Overblog Follow this blog
Administration Create my blog
May 16 2015 7 16 /05 /May /2015 23:40

 

Francis made the compliment Saturday during the traditional exchange of gifts at the end of an official audience in the Apostolic Palace. He presented Abbas with a medallion and explained that it represented the angel of peace “destroying the bad spirit of war.” – Times of Israel

 

On Friday I posted on Pope Francis legitimizing Islamic terrorists in recognizing the unity government of Hamas-Palestinian Authority (PA) as a sovereign nation named Palestine. Today the Times of Israel ran the story on Pope Francis greeting Mahmoud Abbas as an angel of peace that is “destroying the bad spirit of war.”

 

Islamic Terrorist Mahmoud Abbas

 

Born in March 1935, Mahmoud Abbas, commonly known as Abu Mazen, is a leading politician in Fatah. He served as Prime Minister of the Palestinian Authority (PA) from March to October 2003. In January 2005 he was elected President of the PA.

 

 

Through the 1960s, '70s, and '80s, Abbas travelled with Yasser Arafat and the rest of the PA leadership-in-exile to Jordan, Lebanon, and Tunisia. In 1966, after the pair had murdered a number of intelligence officers in Syria, they fled to Jordan. Four years later, after their effort to topple Jordan's Hashemite regime sparked a brutal civil war, they were expelled to Lebanon. "By 1975," writes Yoram Ettinger, former Minister for Congressional Affairs at Israel's Embassy in Washington DC, "they had plundered large parts of southern Lebanon, attempting to overthrow the central regime in Beirut, which triggered the Syrian invasion of Lebanon, a series of civil wars and the destruction of Lebanon."

 

 

"One of the extraordinary blind spots of contemporary Middle East history is the obsession of calling Mahmoud Abbas, whose nom de guerre or war name is Abu Mazen, a peace-loving moderate. ... Abbas was not only Yasser Arafat's deputy for 40 years, he also co-founded with him the terrorist group Fatah, masterminded the Munich massacre and wrote a PhD thesis and book denying the Holocaust. He has completely failed as READ ENTIRITY (MAHMOUD ABBAS (A.K.A. ABU MAZEN); Determine The Networks)

 

Mahmoud Abbas according to his own media courtesy of Palestine Media Watch (PMW)

 

JRH 5/17/15

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

Pope calls Abbas ‘angel of peace’ during Vatican visit

Francis meets with PA chief after Holy See’s decision to acknowledge Palestinian state angers Jerusalem

 

VIDEO: Pope Francis welcomes PA President Mahmoud Abbas 5/16/15

 

 

By AFP AND AP

May 16, 2015, 11:40 am 

Updated: May 16, 2015, 1:51 pm

Times of Israel

 

Pope Francis praised Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas as an “angel of peace” during a meeting at the Vatican.

 

Francis made the compliment Saturday during the traditional exchange of gifts at the end of an official audience in the Apostolic Palace. He presented Abbas with a medallion and explained that it represented the angel of peace “destroying the bad spirit of war.”

 

Francis said he thought the gift was appropriate since “you are an angel of peace.”

 

Abbas is in town for the canonization Sunday of two new saints from what was then Ottoman-ruled Palestine. It also comes days after the Vatican finalized a bilateral treaty with the “state of Palestine,” making explicit its recognition of Palestinian statehood.

 

Abbas, for his part, offered Francis relics of the two new saints.

 

The treaty, which was finalized Wednesday but still has to be signed, makes clear that the Holy See has switched its diplomatic relations from the Palestinian Liberation Organization to the state of Palestine.

 

A bilateral commission is putting the final touches to the agreement, on the Catholic Church’s life and activities in Palestine, which then “will be submitted to the respective authorities for approval ahead of setting a debate in the near future for the signing,” the Vatican said on Wednesday.

 

Some observers speculated that the agreement could be signed during Abbas’s visit.

 

The news of the treaty immediately drew ire from Israel.

 

“Israel heard with disappointment the decision of the Holy See to agree a final formulation of an agreement with the Palestinians including the use of the term ‘Palestinian State’,” said an Israeli foreign ministry official.

 

“Such a development does not further the peace process and distances the Palestinian leadership from returning to direct bilateral negotiations. Israel will study the agreement and consider its next step.”

 

The agreement, 15 years in the making, expresses the Vatican’s “hope for a solution to the Palestinian question and the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians according to the two-state solution,” Antoine Camilleri, the Holy See’s deputy foreign minister, said in an interview earlier this week.

 

In an interview with the Vatican’s Osservatore Romano newspaper, Camilleri said he hoped “the accord could, even in an indirect way, help the Palestinians in the establishment and recognition of an independent, sovereign and democratic State of Palestine.”

 

The Palestinian Authority considers the Vatican one of 136 countries to have recognized Palestine as a state, although the number is disputed and several recognitions by what are now European Union member states date back to the Soviet era.

 

Abbas’s visit came a day before two nuns who lived in Ottoman Palestine during the 19th century will be made saints at a Vatican ceremony.

 

Marie Alphonsine Ghattas of Jerusalem and Mariam Bawardy of Galilee will become the first Palestinian Arabs to gain sainthood.

 

Ghattas was born in Jerusalem in 1847, and died there in 1927. She was beatified — the final step before canonization — in 2009.

 

Bawardy was born in Galilee, now in northern Israel, in 1843. She became a nun in France and died in Bethlehem in 1878.

 

She was beatified by Pope John Paul II in 1983.

 

Although there are several saints who lived in the region during Christianity’s early days, Bawardy and Ghattas are the first to be canonized from Ottoman-era Palestine.

 

The canonization of a third Palestinian — a Salesian monk — is still under review by the Church.

__________________________

© 2015 THE TIMES OF ISRAEL, All rights reserved

 

ABOUT THE TIMES OF ISRAEL

 

The Times of Israel is a Jerusalem-based online newspaper founded in 2012 to document developments in Israel, the Middle East and around the Jewish world.

 

It was established by veteran UK-born, Israeli journalist David Horovitz and his US-based capital partner Seth Klarman. Horovitz is the founding editor, responsible for the site’s editorial content.

 

The Times of Israel has no partisan political affiliation. It seeks to present the news fair-mindedly and offers a wide range of analysis and opinion pieces.

 

We also highlight developments from Jewish communities throughout the Diaspora, and thus serve as a global focal point for the Jewish world – informing and engaging members of the tribe everywhere.

 

We aim for the site to serve as a READ THE REST

Repost 0
Published by ubiquitous8thoughts - in Israel Counterjihad
write a comment
May 16 2015 7 16 /05 /May /2015 10:41

 

The person who goes by the pseudonym Beowulf and signs his name as Randy found an excellent essay on StupidFrogs.com which in turn cross posted the original by Daniel Greenfield on Sultan Knish. Greenfield posted on May 13, I couldn’t find a date for StupidFrogs.com and Beowulf cross posted preceded with an astute observation on May 15. That is the brief history of cross posting of “Schrodinger's Jihad”.

 

If you have been reading this blog you will see the relevance of Greenfield’s essay. His inspiration is the media condemnation against Pamela Geller and explaining a somewhat statistical reality of the real nature of Islam.

 

I am going to include Beowulf’s thoughts on the Conservative Christian Counselors Yahoo Group followed by the Greenfield essay on Sultan Knish.

 

JRH 5/16/15

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

RE: Schrodinger's Jihad

 

By Beowulf

May 15, 2015 12:00 PM

ccpga

 

Two important problems regarding the claimed non-existent terrorism by Moslems:

 

1.  If there are no Moslem terrorists blowing themselves up or beheading dozens of people or shooting as many people as possible in suicidal attacks, that means that these barbarities are being conducted by "false flag operators", meaning mostly American agitators.  Could someone please tell me where they find so many Americans willing to throw away their lives to accomplish some arcane political acts of protest in order to give the American hierarchy a strong excuse to conduct wars all over the world?  Doesn't sound like any Americans I have ever met.

 

2.  If it is true that these "faux-Moslem terrorists" are not Moslems but actually members of other religions, why isn't that group being fought ferociously by offended Moslems who are totally outraged by these usurpers who steal the good name and reputation of "The Religion of Peace" (tm)?  There should have been a long-standing armed avenging force such as an "All-Moslem, Anti-Terrorist, Rapid-Reaction, Elite Special Forces, World-wide Assault and Vengeance Regiment" that travels all over the world on a moment's notice to kill, capture, torture, and execute all the pretenders to the shining Moslem heritage?  The best reason no such Regiment operates or even exists or is even in the planning stages, is the simple fact that everyone, including all the "supposedly offended" Moslem groups, is tacitly admitting that the original claims, evasions, and excuses are totally false.  Feel free to provide logical countervailing evidence.

 

Randy

+++

Schrödinger's Jihad

 

By Daniel Greenfield

May 13, 2015

Sultan Knish

 

The great paradox of the War on Terror is that we are fighting an enemy that doesn’t exist. We are told incessantly that there is no such thing as a Muslim terrorist.

 

There may be a tiny minority of violent extremists, but they are only a tiny minority of no importance whatsoever. And yet we’ve been at war with this same infinitesimally tiny minority for decades. 

This tiny minority has killed thousands of Americans. It has the support of entire governments in tiny countries like Pakistan (182 million), Iran (77 million) and Syria (22 million). We are told that this tiny minority is no way representative of the world’s billion Muslims, and yet it’s hard to find a Muslim country that doesn’t support or harbor a terrorist group.

We were told that the problems was their governments, but the Arab Spring showed us that democratic elections lead to governments that are even more supportive of tiny minority of extremists who are somehow taking over entire countries.

Everything we’ve been told is obviously a lie. And the best evidence comes from the liars themselves.

The media is howling that a bunch of cartoonists in Texas were irresponsible for sketching Islam’s dead warlord because they should have known that Muslim terrorists would come to kill them for it. But if the media is right and Islam is a religion of peace, then why should they have anticipated a terrorist attack?

And if Islam isn’t a religion of peace, then the media has been irresponsibly lying to us and the cartoonists have been risking their lives to warn us of that lie.

The talking heads on the television insist that the cartoon contest was irresponsible because there were bound to be “some crazies” who would “take the bait”. But if Islam is no more violent than any other religion, shouldn’t it be just as statistically likely that some Christian or Jewish crazies would attack one of the art exhibits, plays or musicals ridiculing and blaspheming against their religions?

Weren’t museums and galleries exhibiting “works of art” like Piss Christ or Shekhina provoking and baiting those Jewish and Christian crazies? And since there are more Christians than Muslims in America, isn’t it statistically far more likely that there should have been far more Christian terror attacks targeting blasphemous exhibits? 

We can only conclude that there is a much higher proportion of “crazies” among Muslims than among Christians. How much higher? 78 percent of Americans identify as Christians. 0.6 percent claim to be Muslims. Only 0.3 percent appear to be Sunnis, who are responsible for ISIS and Al Qaeda attacks.

There is indeed a tiny minority of extremists in America. It’s known as Islam.

What keeps the lie alive is another paradox. Call it Schrödinger's Jihad. The more famous Schrödinger's Cat is a paradox in which a cat in a sealed box with poison that has a 50 percent chance of being released is in an indeterminate state. It is neither dead nor alive until someone opens the box.

In Schrödinger's Jihad, the Muslim terrorist is in an indeterminate state until some Western observer opens the box, collapses his wave function and radicalizes him. The two Muslim Jihadists were in an indeterminate state until Pamela Geller and Bosch Fawstin and the other “provocateurs” suddenly turned them into terrorists in a matter of days or weeks. It didn’t matter that Elton Simpson, one of the Garland terrorists, had already been dragged into court for trying to link up with Jihadists in Africa.

Every Muslim is and isn’t a terrorist. He is both a peaceful spiritual person who is eager to embrace our way of life and a violent killer who can be set off by the slightest offense. Like the cat in the box that is neither dead nor alive, he is both violent and peaceful, moderate and extremist, a solid citizen and a terrorist. He does not choose which of these to be or to become; we decide what he will be.

The Jihadist paradox is that the Muslim terrorist is always defined by what we do, not by what he does. 

 

Islamic terrorism does not exist independently of the Western observer. It is not a Jihad with deep historical and theological roots within Islam, but a reaction to our interactions with Muslims. 

Obama insists that talking about Islamic terrorism ‘summons’ them into being. By admitting the existence of Islamic terrorists, we ‘radicalize’ Muslims. Even the words ‘Islamic terrorism’ creates Islamic terrorists who otherwise wouldn’t exist. 

The real threat is not from the terrorists, it’s from the truth.

When we tell the truth, people die. The truth turns Muslims into terrorists while the lies soothe them back into non-existence. Underneath all the academic terminology is the dream logic of wishful thinking. If we believe that Islam is a religion of peace, it will be a peaceful religion, and if we accept the reality that it’s violent, then it will become violent. Islam does not define itself. We define it however we want. Our entire counterterrorism policy is based around the perverse ostrich belief that Islamic terrorism is a problem that we create by recognizing its existence. If we ignore it, it will go away.

