Blog Archives

Benghazi Conspiracy Now Closer to Criminal Behavior


John R. Houk
© May 19, 2015
 
[Blog Editor: In case you missed the import of this info the Most Watched Videos poster repeats same interview twice]
 

 
Largely thanks to Judicial Watch (JW), the Barack Hussein Obama Administration is being exposed to a nefarious cover-up which includes the current Dem Party front runner Hillary Clinton. America’s Liar-in-Chief has been smoking gun proven he was aware that a Benghazi attack was imminent on September 11, 2012. And it is now proven by documentation the Obama Administration was secretly transferring deposed Qaddafi weapons from Libya to Syrian rebels fighting Bashar Assad. The unproven matter is whether those weapons ended up with American backed Syrian rebels or Islamic purist rebels related to al Qaeda and some of which evolved into ISIS.
 
This is a cover-up because BHO acted surprised about the Benghazi attacked and then proceeded to blame an obscure movie trailer showing Mo in a negative light. After the fake blame game the Obama Administration had the film maker (now-a-days known as Mark Basseley Youssef) arrested in 2012 for breaking probation from a previous prison release. Apparently Mr. Youssef (an Egyptian Coptic Christian by profession of faith) has a history of tax evasion and con artist fraud schemes. Perhaps Obama new a fellow fraudster to blame to take eyes off his 2012 campaign for President.
 
It is my personal opinion that Obama and his minions went to such an effort to cover-up the truth about Benghazi to make sure the American voters elected him to a second term as President. Although I suspect the same bumbling GOP campaign staffers that failed to emphasize Obama’s deficiencies in both campaigns that elected Obama to POTUS in 2008 would also have failed to push the fact that Obama and Hillary lied and people died. I mean the Dems had no problem in debasing Bush’s reputation with warped facts by saying Bush lied and people died. Dear God in Heaven I pray the next round of GOP campaigners are bright enough to expose the Obama lies against whoever ultimately wins the Dem nomination in 2016.
 
In order to properly disseminate the news on the Obama/Hillary lies below you will find several cross posts reporting the implications of the JW FOIA documents recently released for public consumption.
 
JRH 5/19/15 (Video Hat Tip: Sharia Unveiled)

Please Support NCCR

*****************************
New docs reveal administration knew about Benghazi 10 days before attack
Judicial Watch’s latest FOIA efforts pack a big punch
 
Posted By Kemberlee Kaye
May 18, 2015 at 7:30pm
hillary-gif-benghazi-FOI-dept-state-scandal-judicial-watch 
I’m struggling to concoct a scenario more damning than this.
 
After filing a FOIA suit, thanks to a court order Judicial Watch obtained documents from the Department of Defense and Department of State which indicate the Obama administration knew al Qaeda was planning the attack in Benghazi ten days before it happened. TEN DAYS.
 
Immediately following the 9/11 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi in 2012, the DOD had identified the culprits and indicated the attack had been planned “ten days or more” prior.
 
A Defense Department document from the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), dated September 12, 2012, the day after the Benghazi attack, details that the attack on the compound had been carefully planned by the BOCAR terrorist group “to kill as many Americans as possible.” The document was sent to then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, then-Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Obama White House National Security Council. The heavily redacted Defense Department “information report” says that the attack on the Benghazi facility “was planned and executed by The Brigades of the Captive Omar Abdul Rahman (BCOAR).” The group subscribes to “AQ ideologies:”
 
The attack was planned ten or more days prior on approximately 01 September 2012. The intention was to attack the consulate and to kill as many Americans as possible to seek revenge for U.S. killing of Aboyahiye ((ALALIBY)) in Pakistan and in memorial of the 11 September 2001 atacks (sic) on the World Trade Center buildings.
 
“A violent radical,” the DIA report says, is “the leader of BCOAR is Abdul Baset ((AZUZ)), AZUZ was sent by ((ZAWARI)) to set up Al Qaeda (AQ) bases in Libya.” The group’s headquarters was set up with the approval of a “member of the Muslim brother hood movement…where they have large caches of weapons. Some of these caches are disguised by feeding troughs for livestock. They have SA-7 and SA-23/4 MANPADS…they train almost every day focusing on religious lessons and scriptures including three lessons a day of jihadist ideology.”
 
The Defense Department reported the group maintained written documents, in “a small rectangular room, approximately 12 meters by 6 meters…that contain information on all of the AQ activity in Libya.”
 
(Azuz is again blamed for the Benghazi attack in an October 2012 DIA document.)
 
But that’s not the end. Evidently, the administration was also aware of arms shipments from Benghazi to rebel troops in Syria.
 
The new documents also provide the first official confirmation that shows the U.S. government was aware of arms shipments from Benghazi to Syria. The documents also include an August 2012 analysis warning of the rise of ISIS and the predicted failure of the Obama policy of regime change in Syria.
 
Intelligence should be tracking who is shipping arms to whom, but according to Judicial Watch, this is the first documentation that shows the administration had constructive knowledge of the arms shipments.
 
Weapons from the former Libya military stockpiles were shipped from the port of Benghazi, Libya to the Port of Banias and the Port of Borj Islam, Syria. The weapons shipped during late-August 2012 were Sniper rifles, RPG’s, and 125 mm and 155mm howitzers missiles.
 
During the immediate aftermath of, and following the uncertainty caused by, the downfall of the ((Qaddafi)) regime in October 2011 and up until early September of 2012, weapons from the former Libya military stockpiles located in Benghazi, Libya were shipped from the port of Benghazi, Libya to the ports of Banias and the Port of Borj Islam, Syria. The Syrian ports were chosen due to the small amount of cargo traffic transiting these two ports. The ships used to transport the weapons were medium-sized and able to hold 10 or less shipping containers of cargo.
 
Of course the State Department has yet to turn over any documents from Hillary’s secret email accounts, as Judicial Watch notes.
 
The release of this information ahead of Hillary’s Congressional hearing will certainly serve to draw even more scrutiny to the former Secretary of State’s involvement in the Benghazi cover-up. Revelations like these exposed by Judicial Watch’s FOIA suit underscore the necessity of a forensic investigation of Hillary’s private email servers.
 
If ever there was a time to unearth all of those “deleted” emails, that time is now.
 
Follow Kemberlee Kaye on Twitter
_______________________________
Military intel predicted rise of ISIS in 2012, detailed arms shipments from Benghazi to Syria
 
Published May 18, 2015
 
Seventeen months before President Obama dismissed the Islamic State as a “JV team,” a Defense Intelligence Agency report predicted the rise of the terror group and likely establishment of a caliphate if its momentum was not reversed.
 
While the report was circulated to the CIA, State Department and senior military leaders, among others, it’s not known whether Obama was ever briefed on the document.
 
The DIA report, which was reviewed by Fox News, was obtained through a federal lawsuit by conservative watchdog Judicial Watch. Documents from the lawsuit also reveal a host of new details about events leading up to the 2012 Benghazi terror attack — and how the movement of weapons from Libya to Syria fueled the violence there.
 
The report on the growing threat posed by what is now known as the Islamic State was sent on Aug. 5, 2012.
 
The report warned the continued deterioration of security conditions would have “dire consequences on the Iraqi situation,” and huge benefits for ISIS — which grew out of Al Qaeda in Iraq.
 
“This creates the ideal atmosphere for AQI (Al Qaeda in Iraq) to return to its old pockets in Mosul and Ramadi,” the document states, adding “ISI (Islamic State of Iraq) could also declare an Islamic state through its union with other terrorist organizations in Iraq and Syria, which will create grave danger in regards to unifying Iraq and the protection of its territory.”
 
ISIS would, in June 2014, go on to declare a caliphate in territory spanning Iraq and Syria, in turn drawing more foreign fighters to their cause from around the world.
 
CLICK TO READ THE DOCUMENTS GIVEN TO JUDICIAL WATCH FROM THE DEFENSE DEPARTMENT AND STATE DEPARTMENT.
 
Also among the documents is a heavily redacted DIA report that details weapons operations inside Libya before the 2012 terror attack in Benghazi. The Oct. 5, 2012 report leaves no doubt that U.S. intelligence agencies were fully aware that lethal weapons were being shipped from Benghazi to Syrian ports.
 
The report said: “Weapons from the former Libya military stockpiles were shipped from the Port of Benghazi, Libya to the Port of Banias and the Port of Borj Islam, Syria. The weapons shipped during late-August 2012 were Sniper rifles, RPG’s, and 125 mm and 155 mm howitzers missiles.”
 
Current and former intelligence and administration officials have consistently skirted questions about weapons shipments, and what role the movement played in arming extremist groups the U.S. government is now trying to defeat in Syria and Iraq.
 
In an interview with Fox News’ Bret Baier broadcast May 11, former Acting CIA Director Michael Morell, deflected questions:
 
Baier: Were CIA officers tracking the movement of weapons from Libya to Syria?
 
Morell: I can’t talk about that.
 
Baier: You can’t talk about it?
 
Morell: I can’t talk about it.
 
Baier: Even if they weren’t moving the weapons themselves, are you saying categorically that the U.S. government and the CIA played no role whatsoever in the movement of weapons from Libya…
 
Morell: Yes.
 
Baier: — to Syria?
 
Morell: We played no role.  Now whether we were watching other people do it, I can’t talk about it.
 
While the DIA report was not a finished intelligence assessment, such Intelligence Information Reports (IIRs) are vetted before distribution, a former Pentagon official said.
 
The October 2012 report may also be problematic for Hillary Clinton, who likewise skirted the weapons issue during her only congressional testimony on Benghazi in January 2013. In an exchange with Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., who is now a Republican candidate for president, the former secretary of state said, “I will have to take that question for the record. Nobody’s ever raised that with me.”
 
Referring to Fox News’ ongoing reporting that a weapons ship, Al Entisar, had moved weapons from Libya to Turkey with a final destination of Syria in September 2012, Paul responded, “It’s been in news reports that ships have been leaving from Libya and that they may have weapons.” He asked whether the CIA annex which came under attack on Sept. 11, 2012 was involved in those shipments.
 
Clinton answered: “Well, senator, you’ll have to direct that question to the agency that ran the annex. I will see what information is available.”
 
In a follow-up letter, the State Department Office of Legislative Affairs provided a narrow response to the senator’s question, and did not speak to the larger issue of weapons moving from Libya to Syria.
 
“The United States is not involved in any transfer of weapons to Turkey,” the February 2013 letter from Thomas B. Gibbons, acting assistant secretary of state for legislative affairs, said.
 
Heavily redacted congressional testimony, declassified after the House intelligence committee Benghazi investigation concluded, shows conflicting accounts were apparently given to lawmakers.
 
On Nov. 15 2012, Morell and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper testified “Yes” on whether the U.S. intelligence community was aware arms were moving from Libya to Syria. This line of questioning by Republican Rep. Devin Nunes, who is now the intelligence committee chairman, was shut down by his predecessor Mike Rogers, R-Mich., who said not everyone in the classified hearing was “cleared” to hear the testimony, which means they did not have a high enough security clearance.
 
An outside analyst told Fox News that Rogers’ comments suggest intelligence related to the movement of weapons was a “read on,” and limited to a very small number of recipients.
 
Six months later, on May 22, 2013, Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, now chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, asked if the CIA was “monitoring arms that others were sending into Syria.” Morell said, “No, sir.”
 
The Judicial Watch documents also contain a DIA report from Sept. 12, 2012. It indicates that within 24 hours of the attack that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens, Foreign Service Officer Sean Smith, and former Navy SEALs Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty at the CIA annex, there were strong indicators that the attack was planned at least a week in advance, and was retaliation for a June 2012 drone strike that killed an Al Qaeda strategist — there is no discussion of a demonstration or an anti-Islam video, which were initially cited by the Obama administration as contributing factors.
 
“The attack was planned ten or more days prior to approximately 01 September 2012. The intention was to attack the consulate and to kill as many Americans as possible to seek revenge for the US killing of Aboyahiye (Alaliby) in Pakistan and in memorial of the 11 September 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center buildings.”
 
