Please read
current events from a variety of sources.
June
2018
Ocala will move to vacate First Amendment
violation ruling
By Katie Pohlman
Posted June 20, 2018
Ocala Star Banner
U.S. District Judge Timothy J. Corrigan ruled in
May that the city of Ocala and Police Chief Greg
Graham violated the clause by organizing,
promoting and holding a prayer vigil in
September 2014.
The Ocala City Council has voted to file a
motion to vacate judgement in a federal case in
which a judge ruled the city and its police
chief violated the Establishment Clause of the
First Amendment.
In a May decision, U.S. District Judge Timothy
J. Corrigan ruled that the city of Ocala and
Ocala Police Chief Greg Graham violated the
clause by organizing, promoting and holding a
prayer vigil in September 2014 after a drive-by
shooting in which several children were injured.
The chief and city were ordered to pay $3 each
in damages ($1 to each plaintiff) plus attorney
fees and costs.
City Attorney Pat Gilligan said during an Ocala
City Council meeting on Tuesday that the motion
to vacate is based on other federal case law.
The city had the opportunity to appeal
Corrigan’s ruling, but decided against that.
Attorneys who represent the city and Graham in
the lawsuit did not immediately respond to an
email request for comment.
A group of four Marion County residents
originally filed the suit, claiming the prayer
vigil violated the constitution by having
uniformed police officers participate, having
government officials plan the event and having
the event promoted on OPD letterhead.
“Not only did they violate well-settled
constitutional rights ... but they did so in the
face of repeated actual warnings from counsel
that their conduct was violating the
Establishment Clause,” the plaintiff’s motion
for summary judgement read.
The Establishment Clause refers to the first 10
words of the First Amendment:
“Congress
shall make no law respecting an
establishment of religion.”
STOP RIGHT HERE.
What does a community's decision have to host a
prayer vigil have to do with the fact that
Congress is banned from making laws regarding
established religions???!!
Does it bother you, too, that a Judge who is
supposed to uphold the Constitution which is
written to protect WE THE PEOPLE from an ever
encroaching government, encroaches on a
community's natural right to gather in a
peaceful manner, whether they pray, or sing
songs, or eat ice cream??? Isn't this judge
overstepping??!!
Read
the articles in its entirety here, and
share it with organizations that are concerned
with our preserving our Constitution and basic
civil freedoms that it was meant to protect.
June
1, 2018
There has been a fair amount of buzz recently
about the "morally straight" organization of
the Boy Scouts and the attempt to move gender
identity into the psychological realm, away
from the realm of the physical way that God
created people- man, and woman.
God loves all his children and wants us
to carry out loving-kindness for one another,
and God is full of forgiveness for all of us;
and who among us doesn't error in some
behaviors and omissions? When we ask, God is
ready to forgive us and point us to a
healthier and happy direction, for that is
what God wants all us children.
Wondering what the Scripture plainly says
about sexual behavior and morality, a
particular
website came to notice. It's worth your time
to read and ponder. In case you
need to save it to visit later, the website
is: http://www.livingout.org/the-bible-and-ssa
Trump’s latest appeal to evangelicals: a new
office to protect religious liberty
Trump will sign an executive order launching
the new White House Faith and Opportunity
Initiative today.
Published: May 3, 2018
Author: Tara Isabella Burton
Vox.com
...The institution of faith-based initiatives is
not uncommon in the White House — Barack Obama
launched the Office of Faith-based and
Neighborhood Partnerships, and George W. Bush
instituted an Office of Faith-Based and
Community Initiatives. Both programs were
designed to provide faith-based charity
organizations with a clear avenue to get federal
funding for their work.
That said, Trump’s initiative seems to expand
previous offices’ remit in a number of ways. For
starters, the office isn’t just focusing on
community-based or charitable initiatives.
According to the Religion News Service, it’s
also charged with informing the administration
of “any failures of the executive branch to
comply with religious liberty protections under
law.” The Trump administration has consistently
been a champion of religious liberty,
particularly insofar as it pertains to
evangelical Christian causes. ...
Please
click here to read the entire article at
Vox.com.
England Moves Submarines Armed With
Cruise Missiles Within Striking Range Of Syria
Theresa May Convenes ‘War Cabinet’
Geoffrey Grider
Apr. 11, 2018
Nowthenedbegins.com
Theresa May was poised last night to
defy calls for a Commons vote on military action
in Syria. The Prime Minister summoned
ministers back to London to seek their
support for joining an American-led attack on
the Assad regime within days.
EDITOR’S NOTE: British
Prime Minister Theresa May is prepared to
act with or without the consent of
Parliament, sources are now saying. UK
submarines armed with Tomahawk cruise
missiles have already been positioned off
the coast of Syria to support the United
States just as soon as President Trump gives
the go ahead to launch the missile strike.
Kinda funny to think that a potential war of
such Biblical proportions could be waged
largely on Twitter and social media, yet it
is. The end times clock is ticking, the only
question is will it blink or go boom?
Clearing the way for action,
she declared the use of chemical weapons could
not go unchallenged and said ‘all the
indications’ suggested that Bashar Assad’s
forces were responsible for Saturday’s
atrocity near Damascus.
Please
click here to read the article in its
entirety.
At Last — A Military Religious Liberty Win
Jordan Candler
Apr. 4, 2018
Patriot Post
"Colonel Bohannon had the right to exercise his
sincerely held religious beliefs and did not
unlawfully discriminate."
Please
click here to read the article in The
Patriot Post in its entirety.
Islamic intimidation of the secular British
school system
Click
here to read an interesting article
from the Gatestone Institute about
intimidation of the secular British school
system.
Islamist threats that would be unacceptable
coming from other groups, are not prosecuted
by law enforcement policies in Britain.
Policies do not defend school
administrators, or the general public. But
Brits do have a choice- they can be engulfed
by the misogenist totalitarian rule of Sharia,
or die.
What will be the tipping point in America?
Click
here to watch a short youtube video that
shed more light on the mentality and judgement
of the Broward County Florida Sheriff Scott
Israel.
The First Amendment Is In Far Greater
Danger Than The Second
Frank Cannon
Town Hall
March 1, 2018
Our nation’s elites are waging
war on the American people, wielding the
institutions they’ve spent several decades
capturing to punish those who disagree with
their preferred positions and to deny them
the ability to speak publicly, all in an
effort to stifle free and open debate. And
no, this isn’t a George Orwell novel — this
is the United States of America.
While many still mistakenly
view our political arena as a skirmish
between “liberals” and “conservatives”, it
would be more accurate to describe it as an
all-out war between “elitists” and
“populists”. As my late friend Jeff Bell
argued in his 1992 book, “Populism and
Elitism: Politics in the Age of Equality”,
elitists believe in a top-down approach
where a cadre of experts rule the country
and determine what is acceptable discourse
and what is not, while populists believe the
people should ultimately determine the
course of our politics and culture.
Traditionally, the “elitists”
have always had the upper hand in this
battle by controlling many of our cultural
institutions, but the respect for the will
of the people — exercised by the ability to
elect our political leaders — remained in
place. Over time, however, that respect
eroded, and today, it is completely gone.
Now the “elitists” find the “populists” to
be repugnant, backward, and bigoted, and
they believe the only way to defeat the
people is to use elite institutional power
in academia, corporate America, the
administrative state, and the mainstream
media to stifle debate, force-feed elite
opinions masquerading as facts, and stamp
out dissent.
For example, consider these
three widely held views by the American
people:
- Young
children should not be taught about
transgenderism or changing their gender.
- Abortion is
wrong, especially after the first
trimester.
- The right to
bear arms shall not be infringed.
Despite their relative
popularity, these views are repulsive to our
elites, and in recent years, they have
sought to shut down debate on all three
topics by calling anti-gender ideology
activists “transphobic”, anti-abortion
activists “anti-women”, and defenders of the
Constitution “gun nuts” who have “blood on
their hands”. On the gender ideology issue,
elites have been wildly successful in
completely removing debate over
transgenderism from the public square and
even politics. On abortion, they have
largely failed as pro-life sentiment among
the people has proven too strong for elites
to overcome. And on guns, the jury is still
out, but elites are engaging in perhaps
their most brazenly outrageous effort to
silence opposing views to date.
It’s About Tactics, Not
Issues
The battle between elite
opinion and popular opinion is as old as
time, but the recent tactical change among
elites seeking to stifle dissenting speech
is a new, and frightening, development. In a
departure from the normal give-and-take of
American democracy, the elites have begun
using their clout within every major
institution of civil society to demonize and
punish their opposition — through public
shaming in the media, economic extortion and
retaliation by big businesses, and even
criminalization of certain protest
activities. And given their entrenchment
within these institutions, the elites face
little or no consequences for their blatant
illiberality.
A case in point of this change
has been the aftermath of the Parkland
school shooting. Despite the complexity of
the issues involved and the diversity of
views held by Americans as to the proper
response, the elites have pursued a scorched
earth campaign against those who do not hold
their black-and-white views on guns. In the
news media, a narrative emphasizing the
immediate necessity of national gun control
legislation has become a 24-hour rallying
cry, with victims of the tragedy exploited
to advance this narrative and brand those
who disagree as somehow complicit in the
violence. Meanwhile, corporations have begun
to sever ties with the NRA, sending a
message that only one side of the debate is
socially acceptable while the other is
deserving of punishment.
A similar strategy has been
playing out with the movement to normalize
the Left’s gender ideology. Despite a lack
of scientific evidence — and widespread
parental skepticism — regarding the
soundness of treating young, gender
dysphoric children with highly experimental
puberty blockers and hormonal treatments,
elites have slowly co-opted influential
medical associations in order to ensure that
these treatments are not only widely adopted
but also that alternative approaches to
gender dysphoria are marginalized and even
criminalized. Moreover, opponents of this
takeover, no matter how well-grounded their
opposition, are branded by the media and its
self-appointed experts as “transphobes” and
“bigots” while being denied any opportunity
to make their arguments in a respected
forum.
Most Americans Already
Understand What’s Happening
Make no mistake: an America
with total elite control over the population
and where dissent from their views is
vilified is not an America at all. The gun
debate is simply another battle in the
all-out war elites are waging on the
American people’s right to even have an
opinion, let alone speak out about it and
not be punished for it.
Fortunately, the American
people are fully cognizant of what is taking
place, which is why they voted for Donald
Trump in 2016. Instead of looking at Trump
and Clinton through the two lenses voters
typically use, moral character and issue
positions, voters applied a third lens:
would their views be allowed to be
articulated at all without dire consequences
under a Clinton administration?
We cannot keep pretending, like
so many Never Trumpers do, that we are
operating in an environment of normal
political give-and-take on issues. That time
has passed. We are instead operating in a
country now where elites demonize the
populist position with such ferocity that
many are afraid to voice their opinion at
all, which is, of course, the entire point
of their strategy. Our fight is no longer
just over political issues — it is a battle
against the very tactics being used by
elites to stifle debate and destroy the
essence of what makes America great.
Frank Cannon is the president
at American Principles Project.
Britain:
The Hijab as the Entry Point for Islam
by
Khadija Khan
February 21, 2018 at 5:00 am
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/11884/britain-hijab-schools
- Islamists seem to be
influencing the British school system with
ease: there is simply no solid opposition
to them. The government even stays silent
about the harassment and intimidation.
- Islamists in Britain seem to
be intent on establishing regressive
requirements, such as the hijab for young
girls, wife beating, making homosexuality
illegal, death for apostates, halala
rituals in divorce, and exploitation of
women and children through Sharia courts
as part and parcel of British culture.
- That St. Stephen's School
allowed itself to be blackmailed in this
way bodes ill for both Britain and its
education system.
St. Stephen's School in East London recently
imposed a ban on hijabs (Islamic
headscarves), but reversed its decision
after administrators received hundreds of
threats from enraged Muslims.
...Four examples of threats and
intimidation follow- click
link to read article in its entirety...
continuing....