The lies about Islam are sustained by a deep conviction among liberals that the “Other” minorities are not real people with real beliefs and cultures, but victims in a game of power played out in the West. Islamic terrorism, like gay marriage or Global Warming, is just another step in the progressive pilgrim’s progress. It’s a problem that we caused and need to atone for in our cosmic karmic journey.

Westerners are privileged observers who have power while those minorities they observe do not. The duel between the Western left and right is taking place outside the box to determine what will be in the box once it’s forced open, while the oppressed minorities are in a state of indeterminacy in the box. 

The Schrödinger's Jihad paradox has many other adjoining boxes. Some are filled with dictators and criminals. If the progressive observer can open the box and find the root cause, out comes a good person; if the right opens the box, then out will march the terrorists, drug dealers and warlords. 

The other side of the rhetoric about oppression and colonization, of punching up and punching down is the conviction that those at the bottom do not have free will or agency. If the mugger chooses to mug, rather than being driven to it by poverty, if Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union gleefully chose conquest instead of being forced to it by Western imperialism, and if the Muslim terrorist is not a helpless victim, but an abuser, then the moral imperative of the left’s worldview collapses in a heap.

If Muslims are real people who are at least as capable of imperialism, racism, slavery and destroying the planet as any Westerner, and who have been doing all of these things a lot longer, then leftists would have to accept that they are tearing down the most progressive civilization on the planet on behalf of ridiculously reactionary civilizations. Not only would they no longer be the privileged observers in control of the future, but they would have to see themselves as destroyers of what is left of the future.

The left refuses to blame Islam or Muslims because that would mean admitting that they are people.

Schrödinger's Jihad is a child’s toy box for overgrown children who view Muslims as social justice dolls and terrorist action figures instead of people as flawed and complicated as they are. The left refuses to take Islamic theology seriously because it is incapable of understanding different points of view. 

It approaches Islam as a race, rather than a religion, because it refuses to delve into what its beliefs are. Instead it chooses to see Muslims as blank slates to be filled with its ideology, as indeterminate patterns that can be reshaped into whatever they want them to be. It does not want to know what it says in the Koran, because that ruins its wonderful fantasy of Muslims as an oppressed race, rather than a creed.

 

Lies that are based on what we want to be true are the hardest to disprove. A lie that is tied into identity cannot be touched without destroying the entire identity of an individual or a movement. 

The lies about Islam run into the heart of what the left is. To the left, everything is indeterminate and everything can be reshaped. Existence flows from power and power is pitted against progress. By destroying that which exists, they can bring their dreams to life. The dream is stronger than reality.

The left doesn’t really believe that Muslim terrorists exist except when we bring them to life. The real animating force behind Al Qaeda was George W. Bush or Dick Cheney. The true power behind ISIS is Pamela Geller or the Pentagon. The Westerner opens the box and the Muslim terrorist comes out. When Western civilization as we know it is destroyed, then the left believes Muslim terrorism will end. Kill the observer and the cat never existed. Destroy the dreamer and the nightmare dies with him.

The truth is more dangerous than the terrorists. Terrorists can kill the body, but truth can kill the dream.

________________________

Sultan Knish Subscription Options

Repost 0
Published by ubiquitous8thoughts - in Counterjihad
write a comment
May 15 2015 6 15 /05 /May /2015 17:33

 

John R. Houk

© May 15, 2015

 

I am sure many of you politically savvy readers have already heard that the Vatican under Pope Francis’ leadership has recognized the Palestine Authority as a sovereign nation with full diplomatic relations.

 

I first found out about this from Breaking Christian News (BCN) which cross posted a partial article from Christian Broadcasting Network (CBN) News.

 

I understand the Roman Catholic Church is more about the authority of Tradition than the authority of the Holy Bible as the Word of God, but come on! Throwing the Land of the Jews under the bus to a group of people whose sole reason to exist is to destroy Israel and murder Jews is either an idiotic act or an insane act:

 

Future: A world without Israel

The PA promises its people that in the future, the State of Israel will be completely erased and replaced by a State of Palestine. A Fatah member of Palestinian parliament, Najat Abu Bakr, told PA TV that the PA supports and adopts the “stages plan.” To the world, the PA claims that the Palestinians seek the West Bank and Gaza Strip, when in fact the goal is all of Israel: “It doesn’t mean that we don’t want the 1948 borders, but in our current political program we say we want a state on the 1967 borders.” [PA TV (Fatah), Aug. 25, 2008] (PA depicts a world without Israel; Palestine Media Watch)

 

And from for all intents and purposes an independent Hamas Islamic terrorist organization:

 

Vowing to destroy Israel, Hamas paraded some 2,000 of its armed fighters and truck-mounted rockets through Gaza on Sunday, marking its 27th anniversary with its biggest show of force since the end of the Gaza war this summer.

 

….

 

At the parade, a senior Hamas leader reaffirmed the Islamist movement's founding charter's pledge to destroy Israel.

 

"This illusion called Israel will be removed. It will be removed at the hands of the Qassam Brigades," said Khalil al-Hayya, a top Hamas leader, referring to the movement's armed wing.

 

 

Hamas seized control of the Gaza Strip in 2007 from Fatah forces loyal to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas. Both groups signed a unity deal in April but are divided over how to administer the Gaza Strip. (Hamas holds Gaza military parade, vows Israel's destruction; By Nidal Al-Mughrabi; Reuters; 12/14/14 11:47am EST)

 

Here are two CBN News articles dated 5/14/15 and 5/15/15 which shows a Vatican decision that is in my opinion a demonstration of ANTISEMITISM.

 

JRH 5/15/15

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

Vatican Officially Recognizes 'State of Palestine'

 

By Tzippe Barrow

CBN News Internet Producer - Jerusalem

May 14, 2015

CBNNews.com

 

JERUSALEM, Israel -- Israeli leaders expressed disappointment with the Vatican's decision to officially recognize a Palestinian state.

 

"This move does not promote the peace process and distances the Palestinian leadership from returning to direct and bilateral negotiations," Israel's Foreign Ministry responded. "Israel will study the agreement and will consider its steps accordingly."

 

One former Israeli diplomat told CBN News, "There was no need for the Vatican to jump ahead."

 

"Given their record in World War II, they should be more careful," he said. "The Vatican should show more responsibility and not interfere with the future of the Jewish people."

 

Does this move by the Vatican mean the Catholic Church is taking sides against Israel? Dr. Paul Bonicelli, a professor of government at Regent University, addressed that question and more with CBN's Efrem Graham. Click play to watch.

 

 

A statement released by the Vatican Wednesday said the decision "deals with essential aspects of the life and activity of the Catholic Church in Palestine."

 

The treaty replaces the Palestine Liberation Organization as the address for its diplomatic interaction with the Palestinian Authority unity government, made up of Fatah in Ramallah and Hamas in the Gaza Strip.

 

"We have recognized the state of Palestine ever since it was given recognition by the United Nations and it is already listed as the state of Palestine in our official yearbook," Vatican spokesman Father Federico Lombardi said.

 

Pope Francis referred to Mahmoud Abbas as the president of the Palestinian state last year during his visit to Israel. The Pope will receive Abbas at the Vatican Saturday, a day before bestowing sainthood on two Arab nuns who lived during the Ottoman occupation.

 

Meanwhile, several American Jewish groups also expressed disappointment with the Pope's decision. The American Jewish Committee called the move "counterproductive."

 

"Formal Vatican recognition of Palestine, a state that, in reality, does not yet exist, is a regrettable move and is counterproductive to all who seek true peace between Israel and the Palestinians," AJC Executive Director David Harris said.

 

"There is a reason why the U.S., the European Union and others have long agreed that statehood can only be achieved through direct, bilateral negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority," he continued.

 

"Meanwhile, the West Bank [Judea and Samaria] is ruled by the Palestinian Authority, whose leader, Mahmoud Abbas, just marked the tenth anniversary of what was meant to be a four-year term, and Gaza is governed by Hamas, a terror organization. What and where exactly is the 'State of Palestine' today?" Harris queried.

 

"We are fully cognizant of the Pope's good will and desire to be a voice for peaceful coexistence, which is best served, we believe, by encouraging a resumption of Israeli-Palestinian peace talks, rather than unilateral gestures outside the framework of the negotiating table," Harris concluded.

 

+++

What Vatican's Move May Mean for Jerusalem's Future

 

By Chris Mitchell

CBN News Middle East Bureau Chief

May 15, 2015

CBNNews.com

 

JERUSALEM, Israel -- Critics say the Vatican's decision to recognize a Palestinian state could have profound consequences for negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority and the future of Jerusalem.

 

In a new treaty, the Vatican switched its diplomatic recognition from the Palestinian Liberation Organization to the state of Palestine. Palestinian officials celebrated the decision.

 

"We are indeed extremely encouraged by the Vatican recognition of the state of Palestine. We also see this as a very positive development, not just politically but in moral terms, human terms, in legal terms, and it prepares for a whole new era in which Palestine will be seen by the whole world as a state," senior Palestinian official Hanan Ashrawi said.

 

Israeli sources told CBN News they believe the Vatican's decision will not lead the Palestinian Authority back to the negotiating table or promote the peace process. They plan to study the agreement and decide what possible steps to take.

 

Other groups like the Zionist Organization of America criticized the decision.

 

"Because what they are instructing the Palestinians is that they can accomplish their ends by being in violation of accords by pursuing unilateral accords as opposes to bilateral negotiations," Jeff Daube, with the Zionist Organization of America, said.

 

Some say the historic diplomatic move puts the Vatican and Pope Francis in the position of supporting a corrupt and terrorist entity.

 

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas is in the tenth year of a four-year term and he presides over a unity government that includes Hamas in the Gaza Strip, a terror organization sworn to Israel's destruction.

 

The Palestinian Authority also sees Jerusalem as its future capital. That means most all of Jewish and Christian holy sites in the city would be in the hands of a Muslim Palestinian state.

 

The Vatican's decision also adds to the diplomatic momentum to recognize a Palestinian state. The U.N. Security Council looks to be the next forum soon when France is expected to introduce a resolution to recognize a Palestinian state.

________________________

Vatican Demonstrates Antisemitism

John R. Houk

© May 15, 2015

_______________________

Vatican Officially Recognizes 'State of Palestine'

 

And

 

What Vatican's Move May Mean for Jerusalem's Future

 

© Copyright 2015 . The Christian Broadcasting Network.

 

Give to CBN.com

Repost 0
Published by ubiquitous8thoughts - in Israel
write a comment
May 15 2015 6 15 /05 /May /2015 11:51

I am going to proffer a guess that someone at WND read the May 13 post “The Muslim Solution”. That post offered two concepts to solving the perpetual Quranic edict against non-Muslims.

 

WND sent out a book review of a book they are releasing on July 8, 2015 – “House of War: Islam's Jihad Against the World”. This book exposes the real nature of Islam according to its own considered holy writings. So if any generous soul decides to pre-order the book, perhaps contact me to let me know about your generosity. The need for contact is I’d hate to receive 100 copies of what promises to be an awesome read. :-)

 

JRH 5/15/15

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

Islam: Not a Religion of Peace, but a 'House of War'

 

Review sent by and by WND.com

Sent: 5/14/2015 12:22 PM

WND Superstore

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

WASHINGTON – With the toppling of one Mideast dictator after another and the ensuing "Arab Spring," horrendous terrorist attacks are increasingly being perpetrated by groups and individuals claiming to act in the name of Islam.

"The bad quasi-secular dictatorships of the Middle East have been replaced," says G. M. Davis, leaving chaos and anarchy, a "fertile ground for jihadist groups whose violent aspirations are in no way limited to their own societies." Yet Western political leaders, with the support of the major media, have consistently affirmed their belief that, despite the violence done in its name, Islam is a religion of peace.

The critical question is, who is right? Do Muslims who wage violent jihad against unbelievers fundamentally misunderstand their own religion? Or are the jihadists following their holy book in their willingness to die as martyrs according to the dictates of their god, who promises paradise to those who "fight in his cause and kill and are killed, a promise binding on him in truth" (Koran 9:111)? With the West engaged in military operations in multiple Islamic countries and with a rapidly growing Muslim population at home, the answer is of critical importance to the future of Western Civilization.

 

Relying primarily on Islam's own sources, House of War: Islam's Jihad Against the World (formerly Religion of Peace? Islam's War Against the World and now available in paperback), compellingly documents that Islam is indeed a violent, expansionist ideology that seeks the subjugation and destruction of other faiths, cultures, and systems of government.