The DIA report also states a little-known group, “Brigades of the Captive Omar Abdul Rahman,” claimed responsibility, though the group has not figured prominently in previous congressional investigations. The document goes on to say the group’s leader is Abdul Baset, known by the name Azuz, “sent by (Al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri) to set up Al Qaeda bases in Libya.”
 
“The Obama administration says it was a coincidence that it occurred on 9/11. In fact, their intelligence said it wasn’t a coincidence and in fact specifically the attack occurred because it was 9/11,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton told Fox News.
 
Catherine Herridge is an award-winning Chief Intelligence correspondent for FOX News Channel (FNC) based in Washington, D.C. She covers intelligence, the Justice Department and the Department of Homeland Security. Herridge joined FNC in 1996 as a London-based correspondent.
__________________
BOMBSHELL: What Was Just Revealed About Benghazi Gives Gowdy EXPLOSIVE New Fuel Against Hillary
A potentially damning memo from the Defense Intelligence Agency…
 
May 19, 2015 at 9:27am
 
Given the bombshell revelation about Benghazi that’s just been pried loose from the Obama administration, Hillary Clinton’s anticipated appearance before the House Select Committee investigating the deadly attack in Libya could prove to be even more explosive and potentially damaging for the Democrats’ leading presidential contender. Mrs. Clinton is expected to testify sometime this summer before the panel headed by GOP Rep. Trey Gowdy, reportedly after the State Department has provided the committee with a number of requested documents relating to the former secretary of state’s tenure.
 
Now, a potentially damning new document from the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) — a memo obtained by Judicial Watch after a court challenge to obtain its release — clearly shows that then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton did not disclose to the public credible intelligence that terrorists had planned for an attack on the Benghazi compound, even as she and other administration officials blamed the deadly assault on an amateur video. The Daily Caller provides details of the latest revelation showing that Clinton participated in an apparent cover up of believable intel while misleading the American people, and quite possibly congressional investigators as well:
 
A heavily redacted copy of a Sept. 12, 2012, Defense Intelligence Agency memo to Clinton, then Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, the White House National Security Council and the Joint Chiefs of Staff said “the attack was planned 10 or more days prior on approximately 01 September 2012. The intention was to attack the consulate and to kill as many Americans as possible to seek revenge for U.S. killing of Aboyahiye ((ALALIBY)) in Pakistan and in memorial of the 11 September 2001 atacks (sic) on the World Trade Center buildings.”
 
And it wasn’t as though the DIA-provided intelligence was late in arriving on Mrs. Clinton’s State Department desk. The memo unearthed by Judicial Watch shows it was given to Clinton and other senior administration officials the day after the September 11, 2012, attack that took the lives of four Americans. As Breitbart News notes, “The details of the memo present an alternative explanation for the Benghazi attack that was given short shrift by the Obama administration after the attack. Instead, the State Department and the White House chose to emphasize a ‘demonstration’ (which it turned out had never happened) held in connection with a YouTube video critical of Islam.”
 
To understand why the Obama administration was so intent on pushing the anti-Islam video explanation of the Benghazi attack, one must remember that Barack Obama was running for reelection in September of 2012 in what seemed at the time to be a close race. For it to appear that his administration ignored or downplayed evidence that a coordinated terror attack had been in the works in Benghazi might have helped put Mitt Romney in the White House.
 
Ironically, considering the new information in the just-released DIA memo — and the potential it has for lighting an even hotter fire under Hillary Clinton when she is put on Trey Gowdy’s congressional hot seat — it may turn out that Benghazi drives a big, sharp nail in the coffin of Mrs. Clinton’s bid to be the next Democrat to occupy the Oval Office.
______________________________
Clinton email mess multiplies with allegations over 2nd email address
 
May 19, 2015
FoxNews.com’s Judson Berger contributed to this report.
 
The Hillary Clinton email mystery took yet another confusing turn Tuesday with accusations from Republicans that the former secretary of state “misled” the public about her email practices, by using multiple “secret” addresses despite claims to the contrary.
 
However, a spokesman with the House committee probing the 2012 Benghazi attack, and Clinton’s handling of it, would not go so far. Rather, he told FoxNews.com the confusion only further underscores the need to subject Clinton’s private server to a third-party analysis, saying that’s the only way to resolve this.
 
The questions over multiple Clinton addresses were raised after emails were published as part of a lengthy New York Times report on Clinton confidante Sidney Blumenthal’s memos on Libya before and after the fall of Muammar Qaddafi. The emails show Clinton writing from the address, hrod17@clintonemail.com. This is distinct from the other address she has acknowledged using as secretary of state, hdr22@clintonemail.com.
 
“Hillary Clinton misled public about the use of only one secret email address,” Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus tweeted in reference to the documents, while promoting an RNC memo outlining the alleged discrepancies.
 
This, however, is not the first time the ‘hrod17′ address has turned up. The House committee investigating the Benghazi attacks earlier this year said it had records showing “two separate and distinct email addresses” from Clinton, and requested documents from both the ‘hrod17′ and ‘hdr22′ accounts.
 
At the time, Clinton’s lawyer and office attributed the appearance of two email addresses to a simple mix-up.
 
They maintained Clinton only used “one email account” as secretary of state, and that the ‘hrod17′ account did not exist during her tenure. They said she only launched that account in early 2013, after her prior address was published online.
 
As for why both email addresses were turning up in records, her office explained that the new email address (the ‘hrod17′ account) happened to show up on printed copies of old documents because it was the same account — but it did not exist at the time.
 
FoxNews.com has reached out to Clinton’s office asking if the emails published by The New York Times reflect a similar situation.
 
However, the spokesman for the Benghazi committee told FoxNews.com it’s simply not clear whether the multiple emails reflect a glitch — or prove Clinton really was using two email addresses, contrary to what her office claims. Spokesman Jamal Ware said in an email they need a neutral, third-party arbiter to investigate.
 
“There’s only one way to know that for certain,” Ware said in an email. “For Clinton to turn over the server for independent analysis.”
 
Clinton, a Democratic presidential candidate for 2016, so far has resisted doing so. But, taking the rare step Tuesday of answering reporter questions while on the campaign trail, Clinton said during a stop in Iowa that she wants the State Department to do all it can to expedite the release of her emails during her tenure as secretary.
 
“I have said repeatedly I want those emails out,” Clinton said.
 
Ware also referred FoxNews.com to a March 4 statement in which the Benghazi committee first revealed they had records with two distinct Clinton email addresses. At the time, the committee likewise said they need someone to have access to the server to determine why those two email addresses show up.
 
Amid the tug-of-war over the server, the State Department did propose, in connection with a separate court case, that they release part of the 55,000 pages of Clinton emails by January. A federal judge on Tuesday, though, rejected that plan and ordered the department to come up with a schedule by next week for releasing the emails on a rolling basis. A State Department spokesman said they would comply.
 
The New York Times story, meanwhile, covered much more than the existence of two email accounts. It detailed how Blumenthal sent multiple memos to Clinton during her State Department years on the situation in Libya, while he was advising business associates seeking contracts from Libya’s transitional government.
 
The venture reportedly was not successful. And it’s ultimately unclear what, if anything, Clinton and the State Department knew of Blumenthal’s involvement in any potential Libya projects.
 
Asked about the report on Tuesday, Clinton said she has “many old friends,” and it’s important to get “outside the bubble” to hear advice from other people. “I’m going to keep talking to friends,” she said.
___________________________________
Benghazi Conspiracy Now Closer to Criminal Behavior
John R. Houk
© May 19, 2015
_________________________________
New docs reveal administration knew about Benghazi 10 days before attack
 
© Copyright 2008-2015, Legal Insurrection, All Rights Reserved.
_______________________________
Military intel predicted rise of ISIS in 2012, detailed arms shipments from Benghazi to Syria
 
©2015 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved.
____________________________________
BOMBSHELL: What Was Just Revealed About Benghazi Gives Gowdy EXPLOSIVE New Fuel Against Hillary
 
Copyright ©2015. All rights reserved.
___________________________________
Clinton email mess multiplies with allegations over 2nd email address
 
©2015 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved.

The Sum of All Lies


Islamic Terrorist Cells in the US Map

Recall in his Senate testimony, Clapper stated that the direct links between ISIL and domestic terror networks have created “the most diverse array of threats and challenges I’ve seen in my 50-plus years in the [intelligence] business.” He added, “When the final accounting is done, 2014 will have been the most lethal year for global terrorism in the 45 years such data has been compiled. … I don’t know of a time that has been more beset by challenges and crises around the world. I worry a lot about the safety and security of this country. … The homegrown violent extremists continue to pose the most likely threat to our homeland.”
 
 
As for the Obama/Kerry negotiations with Iran, Flynn notes, “Iran is [not only] a state sponsor of terrorism. Iran has killed more Americans than al-Qa’ida has through state sponsors, through their terrorist network Hezbollah. … My sense of where the policy is – it’s almost a policy of willful ignorance. … Here we are talking to Iran about a nuclear deal with this almost complete breakdown of order in the Middle East.” – Mark Alexander Editorial “The Sum of All Lies
 
Mark Alexander has written an editorial that I pray goes viral on the Internet. His opinion piece is a damning indictment of Obama, Kerry and the Obama Administration in general in making a nuclear deal with Iran that is not verifiable and essentially will NOT prevent Iran from developing nuclear armed weapons of mass destruction (WMD).
 
As you read the entire Patriot Post editorial by Alexander keep in my mind some real facts:
 
The Foreign Ministers representing UK, France, Germany, Russia and China initially left after March 31 deadline; but I have to wonder what Obama is willing to promise to keep negotiations going until the end of June (Reuters – 4/2/15 1:45 PM ET and Newsweek – 4/2/15 1:50 PM ET).
 
The Islamic State (IS), though not recognized as a nation by anyone, and Iran are the two current state sponsors of transnational Islamic terrorism that is even now reaching the shores of America (HERE, HERE and HERE).
 
[Although I like a little supportive remuneration myself (at SlantRight 2.0 use the Paypal button toward top left of page or link below my initials), I highly encourage you to be a supporter of the The Patriot Post. The online service is totally advertisement free and depends on donations from its readers AND the quality of journalistic writing is quite superior.]
 
JRH 4/2/15
*************************
The Sum of All Lies
Terror Does Not Tolerate a Vacuum
 
Apr. 1, 2015
 
“There is a rank due to the United States, among nations, which will be withheld, if not absolutely lost, by the reputation of weakness. If we desire to avoid insult, we must be able to repel it; if we desire to secure peace, one of the most powerful instruments of our rising prosperity, it must be known that we are at all times ready for war.” –George Washington (1793)
 
 Sum of all Lies Kery-Obama foto
 
The “Sum of All Fears” was one of many well-written novels by the late Tom Clancy, whose fictional military, intelligence and terrorism plots were woven with fact-based tradecraft.
 
The title was inspired by a quote from Winston Churchill: “You may take the most gallant sailor, the most intrepid airman or the most audacious soldier, put them at a table together – what do you get? The sum of their fears.”
 
Clancy’s plot focused on an Islamist terror group’s endeavor to detonate a nuclear weapon in the U.S. A Syrian cell with the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine reconstituted the nuke after discovering the necessary fissile material at an Israeli aircraft crash site.
 
True to Hollywood form, however, filmmakers grossly altered Clancy’s original plot, resulting in a much less plausible but more politically correct version. In the movie, the terrorists are not Islamists, but “right-wing” neo-Nazis conspiring to detonate a nuclear bomb in Baltimore harbor – and to start a war between the U.S. and Russia as a catalyst for cementing fascist alliances in the rest of Europe. Leave it to Tinseltown’s Left-coast libs to cast these murderous villains as right-wing white supremacists rather than expose the real Islam!
 
Despite Hollywood’s revisionism, Clancy’s original plot was close to reality back in 1992, and it’s much closer to the stark reality of today, given that Islamists may soon have fissile material from Iran to wage surrogate Jihad against the U.S.
 
