Islam and Hatred: Why the Free World Civilization is at Risk


I belong to a Yahoo Group that calls itself the Conservative Christian Counselors. The group has created an acronym for their group which is “ccpga.” I am ashamed to say that I am at a loss to how the group derived the acronym “ccpga” from Conservative Christian Counselors. I’m guilty of being an off and on again participator over a number of years and I have never paid much attention to anything but the posted messages which are quite good most of the time.

This Yahoo group is listed as “restricted” so there is a good chance you will not be able to read any of those posts without becoming an approved member. The link I provided above is to the about page.

So, what the heck with the minor group history?

A prominent posting member that goes by the Pseudonym Beowulf found a David Bukay who is a professor at a university in Israel. The original post, “Islam and Hatred: Why the Free World Civilization is at Risk,” was posted at Modern Diplomacy on January 27. This is the version I am cross posting here. Beowulf cross posted the ccpga version on February 7.

JRH 2/7/16

Please Support NCCR

*********************

Islam and Hatred: Why the Free World Civilization is at Risk

 

By David Bukay

January 27, 2016

Modern Diplomacy in New Social Compact

Hatred to the other is one of the main sources as much as commandments in Islam. It is this old inherent religiously commanded hatred that is behind the terrorism of Jihad against the infidels and the criminality of the Muslims in so many places and regions around the world.

Hatred cannot be detached from Islam because it is in fact indoctrinated and motivated by Islam. The Nazi era has taught us that hatred is one of the most important policies that lead to apartheid and genocide. The Qur’an teaches hatred and commands to hate the infidels. The Islamic Caliphate State (ICS) is proving it time and again, even by destroying the archeological sites, the wonders of the old Middle East.

Consider the elements that define hate speech: drawing a moral comparison based on distinction between one’s own identity group and those outside of it; dehumanization of other groups and insistence of personal superiority against these groups; and a call to all kind of atrocities perpetuated against other groups.

The Islamic Shari‘ah qualifies as hate religion on each and every count by which we define hate speech. There is no other religion that draws such sharp distinction between its community of believers and others outside Islam.

a) Its message inspires loathing for others and the Qur’an mandates the superiority of Islam by all means. According to Muslim exegetes, there are seven major features of the superiority of Arab-Muslims over others, based on the Qur’an, among them, they are the best Ummah ever brought forth to men, bidding good (Ma’rûf) and forbidding evil (Munkar); they hold the pillar of superiority over all other world communities; and they will wage war on the people of error and the Anti-Christ.

b) It draws a deep distinction between Muslims and the others, called Kuffār, and it incites to violence and hatred. Islam is ethnocentric religion and political culture. It differentiates the world between Dār al-Islām against Dār al-Harb; between the good and righteous society and the bad and unclean society. It is Halāl against Haram; it is the right against wrong; it is the pious against the evil-doers; it is Paradise or Hell. There is nothing positive in the Qur’an and the Sharī‘ah for non-Muslims who are all infidels.

c) It perpetuate legitimizes atrocities and butchering of non-Muslims whenever they are. There are 527 verses that are intolerant to the infidels, and 109 verses calling on Muslims to make war on the infidels. As Muslims see it, Islam is for everyone in the human race and should be expanded as a winning religion, by force or persuasion, until all human beings proclaim that “there is no God but Allah and Muhammad is his messenger.” Jihad is universally understood as war on behalf of Islam, and its merits are described plentifully in the most-respected religious works.

In ancient as much as in contemporary world, Islamic dominance is characterized by the oppression and discrimination of non-Muslims, all defined as infidels (Kuffār, Kāfirun). There are no “unbelievers” or “disbelievers” in the Qur’an and the Sharī‘ah at large but only infidels or apostates. This is not only a subjective issue, but deep categorical. ‘Unbeliever’ can get neutral in conception, ‘infidel’ is totally different. The pattern of aggressive violence and disregard for human suffering is persistent in Islam and reflects the message of the Qur’an, which is one of superiority, loath and hatred. 64 percent of the Qur’an and 61 percent of the overall Sharī‘ah is related to the infidels, and there is not even one positive stand in favor for them. They are all an integral part of the abode of Hellfire.

The Kuffār are the vilest animals and beasts; the worst of creatures and demons, perverted transgressors and partners of Satan (al-‘Imrān, 3:82, 110; al-Nisā’, 4:76; al-A‘arāf, 7:176; al-Anfāl, 8:55). The Kuffār are to be beheaded. Muslims must strike off their heads and their fingertips (al-Anfāl, 8:12; Muhammad, 47:4). The Kuffār are to be terrorized. Muslims are to cast terror into the hearts of the infidels, their abode is the Hell-fire (al-‘Imrān, 3:151; al-Anfāl, 8:12, 8:60; al-Ahzāb, 33:26; al-Hashr, 59:2). The Kuffār are to be annihilated until the religion of Allah is the only one. They are to be killed wherever they are found, since persecution is severer than slaughter. Muslims are obliged to slay them until there is no persecution, and religion is only Allah’s. This commandment includes not only the infidels and the idolaters, but also the hypocrites and the polytheists, as their abode is Hell-fire (al-Baqarah, 2:191; 193; al-Nisā’, 4:89, 91; al-Anfāl, 8:39; al-Taubah, 9:36, 73, 111, 123; al-Tahrīm, 66:9). The Kuffār are to be crucified (al-Mā’idah, 5:33). They are the constant fuel of the fire burn in Hell (al-‘Imrān, 3:10; al-Taubah, 9:17; Ibrāhīm, 14:30; al-Nahl, 16:29; al-Anbīyā’, 21:98; al-Hajj, 22:19; al-Ahzāb, 33:64; al-Saff, 61:11; al-Mû’min, 48:13). “Hostility and hate” exist between the Kuffār and the Muslim believers forever until they “believe in Allah alone” (al-Taubah, 9:28, 32, 69).

The Egyptian intellectual Sami al-Rabbā’ has elaborated:

If you say that Islam is a violent faith, you are accused of being anti-Islam and “Islamophobe”. Yet, the main of the Qur’an are passages full of incitement and hatred, Jihad-killing and war-mongering.

The educational system is the main source of indoctrination and socialization to hatred and it works almost as a production line. The Muslims start the politics of hatred and Jihad ideology from infancy. The children learn to hate before everything, even without knowing why: at home, in the mosques and in schools, Madāris. They hate the infidels, because they are what they are, and not because they know anything about them. The hatred is in their drink and foods, and this fuel directs and motivates the massacres and lynches that are so pervasive around the world.

The contemporary radicalization of the Muslim youth, the “third generation” Muslims living in the Western world is enormous and alarming. A report by the International Centre for the Study of Radicalization in London claims that “European jihadists in Syria are more numerous than official statistics indicate. Indeed, they point to the existence of entire French-speaking and German-speaking brigades in the Aleppo region.” Many of them are radicalizing through the Internet extremist websites and YouTube videos; others are led by imams at mosques; and others, converted to Islam, men and women, volunteer for sex Jihad.

Sa’id al-Hamad, a liberal thinker from Bahrain

The ‘culture of backwardness’ dominates the Arab world, and it includes ‘culture of terrorism,’ which adopts beheading and lynching people; and the ‘culture of hatred,’ which propagates in the minds and consciousness of the youth deep hatred to the world.

Islam’s conceptions and behavior

Muslim groups and organizations are violent politically and fanatic religiously. Muslims cover their activities by using religious argumentations as an excuse and motivation to their behavior towards the other. Whether they butcher and cut-off heads of infidels of the West; or terrorize their own Muslim believers, Sunnis and Shiites; or massacre minorities of all kinds, mainly Christians; or when they establish Islamic institutions and mosques in Western states; or when they commit acts of horrible homicide bombings and terrorism; or when they conquer, Islamize and Arabize vast territories; or when they commit ethnic cleansing, apartheid and mass holocausts — for example, the Hindus and the Armenians in the past, and Christians today; or when they coerce and intimidate, Muslims always claim they do it in defense.

Another astonishing issue is that Muslim exegetes, preachers and propagators speak only in complete and absolute terms about their religion’s values, without the slightest self-criticism and doubts: ‘Islam is absolutely a religion of peace and harmony;’ ‘Islam is totally devoted to promote peace around the world;’ ‘Jihad is absolutely and totally defined in terms of defense;’ ‘aggression is used only rarely, when the Muslims have no other choice to defend their religion and their self;’ ‘there is nothing in Islam that is against tolerance, democracy and peaceful relations;’ and ‘Islam tolerates all other religions, acts peacefully and preaches for human cooperation and collaboration.’

One finds these slogans abound in books, article, and media resources. It is so pervasive and so totalistic that it becomes almost impossible to argue and to debate with them. Their cultural conceptions; their totalistic approach as being always and under all circumstances the righteous side; and their ethnocentric conceptions make it impossible to argue with them in rational and according to the ‘golden rule’ values.

However, when one elaborates the many verses of the Qur’an and the commandments of the Shrī’ah, he immediately attacked and mocked off as an ignorant of Islam and dismissed as being biased evil Muslim: “you don’t understand the real true meaning of the scriptures;” “you don’t know Arabic;” “you hate Islam and prove Islamophobia exists;” “you prove by your words the white man discrimination of imperialism and colonialism;” “you are racist and oppressive;” and other accusations according to Arab-Islamic imagination and aggression.

What Arab-Islamic history and contemporary tell us?

This is the political language of the Muslim scholars, spokesmen and propagators. Yet, one has to recall the following: the origin of the Arabs and Islam is in Arabian Peninsula. All the vast areas that have been conquered from year 632 on are the result of one of the deepest colonialist and imperialist occupation characterized by process of Arabization and Islamization of the occupied territories. The Middle East was mainly Pharaonic; Phoenician; Babilonian; Ugarit; Chaldean; Jewish, and Berber in North-Africa. Iran was Sassanid; Turkey, Afghanistan and Pakistan were Buddhist. Indeed, Islamic occupations of the Middle East, North Africa, parts of Europe and Asia were all imperialist-colonialist of the worst kind, as they have constantly become Arabized and Islamized.

The invasion out of Arabia was conducted under political ideological ambitions clocked in a religious banner and as an intrinsic part of Islamic doctrine. This process of occupation ended by ethnic cleansing and deportations of the indigenous population; massacres and genocide of peoples; huge slavery by hundreds of millions; and racist policies of Apartheid.

The Palestinian sociologist, Ali ‘Issa Othman, states his conviction that

The spread of Islam was military. There is a tendency to apologize for this, and we should not. It is one of the injunctions of the Qur’an that you must fight for the spreading of Islam.

Indeed, Islam has never been a tolerant, peaceful religion. It is not intolerant as a response to other’s intolerance, but it is inherently intolerant, racist and war-mongering by itself, according to its religious doctrine. Islamic hostility that practices a policy of systematic Jihad against the other are not a modern phenomenon, but deeply rooted in the Qur’an. It has been operated systematically from the 7th century on until today.

Moreover, against the religious command to love their own fellow believers, Muslims massacre by millions other Muslims. Today, it is represented by the emergence of groups and organizations that follow the Islamic ancestors’ tradition, Salafiyah, with the following division: traditional (Salafīyah Taqlīdīyah), represented by the Muslim Brotherhood parties; Jihadi (Salafīyah Jihadīyah), represented by al-Qaeda and its regional organizations (like AQAP, AQIM, al-Shabab in Somalia, Boko Haram in Nigeria, Jabhat al-Nusra in Syria); and Takfīri (Salafiyah Takfīrīyah), represented the Islamic Caliphate State.

The objectives of Islamic hatred

The Qur’an makes it clear that Islam is not about universal brotherhood and cooperation, but the brotherhood of the community of believers. The Qur’an says that all other religions as such are cursed by Allah. Whoever does not believe in Muhammad and totally follow him; whoever contends with Muhammad and Islamic tenets it means heresy that deserves death. It is the nature of Islam to dominate and not to be dominated; to rule and not to be ruled; to be superior on all the infidels. The Muslim vision is clear: there is one universe, and it must be under the banner of Islam. All humanity must submit to Islam as the supreme religion.