To be published by WND Books on July 8, House of War explains how Islam is more than just a religion. It is a system of government, seeking to extend its own peculiar legal code – Sharia law – over the entire world. The "peace" Islam seeks is a world united by the Islamic faith and Sharia law under which all other faiths and political regimes have been either suppressed or eliminated. "Jihad" is the violent struggle against the non-Islamic world to bring it into "submission" to Islamic rule.

 

"The idea that Islam is a religion of peace," says Davis, "is fundamentally, totally, and disastrously wrong." Westerners have been indoctrinated to believe that the jihadists they see on television are extremists who have twisted their religion to serve a violent purpose, when in fact, "Islam is intrinsically violent. It is the impetus for modern terrorism, and its doctrines necessitate that the only possible relationship between Islamic civilization and non-Islamic civilization is war or subjugation," says Davis. By delving into key Islamic writings, Davis reveals the fastest-growing religion in the world for what it is – an existential threat to Western Civilization, a reality to which Western leaders remain determinedly blind.

 

G. M. Davis is a Mideast scholar, author, and filmmaker. He graduated from the University of Rochester in 1997 with a BA in political science, and from Stanford in 2003 with a PhD in the same area of study. In 2005, he produced and directed the feature documentary, Islam: What the West Needs to Know.
 

House of War will be available on July 8, 2015.

If you would like to receive a review copy of House of War, please contact WND marketing at marketing@wnd.com.

 

________________________________

WND | 2020 Pennsylvania Ave NW, #351 | Washington, DC 20006
 

Copyright 1997-2015 WND.com Inc. All Rights Reserved.

 

Repost 0
Published by ubiquitous8thoughts - in Counterjihad
write a comment
May 14 2015 5 14 /05 /May /2015 09:59

Rob Eshman

 

 

Ari and Norma focus this editorial essay on Rob Eshman, the Publisher and Editor-in-Chief of TRIBE Media. TRIBE media owns the largest Jewish circulated English Weekly The Jewish Journal of Greater Los Angeles. The “Postcards from America – Postcards from Israel” duo write about Rob Eshman because of a recent unfavorable editorial written by him in the Jewish Journal concerning Pamela Geller’s Mohammed Cartoon Contest and subsequent attack by radicalized Muslim Americans Elton Simpson and Nadir Soofi at Garland TX event. Here is a short journalistic profile of Mr. Eshman:

 

Rob Eshman is Publisher and Editor-in-Chief of TRIBE Media, a niche multimedia company based in Los Angeles.

 

Rob started his career as a staff writer at The Jewish Journal in 1993, when it was a small community paper.

 

In 2009, Eshman founded TRIBE Media Corp, reimagining the community paper for the future.   Tribe Media Corp. produces The Jewish Journal,  the largest independent American Jewish weekly, Tribe magazine, a glossy four-color monthly lifestyle magazine, and jewishjournal.com, with 1.5 million unique monthly users, now the largest Jewish news website outside of Israel.   In 2011, Jewish Journal launched the world’s first multi-platform mobile Jewish news app.  In 2013 he launched HollywoodJournal.com.

 

Both The Jewish Journal and Rob have won numerous local and national awards for writing, design and community leadership.

 

A graduate of Dartmouth College, Eshman has written for The Jerusalem Post, The Los Angeles Times, and the Huffington Post.  He is a frequent commentator on Los Angeles-area radio and television, and has served as a Visiting Lecturer on journalism at the University of Southern California Annenberg School of Communication and the University of Missouri School of Journalism. Rob serves on the boards of the Media Policy Center, The Miracle Project and is a founding board member of the Daniel Pearl Journalism Institute in Herzliya, Israel.

 

In addition to his editing and publishing duties, Eshman writes the blog Foodaism, named one of the best food blogs in Los Angeles by CitysBest.com. At his home in Venice, Rob tends to fruit and vegetable gardens, as well as six chickens and two goats. (Rob Eshman; Alfred Friendly Press Partners; Copyright © 2013 Press Partners)

 

Ari and Norma offer some contrasting criticism and support of Pamela Geller per Rob Eshman’s editorial.

 

JRH 5/14/15

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

To Speak or Not to Speak?

Pamela Geller - Two Sides of a Coin

 

By Ari Bussel and Norma Zager

Sent: 5/13/2015 11:02 PM

 

Rob Eshman, the editor of the largest-circulation English paper for the Jewish community in Greater Los Angeles, recently dedicated his column to Pamela Geller, declaring:  “You’re no Charlie Hebdo!” 

 

Eshman writes:  “In Texas, she just happened to frost her poisonous ideology with some free-speech icing.”

 

“Except in my opinion, Eshman got it all wrong,” says Ari.

“Except in my opinion, Eshman got it right,” says Norma.

 

Ari’s take is that Pamela Geller, rhetoric to the contrary, is not the enemy.  She is the guard at the crosswalk, keeping a watchful eye over the children on their way to or from school.  She raises her red and white “STOP” sign, warning drivers in stopped or approaching cars of their obligation to yield, be aware and not proceed until it is absolutely safe to do so.

 

Like her or not, call her “Bored Housewife,” “Fat,” “Shorty” (she is none of the above), insults will not deter her.  She is entrusted with protecting the children from a careless driver, from cutting their life short.  However, smearing her with insults may result in a punishment to the person doing the insulting.  Normally there is a police officer in sight, and then suddenly the rude behavior changes 180 degrees.

 

Someone needs to step in to protect Geller who is doing her job, and doing it well, not for the sake of the meager few dollars an hour she receives as a salary, but for knowing no one got hurt on her watch. Although that may not have been the case if one crack shot Texas policeman had not been on the scene.

 

One gets the distinct feeling Eshman really does not like Geller.  She spoils his kumbaya feeling and belief:  “Islam is a peaceful religion.  Muslims are good people (with the exception of those who belong to Isis, but they are an aberration).  We all get along so nicely together.”
 

To make the point stronger, Eshman points the finger at Geller.  She is the extremist, not those who say “Europe has fallen – America is next!”  She is the one who refuses to live in peace.  She does things “Davka” (to spite) and clearly is a menace to a peaceful society.  In short, she is worse than a troublemaker and must be a very troubled woman.

 

Geller indeed spoils the game.  She exposes the truth and puts it smack in one’s face.  The sights are not pleasant, but the dangers are real. She tells it like it is, as she sees the world, and of course she is not alone in her opinions.

 

The slick propaganda machine of the local Muslims (CAIR, MPAC, American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, etc.) is soothing to the ear and smooth as silk.  They are the victims, never the perpetrators.  All terrorist acts carried out in the name of Islam do not belong to Islam but are singular acts by deranged individuals.  In fact, the word “Terrorism” and peace-loving Muslims are two concepts quite incompatible with one other.

 

Thus, continues Eshman’s rationale, Geller is at fault for painting Islam with a skewed brush.  She is a witch casting a devious spell on all Muslims, unjustly smearing their name.  And thus, Eshman who may disagree with her politically or ideologically paints a dreadful picture warning against the icing Geller applies.

 

Eshman is a pure reflection of the established American Jewry, the same “old guard” that surrendered to the Muslims and cancelled an appearance by Geller at the Jewish Federation of Greater LA building because some called to complain.  She was left in the street, doors locked in her face, lest she offend anyone for telling her truth.

 

When was the last time the local Muslims, out of consideration to Jews, turned down the hateful rhetoric against Israel (supposedly committing war crimes and being the new Nazis)?  When did they “disinvite” or even give a second thought when hosting a hateful speaker, one who not only uses blood libels, but also mobilizes listeners to action? Where is the outrage against Muslim students that prevent speakers and Jewish students from exercising their freedom of speech?


There is a tipping point where Eshman has no choice but to change his outer skin.  This was observed recently with the advent of the BDS movement and the thriving anti-Semitism found at local university campuses.  Even UCLA Prof. David Myers wrote a mesmerizing account against BDS, which Eshman to his credit prominently featured.  Yet, how pitiful that Prof. Myers is among those who contributed so much to the advent of this movement.

 

Editor-in-Chief Eshman got it wrong.  Geller is the warning sign that the light is changing from yellow to red.  She is trying to caution us to slow down to a complete stop, look around and be aware of the surroundings, before it is too late.

 

Geller seeks to wake us from our sleep – for our own sake, and for the benefit of the Jewish community at large. Allow me then to add a lesson history has taught us:  Those who helped the Communists attain power were the first to be executed.  That is good to remember even when one refuses to apply the lessons of the past to the present.

 

On another side of the coin – Norma’s – Eshman’s remarks are correct, although laced with insults and demeaning stereotypical comments.

 

There is a great difference between freedom and good sense. When the Nazis marched in Skokie many were appalled they should have the right to do so, but if Americans allow those who hate Jews to be denied free speech, who will be next? And most importantly who will make that call and decide whose speech is allowed and whose is not?

 

That is the slippery slope our forefathers in their wisdom wished to avoid when giving us that precious freedom. Do we all use it wisely and with restraint, perhaps not?

 

If every American agreed with one another’s speech, there would be no need for protection. It is most necessary when we disagree and was designed for that purpose.

 

Having said that, it is also important to note there are considerations of where and how to exercise that right.

 

Where the lives of oneself or others enter into the mix, perhaps a bit of wisdom and caution should prevail.

 

Did Pamela Geller have the right to do what she did? Absolutely and without doubt.

 

Might she have thought better of constructing a situation that would incite violence? Perhaps that would have been wise. Speaking your truth is fine, but when that truth endangers the lives of others, one should be compelled to use a rational and measured approach.

 

Personal attacks against Geller distract from the true issue inherent in her actions. They muddy the waters as much as anti-Muslim rhetoric emotionalizing a serious problem that must be addressed by today’s world.

 

As a Jewish woman I am offended by the “Housewife” remark as trivializing women as unfit to contribute in any remarkable manner. Was Betty Freidan no more than a bored housewife? Did she ignite the Feminist movement because she’d had her fill of “affairs?”

 

Are we not past the Philip Roth’s Sophie Portnoy era of marginalizing and demeaning Jewish women and stereotyping them as annoying and redundant?  If not, I strongly suggest we bury that offensive falsehood once and for all.

 

It is easy to find many on one side or the other of this issue. But free speech is an uncompromising and undeniable cornerstone of our democracy. When we deny it for any reason, we are giving in to the worst kind of terrorism.

 

Should we all exercise discretion in these highly charged and extremely volatile times? In my opinion, advises Norma, that would be the optimum way to proceed. No one benefits when gas is poured on an already raging inferno.

 

Is Ari correct? Yes.

Is Norma correct? Yes.

 

Would we all get along much better if the personal attacks were left at the door and intelligent and mannered conversation were allowed inside?

 

On that we hope we can all agree. 

______________________________________

This is the latest in the series “Postcards from America – Postcards from Israel,” a collaboration between Zager and Bussel, a foreign correspondent reporting from Israel.

 

Ari Bussel and Norma Zager collaborate both in writing and on the air in a point-counter-point discussion of all things Israel-related.  Together, they have dedicated the past decade to promoting Israel.

 

© Israel Monitor, May, 2015

 

First Published May 11, 2015

Contact:  bussel@me.com

Repost 0
Published by ubiquitous8thoughts - in Politics
write a comment
May 13 2015 4 13 /05 /May /2015 15:01

 

John R. Houk

© May 13, 2015

 

Someone is going to Hell: us or them? I say them! I say that because Islam is permanent war and I want peace. Peace cannot coexist with Islam.

 

Nobody has the political will to off 1.3 BILLION Muslims. Neither do they have the will to wage the ideological war. It’s gonna be a tough sell.” - Dajjal

 

The above Dajjal quote is how I derived the title for two combined comments made in light of the ISIS beheading of 15 Ethiopian Christians located in Libya: “Islamist genocide in Libya proof Christians must arm themselves: Gun law expert”.

 

It has taken me awhile to cross post Dajjal’s largely due to the eye for eye concept or worse excising all adherents to Islam that are committed to the belief in the immutability of the Quran and the measured reverence for the Hadith and Sira. Those writings considered holy by even the most nominal of Muslims explicitly call for violence against non-Muslims who at the very refuse to submit to the superiority of Islam. Add this to the fact that Islam teaches that Mohammed is the perfect man to imitate to be a righteous person. The problem imitating Mo is that he seemed to transform from a wise religious philosopher in his early days in Mecca into a lusting blood thirsty maniac after expulsion to Medina, willing to terminate anyone who refused his prophethood or mock his integrity as a holy man.

 

Purist Muslims (aka Radical Muslim terrorists) today committing atrocities today claim justification for their actions by claiming the example of Mo. Check out these five English translation of the so-called immutable Quran 33: 21:

 

Sahih International: There has certainly been for you in the Messenger of Allah an excellent pattern for anyone whose hope is in Allah and the Last Day and [who] remembers Allah often.

 

Pickthall: Verily in the messenger of Allah ye have a good example for him who looketh unto Allah and the Last Day, and remembereth Allah much.