The probability of al-Qa’ida and/or Islamic State actors gaining access to a nuclear weapon and then detonating it in the U.S. (most likely in an East Coast urban center) is increasing by the day.
 
That escalating threat is due solely to the “sum of all lies” being propagated by Barack Hussein Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry, whose record of treasonous treachery dates back to his collaboration with our enemy during the Vietnam War.
 
 BHO- My Foreign Policy Awesome foto
There is another “Iran Hostage Crisis” unfolding here, but, unlike the one resolved minutes after Ronald Reagan took office in 1981, this time all Americans are being held hostage, and the current president is a collaborator.

The Middle East is devolving into an expanding theater of warfare between Iranian Shiites and Arab Sunnis, who could very well combine forces against Israel. Obama, with the help of Kerry and his predecessor, Hillary Clinton, have presided over the political disintegration of North Africa and the Middle East – that dissolution being the direct result of a series of deceptions promulgated to suit Obama’s domestic political agenda.
 
The first and foremost of those deceptions was rooted in Obama’s 2012 bid for re-election. Amid the cascading failure of his domestic economic and social policies, BO centered his campaign upon faux foreign policy “successes” built around two fraudulent pretexts. First: “Four years ago, I promised to end the war in Iraq. I did.” Second: “Al-Qa’ida is on the run.”
 
In fact, Obama’s calamitous retreat from Iraq in order to create a campaign slogan bumper sticker left a regional vacuum for the resurgence of a far more dangerous manifestation of Islamic terrorism under the ISIL label, which, in conjunction with a thriving al-Qa’ida terrorist network, poses a dire asymmetric terrorist threat to the West.
 
In a strategic region where former President George W. Bush’s doctrine of preemption resulted in costly but significant strides toward regional stability and the protection of our critical national interests, Obama has managed to undo the hard-won success of Operation Iraqi Freedom and is doing his best to undermine Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan.
 
And just six months ago, Obama declared that his counterterrorism policies “have [been] successfully pursued in Yemen and Somalia for years.”
 
Well, take a gander at the state of Obama’s poster-nations today.
 
How bad has it become?
 
Earlier this week, Obama’s former ambassador to Iraq, James Jeffrey, stated bluntly, “We’re in a g-ddamn free fall here.”
 
Stop for a moment and ponder that assessment fully.
 
 Memo to BHO Nukes real Climate Threat foto
Of course, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and former Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn have already affirmed Jeffrey’s appraisal.
 
Recall in his Senate testimony, Clapper stated that the direct links between ISIL and domestic terror networks have created “the most diverse array of threats and challenges I’ve seen in my 50-plus years in the [intelligence] business.” He added, “When the final accounting is done, 2014 will have been the most lethal year for global terrorism in the 45 years such data has been compiled. … I don’t know of a time that has been more beset by challenges and crises around the world. I worry a lot about the safety and security of this country. … The homegrown violent extremists continue to pose the most likely threat to our homeland.”
 
And Flynn is firmly on record regarding Obama’s failure to confront the Islamic threat: “You cannot defeat an enemy you do not admit exists. … I think there is confusion about what it is that we are facing. It’s not just what has been defined as 40,000 fighters in the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, it’s also a large [radicalized segment of Muslims] who are threatening our very way of life.”
 
As for the Obama/Kerry negotiations with Iran, Flynn notes, “Iran is [not only] a state sponsor of terrorism. Iran has killed more Americans than al-Qa’ida has through state sponsors, through their terrorist network Hezbollah. … My sense of where the policy is – it’s almost a policy of willful ignorance. … Here we are talking to Iran about a nuclear deal with this almost complete breakdown of order in the Middle East.”
 
In February, former Acting Director of the CIA Mike Morell said that negotiating over the number of nuclear-enriching centrifuges is futile. “If you are going to have a nuclear weapons program, 5,000 is pretty much the number you need,” Morell said. “If you have a power program, you need a lot more. By limiting them to a small number of centrifuges, we are limiting them to the number you need for a weapon.”
 
Just last week, current CIA Director John Brennan declared that Iran “is still a state-sponsor of terrorism,” but the CIA’s current Worldwide Threat Assessment no longer lists Iran and Hezbollah as terrorist threats.
 
Who’s in charge of this debacle?
 
As Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu noted during his recent address to Congress, Obama’s nuclear negotiations have “two major concessions: one, leaving Iran with a vast nuclear program and, two, lifting the restrictions on that program in about a decade. That’s why this deal is so bad. It doesn’t block Iran’s path to the bomb; it paves Iran’s path to the bomb.” Netanyahu further warned, “Iran’s neighbors know that Iran will become even more aggressive and sponsor even more terrorism when its economy is unshackled and it’s been given a clear path to the bomb.”
 
“Free fall.” “The most diverse array of threats.” “Willful ignorance.” “The number you need for a weapon.” “[The deal] paves Iran’s path to the bomb.”
 
And now, after claiming al-Qa’ida’s demise, victory in Iraq and success in Somalia and Yemen, Obama and Kerry are trying to sell us on their nuclear weapons “deal” with Iran under the pretense that it will render the Middle East and our homeland safe from nuclear terrorism?
 
Negotiations with Iran were slated to conclude last night, March 31st, but it’s “April Fools’ Day,” and, accordingly, Obama and Kerry have announced yet another extension of negotiations with Iran. Apparently three is not the charm.
 
Make no mistake, this “deal” is not designed to prevent nuclear terrorism, and at best may just delay it. Of course, no deal is better than a bad deal.
 
Thomas Sowell notes that Obama’s motivation for this charade with Iran, despite robust objections from Senate and now 367 House Republicans and Democrats, is that “such an agreement will serve as a fig leaf to cover his failure to do anything that has any serious chance of stopping Iran from going nuclear. Such an agreement will protect Obama politically, despite however much it exposes the American people to unprecedented dangers.”
 
In the end, the central issue is not whether Iran can be trusted, but that Obama can’t be trusted. Clearly, Obama’s foreign policy malfeasance and his blinding Islamophilia pose the greatest threat to U.S. national and homeland security.
 
 BHO- Helps me Remember how Lies are Connected foto
 
Pro Deo et Constitutione – Libertas aut Mors
Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis
 
*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 © 2015 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/ )”
 
The Patriot Post
PO Box 507
Chattanooga, TN 37401
 
 
 
Mail this form and your credit card information or check, payable to:
The Patriot Fund
PO Box 507
Chattanooga, TN 37401-0507
 

Alton Nolen the Oklahoman Islamic Terrorist


Alton Nolen 2

Alton Nolen profile photos

 

John R. Houk

© September 27, 2014

 

African-American converted to Islam Alton Nolen beheaded 54 year old Colleen Hufford and stabbed 43 year old Traci Johnson 19 times at Vaughan Foods in Moore OK. Why?

 

More details are probably forthcoming but so far it appears Nolen was fired from Vaughan Foods for a combination of proselytizing Islam and expressing a demand that women should be stoned for certain offenses to Sharia Law. The logical conclusion is Nolen wigged out for being fired and apparently went after the two women in his eye-sights with a food processing knife sawing off the head of Ms. Hufford and stabbing Ms. Johnson times before COO and Reserve Deputy Sheriff Mark Vaughan shot Nolen to prevent more stabbings and murders.

 

I wonder if President Obama and outgoing Attorney General Eric Holder will notice that a white man from Oklahoma shot a Black man.

 

So far the local police is reporting this as workplace violence even though Nolen has definite associations with Radical Muslims and an adherence to Islamic terrorists caught promoting terrorism or participating in terrorism. O yeah, in local interviews Vaughan Food workers report hearing Nolen repeating Radical Islamic phrases while beheading Ms. Hufford and stabbing Ms. Johnson.

 

Classifying Nolen’s actions only as workplace violence is insane considering his vehement proselytizing, Clerics followed, Terrorist organizations followed and Islamic utterances on his attempted mass murder spree. To make politically correct Left Wing multiculturalists happy at best the description of this heinous crime must be both workplace violence and Islamic terrorism.

 

AND to address another issue. Mark Vaughan’s foresightedness to carry a weapon saved the day from Nolen executing an intended massacre in the name of Allah. This is yet another demonstration that Leftists’ attempt to confiscate guns from pro-2nd Amendment/pro-gun rights activists is a ludicrous plan. A gun saved more lives than a gun killed anyone.

 

VIDEO: Oklahoma Beheading 911 Call: Sacked Muslim Beheaded Woman And Stabbed Man

 

Now to seal the deal on the political correct moron Obamanites that refuse to associate Islam with violence here is some updated info I found at Liberty News.

 

JRH 9/27/14

Please Support NCCR

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

Uh Oh… Oklahoma Terror Beheader Linked to Al Qaeda Leader (Includes Updates on Beheading Story)

 

By Eric Odom

September 27, 2014 10:36 am

Liberty News

 

A plethora of new details are now available and paint a much clearer picture of what happened in the terror attack in Moore, Oklahoma last week. For those who don’t know, a Muslim man named Alton Nolen brutally attacked two individuals, severely injuring one and severing the head of the other.

 

What was Alton Nolen’s motive? McCurtain Gazette, a local print-only newspaper found details through one of Nolen’s classmates.

 

A classmate of Nolen’s, who didn’t wish to be identified, told this newspaper that he spoke to a close family member of Nolen’s today. He told this newspaper that according to the family member, Nolen was telling coworkers Thursday of an Islamic teaching that said women should be stoned for an offense, and that an argument followed the mark, Nolen was later fired and returned later Thursday, when he beheaded Colleen Hufford, the family member said.

 

So basically Nolan tried to force his fellow-workers that a woman should be stoned for certain minor offenses that violate Sharia law. The workers obviously didn’t take kindly to it and an argument broke out. As a result (not confirmed) Nolan was fired.

 

This suggest the firing is what set Nolan’s terror act in motion. Local police still refer to the beheading as workplace violence. This is likely because Nolan’s firing is what enraged him to the point of committing an act of terror. Where the workplace violence term is wrong, of course, is that Nolan was a Muslim who openly supported radical terrorist murders. Nolan admitted on his Facebook page that he believed Sharia law was coming and called for the death of America as well as Israel.

 

Workplace violence doesn’t include beheading “infidels” over religious disagreements. That’s called Jihad.

 

Speaking of Jihad, new evidence is available via Breitbart is now revealing a very, very ugly connection Nolan had through his Islam religion.

 

Suhaib Webb, an Imam with ties to former Al Qaeda mastermind Anwar al-Awlaki, had also previously been the leader of the Islamic Society of Greater Oklahoma City, which had been attended by Alton Nolen — the man who on Thursday beheaded a former coworker after recently converting to Islam, Breitbart News has learned. Webb now serves as Imam of the sister organization of the mosque attended by Boston Marathon bombers Dzhokhar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev.

 

Imam Suhaib Webb has a history of ties to radicalism. FBI surveillance documents found that he was a known confidant of Al Qaeda mastermind Anwar al-Awlaki. Just two days before the September 11, 2001 attacks on America, Webb spoke at a fundraiser with Awlaki with hopes to raise funds for Atlanta-based H. Rap Brown, a man that shot and killed two police officers. The FBI documents also found that “Webb and Awlaki may be associated with the Muslim American Society,” which is a group described by the Investigative Project on Terrorism as being “founded as the United States Chapter of the Muslim Brotherhood.”

 

It’s possible Nolan’s Imam had nothing to do with his radical Islam conversion. But isn’t it also highly suspicious that Nolan converts to Islam, attends a mosque with an Imam who had ties to Anwar al-Awlaki, and then goes on a rampage that ends in the beheading of an infidel?

 

In any event, it can no longer be questioned whether or not Nolan’s Muslim religion played a role in his act of terror via a beheading of an innocent American. The question now is, when and where will this happen next?

______________________

Alton Nolen the Oklahoman Islamic Terrorist

John R. Houk

© September 27, 2014

______________________

Uh Oh… Oklahoma Terror Beheader Linked to Al Qaeda Leader (Includes Updates on Beheading Story)

 

Eric Odom is Managing Director of LibertyNEWS.com, a liberty movement activist and self-described libertarian-minded political geek.