"This
is an important step in promoting religious
extremism, mob rule and refusing to give
#Muslim young girls equal gender equality
rights.... So much for choice and individual
liberty. Terribly sad day for a secular
democracy."
While
secular British values need to be upheld to
provide equal opportunities to everyone,
regardless of caste, creed, gender or color,
Islamists seem to be influencing the British
school system with ease: there is simply no
solid opposition to them. The government
even stays silent about the harassment and
intimidation.
Was
St. Stephen's forced to succumb to the
pressure of ignorant zealots, who either do
not know or choose to ignore that under
Islamic law (Sharia), girls are not required
to cover their heads until they reach
puberty? Ignorance also seems not to have
prevented them from accusing anyone who says
or acts otherwise of "Islamophobia." It is a
form of political blackmail used by Muslim
extremists against the Western institutions,
the values of which they abhor.
Parliamentary
Under
Secretary of State for the School System,
Lord Agnew of Oulton, pledged to support the
schools that are trying to ban hijabs as
well as obligatory fasting: in Islam, young
children are not subject to either.
Lord
Agnew said that the government should
support head teachers in making difficult
and "sensitive" decisions in the face of
vitriolic opposition. We have yet to see the
effects of his statement. Supporting head
teachers is one thing, but there is also a
dire need to confront these extremists on
all levels, including law enforcement, if
they try to harass or intimidate anyone.
Someone
please
needs to back up Lord Agnew: there are only
a few such policy-makers left willing to
offer rational help during such crises.
Islamists
in
Britain seem to be intent on establishing
regressive requirements, such as the hijab
for young girls, wife-beating, halala
rituals in divorce, making homosexuality
illegal, death for apostates, and the exploitation
of women and children through Sharia
courts as part and parcel with
British culture.
Instead of making statements,
the British government needs to take
concrete steps to stop the further
infiltration of these practices into
Britain's social fabric, the warping of
children's minds, and the harassment of
whoever disagrees with those plans.
That St. Stephen's allowed
itself to be blackmailed in this way bodes
ill for both Britain and its education
system.
Khadija Khan is a Pakistani
journalist and commentator, currently
based in Germany.
Under Islamic repression, 'Christianity has
ignited like a flame'
By Bob Unrah
19 February 2018
World Net Daily
Hopeful news out of Iran....
Has Iran taken on a fight that it can never
win?
Evidence suggests that might be the case, as
the internationally renowned American Center
for Law and Justice points out that the
Islamic regime now is becoming desperate to
extinguish a surging population of Christians
inside its borders.
Iran, after all, is a nation that has exported
terrorism for decades. It has the free world
worried about its nuclear-weapons program. It
routinely threatens to destroy Israel. It
interferes with Middle East conflicts and
engages in cyberwar against the West.
But the American Center for Law and Justice
reports Christianity “has ignited like a flame
across the country of Iran, making the Iranian
government so nervous they’re desperate to
extinguish it quickly.”
Iranians are converting to Christianity at a
record-setting pace, with an estimated 360,000
to 800,000 Christians in the country.
There were fewer than 500 back in the 1980s.
“It’s difficult to take an accurate census
because fears of retribution, arrest, and
violence keep many Christian converts from
self-identifying. Iranian authorities have
been raiding the homes of suspected
Christians, confiscating their books,
computers, and other media and arresting the
men,” ACLJ said.
The government has spent millions of dollars
to fight the growing interest in Christianity,
the mission group Elam Ministries told Mohabat
News, a website that reports on Christians in
Iran.
The money has gone toward Islamic propaganda,
jailing church members, confiscation of
Christian materials and more, the report said.
Ayatollah Alavi Boroujerdi, an official at an
Islamic seminary, has confirmed that
“youth are becoming Christians in Qom and
attending house churches.”
Christians are being forced to hide their
faith to protect themselves and their
families, because worshipping Jesus “will get
you arrested, and very possibly get you
killed,” a critic reported.
“This is something we at the ACLJ have
witnessed first hand, advocating for a number
of imprisoned Christians pastors in Iran –
including Youcef Nadarkhani, who we
successfully fought to free from multiple
false imprisonments for his faith. In each of
these cases, Iran has targeted pastors in an
attempt to squelch the Christian church. It
has failed each and every time. In fact, the
attempts to silence the church has only made
it louder as Christianity grows in Iran,” ACLJ
said.
Please
read this article in its entirety at
http://www.wnd.com/2018/02/under-islamic-repression-christianity-has-ignited-like-a-flame/#eHlmy0mhC3TsZ3ep.99
What
'peace' means to Muslims; just ask Jefferson
By Bill Federer
16 February 2018
World Net Daily
Bill Federer recounts brief history of
American conflicts with brutality of Islam
“The first nation to recognize my country was
Morocco,” stated President Obama in Cairo,
Egypt, June 4, 2009.
Morocco began recognizing American colonists in
1625. Governor William Bradford described the
incident in the History of the Plymouth
Settlement. In 1625, the Pilgrims sent two ships
back to England carrying dried fish and 800 lbs
of beaver skins to trade for much needed
supplies.
What happened next?
Bradford related the fate of one ship: “They …
were well within the England channel, almost in
sight of Plymouth. But … there she was unhapply
taken by a Turkish man-of-war and carried off to
Morocco where the captain and crew were made
slaves. … Now by the ship taken by the Turks …
all trade was dead.”
...
When America became independent, it was no
longer covered by the British extortion tribute
payment to the Muslim pirates. Morocco
“recognized” the United States in 1785 by
capturing two American ships and holding the
sailors for ransom. Thomas Jefferson worked to
free them, writing to John Jay, 1787: “There is
an order of priests called the Mathurins, the
object of whose institution is to beg alms for
the redemption of captives. They keep members
always in Barbary, searching out the captives of
their country, and redeem, I believe, on better
terms than any other body, public or private. It
occurred to me, that their agency might be
obtained for the redemption of our prisoners at
Algiers.”
In 1786, Thomas Jefferson wrote to William
Carmichael regarding Tripoli’s demand for
extortion tribute payment, 1786: “Mr. Adams and
I had conferences with a Tripoline ambassador,
named Abdrahaman. He asked us thirty thousand
guineas for a peace with his court.”
When Jefferson asked the Muslim Ambassador what
the new country of America had done to offend
them, he reported to John Jay, March 28, 1786:
“The ambassador answered us that it was founded
on the laws of the prophet, it was written in
their Qur’an, that all nations which had not
acknowledged the Prophet were sinners, whom it
was the right and duty of the faithful to
plunder and enslave; and that every mussulman
(Muslim) who was slain in this warfare was sure
to go to paradise. He said, also, that the man
who was the first to board a vessel had one
slave over and above his share, and that when
they sprang to the deck of an enemy’s ship,
every sailor held a dagger in each hand and a
third in his mouth; which usually struck such
terror into the foe that they cried out for
quarter at once.”
Jefferson read the Qur’an, not out of admiration
but to understand why Muslims were attacking
Americans unprovoked.
For
a more complete history read this article at
http://www.wnd.com/2018/02/what-peace-means-to-muslims-just-ask-jefferson/#lPxcsFtkvqdTezS1.99
Islam in the Public Square
Crisis Magazine
William Kilpatrick
January 2, 2018
Secularists like to advise
Christians that, for the sake of social
harmony, they ought to keep their religion to
themselves. Religion, they argue, is a private
affair between an individual and his
designated deity, and ought not to be dragged
into the public square. Moreover, they
helpfully add, it’s an imposition on others to
confront them with beliefs that they may find
offensive.
As for themselves, secularists
have no qualms about imposing their own values
on everyone within reach. They are convinced
of the rightness of their beliefs, and
consequently they don’t think twice about
forcing Christian bakers, florists, and
photographers to endorse gay weddings. They
are also convinced that they know what’s best
for your children. And what’s best for them,
they are quite certain, is that they learn all
the latest fashions in gender identity and
marriage equality.
In his groundbreaking 1984 book,
The Naked Public Square, Richard John Neuhaus
argued that the public square can never be
naked for long. In other words, it cannot be
neutral about values: “If it is not clothed
with the ‘meanings’ borne by religion, new
‘meanings’ will be imposed by virtue of the
ambitions of the modern state.”
In short, the committed
secularist won’t be satisfied with the removal
of the crèche from the town square. He’ll
insist that it be replaced with something that
more accurately reflects American
diversity—say, a monument to Margaret Sanger
or a statue of James Obergefell. Of course,
secular society’s reach extends well beyond
the town green. The religion of secularism is
constantly being advanced in a variety of
venues—in courtrooms, school rooms, and in the
newly remodeled bathrooms that accommodate the
newly invented genders.
Fr. Neuhaus was right in
predicting that “a perverse notion of the
disestablishment of religion leads to the
establishment of the state as Church.” The
secular state quickly moves to enshrine
whatever values it currently smiles upon. And
it defends them as though they were divinely
revealed dogma. But, despite his prescience,
Neuhaus did fail to anticipate another
development—namely, that the Judeo-Christian
tradition might be displaced from the public
square not only by the state, but also by
another religion.
The possibility that Islam would
one day be a contender for control of the
public square probably didn’t enter his mind.
That’s no surprise. Except for the blip caused
by the Iranian Revolution, Islam wasn’t on
anyone’s radar in the early eighties. Yet
Islam is now well on its way to controlling
the public square in parts of Europe. And,
were it not for the election of Donald Trump
and the defeat of the Muslim
Brotherhood-friendly Clinton machine, the U.S.
would now be playing catch-up.
As has often been observed,
Islam is a political religion. Some, like
Dutch MP Geert Wilders, contend that it is
almost totally political with only a thin and
deceptive veneer of religiosity. Whatever the
exact proportion of politics to religion, it’s
hard to deny that the political dimension
looms large in Islam. Muhammad, after all, was
a warlord. He conquered all of Arabia, and
within a relatively short time after his
death, his followers conquered an area larger
than the Roman Empire. Sayyid Abul A’la
Maududi, one of the most important
twentieth-century Islamic theorists, wrote
that “Islam requires the earth—not just a
portion, but the whole planet.”
Please
click here to read the article in its
entirety at Crisis Magazine
ISIS Kills Scores of Christians in Retaken
Syrian Town: Report
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 has said.
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 took control.
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 country.
Go
to this website to read the original article
http://www.newsweek.com/isis-killed-scores-christians-retaken-syrian-town-patriarch-446132
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 legacy. Click
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 terrorists
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 wiped away.”
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 slaughter Americans.
The moral, or in this case the immoral, of the
story is this: Jihad terror works.
Click
here to read this article in its entirety,
including links to more information.
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 Resistance."
Wisconsin firm fires Muslims in prayer
dispute
Religious breaks disrupted production at
lawn mower, snowblower manufacturer
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 in protest.
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 Bay.
Please
click here to read entire article at ABC News.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/wisconsin-firm-terminates-muslim-workers-prayer-dispute-36695435
Finland TV airs 'laughable' strategy to stop
rape
If shouting 'No!' doesn't work, then swat
attacker with purse
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."
Click
here to read this article in its entirety at
World Net Daily.
http://www.wnd.com/2016/02/finland-tv-airs-laughable-strategy-to-stop-rape/
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 hard.
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 Old
City.
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
hailed.
Police Commissioner Inspector General Roni
Alsheich paid a visit to the wounded Border
Police officer on Wednesday night.
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 drafted.
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
disposal team.
Cohen was due to be buried on Thursday
afternoon.
Khaled Abu Toameh contributed to this report.
Click
here to read the article at the Jerusalem
Post web site.
A Glimpse of Clinton
and her Advisors...
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 costs.
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 privy to.
Sandy
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 takeover.
But Berger felt the risks to Israeli lives were
worth it.
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 against
him.”
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.”
Robert
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.
Thomas
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 force.”
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
requiring it.”
Regardless, Pickering writes that the protests
could be used against Israel “to influence the
political leadership.”
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 demonstrations.