The Islamic excuses of the past are no more relevant. The claims they revenge only at acts that are committed against them; acts that humiliate their honor and their souls; or for defense of their nation and soil; and all other sorts of fairy-tales for the consumption of Western media to publish and public opinion to impress – these excuses are no more relevant. The fact is that Muslim groups and organizations murder and butcher and operate all kinds of horrible atrocious acts of violence are exactly for political reasons under the cloak of religious issues and as a result of cultural reasoning. They wish to conquer the world, to impose their religion and culture, and they do not feel any shame or guilt remorse. From their vantage point, they are entitled to possess everything, as it is promised in the Qur’an. They have never given up the prophetic message that Islam must dominate the entire world, and they have all the patience (Sabr) in time to bring these ambitions come true.

The Saudi legal expert, Basem ‘Alem states it clearly:

As a member of the only true religion, I have a greater right to invade others in order to impose the Shari’ah, which history has proven to be the best and most just of all civilizations. This is the true meaning of Jihad. When we wage Jihad, it is not in order to convert people to Islam, but in order to liberate them from the dark slavery in which they live.

This is apparent in an interview with Ayat Allah Kamil, a Palestinian woman who had tried to carry out a suicide bombing. When asked by the Guardian journalist: “Do you have any dreams for the future?” She responded

My deep belief and wishes that the whole world becoming Islamic, a world in which we will all live in peace, joy, and harmony, all of us, human beings, animals, flowers, plants, and stones. Islam will even bring peace to vegetables and animals, the grass and the stones… And you will be able to remain Jewish, whatever you want; it doesn’t matter, but only in an Islamic world.

…and its consequences and repercussions

The Western world reaction to this reality if fear and intimidation. One of the fresh examples is the case of Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a victim of genital mutilation in infancy and a victim of Islamic persecution today. Now she has been subjected to yet another example of Western cowardice and hypocrisy. Brandeis University has decided not to award her an honorary degree. As Arnold Ahlert observes, Brandeis honored Desmond Tutu who was an overt anti-Semite, and asserted that the Holocaust’s gas chambers made for “a neater death” than did Apartheid. He regularly accuses the Jewish State of ethnic cleansing, and insists that Zionism has “very many parallels with racism.” Brandeis also honored the playwright Tony Kushner, despite his overt anti-Semitism for Israel. He also accused the Jewish State of ethnic cleansing, and insisted its creation “was a mistake.”

Nevertheless they have been given the honorary degree. A similar case was also the University of Haifa decision not to grant an honorary doctorate to Nobel Prize laureate Yisrael Aumann, “because of his political views,” but has awarded the extreme leftist anti-Zionist Shulamit Aloni the honorary degree without hesitation.

The question is why the academia, the media, and governments in the West, founded on liberalism and secularism, would not only refuse to counter Islamic Jihad and Da‘wah onslaught against other civilizations but even deny that Islam is not compatible with the basic values of freedoms and civil rights? The answer is surprisingly simple: because they are frightened, because they are intimidated and terrorized. They are frightened of being accused of Islamophobia and racism; they are intimidated by brutal savage forces that threaten and actually attack them; they are terrorized by anarchic and chaotic groups of ruffians; and they are paralyzed by Islam’s real intent to bring us all to its 7th century traditions and way of life. Part of them, mainly the academia and the cultural hedonists, act along these lines because they hate the west and its values and they perceive Islam as a cure to what they call ‘Western malaise;’ as they embrace sick and twisted ideologies based on neo-Bolshevism and neo-Fascism.

The best to exhibit the mired reality of this Western world’s situation is the example of the British newspaper, the Guardian’s cartoonist and head of the British Cartoonist Association, Tim Benson. Anti-Semite in profession, he often sketches horrible graphic cartoons against Israel, but never against Islam and the Palestinians. When asked about this, his answer was pure and simple: I am afraid. It means, he can draw anything against Israel, the Jews, Christianity and Buddhism, and nothing happens, but he would not dare to do that when Muslims, Arabs and Palestinians are concerned. He does not want to be persecuted like Salman Rushdie, or be butchered like Theo Van Goch [sic], to mention the few.

The academia and the media worldwide are sick, and Israeli academia and media represent a pure tragic example of this sickness, because Israel is in the forefront of the war of civilizations, the last fortified dam before the deluge. Unless these two important organs of Western society’s body that hold crucial influence on the governmental apparatus decision making stop their submission and capitulation to the forces of evil, the Western world is doomed.

Those in power are still terrified of offending Islam. Honor killing is still overwhelmingly an Islamic tradition; gender equality simply does not exist within Muslim culture and jurisprudence; women still have very few rights and are treated like beasts in Muslim states; women rape victims are punished even to death in large parts of the Middle East; and women are still forced to cover their entire bodies in dark tent. Islamic immigration wrack and havoc Western societies; and the Muslim’s third generation proves to be the most extremist and fanatic, and still Western governments appease Islam and actually even unintentionally promote its victory.

The Muslim women’s clothing is the symbol to Western world’s sick era. If “Sunlight is the best disinfectant,” then Western civilization is marching courageously to a dark era in which Islam determines the values of the future. This is a darkness era that clouds the minds of those in power in the West, as much as in the academia and the media, not to see the bright sights of Islam’s brutal onslaught of Jihad; not to hear the clear voices of Islam’s targets operated by Da‘wah; and not to smell the scent of Islamic blood-hunt that wishes to smash our freedoms and civil rights and to re-mold Western civilization according to their traditions.

This almost constitutes a perpeteum [sic?] mobile, which leads to a simple mathematics: if the number of the Islamic fanatics produced by hatred is higher than those the Free World can neutralize, it means that it is losing the war of civilizations. Indeed, the Western world’s mired situation is so intimidating that it refuses to tell even to itself that Islam is engaging in a Third World War against us, and we even do not fight back, but appease and pay protection money. What we are really dealing with is not Islamophobia, but the acute danger of Islamophilia and Islamization of the Free World’s civilization.

____________________

© 2015 Modern Diplomacy All rights reserved.

About MD

February 16, 2015

The Modern Diplomacy is a leading European opinion maker – not a pure news-switchboard. Today’s world does not need yet another avalanche of (disheartened and decontextualized) information, it needs shared experience and honestly told opinion.

Determined to voice and empower, to argue but not to impose, the MD does not rigidly guard its narrative.

Contrary to the majority of media-houses and news platforms, the MD is open to everyone coming with the firm and fair, constructive and foresighted argumentation.

Balanced geographic, political and generational participation is essential to us. You will hardly find a North Korean and an American from Pentagon sitting in the same Advisory Board as we do have in the MD.

If you ask yourself what connects an Artic polar environmentalist and a tropical country traditionalist, a young businesswoman entrepreneur from north of Europe or South Africa and the former Secretary General of the eldest European institution – Council of Europe, or what puts together a musician from New York, with a President of Constitutional Court in Europe or with a scientist from Japan, a poet and a cabinet minister – it is a honesty and authenticity that we offer – and therefore, all of them are proudly in our Board.

JW Weekly Update: A New Clinton Computer Scandal?


Hillary Clinton is a liar. She uses the old Nazi Joseph Goebbels adage:

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.”

When it comes to the FBI probe of criminality in relation to classified material on her unsecured email server, Hillary sticks to the line I did nothing wrong because anything marked classified was done retroactively. Only an idiot or a Democrat would believe that lie. (Begin about 2:33 mark)

VIDEO: Hillary Clinton 100% Confident Nothing Will Come From FBI Email Investigation – Special Report

Posted by Tech News | IT World

Published on Feb 6, 2016

Hillary Clinton defiantly claimed at Thursday’s Democratic presidential debate that she is “100 percent confident” nothing will come of the FBI’s investigation of her email practices and has no concerns about the controversy’s impact on her chances in the race.

“I have absolutely no concerns about it whatsoever,” the former secretary of state said at the MSNBC-hosted debate in New Hampshire.

If wasn’t for Judicial Watch the Hillary lie about classified material would undoubtedly disappear into history for historians to tell the truth when the Clinton/Obama cabal of transforming America into something our Founding Fathers would not have recognized. Below is an email I received from Judicial Watch yesterday that highlights the obvious. Hillary is hiding something. What she is hiding has nothing to do with National Security. Rather her hiding and erasing has more to do with covering her butt so the Teflon keeps letting crimes slip away.

JRH 2/6/16

Please Support NCCR

************************

Weekly Update: A New Clinton Computer Scandal?

Sent by Tim Fitton

Sent: 2/5/2016 4:51 PM

Email from: Judicial Watch

JW Uncovers another Hillary Clinton Computer Scandal

This is unbelievable. We have just received records from the Department of State disclosing plans by senior State Department officials to set up a “stand-alone PC” so that Clinton could check her emails in an office “across the hall” through a separate, non-State Department computer network system. Referencing the special Clinton computer system, Under Secretary for Management Patrick F. Kennedy, writes Clinton Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills, “The stand-alone separate network PC is a great idea.” The emails are from January 23-24, 2009, a few days after Clinton was sworn in as Secretary of State.

The new emails were obtained by Judicial Watch in response to a court order in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit for State Department records about Hillary Clinton’s separate email system.

In the email chain, Lewis Lukens, former deputy assistant secretary of state and executive director of the secretariat, responds to a request from Mills by informing her, top Clinton aide Huma Abedin, and Kennedy that the new personal computer “in the secretary’s office” would be “connected to the internet (but not through our system).” Abedin responds, “We are hoping for that if possible.”

The email exchange discussing plans to provide Clinton a separate computer to skirt the internal State Department computer network begins with a message from Mills to Lukens in which she requests Clinton being able to access her emails through “a non-DOS computer.” The email discusses how the stand-alone computer can be set up and why it is “a great idea’ and “the best solution”:

From: Cheryl Mills
Sent: Friday, January 23, 2009 6:45 AM
To: Lukens, Lewis A
Subject: Re: Series of questions

Lew – who can I talk to about:

1.Can our email be accessed remotely through the web using a non-DOS computer like my laptop?

2.I am traveling to the M-E – will my DOS bb work there and is there a cell phone attached?

3.Spoke to Dan [Daniel B. Smith, former DOS executive secretary] re: bb for HRC (and reports that POTUS is able to use a super encrypted one)

4.Spoke to Dan re: setting up Counselor office for HRC so she can go across hall regularly to check her email

From: Lukens, Lewis A
To: cmills [REDACTED]
Cc: Habedin [REDACTED]; Kennedy, Patrick F; Smith, Daniel B
Sent: Saturday, Jan. 24, 19:10:33 2009
Subject: Re: series of questions

We have already started checking into the NSA bb. Will set up the office across the hall as requested. Also, I think we should go ahead (but will await your green light) and set up a stand-alone PC in the Secretary’s office, connect to the internet (but not through our system) to enable her to check her emails from her desk. Lew.

From: Kennedy, Patrick F KennedyPF
To: Lukens, Lewis A <LukensLA>; Cheryl Mills
Cc: Huma Abedin; Smith, Daniel B <SmithD2>
Sent: Sat, Jan 24 19:48:25 2009
Subject: Re: Series of questions

Cheryl
The stand-alone separate network PC is [a] great idea
Regards
Pat

From: Huma Abedin
To: Kennedy, Patrick F; Lukens, Lewis A; Cheryl Mills
Cc: Huma Abedin; Smith, Daniel B
Sent: Sat Jan 24 19:48:27 2009
Subject: Re: Series of questions

Yes we were hoping for that if possible so she can check her email in her office.

***

From: Lukens, Lewis A
Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2009 8:26 PM
To: Kennedy, Patrick F
Subject: Re: Series of questions

I talked to Cheryl about this. She says a problem is hrc does not know how to use a computer to do email – only bb [Blackberry]. But, I said would not take much training to get her up to speed.

In separate litigation, the State Department told Judicial Watch and federal courts that Hillary Clinton was never issued secure State Department computing devices.

These emails are shocking. They show the Obama State Department’s plan to set up non-government computers and a computer network for Hillary Clinton to bypass the State Department network. The fact that these records were withheld from the American people until now is scandalous and shows the criminal probe of Hillary Clinton’s email system should include current and former officials of the Obama administration.

Our legal team filed these new emails with U.S. District Court Judge Emmett Sullivan, who is now considering whether to grant discovery in a lawsuit seeking information on the “special government employee” status of Abedin. In our filing, we state:

[Judicial Watch] just recently received additional evidence that demonstrates that senior management at the State Department was well aware that Mrs. Clinton was using a “non-state.gov” system to conduct official government business. This evidence also shows that the senior management at the State Department knowingly aided Mrs. Clinton in establishing and using a “non-state.gov” system.

[T]his newly discovered email demonstrates that there is at least a “reasonable suspicion” that the State Department and Mrs. Clinton deliberately thwarted FOIA by creating, using, and concealing the “clintonemail.com” record system for six years.

The media took up this story (which was reported first by Fox News.) The Obama gang responded with careful word parsing. The State Department spokesman John Kirby told CBS News:

“I will say, a computer was not set up for Secretary Clinton,” he said in an email to CBS News State Department Correspondent Margaret Brennan.

Because “these matters are under review generally,” Kirby declined to comment further.

Was a computer set up for Cheryl Mills (who evidently had the Counselor’s office across the hall)? It will take another lawsuit or court-ordered discovery to get past this obfuscation.

We will continue our investigation – we hope with the support of the courts. In the meantime, you can see that email isn’t the only Clinton computer scandal.

Hillary Clinton Discussed Prosecuting Republicans for Classification Violations

There are a lot of twists and turns in this one, but pay close attention to what a Hillary Clinton confidant advised her to do in response to some of the actions by congressional Republicans. When you have Sidney Blumenthal, Hillary Clinton, Eric Cantor and David Petraeus mentioned in one government document, it’s time to pay close attention.

Back on January 7, 2016, we obtained a new batch of documents from the Department of State, including a “Confidential” memo from Clinton advisor Sidney Blumenthal to the former secretary of state suggesting that a grand jury and the Senate Judiciary Committee should investigate whether former Rep. Eric Cantor or his staff violated the Espionage Act by disclosing classified information related to the FBI investigation of former CIA Director David Petraeus.

According to the Blumenthal-to-Clinton email, if classified information was discussed by Cantor, his staff, or anyone “inside or outside the bureau,” it “is a felony” in violation of the Espionage Act. Blumenthal’s fantasy prosecution of Cantor aside, it is for sure true that if Clinton kept classified information on her non-state.gov server, that also may be a criminal violation of the Espionage Act. (And, of course, Petraeus eventually was forced to plead guilty in a slap-on-the-wrist plea deal.)

The documents also contain an email to Clinton in which Blumenthal sent a copy of a “Confidential” memo to top Obama 2012 presidential debate advisor Ron Klain warning that GOP candidate Mitt Romney would “falsify, distort, and mangle facts” in the final campaign debate. The Blumenthal memo was sent to Klain and copied to Clinton just four days before the final debate.

The documents include an email sent after the Benghazi attack in which Blumenthal informs Clinton of his “Latest Libya intel” regarding the turmoil in that country. Though barred by the Obama administration from being an official State Department advisor to Clinton, Blumenthal – who at the time was also employed by the Clinton Foundation – claimed to have “a very sensitive source” providing him “internal govt discussions high level” concerning Libyan internal security.

The new emails, also available on the State Department website, were obtained by Judicial Watch in response to a court order. The Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed on May 6, 2015, asked for the following:

• Communications between officials, officers, or employees of the Department of State and members of Congress, Congressional staff members, or Congressional members or staff members of the U.S. House of Representatives Select Committee on Benghazi concerning the use of non-“state.gov” email addresses by former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

• Emails of former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton regarding the September 11, 2012, attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya. The timeframe for this request is September 11, 2012, to January 31, 2013.

The State Department’s records include the November 13, 2012, email from Blumenthal to Clinton in which he speculates about former Rep. Eric Cantor’s dealings with then-FBI Director Robert Mueller concerning the agency’s investigation of former CIA Director David Petraeus. In the email, Blumenthal raises the possible need for both a grand jury and a Senate Judiciary Committee investigation of possible violations of the Espionage Act by Cantor and his staff if classified information was made public:

From: Sidney Blumenthal
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2012 9:13 AM
Subject: More questions. Sid

Who else in the Congress besides congressmen Reichert and Cantor knew of the Petraeus investigation before it became public? How many congressional staffers were informed? What roles did they play in deciding who to inform about it? What were their communications among themselves and with others outside their offices if any? Did any of them discuss the matter with anyone in the Romney-Ryan campaign?

Why was Cantor intent on informing FBI Director Mueller of the existence of an FBI investigation that was already resolved?…

What were the internal discussions between Cantor and his staff on his referral to Mueller?…

Was the supposedly rogue FBI agent, described in the Washington Post as motivated by his “worldview,” acting alone? Did he discuss the investigation with any individual either inside or outside the bureau before he went to Reichert and Cantor?

Disclosure of an espionage investigation is a felony. Will a grand jury be empaneled by the Justice Department?

When will Senator Patrick Leahy, chair of the Judiciary Committee and a former FBI agent, begin an investigation of this matter?

Clinton, the United States Secretary of State, responded not with a “you are crazy, why are you writing this to me” but with a request for more info:

What was his “worldview” and why would he think hurting P furthered it? Why would Cantor want to hurt P (beloved by Rs)?

The other major find is an another unhinged October 19, 2012, email from Blumenthal to Clinton in which he sends a copy of a lengthy “Confidential” memo to Klain expounding upon how to defeat Mitt Romney in the third and final 2012 presidential debate:

From: Sidney Blumenthal
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2012 10:32 AM
To: H
Subject: H: fyi, see especially point about bush. Sid

1.Romney will inevitably falsify, distort and mangle facts on a range of subjects from Libya to the defense budget. But why is this debate different from all other debates? In the dedicated foreign policy debate, the stakes are higher-America’s role in the world. That makes Romney’s errors even more consequential and potentially threatening. And that must be an essential predicate of Obama’s point when he exposes Romney’s falsehoods. When Romney lies on domestic policy it’s shameful, but when he lies on foreign policy it’s dangerous.

3.Romney’s attack line on Libya is not only false, as exposed in the last debate. (Obama here can joke that Romney apparently wants to rerun the last debate but this time without Candy Crowley present to call him out. Romney will become angry and nonplussed.) His attack line is a reheated leftover of the Bush era attacks on Democrats designed by Karl Rove as weak on terrorism, which were themselves repackaged old Republican attacks from the Cold War. It’s all nostalgia….

Then, really stick in the shiv by having Obama say that he was somewhat surprised that Romney in the last debate did not give President George W. Bush credit where credit is due-for example, breaking with the neoconservatives around Vice President Cheney by adopting the surge in Iraq led by current CIA director David Petraeus that prepared the groundwork for Obama’s own policy in Iraq.

An email from Blumenthal to Clinton contains a lengthy “Confidential” memo in which he provides his “latest Libya intel” from “internal govt discussions high level.” The memo, later forwarded by Clinton to then-Deputy Chief of Staff Jake Sullivan, reveals that more than a year after the Obama/Clinton assisted overthrow of Qaddafi, ostensibly intended to bring about a peaceful transition, the country remained at the mercy of the same terrorist groups that attacked the Benghazi consulate. Claiming that his information comes from a “very sensitive source,” Blumenthal informed Clinton of the following:

From: Sidney Blumenthal
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2013 11:20 AM
To: H
Subject: H: latest Libya intel; internal govt discussions high level. Sid

1. On the morning of January 15, 2013 Libyan Prime Minister Ali Zidan was informed by Interior Minister Ashour Shuwail and Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation Mohamed Abdulaziz that Italy plan to close its consulate in Benghazi and reduce the size of its embassy in Tripoli following attacks on the consulate itself and the Italian consul general. Shuwail reported that the attacks were carried out by Eastern militia forces associated with Ansar al Islam, which, although put under pressure by the National Libyan Army (NLA) following the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi in September 2012, continues to operate in and around that city.

***

6. According to a very sensitive source, General Hassi disagrees with the NLA analysis that the Sabha attack was not aimed at Magariaf specifically, noting that there were five prior assassination attempts against Magariaf in 2012, and that he is a target for a diverse collection of enemies, including former Qaddafi forces, groups like Ansar al Sharia, and even his political adversaries in the GNC. Accordingly, Hassi intends to establish new programs to train a detachment of presidential bodyguards, and his own anti-terrorism personnel.

It is beyond ironic that Hillary Clinton and Sidney Blumenthal, her secret Clinton Foundation adviser at the State Department, discuss criminal prosecutions of Republicans for the handling of classified information over the Petraeus scandal. And it is disturbing that then-Secretary of State Clinton was involved in advising the Obama reelection campaign on how to continue lying about the Benghazi attack. No wonder Hillary Clinton tried to hide these email records rather than disclose them years ago as required by law.

Federal Judge Orders State Department Answers on New Clinton Documents

The Obama administration continues to provide cover for Hillary Clinton, but some in the judiciary are running out of patience with the gamesmanship. We are pleased to report to you this week that Judge Rudolph Contreras ordered the State Department to explain how and when new records from the office of Hillary Clinton were located and why they were not identified previously.

The court order comes in a Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit seeking records about the State Department vetting of then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s potential conflicts of interest. The explanation was initially due on Monday, but Judge Contreras granted the State Department an extension to Friday, February 5, 2015, due to the federal government shutdown because of the recent blizzard. (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:15-cv-00688)).

Last month, we learned that the Obama State Department recently found “thousands” of new records from Hillary Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State. According to information provided to Judicial Watch by various Justice Department attorneys, the new documents appear be “working” records in electronic format located on both “shared” and “individual” drives accessible to or used by persons identified as being relevant to our various FOIA lawsuits on the Benghazi scandal and controversies from Clinton’s term at State. The State Department admitted to Judge Contreras on January 14 that the new records include the files of two of Clinton’s top aides:

The newly identified files that need to be searched in this case consist of office files that were available to employees within the Office of the Secretary during former Secretary Clinton’s tenure as well as individual files belonging to Jake Sullivan and Cheryl Mills.

Judge Contreras responded with a January 15 order that states:

Defendant [State Department] shall complete its additional search and file a status report (1) disclosing the volume of potentially responsive documents that must be reviewed, (2) containing a detailed description of how and when these files were located and why they had not been previously identified, and (3) proposing a revised schedule for the production of the non-exempt portions of responsive documents subject to the Freedom of Information Act.

At a July 9, 2015, hearing the judge was “concerned” about the preservation of Clinton’s records and warned that the State Department will “have to answer for” any destruction of Hillary Clinton email records.

The lawsuit stems from a Judicial Watch FOIA request on March 17, 2015, and a subsequent lawsuit filed on May 6, 2015, seeking:

• Records that identify the policies and/or procedures in place to ensure that former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton’s personal or charitable financial relationships with foreign leaders, foreign governments, and business entities posed no conflict of interest to her role as Secretary of State; and

• Records concerning the State Department’s review of donations to the Clinton Foundation for potential conflicts of interest with former Secretary Clinton’s role as Secretary of State.

The State Department is protecting Hillary Clinton and has a history of illegally hiding documents from the courts and the public about her record. These newly found Hillary Clinton records show the State Department needs special policing from the courts, federal investigators, and Congress.