 

Yusuf Ali: Ye have indeed in the Messenger of Allah a beautiful pattern (of conduct) for any one whose hope is in Allah and the Final Day, and who engages much in the Praise of Allah.

 

Shakir: Certainly you have in the Messenger of Allah an excellent exemplar for him who hopes in Allah and the latter day and remembers Allah much.

 

 

Muhammad Sarwar: The Messenger of God is certainly a good example for those of you who have hope in God and in the Day of Judgment and who remember God very often.

 

Keeping in mind the Quran is not written in numerical order by date, but rather by size – roughly longest to shortest. (See Also cache PDF) TAKE NOTE that Quran 33:21 was recorded from Medina.

 

Dajjal’s point is that as long as Muslims are devoted to Islamic writings and Mohammed, they will continue rise up in violence even if they are utterly defeat in a war. It is encoded in the considered holy writings and the perfect man’s example – Mohammed – to be violent in the HERE and NOW until Islam forces global submission. ERGO the only solution to preventing the constant rise of Muslims doing their duty is the eradication of all the adherents to all of Islam as if that religion of divine origin in a revelation to a chosen man.

 

Dajjal’s thoughts also occurred among European Christian adherents who grew weary of the constant Muslim violence in medieval days. Hence the Crusades began (See Also HERE) with people capable of the same violence as Muslims. The sad truth about the Crusades is that atrocities were committed contrary to the Revelation of Jesus Christ. Another sad truth is that Muslims from the days of their prophet Mo right on to the present are committing atrocities IN ACCORDANCE to their Allah’s revelation to Mo.

 

I’ve had my share of just turn Dar al-Islam into a nuked sea of glass from September 11, 2001 right on through these days of ISIS and Boko Haram and lesser Islamic terrorism of notoriety. BUT after periods of cooling off I have to realize that blanket eradication of all Muslim devoted to their belief of the immutability of Islamic theopolitical Islamic doctrine is contrary to the Great Commission of Jesus Christ. Here are four Gospel (Good News) examples of it being God’s will that all humanity are Saved in Christ if they only believe in the Risen Savior:

 

Matthew 28:18-20 (NKJV)

18 And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. 19 Go therefore[a] and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” Amen.[b]

 

Mark 16:15-16 (NKJV)

15 And He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. 16 He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.

 

Luke 24:46-49 (NKJV)

46 Then He said to them, “Thus it is written, and thus it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise[a] from the dead the third day, 47 and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. 48 And you are witnesses of these things. 49 Behold, I send the Promise of My Father upon you; but tarry in the city of Jerusalem[b]until you are endued with power from on high.”

 

John 20:21-23; 30-31 (NKJV)

21 So Jesus said to them again, “Peace to you! As the Father has sent Me, I also send you.” 22 And when He had said this, He breathed on them, and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit. 23 If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.”

 

30 And truly Jesus did many other signs in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book; 31 but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name. (New King James Version)

 

That rules out the Muslim Solution a la Hitler’s Jewish Solution.

 

So how in the world does Western Civilization eliminate Muslim lunacy without committing genocide? There is an idea that Dajjal also propagates, yet that idea might still be a bit distasteful to Americans who correctly take a stand with America’s Constitutional Bill of Rights. In particular the First Amendment’s proclamation as basic human right to Religious Freedom (See Also HERE), Free Press, a Free Press, Right to Assemble and to petition government with grievances without fear reprisals. Dajjal’s idea is a full scale government assault on the reality of Islam with psychological warfare.

 

A psychological warfare assault on Islam goes against the grain of Religious Freedom and Free Speech among Americans. HOWEVER, beginning such an assault would be a great secular path that Biblical Christians can support that is not outright genocide.

 

For sure as soon as a psych-assault begins, Western Civilization will receive the traditional Muslim pushback that will include the cry, “die kafir” (infidel non-Muslim). If America remains sincere about exposing Islam with psych-warfare, the Muslim response will also lead to military action in turn. Such military action should lead to a WWII-style rules of engagement (ROE). Those ROE should lead to the utter defeat of any Muslim military capability followed by psychological warfare in a now occupied land. This means the inclusion of the suppression of the theopolitical nature of Islam even if it means arresting every mullah, imam, mufti and/or any religious title that refuses to denounce the Quran-Medina inspired theopolitical ideology including in the Hadith and Sira.

 

As a Christian I am no fan of the entirety of Islam. It is my opinion that the Quran is an antichrist promoting religious book. I haven’t read enough the Quran to know if the antichrist surahs are in both the Mecca and Medina portions of the Quran. I am not going to take the time now to make that exploration. As an American I am willing to tolerate a transformed (as opposed to Islamic purist reform) Islam in which the peaceful allah-searching components of the Quran, Hadith and Sira become preeminent. As long as Islam demands a death to the kafir mentality, especially Americans and Jews, I support harsh suppression.

 

Well, that’s my two-cents. Below are the sentiments of Dajjal – that I must remind you comes shortly after the mass beheading of Christians – which I do have a tough time agreeing with completely, but perhaps partially.

 

JRH 5/13/15

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

Destroy Islam for Western Culture’s Survival

 

By Dajjal

Derived from Comment Dates:

April 20, 2015 at 7:15 PM and April 20, 2015 at 9:28 PM

 

Isdamnic genocide is not soluble by individual armed resistance. Where Allah’s writ runs and Muslimes outnumber Christians; the mob will prevail.

 

Where Allah’s writ does not run, the laws generally preclude individual ownership and carrying of firearms. Jews and Christians are sitting ducks in Europe; forbidden by law to defend themselves.

 

While some American States issue concealed carry permits, those incidents are rare here in the USA. Most of the plots have involved suicide bombings, in which cases a pistol would not be useful.

 

Collective action is required: our government, in alliance with other free nations, must eradicate Islam from the face of the earth.

 

When the impatient zealots of ISIS swarm Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal, Iran gets their own or the Chechens take over Russia’s arsenal, it will be too late and all hope will be lost.

 

Kinetics alone will not solve the problem. The war of ideas alone will not solve the problem. A combination is required.

 

Our government must wage psychological warfare by creating a docudrama based on the Sira. The docudrama must be backed up with shorter productions detailing individual incidents. Those must be distributed globally in multiple languages.

 

By exposing the Ummah to the awful truth about Moe the seeds of doubt will be planted to sprout into apostasy.

 

The hard line true believers who will not apostatize must be ushered into Hell. Off the Imam or Mullah, then bomb and strafe his funeral procession.

 

Wholesale slaughter is needed. Wherever ISIS and like groups are gathered, drop ordinance of sufficient magnitude to wipe them out without regard to collateral damage. Be proactive: do it to them before they do you in. We see videos with long armored columns which should have been strafed by A10s. Kill one fly and one hundred will come to his funeral.

 

Someone is going to Hell: us or them? I say them! I say that because Islam is permanent war and I want peace. Peace cannot coexist with Islam.

 

Nobody has the political will to off 1.3 BILLION Muslims. Neither do they have the will to wage the ideological war. It’s gonna be a tough sell.

 

Islam is like a wasp hive: swat one and they all come after you. Offensive jihad is fard al-kifaya. When we retaliate, its fard al-ayn [Blog Editor: I didn’t have clue what the heck these two fards meant. HERE is a simple explanation from OU of all places and HERE is an explanation a purist Islamic website.]; including Muslimas [Blog Editor: Muslim women – typically younger, hip and/or socially outgoing – Urban Dictionary, wiseGEEK and WhatIsIslamAbout.com], children and sheikhs.

 

Muslims cannot be defeated without destroying their iman. While they [i.e. the Muslim dedication to the concept of **Iman] believe in Allah, his imperatives, threat & promise, they will never cease attacking for long.

 

[** Blog Editor: “Iman” as a concept - Iman is generally outlined using the six articles of faith:

 

  1. Belief in Allah

 

  1. Belief in the Angels

 

  1. Belief in Divine Books

 

  1. Belief in the Prophets

 

  1. Belief in the Day of Judgment

 

  1. Belief in Allah's predestination

 

Of these, the first five are mentioned together in the Qur'an[9] and by Muhammad, while including a corollary of belief in Allah – the good and evil of fate ordained by God – has referred to all six together in the following manner in the Hadith of Gabriel:

 

"Iman is that you believe in God and His Angels and His Books and His Messengers and the Hereafter and the good and evil fate [ordained by your God]."[10] (Iman (concept): The Six articles of Islamic faith; Wikipedia; page was last modified on 18 April 2015, at 16:38.)]

 

 

They think Allah is God and Moe was Al-Insan al-kamil [Blog Editor: “al-insan al-kamil” is the Islamic doctrine of the perfect man of which Mohammed is the highest example – HERE and HERE] Unless someone shows them that Allah is Satan and Moe was a murdering, lecherous pedophile and false prophet, we cannot win this war.

_____________________________

The Muslim Solution

John R. Houk

© May 13, 2015

____________________________

Destroy Islam for Western Culture’s Survival

 

Dajjal’s post is edited. Some by spellcheck and some by common sense. Slang humorously created by Dajjal remains intact. Any text or links enclosed by brackets are by the Editor.

 

© Dajjal

Repost 0
Published by ubiquitous8thoughts - in Counterjihad
write a comment
May 12 2015 3 12 /05 /May /2015 11:26

Senator James Lankford and Rep. Jim Bridentine

 

Congressman  & Senator from Oklahoma

 

By John R. Houk

© May 12, 2015

 

I participated in one of those mass emails to Congress recently in which an email was sent to my Oklahoma Representative from District One and my Okie Senators. I believe the mass emailing was about tax reform. Dog gone it, I can’t remember the facilitator of the email was. I just remember a payment was not necessary and a contribution would have been appreciated. I participate and didn’t think anything further about my participation.

 

Here’s the thing though yesterday I received a response from Rep. Jim Bridenstine. Incidentally the Republican I supported in the First District 2012 Primary as Tea Party Conservative who defeated Republican incumbent John Sullivan. And check it out – Sullivan was a standard Oklahoma Republican. However, as a Congressman, Sullivan towed the GOP marching order line. Bridenstine won in 2012 campaigning on a Less Government, Fairer Taxation and dump Obamacare. And of course Bridenstine won reelection in 2014.

 

Senator James Lankford, my Republican Senator responded today (5/12/15) to the mass email on tax reform. Frankly I enjoyed both their responses even though I suspect they were form letter responses canned according to constituent questions. Since I liked the responses that was some good canning.

 

JRH 5/12/15

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

Regarding Tax Reform Email

 

By Rep. Jim Bridenstine (R-OK District 1)

Sent: 5/11/2015 4:21 PM

Congress Website: http://bridenstine.house.gov/

 

Thank you for contacting me regarding tax reform.  I appreciate your opinion and value your input on this important issue.

As you may know, in the 113th Congress I introduced House Joint Resolution 104 to repeal the 16th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and eliminate the IRS. The 16th Amendment allows the federal government to impose the income tax.  There are viable alternative plans for raising revenue fairly to support constitutionally enumerated functions of the federal government that don't require the 16th Amendment.  The current system is broken beyond repair and it's time for the United States to move beyond our dated tax structure.

Our current tax code is an unfair system which discourages investment, innovation and entrepreneurship.  Our income tax has become so convoluted that even professionals have a hard time understanding its mechanics.  The system is subject to endless manipulation by individuals and groups seeking to gain even the slightest monetary advantage.

The 4th Amendment to the Constitution guarantees, "The right of people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures." The 16th Amendment effectively negates the 4th Amendment.  Now is the time to repeal the 16th Amendment and eliminate the IRS.

If successful, the repeal of the 16th Amendment will eliminate the personal and corporate income tax, the estate and gift taxes, and taxes on investment earnings at the federal level.  Personally, I am in favor of replacing it with the Fair Tax, but I believe that supporters of other alternatives to our broken tax system can also get behind this effort.

 

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 

 

Please click the following links to follow me on Facebook or Twitter, and click here to sign up for my E-Newsletter.

 

++++

Response from Senator James Lankford

 

Sent by Senator James Lankford (R-OK)

Sent: 5/12/2015 9:31 AM

Senate.Gov Website: http://www.lankford.senate.gov/

 

Thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts and concerns on the IRS targeting scandal and the vote to hold Lois Lerner in Contempt of Congress.  I served as a member of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform for four years and was actively involved with this investigation from the beginning. I appreciate the time you took to engage yourself in this important matter.

 

On April 10, 2014, after numerous hearings, the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee voted to hold Ms. Lerner in Contempt of Congress.  On May 7, 2014, the bill to hold her in contempt passed the House in a bipartisan vote of 231-187. I supported both measures.

 

I also supported H. Res. 565, a resolution calling on the Attorney General to appoint a Special Counsel to investigate IRS targeting of conservative groups seeking tax-exempt status.  In addition to 224 Republicans, 26 Democrats voted in favor of the resolution, which passed by a vote of 250 to 168.