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 @ RabbiShmuley.
(Links within this article are
not from
jp.com)
Click
here to read the original article at the
Jerusalem Post website and check for the
follow up column if you have the stomach for it.
Another State Is
Heard From.......
Senate resolution calls for a US
constitutional convention
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 federal government.
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 read at the KFQD Radio Page.
Click here to realize that Alaska is not
the only state that has called for a
Constitutional Convention.
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
Please
click here to read entire article at Morning
Star News
Man with Quran, guns arrested near
Disneyland Paris
Manhunt underway for female companion
CNN
by Laura Akhoun and Jason Hanna
Published: 01/28/2016
(CNN) French police are looking for a woman who
was with the Paris man who was arrested with
guns Thursday at a Disney hotel near Disneyland
Paris, police official Michael Le Provost told
CNN.
When security guards discovered the firearms,
they noticed the woman was with him, but she
eluded arrest, Le Provost said.
Bomb disposal experts are inspecting the man’s
car, Le Provost said.
Please
click here to read the full story at CNN.
Obama vs. Jefferson on Islamic Terror
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
Lies.”)
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.
Click
here to read the entire article of David
Barton and increase your knowledge of
American History.
Hands up, just shoot!
Posted By Jeff Knox On 01/27/2016 @ 7:42 pm
In Commentary,Opinion
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
encounter.
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 the time.
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 those things.
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
easily avoided.
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.
Click
here to read this article in its entirety at
World Net Daily.
Christian persecution reached record high in
2015, report says
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 world.
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 Islamic extremism.
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 fellow Christians."
Click
here to read the article in its entirety at
CNN
WND Exclusive
U.S. in grip of 'Muhammad' baby boom
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 growing exponentially.
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.
Please
click here to read entire article at World
Net Daily
World Net Daily
Alabama 2nd state to sue feds over refugee
resettlement
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 placing refugees.
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.
Please
click here to read the article in it's
entirety.
Expanding
special rights to the 2% who choose the LGBT
lifestyle in Jacksonville FL
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:
Mayor
Curry
Phone:
(904) 630-1776
Fax:
(904) 630-2391
Email:
MayorLennyCurry@coj.net
Or your
representatives on the City Council. Click
their names for direct email, or telephone
their offices:
District 1: Joyce Morgan
(904) 630-1389
District 2: Al Ferraro
(904) 630-1392
District 3 Aaron L.
Bowman
(904) 630-1386
District 4 Scott
Wilson
(904)
630-1394
District 5 Lori N.
Boyer
(904)
630-1382
District 6 Matt
Schellenberg
(904) 630-1388
District 7 Reggie
Gaffney
(904) 630-1384
District 8 Katrina Brown
(904)
630-1385
District 9 Garrett L
Dennis
(904) 630-1395
District 10 Reginald L
Brown (904)
630-1684
District 11 Danny Becton
(904)
630-1383
District 12 Doyle
Carter
(904)
630-1380
District 13 Bill
Gulliford
(904)
630-1397
District 14 Jim Love
(904)
630-1390
Group 1 Anna Lopez
Brosche
(904) 630-1393
Group 2 John R
Crescimbeni
(904) 630-1381
Group 3 Tommy Hazouri
(904)630-1396
Group 4 Greg Anderson
(904)630-1398
Group 5 Samuel
Newby
(904) 630-1387
10th Amendment:
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 'marriages'
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
Dear Jacksonville
Family,
This 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 undress.
And, much more harm will
occur. Get more details at DefendJaxFamilies.
But, you can help
prevent this. How? LET THE
PEOPLE DECIDE this issue.
●
Show your
support for the Public Referendum
proposed by Councilman Gulliford.
Complete and return the Petition found
here,
where there are instructions. The
Petition form can be filled out on your
computer and returned by email.
●
Forward this
letter. Email it to as
many people as possible.
●
Collect
Petition signatures.
Download the Petition
form, print copies and distribute them
at churches and other venues.
●
Help fund the
campaign. And please
urge friends to donate
here . They will understand that
it takes funding to fight this battle.
●
Attend 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 and return.
Thanks for all your help, and for
your support in the past.
Defend
Jax Families
Non-Muslims encouraged to wear Islamic head
scarf at school
Click
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. soil.
Click
here to fact check on Wikipedia
(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 protesting
Photos show demonstrators warning 'Behead
those who insult Islam'
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 miles away).
Wednesday night, Facebook removed Savage’s post,
explaining the social media site “determined
that it violated Facebook community standards.”
Read
more and see the picture at
http://www.wnd.com/2015/12/facebook-censors-michael-savage-post-of-muslims-protesting/#TU3MPU7fYsr0uGyf.99
After Muslim Truckers
Refuse to Deliver Beer… Obama Does the
Unbelievable
From Top Right News on
October 27, 2015
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 stunned.
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 government.
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.
Click
here to view the article in its entirety
at Top Right News.
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 "Washington Compost":
San Bernardino suspects identified; probe
turns to motive, planning
What we know about
the shooting in San Bernardino
Police
in San Bernardino, Calif.,
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
Post)
By
William Dauber, Sarah Kaplan and Brian
Murphy December
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
attack.
In addition, at least 17 people were
wounded, some critically.
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 in San 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 body cameras.
A shootout with police left both suspects
dead and the vehicle peppered with bullet
holes and with its windows shattered.
“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 origins.
An ATF official, speaking on condition of
anonymity, said two of the weapons were
purchased legally, and investigations
continued into the other two.
“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 poverty.
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.
“One
of 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 Riverside, Calif.,
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 Inland
Regional
Center,
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.
Click
here to read the article in its entirety
at the Washington Post website
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 Morning Mix.
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.
November
19. 2015
FROM A
CONCERNED CITIZEN OF JACKSONVILLE
It's
baaack! It's
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.
Evidently, it is not
enough to have EQUAL
rights and EQUAL justice...
at least that is what the paid
lobbyists trolling around city hall
seem to indicate.
My
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?
The
Mayor 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.
The
first 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?
The
first 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.
You
may read more about the first meeting
by clicking
here, courtesy of Channel 4.
http://www.news4jax.com/news/mayor-lenny-curry-holds-first-meeting-addressing-lgbt-issues-in-jacksonville/36492002.
Two
more meetings are scheduled:
Religious
Freedoms, Thoughts & Beliefs,
Dec.
3 at 6 p.m.
Edward
Waters
College
Milne Auditorium at 1658
Kings Road, Jacksonville,
FL 32209
and
Understanding
the
Law & its Effects on Business,
Dec. 15 at 6 p.m.
Jacksonville
University
Policy Institute at 2800
University Blvd. N.,
Jacksonville,
FL 32211.
Jacksonville
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?
So
give this some thought. It's your city
and your tax money. If
you say No No! NO! to this, please
contact your Mayor, Lenny Curry at
Phone:
(904) 630-1776
Fax:
(904) 630-2391
Email:
MayorLennyCurry@coj.net
Or
your representatives on the City
Council. Click their names for direct
email or telephone their offices:
District 1: Joyce
Morgan
(904) 630-1389
District 2: Al
Ferraro
(904) 630-1392
District 3 Aaron
L. Bowman
(904) 630-1386
District 4 Scott
Wilson
(904)
630-1394
District 5 Lori N.
Boyer
(904)
630-1382
District 6 Matt
Schellenberg
(904) 630-1388
District 7 Reggie
Gaffney
(904) 630-1384
District 8 Katrina
Brown
(904)
630-1385
District 9 Garrett
L Dennis
(904) 630-1395
District 10 Reginald
L Brown
(904) 630-1684
District 11 Danny
Becton
(904)
630-1383
District 12 Doyle
Carter
(904)
630-1380
District 13 Bill
Gulliford
(904)
630-1397
District 14 Jim
Love
(904)
630-1390
Group 1 Anna
Lopez Brosche
(904) 630-1393
Group 2 John R
Crescimbeni
(904) 630-1381
Group 3 Tommy
Hazouri
(904)630-1396
Group 4 Greg
Anderson
(904)630-1398
Group 5 Samuel
Newby
(904) 630-1387
This is the time to make your voice
and your priorities for your city of Jacksonville,
heard.
WND EXCLUSIVE
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 similar
measure.
“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 $5,000.
“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 foundation.
“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, not good.”
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 Box.”
“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 agenda.
“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
treated.”
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 quick adoption.
“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, Jonathan Saenz.
“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 vote.
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.
Please
click here to read on World Net Daily in its
entirety.
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 come from.
Please
click here to read article in its entirety
Police Confiscate Mohammed Cartoons At Dutch
Anti-Islam Rally
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 Islamism.
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 causing disturbances.
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 pro-migrant counter-demonstrators.
This
article is from World Net Daily
Thousands Of
German People Chant ‘Merkel Must Go’ At
Anti-Mass Muslim Migration Rally
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 Montenegro.
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 plans.
Please
visit
http://www.nowtheendbegins.com/thousands-german-people-chant-merkel-must-go-at-anti-mass-muslim-migration-rally/
to see the original article, videos, and links
to sources and related information.
Court rules
against Little Sisters of the Poor in
Contraceptive Coverage Case
By Nigel Duara
L.A. Times
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 healthcare exchange.
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' religious
freedom.
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 contraceptive
coverage.
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 wrote.
“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
opinion.
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 ruled.
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.
View
this copyrighted article in it's entirety at
the Los Angeles Times
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-ff-little-sisters-of-the-poor-20150714-story.html
PRESS RELEASE
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 instructional
responsibilities.
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
forgiveness.
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 Caution.
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 CHURCH.
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.
Signed;
DR. GENE A. YOUNGBLOOD
Pastor
Obama blocks Iraqi nun from describing
Christian persecution
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.
“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 a deceiver.”
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 status.”
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 year.”
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 Initiative.
None of this was good enough for the Obama State
Department.
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.’”
This article may be read in its entirety at
http://www.wnd.com/2015/05/obama-blocks-iraqi-nun-from-describing-christian-persecution/
Muslim
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 @RepAndreCarson)
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 religious freedom.”
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, R-Iowa
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 video
interview.
“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 great gifts.”
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 in-between.”
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.
Comparing cultures
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
people.
“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 attacks.
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 discrimination.
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 public debate.”
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
protected groups.
They write:
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 against Muslims.
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
broadly."
The above article can be
read in its entirety on World Net Daily at
http://www.wnd.com/2015/04/muslim-congressmen-try-to-boot-islam-critic-geert-wilders/
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
Washington Post
Michael Miller
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. What’s yours?”
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 pro-Israel organization.
“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. What’s yours?”
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 pro-Israel organization.
“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 turn.
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 MTA.
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 unpersuasive.”
After AFDI’s victory, Geller posed for photos
outside the federal courthouse while holding
the “Killing Jews” advertisement.
“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.
to
see the full article in the Washington Post,
please follow this link:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/04/22/killing-jews-is-worship-posters-will-soon-appear-on-nyc-subways-and-buses/
Navy
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
https://www.libertyinstitute.org/ModderFacts)
"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
www.LibertyInstitute.org.
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 Times.
To take concrete action, here
is a link to urge your congressional
representatives to get personally involved to
protect the religious rights (and
responsibilities) of this chaplain (and all
Americans):
http://www.afa.net/action-alerts/decorated-chaplain-threatened-by-navy-take-action/
Muslim
Brotherhood 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 government
system.
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 related.
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 addresses.
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 classified
information?
“Those are questions that I think (Rep.) Trey
Gowdy and the House Benghazi Committee is going
to want to look at very carefully.”
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
policy implications.”
Get the details about what really happened in
one of America’s biggest foreign operations
failures, in “The REAL Benghazi Story.”
Transforming America
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 Foundation.
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 front.
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 report continued.
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 terrorist organization.
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 militant ties.
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 terrorist organization.
In June 2008, the Treasury Department applied
the terrorist designation to the entire
Al-Haramain organization worldwide
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 groups.”
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 Saudi government.
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 NGO Caucus.”
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 Minority Affairs.”
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.
Hillary praise
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
relationships.
“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
Washington, D.C.”
Article
was originally posted on wnd.com at
http://www.wnd.com/2015/03/muslim-brotherhood-princess-used-clinton-email-server/print/
NUKES FOR IRAN??
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
"Unintended Consequences"
Side effects of a Nuclear Deal with
Iran:
A Middle East Arms Race?:
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/saudi-nuclear-deal-raises-stakes-for-iran-talks-2015-03-11-21103596
According
to two FCC commissioners, those new
regulations are bad all around
By Brad
Matthews
Watchdog.org
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 certainly not.
This article was written by a
contributor of Watchdog Arena,
Franklin Center’s network of writers,
bloggers, and citizen journalists.
Click here to view the article at http://watchdog.org/203631/fcc-commissioners-regulations/
Islamic
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
under way.
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 set ablaze.
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 Monday.
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 elderly.
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
Aziz mountain.
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 damaged.
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.
Click
here to read the article and associated
links on the BBC News Middle East page
ISIS
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 Mediterranean coast.
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 country.
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 Spring.
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 “exponentially”.
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
simultaneously.
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' families
United Kingdom's Daily Mail
Dailymail.com
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 security forces.
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 Libya.
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 media.
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
civilization."
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 consistency.”
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 terrorism.
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 the
Jews.”
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.
Please
click here to see the article in the
Jerusalem Post
http://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/Politics-And-Diplomacy/Netanyahu-Israel-is-standing-by-Europe-Europe-must-stand-by-Israel-387083
Houston Subpoenas Pastors’ Sermons in Gay
Rights Ordinance Case
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 LGBT
community.
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
contracting.
Under one of the hotly contested parts of
the ordinance, transgender people barred
access to a restroom would be able to file a
discrimination complaint.
The ordinance, which exempted religious
institutions, was passed in May, though its
implementation has been delayed due to legal
complaints.
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 signatures.
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
Houston Chronicle.
“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 signal.”
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
petitions.”
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.
Copyright: For copyright information, please
check with the distributor of this item,
Religion News Service LLC. Visit http://www.religionnews.com/2014/10/14/houston-subpoenas-pastors-sermons-equal-rights-ordinance-case-prompting-outcry/
the source of the above article by Sarah
Pulliam Bailey, and updates and comments
regarding this attempted overstep by Houston
government.
Food for thought
from-
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.
Armageddon Can
Wait
Mahir Ali
Kaleej Times
3 September
2014
Global
threat is used to deflect attention
from domestic woes
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 recent
past.
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.
Washington
allowed itself to be catapulted into that
conflict, partly on the basis of Paris and London’s
aggressive
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 tribal affiliations.
Under similar circumstances, would the
outcome the Syria
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?
The US
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 Iraq
in this respect, beginning with the besieged
Yazidis stranded on Sinjar Mountain
— 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 to Iran, 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
nor Tehran
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 for
concern.
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.
Article
in full at Kaleej Times
Iraq's largest Christian town abandoned as
Isis advance continues
UN officials say an estimated 200,000 new
refugees are seeking sanctuary in the Kurdish
north from Islamic extremists
by Martin Chulov
at theguardian.com
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 drew near.
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 peshmurga.
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 rapidly shredded.
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
Christian exiles.
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.
Click
here to read the article at the Guardian
Amnesty On Trial
May 28, 2014
By KrisAnne Hall
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.
Consider this:
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.
The Act also appears to violate 8 US Code 1611
which sets forth specific federal benefits that
cannot be given to illegal aliens.
-
See
more at:
http://krisannehall.com/amnesty-trial/#sthash.9AOkP6WK.dpuf
May 8, 2014 2:19PM
Is the
Constitution Relevant Today?
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 identifies:
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 running!
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 the people.”
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.
Click
here to read the article in its entirety
at The Cato Institute
A
Timeless Message
PAYDAY -
SOMEDAY
"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.
If
you have 60 minutes to listen to Dr Lee's
sermon "PAYDAY- SOMEDAY", Click here.
Ala.
Supreme Court: 'Unborn Child Has
Inalienable Right to Life From its
Earliest Stages
By
Michael W Chapman
CNSNews.com
| 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
development."
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 court document.
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 on
probation.
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 unborn child.
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 viable fetus.'"
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
conception."
"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."
Click
here to view this article at cns news
where we found this affirmation of God's
truth.
April 24, 2014
the clarionproject.org
Tony
Blair: Fighting Islamism –
A
Defining Challenge of Our Time
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 Islamism.
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 battle."
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."
Click
here to read in its entirety at the clarion
project at
http://www.clarionproject.org/news/tony-blair-fighting-islamism-%E2%80%93-defining-challenge-our-time
You
can listen to several minutes of Tony
Blair's speech here:
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/apr/23/tony-blair-west-take-sides-growing-threat-radical-islam
The
full text of the former PM's speech can be
read here:
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/04/full-text-tony-blairs-speech-on-why-the-middle-east-matters/
More
Attacks on the Freedom of
Speech,
In the Form of Religious
Persecution
Of our Air Force Cadets
From The
Traditional Values Coalition:
Earlier
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 claimed
offense.
"I
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
MRFF
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, and supremacy."
The
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.
At
least a dozen cadets responded in support of
religious freedom, posting Bible verses on
their personal white boards. Please join me
and thousands of others in standing with our
cadets for their right to express their
religious beliefs without fear of
persecution <http://capwiz.com/traditional/utr/1/KTQOTSLPVY/KFTWTSLUWE/10253908236>
.
No
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.
Our
Constitution protects the free exercise of
religion. Yet that doesn't seem to be enough
for some groups.
View
this article at the original Traditional
Values Coalition website, where you can
also sign a petition of support:
http://www.capwiz.com/traditional/issues/alert/?alertid=63153151&type=CU
The
Clash of Law: Parsing the Modern War against
Catholics, Catholicism and the Church
From
CatholicCulture.org
By
Dr.
Jeff Mirus
Date March
25, 2014
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 or another.
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 not understand.
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 deeply immoral.
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 power.
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 others.
.......
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 landscape.
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.
Please
click here to read this thoughtful
original article in its entirety:
http://www.catholicculture.org/commentary/otc.cfm?id=1173
What Do The Neighbors
Think?
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
concept.
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 banks are.
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.
But given his history on the subject of
adherence to constitutional principles, is it
any wonder that no one, anywhere in the world,
believes one word of what the man is saying?
Click here to read the original article in its
entirety
Trust, but
Verify
March,
2014
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 here,
and you can send him an email to
subscribe to his newsletter.
Obama
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 distinctly
downplayed."
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 continues:
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 (emphasis added).
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 here).
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
Christians).
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
obfuscate?
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.
This
article can be read in its entirety at:
http://www.rightsidenews.com/2012080316785/editorial/rsn-pick-of-the-day/obama-administrations-war-on-persecuted-christians.html
Federal Court
finds Obama appointees interfered with New
Black Panther prosecution
July 30, 2012
By
Conn
Carroll
Senior
Editorial Writer
The Washington
Examiner
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.”
This
article can be viewed in its entirety at
http://washingtonexaminer.com/federal-court-finds-obama-appointees-interfered-with-new-black-panther-prosecution/article/2503500
NAPOLITANO:
Restraining Arizona,
unleashing Obama
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 southwestern United 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 the feds.
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 the U.S.
from enacting laws on immigration, has
pre-empted the field.
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
Constitution.
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 immigration status.
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 please.
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
Times website, and see readers reactions.
Obama Overlooks
Christian Persecution
Thursday,
24 May 2012
By
James Walsh
Coptic
Christians 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 Muslim radicals.
The
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 in Egypt
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 Muslim world.
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,
Egypt,
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.
The “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 policy.
James H.
Walsh was
associate general counsel with the U.S.
Department of Justice Immigration and
Naturalization Service from 1983 to 1994.
© 2012 Newsmax. All
rights reserved.
Commentary: Making
the Fifth Amendment optional
The Detroit
News
By Dale
McFeatters
May 23, 2012
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 law ..."
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 suspicion.
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 Dec. 31.
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.
Article can be read in
its entirety at
http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20120523/OPINION01/205230316#ixzz1vi6NH2EC
A
RESPONSE TO ORDINANCE 2012-296
Jacksonville’s Moral Constitutional Patriots
Speak
A
Response By Dr. Gene A. Youngblood
Presented at
City Council Meeting of 5/22/2012
WHEREAS Our
City council has introduced ordinance
2012-296.
This bill is cloaked under
the disguise of equal
opportunity and non-discrimination in
the marketplace.
WHEREAS
This 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 region. However,
the bill seems to focus only on a “special
class,” ignoring the U.S.
Constitution and religious liberties.
WHEREAS
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
workplace.
WHEREAS
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.
WHEREAS
Lines 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 businesses leave
their state, thus causing an extra
burden on homeowners being required to
pay higher property taxes. Is
this what we want in Jacksonville?
WHEREAS
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’s
constitutionality 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.
WHEREAS Ordinance
2012-296 will be costly and prohibitive
making the end result a net
loss of business or industry
coming to Jacksonville. This
is clear, based on requirements in the bill
as found on page 4, lines 6-8.
WHEREAS
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, ethical beliefs.
WHEREAS
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).
WHEREAS Section
406.102 of ordinance 2012-296, “Declaration
of policy” is clearly overstepping
the bounds of the U.S. Constitution and the
Florida Constitution. Furthermore,
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
free speech.
WHEREAS
Page 10 lines 7-16 of ordinance 2012-296
will further increase the cost
of providing housing in our city. This
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:
1.
This bill would establish a “special
class” of citizens, contrary to our
Constitution.
2.
This bill would provide for broad
application and enforcement of a law that is
not in compliance with the U.S.
Constitution.
This bill is unconstitutional!
3.
This bill would greatly infringe Constitutional
Rights in the free exercise of
one’s moral conscience.
4.
This bill would bring about a major
tax increase for Jacksonville
property owners. We
already have a $58 million
deficit.
5.
This bill would criminalize free speech
as relates to various religions or homosexuality
as prescribed in God’s Word, the
Bible.
The Bible declares “sodomy,
and those who practice this vile,
evil, lifestyle; God has given
them over to a reprobate life.”
Rom.
1:24-28.
6.
This bill would marginalize Christians
and “all” moral, ethical citizens
of Duval County
and give special privilege to the “sodomites”.
7.
This bill would reduce, not
increase the desirability and social
climate for businesses to settle in
Jacksonville.
8.
This bill uses a “straw man,” false
premise that businesses have in
history past refused to come to Jacksonville
because this bill does not exist. Produce
one such rejection of Jacksonville.
9.
This bill will create division,
discord, debate and declension
in our city that is not welcomed or
wanted.
10.
This bill is in conflict with and contradicts
everything moral, ethical,
and Biblical. We
do not want Jacksonville,
Florida to be another San Francisco. Remember,
a human law, regardless of good
intentions, cannot circumvent
or nullify God’s law. God’s
Word both in Old and New Testament is replete
with God’s condemnation of sodomy! Remember: “Righteousness
exalteth a nation: but sin is a reproach
(shame, insult) to any people!”
Prov. 14:34
DISCRIMINATION
IN AMERICA
May
22, 2012
Introduction:
Bill
2012-296 is introduced as a works bill,
but it is, in fact, a far-reaching, overreaching,
unconstitutional effort to develop
and codify a “special class”
of citizens under the cloak of “anti-discrimination.”
Do
we have discrimination in Jacksonville?
Do
we have discrimination in America?
Yes,
We do!
What
is discrimination?
1.
Discrimination is:
When
a Christian teacher in a government
controlled school is threatened with
dismissal just because as a
Christian, he had his personal Bible
on his desk.
2.
Discrimination is:
When
a teacher is forbidden to say, “God
bless you,” or “We are praying for
you,” to a student.
3.
Discrimination is:
When
a student is not allowed to wear a t-shirt
with a Christian symbol, yet immoral
or anti-God
slogans are accepted.
4.
Discrimination is:
When
a second grader is forbidden to thank
Jesus over her lunch because the
teacher said she was on government
property.
5.
Discrimination is:
When
moral ethical parents are not told
when the schools planned a recognition
day for sodomites in our schools April 21, 2012. This
is unconstitutional!
6.
Discrimination is:
When
Christians are not allowed to have Christian
clubs (after school) in most public
schools, yet all other non-Biblical,
ungodly clubs are allowed to meet.
7.
Discrimination is:
When
we are told that we cannot pray in Jesus’
name, yet, Islamic-jihadists are
free to worship and pray to Allah in public
schools in America
which provide special “halal” meals.
8.
Discrimination is:
When
small startup churches are not allowed
to meet in school buildings for services in
many states.
9.
Discrimination is:
When
YouTube pulls Christian videos, but allows
the ungodly garbage over the
same internet system.
10.
Discrimination is:
When
a Christian school is persecuted by
city government in America,
and when the decision is questioned,
the Christian school is levied with
“retaliatory” taxes.
11.
Discrimination is:
When
Christian teachers in South Florida have
to meet in a supply closet
to pray, or be fired!
12.
Discrimination is:
When
a Christian worker is forbidden
to put a verse of Scripture
on her private cubicle wall
or be fired.
13.
Discrimination is:
When
Christians are required to pay
taxes which are then used to support a
“special class” of individuals
who have chosen to live ungodly,
dissipated lifestyles and demand
acceptance.
14.
Discrimination is:
When
our city will not allow any religious
ads to be purchased on the side
of city buses, but will allow any
other ads.
15.
Discrimination is:
When
street preachers are arrested in some
cities for “disturbing the peace,”
when Islamics, homosexuals,
pedophiles and other deviants
are free to assemble.
16.
Discrimination is:
When
any city council or branch of government
codifies “any” law that is unconstitutional
just to appease the “sodomites” in
their chosen lifestyles.
THEREFORE:
We
publicly
reject
this entire bill and go on record
that we will vote against any council
person running for re-election
or any public office in Jacksonville
or the state of Florida. We
will
endeavor to call, email, notify and engage every
ethical, moral,
taxpaying
patriot in Jacksonville
to stand
against the approval of bill 2012-296.
WND EXCLUSIVE
Holder orders
women's restrooms open to male
University
caves in after warning from Obama DOJ
May 24,
2012
On orders from Barack Obama’s Department of
Justice, officials with the University of Arkansas at Fort Smith
have given permission for a 38-year-old man to
use the women’s restrooms on campus.
The report comes from Campus Reform.org,
which explained that the individual also is
seeking to have someone pay for a sex
reassignment surgery to change from male to
female.
Already living as a female, the individual,
identified in the report as Jennifer Braly,
started using women’s restrooms on campus, but
quickly was the subject of complaints from
women who saw him there.
The university had tried to make
accommodations, designating gender-neutral
restrooms in some buildings.
Not good enough, however.
Braly filed a complaint with the Civil Rights
Division in the Department of Justice under
Attorney General Eric Holder, school officials
reported. The DOJ contacted the school.
“[T]he office of civil rights basically made
its expectations through the attorney and the
decision was made to respond to that
direction,” said Mark Horn, the vice president
of university relations. “[T]he DOJ complaint
caused revisiting of our thinking.
“In the eyes of the law this individual
[Braly] is entitled to use the bathroom that
she identifies with,” Horn said.
The DOJ complaint was filed by Braly after
the university told him to use any of the
gender-neutral restrooms on campus.
“One problem to this is there are not unisex
bathrooms in every building,” Braly wrote in
an online essay about how other people should
contribute to his surgery costs. “Especially
the two main buildings where most of my
classes are, so I have to go to a completely
different building to use the restroom.”
While the university offered to convert other
restrooms to gender-neutral, Braly said that
wasn’t satisfactory.
The Campus Reform report said while anatomy
matters little to the DOJ, it still remains a
concern for other students.
“‘I disagree with allowing a male to use the
female restrooms,” Amanda Shook, a senior at
UA, told Campus Reform. “Even if they are a
transgendered person, they are still a man,
and should have to use the men’s restroom.”
The DOJ and school both have declined to
release the letter giving the school
directions on the dispute, Campus Reform
reported.
The DOJ told Campus Reform that the records
“pertain to a currently active Civil Rights
Division enforcement and access to the records
should therefore be denied pursuant to 5
U.S.C. § 552(b)(7)(A) since disclosure thereof
could reasonably be expected to interfere with
Civil Rights Division enforcement
proceedings.”
While Braly did not respond to Campus Reform
requests for comment, there is an extensive
monologue by Braly on the fundraising website
WePay.
That reflects that $75 has been contributed
to the estimated $18,500 costs of the surgery.
Braly writes that his finances are depleted
because when a second marriage ended, a
custody battle “drained all my funds.”
“I am now a full-time student at the University
of Arkansas Fort
Smith. Most of
my life is pretty normal as fitting into
female society. I am passsable (sic) and have
a part-time job. At the university I am
running into problems all over the place.”
Braly explains that the choice to use women’s
restrooms was unnoticed for a time.
“Then I took General Psychology and had asked
the professor if I could give a lecture on
Gender Identity Disorders for some extra
credit. She not only allowed me to speak to my
class but her other 2 classes as well. She
also referred me to another professor and I
spoke in his class too.
“I was excited I was educating people about
being a transsexual and the other types of
Gender Identity Disorders. Those lectures
would be the beginning of all my problems. As
I did get many great responses from students
how my lectures greatly changed their
perspective of what transsexuals are, some
students were not so accepting.
“Some saw me using the womens public
restrooms and complained to the university
that they didn’t think I should be using the
restroom with them.”
The report also complains that Braly didn’t
get special accommodations in living
arrangements.
“There came a problem that they would not let
me room with males, and I could not room with
females either unless I became friends with
them and disclosed all my medical information
to them…” the report continues.
“I tried to be creative and work with them on
this, but to no prevail (sic),” the report
said.
“Regardless of where I am at in my transtion
(sic) I should have the same rights as every
other female.”
Part of the reason for requesting donations
for the surgery is because Braly’s income goes
partly toward the monthly costs of hormone
treatments as well as “required psychotherapy
for transsexuals.”
To
read this article in its entirety at World
Net Daily, click here.
A Sanctuary Amid
Fears of Persecution at Home
By KIRK SEMPLE
Published:
May 16, 2012
HIGHLAND
PARK, N.J.
— The Reformed Church in this prosperous
suburb has for years packed a lot inside its
walls, including addiction counseling, a
housing program, dance groups, gatherings for
developmentally disabled people, a restaurant,
a thrift shop and space to worship for
hundreds of people from half a dozen religious
congregations.
Some of the Indonesian
Christians seeking to avoid deportation wear
ankle monitors to ensure compliance with court
orders.
Many Indonesians came to New Jersey
on tourist visas.
Now, the church is taking on another role:
sanctuary for five Indonesian Christians
facing deportation and fearful of religious
persecution in their homeland.
“When I got here, I felt safety,” said Arthur
Jemmy, 36, an Indonesian who had been
scheduled to be deported on April 30. “I feel
really terrified to go back to Indonesia.”
The situation has challenged the church’s
co-pastor, the Rev. Seth Kaper-Dale, to weigh
the law against his moral and religious
beliefs.
“You can read all sorts of stuff about the
trouble you can get in if you prevent the
government from doing its job on immigration,”
Mr. Kaper-Dale, 36, said. “We have to stand
with the oppressed even if the law of the land
sometimes doesn’t exactly coincide with the
teachings of peace and justice and love found
in Scripture.”
Indonesian Christians in central New Jersey
began seeking Mr. Kaper-Dale’s help a decade
ago. Most had left Indonesia on tourist visas
in the late 1990s and early 2000s and then
stayed in the United States after their visas
expired, finding jobs in the region’s
warehouses and factories. They feared
returning to Indonesia
because of religious persecution by that
country’s Muslim majority, they said. All
filed asylum applications, but they were
rejected by the American government because
they had filed too long after their arrival.
In 2009, Mr. Kaper-Dale, who has been the
church’s co-pastor, with his wife, Stephanie,
since 2001, brokered an unusual agreement with
immigration authorities: The Indonesians, then
numbering 72, would be allowed to stay
temporarily and work, but the permission could
be rescinded at any moment.
With the extra time, Mr. Kaper-Dale hoped,
the Indonesians would be able to secure
permanent legal status, either through the
courts or changes in immigration laws in Washington.
In any case, he said, the Indonesians should
be eligible for long-term relief under the
Obama administration’s policy of focusing its
deportation efforts on serious criminals and
immigrants who pose a threat to public safety.
But late last year, the Department of
Homeland Security began ordering the
Indonesians to appear at its Newark office, prepared
to return to Indonesia.
Despite aggressive lobbying by Mr. Kaper-Dale
and other advocates for immigrants, the
deportations began. On Jan. 3, a member of the
group, Freddy Pangau, was sent back to Indonesia.
In the weeks that followed, another five were
deported.
On March 1, the day Saul Timisela was
scheduled to be deported, Mr. Kaper-Dale
opened the doors of the church to him. Mr.
Timisela was wearing an electronic monitor
that immigration officials had attached to his
ankle weeks earlier to ensure compliance with
court dates and the deportation order.
“Today, we will cry out to God, and cry out
to the president, asking that he stop
deporting Indonesian Christian refugees who
are neither criminals nor egregious
immigration offenders,” Mr. Kaper-Dale wrote
in an e-mail to reporters.
In interviews, the Indonesians said they were
eager to find a path to legal status in the United States
and continued to fear religious persecution in
Indonesia.
In a recent report, Human Rights Watch said
that the Indonesian authorities had “failed to
adequately address increasing incidents of mob
violence” directed at religious minorities,
including Christians, and that local
governments had closed hundreds of Christian
churches.
Mr. Timisela, 45, said that in 1998, several
months before he left Indonesia,
anti-Christian rioters decapitated his
cousin’s husband, a pastor, and burned down
his church. When Mr. Timisela arrived in the United States
to attend a youth conference, his family urged
him to stay.
“I hope they understand what we’re doing
here,” he said of the American government.
“We’re looking for a better life, freedom of
worship.”
Immigration officials said they were
reviewing appeals for prosecutorial discretion
on a “case-by-case basis,” suspending the
deportation of some of the Indonesians who
posed no threat to public safety and had
strong familial and community ties in the United States.
Ross Feinstein, a spokesman for Immigration
and Customs Enforcement, an arm of the
Homeland Security Department, said the agency
had extended stays of removal for 25 of the
Indonesian Christians in central New Jersey
since last fall “due to the specific
circumstances” of their cases.
Mr. Kaper-Dale is banking on the passage of a
bill in the House of Representatives that
would allow certain Indonesians who fled
persecution in their homeland from 1997 to
2002 to resubmit asylum claims that had been
denied because they missed the one-year filing
deadline.
On the bulletin board in his office, the
pastor has posted a large spread sheet. It
lists all the Indonesian Christians who have
sought his help and the status of their cases,
from their immigration registration numbers to
the citizenship of their children, the status
of their spouses and the date of their
scheduled deportations.
“I used to have to keep very careful track,
but now I have it in my head,” Mr. Kaper-Dale
said. “I know their lives — inside and out.”
This
article may be read in its entirety at
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/17/nyregion/reformed-church-gives-sanctuary-to-indonesians-ordered-to-be-deported.html
The United Church Observer
Compassion
for the persecuted?
By Mike Milne
May, 2012
In
the years following the 1979 Islamic
Revolution, Iran’s
300,000
Baha’is faced escalating persecution. Hundreds
were executed or “disappeared,” and thousands
were imprisoned or denied employment. Their
crime: living in a rigidly theocratic state
but believing in the ultimate unification of
all religions.
