion, sex,
or national origin.This bill would add any “perceived sex”
(perceived sex, gender identity, or expression as
found on pages 3 (lines 7 and 20) and page 4 (lines
1-2)) and would abridge free speech.
WHEREAS The U.S.
Constitution, Florida Constitution, the EEOC, and
several other civil rights laws, all provide more
than adequate oversight and protection
against discrimination in every area in the
Ordinance 2012-296 provides and would codify
rules and regulations that would surpass
and/or circumvent our U.S. Constitution,
Florida Constitution, and present laws-thus, the
bill is unconstitutional.
22-24 on page 3 would bring about chaos,
major additional workplace expenses,
and confusion.This provision would force every business
to provide unisex restrooms.States
such as California
among others, that
have instituted such practices are
now watching industry, trade and new
businessesleave their state,
thus causing an extra burden on homeowners
being required to pay higher property taxes.Is this
what we want in Jacksonville?
Ordinance 2012-296 clearly recognizes that
the requirements of this bill go beyond
the U.S Constitution as revealed in lines
1-5 of page 3, wherein the reference to the bill’sconstitutionality has been stricken.
WHEREAS Page 4,
lines 1-3, provides for a person’s actual or perceived
sexuality, it would be impossible to
legislate or police.This will cause a major increase in tax
money to investigate and/or enforce.This means
that a man may “only” perceive he
is a woman and can enter a woman’s
restroom or demand special exceptions.This would
also allow pedophiles and multitudes of
other perverts to file discrimination
charges against businesses.
2012-296 will be costly and prohibitive
making the end result a net
loss of business or industry coming to
clear, based on requirements in the bill as
found on page 4, lines 6-8.
Ordinance 2012-296 would be overreaching and
overly encompassing by forcing a business
owner to go against his moral
conscience, to comply with the essence
of law that would be contrary to his moral,
Ordinance 2012-296 will create a special “super
class” of protected people that the
U.S. Constitution, Florida Constitution, and state
laws do not recognize as having “special
privileges.”Remember: “Thou shalt
not lie with a man, as with a woman; it is an
abomination.” (Lev. 18-22).
406.102 of ordinance 2012-296, “Declaration of
policy” is clearly overstepping the
bounds of the U.S. Constitution and the Florida
the major cost for the city to be in
compliance will further increase our $58
million budget deficit.The moral,
ethical property owners will be charged
increased fees and taxes to pay
for this immoral law that would circumvent
WHEREAS Page 10
lines 7-16 of ordinance 2012-296 will further increase
the cost of providing housing in our
section will also cause very serious escalation
of tax dollars for the city to be in compliance
of this bill.
WHEREAS Page 2,
lines 1-6 make it clear that 2012-296 is designed
for more than just an equal rights
bill for labor.This bill would “in fact” make it illegal
for anyone speaking out about any
religion in any “antagonism.”This bill
would impose regulations on free speech
in the public arena.This bill is unconstitutional!
WHEREAS It is
the position of the undersigned patriots, clergy
and moral leaders that this bill should not
be approved in any form or part
thereof, based on the following summary:
bill would establish a “special class”
of citizens, contrary to our Constitution.
bill would provide for broad application and
enforcement of a law that is not in compliance
with the U.S. Constitution.This bill
bill would greatly infringe Constitutional
Rights in the free exercise of one’s moral
bill would bring about a major tax
increase for Jacksonville