Islam Means Deception


George Weinert made this comment at my other blog: SlantRight.
George does not pull any punches on his opinion about Mohammedanism. He even uses their own pseudo-scriptures against them to demonstrate the intrinsic evil that Mohammedanism. Anyway I will let George speak for himself:
——————————-
Islam Means Deception
By George M Weinert V
Monday, January 23, 2006 Chicago, IL

Mohammed the Pedophile Prophet is notorious for his statement that "War is Deception". Mo was a brilliant criminal mastermind who understood the miscreant psychology of the Bedouin raiders he relied on quite well and knew that many Arabs are naturally dishonest. The murderous band of raiders that Mo relied on to murder and conquer in the name of his new Ideology of Terror responded well to an invitation to lie in the name of power, sex and money since, like many Arabs, they were born liars and career criminals.

We shall ignore the pusillanimity and political correctness of the liberal mainstream media in America and proceed to delve ever deeper into the criminal genius of the Mass Murderer, Pervert and Demon who is known as Mohammed – the Holy Prophet of Islam:

Bukhari:V7B67N427 "The Prophet said, ‘If I take an oath and later find something else better than that, then I do what is better and expiate my oath.’"

YOU CAN LIE WHEN IT BECOMES CONVENIENT!

Koran 9:3 "Allah and His Messenger dissolve obligations."

Mo can abrogate any promise or oath (and did) when shows a profit.

Koran 66:1 "Allah has already sanctioned for you the dissolution of your vows."

Allah the Talking Rock God has already sanctioned Muslim lies.

Bukhari:V4B52N268 "Allah’s Apostle said, ‘War is deceit.’"

This verse is NOTORIOUS in WORLD HISTORY.

Koran 4:142 "Surely the hypocrites strive to deceive Allah. He shall retaliate by deceiving them."

Allah, a "God" will strike back by deceiving men – got that? A ‘GOD’ WHO LIES – WHO IS THE FATHER OF ALL LIES?

Bukhari:V7B71N661 "Magic was worked on Allah’s Apostle and he was bewitched so that he began to imagine doing things which in fact, he had not done."

Mo imagined a lot of things – and magic in fact plays an important role in Islam today as it did during the 7th century. Though Muslims assert that Islam is "Monotheistic" it incorporates many elements of paganism, including worship of demons and the use of magic spells (this known in Dar al Islam as ‘modern medicine’)

Bukhari:V6B60N8 "Umar said, ‘Our best Koran reciter is Ubai. And in spite of this, we leave out some of his statements because Allah’s Apostle himself said, "Whatever verse or revelation We abrogate or cause to be forgotten We bring a better one."

The Islamic doctrine of Abrogation in the Koran ABROGATES ISLAM ITSELF! Even if the litterateur/theologian accepts the oxymoronic notion that GOD ALWAYS CHANGES HIS MIND – WHICH OPINION IS THEN CORRECT? I.E. When one verse FORBIDS MURDER but another CONDONES AND IN FACT PRAISES IT – WHICH VERSE IS CORRECT? Islamic "Scholars" 1 never can supply a satisfactory answer to this endless enigma.

Koran 33:11 "In that situation the Believers were sorely tried and shaken as by a tremendous shaking. And behold! The Hypocrites and those in whose hearts is a disease said: ‘Allah and His Messenger promised us nothing but delusion; they have promised only to deceive us."

Allah is a lovely Talking Rock God – is he not? Note once again that Allah has promised to lie – this is a ‘God"?

Koran 33:14 "Say: Flight will not avail you if you flee from death, killing, or slaughter. In that case you will not be allowed to enjoy yourselves but a little while. Say, ‘Who will screen you, saving you from Allah if he intends to harm and injure you?’"

THE MUSLIMS WILL FIND AND KILL YOU! NOWHERE TO RUN – NOWHERE TO HIDE – YOU WILL LIVE IN TERROR!

Koran 33:21 "You have in (Muhammad) the Messenger of Allah a beautiful pattern of conduct for any one to follow."

DECEPTION IS THIS BEAUTIFUL PATTERN – see dummy?

Koran 74:31 "We have appointed nineteen angels to be the wardens of the Hell Fire. We made a stumbling-block for those who disbelieve and We have fixed their number as a trial for unbelievers in order that the people of the Book may arrive with certainty, and that no doubts may be left for the people of the Book, those in whose hearts is a disease. And for those to whom the Scripture Book has been given, and the believers, there should be no doubt. The unbelievers may say, ‘What does the Lord intend by this?’ The Lord will lead astray whomever He pleases, and He will guide whomever He pleases: and none can know the armies of your Lord except He, and this is no other than a warning to mankind."

The Angels of Islam GUARD THE FIRES OF HELL – some ANGELS – note that Allah the Talking Rock God will ‘will lead astray whomever He pleases’ – huh? GOD WILL LEAD YOU ASTRAY? ONLY SATAN LEADS YOU ASTRAY!

Koran 74:52 "Each one of them wants to be given scrolls of revelation spread out! No! By no means! Nay, this is an admonishment. Let them keep it in remembrance! But they will not heed unless the Lord wants them to. He is the fountain of fear."

TERROR IS THE FOUNDATION OF ISLAM – this is critical to understanding Islam. While God/Jehovah/Yaweh is pure Love – ALLAH IS TOTAL FEAR – TERROR!