 

© 2014 LibertyNEWS.com

9/11: A Threat Assessment


al-Baghdadi- Our Appt in NY

This threat assessment by Justin Smith is an examination of the threat to America’s National Security from Islamic terrorism and Obama’s failure to address properly that National Security issue.

 

JRH 9/8/14 [Updated: 12:50 PM]

Please Support NCCR

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

9/11: A Threat Assessment

 

By Justin O. Smith

Sent: 9/7/2014 7:22 PM

 

This September 11th America is once again under an intense terror threat from the Islamofascists and the Islamic State. While many Americans reflect on the horror of the September 11, 2001 World Trade Center attacks, innocent Americans falling 100 stories and trapped under burning rubble, and the violent and vicious attacks on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi on September 11, 2012, our leaders must now join together in several courses of action to defeat the ideology of Islam at home and abroad, especially in light of ongoing genocides against Christians in Iraq and Syria and the recent beheadings of two Americans.

 

Whether one believes our war is a cultural clash with Islam or, as Great Britain’s Prime Minister David Cameron recently stated, “a poisonous ideology of Islamic extremism that is condemned by all”, in brief, history shows that ISIS is actually implementing Islam exactly in the manner of Mohammed; history also shows that the Wahhabist philosophy followed by ISIS and the members of Al Qaeda and al-Nusra has been supported by the House of Saud since 1740, all of which are directly involved in global terrorism, along with their Muslim Brotherhood allies from Egypt’s Al Azhar University.

 

Wafa Sultan is a Syrian psychologist who left the Alawite sect of Islam, and she flatly asks, “What is this ‘moderate’, this ‘extremist’ Islam? I never heard such a thing in Syria growing up. Islam is Islam.” Ms. Sultan has made the point in numerous writings that “moderates” and “extremists” are purely a western invention, a myth.

 

The ISIS threat was known to the Obama administration well over a year ago, and yet, on September 3rd Obama admitted “We don’t have a strategy yet.” And on the heels of this admission, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel stated, “… we are aware of over 100 U.S. citizens, who have U.S. passports, who are fighting with ISIL forces. There may be more. We don’t know.”

 

Last year, Moyer Abu Salha, a twenty-two year old American citizen from Florida, went to Syria for terror training. He subsequently returned to the U.S. for a visit, before he went back to Syria and conducted a suicide-bombing for al-Nusra in May 2014.

 

Abdirahmann Muhumed, a 29 year old Somali-American, worked for Delta Airlines before he left the U.S. to fight for al-Shabab, with 39 others, and was killed on the battlefield, just as Troy Kastigar, a close friend of Douglas McArthur McCain, was killed in 2009 after joining al-Shabab in Somalia. McCain was killed in Syria weeks ago, fighting alongside ISIS. All three were from an area in Minneapolis, Minnesota with a large Muslim population and a mosque tied to anti-American propaganda and advocacy for Islamic supremacy.

 

As Muslims increasingly press for concessions to Islamic norms in America, seeking to superimpose Sharia law doctrine over Western principles, the U.S. Congress must halt all Islamic immigration in a sensible, self-preserving measure for America. And common-sense dictates that the U.S. must also stop the ideological subversion by Saudi and the Council on American and Islamic Relations lobby groups that place spies in our military and the upper echelons of U.S. government and terror recruiters in our prisons, as they bribe our State Dept. officials and national security advisors; close your eyes and CIA Chief John Brennan sounds like a Saudi Muslim.

 

Recently, many Americans were appalled and angered to hear the British islamofascist Anjem Choudary tell FoxNews host Sean Hannity, “get ready _ America will be under Sharia law.” Choudary is suspected of recruiting scores of British Muslims to fight for ISIS.

 

Representative Michele Bachmann (R-MN) recently queried the FBI about American citizens fighting for ISIS and other terror groups. She asked, “Once they’re done fighting … what’s going to happen if they try to return?” The FBI replied, “Well, they’ll come into the country.” Bachmann continued, “Are you kidding me? We are not going to stop them from coming into the United States?” [Blog Editor: Bachmann-Beck interview]

Even though Findlaw.com and Senator Jim Rubens (R-NH) hold that “Natural born U.S. citizens may not have their citizenship revoked against their will” [Blog Editor: Rubens’ assertion], hasn’t one willingly abandoned their U.S. citizenship when they take up arms for an enemy of the U.S.?

 

One must certainly agree with Rep Bachmann, who made the following statement regarding her proposed legislation: “ISIS has declared the United States as their enemy. Once you join an enemy army … you should, by definition, lose your American citizenship, therefore your passport. You should have no ability to get back into the United States.”

 

But what about Obama’s open door policy? Isn’t this a severe national security breach and an impeachable offense?

 

According to Judicial Watch, intelligence officials believe a terrorist attack by ISIS and Al Qaeda, along the border between Juarez, Mexico and El Paso, Texas, is so imminent [Blog Editor: JW link] that Command Maj. Gen. Sean McFarland is being briefed at Ft Bliss. The DHS, Justice and Defense Dept. agencies have been placed on alert concerning this imminent threat and the mention of “car bombs and vehicle born improvised explosive devices.” [Blog Editor: NRO confirms]

 

What happens if the Islamic State acquires biological, chemical or nuclear weapon grade material?

 

Obama’s September 3rd message did not instill any further confidence that Obama and company would really do all that they could to ensure America’s national security, as Obama stated: “The primary U.S. objective is to degrade and destroy ISIS so that it’s no longer a threat not just to Iraq but also the region and to the United States.” This from the president whose policies created this crisis, who helped fund and arm ISIS from the beginning and who now says he will “shrink” ISIS “to the point where it is a manageable problem.” [Blog Editor: HERE, HERE & HERE]

 

Senator Roy Blunt (R-MO) angrily retorted, “Terrorists who behead Americans are not ‘manageable’. They must be stopped, and we need President Obama to communicate a clear strategy … on how he plans to eliminate this threat.” [Blog Editor: Blunt retort]

 

The American people’s determination to defeat this new terror threat from ISIS and terror in general from the Islamofascists everywhere should not be underestimated. Americans remember the more than 3000 dead or missing and countless more lives devastated, as pregnant widows were left behind and two thousand children lost a parent on 9/11. Americans recall the images of our Ambassador Chris Stevens being dragged through the streets of Benghazi. Our leaders must resolve that we will not wait until there is another 9/11 before we destroy the Islamic State murderers and scatter their ashes before us.

 

By Justin O. Smith

______________

Edited by John R. Houk

All text or links enclosed by brackets are by the Editor.

 

© Justin O. Smith

I Actually Received a Petition Response from Congress


Oklahoma District 1 Debate

 Senator Jim Inhofe 07-17-13

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Jim Bridenstine

 

Jim Inhofe

 

John R. Houk

© May 14, 2014

 

I sign a lot of petitions pertaining to Conservative issues (usually meaning anti-Leftist) and Counterjihad issues. Sometimes I get a response form my Congressman and one or both of my Senators. Typically the response runs something like, “Thanks for your concern, if you are ever in Washington DC don’t hesitate to contact my office.” I live in Oklahoma. I won’t being showing up anytime soon in our nation’s capital.

 

I actually received a response that was a bit more detailed from my Congressman Rep. Jim Bridenstine and one of my Senators in Jim Inhofe. Now I’d like to think these two Republican gentlemen actually took the time to compose the email with their own hand on their keyboard. That is probably wishful thinking, but I’ll pretend anyway. It was probably one of their staff that drew the short straw to answer email one day.

 

The Bridenstine email came yesterday and the Inhofe email came today. Both emails were canned enough that I can’t be exactly sure to which canned petition-email I signed. By the tone of Bridenstine’s email his was probably a response to an ‘Impeach Obama’ petition. And Senator Inhofe’s email was probably a response to either a Benghazigate petition or a ‘ban the Quran’ canned petition. In the case of Senator Inhofe I am thinking it was probably the ‘ban the Quran’ petition for I believe that was the latest petition I electronically signed.

 

I got to tell ya, if Senator Inhofe or a staff member responded to ‘ban the Quran’ I am a bit surprised.  That is a bit of a radical petition in this day of political correctness. So if it was Inhofe then kudos to him. If it was an Inhofe staff member then kudos to him as well and I am praying that staffer doesn’t get reprimanded for addressing ‘ban the Quran’.

 

At any rate I am going to post both the Bridenstine and Inhofe responses. It was smart politics on their part because at the very least there is the impression of listening to their constituents back home in Oklahoma.

 

JRH 5/14/14

Please Support NCCR

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

From the Desk of Jim Bridenstine

 

By (or attributed to) Jim Bridenstine

Sent: 5/13/2014 5:48 PM

1st District, Oklahoma

 

Dear Mr. Houk,

Thank you for contacting me with your concerns regarding President Obama and the many recent government scandals casting serious doubt on the administration’s integrity.  I appreciate your opinion and value your input on these important issues.

I understand your frustrations with President Obama. As you may know, I recently gave a one-minute speech on the floor of the House of Representatives challenging his leadership.  I encourage you to view it by clicking on this link:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86UL9ekiXDk.


On March 12, 2014, the House passed, with my support, H.R. 4138, the Executive Needs to Faithfully Observe and Respect Congressional Enactments of the Law (ENFORCE) Act
[Blog Editor: Text to H.R. 4138].  If enacted, H.R. 4138 will authorize either chamber of Congress, upon adoption of a resolution, to bring civil action, when the President or any other federal officer has established or implemented a policy in violation of the constitutional requirement that the President faithfully execute the law.

I am also a cosponsor of H. Res. 442, the Stop This Overreaching Presidency Act [Blog Editor: Message from original sponsor Rep. Tom Rice and text].  This legislation directs the House of Representatives to bring civil action to challenge certain policies and actions taken by the Executive Branch in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.  It was subsequently referred to both the House Committee on Rules and the House Committee on Administration, where it currently awaits consideration. 

With regards to impeachment, at this time I believe there are more constructive and effective means to challenge the President’s conduct and hold him accountable. Given the present composition of the Senate, impeachment would likely be an exercise in futility; at worst, it could allow the President and his supporters in Congress to distract the public from the very real and serious scandals the administration is facing. However, please know that I will continue to hold President Obama and his administration accountable and promise to keep your thoughts on this matter in mind at all times.

 

Thank you again for writing and expressing your thoughts on this important issue.  Please visit my website at http://bridenstine.house.gov to send me another message with your thoughts and opinions, read my positions on major issues, or sign up for my E-Newsletter. You can also follow me on Facebook and Twitter by clicking the links below. I look forward to hearing from you again soon.

 

Sincerely,

 

Jim Bridenstine
U.S. House of Representatives

_________________________________

Responding to your message

 

By (or attributed to) Jim Inhofe

Sent: 5/14/2014 3:20 PM

U.S. Senator from Oklahoma

 

Dear Mr. Houk:

 

Thank you for your correspondence regarding Islamic extremism in the United States.  This is a critical issue, and as your voice in Washington, D.C., I appreciate being made aware of your concerns. 

 

Our ongoing war on terrorism is being fought both at home and abroad.  It is complex and interwoven as there are many different individuals and organizations who make it difficult to differentiate the extremists from the law abiding citizens.  However, we must be diligent to assess the true internal and external threats of any extremists, whatever their ideology may be.  Extremists have made it clear that they do not respect individual life, and we must remain committed to fight this battle against radical ideology. 

 

On the homeland security front, the United States has focused on law enforcement, prosecution, and improving the training and preparedness of first responders.  The Department of Homeland Security, established in November 2002, focuses on guarding our border and infrastructure, analyzing terror threats, and coordinating our nation’s response to future emergencies.  An important policy initiative was the enactment of the USA Patriot Act in 2001.  This law bolsters the government’s abilities to investigate, to bar and expel foreign terrorists from the United States, and to punish acts of terrorism. 