 

On April 1, 2015, the Justice Department announced they will not seek criminal charges against Ms. Lerner. In a letter written to Speaker John Boehner, Ronald Machen, former U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, said a criminal case would not be presented to the grand jury over Ms. Lerner's refusal to testify before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

  

Justice Department attorneys determined that Ms. Lerner did not waive her Fifth Amendment right during her opening statement of general claims of innocence on May 22, 2013.  Because she exercised her constitutional right, she cannot be prosecuted for contempt.

 

You might be interested to know the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration indicated in congressional testimony on February 27, 2015, that there could be criminal wrongdoing in the disappearance of IRS emails related to the Lerner case.  Additionally, on April 2, 2015, a federal judge ordered the IRS to turn over any lists of potentially targeted groups.

 

I am disappointed but not surprised by the Justice Department's decision not to take up the contempt case.  The IRS still owes every American taxpayer the truth about whether or not the IRS specifically targeted Americans seeking tax-exempt status based on their political beliefs. I will continue to seek the facts, so we can ensure this type of misconduct does not happen again.

 

Please feel free to contact me again via email at www.lankford.senate.gov for more information about my work in the United States Senate for all of us...

 

In God We Trust,

 

James Lankford
United States Senator
___________________________

Bridenstine & Lankford Tax Reform Emails

By John R. Houk

© May 12, 2015

_________________________

Regarding Tax Reform Email

 

216 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
(202) 225-2211

 

About Rep. Jim Bridenstine

 

Congressman Jim Bridenstine was elected in 2012 to represent Oklahoma’s First District, which covers Washington, Tulsa, Wagoner Counties plus portions of Rogers & Creek Counties. Bridenstine serves on the House Armed Services Committee and the Science, Space and Technology Committee.

From the start, Bridenstine has been widely recognized in the House for his integrity, commitment to principles, and willingness to uphold the rule of law. He has become an effective member of Congress by focusing on three specific areas: National Security, Economic Freedom, and Constitutional Integrity. Jim supports moving toward a balanced budget through spending control, tax reform, and financial measures and policies promoting free markets.

Bridenstine has focused on the elimination of Obamacare and reform of laws and regulations that present a huge burden on the economy. He has introduced legislation and supported a strong national defense, religious freedom, protection of life, free speech and restoration of the balance of power within the branches of the federal government consistent with the Constitution.

 

On April 1st, Bridenstine achieved a remarkable accomplishment and became the READ THE REST

__________________________

Response from Senator James Lankford

 

About Senator James Lankford

 

Senator James Lankford is committed to protecting our freedom, demanding an efficient and transparent federal government, and ensuring our nation remains the world leader.

 

Addressing our national debt and restoring a responsible federal budget is among James’ highest priorities in the Senate. He remains focused on eliminating duplicative and excessive federal regulations that diminish people, suffocate business and drive manufacturing overseas. From regulations that increase the cost of living to the oppressive regulations on consumer lending that make it hard for working people to build credit, Senator Lankford fights for opportunity in Oklahoma and our nation. He believes that empowering families, individual people and private businesses will create jobs, protect our values, and provide the best solution to grow our economy.

 

After serving four years in the U.S. House of Representatives, James was elected to the U.S. Senate on November 4, 2014, to finish the remaining two years of retiring Senator Tom Coburn's term, which will end January 2017. James serves on the Committee on Appropriations, the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, the Select Committee on Intelligence, and the Indian Affairs Committee.  Within the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, he is the Chairman of the Subcommittee on Regulatory Affairs and Federal Management.  Additionally, James serves on the Senate Republican Whip Team for the 114th Congress.

 

Encouraging personal faith, committed families, practical education and the critical need for everyone to invest in READ THE REST

 

 

 

Repost 0
Published by ubiquitous8thoughts - in Politics
write a comment
May 11 2015 2 11 /05 /May /2015 15:45

 

The Leftist paradigm to reinvent America different from the intentions of America’s Founding Fathers:

 

The most effective weapons of assault are divide and conquer, and distraction. (From a Fix Bayonets post)

 

Danny Jeffrey has presented a brilliant post which he attributes as submitted by Dee Fatouros. The thing is this post has a lot of the flavor of Danny’s work so I am a bit uncertain if this is the entire work of Dee Fatouros or if Danny Jeffrey collaborated in the content. Frankly it is irrelevant if this post is collaborative or the work of a sole author. Although essay wise the wording may be lengthy, the journey is quite concise in its layout.

 

This essay is entitled “PLANNED CHAOS PART V, THE POLITICAL INSTITUTION”. I originally wrote that I haven’t examined or did a search on Fix Bayonets to see if parts one through four are. However in trying to checkout some info on Dee Fatouros I discover that Danny Jeffrey placed all parts on a Blogger page with a Fix Bayonets look: DeeFatourosWorkUpSite. In your own investigations of the potential collapse of the America we know, it might behoove you to find parts one through four in your own research.

 

The essay begins with the foundation of a great civics lesson on American politics from inception to the present. THEN the author (or authors) explains how the American Left with George Soros as the current Leftist puppeteer deceptive pulling the strings of politics and money to transform America to a member of global totalitarian One World Government under the paradigm of Leftist altruism that is absolutely void of real Liberty and independent entrepreneurship.

 

JRH 5/11/15

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

PLANNED CHAOS PART V, THE POLITICAL INSTITUTION

 

Submitted By Dee Fatouros

May 11, 2015 6:39 AM 

Fix Bayonets

 

Political Institutions:

Institutions that pertain to the governance of a society, its formal distribution of authority, its use of force, and its relationships to other societies and political units. The state, an important political institution in modern societies, is the apparatus of governance over a particular territory.

 

Here is a rundown of the various forms of government, with definitions provided by "The World Factbook."

 

Absolute monarchy - a form of government where the monarch rules unhindered, i.e., without any laws, constitution or legally organized opposition.

 

Anarchy - a condition of lawlessness or political disorder brought about by the absence of governmental authority.

 

Authoritarian - a form of government in which state authority is imposed onto many aspects of citizens' lives.

 

Commonwealth - a nation, state or other political entity founded on law and united by a compact of the people for the common good.

 

Communist - a system of government in which the state plans and controls the economy and a single -- often authoritarian -- party holds power; state controls are imposed with the elimination of private ownership of property or capital while claiming to make progress toward a higher social order in which all goods are equally shared by the people (i.e., a classless society).

 

Confederacy (Confederation) - a union by compact or treaty between states, provinces or territories that creates a central government with limited powers; the constituent entities retain supreme authority over all matters except those delegated to the central government.

 

Constitutional - a government by or operating under an authoritative document (constitution) that sets forth the system of fundamental laws and principles that determines the nature, functions and limits of that government.


Constitutional democracy - a form of government in which the sovereign power of the people is spelled out in a governing constitution.


Constitutional monarchy - a system of government in which a monarch is guided by a constitution whereby his/her rights, duties, and responsibilities are spelled out in written law or by custom.


Democracy - a form of government in which the supreme power is retained by the people, but which is usually exercised indirectly through a system of representation and delegated authority periodically renewed.


Democratic republic - a state in which the supreme power rests in the body of citizens entitled to vote for officers and representatives responsible to them.


Dictatorship - a form of government in which a ruler or small clique wield absolute power (not restricted by a constitution or laws).


Ecclesiastical - a government administrated by a church.


Emirate - similar to a monarchy or sultanate, a government in which the supreme power is in the hands of an emir (the ruler of a Muslim state); the emir may be an absolute overlord or a sovereign with constitutionally limited authority.


Federal (Federation) - a form of government in which sovereign power is formally divided -- usually by means of a constitution -- between a central authority and a number of constituent regions (states, colonies or provinces) so that each region retains some management of its internal affairs; differs from a confederacy in that the central government exerts influence directly upon both individuals as well as upon the regional units.


Federal republic - a state in which the powers of the central government are restricted and in which the component parts (states, colonies, or provinces) retain a degree of self-government; ultimate sovereign power rests with the voters who chose their governmental representatives.


Islamic republic - a particular form of government adopted by some Muslim states; although such a state is, in theory, a theocracy, it remains a republic, but its laws are required to be compatible with the laws of Islam.


Maoism - the theory and practice of Marxism-Leninism developed in China by Mao Zedong (Mao Tse-tung), which states that a continuous revolution is necessary if the leaders of a communist state are to keep in touch with the people.


Marxism - the political, economic and social principles espoused by 19th century economist Karl Marx; he viewed the struggle of workers as a progression of historical forces that would proceed from a class struggle of the proletariat (workers) exploited by capitalists (business owners), to a socialist "dictatorship of the proletariat," to, finally, a classless society -- Communism.


Marxism-Leninism - an expanded form of communism developed by Vladimir Lenin from doctrines of Karl Marx; Lenin saw imperialism as the final stage of capitalism and shifted the focus of workers' struggle from developed to underdeveloped countries.


Monarchy - a government in which the supreme power is lodged in the hands of a monarch who reigns over a state or territory, usually for life and by hereditary right; the monarch may be either a sole absolute ruler or a sovereign - such as a king, queen or prince - with constitutionally limited authority.


Oligarchy - a government in which control is exercised by a small group of individuals whose authority generally is based on wealth or power.


Parliamentary democracy - a political system in which the legislature (parliament) selects the government - a prime minister, premier or chancellor along with the cabinet ministers - according to party strength as expressed in elections; by this system, the government acquires a dual responsibility: to the people as well as to the parliament.


Parliamentary government (Cabinet-Parliamentary government) - a government in which members of an executive branch (the cabinet and its leader - a prime minister, premier or chancellor) are nominated to their positions by a legislature or parliament, and are directly responsible to it; this type of government can be dissolved at will by the parliament (legislature) by means of a no-confidence vote or the leader of the cabinet may dissolve the parliament if it can no longer function.


Parliamentary monarchy - a state headed by a monarch who is not actively involved in policy formation or implementation (i.e., the exercise of sovereign powers by a monarch in a ceremonial capacity); true governmental leadership is carried out by a cabinet and its head - a prime minister, premier or chancellor - who are drawn from a legislature (parliament).


Presidential - a system of government where the executive branch exists separately from a legislature (to which it is generally not accountable).


Republic - a representative democracy in which the people's elected deputies (representatives), not the people themselves, vote on legislation.


Socialism - a government in which the means of planning, producing and distributing goods is controlled by a central government that theoretically seeks a more just and equitable distribution of property and labor; in actuality, most socialist governments have ended up being no more than dictatorships over workers by a ruling elite.


Sultanate - similar to a monarchy, a government in which the supreme power is in the hands of a sultan (the head of a Muslim state); the sultan may be an absolute ruler or a sovereign with constitutionally limited authority.


Theocracy - a form of government in which a Deity is recognized as the supreme civil ruler, the Deity's laws are interpreted by ecclesiastical authorities (bishops, mullahs, etc.); a government subject to religious authority.


Totalitarian - a government that seeks to subordinate the individual to the state by controlling not only all political and economic matters, but also the attitudes, values and beliefs of its population.

 

The excerpts from the following article are detailed at the end with a link, but they are all part of the same excellent overview.

A SHORT GUIDE TO THE AMERICAN POLITICAL SYSTEM

 

The United States is - by size of electorate - the second largest democracy on the globe (India is the largest and Indonesia comes third) and the most powerful nation on earth, politically, economically and militarily, but its political system is in many important respects unlike any other in the world. This essay then was written originally to inform non-Americans as to how the American political system works.
 


What has been striking, however, is how many Americans - especially young Americans - have found the essay useful and insightful. There is considerable evidence that many Americans know and understand little about the political system of their own country - possibly more than is the case with any other developed democratic nation.



In the U.S., the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) tests what American students are learning. It has found that the two worst subjects for American students are civics and American history. One NAEP survey found that only 7% of eighth graders (children aged 13-14) could describe the three branches of government.



On a recent trip to the United States, I was eating cereal for breakfast and found that the whole of the reverse side of the cereal packet was devoted to a short explanation of the executive, legislative and judicial branches of the American government. I find it hard to imagine that many democratic nations would feel it necessary to explain such a subject in such a format.



HISTORICAL BACKGROUND:


To understand any country's political system, it is helpful to know something of the history of the nation and the background to the creation of the (latest) constitution. But this is a fundamental necessity in the case of the American political system. This is because the Constitution of the United States is so different from those of other nations and because that Constitution is, in all material respects, the same document as it was over two centuries ago...

 


THE CONSTITUTION:


Unlike Britain but like most nation states, the American political system is clearly defined by basic documents. The Declaration of Independence of 1776 and the Constitution of 1789 form the foundations of the United States federal government. The Declaration of Independence establishes the United States as an independent political entity, while the Constitution creates the basic structure of the federal government...