Bukhari:V2B24N555 "I heard the Prophet say, ‘Allah hates for you for asking too many questions.’"

Allah the Talking Rock God HATES PEOPLE – rather odd for a "God" who is ‘Kind. Merciful and Benevolent" no? Allah hates no one since Allah is nothing but a large rock – THE PEDOPHILE PROPHET MOHAMMED HATES THE WORLD! (we shall ignore the poor grammar that typifies the Koran for now)

Koran 92:8 "We will make smooth for him the path to misery."

GEE THANKS DUDE! You’re gonna make my misery smooth – HOW CONSIDERATE OF YOU that’s just what I always wanted!

Ishaq:519 "Hajjaj said to the Apostle, ‘I have money scattered among the Meccan merchants, so give me permission to go and get it.’ Having got Muhammad’s permission, he said, ‘I must tell lies.’ The Apostle said, ‘Tell them.‘"

WAR IS DECEPTION – Jewish and Christian children are taught "Thou Shall not Lie" – Muslims are TAUGHT TO LIE TO GET MONEY! (what do we call this folks?)

Koran 47:24 "Do they not understand the Koran? Nay, on the hearts there are locks preventing them from understanding."

HONEST PEOPLE WITH INTEGRITY CANNOT UNDERSTAND THE KORAN AT ALL.

Ishaq:548 "By Allah, the black mass has spread. Abu Bakr said, ‘There is not much honesty among people nowadays.’"

The "Black Mass"is a.) the Nation of Islam or b.) devil worship

Koran 5:41 "Whomever Allah wants to deceive you cannot help. Allah does not want them to know the truth because he intends to disgrace them and then torture them."

Allah the Talking Rock God intends to disgrace them and then torture them! This is NO GOD – THIS IS SATAN!

Koran 5:101 "Believers! Do not ask questions about things which if made plain and declared to you, may vex you, causing you trouble." Koran 5:102 "Some people before you did ask such questions, and on that account they lost their faith and became disbelievers."

If you dare question Islam you will be beaten or killed – YOU MUST BLINDLY SUBMIT!

Ishaq:567 "Muhammad informed Umar [the second Caliph], and he called the Prophet a liar."

AT LEAST SOMEONE WAS RIGHT!

Bukhari:V6B60N662 "Allah’s Apostle said, ‘Some eloquent speech is as effective as magic.’"

MAGIC! Yes, Muslims believe in magic and many have CRYSTAL BALLS!

Tabari VI:110 "When Muhammad brought a revelation from Allah canceling what Satan had cast on the tongue of His Prophet, the Quraysh said, ‘Muhammad has repented of [reneged on] what he said concerning the position of our gods with Allah. He has altered [the bargain] and brought something else.’ Those two phrases which Satan had cast on Muhammad’s tongue of were in the mouth of every polytheist. The Messenger said, ‘I have fabricated things against Allah and have imputed to Him words which He has not spoken.’"

This is a bit complicated but put simply – Muslims contend that some of the verses in the Koran were authored by Satan – cast in the words of Mohammed – these are known as the "Satanic verses" (you may be familiar with this via Simon Rushdtie and the Ayatollah Khomeini’s Death Sentence for his book "The Satanic Verses") 2 – WHY WOULD MUSLIMS CONTINUE TO USE A "HOLY" BOOK THAT THEY THEMSELVES ADMIT IS AT LEAST PARTIALLY THE WORK OF THE DEVIL? (this Is another question that Islamic scholars can never seem to answer in a cogent fashion)

Koran 40:32 "O my People! I fear a Day when there will be mutual wailing. No one shall defend you against Allah. Any whom Allah causes to err, there is no guide. That is how Allah leads the skeptic astray."

OK NOW THIS IS TOTAL INSANITY! THE MUSLIMS HAVE TO BE ‘DEFENDED" AGAINST THE TALKING ROCK GOD ALLAH! Man, these guys have great dope!

Koran 2:9 "They deceive Allah and those who believe, but they only deceive themselves, and realize (it) not! In their hearts is a disease; and Allah has increased their disease. Grievous is the painful doom they (incur) because they (lie)."

WOAH! HOW CAN A "GOD" BE DECEIVED??!?!? Again, this is non-sensical – BUT A TALKING ROCK CAN EASILY BE FOOLED NO?

Koran 8:30 "Remember how the unbelievers plotted against you (Muhammad). They plotted, and Allah too had arranged a plot; but Allah is the best schemer." Ishaq:323 "I am the best of plotters. I deceived them with My guile so that I delivered you from them."

Allah the Talking Rock God schemes and deceives – ALLAH IS THE MANIFESTATION OF SATAN – but there is no "Allah" at all – this trash is merely the evil hallucinations of the murderous Pedophile Prophet Mohammed ad nauseum.

Koran 8:71 "If they try to deceive you, remember they have deceived Allah before."

THERE YOU GO AGAIN DUMBARSE! How can a "God" be deceived – especially is he is "All Knowing and All Powerful"? Another one they never answer.

Ishaq:365/Tabari VII:94 "Muhammad bin Maslamah said, ‘O Messenger, we shall have to tell lies.’ ‘Say what you like,’ Muhammad replied. ‘You are absolved, free to say whatever you must.’"