 

In response to the increased focus on homeland security, there have also been efforts to involve the Department of Defense (DOD) more closely with federal, state and local agencies in their homeland security activities.  On October 1, 2002, DOD activated a new combatant command, Northern Command (NORTHCOM), to combat terrorism abroad and to protect American citizens at home.  Since the September 11, 2001 attacks, these efforts have made it more difficult for terrorists to operate and to succeed in their attacks.  

 

In combating extremists abroad, the post-September 11 battle against Al Qaeda is worldwide and multifaceted, involving diplomatic and financial, as well as military actions.  On the law enforcement and intelligence front, the United States is working closely with its counterparts around the world to share information and arrest Al Qaeda operatives worldwide, with some successes. 

 

The rise of the Muslim Brotherhood is also of great concern to me. Unfortunately, as you may know, on June 24, 2012 the Muslim Brotherhood candidate, Mohamed Morsi, won Egypt’s first democratic presidential election. Morsi had been the previous leader of the Muslim Brotherhood’s political party, the Freedom and Justice Party (FJP), and a member of parliament.  Although the election seemed to be free and fair, Morsi’s election is further evidence to me that Egypt will face further destabilizing times in the months and potentially years ahead.  Please be assured that I consider any threat by the Muslim Brotherhood internationally or here domestically as a supremely serious threat to our national security, and will investigate any allegations of their involvement in terrorist activities thoroughly. 

 

We are facing an enemy that has the weapons, skills, and mentality to strike at innocent civilians within our own borders.  I believe it is vital that we decisively end the chronic under-funding of our defense needs.  We also need to continue to invest in enhancing our intelligence capabilities, particularly in the area of human intelligence.  Moreover, we must push ahead with the development and deployment of a missile defense system.  The ultimate terror weapon would be a ballistic missile armed with a chemical, biological or a nuclear warhead.  The greatest trust placed upon Congress by the American people is to provide for their security by maintaining a strong national defense.  The U.S. must build and sustain military capabilities required to respond to possible future threats across the spectrum.

 

I will continue to do everything in my power to protect our nation and its citizens from domestic and foreign threats. We must continuously strive to protect the freedoms our servicemen and women fight for everyday. Again, thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts and concerns.  Please do not hesitate to contact me again on this or any other important issue.

______________________

Blog Editor John R. Houk

 

About Rep. Jim Bridenstine

 

About Senator Jim Inhofe

White House aide linked to al-Qaida Funder


Mehdi K. Alhassani - Radical Muslim BHO WH

It is surprising that a Tea Party organization has posted a Counterjihad expose. What is not surprising, is that this Tea Party organization has exposed a Radical Muslim in President Barack Hussein Obama’s White House that has links not only to Radical Islam but the Radical Islamic organizations he is linked to are supportive of Islamic terrorists such as the Muslim Brotherhood and al Qaeda.

 

TeaParty.org utilized WND and Walid Shoebat as sources linking special assistant to the Office of the Chief of Staff of the National Security Council Mehdi K. Alhassani directly to the Muslim World League (MWL). The MWL is also linked to Hillary Clinton’s Deputy of Staff Huma Abedin.

 

JRH 5/11/14

Please Support NCCR

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

White House aide linked to al-Qaida Funder

 

By TeaParty.org Exclusive

May 10, 2014 10:07 am

TeaParty.org

 

Recipient of Benghazi bombshell email blaming attack on Internet video

 

(Tea Party) – A troubling thread links Hillary Clinton’s former chief of staff to the current special assistant to the National Security Council chief of staff of the military’s Islamic chaplain program—the Muslim World League—reported WND. The Muslim World League is a group that has been accused of financing al-Qaida and is even more radical than the Muslim Brotherhood.

 

Offshoots of the organization have been declared official terrorist organizations by both the US State Department and the United Nations. Despite all of that, Muslim World League-linked individuals have been placed in key national security positions. Furthermore, those individuals with radical ties are helping to run the military’s chaplain program.

 

Last week, the case of Mehdi K. Alhassani, special assistant to the Office of the Chief of Staff of the National Security Council, drew attention in the blogosphere world after former a PLO operative named Walid Shoebat reported on Alhassani’s ties to Muslim Brotherhood-linked groups.

 

It was in an administration email made public last week that was part of the Judicial Watch lawsuit where Alhassani’s name emerged. The email in question was sent to Alhassani and other officials from Ben Rhodes just days after the attack in Benghazi on Sept. 11, 2012. Rhodes is Obama’s deputy national security adviser for strategic communication

.

In the email, Rhodes clearly spells out need to “underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, and not a broader failure of policy.”

 

It has since emerged that Alhassani was president of the Muslim Student Association at George Washington University from 2005 to 2006—a group that was openly founded by Muslim Brotherhood activists.

 

Although founded by Brotherhood activists, MSA’s roots are far more dangerous and tie into both Clinton’s deputy chief of staff and adviser, Huma Abedin, and Alhassani as well as the military’s chaplain program.

 

MSA received its start-up funding from the Muslim World League, or MWL.

 

Jihad is their way

 

Shoebat reported that Huma Abedin served on the board of the MSA at George Washington University in 1997. It so happens that the MSA’s official anthem is a restatement of the Muslim Brotherhood credo. This is what it states:

 

Allah is our objective

 

The Prophet is our leader

 

The Quran is our law

 

Jihad is our way

 

Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope

 

News media WND previously attended an MSA event and at that event speakers urged violence against the U.S.:

 

“We are not Americans,” speaker Muhammad Faheed shouted at Queensborough Community College in 2003. He continued: “We are Muslims. [The U.S.] is going to deport and attack us! It is us versus them! Truth against falsehood! The colonizers and masters against the oppressed, and we will burn down the master’s house!”

 

It was also WND that reported Abedin worked on the editorial board of her father’s Saudi-financed Islamic think tank alongside Abdullah Omar Naseef, secretary-general of the Muslim World League. Naseef’s connections to the Abedin family run deep.

 

Huma’s father, Professor Syed Abedin, founded the Institute for Minority Affairs. The Institute for Minority Affairs is a Saudi group that reportedly had the active support of Naseef. Her mother, Saleha, is the editor of the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs. The Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs is the publication of Syed’s institute.

 

The Institute for Minority Affairs touts itself as being “the only scholarly institution dedicated to the systematic study of Muslim communities in non-Muslim societies around the world.”

 

Huma Abedin served on the editorial board of the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs for six years, from 2002 to 2008. Shoebat previously obtained documents revealing that Naseef served on the board with Huma for at least one year—December 2002 to December 2003.

 

In an interesting turn, the sudden departure of Naseef from the board in December 2003 happens to coincide with a time that various charities that happen to be led by Naseef’s Muslim World League were declared illegal terrorism fronts worldwide. The U.S. and U.N were among those who made these declarations.

 

Huma’s mother, Saleha Abedin, has been quoted as representing both the MWL and serving as a delegate for the charity in numerous press accounts.

 

Founded in Mecca in 1962, the MWL proclaims to be one of the largest Islamic non-governmental organizations. However, U.S. government documents and testimony from officials at t the charity show that the Saudi government heavily finances it.

 

The MWL and several of its offshoots, including the International Islamic Relief Organization, or IIRO, and Al Haramain, have been accused of having terrorist ties. Al Haramain was declared by the U.S. and U.N. to be a terror-financing front.

 

In a press release dated September 2004, the Treasury Department alleged direct links between Al Haramain and Osama bin Laden. The group has been banned worldwide by United Nations Security Council Committee 1267.

 

Long-held accusations have also stated that the IIRO and MWL repeatedly funded al-Qaida.

 

In fact, bin Laden reportedly told an associate that the MWL was one of his three most important charity fronts.

 

In a profile of the MWL, the Anti-Defamation League accuses the group of promulgating a “fundamentalist interpretation of Islam around the world through a large network of charities and affiliated organizations.”

 

“Its ideological backbone is based on an extremist interpretation of Islam,” the profile states, “and several of its affiliated groups and individuals have been linked to terror-related activity.”

 

U.S. News and World Report documented back in 2003, that with MWL’s donations, invariably come “a blizzard of Wahhabist literature.”

 

“Critics argue that Wahhabism’s more extreme preachings – mistrust of infidels, branding of rival sects as apostates and emphasis on violent jihad –laid the groundwork for terrorist groups around the world,” said the report.

 

In 1990 in Florida, an Egyptian-American cab driver, Ihab Mohamed Ali Nawawi, was arrested on accusations he was an al-Qaida sleeper agent and a former personal pilot to bin Laden. At the time of the accusation, he also reportedly worked at MWL in its Pakistani branch.

 

In 1988, the MWL founded the Al Haramain Islamic Foundation. The group was responsible for developing chapters in approximately 50 countries. Until it was designated as a terrorist organization they had a chapter in Oregon.

 

Evidence began to grow in the early 1990s that showed the foundation was funding Islamic militants in Somalia and Bosnia. In 1996 a CIA report detailed their Bosnian militant ties.

 

Al Haramain’s offices in Kenya and Tanzania were designated by the U.S. Treasury as sponsors of terrorism. This designation came about as a result of the group’s role in planning and funding the bombings of two American embassies in East Africa in 1998. The Comoros Islands office was also designated because it “was used as a staging area and exfiltration route for the perpetrators of the 1998 bombings.”

 

In 2003, The New York Times reported that Al Haramain had provided funds to another terrorist group—the Indonesian group Jemaah Islamiyah. Jemaah Islamiyah was responsible for the bombings in Bali in 2002 that killed 202 people. Later, the Treasury designated the Indonesia office a terrorist entity.

 

Then the following year in February 2004, the U.S. Treasury Department froze all of Al Haramain’s financial assets pending an investigation. That led the Saudi government to disband the charity, making it part of the Saudi National Commission for Relief and Charity Work Abroad.

 

Al-Haramain was designated a terrorist organization in September 2004 by the U.S.

Four years later, in June 2008, the Treasury Department applied the terrorist designation to the entire Al-Haramain organization all over the world.

 

Bin Laden’s brother-in-law linked to terrorist plots

 

The Philippine and Indonesian branch offices of the MWL-founded IIRO were also designated as terrorist entities in August 2006. According to the Treasury Department they were designated as terrorist organizations “for facilitating fundraising for al-Qaida and affiliated terrorist groups.”

 

The Treasury Department continued: “Abd Al Hamid Sulaiman Al-Mujil, a high-ranking IIRO official [executive director of its Eastern Province Branch] in Saudi Arabia, has used his position to bankroll the al-Qaida network in Southeast Asia. Al-Mujil has a long record of supporting Islamic militant groups, and he has maintained a cell of regular financial donors in the Middle East who support extremist causes.”

 

In the 1980s, Osama bin Laden’s brother-in-law Mohammed Jamal Khalifa ran the Philippines offices of the IIRO. Khalifa has been linked to plots targeting the pope and U.S. airlines.

 

In addition, the IIRO has been pointedly accused of funding Hamas, Algerian radicals, Afghanistan militant bases and the Egyptian terror group Al-Gamaa al-Islamiyya.

 

The families of the 9/11 victims filed a lawsuit against IIRO among other Muslim organizations for having “played key roles in laundering of funds to the terrorists in the 1998 African embassy bombings” as well as for having been involved in the “financing and ‘aiding and abetting’ of terrorists in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing,” reported the New York Post.

 

It’s a Saudi government front

 

In one Canadian court case, the Canadian director of both the IIRO and the MWL, Arafat El-Asahi, admitted the charities are near entities of the Saudi government.

El-Asahi said: “The Muslim World League, which is the mother of IIRO, is a fully government-funded organization. In other words, I work for the government of Saudi Arabia. I am an employee of that government.

 

“Second, the IIRO is the relief branch of that organization, which means that we are controlled in all our activities and plans by the government of Saudi Arabia. Keep that in mind, please,” said El-Asahi.

 

Even though its offshoots were implicated in terror financing, the U.S. government never designated the MWL itself as a terror-financing charity. It has been widely speculated that this is because the U.S. does not want to not embarrass the Saudi government.

 

Muslim chaplain program

 

Last week in a blog posting Shoebat stated that Alhassani attended the Islamic Center of Boston in Wayland, Massachusetts—that is the sister mosque to the Islamic Society of Boston. The Islamic Society of Boston was founded by Abdurahman Alamoudi—a convicted terrorist.