Further information on the thinking expressed in the Constitution can be found in the Federalist Papers which are a series of 85 articles and essays published in 1787-1788 promoting the ratification of the Constitution...



THE PRESIDENCY:


What is the Presidency?


The President is the head of the executive branch of the federal government of the United States. He - so far, the position has always been held by a man - is both the head of state and the head of government, as well as the military commander-in-chief and chief diplomat. He presides over the executive branch of the government, a vast organisation numbering about four million people, including one million active-duty military personnel...



THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES:


What is the House of Representatives?


The House of Representatives is the lower chamber in the bicameral legislature known collectively as Congress. The founders of the United States intended the House to be the politically dominant entity in the federal system and, in the late 18th and early 19th centuries, the House served as the primary forum for political debate. However, subsequently the Senate has been the dominant body...



THE SENATE:


What is the Senate?


The Senate is the upper chamber in the bicameral legislature known collectively as Congress. The original intention of the authors of the US Constitution was that the Senate should be a regulatory group, less politically dominant than the House. However, since the mid-19th century, the Senate has been the dominant chamber and indeed today it is perhaps the most powerful upper house of any legislative body in the world...



THE SUPREME COURT:


What is the Supreme Court?


The Supreme Court is the highest court in the land. Originally it had five members but over time this number has increased. Since 1869, it has consisted of nine Justices: the Chief Justice of the United States and eight Associate Justices. They have equal weight when voting on a case and the Chief Justice has no casting vote or power to instruct colleagues. Decisions are made by a simple majority.



Below the Supreme Court, there is a system of Courts of Appeal, and, below these courts, there are District Courts. Together, these three levels of courts represent the federal judicial system.



POLITICAL PARTIES & ELECTIONS:


To an extent quite extraordinary in democratic countries, the American political system is dominated by two political parties: the Democratic Party and the Republican Party (often known as the 'Grand Old Party' or GOP). These are very old and very stable parties - the Democrats go back to 1824 and the Republicans were founded in 1854.



In illustrations and promotional material, the Democratic Party is often represented as a donkey, while the Republican Party is featured as an elephant. The origin of these symbols is the political cartoonist Thomas Nast who came up with them in 1870 and 1874 respectively.



The main reason for the dominance of these two parties is that - like most other Anglo-Saxon countries (notably Britain) - the electoral system is 'first past the post' or simple majority which, combined with the large voter size of the constituencies in the House and (even more) the Senate, ensures that effectively only two parties can play. The other key factor is the huge influence of money in the American electoral system. Since effectively a candidate can spend any amount he can raise (not allowed in many other countries) and since one can buy broadcasting time (again not allowed in many countries), the US can only 'afford' two parties or, to put it another way, candidates of any other party face a formidable financial barrier to entry...



THE FEDERAL SYSTEM:


Understanding the federal nature of the United States is critical to appreciating the complexities of the American political system.


Most political systems are created top-down. A national system of government is constructed and a certain amount of power is released to lower levels of government. The unique history of the United States means that, in this case, the political system was created bottom-up.



First, some 240 years ago, there were were 13 autonomous states who, following the War of Independence against the British, created a system of government in which the various states somewhat reluctantly ceded power to the federal government. Around a century later, the respective authority of the federal government and the individual states was an issue at the heart of the Civil War when there was a bloody conflict over who had the right to determine whether slavery was or was not permissible. With the exception of Switzerland, no other Western democracy diffuses power to the same degree as America.


So today the powers of the federal government remain strictly limited by the Constitution - the critical Tenth Amendment of 1791 - which leaves a great deal of authority to the individual states.



Each state has an executive, a legislature and a judiciary.


The head of the executive is the Governor who is directly elected.


The legislature consists of a Senate and a House of Representatives (the exception is the state of Nebraska which has a unicameral system).


The judiciary consists of a state system of courts.


The 50 states are divided into counties (parishes in Louisiana and boroughs in Alaska). Each county has its court.



Although the Constitution prescribes precisely when Presidential and Congressional elections will be held, the dates and times of state and local elections are determined by state governments. Therefore there is a plethora of elections in the United States and, at almost all times, an election is being held somewhere in the country. State and local elections, like federal elections, use the 'first past the post' system of election.



The debate about federalism in the US is far from over. There are those who argue for a stronger role for the federal government and there are advocates of locating more power at the state level. The recent rise of the electorally-successful Tea Party movement owes a good deal to the view that the federal government has become too dominant, too intrusive and too profligate.



Meanwhile many states - especially those west of the Rockies - have what has been called "the fourth arm of government": this is the ballot or referendum initiative. This enables a policy question to be put to the electorate as a result of the collection of a certain number of signatures or the decision of the state legislation. Over the last century, some 3,000 such initiatives have been conducted - in some cases (such as California) with profound results.



RECENT TRENDS:


In all political systems, there is a disconnect between the formal arrangements, as set out in the constitution and relevant laws, and the informal arrangements, as occurs in practice. Arguably, in the United States this disconnect is sharper than in most other democratic systems because:



The US Constitution is an old one (late 18th century) whereas most countries have had several constitutions with the current one typically being a 20th century creation.



The US Constitution is relatively immutable so it is very difficult to change the provisions to reflect the reforms that have come about over time from the pressure of events.



Since the US adopted its Constitution, the US has become the pre-eminent world economic and political power which has brought about major changes in how the Presidency operates, most especially in the international sphere.



What this means is that, in the last century and most especially since the end of the Second World War, the reality of how the American political system operates has changed quite fundamentally in terms which are not always evident from the terms of the Constitution (and indeed some might argue are in some respects in contravention of the Constitution). The main changes are as follows:



The balance of power between the Congress and the President has shifted significantly in favour of the President. This is evident in the domestic sphere through practices like 'impoundment' (when money is taken from the purpose intended by Congress and allocated to another purpose favoured by the President) and in the international sphere through refusal to invoke the War Powers Resolution in spite of major military invasions. Different terms for this accretion of power by the Presidency are "the unitary executive" and "the imperial presidency".



The impact of private funding of political campaigns and of lobbyists and special interest groups in political decision making have increased considerably. Candidates raise their own money for campaigns, there is effectively no limit on the money that can be spent in such campaigns (thanks to what is called super Political Action Committees), and the levels of expenditure - especially in the presidential primaries and election proper - have risen astronomically... this has led to some observers describing the American political system as a plutocracy, since it is effectively controlled by private finance from big businesses, which expect certain policies and practices to follow from the candidates they are funding, and big donors, who often expect preferment such as an ambassadorship from a candidate elected as President.



There has been a growth of what is called "pork barrel" politics through the use of "earmarks"...  appropriations are achieved through "earmarks" which can be found both in legislation (also called "hard earmarks" or "hardmarks") and in the text of Congressional committee reports (also called "soft earmarks" or "softmarks").


The nature of political debate in the United States has become markedly more partisan and bitter... US domestic politics has become polarized and tribal. As a result, the political culture is often more concerned with satisfying the demands of the political 'base' rather than attempting to achieve a national consensus.



One final trend worth noting is the frequency of the same family to provide members of Congress. Low polling in elections, the high cost of running for election, and the focus on the individual more than the party all mean that a well-known name can work successfully for a candidate. Everyone is familiar with the Kennedys, Clintons and Bushs in American politics but, in 2014, there are no less than 37 members of Congress who have a relative who has served in the legislature....continue.



Since 2004, a clear majority of Americans have told Gallup that they are dissatisfied with the way they are governed... This disillusionment is reflected in the falling number of Americans who even bother to vote....



The debate about the effectiveness of the US political system is a part of the wider debate about whether or not the United States is in relative decline on the world stage. In his book "Time To Start Thinking: America And The Spectre Of Decline" [for my review click here], Edward Luce writes: "Sometimes it seems Americans are engaged in some kind of collusion in which voters pretend to elect their lawmakers and lawmakers pretend to govern. This, in some ways, is America's core problem: the more America postpones any coherent response to the onset of relative decline, the more difficult the politics are likely to get."


To read the entire presentation, go here.  

 

Enter the primary enabler of the movement to accelerate destruction of the American ethos:



George Soros is one of the most malicious individuals on the face of planet Earth. He uses his immense fortune to undermine the political and financial systems of nations not only to line his pockets but to remake the world to his liking. He has used his wealth and influence to build a lethal network cloaked in social justice to fuel his agenda. Once America has been brought to its knees, nothing will stand in the way of the globalist agenda. His biography is far too lengthy to discuss in this writing, but go here to read much more.

 

From The Shadow Party And The Shadow Government

 

If George Soros were a lone billionaire, or if the Shadow Party consisted of a few disgruntled billionaires, these facts and achievements would not be so ominous. But the Shadow Party is far more than a reflection of the prejudices of one special interest or one passing generation. The Shadow Party has united the forces of the radical and “liberal” left while expelling moderates from the Democratic Party coalition. The Shadow Party is the current incarnation of a socialist movement that has been at war with the free market economy and the political system based on liberty and individual rights for more than two hundred years. It is a movement that has learned to conceal its ultimate goal, which is a totalitarian state, in the seductive rhetoric of “progressivism” and “social justice.” But its determination to equalize outcomes, its zeal for state power and for government control as the solution to social problems, and its antagonism to America as a defender of freedom are the tell-tale signs of a radical movement whose agenda is to change fundamentally and unalterably the way Americans have lived.  

 

For further detail on exactly how he and others have been working for decades to change the face of the American political system, go here and here. The information is both detailed and extensive in the links connected with this section, but well worth the time since they are an excellent illustration of the stealth attack on America. After reading the material, one will no longer need to ask, "How did we get here?"



The most effective weapons of assault are divide and conquer, and distraction.



The strategy of pitting various categories of the citizenry against each other is a most effective emotional technique. Minorities, women, and those comprising the LGBT aggregation are the favorite targets in the current attack in which to implant a narrative of discrimination and victimization by the created straw man of  a white, male dominated, capitalist America.



Take a grain of truth and build upon it until it becomes an an iron clad falsified structure with a siren call to the targeted groups. When such a dynamic is set into motion, it is nearly impossible to counter because currents of such beliefs often flicker below the surface and, in difficult times, can be easily ignited often leading to riots and violence between the different classes of victims as well as against the perceived enemy. The violence, if stoked long enough and hard enough by those seeking to destroy the system, could eventually lead to martial law and an outright totalitarian usurpation of governing power.



Such a takeover would be long and bloody and best avoided by the power masters. It would be far better and more easily managed if a state of collective anomie could be induced resulting in the despair of the national psyche leaving it vulnerable to such promises as "Hope And Change", world peace (UN government), economic security (redistribution of wealth), a classless society where all are equal, (all are equally poor due to the elimination of entrepreneurship) and discrimination (free speech) is a crime.



The above is precisely what has been happening to America over past century via the gradual erosion of our major social institutions. The pillars of our culture have been infested with the corrosive elements of political mendacity as well as disinterest of the electorate, educationally induced intellectual laziness, spiritual rot, and the false promise of a benign central governmental structure that will do everything in its power to care for the cultivated dependence and/or the hedonism of its citizenry.



Total control by a world government has been inching along and is now going full throttle, unnoticed by the collective I.Q. due to decades of conditioning. Great civilizations have risen and fallen due to the ambitions of the ever increasing totalitarian, expansionist, and expensive tendencies of the governing power. The unawareness and often complicity of the citizenry contributed to the downward spirals because the governed were not fully attentive to the true meaning of the events unfolding before their eyes.

Between a sense of false victimization and bread and circuses lavished upon certain groups via the largess of the central government's bleeding of the taxpayers, America will eventually collapse. The set up will then be complete for the UN to step in. A stifling darkness will descend upon humankind until the dormant embers of awareness, safely secured by their guardians, slowly become nascent and begin to glow once again. We must be those guardians and pass our precious treasure to future generations so that they will be ready to "Fix Bayonets" for the combat to come.

 

SHARE this essay...


This feature will allow you to share the above essay to your timeline, a friend's timeline, a group, to a page you manage, or in a private message. It also allows you to leave a comment about the essay. If that comment is meant for me please use the comment section below.

Suggested Reading...

 

Planned Chaos--The Relentless Undermining Of Our Social Institutions Part One


Planned Chaos--The Relentless Undermining Of Our Social Institutions Part Two


Planned Chaos, Part III, The Attack On Our Religious Institutions


Planned Chaos Part IV, The Economy


The Captivity Of Illusion

_____________________________

Some see, few know, many choose to wander aimlessly in a fog, devoid of sunlight. I seek the light of day and leave the others to their chosen realm of ignorance. They are the ones who have brought this great nation down. I write only for the benefit of those who possess the courage required to restore our birthright. – Danny Jeffrey

 

VISIT FIX BAYONETS LIBRARY

 

 

Repost 0
Published by ubiquitous8thoughts - in Politics Conspiracy Theory
write a comment
May 11 2015 2 11 /05 /May /2015 09:16

 

John R. Houk

© May 11, 2015

 

“ABORTION”

 

If you are a Pro-Life Biblically minded Christian, that word is synonymous with profanity.

 

Do you know who Amy Grant is?

 

My Born Again experience began in the late ‘70s. That means as far as my music tastes went, I moved from rock-n-roll to contemporary Christian music. Do you know who became a contemporary Christian music superstar in the decade of the ‘80s? Yup, Amy Grant.

 

Now that I am nearing my 60s in age, I am uncertain how popular Amy Grant is in the contemporary Christian music fan base today. In the 1980s however, a Grant concert was a very desirable ticket to have in hand. On a personal level I have seen and heard Amy Grant three separate times – all in Tulsa OK. The first was a free concert at Tulsa’s Mohawk Park sponsored by a local Christian radio station. At the time she was starting out in a Christian singing career and she was about 18 years old (I can’t remember if it was 17, 18 or 19). At the time of my second concert experience she was worth paying money to buy a ticket. And my third and favorite concert experience was the Grant ‘Unguarded Tour’ in which many of the Christian tunes were really my style in that they were Christian-Pop rock-n-roll(ish).

 

My favorite tune from that concert and album – “Wise Up”.

 

VIDEO: Wise Up - Amy Grant (1985) Official Video

 

 

Posted by James Culpeper

Posted on Apr 9, 2013

 

Perhaps Ms. Grant should take some advice from her 1985 concert days and “Wise Up”. As much as I still have an endearment of her music (most of which I consider Anointed Christian music), I believe she has made an error in judgment in hooking up with the Gates Foundation – as in Bill & Melinda Gates.

 

Now don’t get me wrong, the Gates Foundation does a lot of good educational wise, especially in the realm of making personal computers available to School Districts that are grossly underfunded.

 

On the other hand the Gates Foundation is supportive of very Left Wing agendas which certainly makes Center-Left to extreme-Left people happy. Old Bill and Melinda deep – deep into everything to do with de-populating the earth under the warped Leftist altruistic idea that an optimum human population will better for both the earth and humanity. The de-population paradigm is part of the elitist cult paradigm behind the United Nations Agenda 21.

 

Except for what was a gaffe not intended for public consumption, Bill Gates gave his de-population sentiments in a very public forum. At one of those crazy TED speeches that elitist Leftists participate in, Gates lectures on his algebraic equation to normalize the earth’s human population as part of an overall Climate Change alert paradigm. The equation is Co2 = P x S x E x C which supposed to have at least one variable be as close to ZERO as possible so that both sides of the equation relate to the numeric value of ZERO. After the variables are given English meanings the equation looks like Carbon Dioxide equals People times Services per/people times Energy output per/service times Carbon released per unit of energy which again to be effective has to at least come close to ZERO. In the Gates TED Lecture the variable indicated that should be closest to ZERO as possible is P for People.

 

VIDEO: Bill Gates Exposed: Funds Chemtrails, and Supports Depopulation 

 

 

Posted by Behind the Truth

Updated on Feb 10, 2012

 

Bill Gates helps fund chemtrails, and supports depopulation. The proof is in the pudding! Read and watch for yourself. Bill Gates is clearly part of the global elite. But does it really surprise you?

Natural News Article:

http://www.naturalnews.com/034906_Bill_Gates_geo-engineering_chemtrails.html

The Guardian Article:

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2012/feb/06/bill-gates-climate-scientists-geoengineering

 

Bill and Melinda Gates have used their vast amounts of cash to avoid criminal investigations and to avoid civil suits against them or the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF). Avoiding criminal and civil convictions is what enables the Gates couple and their Foundation to claim all the data against them are a fabricated lie. And of course the ‘show me the proof’ is a typical Left Wing legal tactic to say I or we did nothing wrong. (Look at BHO and his cadres, Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton as examples of this deceptive Leftist strategy.)

 

Thus most of the places willing to expose BMGF are usually pooh-poohed Conspiracy Theory sources or brave Third World investigative journalists whose findings and data are often maligned as not really reliable sources to trust in an accusation.

 

Here is an example of Bill and Melinda deception in vaccines created to fight diseases or as legitimate contraceptive drugs or devices. In the USA vaccines vilified as having the potential of horrible side effects like perhaps Gardasil (aka the HPV vaccine) or the combination of vaccines relating to various diseases. In the case of Amy Grant teaming up with Bill and Melinda Gates is their belief that sterilization of women in birth-baring years will knock down the world’s population.

 

Melinda Gates: Family Planning Means Sterilizing Women in Developing Nations

              

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) are hosting The London Family Planning Summit (LFPS) where they will purvey [Dead Link] their depopulation and eugenics agenda in the name of women’s rights.

 

 

The Department for International Development (DID) claims that as women die from unwated [sic] preganacy [sic], those victims are prime candidates for their depopulation agenda. By simply controlling their ability to be fertile, the lives of countless women will be saved. Andrew Mitchell, aide to the DID said: “It is a shocking fact that pregnancy can be a death sentence for many girls and women in the developing world. What is all the more devastating is that many of these pregnancies were unintended.”

 

Mitchell is working intimately with Melinda Gates as she makes family planning her “top priority”. Gates hopes that the LSFP and her work with the DID “will galvanize a global movement” to sterilize and enforce contraceptives onto the majority of the under-developed nations populations; thereby ensuring that conception cannot take place.

 

Gates Candid Thoughts on Contraception – CNN

 

...

 

Simply put: the BMGF has classified “unwanted” pregnancies and they are focusing on eventually eliminating this number to reduce the world’s population. Africa, a big focus for the BMGF is being targeted along with Muslim nations. 

 

BMGF has partnered with drug corporations like Shanghai Dahua Pharmaceuticals in China to develop implantable fertility controls that will be used in over 20 developing countries to curb population growth. 

 

 

The focus of BMGF on third world nations is clear. They are the most densely populated areas of the world. Their governments are able to take more advantage of their citizens than in industrialized countries. And they are less educated as to the real dangers posed by these NGOs, the BMGF and makeshift medical clinics where surgical procedures to force sterilize their countrymen and women. (Melinda Gates: Family Planning Means Sterilizing Women in Developing Nations; By Susanne Posel; Activist Post; 7/11/12)

 

Melinda Gates

If Amy Grant believes in using her image coupled with the depopulation agenda image of Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is a good thing while still highlighting the Grant Pro-Life stand, THEN Ms. Grant has not done her homework.

 

Other websites with info on the BMGF depopulation agenda that goes with Climate Change, Geo-Engineering, Chemtrails, etc. (Yeah I know of these websites Conspiracy Theory reputations; nonetheless much of MSM is Left oriented and are not willing to investigate elitist power brokers such as Bill Gates.)
 

http://www.sfaw.org/newswire/2014/11/13/bill-gates-and-the-anti-fertility-agent-in-african-tetanus-vaccine/

 

http://www.naturalnews.com/034906_Bill_Gates_geo-engineering_chemtrails.html

 

http://healthimpactnews.com/2014/bill-melinda-gates-foundation-vaccine-empire-on-trial-in-india/

 

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/a-mass-sterilization-exercise-kenyan-doctors-find-anti-fertility-agent-in-u

 

http://conspiracyanalyst.org/2015/02/17/mass-sterilization-kenyan-doctors-find-anti-fertility-agent-in-un-tetanus-vaccine/

 

http://madscientists.exposed/lab/gates-foundation-language-shell-game-to-conceal-evil-doing/

 

The two Life Site News posts below could almost have been written as single post but as updated info. The second report has a lot of duplicated info from the first but diverges with Amy Grant responses in the forms of a tweet and a facebook post.

 

JRH 5/11/15

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

Christian Singer Amy Grant Partners With Pro-Abortion Gates Foundation

 

http://lifenews.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/amygrant.jpg

By STEVEN ERTELT 

May 6, 2015

Life News

 

Popular Christian singer Amy Grant is pro-life on the issue of abortion, but she recently announced she is teaming up with one of the most pro-abortion foundations that shuttled millions towards abortions and abortion businesses.

 

In an opinion column on Fox News’ web site, Grant announced she is partnering with the Gates Foundation to push birth control and contraception in impoverished nations. Grant said she hosted pro-abortion Melinda Gates recently at a Christian event in Nashville, Tennessee to discuss their partnership.

 

“I hosted Melinda Gates in Nashville as she came to meet with our vibrant faith community for the first time. I didn’t know Melinda, and she didn’t know me. But we did know each other’s work well. What an amazing experience to hear about her faith journey, how Christian music had influenced her commitment to the world’s poor, and to learn more about how I could join hands with her and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to help 120 million women around the world, to save their lives and the lives of their children,” Grant writes.

 

“Over 220 million women around the world have raised their voices to say that they want to avoid their next pregnancy but lack the information or contraceptives to do so. To say this takes extreme courage. And to hear this and do something about it takes courage. This means talking about pregnancy and birth and newborns with influential leaders across the United States. It means discussing complications and deaths. It means looking at the statistics and rethinking contraceptives as a pro-life cause,” Grant adds.

 

Grant concludes: “Please join me in this simple prayer for God to lead us to the ones we need and to the ones who need us. And may we have the compassion and the courage to meet those needs, even for the most vulnerable mothers and children worldwide.”

 

While most pro-life people support contraception and birth control and while pushing to lower maternal mortality is truly a laudable goal (and countries with the lowest maternal mortality rates have pro-life laws banning abortions), pro-life advocates and fans of Amy Grant will likely be outraged to learn that Grant is partnering up with the strenuously pro-abortion Gates Foundation.

 

Although Grant says she is knows “well” about the work the Gates Foundation does, apparently she is uninformed about the millions it has thrown to the abortion industry. As LifeNews previously chronicled, the Gates Foundations has sent tens of millions to the two biggest abortion businesses in the world, each of which have snuffed out the lives of millions of unborn babies in abortions that Grant opposes:

 

According to the Gates Foundation grant database, the Foundation gave Planned Parenthood of America, the International Planned Parenthood Federation, and Planned Parenthood of Western Washington about $71 million from before 2009 through 2013. Additionally, the Gates Foundation gave $46.1 million to Marie Stopes International in 2012 alone.

 

Much of this giving is focused on Africa, Asia, and Latin America, where abortion-providers like Planned Parenthood, Marie Stopes, and Ipas seek to overturn pro-life laws and sometimes even provide illicit abortion drugs.

 

While Gates Foundation funds cannot be earmarked for abortion, the fungibility of money makes it easier for these organizations to provide abortion internationally.  In other words, every dollar the Gates Foundation gives to Planned Parenthood for distributing birth control or building an abortion-friendly clinic frees up a dollar in Planned Parenthood’s budget to spend elsewhere.

 

If aid is fungible, it simply does not matter what donors finance. They may end up financing, at the margin, very different and perhaps undesirable activities. When the recipients of these funds are the world’s leading abortion providers, it’s not hard to figure out where newly freed money in their budgets will go.

 

The Gates family has long been intertwined with Planned Parenthood. In a 2003 interview with Bill Moyers, Bill Gates recalled, “When I was growing up, my parents were almost involved in various volunteer things. My dad was head of Planned Parenthood. And it was very controversial to be involved with that. And so it’s fascinating. At the dinner table my parents are very good at sharing the things that they were doing. And almost treating us like adults, talking about that.”

 

Perhaps Grant was prompted by misleading news stories where Melinda Gates claimed the foundation wouldn’t fund abortions directly as making her foundation safe to work with, but the funding of the abortion industry is clear and a proven problem. Grant also needs to look further into the abortion advocacy of the foundation and Melinda’s own abortion push at international events.

 

ACTION: Contact Amy Grant with your comments and concerns and on Twitter.

 

+++

Christian Singer Amy Grant Defends Partnership With Pro-Abortion Gates Foundation After Criticism

 

http://lifenews.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/amygrant3.jpg

By STEVEN ERTELT

May 7, 2015 11:18AM

Life News

 

Popular Christian singer Amy Grant is defending her partnership with Melinda Gates of the pro-abortion Gates Foundation after LifeNews.com exposed the partnership and the foundation’s massive financial support for the abortion industry.

 

Amy Grant is pro-life on the issue of abortion, but she recently announced she is teaming up with one the head of the most pro-abortion foundations that shuttled millions towards abortions and abortion businesses.

 

In an opinion column on Fox News’ web site, Grant announced she is partnering with Melinda Gates of the Gates Foundation to push birth control and contraception in impoverished nations. Grant said she hosted Gates recently at a Christian event in Nashville, Tennessee to discuss their partnership.

 

“I hosted Melinda Gates in Nashville as she came to meet with our vibrant faith community for the first time. I didn’t know Melinda, and she didn’t know me. But we did know each other’s work well. What an amazing experience to hear about her faith journey, how Christian music had influenced her commitment to the world’s poor, and to learn more about how I could join hands with her and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to help 120 million women around the world, to save their lives and the lives of their children,” Grant writes.

 

Although Grant says she knows “well” about the work the Gates Foundation does, apparently she is uninformed about the millions it has thrown to the abortion industry. As LifeNews previously chronicled, the Gates Foundations has sent tens of millions to the two biggest abortion businesses in the world, each of which have snuffed out the lives of millions of unborn babies in abortions that Grant opposes:

 

According to the Gates Foundation grant database, the Foundation gave Planned Parenthood of America, the International Planned Parenthood Federation, and Planned Parenthood of Western Washington about $71 million from before 2009 through 2013. Additionally, the Gates Foundation gave $46.1 million to Marie Stopes International in 2012 alone. Both Planned Parenthood and Marie Stopes have killed tens of millions of unborn children in abortions worldwide and are considered the two biggest abortion businesses with abortion facilities located across the globe. Planned Parenthood actively pushes legalizing abortions and overturning pro-life laws in the very nations Grant is hoping to help in her campaign.

Following the LifeNews article and criticism from pro-life people, Grant is defending her decision to support the Gates Foundation. She posted on Facebook:

 

Gates Foundation is NOT pro-abortion. This key line on the Hope Through Healing Hands website explains the focus of the Gates Foundation-backed Faith-based Coalition for Healthy Mothers & Children Worldwide: What do we mean when we say we support the “healthy timing and spacing of pregnancies”? We mean enabling women and couples to determine the number and timing of their pregnancies, including the voluntary use of methods for preventing pregnancy, not including abortion, that are harmonious with their values and religious beliefs. The term “family planning” is often used synonymously with this concept. This is found at this link: http://www.hopethroughhealinghands.org/about

 

Amy Grant Tweet about Abortion Criticism

Other responses from Amy Grant’s Facebook page make it clear Grant is defending the contraception portion of her partnership with the Gates Foundation but ignoring its enormous investment in the abortion industry.

 

From Team Amy – we respect your opinion but simply do not agree that contraception and family planning are the same as abortion. Blessings.

 

From Team Amy – this initiative is decidedly pro-life in its efforts to improve the health of millions of women and children across the world.

 

From Team Amy – we are trying to respond as best we can. We aren’t perfect but are trying to explain our hearts. For you to insinuate that Amy was “bought” for this cause was insulting. This initiative is decidedly pro-life. The focus is to improve maternal and child health globally. We understand that good people disagree about issues and we certainly don’t want anyone supporting a cause that they don’t believe in. We, however, very much believe that maternal health and family planning (NOT abortions) are pro-life causes that value the lives of millions of women and children.

 

None of the comments from Grant’s official Facebook page at press time appear to respond to comments about the Gates Foundation’s millions in investments in abortion businesses worldwide and Grant’s partnership with an organization that pushes abortion on a global scale.

 

Perhaps Grant was prompted to partner with Gates by misleading news stories where Melinda Gates claimed the foundation wouldn’t fund abortions directly as making her foundation safe to work with, but the funding of the abortion industry is clear and a proven problem. Grant also needs to look further into the abortion advocacy of the foundation and Melinda’s own abortion push at international events.

 

ACTION: Contact Amy Grant with your comments and concerns and on Twitter.

_________________________

Is Amy Grant a Witting or Unwitting Partner with B & M Gates?

John R. Houk

© May 10, 2015

________________________________

COPYRIGHT © 2015 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

 

[Edited by John R. Houk with spellcheck]

 

About Life NEWS

 

LifeNews.com is an independent news agency devoted to reporting news that affects the pro-life community. With a team of experienced journalists and bloggers, LifeNews.com reaches more than 750,000 pro-life advocates each week via our web site, email news reports, social networking outreach and weekday radio program.

 

LifeNews.com also acts as a service provider to furnish news content to media that share the pro-life perspective. The topics covered by LifeNews.com include abortion, assisted suicide and euthanasia, bioethics issues such as human cloning and stem cell research, campaigns and elections, and cultural legal and legislative issues as they affect the pro-life community.

 

Formerly the Pro-Life Infonet, LifeNews.com has been harnessing the power of the Internet since 1992 to bring pro-life news to the pro-life community. We’ve developed a reputation for fairness, accuracy and timeliness in our two decades of service. We are not affiliated with any organization, religious group, political party or church denomination.

 

LIFENEWS.COM STAFF

 

READ THE REST

 

Donating to LifeNews.com

Repost 0
Published by ubiquitous8thoughts - in Conspiracy Theory Christianity
write a comment
May 9 2015 7 09 /05 /May /2015 11:37

 

John R. Houk

© May 9, 2015

 

The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) has been running a petition campaign called “Mr. President, Name the Enemy”. The last time I checked the campaign was just over 90,000 signatures. Now I realize such petition campaigns are typically fund raising programs. But eh … In this case I am pleased that nearly ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND Americans have expressed their displeasure that President Barack Hussein Obama REFUSES to acknowledge America’s most current national enemy at the very least is the Islam interpreted in its purist form called Radical Islam by those who believe that there are Moderate Muslims who don’t believe the Quran is the express word of Allah.

So this is what I’m going to do to encourage people to bring those signatures way over 100K, I going to cross post two ACLJ posts about the ISIS-Garland attack on American Free Speech followed by the wording of the petition. Then click on petition link I’ll provide at the end (or click HERE if you want to forego the actually pertinent information).

 

After you sign you will be taken to the typical donation page. It is not necessary to donate for your petition signature to count. NONETHELESS, the ACLJ is a very good Christian Civil Rights activist organization to support.

 

JRH 5/9/15

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

Jihad Struck Texas But Will the Obama Administration Continue to Bury Its Head in the Sand

 

By Matthew Clark

May 5, 2015

ACLJ

 

Jihad struck Texas last night.  It’s just the latest skirmish in a global radical Islamic assault on free speech – on freedom.

 

It’s a war.  ISIS, Boko Haram, Al Shabaab, and al Qaeda are just a few of the named brigades in this radical Islamic jihadist army.

 

The two Islamic terrorists who opened fire on a free speech art exhibit in Texas are merely the latest casualties in this war.  But they are a reminder of who the enemy is.

 

These radical Islamists are clear on who their enemy is.  To them, free speech is the enemy.  Islamic radicals made this clear through their murderous rampage at Charlie Hebdo in Paris and the free speech exhibit in Texas.  To them, Christians are the enemy, evidenced by the mass murders, propaganda beheadings, and vile statements carried out by ISIS, Boko Haram and other terrorist groups.

 

The terrorists who attacked free speech in Texas last night made it clear what their goal was, what they were fighting for, and who their enemy is.  One tweeted just moments before the attack.

 

Sharia is Light Tweet

That twitter account has now been suspended, but it contained a litany of jihadists tweets, pro-ISIS retweets, and radical Islamic propaganda.

 

In short, to the jihadists, we are the enemy.  They have named their enemy. And by doing so they have inspired the Tsarnaev brothers, the Texas attack, Nidal Hasan, and many others to carry out deadly terrorist attacks throughout America.

 

Yet the Obama Administration still only references these as “extremists.”  President Obama time and time again refuses to acknowledge that these vicious and targeted attacks on freedom are carried out by one ideologically bonded group of people – radical Islamists, jihadists.  Last night was no exception, as the White House has merely referred to the jihadist attack on free speech in Texas as “an act of violence.”

 

In short, President Obama refuses to name the enemy.  And the consequences build every day.

 

The contrast could not be more stark.

 

The jihadists are crystal clear about their enemy.  Tens of thousands of radical Islamists have flocked to join ISIS and other terrorist groups – including attempts by at least one of the militants who carried out last night’s attack.  At the same time, America’s response to jihad, under President Obama’s (lack of) leadership, has weakened the cause of freedom.

 

This must end.  America must demand accountability from our leaders.  We the people must demand that our next President (and there are a lot of people vying for the job right now) is willing to name our enemy and committed to defeating them wherever they train, plot, and carry out jihad.

 

America must never back down.  We must never surrender our First Amendment freedoms.  The local authorities in Texas showed the resolve that we must all exhibit.

 

Free speech, even speech you and I might disagree with, must be protected.  But now it’s time for America’s leaders to speak out – to name the enemy – and engage the jihadists on the battlefields they are creating.  The only way to stop the threat of terror is to overwhelmingly defeat the jihadists who inspire it.

 

This article is crossposted on Red State.

 

++++

Radical Islam In Conflict With Free Speech

 

By Edward White

May 7, 2015

ACLJ

 

terrorist attack took place in Garland, Texas, this week in response to a free speech conference that took issue with the Islamic prohibition against creating images of the Prophet Muhammad. The event awarded a financial prize to the person who drew the best cartoon of Muhammad.

 

The terrorist attack (ISIS has taken credit for it) points out the stark difference between the American view of speech that offends some people and the radical Muslim’s view of such speech. We allow it; they don’t.

 

Americans have broad free speech rights. Our rights, however, are not unlimited. For example, we cannot falsely shout fire in a crowded theater to cause a panic. (This statement is often wrongly uttered by failing to include the word falsely; of course, we can shout fire in a crowded theater that is on fire.)

 

The main idea behind our free speech rights is to allow an array of speech that is robust. Our free speech rights allow us the room to decide whether to say something (or hold a free speech conference) that is provocative. Our freedom allows for satire and debate, which allows ideas to be explored, and, possibly, allows for minds to be changed.

 

Deciding to engage in such speech at a particular time and place comes down to prudence and effectiveness. Such restrictions are not imposed by the First Amendment, just by a person’s sensibilities. Whether we like it or not, our First Amendment allows a group the freedom to hold a conference that may be considered blasphemous.

 

In contrast, sharia (the moral code and religious law of Islam) does not allow the same freedoms as does our First Amendment. It is restrictive. It allows little, if any, room for self-expression, satire, or dissent from orthodoxy. The consequences for holding a free speech conference, such as the one in Garland, under sharia are severe. The punishments for blasphemy include imprisonment, flogging, and death.

 

The terrorist attack over cartoons about Muhammad illustrates the extreme views of the radical Muslim. No one likes to see his religion blasphemed, but the proper response to blasphemy is debate, boycott, prayer, or protest—not killing those with whom you disagree to silence the speech you do not like.

 

+++++++++++

Mr. President, Name the Enemy

The ACLJ Petition

 

Here’s what the Obama Administration believes:

 

The Taliban aren’t terrorists.

 

ISIS—the Islamic State—isn’t Islamic.

 

America isn’t at war with radical Muslims, merely with “extremists.”

 

It’s hard to believe, but the Obama Administration is afraid to name our enemies.

 

This makes no sense.

 

The Muslim world knows the Taliban are terrorists. The Muslim world knows ISIS is Islamic.

 

It’s time for the truth. It’s time to level with the American people. At the ACLJ, we speak the truth. We name the enemy. Why can’t the President?

 

Mr. President, Name the Enemy

 

President Obama,

 

By refusing to name the enemy, you’re choosing weakness over strength. By refusing to name the enemy, you’re hiding the true threat from the American people. Speak the truth and name the enemy. Americans deserve the truth.

 

CLICK HERE TO GO TO THE END OF THE ACLJ PETION & SIGN

 

_______________________

Mr. President, Name the Enemy

John R. Houk

© May 9, 2015

_____________________

Jihad Struck Texas But Will the Obama Administration Continue to Bury Its Head in the Sand

 

Radical Islam In Conflict With Free Speech

 

Mr. President, Name the Enemy

 

American Center for Law and Justice | Washington D.C. | Copyright © 2015, ACLJ

 

About the American Center for Law and Justice

 

Founded in 1990 with the mandate to protect religious and constitutional freedoms, the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) engages legal, legislative, and cultural issues by implementing an effective strategy of advocacy, education, and litigation that includes representing clients before the Supreme Court of the United States and international tribunals around the globe.

 

As ACLJ Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow continued to build his legal and legislative team, the ACLJ experienced tremendous success in litigating cases at all levels of the judiciary – from the federal district court level to the Supreme Court of the United States.

 

Over the last two decades, Sekulow has appeared before the Supreme Court of the United States on numerous occasions, successfully arguing precedent-setting cases before the high Court: Protecting the READ THE REST

 

MAKE A TAX-DEDUCTIBLE CONTRIBUTION TO ACLJ

 

Repost 0
Published by ubiquitous8thoughts - in Counterjihad Politics
write a comment

Overview

  • : ubiquitous8thoughts
  • ubiquitous8thoughts
  • : This is a Christian Right blog. This means there is religious freedom, free speech, Constitutional Original Intent, Pro-Israel, Anti-Islamist and a dose of Biblical Morality (Pro-Life & anti-homosexual agenda) content in this blog.
  • Contact

Search

Links