MUSLIMS ARE INSTRUCTED BY THEIR ‘PROPHET" TO LIE! They listened well and far too many are still listening.

Bukhari:V5B59N369 "Allah’s Apostle said, ‘Who is willing to kill Ka’b bin Ashraf who has hurt Allah and His Apostle?’ Thereupon Muhammad bin Maslamah got up saying, ‘O Allah’s Apostle! Would you like me to kill him?’ The Prophet said, ‘Yes,’ Maslamah said, ‘Then allow me to say false things in order to deceive him.’ The Prophet said, ‘You may say such things.’"

Ok – the "Holy Prophet" of Islam says "IT IS OK TO LIE SO YOU CAN KILL!" – they call this A RELIGION?

Koran 61:5 "Moses said: ‘O my people, why do you annoy and insult me, when you well know I am Allah’s Messenger?’ Then when they turned away, Allah caused them to be deceived."

THERE IS NO RECORD OF MOSES EVERY SAYING ANYTHING LIKE THIS in OVER 2,500 years of Hebrew Scriptures. Muslims contend that these scriptuers have been ‘altered’ and the original verses changed – that means that thousands of scrolls, parchments, and books dating back to as early as 120 A.D. have all been changed in hundreds of locations throughout the Jewish and Christian world. And if you believe that, I’ve got some nice swampland in Florida for sale…………..

Bukhari:V4B52N233 "Allah’s Apostle forbade the people to travel to a hostile country carrying copies of the Koran. [He said:] Unbelievers will never understand our signs and revelations."

Allah’s Pedophile Prophet could never have done this at all – THE KORAN WAS NOT PUT INTO WRITTEN FORM UNTIL AT LEAST 100 YEARS AFTER MO’S DEATH FROM SYPHILIS – The KORAN DID NOT EVEN EXIST DURING THE LIFE OF MOHAMMED.

Ishaq:248 "Allah increases their sickness. A tormented doom awaits the Jews. Allah said, ‘They are mischief makers. They are fools. The Jews deny the truth and contradict what the Apostle has brought. I will mock them and let them continue to wander blindly.’"

Mohammed envied the money and power of the Jews and his hatred for them is unequaled in the history of the world. Sadly, most Muslims are taught this evil hatred from birth and want nothing more than to KILL THE JEWS!

Bukhari:V4B52N147 "Allah’s Apostle said, ‘A man may seem as if he were practicing the deeds of Paradise while in fact he is from the people of Hell.’"

IT TAKES ONE TO KNOW ONE – EH MO?

Koran 13:27 "Say, ‘God leads whosoever He wills astray.’"

OK! THIS IS ABSURD! A "God" who is ‘All knowing, All Powerful, Merciful and Benevolent" LEADS PEOPLE ASTRAY – Allah is NO GOD – ALLAH IS SATAN – THE FATHER OF LIES! (but remember that ALLAH IS A ROCK – this gibberish is the psychotic rambling the mass murderer and master thief Mohammed)

Koran 3:24 "They have been deceived by the lies they have themselves fabricated; their religion has deceived them."

Mo was obsessed with Deception – does this tell you something?

Ishaq:397 "Then Allah said, ‘It is not for any prophet to deceive."

REALLY?!?!? Then WHY WAS MOHAMMED SO FOND OF DECEPTION?

Ishaq:442 "By Muhammad’s order we beguiled them."

Beguiling is sophisticated deception, right?

Tabari VIII:23 "The Messenger and his Companions continued in the fear and distress that Allah has described in the Koran. Then Nu’aym came to the Prophet. ‘I ‘ve become a Muslim, but my tribe does not know of my Islam; so command me whatever you will.’ Muhammad said, ‘Make them abandon each other if you can so that they will leave us; for war is deception.’"

WAR IS DECEPTION!

There you have it class – STRAIGHT FROM THE CAMEL’S MOUTH!

If you are ready to dismiss the disingenuous sophistry of the narrow "etymological" arguments propounded by the Muslim apologists and their Islamic partners in crime the conclusion is merely the ineluctable result of rational thinking – The moral of today’s lesson –

NEVER TRUST A MUSLIM!

Let us Pray:

St. Michael, the Archangel, Defend us in battle. Be our defense against the wickedness and snares of the Devil. May God rebuke him, we humbly pray. And do Thou, O heavenly host, through the Power of God, THRUST INTO HELL SATAN, and all the EVIL SPIRITS THAT PROWL ABOUT THE WORLD SEEKING THE RUIN OF SOULS AMEN.

Fear not, for I am with you. I have called you by name, you are Mine. When you pass through the waters, I shall be with you. When you walk through the fire, you shall not be burned, nor shall the flames scorch you. For I am the Lord, your God, the Holy One of Israel, your Savior." Isaiah 43:1b-3a

Remember MOHAMMED The obliterator."! (nickname given by Tabari)

"I say to our enemies: We are coming. God may have mercy on you, but we won’t."

WE NEED INTERNMENT CAMPS FOR THE MUSLIM TERRORISTS NOW!

WE MUST FIGHT SIR, I SAY WE MUST FIGHT! – John Payne, 1775

Praise the Lord and God Bless America,
Zionist/Infidel/Neocon/Crusader/Jew/Kafir
George M Weinert V

The Road to Tehran… Assad’s fall will have a domino effect.