 

WND first reported on Alamoudi’s role in founding the American Muslim Armed Forces and Veterans Affairs Council. The Council was created in 1991 and operates under the umbrella of the American Muslim Foundation.

 

The American Muslim Armed Forces and Veterans Affairs Council was the official endorsing agency of the military’s Muslim chaplain program along with the Muslim Brotherhood-tied Islamic Society of North America, or ISNA.

 

ISNA, an unindicted co-conspirator in a scheme to raise money for Hamas, still happens to be the official endorsing agency for all Muslim chaplains in the U.S. military.

 

An Islamic cleric, Alamoudi served as an Islamic adviser to President Bill Clinton and it was Alamoudi who guided the establishment of the military’s Muslim chaplain program.

 

Alamoudi has been said to have handpicked the army’s first Islamic chaplain, Imam Abdul-Rasheed Muhammad. Muhammad is still serving in that Islamic chaplain position. It also happens to be Muhammad who endorsed the most recent Islamic chaplains who just joined the military. He was also a key figure in the selection of several of the military’s other Islamic chaplains.

 

Where is Alamoudi now? He is serving a 23-year sentence for terrorism-related financial transactions with the Libyan government and for his purported role in the conspiracy to assassinate then-Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah.

 

In one report, Newsweek journalists Mark Hosenball and Michael Isikoff described Alamoudi as an “expert in the art of deception.” The article in Newsweek noted that Alamoudi espoused moderate, pro-American views while lobbying for Muslim causes in the U.S. But at a rally he expressed support for Hamas and Hezbollah.

 

The American Muslim Council was founded by Alamoudi in 1990. The American Muslim Council is a lobbying group advocating on behalf of Muslims in the United States.

 

The first Islamic military chaplain, Muhammad, is also tied to the al-Qaida-front Muslim World League.

 

Alamoudi’s American Islamic Council recommended Muhammad for appointment.

 

Alamoudi was present at Muhammad’s swearing-in ceremony. He was also at the 1996 swearing-in of the military’s second Muslim chaplain, Lt. (junior grade) Monje Malak Abd al-Muta Ali Noel Jr.

 

A convert to Islam, Muhammad joined the Lost-Found Nation of Islam, a black Muslim group that espoused racial separatism and black nationalism in 1974. Later he claimed that he did not fully subscribe to the radical group’s philosophy but was attracted by the organization’s emphasis on personal responsibility and self-help.

 

Muhammad stated, “In the projects where I grew up, the women were exploited. In the Nation of Islam the men were always polite. They were always clean cut. I felt the Nation of Islam had more to offer than the church.”

 

Muhammad detailed his association with the Muslim World League during a 1993 interview with Muslehuddin Ahmed of Islam4all.com.

 

According to the website, Muhammad was in discussion with the charity to help establish the army’s Muslim chaplain program.

 

During the time that Muhammad was associated with the MWL, the group spawned Muslim charities—those charities as it turns out, were alleged fronts for al-Qaida and Osama bin Laden.

 

As Muhammad stated to Islam4all, he was an “honored guest” of the MWL for his pilgrimage to Mecca.

 

“He was also full of praise for the Muslim World League for its excellent arrangements, which it had made for its guests, and was highly impressed by its dedicated Secretary General Dr. Ahmad Muhammad Ali, who symbolized for him a model Muslim leader,” Islam4all reported.

 

Furthermore the Islamic website reported that Muhammad said he would work closely with the MWL and he began an “ongoing interaction with the MWL in shaping and developing a vital Islamic presence within the U.S. Armed Forces.”

 

Muhammad “evinced keen interest in the magazines and other publications of the Muslim World League and other similar organizations for support in his Dawah (outreach) work.” reported the website.

___________________________

Copyright © 2014 Tea Party, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

 

Editor: Original TeaParty.org post had a fund raising ad link I did not include in the cross post: SPECIAL: Do you want Obama impeached? Then get your name on the IMPEACH OBAMA PETITION! Sign it here

Would you Believe ‘Islamist’ and ‘Jihad’ not part of 911?


Not the 911 Memorial Museum documentary ‘Rise of al Qaeda’

VIDEO: RADICAL islam DECLARES WAR AGAINST AMERICA AND THE WEST

 

 

Posted by paryabaker

Published: Jun 19, 2008

 

These events will happen again if we are not vigilant. The wheel of islamic terrorism still turning. Never let our guard down. This problem will not go away by doing nothing. Let us expose the hatred and violence against non-muslims and the evil of islam. Be aware that there are radical muslims who don’t hesitate to kill their own fellow muslims who don’t conform to their idea and standard of a true muslim, how much more of us non-muslims, hated and despised by their god who only yearn for our suffering, misfortune and distruction, they won’t even blink their eyes cutting off our head. All of these are inspired by the hateful and violent verses of the koran and events in the hadith.

 
Radical muslims’ inspiration and
READ THE REST at YOUTUBE

 

 

Would you Believe ‘Islamist’ and ‘Jihad’ not part of 911?

John R. Houk

© April 29, 2014

 

So who flew jet airliners into the Twin Towers on September 11, 2001? Was it DB Cooper hijacking cash? Was it extortionists demanding money and a free pass to Cuba or they will crash the jet into the Twin Towers? Or was it perhaps Right Wing Extremists demanding personal sovereignty from the U.S. government? Maybe it was friends of Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn showing the resurrection of the violent Communist the Weathermen Underground?

 

NO!

 

It was Islamic terrorist members of al Qaeda executing jihad against the symbol of American Wealth. AND these Islamic terrorist were not using telekinesis of their minds fighting an inner struggle to comply with Allah. Rather these dudes hijacked airliners with some kind of weaponry and violence probably murdering the pilots then commandeering the jets with skills learned in American flight school to fly them into the Twin Towers.

 

The National September 11 Memorial & Museum at the World Trade Center told the truth with a short documentary using terminology like “Islamist” and “jihad”. I would have been even more direct by saying “Islamic Terrorists” following the original Islam of the religion’s founder Mohammed.

 

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) wants to perpetuate the Stealth Jihad lie that Islam had nothing to do with al Qaeda Islamic terrorists or violent Jihad to spread Islam by destroying the enemies of Allah.

 

If you foolishly agree CAIR you have no need to read further.

 

If you want to take a stand for America like New York City’s first responders and so something about CAIR deceptive lies; ACT! For America is providing phone call content and contact info as well as email content to send to the 911 Memorial Museum to tell them their 7 minute documentary got it right AND to not allow Islamic terrorist sympathizers like CAIR be the bully that stops the truth. ACT! For America will even send the email for free. They are not asking for a donation to make it happen. But I am adding donation info at the end anyway.

 

3. THE ULTIMATE PURPOSE OF THE ATTACK WAS TO CALL THE U.S. TO ISLAM.

 

In Osama bin Laden’s letter to the American people, which was published on November 24, 2002, he put it succinctly: “The first thing that we are calling you to is Islam.” This was the ultimate purpose of the 9/11 attacks: to weaken the American economy, so that ultimately the American government would collapse. That, presumably, would end what bin Laden and his allies considered to be unacceptable American interference in Muslim countries, and pave the way for the U.S. itself to become an Islamic state. (From Doc’s Talk; point 3 of essay – “5 Truths the 9/11 Museum Should Tell About 9/1”; By Robert Spencer; 5/29/14)

 

 

One of the chief reasons that CAIR is waging war against words like “jihad” and “Islamist” is because the group doesn’t want its ideology to be discussed and it certainly doesn’t want Americans to know that it and Al-Qaeda share the same overall Islamist ideology. Their disagreements are only about target selection, rhetoric and tactics. (Found at The Counter Jihad Report – 4/28/14)

 

Contact your Congressman by phone or email and show your support the 911 Memorial Museum documentary just as it is!

 

JRH 4/30/14

Please Support NCCR

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

Action Alert! Stop the Whitewashing of 9/11 History!

CAIR PRESSURES THE NATIONAL 9/11 MEMORIAL & MUSEUM TO REMOVE “ISLAMIST” AND “JIHAD” FROM HISTORIC DEPICTION

 

Sent by ACT! For America

Sent: 4/29/2014 1:00 PM

Link Date: 29 APRIL 2014 09:15

 

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) is at it again.

This time they are working to water down a 7-minute film entitled, “The Rise of Al Qaeda” that will be shown at the soon-to-be opened September 11 Memorial & Museum at the World Trade Center. Specifically, CAIR wants to whitewash the description of Al Qaeda and the 9/11 attacks by having the film edited to remove the words “Islamists” and “jihad.”

We must stop CAIR now! We cannot allow CAIR to rewrite the history of 9/11.

Removing the accurate description of those who caused this heinous attack not only would be factually incorrect, but would be a tragic slap in the face to all Americans, as well as a disservice to all future generations by misrepresenting the truth.

Further, if Jihad truly means to “struggle” and not warfare to establish the religion, how does CAIR explain the names of terrorist organizations such as these?

 

 

o   Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami (Pakistan, Bangladesh, India)

 

o   Islamic Front for Armed Jihad (Algeria)

 

o   Islamic Jihad for the Liberation of Palestine (Lebanon)

 

o   Islamic Jihad Movement in Palestine (Israel)

 

o   Islamic Jihad Organization (Lebanon)

 

o   Islamic Jihad Union (Uzbekistan)

 

o   Jama’at al-Jihad al-Islami (Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Russia)

 

o   Laskar Jihad (Indonesia)

 

o   United Jihad Council (India)

 

 

You cannot deny the fact that there is a connection between Islam and Jihad. The reality is Jihad is a tenet of Islam. Depicting anything else – and at a memorial dedicated to the remembrance of the 9/11 attacks no less – would be factually dishonest.

We must take action and we must take action now. The National September 11 Memorial and Museum officials must hear what the rest of America thinks about this issue, otherwise, the only ones they will hear from are groups like CAIR. This is your turn to protect historical truth from being erased from the 9/11 Museum. We owe it to our children to keep the truth alive.

Can we count on you to take a moment to contact the 9/11 Memorial Museum about this issue today?

*** IMPORTANT AND TIME-SENSITIVE ACTION ITEM! ***

Please contact the National September 11 Memorial & Museum at the World Trade Center today to let them know that you fully support their film, “The Rise of Al Qaeda,” as it currently stands and that you oppose any modification of that film to whitewash historically accurate depictions of who perpetrated the 9/11 attacks on our nation.

Let them know that including the words “Islamist” and “jihad” are historically accurate and in no way impugn the entire Muslim community.

We have provided all the contact information you need to take this action.

We have also written a sample call and e-mail script for you, to make this as easy as possible. (NOTE: The e-mail script is modifiable if you wish to convey the message in your own words. We ask that you please be respectful at all times.)

Click HERE TO CALL and click HERE TO E-MAIL.

Then, please pass this e-mail along to everyone you know. Time is of the essence.

Thank you. Together we are making a difference!

____________________________

Would you Believe ‘Islamist’ and ‘Jihad’ not part of 911?

John R. Houk

© April 29, 2014

___________________________

Action Alert! Stop the Whitewashing of 9/11 History!

 

ACT for America is an issues advocacy organization dedicated to effectively organizing and mobilizing the most powerful grassroots citizen action network in America, a grassroots network committed to informed and coordinated civic action that will lead to public policies that promote America’s national security and the defense of American democratic values against the assault of radical Islam. We are only as strong as our supporters, and your volunteer and financial support is essential to our success. Thank you for helping us make America safer and more secure.

Attempting to Rewrite the History of September 11th


Flight 93 - 2nd Jet - World Trade Center 9-1-01

Two national Islamist organizations and other aligned Arab-American groups have hopped on the bandwagon to expunge references to “Islamic” or “Islamist” from a film about al-Qeda (sic), which will be shown at the National September 11 Memorial Museum.

 

The Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) are among the groups that called the video “ill-considered and insufficiently vetted” in a letter to museum leadership.