A separate and ongoing Judicial Watch lawsuit, one of nearly 23 active Judicial Watch lawsuits in which the Clinton email system is at issue, forced the disclosure last year of documents that provided a road map for over 200 conflict-of-interest rulings that led to $48 million for the Clinton Foundation and other Clinton-connected entities during Hillary Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state. Previously disclosed documents in this lawsuit, for example, raise questions about funds Clinton accepted from entities linked to Saudi Arabia, China and Iran, among others.

I wish I could tell you the State Department’s explanation has arrived, but it has not. I expect it will come after hours in order to keep the new scandal out of the news. But we will spread the details far and wide, so be sure to check back here next week.

Until next week…

Tom Fitton
President

_____________________

JudicialWatch.org
425 3rd St, SW Suite 800
Washington, D.C. 20024

About Judicial Watch

Judicial Watch, Inc., a conservative, non-partisan educational foundation, promotes transparency, accountability and integrity in government, politics and the law. Through its educational endeavors, Judicial Watch advocates high standards of ethics and morality in our nation’s public life and seeks to ensure that political and judicial officials do not abuse the powers entrusted to them by the American people. Judicial Watch fulfills its educational mission through litigation, investigations, and public outreach.

The motto of Judicial Watch is “Because no one is above the law”. To this end, Judicial Watch uses the open records or freedom of information laws and other tools to investigate and uncover misconduct by government officials and litigation to hold to account politicians and public officials who engage in corrupt activities.

Litigation and the civil discovery process not only uncover information for the education of the American people on anti-corruption issues, but can also provide a basis for civil authorities to criminally prosecute corrupt officials. Judicial Watch seeks to ensure high ethical standards in the judiciary through monitoring activities and the use of the judicial ethics process to hold judges to account.

Judicial Watch’s investigation, legal, and judicial activities provide the basis for strong educational outreach to the American people. Judicial Watch’s public education programs include READ THE REST

Explaining the Islamic State Phenomenon, Part Two


Here in Part Two Neriah examines the psyche primarily of non-Syrian/non-Iraqi Jihadis that have flocked to join the Islamic State. He explains the attraction partly resulting from the impotent bombing by the U.S. Air Force. (I found it interesting that Neriah doesn’t include other Western nations also bombing targets in the Islamic State such as the French, Russians, etc.) Typical as in Part One Neriah blames U.S. incompetent Foreign Policy and idiotic military decisions on the American government. As in my intro in Part One most of this Foreign Policy/Military idiocy was put into place by President Barack Hussein Obama and no little contribution by then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton now running for the Dem nomination for POTUS.

JRH 2/5/16

Please Support NCCR

********************

Explaining the Islamic State Phenomenon, Part Two

By Col. (ret.) Dr. Jacques Neriah, Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs

2016-02-02

ACT for America

Part II:

Profiling the Jihadist

Almost all of those who join the armed Jihad, Al-Qaeda or the Islamic State fall into two primary categories:

1) Criminals, often recruited in prison by radical imams who manage to rally those individuals to their cause by promising them that if they continue their actions on behalf of Islam – and not just for their only personal enrichment – their actions will become lawful and consistent with the will of Allah.

2) The “exalted” and the “deranged” who dream of war and action, seeking to assert their manhood at all costs and who are in search of violence and epic adventure to express it. For these individuals, jihad offers a unique opportunity to indulge their inclinations and publicize them to satisfy their deranged ego.

Religion doesn’t have much to do with the jihadists’ actions. Most know nothing about Islam and mindlessly repeat some verses that have been hammered into them by radical imams, less stupid than them, but much more dangerous. Those who are outside these profiles are only a tiny minority – exceptions that confirm the rule. Jihadist university graduates, for instance, are often frustrated individuals who have failed to integrate into society through work, study, socialization, marriage, etc. There again, radical imams succeed to convince them that their failures are not of their making but that of the environment that dismisses them. They teach them the idea that it is legitimate that they restore the situation to their benefit and by acting with force.

In fact, all jihadists have a psychiatric pathology, characteristics of obsessive-compulsive, even depressive disorders, as well as an inability to be socialized. The study of their past reveals that they had left homes and families voluntarily, that many had been the witnesses of family crises, and that they were often unemployed. Some have even made use of drugs when they were not directly involved in its trafficking.

The Islamic State has an undeniable power of attraction over these individuals. Indeed, it controls a territory on which it can implement the life principles that guide its action. Thus, young men leaving to join the IS receive on the spot what they have lacked in their previous homeland: On the one hand, they receive a reason that spares them the need to reflect, to earn a salary, to court women, while on the other hand they are offered warlike activities that become an outlet for their frustrations.

For many, aspects of life – physical, sexual and sentimental – in the Islamic State are better than in their country of origin. This is particularly the case for Chechen fighters who flock to the IS because the conditions of combat in Iraq and Syria are less harsh than against the Russians. Many young jihadists in the Arab world believe the Islamic State offers them greater social justice. No doubt they hear of the permission to murder, torture, rape, and entering into forced marriage of non-Muslims, or even of Muslims when they are not quite as radical. And, of course, there is the extermination of the Shiites.

Why North Africans?

Out of the thousands who volunteered for jihad, about 5,000 fighters, originating from North African countries, have joined the ranks of IS and the Jabhat al-Nusra fundamentalist organizations active in Syria and Iraq. The biggest contingent is composed of Tunisians (3,000), followed by Moroccans (1,500) and Algerians (500-800) representing roughly 50 percent of the foreign fighters. These numbers exclude the European fighters of North African origin (mostly from France, 1,800, and Belgium, 400-600).

Ironically, most of North Africa’s jihadist groups were hesitant to associate themselves with the Islamic State until the United States commenced its military intervention in Iraq and Syria in August 2014. Jihadists such as Abdel Malek Droukdel from AQIM (Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb), Mohammed Zahawi , from Libya’s Ansar al-Sharia, and Mokhtar Belmokhtar from al-Mourabitoun, who fought alongside Bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri, had refused, sometimes openly, to pledge allegiance to the Islamic State — even after it captured swathes of territory in Iraq in June 2014 and declared a caliphate. Recently, however, North Africa’s younger jihadist generation has become emboldened to break away from al Qaeda, seeking instead to join Baghdadi’s IS caliphate to benefit from its success and wealth. Rather than deterring these groups, the U.S.-led coalition’s sporadic airstrikes in Iraq and Syria seem to have afforded the Islamic State even more legitimacy in the eyes of North Africa’s jihadists.

Some of the Moroccan militants are filling senior positions in the Islamic State as are “emirs,” ministers (Justice, Finance, Interior), as well as a Military Emir (Military Chief) and even the head of a geographical region (the Turkman Mountain). However, 75 percent of the North Africans are “Inghimasiyyine,” an Islamic State terminology for an undercover operative responsible for protecting convoys and serving as the second wave of attack when an offensive mission or targeted attack is carried out.

During the first days of the civil war in Syria, the North Africans were organized in brigades, one of which was named “Sham al-Islam” and headed by a Moroccan, Ibrahim Benchekroun, alias Abu Ahmad EL-Maghrebi. Some even nicknamed the brigade as the “Liwa al Infransiyyoun” (the French Brigade) since the combatants communicated among themselves in French; some of its members were French nationals, mostly of North African origins, who were integrated into the North African French-speaking brigade. The ill-fated brigade that was active in the Latakia region of Syria was almost annihilated by the Syrian army loyal to Bashar Assad. The remaining members were scattered in different units created since then by the Islamic State.

Considered by the Islamic state as “Muhajirun” (immigrants), the North African fighters receive a monthly salary of $2,000-3,000 (compared to $500 paid to the local fighters). If married, the volunteer receives an additional $200 and $50 more for each of his children. A new born child will automatically generate a “bonus.”

Be sure to read Part I here.

___________________

ACT for America accepts no funding from any governmental agency, any foreign influence peddlers, or political institutions. Your support of ACT for America is critical in winning a battle we cannot afford to lose. All donations are tax-deductible. Click here to donate. ACT for America education is a 501(c)3 organization.

ACT for America Action Center

ACTION CENTER Page

ABOUT PAGE

  • ACT for America is the largest and the only grassroots organization dedicated to national security and defeating terrorism. Today, ACT for America has expanded to 890 chapters and 280,000 members with a goal of 2,500 chapters and 1,000,000 members by the end of the decade.
  • ACT for America is a non-partisan organization whose mission appeals to every American concerned about national security and terrorism -a powerful, organized, informed and mobilized voice.
  • ACT for America educates citizens and elected officials to help impact national security policy & stands ready to take action as the only national security grassroots organization in America.

Who We Are

We are all Americans first -citizens who put their differences aside and came together to secure our country. Every American has one thing in common – “we are all interested” in keeping our homes, communities, states, and nation safe. What makes ACT for America different is that our members and supporters come from every background, age, gender, race, social status, political point of view, and lifestyle choice. Remember, national security is not a conservative, liberal, or libertarian issue – it’s an American issue.

What We Do

ACT for America is continuing to expand its nationwide volunteer chapter network that trains citizens to recognize and help prevent criminal activity and terrorism in the United States while preserving civil liberties protected by the United States Constitution.

ACT for America focuses on activities that enhance the national security standing of the United States — such as educating elected officials from the school board level to Congress. Many of these officials go on to pass vital legislation to this end. ACT has driven the education process towards the successful passage of 37 bills in 19 states over the last six years.

About Brigitte Gabriel

Brigitte Gabriel is the Founder and President of Act for America. Ms. Gabriel is one of the leading national security experts in the world -providing information and analysis on the rise of Islamic terrorism. Ms. Gabriel lectures nationally and internationally about national security and current affairs. Her expertise is sought after by world and business leaders. Ms. Gabriel has addressed the United Nations, the Australian Prime Minister, members of the British Parliament/House of Commons, members of the United States Congress, the Pentagon, the Joint Forces Staff College, the U.S. Special Operations Command, the U.S. Asymmetric Warfare group, the FBI, and many others. In addition, Ms. Gabriel is a regular guest analyst on Fox News Channel, CNN, MSNBC, and various radio stations daily across America. She serves on the board of advisers of the Intelligence Summit.

Ms. Gabriel is the author of two New York Times Best Sellers, BECAUSE THEY HATE and THEY MUST BE STOPPED. Ms. Gabriel is named one of the top 50 most prominent speakers in America. She speaks Arabic, French, English and Hebrew.

I’m Still a Cruzer


John R. Houk

© February 4, 2016

The next day after the Cruz victory in Iowa the Senator was castigated by Ben Carson for disseminating false information that possibly led Carson supporters to support Ted Cruz. The question then is: Did Cruz tell his campaigners to lie about Carson or did the campaigners take it upon themselves to tell caucus goers that Carson had pulled out of the Iowa contest?

If Cruz was involved in that decision that indeed would be a dirty trick that probably isn’t illegal but morally bankrupt. If Cruz wasn’t culpable the next logical step would be to fire the campaign staff personnel involved in the error in decision or outright scandalous political behavior. Myself I am going to err on believing Cruz had little to zero involvement in giving marching orders to undermine Carson’s campaign.

This whole issue has inspired Donald Trump to cry foul probably because if Carson delegates left for Cruz, that may have rocketed Cruz to his win and relegated Trump to second place. After understanding situation, Trump has become furious. Not because Trump’s good buddy Carson was robbed of delegate votes but because the issue may have cost Trump an Iowa victory. Ergo, if I heard correctly on the news this morning, Trump wants the Iowa Caucus vote nullified and a do-over to occur. Frankly I doubt such a re-vote or re-count will occur; nevertheless, the tone taken by Trump demonstrates just how vicious the hotel/casino magnet can get when a “deal” falls through.

Now this led me to ask myself who are my favorite candidates to win the GOP nomination for President.