The Shi’ite axis of Islamofascism is coalescing into a deluded unit of violence. We are talking Iran, Syria, Hezbollah and any various shi’ite terrorists under the financial aegis of Mahdi crazed Iran. Statistically this group has to know on paper there is nothing but death and destruction to be gained. So what is the end game the Islamofascists are attempting to visualize?

For Iran it is backword spirituality fomented by the delusions that if world conflageration is intiated, then the hidden 12th Imam – the Mahdi – will come to deliver Mohammedanism. This Imam is the last bloodline descendant of none other than the Grand Pubah himself – Mohammed. Shi’ites believe he is the Messiah like figure that will unite Mohammedanism (and the Sunnis whether they like or not) to bring world peace so-to-speak. I say "so-to-speak" because this envisioned Mohammedan world state of peace is actually a totalitarian fascist death cult that will command absolute allegiance or off with your heads. This is not exactly a peaceful situation ladened with rights and liberty for non-Mohammedans. It is a Mohammedan uberman dream that belittles the rest of humanity.
I have gleened this from my other blogs: Slantright and related material at SlantRight.com.

Enough of my personal opinion, read Michael Ledeen:
————————
Michael Ledeen
1/23/06
NRO

The Syrian-Iranian terror alliance goes back a long time, at least to the mid-1980s, when Hezbollah was created to wage terror war against American and French forces in Lebanon. There was a neat division of labor: Syria controlled the territory, and Iran ran the organization. Hezbollah’s murderous successes are legendary, from the suicide bombings against the French and American Marine barracks to a similar operation against the American embassy, all in Beirut, to massive bombings of Jewish targets in Argentina. That alliance remains intact, and provides the base of the terror war in Iraq today.

So it should not have surprised anyone that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad flew to Damascus last Thursday to meet with Bashar Assad, nor was it surprising that among his entourage were key Iranian officials in charge of Hezbollah, probably including the operational leader, Imad Mughniyah. And in case our Middle East analysts were in doubt about the mission of the Iran-Syria partnership, a suicide bomber struck in Tel Aviv at about the same time Ahmadinejad and Assad were meeting.

A Weakening Grip
Ammar Abdulhamid, a Syrian blogger presently in the United States, summed up the intent of the two leaders as follows:

And so it happened just like we knew it would. Iranian President Ahmadinejad has just announced the formation of new alliance including Syria, Iran, rejectionist Palestinian groups, and Shia factions in Lebanon (in other words: Hezbollah).

The die seems to have finally been cast. The Shia Crescent has just been formalized and reconfigured into a living and breathing entity, with its own network of supports from among the secular nationalist movements and extremist Sunni groups, which simply have no other means of support at this stage.

The Iranians are concerned at signs of cracks in the edifice of the Assad regime, and are at pains to remind the Syrians that the destinies of the two tyrannical regimes are closely linked, and they must continue to make a common front against the destabilizing revolutionary forces unleashed on the region by the United States. Assad is now famously under pressure from unexpectedly honest U.N. investigations into the assassination of Rafik Hariri in Lebanon, and that pressure has intensified after the defection of former Vice President Abdel-Halim Khaddam, now openly calling for regime change in Damascus. Things are also a bit dicey for Assad in Lebanon, where there have been many calls for disarming Hezbollah.

Assad had been hinting that he would be willing to cooperate with investigators, provided he and his family were given immunity, but the Bush administration has rejected any such deals, as Vice President Dick Cheney emphasized on his recent sortie to Saudi Arabia and Egypt, both of whom had given signs of willingness to compromise. But following the Cheney trip, both governments took a tough line, and even Amr Moussa, the head of the Arab League and a man who has given new meaning to the concept of appeasement of tyrants, said there would be no leniency with the murderers of Hariri. To add an exclamation point to this welcome show of American seriousness, the Treasury froze the bank accounts of the head of Syrian military intelligence, Bashar’s brother-in-law, Assef Shawkat.

In short, the Assad family’s grip on Syria is weakening, and this is welcome news indeed, both for the long-suffering Syrian people and for us. The Iranians are obviously desperate to keep Assad in power, and Hezbollah armed to the teeth. Should things go the other way, Iran would lose its principal ally in the war against us in Iraq. As is their wont, the Iranians have been paying others to do much of their dirtiest work, and they have awarded Assad tens of millions of dollars’ worth of oil, as well as cash subsidies, to cover the costs of recruiting, training and transporting young jihadis, who move from Syria into the Iraqi battle space (and, according to Jane’s, a serious publication, the Iranians have also sent some of their WMDs to Assad for safekeeping). That deadly flow has been considerably reduced in recent months, thanks to an extended campaign waged by U.S. and Iraqi forces in Anbar Province, and further along the Iraq/Syria border. The Syrians have accordingly sent radical Islamists into Lebanon, perhaps to link up with Hezbollah in a new jihad against Israel.

Should the jihadist traffic into Iraq and Lebanon cease, we and the Iraqis would be free to concentrate our attention on the Iranian border, especially in the oil-rich south, where Revolutionary Guards forces are very active, both to contain the anti-regime rage of the Ahwaz Arabs on the Iranian side of the border, and to infiltrate the Iraqi side, both in support of Zarqawi’s terror network, and to agitate for an Islamic republic in the Shiite region around Basra. The Iranians have been hyperactive in that area ever since the fall of Saddam, and it would be a very good thing to start to turn the tables on them. For, just as many Iraqi oil fields, and millions of Iraqi Shiites, are vulnerable to Iranian maneuver, the reverse is also true: the bulk of the Iranian oil fields, and millions of Iranians, are vulnerable. And the strategic balance is definitely in our favor.

The population of the Iranian oil region is largely Arab, and they have been brutally oppressed and ethnically cleansed by the mullahs. Tehran has gobbled up thousands of square kilometers of land on the pretext of building industrial parks or expanding military facilities, and the locals have been protesting on and off for many months. As I wrote last week, the regime is so nervous about disorder in the spinal cord of the Iranian economy that they sent Lebanese Hezbollahis and members of the Badr Corps (Shiites of Iraqi origin trained in Iran for the past two decades and then sent into Iraq to fight the Coalition).

In short, the Iranians have a lot to worry about, regardless of whether or not they have atomic bombs. Indeed, as I have long argued, the mullahs have made an enormous strategic miscalculation by going all-out for nukes, because it has made regime change in Iran an absolute imperative for the West. The closer they get to their first nuclear test, the closer the mullahs approach judgement day, and not in the way the fanatics around Khamenei and Ahmadinejad believe. They will not face the 12th Imam, but the harsh condemnation of their own people.

The mullahs have long seen this threat, and indeed the elevation of Ahmadinejad was a desperate throw of the dice to quash any and all revolutionary forces in the country. In recent weeks, Tehran forced the government of Dubai to cancel all live satellite TV broadcasts in the Persian language. Just a year ago, the mullahs had similarly intimidated the Dutch government, even though parliament in the Hague had appropriated funds for the project. In a little noted sequence of events, the Dutch won some big contracts in Iran shortly thereafter, and the Bush administration fined Dutch banks to the tune of eighty million euros for embargo-busting (do you ever wonder, as I do, that this tasty information has to be gleaned from Rooz Online?).

This is the usual practice of insecure tyrants (whose sense of doom is demonstrated by the ongoing exodus of money and talent from the country). They cannot risk the consequences of honest news reaching their people, and they run around like little mad hatters, sticking their thumbs in every crack in their ideological dykes. They are now shutting down NGOs, which, according to the hard-line publication Qods, the interior ministry accuses of planning to overthrow the regime. The mullahs want Islamic organizations, not independent ones, which might support civil liberties or elementary human rights. They want a total monopoly on the flow of information inside the Islamic republic.

Power to the People
This situation is tailor-made for the Bush administration, if only it will support the Iranian people against the mullahs, and the Syrian people against the Assads. The Iranian people see the desperation of their rulers, and honest broadcasts into Iran will be welcome indeed. Support for the Ahwaz Arabs — provided we take care to stress that we have no interest in any separatist impulses, but seek to support all Iranians who wish to exercise their human rights — would also have considerable impact, as would support for the bus drivers’ organization, recently savaged by the regime, which has thus far received moral support only from Teamsters President Jimmy Hoffa. Perhaps the Labor Department might say a few words about the suppression of workers’ organizations in Iran? And, for those millions of Iranians who do not fear the consequences of seeking the truth, we should be providing the tools of modern communications: phones, servers, laptops, phone cards, and so forth.

Meanwhile, we must increase our support for freedom in Syria. There are several new political organizations calling for Syrian freedom. Predictably, most of the organizers live outside the shadow of Assad’s thumb, but they have held recent meetings in Europe with a surprising number of Syrian citizens, they are beginning to broadcast into the country, and many entrails and tea leaves suggest far more support for democratic revolution than the cynical old guys at State and CIA had believed possible. The administration should embrace all such organizations — it is not for us to pick Bashar’s successor, that is the kind of old-Europe tactics best left to the futile Cartesian scheming of the Quai D’Orsay — and press hard for pulling the military fangs of Hezbollah, the sooner the better.

You can be sure that, as Assad collapses, the reverberations will reach Baghdad and Tehran. The Iraqis will gain the security they desperately need in order to advance their brave democratic project. And the Iranians, turbaned and bare-headed alike, will see the hour of their own freedom draw ever closer.

It sure beats drawing up a list of bombing targets, doesn’t it?

— Michael Ledeen, an NRO contributing editor, is most recently the author of The War Against the Terror Masters. He is resident scholar in the Freedom Chair at the American Enterprise Institute

Hillary can run, but she can’t hide from Bill


Senator Hillary Clinton has been caught with a politically schidzo mind by the London Times. Here you will Senator Clinton was sounding leftist and neo-conservative simultaneously.
 
————————————-
January 22, 2006 

Andrew Sullivan

 

 

If there’s a certain schizophrenia in the rhetoric of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton these days it’s intentional. There she was last week, at a predominantly black congregation, lambasting Republicans. She lamented that the Republican-controlled House of Representatives has been “run like a plantation . . . And you know what I am talking about”. Republicans as slave holders? Now that’s inflammatory.

Then only days later we saw the other side of Hillary’s split political personality — a neoconservative one: “I believe that we lost critical time in dealing with Iran because the White House chose to downplay the threats and to outsource the negotiations. I don’t believe you face threats like Iran or North Korea by outsourcing it and standing on the sidelines.”