 

The signatories demand that “stereotypical” elements in the film, “The Rise of Al-Qaeda,” be addressed and (Islamic Groups Try to Censure Free Speech at 9/11 Memorial; By John Rossomando; the algemeiner; 4/28/14 12:24 AM)

 

CAIR is American-Islamic linked to Islamic terrorist organization Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood. MPAC is also a Muslim Brotherhood front group. Hmm … Is it any wonder these two stealth promoters of Islamic terrorism and radical Islam are whining about the al Qaeda documentary?

 

In an email sent by Brigitte Gabriel of ACT! For America she explains why CAIR and MPAC are full of bologna in their criticism of 911 Memorial Museum documentary “The Rise of al Qaeda”.

 

JRH 4/28/14

Please Support NCCR

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

Attempting to Rewrite the History of September 11th

 

By Brigitte Gabriel

Sent 4/28/2014 11:20 AM

ACT link: http://tinyurl.com/m5nuq7h

28 APRIL 2014 07:59

 

On May 21st, more than 13 years after the terrorist attacks of September 11th, 2001, the National September 11 Memorial Museum will open its doors to the public to make certain that Americans will never forget what happened that day.

Unfortunately, some are working to ensure that future generations of Americans never fully understand the attacks, which were the most deadly terrorist attacks in the history of the United States.

One of the exhibits in the museum will feature a 7-minute film called “The Rise of Al Qaeda.”

In that film, the Al Qaeda terrorists are referred to as “Islamists” who were waging “jihad” with the attacks upon America.

Those two words, “Islamists” and “Jihad” have caused a controversy, with a variety of critics calling for whitewashing the description of Al Qaeda and the attacks by sanitizing the museum commentary by removing those two words.

This would be a tragic mistake.

Despite the complaints, the use of the terms “Islamist” and “jihad” in no way suggest that all Muslims are terrorists or support violence. No serious analyst in his or her right mind would make such an assertion.

Nevertheless, in warfare the enemy’s reality becomes your reality, so it makes perfect sense to call Islamists “Islamists” and to call Jihad “Jihad.” After all, in World War II, Nazis were referred to as Nazis, because they themselves referred to themselves as such.

America’s enemies in the war on terror do NOT refer to themselves as “extremists,” “militants,” or “radicals.”

They refer to themselves as Jihadists and Jihadis.

Interestingly, critics on both sides of the issue seem to dislike the term “Islamist.” Apologists for organizations such as Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood claim that the term too closely identifies Islam with “extremism.” Many in the countershariah and counterjihad movement say that the term “Islamist” is a term concocted in the West that has no meaning in the Islamic world.

Both are wrong.

The first known use of the term “Islamist” came from the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the late dictator of the Islamic Republic of Iran, the world’s foremost state sponsor of terrorism.

Khomeini said: “We are neither capitalists nor communists. We are Islamists.”

There are many different definitions listed for the term “Islamist,” but that is not the point. The point is that one of the world’s most prominent Muslim leaders coined the term to describe the revolution he led. It is entirely proper for the 9/11 museum to use the term “Islamists” to describe Al Qaeda.

The same is true for the term “jihad.” There has long been a debate about the use of the term jihad, with Muslim Brotherhood organizations such as CAIR particularly objecting to its use to describe violent warfare or terrorism.

The Muslim Brotherhood in America aims to convince Americans that Jihad only means “to struggle” or, more specifically, an internal, personal struggle.

This is only partially correct and any campaign that claims that the term Jihad only means an internal, personal struggle amounts to disinformation. The dualistic nature of Islam, in this case as it applies to the meaning of “Jihad,” is well documented both in historical Islamic doctrine and in contemporary use of the term.

And Jihad definitely does not only mean an internal, personal struggle. In fact, the most widespread meaning of the term that is of particular interest to Westerners who are threatened by Jihad does in fact entail violence.

A false and misleading statement has been attributed to the San Francisco chapter head of CAIR, Zahra Billoo:

“A common misconception of the word jihad is that it means armed struggle or holy war, and that is something that has been perpetrated by many who’ve made careers out of pushing anti-Muslim sentiment.”

Such a meaning for Jihad has nothing to do with anyone with an “anti-Muslim sentiment.” It has everything to do with Islam itself.

Let us examine definitions of Jihad from two authoritative sources.

Jihad According to the Quran

The first is the Quran itself. In this case, specifically The Noble Qu’ran, translated into English by two scholars: Dr. Muhammad Taqi-ud-Din Al-Hilali, PhD, professor of Islamic Faith and Teachings at the Islamic University, Al-Madinah Al-Munawwarah, Saudi Arabia and Dr. Muhammad Mushin Khan of the same institution. The Noble Qu’ran was published by Darussalam Publishers and Distributors, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. It has been catalogued by King Fahad National Library. On page 818, in a glossary accompanying the text of the Quran, The Noble Qu’ran provides the following definition of Jihad:

 

Jihad: Holy fighting in the Cause of Allah or any other kind of effort to make Allah’s Word superior. Jihad is regarded as one of the fundamentals of Islam”


Can the Quran itself be promoting “anti-Muslim sentiment” as CAIR’s Zahra Billoo asserts?


Jihad According to Shariah

Our second source is Reliance of the Traveler: A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law.

Reliance of the Traveler is one of the world’s most widely read manuals of Shariah law. It has been endorsed by a variety of Islamic authorities, including Al Azhar University in Cairo, IIIT (International Institute of Islamic Thought) in Herndon, Virginia, the Fiqh Council of North America, the Islamic Fiqh Academy in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, the Mufti of the Jordanian Armed Forces and the Imam of the Mosque of Darwish Pasha in Damascus, Syria.

These can hardly be termed as those pushing “anti-Muslim sentiment” as Billoo claims.

On page 599 of Reliance of the Traveler, readers can find the following passage:

 

o9.0 JIHAD

(O: Jihad means to war against non-Muslims, and is etymologically derived from the word mujahada, signifying warfare to establish the religion…

The scriptural basis for jihad, prior to scholarly consensus is such Koranic verses as:

(1) “Fighting is prescribed for you” (Koran 2:216);
(2) “Slay them wherever you find them” (Koran 4:89);
(3) “Fight the idolators utterly” (Koran 9:36);

and such hadiths as the one related by Bukhari and Muslim that the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said:

“I have been commanded to fight people until they testify that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and perform the prayer, and pay zakat. If they say it, they have saved their blood and possessions from me, except for the rights of Islam over them. And their final reckoning is with Allah”;

and the hadith reported by Muslim,

“To go forth in the morning or evening to fight in the path of Allah is better than the whole world and everything in it.”

 

Jihad According to Terrorists

If Jihad truly means to “struggle” and not warfare to establish the religion, how does CAIR explain the names of all these terrorist organizations?

Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami (Pakistan, Bangladesh, India)
Islamic Front for Armed Jihad (Algeria)
Islamic Jihad for the Liberation of Palestine (Lebanon)
Islamic Jihad Movement in Palestine (Israel)
Islamic Jihad Organization (Lebanon)
Islamic Jihad Union (Uzbekistan)
Jama’at al-Jihad al-Islami (Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Russia)
Laskar Jihad (Indonesia)
United Jihad Council (India)

So, it is completely appropriate for the 9/11 museum to use the term “jihadist” and “jihad” to describe Al Qaeda terrorists and their activity.

Conclusion

We suspect that the sensitivity expressed with regard to the 9/11 museum goes way beyond the use of the terms “Islamist” and “jihad.”

The fact is, our country has never truly come to terms with the role that Islam plays in Jihadist terrorism.

It would be great if there was truly no connection whatsoever between Islam and Jihad. But the reality is Jihad is a tenet of Islam.

As previously stated, in warfare the enemy’s reality becomes your reality. It makes no difference what Americans think about the stated motivations and doctrine behind the actions of Al Qaeda. The only thing that truly matters is what the leaders and members of Al Qaeda think about why they wage warfare.

The fact of the matter is, Al Qaeda justify their actions by invoking Islam and Allah:

 

In the name of Allah, the Merciful, the Compassionate,

The General Command of the al-Qaeda Organization Statement on the Succession of Sheikh Osama Bin Laden in the al-Qaeda Organization’s Command

With hearts that are satisfied with Allah’s ordainment, and assured of Almighty Allah’s promise and His good reward, the Islamic umma, the mujahideen in the al-Qaeda Organization, and in other groups received the news of the martyrdom of the reviver imam, the jihadist immigrant Sheikh Osama Bin-Muhammad Bin Laden, may Allah rest his soul in peace. We pray to the Almighty Allah to raise his rank and to reward him, on behalf of us and the Muslim umma, with the best of rewards.

Since jihad is continuing until the Day of Resurrection … the General Command of the al-Qaeda Organization announces, after completion of consultations, that Sheikh Dr Abu-Muhammad Ayman al-Zawahiri, may Allah guide him to success, has taken over command of the group…

 

Statement from Al Qaeda
Announcing Zawahiri as the
New leader of Al Qaeda after
Osama Bin Laden’s death

 

All these sins and crimes committed by the Americans are a clear declaration of war on Allah, his messenger and Muslims.

The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies – civilians and military – is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in every country in which it is possible to do it…

We, with Allah’s help, call on every Muslim who believes in Allah and wishes to be rewarded to comply with Allah’s order to kill the Americans and plunder their money wherever and whenever they find it.

 

Ayman al-Zawahiri
Leader of Al Qaeda

 

It would be a tragic mistake if the 9/11 museum was to erase the role that their Islamic faith played in the leadership and membership of Al Qaeda’s horrific actions on September 11th, 2001.

____________________________

ACT for America Content, LLC. All Rights Reserved

 

ACT for America is an issues advocacy organization dedicated to effectively organizing and mobilizing the most powerful grassroots citizen action network in America, a grassroots network committed to informed and coordinated civic action that will lead to public policies that promote America’s national security and the defense of American democratic values against the assault of radical Islam. We are only as strong as our supporters, and your volunteer and financial support is essential to our success. Thank you for helping us make America safer and more secure.

 

BENGHAZI REVEAL PART ONE


Change to Believe in - Benghazi 4 Abandoned

CHANGE YOU CAN BELIEVE IN?

I am a great (or infamous depending on one’s outlook) cross poster of blogs or online news sources. One of my favorite people to cross post is the blogger Danny Jeffrey (older but still active – Freedom Rings 1776 and Fix Bayonets). In fact I have enjoyed Danny’s perspective so much that I noticed I was cross posting a lot of his articles. So I have slowed down on doing this.

 

I am on the email list of Fix Bayonets and a post crossed my eyes that Danny was sharing his outlook on Benghazigate. You may or may not agree with Danny’s perspective but he is very hard to refute except perhaps conclusions based on opinion more than facts. In the blogging world facts are like math – they don’t lie. However unlike math facts can be massaged to slant toward one’s perspective. Too much massaging may lead to the danger of turning facts into mirages; i.e. something you want to see but really is not there.

 

Whatever your take on Benghazigate Danny Jeffrey is one of the best sources to build an information base. Enjoy the read.

 

JRH 3/10/14

Please Support NCCR

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

BENGHAZI REVEAL PART ONE

 

By Danny Jeffrey

March 10, 2014 8:42 AM

Fix Bayonets

 

Last year I wrote an essay about how little people really know about what is going on, due not to a lack of interest, but to the junk sites that from which they tend to get their information. I am about to prove it.

Benghazi is probably the most mentioned city in the world and has been for nearly the last two years. Everyone talks about, reads about it, posts about it and few know anything other than the fact that four men died there and it was due to Obama allowing them to die, for reasons of his own. Beyond those basics there is only confusion and conjecture. Still, in an effort to waken those who are trying to waken others I shall show you what real research can do and then hope you reconsider using some of the sources I provided inWake Up America‘.