I have to be honest with you. I was as intrigued by the Trump make America great again message as many other Americans have been and still are. I want to reverse the Obama curse, make the military strong again, name and confront American enemies, stop illegal immigration, kick out illegal immigrants taking advantage of entitlements while deserving Americans are still waiting in line (e.g. Veterans), refusing Muslim refugees whose devotion to Islam will eventually lead to un-American activities rather than assimilation and so on.

With all that intrigue I had this gnawing in the back of my mind about how the old deal maker mixed with Big Business causes to the detriment of basic core Conservative values, mixed with Democrats that definitely promoted anti-Conservative principles and had a mixed pro-life and a mixed Christian affinity past.

Then I have always had an affinity to the causes that Cruz stood for such as pro-life, pro-Tea Party causes, a staunch Conservative and anti-Establishment GOP kind-of-guy.

I also liked Marco Rubio as a Christian and Conservative but thought his experience was a bit lacking especially when GOP Establishment individuals began to throw support behind Rubio after it became evident that Jeb Bush did not have the support of the GOP Conservative base.

And so perhaps we Conservatives should pay attention to Conservatives like Mark Alexander of The Patriot Post who have always questioned Trump’s dedication to Conservative principles and values as you can read in Alexander’s February third essay that is less than favorable toward Donald Trump.

JRH 2/4/16 (Hat Tip Don Moore of Blind Conservatives)

Please Support NCCR

****************************

If Trump Is the Answer…

What Is the Question?

By Mark Alexander

Feb. 3, 2016

The Patriot Post

“It is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts.” —Patrick Henry, 1775

If Donald Trump is the answer, then what’s the question his supporters are asking?

Fact is, they’re asking the most important questions every genuine conservative is asking. Consistent with The Patriot Post’s mission statement, all of us are asking, “How do we restore constitutional limits on government and the judiciary? How do we restore free enterprise, our national defense capabilities and traditional American values? How do we undo all of the damage Obama has done and correct our nation’s course back toward Liberty? How do we defeat Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders and win the next presidential election?”

But Donald Trump?

By way of disclosure, let me say that I would “vote early and often” for Trump if he is the Republican nominee. Having said that, I hope there will be a more viable and reliable ballot option.

Bear with me.

In the wake of the Iowa caucus results, Trump is again asking, “How stupid are the people of Iowa?” After a 15-hour blackout, he woke up mad, claiming, “Ted Cruz didn’t win Iowa, he stole it. … Based on the fraud committed by Senator Ted Cruz during the Iowa Caucus, either a new election should take place or Cruz results nullified.” This from a guy who has not voted in a Republican primary for almost 30 years… (This sounds like a set up — “I’m being treated unfairly, thus I will run third-party to insure a Democrat victory in 2016!”)

Though I consider Iowa more a generator of media advertising revenue than I do a solid predictive indicator of presidential election outcomes, the caucus results are, just the same, instructive.

Trump, who assumed he had Iowa in the bag, made two mistakes that will influence the results of the upcoming primaries.

First, he backed out of the Iowa debate just before the caucuses, not because he has “zero respect for [Fox News journalist] Megyn Kelly,” as he claimed, but to avoid being called out on a growing list of prevarications and obfuscations. Despite the not-too-clever diversion of his alternate event “for the veterans,” his supporters in Iowa stayed focused on the task at hand — casting a vote for the candidate they think is best suited to be the 45th president of the United States.

Second, while he may have avoided the Iowa debate, Trump’s petulant attack against his primary rival, Texas Senator Ted Cruz, in the days after that debate resulted in exposing his clear and continuing support for ObamaCare, one of the most important agenda items on conservative lists for legislative repeal.

Just before the Iowa Caucus, Cruz asserted, “Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders have the identical position on health care, which is they want to put the government in charge of you and your doctor.” That is not quite accurate — Trump’s socialist health care plan is actually more statist than Clinton’s plan.

Trump attempted to deflect the criticism, protesting, “Ted Cruz is a total liar. I’m so against ObamaCare. … I don’t even know where he gets this.” Where Cruz “gets this” is the same place he got Trump’s liberal “New York values” — remarks from Trump himself! Trump has written and spoken repeatedly in support of state-run health care systems. In his book, “The America We Deserve,” he praised Canada’s failed socialist single-payer health care system: “We must have universal health care. I’m a conservative on most issues but a liberal on this one.”

Betrayed by his own words, Trump refuted (and simultaneously confirmed) Cruz’s claims, saying, “He has got no heart. And if this means I lose an election, that’s fine because frankly, we have to take care of the people in our country.” Of course, Trump’s socialized medicine proposals would deepen the disastrous consequences of the so-called “Affordable Healthcare Act” and accelerate the deterioration of health care services. Think “Veterans Affairs on steroids.”

The fact is, Trump is a case study in contradictions, with long-held and defended liberal positions averse to Liberty, including his support for state-run health care, gun control, enormous tax increases and executive unilateralism. His apparent contradictions are now the toasts of late-night liberals like Stephen Colbert, who recently aired a “debate” segment, Donald vs. Trump.

Apparently, Trump didn’t receive the memo that a man has only one chance to make a first impression. Now, instead of providing a candid and honest explanation for his 11th-hour conversion to conservatism and all the flip-flopping, Trump is content to simply deny he ever held those liberal positions. His undeniable denial of reality should concern anyone who supports him.

Having said this, I expect protests from Trump supporters that will fall into two previously established categories.

About 10% will offer reasoned objections, which I welcome. They are actually open to criticism of Trump, and the resulting dialogue provides useful insights for both of us.

However, the remaining 90% will hurl vitriolic diatribes, shooting insults and threats at this messenger, much like the shots Trump takes at his critics. The rage and resentment in these protests are a testament to Trump’s anger-driven support, which I described in “The Trump Card — Ace of Anger Affirmation.”

For the record, I have been shot at on a few occasions — and by “shot at” I mean with high-velocity projectiles, not derogatory words — so insults don’t bother me. But what I do find deeply troubling is that the vitriolic variety reflects a cultish devotion to Trump, whose narcissistic persona basks in the light of such unquestioned devotion. Too many of his supporters are intolerant of any divergent perspective on Trump, no matter how well reasoned.

Don’t get me wrong: Grassroots Americans should be angry about the lame “establishment Republicans” who haven’t made way for the growing ranks of young conservatives now in the House and Senate.

And it’s not only Trump’s conservative supporters who are mad. Notably, analysis in The New York Times — “Trump’s Strongest Supporters: A Certain Kind of Democrat” — recently reflected that “[h]is very best voters are self-identified Republicans who nonetheless are registered as Democrats.” These are folks who, in 1980, might have been described as “Reagan Democrats.”

The comparison is understandable, given that Trump’s simple mantra, “Make America Great Again,” was “borrowed” from President Reagan’s slogan, “Let’s make America great again.” Fact is, Trump is a “good communicator” and his simple solutions to complex problems resonate with both grassroots Republicans and Democrats.

But Donald Trump is no Ronald Reagan, who was a genuine, humble conservative, and a model of servant leadership.

Human nature tells us that many people are more convicted by what they want to believe than by a considerable body of evidence contradicting those beliefs. Noted historian John Lukacs, in his book “Democracy and Populism,” wrote, “Most people believe and think what they prefer to think and what they want to believe: their vision of the world and their own likes and dislikes … are seldom separable.”

In the timeless words of John Adams, however, “Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclination, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”

Facts and evidence, fellow Patriots. Facts and evidence.

Donald Trump is not the answer to the critical questions genuine conservatives are asking, including those genuine conservatives among his supporters.

So, it’s off to New Hampshire we go, where I expect Trump’s “New York values” to play well. However, take note. His national disapproval rating has soared to 60%, which renders him all but unelectable against potential adversaries as fundamentally flawed as Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and Joe Biden.

But if Trump actually makes it to the general election and defeats his Democrat opponent, I note this irony: Now that the ranks of conservatives (as opposed to “Republicans”) in the House and Senate have surged, those conservatives might be faced with a “Republican” president who is both autocratic and statist, a combination that will be perilous to the future of Liberty.

Finally, Donald Trump was asked recently to define “conservatism” and he was at a loss of words – rare for Trump. But last week, Ben Sasse, one of the rising young conservatives in the U.S. Senate, was asked the same question, and Trump should listen to Ben’s 90-second response.

 

[Blog Editor: Here’s Youtube video not a part of original Patriot Post]

 

VIDEO: Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.) on MSNBC Defining Conservatism

 

Posted by Heritage Response Room

Published on Jan 29, 2016

 

Pro Deo et Constitutione — Libertas aut Mors
Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis

____________________

I’m Still a Cruzer

John R. Houk

© February 4, 2016

___________________

If Trump Is the Answer…

*PUBLIUS*

The Patriot Post is protected speech pursuant to the “unalienable rights” of all men, and the First (and Second) Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America. In God we trust. Copyright © 2016 The Patriot Post. All Rights Reserved.

REPRINTING, FORWARDING AND POSTING: Subscribers may reprint, forward or post original content from The Patriot Post, in whole or part, in accordance with our Terms of Use, with the following citation: “The Patriot Post (http://patriotpost.us/subscribe/)”

© 2016, The Patriot Post.

About The Patriot Post

About Mark Alexander

Donate Online

Bad News, Good News, and a Common Blind Spot


Let me ask a question: When you think of a person who is a Nazi do you also think that person is a follower of the ideology of Nazism? Both person and ideology are thought of as evil, right?

Hmm… So why is a Muslim divided into moderate-good and radical-evil Islamic ideology when both the moderate and the radical both believe the Quran is the uncreated word of Allah? Or why do present day multiculturalists brainwash students and listeners that Islamic history during Muhammad’s life and the next thousand years or so are taught that this time period is the golden age of Islam? Keep in mind I ask about this golden age fallacy because one can account for about “270 million killed by jihad”.

Elsa Schieder addresses the hypocritical paradox about personhood and ideology.

JRH 2/3/16

Please Support NCCR

******************

Bad News, Good News, and a Common Blind Spot

By Elsa Schieder

January 30, 2016 2:37 PM

Sent by WorldTruthSummit.com

Today, bad news, good news, and a way that most people – even those very aware of the threat of Islam – are asleep.

Bad news. In Israel, the stabbings of Jews by Islamics continue. A mother was murdered in front of her children. In Canada, a man named Mohammed entered a Calgary nightclub with a gun and started firing. There was only one injury – bouncers tackled the man, subdued him. In Paris, a man with 2 guns, ammo and a Quran was caught in Disney Land. A 22-year-old Swedish woman, daughter of Christian refugees from Lebanon, was murdered by an Islamic so-called refugee at a refugee center for unaccompanied minors. (The supposed minor was over 6′ tall.) Another story from Sweden: a 15-year-old Lithuanian student was murdered by an Islamic student after the Lithuanian student protected a non-Islamic female student from sexual harassment. In Berlin, a German-born Iranian Muslim man murdered a 20-year-old German woman by pushing her into the path of an oncoming subway train. I could go on and on.

I hear so many stories, and grieve for the lives lost.

Good news. There’s a new Fortress Europe coalition. It’s planning to hold mass demonstrations across Europe on February 6. And in the United Stated, a presidential candidate, Donald Trump, has declared that, if elected, he will stop all Islamic immigration until the jihad threat has been eliminated.

Will enough people wake up in time to save the West? My inner answer: yes. At what cost? We will see. I remember a film that gripped me when I was a child: High Noon. It feels like high noon, right now.

And now I want to pay attention to a way that most people are asleep.

It should be obvious: Christians are to Christianity, what Muslims are to Islam, what Nazis are to Nazism. But just try and see – maybe even on yourself – and you’ll almost certainly experience very different responses to the 3 things. I can certainly feel this in myself. My intrained [sic] kneejerk response re Muslims and Islam: of course one can’t generalize about Muslims, Muslims are people, Islam is an ideology. My kneejerk response re Nazis is utterly different: within myself, I tar them all with the same brush – bad, evil, Jew-killers. As for Christians, it’s also automatic: I don’t feel any need to say, of course not all Christians are like this or that.

I did a mini-experiment with a few people when they spouted the usual line (“We must be careful not to negatively stereotype Muslims”). I agreed vehemently, that it’s important to distinguish between Muslims (people) and Islam (ideology) – just as we need to make a distinction between Nazis (people) and Nazism (ideology). The people were stunned. Spluttering. Silence. What??

What’s good for the goose is good for the gander, I have heard. Instead I could feel a powerful double standard, which these people – and most Western people, I suspect – hold, without awareness.

The biggest thing: Muslims are radically disconnected from any of the nasty ideology found in the supposedly perfect Quran. On the other hand, Nazis are 100% connected to The Final Solution (the plan to murder all Jews) – though The Final Solution is NOT in Hitler’s Mein Kampf, in fact was not developed until 1942, the middle of World War II. Yet in World War II, there were no cell phones, no instant videos instantly uploaded, no selfies of SS guards herding Jews into the gas chambers. There was no Twitter, no Facebook, no internet. There was even no mention in the news – for the most part, outside as well as inside Germany – of the concentration camps. Not a single train track leading to the concentration camps was ever bombed.

Now there is a wealth of information on Islamic ideology, plus there are scores of graphic videos of Islamics quoting the Quran while committing atrocities. No one can say that Muslims have no access to knowledge of Islamic ideology that includes Jew hatred, belief in Islamic superiority, and worldwide Sharia, and an Islamic caliphate. In fact, there is massive evidence that millions of Muslims adhere to this ideology. About three-quarters of a billion Muslims (about 50%), according to some recent statistics, want worldwide Sharia.

So what is going, that now, with all this information readily available, Muslims are “anti-demonized”, disconnected from Islamic ideology?

Just ask yourself:

– Why it isn’t even suggested that we need to distinguish between Nazis (people) and Nazism (Nazi ideology as laid out in Mein Kampf)?

– Much more important, why is it drilled into us (correctly) that we need to distinguish between Muslims (people) and Islam (Islamic ideology as laid out in the Quran)?

 – But why it isn’t drilled into us that we must educate ourselves as well as Muslims – or that Muslims are responsible for educating themselves – on Islamic ideology, so we all know the ideology Muslims are associating themselves with?

To me, it doesn’t make any logical sense to demonize all adherents of one of these ideologies (Nazism), while treating adherents of the other (Islam) with kid gloves – “one must not generalize about Muslims.”

We know the answers to these questions, actually. Islam is powerful. So are the politically correct. Nazis are not. It’s easy to demonize those out of power.

Now for something else, something that shocked me, and made me do a lot more thinking about Nazis and Nazism.

It’s something I came across accidentally online. I had to look twice to believe what I was seeing. I was so shocked I didn’t even mention it to anyone for a week. I was looking for Silent Night, in the original German. I found a lovely sing-along version by Nana Mouskouri. Then, in one of those automatic changes, right after Nana Mouskouri finished, on came a German version of White Christmas. Nothing strange about that – except that it included photos of Hitler. (183,942 views. 522 likes. 87 dislikes. January 30, 2016.)

Sweetly ring the bells Christmas

As I said, I had to look twice to believe what I was seeing. Hitler at Christmas.

Then I clicked off the video.

You can see it here: https://youtu.be/jE2vyGSbUVM

VIDEO: Weiße Weihnacht (White Christmas) German – Sing Along

Posted by Valhalla Videos Network

Uploaded on Dec 20, 2007

This is White Christmas in German Sung by the boy choir Toelzer Knabenchor.
This music video is a continuation to last year’s Christmas video of Stille Nacht (Silent Night) which I did. I’ve included subtitles if you want to sing along also with a few pics and video clips from Germany during Christmas between the late 1930’s till the early 1940’s. Enjoy!

A week later I went looking for the video. It was easy to find. Once again, it came on automatically after Nana and her sweet sing-along. This time I made myself watch closely, quietly.

I could understand the images of German housewives, little German children, German soldiers.

image006

image007

And there is only one wish

May there be peace on earth forever. Wonderful words.

All that existed – people, not some strange monsters, celebrating Christmas.

I could feel the humanity of the young soldiers who went to war – like my 2 oldest uncles, 18, 19, both killed on the Russian front when my father was a boy.

Gone are worry and pain

The celebration of love is now here.

But, as I’ve said, I was stopped cold at the photos of Hitler.

And I was stunned that this video played automatically. What was going on here?

One good thing. Most of us – including myself – are at pains to make the distinction between Muslims and Islam. Muslims are people – lots of different attitudes and viewpoints – while Islam is an ideology.

The video got me to recognize, on a gut level, how differently I have been trained to respond to Nazis and Nazism, than to Muslims and Islam.

So, one thing positive, for me, about the images of German citizens celebrating Christmas during World War II is that the people were not demonized.

Sweetly ring the bells Christmas

One thing horrific is that Hitler was in there.

That crossed my inner line so much that I did what I tend to do when something is too much. I pushed the video out of my mind for a few days. I “numbed out.” But now I’ve done what I generally do next: I’ve thought about it more, and I’m writing to you about it.

I wonder: how many people, like me, react with shock when they see the video? How many don’t think about it at all? And how many are glad of the positive images of Hitler?

By the way, I had another experience of the way that Islam is let off the hook when I recently attended a presentation on the rise of anti-Semitism in Europe. The presenter had many statistics – including that 91% of Muslims surveyed in (I think) Morocco were anti-Semitic. However, even when repeatedly pressed, he refused to make any link between the rise of anti-Semitism, the growing Islamic presence in Europe, and the anti-Semitism inherent in the Quran. Instead there were dismissive comments: basically, the Quran was deemed irrelevant. It was as if I were faced with someone truly closed to considering that there could be a connection between lung cancer and smoking.

And now, to all of us who care and dare, to life and to love,

Elsa

PS. American volunteers wanted to Stop the Stealth Jihad in America: The Truth in Textbooks Project. TNT (Truth in Textbooks) is joining ACT for America Education to form the most extensive teams to review social studies textbooks in the country. Training classes start in April, July and Oct 2016. The goal is to have a total of 300-500 volunteers fully trained by the end of this year. More information here: http://www.citizenwarrior.com/2016/01/seeking-volunteers-to-stop-stealth.html

You can also get more information at: tnt@actforamerica.org

PPS. And this is if you are a British citizen or UK resident – a petition to ban Sharia in the UK. Please sign, support, send on: https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/107864

PPS. Strange what shocks us. I don’t watch videos of beheadings. But I’ve heard of them so often that I’m not shocked that they exist and that millions have watched. On the other hand, Nazis not demonized!! That shocks me!!

PPPS. The next update will likely only come in 2 weeks.

PPPPS. More images from the video.

May there be peace on earth forever

 

Merry Christmas

PS. For lots more, come to: http://ElsasEmporium.com

___________________

John R. Houk Editor

© Elsa Schieder

ELSA, TRUTH SLEUTH:
MY JOURNEY INTO ISLAM

It could be about, how I came to find the wonder of Islam.

The words that come into my mind: The Heart of Darkness, the title of a novel by Joseph Conrad.

What I mean is that I found so many things I did not expect, so many things I could not admire. I would have loved to find a religion of peace. I did not. I feel as if I slowly stepped into a cave, slowly found lights, and had to recoil from what I found.

In one corner, the corpses of 600-900 dead Jews, murdered by Mohammed. The story isn’t one I found in early versions of his story that I came across. But it’s right there, hinted at in the Qu’ran, and spelled out in detail in the Sira and Hadiths (very revered Islamic religious texts). The story is right there.

But I didn’t find the story until late in my exploration, when I already had a good idea of what kinds of things I’d be coming across.

The early explorations were much more tentative.

After all, I was told Islam was a religion of peace. But something did not make sense.

It was a bit like being a detective – Nancy Drew, say – young and innocent and very Western. Why was there this feeling of danger when I was tiptoeing into finding out about a religion of peace? The cave felt damp, and at the same time dusty. It felt that much lurked, that did not want me tiptoeing around, just wanting to look and see. But why should this be, if this was truly a religion of peace? After all, all I READ THE REST

Explaining the Islamic State Phenomenon, Part One


The perception that the West led by the United States are the new Crusaders trying to subdue Islam has nurtured extremists ideologies and created many militant organizations whose mission is to fight “the infidels.” This perception should be considered to be at the root of the creation of Al-Qaeda whose raison d’être is to fight the West and to strive to re-create a Muslim (Sunni) caliphate in the areas extending from North Africa to “Ma wara al Nahr,” meaning Central and Eastern Asia, the historical boundaries of the once Islamic empire. – Col. (ret.) Dr. Jacques Neriah

I do believe Col. Neriah has hit the nail on the head about how Middle Eastern Muslims feel toward the West and America in particular. As you read Col. Neriah’s part one essay about the pattern of the emergence of what Daesh/ISIS calls itself the Islamic State, he elaborates on the part United States played in this emergence. Although Col. Neriah talks of America’s part he is very careful not to talk about America’s President in charge of Foreign Policy during this growth of the Islam State. Of that President the most responsible is Barack Hussein Obama in which Hillary Clinton was his Secretary of State in Obama’s earliest days of Foreign Policy decisions.

JRH 2/2/16

Please Support NCCR

************************

Explaining the Islamic State Phenomenon, Part One

By Col. (ret.) Dr. Jacques Neriah, Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs

2016-02-01

ACT for America

Part One: Explaining the Islamic State Phenomenon

  • The Islamic State is a terrorist state with almost all governing elements. Over the last four years, it has developed from an extremist fringe and marginal faction to become the strongest, most ferocious, best funded and armed militia in the religious and ethnic war that is waged today in Syria and Iraq.
  • ISIS rules today over a swath of land bigger than the United Kingdom, with a population of almost 10 million. ISIS changed its name to the Islamic State to illustrate that its goals are not limited to Iraq and the countries of the Fertile Crescent.
  • Since the fall of Muslim empires and supremacy, Muslim scholars and philosophers have tried to understand the reasons behind its collapse. The conclusion of most was that Muslim civilization had drifted away from the teachings of the Koran and adopted foreign and heretical inputs that had destroyed its fabric. The remedy they proposed was to return to “pure Islam” and reconstruct Muslim society.
  • After the U.S. occupational authority in Baghdad disbanded the Iraqi army in May 2003, thousands of well-trained Sunni officers were robbed of their livelihood with the stroke of a pen, creating some of America’s most bitter and intelligent enemies. In addition, many Islamic State terrorists spent years in detention centers in Iraq after 2003.
  • Never in the modern history of the Muslim world has a conflict drawn so many jihadists, who seek to participate in the establishment of an Islamic Caliphate to rule the world after the defeat in battle of the Western powers and their local Arab allies.
  • For many, life in the Islamic State is better than in their country of origin. This is particularly the case for Chechen fighters who flock to the IS because the conditions of combat in Iraq and Syria are less harsh than against the Russians.

Much has been written about the Islamic State in Iraq and Sham (the Levant) — ISIS. Most of the analysts have looked at ISIS as another terrorist organization, an al-Qaeda off-shoot, waging a guerrilla war with cohorts of unorganized thugs. The Afghani-style gear, the pickup trucks, the all black or army fatigue uniforms that most ISIS fighters wear, the unshaven beards, the turbans, hoods and head “bandanas” with Arabic inscriptions have added to the confusion.

In fact, ISIS is much more than a terrorist organization; it is a terrorist state with almost all governing elements. Over the last four years, since the beginning of the civil war in Syria, the Islamic State developed from an extremist fringe and marginal faction participating in the civil war to become the strongest, most ferocious, best funded and armed militia in the religious and ethnic war that is waged today in Syria and Iraq.

ISIS rules today over 300,000 square kilometers, a swath of land roughly bigger than the United Kingdom with a population of almost 10 million citizens. In the course of its first year of expansion, ISIS has changed its name to the Islamic State, a choice made to illustrate that its goals are not limited to Iraq and the countries of the Fertile Crescent. Moreover, the IS caliphate now has 10 branches, following pledges of allegiance in the past few months from new fronts including Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Libya, Algeria, Afghanistan, Nigeria and, most recently, the Caucasian Emirates.

Factors behind the Establishment of the Islamic State

To understand the IS phenomenon, it is crucial to examine the factors that contributed to its emergence.

Since the fall of Muslim empires and supremacy, Muslim scholars and philosophers have tried to understand the reasons behind its collapse, its domination by Western Powers, its colonization and its incapacity to reproduce the genius that so much characterized the Muslim civilization following the conquests that stretched the Muslim lands from Spain to India, West Asia, and China. Most, if not all the scholars tried to analyze the characteristics behind the “Golden Age” of Islam and why at a certain point, the Muslim world stopped producing innovations in science, medicine, algebra, mathematics, military warfare machines and graphic arts. The conclusion of most was that Muslim civilization had drifted away from the teachings of the Koran and adopted foreign and heretical inputs that had destroyed its fabric. The remedy they proposed was to return to the “pure Islam” which would heal the wounds and respond to the West by first reconstructing the Muslim society according to their raw interpretation of the Koran and organizing to defeat Western power.

Indeed, since the fall of Muslim Spain in the fifteenth century and especially since the beginning of western colonization of Muslim territories, the Muslim world has witnessed the rise and fall of successive radical movements whose prime aim was to combat the West while regenerating the original Muslim society of Prophet Mohammad which was thought to be the cure for all ailments. Muslim thinkers like Jamal ad-Din al-Afghani (late 19th century), Muhammad ‘Abduh (19th century), Sayyed Qutub (20th century), Muhammad Iqbal (early 20th century), and the Muhammad Ahmad al-Mahdi in Sudan (19th century) are only a few examples of Muslim radicals who inspired upheavals against Western powers. ISIS is but another refined product of the radicalization of the Sunnis in West and Central Asia.

Since the Soviet intervention in Afghanistan, foreign military intervention in the latter part of the 20th century, be it Soviet or American, was greatly responsible for the awakening of Sunni radicalism in West and Central Asia and to its expression today as a Holy War against the West, its allies and Israel. The perception that the West led by the United States are the new Crusaders trying to subdue Islam has nurtured extremists ideologies and created many militant organizations whose mission is to fight “the infidels.” This perception should be considered to be at the root of the creation of Al-Qaeda whose raison d’être is to fight the West and to strive to re-create a Muslim (Sunni) caliphate in the areas extending from North Africa to “Ma wara al Nahr,” meaning Central and Eastern Asia, the historical boundaries of the once Islamic empire.

The civil war in Syria transformed very quickly into a radical Sunni armed insurrection against the Alawite Iranian-backed Assad regime. The Muslim Brotherhood, which led the battle against the regime at the beginning of the conflict, was soon joined by radical organizations financed not only by Saudi Arabia and Qatar but also by other actors such as the United States, UK, France and Turkey. Qatar alone is said to have poured into the conflict more than $500 million. The Syrian scene provided all the ingredients for the radicalization of Sunni organizations. The Syrian civil war is an “all-in-one” situation in which all the previous factors are involved: foreign presence, Sunnis against Shiites, Iran and Hizbullah, Saudi Arabia and Qatar, the United States, France and Turkey and an international coalition led by the United States fighting Islamic militants in the lands of Islam.

Saudi Arabia and Qatar fund Islamic organizations all over the world, nurturing mainly the Salafi-Wahhabi schools at the expense of traditional and moderate Islam. Most of the Muslim states have been exposed for a long time to Wahhabi proselytism that is by essence opposed to the “moderate” Sufi Islam practiced in North Africa. No wonder after the revolution in Libya and the takeover of Mali by Islamic fundamentalists, the Muslim militants destroyed all religious shrines, an exact copy of the reality in Saudi Arabia and Qatar. However, it appears now that Saudi Arabia is apprehensive of what seems to be the result of its actions: One of the biggest contingents fighting in Syria and Iraq is Saudi (almost 2,500). As a consequence of the assessment that these Jihadist organizations could harm the monarchy, Saudi Arabia and all Gulf states have adopted a sort of “Patriot Act” and designated all those volunteers as terrorists.

The Islamic Republic of Iran has also played a major catalyst role in contributing to the polarization of the Muslim world into two rival camps, Shiites and Sunnites. Since the beginning of the Khomeini takeover in 1979, Iran has been preaching a pan-Islamist ideology while sealing alliances with Islamic movements in the Arab world, Africa, and Asia. Iran concealed its Shiite philosophy and succeeded in creating the illusion that it was transcending its origins and its identity as a Shiite entity. It was not until the beginning of the so-called “Arab Spring” that the Arab nations realized the Iranian scheme. The war in Syria and Iran’s open alliance with the Assad regime and the Shiite regime in Baghdad, Iran’s subversive activity in Lebanon through Hizbullah and the Houthis in Yemen, unveiled the implications of the Iranian contribution: the transformation of local conflicts in West Asia into a Shiite-Sunni open conflict over hegemony. Moreover, the Arab perception that the U.S. administration was looking to mend the fences with Iran at the expense of it historical clients in the Middle East accelerated the crisis between the Arab world and Iran and justified in the eyes of many the armed struggle waged by the Islamists against Iran and its allies in the region.

Another factor in the rise of the Islamic State is the so-called “Arab Spring” which was the expression of the failure of the Arab nation-states. The events in Egypt, Tunisia, Syria, Bahrain and Yemen were exploited by Islamic militant movements which found the right opportunity to rise from their clandestine activities after years of oppression and persecution by the different Arab regimes to the forefront of the political struggle for power. Years of military rule did not eradicate the Islamic political forces that had remained in the shadow and camouflaged themselves under the cover of charitable organizations, social assistance and non-profit entities. However, after a first round in which the Islamists seemingly won in Tunisia and Egypt, the secular forces backed by the military succeeded in overcoming the Islamists. The Muslim Brotherhood was dealt a heavy blow both in Syria and Egypt. However, the different regimes were unsuccessful in eradicating the plethora of militant terrorist Islamic organizations that are still conducting their deadly attacks against the different regimes. Some regimes survived – even though deeply shaken and destabilized – like Egypt, Tunisia, Algeria, and Morocco – while others like Libya deteriorated into failed states, and others are struggling for their survival such as Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and Yemen.

The second American war in Iraq in 2003 dealt a death blow to the Sunni minority that had ruled Iraq since its separation from the Ottoman Empire by British colonialism. The Americans, striving to establish a new world order with democratic regimes as a copy of the West, established an unprecedented Shiite regime which in turn discriminated against the Sunnites who found themselves out of jobs, positions, army command, and Baath party offices. Paul Bremer, then head of the U.S. occupational authority in Baghdad, disbanded the Iraqi army in May 2003. Thousands of well-trained Sunni officers were robbed of their livelihood with the stroke of a pen. In doing so, America created its most bitter and intelligent enemies. This was the fertile ground that welcomed Al-Qaeda and allowed the symbiosis between the Sunnite opposition to the Shiite regime and the Al-Qaeda terrorist organization. Until the schism with ISIS in 2013, Al-Qaeda was, in fact, the sole quasi-military opposition to the U.S.-led coalition campaign:

Amazingly, the Islamic State terrorists who have emerged in Iraq and Syria are not new to the U.S. and Western security agencies. Many of them spent years in detention centers in Iraq after 2003. “There were 26,000 detainees at the height of the war,” the New York Times reported, “and over 100,000 individuals passed through the gates of Camps Bucca, Cropper, and Taji.” The leader of the Islamic State, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, was incarcerated in Camp Bucca in southern Iraq. “A majority of the other top Islamic State leaders were also former prisoners, including Abu Muslim al-Turkmani, Abu Louay, Abu Kassem, Abu Jurnas, Abu Shema and Abu Suja,” the Times detailed. “Before their detention, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and others were violent radicals. Their time in prison deepened their extremism and gave them opportunities to broaden their following.”

Unfortunately, the phenomenon went unnoticed for most American decision makers. “The prisons became virtual terrorist universities,” the Times reporters Andrew Thompson and Jeremi Suri wrote. “Policies changed in 2007… Where possible, the military tried to separate hardline terrorists from moderates.” But after the American withdrawal these prisoners were placed in Iraqi custody. The Islamic State freed these extremists as they swept across parts of Iraq. “With a new lease on life,” the New York Times reported, “these former prisoners are now some of the Islamic States’ most dedicated fighters.”

Never in the modern history of the Muslim world has a conflict drawn so many jihadists as is the case with the Syrian and Iraqi civil wars, surpassing wars in Afghanistan in 2001 and Iraq in 2003. Since the outburst of the conflict in Syria in 2011 and the 2014 takeover of Mosul by the IS (the Islamic State), Syria and Iraq have become the epicenter of the global Jihad. Thousands of jihadists originating from more than 90 different nationalities have flocked to Syria and Iraq to be part of the battle against the Assad regime and the Shiite regime in Iraq. The latter two are reinforced by Hizbullah and Iran.

The jihadists seek to participate in the establishment of an Islamic Caliphate to rule the world after the defeat in battle of the Western powers and their local Arab allies. The attraction the Islamic State is exercising on Sunni Muslims around the globe and jihadists in the Arab and Muslim world is tremendous. The Islamic State has become the beacon to rally thousands of militants in Iraq, Syria and around the globe.

The attraction is not limited in space or time. The movement is in Europe, the United States, Australia, Xinyang and also in the Arab world and Africa. As a matter of fact, most of North Africa’s jihadist groups were hesitant to associate themselves with the Islamic State until the United States commenced its military intervention in Iraq and Syria in August 2014.

Part Two of this series will be published on Wednesday, February 3rd

________________________

ACT for America accepts no funding from any governmental agency, any foreign influence peddlers, or political institutions. Your support of ACT for America is critical in winning a battle we cannot afford to lose. All donations are tax-deductible. Click here to donate. ACT for America education is a 501(c)3 organization.

ACT for America Action Center

ACTION CENTER Page

ABOUT PAGE

  • ACT for America is the largest and the only grassroots organization dedicated to national security and defeating terrorism. Today, ACT for America has expanded to 890 chapters and 280,000 members with a goal of 2,500 chapters and 1,000,000 members by the end of the decade.
  • ACT for America is a non-partisan organization whose mission appeals to every American concerned about national security and terrorism -a powerful, organized, informed and mobilized voice.
  • ACT for America educates citizens and elected officials to help impact national security policy & stands ready to take action as the only national security grassroots organization in America.

Who We Are

We are all Americans first -citizens who put their differences aside and came together to secure our country. Every American has one thing in common – “we are all interested” in keeping our homes, communities, states, and nation safe. What makes ACT for America different is that our members and supporters come from every background, age, gender, race, social status, political point of view, and lifestyle choice. Remember, national security is not a conservative, liberal, or libertarian issue – it’s an American issue.

What We Do

ACT for America is continuing to expand its nationwide volunteer chapter network that trains citizens to recognize and help prevent criminal activity and terrorism in the United States while preserving civil liberties protected by the United States Constitution.

ACT for America focuses on activities that enhance the national security standing of the United States — such as educating elected officials from the school board level to Congress. Many of these officials go on to pass vital legislation to this end. ACT has driven the education process towards the successful passage of 37 bills in 19 states over the last six years.

About Brigitte Gabriel

Brigitte Gabriel is the Founder and President of Act for America. Ms. Gabriel is one of the leading national security experts in the world -providing information and analysis on the rise of Islamic terrorism. Ms. Gabriel lectures nationally and internationally about national security and current affairs. Her expertise is sought after by world and business leaders. Ms. Gabriel has addressed the United Nations, the Australian Prime Minister, members of the British Parliament/House of Commons, members of the United States Congress, the Pentagon, the Joint Forces Staff College, the U.S. Special Operations Command, the U.S. Asymmetric Warfare group, the FBI, and many others. In addition, Ms. Gabriel is a regular guest analyst on Fox News Channel, CNN, MSNBC, and various radio stations daily across America. She serves on the board of advisers of the Intelligence Summit.

Ms. Gabriel is the author of two New York Times Best Sellers, BECAUSE THEY HATE and THEY MUST BE STOPPED. Ms. Gabriel is named one of the top 50 most prominent speakers in America. She speaks Arabic, French, English and Hebrew.

Newbill Shares on Finicum & Dearborn Cop’s Murdering Woman


John R. Houk, Editor

February 1, 2016

Tony Newbill has found two stories that are not really similar except perhaps in one thought; viz. the focus is in government overreach as in utilizing too much police authority as per the rights of American citizens.

The first examines that LaVoy Finicum’s murder was motivated more by government greed via the deception of ecological concern. Evidently the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) usurped public land in Oregon under the auspices of protecting a bird that MIGHT go on the endangered species, BUT when the bird did not make the list the BLM began collaborating with a mining company that wants to mine for uranium to turn it into yellow cake. The thing is the process of extracting the yellow cake is a probably environmental disaster toward ranchers and farmers in that Oregon area.

The second case involved the Dearborn Police chasing a woman that fled a mall in which she aimed her car at mall security. As the chase ensued the Dearborn Police managed to place the lady’s car into an enough of a standstill for massive bullet to be shot at the fleeing 31-year-old lady (Janet Wilson) who died from the bullets. Two things of note to me is that the Dearborn Police have a habit propping up the Dearborn Muslim majority’s acts of stifling the First Amendment rights of Christians AND the 31-year-old lady was an African-American. Sadly, within a 40-day period the 31-year-old Black lady was the second African-American that died (Kevin Matthews) at the hands of the Dearborn Police through the same use of unreasonable force.

JRH 2/1/16

Please Support NCCR

************************

The Hegelian Dialectic: Problem, Reaction, Solution

Oregon Standoff: Robert ‘LaVoy’ Finicum Dead, Bundys Arrested

Tony Newbill

Sent: 1/31/2016 11:03 AM

The police in cooperation with the FBI got their men about 20 miles north of Burns, Oregon on Tuesday, January 26, 2016. Mark that day in history, folks, as the day the old west was given a warning shot. A warning shot that said very loud and clear to the American public: Don’t mess with the government, don’t question authority, don’t stand up for the Constitution or your supposed “rights,” just submit or die.

©2016 Barbara H. Peterson

Consider this: http://farmwars.info/?p=14481

A Tale of Cattle, Sage Grouse, and Uranium in Oregon

By Barbara H. Peterson

January 28, 2016

Farm Wars

Once there was a cowboy who let his herd of cattle roam free on thousands of acres of wilderness. He knew that they would live in harmony with the other critters, and that the land would benefit. He made sure that there was plenty of water and plenty of room so that the land would flourish. You see, if given enough room, critters are good for the land. They eat the overgrown forage and leave behind fertilizer that helps new forage to grow, which nourishes every other critter. Each critter has enough room to get out of the other one’s way, and everyone is happy.

That is, until the government in its infinite “scientific” wisdom, decides that cattle are bad for the land.

But is that the real reason that cattle ranching, as it has been done for over a hundred years, is now scheduled to become obsolete? A thing of the past – something to be disdained and thrown to the curb?

Picture a pristine wilderness devoid of the ravages of civilization and industrial development. Birds flying overhead and deer roaming free. Paradise as far as the eye can see. And in the middle of this haven designated as “public lands” set apart to be protected by the benevolence of the Federal Government’s Bureau of Land Management (BLM), is an open pit uranium mine.

Say what??? You have got to be kidding me! Nope. This is what the BLM has on the back burner for the Malheur Wilderness area.

And the cowboys? Well, the last ones who attempted to get in the way of this takeover of land for the “public good” are now sentenced to 5 years in prison and branded as terrorists for protecting their land and cattle and forced to “grant the BLM first right of refusal if the Hammonds ever sold their ranch.”

The Dark Side of Environmental Conservation

Environmental conservation is a good thing. But is that what is really being done by the BLM when it takes over land? Maybe what the BLM is actually doing is grabbing land in the name of environmental conservation and placing it under the sole control of the government and out of the hands of we the people in order to do with it as the government pleases.

The lands that the government collects are called “public lands.” The BLM is charged with managing “public lands,” and routinely leases and sells mineral rights on the very same lands that it is supposed to manage and protect.

BLM’s Planning Manual 1601 explains the use of public lands:

Land use plans ensure that the public lands are managed in accordance with the intent of Congress as stated in FLPMA (43 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.), i.e., under the principles of multiple use and sustained yield. As required by FLPMA, the public lands must be managed in a manner that protects the quality of scientific, scenic, historical, ecological, environmental, air and atmospheric, water resource, and archaeological values; that, where appropriate, will preserve and protect certain public lands in their natural condition; that will provide food and habitat for fish and wildlife and domestic animals; and that will provide for outdoor recreation and human occupancy and use by encouraging collaboration and public participation throughout the planning process. In addition, the public lands must be managed in a manner that recognizes the Nation’s need for domestic sources of minerals, food, timber, and fiber from the public lands.

http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/blm/ak/aktest/planning/planning_general.Par.65225.File.dat/blm_lup_handbook.pdf

According to the BLM Planning Manual, the agency is charged with maintaining the ecological environment of its public lands. That is, of course, unless it decides that mining for uranium supersedes any such directive.

Uranium on BLM-Administered Lands in OR/WA

In September 2011, a representative from Oregon Energy, L.L.C. (formally Uranium One), met with local citizens, and county and state officials, to discuss the possibility of opening a uranium oxide (“yellowcake”) mine in southern Malheur County in southeastern Oregon. Oregon Energy is interested in developing a 17-Claim parcel of land known as the Aurora Project through an open pit mining method. Besides the mine, there would be a mill for processing. The claim area occupies about 450 acres and is also referred to as the “New U” uranium claims.

http://www.blm.gov/or/energy/uranium.php

This is conservation? Here is the open pit uranium mining proposal:

Uranium mine plan

Oregon Energy’s proposal calls for extracting ore from a mile-long, 600-foot wide, 250-foot deep open pit 10 miles west of McDermitt and 3 miles north of the Oregon-Nevada border. The mine, adjoining the former Bretz Mercury Mine, a contaminated open-pit site from the 1960s, would cost $200 million to develop and uranium extraction could continue for up to 20 years, said Oregon Energy President Lachlan Reynolds.

Plans call for the ore to be crushed and mixed with an acid solution in enclosed vats to leach out the uranium, he said. The acid would bond with the uranium and when dry become a sand-like powder called uranium oxide concentrate, or yellowcake. Yellowcake would bring $52 per pound and could fuel nuclear reactors or be processed into weapons.

Tuttle, spokesman for the Portland-based Center for Environmental Equity, foresees environmental problems.

The likelihood of sulfuric acid being used in READ THE REST

Problem: The government wants the land.

Reaction: Demonize cattle ranchers and blame the cattle for a decline in the sage grouse in order to free the land for alternate government use by pitting environmentalists against cattle grazing and the ranchers to gain the required reaction of placing the land under further restrictions in order to be protected from environmental harm.

Solution: The government gets the land.

The government wants the land for “conservation” efforts. In order to achieve this, the ranchers with their cattle and any private property interests need to go so that there is no interference. This way the land can be “protected” by the BLM and used for any purpose that the government wants it for, including uranium development.

The question then becomes – who will get the land – the sage grouse or uranium miners. In either case, the ranchers are out and the cattle can be consigned to your friendly neighborhood CAFO (concentrated animal feeding operation).

The rancher takes the blame, and the government does as it pleases. If the grouse is listed as an endangered species, the land is taken for conservation. If it isn’t, the land is taken for corporate energy and uranium mining. A win/win for big government. It’s called hedging your bets. Either way, the little guy loses and the government wins, and the rancher is left holding the bag. He either gets booted out by the sage grouse, or booted out by uranium interests, and there goes another source of local food and independence, leaving us ever more dependent on the corporate food chain.

Since a decision was made to not list the sage grouse as an endangered species in 2015, guess which interests won? You’ve got it – mining. Now the only problem left is to work out how to make the energy industry operations appear “beneficial” to the environment so as not to concern the sage grouse supporters, and to declare more public land as “cattle free,” again, for the benefit of the environment. Not a problem that a good Public Relations campaign can’t handle. Cha-Ching!

+++

This is Interesting Stuff

Tony Newbill

Sent: 1/31/2016 12:39 PM

Enhanced Video: LaVoy points out his Assassins:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RmeIZkqMLDg

VIDEO: Enhanced Video: LaVoy points out his Assassins

Posted by Lorri Anderson

Published on Jan 30, 2016

Thank you to Call of Duty Goddess: https://youtu.be/HRmbVDS4p4I

Definition of Assassin: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/assassin

This footage must get everywhere. This also needs to be downloaded by anyone and everyone that has the ability. Please reshare, and save and help spread the truth of what happened.

To help support RTR Truth Media continue to report unedited truth please donate via PayPal to: tomlacovara@gmail.com

FACEBOOK: https://www.facebook.com/TruthMovemen… [Blog Editor: Link incomplete]

TWITTER: https://twitter.com/LorriA1970

NEWS BLOGS:

http://freedomoutpost.com/author/lorrianderson

http://www.freedomlover70.blogspot.com/

http://www.resurrecttherepublic.com/ 

 

GOOGLE: https://plus.google.com/+LorriAnderson

https://plus.google.com/communities/1… [Blog Editor: Link incomplete]

Wayne County Medical Examiner rules death of woman shot by Dearborn police a homicide (UPDATED) Yesterday’s fatal shooting of a 31-year-old Detroit woman by Dearborn police has been ruled a homicide by the Wayne County Medical Examiner’s office.

Janet Wilson was shot Wednesday afternoon by a Dearborn officer after driving erratically and allegedly trying to run over an officer on Hubbard Drive near the Southfield Freeway. Witnesses had reported Wilson acting strangely at nearby Fairlane Town Center and mall security was notified.

http://www.pressandguide.com/articles/2016/01/31//news/doc56a94288a2c62871199629.txt

Wayne County Medical Examiner rules death of woman shot by Dearborn police a homicide (UPDATED)

By Andrea Blum

Published: Sunday, January 31, 2016

Press & Guide

Yesterday’s fatal shooting of a 31-year-old Detroit woman by Dearborn police has been ruled a homicide by the Wayne County Medical Examiner’s office.

Janet Wilson was shot Wednesday afternoon by a Dearborn officer after driving erratically and allegedly trying to run over an officer on Hubbard Drive near the Southfield Freeway. Witnesses had reported Wilson acting strangely at nearby Fairlane Town Center and mall security was notified.

Michigan State Police Lt. Mike Shaw said the 31-year-old woman’s vehicle got stuck in traffic as she left the mall, and she tried to flee as officers approached.

Shaw says a Dearborn officer fired when the woman almost ran over an officer. Wilson died of multiple gunshot wounds and the officer was treated for non-life threatening injuries.

Dearborn Police Chief Ronald Haddad said both of the officer-involved shooting incidents are being independently criminally investigated by outside agencies, and that the department is committed to transparency and disclosure by fully cooperating with the investigations.

“Upon conclusion of the criminal investigations we will be conducting internal reviews on both of these incidents,” Haddad said. “While we are very proud of our long history of Civil Rights advocacy as well as our history of appropriate use of force, we will closely examine all of our policies and procedures to ensure that we are employing the latest training and following national best practices in all of our responsibilities to the community.

Once we are allowed and it is appropriate to do so, we fully intend to make public disclosures regarding these incidents.”

_____________________

Edited by John R. Houk

© Tony Newbill