She went on: “Let’s be clear about the threat we face. A nuclear Iran is a danger to Israel, to its neighbours and beyond. We cannot and should not — must not — permit Iran to build or acquire nuclear weapons.”

Running to the left of President George W Bush and to the right of him as well is not a feat most politicians are able to pull off. But Hillary has no alternative. And in that lies her dilemma. She has too liberal a past (and reputation) to be the Democratic right’s favoured candidate; and she’s become far too conservative in the Senate to win over the Democratic left.

Senator Clinton’s straddle between two political identities, of course, is temporarily shrewd. She knows full well that the Democrats’ key weakness is the war on terror. They have yet to persuade the public that they can defend the West more effectively than the Republicans. And so they have to do two things at once: oppose the president’s conduct of the war, while explaining how they’d do better. So far: not so good. But at least Hillary is trying. It’s complicated. Saying that you’re in favour of wiretaps to spy on Al-Qaeda but want to have court warrants to monitor them, is very sane. But it’s not a soundbite. Compared with the Bush-Cheney Big Daddy act, it’s not terribly convincing.

Hillary’s strategy, in response, has been not just to deploy hawkish words but to back them with a hawkish voting record. She’s now evaluated as one of the more conservative Democrats in Congress. She has visited the troops and she says she won’t revoke her vote in favour of the war to depose Saddam. She’s following her husband’s old gamble: triangulate, triangulate. But Bill triangulated once he’d become president. Hillary is triangulating while trying to win over her party’s left-wing base and more moderate voters. That is proving the tough part.

 

The left loathes the war in Iraq, believes it was started in bad faith, and that it is counterproductive in the war on terror. It has gained traction from the internet as left-wing collective websites such as the Daily Kos ramp up the anti-war and anti-Bush rhetoric. Their favourite candidate is Senator Russ Feingold, an independent liberal, who is unrepentant in his anti-war stance, and a big campaigner against Washington sleaze. If Feingold falters, there’s even Al Gore, now well to the left of Hillary and incensed by what he argues is systematic abuse of executive power.

Hillary’s response has not been to co-opt the left’s rhetoric. She knows it would kill her in a presidential race with a centrist Republican in 2008. So she has tried to win over the base by raising oodles of money for local candidates, travelling the country to win points and curry favours.

Her celebrity can guarantee a big crowd at any fundraising event. So she just had a big shindig for the New Hampshire governor. She raised a cool half a million bucks for Senator Debbie Stabenow of Michigan last month, raked in another $600,000 for the Dems in Kentucky and is scheduled to do the same in Washington state.

In all this she has been lucky to have lacklustre Republican opposition in New York state where she faces re-election as senator this November. Secure at home, she’s pursuing Bush’s 2000 strategy of amassing so much campaign money and so many favours that she becomes the “inevitable” nominee for 2008, regardless of her ideological blur.

 

Two men, however, stand in her way. The first is Mark Warner, a telegenic, youthful retiring governor of Virginia, who turned one of the redder Republican states blue with smart governance and fiscal responsibility. Governors almost always have the advantage over senators in presidential contests because they have had to make decisions rather than simply debate them in Congress.

Warner is also — how to put this nicely? — fresher than Senator Clinton. Yes, there’s nostalgia for the 1990s, but not that much.

Which brings us to Hillary’s other problem male: her husband. It’s impossible to imagine him in the White House as a “first lady” figure, arranging state dinners and redecorating the Lincoln bedroom. Electing Hillary means re-re-electing Bill.

When Bush Jr was elected no one believed his dad would actually be running the show (although a few chastened conservatives might have appreciated some old-school moderation at the helm these past few years). Electing Hillary will be the same two-for-one deal it was in 1992 and 1996. Americans like moving forward, not backwards.

At some point, Hillary’s positioning will also hit a wall of opposition. That wall will either be the Democratic left-wing base of activists, a base that rallied to her in the White House largely because of her rabid right-wing opponents, and certainly not because of her centrist policies.

Or it will be centrist independents who’d pick John McCain over another Clinton.

 

My own hope is that she doesn’t run. She doesn’t have the instinctive connection with people to be an effective national politician: she’s too cold, too calculating, too distant.

Her speeches have been getting better but still make Gore seem like a good performer. And a repeat of the acrimonious culture wars of the 1990s is about the last thing America needs.

Besides, there is a perfect position for her in American public life — and it’s not in the Senate, despite her eminently respectable record there. She belongs on the Supreme Court. She’s a lawyer who wants to change the world. That’s almost a job description for a liberal justice. But she’ll need a Democratic president to put her there. Maybe some of the cash she has been raising will help bring that about.

It could fund far worse causes — Hillary’s own presidential ambition, for one.

——————

Copyright 2006 Times Newspapers Ltd.

Bush Defends NSA Program, Calling it a Terrorist Surveillance Program


We are in a War on terror. This encompasses independant terrorist organizations and the rogue nations that hide them. You could call it WWIV(WWIII in concept was the Cold War) or the Islamofascist War.
 
Incumbent in this war is the ability to combat the enemy. Sometimes the enemy is on America’s land. For whatever reason – treason or greed – if an American aids and abetts the enemy of war they need to be addressed. In war it is not a judicial issue, but it is a military issue.
 
NSA wiretapping is a step to confirm or eliminate the suspicion aiding and abetting enemy combatents. It is that simple.
—————–
By Jay
1/23/06
 
 

President Bush and the nation’s deputy national intelligence chief today defended the legality of a controversial domestic spying program, describing it as a vital tool in the war against terrorists and denying that it violates the civil liberties of Americans. Calling the effort a “terrorist surveillance program,” Bush said in a speech at Kansas State University that he authorized the eavesdropping program after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks in an effort to detect any continuing plots involving members of Osama bin Laden’s al Qaeda terrorist network overseas and persons operating inside the United States. “If they’re making phone calls into the United States, we need to know why — to protect you,” Bush said. The comments, made during a wide-ranging speech and question and-answer session that lasted about two hours, came after Gen. Michael V. Hayden, the deputy director of national intelligence, told the National Press Club in Washington that the program is “targeted and focused” on al Qaeda and does not cast a “drift net” over Americans’ telephone and e-mail communications. Bush said of the intercepted communications, “These are not phone calls within the United States. This is a phone call of an al Qaeda — known al Qaeda suspect — making a phone call into the United States.” He said, “I’m mindful of your civil liberties, and so I had all kinds of lawyers review the process. We briefed members of the United States Congress . . . about this program. “You know, it’s amazing that people say to me, ‘Well, he was just breaking the law.’ If I wanted to break the law, why was I briefing Congress?” Bush said with a chuckle. Bush said he has “authority under the Constitution to conduct foreign intelligence surveillance against our enemies,” and that a 2001 congressional authorization for the use of force gave him “additional authority” in waging war against al Qaeda. “Congress gave me the authority to use necessary force to protect the American people, but it didn’t prescribe the tactics,” he said. “It said, Mr. President, you’ve got the power to protect us, but we’re not going to tell you how.”

This is the first of a series of speeches planned for the week defending the program.

The debate is growing tiresome, only leaving us to repeat the same talking points on both sides, when the facts are still unknown, and we may never know the full details. The program is supposed to be secret anyway.

 

Andrew McCarthy sums it up well today, so I’ll just quote him.

 

We are either at war or we are not. If we are, the president of the United States, whom the Constitution makes the commander-in-chief of our military forces, is empowered to conduct the war — meaning he has unreviewable authority to employ all of the essential incidents of war fighting. Not some of them. All of them. Including eavesdropping on potential enemy communications. That eavesdropping — whether you wish to refer to it by the loaded “spying” or go more high-tech with “electronic surveillance” or “signals intelligence” — is as much an incident of warfare as choosing which targets to bomb, which hills to capture, and which enemies to detain. It was critical in the Civil War, when, by definition, it was done domestically — and without the slightest suggestion that federal courts should be involved. It was critical in World War II, when concerns about enemy infiltration were very real. And it is perhaps more critical today than during any war in our nation’s history. Al Qaeda is an international terrorist network. We cannot defeat it by conquering territory. It has none. We cannot round up its citizens. Its allegiance is to an ideology that makes nationality irrelevant. To defeat it and defend ourselves, we can only acquire intelligence — intercept its communications and thwart its plans. Nothing else will do. Al Qaeda seeks above all else to strike the United States — yet again — domestically. Nothing — nothing — could be worse for our nation and for the civil liberties of all Americans than the terrorists’ success in that regard. For those obvious reasons, no communications are more important to capture than those which cross our borders. Al Qaeda cannot accomplish its ne plus ultra, massive attacks against our domestic population centers, unless it communicates with people here. If someone from al Qaeda is using a phone to order a pizza, we want to know that — probable cause or not.

There are more comments from "Stop the ACLU," but they are mostly to do with joining in stopping the ACLU lawsuit. Go to the link above in the subject and author section if you wish to participate. 

Sunnis’ bet pays off in election totals


Well apparently the Mohammedan sects in Iraq will have to cooperate or obliterate themselves in order to have a viable national government. The Kurds and Shi’ites seem to have fallen short in the votes that would have allowed them to dominate the Sunnis. This is a shot in the arm of the Bush mandate to democratize Iraq and an additional nail in the coffin of Sunni insurgents. Especially the foreign Al Qaeda insurgents.
——————-
 
January 23, 2006

RockyMountainNews.com

 
 
Ballots may trump bullets after all. That was the positive news from Baghdad on Friday. Election results show that Iraq’s three main ethnic factions will have to work together if they hope to govern.

By participating in December’s parliamentary elections, Sunnis elected 55 legislators – enough to secure a role in the coalition government that eventually forms.

Had the Sunnis boycotted the vote, as they did last January, Shiite and Kurdish politicians combined would have won the 184 seats needed to form a government, shutting the Sunnis out. This exclusion could have fueled a civil war.

Instead, the Shia and Kurds fell three seats short. This enhances the prospects of a "national unity" government. And, we hope, it also puts a little more distance between Sunnis who want a stake in the new Iraq and the insurgency.

Is Iran already at war with U.S.?


Islamofascist Ahmadinejad, President of Iran has indicated a greater plan than just wiping Israel off the map. His plan includes the United States of America. The reference is from Joseph Farah’s G-2 Bulletin. WorldNetDaily picked up an abbreviated version. To read the details you will have pay the bucks to Joseph Farah. Here is the WorldNetDaily version:
————————–
Ahmadinejad called for more than
wiping Israel off the face of the earth

 

WorldNetDaily.com

1/21/2006

 

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s speech in Tehran last fall, in which he called for Israel to be wiped off the face of the earth, got a healthy amount of coverage by the international media.

Yet, despite the number of stories published and broadcast, a key element of that address to ‘The World Without Zionism" conference was overlooked, ignored – spiked, if you will – by major press organizations, according to a new report in Joseph Farah’s G2 Bulletin.

It wasn’t just a world without Zionism and Israel that Ahmadinejad and his friends in Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad and other terrorist groups were envisioning. It was a world without the United States of America.

They say a picture is worth a thousand words. In this case, it is literally true. Examine for yourself the photos published here of Ahmadinejad addressing the Tehran conference Oct. 26, 2005.

Some of them will look very familiar. Those showing the Iranian president gesticulating at a podium showing the name of the conference were published worldwide – from Al-Jazeera to the Associated Press. But those showing a wider view – and the complete poster for the event – are getting their biggest audience yet here in G2B.

It is worth noting that Ahmadinejad didn’t just stroll up to the podium. The Iranian government actually produced the visual aids you see here.

Yes, that is a ball representing the USA cracked at the bottom of that hourglass — with another representing Israel falling later.

It wasn’t just the imagery of the conference that was overlooked, ignored, unreported and underplayed by the world press. It was also the anti-American substance of Ahmadinejad’s speech.

"Is it possible for us to witness a world without America and Zionism?" he asked. "But you had best know that this slogan and this goal are attainable, and surely can be achieved."

What is he talking about?

Iran has developed a strategic "war preparation plan" for what it calls the "destruction of Anglo-Saxon civilization."

———————————

To see the pictures go to the WorldNetDaily.com Link.

To read the details go here: G2 Bulletin’s annual subscription price has been slashed to just $99 and it is available to sample for just $9.95 a month.  

Again! Homosexual teacher gets no jail for teen assault


This is second incident in which incompetent or liberal judges have allowed homosexuals in positions of trust to get off with a slap in a limp wrist for rape. Read the below story.
—————————————
SEXTRA CREDIT
Choir instructor at Wisconsin school is 2nd case this week without prison
Posted: January 19, 2006

 

For the second time this week, a homosexual teacher has been given no prison time for sexually assaulting one of his students.

 

The latest case involves Gary Hoff, a 44-year-old former choir instructor for the Parkview School District in Orfordville, Wis.

 

According to the Janesville Gazette, Rock County Judge Alan Bates sentenced Hoff to three years probation after he pleaded no contest to one count each of disorderly conduct and misdemeanor fourth-degree sexual assault of a 16-year-old boy, who now is 17.

Bates also ordered Hoff to pay a $1,000 fine, serve 30 hours of community service and have no contact with the victims. Hoff must also surrender his teaching license and participate in counseling and treatment required by his probation officer.

Another sexual assault victim of Hoff, former student Jeb McMahon, now 27, was hoping Bates would be tougher when it came to the sentence.

"I’m not happy with what all’s been found in the investigation," McMahon told the court. "I would like to see you set a strong example that this is not something, as a community, we’re going to tolerate."

McMahon’s assault occurred in 1993 when he was 15, but he didn’t report it until last year. Hoff was not charged in connection with that case, only a more recent incident in November 2004 in which he picked up a 17-year-old at the boy’s home for a planned "boys’ night out."

Prosecutors handling the case stated:

Hoff told the boy other friends had canceled on plans for dinner and a movie, but he still took him out. The boy said Hoff hugged him while driving and being sexually aroused. The boy broke away from Hoff, who told him, "still looking good buddy."

Hoff encouraged the boy to take his shirt off for a photo, claiming he resembled singer Justin Timberlake. He also massaged the teen’s back.

Returning home from the movie, Hoff offered the boy $20 to not wear his shirt. The boy said, "this was an easy $20."

"I’m truly sorry to the court and would like to offer my heartfelt apologies to both Jeb and [the 17-year-old boy]," Hoff said during his sentencing hearing.

Hoff, a 17-year veteran of the district quit his position before the school board could take any disciplinary action. During his career, he oversaw many high-school musical productions and the school’s Pizzazz Show Choir, which he took to Branson, Mo., for a 2004 competition.

Three months before his arrest on the sexual assault charges, he pleaded no contest to procuring alcohol for another minor in 2004, and was ordered to pay a $243 fine.

 

Hoff’s avoidance of jail time comes the same week another homosexual teacher in Massachusetts avoided incarceration despite raping a teenage boy.

As WorldNetDaily is reporting, Gregory Pathiakis, 26, of Brockton, Mass., was given five years probation after pleading guilty to one count of rape of a child, enticement of a child under 16, five counts of possession of child pornography and one count of distribution of harmful material to a child.

The jurist handling that case, Judge Suzanne Delvecchio, the first woman to be appointed chief justice of the Massachusetts Superior Court, was honored in 2000 as the keynote speaker at the Massachusetts Gay and Lesbian Bar Association’s annual dinner.

Both cases are emerging on the heels of national outrage this month after a judge in Vermont gave an admitted child rapist a 60-day jail sentence.