In March of 2011 ‘Rebels’ were involved in an attempted overthrow of Qaddafi. I emphasized ‘Rebels’ because most were not rebels as such. The vast majority of these people were paid militias, and a great many of them were Al Qaeda. The powers that be behind the Obama regime thought it best if we helped to topple a dictator and hand his nation over to Islamic radicals. The simple fact of the matter is that Robert Gates and the Joint Chiefs of Staff were opposed to our becoming involved in a war in Libya, citing no national interest. Credit our intervention to three women who overruled the JCS; Samantha Power, Hillary Clinton, and Susan Rice.

At any rate we became involved, with John ‘Traitor’ McCain leading the cheering section and CIA spook Christopher Stevens helping to arm the forces of Al Qaeda. Stevens arrived in Benghazi in the middle of the night aboard a Greek freighter. He spent the night in a hotel and moved the next day due to a car bomb going off in the parking lot.

I love using links from Obama’s loyal media for when they concede something you know you have a live one on the line.

ABC tells us

Stevens, whose diplomatic foothold were a couple of battered tables, was literally on the rebels’ side while the revolution was at its most vulnerable and in danger of being crushed by Gadhafi’s troops who were moving on the city. The threat was pushed back at the last minute by the intervention of NATO planes which began bombing Gadhafi’s tanks and troops.

At the risk of sounding disloyal I must ask; by what right and in whose interest did we do this? After Ronald Reagan had a bomb dropped in Qaddafi’s front yard that little warlord learned some manners and actually joined us in the war on terror after 911. Not wanting another crater in his yard he had been helping to expose and eliminate Al Qaeda. Then we turned on him, aiding Al Qaeda in his overthrow and murder.

Paraphrasing Julius Caesar Hillary Clinton showed her true worth in this 12 second video as she said laughing We Came. We Saw. He Died.” Qaddafi did not simply die. He was tortured and murdered. Raped with sharpened sticks at the hands of savages we empowered until he bled to death. And her victory chant tells me everything that I need to know about the woman that is being groomed for the Oval Office.

Christopher Stevens was rewarded for his efforts by being appointed Ambassador to Libya and he returned there in May of 2012 assuming his new role.

The following is a brief from the U.S. Department of State entitled ‘Securing Our Embassies Overseas’. It details the planning that goes into the safeguarding of our embassies abroad, its Ambassadors, support teams, and families. If this plan had been followed. Four Americans, now dead, would be alive today. The Obama regime intentionally disregarded all protocol and with malice aforethought allowed these men to be killed.


Excerpt:


Following the bombings of the U.S. Embassies in Dar es Salaam (Tanzania) and Nairobi (Kenya) in 1998, security countermeasures for our U.S. missions overseas took on greater importance, and this continues today.

Recall this excerpt as I later present a timeline of events as they transpired, for the State Department was far more aware of the danger than was the Ambassador as they removed his safeguards.

 

Another link from the State Department, this one describing the two types of mobile defense teams available to protect our ambassadors. One is referred to as a Security Support Team and their duties are described as:


A Security Support Team’s job is to augment and enhance security at U.S. Embassies and Consulates that are faced with civil unrest, hostile hosts or any other threat. Recent deployments included Yemen, Libya, Egypt, Tunisia, Jamaica and Cote d’ Ivoire.

And the Tactical Support Team:


Tactical Support Teams deliver counter-assault capability in high-threat protective details both overseas and in the United States. Missions have included deployments to Niger, Zaire, Mauritania, Mali, Indonesia, the Philippines, Yemen, Pakistan, Tunisia and Jamaica.

One would tend to believe that with such support teams available an Ambassador should feel safe, but the fact of the matter is that the Security Support Team was removed and the Tactical Support Team was ordered to “Stand Down!”

Such executive behavior rings not of leadership but of premeditation.

There are a set of standards applied to any foreign mission site. Among them are three meter high walls topped with barbed wire. The building must be set back from those walls by a minimum of one hundred feet. That building must also be equipped with bullet proof glass, tactical doors, and a fire proof safe room. The site in Benghazi had none of the above and could only be operated under the terms of a special waiver from the State Department.

Again, calling upon one of Obama’s lapdog’s…


From CNN


Excerpt:


By leaving the Consulate open for business with a waiver, it essentially meant that no barriers were required, no safe room was needed, and multiple layers of security weren’t necessary.

The State Dept’s waiver was mentioned in the Ambassador’s diary which was recovered by CNN on site as the FBI was weeks getting there.

Then we have this video on the topic from CNN as well. Note that such a waiver on such a facility had to be signed off not only by the State Dept, and Libya, but the Ambassador as well. Why was the Ambassador willing to agree to an unprotected mission in the very pits of hell? More on that topic later.

Recall the basic Security Support Team tasked with protecting the Ambassador. Calling yet again on the Obama loyal:


This from ABC…


U.S. Security Official In Libya Tells Congressional Investigators About ‘Inappropriately Low’ Security At Benghazi Post


I shall use no excerpt from this link as you should read all of it. It is by Jake Tapper, who pulls no punches.

U.S. Security personnel for the Ambassador were limited to three men and they were not allowed to carry weapons as we did not want to offend the ‘sensitivities’ of the Libyans. Their armed support was recruited from the February 17th Martyrs Brigade, but they were nowhere to be found on the night of September 11, 2012. F17MB has a Facebook page.

This from Newsmax…


US Hired Al Qaeda Linked Group To Defend Benghazi Mission


Excerpt:


Several entries on the militia’s Facebook page openly profess sympathy for Ansar al-Sharia, the hardline Islamist extremist group widely blamed for the deadly attack on the mission. The State Department did not respond to a Newsmax request for an explanation as to why the February 17th Martyrs Brigade was hired to protect the mission.

This is a one time (sic) cover from their FB page:

 

al qaeda from facebook

 

In Part Two the plot thickens. [Blog Editor: Part Two was completed today at 10:04 AM]

Suggested Reading…


Can You Handle The Truth

Sharing…


I have been frequently asked if it is alright to share my essays. By all means please do. The icons on the lower left allow you to email an essay, post it on a blog you follow, post to Twitter, Facebook, Pinterest, or Google Plus.

_____________________________

AN INTRODUCTION TO ‘FIX BAYONETS’

 

For the sake of long term readers, I must briefly explain my need for a new website:

I have an insurmountable problem with my previous blog that has to do with the ‘feed’. Everything about it works just fine with the exception of it not being able to send Emails to my followers whenever I post a new essay. I have learned what caused the cumulative problem but am still unable to repair it, and so today I turn a new page. Armed with a new knowledge of how to avoid future problems, I am relegating Freedom Rings 1776 to a background archive, totally accessible but no longer serving my needs.

There is also a second reason for what I have begun. My first website was named with a sense of optimism, while this one is from a sense of desperation, for we are most assuredly losing in the political arena. Since Obama was first chosen by the Progressive overlords, we have been subjected to betrayal, deceit, a loss of liberty, and READ THE REST

I Found Clarity in my Thoughts of Islam


Moderates hold Islam bomb - Radicals lite Fuse

John R. Houk

© March 3, 2014

 

I don’t wish to sound too sophomoric (a favorite term used by one of my History Professors when a student or pundit said something he considered beneath his intellect), but I have to make that sound – SHAZZAM!

 

I just read an essay by Dr. Mary Habeck a PhD in history from Yale; a MA in International Relations from Yale and a BA in International Relations, Russian, and Spanish from Ohio State. Those are a lot of letters.

 

Dr. Habeck’s essay has brought the best clarity for me to understand Islam in that so-called fine line between Moderate and Radical. I use the term “so-called” because I have had quite a bit of difficulty in seeing the difference in beliefs between Moderate and Radical Islam even if there is a difference in practice.

 

Here is my difficulty with the concepts of “Moderate” and “Radical” within Islam. ALL practicing Muslims believe the Quran is the direct manifested word from their deity Allah as delivered from whom Muslims consider the perfect man their prophet Mohammed (or Muhammad or Mohamet or whatever depending in the time frame someone writes about this guy). That means the Quran is an absolutist holy document. Then the other commentaries on the Quran such as the Hadith and Sira (or whatever combination the Sunna is as part of the Sira – I am unsure of the difference between Sira and Sunna) are of value depending on which Muslim scholar majority opinion says which commentary are authentic or bogus. When there is wide agreement on authenticity on Muslim commentaries those commentaries are nearly as holy as the Quran in its force but still NOT the very word of Allah.

 

I reassert the word “ALL” because it doesn’t matter whether one is Moderate or Radical, all Muslims believe what I just wrote about the Quran, Hadith and Sira. What Dr. Habeck has accomplished for me is how the Moderate and Radical Muslim interpret the meanings of the Quran, Hadith and Sira.

 

A Muslim who contends that he/she is Moderate will undoubtedly respond, “Well DUHHHH!” However, in Dr. Habeck’s clarity I also comprehend why there is little public condemnation from a Moderate or as the good scholar Doctor writes, a “typical Muslim” about the terrorist actions of a Radical Muslim. The Moderate Muslim will consider the violence and harshness employed by Radical Muslims as un-Islamic. Even so the Radical Muslim STILL IS interpreting the Quran, Hadith and Sira from their original intent. Ergo even if the interpretation varies in implementation in the now, the Radical Islamic goals of global Islam, a global Caliphate and an absolute Islamic society governed by Islamic Sharia Law; the ends of Radical Islam do not differ from the ends of Moderate Islam. That which differs is the MEANS.

 

The Moderate (or “typical”) Muslim have updated their “MEANS” with modernity which is indeed is more peaceful than the “MEANS” of Radical Islam. Nonetheless, wherever Islam is already supreme a Moderate Muslim will view Islam as a superior way of life for society and law. This is the case even if Moderate Islam by activity is of a more peaceful manner. In an Islamic society Islamic Superiority is more than an ideological concept it is a norm that is sacrosanct. Hence when a non-Muslim is viewed as being insulting to that which holy even Moderate Muslims can be stirred to go nuts against that non-Muslim.

 

In Western society differences of opinion in ideology or religion are viewed as an individual right. Especially in the USA where we have enshrined Liberty in the First Amendment of our Constitution. Thus everyone is entitled to their opinion as long as it does not elicit harm to individuals or the community. In America the radical side of Leftism which is an offshoot of Marxism which leads to absolute State control of individuals especially by force is frowned upon even by center-Left Americans. Also the radical side of the Right Wing such as unrestrained Capitalism-Free Market that harms individuals in the name of the bottom line of profit is frowned upon even by center-Right Americans. Also there are the violent Right Wingers that will utilize violence to bring racial superiority ideologies that leads to the harm of individuals is heavily frowned upon by center-Left and center-Right Americans. The key for Americans at the least unconsciously is the harm to individual Liberty.

 

The Right of individual Liberty is absolutely foreign in Islamic society. The actions, beliefs and Freedoms are viewed through the filter of submission to Allah. If an action, belief or perceived freedom deviates from submission to Allah as understood from the Quran, Hadith and Sira is unacceptable in Islamic society.

 

This is the real essence of the clash of societies when it comes to Western thought and Islamic thought!

 

Individual Rights are the very identity of Americans and to a filtered extent due to history to all Western influenced nations. Submission to Allah is the very identity of Muslims. As long as there is a U.S. Constitution Americans as a whole will not accept Islam. As long as the Quran is considered absolute closely followed by authentic Hadith and Sira; Muslims as a whole will not accept or conceive Liberty as a good thing.

 

Just to be clear – even though Dr. Habeck brought some clarity to my mind, I cannot speak that this is the same clarity that Dr. Habeck has a conclusion of an irreparable clash between Western Liberty and Islamic submission. In fact the essay I read “Attacking America: Al Qaeda’s Grand Strategy in Its War with the World” is less about an inevitable clash between the West and Islam and more about American leaders underestimating the global agenda of Radical Islam especially as embodied in the Islamic terrorist organization al Qaeda. Even so – I have clarity about America and Islam. And thus I feel actually feel better about distrusting all of Islam in general. This is the case even if I am labeled an Islamophobic bigot. If the love of America makes me a bigot, then a bigot I will be when it comes to Islam.

 

JRH 3/3/14 (Hat Tip: Foreign Policy Research Institute)

Please Support NCCR

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 110 other followers

%d bloggers like this: