|
Please read
current events from a variety of sources.
July
2018 Revolt
grows over Islamization of U.S. schools Group already in court
over San Diego decision to let activists
define curriculum Published: July 11, 2018 Bob Unrah World Net Daily An organization fighting
Islamic indoctrination in the San Diego
Public schools – it’s already in court over
the issue – is now insisting on access to
communications between Seattle school
officials and the Council on
American-Islamic Relations. WND has reported on
the dispute between the Freedom of Conscience
Defense Fund and the San
Diego school district. U.S. District Court Judge
Cynthia A. Bashant issued an order setting
July 17 as the hearing date regarding a
motion for a preliminary injunction in that
dispute. The organization alleges that
school officials improperly are giving CAIR,
and its “anti-Islamophobia” initiative,
undue control over school curriculum. The case was brought by parents
in the district who are suing over the
pro-Islam instructional materials sold by
CAIR to the district. Ocala will move to vacate First Amendment violation rulingBy Katie PohlmanPosted 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 libertyTrump will sign an executive order launching the new White House Faith and Opportunity Initiative today.Published: May 3, 2018 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 GriderApr. 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 |
|
o
Daniel was thrown
into the den
of lions for refusing to obey
a godless
law. The
lions became
his pillow—God
delivered him! (Daniel,
Chapter 6)
·
Ladies and Gentlemen—may I read you some
quotes from our founding fathers:
·
“Without
freedom of thought there can be no
such thing as liberty without
freedom of speech.”
Benjamin Franklin
·
“Those
who would give up essential
liberties to purchase temporary
safety deserve neither
liberty nor safety.”
Benjamin Franklin
·
“If it
be asked, What is the most sacred duty
and the greatest source of our security
in a republic? The
answer would be an inviolable respect
for the Constitution and laws—the
first growing out of the last---a
sacred respect for the Constitutional
law is the vital principle,
the sustaining energy of a
free government.”
Alexander Hamilton
·
“When
the people fear their government
there is tyranny; when government
fears the people, there is “liberty.””
Thomas Jefferson
·
“The price of freedom
is eternal vigilance.”
Thomas Jefferson
·
“In matters
of style, swim with the
current. In
matters of principle, stand
firm like a rock.” Thomas
Jefferson
· Ladies and Gentlemen—let’s send a message to Washington, LOUD AND CLEAR—“We the People.”
o We will not surrender our Constitution on the account of convenience.
o We will not sacrifice our convictions on the altar of coercion.
o
We will not
submit
our church
rights to the rule
of unelected
czars
in
o We will not be silent and allow socialism to subvert our Constitution.
o We will be vigilant, visible, vocal, and vote in every election.
o We will have “revolution” at the “ballot” box.
o The Bible is very clear (Acts 5:29) we ought to obey God rather than man.
MAY GOD BLESS YOU AND
MAY GOD BLESS
4 Ways the Fourth
Amendment's Already Being Pummeled in a Non-Top
Secret Way
The
government will always insist it's acting
within the law.
Last week The
Guardian and The Washington Post
reported that the National Security Agency
collects information on the phone and Internet
habits of millions of Americans. Since then
we've seen President Barack Obama
argue against the strawman of combining
“100 percent privacy and 100 percent
security.” We've seen the Director of National
Intelligence and apologists point to
federal statutes that allegedly permit the
behavior. And, on the brighter side, we've
seen Sen. Rand Paul introduce the Fourth
Amendment Restoration Act.
Our View: Illinois , meet U.S.
Journal Star article
Posted May 20, 2013
Last update May 21, 2013
So
Nonetheless, last time we checked, Chicago is
a city in the United States of America, which
has a Second Amendment that permits the
citizens of this country — even those living
in Chicago — the right to gun ownership. The
U.S. Supreme Court specifically told
We have not always been thrilled by the
prospect of people packing heat everywhere you
go, either, but fundamentally, the federal
courts carry a bigger gavel than the city of
Yet that has not stopped Chicago-area
legislators from doing everything they can to
drag this thing out and neuter it as much as
possible. Case in point is state Sen. Kwame
Raoul, D-Chicago, sponsor of the concealed
carry measure (House Bill 183, which is
sponsored by Lou Lang, D-Skokie, in the
House).
Raoul initially wanted to give Chicago’s
police chief and county sheriffs the authority
to veto these gun permits, with applicants
having to show “proper reason” for carrying
and “good moral character” to get law
enforcement’s “endorsement.” He has since
dropped the latter, but the former remains. In
any case, who defines “proper reason” or
“moral character,” and how do you implement
that on a consistent basis? Those are so vague
as to be unworkable, if also ripe for abuse.
The Second Amendment doesn’t say that “the
right of the people to keep and bear arms
shall not be infringed ... unless the police
chief or some other government official says
so.” It really is no wonder that the National
Rifle Association objected to that. Moreover,
it’s hardly in keeping with the spirit of the
federal appellate court’s ruling that “to
confine the right to be armed to the home is
to divorce the Second Amendment from the right
of self-defense.”
Meanwhile, Raoul also wants to give home-rule communities — like Chicago and Peoria — the ability to expand the state’s list of gun-free zones, which critics have charged would create a “patchwork” of regulations that virtually no one can follow and that risks making criminals of people who are not. We feel strongly that any concealed carry law should be uniform throughout the state.
Cameron says London attack was betrayal of Islam
(Reuters) - Prime Minister David Cameron said
the brutal killing of a soldier who was hacked
to death in
"We will never give in to terror or terrorism
in any of its forms," Cameron told reporters
outside his
"This was not just an attack on
Comment:
That is
like calling the Fort Hood Texas incident
over three years ago, of
an Islamist
Major who yells 'AllahuAkbar’
fires,
and kills twelve soldiers and one civilian
“Workplace Violence”.
No
wonder modern Western “Civilizantion” is
in deep trouble.
Click here to see this on reuters.uk
Top Senate Democrat:
DOJ action against AP ‘inexcusable’
By Chris Moody, Yahoo
News, Tue, May 14, 2013
While the White
House remains quiet about whether the Justice
Department was right to seize the phone
records of Associated Press reporters, on
Capitol Hill the top Democrat in the Senate
was unequivocal about his opposition.
In his weekly
press briefing on Tuesday, Senate Majority
Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., blasted the DOJ for
its behavior, which included tracking
reporters' phone records within the House
press gallery over a leak related to an
attempted terror plot last year.
"I have trouble
defending what the Justice Department did in
looking at the AP," Reid said. "I really
believe in the First Amendment. I think it's
one of the great things we have as a country.
I don't know who did it or why it was done,
but it was inexcusable. There is no way to
justify this. In my career, I've stood
consistently for freedom of the press."
Reid added that
he would make a determination about whether
"legislative action" is needed in response.
Attorney General
Eric Holder on Tuesday defended the
department's tactics, saying that the AP's
reporting about a foiled airline bomb plot in
2012 "put the American people at risk." He
called the information the AP received from
undisclosed sources the “top two or three most
serious leaks I’ve ever seen.”
Click
here to see the original yahoo article
Pentagon: Proselytizing Punishable by Court-Martial
CBNNews.com
Thursday, May 02, 2013
The Pentagon says soldiers can be prosecuted for sharing their faith.
The Defense Department released the statement to Fox news, which reads, "Religious proselytization is not permitted within the Department of Defense" and punishments can include court-martial.
This comes after Pentagon officials met with Mikey Weinstein of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, who said even the presence of a Bible on a desk can amount to proselytizing.
He added that even a Christian bumper sticker on an officer's car or a Bible on a desk can amount to "pushing this fundamentalist version of Christianity on helpless subordinates."
Retired Lt. Gen. Jerry Boykin told CBN News he believes there's an agenda to get Christians out of the military.
"It's not just about
officers or commanders sharing their faith,
it's about every individual soldiers, sailor,
airmen or marine being able to exercise their
faith," Boykin said.
"The First Amendment talks about the 'free
exercise, thereof,' speaking of our faith.
This will destroy our military because mom and
dad in the central part of the
Please
click here to view the article in it's
entirety at Christian Broadcasting News
Network
Rhetoric heats up in debate over proselytizing in the military
A war over the religious freedom of military chaplains and the troops they serve is being waged in the Pentagon.
The latest salvo came this week when conservative blogger Todd Starnes wrote on Fox News and the Christian Post that the Pentagon confirmed that "religious proselytization is not permitted within the Department of Defense."
The regulation is not new. In August, the Air Force issued a policy telling its chaplains that they must balance an airman's right to religious exercise with a prohibition against government establishment of religion. A violation of the policy could result in a court-martial.
What is new is a recent demand to enforce the rule. It came after a private meeting last week between Pentagon officials and Larry Wilkerson, former chief of staff to Colin Powell, former Ambassador Joe Wilson and civil rights attorney Michael L. "Mikey" Weinstein.
Conservative Christians are particularly upset that the Department of Defense is taking advice from Weinstein, who heads the Military Religious Freedom Foundation.
"God help us now when someone with such visceral hatred of conservative Christians — literally tens of millions of Americans — who says sharing this gospel is 'spiritual rape' is helping develop policies for how to deal with Christians in the military," wrote Ken Klukowski, director of the Center for Religious Liberty at Family Research Council.
He draws his conclusions about Weinstein's view of Christianity from a Huffington Post blog in which Weinstein referred to so-called fundamentalist Christians as monsters, bigots, bandits and evil, among other things.
Weinstein told Washington Post columnist Sally Quinn that “there is systematic misogyny, anti-Semitism and Islamophobia in the military.” He called such a culture "a national security threat. What is happening (aside from sexual assault) is spiritual rape. And what the Pentagon needs to understand is that it is sedition and treason. It should be punished.”
Tony Perkins, president of the Family
Research Council, reacted by saying the
military meeting with Weinstein on religious
freedom is "like consulting with
The FRC has launched a petition drive urging
Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel to "not to
proceed with the purge of religion within the
ranks called for by anti-Christian
activists." (Click
here to sign petition)
Ron Crews, the executive director of the Chaplain Alliance for Religious Liberty, told the Christian Post that deciding "a service member cannot speak of his faith is like telling a service member he cannot talk about his spouse or children.
"I do not think the Air Force wants to ban personnel from protected religious speech, and I certainly hope that it is willing to listen to the numerous individuals and groups who protect military religious liberty without demonizing service members."
Two other stories this week signaled that military chaplains are on edge over what they can and cannot say to the troops they advise. Barry Black, the U.S. Senate chaplain and a former military chaplain, said military chaplains could be accused of "hate speech" for teaching what scripture says about homosexuality, according the Christian Post.
"I can see many military chaplains having some problems because, to teach the passages of Paul with exegetical integrity would mean being accused of engaging in hate speech," Black told a Heritage Foundation audience. "So, this is a challenge that I think we're going to have to deal with going forward."
Same-sex marriage may affect more than what a chaplain preaches, says a candidate for the chaplaincy, who wrote under a pseudonym in American Thinker for fear of hurting his chances to become a military chaplain.
"What will happen when a military chaplain
turns down gay soldiers who want the chaplain
to marry them?" he asked hypothetically. "The
military has already seen a major shift in
policy towards homosexuals as well as
significant rules towards political
correctness. If the Army decides that gay
marriage is more valuable than the religious
beliefs of their chaplains there will likely
be a significant change to the Chaplain
Corps."
Please
click here to read the article in its
entirety at the Deseret News
Baptist Website
Blocked by Army
Thursday, 25 Apr 2013 02:18 PM
Newsmax.com
The
United States Army has blocked the website
of the Southern Baptist Convention from some
of its computers — a move that family values
groups say is a disturbing continuation of
the Pentagon’s hostile attitude towards
religion.
The
Defense Department insists the blocking is a
“glitch’’ in the system which is being
corrected.
But the
American Family Network, which is affiliated
with the American Family Association, says
the issue comes just weeks after an Army
email called Christian ministries like the
Family Research Council and American Family
Association “domestic hate groups.’’
“This is
just another example of the Christian faith
coming under attack in the military,’’ Tim
Wildmon, president of American Family
Network,’’ told The Tennessean newspaper,
which broke the story.
Roger
Oldham, a spokesman for the Southern Baptist
Convention, said he has been assured the
problem is “a random event with no malicious
intent.’’
But he
added: "This is deeply disturbing . . . The
First Amendment exists to protect the church
from governmental censorship of or
infringement upon religious speech and the
free exercise of religion."
Lieutenant
Col. Damien Pickart, a department of defense
spokesman, told the newpaper the military is
working to resolve the problem and is “not
intentionally blocking access.’’
© 2013 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
American Family
Association Notified: U.S.
By Mel Fabrikant
Thursday, April 25, 2013
The
Paramus Post (
Congressman Speaks out on Behalf of
Christians in Military
The United
States Army has blocked the website of the
Southern Baptist Convention from government
computers, saying the Christian site contains
“hostile content.”
An Army officer assigned to a
Team Conus is the Department of Defense
management and computer network overseer of
the military’s Continental US Theater Network
Operations and Security Center (CTNOSC)
Regional Computer Emergency Response Team.
“So the Southern Baptist Convention is now
considered hostile to the U.S. Army…it just
corroborates the recent string of events
highlighted by AFA,” the officer wrote in an
email to American Family
Association.(www.afa.net)
According to Tim Wildmon, president of
American Family Network, “This is just another
example of the Christian faith coming under
attack in the military. Earlier this month, an
Army email labeled prominent Christian
ministries like the Family Research Council
and American Family Association as ‘domestic
hate groups.’ Their list continues to grow as
is evidenced by their new addition of the
Southern Baptist Convention as ‘hostile.’”
This prompted Congressman Randy Forbes (R-VA)
to question Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel
about religious liberty issues during a House
Armed Services Committee meeting just two
weeks ago.
For more information on American Family
Association, visit www.afa.net .
Read this
article in its entirety at
http://www.paramuspost.com/article.php/20130425110747845
Kansas
(Reuters) -
The Kansas House of Representatives passed the bill 90-30 on Friday night, a few hours after the Senate backed it on a 28-10 vote. Strongly anti-abortion Republican Governor Sam Brownback is expected to sign it into law. Republicans hold strong majorities in both houses.
In addition to the provision specifying when life begins, the bill prevents employees of abortion clinics from providing sex education in schools, bans tax credits for abortion services and requires clinics to give details to women about fetal development and abortion health risks. It also bans abortions based solely on the gender of the fetus.
The
The
Ostrowski said the language protects the rights of the unborn in probate and other legal matters.
If the bill is signed into law,
While it would not supplant
"It's a statement of intent and it's a pretty strong statement," Nash said. "Should the U.S. Supreme Court overturn Roe v. Wade or should the court come to some different conclusion, the state legislature would be ready, willing and able to ban abortions."
States that already have such language are
The
Taking away tax benefits would amount to 12
tax increases for abortion providers, women
and their families, said Elise Higgins,
The bill bars school districts from letting abortion providers offer, sponsor or furnish course materials or instruction on human sexuality or on sexually transmitted diseases. Higgins said that creates an unfair stigma for employees of abortion providers.
(Reporting by Kevin Murphy; Editing by Greg McCune, Doina Chiacu and Gunna Dickson)
Please
click here to read this Reuters article in
its entirety
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/06/us-usa-kansas-abortion-idUSBRE93501220130406
China
By: Release International
1 April 2013
Christians in remote Xinjiang province have
been interrogated on suspicion of being a cult
after a violent armed raid on their house
church.
One Christian named as Sister Xu remains in
detention after being arrested during a raid
in which police armed with guns and electric
batons ransacked her home and seized property.
Another Christian, house church leader Brother
Shen, was summoned for interrogation
separately, which caused him to suffer an
'episode' relating to a heart condition, says
Release partner China Aid. A second leader
named as Sister Cao fled the area, fearing she
too would be detained.
All three are members of a house church in
However, that evening, armed police arrived.
As well as confiscating property, they took
fingerprints and blood samples from Xu, her
son and husband, and took all three to the
local police station for written statements.
It was there that Xu's husband saw information
on a computer alleging links between the house
church and a Chinese religious cult.
Xu's son and husband were both released the
following day, after the latter claimed he was
not a Christian. Brother Shen, who was
interrogated on March 18, was released within
three hours, after his health deteriorated.
'The police made his family guarantee that
there was nothing seriously wrong with his
health,' says China Aid.
(Source:
http://au.christiantoday.com/article/china-armed-raid-on-house-church-accused-of-being-religious-cult/15188.htm
Tensions Rise as
Israel
and Gaza
New York Times
By ISABEL KERSHNER
Published: April 3, 2013
In response to rockets fired from
Sami Abu Zuhri, a spokesman for Hamas, the
Islamic militant group that controls
The rocket fire from
An Islamic extremist group in Gaza, the Mujahedeen Shura Council — Environs of Jerusalem, claimed responsibility for the rocket fire, saying in a statement that it was in support of the Palestinians held by Israel. The group criticized other Palestinian factions for their inaction on the prisoner issue.
On Wednesday morning,
The death of the prisoner has also stirred
unrest in the
The Israeli military said that several Palestinians had attacked a military post with firebombs and that soldiers responded with live fire. A spokeswoman said the episode was being reviewed.
The United Nations special coordinator for
the
Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon of
He added, “As soon as we identify the source of the fire, we will take it down without hesitation, as we did last night and in previous cases.”
But analysts said that neither
The highly charged issue of Palestinian
prisoners came to the fore again after the
Palestinian leadership accused
Mr. Hamdiya, a resident of the West Bank city
of
Mr. Hamdiya’s death came amid efforts by the Western-backed Palestinian leadership to place the prisoner issue high on the diplomatic agenda, with Secretary of State John Kerry expected in the region next week to press for a renewal of peace talks. Emotions over the prisoner issue have been running high among Palestinians in recent months, leading to protests in support of prisoners on hunger strikes and over the death of a prisoner in February under disputed circumstances.
The Palestinian Authority distributed a copy of an affidavit that it said was signed by Mr. Hamdiya’s lawyer, Rami Alami, who visited him in jail on March 12. Mr. Alami said he found Mr. Hamdiya to be tired and weak and unable to walk without help.
Fares Akram contributed reporting from
New U.N. arms treaty
faces rough road in U.S.
(Reuters) - The new global arms trade treaty
was overwhelmingly approved by the United Nations,
with
The 193-nation U.N. General Assembly approved the pact by a vote of 154-3 on Tuesday, with 23 abstentions, many by major weapons exporters.
The powerful National Rifle Association gun industry lobby promised to fight against ratification. Several senators, mostly Republicans, quickly issued statements opposing the pact.
The
The treaty, the first of its kind, seeks to regulate the $70 billion business in conventional arms and keep weapons out of the hands of human rights abusers.
A
The
The White House said on Wednesday it had not yet decided whether President Barack Obama would sign the pact, and gave no timeline for doing so. Such a signing seems likely, however, given White House support for the pact at the United Nations.
If Obama signs, government agencies would review the treaty before the administration decides whether to seek ratification by the Senate.
"Timelines for the treaty review process vary and given that we're just beginning the review, I wouldn't want to speculate about when we'll make a decision," said Caitlin Hayden, spokeswoman for the National Security Council.
The Senate voted 53-46 on March 23 for a
nonbinding amendment to its budget resolution
calling for the treaty's rejection. Supporters
said they were worried it would infringe on
'DON'T EXPECT A CAKEWALK'
Winning 67 votes for ratification would require the support of all Democrats, including eight who voted for the amendment, as well as at least 12 Republicans, or a quarter of the entire Republican caucus, which strongly opposes almost any limits on gun sales.
"Don't expect a cakewalk," one Democratic Senate aide said.
The U.S. Senate has often been skeptical of
international treaties, seeing them as
limiting
As with some other unratified treaties,
however,
Several senators issued statements after the U.N. vote reiterating their opposition.
"The U.N. Arms Trade Treaty ... would require
the
He, fellow Republican Jerry Moran and
Democratic Senator Max Baucus issued a press
release objecting to the treaty after the U.N.
vote.
(Additional reporting by Lou Charbonneau at
the United Nations and Doug Palmer and Roberta
Rampton in
Click
here to view the entire article on Reuters
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/03/us-arms-treaty-un-usa-idUSBRE93216F20130403
A Christian Catastrophe
Islamist ‘cleansing’ in Mideast
- By RALPH PETERS
- Last Updated: April 1, 2013
Islamist
terrorists and fanatics are methodically
exterminating the 2,000-year-old Christian
civilization of the
Our media ignore
the intensifying savagery against Christians
in Muslim Brotherhood-controlled
For a century and a half, the varied strands of Middle East Christianity have faced increasingly fierce pogroms and, for the Armenians, outright genocide. But with the rise of Wahhabi and Salafist terror, the long, slow-motion Holocaust accelerated.
Another attack on
Western liberals romanticize barbaric cultures but have no interest in the destruction — before their averted eyes — of a great and brilliant religious civilization. It’s as if they accept the Islamist creed that Christians don’t belong in the realms of Islam.
But the
Christianity’s
greatest thinkers, greatest monuments and
greatest triumphs for its first 1,000 years
rose in the
Today, the end is in sight.
In
Over 2 million
Christians in
Christians were
early supporters of Arab nationalism. One of
the fiercest Palestinian leaders, George
Habash, was a Christian, as was the wife of
Yasser Arafat. Their thanks? Two-thirds of the
West Bank’s and more of
And we’ll send
the regime at least a billion dollars this
year — with no stipulations or conditions
except that military-related funds must
purchase US-made or US-licensed equipment.
With
Christians in
And in Lebanon, the only Middle East country that until recently had a Christian majority, Christian rights have been so threatened by Sunni fanaticism that some Christians have reached out to Shia Hezbollah in their desperate hunt for allies.