At the United Nations last fall, Canada’s
Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird cited the
plight of Iran’s Baha’is, women, Christians
and dissident Muslims while announcing plans
for a Canadian Office of Religious Freedom.
Six months later, it’s still not entirely
clear how the office will operate or what it
will do beyond a vague mandate to address
religious persecution around the world. Baird
continues to hold consultations with religious
leaders in Canada
and elsewhere.
Many of them have high hopes that the new
office will fulfil Baird’s pledge at the UN
“to defend the vulnerable, to challenge the
aggressor, to protect and promote human rights
and human dignity, at home and abroad.” Amid
the hopeful voices, though, are accusations
that consultations haven’t been broad or
transparent enough, and fears that the office
may simply be a ploy to lure religious voters.
Few dispute that religious persecution is a
problem. According to the U.S.-based Pew Forum
on Religion and Public Life, restrictions on
and hostilities over religion affect 2.2
billion people, a third of the world’s
population.
Religious persecution ranges from hostility
between faiths — such as attacks by radical
Islamists on Coptic Christians in Egypt — to
state-sanctioned suppression of all religions
(as in North Korea), minority religions
(Christians in Saudi Arabia) or any believers
seen as enemies of the state (Jehovah’s
Witnesses and some evangelical Christians in
Eritrea).
Official restrictions on religion range from France’s ban
on wearing face-covering veils, such as the
Islamic niqab, to death sentences in Iran
for abandoning the Muslim faith. Almost a
third of the world’s nations have laws against
apostasy, blasphemy and defamation of their
dominant religion. A handful enforce them
vigorously.
In China,
where all religions are subject to state
scrutiny and control, the banned Falun Gong
alleges that practitioners of the movement
have been used as live organ donors and then
executed. China
has consistently denied the charges.
In 2010, Christians were estimated to comprise
33 percent of the world’s population. The Pew
Forum study found that Christians were
harassed in more countries — 130 — than any
other faith group. Muslims, harassed in 117
countries, were second. And although Jews make
up only about one percent of the world’s
population, they are fourth on the list,
harassed in 75 countries.
Don Hutchinson, vice-president of the
Evangelical Fellowship of Canada (EFC), was a
panelist at the Department of Foreign Affairs
and International Trade’s initial consultation
on the proposed Office of Religious Freedom in
Ottawa
last fall. Subsequent media coverage implied
that evangelical Christians were guiding the
office’s design.
The notion that Stephen Harper’s Conservative
government has teamed up with Christian
conservatives is not new. In her 2010 book, The
Armageddon Factor, author Marci
McDonald outlines how Harper — who grew up in
the United Church
but now attends an evangelical Christian and
Missionary Alliance church — has carefully
nurtured those connections.
Hutchinson, a lawyer with a long record of
pro-Christian human rights work, brushes off
those concerns and denies reports that the
consultation was closed or secretive. He also
says it’s natural that as a Christian and the
chair of a group of evangelicals working on
the issue of persecution (the Religious
Liberty Commission), he is mainly concerned
about Christians. “So, we’re out engaging on
the persecution of Christians,” says Hutchinson,
“but I can tell you that the Baha’i community
is engaging for the Baha’is and . . . that the
different Muslim communities are engaging on
behalf of their communities. And we can go
down the list.”
Len Rudner, director of community relations
and outreach for the newly created Centre for
Israel
and Jewish Affairs, calls the proposed new
office “a worthwhile endeavour.”
“This is certainly more than simply speaking
out because we believe our community has
something to gain,” he says. “It’s not just
about us.”
If Baird’s office is attempting to push only
the concerns of certain groups, it’s covering
its tracks exceptionally well. In his speech
to the UN, after promising to stand up for
persecuted minority Buddhists and Muslims in Burma, Baird
mentioned concerns about “gays and lesbians
threatened with criminalization of their
sexuality in Uganda.”
That’s not a statement all evangelical
churches would encourage. As well, Canadian
representatives of Falun Gong have been
welcomed at consultations, something that is
sure to annoy Baird’s counterparts in Beijing
when he travels there to promote trade.
Joining Christian, Jewish and Baha’i groups at
last fall’s consultation were Shia, Sunni and
Ahmadiyya Muslims, plus Hindus and Buddhists.
Due in part to travel budget cutbacks, the
Canadian Council of Churches monitored the
event by Internet. The United Church
sent Ottawa Presbytery staffer Rev. Lillian
Roberts. If the creation of the office had any
hidden agenda, she says, it wasn’t apparent at
the consultation.
Still, says Imam Abdul Hai Patel, past
co-ordinator of the Canadian Council of Imams,
mainstream Muslim groups like his were not
invited to the Ottawa
meeting. He attended a later Toronto-area
consultation along with Roman Catholic
Cardinal Thomas Collins.
In the government’s defence, Muslim groups are
numerous and varied. Reaching all of them is
not easy.
The Muslim Canadian Congress, which did attend
the consultation, claims to represent the
majority of Canadian Muslims — who, according
to the group’s founder, Toronto-based author
and radio host Tarek Fatah, defy stereotypes
by rarely attending mosques, by opposing
Shariah law and by not wearing the hijab.
Fatah, who bills himself as an enemy of
militant Islam, says the proposed Office of
Religious Freedom is “quite timely.” And he’s
blunt about why. “The main issue here is we’re
not talking about the mistreatment of, say,
Muslim immigrants in Greece,
but the abysmal condition of Christians in
Muslim lands,” says Fatah. He chides liberal
Christian groups for their reluctance to speak
out against the persecution of other
Christians.
Announcing the beginning of World Interfaith
Harmony Week earlier this year, United Church
Moderator Mardi Tindal quoted the United
Nations’ acknowledgment that “Our world is
rife with religious tension and, sadly,
mistrust, dislike and hatred.” Yet, as Fatah
suggests, the United Church
is one of those groups that rarely speak out
against specific instances of persecution of
fellow Christians. Gail Allan, in charge of
the denomination’s interchurch and interfaith
work, says the church is committed “to be
attending to persecution of all communities of
faith, wherever that might take place,” and
works through the World Council of Churches
and its own global partners wherever religious
persecution is seen as a problem.
As Allan also points out, United
Church
analysis often sees non-religious forces
behind what seems to be religious persecution.
Early in 2011, for example, the church wrote
Coptic Christian church leaders to express
concerns over the bombing of a Coptic church
in Alexandria,
Egypt.
The letter noted that church bombings in Egypt and Iraq
had been “condemned by Muslims and Christians
alike and are not at their root expressions of
religious hatred or intolerance.” Allan says
the ongoing tension between Copts and majority
Muslims in the Middle
East is “part of a political,
economic and social conflict that needs to be
addressed.”
“I have been challenged by the Jewish
community . . . over the years for a general
Christian inattention to the persecution of
Christians around the world,” says Canadian
Council of Churches general secretary Rev.
Karen Hamilton. “That’s not to say there are
any easy answers, but maybe we need to pay a
little more attention.”
Former
United
Church
moderator Very Rev. Lois Wilson says the
proposed Office of Religious Freedom “sounds
wonderful” — during her four years in Ottawa
as a senator, she tried unsuccessfully to
persuade the foreign affairs department to
establish an advisory group on religion. She
also learned a thing or two about how Ottawa
works. “I can’t help but feel that this was
put in place to get votes,” says Wilson.
“That’s the only reason they do anything,
including the Liberals and the NDP.”
This
abbreviated article may be read in its
entirety at
http://www.ucobserver.org/features/2012/05/compassion/
From Rapid City
Journal
Officials:
Expanded drone strikes approved
Associated
Press
| Posted: Thursday, April 26, 2012
The
U.S.
is widening the war on al-Qaida in Yemen,
expanding drone strikes against the terror
network a year after the raid that killed
al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden.
U.S.
counterterrorist forces will now be allowed to
target individuals found to be plotting
attacks on U.S.
territory, even if U.S.
intelligence cannot identify the person by
name, two senior U.S.
officials said.
Prior
practice required militants to be identified
as part of a lengthy legal vetting process.
Now, tracking an individual in the act of
commanding al-Qaida fighters or planning an
attack on U.S.
territory or American individuals can land the
person on the shoot-to-kill list, officials
said.
"What
this means in practice is there are times when
counterterrorism professionals can assess with
high confidence someone is an AQAP leader,
even if they can't tell us by name who that
individual is," one of the officials said,
referring to al-Qaida in the Arabian
Peninsula.
The
White House did not approve wider targeting of
groups of al-Qaida foot soldiers, a practice
sometimes employed by the CIA in Pakistan,
and strikes will only be carried out with
Yemeni government approval, officials said.
The
new policy will widen the war against AQAP, Yemen's
al-Qaida branch, which has gained territory in
fighting against the Yemeni government… as
al-Qaida's Yemen
branch is seen as gaining ground against a
government that is allied with the Americans.
The
past year of political turmoil in Yemen, since
the start of revolts linked to last year's
Arab Spring, is "making it harder for them
(the Yemeni government) to take a focused
effort against al-Qaida" one of the officials
said. "So these are counterterrorism tools
designed to protect U.S.
interests and homeland."
The
expanded strikes would not be used in support
of the Yemeni government's fight against
internal opponents, the official added.
The
U.S.
has carried out 23 airstrikes in Yemen
since last May, with twelve of those strikes
in 2012, according to The Long War Journal, a
website that tracks U.S.
counterterrorism and militant activity.
Copywrite 2012 AP
This article can be read in its entirety at
http://rapidcityjournal.com/news/national/official-expanded-drone-strikes-approved/article_eb614fa4-c2e7-544a-b50d-3f491e3f799f.html
Look who's
behind uprising in Orlando
Who'da thunk this group
would be pulling strings?
Posted: October 19, 2011
By Bob Unruh
© 2011 WND
A lawyer linked through the Council on
American Islamic Relations to Hamas and the
Muslim Brotherhood has been identified as the
driving force behind the Occupy Orlando
protests that have been staged in Johnson
Park, according to a video report from Tom
Trento of the Florida Security Council and The
United West.
The report from the organization that
"educates and activates freedom minded people"
to strategize the propagation of the
exceptionalism of Western civilization over
"the totalitarian choke-hold of Shariah Islam"
explains that the same attorney who
represented the Islam-bent parents in the
famous Rifqa Bary dispute obtained the permit
for the Occupy Orlando event and was on scene
giving directions.
"You're not going to believe ... the evidence
... that links this movement with a key Muslim
individual who's associated with CAIR and the
Muslim Brotherhood," Trento explains on the
video. "This individual has assumed a
leadership [role] if [he is] not the leader of
this movement in Orlando."
The "Muslim activist lawyer" was identified
as Shayan Elahi, who was the losing counsel
for the parents of Rifqa Bary in a custody
dispute that developed in Florida.
Bary fled the Ohio home of her Muslim parents
because she accused them of threatening her
after they discovered her conversion to
Christianity. She traveled as a teenager on
her own to friends in Florida, and ultimately
gained her independence when she turned 18.
Elahi was counsel for Bary's parents when
they were seeking to have her returned home.
CAIR also was integral to the parents'
strategies regarding their daughter and the
various parties cooperated on the effort.
Trento’s video report about Elahi's
activities at Occupy Orlando:
The presence of Elahi at the events, and his
signature on the permit that was issued for
the gathering are not the only indications of
a radical element behind the "occupations."
Trento noted that the "Occupy Orlando"
FaceBook page reads; " ... we plan to use the
revolutionary Arab Spring tactic of mass
occupation to restore democracy in America."
The group Mass Resistance reported that
old-stream media reports on the Occupy Boston
protests, "the flood of communist, anarchist,
anti-Israel, and similar literature that
permeates ... is simply ignored."
The organization's visit to the scene of the
protests found "political ideology of
communism, socialism and anarchism, with
additions of anti-Israel, pro-Muslim,
law-breaking, and other radical advocacy.
"Plus, like so many left-wing venues after a
few days, the park they've taken over is now
filthy and smells of urine."
In Egypt and in several other countries of
North Africa in recent months, uncontrolled
demonstrations and protests have led to
upheaval, and those factions have been blamed
for the overthrow of Egyptian President Hosni
Mubarak and other leaders friendly to the
West.
Their replacements have been almost without
exception those groups and organizations
linked to the Muslim Brotherhood, a faction
that has a worldwide Islamic caliphate as one
of its goals.
The Florida Independent was able to reach
Elahi, who confirmed he was at the protests,
"volunteering [his] legal services as just
another proud American and a member of the
movement."
Trento reveals
in his video how Elahi repeatedly tried to
intimidate his crew at the Orlando protests,
pointedly calling him a "bigot" and a "racist
bigot."
"Anyone think attorney Elahi, who lost the
Rifqa Bary case, lost the race for a
judgeship, is looking for a place to mark up
his first win by co-opting an incoherent
movement primarily made up of 'hippies and
anarchists' so that he can build a political
base for his Islamic goals?" Trento asked.
"We attended the 'Occupy Orlando' event to
analyze and understand this movement, but the
anger of an insecure Muslim attorney may have
provided for us an important component to
understand and defeat the cultural jihad of
the Muslim Brotherhood, right here in
beautiful, sunny Florida," he wrote.
Tom Tillison from the Florida Political Press
also reported what Trento discovered: that the
permit for the event was signed by Elahi.
Tillison also raised the issue of the city's
concessions for the group, noting that while
the permit was supposed to be submitted three
days in advance, it actually was submitted and
approved for a protest within 24 hours. And
the application states the time was supposed
to be from 8 a.m. until 8:59 p.m. on Oct. 15,
yet the group remains camped there days later.
"Does this mean that the protesters are in
violation of city ordinances government the
use of city owned park facilities?"
Finally, he wondered about the extended stay,
since there are no restrooms on site.
Click here to
read the article in its entirety
October 31, 2011
By BosNewsLife Asia Service
RANGOON, BURMA (BosNewsLife)-- Authorities in
Burma, also known as Myanmar, are imposing new
restrictions on Christian and other religious
activities in the Kachin State region, an
influential religious rights group said
Monday, October 31.
Britain-based Christian Solidarity Worldwide
(CSW), which has investigated the situation in
Burma,
said local churches have received a letter
warning them that advance permission is
required for events such as worship and Bible
studies.
CSW told BosNewsLife that the letter titled
“Concerning Christians conducting cultural
training" was send on October 14 by the
government's Chairman of Maw Wan Ward in Phakant
Township.
The document "refers to an order by the
General Township Administration Department
requiring Christians in Phakant Township to
submit a request at least 15 days in advance
for permission to conduct "short-term Bible
study, Bible study, Sunday school, reading the
Bible, fasting prayer, Seasonal Bible study
and Rosary of the Virgin Mary Prayer," CSW
explained.
MORE BUREACRACY
"A request for permission must be accompanied
by recommendations from other departments, and
must be submitted to the Township
Administration Office."
CSW said it had obtained a copy of the
document in Burmese, and a translation, last
week. Churches in Burma
are already required to obtain permission for
any events other than Sunday services, but
this new regulation "imposes further severe
restrictions," according to CSW investigators.
CSW's East Asia Team Leader Benedict
Rogers said that “For many years, successive
Burmese regimes have suppressed freedom of
religion and imposed serious restrictions on
Christians and other religious minorities."
Rogers
said both "Christians and Muslims in
particular have been the target of
discrimination and persecution. It appears
that despite changes in rhetoric, there has
been no change of attitude, particularly at a
local level, on the part of Burmese
authorities to religious minorities."
He claimed that Burma
is already "regarded as one of the world’s
worst violators of religious freedom" and is
one of the United States State Department’s
'Countries of Particular Concern' list.
"EXTREME RESTRICTION"
"To impose a requirement on churches and
individuals to seek permission to read the
Bible, pray, fast and hold a Sunday school is
an extreme restriction and an extraordinary
further violation of freedom of religion," Rogers
said.
He added that his group had urged Burmese
authorities to withdraw this requirement, in Phakant Township and in
any other parts of the country where it may
have been issued, "and to uphold freedom of
religion for all the people of Burma."
Additionally CSW has urged the Burmese
government to invite the United Nations
Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Religion or
Belief to visit the country, "and conduct an
independent investigation.”
Burmese officials have not reacted to the
latest allegations. However Burma's
government has in the past denied wrongdoing
describing reports to the contrary as
"Western" or "U.S.
propaganda."
http://www.bosnewslife.com/18890-burma-crackdown-on-local-bible-studies-worship-report
WND Exclusive
Congressman to
keynote CAIR fundraiser with terror
co-conspirator
D.C.
group identified by FBI as Hamas-front
features workshops on countering
'anti-Shariah campaign'
Posted: October 13, 2011
1:00 am Eastern
WND
Democratic Rep. Jim Moran of Virginia is
headlining a fundraiser this weekend for the
controversial Council on American-Islamic
Relations along with an imam tied to the 1993
World Trade Center bombing who urges the
violent overthrow of the "filthy" U.S.
government and the establishment of Islamic
law.
CAIR's 17th annual banquet Saturday at the
Crystal Gateway Marriott in Arlington, Va.,
features the theme "Making Democracy Work for
Everyone."
Imam Siraj Wahhaj, designated by the Justice
Department as an "unindicted co-conspirator"
in the WTC bombing, is promoted as a keynote
speaker along with Moran.
The evening banquet concludes a day-long
leadership conference offering workshops on
subjects such as "counteracting Islamophobia,"
"challenging scapegoating of Muslims in the
2012 election" and countering "the
anti-Shariah campaign," referring to state
legislative efforts to ensure Islamic law is
not implemented in the U.S.
As WND reported, Moran, a longtime supporter
of CAIR, was forced to step down from his
leadership role as regional whip in 2003 after
he blamed the influence of the Jewish
community for the U.S. war in Iraq.
Wahhaj's presence at CAIR's 2009 annual
banquet prompted an activist group to launch a
campaign to urge the hosting hotel, the venue
for this year's event, to cancel.
As WND reported, Wahhaj, a regular CAIR
fundraiser and a former member of its advisory
board, initially was a featured speaker but
ended up giving only a short fundraising
appeal at the banquet.
As late as nine days prior to the 2009
banquet, CAIR featured Wahhaj and White House
adviser Dalia Mogahed in its promotions as its
two marquee names. But on the eve of the event
– after WND reports of Wahhaj's radical views
as documented in WND Books' best-seller
"Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld
That's Conspiring to Islamize America" – a
press release did not even mention them.
'Filthy' U.S.
Wahhaj is one of many Muslim leaders
affiliated with CAIR who have been named or
prosecuted in U.S. terrorism-related
investigations. CAIR itself was named by the
Justice Department as an "unindicted
co-conspirator" in the Holy Land Foundation
probe in Texas, the largest terrorism-finance
case in U.S. history.
An imam at Masjid Al-Taqwa in Brooklyn,
Wahhaj is on record urging a violent overthrow
of the "filthy" U.S. government assisted by
jihad warriors armed with Uzis.
In a videotaped May 8, 1992, sermon obtained
by the authors of "Muslim Mafia" titled "Stand
Up for Justice," Wahhaj makes it clear that,
contrary to CAIR's media guide, he believes
jihad means "holy war," not merely a "struggle
to better oneself."
"If we go to war, brothers and sisters – and
one day we will, believe me – that's why
you're commanded [to fight in] jihad," the
Brooklyn-based Wahhaj says. "When Allah
demands us to fight, we're not stopping and
nobody's stopping us."
Wahhaj preaches that Islam teaches violent
insurrection in "infidel lands" such as
America, points out the "Muslim Mafia"
co-authors, counterterrorism investigator
Gaubatz and "Infiltration" author Paul Sperry.
"Believe me, brothers and sisters, Muslims in
America are the most strategic Muslims on
Earth," Wahhaj says in the 1992 sermon,
arguing the government can't drop bombs on
warring Muslims in the U.S. without causing
collateral damage.
The American government's "worst nightmare is
one day that the Muslims wake these people up
in South Central Los Angeles and other
inner-city areas," he says in the video.
Wahhaj exhorts the faithful to go into the
"hood and the prisons and convert
disenfranchised minorities, and then arm them
and train them to carry out an Uzi jihad in
the inner cities."
"We don't need to arm the people with
nine-millimeters and Uzis," he says. "You need
to arm them with righteousness first. And then
once you arm them with righteousness first,
then you can arm them [with Uzis and other
weapons]."
CAIR tells the public in its media guide,
however, "There is a common misperception
among Westerners that the Quran teaches
violence."
Wahhaj makes it clear, nevertheless, he sees
Islam as a uniquely militant religion.
Counterterrorism expert Steven Emerson obtained
a video of a Wahhaj speech in Toronto Sept. 28,
1991, titled "The Afghanistan Jihad" in which
the imam declared:
Those who struggle for
Allah, it doesn't matter what kind of weapons,
I'm telling you it doesn't matter! You don't
need nuclear weapons or even guns! If you have
faith in Allah and a knife! If Allah wants you
to win, you will win! Because Allah is the
only one who fights. And when his hand is over
your hand. whoever is at war against my
friends, I declare war on them.
Citing Emerson, "Muslim Media" notes Wahhaj
once likened the U.S. to a trash bin and
prayed it would "crumble" and be replaced by
Islam.
"You know what this country is? It's a
garbage can," Wahhaj said. "It's filthy."
Click
here to view and read the article in its
entirety
Texas School
District Fully Vindicates Christian Student
After Wrongful Suspension
October 11, 2011
Liberty Alerts,
Liberty Counsel
The Fort Worth Independent School District
has issued a letter to Liberty Counsel fully
vindicating high school freshman Dakota Ary,
who was given in-school suspension for telling
another student that he believes homosexuality
is wrong because of his Christian faith. The
letter is in response to Liberty Counsel’s
demand letter requesting full vindication and
a full retraction of the suspension. The
district’s letter will be placed in Dakota’s
permanent file to further clear his record.
Liberty Counsel is representing Dakota in this
case.
The District’s letter apologized for the
delay in returning Dakota back to the
classroom, and stated that “Dakota has the
right to express an opinion in a manner
consistent with law and policy.”
Dakota was in Kristopher Franks’ German
language class at Western Hills High School
when the topic of homosexuality arose. Dakota
said to one of his classmates, “I’m a
Christian and, to me, being homosexual is
wrong.” Franks overheard the comment, wrote
Dakota an infraction, and sent him to the
principal’s office. The class topic was
religious beliefs in Germany. During the
discussion, one student asked what Germans
thought about homosexuality in relation to
religion. Another student then asked to hear
some translated terms such as “lesbian.” These
questions provoked the conversation about
Christianity and Dakota’s expression of his
opinion to one classmate.
The discipline referral form says the comment
was out of context, even though the lesson for
the day was on religious beliefs. Franks
charged Dakota with “possible bullying” and
indicated, “It is wrong to make such a
statement in public school.” Two weeks prior
to this event, Franks displayed a picture of
two men kissing on a “World Wall” and told his
students that homosexuality is becoming more
prevalent in the world and that they should
just accept it. Many of the students were
offended by Franks’ actions and his
continually bringing up the topic of
homosexuality in a German language class.
Franks was temporarily placed on
administrative leave with pay last week.
Mathew D. Staver, Founder and Chairman of
Liberty Counsel, commented: “We are pleased
that the school district vindicated Dakota
Ary. No public school teacher should use the
position of authority to bully students to
accept homosexuality. That is what this
teacher did, and he got his hand caught in the
cookie jar. We want to make sure this never
again happens to any student.”
Click
here
to
view
the
original article
US Bishops Defend
the Freedom of Religion in the Face of Growing
Threats
U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops
Office of Media Relations
4 October 2011
WASHINGTON, DC (USCCB) - The U.S.
bishops have established a new Ad Hoc
Committee for Religious Liberty to address
growing concerns over the erosion of freedom
of religion in America. Archbishop Timothy M.
Dolan, president of the United Sates
Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB),
established the ad hoc committee after
consulting with the USCCB Administrative
Committee during the Committee's September
13-14 meeting in Washington.
The Administrative Committee meets three
times a year and conducts the work of the
bishops' conference between plenary sessions.
He announced formation of the ad hoc committee
in a September 29 letter to the U.S. bishops
Archbishop Dolan also named Bishop William
Lori of Bridgeport, Connecticut, to chair the
new committee.
Support for ad hoc committee work will
include adding two full-time staff at the
USCCB, a lawyer expert in the area of
religious freedom law, and a lobbyist who will
handle both religious liberty and marriage
issues.
Bishop Lori said he welcomed "the opportunity
to work with fellow bishops and men and women
of expertise in constitutional law so as to
defend and promote the God-given gift of
religious liberty recognized and guaranteed by
the Bill of Rights of the Constitution of the
United States."
"This ad hoc committee aims to address the
increasing threats to religious liberty in our
society so that the Church's mission may
advance unimpeded and the rights of believers
of any religious persuasion or none may be
respected," he added.
In a letter to bishops to announce the ad hoc
committee, Archbishop Dolan said religious
freedom "in its many and varied applications
for Christians and people of faith, is now
increasingly and in unprecedented ways under
assault in America."
"This is most particularly so in an
increasing number of federal government
programs or policies that would infringe upon
the right of conscience of people of faith or
otherwise harm the foundational principle of
religious liberty," he said. "As shepherds of
over 70 million U.S. citizens we share a
common and compelling responsibility to
proclaim the truth of religious freedom for
all, and so to protect our people from this
assault which now appears to grow at an ever
accelerating pace in ways most of us could
never have imagined."
Archbishop Dolan said the committee will work
closely with national organizations,
charities, ecumenical and interreligious
partners and scholars "to form a united and
forceful front in defense of religious freedom
in our nation," and its work will begin
immediately.
He added that "the establishment of the Ad
Hoc Committee is one element of what I expect
to be a new moment in the history of our
Conference. Never before have we faced this
kind of challenge to our ability to engage in
the public square as people of faith and as a
service provider. If we do not act now, the
consequence will be grave."
Archbishop Dolan said that, although he and
his predecessor as USCCB President, Cardinal
Francis George, had sent private letters to
President Obama on religious liberty in the
context of redefining marriage, none of those
letters received a response.
"I have offered to meet with the President to
discuss these concerns and to impress upon him
the dire nature of these actions by
government," Archbishop Dolan said.
Archbishop Dolan listed six religious liberty
concerns arising just since June:
-Federal Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS) regulations that would mandate
the coverage of contraception (including
abortifacients) and sterilization in all
private health insurance plans, which could
coerce church employers to sponsor and pay for
services they oppose. The new rules do not
protect insurers or individuals with religious
or moral objections to the mandate.
-An HHS requirement that USCCB's Migration
and Refugee Services provide the "full range
of reproductive services"-meaning abortion and
contraception-to trafficking victims and
unaccompanied minors in its cooperative
agreements and government contracts. The
position mirrors the position urged by the
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) in the
ongoing lawsuit challenging the
constitutionality of MRS's contracts as a
violation of religious liberty.
-Catholic Relief Services' concern that US
Agency for International Development, under
the Department of State, is increasingly
requiring condom distribution in HIV
prevention programs, as well as requiring
contraception within international relief and
development programs.
-The Justice Department's attack on the
Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), presenting
DOMA's support for traditional marriage as
bigotry. In July, the Department started
filing briefs actively attacking DOMA's
constitutionality, claiming that supporters of
the law could only have been motivated by bias
and prejudice. "If the label of "bigot" sticks
to us-especially in court-because of our
teaching on marriage, we'll have church-state
conflicts for years to come as a result,"
Archbishop Dolan said.
-The Justice Department's recent attack on
the critically important "ministerial
exception," a constitutional doctrine accepted
by every court of appeals in the country that
leaves to churches (not government) the power
to make employment decisions concerning
persons working in a ministerial capacity.In a
case to be heard this term in the U.S. Supreme
Court, the Department attacked the very
existence of the exception.
-New York State's new law redefining
marriage, with only a very narrow religious
exemption. Already, county clerks face legal
action for refusing to participate in same-sex
unions, and gay rights advocates are publicly
emphasizing how little religious freedom
protection people and groups will enjoy under
the new law.
Click
here
to
see
the
original
article
More allegations
heaped upon Iranian pastor
Yousef Nardarkhani faces execution on
trumped-up charges
Posted: 4 October, 2011
Mission Network News
Iran (MNN) ― The life of an Iranian pastor
continues to hang in the balance as the Iranian
state media is now getting involved in the case.
34-year-old Pastor Yousef Nardarkani was
arrested two years ago this month for protesting
Muslim education for his children because he is
a Christian. He was convicted of apostasy, but
now new false charges are being leveled against
him.
Todd Nettleton with Voice of the Martyrs says,
"Now they're saying that what he's actually
going to be executed for is not apostasy, not
becoming a Christian, but actually rape and
extortion that are the charges that he will be
executed for. So it's really a 180-degree turn
for the Iranian government."
According to Nettleton, this is mindboggling.
"After an initial court hearing, an appeal to
the Supreme Court, and then another hearing back
at the local court -- after all those hearings
where they never talked about extortion and
never talked about rape, now they're saying he's
actually going to be executed for rape and
extortion."
A bit of good news about this case, according to
Nettleton, is that "the international pressure
is working. The Iranian government is hearing
from people around the world, including regular
people like you and me, as well as government
officials and government agencies. They're
saying, 'Listen, you cannot put this man to
death for being a Christian. That's a complete
violation of human rights.' The Iranian
government is hearing that, and it's having an
effect."
Please help Pastor Nardarkhani. Nettleton by
praying for him as he continues to be in prison.
You can also "go to PrisonerAlert.com [where]
you can write Pastor Yousef himself and also
send e-mails to Iranian government officials,
including the office of President Ahmodinejad.
So we can pray first, and then we can also have
a voice for him, as well."
This article can be found in its entirety at
http://www.mnnonline.org/article/16304
Land without peace:
Why Abbas went to the U.N.
October
03, 2011
WASHINGTON — While diplomatically
inconvenient for the Western powers,
Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas'
attempt to get the U.N. to unilaterally
declare a Palestinian state has elicited
widespread sympathy. After all, what choice
did he have? According to the accepted
narrative, Middle East peace is made
impossible by a hard-line Likud-led Israel
that refuses to accept a Palestinian state and
continues to build settlements.
It is remarkable how this gross inversion of
the truth has become conventional wisdom. In
fact, Benjamin Netanyahu brought his Likud-led
coalition to open recognition of a Palestinian
state, thereby creating Israel's first
national consensus for a two-state solution.
He is also the only prime minister to agree to
a settlement freeze — 10 months — something no
Labor or Kadima government has ever done.
To which Abbas responded by boycotting the
talks for nine months, showing up in the 10th,
then walking out when the freeze expired. Last
month he reiterated that he will continue to
boycott peace talks unless Israel gives up —
in advance — claim to any territory beyond the
1967 lines. Meaning, for example, that the
Jewish Quarter in Jerusalem is Palestinian
territory. This is not just absurd. It
violates every prior peace agreement. They all
stipulate that such demands are to be the subject
of negotiations, not their precondition.
Abbas unwaveringly insists on the so-called
right of return,which would demographically
destroy Israel by swamping it with millions of
Arabs, thereby turning the world's only Jewish
state into the world's 23rd Arab state. And he
has repeatedly declared, as recently as last
month in New York: "We shall not recognize a
Jewish state."
Nor is this new. It is perfectly consistent
with the long history of Palestinian
rejectionism. Consider:
•Camp David, 2000. At a U.S.-sponsored
summit, Prime Minister Ehud Barak offers
Yasser Arafat a Palestinian state on the West
Bank and Gaza — and, astonishingly, the
previously inconceivable division of
Jerusalem. Arafat refuses — and makes no
counteroffer, thereby demonstrating his
unseriousness about making any deal.
Instead, within two months, he launches a
savage terror war that kills a thousand
Israelis.
•Taba, 2001. An even sweeter deal — the
Clinton Parameters — is offered. Arafat walks
away again.
•Israel, 2008. Prime Minister Ehud Olmert
makes the ultimate capitulation to Palestinian
demands — 100 percent of the West Bank (with
land swaps), Palestinian statehood, the
division of Jerusalem with the Muslim parts
becoming the capital of the new Palestine. And
incredibly, he offers to turn over the city's
holy places, including the Western Wall —
Judaism's most sacred site, its Kaaba — to an
international body which sit Jordan and Saudi
Arabia.
Did Abbas accept? Of course not. If he had,
the conflict would be over and Palestine would
already be a member of the United Nations.
This is not ancient history. All three peace
talks occurred over the past decade. And every
one completely contradicts the current
mindless narrative of Israeli "intransigence"
as the obstacle to peace.
Settlements? Every settlement remaining
within the new Palestine would be destroyed
and emptied, precisely as happened in Gaza.
So why did the Palestinians say no? Because
saying yes would have required them to sign a
final peace agreement that accepted a Jewish
state on what they consider the Muslim
patrimony.
The key word here is "final." The
Palestinians are quite prepared to sign
interim agreements, like Oslo. Framework
agreements, like Annapolis. Cease-fires, like
the 1949 armistice. Anything but a final deal.
Anything but a final peace. Anything but a
treaty that ends the conflict once and for all
— while leaving a Jewish state still standing.
After all, why did Abbas go to the U.N. last
month? For nearly half a century, the United
States has pursued a Middle East settlement on
the basis of the formula of land for peace.
Land for peace produced the Israel-Egypt peace
of 1979 and the Israel-Jordan peace of 1994.
Israel has offered the Palestinians land for
peace three times since. And been refused
every time.
Why? For exactly the same reason Abbas went
to the U.N.: to get land without
peace. Sovereignty with no reciprocal
recognition of a Jewish state. Statehood
without negotiations. An independent Palestine
in a continued state of war with Israel.
This is the reason that, regardless of who is
governing Israel, there has never been peace.
Territorial disputes are solvable; existential
conflicts are not.
Land for peace, yes. Land without peace is
nothing but an invitation to suicide.
Washington Post Writers Group
Charles Krauthammer is a syndicated
columnist.
See what Obama
promises Arabs after 2012 election
Democrats fear
treatment of Israel is voting liability
Posted: September 28, 2011
By Aaron Klein
© 2011 WND
The Obama administration told the Palestinian
Authority it cannot significantly help advance
a Palestinian state until after the 2012
presidential elections, a top PA official told
WND.
The official, however, said the U.S. will
press for a Palestinian state quickly if
President Obama is re-elected.
"The main message we received from the U.S.
is that nothing will happen in a serious
The PA official said Obama "will not accept
the Palestinian request of a state at the
(U.N.) Security Council and cannot help on the
ground for now."
"We were told to wait for Obama's reelection,
and that before then nothing serious will
happen for a state," the official continued.
"But after the reelection, the U.S. said the
schedule will be short to reach a Palestinian
state."
Obama's policies toward Israel have been
highlighted in local and national campaigns,
with many Democrats fearing voters will oppose
them due to the perception the president is
anti-Israel.
Obama's treatment of Israel was a significant
issue in the recent election of Republican Bob
Turner to former Rep. Anthony Weiner's seat in
a district that had not elected a GOP
candidate since 1923.
Also, presidential contenders such as Texas
Gov. Rick Perry and Rep. Michele Bachmann,
R-Minn., have been strongly criticizing Obama
on Israel.
This article can be read in its entirety at:
See what
Obama promises Arabs after 2012 election
http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=349705#ixzz1ZMSYgbmM