| August
2016 |
| |
Main Page | | |
October 2016 » |
September
2016
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
In Saudi Arabia, signs of an effort to break the Israel taboo
By Michael Wilner, Herb Keinon08/30/2016 21:30
Saudi state-run media appears to be softening its reporting on Israel, running unprecedented columns floating the prospect of direct relations, quoting Israeli officials and filling its news holes with fewer negative stories on Israel’s relationship with the Palestinians.
The public shift – from outlets such as al-Arabiya and Riyadh newspaper, among other local or state-owned outlets – reflects secret, under-the-table contact between the Arab kingdom and the Jewish state that has been a work in progress for years.
But media movement marks a new phase in that diplomatic process, according to some experts on the kingdom, who see signs of a monarchy effort to prepare Saudi society for debate that had previously been off limits.
“The key here is that everybody understands this is not going to turn around overnight, and its probably not going to convince a lot of people. But that’s not really the point,” said David Pollock, an expert on the region at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. “The point is to establish this as a debatable proposition, and to break the taboo of even debating about it – about the prospect of normalizing relations.”
“Once you’ve done that, you’ve made it legitimate,” Pollock added. “There are suddenly two sides.”
One column called for Saudis to “leave behind” their “hatred of Jews,” and another said that talks between the two nations should be direct, without intermediaries, based on Saudi national interests.
Those national interests appear to align with Israel’s, primarily on the issue of Iran, which has dominated the Saudi news cycle in recent months– from Islamic Republic activities in Lebanon, Syria and Yemen.
Saudi conservative Islamists view Iran, the Shi’ite and Hezbollah as “much worse than the Jews,” Pollock commented. “So that kind of takes the edge off – and actually pushes them in the same direction.”
An official in the Foreign Ministry said there have been some positive signals from Riyadh – such as an interview that ambassador to Washington Ron Dermer gave recently to the Saudi media, and one that Foreign Ministry Director-General Dore Gold had last year with a Saudi website – but that there is no sense this is part of an organized campaign to prepare the ground for better ties.
“These are positive signs, but I would not say they are game changers,” the official said. “Good things are happening.
But rather than seeing this as trying to prepare the ground for something, I’d say it is a sign that there is less enmity.”
A source in the Prime Minister’s Office concurred. He acknowledged a few articles of late from “some pretty big journalists” against hating Jews, but said that he knows nothing about it coming from the top as part of an organized campaign.
Quiet talks between Israel and Saudi Arabia began leaking into public view in June, when a handshake between Gold and former Saudi government adviser Anwar Eshki raised eyebrows. Putting to rest any doubt that the handshake was an isolated affair, Eshki led a Saudi delegation to Jerusalem the following month that was publicly acknowledged.
Saudi Prince Turki bin Faisal Al Saud also shared a stage with Israel’s former military intelligence chief, Amos Yadlin, in 2014.
A similar effort is under way in Egypt, Pollock said.
“I gather from talking to some of the people who are directly involved with it that there are different camps – different schools of thought in these countries,” said Pollock. “There is definitely internal opposition, and it’s very delicate, and fragile. But in both countries, the government and the establishment media – and their spin-offs and allies – are pursuing a deliberate strategy to do this.”
Click here to read the entire article on the Jerusalem Post web site.
UN Backs Secret Obama Takeover of Police
International org calls for federalization of U.S.
law enforcement to be 'beefed up,' cover all of
America
by Robert Romano | Updated 04 Aug 2016 at 10:04 AM“The Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice has provided oversight and recommendations for improvement of police services in a number of cities with consent decrees. This is one of the most effective ways to reduce discrimination in law enforcement and it needs to be beefed up and increased to cover as many of the 18,000-plus local law enforcement jurisdictions.”
That was United Nations Rapporteur Maina Kai on July 27, a representative of the U.N. Human Rights Council, who on the tail-end of touring the U.S., endorsed a little-known and yet highly controversial practice by the Justice Department to effect a federal takeover of local police and corrections departments.
The Obama administration has been pursuing the federal takeover of local police right under Congress' nose — and Republicans in Congress were apparently unaware it was happening.
The consent decrees are already being implemented in Newark, New Jersey; Miami, Florida; Los Angeles, California; Ferguson, Missouri; Chicago, Illinois; and other municipalities.
Here's how it works: the Civil Rights Division at the Department of Justice files a lawsuit in federal court against a city, county, or state, alleging constitutional and civil rights violations by the police or at a corrections facility. It is done under 42 U.S.C. § 14141, a section of the 1994 Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, granting the attorney general the power to prosecute law enforcement misconduct. The municipality then simply agrees to the judicial finding — without contest — and the result is a wide-reaching federal court order that imposes onerous regulations on local police.
The federal court orders are designed to undo Rudy Giuliani-style policing tactics that were effective at reducing crime in big cities in the 1990s and 2000s.
In short, the much-feared nationalization of local police departments is already being initiated by the Obama administration's Justice Department. And somehow nobody noticed.
Federal requirements include how searches are conducted, what constitutes legitimate use of force, the mandatory use of on-body cameras by the police, and so forth. The agreements impose years-long compliance review regimes, implementation deadlines, and regular reviews by federal bureaucrats. This makes local police directly answerable to the Civil Rights Division at the DOJ.
One example includes a 77-page March 30 consent decree between the department and the City of Newark, New Jersey, that resulted from a 2011 investigation, a 2014 series of findings by the Civil Rights Division, and then finally a federal lawsuit alleging police misconduct in the U.S. District Court in the District of New Jersey.
The original complaint alleged that the Newark Police Department (NPD) "has engaged in a pattern or practice of constitutional violations in its stop and arrest practices, responses to individuals' exercise of their rights under the First Amendment, uses of force, and theft by officers. The investigation also revealed that the pattern or practice of constitutional violations stems in part from deficiencies in NPD's systems that are designed to prevent and detect misconduct, including its systems for reviewing force and investigating complaints regarding officer conduct."
The city of Newark, via the consent decree, agreed to the allegations and to implement a "comprehensive and agency-wide policies and procedures that are consistent with and incorporate all substantive requirements of this agreement," including rules on stops, searches, use of force, etc. The city has two years to implement, with the full agreement lasting five years. Meaning — even if the political parties change power in the city of Newark, the new mayor and city council would still be required to implement the court order.
U.S. Cities with Active DOJ Consent Decrees
City State Police Force
Chicago IL 11944
Los Angeles CA 10000
Miami FL 1259
Ferguson MO 54
Source: Americans for Limited Government
These consent decrees are in essence regulations. That, is, without the niceties of administrative procedures requirements, public comments, or even any congressional oversight.
Remarkably, congressional offices contacted by this author were generally unaware of the regulation of local policing via DOJ consent decrees with cities — even though the agreements have been implemented for years. Not a single hearing or word of protest has occurred on this topic.
The lack of oversight is pathetic enough — but to make matters even worse, this could actually be the first step in a new wide-ranging body of federal rules on local police.
The Department of Housing and Urban Development regulation "Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing" (AFFH) actually originated as a consent decree in 2009 against Westchester County, New York, requiring affordable housing units to be built in the county. Afterward, Republican Robert Astorino was elected county executive and yet was still required to implement the court order.
Westchester became the basis for AFFH, where every city and county in the country that accepts any part of $3 billion of annual community development block grants to 1,200 recipient cities and counties now has to comply with HUD's dictates on zoning along racial and income guidelines.
DOJ may very well end up doing the same thing with the local police — that is, if Congress does not wise up to what's really happening and defund implementation of 42 U.S.C. § 14141. This is dangerous. What is most chilling is how far along the Obama Justice Department is in this process. The breadth of regulation here shatters any notion of local governance or federalism. The Obama administration has been pursuing the federal takeover of local police right under Congress' nose — and Republicans in Congress were apparently unaware it was happening.
No doubt the practice would continue under a Hillary Clinton administration too. Do you want a Clinton Justice Department running your local police force? That is how important the election in November suddenly becomes — with law and order already hanging in the balance and police being targeted by domestic terrorists in the slayings in Dallas and Baton Rouge.
As Americans for Limited Government President Rick Manning noted in a statement calling attention to the U.N.'s interest in the DOJ program and urging Congress to act, "The fact that the U.N. Human Rights Council — which includes some of the worst abusers of human rights in the world that hate the U.S. — is cheering for this DOJ national takeover of the police should tell members everything they need to know. It's time to support local police, not render them impotent via federal restrictions against maintaining law and order. No less than the very existence of local government is at stake."
Robert Romano is the senior editor of Americans for Limited Government.
Panic Mode: Khizr Khan Deletes Law Firm Website that Specialized in Muslim Immigration
by Matthew Boyle
Breitbart
August 2, 2016
Khizr Khan, the Muslim Gold Star father that
Democrats and their allies media wide have been using
to hammer GOP presidential nominee Donald J. Trump,
has deleted his law firm’s website from the Internet.
This development is significant, as his website
proved—as Breitbart News and others have reported—that
he financially benefits from unfettered pay-to-play
Muslim migration into America.
A snapshot of his now deleted
website, as captured by the Wayback Machine which
takes snapshots archiving various websites on the
Internet, shows that as a lawyer he engages in
procurement of EB5 immigration visas and other
“Related Immigration Services.”
The website is completely removed
from the Internet, and instead directs visitors to the
URL at which it once was to a page parking the URL run
by GoDaddy.
The EB5 program, which helps
wealthy foreigners usually from the Middle East
essentially buy their way into America, is fraught
with corruption. U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee
chairman Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) has detailed such
corruption over the past several months, and in
February issued a blistering statement about it.
Please
click here to read the article in its entirety.
Or
click here to read how Captain Khan's father is
being used by the leftist media and political
establishment.
Islamic State Answers Pope Francis: Ours Is a Religious War, and We Hate You
breitbart.comThomas D. Williams, Ph.D.
2 Aug 2016
The Islamic State terror group has come out publicly to reject Pope Francis’ claims that the war being waged by Islamic terrorists is not religious in nature, assuring the pontiff that their sole motivation is religious and sanctioned by Allah in the Qur’an.
In the most recent issue of Dabiq, the propaganda magazine of the Islamic State, ISIS criticizes Pope Francis for his naïveté in clinging to the conviction that Muslims want peace and that acts of Islamic terror are economically motivated.“This is a divinely-warranted war between the Muslim nation and the nations of disbelief,” the authors state in an article titled “By the Sword.”
The Islamic State directly attacks Francis for claiming that “authentic Islam and the proper reading of the Quran are opposed to every form of violence,” saying that by doing this, “Francis continues to hide behind a deceptive veil of ‘good will,’ covering his actual intentions of pacifying the Muslim nation.”
Pope Francis “has struggled against reality” in his efforts to portray Islam as a religion of peace, the article insists, before going on to urge all Muslims to take up the sword of jihad, the “greatest obligation” of a true Muslim.
Despite the obviously religious nature of their attacks, the article states, “many people in Crusader countries express shock and even disgust that Islamic State leadership ‘uses religion to justify violence.’”
“Indeed, waging jihad – spreading the rule of Allah by the sword – is an obligation found in the Quran, the word of our Lord,” it reads.
“The blood of the disbelievers is obligatory to spill by default. The command is clear. Kill the disbelievers, as Allah said, ‘Then kill the polytheists wherever you find them.’”
The Islamic State also reacted to Pope Francis’s description of recent acts of Islamic terror as “senseless violence,” insisting that there is nothing senseless about it.
“The gist of the matter is that there is indeed a rhyme to our terrorism, warfare, ruthlessness, and brutality,” they declare, adding that their hatred for the Christian West is absolute and implacable.
The fact is, even if you were to stop bombing us, imprisoning us, torturing us, vilifying us, and usurping our lands, we would continue to hate you because our primary reason for hating you will not cease to exist until you embrace Islam. Even if you were to pay jizyah [tax for infidels] and live under the authority of Islam in humiliation, we would continue to hate you.
In a recent press conference, Pope Francis told journalists that the world is at war. “But it’s a real war, not a religious war,” he said.
“It’s a war of interests, a war for money. A war for natural resources and for the dominion of the peoples.”
“Every religion wants peace,” he said.
Read this article, and related others at breitbart.com
Netanyahu reaches out to
Orlando victims in video
PM draws parallel to attacks
in Israel and across Middle East, says Islamic
terror driven by ‘fanatical hatred’
from Times of Israel by Raoul Wootliff
June 16, 2016, 12:29 am
In an English language video posted to Facebook on Wednesday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the casualties in Sunday’s deadly nightclub shooting in Orlando were victims of homophobia and intolerance and called on people not to give in to “hate and fear.”
Here is the complete text of his statement:
"In Orlando, a terrorist walks into a nightclub and murders nearly 50 human beings. Sons and daughters, brothers and sisters cut down in cold blood.
They did nothing wrong. They were dancing with friends, they were enjoying music with loved ones.
Why did the terrorist murder
them?
Because he was driven by a fanatical hatred.
He targeted the LGBT community because he believed they were evil.
Now, the murderer wasn't alone.
Regimes and terrorist organizations around the world ruthlessly persecute the LGBT community.
In Syria, ISIS throws gays off
rooftops.
In Iran, the regime hangs gays from cranes.
Too many people have remained silent in the face of this awful persecution.
This week's shooting wasn't merely an attack on the LGBT community. It was an attack on all of us, on our common values of freedom and diversity and choice.
Radical Islamist terror makes no distinction between shades of infidel.
This week it was gays in Orlando. A few days before that it was Jews in Tel Aviv. Before that it was music fans in Paris; Travelers in Brussels; Yazidis in Iraq; Community workers in San Bernardino; Christians and journalists in Syria.
All of us are targets.
We believe that all people are created in the image of God.
ISIS, by contrast, believes that all people who aren't just like them deserve to die.
We will not be terrified into submission. We will fight back. And we will triumph.
Today I ask you to reach out to friends in the LGBT community. Comfort them. Tell them you stand together, we stand together as one. And that you will always remember the victims. Tell them they will never be alone, that we are all one family deserving of dignity, deserving of life.
I have no doubt that those who seek to spread hate and fear will be defeated.
Working together we will defeat them even faster.
We need to stand united, resolute in the belief that all people regardless of their sexual orientation, regardless of their race, regardless of their ethnicity, all people deserve respect, deserve dignity."
This was posted on the Prime Minister's Facebook page if you wish to log in and READ and/or WATCH his statement at https://www.facebook.com/IsraeliPM/?fref=nf
or you can WATCH his statement at
http://www.timesofisrael.com/netanyahu-reaches-out-to-orlando-victims-in-video-after-attack/
PM Netanyahu is not afraid to speak the Truth.
Continental Chutzpah: EU Building on Israeli Land, Warning Against Demolitions
the JewishPress.comby David Israel
Published June 1, 2016
The European Union over the past few years has been erecting illegal structures in Area C, which according to the Oslo agreement is under Israeli control. After several rightwing NGOs have complained, the IDF set out to demolish some of those structures. By rights, they should have taken all of them down, what with their being built without a permit. Israeli media publicized the demolition of those structures, some of which actually flew the EU flag — like those mythical cat burglars who leave their personal business card in the open safe. But last week the EU chutzpah has reached unprecedented highs when Lars Faaborg-Andersen, the Danish diplomat who since 2013 has been the ambassador of the European Union to Jerusalem, met with Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories Gen. Yoav Mordechai, to warn him that if Israel keeps demolishing those “Palestinian homes” it would damage relations with Brussels.
According to a senior Israeli official who spoke to Ha’aretz, the meeting was tense and loaded. The ambassador accused Israel of hurting the “weakest Palestinian populations.” What the senior official did not share was that those structures are a means by which the EU has been challenging Israel’s claim to sovereignty in Area C (the PA is currently in charge in Areas A and B). It has to do with the diametrically opposed views of Israel and the EU of what constitutes the “two-state solution.”
Essentially, the Israeli politicians who are now in government, as well as more than a few in the opposition, envision a future peace deal that turns Areas A and B into an independent Palestinian entity, either as a state or an autonomy. The same Israeli leaders envision some permanent legal solution for the upwards of 400 thousand Jews living in Judea and Samaria, all of them in Area C, most likely with Israel annexing the large settlement clusters and giving away the rest of the land.
Virtually no one outside Israel supports this idea at the moment. Even Israel’s best friends in the world envision the ousting of the Jews from Area C, possibly while allowing Israel to retain eastern Jerusalem. How would that actually be done—no one cares to say, nor where would Israel gather the tens of billions of dollars required for such a move, never mind whether the settler population would acquiesce or opt instead for resistance that would make the traumatic evacuation of 8,000 Jews from Gaza’s Gush Katif look like a picnic. Meanwhile, while Area C in Israel’s view is eventually going to be annexed as part of a peace deal — to the Europeans Area C is Palestinian land ready to be redeemed.
Which is why the EU has been relentless at challenging Israel’s claim to Area C. And it’s why they’ve come up with the delusional notion that taking down 531 illegal Arab structures in 2015, 75 of which had been built by the EU, was damaging the two-state solution. Because the two-state solution the Europeans envision is without any Jews in Area C.
For the same reason, Ambassador Faaborg-Andersen was complaining that Israel is quick to condemn and demolish those illegal structures, but at the same time refuses to give Arabs permits to build legally in Area C. Because while the Arabs view Area C as soon to be part of free Palestine, Israelis plan to keep most of it, thank you very much.
There’s going to be another meeting with the EU envoy, on June 15, this time at the Israeli foreign ministry. The Europeans are going to demand a freeze on demolishing Arab structures in Area C, while at the same time also demanding a freeze on Jewish construction in the same Area C. And at some point something will have to give.
About the Author: David writes news at JewishPress.com.
Click here to read the article in its entirety at JewishPress.com
http://www.jewishpress.com/news/breaking-news/continental-chutzpah-eu-building-on-israeli-land-warning-against-demolitions/2016/06/01/
ISIS Kills Scores of Christians in Retaken Syrian Town: Report
By Conor GaffeyNewsweek.com
4/11/16
The Islamic State militant group (ISIS) killed scores of Christians when they captured a Syrian town recently liberated by the government, a Syrian Christian leader has said.
ISIS swept into the town of Al-Qaryatain in August 2015, kidnapping at least 230 civilians including dozens of Christians in the central Syrian town, which lies 104 kilometers (65 miles) southwest of Palmyra. The town had a population of some 2,000 Syriac Catholics and Orthodox Christians prior to the outbreak of civil war in Syria in 2011, but this had dropped to just 300 before ISIS took control.
Al-Qaryatain was retaken by Syrian government forces with the backing of Russian airstrikes earlier in April and reports are just beginning to emerge of life under the extremist group for civilians in the town. Patriarch Ignatius Aphrem II, the head of the Syrian Orthodox Church, told the BBC on Sunday that 21 Christians were murdered when ISIS first captured the city.
Some died trying to escape while others were killed for violating the terms of contracts they had signed requiring them to submit to the extremists’ interpretation of Islamic law. Hundreds of Christians in Al-Qaryatain were reportedly forced to sign so-called dhimmi contracts, which enabled them to live under ISIS rule in the town. The patriarch added that five other Christians are missing and presumed dead, while ransoms had been paid to ISIS to secure the release of the rest of the Christians.
The civil war in Syria has had a devastating impact on the country’s Christian contingent, which made up approximately 10 percent of Syria’s population before the outbreak of the conflict. The European Parliament stated in October 2015 that about 40 percent of Syria’s Christian population—or 700,000 people—had fled the country.
Go to this website to read the original article http://www.newsweek.com/isis-killed-scores-christians-retaken-syrian-town-patriarch-446132
NOTE: Jesus Christ was crucified in Jerusalem, was dead for three days, and rose from the dead, and walked among us for forty days until his Ascension. After the Pentecost, when the Holy Spirit came to the Apostles, they spread out to different areas of the land to spread the good news, of our salvation. One of the first places they went to was what is now Syria, which was the home of Simon Peter. Not only does ISIS eradicate people who do not bow down to their cult they attempt to erase the ancient traces of preceding times like in Palmyra which was a Roman outpost in Syria, from the first or second century after the year of our Lord. Click here to view more about that.
R.I.P. Justice Scalia
Feb. 18, 2016
It is hard to imagine a greater
loss to Liberty in America than has occurred in the
passing of Justice Antonin Scalia. His understanding
of the Constitution as a pact between free people
and government, and our protection from oppressive
government, was unparalleled.
The fact that 30% of Americans do not know who he
was, speaks volumes about the state of our Union and
our education system.
My words and thoughts are totally inadequate but you
can easily find more about the great man's life and
legacy. Click
here for a link to wikipedia. Or click
here to read the thoughts of the other
Justices on the Supreme Court about him.
R.I.P. Justice Scalia.
Shariah Law at work in the Obama Administration
Obama DHS scrubs records of hundreds of Muslim terrorists
Published: 7 Feb 2016
World Net Daily
Pamela Geller
An agent of the Department of Homeland Security, or DHS, for 15 years, Philip Haney, reported Friday that after the Christmas Day underwear bomber, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, tried to blow up a crowded passenger jet over Detroit, “President Obama threw the intelligence community under the bus for its failure to ‘connect the dots.’ He said, ‘This was not a failure to collect intelligence; it was a failure to integrate and understand the intelligence that we already had.'”
Haney revealed: “Most Americans were unaware of the enormous damage to morale at the Department of Homeland Security, where I worked, his condemnation caused. His words infuriated many of us because we knew his administration had been engaged in a bureaucratic effort to destroy the raw material – the actual intelligence we had collected for years, and erase those dots. The dots constitute the intelligence needed to keep Americans safe, and the Obama administration was ordering they be wiped away.”
What Haney discloses is truly shocking: “Just before that Christmas Day attack, in early November 2009, I was ordered by my superiors at the Department of Homeland Security to delete or modify several hundred records of individuals tied to designated Islamist terror groups like Hamas from the important federal database, the Treasury Enforcement Communications System (TECS). These types of records are the basis for any ability to ‘connect dots.’ Every day, DHS Customs and Border Protection officers watch entering and exiting many individuals associated with known terrorist affiliations, then look for patterns. Enforcing a political scrubbing of records of Muslims greatly affected our ability to do that. Even worse, going forward, my colleagues and I were prohibited from entering pertinent information into the database.”
Who gave the order to scrub the records of Muslims with ties to terror groups?
These new shocking revelations come fresh on the heels of whistleblower testimony in the wake of the San Bernardino jihad slaughter, revealing that the Obama administration shut down investigations into jihadists in America (and quite possible the San Bernardino shooters) at the request of the Department of State and the DHS’ own Civil Rights and Civil Liberties Division. Haney noted: “They claimed that since the Islamist groups in question were not Specially Designated Terrorist Organizations (SDTOs) tracking individuals related to these groups was a violation of the travelers’ civil liberties. These were almost exclusively foreign nationals: When were they granted the civil rights and liberties of American citizens?”
How is this not impeachable? When did foreign terrorists get civil rights?
Haney described how he began investigating scores of individuals with links to the traditionalist Islamic Indo-Pakistani Deobandi movement, and its related offshoots, prominently, Tablighi Jamaat.
I have reported on this infiltration for years. I reported on it extensively in my book, “Stop the Islamization of America: A Practical Guide to the Resistance.” Obama has partnered with terror-tied groups such as the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the Islamic Society of North America, the Muslim American Society and others. The stealth jihad in the information battle-space has led to the vigorous enforcement of blasphemy laws under the Shariah, as Obama ordered that counter-terror training materials must avoid all reference to Islam and jihad. Under Islamic law, it is prohibited to criticize Islam.
The Obama administration is Shariah-compliant at all costs. Its number one priority is to protect Islam, even when it puts American lives at risk. The cold-blooded slaughter of Americans in the homeland by Muslims has not tempered Obama’s Shariah enthusiasm. On the contrary, Garland, Fort Hood, Chattanooga, UCMED, San Bernardino, etc., have accelerated it.
My civil liberties and your civil liberties are being abridged in accordance with the blasphemy laws under Shariah. My organization is engaged in 15 different free-speech lawsuits against various cities. Our free-speech lawsuit against Boston is heading to the Supreme Court, because even though truthful, our ads violate the laws of Shariah (“do not criticize Islam”). We are being forced to adhere to Shariah mores, but jihad murderers are given sanctuary and protection – to slaughter Americans.
The moral, or in this case the immoral, of the story is this: Jihad terror works.
Click here to read this article in its entirety, including links to more information.
Pamela Geller is the publisher of AtlasShrugs.com and the author of the WND Books title "Stop the Islamization of America: A Practical Guide to the Resistance."
Wisconsin firm fires Muslims in prayer dispute
Religious breaks disrupted production at lawn mower, snowblower manufacturer
Published: 02/04/2016(ABC News) A civil liberties group said Wednesday that it plans to file federal discrimination and harassment complaints after a Wisconsin manufacturer fired seven Muslim employees for violating a company break policy that doesn’t provide extra time for prayer.
Ariens Co. terminated the workers in a dispute that began last month when it moved to enforce an existing rule of two 10-minute breaks per work shift and dozens of Muslim staffers of Somali descent walked off the job in protest.
Of the 53 employees involved, 32 have abided with the policy, 14 resigned and seven were terminated Tuesday, according to Ariens spokeswoman Ann Stilp. The news of the terminations was first reported by WLUK-TV in Green Bay.
Please click here to read entire article at ABC News.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/wisconsin-firm-terminates-muslim-workers-prayer-dispute-36695435
Finland TV airs 'laughable' strategy to stop rape
If shouting 'No!' doesn't work, then swat attacker with purse
World Net Daily
Published: 02/03/2016
by Leo Hohmann
A public-service advertisement running on Finland TV
instructs women in the Scandinavian country on how to
fend off a rapist.
But rather than pull out a handgun or even pepper
spray, the women of Finland are taught to confront
their attackers with bare hands and a purse.
Rape epidemics have engulfed Finland, Sweden and
Germany in a sea of fear since the mass influx of
migrants from the Middle East and North Africa began
two years ago.
Alan Gottlieb, executive vice president and
founder of the Second Amendment Foundation, said he
found the video laughable.
Anti-Shariah activist and author Pamela Geller posted
the video on her website earlier this week under the
title "It just gets more absurd."
Click
here to read this article in its entirety at World
Net Daily.
http://www.wnd.com/2016/02/finland-tv-airs-laughable-strategy-to-stop-rape/
Netanyahu: Islamic terrorism is flooding the world from Jakarta to California
The prime minister says the struggle against terrorism will take time but that Israel is fighting hard.
Jerusalem Post
by JPOST.COM STAFF
BEN HARTMAN
02/04/2016
Islamic terrorism is flooding the world and inciting
millions from Jakarta to Africa and all the way to
California, said Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
during a trip on Thursday to the Jerusalem hospital
treating a Border Police officer who was injured in
yesterday's attack at the Damascus Gate in Jerusalem's
Old City.
Netanyahu praised the courage of the security forces
and the courage and strength the Border Police officer
shown during Wednesday's attack. He also expressed his
condolences to the family of Border Police officer
Hadar Cohen who was killed in the combined shooting
and stabbing attack.
Three Arab terrorists wielding machine guns, pipe
bombs and knives carried out the attack on Wednesday
killing Cohen, 19, who died of her wounds shortly
after being rushed to the capital's Hadassa University
Medical Center at Mt. Scopus. Her partner, Ravit, was
seriously wounded and underwent emergency surgery at
the hospital. As of Thursday morning she was
considered to be in moderate condition.
"We are all saddened by the death of Hadar Cohen, a
real hero. We all embrace the family," Netanyahu said.
The prime minister emphasized that a great effort is
being put into the fight against terrorism, during the
lengthy effort to defeat it.
"It will take time, it is a long struggle," Netanyahu
said. "We are in this fight, it is not passing us by,
but we are fighting it with great force and will
continue to do so."
"Kabatiya has been closed off while the IDF and the
Shin bet make widespread arrests of wanted suspects,
we have cancelled many work permits and the
attorney-general informed me yesterday that he has
added a number of houses belonging to terrorists to be
slated for demolition," Netanyahu said of the West
Bank village, from where Wednesday's terrorists
hailed.
Police Commissioner Inspector General Roni Alsheich
paid a visit to the wounded Border Police officer on
Wednesday night.
During his visit, Alsheich praised the two teenager
Border Police officers who had recently drafted into
the force for preventing a major terror attack.
Alsheich said “I have no doubt that a terror cell that
comes with an arsenal like this has every intention of
carrying out a massive attack.”
Ravit and Cohen were part of a three-man patrol along
with their commander. They had only been drafted a
couple months before and their deployment at Damascus
Gate in East Jerusalem was part of their training.
Since the attack yesterday, police and the Border
Police have drawn criticism for the fact that the two
women were posted at one of the most dangerous
flashpoints in the country so soon after they were
drafted.
The three terrorists were responsible for the attack
were identified as Ahmed Rajeh Zakarneh, Muhammad
Ahmed Kmail, and Ahmed Najeh Abu al-Rub. All three
were shot dead at the scene. Their explosives did not
detonate and were later neutralized by a police bomb
disposal team.
Cohen was due to be buried on Thursday afternoon.
Khaled Abu Toameh contributed to this report.
Click
here to read the article at the Jerusalem Post web
site.
A Glimpse of Clinton and her Advisors...
No holds barred: Torrent of anti-Israel advice found in Hillary’s emails
Jerusalem Post - Opinion
By Shmuley Boteach
02/01/2016
Clandestinely stirring up potentially violent protests in an attempt to try and force Israel to go against its best interests? Advice like this was par for the course with Clinton’s advisers.
It’s already been established that one of Hillary Clinton’s most trusted advisers, Sid Blumenthal, sent her anti-Israel articles, ideas and advice during her time as secretary of state. But the stream of anti-Israel advice received by Clinton was much more comprehensive.
In the entire forced dump of Clinton’s emails, you will be hard pressed to find a single one sympathetic toward the Jewish state from any of the people she relied on. The negative, poisonous approach to Israel throughout this email expose shows the atmosphere that she had established around herself. These emails seem to demonstrate that a huge segment of her close advisers and confidantes were attacking Israel, condemning Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and strategizing how to force Israel to withdraw from Judea and Samaria at all costs.
This was occurring against the backdrop of Israel’s recent Gaza withdrawal, which led to the takeover of Gaza by Hamas. There is almost zero mention of the huge risks to Israel’s security in withdrawing as Clinton and the Obama administration did everything they could to pressure Israel to capitulate to their demands.
Take a look at a sampling of the advice being sent to Clinton from her many advisers that we have now become privy to.
Sandy Berger was Clinton’s foreign policy adviser during her 2008 presidential campaign. In September of 2010 he sent her ideas on how to pressure Israel to make concessions for peace. Berger acknowledged “how fragile is Abbas’s political position,” and how “Palestinians are in disarray,” and that “failure is a real possibility.” Berger was well aware of, and informed Hillary of, the very real possibility that Israel would be placing its national security at grave risk in a deal that would very likely fail and lead to a Hamas takeover.
But Berger felt the risks to Israeli lives were worth it.
He advised the need to make Netanyahu feel “uneasy about incurring our displeasure....”
Berger emphasizes the need “to convince the prime minister – through various forms of overt persuasion and implicit pressure – to make the necessary compromises” and talks of the “possibility – to turn his position against him.”
Astoundingly, Berger seems to accuse the Jews in America of racism toward Obama. He writes, “At a political level, the past year has clearly demonstrated the degree to which the U.S. has been hamstrung by its low ratings in Israel and among important segments of the domestic Jewish constituency....” He then adds, “Domestically, he faces a reservoir of skepticism on this issue which reflects many factors, including inexcusable prejudice.”
Anne Marie Slaughter was Clinton’s director of policy planning from 2009-2011. She wrote to Clinton in September of 2010 and devised a scheme to encourage wealthy philanthropists to pledge millions to the Palestinians (which no doubt would have been embezzled by Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and his cronies as were other funds).
She wrote: “This may be a crazy idea.... Suppose we launched a “Pledge for Palestine” campaign... Such a campaign among billionaires/multi-millionaires around the world would reflect a strong vote of confidence in the building of a Palestinian state....”
She adds: “There would also be a certain shaming effect re Israelis who, would be building settlements in the face of a pledge for peace.”
Clinton’s response to this email: “I am very interested- pls flesh out. Thx.”
Robert Russo, one of Clinton’s aides and currently her campaign’s “director of correspondence and briefings” sent an email in April of 2012 informing her of Netanyahu’s father’s death and advising her to give him a condolence call. Included with Russo’s email is an extremely biased article attacking both Netanyahu and his father, describing them as virulently racist warmongers and calling the elder Netanyahu “a behindthe- scenes adviser to his son, the most powerful person in Israel.”
The article noted that “Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu repeatedly denied that his father was a one-dimensional ideologue. He further emphasized that he himself was a different person from his father.”
But then it goes on to say, without providing any proof whatsoever, “Israelis seemed in the dark about the extent of paternal influence on their leader,” and “To understand Bibi, you have to understand the father.”
One might be forgiven for questioning Clinton’s sympathy and sincerity when she later placed the call and gave Netanyahu her condolences.
Thomas Pickering, former US ambassador to Israel, wrote to Clinton on December 18, 2011, and suggested a secret plan to stir up major Palestinian protests in an attempt to force the Israeli government into peace negotiations.
He stated that the protests “must be all and only women. Why? On the Palestinian side the male culture is to use force.”
Pickering’s goal was to ignite protests that would engulf the West Bank, “just like Tahrir square.” He adds that the Palestinian “leadership has shied away from this idea because they can’t control it,” and they are “afraid of being replaced.”
This idiotic reasoning that somehow only women would participate and things would stay peaceful is obviously absurd. As Pickering himself notes, “Palestinian men will not for long patiently demonstrate – they will be inclined over time and much too soon to be frustrated and use force. Their male culture comes close to requiring it.”
Regardless, Pickering writes that the protests could be used against Israel “to influence the political leadership.”
The idea was as dangerous for the Palestinians as it was for Israel. As Pickering himself admits, widespread protests could overthrow Abbas’ government, and if Palestinian men joined in, widespread violence would inevitably break out. It would obviously be impossible to prevent men from participating in these demonstrations.
Yet Pickering felt this extreme risk was worth taking, even if it meant the replacement of Abbas with another Hamas-led government. And even if meant violence breaking out across the West Bank leading to a third intifada and the murder of countless Jews. He also emphasizes the need to hide all US involvement in this plot. Clinton forwarded this email to Monica Hanley and asked her to “pls print.”
Clandestinely stirring up potentially violent protests in an attempt to try and force Israel to go against its best interests? Advice like this was par for the course when it came to Clinton’s advisers.
In a follow-up column we’ll illuminate even more anti-Israel advice that was given the then-secretary of state. Sadly, there was just so much of it.
The author, “America’s Rabbi,” is the international bestselling author of 30 books including his upcoming The Israel Warrior’s Handbook. Follow him on Twitter @ RabbiShmuley.
(Links within this article are not from jp.com)
Click here to read the original article at the Jerusalem Post website and check for the follow up column if you have the stomach for it.
Another State Is Heard
From.......
Senate resolution calls for a US constitutional convention
Posted: February 3, 2016 at 10:37 amKFQD Radio Anchorage, Alaska
JUNEAU, Alaska (AP) – An Alaska Senate committee is
set to consider a resolution calling for a convention
of the states to propose a countermand, or veto,
amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
The measure calls on legislators in the other 49
states to apply for a convention as well.
In his sponsor statement, Chugiak Republican Senator
Bill Stoltze says the resolution is meant to restore
the balance of power between the states and the
federal government.
The resolution calls for a convention of states to
amend the U.S. Constitution and provide states with
the power to vote on nullifying federal laws.
Click
here to read at the KFQD Radio Page.
Click here to realize that Alaska is not the
only state that has called for a Constitutional
Convention.
Turkish Court Rules Government Failed to Protect Christians Killed in Malatya
Civil suit results in order to pay damages to relatives of victims.
January 27, 2016
By Our Middle East Correspondent
Morning Star News
ISTANBUL, Turkey (Morning Star News) – A Turkish court ruled on Tuesday (Jan. 26) that the government was negligent in its duty to protect three Christians who were tortured and killed in 2007 and ordered it to pay damages to the victims’ families.
The Malatya Administrative Court ruled that, nearly nine years ago, the Interior Ministry and the Malatya Governor’s Office ignored reliable intelligence that Turkish nationalists were targeting the three Christians days prior to the April 2007 killings.
At the present rate, it is doubtful what year money might actually change hands
Please click here to read entire article at Morning Star News
Man with Quran, guns arrested near Disneyland Paris
Manhunt underway for female companion
CNNby Laura Akhoun and Jason Hanna
Published: 01/28/2016
(CNN) French police are looking for a woman who was with the Paris man who was arrested with guns Thursday at a Disney hotel near Disneyland Paris, police official Michael Le Provost told CNN.
When security guards discovered the firearms, they noticed the woman was with him, but she eluded arrest, Le Provost said.
Bomb disposal experts are inspecting the man’s car, Le Provost said.
Please click here to read the full story at CNN.
Obama vs. Jefferson on Islamic Terror
Posted By David Barton On 01/27/2016 @ 10:32 pmIn Education,Faith,Front Page,Politics,U.S.,World
World Net Daily
Democrats have long heralded Thomas Jefferson (along
with Andrew Jackson) as the founder of their Party.
They traditionally hold annual Jefferson-Jackson Day
fundraising dinners, and President Obama is one of
their most sought after speakers. But this past year,
Democrats began to remove any mention of Jefferson’s
name from their functions. They claim that this
is because Jefferson was a bigoted racist, iii but
this excuse is historically inaccurate, based on an
errant modern portrayal.
If you doubt this, ask yourself why black civil rights
leaders over the past two centuries (such as Frederick
Douglass, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr, Benjamin
Banneker, Francis Grimke, Henry Highland Garnett, and
so many others) openly praised Jefferson as a racial
civil rights pioneer and champion, as did
abolitionists such as John Quincy Adams, Abraham
Lincoln, and others They recognized that Jefferson led
a vocal lifelong campaign to emancipate all slaves in
the United States, but that the laws of Virginia
prevented him from freeing his own slaves. (All of
this is covered in my new book, “The Jefferson
Lies.”)
The real reason that Democrats should discard
Jefferson is that he held nearly no policy position
similar to those Democrats hold today. Consider
fifteen major categories where the policies of
Presidents Jefferson and Obama are opposite.
Click
here to read the entire article of David Barton and
increase your knowledge of American History.
Hands up, just shoot!
Posted By Jeff Knox On 01/27/2016 @ 7:42 pm
In Commentary,Opinion
World Net Daily
The occupation of a remote wildlife refuge
turned violent yesterday when federal agents stopped
two vehicles carrying protesters to a town hall
meeting in John Day, Oregon. Victoria Sharp, a
passenger in one of those vehicles, has reported that
federal agents opened fire on the group without
provocation after conflicting and confusing demands
for the protesters to surrender. Sharp reported that
shots were first fired at Ryan Payne as he complied
with orders to show his hands out of the window of the
vehicle in which she was riding, but that the shots
missed. Payne was calling for police to not shoot, as
there were women in the vehicle, and exited the
vehicle, asking that the women be allowed out.
At this point, LaVoy Finicum, one of the spokesmen for
the occupiers, who was driving the vehicle in which
Ms. Sharp was riding, yelled out the window that they
were going to go talk to the sheriff (at the meeting
in John Day), or that agents could just shoot him. He
told the passengers to get down, and drove forward,
precipitating heavy gunfire from the agents, and
crashing the vehicle into a snowbank.
Sharp said that Finicum then exited the vehicle, hands
in the air, yelling, “Just shoot me then!” A volley of
shots rang out, and Finicum fell to his back, hands
still over his head, and was shot several more times
on the ground, Sharp said.
According to Sharp, agents continued shooting at the
car, striking Ryan Bundy in the shoulder as he
shielded her on the floorboard, and deploying tear gas
before finally taking the rest of the group into
custody. She also claims that none of the protesters
fired a shot or even touched a gun during the
encounter.
The full audio of Victoria Sharp’s account is posted
on YouTube, and comes across as very credible.
Listen to Victoria Sharp’s testimony:
Another report suggested that Finicum "charged" at
police after exiting the vehicle but does not dispute
the claim that his hands were in the air. Cliven
Bundy, father of Ammon and Ryan Bundy, leaders of the
occupation who were both taken into custody during the
incident, has further charged that, not only were
Finicum's hands in the air, but he was not armed at
the time.
In interviews during the occupation protest, Finicum,
a soft-spoken rancher and father of 11 from Arizona,
had insisted that he would rather be killed than "put
in a cement box" prison. He said that some things were
more important than life, and that freedom was one of
those things.
The occupation was initiated in protest of the
re-incarceration of a pair of Oregon ranchers who had
been convicted of terrorism for starting two
controlled burns on their graze lands back in 2001 and
2005. The ranchers, father and son Dwight and Steven
Hammond, were initially sentenced to, and served short
sentences and fined $400,000 for their actions, but a
federal appeals court later concluded that the judge
in the case had improperly waived a five-year minimum
sentence for the charges, and the two were resentenced
to that minimum and ordered to return to prison.
I reported on the Hammond case and the resulting
protests a few weeks ago in this column, pointing out
that the stated objective of the protest was being
lost in the news coverage of the protest itself. Ammon
Bundy and his compatriots appeared to be more
interested in generating a confrontation with federal
authorities than in drawing attention to the Hammonds
and the abusive practices of federal agencies that led
to their plight.
The death of LaVoy Finicum is a needless tragedy.
Federal authorities had wisely been taking a hands-off
approach to the occupation, denying Bundy and his
friends the opportunity for the tense stand-off they
seemed to be seeking. Unfortunately, politicians like
Oregon's Democrat Gov. Kate Brown, took the occupation
as a personal affront and were calling for law
enforcement to take more aggressive action to put a
stop to the flagrant defiance of federal authority.
The result is a martyr for the fringe and escalation
of the situation from a nuisance to a volatile and
dangerous level. The strategy was clearly to "remove
the head of the snake" by capturing the leaders of the
occupation, but what if those leaders were the cooler
heads that were keeping the protest calm and peaceful?
With the death of Finicum, in circumstances that some
are calling murder, a fuse has been lit, and unless
authorities can and do quickly produce evidence that
their actions were clearly justified, this could blow
up in a very ugly way. And it all could have been
easily avoided.
Realistically, what harm were the protesters doing?
They were occupying buildings of a remote wildlife
refuge in a sparsely populated area of the country in
the dead of winter. They were making no threats,
harming no one, and getting less and less attention
from an unsympathetic media. They were not supported
by any national or state militia organizations, and
their whole agenda had pretty well fizzled.
I wish Ammon Bundy had taken my advice, negotiated a
peaceful end to the situation and sent his supporters
home to their families weeks ago. That didn't happen,
and what happens next is anyone's guess. The remaining
occupiers must be concerned about what might happen to
them if they try to leave, especially in light of the
death of Finicum, and by setting up roadblocks and
checkpoints, authorities have now committed manpower
and resources to potentially long, cold, uncomfortable
duty that can't help but engender deeper frustration
and resentment between police and occupiers. Any trust
that might have developed is completely out the
window. Worse, the bloodshed may provoke other groups
to step in and escalate the mess even further.
Perhaps this week's arrests will bring this whole
thing to a close, but I fear that it is more likely
signaling the beginning of something much worse than
protesters occupying a wilderness outpost.
Click
here to read this article in its entirety at World
Net Daily.
Christian persecution reached record high in 2015,
report says
By William J. Cadigan, CNNSun January 17, 2016
Christians flee persecution in the middle east
(CNN)Last year was the most violent for Christians in
modern history, rising to "a level akin to ethnic
cleansing," according to a new report by Open Doors
USA, a watchdog group that advocates for Christians.
In total, the survey found that more than 7,100
Christians were killed in 2015 for "faith-related
reasons," up 3,000 from the previous year, according
to the group's analysis of media reports and other
public information as well as external experts. Open
Door's report is independently audited by the
International Institute of Religious Freedom. Open
Doors USA is an organization that works with
Christians worldwide to "equip and encourage" those
living under persecution while also helping churches
in America advocate for the persecuted around the
world.
The group's report defines Christian persecution "as
any hostility experienced as a result of one's
identification with Christ." Open Doors found this
persecution ranged from imprisonment, torture,
beheadings and rape to the loss of home and assets,
the loss of a job, or even rejection from a community.
Speaking at the National Press Club on Wednesday,
David Curry, president and CEO of Open Doors,
introduced the annual ranking of countries based on
their severity of Christian persecution, evaluating
levels of violence worldwide to formulate the global
top 50. The list, now in its 25th year, is topped by
North Korea for the 14th consecutive time. Curry says
that "pariah states" like North Korea are especially
hostile toward Christians.
According to the report, however, much of the
persecution faced by Christians occurs in
predominantly Muslim nations, many of which are
"failed states" that fail to protect any of their
citizens' religious liberty.
The presence of Islamic extremist factions across the
world in 2015 brought religious persecution for not
only Christians, but also Muslims, Yazidis and other
religious minorities, the report found. Notably, Iraq
(No. 2) and Syria (No. 5) are the epicenter of ISIS'
so called "caliphate," while Afghanistan (4), Pakistan
(6), Iran (9) and Libya (10) all have elements of
Islamic extremism.
Curry said that while "Islamic extremism is one of the
driving forces" of Christian persecution,
"peace-loving Muslims can make an impact on that part
of their culture."
ISIS and other extremist groups are spreading, the
report highlights, not just in the Middle East but
around the world. Curry said he hoped the list would
bring attention to the plight of Christians across the
globe as they face a "total lack of religious
freedom," forced migration and even genocide.
In fact, part of the reason for the annual list,
according to Curry, is to highlight for U.S.
policymakers the continued persecution of Christians
by our "geopolitical allies." Countries such as Saudi
Arabia and India are key global partners for the
United States, yet Open Doors ranks both in its top 50
of persecutors of Christians.
"We believe in religious freedom for all," Curry said,
"and that does not happen in countries that we do
business with every day."
Open Doors also seeks to inspire and inform Christians
in America, using the annual watch list "as a clarion
call to pray, advocate and remember their persecuted
fellow Christians."
Click
here to read the article in its entirety at CNN
Ethics Complaint Says Big Clinton Donors Got State Dept Access
The Daily Caller
Richard Pollock, Reporter
01/10/2016
The non-profit government watchdog group filed the complaint with the Office of Government Ethics, asking it to conduct a “full investigation” into Clinton’s “apparent breach of ethics rules.” A copy of the complaint was exclusively obtained by The Daily Caller News Foundation.
The organization charged Clinton gave “preferential treatment to individuals with which she had financial ties” and “regularly granted access” to rich donors, celebrities, and even powerful foreign nationals.
The FACT complaint follows the State Department’s latest release of thousands of Clinton emails that she turned over to the government more than two years after leaving the office in 2013. She used a private email address and a home-brew server in her private New York residence to conduct official government business throughout her tenure.
This article can be read in its entirety at
http://dailycaller.com/2016/01/10/hillary-clinton-foundation-donors-ethics/
WND Exclusive
U.S. in grip of 'Muhammad' baby boom
Number of Muslim-Americans born to Middle Eastern migrants 'off the charts'
Leo HohmannPublished: 1/06/2016
So-called “home-grown” terrorists such as Syed
Farook, who slaughtered 14 people last month in San
Bernardino, or Muhammad Abdulazeez, who gunned down
five U.S. servicemen in Chattanooga last summer, were
both second-generation Muslim-Americans whose parents
emigrated to the U.S.
Most of the terrorists who attacked Paris in November,
killing 130 people with guns and bombs, were also
described by the media as “home grown jihadists” when
in reality they still represented a foreign culture,
born of Middle Eastern parents who migrated to Europe
and never fully assimilated. And now there is fresh
evidence that this segment of the U.S. population is
growing exponentially.
Buried in the Social Security data is a count of
babies born with the name Muhammad. While offering a
small sample, the Social Security database is able to
shed light on the growth of second-generation Muslims
in America. It is highly reliable and accurate. It
shows a huge growth pattern.
“A boy named Mohammed born here is likely to grow up
in a Muslim environment and, at the same time, be a
U.S. citizen,” North writes. “So we can get a rough
proxy of the growth of the population of
second-generation Muslim immigrants by noting how many
of them carry these names. (Third-generation babies
are also included.)”
The figures show the huge growth in this population
over the last 50 years, starting in 1964 when only 29
baby boys were named after the Islamic prophet who
lived in the seventh century. By 2014 the number had
soared to 2,931, a more than 100-to-one ratio.
Please
click here to read entire article at World Net Daily
World Net Daily
Alabama 2nd state to sue feds over refugee resettlement
Suit claims program too secretive
Leo Hohmann
Published: 01/07/2016
Alabama has become the second state to sue the
federal government alleging that it has failed to
“consult” with state officials while secretly placing
foreign refugees into communities. The suit claims the
Obama administration has violated the terms of the
Refugee Act of 1980, which says the federal government
“shall consult regularly” with states before
placing refugees.
A spokeswoman for Gov. Robert Bentley told the
Associated Press the lawsuit was filed Thursday,
following a similar suit by Texas a month ago.
But an expert on the 1980 law governing refugee
resettlement told WND that neither suit stands a
chance of stopping the flow of refugees into Texas or
Alabama. Richard Thompson, president and chief counsel
of the Thomas More Law Center, said his organization
is not involved in either the Texas or the Alabama
cases because he believes there is a stronger case to
be made on the grounds of the 10th Amendment.
“They filed a suit on the grounds that the feds have
failed to consult with the state on the location of
refugees in the state, and failure to consult is a
term that has no real definition to it. Texas has
filed a similar suit that thus far has not gone
anywhere,” Thompson said. “Thomas More Law Center’s
position is that there is a constitutional claim and
that claim is based on the 10th Amendment.”
Bentley is one of more than two-dozen Republican
governors who opposed the settlement of Syrian
refugees in their states after the Nov. 13 jihadist
attacks that killed 130 people in Paris.
About 80 GOP congressmen have also signed on to
co-sponsor a bill by Rep. Brian Babin, R-Texas, which
would halt all refugee resettlement until the program
can undergo a full investigation into its costs and
its risks to national security.
But the U.S. State Department has continued
distributing Muslim refugees into more than 180 U.S.
cities and towns. They come not only from Syria and
Iraq, but from Somalia, Afghanistan, the Democratic
Republic of Congo, Burma and other countries with
active jihadist movements.
A stronger response is ready and waiting for a taker.
The Ann Arbor, Michigan-based Thomas More Law Center
has been working since June to prepare a case that
would challenge the constitutionality of federal
authority over the refugee program. The program is
administered by the U.S. State Department along with
the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
Office of Refugee Resettlement.
Please
click here to read the article in it's entirety.
Expanding special rights to the 2% who choose the LGBT lifestyle in Jacksonville FL
with excerpts from
Christopher Hong
Jan 13, 2016
Jacksonville Florida Times-Union
"Jacksonville residents crowded Tuesday’s City Council
meeting to voice their stance on the longstanding
question of whether to expand discrimination
protections to the LGBT community...
Tuesday’s meeting saw the formal introduction of two
bills on the issue. Councilman Tommy Hazouri
introduced a bill to expand the discrimination
protections, while Councilman Bill Gulliford
introduced a bill to let voters decide.
Next month, the council will begin debating those two
bills.... the council defeated similar legislation in
2012. Tuesday’s discussion mostly remained civil, with
council members hearing many of the same arguments
voiced years ago and in a series of community meetings
that (Mayor) Curry hosted late last year.
Supporters of expanding the law said the LGBT
community deserves the same rights and protections
afforded to other minority groups and urged the
council to vote on it.
Opponents, many citing their religious beliefs that
homosexuality is morally wrong, said expanded
protections amounted to a special privilege that would
interfere with small business and could allow men into
women’s restrooms. Many urged council members to let
voters decide the issue.
The full council will debate Hazouri’s and Gulliford’s
bills during special meetings scheduled for Feb. 4,
Feb. 18 and March 3."
Has your voice been heard about this expansion of
Special Rights in Jacksonville FL? Contact
your Mayor and your Council Representatives:
Fax: (904)
630-2391
Email: MayorLennyCurry@coj.net
Or your
representatives on the City Council. Click their
names for direct email, or telephone their
offices:
District 1: Joyce Morgan (904) 630-1389
District 2: Al Ferraro (904) 630-1392
District 3 Aaron L. Bowman (904) 630-1386
District 4 Scott Wilson (904) 630-1394
District 5 Lori N. Boyer (904) 630-1382
District 6 Matt Schellenberg (904) 630-1388
District 7 Reggie Gaffney (904) 630-1384
District 8 Katrina Brown (904) 630-1385
District 9 Garrett L Dennis (904) 630-1395
District 10 Reginald L Brown (904) 630-1684
District 11 Danny Becton (904) 630-1383
District 12 Doyle Carter (904) 630-1380
District 13 Bill Gulliford (904) 630-1397
District 14 Jim Love (904) 630-1390
Group 1 Anna Lopez Brosche (904) 630-1393
Group 2 John R Crescimbeni (904) 630-1381
Group 3 Tommy Hazouri (904)630-1396
Group 4 Greg Anderson (904)630-1398
Group 5 Samuel Newby (904) 630-1387
10th Amendment:
The powers not delegated to the United States by
the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the
States, are reserved to the States respectively, or
to the people.
Alabama chief justice tells judges to halt same-sex 'marriages'
Posted By Bob Unruh On 01/06/2016World Net Daily
Chief Justice Roy Moore of the Alabama Supreme Court on Wednesday ordered the state’s probate judges, the only ones in the state who are allowed to issue marriage licenses, to follow the state’s Sanctity of Marriage Amendment and its Marriage Protection Act until the full state Supreme Court rules on the issue.
Please click here to read the article in its entirety
January 7, 2016
Subject: URGENT: Stop the LGBT Law
Dear
This
is URGENT. Please forward this
email to others.
Unless we do something
about it, just 10
City Council members will force a LGBT
favoritism law upon Jacksonville, Duval County,
Florida – a law which will restrict Free
Speech and religious liberties and which will
allow men, claiming to be women, to enter women’s
and children’s dormitories, and dressing, locker
and rest rooms – to view them in all stages of
undress.
And, much more harm will
occur. Get more details at DefendJaxFamilies.
But,
you can help
prevent this. How? LET THE PEOPLE
DECIDE this issue.
● Show
your support for the Public Referendum
proposed by Councilman Gulliford. Complete and
return the
Petition found here,
where there are instructions. The Petition
form can be filled out on your computer and returned
by email.
● Forward
this letter. Email it to as
many people as possible.
● Collect
Petition signatures. Download
the Petition
form, print copies and distribute them at
churches and other venues.
● Help
fund the campaign. And please
urge friends to donate
here . They will understand that it
takes funding to fight this battle.
● Attend
key City Council meetings. The
next City Council meeting is January 12, 2016 at
5:00 P.M. Followed by the Finance Committee meeting
on Jan 19 at 9:30 A.M. Click
here to view regularly scheduled City Council
meetings and plan accordingly.
Please act quickly.
Time is short. Please act now to complete the forms
and return.
Thanks for all your help,
and for your support in the past.
Non-Muslims encouraged to wear Islamic head scarf at school
Click here to read a thoughtful piece posted by Leo Hohmann on WND 12/14/2015.This news occurred courtesy of American educational systems and Muslim Student Associations (M.S.A.), a known front group for the Muslim Brotherhood and an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terror-financing trial ever held on U.S. soil.Click here to fact check on Wikipedia
(The above may more be correctly filed under "How Political Correctness is destroying our nation")
If your blood pressure is not high enough yet, click here to read about the Virginia high school Geography class that passed around the Koran and included a lesson practicing Arabic calligraphy, or the California School with the Muslim fight song. Wonder when is the last time they sang "Onward, Christian Soldiers" and passed around a Bible. (Thanks again to wnd.com)
Facebook censors Michael Savage post of Muslims protesting
Photos show demonstrators warning 'Behead those who insult Islam'
Published: 12/10/2015 at 3:38 PMWorld Net Daily
When Muslims held a demonstration in London in 2006 in protest of cartoons depicting their founder, Muhammad, many bore signs warning of beheading and death for “those who insult Islam.”
Talk-radio host Michael Savage thought that amid a fierce national debate on whether or not to allow Muslims to immigrate to the United States, it would be worth considering what has been happening in Europe.
So, he posted on his Facebook page photographs of the Feb. 3, 2006, demonstration outside the Embassy of Denmark in London. The focus of protest was the publication of editorial cartoons depicting Muhammad in the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten. Snopes.com verified that the photographs were taken at the London demonstration, with the exception of one, which was from a protest in the English city of Luton (which is 33 miles away).
Wednesday night, Facebook removed Savage’s post, explaining the social media site “determined that it violated Facebook community standards.”
Read more and see the picture at http://www.wnd.com/2015/12/facebook-censors-michael-savage-post-of-muslims-protesting/#TU3MPU7fYsr0uGyf.99
After Muslim Truckers Refuse to Deliver Beer… Obama Does the Unbelievable
From Top Right News on October 27, 2015
by Bill Callen | Top Right News
Barack Obama just sided with Muslims to enforce Islamic Sharia Law on an American business, leaving many outraged and two FoxNews anchors absolutely stunned.
Two Muslim truck drivers — former Somali “refugees” — refused to make deliveries of beer to stores for their employer. So they were understandably fired.
They claimed it was a violation of their religious beliefs — even though Islam bars only the consumption of alcohol. And, as the employer pointed out, the workers knew they would have to deliver alcohol before they took the job.
So guess what Barack Obama did.
He SUED the employers it on behalf of the pair, Mahad Abass Mohamed and Abdkiarim Hassan Bulshale, claiming religious discrimination.
Obama’s Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) represented them in the case, providing tens of thousands of taxpayer dollars in legal support, judicial filings and court appearances against the employer who was hopelessly outgunned by the Federal government.
And this week the Muslims were awarded a stunning $240,000 by a jury, presided over by an Obama appointee who stunned analysts by allowing the case to go forward at all.
Click here to view the article in its entirety at Top Right News.
Hard to believe, isn't it? Why would someone accept a job knowing he is unable to perform the work?? This has been fact checked at this link and it is, sadly, true.
from the Washington Post (which commentator and author Mark Levin colorfully refers to as the "Washington Compost":
San Bernardino suspects identified; probe turns to motive, planning
What we know about the shooting in San Bernardino
Police
in
SAN BERNARDINO, Calif. — Investigators grappled Thursday on two main fronts after the deadliest U.S. mass shooting since the Sandy Hook Elementary School bloodshed: Seeking clues on the motives and apparent commando-style planning by a couple who turned an office holiday party into a killing field with at least 14 dead.
“I don’t think they grabbed the guns and tactical gear on a spur-of-the-moment thing,” said San Bernardino Police Chief Jarrod Burguan hours after Wednesday’s rampage and a police shootout that left both alleged shooters dead several miles from the attack.
In addition, at least 17 people were wounded, some critically.
Bit by bit, profiles emerged of the suspects: Syed
Rizwan Farook, 28, a former county health worker who
was born in the
As many as
three people opened fire at a nonprofit facility
in
Also being pieced together were the hour-by-hour events before police say the suspects stormed a conference center wearing black masks and armed with assault rifles and handguns.
Earlier in the day, the suspects dropped off their
6-month-old daughter with Farook’s mother, saying
they had a doctor’s appointment, said Hussam
Ayloush, executive director of the Council on
American-Islamic Relations in
Later, Farook attended the office party hosted by the San Bernardino County Department of Public Health, where he had once worked as an inspector, earning more than $71,000 in salary and benefits in 2013. Farook then left the gathering “under circumstances described as angry or something of that nature,” said Burguan, the police chief.
Police said Farook then returned with Malik and the pair opened fire on the crowd before fleeing in a black SUV, which was later spotted about two miles from the shooting site with the area under near-total lockdown. Some unconfirmed reports quoted police saying the attackers also were outfitted with body cameras.
A shootout with police left both suspects dead and the vehicle peppered with bullet holes and with its windows shattered.
“They came prepared to do what they did, as if they were on a mission,” Burguan said.
Muslim community leader Ayloush described Malik as
a Pakistani-born immigrant who lived in
A third person seen fleeing the shootout was also taken into custody, but it remained unclear whether there was any link to the suspect.
“Right now, as we continue to drill down our information, it looks like we have two shooters,” Burguan said. “We are comfortable that the two shooters that went into the building are the two shooters that are deceased.”
But many other questions loomed.
Among them was whether the attack was pre-planned and why the suspects amassed assault-style gear and arms in a tidy residential neighborhood about 50 miles east of Los Angeles where the couple was often seen relaxing in their back yard.
Burguan declined to comment on what may have precipitated the attack. But, he said, the couple seemed too well-prepared for the shooting to be viewed as a spontaneous act.
He added: “We have not ruled out terrorism.”
“I have no idea why he would do something like this,” Farhan Khan, who is married to Farook’s sister, said at a news conference. “I cannot express how sad I am today.”
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives said it recovered two rifles and two handguns and is conducting “urgent traces” on their origins.
An ATF official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said two of the weapons were purchased legally, and investigations continued into the other two.
“Whatever the results of this investigation ... one thing is clear: Violence like this has no place in this country,” said Attorney General Loretta Lynch, speaking at a White House event on incarceration and poverty.
Recent mass shootings in the
“One of
the big questions that will come up repeatedly is:
‘Is this terrorism?’ ” said David Bowdich, assistant
director in charge of the FBI’s
The two left behind little in the way of a paper trail — no apparent criminal record, no Facebook page or Twitter account.
An online dating profile for a “farooksyed49” from
“I work for county as health, safety and environmental inspector,” it reads. “Enjoy working on vintage and modern cars, read religious books, enjoy eating out sometimes travel and just hang out in back yard doing target practice with younger sister and friends.”
The man in the profile picture is tall and bearded, posed jauntily in front of a nondescript building flanked by palm trees and a smooth, green lawn. He writes that he is interested in “matrimonial.”
Speaking to the Los Angeles Times, co-workers who
knew Farook described him as a quiet and polite man
who held no obvious grudges against people in the
office. They said he recently traveled to
The officer had recently held a shower for the couple’s new baby, and the two seemed to be “living the American dream,” said Patrick Baccari, a fellow inspector who shared a cubicle with Farook.
Griselda Reisinger, who worked with Farook before leaving the agency in May, and other colleagues told the Los Angeles Times that Farook was a devout Muslim but not vocal about his religion.
The site of the shooting, the
The center held its own holiday party Tuesday, and a brief video clip showed staffers and clients in wheelchairs dancing to the 1980 mega-hit “Celebration” by Kool & the Gang.
On Wednesday, the city’s public health department had rented out the conference center’s first-floor banquet room for a holiday party, complete with Christmas trees and other decorations. The event was in full swing when the first reports of gunfire came, at 10:59 a.m.
Click
here to read the article in its entirety at the
Washington Post website
Dauber is a freelance writer. Kaplan and Murphy
reported from
Sarah Kaplan is a reporter for Morning Mix.
Brian Murphy joined the Post
after more than 20 years as a foreign
correspondent and bureau chief for the Associated
Press in Europe and the
November 19. 2015
FROM A CONCERNED
CITIZEN OF
It's
baaack! It's
the so-called “Human Rights Ordinance”
(H.R.O.- not to be confused with the Holy
Roman Empire which failed centuries ago), a
second attempt to introduce another
"SPECIAL" group with "SPECIAL" rights
un-accorded to you- the average moral
citizen of our city.
Evidently, it is not enough to have EQUAL rights and EQUAL justice... at least that is what the paid lobbyists trolling around city hall seem to indicate.
My
consternation is that as a color-blind, sexual
orientation-blind, class-blind person, now the
city wants to FORCE me to look at the
private sexual inclinations
of others, whether I choose to or not, and
then may misinterpret my response, putting me
at risk of criminal actions against me!
We have inalienable
God-given rights- Life,
The Mayor
of Jacksonville, Lenny Curry, has mandated
three fact finding meetings, “Community
Conversations”, so that all sides of
the H.R.O. proposal can be heard.
The first
meeting has taken place.... the topic was "Supporting
the Needs and Well-Being of Families"- not
ALL families, evidently- not military families
or racially mixed families or families with
one partner living out of town, or single
parent families. Why a meeting about this
little LGBT segment of families?? Don't all
families have challenges? All households? Is
it the City’s balliwick to give this SPECIAL
consideration, at the expense of our
public safety, roads, and pensions for those
who keep us safe?
The first
meeting was composed of a panel of six, four
of whom were “for” the LGBT Special Privilege
bill. The meeting was attended by several
busloads of LGBT supporters who were shipped
in from outside of the city. Arriving first,
it was only they who were allowed to comment
during the first-come-first served portion of
the meeting. Needless to say, the first
meeting did not prove to be a successful
format to hear “all sides” of the proposal.
You may
read more about the first meeting by clicking
here, courtesy of Channel 4.
http://www.news4jax.com/news/mayor-lenny-curry-holds-first-meeting-addressing-lgbt-issues-in-jacksonville/36492002.
Two more
meetings are scheduled:
Religious
Freedoms, Thoughts & Beliefs, Dec. 3 at
6 p.m.
and
Understanding
the
Law & its Effects on Business, Dec. 15
at 6 p.m.
Jacksonville
University
Policy Institute at
Jacksonville
is a city struggling to pay the costs
and pensions of our public safety
professionals at JFRD and JSO, to maintain our
infrastructure, and to promote the general
welfare and safety of ALL of our citizens, yet
our elected leaders are spending our resources
discussing how you and I should respond
to the sexual choices of others,
allowing them into public restrooms frequented
by my family and neighbors. If this should
pass, will the city also spend my money to
retrofit bathroom facilities so my kids will
be safe? Will the city require private
businesses to do likewise?
So give
this some thought. It's your city and your tax
money. If
you say No No! NO! to this, please contact
your Mayor, Lenny Curry at
Phone:
(904) 630-1776
Fax: (904)
630-2391
Email: MayorLennyCurry@coj.net
Or your
representatives on the City Council. Click
their names for direct email or telephone
their offices:
District 1: Joyce Morgan
(904) 630-1389
District 2: Al Ferraro
(904) 630-1392
District 3 Aaron L. Bowman
(904) 630-1386
District 4 Scott
Wilson
(904)
630-1394
District 5 Lori N.
Boyer
(904)
630-1382
District 6 Matt
Schellenberg
(904) 630-1388
District 7 Reggie Gaffney
(904) 630-1384
District 8 Katrina Brown
(904)
630-1385
District 9 Garrett L
Dennis
(904) 630-1395
District 10 Reginald L
Brown (904)
630-1684
District 11 Danny Becton
(904)
630-1383
District 12 Doyle
Carter
(904)
630-1380
District 13 Bill Gulliford
(904)
630-1397
District 14 Jim Love
(904)
630-1390
Group 1 Anna Lopez
Brosche (904)
630-1393
Group 2 John R
Crescimbeni (904)
630-1381
Group 3 Tommy Hazouri
(904)630-1396
Group 4 Greg Anderson
(904)630-1398
Group 5 Samuel
Newby
(904) 630-1387
This is the time to make your voice and
your priorities for your city of
WND EXCLUSIVE
Houston faith leaders gear up for new transgender fight
'We will work with Dallas pastors to determine how to appropriately respond'
Bob Unruh11/11/2015
The coalition of pastors from Houston who defeated lesbian Mayor Annise Parker’s transgender-rights ordinance – a fight that included her subpoenas of sermons – now are volunteering to help pastors in Dallas oppose a similar measure.
“We will work with Dallas pastors to determine how to appropriately respond to the wholesale catering by city council to the radical, anti-faith, anti-family agenda of the LGBT Human Rights Campaign,” said Rev. Dave Welch, president of the Texas Pastor Council.
Welch said Dallas’ change to its existing nondiscrimination ordinance “not only opens but essentially removes the doors of women’s restrooms, showers and locker rooms in Dallas, as well as criminalizes businesses, employees as well as eventually, churches who attempt to keep men out.”
WND has reported extensively on the Houston fight, which took nearly two years. It ended last week when citizens, by order of the state Supreme Court, were allowed to vote on the measure and soundly rejected it, 62 percent to 38 percent.
The Houston Equal Rights Ordinance would have banned discrimination against transgender people, allowing, for example, men who perceive themselves to be women to use women’s restrooms, locker rooms and other gender-specific facilities in the city. Anyone opposing or obstructing them could have been fined $5,000.
“Outlasting the Gay Revolution” spells out eight principles to help Americans with conservative moral values counter attacks on our freedoms of religion, speech and conscience by homosexual activists
The Texas Pastor Council’s Welch condemned the change in the Dallas ordinance as an attack on society’s foundation.
“There are many issues that our city governments should be focused on to improve the city, and this ordinance patently rejects cornerstones of our civilization that family is built upon the covenant of marriage between a man and a woman, that our sex is embedded in our chromosomes, and this beautiful created order is a gift from God.”
Welch added, “A bad tree cannot produce good fruit and a law based on elevating gender confusion to being a protected class equal with race can only produce harm, not good.”
The Dallas law protecting “gender identity and expression” says the places of public accommodation that must grant a man who defines his gender as female full access to women’s facilities are any inn, hotel, temporary lodging, restaurant, cafeteria, lunchroom, soda facility, motion picture house, theater, concert hall, and retail or wholesale establishment selling goods or services.
The measure, Welch said, is a “bottomless Pandora’s Box.”
“Definition A plus Definition B equals exposing girls and women to violation of their privacy as well as their safety,” he said.
He said city officials in Dallas should have paid attention to the Houston vote and learned that pastors and citizens will react negatively to such a social agenda.
“As our very ethnically diverse coalition of pastors in Houston stated and showed for the last eighteen months, every one of us are for equal rights for all, however we cannot allow special rights for a tiny fraction of society to endanger the safety and freedom for the rest,” he said.
Stephen Young at the Dallas Observer wrote that Dallas didn’t pass an ordinance but “adjusted the language of an ordinance that’s existed since 2002 in a way that made very little change to how anyone in the city is treated.”
He said in Houston, voters denied “protection” to their fellow residents.
Young said the Dallas ordinance “doesn’t even have the word restroom in it, and the failed Houston law only allowed opposite-gender restroom use in a fantasy world in which trans people don’t exist.”
At the Advocate, Dawn Ennis explained that while “sexual orientation” has been a protected class for years, “gender identity” was a class left unprotected.
She noted there was no organized opposition to the expansion of the sexual identity protections, but critics say that was because there was very little notice to the public of the looming change.
Texas Values Action blasted the Dallas law and its quick adoption.
“This Dallas bathroom ordinance will allow men into women’s bathrooms and that’s why the Dallas city council is deliberately trying to avoid the people,” said a statement released by the group’s president, Jonathan Saenz.
“Their fast track method of passing this dangerous bill that threatens the safety of women and children is the same strategy used in Houston to disenfranchise voters with their failed bathroom bill. Creating law behind closed doors and forcing it onto the people the next morning is a recipe for disaster. These Obama and D.C. style tactics will not work in Texas. Get ready for a Texas-sized response.”
“Outlasting the Gay Revolution” spells out eight principles to help Americans with conservative moral values counter attacks on our freedoms of religion, speech and conscience by homosexual activists
The strategy in Houston was to move the ordinance through the city council quickly. City officials then tried to invalidate a petition demanding a public vote.
After a months-long court fight, the state Supreme Court stepped in and ordered the city to repeal the ordinance or put it on the election ballot in compliance with the city charter.
Some of the pastors who were targeted by the mayor’s subpoena have filed a lawsuit charging her with violating their rights.
Please click here to read on World Net Daily in its entirety.
It is hard to know where to catalogue the following ... under Politics? Religious Liberties? Islamic Threat? Christian or Cult? Perhaps "Know They Enemy"? You be the judge.
40 Mind-Blowing Quotes From Barack Hussein Obama On Islam And Christianity
by Geoffrey Gridernowtheendbegins.com
Oct 2, 2013
When someone shows you who they are, believe them
Since 2009, NOW THE END BEGINS has brought you story after story in detailed accounts of exactly how Obama feels about Islam, and how he views Christianity and the Bible. So today, in light of recent events in Washington, we feel it important that you know exactly where your president stands in regards to his faith and his god. Below are 20 quotes he has made about Islam, and 20 quotes he has made about Christianity. Nothing edited or mashed up, just exactly in the context he originally spoke them in with fully-sourced links so you can see where they come from.Please click here to read article in its entirety
Police Confiscate Mohammed Cartoons At Dutch Anti-Islam Rally
by Nick Hallett
9 Nov 2015
Police seized “offensive” Mohammed cartoons during a demonstration by the Dutch branch of the Patriotic European Against the Islamisation of the West (PEGIDA) movement in the city of Utrecht this weekend.
The rally, which attracted around 150 supporters, criticised the “Islamisation” of the Netherlands, with demonstrators also expressing their support for the Freedom Party of Geert Wilders, a noted critic of Islamism.
DutchNews reports that police arrested 32 people at the demonstration for a variety of offences including failing to carry IDs, not following police orders and displaying “insulting banners”.
One such banner said the “Koran is poison”, while another claimed “Islamisation is EU-thanasia”.
Video footage emerged of police removing Mohammed cartoons, although their ultimate fate is unknown.
Utrecht City Council had banned the demonstrators from marching through the city so they gathered instead in a park on the outskirts of the city.
The PEGIDA marches started in Dresden, Germany last year as “evening strolls” through the streets every Monday to protest against militant and political Islam. The marches soon grew and spread across the country, but died down again at the start of this year to point where most commentators assumed the movement had petered out.
However, as the migrant crisis intensifies in Europe, especially thanks to German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s relaxed border policies, the marches have started again and are growing.
Authorities have hit back, however, charging founder Lutz Bachmann with hate speech for comments he made in Facebook posts back in 2014. State prosecutors in Saxony claim private posts in which Mr Bachmann uses terms such as “livestock” and “scum” to refer to migrants risked causing disturbances.
This weekend in the German capital Berlin, supporters of the anti-mass migration Alternativ für Deutschland (AfD) party also held a rally criticising Mrs Merkel’s immigration policy and calling for her to resign.
The rally passed off largely peacefully, although violent scuffles broke out between police and pro-migrant counter-demonstrators.
This article is from World Net Daily
Thousands Of German People Chant ‘Merkel Must Go’ At Anti-Mass Muslim Migration Rally
by Geoffrey GriderNovember 7, 2015
The AFD has seen its popularity surge as Germany struggles to deal with the huge influx of Muslim migrants, and is currently campaigning in local elections in the Saxony-Anhalt region that will be seen as an indicator of public sentiment on the issue.
The anti-mass Muslim migration Alternativ für Deutschland (AfD) party held a rally in the German capital Berlin this afternoon, demanding the resignation of Chancellor Angela Merkel and calling for the country to adopt a strong policy on immigration.
German paper Handelsblatt estimates that 5,000 people joined the rally this afternoon, calling for the immediate closure of Germany’s borders and introduction of visa requirements from migrants from the Balkan states, including Serbia, Bosnia-Herzegovina and Montenegro.
Angry demonstrators chanted “Merkel must go” and “traitor to the people” under the banner “Asylum has its limits – red card for Merkel”.
Addressing the crowd, Beatrix von Storch, member of the European Parliament, accused the German chancellor of causing "asylum chaos” in Germany.
This was a rally in German from about two weeks ago, as the German people are being forced to rise up and do what their government refuses to do.
Although the main protest was largely peaceful, several counter-protests by pro-migrant activists descended into violence, with around 40 arrests. Around 800 counter-demonstrators showed up, far lower than organisers had hoped.
Yesterday, it was reported that the German government had agreed the downgrade the status of Syrian migrants, reducing the amount of time they could stay in the country and banning them from bringing their families. Today, however, the government did a U-turn on the plans.
Please visit
http://www.nowtheendbegins.com/thousands-german-people-chant-merkel-must-go-at-anti-mass-muslim-migration-rally/
to see the original article, videos, and links to sources and related information.
Court rules against Little Sisters of the Poor in Contraceptive Coverage Case
By Nigel DuaraL.A. Times
July 14, 2015
A federal appeals court ruled Tuesday that there is a limit to how far the government must bend to accommodate religious objections to the federal healthcare exchange.
The U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that if the Colorado-based Little Sisters of the Poor want to refuse contraceptive coverage to their employees, they must sign a waiver to be exempted, and that such a waiver is not a substantial burden on the nuns' religious freedom.
The 2-1 decision is one of the few victories the U.S. government can claim in defense of the healthcare law in the contraceptive mandate debate.
Hobby Lobby, a business run by evangelical Christians, successfully argued before the U.S. Supreme Court last year that a mandate to provide contraception to female employees violated their belief that life begins at conception.
The high court agreed that for-profit organizations like Hobby Lobby required protection, but did not say how far such protections would go.
In response, on Aug. 27, 2014, Affordable Care Act administrators created a waiver for religious nonprofits that would grant them an exemption from contraceptive coverage.
But the Little Sisters of the Poor, who run the Mullen Home for the Aged in Denver, argued before a three-judge panel of the 10th Circuit that the waiver itself both crosses the nuns’ moral boundary by endorsing contraceptives and gives control of their healthcare program to the government.
“Most religious liberty claimants allege that a generally applicable law or policy without a religious exception burdens religious exercise,” according to the decision, noting that most cases begin with prisoners demanding a religious right.
But in the Little Sisters of the Poor case and accompanying suits by self-insured religious objectors and religious universities, the government made clear attempts to offer a religious exemption, the judges wrote.
“Although plaintiffs allege the administrative tasks required to opt out of the mandate make them complicit in the overall delivery scheme, opting out instead relieves them from complicity,” according to the opinion.
The judges said the difference between Hobby Lobby and the Little Sisters of the Poor is that Hobby Lobby faced fines for every day of noncompliance. Ihe Little Sisters of the Poor faced no such burden, the judges ruled.
10th Circuit Judge Bobby R. Baldock, the lone dissenter, agreed with the decision on the Little Sisters of the Poor but said other self-insured groups were indeed substantially burdened when they faced fines for refusing to provide contraceptives because of their religious belief.
View this copyrighted article in it's entirety at the Los Angeles Timeshttp://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-ff-little-sisters-of-the-poor-20150714-story.html
PRESS RELEASE
May 9, 2015
Dr. Gene A. Youngblood, Pastor
First Conservative Baptist Church
12021 Old St Augustine Rd
Jacksonville, Florida 32258
It has come to my attention that there are some in our community, as well as, a few media that have expressed questions or concerns relating to our Church-Ministry campus/outdoor marquee, changeable copy sign and its current message. This marquee generally has a message change each week. Generally the message relates in some fashion to those things and events taking place in our city or nation. As a pastor and ministry we feel it needful to keep our citizens informed and at the same time be relevant through the Word of GOD.
FIRST: Let me state
my deep love and concern for our great city, state,
and nation. I am a Bible believing patriot
with a deep concern over the moral declension. I am
deeply saddened to see the morals and family values
under attack on a national basis. I have invested
the past 50 years of my life in the defense of the
WORD of GOD through religious-theological studies,
pastoral, pulpit, and classroom academic
instructional responsibilities.
SECOND: We are profoundly committed to the
preaching-teaching of God’s Word. God’s Word
commands that I “Preach the WORD” (11Tim 4:1-3)
which in the text includes confronting sin. I do not
have the authority OR permission to change any text
of GOD’S Word-THE BIBLE.
THIRD: Our ministry marquee has been used as a tool
to educate, inspire, and caution for over 30 years.
We have dealt with multiple Biblical-Theological
issues that caution and confront sin of whatever
kind. Our prayer is that in our small way we may
make a difference in the lives of all those who pass
by. We do realize that any scriptural absolute may
cause conviction resulting in the attack on the
messenger as well as the message.
FORMALLY: The present message (caution) comes from
the WORD of GOD, The BIBLE as found in a multitude
of Scripture references:
• Romans 1:24-32, deals with
several kinds of Sin, with the focus on those
believing that they are wise and God says that they
are unwise. God then deals with the specific sin of
homosexuality and firmly condemns it.
• I Corinthians 6:9-10, warns that
all (including homosexuals) that commit sin and DO
NOT REPENT will die and go to HELL.
• OTHER text include and is NOT
limited to: Leviticus 20:13, Leviticus 18:22,
Deuteronomy 23:17-18, Galatians 5:19-21, Revelation
21:8, Revelation 22:15
Needless to say, the Scriptures are replete with
GOD’S warnings to all of us that SIN must be
confessed and repented of or HELL is GOD’S judgment
upon sin. The wonder of it all is that God through
Jesus Christ will forgive “ANY” confessed sin that
is repented of.
BECAUSE we love people (yet, as directed in
Scripture to hate the sin), we therefore want to
warn them of the coming Judgment of God on the sin
of Homosexuality (and any other sin that is NOT
repented of). ALL SIN that is not confessed and
repented will cause a person to GO TO HELL (God says
it, I did not originate the Word), God did. In fact,
according to several of the heretofore mentioned
Biblical text remind us of other sin specifically
mentioned in Scripture including; “All Liars,
Prostitutes, Sexually Promiscuous, Idolaters,
Adulterers, Homosexuals, Revilers, Extortioners,
WILL GO TO HELL unless they repent and seek God’s
forgiveness.
It is my sincere prayer that perhaps “ONE”
practicing Homosexual will have read our sign and
will REPENT before it is too late and they are cast
into HELL. HELL is a real place and anyone not
believing in the reality of HELL will not change the
temperature of the FLAMES a single degree.
I am eternally grateful to God for allowing me to
preach HIS WORD at a time when our Religious
FREEDOMS are being challenged and FREEDOM of speech
is being challenged, as well as, our (all of us)
Constitutional Liberties are under ATTACK.
Notwithstanding all of the above, I do understand
and sympathize with SOME that are not well
instructed or versed in the BIBLE and thus will
consider our marquee’s message to be incorrect or
un-spiritual. PLEASE allow me to state forthrightly;
we stand on SOLID Biblical TRUTH, therefore we pray
for each person that reads our message (changes
weekly), and prayerfully considers its TRUTH and
Caution.
FURTHERMORE, I pray that the media will NOT attempt
to thwart or interfere with our FREEDOM OF RELIGIOUS
SPEECH. We also pray that the media will be
cautioned NOT to in any way interfere with or
disrupt ANY worship or other programs or services
conducted in and through FIRST CONSERVATIVE BAPTIST
CHURCH.
May God bless and use all in the MEDIA as an
instrument to preserve society and help protect
AMERICA and our great document THE CONSTITUTION.
Signed;
DR. GENE A. YOUNGBLOOD
Pastor
Obama blocks Iraqi nun from describing Christian persecution
Posted By Leo Hohmann
World Net Daily
05/01/2015 @ 11:52 am
In Faith,Front Page,U.S.,World
Sister Diana Momeka is a Dominican Catholic nun who fled her home in Iraq last August along with 50,000 other Christians and religious minorities escaping ISIS.
A leading conservative is asking why the Obama State Department is barring a persecuted Iraqi nun from entry into the United States to share her message about the brutal treatment of Christians in her country.
Nina Shea of the Hudson Institute’s Center for Religious Freedom, writes in a National Review op-ed that Sister Diana Momeka is “an internationally respected and leading representative of the Nineveh Christians who have been killed and deported by ISIS.”
Yet this nun is being “barred from coming to Washington to testify about this catastrophe?”
Sister Diana was the only Christian in the delegation and the only member blocked from the trip, the Washington Times reported, leading some of her American supporters to question why she was singled out.
Shea, in her op-ed titled “With Malice Toward Nun,” exposed the real reason why Obama denied the visa for Sister Diana.
“Sister Diana Momeka of the Dominican Sisters of Saint Catherine of Siena was informed on Tuesday by the U.S. consulate in Erbil that her non-immigrant-visa application has been rejected.
“The reason given in the denial letter, a copy of which I have obtained, is:
‘You were not able to demonstrate that your intended activities in the United States would be consistent with the classification of the visa.’”
Shea further explains:
“She told me in a phone conversation that, to her face, consular officer Christopher Patch told her she was denied because she is an ‘IDP’ or Internally Displaced Person. ‘That really hurt,’ she said. Essentially, the State Department was calling her a deceiver.”
Shea states that the State Department officials made the determination that the Catholic nun “could be falsely asserting that she intends to visit Washington when secretly she could be intending to stay. That would constitute illegal immigration, and that, of course, is strictly forbidden. Once here, she could also be at risk for claiming political asylum, and the U.S. seems determined to deny ISIS’s Christian victims that status.”
Shea then outlined Sister Diana’s reasons for her visit and the endorsements she received from two politicians – one Republican and one Democrat — among others:
“In reality, Sister Diana wanted to visit for one week in mid-May. She has meetings set up with the Senate and House foreign-relations committees, the State Department, USAID, and various NGOs. In support of her application, Sister Diana had multiple documents vouching for her and the temporary nature of her visit. She submitted a letter from her prioress, Sister Maria Hana. It attested that the nun has been gainfully employed since last February with the Babel College of Philosophy and Theology in Erbil, Kurdistan, and is contracted to teach there in the 2015–16 academic year.”
Sister Diana also submitted an invitation from her sponsors, two respected Washington-area think tanks, the Institute for Global Engagement and former congressman Frank Wolf’s (R., Va.) 21st Century Wilberforce Initiative.
None of this was good enough for the Obama State Department.
Yet, as Matthew Balan points out in an article for News Busters, even as the administration denies a visa to a persecuted Christian nun, it has created a “special envoy for the human rights of LGBT persons.”
“One wonders if any of the major news media outlets will pick up the story of Sister Diana,” Balan muses. Just over a month ago, on 60 Minutes, CBS’s Lara Logan refreshingly brought new attention to ISIS’s genocidal campaign against the ancient Christian communities in Iraq. But since then, there has been scant coverage of the Islamic extremist group’s persecution of the religious minority. ”
Sister Diana, along with the town’s 50,000 other, mostly Christian, residents, were forced out of their homes by ISIS in the second week of August and fled for their lives to Kurdish-controlled areas.
“Since then, the 30-something religious woman has served as a spokesperson for this community, as well as for the over 100,000 other Christians driven into Kurdistan under the ISIS ‘convert or die’ policy,” Shea writes.
“Mr. Wolf, who met her in Kurdistan a few months ago, explained, ‘We had hoped to facilitate her trip to the States so that she could speak with great candor, as is her custom, to policymakers. Perhaps just as significantly, we viewed her as a critical voice to awaken the church in the West to the suffering of Christians and other religious minorities in Iraq.’”
This article may be read in its entirety at http://www.wnd.com/2015/05/obama-blocks-iraqi-nun-from-describing-christian-persecution/
Muslim congressmen try to boot Islam critic Geert Wilders
Posted By Art Moore On 04/30/2015 @ 7:38 pm In Front Page,Politics,U.S.
Reps. Andre Carson, D-Ind., Joe Crowley, D-N.Y., and Keith Ellison, D-Minn., in Washington, D.C., protesting Geert Wilders visit to the U.S. (Twitter @RepAndreCarson)
As one of the world’s most prominent critics of Islam, Dutch lawmaker Geert Wilders doesn’t go anywhere without his security detail of as many as six plainclothes police officers, and he rarely crosses international borders without causing political uproar, having already been banned in Britain at one time.
So it was of little surprise that three U.S. congressmen urged Secretary of State John Kerry and Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson to deny him a visa ahead of his planned visit to the U.S. this week, due to his alleged ongoing “participation in inciting anti-Muslim aggression and violence.”
Reps. Keith Ellison, D-Minn., and André Carson, D-Ind., who both are Muslim, along with Rep. Joe Crowley, D-N.Y., wrote a letter April 23 citing “the International Religious Freedom Act which allows the Department of State to deny entry to a foreign leader who is responsible for severe violations of religious freedom.”
Nevertheless, Wilders – who insists he doesn’t hate Muslims but believes Western civilization is threatened by adherents of the Islamic supremacy taught in the Quran – showed up on Capitol Hill Wednesday and spoke at two events at the invitation of Reps. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, and Steve King, R-Iowa
King’s communications director, Sarah Stevens, told WND the congressman invited Wilders a month or so ago to speak at the weekly Conservative Opportunity Society breakfast he chairs. Wilders spoke Wednesday on his latest book, “Marked for Death: Islam’s War Against the West and Me,” and also attended an evening reception with Congress members and staff along with representatives of foreign-policy groups on Capitol Hill.
Ellison, Carson and Crowley showed up Thursday at a news conference King and Gohmert held for Wilders in front of the U.S. Capitol and voiced their opposition to the Dutch newspaper De Telegraaf in a video interview.
“Personally, I find it disturbing, but mostly sad, because, you know, the people of the Netherlands are a good people, and this is absolutely true, with a great history of tolerance, great history of giving art to the world and great gifts,” Ellison said.
“And it’s unfortunate,” the Minnesota congressman continued, “that someone such as this would come over here and sort of represent himself as a member of that society.”
Wilders, for his part, would contend that Ellison actually is drawing attention to the central issue: It’s the intolerance of Muslim immigrants and their refusal to assimilate, Wilders argues, that threatens the historic Judeo-Christian Dutch culture that forms the basis of a tolerant, pluralistic society capable of “giving art to the world and great gifts.”
As for whether or not Wilders represents his country, in 2009 he remarked: “Half of Holland loves me and half of Holland hates me. There is no in-between.”
King was unable to speak to WND due to schedule constraints, but he was interviewed by the De Telegraaf reporter in front of the Capitol Thursday, who asked him for his view of Wilders.
“I think he’s solid and courageous. I introduced him yesterday as a man who will stand up and speak the truth – even if he’s under death threats, speak the truth,” King said in the video interview.
“He’s done that consistently for a decade.”
Wilders is scheduled to be the keynote speaker at an event Sunday in the Dallas area called the “Muhammad Art Exhibit and Contest.” Held at the venue where Muslims hosted a “Stand with the Prophet in Honor and Respect” conference one week after the Paris Charlie Hebdo massacre in January, the event’s organizers, the American Freedom Defense Initiative, see Wilders as representative of their aggressive defense of freedom of speech.
ADI is run by author and Atlas Shrugs blogger Pamela Geller, and author and Jihad Watch Director Robert Spencer, who themselves have been branded by Ellison, Carson and their allies as “Islamophobes.” Geller and Spencer argue their work amounts to citing the justifications from the Quran and other Islamic texts used by Muslims who employ violent acts and other means to assert Islamic supremacy.
Comparing cultures
Summarizing their complaint, the three protesting congressmen told Kerry and Johnson that Wilders’ “policy agenda is centered on the principle that Christian culture is superior to other cultures.”
“He justifies his desire to ban the Quran and Islam from the Netherlands with depraved comments like, ‘Islam is not a religion, it’s an ideology, the ideology of a retarded culture.’ We should not be importing hate speech,” they write.
Wilders’ defenders point out that the Dutch word he used to describe Islamic culture can be translated as “backward” rather than “retarded,” insisting that while Wilders doesn’t mince words, he is no hater of people.
“I don’t hate Muslims, I hate Islam,” explains Wilders, the leader of the Party for Freedom, the fourth-largest party in the Dutch parliament.
That sentiment apparently is of little consolation to many of the more than 1 billion people who identify as Muslim, but Wilders contends the orthodox teaching of Islam derived from Muhammad is an existential threat to Western civilization.
While he puts the percentage of Islamic extremists at about 5 to 15 percent of Muslims, he contends “moderate Islam” doesn’t exist and notes the Quran itself states that Muslims who accept the Islam’s holy book in part are “apostates.”
As evidence of the failure to assimilate, in a speech to parliament last year he cited a study showing that nearly three-quarters of ethnic Turks and Moroccans in the Netherlands regard those who leave the European nation to join jihadists in Syria as “heroes.” Wilders pointed out that the same percentage of Dutch Muslims condoned the 9/11 attacks.
Wilders has been under constant security protection since November 2004, when two North African Muslims were accused of planning to murder him and another outspoken critic of Islam in the parliament, Ayaan Hirsi Ali. The attack at the Hague came shortly after the murder of Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh by a Moroccan national.
Wilders was banned from the U.K. as an “undesirable person” under Prime Minister Gordon Brown in February 2009, two days before he was scheduled to show his short film “Fitna” at the invitation of two members of the House of Lords. Wilders appealed the ban to Britain’s Asylum and Immigration Tribunal, which overturned it in October 2009.
Wilders writings and film “Fitna” warning of the “Islamization” of the Netherlands and Europe prompted Turkish, Moroccan and Antillean organizations in the country to bring charges against him of criminally insulting religious and ethnic groups and inciting hatred and discrimination.
In June 2011, he was acquitted of all charges. Judge Marcel van Oosten called Wilders’ statements about Islam “gross and denigrating” but ruled they didn’t constitute hatred against Muslims and, therefore, were “acceptable within the context of public debate.”
Limiting free speech
In their letter, Ellison, Carson and Crowley assert Wilders’ right to speak freely in the U.S. under the First Amendment is limited because he allegedly incites violence and “prejudicial action” against protected groups.
They write:
In the U.S., freedom of speech is a bedrock principle that distinguishes free societies from ones living under oppressive regimes. Freedom of speech, however, is not absolute. It is limited by the legal and moral understanding that speech that causes the incitement of violence or prejudicial action against protected groups is wrong. As Mr. Wilders continues his pursuit of political power, granting him entry will embolden him to engage in further incitement of violence and discrimination against Muslims.
Legal analyst Eugene Volokh noted the incitement exception to free speech, according to Supreme Court precedent, is “limited to speech intended to and likely to produce imminent lawless conduct — conduct in the coming hours or maybe few days.”
Wilders’ statements, Volokh wrote in a Washington
Post blogpost, appear to be constitutionally
protected, he said, because they “don’t urge any
imminent conduct (or even any criminal conduct, as
opposed to long-term changes in the law). Such
statements’ are “incitement” in the Congressmen’s
opinion only because the Congressmen apparently view
constitutionally unprotected “incitement” (or, as
they term it earlier, “hate speech”) much more
broadly."
The above article can be read in its entirety on World Net Daily at http://www.wnd.com/2015/04/muslim-congressmen-try-to-boot-islam-critic-geert-wilders/
It's hard to say if the following somewhat
abbreviated article should be filed under the truthsthatfree.com
category of Freedom of Speech, Islamic Threat, Israel
and the Land, Religious Liberty or perhaps Politics.
So it is place in our monthly archive.
‘Killing Jews is Worship’ posters will soon
appear on NYC subways and buses
Washington Post
Michael Miller
April 22, 2015
‘Killing Jews is Worship’ posters will soon appear on
NYC subways and buses
New Yorkers are used to aggressive advertising.
Banners for breast implants. Billboards for condoms.
But a federal judge’s ruling has opened the door for
far more controversial posters on buses and subways
across the city.
“Killing Jews is Worship that draws us close to
Allah,” reads one such ad next to the image of a young
man in a checkered headscarf. “That’s His Jihad.
What’s yours?”
The poster is at the center of heated legal debate
over public safety and free speech. On Tuesday, U.S.
District Judge John Koeltl ruled that New York’s
Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) cannot
stop the controversial ad from running on scores of
subway cars and buses.
The MTA has argued that the ad could incite violence
against Jews, but Koeltl rejected that idea.
MTA officials “underestimate the tolerant quality of
New Yorkers and overestimate the potential impact of
these fleeting advertisements,” he ruled. “Moreover,
there is no evidence that seeing one of these
advertisements on the back of a bus would be
sufficient to trigger a violent reaction. Therefore,
these ads — offensive as they may be — are still
entitled to First Amendment protection.”
Making the case all the stranger is that the posters
are not the work of an Islamist group, but rather a
pro-Israel organization.
“This is a triumph for liberty and free speech,”
tweeted Pamela Geller, the president of the American
Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI), the group that
purchased the ads and sued the MTA to run them.
New Yorkers are used to aggressive advertising.
Banners for breast implants. Billboards for condoms.
But a federal judge’s ruling has opened the door for
far more controversial posters on buses and subways
across the city.
“Killing Jews is Worship that draws us close to
Allah,” reads one such ad next to the image of a young
man in a checkered headscarf. “That’s His Jihad.
What’s yours?”
The poster is at the center of heated legal debate
over public safety and free speech. On Tuesday, U.S.
District Judge John Koeltl ruled that New York’s
Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) cannot
stop the controversial ad from running on scores of
subway cars and buses.
The MTA has argued that the ad could incite violence
against Jews, but Koeltl rejected that idea.
MTA officials “underestimate the tolerant quality of
New Yorkers and overestimate the potential impact of
these fleeting advertisements,” he ruled. “Moreover,
there is no evidence that seeing one of these
advertisements on the back of a bus would be
sufficient to trigger a violent reaction. Therefore,
these ads — offensive as they may be — are still
entitled to First Amendment protection.”
Making the case all the stranger is that the posters
are not the work of an Islamist group, but rather a
pro-Israel organization.
“This is a triumph for liberty and free speech,”
tweeted Pamela Geller, the president of the American
Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI), the group that
purchased the ads and sued the MTA to run them.
AFDI is not your traditional free speech organization,
however. The “about” section on its Web site starts
out pretty straightforward, then takes a very hard
turn.
Whatever you make of the group, AFDI has been
remarkably successful in bringing its message to
America. AFDI has filed at least nine lawsuits across
the country, often against cities or their contractors
that refuse to display their messages.
Those messages include a poster depicting Adolf Hitler
meeting with “the leader of the Muslim world” and
demanding that the United States cut off all aid to
Islamic countries. “In any war between the civilized
man and the savage, support the civilized man,” reads
another AFDI poster. “Support Israel. Defeat Jihad.”
AFDI’s ads have also drawn objections from Muslims.
The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), a
civil liberties group that promotes the rights of
Muslims and better relations between Muslims and
non-Muslims, launched its own public relations
campaign to combat AFDI. In 2012 and 2013, CAIR ran
posters in several U.S. cities promoting peaceful
versions of Islam. “‘#MyJihad is to build friendships
across the aisle.’ What’s yours?” But the ads never
ran in New York due to a disagreement between CAIR and
MTA.
The poster attributes the “Killing Jews” quote to
“Hamas MTV,” apparently a reference to the Palestinian
group’s odd blend of violence and music videos. The ad
also has a disclaimer at the bottom noting that it is
“a paid advertisement sponsored by” AFDI and “does not
imply MTA’s endorsement.”
But MTA Security Director Raymond Diaz worried that
the poster would nonetheless incite violence,
primarily against Jews. “What matters is not AFDI’s
intent, but how the ad would be interpreted,” he
wrote. The line “What is yours?” could be considered a
“call to violence,” particularly because the CAIR
posters it was mocking never appeared in New York.
When AFDI pointed out that the exact same poster had
not caused any problems in Chicago or San Francisco,
Diaz argued that New York was different because it is
“the prime terror target” and that the “terrorist
security threat” had grown worse since 2013.
On Tuesday, however, Judge Koeltl tossed out those
arguments and sided with AFDI. The ads could not
reasonably be considered an incitement to violence,
even if someone didn’t understand them.
“The defendants admit that the actual intention of the
advertisement is not to advocate the use of force, but
to parody the CAIR ‘My Jihad’ campaign and to
criticize Hamas and radical Islam. However, they argue
that a reasonable New Yorker would not read the
advertisement this way, but would instead read it as
advocating the killing of Jewish people,” Koeltl
wrote. “The defendants’ theory is thoroughly
unpersuasive.”
After AFDI’s victory, Geller posed for photos outside
the federal courthouse while holding the “Killing
Jews” advertisement.
“With our NY win, our ads will make their debut on New
York buses in the coming weeks,” AFDI’s Web site
promises above a “donate” button. “We want to run 100.
Help us make that happen.”
But even if the ads don’t incite violence in New York
City, they could overseas. Earlier this month, Egypt’s
top religious authority called AFDI’s posters “racist”
and issued a fatwa, or official edict, against them.
“This hazardous campaign will leave the gate of
confrontation and clashes wide open instead of
exerting efforts towards peaceful coexistence and
harmony,” according to the edict.
Hamas, the group cited on the ads, has not said
whether it approves of the message.
to
see the full article in the Washington Post, please
follow this link:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/04/22/killing-jews-is-worship-posters-will-soon-appear-on-nyc-subways-and-buses/
Navy Official Bans Chaplain From Ministering To Bereaved Families And Sailors
GOOSE CREEK, S.C.,
March 24, 2015
/PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Today, Liberty
Institute announces that Chaplain Modder's commanding
officer, Captain Jon R. Fahs, issued a "no contact"
order to Chaplain Wes Modder (the military version of
a restraining order), forbidding him from counseling
or ministering to members of his unit. The order comes
on the heels of a tragic death in Modder's unit,
banning him from ministering to grieving sailors and
the deceased sailor's family members.
After a sailor in his unit unexpectedly passed away, Chaplain Modder immediately sprung into action to fulfill his usual chaplain duties of providing comfort and support to the deceased sailor's grieving family. But just as Chaplain Modder was about to perform those duties, the Navy informed him of the "no contact" order, banning him from having any contact with any personnel from his unit, depriving him of the ability to comfort them during a time of grief and mourning. Captain Fahs also banished Chaplain Modder from the Naval base where Modder is stationed on the day of the memorial service for the fallen sailor. The order also comes just days after Captain Fahs denied Chaplain Modder's request for a religious accommodation to provide pastoral counseling in accordance with his faith. (See Captain Fahs' denial letter at https://www.libertyinstitute.org/ModderFacts)
"This Navy official is using the 'no contact' order as a weapon to punish and humiliate a decorated military chaplain," said Mike Berry, Liberty Institute Senior Counsel and Director of Military Affairs. "I am stunned that he would deny Chaplain Modder the ability to minister to a grieving family and other sailors."
Liberty Institute President and CEO Kelly Shackelford said, "Of the most critical times for chaplains, the death of a colleague is near the top of the list. For this Navy official to bar a chaplain from comforting and ministering to sailors and families is a reprehensible violation of religious freedom and common human decency."
Case Background: Chaplain Wes Modder is a Navy chaplain and former Marine who previously served as the Force chaplain for Naval Special Warfare Command. He has deployed overseas multiple times during the War on Terror, including in support of Navy SEAL Teams. In October 2014, Chaplain Modder's commander called him a "consummate professional leader," "the best of the best," and said he sets the "clear benchmark" for chaplain professionalism. Now, the Navy is threatening Chaplain Modder with career-ending punishment because, when asked, he expressed faith-based views on marriage and human sexuality in private counseling sessions. Liberty Institute is defending Chaplain Modder and asserts that censoring his religious expression is unconstitutional religious discrimination. The "no contact" order comes only days after the Navy officially denied Chaplain Modder's request for religious accommodation, in violation of federal law and Department of Defense (DoD) regulations. (Read more about Modder's case at https://www.libertyinstitute.org/ModderFacts)
About Liberty Institute
Liberty Institute is the largest nonprofit legal organization in the nation dedicated solely to defending religious liberty in America. Liberty Institute protects freedom of religious expression in our military, schools, churches, and throughout the public arena. For more information, visit www.LibertyInstitute.org.
March 12, 2015
In mid February of this year Navy Chaplain Wesley Modder received a "detachment for cause" letter after commanders concluded he was "intolerant" and "unable to function in the diverse and pluralistic environment" of his current assignment. Lt Cmdr. Modder has served more than 19 years with commendations as "best of the best" and a "talented and inspirational leader. Click here to read the March 11 article in the Military Times.
03/11/2015 @ 9:10 pm
WND.com In Front Page,Politics,U.S.
Hillary Clinton and Huma Abedin
At least three of Hillary Clinton’s top aides – including one with ties to the Muslim Brotherhood – used emails hosted on Clinton’s private server while she was secretary of state, according to several reports.
At a news conference Tuesday at the U.N., Clinton directly addressed media about the revelation that she conducted her business as secretary of state using a private email account instead of the secure and archived government system.
She acknowledged she deleted thousands of personal emails and said she turned over hard copies of messages to the State Department that she deemed to be work related.
But Clinton apparently wasn’t the only one at the State Department using private email.
Weekly Standard senior writer Stephen Hayes told Fox News, “Two of Hillary Clinton’s top aides used personal email while they were employed at the State Department.”
Hayes specifically named Clinton Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills and Huma Abedin, who served as Clinton’s longtime deputy chief of staff. Abedin and Clinton worked closely together for nearly 20 years.
“The State Department has evidence of this,” he said.
In another report, the gossip website Gawker claimed both Abedin and Phillippe Reines, Clinton’s communications strategist, used the private email addresses.
The London Daily Mail confirmed one of Abedin’s email addresses was listed as Huma@clintonemail.com.
Abedin’s emails would be of particular interest because she has known ties to the Muslim Brotherhood – a group that’s bent on “destroying Western civilization from within” – and other Islamic supremacists.
Hayes said, “The question, I think becomes: Were they emailing with Hillary Clinton from their personal email addresses to her personal email address about State Department business, about Benghazi, including sensitive classified information?
“Those are questions that I think (Rep.) Trey Gowdy and the House Benghazi Committee is going to want to look at very carefully.”
What do YOU think? Will Hillary’s email troubles delete her run for president? Sound off in today’s WND poll
Government watchdog Judicial Watch has filed a lawsuit against the State Department seeking all emails from 2009 to 2013 between Clinton, Abedin and Nagla Mahmoud, wife of Muslim Brotherhood leader Mohammed Morsi.
“Now we know why the State Department didn’t want to respond to our specific request for Hillary Clinton’s and Huma Abedin’s communications,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in a statement. “The State Department violated FOIA law rather than admit that it couldn’t and wouldn’t search the secret accounts that the agency has known about for years. This lawsuit shows how the latest Obama administration cover-up isn’t just about domestic politics but has significant foreign policy implications.”
Get the details about what really happened in one of America’s biggest foreign operations failures, in “The REAL Benghazi Story.”
Transforming America
Abedin and Clinton worked closely together for nearly 20 years. As WND has extensively reported, the Muslim Brotherhood and Islamic supremacist connections not only extend to Abedin’s mother and father, who are both deeply tied to al-Qaida fronts, but to Abedin herself.
Major news media profiles of Abedin report she was born of Pakistani and Indian parents, without delving much further into her family’s history.
As WND reported, a manifesto commissioned by the ruling Saudi Arabian monarchy places the work of an institute that employed Abedin at the forefront of a grand plan to mobilize U.S. Muslim minorities to transform America into a Saudi-style Islamic state, according to Arabic-language researcher Walid Shoebat.
Abedin was an assistant editor for a dozen years for the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs for the Institute for Muslim Minority Affairs. The institute – founded by her late father and currently directed by her mother – is backed by the Muslim World League, an Islamic organization in the Saudi holy city of Mecca that was founded by Muslim Brotherhood leaders.
The 2002 Saudi manifesto shows that “Muslim Minority Affairs” – the mobilizing of Muslim communities in the U.S. to spread Islam instead of assimilating into the population – is a key strategy in an ongoing effort to establish Islamic rule in America and a global Shariah, or Islamic law, “in our modern times.”
WND reported Abedin also was a member of the executive board of the Muslim Student Association, which was identified as a Muslim Brotherhood front group in a 1991 document introduced into evidence during the terror-financing trial of the Texas-based Holy Land Foundation.
At her father’s Saudi-financed Islamic think tank, WND reported, Abedin worked alongside Abdullah Omar Naseef, who is accused of financing al-Qaida fronts.
Naseef is deeply connected to the Abedin family.
WND was first to report Huma’s mother, Saleha Abedin, was the official representative of Naseef’s terror-stained Muslim World League in the 1990s.
Shoebat previously reported that as one of 63 leaders of the Muslim Sisterhood, the de facto female version of the Muslim Brotherhood, Saleha Abedin served alongside Nagla Ali Mahmoud, the wife of Muslim Brotherhood figure Mohammed Morsi, Egypt’s now ousted president.
Saleha Abedin and Morsi’s wife both were members of the Sisterhood’s Guidance Bureau, Shoebat found.
Huma worked with al-Qaida front man
Abdullah Omar Naseef is secretary-general of the Muslim World League, an Islamic charity known to have spawned terrorist groups, including one declared by the U.S. government to be an official al-Qaida front.
The institute founded by Huma Abedin’s father reportedly was a quiet, but active, supporter of Naseef.
The institute bills itself as “the only scholarly institution dedicated to the systematic study of Muslim communities in non-Muslim societies around the world.”
Huma served on the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs’s editorial board from 2002 to 2008.
Documents obtained by Shoebat revealed that Naseef served on the board with Huma from at least December 2002 to December 2003.
Naseef’s sudden departure from the board in December 2003 coincides with the time at which various charities led by Naseef’s Muslim World League were declared illegal terrorism fronts worldwide, including by the U.S. and U.N.
The MWL, founded in Mecca in 1962, bills itself as one of the largest Islamic non-governmental organizations.
But according to U.S. government documents and testimony from the charity’s own officials, it is heavily financed by the Saudi government.
The MWL has been accused of terrorist ties, as have its various offshoots, including the International Islamic Relief Organization, or IIRO, and Al Haramain, which was declared by the U.S. and U.N. as a terror financing front.
Indeed, the Treasury Department, in a September 2004 press release, alleged Al Haramain had “direct links” with Osama bin Laden. The group is now banned worldwide by U.N. Security Council Committee resolution 1267.
There long have been accusations that the IIRO and MWL also repeatedly funded al-Qaida.
In 1993, bin Laden reportedly told an associate that the MWL was one of his three most important charity fronts.
An Anti-Defamation League profile of the MWL accuses the group of promulgating a “fundamentalist interpretation of Islam around the world through a large network of charities and affiliated organizations.”
“Its ideological backbone is based on an extremist interpretation of Islam,” the profile states, “and several of its affiliated groups and individuals have been linked to terror-related activity.”
In 2003, U.S. News and World Report documented that accompanying the MWL’s donations, invariably, are “a blizzard of Wahhabist literature.”
“Critics argue that Wahhabism’s more extreme preachings – mistrust of infidels, branding of rival sects as apostates and emphasis on violent jihad –laid the groundwork for terrorist groups around the world,” the report continued.
An Egyptian-American cab driver, Ihab Mohamed Ali Nawawi, was arrested in Florida in 1990 on accusations he was an al-Qaida sleeper agent and a former personal pilot to bin Laden. At the time he was accused of serving bin Laden, he also reportedly worked for the Pakistani branch of the MWL.
The MWL in 1988 founded the Al Haramain Islamic Foundation, developing chapters in about 50 countries, including for a time in Oregon until it was designated a terrorist organization.
In the early 1990s, evidence began to grow that the foundation was funding Islamist militants in Somalia and Bosnia, and a 1996 CIA report detailed its Bosnian militant ties.
The U.S. Treasury designated Al Haramain’s offices in Kenya and Tanzania as sponsors of terrorism for their role in planning and funding the 1998 bombings of two American embassies in East Africa. The Comoros Islands office was also designated because it “was used as a staging area and exfiltration route for the perpetrators of the 1998 bombings.”
The New York Times reported in 2003 that Al Haramain had provided funds to the Indonesian terrorist group Jemaah Islamiyah, which was responsible for the 2002 Bali bombings that killed 202 people. The Indonesia office was later designated a terrorist entity by the Treasury.
In February 2004, the U.S. Treasury Department froze all Al Haramain’s financial assets pending an investigation, leading the Saudi government to disband the charity and fold it into another group, the Saudi National Commission for Relief and Charity Work Abroad.
In September 2004, the U.S. designated Al-Haramain a terrorist organization.
In June 2008, the Treasury Department applied the terrorist designation to the entire Al-Haramain organization worldwide
Bin Laden’s brother-in-law
In August 2006, the Treasury Department also designated the Philippine and Indonesian branch offices of the MWL-founded IIRO as terrorist entities “for facilitating fundraising for al-Qaida and affiliated terrorist groups.”
The Treasury Department added: “Abd Al Hamid Sulaiman Al-Mujil, a high-ranking IIRO official [executive director of its Eastern Province Branch] in Saudi Arabia, has used his position to bankroll the al-Qaida network in Southeast Asia. Al-Mujil has a long record of supporting Islamic militant groups, and he has maintained a cell of regular financial donors in the Middle East who support extremist causes.”
In the 1980s, Mohammed Jamal Khalifa, Osama bin Laden’s brother-in-law, ran the Philippines offices of the IIRO. Khalifa has been linked to Manila-based plots to target the pope and U.S. airlines.
The IIRO has also been accused of funding Hamas, Algerian radicals, Afghanistan militant bases and the Egyptian terror group Al-Gamaa al-Islamiyya.
The New York Post reported the families of the 9/11 victims filed a lawsuit against IIRO and other Muslim organizations for having “played key roles in laundering of funds to the terrorists in the 1998 African embassy bombings” and for having been involved in the “financing and ‘aiding and abetting’ of terrorists in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.”
‘Saudi government front’
In a court case in Canada, Arafat El-Asahi, the Canadian director of both the IIRO and the MWL, admitted the charities are near entities of the Saudi government.
Stated El-Asahi: “The Muslim World League, which is the mother of IIRO, is a fully government-funded organization. In other words, I work for the government of Saudi Arabia. I am an employee of that government.
“Second, the IIRO is the relief branch of that organization, which means that we are controlled in all our activities and plans by the government of Saudi Arabia. Keep that in mind, please,” he said.
Despite its offshoots being implicated in terror financing, the U.S. government never designated the MWL itself as a terror-financing charity. Many have speculated the U.S. has been trying to not embarrass the Saudi government.
Huma’s mother represented Muslim World League
Saleha Abedin has been quoted in numerous press accounts as both representing the MWL and serving as a delegate for the charity.
In 1995, for example, the Washington Times reported on a United Nations-arranged women’s conference in Beijing that called on governments throughout the world to give women statistical equality with men in the workplace.
The report quoted Saleha Abedin, who attended the conference as a delegate, as “also representing the Muslim World League based in Saudi Arabia and the Muslim NGO Caucus.”
The U.N.’s website references a report in the run-up to the Beijing conference that also lists Abedin as representing the MWL at the event.
The website posted an article from the now defunct United States Information Agency quoting Abedin and reporting she attended the Beijing conference as “a delegate of the Muslim World League and member of the Muslim Women’s NGO caucus.”
In the article, Abedin was listed under a shorter name, “Dr. Saleha Mahmoud, director of the Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs.”
WND confirmed the individual listed is Huma Abedin’s mother. The reports misspelled part of Abedin’s name. Her full professional name is at times listed as Saleha Mahmood Abedin S.
Hillary praise
Saleha Mahmood formerly directed the Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs in the U.K. and served as a delegate for the Muslim World League, an Islamic fundamentalist group Osama bin Laden reportedly told an associate was one of his most important charity fronts.
In February 2010, Clinton spoke at Dar Al-Hekma College in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, where Abedin was an associate professor of sociology at the time.
Clinton, after she was introduced by Abedin, praised the work of the terror-tied professor.
“I have to say a special word about Dr. Saleha Abedin,” Clinton said. “You heard her present the very exciting partnerships that have been pioneered between colleges and universities in the United States and this college. And it is pioneering work to create these kinds of relationships.
“But I have to confess something that Dr. Abedin did not,” Clinton continued, “and that is that I have almost a familial bond with this college. Dr. Abedin’s daughter, one of her three daughters, is my deputy chief of staff, Huma Abedin, who started to work for me when she was a student at George Washington University in Washington, D.C.”
Article was originally posted on wnd.com at http://www.wnd.com/2015/03/muslim-brotherhood-princess-used-clinton-email-server/print/
NUKES FOR IRAN??
The main web page of the Clarion Project is www.clarionproject.org. They are currently sponsoring an email campaign to your elected officials "No Nukes For Iran".
As Prime Minister Netanyahu stated in his speech to the U.S. Congress on March 3, 2015, "for over a year, we've been told that no deal is better than a bad deal (with Iran). Well, this is a bad deal. It's a very bad deal. We're better off without it." Visit this link to quickly send an email to your elected officials in Washington www.acttoimpact.com.
File Under the category of
"Unintended Consequences"
Side effects of a Nuclear Deal with Iran:
A Middle East Arms Race?:
File Under the category of "Unintended Consequences"
Side effects of a Nuclear Deal with Iran:
According to two FCC commissioners, those new
regulations are bad all around
According to two FCC commissioners, those new regulations are bad all around
By Brad Matthews
Watchdog.org
March 4, 2015
By Brad Matthews
Watchdog.org
March 4, 2015
The Obama administration and proponents of the
FCC’s version of net neutrality may be ecstatic
at the passing of regulations that make the
Internet a public utility on Feb. 26th, but not
all FCC members are so sunny in their outlook
for the future.
TechFreedom held a fireside chat on Feb. 27th
with two FCC commissioners, Ajit Pai and Mike
O’Rielly, and the two of them concurred that the
new regulations are far-reaching, largely
unchecked and pose a threat to consumer bills
and to innovation in the industry.
Ajit Pai openly questioned what the problem was,
saying, “There’s never been a systemic analysis
of what the problem with the Internet is. In
this order, you see scattered niche examples
[Comcast and BitTorrent, Apple and FaceTime,
others] all of which were resolved, mind you,
through private sector initiatives.” He
continued, saying that the FCC’s net neutrality
regulatory regime is a solution that won’t work
in search of a problem that doesn’t
exist.” Essentially, this is, contrary to
the assertion of activists and others, a vaguely
justified power grab by a government agency.
Mike O’Rielly added, in a bit of humor that
“there is a problem, and it’s the document we
adopted [Feb. 26].” Neither of them were
reticent in explaining exactly how and why the
document was the problem. For one, the document
was, as Commissioner Pai pointed out, written to
solve a problem that wasn’t readily apparent.
O’Rielly said the document is “guilt by
imagination, trying to guess what will go wrong
in the future”; instead of tackling a readily
apparent and current issue, the FCC proposal is
instead stumbling forward, trying to find
future, hypothetical transgressions to
retroactively justify its own regulations.
This conspiratorial and wide-ranging thinking on
the part of FCC is not a bug, but rather a
feature. O’Rielly openly said that “it’s
intended to catch everybody”. Pai noted that the
FCC was going to centralize powers over what
infrastructure was deployed and where through
the use of statutes and other laws; O’Rielly
mentioned specifically that the FCC was going to
“use Section 201 [of the Communications Act] to
do it’s dirty work.”
Pai continued, saying that the FCC was largely
focused on the ends of Internet regulation
rather than the means, and that “a lot of these
promises of regulatory restraint are pretty
ephemeral.” O’Rielly mentioned that mobile data
policies were likely to be subsumed by the new
regulations into policies on the wider Internet
as a whole. This one-size-fits-all approach
ignores the differences in how mobile data is
used versus the way the Internet is used by a
normal computer or other devices. Many features
of mobile service, the two said, could be
construed as a company favoring one app or one
site over another in terms of data, which would
violate the FCC’s standards.
The consumer will inherit many of these new
costs and burdens. O’Rielly outright told the
audience that “Rates are going to go up because
of this.” The new regulations also fail to
recognize the burden of local telecommunications
taxes, especially in major cities where tax
rates on mobile service are often incredibly
high. The new regulations, combined with the
laws of local governments, stand to impose even
more costs onto consumers.
The outlook the two gave was anything but
bright–the worries of small government advocates
seem justified. The new FCC regulations will, in
concert with other laws and under the directive
of an organization looking for future problems
rather than current problems, give more power to
government, more restrictions to innovators, and
more costs to the people.
Commissioner Pai summed it up best: “This issue
has been largely fact-free for the better part
of a decade, and I think it’s frankly shocking
that decision-making on something as important
as this has been thrown by the wayside in favor
of what I consider to be an ideological agenda.”
The net may be “neutral” but the FCC is most
certainly not.
This article was written by a contributor of
Watchdog Arena, Franklin Center’s network of
writers, bloggers, and citizen journalists.
Click here to view the article at http://watchdog.org/203631/fcc-commissioners-regulations/
Islamic
state: Fears Grow For Abducted Syrian
Christians
United Kingdom
BBC
Wednesday 25 Feb 2015
Islamic
state: Fears Grow For Abducted Syrian
Christians
United Kingdom
BBC
Wednesday 25 Feb 2015
There are fears that more members of an Assyrian
Christian community in north-eastern Syria were
abducted by Islamic State militants than at first
thought. Initial reports had put the number of missing
at 90, but one activist said as many as 285 people had
been seized on Monday in Hassakeh province. Efforts to
try to negotiate their release are reported to be
under way.
Some 1,000 local Assyrian families are believed to
have fled their homes in the wake of the abductions.
Kurdish and Christian militia are battling IS in the
area, amid reports of churches and homes having been
set ablaze.
Thousands of Christians in Syria have been forced from
their homes by the threat from IS militants.
In areas under their control, Christians have been
ordered to convert to Islam, pay jizya (a religious
levy), or face death. IS militants in Libya also
recently beheaded 21 Egyptian Coptic Christians.
The Assyrians were seized by the militants as they
swept into 12 villages along the southern bank of the
Khabur river near the town of Tal Tamr before dawn on
Monday.
The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, a UK-based
activist group, said at least 90 people had been
abducted, most of them women, children and the
elderly.
However, the Syriac National Council of Syria put the
figure as high as 150, while Afram Yakoub of the
Assyrian Federation of Sweden said sources on the
ground had told him that up to 285 people were
missing, including 156 from the village of Tal Shamran
and 90 from Tal al-Jazira.
"These were peaceful villages that had nothing to do
with the battles," Nasir Haj Mahmoud, a Kurdish
official in the YPG militia in north-eastern Syria,
told the Reuters news agency.
There are conflicting reports as to where the families
have been taken.
Kino Gabriel, a spokesman for the Syriac Military
Council - a Christian militia fighting alongside the
Kurdish Popular Protection Units (YPG) - told the BBC
that it believed the captives had been taken to Abdul
Aziz mountain.
Osama Edward of the Sweden-based Assyrian Human Rights
Network told the AFP news agency that the captives had
been taken to the IS stronghold of Shaddadi, as did
Syria's state news agency, Sana.
Another report said they were in Raqqa, 145km (90
miles) to the west, the de facto capital of the
"caliphate" declared by IS last June.
The BBC's Jonny Dymond in Beirut says the motive for
the seizure of so many Assyrians is not yet clear. Our
correspondent says it may be that the captives are to
be used as part of a swap with the Kurdish forces.
Hundreds of Assyrians who were living in villages on
the north bank of the Khabur river and elsewhere are
reported to have fled following the attack to the
largely Kurdish-controlled provincial capital of
Hassakeh, to the south-east, and Qamishli, another
city to the north-east.
Mr Edward said two historic churches had been burned
down in captured villages - one in Tal Hurmiz and the
other in Qaber Shamiya. The Syrian Observatory also
reported that a church in Tal Shamran had also been
damaged.
Mr Gabriel said IS had moved a big force into the area
and were trying to take control of Tal Tamr.
The Syriac Military Council had about 400 fighters in
the area and at least four had been killed in clashes
with the jihadists, he added. The YPG has deployed
between 1,000 and 1,500 fighters.
The YPG is also continuing a major offensive launched
on Sunday against IS some 100km (60 miles) to the
east, near the border with Iraq - an area of vital
importance to the jihadists.
Click
here to read the article and associated links on the
BBC News Middle East page
ISIS
beheading of Coptic Christians on Libyan beach
brings Islamists to the doorstep of Europe
ISIS beheading of Coptic Christians on Libyan beach brings Islamists to the doorstep of Europe
The Independent,
Thursday 19 Feb 2015
The beheading of 21 Coptic Christians on a beach in Libya has brought ISIS to the doorstep of Europe.
The mass murder, which provoked a volley of Egyptian air strikes on the group’s Libyan stronghold of Derna, realised long-held fears of militants reaching the Mediterranean coast.
ISIS started in Iraq and now controls swathes of adjoining Syria, including along the Turkish border, as part of its so-called Islamic State.
Its ideology has spread much further, with pledges of allegiance from terrorist groups in Egypt, Gaza, Jordan, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia, Yemen and now Libya.
Days before ISIS released its gory video depicting the Egyptians’ beheadings, Libya’s former Prime Minister warned that the group would soon reach the Mediterranean and even Europe if order was not restored in the country.
Ali Zeidan said Libya’s fractured government and easy access to weapons seized during the fall of Colonel Gaddafi made it more susceptible to the activities of jihadists, according to The Times.
“(ISIS) are growing. They are everywhere,” he added.
“In Libya, the situation is still under control. If we leave it one month or two months more I don’t think you can control it.
“It will be a big war in the country and it will be here in Europe as well.”
Libya has seen fierce fighting between rival militias since Gaddafi was overthrown during the 2011 Arab Spring.
Mr Zeidan, who fled to Europe after losing a parliamentary vote of confidence, reported that ISIS had a growing presence in some of the bigger cities and was trying to recruit fighters from rival Islamist groups.
Libya's former Prime Minister Ali Zeidan warned that Isis would reach the Mediterranean Aref Ali Nayed, Libya’s ambassador to the United Arab Emirates, also said Isis’s presence in Libya was increasing “exponentially”.
Its military gains last summer sparked a rush by other Islamist groups in the Middle East and North Africa to ally themselves with the group by pledging allegiance and changing their names.
The jihadists behind the beheadings in Libya call themselves the Tripoli Province of the Islamic State.
As the turmoil in Libya continued last year, they gained control of the port city of Derna and nearby Sirte, where Isis seized the murdered Coptic hostages in December and January.
The location of their murders could not be confirmed but footage showed them dressed in orange jumpsuits kneeling on a beach. Behind each of them were masked militants who wielded their knives to kill the bound hostages simultaneously.
ISIS affiliates have also claimed responsibility for attacks on the Egyptian military and police in the Sinai Peninsula, further along the Mediterranean coast between Egypt and Gaza.
England and Europe's greater concern than the United States is evident in this article, due to their proximity to the menacing Radical Islamic peril. Learn more about this with accompanying links at the UK's INDEPENDENT website by clicking here.
ISIS burn 45 people to
death in captured Iraqi town of al-Baghdadi as
Islamists attack the homes of security forces'
families
United Kingdom's Daily Mail
Dailymail.com
Karen Pickles for Mailonline
February 17, 2015
ISIS burn 45 people to death in captured Iraqi
town of al-Baghdadi as Islamists attack the homes
of security forces' families
Western town al-Baghdadi
captured by ISIS fighters last week
Victims thought to be members
of security forces and their families
Follows barbaric video of
Jordanian pilot Lieutenant Muath al-Kaseasbeh
Attack is only five miles from
air base with 320 US Marines
Militants from Islamic State have burned 45 people to
death in the western Iraqi town of al-Baghdadi,
according to the local police chief.ISIS burn 45 people to death in captured Iraqi town of al-Baghdadi as Islamists attack the homes of security forces' families
United Kingdom's Daily Mail
Dailymail.com
Karen Pickles for Mailonline
February 17, 2015
ISIS burn 45 people to death in captured Iraqi
town of al-Baghdadi as Islamists attack the homes
of security forces' families
Western town al-Baghdadi
captured by ISIS fighters last week
Victims thought to be members
of security forces and their families
Follows barbaric video of
Jordanian pilot Lieutenant Muath al-Kaseasbeh
Attack is only five miles from
air base with 320 US Marines
Col. Qasim al-Obeidi said the motive was unknown but he believed some of the victims were members of the security forces.
He has pleaded for help from the government and international community and said the compound, which houses the families of security personnel and local officials, was now under attack.
It follows the capture of al-Baghdadi, near Ain al-Asad air base, by ISIS fighters last week.
The unconfirmed reports have haunting similarities to the video published earlier this month, showing militants burning alive a Jordanian air force pilot, whose plane crashed in Syria in December.
Al-Baghdadi had been besieged for months by Islamic State fighters before its fall. It had been one of the few towns to still be controlled by the Iraqi government in Anbar province, where IS and allied Sunni Arab tribesmen launched an offensive in January 2014.
On Friday, Pentagon spokesman Rear Adm John Kirby, played down its capture, telling reporters it was the first time in the last couple of months that the jihadist group had taken new ground.
But with 320 US Marines stationed just five miles away at the Ain al-Asad air base, training members of the Iraqi army's 7th Division, it will cause concern.
The base was attacked by several suicide bombers, on Friday with the militant repelled by Iraqi troops backed by US-led coalition aircraft.
In a separate development on Tuesday, the influential Shia cleric Moqtada Sadr announced he was withdrawing his forces from an umbrella group of Shia militia fighting IS alongside the Iraqi army.
He cited what he called the bad behaviour of other militia within the Popular Mobilisation Forces, whom he accused of 'wreaking havoc through murdering, kidnapping and violating sanctuaries'.
Shia militia have been accused of kidnapping and killing scores of Sunni civilians since Islamic State launched an offensive in northern Iraq last June that saw it seize large swathes of the country.
Elsewhere, there are reports at least 35 more Egyptian Christians are feared to have been kidnapped by jihadists in retaliation for air strikes on targets in Libya.
Militants from the Islamic State and Ansar Al-Sharia are understood to have rounded up dozens of farm workers in the wake of bombings by Cairo, it was reported by local media.
The move is believed to be a direct response to strikes by Egyptian warplanes yesterday which came after fanatics released a horrific video showing the beheading of 21 Christians on a beach.
Click
here to read the article in its entirety with
maps and links at The Dailymail.co.uk
Click here to read the article in its entirety with maps and links at The Dailymail.co.uk
Netanyahu: Israel is standing by Europe, Europe must stand by Israel
January 8, 2015
The Jerusalem Post
By HERB KEINON
In meeting with Norwegian FM, Netanyahu says radical
Islam is a "threat to our common
civilization."
Israel is being attacked by the same forces
attacking Europe, and just as Israel stands with
Europe, so too Europe must stand with Israel, Prime
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Thursday.
Netanyahu, speaking following a meeting with
visiting Norwegian Foreign Minister Børge Brende,
said that Wednesday’s terrorist attack in Paris
“clearly demonstrates the disdain of radical Islam
for the values we hold dear. We cherish freedom and
tolerance; they worship tyranny and terror. And
through this terror they seek to impose a new dark
age on humanity.”
Netanyahu said the terrorists were “part of a global
movement and this necessitates a global response. I
believe that with the strength of our resolve and
the unity of our action, we can defeat this threat
to our common civilization. And what the battle
against terror requires is courage, clarity and
consistency.”
Deputy Foreign Minister Tzahi Hanegbi said in an
Israel Radio interview that precisely that type of
determination has been missing up until now in
France and elsewhere in Europe in the battle against
terrorism.
Hanegbi said the French in the past tried to delude
themselves regarding the true nature of threat,
saying “maybe it was only sporadic incidents, maybe
it is only anti-Semitism, maybe it is only against
the Jews.”
He said that the French at times tried to understand
the terrorists motivations, and at other times tried
to downplay their ties to Islam. The sheer brutality
of Wednesday attack, especially the murder of the
policeman on the sidewalk, will compel the French
government to “look at the reality square in the
face” and realize there is a serious danger at their
gates, he said.
Hanegbi predicted that France will be forced, like
the US was after the September 11, 2001 attacks, to
empower the security establishment with tools to
effectively deal with the threats.
“France must deal with the threat coming from
within,” he said. Hanegbi added that Israel,
unfortunately, has quite a deal of experience
dealing with terrorism, and that “anyone who
cooperates with a county as experienced [in dealing
with terrorism] as Israel, only benefits.”
He said that Israel has the capability to help
France a lot more than the French have requested in
the past. Now, he said, France “ will have an
interest in being helped by anyone who can help
them, including israel.”
Foreign Minister Avigdor Liberman, meanwhile, took
the Paris attack and used it to prove a point
regarding domestic Israeli policies.
If there was an important lesson to be learned from
the attack, he said, it is that extremist movements
must be dealt with early, and that there are only
small legal and semantic differences separating
those organizations from terrorist groups.
Those who demonstrate tolerance toward those
organizations, he said, will ultimately pay a high
price in blood, as well as in threats to their very
democracies that allows those organizations to work.
Israel's lesson, he said, must be not to tarry and
to stop the activities of Raed Salah and the
northern branch of the Islamic Movement in Israel.
Liberman said Salah's organization was an
inseparable link in the chain of terrorist
organizations that includes Hamas, Islamic Jihad,
al-Qaida and the Islamic State. He said the
organization “shares exactly the same values of the
perpetrators of the massacre in Paris and its
intolerance of criticism and of anything
inconsistent with its extreme world view.”
Liberman said the the northern branch is a threat to
Israeli democracy and the country's citizens, and
that it needed to be outlawed.
Please
click here to see the article in the Jerusalem
Post
Houston Subpoenas Pastors’ Sermons in Gay Rights Ordinance Case
By Sarah Pulliam Bailey
Religion News Service
October 15, 2014
Evangelical leaders are
angry after city officials in Houston subpoenaed
sermons given by local pastors who oppose an equal
rights ordinance that provides protections to the
LGBT community.
Houston Mayor Annise Parker, who drew headlines for
becoming the first openly lesbian mayor of a major
American city, led support for the ordinance. The
measure bans anti-gay discrimination among
businesses that serve the public, private employers,
in housing and in city employment and city
contracting.
Under one of the hotly contested parts of the
ordinance, transgender people barred access to a
restroom would be able to file a discrimination
complaint.
The ordinance, which exempted religious
institutions, was passed in May, though its
implementation has been delayed due to legal
complaints.
Opponents were hoping to repeal the ordinance
through a ballot measure and claimed the city’s
attorney incorrectly determined they had not
gathered enough signatures to qualify for a ballot.
Supporters of the repeal reportedly gathered 50,000
signatures, well over the 17,269 needed for
inclusion on the November ballot. Opponents of the
repeal have questioned the validity of the
signatures.
A group of Christians sued the city. In response,
city attorneys issued subpoenas to five local
pastors during the case’s discovery phase, though
the five pastors were not involved in the lawsuit.
The subpoenas sought “all speeches, presentations,
or sermons related to HERO, the Petition, Mayor
Annise Parker, homosexuality, or gender identity
prepared by, delivered by, revised by, or approved
by you or in your possession,” according to the
Houston Chronicle.
“The subpoenas were issued to pastors who have been
involved in the political campaign to organize a
repeal of Houston’s new equal rights ordinance,”
said Janice Evans, chief policy officer to the
mayor, in a statement. “It is part of the discovery
process in a lawsuit brought by opponents of the
ordinance, a group that is tied to the pastors who
have received the subpoenas.”
An Arizona-based religious liberty group, Alliance
Defending Freedom, has filed a motion on behalf of
the pastors seeking to halt the subpoenas. The
ministers call the subpoenas “overbroad, unduly
burdensome, harassing, and vexatious.”
“The pastors made their sermons relevant to the case
by using the pulpit to do political organizing,”
Evans said in her statement. “This included
encouraging congregation members to sign petitions
and help gather signatures for equal rights
ordinance foes. The issue is whether they were
speaking from the pulpit for the purpose of
politics. If so, it is not protected speech.”
The lawsuit is scheduled for trial in January.
“It’s procedural — it’s common to ask for a wide
range of documents — but the mayor is playing real
hardball,” said David Skeel, professor of law at the
University of Pennsylvania. “The fact that she’s
subpoenaing pastors seems quite unusual in a case
that’s mostly about politics, and the fact that
she’s going inside the church is even more radical.
It would be easy enough to get sermons, of course,
but asking for them is clearly meant to send a
signal.”
City Attorney David Feldman argues the subpoenas are
justified because the churches are where opponents
of the ordinance met to organize.
“We’re certainly entitled to inquire about the
communications that took place in the churches
regarding the ordinance and the petitions because
that’s where they chose to do it,” Feldman told KTRH
News. “It’s relevant to know what representations
and instructions were given regarding these
petitions.”
The issue has angered evangelicals nationwide,
prompting outcry from people such as Russell Moore,
president of the Southern Baptist Ethics and
Religious Liberty Commission.
“The separation of church and state means that we
will render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s, and
we will,” Moore wrote. “But the preaching of the
church of God does not belong to Caesar, and we will
not hand it over to him. Not now. Not ever.”
More than 1,800 pastors participated in ADF’s
seventh annual Pulpit Freedom Sunday event on Oct.
5, daring the Internal Revenue Service to prosecute
them for endorsing political candidates. Under IRS
regulations, tax-exempt churches are not allowed to
engage in partisan politics.
Copyright: For copyright information, please check
with the distributor of this item, Religion News
Service LLC. Visit http://www.religionnews.com/2014/10/14/houston-subpoenas-pastors-sermons-equal-rights-ordinance-case-prompting-outcry/
the source of the above article by Sarah Pulliam
Bailey, and updates and comments regarding this
attempted overstep by Houston government.
Food for thought from-
The Khaleej Times
- a daily U.S. language newspaper published in United Arab Emirates. It is the
second most popular English language newspapers
published in the UAE.
The Khaleej Times
- a daily U.S. language newspaper published in United Arab Emirates. It is the
second most popular English language newspapers
published in the UAE.
Armageddon
Can Wait
Armageddon Can Wait
Mahir Ali
Kaleej Times
3 September 2014
Global
threat is used to deflect attention from
domestic woes
Mahir Ali
Kaleej Times
3 September 2014
Global
threat is used to deflect attention from
domestic woes
Barack Obama’s recent confession that his country
did not so far have a strategy as far as the
so-called
The United States did not really have a strategy a decade or so ago either, when the administration of George W. Bush decided to invade Iraq, evidently expecting that the various pieces would magically fall into place once Saddam Hussein was toppled. The tactic represented a disastrous combination of hubris and ignorance.
The extent to which the subsequent implosions and explosions in the region are a direct consequence of that particular debacle is arguable, but there can be little doubt that the big picture would have been decidedly different, and in all probability considerably less unpleasant, in the absence of that monumental neoconservative folly.
Of course, what’s done cannot be undone, and the present crisis demands a resolute response. It’s by no means undesirable, however, for that response to take account of all that has gone wrong in the recent past.
Obama has come under attack, for instance, for
hesitating to strike
Under similar circumstances, would the outcome the
The
There have evidently been some tactical successes
in
In the latter instance, the
Naturally, neither
The United Nations this week decided to investigate
“acts of inhumanity on an unimaginable scale” by
Meanwhile, there has been considerable concern
across several nations in Europe as well as in the
This is hardly a novel trend — it can be traced
back at least to
The
The Western insistence on “no boots on the ground”
is open to interpretation as insufficient commitment
or even cowardice. But in fact it’s a welcome
augury, not least in the light of recent experience.
When, since the Second World War, have Western boots
on the ground produced positive consequences in the
Article in full at Kaleej Times
Iraq's largest Christian town abandoned as Isis advance continues
UN officials say an estimated 200,000 new refugees are seeking sanctuary in the Kurdish north from Islamic extremists
US considering humanitarian relief to Iraqis trapped by Isis
by Martin Chulovat theguardian.com
Thursday 7 August 2014
Thousands of Yazidi and Christian people flee to Erbil after the latest wave of Isis advances. Photograph: Anadolu Agency/Getty Images
Iraq's largest Christian city was all but abandoned on Thursday as the jihadist advance through minority communities in the country's north-west rampaged towards the Kurdish stronghold of Erbil.
UN officials said an estimated 200,000 new refugees were seeking sanctuary in the Kurdish north from Islamic extremists who had pursued them since the weekend. The city of Qaraqosh, south-east of Mosul, home to around 50,000 Christians was the latest to fall, with most residents fleeing before dawn as convoys of extremists drew near.
Other Christian towns near Mosul, including Tel Askof, Tel Keif and Qaramless have also largely been emptied. Those who remained behind have reportedly been given the same stark choice given to other minorities, including Yazidis: flee, convert to Islam, or be killed.
Christians, Yazidis and Turkmen have been at the frontlines of Iraq's war with the Islamic State (Isis) ever since the jihadist group stormed into Mosul and Tikrit and mid-June. The Iraqi army capitulated within hours, with at least 60,000 officers and soldiers fleeing on the first day of the assault alone.
Ever since, the jihadists have continued to make advances, while Iraqi troops have concentrated on defending Baghdad and the Shia south, leaving the defence of minorities in the north to the Kurdish peshmurga.
However, even the much vaunted Kurdish forces were no match for the heavy weapons wielded by the jihadists as they advanced in recent days. Peshmurga officers ordered troops to withdraw to areas administered by the Kurdish regional government – a clear sign of priorities and of where the battle lines are being drawn.
Without any protection, Yazidis, Christians and Turkmen are being uprooted from communities they have lived in for millennia and the geo-social fabric of Iraq is being rapidly shredded.
While those who have managed to flee the Christian areas have so far had a relatively safe passage to Erbil, tens of thousands of Yazidis remain besieged on a mountain top near Sinjar, with little food or water.
The UN said on Thursday it was able to get some supplies overland to the stranded hordes – avoiding Isis fighters who have surrounded most of Mount Sinjar. Turkish foreign minister Ahmet Davutoglu announced that Turkish helicopters had dropped food and water on the mountain top. Iraqi helicopters have also made food drops, but stranded Yazidis say they do not have enough to survive.
The Chaldean archbishop of Kirkuk, Joseph Thomas, described the situation in northern Iraq as "catastrophic, a crisis beyond imagination". He demanded urgent intervention to save what remained of the area's Christian heritage.
Kurdish officials on Thursday demanded more help in catering for refugees. The Kurdish administered areas have seen staggering numbers cross their notional border since the original Isis onslaught two months ago. In the first week alone, some 500,000 people are thought to have fled towards Erbil.
The capital of the Kurdish north is already home to a new Chaldean Christian community, which fled Baghdad in the wake of an Isis-led massacre inside a cathedral in October 2010. Many fleeing Christians have headed for the Ainkawa neighbourhood, which is home to Baghdad's Christian exiles.
The past 11 years of war and insurrection since the US invasion have led to most of Iraq's Christians fleeing. Numbers have plummeted starkly from an estimated one million before 2003 to around 150,000 now. A large number of those who remain are now displaced.
Miriam Dagher, 53, from Qaraqosh, said churches in the city had already been torched and religious insignia smashed. "We stayed as long as we could," she said. "But nothing could save us. This is the end of our community.
Click here to read the article at the Guardian
Amnesty On Trial
May 28, 2014
By KrisAnne Hall
If the federal government were a person, if Congress were subject to the laws they create, they would face fines, prison or both for many of their actions. The ENLIST Act, being touted as a “pathway” to citizenship for illegal aliens may be one of those actions. It could be argued that the very act itself violates federal law. Consider this:
Immigration law, 8 US Code 1324 states that it is a crime to, either knowingly or recklessly, “conceal, harbor, or shield from detection, or attempt to conceal, harbor, or shield from detection… transport, or move or attempt to transport or move” or to even “encourage or induce” an illegal alien “to come to, enter, or reside in the United States, knowingly or in reckless disregard of the fact that such coming to, entry, or residence is or will be in violation of law.”
It is not only a crime to actually commit these offenses, but it is a crime to even attempt to do so. Anyone found guilty of violating 8 US Code 1324 is subject to fines, prison or both. However, if it can be proven that this person has committed this act for personal gain, the fines go up and the prison sentence can be as much as ten years.
The Act also appears to violate 8 US Code 1611 which sets forth specific federal benefits that cannot be given to illegal aliens.
- See more at: http://krisannehall.com/amnesty-trial/#sthash.9AOkP6WK.dpuf
May 8, 2014 2:19PM
Is the Constitution Relevant Today?
By David BoazFrom The Cato Institute
May 8, 2014 2:19PM
In the Washington Post, Paul Kane reports that recent experiences with ultra-conservative Senate candidates have made Republican leaders fearful of candidates like Rep. Paul Broun in Georgia. There may be reasons for party leaders or voters to have doubts about Broun, but I hope they aren’t actually concerned about the purported problem that Kane identifies:
Broun is prone to fiery speeches invoking the Founding Fathers and applying those 1789 principles to issues 225 years later.
Seriously? He thinks the Constitution is still the law of the land? And that the framework it established for individual rights and limited government is still relevant today? Do Republican leaders really think that’s a bad message? Or does the Washington Post?
Thomas Jefferson and his followers hailed “the principles of ‘76” or “the spirit of ‘76” in their battles with Federalists. As historian Joseph Ellis put it, “Jefferson’s core conviction was that what might be called ‘the spirit of ‘76’ had repudiated all energetic expressions of government power, most especially power exercised from faraway places, which included London, Philadelphia or Washington.” Good thing there isn’t an actual Jeffersonian running!
But the principles of 1789, or actually of 1787, also protect freedom from government power and are just as essential today as they were at the Founding. The Framers knew their history. They knew that people with power tend to abuse it and to restrict freedom. In his last letter, 50 years after the Declaration of Independence, Jefferson wrote:
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately, by the grace of God.
Because they feared the exercise of power, the Framers wrote a Constitution that established a government of delegated, enumerated, and thus limited powers. Then the people insisted on a Bill of Rights to further protect their rights even from the very limited federal government established in the Constitution. Then, after identifying specific rights that individuals retained, they also added, “for greater caution,” as James Madison put it, the Ninth Amendment to clarify that “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”
One would hope that all members of Congress – and voters, and political reporters – believe that those principles and those constitutional rules should be applied to issues of today. Surely the First Amendment remains relevant. And the Fourth. And the limits on unconstrained power in the basic structure of the Constitution. The merits of any particular candidate aside, support of the Constitution and the principles it embodies seems like a good, even minimal, qualification for public office.
Click here to read the article in its entirety at The Cato Institute
A
Timeless Message
PAYDAY - SOMEDAY
Jeremiah 6:16
Dr. Robert G Lee was the pastor of Bellevue Baptist Church in Memphis, Tennessee for thirty-two years. During his lifetime he was a strong leader in the Southern Baptist Convention, known as a preacher’s preacher, and was highly respected among his peers. This sermon has been accepted as a classic by all that have heard and read it, and through its message, the Lord still speaks to mankind.
Dr. Lee originally published the following message in 1926. It is said that he developed it following the suggestion of a deacon at a prayer meeting in 1919 and that he preached it at least once a year at his home church. All total, it is related that he preached the messsage over 1,000 times. Like many Baptists, Lee was known more as a preacher than a theologian but his doctrine was sound to the core. Lee believed in and preached a doctrine often overlooked in our day, that of the necessity of regeneration.
Or if you're a reader with time to read 17 pages, Click here.
Ala. Supreme Court:
'Unborn Child Has Inalienable Right to Life From
its Earliest Stages
In a case
about a pregnant woman who used cocaine and
endangered her unborn child, the Alabama Supreme
Court affirmed (8-1) that the word "child" includes
"an unborn child," and that the law therefore
"furthers the State's interest in protecting the
life of children from the earliest stages of their
development."
In his concurring opinion, Alabama Chief Justice Roy
S. Moore wrote that "an unborn child has an
inalienable right to life from its earliest stages
of development," and added, "I write separately to
emphasize that the inalienable right to life is a
gift of God that civil government must secure for
all persons - born and unborn."
The court decision on April 18 was in reference to
Sarah Janie Hicks v. State of Alabama. Hicks had
been charged in 2009 with violating Alabama's
chemical-endangerment statute, which in part says
that a "person commits the crime of chemical
endangerment" by "knowingly, recklessly, or
intentionally causes or permits a child to be
exposed to, to ingest or inhale, or to have contact
with a controlled substance, chemical substance, or
drug paraphernalia," a felony.
In Hicks' case, she was charged with using cocaine
while pregnant. Her child, "J.D.," tested positive
for cocaine "at the time of his birth," reads the
court document.
In January 2010, Hicks pleaded guilty to the crime
but also "reserved the right to appeal the issues"
she and her attorneys had presented earlier in
trying to get the charges dismissed. Hicks got a
three year suspended prison sentence and was placed
on probation.
Hicks appealed to the Court of Criminal Appeals in
Alabama, arguing that because the
chemical-endangerment statute did not specifically
use the words "unborn children" or "fetuses," the
law was ambiguous and could not have applied to her
unborn child.
The Appeals Court ruled against Hicks, stating that
"the plain language of 26-15-3.2
[chemical-endangerment statute] was clear and
unambiguous and that the plain meaning of the term
'child' in [the statute] included an unborn child or
viable fetus.'"
Hicks then petitioned the Alabama Supreme Court in
2012 to review the Appeals Court decision.
Last Friday's ruling affirmed the judgment of the
Court of Criminal Appeals.
In their conclusion, eight of the nine Alabama
Supreme Court justices said: "Consistent with this
Court's opinion in Ankrom [a similar
chemical-endangerment case], by its plain meaning,
the word 'child' in the chemical-endangerment
statute includes an unborn child, and, therefore,
the statute furthers the State's interest in
protecting the life of children from the earliest
stages of their development."
The law to protect the life of unborn children "is
consistent with many statutes and decisions
throughout our nation that recognize unborn children
as persons with legally enforceable rights in many
areas of the law," said the justices.
In his own concurring opinion, Chief Justice Moore
argued that natural rights come from God, not from
the government. He cited the Declaration of
Independence that there is a "self-evident" truth
that "all Men are created equal, [and] that they are
endowed by their creator with certain unalienable
rights," particularly "life."
The Declaration of Independence "acknowledges
as 'self-evident' the truth that all human
beings are endowed with inherent dignity and the
right to life as a direct result of having been
created by God," said Chief Justice Moore.
He also cited Sir William Blackstone's Commentaries
on the Laws of England, which says, "This law of
nature, being co-eval [beginning at the same time]
with mankind and dictated by God himself, is of
course superior in obligation to any other. It is
binding over all the globe, in all countries, and at
all times: no human laws are of any validity, if
contrary to this."
Chief Justice Moore went on to explain how at the
Nuremburg Trials at the end of World War II, Nazi
criminals could not argue that they were only
following orders or just following the laws of the
German government because there is a higher law, the
"very law of nature."
"Although the Nuremberg defendants were following
orders and the laws of their own officials and
country, they were guilty of violating a higher law
to which all nations are equally subject: the laws
of nature and of nature's God," wrote Justice Moore.
That law binds all nations, including the State of
Alabama, said Justice Moore. "In 2006, the
AlabamaLegislature amended the homicide statute to
define 'person' to include 'an unborn child in utero
at any stage of development, regardless of
viability," he wrote, "thus recognizing under the
statute that, when an 'unborn child' is killed, a
'person' is killed."
In conclusion, he wrote, "The Equal Protection
Clause of the 14th Amendment provides that a state
may not 'deny to any person within its jurisdiction
the equal protection of the laws. Unborn children
are a class of persons entitled to equal protection
of the laws."
"States have an obligation to provide to unborn
children at any stage of their development the same
legal protection from injury and death they provide
to persons already born," wrote Justice Moore.
"Because a human life with a full genetic endowment
comes into existence at the moment of conception,
the self-evident truth that 'all men are created
equal and are endowed by their Creator with certain
unalienable rights' encompasses the moment of
conception."
"Legal recognition of the unborn as members of the
human family derives ultimately from the laws of
nature and of nature's God, Who created human life
in His image and protected it with the commandment:
'Thou shalt not kill,'" wrote Chief Justice
Moore. "Therefore, the interpretation of the
word 'child' in Alabama's chemical-endangerment
statute, § 26-15- 3.2, Ala. Code 1975, to include
all human beings from the moment of conception is
fully consistent with these first principles
regarding life and law."
Click
here to view this article at cns news where we
found this affirmation of God's truth.
April 24, 2014
the clarionproject.org
Tony Blair:
Fighting Islamism –
Tony Blair: Fighting Islamism –
A Defining Challenge of Our Time
Tony Blair, the Former British Prime Minister, delivered a keynote speech at Bloomberg HQ in London entitled 'Why the Middle East Still Matters.' In it he described radical Islam as the greatest threat facing the world today.He argued "there are four reasons why the Middle East remains of central importance and cannot be relegated to the second order."
Blair rapidly moved on to the fourth and most important reason: Islamic extremism also known as Islamism.
He identifies the conflict in the Middle East as one between an open and tolerant viewpoint and a fundamentalist Islamist ideology. He said "wherever you look – from Iraq to Libya to Egypt to Yemen to Lebanon to Syria and then further afield to Iran, Pakistan and Afghanistan – this is the essential battle."
Addressing those who regard these conflicts as distinct he said "there is something frankly odd about the reluctance to accept what is so utterly plain: that they have in common a struggle around the issue of the rightful place of religion, and in particular Islam, in politics." It is this central point that he hammered home again and again over the course of his 40 minute speech.
He argued that this struggle does not end at the borders of the region. Rather, "The reason this matters so much is that this ideology is exported around the world."
Click here to read in its entirety at the clarion project at
http://www.clarionproject.org/news/tony-blair-fighting-islamism-%E2%80%93-defining-challenge-our-time
You can listen to several minutes of Tony Blair's speech here:
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/apr/23/tony-blair-west-take-sides-growing-threat-radical-islam
The full text of the former PM's speech can be read here:
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/04/full-text-tony-blairs-speech-on-why-the-middle-east-matters/
More
Attacks on the Freedom of Speech,
In the Form of Religious
Persecution
Of our Air Force Cadets
From The Traditional
Values Coalition:
Earlier this month, an Air Force Academy cadet was forced to remove a Bible verse on his personal white board after the Military Religious Freedom Foundation claimed offense.
"I have been crucified with Christ, and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I now live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me." - Galatians 2:20
MRFF President Michael "Mikey" Weinstein, self proclaimed "undisputed leader of the national movement to restore the obliterated all separating church and state" in the military, described the student's white board quoting of scripture as pouring "fundamentalist Christian gasoline on an already raging out-of-control conflagration of fundamentalist Christian tyranny, exceptionalism, and supremacy."
The Air Force Academy complied with Weinstein's demands, having the scripture removed. But that's not enough -- Weinstein is demanding that not only should the cadet be punished, but that their entire chain of command should be as well.
At least a dozen cadets responded in support of religious freedom, posting Bible verses on their personal white boards. Please join me and thousands of others in standing with our cadets for their right to express their religious beliefs without fear of persecution <http://capwiz.com/traditional/utr/1/KTQOTSLPVY/KFTWTSLUWE/10253908236> .
No one, especially those who volunteer to risk their lives to defend our freedoms, should be denied their constitutional rights and religious freedoms. Groups like the Military Religious Freedom Foundation are seeking to silence those who profess their faith, stripping them of their religious liberties in the name of political correctness.
Our Constitution protects the free exercise of religion. Yet that doesn't seem to be enough for some groups.
http://www.capwiz.com/traditional/issues/alert/?alertid=63153151&type=CU
The Clash of Law: Parsing the Modern War against Catholics, Catholicism and the Church
From CatholicCulture.org
By Dr. Jeff Mirus
Date March 25, 2014
Opposition to Catholicism in the modern West is brought to a head almost universally through the pressure of today’s legal systems. .... what bother us are the increasing restrictions on the exercise of our Christian duties by bureaucratic laws and regulations, administered by people who otherwise do not care much about our religious identity one way or another.
This is the result of a utopian vision of the future implemented at the highest levels of the social order. It is not the cruel and unthinking persecution of those who have simply been raised, in their local enclaves and neighborhoods, to hate Catholics. It is rather a relatively high brow and carefully orchestrated process of civic improvement. As such, the anti-Catholic prejudice today wears a mantle of utter reasonableness and courtesy. Whatever is done is portrayed as necessary for the noblest of reasons, to serve an exalted vision of human good. As we will see shortly, this is a deception which even its proponents probably do not understand.
Consider how varied are the pressure points which
have been attacked in exactly this way. There is the
progressive public pressure for Catholic social
service agencies to conform to the values of our
secular elites. There is the growing impossibility
of running Catholic organizations as a part of
student life on college campuses. There are the
battles over freedom of conscience in an
ever-widening array of professions, beginning with
doctors, nurses and pharmacists and extending now to
anyone who might provide business services to
same-sex couples. There are escalating battles over
religious liberty. There is the HHS Mandate in the
Meanwhile, in another part of the world, there is
the unending pressure against Catholic life imposed
by the theocratic laws of Islamic states, called
Shari’a law. This alternative form of coercion is in
the process of entering the West through
A Striking Parallel
Interestingly, in his Regensburg Address in 2006, Pope Benedict XVI drew a close parallel between the habits of thought which underlie Islamic law and those that lie at the basis of contemporary European (or Western) law. Benedict saw that neither Islam nor the contemporary West (any longer) assigns to reason the role of identifying natural moral principles which can allow people of different beliefs and cultural backgrounds to share a common good and a common polity. Islam believes Shari’a Law covers all of life and is rooted purely in the will of God, completely unbound by any rational characteristic of consistency or fairness. Similarly, the old natural law tradition of the West—in which rational consistency and fairness were perhaps the most easily-grasped components—has given way to the sovereignty of the human will to remake reality according to whatever happens to be desired by those who have political, social and cultural power.
One of the greatest Christian gifts to the world has been the distinction between two fonts of law which arise without any possible contradiction from the same profoundly rational Divine source. On the one hand, there is the natural law, which is accessible to human reason and which opens to the human community a common ground of morality as the basis for human flourishing in the social order. On the other hand, there is the law derived from Revelation, equally rational but containing mysteries which are accessible only by faith. While in no way conflicting with the natural law—and in fact presupposing it in the created order—this Revelation enables the believer to rise to greater perfection through grace, in a direct relationship with God Himself, expressed in voluntary service to others.
.......
Fortunately, reading through the material has at least enabled me grasp the central issue more clearly, and to stress three important principles which might be used to guide our thinking and our response to the characteristic anti-Catholic pressures of our time. First, the practical points of serious clash and conflict are now primarily creations of law. Second, when it comes to law, the primary problem is not an attack on Faith but an attack on reason—the presumption that law derives its authority from the specific will of those in power, and is not limited by clear and consistent natural or supernatural principles. Third, and precisely because rational consistency is lacking, it will take great creativity to navigate this increasingly repressive legal landscape.
In closing, I should emphasize one even deeper truth: The will darkens the intellect by ordering it to cease its independent explorations in order to serve what the will desires. This is not something that we can expect to counteract naturally; it is in fact the mechanism which human nature uses to refuse cooperation with grace. Yet paradoxically the pandemic loss of the recognition of reason, and even of nature itself, must be remedied by grace. And so, in the midst of growing suffering and sacrifice for Catholics, it is not only arguments and creativity that we need, but prayer.
http://www.catholicculture.org/commentary/otc.cfm?id=1173
From The Canada Free Press
By Jim Yardley
Thursday, March 20, 2014
Checking to make sure that there was an easily understandable definition of the word, the dictionary defines Constitution as “the fundamental political principles on which a nation-state is governed, especially when considered as embodying the rights of the subjects of that nation-state and the statute embodying such principles.”
One would think that the President of the first nation to create that very thing, a legal statute that embodied the fundamental political principles, and who also was a college level lecturer on the topic of the Constitution, would have absolutely no problem in dealing with the concept.
Unfortunately for us, and for several other nations, Mr. Obama seems to view constitution to be infinitely malleable, and are subject to change upon a change in his whims of the day.
As far back as 2001, Barack Obama said in a radio interview with Public Radio station WBEZ-FM that the U.S. Supreme Court (under Chief Justice Earl Warren)
“…didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution, at least as it’s been interpreted and Warren Court interpreted in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can’t do to you. Says what the Federal government can’t do to you, but doesn’t say what the Federal government or State government must do on your behalf…”
So even at that time, the President announced clearly that he disagreed with the judgments of the Founding Fathers and two centuries of successfully working within the framework of the U.S. Constitution. He had a different view of how the Constitution should have been written, and that had he been alive in 1789, he would have made sure it was different.
Of course he would have been limited to having only a pen at that time, since his Blackberry wasn’t even a science fiction fantasy at that time.
Apparently Obama’s disdain for Constitutions is not limited to only home grown ones, or limited to only with regard to “negative liberties.” Fast forward to June 2009 and look at Honduras.
Manuel Zelaya, who was then in his second term as president of Honduras, violated that country’s Constitution (specifically Article 239) which bans presidents from holding office if they even propose to alter the constitutional term limits for presidents.
Apparently Mr. Zelaya really liked being president of Honduras, and wanted to change his country’s Constitution so that he could continue in the job. Note again that any president of Honduras loses the right to serve as president if he even proposes a change like that. The Honduran Supreme Court, expressly had the right to remove the president for seeking to alter the constitutional term limit, under Article 272 of the Honduran Constitution.
But apparently this made Obama upset, so he declared the Constitutional crisis in Honduras to have been a “coup”. It wasn’t, of course. Sadly, for Obama, if he were to snivel that he didn’t like that part of the Honduran Constitution it probably would have been a public relations nightmare for him.
One might infer that Obama personally wanted that presidential term limit article to be ignored by the citizens of Honduras because it might set a bad precedent if he wanted to run for a third term himself. Then Senator (and now Secretary of State) John Kerry agreed with Obama’s idea that the removal of a president who had acted contrary to the clear language of his nation’s Constitution must have been a “coup.” This view was vocally supported by the then Secretary of State, Hillary Rodham Clinton who lusts after the idea of being Obama’s replacement.
Mr. Obama’s disdain for the U.S. Constitution has been demonstrated on a continuing basis over the five years that he has been in office, with “recess appointments” to the NLRB when the Senate was not in recess, the innumerable delays, waivers, interpretations and so on related to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, and so on.
Given Obama’s disdain for any constitutional limits on doing whatever pops into his head at any time, his reaction to the situation in Ukraine becomes almost comical. Sadly, even the always irreverent magazine The Onion couldn’t have seen the idea that Obama would leap to the defense of Ukraine by saying that the Crimean referendum was illegitimate and (wait for it) unconstitutional. Even Nancy Pelosi was probably tempted to ask “Are you serious?”
The idea that Barack Obama would demand deference to any nation’s constitution is on a par with, well, nothing readily comes to mind.
Well perhaps it would be like seeing Dr. Jack Kervorkian leading a Right-to-Life rally, or perhaps seeing Willy Sutton doing an infomercial telling people how safe banks are.
It’s possible I suppose that Obama’s defense of Ukraine’s constitutional authority would be equivalent to listening to Bill Clinton lecturing on the benefits of sexual abstinence.
But given his history on the subject of adherence to constitutional principles, is it any wonder that no one, anywhere in the world, believes one word of what the man is saying?
Click here to read the original article in its entirety
Trust, but Verify
March, 2014
They are still at it. I am thankful for the newsletters of people like Dave Gaubatz who report current affairs that are ignored or overlooked by most news sources. It is hard to imagine how people like Dave can be so vilified for reporting well documented FACTS. Although the truth may set one free it can also become tiring to be a target and cause grey hairs and ulcers. But enough about the messenger.... on to the message.
There are many Muslim organizations in America, raising money that sometimes end up supporting known terrorist organizations (viz: the well documented CAIR connections). Recently a united alliance of these organizations was formed, with the purpose of becoming more influential. Our presidential election of 2016 was the example cited, once a consensus would be agreed upon by individual members.
Dave's recent newsletter linked to the report about this new alliance at religiousnews.com. Click here to read it.
While I wouldn't bet the farm on it, my prayer is that the uniting voice of American Muslims is the foremost recognition of individual freedom and opportunity that has drawn so many families to America. EACH individual's freedom of beliefs, associations, and speech (to mention a few of our inalienable God-given freedoms) are worthy principles that all Americans should recognize, be thankful for, and do our level best to protect and preserve. In the meantime I will continue to "Trust, but verify."
To find Mr Gaubatz blogspot, click here, and you can send him an email to subscribe to his newsletter.
The Brave German Woman
February 14, 2014
One
can recognize that sometimes well meaning
people and institutions can err in the side of
trying to "be nice". However the mentality of
automatic acceptance and accommodation, when
institutionalized, can, and has, placed free
societies in peril; it is the dangerous side
of "political correctness."
Please
click here to view the video of Heidi
Mund, who has become known as "The Brave
German Woman" for speaking the truth. If
more people spoke the "Truths that Free" we
would go far in ridding this old world from
the inroads of the evil tentacles of that
totalitarian philosophy that goes by the name
of Islam, which does not condemn murder in the
name of Allah.
December 20, 2013
Many of us are aware of
hostility toward Christians in foreign
countries.
But has there even been a more
Biblically-hostile administration in Washington
DC, towards its own citizens? David Barton of
WallBuilders doesn't think so.
After reading his list (and documentation) of
the many dozens of offensive hostile acts
towards Bible believers in America ask yourself-
how can this be? We are a God fearing
people living in a free country that was founded
on the recognition that our life and liberty
originates from God (NOT at the whim of
some officeholder or bureaucrat!)
The encroachment by the current
administration does not resemble actions of a
government "of the People, by the People,
and for the People". Offer a prayer for
protection by our Father above. Ask Him to throw
light upon the hearts and minds of those in
power and those who elect some of those
bureaucrats. Be vigilant and protect our
children and their future.
Click
here to read David Barton's December article
and list.
Military Priests Face Arrest For Defying Shutdown And Celebrating Mass
Huffington
Post
Posted:
10/07/2013
Updated: 10/08/ 2013
Is religious freedom the latest casualty of the government shutdown?
Some priests are being actively prevented from ministering to service members and their families, even on a volunteer basis, and they run the risk of arrest if they disobey. As a result, military families serving at home and abroad who depend on the government for their religious services, are now actively being denied communion on bases that are served by civilian priests. Active-duty priests are still holding services.
John Schlageter, General Counsel for the Archdiocese for the Military Services, wrote in an op-ed, "With the government shutdown, many GS and contract priests who minister to Catholics on military bases worldwide are not permitted to work – not even to volunteer. During the shutdown, it is illegal for them to minister on base and they risk being arrested if they attempt to do so. "
He told The Huffington Post that many civilian priests had contacted him to say that Mass had been cancelled on their local installations, because non-active-duty priests are deemed "non-essential personnel" under the terms of the shutdown. Schlageter wrote the op-ed in order to encourage members of the faithful to contact Congress and get their attention about the issue, which he called "a residual effect of the government shutdown that no one contemplated."
His efforts have not been in
vain, as the House of Representatives passed a
resolution on Saturday 400 to 1 which will allow
GS and contract priests to return to work once passed
by the Senate.
Schlageter went on to explain in his op-ed that the First Amendment guarantees the "free exercise" of faith, and because military personnel are considered a "captive audience," the laws requires the government to provide access to their faith. This particularly applies to military families stationed abroad who may not be able to attend services regularly, depending on the religious rules of their host country. Those that have active-duty chaplains will not be affected.
"Until the Federal Government resumes normal operations, or an exemption is granted to contract and GS priests, Catholic services are indefinitely suspended at many of those worldwide installations served by contract and GS priests," Schlageter wrote. He told the Huffington Post that some priests that contacted him had been informed that they could be arrested if they returned to base to administer services during the shutdown.
The Antideficiency Act prevents those on furlough from volunteering their services, and violators may be subject to disciplinary action, suspension, fines, and imprisonment. It was passed in 1870 in order to stop the government from "incurring any monetary obligation for which Congress has not appropriated funds."
Click
here to read article in its entirety at the
Huffington Post
Tenth Amendment
“The powers
not delegated to the United
States
NEW STATE LAW
BANS CALIFORNIA
Sweeping measure
also applies to other laws that violate
Constitution or state law
October 7, 2013
(
However
Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood
to Coptic Christians: Convert to Islam, or pay
‘jizya’ tax
By
Jessica Chasman
The Washington
September
10, 2013
By Jessica Chasman
The
September 10, 2013
The Muslim Brotherhood and its supporters have
began forcing the roughly 15,000 Christian Copts
of Dalga village in Egypt
Jizya is the money, or tribute, “that conquered
non-Muslims historically had to pay to their
Islamic overlords ‘with willing submission and
while feeling themselves subdued’ to safeguard
their existence,” Mr. Ibrahim explained.
According to Fr. Yunis Shawqi, who spoke
yesterday to Dostor reporters in Dalga, all Copts
in the village, “without exception,” are being
forced to pay the tax.
“[The] value of the tribute and method of payment
differ from one place to another in the village,
so that, some are being expected to pay 200
Egyptian pounds per day, others 500 Egyptian
pounds per day,” Mr. Shawqi said, according to the
translator.
In some cases, families not able to pay have been
attacked. As many as 40 Christian families have
now fled Dalga, Mr. Ibrahim reported.
The taxes are not unique to Egypt
Just over the weekend Syrian rebels went into a
Christian man’s “shop and gave him three options:
become Muslim; pay $70,000 as a tax levied on
non-Muslims, known as jizya; or be killed along
with his family,” Christian Science Monitor
reported.
The Muslim Brotherhood and its supporters have
began forcing the roughly 15,000 Christian Copts
of Dalga village in
Jizya is the money, or tribute, “that conquered non-Muslims historically had to pay to their Islamic overlords ‘with willing submission and while feeling themselves subdued’ to safeguard their existence,” Mr. Ibrahim explained.
According to Fr. Yunis Shawqi, who spoke yesterday to Dostor reporters in Dalga, all Copts in the village, “without exception,” are being forced to pay the tax.
“[The] value of the tribute and method of payment differ from one place to another in the village, so that, some are being expected to pay 200 Egyptian pounds per day, others 500 Egyptian pounds per day,” Mr. Shawqi said, according to the translator.
In some cases, families not able to pay have been attacked. As many as 40 Christian families have now fled Dalga, Mr. Ibrahim reported.
The taxes are not unique to
Just over the weekend Syrian rebels went into a Christian man’s “shop and gave him three options: become Muslim; pay $70,000 as a tax levied on non-Muslims, known as jizya; or be killed along with his family,” Christian Science Monitor reported.
Egypt
Rights groups say Egypt
But the serenity only masked the unease here. Since the July 3 coup that ousted former president Mohammed Morsi of the Muslim Brotherhood, Christians have faced a spike in violent attacks that Egyptian authorities have not prevented, rights groups allege.
"I'm very afraid, and I'm afraid for my daughter," said Mona Roshdy, 55, as she left the church with her family.
She had reason to be. On Wednesday, as the police in
Churches, houses, monasteries, orphanages, schools and businesses belonging to Copts were attacked in nine provinces "causing panic, losses and destruction for no reason and no crimes they committed except being Christians," the Maspero Youth Union, a Coptic activist group, said Thursday.
As if sensing trouble, just two days before
Wednesday's violence,
"With all compassion I urge everyone to conserve Egyptian blood and ask of every Egyptian to commit to self-restraint and avoid recklessness and assault on any person or property," Tawadros wrote on his official Twitter account Monday.
Youssef Sidhom, editor-in-chief of the Christian weekly Watani, said the recent attacks are painful and vicious but it could be worse if they are allowed to divide the two faiths.
"Christians shouldn't be moved by this, shouldn't be dragged to fulfill the target that lies behind this, which is segregating the national solidarity between Christians and Muslims in the very difficult time Egypt is passing through," Sidhom said.
Christians make up about 8 million of
But the ancient Coptic communities here that predate Islam by centuries say they now see a new wave of violence against them since the ouster.
In Upper Egypt – a swath of arid land from south of Cairo to Sudan that is home to many hard-line Islamist Egyptians – four Christians were killed when a mob of several hundred people in the Luxor governorate attacked with knives, tree limbs and hammers two days days after the overthrow of Morsi, Amnesty International said.
They also vandalized Christian homes and set properties on fire, Amnesty said.
In a village in Upper Egypt's
And in the north
On Wednesday, Interior Minister Mohammed Ibrahim said Morsi supporters damaged or torched seven churches nationwide. They also stormed 21 police stations, he said.
Many Christians participated in massive protests against Morsi at the end of June, and Tawadros sat with a row of officials behind Gen. Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi when the army chief gave his speech that overthrew Morsi.
In a 15-minute audio recording posted online earlier this month, al-Qaeda chief Ayman al-Zawahri accused Coptic Christians, the military and secular-minded elites of conspiring against Morsi because he is an Islamist.
In
Ibrahim said incendiary speeches indicate Islamist leaders think Copts were heavily involved in anti-Morsi protests.
"I'm not scared, but I'm very sad about the situation in the country – the relationship between Muslims and Christians," said Margaret Naby as she walked into church on Sunday. "There is so much fanaticism."
"The Egyptian government should make ending sectarian violence a priority, or risk letting this deadly problem spiral out of control," Nadim Houry, acting Middle East director of Human Rights Watch, said in a recent report about attacks on Christians.
"Prosecutors should thoroughly investigate and prosecute those responsible, including security forces, if they want to show they are capable of preventing future bloodshed," he said.
Last week, 16 human rights groups condemned rhetoric used by the Muslim Brotherhood and its allies that the organizations said incited violence and religious hatred for political gain. They also denounced state agencies for failing to protect Christians, confront sectarian attacks and enforce the law by holding responsible parties or individuals accountable.
"This negligence reveals that the pattern of impunity which spread during the Mubarak era and remained in place throughout the rule of the Muslim Brotherhood continues to this day, even after both of these regimes were overthrown," a statement by the groups said.
In Coptic
Cairo, which was a Christian stronghold until the
7th-century rise of Islam, Zarour Ayzut Dawoud propped
her son on her hip as she visited the place where
Mary, Joseph and baby Jesus are believed to have
stayed when they escaped King Herod's execution of
young male children in the vicinity of
"I want to go to
Peter Fakhry, 22, said the feeling is shared by non-Christian Egyptians.
"Many people want to leave – Christians and Muslims, too, because of the situation and lack of work," he said.
"Do you see this? There are no tourists," he said
about the Coptic site that is no longer as much a
residential space as it is a place for visitors, who
come to see relics of an almost forgotten past in
which
Click here to read article in its entirety at USA Today
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/08/15/egypt-coptic-church-islamists/2640419/
The Feds vs the Fourth Amendment
By Tenth Amendment on August 5, 2013 in Featured, Founding Principles
by Jacob Hornberger, Future of
Freedom Foundation
What does the Fourth Amendment do? It prohibits federal officials from searching people’s homes, businesses, and personal effects indiscriminately. If a crime has been committed, the feds cannot simply go out and search every house and business in the neighborhood to seek out evidence of the crime. And they cannot search everyone’s things with the aim of preventing a crime.
Instead, the Fourth Amendment requires that to conduct a search of a person’s home or business, they have to first go to a member of the third branch of the government— the federal judiciary — and seek out a search warrant from a judge or magistrate. In order to get such a warrant, law-enforcement officers have to swear out an affidavit specifying the exact nature of the evidence that is being searched for. Moreover, they have to provide sworn evidence that rises to the level of “probable cause” for the judge to consider. If they fail to do those two things, the judge’s responsibility is to deny the application for the search warrant.
Like it or not, that’s the system that our American ancestors put into place with the Fourth Amendment.
That’s obviously not the
system that we have been living under for many years,
given the massive secret surveillance scheme that has
now come to light thanks to former NSA employee Edward
Snowden. We now know that the
Well, let’s see. If we go back and read the Fourth Amendment, we immediately notice one important thing: Our American ancestors did not provide an exception to the restrictions based on keeping Americans “safe.”
That is, the amendment doesn’t have the following sentence at the end of it: “The provisions of this amendment are null and void in cases where the government is keeping people ‘safe.’”
If our ancestors had added such a provision, then the NSA and its supporters might have a point. But they didn’t.
Is there anything to prevent the advocates of the NSA’s surveillance scheme from seeking a constitutional amendment that modifies the Fourth Amendment to include such a safety exception?
No, there isn’t. Then why shouldn’t the supporters of such a scheme be required to go that route — the route of seeking a “keep people safe” amendment to the Fourth Amendment, rather than the super-secret, illegitimate route that they have taken?
Proponents also say that the 9/11 terrorist attacks provided the feds with the authority to avoid the Fourth Amendment.
Well, let’s see. If we go back and read the amendment, we notice something else important: There is no exception for terrorist attacks in the amendment.
If the amendment had provided such an exception, then the proponents of the NSA’s massive secret surveillance scheme might have a point. But they didn’t. Our ancestors provided no exceptions for terrorist cases or any other crime. So, if proponents of such a scheme don’t like what our ancestors did, why shouldn’t they be required to seek a constitutional amendment seeking the modification of the Fourth Amendment?
Our American ancestors knew exactly what they were doing. When you see people like Barack Obama, Dianne Feinstein, Peter King, Mike Rogers, and others who are coming to the defense of the massive, secret NSA surveillance scheme that is searching, gathering, and compiling personal information on millions of innocent Americans, you are seeing precisely the types of people that our ancestors knew would end up serving in the federal government and doing the types of things the Fourth Amendment expressly prohibits. You are also seeing precisely why our ancestors believed the Fourth Amendment was absolutely necessary to our freedom, privacy, and well-being.
Remember the wise and
immortal words of Justice Louis Brandeis in his
dissent in the case of Olmstead v.
Experience should teach
us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the
government’s purposes are beneficent. Men born to
freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their
liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to
liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal,
well-meaning but without understanding.
http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2013/08/05/the-feds-vs-the-fourth-amendment/#.UgPkA6xXfFw
Speech delivered by
Dr. Gene A. Youngblood
July, 2013
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.”
AMENDMENT #2 -“And the
Right to Keep and Bear Arms!”
Our Constitution: 56 men who pledged
their Lives, Fortunes, and Sacred Honor.
- Ladies and gentlemen, our government, under the leadership of Obama’s socialist agenda that is determined to shred our beloved Constitution, thus destroying our freedoms and liberties.
- 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, out of the White House! ILLU:
National Scandals as IRS, NSA,
- We now have a nation being directed and dictated to by about 200 un-elected czars that are proud socialists and/or active 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.”
- We have seen the
NSA,
IRS, BATF, HOMELAND SECURITY,
FBI, and other Federal
Agencies strangle
Americans and Demand
us to Bow
in Fear!
- WHAT IS FREEDOM? Where do we get our freedoms?
God has given us
our freedoms and we have codified them in our
Constitution, “...All men are
created equal and endowed by their creator with
certain unalienable rights, that among these are
life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness...”
· 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:
- 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.
3. FREEDOM IS – a child that 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.
6. FREEDOM IS – being able to reject Shariah Law as unconstitutional without threats from C.A.I.R.
7.
FREEDOM IS--Being
able to make
a phone call, without the
Government
Listening.
8.
FREEDOM IS—Being
FREE
to travel
without the Feds Tracing
Your Movements.
9.
FREEDOM IS
– to be able to go to bed at
night without fear
of invasion
by
10. FREEDOM IS—Not Being Forced to Accept Sodomite Marriages!
11. FREEDOM IS
– to have openness in
12. FREEDOM IS—Allowing the Voice of the Moral Majority to be Heard!
13. FREEDOM IS—Having a Right to Confront and Evil-Illegal Presidency!
14. FREEDOM IS – to be able to decide our own food menu, our own diet and medical care without governmental intervention or directive.
15. FREEDOM IS – to allow every child conceived to have “life” protection under our Constitution.
16. FREEDOM IS—Not having IRS Enforcement Agents Stealing our Hard-Earned Income and Sending it to Islamic Nations!
17. FREEDOM IS—Having a President that Honors God, and Our Constitutional Controls on Government!
18. FREEDOM IS—Having
Pastors
with Backbone
to Publicly
Stand on Issues
Without Fear
of Government!
19. FREEDOM IS—When
Government
is Afraid
of the People
–Not
People
Fearful of
Government.
20. FREEDOM IS—Where the Tea Party, Patriots, and Conservatives Are Not Targeted by our Government, Directed by the President!
21. FREEDOM IS – to live in a land where the government cannot intrude into the church.
- Separation of church and state is Biblical. (Not found in our Constitution.)
- King Uzziah entered into the temple to offer sacrifice (81 priests begged him not to). It is the duty and responsibility of the church—Uzziah did it anyway, and God killed him, therefore, we must say,Government—hands off God’s church, stop the marginalization of believers.
22. FREEDOM IS
– to be able to render to
Caesar what belongs to
Caesar, and render
unto God
what belongs to God, without the government—(city, state or
national) using back door fees
to rob God’s
offering plate. Where
would
23. FREEDOM IS – to have a government that is restrained by the U.S. Constitution: American law and NO international, foreign, or Koranic-Shariah law in our courts. SB-58 & H.B. 351 Defeated by Pressure on FL. Lawmakers by Islamic Terrorists!
24. FREEDOM IS
– to have our educational
system returned
back to our state
and local leaders, NOT czars in
25. FREEDOM IS – to not have 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 to be forced to provide murder by abortion at taxpayer’s expense.
56 Million Murdered since 1973 –Roe vs Wade!
27. FREEDOM IS – is to have presidential candidates provide a legitimate birth certificate and proof of citizenship before running for office.
28. FREEDOM IS—To be Able to Go to a Public Park, Beach, or Public Venue and Proclaim Truth, Including Preaching the Gospel.
29. FREEDOM IS – knowing that we have the Constitutional Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms, not Just for Hunting, But to Protect U.S. From the Intrusions and Tyrannies of Government!
30. FREEDOM IS – knowing that our children in school are being taught TRUE American History without the distortions, deletions and promotion of Islam in our textbooks.
31. FREEDOM IS – knowing that our fee simple title deeds to our properties are secure without fear of the EPA Gestapo seizing it to protect a snail or rodent.
32. 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.
o
ILLU:
Daniel Chapter 3 tells us of three young
men that refused
to bow
to a law.
They
were thrown
in the fiery
furnace, but because
of their faith
in God, they would
NOT
burn!
They Did Not
Bow to
the Godless
Law, When Threatened
They Did Not
Bend, and Thrown
into
the Furnace
They Did
Not Burn!!!
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