Far to the east,
in
It’s the end of a world as we know it.
If Islam is a
“religion of peace,” it’s time to show the
evidence to the endangered Christians of the
Of course, not all Christians are angels, nor are all Muslims demons. Most humans of any faith just want to get through the day. And some Christians have collaborated with odious Baathist regimes (usually, to ensure their community’s survival). Nor are most Muslims active supporters of the religious cleansing of Christians from their shared homelands.
But disappointingly few Muslims actively defend religious minorities. It’s not unlike Nazi Germany, where most Germans didn’t want to murder Jews, but were complicit through their silence.
If a
Read
the article in its entirety at nypost.com
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/christian_catastrophe_lX4yqB48KfKyKuUgQPreDM
When the government demands silence -- the ugliness of the Patriot Act
Published March 21, 2013
FoxNews.com
In 1798, when John Adams was president of the
The feds used these laws to torment their adversaries in the press and even successfully prosecuted a congressman who heavily criticized the president. Then-Vice President Thomas Jefferson vowed that if he became president, these abominable laws would expire. He did, and they did, but this became a lesson for future generations: The guarantees of personal freedom in the Constitution are only as valuable and reliable as is the fidelity to the Constitution of those to whom we have entrusted it for safekeeping.
We have entrusted the Constitution to all
three branches of the federal government for
safekeeping. But typically, they fail to do
so. Presidents have repeatedly assaulted the
freedom of speech many times throughout our
history, and Congresses have looked the other
way. Abraham Lincoln arrested Northerners who
challenged the Civil War. Woodrow Wilson
arrested Americans who challenged World War
In our own post 9/11 era, the chief instrument of repression of personal freedom has been the government’s signature anti-terror legislation: the Patriot Act. It was born in secrecy, as members of the House of Representatives were given 15 minutes to read its 300 pages before voting on it in October 2001, and it operates in silence, as those who suffer under it cannot speak about it.
The Patriot Act permits FBI agents to write their own search warrants and gives those warrants the patriotic and harmless-sounding name of national security letters (NSLs). This authorization is in direct violation of the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which says that the people shall be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects from unreasonable searches and seizures, and that that security can only be violated by a search warrant issued by a neutral judge and based upon probable cause of crime.
The “probable cause” requirement compels the feds to acquire evidence of criminal behavior about the person whose records they seek, so as to prevent politically motivated invasions of privacy and fishing expeditions like those that were common in the colonial era. Judges are free, of course, to sign the requested warrant, to modify it and sign it, or to reject it if it lacks the underlying probable cause.
The very concept of a search warrant authorized by law enforcement and not by the courts is directly and profoundly antithetical to the Constitution -- no matter what the warrant is called. Yet, that’s what Congress and President Bush made lawful when they gave us the Patriot Act.
When FBI agents serve the warrants they’ve written for themselves -- the NSLs as they call them -- they tell the recipient of the warrant that he or she will commit a felony if he or she tells anyone -- a lawyer, a judge, a spouse, a priest in confessional -- of the receipt of the warrant. The NSLs are typically not served on the person whose records the FBI wants; rather, they are served on the custodians of those records, such as computer servers, the Post Office, hospitals, banks, delivery services, telephone providers, etc.
Because of the Patriot Act’s mandated silence, the person whose records the FBI seeks often never knows his or her records have been seized. Since October 2001, FBI agents and other federal agents have served more than 350,000 search warrants with which they have authorized themselves to conduct a search. Each time they have done so, they have warned the recipient of the warrant to remain silent or be prosecuted for telling the truth about the government.
Occasionally, recipients have not remained
silent. They have understood their natural and
constitutionally protected right to the
freedom of speech and their moral and
fiduciary duty to their customer or client,
and they have moved in federal court either to
suppress the warrant or for the right to tell
the customer or client whose records are being
sought that the FBI has come calling. Isn’t
that odd in
What’s even more odd is that the same section of the Patriot Act that criminalizes speaking freely about the receipt of an agent-written search warrant also authorizes the FBI to give the recipient of the warrant permission to speak about it. How un-American is that -- asking the FBI for permission to tell the truth about the government?
Last week in San Francisco, U.S. District Court Judge Susan Illston held that the section of the Patriot Act that prohibits telling anyone about the receipt of an FBI agent-written search warrant and the section that requires asking and receiving the permission of the FBI before talking about the receipt of one profoundly and directly infringe upon the freedom of speech guaranteed by the First Amendment. And the government knows that.
We all know that the whole purpose of the First Amendment is to encourage open, wide, robust debate about and transparency from the government. Our right to exercise the freedom of speech comes from our humanity, not from the government. The Constitution recognizes that we can only lose that right by consent or after a jury trial that results in conviction and incarceration.
But we can also lose it by the tyranny of the majority, as Congress and the president in 1798 and 2001 have demonstrated.
Andrew P. Napolitano, a former judge of
the Superior Court of New Jersey, is the
senior judicial analyst at Fox News Channel.
Judge Napolitano has written seven books on
the
Click here view the original article and comments
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/03/21/when-government-demands-silence-ugliness-patriot-act/
Obama
urged: act tough on Israel
By Chris McGreal, US correspondent
The Guardian,
19 March 2013
Barack
Obama begins his first official visit to
The White
House has played down expectations that
Obama will put any real effort into
pressing
But there
is increasing concern among some of
Among
those sounding the warning is the
The
inclusion of hardline pro-settler
ministers in Netanyahu's new government,
who are expected to press for the
continued expansion of Israel's colonies
in the West Bank, has heightened concerns
in Washington that physical realities on
the ground are making the prospect of a
negotiated agreement ever more difficult.
Others
have pointed up a recent Hebrew University
demographic study, which showed that Jews
are now in a minority in the territory
covered by Israel, Gaza and the West Bank
– suggesting that Israel's democratic and
Jewish character are threatened by its
reluctance to give up territory to an
independent Palestine.
That led
David Aaron Miller – a negotiator in
efforts by the Clinton administration to
broker an Israeli-Palestinian agreement
and an adviser on Middle East policy to
six US secretaries of state – to advise
Obama to "take a quick tour around
Israel's demographic neighbourhood" in
order to understand the issue that might
be most persuasive in pressuring Israeli
leaders to take negotiations with the
Palestinians seriously.
"Demographic
trends mean that
"The
demographic imperative probably appeals to
Obama, a rational thinker who understands
the importance of acting in the present to
avoid future catastrophes. He has at least
once referred to the demographic realities
in his speeches on the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict. But the president also knows
from his own political choices that
getting politicians to take risks now to
prevent disasters and gain rewards later
isn't so easy."
It is a
warning echoed earlier this month by S
Daniel Abraham, a
"Obama
should realize that
"Right
now – not in five or 10 years, but right
now – only 50% of the people living in the
Jewish state and in the areas under its
control are Jews. The dreaded tipping
point – which advocates of the
two-solution have been warning about for
years – has finally arrived."
That is a
warning reinforced by an Oscar-nominated
documentary, The Gatekeepers – in which
former heads of the Israel's internal
security organisation, the Shin Bet, warn
that the occupation is endangering Israel
– which has shaken up the assumptions
among some in the Jewish community and
among Israel's other supporters in the US.
Martin
Indyk, a former
"My sense
is that this is the view of Secretary
Kerry – that there's an urgency to try to
not just resume negotiations but to
resolve at least some of the critical
issues in the conflict because the
two-state solution is in danger of cardiac
arrest. I think there is an urgency, but I
don't actually think that if the window
closes it can't be prised open again," he
said.
"The
simple reason for that is there is no
alternative to the two-state solution –
except no solution. And no solution for
the time being may suit both sides… in
preference to the kind of compromises and
the hard decisions that have to be made in
order to achieve a solution. We are fond
of saying, and our leaders are fond of
saying, the status quo is not sustainable.
But if you go out there on both sides,
especially compared to what is going on
around them – in Syria to the north and
Egypt to the south – the status quo, it's
OK."
Indyk
said there will not be movement until
leaders on both sides are prepared to make
hard decisions, and that Obama is probably
unwilling to force that after his "searing
experience" of dealing with Netanyahu over
the Jewish settlements four years ago.
"I think
that there is something achievable, and I
actually think it's very important. And
that is that President Obama has the
opportunity to reintroduce himself to the
Israeli public. The first time he
introduced himself to them was in
"It is
hard to imagine that the president himself
is going to do much more than make this
visit. There are greener pastures that
beckon him in Asia, and you can see, from
a variety of other actions that he's taken
or hasn't taken in the
Ian Black's analysis after the President’s key speech of his trip
(March
21,
2013)
"It was a very
clever speech” says the Guardian’s
First he pressed all the buttons that matter to a mainstream Israeli Jewish and Zionist audience. He went to great lengths to recognize the legitimacy of the Zionist dream ...
He attacked
all of
But having
done all that, he then moved to the second
message of trying to achieve a just and
viable solution for the Palestinians.
There was nothing in this speech that gives us any practical pointers as to how the long-stalled peace process can be revived ... It gave positive messages to Israelis, it made important points about the need to resolve the conflict with the Palestinians, it provided no obvious ways forward, but will I am sure have created a positive mood in Israel towards the message he was trying to put across.
He set out
quite a compelling vision of a country that
needs to come to terms with an existential
problem for itself, and a matter of
fundamental justice for the people who are
suffering from it at the moment.
Click
here to see source of this speech analysis
FLORIDA ETHICS
This “Truths That Free” section
of “Ethics”
has not been updated for quite some time...
that is not for want of material. Located in
Growing up with my parents included the “larning” that honesty and abiding by the law were virtues to be cultivated if at all possible. “if at all possible” has caveats. Don't forget or neglect the value and importance of CIVIL disobedience or as Gandhi called it, “satyagraha” nonviolent resistance, or obedience to truth- THE TRUTH AND RIGHT IS- independant, inalienable, and proceeding before all institutions of people- although no one said that was always easy or convenient.
Why do citizens have an
expectation of good character and ethical
behavior from those we elect or appoint to
govern or
to head unions, or to populate our many civic
departments? Surely part of the reason is that
we are their bosses, we pay their salaries
(often higher than their counterparts in the
private sector) and they are accountable to
us.
If you
have not felt your blood pressure rise, or
your anger mount often enough today here are a
couple links
to a few articles about our finest in
http://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/showstory.php?Story_id=538987
http://www.tcpalm.com/news/2013/mar/07/carl-hiaasen-leadership-at-florida-citizens-has/
After reading these articles consider shooting off (er... maybe that is not a good metaphor anymore) sending an email or making a phone call to one of your representatives and let them know that you back their honest effort (in a few rare cases) or that you demand that they make an effort to discourage graft, dishonesty, waste, and corruption from among their own ranks.
Hearing on
Religious Freedom Next Week
By Peter Kirsanow
from The National Review
March 13, 2013
The U.S. Commission on
Civil Rights will hold a public hearing next
week on recent developments involving the
intersection of religious freedom and
anti-discrimination laws. The hearing will
take place on Friday March 22, at 9:30 a.m. at the
Commission’s headquarters, located at
Witnesses will address, among other things, the HHS mandate, the implications of Christian Legal Society v. Martinez and Hosanna-Tabor v. EEOC, and religious-liberty claims under First Amendment provisions other than the religion clauses.
Interested members of the public are invited to attend. Further, members of the public may also submit comments until April 21 on any of those topics by sending them to the above address or emailing them to publiccomments@usccr.gov.
This may be one of the few opportunities
members of the public will have to
address comments on the above topics to
an agency of the federal government. Note
that there’s no page limit on comments — they
may range from a short paragraph to a
treatise.
Click
here to see the notice in the National
Review
Debating the 'religious freedom' bill Rejection would be serious blow
from
Louisville
Courier-Journal
MARTIN COTHRAN
Senior Policy Analyst
March
13, 2013
The campaign against the bill being conducted by the ACLU, the Fairness Alliance, and a small minority of lawmakers has sadly turned into an ugly and virulent campaign of hateful rhetoric and misinformation.
If there had been no evidence before of the
anti-religious sentiment that now threatens
religious freedom in
The Religious Freedom Act is a response to a decision last year in which the state’s high court ruled against several Amish men who were being forced to put brightly colored orange reflectors on their buggies in violation of their religious strictures. The court ruled against them. In doing so, the justices announced that the former standard courts applied to religious freedom cases, called “strict scrutiny,” would now be replaced by a lower standard.
They made it easier for the government to violate someone’s First Amendment right to free exercise of religion.
Previously, the government had been required to show that it had a compelling interest in overturning someone’s religious rights. It also required the government to use the least restrictive means to accomplish its purposes. This bill would simply restore these requirements.
The bill’s language is almost identical to the language in the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, passed by the U.S. Congress in 1993 after the U.S. Supreme Court lowered the religious freedom standard in a 1990 decision.
RFRA, whose protections were later limited only to the federal government, was passed almost unanimously by the U.S. Congress, signed by Bill Clinton, sponsored by Ted Kennedy — and supported by the ACLU.
Given what this bill is really about, it is sad and disappointing that the groups opposing it have chosen to misrepresent the nature of the bill to the public and to malign the many good people involved in supporting the legislation.
When HB 279 passed the State House in a bipartisan 82-7 vote, Rep. Kelly Flood, D-Lexington, took to the floor and attacked the Catholic church, charging them with wanting to protect abusive priests. And when the state Senate passed the measure in a 29-6 vote, state Sen. Kathy Stein, D-Lexington, charged that the bill would promote racism.The ACLU and several gay rights groups also argue that the bill would be used to gut civil rights protections.
But if this is true, then why did none of this ever happen before Oct. 25 of last year, when the standard this bill reinstitutes was in force? If there were any such cases, these groups would have produced them, but they haven’t — and they can’t.
Because they don’t exist.
The bill has absolutely nothing to do with the sexual abuse of children and nothing to do with federal civil rights protections. In fact, the U.S. Supreme Court has already ruled that preventing racial discrimination is a compelling state interest — the very standard used in this bill.
No one supporting the bill has used one hateful word in arguing for it. Not a single person speaking for the bill has maligned the character of those who oppose it. And not a single supporter has misrepresented the nature of the bill.
Ironically, the group leading the charge against the bill, the ACLU, was the very group who represented the Amish in the case before the Supreme Court four months ago. They argued their case under the standard of strict scrutiny, the same standard they are now opposing.
If Gov. Beshear succumbs to pressure from the
ACLU and other groups and vetoes HB 279, it
will be a serious blow to religious freedom in
To
view the article in its entirety in the
Courier-Journal, click here
Jihad? What Jihad?
Media Shrug At Islamic Threat
Posted 03/01/2013
An Investors Business Daily
Editorial
Homeland Insecurity: The attorney
general says the threat from local jihadists
is now worse than terrorist plots hatched
overseas. He warned Americans not to grow
"complacent." Tell it to the media.
The major news gatekeepers have ignored the
jihadist element in no fewer than four recent
cases of sensational killings of non-Muslims
by mostly young Muslim men inside the
• Yusuf Ibrahim, a 27-year-old Egyptian
immigrant who on Feb. 5 allegedly beheaded two
Coptic Christians living in
• Ali Syed, a 20-year-old Muslim who
allegedly randomly killed three people in
• Ammar Asim Faruq Harris, a 26-year-old
reported black Muslim convert who on Feb. 21
is said to have killed three people in
• Ali Salim, a 44-year-old Pakistan-born
doctor who is accused of raping and killing a
pregnant woman and her 9-month-old fetus last
year in his Ohio office.
This rash of homicides by Muslims has
triggered a giant media yawn, despite telltale
signs of jihadist motive. Jihad? What jihad?
Reporters seemed to be collectively shrugging
in another fit of extreme PC.
Here's another key piece of information
denied the average American watching the
evening news: the majority of convicted
terrorists in the
Equally stunning, more than half of the 171
terror convicts analyzed by the London-based
Henry Jackson Society are college-educated.
Many are black converts. Nearly half were born
and raised here, according to the report
prefaced by former CIA director Mike Hayden.
Yet they want to kill fellow Americans simply
because they believe that's what their creed
tells them to do. But instead of confronting
this homegrown threat, our society is
fig-leafing it, even glorifying it.
Even in red-state
This isn't an isolated event. There's a
coordinated effort by leftist do-gooders and
multiculturalists to de-link Islam from
violence and terror and rewrite history.
When educators, journalists and politicians
hear no Islamic violence, see no Islamic
violence and report no Islamic violence,
beware, it's Sept. 10, 2001, again.
Read article in its
entirety at
Email tells feds to make sequester as painful as promised
by Stephen DinanMarch 5, 2013
The Washington Times
The White House announced Tuesday that it is
canceling tours of the president’s home for
the foreseeable future as the sequester
spending cuts begin to bite and the
administration makes good on its warnings of
painful decisions.
In the internal email, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service official Charles Brown said he asked if he could try to spread out the sequester cuts in his region to minimize the impact, and he said he was told not to do anything that would lessen the dire impacts Congress had been warned of.
“We have gone on record with a notification
to Congress and whoever else that ‘APHIS would
eliminate assistance to producers in 24 states
in managing wildlife damage to the aquaculture
industry, unless they provide funding to cover
the costs.’ So it is our opinion that however
you manage that reduction, you need to make
sure you are not contradicting what we said
the impact would be,” Mr. Brown, in the
internal email, said his superiors told him
Neither Mr. Brown nor the main APHIS office
in Washington returned calls seeking comment,
but Agriculture Secretary Thomas J. Vilsack,
who oversees the agency, told Congress he is
trying to give flexibility where he can.
“If we have flexibility, we’re going to try
to use it to make sure we use sequester in the
most equitable and least disruptive way,” the
secretary told Rep. Kristi L. Noem, a South
Dakota Republican who grilled Mr. Vilsack
about the email. “There are some
circumstances, and we’ve talked a lot about
the meat inspection, where we do not have that
flexibility because there are so few
accounts.”
Ms. Noem told Mr. Vilsack that the email made
it sound like the administration was
sacrificing flexibility in order to justify
its earlier dire predictions.
“I’m hopeful that isn’t an agenda that’s been
put forward,” the congresswoman told Mr.
Vilsack.
Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/mar/5/email-tells-feds-make-sequester-painful-promised/#ixzz2Mswed6KN
By Joshua Rhett Miller
Published March 5,2013
Fox News
A Florida legislator wants anyone trying to buy ammunition to complete an anger management program first, in what critics say is the latest example of local lawmakers reaching for constitutionally-dubious solutions to the problem of gun violence.
The bill filed Saturday by state Sen. Audrey
Gibson, D-Jacksonville, would require a
three-day waiting period for the sale of any
firearm and the sale of ammunition to anyone
who has not completed anger management
courses. The proposal would require ammo
buyers to take the anger management courses
every 10 years.
“This is not about guns," Gibson said. "This is about ammunition and not only for the safety of the general community, but also for the safety of law enforcement.”
Gibson said she’s concerned with citizens stockpiling ammunition, potentially creating dangerous situations should those individuals ever come in contact with law enforcement agencies or criminals.
“It’s about getting people to think, really, about how much ammunition they need,” Gibson said. “It’s a step, I think, in a safer direction. It’s about getting people to think before they buy.”
Benghazi Documents Reveal White House 'Specifically Warned of Imminent Attack
March 6, 2013Jason Howerton
The Blaze
CBS News investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson on Tuesday night reported that the Obama adminsitration has turned over documents relating to the Benghazi terrorist attack to the Senate Intelligence Committee. She made a number of revelations that don't bode well for the White house via her official Twitter account.
She also reported that an “official familiar
with the docs” said there were advanced
warnings in the days leading up to the attack,
including ones that “specifically warned of an
imminent attack on the
The CBS
reporter also referenced another source
familiar with the
“A source who
viewed the docs says the few that mentioned a
protest” on night of
Click
here to read the article in its entirety on
The Blaze
Christian Science
Teacher Fired Over Creationism to Head to Ohio
By Leonardo Blair , Christian Post Contributor
February 26, 2013|
A 20-year Ohio
middle school science teacher who was fired
in 2011 for teaching creationism in his
class will have his day in the Ohio
"In oral arguments before the Ohio Supreme Court tomorrow, February 27, The Rutherford Institute will defend the right to academic freedom of a science teacher fired for encouraging students to think critically about the school's science curriculum, particularly as it relates to evolution theories," said the Rutherford Institute in a statement released in response to questions from The Christian Post on Tuesday.
"In coming to
veteran science teacher John Freshwater's
defense, Institute attorneys argue that the
The Mount Vernon
School Board had spent almost $1 million
fighting John Freshwater's case when they
decided to end his contract, according to a
report in the Mount Vernon News. Board
president Margie Bennett told the Mount Vernon
News at the time that Freshwater's fired was a
difficult decision.
Freshwater, however, appealed his termination in state court arguing that the firing violated his rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments and constituted hostility toward religion. The Board's decision was upheld by a Common Pleas judge as well as the Fifth District Court of Appeals. But according to the Rutherford Institute, these decisions were made without an analysis of the constitutional claims. The appeal was made to the Ohio Supreme Court to examine theme. According to the Institute, the Mount Vernon School Board attempted to have the court strike the First Amendment claim from the lawsuit but they were unsuccessful.
"Academic freedom was once the bedrock of American education. That is no longer the state of affairs, as this case makes clear," said John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute, in the release. "What we need today are more teachers and school administrators who understand that young people don't need to be indoctrinated. Rather, they need to be taught how to think for themselves. By firing John Freshwater for challenging his students to think outside the box, school officials violated a core First Amendment freedom – the right to debate and express ideas contrary to established views."
In June 2008,
the Mount Vernon City School District Board of
Education in
The
Rutherford Institute is a nonprofit civil
liberties organization that provides legal
assistance at no charge to individuals whose
constitutional rights have been threatened
or violated.
Click
here to read the article on the Christian
Post web site in its entirety
Constitution 201: Founders vs. Progressives
December 3, 2012
The Hawaian Reporter
By Stephen Zierak
This lesson is taught by Dr. Thomas West,
the Paul & Dawn Porter Professor of
Politics at
The Founders believed that the purpose of government was to secure the unalienable rights of American citizens to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness by protecting against violations by foreign or domestic enemies. The Progressives believe that the purpose of government is to give you the benefit of government programs, while changing you into a more socially responsible individual.
As we watch the Founder’s vision slip away with the advent of big government and the welfare state, we might wonder what went wrong. Some American conservatives blame the language of the Founding. They believe that the equality and rights talk has led to Obama, that Progressivism was derived from expressions in our revolutionary documents. Actually, nothing could be farther from the truth. Progressivism was a radical departure from the Founding, as can be seen in comparisons around six points of contrast: (1) What is freedom? (2) Purpose of government? (3) Domestic policy? (4) Foreign policy? (5) Consent of the governed? (6) Government limited or unlimited?
Click here to view and read this lesson in its entirety at the Hawaiian Reporter.
Open Doors:
Violence Targeting Christians Increasing
in
Contact: Jerry Dykstra, Open Doors USA,
616-915-4117, jerryd@odusa.org
"The car bomb in Jaramana was targeting the
Christian and Druze community as a group,
since the area has no political ties or
buildings," a local Christian source explained
about the large bomb blast in the
According to contacts in the neighborhood, 11
Christians where killed and one Muslim killed
in the explosion. The blast left 69 people,
all Christians, wounded. Twenty are in
critical condition.
Open Doors' country coordinator for
A believer from
Situation
in
An Open Doors contact in
Last week Open Doors received a report from a
believer in
Another believer reports that in some of the
predominantly Christian villages in the
In a village in the
The Open Doors country coordinator for
Jerry Dykstra, media relations director for
Open Doors, says the request for prayer from
Syrian Christians comes as the International
Day of Prayer for the Persecuted Church (IDOP)
will be observed in the
Click here to see entire article at http://www.christiannewswire.com/news/7527470787.html
Global News Blog
All politics is local, even the US
Villagers in the
home
Kenyans are closely watching the
US President Barack Obama’s reelection bid is
preoccupying the people in Nyang’oma Kogelo,
his Kenyan father’s home village, as
challenger Mitt Romney’s run is invigorating
Mormons in the East African country.
Mr. Romney’s candidacy has thrust the
Christian group into the spotlight here, with
its leaders on Monday unveiling a website
called Kenya Mormon Newsroom to help answer
questions ignited by the American political
process. Leaders say the church maintains a
firm political neutrality.
“In the most recent past, questions have been
asked about who we are. The reasons is we have
a member of the church running as president of
the
Elder Thomas Hatch, a former
Hatch says Mormons would relish the idea of a
Romney presidency, hoping it would bring the
church out of obscurity. However, he cautioned
that there could be many downsides as well as
upsides, since presidents have to make tough
decisions.
“If Mr. Romney is seen as a Mormon
president, there could be retaliation by other
countries against our church and missions,” he
says.
Meanwhile, in Nyang’oma Kogelo, the western
Kenyan village that is home to the president's
step-grandmother, Sarah Obama, the
community is organizing daily prayers for
Obama, with special prayers reported in
churches and mosques. Often gathering in small
groups to listen to news and discussions on FM
radios from mobile phones, the residents say
they have learned Obama was facing a stiff
challenge.
“We would like to organize bigger meetings to
show support, but we fear the security is not
good. Terrorists may attack us because of our
Obama links. The threats and attacks in
For them, the interest in the American
election is driven by pride more than economic
or material gains, since Obama is viewed as a
grandson there.
“We are proud because we have seen he can
make a good global leader. People now know us
globally because of him. We are praying that
he continues,” says Mr. Ogombe.
But since Obama’s election in 2008, Kogelo
can also count material gains. Electricity has
been installed in the area and infrastructure
improved. Micro-finance organizations and
nongovernmental organizations have also moved
here to help improve the community’s living
standards. The local people say they are
better since he became president.
For Jesse Mugambi of the University of
Nairobi, America foreign policy on
“The voters out there will decide what is
good for them, and Kenyans will put up with
whoever wins. That is what democracy demands,”
he says.
Some analysts have also considered an Obama
loss. Charles Onyango-Obbo, in an opinion in
the Daily Nation today, analyzed why an Obama
loss would be good for him and the world.
“Obama has the energy and smarts to be an
influential international citizen and
non-state actor to join Clinton and Gates as
the non-white face at the top of international
NGO priesthood. To do that, he has first to
lose the election,” wrote Mr. Onyango-Obbo.
Click here to see article at the CSM
Sixty Percent of US
Muslims Reject Freedom of Expression
RIGHT
SIDE NEWS.com
Thursday, 01 November 2012
Dr.
Andrew Bostom
After
violent Muslim reactions to the amateurish
“Innocence of Muslims” video, which simply
depicted a few of the less salutary aspects of
Muhammad’s biography, international and
domestic Islamic agendas have openly converged
with vehement calls for universal application
of Islamic blasphemy law. This demand to
abrogate Western freedom of expression was
reiterated in a parade of speeches by Muslim
leaders at the UN General Assembly. The US
Muslim community echoed such admonitions, for
example during a large demonstration in
Now the results of polling data collected by Wenzel Strategies during October 22 to 26, 2012, from 600 US Muslims, indicate widespread support among rank and file American votaries of Islam for this fundamental rejection of freedom expression, as guaranteed under the US Constitution. The first amendment states, plainly,
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press;
When asked, “Do you believe that criticism of
Islam or Muhammad should be permitted under
the Constitution’s First Amendment?, 58%
replied “no,” while only 42%
affirmed this most basic manifestation of
freedom of speech, i.e., to criticize
religious, or any other dogma. Indeed,
oblivious to
Also, consistent with such findings 43% of
these US Muslims rejected the right of members
of other faiths to proselytize to adherents of
Islam, disagreeing, “…that
These alarming data remind us that despite intentionally obfuscating apologetics, Sharia, Islamic law, is not merely holistic, in the general sense of all-encompassing, but totalitarian, regulating everything from the ritual aspects of religion, to personal hygiene, to the governance of a Muslim minority community, Islamic state, bloc of states, or global Islamic order. Clearly, this latter political aspect is the most troubling, being an ancient antecedent of more familiar modern totalitarian systems. Specifically, Sharia’s liberty-crushing and dehumanizing political aspects feature: open-ended jihadism to subjugate the world to a totalitarian Islamic order; rejection of bedrock Western liberties—including freedom of conscience and speech—enforced by imprisonment, beating, or death; discriminatory relegation of non-Muslims to outcast, vulnerable pariahs, and even Muslim women to subservient chattel; and barbaric punishments which violate human dignity, such as amputation for theft, stoning for adultery, and lashing for alcohol consumption.
And the US Muslim data mirror global Islamic trends. Previously, the 57-member Organization of the Islamic Conference (subsequently renamed the Organization of Islamic Cooperation [OIC])—the largest voting bloc in the UN, which represents all the major Muslim countries, and the Palestinian Authority—had sponsored and actually navigated to passage a compromise U.N. resolution insisting countries criminalize what it calls “defamation of religion.” Though the language of the OIC “defamation of religion” resolution has been altered at times, the OIC’s goal has remained the same—to impose at the international level a Sharia-compliant conception of freedom of speech and expression that would severely limit anything it arbitrarily deemed critical of, or offensive to, Islam or Muslims. This is readily apparent by reading the OIC’s supervening “alternative” to both the US Bill of Rights and the UN’s own 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, i.e., the 1990 Cairo Declaration, or Universal Declaration of Human Rights in Islam.
The opening of the preamble to the Cairo Declaration repeats a Koranic injunction affirming Islamic supremacism (Koran 3:110, “You are the best nation ever brought forth to men . . . you believe in Allah”); and its last articles, 24 and 25, maintain [article 24], “All the rights and freedoms stipulated in this Declaration are subject to the Islamic Sharia”; and [article 25] “The Islamic Sharia is the only source of reference for the explanation or clarification to any of the articles of this Declaration.” The gravely negative implications of the OIC’s Sharia-based Cairo Declaration are most apparent in its transparent rejection of freedom of conscience in Article 10, which proclaims:
Islam is the religion of unspoiled nature. It is prohibited to exercise any form of compulsion on man or to exploit his poverty or ignorance in order to convert him to another religion, or to atheism.
Ominously, articles 19 and 22 reiterate a principle stated elsewhere throughout the document, which clearly applies to the “punishment” of so-called apostates from Islam, as well as “blasphemers”:
There shall be no crime or punishment except as provided for in the Sharia. Everyone shall have the right to express his opinion freely in such manner as would not be contrary to the principles of the Sharia. Everyone shall have the right to advocate what is right, and propagate what is good, and warn against what is wrong and evil according to the norms of Islamic Sharia.
Information is a vital necessity to society. It may not be exploited or misused in such a way as may violate sanctities and the dignity of Prophets, undermine moral and ethical values or disintegrate, corrupt or harm society or weaken its faith.
Institutional Islam in
Finally, it should be noted, 81% of this sample of Muslim Americans were either “definitely for Obama,” or “leaning Obama”.
Source: and All Articles Copyright © Dr. Andrew Bostom | All Rights Reserved
Click here to read at rightsidenews.comhttp://www.rightsidenews.com/2012110117312/editorial/rsn-pick-of-the-day/sixty-percent-of-us-muslims-reject-freedom-of-expression.html
Malala Yousafzai taken to specialist hospital
Girl shot by Taliban
in
The Guardian, Thursday 11 October 2012
A Pakistani schoolgirl fighting for her life
after being shot by Taliban gunmen has been
transferred to a specialist hospital in the
army garrison town of
Malala Yousafzai, 14, was unconscious and in a critical condition after being shot in the head and neck as she left school in the Swat region on Tuesday, but doctors said she had moved her arms and legs slightly overnight.
On Wednesday surgeons at an army hospital in
the regional capital,
A Taliban spokesman said Malala had been targeted for trying to spread western culture, and that they would try to kill her again if she survived. Malala's father, Ziauddin Yousafzai, who runs a girls' school, said his daughter had defied threats for years, believing the good work she was doing for her community was her best protection.
The regional governor, Masood Kausar, said officials had identified the attackers. The local government has posted a 10m rupee reward for their capture. "The security agencies are closely working with each other and they have a lot of information about the perpetrators. We hope they will soon capture them and bring to justice," Kausar said.
The attack outraged many in
Malala had spent the last three years
campaigning for girls' education after the
Taliban shut down girls' schools. She received
This
article can be seen at the UK Guardian by
clicking here
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/oct/11/malala-yousufzai-specialist-hospital
or
click here to read more about this young
person in the Christian Science Monitor
The Islamic
Threat Doctrine and 9/11/2012
by ALAN
KORNMAN
October 9, 2012
Family
Security Matters
A dark feeling of betrayal and stunned disbelief washed over me as I read the newspaper headline, "Jordanians press for democratic reforms" in the October 6, 2012 Orlando Sentinel.
The Myth of Islamic Democratic Reforms
The mainstream
media, U.S. State Department, and President
Obama fed us a steady stream of news in 2011
that Egyptian youth were protesting in the
streets for an Arab Spring of democratic
reforms in
While the press was printing gallons of ink reporting the Muslim Brotherhood would pursue democratic reforms in Egypt, Mohammad Morsi was consolidating his political base with the Salafi Islamist fundamentalist, whose objective was to institute a Sunni led Shariah compliant Islamic State in Egypt by overthrowing the colonialist dictator and friend of the United States, Hosni Mubarak.
The utopian
mantra from the liberal left of democratic
reforms blooming in
When will our
mainstream press learn that Shariah compliant
political Islam and our Jeffersonian democracy
are not compatible? Understanding the
PLO's failed coup of
Black September in
In September of
1970, the Nobel Peace Prize recipient Yasser
Arafat, nephew of Nazi collaborator Grand
Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini, tried
unsuccessfully to violently overthrow the
Arafat's PLO
organization lost over 2,000 Muslim men in the
attempted Black September coup of their
Jordanian Muslim brothers and were violently
expelled from their native
History seems to
be repeating itself again, except now
The Muslim Brotherhood is making a play to
wrestle control of
If King Abdullah II tries to appease The Muslim Brotherhood he will find himself either dead or in exile wondering how he lost his throne. King Abdullah II need look no further than Qaddafi, Mubarak, and Assad to see his future, if he continues on his current path.
Understanding The Islamic Threat Doctrine
Understanding the Islamic Threat Doctrine is essential in predicting events as they unfold on the ground and anticipating what to expect will happen in the future. Fortunately for the American people, our Islamist adversaries are more than happy to tell us exactly what their doctrine and objectives are.
We will now
learn the Islamic Threat Doctrine from a well
respected Islamic Jihadist who was tops in his
class amongst his Jihadi peers. Today's
teacher of the doctrine is Sheikh Abu Musab
Al-Zarqawi or by his title, "Emir of Al Qaeda
in the Country of Two Rivers." On June
7, 2006 Mr. Zarqawi was killed when a USAF
F-16 dropped two 500 pound guided bombs on his
safe house in
Shortly before his death, Mr. Zarqawi conducted an in depth interview with the Al-Furican Foundation for Media Production, an entertainment arm of Al-Qaeda. Hidden deep in the interview Mr. Zarqawi explains clearly what the Islamic Threat Doctrine is and it's objectives.
These two paragraphs below should change your life forever and how you view the world around you. Al-Qaeda terrorist Musab Al-Zarqawi says,
"We fight in the way of Allah, until the law of Allah is implemented, and the first step is to expel the enemy, then establish the Islamic state, then we set forth to conquer the lands of Muslims to return them back to us, then after that, we fight the kuffar (disbelievers) until they accept one of the three.
"I have been sent with the sword, between the hands of the hour"; this is our political agenda."
"It is necessary to accept the fact that it is an obligation for every Muslim to rush to help each other and it is also very necessary to agree that the houses of Muslims are just one house. The enemies (the disbelieving nations) have imposed boundaries and divided the lands of Muslims to tiny nations however we do not believe in them and the boundaries of Sax Bacon do not restrict us. We, the Muslims are one nation and the lands of Islam are one land, we fight for the sake of "there is no god but Allah".
The Muslim
Brotherhood in the Middle East and Northern
Africa are "expelling the enemy" and
establishing an Islamic State as they did in
The Islamic Threat Doctrine Mr. Zarqawi articulated above is being implemented in coordinated steps to achieve their short term objective of unifying, "Muslims to rush to help each other...and Muslims are of one house." The coordinated attacks on 9/11/12 on U.S. interests in the Middle East and Northern Africa was the real warning to America, not the red herring of an internet movie.
When the
Islamist enemies of the
What Our Islamist Enemies Fear Most
The one thing
our Islamist adversaries fear most is an
American public that understands the basics of
The Islamic Threat Doctrine. Thomas
Jefferson read the Qur'an to fight and defeat
the Muslim Barabary Pirates in
Conclusion
The future
of
We, the Muslims are one nation and the lands of Islam are one land, we fight for the sake of "there is no god but Allah".
What we believe as Americans and our man made laws is of small concern to our Islamist enemies. The followers of Islam believe "there is no God but Allah and Muhammad is his messenger" and that was the message on the black flags that flew above our overrun embassies and consulates when they were attacked on 9/11/2012.
God Bless
Family Security Matters Contributing
Editor Alan Kornman is the regional
coordinator of The United West-Uniting
Western Civilization for Freedom and
The morality of Paul Ryan’s budget
By Babette Francis - posted Thursday, 4 October 2012In Onlineopinion.com
Recent
polls on the
Perhaps the USCCB needs to take some responsibility for the confusion among Catholic voters, so many of whom seem to be willing to vote for the most pro-abortion President in US history - and the first to support same-sex "marriage" - because the message from the bishops has been somewhat mixed.
In April before Congressman Paul Ryan (Republican, Wisconsin's lst District) was chosen by Mitt Romney to be his Vice-Presidential candidate in the US November elections, Ryan proposed a budget plan which was adopted by the Republican-majority House of Representatives Budget Committee, 21-9. However, the US Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) was been critical of Ryan's budget implying that it 'failed a basic moral test':
....The Catholic bishops of the
The USCCB was specifically concerned about alterations to the Child Tax Credit to exclude immigrant families (it is not clear whether this cut is targeted primarily at illegal immigrants), cuts in the food stamps and the Social Services Block Grant.
While the USCCB mentions serious deficits, I
wonder if they can get their heads around the
16 TRILLIONS of
Not all bishops agree with the USCCB
statement. Bishop Boyea,
Archbishop Joseph Naumann,
Archbishop Allen Vigneron,
Warm support for Paul Ryan came from Cardinal Dolan of New York who described Ryan as a "great public servant" and praised his “call for financial accountability, restraint and a balanced budget” as well as his “obvious solicitude for the poor.” He emphasized there are differences in “prudential judgment” over how to assist the poor.
Ryan's diocesan Bishop Morlino,
... I am proud of Paul Ryan's accomplishments as a native son, and a brother in the faith, and my prayers go with him and his family as they endure the unbelievable demands of a presidential campaign .....
Click here
to see this article in its
entirety and read more
August
2012: 969 People Slaughtered by by
Muslims - one person every 46 minutes
Welcome
to Islam
Sept.
5, 2012
No
additional commentary required.
Rising
anti-Islamic sentiment in America troubles
Muslims
By Moni Basu,
CNN
Sept. 5, 2012
(CNN) – When the nation
pauses to remember 9/11 next week, a group of
Tennesseans will gather at the Embassy Suites
Hotel in
On the program, called "The Threat in Our Backyard," is a lecture on Islam in public schools and a short film on Sharia finance.
It's a program organized by people who feel the American way of life is threatened by Islam - in particular, Sharia, or Islamic law.
Sharia would bring ruin to
He says he has nothing against Muslims, but he takes issue with the tenets of Islam.
Sharia, he believes, would mean that practicing homosexuals would be put to death, women would not be educated and would be married off to men chosen by their fathers, and non-Muslims would become kafirs - nonbelievers - relegated to second-class citizenship.
"And I don't want that coming to
He's not alone in his fears.
A tide of anti-Islam sentiment has been swelling across America in recent months, strong enough to prompt one imam to wish for the days immediately after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks when President George W. Bush declared that Muslims were not our enemies; that the war on terror was against a select few who acted upon their hate for America.
"In the 11 years since, we have retreated,"
says Abdullah Antepli, the Muslim chaplain at
Muslims make up less than 1% of the
Hate crimes against Muslims spiked 50% in
2010, the last year for which FBI statistics
are available. That was in a year marked by
Muslim-bashing speech over the Islamic center
near ground zero in
Antepli likens the current climate to McCarthyism. Left unchecked, he says, anti-Muslim fervor, like racism and anti-Semitism, has the potential to evolve into something dangerous.
This year's holy month of Ramadan, which
ended August 19, was marred by a spate of
violence at
At least seven mosques and one cemetery were
attacked in the
Particularly visible on the anti-Muslim radar
has been the state of
Also in
State senatorial candidate Woody Degan's website also mentions Sharia:
"VOTE CONSERVATIVE! VOTE Anti-Sharia, VOTE Against Internet Taxes, Vote FOR Gun Carry Rights! VOTE for your PERSONAL RIGHTS!"
And Gov. Bill Haslam recently came under fire
for hiring lawyer Samar Ali, a Muslim woman
from
Ali's critics called her Sharia-compliant and a website called Bill H(Islam) attacked the governor for pursuing "a policy that promotes the interest of Islamist (sic) and their radical ideology."
The website links to another that discusses, among other things, Islamic infiltration of public schools.
"I cannot stress enough the seriousness of
their push to spread their religion to all
non-Muslims throughout our country," says
website author Cathy Hinners, another speaker
at next Tuesday's 9/11 event in
"Why? Why are Muslims so adamant that we
accept their religion? The answer is simple.
The answer is in black and white. The answer
is in the Muslim brotherhoods "Strategic Goal
for
In November 2010, more than 70% of voters in
The amendment died after a federal court ruled it discriminatory.
"That was very explicitly anti-Islamic," says
Glenn Hendrix, an
This year, 33 anti-Sharia or international
law bills were introduced in 20 states, making
it a key issue. Six states -
Two
The Council on American-Islamic Relations
says the anti-Sharia bills are based on draft
legislation promoted by David Yerushalmi, an
anti-Islamic lawyer from
Yerushalmi founded the Society of Americans for National Existence, an organization devoted to promoting his theory that Islam is inherently seditious and Sharia is a "criminal conspiracy to overthrow the U.S. government," according to the Southern Poverty Law Center, which tracks hate groups.
"Ideally," says the center, "he would outlaw Islam and deport its adherents altogether."
Hendrix says anti-Sharia legislation is not
necessary since
But it sends a strong message to the Muslim community.
The American Bar Association, which opposes federal or state laws that impose blanket prohibitions on foreign laws, says such legislative initiatives stigmatize an entire religious community and "are inconsistent with some of the core principles and ideals of American jurisprudence."
Valarie Kaur, a legal advocate and hate crimes specialist, says proponents of anti-Sharia bills are battling an imaginary threat.
"There is no push to install Sharia law in
the
An attack at a Wisconsin Sikh temple last
month killed six people. Many believe the
shooter mistook Sikhs for Muslims. A Sikh gas
station attendant in
Kaur blames tough economic times and an amplification of hateful speech for incidents like the temple shooting and the momentum behind the anti-Sharia campaign.
For Muslims, Sharia - which means "path to the watering hole" in Arabic - is the divine law revealed centuries ago in the Quran that governs all aspects of life. More often than not, it's the most sensational parts of Sharia - like cutting off a thief's hand - that garner the most publicity.
A trial court in
That's the kind of ruling that fuels anti-Sharia activists.
"If you wanted to pray to a large rock and that was your God, I could care less," he says. "But the minute you want to put a gun to my head and say you will pray to this large rock and your family will or you will pay the price, that's when I see a bully. I see an overbearing ideology that wants to force and coerce people.
Miller describes himself as a tolerant person but not when it comes to people dictating how others will live.
"That's antithetical to the freedoms that we value, the liberty we value," he says.
The message that Islam is evil has been repeated so many times - sometimes directly, sometimes in a more subtle fashion - that it has sunk in as reality in the hearts and minds of many Americans, says Antepli, the Duke chaplain.
Part of it is fear of the unknown, he says.
"I, too, would have a monstrous image of Islam if I did not know any better."
But another part of it is orchestrated, he says, referring to "well-organized and polished" anti-Islam websites that have sprouted in recent years. Marry that with ignorance and the end result is lethal, Antepli says.
The Center for American Progress, a liberal research and advocacy organization, published a report last year that attributed the rise of Islamophobia to a "small, tightly-networked group of misinformation experts."
The report called "Fear, Inc." lists seven foundations that gave $42.6 million to think tanks to promote anti-Islamic thought.
It describes "deeply intertwined individuals and organizations" that "manufacture and exaggerate threats of 'creeping Sharia,' Islamic domination of the West, and purported obligatory calls to violence against all non-Muslims by the Quran."
The issue of Sharia, say some Muslims, has become a political hot potato in an election year.
GOP candidates Newt Gingrich and Michele Bachmann mentioned Sharia in their campaign speeches. This year's Republican Party platform makes mention of foreign laws:
"Subjecting American citizens to foreign laws
is inimical to the spirit of the Constitution.
It is one reason we oppose
That's the message Miller hopes people will
take away from next week's 9/11 meeting; that
the tenets of Islam go against the
constitution of the
It's diametrically opposed to what people
like Antepli and Kaur will be saying as
This
blog read be seen in its entirety at:
http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/09/05/rising-anti-islamic-sentiment-in-america-troubles-muslims/
The
Growing Islamic Threat IN
from The Strategy Page
September 4, 2012: Despite all the publicity
about increased defense spending, there is
much less talk on how to solve the growing
problem with Islamic terrorism. This is a war
going on inside
August 29, 2012: In the Caucasus (
August 28, 2012: In the Caucasus (Ingushetia) several police raids left three Islamic terrorist dead, several more arrested, and large quantities of weapons and ammunition seized.
Also in the Caucasus, a group of Islamic
terrorists crossed the border from Dagestan
into
August 27, 2012: A Russian shipyard launched
the first of six Kilo class submarines
August 26, 2012: In a rural part of
southern
August 22, 2012: In the United States
there was an unsubstantiated news story about
a Russian Akula class nuclear submarine
cruising through the
August 21, 2012: In the Caucasus
(Kabardino-Balkaria) an Islamic terrorist died
in a gun battle with police. In nearby
This
article can be read in its entirety at:
http://www.strategypage.com/qnd/russia/articles/20120903.aspx
From THE FOUNDRY
Religious Freedom
Means “Sticking up for All Believers”
Ken
McIntyre
Aug. 21, 2012
The crowd erupted into disarmed laughter when Kevin J. “Seamus” Hasson got to the point. “I have to say when it comes to religious freedom and the other great constitutional questions at the moment that are at stake: However bad you think things are, however bleak it looks, however dire it may seem—it’s almost certainly worse than you think.”
That’s as good a reason as any to be better equipped for the debates ahead. Hasson, founder and president emeritus of the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, made those remarks nearly four months ago upon receiving The Heritage Foundation’s Salvatori Prize for American Citizenship.
His acclaimed 2005 book, The Right to Be Wrong: Ending the Culture War Over Religion in America, is just out in a timely paperback reprint from Image (with a new afterword).
Examples of government’s intolerance toward personal faith in the public square have multiplied since Hasson’s “it’s almost certainly worse” crack—from Obamacare’s Health and Human Services (HHS) mandate that employers get over their faith and provide employees with “free” abortion-inducing drugs, to elected officials who threaten to make an entrepreneur’s religion a reason to deny a building permit in their cities.
Hasson’s The Right to Be Wrong, overflowing with real-life cases and reflecting the life’s mission of this Notre Dame-trained lawyer and theologian, is about why we need to protect religious freedom from tyranny in all shapes and sizes.
“We are manning the believer’s side of the barricades against the forces who believe in nothingness,” the essayist and scholar said in accepting the Salvatori Prize during an April 26 luncheon in Colorado Springs opening Heritage’s 35th annual Resource Bank gathering. He added:
“Therefore, we
need to defend the rights of other people
who believe in something—even if we think
they believe the wrong thing. In so doing,
we are sticking up for all believers against
the nihilists. We are standing tall for
those who are convinced there is a truth,
against those who are opposed to the very
idea of anybody making truth claims in
public. That is the fight that we are in the
middle of—repelling an assault by people who
believe in nothing against the very idea of
believing in anything.”
This
article can be read in its entirety at
http://blog.heritage.org/2012/08/21/religious-freedom-means-sticking-up-for-all-believers/
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
The CNS report
goes on to quote several
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
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
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
Senior Editorial Writer
The
A federal court in
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
“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
High court allows president discretion in upholding law or not
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
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
The court
specifically invalidated the heart and soul of
this misguided
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
So, because the
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).
Obama Overlooks Christian Persecution
Thursday,
24 May 2012
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
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.
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
These terrorist acts, which began in earnest in the 1970s, escalated to a crescendo during the Arab Spring of 2011-2012 in
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
The 2011 State Department Annual Report on International Religious Freedom refused to list
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
It is time for a new foreign policy.
© 2012 Newsmax. All
rights reserved.
View article in its entirety at Newsmax.com: Obama Overlooks Christian Persecution
Commentary: Making the Fifth Amendment optional
The
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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.”
6.
This bill would marginalize Christians
and “all” moral, ethical citizens
of
7.
This bill would reduce, not
increase the desirability and social
climate for businesses to settle in
8.
This bill uses a “straw man,” false
premise that businesses have in
history past refused to come to
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
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
Do
we have discrimination in
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
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
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
11.
Discrimination is:
When
Christian teachers in
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
WND EXCLUSIVE
Holder orders
women's restrooms open to male
University
caves in after warning from Obama DOJ
On orders from Barack Obama’s Department of
Justice, officials with the
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
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
Some of the Indonesian Christians seeking to avoid deportation wear ankle monitors to ensure compliance with court orders.
Many Indonesians came to
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
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
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
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
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
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
Mr. Timisela, 45, said that in 1998, several
months before he left
“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
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
The United Church Observer
Compassion
for the persecuted?
By Mike Milne
May, 2012
In
the years following the 1979 Islamic
Revolution,
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
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
In
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
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
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
Len Rudner, director of community relations
and outreach for the newly created Centre for
“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
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
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
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
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
As Allan also points out,
“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.”
This abbreviated article may be read in its entirety at
http://www.ucobserver.org/features/2012/05/compassion/
From
Officials:
Expanded drone strikes approved
Associated
Press
| Posted: Thursday, April 26, 2012
The
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
"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
The
new policy will widen the war against AQAP,
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
The
expanded strikes would not be used in support
of the Yemeni government's fight against
internal opponents, the official added.
The
Copywrite 2012 AP
This article can be read in its entirety at
The war is over?
Tribune Media Services
April
26, 2012
Really? Well, if the war is over, I must have
missed the peace treaty signing ceremony. I
also haven't noticed a decline in incendiary
rhetoric, or the disarmament -- or at least
laying down of arms -- that usually
accompanies the end of war. Does this mean we
can do away with full-body scanners and TSA
pat-downs?
DFLers want U.S.
By Joe Kimball
MinnPost.com
04/23/12
It's not only Republicans looking for constitutional amendments these days.
DFLers (Democratic Farmer Labor Party members) in the Minnesota House and Senate have introduced bills asking Congress to call a constitutional convention to propose an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would clarify that corporations are not people.
There's been much consternation on this point, particularly after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in a corporate political spending case that corporations have a First Amendment right to free speech.
The bill introduced by DFLers wants the constitutional amendment to say:
- (1)
The rights protected by the Constitution of
the
- (2)
Artificial entities, such as corporations,
limited liability companies, and others
established by the laws of any state, the
- (3) The privileges of artificial entities shall be determined by the people, through federal, state, or local law, and shall not be construed to be inherent or inalienable.
- (4) Federal, state, and local government shall regulate, limit or prohibit contributions and expenditures, including a candidate's own contributions and expenditures, for the purpose of influencing in any way the election of any candidate for public office or any ballot measure.
- (5) Federal, state, and local government shall require that any permissible contributions and expenditures be publicly disclosed.
- (6) The judiciary shall not construe the spending of money to influence elections to be speech under the First Amendment.
- (7) Nothing contained in this amendment shall be construed to abridge the freedom of the press.
In the state House, the bill was introduced and referred to committee.
This article can be seen in its entirety atCatholic
Bishops Urge ‘Campaign’ for Religious
Freedom
By LAURIE GOODSTEIN
In New York Times
Published April 12, 2012
The nation’s Roman Catholic bishops issued a proclamation on Thursday calling for every priest, parish and layperson to participate in “great national campaign” to defend religious liberty, which they said is “under attack, both at home and abroad.”
In particular they urged every diocese to hold a “Fortnight for Freedom” during the two weeks leading up to the Fourth of July, for parishioners to study, pray and take public action to fight what they see as the government’s attempts to curtail religious freedom.
“To be Catholic and American should mean not having to choose one over the other,” said the statement, issued by the bishops ad hoc committee on religious freedom.
For more than half a year, the bishops have put the religious liberty issue front and center, but it has not yet galvanized the Catholic laity and has even further polarized the church’s liberal and conservative flanks. In an election year, liberal Catholics have accused the bishops of making the church an arm of the Republican Party in the drive to defeat President Obama — an accusation that the bishops reject.
“This ought not to be a partisan issue,” the bishops say in their statement in a section addressed to political leaders. “The Constitution is not for Democrats or Republicans or Independents. It is for all of us, and a great nonpartisan effort should be led by our elected representatives to ensure that it remains so.”
In the document, the bishops seek to explain that their alarm is not only about the mandate in the health reform act that requires even Catholic colleges and hospitals to have insurance plans that cover birth control. They cite seven examples of what they say are violations of religious freedom, including immigration laws in several states that they say make it illegal to minister to illegal immigrants.
They also assert that the government has violated the religious freedom of Catholics by cutting off contracts to Catholic agencies. Several states have denied financing to Catholic agencies that refused to place foster children with gay parents. And the federal government refused to reauthorize a grant to a Catholic immigration organization that served victims of sex trafficking because as a Catholic group, it would not provide or refer women to services for abortion and birth control.
Quoting from the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King
Jr.’s “Letter from a Birmingham Jail,” the
bishops say that unjust laws should be either
changed or resisted. “In the face of an unjust
law,” the bishops wrote, “an accommodation is
not to be sought. If we face today the
prospect of unjust laws, then Catholics in
Article
can be seen in its original entirety at
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/13/us/catholic-bishops-urge-campaign-for-religious-freedom.html
Pastor Youcef
Nadarkhani Spends 35th Birthday Behind Bars
By Tiffany Barrans
April 11, 2012
Today, is Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani’s
birthday, and our sources in
This is the third birthday that Pastor Youcef
has been forced to celebrate behind bars,
condemned to death in
Tomorrow, marks exactly two and a half years of imprisonment – 913 days illegally held in prison for his faith.
Both the Iranian Constitution and the
International Declaration of Human Rights, of
which
Today, Christians and supporters of Pastor
Youcef all around the world are holding a
fasting and prayer vigil for the persecuted
pastor to bring attention to his plight. Just
last week, hundreds of Christians and
supporters of religious liberty attended a
vigil and march for Pastor Youcef’s release in
These are just a few examples of the
increasing international pressure being placed
on
The ACLJ’s Tweet for Youcef campaign is now
reaching nearly 1.5 million Twitter accounts
around the world each day with updates about
Pastor Youcef. His story has reached over 91
percent of the United Nations member states,
including
Even with this increasing international
pressure on
Please continue to pray for Pastor Youcef. As a Birthday present for Pastor Youcef and symbol of solidarity for those persecuted for their faith, please let the world know that you support Pastor Youcef by signing up to Tweet for Youcef today.
Happy Birthday Pastor Youcef.
Article can be seen in its original entirety
at
http://aclj.org/iran/pastor-youcef-nadarkhani-spends-birthday-behind-bars
Obama’s supremely damaging court battle
His accusations of judicial activism are off the markNEW YORK
Thursday, April
5, 2012
By Andrea Tantaros
After
years of barely mentioning Obamacare due to
its unpopularity in the polls, it is now
seemingly all President Obama and his aides
find themselves talking about. But instead of
defending the mandate’s constitutionality —
the main issue in question for the Supreme
Court — the President unwisely decided to
launch an attack on the court itself.
At a press conference on Monday, Obama
expressed the belief that the Court would not
take an “unprecedented, extraordinary step” by
overturning the law. He then went on to
caution the “unelected” court against reaching
any other conclusion, and spoke of concerns
about judicial activism.
In fact, overturning unconstitutional laws is
exactly the job of the Supreme Court.
But the real story is how he went after the
justices. This is rare behavior for a
President, but it’s not the first time Obama
has ventured into this taboo territory. In
January 2010, the President complained in his
State of the Union Address about the court’s
decision in Citizens United v. the Federal
Election Commission, holding that the
government may not keep corporations or unions
from spending money to support or oppose
candidates in elections.
Judicial activism is seeing things in the
Constitution that aren’t there just to get a
specific result. The Commerce Clause is in the
Constitution, but so is the 10th Amendment,
meaning that whatever isn’t written down here
is left to the states. While Obama might think
he has no option but to demagogue the Supreme
Court should his law get struck down, he has
no business in meddling in its affairs,
playing politics with matters of pure law.
The Constitution is designed to limit the
vast growth of government. The Founders put
many checks and balances in place to protect
liberty and impede the progressive agenda of
expanded government. The real activism is on
the part of liberals who want to subvert the
original meaning of the Constitution.
The judicial system, it should be noted,
isn’t taking the President’s comments lightly.
Following the President’s controversial
comments, a three-judge panel of the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, ordered
the Justice Department to answer by Thursday
whether the Obama administration believes that
the courts have the right to strike down a
federal law (Marbury v.
It makes for a real conundrum for the
President in a tough election year, but it’s
one of his own making. Obama is asking the
court to radically rethink the Constitution
and read the Commerce Clause as giving him
unprecedented power. He is turning the 10th
Amendment into a guideline. And he is now
putting the court in a position where it is
reviewing two centuries of established
precedent, all while he criticizes that same
court.
If this mandate is struck down, he will have to defend more than his words. He’ll have to defend how he spent the last four years wasting his time, and ours, with a law that was never really constitutional.
This
article can be read in its original entirety
at
http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/obama-supremely-damaging-court-battle-article-1.1056570
Is the Health Care Law Constitutional? No, Strike It Down
DAVID J. PORTER, VISION FOR CENTER & VALUES
Editor’s note: A version of this
article first appeared in the
This summer, the Supreme Court will decide whether Congress violated the Constitution when it enacted the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, which contains an “individual mandate” requiring virtually every American to purchase health insurance. Based on the Constitution’s text and structure, and judicial interpretations of the relevant provisions, the mandate should be struck down.
The framers and those who ratified the Constitution withheld from Congress a plenary police power to enact any law that it deems desirable. Instead, the powers granted to Congress in Article I of the Constitution are limited and enumerated. The 10th Amendment emphasizes this structure by affirming that all powers not given to Congress “are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
Given that background, the states’ argument against ACA is simple: Even under the broadest interpretation, Congress’ enumerated powers do not authorize a federal law that forces individuals to purchase health insurance.
ACA’s defenders argue that Congress’ authority to impose the mandate is granted by any of three constitutional provisions: the Commerce Clause, the Necessary and Proper Clause, or the Taxing Clause. However, under the original understanding of those provisions and the more expansive interpretation given to them by the Supreme Court in recent decades, the mandate is an unprecedented assertion of federal control that violates the framers’ constitutional design.
As Congress itself said in the ACA, the mandate purports to regulate each individual’s “economic and financial decision” whether to purchase health insurance. But if that is a valid exercise of Commerce Clause power, then there is literally no end to Congress’ power over individuals.
Finally, ACA’s defenders argue that even if the individual mandate is not supported by the Commerce Clause or the Necessary and Proper Clause, it is nevertheless constitutional because it is a tax. For example, the penalty for noncompliance is calculated as a percentage of household income for income tax purposes, and it is self-declared on the taxpayer’s income tax return.
Congress foreclosed this argument by
separating the individual mandate from the
penalty. The mandate itself offends the
constitutional separation of powers; it cannot
be saved by pointing to a penalty for
noncompliance. In any event, the monetary fine
was deliberately structured as a “penalty” and
not as a “tax.” Congress could have provided
health insurance for all Americans by invoking
its Article I power “[t]o lay and collect
Taxes,” but following President Barack Obama’s
lead, it refused to do so for political
reasons.The federal government's Taxing clause
argument has been rejected by every court that
has reviewed the ACA, and the Supreme court is
not likely to adopt it, either. Nor should it.
The
Moral Liberal Guest Contributor, David J.
Porter, J.D., is an attorney with
Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney PC, a trustee
of
This article may be read in it’s entirety at:
http://www.themoralliberal.com/2012/03/28/is-the-health-care-law-constitutional-no-strike-it-down/
Speech delivered by
Dr. Gene A. Youngblood
3/23/12
In front of
Federal Courthouse,
Our Constitution (Amendment I) says: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Ladies and gentlemen, our government, under the leadership of a socialist agenda that is determined to shred our beloved Constitution, thus destroying our freedoms.
We live in a very dark era, our national media have determined not to present real truth in news, or they report with such bias as to nullify the facts. We are watching a complicit Senate give right-of-way to the Executive Branch of Government to control our nation.
We now have a nation being directed and dictated to by about 200 un-elected czars that are proud socialists and/or sodomites. God help us to stand up, speak up, and act as the ethical, moral nation we once were. Believers are to be salt and light.
What is Freedom? Where do we get our freedoms? God has given us our freedoms and we have codified them, “…All men are created equal and endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness…”
Senator Rand Paul said, “Without the right to life, there can be no liberty or pursuit of happiness.”
Ladies and gentlemen, God has provided us with the greatest nation and Constitution on the face of the earth. He has charged us with the responsibility of vigilance, commitment and involvement in the protection of our freedom.
What is freedom?
FREEDOM IS a raw milk farmer not fearful of the Gestapo breaking into his home.
FREEDOM IS praying in Jesus’name without fear or intimidation.
FREEDOM IS a child who can take a sack lunch to school without fear of it being taken.
FREEDOM IS being able to fly the American flag without breaking a law.
FREEDOM IS to be able to read the Bible in a public classroom without arrest.
FREEDOM IS being able to reject Shariah Law as unconstitutional without threats from C.A.I.R.
FREEDOM IS going to be at
night without fear of invasion by
FREEDOM IS openness of
our government in
FREEDOM IS deciding our own food menu, diet and medical care without governmental intervention or directive.
FREEDOM IS allowing every child conceived to have “life” protection under our Constitution.
FREEDOM IS living in a land where the government cannot intrude into the church.
Separation of church and state is Biblically God-based rather than mandated by a law of rulers. King Uzziah entered into the temple to offer sacrifice though eighty one priests begged him not to, as is the fitting duty and responsibility of the church. Uzziah did it anyway, and God killed him, therefore we must say, “Government! Hands off God’s church! Stop the marginalization of believers!”
FREEDOM IS the ability to
render to Caesar what belongs to Caesar, and
unto God, without the government (city,
state or national) using back door fees to
rob God’s offering plate. Where would
FREEDOM IS having a government that is restrained by the U.S. Constitution: American law and NO international, foreign, or Koranic-Shariah law in our courts.
FREEDOM IS having our
educational system returned to our state and
local leaders from the czars in
FREEDOM IS not having the government mandate faith/religious, Christian people to have to choose between conscience, constitution or confiscation by government. Our churches, church schools and universities should not be forced to provide abortion or contraception against our Biblical, theological or spiritual convictions.
FREEDOM IS not being forced to provide murder by abortion at taxpayers’ expense.
FREEDOM IS having Presidential candidates provide a legitimate birth certificate and proof of citizenship before running for office.
FREEDOM IS knowing that we have Constitutional Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.
FREEDOM IS knowing that our children in school are being taught TRUE American history without the distortions, deletions, and the promotions of Islam in our textbooks.
FREEDOM IS knowing that our fee simple title dees to our properties are secure without fear of the EPA Gestapo seizing it to protect a snail or rodent.
FREEDOM IS in the final analysis knowing God, through His Son, Jesus Christ, and NOT being fearful to call the name of Jesus from the highest mountain.
FREEDOM IS not apologizing for breaking things and killing people in a just war.
The book of Daniel, Chapter Three tells us of three young men who refused to bow to a law. They were thrown in the fiery furnace, but because of their faith in God, they did NOT burn! Daniel was thrown into the den of lions for refusing to obey a godless law. The lions became his pillow- God delivered him!
Ladies and Gentlemen, may I read you some quotes from our founding fathers-
“Without freedom of thought there can be no such thing as liberty without freedom of speech.” –Benjamin Franklin
“Those who would give up essential liberties to purchase temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” – Benjamin Franklin
“If it be asked, What is the most sacred duty and the greatest source of our security in a republic? The answer would be an inviolable respect for the Constitution and laws- the first growing out of the last- a sacred respect for the Constitutional law is the vital principle, th sustaining energy of a free government.”
- Alexander Hamilton
“When the people fear their government there is tyranny; when government fears the people, there is liberty. – Thomas Jefferson
“The price of freedom is eternal vigilance” – Thomas Jefferson
“In matters of style, swim with the current. In matters of principle, stand firm like a rock. – Thomas Jefferson
Ladies and Gentlemen-
Let’s send a message to
WE WILL not surrender our Constitution on the account of convenience.
WE WILL not sacrifice our convictions on the altar of coercion.
WE WILL not submit our
church rights to the rule of unelected czars
in
WE WILL not be silent and allow socialism to subvert our Constitution.
WE WILL be vigilant, visible, vocal and vote in every election.
WE WILL have “Revolution” at the Ballot Box.
The Bible is very clear in Acts 5:29 that “we ought to obey God rather than man.”
Christian Missions Play Key Role Amid Rumors
of 'New Darfur '
Genocide
From The Christian Post
By Luiza Oleszczuk, Christian Post Reporter
March 13, 2012
As reports coming from Sudan paint an
increasingly gruesome picture of the Khartoum
government allegedly planning to wipe out the
country's ethnic populations and non-Muslims
in the southern region of the Nuba Mountains,
local Christian missions are playing an
important role, as even the United Nations has
no access to the country's embattled southern
regions.
Experts have been warning that
The south of overwhelmingly Muslim Sudan used
to be traditionally Christian and ethnically
tribal African, as opposed to the mostly Arab
north. Most of the south seceded in 2011 and
formed
While the Islamist government forces were
ravaging the south, including burning churches
and killing pastors, foreign missionaries
started entering the region. One of them was
Samaritan's Purse, one of the most prominent
missionary ministries in the world,
administered by the Rev. Franklin Graham, his
daughter, Cissie Graham Lynch told The
Christian Post recently.
This mission, related to Billy Graham's
Evangelistic Association (BGEA), opened a
Bible school in the
"They built Bible college there because
during the war the northern part of
The Bible school was bombed on Feb. 1 this
year by the Sudanese air force, the
ministry claims. The mission also has a camp
in
Many people of the
"It's horrific what these Christians in
southern
"We need to be praying for these people
because this is a serious issue that cannot be
ignored," she added.
Samaritan's Purse offices are in a constant
state of prayer for the missionaries who risk
their lives on the ground in
"That is the major part of our ministry –
praying for our staff members. Praying for the
situation and praying for the people of
Another U.S.-based Christian mission with a
prominent presence in
The presence of foreign missionaries seems
particularly important given that the
"I recently returned from several days in
South Sudan – specifically Yida refugee
camp, where I encountered bone-chilling
stories of the nightmare unfolding in the
Southern Kordofan and Blue Nile states just
north of the border in Sudan," Rep. Frank R.
Wolf (R –Va.) who visited a refugee camp in
southern Sudan (featuring 25,000 people at the
time) wrote in a blog last week.
"In speaking with the refugees in the camp, I
heard echoes of
Wolf recounted stories the local Nuba people
told him, including those of rape and murder,
as well as soldiers saying: "We don't want
anyone who says they are a Christian in this
village."
A former top U.N. humanitarian official in
Sudan, Mukesh Kapila, warned last week that
Khartoum's military is carrying out crimes
against humanity in the region that remind him
of Darfur. Kapila reportedly recalled seeing
military planes striking villagers, the
destruction of food stocks and "literally a
scorched-earth policy," upon his recent visit.
"
The former U.N. official also said the
Recently U.N. has called upon the governments
of
But the
In 2008, the prosecution of the
International Criminal Court (ICC) filed 10
charges of war crimes against
http://www.christianpost.com/news/christian-missions-play-key-role-amid-rumors-of-new-darfur-genocide-71350/
Judge:
Insulting Islam Grounds for Beating
Updated 2/29/2012
A legal expert, a former Navy chaplain,
and a pro-family leader agree that a
Judge Mark Martin is an
Judge Martin threw out video evidence of the
assault, dismissed the testimony of an
eyewitness officer, and then lectured the
atheist victim about the sensitivities of the
Muslim culture. He stated in court that
Elbayomy was obligated to attack the victim
because of his culture and religion.
"They are so immersed in it," Martin says in a
recording made available to the media. "And
what you've done is you've completely trashed
their essence, their being. They find it very,
very, very offensive. I'm a Muslim. I
find it offensive." [Editor's note: Judge
Martin has told Associated Press that he has
received hundreds of calls, many under the
mistaken impression he is a Muslim. He says
he is, in fact, a Lutheran.]
Gordon Klingenschmitt is a former Navy
chaplain who was forced out of the
service for publicly praying in Jesus' name
while in uniform. He now runs "The Pray In
Jesus Name Project" and says the judge is
basically conveying the message that if you
mock Muhammad, you deserve to get beaten.
"He freed the Muslim attacker and said
basically it's okay to choke atheists if they
insult Islam," he comments.
Klingenschmitt also finds it outrageous that
Judge Martin told Perce that mocking Muhammad
in Muslim countries is punishable by death.
"This is a different country. We live in
So he believes Martin should be removed
from the bench, and Mat Staver of Liberty
Counsel agrees. The latter tells
OneNewsNow Judge Martin's decision an
indication of what may be coming if sharia is
used in the
"This particular judge actually had the
audacity to rule in favor of the attacker,
saying that the attacker was compelled to
attack this individual because it was an
insult to Islam and the Prophet Muhammad,"
Staver reports.
And Diane Gramley, head of the American
Family Association (AFA) of
"That definitely changes everything, because
if he's a Muslim convert, then that definitely
has tainted his view of the law, and he is
looking at sharia law and making his
decision," she offers. "You cannot look at a
situation where a Muslim has physically
harassed, physically attacked an atheist --
granted the guy's an atheist who's in a
parade; he's dressed as a Muslim -- but that's
not against the law."
Staver finds the ruling to be almost
unbelievable.
"This situation is one involving a judge that
needs to be removed from the bench," the
attorney suggests. "He is clearly instituting
sharia from the bench, using sharia law as a
basis to ultimately acquit a person who
actually committed an assault and a battery
against an individual."
Professor Turley also notes that another
atheist, dressed as a zombie Pope, was
marching beside the zombie Muhammad, but no
outraged Catholics attacked him.
"If a Christian had been doing the harassing,
I don't believe the judge would have dismissed
those charges," Gramley contends. "I think in
this case, Judge Martin is showing preference
to the Muslim."
Staver concludes that this is the type of case
that has prompted several states, including
This article can be found in its entirety at
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Legal/Default.aspx?id=1544716
Stop Feeding the Islamic Crocodile
February
27, 2012 by
“To sit back hoping that someday, some way, someone will make things right is to go on feeding the crocodile, hoping he will eat you last — but eat you he will.” — Ronald Reagan
Ronald Reagan was the consummate collector of great quotations. The one about the crocodile was borrowed and adapted from Winston Churchill. “Winston Churchill took a dim view of neutrals. For him there were only two options in the face of Hitler: fight or surrender. Each neutral, Churchill said on 20 January 1940, ‘hopes that if he feeds the crocodile enough, the crocodile will eat him last. All of them hope that the storm will pass before their turn comes to be devoured. But I fear — I fear greatly — the storm will not pass.’”
What was true of Hitler and Nazism is equally true of radical Islam. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu brought the crocodile story up to date when he spoke before the 66th session of the General Assembly at the United Nations on September 23, 2011, following Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas’ speech:
And these critics continue to press
Appeasers to the Islamic worldview keep telling us that only a small percentage of Muslims are radicals. Some say it’s about ten percent. I’m not great at math, but I do know that ten percent of one billion is 100 million. That’s a lot of radical Muslims who want to see every aspect of Western culture destroyed.
What has President Obama’s apology for
burning already Muslim-desecrated Qurans done
for
He then added: “Their apology can be accepted only by hanging their commanders; hanging their commanders means an apology.”
The Islam world always saw President Obama as
a dupe, a useful idiot, who would believe that
appeasement toward a sworn enemy of the
President Obama’s June 4, 2009 speech in
All of this reminds me of the long out-of-print book by John Ames Mitchell (1848–1918) — The Last American (1889) — that I have in my library. There is a sobering message on the dedication page and the book’s closing words:
“To those thoughtful Persians who can read a
warning in the sudden rise and swift
extinction of a foolish people [the Americans]
this volume is dedicated. . . . Again upon the
sea. This time for
There are several ink etchings in The
Last American. One shows “The Ruins of
the
This article can be read in its entirety at
http://godfatherpolitics.com/3927/stop-feeding-the-islamic-crocodile/
LIFE WITH BIG BROTHER
Homeschoolers can't be taught 'gay' sex sinful
You won't believe latest intrusion by government
Published: February 27, 2012
Homeschooling families will soon be forbidden
from teaching that homosexual sex is sinful as
part of their schooling program, according to
the government of
Under the province’s Education Act, homeschoolers and religious schools will be banned from “disrespecting” people’s differences, Alberta Education Minister Thomas Lukaszuk’s office told LifeSiteNews just last week.
“Whatever the nature of schooling – homeschool, private school, Catholic school – we do not tolerate disrespect for differences,” said Donna McColl, Lukaszuk’s assistant director of communications. “You can affirm the family’s ideology in your family life, you just can’t do it as part of your educational study and instruction.”
Paul Faris, president of the Home School Legal Defence Association of Canada, told the news website the Ministry of Education is “clearly signaling that they are in fact planning to violate the private conversations families have in their own homes. A government that seeks that sort of control over our personal lives should be feared and opposed.”
According to the report, a government spokesman said, “You can affirm the family’s ideology in your family life. You just can’t do it as part of your educational study and instruction.”
HSLDA and other homeschool organizations have expressed concerns that the new Alberta Education Act would to force “diversity” education on all schools – including private and home schools.
The legislation, known as Bill 2 in the
Legislative Assembly of Alberta, requires that
all schools “reflect the diverse nature and
heritage of society in
LifeSiteNews reports that the Human Rights Act has been used to target Christians and conservatives across the country, especially those who hold traditional beliefs about homosexuality.
McColl added that Christian homeschooling families can teach biblical lessons on homosexuality in their homes, “as long as it’s not part of their academic program of studies and instructional materials.”
“What they want to do about their ideology elsewhere, that’s their family business,” she said. “But a fundamental nature of our society is to respect diversity.”
According to the report, when McColl was asked by LifeSiteNews to explain the distinction between homeschoolers’ education and their family life, she replied that the question involved “real nuances” and said she would need to get back to reporter with specifics.
In a second interview, McColl explained that the government “won’t speculate” about specific examples and said she hadn’t been given a “straight answer” on what precisely constitutes “disrespect” – adding that families “can’t be hatemongering, if you will.”
The news site reports several Canadian
provinces – including
Patty Marler, government liaison for the Alberta Home Education Association, told the website she was astonished at the Ministry’s candor. She wondered how the government would stipulate the difference between homeschoolers’ school and family time.
“We educate our children all the time, and that’s just the way we live. It’s a lifestyle,” she said. “Making that distinction between the times when we’re homeschooling and when we’re just living is really hard to do.”
She added, “Throw in the fact that I do use the Bible as part of my curriculum, and now I’m very blatantly going to be teaching stuff that will be against [the Alberta Human Rights Act].”
In 2009, the Alberta Human Rights Act was amended to classify marriage as an institution between two “persons,” rather than a man and a woman.
“When I read Genesis and it talks about marriage being one man in union with one woman, I am very, very clearly opposing the human rights act that says it’s one person marrying another person,” Marler said.
Faris noted that the most troubling issue is how government is attempting to control homeschoolers and how they teach their own children in their own homes.
He added that many homeschoolers have been receiving misleading information when they call the Minister’s office, which has been saying, “‘Look, there are no changes here. We’re not going to do anything differently,’ and other things like that.”
“The long arm of the government wants to reach into family’s homes and control what they teach to their own children in their own homes about religion, sexuality and morality,” Faris said. “These are not the words of a government that is friendly to homeschooling or to parental freedom.”
LifeSiteNews noted that the Progressive Conservative government has 67 of the 83 seats in the Alberta Legislature, so the bill is almost certain to pass. However, with an election coming up, the new right-wing Wildrose Alliance Party may have a strong showing.
Concerned
individuals
may email Alberta Education Minister
Thomas Lukaszuk or contact
his
office by phone, fax or mail.
This article can be read in its entirety
at
http://www.wnd.com/2012/02/homeschoolers-cant-be-taught-gay-sex-sinful/print
Canada law would forbid homeschoolers to teach the Bible
For those who would like a snapshot of where liberalism and Statism lead, they need only look to our northern neighbor Canada. LifeSiteNews.com reports on Alberta’s new proposed law forbidding even homeschoolers from teaching what the Bible plainly says:
Under Alberta’s new Education Act, homeschoolers and faith-based schools will not be permitted to teach that homosexual acts are sinful as part of their academic program, says the spokesperson for Education Minister Thomas Lukaszuk.
“Whatever the nature of schooling – homeschool, private school, Catholic school – we do not tolerate disrespect for differences,” Donna McColl, Lukaszuk’s assistant director of communications, told LifeSiteNews on Wednesday evening.
“You can affirm the family’s ideology in your family life, you just can’t do it as part of your educational study and instruction,” she added.
Reacting to the remarks, Paul Faris of the Home School Legal Defence Association said the Ministry of Education is “clearly signaling that they are in fact planning to violate the private conversations families have in their own homes.”
“A government that seeks that sort of control over our personal lives should be feared and opposed,” he added.
I mildly disagree: such a government is indeed a tyranny, but it should not be “feared.” It should be opposed with legitimate organization, without fear, and resisted. We must stand for freedom and live without fear.
By the way, we have such liberals already stateside as well. I wrote about this very agenda—leftists wanting to pass legislation to control the curricula of homeschoolers—already a few years ago. Here’s a section from the longer article:
In fact, some recent leftists have come out openly in favor of controlling even homeschooling. I spoke at American Vision’s Worldview Superconference in 2007 on the topic “There’s an Atheist After Your Child!” I quoted from recent outspoken atheist Daniel C. Dennett:
We should have a national curriculum on world religions that is compulsory for all school children, from grade school through high school, for the public schools, for the private schools, for the home-schooling.…
“National curriculum”? “Compulsory”? Well, of course, we already have that in regard to some things: math, science, reading, etc. But Dennett wants in your house, and wants to control the content of the religious education of your children as well. He continues, “because if we taught the young people of a country this, then you could teach them whatever else you wanted and I wouldn’t worry about religions.”
The atheist wants to insulate your children against whatever you may add in catechizing them. Of course, this assumes that you catechize your children. These atheists hate the idea of religious catechism. Atheist Richard Dawkins, in a tirade against baptism, refers to the participation of “a superstitious and catechistically brainwashed babysitter.”[2] In these guys’ minds, religious catechism is “brainwashing,” but of course, it’s OK for them to call for a compulsory national curriculum of religion as they see it.
Dennett goes on: “I think any religion that can flourish under those conditions would be a benign, a valuable, a wonderful religion.”
I guess, for him maybe. Of course, he just assumes that he by default knows truly what is valuable. Truth is, he’s got no real standard by which to judge that which is benign, or valuable, or wonderful. “Valuable”? Valuable for whom? Who decides what is valuable and what is not valuable in education or in general? If you believe like Dennett that there is no transcendent Creator God, then aren’t words like “valuable” and “wonderful” left up to each individual to determine? In that case, “valuable” and “wonderful” will be determined politically and culturally by either a dictator (like Franco or Stalin), or a group of dictators (think Roe-v-Wade, 5–4 decision). You might just as well hear Franco say, “Any leftist who can flourish under my conditions would be ‘a benign, a valuable, a wonderful leftist.’”
So, I’m sorry, but I’m not going to let the atheists or leftists define for me what kind of religious instruction is benign, or valuable, or even acceptable. But Dennett wants this, and he continues to say,
I think … if you look at the “toxic” religions, they are all of the religions that survive by the enforced ignorance of their young; and all we have to do, I think, is, we can tell people, “You can home-school your kids, you can give them 30 hours a week of religious instruction, but you’ve also got to teach them what the people that are not of your faith believe, and you have to teach them about the history of all faiths in question, including your own.”[3]
Now, like I said, I have no problem teaching my child about other religions, and I (we) certainly have no problem teaching them the History of our faith (we can do it better than they can). But I sure am not going to sit by while this atheist assumes he has the right to tell me whether I can or cannot home-school, or how to do it, or what I “have to” include.
So who does he think he is? Where does he think he gets the right to assume that kind of authority? (Well, it’s because he’s an atheist and an intellectual, and he thinks there’s no One higher than him, and he’s smarter than most people.) But how does this work out? Dennett says,
Children below the age of consent are a special case . . . parents are stewards of their children. They don’t own them—you can’t own your children—You have a responsibility to the world, to the state, to them, to take care of them right. You may, if you like, teach them whatever creed you think is most important, but I say you have a responsibility to let them be informed about all the other creeds in the world, too.[4]
Children are a special case? Why are they being singled out? Because the atheists have realized the power of capturing the next generation. They’ve chosen the path of least resistance, which is the indoctrination of children. But they have to get around the influence of home-schools and private schools.
Other atheists such as Richard Dawkins argue “in favor of censorship” of family education for this so-called “special case of children” (that’s a direct quote from his book: notice the use of the same rhetoric by both guys). Dawkins quotes fellow atheist Nicholas Humphrey:
[M]oral and religious education, and especially the education a child receives at home, where parents are allowed – even expected – to determine for their children what counts as truth and falsehood, right and wrong. Children, I’ll argue, have a human right not to have their minds crippled by exposure to other people’s bad ideas – no matter who these other people are. Parents, correspondingly, have no God-given license to enculturate their children in whatever ways they personally choose: no right to limit the horizons of their children’s knowledge, to bring them up in an atmosphere of dogma and superstition, or to insists they follow the straight and narrow paths of their own faith.
In short, children have a right not to have their minds addled by nonsense, and we as a society have a duty to protect them from it. So we should no more allow parents to teach their children to believe, for example, in the literal truth of the Bible or that the planets rule their lives, than we should allow parents to knock their children’s teeth out or lock them in a dungeon.[5]
So, this group of
atheists is unanimous in pushing that children
are a special case, require special attention
by the state, they should not be left to
parents for their education without state
supervision, even to the extent of State
control of religious education in the
home. The child has a “right” to be
protected from these “toxic” beliefs such as
belief in the literal truth of the Bible,
which is equivalent, for the atheist, to
physical abuse and masochism. Again, unduly
associating conservativism with violence, all
the while really just wanting more power over
other people’s children than any genuine
conservative ever has.
This article was
originally found at
http://americanvisionnews.com/2056/canada-forbids-homeschoolers-to-teach-the-bible
Freedom — and four fallacies
Religious
liberty is a frail thing, easily abused or
neglected
February 15, 2012
Think what you wish of President Barack Obama's attempt Friday to end a fierce skirmish over insurance coverage of drugs that prevent conceptions and induce abortions.
The president said he would guarantee that coverage, without cost to female recipients. Under his modified mandate, he said, "religious organizations won't have to pay for these services, and no religious institution will have to provide these services directly." It's the "directly" — and the persistent distinction between "religious organizations" and "religious institutions" — that's sure to keep this controversy aflame.
In Obama's scenario, that is, religiously affiliated institutions such as schools, hospitals or charities would supply insurance for their workers' other health services; employees who also want contraceptives would get them from the insurers. What's unclear is who actually pays for the drugs — the insurers or the employers? If insurers simply divert money from health premiums paid by the religious institutions to cover contraceptive costs, then employers who have religious objections to buying these drugs will end up footing the bill. We'll all learn, as more details come forward, whether this new directive is a full recognition of religious rights, or a shell game.
Our previously stated opinion, offered Feb. 3, hasn't changed: The Obama administration, by not providing a broad conscience exemption for this insurance mandate, is denying Roman Catholic and other religions their right — the first right enumerated in the First Amendment — to freely live by their faith.
This is, though, a useful debate: Mandated contraception coverage is but the latest twist in an endless American discussion about religious freedom. In the course of this debate, though, the White House and some proponents of compulsory coverage have relied on four fallacies that ought to give all of us pause — not only in this instance, but in the next, and in all that come after that:
Even Catholics say ... : While leaders of many faiths have objected to any contraceptive coverage mandate, no one has spoken more vociferously than the U.S. Conference of Catholics Bishops. Last week, though, The New York Times reported that a majority of Catholics favor the contraceptive mandate, according to "recent polls which Obama officials were pointing to on Tuesday ... " Problem already. What a majority of self-described Catholics (or Presbyterians or Sunni Muslims) thinks is of great importance to discussions, maybe disagreements, within each faith. But disagreement within the faith doesn't abrogate the constitutional right to practice that faith free of government interference.
Public opinion polls find ... : Planned
Parenthood and other supporters of a mandate
pointed last week to broader polling results
showing that a majority of all Americans, not
just Catholics, agree with mandated coverage.
That's good to know. But to the extent this
argument suggests that public opinion should
dictate government policy in matters of
conscience, no other questions asked, then
this is perilous turf. Example: Should
opponents of capital punishment surrender
their objections because, in the most recent
polling reported on its website,
We offered a grace period: White
House spokesman Jay Carney, among others, has
noted that the original mandate included a
one-year enforcement delay. The stated intent
was to give religiously affiliated employers
time to adjust. Writing in The Wall Street
Journal, Archbishop Timothy Dolan of
If you keep to yourselves, you're
exempt: Obama's continuation
Friday to distinguish between "religious
organizations" and "religious institutions"
suggests that he still sees the latter as
different, because they serve many people of
other faiths, or of no faith. By that
reckoning, the University of Notre Dame isn't
exempted from a mandate that might exempt,
say, the offices of
We don't yet know every detail of the Obama administration's evolving policies on contraception. We do, though, take seriously the concerns — from the Constitution forward — that religious freedom is a frail thing, easily abused or neglected. Given that American heritage, the White House may have a difficult time establishing in federal courts that the policy separation of religious organizations and religious institutions is anything more than a distinction without a difference.
The right thing for President Obama to do is to exempt from his rules any entity that would be forced to contravene its religious teachings and beliefs. The president needs to consult what should be, in this and future similar disputes, our nation's guiding principle:
Make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.
Sound familiar? Many people gave their lives to protect those words — especially the unequivocal "no."
Copyright © 2012,
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/editorials/ct-edit-freedom-20120215,0,6126011.story
King Barack’s power grab
Posted: January 05, 2012
President Obama yesterday played a violent game of kickball with the US Constitution, making a number of high-level “recess” appointments — even though the Senate isn’t actually in recess.
He named former Ohio Attorney General Richard Cordray to head the Consumer Financial Protection Board, a nomination Republicans have been fighting.
And then he named three new members of the pro-union activist National Labor Relations Board.
Presidents have
the right to make temporary appointments when
Congress is away from
But Obama is the first president to declare that he, and he alone, can decide whether the Senate — which must confirm his appointments — is actually meeting.
In order to block recess appointments, the Senate intentionally has been holding pro forma sessions every few days, each of which lasts only a few seconds.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid — with then-Sen. Obama’s support — did the same thing in 2007 to block any recess appointments by President George W. Bush.
But now Obama, with Reid’s concurrence, contends that such sessions are actually “gimmicks” — and that the Senate actually is in recess.
So much for the
separation of powers and the carefully
calibrated system of checks and balances that
are hallmarks of the
Obama, of course, plans to run for re-election against Congress, painting it as Wall Street’s puppet.
But what he did yesterday was no shot across the bow; it was, rather, a direct hit — with the Constitution taking the brunt of the blow.
Moreover, as the Cato Institute’s Mark Calabria notes, the Dodd-Frank bill, which calls for the creation of the CFPB, explicitly requires that its director be “confirmed by the Senate.”
That means that Obama’s nonrecess “recess” appointment may well violate the law, in addition to coming as part of a blatantly unconstitutional overreach.
Then again, this is not the first time Team Obama has sidestepped Congress; just consider some of its aggressive regulatory measures done with no legislative authorization whatsoever.
Democrats like to criticize anything that smacks of an “imperial” presidency — but now it seems they’ve got one.
Read article in the New York post at: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/editorials/king_barack_power_grab_FQVJqAlOM3eplEuV7fNxDN#ixzz1ibwIqIMd
Christian
Persecution Increased Most In Sudan , Nigeria
Written
by: Compass Direct News
January 4, 2012
By Jeff M. Sellers
“Nigeria continues to be the country where the worst atrocities in terms of loss of life occur, with over 300 Christians losing their lives this year, though the true number is thought to be far higher,” according to the Open Doors report, noting that the Islamic extremist Boko Haram (literally, “Western learning is forbidden”) became increasingly violent across the reporting period through most of 2011.
As it has the previous nine years,
Both
In terms of ranking,
“As the 2012 World Watch List reflects, the persecution of Christians in these Muslim countries continues to increase,” said Carl Moeller, president/CEO of Open Doors USA. “While many thought the Arab Spring would bring increased freedom, including religious freedom for minorities, that certainly has not been the case so far.”
In the case of
“In response to the loss of the south, he has vowed to make his country even more Islamic, promising constitutional changes,” the report states. “On the ground, however, Christian communities have been attacked in complex battles over resources, and estimates of thousands killed by the Sudanese military are known of, yet impossible to verify.”
Territorial violence flared on border areas
with South Sudan in the provinces of Abyei,
South Kordofan and
In Egypt, a bomb attack on a Coptic church in Alexandria killed at least 21 Christians on New Year’s Day, 2011, and the Feb. 11 ouster of President Hosni Mubarak was followed by a series of Islamic extremist attacks on Christians that culminated in the Maspero massacre in Cairo on Oct. 9, “when the military turned on its own citizens,” killing 27 Coptic Christian demonstrators, the report notes.
“Some were shot by soldiers or ran over by tanks, while others were killed by Muslim extremists,” the report states. “At the closing of 2011, Islamist parties flourished in the November elections, prompting some to speak of an Arab Winter instead of an Arab Spring for Christians.”
A new addition to the list is
After
http://www.eurasiareview.com/04012012-christian-persecution-increased-most-in-sudan-nigeria-report-says/
December 14, 2011
by Clare M Lopez
www.RadicalIslam.org
SAUDI ARABIA - MODERATE
VOICE OR DRACONIAN MONARCHY?
Saudi Arabia’s hardline ultra-conservative religious council, the Majlis al-Ifta’ al-A’ala working in conjunction with Kamal Subhi, a former professor at the King Fahd University, have just released a ‘scientific study’ that has come to some rather outlandish conclusions.
In response to the growing
pressure from women’s groups in
Just a few weeks earlier, the Kingdom’s Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice has proposed a law to stop women from revealing their "tempting" eyes to the public. Should this law be passed, it would in effect, force Saudi women to more or less cover their entire bodies from head to toe – including their eyes.
The
This is the absurdity of
A new book “Saudi Arabia and the Global Islamic Terrorist Network: America and the West’s Fatal Embrace,” presents a disturbing look at the realities of the Saudi Kingdom, whose rigid Wahhabist Islamic code locks it into a bigoted, jihadist, misogynist world view grounded in anti-Western animus and Jew-hatred. Without the Saudis’ key role in the global oil-based economy and calculated largesse to policymakers, think tanks, and universities to help smooth the way, it surely would be an uphill slog otherwise for their armies of well-heeled lobbyists. As it is, for decades the Saudis have counted on petro-dollars and Western cupidity to ensure official submissiveness in the face of blatant financial support to Muslim terrorist groups, mega-mosques and Islamic Centers, and the shariah-promoting literature and textbooks that stoke jihad in all of them.
Before the well-organized
onslaught of the so-called “Arab Spring” in
2011, the
Only the lack of an organized opposition characterized by the total absence of political parties or trade unions and real fear among the Saudi urban middle class that revolt against the House of Saud could set loose chaos that would split apart the country’s regional, religious, and sectarian fault lines have kept the place together this long. But it is Western, especially American, willingness to turn a blind eye to Saudi terror funding, support for the Da’wa stealth jihad campaign led by the Muslim Brotherhood, and backing for the spread of Shariah Compliant Finance that enables the charade of Saudi “partnership” to stand.
A few crumbs like King Abdullah’s September 2011 decree that Saudi women will be allowed to serve in parliament in 2012 and vote and stand as candidates in 2015 municipal elections are hardly enough to satisfy the pent-up energy of the 50% of the Saudi population whose every move in life remains chained to primitive, misogynistic and often violent notions of gender roles. Even as Saudi society deprives itself of intellectual and professional contributions from half its population, its aging, hypocritical rulers indulge in polygamous and hedonistic lifestyles According to a WikiLeaks cable from 2008, the U.S. Embassy in Riyadh reported that King Abdullah "remains a heavy smoker, regularly receives hormone injections and 'uses Viagra excessively.'"
Change is coming to the Saudi desert kingdom whether the Saudis are ready or not. All things considered, trends already in motion do not look good over the long-term for the House of Saud, no matter how many hundreds of billions the King hands out. Foreign policy outreach to establish a network of economic and political ties with potential global partners such as China, Japan, and Russia is not a bad idea either, just inadequate to deal with what is essentially an internal problem: how to unleash the potential of all Saudis to compete in the modern world and loose the shackles that have hobbled them since the dawn of Islam.
Saudi youth, both male and female, have some choices to make, choices their diminishingly lucid elders probably cannot make, about what kind of society they want to live in. U.S. and Western leaderships have some shackles of their own to cast off, beginning with energy dependence and willful blindness about the Saudi commitment to shariah Islam, jihad, and the subjugation of Dar al-Harb (the non-Muslim world) to Dar al-Islam (the Muslim world) Absent is the realization that equality, individual liberty, minority protection, pluralism, rule of man-made law, and tolerance are the building blocks of civil society that undergird a true democracy, and that these things are not necessarily genetically coded in human beings but must be defended and nourished, neither the House of Saud nor American exceptionalism can expect to weather intact the storms ahead.
Clare M. Lopez, a
senior fellow at the Clarion Fund, is a
strategic policy and intelligence expert
with a focus on Middle East, national
defense, and counterterrorism issues.
US Government
to apply peer pressure to your
Islamophobia
December 14, 2011
by J.E. Dyer
from Hotair.com/greenroom/archives
Hillary Clinton’s promise on this matter has
been out there for months, but a virtually
unadvertised conference in
Back in July, at a conference of the
Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) in
It’s worth taking a moment to reflect on
that.
The
And it is worth taking another moment to remember why we determined to allow such free speech. We didn’t do it because it is “good,” in any positive sense, for people to say vile things about each other’s beliefs. It may be perfectly good, or at least not repulsive, for people to say reasonably critical things about religious beliefs. But whether it’s ridiculous allegations about Jews, absurd accusations against Catholics, or today’s fresh-milled 20-something atheists calling Christians “Christofascists,” the point of free speech was never to encourage idiocies of this kind on the theory that we need more of them.
The point of free speech is to keep the government out of the business of deciding whether they’re “bad” or “good.” Government is incompetent to decide such questions, and they should therefore not be within its scope of authority. Precisely because government has civic authority, its involvement in classifying critical speech should be somewhere between severely limited and non-existent. The step from government having an opinion to government repressing intellectual freedom is perilously short. Government can’t wave a magic wand to kindly and gently fix people’s thoughts; it has only the hammer of force and punishment, and that means making every unapproved thought into a “nail.” The American Founders understood this about government, and insisted therefore on keeping its powers limited, constitutionally explicit, and federally divided.
So when Hillary Clinton promises the following, she is on wholly un-American, anti-liberal ground (emphasis added):
In the
OK, so the
What exactly is it that we abhor? Elizabeth Kendal has an excellent summary at her Religious Liberty Monitoring website of the history behind the UN push to “combat religious intolerance,” and it is worth talking the time to understand how a number of terms – Islamophobia, “defamation” of religion, and “incitement” against religion – have been conflated over the last decade. Getting forms of intellectual discretion wrapped up in “what we abhor” is an ongoing project in the misnamed effort to “combat religious intolerance.”
But another entry point is the definition of “Islamophobia” cited by the typical Islamophobia watchdog. The definition was produced by a British think tank, The Runnymede Trust, in the 1990s, and was consciously constructed as an analogue to definitions of Judeophobia or anti-Semitism. These are its basic elements:
1) Islam is seen as a monolithic bloc,
static and unresponsive to change.
2) Islam is seen as separate and
“other.” It does not have values in common
with other cultures, is not affected by them
and does not influence them.
3) Islam is seen as inferior to the
West. It is seen as barbaric, irrational,
primitive and sexist.
4) Islam is seen as violent, aggressive,
threatening, supportive of terrorism and
engaged in a “clash of civilizations.”
5) Islam is seen as a political ideology
and is used for political or military
advantage.
6) Criticisms made of the West by Islam
are rejected out of hand.
7) Hostility towards Islam is used to
justify discriminatory practices towards
Muslims and exclusion of Muslims from
mainstream society.
8)Anti-Muslim hostility is seen as natural or
normal.
Most of these elements are susceptible of extremely ambiguous interpretation. Credentialed academics like Samuel Huntington and Victor Davis Hanson would be indicted by some of them. And in almost any case you can think of, deciding that these criteria correctly classify the actions of non-Muslims is a matter not of objective judgment but of partisan opinion.
Regarding #6, for example, both non-Muslims and Muslims are likely to reject some criticisms from each other out of hand – because our beliefs about some things are fundamentally different. There are Muslim leaders, after all, who constantly reject Western criticisms of sharia out of hand. And there are Muslim leaders who don’t. There is no valid reason why any Westerner should be charged with “Islamophobia” for ignoring or rejecting criticisms of Western practices by Muslims.
Consider the practice of veiling women. When an imam criticizes Western society for failing to veil women, I have no heartburn whatsoever in rejecting that criticism as invalid and inapplicable to my life and my society. How absurd to suggest that I am being “Islamophobic” by doing this.
I recognize, of course, that many Muslim women don’t wear a veil, and many clerics are fine with that. Muslims don’t do the same things in every part of the world. And I prefer civic approaches in the West that seek to live with the practice of veiling where it is important to some citizens. I disagree with the veil being imposed on women, but 99% of the time, the issue isn’t one that affects me directly or requires me to register an official political opinion.
But the fundamental issue here is the status of women. Declaring it to be a “phobia” when people adhere to their original opinions about that is something no government should be in the business of doing.
At what point would a government decide that it was not Islamophobia when a person “rejected out of hand” criticisms of the West made by “Islam”? Where would the line be drawn? Can I reject, for example, Islam’s criticism that the West doesn’t accept Mohammed as a prophet of God? Or does this criterion indicate that I am allowed to reject it, but only after giving some positive display of having considered it without “prejudice”? And if so, how will that work, exactly? Will I carry a card with me, certifying that I was observed by a competent authority to give due consideration to the criticisms of my society made by Islamic leaders?
This is not a laughing matter; the 20th century was a vast, vicious playground for exactly such measures of control over the intellectual lives of peoples and societies. The criticism we should be leveling here is not against “Islam” or “Muslims,” it is against our own government, and the factions of our own, Western/American political spectrum that conceive of government as a method of administering anti-phobia measures.
The idea of government, for too many in
Judaism and Christianity are, along with Western philosophy, the progenitors of that idea of liberty. The positive, absolute good of liberty is what we must proclaim and defend. And in our nation, on our terms, Islam has the opportunity to thrive as Judaism and Christianity have, by being consistent with it. It cannot be the other way around.
J.E. Dyer’s
articles have appeared at The Green Room,
Commentary’s
“contentions,” Patheos,
The Weekly Standard online, and her own
blog, The Optimistic Conservative.
Read this article in its entirety at
Nov 1, 2011
ABC
News
GOP Ad Turns Obama’s
Words Against Him
If you want an indication of how Republicans –
whoever their presidential nominee is – will run
against President Obama, check out this slick
new video from the Republican National
Committee.The video is made up largely of Obama’s own
words; from his ’08 campaign and his Yahoo/ABC
News interview with George Stephanopoulos when
he said Americans “aren’t better off than they
were four years ago.” Also note the use of
images from the Occupy Wall Street protests to
make it look as though the primary target of
the movement is President Obama.
Watch the video here.
Click here to see the original article on abcnewsBurma Crackdown
On Local Bible Studies, Worship, report
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
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
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
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."
He claimed that
"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,"
He added that his group had urged Burmese
authorities to withdraw this requirement, in
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
Click here to read the original article in
its entirety.
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
Burma
Crackdown On Local Bible Studies,
Worship, report
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
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
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
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."
He claimed that
"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,"
He added that his group had urged Burmese
authorities to withdraw this requirement, in
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
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
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.”
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
May
2018
As England Moves Submarines Armed With Cruise
Missiles Within Striking Range Of Syria Theresa May
Convenes ‘War Cabinet’
Geoffrey GriderApr. 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 CandlerApr. 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.
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
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.
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
by Dan Riehl
28 December 2017
Breitbart News
An alleged ISIS fighter with an American accent and
one leg, identified as Abu Salih al-Amriki, used
a web video to call on Muslims to “take
advantage of the gun laws” in America to carry out
terror attacks.
The man also denounced President Donald Trump,
according to reports.
The fighter appeared in a
propaganda video released on Wednesday saying Trump’s
war on Islam was making the US more vulnerable to
terror attacks and would help fuel support globally.
Using the name Abu Salih al-Amriki,
the fighter wore khaki fatigues and had a gun strapped
to him as he condemned President Trump for playing up
a clash of civilizations.
....
According to a report in the Washington Post, the SITE
intelligence group published the video:
...
Last week, the outgoing director of
the National Counterterrorism Center, Nicholas
Rasmussen, told reporters that U.S. gun laws are
undermining efforts to protect the country from
mass-casualty attacks.
“We find ourselves in a more
dangerous situation because our population of violent
extremists has no difficulty gaining access to weapons
that are quite lethal,” Rasmussen said. “I wish that
weren’t so.”
The Post also could be said to have reported the news
with something of an anti-Second Amendment bent as
evidenced by the quotes above.
Please
click here to read the article in its entirety.
France allows Muslim street prayers but bans Christmas movie because it was “too Christian”
By Voice of Europe26 December 2017
France is a secular Republic, because it separates religion and state and it mostly sees religion as a private matter; restricted to the home and places of worship.
But for years, France has allowed Muslim street prayers and to heavily criticise them was simply not done. Sometimes even roads were blocked and cars were being redirected to make room for Muslim street prayers. It looks like when Islam is involved, France’s secular principles have suddenly disappeared.
For Christianity in France it’s a totally different story. According to the European Post, a Christmas movie in the French city of Langon was banned, because it was “too Christian”, or “not secular enough”. The European Post writes:
A Christmas movie was judged by teachers as “not secular enough” and was therefore banned from schools in the French city of Langon in the department of Gironde on 13 December.
83 students of a French school started to watch the movie “The Star“, a computer animated adventure comedy based on the history of Jesus, a movie produced by Columbia Pictures.
But when the teachers realised the subject of the movie was the nativity of Jesus Christ, they immediately cancelled it because it was “not secular enough”. All students were obliged to go back to school without watching the end of the movie.
There are more examples. Please click here to read the article in its entirety.
Muslim
Brotherhood Calls for Uprising Against US
By Clarion Project
Monday, December 11, 2017
The Muslim Brotherhood is launching today a solidarity call with all Palestinian factions and Islamic movements to ignite an uprising throughout the Islamic world against the Zionist occupation and the American administration in support of the occupation and against the rights and freedoms of the peoples.
The last “uprising” some 15 years ago resulted in the deaths of hundreds of civilians – Christians, Jews and Muslims.
While the Brotherhood issued the statement in the wake of President Donald Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital a week ago, the organization has been fomenting anti-American, pro-sharia sentiment for some time.
Clarion Project is closely following Muslim Brotherhood activities on Capitol Hill, across the United States and beyond.
There are growing concerns about the strong ties between the Brotherhood, ISIS and al-Qaeda.
Please click here to read the article on the Clarion Project page.
British Intelligence Reportedly Foils Plot To Kill Prime Minister
Scott Neuman
December 6, 2017
NPR
Britain's domestic intelligence agency MI5 has foiled
a terrorist plot to assassinate Prime Minister Theresa
May, U.K. media report.
Two men have been charged with terrorism-related
offenses in connection with the plot, which reportedly
involved using improvised explosives to blow up the
gate at No. 10 Downing St., the prime minister's
residence, and to kill May in the ensuing chaos,
various media say.
The men, who Sky News said were arrested last week,
were scheduled to appear on Wednesday in Westminster
Magistrates' Court, according to The Telegraph, which
said the information was provided on Tuesday in a
briefing by Andrew Parker, the head of MI5.
However, the prime minister's spokesman declined to
discuss details of the plot.
Sky quoted unnamed sources as describing the planned
attack as "an extreme Islamist suicide plot."
Reuters reports that police have confirmed that the
two suspects are Naa'imur Zakariyah Rahman, 20, of
north London, and Mohammed Aqib Imran, 21, of
southeast Birmingham.
Please click here to read the article on NPR, or read an ironic interview with Charlie Winter last JUNE 2017. He is a senior research fellow at the International Center for the Study of Radicalization and Political Violence in London.
The SuperPAC Attacking Roy Moore Won’t Disclose Its Donors Before the Vote
Highway 31 has spent millions to defeat the GOP candidate. And it won’t reveal who finances it till after the election. The kicker: It’s all legal.
Lachlan Markay12.01.17 8:52 AM ET
The Daily Beast
The biggest independent spender in the contentious Alabama Senate race is a super PAC backing Democrat Doug Jones. But voters will have no idea who is funding its seven-figure ad blitz until the election is over.
Super PACs are required to disclose their donors, but the group Highway 31 has structured its spending in a way that campaign-finance experts say is almost unprecedented. While legal, it will have the effect of obscuring the group’s benefactors, who will have financed a series of ads over the last two months of the campaign propping up Jones and hammering his Republican opponent, former State Supreme Court Justice Roy Moore.
Highway 31 has reported nearly $2 million worth of ads in the race, according to filings with the Federal Election Commission, making it the single largest independent spender of the general-election contest. The group filed what was expected to be its first itemized disclosure of donors and expenditures Thursday. But in the filing, Highway 31 said it had received and spent no money whatsoever.
....
Assuming, as Fischer predicted, that the vendors do not end up having provided their services pro-bono, he said, “this looks like a shady scheme to deprive voters of information about who is trying to influence them.”
Please click here to read the article in its entirety
https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-super-pac-attacking-roy-moore-wont-disclose-its-donors-before-the-vote
U.S. Muslim stokes violence against Coptic Christians
Posted By Leo Hohmann11/09/2017
World Net Daily
“As for Muslims, they are the food of the nations. This is a period when the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) told us that the Caliphate will come again.”
– Ayat Oraby, Egyptian Muslim activist who migrated to U.S. in 1993
Some of the most vicious incitement against Christians in Egypt originates from a petite Egyptian woman sitting at a computer in her home in a quiet suburb of New Jersey.
It is not as though Egypt’s Muslim community needs any encouragement to go after Coptic Christians, but Arat Oraby does her part, calling the Copts a “gang” that needs to be boycotted and subjugated.
Please click here to read more of the article.
A Jihad Grows in America
By Daniel
Greenfield
Canada Free
Press
November
8, 2017
“The racist president who is a supremacist — white, who does not like Blacks, does not like the Chinese, he does not like the Muslims, he doesn’t like the Hispanics,” Vicente Adolfo Solano declared in Spanish, standing in front an ISIS flag. “In the name of Allah and our leader, Abu, we are going to defeat you.”
Solano, a 53-year-old Honduran living in Miami,
seemed like an unlikely candidate to join ISIS.
“I am going to plant a bomb like in Boston, in the name of Allah”
But there he is on video lashing out at President Trump. Solano was resentful over his “temporary immigration status”. Hondurans living in the United States had been automatically converted to “refugees” after Hurricane Mitch in 1999. Temporary Protected Status for the eighteen year hurricane refugees expires in Jan 2018. And President Trump appears unwilling to extend it any further.
Please
click here to read the article in its entirety.
Inside Hillary Clinton's Secret Takeover of the DNC
by Donna BrazilePolitico
November 2, 2017
"When I was asked to run the Democratic Party after the Russians hacked our emails, I stumbled on to a shocking truth about the Clinton campaign."
Click here to read more from this American author and political analyst. Ms Brazile is a member of the Democratic Party, serving as the interim chairperson fo rthe Democratic National Committee in spring 2011, and assumed that role again in July 2016, until February 2017.
FLASHBACK:
Author sees Islam's 20-year plan for U.S.
Arab-American author outlined secret, in 2003
World Net DailyJoseph Farah
August 4, 2003
(reposted November 2, 2017 for your consideration)
"You've Come A Long Way Baby"
These just a few of the TWENTY action points for Islam to conquer the United States:* Terminate America's freedom of speech by replacing it with statewide and nationwide hate-crime bills.
*Nominate Muslim sympathizers to political office to bring about favorable legislation toward Islam and support potential sympathizers by block voting.
*Take control of as much of Hollywood, the press, TV, radio and the Internet as possible by buying the related corporations or a controlling stock.
*Yell "foul, out-of-context, personal interpretation, hate crime, Zionist, un-American, inaccurate interpretation of the Quran” anytime Islam is criticized or the Quran is analyzed in the public arena.
*Encourage Muslims to penetrate the White House, specifically with Islamists who can articulate a marvelous and peaceful picture of Islam.
Read the entire article at http://www.wnd.com/2003/08/20098/#TxcHu5X6MGeBeHKq.99
HOMELAND INSECURITY
NYC jihadist slipped 4 anti-terror systems
World Net Daily
Art Moore
November 1, 2017
Former NYPD adviser: 'Without Islam there is no
Islamic terrorism'
What about that Justice Gorsuch upholding the Constitution that our leaders and defenders pledge to protect and defend?
The liberal NPR (National Propaganda Reporting) and other traditional unschooled libs, chide a Supreme Court justice for basing his judgements upon the U.S. Constitution. Hail to that unprecedented document that recognized some self-evident unchangeable values of individual liberty, and the importance to rein in a national government that (like gravity) tends to encroach individual freedoms.Click here to read more in
The Daily Signal
November 1, 2017
by Elizabeth Slattery
Russian attempts to create confusion and dissent-
AFTER the Election
World Net DailyNovember 1, 2017
Chelsea Schilling
The social media reps at the White House have revealed the unsought: Click here to read.
Judge orders halt to state scheme promoting abortion
Lawmakers required pro-lifers to deliver offensive message
World Net DailyBob Unrah
October 31, 2017
A judge reins in California zealots. File this under "Score One For Free Speech"
Click here to read the article
Chuck Todd: Roy Moore Doesn't 'Believe in the Constitution' Because He Thinks Rights Come From God
BY:
Alex Griswold
Washington Free Beacon
September 27, 2017 6:33 pm
MSNBC host Chuck Todd said Wednesday that Republican
Alabama senatorial candidate Roy Moore doesn't believe
in the U.S. Constitution because he believes in
God-given rights.
Todd, introducing his discussion of the former Alabama
chief justice, said that "the phrase ‘Christian
conservative' doesn't even begin to describe him."
"First off, he doesn't appear to believe in the
Constitution as it's written," Todd said.
He then played a clip of Moore saying, "Our rights
don't come from government, they don't come from the
Bill of Rights, they come from Almighty God."
"Those are just a taste of what are very
fundamentalist views that have gotten him removed from
office twice as Alabama's chief justice," Todd said.
Moore's views are actually well in line with the
philosophy of many of the Founders. As they saw it,
the Constitution and the government only protected
inalienable rights that were endowed by God or some
other divine provenance.
Please click here to read more of the article
From Transgender to Transformed
by Brian HobbsThe Baptist Messenger
posted Tuesday, August 08, 2017
BARTLESVILLE, Okla. -- Francine Perry and her daughter Laura recently sat down to look at family photos. As they reflected on the good times, they also could see how God was at work, especially through the difficult times -- and there were many of those.
On the heels of rebellious teenage years, Laura lived as a transgender man for nearly a decade of her adult life. Other than her family and select friends, though, most people just knew Laura as "Jake."
...It would be a long road leading home, but God began to awaken faith and belief in Laura.
"I always knew about Jesus and believed. But I never knew Jesus personally or made Him Lord of my life," Laura said.
Francine and Paul (Laura's parents) kept the lines of communication open, and met with Laura from time to time.
Francine said, "It was as if God said to me, 'If you keep trying to fix Laura yourself, I will not. If you just sit down and leave Laura to me, I will work.'"
That began the change, not only in Francine's life and heart but Laura's.
"I didn't know what came next," Laura said. "But I was clinging to God's promise that He would take care of me. I experienced such love and acceptance from my mother's Bible study group. It was hard, but I had never experienced such peace and love as when I came back to the church."
...Last August, Laura made her decision to follow Christ public in front of the church and was baptized the following month.
The journey home, which took place a year ago, has led to both restoration and reconciliation. Francine and Paul believe God answered their prayers, and they believe that parents should never stop praying for their "prodigal" child or children.
They give all glory to God. "Only God could have done this," Francine said.
Pastor James also sees God's grace demonstrated in the Perry family.
Please read the entire article at http://bpnews.net/49333/from-transgender-to-transformed
Brian Hobbs is editor of The Baptist Messenger (www.baptistmessenger.com), newsjournal of the Baptist General Convention of Oklahoma, and communications director of the BGCO.
An NSC Staffer Is Forced Out Over a Controversial
Memo
The document charges that globalists, Islamists, and
other forces within and outside the government are
subverting President Trump’s agenda.
Rosie GrayAugust 2, 2017
TheAtlantic.com
A top official of the National Security Council was fired last month after arguing in a memo that President Trump is under sustained attack from subversive forces both within and outside the government who are deploying Maoist tactics to defeat President Trump’s nationalist agenda.
His dismissal marks the latest victory by National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster in the ongoing war within Trump’s White House between those who believe that the president is under threat from dark forces plotting to undermine him, and those like McMaster who dismiss this as conspiratorial thinking.
Rich Higgins, a former Pentagon official who served in the NSC’s strategic-planning office as a director for strategic planning, was let go on July 21. Higgins’s memo describes supposed domestic and international threats to Trump’s presidency, including globalists, bankers, the “deep state,” and Islamists. The memo characterizes the Russia story as a plot to sabotage Trump’s nationalist agenda. It asserts that globalists and Islamists are seeking to destroy America. The memo also includes a set of recommendations, arguing that the problem constitutes a national-security priority.
Please click here to read the full article
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/08/a-national-security-council-staffer-is-forced-out-over-a-controversial-memo/535725/
or read it at other news sites:
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/344984-nsc-aide-fired-after-producing-memo-that-alleged-political-warfare
or
http://www.wnd.com/2017/08/trump-adviser-fired-over-memo-warning-of-globalist-islamist-deep-state/
(Why does it seem to me that McM is the one with the blindspot? Is he so young that he doesn't recognize a threat when it is more subtle than a North Korean missile? My WWII era military Dad recognized and taught threats to America, but that was from a time when global security threats like Communism and totalitarianism were recognized and taught in our schools as well as to our fighting forces. Just saying...)
Former U.N. Amb. Power Unmasked ‘Hundreds’ In Final Year Of Obama Admin
Congress moves closer to detailing potentially illicit national security leaks
by Adam Kredoof the Free Beacon
August 2, 2017
Former United Nations Ambassador Samantha Power is believed to have made "hundreds" of unmasking requests to identify individuals named in classified intelligence community reports related to Trump and his presidential transition team, according to multiple sources who said the behavior is unprecedented for an official in her position.
to read the full article please click here http://freebeacon.com/national-security/former-u-n-amb-power-unmasked-hundreds-last-year-obama-admin/
Court: Residents Can’t Mention “Islam” or “Muslim” At Public Hearing on Mosque Construction;
Thomas More Law Center Files Federal Lawsuit
August 1, 2017
Thomas More Law Center
ANN ARBOR, MI – In a settlement agreement, which reads more like an instrument of surrender, Bernards Township (“Township”), New Jersey officials agreed that, in addition to a $3.5 million payment to Islamic Society of Basking Ridge (“ISBR”), residents and citizens of the Township are prohibited from commenting on “Islam” or “Muslims.” at the upcoming public hearing to approve the settlement. Astonishingly, a federal judge approved the prohibition as a fully enforceable Order of the Court.
Click here to read more of this astonishing order from an American court:
https://www.thomasmore.org/press-releases/court-residents-cant-mention-islam-muslim-public-hearing-mosque-construction-thomas-law-center-files-federal-lawsuit/
Will There Be Justice For Family Whose Home Was Raided Because Cops Couldn't Tell Tea From Pot?
August 1, 2017Forbes.com
George Leef, contributor
A case just decided by the Tenth Circuit shows how utterly absurd the “war on drugs” has become, how petty and power-mad the police can be, and how blindly deferential some of our federal judges are.
The case, Harte v. Johnson County Board of Commissioners, arose out of an idiotic, military-style raid by Kansas police on the home of Robert and Adlynn Harte in 2012. They were not in any way involved with drugs (particularly marijuana), but a few officers came to the conclusion that they might be.
Click here to read the article in its entirety:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/georgeleef/2017/08/01/will-there-be-justice-for-family-whose-home-was-raided-because-cops-couldnt-tell-tea-from-pot/#1671ec2b70e6
Ohio Muslim plotted U.S. attack after
training in Syria
Lied to FBI about
international terrorist activities
World Net Daily
Art Moore
July 5, 2017
An Ohio Muslim who pleaded guilty to
plotting a “big” terrorist attack in the United
States after receiving training from jihadists in
Syria was found to have lied to the FBI.
The public release of the plea deal came
Thursday as President Trump’s executive order
temporarily banning travelers from Syria and five
other terror hot spots went into effect.
A federal grand jury charged Abdirahman
Sheik Mohamud with providing material support to
terrorists, providing support to a designated
terrorist organization and lying to the FBI about
international terrorism.
His lack of cooperation with the FBI is a
salient point, says Jihad Watch Director Robert
Spencer, because the leading Islamic civil rights
organization, the Council on American-Islamic
Relations, or CAIR, urges Muslims in the U.S. not to
answer the bureau’s questions if interviewed
regarding terrorist activity.
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2017/07/ohio-muslim-plotted-u-s-attack-after-training-in-syria/#vJImOrkAFctxTAwu.99
FAITH UNDER FIRE
Christian school defunded over Bible
verses!
Government: Can't share 'teachings that denigrate or vilify someone's sexual orientation'
World Net Daily
July 5, 2017
A Christian school in Alberta, Canada, is
learning the perils of depending on public funding
for its operation.
Cornerstone Christian Academy and Battle
River School Division have enjoyed a nine-year
cooperative arrangement where the Christian school
is operated as an alternative public school,
providing nondenominational Christian instruction.
BRSD leased facilities to the school and provided
instructional resources available to other public
schools. Thanks to the partnership, student tuition
was lower than private Christian schooling, with
fees going primarily to cover facility costs and bus
transportation.
But that has come to an end in a dispute
over the school’s use of two biblical passages that
BRSD board members contend “denigrate” and “vilify”
LGBT individuals.
Cornerstone Chairwoman Deanna Margel said
school staff were told by email the passages from
the letters of St. Paul “should not be read or
studied.” She called the directive “shocking,”
reported the London Express.
“We’re talking about freedom of religion,
but we’re also talking about freedom of expression.
We need every single word there [from the Bible] to
challenge us, to call us to greater understanding.
It’s just so important.”
A spokesman with the Justice Center for
Constitutional Freedom, a legal group representing
Cornerstone, said BRSD’s funding-body members “have
no right to impose their own ideology on schools
they disagree with.”
Government ‘health care’ and the US Constitution
written by Ron Bischof
July 6, 2017
The Signal of Santa Clarita Valley
My fellow columnists have written thoughtful and concerning columns that have addressed their challenges with PPACA (Obamacare), health insurance carriers and prospective legislative solutions to address the defects in our health-care delivery and financing system.
This column will offer a perspective that’s been largely overlooked in our community discussion, namely: What is the federal government’s authority to regulate health-care services and its financing for more than 320 million U.S. citizen residents in their respective states and territories?
Bear with me a moment as I review the federal government’s defined role in our constitutional republic.
Click here to read more of this thoughtful article at https://signalscv.com/2017/07/03/ron-bischof-government-health-care-us-constitution/
Sweden on the Brink of CIVIL WAR, National Police
Chief: “HELP US, HELP US!”
Jihad Watch
June 25, 2017
By Nicolai Sennels
Sweden is being torn to pieces by Muslim immigrants
and refugees. Law enforcement is crying out for help,
and it is only a question of time before the country
will need military intervention from abroad in order
to avoid a humanitarian catastrophe.
A leaked report concludes that the number of lawless
areas (commonly referred to as “no-go zones”) in
Sweden now totals 61. That is up from 55 in just one
year’s time. This increase includes not only the total
number, but also the geographical size of these areas.
Sweden’s National Police Commissioner, Dan Eliasson,
spoke on national television and pleaded for
assistance: “Help us, help us!,” he said, while
warning that Swedish police forces no longer can
uphold the law and therefore must ask all good powers
in the country to support them.
Please
click here to read in entirety at jihadwatch.org
Moms declare holy war after school teaches Islam 'true faith'
Women pilloried as 'KKK' for going public with lesson concerns
Updated: 04/01/2017 at 6:15 PM
Author: Leo Hohmann
World Net Daily
A middle school in Chatham, New Jersey, is using a
cartoon video to teach the Five Pillars of Islam to
seventh-grade students, and now two parents have
obtained legal services to fight the school district
which has ignored their concerns.
Seventh graders in this school are taught: “May God
help us all find the true faith, Islam.”
Also taught in the video is the Shahada, which is the
Muslim prayer of conversion “There is no god but Allah
and Muhammad is his messenger.”
The parents say no other religion is taught nearly to
this level of detail in the “world cultures and
geography” class.
The parents wanted to know who picked the curriculum,
who picked the video and the accompanying PowerPoint.
None of their concerns have been addressed by the
school board or the superintendent.
So, the two mothers have retained legal help from the
Ann Arbor, Michigan-based Thomas More Law Center.
For speaking out, the moms have been attacked by
members of their community. Their crime: appearing on
Fox News’ “Tucker Carlson Tonight” to voice concerns
about Islamic indoctrination of Chatham Middle School
seventh graders.
http://www.wnd.com/2017/03/moms-declare-holy-war-after-school-teaches-islam-true-faith/
Trump Wins Saudi Praise for ‘Turning Point’ After
Meeting Prince
by Nafeesa Syeedand Glen Carey
March 15, 2017, 11:08 AM EDT
Saudi Arabia, seeking to breathe life into its
decades-old alliance with the U.S., claimed “a
historic turning point” in bilateral relations after
President Donald Trump welcomed Deputy Crown Prince
Mohammed bin Salman to the White House.
“Relations had undergone a period of difference of opinion,” a senior adviser to the crown prince said in a statement after Tuesday’s meeting. “However, today’s meeting has put things on the right track, and marked a significant shift in relations, across all political, military, security and economic fields.”
Sunni Arab leaders are embracing Trump with praise the president isn’t finding from other U.S. allies in the world, reflecting an eagerness to reset ties after feeling shunned by President Barack Obama, who crafted the 2015 nuclear deal with their Shiite rival Iran. The Saudi statement said Trump had a “great understanding” of the bilateral relationship. The president and the prince “share the same views on the gravity of the Iranian expansionist moves in the region,” the adviser said.
In a statement Wednesday, the White House said that Trump and the prince “directed their teams to explore additional steps across a broad range of political, military, security, economic, cultural, and social dimensions to further strengthen and elevate the United States-Saudi strategic relationship” and to confront “Iran’s destabilizing regional activities.”
But while Trump has signaled his plans for a more aggressive policy against the Islamic Republic, political analysts say it’s unlikely he’d seek an open confrontation with Iran or deepen the U.S. role in Iraq, Syria and Yemen, which are serving as proxy battlegrounds between the regional rivals.
“The administration will give the Saudis the rhetoric they want on Iran -- more confrontational, emphasize the threat,” said Gregory Gause, a professor of international affairs at Texas A&M University and a Saudi specialist. “But in terms of specifics, I do not think that the Trump administration wants to get more deeply involved in Iraq, Syria or other places where the Saudis would want help in turning back Iranian influence.”
Saudi Arabia and its closest regional ally, the
United Arab Emirates, are bogged down in a two-year
war in Yemen against Shiite rebels they say are armed
by Iran. Its leaders have openly complained about the
rising Iranian influence in Iraq. In Syria, the Sunni
rebels they have backed are losing ground against
President Bashar al-Assad and Hezbollah, the
Iranian-backed Shiite militant group.
Germany: Muslim migrant killed “infidel” landlady,
scrawled Qur’an verses on wall
Jihadwatch.org
January 26, 2017 2:09 pm
By Robert Spencer
Remember: if you think this is reprehensible, you’re a racist, bigoted “Islamophobe.”
“Asylum seeker in court for killing ‘infidel’ landlady,” Express, January 26, 2017:
An asylum seeker has appeared in court accused of having killed his landlady because she was an infidel.
The man named only as Abubaker C. appeared for the first time in the courthouse of Heilbronn, a city in the south-western German state of Baden-Wuerttemberg, on murder charges.
Prosecutors say the asylum seeker killed his landlady Maria M., 70, in the nearby town of Bad Friedrichshall because she was an infidel.
Although the man’s full surname has been withheld under Germany’s privacy laws, his real name is unclear because he has given various names and ages when questioned about himself, telling detectives on one occasion: “I am known by many names.”
The asylum seeker is estimated to be 27 years old and thought to have been born in Pakistan, although he says his family moved to Saudi Arabia with him later on in life.
In court he had a Punjabi translator, a language spoken in Pakistan.
The prosecution alleges that the defendant strangled his victim with a telephone cable.
Afterwards, he is said to have smashed his victim’s face with an iron rod and fled the house with cash and jewellery.
When the police arrived, the walls were full of Arabic writing, including verses of the Quran, and also the English phrase: “It’s payback time.”
A lawyer for the prosecution said: “The accused wanted to kill a person who disbelieved in his view.”
This article can be read where it was originally published at
https://www.jihadwatch.org/2017/01/germany-muslim-migrant-killed-infidel-landlady-scrawled-quran-verses-on-wall
https://youtu.be/m6s-JFnw15Q
This ^ ten minute youtube video is an aid in your understanding, as a westerner and American, of ISIL, radical Islam, an enemy of freedom, through the words of a British Islamist, Anjem Choudary. His view of Islam upholds the totalitarian notion that those non-Muslims and apostates who do not agree with, and bow to the tenets of his religion should be killed, and the entire world should be under the rule of sharia (Muslim) law. He repeatedly proclaims that the killing of non-Muslims, is legitimate.On 6 September 2016, Choudary was sentenced to five years and six months in prison for his support for a proscribed organization ISIS.
Several quotes from that trial:
The judge: “The jury were sure that you knowingly crossed the line between the legitimate expression of your own views and the criminal act of inviting support for an organisation which was at the time engaged in appalling acts of terrorism.”
The judge said both men (he and his acolyte Mohammed Rahman, 33) justified Isis’s most appalling acts and expressed contempt for democracy. They had “encouraged your audience ... to believe that no one who failed to support the caliphate established by Isis could be a true Muslim,” the judge said.
Pam Geller does a fine job (when she has a chance to speak) of defending the Western notion that the Lord God created people as free beings rather than robots, an inconvenient truth for tyrants and despots.
To allude to a comic strip, Pogo, from the 1950s to 1970s, We have met the enemy and this time it isn't us.
House Dems demand 'full, categorical pardon' for illegals
Say Obama misunderstands extent of own powers
The Washington Time
Wednesday, December 7, 2016
House Democrats renewed their call for President Obama to issue a “full, categorical pardon” for illegal immigrants, saying Wednesday that he is misunderstanding the extent of his powers and he can, in fact, help out hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrant Dreamers.
Young adults who came to the U.S. as children, the more than 740,000 Dreamers who gained tentative legal status under Mr. Obama’s 2012 deportation amnesty, are the most sympathetic figures in the debate.
Democrats demand ‘full, categorical pardon’ for illegal immigrants, say Obama ignoring own powers
Democrats said they trusted Mr. Obama’s promises and came forward, announcing themselves as illegal immigrants, and now a Trump administration would have a road map for how to deport them, unless the president finds a way to shield them.
“You’re the president of the United States, you asked them to join this program, you use the power of your pardon,” said Rep. Luis V. Gutierrez, an Illinois Democrat who led a letter signed by more than 60 House Democrats in asking for the relief.
The White House’s top domestic policy adviser shot down the idea of a pardon, saying that they had concluded that the president’s powers apply to criminal offenses, while immigration status is a civil offense. Cecilia Munoz, the adviser, also said a pardon couldn’t grant legal status, so the Dreamers would still not be on firm footing even if they could be pardoned for their immigration offenses.
Please click here to read the full story
Why is the world silent about Christian genocide?
December 8, 2016The American Spectator
A Toronto conference last week asked: Why is the world silent about Christian genocide?
“If Christianity [in the Middle East] survives, it will not be because of any interest taken by Christians in our part of the world, but rather because the State of Israel, the people of Israel, and conscientious Jews everywhere are dedicated to saving it,” said Dr. Paul Merkley, Professor of History at Carleton University, last week in a panel discussion at Toronto’s Beth Radom synagogue.
The academic conference, titled “Christian Genocide in the Middle East: Why is the World Silent?” was co-sponsored by the International Christian Embassy Jerusalem and the Canadian Institute for Jewish Research.
“In 1910, it’s estimated that Christians were 14% of the Middle Eastern population” said Dr. Frederick Krantz, Director of CIJR. “Today, they are under 4% and rapidly declining.”
Other figures were highlighted throughout the conference, such as how in Iraq alone, there were 1.5 million Christians until 2003. Today, that number is estimated at 275,000 with the strong likelihood that there won’t be any more of a community left within five years.
Much of the present-day persecution was tied to the Islamic State. National Executive Director of ICEJ Canada, Donna Holbrook, showed graphic images of the genocide of Christians currently taking place in Iraq.
“This mother was killed, but not before the terrorists made her watch them kill her baby,” said Holbrook, showing a horrific image of an Iraqi Christian woman murdered by ISIS terrorists.
Please click here to read the complete article on the American Spectator.
AMERICA TO TRUMP: YOU'RE HIRED!
November 9, 2016
November 3, 2016
US taxpayers (by way of deficit spending to be inherited by our children) are footing the bill for the U.S. State Department's refurbishment of mosques and setting up of internet service in Muslim countries of the Middle East.
Those Muslim nations (rightly) views us as weak, appeasing fools, worthy of contempt.
As a US citizen and taxpayer, I regard the
U.S. federal government as a poor steward of my hard
earned money and US State Department expenditures as
treasonous to my children and our way of life.
Check
out this short video and see what you think.
In
Boston
Joshua
Miller
Feb 22, 2016
DENVER
At Euflora, tables are filled
with glass containers of marijuana next to
interactive tablets describing each strain (“sweet
floral aroma,” “intoxicatingly potent”). An array
of marijuana-infused products beckon behind locked
cases: from energy shots to sour gummies, brownies
to bacon brittle. And if you’re 21 or older, it’s
all legal to buy.
This is Colorado Massachusetts
So has legalization been a plus
or a minus?
“Yes,” Colorado Senate
President Bill Cadman replied with a laugh.
The consensus among several top
state officials — who emphasize that their job is
to carry out the will of the voters rather than
mull whether their constituents made the right
choice — is that there have been no widely felt
negative effects on the state since marijuana
became legal, and a crop of retail stores,
cultivation facilities, and manufacturers sprung
up from Aurora to Telluride.
Legalization has ushered in
thousands of new jobs in the burgeoning industry,
brought $135 million into state coffers last year,
and ended the prohibition of a widely used
substance.
But police say they struggle to
enforce a patchwork of laws covering marijuana,
including drugged driving. Officials fret about
the industry becoming like big tobacco, dodging
regulation and luring users with slick
advertising. And this state, long a leader in
cannabis use, has the highest
youth rate of marijuana use in the nation,
according to the most recent data available from a
federal drug-use survey.
Colorado
The drug is heavily regulated.
Each plant for sale must be tagged with a radio
frequency identification chip, from an early stage
of its life to sale, to help the state track it.
Marijuana, both in plant form and infused in
products, is required to be tested for potency and
contaminants, and sold in child-resistant
containers.
Tourists and locals alike can
buy recreational marijuana as long as they are at
least 21 and can possess up to 1 ounce. Only those
with a medical marijuana “red card,” issued by the
state on the recommendation of a physician, can
possess more at one time.
While the popular image of
marijuana use remains joints and vaporizers, a
significant percentage of marijuana sales in
Colorado — nearly half according to some estimates
— take the form of infused products, such as
edible treats, pills, drops, bath soak, and even
“sensual enhancement oil.”
More than two years into the
still-rapidly growing industry, how do top
officials and their constituents see legalization?
“There are a certain number of
folks, like myself, who were pretty reticent about
it to begin with,” said House Speaker Dickey Lee
Hullinghorst, a Democrat. But “the sky didn’t
fall. Everything seems to be working pretty well.”
That’s in line with the view of
Colorado
And Dr. Larry Wolk, the top
medical official in Colorado
He said this month new data
indicate that the biggest
increases in marijuana hospitalizations have
been seen among out-of-staters, who might be
naive about the drug’s effects.
All marijuana, including
medical, is subject to standard state and local
sales tax in Colorado
For producers, the tax picture
is among the many complexities of running a
marijuana business.
Sally Vander Veer, president of
one of the state’s largest dispensaries and
cultivation operations, which has 70 employees and
a payroll of about $3.8 million a year, is bullish
on her rapidly expanding business. Medicine Man
has a 40 percent profit margin, she said. But her
company struggles with what she estimates to be an
effective tax rate of nearly 50 percent, as well
as having to deal almost exclusively in cash.
Because marijuana remains illegal under federal
law, access to banking services is severely
restricted.
The state saw $135 million in
tax and fee revenue last year from the
recreational and medical marijuana industry, money
that has gone to, among other efforts, education
for youth and law enforcement on the drug.
State Representative Jonathan
Singer, a leader on marijuana issues in the House,
said what legalization has done is “allowed
marijuana to pay its own way,” with the cost of
regulation paid for by dispensaries and consumers.
Yet law
enforcement officials offer a more negative,
chaotic view. They paint a picture of a quickly
evolving array of laws, regulations, and
ordinances that outpace their enforcement tools
for related issues, such as drugged driving.
For one, they say, there’s no
quick, reliable check to see whether drivers are
too high to operate a vehicle safely, as
there is for blood-alcohol level. And there’s no
easy way to determine whether food products in a
vehicle are infused with pot.
“You have no ability to test
the gummy bear laying there on the dashboard,”
said Chief John Jackson of the Greenwood Village,
Colo., Police Department said.
“Edibles pose a problem because
there is no way to tell the potency of it, there
is no way to test it in the field. And no law
enforcement officer is going to lick it and say,
‘Well, there’s marijuana, THC in that.’ ” (THC is
the primary psychoactive compound in marijuana.)
Jackson, former president of
the Colorado Association of Chiefs of Police, and
other police officials said legalization simply
moved much faster than law enforcement officers’
ability to keep up with it.
Jackson, who sounded
beleaguered in an interview, said a fallacy of
legalization is that it would give law enforcement
time back to focus on more serious, complicated
criminal issues and bigger drug problems.
Two years and two months into
full legalization, he said, “we’re not seeing
that.”
Another problem with edible
marijuana products, said Dr. Michael DiStefano,
who directs emergency medicine clinical operations
at Colorado
When marijuana is “handled
responsibly, it’s not an issue for children’s
health. The problem is a lot of these edibles,” he
said. “They look like regular candy. . . . There’s
no way to discern what is an edible gummy bear
that has THC in it, versus a regular gummy bear.
In fact, you cannot distinguish them unless
they’re in the package.”
He said he’s seen an uptick in
kids admitted to the ER at Children’s Hospital Colorado
Indeed, the most grinding
concerns and the biggest question marks focus on
kids and young adults. But the effects of
legalization on children remain effectively
unknown with about two years of experience and
lagging statistics.
Opponents of legalization point
to a federal drug survey that estimates Colorado
Wolk, the top doctor at the
state’s public health department, said Colorado
“No pun intended,” he said, “we
started high and stayed high — use hasn’t
increased in a statistically significant way since
legalization. Those that were using before are
still using now, among youths and adults.”
For some opponents, a big
concern isn’t just what has happened so far, but
what’s yet to come. They worry that the burgeoning
marijuana industry, like alcohol and tobacco
before it, could eventually use its profits to
gain clout and subvert attempts at regulation.
Jeffrey Zinsmeister, executive
vice president of Smart Approaches to Marijuana, a
national nonprofit group cofounded by former US
“You’re seeing this headlong
rush into another addictive industry without
knowing what widespread marijuana use is going to
do to society,” he warned. “And the signs from Colorado
Officials say their primary
concerns include: adults being
able to legally consume the drug normalizes it
for kids; Joe
Camel-like ads that make pot smoking seem
appealing to kids; and legalization
increasing availability, thus making the barrier
to getting marijuana lower.
“I worry about normalization, I
worry about commercialization, and I worry about
availability,” said Andrew Freedman, who directs
Governor John Hickenlooper’s Office of Marijuana
Coordination.
“What happens to people over
the long term, especially kids over the long term,
as they see marijuana normalized, as they see
people advertising for marijuana, and as
accessibility becomes greater and greater?” he
asked. “Kids who are, right now, saying, ‘No
thanks,’ will that change over time?”
Freedman and other people
deeply involved in the day-to-day oversight of the
new market say it functions pretty smoothly. But they
emphasize the broader question of whether or not
legalization ends up a success will probably
take five or 10 years to answer fully.
Joshua Miller
can be reached at joshua.miller@globe.com.
Follow him on Twitter @jm_bos. Click here to
subscribe to his weekday e-mail update on
politics.
Joshua
Miller
Feb 22, 2016
At Euflora, tables are filled with glass containers of marijuana next to interactive tablets describing each strain (“sweet floral aroma,” “intoxicatingly potent”). An array of marijuana-infused products beckon behind locked cases: from energy shots to sour gummies, brownies to bacon brittle. And if you’re 21 or older, it’s all legal to buy.
This is
So has legalization been a plus or a minus?
“Yes,” Colorado Senate President Bill Cadman replied with a laugh.
The consensus among several top state officials — who emphasize that their job is to carry out the will of the voters rather than mull whether their constituents made the right choice — is that there have been no widely felt negative effects on the state since marijuana became legal, and a crop of retail stores, cultivation facilities, and manufacturers sprung up from Aurora to Telluride.
Legalization has ushered in thousands of new jobs in the burgeoning industry, brought $135 million into state coffers last year, and ended the prohibition of a widely used substance.
But police say they struggle to enforce a patchwork of laws covering marijuana, including drugged driving. Officials fret about the industry becoming like big tobacco, dodging regulation and luring users with slick advertising. And this state, long a leader in cannabis use, has the highest youth rate of marijuana use in the nation, according to the most recent data available from a federal drug-use survey.
The drug is heavily regulated. Each plant for sale must be tagged with a radio frequency identification chip, from an early stage of its life to sale, to help the state track it. Marijuana, both in plant form and infused in products, is required to be tested for potency and contaminants, and sold in child-resistant containers.
Tourists and locals alike can buy recreational marijuana as long as they are at least 21 and can possess up to 1 ounce. Only those with a medical marijuana “red card,” issued by the state on the recommendation of a physician, can possess more at one time.
While the popular image of marijuana use remains joints and vaporizers, a significant percentage of marijuana sales in Colorado — nearly half according to some estimates — take the form of infused products, such as edible treats, pills, drops, bath soak, and even “sensual enhancement oil.”
More than two years into the still-rapidly growing industry, how do top officials and their constituents see legalization?
“There are a certain number of folks, like myself, who were pretty reticent about it to begin with,” said House Speaker Dickey Lee Hullinghorst, a Democrat. But “the sky didn’t fall. Everything seems to be working pretty well.”
That’s in line with the view of
And Dr. Larry Wolk, the top
medical official in
He said this month new data
indicate that the biggest
increases in marijuana hospitalizations have
been seen among out-of-staters, who might be
naive about the drug’s effects.
All marijuana, including
medical, is subject to standard state and local
sales tax in
For producers, the tax picture is among the many complexities of running a marijuana business.
Sally Vander Veer, president of one of the state’s largest dispensaries and cultivation operations, which has 70 employees and a payroll of about $3.8 million a year, is bullish on her rapidly expanding business. Medicine Man has a 40 percent profit margin, she said. But her company struggles with what she estimates to be an effective tax rate of nearly 50 percent, as well as having to deal almost exclusively in cash. Because marijuana remains illegal under federal law, access to banking services is severely restricted.
The state saw $135 million in tax and fee revenue last year from the recreational and medical marijuana industry, money that has gone to, among other efforts, education for youth and law enforcement on the drug.
State Representative Jonathan Singer, a leader on marijuana issues in the House, said what legalization has done is “allowed marijuana to pay its own way,” with the cost of regulation paid for by dispensaries and consumers.
Yet law
enforcement officials offer a more negative,
chaotic view. They paint a picture of a quickly
evolving array of laws, regulations, and
ordinances that outpace their enforcement tools
for related issues, such as drugged driving.
For one, they say, there’s no quick, reliable check to see whether drivers are too high to operate a vehicle safely, as there is for blood-alcohol level. And there’s no easy way to determine whether food products in a vehicle are infused with pot.
“You have no ability to test the gummy bear laying there on the dashboard,” said Chief John Jackson of the Greenwood Village, Colo., Police Department said.
“Edibles pose a problem because there is no way to tell the potency of it, there is no way to test it in the field. And no law enforcement officer is going to lick it and say, ‘Well, there’s marijuana, THC in that.’ ” (THC is the primary psychoactive compound in marijuana.)
Jackson, former president of the Colorado Association of Chiefs of Police, and other police officials said legalization simply moved much faster than law enforcement officers’ ability to keep up with it.
Jackson, who sounded beleaguered in an interview, said a fallacy of legalization is that it would give law enforcement time back to focus on more serious, complicated criminal issues and bigger drug problems.
Two years and two months into full legalization, he said, “we’re not seeing that.”
Another problem with edible
marijuana products, said Dr. Michael DiStefano,
who directs emergency medicine clinical operations
at
When marijuana is “handled responsibly, it’s not an issue for children’s health. The problem is a lot of these edibles,” he said. “They look like regular candy. . . . There’s no way to discern what is an edible gummy bear that has THC in it, versus a regular gummy bear. In fact, you cannot distinguish them unless they’re in the package.”
He said he’s seen an uptick in
kids admitted to the ER at Children’s Hospital
Indeed, the most grinding concerns and the biggest question marks focus on kids and young adults. But the effects of legalization on children remain effectively unknown with about two years of experience and lagging statistics.
Opponents of legalization point
to a federal drug survey that estimates
Wolk, the top doctor at the
state’s public health department, said
“No pun intended,” he said, “we started high and stayed high — use hasn’t increased in a statistically significant way since legalization. Those that were using before are still using now, among youths and adults.”
For some opponents, a big concern isn’t just what has happened so far, but what’s yet to come. They worry that the burgeoning marijuana industry, like alcohol and tobacco before it, could eventually use its profits to gain clout and subvert attempts at regulation.
Jeffrey Zinsmeister, executive
vice president of Smart Approaches to Marijuana, a
national nonprofit group cofounded by former
“You’re seeing this headlong
rush into another addictive industry without
knowing what widespread marijuana use is going to
do to society,” he warned. “And the signs from
Officials say their primary concerns include: adults being able to legally consume the drug normalizes it for kids; Joe Camel-like ads that make pot smoking seem appealing to kids; and legalization increasing availability, thus making the barrier to getting marijuana lower.
“I worry about normalization, I worry about commercialization, and I worry about availability,” said Andrew Freedman, who directs Governor John Hickenlooper’s Office of Marijuana Coordination.
“What happens to people over the long term, especially kids over the long term, as they see marijuana normalized, as they see people advertising for marijuana, and as accessibility becomes greater and greater?” he asked. “Kids who are, right now, saying, ‘No thanks,’ will that change over time?”
Freedman and other people
deeply involved in the day-to-day oversight of the
new market say it functions pretty smoothly. But they
emphasize the broader question of whether or not
legalization ends up a success will probably
take five or 10 years to answer fully.
Joshua Miller
can be reached at joshua.miller@globe.com.
Follow him on Twitter @jm_bos. Click here to
subscribe to his weekday e-mail update on
politics.
File this Under U S Constitution or Religious Freedom??
September 22, 2016
A 300 page report
issued by the United States Council on Civil Rights
(USCCR) on 7 September of 2016, has caused a righteous
outcry from many religious and other liberty loving
institutions. You may rightly question the authority
of a commission that blindly ignores the
fundamental liberty of individuals alluded to in the
first amendment of the Bill of Rights of the U.S.
Constitution. The commission, headed by chairman
Martin R Castro, appointed by President Obama in 2011,
suffers a serious blind spot of vision.
The USCCR recommends particular protections for people who fall within a variety of groups designated by particular labels adopted over the years, offering these groups special privileges beyond that of "regular" Americans, those generic citizens, whose basic liberties were noted and codified in the founding documents of our country to be protected from the encroachment of the rules and restrictions and regulations of an ever-growing totalitarian government which has usurped some non-existent power to brand my conscience and beliefs as "intolerant" or discriminatory.
There is a blind spot on the part of the commission that does not recognize the freedom of faith-abiding people of conscience to live by the tenets of their respective religions, that do not infringe upon health and welfare of others.
There are a number of links to explore- first of all a link to the report itself, followed by reactions and comments of a variety of faith-based organizations, as well as the watchdog groups that recognize the freedoms that our Constitution attempted to protect.
http://www.usccr.gov/pubs/Peaceful-Coexistence-09-07-16.PDF
http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/obama-crony-religious-liberty-code-discrimination-intolerance
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2016/09/16/the-deeply-troubling-federal-report-highlighting-religious-freedom/
https://cruxnow.com/church-in-the-usa/2016/09/14/archbishop-blasts-claim-religious-freedom-code-discrimination/
http://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/bill-donohue/federal-agency-trashes-religious-liberty
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865662326/US-Civil-Rights-Commission-chairman-says-religious-freedoms-stand-for-nothing-except-hypocrisy.html?pg=all
http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/are-religious-freedom-advocates-christian-supremacists
http://erlc.com/resource-library/articles/discriminatory-overreach-civil-rights-commission-attacks-religious-freedom
http://www.sasse.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=8CEC1C14-EA39-40FC-97A8-51BB6408C91C
http://libertycounsel.com/breaking-obama-administration-declares-war-on-religious-liberty-liberty-counsel/
U.S. Slams Israel for New West Bank Settlement Expansion
Marcy Oster
September 1, 2016
(JTA) — The U.S. State Department condemned the
announcement that an Israeli planning committee
approved the construction of hundreds of housing units
in four West Bank settlements.
“We’re deeply concerned by the government’s
announcement to advance plans for these settlement
units in the West Bank,” State Department Spokesman
John Kirby said Wednesday, in answer to a reporter’s
question during a briefing, hours after reports of the
approval. “Since the Quartet report came out, we have
seen a very significant acceleration of Israeli
settlement activity that runs directly counter to the
conclusions of the report. So far this year, Israel
has promoted plans for over 2,500 units, including
over 700 units retroactively approved in the West
Bank.”
Kirby said that the State Department is “particularly
troubled by the policy of retroactively approving
unauthorized settlement units and outposts that are
themselves illegal under Israeli law. These policies
have effectively given the Israeli Government a green
light for the pervasive advancement of settlement
activity in a new and potentially unlimited way. This
significant expansion of the settlement enterprise
poses a very serious and growing threat to the
viability of the two-state solution.”
“Potentially unlimited” is a recent term used by the
State Department, and seems to indicate that State
believes Israel wants to annex the West Bank.
The Civil Administration’s High Planning Committee on
Wednesday approved construction of 234 living units in
Elkana in the northern West Bank, designated to be a
nursing home; 30 homes in Beit Arye in the northern
West Bank; and 20 homes in the Jerusalem ring
neighborhood of Givat Zeev.
The committee also retroactively legalized 179 housing
units built in the 1980s in Ofarim, part of the Beit
Arye municipality.
The approval comes less than a week after Nickolay
Mladenov, the U.N. special coordinator for the Middle
East peace process, criticized Israel for continuing
to build in West Bank settlements and neighborhoods in
eastern Jerusalem, going against the recommendations
issued in June by the Mideast Quartet. The Quartet,
made up of the United States, Russia, the European
Union and the U.N., called on Israel in June to stop
building in the settlements and on the Palestinians to
halt incitement.
Click
here to read the above article on the forward.com
web site